Tag: dan scavino
Judge May Expose Trump's Secret Effort To Block Testimony About January 6

Judge May Expose Trump's Secret Effort To Block Testimony About January 6

The chief judge of the District Court in Washington, D.C., is considering making documents concerning Donald Trump’s connections to January 6 open to the public. In this case, the documents relate to how Trump has attempted to prevent former advisors and staff members from testifying before a grand jury hearing evidence related to January 6.

When it comes to Trump and court battles, it can be difficult to keep up. This time, it’s not Trump’s theft of government documents, his tax fraud, or his subpoena to appear before the House Select Committee that’s in the news. It’s that other January 6 investigation, the one being conducted by the Justice Department, that has already resulted in at least 928 arrests, 412 guilty pleas, and 21 people found guilty at trial. There are still dozens, if not hundreds, of trials to come — including the trial of Oath Keepers leaders charged with seditious conspiracy.

But the DOJ’s January 6 investigation doesn’t just include the people who assaulted police, smashed through windows, invaded the Capitol, and physically threatened lawmakers. It also includes those who planted the seeds for that day, and who planned to disrupt the lawful completion of the election process by lying about election fraud, attempting to interfere with state officials, and pushing slates of false electors. Those people are basically known as Trump’s entire campaign and White House team. The DOJ wants the grand jury to hear from those people. Trump has been interfering. And now Judge Beryl Howell is considering showing everyone just what’s going on.

On Wednesday, The New York Times reported on efforts to force two former Trump lawyers—Pat Cipollone and Patrick Philbin—to testify. Trump has claimed that both attorney-client privilege and executive privilege mean that Cipollone and Philbin don’t need to appear. The DOJ has argued that, as the law makes clear, privilege claims cannot be used to cover up a crime. In this case, both Cipollone and Philbin are known to have been directly involved in organizing slates of false electors who could be put forward on January 6 as an excuse to halt the official tallying of electoral votes.

The fight over these two attorneys is just one of many times that Trump has tried to block an appearance before the grand jury. Last week, a panel of federal judges turned down an attempt by Trump to block testimony from Marc Short, who was chief of staff for former Vice President Mike Pence.

In September, 40 subpoenas were issued to former Trump officials, aides, and advisors in one of the clearest signals that the Department of Justice was closing in on how Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election led to the violence of January 6—and how that effort involved a whole host of potential crimes. Those subpoenas included former Trump speechwriter Stephen Miller, campaign strategist Mike Roman, Trump attorney Boris Epshteyn, social media director Dan Scavino, former New York police commissioner turned election-fraud conspiracist Bernard Kerik, and former Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows.

Trump has tried to block the appearance of all these officials, generally using arguments of executive privilege. In fact, the cases that are making their way through the courts now are not those related to the September subpoenas, but a group of officials, including Short, whose subpoenas went out back in June. As Politico reports, it’s been a four-month effort to bring those officials in front of the jury, with Trump filing one appeal after another in an effort to prevent their testimony.

Hours after the court ruled that Trump could not block Short’s testimony, the former Pence chief of staff had his say before the jury and went home. But that’s just one name on a long list, and dealing with Trump’s efforts to prevent former associates from testifying is seriously slowing the pace of the proceedings.

Both Politico and The New York Times have asked Chief Judge Howell to unseal documents related to what is being called “Trump’s secret battle” to prevent the grand jury from hearing from his former aides. Judge Howell has now asked the Department of Justice for their opinion on whether Trump’s meddling should be made public.

In such efforts to block testimony, Trump has consistently lost when it comes to the official results in court. However, his actions have often so slowed processes that by the time the final appeal was put down, the value of testimony or documents was so reduced that Trump’s “loss” is questionable. Trump has become the exemplar for how unlimited money and an unlimited stream of unscrupulous lawyers can keep anything in court perpetually, even when there is no real justification. Appeal. Lose. Appeal. Lose. Appeal. Lose. Change the basis of the appeal and start over. With weeks or months passing between each step, Trump can lose every case and never take a scratch.

These efforts reveal an obvious weakness in the legal system that can be easily exploited. So far, there doesn’t appear to be any effort to address this weakness.

However, Howell—like “special master” Judge Raymond Dearie in the documents case—is taking action to move things along more quickly. In a September 28 ruling, she dismissed efforts by Trump to delay any hearings until after he had exhausted his appeals based on executive privilege. Howell ruled that hearings would continue, even as Trump tried to defend his all-encompassing view on privilege.

Will it help move things along if more information on Trump’s interference with the grand jury becomes public? Probably not. It’s not as if Trump can be shamed. But it would provide some greater insight into just how Trump has been moving to prevent testimony, and what kinds of claims he is making. That could be interesting, and it might even help the next prosecutor and the next judge in dealing with Trump’s infinite bag o’ monkey wrenches.

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos.

Unrepentant Trump Justifies His Inaction During Capitol Attack

Unrepentant Trump Justifies His Inaction During Capitol Attack

Washington (AFP) - Former President Donald Trump defended his conduct during the US Capitol assault in an incendiary interview published Thursday, saying he did not regret summoning his rioting supporters to Washington.

He told The Washington Post he would have accompanied his ultra-loyal followers as they marched on the complex on January 6 last year, but was stopped by his security detail.

