President Donald Trump didn’t exactly hide his efforts to overturn the election he’d just lost in the closing days of his presidency, and it’s easy to get tired of thinking about it now that he’s out of office and his official powers have been curtailed. But, in addition to the lies he’s been spreading all along, we’re learning more and more about his obstinate and pernicious efforts to poison the system from within, which included a “Apprentice”-style showdown at the White House between two top Justice Department officials and threats of resignation.
Only now is the entire image of Trump’s attempted coup beginning to emerge
They reveal that Trump’s assault on democracy, which is increasingly like a coup attempt, was considerably more rash and persistent than previously assumed.
The following items have appeared in recent news:
- According to the notes of acting Deputy Attorney General Richard Donoghue, which were shared with House investigators, Trump pressured acting DOJ officials like acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen on December 27 to “just say that the election was corrupt + leave the rest to me and the R. Congressmen.”
- On December 28, at least one acting DOJ official, Jeffrey Clark, who was in charge of the civil division, appeared to have bought into Trump’s lies, or at least wanted to reassure him, and drafted a letter claiming election irregularities (there weren’t), but it was rebuffed by other top acting officials.
- Officials such as Rosen’s chief of staff Patrick Hovakimian drafted resignation letters in case his boss was replaced by Clark.
The fear of a block of acting Justice Department resignations (these people were meant to be Trump loyalists as acting officials) may have deterred Trump from firing officials at the last minute. Keep in mind that Trump’s pressure on Rosen and Donoghue occurred one day after former Attorney General William Barr’s final resignation. Barr left the government in the final month, not long after telling a reporter the truth: there was no proof of massive voting fraud that could have swung the election’s outcome. In a White House meeting chronicled by Jonathan Karl in a forthcoming book, Trump erupted over Barr’s apparent betrayal. Trump spoke on the phone with authorities in Georgia on Barr’s last day, pressing them to “find” votes. They were not going to do it. Now that House investigators are interviewing former Trump officials, these details will be revealed in a more complete story. That formal record will add to the information we already knew, such as the hours-long “Apprentice”-style battle in which Rosen and Clark each presented Trump with arguments about how to proceed in his final days. That happened on January 3rd. Three days later, Trump supporters stormed the Capitol in an attempt to halt the count.Trump’s attempts to sabotage the election were not confined to the Justice Department. We know earlier this year from another book that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Mark Milley, was actively engaged in fighting any attempt by Trump to gain power through the government. It’s encouraging to hear that even authorities who were earlier thought to be Trump supporters will not assist him in overturning the election. But it’s important to keep everything in perspective, especially given the possibility that Trump will run for President again. It’s also worth evaluating whether he broke the law by putting pressure on the US democratic process to undermine it. “Forget about committing a crime. I see a number of criminal offenses here “Elie Honig, a former federal prosecutor and CNN analyst who recently wrote a book critical of Barr’s experience in the Trump administration, agreed.
Here’s more from Honig, who spoke with CNN’s Erin Burnett about it: “I’m going to be specific. Depriving a state of a fair election is a federal felony. The solicitation of fake ballot counting and election certification is a criminal felony. Conspiring against the United States is a federal offense. Could a qualified defense attorney now come in and argue with this or try to find flaws in it? Sure. That’s a struggle I’d gladly take on.” Honig believes there is sufficient evidence for a criminal investigation and that current Attorney General Merrick Garland should begin one, despite the fact that the DOJ has yet to do so: “This is a grave situation, and there must be repercussions. Consider what would happen if there were no repercussions. What is the message that this sends?” He’s attempting to tamper with our understanding of events, just as he attempted to tamper with the election’s outcome. Trump has already avoided impeachment, despite the fact that these additional revelations were unknown at the time of the vote. He put pressure on Republicans on Capitol Hill to reject a comprehensive unbiased investigation of the insurgency. He’s contended that the Democratic-appointed committee is partisan.
You can click on the image below to owning our products