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.
I read it yesterday. My spouse is recovering from an illness and watched it. Stunning stuff. There are many Americans who will ignore this or deny that it has any value. I suspect they will largely be the same people who were very alarmed about the Hur report but dismissed the Mueller report. There's a pattern of behavior among some of our our fellow Americans when it comes to Trump. .
Released 12/31/25 Jack Smith Deposition video here:
Jack Smith kept asking to have all hearings made public. Now we know why they wanted to deny him.
It seemed that the republican questions were designed to try to discredit three investigations and Smith's processes. The democrats, OTOH, focused upon Trump's behavior and the appearance that Judge Cannon and the GOP are covering up for a criminal. They should release volume 2 to the public.
Specializes in Peds/outpatient FP,derm,allergy/private duty.
Beerman said:
I told you so.
"If I were a defense attorney and Ms. Hutchinson were a witness, the first thing I would do was seek to preclude some of her testimony because it was hearsay, and I don't have the full range of her testimony in front of me right now, but I do remember that that was a decent part of it," Smith said.
Smith was also asked about specific claims Hutchinson had made, including that Trump was aware that some of his supporters would be armed at his rally and that Trump attempted to grab the steering wheel of his driver out of anger.
Hutchinson "was a second or even thirdhand witness," Smith said, adding that other witnesses gave "different perspectives" than her. "
Where is the told you so part? He's talking about what he would do if he were a defense attorney and this was a trial. Obviously her free-wheeling conjecture would be ripped apart if he was in the role of Trump's defense attorney.
nursej22, MSN, RN
5,247 Posts
I'm reading the transcript of the hearing. It's very interesting.
https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/republicans-judiciary.house.gov/files/2025-12/Smith-Depo-Transcript_Redacted-w-Errata.pdf