Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation  (Read 115258 times)

Offline Rick Plant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8177
Re: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation
« Reply #720 on: June 24, 2022, 02:58:49 PM »
Advertisement
A damning Donald Trump quote you need to hear from today’s January 6 hearing

CNN — Donald Trump said and did a whole lot of things on and around January 6, 2021, as he sought to use the levers of government to push his false election fraud schemes and remain in power.

None was more damning than a quote that re-surfaced during the latest public hearing of the House select committee investigating January 6 on Thursday. It came from an extended phone call between Trump, acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen and acting Deputy Attorney General Richard Donoghue in December 2020.

The call, according to Donoghue, who took contemporaneous notes, featured the then-President repeatedly pressing the top Justice Department officials over a variety of false and conspiratorial claims about the election – all of which Donoghue shot down.

At some point during the call, Trump appears to grow exasperated. He implored Rosen and Donoghue to “just say that the election was corrupt and leave the rest to me and the Republican congressmen,” Donoghue testified Thursday.

Yeah. Think about that for a minute.

This is not the first time we have heard that line. CNN reported on the existence of Donoghue’s notes – and the Trump quote therein – in July 2021.

But in the context of the case being made by the January 6 committee, the quote is absolutely stunning and deeply revealing.

Consider, first, the brazenness exhibited by Trump here. He is asking the two highest-ranking officials of the Justice Department at the time, who have already repeatedly made clear to him on the same call that his claims of election fraud are spurious, to just say that there was fraud – and be done with it.

Second, the quote reveals – or, in truth, re-reveals – the utter misunderstanding (and contempt) that Trump had for the Department of Justice.

Time and time again, from the very early days of his time in office, Trump publicly expressed his frustrations that the DOJ would not simply do his bidding.

Trump repeatedly wondered – via his Twitter feed and his own public comments – why his first attorney general, Jeff Sessions, had recused himself from the investigation into Russia’s attempts to influence the 2016 election.

In an interview with Fox in August 2018, Trump asked, “What kind of man is this?” of Sessions, adding that he “never took control of the Justice Department.”

Trump fired Sessions on the day after the 2018 election.

Despite hand-picking Sessions’ successor, Bill Barr, Trump still complained the probe, led by special counsel John Durham, designed to look into the origins of the FBI’s Russia investigation was not moving quickly enough.

“If that’s the case I think it’s terrible,” Trump told conservative radio show Rush Limbaugh in October 2020 when asked about the possibility that the Durham probe might not be released until after the election. “It’s very disappointing. And I’ll tell [Barr] to his face. I think it’s a disgrace. It’s an embarrassment.”

(Worth noting: It wasn’t just the Department of Justice where Trump seemed to fundamentally misunderstand his power over them. He repeatedly referred to “my generals” and “my military".

The third thing the quote reveals is that Trump didn’t really care – in any meaningful way – whether or not there was actual election corruption. Remember that in the same phone call where Trump asks Rosen and Donoghue to “just say the election was corrupt,” he had told that the various claims he was making about election fraud were false.

All Trump cared about was using the imprimatur of the Justice Department as a shield by which he could then steer perception in favor of his election lies. In short: He knew what he was saying wasn’t born out by the facts. He didn’t care. He just wanted the DOJ to say “corrupt” so that he could meld and shape that for his own goal: staying in office no matter what.

It’s not clear yet whether the committee will recommend criminal charges at the end of all of this. Or whether the DOJ will charge Trump – or anyone else – in connection with their activities on January 6.

But what is clear is that Trump viewed the Justice Department as just another arm by which to carry out his agenda. He never knew or cared about the independence of DOJ, or why that was (and is) critical to the health of American democracy.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/23/politics/trump-quote-jan-6-hearings-day-5/index.html

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation
« Reply #720 on: June 24, 2022, 02:58:49 PM »


Offline Rick Plant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8177
Re: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation
« Reply #721 on: June 24, 2022, 10:37:51 PM »
GOP members of Congress sought preemptive pardon in final Trump days

Former Trump White House officials testified under oath that five Republican members of Congress requested pardons in the final days of the Trump administration.

Watch: Below

https://abcnews.go.com/GMA/News/video/gop-members-congress-sought-preemptive-pardon-final-trump-85631443

Offline Rick Plant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8177
Re: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation
« Reply #722 on: June 25, 2022, 01:24:47 AM »
Trump Should Not Be Sleeping Well After This Jan. 6 Hearing


A video of Rudy Giuliani projected during the Jan. 6 committee hearing in Washington on Thursday.

Thursday’s fifth in a series of summer hearings of the Jan. 6 committee was dominated by former acting Assistant Attorney General Jeffrey Clark’s role in Donald Trump’s alleged conspiracy to overturn the election.*

That was because a series of unimpeachable Republican witnesses denounced Clark’s abandonment of the Department of Justice’s foundational principles: follow the facts, apply the law, and represent your true clients, the country and justice—not the president.

The day of the hearing, reports also emerged that federal agents executed a judicially approved search warrant of Clark’s home and seized his electronic devices. That news sends the country a clear signal: The DOJ is now investigating the same scheme involving Trump and Clark that was dissected at Thursday’s hearing.

We should not, however, allow Thursday’s focus on Clark to obscure five other important developments that emerged in the hearing. They deserve attention as the astonishing story of Trump’s attempted coup unfolds.

1. Pardons. Liz Cheney hinted in the committee’s first hearing that “multiple other Republican congressmen” requested pardons from the former president in the weeks after Jan. 6. Now we know there is evidence as to whom: Reps. Matt Gaetz, Scott Perry, Louie Gohmert, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Mo Brooks, and Andy Biggs.

To put the words of Republican Illinois Rep. Adam Kinzinger into courtroom terms, actively seeking a pardon is powerful evidence of “consciousness of guilt.” That is a key route that prosecutors can take to prove criminal intent. People ask for pardons because they’ve done something that they believe makes them vulnerable to criminal prosecution.

The principal crime that comes to mind in the case of these congressional representatives is the same that a federal judge already found Trump and his outside counsel John Eastman “likely” committed: conspiracy to defraud the United States. The congressional representatives may also be implicated in another crime that the judge found Trump likely committed: obstructing an official government proceeding—the Jan. 6 joint session of Congress to certify the election.

2. Attorneys as villains—and heroes. This was an attempted coup using law books and statutes instead of tanks and guns. So it’s little wonder that Clark, Trump’s “Mr. Inside” collaborator/lawyer, and John Eastman, Trump’s “Mr. Outside” collaborator/lawyer, along with Rudolph Giuliani, are in legal jeopardy.

Still, we couldn’t help but find solace, even pride, as we watched and listened to former acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen, Deputy Attorney General Richard Donoghue, and Assistant Attorney General Steven Engel. If some attorneys were coup enablers and co-plotters, others redeemed the Justice Department, their oaths of office, and the professional standards to which lawyers are bound. Thursday’s witnesses had the courage to stand up for the rule of law and the Constitution, especially after weeks and weeks of unceasing pressure from the most powerful man on Earth.

Here’s a piece of news from Thursday’s hearing that may not have been evident to lay observers, but that Justice Department prosecutors are sure to have observed, even if they already knew it: Rosen, Donoghue, and Engel emerged as witnesses whose credibility will be unshakeable in any trial. Any reasonable juror will take their word over the testimony of any witness Trump can produce, including himself.

Trump himself has been reportedly watching. He may not be sleeping well in Mar-a-Lago.

3. Voting machines. Donoghue’s testimony revealed a Dec. 31, 2020, conversation with the president in which Trump demanded that the DOJ seize voting machines. Upon being told by Donoghue that voting machines’ performance was within the Department of Homeland Security’s purview, Trump phoned Ken Cuccinelli, the acting deputy secretary of DHS. Trump told Cuccinelli that “the acting Attorney General … just told me it’s your job to seize machines, and you’re not doing your job.”

Though Cuccinelli never ordered his agency to seize the machines, Trump’s call was one more piece of evidence—added to all the other calls and meetings described—showing both his central role in the concerted scheme and his desperation to accomplish its end: thwarting the lawful transition of power. Trump could not have cared less that such a seizure was illegal, as Rosen and Donoghue counseled him.

4. Trump’s lack of interest in evidence contradicting his Big Lie. The theme that Trump’s sole concern was power, and not facts or law, is the dominant message emerging from hearing after hearing, Republican witness after Republican witness.

It was one thing to watch William Barr’s testimony that Trump disregarded the attorney general’s message that the postelection narrative Trump and his minions were spreading about widespread voter fraud was “bullspombleprofglidnoctobuns.” Now we have heard Barr’s successor, Rosen, along with Donoghue, testify to their serially giving Trump the same message about the baselessness of the president’s bizarre, internet-gathered election conspiracy theories.

In the end, Trump told the DOJ officials to “just say the election was corrupt and leave the rest to me and the Republican Congressmen.”

In other words, “I don’t care what’s true—just say it.” Repeated testimony about disregard for truth, with the goal of personal gain, is for prosecutors evidence of criminal intent wrapped in ribbon with a perfectly tied bow.

5. Sidney Powell as special counsel? Powell’s recorded testimony indicated that Trump promised her a special counsel appointment to investigate the election. Our jaws dropped. That’s not just because of who Powell is—a lawyer whose wild public statements led even Trump to drop her from his team (at least publicly), and whom a Michigan federal judge has fined for her misrepresentations in one of the Trump campaign’s postelection lawsuits. She is also the subject of bar disciplinary proceedings in Texas. And on June 22, the Justice Department asked a judge to launch an ethics probe of Powell for allegedly funding the legal defense of the Oath Keepers, the militant group whose leader is now under indictment for his role in the violence on Jan. 6.

The idea of Powell serving as a Justice Department special counsel should send chills up the spine of anyone who believes in the importance of the truth. Moreover, as Engel’s testimony revealed, neither Rosen nor his predecessor Barr believed there was a conflict of interest in the Justice Department investigating the election; such a conflict is the predicate for a special counsel’s appointment. Who, we struggle to imagine, would have posed a greater conflict of interest as special counsel probing the election than Sidney Powell?

Each of the select committee’s hearings seems like an impossible evidentiary act to follow. And for those watching, each presentation exceeds expectations in laying out a coherent narrative about Trump’s seven-part plot to destroy American democracy.

We are only midway through the hearings. But with the Justice Department suddenly issuing subpoenas and searching the homes of collaborators in Trump’s coup attempt, one thing is clear: There are more surprises ahead.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/06/trump-january-six-hearings-crimes-trial-jury-ouch.html

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation
« Reply #722 on: June 25, 2022, 01:24:47 AM »


Offline Rick Plant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8177
Re: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation
« Reply #723 on: June 25, 2022, 05:37:53 AM »
Stunning details you might have missed from Thursday's Jan. 6 hearing on Trump's pressure campaign against DOJ

Trump's efforts to cling to power were laid out in detail.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/stunning-details-missed-thursdays-jan-hearing-trumps-pressure/story?id=85607045

Offline Rick Plant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8177
Re: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation
« Reply #724 on: June 26, 2022, 12:22:01 AM »
Watch: Jan. 6 Committee Hearings - Day 5

Starts at 36:30

The House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack will held its fifth public hearing on June 23, focused on former President Donald Trump's efforts to pressure the Justice Department to help undo the 2020 presidential election.



JFK Assassination Forum

Re: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation
« Reply #724 on: June 26, 2022, 12:22:01 AM »


Offline Joe Elliott

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1727
Re: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation
« Reply #725 on: June 26, 2022, 05:16:39 AM »
I have not been following the hearings on TV (no cable) so these posts by Rick help make it easy to keep abreast of the Capitol Hearings on Trump's efforts to negate an American election.
« Last Edit: June 26, 2022, 05:17:19 AM by Joe Elliott »

Offline Rick Plant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8177
Re: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation
« Reply #726 on: June 27, 2022, 12:09:35 PM »
Trump's lawyers could be the first indicted due to the Jan 6th hearings -- and that's very bad news for him



In a column for Politico, former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti suggested that a quintet of lawyers who attempted to help Donald Trump steal the 2020 presidential election could be the first major players in the former president's orbit to be hit with criminal conspiracy charges due to revelations from the House Jan 6th committee hearings thus far.

According to Mariotti, the actions of John Eastman, Rudy Giuliani, Sydney Powell, Jenna Ellis and Jeffrey Clark seem to be a major focus of the bi-partisan select committee, and that the evidence presented makes a strong case against each of them.

"Of all the evidence uncovered by the committee, what jumps out to me as a former federal prosecutor are the 'fake elector' certificates signed by Trump electors and submitted to former Vice President Mike Pence in an effort to delay the certification of the electoral votes on January 6. Those certificates contained statements that are easily proven false," he wrote before adding, "Typically, lawyers are not a weak link. In my experience, lawyers have been the most difficult defendants to convict. They’re usually careful about what they say and what they write down. But Trump’s coterie of dishonest legal advisers — John Eastman, Rudy Giuliani, Sydney Powell, Jenna Ellis and Clark — weren’t careful. In their attempts to overturn the results of the 2020 election, they said things that were demonstrably false and were personally involved in lies told to government officials."

Writing, "If prosecutors can prove that one or more of them created the false certificates, and knew that doing so was illegal, they may have criminal liability," he suggested that testimony given so far has demonstrated that they knew they were lying and that could be used against them in a trial where, by virtue of the fact that they are also attorneys, makes the case against them even easier.

"Because the statute criminalizing false statements requires knowledge that the statement was false and that the defendant was doing something illegal, the attorneys are the easiest targets for DOJ," he wrote before elaborating, "As attorneys, it will be hard for Eastman, Giuliani and Ellis to claim that they had no idea that they were acting outside the four corners of state law by convening 'alternative' electors and submitting them to the Senate even though the state had already submitted official electors. It will also be hard for Clark to argue that he had no idea that what he was doing was illegal, given that his superiors forcefully told him so."

