The Trump to Willard War Room to Militia Connection

The name Roger Stone does not appear in the Guardian story reporting that the January 6 Committee will soon seek more information on Trump’s calls to the Willard Hotel late on January 5 and on January 6, as he faced the prospect that Mike Pence would not violate his oath and fail to certify the legitimate winner of the election.

Congressman Bennie Thompson, the chairman of the House select committee investigating the Capitol attack, has said the panel will open an inquiry into Donald Trump’s phone call seeking to stop Joe Biden’s certification from taking place on 6 January hours before the insurrection.

The chairman said the select committee intended to scrutinize the phone call – revealed last month by the Guardian – should they prevail in their legal effort to obtain Trump White House records over the former president’s objections of executive privilege.

“That’s right,” Thompson said when asked by the Guardian whether the select committee would look into Trump’s phone call, and suggested House investigators had already started to consider ways to investigate Trump’s demand that Biden not be certified as president on 6 January.

Thompson said the select committee could not ask the National Archives for records about specific calls, but noted “if we say we want all White House calls made on January 5 and 6, if he made it on a White House phone, then obviously we would look at it there.”

Instead, the story lists a bunch of people who have been even less cooperative with the Jan 6 investigation than Stone.

The former president’s remarks came as part of wider discussions he had with the lieutenants at the Willard – a team led by Trump lawyers Rudy Giuliani, John Eastman, Boris Epshteyn and Trump strategist Steve Bannon – about delaying the certification, the sources said.

The story also mentions that the Jan 6 Committee is finally considering a subpoena to Rudy Giuliani — a subpoena that will hit just as debates over crime-fraud excepted conversations start to appear on the SDNY docket.

A spokesperson for the select committee declined to comment about what else such a line of inquiry might involve. But a subpoena to Giuliani, the lead Trump lawyer at the Willard, is understood to be in the offing, according to a source familiar with the matter.

The underlying Guardian story had noted that the calls to the Willard proved a direct tie between the White House and the war room.

Trump’s remarks reveal a direct line from the White House and the command center at the Willard.

The reason I raise Stone is that the repeated reports from Joshua James to Oath Keeper field commander Mike Simmons about a VIP disgruntled about his shoddy treatment — a VIP that is almost certainly Stone — show there was a direct tie from the Willard to one of several militias who were instrumental in breaching the Capitol from multiple points.

Particularly given the confirmation that the government believes he was lying, I’d like to point to some redacted references to a VIP that Joshua James was guarding who was bitching that he wasn’t getting VIP treatment.

This is likely Roger Stone. That’s true because — as Dan Friedman reported — James was “guarding” Stone that day (and Simmons guarded Stone the previous day), the name seems to fit, and Stone has publicly complained about his treatment that day.

While exchanging calls with Simmons, James traveled from the Willard Hotel, in downtown Washington—where he had been leading a security detail guarding Stone—to the Capitol.

What appears to be the first reference to this person also seems to fit the name, which would be the full name, Roger Stone, on first reference. Roberto Minuta, Jonathan Walden, and the now-cooperating Mark Grods were also guarding Stone.

Which brings us to the middle reference. Simmons claims that James called him every time his VIP moved.

Only, if that VIP was Roger Stone, he didn’t move. By his own account he stayed at the Willard before taking his bruised ego and leaving town.

If that’s right, it means Simmons was trying to explain multiple calls with James, and to do so, he offered the bullshit excuse that Stone, who by his own account never left the Willard, kept moving.

These reports in on said VIP’s non-movement would have taken place the morning before the assault on the Capitol, during the same period when, the Guardian reports, Trump alerted the Willard war room that Pence was likely going to put his duty to the Constitution over his fealty to Donald Trump.

The Guardian reports that Thompson may go this route to increase pressure on the people who were privy to the contents of those calls. That pressure could work in multiple directions. If it coughed up evidence from a less-damning non-privileged call, it might help SDNY in battles to access such materials from Rudy’s phones. It might increase pressure on John Eastman, a lawyer who has only inconsistently claimed privilege for his conversations with Trump. Or it might cause one or another of Trump’s bottom-feeders — Stone and Steve Bannon — to take the other out.

Even just identifying the times of such calls, though, would provide a way to understand how White House input into the Willard intersected with Willard communications with the Oath Keepers, Willard directions to Congress, and White House pressure on Congress intersected.

145 replies
  1. Peterr says:

    Sounds like it might be time to add a “January 6 Timeline” (or several sub-timelines under that theme) to the EW Timeline collection.

  2. P J Evans says:

    AFAIK none of the former guy’s lawyers and cabinet had offices at the Willard, so privilege wouldn’t seem to apply.

    • Peterr says:

      Privilege does not attach to a physical space, but to the people having the conversation. If I am talking to my attorney on the phone, it doesn’t matter if my lawyer is in the office, in a car, on a hiking trail, or in the bathtub. So long as no non-attorney is present, it’s a privileged conversation.

      • P J Evans says:

        Point being that none of them should have been at the Willard – so why was he calling, and how would privilege apply?

        • Peterr says:

          Again, privilege applies to people, not places.

          If a cabinet official is talking to the president about official business, that is (broadly speaking) covered by executive privilege. Doesn’t matter where either of them is.

          Of course, there is also the crime-fraud exception to any kind of privilege, which again goes to the people having the conversations, not the places where they are held.

        • Leoghann says:

          Also, the Willard is a public venue. Any member of the general public may rent a room or suite there. All of those turds are members of the general public, and none were legally constrained from being at the Willard. It was WHAT they were doing that is reprehensible, not where they were doing it.

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        The Willard occupies some of the best real estate in DC, not quit halfway between the White House and the Capitol. It’s overwhelmed whenever there’s a national election or inauguration event. Lawyers disproportionately populate those events, which makes a lawyer’s presence at the Willard unremarkable.

        As Peterr says, AC privilege is the client’s and binds the lawyer, wherever she is. But it can be lost. One way is for the client to share privileged information with third parties. Another is for the topics discussed to fall outside of offering legal advice. Trump is famous for doing both.

          • OldTulsaDude says:

            When it comes to threats against Mike Pence, the EP claim they may try is Execution Privilege but perhaps that defense is only valid in France.

        • Curveball says:

          Technical point: the Willard Hotel is two blocks from the White House; the Capitol Building is more than 1.5 miles away.

        • MMVA says:

          Er…the Williard Hotel (1401 Pennsylvania Ave, NW) is much closer to the White House than you may be remembering. It is about 0.25 miles from the White House as the crow flies on my map. It is an easy walk from the Willard across 15th St, NW, to the White House grounds. The Capital is about 1.5 miles from the White House.

  3. BobCon says:

    One of Dick Cheney’s favorite tactics for shaping a narrative was taking a story where he already had an answer and framing it as something new, troubling, and uncertain by letting it unfold along predictable lines with regular leaks along the way that supported his conclusion.

    The presence of a certain someone on the 1/6 Committee makes it a little hard not to wonder if any of that is happening now.

    The obvious question is whether there is just Judith Miller vapor here, and I think the case is a lot more than aluminum tubes.

    The main defense the GOP is going to stage is claiming that without a Trump criminal conviction there is no wrongdoing whatsoever. I think what is going on in part now is an effort to preempt that lazy press narrative, which Barr managed extremely effectively with Mueller.

