Skip to content

Month: February 2021

They will die for him

The never before seen footage of how close the members of congress came to being assaulted by that mob on January 6th should wake them up to what Donald Trump incited his mob to do that day: kill them. They didn’t know or care if they were Democratic or Republican. In fact, at an earlier rally, Proud Boys had said they were declaring war on the GOP. On January 6th, they hunted Mike Pence specifically. Do they think they are still safe from Trump and his Red Hats? They shouldn’t …

https://twitter.com/rebecca_cusey/status/1359635535543885824

Here is what Trump’s cult is hearing today:

*They* said it was incitement

Not that it matters. Republicans are shameless and they will have no problem completely changing gears, even as they are being vividly reminded of the fact that this insurrection happened to them.

The Republican National Committee has distributing talking points.

“Nothing the president said on January 6 was inciteful, let alone impeachable,” one of them read, “and in fact, President Trump urged supporters to exercise their rights ‘peacefully and patriotically.’ ”

That first part might be news to some of the party’s top leaders, though. Although the GOP has rallied around Trump lately, even many GOP senators who appear likely to acquit him have said Trump bore at least some blame for the events of Jan. 6. And that poses problems as Trump’s defense moves beyond constitutionality and into culpability.AD

Whether they think Trump’s actions rose to the level of incitement is a valid question, but they clearly pointed a finger at him playing a role. And their comments are worth parsing in light of the emerging party line that Trump is effectively blameless.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), before voting twice that the trial was unconstitutional, expressed an openness to convicting Trump. He said Trump “provoked” the Capitol rioters.

“The mob was fed lies,” McConnell said on the Senate floor nearly two weeks after Jan. 6. “They were provoked by the president and other powerful people. And they tried to use fear and violence to stop a specific proceeding of the first branch of the federal government which they did not like.”

If McConnell didvote to acquit — and it bears noting that he’s reportedly still open to conviction — it would be interesting to see how he squares his statement that Trump provoked the riot with the idea that Trump didn’t incite it. Indeed, Merriam-Webster lists “provoke” as a synonym for “incite.” Incitement does carry a more specific meaning in a legal context, but experts generally agree that an impeachment need not prove or even involve a statutory crime. (Despite Trump lawyer Bruce Castor’s claim Tuesday that “high crime” means “felony,” that is not at all the case.)

McConnell wasn’t the only one to walk right up to that line of saying Trump incited. In fact, Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) actually used that word, and connected it directly to the Jan. 6 speech the RNC now says contained “nothing” inciteful.

The call to march down the Capitol — it was inciting,” Cramer said. He also noted that Trump had praised his lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani, who had just called for a “trial by combat” at the same rally. “It was pouring fuel on a spark,” Cramer added. “So, no, he does bear some responsibility.”

Cramer then quickly argued, in the same breath, that “it’s not his fault” that people took the actions they did. But he’s now in a position of voting that Trump didn’t incite after literally saying Trump’s speech was “inciting.”

Others pointed a finger at Trump in ways that might also be difficult to explain, but didn’t necessarily come so close to saying he incited the mob.

“I think it was a tragic day, and he was part of it,” said Sen. Roy Blunt (Mo.), the No. 4-ranking Senate Republican.

The Senate GOP’s No. 2, John Thune (S.D.), added that Trump’s rhetoric “sure didn’t help.”

“Certainly encouraging people to go to the Capitol and some of the sort of implied suggestions I think are, you know … they just encourage the wrong behavior,” Thune said.

“If anything he urged, in a very emotional situation, very inappropriate action by people that appear to be his supporters,” said Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.).

So he “urged … very inappropriate action” by his supporters. “Implied suggestions.” “Encourage the wrong behavior.” Again, we’re talking about things that sound a lot like incitement and, at the very least, don’t line up with the RNC’s position that Trump is blameless. And many of these comments specifically cite Trump’s Jan. 6 speech.AD

Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) also seemed to point a finger at Trump, albeit more indirectly.

“It’s past time for the president to accept the results of the election, quit misleading the American people and repudiate mob violence,” he said on the night of Jan. 6. He also cited “the senators and representatives who fanned the flames by encouraging the president.”

A day later, in a Fox News interview, Cotton again blamed some of his colleagues and said, “What happened yesterday is in part a result of the misleading claims in recent weeks.”

Cotton was careful to blame his colleagues more than Trump, but if they encouraged Trump and all of these misleading claims (which Trump was first in line in promoting) led to what happened, that would seem to suggest culpability for Trump far beyond what the RNC now says.AD

Sen. Patrick J. Toomey (R-Pa.) was perhaps the most direct.

“We witnessed today the damage that can result when men in power and responsibility refuse to acknowledge the truth,” he said on Jan. 6. “We saw bloodshed because a demagogue chose to spread falsehoods and sow distrust of his own fellow Americans. Let’s not abet such deception.”

Of the men listed above, only Toomey voted to proceed with the trial. Some of them could still vote to convict, as Blunt suggested Tuesday. And perhaps some of the others will vote to acquit on procedural grounds (i.e. that the trial is unconstitutional) rather than saying they’re absolving Trump altogether.

