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'm no fan of Hunter Biden, but I would think a health care professional would have a little bit of understanding of addiction and not resort to such language.
When we take back the House this fall we'll continue the hearings and we'll subpoena and frog march Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff in front of the committees along with Biden's crack head son.
I'm no fan of Hunter Biden, but I would think a health care professional would have a little bit of understanding of addiction and not resort to such language.
Not much for people suffering from liberal privilege.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
37 minutes ago, Justlookingfornow said:
Fair enough but we already knew this. So what's the point of this committee? I thought there was to be clear evidence that he organized and plotted the riot and that he personally encited the riot. In my opinion the purpose was to just remind everyone for the upcoming elections and to try and prevent him from running in 2024. Presented in a formal way but without any push back. I meant that I do hope they charge him criminally. However they never intended to. Because then he would be able to provide a rebuttle.
I will admit he acted disgracefully. He could have went about his beliefs in a different way. He made himself look foolish. No doubt about it. The images of violence were unsettling. As is violence and should not be tolorated by anyone for any political belief. I think all politicians need to be more vocal against violence and hold each other to the same accountability. However they won't. Was it 23 or 27? Democrats voted against the Supreme Court Justice protection bill. I gotta say it, if it was in reverse and a Democrat Justice's life was threatened.......Deflection? Maybe, but am I wrong?
The point of this committee is to discover why a violent mob attacked our capitol in an attempt to overturn the election results to benefit Trump. The hearings aren't completed yet, have you watched any of them?
You are allowed your opinion as to why there was a House investigation and hearings. It seems obvious that Congress would investigate an attempted coup.
Of course there will be political ramifications to the findings which seem to significantly incriminate Trump and his close post-election advisors (like Giuliani or Meadows). There should be political ramifications for any politician who was involved in forwarding that lie about the 2020 election and those who are using that lie to push dangerous legislation making our elections vulnerable to political interference.
When you say "I hope they charge him", who is the "they" you are referencing? You are likely aware that the politicians don't decide who gets charged or indicted by the DOJ.
I would say that a US president lying about election security as a means of explaining his loss is more than just disgraceful behavior. Lying about election security and fraud to justify overturning the vote results to benefit yourself or your party is dangerously corrupt and represents a threat to our republic.
Yeah, your partisan "what if" about the Supreme Court is definitely off topic... are you tired of talking about the ideology and motivations for the violence of 010621?
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
1 hour ago, Justlookingfornow said:
Yes. You've made hints to your angst of the electoral college........
They did? Perhaps you can provide some info from the committee that they were actually trying to stop the transition? It was a terrible shamefully protest that turned violent. That's it and nothing thus far has proven otherwise.
What was their plan? Hold everyone in congress hosage in the rotunda until Biden said he lost? Hold their breaths until they stayed Trump run? There was no military brought in by Trump,no heavy inserectionist type weapons bybthe rioters. Who in the right mind would attempt to over throw the US government without at least some weapons of war? Fantastical conspiracy theory.
My source? The Jan.6 committee that has failed to bring any evidence that we already didn't know. No criminal charges for him? After the tried to overthrow a US election?
The only new thing I learned was Trump acted worse than I thought and Guliani was drunk LOL.
We should all have some angst about the electoral college since some Republicans have decided to try to abuse it to benefit Trump in 2020.
You might change you mind about whether the attack was a simple protest turned violent if you considered the available evidence unfiltered through a right wing media outlet. Try watching the hearings on c-span.
It's naive to believe that all coup attempts involve the military.
It's unfortunate that you've learned nothing new from the hearings. How badly do you think Trump behaved?
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
1 hour ago, MaybeeRN said:
When we take back the House this fall we'll continue the hearings and we'll subpoena and frog march Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff in front of the committees along with Biden's crack head son.
For what purpose? A political dog and pony show for the "lock her up" cult?
The people who could rebut the information presented in front of the committee are refusing to testify. Bannon, McCarthy, Biggs, Brooks, Meadows, Jordan, and others have been invited and subpoenaed.
That's a good point! I'll have to research. What I think may be there issue is privileged information(some that I heard) but mostly because they will be asked only one side questions. There will be no rebuttal to their testimony.
We should all have some angst about the electoral college since some Republicans have decided to try to abuse it to benefit Trump in 2020.
You might change you mind about whether the attack was a simple protest turned violent if you considered the available evidence unfiltered through a right wing media outlet. Try watching the hearings on c-span.
It's naive to believe that all coup attempts involve the military.
It's unfortunate that you've learned nothing new from the hearings. How badly do you think Trump behaved?
Bad. I'm embarrassed.
It's naive to believe that people intending on taken down the US government, which has the most powerful military in the word would not think of bringing weapons.
They were Republican and probably could have formed a nice orificenal of weapons. However , they did not.
35 minutes ago, toomuchbaloney said:
For what purpose? A political dog and pony show for the "lock her up" cult?
Similar to this dog and pony show? Wagon without wheels on both sides?
Not for that family. If you want to see why he's so messed up look at the Dad. Biden's have had nothing but privilege all their life. Que the Biden tragedy excuses in 2,3,1...
The point of this committee is to discover why a violent mob attacked our capitol in an attempt to overturn the election results to benefit Trump. The hearings aren't completed yet, have you watched any of them?
You are allowed your opinion as to why there was a House investigation and hearings. It seems obvious that Congress would investigate an attempted coup.
Of course there will be political ramifications to the findings which seem to significantly incriminate Trump and his close post-election advisors (like Giuliani or Meadows). There should be political ramifications for any politician who was involved in forwarding that lie about the 2020 election and those who are using that lie to push dangerous legislation making our elections vulnerable to political interference.
When you say "I hope they charge him", who is the "they" you are referencing? You are likely aware that the politicians don't decide who gets charged or indicted by the DOJ.
I would say that a US president lying about election security as a means of explaining his loss is more than just disgraceful behavior. Lying about election security and fraud to justify overturning the vote results to benefit yourself or your party is dangerously corrupt and represents a threat to our republic.
Yeah, your partisan "what if" about the Supreme Court is definitely off topic... are you tired of talking about the ideology and motivations for the violence of 010621?
The most non-violent coup attempt in history. Can't wait to see how many FBI agents were the agitators at that rally. Didn't work out so well for the Federal Bureau of Incompetence in the Whitmer trial.
That's a good point! I'll have to research. What I think may be there issue is privileged information(some that I heard) but mostly because they will be asked only one side questions. There will be no rebuttal to their testimony.
I’m sorry, what does this mean “they will be asked only one side questions.” There are no sides to the truth. Who is going to rebut their testimony? If McCarthy is asked about a call to Trump asking for help, why does that need rebuttal?
Tweety, BSN, RN
36,297 Posts
I'm no fan of Hunter Biden, but I would think a health care professional would have a little bit of understanding of addiction and not resort to such language.