Tangle - The Peter Navarro indictment.

Episode Date: June 7, 2022

On Friday, Navarro, a White House adviser to former President Donald Trump, was indicted by a grand jury after failing to comply with a subpoena from the House committee investigating the riot at the Capitol on January 6. Plus, a question about anonymity online.You can read today's podcast here.You can subscribe to Tangle by clicking here or drop something in our tip jar by clicking here.Our podcast is written by Isaac Saul and produced by Trevor Eichhorn. Music for the podcast was produced by Diet 75.Our newsletter is edited by Bailey Saul, Sean Brady, Ari Weitzman, and produced in conjunction with Tangle’s social media manager Magdalena Bokowa, who also created our logo.--- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/tanglenews/message Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Based on Charles Yu's award-winning book, Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu, a background character trapped in a police procedural who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime, Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. The flu remains a serious disease. Last season, over 102,000 influenza cases have been reported across Canada, which is Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. yourself from the flu. It's the first cell-based flu vaccine authorized in Canada for ages six months and older, and it may be available for free in your province. Side effects and allergic reactions can occur, and 100% protection is not guaranteed. Learn more at flucellvax.ca.

From executive producer Isaac Saul, this is Tangle. Good morning, good afternoon, and good evening, and welcome to the Tangle Podcast, the place where you get views from across the political spectrum, some independent thinking, without all that hysterical nonsense you find everywhere else. I'm your host, Isaac Saul, and on today's episode, we are going to be talking about Peter Navarro, the former White House trade advisor who was indicted and arrested last week. Some of the debates and arguments that move caused. As always, though, before we start, we'll jump in with some quick hits. First up, President Biden invoked the Defense Production Act to boost supplies of solar panel

parts. He also suspended tariffs on panel imports from Southeast Asia. Number two, Henry Enrique Tarrio, the longtime leader of the Proud Boys, was indicted along with four top lieutenants for seditious conspiracy related to their actions leading up to and on January 6th. Number three, Elon Musk accused Twitter of breaching an agreement on their acquisition by not handing over data on spam accounts, putting Musk's purchase of the company in jeopardy. Number four, United Kingdom Prime Minister Boris Johnson won a no-confidence vote, 211 to 148 yesterday, to remain in power. Number five, seven states hold primary elections today in the U.S., California, Iowa, Mississippi, Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico, and South Dakota.

Former Trump aide Peter Navarro indicted today by the Justice Department on two counts. Contempt of Congress for the way that he has defied repeatedly and publicly the insurrection probe. Today, Justice Department officials did what members of the committee asked them to do. They charged the former Trump advisor Pete Navarro with contempt of Congress and took him into custody. Meanwhile, former Trump aide Peter Navarro was arrested by the FBI today, and he said he was startled by how the confrontation went down. On Friday, Navarro, a White House advisor to former President Donald Trump, was indicted by a grand jury after failing to comply with a subpoena from the House committee investigating the riot at the Capitol on January

6th. The Justice Department declined to charge Mark Meadows and Dan Scavino Jr. to other top Trump officials who refused to cooperate, but indicted Navarro instead. Navarro has remained a staunch proponent of the stolen election theories and is the first White House official who served under Trump during the events of January 6th to be charged in connection with the investigation into the attack. He was charged with two counts of criminal contempt for failing to appear for a deposition or provide documents to the committee. Each count carries a maximum sentence of a $100,000 fine and one year in prison. The January 6th committee praised the indictment, though they questioned why the Justice Department didn't charge other top Trump aides who refused to comply with their subpoenas. We find the decision to reward Mark

Meadows and Dan Scavino for their continued attack on the rule of law puzzling, Representatives Benny Thompson and Liz Cheney said in a statement. Mr. Meadows and Mr. Scavino unquestionably have relevant knowledge about President Trump's role in the efforts to overturn the 2020 election and the events of January 6th. Navarro, like other former Trump aides, has claimed that he cannot comply with the subpoena because Trump has invoked executive privilege to bar the release of information the committee wants. The executive privilege invoked by President Trump is not mine to waive, Mr. Navarro has said publicly. Navarro also filed a lawsuit against Speaker Nancy Pelosi, the Democrat from California, and the U.S. Attorney in Washington, Matthew Graves, alleging that the House committee is unlawful and the subpoena unenforceable.