It’s hard for me to imagine how they can watch this and not pe persuaded that Trump must be barred from holding office again. But they will. They are obviously ready and willing to die for Donald Trump.

She’s a MAGA supah-stah

30% of GOP voters view Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene favorably, up 11 points since last week.

Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney, the No. 3 House Republican, is liked by 22% of Republicans, up 7 points during that time.

59% of voters nationwide have an opinion of Greene, matching prominence of Cheney and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.).

MTG is more popular among today. Republicans. But so is Cheney. And MTG’s unfavorables ticked up while Cheney’s went down. I don’t know what that means exactly except that the GOP is at a crossroads. And I hate to say it, but it really seems like the MAGA’s are dominant.

It’s all in good “fun”

The Democrats are not afraid of running against Donald Trump in 2024. Why would they be? They just beat him soundly.

They are a bit worried about the fact that he proudly foments violent sedition and insurrection though. It’s a problem.

And, by the way, these Republican Senators are just as bad as Trump. It’s a party problem, not a Trump problem.

They did it for Dear Leader

USA Today:

They broke through barricades, shattered windows and seized control of the U.S. Capitol, some making death threats against members of Congress hiding inside, others brutalizing the police officers who stood in their way.

As the cases against nearly 200 of the Capitol rioters begin to wind through federal court, many of the defendants blame the commander in chief they followed for the violence that left five dead during the insurrection Jan. 6.

In court documents, media interviews and through official attorney statements, staunch supporters of former President Donald Trump who carried out the attempted coup argue they were merely doing what they thought the nation’s leader had asked, some citing a cult-like loyalty.

Though experts said it’s unlikely the Senate would call the alleged rioters as witnesses, a handful volunteered to testify against Trump in his impeachment proceedings. Short of that, legal scholars said, Congress could enter their statements about Trump’s influence into the record during the House trial.

The notion that accused insurrectionists were following the call of the president will not likely be enough to prove innocence in their own individual cases, legal experts said, but Trump’s purported influence over their thinking could lead to reduced punishments and mitigated sentences as part of plea deals, especially for those with no prior criminal histories. 

“Trump didn’t get in the car and drive him to D.C., but it’s important to understand the context,” said attorney Clint Broden, who represents Garret Miller in Texas. The Department of Justice used Miller’s own social media posts to charge him with entering the Capitol and threatening U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., whom he said should be assassinated. 

“You have to understand the cult mentality,” Broden said. “They prey on vulnerable victims and give them a sense of purpose. In this case, Trump convinced his cult followers that they were working to preserve democracy.”

In an 80-page brief outlining arguments to support the impeachment charge, House managers focused on Trump’s statements in the months leading up to Jan. 6. Before Congress set out to confirm the Electoral College results that day, Trump spoke to thousands of supporters at the Ellipse, roughly 1.5 miles from the Capitol.

He told them, “We fight like hell, and if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.”

The House brief says Trump aimed his supporters “like a loaded cannon.”

Here’s one of the specifics:

One of the Proud Boys arrested for participating in the Jan. 6 insurrection at the Capitol told a court Wednesday that he was duped by President Donald Trump’s “deception” and “acted out of the delusional belief” that he was responding patriotically to the commander in chief.

Dominic Pezzola, who was indicted last month and charged with conspiracy, urged a federal court to grant his release pending trial, emphasizing that his involvement in the Proud Boys was recent and minimal and that he has no other criminal history. But the most notable part of Pezzola’s 15-page motion for leniency was his thorough repudiation of Trump.

“[D]efendant acted out of the delusional belief that he was a ‘patriot’ protecting his country … He was responding to the entreaties of the-then commander in chief, President Trump,” Pezzola’s lawyer argued in the filing. “The President maintained that the election had been stolen and it was the duty of loyal citizens to ‘stop the steal.’ Admittedly there was no rational basis for the claim, but it is apparent defendant was one of millions of Americans who were misled by the President’s deception.”

Pezzola is not the first charged in the Capitol insurrection to cite Trump’s calls as the motivation for marching on and breaching the Capitol. But he’s among those facing the most serious charges, along with several other members of the Proud Boys, in connection with Jan. 6.

His filing also takes sharper aim at Trump than many of the other rioters who mentioned Trump.

“Many of those who heeded his call will be spending substantial portions if not the remainder of their lives in prison as a consequence,” Pezzola’s attorney wrote. “Meanwhile Donald Trump resumes his life of luxury and privilege.”

Yes he has. He’s sitting down in Mar-a-lago watching the events on TV as usual and letting his rabid followers take the heat while he gobbles down his “delicious chocolate cake” and washes it down with Diet Coke.

And yet the Republican Senators can’t bring themselves to issue the mild slap on the wrist of conviction in the impeachment trial and barring him from holding office.

The case is a slam dunk

One senator finds time to read a newspaper during the impeachment hearing.

The second impeachment trial of Donald Trump opened with a bang.

Lead House manager, Democratic Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, spoke a few words and then went to the tape. The senators serving on Trump’s jury and everyone watching over broadcast then saw 13 minutes of anarchy, violence and fear that made vivid the detailed events of January 6th, starting with Trump offering one final incitement to the crowd at his “Stop The Steal” rally and culminating with his congratulatory tweet issued later that evening which asked the mob to “remember this day forever!”

Missouri Republican Sen. Roy Blunt said viewing that video was “the longest time I’ve sat down and just watched straight footage of what was truly a horrendous day.” Sadly, however, it wasn’t horrendous enough for Blunt to recognize that the impeachment trial is a constitutional necessity. Blunt voted on Tuesday with the majority of his fellow GOP colleagues to not proceed with the first-ever trial of a former president. So as harrowing as the opening footage was, it likely won’t result in enough votes to impeach Trump and bar him from holding office in the future. The vast majority of Republicans from the national leadership to the Party committees all over the country to the average, everyday voter, simply do not think what happened that day was anything to get worked up about. And they are certainly not prepared to admit that Donald Trump did anything wrong at all. At this point, you have to assume that Trump’s famous quip that he could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and not lose any votes is literally true.

That hasn’t deterred the Democrats from trying Trump before the Senate, however, in hope that there is at least a record of what happened. House Managers Rep. Joe Neguse of Colorado and Rep. David Cicilline of Rhode Island methodically laid out their argument that impeachment of a president under these circumstances is not only constitutional but historically well documented. Raskin presented the opening argument making the case that what happened on that day was so dangerous that the former president must be impeached and barred from ever holding federal office again. He shared his own horror, revealing that his own family was at the Capitol that day, in stark emotional terms illustrating the human dimension of that incursion into the building.

It was an impressive first day for the managers but it was not quite as auspicious for the former president’s defense team.

It’s probably wrong to be too critical of them since they have the worst client in the world and they just took on the case a little over a week ago after the president’s former lawyers abruptly quit. So, when his new lawyer Bruce Castor took to the podium it was with the understanding that they might not be fully up to speed. But no one expected anything as bad as what Castor delivered. He rambled and meandered and seemed to not have any point other than compliment the House managers, suck up to the senators and admit that Trump lost the election even suggesting that it might be better to prosecute him in a court of law rather than the Senate. His employer was reportedly apoplectic and yelling at the TV. He did the one thing Trump did not want him to do.

Trump’s other lawyer, David Schoen, was more polished but much more disturbing. His delivery was frenetic and hostile, barely able to contain his contempt for the process and threatening repeatedly that the trial was going to “tear the country apart,” which no doubt soothed his boss after Cantor’s bizarre performance. His half-baked arguments against the constitutionality of the process were nothing more than window dressing since more than 40 Senators had already signaled that they would buy anything he said so there would be no conviction regardless.

The fact of the matter is that the two of them could have come out and done an interpretive dance to “YMCA” and it wouldn’t have made any difference. The fix was in on this from the beginning and everyone knows it.

Nonetheless, the Democrats did get one more Republican over to their side than was expected. Louisiana Sen. John Cassidy voted to go ahead with the trial along with the other five Republicans who were expected. It’s a long way from the 17 they would need to convict but it does show that a handful of them have too much pride to pretend to believe the nonsense Trump and his allies are trying to force them to swallow. It’s obvious what Trump did and the Democrats have the evidence, a legal case backed up even by prominent conservative lawyers and academics, and the historical precedents. They also have the advantage of the reality of what we all saw with our own eyes that day and all the video that’s emerged since then, not to mention the hundreds of arrests of insurrectionists Trump said he loved and believed were “very special” as they sacked the Capitol.

It boggles the mind that these Republican senators would defend this. People died that day, including police officers whom the MAGA followers purport to love, and many others were grievously wounded. This lame “process argument” about the unconstitutionality of the trial, does nothing more than confirm that they will do anything to protect their seats. If they had any integrity or loyalty to their oath, this one would not be a hard call.

I checked in with Fox News to try to get a sense of how the right-wing media is covering Trump’s second impeachment trial and it was predictably dismissive.

Tucker Carlson proudly said he didn’t watch it and called it a distraction “from something that is actually important” — such as his apparent belief that the COVID vaccines aren’t safe. Sean Hannity called in Donald Trump Jr to rev up the audience to “play hardball” which seems stupendously idiotic in light of what Trump is being impeached for. Perhaps Junior is up for another run at the Capitol? No Fox News viewers saw that 13-minute video during prime time. Across the board, the word to the Trump followers was, “don’t worry, Trump did nothing wrong. The Democrats are just persecuting him, as usual.” If they haven’t ventured beyond their right-wing bubble they do not know what really happened that day.

But the senators were all there. They experienced it personally. They saw that footage and heard the arguments and they have no excuses. Neither does the right-wing media, which continues to perpetuate the MAGA mentality even now that Trump is no longer in office. I suppose it’s too much to expect any of them to speak truth to power. But you might have thought more than a small handful would summon the guts to speak truth to someone who no longer has any. As Trump would say: “Sad!”

Salon

Can you ever trust Republicans again?

May be an image of 1 person and text that says 'LIVE U.S. SENATE DAVID SCHOEN President Trump's Attorney IMPEACHMENT TRIAL C-SPAN2'

“We all know there are many systems and other countries around the world that do not offer any semblance of safeguard our constitutional concept of due process provides,” Trump defense attorney David Schoen said Tuesday, holding aloft a copy of “Quotations from Chairman Mao Tse-tung.”

Rather than defend his client against impeachment, Schoen tried indicting the process and Democrats by waving a book he never named and many Trump fans wouldn’t recognize.

Schoen’s antics may not matter in the end. It is unlikely that enough Senate Republicans will vote to convict the former president. (It will take 17.) Someone suggested a vote to acquit could haunt them like the Iraq War vote did for Democrats.

“Dems will tie the insurrection around their necks and ask voters: Can you ever trust Republicans again?” tweets Susie Madrak, referencing this article in Roll Call:

The campaign arm of House Republicans is targeting 47 Democratic incumbents in next year’s midterm elections, the first sign of where the battle lines will be drawn as the GOP seeks to retake the chamber. 

The National Republican Congressional Committee’s list, shared with CQ Roll Call on Wednesday, includes 29 districts that either did not back President Joe Biden or supported their House incumbent by 5 points or less. The list also includes eight Democrats who won by less than 10 points and underperformed Biden, and 10 members the NRCC believes could face redistricting trouble next year. 

Democrats lost a net 11 House seats in 2020 and 13 incumbents.

Republicans have their own target list, of course. Prior history favors the party out of power in mid-term elections.

But then, no prior president has tried not only to overturn the results of a national election, but the national government itself. What is unclear is how public oipnion will shift with multiple viewings of the the House impeachment managers’ video (below) and other heretofore unseen evidence they have to present against Trump and, by extension, elected supporters in his party.

Naturally, conservative news outlets will avoid showing the video.

House impeachment managers should tie these guys to Trump with whatever supplementary evidence they have. The FBI already has loads. These people are wanted for assault on a federal officer (AFO) or assault on the media (AOM). There are more. Many, many more at the link.

Do it! Do it now!

U.S. 74 West along the Ocoee River west of Ducktown, Tenn. (Pop. under 500) in Polk County (Pop. under 17,000). Five-mile wooden flume along cliff in distance carries water to Ocoee No. 2 powerhouse (TVA). The working hundred-year-old structure is on the National Register of Historic Places. The Ocoee River is a whitewater sports destination.

“My Republican friends feel the same as my Democrat friends,” Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) tells The New Yorker‘s Sue Halpern. “They all want connectivity.”

But industry groups want their turf protected, even turf they see no economic interest in developing. The telecom industry wants to sit on unwired areas of the country like undeveloped oil leases, and state legislatures go along with them, limiting development of municipal broadband in towns that would take it on themselves.

Here’s some free advice for Joe Biden: give voters what they want.

Halpern writes:

Early on in the pandemic, Larry Irving left Washington, D.C., and took up residence in a rental property on the edge of Shenandoah National Park, in Virginia, where, he soon found, the Internet service was not sufficient to run his consulting business. So Irving would drive to the local library each day and work in his car, piggybacking on the library’s Wi-Fi. More than two decades earlier, as the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information in the Clinton Administration, Irving had popularized the term “digital divide” to describe the disparity between Internet haves and have-nots. “We did a series of studies that showed that if you were poor, if you were a minority, if you were elderly, and if you were rural, you were less likely to have access to the Internet,” Irving told me. “Poverty was the constant.”

Since the Clinton administration. Why do rural voters feel left behind and neglected? Maybe we need another study and another couple of decades to find out?

After Clinton, the George W. Bush administration dithered on rural broadband. S.1853 – Community Broadband Act of 2007 died in the Senate. That bill would:

  • Prevent State governments from enforcing or adopting laws that would prohibit municipalities from providing broadband services
  • Encourage the development of public-private partnerships to spread the use of broadband services
  • Initiate notice requirements about broadband deployment to ensure the public has adequate information available to evaluate options
  • Give private providers the opportunity to provide alternative broadband services
  • Ensure public and private providers of broadband services are treated equally with respect to the laws, guidelines and policies that apply to all providers of broadband services

The Obama administration sent some but not enough money to the states for rural broadband.

After a dozen years, H.R.2785 – Community Broadband Act of 2019 died in committee. The short summary reads: This bill prohibits state and local entities from blocking the provision of broadband by public providers or public-private partnership providers. Further, public providers and state or local entities participating in such a partnership must administer applicable ordinances and rules without discrimination against competing private providers.

Voters remain unserved. Biden has a limited opportunity to do more than talk:

As a candidate, Joe Biden seemed to understand that appealing to rural voters was a political necessity. In his “Plan for Rural America,” Biden promised “to expand broadband, or wireless broadband via 5G, to every American.” As part of the effort, Biden promised twenty billion dollars to build rural-broadband infrastructure, as well as a tripling of the amount of money available to organizations, local governments, tribal groups, and corporations to wire rural communities through the United States Department of Agriculture’s Community Connect program. Shirley Bloomfield, the C.E.O. of the Rural Broadband Association, a national membership organization of eight hundred and fifty small local providers, was invited to join the campaign’s innovation and broadband-deployment committees. “Probably two weeks after the election, we were called in to meet with the F.C.C. transition team, with the National Telecommunications and Information Administration transition team, and the U.S.D.A. rural-development team to share our ideas and priorities,” she told me. “They hit the ground running.”

Fine. But the obstacles are the same as they were decades ago: a profit and market mentality.

In the past twenty years, population density has favored the building of Internet infrastructure in urban areas, but there has been little economic incentive to do so in many rural parts of the country. It’s a void that the covid-19 lockdown has laid bare, with so many Americans working from home, attending school using Zoom, relying on telehealth, registering for vaccination online, and, in many cases, saying a final goodbye to a loved one on a screen. Among the enduring images of the pandemic are pictures of children without broadband at home, logging on to remote classrooms from the parking lots of fast-food restaurants or the steps of shuttered elementary schools.

U.S. 74 West east of Bryson City, N.C. (Pop. approx 1,500) in Swain County (Pop. just over 14,000). Try getting cell service out there.

The problem remains unfixed. Perhaps because ideas for how to solve it remain fixed in failed models. And when federal grants are allocated, well, you can guess. The bulk goes to large, for-profit players. This is what comes from attempting to public-private-partnership your way to providing service where the profit incentive not enough (emphasis mine):

Tom Wheeler, the F.C.C. chair under Obama, told me that, in 2016, shortly before leaving office, he and his team put out a study showing that the cheapest way to deliver broadband was for the government to pay for it up front, the way highways and airports are financed, rather than use a convoluted subsidy program. “The analysis we did showed that for about forty billion dollars, we could deliver fiber to ninety-eight per cent of all the unconnected locations in the country,” he said. (He was quick to point out that this only solved the rural problem, not the “it goes by my house but I can’t afford it problem,” which is significant.)

The experience of Slic Network Solutions, a forty-three-person operation in the far reaches of New York State that won just under a million dollars in the R.D.O.F. auction, illustrates the challenge of funding broadband piecemeal, through grants and auctions. Two years ago, Slic received thirty-two million dollars from New York State to provide service to ninety-two hundred homes in the Adirondack Park and surrounding counties, where a dismal return on investment had scared away the bigger service providers. Kevin Lynch, Slic’s chief operating officer, told me, “Although there’s somewhat of a high capital cost to deploy initially, it’s a very long-term infrastructure investment. Think of the electric lines. Some of them have been there since the thirties. And, so, you know, over time, it will more than pay for itself and provide a great service to the rural areas. That’s why we’ve been big on it.”

Read on to see how that deal went south for Slic. Perhaps the TVA or rural electrification is a better model than trying to shoehorn for-profit ventures into unprofitable services, you know, because Markets.

Rural electrical co-ops already have the rights of way and the infrastructure in these areas. Why not incentivize them to expand their service beyond delivering electricity?

Oh look. New evidence in Trump’s FIRST impeachment

Check this out:

“Let these investigations go forward,” Rudy Giuliani told the presidential headquarters in Kyiv, Ukraine, his voice turning impatient. “Get someone to investigate this.” On the other end of the line, hunched over a speakerphone, two Ukrainian officials listened in disbelief as Giuliani demanded probes that could help his client, then-President Donald Trump, win another term in office.

The 40-minute call, a transcript of which was obtained by TIME, provides the clearest picture yet of Giuliani’s attempts to pressure the Ukrainians on Trump’s behalf. The President’s personal lawyer toggled between veiled threats—“Be careful,” he warned repeatedly—and promises to help improve Ukraine’s relations with Trump. “My only motive—it isn’t to get anybody in trouble who doesn’t deserve to be in trouble,” Giuliani said. “For our country’s sake and your country’s sake, we [need to] get all these facts straight,” he added. “We fix them and we put it behind us.”

The conversation on July 22, 2019, kicked off the campaign of intimidation that resulted in Trump’s first impeachment. For a year and half, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and his aides said little about their interactions with Giuliani, not wanting to anger an emissary of the U.S. President. But now, as the Trump era ends with a historic second impeachment trial, the Ukrainians have begun to speak up about the circumstances that led to the first. They are also taking steps that could imperil Giuliani and his Ukrainian allies.

Igor Novikov, who served as a close adviser to Zelensky during Trump’s first impeachment, says he is willing to assist an ongoing federal investigation of Giuliani that is reportedly underway in New York, as well as a separate effort to strip Giuliani of his license to practice law. Zelensky’s government has taken legal action against Giuliani’s Ukrainian associates. And they have opened up to the media about the pressure campaign mounted by Trump and his allies. On Feb. 3, Novikov sent TIME a transcript of the Giuliani call, whose accuracy TIME has independently verified.

I guess Giuliani is going to get away with everything he did, right along with Trump. But it’s still possible that something could come of this. There is talk of disbarring him for his work on the Trump post-election campaign. But this may be more fruitful:

[W]orrying for Giuliani is the Ukrainian support for the investigations he is reportedly facing in New York. Novikov tells TIME that he is providing assistance to a legal campaign to revoke Giuliani’s law license. Novikov is also open to helping the investigation that the former New York City mayor is reportedly facing in the Southern District of New York, the same office where Giuliani made his name as a prosecutor in the 1980s.

