Tag Archives: Subpoenas

Bannon trial set to begin over failure to comply with Jan. 6 committee subpoenas

His proceedings begin Monday with jury selection at the federal courthouse in Washington, DC.

The polarizing long-time Trump ally has always been at the top of the January 6 witness list for House investigators. But Justice Department prosecutors say the trial is intended to punish Bannon for noncompliance with the subpoenas, rather than coerce him into sharing information.
The case is a major test of what leverage Congress has when a witness evades a House subpoena. Bannon’s is the first of two similar House select committee subpoena cases to head to trial; a contempt case against former White House trade adviser Peter Navarro is still in its early stages.
Bannon’s trial also carries special relevance for the House panel as it continues to negotiate bringing in additional witnesses, and as it prepares for a major primetime hearing Thursday night intended to spotlight what committee members have called former President Donald Trump’s “dereliction of duty” on January 6.

Prosecutors pledge that their case against Bannon will be presented succinctly, over just a few days, with only two or three prosecution witnesses. That list includes House committee investigators.

It’s unknown how extensive Bannon’s defense will be, or if he will want to take the stand in his own defense. He will not be able to force House members to testify, the judge has said.
Early in the case, Bannon vowed to make the proceedings the “misdemeanor from hell for (Attorney General) Merrick Garland, (House Speaker) Nancy Pelosi and (President) Joe Biden.” But at a recent court hearing, his defense attorney David Schoen complained, “What’s the point of going to trial here if there is no defense?”
Bannon — who accepted an 11th-hour pardon from Trump in 2021 as he was facing conspiracy wire fraud and money laundering charges in Manhattan’s federal court related to a border wall fundraising scheme — has made a series of attempts in court in recent days to stop the trial, to fashion more of a defense, or to prepare for possible appeals.
So far, US District Judge Carl Nichols has overwhelmingly sided with the Justice Department on what evidence the jury can hear, cutting off Bannon’s ability to try to defer to advice his attorney gave him or to use internal DOJ policies on presidential advisers that he hoped might protect him.
In recent weeks, Trump indicated he wanted to waive any executive privilege that might have applied to Bannon, and Bannon suggested he may be interested in speaking with the House committee — a series of events that Bannon’s team now wants to try to show to the jury. But his ability to bring up arguments about executive privilege will be, at best, severely limited. Bannon was not a government official during the period the committee is probing.
A federal grand jury indicted the right-wing figure in November on two counts of criminal contempt — one for his failure to provide testimony demanded by the House select committee’s subpoena in the fall and the other for his failure to produce documents. A key issue at trial will be whether the jury agrees with prosecutors and the House that Bannon’s October subpoena deadlines were final, and that he deliberately disregarded them.

Both charges he faces are misdemeanors. But if he is found guilty, each carries a mandatory minimum of 30 days in jail.

Bannon was one of the first potential January 6 witnesses the House committee subpoenaed — and he is one of a handful of people the committee has held in contempt. The committee said it wanted to obtain his documents and ask him questions because Bannon had contact with Trump, was in the so-called war room of Trump allies at the Willard hotel in Washington as the riot unfolded, and made a prediction on his podcast before the riot that “all hell” was “going to break loose.”

“In short, Mr. Bannon appears to have played a multi-faceted role in the events of January 6th, and the American people are entitled to hear his first-hand testimony regarding his actions,” the House committee said in its report putting forward a contempt resolution against Bannon.

When Bannon was facing deadlines in October, his attorney Robert Costello told the committee Bannon would not be cooperating with the investigation because of instructions from Trump that said he should, “where appropriate, invoke any immunities and privileges he may have.”
Since then, criminal investigators have interviewed Costello, as well as a Trump lawyer, Justin Clark, in building their case. According to their description of Clark’s statements, he told Costello Trump couldn’t shield Bannon from total noncompliance with the subpoenas.

Ahead of Bannon’s trial, the House committee has featured details about him in some of its public presentations. At a hearing last Tuesday, the committee revealed White House phone logs indicating Bannon and Trump spoke twice on January 5, 2021, including once before Bannon made his predictions about the next day on the podcast.

The committee has another hearing planned for primetime Thursday evening. Depending on the pace of the proceedings at DC’s federal courthouse, and the length of his defense presentation and jury deliberations, Bannon’s trial could be over by then.

Read original article here

Jan. 6 panel subpoenas Secret Service for erased texts

WASHINGTON (AP) — The House committee investigating the U.S. Capitol attack subpoenaed the Secret Service on Friday night for text messages agents reportedly deleted around Jan. 6, 2021, as the panel probes Donald Trump’s actions at the time of the deadly siege.

Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., said in a statement that the committee understands the messages had been “erased.” Thompson outlined an aggressive timeline for production of the documents by Tuesday.

“The USSS erased text messages from January 5 and 6, 2021, as part of a ‘device-replacement program,’” Thompson said late Friday. He said the panel “seeks the relevant text messages, as well as any after action reports that have been issued in any and all divisions of the USSS pertaining or relating in any way to the events of January 6, 2021.”

The Secret Service did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The subpoenas come hours after the nine-member panel received a closed briefing from the watchdog for Department of Homeland Security, which oversees the Secret Service. The watchdog briefed the lawmakers about his finding that the Secret Service deleted texts from around Jan. 6, according to two people familiar with the matter.

