Kansas Crimson

Recordings at the link:

Exclusive: Recordings describe 2020 Oval Office photo-op where Trump was briefed on fake electors and January 6

Before a group of supportive lawyers entered the Oval Office for a photo-op with then-President Donald Trump in December 2020, they were given a clear instruction, according to one attendee: Don’t get Trump’s hopes up about overturning the election.

One attorney, Jim Troupis, toed the line. He’d just finished leading Trump’s failed election challenge in Wisconsin, and bluntly told the president it was over in that state.

But when the conversation shifted to Arizona, attorney Kenneth Chesebro deviated from the plan. He told Trump he could still win – and explained how the “alternate electors” he helped assemble in Arizona and six other states gave Trump an opening to continue contesting the election until Congress certified the results on January 6, 2021.

Chesebro’s optimistic comments immediately created problems by apparently giving Trump renewed hope that he could still somehow stay in office. Former RNC chairman Reince Priebus left the meeting “extremely concerned” about the January 6 conversation. Priebus, a Wisconsin native who served as Trump’s first chief of staff, later warned Troupis and Chesebro not to tell anyone about what happened.

This dramatic account comes from Chesebro, who sat for an interview last week with Michigan state prosecutors investigating the fake electors plot. CNN has exclusively obtained audio of that interview, which includes previously unreported details about the pivotal Oval Office meeting.

...The “photo-op … gone south,” as Chesebro called the December 16, 2020, meeting, reveals a previously unknown instance of Trump hearing directly that he lost – which could factor into his federal election subversion trial. But it also highlights how others in Trump’s orbit leaned into his delusions and aided his quixotic effort to cling onto power.

[...]

Shirley wrote: ↑Wed Dec 13, 2023 10:45 am Recordings at the link:

Exclusive: Recordings describe 2020 Oval Office photo-op where Trump was briefed on fake electors and January 6

Before a group of supportive lawyers entered the Oval Office for a photo-op with then-President Donald Trump in December 2020, they were given a clear instruction, according to one attendee: Don’t get Trump’s hopes up about overturning the election.

One attorney, Jim Troupis, toed the line. He’d just finished leading Trump’s failed election challenge in Wisconsin, and bluntly told the president it was over in that state.

But when the conversation shifted to Arizona, attorney Kenneth Chesebro deviated from the plan. He told Trump he could still win – and explained how the “alternate electors” he helped assemble in Arizona and six other states gave Trump an opening to continue contesting the election until Congress certified the results on January 6, 2021.

Chesebro’s optimistic comments immediately created problems by apparently giving Trump renewed hope that he could still somehow stay in office. Former RNC chairman Reince Priebus left the meeting “extremely concerned” about the January 6 conversation. Priebus, a Wisconsin native who served as Trump’s first chief of staff, later warned Troupis and Chesebro not to tell anyone about what happened.

This dramatic account comes from Chesebro, who sat for an interview last week with Michigan state prosecutors investigating the fake electors plot. CNN has exclusively obtained audio of that interview, which includes previously unreported details about the pivotal Oval Office meeting.

...The “photo-op … gone south,” as Chesebro called the December 16, 2020, meeting, reveals a previously unknown instance of Trump hearing directly that he lost – which could factor into his federal election subversion trial. But it also highlights how others in Trump’s orbit leaned into his delusions and aided his quixotic effort to cling onto power.

[...]

Semi-relatedly, I am trying very hard not to set my expectations too high for what Trump's cell records might reveal. Because, my god, it would just be delightful if - in a spasm of cosmic kismet - the lack of concern for national security that would have sunk any public official anywhere until this stupid era,* is material to Trump spending his remaining days in prison (or in Qatar).

* Most of us are old enough to remember BUT HER EMAILZZZ!!!

https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2023/12 ... -trump-dg/

"A binder containing highly classified information related to Russian election interference went missing at the end of Donald Trump’s presidency, raising alarms among intelligence officials that some of the most closely guarded national security secrets from the US and its allies could be exposed, sources familiar with the matter told CNN."

Went missing with Mango Mussolini

twocoach wrote: ↑Fri Dec 15, 2023 1:33 pm https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2023/12 ... -trump-dg/

"A binder containing highly classified information related to Russian election interference went missing at the end of Donald Trump’s presidency, raising alarms among intelligence officials that some of the most closely guarded national security secrets from the US and its allies could be exposed, sources familiar with the matter told CNN."

But her vagina, I mean EMAILZZZ.

twocoach wrote: ↑Fri Dec 15, 2023 1:33 pm https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2023/12 ... -trump-dg/

"A binder containing highly classified information related to Russian election interference went missing at the end of Donald Trump’s presidency, raising alarms among intelligence officials that some of the most closely guarded national security secrets from the US and its allies could be exposed, sources familiar with the matter told CNN."

Shirley wrote: ↑Fri Dec 15, 2023 4:15 pm

twocoach wrote: ↑Fri Dec 15, 2023 1:33 pm https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2023/12 ... -trump-dg/

"A binder containing highly classified information related to Russian election interference went missing at the end of Donald Trump’s presidency, raising alarms among intelligence officials that some of the most closely guarded national security secrets from the US and its allies could be exposed, sources familiar with the matter told CNN."

Meadows' lawyer's statement isn't something you could drive a truck through...but nor is it a complete and unequivocal denial of Hutchinson's testimony.

It is more like "prove we didn't burn it or give it away." But high treason. Like Randy loves

Who knew that trying to overturn a presidential election wasn't an official duty of the president's chief of staff?

A federal appeals court on Monday ruled that former Trump White House chief of staff Mark Meadows cannot move charges related to efforts to overturn the 2020 election in Georgia to federal court.

Shirley wrote: ↑Mon Dec 18, 2023 5:03 pm Who knew that trying to overturn a presidential election wasn't an official duty of the president's chief of staff?

A federal appeals court on Monday ruled that former Trump White House chief of staff Mark Meadows cannot move charges related to efforts to overturn the 2020 election in Georgia to federal court.

We know that the crux of Trump's defense to the assertion that Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment* serves as a self-executing bar to a second term as President, is that the Presidential oath of office does not include a promise to "support"+ the Constitution - only to "preserve, protect and defend" it.

We also know that the key to Trump's (and others') immunity argument is that culpability cannot attach where the alleged perpetrator was acting within "the outer perimeter" of his duties.

Which is where things break down a little for Trump.

Because the Constitution expressly requires the President to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed."

It breaks my brain to understand how any sane person could argue in good faith that the President breaking the law to avoid the Constitutional transfer of the office of the President could somehow possibly be within "the outer perimeter" of his official duties.

Particularly where the Presidential oath of office, laid out with specificity in the Constitution, reads:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

I will note that the "to the best of my Ability" clause does NOT apply to the "faithfully execute the Office" clause, and the Constitution expressly requires the President to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed."

This is all annoyingly intricate, but the point is that even these textualist schmucks would not seem to have a colorable argument here.

And yet.

* "No person shall [...] hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, [...] who, having previously taken an oath [...] as an officer of the United States [...] to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability."

+ "The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."

Trump recorded pressuring Wayne County canvassers not to certify 2020 vote

Then-President Donald Trump personally pressured two Republican members of the Wayne County Board of Canvassers not to sign the certification of the 2020 presidential election, according to recordings reviewed by The Detroit News and revealed publicly for the first time.

On a Nov. 17, 2020, phone call, which also involved Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel, Trump told Monica Palmer and William Hartmann, the two GOP Wayne County canvassers, they'd look "terrible" if they signed the documents after they first voted in opposition and then later in the same meeting voted to approve certification of the county’s election results, according to the recordings.

"We've got to fight for our country," said Trump on the recordings, made by a person who was present for the call with Palmer and Hartmann. "We can't let these people take our country away from us."

McDaniel, a Michigan native and the leader of the Republican Party nationally, said at another point in the call, "If you can go home tonight, do not sign it. ... We will get you attorneys."

To which Trump added: "We'll take care of that."

Palmer and Hartmann left the canvassers meeting without signing the official statement of votes for Wayne County, and the following day, they unsuccessfully attempted to rescind their votes in favor of certification, filing legal affidavits claiming they were pressured.

The moves from Palmer, Hartmann and Trump, had they been successful, threatened to throw the statewide certification of Michigan's 2020 election in doubt.


The revelation of the contents of the call with the former president comes as he faces four counts of criminal conspiracy to defraud the United States and its voters of the rightful outcome of the election. Efforts to prevent certification of Democrat Joe Biden’s 154,000-vote victory in Michigan are an integral part of the indictment.

McDaniel, a Michigan native and the leader of the Republican Party nationally, said at another point in the call, "If you can go home tonight, do not sign it. ... We will get you attorneys."

To which Trump added: "We'll take care of that."

Palmer and Hartmann left the canvassers meeting without signing the official statement of votes for Wayne County, and the following day, they unsuccessfully attempted to rescind their votes in favor of certification, filing legal affidavits claiming they were pressured.

