The Bonkers Story of How Trump Tried to Corrupt the DOJ to Steal the Election

January 6 witnesses detail his bid to install a loyalist as acting attorney general.

Jeffery ClarkMother Jones Illustration; Susan Walsh/AP

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

It was an odd coincidence of history: On Thursday, the 50th anniversary of the “Smoking Gun” conversation that forced Richard Nixon to resign his presidency, the House select committee investigating the January 6 riot held a hearing on Donald Trump’s effort to enlist the Justice Department in a corrupt bid to overturn the 2020 election.

Thursday’s hearing told the alarming tale of how Trump leaned on DOJ officials to affirm his false allegations of fraud and baseless conspiracy theories, and tried to corrupt the department by installing as acting attorney general Jeffrey Clark, a lackey loyal to Trump’s Big Lie crusade, who was prepared to declare the election tainted and to ask legislators in swing states Joe Biden had won to nullify the results. Testimony showed that Trump came close to triggering a full-scale constitutional crisis, which was thwarted only because a few senior department officials stood up to him.  

The secretly recorded tape of that damning Nixon discussion revealed that the president had directly ordered the attempted cover-up of the Watergate break-in and had obstructed justice. But the specific plan—to have the CIA tell the FBI to cease its investigation—was cooked up by John Mitchell, the attorney general. Nixon’s Justice Department was obstructing itself. 

It was the Justice Department’s deep involvement in the Watergate scandal that led to the creation of rules to protect the department from political interference from the White House—which was precisely what occurred with Trump. “We were only a half-step away from a full blown constitutional crisis as President Donald Trump and his loyalists threatened a wholesale takeover of the Department of Justice,” the Senate Judiciary Committee, which investigated the matter, noted in an extensive report last October. 

The attempted subversion took place in December 2020, after then-Attorney General Bill Barr, up to that point a Trump sycophant, resigned in disgust when his boss refused to accept the election results. Trump then tried to pressure Jeff Rosen, the acting AG, to declare the election fraudulent.

According to notes taken by Richard Donoghue, Rosen’s deputy, Trump at one point told Rosen to “just say the election was corrupt and leave the rest to me and the Republican congressmen.” This referred to Reps. Jim Jordan, Scott Perry, Marjorie Taylor Greene, and others who were colluding with the White House to stop the certification of Biden’s win. When Rosen refused, Trump threatened to replace him with Clark, a DOJ subordinate who eagerly wanted the department to claim there was evidence of widespread election fraud so states could replace Biden electors with Trump electors.

As the Judiciary Committee pointed out, the White House’s communications with DOJ in this matter violated the post-Watergate restrictions governing interactions between 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and the department. In fact, Trump’s skullduggery wins the contest for most outlandish attempt to politicize the Justice Department. (It takes some doing to one-up Nixon in that regard.)

On Thursday, Rosen and Donoghue provided dramatic testimony chronicling their conversations and meetings with Trump, who was constantly haranguing them and was upset that the Justice Department wouldn’t confirm the debunked allegations and batty conspiracy theories he and his allies were hawking. The officials repeatedly informed Trump that the department had investigated the claims and found them inaccurate and that they had no business meddling in the election. It was like telling a mob boss he couldn’t get his way. Trump would not accept that.

A key point of the hearing focused on Clark pressing Rosen and Donoghue to send a letter to Georgia and other states stating that the election was tarred by fraud, and thus state lawmakers should select new slates of electors—presumably Trump supporters. Rosen and Donoghue each believed forwarding this letter would be disastrous for the department and the nation, and told Trump as much. But neither he nor Clark would relent. 

The testimony demonstrated just how desperate and crazy Trump and his crew had become, and the extent of their schemes to to prevent the legitimate transfer of power. White House chief of staff Mark Meadows even encouraged Rosen and Donoghue to investigate the ludicrous conspiracy theory that hackers (apparently connected to the CIA and MI6) had used an Italian satellite to switch Trump votes to Biden. The DOJ declined, but the White House managed to have acting Defense Secretary Chris Miller instruct the defense attaché in Rome to look into this bunk. 

The Clark story is especially nutty. An environmental lawyer who was the acting head of the DOJ’s civil division, he had no experience whatsoever in criminal investigations, let alone election fraud. Yet Rep. Perry (R-Penn.) had introduced him to Trump, who immediately latched on to Clark as a toady who would corrupt the department to help him stay in power.

According to Thursday’s testimony, Clark’s attempts to pressure Rosen and Donoghue were assisted by Ken Klukowski, a young, conservative lawyer the department had hired in mid-December. The big reveal: Klukowski also was working with John Eastman, the conservative attorney behind Trump’s strategy to block the certification of electoral votes. This disclosure raised the possibility that someone had planted Klukowski in the Justice Department to help Trump steal the election.

Trump’s moves to pervert the DOJ culminated in a Oval Office meeting on January 3, in which he castigated Rosen for not producing evidence to back up the allegations of fraud. At that meeting, Trump expressed his desire to replace Rosen with the inexperienced Clark, who would willingly send those letters to the states. White House records, in fact, were already identifying Clark as acting attorney general, as if it were a done deal.

The coup was almost in place. Trump backed off only after the DOJ brass told him a Clark-for-Rosen switch would prompt mass resignations. During the hearing, Donoghue recalled that his fellow witness, former Assistant Attorney General Steven Engel, had warned Trump that “Jeff Clark would be left leading a graveyard,” and that Engel’s comment “clearly had an impact on the president.” Once again, a thin line of sticking-to-the-rules Republican officials had blocked Trump from an unprecedented abuse of power. 

The hearing also revealed that some of the Republican House members plotting with the White House to overturn the election sought pardons from Trump after January 6. These included Reps. Matt Gaetz, Mo Brooks, Andy Biggs, Louie Gohmert, and Perry. There was also testimony suggesting that Greene may have contacted the White House counsel’s office to request a pardon, and that Jim Jordan had inquired about pardons for House Republicans. 

Trump’s attempts to muscle DOJ officials into baselessly declaring the election fraudulent could place him in legal jeopardy. As a recent Brookings Institution report noted, this scheme may have violated one or more provisions of the federal law prohibiting conspiracy to defraud the United States or “any agency thereof.” The report also said that Trump and others in his last-days inner circle, notably Eastman, might have violated another part of the criminal code that forbids corruptly obstructing or impeding—or attempting to obstruct or impede—an official proceeding, such as the certification of electoral votes.

This week, federal agents raided Clark’s home, and the Justice Department served subpoenas on several Republicans who were involved in state-level efforts to thwart the certification of Biden’s victory. The raid and the subpoenas are signs that Merrick Garland’s Justice Department is actively investigating plots Trump and his allies instigated to overturn the election.

Thursday’s proceedings depicted an attempt to subvert the Justice Department that even Nixon could never have dreamed of. And that’s only one piece of the January 6 story. The committee has again demonstrated how Trump’s war on democracy nearly succeeded, with more hearings yet to come. 

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate