Donald Trump

Subterms

    More stories

    • 175 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump asked May at debut meeting why Boris Johnson was not PM, book says

      by

      Trump asked May at debut meeting why Boris Johnson was not PM, book saysFormer president reportedly asked indelicate question at White House in January 2017 when Johnson was foreign secretary In his first White House meeting with a major foreign leader, Donald Trump asked Theresa May: “Why isn’t Boris Johnson the prime minister? Didn’t he want the job?”Kushner camping tale one of many bizarre scenes in latest Trump bookRead moreAt the time, the notoriously ambitious Johnson was foreign secretary. He became prime minister two years later, in 2019, after May was forced to resign.May’s response to the undiplomatic question is not recorded in Confidence Man: The Making of Donald Trump and the Breaking of America, a new book by the New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman which will be published next week. The Guardian obtained a copy.Eagerly awaited, Haberman’s book has been extensively trailed. Sensational stories revealed include startling instances of Trump’s racism and transphobia and his attempt to order the bombing of drug labs in Mexico.Trump’s presidency would begin, proceed and end in chaos but in January 2017, Britain’s May was seen to have achieved an important diplomatic success by being the first foreign leader to visit Trump in the White House.Describing the meeting, Haberman cites “extensive notes of the discussion” as she reports that “for May, getting Trump to focus on any issue was impossible”.The new president, Haberman writes, bragged about the White House and talked about both the size of the crowd for his inauguration and the Women’s March, a huge national protest against him.Trump also treated May to a discourse on abortion, a hugely divisive issue in the US but less so in Britain.“Abortion is such a tough issue,” Trump said, unprompted. “Some people are pro-life, some people are pro-choice. Imagine if some animals with tattoos raped your daughter and she got pregnant?”Haberman says Trump pointed to his vice-president, Mike Pence, saying “He’s the really tough one on abortion”, then asked May “whether she was pro-life”.Again, May’s response is not reported.Trump then asked about Johnson. The former London mayor’s ambition to be prime minister was well-known, the defection of a key ally, Michael Gove, having torpedoed his hopes of succeeding David Cameron after the Brexit vote in 2016, effectively handing the job to May.Trump, Haberman writes, told the prime minister it sounded like she had a “team of rivals” – the title of a famous book about Abraham Lincoln’s cabinet – but said he could not pursue such a course.“John Kasich wanted to work for me after the election, but I couldn’t do that,” Trump said, referring to the former Ohio governor who opposed him in 2016 and after.Haberman says Northern Ireland was also discussed, though Trump “appeared to get bored” and instead talked about an offshore wind farm near one of his Scottish golf courses.He also reportedly asked if immigration had been a major factor in the Brexit vote and criticised European leaders.Telling May “crime is way up in Germany”, Trump brought up rape a second time, claiming “women are getting raped all over the place” and predicting Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, would lose an election that year.In this instance May’s response is reported: Haberman says the prime minister “contradicted” Trump, “saying that Merkel, in fact, was Europe’s best politician”.Elsewhere, Haberman reports that Trump called Merkel “that bitch”.How Donald Trump’s hand-holding led to panicky call home by Theresa MayRead moreIn the Oval Office, Haberman says, May pivoted to “one of her primary interests for the conversation – sanctions against Russia and whether Trump planned to discuss them with [Vladimir] Putin”.Told by aides he was scheduled to speak to the Russian president the next day, Trump complained that he had not yet done so, cited Russia’s nuclear arsenal and said: “I need to talk to this guy … this isn’t the Congo.”Haberman also reports what happened when president and prime minister left the Oval Office and took the steps to the White House colonnade: “appearing to need to steady himself”, Trump took May by the hand.The move caused controversy. Citing Guardian reporting, Haberman recounts the prime minister’s “bewilderment” and a call to her husband to “explain why she was holding another man’s hand”.“He just grabbed it,” May told aides. “What can I do?”TopicsBooksDonald TrumpUS politicsTheresa MayBoris JohnsonnewsReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Kushner camping tale one of many bizarre scenes in latest Trump book

