1/6 Insurrection Investigation

[Rick Plant]

Capitol riot organizers' body-cam footage may come back to haunt them: reporter



Appearing on MSNBC Saturday afternoon with host Alex Witt, Guardian reporter Hugo Lowell revealed that the House select committee that recently subpoenaed organizers of the January 6th protest that turned into a riot have every intention of demanding new video taken by the insurrectionists -- many of whom were wearing body cams.

According to Lowell, the recent round of subpoenas handed out to Roger Stone and members of the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys could turn up more valuable information about the events of the day.

"What do investigators want to know from these groups? What kind of information could they provide?" host Witt asked.

"Well, the January 6th committee, as you know, is trying to see if there was a connection between the [Donald] Trump White House, possibly Trump himself, and the attack on the Capitol," the journalist explained. "And, of course, the people that attacked the Capitol were led by these paramilitary groups like the Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys, and if you look into the subpoenas that were issued, I think Tuesday, you see kind of what the committee is trying to get at."

"They want the documents, they want testimony as usual," he elaborated. "They're also looking for body cam footage. These guys wore body cams everywhere. If there were incriminating conversations or meetings, then the committee wants to get ahold of that as well."

"That makes sense," Witt replied. "What about the subpoenas that were issued to five political operatives that were associated with Trump; the most notable is Roger Stone, Alex Jones as well. What does that tell you about the direction of the investigation and the kinds of questions they could answer, and what do you think the odds are, Hugo, that they actually cooperate?"

'Well, I think these subpoenas are really interesting," he replied. "If you look at the subpoena for these two guys, like Roger Stone, Alex Jones, what becomes clear is that the committee has noted that these two guys, huge figures in Trump world were invited to speak at the rally before the January 6th attack, and they were also invited to lead the march from the rally to the Capitol, but curiously, they didn't attend either."

"I think the fact that chairman Bennie Thompson mentioned this in the letter shows where the committee is going with this, and they want to know did these guys, you know, who are connected to the people -- that are connected to Trump world operatives, possibly even to president Trump himself, did they have advance knowledge of what might go down at the capitol and was that the reason why they didn't participate? I think this is the central question," he explained.

Watch below:

[Rick Plant]

Key Jan. 6 organizer to comply with Capitol riot subpoena: 'I don't want to go to jail'



Jan. 6 organizer Ali Alexander, who calls himself the "founder" of former president Donald Trump's "Stop the Steal" movement, announced Saturday that he will comply with a subpoena from the House Select Committee investigating the Capitol insurrection.

"You may have missed the news that I've been subpoenaed by the the Democrats' partisan Jan. 6 committee," Alexander said in a video posted to the right-wing social-media platform Telegram. "This is a midterm issue that they want to run on, and what they want to do is paint me as the black face for a white supremacy movement that doesn't actually exist."

Speaking in front of a poster of singer Johnny Cash flashing the middle finger, Alexander added that he respects his "fellow patriots" who are defying the committee, but called it "an expensive right" — claiming that it would cost between $250,000 and $500,000 to fight the subpoena.

"I frankly don't have that money to spend on legal bills, so for this unselect committee, I will actually be privately deposed in December," Alexander said. "I've asked to make it public testimony. They won't cooperate with that request."

"The only reason I'm going is that I don't want to go to jail," he added. "So under the threat of imprisonment and spending tens and tens and tens of thousands of dollars on lawyers, I will be privately deposed before this committee in December, and I will make public whatever I can."

In a post accompanying the video, Alexander wrote that he plans to submit to the committee "photographic and video evidence of agitators sabotaging his January 6th peaceful protests."

Referring to himself in the third person, Alexander wrote: "He will also present evidence to the Committee that President Trump was betrayed by someone in his inner circle. Someone made the decision to take instructions for patriots out of the Ellipse Rally. Ali says he's not backing down and the Democrat Committee has already threatened to imprison him."

Watch below:

[Rick Plant]

Editorial: It's long past time for the Senate ethics panel to address Hawley's Jan. 6 actions

Ten months after a group of Senate Democrats lodged ethics complaints into the conduct of Republican Sens. Josh Hawley of Missouri and Ted Cruz of Texas regarding their roles in sparking the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, the Senate Ethics Committee has shown no sign of movement. Both senators tell Politico they haven’t even been contacted by the committee.

The House recently moved with appropriate speed to censure Rep. Paul Gosar, R-Arizona, for promoting a cartoon fantasy in which his character kills a fellow member of Congress.

Jan. 6 wasn’t a fantasy; it was real, and the culpability of these two senators must be determined.

Hawley and Cruz were the only two senators to object to certification of Joe Biden’s clear victory in the 2020 election results, citing (with zero evidence) supposed concerns about the election’s integrity. That was the same baseless, toxic nonsense then-President Donald Trump had been spewing since before the election. Such talk whipped up the mob of Trump loyalists to attack the Capitol on Jan. 6.

Hawley was the first senator to object to certification, which is the only reason there had to be a floor vote on the issue. That vote provided the rallying point for the mob. Without that, the attack might not have even happened.

More than a dozen Republican senators initially said they would join Hawley in voting against certification. But after the mob attacked, most of them realized the damage the charade had done to the country and backed off, voting to certify an election in which — again — there wasn’t a single valid indication of significant irregularities. But not Hawley. Even after the violence, he persisted in voting with just five other senators to continue promoting Trump’s big lie that Biden’s win was illegitimate.

Hawley even had the nerve to give a glowering Senate floor speech later that night condemning the violence — an arsonist standing among the ashes. If he had an ounce of honor, he’d have heeded our Jan. 7 call for his resignation (we certainly weren’t alone on that). But at this point, why even talk about honor?

Hawley, of course, now claims victimhood, alleging the ethics complaint would punish him for exercising his official power to object to election results. But the complaint, filed in late January, specifically cites the Code of Ethics for Government Service, which requires that elected officials put “loyalty to the highest moral principles and to country above loyalty to persons, party, or Government department.” Just because there’s a mechanism in place allowing senators to object to election results doesn’t mean it’s OK for Hawley to abuse that process for crass political gain.

Hawley and Cruz have the right to defend themselves from the allegations — but so far, they haven’t even had to. The Ethics Committee should stop sitting on this.

https://www.stltoday.com/opinion/editorial/editorial-its-long-past-time-for-the-senate-ethics-panel-to-address-hawleys-jan-6/article_3ca27f48-21fa-5eca-ab0f-3856bb9b5c79.html

[Rick Plant]

Lauren Boebert needs to be subpoenaed to explain her 'violent revolution' Jan 6th tweets: MSNBC contributor



During an MSNBC "The Sunday Show" panel on the chaos being created by far-right Republican Party lawmakers, SiriusXM radio host and political commentator Dean Obeidallah suggested it is about time the House committee investigating the Jan. 6th Capitol riot to subpoena Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO) and grill her over her suspicious tweets she made that day.

With host Jonathan Capehart wondering who is next to be subpoenaed, Obeidallah immediately mentioned the controversial Boebert who is currently under fire for inflammatory comments she made about Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN).

"I think you're going to see some," the radio host began. "I think it's really important that the DOJ has indicted Steve Bannon. It sends a very clear message we're not playing games. This is a congressional subpoena and you're going to go to jail potentially if you don't comply with it."

"I hope Congress will consider subpoenaing Lauren Boebart," he continued before quoting one tweet from the Republican on Jan 6th that stated, "Today is 1776."

"1776, that's code for violent revolution to overthrow the government so Trump can stay in power," he explained. "I hope that Congress doesn't stop with just some of the Proud Boys which they are subpoenaing and the Oath Keepers. But Lauren Boebart, she tweeted 'Today is 1776' when she knew that was code for violent revolution for those on the right. I want that answer."

Watch below:

[Rick Plant]

'This is not going well for Bannon': MSNBC legal analyst says Trump ally on track for stinging defeat

Former Solicitor General Neal Katyal explained that Trump ally Steve Bannon is going to be highly unsuccessful in his efforts to beat criminal contempt charges.

In a Sunday filing by the Justice Department, prosecutors said Bannon's attorney, Evan Corcoran, refused their attempts to negotiate on some kind of agreement. According to the 10-page filing, the prosecutors alleged Bannon's lawyers were using their filing as a press release instead of a legal filing.

"The prosecutors called Steve Bannon's filing frivolous, so Bannon claimed that he wanted to make certain documents public and the Justice Department wasn't letting him," said Katyal. "And the Justice Department's response today was to call it frivolous and basically say, 'Oh, no, you didn't!' They point out that Bannon never even asked the Justice Department to try and make these documents public, and so this dispute is not going to go well for Bannon. Judges don't like it when parties can't work out stuff among themselves... and that's particularly true here, given Bannon's specific claim."

At its heart, Katyal said that Bannon is complaining that he can't publicly discuss certain documents.

"I have a very easy suggestion for him if he's worried about that: Testify," he continued. "This guy is afraid to go and tell the truth about what happened under oath, and that's what all of these legal skirmishes are about. That's the part that's frivolous. So, I think he's going to lose these claims and it's going to embolden the House investigators."

See the full conversation below:

[Rick Plant]

Jan 6 committee to vote on a criminal referral of Trump DOJ official Jeffrey Clark

The House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol has announced it will vote on holding Trump-era Assistant Attorney General Jeffrey Clark.

"According to a report released last week by the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, there is credible evidence that, while serving as an official at the Department of Justice, Mr. Clark was involved in efforts to interrupt the peaceful transfer of power. Mr. Clark proposed delivery of a letter to state legislators in Georgia and others encouraging to delay certification of election results. Moreover, he recommended holding a press conference announcing that the Department was investigating allegations of voter fraud despite the lack of evidence that such fraud was present. Both proposals were rejected by Department senior leadership for lacking a factual basis and being inconsistent with the Department’s institutional role," the committee announced on October 13.

https://www.rawstory.com/jeffrey-clrk/

[Rick Plant]

Jan 6 committee has interviewed over 250 people: Congressman

Rep. Pet Aguilar (D-CA) revealed that over 250 witnesses were interviewed, so far, by the House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack.

Speaking to MSNBC's Rachel Maddow on Monday, Aguilar explained that people like Steve Bannon, Jeffrey Clark, and former Donald Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows are outliers in those willing to come forward and speak to the committee.

"We've said all along we want to tell the full and complete story, and in order to do that we're going to need documents and interviews," said Aguilar. "So, clearly that is what's helpful about the document requests and national archives request. We're pleased with the timeline the court is addressing this, and Doug Letter and the team here will be arguing that before the Court of Appeals tomorrow. So, we're excited to move to that next step, but it's helpful and important to the work that we need to have those documents."

Maddow asked about those few members of the Trump inner circle who have refused to testify and what the next steps will be for those people.

"Mr. Clark is in a small group that has continued to stonewall us," Aguilar said of the former Justice Department deputy who penned a kind of guide to justify Vice President Mike Pence refusing to certify the 2020 election. "He has not produced any documents. He came to the deposition but refused to answer questions and exerted both executive privilege and attorney-client privilege, which is a little confusing. And so we're going to proceed, and so that's what the business committee meeting on Wednesday evening will be about is referral of the criminal contempt. We feel that he has shown just an unwillingness to come forward and to testify, and we feel that over 250 people have come before us and given -- submitted interviews and this should be no different, including his two superiors at the time, acting Attorney General [Jeff] Rosen and Deputy Attorney General [Richard] Donahue, so we've received a lot of information."

He went on to note that the Senate Judiciary Committee report detailed Clark's attempts to delegitimize the election and that he should be willing to talk to them as well.

See the video below: