Congress GOP Justice Department The Biden Administration

WATCH A DOJ Official Give Jim Jordan A Brutal Fact-Check During House Hearing

A hearing of the House Judiciary Committee wound up proving just how little chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) knows about the law or U.S. history, with an official of the Justice Department having to give Jordan some embarrassing facts which completely undercut the point he was trying to make.

Jordan asked Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke about a civil rights investigation into Elon Musk’s SpaceX company, which the DOJ has accused of refusing to hire asylum recipients and refugees in direct violation of U.S. law.

“Did Elon Musk’s purchase of Twitter have anything to do with the Justice Department’s decision to file that lawsuit against SpaceX?” Jordan asked Clarke.

Clarke told Jordan that the DOJ investigation of SpaceX began during the Trump administration.

“The investigation into SpaceX was open during the last administration, and we filed an administrative action under the Immigration and Nationality Act, an important law passed by this body with bipartisan support and signed into law by President Reagan,” she noted.

Jordan: “What are you alleging that SpaceX did wrong?”

Clarke: “In this case, we allege that the company is not compliant with the anti-discrimination provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act.”

Rather than accept that, Jordan asked, “They’re discriminating against refugees and asylum seekers, is that right?”

Once again, Clarke had to fact check Jordan.

“No, Chairman. Against people who have received refugee status and asylum status by our federal courts and who enjoy equal standing under federal law to U.S. citizens and naturalized citizens.

“The law requires equal treatment of these individuals.”

Jordan continued to press.

“I just want to cut to the chase. You’re suing SpaceX because they hired too many Americans, too many citizens.”

“And yet you bring the lawsuit after Mr. Musk purchases Twitter, now X, is that right?”

Clarke shut Jordan down by responding: “We apply the laws that this body gave us without fear or favor.”

Congress Crime Donald Trump GOP Justice Department

House Republicans Demand Jack Smith Give Them All Trump Indictment Documents – Or Else

Perhaps sensing that the federal criminal case progressing against former president Donald Trump on multiple fronts is closer to becoming a slam dunk for Special Counsel Jack Smith, three members of the House Republican caucus are now demanding that Smith and the Justice Department hand over all of the documents related to Trump’s indictment.

According to Eric Cortellessa of Time Magazine, House Oversight Committee members James Comer (R-KY), Jim Jordan (R-OH), and Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL) sent a letter in which they demand “all documents and and communications” between Smith and the DOJ that pertain to Trump or his federal indictments.

The three lawmakers also threatened to use a “compulsory process” if Smith doesn’t comply by Dec. 15.

Specifically, Jordan, Comer, and Luna say they want to know how Smith empaneled grand juries and how he decided what witnesses he would offer immunity in exchange for the testimony. In other words, they want to know everything Smith knows even though they aren’t entitled to such information until after the case has concluded.

What “compulsory process” would be used against Smith? That remains unclear, but it’s safe to say no federal court in the country is going to compel the Justice Department to hand over information related to an ongoing criminal prosecution.

Here’s more from Eric Cortellessa, which he shared on Twitter:

Donald Trump GOP Justice Department The Trump Adminstration WTF?!

Evidence Suggests Some Congressional Republicans Could Still Be Charged For Jan. 6

While it’s been clear for some time now that former President Donald Trump was directly involved in fomenting the violence that took place on January 6 at the U.S. Capitol, reporting from The New York Times suggests that some Republicans in Congress also played a role in the efforts to subvert the 2020 election and keep power through a violent uprising.

Specifically, the Times reveals that notes taken by a top deputy to then-Acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen point directly to a coordinated effort between Trump and members of Congress. Those notes, which were handwritten by deputy AG Richard Donoghue, report what Trump told Rosen:

“Just say that the election was corrupt + leave the rest to me and the R. Congressmen.”

That, many legal experts said, is a literal smoking gun, and it means that several Republicans in Congress are facing indictment for their role in what transpired on that fateful day.

Philip Bump of The Washington Post focused in on the notation from Donoghue:

“What Donoghue’s notes suggest is that Trump had fully bought into the effort that would eventually become his Alamo: having Republican legislators block the electoral-vote counting due to take place at the Capitol on Jan. 6.”

Failing to certify counting of the electoral votes would have resulted in a Constitutional crisis. The added chaos of a riot at the Capitol would have provided the perfect opportunity for Trump to declare a national emergency and refuse to hand over the reins of power to Joe Biden. It also would have provided an “excuse” for a coup d’etat. And it would have even had the blessing of a faction in Congress.

Once again, quoting Philip Bump:

“Some congressional Republicans clearly did their best to aid Trump’s effort. On the morning of Jan. 6, (Rep Mo) Brooks spoke before Trump at a rally outside the White House. It was time, he said, to ‘start taking down names and kicking ass.’ It’s not clear if any of those in attendance did the former, but some clearly did the latter.”

