House Dems just released new info detailing Trump's corrupt pressure on Jeffrey Rosen (Barr's replacement) to use DOJ to subvert the election. This will get worse: Sources tell me Rosen is in talks about sitting for an interview. He can tell us much more: washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/…
The new revelations from House Dems detail a truly extraordinary effort on Trump's part to enlist DOJ in his scheme to subvert the election and remain in power illegitimately.
If Dems can secure an interview with Jeffrey Rosen, it could fill in the full scope of Trump's efforts to corrupt DOJ into helping overturn the election.
Here's a rundown of what we could learn. We may be just scratching the surface now:
These revelations also vividly demonstrate how bad the ongoing GOP cover-up truly is.
Trump fully intended to remain in power illegitimately through illicit means. When that failed, he tried to do so with mob violence. This is what the GOP wants buried:
Here's more from @rickhasen. Important to note how corrupt Trump's effort to enlist the Supreme Court in subverting the election truly was. And no, sorry, the fact that he failed doesn't mean none of this matters.
@RepAdamSchiff's office has repeatedly asked DOJ for info on the subpoenaing of Dems' metadata, including what the legal basis is and what prompted the move.
Incredibly, DOJ has refused to answer, a committee official tells me.
@propublica@RonWyden The fact that we tax income and investment returns but not overall worth, and that we tax investment returns at lower rates than labor income, are policy choices we make, not something handed down to us on stone tablets.
@propublica@RonWyden The folk theory that distributive outcomes flow from "free" markets has badly distorted our public debate. It has insulated from public scrutiny the *many* ways in which market rules have been restructured to channel income and wealth upward for decades:
There's a deep tension at the core of Biden's European trip. He'll declare the US is prepared to lead the global struggle between democracy and autocracy. Yet we're failing to protect democracy at home, and Biden's urgency about this is unclear. My latest: washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/…
Biden has been reading "How Democracies Die" to prepare for making the case for democracy abroad.
As it happens, that book's authors just signed a statement warning that US democracy is in real peril and urging passage of major voting rights legislation:
Given that Biden has been reading "How Democracies Die" to prep for making the case for democracy abroad, I called up @dziblatt, one of the book's authors, to see what he thinks of our current moment.
The new Senate report on Jan 6 security failures was carefully negotiated to win GOP buy-in, which required minimizing the importance of Trump's lies about the election and the real motive of the rioters, a Dem aide tells me.
Manchin's position is unsustainable. He says GOP voting restrictions threaten our "freedom." So what happens when 10 GOP senators don't support *his* solution, the John Lewis act? Dems can't act alone when freedom is on the line by *his* lights? New piece: washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/…
In his op ed piece and on the Sunday shows, Manchin lays out three essential propositions. They cannot coexist forever. At a certain point, he'll have to either change positions or admit that his current words have no meaning:
Ira Shapiro, former counsel to Robert Byrd, tells me that if Manchin supported lowering the filibuster threshold to 55, it would be consistent with Byrd's legacy. Byrd backed lowering it from 67 to 60.
This would be consistent with Manchin's principles:
The right response to Republicans opposing the 1/6 commission is that they're doing this because they're implicated in the crime. Their excuses are entirely unmoored from anything resembling good faith arguments. Here's a rundown of the 5 most absurd ones: washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/…
Republicans claim the Jan 6 commission is "partisan."
That's nonsense on its face. But what they really mean is that if the commission doesn't give them absolute veto power over investigative direction, they won't permit for it to be called bipartisan: