Daily Archives: June 18, 2022

This year, Pence has taken on a new persona among the crowda Trump era castoff who is probably better off not showing his face. And he seems to know it. The former veep was invited to the conference but decided not to attend. It was the first time Pence had missed the conference in five years.

I was such a big fan of his but that part of the Republican Party is the educational elites the old horses are on their way out, said Mary Obersteadt, the immediate past president of Nashville Republican Women. She wore rhinestone Trump and DeSantis pins on her conference lanyard. I respect him for what he did and how he served this nation but hes so disappointing when he - he should have communicated and stayed with Trump with Jan. 6, they should have been on the same level.

Pences absence from this years conference was due to a scheduling conflict, according to the conference organizers and Pences team. On Thursday, he attended a roundtable with Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine.

But while he still is rooted in the Christian conservative community, having attended an event with the Coalition in North Carolina to engage Chrisitan voters in the Charlotte area, his decision to skip the Faith & Freedom gathering underscores the crossroads he currently finds himself in politically.

I think hes seeking Gods direction for his decision on what to do next, said Dr. Robert Jeffress, pastor at First Baptist Dallas, who is close to both Pence and Trump, and sits on the advisory board for Pences political group, Advancing American Freedom.

At a time when Pences main ideological causes are on the cusp of historic successwith the Supreme Court set to overturn the landmark abortion rights case, Roe v. Wade he finds himself in the thick of intra-party drama. This week, the House select committee investigating the riots on Capitol Hill zeroed in on Pences decision to resist Donald Trumps pressure for him to block certification of the Electoral College vote count.

Former U.S. President Donald Trump points to the crowd after giving the keynote address at the Faith & Freedom Coalition during their annual "Road To Majority Policy Conference" on June 17, 2022 in Nashville, Tennessee.|Seth Herald/Getty Images

While Pence has, so far, dodged discussing the committees proceedings, Trump used his own appearance at the Faith & Freedom conference to attack his veep.

Mike Pence had a chance to be great, he had a chance to be frankly historic, Trump said. But Mike did not have the courage to act.

It was a remarkable moment for a conference that in past years served as a celebration for the former vice president as a top conservative Christian leader. But things have changed since Trump left office. Last year, in the shadow of Jan. 6, Pence was jeered by the crowd and called a traitor while on stage. Now, when asked about what they think of Pence or how they view his political future, attendees sighed or visibly shrugged.

Thats a good question, said Sandi McGuire, a Christian minister from Raleigh, North Carolina. I havent seen him much. I dont like speaking adverse toward anyone, he did great work. He came here last year and a percentage booed him. Im not sure in fairness where he is. I wish him the best but he hasnt been anywhere to be found.

Its kind of hard, its a hard one, said Emily Hinojos from Rutherford, N.C. when asked about Pences political future. I dont know where hes at since Jan 6. Its hard to tell youre not in their shoes but we would have liked him to support Trump better.

The mood of the crowd at Faith & Freedom reflected the degree to which Republican politicians are judged not so much by their ideologies but by their relationship to Trump. Ralph Reed, a Republican strategist and founder of the Faith & Freedom Coalition, is close with both Trump and Pence. But when asked if he was surprised by Trumps attacks, he would only say he consulted with Trumps speechwriters yesterday.

If Mike Pence wanted to come and wanted to offer a rejoinder to these folks, he could have done it. Im not saying he should have done it. I told him when I saw him a couple weeks ago, no harm no foul, but I said I want you here next year and hell be there, Reed said to a small group of reporters after Trumps speech.

Former U.S. President Donald Trump exits the stage after giving the keynote address at the Faith & Freedom Coalition during their annual "Road To Majority Policy Conference" on June 17, 2022 in Nashville, Tennessee.|Seth Herald/Getty Images

Pences own relationship with Trump is deeply complicated. For a few months after leaving the White House, the two would occasionally speak. But they havent talked for a year now even though their paths have occasionally crossed, including when both men addressed top Republican donors at a retreat in New Orleans in March. Trump continues to admonish his former vice president in public, while Pence has remained firm in his decision to certify the election.

In recent months, Pence has turned his focus to the midterms. Hes offered endorsements in key midterm races like Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp and held a fundraiser for incumbent Rep. Steve Chabot on Thursday. On Monday, he is set to deliver a speech on the economy at the University Club of Chicago.

Our path is a little bit different than everybody else is at this point, said a person close to Pences political operation, who defended Pences decision to not go to the Nashville cattle call. And whether he decided to do this thing or not, he doesnt have to go there to get coverage.

But its unclear how Pence can build up a national profile if he were to lose the full support of his bedrock constituency: Evangelicals. Not everyone in his camp is worried. Aides to Pence say he holds appeal across the Republican party.

Vice President Pence checks the hawk lane. He checks the traditional GOP lane. And obviously probably the biggest one is the Evangelical lane, said the Pence ally.

And Bob Vander Plaats, president and CEO of The Family Leader, a conservative Christian parent organization for the Iowa Family Policy Center, said Pences support remains strong among social conservatives and Evangelicals in Iowa, especially as support of Trump wanes.

Not to play Bob Seger on you, but I think theyre looking to turn the page, Vander Plaats said of Iowa voters he talks to. Take the best of Trump, and lets see if Ron DeSantis can carry on that fightor Mike Pence or Mike Pompeo or Ted Cruz or whoever you throw into that match.

But among those in Nashville this weekend, Pence seemed more a relic of the past than an element of the future. None of the merchandise stalls that lined the entrance to the conference ballroom featured Pences name, while there were piles of red, white, and blue Trump and Trump 2024 t-shirts and hats for sale.

I feel like he was mistreated so long he wanted to give his soul a break and his family. I dont think its political, its personal he doesnt want to get attacked right now, said Krista Kiepke from Clarksville, Tenn. Jesus himself removed from the disciples to refresh so he could do his job so I look at it as that.

View post:

Pence skips Faith & Freedom conference. Is attacked by Trump anyways. - POLITICO

The lawyer who advised former President Donald Trump on how to overturn the 2020 election requested a pardon from him in the days after Jan. 6, the committee investigating the Capitol attack revealed on Thursday.

At the committees third public hearing on June 16, law professor John Eastman emailed Trumps personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, asking for executive clemency. Ive decided that I should be on the pardon list, if that is still in the works, he wrote, according to an email obtained by the House panel.

The revelation came a week after Rep. Liz Cheney, the vice chair of the panel, alleged that multiple Republicans in Congress had also requested pardons from Trump before he left office for their roles in trying to block the transfer of power to Joe Biden. She only mentioned one lawmaker by name: Rep. Scott Perry of Pennsylvania.

As you will see, Rep. Perry contacted the White House in the weeks after Jan. 6 to seek a presidential pardon, said Cheney, a Wyoming Republican. Multiple other Republican congressmen also sought presidential pardons for their roles in attempting to overturn the 2020 election. (Perry quickly denied ever seeking a pardon, calling it an absolute, shameful, and soulless lie.)

The mentions of presidential pardons have set off a whirlwind of speculation on Capitol Hill about which members of Congress might have sought pardons and why. Committee members plan to flesh out what they have learned about the pardon requests in an upcoming hearing. Legal experts say such pardon requests could be construed as demonstrating a consciousness of guilt or recognition that they might have committed a crime by the members who sought them. Less damningly, their entreaties could also reflect concern that they feared unfairly becoming targets of investigation or prosecution.

The disclosure of multiple Trump allies seeking pardons in the wake of the attack on the Capitol has also raised questions about the extent of a presidents pardoning authority, including whether Trump may have issued secret presidential pardons that have yet to come to light. (Answer: maybe.)

Here is what you need to know.

According to one former prosecutor, the reason is simple. It tells us that they fear theyre going to be charged, or more generally, that theyve engaged in conduct thats a federal crime, Harry Litman, a former U.S. attorney, tells TIME.

Since Jan. 6, 2021, the Department of Justice has been conducting its own investigation of the attack. Thus far, more than 800 people have been charged for storming the Capitol, and nearly 300 have entered guilty pleas on charges ranging from civil disorder and theft of government property to obstruction of an official congressional proceeding and seditious conspiracy.

President Donald Trump's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani speaks to supporters from The Ellipse near the White House, in Washington, D.C. on January 6, 2021.

Brendan SmialowskiAPF/Getty Images

So far, no lawmakers or government officials have been charged, nor is there evidence that any are targets of the DOJ investigation.

One of the challenges prosecutors face is untangling criminal behavior from constitutionally protected political protests.

If the speech is likely and intended to incite imminent criminal action, then its not protected, says Elie Honig, a former federal and New Jersey state prosecutor. But, he notes, theres a difference between someone saying We need to throw these bums out and Lets go in there, smash up the windows, and beat the crap out of the first representative we see.

So its a spectrum between those two poles, he adds. Theres no automatic formula for that. It ultimately comes down to the prosecutors judgment and what the prosecutor believes would be convincing to the jury.

Several right-wing Republican lawmakers were reportedly involved in the planning of Jan. 6 protests. Several also vociferously challenged the certification of Biden as president on the House floor. Others cheered the crowd that day. On Wednesday, the Jan. 6 committee released surveillance footage of Rep. Barry Loudermilk, Republican of Georgia, giving a tour of the building to people later spotted in videos breaching the Capitol. None of those actions is a crime. (Loudermillk criticized the committee for what he called a smear campaign, adding that the Capitol Police already put this false accusation to bed.)

If a member of Congress did knowingly commit a crime like those the Justice Department is prosecuting related to the Capitol attack, they would of course have a reason to ask for a pardon. But from a practical standpoint, if any lawmakers thought they could be at risk of criminal prosecution, requesting a pardon from a sympathetic president is not necessarily unreasonable, says Margaret Love, former U.S. Pardon Attorney from 1990 to 1997 under Presidents George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton. Why not? Love says of members of Congress seeking clemency. A little insurance policy? Theres no reason why they shouldnt have asked.

In his final days in office, Trump did pardon many people close to him, such as Steve Bannon, Roger Stone, Paul Manafort, and Charles Kushner, the father of his son-in-law and special adviser Jared Kushner. But in all of those cases, Trump pardoned individuals who had already been charged with or convicted of crimes. If any members of Congress asked Trump for a presidential pardon, they were presumably asking for a preemptive one.

The short answer is yes. Generally speaking, the president can pardon federal crimes and people can request clemency, Jeffrey Crouch, a government professor at American University and an expert on presidential pardon power, wrote in an email to TIME. Even though a pardon usually comes at the end of the legal process, the president can short-circuit that process if he wants.

Past presidents have issued blanket pardons, such as Jimmy Carter who exonerated everyone who dodged the Vietnam draft. Its much rarer, though, for presidents to pardon individuals who have not yet been charged with a crime or not knowing the precise charge, if any, they were expected to face. A rare exception was when former President Gerald Ford pardoned his predecessor, Richard Nixon, in 1974 for whatever crimes he may have committed against the United States as president.

Trump himself waded into similar territory with his former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, whom he pardoned in 2020 for lying to federal investigators but also for any and all possible offenses he may have committed related to Special Counsel Robert Muellers investigation.

For the most part, however, pardons are issued for specific offenses, Litman argues. In theory, its well understood that a pardon is for specified conduct, he said. Its not just a get-out-of-jail-free card.

Nonetheless, Trump had the authority to issue very broad pardons to some of his allies in Congress, Crouch says. President Trump could have pardoned people without spelling out exactly what offenses he was pardoning, he says. The president has leeway to fashion the type of mercy he is offering and how broad it can be, but recent presidents are usually specific about pardons.

There are two glaring exceptions, though, to that power: if the pardon itself was part of a criminal act or the cover up of one. Most scholars would agree that even though the presidents pardon power is broad, it cant be used as part of a crime, Litman says. So its possible to grant a pardon in a way that is an obstruction of justice, for example.

Representative Zoe Lofgren, a Democrat from California, from right, Representative Liz Cheney, a Republican from Wyoming, and chairman Representative Bernie Thompson, a Democrat from Mississippi, exit following a hearing of the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the US Capitol in Washington, D.C., US, on Thursday, June 16, 2022.

Tom BrennerBloomberg/Getty Images

In the June 9 primetime hearing, Cheney suggested that the committee had evidence that GOP members of Congress requested pardons from Trump. Yet some veteran prosecutors and pardon lawyers say that has left them wondering whether the president might have issued any in secret.

The Justice Department has a page on its website listing every pardon it knows of that was issued by Trump. When asked by TIME whether Trump may have issued pardons not on the list, Dena Iverson, a DOJ spokesperson responded, All of the pardons are on the website.

Love, however, says Trump still could have granted additional pardons and never informed the Justice Department about them.

The president could have signed a cocktail napkin and put it away in a bottom drawer only to be revealed after he left office, Love says. Its just that this has never before happened, at least since the Civil War. And after January 20, he could have called up and said, Oh, by the way, Joe, look in the bottom drawer there. Youll find a bunch of paper there. He could have given them to the beneficiaries of these acts of grace. A pardon doesnt have to be published right away to be valid, or even published at all.

Its not the first time the prospect of Trump issuing secret pardons has come up. In September 2017, a Democratic congressman introduced a bill that would have forced the White House to publicly announce any presidential pardons within three days of their being granted. With Republicans then in control of both houses of Congress, the legislation went nowhere. But it underscored the reality that theres nothing forcing a president to publicly disclose every pardon they issue.

The Jan. 6 committee appears to be preparing to show the public how Perry and other members of Congress at the very least sought pardons from Trump. Everything were doing is documented by evidence, Rep. Jamie Raskin, Democrat of Maryland, recently told CNN regarding the pardon requests. Everything that we are doing is based on facts.

When asked by TIME on Thursday about the possibility that Trump may have issued pardons in secret, Raskin said the committee had not considered it.

The question prompted Raskin to think back to when the committee deposed Eastman. He was not particularly forthcoming, pleading his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination 100 times. But the committee had focused on the paper trail showing Eastman seeking a pardon, and not the possibility that Trump may have agreed to the request without ever formally announcing it.

We should have asked him, Raskin says, Do you have a pardon?

More Must-Read Stories From TIME

Contact us at letters@time.com.

Excerpt from:

Could Donald Trump Have Issued Jan. 6 Pardons to Allies? - TIME

So, the U.S. House of Representatives Jan. 6 Select Committee has revealed that former President Donald Trump used his baseless claims that the 2020 presidential election was stolen from him to fleece his followers.

What.

A.

Shock.

Who could have predicted that a man who built his business, such as it is, by slapping his name on everything but used tissues and then selling those products, such as they are, at inflated prices would resort to yet another con when he was under pressure?

Who would have thought that a guy who ran for president primarily to restore some luster to his fading brand wouldnt leap at one more chance to bilk the faithful?

And who possibly could have seen that a fellow who spent at least a third of his time as both presidential candidate and president staying at Trump properties, thus lining his own pockets with taxpayer funds and campaign contributions, would not be able to resist one more grab at the cookie jar?

Clearly, such grasping chicanery on the part of the former president comes completely out of left field because, up until this point, nothing Donald Trump ever has done in his life would indicate that he is either greedy or mendacious.

Yeah.

Right.

When the history of this period is written presuming the republic survives and Americans still are permitted to express themselves freely and honestly one question will be at the center of all the studies and scholarship.

Why and how did so many Americans allow themselves to be gulled by a con artist who views them the way a rat does pieces of cheese?

I understand why so many working-class Americans turned to Trump in the first place. Their concerns werent being addressed by either political party.

Still arent, for that matter.

The traditional Republican Party always has favored the wishes of capital over the needs of labor, elevating the interests of the haves over those of the have-nots. The GOP also has a history of pitting working people against each other.

Were seeing that again now.

After years of encouraging tensions and resentments between working-class U.S. citizens and undocumented immigrants, some Republicans now have begun quietly arguing that relaxing immigration restrictions would help ease inflationary pressures.

By driving down wages.

Once again, in the GOPs world view, the burden of solving an economic problem must fall on the shoulders of working people.

Not that the Democrats cant be just as clueless. Their solution to the problems of the working class is to raise the minimum wage to $15 per hour.

There are at least two problems with that.

The first is that the real minimum wage in this country now already is between $15 and $17 per hour and its likely to climb higher than that as the worldwide labor shortage deepens in the coming years. Democrats want to close the barn door not just after the horse fled but at one of the few times in history when the horse might have some power to choose which barn it likes best and under what conditions.

The second problem with the Democrats minimum-wage policy is that it isnt grounded in any recognizable reality.

How many of them would like to try to raise a family of four on $31,000 a year? Thats what 40 hours per week of $15 per hour pays for a years labor. How many Democrats in Congress and state legislatures across the country think they could build better lives for their own children and pursue the American dream on those wages?

Donald Trump became a force in Americas political life because neither party seemed to care or grasp the challenges millions of Americans faced.

In their desperation, they turned to a grifter who saw them as lemons to squeeze for the juice they might provide him.

Now, even as evidence overwhelmingly mounts that Trump has done little but use and abuse those who gave him their devotion, many, many Americans remain faithful to the man who has misled them at every turn.

Why?

Perhaps Mark Twain said it best.

Its easier to fool people, Twain wrote, than to convince them they have been fooled.

John Krull is director of Franklin College's Pulliam School of Journalism and publisher of TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students. The opinions expressed by the author do not reflect the views of Franklin College.

Read the original:

John Krull: Donald Trump and the art of the grift - Terre Haute Tribune Star

Many other Trump advisers, including former attorney-general Bill Barr, had revealed earlier in the week how they repeatedly tried to debunk Trumps claims of a stolen election.

Former US vice president Mike Pence.Credit:AP

But in a grievance-fuelled address lasting almost 90 minutes, Trump said he simply wanted Pence to send the votes back to state legislatures because of the electoral fraud he claims took place.

He had a chance to be, frankly, historic, Trump said of Pence. But just like Bill Barr and the rest of these weak people he did not have the courage to act.

The former president also took aim at the committee itself, accusing the group of editing video depositions and taking witness statements out of context in order to create a fake and phony narrative and a chilling attempt to weaponise the justice system against their political opponents.

What happened on January 6 was a simple protest that got out of hand, he said. And they never show the size of the crowd. I believe it was the largest number of people Ive ever spoken to. Im not talking about the very small percentage of people who went down to the Capitol, many of whom did nothing wrong ... Im talking about the crowd I spoke to before [at the rally that preceded the attack].

Loading

Trumps speech was the seventh time he appeared at the Faith and Freedom conference, an annual conservative gathering that bills itself as Americas premiere pro-faith, pro-family event and is designed to empower conservative activists to fight for their values at the polls.

The former president has repeatedly said he would wait until after the midterms when the Republicans are expected to regain control of Congress to announce if he would run for president again.

The findings of the committees probe could end up having an impact on such an announcement, particularly if it leads to a criminal investigation into Trump by the Department of Justice.

Others in Trumps orbit have already found themselves in legal turmoil as a result of the committees work, such as former White House trade adviser Peter Navarro, who pleaded not guilty to contempt of Congress charges on Friday after not co-operating with the January 6 investigation.

The committees fourth hearing will take place on Tuesday and is likely to feature testimony from Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger and his top deputy Gabriel Sterling.

Raffensperger is the electoral official who famously rebuffed Trumps pressure to simply find enough votes to help reverse his defeat in Georgia the once Republican state that ultimately handed Biden control of the White House after it flipped to the Democrats in 2020. Sterling, meanwhile, was an outspoken critic of Trumps claims of fraud.

Get a note directly from our foreign correspondents on whats making headlines around the world. Sign up for the weekly What in the World newsletter here.

Read this article:

A simple protest that got out of hand: Trump defends role in Capitol attack - Sydney Morning Herald

Public hearings serve a subtle function. They permit the minds of the American people to acculturate to the facts and evidence. By laying out the facts that explain what Mr. Trump did, the Jan. 6 hearings can, in advance, help acclimate the public to why the Justice Department has to take criminal action against the former president. The hearings may afford the department a deeper and public explanation of its reasoning than an indictment out of the blue would offer. Public sentiment of this kind could help insulate the department against a claim that it is politically motivated. These hearings may prove to be a bridge between the Justice Department and the public.

Now consider that elusive third audience: the eyes of history. On the one hand, Mr. Garland has to fear being seen as political, and on the other, he knows that the rule of law requires him to bring an indictment if the evidence shows Mr. Trump committed one of the most serious crimes against the United States in our history. Trying to game history is a notoriously fraught enterprise, but it seems certain that if Mr. Garland is to be the first attorney general to bring criminal charges against a former president, having the facts surfaced first by a bipartisan congressional committee would be enormously helpful and provide an evidentiary record that the public today, and historians in the future, could examine.

Of course, critics will complain about the composition of the committee and the like, but those complaints, relatively speaking, are likely to be weaker than they would be if the Justice Department just investigated and prosecuted the case against the former president by itself. Here, Congress has a unique voice because the attack occurred on its members, on their soil.

