GOP House members worked with Trump to overturn election

Interview transcripts and text messages collected by the Jan. 6 committee investigating the Capitol assault show that a dozen right-wing members of the House of Representatives were deeply involved with President Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the election.

|
John Raoux/AP
Texting with then-White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, Ohio GOP Rep. Jim Jordan offered a legal rationale for what President Donald Trump was publicly demanding – that Vice President Mike Pence somehow assert the authority to reject electors from Biden-won states.

Rioters who smashed their way into the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, succeeded – at least temporarily – in delaying the certification of Joe Biden’s election to the White House.

Hours before, Rep. Jim Jordan had been trying to achieve the same thing.

Texting with then-White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, a close ally and friend, at nearly midnight on Jan. 5, Mr. Jordan offered a legal rationale for what President Donald Trump was publicly demanding – that Vice President Mike Pence, in his ceremonial role presiding over the electoral count, somehow assert the authority to reject electors from Biden-won states.

Mr. Pence “should call out all electoral votes that he believes are unconstitutional as no electoral votes at all,” Mr. Jordan wrote.

“I have pushed for this,” Mr. Meadows replied. “Not sure it is going to happen.”

The text exchange, in an April 22 court filing from the congressional panel investigating the Jan. 6 riot, is in a batch of startling evidence that shows the deep involvement of some House Republicans in Mr. Trump’s desperate attempt to stay in power. A review of the evidence finds new details about how, long before the attack on the Capitol unfolded, several GOP lawmakers were participating directly in Mr. Trump’s campaign to reverse the results of a free and fair election.

It’s a connection that members of the House Jan. 6 committee are making explicit as they prepare to launch public hearings in June. The Republicans plotting with Mr. Trump and the rioters who attacked the Capitol were aligned in their goals, if not the mob’s violent tactics, creating a convergence that nearly upended the nation’s peaceful transfer of power.

“It appears that a significant number of House members and a few senators had more than just a passing role in what went on,” Rep. Bennie Thompson, the Democratic chairman of the Jan. 6 committee, told The Associated Press last week.

Since launching its investigation last summer, the Jan. 6 panel has been slowly gaining new details about what lawmakers said and did in the weeks before the insurrection. Members have asked three GOP lawmakers – Mr. Jordan of Ohio, Rep. Scott Perry of Pennsylvania, and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy of California – to testify voluntarily. All have refused. Other lawmakers could be called in the coming days.

So far, the Jan. 6 committee has refrained from issuing subpoenas to lawmakers, fearing the repercussions of such an extraordinary step. But the lack of cooperation from lawmakers hasn’t prevented the panel from obtaining new information about their actions.

The latest court document, submitted in response to a lawsuit from Mr. Meadows, contained excerpts from just a handful of the more than 930 interviews the Jan. 6 panel has conducted. It includes information on several high-level meetings nearly a dozen House Republicans attended where Mr. Trump’s allies flirted with ways to give him another term.

Among the ideas: naming fake slates of electors in seven swing states, declaring martial law, and seizing voting machines.

The efforts started in the weeks after The Associated Press declared Mr. Biden president-elect.

In early December 2020, several lawmakers attended a meeting in the White House counsel’s office where attorneys for the president advised them that a plan to put up an alternate slate of electors declaring Mr. Trump the winner was not “legally sound.” One lawmaker, Rep. Scott Perry of Pennsylvania, pushed back on that position. So did GOP Reps. Matt Gaetz of Florida and Louie Gohmert of Texas, according to testimony from Cassidy Hutchinson, a former special assistant in the Trump White House.

Despite the warning from the counsel’s office, Mr. Trump’s allies moved forward. On Dec. 14, 2020, as rightly chosen Democratic electors in seven states – Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, New Mexico, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin – met at their seat of state government to cast their votes, the fake electors gathered as well.

They declared themselves the rightful electors and submitted false Electoral College certificates declaring Mr. Trump the true winner of the presidential election in their states.

Those certificates from the “alternate electors” were then sent to Congress, where they were ignored.

The majority of the lawmakers have since denied their involvement in these efforts.

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia testified in a hearing in April that she does not recall conversations she had with the White House or the texts she sent to Mr. Meadows about Mr. Trump invoking martial law.

Mr. Gohmert told AP he also does not recall being involved and that he is not sure he could be helpful to the committee’s investigation. Rep. Jody Hice of Georgia played down his actions, saying it is routine for members of the president’s party to be going in and out of the White House to speak about a number of topics. Mr. Hice is now running for secretary of state in Georgia, a position responsible for the state’s elections.

Rep. Andy Biggs of Arizona didn’t deny his public efforts to challenge the election results but called recent reports about his deeper involvement untrue.

In a statement Saturday, Rep. Paul Gosar of Arizona reiterated his “serious” concerns about the 2020 election. “Discussions about the Electoral Count Act were appropriate, necessary and warranted,” he added.

Requests for comment from the other lawmakers were not immediately returned.

Less than a week later after the early December meeting at the White House, another plan emerged. In a meeting with House Freedom Caucus members and Trump White House officials, the discussion turned to the decisive action they believed that Mr. Pence could take on Jan. 6.

Those in attendance virtually and in-person, according to committee testimony, were Reps. Hice, Biggs, Gosar, Perry, Gaetz, Jordan, Gohmert, Mo Brooks of Alabama, Debbie Lesko of Arizona, and Greene, then a congresswoman-elect.

“What was the conversation like?” the committee asked Ms. Hutchinson, who was a frequent presence in the meetings that took place in December 2020 and January 2021.

“They felt that he had the authority to, pardon me if my phrasing isn’t correct on this, but – send votes back to the States or the electors back to the states,” Ms. Hutchinson said, referring to Mr. Pence.

When asked if any of the lawmakers disagreed with the idea that the vice president had such authority, Ms. Hutchinson said there was no objection from any of the Republican lawmakers.

In another meeting about Mr. Pence’s potential role, Trump lawyers Rudy Giuliani, Sidney Powell, and Jenna Ellis were joined again by Mr. Perry and Mr. Jordan as well as Ms. Greene and Rep. Lauren Boebert, a Republican who had also just been elected to the House from Colorado.

Communication between lawmakers and the White House didn’t let up as Jan. 6 drew closer. The day after Christmas, Mr. Perry texted Mr. Meadows with a countdown.

“11 days to 1/6 and 25 days to inauguration,” the text read. “We gotta get going!” Mr. Perry urged Mr. Meadows to call Jeffrey Clark, an assistant attorney general who championed Mr. Trump’s efforts to challenge the election results. Mr. Perry has acknowledged introducing Mr. Clark to Mr. Trump.

Mr. Clark clashed with Justice Department superiors over his plan to send a letter to Georgia and other battleground states questioning the election results and urging their state legislatures to investigate. It all culminated in a dramatic White House meeting at which Mr. Trump considered elevating Mr. Clark to attorney general, only to back down after top Justice Department officials made clear they would resign.

Pressure from lawmakers and the White House on the Justice Department is among several areas of inquiry in the Jan. 6 investigation. Rep. Jamie Raskin, a Democratic member of the panel from Maryland, has hinted there are more revelations to come.

“As the mob smashed our windows, bloodied our police and stormed the Capitol, Trump and his accomplices plotted to destroy Biden’s majority in the electoral college and overthrow our constitutional order,” Mr. Raskin tweeted last week.

When the results of the panel’s investigation come out, Mr. Raskin predicted, “America will see how the coup and insurrection converged.”

This story was reported by The Associated Press.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to GOP House members worked with Trump to overturn election
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2022/0502/GOP-House-members-worked-with-Trump-to-overturn-election
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe