Donald Trump’s legal team is considering a brash move that would put Republican members of Congress on the stand in his defense by questioning them about their own January 6 objections, DailyMail.com has learned.

The maneuver would have Trump’s legal team query lawmakers who cast votes objecting to the certification of Joe Biden‘s win, such as Senators Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley, as part of his federal criminal trial in Washington, D.C.

It would be a bid to persuade potential jurors that Trump was not an outlier when pushing election fraud, because he represented a widespread view within his party.

‘They were essential to the recognition of objections, because you had to have a representative from the Senate and from the House [to trigger a floor debate]. 

‘So the senators’ objections were obviously important, very important,’ a source familiar with Trump’s legal team’s thinking told DailyMail.com.

The move – which would have to be approved by a federal judge and could face objections from prosecutors – could allow the former president to cover his own post-election conduct by having his lawyer question the likes of Hawley and Cruz.

The pair were among the members of the GOP instrumental in setting up a political clash in Congress as Trump supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol.

The effort wouldn’t involve probing lawmakers about why they voted the way they did – a posture that could touch on separation of powers issues and the Constitution’s ‘Speech or Debate’ clause.

But it could examine ‘what objections that you see right up until and including J6 [January 6] and to the extent that elected officials have legitimate objections, it’s hard to criticize the president for having the same objections or similar ones,’ said the source.

‘So that would really be the theory and it would go to the bona fides of having objections right through the J6 period,’ the source added.

If sustained, it could have political implications beyond the federal courthouse in Washington, D.C. by providing a platform for Republicans facing their own reelections, and giving them a chance to reinforce their loyalty to Trump, the who is leading all Republicans by a wide margin in presidential polls. 

Trump’s team believes it can demonstrate that in ‘in the political environment right through January 6 elected officials had very good faith objections, based on what they were seeing as anomalies or unlawful acts with respect to the election,’ said the source.

Even some Republican officials who would later state that Biden won the election spoke publicly before January 6 about fraud allegations. (Former Trump AG Bill Barr, who told the House January 6 committee fraud claims put forward by Trump’s lawyers were ‘bull**** had before the election raised concerns about mail-in ballots).

The tactic could include examining efforts by a group of senators, including Hawley and Cruz, to rally fellow senators to delay certification during Trump’s final days to further probe election fraud claims, even after they were tossed by a series of courts. 

Former Trump economic advisor Peter Navarro, who is currently on trial for defying a congressional subpoena, described the delay tactic as the ‘Green Bay Sweep.’

The move to bring in elected Republican witnesses could very well extend to the state legislative level – where many Republican lawmakers also voted objections during the state certification process, putting forward some of the same fraud claims as members of Trump’s 2020 advisors who are now facing criminal charges.

Those claims went in concert with the ‘fake electors’ scheme, where states that voted for Biden sent slates of alternate Trump electors to Washington.

It comes in a blockbuster trial where U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan has warned Trump’s lawyers she wants to try to keep politics at bay – dismissing appeals to Trump’s busy schedule and comparing him to a professional athlete who must face charges despite having a game schedule.

She set a trial date for Trump of March 4, the day before Super Tuesday, prompting howls of complaint from Trump’s lawyers about the need to sift through 12 million documents the government provided through the discovery process amid a complex case with historic implications.

Lawmakers including Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) have fought efforts to be dragged into court cases related to Trump’s election overturn effort. Graham, who voted to certify votes from contested states, battled efforts to compel his testimony in Georgia, where Trump and 18 other defendants are charged with a racketeering conspiracy related to the election overturn effort there.

The Supreme Court denied his effort to block a subpoena, but that came after a federal judge ruled there would be protections against his being questioned about his legislative function, due to the Constitution’s Speech or Debate clause.   

Although elected lawmakers being pulled into judicial matters, there is a good argument that they would have to comply with a subpoena to appear, according to the source.

But unlike some of those other instances, there is reason to believe that congressional Republicans would relish the opportunity to make headlines testifying as witnesses for Trump. Party members stood by Trump during two impeachments, sought to discredit the House January 6 Committee, and then probed President Biden and his family. Some top House members with investigative panels say they intend to probe Special Counsel Jack Smith.

‘My sense is that many of those elected officials … would welcome the opportunity to testify on these important issues and confirm the reasons why they had objected to aspects of the election,’ said the source.

Their testimony would seek to counter the narrative sketched by Smith when announcing Trump’s indictment last month for conspiring to defraud the U.S., conspiring to disenfranchise voters, and conspiring to obstruct an official proceeding.

Smith called it an ‘unprecedented assault on the seat of American democracy’ that was ‘fueled by lies’ targeted at obstructing the electoral count.

The government’s burden ‘is to show that the president acted corruptly, which is to some extent not a clearly defined term, but would suggest that he was he was acting for simply an obstructive purpose unrelated to any proper government function. And if we have elected representatives say, “Hey, I was just doing my job. I raised these objections” … it’s kind of hard to say that President Trump was acting with a corrupt intent,’ the source added.

The DOJ could try to object, and Judge Chutkan could try to impose limitations on the number of witnesses. During a hearing last month, she said both sides have estimated a trial could take four to six weeks. Calling dozens of witnesses, and wrangling over securing their testimony, could delay matters further or soak up more court time.

The objectors could testify about their fraud claims, which were repeatedly rejected by courts, but also about state changes to election laws in the run-up to the election amid the pandemic.  

Fears of a government shutdown rise as Congress leaves for SIX WEEKS: Lawmakers facing pressure to avoid an economic collapse as they leave DC for a summer break

• The House will not return to Washington until September 12 – at which point there will only be 12 days of session before the end of the fiscal year on Sept. 30
• Congress must use that handful of days to push through 12 appropriations bills – which refill the budgets for every federal agency
• The House has passed one appropriations bill, 11 to go, and the Senate has passed none

By Morgan Phillips, U.S. Political Reporter For Dailymail.Com

Published: 15:13 EDT, 28 July 2023 | Updated: 15:45 EDT, 28 July 2023

A Californian state senator has urged black residents of his state to be ‘realistic’ about reparations, a week after the task force – set up to look into the issue – approved its final proposals.

The task force has not announced how much they think should be given to eligible residents.

Economists studying the issue have argued the state is responsible for more than $500 billion, due to decades of over-policing, mass incarceration and redlining that kept black families from receiving loans and living in certain neighborhoods. 

Some have calculated that black residents who meet all the criteria could receive $1.2 million. 

Their plan must be approved by the governor, Gavin Newsom, who has already said he does not support the distribution of checks, arguing that there are better ways to deal with the legacy of racist policies. 

On Friday, Newsom said the state’s budget deficit is expected to soar to almost $32 billion, nearly $10 billion more than he had projected in January.

A state senator who sits on the nine-member task force said people should not get their hopes up. 

Steven Bradford, of Los Angeles, said ‘anything’s possible if the money’s there,’ but he remains ‘realistic’ that it could be difficult to garner enough support for large payments at a time when lawmakers haven’t even debated where the money would come from.

‘I don’t want to set folks’ expectations and hopes up that they’re going to be getting, you know, seven-figure checks,’ the California Senator said in an interview with Associated Press on Friday.

‘That’s just not happening.’

California became the first state to form a reparations task force in September 2020, following national protests over the death of George Floyd, who was killed by a white Minneapolis police officer.

The task force’s hearings have attracted large crowd, and impassioned activists.

Marcus Champion, a Los Angeles resident and organizer with the Coalition for a Just and Equitable California, a reparations advocacy group, said he was disappointed with Bradford’s comments.

‘That is not the way you come to the table to pay a historic debt,’ he said. 

‘That is not the way that you come to the table in any type of negotiation. 

‘Start as high as you possibly can, and then work from there.’

Assembly member Reggie Jones-Sawyer, another Los Angeles-area Democrat on the task force, said he did not agree with Bradford, and it was too early to say what would be decided.

‘We have absolutely no idea right now what will or will not be approved,’ he said.

Assembly member Lori Wilson, who chairs the state Legislative Black Caucus, said in a statement that the caucus will champion policy proposals included in the task force’s report.

‘We look forward to working collaboratively with our Legislative colleagues and Governor Newsom’s Administration as we continue to fight for equity in our communities,’ the San Francisco Bay Area Democrat wrote.

Newsom on May 9 came out against reparations checks being handed out to black residents of his state.

Newsom said dealing with the legacy of slavery and discrimination is ‘about much more than cash payments.’ 

He told Fox News in a statement: ‘Many of the recommendations put forward by the task force are critical action items we’ve already been hard at work addressing: breaking down barriers to vote, bolstering resources to address hate, enacting sweeping law enforcement and justice reforms to build trust and safety, strengthening economic mobility — all while investing billions to root out disparities and improve equity in housing, education, healthcare, and well beyond. 

‘This work must continue.’

Newsom on Friday revealed his revised budget plan for the fiscal year starting on July 1, proposing a plan that to cover the shortfall while potentially leaving the state with multibillion-dollar deficits in the future.

‘This was not an easy budget, but I hope you see we will try to do our best to hold the line and take care of the most vulnerable and most needy, but still maintain prudence,’ Newsom said.

