Subterms
Donald TrumpTrump tries to defend ‘just say the election was corrupt’ demand
Ex-president claims he was not trying to subvert democracy
Trump restates election lie that fraud to blame for Biden loss
Giuliani: ‘I committed no crime’ while working for Trump
What did Jim Jordan know about the insurrection and when?
Martin Pengelly in New York@ More
CoronavirusAmerica’s mask wars return as communities split over new guidance The CDC has advised people to wear masks indoors regardless of vaccination status, prompting a political fight in several US states
Eviction crisis after Biden and Congress fail to extend ban
Mike Jordan in AtlantaSat 31 Jul 2021 13.02 EDTFirst published on Sat 31 Jul 2021 08.37 EDTOn Wednesday, Georgia governor Brian Kemp used his official Twitter account to say his state “will not lock down or impose statewide mask mandates”.California expands Covid restrictions as Delta variant threat growsRead moreIt was not the first time the Republican had expressed firm opposition to mandatory face coverings to curb the spread of Covid-19. It was also not the first time Kemp’s resistance to mask mandates met with equally firm resistance from the mayor of Atlanta. Hours later, Keisha Lance Bottoms issued an executive order mandating that masks be worn indoors throughout the Georgia state capital.“Public health experts overwhelmingly agree, and data has proved, that wearing a face covering helps slow the spread of this deadly virus,” Mayor Bottoms said in a statement.“As Covid-19 rates increase, we must remain vigilant, wear a mask, follow [federal] guidelines and other measures to ensure the safety and wellbeing of our communities.”The two leaders have clashed publicly over mask requirements since last summer, on Twitter and in court. A year ago Kemp filed a lawsuit against Bottoms, stating that the mayor “does not have the legal authority to modify, change or ignore” his executive orders forbidding municipal officials from mandating that citizens wear masks.Businesses in Georgia have attempted to avoid offending customers while trying to promote safety after a period of economic challenges.Many restaurant owners declined to comment on the record, saying through representation that the subject was “too toxic”. Others seemed inclined to strike a careful balance.“Our staff is fully vaccinated and we rely on our customers to decide for themselves to wear, or not to wear, masks,” said Chris Green, chief marketing officer of Legends Distillery, which will open in Atlanta’s northern suburbs in mid-August.Paulina de La Valette, co-owner of the Atlanta dance studio Dance 101, sent a note to newsletter subscribers saying the company would “encourage” members to wear masks but would not issue a rule. She opened the newsletter with a bit of political humor: “Welp, Georgia’s favorite divorced parents, Brian Kemp & Keisha Lance Bottoms, are fighting again and we’re in the middle of it … awesome.”Kemp and Bottoms are not the only officials arguing it out. Disagreements over whether people can opt out of wearing masks are also causing passionate political arguments in other southern states, including Texas.Two days after the Atlanta-based Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) released updated guidance recommending Americans wear masks indoors, Governor Greg Abbott signed an executive order stopping municipalities and government agencies from compelling Texans to do so, or even to require Covid vaccines.Abbott is threatening fines of up to $1,000 against local government entities in Texas, days after officials in Austin, Dallas and Houston urged residents to return to mask-wearing.Abbott was joined in denouncing mandates by the Texas senator Ted Cruz, who said: “The CDC has lost its credibility when it comes to what decisions Americans should make about Covid-19. It’s long past time we got back to trusting the American people, not unelected federal bureaucrats.”Elsewhere in the southern US, Florida is grappling with rising Covid cases, having experienced a 50% increase in positivity in a week. Still, Governor Ron Desantis says he wants parents to decide if their children wear masks to school, not local government.Late on Friday, DeSantis signed an executive order that allowed parents to ignore mask mandates. A month ago, the governor signed the “Parents’ Bill of Rights,” which he cited on Friday as a legal rationale for his decision on masks.DeSantis’s order came after the mayors of Orange and Miami-Dade Counties defied him by instituting requirements for facial coverings and, in Orange County, full vaccination for non-union county employees by the end of September. Disney World also just required all visitors aged two and older to wear face coverings, regardless of vaccination status, indoors and in certain modes of its company-owned transit.It all leads to confusion, said Carlton Solle, co-founder of G95, a protective apparel company in the Atlanta area that has been making facial coverings since 2016.Solle told the Guardian business increased with the need for masks under Covid, so he began making masks in addition to scarves and neck gaiters. He also said a lack of understanding and education may keep people from fully protecting themselves.