Trump’s plot almost ignited a revolution
A retired federal judge testified that Donald Trump’s demand for Mike Pence to reject the results of the 2020 US election would have triggered a “revolution” had the then vicepresident obeyed.
J Michael Luttig had advised Mr Pence that his role in overseeing congress’s ratification of the 2020 election result on January 6 last year was purely ceremonial – rejecting Trump lawyer John Eastman’s theory that Mr Pence had the power to overturn Joe Biden’s victory.
Mr Luttig, a renowned conservative legal scholar, told a hearing of the congressional committee investigating the 2021 US Capitol
assault that had Mr Pence gone along with the plot, it would have triggered “what I believe would have been tantamount to a revolution within a paralysing constitutional crisis in America”.
The jurist outlined how close he believed democracy came to collapsing as he appeared at the committee’s third hearing, which focused on the pressure campaign mounted by Mr Trump against Mr Pence to help the defeated Republican leader cling to power.
“There was no basis in the constitution or the laws of the United States at all for the theory espoused by Mr Eastman. None,” Mr Luttig said.
Liz Cheney, vice chair of
the committee, said Mr Eastman was the architect of a “nonsensical theory” he knew was based on false claims.
“Under several of the scenarios, the vice-president could ultimately just declare Donald Trump the winner, regardless of the vote totals that had already been certified by the states,” Ms Cheney said, describing Mr Eastman’s plan. “However, this was false and Eastman knew it was false,” she said. “In other words, it was a lie.”
The committee is in the middle of a run of televised hearings on the insurrection mounted by a pro-trump mob to prevent the peaceful transfer of power and overturn the results of the 2020
election. It has already revealed testimony from many of Mr Trump’s closest allies who said he was told repeatedly he had lost a fair fight to Mr Biden but declared victory and pushed his fake election fraud narrative anyway.
Mr Eastman’s theory, essentially, was that Mr Pence had the power to reject states’ results due to allegations of fraud. This could have handed the presidency to Mr Trump, according to Mr Eastman’s plan, because deciding the outcome would then have fallen under an arcane procedure to the House of Representatives whereby House Republicans, who had a majority of state delegations even though they didn’t con
trol the chamber, would have chosen the next president.
The committee showed testimony from Mr Pence’s general counsel, Greg Jacob, saying he believed Mr Eastman admitted in front of Mr Trump that his plan would violate federal law – but this didn’t deter Mr Trump.
The insurrection took place two days later, delaying congress certifying the election results for several hours.
The committee also played testimony from Trump White House lawyer Eric Herschmann, who said he told Mr Eastman the day after the January 6 insurrection: “Get a great effing criminal defence lawyer; you’re going to need it.”