Trump ally Jeffrey Clark was adamant about fraud in 2020 election despite evidence, superior said

WASHINGTON — The second day of the disciplinary hearing for former Justice Department official Jeffrey Clark painted a picture of someone who, despite numerous attempts by his superiors to convince him otherwise, remained adamant that there were irregularities and fraud in the 2020 elections that required deeper investigation.

Former Acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen, testifying before the three-member Board of Responsibilities on Wednesday, said he and Richard Donoghue, who had been acting No. 2, met with Clark several times after the 2020 presidential election to urge him urge to change his position on the issue. how the department should handle allegations of voter fraud.

Clark is accused of engaging in dishonest conduct during his role in the aftermath of then-President Donald Trump’s loss in the 2020 presidential election and efforts to overturn the 2020 election. At issue is a letter Clark drafted, saying the department is investigating “several irregularities” and has identified “significant concerns” that may have affected the election. He tried to convince Rosen and Donoghue to send the letter to Georgia.

During a meeting the men had with Clark, they asked why he was raising an issue that was outside his authority as then head of the department’s civilian division.

“Mr. Clark was not very approachable. He just indicated that these were his ideas. He thought they were good ones,” Rosen said.

The pair tried to explain why the department had concluded that while there was fraud and misconduct, it was not enough to have cost Trump the election. In addition, the men learned that Clark had spoken to Trump, a violation of department policy on who should have contact with the White House.

Rosen said the meeting ended with Clark saying, “Well, I thought these were good ideas, but if you don’t like them, okay.” Rosen and Donoghue thought Clark had accepted their explanation and the matter was closed.

That was not the case. Clark continued his efforts and maintained contact with Trump.

Rosen changed course and at one point Clark received a classified briefing from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence about an allegation he had heard. Rosen and Donoghue decided to grant him access and also suggested he speak to a U.S. attorney in Georgia about how he made the allegations there.

“He had expressed interest in the ODNI report, so I thought this was a way to prevent him from giving bad advice to the president and perhaps see why the rest of the department was in the position we were in,” Rosen testified. .

Clark did not budge from his position and disagreed with the report. He has not contacted the U.S. Attorney’s Office.

The issue came to a head when Trump considered firing Rosen and replacing him with Clark. That was averted when senior Justice Department leaders and lawyers within the White House said they would quit if Trump took that step.

Rosen’s testimony took most of the day. Clark was called to testify by Hamilton Fox III, the disciplinary counsel at the hearing, over the objections of Clark’s attorneys, who indicated that their client had made it clear that he would invoke privilege.

Clark answered initial questions about when he joined the bar in Washington, D.C. and his work history leading up to his time at the Department of Justice.

He invoked several privileges, including executive privilege, law enforcement privilege, deliberative process privilege, attorney-client privilege, and the Fifth Amendment, which protects people from taking self-incriminating testimony, during more than 30 minutes of questioning by Fox, focusing on the letter and Clark’s role in the aftermath of the election.

At one point, after Fox’s questioning, board member Patricia Mathews asked who Clark’s client was because of his invocation of attorney-client privilege, and Clark responded: “President Trump. The head of the executive branch. The sole and centralized head of Article Two, the executive branch of the United States government.”

One of his lawyers intervened and asked Clark to continue to invoke the privileges he used during the remainder of the interrogation.

Clark faces criminal charges in Georgia for his role in the effort to overturn the election there. Trump is one of the co-suspects.

Clark could face sanctions, including possible suspension. He can appeal any action taken against him to the DC Court of Appeals.

His lawyer, Harry MacDougald, has said that action being taken against his client over the normal back and forth between lawyers would have a chilling effect on the profession.

The case will resume on Thursday with defense witnesses.