Trump supporters and conspiracy theory - Part 2

[Rick Plant]

Lock Them Up!

Trump likely committed felony obstruction, federal judge rules

A federal judge ruled Monday that former President Donald Trump “more likely than not” attempted to illegally obstruct Congress.



A federal judge ruled Monday that former President Donald Trump “more likely than not” attempted to illegally obstruct Congress as part of a criminal conspiracy when he tried to subvert the 2020 election on Jan. 6, 2021.

“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,” U.S. District Court Judge David Carter wrote.

Carter’s sweeping and historic ruling came as he ordered the release to the House’s Jan. 6 committee of 101 emails from Trump ally John Eastman, rejecting Eastman’s effort to shield them via attorney-client privilege.

Eastman used the email account of his former employer, Chapman University, to discuss political and legal strategy related to efforts to overturn the 2020 election and had sued the select committee to prevent them from obtaining the emails from the school.
Carter, who sits in federal court in California, said that the plan Eastman helped develop was obviously illegal and that Trump knew it at the time, but pushed forward with an effort he says would have effectively ended American democracy.

“If Dr. Eastman and President Trump’s plan had worked, it would have permanently ended the peaceful transition of power, undermining American democracy and the Constitution,” Carter wrote. “If the country does not commit to investigating and pursuing accountability for those responsible, the Court fears January 6 will repeat itself.”

The remarkable ruling may be the first in history in which a federal judge determined a president, while in office, appeared to commit a crime. The decision has no direct role in whether Trump will be charged criminally but could increase pressure on the Justice Department and its chief, Attorney General Merrick Garland, to conduct an aggressive investigation that could lead to such charges.

Thus far, Garland has promised to probe legal violations related to Jan. 6 “at any level,” but there have been virtually no outward signs that the Justice Department is investigating Trump or his top advisers over their roles in instigating the Capitol attack or otherwise scuttling or delay the electoral-vote-tallying session.

Justice Department spokespeople did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the ruling.

Eastman’s strategy centered on pressuring then-Vice President Mike Pence to single-handedly overturn the election when Congress convened on Jan. 6 to count electoral votes. Eastman urged Pence to simply declare the election in dispute and send the process back to GOP-controlled state legislatures, who could then replace Joe Biden’s electors with Trump’s. Pence resisted that push, and his aides argued fiercely that the plan was plainly illegal.

Carter ruled that the efforts by Trump and Eastman were obviously contrary to a federal law, the Electoral Count Act, which has governed the counting of electoral votes since 1887. Eastman premised his plan on a belief that the 135-year-old law was unconstitutional and urged Pence to simply ignore aspects of it he viewed as inconvenient. Carter said the recourse to oppose the Electoral Count Act was in court, not “a last-ditch attempt to secure the Presidency by any means.”

“Our nation was founded on the peaceful transition of power, epitomized by George Washington laying down his sword to make way for democratic elections,” Carter wrote in a 44-page ruling. “Ignoring this history, President Trump vigorously campaigned for the Vice President to single-handedly determine the results of the 2020 election. With a plan this ‘BOLD,’ President Trump knowingly tried to subvert this fundamental principle.”

The decision also helps shore up a theory increasingly embraced by members of the Jan. 6 select committee: that Trump seized on legal strategies he knew were meritless in order to subvert the transfer of power to Joe Biden — an effort that contributed to the violence that unfolded at the Capitol. Trump allies have long assailed the select committee as a political effort led by Democrats, but Carter’s analysis now gives the committee the imprimatur of a federal court.

Among the emails Carter ordered released included documents prepared for members of Congress. Seven senators are named as the recipients of some of the documents, though they were created to persuade lawmakers, not in preparation for litigation.

Eastman had claimed attorney-client privilege over nine emails and attachments, but none of the emails listed Trump as a sender or recipient, Carter noted, and two of them blind copied a close Trump adviser. Other emails included discussion of state-level efforts about election fraud allegations.

Perhaps the most important email in the newly disclosed batch is a memo to Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani, which was forwarded to Eastman, sketching out a series of scenarios surrounding the Jan. 6 session.

“This may have been the first time members of President Trump’s team transformed a legal interpretation of the Electoral Count Act into a day-by-day plan of action,” Carter noted. “The memo is both intimately related to and clearly advanced the plan to obstruct the Joint Session of Congress on January 6, 2021.”

Carter indicated that the memo “maps out potential Supreme Court suits and the impact of different judicial outcomes.” Though the memo was clearly related to potential litigation, Carter determined that it warranted disclosure because of the “crime-fraud exception” to attorney-client privilege.

In his ruling, Carter agreed that 10 of Eastman’s emails should remain shielded by attorney-client privilege. But he said none of the 10 appeared “pivotal” to the select committee’s investigation. Nine of them, he wrote, were about potential litigation, and the tenth captured Eastman’s “thoughts on the evening of January 6 about potential future actions.”

Carter, who sits in Los Angeles and is an appointee of President Bill Clinton, acknowledged long-shot arguments by Eastman that the 1887 law governing the tallying and certification of electoral votes was at odds with the Constitution. However, the judge said that did not permit Trump the right to defy the statute or to seek to persuade Pence to circumvent it.

“Believing the Electoral Count Act was unconstitutional did not give President Trump license to violate it,” Carter wrote. “Disagreeing with the law entitled President Trump to seek a remedy in court, not to disrupt a constitutionally-mandated process. And President Trump knew how to pursue election claims in court — after filing and losing more than sixty suits, this plan was a last-ditch attempt to secure the Presidency by any means.”

Eastman could try to appeal the decision to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and, from there, to the Supreme Court.

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/03/28/trump-judge-felony-obstruction-insurrection-00020918

[Richard Smith]

Lock Them Up!

Trump likely committed felony obstruction, federal judge rules

"Likely" LOL.  What kind of legal standard is that?   Another politically driven "investigation" that will come to nothing.  The NY AG is returning "evidence" to parties in that matter.  Meaning it's over.  Trump can't stop winning even when the deck is stacked against him.  Magnificent. 

[Rick Plant]

Judge's damning ruling on Trump will 'reverberate throughout the office' at the DOJ: Ex-FBI official



Former FBI official Frank Figliuzzi explained to MSNBC's Nicolle Wallace how the Department of Justice likely reacted when a federal judge issued a ruling stating that former President Donald Trump likely committed a felony.

Specifically, Figliuzzi described everything stopping at the Justice Department and the FBI when a well-respected, long-time federal judge says something akin to what U.S. District Judge David Carter did on Monday.

"It reverberates through the office," he said.

"The Court finds it more likely than not that President Trump corruptly attempted to obstruct the Joint Session of Congress on January 6, 2021," Carter said in a decision Monday. "The illegality of the plan was obvious."

"You stop what you're doing at the FBI, at the U.S. Attorney's Office and you say, 'Wow. We have a federal judge who's actually told us out loud what we have been wondering and now you have to take some action,'" explained the former counter-intelligence deputy. "There's no rule that says you don't go to a manual and says if a federal judge says this you do this, but the impact is that you stop what you're doing and almost if you don't take action now to open a case if you haven't already, you now owe it to the judge, any U.S. Attorney worth a darn and now this is the attorney general of the United States, is going to feel compelled if he never does anything to explain himself to the judge. That is the respect, the gravity that's attached to the federal bench. If this happened anywhere else in America the local FBI, the local U.S. Attorney's Office would stop and have a meeting and figure out what do we do?"

Wallace noted that it's likely the reason that the news alert landed with a boom in the inboxes across Washington. She asked about the so-called "Coup Memo," the document written by John Eastman to justify the election overthrow. The judge said that the felonies were likely committed by Trump and by Eastman.

[Rick Plant]

The courts were always going to rule against John Eastman. It was clearly obvious if you know anything about law. The January 6th Committee was always going to obtain these emails. They were always going to directly incriminate Criminal Donald. That was obvious as well. Today is GREAT news. But if you’re surprised by any of it, you’ve been listening to some real b.s.   

DOJ leadership publicly confirmed today, for the third time in recent weeks, that it’s taking its January 6th probe all the way to the top.

And who is at the top?

Criminal Donald.