On Thursday night, the House committee, leading the investigation into January 6, which is made up of seven Democrats and two Republicans, will hold primetime hearings where they will attempt to present the American public with evidence on how the day unfolded and who is responsible. The committee has interviewed more than 1,000 witnesses and received more than 140,000 documents in 11 months. It also hired former ABC News president James Goldston as an advisor to help it present the evidence to the public. There are links to our previous coverage of Mark Meadows being held in contempt in today's newsletter, as well as two previous newsletters about the January investigations. In a moment, you're going to hear some arguments from the

right and the left, and then my take. First up, we'll start with what the right is saying. The right has argued that the arrest was an excessive move. Some have criticized the Justice Department for being partisan. Others have said Congress is headed for mutually assured destruction. partisan. Others have said Congress is headed for mutually assured destruction. In National Review, Andrew McCarthy said the ratings battle has begun for the January 6th committee. Make no mistake, this is hardball, McCarthy wrote. The contempt charges are highly unusual, nonviolent, and comparatively minor. When DOJ indicted Trump advisor Steve Bannon on contempt of Congress charges, Bannon was not arrested. He was permitted to surrender through the usual agreement between prosecutors and defense lawyers for an

accused who poses no threat of violence or flight. Yet, the 72-year-old Navarro was not given that option even though he says he has been in communication with federal prosecutors and agents, evidently in connection with a lawsuit Navarro is poised to file against the January 6th committee. Attorney General Mayor Garland's DOJ had the FBI slap handcuffs and, Navarro says, leg irons on him, hauling him into custody as he was about to board a flight to Nashville, not to go on the lam, but to do more media appearances ripping the committee and the Biden administration, McCarthy said. Remember, this is a Justice Department that is turning a blind eye to blatant violations of federal criminal law by pro-abortion activists who have demonstrated at the homes of Supreme Court justices. The demonstrators have no defense, but because

they are protesting in furtherance of a political cause the Biden administration favors, the Justice Department is pretending that nothing can be done since the demonstrations are non-violent so far. The New York Post editorial board called it another partisan move from the Justice Department. Former Trump trade advisor Peter Navarro was cuffed and dragged into custody on Friday for no reason. The 72-year-old said he would have voluntarily surrendered over his contempt of Congress charges relating to his refusal to work with the January 6th committee, and noted he was given no warning that he was going to be arrested, the editor said. The man has no history of violence and

zero flight risk, and the judge in the case released him on his own recognizance and admission that no one really thinks Navarro is going anywhere. Defendants in similar situations are nearly always given the opportunity to surrender. Instead, the feds pulled Navarro off a plane at a Nashville airport as he was off to a TV appearance, they added. This is pure ugly politics. The Justice Department and the January 6th Committee are coming down hard on Navarro for being a Donald Trump ally, nothing else. It's a naked effort to drum up publicity, outrage, and media interest

for next week's hearings over just how involved the ex-prez and various other officials were with the Capitol riots. Making a show of force against an aging trade expert as though he were a fleeing drug kingpin doesn't serve justice. It only serves the nakedly partisan aims of the Democrats who control Congress and the Justice Department. Jonathan Turley said Washington is on the route to mutually assured destruction. In the build-up to next week's start of public hearings by the House of Representatives January 6th investigative committee, Democrats have subpoenaed Republican colleagues and held former Trump officials in

contempt, Turley wrote. Then, instead of simply arranging for Navarro to voluntarily surrender, the Justice Department made a dramatic public arrest of him at an airport and dragged him off the jail in handcuffs. These subpoena fights seem to be unfolding with little consideration given to the potential costs, either for Washington institutions or the individuals involved. Despite years of bitter political divisions, the two parties have long avoided using subpoenas against each other, he added. It was viewed as a step toward mutually assured destruction if House members unleashed inherent investigatory powers on each other. House Democratic leaders, however, shattered that long tradition of restraint, despite the fact that many gained little from the effort.

