Trump advisor blasted for trying to pass off their coup attempt as a righteous and legal effort
Official White House photo by D. Myles Cullen.

Former Trump White House advisor Peter Navarro's attempt to separate his efforts to overturn the 2020 election from the actions of the violent mob that attacked the U.S. Capitol was analyzed by conservative columnist Amanda Carpenter for The Bulwark.

"Donald Trump’s former White House advisor Peter Navarro is mad. The way he tells it, he and Steve Bannon had a perfectly legal strategy they termed the 'The Green Bay Sweep' (a nod to Vince Lombardi) to deprive Joe Biden of the presidency. And, everything was going swimmingly until Trump’s mob showed up and ruined the flow," she wrote.

Navarro has detailed in recent interviews and his new book how he worked with Bannon on a scheme to reject the vote in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

READ MORE: Reporter reveals the moment Peter Navarro realized he may have landed in hot water

In his new book "In Trump Time: A Journal of America's Plague Year," Navarro writes that he, Trump, and Bannon were “the last three people on God’s good Earth who wanted to see violence erupt on Capitol Hill” because “it was this violence that finally put an abrupt end to any hope the president had for taking back an election likely stolen from him.”

Carpenter offered her analysis of the defense Navarro offered.

"In other words: He, Bannon, and Trump were in the middle of executing a legal coup, which the violent coup attempt foiled. Therefore, he, Bannon and Trump couldn’t possibly be responsible for the violent attempted coup," she explained. "Which is a defense, of sorts."

Read the full analysis.