Month: March 2022

Obviously, the top two questions are slanted which makes these results questionable. But I still think there’s something very encouraging for Democrats in these results.

Mitch McConnell sure is unpopular. Not that he cares. But the very negative reaction to candidates who say that Donald Trump won the 2020 election is where the Democrats have a huge advantage. That has become a litmus test among Republicans, even the “mainstream.” If the Democrats don’t use this to hit them hard it will be political malpractice. (His endorsement isn’t exactly a winner either …)

And if the Supremes roll back Roe or ban abortion altogether, which is very possible, the Dems need to hit the Republicans hard. They did that.

I’ve never been much of a Facebook person. I haven’t posted anything on there in well over a year. It’s just not my jam. And I have to say my instincts about it were well founded because this stuff is just gross. It has become the Republican party:

Facebook parent company Meta is paying one of the biggest Republican consulting firms in the country to orchestrate a nationwide campaign seeking to turn the public against TikTok.

The campaign includes placing op-eds and letters to the editor in major regional news outlets, promotingdubious stories about alleged TikTok trends that actually originated on Facebook, and pushing to draw political reporters and local politicians into helping take down its biggest competitor. These bare-knuckle tactics, long commonplace in the world of politics, have become increasingly noticeable within a tech industry where companies vie for cultural relevance and come at a time when Facebook is under pressure to win back young users.

Employees with the firm, Targeted Victory, worked to undermine TikTok through a nationwide media and lobbying campaign portraying the fast-growing app, owned by the Beijing-based company ByteDance,as a danger to American children and society, according to internal emails shared with The Washington Post.Advertisement

Targeted Victory needs to “get the message out that while Meta is the current punching bag, TikTok is the real threat especially as a foreign owned app that is #1 in sharing data that young teens are using,” a director for the firm wrote in a February email.

Campaign operatives were also encouraged to use TikTok’s prominence as a way to deflect from Meta’s own privacy and antitrust concerns.

“Bonus point if we can fit this into a broader message that the current bills/proposals aren’t where [state attorneys general] or members of Congress should be focused,” a Targeted Victory staffer wrote.

The emails, which have not been previously reported, show the extent to which Meta and its partners will use opposition-research tactics on the Chinese-owned, multibillion-dollar rival that has become one of the most downloaded apps in the world, often outranking even Meta’s popular Facebook and Instagram apps. In an internal report last year leaked by the whistleblower Frances Haugen, Facebook researchers said teens were spending “2-3X more time” on TikTok than Instagram, and that Facebook’s popularity among young people had plummeted.Advertisement

Targeted Victory declined to respond to questions about the campaign, saying only that it has represented Meta for several years and is “proud of the work we have done.”

In one email, a Targeted Victory director asked for ideas on local political reporters who could serve as a “back channel” for anti-TikTok messages, saying the firm “would definitely want it to be hands off.”

In other emails, Targeted Victory urged partners to push stories to local media tying TikTok to dangerous teen trends in an effort to show the app’s purported harms. “Any local examples of bad TikTok trends/stories in your markets?” a Targeted Victory staffer asked.

“Dream would be to get stories with headlines like ‘From dances to danger: how TikTok has become the most harmful social media space for kids,’ ” the staffer wrote.

There’s not a whole lot of difference between this and smearing Ketanji Brown Jackson as a pedophile enabler.

The Washington Post’s Bob Woodward and Robert Costa just brought us some very big January 6th news. It appears that the White House did not log any calls from 11:17 a.m. to 6:54 p.m. that day — a seven-hour and 37-minute gap — or someone in the Trump administration went in later and deleted the record.

No matter what, we can be sure that it isn’t the case that no one called in or out during that period. Of course, as the violent insurrection at the U.S. Capitol took place during those seven hours and 37 minutes and you’d better believe that people were on the horn trying to get through to Donald Trump’s White House. Unfortunately, there is no official record of who they were, in complete contradiction with the law.

We’ve only heard about some calls that day from people who cooperated with the committee or told reporters. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, for instance, was overheard telling Trump that he needed to call off the mob. Trump reportedly retorted, “well, Kevin, I guess these people are more upset about the election than you are” after which McCarthy told Trump the rioters were breaking into his office through the windows, and yelled, “Who the f–k do you think you are talking to?”

Evidently, that call didn’t go through official channels because it happened during that long seven-hour and 37-minute gap along with several other calls we know about from people like Senator Mike Lee, R-Ut, and Senator Tommy Tuberville, R-Al.

The House Select Committee investigating Jan. 6 is suspicious for obvious reasons. According to Woodward and Costa, “the House panel is now investigating whether Trump communicated that day through back channels, phones of aides or personal disposable phones, known as ‘burner phones,’ according to two people with knowledge of the probe…”

Trump has claimed that he doesn’t know what a burner phone is (hard to believe that such a stable genius would be unaware of such things) and his former National Security Adviser John Bolton says that’s a lie, that he heard Trump talk about burner phones more than once. Rolling Stone reported a few months ago that some of the organizers of the rally that day had bought burner phones with cash to covertly communicate with the White House and members of the Trump family, so people around him had definitely heard of them.

As Salon’s Igor Derysh observed, this is all very redolent of Watergate. The seven and a half-hour gap immediately brought to mind the famous 18 and a half minute gap in Richard Nixon’s secret White House tapes and the absurd lengths to which his secretary, Rosemary Woods, went to try to explain it away. The gap in that tape also just happened to occur during a crucial time — three days after the Watergate break-in during a discussion between Nixon and his chief of staff, H.R. Haldeman. I have a sneaking suspicion that someone from Trump’s White House will end up being held responsible for this missing seven-and-a-half hours in the official call logs as well. You wonder if they will be as loyal to Trump as Rosemary Woods was to Nixon. To this day, no one knows exactly what was said in those 18 and a half minutes.

Speaking of Watergate, this week the January 6th Committee held two more Trump minions in contempt of Congress for failing to comply with subpoenas. They referred the cases of former Trump “digital guy,” then-White House deputy chief of staff for communications Dan Scavino, and Trump’s trade adviser Peter Navarro, to the Department of Justice, pending a vote from the full House. They both just refused to even appear, citing executive privilege. But that’s not how this works. Even assuming that the privilege exists in the case of coup plotting, it would require them to appear and claim the privilege in answer to specific questions. It’s not a blanket claim you can just make and then ignore. It’s a subpoena — from the U.S. Congress. Moreover, when you have written a book and appeared on national television repeatedly to discuss your participation in the coup-plotting, as Navarro has done, you have waived whatever privilege you might claim.

Perhaps more interesting is the case of Scavino, who hasn’t said anything at all but may be in possession of the most important information in the whole investigation. He reportedly had been monitoring the right-wing websites that were planning violence in the Capitol if Trump’s allies were unable to stop the vote count on January 6th. What are the chances that he didn’t tell the boss about all that? And if he did, Trump going out and inciting that crowd, pointing them toward the Capitol, saying that he was going to lead them there, takes on a whole different cast.

The committee also called out the Department of Justice for moving so slowly on the other contempt referrals of former Trump adviser and podcaster Steve Bannon and former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, urging the agency not to lollygag with these two new referrals as well. Their frustration is understandable but as committee member Zoe Lofgren, D-Ca., pointed out later, they really don’t know what the DOJ is doing and it would be inappropriate if they did.

RELATED: “Merrick Garland, are you listening?”: Jan. 6 committee says Trump may have violated multiple laws

As I wrote last week, it’s easy to see why prosecutors would be leery of prosecutions of the president and his closest aides. But I’m reminded once again of Watergate in which more than 40 people went to jail, including Nixon’s top senior advisers, his chief of staff, White House counsel and even the attorney general. And they did real-time. Haldeman and John Erlichman were convicted of conspiracy, obstruction of justice, and perjury and each did 18 months in prison. Attorney General John Mitchell did 19 months. (The former vice president, Spiro Agnew, wasn’t involved in Watergate but coincidentally had to resign after he was implicated in an elaborate kickback scheme pled guilty to tax evasion.)

I point this out just to say that it’s not unprecedented for the Department of Justice to investigate and prosecute obstruction and conspiracy charges. If Nixon hadn’t been pardoned there is every reason to believe they would have prosecuted him as well. If they could put all of President Nixon’s men in jail for what they did, surely all of Trump’s henchmen can be held accountable for what they did as well.

And, by the way, as Nixon similarly did in 1968 by sabotaging peace negotiations in order to win the election, Trump is once again coming perilously close to downright disloyal behavior. The alleged patriots of the GOP seem to have decided somewhere along the line that betraying your country and your allies is an excellent electoral strategy.

Extended clip is worth watching: "As long as Putin is not exactly a fan of our country… I would think Putin would know the answer to that. I think he should release it… you won't get the answer from Ukraine… I think Putin now would be willing to probably give that answer." pic.twitter.com/JFGcBk4Kxd

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) March 30, 2022

To paraphrase President Biden — for God’s sake, this man cannot get back in power.

From the Bulwark:

Here is a secret no one in Washington is willing to say out loud: Ginni Thomas is an idiot. The only reason she was texting the president’s chief of staff instead of being the angry cat lady on Facebook is because she married a man who got himself appointed to the Supreme Court.

The Thomases were never a duo of intellectual equals, or a power couple where each member had their own thing going on, and where the merger of the two was like Voltron coming together.

This isn’t James Carville and Mary Matalin. Or Norman Podhoretz and Midge Decter. Or Irving Kristol and Gertrude Himmelfarb. Or any number of other famous couples. Heck, this isn’t even Sonny and Cher.

No. The Thomases are more like Ivanka and Jared: The senior partner in the arrangement held a position of such high importance that their society scrabbled around to find something for the dimmer partner to do in order to make them feel important. In Jared’s case, that has been destroying newspapers, losing money on real estate, and being tasked with brokering peace in the Middle East.

Lol… Poor Jared.

And Last gives away his Goperness here. Anyone else would have mentioned Bill and Hillary Clinton or Eleanor and Franklin. But be that as it may…

For Ginni Thomas it has meant creating makework for her at various conservative “activist” groups and letting her participate in listservs with people who have real jobs.1

I got my hands on some of the widely circulated emails Mrs. Thomas sent to one of these listservs and they are illustrative of the level at which she operates. Some examples:

From: Ginni Thomas <vthomas@*****.co>

Date: Sun, Oct 30, 2016 at 7:57 AM

Subject: WOW – Milwaukee Sheriff David Clarke!!!

Compelling man. IMHO.

Well read. 

Inspiring.

Please consider helping more eyes and ears use this video interview to absorb what Milwaukee Sheriff David Clarke is saying about Trump, America, the media and what is needed right now.

http://dailycaller.com/2016/10/29/sheriff-clarke-americas-survival-depends-on-donald-trump-video/

Thank you! Ginni

P.S. As the Democrats feign new outrage about what FBI Director James Comey did to the Clinton investigation on Friday, recall the seemingly FAR MORE flimsy and actual indictment by Lawrence Walsh of Caspar Weinburger 24 years ago today … to no discernable Democrat outrage then… a last minute controversy many believe caused Bill Clinton to beat George Bush.2 Just sayin’.

---

From: Ginni <vthomas@*****.co>

Date: Sun, Oct 1, 2017 at 7:44 AM

Subject:Rush Limbaugh’s Bo Snerdley Takes On NFL Protests And White Privilege

WOW! 

Please listen to Rush Limbaugh’s amazing call screener, James Golden, AKA “Bo Snerdley” on the NFL flap, white privilege and the Republican Congress!

http://dailycaller.com/2017/09/30/rush-limbaughs-bo-snerdley-takes-on-nfl-protests-and-white-privilege-video/

Would love your help on social media with getting it heard by others too!

Cheers, 

Ginni

---

From: Ginni <vthomas@*****.co>

Date: Sun, Feb 11, 2018 at 8:01 PM

Subject: James O’Keefe: talks of the courage it takes to tell the truth today — my FINAL Daily Caller interviewee!

With one amazing 34 year old warrior, James O’Keefe, I end a nearly 7 year old series of bringing leaders who offer hope, information and inspiration to you through The Daily Caller. James is the perfect exclamation mark to my tenure with The Daily Caller News Foundation. Please enjoy and circulate, as James should be prayed for, supported and encouraged by all of us! Buy his book too!

It has been a joy to interview hundreds of people for your consumption. I am using the next few weeks to explore some options to keep me busy! Let me know if you have suggestions, as I love connecting leaders in the movement and listening to the grassroots!

Cheers, Ginni

---

From: Ginni <vthomas@*****.co>

Date: Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 2:50 PM

Subject: Please take time to listen to Joe diGenova about the weaponization of law enforcement and intelligence to protect HRC and destroy DJT

Beyond the #SchumerShutdown….Please take time to listen and pass on this compelling Joe diGenova video, which is going pretty dang viral today (from my standards)! A Facebook friend said this today:

Barry Dale shared Ginni Thomas‘s post.

Must See. Every American needs to be aware of its seriousness.

My friend and fellow Patriot, Ginni Lamp Thomas, exposes what is known, what is suspected with confidence, and what is likely and unlikely to be proven.

Folks, if this plays out as seems likely, this is WAY worse than Watergate even if a former president cannot be definitively connected to it:

http://dailycaller.com/2018/01/20/obama-administration-plot-exonerate-hillary/

Traffic today keeps the post up high where it gets natural traffic at Daily Caller, and THIS IS EDUCATIONAL!!

---

Everything about these emails—from the bizarre capitalization and punctuation,3 to the references to “Facebook friends,” to the obsession with talk radio and her genuflection before grifters like O’Keefe, Clarke, and diGenova shows that what we’re dealing with isn’t an intellectual, or even a smooth operator, but a Boomer with an internet connection, an important spouse, and too much time on her hands.

She is the Republican base. And she has been for decades.

TFG is once again asking Vladimir Putin for a solid. You’d think the Russian dictator was just another of Donald Trump’s golf buddies. See, Putin is also into real estate. He just acquires his using tanks rather than swindles and laundered money. If it takes slaughtering innocents or poisoning competitors, it’s not personal. Trump admires that in him.

It is useful to remind ourselves what is politically at stake both here and abroad with autocracy on the rise and liberal democracy under threat. Charlie Sykes asked Francis Fukuyama for his thoughts on his Tuesday podcast:

Francis Fukuyama: It’s now 75 years following the last World War, and particularly since 1991, things have been pretty peaceful and stable for many people around the world. And I think that they just begin to take liberalism for granted — It’s kind of the framework.

Sykes: We take it for granted, and we forget why it was so crucial.

Fukuyama: Yeah, and that’s why I felt I should write a book, kind of defending it in itself. But then, also, I think that what Putin has done is in a way to demonstrate for a new generation what some of the dangers of the alternatives to liberalism are — that it does lead to intolerance, exclusion, and then foreign aggression, which then produces war, conflict, unnecessary death, and so forth. And people can see that very vividly.

Fukuyama: So, I hope that one of the consequences of this is at least to remind a whole younger generation that didn’t experience the Cold War, didn’t live in a dictatorship, just remind them that these things still exist. And liberalism is not something that just happens by itself. You have to fight for it, you have to struggle for it, and you have to be vigilant. Maybe that’s the lesson that every generation has to learn on its own.

Let’s hope post-Boomers do, and thoroughly enough to last another 75 years.

To my fellow Americans now praising Putin, please remember – 1 – this is Viktor Yushchenko, poisoned with dioxin in 2004 as he ran against the pro-Russian candidate for president. pic.twitter.com/87B8U15baa

— Jim Sciutto (@jimsciutto) February 23, 2022

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

For The Win, 4th Edition is ready for download. Request a copy of my free, countywide get-out-the-vote planning guide for county committees at ForTheWin.us. This is what winning looks like.

The Hitler-curious young Republican from Western North Carolina was sending a signal. As newly elected congressman, Madison Cawthorn announced he would build his staff around communications (comms). He was not going to Washington to represent constituents but to get airtime for himself and engage in ideological battle.

“Cawthorn is one of a new breed of Republican representatives who operate in the most fetid gutters of the new political pathways carved by Donald Trump,” write Paul Waldman and Greg Sargent. He would join Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene (Ga.), Lauren Boebert (Colo.) and Matt Gaetz (Fla.) as “professional media provocateurs who also happen to have gotten elected to Congress.”

The most lurid conspiracy theories pepper their interviews when they are not trying to kill off Social Security and the Affordable Care Act. Did you know a transnational cabal of elite, Satan-worshiping, cannibal-pedophiles supported by Democrats drink babies’ blood and maintain their youth by extracting adrenochrome from their skulls? No? I didn’t either.

That one has not popped up in Cawthorn interviews yet. Give him time:

But Cawthorn went too far when he responded to a question about whether the over-the-top melodrama “House of Cards” accurately depicted Washington:

The sexual perversion that goes on in Washington, I mean being kind of a young guy in Washington, where the average is probably 60 or 70. You look at all these people, a lot of them that I’ve looked up to through my life, I’ve always paid attention to politics … Then all of a sudden you get invited to, “Well hey, we’re going to have kind of a sexual get-together at one of our homes, you should come.” What did you just ask me to come to? And then you realize they’re asking you to come to an orgy. Or the fact that some of the people leading on the movement to try and remove addiction in our country, and then you watch them do a key bump of cocaine right in front of you.

While we can’t prove Cawthorn made this up, let’s just say the idea that he’s being invited to orgies by lawmakers in their 60s and 70s strains credulity. And Cawthorn’s long history of making up stories is precisely what turned him into a right-wing superstar.

True or not, Politico reports that at a meeting of GOP representatives, many were angered with Cawthorn for portraying his own colleagues as “bacchanalian and sexual deviants.” One complained that he’s fielding questions about orgies from constituents.

(How does young Cawthorn know what a “key bump” is? I had to look it up.)

These tales fall under the category of Donald Trump’s “Sir” and “A lot of people are saying” stories. But in less-experienced liars’ hands they tend to boomerang. It’s one thing to accuse Democrats of engaging in drug-fueled orgies but include your fellow Republicans and they get a mite peeved. Republicans already have an unusual fascination with sexuality they insist must be shoved back into the closet. They are passing bills all over the country to nip that gay-transgender stuff in the bud.

“Many of these, in addition to muzzling teachers, also seem designed to advance an underlying premise: that parents should constantly fear that their kids risk falling prey to perverts and deviants around every classroom corner,” Waldman and Sargent explain:

“A lot of these bills rest on the belief that at all hours of the school day, students are surrounded by constant threat of perversion, and that teachers are complicit in that threat,” Jeffrey Sachs, a political scientist who closely tracks these laws, told us.

“These bills see schools as cesspools of deviancy” Sachs said, and as “places where students will be, quote, ‘tricked’ into thinking of themselves as gay or trans.”

Waldman and Sargent sum up saying, “The lure of depicting Washington as a kind of bottomless cesspool of degeneracy — a guaranteed right-wing applause line — led Cawthorn to accidentally hit his own colleagues with friendly fire in the form of charges of ‘sexual perversion.’”

The gun afficionado has a talent for that.

Cawthorn is drawing fire this week for accusing the nonprofit Rails to Trails Conservancy supporting a trail project in his district of being “super communist.” Some of the project’s key local supporters are Republicans.

A spokesperson for Cawthorn now insists he supports the trail project but “does not, however, support the confiscation of private property for those projects.”

Former Republican NC House member (and former national Sierra Club president) Chuck McGrady had a few select words for Cawthorn:

Cawthorn faces multiple challengers in the May Republican primary, including incumbent state senator Chuck Edwards (Asheville Citizen-Times):

Edwards explained that he went with a delegation from Brevard to Washington D.C. in 2021 seeking a grant that would partially have funded the Ecusta Trail. 

“He applauded the trail, supported the trail and asked to be invited for the ribbon cutting,” he said March 29. “(He) referenced he would be using the trail himself and that he would offer a letter of support and now he’s playing politics.”

After November, Cawthorn may be taking his ball and going to play at Fox News.

(h/t BS)

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

For The Win, 4th Edition is ready for download. Request a copy of my free, countywide get-out-the-vote planning guide for county committees at ForTheWin.us. This is what winning looks like.

You cannot make this stuff up. He did it again:

Former President Donald Trump is calling on Russian leader Vladimir Putin to release any information he possesses on Hunter Biden’s dealings with oligarchs in Eastern Europe. 

“She gave him $3.5 million so now I would think Putin would know the answer to that. I think he should release it. I think we should know that answer..Now, you won’t get the answer from Ukraine…

How is it that the mayor of Moscow, his wife gave the Biden family three and a half million dollars? I think Putin now would be willing to probably give that answer. I’m sure he knows.”

Right. Now that Putin has enraged and horrified the entire world with his horrific assault on Ukrainian civilians and has been beaten back by the Ukrainian military, backed by NATO, led by the US, he might want to help Trump smear Joe Biden. Yes, he might.

This is about as close to treason as it gets. We’re not technically at war with Russia but it’s damn close. He may not be legally guilty of it, but he is a traitor.

Does he have no sense whatsoever? He was investigated by a Special Counsel for two years and impeached for this crap. And he just can’t stop doing it. Is there something literally wrong with his brain?

Extended clip is worth watching: "As long as Putin is not exactly a fan of our country… I would think Putin would know the answer to that. I think he should release it… you won't get the answer from Ukraine… I think Putin now would be willing to probably give that answer." pic.twitter.com/JFGcBk4Kxd

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) March 30, 2022

Everyone knows that…

 House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy is planning to sit down with Rep. Madison Cawthorn and talk to the North Carolina Republican about his latest incendiary public comment — suggesting that some of his colleagues invited him to orgies as well as used cocaine in front of him.

During a closed-door House GOP conference meeting on Tuesday, multiple Republicans in the room said lawmakers stood up to air their anger and frustration over Cawthorn portraying his own colleagues as bacchanalian and sexual deviants.

In one case, Rep. Steve Womack (R-Ark.) stood up and addressed his colleagues, telling them that he rarely speaks during the closed-door weekly meetings but felt he must address the topic because he’s now getting questions about participants in Cawthorn’s alleged orgies and drug use. Womack remarked that many lawmakers go to bed at 9 p.m. and still use fax machines and flip phones, stating that it was inappropriate to paint them with a broad brush, as Cawthorn did.

Cawthorn’s comments about “sexual perversion” in Washington comes in response to a podcast interviewer’s question about whether the show “House of Cards” – which features an ambitious, corrupt congressman trying to rise to power – is unrealistic or if it paints a somewhat accurate picture of the D.C. political scene. Cawthorn suggested the latter.

The first-term conservative said he received invitations along the lines of: “‘Well, hey, we’re going to have kind of a sexual get-together at one of our homes, you should come’.” The 26-year-old described his response on the podcast “Warrior Poet Society”: “I’m like, ‘What did you just ask me to come to?’ And then you realize they are asking you to come to an orgy.”

Cawthorn also claimed to have seen other people who are “leading” efforts to eradicate drug addiction using cocaine in front of him.

 Many GOP lawmakers privately expressed disbelief at Cawthorn’s claims, particularly of orgies. Some wondered if he made the comments consciously in a bid to portray himself above such acts — past media reports have addressed sexual misconduct allegations against him before his election. There’s a desire among fellow Republicans for Cawthorn to identify the colleagues involved to prove the truth of his comments, but that desire to name names could also cause new headaches for a conference that’s already faced an array of controversies this Congress.

Lol. You have to love that the Republicans knew he was referring to them.

But not to worry. Kevin’s going to have a chat with him about it. It’s all good.

25th amendment https://t.co/GxV1iLCFQv

— Liz Harrington (@realLizUSA) March 28, 2022

Right. Using talking points is very unusual in politics. It must mean the person using them has dementia:

How about this one:

Biden had official talking points prepared for an important foreign policy statement to ensure that the world understood exactly what the US policy was.

Trump needed talking points from a staffer to remind him to say “I hear you” to grieving parents because he is such a clod that he couldn’t counted upon to act like a human being.

You tell me which one has issues.

More on that 7 hour and 27 minute gap from the Post:

The lack of an official White House notation of any calls placed to or by Trump for 457 minutes on Jan. 6, 2021 – from 11:17 a.m. to 6:54 p.m. – means the committee has no record of his phone conversations as his supporters descended on the Capitol, battled overwhelmed police and forcibly entered the building, prompting lawmakers and Vice President Mike Pence to flee for safety.

The 11 pages of records, which consist of the president’s official daily diary and the White House switchboard call logs, were turned over by the National Archives earlier this year to the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack.Advertisement

The records show that Trump was active on the phone for part of the day, documenting conversations that he had with at least eight people in the morning and 11 people that evening. The seven-hour gap also stands in stark contrast to the extensive public reporting about phone conversations he had with allies during the attack, such as a call Trump made to Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) — seeking to talk to Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) — and a phone conversation he had with House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.)

The House panel is now investigating whether Trump communicated that day through backchannels, phones of aides or personal disposable phones, known as “burner phones,” according to two people with knowledge of the probe, who, like others interviewed for this report, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive information. The committee is also scrutinizing whether it received the full logs from that day.

One lawmaker on the panel said the committee is investigating a “possible coverup” of the official White House record from that day. Another person close to the committee said the large gap in the records is of “intense interest” to some lawmakers on the committee, many of whom have reviewed copies of the documents. Both spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss internal committee deliberations.

Below, listed in alphabetical order, are those Trump tried to speak with or spoke with on Jan. 6. While many of the names might not be immediately familiar, we’ve included information about who they are and the likely reason that Trump reached out.

The calls we know about

Stephen K. Bannon, former adviser and podcast host. (Logged calls: 8:37 a.m. for about two minutes; 10:19 p.m. for about eight minutes)

Bannon is a familiar name, having been part of Trump’s campaign team in 2016 and, briefly, his administration. By Jan. 6, Bannon had transitioned back into the media world, hosting a podcast in which he hyped pro-Trump positions and rhetoric. On Jan. 5, for example, his podcast focused on the events that would unfold the following day as Congress convened to count electoral votes in the Capitol.

“Tomorrow it’s game day,” Bannon said. “So strap in. Let’s get ready.”

On Jan. 6 itself, Bannon was seen at the Willard Hotel, where Trump’s closest advisers were gathering to try to pressure members of Congress to reject the cast electoral college votes.

William Bennett, former Cabinet official; conservative pundit. (10:45 a.m., two minutes)

Speaking to CBS News’s Robert Costa, who helped break the story about the phone logs, Bennett said he didn’t “recall” his conversation with Trump. It’s not clear why Bennett would have been contacted. Bennett served as education secretary in Ronald Reagan’s second term in office and has written extensively through a conservative political lens.

Pat Cipollone, White House counsel. (7:01 p.m., seven minutes)

Trump’s conversation with his lead government counsel was the first one indicated in the evening hours logged in the newly obtained documents. It’s not the first attempted call, though; Trump reached out to Dan Scavino (see below) before speaking with Cipollone.

The conversation occurred shortly before Trump’s Twitter account published a second video addressing the events of the day. The first such video, released hours earlier, was criticized for the generous tone it used in describing the rioters.

Rudy Giuliani, attorney. (8:42 a.m., four minutes; 9:41 a.m., seven minutes)

Giuliani is probably the best-known of Trump’s legal team and played a key role in the weeks leading up to the Jan. 6 riot. There are only two recorded calls between Giuliani and Trump, which may be in part because Giuliani was at the rally on the morning of Jan. 6, where he would have seen the president face-to-face.

As the riot unfolded, Giuliani was at the Willard Hotel. He left at least one message for a senator, Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.), asking that the final count of electoral college votes be delayed.

Bill Hagerty, senator from Tennessee. (White House called)

Trump had the White House switchboard contact Hagerty, his former ambassador to Japan, but no response is recorded. Hagerty was first elected the prior November.

Sean Hannity, Fox News host. (11:08 p.m., nine minutes)

As the riot was underway, Hannity (like many others close to Trump) encouraged the White House to more aggressively renounce the violence. His text messages to Trump staffers have been obtained by the House select committee and made public, revealing a divergence between his private exhortations and his on-air commentary that night. Hannity and Trump often spoke on the phone; in this case, it was well after Hannity’s program aired.

Josh Hawley, senator from Missouri. (White House called; called Trump without recorded call back)

Hawley was the first Republican senator to announce his intent to object to the submitted electoral college votes on Jan. 6 — an objection he maintained even after the riot. The White House contacted him in the morning, and the call logs record that he had tried to reach Trump by the early evening, but no conversation is logged.

Eric Herschmann, lawyer and White House adviser. (10:50 p.m., six minutes)

Herschmann was a member of Trump’s legal team during his first, Ukraine-related impeachment trial in 2020. He stayed at the White House, popping up later in the year as part of an effort to spread negative stories about Joe Biden’s son Hunter. It’s not clear why he spoke with Trump on Jan. 6.

Jim Jordan, representative from Ohio’s 4th Congressional District. (9:24 a.m., 11 minutes)

For months, Jordan faced questions about his contacts with Trump on Jan. 6. In August, he acknowledged that he and the president had spoken more than once on that day. He told Politico at the time that he believed one of the calls occurred after legislators had been moved to a secure location during the riot — meaning that he spoke with Trump during the window for which no call logs exist.

Nick Luna, Trump’s personal assistant. (10:32 a.m., two minutes)

Trump’s quick call with his assistant is one of the last recorded on the morning of Jan. 6, shortly before he went out to speak to the audience outside the White House.

Mark Martin, former North Carolina Supreme Court justice. (7:30 p.m., 10 minutes)

As the weeks passed after the 2020 election, Trump increasingly emphasized a lawsuit filed by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) that sought to force the Supreme Court to reject the vote results in a number of states Trump lost. Calling it a long shot is overly generous; it was a mishmash of spurious claims and dubious legal arguments. Martin was part of the team that helped develop that suit.

Martin was also reportedly one of those advocating that Vice President Mike Pence simply reject cast electoral college votes on Jan. 6. That Trump spoke with Martin that evening may reflect Trump’s ongoing hope that members of Congress could be persuaded to block the finalization of the electoral college vote even after the Capitol had been cleared. This was the plan all along, after all: get Congress to throw up roadblocks and, potentially, have the House or the Supreme Court adjudicate a new winner.

Kevin McCarthy, House majority leader. (Reported; not in log)

McCarthy is known to have spoken with Trump on the day of the riot, after legislators had been evacuated. In January, he told reporters that the conversation “was very short, that he was advising the president what was happening” in the building. To Republicans at the time, though, he offered more detail.

“I guess these people” — that is, the rioters — “are more upset about the election than you are,” Trump told the House leader, according to those with whom McCarthy shared details of the call at the time.

This call also falls into the period that isn’t captured in the White House logs.

Mitch McConnell, Senate majority leader. (White House called)

Trump tried to reach McConnell on the morning of Jan. 6. An aide to McConnell told Costa on Monday that the leader “declined the call.”

Kayleigh McEnany, press secretary. (9:42 p.m., 12 minutes)

McEnany would later receive an outline from Hannity delineating how Trump should move forward on his fraud claims.

John McEntee, director of the White House Presidential Personnel Office. (11:23 p.m., 19 minutes)

One of the last recorded calls Trump made on Jan. 6 was to McEntee, the person in charge of staffing at the White House. This is intriguing, given that there were already reports about White House staffers tendering their resignations as a result of the day’s violence.

Mark Meadows, chief of staff. (9:03 a.m., five minutes; 10:11 p.m., nine minutes)

Meadows probably spent much of the day with Trump, obviating the need for regular calls. Meadows has emerged as a locus of efforts to contact Trump as the riot unfolded, in part because of that proximity and, in part, because we know more about his contacts that day, compared with those of other Trump allies and advisers.

Jason Miller, senior campaign adviser. (9:23 p.m., 19 minutes)

Miller worked on both of Trump’s presidential campaigns and would continue to serve the former president until last summer. It’s not clear what the two discussed on Jan. 6.

Stephen Miller, senior Trump adviser. (9:51 a.m., 28 minutes)

Miller was one of Trump’s primary speechwriters, so it’s likely that his lengthy call with the president on the morning of Jan. 6 centered heavily on the speech that Trump would give at the Ellipse a few hours later.

Cleta Mitchell, lawyer. (7:53 p.m., three minutes)

Trump’s robust effort to overturn the election results in the weeks after Nov. 3, 2020, included assistance from Mitchell, who elevated various dubious claims about fraud to Meadows. She was on Trump’s call with Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger a few days before Jan. 6, the call during which Trump tried to cajole Raffensperger into belatedly “finding” enough votes for Trump to win the state.

Mitchell was also in contact with members of Congress about her claims, which is probably why Trump spoke with her that day.

Kurt Olsen, lawyer. (8:34 a.m., three minutes; 7:17 p.m., 12 minutes)

Olsen was the attorney for Texas in its doomed lawsuit. He would later be mentioned in an unknown context as part of a document that MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell took to the White House outlining a last-ditch plan for Trump to retain power.

Olsen, Bannon, Giuliani and Meadows are the only individuals known to have spoken to Trump both before and after the period in which no calls were logged.

Mike Pence, vice president. (White House called; reported conversation not logged)

Trump tried to reach Pence at 9:02 a.m. on Jan. 6, without luck. We know that the two spoke shortly before Pence headed to Capitol Hill to lead the electoral vote count; that call apparently included a last-ditch attempt by Trump to cajole Pence into rejecting the vote results. It didn’t work.

David Perdue, senator from Georgia. (11:04 a.m., three minutes)

Perdue had lost his reelection bid the night before and had expressed support for objecting to the submitted electoral college votes. After the riot, he chose not to.

Dan Scavino, White House deputy chief of staff for communications. (7:08 p.m., eight minutes; 9:55 p.m., 16 minutes)

The first outreach on the Jan. 6 call log is from Trump to his longtime aide Scavino, the person largely in charge of Trump’s social media accounts. He tried to reach Scavino at 8:23 a.m., without luck. They spoke later, including shortly before the second video message was released. It’s likely that, like Meadows, Scavino spent much of the day in Trump’s direct company.

Tommy Tuberville, senator from Alabama. (Reported; not in log)

Tuberville, newly elected to his position, committed to objecting to the submitted electoral votes before Jan. 6 and subsequently did so. He was also the target of multiple calls on Jan. 6 itself, including one from Trump early that afternoon. (Tuberville reportedly told Trump during the call that Pence was being evacuated from the House chamber.)

Later, Giuliani would try to reach Tuberville to encourage the senator to drag out the vote-counting process “until the end of tomorrow” so that other legislators could be persuaded to join the effort. Unfortunately, Giuliani accidentally left that message on the voice mail of Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah).

Unknown person. (11:17 a.m., unclear duration)

There’s one other call indicated in the material included in The Post’s report. At 11:17 a.m., shortly before Trump went to speak at the Ellipse, he had a call with an unidentified person for an unclear amount of time.

It would be the last call logged until after the Capitol had been overrun by pro-Trump rioters.

There were probably several dozen other calls that haven’t been uncovered. Was Trump aware of the plans to storm the Capitol (which we now know that the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers among others had a plan to do just that.) I have always thought that he at least had an inkling, largely because of this:

On the evening of January 5, as he waited for Pence to arrive from a coronavirus task force meeting, an aide informed Trump his supporters were gathering near the White House on Freedom Plaza near Pennsylvania Avenue. Despite the bitter cold the supporters were cheering loudly and chanting his name. They were waving “Make American Great Again” flags.

When Pence arrived Trump told him about the thousands of supporters. They love me, he said.

Pence nodded. “Of course they’re here to support you, He said. “They love you Mr President.” But, Pence added, “they also love the Constitution.”

Trump grimaced.

That may be, Trump said, but they agree with him regardless.

Pence could and should throw Biden’s electors out. make it fair. Take it back. That’ all I want you to do, Mike, Trump said, Let the House decide the election.

Trump was not ready to give up, especially to a man he maligned as “Sleepy Joe.” “What do you think, Mike?” Trump asked. Pence returned to his mantra: he did not have the authority to do anything other than count the electoral votes.

“Well, what if these people say you do?” Trump asked, gesturing beyond the White House to the crowds outside. Raucous cheering and blasting bullhorns could be heard through the Oval office windows. “If these people say you had the power wouldn’t you want to?” Trump asked.

“I wouldn’t want any one person to have that authority,” Pence said.

“But wouldn’t it almost be cool to have that power?” Trump asked.

The next day he called for his followers to march to the Capitol as the joint session of congress was counting the votes. It wasn’t spontaneous. We have evidence that they knowingly decided not to permit the march, resulting in much lower security.

Dan Scavino, his “digital guy” had reportedly been tracking all the right wing sites before the insurrection. He would have known what was being planned. So Trump knew too.