“Unfortunately,” he said, “I think the messaging has changed so much that now you have folks who were supportive of wearing masks questioning what the hell’s going on, because it constantly changes.”Solle said he pulled his daughter out of school in the Atlanta area before other parents because he was concerned about the spread of the virus. After realizing home-schooling presented challenges he hadn’t considered, he sent her back. But the experience made him wish things had been handled differently when Covid first began to spread.“If they would have just said, ‘Hey, suit up, be cautious and keep on rolling,’ I think it would have been a better way of approaching this. But I think shutting everything down and the politics getting involved just made it so messy and complicated.”TopicsCoronavirusUS politicsfeaturesReuse this content More
RepublicansOklahoma Republicans: vaccine mandates like Nazi persecution of Jewish peoplePost on Facebook page features yellow Star of DavidVice-chairman calls post ‘beyond abhorrent’ A More
September 11, 2001, is internationally recognized as a date associated with terrorism and mass murder by al-Qaeda militants based in a Taliban-ruled Afghanistan. Yet the current situation in the country means that September 11, 2021, could see another tragedy: the ethnic cleansing of the Hazara minority. In April, President Joe Biden announced that US forces, and NATO troops along with them, will depart from Afghanistan after 20 years of conflict. This is despite the absence of a peace treaty between the Afghan government and Taliban insurgents.
Britain Must Protect Afghanistan’s Chevening Scholars
READ MORE
Unconstrained by the presence of foreign forces or the binding conditions of a peace agreement, Afghan civilians will be vulnerable to attacks by the Taliban and other terrorist groups, such as the Islamic State in Khurasan Province (IS-KP). Yet if history and the current situation are indicators, the Hazaras are at the greatest risk.
The Hazara of Afghanistan
Before the 19th century, Shia Hazaras were the largest minority in Afghanistan, making up 67% of the population. Between 1890 and 1893, Pashtun Sunni leader Amir Abdur Rahman Khan declared jihaduponHazaras, who resisted by declaring jihad against the ruling forces. Although their fighting was fierce, over half the Hazara population was killed or forced into exile, their lands confiscated and thousands sold via slave markets that remained active until 1920. Women were coerced into marriage with Pashtun men, a practice intended to destroy the cultural integrity and identity of Hazaras.
Embed from Getty Images
This period has been described as the “most significant example of genocide in the modern history of Afghanistan.” The historic significance of Khan’s jihad not only galvanized Pashtun and other Afghan tribes against the Hazaras, but it institutionalized their relegated status within Afghan society to an inferior position. This continued until the invasion of US and NATO forces in 2001.
Today, Hazaras make up around 20% of Afghanistan’s 38-million population. Some, such as international relations scholar Niamatullah Ibrahimi, put this figure at 25%. Yet regardless of how many remain, one thing is clear: The Hazaras are amongst the most discriminated against and persecuted people in the world. As such, they form one of the largest groups of asylum seekers and refugees.
The Soviet Union’s invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 precipitated the largest exodus of Hazaras since 1890. After 10 years of war, the Soviets withdrew. A vacuum ensued that led to various factions vying for power. The Taliban seized control and ruled the country from 1996 to 2001. The Taliban soon launched another era of persecution of Hazaras. Two years after taking control of the Afghan capital, Kabul, the Taliban slaughtered 2,000 Hazaras in Mazar-e-Sharif. An estimated 15,000 Hazaras lost their lives under the Taliban regime. The US-led invasion removed the Taliban from power and resulted in less violence against the Hazaras. Yet the community continued to be deemed an inferior group in Afghanistan. Historically, Hazaras were relegated to menial labor.
Despite the legacy of persecution, marginalization and exclusion from the highest levels of government, Hazaras have achieved important gains in the fields of education and culture since 2001. The Hazaras advocate and practice democratic participation, universal education and tolerance for religious and ethnic pluralism. These values are indispensable for the creation and maintenance of a healthy civil society. Yet Hazaras are anathema to the Taliban and IS-KP.
Targeting the Hazara
With the US departure imminent and the return of the Taliban inevitable, the identity, values and achievements of the Hazara people make them a primary target. The formula was repeated throughout the 20th century: An ideologically intolerant group obtains political power and accentuates salient differences of a minority. The dominant group discriminates against minorities, marginalizes them to the lowest caste in society and then systematically eliminates them.
The pattern of violence often appears to the outside world as random. But to the Hazaras, the violence is systematic. Due to their religious and ethnic identity, passion for education and procreation, the minority community has been targeted for ethnic cleansing.
Embed from Getty Images
Since December 6, 2011, when thousands of Hazaras were attacked in Kabul during the holy day of Ashura, the violence has resembled a genocidal character. The bombings, which killed 70 in Kabul and four in Mazar-e-Sharif, were claimed to be conducted by Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (Lei) a Pakistan-based group strongly affiliated with al-Qaeda and the Taliban. In May of this year, triple bombings left nearly 100 dead, 85 of whom were students at Syed-Al-Shuhada high school, which is predominantly attended by teenage girls. Last year, a maternity ward of a hospital operated by Médecins Sans Frontières was attacked. Twenty-four people died, including 16 mothers and two children. In the same year, 40 students were killed at the Kawsar Danish tutoring center.
Currently, the Taliban control more than half of Afghanistan’s territory. This includes 17 out of 19 districts in Herat’s province, which is densely populated by Hazaras. With repeated attacks against Hazaras, it is clear that ethnic cleansing is taking place in Afghanistan.
The Taliban have applied this formula before and are deliberately using it again with renewed expectation for its all-out assault on Afghanistan after the US departs. Vulnerable groups in the country are already arming themselves and realigning their relationship with the Taliban. Yet not all of these groups support or embrace the Taliban. Rather, they are only doing so out of political necessity and survival. In other words, act supportively of the Taliban or die.
The litmus test of loyalty will be measured by the degree to which other ethnic groups hold the Hazaras in contempt and advance the Taliban’s agenda against them. The phenomenon is called a “cascade,” wherein acts of violence against a marginalized group establishes one’s legitimacy in the eyes of the dominant group.
What Can Be Done?
The Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission has called for the UN to appoint a commission of inquiry to investigate the murder of Hazara school children and attacks on Shia worshippers. The International Criminal Court has authorized the chief prosecutor, Fatou Bensouda, to investigate war crimes committed by all responsible parties, including the Taliban.
Yet more needs to be done. The international community should acknowledge the emerging signs that genocide is underway against the Hazaras and will only escalate. Global powers, such as the United States, must call for the protection of the most vulnerable people. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) should place Hazara refugees on the high-priority list for asylum.
Unique Insights from 2,500+ Contributors in 90+ Countries
In response to the Taliban’s territorial gains, several mujahedeen commanders, including Hazara leader Mohammed Mohaqiq, have organized local civilian forces whose presence has strengthened and inspired government troops. In the recent past, the government armed Hazara civilians, who successfully defended mosques and sacred celebrations from Taliban attacks. Kabul must consider this strategy again.
Yet local civilian forces, the Afghan army and international troops alone will never bring peace, security and stability to Afghanistan. If Hazaras are to remain in the country with any expectation of a recognizable civil existence, a political solution is required. But a settlement without involving Pakistan, China, Iran and the US is doomed to fail.
Pakistan continues to provide safe harbor and assistance to the Afghanistan-based Taliban. China, a key ally of Islamabad, is the only global power with credible influence over the Pakistanis. Iran now supports the Taliban. It does so in order to counter the emergence of an anti-Iranian Islamic state in Afghanistan. The long-term interest of the United States is to prevent Afghanistan from becoming a training ground for anti-Western terrorists. The presence of all these parties, particularly the Iranians and Americans, is required at the negotiating table.
International leadership capable of identifying and appealing to these four powers, whose current relationship is shaped more by enmity than commonality, has yet to emerge. The situation on the ground requires immediate remedies specifically addressed to the threats posed to the Hazaras. It is time to take notice.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy. More
The Biden administration has made it clear that US engagement with the Western Hemisphere is a priority. Much of its early focus has been on Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador, as forced displacement from these countries is such a pressing concern. But a worrying crackdown in Nicaragua is going largely unnoticed. Nicaragua’s political crisis could soon have major humanitarian consequences and further destabilize an already fragile situation in the region. The United States must act.
Nicaragua’s latest crisis began in 2018 with a small demonstration against President Daniel Ortega’s changes to the nation’s pension system. Since then, Ortega and pro-government groups have waged a brutal crackdown on protesters, leaving more than 300 people dead and over 2,000 injured.
Biden’s Pirates of the Caribbean
READ MORE
The situation is becoming increasingly alarming in the run-up to the presidential election on November 7. Last month, Ortega’s government carried out sweeping arrests of top opposition leaders and silenced dissenting voices. There is almost no likelihood of a free and fair election later this year. The government’s actions have also contributed to Nicaragua’s perilous economic situation, which could impede the country’s COVID-19 recovery. Only 2.5% of the Nicaraguan population has been fully vaccinated against COVID-19 and even fewer have received only one dose.
Unique Insights from 2,500+ Contributors in 90+ Countries
Political repression and economic despair have forced over 100,000 Nicaraguans to flee the country. Costa Rica has generously hosted nearly 80% of those who left. Thousands more have gone to Mexico, Panama and the United States. In fact, apprehensions of Nicaraguans at the US southern border increased by 670% between January and May of this year. A recent CID Gallup (Interdisciplinary Development Consultants, Inc.) survey revealed that nearly two out of every three Nicaraguans still in the country want to migrate to the United States, Spain or Canada, due mainly to Nicaragua’s sociopolitical crisis.
Though Nicaraguan refugees and asylum seekers have been generally well-received by their neighbors, the Costa Rican system is under strain as more Nicaraguans — as well as Venezuelans, Cubans and other asylum seekers — seek protection. Nicaraguans in Costa Rica also face barriers to full economic integration and were hard-hit by the COVID-19 pandemic. Many lost jobs in the informal economy and more than three-quarters of Nicaraguans in Costa Rica are experiencing immense hunger. Even more alarming, nearly 60,000 Nicaraguans in Costa Rica made the harrowing decision to return home as opposed to continue living in their host country with limited support.
Take Notice of Nicaragua
The United States should take several steps to address the ongoing displacement and suffering of Nicaraguans.
First, the Biden administration should support Costa Rica in its efforts to receive, protect and integrate Nicaraguans. During a recent visit to Costa Rica, Secretary of State Antony Blinken sent a valuable signal of US engagement. The administration should convey strong public support for Costa Rica, as a democratic leader in the region that is making serious efforts to provide safety to those in need.
The US government should also look for opportunities — directly or through international organizations like the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) — to support Costa Rica’s asylum system and continue to strongly back the Comprehensive Regional Protection and Solutions Framework (MIRPS), the regional initiative to address forced displacement in Central America and Mexico.
Embed from Getty Images
Second, as Costa Rica steps up the provision of COVID vaccines for its population, the Biden administration should explore with agencies, such as UNHCR and the International Organization for Migration (IOM), the provision of humanitarian aid to the Costa Rican government bodies and civil society groups supporting the needs of Nicaraguans receiving protection in Costa Rica.
The administration recently announced its plan to distribute approximately 6 million vaccines through the COVAX initiative to Latin American countries, including Costa Rica. This is a welcomed step in supporting Costa Rica during this tenuous time. Yet Washington could go further by supporting assistance to address job losses and food insecurity that Nicaraguans in Costa Rica have faced amid the pandemic, as well as efforts to ensure that these vulnerable individuals remain protected while they await their vaccinations.
Third, the Biden administration must comply with its own laws and international obligations by permitting Nicaraguans fleeing political persecution to seek asylum at the US southern border with Mexico. The US should commit to ending a near-complete ban on asylum applications and stop sending people back to dangerous situations. Nicaraguan asylum seekers should have their claims assessed — with access to counsel and without being subjected to detention.
As the situation in Nicaragua becomes increasingly dire, these measures would be a step in the right direction and would have a positive impact on displaced Nicaraguans, the government of Costa Rica and the region.
*[Rachel Schmidtke is the advocate for Latin America and Irla Atanda is the special assistant to the president at Refugees International.]
