Steve Bannon

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      Steve Bannon’s criminal contempt of Congress trial set to begin

      by

      Steve Bannon’s criminal contempt of Congress trial set to beginFormer Trump adviser refused to comply with Capitol attack subpoena for documents and testimony related to January 6 A federal criminal trial is set to begin on Monday to determine whether Steve Bannon, the influential former adviser to Donald Trump, broke the law by refusing to comply with a subpoena for documents and testimony by the panel investigating the January 6 attack on the Capitol.Last fall, the congressional committee investigating the deadly Capitol riots subpoenaed Bannon to sit for a deposition and to provide a wide range of documents related to the events of January 6. Bannon refused to comply. The committee cited him for contempt and referred him to the US justice department for prosecution in October of last year. Too old to run again? Biden faces questions about his age as crises mountRead moreThe justice department pursued the referral, and a federal grand jury indicted Bannon on two counts of contempt of Congress, both misdemeanors, in November. It is extremely rare for the justice department to pursue such charges – before Bannon, the last contempt prosecution was in 1983. Bannon faces between 30 days and a year in prison if convicted on each charge.Bannon, whom Trump fired from the White House in August of 2017, has emerged as a powerful conservative voice since leaving the White House, and his podcast, War Room, has become a must-stop for those on the political right. He has used it to stoke baseless conspiracy theories about the 2020 election and began outlining how Trump could try to overturn the elections starting in September 2020.Days in advance, Bannon predicted that Trump would declare himself the winner on election night and take advantage of confusion that would result as Democrats picked up votes because of mail-in ballots that were counted after in person votes. Trump wound up doing exactly that.The committee said in its contempt report that Bannon appeared to have “some foreknowledge” of what would happen on 6 January. It has also said that Bannon and Trump spoke twice on 5 January. “All hell is going to break loose tomorrow,” Bannon said on a podcast after the first call. “It’s all converging and now we’re on the point of attack tomorrow.”In the leadup to the attack, Bannon was also was present at the Willard hotel, the nucleus of Trump’s legal efforts to overturn the 2020 election.Bannon is the first former Trump administration official to face a criminal trial for refusing to participate in the January 6 probe. From the moment he was indicted, he has pledged to fight the charges, saying on his podcast recently he was going “medieval” and would “savage his enemies”. But Bannon has suffered a number of defeats in the leadup to the trial as US district court Judge Carl J Nichols, a Trump appointee, has blocked many of Bannon’s main defenses.“What’s the point of going to trial if we don’t have any defences?” David Schoen, one of Bannon’s lawyers, said at a recent hearing. Nichols replied by simply by saying “agreed”.Nichols’s ruling stripped Bannon of some of his key defenses, including that he had been relying on the advice of his lawyer when he defied the subpoena. Bannon’s lawyers have also claimed that Trump invoked executive privilege to shield Bannon from compliance, but it’s not clear that Trump did so and whether or not a former president has the power to grant such protection to someone not serving in government. The Trump lawyer Justin Clark told Bannon’s attorney in a letter that he didn’t believe Bannon was immune from testimony.After the rulings, the only defenses that appear to remain for Bannon is that he might have somehow misunderstood the deadline to respond to the subpoena, and that he did not think he had defied the subpoena because the select committee told him in a letter after the deadline that they hoped he might still cooperate with the investigation.Bannon has maneuvered to try to delay the trial, citing the publicity of the committee’s public hearings and by recently offering to testify before the panel. Prosecutors argued the move was an attempt to put off the trial. Bannon had also attempted to call prominent Democrats, including Nancy Pelosi, as witnesses in his case, but Nichols’s rulings appear to make it more difficult for him to do so.Government prosecutors have said it will take them just a day to put on their case. Bannon’s lawyers have said their defense could take weeks.Federal prosecutors are also pursuing contempt charges against Peter Navarro, another ex-Trump administration official. Like Bannon, Navarro has pleaded not guilty.Hugo Lowell contributed to this reportTopicsUS politicsSteve BannonJanuary 6 hearingsUS Capitol attacknewsReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Steve Bannon admitted Trump ‘would lie about anything’, new book says