What they will lose is a long-standing detente on the use of subpoenas against colleagues, and they are creating a new precedent for such internal subpoenas just months before they could find themselves in the minority. Today's hunters, then, could become the hunted if Republicans claim the same license after November's elections. The House already is a dysfunctional body that allows for little compromise or dialogue between parties. The targeting of fellow members now will remove one of the remaining restraints on unbridled partisan rage. Alright, that is it for what the right is saying, which brings us to what the left is saying. The left says the arrest was well justified. Some claim the January 6th committee is getting closer to Trump. Many believe Navarro has a lot to offer investigators.

In the Washington Post, Philip Bump wrote about what Peter Navarro may have to offer investigators. People often forget that Trump's infamous effort to cajole supporters to show up in Washington on January 6th, 2021, be there, we'll be wild, was not a standalone imperative. It was, instead, the conclusion to a tweet that began with his promotion of a 30-plus page document written by Navarro that purported to show how the election had been stolen, Bump wrote. At the time, I described that report succinctly, and I believe accurately, as perhaps being the most embarrassing document created by a White House staffer. This is useful context for the revelation Monday that Navarro was subpoenaed to provide testimony to a federal grand jury in Washington.

We do understand that the Justice Department has been working to build a criminal case against someone that necessitates testimony from aides and attorneys who are involved in Trump's post-election efforts, Bump said. Attorney General Merrick Garland has been criticized from the left for not having announced any charges, criticism that often fails to appreciate 1. what's been done, and 2. the diverging natures of quiet criminal investigations and loud political ones. Navarro states flatly, for example, that what he sought from January 6th was to delay certification of the election for at least another several weeks

so that Congress and legislative bodies could probe the fraud and election irregularities that were revealed during the counting of electoral votes. To an outside observer, this perhaps sounds sensible, except that the election had been certified in each state weeks earlier and that there were no fraud and irregularities raised during the process that had not already been dismissed as irrelevant. In Slate, Dennis Aftergut said Trump's very bad summer is about to get much worse. Why was May so bad for Trump, Aftergut asked? It's not just a matter of investigators closing in. Georgia's primary on May 24th delivered a blow to Trump. Three men the former president loves to hate, Governor Brian Kemp, Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, and Attorney General Chris Carr all defeated

Trump's candidates in the Republican primary. Trump is already trying to cast doubt on their election results, raising questions about Kemp's 50-point win over David Perdue. Based on Charles Yu's award-winning book, Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu, a background character trapped in a police procedural who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime, Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. The flu remains a serious disease. Last season, over 102,000 influenza cases have been reported across Canada, which is nearly double the historic average of 52,000 cases. What can Thank you. for ages six months and older, and it may be available for free in your province. Side effects and allergic reactions can occur, and 100% protection is not guaranteed.

Learn more at flucellvax.ca. Georgia voters, however, signaled they are ready to move on from the big lie. As for the Justice Department, it is reportedly ramping up its inquiry into Trump's circle and the fake elector scheme that Rudy Giuliani allegedly led for the Trump campaign, he wrote. On May 31st, The Guardian reported that DOJ's May 26th subpoena to former Trump aide Peter Navarro specifically refers to Trump and seeks communications with him, hinting at tightening scrutiny for the former president. On June 2nd, the DOJ indicted Navarro on two counts of contempt for defying the committee's subpoena to testify and provide documents. Trump's actions supporting violence that day

and his inaction for three hours permitting the insurrection to continue demonstrate the lengths to which he would go to advance the alleged criminal conspiracy's month-long goal, to intimidate Pence and Congress into rejecting or delaying certification of Joe Biden's election victory. In Vox, Ian Millhiser said Merrick Garland can prosecute Peter Navarro, and he should. Navarro is openly hoping that his status as a former consulier to a president will rescue him from contempt charges. The subpoena, he misleadingly claimed, is predicated on the ridiculous legal premise that Joe Biden can waive Donald Trump's executive privilege, before predicting that the Supreme Court will say otherwise when the time comes. There are several reasons to doubt that Navarro's prediction will prove accurate, Millhiser wrote.

