Jan. 6 Committee Member: Many Ex-Trump Staffers Came Forward Voluntarily

WASHINGTON, DC - JULY 27: U.S. Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) questions witnesses during a hearing by the House Select Committee investigating the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol on July 27, 2021 at the Cannon House Of... WASHINGTON, DC - JULY 27: U.S. Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) questions witnesses during a hearing by the House Select Committee investigating the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol on July 27, 2021 at the Cannon House Office Building in Washington, DC. Members of law enforcement testified about the attack by supporters of former President Donald Trump on the U.S. Capitol. According to authorities, about 140 police officers were injured when they were trampled, had objects thrown at them, and sprayed with chemical irritants during the insurrection. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images) MORE LESS
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), who serves on the Jan. 6 select committee, on Saturday said that many of the more than 200 witnesses the panel has interviewed are former Trump administration officials who came forward voluntarily.

In an interview with CNN on Saturday, Lofgren noted that some other ex-Trump administration officials also volunteered testimony, but needed a subpoena for “cover.”

Lofgren, however, declined to offer insight into whether the former Trump officials who voluntarily came forward to the panel served in Trump’s White House, the Trump campaign or were part of former Vice President Mike Pence’s staff.

“Let me not be that specific, but let me say certainly there have been people, part of the Trump administration, who have spoken to us and provided important insights that have led us to further questions,” Lofgren said when asked about whether they were White House staffers, according to CNN.

Lofgren also dismissed former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows’ executive privilege claim. Earlier this month, Meadows skipped his deposition after the committee subpoenaed him alongside others within Trump’s inner circle, prompting leaders of the Jan. 6 committee to threaten Meadows with referring him for criminal contempt. Lofgren on Saturday told CNN that the committee still has questions for Meadows unrelated to his private conversations with the former president, which include whether Meadows used a private cell phone to communicate on Jan. 6 and where his text messages from that day are.

Lofgren declined to comment on evidence that the committee has obtained when pressed on whether the panel is concerned about Meadows potentially destroying evidence.

“It would be unfair of me to say that. But let me just say we would like to know about his use of a private cell phone and what happened to that cell phone and whether those records have been captured by the National Archives as the law requires,” Lofgren said, according to CNN.

Lofgren’s remarks to CNN come days after former Trump adviser and podcast host Steve Bannon pleaded not guilty to two counts of contempt of Congress, following his refusal to comply with the committee’s subpoena, saying that Jan. 6, 2021-related information was shielded by executive privilege.

Last week, Lofgren told CNN that in addition to the interviews with hundreds of witnesses, the committee received nearly 25,000 documents as well as more than 200 tips from its tip line.

Earlier this month, CNN also reported that the committee is looking into gathering information from at least five people close to Pence. The committee reportedly subpoenaed Keith Kellogg, who served as national security adviser and accompanied Trump for most of Jan. 6 as the then-President’s supporters breached the Capitol on the day of the joint session of Congress certifying Joe Biden’s electoral victory.

Latest News

Notable Replies

  1. Let’s see, how many Trumpers are possessed of a conscience?? Survey Says??

  2. OT/ when women have dark eyebrows, WHY do they paint their hair blond ?

  3. This seems consistent: Conservatives have a strong revenge and retribution impulse so deviation from the party line requires deniability.

    ETA: I have long thought the reactionary impulse for revanche explains not only enforced adherence to party doctrine but also the unwillingness of media to report on it fully; i.e., punishment is not reserved for party members, it is applied to deviation anywhere and that includes denial of access to reporters.

  4. Avatar for godwit godwit says:

    It also ups the paranoia and the pressure to flip. “Some of your colleagues have already testified, do you want to be the sucker left holding the bag?”

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

248 more replies

Participants

Avatar for rollinnolan Avatar for chelsea530 Avatar for ralph_vonholst Avatar for 26degreesrising Avatar for alyoshakaramazov1 Avatar for darcy Avatar for leftcoaster Avatar for darrtown Avatar for pshah Avatar for tena Avatar for dominic Avatar for justruss Avatar for bcgister Avatar for occamscoin Avatar for zenicetus Avatar for rascal_crone Avatar for osprey Avatar for trustywoods Avatar for Hatmama Avatar for carpe_diem Avatar for LeeHarveyGriswold Avatar for ClutchCargo Avatar for geographyjones Avatar for Pluckingenius

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Associate Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: