The National  Memo Logo

Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.

Monday, December 09, 2019 {{ new Date().getDay() }}

Tag: trump campaign 2020

Trump Campaign Memo Shows Giuliani, Powell Knew Election Fraud Claims Were False

Reprinted with permission from Aternet


A memo obtained by The New York Times makes clear that the Trump campaign not only spread propaganda and misinformation about the results of the 2020 election, they did so with full knowledge that what they were telling the American people was simply a lie.

Long before Jan. 6, in the days immediately following the election, Trump's team was aware that claims about voting machines made by Dominion and Smartmatic were utterly false. The interal memo, prepared by Trump's communication team, includes a thorough debunking of claims about the software, hardware, origins, and political connections of each company, One by one, everything circulating in the fever swamp of right-wing claims about the election was stood up, and just as quickly shot down.

Despite this, Trump's legal team would step forward six days after that memo was circulated and make exactly the claims they already knew not to be true. That included false claims about how the companies were connected to antifa. False claims about how the software had originated in Venezuela. False claims about the connections between the two companies. False claims about connections to George Soros. And false claims about votes being counted overseas.

Now that memo has surfaced in court papers as part of a defamation lawsuit against Trump's campaign. And a quick look at the information suggests that another, very brief, memo could be written. The title of that memo: Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell are f***ked.

On Nov. 19, 2020, Rudy Giuliani stepped out to deliver another round of nonsense claims, random non sequiturs, and outright lies concerning the 2020 presidential election. It was on this occasion that Giuliani explained the legal basis of his claims about voter fraud. "I know crimes," said the former prosecutor. "I can smell them. You don't have to smell this one, I can prove it to you 18 different ways. I can prove to you that Trump won Pennsylvania by 300,000 votes. I can prove to you that he won Michigan, probably by 50,000 votes." Needless to say, he provided no such proof.

But other than Giuliani's crime-sniffing nose, that press event is mostly remembered for two things.

First, that a steady stream of dark hair dye trickled down Giuliani's face as he spoke, lending his overt lies about how Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito had blocked votes in Pennsylvania or how Michigan's most populous county had decertified its vote total an extra air of comic desperation. Again and again, Giuliani threw out numbers along with a claim that he could "prove" some level of malfeasance on the part of election officials and voting machine companies. Again and again, he offered absolutely no proof.

Second, it was at that event that Powell, until then best known for her judge-infuriating defense of disgraced general Michael Flynn, stepped forward to present a jaw-dropping collection of claims that included how Democrats had engaged in a multistate conspiracy to "inject" hundreds of thousands of Biden votes by using voting machines built to appease Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez with the help of wealthy Jew George Soros and sent American votes overseas to servers in Germany, where they could be altered according to orders from antifa.

Powell was detailed, if little short of deranged, in her claims about connections between Dominion and Smartmatic, the origins of their systems as a means of ensuring the election of long-dead dictator Hugo Chavez, the control of mysterious figures from antifa, and a connection to this Biden-Venezuelan-Jewish-Cuban-antifa conspiracy and the Clinton Foundation.

The simple amount of hogwash, hooey, and absurdity in the statements from Giuliani and Powell would have been amusing had all that propaganda not been in service of a lie that led directly to the January 6 insurgency and fueled ongoing claims of election fraud now supported by a majority of Republicans. In the course of the morning, Giuliani and Powell managed to hit Every. Single. One. Of the claims that the Trump team had already investigated and found to be false.

It was if they had taken the internal memo and used it as a checklist to be sure they punched every button on the defamation elevator.

Clearly, someone on Trump's team was listening well enough to hear all the alarms that the claims—particularly those made by Powell—were setting off. Just three days later, Giuliani issued a statement in which he made another false claim: "Sidney Powell is practicing law on her own," wrote Giuliani. "She is not a member of the Trump Legal Team. She is also not a lawyer for the President in his personal capacity."

Unfortunately for them, not only had Giuliani introduced Powell and appeared with her in front of the nation's cameras while she went on her everything-but-the-kitchen sink rant; Powell had been introduced by Trump attorney Jenna Ellis as part of "an elite strike team that is working on behalf of the president and the campaign to make sure that our Constitution is protected."

And there was some other fellow. Some guy on Twitter. What did he say?

"I look forward to Mayor Giuliani spearheading the legal effort to defend OUR RIGHT to FREE and FAIR ELECTIONS! Rudy Giuliani, Joseph diGenova, Victoria Toensing, Sidney Powell, and Jenna Ellis, a truly great team, added to our other wonderful lawyers and representatives!"

Within days of Trump's "distancing" from Powell, she was right back at the center of his representation, acting as the lead attorney on lawsuits filed in December and January. Any claim that she was not connected to the Trump campaign is less believable than Hugo Chavez and George Soros counting votes in Spain using an antifa-branded server.

What's absolutely clear is that both Giuliani and Powell were members of Donald Trump's legal team, who not only stepped forward on November 19—and on many other occasions—to make false claims about the 2020 president election, they did so knowingly. In particular, despite having investigated and found the claims about Dominion and Smartmatic absolutely false, Trump's team went on to file at least four lawsuits against the company and publicly accuse it of crimes in statements they were well aware did not reflect reality. Those accusations generated threats of violence about the companies and their employees, as well as interfering in the ability of the companies to do business.

The only real question should be, will Dominion get the pleasure of taking Giuliani's last dime before the FBI finally completes their actions?

And just in case someone thought either of these two was being more sensible these days …

Follow The Money: How Trump's Campaign Financed Jan. 6 Pre-Riot Rally

Reprinted with permission from Daily Kos

"Follow the money" is a handy bit of kit in a lot of situations. When it comes to looking at the events of January 6, it's good advice. Because, as OpenSecrets.org has revealed, Donald Trump's various campaign funds paid out over $4.3 million to the people who organized the insurgency warm-up rally on January 6. In fact, running down the list of people, there seems to be considerable overlap in the "staff" for Trump and the supposedly grassroots protest. That includes Trump's campaign director of operations, his national finance consultant, and at least half a dozen other people on the payroll of Trump's various campaign PACs.

In fact, the web of connections between Trump's campaign and the rally where he stepped up to urge the crowd's assault on Congress seems so entangled that the whole thing can be read as just another front stretched over Trump's campaign of self-enrichment. Not all of the names on the overlapping list of Trump and January 6 rally organizers have been targeted by the House Select Committee's latest requests for documents, but they ought to be.

It's past time for someone to turn on the lights and reveal just where the "dark money" that funded Women for America First, the "nonprofit group" that secured a permit and locked down a handy launchpad for insurrection.

Last week, the House Select Committee investigating the January 6 insurgency sent out a long list of requests for documents. That list included documents related to almost every adult member of Trump's family (excluding Tiffany), several long-time campaign advisors including Steve Bannon and Roger Stone, and a long list of others involved in planning or executing events on that day. Several of those who worked for both Trump's campaign staff and the various organizations that put together the "Stop the Steal" event were included on that list, but far from all.

This only shows that, as sweeping as the committee's requests were, they're still insufficient to come close to capturing the full scope of individuals and organizations involved, which should be no surprise. After all, the Republican Party has spent decades setting up a seemingly infinite number of "institutes" and "foundations" and "think tanks" through which a handful of extremely wealthy donors can turn their money into action. Add to this a Citizen's United-fueled PAC infrastructure and the kind of morass of entangled power and money that people visualize when talking about "the swamp" absolutely exists—on the right.

Now introduce to this Donald Trump, a man whose 100 percent one-man-owned "empire" consists of over 500 companies and corporations created expressly to disguise his own real worth, moving money around without visibility, and creating the illusion of actions necessary to generate tax breaks. Trump really was out to drain the swamp … right into his personal swamp.

From the look of the connections on January 6, he succeeded.

That document request wasn't, and won't be, the last. As The Washington Post reported, the committee has already followed up with a request to tech companies that could generate even more pages of text. On that document, it may not be the exact list of names that's drawing the biggest attention, but the request for communications records related to "any Member of Congress or congressional staff" who put in a call to Trump or the White House on that day.

That request has made GOP leader Kevin McCarthy very upset. For good reason. After all, the news has already come out about how Jim Jordan and Matt Gaetz phoned Trump from the Capitol and begged him to call off his goons. Again and again, it seems that Republicans understood two things very well on January 6: The people who were attacking the Capitol and threatening their lives were working for Trump, and Trump had the ability to tell them to stand down. But beyond showing how Republicans in Congress understood who was pulling the strings, the committee's review should also show how many were directly involved in planning or executing the assault on the Capitol.

The actions of the Select Committee won't drain the Republican swamp. It's been dredged out over decades, and exploring its labyrinthine bayous of purposeful obfuscation is work that might never be complete. But this much is clear just from the outset:

  • The Trump campaign and the supposedly separate entities that not only planned the January 6 rally but also conducted attacks on democracy across the country were connected by both money and people.
  • Trump's team created a media company to supposedly pay consultants, then lined up to take checks for themselves.
  • Trump's campaign and PACs put out at least $4.3 million to pay those who set up the Washington, D.C. rally.
  • Behind all of this was "dark money" whose sources have not been revealed, hiding behind the farce of nonprofit groups.
  • The members of Congress who are now defending Trump understood—and understand—that he was behind the assault and that the mob and their organizers answer to him.
  • As members of Congress, none of them can hide behind executive privilege, even in attempting to protect their conversations with Trump.
  • Kevin McCarthy is a wiener.

That last part may seem unconnected, but it's always worth noting. Especially since McCarthy's taking the Fifth rather than admitting that he was one of those begging Trump to call off his mob is likely to be one of the highlights of the Select Committee's work.

‘Bombshell’ Notes Expose Trump’s Post-Election Scheme To Corrupt Justice Department

Reprinted with permission from Alternet

Lawmakers in the House Oversight Committee released new evidence on Friday of former President Donald Trump's extensive pressure campaign to use the Justice Department to help him overturn the result of the 2020 presidential election in the final days of his administration.

Notes from conversations between the president and DOJ officials detail his aggressive push to have the department validate the wild conspiracy theories about election fraud that he fomented, despite the lack of evidence.

On December 27, when told the department couldn't "snap its fingers" and "change the outcome of the election," Trump said, "Don't expect you to do that, just say that the election was corrupt + leave the rest to me and the R. Congressmen," according to the notes.

These new revelations follow a recent report from the Washington Post that Trump called acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen about the election almost daily at the end of 2020 about the election. Bill Barr had resigned as attorney general in part because of his split with Trump on the legitimacy of the election

Publicizing notes of communications between the president and the heads of administration departments is highly unusual, but the Biden administration concluded that it was an "extraordinary circumstance" to have "congressional investigators...examining potential wrongdoing by a sitting president," according to the New York Times.

Trump repeatedly pressed the department to investigate the wild claims of election fraud that percolated in right-wing media and corners of the internet at the time, which were repeatedly debunked. At one point, having been told that certain claims he was pushing were simply untrue, Trump reportedly responded: "Ok fine — but what about the others?"

According to the notes, he also told the DOJ officials: "You guys may not be following the internet the way I do."

Perhaps one of the most significant revelations is that Trump was recorded as directly threatening the officials' jobs based on their handling of the investigation. The New York Times explained:In a moment of foreshadowing, Mr. Trump said, "people tell me Jeff Clark is great, I should put him in," referring to the acting head of the Justice Department's civil division, who had also encouraged department officials to intervene in the election. "People want me to replace D.O.J. leadership."
"You should have the leadership you want," Mr. Donoghue replied. But it "won't change the dept's position."
Mr. Donoghue and Mr. Rosen did not know that Mr. Perry had introduced Mr. Clark and Mr. Trump. Exactly one week later, they would be forced to fight Mr. Clark for their jobs in an Oval Office showdown.

George Conway, a conservative lawyer, argued on Twitter that the evidence could support a potential criminal case against the president.

New York Court Suspends Giuliani’s Law License Over Election Lies

Reprinted with permission from American Independent

Rudy Giuliani was suspended on Thursday from practicing law in New York State, after a panel of judges found he violated the professional rules of conduct in his effort to overturn former President Donald Trump's 2020 election loss.

"We conclude that there is uncontroverted evidence that respondent communicated demonstrably false and misleading statements to courts, lawmakers and the public at large in his capacity as lawyer for former President Donald J. Trump and the Trump campaign in connection with Trump's failed effort at reelection in 2020," the judges' decision read.

They continued, "We conclude that respondent's conduct immediately threatens the public interest and warrants interim suspension from the practice of law."

Giuliani can fight the interim suspension. However, the judges wrote that his conduct was egregious enough that it would likely "result in substantial permanent sanctions" and decided to suspend his license until a full investigation could be completed.

Giuliani's suspension marks a stunning fall from grace for the former New York City mayor, who once served as U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York — one of the most prestigious federal court districts in the country, which prosecutes some of the most high profile financial crimes and terror cases.

The decision was scathing, saying Giuliani lied multiple times about everything from dead people voting to the number of absentee ballots cast as part of his campaign to overturn Trump's loss.

It also said Giuliani's "misconduct directly inflamed tensions that bubbled over into the events of January 6, 2021 in this nation's Capitol," referring to the pro-Trump insurrection that resulted in several deaths, tens of millions of dollars in damage and repairs, and federal charges against at least 500 people.

The decision also pointed to Giuliani's disastrous appearance before a federal court in Pennsylvania — in which the Trump campaign sought to overturn Trump's election loss in the state — as a violation of New York's Rules of Professional Conduct for lawyers.

Giuliani, they said, "repeatedly represented to the court that his client, the plaintiff, was pursuing a fraud claim, when indisputably it was not." The decision added that Giuliani's "mischaracterization of the case was not simply a passing mistake or inadvertent reference. Fraud was the crown of his personal argument before the court that day."

The judges similarly cited Giuliani's now infamous press conference at Four Seasons Total Landscaping, during which he claimed that champion boxer Joe Frazier was "still voting" in Pennsylvania despite being dead. That allegation, unsurprisingly, turned out to be false.

"The public records submitted on this motion unequivocally show that [Giuliani's] statement is false," the judges' decision read. "Public records show that Pennsylvania formally cancelled Mr. Frazier's eligibility to vote on February 8, 2012, three months after he died."

Giuliani told the court that he didn't know his statement was false. The court disagreed.

"As for respondent's argument that his misstatements were unknowing, respondent fails to provide a scintilla of evidence for any of the varying and wildly inconsistent numbers of dead people he factually represented voted in Philadelphia during the 2020 presidential election," the judges wrote.

Giuliani is currently facing other legal challenges for his role in trying to overturn Trump's loss.

Dominion Voting Systems filed a $1.3 billion lawsuit against Giuliani in late January, claiming he had lied about the voting machine company and had pushed false claims that its tech had been rigged to swing the election for President Joe Biden.

Smartmatic USA, another voting machine company, also filed a $2.7 billion lawsuit against Giuliani, as well as Fox News and fellow lawyer Sidney Powell, in February, claiming he and Trump's allies had knowingly pushed damaging conspiracies about the company in their attempt to overturn the election.

Giuliani's lawyers responded to the court's decision on Thursday, saying in a statement that the move to suspend him was "unprecedented as we believe that our client does not pose a present danger to the public interest."

"We believe that once the issues are fully explored at a hearing, Mr. Giuliani will be reinstated as a valued member of the legal profession that he has served so well in his many capacities for so many years," they added.

Correction: This article was updated to note that Giuliani served previously as U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, not district attorney.

Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.

Texas Attorney General Admits Voter Suppression Saved State For Trump

Reprinted with permission from Alternet

One need only compare now-President Joe Biden's losses in Texas in 2020 to his losses in Idaho or Wyoming to see that Texas has gone from deep red to light red. Biden lost Texas by six percent; he lost Wyoming by 43 percent, Idaho by 30 percent, and North Dakota by 43 percent. Nonetheless, the Democratic Party has, historically, had a turnout problem in the Lone Star State; Democrats are going to need a heavier turnout in the Democrat-leaning parts of the state if they are going to win statewide races (presidential, gubernatorial or U.S. Senate) in the future. And Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, during a June 4 appearance on Steve Bannon's podcast, essentially admitted that voter suppression helped former President Donald Trump win Texas in 2020.

Paxton told Bannon, who served as White House chief strategist in the Trump Administration in 2017 following his years as chairman of Breitbart News, that had his office not blocked Harris County from sending out mail-in ballot applications to its residents, Trump would have lost Texas in 2020. Harris County includes Democrat-leaning Houston.

"Trump won by 620,000 votes in Texas," Paxton told Bannon. "(The) Harris County mail-in ballots that they wanted to send out were 2.5 million. Those were all illegal, and we were able to stop every one of them."

What Paxton described as "mail-in ballots" were mail-in ballot applications. There's a difference between sending out 2.5 applications for mail-in ballots and actually sending out 2.5 mail-in ballots. And there was nothing evil or sinister about the applications that Harris County officials wanted to send out, as Paxton claimed.

Nonetheless, Paxton's comments were revealing, as they underscore the fact that far-right Republicans like Paxton and Texas Gov. Greg Abbott are scared to death of the possibility of Democrats ramping up voter turnout in the more Democratic parts of the state — which include not only Houston (which hasn't had a Republican mayor since the early 1980s), but also, Austin, El Paso, Dallas and San Antonio. However, the Texas GOP has a very strong ground game in countless rural counties in North Texas and Central Texas, and they really know how to turn out the Republican base in those areas of the state.

Journalist Sharon Zhang, reporting on the interview in Truthout on June 7, stresses that it's "unclear" whether or not Trump "would have actually won the state if Harris County had been allowed to follow through on its plan to make voting more accessible."

"While President Joe Biden won the county by a 13-point margin or nearly 220,000 votes, with record-breaking voter turnout, Trump carried the state with over 600,000 votes," Zhang explains. "Regardless of whether the results would have been any different for Biden had Harris County been able to send out mail-in ballot applications, Paxton's statement about the election results seven months after the fact is revealing of how conservatives view elections and voting rights. Rather than ensuring that elections are conducted fairly, they openly support blocking access to the ballot by any means necessary — especially among voters in more Democratic leaning and non-White areas."

Zhang continues, "Paxton, after all, is the same person who sued to disenfranchise millions of voters in battleground states following Biden's victory in the 2020 elections. Regardless of whether Paxton's lawsuit against the mail-in ballot applications handed Trump his victory in Texas, it was certainly one more tool in the GOP's voter-suppression toolbox for the state."

Why Facebook Should Ban Trump Permanently

Reprinted with permission from Media Matters

Facebook has done the bare minimum once again regarding Donald Trump's account, postponing real action for two years. But anything short of a full ban rings hollow. Trump spent years using Facebook to push misinformation and spread extreme rhetoric against his critics -- particularly during his presidency -- and it should be easy for the platform to do the responsible thing and permanently ban his account.

On June 4, Facebook announced plans to suspend Trump for two years, leaving open the possibility of his return "if conditions permit." But if Trump is let back on, he will by all indications continue to abuse the platform to spread misinformation and attack others, as he's done for years. A two-year suspension — just one election cycle — is unlikely to change that.

