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 CNA telemetry progressive care ICU.
It’s sick state of emergency America is living now the change is already in motion and being a person mixed race my mother’s white father black my black side of family was the educated ones all having degrees and masters and such my mother fell in love with a soldier and coming from a small town she was ready to live a better life they are still happily married and living their grandkids but fought so much racial inequality like having to live on the outskirts where it was mixed more mixed race people and we saw things how my mom was treated by some people but that was the 70’s it’s sad to see that some people don’t change and we still have race discussions in the year 2022 makes us wonder what the future stars of tommorrow will face 100 years ahead of today? I’m not about racism but I don’t support nepotism so many are not qualified for positions but because of connections or what have you that’d is there qualification btw my mother and father have lived through racism cancer and still survived property owners and proud grandparents or police officers airmen and much more maybe a future writer
We do. That's what a Grand Jury is, the hearings are the Legislative branch's equivalent of a Grand Jury investigation. The accused has no ability to present a defense, cross examine, etc in a Grand Jury investigation.
And you're correct that misleading or false evidence shouldn't be presented, which could include manipulated edits of statements or video, what are you claiming was presented that was false?
Yes, then if the Grand Jury finds a significant amount of evidence is present and enough to possibly lead to a conviction, then it goes to criminal court. In the criminal court system, it is here where the charges are to be proven, which includes a constitution right to a defense to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
If the Supreme Court rules there is not enough evidence, it will not go to the criminal court. The accused is not charged therefor does not require a defence. However the accusations are not generally broadcasted across the country during prime time to maximize viewing.
Do you not see the bias in that? Trump is accused, every piece of evidence that is culpatory is presented and any exculpatory evidence is completly omitted. This is a extortion of legitimate government processes that in my opinion also threatens our democracy.
None of what's been presented thus far if false. However omitting the entirety of the evidence is misleading. Example, the speeches and tweets.
She was a participant in a riot attempting to take control of the seat of the US government, she breached the last secure buffer between the rioters and the House chambers, I don't see how it's even up for debate whether you're going to get shot if you're in the last defensive front before being the House Chambers.
If you go back and read again I stated that Ashley's own actions that day had a significant contribution to her death.
Just as many people who don't listen to police when committing a crime or simply being questioned, and or otherwise act threatening , are also partially to blame for their own death.
You are also going to get shot whe you grab for a police officers taser or gun, attempt to flee or resist arrest or go to stab another person. Etc....
This was my point but apparently we only agree theres responsibility when it is happening to a particular group.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
26 minutes ago, Justlookingfornow said:
Yes, then if the Grand Jury finds a significant amount of evidence is present and enough to possibly lead to a conviction, then it goes to criminal court. In the criminal court system, it is here where the charges are to be proven, which includes a constitution right to a defense to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
If the Supreme Court rules there is not enough evidence, it will not go to the criminal court. The accused is not charged therefor does not require a defence. However the accusations are not generally broadcasted across the country during prime time to maximize viewing.
Do you not see the bias in that? Trump is accused, every piece of evidence that is culpatory is presented and any exculpatory evidence is completly omitted. This is a extortion of legitimate government processes that in my opinion also threatens our democracy.
None of what's been presented thus far if false. However omitting the entirety of the evidence is misleading. Example, the speeches and tweets.
Yep... Trump needs to end up in a criminal prosecution after this evidence is fully revealed.
There's nothing inappropriate about this public hearing, this is the people's work and it pertains to the health of the republic. There should be nothing secret about these proceedings.
You seem to be treating these hearings as if they are criminal prosecutions. That represents a misunderstanding of their purpose although the hearings will reveal some very criminal behaviors. This is a very legitimate government process which is focused upon the actual threat to our republic... GOP disregard for our democratic republic based upon lies and distortions.
The speeches and tweets are readily available to the public. The hearings are revealing other, previously unheard or unseen evidence of the attempt to break our republic. If there is exculpatory witness statesments that could make Trump appear less guilty, those people ought to stop hiding and come out and tell their stories... don't you think?
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
41 minutes ago, Justlookingfornow said:
If you go back and read again I stated that Ashley's own actions that day had a significant contribution to her death.
Just as many people who don't listen to police when committing a crime or simply being questioned, and or otherwise act threatening , are also partially to blame for their own death.
You are also going to get shot whe you grab for a police officers taser or gun, attempt to flee or resist arrest or go to stab another person. Etc....
This was my point but apparently we only agree theres responsibility when it is happening to a particular group.
However this is off topic.
Yeah... you said that AFTER you referred to it as a murder. Now you seem more interested in comparing her to the plethora of unarmed POC who are brutalized or shot to death by poorly trained and aggressive police.
Yeah... it is off topic here but police violence is occasional a topic for discussion in other threads.
MOST OF THE FOOTAGE WE ARE ABOUT TO PLAY HAS NEVER BEEN SEEN. THE CUP -- THE SELECT COMMITTEE OBTAINED AS A PART OF OUR INVESTIGATION. THIS ISN'T EASY TO WATCH. I WANT TO WARN EVERYONE THAT THIS VIDEO INCLUDES VIOLENCE AND STRONG LANGUAGE. WITHOUT OBJECTION I INCLUDE IN THE RECORD A VIDEO PRESENTATION OF THE VIOLENCE OF January 6.
If you go back and read again I stated that Ashley's own actions that day had a significant contribution to her death.
Just as many people who don't listen to police when committing a crime or simply being questioned, and or otherwise act threatening , are also partially to blame for their own death.