Calling the cases against them the easiest path for prosecutors eager to head to court, Mariotti added, "But if federal prosecutors build a case against Giuliani, Eastman or Clark first, they could potentially flip one of them and have a key cooperator against Trump. Presumably Trump had forthcoming one-on-one conversations with those attorneys, believing that they were protected by attorney-client privilege."

"If one of them agreed to cooperate, DOJ could go to a judge seeking an order permitting disclosure of Trump’s statements under the crime-fraud exception to attorney-client privilege, which permits disclosure of private communications between an attorney and client if they were about ongoing crimes," he predicted.

You can read more here:

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/06/24/charge-trumps-lawyers-00042361

Offline Rick Plant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8177
Re: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation
« Reply #727 on: June 27, 2022, 12:14:11 PM »
The battle of the Jeffs: The fate of the DOJ — and Trump’s coup



Thursday’s J6 committee hearing recounted the historic Battle of the Jeffs, a titanic bureaucratic struggle between the former president and the top brass at the Department of Justice that nearly put a frothing MAGA conspiracy theorist in charge of the nation’s top law enforcement agency on the eve of the J6 coup attempt.

Three days before the insurrection, the former president sat down with acting Attorney General Jeff Rosen, top lawyers from the Department of Justice and an obscure environmental lawyer from the department’s Civil Division named Jeff Clark. Trump had decided to replace Jeff Rosen with Jeff Clark.

This was an alarming development because Clark, whose home was raided by the FBI Wednesday, had no qualifications to lead the DOJ besides his fervent belief in MAGA election conspiracy theories and his fanatical personal loyalty to Trump. Trump outlined his plan during the meeting. He wanted Clark to put the Justice Department’s stamp of approval on the fake allegations of election fraud by pretending to investigate them and ordering state legislators to do the same.

“Just say it was corrupt and leave the rest to me,” Trump told the lawyers, displaying once again his disregard for the truth.

The committee heard that Clark had gone rogue in the days prior, flouting DOJ rules and the direct orders of his superiors to meet with Trump and Pennsylvania Congressman Scott Perry, a Republican, at the White House to plot to overturn the election.

Clark had already drafted a letter from the Department of Justice to Georgia state legislators asserting, baselessly, that there were significant irregularities in the presidential election in that state.

The letter further recommended that the Georgia legislature convene a special session to investigate these so-called “irregularities.” White House Counsel Pat Cippolone described the letter as a “murder-suicide pact” and warned that it would taint any official who touched it. DOJ’s top lawyers were adamant. This letter must not be sent.

The supposedly nonpartisan imprimatur of the nation’s top law enforcement agency would have dramatically improved the prospects of Trump’s coup.

It would have lent an aura of legitimacy to election theft conspiracy theories. The Stop the Steal theories desperately needed a credibility infusion. Former Trump officials testified about the flimsiness of the claims that Trump dredged up from “the internet” for them to investigate, including the claim that Italian satellites had changed vote counts.

If Clark had affirmed in the name of the Justice Department that there were legitimate concerns about fraud, that would have provided political cover for any Republican legislator, state or federal, who wanted to challenge the results.

Furthermore, if Clark had taken over the Justice Department, he would have been in a position to start acting on MAGAland’s demands to arrest Trump’s political enemies on the eve of the coup.

At the last hearing, the J6 committee heard the testimony of Shaye Moss and her mother Ruby, Georgia election officials whom Rudy Giuliani falsely accused of committing election fraud. The two women endured a horrific MAGA harassment campaign. The message was clear: Confess and it will all go away.

Thankfully, Georgia officials didn’t charge the Mosses with any crime, but If Clark had become Attorney General, he could have sent the FBI to arrest Shaye and Ms. Ruby on trumped-up charges. MAGA was hungry for false confessions to bolster their fake fraud narratives and there’s little doubt that Clark would have been happy to supply them.

The DOJ lawyers threatened to resign en masse if Trump didn’t back down from his plan to install Clark as attorney general. They warned that if that happened, the story would be that Trump had burned through two attorneys general in two weeks in his quixotic quest to overturn the election. Ultimately, the former president relented.

The Battle of the Jeffs ended with Jeff Rosen still in charge.

The attorney general wields immense powers of coercion and persuasion. Trump had a plan to use both to overturn the election. It is truly frightening to contemplate what would have happened if Trump had handed the country’s vast federal law enforcement apparatus to a conspiracy theorist on the eve of the coup.

https://www.rawstory.com/rosen-clark/

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation
« Reply #727 on: June 27, 2022, 12:14:11 PM »