Speaking at the Federalist Society Florida Chapters conference near Orlando, Pence delivered his strongest response yet to Trump's ongoing efforts to relitigate the 2020 presidential election, calling it "un-American" to suggest one person could have decided the outcome.
Pence warned against conservatives who continue to insist the vice president can alter an election, and said it could be a problematic position for Republicans in the next presidential contest.
"Under the Constitution, I had no right to change the outcome of our election, and (Vice President) Kamala Harris will have no right to overturn the election when we beat them in 2024," Pence said.

LCDFlight wrote:

In my view, it only happened because we have so few actual threats that the security directors treated their jobs as pure patronage jobs with no need to perform actual work. They were fat, lazy walruses collecting a paycheck for a threat they believed would never come.

alberchico wrote:

https://mobile.twitter.com/RepLizCheney/status/1489691175883882496

The best response so far by Liz Cheney.

seb146 wrote:

casinterest wrote:

And Now just hours after the RNC voted to Censure GOP members actively looking to uncover what happened on Jan 6, Mike Pence just finally stood up for himself and has stated that Trump was wrong to try to make Pence Overturn the election.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/04/politics ... index.html

Speaking at the Federalist Society Florida Chapters conference near Orlando, Pence delivered his strongest response yet to Trump's ongoing efforts to relitigate the 2020 presidential election, calling it "un-American" to suggest one person could have decided the outcome.
Pence warned against conservatives who continue to insist the vice president can alter an election, and said it could be a problematic position for Republicans in the next presidential contest.
"Under the Constitution, I had no right to change the outcome of our election, and (Vice President) Kamala Harris will have no right to overturn the election when we beat them in 2024," Pence said.

So Trump really was trying to overthrow the Government. This should help put away quite a few more members of the White House staff.

This will strengthen the resolve of MAGA Republicans to violently overthrow the government. Might, not right. They don't care about law. They only care about being in control.

tomaheath wrote:

From what I’m seeing right now the democrats are the ones that want control.

Newark727 wrote:

tomaheath wrote:

From what I’m seeing right now the democrats are the ones that want control.

Ah, that most time-honored and dignified argument, beloved of conservatives since the time of Burke: "NO U."

tomaheath wrote:

Ok. I live in a free state with no restrictions then I see a democratic state with all kinds of restrictions.

Newark727 wrote:

tomaheath wrote:

Ok. I live in a free state with no restrictions then I see a democratic state with all kinds of restrictions.

On the contrary, you simply haven't noticed the restrictions, because you've never needed to get an abortion.

See, there's more than one kind of "freedom" and more than one kind of "restriction."

n229nw wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

In my view, it only happened because we have so few actual threats that the security directors treated their jobs as pure patronage jobs with no need to perform actual work. They were fat, lazy walruses collecting a paycheck for a threat they believed would never come.

It's more than that. A disturbing percentage of almost all police forces agrees with the insurrectionists and that day let them get as far as they did...or even helped them. Of course others worked to stop it, but there were a lot who thought they were safe helping the rioters because they were fellow white supremacist conspiracy theorists. Of course, it turns out that "back the blue" only applied when it was Blue against Black...There is a reason people like AOC were scared of certain colleagues and certain officers. (Also, the WH blocking extra security is very telling...)

bpatus297 wrote:

n229nw wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

In my view, it only happened because we have so few actual threats that the security directors treated their jobs as pure patronage jobs with no need to perform actual work. They were fat, lazy walruses collecting a paycheck for a threat they believed would never come.

It's more than that. A disturbing percentage of almost all police forces agrees with the insurrectionists and that day let them get as far as they did...or even helped them. Of course others worked to stop it, but there were a lot who thought they were safe helping the rioters because they were fellow white supremacist conspiracy theorists. Of course, it turns out that "back the blue" only applied when it was Blue against Black...There is a reason people like AOC were scared of certain colleagues and certain officers. (Also, the WH blocking extra security is very telling...)

Do you have a link to your claim about police forces? Generally speaking, police agencies and departments are apolitical. Otherwise you need to state that this is your opinion.

seb146 wrote:

bpatus297 wrote:

n229nw wrote:

It's more than that. A disturbing percentage of almost all police forces agrees with the insurrectionists and that day let them get as far as they did...or even helped them. Of course others worked to stop it, but there were a lot who thought they were safe helping the rioters because they were fellow white supremacist conspiracy theorists. Of course, it turns out that "back the blue" only applied when it was Blue against Black...There is a reason people like AOC were scared of certain colleagues and certain officers. (Also, the WH blocking extra security is very telling...)

Do you have a link to your claim about police forces? Generally speaking, police agencies and departments are apolitical. Otherwise you need to state that this is your opinion.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... estigation
https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/cu ... g-1167304/
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nat ... 128167001/

Republicans are openly racist. We have seen this time and again. The cries of "all lives matter" and accusing anyone outside the echo chamber of racism when a minority is hired for a high level position within a Democratic administration and the defense of Nazi propaganda and Nazi marches (Charlottesville was "very fine people" and the current thread on Nazi literature in Florida)... It all lines up perfectly.

LCDFlight wrote:

seb146 wrote:

bpatus297 wrote:

Do you have a link to your claim about police forces? Generally speaking, police agencies and departments are apolitical. Otherwise you need to state that this is your opinion.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... estigation
https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/cu ... g-1167304/
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nat ... 128167001/

Republicans are openly racist. We have seen this time and again. The cries of "all lives matter" and accusing anyone outside the echo chamber of racism when a minority is hired for a high level position within a Democratic administration and the defense of Nazi propaganda and Nazi marches (Charlottesville was "very fine people" and the current thread on Nazi literature in Florida)... It all lines up perfectly.

Sorry. “All lives matter” is not a racist statement…. You are embarrassing yourself with that one.

There is no discrepancy between “all lives matter” and “black lives matter.” They are not somehow opposite statements.

Proud racism exists across the political spectrum. They just call it different things. A lot of things Strom Thurmond used to say in the 1950s, woke leftists say today. They are obsessed with deriving meaning from race, just as racists on the right do. And it’s sickening.

The records the House select committee has obtained do not contain entries of phone calls between the President and lawmakers that have been widely reported in the press. Trump was known to make calls using personal cell phones, which could account for those.
Two of the sources, who have also reviewed the presidential diary from that day, say it contains scant information and no record of phone calls for several hours after Trump returned to the Oval Office after giving a speech to his supporters at the Ellipse until he emerged to address the nation in a video from the Rose Garden.

A spokesperson and an attorney for Trump did not respond to requests for comment.

casinterest wrote:

It appears that Trump used personal phone calls on Jan 6. with no official records between himself and the others that called him that day .


https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/10/politics ... index.html

The records the House select committee has obtained do not contain entries of phone calls between the President and lawmakers that have been widely reported in the press. Trump was known to make calls using personal cell phones, which could account for those.
Two of the sources, who have also reviewed the presidential diary from that day, say it contains scant information and no record of phone calls for several hours after Trump returned to the Oval Office after giving a speech to his supporters at the Ellipse until he emerged to address the nation in a video from the Rose Garden.

A spokesperson and an attorney for Trump did not respond to requests for comment.

So a man that attacked Clinton for lost records, couldn't keep them either.

seb146 wrote:

casinterest wrote:

It appears that Trump used personal phone calls on Jan 6. with no official records between himself and the others that called him that day .


https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/10/politics ... index.html

The records the House select committee has obtained do not contain entries of phone calls between the President and lawmakers that have been widely reported in the press. Trump was known to make calls using personal cell phones, which could account for those.
Two of the sources, who have also reviewed the presidential diary from that day, say it contains scant information and no record of phone calls for several hours after Trump returned to the Oval Office after giving a speech to his supporters at the Ellipse until he emerged to address the nation in a video from the Rose Garden.

A spokesperson and an attorney for Trump did not respond to requests for comment.

So a man that attacked Clinton for lost records, couldn't keep them either.

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-sho ... -rcna15714
https://www.newsweek.com/trump-reported ... ts-1678196

Americans have to flush 10 to 15 times, he said. Leaving out the part about official documents...

Remus explained the administration's decision by noting that, while Trump decided to block the visitor logs from public view on claims about national security, the Biden administration "voluntarily discloses such visitor logs on a monthly basis," with some exceptions.

Remus also notes the committee has agreed to treat such entries associated with appointments designated as national-security sensitive ("NSS") or otherwise-highly sensitive ("OHS") "as confidential and to refrain from sharing or discussing such entries outside the Select Committee without prior consultation."

In the 61-page court filing on Wednesday, lawyers for the House wrote: "Evidence and information available to the Committee establishes a good-faith belief that Mr. Trump and others may have engaged in criminal and/or fraudulent acts, and that Plaintiff's legal assistance was used in furtherance of those activities."

Richard Donoghue, a former deputy attorney general under Trump, testified that the then-President specifically pushed the Justice Department to label the entire election "corrupt."
"He wanted us to say that it was corrupt. And this was consistent with some things he said at other points about. The Department should publicly say that the election is corrupt or suspect or not reliable. At one point, he mentioned the possibility of having a press conference. We told him we were not going to do that," Donoghue testified, according to the House's filing.

A jury in Washington, DC, on Tuesday found January 6 rioter Guy Reffitt guilty of all five charges he faced related to the US Capitol attack,
in the pivotal outcome of the first federal trial related to the riot.

Reffitt, a Texas Three Percenter and supporter of then-President Donald Trump when he went to the Capitol on January 6, was charged with five counts --
wanting to obstruct the congressional certification of the 2020 presidential election, transporting guns into DC, carrying a Smith & Wesson handgun
onto the restricted grounds of the Capitol, interfering with Capitol Police protecting the Upper West Terrace and obstructing justice by
threatening his son and daughter when he returned to Texas.

Thunderboltdrgn wrote:

First federal trial conviction is in and says guilty on all charges.

A jury in Washington, DC, on Tuesday found January 6 rioter Guy Reffitt guilty of all five charges he faced related to the US Capitol attack,
in the pivotal outcome of the first federal trial related to the riot.

Reffitt, a Texas Three Percenter and supporter of then-President Donald Trump when he went to the Capitol on January 6, was charged with five counts --
wanting to obstruct the congressional certification of the 2020 presidential election, transporting guns into DC, carrying a Smith & Wesson handgun
onto the restricted grounds of the Capitol, interfering with Capitol Police protecting the Upper West Terrace and obstructing justice by
threatening his son and daughter when he returned to Texas.

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/03/08/poli ... index.html

casinterest wrote:

Thunderboltdrgn wrote:

First federal trial conviction is in and says guilty on all charges.

A jury in Washington, DC, on Tuesday found January 6 rioter Guy Reffitt guilty of all five charges he faced related to the US Capitol attack,
in the pivotal outcome of the first federal trial related to the riot.

Reffitt, a Texas Three Percenter and supporter of then-President Donald Trump when he went to the Capitol on January 6, was charged with five counts --
wanting to obstruct the congressional certification of the 2020 presidential election, transporting guns into DC, carrying a Smith & Wesson handgun
onto the restricted grounds of the Capitol, interfering with Capitol Police protecting the Upper West Terrace and obstructing justice by
threatening his son and daughter when he returned to Texas.

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/03/08/poli ... index.html

Another Gun toting criminal at the "Peaceful Protest"
Good thing that he was found guilty.

It's part of a central question the panel hopes to answer: Did Trump find new ways to keep the money coming in after his loss by shifting from a presidential campaign to a "Stop the Steal" effort?

he publicly available version of the Dominion report, which first surfaced in early December 2020 on the conservative outlet the Gateway Pundit, names on the cover and in metadata as its author Katherine Friess, a volunteer on the Trump post-election legal team.

But the Dominion report was in fact produced by the senior Trump White House policy aide Joanna Miller, according to the original version of the document reviewed by the Guardian and a source familiar with the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

The original version of the Dominion report named Miller - who worked for the senior Trump adviser Peter Navarro – as the author on the cover page, until her name was abruptly replaced with that of Friess before the document was to be released publicly, the source said.

scbriml wrote:

Tugger wrote:

I don't want to be Kazakhstan. Or Russia, Or China. Or North Korea. Ever.

Tugg

But apparently, for one Capitol Rioter/Terrorist/Insurrectionist, freedom now tastes like Belarus!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-60843262

A California man suspected of taking part in the US Capitol riots last year has been granted asylum in Belarus.

Evan Neumann fled the US after being charged in connection with the riots.

The 48-year-old first settled in Ukraine, before reaching Belarus where he asked for asylum - claiming he faced "political persecution" in the US.

A Belarusian official said Mr Neumann has been granted permission to remain in the country "indefinitely".

State officials also alleged that Mr Neumann had been forced to cross the Belarusian border "illegally" after attracting "interest from local secret services" in Ukraine.

Mr Neumann told Belarusian state-owned news agency Belta he had "mixed feelings".

"I am glad Belarus took care of me. I am upset to find myself in a situation where I have problems in my own country."

That's really owning the liberals!

casinterest wrote:

scbriml wrote:

Tugger wrote:

I don't want to be Kazakhstan. Or Russia, Or China. Or North Korea. Ever.

Tugg

But apparently, for one Capitol Rioter/Terrorist/Insurrectionist, freedom now tastes like Belarus!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-60843262

A California man suspected of taking part in the US Capitol riots last year has been granted asylum in Belarus.

Evan Neumann fled the US after being charged in connection with the riots.

The 48-year-old first settled in Ukraine, before reaching Belarus where he asked for asylum - claiming he faced "political persecution" in the US.

A Belarusian official said Mr Neumann has been granted permission to remain in the country "indefinitely".

State officials also alleged that Mr Neumann had been forced to cross the Belarusian border "illegally" after attracting "interest from local secret services" in Ukraine.

Mr Neumann told Belarusian state-owned news agency Belta he had "mixed feelings".

"I am glad Belarus took care of me. I am upset to find myself in a situation where I have problems in my own country."

That's really owning the liberals!

Can't really call yourself a patriot if you run to another country.

MaverickM11 wrote:

Ginni Thomas, wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, urged White House chief Mark Meadows to overturn election, reports show

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol ... 159937001/

In January, the Supreme Court rejected former President Donald Trump's bid to block the release of some presidential records to the House select committee investigating the January 6 Capitol riot.

Only one of the nine justices dissented: Clarence Thomas.

At the time, Thomas provided no explanation for why he would have approved Trump's request — a standard omission when the top court addresses emergency motions.

casinterest wrote:

MaverickM11 wrote:

Ginni Thomas, wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, urged White House chief Mark Meadows to overturn election, reports show

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol ... 159937001/

No Surprise there. No integrity from Clarance Thomas either in putting up with his wife's attempt to overthrow the US government .

He also seemed to try to protect her as well.

https://www.businessinsider.com/clarenc ... bid-2022-3

In January, the Supreme Court rejected former President Donald Trump's bid to block the release of some presidential records to the House select committee investigating the January 6 Capitol riot.

Only one of the nine justices dissented: Clarence Thomas.

At the time, Thomas provided no explanation for why he would have approved Trump's request — a standard omission when the top court addresses emergency motions.

Rather blatant politicizing of the court by Thomas.

"Based on the evidence, the Court finds it more likely than not that President Trump corruptly attempted to obstruct the Joint Session of Congress on January 6, 2021," Judge David Carter wrote Monday.

"The illegality of the plan was obvious," Carter wrote. "Our nation was founded on the peaceful transition of power, epitomized by George Washington laying down his sword to make way for democratic elections. Ignoring this history, President Trump vigorously campaigned for the Vice President to single-handedly determine the results of the 2020 election ... Every American -- and certainly the President of the United States -- knows that in a democracy, leaders are elected, not installed."

n his order, Carter made an unusually bold statement wishing for accountability so that history does not repeat itself.
"If the country does not commit to investigating and pursuing accountability for those responsible, the Court fears January 6 will repeat itself," the judge wrote.
While Carter agreed with the House's argument that Eastman and Trump shouldn't be able to keep secret emails that show them trying to plan a crime, the judge decided many of the emails should be released to the House for other reasons, in a resounding loss for Eastman and Trump.
"Dr. Eastman and President Trump launched a campaign to overturn a democratic election, an action unprecedented in American history. Their campaign was not confined to the ivory tower -- it was a coup in search of a legal theory. The plan spurred violent attacks on the seat of our nation's government, led to the deaths of several law enforcement officers, and deepened public distrust in our political process."

Documents obtained by the Washington Post and CBS News put flesh on the bones of one of the great mysteries of January 6: why White House phone
logs contain holes in the record despite evidence that the then president busily made calls at the height of the insurrection.

The documents reveal that Trump’s daily diary shows an entry at 11.17am when he “talked on a phone call to an unidentified person”. The next entry is not
until 6.54pm – 457 minutes later – when he asked the White House switchboard to place a call to his communications chief Dan Scavino.

The former president called the phone of a Republican senator, Mike Lee, with a number recorded as 202-395-0000, a placeholder number that shows up when a call is incoming from a number of White House department phones, the sources said.

The number corresponds to an official White House phone and the call was placed by Donald Trump himself, which means the call should have been recorded in the internal presidential call log that was turned over to the House select committee investigating the Capitol attack.

seb146 wrote:

If you have to work this hard at covering something up, it points to something bad.

Charles Donohoe, 34, is the first person in the Proud Boys leadership to plead guilty and to assist the Justice Department's investigation against the pro-Donald Trump group.
He pleaded guilty to conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding and assaulting an officer and could provide vital information to prosecutors about what the top members of the organization had planned for the attack.

MaverickM11 wrote:

Ginni Thomas, wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, urged White House chief Mark Meadows to overturn election, reports show

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol ... 159937001/

Mark Meadows, a close adviser to former President Donald Trump, has been removed from North Carolina's voter rolls, according to
the North Carolina State Board of Elections. Meanwhile, state investigators are conducting a probe into potential allegations of voter fraud related to his voter registration.

The development comes after news reports revealed that Meadows, who served as a congressman before becoming Trump's chief of staff,
was registered to vote in September 2020 at a mobile home in Scaly Mountain, N.C., where the former owner claims Meadows never stayed.

scbriml wrote:

Thunderboltdrgn wrote:

MaverickM11 wrote:

Ginni Thomas, wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, urged White House chief Mark Meadows to overturn election, reports show

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol ... 159937001/

Mark Meadows has now been removed from North Carolina's voter rolls.

Mark Meadows, a close adviser to former President Donald Trump, has been removed from North Carolina's voter rolls, according to
the North Carolina State Board of Elections. Meanwhile, state investigators are conducting a probe into potential allegations of voter fraud related to his voter registration.

The development comes after news reports revealed that Meadows, who served as a congressman before becoming Trump's chief of staff,
was registered to vote in September 2020 at a mobile home in Scaly Mountain, N.C., where the former owner claims Meadows never stayed.

https://www.wral.com/former-nc-congress ... /20234236/

So there was voter fraud?

" this point, as Sullivan and Rigby were talking over each other, Gieswein jumped into the exchange.

“Your honor, I object to all of those comments there,” Gieswein said.

“I don’t want to hear form you,” Sullivan said, telling Gieswein that he should keep talking only if he wanted to be “excluded from the room.”

“This is my case and I have a First Amendment right,” Gieswein replied.

After Sullivan said Gieswein “mouthing off” would land him behind bars, Gieswein reminded the judge that he was already incarcerated. Sullivan urged Rigby to talk to her client and cautioned Gieswein once again against speaking out in court.

“You have an excellent lawyer speaking for you,” Sullivan said."

Toward the end of the hearing, prosecutors noted that the government had offered Gieswein a plea deal that would allow him to drop all but two of the assault charges against him. Gieswein rejected that offer.

Already jailed pending trial, Gieswein faces multiple felony charges, including assaulting police officers, civil disorder, and obstruction of an official proceeding. Decked out in military-style gear including a helmet, goggles, and tactical vest, Gieswein allegedly entered the Capitol through a broken window. He allegedly sprayed law enforcement with a chemical spray and brandished a baseball bat as he and other supporters of Donald Trump overran police and swarmed the Capitol building

casinterest wrote:

In the trials we have some more robust characters.


A reminder of the people that actually stormed the Capitol that day. This person is so incenced at the US Government that they want the case moved to some place else more sympathetic to their attack on the Capitol.

I am amazed he didn't take the plea deal. Now he still has to wait until October in Jail pending trial.

Thunderboltdrgn wrote:

casinterest wrote:

In the trials we have some more robust characters.


A reminder of the people that actually stormed the Capitol that day. This person is so incenced at the US Government that they want the case moved to some place else more sympathetic to their attack on the Capitol.

I am amazed he didn't take the plea deal. Now he still has to wait until October in Jail pending trial.

They're not smart enough for that because if they were they wouldn't get themselves into that situation in the first place.

In the days after the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol building, the two top Republicans in Congress, Rep. Kevin McCarthy and Sen. Mitch McConnell, told associates they believed President Donald Trump was responsible for inciting the deadly riot and vowed to drive him from politics. McCarthy went so far as to say he would push Trump to resign immediately: “I’ve had it with this guy,” he told a group of Republican leaders.

But within weeks both men backed off an all-out fight with Trump because they feared retribution from him and his political movement. Their drive to act faded fast as it became clear it would mean difficult votes that would put them at odds with most of their colleagues.

“I didn’t get to be leader by voting with five people in the conference,” McConnell, the Senate Republican leader, told a friend.

casinterest wrote:

Thunderboltdrgn wrote:

casinterest wrote:

In the trials we have some more robust characters.


A reminder of the people that actually stormed the Capitol that day. This person is so incenced at the US Government that they want the case moved to some place else more sympathetic to their attack on the Capitol.

