The 01-06-21 Select Committee Thread

[TwiceHorn 31992]

Just now, Satchel said:

Now, we know why Eastman invoked his 5th amendment right.

What's bizarre is that I am still not sure Eastman has any criminal liability for any of this.  The Committee builds a case for "conspiracy to defraud the US" 18 USC 371, but that is not usually a standalone charge, it's an add-on when some other crime is alleged.   You can't assert the 5th to protect someone else, or generally to protect documents as opposed to testimony.  I suppose he could be considered a conspirator in the attempt to obstruct an official proceeding.

There's a fine line between advancing a position that's utterly frivolous and one that is "warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for extending, modifying, or reversing existing law or for establishing new law;" which is a civil standard, anyway, violation of which doesn't lead to criminal liability.

And that one email isn't even apparently asserted to be privileged and couldn't be given that it's sent to a third party, arguably even an opponent.

[horn4life 3829]

While I hate the slow pace of the investigation, it's about the best they can do with every single person close to the President refusing to tell the truth about ANYTHING!

Eastman is gonna either suck a dick (not Donald's) or eat a gun by the time THE TRUTH comes out.  

What I wish I knew was what the DOJ has been doing this whole time?  Have they been building a case against the traitors or not?

 

[Biff Tannen 46061]

1 minute ago, horn4life said:

eat a gun by the time THE TRUTH comes out.  

If they all did this, that'd be fine by me.

[TwiceHorn 31992]

1 hour ago, Player said:

"one more" 

Schiff about to go hard in the paint on that crime-fraud exception. 

Thankfully, it's not Schiff's argument, it's committee counsel Doug Letter's argument, along with Arnold & Porter's and some firm called Sher Tremonte.

Letter and his team are kicking ass.  I am officially impressed.  Doesn't hurt that their opponents seem to be a lot of B-teamers.

Schiff did some eloquent bloviating during the impeachment, but he also made some strange and bad decisions.  I'm not particularly enamored with his skill as a lawyer, at least what he has displayed recently.

[Fudge Nuggets 19407]

2 hours ago, Satchel said:

Now, we know why Eastman invoked his 5th amendment right.

The 5th amendment is so overrated.  

[Fudge Nuggets 19407]

shit. 

Edited March 3, 2022 by Fudge Nuggets

[WhatTheBuck 28904]

1 hour ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

The 5th amendment is so overrated.  

The 5th of bourbon, otoh...

[Gil Bang 26177]

[Gil Bang 26177]

You don't say...

 

 

[NAVY 6910]

1 hour ago, Gil Bang said:

You don't say...

 

 

Not a lawyer but… I need more time to hide these crimes seems like a pretty weak argument 

[Biff Tannen 46061]

1 hour ago, Gil Bang said:

You don't say...

 

 

I believe that called fucking around and finding out.

[DDD Dad 14572]

1 hour ago, Gil Bang said:

You don't say...

 

 

To clarify, it's not been established that Eastman was even Trump's attorney.

[Gil Bang 26177]

[Pato del Muerto 53335]

Lol he’s on his mom’s phone plan. 

[TwiceHorn 31992]

15 hours ago, DDD Dad said:

To clarify, it's not been established that Eastman was even Trump's attorney.

Yeah. I'm not even sure the judge has to reach the crime/fraud exception to privilege to disclose all or most of these emails or documents.

But, it appears that all that is necessary is a prima facie showing of the commission of a crime, and I think the Committee has got that.  For the peanut gallery, "prima facie" means some evidence establishing each element of the offense.  It is not proof beyond a reasonable doubt, or even by a preponderance of the evidence.  It just means there isn't an absence of proof at the early or preliminary stage of proceedings.

So, even a finding by this judge that the crime/fraud exception applies doesn't mean Trump is guilty in the criminal conviction sense.  There are still the usual questions about meeting the burden of proof at a trial.

And, it seems to me that at a trial on these charges, Trump would almost have to testify in his defense.  And that is  . . .  interdasting.

[Satchel 6982]

This should come as a surprise to absolutely nobody:

(CNN) -- [Trump’s] Department  of Homeland Security intelligence division had identified "specific" threats related to January 6, 2021, prior to the attack on the US Capitol, but did not widely share any intelligence it had gathered until two days after the riot, according to a new watchdog report.

The DHS Office of Inspector General found that three different divisions within the Trump-era DHS Office of Intelligence and Analysis had either collected intelligence or identified potential violent threats and did not release that information in in reports outside the department prior to January 6 -- instead emailing threat information to local Washington, DC, partners before the attack in a way that was "not as widely disseminated" as its usual intelligence products. Such threats, the report said, included storming the Capitol, targeting politicians and law enforcement and "sacrificing their lives while conducting violence."

Because of the lapse in information sharing, DHS "was unable to provide its many state, local and Federal partners with timely, actionable and predictive intelligence," the report found.

The Inspector General report released Tuesday marks the first of three DHS watchdog reports related to the attack on the Capitol. The findings come a day after it was revealed that dozens more US Capitol Police officers had been injured during the insurrection than previously known, according to a report from the Government Accountability Office

[Gil Bang 26177]

 

 

[Gil Bang 26177]

"The Mob takes the 5th"- Donald Trump

 

 

[WhatTheBuck 28904]

String him up! String him up! String him up!

Fucking traitor. An American general and a traitor to his own country. He’s the lowest of the low. He should hang. 

[Gil Bang 26177]

This is grounds to yank his security clearance, right? Right? 

[Gil Bang 26177]

https://twitter.com/SarahBCalif/status/1502035998716301313

[Gil Bang 26177]

 

[Satchel 6982]

Ginni Thomas was an insurrectionist on J/6. The committee should haul her in:

Ginni Thomas, the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, says she attended the “Stop the Steal” rally on Jan. 6, 2021, that preceded the deadly assault carried out by supporters of then-President Donald Trump on the U.S. Capitol.

In an interview published Monday by the Washington Free Beacon, a conservative publication, Thomas said she attended the rally but got cold and left before the riot took place. She rebutted reporting from the New Yorker and the New York Times Magazine about her efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election, including the claim that she was a key figure in planning the events that led to the storming of the Capitol building.

“I played no role with those who were planning and leading the Jan. 6 events,” Thomas said. “There are stories in the press suggesting I paid or arranged for buses. I did not. There are other stories saying I mediated feuding factions of leaders for that day. I did not.”

[Gil Bang 26177]

13 minutes ago, Satchel said:

Ginni Thomas was an insurrectionist on J/6. The committee should haul her in:

Ginni Thomas, the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, says she attended the “Stop the Steal” rally on Jan. 6, 2021, that preceded the deadly assault carried out by supporters of then-President Donald Trump on the U.S. Capitol.

In an interview published Monday by the Washington Free Beacon, a conservative publication, Thomas said she attended the rally but got cold and left before the riot took place. She rebutted reporting from the New Yorker and the New York Times Magazine about her efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election, including the claim that she was a key figure in planning the events that led to the storming of the Capitol building.

“I played no role with those who were planning and leading the Jan. 6 events,” Thomas said. “There are stories in the press suggesting I paid or arranged for buses. I did not. There are other stories saying I mediated feuding factions of leaders for that day. I did not.”

"however, the stories that suggested that I'm a crazy old cunt are 100% accurate". 

[Bullneck 19454]

I realize this is the Justice Dept and not the J6 Committee but . . . 

Document in Jan. 6 Case Shows Plan to Storm Government Buildings

New details from evidence cited in the indictment of Enrique Tarrio, the former head of the far-right Proud Boys, reveal a plan with similarities to what unfolded at the Capitol.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/14/us/politics/enrique-tarrio-jan-6-document.html

 

Edited March 15, 2022 by Bullneck
Added link

[WhatTheBuck 28904]

13 minutes ago, Bullneck said:

I realize this is the Justice Dept and not the J6 Committee but . . . 

Document in Jan. 6 Case Shows Plan to Storm Government Buildings

New details from evidence cited in the indictment of Enrique Tarrio, the former head of the far-right Proud Boys, reveal a plan with similarities to what unfolded at the Capitol.

Link?

[Satchel 6982]

Damn!

But the document could help explain why prosecutors chose to charge Mr. Tarrio with conspiracy, even though he was not at the Capitol during the attack. And it appears to be the first time that prosecutors have sought to use evidence of a specific written plan to storm and occupy government buildings in their wide-ranging investigation into the attack and what led up to it.

Mr. Tarrio’s lawyer, Nayib Hassan, declined to comment.

Broken into five parts — Infiltrate, Execution, Distract, Occupy and Sit-In — the nine-page document recommends recruiting at least 50 people to enter each of the seven government buildings and advises protesters to appear “unsuspecting” and to “not look tactical,” the people familiar with it said.

After ensuring that crowds at the buildings are “full and ready to go,” the document suggests that “leads and seconds” should enter and open doors for others to go in, “causing trouble” to distract security guards, if necessary.

Should the crowds fail to gain entrance to the buildings quickly, the document suggests pulling fire alarms at nearby stores, hotels and museums to further distract guards or the police, the people said. It then says protesters should occupy the buildings and conduct sit-ins, even recommending slogans for people to chant, like “We the people” and “No Trump, No America.”

[Gil Bang 26177]

 

[TwiceHorn 31992]

1 hour ago, Gil Bang said:

 

Some more on that, from an only marginally credible source, but a fairly factual article. https://nypost.com/2022/03/15/bannon-prosecutors-admit-mistake-in-tracking-lawyer-emails/

Apparently, the government subpoenaed email, text, and phone records (only the dates/times/recipients) in an effort to prove that Bannon was aware of the subpoena via communications with counsel Robert Costello. Apparently, they subpoenaed some of the "wrong" Robert Costellos.

Bannon is trying to get all of the investigative material related to that to try to find some kind of bs Brady or investigative wrongdoing.  Ala Sidney Powell and Flynn.

It could be part of a "multi-pronged" defense, but there are some other indications that perhaps Bannon is not defending on the merits of the contempt charge.

I get a little creeped out every time the government goes after this type of electronic record, but it depends on what they need it for and this seems completely legit.  And, it's important to note that they are not going for any actual content, just dates and times, the "pen register" stuff.

Also, some more on Bannon more generally.  https://abovethelaw.com/2022/03/bannon-lawyer-may-have-made-one-or-two-oopsies-in-conversation-with-fbi/  I take ATL with a grain of salt, but it appears that there are gaping holes in Bannon's ability to claim any executive privilege in response to a Congressional subpoena.  Apparently, even Trump's counsel advised that there is no "testimonial" privilege, i.e. that Bannon had to show up and invoke any privileges on an issue by issue or question by question basis.

So it looks like Bannon may be going down, for whatever that's worth.

Edited March 15, 2022 by TwiceHorn

[Horn Dog 10156]

58 minutes ago, Gil Bang said:

 

I have only been in court 1 time in my life but I also found the other attorney arrogant and disingenuous.   I wish i had know to bring that up to my attorney to help my case.

Edited March 15, 2022 by Horn Dog

[TexasEd 8248]

21 hours ago, Bullneck said:

I realize this is the Justice Dept and not the J6 Committee but . . . 

Document in Jan. 6 Case Shows Plan to Storm Government Buildings

New details from evidence cited in the indictment of Enrique Tarrio, the former head of the far-right Proud Boys, reveal a plan with similarities to what unfolded at the Capitol.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/14/us/politics/enrique-tarrio-jan-6-document.html

 

 

[Nolacycling 893]

8 hours ago, Horn Dog said:

I have only been in court 1 time in my life but I also found the other attorney arrogant and disingenuous.   I wish i had know to bring that up to my attorney to help my case.

Two for me. I was married to one. 

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

8 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Some more on that, from an only marginally credible source, but a fairly factual article. https://nypost.com/2022/03/15/bannon-prosecutors-admit-mistake-in-tracking-lawyer-emails/

Apparently, the government subpoenaed email, text, and phone records (only the dates/times/recipients) in an effort to prove that Bannon was aware of the subpoena via communications with counsel Robert Costello. Apparently, they subpoenaed some of the "wrong" Robert Costellos.

Bannon is trying to get all of the investigative material related to that to try to find some kind of bs Brady or investigative wrongdoing.  Ala Sidney Powell and Flynn.

It could be part of a "multi-pronged" defense, but there are some other indications that perhaps Bannon is not defending on the merits of the contempt charge.

I get a little creeped out every time the government goes after this type of electronic record, but it depends on what they need it for and this seems completely legit.  And, it's important to note that they are not going for any actual content, just dates and times, the "pen register" stuff.

Also, some more on Bannon more generally.  https://abovethelaw.com/2022/03/bannon-lawyer-may-have-made-one-or-two-oopsies-in-conversation-with-fbi/  I take ATL with a grain of salt, but it appears that there are gaping holes in Bannon's ability to claim any executive privilege in response to a Congressional subpoena.  Apparently, even Trump's counsel advised that there is no "testimonial" privilege, i.e. that Bannon had to show up and invoke any privileges on an issue by issue or question by question basis. LEGAL STUFF THAT I READ AND FOUND INTERESTING BUT WILL FILE AWAY FOR FURTHER REFLECTION.

 

So it looks like Bannon may be going down, for whatever that's worth.

Not that I believe it will happen, but.....

[TwiceHorn 31992]

20 minutes ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

Not that I believe it will happen, but.....

To elaborate and simplify.  I thought there was a good chance Bannon would escape conviction on the "good faith reliance on advice of counsel" defense, i.e. "my lawyer told me I didn't have to go."  Well, for one thing, that is not a defense to this, for most purposes.  And for another, as I have kind of bitched all along:  you can't just not show up. You have got to show up, answer the innocent questions, and take the 5th or assert a privilege in response to each question asked.

There's not much wiggle room for a jury or Bannon on this one.  So he's prolly gonna get convicted.

[Francisco 2.0 32544]

 

 

[TwiceHorn 31992]

11 minutes ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

 

 

They've been making the claim that the subpoenas and committee have only a "law enforcement purpose" all along.

Shot down at every turn.  It appears that the way it's phrased in this particular argument of the point seems particularly bad.

Also, that tweet about Salesforce is oddly worded.  What they mean is that most subpoena "witnesses" (recipients) agree to withhold production of documents or testimony until a court orders them to do so, or not to, once someone files suit.  Salesforce has said "fuck it, we're producing until a court tells us not to."

Edited March 16, 2022 by TwiceHorn

[Gil Bang 26177]

[Gil Bang 26177]

 

[TwiceHorn 31992]

20 minutes ago, Gil Bang said:

 

A high road move by counsel for the Committee.  I know everyone's sick of the high road, but I think the court will look favorably upon that.

[Gil Bang 26177]

[NWBuck 8621]

43 minutes ago, Gil Bang said:

 

Pleaded? Pled? Pleded? Many much pleaden?

[Longhorn_Fan68 34079]

 

On 3/18/2022 at 1:51 AM, NWBuck said:

Pleaded? Pled? Pleded? Many much pleaden?

many much moosen?

[Gil Bang 26177]

Heh. 

https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/28/politics/john-eastman-memo/index.html

 

(CNN)A federal judge said Monday that former President Donald Trump and right-wing attorney John Eastman may have been planning a crime as they sought to disrupt the January 6 congressional certification of the presidential election.

"Based on the evidence, the Court finds it more likely than not that President Trump corruptly attempted to obstruct the Joint Session of Congress on January 6, 2021," Judge David Carter wrote Monday.

Carter, a federal judge in California, ordered Eastman to turn over 101 emails from around January 6, 2021, that he has tried to keep secret from the House select committee investigating the US Capitol attack.

 

[Gil Bang 26177]

 

 

[jimmyjazz 46981]

Damn.  They blew it in one email?  So sad.

[Gil Bang 26177]

 

 

[Gil Bang 26177]

 

[Captainant 28399]

Shocking nobody: White House records turned over to House show 7-hour gap in Trump phone log on Jan. 6

Quote

Internal White House records from the day of the attack on the U.S. Capitol that were turned over to the House select committee show a gap in President Donald Trump's phone logs of seven hours and 37 minutes, including the period when the building was being violently assaulted, according to documents obtained by CBS News' chief election & campaign correspondent Robert Costa and The Washington Post's associate editor Bob Woodward.

The lack of an official White House notation of any calls placed to or by Trump for 457 minutes — from 11:17 a.m. to 6:54 p.m. — on Jan. 6, 2021 means there is no record of the calls made by Trump as his supporters descended on the U.S. Capitol, battled overwhelmed police and forcibly entered the building, prompting lawmakers and Vice President Mike Pence to flee for safety.

The 11 pages of records — which consist of the president's official daily diary and the White House switchboard call log — were turned over by the National Archives earlier this year to the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack.

The records show that Trump was active on the phone for part of the day, documenting conversations that he had with at least eight people in the morning and 11 people that evening. The gap also stands in stark contrast to the extensive public reporting about phone conversations he had with allies during the attack.

The House panel is now investigating whether Trump communicated that day through backchannels, phones of aides or personal disposable phones, known as "burner phones," according to two people with knowledge of the probe, who, like others interviewed for this report, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive information. The committee is also scrutinizing whether it received the full log from that day.

The records show that former White House chief strategist Stephen K. Bannon — who said on his Jan. 5 podcast that "all hell is going to break loose tomorrow" — spoke with Trump twice on Jan. 6.

TLDR: In a statement Monday night, Trump said, "I have no idea what a burner phone is, to the best of my knowledge I have never even heard the term." (actual real unedited quote lmao)

Trump really is going for the full Nixon. Whodathunk that surrounding himself with the same ratfuckers, namely Manafort and Stone, could lead to the same fucked up national outcome??

[Francisco 2.0 32544]

EDIT:  Captain beat me to it. Here's the full Post article.

 

I remember when a single 18 minute gap helped to bury Nixon.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/03/29/trump-white-house-logs/

 

Quote

Internal White House records from the day of the attack on the U.S. Capitol that were turned over to the House select committee show a gap in President Donald Trump’s phone logs of seven hours and 37 minutes, including the period when the building was being violently assaulted, according to documents obtained by The Washington Post and CBS News.

The lack of an official White House notation of any calls placed to or by Trump for 457 minutes on Jan. 6, 2021 – from 11:17 a.m. to 6:54 p.m. – means the committee has no record of his phone conversations as his supporters descended on the Capitol, battled overwhelmed police and forcibly entered the building, prompting lawmakers and Vice President Mike Pence to flee for safety.

 

Quote

The 11 pages of records, which consist of the president’s official daily diary and the White House switchboard call logs, were turned over by the National Archives earlier this year to the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack.

The records show that Trump was active on the phone for part of the day, documenting conversations that he had with at least eight people in the morning and 11 people that evening. The seven-hour gap also stands in stark contrast to the extensive public reporting about phone conversations he had with allies during the attack, such as a call Trump made to Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) — seeking to talk to Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) — and a phone conversation he had with House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.).

 

Spoiler

The House panel is now investigating whether Trump communicated that day through backchannels, phones of aides or personal disposable phones, known as “burner phones,” according to two people with knowledge of the probe, who, like others interviewed for this report, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive information. The committee is also scrutinizing whether it received the full logs from that day.

One lawmaker on the panel said the committee is investigating a “possible coverup” of the official White House record from that day. Another person close to the committee said the large gap in the records is of “intense interest” to some lawmakers on the committee, many of whom have reviewed copies of the documents. Both spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss internal committee deliberations.

The records show that former White House chief strategist Stephen K. Bannon – who said on his Jan. 5 podcast that “all hell is going to break loose tomorrow” – spoke with Trump twice on Jan. 6. In a call that morning, Bannon urged Trump to continue to pressure Pence to block congressional certification of Joe Biden’s victory in the 2020 presidential election, according to people familiar with the exchange.

Trump was known for using different phones when he was in the White House, according to people familiar with his activities. Occasionally, when he made outbound calls, the number would show up as the White House switchboard’s number, according to a former Trump Cabinet official. Other times, he would call from different numbers – or no number would appear on the recipient’s phone, the official said.

A spokesman for the committee declined to comment.

In a statement Monday night, Trump said, "I have no idea what a burner phone is, to the best of my knowledge I have never even heard the term."

A Trump spokeswoman said that Trump had nothing to do with the records and had assumed any and all of his phone calls were recorded and preserved.

In a recent court filing, the Jan. 6 committee asserted it has “a good-faith basis for concluding that the President and members of his Campaign engaged in a criminal conspiracy to defraud the United States” and obstruct the counting of electoral votes by Congress.

A federal judge said in a ruling Monday that Trump “more likely than not” committed a federal crime in trying to obstruct the congressional count of electoral college votes on Jan. 6. The ruling was regarding emails that conservative lawyer John Eastman, a Trump ally, had resisted turning over to the Jan. 6 committee.

A Trump spokesman called the ruling “absurd and baseless.”

Judge: Trump ‘more likely than not’ committed crime in trying to block Biden win

Five of the pages in the White House records obtained by the House committee are titled “THE DAILY DIARY OF PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP” and detail some of Trump’s phone calls and movements on Jan. 6. The remaining six pages are titled “PRESIDENTIAL CALL LOG” and have information provided by the White House switchboard and aides, including phone numbers and notes on the time and duration of some calls.

Those records were given to the committee by the National Archives earlier this year after the Supreme Court rejected Trump’s request for the court to block the committee from obtaining White House documents from Jan. 6.

Read the Presidential Call Log from Jan. 6, 2021

The Presidential Records Act requires the preservation of memos, letters, notes, emails, faxes and other written communications related to a president’s official duties. The National Archives website states the presidential diary should be a “chronological record of the President’s movements, phone calls, trips” and meetings.

In January, The Post first reported that some of the Trump White House records turned over to the committee were potentially incomplete, including records that had been ripped up and taped back together. The New York Times first reported in February on the committee’s discovery of gaps in the White House phone logs from Jan. 6, but it did not specify when or for how long on that day. CNN first reported that “several hours” in Trump’s records provided to the committee lacked any notation of phone calls.

The documents obtained by the committee show Trump having several previously unreported exchanges on Jan. 6, including brief calls with Bannon and personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani that morning, before Trump had a final call with Pence, in which the vice president told him he was not going to block Congress from formalizing Biden’s victory. The call to the vice president was part of Trump’s attempt to put into motion a plan, advocated by Bannon and outlined in a memo written by conservative lawyer John Eastman, that would enable Trump to hold on to the presidency, as first reported in the book “Peril.”

According to White House records, Bannon and Trump spoke at 8:37 a.m. on Jan. 6. Trump spoke with Giuliani around 8:45 a.m. At 8:56 a.m., Trump asked the White House switchboard to return a call from chief of staff Mark Meadows. Then, at 9:02 a.m., Trump asked the operator to place a call to Pence. The operator informed him that a message was left for the vice president.

Bannon’s first Jan. 6 call with Trump lasted for about one minute, according to the documents. During that conversation, Bannon asked Trump whether Pence was coming over for a breakfast meeting, according to two people familiar with the exchange. Bannon hoped Trump could pressure the vice president over breakfast to agree to thwart the congressional certification of Biden’s victory, the people said.

But Trump told Bannon that Pence was not scheduled to come to the White House following a heated meeting Trump and Pence had the previous evening, Jan. 5, in the Oval Office. Bannon quickly pressed Trump that he needed to call Pence and tell him again to hold off on doing anything that would enable certification. Trump agreed, the people said.

According to the White House phone logs, Bannon and Trump spoke again late on Jan. 6 in a call that began at 10:19 p.m. and ended at 10:26 p.m.

Bannon declined to comment through a representative.

Bannon, a central player in a group of Trump allies who met at the Willard hotel near the White House on Jan. 5 to discuss their strategy for Jan. 6, was indicted last year by the Justice Department for refusing to cooperate with the House committee, which is seeking more documents and testimony about his conversations with Trump.

Trump’s final call with Pence is not listed in the call log, even though multiple people close to both men said that call occurred sometime in the late morning before Trump headed to the “Save America” rally on the Ellipse.

During their conversation, Pence told Trump, “When I go to the Capitol, I’ll do my job” and not block Biden’s certification, enraging Trump, according to “Peril.”

Trump said, “Mike you can do this. I’m counting on you to do it. If you don’t do it, I picked the wrong man four years ago,” he added, according to the book. “You’re going to wimp out!”

Pence later released a letter saying he did not, as vice president, have “unilateral authority to decide presidential contests,” and said he would “keep the oath” he made when he was sworn into office.

The White House logs also show that Trump had conversations on Jan. 6 with election lawyers and White House officials, as well as outside allies such as then-senator David Perdue (R-Ga.), conservative commentator William J. Bennett and Fox News host Sean Hannity.

Bennett, Hannity and Perdue did not respond to requests for comment.

According to the documents, Trump spoke with other confidants and political advisers that morning ahead of the rally. At 8:34 a.m., he spoke with Kurt Olsen, who was advising Trump on legal challenges to the election.

Trump then placed calls to Sen. Mitch McConnell (Ky.), the Republican leader, and Sen. Josh Hawley (Mo.), but it is unclear whether he reached them, according to the documents. A McConnell aide said Monday that McConnell declined Trump’s call. Hawley, a Trump ally, was the first senator to declare he would object to the certification, a decision that sparked other GOP senators to say they too would object.