While the GOP-controlled Supreme Court was quite protective of Trump while the former president was in office, effectively thwarting a House-led investigation that sought his financial records until after Trump left office, the court broke with Trump in a January 6th-related case after he left. Navarro is also wrong that President Biden's views are irrelevant to whether Navarro can hide behind executive privilege, he added. Though the Supreme Court held in Nixon v. Administrator of General Services that this privilege survives the individual president's tenure. The GSA case also held that a former president's power to keep their staff's deliberations secret is much less potent than a sitting president's power to do so. On top of these problems for Navarro, it's far from clear that Navarro's actions are even covered by the executive privilege.

Though communications between a president and their top aides are often privileged, according to a federal appeals court, that privilege only applies to communications concerning, quote, official government matters. Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election fall outside of a president's official duties. All right, that is it for the right and the left's take, which brings us to my take. I have not been shy about my feelings on January 6th or this committee. I believe the events of that day will be a stain on Trump's legacy forever, and I support thorough investigations into everything that led up to the riot at the Capitol and the attempts to halt the election certification.

That is because I want a better understanding of how coordinated the day was, who made up the crowd of rioters, whether they were incited or let in by law enforcement, if any members of Congress knew what was coming, how the president reacted, why the law enforcement response failed, what happened to the explosive devices that were found that day, and much, much more. Nothing is black and white, and while I think there are problems with the committee, the theatrics, the mostly partisan makeup, the expansion of federal policing it sometimes represents, I also think the committee is a much smaller problem than a group of people who tried to stop the certification of a free and fair election. I don't know Peter Navarro personally, but I was once scheduled to go on a radio show

with him to discuss his claims of election fraud and the show never panned out. What I do know from watching him closely and doing research on his claims is that his allegations of fraud have changed and evolved over time, and he has seemingly abandoned his expertise as a trade advisor to go all in on the notion that 2020 was stolen. I do not think he is a credible person. I do not view his motivations as an earnest desire to save the country from so-called fraud and corruption. I think he is deeply loyal to former President Trump and deeply invested in election fraud theories because it's a good way to get attention and make money. From what we know about Navarro in January 6th, he was a key player in Trump's thinking and obviously carried a great deal of weight with folks who believed they were saving the country

by objecting to the election results. Trump repeatedly pushed Navarro's now laughable 30-page PDF on purported election fraud to his millions of followers up to and on the day of January 6th. All this is to say, yes, I believe he should testify, and turn over documents, and cooperate. Should he be handcuffed and shackled at the airport? No. Is this an obviously excessive move from the Justice Department and the committee to send a message? I think so. Will it lead to payback when Republicans take control of Congress? Almost certainly. The main difference between Navarro and other Trump allies, though, is that he is still going on TV every weekend promising to sue Democrats and trying to goad them into heavy-handed moves

like this. Apparently, it worked. As conservative legal expert Andrew McCarthy put it, Navarro is a jackass, but the criminal charges smack of selective prosecution, not to mention the gratuitous manner of his arrest. Regardless, it is important to keep the main thing the main thing. Navarro was clearly at the center of an effort to organize the halting of the election certification. He made his plans public. He has been subpoenaed and is attempting to hide behind a thin veil of executive privilege. It almost certainly will not work, and it shouldn't. He didn't need to be arrested, but the indictment was worthy and he does need to testify. In December of 2021, this is how I closed a similar piece on Mark Meadows.

Nearly all of it applies to Navarro now, too. Do I want answers about potential FBI involvement in the riots, or the pipe bomber who we mysteriously have no more information on, or whether some Capitol police let the rioters through? Yes, yes, and yes. Are some of the rioters being overcharged? Yes. Do Democrats want to make this as politically painful as Republicans as possible? Of course. Does any of that absolve Mark Meadows or mean he should be able to avoid testifying? No. Just like Bannon, and now Navarro, his claims of executive privilege are on flimsy legal footing. And given the vital information he's already brought forward, I would love to see him answer questions before Congress.

All right, that is it for my take, which brings us to your questions answered. This one is from Morgan in Austin, Texas. Morgan said, what impact do you think anonymity has on allowance of free speech? In other words, how would you feel about limiting the free speech of anonymous shit posters because they can hide behind a made-up username but giving people free reign if they're willing to put their name to the comments? Okay, so on the surface, I like this idea, mostly because I like the attitude of it. If you are going to say something, put your name on it. I get attacked every day by anonymous people online and it is incredibly frustrating to engage with someone who is hiding behind a fake name and can play by different rules. But when I scratch the surface, I'm really not a fan.

Anonymity can be frustrating, but it is also important. It often allows people to say what they are really thinking or challenge powerful entities without fear of repercussion. Along with the shit posters, I get messages from anonymous accounts or emails all the time with tips about the news, criticism of my work, or thoughts about sensitive issues that have all been really valuable. And while it's easy to blame anonymity for provocative posts, a lot of provocative people online are not anonymous at all. As a journalist especially, I like anonymity. Many of the most valuable things I've learned about politics have come from talking to people off the record or

when they are anonymous. I imagine similar value comes to the surface in social media settings when anonymity is granted. To me, the biggest thing is about how we use and frame anonymous comments. If you're operating on social media and engaging an anonymous person, I would suggest taking everything they say with a grain of salt. Similarly, if you're reading a story that carries comments from anonymous sources, you should proceed with a higher degree of skepticism. All right, that is it for your questions answered, which brings us to a story that matters. All right, that is it for your questions answered, which brings us to a story that matters. More than 250 self-declared gun enthusiasts, including conservative donors, have sent a letter to Texas Governor Greg Abbott calling for a bipartisan gun reform legislation. The letter, which ran as a full-page ad in the Dallas Morning News, endorses red flag

laws, expanding background checks, and raising the purchase age of a gun to 21. Most law enforcement experts believe these measures would make a difference, the letter reads, and recent polls of fellow conservatives suggest there is strong support for such gun safety measures. The letter to Abbott has wider implications beyond just Texas. Senator John Cornyn, the Republican from Texas, is in the center of gun reform talks in Congress, and the signers of the letter express support for proposals he is pushing at the federal level. The Texas Tribune has a story. There's a link to it in today's newsletter. All right, next up is our numbers section.

The number of Americans who trust the government to do what is right just about always or most of the time is just 2 in 10. The percentage of registered voters who said the January 6th committee was too focused on the past is 39%. That's according to a Navigator research poll. The percentage of registered voters who said the January 6th committee was doing important work is 49%. The percentage of American voters who said too much attention has been paid to the January 6th riots is 35% according to a January poll. The percentage of Americans who say too little attention has been paid to the riots is 31% according to that same Pew poll. The percentage of Americans who said the right amount of attention had been paid to the January 6th riots is 33%

according to that January Pew poll. All right, everybody, last but not least, our have a nice day section. This one is from Northern California, where firefighters are getting some help from an unlikely sidekick, goats. In West Sacramento, goats are being used to clear weeds, brush, and high grass that can serve as fuel for forest fires. Hundreds of goats are released to help create fire breaks, and one official said 400 goats can clear two acres in a day in areas that mowers can't even reach. Before a fire broke last week, goats had cleared out brush around a housing complex that kept the flames from reaching any homes. Along with being effective, the goats are environmentally friendly and cheap. ABC 13 has the story. There's a link to it in today's newsletter.

All right, that's it for the podcast. As always, if you want to support our work, please go to readtangle.com membership. Become a member. You can see access to over 600 posts in our archives, Friday editions, the comments section, all sorts of great content. And it is the source of revenue that keeps this podcast rolling. Either way, we'll be right back here at same time tomorrow. Have a good one. Peace. Our newsletter is written by Isaac Saul, edited by Bailey Saul, Sean Brady, Ari Weitzman, and produced in conjunction with Tangle's social media manager,

Magdalena Bokova, who also helped create our logo. The podcast is edited by Trevor Eichhorn, and music for the podcast was produced by Diet75. For more from Tangle, subscribe to our newsletter or check out our content archives at www.readtangle.com. Thanks for watching! who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime, Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th,

only on Disney+. The flu remains a serious disease. Last season, over 102,000 influenza cases have been reported across Canada, which is nearly double the historic average of 52,000 cases. What can you do this flu season? Talk to your pharmacist or doctor about getting a flu shot. Thank you.