      by

      Kushner camping tale one of many bizarre scenes in latest Trump book Confidence Man by Maggie Haberman reveals racism, transphobia and ignorance from ex-president’s time in powerIn a meeting supposedly about campaign strategy in the 2020 election, Donald Trump implied his son-in-law and senior adviser, Jared Kushner, might be brutally attacked, even raped, should he ever go camping.Trump asked May at debut meeting why Boris Johnson was not PM, book saysRead more“Ivanka wants to rent one of those big RVs,” Trump told bemused aides, according to a new book by Maggie Haberman of the New York Times, before gesturing to his daughter’s husband.“This skinny guy wants to do it. Can you imagine Jared and his skinny ass camping? It’d be like something out of Deliverance.”According to Haberman, Trump then “made noises mimicking the banjo theme song from the 1972 movie about four men vacationing in rural Georgia who are attacked, pursued and in one case brutally raped by a local resident”.The bizarre scene is just one of many in Confidence Man: The Making of Donald Trump and the Breaking of America, which will be published next week. The Guardian obtained a copy.The book has been extensively trailed. Headlines drawn from it have concerned Trump’s racism (he thought Black White House staffers were waiters); his transphobia (he asked if a notional young questioner was “cocked or uncocked”); and his belligerent ignorance (he mistook a health aide for a military adviser because he wore uniform, and asked if he could bomb Mexican drug labs).Trump’s undiplomatic crudity has also been put on display. According to Haberman, he asked the British prime minister, Theresa May, to “imagine if some animals with tattoos raped your daughter and she got pregnant” and called Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, “that bitch”.In other shocking scenes, Trump is reported to have said he could not afford to alienate white supremacists because “a lot of these people vote”, and to have been called a fascist by John Kelly, his second chief of staff.Haberman also writes that when the liberal supreme court justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg was battling cancer, Trump sarcastically prayed for her health and asked: “How much longer do you think she has?”Haberman even reports that Trump may have called a Democratic congresswoman, pretending to be a Washington Post reporter and angling for comments about himself.The story about Trump mocking Kushner’s suitability for outdoor pursuits, meanwhile, is of a piece with other scenes in which Trump is shown to mock and belittle his son-in-law.According to Haberman, Trump criticised Kushner for observing religious customs (“‘Fucking Shabbat,’ Trump groused, asking no one in particular if his Jewish son-in-law was really religious or just avoiding work”) and for being effete.“He sounds like a child,” Trump is said to have commented in 2017, after Kushner spoke to reporters following an appearance before a congressional committee.In a scene which echoes the former Trump aide Peter Navarro’s description of an abortive campaign coup against Kushner, Trump is also shown resolving to fire Kushner and his wife, Ivanka Trump, by tweet – but being talked out of doing so.Trump’s political career has generated a stream of books by Washington reporters and tell-alls by ex-White House staffers. Nonetheless, Confidence Man is eagerly awaited, touted as “the book Trump fears most”.Haberman has covered Trump since his days as a New York property magnate, reality TV host and celebrity political blowhard. Known in some circles as “the Trump whisperer”, she was even seen taking calls from the then president in a documentary about the Times, The Fourth Estate, which was released in 2018.Having written countless scoops about the Trump White House, Haberman has continued to cover a post-presidency in which Trump has maintained control of the Republican party while seemingly plotting another campaign, having escaped being brought to account over the January 6 insurrection.The Divider review: riveting narrative of Trump’s plot against AmericaRead moreLike other authors of Trump books, Haberman draws on interviews with the former president. As with other authors, Trump appears to have enjoyed the process. At one point, Haberman writes, he “turned to the two aides he had sitting in on our interview, gestured toward me with his hand, and said, ‘I love being with her; she’s like my psychiatrist.’”But such comfort may have prompted Trump to reveal more than might have been advised.In one exchange that has excited widespread comment, Trump admitted taking classified material from the White House – a decision now the source of considerable legal jeopardy.In light of the FBI search of Mar-a-Lago on 8 August, some observers have questioned whether Haberman should have reported Trump’s admission immediately or even alerted the Department of Justice.Most of Haberman’s reporting, however, has been greeted with familiar glee, not least the opening salvo of her pre-publication campaign: a picture of presidential documents torn up and put down a toilet.TopicsBooksDonald TrumpTrump administrationUS politicsUS press and publishingNew York TimesNewspapersnewsReuse this content More

