It was inevitable that sooner or later, the House committee examining the events of Jan. 6, 2021, would collide with the Republican Party’s attempt to cover up President Donald Trump’s extraordinarily corrupt and possibly criminal effort to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power and remain in office illegitimately.
Sign up for a weekly roundup of thought-provoking ideas and debates
That now appears to have happened.
After unsuccessfully seeking voluntary testimony from key House Republicans — Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (Calif.) and Reps. Mo Brooks (Ala.), Andy Biggs (Ariz.), Scott Perry (Pa.) and Jim Jordan (Ohio) — the committee has issued them subpoenas compelling them to appear for depositions at the end of the month.
They will probably refuse. The position Republicans have taken is that the entire investigation is illegitimate, and therefore they can refuse any and all cooperation with it.
Members of the select committee, however, are treating it as a given that they will cooperate, since this is a legitimate investigation run by the body they themselves belong to.
“We have information from other sources that they have firsthand information that would be useful,” Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), a member of the committee, told us, noting that “they are now legally obliged to shed light on what we already found.”
But if that doesn’t happen, it will demonstrate the full extent of the Republican coverup on Trump’s behalf. And it will be a reminder: This saga has never been just about Trump.
It has also been about how a major party made the fateful decision not to participate in any response to an effort by that party’s leader to destroy our political order, and decided to be complicit in his effort to escape accountability for it entirely.
Why these five congressmen? It appears the committee is interested in communications they had with Trump himself, his chief of staff Mark Meadows or both on Jan. 6 and during the time leading up to it:
You can see this in the committee’s previous letter to McCarthy requesting his testimony. It pointedly noted that McCarthy pleaded with Trump to call off the rioters as they threatened to break into his office.
Trump refused McCarthy’s pleading, snarling: “Well, Kevin, I guess these people are more upset about the election than you are.” As the committee noted, McCarthy’s testimony about this call could shed much more light on Trump’s “state of mind” as he said this.
This means the committee probably wants to know whether Trump suggested he’d call off the rioters if McCarthy and other Republicans did the “right thing,” i.e., somehow secure a delay in the counting of electoral votes.
Remember, Trump had failed to get Vice President Mike Pence to subvert the electoral count, and he then egged on the mob about this exact thing. Trump’s incitement speech, and a tweet he sent about Pence while the mob gathered, essentially pointed the mob like a loaded gun toward Pence.
McCarthy, then, can provide more insight on Trump’s true insurrectionist intentions, and he can perhaps shed light on whether Trump committed crimes. The committee has already suggested that his actions might have constituted criminal obstruction of the “official proceeding” of the electoral count.
If it can be shown that Trump deliberately wielded the mob as a weapon to carry out that obstruction, it might further amplify an already very strong case against him. McCarthy could make this crystal clear.
Conversely, if and when McCarthy stonewalls the subpoena, it will underscore his coverup of what may be extraordinarily grave information about Trump. And these other Republicans, needless to say, will join him.
Sign up for a weekly roundup of thought-provoking ideas and debates
That now appears to have happened.
After unsuccessfully seeking voluntary testimony from key House Republicans — Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (Calif.) and Reps. Mo Brooks (Ala.), Andy Biggs (Ariz.), Scott Perry (Pa.) and Jim Jordan (Ohio) — the committee has issued them subpoenas compelling them to appear for depositions at the end of the month.
They will probably refuse. The position Republicans have taken is that the entire investigation is illegitimate, and therefore they can refuse any and all cooperation with it.
Members of the select committee, however, are treating it as a given that they will cooperate, since this is a legitimate investigation run by the body they themselves belong to.
“We have information from other sources that they have firsthand information that would be useful,” Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), a member of the committee, told us, noting that “they are now legally obliged to shed light on what we already found.”
But if that doesn’t happen, it will demonstrate the full extent of the Republican coverup on Trump’s behalf. And it will be a reminder: This saga has never been just about Trump.
It has also been about how a major party made the fateful decision not to participate in any response to an effort by that party’s leader to destroy our political order, and decided to be complicit in his effort to escape accountability for it entirely.
Why these five congressmen? It appears the committee is interested in communications they had with Trump himself, his chief of staff Mark Meadows or both on Jan. 6 and during the time leading up to it:
- Brooks appeared with Trump at the Jan. 6 rally near the White House at which Trump incited his supporters to head to the Capitol. Brooks gave a fiery speech telling the crowd to “do what it takes” to go after “weak-kneed Republicans” in Congress and save the country. What did Trump say to Brooks about what he hoped the mob would do?
- Perry was deeply involved in strategizing with Trump aides on how to overturn the election in the weeks before Jan. 6. Texts with Meadows showed Perry urging the White House to enlist the American national security apparatus in that effort. What did Trump or others in the White House say in response?
- Jordan also participated in White House meetings planning how to overturn the election, and he has admitted speaking with Trump multiple times on Jan. 6. What did Trump say about what he hoped the gathering rally might accomplish?
- The committee earlier wrote to Biggs that it had information indicating he participated in White House planning sessions for Jan. 6 and sought to convince state legislators that the election was stolen and persuade them to help overturn it.
You can see this in the committee’s previous letter to McCarthy requesting his testimony. It pointedly noted that McCarthy pleaded with Trump to call off the rioters as they threatened to break into his office.
Trump refused McCarthy’s pleading, snarling: “Well, Kevin, I guess these people are more upset about the election than you are.” As the committee noted, McCarthy’s testimony about this call could shed much more light on Trump’s “state of mind” as he said this.
This means the committee probably wants to know whether Trump suggested he’d call off the rioters if McCarthy and other Republicans did the “right thing,” i.e., somehow secure a delay in the counting of electoral votes.
Remember, Trump had failed to get Vice President Mike Pence to subvert the electoral count, and he then egged on the mob about this exact thing. Trump’s incitement speech, and a tweet he sent about Pence while the mob gathered, essentially pointed the mob like a loaded gun toward Pence.
McCarthy, then, can provide more insight on Trump’s true insurrectionist intentions, and he can perhaps shed light on whether Trump committed crimes. The committee has already suggested that his actions might have constituted criminal obstruction of the “official proceeding” of the electoral count.
If it can be shown that Trump deliberately wielded the mob as a weapon to carry out that obstruction, it might further amplify an already very strong case against him. McCarthy could make this crystal clear.
Conversely, if and when McCarthy stonewalls the subpoena, it will underscore his coverup of what may be extraordinarily grave information about Trump. And these other Republicans, needless to say, will join him.
