US Capitol attack

Subterms

    More stories

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump lawyer knew plan to delay Biden certification was unlawful, emails show

      by

      Trump lawyer knew plan to delay Biden certification was unlawful, emails showJohn Eastman conceded that scheme represented violation of Electoral Count Act but urged Mike Pence to go ahead anyway Interrupting the certification of Joe Biden’s election win on 6 January last year as part of the scheme to return Donald Trump to office was known to be unlawful by at least one of the former president’s lawyers, according to an email exchange about the potential conspiracy. Trump ‘admired’ Putin’s ability to ‘kill whoever’, says Stephanie GrishamRead moreThe former Trump lawyer John Eastman – who helped coordinate the scheme from the Trump “war room” at the Willard hotel in Washington – conceded in an email to counsel for then vice-president Mike Pence, Greg Jacob, that the plan was a violation of the Electoral Count Act.But Eastman then urged Pence to move ahead with the scheme anyway, pressuring the former vice-president’s counsel to consider supporting the effort on the basis that it was only a “minor violation” of the statute that governed the certification procedure.The admission that the scheme was unlawful undercuts arguments by Eastman and the Willard war room team that they believed there was no wrongdoing in seeking to have Pence delay the certification past 6 January – one of the strategies they sought to return Trump to power.It additionally raises the prospect that the other members of the Willard war room – including Trump’s former attorney Rudy Giuliani and Trump’s former strategist Steve Bannon – were also aware that the scheme to delay or stop the certification was unlawful from the start.The request to adjourn the joint session was one of several strategies Eastman had laid out in an infamous memo presented to Trump, Pence and top aides last year that outlined how the former vice-president could attempt to unilaterally overturn the 2020 election results.The strategy to delay the joint session past 6 January was about buying time for Trump and his team to pressure state legislatures to send Trump slates of electors to Congress on the basis that the Biden slates were illegitimate because of supposed election fraud.The email exchange – revealed in court filings by the select committee last week – shows Eastman attempted to take advantage of the fact that the Electoral Count Act was not followed exactly in the immediate aftermath of the Capitol attack to try and benefit Trump.“The Senate and House have both violated the Electoral Count Act this evening – they debated the Arizona objections for more than two hours. Violation of 3 USC 17,” Eastman wrote to Jacob in his 9.44pm email, referring to the statute in the US criminal code.But in the second part of his email, Eastman claimed that because the statute had already been violated in small ways – delays that amounted to a few hours at best – Pence should have no problem committing “one more minor violation and adjourn for 10 days”.That admission is significant since it demonstrates Eastman knew the scheme to delay Biden’s certification was unlawful – which the select committee believes bolsters its case that he was involved in a conspiracy to defraud the United States and obstruct Congress.The House counsel, Douglas Letter, appearing on behalf of the select committee in federal court on Tuesday, referenced the admission as he postulated that Eastman knew what he was advocating violated both the Electoral Count Act statute and the constitution.Letter also said of Eastman’s request of Pence: “It was so minor it could have changed the entire course of our democracy. It could have meant the popularly elected president could have been thwarted from taking office. That was what Dr Eastman was urging.”But if Eastman knew the scheme violated the law, it raises the additional possibility that Giuliani also knew it was unlawful when he called the Republican senator Tommy Tuberville and asked him to object to Biden’s wins, after the Capitol attack had taken place.In a voicemail recorded at about 7pm that evening, and published by the Dispatch, Giuliani implored Tuberville to object to 10 states Biden won once Congress reconvened at 8pm, a process that would have concluded 15 hours later and dragged the joint session into the next day.“The only strategy we can follow is to object to numerous states and raise issues so that we get ourselves into tomorrow – ideally until the end of tomorrow,” Giuliani said.The admission from Eastman came as part of a thread of emails with Jacob in filings submitted by the select committee seeking to challenge Eastman’s claim that more than a hundred emails demanded by the panel are protected by attorney-client privilege and should remain secret.But the select committee said in the filings that it should be allowed to conduct an in camera review of the records to determine whether the crime-fraud exception applied, arguing in part they appeared to show Eastman was engaged in criminal conspiracy and common law fraud.The judge in the case ruled in the panel’s favor after the hearing on Tuesday, allowing a review of around a hundred emails to determine whether the records were subject to privilege, though he did not comment on whether Eastman might have engaged in criminal activity.TopicsDonald TrumpUS elections 2020US politicsUS Capitol attacknewsReuse this content More

