Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation  (Read 115228 times)

Offline Rick Plant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8177
Re: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation
« Reply #664 on: June 17, 2022, 12:29:51 PM »
Advertisement
Pence could have prevented Jan. 6, but his presidential ambitions got in the way: Lawrence O’Donnell



MSNBC anchor Lawrence O'Donnell harshly criticized Mike Pence for waiting so long to publicly announce he would not go along with Donald Trump's attempted coup.

O'Donnell discussed his perspective with Rachel Maddow during the handoff between their shows

"Good evening, Rachel," O'Donnell said. "We're gonna have Rep Adam Schiff (D-CA) joining us."

"He's a member of the committee and based on what you are saying a few minutes ago, I'm gonna ask him, if their investigation, talking to the Pence staff, did anyone explain to the committee why the day before Jan. 6, when Donald Trump put out a statement saying Mike Pence and I completely agree that Mike Pence has the authority to reject electors, why didn't Mike Pence immediately put out a statement saying, no this is my position?"

"Why did he wait until the next day, when the attack on the Capitol was already underway? O'Donnell wondered.

"Yes," Maddow replied. "I mean, he could've said 'I want everyone in America, including those who are coming to Washington tomorrow to support me and the president, I want everybody to be under no illusions. I do not have the power to throughout the election results, nor does any individual American as our forefathers said. and we look forward to seeing you tomorrow, and MAGA forever, but I'm not gonna do that."

O'Donnell suspects Pence did not issue such a statement due to his 2024 presidential campaign aspirations.

"On Dec. 19, Donald Trump summoned his troops to Washington for a rally on Jan. 6. That would have been a very good day for the vice president of the United States to announce that nothing can change the Electoral College count on Jan. 6," he explained. "Could've made that announcement on the day Donald Trump made the announcement that it will be a rally on Jan. 6, but Mike Pence decided not to tell Donald Trump, and Trump voters the truth, because Mike Pence was still clinging to the dream that someday, those Trump voters would be voting for Mike Pence for president."

"And so, he didn't want to be the bearer of bad news to see future voters," O'Donnell concluded.

Watch below;


JFK Assassination Forum

Re: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation
« Reply #664 on: June 17, 2022, 12:29:51 PM »


Offline Rick Plant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8177
Re: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation
« Reply #665 on: June 17, 2022, 01:27:27 PM »
Mike Pence, hiding from the MAGA mob, on the phone watching Trump from the Rose Garden say how much he loves the people hunting him.




MSNBC @MSNBC
FBI confidential informant said Proud Boys would have killed then-VP Pence, Speaker Pelosi, and other lawmakers if given the chance on January 6, court filing shows. #January6thCommiteeHearings

Watch: https://twitter.com/MSNBC/status/1537532287734128641

Offline Rick Plant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8177
Re: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation
« Reply #666 on: June 17, 2022, 02:51:41 PM »
Jan. 6 Committee 'moving closer' to proving Trump led a seditious conspiracy: legal expert



MSNBC's Chuck Rosenberg believes the House Select Committee has come close to proving former President Donald Trump led a seditious conspiracy.

The "Morning Joe" legal analyst explained that Thursday's public hearing showed compelling evidence that the former president and his legal advisers, including attorney John Eastman, attempted to obstruct the congressional certification of President Joe Biden's election win, and that they were aware the scheme was unlawful.

"I think they're getting closer all the time, right?" said Rosenberg, a former federal prosecutor and senior FBI official. "The more you talk to people who are around the former president, like Eastman, the more you know about what the president intended. You don't know it perfectly, right? Let's take Eastman as an example. This man gave horrible legal advice, [but] being a bad lawyer is not a crime. I mean, thank goodness for that, right? I'm grateful for that every day."

"But being an unprincipled or unscrupulous lawyer gets you much closer to a crime," he added. "Eastman knew, and we learned this yesterday, that his theory that Pence could reject electors was unfounded. He said he'd lose 9-0 in the Supreme Court. He said that this recourse was not available to Al Gore as vice president in 2000, and he said it wouldn't be available to Kamala Harris in 2024. He also said he knew his theory violated the Electoral Count Act of 1887, yet he urged this on the president of the United States."