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy. More
Donald TrumpIRS must turn over Trump tax returns to Congress, DoJ saysDepartment says House panel has ‘sufficient reasons’ for requesting returns as Nancy Pelosi hails ‘victory for the rule of law’ Joan E Greve in Washington, Martin Pengelly in New York and agenciesFri 30 Jul 2021 17.40 EDTFirst published on Fri 30 Jul 2021 14.58 EDTThe US Department of Justice on Friday ordered the Internal Revenue Service to hand Donald Trump’s tax returns to a House committee, saying the panel had “invoked sufficient reasons” for requesting them.Trump pressured DoJ officials to falsely claim election corrupt, memos showRead moreThe news was a second blow for Trump in a matter of hours, after released DoJ memos revealed that as part of his campaign to overturn his election defeat by Joe Biden, he pressured top officials to falsely label the 2020 election as corrupt, then “leave the rest to me”.House speaker Nancy Pelosi applauded the DoJ’s order to the IRS to release Trump’s tax returns to the ways and means committee.“Today, the Biden administration has delivered a victory for the rule of law, as it respects the public interest by complying with Chairman [Richard] Neal’s request for Donald Trump’s tax returns,” Pelosi said in a statement.“Access to former President Trump’s tax returns is a matter of national security. The American people deserve to know the facts of his troubling conflicts of interest and undermining of our security and democracy as president.”Candidates for president traditionally disclose their tax returns, although they are not legally compelled to do so. Trump kept his out of the public eye when he ran for the White House in 2016, saying they were under IRS audit, and did not release them while in office.Once Democrats took control of the House in 2018, amid the investigation of Russian election interference and links between Trump and Moscow by the special counsel, Robert Mueller, they began to seek the records in court.Trump fought hard to keep his tax returns out of the public eye but the New York Times obtained some of the records, which showed Trump paid almost nothing in federal income taxes in the years before he entered the White House.In a memo on Friday, the DoJ Office of Legal Counsel said Neal, the Massachusetts congressman who chairs the ways and means committee, had “invoked sufficient reasons for requesting the former president’s tax information”.Under federal law, the OLC said, the Department of the Treasury “must furnish the information to the committee”.The 39-page memo was signed by Dawn Johnsen, installed by the Biden administration as the acting head of the OLC.Trump’s treasury secretary, Steven Mnuchin, said he would not turn over Trump’s tax returns because they were being sought for partisan reasons.The House ways and means committee sued for the records under a federal law that says the IRS “shall furnish” the returns of any taxpayer to a handful of top lawmakers. The committee said it needed Trump’s taxes for an investigation into whether he complied with tax law.Trump’s justice department defended Mnuchin’s refusal and Trump intervened to try to prevent the materials from being turned over to Congress. Under a court order from January, Trump would have 72 hours to object after the Biden administration formally changes the government’s position in the lawsuit.Bill Pascrell, a New Jersey Democrat who chairs the House ways and means subcommittee on oversight, said: “It is about damn time. Our committee first sought Donald Trump’s tax returns on 3 April 2019 – 849 days ago. Our request was made in full accordance with the law and pursuant to Congress’s constitutional oversight powers.”Daniel Goldman, an attorney who counselled Democrats during Trump’s first impeachment inquiry and trial, said: “The former OLC opinion supporting Mnuchin’s ability to withhold Trump’s tax returns was perhaps the most egregious and baseless opinion of many bad ones during the Trump era.”Michael Stern, a former senior counsel for the House Office of General Counsel, told Politico Trump had options to stop the release of his returns.“I think Trump will be given an opportunity to either file a new case or file something in this case in which he states his legal grounds for objecting to his tax returns being produced,” he said, adding: “It’s definitely not over yet.”Elsewhere, the Manhattan district attorney, Cyrus Vance Jr, has obtained copies of Trump’s personal and business tax records as part of a criminal investigation.Trump tried to prevent his accountants from handing over the documents, taking the issue to the supreme court. The justices rejected Trump’s argument that he had broad immunity as president.Speaking to Reuters about the DoJ order, Richard Painter, a University of Minnesota law professor who was ethics counsel to George W Bush, said it seems the Biden justice department “is no longer going to simply kowtow to Donald Trump”.“Every other president has disclosed their tax returns” he said, “and finding out what the conflicts of interest are on the president or a former president who may have made decisions that now have to be revisited – that’s critically important.”TopicsDonald TrumpUS politicsUS elections 2020newsReuse this content More
US SenateCarl Levin, Democratic Michigan senator who opposed Iraq war, dies at 87Widely respected senator served six terms from 1978Biden says Levin was ‘brilliant, humble and principled’ A More
Donald Trump‘Just say the election was corrupt,’ Trump urged DoJ after loss to BidenNotes obtained by House oversight committee show Trump pressured officials to falsely claim the election was not legitimate Hugo Lowell in WashingtonFri 30 Jul 2021 14.49 EDTFirst published on Fri 30 Jul 2021 13.23 EDTDonald Trump pressured top justice department officials to falsely claim that the 2020 election was corrupt so he and his allies in Congress could subvert the results and return him to office, according to newly released memos.“Just say that the election was corrupt [and] leave the rest to me,” the former president told the former acting attorney general, Jeffrey Rosen, and his deputy, Richard Donoghue, memos obtained by the House oversight committee showed. The notes were taken by Donoghue, who documented a 27 December call with Trump and Rosen.Jared Kushner set to move away from politics and launch investment firmRead moreTrump’s demand to the justice department represented an extraordinary instance of a president seeking to influence an agency that is supposed to operate independently of the White House, to advance his own personal interests and political agenda.It is also the latest example of the far-reaching campaign mounted by Trump over the final weeks of his presidency to cast doubt on the results of the 2020 election, which he lost to Joe Biden in a contest devoid of any widespread voter fraud.In the December call, Donoghue told Trump that the justice department had no power to change the outcome of the election, to which the former president replied that he had no such expectation and that he and his allies in Congress would advance the voter fraud claims.Trump did not specifically name the members of Congress on board with his plan, but at various points through the call referred to the House Republicans Jim Jordan and Scott Perry, as well as the Senate Republican Ron Johnson, who are some of his most vociferous defenders on Capitol Hill.The memos taken by Donoghue and turned over to the House oversight committee, which has been investigating Trump and the 6 January attack on the Capitol, directly connect key Republicans to his disinformation campaign to unlawfully subvert the 2020 election.Jordan was among a slew of House and Senate Republicans who voted against certifying Biden’s election victory at the joint session of Congress on 6 January, before a mob of Trump supporters stormed the Capitol in a violent insurrection that left five dead and nearly 140 injured.But the top Republican on the powerful House judiciary committee has since downplayed his role in the former president’s pressure campaign. “Congressman Jordan did not, has not, and would not pressure anyone at the justice department about the 2020 election,” a spokesperson said.The DoJ has typically fought to keep private, executive-branch discussions between presidents and top advisers secret, to avoid setting a precedent that could prevent officials from having candid conversations for fear that they might later becoming public.But the DoJ’s release of the Donoghue memos to Congress reflects a determination that, as with Richard Nixon and Watergate, congressional investigators ought to have the ability to scrutinize potential wrongdoing by a sitting president.The move by the DoJ also follows its decision this week not to assert executive privilege for Rosen to testify to Congress – clearing the path for other top Trump administration officials to appear before congressional committees investigating the former president.Officials at the DoJ and the White House Office of Legal Counsel concluded that executive privilege exists to protect the country, rather than a single individual – and said in a letter it would not be appropriate to invoke the protection for Trump’s efforts to push his personal agenda.Carolyn Maloney, the chair of the House oversight committee, on Friday commended the release of the memos: “These handwritten notes show that President Trump directly instructed our nation’s top law enforcement agency to take steps to overturn a free and fair election.”In the December call, the notes show both officials pushed back against Trump, who, at one point, alleged that there had been widespread fraud in Georgia, Michigan, Nevada and Arizona, which he described as “corrupted elections” – an assertion that drew an immediate condemnation from Donoghue.“Much of the info you’re getting is false,” Donoghue told Trump, adding that the DoJ had completed dozens of initial investigations into his claims but were unable to substantiate any, according to the memos. “We look at allegations but they don’t pan out.”But Trump, undeterred and seemingly anxious about his looming departure from office, pressed on: “Ok fine – but what about the others?” he said, the memos show, referring to the slew of other conspiracies about voter fraud in Georgia. “Not much time left,” Trump added.The former president, in an ominous moment of foreshadowing, then raised the prospect of purging the DoJ’s top officials and installing in their place loyalists such as Jeffrey Clark, who was then the head of the DoJ’s civil division.“People tell me Jeff Clark is great, I should put him in,” Trump said, according to the memos. “People want me to replace DoJ leadership.” The New York Times reported that Clark a week later schemed with Trump to oust Rosen as acting attorney general and force Georgia to overturn its election results.TopicsDonald TrumpUS elections 2020Trump administrationHouse of RepresentativesUS politicsnewsReuse this content More