For the Jan. 6 panel, the watchdog’s finding raised the startling prospect of lost evidence that could shed further light on Trump’s actions during the insurrection, particularly after earlier testimony a about the president’s confrontation with security as he tried to join supporters at the Capitol.

It was a rare action for the panel to issue a subpoena to an executive branch department.

While lawmakers were tight-lipped about what they heard, the closed-door briefing with the inspector general, Joseph Cuffari, came two days after his office sent a letter to leaders of the House and Senate Homeland Security committees stating that Secret Service agents erased messages between Jan. 5 and Jan. 6, 2021 “as part of a device-replacement program.” The deletion came after the watchdog office requested records from the agents as part of its probe into events surrounding the Jan. 6 attack, the letter said.

The committee had originally sought the electronic records in mid-January and made an official request in March for all communications received or sent from DHS employees between Jan. 5 and Jan. 7, 2021.

Thompson, the Democratic chairman of the House Jan. 6 panel, told the Associated Press on Friday that the committee is taking a deeper look at whether records may have been lost. “There have been some conflicting positions on the matter,” the Mississippi lawmaker said.

The private briefing was confirmed by two people familiar with the matter who spoke to The Associated Press on the condition of anonymity to discuss it.

The Secret Service insists proper procedures were followed. Agency spokesman Anthony Guglielmi said, “The insinuation that the Secret Service maliciously deleted text messages following a request is false. In fact, the Secret Service has been fully cooperating with the OIG in every respect — whether it be interviews, documents, emails, or texts.”

He said the Secret Service had started to reset its mobile devices to factory settings in January 2021 “as part of a pre-planned, three-month system migration.” In that process, some data was lost.

The inspector general has first requested the electronic communications on Feb. 26, “after the migration was well under way,” Guglielmi said.

The Secret Service said it has provided a substantial number of emails and chat messages that included conversations and details related to Jan. 6 to the inspector general. It also said text messages from the Capitol Police requesting assistance on Jan. 6 were preserved and provided to the inspector general’s office.

The Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, which has jurisdiction over the Department of Homeland Security and the Secret Service, is also expecting a briefing from the inspector general about the letter, according to a person familiar with the committee’s discussions who was not authorized to discuss them publicly.

The Jan. 6 committee has taken a renewed interest in the Secret Service following the dramatic testimony of former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson, who recalled what she heard about former President Donald Trump’s actions the day of the insurrection.

Hutchinson recalled being told about a confrontation between Trump and his Secret Service detail as he angrily demanded to be driven to the Capitol, where his supporters would later breach the building. She also recalled overhearing Trump telling security officials to remove magnetometers for his rally on the Ellipse even though some of his supporters were armed.

Some details of that account were quickly disputed by those agents. Robert Engel, the agent who was driving the presidential SUV, and Trump security official Tony Ornato are willing to testify under oath that no agent was assaulted and Trump never lunged for the steering wheel, a person familiar with the matter told the AP. The person would not discuss the matter publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity.

With evidence still emerging, the House Jan. 6 committee on Friday officials scheduled its next hearing to take place Thursday in primetime. The 8 p.m. hearing, which is the eighth in a series that began in early June, will take a deeper look into the three-hour-plus stretch when Trump failed to act as a mob of supporters stormed the Capitol.

It will be the first hearing in prime time since June 9, the first on the committee’s findings. It was viewed by 20 million people.

___

Associated Press writer Gary Fields contributed.

___

For full coverage of the Jan. 6 hearings, go to https://www.apnews.com/capitol-siege.

Read original article here

Trump left social media company board before federal subpoenas

The Truth social network logo is seen on a smartphone in front of a display of former U.S. President Donald Trump in this picture illustration taken February 21, 2022.

Dado Ruvic | Reuters

Former President Donald Trump left the board of his social media company just weeks before it was issued subpoenas by the Securities and Exchange Commission and a federal grand jury in Manhattan, records show.

Trump, who had served as the chair of Trump Media and Technology Group, was one of six board members removed, according to a June 8 filing with the Florida Department of State’s Division of Corporations. His son Donald Trump Jr. also departed the board, along with Wes Moss, Kashyap Patel, Andrew Northwall and Scott Glabe. The news was first reported by the Sarasota Herald-Tribune.

The SEC served the company with a subpoena on June 27. Three days later, a federal grand jury in Manhattan issued a subpoena to the firm. Grand jury subpoenas typically indicate a criminal investigation is in progress.

The company said last week none of the subpoenas were directed at Trump. Representatives for Trump and for the company didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment Thursday.

The subpoenas appear to be related to a proposed merger between Trump Media and Technology and Digital World Acquisition Corp. DWAC disclosed the connection with a criminal probe Friday. A week prior, DWAC said the government investigations could delay or even prevent its merger with Trump’s newly formed company, which includes Truth Social, a social media app intended to be an alternative to Twitter.

The Justice Department and the SEC, which regulates the stock market, are investigating the deal between DWAC and Trump Media. By merging with DWAC, which is a kind of shell company called a special purpose acquisition company, or SPAC, Trump’s firm would gain access to potentially billions of dollars on public equities markets.

Early criticism of the deal came from Sen. Elizabeth Warren in November. She wrote to SEC Chair Gary Gensler, telling him that DWAC “may have committed securities violations by holding private and undisclosed discussions about the merger as early as May 2021, while omitting this information in [SEC] filing and other public statements.”

Shares of DWAC were down less than a percent Thursday, but have fallen more than 50% so far this year.

—CNBC’s Mike Calia contributed to this report.

Read original article here

January 6 committee subpoenas ex-White House counsel Pat CiPO

Cipollone, who many former administration officials credit with helping to prevent Trump from taking legally questionable actions in the months around the 2020 presidential election, has long been considered a key witness by the committee. He has resisted talking further with the committee after previously sitting for a closed-door interview on April 13.

The committee said in its subpoena letter that it has obtained evidence that Cipollone is “uniquely positioned to testify” but he has “declined to cooperate” past that interview, leaving the panel with “no choice” but to issue the subpoena. During recent public hearings, members of the panel have publicly pressured Cipollone to testify. The committee is now taking the step to issue a subpoena in an effort to force his formal cooperation.

Mississippi Democratic Rep. Bennie Thompson, the panel’s chairman, and Wyoming Republican Rep. Liz Cheney, the panel’s vice chair, said that “the Select Committee’s investigation has revealed evidence that Mr. Cipollone repeatedly raised legal and other concerns about President Trump’s activities on January 6th and in the days that preceded.”

“While the Select Committee appreciates Mr. Cipollone’s earlier informal engagement with our investigation, the committee needs to hear from him on the record, as other former White House counsels have done in other congressional investigations,” the pair continued. “Any concerns Mr. Cipollone has about the institutional prerogatives of the office he previously held are clearly outweighed by the need for his testimony.”

Witnesses who have testified before the panel have repeatedly mentioned Cipollone as someone who can shed light on key events inside the Trump White House leading up to, on and after January 6, 2021.
Not long after the rioters broke into the US Capitol, Cipollone rushed into then-White House chief of staff Mark Meadows’ office demanding a meeting with Trump, Meadows aide Cassidy Hutchinson told the January 6 committee this week.

“I remember Pat saying to him something to the effect of, ‘the rioters have gotten to the Capitol. We need to go down and see the President now,'” Hutchinson said in a videotaped interview.

“And Mark looked up at him and said, ‘He doesn’t want to do anything, Pat,'” she said.

Cipollone, Hutchinson added, emphasized to Meadows the need for action to control the situation to Meadows. She said Cipollone “very clearly said this to Mark — something to the effect of, ‘Mark, something needs to be done or people are going to die and the blood’s going to be on your f**king hands. This is getting out of control. I’m going down there.'”

Meadows then handed his phones to Hutchinson and walked out of his office with Cipollone, Hutchinson told the committee.

Cheney tweeted Wednesday before the subpoena was announced that “as we heard yesterday, WH counsel Pat Cipollone had significant concerns re. Trump’s Jan 6 activities. It’s time for Mr. Cipollone to testify on the record. Any concerns he has about the institutional interests of his prior office are outweighed by the need for his testimony.”

This story has been updated with additional details.

Read original article here

McCarthy, GOP lawmakers escalate standoff with Jan. 6 panel

WASHINGTON (AP) — Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy is making it clear that he will likely defy a subpoena from the House committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol attack, escalating a standoff with the panel over his and other GOP lawmakers’ testimony.

In an 11-page letter to the panel Friday, an attorney for McCarthy argued that the select committee does not have the authority to issue subpoenas to the lawmakers under House rules and demanded answers to a series of questions and documents if his client were to comply.

Attorney Elliot Berke requested a list of “topics that the Select Committee would like to discuss with the Leader, and the constitutional and legal rationale justifying the request.”

“I expressly reserve Leader McCarthy’s right to assert any other applicable privilege or objection to the Select Committee’s subpoena,” Berke wrote.

Committee spokesperson Tim Mulvey responded Friday evening, “Leader McCarthy and other Members who have been served subpoenas are hiding behind debunked arguments and baseless requests for special treatment.”

He added, “The refusal of these Members to cooperate is a continued assault on the rule of law and sets a dangerous new precedent that could hamper the House’s ability to conduct oversight in the future.” Mulvey said committee Chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., “will formally respond to these Members in the days ahead.”

The House panel believes testimony from the Republican lawmakers is crucial to their investigation as each of the men was in contact with then-President Donald Trump and his allies in the weeks and days leading up to the Capitol insurrection. Some participated in meetings and urged the White House to try to overturn the 2020 presidential results.

McCarthy has acknowledged he spoke with Trump on Jan. 6 as Trump’s supporters were beating police outside the Capitol and forcing their way into the building. But he has not shared many details. The committee requested information about his conversations with Trump “before, during and after” the riot.

His apparent defiance presents a new challenge for the committee after lawmakers decided to take the extraordinary and politically risky step of subpoenaing their own colleagues.

“For House Republican leaders to agree to participate in this political stunt would change the House forever,” the California lawmaker wrote Thursday in an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal with GOP Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio.

The committee now must decide whether to enforce the subpoenas even as it looks to wrap up the investigation and prepare for a series of public hearings in early June. It could refer the lawmakers to the House ethics committee or take steps to hold them in contempt.

The subpoenas were issued to McCarthy, Jordan, and Reps. Scott Perry of Pennsylvania, Andy Biggs of Arizona and Mo Brooks of Alabama in mid-May. The panel has already interviewed more than 1,000 witnesses and collected more than 100,000 documents as it investigates the worst attack on the Capitol in two centuries.

“I have no relevant information that would advance any legitimate legislative purpose,” Jordan said in a letter detailing his reasons for not cooperating. The others indicated after the subpoenas were issued that they too would not cooperate.

Perry’s lawyer sent the committee a letter earlier this week saying he could “not in good conscience comply” with the subpoena because he does not believe it is valid under House rules.

Requests for comment from Biggs and Brooks were not immediately returned.

The panel had previously asked for voluntary cooperation from the five lawmakers, along with a handful of other GOP members, but all refused to speak with the panel, which debated for months whether to issue the subpoenas.

McCarthy and the others were summoned to testify in front of investigators this week and next week. McCarthy, who aspires to be House speaker if Republicans take over the majority next year, indicated that the committee’s decision will have a lasting impact.

“Every representative in the minority would be subject to compelled interrogations by the majority, under oath, without any foundation of fairness, and at the expense of taxpayers,” he wrote in the op-ed.

In a separate move, McCarthy and the No. 2 House Republican, Louisiana Rep. Steve Scalise, filed a court brief in support of Donald Trump ally Steve Bannon, who is facing criminal contempt charges for defying a subpoena from the committee. In the brief, lawyers for the two write that the committee does not have the authority to issue subpoenas, an argument that has been dismissed in other court proceedings.

The lawyers also wrote that McCarthy and Scalise filed the brief “out of concern for the potential damage to House institutional” rules and order.

Read original article here

House subpoenas its own, grave new norm after Jan. 6 attack

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Jan. 6 committee’s remarkable decision to subpoena House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy and other congressional Republicans over the insurrection at the Capitol is as rare as the deadly riot itself, deepening the acrimony and distrust among lawmakers and raising questions about what comes next.

The outcome is certain to reverberate beyond the immediate investigation of Donald Trump’s unfounded efforts to overturn Joe Biden’s presidential election victory. Fuming Republicans vow to use the same tools, weaponizing congressional subpoena powers if they wrest control of the House in November’s midterm elections to go after Democrats, even at the highest levels in Congress.

“It’s setting a very jarring and dangerous precedent,” said Rep. Peter Meijer of Michigan, who was among the handful of Republicans who voted to impeach Trump over the insurrection.

On Friday, the subpoenas for McCarthy and the four other Republican lawmakers were served as the committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol is wrapping up its initial phase. Public hearings are expected to begin in June, and the panel is still determining whether to call Republican senators to testify.

While the summons for McCarthy and the other Republican lawmakers was not wholly unexpected, it amplified concerns over the new norm-setting in Congress.

McCarthy, in line to become House speaker, brushed past reporters Friday, declining to say whether he would comply with the committee’s summons for testimony. Asked repeatedly for comment, McCarthy was mum.

The other Republicans — Andy Biggs of Arizona, Mo Brooks of Alabama, Jim Jordan of Ohio and Scott Perry of Pennsylvania — have decried the investigation as illegitimate, and it is unclear whether any of them will comply. The four all had conversations with the Trump White House about challenging the election, and McCarthy tried unsuccessfully to convince Trump to call off the Capitol siege that day as rioters broke windows near his own office.

“They have a duty to testify,” said Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.

“I mean, we’re investigating an insurrection against the United States government,” Nadler said. “An insurrection. Treason.”

The next steps are highly uncertain as the House, with its Democratic majority, weighs whether to take the grave, if unlikely, action of holding its own colleagues in contempt of Congress by voting to send a criminal referral to the Department of Justice for prosecution.

While other lawmakers have voluntarily come forward to talk to the committee, a move to force the subpoenaed members to share information would be certain to become tangled in broader constitutional questions — among them, whether the executive branch should be intervening in the governance of the legislative branch that tends to make its own rules. Action would drag for months, or longer.

Instead, the House could take other actions, including a vote of public censure of McCarthy and the four GOP lawmakers, a referral to the Ethics Committee, the imposition of fines or even the stripping of their committee assignments.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi declined to answer any questions Friday.

“I don’t talk about what happens in the Jan. 6 committee,” she said in the halls, deferring to the panel as she typically does.

Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., who chairs the bipartisan Jan. 6 panel, said it has options after the five GOP lawmakers refused its request for voluntary interviews and now face the summons.

“Look, all we’re saying is, these are members of Congress who’ve taken an oath,” he said. “Our investigation indicated that January 6 did actually happen, and what people saw with their own eyes did, in fact, happen.”

It’s a volatile time for Congress, with an intensified political toxicity settling into a new normal since the Capitol insurrection left five dead. That included a Trump supporter shot by police and a police officer who died later after battling the mob.

The Capitol is slowly reopening to tourists this spring after being shuttered over security concerns and the ongoing COVID-19 crisis, but unease remains. Tensions run high and at least one lawmaker on the panel, Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., a vocal Trump critic, is flanked daily by security guards, a jarring sign of how America has changed.

Trump’s influence over the Republican Party remains strong, leaving many GOP lawmakers unwilling to publicly accept Biden’s election victory, some promulgating their own false claims of a fraudulent 2020 election. Courts across the nation have rejected claims the election was rigged.

If Republicans win power this fall, they are almost certain to launch investigations into Biden, Jan. 6 and other topics, now armed with the tool of subpoenas for fellow lawmakers.

“It’s a race to the bottom, is what it is,” said Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., who won Trump’s endorsement last week for his own reelection, despite having sparred with him in the past.

“I mean, I hope when we get in power, we don’t do the same things that they’re doing,” he said. “But you know, turnabout is fair play.”

While Democratic leaders say they would happily testify if summoned by newly empowered Republicans next year, more rank-and-file lawmakers privately express unease with what comes next, worried about being drawn into the fray.

Congress issuing a subpoena to one of its own would be rare, but not a first.

The ethics committees have subpoenaed individual lawmakers over potential wrongdoing. That includes the Senate voting in 1993 to subpoena the diary of Sen. Bob Packwood, R-Ore., during an investigation into allegations of sexual harassment. Facing expulsion, he resigned first.

But traditionally, congressional subpoenas are pointed outward. Shortly after the country’s founding the first congressional subpoena was issued not to a lawmaker but to a real estate speculator who tried to purchase what is now Michigan and attempted to bribe members of Congress, according to the House history website.

The Jan. 6 panel has wrestled privately for weeks over whether to subpoena fellow lawmakers, understanding the gravity of the action it would be taking.

Once the members of the committee made their choice to issue the subpoenas, Pelosi was informed of their decision.

Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., a member of the panel, suggested the decision was justified based on the seriousness of the Jan. 6 attack.

“People have asked, ‘Does this set a precedent for the issuance of subpoenas for members of Congress in the future?’ If there are coups and insurrections, then I suppose that it does,” Raskin said.

Read original article here

January 6 committee subpoenas Kevin McCarthy, other GOP lawmakers after they decline to voluntarily participate

Washington — The House select committee investigating the January 6 assault on the U.S. Capitol issued subpoenas Thursday to House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy and four other House Republicans, a significant escalation in its efforts to obtain information from GOP lawmakers as part of its probe.

In addition to McCarthy, the select committee subpoenaed Reps. Jim Jordan of Ohio, Mo Brooks of Alabama, Scott Perry of Pennsylvania and Andy Biggs of Arizona for testimony. The demand from the panel is likely to spark a legal fight, as others who have been called to testify before lawmakers, such as former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, have turned to the courts to challenge subpoenas issued by House investigators. 

Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson, a Democrat from Mississippi, said the GOP lawmakers have information relevant to its investigation, and the panel was forced to issue the subpoenas after they rebuffed the opportunity to participate voluntarily.

“We urge our colleagues to comply with the law, do their patriotic duty, and cooperate with our investigation as hundreds of other witnesses have done,” he said in a statement.

If the five Republicans defy the subpoenas, Thompson said the committee could recommend contempt charges, as it has done for others, though members have not discussed that step. The panel could also make a referral to the House Ethics Committee or explore other civil options, he said, adding the committee is “taking it one step at a time” and hopes lawmakers comply with their subpoenas.

President Trump speaks as he joined by House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy in the Rose Garden of the White House on January 4, 2019.

Getty Images


The panel asked the Republican lawmakers for their voluntary cooperation with their investigation into January 6 riots, but they declined to provide information to its members. Brooks, who spoke at the rally outside the White House hours before the Capitol attack, said earlier this month that while he would have testified voluntarily at some point in the past, he would only do so if subpoenaed and vowed to fight such a demand. 

While the select committee has issued subpoenas for McCarthy, Jordan, Brooks, Perry and Biggs, it has also asked GOP Rep. Ronny Jackson to participate in voluntary meetings with investigators. It’s unclear whether the panel will subpoena Jackson in the future.

The panel told Jordan and Brooks in earlier requests for information they would like to discuss conversations the two had with former President Donald Trump regarding his efforts to overturn the outcome of the 2020 presidential election. Investigators believe Perry played an “important role” in efforts to install former Justice Department official Jeffrey Clark as acting attorney general, and found the Pennsylvania Republican communicated with Meadows about Clark through text messages and Signal, an encrypted messaging app.

The committee believes Biggs participated in meetings at the White House and remotely regarding planning for January 6, including on the strategy for Vice President Mike Pence to reject electoral votes from key battleground states Trump lost in the 2020 presidential election. The panel also said it learned Biggs was involved in plans to bring protesters to Washington on January 6, when lawmakers were convening for a joint session to count state electoral votes and reaffirm President Biden’s win. Additionally, it has information about Biggs’ alleged efforts to convince state officials the 2020 election was stolen and to seek their help with Trump’s efforts to overturn the results, and former White House staff identified Biggs as potentially involved in effort to seek a presidential pardon for activities tied to Trump’s campaign to reverse the election outcome.

The panel said McCarthy was in contact with Trump “before, during and after” January 6, and wants information about his conversations with fellow lawmakers in the days after the January 6 attack. In a conference call with Republican leaders, McCarthy said the then-president had acknowledged bearing some blame for the assault, according to recently released audio.

“He told me he does have some responsibility for what happened. And he needs to acknowledge that,” the top House Republican said. 

McCarthy said in another leaked call that he was considering asking Trump to resign. 

“The only discussion I would have with him is that I think this will pass, and it would be my recommendation you should resign,” he told Rep. Liz Cheney in a January 10, 2021, call, referring to an impeachment resolution crafted by House Democrats. Cheney is one of two Republicans on the January 6 committee and serves as vice chair.

At the Capitol on Thursday, Cheney said the decision to subpoena sitting members of Congress was “a reflection of how important and serious the investigation is, and how grave the attack on the Capitol was.”

“We asked these five individuals to come in and speak with us and they’ve refused, and they have an obligation,” the Wyoming Republican said. “They have critically important information about the attack that we need for the investigation.”

The committee has signaled for weeks that it could issue subpoenas if the congressmen didn’t voluntarily comply with their requests. Rep. Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, the other Republican on the panel, told “Face the Nation” earlier this month that the committee would “ultimately [do] whatever we can do to get that information” from members.

“We’ve requested information from various members. In terms of whether we move forward with a subpoena, [that] is going to be both a strategic, tactical decision and a question of whether or not, you know, we can do that and get the information in time,” Kinzinger said in the May 1 interview.

Kinzinger said Thursday that the committee members were “well aware” of “the impact” of subpoenaing members of Congress, but “what happened in January 6 was unprecedented.”

McCarthy, Perry and Brooks said they had not yet received the subpoenas before the committee announced them, but they denounced the proceedings conducted by their colleagues.

Perry told reporters the demands were “all about distracting America from their abysmal record of running America into the ground,” while McCarthy said the committee is “not conducting a legitimate investigation.” Brooks said in a statement his compliance hinges on several factors, including whether his testimony will be public, whether questions will be limited to events relevant to the January 6 assault, and who will be questioning him. The Alabama Republican also said he plans to consult with the other Republicans the committee wants to depose.

In the course of its investigation into the January 6 insurrection and events surrounding it, the committee has issued more than 90 subpoenas to a wide range of former White House aides, allies of Trump, former campaign officials, organizers of the rallies protesting the results of the 2020 election and far-right extremist groups like the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers.

A number of prospective witnesses have unsuccessfully tried to nullify the subpoenas in federal court. Most recently, a U.S. district judge in Washington rejected an attempt by the Republican National Committee to block a subpoena from the select committee to its email fundraising vendor, finding the committee was seeking information relevant to its investigation.

The House has also voted to hold Meadows, and former White House top aides Dan Scavino, Peter Navarro and Steve Bannon in contempt of Congress after they failed to comply with subpoenas. Bannon was indicted by a federal grand jury in November for refusing to appear for a deposition and turn over documents, and has pleaded not guilty.    

Some members of Trump’s family, meanwhile, have spoken to House investigators, including Donald Trump Jr., Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law.

Much of the committee’s work thus far has been conducted behind closed doors, with lawmakers and staff conducting more than 900 interviews and depositions and receiving more than 100,000 documents in the course of their probe. But the panel’s examination of the January 6 assault will enter its public phase next month, holding a series of eight hearings beginning June 9.

Zak Hudak and Ellis Kim contributed to this report.

Read original article here

Jan. 6 committee subpoenas Kevin McCarthy, four other House Republicans

Placeholder while article actions load

The committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol by a pro-Trump mob has subpoenaed five Republican members of Congress, including House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (Calif.), after they refused to cooperate with the panel’s inquiry.

Rep. Bennie G. Thompson (D-Miss.), who chairs the select committee, said Thursday that the panel has subpoenaed McCarthy and Reps. Mo Brooks (Ala.), Andy Biggs (Ariz.), Scott Perry (Pa.) and Jim Jordan (Ohio).

The move marks a significant escalation in the committee’s efforts to obtain information related to lawmakers’ communications with then-President Donald Trump and White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows before, during and after the attack.

In a statement, Thompson said the committee “has learned that several of our colleagues have information relevant to our investigation into the attack on January 6th and the events leading up to it.”

“Before we hold our hearings next month, we wished to provide members the opportunity to discuss these matters with the committee voluntarily,” Thompson said. “Regrettably, the individuals receiving subpoenas today have refused and we’re forced to take this step to help ensure the committee uncovers facts concerning January 6th. We urge our colleagues to comply with the law, do their patriotic duty, and cooperate with our investigation as hundreds of other witnesses have done.”

The committee said in its letters to McCarthy and Brooks that it is compelling the two Republicans to appear for depositions on May 31. Depositions of Biggs and Perry are scheduled for May 26, and Jordan is scheduled to testify on May 27.

The subpoenas come ahead of the committee’s long-awaited public hearings, which are scheduled to begin June 9.

Until Thursday, the committee had been reluctant to subpoena GOP lawmakers because of a variety of issues, including time constraints — a complex and lengthy legal fight could last beyond the November midterm elections — along with fears of retribution in the likely case that Republicans win back the House majority.

Investigators have been working to identify precedents for subpoenaing sitting members, according to two people familiar with the inquiry. One example on which they’ve focused is the House Ethics Committee’s two-year-long probe into the personal finances of former congressman Charles B. Rangel (D-N.Y.). Rangel, who was ultimately found guilty on 11 ethics charges, was subpoenaed by the investigative subcommittee after refusing repeated requests for a forensic accountant’s report and other documents.

All five of the Republican lawmakers subpoenaed Thursday have declined to voluntarily provide information to the committee.

In a brief interview with reporters Thursday, McCarthy declined to say whether he would comply with the subpoena while reiterating his criticism of the committee.

“My view on the committee has not changed,” he said. “They’re not conducting a legitimate investigation. It seems as though they just want to go after their political opponents.”

Jordan also declined to say whether he would comply. The other lawmakers did not immediately respond to news of the subpoenas.

In a January letter to McCarthy, Thompson said the panel is interested in his correspondence with Meadows ahead of the attack, along with McCarthy’s communications with Trump during and after the riot. Details of those conversations could provide the committee with further insight into Trump’s state of mind at the time, Thompson wrote.

“We also must learn about how the President’s plans for January 6th came together, and all the other ways he attempted to alter the results of the election,” he wrote. “For example, in advance of January 6th, you reportedly explained to Mark Meadows and the former President that objections to the certification of the electoral votes on January 6th ‘was doomed to fail.’”

McCarthy responded in January by arguing in a statement that the committee’s “only objective is to attempt to damage its political opponents.”

If Republicans retake the House in November, McCarthy is widely expected to be elected speaker — although some members of the House GOP conference have expressed reservations after the recent leak of audio recordings in which McCarthy blamed Trump for the insurrection and voiced alarm about the actions of several House Republicans days after the Jan. 6 attack.

Rep. Jim Banks (R-Ind.), chairman of the conservative Republican Study Committee, said he would defer to McCarthy and others on whether they should comply with the subpoenas. He maintained — as almost all in the House GOP have said — that the bipartisan committee is “a witch hunt.”

“It’s a political circus,” Banks said. “It’s a joke. And nobody’s surprised that they’ve taken another step to completely politicize this.”

Asked Thursday whether he thinks McCarthy and the other four Republicans will comply with the subpoenas, Thompson replied, “I hope they do.”

Throughout the investigation, the names of the five Republicans “have come up in a number of ways, and we feel that information and responding to it is important,” Thompson told reporters at the Capitol.

He declined to say whether a contempt vote may be in the works if the lawmakers refuse to comply.

“No conversation about contempt. We’ll talk about next steps, which could be a number of things,” Thompson said.

House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) rejected the notion that the committee’s decision to subpoena the five lawmakers marks a political escalation.

“It’s not an escalation at all,” Hoyer said Thursday. “We ought to all be subject to being asked to tell the truth before a committee that is seeking information that is important to our country and our democracy.”

He shrugged off suggestions that Democrats may be exposing themselves to future subpoenas under a potential Republican majority.

“I have no problem being subpoenaed personally,” Hoyer said. “You know, I’ll tell the truth. If I have information they need, that’s fine. I do not understand this extraordinary reaction to pursuing a legal, appropriate process.”

Marianna Sotomayor, Leigh Ann Caldwell and Mike DeBonis contributed to this report.

Read original article here

January 6 committee issues subpoenas to 5 House Republicans

Lawmakers on the panel have been weighing whether to subpoena their Republican colleagues for months, wrestling with whether they had the constitutional right to do so, and debating if they wanted to set such a precedent.

And with hearings less than a month away, the panel is facing a ticking clock to get all the information it can.

“The Select Committee has learned that several of our colleagues have information relevant to our investigation into the attack on January 6th and the events leading up to it,” the panel’s chairman, Democratic Rep. Bennie Thompson of Mississippi, said in a statement. “Before we hold our hearings next month, we wished to provide members the opportunity to discuss these matters with the committee voluntarily.”

“Regrettably, the individuals receiving subpoenas today have refused and we’re forced to take this step to help ensure the committee uncovers facts concerning January 6th,” he continued. “We urge our colleagues to comply with the law, do their patriotic duty, and cooperate with our investigation as hundreds of other witnesses have done.”

The committee has scheduled the depositions for the members of Congress for the end of May.

CNN has reached out to the five congressmen for comment.

In its initial letter to McCarthy in January, the panel made clear it wanted to question him about his communications with former President Donald Trump, White House staff and others in the week after the January 6 attack, “particularly regarding President Trump’s state of mind at that time.”

The committee also wanted to understand how McCarthy’s public comments since the attack had changed from critical to in defense of Trump over time, and questioned whether Trump pressured him to change his tone when the pair met in late January 2021.

Since the panel’s letter to McCarthy, new audio revealed that in the days following the January 6 insurrection, the minority leader had considered asking Trump to resign. Audio has also exposed that McCarthy told Republican lawmakers on a private conference call that Trump had admitted bearing some responsibility for the deadly attack.

The panel first reached out to Jordan, one of Trump’s staunchest allies on Capitol Hill, in December to learn more about communications he had with Trump on January 6, and with Trump allies who were stationed in the Willard Hotel war room in the days leading up to the attack.

Jordan and Trump spoke on the phone in the morning of January 6, 2021, while Trump was in the White House residence, White House call records in the panel’s possession, first reported by CNN, showed. Since Jordan first acknowledged that he spoke to Trump on the phone that day, the Ohio Republican and Trump loyalist has waved off questions about it or have been inconsistent in his answers.