    There was also no real court of law case against Iraq in 2002 — everything Cheney did was aimed at swaying the press to launch a drumbeat on WMDs that moved public opinion and created enough jitteryness on the other side to limit cohesion and put them on the defensive.

    And in addition to the issues MW has noted that a tag team approach between Congress and DOJ can provide on the legal front, it’s worth adding that the benefit on a PR front is that US reps have freedom to share information that DOJ officials do not, at least legally.

    Meadows used that freedom liberally as a rep, and it’s still a mystery to me why the GOP didn’t try harder to get moles on the 1/6 Committee. If McCarthy hadn’t pulled all of his nominees after Pelosi refused to accept Jordan and Banks, he still could have had more inside information with three members on his side than he has now.

    • John B. says:

      I have been curious about this too…namely why McCarthy and the GOP in the House didn’t try harder to get less obvious moles on the 1/6 select committee than Jordan and Banks…my reading was always that TFG insisted on those two as he could count on them to obstruct and destroy and report back to him and when they were dismissed by the Speaker they didn’t have another 5 in waiting…again my reading was that TFG objected to placing anyone on the committee thus validating it and causing the G(Q)P to lose their select narrative that the select committee was partisan and illegal.

      • Peterr says:

        I disagree.

        McCarthy put forward Jordan and Banks *knowing* they would be unacceptable, so that he could wail and moan about Democratic steamrolling of the process. This was yet another step in the PR war to undermine whatever the committee comes up with.

          • BobCon says:

            I think that might be true. I think it is certainly possible the Trump team was only thinking in terms of a one week news cycle and the bump they would get from the usual idiot pundits bemoaning the lack of bipartisanship.

            But if that’s the case, I’m still struck by how blinkered they were. I know the core group is dumb, but this is on a par of dumb with reports a few years ago that Trump was seriously considering testifying in person before Mueller.

            It may be a sign that they are lacking even the common sense of someone like Ty Cobb. The present day Cobb is a minor leaguer, but he’s still enough of a pro to know where the foul lunes are.

            • matt fischer says:

              It’s hard for me to see as anything but a serious blunder. Though sold by the Right (and some MSM) as merely a partisan committee, there’s no getting around the fact that two Republicans serve on it.

              • Rugger9 says:

                Or that McCarthy had his opportunity to put more members on that could serve as moles (i.e. Doug LaMalfa from CA and other under-the-radar GQP types) as well as limiting the time that the committee would operate. This week would have been its last if the GQP played nice with Pelosi.

                However, being an idiot engaged in eleventy dimension trickeration Kevin McC decided to nominate completely unacceptable options including members likely to be summoned to blow up the process. Kevin McC’s reward for being too clever by half is to have the GQP seditionists in the news all year, especially if the Archivist releases the DJT records.

                I think it was PT Barnum that said there is no such thing as bad publicity, but we’re about to see the exceptions that prove the rule.

                • VinnieGambone says:

                  Pity Jordan got wung. They could have had one of the page’s walk the subpeona across the floor and hand it to him live on CSPAN.

            • Zirc says:

              It seems to be a blunder to me. Right up there with the Soviets boycotting the UN Security Council when the vote for UN military action in Korea took place.


            • Peterr says:

              I don’t know that they were blinkered as much as they were afraid of pissing off Trump and facing the wrath of him and his followers.

              And if you are an elected GOP person, nothing says “Primary opponent” in the GOP more loudly than being insufficiently obsequeous to Dear Leader.

          • Peacerme says:

            It’s possible that if they put legit republicans on the committee, in reporting back, republicans would find out the truth, that they may suspect but can now continue to ignoreand no longer be able to feign ignorance about what they have all been colluding to uphold. Maybe they didn’t want to put anyone in the committee who didn’t already know the whole truth.

              • timbo says:

                There were a few more that voted for various other things anti-Twitler over the past year. The two Republicans on the J6 Committee just have more cajones than the average GOP member in swing districts. Plus, swing districts will go Dem for sure if the GOP Reps currently there get primaried by wingnuts so… here we are with just two x two.

    • obsessed says:

      This is a extremely fascinating comment. I’d love to hear more discussion of the similarities and differences among the various scandals of the Bush/Cheney & Trump administrations. When you talk about D. Cheney’s narrative management are you talking about lying us into the war in the first place or protecting himself and others in the aftermath? Also, how do you think the present of Ms. Certain Someone relates to this? I’m also deeply intrigued about her motivations and strategies in all of this (and D. Cheney’s, if any).

      In a broader sense, to what extent if any does the well worn TV trope “crisis management” apply here?

      • BobCon says:

        I’m vastly less well read on Cheney’s post-fiasco message management, but everything I know about his manipulation of the prewar buildup suggests he was extremely adept at working feedback loops in the press.

        He got reporters and pundits to tell him what kind of doubts and concerns they had about war with Iraq, and figured out the info and framing that would get them to his side. He understood that they placed a lot more value on their own spadework than on simple info dumps, and he figured out how to dole out info in sequential pieces that led to the conclusion he wanted.

        He understood their sourcing needs, and made sure that the people they would talk to had the same data and were on the same page. And he understood how to cut people like Powell out of the loop on that info, so that they couldn’t contest it, or even necessarily know what reporters were asking about.

        I doubt he is directing Liz Cheney on a day to day basis, but I am sure she has learned a lot about how this stuff works from him over the years. And I am sure the name gives her access that most other people have to fight for.

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          I suspect the two have each other on speed dial and that Papa is available 24/7. Baby Dick is his legacy, one they both want to take into the Oval Office.

      • Leoghann says:

        I get a tremendous laugh whenever I read someone’s suspicions that Liz Cheney is McCarthy’s, or Trump’s, mole. Liz is indeed her father’s daughter. He was one of the original neo-cons; people tend to forget that in 2021 the neo-cons have become “Old Line Republicans.” His daughter has followed in his footsteps philosophically as well as politically.

        I think L. Cheney originally stuck out on her own in this mess because she had been encouraged by a lot of her elders and a few of her cohorts to assert the standards of the (now dearly departed) Grand Old Party. As we know, that has been slapped into a very small closet by the New GQP. Since her banishment from the party by Trumpsters, I strongly suspect that her activities on the Jan 6 Committee and her public statements are her way of saying “fuck all of you.” She isn’t Susan Collins; she has a very strong personality.

        People tend to forget that Dick Cheney was in the corporate world during the early part of his political career, and again during the Clinton administration. Also, Cheney and Karl Rove have been friends and associates since both were young, arrogant deplorables. And Rove was basically the inventor of “shaping the narrative.”

        Cheney has been manipulating public images since he was Secretary of Defense (remember the first Gulf War?). His lifelong involvement in the oil industry had made him very aware of the oil production in Iraq and its potential since the Seventies. So his conniving to get into Iraq was not something he woke up with one morning. It had been developed.

        Cheney learned the importance of opacity in public dealings in his twenties, from Richard Nixon, and he and Rove worked together to develop narratives for numerous Republican scams. The talent served him well as he continued to cast the filthy, scandal-ridden Reagan administration so that it looked like Morning in America. And it continued to serve him in making the USA’s misadventures in Iraq palatable. Cheney’s time as Chairman & CEO of Halliburton, 1995-2000, was remarkable by its lack of transparency and constant treading of the fine line between corporate governance and fraud.

        And Dick Chaney really hates Donald Trump.