“If I get an official request from SDNY or any other non-partisan effort, such as potential disbarment of Rudy Giuliani, I would be open to helping them,” says Novikov, who left government in August but remains close to Zelensky’s administration. “That is because I believe Mayor Giuliani’s actions in Ukraine threatened our national security,” he adds. “It is our responsibility to make sure that any effort to drag our country into our allies’ domestic politics does not go unpunished.”

Initiated in 2019, the SDNY investigation has reportedly focused on Giuliani’s alleged lobbying on behalf of Ukrainian politicians, as well as business deals that his associates pursued in the country’s energy sector. A spokesman for the Southern District declined to comment on the status of the probe, though an NBC News report indicated that it is ongoing as of December. At least two Ukrainian officials have told TIME that they already discussed Giuliani with SDNY investigators. “It was weird,” says one, describing a visit in 2019 to their Manhattan offices, which Giuliani led before becoming mayor of New York City. “There I am to give testimony against Giuliani, and [hanging on the wall] they’ve got these pictures of him shaking hands with people.”

Giuliani has long insisted that there is no grounds for SDNY to investigate him. After NBC News reported in December that prosecutors are seeking access to his communications, Giuliani tweeted, “They want to seize my emails. No reason[.] No wrongdoing.” On his video blog and other outlets, the former mayor has also defended his ethical standards. “I’m not stupid,” he said on his radio show Jan. 14. “I don’t want to get in trouble. And I have a high sense of ethics, personally. I hate it when people attack my integrity.”

In the phone call with Zelensky’s aides in 2019, Giuliani was careful to avoid explicitly asking for a favor, according to the transcript. “I have no interest in anybody not telling the truth or exaggerating. It isn’t about political favor,” Giuliani said on the call. He also seemed keenly aware of the dilemma he was creating for the Ukrainians, and how it might make them feel. “You shouldn’t feel terrible,” he said. “All we need from the President is to say, ‘I’m putting an honest prosecutor [on these investigations], and he will dig up the evidence that presently exists.’”

But from Ukraine’s perspective, the call put the Zelensky government in a perilous position. “That first phone call left me in a state of shock,” says Novikov, who participated in the call along with Andriy Yermak, then a top adviser to Zelensky and currently his chief of staff. “After we hung up the phone, without a shadow of a doubt I knew that we were in grave danger.”

Three days after that conversation, Trump held a phone call with Zelensky that would become Exhibit A in his first impeachment inquiry. He used the call to make some of the same requests of the Ukrainians that his lawyer made earlier that week. Trump famously asked Zelensky to “do us a favor” by opening investigations related to Biden and his son Hunter, who had served on the board of a Ukrainian gas company.

If the Republicans had done their job in January of 2020, Mike Pence might be president today. (I doubt it, actually.) But at least their Party and their country would have avoided the nightmare of Trump’s final days. And, who knows? President Pence might not have presided over the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans without even pretending to give a damn. He wouldn’t have been great but he wouldn’t have suggested we drink bleach. And I doubt he would have ordered an assault on the Capitol or that the voters would have done it on his behalf. After all, they wanted to hang him.

But they didn’t get him off the stage when they had the chance. And they are going to fail to do their duty again. They are hopeless.

And then what did he do?

Over the course of this impeachment trial we’re going to hear a lot of details about what happened on January 6th, much of the evidence being video and public testimony we’ve already seen. But one of the important aspects of this narrative is what Trump did while the mob was sacking the Capitol.

This Washington Post timeline lays that out and I think it’s worth reading. I do not know how much of this the House Managers will be able to get into the record:

President Donald Trump was “horrified” when violence broke out at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, as a joint session of Congress convened to confirm that he lost the election, according to his defense attorneys.

Trump tweeted calls for peace “upon hearing of the reports of violence” and took “immediate steps” to mobilize resources to counter the rioters storming the building, his lawyers argued in a brief filed Monday in advance ofTrump’s impeachment trial in the Senate. It is “absolutely not true,” they wrote, that Trump failed to act swiftly to quell the riot.

But that revisionist history conflicts with the timeline of events on the day of the Capitol riot, as well as accounts of multiple people in contact with the president that day, who have said Trump was initially pleased to see a halt in the counting of the electoral college votes. Some former White House officials have acknowledged that he only belatedly and reluctantly issued calls for peace, after first ignoring public and private entreaties to do so.

The assertion that Trump acted swiftly and out of genuine horror as his supporters ransacked the Capitol is largely a side note to his lawyers’ defense. In their 78-page brief, they focused on two legal arguments: that the Constitution does not allow for the conviction of an impeached former officeholder and that Trump’s speech to the crowd on Jan. 6 was political rhetoric protected by the First Amendment.

In a test vote earlier this month, the majority of Republican senators indicated that they will be receptive to a defense based on the question of whether the proceedings are constitutional.

But the decision by Trump’s attorneys to also assert a claim about Trump’s reaction that day could give the House impeachment managers an opening as they prosecute their case. Among the possible witnesses who could rebut the contention that Trump moved quickly to rein his supporters are Republican senators who will now sit as jurors in the impeachment trial — some of whom have spoken publicly about their failed attempts to get the president to act expeditiously when his supporters invaded the Capitol.

“It took him awhile to appreciate the gravity of the situation,” Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.), one of Trump’s most loyal supporters, said in an interview with The Washington Post two days after the riot. “The president saw these people as allies in his journey and sympathetic to the idea that the election was stolen.”

That same day, Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) told conservative radio broadcaster Hugh Hewitt that it was “not an open question” as to whether Trump had been “derelict in his duty,” saying there had been a delay in the deployment of the National Guard to help the Capitol Police repel rioters.

“As this was unfolding on television, Donald Trump was walking around the White House confused about why other people on his team weren’t as excited as he was as you had rioters pushing against Capitol Police trying to get into the building,” he said,indicating that he had learned of Trump’s reaction from “senior White House officials.”

Sasse declined to comment on Monday, saying he was a juror in the trial.Graham did not respond to requests for comment.

A spokesman for Trump’s defense team did not respond to requests for comment.

For many White House aides, lawmakers and others who had been ensconced in the Capitol, Trump’s actions after the riots began were particularly offensive — even more objectionable, some said, than what he did to incite the crowd.

“President Trump did not take swift action to stop the violence,” the nine House impeachment managers wrote in their opening brief submitted last week, adding: “This dereliction of President Trump’s responsibility for the events of January 6 is unmistakable.”

Weeks before the joint session of Congress, Trump had summoned the crowd to Washington for a protest to coincide with counting of the electoral college votes. In the days leading up to the rally on the Ellipse, Trump was consumed with the event, former White House officials said, as he met with aides to plan thespeakers, music and even staging.AD

On Jan. 6, Trump spent part of his morning making a final pitch to Vice President Mike Pence to derail the proceedings. The president tried to convince Pence to use his ceremonial role presiding over the joint session of Congress to reject slates of electoral college votes that confirmed Joe Biden’s victory.

“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!” Trump tweeted at 8:17 a.m.

Trump also kept up the pressure privately, calling Pence before he left his home at the Naval Observatory for the Capitol and making one last effort to push him to try to overturn or delay the election results, former White House officials said.

Instead, Pence informed the president on the call that he would soon be issuing a public statement arguing the Constitution did not allow him to interfere with the counting of the vote.

Trump’s mood immediately soured, aides said.

As the thousands of people gathered on the Ellipse, Trump monitored warm-up speeches by attorneys Rudolph W. Giuliani and John Eastman from the White House. Around midday, he left the White House and made his way to his a tent set up for VIPs near the stage. In videos posted on social media by his son Donald Trump Jr., the president can be seen intently watching the gathering crowd, surrounded by family members and aides.

A permit filed with the National Park Service for the event explicitly said there were no plans for an “organized march” from the Ellipse after the rally concluded.

But some publicity for events that day, including ads posted to a website called www.marchtosaveamerica.com, urged participants to “take a stand with President Trump” at the Ellipse and then “march to the US Capitol building to protest the certification of the Electoral College.”

And Trump was taken with the idea that he might lead the crowd in a dramatic walk along Pennsylvania Avenue to the Capitol and raised it with aides days before the event, according to an official with knowledge of the discussions, who was among more than 15 advisers, members of Congress, GOP officials and Trump confidants who described his actions to The Post last month, many speaking on the condition of anonymity to share candid details.

Even after the Secret Service and advisers around Trump nixed the idea for security reasons, according to former officials, Trump still included several references to such a march in his speech.

“After this, we’re going to walk down and I’ll be there with you,” Trump said early in his speech. Later, he added, “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.” He concluded: “So let’s walk down Pennsylvania Avenue!”

Instead, Trump returned to the White House.

Even before Trump’s speech was over, thousands of his supporters turned and began marching toward the Capitol.

There was already a large crowd gathered around the complex. By the time Trump had finished his 70-minute speech, Pence had gaveled open the joint session inside the Capitol. Outside, crowds were surging toward the building and already overwhelming metal barricades set up outside.AD

Soon, cable news reports showed rioters clashing with police outside the building.

By 1:49 p.m. — nearly an hour after the Capitol Police chief had urgently requested backup from D.C. police — Trump remained focused on his recently concluded speech.

He tweeted a video of his own remarks, adding the caption, “Our country has had enough, we will not take it anymore, and that’s what this is all about.”

At 2:11 p.m., the rioters broke into the building, smashing a window with a piece of lumber, video footage shows.

Minutes later, Pence was hustled from the Senate Chamber. First the Senate, and then the House, went into recess and lawmakers were hastily evacuated.

A spokesman for Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) has said that around this time Lee received a call on his cellphone from Trump.

The president was not calling to inquire about the well-being of the senators who had been rushed from the chamber. Rather, he thought he had the phone number for Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.), who had said he would object to the electoral votes of some states. Trump was hoping to persuade Tuberville to expand his challenges and slow the process further.

