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.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
1 hour ago, Beerman said:
Interesting poll results. And not surprising, CBS tried to spin it in a way to fit their narrative.
"So far so good? Good. Here’s the thing. That shareable graphic that made a splash doesn’t include all the phrases the respondents were asked to agree or disagree with. Two were left off. One of them was kind of important.Thetopanswer wasn’t in the graphic: A protest that went too far, with76%of adults saying yes."
"The by-party numbers are telling, too. On whether they’d describe it as “a protest that went too far,” 80% of Republicans said yes, and 69% of Democrats said yes. Those are huge majorities and only 11 points apart."
"The issue is the fact that, in reporting on political division and violence, the description of January 6th that had the most agreement was left out, and CBS Evening News made it sound like multiple choice."
Nevertheless...the "protest that went too far" didn't actually go as far as Trump intended it to go because they didn't accomplish their goal. That lie based attack was intended to usurp the election results. It's interesting that you are more interested in polling than in the intentions which incited the mob. We all know that poll results are simply a reflection of messaging. The messaging from the right wing has convinced millions of Americans that there's evidence of voter fraud and that Trump is a victim of corrupt democrats.
The danger to our republic doesn't live where there's agreement...it lives with the zealots who downplay the intentions of the attack and the goals of those who incited it.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
9 minutes ago, Beerman said:
With a microphone or camera in front of them, they all babble.
But this level of babbling is important and dangerous and is different from standard politispeak. Jim Jordan seems to be lying and withholding information from a Congressional committee about an important issue of national security. Are you trying to normalize what he's doing?
With a microphone or camera in front of them, they all babble.
Deflection.
But a good deal of them do, but saying "they all babble" is a generalization I don't find true. For example, I think Buttigieg is a pretty good speaker.
But this level of babbling is important and dangerous and is different from standard politispeak. Jim Jordan seems to be lying and withholding information from a Congressional committee about an important issue of national security. Are you trying to normalize what he's doing?
I don't think he's lying and withholding information and believe that he has nothing to offer them, but he clearly is making a point that he doesn't approve of the investigation. But it does give the appearance that he has something to hide he doesn't want them to know.
4 minutes ago, Beerman said:
LOL. No, more of a side comment, obvious observation. I don't care enough that he babbled or not to deflect.
I agree with you, he could have been more succinct. But let him babble away if he wants.
Sure he can babble all he wants to. He tends to look and sound foolish a good deal of the time.
It was just a side comment on my part as well, but also staying on topic that he just declined to cooperate.
While I do approve of the committee investigating, as it's certainly is something that needs investigation, I have no hope it's going to be anything but a waste of time
"More than one year after the Capitol insurrection, the select committee investigating the events has issued more than 50 subpoenas to Trump's allies, former White House officials, campaign aides and individuals involved in the planning of the rally outside the White House before the Capitol building came under siege. "
If we're going to bother with this, where is the subpoenas for Pelosi, the Sergeant of Arms, Capitol Police and others who where in charge of security that day? I'd like to know what led to such lax security measures.
I'd like to know what led to such lax security measures.
I think it's a case of them being caught with their pants down. I think mostly because they thought it would be a peaceful protest. Also with a history of hundreds of protests over the years this kind of stuff doesn't happen.
Also there were accusations of racism involved because BLM protests had more security and this one did not.
But it would be interesting to see supeona Pelosi to see if she had any advance notice that this could happen and did nothing about it. I suppose.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
27 minutes ago, Beerman said:
From Tweety's article:
"More than one year after the Capitol insurrection, the select committee investigating the events has issued more than 50 subpoenas to Trump's allies, former White House officials, campaign aides and individuals involved in the planning of the rally outside the White House before the Capitol building came under siege. "
If we're going to bother with this, where is the subpoenas for Pelosi, the Sergeant of Arms, Capitol Police and others who where in charge of security that day? I'd like to know what led to such lax security measures.
Of course you would because that is the deflection from republican pundits who don't want to consider why the angry mob was there and what their goals were. What led to lax security measures was uniformed people not taking the abundant evidence that violence was a possibility seriously in advance of the event. For all we know that lax security was related to the number of military and police who are sympathetic to the authoritarian thinking that resulted in the violent attack on the Capitol.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
29 minutes ago, Tweety said:
I think it's a case of them being caught with their pants down. I think mostly because they thought it would be a peaceful protest. Also with a history of hundreds of protests over the years this kind of stuff doesn't happen.
Also there were accusations of racism involved because BLM protests had more security and this one did not.
But it would be interesting to see supeona Pelosi to see if she had any advance notice that this could happen and did nothing about it. I suppose.
Mentioning Pelosi relative to Trump's coup attempt is partisan drivel. It is interesting that accountability applies to everyone except Trump when it comes to 010621 as far as conservatives are concerned.
toomuchbaloney
16,033 Posts
Nevertheless...the "protest that went too far" didn't actually go as far as Trump intended it to go because they didn't accomplish their goal. That lie based attack was intended to usurp the election results. It's interesting that you are more interested in polling than in the intentions which incited the mob. We all know that poll results are simply a reflection of messaging. The messaging from the right wing has convinced millions of Americans that there's evidence of voter fraud and that Trump is a victim of corrupt democrats.
The danger to our republic doesn't live where there's agreement...it lives with the zealots who downplay the intentions of the attack and the goals of those who incited it.