Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation  (Read 115160 times)

Offline Rick Plant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8177
Re: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation
« Reply #560 on: June 01, 2022, 04:44:15 PM »
Advertisement

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation
« Reply #560 on: June 01, 2022, 04:44:15 PM »


Offline Rick Plant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8177
Re: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation
« Reply #561 on: June 02, 2022, 11:24:31 AM »
Trial set for June 13 in high-profile Capitol breach case of Kevin Seefried, who is the man carrying the Confederate flag through the Capitol on Jan 6, 2021, according to prosecutors.




Offline Rick Plant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8177
Re: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation
« Reply #562 on: June 02, 2022, 11:37:34 AM »
SENTENCING set for July 13 in US Capitol riot case of David Blair, who pleaded guilty to a felony.

Feds say Blair was "waving a Confederate battle flag attached to a lacrosse stick. He yelled words to the effect of “hell naw, quit backing up, don’t be scared”

Facing up to 5 years.


JFK Assassination Forum

Re: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation
« Reply #562 on: June 02, 2022, 11:37:34 AM »


Offline Rick Plant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8177
Re: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation
« Reply #563 on: June 02, 2022, 12:09:18 PM »
Old man Chuck Grassley was a key figure in Trump's coup attempt.

NEW: Trump lawyer Kenneth Chesebro said in 13 Dec 2020 memo to Giuliani that VP Pence should recuse himself from running the electoral count and hand the gavel to a senior GOP senator like Graham — recall that Sen. Grassley said on Jan. 5 he didn’t expect Pence to preside.


Offline Rick Plant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8177
Re: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation
« Reply #564 on: June 02, 2022, 12:28:03 PM »
Remember when a judge determined that one of John Eastman's emails was subject to the "crime-fraud" exception to attorney-client privilege?

That document — a Dec. 13, 2020 memo to Rudy Giuliani — was just made public in new court filings.

Read it below:

https://www.politico.com/minutes/congress/06-1-2022/jan-6/


The memo, authored by attorney Kenneth Chesebro, described what he called the "'President of the Senate' strategy," an effort to convince Mike Pence to assert control of the Jan. 6 count of electoral votes.




Chesebro's memo lays out a day-to-day plan of action beginning Jan. 3 with hearings by Sen. Graham. A Graham spokesman emphasized that no hearings were ever held but declined to address whether Graham was ever approached about this strategy.




On Jan. 6, Chesebro recommended that Pence attend but recuse himself from the actual count, allowing a senior senator like Chuck Grassley to take the gavel. This would keep his hands clean from the fight about to ensue over electors.






Chesebro then argued to let the chips fall. No one could predict what SCOTUS would do and Trump could very well still lose, he said. But he said the effort would be worth it and could even result in an unexpected outcome, like Pence becoming president.


JFK Assassination Forum

Re: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation
« Reply #564 on: June 02, 2022, 12:28:03 PM »


Offline Rick Plant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8177
Re: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation
« Reply #565 on: June 02, 2022, 03:46:29 PM »
Primer on the Hearings of the January 6th Select Committee
https://www.justsecurity.org/81729/covering-the-january-6th-select-committee-a-primer/

Offline Rick Plant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8177
Re: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation
« Reply #566 on: June 02, 2022, 04:19:37 PM »
Who is Cassidy Hutchinson and what has she told the Jan. 6 committee?

The House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection has kept a tight lid on its plans for televised hearings slated to take place this month, but that hasn’t stopped speculation about who might be called to testify.

Among the names that have been floated as a potential witness in the highly anticipated hearings is that of Cassidy Hutchinson, an aide to former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, who has already been cited as the source of multiple revelations uncovered by the select committee’s probe.

Hutchinson, who served as a special assistant to the president for legislative affairs, was subpoenaed in November 2021, along with several other former Trump administration officials who, the panel believed, had relevant information regarding the former president’s activities on Jan. 6 and the role he and his aides played in efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election.

According to her subpoena, Hutchinson was not only at the White House on Jan. 6 but she’d been with Trump during his speech at the “Stop the Steal” rally on the Ellipse, where he urged his supporters to “fight like hell” before promising to march with them to the Capitol.

She also emailed Georgia officials directly following Meadows’s trip to attend that state’s election audit, according to the subpoena, and was present for other key meetings and conversations at the White House leading up to Jan. 6.

Unlike her former boss, whose refusal to cooperate with House investigators has earned him a Justice Department referral for criminal contempt charges, Hutchinson has appeared before the committee on three separate occasions since the beginning of this year. In fact, following her most recent deposition last month, a source reportedly told CNN that Hutchinson believes she’s being forced to testify due to Meadows’s refusal to comply with his own subpoena. The same source said Hutchinson will likely make another appearance before the committee, possibly during the upcoming public hearings, according to CNN.

A spokesperson for the Jan. 6 committee declined to comment on whether Hutchinson will be called as a witness at the hearings, the first of which is set for June 9. Hutchinson’s attorney did not respond to a request for comment from Yahoo News.

While much remains unknown about what Hutchinson has told the select committee so far, a handful of key details have emerged from her closed-door depositions that seem likely to feature prominently in the case House investigators hope to present to the American public this summer.

Here’s a look at some of the key revelations that have already been attributed to Hutchinson, and how they might factor into the public hearings.

Meadows and others pressed ahead with plans to overturn Trump’s election loss, court filing says, even after White House counsel had deemed them not “legally sound.”

The select committee’s legal battle against Meadows, who has sued to block the panel’s subpoenas, may offer clues on how Hutchinson’s testimony could be used in the hearings.

In an April court filing, the select committee cited sections of Hutchinson’s testimony as proof of the former chief’s involvement in the effort to overturn the results of the 2020 election and that he had pursued unlawful plans to make that happen.

According to the filing, Hutchinson told the committee that the White House Counsel’s Office repeatedly objected on legal grounds to a plan to push Republican officials in battleground states that had voted for Biden to send alternate, pro-Trump slates of electors to Congress when lawmakers met on Jan. 6 to certify the Electoral College vote count.

Hutchinson told the committee that the counsel’s office had concluded that the alternate electors plan was not legally sound potentially as early as November 2021, and that this conclusion was raised during multiple meetings at the White House involving Meadows, other Trump associates like Trump’s former personal attorney Rudy Giuliani, and members of Congress including Reps. Scott Perry, R-Pa., Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., and Louie Gohmert, R-Texas.

“Despite that advice, the plan moved forward,” the committee’s filing states.

https://news.yahoo.com/who-is-cassidy-hutchinson-and-what-has-she-told-the-jan-6-committee-214435600.html

Offline Rick Plant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8177
Re: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation
« Reply #567 on: June 03, 2022, 12:42:48 AM »
What 5 previous congressional investigations can teach us about the House Jan. 6 committee hearings

Six public hearings to be held in June by the House committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol insurrection will attempt to answer the question of whether former President Donald Trump and his political allies broke the law in seeking to overturn the 2020 election results.

The Jan. 6 hearings are part of a long history of congressional investigation.

The first congressional inquiry occurred in the House in 1792 to investigate Gen. Arthur St. Clair’s role in the U.S. Army’s defeat in the Battle of the Wabash against the tribes of the Northwest Territory. The Senate conducted its first official investigation in 1818, looking into Gen. Andrew Jackson’s conduct in the Seminole War.

A look back at five of the most noteworthy congressional investigations since those initial probes suggests that Congress regularly has used its constitutional authority to gather facts and draw public attention to important issues in the country.

Ku Klux Klan hearings

In 1871, Congress established a committee to investigate violence against and intimidation of Black voters in several states.

A year later, the committee produced 13 volumes of evidence containing the testimony of over 600 witnesses describing systemic violence – including killings, beatings, lynchings and rapes – committed by the Ku Klux Klan, known also as the KKK.

Despite extensive media coverage and the wealth of information uncovered by the committee, many Americans at that time still questioned the KKK’s existence.
Such skepticism was supported by the Democratic minority report that accompanied Congress’ investigation. At a time when Democrats represented the party that had supported slavery, their report legitimized the KKK’s actions in undeniably racist language. Segments of the public adopted the bigoted language and ideas contained in the minority report for decades to come.

Teapot Dome scandal

In 1922, news broke that President Warren G. Harding’s administration had secretly leased federal oil fields to political allies. At the time, these no-bid contracts were valued at around $200 million – the equivalent of over $3 billion today.

The contracts were awarded by Secretary of the Interior Albert Fall, a former senator and a friend of the president’s.

Congress opened an investigation into the matter, and a UPI news story said on Jan. 22, 1924, “The assistance of Department of Justice agents, United States marshals and the federal courts will be invoked if necessary, senators said, to force the truth from reluctant witnesses.”

As a result of the investigation, Fall resigned and was later convicted of bribery. He was the first former Cabinet official in history to be sentenced to prison because of misconduct in office.

Harding is considered to be one of the country’s worst presidents, in part because of the scandal and corruption brought to light by Congress’ investigation.

Organized crime and the Kefauver Committee

In 1950, Congress formed a special committee in response to a series of news articles suggesting that organized crime was corrupting many local government officials. It was referred to as the Kefauver Committee after its chairman, Democratic Senator Estes Kefauver of Tennessee. The committee launched an investigation, traveling to 14 major cities in the process.

The committee’s hearings rank among the most widely viewed congressional investigations in history. It is estimated that 90% of televisions in America were tuned in to the hearings.

In part, what made the investigation such good TV was the cast of characters subpoenaed to testify. Mobsters, their girlfriends, former elected officials and their lawyers paraded into the hearings, all captured on live television.

Not all witnesses complied with the subpoenas. In fact, the Senate approved 45 contempt of Congress citations in 1951 alone. Litigation over witness noncompliance continued in most cases even after the committee issued its over 11,000-page final report.

Watergate

In 1973, after seven men from President Richard Nixon’s reelection campaign broke into the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee, the Senate voted 77-0 to establish a committee to investigate the break-in.

Throughout the investigation, President Nixon refused to cooperate with the committee’s requests for information and directed his aides to do the same. He claimed executive privilege gave him the right to refuse to hand over White House records, including audiotapes, and planned for many of them to be destroyed.

The battle between the president and Congress went to court and, hours before the House was scheduled to start debating whether to impeach him, the Supreme Court ruled against Nixon.

The tapes showed Nixon had, despite his denials, taken part in the cover-up. Nixon lost the support of prominent Republicans in Congress, and he resigned shortly thereafter to avoid impeachment.

Intelligence community and the Church Committee

In addition to revealing presidential misconduct, the Watergate Committee investigation found evidence that the U.S. intelligence community was conducting potentially unconstitutional domestic operations, including spying on U.S. citizens.

In response, Congress established a special committee to investigate. The committee’s 16-month inquiry exposed the attempted assassinations of foreign political leaders, experiments conducted on U.S. citizens, and covert operations to recruit journalists to monitor private citizens’ communications and to spread propaganda over the media.

The committee found that every presidential administration from Franklin D. Roosevelt to Richard Nixon had abused its authority.

“Intelligence agencies have undermined the constitutional rights of citizens,” the final report concluded, “primarily because checks and balances designed by the framers of the Constitution to assure accountability have not been applied.”

Mainstream oversight

A few common themes run throughout these five noteworthy congressional investigations.

First, as the legacy of the Church Committee suggests, public hearings help provide a layer of transparency to government.

Congress and the media can be allies in investigation. Investigative reporting like in the work that revealed the Teapot Dome scandal and Watergate can lay the groundwork for congressional probes. And media coverage of proceedings like the Kefauver Committee’s investigation not only raises public awareness but also puts pressure on federal, state and local government officials to act.

But party can get in the way. In one example, partisan infighting and the Democrats’ rejection of the KKK proceedings hindered Congress’ effectiveness and provided a narrative that helped justify Jim Crow laws and other racist policies.

Similarly, party loyalty led many Republicans to remain vocal in support of Nixon until the full scope of the president’s actions were revealed through the Watergate investigation.

These moments in history also illustrate the importance of examining elected officials’ political support networks.

When President Harding assumed office, he placed loyal allies in government positions. While these allies helped reinforce Harding’s pledge to reorganize government and “return to normalcy,” they also perpetuated corruption.

Likewise, the Watergate investigation prompted criminal charges against 69 people, including two Cabinet officials. Additionally, dozens of major corporations pleaded guilty to illegally financing Nixon’s reelection campaign.

While the upcoming hearings of the House Jan. 6 investigative committee will be dealing with unprecedented events in American history, the very investigation of these events has strong precedent. Congress has long exercised its power to investigate some of the greatest problems facing the nation. In that way, the upcoming hearings fit squarely into the mainstream of American government oversight.

https://theconversation.com/what-5-previous-congressional-investigations-can-teach-us-about-the-house-jan-6-committee-hearings-181548

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation
« Reply #567 on: June 03, 2022, 12:42:48 AM »