Media Matters previously reported that roughly 24 percent of Trump's posts between January 1, 2020, and January 6, 2021, contained either misinformation, content warranting an additional information label, or harmful rhetoric about others. Based on his previous habits, we estimate that his two-year suspension will keep at least 2,800 posts with misinformation or extreme rhetoric off the platform, including at least 700 posts that would likely have contained election misinformation.

Facebook has let Trump abuse its platform for years. His 2016 campaign was bolstered on Facebook by fake accounts, and it used data illegally obtained from the platform. And things have not improved since. As our data on his 2020 posts shows, the 24 percent of his 2020 posts that pushed misinformation or extreme rhetoric earned 331.6 million interactions. Facebook's meager attempts to rein in Trump's lies have not been effective, and in some cases -- such as with the platform's labeling system -- they may have backfired.

Facebook's refusal to permanently ban Trump is unsurprising, as he and his extreme rhetoric are good for business. According to Pathmatics data analyzed by Media Matters, the Trump campaign spent roughly $121.5 million on Facebook ads in 2020, earning over 16 billion impressions on these ads. The only companies that spent more on Facebook ads in 2020 were Disney and HBO. And this figure includes only the money the campaign gave directly to Facebook; Trump also directed users to other misinformation spreaders that make Facebook money, putting him at the center of Facebook's lucrative right-wing misinformation ecosystem.

Despite at least one Facebook executive's claims, divisive content garners high engagement, and engagement drives Facebook's profits. The ecosystem propped up by Trump is lucrative, so it is predictable – though still disappointing – that Facebook is hesitant to upset its profit producers.

Trump's Facebook and Instagram pages remain visible, as they have throughout his suspension, and his old content continues to garner new engagement. It's unacceptable that Facebook has left visible content featuring the behaviors (spreading misinformation, inciting violence) that got him kicked off the platform in the first place, and it's exemplary of Facebook's careless content moderation.

Facebook has done everything it could to avoid taking responsibility for Trump's misuse of the platform, and this approach continues in its unwillingness to commit to permanently preventing his return. Now Facebook has all but guaranteed that Trump will make headlines again when his suspension is reevaluated. The cowardly decision is completely antithetical to the platform's stated mission – "to give people the power to build community and bring the world closer together." By failing to ban Trump outright, despite the damage he has done, Facebook has shown its true mission is increasing profit regardless of the costs.

New Book: Sean Hannity Wrote Trump 2020 Campaign Ad

Reprinted with permission from Media Matters

Fox News host Sean Hannity's role as an off-the-books political operative to former President Donald Trump extended to writing copy for one of the Trump campaign's commercials, according to a new report.

Mike Bender, the Wall Street Journal''s senior White House reporter, reports that Hannity played a role in scripting a Trump campaign ad in his forthcoming book, Frankly, We Did Win This Election: The Inside Story Of How Trump Lost. According to a write-up in PunchBowl News, "The ad was known in the Trump campaign as 'the Hannity ad' and 'the one Hannity wrote,'" and Bender describes internal Trump campaign emails which "referred to the spot simply as 'Hannity'" or "the 'Hannity-written' spot."

The ad, like Hannity's show during the campaign, is a semi-coherent mashup of pro-Trump and anti-Biden talking points that lacks a clear narrative.

And indeed, according to Bender, the ad was widely mocked within the Trump campaign and aired only once, on Hannity's program, at a cost of $1.5 million.

Hannity vaguely denied writing the ad copy, telling Bender, "The world knows that Sean Hannity supports Donald Trump. But my involvement specifically in the campaign -- no. I was not involved that much. Anybody who said that is full of shit."

It's hard to know what to think about a statement like this from a notorious liar. But one reasonable interpretation is that this helps to establish an outer bound for the type of political behavior Hannity thinks his employer would let him get away with. The statement suggests that he believes that Fox would have a problem with him openly accepting responsibility for writing one of the former president's campaign ads.

