Former US Justice Department official Jeffrey Clark's efforts to help then-President Donald Trump overturn th𝔉e 2020 election were characterised Tuesday as a coup attempt by Washington, DC, Office of Disciplinary Counsel at a hearing to determine if Clark should be sanctioned.
Clark is accused of attempting to engage in dishonest💯 co🍸nduct during his role in aftermath of the last presidential election.
Much of the hearing before theꦬ three-member Board of Responsibility focused on a letter which Clark sent to his superiors at the time, Jeffrey Rosen and Richard Donoghue. Clark suggested the letter be sent to Georgia indicating that the Justice Department was investigating irregularities in the state's electiꦦon and state lawmakers should void Biden's electoral win.
H🗹amilton Fox III, the disciplinary counsel at the hearing, said the letter and Clark's continued attempts to intercede on Trump's behalf, including multiple meetings with Trump in violation Justice Department procedure, were "essentially a coup attempt at the Department of Justice".
Clark's attorney, Harry MacDougald, said the action being taken against his client was unprecedented. He said the letter was not supposed to 😼have been public and should haveꦗ fallen under various privilege protections. He added that the letter was part of the debate that normally occurs between lawyers.
He said punishing Clark in those circumstances would have a "chilling effect", a point that Donoghue agre🥃ed with during the cross examination portion of his testimony when he said it could discourage people from "being as candid as they otherwise mighಌt be".
Much of the hearing played like a rerun of the fraud claims from the 2020 election and the House January 6 committee testimony, includinಞg a rehash of the dramatic January 3, 2021 meeting when several attorneys within the White House and Justice Department threatened to quit if Trump fired Rosen as the acting attorney general and named Clark.
The testimony also high🗹lighted how much pressure was put on the Justice Department directly by Trump. He spoke multiple times to Donoghue and Rosen about allegations oꦏf fraud and misconduct.
As events con🅰tinued the pair met with Clark at one point to talk about the letter in what Donoghue described as a contentious meeting. He said he and Rosen tried to convince Clark that the department had examined various claims, while other things fell outside the department's purview.
"We fundamentally d🐓isagreed on what the evidence showed," Donoghue said duri𒈔ng testimony. "It was just we were almost living in two different worlds."
Former deputy White House counsel Patrick Philbin, who knew Clark, testified that he spoke with the then-acting head of the Civil Division and told him the theories hꦰe was espousing and had been debunked. But, Philbin said, he felt Clark pursued what he thought was his duty because Clark believed there were serious issues in the election.
During his testimony Donoghue acknowledged that there were instances of fraud and misconduct that year but nothing of ඣa level to overturn the election. MacDougald's questioning focused on absentee balloting in Fulton County, Georgia and how there were legitimate concerns that had not been fully examined by the department.
The hearin🔯g is expected to resume Wednesday with Rosen testifying. &nbs👍p;
Clark could be sanctioned or disbarred. Any sanctions could bꦯe appealed to the DC Court of Appeals.