Days ago it was reported that Ginni Thomas, the wife of Supreme Court justice Clarence Thomas, communicated with Jared Kushner ahead of January 6th. Now it’s being reported that Kushner has suddenly decided to voluntarily testify to the January 6th Committee. Not sure what’s up with that, but that sure doesn’t feel like a coincidence.

Ginni Thomas’ published texts certainly amount to sedition. What we don’t know is how each person responded to her. Best case for Kushner would be if he blew off Thomas, thus has no criminal exposure on that front, and he can throw her under the bus to avoid a contempt referral.

If Kushner did engage with Thomas about her sedition plan, and worries that he could end up charged for it (even if he considers himself innocent), he could instead decide to show up and invoke the fifth amendment like Eastman did.

The 1/6 committee has previously made clear that any witnesses who plead the fifth to every question will be considered non-cooperative and subject to referral for contempt. So Kushner would not be getting himself off the contempt hook by pleading the fifth to every question.

But again, we don’t know how Kushner plans to testify – only that he’s suddenly decided to testify.

Michael Cohen, who was Donnie's former "fixer" and henchman, has a long track record of being proven right about Trump world. Here he makes another prediction:

"Kushner will claim he was uninvolved with the January 6th Insurrection and that he wasn’t even in the country at the time. Any questions that could be answered will result in him pleading the Fifth! Just watch…"

[Rick Plant]

Trump 'incitement' tweet new focus of Jan 6th investigators



According to a report from the New York Times, Justice Department prosecutors and congressional investigators are renewing their focus on a December tweet from former president Donald Trump in December that they feel set the stage for the Jan 6th riot at the Capitol.

The report notes that the Dec. 19, 2020 tweet from Trump about the "Stop the Steal" rally where he urged supporters “Be there, will be wild!" has become central to making their case of a criminal conspiracy.

According to the report, "Federal prosecutors and congressional investigators have gathered growing evidence of how a tweet by President Donald J. Trump less than three weeks before Jan. 6, 2021, served as a crucial call to action for extremist groups that played a central role in storming the Capitol," adding that the former president's exhortation "was a powerful catalyst, particularly for far-right militants who believed he was facing his final chance to reverse defeat and whose role in fomenting the violence has come under intense scrutiny."

The Times is reporting that filings from the House select committee investigating the insurrection indicate, "Extremists began to set up encrypted communications channels, acquire protective gear and, in one case, prepare heavily armed 'quick reaction forces' to be staged outside Washington."

Reporting, "Directly after Mr. Trump’s tweet was posted, the Capitol Police began to see a spike in right-wing threats against members of Congress," the Times adds, "The House committee has also sharpened its focus on how the tweet set off a chain reaction that galvanized Mr. Trump’s supporters to begin military-style planning for Jan. 6. As part of the congressional inquiry, investigators are trying to establish whether there was any coordination beyond the post that ties Mr. Trump’s inner circle to the militants and whether the groups plotted together."

According to Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-CA), "It’s definitely something we’re asking questions about through our discussions with witnesses. We want to know whether the president’s tweets inflamed and mobilized individuals to take action.”

You can read more here: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/29/us/politics/trump-tweet-jan-6.html


'Possible coverup': White House logs show seven-hour gap in Trump phone calls



White House records turned over to the House select committee show a gap of more than seven hours in Donald Trump's call logs from Jan. 6, 2021.

There is no official White House notation of any calls placed by or to the former president for seven hours and 37 minutes, from 11:17 a.m. to 6:54 p.m. that day, which means congressional investigators have no record of Trump's phone conversations as his supporters mobbed the U.S. Capitol, reported the Washington Post.

The National Archives turned over 11 pages of the president's official daily diary and White House switchboard call logs that show Trump was active on the phone for part of that day, speaking to at least eight people in the morning and 11 people that evening, but the gap does not show publicly reported calls to GOP lawmakers.

Those calls include conversations with Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) and House minority leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) and an attempt to speak with Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-AL).

One panel member said the committee was investigating a "possible coverup" of the official White House record, and another individual close to the committee said the hours-long gap was of "intense interest" to investigators -- who are now looking into whether Trump used "burner phones" to communicate that day.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/03/29/trump-white-house-logs/


'I have no idea what a burner phone is': Trump denies wrongdoing after White House call logs reveal seven-hour gap

The House select committee is looking into a seven-hour gap in the White House call logs from Jan. 6, 2021.

