Daily Archives: June 22, 2022

Many sophisticated observers of the January 6 committee will judge its success by two key metrics: whether the panel refers former President Donald Trump for criminal investigation and, if so, whether Attorney General Merrick Garland actually proceeds. But committee members are doing another job at least as important as advising the Justice Department: They are giving an off-ramp to those who accepted Trumps insistence that the 2020 election was stolen out from under himand who might excuse or even support violence done in his name.

Democracies do not fail in a single moment; they gradually break down from within. The same can be said of violent movements. Since the Capitol riot, the United States has been waging what is essentially a counter-extremism effort against Trump and the forces that nearly toppled our democracy. Such movements grow by portraying themselves as successful and their leadership as exceptional. The committee hearings have shown Trump to be not only an insurrectionist and an inciter of violence, but also a desperate sore loser. Almost everyone around Trump was telling him that his public claims of election fraud were bullshit, as former Attorney General William Barr put it. The people who continue spreading that myth need to know that Trump is making a fool of them. The savviest of his advisers long ago headed for the exits, and the ones who havent are not to be believed.

Notably, most of the committees witnesses against the former president are or were members of Team Trump or the GOP. Look at them, the committee is sayingthere is a way out. Trump, according to Representative Liz Cheney, the committees Republican vice chair, was advised by an apparently inebriated Rudy Giuliani. This description, based on the accounts of Trump-campaign figures, isnt idle gossip, but is meant to humiliate Trump, make him seem like a puppet of the unhinged and reckless. Run away from that guy! Trump is also betrayed by his daughter Ivanka, who in videotaped testimony looks deflated and pale as she sides with the forces telling Trump to stop his madness. The implication is clear: If his own daughter isnt with him, why should you be?

Read: The January 6 committees most damning revelation yet

The former presidents critics may rightly ask why neither she nor Barr spoke up in the moment. But longtime Trump skeptics arent the committees target audience. The message to his remaining supporters is: Trump has peaked. His best days are behind him. You wont be the first to take the off-ramp, but you dont want to be the last.

Instead of subscribing to Trumps stolen-election fantasies, Republicans can join Team Normal, the term used by the former campaign manager Bill Stepien to describe those who were not instigating violence. If these former Trump loyalists can reject the lies, the committee is effectively telling his current followers, then so can you. And by the way, there was no honor among Trumps abettors; the committee has evidence, one of its two Republican members has said, that GOP politicians who may have been involved with coordinating the January 6 effort had sought pardons, leaving everybody else exposed to prosecution.

According to evidence aired Thursday, John Eastmana Trump legal adviser who kept insisting that thenVice President Mike Pence had the power to alter the Electoral College votepresumptuously declared in an email after the riot, Ive decided that I should be on the pardon list, if that is still in the works. One of Trumps White House lawyers testified that hed told Eastman, Get a great effing criminal-defense lawyer. Youre gonna need it. The message to Trump supporters: With company like this, do you need any more reason to take an exit?

My background is in homeland security, and I have previously argued that counterterrorism holds lessons in how to isolate Trump and de-radicalize MAGA extremists. (Earlier this year, I was among hundreds of experts contacted by committee staffers who were seeking perspective about the events of January 6.) The committee and its investigators plainly understand the one way in which extremist groups gain a foothold politically: Their leaders present themselves as more reasonable and less violent than they really are. The committee is trying to deny Trump and his MAGA allies that option by reminding Americans that the threat of brute force was always the undercurrent behind Stop the Steal.

A single congressional committee cannot make Trumps most violent supporters better, kinder, more accepting of Americas diversity. But it can help separate the former president from elites, donors, and those who would support him simply because they dont like the alternative.

The committees case against Trump is relentless and personaland one apparently targeted at Americans who might have voted for the former president or been sympathetic to his ideas. As Cheney said, There will come a day when Donald Trump is gone, but your dishonor will remain. The committee and its investigators arent being nasty for its own sake.

Quinta Jurecic: The January 6 committee is not messing around

A fair question is how many of Trumps most enthusiastic supporters are actually seeing the committees work; some of Trump supporters preferred media platforms are largely ignoring the proceedings. But the hearings and the conversations they spawn appear on numerous national outlets and local news. Fox News at least covered them in the daytime. Republican elites and conservative influencers are paying attention. Commentators at The Wall Street Journal and the New York Post were not pleased with Trump after the first days proceedings; donors are expressing their annoyance; and some GOP members seem more vocal in treating Trump as a political liability for 2024. Asa Hutchinson, the Republican governor of Arkansas, has said that many in the GOP are looking for the off-ramp from Trumps election fiction. On the left, many of Trumps critics seem to yearn for a single blow of reckoning, but perhaps the threat he and his followers pose is best handled with a thousand cuts.

The most effective attempt to isolate Trump came at the end of the second hearing, when Representative Zoe Lofgren highlighted the Trump familys greed and opportunism in the days after the election. This narrative isnt particularly necessary for an indictment. Still, a committee staffer disclosed that, after losing the November 2020 election, Trump and his allies raised $250 million in pursuit of the lie but never set up the special fund that they had promised to dedicate to the cause. Some of the money went to paying Kimberly Guilfoyle, Donald Trump Jr.s fiance, $60,000 for a two-and-a-half-minute speech on January 6. Donors deserve better than what President Trump and his team did, Lofgren declared, lending a sympathetic ear to those who might be feeling a little duped. Perhaps she doesnt really believe it, but it works as a way of saying: Have you had enough yet?

The conservative commentator Ann Coulter appears to concur. Every time you think you have your arms fully around Trumps con, she wrote this week, you realize its unfathomably more cynical and far-reaching than you could have imagined. She added, Is there anyone in Trump World who isnt trying to fleece the Deplorables?

The committee is building a historical record as well as a legal case against Trump and his aides. But it is also grappling with the threat posed by a violent movementa threat that weakens if enough of Trumps supporters quietly back away from him. Trump does not need to go to prison to be disgraced. If the former president ends up a rich, lonely man who can no longer fill a stadium, begging a dwindling number of radical adherents for attention while his children grift off his name, then America will have won.

The rest is here:

The January 6 Committee Is Giving Trumpers an Off-Ramp - The Atlantic

The searing testimony and growing evidence about Donald Trumps central role in a multi-pronged conspiracy to overturn Joe Bidens election in 2020 presented at the House January 6 committees first three hearings, has increased the odds that Trump will face criminal charges, say former DoJ prosecutors and officials.

The panels initial hearings provided a kind of legal roadmap about Trumps multi-faceted drives in tandem with some top lawyers and loyalists to thwart Biden from taking office, that should benefit justice department prosecutors in their sprawling investigations into the January 6 assault on the Capitol by a mob of Trump supporters.

Ex-justice department lawyers say new revelations at the hearings increase the likelihood that Trump will be charged with crimes involving conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding or defrauding the United States, as he took desperate and seemingly illegal steps to undermine Bidens election.

Trump could also potentially face fraud charges over his role in an apparently extraordinary fundraising scam described by House panel members as the big rip-off that netted some $250m for an election defense fund that did not exist but funneled huge sums to Trumps Save America political action committee and Trump properties.

The panel hopes to hold six hearings on different parts of what its vice-chair, Liz Cheney, called Trumps sophisticated seven-part plan to overturn the election.

Trump was told repeatedly, for instance, by top aides and cabinet officials including ex-attorney general Bill Barr that the election was not stolen, and that his fraud claims were completely bullshit and crazy stuff as Barr put it in a video of his scathing deposition. But Trump persisted in pushing baseless fraud claims with the backing of key allies including his ex-personal attorney Rudy Giuliani and lawyer John Eastman.

The January 6 committees investigation has developed substantial, compelling evidence that Trump committed crimes, including but not limited to conspiracy to defraud the United States and obstruct official proceedings, Michael Bromwich, a former inspector general at the DoJ told the Guardian.

Donald Ayer, a former deputy attorney general in the George HW Bush administration, told the Guardian that the committee hearings have bolstered the need to seriously consider filing criminal charges against Trump.

The crux of any prosecution of Trump would hinge heavily on convincing a jury that Trump knew he lost the election and acted with criminal intent to overturn the valid election results. The hearings have focused heavily on testimony that Trump fully knew he had lost and went full steam ahead to concoct schemes to stay in power.

New revelations damaging to Trump emerged on Thursday when Greg Jacob, the ex-counsel to former vice-president Mike Pence, recounted in detail how Eastman and Trump waged a high-pressure drive, publicly and privately, even as the Capitol was under attack, to prod Pence to unlawfully block Bidens certification by Congress on January 6.