Jordan has also previously been identified as one of the lawmakers who sent a text message to then-White House chief of staff Mark Meadows that the committee has in its possession. The message that Jordan forwarded to Meadows on January 5, 2021, outlined a legal theory that then-Vice President Mike Pence had the authority to stand in the way of the certification of the 2020 election.

Perry was the first lawmaker the committee sought voluntary cooperation from because of the key role he played in trying to help Trump undermine the 2020 election. Text messages obtained by CNN that came out after the panel’s initial letter, have filled in significant gaps about the role Perry played at almost every turn in scheming to reverse or delay certification of the 2020 election.

Text messages selectively provided by Meadows to the committee, show that Perry was pushing to have the nation’s top intelligence official investigate baseless conspiracy theories and worked to replace the US acting attorney general with an acolyte willing to do Trump’s bidding.

“From an Intel friend: DNI needs to task NSA to immediately seize and begin looking for international comms related to Dominion,” Perry wrote to Meadows on November 12, 2020, just five days after the election was called for Joe Biden.

In the text, which had not been previously reported, Perry appeared to be urging Meadows to get John Ratcliffe, then-Director of National Intelligence, to order the National Security Agency to investigate debunked claims that Dominion voting machines were hacked by China.

A recent court filing also revealed how Perry played a key role in strategizing with Trump allies about throwing out electoral votes in states Trump lost.

In testimony released in April, former Trump White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson told House investigators about Perry’s role in White House strategy sessions.

“Mr. Perry is one that immediately jumps to mind as me recalling him physically being there and then pushing back,” Hutchinson said, describing how the Pennsylvania Republican clashed with Trump’s White House counsel over whether the plan for states to submit alternate slate of electors was legally sound.

A text from November 21, 2020, shows that Meadows even went through Perry in order to get in touch with local lawmakers in his state.

“Can you send me the number for the speaker and the leader of PA Legislature. POTUS wants to chat with them,” Meadows wrote to Perry.

The texts also show that Perry acted as a conduit between Meadows and Justice Department attorney Jeffrey Clark, a relatively obscure official who emerged as a central figure in Trump’s election gambit after the former President nearly named him as acting attorney general days before the US Capitol riot.

The messages draw a direct link between Perry, Clark and the Trump White House-led effort to enlist the Justice Department to help overturn the election.

Last year, the Senate singled out Perry for his role in promoting Trump’s election fraud conspiracies.

Text messages in the panel’s possession reveal that Perry texted Meadows multiple times to request the conversation move to the encrypted messaging app Signal or to alert Meadows to a message he sent on the encrypted platform.

Such a move could put the exchange out of the committee’s reach because Signal does not collect or save user data, making it more difficult to provide that information to outside entities, including law enforcement and congressional investigators, even under subpoena.

The panel reached out to Biggs earlier this month to discuss his participation in planning meetings at the White House and remotely regarding “various aspects of planning for January 6th.”

When seeking Biggs’ voluntary cooperation, the committee said it wanted to understand “precisely” what he knew before the violence on January 6, “about the purposes, planning, and expectations for the march on the Capitol.”

Biggs also was communicating with Meadows about efforts to persuade state legislators that the 2020 election was stolen, and sought their help in trying to overturn the election, according to the communications in the committee’s possession.

Brooks caught the committee’s attention after he revealed that Trump had repeatedly asked him to work to rescind the 2020 election and remove Biden from office.

This story has been updated with additional developments Thursday.

Read original article here

Pro-Trump organizer agrees to cooperate with DOJ in Jan. 6 probe

Pro-Trump organizer Ali Alexander confirmed Friday that he is cooperating with the Justice Department’s investigation of the Jan. 6 insurrection, Politico reports.

Why it matters: Alexander, who was connected to permit applications for the “Stop the Steal” rally that preceded the Capitol attack, claimed to have been in communication with the White House and Congress members about events planned to coincide with the certification of the 2020 election, according to the Jan. 6 select committee, which subpoenaed him in October.

  • Leading up to Jan. 6, Alexander “made repeated reference during Stop-the-Steal-sponsored events to the possible use of violence to achieve the organization’s goals,” the select committee said in an October release.

What he’s saying: Alexander said in a statement Friday, per Politico, that a federal grand jury recently subpoenaed him for information on several groups of people linked to pro-Trump rallies in D.C. after the 2020 election, including “Women for America First” and the “Save America March.”

  • He denied talking with the White House about security groups or coordinating plans with the Proud Boys. “I don’t believe I have information that will be useful to them but I’m cooperating as best as I can,” he said.
  • “I did nothing wrong and I am not in possession of evidence that anyone else had plans to commit unlawful acts,” he added.
  • “I denounce anyone who planned to subvert my permitted event and the other permitted events of that day on Capitol grounds to stage any counterproductive activities.”

The big picture: Alexander’s cooperation could offer insight into the White House officials and lawmakers who may have been involved in the attempt to block the certification of President Biden’s win.

  • The subpoena delivered to him is an “indication that the inquiry could reach into the Trump administration and its allies in Congress,” the New York Times notes.
  • Alexander voluntarily sat for a deposition with the House committee in December and handed over documents related to its investigation.

Editor’s note: This story has been updated with Alexander’s statement.



Read original article here

The Ultimate News Site