The moves from Palmer, Hartmann and Trump, had they been successful, threatened to throw the statewide certification of Michigan's 2020 election in doubt.


The revelation of the contents of the call with the former president comes as he faces four counts of criminal conspiracy to defraud the United States and its voters of the rightful outcome of the election. Efforts to prevent certification of Democrat Joe Biden’s 154,000-vote victory in Michigan are an integral part of the indictment.

[...]

Shirley wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2023 6:35 pm Trump recorded pressuring Wayne County canvassers not to certify 2020 vote

Then-President Donald Trump personally pressured two Republican members of the Wayne County Board of Canvassers not to sign the certification of the 2020 presidential election, according to recordings reviewed by The Detroit News and revealed publicly for the first time.

On a Nov. 17, 2020, phone call, which also involved Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel, Trump told Monica Palmer and William Hartmann, the two GOP Wayne County canvassers, they'd look "terrible" if they signed the documents after they first voted in opposition and then later in the same meeting voted to approve certification of the county’s election results, according to the recordings.

"We've got to fight for our country," said Trump on the recordings, made by a person who was present for the call with Palmer and Hartmann. "We can't let these people take our country away from us."

McDaniel, a Michigan native and the leader of the Republican Party nationally, said at another point in the call, "If you can go home tonight, do not sign it. ... We will get you attorneys."

To which Trump added: "We'll take care of that."

Palmer and Hartmann left the canvassers meeting without signing the official statement of votes for Wayne County, and the following day, they unsuccessfully attempted to rescind their votes in favor of certification, filing legal affidavits claiming they were pressured.

The moves from Palmer, Hartmann and Trump, had they been successful, threatened to throw the statewide certification of Michigan's 2020 election in doubt.


The revelation of the contents of the call with the former president comes as he faces four counts of criminal conspiracy to defraud the United States and its voters of the rightful outcome of the election. Efforts to prevent certification of Democrat Joe Biden’s 154,000-vote victory in Michigan are an integral part of the indictment.

McDaniel, a Michigan native and the leader of the Republican Party nationally, said at another point in the call, "If you can go home tonight, do not sign it. ... We will get you attorneys."

To which Trump added: "We'll take care of that."

Palmer and Hartmann left the canvassers meeting without signing the official statement of votes for Wayne County, and the following day, they unsuccessfully attempted to rescind their votes in favor of certification, filing legal affidavits claiming they were pressured.

The moves from Palmer, Hartmann and Trump, had they been successful, threatened to throw the statewide certification of Michigan's 2020 election in doubt.


The revelation of the contents of the call with the former president comes as he faces four counts of criminal conspiracy to defraud the United States and its voters of the rightful outcome of the election. Efforts to prevent certification of Democrat Joe Biden’s 154,000-vote victory in Michigan are an integral part of the indictment.

[...]

I don’t know what percentage of the facts are, at present, publicly known. But it would not surprise me if it’s <50%. Rep. Perry’s texts are now in play, and he is sure acting like a guy readying to cut a deal.

Steve Vladeck
@steve_vladeck

SCOTUS denying cert. before judgment in the Trump immunity case.

All this does is kick things back to the D.C. Circuit, which is already set to hear argument on January 9—and will likely rule soon thereafter.

Then, we go back to the Supreme Court…

Shirley wrote: ↑Fri Dec 22, 2023 1:56 pm Steve Vladeck
@steve_vladeck

SCOTUS denying cert. before judgment in the Trump immunity case.

All this does is kick things back to the D.C. Circuit, which is already set to hear argument on January 9—and will likely rule soon thereafter.

Then, we go back to the Supreme Court…

Yeah, this just isn't a big deal. It will be a very big deal if the DC Circuit issues a finding (which will be against Trump) and the Supreme Court then drags its feet.

Sadly, I’m afraid this red flag is going to be required reading.

https://x.com/davidcorndc/status/173857 ... PzNG4aOfKQ

THIS JUST IN: The far-right is pushing a bizarre conspiracy theory to discredit Jack Smith. It's based on unconfirmed & wild allegations from a Kosovo businessman who's been arrested for extortion & fraud. @dfriedman33 & I break it down. It's a wild read:

[…]

Making cameo appearances in this crazy story: Russian oligarchs, a guy who claims to be CIA, Serbian intelligence, a Russian mobster, Michael Flynn, top election denier Patrick Byrne, the lawyer repping the man who obtained Hunter Biden's laptop & an anti-Clinton former DEA agent

Shirley wrote: ↑Fri Dec 22, 2023 1:56 pm Steve Vladeck
@steve_vladeck

SCOTUS denying cert. before judgment in the Trump immunity case.

All this does is kick things back to the D.C. Circuit, which is already set to hear argument on January 9—and will likely rule soon thereafter.

Then, we go back to the Supreme Court…

I also read that another possibility is that, for whatever reason (maybe the Court doesn’t want to touch this at all; maybe the Court knows which way it’s deciding and doesn’t want to have to deal with a due process appeal based on skipping levels), the Court wants the DC Circuit to make a fulsome ruling that can simply be one-line affirmed.

jfish26 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 23, 2023 9:08 am

Shirley wrote: ↑Fri Dec 22, 2023 1:56 pm Steve Vladeck
@steve_vladeck

SCOTUS denying cert. before judgment in the Trump immunity case.

All this does is kick things back to the D.C. Circuit, which is already set to hear argument on January 9—and will likely rule soon thereafter.

Then, we go back to the Supreme Court…

I also read that another possibility is that, for whatever reason (maybe the Court doesn’t want to touch this at all; maybe the Court knows which way it’s deciding and doesn’t want to have to deal with a due process appeal based on skipping levels), the Court wants the DC Circuit to make a fulsome ruling that can simply be one-line affirmed.

When I heard that, cynical me had a hard time buying it...at first.

But the plausibility grew with time.

Shirley wrote: ↑Sat Dec 23, 2023 12:15 pm

jfish26 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 23, 2023 9:08 am

Shirley wrote: ↑Fri Dec 22, 2023 1:56 pm Steve Vladeck
@steve_vladeck

SCOTUS denying cert. before judgment in the Trump immunity case.

All this does is kick things back to the D.C. Circuit, which is already set to hear argument on January 9—and will likely rule soon thereafter.

Then, we go back to the Supreme Court…

I also read that another possibility is that, for whatever reason (maybe the Court doesn’t want to touch this at all; maybe the Court knows which way it’s deciding and doesn’t want to have to deal with a due process appeal based on skipping levels), the Court wants the DC Circuit to make a fulsome ruling that can simply be one-line affirmed.

When I heard that, cynical me had a hard time buying it...at first.

But the plausibility grew with time.

I think what the Trump-blinder folks miss is that the intellectual core of the right cannot STAND Trump, and thinks (with good reason) that he has actually become an impediment to implementing their agenda. And, to the extent the Court is a political animal, it is one that is aligned with the right’s intellectual core, not its reactionary one.

And this is another golden opportunity to end Trump without nuking 2024 and beyond. In fact I would expect that, as dumb as it would be, ending Trump now would win the big chair for the Rs in 2024.

We all have our scars, our (good) reasons to expect the Court to do something crazy like say Presidents are out of scope for the part of the Constitution designed to prevent insurrectionists from taking power. But the Court may well actually be pretty eager to kill Trump and save the GOP.

jfish26 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 23, 2023 12:40 pm

Shirley wrote: ↑Sat Dec 23, 2023 12:15 pm

jfish26 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 23, 2023 9:08 am

I also read that another possibility is that, for whatever reason (maybe the Court doesn’t want to touch this at all; maybe the Court knows which way it’s deciding and doesn’t want to have to deal with a due process appeal based on skipping levels), the Court wants the DC Circuit to make a fulsome ruling that can simply be one-line affirmed.

When I heard that, cynical me had a hard time buying it...at first.

But the plausibility grew with time.

I think what the Trump-blinder folks miss is that the intellectual core of the right cannot STAND Trump, and thinks (with good reason) that he has actually become an impediment to implementing their agenda. And, to the extent the Court is a political animal, it is one that is aligned with the right’s intellectual core, not its reactionary one.

And this is another golden opportunity to end Trump without nuking 2024 and beyond. In fact I would expect that, as dumb as it would be, ending Trump now would win the big chair for the Rs in 2024.

We all have our scars, our (good) reasons to expect the Court to do something crazy like say Presidents are out of scope for the part of the Constitution designed to prevent insurrectionists from taking power. But the Court may well actually be pretty eager to kill Trump and save the GOP.

IMO, for the most part, the "Trump-blinder folks" don't buy into the issues the "intellectual core of the right", either. It would take up too much bandwidth, and where would their undying grievance and bigotry go?

And yes, repubs could have saved us all from this twice before, but they're craven opportunists.

The Court is pretty craven. At least a majority of them. They do whatever Leo, Crow and the rest of the fascist oligarchs want.