        • naomi emmich says:

          Thank you for mentioning Carl Rove…
          for the youngens here Marcy has:
          I suspect he was on the planning committee.
          If so was he active during the time period this committee studies? Are the Chaneys and Rove still friends?

        • obsessed says:

          “And Dick Cheney really hates Donald Trump.”

          I wonder how that hatred evolved and why Cheney didn’t just use Trump and Pence as useful idiots, as he did with Bush II and Reagan. With Liz Cheney, it seems like a lot of her animus stems from having her life physically threatened for several hours. That certainly seems to have provided a lot of extra motivation in the case of Pelosi.

          Also curious about Rove in all this. He seems torn between using Trump as a tool and trying to get him out of the way.

          Another thing I really don’t understand is why the GOP didn’t use the second impeachment to prevent Trump from running again. There seems to be a non-public hatred of him and the old adage “Everything Trump Touches Dies” rings truer and truer by the day. It’s amazing how easy it is to imagine all these peoples’ motivations and machinations playing out like scenes from a season of “Succession”.

          • Rita says:

            Conventional wisdom suggests that Republicans are fearful of being primaried by someone even more loyal to Trump. Plus some Republicans are Trump believers.

            One Republican has recently come forward and said he should have voted for the 2nd impeachment.

            • Knox Bronson says:

              There is also the problem that most of the Republicans are deeply compromised and Trump probably has the goods on all of them. Witness Lady Graham’s transformation from intermittent Trump naysayer to Trump’s fiercest defender after a round of golf with the then-President one afternoon.

  4. Benton says:

    In a previous comment, I showed how former Acting SecDef Miller was deceptive in his testimony before the House COR on May 12. The most critical parts of that testimony concern his interactions with Trump prior to Jan 6. First is an exchange Miller had with Rep. Byron Donalds concerning his Jan 3 meeting with Trump:

    Mr. DONALDS. At what point did you and President Trump actually have a discussion on this request [Dec 31 RFA] from Mayor Bowser?
    Mr. MILLER. I had a meeting with President Trump on the 3d of January concerning some international threats, and at the very end, he asked if there were any requests for National Guard support, and I informed him of Mayor Bowser’s request.
    Mr. DONALDS. Mr. Miller, to clarify that point, did you tell the President about the Mayor’s request, or did President Trump ask if there were requests?
    Mr. MILLER. He asked if there were requests.
    Mr. DONALDS. What was the President’s response to you with regard to the request made by Mayor Bowser?
    Mr. MILLER. Fill it and do whatever was necessary to protect the demonstrators and that were executing their constitutionally protected rights.

    Second is Miller’s written, prepared testimony for the committee about a Jan 5 phone call with Trump:

    “On the afternoon of January 5, I received a call from the President in connection with a rally by his supporters that day at Freedom Plaza. The President asked if I was watching the event on television. I replied that I had seen coverage of the event. He then commented that “they” were going to need 10,000 troops the following day. The call lasted fewer than thirty seconds and I did not respond substantively, and there was no elaboration.”

    How did the DoD IG report handle these crucial exchanges, ones that directly concern a President potentially using the military to interfere with the democratic transfer of power? Regarding the Jan 3 meeting at the White House, General Milley’s account is given, but no mention is made of Miller’s House testimony:

    “Mr. Miller and GEN Milley met with the President at the White House at 5:30 p.m. The primary topic they discussed was unrelated to the scheduled rally. GEN Milley told us that at the end of the meeting, the President told Mr. Miller that there would be a large number of protestors on January 6, 2021, and Mr. Miller should ensure sufficient National Guard or Soldiers would be there to make sure it was a safe event. Gen Milley told us that Mr. Miller responded, ‘We’ve got a plan and we’ve got it covered.'” (IGp31)

    Regarding the Jan 5 phone call, indications emerge that the conversation between Trump and Miller lasted longer than the thirty seconds Miller previously reported. Additionally, Trump’s words are largely washed from the account:

    “Mr. Miller told us that the President called him during the evening of January 5, 2021, and asked if Mr. Miller was watching the protests in Freedom Plaza. Mr. Miller told us that at that point, he was not concerned that there was going to be a mobilization of violence. Mr. Miller told us that he and the President discussed the upcoming rallies, and the President’s guidance was to do what was required to protect the American people.” (IGp41)

    • Leoghann says:

      Please keep in mind that there were more than one Miller in the Trump administration. It would benefit me, and possibly others here, if you would specify which one you’re referring to.

      • Peterr says:

        Benton opened the comment with “In a previous comment, I showed how former Acting SecDef Miller . . .”

        That’s Christopher Miller

      • Solo says:

        ” Stoned you when they tried to overturn.
        They’ll Stone the Constitution, let it burn.
        They’ll Stone with you pounding down the door.
        They’ll Stone you standing on the Senate floor.
        You know he just might toss the press a bone.
        I tell you gotta keep an eye on Stone.

        His got a hand on the ladle in the stew.
        I tell you Stone is never cooking nothing new.
        He’ll Stone you if you take a little whiff.
        He’ll call it just a little Christmas gift.
        Oh, we sure hope they tag him out at Home.
        You know, everybody keep an eye on Stone. ”

        (“Everybody Must Get Stoned” – B. D.)

    • Nord Dakota says:

      Savage Librarian–I am catching up on the posts but also this is for you:

      This is the Italian Bakery in Virginia, MN, where many people came from Slovenia, Italy, Greece, Czechoslovakia, etc a century+ ago and has the best potica anywhere. It was a staple at dessert buffets when I was growing up in the area (even though as kids we wouldn’t touch anything that contained nuts) and my mom was addicted to it.

      • Solo says:

        Nord Dakota – then you’ve maybe shopped canoes at Spring Creek Outfitters in Mt. Iron? Or had an auto worked on at A Pair of Jacks?

  5. Rugger9 says:

    I noticed that EW has mentioned a couple of time now that Stone did not move from the Willard. Where did this information originally come from and is it reliable (i.e. not from Stone) and/or independently verified? Alternatively, would “moving” also include between war rooms in the Willard which I would expect the militias to have set up? That would let Stone keep his hands on the marionette strings with some plausible deniability. This whole Stop the Steal “movement” was his baby so why would he vanish on J6?

    • Peterr says:

      In publicly released text messages from various DOJ court filings, Stone’s “security” folks texted to each other that he was not moving.

    • harpie says:

      Why would STONE abandon “his baby”?

      Because STONE and TRUMP KNEW their baby was designed to, and destined to create HAVOC, and they took positive steps to pawn that baby off to [among others] Jack POSOBIEC and Ali ALEXANDER, who publicly adopted STONE and TRUMP’s baby on 9/7/20. [See screenshot here:

      TRUMP also accused his own SUPPORTERS of spawning that baby in his J6 speech:

      You don’t concede when there’s theft involved. Our country has had enough. We will not take it anymore (cheering) and that’s what this is all about. And to use a favorite term that all of you people really came up with: We will stop the steal.

      • Rugger9 says:

        That points to the “plausible deniability” aspect of my earlier comment, but fundamentally, is either Stone or DJT capable of not keeping an eye on the inside? I don’t see it.

        As for not moving, if Stone was monitoring events virtually, he wouldn’t need to move, just be able to talk to the front line.

  6. OldTulsaDude says:

    When I dare hope that Mr. Trump will finally be held responsible for crimes, I remind myself of the difficulties in the past of bringing down heads of criminal families, and the tactics engaged in those actions that could not be engaged due to the status of a legally elected U.S. President, regardless of illegalities. The wiretaps that could not be authorized for the White House, the FBI plants and informants.

    Nope, seems to me the only hope is to build a criminal case against someone deep inside the organization and then squeeze until the truth spills out.

    • Bobby Gladd says:

      I struggle to fight off episodic bouts of cynical anxiety that Trump will yet again escape accountability. Really tired of thinking about him and his endless shitshow.

      Meanwhile, MAGA world remains in the Trump-induced cognitive coma of #DontLookUp.

      My sister gave me a stemless wine glass for Christmas engraved with “it’s not really drinking alone if the dog is home?“ 🤣

      • MB says:

        I’ve heard of young mothers who have admitted to occasionally putting red wine into the baby bottle, to calm that cranky kid down. But I do wonder now what’s in that dog’s water bowl!

        • John Paul Jones says:

          Years ago one of our local department stores sold what was called “grippe water,” for “collicky babies.” Since our firstborn was a bit of a fussy dude for his first six months, I considered getting some – various parental types had recommended it. However, when I checked the ingredients, the small print informed me that the mixture was 25% alcohol. I think what might be just as effective is for mom to have a shot of single malt herself. My understanding is that it will show up in the milk fairly quickly.

          • JohnJ says:

            I had friends my parents age tell me they were given “cough syrup” with morphine before bed every night. Especially the 2 I knew raised in boy’s town style orphanages.

            I can remember times it would have crossed my mind as a parent.

            • vvv says:

              In the late 90’s I had in-laws that gave the kids cough syrup, on a fairly regular basis, to “help them sleep”.

          • Nord Dakota says:

            Since the kid is now 32, I think it’s safe to confess. He was a handful (sometimes still is) and there was a teething stretch that was a nightmare. All the usual tricks did nothing, he’d be crying and tired but unable to fall asleep. Did I pour whiskey in his bottle? Well. . . . not exactly. I calculated approximate blood volume compared to an adult and the amount that would equate to a single shot, and used an eyedropper to put, I think, 20 drops in an 8 oz bottle, plus some sugar. It only took about 2 ounces to get him over the turnstile and settle down and then get him to sleep. But I was terrified of a social worker showing up out of the blue and inspecting my fridge. Only used it a couple of times.

            In the 70s New Mexico bars allowed a minor to drink if they were there with a parent or spouse (there were a lot of short-lived “marriages” amongst my college friends and me). Once someone’s mom was visiting along with her 10 year old sister, and they joined a large group to go dancing at a place with bluegrass music. I remember the little sister sitting next to me happily drinking her Sangria and hearing about her mom rubbing whisky on her gums when she was teething.

            • JohnJ says:

              Too bad we aren’t a parenting blog here or I would argue how to relieve teething without any of that. Just press firmly and rub on the gums over the teeth. Relieves the pressure of the teeth tearing the gums. That’s what teething rings allow the kid to do themselves. Let the teeth cut their way out instead of stretching the gums and tearing the tissue.

              Never had it fail over 3 kids.
              Sorry for the OT.

              • JohnJ says:

                Didn’t mean to get this deep into it but wanted to correct that you are not pushing until they erupt, just a little press relieves the pressure.

                I am done, sorry.

      • Peterr says:

        Was at a local winery recently whose tasting glasses said something like “Save the planet – it’s the only one with wine.”

        Jowler Creek is Missouri’s first certified totally sustainable green winery. They use chickens and bats for insect control in the fields, sheep to control weeds, solar power to run everything, compost the organic waste (stems, seeds, skins, etc.), are part of a KC-wide glass collection and recycling program, and they provide electric charging stations in the parking area for their guests.

        Their wine is very good also, at prices that match other wineries. Anyone who tells you that sustainability practices will result in poor wine, higher prices, or both needs to visit this place.

        [Note: I am not affiliated with the winery, other than being a very satisfied customer.]

    • Tom R. says:

      The situation is even more dire than OTD describes. If every indictment you ever wished for were returned tomorrow, we would still be in deep, deep trouble.

      You can’t have a democracy unless the parties agree to abide by the results of elections. We haven’t had a democracy for the last 5½ years, at least.

      Tens of millions of people have decided that if democracy means integrated schools, they don’t want democracy. They’d rather have fascism. More generally, they have figured out that if elections are free and fair, the libs will win, so they don’t want to have free elections ever again. Not letting the libs win is worth more to them than life itself.

      Similarly, some exceedingly wealthy individuals have decided that if democracy means progressive taxation, they don’t want democracy. They have been systematically undermining democracy for decades. Quite a few large corporations are fine with this, judging by their campaign contributions.

      IMHO all these guys are being woefully short-sighted. Authoritarianism is bad for everybody in the long run, and even the not-so-long run. We need to get this point across. Indictments will not solve this problem, and may even make it worse by feeding into the “victimhood” narrative. In the best case indictments might help a little, but only a little.

      Merrick Garland cannot possibly save us, for the same reason that Robert Mueller was never going to save us.

      Our task is not to preserve democracy. It’s too late for that. We need to construct a new democracy upon the ashes of the old.

      “No matter how cynical you become, it’s never enough to keep up.”
      ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ — Jane Wagner (for Lily Tomlin).

      • bmaz says:

        This is exactly why I have repeatedly noted the political question doctrine. Courts and the DOJ can never be the savior of democracy, nor are they designed to be.

        • Peterr says:

          Chief Justice Marshall begs to differ, at least in part.

          The courts may not be the saviors of democracy, but he certainly saw their job to be the guardians of it. Paraphrasing, “No, Mr. President, you CANNOT do that. That’s what kings do, and you are no king.”

              • bmaz says:

                You will rescue us. Vote. Help others to vote. Make change from within, the courts are not the magic savior, nor were they ever designed to be.

                • Bay State Librul says:

                  Oh yes, I agree with you, in principle.
                  But, I’m waiting for the next ballad by Bob Dylan following “Murder Most Foul”
                  I don’t think voting will take us to the finish line… our slow decay will continue.

                  • BobCon says:

                    I say this in all sincerity — stop this vague reductionist defeatism and get a good history of the Civil Rights movement that traces the long run of history and all of the challenges and ups and downs.

                    A good one will not just paint a rosy picture but will cover the fears and challenges of the participants, and make it clear how hard the work was.

                    The Taylor Branch trilogy is a good one. John Lewis’s March is a good starting point.

                    One of the common themes of any good history is that reductionist defeatism is the tool of evil people which is carried on their behalf by other people.

                    Always ask yourself — does Steve Bannon want me to say this? Is there a better way to get this point across that doesn’t serve his purposes?

      • Chirrut Imwe says:

        “Not letting the libs win is worth more to them than life itself.”

        This more than anything explains the GQP ‘doctrine’ for me. It explains anti-maskers, and the rise of the no-longer-law-and-order party, and the ability to ignore TFG’s evil sayings/doings, and the destruction of voting rights, and the willful disregard of climate science (any science, actually), and, and…

        • Tom R. says:

          Hatred for the libs is one manifestation of the problem, but there is an even higher-level view that explains that and more besides. Recommended reading:

          The idea is that fear of losing control, i.e. not being able to tell Lesser People what to do, is driving a great deal of this. Surely “caste” is not exactly the right word, but it’s close, and I can’t think of a better word.

          This framework explains why cops as a group have such a low vaccine uptake. They tend to be super-authoritarian. They tell you what to do; nobody tells them what to do.

          At the same time, it explains why the reich-wingers who claim to be the party of “law and order” felt it was OK to do battle against police on Jan. 6th. Their goal is to uphold the caste structure. They expect police to do that. Any police who instead uphold the actual law become the enemy.

          Note that according to intercepted communications, in preparation for Jan. 6th, some attackers had already identified DC police as the enemy, supposedly in league with “antifa”. Reference: page 12 here:

          • Kyle S says:

            It is more fundamental than the “fear of losing control.” It is a fear of losing privilege. For the entire history of the US, the culture has existed to serve the whims & desires of the white patriarchy. Only in the last few decades has that been challenged.

            To MAGAts, when you are used to having privilege & standing over minorities, feminists, etc, seeing those groups gain footing & equality feels like oppression.

            MAGAts would happily burn the country to the ground if it meant that groups of people they identify as “others” don’t get equal status with them.

            That’s really what all this is about, what the last 5 years has been about: a bunch of rednecks mad that society no longer revolves around them, a bunch of authoritarian R’s using this angry base to gain power, and a bunch of grifters going along for the ride.

          • Justlp says:

            Thanks for sharing that link on caste & TFG’s cult members. I read Caste a few months ago, but hadn’t made that association. It makes so much sense.

      • Tom R. says:

        Courts have an important role to play in defending democracy, but I’m not talking about criminal trials. Rather, we need congress to pass comprehensive voting-rights legislation *immediately*. Then we can litigate to overturn the anti-election measures that the reich-wingers are busily putting into place.

        Specific action item #1: Call and/or write to your senators. This applies in all states, but super-especially in Arizona or West Virginia. Explain that protecting the filibuster makes no sense if the senate as a whole ceases to exist, because there are no more elections. Explain that it doesn’t matter how much campaign money they raise if there are no more elections. We need comprehensive voting-rights legislation. Immediately.

        We cannot wait until the 2024 elections, or even the 2022 elections. Voting solves problems if you have a functioning democracy, which we don’t.

        Specific action item #2: We need to explain to the millions of MAGA voters that authoritarianism is bad for them, directly, in the long term and even the not-so-long term. The takeover will not stop with depriving dark-complected people of the vote; it will take away everybody’s vote, permanently.

        Similarly, we need to explain to the fat-cat donors (corporate and individual) that fascism is bad for business.

        Let’s be clear: Exhorting all your friends to vote is not good enough. That’s a base-only turnout-focused strategy, which is nowhere near sufficient. We need outreach. We need to engage on the issues, to engage with people who are not part of our base, so as to grow the base.

        In 1860, enslaved people could not vote. Lincoln made the argument to people who could vote that the slavery-based economy was bad for everybody except a handful of über-wealthy plantation owners. We need to make a similar argument today. We need to explain to the MAGA types that they have more in common with the caste just below them and just above them then they do with the handful of plutocrats who are preaching the gospel of hate thy neighbor.

      • OldTulsaDude says:

        First, great comment.
        Second, a problem with democracy is its inherent lack of decisiveness. The appeal of the dictator is that his word is not a suggestion from the bully pulpit but an order from a bully to build a new gold-plated pulpit.

        Since WWII we have taught generations to expect instant gratification. Is it so surprising that now the same instantaneous action is expected of our leaders and our government? Enter Trump.

        • OldTulsaDude says:

          As for the psychology of protectors of whiteness, I suggest “Mississippi Burning” and its scene “A story about my daddy”, easily located on you tube.

  7. Badger Robert says:

    The incoming calls from Trump might be subject to claims of privilege. But the outgoing calls from the Willard to the on the ground riot leaders would not be privileged and may be accessible if a participant in those calls turns. To me, that seems like the next step.
    Also, the comment above that Rep. Cheney knows where this leads, and how to drag the press to that conclusion, is worth considering as one possibility.

    • notjonathon says:

      I suspect that Rudy, no longer in full possession of his faculties, has a broader view of privilege than the law does, as many have pointed out here. It may well turn out that none of his conversations with Trump are really privileged, in that they most likely involve planning to commit crimes.

    • Peterr says:

      I think Cheney knows where this leads in the same way that lots of us know where this leads. As recounted in The Hill:

      In “I Alone Can Fix It,” Washington Post reporters Carol Leonnig and Philip Rucker write about a phone call between Cheney and Gen. Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in which the Wyoming Republican describes a confrontation she had with Jordan during the riot, CNN reported.

      “That f—— guy Jim Jordan. That son of a bitch. … While these maniacs are going through the place, I’m standing in the aisle and he said, ‘We need to get the ladies away from the aisle. Let me help you.’ I smacked his hand away and told him, ‘Get away from me. You f—— did this,’” Cheney reportedly told the general.

    • subtropolis says:

      Everything regarding the protest was being handled by the Trump campaign. Privilege does not apply, even to his lawyers.

  8. timbo says:

    Any speculation on which phones (like, fer instance Mark Meadows) that might have been used in those comms between the WH and Williard Hotel?

    • subtropolis says:

      That’s a good question. TFG is notorious for using other people’s phones to communicate. (Stormy Daniels reported calling Keith Schiller’s number to speak with him, for example.) I’m certain that he was doing that constantly during his so-called administration.

  9. jaango1 says:

    When the J6 Report is finally issued, the Committee will conclude that Vice President Pence will be “hailed as a hero” and subsequently exempted from his admission into the National Monument/Museum for Criminal Stupidity. As such, Pence’s history has been a ‘voice’ for perpetuating the standard or traditional conservative ideology with a large emphasis on his behavior toward the evangelical behavior located on the political right.

  10. BobCon says:

    I’m interested by the phenomenon of the books that have been published by Meadows and Navarro this month, as well as the launch of the Webb telescope.

    Webb is a form of a time machine that can’t see a galaxy as it is today, just how it was way back when it transmitted the light now reaching our orbit.

    What we’re seeing in these books probably isn’t what Navarro and Meadows (and their attorneys) would want to say today. They represent the cover stories they were planning months ago back when the pitches were made, contracts were signed, and files were submitted to editors.

    The fact that they wrote books at all gives a hint to their states of mind months ago — I’m sure they thought the situation would be a lot more stable today and there wasn’t a serious risk of any of what they wrote being used as evidence.

    The sudden turn in the spin coming from Meadows from willing cooperator in November to invoker of the 5th now is a nice parallel — I suspect their attorneys wished they had a time machine which could let their clients know months ago that a PR strategy that involved signing book contracts and pretending to be open and honest was a bad idea.

    • Benton says:

      I wonder if that phenomenon is going to come home to roost for others besides Meadows and Navarro. Christopher Miller, the guy I’ve been focusing on, comes to mind. He hasn’t published a book yet, but my instinct says that he’s been weaving cover stories for himself or others like an old pro. His book, “Soldier Secretary: Warnings from the Battlefield & the Pentagon about America’s Most Dangerous Enemies” is expected to be released in August.

      • BobCon says:

        There was already this really weird piece in Vanity Fair where Miller let reporter and TV producer Adam Ciralsky “embed” with him after the election. It basically reads like a pitch for a book, movie, or TV series with Miller as lead character.

        Miller’s combination of dim wittedness, lousy judgment, and arrogance really shines through, and Ciralsky sure comes off as a hack.

        I suspect Miller at least got talked into clamming up sooner than some of the others. Statements in that article like “I cannot wait to go to the Hill and have those conversations with senators and representatives” aren’t something a smarter guy would have said.

        • Benton says:

          There is something really wrong going on. I’m reading the opening paragraphs of that article. I haven’t decided yet whether to register with Vanity Fair to read the whole article.

          The second paragraph says that Miller and Kash Patel were at the White House meeting with Trump on the evening of Jan 5. The problem is that in his testimony he never mentions meeting at the White House on Jan 5. There was supposed to have only been a phone call on that date. Miller, according to testimony, met at the White House with Trump and General Milley on Jan 3. Nor does the IG report mention a Jan 5 meeting at the White House with Miller. The IG report says that Trump called Miller on the evening of Jan 5. (IGp16, IGp41)

          Additionally, the article mentions that Miller was meeting with Trump about Iran. That was supposed to have been the purpose of the Jan 3 meeting, not the Jan 5 phone call. Some of the words attributed to Trump in the second paragraph of the article correspond to Miller’s written, prepared statement for the House Committee on Oversight and Reform hearings on May 12 (see p.11, linked below). Also see my long comment above that covers all these issues. This account, if accurate, would reinforce my argument that the Jan 5 discussion between Trump and Miller on the upcoming Capitol attack certainly lasted longer than thirty seconds.

          Also interesting is that the DoD IG report never mentions Kash Patel at all.

          So, either Vanity Fair is getting their facts wrong or we’re looking at more evidence that Miller is repeatedly lying and the DoD is engaged in a cover-up.

        • Benton says:

          I checked the transcript of the House COR hearings on May 12. I wanted to see if anyone referenced the Vanity Fair article.

          It turns out that Rep. Krishnamoorthi does reference it. (see p.26 linked below) But, he completely fumbles the opportunity to hit Miller on the conflicting accounts of Trump meetings.

          He does reference a passage from the article that probably tells you everything you need to know about Miller’s character:

          Mr. KRISHNAMOORTHI. Let me turn your attention to another topic, namely, Russia. You said, “I have professional respect for how they do things. I kind of, you know, like professionally I’m, like, wow, they are doing pretty well, and they are using a lot of irregular warfare concepts, information, all this stuff in a way that, you know, like, oh, good on them.”

    • rip says:

      Makes me think of another time machine that could totally up-end all forms of secrecy that these traitors used (as well as every other type of security/privacy.)

      Apparently some large entities (think nation-states such as China, and I’m sure the NSA/etc.) are harvesting as much currently encrypted data as they can. The progress on the quantum processing front are such that eventually the currently-encrypted data will be able to be decoded.

      Does this mean that in 10 years someone can read all state-encrypted messages? Or that all of your banking transactions belong to the decryptor?

      My guess is that it will be sooner rather than later. Perhaps not real-time but close enough to be actionable.

  11. Badger Robert says:

    We await Ms.Wheeler’s further installments, as do the TV lawyers that are following her lead.
    But to me it seems the Committee and the Justice Department have to get the obstructers to turn on the conspirators.The conspirators probably did not enter the capital, and thought that would protect them. By conspirators I mean the people on the receiving of the ad hoc phone calls from the Willard. If the people on the receiving end turn on the people placing the calls, to whom the label directors could be applied, then the main planners have to decide who is going to get the best deal.

  12. Badger Robert says:

    How big a fraction of what used to be the Republican Party can Cheney and Kinzinger influence? Democratic leaning voters already know it as a coup. MAGA voters are only disappointed because it did not work.
    So what can Rep Cheney achieve by exposing more evidence? Can she make the fissure wide enough that a Trump 2024 candidacy is clearly doomed and she and others are justified in running a third party candidate? The object would be to make that outcome so probable that serious Republicans find some acceptable alternative to Trump.

  13. dwfreeman says:

    The night before the insurrection, while a special election vote count in Georgia on two critical Senate races framed the evening, an aide informed Trump his supporters were gathering in bitter cold conditions near the White House on Freedom Plaza cheering loudly, waving MAGA flags and chanting Trump’s name, as Bob Woodward and Robert Costa report in their book, Peril.
    Trump is waiting for Pence.
    When he arrives for one last face-off meeting in a pressure campaign to convince Pence to change his mind about going ahead with the ceremonial task of overseeing certification of the Jan. 6 Electoral College vote, Trump cites the vociferous crowd’s backing as a primary reason Pence should change his mind about defying constitutional order and a 200 year tradition of a peaceful transfer of power.
    “Of course, they’re here to support you. They love you, Mr. President,” Pence tells Trump. “They also love our Constitution.”
    Trump concedes that might be true but nevertheless pushes Pence to do his bidding and throw Biden’s electors out. Let the House decide the election. “What do you think, Mike?” he asks Pence.

    Pence, who has never disagreed publicly with Trump, now tells Trump privately there is no way he can support him on his quest to remain in office. “I met with all of these people, they’re all on the same page. I personally believe there are limits to what I can do. So, if you have a strategy for the 6th, it really shouldn’t involve me, because I’m just there to open the envelopes. You should be talking to the House and Senate. You’re team should be talking to them about what kind of evidence they’re going to present.”

    Trump rejects Pence contention. “No, no, no,” he shouts. “You don’t understand, Mike. You can do this. I don’t want to be your friend anymore if you don’t do this.”
    Adamantly, Pence delivers a painful dose of reality in reply, “You’re not going to be sworn in on the 20th. There is not a scenario in which you can be sworn in on the 20th. We need to figure out how to deal with it, how we want to handle it. How we want to talk about it.”
    Now furious, Trump angrily reacts to what he perceives as Pence’s lack of courage and weakness in failing to commit to this final request of a favor, for renewed personal loyalty over elected dint of duty. “You’ve betrayed us. I made you. You were nothing,” Trump tells Pence. “Your career is over if you do this.”
    But Pence won’t back down. The meeting ends. A Pence advisor, Tom Rose, later describes Pence as looking chalk white upon leaving the Oval Office.
    Back briefly in his West Wing office, Pence advises staff, that he “left it all on the field” in his meeting with Trump. ” I made my case.” With that, there was nothing left to say. Walking to his motorcade, he told his chief of staff Marc Short, he did not break. Ducking into a waiting vehicle, he was gone.
    After Pence left, Trump opened a door near the Resolute Desk. A blast of cold air seemed to refresh the room’s atmosphere and perspective, as Trump stood and listened to distant sounds of his people. They sounded joyful. He breathed it in and smiled.
    “It’s so cold and they’re out there by the thousands,” Trump said to those now gathered with him. “Isn’t that great? Tomorrow is going to be a big day.”

  14. P J Evans says:

    Now that Navarro has said in public what we all suspected, I hope the various legal authorities are going to take much closer looks at Gosar and Cruz.

  15. Rita says:

    The Peter Navarro article in The Daily Beast is interesting in a number of ways.

    He aligns himself with Bannon and says that the Green Bay Sweep was disrupted by the Capitol protesters. Since there have been recent rumors about Bannon splitting with Stone, Navarro’s statements might imply that Trump advisors are now (or, maybe have been) splitting off into factions.

    Also his version of the plan coincides with Eastman/Ellis’ peaceful persuasion concepts rather than the 38 page PowerPoint by the Flynn-allied Colonel, which was much more brute force. The Navarro/Bannon/Eastman/Ellis plan required delay of Certification so that pressure could be applied to Pence and Congress. Trump’s instruction to the riled up supporters was to march to the Capitol to apply pressure.