Lee’s spokesman did not respond to requests for comment this week.

Not long afterward, at 2:24 p.m., Trump tweeted: “Mike Pence didn’t have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our Country and our Constitution … USA demands the truth.”

Inside the Capitol, the pro-Trump mob had just come within seconds of encountering Pence, who had been rushed into a hideaway by his Secret Service detail.

Speaking Sunday on Fox News, Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) questioned whether the tweet, sent as the invading mob was marauding through the Capitol, was “a premeditated effort to provoke violence.”

At the White House, Trump’s aides began fielding panicked calls from members of Congress, including close allies who had long been loyal to the president. They had promised they would vote against the counting of the electoral college votes — but begged him now to tell the crowd to stand down.

Graham reached out to Trump’s daughter Ivanka, who had gone to the Oval Office as the riot began, to implore her for help, he said in the interview last month.

“They were all trying to get him to speak out, to tell everyone to leave,” Graham said of the aides huddled with Trump that day. The senator said he did not know why it took so long to get the president to respond.

Another close adviser said that rather than appearing appalled, Trump was voraciously consuming the events on television, enjoying the spectacle and encouraged to see his supporters fighting for him.

At some point, White HouseChief of Staff Mark Meadows was persuaded by staff to attempt to intervene with the president.

Finally, at 2:38 p.m. — more than 90 minutes after the siege had begun — Trump tweeted, “Please support our Capitol Police and Law Enforcement. They are truly on the side of our Country. Stay peaceful!”

One person familiar with discussions about what the president should tweet said Trump had resisted adding the final phrase: “Stay peaceful.”

A little after 3 p.m., acting defense secretary Christopher Miller authorized full activation of all 1,100 members of the D.C. National Guard after urgent requests from the Capitol Police.

While Trump’s defense attorneys claim he and the White House “took immediate steps to coordinate with authorities,” the president played no known role in organizing reinforcements that day.

Among those who reached out to Trump that afternoon was House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), a close Trump ally, who later told allies he found Trump watching events on television and distracted.

Concerned his request for the president to intervene had not gotten through, McCarthy followed up with Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, and asked him to get Trump to urge the rioters to go home.

At 3:13 p.m., a little more than an half-hour after his first tweet, Trump tweeted again. This time he wrote more forcefully: “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!”

Another hour passed. During this time, as rioters surged through the building and reveled on the Senate floor, Trump made no effort to check on the well-being of his vice president or his team, who were sheltering in place in the Capitol complex. Aides said that lack of outreach angered Pence more than anything else Trump did before or after the riot. Five days passed before the two men spoke again.

Trump also did not make contact with Sen. Mitch McConnell (R.-Ky,), then the Senate majority leader, who was in constant communication with Pence, Senate Democratic Leader Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), aides said, along with military and law enforcement officials. Trump did not participate in any of the group calls.

Shortly before 4 p.m., former New Jersey governor Chris Christie went on ABC News and said that he had been trying without success to reach Trump for 25 minutes.

“The president caused this protest to occur; he’s the only one who can make it stop,” Christie, a close Trump confidant, said he had hoped to tell the president.

At 4:17 p.m., more than an hour after his last public comment and as police continued to wage hand-to-hand combat with rioters trying to press into the building, Trump posted a video to Twitter in which he told crowd directly, “You have to go home.”

But he also expressed sympathy for them and their cause. Trump insisted the election had been fraudulent, adding, “There’s never been a time like this when such a thing happened when they could take it away from all of us.”

“Go home. We love you. You’re very special,” he said.

Trump aides later said that the video was considered the best of three separate takes he filmed that day.

As a curfew called by D.C. Mayor Muriel E. Bowser (D) fell over the city at 6 p.m., Trump tweeted again. This time, he went even further in expressing sympathy for his supporters and their actions.

“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,” he wrote. “Go home with love & in peace. Remember this day forever!”

In The Post interview two days after the riot, Graham called the tweet “very unhelpful” and expressed confusion about why Trump had not acted more forcefully during the riot. “I’d like to know more,” he said then.

In the immediate wake of the riot, Meadows was already telling people that Trump had wanted the violence to end immediately,according to an administration official at the time.

The official said it was “not believable” then — or now, when presented by Trump’s lawyers. A spokesman for Meadows did not respond to a request for comment.

The House impeachment managers are expected to argue that Trump could have restrained the mob if he had acted more swiftly and forcefully. Comments by some of those who allegedly invaded the Capitol that day support that idea.

In a video posted to the social media site Parler on the afternoon of Jan. 6, Jacob Chansley — who was photographed in the well of the Senate chamber, wearing a headdress of animal fur and horns — told an unnamed person after he exited the building that he had done so because Trump had tweeted that the rioters should leave.

“Donald Trump asked everybody to go home,” Chanlsey said. “He just put out a tweet. It’s a minute long. He asked everybody to go home.”

That final tweet, late in the day, in which he wrote, “Remember this day forever!” is the put away shot in my opinion. He was celebrating what he did.

As I said, I don’t know how much of this they can put in evidence. A lot of it come from anonymous sources in news reports. But Trump’s tweets and the videos speak for themselves.