This is, of course, an absurdly low bar for a cable news host. But as I noted last year, Hannity regularly violated basic tenets of journalistic ethics throughout the Trump years, with the network brass either ignoring his behavior or offering slaps on the wrist:

2016: Amid a presidential campaign that saw Hannity actively using his show to boost Trump's candidacy and promoteunhinged conspiracy theories about his opponent, Hillary Clinton, Hannity endorsed Trump in a promotional video for his campaign, leading to a stern statement from Fox.
2017: Hannity triggered an advertiser exodus and internal dismay when he tried to defend Trump against reports linking his campaign to Russian interference in the 2016 election by championing the Seth Rich conspiracy theory.
2018: Profiles in The Washington Post and New York magazinedetailed the scope of Hannity's White House influence and regular conversations with Trump. He was revealed as a secret client of Trump's longtime lawyer Michael Cohen, a fact the Fox host had not disclosed in his commentary on Cohen's case. And he appeared on stage and spoke at a Trump political rally on the eve of the 2018 midterm elections.
2019: Hannity was a central figure in the Ukraine disinformation plot that triggered Trump's impeachment by the House of Representatives.
2020: Documents uncovered by BuzzFeed News showed that Hannity had served as a backchannel between Trump and his associates under investigation during special counsel Robert Mueller's probe.

Since then, Fox has become even less ethical and more propagandistic. The network hired a slew of former Trump administration officials. The list includes 2024 presidential hopeful Mike Pompeo, as well as the former president's daughter-in-law, would-be Senate candidate Lara Trump. One Fox contributor, Newt Gingrich, is working with Trump to develop the GOP's policy agenda for the 2022 elections.

But taking ownership of a campaign ad appears to still be a step too far.

McCarthy: Nobody Is ‘Questioning The Legitimacy’ Of The 2020 Election

Reprinted with permission from American Independent

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy said on Wednesday that no one is "questioning the legitimacy of the presidential election," even as multiple members of his own party, including Donald Trump, continue to do exactly that.

"I don't think anybody is questioning the legitimacy of the presidential election," McCarthy said at a news conference outside the White House, where he met with President Joe Biden on Wednesday. "That's all over with. We are sitting here with the president today."

McCarthy made the comment just hours after Republicans ousted Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY) from her House leadership role for her outspoken criticism of Donald Trump and his lies of a stolen election.

Cheney accused members of her own party of going down an authoritarian path by not calling out voter fraud lies, saying in a Tuesday night speech that Republicans need to "speak the truth. Our election was not stolen. And America has not failed."

House Republicans are likely to replace Cheney with is Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY), who is still calling Trump "the president."

On January 6, the day of the Capitol insurrection, Stefanik lied about voter fraud, falsely claiming in an "open letter" to her constituents that "more than 140,000 votes came from underage, deceased, and otherwise unauthorized voters — in Fulton County alone."

It's a lie Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger said was outrageous.

"The suggestion that one-fourth of all ballots cast in Fulton County in November were illegal is ludicrous," Raffensperger told CNN fact-checker Daniel Dale.

What's more, McCarthy's claim that no one is questioning the outcome of the race came two days after Trump himself issued yet another lie-filled post on his new blog claiming there was widespread fraud in the election and that he, not Biden, won.

McCarthy himself has worked to raise doubts about the election outcome.

On November 6, one day before the race was called for Biden, McCarthy said in a Fox News appearance that "President Trump won this election, so everyone who's listening, do not be quiet. We cannot allow this to happen before our very eyes."

McCarthy also backed a since-failed lawsuit from the Texas Attorney General that sought to invalidate the votes in states Biden won. And he later was one of the 147 members of Congress to vote to block certification of Joe Biden's win — based off lies of fraud and irregularities in the election.

Ultimately, the consistent lies from Trump and the GOP about a stolen election have led Republican voters to believe Biden's win was illegitimate.

An Economist/YouGov poll from the end of April found 74 percent of Republican voters don't believe Biden legitimately won the election.

It's something Cheney said in her Tuesday speech she is afraid of.

"I will not sit back and watch in silence while others lead our party down a path that abandons the rule of law and joins the former President's crusade to undermine our democracy," Cheney said.

Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.