1/6 Insurrection Investigation

[Rick Plant]

LOL.  Here is the title of the article:  "Official review of Trump phone logs from January 6 finds record is complete."   Some of the sources of how the White House call log works would, of course, be folks who worked in the White House, but the story confirms that multiple sources involved with the "official" investigation confirm that the log is complete. By continuing to post the claim that the call log was manipulated to remove calls, you are now intentionally and knowingly disseminating false information.

Just more nonsense above and there is no "false information". There was no "official investigation" because the 1/6 House Committee is currently "intensely" investigating this 7 hour call log gap scandal.   



Yesterday, during the House Rules Committee hearing before the Contempt of Congress vote, Rep. McGovern made the 7 hour gap a main topic. And then Rep. Jamie Raskin said the 7 hour gap is of "intense interest" and it's being investigated. So, there is no "false information".   

Rep McGovern: “For his part Mr Scavino spoke by phone with (Trump) multiple times during attack”…...during period In which people “begged” Trump to intervene."

McGovern then cited a long 7 hour gap in the call logs as reported by Costa Report and then compared it to 18 minutes of missing tape from Watergate. 

Rep. Raskin: "The House committee investigating the deadly Jan. 6 Capitol riot has 'intense interest' in the gap in former President Donald Trump's call log. It's a very unusual thing for us to find, that suddenly everything goes dark for a 7-hour period in terms of tracking the movements and the conversations of the president. We are aware of other phone calls that took place during that time that included the president. But we have no comprehensive, fine-grained portrait of what was going on during that period. And that's, obviously, of intense interest to us." 

[Rick Plant]

January 6th Committee chair Bennie Thompson begins his testimony: “This situation is so clear cut….The actions of these men are so blatant and brazen.”

Rep Thompson: Scavino “held the keys to the infamous Twitter account. Last time I checked a President’s effort to stay in power after people voted him out is not subject to executive privilege. If we don’t cite them for contempt of Congress, we weaken the institution."

Rep Cheney (R-WY): “Despite all the warnings, President Trump and his team moved to halt the peaceful transfer of power. Mr Scavino worked directly with Pres. Trump to spread his false message. Widely effective. And widely destructive. Trump’s stolen election campaign succeeded in provoking the violence on January 6th. Peter Navarro does not have the courage to testify here.”

Cheney cited the California federal judge who last week said “more likely than not” Trump committed a crime. The judge’s opinion has infused Committee with a powerful new talking point and leverage.

Rules Committee chair Jim McGovern recounts how he was among the closest to mob in House. He could see them through the glass doors to House Speaker’s lobby. The mob was so close to the target.

Rep McGovern: “History is watching us right now. We better get this right."

GOP Rep. Tom Cole (R-OK) asks if the Jan 6 Committee chair has had communication with Justice Dept about other criminal referrals. (Mark Meadows for example). Rep Thompson says "no".

Jan 6th Committee vice chair Liz Cheney and Democrats at this hearing specifically questioning the “courage” of these two Trump aides.

Rep Norma Torres (D-CA): “How can you call yourself a patriot, because you support one man, but ignore the fact that you’re an American? We’re in a very, very fragile state right now…..it’s time to choose our country, our flag and our Constitution.”

Rep Cheney: “Our country demands better.”

Rep Jamie Raskin: “it’s fantastical and preposterous” to invoke Executive privilege in an investigation of a “massive violent” attack against the Congress."

House Rules Committee is setting up ONE HOUR of debate on House floor on this resolution recommending criminal prosecution of Peter Navarro and Dan Scavino. Later this week.

House Rules Committee makes it official. In straight party-line vote, they send contempt of Congress resolution to US House. A step closer to possible prosecution of Peter Navarro and Dan Scavino for Contempt of Congress.

[Rick Plant]

These chats suggest pro-insurrectionist rot has infiltrated America's intelligence community
These men and women swear to defend the Constitution. But some may be cheering Jan. 6.

The disturbing depth to which MAGA-related lunacy has penetrated the institutions responsible for our protection continues to reveal itself. It was already known that at least 13 percent of defendants arrested in the Jan. 6 investigation have current or former law enforcement or military affiliation. Now we’re learning that the powerful cocktail of conspiracy theories and race-based hate has revealed itself among members of some of the U.S. intelligence community’s 18 agencies.

In a March 11 report in SpyTalk by veteran national security reporter Jeff Stein, he writes about internal intelligence community (IC) chat rooms associated with the classified Intelink system. According to that report, “by late in the third year of the Trump administration the system was afire with incendiary hate-filled commentary, especially on ‘eChirp,’ the intelligence community’s clone of Twitter.”

Stein quotes Dan Gilmore, “a 30-year veteran of Navy and NSA cryptologic systems,” who had written a post on his own website called “Why I Left the Intelligence Community.” Gilmore, an administrator of the eChirp application called the app “a dumpster fire" of hate speech directed at minorities, women, gay people, transgender people and Muslims.

“Hate speech was running rampant on our applications,” Gilmore wrote on his site. “I’m not being hyperbolic. Racist, homophobic, transphobic, Islamaphobic, and misogynistic speech was being posted in many of our applications.

“On top of that, there were many employees at CIA, DIA, NSA, and other IC agencies that openly stated that the January 6th terrorist attack on our Capitol was justified.”

In a separate March 26 SpyTalk post Stein says CIA veterans told him that “partisan political talk in the office was rare until Trump took office and appointed former Republican Congressman Mike Pompeo as its director.” According to Stein, those CIA veterans told him that “Pro-Trump sentiment arose mostly in the action arms of the counterterrorism programs staffed largely by military veterans.”

Both the House and Senate intelligence committees say they are aware of the allegations and are reviewing them. But it shouldn’t take congressional interest for the leaders of those intelligence agencies to start extinguishing the flames of their community dumpster fire. Here are three actions IC leaders — starting with Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines — must take to police their own and preserve credibility.

First, the director should instruct each intelligence community agency head to cease sponsorship of chat rooms that permit anything other than work-related professional intelligence collaboration. Spies, spy-catchers and intelligence analysts don’t need a classified environment to exchange recipes, racism or radicalization.

Second, the directors of each intelligence community agency should initiate reviews of internal chat room postings to identify their employees and contractors who espouse violence or support attempts to forcefully overturn a valid election. If such dialogue would result in discipline or admonishment if it had happened in the employee break room, then it has no place in an employee chat room, and it should result in the same consequences.

Third, the intelligence community employees and contractors who have engaged in this un-American and potentially subversive conduct may hail from different three-letter agencies, but they all have something in common: They need security clearances to do their jobs. The intelligence community agencies must make reviews of social media and chat room postings a regular part of background investigations for employment, and for the periodic reinvestigations required for continuance of a security clearance. The Department of Defense has already included potential punishment for certain social media postings as part of its battle against extremism. It’s time our intelligence agencies did the same. And if they won’t, the intelligence community inspector general should start asking them why.

Intelligence community employees all have something else in common. They take an oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic. They can’t preserve, protect and defend the Constitution if they become the domestic enemies referred to in their oath. We need to make it harder for them to become a threat while they’re supposed to be working against the threats. We deserve to hear from the intelligence community leadership on this issue now. Our national security depends on it.

https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/america-s-intelligence-community-has-pro-jan-6-bias-lurking-n1293694


Former FBI official issues dire warning: Jan. 6 sympathizers are embedded in the intelligence community

On Monday's edition of MSNBC's "Deadline: White House," former FBI official Frank Figliuzzi detailed the danger of January 6 sympathizers lurking within the intelligence community — an issue he wrote on over the weekend.

"We are now learning that members of the intelligence community have these classified chatrooms, in particular, one ... that is the intelligence community classified equivalent of Twitter," said Figliuzzi. "Where they've reportedly been exchanging support for the Jan. 6 insurrection, they've engaged in racist, even violent speech, misogynistic speech, anti-Islam speech. And according to a quote that [reporter] Jeff Stein got from an administrator of these groups, he says he calls it a 'dumpster fire of hate and other violence-related speech."

"So in my piece, what I'm offering here is three things," said Figliuzzi. "First, knock it off. The intelligence community sponsors these chatrooms. They give them a classified environment. Yes, intelligence analysts need a secure place to exchange ideas, collaborate professionally on intelligence, but not to exchange racism and radicalization and even recipes. It's time for them to modify and disciplining employees who are engaged in support of violence and hate talk. If it can't happen at the employee breakroom, it shouldn't be happening in the employee chatroom."

"Like Secretary of Defense Austin has done, start making your social media postings part of your security review," added Figliuzzi. "Not only hiring but continued maintenance of security clearance. It's already happening at DOD but not at the intelligence community."

Watch below:

[Rick Plant]

Feds will try again today at 11am for ARRAIGNMENT of high-level Jan 6 defendant Enrique Tarrio, who's accused of conspiracy (despite not being at Capitol on Jan 6)

Arraignment has been postponed twice already.

Here's Tarrio palling around with Donald Trump Jr, Ted Cruz, and Roger Stone. Just more proof they were all involved in a seditious criminal conspiracy with Proud Boy leader Enrique Tarrio.     

[Rick Plant]

DOJ’s expanded coup investigation could ensnarl ‘hundreds’ — including GOP members of Congress



The federal grand jury empaneled to investigate efforts to overturn the election by supporters of Donald Trump could be ensnare hundreds of people.

"According to a subpoena issued by the grand jury, prosecutors are asking for records about people who organized or spoke at several pro-Trump rallies after the election," The New York Times reported Tuesday. "The subpoena is also seeking records about anyone who provided security at those events and about those who were deemed to be 'V.I.P. attendees.' Moreover, it requests information about any members of the executive and legislative branches who may have taken part in planning or executing the rallies, or tried to 'obstruct, influence, impede or delay' the certification of the presidential election."

Similar to the investigation by the House Select Committee to Investigate the Jan. 6 Attack on the U.S. Capitol, the Department of Justice investigation is sprawling.

"Each of these broad categories could involve dozens of individuals. Taken together, the total number of potential witnesses — or at some point, targets — sought after by the grand jury could easily reach into the hundreds," the newspaper reported. "Altogether, scores of people spoke at the rallies in November and December and at the gatherings on Jan. 5 and Jan. 6. They included people like Mr. [Roger] Stone; Mr. Trump’s former national security adviser, Michael T. Flynn; and Alex Jones, the conspiracy theorist and host of the TV show Infowars. The speakers also included pastors, state-level politicians and anti-vaccine activists."

Speakers at the Jan. 6 rally included Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL), Rudy Giuliani and John Eastman and Mike Lindell was in attendance, along with Ginni Thomas.

"The federal grand jury subpoena examined by The New York Times seeks information about members of the executive and legislative branches who might have been involved in the effort to delay congressional certification of the election results, suggesting that prosecutors are interested in learning more about the roles that Mr. Trump’s aides and allies inside the government may have played," the newspaper reported. "Among the Republicans in Congress who worked publicly to keep Mr. Trump in power were Representatives Mo Brooks of Alabama, Paul Gosar of Arizona and Andy Biggs of Arizona, all of whom Mr. Alexander, the 'Stop the Steal' organizer, has said helped set the events of Jan. 6 in motion."

"On Dec. 21, 2020, Mr. Trump met with members of the House Freedom Caucus to discuss their plans to challenge Mr. Biden’s victory. Among those present were Mr. Gosar, Mr. Biggs, Mr. Brooks, Ms. Greene, and Representatives Jim Jordan of Ohio and Scott Perry of Pennsylvania, who were deeply involved in Mr. Trump’s effort to fight the election results," the newspaper reported. "The House committee has so far asked only three members of Congress for an interview: Representative Kevin McCarthy of California, the Republican leader who engaged in what he called a 'very heated' call with Mr. Trump during the riot; Mr. Jordan and Mr. Perry. All three men have refused to agree to a voluntary interview."

https://www.rawstory.com/doj-trump-coup/

[Rick Plant]

This fight for John Eastman emails has been a transcendent event in the Congressional investigation of Jan 6th.

The committee and the federal judge handling email case both made statements about the likelihood Trump committed a crime .. during the process.




House Select Jan 6 Committee has received the John Eastman records.

[Rick Plant]

House investigators obtain emails from Trump 'coup lawyer' John Eastman



On Tuesday, CNN reported that investigators on the House January 6 Committee have obtained the emails from pro-Trump attorney John Eastman that he had sought to keep secret.

This comes after a ruling from a Federal District Judge David Carter that Eastman's correspondence with Trump is not covered by attorney-client privilege — a ruling in which Carter also stated it was likely that Trump had committed criminal obstruction of Congress.

"One email, a draft memo for Rudy Giuliani, was obtained by the committee because the judge decided it was potentially being used to plan a crime. The memo recommended that then-Vice President Mike Pence reject some states' electors during the January 6 congressional meeting," reported Katelyn Polantz and Paul LeBlanc. "'This may have been the first time members of President Trump's team transformed a legal interpretation of the Electoral Count Act into a day-by-day plan of action,' Carter wrote."

"The select committee's efforts to obtain Eastman's emails had been closely watched in the legal community because of the panel's bold move to accuse Eastman and Trump of criminal conspiracy. The House said it believed Trump had been trying to obstruct Congress and to defraud the government by blocking his loss of the election and discussing it with Eastman," noted the report. "Still, neither Trump nor Eastman has been charged with any crimes. Further, despite the House's filings, lawmakers aren't prosecutors and can't bring charges."

Eastman was a central role in the plot to overturn the election. He drafted the infamous "coup memo" outlining a plan whereby Republican legislators in states that voted for Joe Biden would submit "alternate" electors for Trump, and former Vice President Mike Pence would declare the legitimate electors from these states invalid and throw the election to the House, where Republicans controlled enough delegations to swing the result to Trump.

Pence believed this plan was illegal and refused to go forward with it. Eastman, who has since tried to distance himself from the memo, also faces investigation by the California State Bar.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/05/politics/john-eastman-january-6-emails/index.html

[Rick Plant]

Ivanka Trump's Jan. 6 Testimony Could Reveal Ex-President's 'State of Mind'

Ivanka Trump, the eldest daughter of Donald Trump and one of his closest advisers during his presidency, appeared Tuesday before the House panel investigating the January 6 Capitol riot, and committee members were expected to pay close attention to anything she could reveal about her father's "state of mind" that day.

In a letter requesting her voluntary cooperation with the investigation, committee Chairman Bennie Thompson informed her that the committee believes her proximity to the former president on the day of the riot gave her "knowledge bearing directly on the President's actions or inaction on January 6th, and his mind as the violent attack occurred at the Capitol."

One committee member, Democratic Representative Stephanie Murphy, told the Associated Press that Ivanka "has details about what occurred in the lead-up to and on January 6 and about the former president's state of mind as events unfolded."

The former first daughter's testimony comes just days after her husband and top Trump adviser Jared Kushner sat for an interview with the House panel. Thompson said that "there were some things revealed" in Kushner's testimony but stopped short of sharing those developments with the public. Ivanka and her husband are among the highest-ranking officials to testify before the committee. Neither of them was subpoenaed.

In its letter to Ivanka, the committee laid out four critical matters it is seeking from the interview—one leading up to January 6, two involving the unfolding of events that day and the fourth about the riot's aftermath.

First, the panel is seeking any information she might have about the early-morning call between Trump and Vice President Mike Pence—a conversation that Ivanka was present for in the Oval Office, according to testimony from Keith Kellogg, Pence's former national security adviser.

The panel has also asked her to provide knowledge she has on "any other conversations you may have witnessed or participated in regarding the President's plan to obstruct or impede the counting of electoral votes" ahead of the joint meeting of Congress on January 6 to certify the election.

The committee noted there were messages that revealed top White House staffers opposed Trump's desire to overturn the election's results. The panel wants to ask her whether her father was aware that his senior staff and lawyers believed Pence should have gone against his wishes for a challenge to Joe Biden's victory.

Secondly, the panel is seeking any information Ivanka has on discussions inside the White House before and after Trump's 2:24 p.m. tweet in which he wrote that Pence "didn't have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our Country and our Constitution."

The tweet in question falls within a nearly eight-hour gap that exists in the presidential phone log turned over to the committee.

The panel hopes that Ivanka, who was urged by staffers to speak with her father during that period, can shed light on those conversations and provide insight as to why Trump did not address the nation on live television as the Capitol was being attacked.

As the situation at the Capitol intensified, Trump was asked by members of his own party to hold an emergency press briefing urging the mob to leave. Instead of doing so, the president released a pretaped video hours later, telling his supporters, "I know how you feel, but go home, and go home in peace."

Thirdly, the committee wants Ivanka to reveal whether her father gave an order to deploy the National Guard. While former White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany announced on Twitter that the National Guard had been deployed, the panel said there was no evidence that this was ordered by Trump.

Former Acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller specifically stated he was never contacted by Trump on January 6.

Finally, the panel wants Ivanka to provide information about an "effort after January 6th to persuade President Trump not to associate himself with certain people, and to avoid further discussion regarding election fraud allegations."

Some of the Trump administration officials who have been legally ordered to appear before the committee have refused to do so and, as a result, have been charged with contempt of Congress.

https://www.newsweek.com/ivanka-trumps-jan-6-testimony-could-reveal-ex-presidents-state-mind-1695293