He offered no contrition for whipping up the crowd with bogus claims that victory was stolen from him through widespread fraud -- although he was clear in his condemnation of the violence that ensued.

"Secret Service said I couldn't go. I would have gone there in a minute," he said, in the wide-ranging interview, adding that it was the largest crowd he had ever spoken to.

Thousands of Trump's supporters stormed the Capitol last year in an effort to halt the peaceful transfer of power after Joe Biden won a decisive victory in 2020, described by the government as one of the most secure elections in US history.

Trump repeatedly boasted about the "tremendous" size of the crowd at his rally ahead of the riot and glossed over his explosive rhetoric that whipped up the crowd.

"I don't know what that means, but you see very few pictures. They don’t want to show pictures, the fake news doesn't want to show pictures," he said.

The ex-president defended his long silence during the attack, deflecting blame to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, even though she isn't responsible for policing at the Capitol and was a target of the mob herself.

He also pointed a finger at Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser, who "furiously tried to reach Trump's team that day," according to the Post.

"I hated seeing it. I hated seeing it. And I said, 'It's got to be taken care of,' and I assumed they were taking care of it," Trump said of the violence, which has been linked to at least five deaths.

The interview came after the House of Representatives voted to refer ex-Trump aides Peter Navarro and Dan Scavino for criminal contempt charges on Wednesday for defying congressional subpoenas to testify about the riot.

January 6 Committee Will Hold Bannon In Criminal Contempt

January 6 Committee Will Hold Bannon In Criminal Contempt

The Congressional committee investigating the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol announced on Thursday that it would move to hold Steve Bannon in criminal contempt for refusing to comply with a subpoena.

The House select committee sent subpoenas to Bannon and three of former President Donald Trump's other close allies on September 23.

Read NowShow less
Tell The Truth About The Coup -- Or Go Directly To Jail

Tell The Truth About The Coup -- Or Go Directly To Jail


Overturning the results of a national election is not the kind of crime that any single conspirator can perpetrate -- not even the most powerful man in the world. To mount an attempted coup against the constitutional order was the work of many dirty hands. Just ask Donald Trump, whose aggressive and lawless attempt to nullify his defeat can now be seen as a multi-layered putsch that secretly involved many individuals and organizations over a period of several months – and extended far beyond the array of thugs and misfits who assaulted the Capitol on January 6.

It will surprise nobody who has been paying attention that these covert actors emerged from the far right, which has posed a chronic threat to democracy for decades and finally consolidated its control of the Republican Party under Trump. The most effective response to that threat must occur on at least three levels: identifying every perpetrator; holding them all accountable by every lawful means, including criminal prosecution; and erecting every legislative and political bulwark to prevent any repetition of their crimes.

Like their boss Trump, these co-conspirators are habitual offenders. Fortunately, many of them also share his tendencies toward self-exposure, bluster, and hysterical excess. But others are deceptive, manipulative and ruthless, also like Trump.

For months following the outrages of January 6, attention was focused on those directly involved in that day's insurrectionary violence – the QAnon fanatics, the neo-fascist Proud Boys, the paramilitary Oath Keepers, and the angry, alienated Trumpsters who followed along. More than a few have prior criminal records, and most will be apprehended and punished.

But lately we have gotten a glimpse at the schemers whose weeks and months of planning led to those traumatic hours on Capitol Hill. We are beginning to learn that Trump and his shock troops never intended to accept an election that he didn't win, and how they plotted to subvert it.

In the Washington Spectator, Anne Nelson shows that a key hub of the coup was the Council for National Policy, which has existed since the Reagan era as a kind of Central Committee for the right-wing, primarily evangelical but also secular. Investigative reporting by Nelson and others has revealed that CNP leaders and affiliates in both Washington and contested states were activated as early as August 2020 in a coordinated effort to discredit the election, which they apparently expected to lose.

Notable on the long list of CNP members who organized that "Stop the Steal" campaign during the period leading up to Election Day and beyond included convicted felon Ali Alexander, a close associate of Roger Stone; Charlie Kirk, whose Turning Point student group brought busloads to the capital on January 6; Ginni Thomas, spouse of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas at the center of a web of far right organizations; and Cleta Mitchell, a prominent Republican elections lawyer who joined the cries of "fraud" voiced by Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell.

Nelson outlines how the Trump campaign actually sought to steal the election with pressure campaigns in the contested states, especially Georgia, where Cleta Mitchell participated in Trump's notorious phone call pressuring state officials to "find 11,780 votes" that would undo his defeat. When Georgia officials—Republicans at that--rejected that bullying overture from the White House, Trump turned to the Justice Department – and to law professor named John Eastman, an eminence in the conservative Federalist Society. In another illuminating essay published by the Washington Spectator, former State Department official Jonathan Winer explains Eastman's radical legal theory, under which GOP state legislators could simply proclaim "fraud," toss out the popular vote, and anoint Trump.

The full picture of this plot – not a theory but a real and very sinister conspiracy – has yet to be fully exposed, but we know that months before January 6th, the CNP and its allies were working to mobilize state legislators to discard actual votes and install fake electors. To uncover every aspect of the coup means thwarting the coverup that Trump is orchestrating, as he orders his former staffers to invoke imaginary "executive privilege" and avoid testifying before House and Senate investigators. Steve Bannon, Mark Meadows and all the conspirators must be compelled to testify and produce documents – or go to jail.