    • 125 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      Proud Boys leader arrested on US Capitol attack conspiracy charge

      by

      Proud Boys leader arrested on US Capitol attack conspiracy chargeEnrique Tarrio was not physically in Washington on 6 January but is charged with directing, mobilising and leading crowd Enrique Tarrio, the former leader of the Proud Boys far-right nationalist group, has been arrested and charged with conspiracy over the attack on the US Capitol on 6 January 2021.Jury begins deliberations in trial of Texas man who stormed CapitolRead moreTarrio, 38, faces counts of conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding and obstruction of an official proceeding, and two counts each of assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers and destruction of government property.The US Department of Justice (DoJ) said Tarrio was scheduled to make an initial appearance in federal court in Miami on Tuesday.Tarrio was not at the Capitol during the insurrection. Two days before, he was arrested in Washington and accused of vandalizing a Black Lives Matter banner at a historic Black church. Also charged with possessing two high-capacity rifle magazines, he was released the following day and ordered to stay out of the capital.According to the DoJ, Tarrio “nonetheless continued to direct and encourage the Proud Boys prior to and during the events of 6 January 2021”.He later “claimed credit for what had happened on social media and in an encrypted chat room during and after the attack,” prosecutors said.Four other individuals have been charged: Ethan Nordean, 31, of Auburn, Washington; Joseph Biggs, 38, of Ormond Beach, Florida; Zachary Rehl, 36, of Philadelphia; Charles Donohoe, 34, of Kernersville, North Carolina; and Dominic Pezzola, 44, of Rochester, New York.“They earlier pleaded not guilty to charges,” the DoJ said, referring to an indictment in December.Tarrio’s arrest followed charges of seditious conspiracy against 11 members of another far-right group, the Oath Keepers militia, which were announced in January.Tarrio and the Proud Boys rose to prominence in support of Donald Trump and through violent confrontations with leftwing protesters.On 6 January 2021, Trump supporters gathered in Washington DC to protest against Trump’s election defeat by Joe Biden. Trump told them to “fight like hell” in service of his lie about electoral fraud. The Capitol was attacked. Seven people died around the riot and more than 100 police officers were hurt.More than 770 people have been charged. The first jury trial arising from the attack, involving a Texas man who was a member of the Three Percenters rightwing group, reached jury deliberations on Tuesday.The DoJ has faced intensifying pressure to more aggressively pursue those suspected of organizing and planning the Capitol attack. In a speech earlier this year, the attorney general, Merrick Garland, vowed to hold accountable all those responsible for the riot, whether or not they were present at the Capitol.In its announcement on Tuesday, the DoJ said: “From in or around December 2020, Tarrio and his co-defendants, all of whom were leaders or members of the Ministry of Self Defense [a Proud Boys group] conspired to corruptly obstruct, influence, and impede an official proceeding, the certification of the electoral college vote.“On 6 January, the defendants directed, mobilised and led members of the crowd on to the Capitol grounds and into the Capitol, leading to dismantling of metal barricades, destruction of property, and assaults on law enforcement.Proud Boys: who are the far-right group that backs Donald Trump?Read more“Although Tarrio is not accused of physically taking part in the breach of the Capitol, the indictment alleges that he led the advance planning and remained in contact with other members of the Proud Boys during their breach of the Capitol.“The indictment alleges that Tarrio nonetheless continued to direct and encourage the Proud Boys prior to and during the events of 6 January 2021, and that he claimed credit for what had happened on social media and in an encrypted chat room during and after the attack.”In August last year, Tarrio was sentenced to five months in prison. He has also been revealed to have previously been an FBI informant.Tarrio has denied organising violence on 6 January. The Times said a lawyer for Tarrio declined comment, as he was waiting to see the indictment.TopicsUS Capitol attackThe far rightUS crimenewsReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Jury begins deliberations in trial of Texas man who stormed Capitol