Brooks, along with Reps. Jim Jordan, Jim Banks, Lauren Boebert, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Kevin McCarthy (and perhaps others) may well find themselves charged with crimes by the Justice Department.


Crime Donald Trump Justice Department

Jack Smith Accuses Trump Of ‘Threatening’ Mark Meadows – Judge Considering Penalties

Multiply-indicted former president Donald Trump is once again in very hot water due to his inability to keep his threats to himself, and could be on the verge of being punished legally for his actions.

Special Counsel Jack Smith has filed an emergency motion with U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan accusing the disgraced ex-president of threatening his former chief of staff Mark Meadows.

ABC News reports:

In a filing Wednesday night to the judge presiding over Trump’s federal election interference case in Washington, Smith’s team said Trump’s “harmful” post on Truth Social was trying to “send an unmistakable and threatening message to a foreseeable witness in this case.”

Smith’s team argued to U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan that the alleged threat is just one more example of why a limited gag order in the case is needed as soon as possible.

Chutkan had issued such a gag order early last week but then temporarily suspended it after the former president’s legal team appealed the judge’s order to a higher court.

Here’s the post that drew the court filing from Smith. It was made on Trump’s failing Truth Social site:

I don’t think Mark Meadows would lie about the Rigged and Stollen 2020 Presidential Election merely for getting IMMUNITY against Prosecution (PERSECUTION!) by Deranged Prosecutor, Jack Smith. BUT, when you really think about it, after being hounded like a dog for three years, told you’ll be going to jail for the rest of your life, your money and your family will be forever gone, and we’re not at all interested in exposing those that did the RIGGING — If you say BAD THINGS about that terrible “MONSTER,” DONALD J. TRUMP, we won’t put you in prison, you can keep your family and your wealth, and, perhaps, if you can make up some really horrible “STUFF” a out him, we may very well erect a statue of you in the middle of our decaying and now very violent Capital, Washington, D.C. Some people would make that deal, but they are weaklings and cowards, and so bad for the future our Failing Nation. I don’t think that Mark Meadows is one of them, but who really knows? MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!

The filing from Smith’s team alleges that Trump has a “long and well-documented history of using his public platform to target disparaging and inflammatory comments at perceived adversaries. When the defendant does so, harassment, threats, and intimidation foreseeably and predictably follow.”

Just last week, Judge Chutkan issued a limited gag order that specifically prohibited Trump from attacking the special counsel or members of his team, court staff, or any witnesses in the ongoing case, which is scheduled for trial in March of next year.

Smith notes in the filing, “Recent social media posts targeting a known witness in this case in an attempt to influence and intimidate him” necessitate a more stringent gag order.


Crime Donald Trump Justice Department

Jack Smith Is About To Get Trump’s ‘Trove Of Secrets’

A court filing from Special Counsel Jack Smith makes it clear Smith is demanding that failed former president Donald Trump either “put up or shut up” regarding whether or not he wants to use a specific legal defense in the 2020 election interference case brought against him by the Department of Justice, according to a former U.S. Attorney.

Barbara McQuade, who served as U.S. Attorney for Eastern District of Michigan in the Obama administration, notes in an article she wrote for MSNBC that the motion is to the point and could prove devastating for Trump’s legal team and his overall defense.

In a motion filed this week, the special counsel asked Judge Tanya S. Chutkan to order Trump to provide formal pre-trial notice of any intent to rely on advice of counsel as a defense in the federal election interference case. According to the motion, Trump and his lawyers have ‘repeatedly and publicly’ stated an intent to assert the defense at trial. The Dec. 18 exhibit list deadline, Smith argues, is the time for Trump to put up or shut up.

If Trump uses the defense, McQuade explains, he’ll lose the protections found in the attorney-client provisions of the law, which means he could then be forced to turn over any and all documents between him and his lawyers, which is about as risky as it gets when dealing with a criminal case.

Smith’s demand is important because this defense would trigger two significant consequences — a waiver of attorney-client privilege and a duty to produce all documents related to the advice. Until now, Trump has been able to have it both ways — protect testimony and documents from disclosure as privileged, while also claiming that his conduct was lawful because he simply relied on what his lawyers told him.

Those documents could prove especially damning, as they might well show exactly how Trump planned and carried out his attempted coup that culminated in the horror of January 6, 2021.

No matter what happens with the motion in the long run, McQuade concludes, it will force Trump to make a decision that could send him to prison for decades.

Regardless of whether Smith’s motion succeeds, at some point Trump will have to decide whether asserting what may be a flimsy defense is worth sharing his trove of secrets.

Will he or won’t he? We’re about to find out.