#January6Committee's letter to Kevin McCarthy squarely raises issue of witness tampering/obstruction in Trump conversations with McCarthy following Jan. 6.
As I've noted before, then-Fox News Sunday's Chris Wallace raised this issue directly with McCarthy too.
2. Here's Chris Wallace's exchange with Kevin McCarthy (and Wallace saw reason to raise the issue again with Liz Cheney).
McCarthy tried flat denial, but admitted it would be witness tampering.
Senator Ted Cruz tries to prove himself to you-know-who by using Senate hearing with senior FBI official to press debunked conspiracy of "FBI agents" and Capitol attack.
Very soon after Senators Cruz and Cotton promote disinformation around bogus Epps-"FBI agent" conspiracy theory in the United States Senate, Durbin enters @PolitiFacts' fact check into the record.
Six items about #January6th that have been unreported/under-reported or deserve more attention.
Item No. 1: We came extremely close to DOJ as lead agency for security on Jan. 6 with Trump coup co-conspirator (for lack of a better term) Jeff Clark as Attorney General.
2. On Jan 3
3:45pm: Clark tells Rosen that Trump has decided to fire Rosen and put Clark in as Attorney General.
5:30pm: Trump meets Miller, Milley and agrees DOJ will be lead agency.
6:00pm: Trump meets Rosen, Clark, others and backs down from firing and replacing Rosen.
3.
added note: Trump backs down due to DOJ threat of mass resignations
added note: Rosen says he was not subsequently told DOJ would be lead agency for Jan 6
2. Former acting defense secretary Chris Miller in IG interview:
"There was absolutely no way…I was putting U.S. military forces at the Capitol, period,” he said citing media stories alleging Trump's advisors were pushing him to declare martial law to invalidate the election.
3. In congressional testimony, former acting SecDef Miller:
"My concerns regarding the appropriate and limited use of the military in domestic matters were heightened by commentary in the media ... that advisors to the President were advocating the declaration of martial law..."
This isn't a hair-on-fire moment. Mainstream media has been responsible not reporting it as such.
I’ve written Meadows has significant criminal exposure
But this is not strong evidence of that.
A few key points to consider…
<thread>
2. All we know is Mark Meadows had the slides on this phone.
Not that he plotted it, not that he or any administration officials created it, not that he did something nefarious (or did anything) with it.
3. Meadows’ lawyer says the reason they voluntarily turned over the document is because Meadows did nothing with it -- and is accordingly not claiming it is ‘privileged’ info that should be kept from congressional investigators.
Bannon "in deep legal trouble…executive privilege would at best allow him to refuse to answer specific questions. The claim of executive privilege in no way shape or form allows a witness to refuse to show up at all" msn.com/en-us/news/pol…
2. In addition to criminal contempt, Congress could directly pursue escalating fines against Bannon.