What would criminal charges against Donald Trump look like? Obstruction of an official proceeding is a serious offense that requires the prosecution to show that a defendant obstructed, or attempted to obstruct, an official proceeding and that the defendant did so corruptly. The official proceeding part of this is clear by law, on Jan. 6, Congress and the vice president must certify the votes. There appears to have been an orchestrated plot by some to try to interfere with that certification the question is really whether the former president was part of that plot. The committee has presented evidence suggesting that Mr. Trump, along with the lawyer John Eastman, and perhaps others such as the former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows and Jeffrey Clark, a former Justice Department official, attempted to interfere with the election certification on Jan. 6. Before the hearings, it was thought that Mr. Trumps defense against this charge is that he genuinely believed that he had won the election and wasnt acting corruptly.

The testimony in last weeks hearing cast immense doubt on that claim. Mr. Trumps close ally, former Attorney General William Barr, testified that he told the president that arguments claiming he had won the election were bullshit. Mr. Trumps daughter Ivanka testified that she believed Mr. Barr. Mr. Trumps own election data people told him the same. Mr. Trump might try to claim he still believed the nonsense, but such an argument would be difficult to make given the array of people who told him in no uncertain terms that he had lost. Mr. Trump persisted, despite the warnings, to try to interfere with the lawful transfer of power. This looks very much like an attempt to obstruct an official proceeding.

The Justice Department could also bring the charge of conspiracy to defraud the United States. A charge of conspiracy requires proof that two or more people agreed to defraud the country. A key feature of conspiracy charges is that the plot need not succeed charges are tethered to the agreement to do something illegal, not to actually pull it off. Prosecutors need not wait until the bomb goes off (or in this case, until the election results are wrongfully thrown out) before bringing charges.

Here is the original post:

Opinion | The Future Criminal Case Against Donald Trump - The New York Times

IE 11 is not supported. For an optimal experience visit our site on another browser.

Joe on Thursday revelations: Trump on Jan. 6 was working to cause harm or death to Pence07:40

There has to be further investigation into Jan. 5 tour, says former CIA officer11:35

Search continues for missing Americans in Ukraine04:30

'Approach life like a game': Son details the life of his 'World's Greatest Negotiator' father05:55

Michael Beschloss: Watergate hearings led to a number of indictments07:23

FDA authorizes Pfizer and Moderna vaccine for kids as young as six months00:36

Fathers of Jacob Blake, Michael Brown and Trayvon Martin sit down for Father's Day special08:08

Joe: Eastman clearly working with Trump to try and commit sedition against the U.S.03:12

Rev. Al: Chairman Thompson, Rep. Cheney have risen to real heights03:22

Historian traces the historical significance of Juneteenth07:28

USAFacts releases its America in Facts report for 202209:21

Brand Up, Brand Down: Shrinkflation, tipping, delivery workers eating your food06:19

Joe: The burden of proof appears to be on Rep. Loudermilk10:16

How election conspiracies have taken hold in Colorado05:16

New Jersey and New York make bid to host 2026 World Cup09:52

Sen. Durbin: The Jan. 6 Committee is historic; we should pay close attention to it10:38

Now Playing

Joe: There has to be consequences for Donald Trump for Jan. 607:24

UP NEXT

Ginni Thomas' efforts to overturn election more extensive than previously known: WaPo08:09

Capitol officer: Jan. 6 rioters called us traitors because we did our job05:39

Inside the DOJ clash over Trump's election claims07:13

The Morning Joe panel discusses the findings and footage from the January 6 Committee hearings, including new footage of a tour led by a GOP lawmaker the day before the Capitol attack.June 16, 2022

UP NEXT

Joe on Thursday revelations: Trump on Jan. 6 was working to cause harm or death to Pence07:40

There has to be further investigation into Jan. 5 tour, says former CIA officer11:35

Search continues for missing Americans in Ukraine04:30

'Approach life like a game': Son details the life of his 'World's Greatest Negotiator' father05:55

Michael Beschloss: Watergate hearings led to a number of indictments07:23

FDA authorizes Pfizer and Moderna vaccine for kids as young as six months00:36

Go here to read the rest:

Joe: There has to be consequences for Donald Trump for Jan. 6 - MSNBC