The records show that Trump had a 10-minute call starting at 9:24 a.m. with Rep. Jim Jordan, an Ohio Republican who worked closely with the Trump White House and was a key figure in pushing fellow GOP lawmakers to object to the certification of Biden’s election.

Jordan has declined to cooperate with the House committee. The 10-minute call Trump had with Jordan was first reported by CNN.

Giuliani and Trump spoke on Jan. 6 at 9:41 a.m. for six minutes, and at 8:39 p.m. for nine minutes, according to the White House logs. According to the documents, Giuliani called from different phone numbers.

Giuliani did not respond to a request for comment.

Trump senior adviser Stephen Miller – who told Fox News in December 2020 that an “alternate slate of electors in the contested states is going to vote” – spoke with Trump for 26 minutes on the morning of Jan. 6, the records show. That call started at 9:52 a.m. and ended at 10:18 a.m.

Miller did not respond to a request for comment.

At 11:17 a.m., the White House daily diary states, “The President talked on a phone call to an unidentified person.” That vague call listing, with no notes on duration, is the last official record of a phone conversation that Trump had until the evening of Jan. 6.

The records of Trump’s activity throughout the day are very limited. The daily diary notes that he addressed supporters at a rally at the Ellipse midday and returned to the south grounds of the White House at 1:19 p.m.

“The President met with his Valet,” the records note of Trump’s activity at 1:21 p.m. on Jan. 6.

Trump’s supporters breached the Capitol building shortly after 2 p.m.

The next documented event in the president’s diary comes at 4:03 p.m., when “The President went to the Rose Garden” to record, for four minutes, a video message for the pro-Trump mob that had stormed the Capitol. The video, posted on Twitter at 4:17 p.m., begins with Trump falsely claiming the 2020 election was stolen, then asks the rioters to “go home.” He added, “We love you. You’re very special.”

“The President returned to the Oval Office” at 4:07 p.m., the records state. The next listed action comes at 6:27 p.m.: “The President went to the Second Floor Residence.”

According to the logs, Trump made his first phone call in more than seven hours at 6:54 p.m., when he instructed the operator to call aide Daniel Scavino Jr.

Jan. 6 committee backs contempt charges for two former Trump aides

At 7:01 p.m., the records show, Trump spoke with Pat Cipollone, the White House counsel, for six minutes, and later spoke with press secretary Kayleigh McEnany.

At 9:23 p.m., Trump spoke with political adviser Jason Miller for 18 minutes. Miller has engaged with the committee and sat for a deposition, parts of which were excerpted in the committee’s filing alleging a criminal conspiracy was advanced by Trump and his allies.

Scavino could not be reached for comment. Cipollone and McEnany did not respond to requests for comment. Miller did not respond to a request for comment.

That night, Trump also spoke with lawyers supporting his election fight, such as former North Carolina Supreme Court chief justice Mark Martin and Cleta Mitchell, a veteran conservative Washington attorney who worked closely with Trump on contesting Biden’s victory in Georgia, according to the records.

His final listed call came at 11:23 p.m. and lasted 17 minutes. It was with John McEntee, then the director of presidential personnel.

Earlier this year, the Supreme Court, in an unsigned order, rejected Trump’s request to block the release of some White House records, which have been stored by the National Archives, to the committee. The Supreme Court’s order in January included a dissent from Justice Clarence Thomas.

Last week, The Post and CBS News reported the committee has obtained 29 text messages from the post-election period between Meadows and Virginia “Ginni” Thomas, Justice Thomas’s wife and a longtime conservative activist.

The messages, which do not directly reference Justice Thomas or the Supreme Court, show how Ginni Thomas used her access to Trump’s inner circle to promote and seek to guide the president’s strategy to overturn the election results – and how receptive and grateful Meadows said he was to receive her advice. Justice Thomas and Ginni Thomas have not responded to multiple requests for comment. She has long maintained that there is no conflict of interest between her activism and her husband’s work.

 

Edited March 29, 2022 by Francisco 2.0

[Captainant 28399]

Just now, Francisco 2.0 said:

I remember when a single 18 minute gap helped to bury Nixon.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/03/29/trump-white-house-logs/