One panel member said the committee was investigating a "possible coverup" of the official White House record from that day and looking at whether Donald Trump used "burner phones" -- which the former president denied in a statement to the Washington Post.

"I have no idea what a burner phone is, to the best of my knowledge I have never even heard the term," Trump told the newspaper.

The committee is investigating whether Trump communicated through backchannels, including aides' phones or disposable personal phones, according to two sources with knowledge of the probe, after call records turned over by the National Archives showed a seven-hour and 37-minute gap, from 11:17 a.m. to 6:54 p.m.

Trump was known for using different phones while president, with some outbound calls showing up as the White House switchboard's number and other times it would show up to the recipient from a different number -- or no number at all, according to a former Cabinet member.

The Presidential Records Act requires the preservation of all written communications and a presidential daily diary that chronicles all the president's movements, phone calls and meetings.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/03/29/trump-white-house-logs/


Over 7 hours of disappearing Trump phone records makes Nixon's tapes 'look like nothing': Harvard law professor

It was revealed by Robert Costa that Donald Trump's White House phone records had seemingly disappeared between 11:17 a.m. to 6:54 p.m. on Jan. 6, 2021. At a time when many leaders said that they were calling the White House, somehow there was no record of it from the White House. It was a tip-off to any investigators that something was being held back or intentionally hidden.

As Molly Jong-Fast recalled Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) and Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) both indicated that they spoke to Trump on Jan. 6.





It prompted the Salt Lake City Tribune to ask for an explanation given his past statements.

"So now might be a good time for someone who apparently didn’t really support the rebellion, but who may have failed to raise the alarm when given advance word of the plans, to explain himself," wrote the Tribune. "Someone like Utah Sen. Mike Lee."

The newspaper went on to say that despite never being a Trump supporter in 2016, Lee became a convert. "Apparently that abject subjugation was enough to make Trump think Lee might be on board with a plan to overturn the results of the 2020 election and keep Trump in office — presumably for life," the piece said.

When a profile of Tuberville appeared in the Washington Post, the new senator revealed that Trump accidentally called Lee when he meant to call Tuberville.

"I know we've got problems," Tuberville recalled the president saying as the crowd came into the Capitol. "Protect yourself."

The new report from the Post is something that many legal analysts, political commentators and activists found disturbing, particularly given that it has been over a year since the information was being uncovered.

Former MSNBC host Keith Olbermann recalled that when former President Richard Nixon attempted a cover-up 18 minutes were eliminated from his recordings. In Trump's case, it's over seven hours. Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe agreed with the sentiment, saying that such a massive gap makes Nixon's tapes look like nothing.

@KeithOlbermann
Bulletin: The Trump version of the Watergate "18-Minute Gap" is SEVEN HOURS LONG.

Arrest. Trump. Now.

@tribelaw
The “gap in President Donald Trump’s phone logs of seven hours and 37 minutes, including the period when the Capitol was being violently assaulted” makes the infamous 18-minute gap in Nixon’s tapes look like nothing in comparison

The news that Trump was possibly using a "burner phone" led to even more questions. Trump told the Post that he's never even heard of the term before.

Ironically, Trump's second son, Eric Trump, threatened to sue the blog "The Palmer Report" because of commentary about a Nov. 2021 Rolling Stone piece saying that Eric and his wife Lara Trump spoke to Jan. 6 organizers on burner phones. The burner phones were used by the Jan. 6 organizers to call the Trumps, not the other way around, according to the piece. Regardless, it means Eric Trump certainly knows what the term means.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/03/29/trump-white-house-logs/

[Rick Plant]

Well, we all knew Donnie was lying when he said he didn't know what a "burner phone" was. Nobody was buying that lie. Even his most ardent supporters wasn't buying it either. But now we have confirmation that Donnie was lying thanks to his former National Security advisor John Bolton. And what about this "seven hour gap" between recorded phone calls? Who was Donnie conspiring with all that time to cover up who he was calling? Investigators are zeroing in on that as we speak.     