The Eastman pressure included a scheme to substitute pro-Trump fake electors from states that Biden won for electors rightfully pledged to Biden a scheme the DoJ has been investigating for months and that now involves a grand jury focused on Eastman, Giuliani and several other lawyers and operatives.

Eastman at one point acknowledged to Jacob that he knew his push to get Pence on January 6 to reject Bidens winning electoral college count would violate the Electoral Count Act, and that Trump, too, was told it would be illegal for Pence to block Bidens certification.

Paul Pelletier, a former acting chief of the DoJs fraud section, said: It is a target-rich environment, with many accessories both before and after the fact to be investigated.

But experts caution any decision to charge Trump will be up to the current attorney general, Merrick Garland, who has been careful not to discuss details of his departments January 6 investigations, which so far have led to charges against more than 800 individuals, including some Proud Boys and Oath Keepers charged with seditious conspiracy.

After the first two hearings, Garland told reporters, Im watching and I will be watching all the hearings, adding that DoJ prosecutors are doing likewise.

Garland remarked in reference to possibly investigating Trump: Were just going to follow the facts wherever they lead to hold all perpetrators who are criminally responsible for January 6 accountable, regardless of their level, their position, and regardless of whether they were present at the events on January 6.

But Garland has not yet tipped his hand if Trump himself is under investigation. Despite that reticence, justice department veterans say the wealth of testimony from one-time Trump insiders and new revelations at the House hearings should spur the department to investigate and charge Trump.

Barbara McQuade, a former US attorney for eastern Michigan, said the panels early evidence was strong, including video testimony of Trump insiders who told Trump that he was going to lose badly, and that with regard to claims of election fraud, there was no there there, as Trumps ex-chief of staff Mark Meadows acknowledged in one exchange made public at the hearings.

McQuade added that Barrs testimony was devastating for Trump. He and other Trump insiders who testified about their conversations with Trump established that Trump knew he had lost the election and continued to make public claims of fraud anyway. That knowledge can help establish the fraudulent intent necessary to prove criminal offenses against Trump.

In a novel legal twist that could emerge if Trump is charged, Bromwich said: Bizarrely, Trumps best defense to the mountain of evidence that proves these crimes seems to be that he was incapable of forming the criminal intent necessary to convict. That he was detached from reality, in Barrs words. But there is strong evidence that he is not crazy but instead is crazy like a fox.

How else to explain his attempts to pressure the Georgia secretary of state to find the votes necessary to change the result? Or his telling DoJ officials to simply declare the election corrupt and leave the rest to me and Republican House allies?

Bromwich added: All of this shows not someone incapable of forming criminal intent, but someone who understood what the facts were and was determined not to accept them. Because he couldnt stand to lose. That was far more important to him than honoring our institutions or the constitution.

Former federal prosecutor Michael Zeldin said Trump could face charges over what Cheney called the big rip-off, which centers on the allegation that Trump raised money from small-dollar donors after the election under false pretenses.

Zeldin said: Specifically, he asked for money to fight election fraud when, in fact, the money was used for other purposes. This type of conduct could violate the wire fraud statute.

Ayer cited the importance of a justice department regulation identifying factors to consider in deciding whether to charge, and noted three of particular relevance to Trump the nature and severity of the offence, the important deterrent effect of prosecutions, and the culpability of the individual being charged.

But it might not be all plain sailing.

Simmering tensions between the panel and the justice department have escalated over DoJ requests rebuffed so far to obtain 1,000 witness transcripts of committee interviews, which prosecutors say are needed for upcoming trials of Proud Boys and other cases. However, the New York Times has reported some witness transcripts could be shared next month.

Nonetheless, as Garland weighs whether to move forward with investigating and charging Trump, experts caution a prosecution of Trump would require enormous resources, given the unprecedented nature of such a high-stakes case, and the risks that a jury could end up acquitting Trump which might only enhance his appeal to the Republican base. Yet at the same time ,the stakes for the country of not aggressively investigating Trump are also extremely high.

No one should underestimate the gravity of deciding to criminally charge an ex-president, said former federal prosecutor Dennis Aftergut.

For Aftergut, though, charging Trump seems imperative.

Ultimately, the avalanche of documents and sworn testimony proving a multi-faceted criminal conspiracy to overturn the will of the people means one thing: if no one is above the law, even an ex-president who led that conspiracy must be indicted.

Here is the original post:

Searing testimony increases odds of charges against Trump, experts say - The Guardian US

1/2

June 22 (UPI) -- President Gerald Ford's pardon of Richard Nixon after the Watergate fiasco no doubt helped Jimmy Carter win the 1976 election. But Ford was right then and right now. A former president in the docket would have been devastating to the nation.

Today, that possibility would be catastrophic. But make no mistake: Donald Trump could face prosecution over Jan. 6. The charge could be far more serious than inciting a riot, which would be very difficult to prove in a court.

Trump's legal problem stems not from Democratic allegations but from his and former Vice President Mike Pence's lawyers; two judges; former Attorney General Bill Barr; and other witnesses who will testify in the remaining House select committee's televised hearings. And Trump's possible legal problems are not his alone. President Joe Biden could be swept in them as Gerald Ford was 48 years ago as to whether to prosecute or to pardon a former president.

How serious are the possible charges against the former president? U.S. District Judge David Carter, in a case involving former Trump attorney John Eastman, concluded Trump "more likely than not corruptly attempted to obstruct Congress." Retired Republican-appointed Court of Appeals Judge Michael Luttig declared in testimony that Trump was "a clear and present danger to democracy."

Trump deputy White House counsel Eric Herschmann strongly recommended to Eastman that he hire the "best criminal attorney" he can find. Barr testified he repeatedly warned Trump that believing the election was stolen was "nonsense." And the evidence so far, if proven correct, could make the case that Trump not only attempted to subvert government. By his actions, he meant to overthrow it.

This bombshell has been obscured by focus on Trump's role to incite the riot. Rioters testified how he "summoned them" to Washington to reverse the stolen election, by force if necessary. No doubt, Trump's actions certainly facilitated, if not provoked, the large crowds to assemble on the National Mall and march on the Capitol that fateful day. But can guilt be established beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law? Probably not.

As former prosecutor and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie observed, if a case is to be made against a president, it cannot be a "swing and a miss." It must have a 99.999% or higher probability of obtaining a guilty verdict. And any Department of Justice is well aware of that standard.

The most chilling possibility is a question. Given that Trump attempted a coup and had a plan to overturn the election and, in essence, overthrow the government illegally, does that amount to sedition? 18 U.S.C 2384 defines the crime of sedition as conspiring to "overthrow the government of the United States..." or opposing by force the "authority of the United States government...the execution of any law....."

The evidence is very strong. But the ramifications are staggering. The divisions in the nation are such that a large faction of Americans would fiercely protest a trial of a former president over an election they thought was won. Other forms of Jan. 6 levels of violence almost certainly would break out, probably country wide. A national state of emergency could be declared with horrendous consequences.

Hence, Biden could face impossible decisions, making Ford's pardon of Nixon seem trivial. First, how would Biden deal with the Justice Department if it embarked on a criminal investigation of Trump's conduct surrounding the events of Jan. 6? Second, how would Biden deal with an indictment were one forthcoming? And last, if a trial were to be held, would the White House be capable of preventing the proceedings from disintegrating into a national nightmare?

All this is speculative. However, as the leak of a Supreme Court draft memo on Roe vs. Wade has set the stage for a potential political explosion, trying a former president would elevate such a spectacle to thermonuclear proportions. What can be done?

Few people have realized how potentially dangerous the findings of this select committee could prove. Would Biden preempt them by offering Trump a pardon or the equivalent of a "plea bargain" by not prosecuting should the former president agree never to run for office? And could that be binding?

Is a nation wracked with COVID-19; massive inflation and soaring gas prices; a war in Ukraine that could escalate; and other ticking time bombs capable of withstanding perhaps the greatest political crisis since the Civil War? For certain, no one knows.

Harlan Ullman is senior adviser at Washington's Atlantic Council, the prime author of "shock and awe" and author of "The Fifth Horseman and the New MAD: How Massive Attacks of Disruption Became the Looming Existential Danger to a Divided Nation and the World at Large." Follow him @harlankullman.

The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.

