BROADCASTS.com

b'Incoming House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries described the Republican \\u201ccircus\\u201d in Washington as \\u201cchaos, crisis, confusion, and craziness.\\u201dI\\u2019m afraid he is correct, but even worse, these folks represent a real national security threat. Not only are they being led by what\\u2019s been labeled the \\u201cSedition Caucus,\\u201d because major players in the domestic terrorist attack on our country have been elevated to leadership positions instead of being kicked out, but we learned on Monday that the January 6 committee Chair Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS) and committee Vice-Chair Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY) \\xa0fear Republicans will leak names of national security personnel who work at the White House and who testified to help their country before the now disbanded U.S. House Select Committee\\u2019s 1/6 investigation.The Daily is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and podcasts consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.Thompson and Cheney said in a letter to the White House that White House employees had \\u201cprovided very important information for the Committee\\u2019s investigation\\u201d and have had their identities shielded, but warned that with the changeover, they can no longer \\u201censure enforcement of the commitment to maintain the confidentiality of the identity of the witnesses.\\u201d They have concern for \\u201cthe safety, security, and reputations\\u201d of the witnesses.And who can blame them.We have all seen what happens to anyone who gets on the bad side of Donald Trump, but of course, this kind of political extremism and even terrorism isn\\u2019t relegated to just Trump supporters.There are extremists on both sides, but the extremists on the Right are responsible for most of the domestic terrorism we are currently experiencing, and they were also using these same tactics back during President Obama\\u2019s leadership. Let\\u2019s not allow this all to be laid at Trump\\u2019s feet. The Tea Party bringing machine guns to town halls to stop affordable healthcare wasn\\u2019t exactly a gesture of willingness to share power with the executive branch when they don\\u2019t hold it.But just based on the earlier testimony in the January 6th committee, we know that witnesses who cooperated will be targeted if their names are leaked.What would Republicans get out of leaking those names? Why would they jeopardize their own country? To further obstruct justice and send a message to anyone else even thinking of coming forward that they will be harassed, threatened, and even physically harmed. This party is operating more like an organized crime operation than a political party in a two-party democracy.In December, we learned that in her Sept. 14 deposition, former White House aide and assistant to former Chief of Staff Mark Meadows Cassidy Hutchinson was assigned a lawyer by the Trump team, who then took calls with New York Times\\u2019 \\u201cTrump whisperer\\u201d Maggie Haberman, even when Hutchinson asked him not to.Hutchinson said under oath that the same Trump lawyer who told her to lie, Stefan Passantino, said, "Don\'t worry. Like, Maggie\'s friendly to us. We\'ll be fine."Thank you for reading The Daily. This post is public so feel free to share it.Here\\u2019s that whole exchange from May 17th, when they were on their way to Hutchinson\\u2019s third interview. This is important because it shows how Trump lawyers appear to have used what they qualify as \\u201cfriendly\\u201d media sources to let Trump know what had transpired in a witness\\u2019 interview and it is also the last time Passantino represented Hutchinson:So we\\u2019re going to the wharf and literally \\u2014 I want to say maximum 2 minutes after we\\u2019re in the car, his phone starts to ring. I look over at his phone. We\\u2019re sitting, like, probably closer than Jody and I are sitting here, so maybe about a foot, foot and a half apart. His phone is ringing. I look down at his phone. It\\u2019s Maggie Haberman calling him. And I looked at Stefan, and I said, \\u201cStefan, did you tell Maggie Haberman that we were meeting with the committee today?\\u201d And he\\u2019s like, \\u201cNo, no. Maybe that\\u2019s not what she\\u2019s calling me about.\\u201d And I said, \\u201cStefan, did you tell Maggie that we were meeting with the committee today?\\u201d And he said, \\u201cNo, no, but I should probably answer to see if she knows, right? I should answer.\\u201d And I said, \\u201cStefan, no. I don\\u2019t think you should answer that call. She probably wants to know if we met with the committee today.\\u201d He said, \\u201cCass, I\\u2019m just going to answer. It will just be 2 seconds. I just want to find out what she\\u2019s going to talk to me about.\\u201d He answers. I can\\u2019t hear what she\\u2019s saying, but I hear Stefan say, \\u201cYeah, yeah, we did just leave her third interview. You can put it out, but don\\u2019t \\u2014 don\\u2019t \\u2014 don\\u2019t \\u2014 don\\u2019t make it too big of a deal. I don\\u2019t think she\\u2019ll want it to be too big of a deal. All right. Thanks.\\u201d And I said, \\u201cStefan, was that Maggie Haberman asking about my interview?