To cover the projected shortfall, Newsom proposed a combination of modest spending cuts, increased borrowing, and a plan to push some expenses into future budget years, creating a projected $14 billion annual deficit by 2027.

Republicans in the state legislature slammed Newsom’s plan, with GOP Assembly Leader James Gallagher saying it was ‘dangerous’.

He said: ‘His cuts to drought programs are dangerous, his ‘fiscal gimmicks’ are shortsighted, and his words about good government and efficiency are yet another empty promise. Californians deserve better.’

The projected $31.5 billion shortfall would mark California’s first budget deficit since Newsom took office in 2019, and follows several years of booming surpluses as tax revenues surged. 

California has a progressive tax system that relies heavily on rich people and taxes investment gains as regular income, meaning it gets about half its revenues from just 1 percent of the population. 

When the economy is good and the stock market surges, the wealthy pay more in taxes and revenues can soar quickly. When the economy is bad, they pay less and revenues can plunge just as fast. 

The economic reality means that payments of hundreds of thousands in reparations were exceptionally unlikely. 

The amount the reparations would cost the state were not outlined in the report, but previous calculations from economists predicted it could cost around $800 billion – more than twice California’s approximate $300 billion annual budget.

The report suggests that the amounts, based on what has been lost to specific types of racial discrimination, should be paid back to black residents.

This includes $2,352 lost per person per year for the over-policing and mass incarceration of black communities and $3,366 per person per year of residence between 1933 and 1977 for ‘discriminatory lending and zoning’.

It also includes $13,619 per person per year for residents in California for ‘injustices and discrimination in health’ and $77,000 per person for black-owned business losses and devaluations. 

This means a lifelong black California resident aged at least 71 could receive more than $1.2million in compensation. 

Newsom said: ‘Following the task force’s submission of its final report this summer, I look forward to a continued partnership with the Legislature to advance systemic changes that ensure an inclusive and equitable future for all Californians.’

But the 100 residents and activists who gathered at the meeting at the beginning of May were not impressed with the calculations in the draft report, and said it should be more.

Reverend Tony Pierce, CEO of the Oakland-based Black Wall Street organization, aired his frustration and pointed to the country’s ‘broken promise’ to offer 40 acres and a mule to newly freed slaves.

He said: ‘You know that the numbers should be equivocal to what an acre was back then. We were given 40, OK? We were given 40 acres. 

‘You know what that number is. You keep trying to talk about now, yet you research back to slavery and you say nothing about slavery, nothing.

‘So, the equivocal number from the 1860s for 40 acres to today is $200 million for each and every African-American.’

He then hit out at the panel for not being ambitious enough with the reparations plan.

‘You’re not supposed to be afraid,’ he added. 

‘You’re just supposed to tell the truth. You’re not supposed to be the gatekeepers. You’re supposed to say what the people want and hear from the people.’

One woman said: ‘$1.2million is nowhere near enough. It should be starting at least $5million like San Francisco.

‘We want direct cash payments just like how the stimulus [checks] were sent out. It’s our inheritance, and we can handle it.’

And another resident added: ‘This million dollars we’re hearing on the news is just inadequate and a further injustice if that’s what this task force is going to recommend for black Americans for 400-plus years and continuing of slavery and injustice that we have been forced to endure.

‘To even throw a million dollars at us is just an injustice.’

Elaine Brown, former Black Panther Party chairwoman, urged people to express their frustrations through demonstrations.

The report insisted the figures are just estimates and that lawmakers would have to conduct additional research to work out the specifics.

Panel members recommended direct payments for those eligible in the report.

‘The initial down payment is the beginning of a process of addressing historical injustices not the end of it,’ it read.

The reparations task force has also asked for those eligible to receive cash ‘down payments’ as soon as any recommendations are forged into law while they wait for the compensation to be calculated.

The task force, made up of elected officials, academics and lawyers, decided on the eligibility criteria last year.

It determined that any descendant of enslaved African Americans or of a ‘free black person living in the United States prior to the end of the 19th century’ should be entitled to reparations.

If legislation is passed for the payments, the committee suggested that a state agency be created to process claims and make payments with elderly black residents being the priority.

Around 1.8 million people in California identify as black or African American. 

No other state in the country is more advanced than California in its consideration of reparations proposals for black Americans, although multiple cities – among them Evanston, Illinois and Ashville, North Carolina, are considering their own schemes. 

Task Force Chair Kamilah Moore said she is hopeful recommendations including the payments could get enough support from state lawmakers.

‘We’ve gone above and beyond,’ Moore said of the group’s work.