The Select Committee also showed evidence that others told the former president that Eastman's scheme was unfounded, illegal and improper, but Trump continued to press forward with a plan to pressure vice president Mike Pence to overturn his election loss in several key states.

"You're getting closer and closer to what the president knew and, therefore, what he intended," Rosenberg said. "Whether or not there is a criminal referral at the end of the day, I think you're beginning to see a very compelling case that the president of the United States, with others, conspired to obstruct Congress, to thwart the count of electoral votes, to interfere in this work."

"If you can tie them to the use of force, to a seditious conspiracy," he added.

Watch:


JFK Assassination Forum

Re: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation
« Reply #666 on: June 17, 2022, 02:51:41 PM »


Offline Rick Plant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8177
Re: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation
« Reply #667 on: June 17, 2022, 03:07:05 PM »
How the J6 Committee has masterfully trapped Donald Trump

The January 6 Committee is methodically slamming Donald Trump’s remaining escape hatches. The committee’s third televised hearing deftly wove together expert and eye-witness testimony, video, and Trump’s own tweets to put the former president at the very center of the failed coup.

Officially, Thursday’s hearing was about whether Vice President Mike Pence had the power to single-handedly decide the winner of the 2020 election. The answer was a resounding “no.” The public learned what those who have been following the J6 committee’s legal findings have long known: that the scheme outlined in the Eastman memos was a crackpot plan that even Eastman acknowledged was illegal.

Just as importantly, today’s hearing established that Trump waged a public and private pressure campaign to get Mike Pence to follow John Eastman’s plan to overturn the election during the certification. This campaign was waged in person, over the phone, and on twitter, and the committee shared evidence of every step.

One of the hearing’s star witnesses was Greg Jacob, Pence’s former counsel. One of the most intriguing aspects of his testimony was a review of an email exchange between Jacob and Eastman that took place while Pence and Jacob were hiding from the mob.

“And thanks to your bulls**t, we are now under siege,”Jacob wrote to Eastman from the secure location.

Eastman shot back that the siege was happening “because you and your boss did not do what was necessary.” There you have it in Eastman’s own words: the mob stormed the Capitol because Pence refused to play his assigned role in the coup. And Eastman should know, he was on stage with Trump at the Ellipse when Trump explained to the crowd that Mike Pence had to send the election back to the states so that the Republicans would win the election.

“[The states] want to recertify. But the only way that can happen is if Mike Pence agrees to send it back. Mike Pence has to agree to send it back,” Trump told the crowd.

In another email from hiding, Jacob asked Eastman whether he had advised Trump that the Vice President lacks the power to unilaterally overturn the election. “[Trump] been advised, as you should know, because you were on the phone when I did it,” Eastman wrote back, “But you know him. Once he gets something in his head, it’s hard to get him to change course."

During this exchange, Jacob forced the former law professor to concede that his plan violated the Electoral Count Act. Jacob also testified that Eastman admitted that not a single Supreme Court Justice would credit Eastman’s far-fetched theory that the vice president can decide who wins an election.

Eastman is saying that he told Trump the coup was illegal, but Trump tried to make it happen anyway. Knowingly, willfully, unlawfully.

https://www.rawstory.com/the-house-january-6th-select-committee-has-masterfully-trapped-donald-trump/

Offline Rick Plant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8177
Re: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation
« Reply #668 on: June 17, 2022, 03:33:46 PM »
8 takeaways from the January 6 hearings day 3



CNN — The House select committee investigating the Capitol insurrection on Thursday detailed how former President Donald Trump tried to pressure his vice president to join in his scheme to overturn the presidential election – and how Mike Pence’s refusal put his life in danger as rioters called for his hanging on January 6, 2021.

Two witnesses testified at Thursday’s hearing who advised Pence that he did not have the authority to subvert the election, former Pence attorney Greg Jacob and retired Republican judge J. Michael Luttig.

The committee walked through how conservative Trump attorney John Eastman put forward a legal theory that Pence could unilaterally block certification of the election – a theory that was roundly rejected by Trump’s White House attorneys and Pence’s team but nevertheless embraced by the former President.

Here are the key takeaways from the committee’s third hearing this month:

Trump was told Eastman’s plan was illegal – but tried it anyway

There were many revelations, but the perhaps most important one: Trump was told repeatedly that his plan for Pence to overturn the election on January 6 was illegal, but he tried to do it anyway.

According to witness testimony, Pence himself and the lawyer who concocted the scheme advised Trump directly that the plan was unconstitutional and violated federal law. Committee members argued that this shows Trump’s corrupt intentions, and could lay the groundwork for a potential indictment.

In a videotaped deposition, which was played Thursday, Pence’s chief of staff Marc Short said Pence advised Trump “many times” that he didn’t have the legal or constitutional authority to overturn the results while presiding over the joint session of Congress on January 6 to count the electoral votes.

Even Eastman, who helped devise the scheme and pitched it to Trump, admitted in front of Trump that the plan would require Pence to violate federal law, according to a clip of a deposition from Jacob, Pence’s senior legal adviser, which was played at Thursday’s hearing.

Legal scholars from across the political spectrum agree that Eastman’s plan was preposterous. Luttig, the former federal judge who advised Pence during the transition, testified at Thursday’s hearing that he “would have laid my body across the road” before letting Pence illegally overturn the election.

The panel tied the Mike Pence pressure campaign to January 6 violence

The committee tried to connect Trump’s pressure campaign against Pence to the violence on January 6, by weaving together testimony from Pence aides, Trump’s public statements and comments from rioters at the Capitol.

Some of the most compelling evidence came from the rioters themselves.

Many of them had listened to Trump’s rallies where he claimed – inaccurately – that the election was rigged against him, and Pence had the power to do something about it while presiding over the Electoral College certification. While the insurrection was underway, they cited Trump’s comments about Pence.

And many of them saw, in real-time, Trump’s tweet criticizing Pence while the Capitol was under attack, where he said Pence “didn’t have the courage to do what should have been done.”

The point of highlighting this on Thursday was to lay the blame for the violence at Trump’s feet. And right after the attack, many top Republicans agreed with that conclusion. But over the last year and a half, many Republicans have shied away from blaming Trump, and the committee hopes to change that.

Former Trump White House attorney Eric Herschmann told the committee that Eastman told him he was willing to accept violence in order to overturn the 2020 election. The panel played video from Herschmann’s deposition where he described a conversation with Eastman about his claims that the vice president could overturn the election in Congress.

Herschmann warned Eastman that his strategy, if implemented, was “going to cause riots in the streets.”

"And he said words to the effect of, ‘There’s been violence in the history of our country in order to protect the democracy, or to protect the republic,’ ” Herschmann said.

And the committee highlighted testimony from witnesses who described Turmp exacerbating the situation on January 6 during the riot. Deputy press secretary Sarah Matthews testified in a taped deposition that was shown that a tweet Trump sent on January 6 helped escalate the situation.

“It felt like he was pouring gasoline on the fire,” she added.

The danger to Pence was real as the mob got about 40 feet from the vice president

The committee underscored that Pence was in real danger on January 6, and the panel made the case that Trump was to blame.

The mob got about 40 feet from Pence – that’s a little more than a first down in football. Rioters threatened him by name, and were enraged that he didn’t overturn the election, because they believed Trump’s lie that Pence could unilaterally nullify Joe Biden’s victory in the Electoral College.

"Vice President Pence was a focus of the violent attack,” said committee member Rep. Pete Aguilar, a California Democrat.

Pence’s team evacuated and the committee showed new images of the then-vice president sheltering in a basement bunker in the US Capitol as the violence unfolded.

Pence and his wife, Karen Pence, reacted “with frustration” to the fact that Trump never called to check on them, according to Jacob’s testimony.

Pence and Trump’s relationship had soured deeply in the lead-up to the January 6 congressional session, as Pence made clear that he would not comply with the scheme to overturn the election results that Trump was pushing.

Trump then began to turn on his vice president in his public remarks, stirring up his supporters’ anger.

For his part, as he worked from a secure location in the Capitol, Pence reached out to congressional leaders, the acting defense secretary and others “to check on their safety and to address the growing crisis,” Aguilar said Thursday.

Eastman wouldn’t take no for an answer on overturning the election

The hearing underscored how Eastman had pushed over and over for Pence to try to overturn the election, despite facing sharp resistance from White House lawyers and Pence’s team.

Even after the riot at the Capitol, Eastman was still pursuing efforts to block the election result, the committee revealed. Eastman’s actions in many ways mirrored those of Trump, who also refused to accept Pence’s rejection and lashed out at his vice president in his speech and on Twitter.

The committee played testimony from video depositions where White House officials explained how they thought Eastman’s theory was “nutty” before January 6 – and told him so. Jacob described Eastman’s plans as “certifiably crazy.”

Jacob, Pence’s chief counsel, described the meetings he’d had with Eastman on January 4 and January 5, including when Eastman directly asked him for Pence to reject electors.

“I concluded by saying, ‘John, in light of everything that we’ve discussed, can’t we just both agree that this is a terrible idea?’ ” Jacob said. “And he couldn’t quite bring himself to say yes to that. But he very clearly said, ‘Well, yeah, I see we’re not going to be able to persuade you to do this.’ And that was how the meeting concluded.”

But on the evening of January 6 – after rioters had attacked the Capitol and forced the vice president and his team to flee – Eastman tried to leverage the delay in certification by arguing there had been a minor violation of the Electoral Count Act and Pence should delay for 10 days as a result.

In a phone call with Herschmann on January 7, Eastman was still pursuing legal options to appeal the election results in Georgia.

Herschmann told the committee in a deposition: “I said to him, ‘Are you out of your effing mind? Because I only want to hear two words coming out of your mouth from now on: orderly transition.’”

Eastman emailed Giuliani about receiving a presidential pardon after January 6

Eastman emailed Rudy Giuliani a few days after January 6, 2021, and asked to be included on a list of potential recipients of a presidential pardon, the committee revealed during Thursdays hearing.

The committee said Eastman made the request to Giuliani, Trump’s former attorney, in an email.

“I’ve decided that I should be on the pardon list, if that is still in the works,” the email from Eastman to Giuliani read.

Eastman did not ultimately receive a pardon and refused to answer the committee’s questions about his role in efforts to overturn the 2020 election, repeatedly pleading the Fifth during his deposition.

The committee argued during Thursday’s hearing that Eastman’s request for a pardon, and his decision to repeatedly plead the Fifth when questioned previously by the panel, indicates Eastman knew his actions were potentially criminal.

CNN previously reported that Giuliani and other Trump associates had raised the idea of receiving preemptive pardons in the weeks leading up to January 6 but the US Capitol riot had complicated his desire to pardon himself, his kids and personal lawyer. At the time, several of Trump’s closest advisers also urged him not to grant clemency to anyone involved in the January 6 attack, despite Trump’s initial stance that those involved had done nothing wrong.

The star of Thursday’s hearing was not in the room

One person noticeably absent on Thursday was the star of the hearing himself: the former vice president.

The committee cast Pence as the hero – making the case that American democracy would have slipped into a state of chaos had he succumbed to Trump’s pressure campaign.

But as the committee touted Pence’s commitment to the Constitution and bravery on January 6, it was impossible to ignore the fact that the former vice president was not in the room.

Instead, the committee relied on live witness testimony from the two former Pence advisers who appeared to speak on his behalf.

Earlier this year, the committee’s chairman, Democratic Rep. Bennie Thompson of Mississippi, had suggested the committee would seek testimony from Pence. Still, the prospect of Pence appearing before the committee, particularly in public, has always been viewed as a long shot – to say the least.