\\u201d And he said, \\u201cYeah, but don\\u2019t worry. She\\u2019s not going to make it a big deal.\\u201d I said, \\u201cStefan, I don\\u2019t want this out there.\\u201d He said, \\u201cDon\\u2019t worry. Like, Maggie\\u2019s friendly to us. We\\u2019ll be fine.\\u201d So I was just like, \\u201cWhatever.\\u201dHaberman followed this up with a tweet about Hutchinson\\u2019s appearance at her third deposition.Back in July, Cheney said several witnesses had been contacted ahead of questioning, including this message sent to Hutchinson in an apparent attempt to influence her testimony. They didn\\u2019t say at the time who had sent it, but it was later reported to have been sent by Mark Meadows to Hutchinson.\\u201c[A person] let me know you have your deposition tomorrow. He wants me to let you know that he\\u2019s thinking about you. He knows you\\u2019re loyal, and you\\u2019re going to do the right thing when you go in for your deposition.\\u201dIf we put that in context with calling Haberman, we can see a very effective and well-oiled mob-esque pressure campaign. (Haberman might not be friendly to them and she most certainly didn\\u2019t report on these matters to help Trump pressure witnesses, but she was clearly used to do so.)The January 6th Committee pointed out that Trump and his lieutenants "engaged in at least 200 apparent acts of public or private outreach, pressure, or condemnation" regarding state officials to overturn the election results.Trump\\u2019s team contacted nearly 200 state legislators from battleground states to solicit support for overturning the election - at least some said they were on behalf of the president.On Jan 2, 2021 nearly 300 state legislators from battleground states participated in a private briefing with then President Trump, Rudy Giuliani, John Eastman and others.Before January 6th, there were other \\u201copponents\\u201d who got targeted, including Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, who made the courageous decision to share her experience of being sexually assaulted by Brett Kavanaugh years ago, only to have to move from her home and be unable to go to work.Okay, so we\\u2019ve established the pressure campaign, but you might be thinking that you don\\u2019t see national security risks yet. I would argue that a party enabling an attack on its own country is obviously a national security risk, in addition to the foreign interference and specifically Russian talking points the party had adopted against its own country and against Ukraine, starting in 2016 when they allowed Trump to alter their party platform in regard to Ukraine.But no, it gets worse.This is a moment that is simply stunning. We had heard of this in Bob Woodward\\u2019s book Peril, but it was confirmed in 1/6 Committee testimony. Speaker Pelosi asked the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs if the nuclear codes were safe because she feared the President was crazy and might use military power to hold power.From Milley\'s testimony regarding the January 8, 2021 call:Q: Yeah. What prompts her call is concern about the President\'s stability or mental health. She even says in the call, "You know he\'s crazy, don\'t you," and she is reported to have said, General Milley, that you agreed with her. You said: I agree a hundred percent with everything you\'ve said. The one thing I can guarantee is that as the Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff, I want you to know, I want to you to know this in your heart of hearts. I can guarantee you 110 percent that the military, use of military power, whether it\'s nuclear or strike in a foreign country of any kind, we\'re not going to do anything illegal or crazy.You reassured her that, despite her concerns about the President\'s stability, the nuclear codes and the launch capacity has to go through this process, and you personally will ensure that nothing crazy, the word that you used, happens.A: That\'s right. And I was, you know, talking to the Speaker of the House.As you all are all aware, the current Speaker of the House is no longer the esteemed Nancy Pelosi. We don\\u2019t have one as of this recording, because Republicans are having a war among extremists to see who can seize the most power from the Speaker in order to misuse the power granted to the U.S. House of Representatives, to abuse that power to go after political opponents instead of doing the work they were ostensibly elected to do.Former Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund warns us in his new book \\u201cCourage Under Fire,\\u201d that the Capitol is still not safe from domestic terror attacks. This is coming from top law enforcement.Back to the House, the New York Times reported that Brazilian authorities intend to prosecute George \\u201cJew-ish\\u201d Santos for fraud. These are the kinds of people that a healthy political party would reject. But Republican leadership can\\u2019t afford to give any members the boot, even if they attacked their own country and or tried to steal the votes from millions of Americans or defrauded people, because they only have a four-seat majority.None of this concern is hyperbole, I wish it were. I\\u2019ve been covering politics since 2010, and the Republican Party has only gotten worse in that time. Even Jake Sherman tweeted, \\u201cI\''