    Hard to believe that Roger Stone would just be sitting in his hotel room watching events unfold. And that he had no role to play. We are learning that there were various teams at the Willard. Whose team was Stone on?

    • subtropolis says:

      Stone was on Team Stone. Just as Bannon has ambitions way beyond Trump. TFG was always a means to an end for him, which involves the utter destruction of society in the United States. One can see how TFG would have been a most wonderful opportunity for Bannon, though he has little respect for the guy.

      Stone and Bannnon — and a host of others — are opportunists who don’t necessarily see eye to eye with each other. Indeed, Stone has long been calling for Bannon’s head, in so many words, because the latter testified in Stone’s trial.

  16. pdaly says:

    A phone call timeline on the morning of 1/5/21 might be fun if the WH records and Willard Hotel phone call records roll in.

    “said VIP’s non-movement would have taken place the morning before the assault on the Capitol, during the same period when, the Guardian reports, Trump alerted the Willard war room that Pence was likely going to put his duty to the Constitution over his fealty to Donald Trump.”

    Is this also around the same time that someone told Grassley/called Grassley that VP Pence would not be presiding tomorrow? [I know I brought this up recently, before, but it seems to fit in this timeline]

    From The NY Times:
    “There was brief confusion on Tuesday morning when Mr. Grassley was quoted saying that he would be the one presiding over the certification, and not Mr. Pence, because “we don’t expect him to be there.”

    • timbo says:

      I’d be interested in what Pence’s staff et al have submitted that show various players at Willard calling them on Jan 5 and Jan 6…there obviously was some pressure being applied on Pence but how silly was it?

    • harpie says:

      Following your quote, directly:

      Mr. Grassley’s aides later said he was suggesting a hypothetical, should Mr. Pence step out for a break at some point.

      LOL! Yes, that’s exactly what I think when someone is QUOTED saying
      “we don’t expect him to be there.”

      Hmmm, that’s quite a LONG period of time between publication and UPDATE:

      Published Jan. 5, 2021 Updated Sept. 14, 2021

      • pdaly says:

        timbo, I do hope Pence and staff have cooperated.

        harpie, LOL. Yes. And the backpedaling occurred soon after the original declarative statement.

        I saw that large gap in publication date and update, too. Wondering if there is a way to see what was changed.

      • skua says:

        Yes, “we don’t expect him to be there” definitely could not be a clear message to Pence meaning “if you’re on our team then you’ll be elsewhere”.

    • harpie says:

      Further down, I found this interesting:

      The president has told several people privately that he would rather lose with people thinking it was stolen from him than that he simply lost, according to people familiar with his remarks.

      Seems like a big deal.

      • P J Evans says:

        Because simply losing means he’s a loser, and having it “stolen” means he’s a “winner”, not a sore loser.

      • Tom says:

        That sounds like the voice of a man who knows he really, truly LOST the 2020 election. No “delusions” about it.

      • Reader 21 says:

        Yes—yes it does. Trump is also quoted elsewhere as hammering Pence-“you’re not going to help us ‘overturn’ the election”—seems to go to state of mind, he knew he’d lost!

    • rip says:

      Could this have been referring to the stories that Pence was encouraged to get into some “Secret Service” vehicle and he declined? A black large SUV with darkened windows – who wouldn’t trust that?

      “We don’t expect VP Pence to be there…”

  17. harpie says:

    TRUMP TWEETS 1/5/21-1/8/21


    9:50 AM Pleased to announce that @KLoeffler & @sendavidperdue have just joined our great #StopTheSteal group of Senators. They will fight the ridiculous Electoral College Certification of Biden. How do you certify numbers that have now proven to be wrong and, in many cases, fraudulent!
    10:02 AM Georgia, get out and VOTE for two great Senators, @KLoeffler and @sendavidperdue. So important to do so!
    10:27 AM See you in D.C. [link]
    11:06 AM The Vice President has the power to reject fraudulently chosen electors.
    1:14 PM RT @Perduesenate: The Trump family is right — we need YOU to get out and vote today to defend our majority and defend America! #GASen #gapo…
    1:14 PM RT @KLoeffler: It’s lunchtime. Have you voted yet? If you haven’t — GO VOTE and bring 10 people know! If you have — call your family, f…
    1:14 PM RT @KLoeffler: Georgia, we have a job to do TODAY. We have to STOP socialism. We have to PROTECT the American Dream. We have to SAVE…
    1:15 PM RT @Perduesenate: Thank you, @realDonaldTrump. Go vote, Georgia!
    1:18 PM Reports are coming out of the 12th Congressional District of Georgia that Dominion Machines are not working in certain Republican Strongholds for over an hour. Ballots are being left in lock boxes, hopefully they count them. Thank you Congressman @RickAllen!
    2:06 PM RT @jmclghln: @realDonaldTrump voters across the USA if you have friends or family in Georgia call, text, Facebook, Instagram and email the…
    2:25 PM GEORGIA! Get out today and VOTE for @KLoeffler and @Perduesenate! [link]
    5:05 PM Washington is being inundated with people who don’t want to see an election victory stolen by emboldened Radical Left Democrats. Our Country has had enough, they won’t take it anymore! We hear you (and love you) from the Oval Office. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!
    5:12 PM I hope the Democrats, and even more importantly, the weak and ineffective RINO section of the Republican Party, are looking at the thousands of people pouring into D.C. They won’t stand for a landslide election victory to be stolen. @senatemajldr @JohnCornyn @SenJohnThune
    5:25 PM Antifa is a Terrorist Organization, stay out of Washington. Law enforcement is watching you very closely! @DeptofDefense @TheJusticeDept @DHSgov @DHS_Wolf @SecBernhardt @SecretService @FBI
    5:43 PM I will be speaking at the SAVE AMERICA RALLY tomorrow on the Ellipse at 11AM Eastern. Arrive early — doors open at 7AM Eastern. BIG CROWDS! [link]
    9:45 PM RT @Jim_Jordan: For nine weeks, Democrats have been afraid to have a real debate on election integrity. Why? [link to JORDAN tweet from 1:09 PM · Jan 5, 2021 [VIDEO]
    10:28 PM Looks like they are setting up a big “voter dump” against the Republican candidates. Waiting to see how many votes they need?

    • harpie says:


      12:08 AM Just happened to have found another 4000 ballots from Fulton County. Here we go!
      12:16 AM RT @kayleighmcenany: Why are they stopping the vote count in Democrat Chatham county, Georgia? This sounds familiar! [emoji]
      12:16 AM RT @TomiLahren: The steal is in the making in Georgia. Wait for it.
      12:17 AM RT @TomiLahren: Democrats scrounging up votes from mystical places again….
      12:17 AM RT @TomiLahren: I wonder when the water main is gonna burst in Georgia….
      12:43 AM Get smart Republicans. FIGHT! [link]
      Links to:
      12:51 PM · Jan 5, 2021 Republicans confirmed Justice Barrett, which they had the clear, lawful right to do, and in response Chuck Schumer said “EVERYTHING IS ON THE TABLE NOW.” // If that’s the case, why shouldn’t Republican legislators go to the wall for the President?]
      [BIO: Will Chamberlain @willchamberlain // Lawyer. Senior Counsel at @The_IAP, the @Article3Project, and @UnsilencedOrg]

      12:46 AM RT @christina_bobb: Pennsylvania is going to Trump. The legislators have spoken.
      12:47 AM RT @DanScavino: [speaker emoji] WOW! We hear you from the West Wing—THANK YOU [heart, flag, eagle emojis] [VIDEO]
      Links to: DanScavino tweet from 5:30 PM · Jan 5, 2021]
      1:00 AM If Vice President @Mike_Pence comes through for us, we will win the Presidency. Many States want to decertify the mistake they made in certifying incorrect & even fraudulent numbers in a process NOT approved by their State Legislatures (which it must be). Mike can send it back!


    • harpie says:


      8:06 AM Sleepy Eyes Chuck Todd is so happy with the fake voter tabulation process that he can’t even get the words out straight. Sad to watch!
      8:17 AM States want to correct their votes, which they now know were based on irregularities and fraud, plus corrupt process never received legislative approval. All Mike Pence has to do is send them back to the States, AND WE WIN. Do it Mike, this is a time for extreme courage!
      9:00 AM They just happened to find 50,000 ballots late last night. The USA is embarrassed by fools. Our Election Process is worse than that of third world countries!
      9:15 AM The States want to redo their votes. They found out they voted on a FRAUD. Legislatures never approved. Let them do it. BE STRONG!
      9:16 AM Even Mexico uses Voter I.D.
      10:44 AM These scoundrels are only toying with the @sendavidperdue (a great guy) vote. Just didn’t want to announce quite yet. They’ve got as many ballots as are necessary. Rigged Election!


      1:49 PM [Link to > Watch LIVE: Save America March at The Ellipse featuring President @realDonaldTrump]
      2:24 PM [Deleted] Mike Pence didn’t have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our Country and our Constitution, giving States a chance to certify a corrected set of facts, not the fraudulent or inaccurate ones which they were asked to previously certify. USA demands the truth!
      2:38 PM Please support our Capitol Police and Law Enforcement. They are truly on the side of our Country. Stay peaceful!
      3:13 PM I am asking for everyone at the U.S. Capitol to remain peaceful. No violence! Remember, WE are the Party of Law & Order – respect the Law and our great men and women in Blue. Thank you!
      4:17 PM [Deleted] [Link]
      6:01 PM [Deleted] These are the things and events that happen when a sacred landslide election victory is so unceremoniously & viciously stripped away from great patriots who have been badly & unfairly treated for so long. Go home with love & in peace. Remember this day forever!

      • timbo says:

        Yeah, that deleted tweet at 2:24PM is extremely problematic for Twitler and the Twisslerings, ain’t it?

        And then that one later in the day too… like ‘>this is what happens< if you don't do it all for me!' from Twitler.

    • harpie says:

      7:10 PM [link]


      9:46 AM The 75,000,000 great American Patriots who voted for me, AMERICA FIRST, and MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN, will have a GIANT VOICE long into the future. They will not be disrespected or treated unfairly in any way, shape or form!!!
      10:44 AM To all of those who have asked, I will not be going to the Inauguration on January 20th.

      [THE END]

  18. Marc In Denver says:

    “The name Roger Stone does not appear in the Guardian story reporting that the January 6 Committee will soon seek more information on Trump’s calls to the Willard Hotel late on January 5 and on January 6, as he faced the prospect that Mike Pence would not violate his oath and fail to certify the legitimate winner of the election.”

    Why does this, with regard to sourcing in the article , make me think of the Hounds of the Baskervilles; the silence saying … something?

    • John Paul Jones says:

      That’s “The Silver Blaze,” where the stable dog fails to bark. Holmes says that once he had figured out the “curious incident of the dog in the night time” the rest of the case just fell into place.
      “But the dog did nothing in the night time,” says an interlocutor.
      That was the curious incident,” says Holmes.

  19. harpie says:


    – TRUMP arrives back at WH early from vacation at BANNON’s urging
    – GOHMERT and 10 other GOP plaintiffs file suit against PENCE
    – SHOWDOWN at DOJ corral- – DOJ’s Rosen, Donoghue, and Clark meet to discuss Clark’s refusal to hew to the department’s conclusion that the election results were valid.
    – TRUMP COS MEADOWS sends MEMO written by TRUMP Campaign Lawyer, Jenna ELLIS [“A detailed plan for undoing President Joe Biden’s election victory”], to top PENCE Aide. [I guess that means Marc SHORT?]

    • harpie says:

      – GOHMERT’s 12/31/20 lawsuit DISMISSED for lack of standing. He files an appeal to SCOTUS on 1/6/21.
      – JONES, re: STONE’s 12/27/20 conversation with TRUMP, says:
      “Roger Stone spent some substantial time with Trump in Florida just a few days ago, and I’m told big things are afoot and Trump’s got major actions up his sleeve.”
      – TRUMP Administration Aide John MCENTEE sends another [Campaign] MEMO, titled “Jefferson used his position as VP to win.”, to PENCE’s COS, Marc SHORT.

      • harpie says:

        Subverting Justice -How the Former President and His Allies Pressured DOJ to Overturn the 2020 Election
        Senate Select Committee on the Judiciary – Majority Staff Report
        October 2021

        12/31/20 Rosen speaks with Clark again. Clark reveals that he has spoken to Trump again and tells Rosen that Trump asked him whether he would be willing to take over as Acting Attorney General if Trump replaced Rosen, but that Clark wanted to do some “due diligence” on certain election fraud claims before deciding.

        1/1/21 TRUMP tweets: “January 6th. See you in D.C.”

    • harpie says:

      [I thought I’d do one of these each day one year later until 1/6…what do you think, RAYNE?]

  20. harpie says:
    7:45 PM · Dec 31, 2021

    NEWS: Bernie Kerik has given docs to the Jan. 6 committee. He also provided a log of documents he didn’t turn over.


    Kerik withheld the document, according to his privilege log, as “attorney work product.” [drafted and/or edited by attorney] / [THREAD] [link]

    Links to:
    Bernard Kerik provides batch of documents to Jan. 6 select committee The former New York City Police commissioner also provided a “privilege log” describing materials he declined to provide to the committee.
    NICHOLAS WU and KYLE CHENEY 12/31/2021

    • harpie says:

      KERIK’s lawyer to the COMMITTEE

      […] The fatal flaw in all of your rhetoric about your investigation is that you are operating under the following presumptions, without first conducting an investigation:

      1. That there was no widespread fraud in the 2020 election;
      2. That the Trump campaign knew that there was no widespread fraud;
      3. That the Trump campaign chose to knowingly push false claims of election fraud in an effort to subvert the constitutional process and overturn the will of the people.

      The information that Mr. Kerik can provide, presuming we can resolve the privilege issues, will undermine confidence in the first presumption and will eviscerate the second and third presumptions. […]

      • bmaz says:

        Lol, that would be “Mr. Kerik, a felon convicted of multiple moral turpitude counts including fraud, unethical conduct and criminally false statements…crimes to which he fully admitted his guilt”.

        That was just in federal court, and his admission of guilt is still of record in spite of Trump’s craven pardon. Not to mention Kerik’s convictions in NY state court for unethical conduct in the scope of his governmental duties, and those have never been pardoned or set aside.

        Also Lol, the “privilege” Parlatore bandies about so easily belongs to the current Biden Administration, not Trump. It is a well crafted letter, but is complete bullshit.

Comments are closed.