Things seem to be unfolding rather quickly. Former White House aides and advisors are scrambling to cover themselves as they receive subpoenas to appear and produce documents.
It’s rare when lawyers — as opposed to their clients — take the Fifth Amendment. But Jeffrey Clark, the former Justice Department lawyer who reportedly tried to help Donald Trump overturn the 2020 presidential election, is now claiming the privilege against self-incrimination to avoid testifying before the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol. He has just been joined in that posture by one of Trump’s main outside legal advisers, John Eastman.
The lawsuit comes after the committee signaled it would pursue a criminal contempt referral against Meadows because of his refusal to sit for a deposition in the investigation into the Capitol riot. Meadows alleges that the subpoenas are "overly broad and unduly burdensome," while claiming that the committee "lacks lawful authority to seek and to obtain" the information requested.
And apparently Mark Meadows had a power point outlining how to overturn election results.
The 38-page presentation, entitled "Election Fraud, Foreign Interference & Options for 6 Jan," is dated one day before the Capitol riot. It's believed to have been submitted by Meadows after he was subpoenaed by the panel in connection with the insurrection.
Yeah. Why didn't we hear from them? The Secret Service has a big magnifying glass looking at their leadership and the judgment within the ranks right now, do you understand why?
Why do you think that Tony Oranato didn't make public proclamations about Trump's behavior that day? Do you think that the Select Committee has muzzled him? If so, why?
I don't think the Secret Service makes public proclamations anytime about a President. Although I'm not sure what he's told them in the past.
The Committee may be bringing him back.
Quote
It’s not clear whether Ornato will end up testifying related to the claims from Cassidy Hutchinson, an aide to former Trump White House chief of staff Mark Meadows. Hutchinson specifically testified that Ornato had told her about Trump lashing out in anger and lunging at a member of his protective detail as he demanded to be taken to the Capitol on January 6.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
44 minutes ago, Beerman said:
Exactly.
It's surprising that someone wouldn't realize that.
Right. Neither did the DOJ, except in some cases apparently. Regardless, Tony Oranato is not a member of the Secret Service, he's a private citizen who WAS the lead agent in Trump's presidential security during the time under investigation. It's surprising that someone wouldn't realize that.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Suit by Meadows Seeking to Block Jan. 6 Panel’s Subpoenas Is Dismissed https://nyti.ms/3fuvkHQ
Quote
A federal judge on Monday dismissed a lawsuit by Mark Meadows, the final chief of staff for President Donald J. Trump, that sought to block two subpoenas from the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack, including one to Verizon for Mr. Meadows’s phone and text data.
In throwing out the suit, Judge Carl J. Nichols of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia found that the committee’s subpoenas were covered under the Constitution’s speech or debate clause, which he said protected them from civil suits as legislative actions.
The decision is the latest chapter in a nearly yearlong legal battle between Mr. Meadows and the committee, but it is unlikely to be the final one that delivers investigators what they have been seeking.
Mr. Meadows can appeal. (His lawyer did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Monday.) And with the committee almost certain to shut down if Republicans win control of the House, as expected, in next week’s elections, the panel is most likely running out of time.
It's likely that Meadows will simply try to run out the clock and hope that House Republicans continue to protect the Insurrection and the attempt to stop the peaceful transition of power.
Pretty much every news site I've checked is following this story as a headline story. Whether the committee will recommend criminal charges.
Quote
Donald Trump’s Vice-President Mike Pence, who was forced into hiding during the riot, says he hopes the justice department “would not bring charges against the former president".
In an interview with Fox News, he said: “The president’s actions and words on January 6 were reckless, but I don’t know that it’s criminal to take bad advice from lawyers.”
Pence, who has presidential hopes of his own in 2024, must walk a fine political line between criticising Trump and not alienating the section of the Republican Party that remains loyal to his former boss.
“I hope the justice department understands the magnitude, the very idea of indicting a former president of the United States,” he said. “I think that would be terribly divisive in the country.”
It's the 11th story on Fox News. Even Johnny Depp is higher up. But I'm sure it move up as the day ends. But I guess it's about the clicks and not importance. Their lead story is something about Hunter Biden and their continuing coverage of what Twitter was like before Musk came along.
I have to say that I agree with Pence that it certainly will be divisive and not good for the country.
Then again his form boss stirs the pot with:
Quote
Trump baselessly insisted in a Truth Social post that the FBI was “absolutely” involved in a “coordinated effort to change election results” to make him a loser. That justified last year’s violent Jan. 6 “protest” at the U.S. Capitol, he insisted, even though nearly 1,000 rioters have been indicted for crimesrelated to the insurrection that day.
Now, Trump is urging his followers on Truth Social that the “weaponized thugs and tyrants” in the FBI and DOJ “must be dealt with.”
The blame for divisiveness runs two ways and does anyone know what he means but "dealt with"?
It's the 11th story on Fox News. Even Johnny Depp is higher up. But I'm sure it move up as the day ends. But I guess it's about the clicks and not importance. Their lead story is something about Hunter Biden and their continuing coverage of what Twitter was like before Musk came along.
Nobody cares. They are not a grand jury and their “referrals” mean nothing and carry zero weight.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
22 minutes ago, MaybeeRN said:
Nobody cares. They are not a grand jury and their “referrals” mean nothing and carry zero weight.
So you don't value the work of congress at all or just when it involves investigating an attempt to stop the peaceful transfer of power to benefit Trump? Will you be waiting for McCarthy's congress to refer Hunter Biden for criminal indictment?
So you don't value the work of congress at all or just when it involves investigating an attempt to stop the peaceful transfer of power to benefit Trump? Will you be waiting for McCarthy's congress to refer Hunter Biden for criminal indictment?
So you don't value the work of congress at all or just when it involves investigating an attempt to stop the peaceful transfer of power to benefit Trump? Will you be waiting for McCarthy's congress to refer Hunter Biden for criminal indictment?
A partisan witch hunt from a kangaroo committee. Peaceful transfer of power? The only violence was the killing of an unarmed protester.
Tweety, BSN, RN
36,273 Posts
I don't think the Secret Service makes public proclamations anytime about a President. Although I'm not sure what he's told them in the past.
The Committee may be bringing him back.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/16/politics/zoe-lofgren-January-6-secret-service-cnntv/index.html