After our week of semi-vacation, I can’t think of a better way to bring you up to speed on the January 6 committee than with this monologue from Sunday’s LIFE, LIBERTY & LEVIN. Watch from the beginning, but he gets into specifics about ongoing problems with the committee at about the 2:30 mark.
As Levin points out, every last member of the committee voted to impeach President Trump; it’s even been called “the third impeachment.” At least five members “openly, publicly in the press, stated their purpose is to pressure the United States Department of Justice, under the attorney general appointed by Biden, and the U.S. attorney’s office, the U.S. attorney appointed by Biden, to indict former President Trump to ensure that he never gets close to the Oval Office again, that he can’t take over the Republican Party, that he can’t run for office again. That is a clearly unconstitutional process for the House of Representatives to be involved in.”
We’ve covered the various ways in which this committee is in flagrant disregard of the Constitution, but Levin goes on to list a number of them. He calls their Hollywood production, in which they read from scripts helpfully displayed on teleprompters, “a choreographed Stalinist show trial,” and it is.
Levin cites the numerous violations of attorney-client privilege and other issues of confidentiality. “This is a core fundamental principle in our system of justice,” he says. He also notes the committee is working with left-wing groups such as the Southern Poverty Law Center, which even bragged about it to POLITICO. Here’s more on that…
You know the SPLC from its insistence on labeling Christian and conservative organizations “hate groups” in order to censor them. They’re reportedly funneling information to the January 6 committee. “Our work has helped to document coordination between Trump, his allies and two extremist groups we’ve tracked for years,” SPLC Senior Policy Counsel on Hate and Extremism (yes, that’s his job title) Michael Lieberman told POLITICO.
In his monologue, Levin also mentions that testimony given behind closed doors remains secret. They cherry-pick what we see. One thing they don’t talk about is the 20,000 National Guard troops that Trump authorized ahead of the rally and that House Speaker Pelosi and Washington DC mayor Bowser refused.
Something new: Former Defense Department Chief of Staff Kash Patel, on Levin’s radio show, told the story of Trump authorizing the DoD, in NOVEMBER 2020, to prepare for the transition to a Biden administration. Does that sound like the behavior of an insurrectionist to you?
“You can challenge an election while at the same time allowing the government to go forward with a likely or possible transition,” Levin says. That appears to be exactly what Trump did. But never mind –-- Biden Attorney General Merrick Garland and his ‘Justice’ Department are coordinating with Pelosi’s committee, “attempting to criminalize challenges to the 2020 election, in ways we’ve never seen before in American history.”
This will do grave damage to our political system, Levin says. It’s constitutional for a candidate or his surrogates to challenge the vote in states --- through litigation (Al Gore) and in state legislatures. This has legal precedent. There was also a case (Hawaii, as we’ve reported) where two sets of electors were sent to Congress, just in case.
“It’s not a crime for a candidate to ask or to lobby state legislators to take a look at what’s taken place or to change the outcome,” Levin says. “You may not like it; you may not think it’s politically wise; you may not think it’s ethical. It’s certainly not illegal, and it’s certainly not criminal.”
He condemns the behavior of the U.S. attorney –- “with the approval of the attorney general, no doubt” –- who’s searching the homes and confiscating the electronic devices of attorneys. There’s federal grand jury hearing testimony about information taken from attorneys, he notes with disgust. “The effort to use...criminal statutes that have never been used in this way to try to manufacture a coup effort, or to try to claim some kind of obstruction or interference with the electors...is a horrific, unconscionable abuse of power by people who really are not interested in the Constitution.”
Levin also reminds us of something else reported here: that in Washington DC, 92 percent of the vote in 2020 went to Joe Biden. “Well, who do you think makes up the grand juries?” he asks (rhetorically). In grand jury proceedings, there’s no opposition. (Ha, in that respect, it’s just like the January 6 committee.) One can’t receive a fair trial. Can you say ‘change of venue’?
“This whole thing is rigged,” Levin says. “It’s a disgrace...” He suggested that they hold it in Utah or Idaho.
So, when reporters talk about “what we’ve learned,” here’s what we’ve learned: “...that we have a rogue committee, a rogue U.S. attorney, a rogue attorney general, where information is being censored, where contrary witnesses are not permitted to publicly testify because it destroys the narrative, and with the whole system set up to destroy the Republican Party generally, MAGA specifically, and Donald Trump overall.”
“That violates separation of power by this committee, and the abuse of these criminal statutes should not stand.”
After reading this, you won’t be surprised at POLITICO’s report that of the eight Jan. 6 defendants who’ve faced jurors so far, “all of them have been convicted of every charge to date...” No kidding.
I’ll link to POLITICO, but don’t bother unless you can stomach a report that has nothing to say about Cassidy Hutchinson’s testimony except that it was “vivid.” Personally, I wouldn’t waste my time.
As a palate-cleanser after POLITICO, committee member Zoe Lofgren openly wondered why the ‘Justice’ Department hasn’t subpoenaed Hutchinson. Does the clueless Rep. Lofgren not realize how disastrous Hutchinson’s testimony was? Cue the laugh track...
“We’re not an arm of the Department of Justice,” she said on “Meet the Press.” “We’re a legislative committee. They have subpoena power. They could subpoena Ms. Hutchinson. I’m surprised they had not done so...What are they doing over there? They have a much greater opportunity to enforce their subpoenas than our legislative committee does.”
Finally, Margot Cleveland has an exclusive, MUST-READ piece about a letter concerning the January 6 committee written by a lawyer for 1st Amendment Praetorian, a nonprofit organization dedicated to protecting free speech rights, and subpoenas they apparently shared with her. She says it’s proof the committee is “McCarthyism on steroids.”
1st Amendment Praetorian has been targeted along with groups such as the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers, and attorney Leslie McAdoo Gordon has plenty to say about it. Good for her and the organization she represents for not backing down! As Gordon says, “Every American should be outraged at the attack on our fellow citizens’ First Amendment rights of free association, speech and assembly.”