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.
You are making stuff up again. It seems to be a pattern of behavior.
Well, you kinda admitted it,
"
"Yes, when behavior and attitudes are reminiscent of 20th century fascists, that might get mentioned by members. I still think that Session's zero tolerance policy that considered permanent family separation a useful deterrent falls on the evil side if the morality scale".
Sorry I should have said, " I don't "mention" members as being 20th century fascists like you do" when I do not agree or as a method of silencing people.
What are you even þalking about? What facts contradict my claims? That the media completely falsified this claim about the police officer who actually wasn't beat to death by "Trump inserectionist"? I mean it wasn't even just a slight deviation from the truth like, "because the officer died several hours after the insurrection, it was first believed that it was caused by events that had been taken place earlier in the day, along with false reports of beating with a fire extiguisher. However this has been shown not to be the case"
The Medical Examiner concluded that the events earlier in the day played a role in his death, so claims that he died as a result of the riot are not false.
You are correct that it was initially reported that he had been hit with a fire extinguisher although that wasn't "falsified" by the media, that claim came from the US Capitol Police news release.
On 12/21/2021 at 2:46 PM, Cclm said:
No. Then they decided to furthervtheir propaganda by alluding that it was a allergic reaction to being bear sprayed... Then even with the autopsy it's still bring manipulated.
Officer Sicknick had a condition in which he was not aware of. Yes, stressful situation causing increase of blood pressure leading to the 2 strokes. Any high stress police interaction put him at great risk or any situation which his BP would increase. Getting into a minor car accident voted cause that. So is the other driver responsible for his death because the crash increased his BP then he suffered a stroke? What??? But but still it was because of the riot, it caused his BP to rise.
What "condition" are you referring to?
There's been no evidence that he had a condition that was the primary cause of the basilar artery thrombus, if it was a dissection or spontaneous bleed then you'd have a point since those are typically caused by a pre-existing defect.
Basilar artery thrombus is typically caused by the same adverse effects caused by capsaicin spray, critically elevated BP (far more than what typical stress causes) and inflammation-mediated embolic events.
There was initially some confusion with what was initially reported regarding the autopsy report, which drew widespread criticism from forensic pathologists and neurologists, until the medical examiner clarified that he was apparently using the term "natural causes" differently than how it is commonly understood, since he did conclude that the riot contributed to his death.
On 12/21/2021 at 2:46 PM, Cclm said:
Instead of just correcting the story and moving on they could not just accept or let go of the political jewl that he died as a result somehow of Jan.6. Complete with an embarrassing flamboyant service at the Capital for the fallen officer.(he deserved his housed funeral but) Coming from the party of ACAB and defend the police.
Again, according to the medical examiner that conducted the autopsy, his death was related to the riot of January 6th.
On 12/21/2021 at 2:46 PM, Cclm said:
Do you not find that a bit disturbing? Do you mean that there has been reports of the "facts" that I ignore because I'm delusional? Even Reuters reported it falsely so what's to say any of the "facts" we heard are actually the facts?
Same with Nick Sandman and Kyle Rittenhouse. Jussy Smoliet and the Nascar fake hate crime! All false reported "facts",.
When an average person see this with their own eyes year after year and so blatantly, can you wonder why there could be a conditioning of believing something misrepresented as a stolen election?
P.s: I never said that people believed something untruthful and committed crimes that day. However with the inflated BS I described above, can you blame me for thinking that this "inserection" may not be what these dishonest demagogues are saying it is? The FBI came out and said there wasn't a organized connection between Trump and his associates. But here we are having a enquiry. Just to keep up the BS narrative at all cost.
"Delusional" means to hold a view of reality that ignores readily available facts. It's one thing to dispute what the facts are, it's another to just pretend they don't exist.
It's completely reasonable to be critical of everything you hear, but to reflexively believe the opposite of what you hear must be true is a bit different.
The was no operational coordination between trump and the mob, although typically there isn't between a corrupt leader and the insurrectionist mobs that seek to unlawfully keep them in power. They were driven by false claims of a stolen election and the idea that what should be done about it was to obstruct or impede the lawful transfer of power, and it was Trump promoting these ideas.