Read more:

If Donald Trump were convicted, Joe Biden would have to consider a pardon - UPI News

The attempted handoff shows just how much former President Donald Trump and his allies tried to lean on Pence to introduce false slates of electors that could have thrown the 2020 election from Biden to Donald Trump. The committee laid out an intense pressure campaign, led primarily by Trump and his attorney Rudy Giuliani, to push state legislatures to appoint pro-Trump electors and override the will of voters in their states.

In video and live testimony, state legislative leaders in Pennsylvania, Arizona and Michigan all Republicans described repeated, sometimes daily pressure from Trump and his allies in the aftermath of the 2020 election. Michigan State Senate leader Mike Shirkey recalled in video testimony how, after Trump tweeted out his phone number, he received thousands of messages from Trump supporters asking him to appoint Michigans electors through the legislature.

Arizona State House speaker Rusty Bowers rejected similar pressure from Trump.

You are asking me to do something that is counter to my oath, he recalled saying.

The panel drew a direct connection between the events of Jan. 6 and the months-long effort by Trump and Giuliani to browbeat state legislative leaders. Even without the compliance of those lawmakers, Trump pushed the Republican National Committee to help identify and coordinate false slates of electors in the states.

In fact, Trump had called RNC Chair Ronna McDaniel and handed the phone to attorney John Eastman, an architect of Trumps plan to remain in power, according to newly revealed video of her testimony to the committee. Eastman urged her to help identify false electors to meet and cast votes for Trump on Dec. 14, 2020, when the legitimate members of the Electoral College were required to meet and vote.

He turned the call over to Mr. Eastman, who then proceeded to talk about the importance of the RNC helping the campaign gather contingent electors in case legal challenges that were ongoing change the result, McDaniel said in video testimony.

Under Trumps plan, Pence would be presented with competing slates of electors the official results certified by the governors and those certified by state legislators and he would assert the extraordinary power to choose which slates to count. But no state legislature responded to Trumps demand, and Pence, without any genuine controversy, rejected the scheme as illegal.

The legality of the plan was at the heart of Tuesday afternoons hearing, led in part by panel member Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.).

The system held, but barely, Schiff said in his opening remarks.

During the hearing, another theme emerged: State legislative leaders pleaded with Trump and Giuliani for any evidence to support their sweeping claims of fraud and irregularities. But Giuliani, while insisting the evidence existed, never provided it. Trump attorneys Cleta Mitchell and Eastman discussed the absence of such evidence in emails on Jan. 2 and Jan. 3.

Asked about the text messages displayed by the select committee, Johnson called it a non-story.

The senator said he was aware that his office had received a package but had no idea who delivered it. Nevertheless, he said his office attempted to facilitate the delivery of the package from Johnson to Pence, but ultimately did not after Pences team rejected it.

I was aware that we got this package and that somebody wanted us to deliver to the vice president, Johnson said. We reached out. They didnt want it, we didnt deliver it.

Johnson said his chief of staff did the right thing by attempting to arrange the delivery, adding that it all took place in a span of a few minutes.

Notably, Johnson held his own hearing on purported election fraud in mid-December 2020 and was accused by Democrats of spreading misinformation.

Trump-aligned lawyers concocted the effort, leaning on fringe constitutional theory and the guidance of Eastman. He acknowledged in emails obtained by the select committee that the Pence plan would be dead on arrival without the backing of state legislatures yet he pushed ahead anyway, suggesting that the confusion around alternate electors would give Pence enough cover to act.

Trumps own White House counsels office also raised doubts about the plan, according to testimony released by the select panel in court filings. And in the days before Jan. 6, Pences chief counsel Greg Jacob engaged in an intense debate with Eastman, contending that not a single justice of the Supreme Court would back his plan a point he said Eastman reluctantly conceded.

Other witnesses testified about Trumps pressure on Tuesday, including Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, whom Trump famously told on Jan. 2, 2021, to help him find the 11,000 votes he needed to win the state. Neither Raffensperger nor GOP legislators in Georgia complied with Trumps push, and his effort in Georgia triggered an ongoing investigation by the Fulton County district attorney.

Members of Trumps inner circle began contemplating the notion of turning to state legislatures even before the election was called for Biden. On Nov. 5, 2020, Mitchell who had been leading preelection preparations for Trumps legal team reached out to Eastman with a request.

John what would you think of producing a legal memo outlining the constitutional role of state legislators in designating electors? Mitchell wondered. Rather than governors, the US Constitution vests that responsibility with state legislators. why couldnt legislatures reclaim that constitutional duty, and designate the electors rather than delegating to governors.

