3. Pivoting off of @evanperez's reporting, @BarbMcQuade and @AshaRangappa_ discuss why the Department of Justice may have chosen to charge seditious conspiracy against the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys, but consider Insurrection (18 USC § 2383) the proper fit for President Trump.
4. Lots more packed into this 20 minute discussion.
Listen (or read transcript) -- especially at the end how @AshaRangappa_@BarbMcQuade@rgoodlaw think and talk about the lasting legacy of the January 6th House Select Committee's work.
Three discussions with Trump on 11/23, 12/1, 12/14.
“I made it clear I did not agree with the idea of saying the election was stolen and putting out this stuff, which I told the President it was BULLSH*T.”
Committee Vice Chair @RepLizCheney says the Committee has testimony that President Trump, when told his supporters sought to hang Vice President Pence, responded:
“Maybe our supporters have the right idea. Mike Pence deserves it.”
"Note also how Carlson gives his audience permission. It is the other side’s fault for 'picking at the wound, America’s wound' of racial divisions. He adds that government leaders 'are working hard to divide us into warring camps.'"
2. From the article's interview with @NormEisen, former White House special counsel for ethics and government reform:
State Dept's acting legal adviser Marik String's reported actions raise “multiple red flags."
3. From article's interview with @KeitnerLaw, former counselor at State Dept:
“I would certainly expect someone who participated in a decision under review to recuse him or herself from the review process, since both the appearance and reality of impartiality are essential...”