John Bolton contradicts Trump's claim that he has no idea what 'burner phones' are



In response to speculation that he used prepaid burner phones to talk with allies during a key seven-hour period on January 6, 2021, former President Donald Trump on Tuesday denied even knowing what burner phones were.

"I have no idea what a burner phone is, to the best of my knowledge I have never even heard the term," Trump claimed.

However, former Trump national security adviser John Bolton now tells The Washington Post's Robert Costa that he's not buying Trump's explanation.

Specifically, Bolton tells Costa that he recalls Trump discussing burner phones multiple times and being generally aware of what the devices are used for.

People who do not wish to have their communications tracked or monitored typically buy burner phones, which come with a finite number of prepaid cellular minutes and that do not require users to register an individual account with wireless carriers.

In fact, Bolton tells Costa that he remembers Trump talking about how people have used such phones to avoid having their calls scrutinized.

Robert Costa
@costareports

"Former Trump national security adviser John Bolton said in an interview Tuesday, after the CBS-Post reporting was published, that he recalls Trump using the term “burner phones” in several discussions and that Trump was aware of its meaning

https://twitter.com/costareports/status/1508890138037964800


Trump’s mysterious last recorded phone call before the Jan. 6 riot was to an ‘unidentified person’



The last phone call Donald Trump made before the Jan. 6 insurrection began was with an "unidentified person," according to White House call logs.

That call came at 11:17 a.m., before Trump addressed his supporters at a "Stop the Steal" rally at the White House Ellipse, and was the last official record of a phone conversation the then-president made until seven hours and 37 minutes later -- a gap that has fallen under investigation by the House select committee, reported the Washington Post.

“The President talked on a phone call to an unidentified person," reads the 11:17 a.m. entry.

Records turned over by the National Archives show no calls until 6:54 p.m., when he instructed the operator to call aide Dan Scavino, and committee members are investigating as whether Trump used burner phones or backchannels to communicate as his supporters stormed the Capitol.

"I have no idea what a burner phone is, to the best of my knowledge I have never even heard the term," Trump told the Post in a statement.

The call records show Trump spoke to allies Steve Bannon and Rudy Giuliani before 9 a.m. and then returned a call from chief of staff Mark Meadows before instructing the operator to call then-vice president Mike Pence at 9:02 a.m.

Bannon asked Trump during their one-minute call whether Pence was coming for a breakfast meeting, where he hoped he could be pressured to stop the certification of Joe Biden's win, according to two people familiar with the conversation, but Trump said the vice president would not be coming to the White House after their heated meeting the previous evening in the Oval Office.

Trump agreed to call Pence again and ask him to delay certification, and the call logs show he and Bannon spoke again for seven minutes starting at 10:19 p.m.

The final call with Pence was not listed in the records, although multiple sources close to both men say they spoke by phone in the late morning, before the "Stop the Steal" rally, and the vice president reportedly enraged Trump by stating he would not block certification.

The call logs also show Trump spoke Jan. 6 with election lawyers, White House officials, outside allies including then-Sen. David Perdue (R-GA), conservative pundit William Bennett and Fox News host Sean Hannity.

Other calls were made to Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), who an aide says declined the call, and Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO), and Trump spoke for 10 minutes with Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) starting at 9:24 a.m.

He next spoke with Giuliani for six minutes at 9:41 a.m., and then again for nine minutes at 8:39 p.m., and the logs show Giuliani called from different phone numbers.

Trump spoke to senior adviser Stephen Miller for 26 minutes starting at 9:52 a.m.

The records show Trump spoke that evening with White House counsel Pat Cipollone, press secretary Kayleigh McEnany, political adviser Jason Miller, former North Carolina Supreme Court chief justice Mark Martin and conservative attorney Cleta Mitchell.

His final call was a 17-minute conversation with John McEntee, his director of presidential personnel, starting at 11:32 p.m.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/03/29/trump-white-house-logs/

[Rick Plant]

Trump could be arrested or indicted based on evidence in judge’s ruling: Former federal prosecutor



A former federal prosecutor who served for more than 24 years in the District of Columbia's U.S. Attorney's Office says Donald Trump could be arrested or indicted on just the evidence included in Monday's bombshell legal ruling by U.S. District Court Judge David O. Carter.

"Judge Carter’s finding by a preponderance of the evidence [which says] more likely than not that Trump committed felony offenses is a HIGHER evidentiary standard than the one needed to arrest/indict Trump for his crimes, which requires only probable cause," writes Glenn Kirschner, who is now an NBC News/MSNBC legal analyst and host of "Justice Matters" podcast.

Judge Carter on Monday wrote: “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.” In response, legal experts are calling his ruling “striking,” “massive,” “monumental,” and “historic.”

“Dr. Eastman and President Trump launched a campaign to overturn a democratic election," Carter also wrote, calling it "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.”

Kirschner, whose total federal prosecutorial experience spans 30 years, adds he will be discussing the ruling in his next podcast.

https://www.youtube.com/c/GlennKirschner2/featured

https://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/2022/03/trump-could-be-arrested-or-indicted-based-on-evidence-in-judges-ruling-former-federal-prosecutor/


‘Woodward and I have the docs’: Robert Costa posts Jan. 6 WH call logs that could be big trouble for Trump and allies



CBS News' Robert Costa Tuesday morning announced, "Woodward and I have the docs," referring to the White House call logs and Donald Trump's Presidential "Daily Diary" for January 6, 2021, the infamous day of the insurrection and the attack on the U.S. Capitol and American democracy.

Costa, formerly of The Washington Post, and Woodward, currently with The Post, have been working together. Costa published links to the White House call logs and the Presidential "Daily Diary":

Woodward and I have the docs. @CBSNews @washingtonpost
 
Read them here: https://mobile.twitter.com/costareports/status/1508775516337283076

They reveal a president who was in a flurry of phone calls from 8:23 AM to 11:06 AM – and then a mysterious seven-hour gap, until 6:54 PM.

The logs and diary could pose serious problems for Donald Trump, the former president, and his top aides and allies, as the House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack puts together a detailed timeline of everything that happened on that day.

For example, Congressman Jim Jordan infamously told a reporter he couldn't remember when he talked to the president on January 6, even if it was before or after the insurrection. He talked to Trump for ten minutes, from 9:24 AM to 9:34 AM – before the attack on the Capitol.

Costa points to Steve Bannon: Bannon was at the Willard war room on January 5, working closely with Giuliani. They both spoke with Trump that night about how to push Pence to do what Trump wanted.

Now, we know Bannon then spoke twice w/ Trump on the day of attack, and once again pushed Trump to pressure VP.

Trump's last call before the massive gap was to Senator David Perdue (R-GA), who is now running for governor of Georgia.

Also noteworthy is at 7:16 PM, after the attack on the Capitol, the White House operator told the president there were "pending calls" from Sen. Hawley, and attorney Cleta Mitchell who was on Trump's possibly unlawful call to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger.

https://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/2022/03/woodward-and-i-have-the-docs-robert-costa-posts-jan-6-wh-call-logs-that-could-be-big-trouble-for-trump-and-allies/


'How can you forget a call that long?' Reporter hounds Jim Jordan about his infamous Jan. 6 Trump phone call



Spectrum News reporter Taylor Popielarz on Tuesday filmed himself hounding Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) about the infamous phone call he had on January 6th, 2021 with former President Donald Trump.

The video shows Popielarz following Jordan around the United States Capitol building and asking Jordan about the seven-and-a-half-hour gap in White House call logs that occurred on January 6th, including the time when Trump supporters were violently rioting at the Capitol.

Popielarz grilled Jordan about having a ten-minute call with Trump that morning and claiming to not remember the contents of what was discussed.

"What do you say to constituents who question... how do you forget a call that long on a day as significant as that?" he asked.

"I said I talked to him," Jordan replied.

"I know," said Popielarz. "But you said you didn't remember, you initially told me you didn't remember if it happened before."

"Right and that's old news," Jordan shot back. "I talked to the president on that day."

"Do you think your constituents deserve to know what you talked about?" asked Popielarz.

"You can look at our letter," Jordan replied. "We got all the answers in our letter we sent two months ago."

Jordan then declined to say whether he would cooperate with a subpoena from the House Select Committee investigating the riots.

Watch the video below.

https://twitter.com/i/status/150891454147586458