Eastman wrote a memo later that month, which was then forwarded to the Oval Office by Trump campaign attorney Jenna Ellis, according to documents obtained by the Jan. 6 select committee. As Trumps legal challenges to the election began to fail and states began certifying Bidens victory, Eastman began consulting directly with state legislators, encouraging some to simply retabulate their popular votes in order to show Trump in the lead.

The goal was ultimately to present Pence with an apparent controversy: competing slates of electors certified by different government bodies governors and legislators. Jacob, Pences chief counsel, told the vice president at the time that had any state legislatures certified an alternative slate the outcome mightve been different.

A reasonable argument might further be made that when resolving a dispute between competing electoral slates, Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution places a firm thumb on the scale on the side of the State legislature, he wrote in a memo obtained by POLITICO.

Even as rioters swarmed the Capitol on Jan. 6 and sent Pence, Jacob and lawmakers into hiding, Eastman leaned on Pence to single-handedly delay the count of electoral votes, citing the possibility that the Pennsylvania legislature would reconvene and adopt an alternative slate. But Pence and his team came to view the delay as a violation of the law that governs the transfer of power and the counting of electoral votes.

Eastmans correspondence throughout the post-election period, including with another pro-Trump lawyer Kenneth Chesebro, shows the two grappling with the challenge of convincing state legislatures to adopt Trump slates of electors and building it into their plans. The two men helped contemplate the Trump campaigns effort to assemble pro-Trump electors to meet on Dec. 14, 2020, and cast ballots as though they were the true electors from their states. Those false certificates have drawn scrutiny from federal prosecutors. Eastman and other Republicans have contended that those meetings were necessary in case any courts sided with Trump and tipped the outcome in his favor.

Burgess Everett contributed to this report.

See original here:

Ron Johnson tried to hand fake elector info to Mike Pence on Jan. 6, panel reveals - POLITICO

A former president took a shot at another former president when asked a question on a late-night talk show.

What Happened: In an appearance on last weeks Late Late Show With James Corden, former President Bill Clinton was a featured guest.

The economy, international relations and aliens were among the key topics the duo talked about.

Corden also asked Clinton to take part in a segment called Ask a President, which hadmembers of the audience and staff ask the former president questions.

The show, which aired on Paramount Global PARAPARAA owned channel CBS, saw Clinton answer what makes a good leader, what plant-based milk is the best and if we could see a woman president.

Clinton answered yes that we will likely see a woman president, a Latino president and a gay president over the coming years.

Clinton also shared that he drinks almond milk, but it is vodka that is his favorite plant-based drink.

For a question aboutfictional presidents, he answered: I like Tony Goldwyn, I like Martin Sheen, I liked Michael Douglas, I loved Harrison Ford and Morgan Freeman and Donald Trump."

Related Link: 2024 President Election Betting Odds: Is Donald Trump Or Joe Biden The Current Favorite

Why Its Important: Trump served as the 45th president of the U.S. In the 2016 election, Trump defeated Hillary Clinton, the wife of Bill Clinton.

There is a long standing feud between Hillary Clinton and Trump, which likely led to the comments by Clinton on the late night talk show. The rest of the names singled out by Clinton portrayed presidents in movies or on television shows.

Hillary Clinton has ruled out another run for president of the U.S. Neither Trump or current PresidentJoe Biden, the last two presidents, have announced their intentions for the 2024 election, but both are expected to run.

Trump owned Trump Media & Technology Group is working to become a publicly traded company with a pending SPAC merger with Digital World Acquisition Corp DWAC.

Photo:Anthony Correia(Clinton) andEvan El-Amin(Trump) via Shutterstock

More:

Bill Clinton Takes A Shot At Donald Trump: Here's What He Said - Benzinga - Benzinga

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

Robin Rue Simmons: It must start. Thats how you seek reparations. You start.07:45

Rep. Dean: Its a very dangerous time06:18

Watergate vs 1/6: There wasnt really the cult of Nixon as there it the cult of Trump09:27

Rep. Stacey Plaskett: Donald Trump isnt interested in our democracy.06:27

Fmr. Sr. Pence Adviser: Ive been wanting my former boss to come forward05:28

W. Kamau Bell urges men to stand up for abortion rights07:15

Now Playing

Michael Cohen: Donald Trump is the greatest grifter in the history of the United States06:26

UP NEXT

Rep. Debbie Dingell: Dems need to understand election denial is pervasive06:27

Ret. Police Cpt. Sonia Pruitt: Law enforcement not being heard on gun reforms04:58

#VelshiBannedBookClub: Todd Strasser talks Give a Boy a Gun06:35

NH Rep. Annie Kuster: There are Republicans that will that will be shocked06:52

Fmr. Sr Pence advisor: He knew what he was going into on Jan. 6th and he stepped in04:44

Joe Walsh: responsible gun owners should get off of our ass and call for gun reform05:00

Ruth Ben-Ghiat: Coups are fast, violent & take planning. Thats what happened on Jan. 6th05:05

Fmr. Impeachment Manager Rep. Stacey Plaskett: What we alleged was true05:57

Former NRA lobbyist says there is room for compromise on gun legislation06:08

Father of Parkland victim is still fighting for change: We were betrayed06:26

Rep. Krishnamoorthi wants to know what Jared Kushner is up to in Saudi Arabia06:36

Jodi Picoult: Fiction is a really important tool06:54

Jane Harman: Pres. Biden deserves a lot of credit for the renewal of NATO06:20

From Big Lie to Big Rip-off: The Trump campaigns fundraising tactics are in the spotlight this week after the January 6th hearings exposed a fake Official Election Defense Fund that raised $250 million to pay for legal fees to overturn the 2020 presidential election results. Michael Cohen, Donald Trumps former personal attorney, host of Mea Culpa, and principal at Crisis-X, tells Michael Steele that Trump is a menace. Its sad to see that there are so many people out there that have so much faith in him, after they see exactly what is going on.June 18, 2022

UP NEXT

Robin Rue Simmons: It must start. Thats how you seek reparations. You start.07:45

Rep. Dean: Its a very dangerous time06:18

Watergate vs 1/6: There wasnt really the cult of Nixon as there it the cult of Trump09:27

Rep. Stacey Plaskett: Donald Trump isnt interested in our democracy.06:27

Fmr. Sr. Pence Adviser: Ive been wanting my former boss to come forward05:28

W. Kamau Bell urges men to stand up for abortion rights07:15

Original post:

Michael Cohen: Donald Trump is the greatest grifter in the history of the United States - MSNBC

Former President Donald Trump lashed out at Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) on Friday during a speech at a Faith and Freedom event in Nashville, Tennessee.

"For the radical left, politics has become their religion," Trump said. "It has warped their sense of right and wrong. They don't have a sense of right and wrong, true and false, good and evil. You saw the Russia, Russia hoax that we all went through for 2.5 years. I watched this Adam Schiff the other day. Shifty Schiff, this guy is nothing. He's nothing -- we call him watermelon head."

"I'll never forget when this guy, he knew it was a fake story," the former president continued. "I'll never forget when he stood up at the microphone and said Donald Trump Jr. will go to prison. Think of this. Donald Trump Jr. will go to prison for what he has done to our country and for his relationship with Russia. And I said, what the hell is going on?"

During the 2016 election, Trump's campaign had numerous contacts with Russia. Aides sought to arrange a meeting between Trump and Putin. Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak met Trump briefly in a campaign event and met other advisers during the July Republican convention.

Some campaign associates communicated with WikiLeaks over its publication of damaging Democratic communications allegedly hacked by Russian intelligence.

Campaign chairman Paul Manafort offered to brief oligarch Oleg Deripaska, a Putin ally, on the election, and gave campaign polling data to a Russian business associate with intelligence ties.

And top campaign officials met a Russian lawyer who had offered them dirt on Clinton. Later both sides insisted they only discussed Putin's ban on American adoptions of Russian orphans.

"The meeting, which took place at Trump Tower in New York City on June 9, 2016 was pitched to Trump Jr. as the opportunity for members ofTrump's presidential campaign to receive damaging informationabout Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton from Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya," NBC News reporeted.

After Trump's election victory, in back-channel talks with Kislyak, his future national security advisor Michael Flynn allegedly promised Moscow that Trump would lift sanctions after he takes office despite Russia's election meddling.

Watch video below:

Excerpt from:

Trump enraged that Trump Jr. might go down with him - Salon