      by

      Steve Bannon admitted Trump ‘would lie about anything’, new book saysBannon, according to Jonathan Lemire’s Big Lie, said Trump lies ‘to win whatever exchange he [is] having at that moment’ The former White House strategist Steve Bannon has publicly claimed Donald Trump does not lie. But according to a new book, Bannon told aides: “Trump would say anything, he would lie about anything.”‘Game over’: Steve Bannon audio reveals Trump planned to claim early victoryRead moreThe former president lies “to win whatever exchange he [is] having at that moment”, Bannon said.Bannon is quoted in The Big Lie: Election Chaos, Political Opportunism, and the State of American Politics After 2020, by Jonathan Lemire, White House bureau chief for Politico and a host for MSNBC. The book will be published on 26 July. The Guardian obtained a copy.Lemire’s title refers to Trump’s lie, supported by Bannon, that his 2020 election defeat by Joe Biden was the result of electoral fraud. That lie fueled the attempt to overturn the election that culminated in the deadly Capitol attack of 6 January 2021.A far-right gadfly and provocateur, Bannon managed Trump’s winning campaign in 2016 then spent less than a year in the White House before being fired.A source for numerous books about Trump – even saying he believed Trump had early stage dementia – he returned to the 45th president’s inner circle to play a central role in his attempt to stay in power.This week, Mother Jones published audio recorded three days before polling day in which Bannon told associates Trump planned to “just declare victory” on election night.Trump did not do so but Bannon continued to work to keep the president in power.Lemire reports that Bannon promised January 6, the day when congress certifies electoral college results and therefore “an obscure date, known only by a few political junkies … would [come to] be ‘known the world over’”.On January 6, Trump told supporters to “fight like hell” and to march on the Capitol. Authorities have linked nine deaths to the riot that followed. More than 870 people have been charged, some with seditious conspiracy.Bannon’s role in Trump’s attempt to stay in power, including links to far-right groups including the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers, is of central interest to the House January 6 committee.Bannon refused to comply with a subpoena. He has since offered to testify but jury selection in his trial for contempt of Congress – a charge which can carry jail time – is scheduled for Monday.Bannon escaped another brush with the law at the very end of Trump’s presidency, when Trump pardoned his former adviser in a case of alleged fraud.As president, Trump was famously happy to lie. One count from the Washington Post found he did so 30,573 times in his time in power.Regardless, in 2018, Bannon made headlines by telling ABC News Trump did not lie.Bannon suffers setback as judge rejects delaying contempt of Congress trialRead moreTold Trump “has not always told the truth”, Bannon said: “I don’t know that” and also said claims Trump lied were “another thing to demonise him”.His host, Jonathan Karl, asked: “The president’s never lied?”Bannon said: “Not to my knowledge, no.”But Lemire writes that “even for Bannon, Trump was something new. The chief strategist told me that Trump ‘was not looking to win a news cycle, he was looking to win a news moment, a news second.’“An at-times shell-shocked Bannon would relay to aides that ‘Trump would say anything, he would lie about anything to win that moment, to win whatever exchange he was having at that moment.’“Entire campaign proposals had to be written on the fly, policy plans reverse engineered, teams of aides immediately mobilised to meet whatever floated through Trump’s head in that moment to defend his record, put down a reporter, or change a chyron on CNN.”TopicsBooksDonald TrumpSteve BannonUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      ‘Game over’: Steve Bannon audio reveals Trump planned to claim early victory

      by

      ‘Game over’: Steve Bannon audio reveals Trump planned to claim early victoryRecording shows the president intended to ‘take advantage’ of early vote lead and declare himself the winner prematurely Days before the 2020 presidential election, Donald Trump was already planning to declare victory on election night, even if there was no evidence he was winning, according to a leaked Steve Bannon conversation recorded before the vote.In the audio, recorded three days before the election and published by Mother Jones on Wednesday, Bannon told a group of associates Trump already had a scheme in place for the 3 November vote.“What Trump’s gonna do is just declare victory. Right? He’s gonna declare victory. But that doesn’t mean he’s a winner,” Bannon, laughing, told the group, according to the audio.“He’s just gonna say he’s a winner.”The release of the audio comes as Bannon is due to go on trial Monday for criminal contempt, after he ignored a subpoena last year from the House select committee investigating the attack on the US Capitol in 2021.On Wednesday Bannon’s attorneys again asked a federal judge to delay the trial, citing references to some of his past comments during Tuesday’s public hearing of the select committee, and the planned airing of a CNN documentary on Bannon the day before his trial is due to start.Both events create “the very serious risk of prejudice here” among jurors, Bannon’s lawyers said, according to CNBC.On Monday a federal judge dismissed a previous motion by Bannon to delay the trial, and ruled Bannon could not make two of his principal defences to a jury.That came after Bannon said he was now willing to testify before the House select committee, an offer dismissed by the justice department as a “last-ditch attempt to avoid accountability”, and US district judge Carl Nichols said the trial must go ahead.Before the 2020 election it had been reported that Trump planned to declare victory early, and in the Mother Jones audio Bannon says the former president planned to “take advantage” of the likelihood that Democratic postal votes would be tallied later than in-person Republican ballots.Trump did exactly that hours after the election, claiming: “Frankly, we did win this election”, even as millions of ballots were yet to be counted, and after Fox News had – correctly – called the state of Arizona for Joe Biden.“As it sits here today,” Bannon said later in the audio, describing a scenario in which Trump held an early lead in swing states, “at 10 or 11 o’clock Trump’s gonna walk in the Oval, tweet out, ‘I’m the winner. Game over. Suck on that.’”Mother Jones said the audio, which is nearly an hour long, was recorded during a meeting between Bannon and supporters of Guo Wengui, an exiled Chinese mogul whom Bannon helped launch a series of rightwing websites.In the meeting Bannon said Democratic supporters were more likely than Republicans to vote by mail, meaning their votes would be counted and reported later.That would lead to a public perception that Trump was winning the election, according to the audio. Democrats would “have a natural disadvantage”, Bannon said.“And Trump’s going to take advantage of it. That’s our strategy. He’s gonna declare himself a winner.”“So when you wake up Wednesday morning, it’s going to be a firestorm,” Bannon said.“You’re going to have antifa, crazy. The media, crazy. The courts are crazy. And Trump’s gonna be sitting there mocking, tweeting shit out: ‘You lose. I’m the winner. I’m the king.’”Axios reported before the 2020 election that Trump had “told confidants he’ll declare victory on Tuesday night if it looks like he’s ‘ahead’”, and Bannon said on his podcast on the day of the election that Trump would claim victory “right before the 11 o’clock news”. The Mother Jones audio supports both claims.Trump, the only US president to have been impeached twice, lost the election: Biden won 306 electoral votes to Trump’s 232. About 81.3 million people voted for Biden, compared with 74.2 million for Trump.TopicsUS elections 2020Donald TrumpSteve BannonUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Bannon suffers setback as judge rejects delaying contempt of Congress trial

      by

      Bannon suffers setback as judge rejects delaying contempt of Congress trialFederal judge also rejects claim by former Trump strategist that he thought his non-compliance was excused by executive privilege Donald Trump’s former top strategist, Steve Bannon, suffered heavy setbacks in his contempt of Congress case on Monday after a federal judge dismissed his motion to delay his trial, scheduled for next week, and ruled he could not make two of his principal defences to a jury. Bannon initiates talks with January 6 panel on testifying over Capitol attackRead moreThe flurry of adverse rulings from District of Columbia district judge Carl Nichols – a Trump appointee – marked a significant knock back for Bannon, who was charged with criminal contempt after he ignored a subpoena last year from the House January 6 select committee investigating the attack on the US Capitol by extremist Trump supporters in 2021.Nichols refused in federal court in Washington DC, to delay Bannon’s trial date set for next Monday, saying that he saw no reason to push back proceedings after he severely limited the defences that the former Trump aide’s lawyers could present to a jury.The defeats for Bannon stunned his lead lawyer, David Schoen, who asked, aghast: “What’s the point of going to trial if we don’t have any defences?”Nichols stripped Bannon of two of his main defences for defying the select committee’s subpoena, ruling he could not present evidence to the jury that he had relied on the advice of counsel, and could not rely on entrapment by estoppel, the argument that a defendant was advised erroneously by an official that certain conduct was legal.The decision, Nichols said, came in large part because he was bound by the controlling case law at the DC circuit level, which ruled in Licavoli v United States 1961, that advice of counsel was no defence against contempt of Congress charges.Nichols also rejected Bannon’s claims that he thought his non-compliance was excused by executive privilege, and narrowed the arguments Bannon could present to mainly whether he was aware of the deadlines for testimony and producing documents established by the select committee.The decision not to allow Bannon to pursue executive privilege arguments came after the US prosecutors said in a filing that Trump’s own attorney, Justin Clark, told the FBI last month that Trump never invoked privilege for specific materials compelled in the subpoena.But Nichols went further and said Bannon could not make an executive privilege claim because none of the justice department’s internal guidelines he supposedly relied on to determine he was immune from the congressional inquiry applied to non-White House officials, such as Bannon was at that time.The judge, in refusing to delay the trial date, ruled in favour of prosecutors who urged him to look past Bannon’s “sudden wish to testify” to the House select committee – a development first reported by the Guardian – as nothing more than a last-ditch move to avoid trial.It was not clear whether Bannon still intended to testify and produce documents to the select committee after Nichols’ rulings.Nichols handed down additional defeats for Bannon, rejecting the interpretation by Bannon’s lawyers of “willful non-compliance” which they took to include an element of intent. Nichols said prosecutors needed only to show his default was deliberate and intentional.He quashed Bannon’s motion to subpoena top Democrats – including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi – and select committee members, and denied a motion to introduce evidence about the justice department’s decision not to charge other Trump White House officials referred for contempt.The judge, who served in George W Bush’s justice department, also reaffirmed that the select committee was properly constituted and served a legitimate legislative function, in a significant signal undercutting claims by some House Republicans.While some Republican congressmen have complained that the panel was illegitimate, Nichols said the House voting on contempt referrals from the panel meant it had been repeatedly ratified, and he would defer to the House to interpret its own rules.TopicsSteve BannonUS politicsUS Capitol attackJanuary 6 hearingsDonald TrumpnewsReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Bannon initiates talks with January 6 panel on testifying over Capitol attack

      by

      Bannon initiates talks with January 6 panel on testifying over Capitol attackCooperation of former Trump strategist could provide unique insight into inner-workings of Trump’s push to overturn election Steve Bannon, the onetime strategist to Donald Trump who was involved in the former president’s efforts to invalidate his defeat in the 2020 election, has opened discussions with the House January 6 select committee about testifying to the inquiry into the Capitol attack.The offer of cooperation could mark a breakthrough for the panel, which has sought Bannon’s testimony for months, believing he could provide unique insight into the inner-workings of Trump’s unlawful push to stop the congressional certification of his loss to Joe Biden from taking place.Bannon signalled in an email to the select committee, first obtained by the Guardian, that he was prepared to initiate discussions about a time and place for an interview, after Trump said in a letter he would waive executive privilege if he reached an agreement to testify.The email broadly reiterated Bannon’s legal defense that he was previously unable to comply with a subpoena from the panel because at the time, in a claim that has been disputed, the former president had asserted executive privilege over his testimony.But with Trump now willing to waive executive privilege if Bannon and the select committee could secure an arrangement, Bannon was in a position to initiate negotiations about a potential interview, the email said, citing the letter from the former president.The situation with Bannon and executive privilege is complex because he has argued that he does not have to have been a White House employee – he was not for January 6 – to be a close presidential adviser dispensing confidential advice and be subject to executive privilege.He has also argued that while the supreme court has ruled that a current president’s waiver for executive privilege overrules a former president’s assertion, Biden never formally waived Trump’s assertion – the select committee didn’t believe Trump asserted it in the first place.Speaking on CNN’s State of the Union on Sunday, January 6 committee member and congresswoman Zoe Lofgren said she anticipated the panel would schedule an interview with Bannon.“I expect that we will be hearing from him,” Lofgren said. “And there are many questions that we have for him.”The email specifically said Bannon was prepared to testify at a public hearing. It did not say whether Bannon would agree to appear at a closed-door interview first, or ever, and whether he would provide documents in addition to providing testimony.Also unclear was the extent of the assistance Bannon might provide in his testimony, though he was a witness to several key moments in the illicit effort to stop the certification of Biden’s election win on 6 January.That would mean Bannon could, in theory, reveal to House investigators about his conversations with Trump ahead of the Capitol attack – Bannon spoke with Trump on the phone the night before – and strategy discussions at the Trump “war room” at the Willard hotel in Washington.The Trump “war room” at the Willard played a major role in the former president’s push to stop the certification. Bannon was based there in the days before the attack, alongside Trump lawyers John Eastman and Rudy Giuliani, widely seen as the architects of that scheme.Bannon’s offer to testify appears to be a strategic move ahead of his trial for criminal contempt of Congress, scheduled to start on 18 July, that comes after justice department prosecutors charged him for refusing to comply with the select committee’s subpoena last year.The move to testify to the panel now would not “cure” his contempt since he faces criminal contempt and the prosecution is for the past failure to comply with the subpoena, according to former US attorney Joyce Vance.But the email offering to testify could have the effect of reinforcing his legal defense that Trump did in fact assert a legitimate executive privilege claim in October 2021, and that he cannot be prosecuted because of that invocation, according to his letter on Saturday.The offer to testify – and an actual agreement where he appears before the select committee – could also serve to defang the prosecution to some extent, making it a less attractive case for the justice department to pursue and one generally less appealing to jurors.Regardless of what Trump now says in his letter, and in referring Bannon for prosecution, the select committee has maintained that Trump did not assert executive privilege – and even if he did, it did not cover Bannon, who was out of the Trump White House by 6 January.The select committee has also said that Bannon was required to respond to the subpoena in some way, for instance by citing executive privilege on a question-by-question basis, and at least responding to questions that had nothing to do with Trump.Bannon became one of two former Trump advisers charged by the justice department for contempt of Congress. Federal prosecutors also charged Peter Navarro but declined to prosecute the former White House chief of staff, Mark Meadows, and the deputy chief, Dan Scavino.TopicsUS politicsSteve BannonDonald TrumpUS Capitol attackReuse this content More

    • 113 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump considers waiving Bannon’s executive privilege claim, reports say

      by

      Trump considers waiving Bannon’s executive privilege claim, reports sayDecision from former president would clear way for one-time adviser to testify before committee investigating Capitol attack Donald Trump is considering waiving executive privilege for his longtime political adviser Steve Bannon, which would clear the way for a key ally of the former president to testify before the congressional committee investigating the deadly January 6 attack on the Capitol.Trump is reportedly considering sending a letter to Bannon, his former White House strategist, acknowledging that he granted Bannon executive privilege on 21 September but is now willing to give up the claim if Bannon reaches an agreement to testify before the House committee investigating the Capitol insurrection, the Washington Post first reported, citing sources familiar with the situation.According to the Post, some of Trump’s advisers have warned him not to send the letter, but the ex-president may be bullish on getting a witness who is ostensibly friendlier to him to appear at one of the committee’s televised hearings.Bannon was charged with two counts of criminal contempt of Congress in November after defying a subpoena from the House committee investigating the Capitol riots. Bannon has pleaded not guilty.If convicted, Bannon could face up to a year in prison and a fine of up to $100,000. His trial is expected to start later this month, reported CNN.Bannon has claimed that discussions between Trump and him are protected under the dictum of executive privilege. But prosecutors say Bannon is not protected because he was not working at the White House on the day of the Capitol attack.The committee has also said that Bannon’s executive privilege claims do not mean he can simply ignore the subpoena outright, but he could cite the privilege in response to certain questions.“Even if your client had been a senior aide to [Trump] during the time period covered by the contemplated testimony, which he was most assuredly not, he is not permitted by law to the type of immunity you suggest that Mr. Trump has requested he assert,” committee chair Bennie Thompson wrote to Bannon’s attorney in October.Federal prosecutors have not brought contempt charges against other Trump aides who ignored subpoenas while citing executive privilege, including former White house chief of staff Mark Meadows.Even after leaving his position in the White House, Bannon remained an outspoken proponent of the falsehood that electoral fraudsters stole the 2020 presidential race against Joe Biden from Trump.The committee has staged numerous public hearings airing evidence that the lie helped inspire the attack on the Capitol, to which a bipartisan Senate report linked seven deaths.TopicsSteve BannonUS politicsDonald TrumpJanuary 6 hearingsUS Capitol attacknewsReuse this content More

    • 188 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      January 6 committee focuses on phone calls among Trump’s children and aides weeks before election

      by

      January 6 committee focuses on phone calls among Trump’s children and aides weeks before electionFootage captured by documentary film-maker understood to show former president’s children privately discussing election strategies The House select committee investigating the January 6 Capitol attack is closely focused on phone calls and conversations among Donald Trump’s children and top aides captured by a documentary film-maker weeks before the 2020 election, say sources familiar with the matter.The calls among Trump’s children and top aides took place at an invitation-only event at the Trump International hotel in Washington DC that took place the night of the first presidential debate on 29 September 2020, the sources said.The select committee is interested in the calls, the sources said, since the footage is understood to show the former president’s children, including Donald Jr and Eric Trump, privately discussing strategies about the election at a crucial time in the presidential campaign.‘Watergate for streaming era’: how the January 6 panel created gripping hearingsRead moreHouse investigators first learned about the event, hosted by the Trump campaign, and the existence of the footage through British film-maker Alex Holder, who testified about what he and his crew recorded during a two-hour interview last week, the sources said.The film-maker testified that he had recorded around seven hours of one-to-one interviews with Trump, then-vice president Mike Pence, Trump’s adult children and Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, the sources said, as well as around 110 hours of footage from the campaign.But one part of Holder’s testimony that particularly piqued the interest of the members of the select committee and chief investigative counsel Tim Heaphy was when he disclosed that he had managed to record discussions at the 29 September 2020 event.The select committee is closely focused on the footage of the event – in addition to the content of the one-on-one interviews with Trump and Ivanka – because the discussions about strategies mirror similar conversations at that time by top Trump advisors.On the night of the first presidential debate, Trump’s top former strategist Steve Bannon said in an interview with HBO’s The Circus that the outcome of the 2020 election would be decided at the state level and eventually at the congressional certification on January 6.“They’re going to try and overturn this election with uncertified votes,” Bannon said. Asked how he expects the election to end, Bannon said: “Right before noon on the 20th, in a vote in the House, Trump will win the presidency.”The select committee believes that ideas such as Bannon’s were communicated to advisors to Donald Jr and his fiancee, Kimberly Guilfoyle, even before the 2020 election had taken place, the sources said – leading House investigators to want to review the Trump hotel footage.What appears to interest the panel is whether Trump and his children had planned to somehow stop the certification of the election on January 6 – a potential violation of federal law – and to force a contingent election if Trump lost as early as September.The event was not open to the public, Holder is said to have testified, and the documentary film-maker was waved into the Trump hotel by Eric Trump. At some point after Holder caught the calls on tape, he is said to have been asked to leave by Donald Jr.Among the conversations captured on film was Eric Trump on the phone to an unidentified person saying, according to one source familiar: “Hopefully you’re voting in Florida as opposed to the other state you’ve mentioned.”January 6 hearings: if Republicans did nothing wrong, why were pardons sought?Read moreThe phone call – a clip of which was reviewed by the Guardian – was one of several by some of the people closest to Trump that Holder memorialized in his film, titled Unprecedented, which is due to be released in a three-part series later this year on Discovery+.Holder also testified to the select committee, the sources said, about the content of the interviews. Holder interviewed Trump in early December 2020 at the White House, and then twice a few months after the Capitol attack both at Mar-a-Lago and his Bedminster golf club.The select committee found Holder’s testimony and material more explosive than they had expected, the sources said. Holder, for instance, showed the panel a discrepancy between Ivanka Trump’s testimony to the panel and Holder’s camera.In her interview in December 2020, the New York Times earlier reported, Ivanka said her father should “continue to fight until every legal remedy is exhausted” because people were questioning “the sanctity of our elections”.That interview was recorded nine days after former attorney general William Barr told Trump there was no evidence of election fraud. But in her interview with the select committee, Ivanka said she had “accepted” what Barr had said.TopicsJanuary 6 hearingsUS Capitol attackUS politicsDonald TrumpRepublicansDonald Trump JrSteve BannonnewsReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      January 6 committee focuses on phone calls among Trump’s children and aides

      by

      January 6 committee focuses on phone calls among Trump’s children and aidesFootage captured by documentary film-maker understood to show ex-president’s children privately discussing election strategies The House select committee investigating the January 6 Capitol attack is closely focused on phone calls and conversations among Donald Trump’s children and top aides captured by a documentary film-maker weeks before the 2020 election, say sources familiar with the matter.The calls among Trump’s children and top aides took place at an invitation-only event at the Trump International hotel in Washington that took place the night of the first presidential debate on 29 September 2020, the sources said.The select committee is interested in the calls, the sources said, since the footage is understood to show the former president’s children, including Donald Jr and Eric Trump, privately discussing strategies about the election at a crucial time in the presidential campaign.‘Watergate for streaming era’: how the January 6 panel created gripping hearingsRead moreHouse investigators first learned about the event, hosted by the Trump campaign, and the existence of the footage through British film-maker Alex Holder, who testified about what he and his crew recorded during a two-hour interview last week, the sources said.The film-maker testified that he had recorded around seven hours of one-to-one interviews with Trump, then-vice president Mike Pence, Trump’s adult children and Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, the sources said, as well as around 110 hours of footage from the campaign.But one part of Holder’s testimony that particularly piqued the interest of the members of the select committee and chief investigative counsel Tim Heaphy was when he disclosed that he had managed to record discussions at the 29 September event.The select committee is closely focused on the footage of the event – in addition to the content of the one-on-one interviews with Trump and Ivanka – because the discussions about strategies mirror similar conversations at that time by top Trump advisors.On the night of the first presidential debate, Trump’s top former strategist Steve Bannon said in an interview with The Circus on Showtime that the outcome of the election would be decided at the state level and eventually at the congressional certification on January 6.“They’re going to try and overturn this election with uncertified votes,” Bannon said. Asked how he expects the election to end, Bannon said: “Right before noon on the 20th, in a vote in the House, Trump will win the presidency.”The select committee believes that ideas such as Bannon’s were communicated to advisers to Donald Jr and his fiancee, Kimberly Guilfoyle, even before the 2020 election had taken place, the sources said – leading House investigators to want to review the Trump hotel footage.What appears to interest the panel is whether Trump and his children had planned to somehow stop the certification of the election on January 6 – a potential violation of federal law – and to force a contingent election if Trump lost as early as September.The event was not open to the public, Holder is said to have testified, and the documentary film-maker was waved into the Trump hotel by Eric Trump. At some point after Holder caught the calls on tape, he is said to have been asked to leave by Donald Jr.Among the conversations captured on film was Eric Trump on the phone to an unidentified person saying, according to one source familiar: “Hopefully you’re voting in Florida as opposed to the other state you’ve mentioned.”January 6 hearings: if Republicans did nothing wrong, why were pardons sought?Read moreThe phone call – a clip of which was reviewed by the Guardian – was one of several by some of the people closest to Trump that Holder memorialized in his film, titled Unprecedented, which is due to be released in a three-part series later this year on Discovery+.Holder also testified to the select committee, the sources said, about the content of the interviews. Holder interviewed Trump in early December 2020 at the White House, and then twice a few months after the Capitol attack both at Mar-a-Lago and his Bedminster golf club in New Jersey.The select committee found Holder’s testimony and material more explosive than they had expected, the sources said. Holder, for instance, showed the panel a discrepancy between Ivanka Trump’s testimony to the panel and Holder’s camera.In her interview in December 2020, the New York Times earlier reported, Ivanka said her father should “continue to fight until every legal remedy is exhausted” because people were questioning “the sanctity of our elections”.That interview was recorded nine days after former attorney general William Barr told Trump there was no evidence of election fraud. But in her interview with the select committee, Ivanka said she had “accepted” what Barr had said.TopicsJanuary 6 hearingsUS Capitol attackUS politicsDonald TrumpRepublicansDonald Trump JrSteve BannonnewsReuse this content More