    • 175 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Secret Service took phones from 24 agents involved in January 6 response – report

      by

      Secret Service took phones from 24 agents involved in January 6 response – reportPhones reportedly confiscated amid criminal investigation about missing text messages from January 5 and 6 US Secret Service leaders confiscated cellphones from 24 agents involved in the response to the Capitol attack amid a criminal investigation about missing text messages from 5 and 6 January 2021, according to a new report.Citing “two sources with knowledge of the action”, NBC News said the phones were handed to Joseph Cuffari, the Department of Homeland Security inspector general, in late July or early August, shortly after Cuffari launched an investigation requested by the National Archives.Hurricane Ian barrels towards Florida as officials warn of looming catastrophe – liveRead more“One source familiar with the Secret Service decision to comply with Cuffari’s request said some agents were upset their leaders were quick to confiscate the phones without their input,” NBC reported. “But given that the phones belong to the agency … the agents had little say in the matter.”The Secret Service did not immediately comment. Cuffari’s office said it would not confirm or comment on the investigation.In July, Cuffari told Congress Secret Service text messages from 5 January 2021, the day before Trump supporters attacked the Capitol, and 6 January had been erased despite an oversight request.The resulting tussle between the Trump-appointed official and the House January 6 committee and made dramatic headlines.Investigators have since secured access to chats and emails between agents on security details for Donald Trump and Mike Pence.The committee is seeking to establish how the Secret Service moved Trump and his vice-president – and why – as the Capitol attack unfolded.Testimony has described how Trump struggled with one member of his security detail, as he was moved to the White House instead of going to the Capitol with his supporters.The committee has also been told how Pence’s detail moved him through the Capitol as rioters broke in with some chanting “Hang Mike Pence” as a gallows was erected outside.An unnamed security official said: “The members of the VP detail were starting to fear for their own lives. There was a lot of yelling. There were a lot of very personal calls over the radio … there were calls to say goodbye to family members … for whatever reason it was on the ground, the VP detail thought this was about to get very ugly.“… It sounds like we came very close to either Service having to use lethal options or worse.”In July, referring to controversy over the missing texts and friction between the House committee and Secret Service officials, the presidential historian Michael Beschloss tweeted: “For all of those … agents who seem to love and venerate Trump, look at how he did nothing to defend Mike Pence’s agents on January 6 as they called their frightened families to say goodbye forever.”The rioters were attempting to stop certification of Joe Biden’s election victory, a process overseen by the vice-president. Pence reportedly resisted Secret Service attempts to remove him from the Capitol.In their book I Alone Can Fix It: Donald J Trump’s Catastrophic Final Year, Carol Leonnig and Philip Rucker of the Washington Post said Pence refused to get into a car.A Pence aide, Keith Kellogg, reportedly told Tony Ornato, the head of Trump’s detail who became deputy White House chief of staff, Pence had “a job to do” and was going to stay at the Capitol “if he has to wait there all night”.Pence ultimately presided over the certification in the small hours of 7 January.TopicsSecret ServiceUS politicsDonald TrumpnewsReuse this content More

    • 125 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      House January 6 committee postpones public hearing, citing Hurricane Ian

      by

      House January 6 committee postpones public hearing, citing Hurricane IanStorm bearing down on Florida nixes session that had been expected to feature footage of Trump ally Roger Stone The House January 6 select committee announced that it would postpone what was expected to be its final investigative hearing scheduled for Wednesday over concerns about a hurricane and as it considers how best to present a number of unresolved questions surrounding the US Capitol attack.McConnell endorses bipartisan bill to prevent efforts to overturn US elections Read more“In light of Hurricane Ian bearing down on parts of Florida, we have decided to postpone tomorrow’s proceedings,” the panel’s chairman Bennie Thompson and the vice-chair Liz Cheney said in a joint statement. “We’re praying for the safety of all those in the storm’s path.”The hurricane is forecast to reach category 4 and make landfall on Florida’s gulf coast around the time the hearing is scheduled to begin in Washington, bringing hurricane-force winds and major flooding around the Tampa area, which has not suffered a direct hit from a major storm since 1921.That was not the optimal time to be holding the hearing, sources close to the investigation said: members felt it was insensitive to have a hearing during a potential natural disaster, while television coverage of the findings surrounding Donald Trump would probably be diminished.And at least one of the select committee’s members, Stephanie Murphy, had communicated that she was unable and unwilling to leave her Florida district at a time of a statewide crisis to make a rehearsal the night before the hearing, the sources said.The panel had not disclosed the topics it intended to cover in the hearing – expected to be the final “investigative” hearing, though the select committee could hold another around the time it releases its final report and makes recommendations to prevent future repeats of the 6 January 2021 events.But the select committee was expected to focus at least in part on how Trump political operatives planned to declare victory in the 2020 election regardless of the actual outcome, through court battles and other extrajudicial means to secure Trump a second term, the sources said.The select committee was also expected at the hearing to play several short clips from a documentary by Danish film-makers who captured on camera Trump operative Roger Stone predicting violent clashes over the election results months before it took place.It was not immediately clear what date the hearing, which was originally slated for Wednesday at 1pm, would be rescheduled for, though one of the sources suggested sometime in October. The panel said in the statement: “We will soon announce a date for the postponed proceedings.”The hearing is supposed to mark the winding down of the investigative phase of the select committee’s work, though several pressing issues remain unresolved since the panel last convened in July and made the case that Trump violated the law in refusing to call off the Capitol attack.Among them is whether there existed an indubitable through-line from the former president to operatives such as Stone and Michael Flynn, who were in close contact with the far-right extremist groups – including the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers – since indicted for seditious conspiracy over the insurrection.The select committee has found some circumstantial evidence about such ties and previously revealed that Trump directed his then White House chief of staff, Mark Meadows, to call Stone and Flynn the night before as the extremist groups finalized their plans for the day.Another issue for House investigators is whether Trump’s ouster of former defense secretary Mark Esper was an effort to install a loyalist in his place, one who might have had no objection to using the national guard to seize voting machines or delay their deployment to stop the Capitol attack.Republican ex-congressman suggests colleagues ‘had serious cognitive issues’Read moreThe panel has viewed the plot to seize voting machines – suggested by Flynn during a contentious White House meeting in December 2020, hours before Trump sent a tweet urging his supporters to attend a “wild protest” on 6 January 2021 – as a crucial moment in the timeline.House investigators have also spent time in recent weeks examining Microsoft Teams chats and emails sent between Secret Service agents on security details for Trump and former vice-president Mike Pence that day, as well as discussions about invoking martial law even after the riot.The select committee has also debated in private about how best to highlight other information that it has uncovered, with the members differing on what to present in made-for-television hearings that might reach a broader audience than the contents of a report published later this year.The final stages of its investigation is also playing out against a shifting political situation that could impact how the select committee moves next, including on the question of whether to subpoena Trump himself, as Democrats contemplate potentially losing the House in the midterms in November.TopicsJanuary 6 hearingsUS Capitol attackHouse of RepresentativesUS politicsExtreme weatherLiz CheneyDonald TrumpnewsReuse this content More

    • 175 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      My donations are principled – unlike the Democrats who support Maga candidates | Letter

      by

      My donations are principled – unlike the Democrats who support Maga candidatesKenneth C Griffin defends his financial support for politicians and attacks ‘hypocritical and cynical’ spending by Democrats to influence Republican primaries Robert Reich (History will judge Republicans who stay silent about the big lie, 11 September) criticises me and others who have supported Republican candidates.Conspicuously, Mr Reich fails to make the same criticism of Democratic donors. Across the country, the Democratic party and its affiliates have given generously to support Maga candidates again and again. In Illinois, for example, the billionaire Democratic governor JB Pritzker and the Democratic Governors Association just spent $35 million to promote the Maga credentials of one Republican candidate. The transparent strategy was engineered to defeat a moderate Republican candidate. This is politics at its most hypocritical and cynical.I proudly spend money to support politicians whose ideas, I believe, will secure a better future for America – and encourage others to do the same. I have supported politicians from both parties who are focused on education, thoughtful economic policies, crime prevention and national security. I will continue to use my resources to support the men and women who work to stop foolish policies that are destroying lives, devastating communities and weakening America.If my actions in the public arena can play a small role in better educating our children, making our cities safer, and creating a thriving economy that rewards hard work by all, I’m more than happy to be judged on these results. I would submit that the issues of education, safety, and economic prosperity are far more important to ordinary Americans – and to the future of democracy – than Mr Reich’s partisan attacks.Kenneth C GriffinChief executive officer, CitadelTopicsRepublicansUS politicsDemocratsDonald TrumplettersReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      DoJ pushes back on Trump’s claims it planted evidence at Mar-a-Lago

      by

      DoJ pushes back on Trump’s claims it planted evidence at Mar-a-Lago Agency files slightly amended list of seized materials and an affidavit that the list reflects what was taken during search The Department of Justice has pushed back on the unsubstantiated claims from Donald Trump that the agency planted evidence during its search of Mar-a-Lago, submitting a slightly amended list of seized materials and an affidavit that the list reflects what was taken during the 8 August search.The FBI submitted a first version of the inventory list several weeks ago. It only had one business day to compile the first list but had more time to submit the most recent version, reported CNN.The agency also said that, in the updated version, it filtered out potentially privileged items.“I am not aware of any documents or materials seized from the Premises on that date by the FBI that are not reflected in the Revised Detailed Property Inventory … other than materials that the Privilege Review Team has not provided to the Case Team,” wrote an FBI agent in the affidavit.The unnamed agent noted that changes between the two versions were “minor”.Judge Raymond Dearie, the special master appointed to review the documents case, requested that the FBI submit an inventory to provide a “full and accurate” picture of what was obtained in the search.Dearie’s request came after Trump and several allies claimed, without evidence, that the FBI planted items during its search of the Florida mansion.Dearie has given Trump’s lawyers until Friday to provide any evidence to back up the accusation that the agency is “incorrectly describing” any materials. “This submission shall be Plaintiff’s final opportunity to raise any factual dispute as to the completeness and accuracy of the Detailed Property Inventory,” Dearie wrote.TopicsDonald TrumpMar-a-LagoUS politicsFBInewsReuse this content More

    • 200 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      January 6 changed America. Here are two directions the country could go now | Thomas Zimmer