You are also going to get shot whe you grab for a police officers taser or gun, attempt to flee or resist arrest or go to stab another person. Etc....
This was my point but apparently we only agree theres responsibility when it is happening to a particular group.
Yep... Trump needs to end up in a criminal prosecution after this evidence is fully revealed.
There's nothing inappropriate about this public hearing, this is the people's work and it pertains to the health of the republic. There should be nothing secret about these proceedings.
You seem to be treating these hearings as if they are criminal prosecutions. That represents a misunderstanding of their purpose although the hearings will reveal some very criminal behaviors. This is a very legitimate government process which is focused upon the actual threat to our republic... GOP disregard for our democratic republic based upon lies and distortions.
The speeches and tweets are readily available to the public. The hearings are revealing other, previously unheard or unseen evidence of the attempt to break our republic. If there is exculpatory witness statesments that could make Trump appear less guilty, those people ought to stop hiding and come out and tell their stories... don't you think?
Sure. Perhaps Cheney can invite them. There is no excuse to leave out all the content. As you said,it's readily available on line so why show it anyway? Right, because if you edit some out, it's easier to push the narrative. To hear what they want you to but not the whole story.
I'm not treating it as a criminal process because a criminal process the person will be given a defense. It's a covienient way to accused someone with out them having any defense. In fact it might be by design. Knowing that it will not be challenged but is still delivered. It's rather genius actually.
The last time I checked, a "narcissist" doesn't put Americans first like Trump did, unlike Biden who has accomplished nothing and has abused his power to the nth degree in his 50 years in politics.
Yes or no: is our way of life better now than it was late 2019?
Great point with the narcissist! Another hypocrisy.
Yes, then if the Grand Jury finds a significant amount of evidence is present and enough to possibly lead to a conviction, then it goes to criminal court. In the criminal court system, it is here where the charges are to be proven, which includes a constitution right to a defense to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
If the Supreme Court rules there is not enough evidence, it will not go to the criminal court. The accused is not charged therefor does not require a defence. However the accusations are not generally broadcasted across the country during prime time to maximize viewing.
Do you not see the bias in that? Trump is accused, every piece of evidence that is culpatory is presented and any exculpatory evidence is completly omitted. This is a extortion of legitimate government processes that in my opinion also threatens our democracy.
None of what's been presented thus far if false. However omitting the entirety of the evidence is misleading. Example, the speeches and tweets.
Let's someone admits to murder, they admitted to it on a Tuesday. Their lawyer argues; how can you say they murdered someone just because they admitted to it, because that was on Tuesday but on Monday they made no mention of murdering someone.
If the claims of what Trump has said related to the election and January 6th can be disproven then yes, that is something that can be brought up during the hearings. But the fact that he didn't always openly admit to making wildly false claims really doesn't disprove the instances where he did.
I'm not sure what's so horribly difficult about saying a sitting President shouldn't push false claims about the validity of an election and encourage our democratic process to be overthrown. How have we gotten to the point where we can't generally agree that's poor Presidential behavior.
Let's someone admits to murder, they admitted to it on a Tuesday. Their lawyer argues; how can you say they murdered someone just because they admitted to it, because that was on Tuesday but on Monday they made no mention of murdering someone.
If the claims of what Trump has said related to the election and January 6th can be disproven then yes, that is something that can be brought up during the hearings. But the fact that he didn't always openly admit to making wildly false claims really doesn't disprove the instances where he did.
I'm not sure what's so horribly difficult about saying a sitting President shouldn't push false claims about the validity of an election and encourage our democratic process to be overthrown. How have we gotten to the point where we can't generally agree that's poor Presidential behavior.
So if person is accused of murder and he is entitled to a defense on Monday, but considering who they are and what political group they describe doesn't deserve to have the entire facts on the murder presented on Tuesday or Friday? Or is it depending on the location of where they are being accused?
Sure. That is poor presidential behavior, and as a general human being. However if he is being accused of insurrection sedition and/or incitement ... Then the whole story should be presented,not just pieces and professionally edited video selected for its high emotional impact.
We already know he made those claims like the other members said its readily available.
He has freedom of speech just like another American however this does not mean he pre-planned an insurrection and if he did, he should be charged criminally. If this is was this committee believes, then charge him. This won't happen and conveniently goes un-challenged.
Sure. That is poor presidential behavior, and as a general human being. However if he is being accused of insereti9n, sedition and/or exciting violence.... Then the whole story should be presented,not just pieces and professionally edited video selected for its high emotional impact.
We already know he made those claims like the other members said its readily available. He has freedom of speech just like another American however this does not mean he pre-planned an insurrection and if he did, he should be charged criminally. If this is was this committee believes, then charge him. This won't happen and conveniently goes un-challenged.
MEDFET, CNA
242 Posts
It’s sick state of emergency America is living now the change is already in motion and being a person mixed race my mother’s white father black my black side of family was the educated ones all having degrees and masters and such my mother fell in love with a soldier and coming from a small town she was ready to live a better life they are still happily married and living their grandkids but fought so much racial inequality like having to live on the outskirts where it was mixed more mixed race people and we saw things how my mom was treated by some people but that was the 70’s it’s sad to see that some people don’t change and we still have race discussions in the year 2022 makes us wonder what the future stars of tommorrow will face 100 years ahead of today? I’m not about racism but I don’t support nepotism so many are not qualified for positions but because of connections or what have you that’d is there qualification btw my mother and father have lived through racism cancer and still survived property owners and proud grandparents or police officers airmen and much more maybe a future writer