Politics
Here’s what stands out in Jack Smith’s 1,889 page appendix

When it comes to legal briefs, I can be a speed reader. But where evidence is concerned, I always prefer to take a more focused, methodical review where I can.
As of Friday afternoon, I’m continuing to pore over all 1,889 pages of the newly released, heavily redacted appendix of special counsel Jack Smith’s brief defending his superseding indictment of former President Donald Trump. But in the few hours since Judge Tanya Chutkan ordered its release, I’ve found several things that stand out already.
What I have reviewed — and the limited amount we can see — reveals that Smith alternately intends to play it safe and take risks as Chutkan assesses which of the allegations and evidence from the superseding indictment should remain in the case.
[It’s] inexplicable that the witness names are redacted, especially as the dates of the interviews are not.
First, the unsealed content within the first volume of 720-plus pages is excerpted testimony and interviews from the House Jan. 6 committee’s investigation. With one notable exception — which I’ll address — those transcripts have long been public.
That makes it all the more inexplicable that the witness names are redacted, especially as the dates of the interviews are not. That means each witness can be identified through both the dates of their interview or deposition and a comparison of the substance of their comments to public versions of the transcripts.
Specifically, the special counsel’s appendix includes portions of interviews with the following, who appear in alphabetical order: former Attorney General Bill Barr, who resigned in late December 2020; former Arizona House Speaker Rusty Bowers; former Trump deputy campaign manager Justin Clark; former senior Trump White House aide Kellyanne Conway, who left the Trump administration months before the election; Georgia election worker Ruby Freeman; Stephanie Grisham, former chief of staff to Melania Trump; White House speechwriter Vincent Haley, who helped draft the Ellipse speech; Chris Hodgson, then Vice President Mike Pence’s chief aide in the Senate; Pence’s counsel Greg Jacob; Jan. 6 rally organizer Amy Kremer; then-senior campaign adviser Jason Miller; then-campaign adviser Katrina Pierson; Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger; former Michigan Senate Majority Leader Mike Shirkey; former Trump campaign manager Bill Stepien; White House speechwriter Ross Worthington, who also contributed to the Ellipse speech; and former Trump fundraiser Caroline Wren, who later advised grocery heiress Julie Fancelli on where to direct her money in the post-election period.
What’s most interesting about this group collectively — but also advisable in the wake of the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling — is that the vast majority of these witnesses were not executive branch employees, but instead were private citizens, campaign staff or state officials Trump tried to influence. Those who did work within the executive branch — Barr, Jacob, two White House speechwriters and Grisham — were included likely because they observed or participated in an overtly political act, event or conversation or because their own decision-making or communications with others (as with the circumstances surrounding Barr’s resignation, which he discusses in the portion of his interview excerpted) provide context for understanding Trump’s own intent or knowledge.
Now, for that exception: As Blue Light News’s Kyle Cheney observed on X, one interview was provided with fewer redactions than were previously in the public domain. Specifically, earlier this year, Rep. Barry Loudermilk, R-Ga., released a redacted version of the June 10, 2022, interview that a still-unnamed White House valet provided to the Jan. 6 committee.
The version that begins at page 169 of the first volume, however, reveals that the valet, who acknowledged that “sometimes I just don’t know how to deal with my emotions,” had a critical interaction with Trump during the early afternoon of Jan. 6. At 1:21 p.m. ET, the valet notified Trump, who was eager to see footage of his Ellipse speech, that he was not able to record it all because live TV “cut off” coverage in order to show the “rioting down at the Capitol.” According to the valet, Trump then walked straight to the Oval dining room to “go see” for himself as the valet removed Trump’s overcoat, set up the TV, and handed him the remote, at which point the valet left to retrieve Trump’s beloved Diet Coke while Trump “s[aw] it” — meaning the mounting violence at the Capitol — “for himself.”
The version that Loudermilk released in the name of “complete transparency,” however, curiously redacts many of those details.
But, of course, those are just the witnesses whose statements we can see. And while Volume 3 of the appendix contains the cover and several highlighted pages from Pence’s book “So Help Me God,” actual testimony from Pence is nowhere to be found. Or is it merely hiding in plain sight? After all, there are nearly 100 pages of fully sealed material (GA 387-481, for those following along at home) between the apparent end of the excerpt of Miller’s Jan. 6 committee deposition and the start of the portion of Pierson’s transcribed interview. And alphabetically, what, or rather who, falls between them? Pence.
But don’t take it just from me. Smith’s immunity brief recounts, in bulleted form, a series of conversations between Pence and Trump, at pages 12-14. In some cases, Smith cites Pence’s book as a source. But Smith more often credits pages from the government’s appendix within the same range I identified above. And that likely means Smith has ample testimony from Pence about his many post-election conversations with Trump about its outcome — and whether either of them had any reason to doubt or try to change it.
Whether we’ll ever read that testimony, however, is unclear. And before we ever get to courts’ analyses of whether, during the conversations he likely testified to, Pence was functioning as Trump’s adviser, rendering the evidence inadmissible, or his running mate, making it fair game, the bigger determining factor seems to be the outcome of this election.
Lisa Rubin is an BLN legal correspondent and a former litigator. Previously, she was the off-air legal analyst for “The Rachel Maddow Show” and “Alex Wagner Tonight.”
Politics
‘Uniting anger’: Democrats fume over Schumer’s handling of funding fight
Chuck Schumer is facing one of the most perilous moments of his Senate leadership career.
The Senate minority leader came under heavy fire for the second straight day from Democrats enraged at him for backing a Republican bill to avoid a government shutdown, and fallout appears likely to last well past Friday’s vote.
A handful of House lawmakers, including some in battleground districts, are floating supporting a primary challenge against him. Activists are organizing efforts to punish him financially. Schumer is facing questions within his own caucus about whether he made strategic errors in handling the high-stakes moment and failed to outline a clear plan about how to deal with the complex politics of a shutdown, according to interviews with six lawmakers or their aides. Some Democratic senators are even privately questioning whether he should stay on as their leader.
“He’s done a great deal of damage to the party,” said Ezra Levin, co-founder of the liberal group Indivisible, which has scheduled an emergency call Saturday with its New York chapter and other local leaders to “seriously consider if the current [Democratic] leadership is equipped to handle the moment we’re in.”
In a remarkable sign of how deep the intraparty frustration with Schumer runs, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries refused to throw his fellow New Yorker a life raft. Asked by reporters on Friday if there should be new leadership in the Senate, he said, “Next question.”
Schumer’s one-time partner, former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), went so far as to urge senators to vote against his position, saying that “this false choice that some are buying instead of fighting is unacceptable.” And dozens of House Democrats sent a sharply worded letter to Schumer Friday, which expressed “strong opposition” to his standpoint, arguing that the “American people sent Democrats to Congress to fight against Republican dysfunction and chaos” and that the party should not be “capitulating to their obstruction.”
Though several senators said they supported his leadership, some Senate Democrats avoided questions when asked directly Friday about whether they continued to support him in the role.
“We still have more to play out on this,” said Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.). “So I’m not really thinking about the big-picture politics.”
Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) also dodged, saying: “The leader I don’t have confidence in is Donald Trump.” And Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) responded to a query on whether he still supports Schumer by calling for a “good post-mortem” on Senate Democrats’ approach to the government funding fight.
“Anytime you have a failure — and this is a failure altogether — we as a caucus owe it to Democrats across the country and our constituents to look back and see: How do we get ourselves into this situation?” he said.
One Democratic senator granted anonymity to share private discussions said conversations are starting about whether Schumer should be their leader going forward.
“There’s a lot of concern about the failure to have a plan and execute on it,” the senator said. “It’s not like you couldn’t figure out that this is what was going to happen.”
The frustration toward Schumer reflects a boiling anger among Democrats over what they view as their party’s lack of a strategy for taking on Trump in his second term. Though few in Democratic circles think Schumer’s job as minority leader is at risk — and he isn’t up for reelection until 2028 — the frustration toward him spans the party’s spectrum, from moderates to progressives, both in and outside of Congress.
Schumer has defended his vote to keep the government running as the best of two bad choices aimed at not ceding Trump and billionaire adviser Elon Musk even more power to slash the government. Nine Democratic senators and an independent who caucuses with Democrats joined him to advance the bill, enough to prevent a government shutdown.
“A government shutdown gives Donald Trump, Elon Musk and DOGE almost complete power as to what to close down, because they can decide what is an essential service,” Schumer said in a BLN interview. “My job as leader is to lead the party, and if there’s going to be danger in the near future, to protect the party. And I’m proud I did it. I knew I did the right thing, and I knew there’d be some disagreements. That’s how it always is.”
He added that he is not concerned with his leadership position: “I have the overwhelming support of my caucus. And so many of the members thanked me and said, ‘You did what you thought was courageous, and we respect it.’”
But behind closed doors, even some longtime Schumer allies are raising the specter that his time has passed.
“Biden is gone. Pelosi is in the background. Schumer is the last one left from that older generation,” said one New York-based donor who is a longtime supporter of the leader. “I do worry that the older generation thinks 2024 was just about inflation, but no, the game has changed. It’s not left wing or moderate, it’s everyone now saying — the game is different now. But he was set up to battle in 2006, and we’re a long way from 2006.”
Adam Green, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, said “active conversations” are taking place among liberal groups about how to make Schumer pay. He said Schumer will likely face protests over his support for the GOP bill at his tour stops next week for his new book “Antisemitism In America: A Warning.” But he said the effort to hold him “accountable” will not end there.
“He has to be made an example of to enforce Democratic backbone going forward,” he said.
And it’s far from just progressives.
“I have not seen such uniting anger across the party in a long, long time,” said Charlotte Clymer, a Democratic operative associated with the moderate wing of the party who launched a petition to boycott donations to Senate Democrats until they force Schumer out as minority leader. “Sen. Schumer has managed to unite us far more than Trump has in recent months.”
After the GOP bill advanced Friday, Congressional Progressive Caucus chair Greg Casar said in a statement that “we need more leaders from the stand and fight wing of the Democratic Party.” MoveOn warned that the liberal group’s “members will be demanding answers from their elected officials” about the vote. The progressive organization Justice Democrats sent a text to supporters reading “F*ck Chuck Schumer.”
Also on Friday, dozens of protesters organized by the Sunrise Movement descended on Schumer’s office in the Hart Senate building holding signs that read: “Schumer: step up or step aside,” demanding he reverse course on supporting the bill. The group said 11 people were arrested.
“We have to reckon with the fact that young people, working-class people, people of color — the backbone of the Democratic Party — are moving away from the party,” said Stevie O’Hanlon, the organization’s political director. “Chuck Schumer is part of that reason.”
Still, some Democratic senators publicly stood by Schumer on Friday.
Asked if people are urging her to run for Schumer’s job, Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), said, “No, no,” adding, “I’m doing my job today.”
Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.), who is retiring after this term, called Schumer “a good leader.” Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.) told reporters he still has confidence in Schumer in the top role.
Others acknowledged the difficult position Schumer found himself in as he attempted to steer his caucus through a lesser-of-two-evils situation without the same simple-majority cover that Jeffries had in the House.
“It’s tough to be the leader,” said Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.).
With reporting by Emily Ngo and Hailey Fuchs.
Politics
Trump lauds Schumer’s ‘guts’ in backing bill to avoid shutdown
President Donald Trump on Friday congratulated Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer for “doing the right thing” by backing the Republican-led bill to avert a government shutdown, a choice that’s put the New York Democrat at odds with many in his party. “A non pass would be a Country destroyer…
Read More
-
The Josh Fourrier Show4 months ago
DOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?
-
Uncategorized4 months ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
Economy4 months ago
Fed moves to protect weakening job market with bold rate cut
-
Uncategorized4 months ago
Johnson plans to bring House GOP short-term spending measure to House floor Wednesday
-
Economy4 months ago
It’s still the economy: What TV ads tell us about each campaign’s closing message
-
Politics4 months ago
RFK Jr.’s bid to take himself off swing state ballots may scramble mail-in voting
-
Politics4 months ago
What 7 political experts will be watching at Tuesday’s debate
-
Politics4 months ago
How Republicans could foil Harris’ Supreme Court plans if she’s elected