      by

      January 6 changed America. Here are two directions the country could go nowThomas ZimmerWhether or not the assault on the Capitol actually failed is yet to be determined As the January 6 hearings are about to resume, it is unlikely that our basic understanding of what happened between the 2020 presidential election and the attack on the Capitol will significantly change. That is a testament to the crucial work the Committee has already done and to which we owe much of our detailed knowledge of the weeks long, multi-level coup attempt and the evolving strategies of those involved in this deliberate campaign to nullify the election results, prevent the transfer of power and end constitutional government in America.And yet, the Committee’ job is far from done. It still has an important role to play in determining the meaning and role of January 6 in US history. Was the attack on the US Capitol a failed, desperate, last-ditch effort by delusional extremists? Or will it be remembered as a milestone in America’s accelerating descent into authoritarianism – an assault on the system that didn’t succeed initially but played a key role in democracy’s demise? The answer to these questions is not decided by facts and past events. In a very real sense, January 6 isn’t over yet, and the success or failure of the Trumpian coup attempt will be decided by what happens next.If that sounds counter-intuitive, it is helpful to examine how the meaning of another infamous historical event to which January 6 has often been compared – the Beer Hall Putsch, Adolf Hitler’s failed coup attempt in November 1923 – changed significantly over time. Hitler and his Nazi Party wanted to emulate the “March on Rome,” which had resulted in Benito Mussolini rising to power and installing a fascist regime in Italy in October 1922. The plan was to unite far-right factions and the military in Munich and then march on Berlin and establish a new government under national-socialist lead. Hitler and his allies were certain that the Weimar Republic, which had been founded just five years earlier in the wake of the German Empire’s crushing defeat in World War I, was ripe for the taking. This remarkable democratic experiment had indeed been under pressure from the start, never more so than in 1923, when a French and Belgian military occupation of the Ruhr area, Germany’s industrial center, hyper-inflation, economic collapse, and a steep rise in unemployment all contributed to a deep political crisis.The Beer Hall Putsch, however, was unable to capitalize on this situation – it was a rather dilettantish affair. The Bavarian Right did not unite behind the attempted coup, the military did not join, and the march of about 2,000 supporters on the Feldherrenhalle in Munich’s city center on November 9 ended quickly when police forces opened fire, leaving four police officers and 16 putschists dead.In the context of the current political situation in the US, what happened after the Beer Hall Putsch seems to serve as an important warning. Hitler was arrested and charged with high treason. But because the judges were rather sympathetic to his political project and inclined to lend credence to his version of the events, in which he presented himself as a true patriot who tried to save the nation, he got off easy: he was sentenced to just five years in prison and was granted significant comforts and privileges. Due to good conduct, he was set free before the end of 1924, having spent less than nine months behind bars. It was during his time in prison that he dictated the first volume of Mein Kampf. Just a few years later, on January 30, 1933, Hitler was installed as Chancellor and immediately started dismantling what was left of the Weimar democracy. As America is debating what to do with Donald Trump, the message seems clear: this is what happens when extremists who attack the republic aren’t held to account.From a historical perspective, it is important to emphasize that there are rarely any clear-cut lessons to be learned from the past, and presenting past events as perfect analogies is always reductionist and problematic. Twenty-first century America is not Weimar Germany, history doesn’t repeat itself, and it doesn’t unfold according to abstract, generalizable rules. While it may sound like a cliché, context really matters.However, it is still instructive to examine the dynamics that shaped and, most importantly, changed the meaning of the Beer Hall Putsch. Initially, it very much looked like it was going to be a cautionary tale – for extremists who believed they could take the republic down with little effort. So disastrous was the failure that the far-right political project was significantly compromised for years, Hitler and his party disappeared from the scene. Most importantly, the Weimar Republic stabilized after 1923. It always remained in a somewhat precarious state, but there is no direct line from 1923 to 1933, or from Hitler escaping serious punishment to his rise as dictator. What brought Weimar down was not the sins of 1923, but the completely changed political and economic landscape in the wake of the Global Depression in the early 1930s.Hitler was allowed to rise to power in 1933 because a significant part of Germany’s conservative elites was all too willing to make common cause with the Nazis in order to keep the Left in check. And when this happened, the Beer Hall Putsch’s role in German history changed. Yes, it had clearly failed initially, but it still played a key role in Weimar’s fall, as it had contributed to the mystique surrounding Hitler, and the subsequent trial had allowed him to build his national profile, to propagate the idea that he was defending the true nation. The meaning of the Hitler Putsch wasn’t determined by the facts of 1923, but by democracy’s fall thereafter.What is the meaning of January 6? There are signs that the attack on the Capitol might ultimately play a crucial role in galvanizing the pro-democracy forces in America, in getting more people – starting with the leaders of the Democratic Party – to grapple honestly with the anti-democratic radicalization of the Republican party, in sparking a mobilization of civil society in the defense of constitutional government. In this scenario, January 6 could mark an important moment in an intensified push towards finally realizing the promise of egalitarian, multiracial, pluralistic democracy.There is another scenario, however – one in which democracy does not hold. In this scenario, January 6 didn’t accomplish its immediate goal, but still served as a catalyst for the radicalization of the Republican party, a rallying cry for the Far-Right more generally, and a milestone on the path towards democracy’s eventual downfall. This scenario does not just hinge on what happens to Donald Trump personally, but also on whether or not the party that first elevated and then stuck with him will actually have to face electoral consequences. January 6 has undoubtedly accelerated the process of ostracizing everyone who is not on board with openly embracing the authoritarian assault on the political system from the Republican ranks, and we must expect a significant shift towards the conspiratorial Right in Congress after the mid-term elections. The result is a Republican party that is fully committed to the core principles of Trumpism and, specifically, to the idea that Democratic election victories must never be accepted, that Democratic governance is fundamentally illegitimate. If a party defined by Trumpism (with or without Trump) is allowed to entrench its power on the federal level and potentially take the presidency in 2024, then January 6, the ideology behind it, the political project of maintaining established hierarchies and white Christian patriarchal dominance by whatever means, ultimately succeeded.What is the meaning of January 6? What is its place in US history? We don’t know yet, because January 6 won’t be over for quite some time. For now, it is crucial that America’s pro-democracy forces grapple with the fact that we are quickly running out of time to force the answers we desire.
      Thomas Zimmer is a visiting professor at Georgetown University, focused on the history of democracy and its discontents in the United States, and a Guardian US contributing opinion writer
      TopicsJanuary 6 hearingsOpinionDonald TrumpUS politicscommentReuse this content More

    • 163 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Meadows was central to hundreds of texts about overturning 2020 election, book says

      by

      Meadows was central to hundreds of texts about overturning 2020 election, book saysMessages include group chat among cabinet officials and plans by lawmakers to object to election certification Mark Meadows, Donald Trump’s former White House chief of staff, was at the center of hundreds of incoming messages about ways to aid Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election results, according to texts he turned over to the House January 6 select committee that have been published in a new book.The texts included previously unreported messages, including a group chat with Trump administration cabinet officials and plans to object to Joe Biden’s election certification on January 6 by Republican members of Congress and one former US attorney, as well as other Trump allies.The book, The Breach, was obtained by the Guardian in advance of its scheduled publication on Tuesday. Written by the former Republican congressman and senior adviser to the investigation Denver Riggleman, the work has already become controversial after being condemned by the panel as “unauthorized”.Though most of the texts sent to and from Meadows that Riggleman includes have been public for months, the book offers new insight and fills some gaps about how all three branches of government were seemingly involved in strategizing ways to obstruct the congressional certification on January 6.Less than an hour after the election was called for Biden, for instance, Rick Perry, Trump’s former energy secretary, texted a group chat that included Meadows; the housing secretary, Ben Carson; and the agriculture secretary, Sonny Perdue, that Trump should dispute the call.“POTUS line should be: Biden says hes [sic] president. America will see what big data says,” Perry wrote. “This sets the stage for what we’re about to prove.” While Carson was more cautious, Perdue appeared unconcerned about seeing concrete proof of election fraud. “No quit!” he wrote.White House switchboard called phone linked to January 6 rioter after attackRead moreThe former president’s final White House chief of staff also fielded a text from the Republican senator Kevin Cramer, who forwarded a note from North Dakota’s then US attorney, Drew Wrigley, who offered his own advice for overturning the results because “Trump’s legal team has made a joke of this whole thing”.“Demand state wide recount of absentee/mail-in ballots in line with pre-existing state law with regard to signature comparisons,” Wrigley wrote. “If state officials refuse that recount, the legislature would then act under the constitution, selecting the slate of electors.”The suggestion from Wrigley echoed what the Trump legal team would ultimately pursue in having fake electors sent to Congress on January 6 to have the then vice-president, Mike Pence, refuse to certify Biden’s win – a scheme now part of a criminal investigation by the US attorney in Washington DC.The text from Wrigley is significant since the justice department is supposed to remain above the political fray. Wrigley’s note appears to mark an instance of a federal prosecutor endorsing a legally dubious scheme when there was no fraud sufficient to alter the outcome of the 2020 election.A justice department spokesman could not immediately be reached for comment. Wrigley, now the North Dakota state attorney general, also could not be immediately reached for comment.Texts to Meadows also show Republican lawmakers started to finalize objections to the certification of the 2020 election only hours after Trump sent a tweet about a “big protest” that the House January 6 committee has said mobilized far-right groups to make preparations to storm the Capitol.The former president sent the pivotal tweet in the early hours of 19 December 2020. The panel previously described it as the catalyst that triggered the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers groups, as well as “Stop the Steal” activists, to target obstructing the certification.But the tweet also coincided with efforts by Republican lawmakers to finalize objections to the congressional certification of Joe Biden’s election win, new texts from some of Trump’s most ardent supporters on Capitol Hill sent to Meadows show.Hours after Trump sent his tweet, according to texts published in the book, the Republican congressman Jody Hice messaged Meadows to say he would be “leading” his state’s “electoral college objection on Jan 6” – days before Trump is known to have met with Republicans at the White House to discuss it.The congressman also told Meadows that Trump “spoke” with Marjorie Taylor Greene, a far-right Republican who had been elected to a House seat in Georgia but had yet to be sworn in, and was interested in meeting with the ultra-conservative House Freedom Caucus.Hice’s messages to Meadows came at a critical juncture: it was the Saturday after a contentious Friday meeting at the White House, where Trump entertained seizing voting machines and installing a conspiracy theorist lawyer, Sidney Powell, as special counsel to investigate election fraud.The meeting to discuss objecting to Biden’s win on January 6 was originally scheduled for the next Monday, 21 December 2020, but it was rescheduled to take place on the next Tuesday, according to the book, citing additional messages sent by the Republican congressman Brian Babin.Nine days after the meeting with Trump, the Republican members of Congress seemed to finish their objection plans, and Babin texted Meadows to say the “objectors” would be having an additional strategy session at the Conservative Partnership Institute, which played host to other January 6 efforts.The timing of the new texts to Meadows raised the prospect that Trump’s tweet moved ahead several plans that worked in concert, with the Republican objections about supposed fraud giving Pence a pretext to throw out Biden votes as rioters obstructed proceedings.TopicsTrump administrationDonald TrumpUS elections 2020US politicsnewsReuse this content More