      by

      Jury begins deliberations in trial of Texas man who stormed CapitolGuy Wesley Reffitt’s trial could set the stage for the trial of over 750 people charged with federal crimes related to the January 6 riot An armed Texas militia member led a “vigilante mob” that overwhelmed police officers and became the first group of rioters to breach the US Capitol last year, a federal prosecutor said on Monday at the close of the first criminal trial over the riot.A 12-member jury was scheduled to begin deliberating on Tuesday for Guy Wesley Reffitt’s trial on charges that he stormed the Capitol with a holstered handgun strapped to his waist and interfered with police officers guarding the Senate doors.Trump’s private schedule reveals no plans for him to join 6 January marchRead moreHe also is charged with threatening his teenage children if they reported him to law enforcement after the attack on 6 January 2021.Assistant US attorney Risa Berkower told jurors that Reffitt drove to Washington intending to stop Congress certifying Joe Biden’s electoral victory, to “overthrow Congress” and to drag lawmakers out of the building.Reffitt proudly “lit the fire” that allowed others in the mob to overwhelm Capitol police officers, the prosecutor said during the trial’s closing arguments.“They were in an impossible situation – outnumbered and, they feared, outgunned,” Berkower said of police.Reffitt, 49, from Wylie, Texas, didn’t testify at his trial, which started last Wednesday. Defense attorney William Welch didn’t call any defense witnesses after prosecutors rested their case.Welch urged jurors to acquit Reffitt of all charges but one. He said they should convict him of a misdemeanor charge that he entered and remained in a restricted area.“That is what proof beyond a reasonable doubt looks like, but it ends there,” Welch said.Reffitt faces five felony counts: obstruction of an official proceeding, being unlawfully present on Capitol grounds while armed with a firearm, transporting firearms during a civil disorder, interfering with law enforcement officers during a civil disorder and obstructing justice. The obstructing justice charge relates to his alleged threats against his children.Welch denied that Reffitt had a gun at the Capitol and said there is no evidence that he engaged in any violence or destructive behavior on January 6.“Guy does brag a lot,” Welch said. “He embellishes and he exaggerates.”“Yes, Guy Reffitt brags,” assistant US attorney Jeffrey Nestler countered. “And you know what he brags about? The truth.”Reffitt was arrested less than a week after the riot at the Capitol. He has been jailed in Washington for months.Reffitt is a member of the “Texas Three Percenters” and bragged about his involvement in the riot to other members of the group, according to prosecutors. The Three Percenters militia movement refers to the myth that only 3% of American colonists fought against the British in the revolutionary war.On Friday, jurors heard testimony from a self-described Texas Three Percenters member who drove from Texas to Washington with Reffitt. Rocky Hardie said he and Reffitt both had holstered handguns strapped to their bodies when they attended Donald Trump’s Stop the Steal rally just before the riot.On Thursday, Reffitt’s 19-year-old son, Jackson, testified that his father told him and his sister, then 16, they would be traitors if they reported him to authorities and said “traitors get shot”.On 6 January 2021, Reffitt had the holstered gun under his jacket, was carrying zip-tie handcuffs and was wearing body armor when he and other rioters advanced on police officers on the west side of the Capitol, according to prosecutors.“Every step he took up the railing, the crowd came with him,” Berkhower said. “The crowd was energized and cheered him on.”Reffitt is not accused of entering the building. He retreated after an officer pepper-sprayed him in the face, prosecutors said.National Archives turns over Trump White House logs to January 6 panelRead moreBerkower played surveillance video of the rioters who poured into the building while the then vice-president, Mike Pence, was presiding over the Senate. She said it was a dark day in American history, but not for Reffitt.“He was ecstatic about what he did, about what the mob did,” she added. “What the defendant did was not just bragging or hype.”Welch accused prosecutors of rushing to judgment.“Be the grown-ups in the courtroom. Separate the facts from the hype,” he told jurors.More than 750 people have been charged with federal crimes related to the riot. A verdict in Reffitt’s case could have an enormous impact on many others. A conviction could give prosecutors more leverage over defendants facing the most serious charges. An acquittal could embolden other defendants to seek more favorable plea deals or gamble on trials of their own.More than 220 defendants have pleaded guilty, mostly to misdemeanors and over 110 of them have been sentenced. Approximately 90 others have trial dates.TopicsUS Capitol attackLaw (US)newsReuse this content More

    • 163 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      William Barr: Trump is full of bull – but I’ll vote for him

      by

      William Barr: Trump is full of bull – but I’ll vote for himBarr’s book reveals he told Trump he was ‘like a bull in a bull ring’ – in return, Trump calls his former attorney general a ‘horse’ Donald Trump’s second attorney general, William Barr, told the former US president he was “like a bull in a bull ring” and “someone’s going to come and put a sword through your head”.Trump: US should put Chinese flags on F-22 jets and ‘bomb shit out of’ RussiaRead moreIn return, Trump called Barr a “horse” who had been “broken” by the radical left.Such was the state of debate in the upper echelons of the Republican party on Monday as it digested the latest round of promotion of Barr’s memoir, One Damn Thing After Another.The book will be published on Tuesday but it has been extensively trailed – including by the Guardian. On the page and in interviews, Barr says Trump is unfit for the presidency and should not be the Republican nominee in 2024.But Barr remains a staunch conservative. On Monday, he told NBC’s Today that despite it all, if Trump was the Republican nominee in 2024, he would vote for him.“Because I believe that the greatest threat to the country is the progressive agenda being pushed by the Democratic party, it’s inconceivable to me that I wouldn’t vote for the Republican nominee,” Barr said.In his book, Barr repeatedly describes disagreements with Trump and tactics used by senior aides including the then secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, to distract or obstruct the erratic and often furious president.Speaking to NPR on Monday, Barr repeated a passage in his book when he said: “At one point, I said to [Trump]: ‘You know, Mr President, you’re like a bull in a bull ring and your adversaries have your number. They know how to get under your skin, and all they have to do is wave a red flag over here and you go charging and attack it.’“And I said, ‘At the end of the day, you’re going to be in the middle of the ring sweating and someone’s going to come and put a sword through your head.“He didn’t think much of that metaphor.”Trump evidently no longer thinks much of Barr. This weekend, the former president wrote a lengthy letter to Lester Holt, an NBC anchor who interviewed Barr on TV.“Bill Barr cares more about the corrupt Washington media and elite than serving the American people,” Trump wrote, as reported by Axios.“He was slow, lethargic, and I realised early on that he never had what it takes to make a great attorney general. When the radical left Democrats threatened to hold him in contempt and even worse, impeach him, he became virtually worthless for law and order and election integrity. They broke him just like a trainer breaks a horse.”Trump also said: “I would imagine that if the book is anything like him, it will be long, slow and very boring.”Critics might disagree. Reviewing the book for the Washington Post, Devlin Barrett said Trump’s second attorney general “was easily [his] most effective and important cabinet member” and Barr’s memoir showed he could “tell a good yarn and has a penchant for deadpan punchlines”.That said, Barrett wrote, Barr had really written “a defense of his tenure to fellow conservatives”.“Barr bided his time before taking one last swing,” Barrett said. “But as long as there are senior officials like Barr, there will be presidents like Trump.”The book has produced a flood of media attention, including charges that Barr is seeking to whitewash his role in some of Trump’s most controversial moments.Barr defends his handling of the investigation of Russian election interference and links between Trump and Moscow. In particular, he focuses on his decision to release a summary of the report by Robert Mueller. In that letter, Barr cleared Trump of seeking to obstruct justice despite the special counsel laying out 10 possible instances of such potentially criminal behavior.Speaking to NBC, Barr repeated his conclusion that Trump’s claims of voter fraud in his defeat by Joe Biden were baseless – he has used the word “bullshit” – while skating over criticism for using the Department of Justice to investigate such lies.He said Trump was “responsible in the broad sense of that word” for the deadly Capitol riot over which he was impeached a second time, for inciting an insurrection.William Barr’s Trump book: self-serving narratives and tricky truths ignoredRead more“It appears that part of the plan was to send this group up to the Hill,” Barr said, of the storming of Congress by Trump supporters around which seven people died. “I think the whole idea was to intimidate Congress. And I think that that was wrong.”But he also said: “I haven’t seen anything to say he was legally responsible for it in terms of incitement.”Barr also addressed an incident he left out of his book: the firing of a US attorney, Geoffrey Berman, who was supervising investigations of Trump associates and business affairs as well as an investigation of a Turkish bank which the Turkish president asked Trump to drop.“I didn’t think there was any threat to the president,” Barr told NBC, adding that the decision “was my call”.“I hadn’t really thought much of him,” he said. “I wanted to make the change.”TopicsWilliam BarrDonald TrumpUS politicsUS elections 2020US elections 2024US Capitol attackPolitics booksnewsReuse this content More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Texas man could become first Capitol rioter convicted by jury as trial ends

      by

      Texas man could become first Capitol rioter convicted by jury as trial endsDepartment of Justice lawyers make closing arguments against Guy Reffitt, first of 750 people charged with joining riot to face trial Federal prosecutors were on Monday expected to make closing arguments in the first jury trial of someone charged with joining in the deadly January 6 assault on the Capitol by Donald Trump’s supporters.Department of Justice lawyers were set to wrap up their case against Guy Reffitt of Texas, the first of some 750 people charged with joining the riot to face trial in Washington.The charges against Reffitt include carrying a semi-automatic handgun while on Capitol grounds and obstructing justice by threatening his children with harm if they reported him to authorities.Some 200 defendants have pleaded guilty to charges relating to the attack, which sent lawmakers running for their lives. Reffitt’s trial is an important test case as the DoJ attempts to secure convictions from the hundreds of defendants who have not taken plea deals.They face charges ranging from unlawful picketing to seditious conspiracy, with which 11 people affiliated with the rightwing Oath Keepers were charged in January.A guilty verdict for Reffitt could motivate defendants to accept plea deals. A verdict in Reffitt’s favor could motivate hundreds who have not taken deals to risk a trial.Reffitt’s estranged son Jackson, now 19, turned him into the FBI and testified against him last week. If convicted of the most serious charges against him, Reffitt faces a maximum of 20 years in prison, though defendants rarely receive maximum penalties.Thousands of people stormed the Capitol on 6 January 2021, after a fiery speech in which Trump falsely claimed his election defeat was the result of widespread fraud, an assertion rejected by multiple courts, state election officials and members of his own administration. TopicsUS Capitol attackDonald TrumpUS crimeUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump’s private schedule reveals no plans for him to join 6 January march

      by

      Trump’s private schedule reveals no plans for him to join 6 January marchEx-president said he would join crowd to US Capitol but his schedule indicates he deliberately lied to his supporters Donald Trump was aware long before he took the stage at the “Save America” rally on 6 January that he would not march to the Capitol to protest the congressional certification of Joe Biden’s election win, according to his White House private schedule from that day.William Barr’s Trump book: self-serving narratives and tricky truths ignoredRead moreThe former president started his nearly 75-minute long speech at the Ellipse by saying he would go with the crowd to the Capitol, and then repeated that promise when he said he would walk with them down Pennsylvania Avenue towards the Capitol.But Trump’s private schedule – released by the House select committee investigating the Capitol attack in a filing on Wednesday – shows Trump must have known that there were no plans for him to join such a march, and that he was being taken back to the White House.The newly-released private schedule indicates Trump deliberately lied to his supporters, raising the spectre that he made a promise he had no intention of honoring so that they would descend on the Capitol and disrupt Congress from certifying Biden as president.It is a significant revelation that could bolster the select committee’s claim in the filing that Trump engaged in a criminal conspiracy to defraud the United States by seeking to obstruct a lawful function of the government by deceitful or dishonest means.“Trump telling the crowd that he would join them at the Capitol was incendiary in that they thought that their field marshal would be there,” said Ryan Goodman, a former special counsel at the Department of Defense. “It is further evidence that Trump knew he was inciting an already highly volatile situation.”The former president’s private schedule may also support a parallel civil suit brought by the Democratic congressman Eric Swalwell, a former House impeachment manager, that Trump prompted the Capitol attack through his comments in his speech.“Trump directly incited the violence at the Capitol that followed and then watched approvingly as the building was overrun,” the lawsuit said. “The horrific events of January 6 were a direct and foreseeable consequence of the Defendants’ unlawful actions.”Trump’s private schedule for that day indicated the former president was to travel directly from the White House to the Ellipse, speak at the “Save America” rally there, and then immediately return to the White House once his speech had concluded.The former president was running late on 6 January, but the timestamp on the document reads 11.22am – roughly half an hour before he started to speak at the rally at 11.50am – meaning he must have known before he took to the stage that he was not going to the Capitol.Trump’s promises are significant as they served as one of the primary motivations for his supporters to march to the Capitol alongside militia groups like the Oath Keepers, and were used by far-right activists like Alex Jones to encourage the crowd along the route.Indeed, testimony in federal prosecutions of rioters charged in connection to the Capitol attack suggest Trump’s promises that he would walk with them to the Capitol was the proximate cause for them to also walk up to Congress before the march descended into a riot.An analysis of cellphone data published by the New York Times also reveals that many of Trump’s supporters who marched from the rally to the Capitol went down Pennsylvania Avenue as he had suggested, a more circuitous route than walking up the National Mall.Crucially, Trump made the false promises that led the crowd to go to the Capitol in spite of being told by the Secret Service days before the situation was too volatile for them to guarantee his security if he joined them, according to a source familiar with the matter.That raises the prospect that the former president encouraged his supporters to march on the Capitol, on a premise he knew to be false, in the hope that the security situation he had been told was volatile would lead to some event that would stop Biden’s certification.But regardless of what he agreed with the Secret Service, his private schedule from just before the speech indicates Trump deliberately and repeatedly lied to the crowd about his intentions in a way that could leave him vulnerable to criminal or civil charges.The former president’s private schedule came as part of court filings submitted by the select committee seeking to challenge former Trump lawyer John Eastman’s claim that thousands of emails demanded by the panel are protected by attorney-client privilege.The select committee said in its filing that it believed the privilege asserted over the records were not applicable because of the so-called crime-fraud exception, arguing Eastman was involved in potentially illegal efforts by Trump to overturn the 2020 election.TopicsDonald TrumpUS Capitol attackUS politicsHouse of RepresentativesnewsReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      National Archives turns over Trump White House logs to January 6 panel

      by

      National Archives turns over Trump White House logs to January 6 panelSelect committee investigating Capitol attack also receives records from former vice-president Mike Pence The US National Archives has delivered White House visitor logs from Donald Trump’s administration to the congressional committee investigating the January 6 insurrection at the US Capitol by extremist supporters of the then president, the committee said on Friday.The National Archives also turned over records from former vice-president Mike Pence, meeting a 3 March deadline.Trump strikes deal to evade deposition in New York investigation – for nowRead more“Yesterday, the select committee received additional production of records from the National Archives,” a House of Representatives select committee aide said. “This included records that the former president attempted to keep hidden behind claims of privilege.”Trump had tried to block the release of the visitor logs, but Joe Biden rejected his claim that they were subject to executive privilege “in light of the urgency” of the committee’s work and Congress’s “compelling need”.Several courts, including the US supreme court, have also ruled against the Republican ex-president’s efforts to block the release of various records to the committee.So far, more than 725 people have been charged with playing a role in the attack on the Capitol by mobs of Trump supporters, which left five people dead and more than 100 police officers injured, as, at Trump’s urgings at a rally that morning, they tried to prevent the US Congress certifying Biden’s win for the Democrats in the 2020 presidential election.Another four police officers involved in defending the Capitol later killed themselves.The bipartisan January 6 committee chaired by Representative Bennie Thompson of Mississippi has been investigating the events surrounding the attack – and the former president’s role in it – for more than seven months, as well as allegations of a political conspiracy by Trump and key allies to get the results overturned.The committee has made more than 80 subpoenas public, including many issued to top Trump aides and allies, and interviewed more than 560 witnesses. It has also gathered records from social media and other telecommunications firms.TopicsDonald TrumpUS Capitol attackUS politicsHouse of RepresentativesnewsReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      January 6 panel subpoenas Kimberly Guilfoyle, fiancee of Donald Trump Jr

      by

      January 6 panel subpoenas Kimberly Guilfoyle, fiancee of Donald Trump JrHouse select committee issues subpoena after Guilfoyle abruptly cut short interview with panel last week The House select committee investigating the January 6 Capitol attack has subpoenaed Kimberly Guilfoyle, the fiancée of Donald Trump’s eldest son. House investigators issued the subpoena Thursday, after she had abruptly ended a voluntary interview with the panel last week.The committee is investigating the events surrounding the insurrection at the Capitol last year, when a mob of Trump supporters violently attacked the building in a failed attempt to halt the certification of Joe Biden’s 2020 election victory.The chairman of the select committee, Bennie Thompson, said in the subpoena letter to Guilfoyle that the panel was compelling her testimony because of her proximity to the former president and the rally that preceded the Capitol attack on January 6.Thompson said the panel had been left with no choice but to force her cooperation.“Because Ms Guilfoyle backed out of her original commitment to provide a voluntary interview, we are issuing today’s subpoena that will compel her to testify. We expect her to comply with the law and cooperate,” Thompson said.US Capitol attack committee plans April hearings to show how Trump broke lawRead moreGuilfoyle met virtually with the panel for an interview last week, but cut off questioning when she learned that select committee members Adam Schiff and Jamie Raskin – in addition to counsel – had joined the call.After news of her appearance was leaked to news outlets, Guilfoyle refused to continue, and her lawyer accused the select committee of trying to “sandbag” her and not keeping participants limited to committee counsel, according to a source familiar with the interview.Members of the select committee are actively involved in the investigation, and are almost always present at depositions. But Guilfoyle’s lawyer said in a statement that the panel sought to use her cooperation as a “political weapon” against Trump.“Ms Guilfoyle, under threat of subpoena, agreed to meet exclusively with counsel for the select committee in a good-faith effort to provide true and relevant evidence,” Joseph Tacopina, Guilfoyle’s lawyer, said in a statement after she halted her interview.“However, upon Ms Guilfoyle’s attendance, the committee revealed its untrustworthiness, as members notorious for leaking information appeared,” Tacopina said, referring to the two congressmen Schiff and Raskin.The lawyer for Guilfoyle added that after he asked for a break to address the issue with House investigators, the select committee leaked the breakdown in proceedings to reporters. A spokesman for the select committee has denied Tacopina’s claim.The select committee did not address those complaints on Thursday. But the subpoena authorisation suggested the panel does not believe the matter precludes her from testifying about her contacts with Trump and rally organisers on January 6.The panel additionally noted that it had earlier informed her legal team that members would be present in her interview and even offered to reschedule Guilfoyle’s interview, but she declined.Guilfoyle was notably present for an Oval Office meeting that morning when Trump pressed then Vice-President Mike Pence to reject slates of electors for Biden at the joint session of Congress and thus return him to power, the subpoena said.House investigators added in the subpoena that they were also interested in Guilfoyle’s claims that she helped fund the “Save America” rally that preceded the Capitol attack, as well as discussions with Trump about who spoke at the rally.Guilfoyle told at least one rally organizer that she had “raised so much money for this. Literally one of my donors Julie at 3 million” – a reference to Julie Fancelli, who did in fact finance the event, the panel said.TopicsUS Capitol attackHouse of RepresentativesDonald Trump JrUS politicsDonald TrumpnewsReuse this content More