Asked Wednesday if the committee is still interested in hearing from Pence, committee aides demurred, telling reporters the investigation is ongoing and therefore they cannot provide details about any engagement with a particular witness.

“Nothing new to share on that, other than we continue to search for facts and if there is more to share, we’ll share it in the future,” one of the aides said.

The fact that two of Pence’s former advisers appeared Thursday, and Short testified on camera behind closed doors, indicates that Pence was not actively seeking to block those around him from sharing information with the committee in his stead.

Luttig turns parts of the hearing into a lengthy constitutional seminar

The January 6 committee’s hearings to date have been briskly produced affairs, with emotional, violent video interspersed with testimony from depositions – and minimal live witness testimony.

On Thursday, Luttig, a retired judge, had other ideas.

Luttig gave lengthy, meandering answers with a halting approach that stretched on while he dove into issues like the history of the Electoral Count Act.

Luttig’s comments were basically the opposite of “must-see TV,” the prime-time hearings that committee has signaled it’s holding to try to connect with the American public about the significance of the January 6 attack on the Capitol and on democracy.

At the same time, the points Luttig made – about how the legal schemes Eastman and Trump pushed were baseless and Trump was told as much before January 6 – were essential to the committee’s case trying to connect Trump’s efforts to overturn the election to the violence. But his delivery got in the way of his message.

American democracy is on the line

The investigation is about the 2020 election, but committee members went to great lengths to reframe the conversation about the future threats to democracy, with an eye toward 2024.

And it’s not just the Democrats who run the committee who are raising the alarm about Trump’s increasingly anti-democratic – lowercase D – behavior, and what it means for future elections.

Jacob said Trump’s plan was “antithetical to everything in our democracy” and would’ve thrown the nation into an unprecedented constitutional crisis.”

Luttig said Trump poses a “clear and present danger to American democracy.” The conservative Republican said he had reached this conclusion because Trump and his allies are still lying about the 2020 election, endorsing candidates who are promoting these lies and showing no signs of backing down.

The committee says it will put forward legislative proposals to clarify old election laws, close the loopholes that Trump and Eastman tried to exploit, and safeguard the transition of power. There is bipartisan interest in passing some of these proposals, but it’s not clear yet if there is enough support to send any bills to Biden’s desk. With the midterm elections looming, time may be running out.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/16/politics/january-6-hearing-day-3-takeaways/index.html

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation
« Reply #668 on: June 17, 2022, 03:33:46 PM »


Offline Rick Plant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8177
Re: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation
« Reply #669 on: June 18, 2022, 12:56:12 PM »
The next Jan. 6 hearing ‘is going to trigger Trump like nothing else’: Rick Wilson

Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger and his deputy Gabe Sterling are expected to testify on front of the Jan. 6 committee at the end of this month, CNN reports.

Raffensperger's made headlines after the 2020 election for refusing former President Donald Trump's attempt to pressure him to "find" the votes necessary for Trump to win Georgia. Raffensperger, who is a Republican, already testified before the committee as well as a special grand jury investigating Trump's efforts to overturn the election.

According to the Lincoln Project's Rick Wilson, Raffensperger and Sterling appearing before the committee is bad news for Trump.

"This is going to trigger Trump like nothing else," Wilson tweeted this Friday.

"As Trump refused to accept the outcome of the 2020 election and his allies pursued various schemes to try to upend the results, Raffensperger, Raffensperger's wife Tricia, and other Georgia officials faced a barrage of threats," CNN's report stated. "In December 2020, Sterling publicly pleaded for Trump to condemn the harassment that officials and election workers had been facing."

On Thursday, the Jan. 6 committee detailed how the former president berated Mike Pence for not going along with the scheme both knew to be unlawful -- even after being told violence had erupted as Congress was meeting to certify Joe Biden's victory.

The committee heard from retired federal judge J Michael Luttig, who testified that the United States would have been plunged into "a revolution within a paralyzing constitutional crisis" had Pence folded under Trump's pressure.