I am amazed he didn't take the plea deal. Now he still has to wait until October in Jail pending trial.

They're not smart enough for that because if they were they wouldn't get themselves into that situation in the first place.

True Enough,
And in other news today we have open reports of how McConnell and McCarthy shrunk from honoring America to being political disgraces when it came to holding Trump and his Administration responsible for the attacks on the nations Capitol, and the big lie they keep selling.

.


https://news.yahoo.com/ive-had-guy-gop- ... 57324.html

In the days after the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol building, the two top Republicans in Congress, Rep. Kevin McCarthy and Sen. Mitch McConnell, told associates they believed President Donald Trump was responsible for inciting the deadly riot and vowed to drive him from politics. McCarthy went so far as to say he would push Trump to resign immediately: “I’ve had it with this guy,” he told a group of Republican leaders.

But within weeks both men backed off an all-out fight with Trump because they feared retribution from him and his political movement. Their drive to act faded fast as it became clear it would mean difficult votes that would put them at odds with most of their colleagues.

“I didn’t get to be leader by voting with five people in the conference,” McConnell, the Senate Republican leader, told a friend.

Party over country. Directly against what George Washington and the founding fathers wanted.

luckyone wrote:

casinterest wrote:

Thunderboltdrgn wrote:

They're not smart enough for that because if they were they wouldn't get themselves into that situation in the first place.

True Enough,
And in other news today we have open reports of how McConnell and McCarthy shrunk from honoring America to being political disgraces when it came to holding Trump and his Administration responsible for the attacks on the nations Capitol, and the big lie they keep selling.

.


https://news.yahoo.com/ive-had-guy-gop- ... 57324.html

In the days after the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol building, the two top Republicans in Congress, Rep. Kevin McCarthy and Sen. Mitch McConnell, told associates they believed President Donald Trump was responsible for inciting the deadly riot and vowed to drive him from politics. McCarthy went so far as to say he would push Trump to resign immediately: “I’ve had it with this guy,” he told a group of Republican leaders.

But within weeks both men backed off an all-out fight with Trump because they feared retribution from him and his political movement. Their drive to act faded fast as it became clear it would mean difficult votes that would put them at odds with most of their colleagues.

“I didn’t get to be leader by voting with five people in the conference,” McConnell, the Senate Republican leader, told a friend.

Party over country. Directly against what George Washington and the founding fathers wanted.

McCarthy may have found himself deprived the speakership for a second time--the first was a gaffe that implied that the multiple rounds of Benghazi hearings were politically motivated toward damaging Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign, that magically stopped when Trump won the White House (I'm shocked I tell you, shocked). This week, he called reports that he would advise Trump to resign lies. Well, whoops. Turns out there was audio of him saying precisely that.

https://thehill.com/news/morning-report ... ater/?rl=1

Former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows was registered to vote in not just Virginia and North Carolina, as we already knew, but South Carolina, as well, according to a new report from The Washington Post.

Meadows, a former congressman from North Carolina and central figure in the Trump administration’s efforts to overturn Joe Biden’s election win, was registered in all three states for a period of about three weeks that ended last Monday. He was kicked off the voter rolls in North Carolina on April 11 amid a voter fraud investigation by the State Bureau of Investigation.

seb146 wrote:

Damage control from House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy after leaked audio putting full responsibility for the domestic terror attack on his boss

https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/22/politics ... index.html

Cassidy Hutchinson, who served as a special assistant in the Trump White House, told the committee "there were concerns brought forward" to Meadows ahead of the riot but it was unclear what Meadows did with that information.

"I just remember Mr. Ornato coming in and saying that we had intel reports saying that there could potentially be violence on the 6th," Hutchinson said, presumably referencing Anthony Ornato, a senior Secret Service official. "And Mr. Meadows said: 'All right. Let's talk about it.'"

"Throughout the logs, Hannity both gives advice and asks for direction," which was a common theme throughout Trump's presidency, CNN reports. Former White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham recounted in January that "there were times the president would come down the next morning and say, 'Well, Sean thinks we should do this,' or, 'Judge Jeanine thinks we should do this.'"

"When you look at these messages, if this is what Meadows turned over willingly to the Jan. 6 committee, you have to wonder what's in the rest of the documents, because these are so damning," said CNN's Jamie Gangel. Meadows withheld more than 1,000 messages from the Jan. 6 committee, claiming executive privilege, the committee said in a court filing Friday.