The Medical Examiner concluded that the events earlier in the day played a role in his death, so claims that he died as a result of the riot are not false.
You are correct that it was initially reported that he had been hit with a fire extinguisher although that wasn't "falsified" by the media, that claim came from the US Capitol Police news release.
What "condition" are you referring to?
There's been no evidence that he had a condition that was the primary cause of the basilar artery thrombus, if it was a dissection or spontaneous bleed then you'd have a point since those are typically caused by a pre-existing defect.
Basilar artery thrombus is typically caused by the same adverse effects caused by capsaicin spray, critically elevated BP (far more than what typical stress causes) and inflammation-mediated embolic events.
There was initially some confusion with what was initially reported regarding the autopsy report, which drew widespread criticism from forensic pathologists and neurologists, until the medical examiner clarified that he was apparently using the term "natural causes" differently than how it is commonly understood, since he did conclude that the riot contributed to his death.
Again, according to the medical examiner that conducted the autopsy, his death was related to the riot of January 6th.
"Delusional" means to hold a view of reality that ignores readily available facts. It's one thing to dispute what the facts are, it's another to just pretend they don't exist.
It's completely reasonable to be critical of everything you hear, but to reflexively believe the opposite of what you hear must be true is a bit different.
The was no operational coordination between trump and the mob, although typically there isn't between a corrupt leader and the insurrectionist mobs that seek to unlawfully keep them in power. They were driven by false claims of a stolen election and the idea that what should be done about it was to obstruct or impede the lawful transfer of power, and it was Trump promoting these ideas.
No. It was not related to the bear spray. The only thing could have been was a increase of blood pressure. Probably from being in a stressful situation. Could have been anything. But keep pushing the narrative. People will still believe it.
It's hard to know the "facts" when the "facts" turn to be false. I do not pretend facts don't exist, but I do tend to not believe everything I see or hear. It's up to ourselves to decide because the media sure isn't trustworthy. Weak argument. I could say you chose to nor believe the "facts" and are delusional. See?
Going by my own eyes and all the info I have absorbed, that it was a 4 hour clown show and none of those people looked like they had any idea of what they were doing let alone stage an actual coup LOL. Nor did Trump. He sounds dumb , do you think his words actually staged a couple? Really? I guess if you tell people to peacefully and patrioticaly make your voices heard. If that incitement then okay.
Officer Sicknick had a condition in which he was not aware of. Yes, stressful situation causing increase of blood pressure leading to the 2 strokes. Any high stress police interaction put him at great risk or any situation which his BP would increase. Getting into a minor car accident voted cause that. So is the other driver responsible for his death because the crash increased his BP then he suffered a stroke? What??? But but still it was because of the riot, it caused his BP to rise.
Instead of just correcting the story and moving on they could not just accept or let go of the political jewl that he died as a result somehow of Jan.6. Complete with an embarrassing flamboyant service at the Capital for the fallen officer.(he deserved his housed funeral but) Coming from the party of ACAB and defend the police.
Do you not find that a bit disturbing
No, I do not in the least find that disturbing.
Maybe he would have stood a chance in a routine screening for discovering his condition and been treated rather than dying in the line of duty under stress.
Yes, he's worthy of his "flamboyant service at the Capital for the fallen officer". Why would you find that embarrassing? He died in the line of duty defending the capital, not some minor car accident off duty.
Yes, it was first reported he died of injuries, but then It was widely reported that he died of natural causes. It wasn't twisted or spun after the medical examiner released their report.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
17 hours ago, Cclm said:
Well, you kinda admitted it,
"
"Yes, when behavior and attitudes are reminiscent of 20th century fascists, that might get mentioned by members. I still think that Session's zero tolerance policy that considered permanent family separation a useful deterrent falls on the evil side if the morality scale".
Sorry I should have said, " I don't "mention" members as being 20th century fascists like you do" when I do not agree or as a method of silencing people.
Better?
1
Quoting me making a comment about facism isn't evidence that I call Trump supporters nazis. It is more likely just you projecting your preference to throw around the term NAZI onto me. That's a pattern of behavior for you.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
On 12/21/2021 at 2:03 PM, Cclm said:
I think I posted evidence that this did get blown up and misrepresented. And you seem to not like it. This isn't the only example either. Even sources you, the propaganda detector and decider believe to be reputable. Including the tool you referenced me.
The struggle before his death really fid not have anything to do with it except his BP was raised. He could have drive home and got into a car accident and the same could have happened. Was it the car or the other drivers fault? (If the driver wasn't a Trump supporter of course".
Trump spouted off a bunch of egotistical comments that a SMALL group of people took too litterally. He did not incite an inserection. Those people were a disorganized mess. They didn't know what they were doing. Imo reading all different types of sourced which evidently are not 100% truthful proved by my source. If I saw 100% proof this was caused by Trump, I would denounce him right away. You would coddle Biden if he killed puppies.
Sounds like you believe anything that goes with your narrative, just like the dishonest people who reported this all wrong.
P.s: it's not large scale election fraud but can you with a straight face claim the democrats did not exploit covid and mail in voting at all? Looool. Nevermind you wouldn't be honest anyway.....
Your opinion of the events doesn't seem to match the medical examiner's expert opinion and, honestly reflects a simplistic view of trauma and mechanism of injury.
There is no evidence of voter fraud on any level which should cause the average American concern about election integrity...not even with the intentionally delayed mailed in ballots by the Post Master General. The concern that you reference is fabricated and Trump was the instigator or that bunch of crap too.
It's important to note that you cannot present one iota of evidence that mailed in ballots were exploited somewhere by someone. No matter, you'll just ignore that lack of evidence and carry on commenting as if your premise about mailed ballots isn't total garbage. That's also a pattern of behavior for you in these threads. You are impervious to facts which counter your opinion but persistent in promoting propaganda...like the thought that American elections were somehow suspect since Trump lost the popular vote twice.
Quoting me making a comment about facism isn't evidence that I call Trump supporters nazis. It is more likely just you projecting your preference to throw around the term NAZI onto me. That's a pattern of behavior for you [emphasis added].
If you have, I haven't seen it; and while I rarely participate in these threads I do follow them. Thank you for that.
Waiting has been difficult but the story of January 6 is about to be publicly narrated. There will be hearings that we can watch plus some written findings. The plan is to publish a report in the Summer and perhaps another in the early autumn. Just in time to keep people aware of the value of a vote.
Chairman Bennie G. Thompson (D-MS) and Vice Chair Liz Cheney (R-WY) today announced that the Select Committee is seeking information from Sean Hannity about information relevant to the committee’s investigation into the violent attack of January 6th and its causes.
Quote
Dear Mr. Hannity:
On June 30, 2021, the House adopted House Resolution 503, establishing the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol (the “Select Committee”). The Select Committee is investigating the facts, circumstances, and causes of the January 6th attack and issues relating thereto. The Select Committee now has information in its possession, as outlined in part below, indicating that you had advance knowledge regarding President Trump’s and his legal team’s planning for January 6th. It also appears that you were expressing concerns and providing advice to the President and certain White House staff regarding that planning. You also had relevant communications while the riot was underway, and in the days thereafter. These communications make you a fact witness in our investigation.
...Thus, we write today to seek your voluntary cooperation on a specific and narrow range of factual questions.
The Select Committee is in possession of dozens of text messages you sent to and received from former White House Chief of Staff, Mark Meadows and others related to the 2020 election and President Trump’s efforts to contest the outcome of the vote. At this time, we are specifically focused on a series of your communications with President Trump, White House staff and President Trump’s legal team between December 31, 2020, and January 20, 2021. For example, on December 31, 2020, you texted Mr. Meadows the following:
“We can’t lose the entire WH counsels office. I do NOT see January 6 happening the way he is being told. After the 6 th. [sic] He should announce will lead the nationwide effort to reform voting integrity. Go to Fl and watch Joe mess up daily. Stay engaged. When he speaks people will listen.”
Among many other things, this text suggests that you had knowledge of concerns by President Trump’s White House Counsel’s Office regarding the legality of the former President’s plans for January 6th. These facts are directly relevant to our inquiry.
Similarly, on January 5th, the night before the violent riot, you sent and received a stream of texts. You wrote: “Im very worried about the next 48 hours.” With the counting of the electoral votes scheduled for January 6th at 1 p.m., why were you concerned about the next 48 hours?
Also, on the evening of January 5th, you texted Mr. Meadows: “Pence pressure. WH counsel will leave.” What communications or information led you to conclude that White House Counsel would leave? What precisely did you know at that time?
It also appears from other text messages that you may have had a conversation directly with President Trump on the evening of January 5th (and perhaps at other times) regarding his planning for January 6th. Each of these non-privileged communications is directly relevant to our investigation. ...
Additionally, Representative Raskin, a Jan. 6th committee member, confirmed that the Committee Chair Benny Thompson would like to speak with former VP Mike Pence (formal invite not yet submitted). They've already spoken with various Pence aides including his Chief of Staff Marc Short and national security adviser Keith Kellogg.
Specializes in Vents, Telemetry, Home Care, Home infusion.
Attorney General Merrick Garland will give a speech Wednesday 1/5/2022 about the Justice Department’s efforts to investigate and prosecute those responsible for the Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol. Seeing lots of discussions that"small fry" being prosecuted but no word re those at the top + Garland cannot prevent future violence “without a robust criminal investigation of those at the top.”
The remarks will be streamed on the Justice Department’s website, scheduled to begin at 2:30 p.m. Wednesday, per the department. Setting my cell phone alarm so I won't miss it!
In a little less than six months, the committee has taken in a massive amount of data — interviewing more than 300 witnesses, announcing more than 50 subpoenas, obtaining more than 35,000 pages of records and receiving hundreds of telephone tips provided through the Jan. 6 tip line.
The task of wading through this torrent of information has been divided among five teams that the committee initially put together for its staff of about 40:
One team, dubbed “Inside the Fence,” is devoted to understanding the preparation and response to the event by federal and local law enforcement.
A second, called “follow the money,” is examining the funding for demonstrations against the election results.
A third is investigating online misinformation and extremist activity.
A fourth is looking at the pressure campaigns in Washington and in state capitols to overturn election results or delay certification of electors.
A fifth team is focused on the organizers of the demonstrations on the National Mall and at the Capitol....
...
What is the committee focusing on going forward?
The panel continues to seek new information even as it begins to focus on two must-do tasks: a slate of public hearings to tell the story of Jan. 6 from start to finish, along with one or more written reports. The reports will not only detail the events of that day but make recommendations on how to prevent a similar situation from occurring again. This includes whether the laws overseeing how electoral votes are tallied (the Electoral Count Act), and that grant a president emergency powers, need to be changed.
“After assembling a complete documentary record of what happened on Jan. 6 and what caused it, the main purpose of the Jan. 6 committee is to make recommendations as to policy changes that will prevent any further close calls with violent and lawless attacks on our government. So we have to look at fortifying our defenses against both inside political coup attempts and violent insurrectionary challenges to the government,” Raskin added.
The rough timeline being discussed among senior committee staffers includes a number of public hearings starting this Winter and stretching into Spring, followed by a possible interim report being released in the Summer, with a final report coming out before the midterm elections in November. The midterms are a key date for the committee because political prognosticators expect Republicans to win the House and then shut down the panel.
Cclm, LPN
786 Posts
Well, you kinda admitted it,
"
"Yes, when behavior and attitudes are reminiscent of 20th century fascists, that might get mentioned by members. I still think that Session's zero tolerance policy that considered permanent family separation a useful deterrent falls on the evil side if the morality scale".
Sorry I should have said, " I don't "mention" members as being 20th century fascists like you do" when I do not agree or as a method of silencing people.
Better?
1