Luttig, a renowned conservative legal scholar, had advised Pence at the time that his role in overseeing the ratification of the election was purely ceremonial -- and that he had no power to oppose the result.

"There was no basis in the constitution or the laws of the United States at all for the theory espoused by Mr Eastman. At all. None," Luttig said.

Trump reacted to the hearing by demanding that he receive "equal time" on the airwaves to lay out his bogus theory that the election was stolen -- but opponents pointed out that he has not taken up the committee's invitation to testify.

https://www.rawstory.com/jan-6-hearing-trump/

Offline Rick Plant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8177
Re: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation
« Reply #670 on: June 18, 2022, 01:05:56 PM »
Trump wanted a different insurrection: Jan. 6 hearing reveals violent intent behind Pence plot



Over the many months of revelations about Donald Trump's attempted coup, one lingering question has rarely been asked: What would have come next if Vice President Mike Pence had done what they asked?

A collective "Oh well, I guess Trump is president for another four years after all" from the country sounds unlikely, to say the least. And if the courts had become involved, it's hard to imagine that Trump's followers would have been any less angry than they already were. So, what was the plan?

Thursday's January 6th Committee hearing finally addressed that question, at least obliquely, through testimony by Donald Trump's staff and Mike Pence's inner circle. The answer was not comforting.

This third hearing discussed the campaign to pressure Pence, then the vice president, into overturning the election — and what a campaign it was. The main player in this scheme was Republican lawyer John Eastman, who appears to have been a Trump true believer (as well as a highly credentialed, conservative, constitutional scholar) who offered his services to serve Trump's pre-fabricated conspiracy theory that the election had been stolen. Trump was apparently pleased with his devotion to the Big Lie and Eastman quickly became the primary January 6th coup plotter.

It is pretty clear that Eastman knew there was a good chance for serious bloodshed if Pence overturned the election.

The hearings showed that Eastman was relentless, throwing out one argument after another to get Pence to go along with the program. His and Trump's entreaties were met with furious pushback from the White House counsel's office and Pence's own lawyers who argued that it was illegal, unconstitutional and wrong over and over again. Eastman was so obsessive about his crusade to overturn the election, however, that even after the insurrection on Jan. 6th he came back to one of the White House lawyers who said what is no doubt going to be one of the most famous quotes of this scandal: "I'm going to give you the best free legal advice you're ever getting in your life. Get a great f-ing criminal defense lawyer. You're going to need it." A few days later Eastman emailed Trump's other attorney Rudy Giuliani asking to be on the "pardon list."

The pressure on Pence was immense. But on Jan. 6th, Pence refused to do his boss's bidding even after Trump insulted him on the phone by calling him a "pussy." Pence refused to leave the Capitol complex that day despite the danger presented by the mob Trump had incited. The hearing showed that at one point rioters were only 40 feet away and there is evidence some of the Proud Boys intended to kill Pence.

Stipulating that Pence did the right thing and showed courage on that day, the narrative set forth in the witness testimony that Pence was "steely and determined" from the beginning, telling Trump he didn't have the authority to do what they were asking, is belied by the fact that Pence never said a word in public to that effect and sought the guidance of both legal and political advisers about what he should do. The New York Times reported on January 5th that he was still trying to find some middle ground, even suggesting that while he couldn't overturn the election, he could make a statement supporting Trump's contention that the election was fraudulent. Like so many others in Trump's orbit, Pence could have taken action much earlier.

The second hearing earlier this week made the case that Trump knew the election was legitimate and lied about it anyway. The upshot of the third hearing was that Trump and his lawyers knew their plot to overturn the election was illegal and unconstitutional and pushed it anyway. It was an act of sheer partisan power, perfectly illustrated by this comment:

Eastman and Trump thought they could bully their way through and get their way. And the testimony strongly suggests that they were well prepared for, perhaps even anticipating, violence as a result of their actions. But it's not clear at all that they anticipated their own supporters would storm the Capitol before the vote was even taken. They assumed there would be violence in the streets after Pence did their bidding.

Like so many others in Trump's orbit, Pence could have taken action much earlier.

Greg Jacob, a former advisor to Pence, relayed a conversation with Eastman in which the two discussed the possible reaction. Jacob said the whole gambit would be kicked out of court and Eastman claimed that the Supreme Court would invoke the "political question doctrine" and refuse to take the case. Jacob pointed out that that would lead to "an unprecedented constitutional jump ball situation with that stand off and as I expressed to him, that issue might well have to be decided in the streets."

Eric Hershmann, from the White House counsels office had a similar conversation with Eastman:

I said you're going to turn around and tell 78-plus million people in this country that your theory is --- this is how you're going to invalidate their votes, because you think the election was stolen? And I said they're not going to tolerate that. I said you're going to cause riots in the streets. And he said words to the effect of there has been violence in the history of our country, Eric, to protect the democracy or protect the republic.

It is pretty clear that Eastman knew there was a good chance for serious bloodshed if Pence overturned the election. And I think it's fair to say that Trump knew that too. In fact, he was probably welcoming it. It would give him the chance to do what he'd been wanting to do for ages: invoke the Insurrection Act.

Former acting Defense Secretary Chris Miller told Congress over a year ago that Trump had ordered him to have the National Guard ready to protect his supporters on January 6th. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley and Defense Secretary Mark Esper both said Trump had to be talked out of using the Insurrection Act to put down the George Floyd protests and former Homeland Security official Miles Taylor tweeted that Trump "mused about invoking the Insurrection Act YEARS before Jan 6 — calling it a 'magic power' — in convos I witnessed & was briefed on."

Taylor thinks Trump purposefully incited the mob of January 6th for that purpose but Thursday's testimony is far more suggestive of a plan to invoke the act after Pence overturned the election, inciting expected street protests from the people whose votes had just been discarded and whose democracy had just been incinerated. This would have given Trump the excuse he needed to solidify his coup with a classic military intervention.

Trump and his henchmen may very well have known their actions would incite an insurrection. They just planned for a different one than they got. When the mob stormed the Capitol, Trump was left with the choice to call out the National Guard on his own supporters or let them try to overturn the election by force. We all know which path he chose to take.

https://www.rawstory.com/trump-wanted-a-different-insurrection-jan-6-hearing-reveals-violent-intent-behind-pence-plot/

Offline Rick Plant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8177
Re: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation
« Reply #671 on: June 18, 2022, 01:17:47 PM »
Jaime Raskin reveals the importance of what Trump isn't saying about the Jan. 6 hearings

Democratic Rep. Jaime Raskin of Maryland offered his analysis of Donald Trump's Friday speech at a "Faith and Freedom Coalition's Road to a Majority" conference in Nashville.

Raskin, a former constitutional law professor, is a member of the House Select Committee Investigating the Jan. 6 Attack on the U.S. Capitol.

Raskin was interviewed by CNN senior legal analyst Laura Coates after she played a clip of Trump's speech

"All eyes have really been on these hearings, waiting to see what might unfold," Coates said. "And iIm wondering from your perspective, initially, how do you think it's going in the mission to alert the public about not only the need for the committee but the clear and present danger it still poses?"

"The evidence is still overwhelming that even Donald Trump isn't trying to lie about it anymore," Raskin said.

'He just came right out tonight and essentially affirmed everything we're saying. He never challenged the idea that he's been lying about who won the election. He never challenged the idea that he's been ripping off his followers by pretending that their money was somehow going into litigation or, you know, anything to try to overturn the official result," he explained. "And he's basically did nothing to challenge any fact that we have produced in this process."

Raskin did not answer Coates' repeated questions on why the select committee has refused to turn over interview transcripts to the Department of Justice, which is running a parallel investigation.

Watch:


JFK Assassination Forum

Re: 1/6 Insurrection Investigation
« Reply #671 on: June 18, 2022, 01:17:47 PM »