Indicting the President Donald Trump: Investigating the 2018 January 6, 2021 Capitol Reheating Using a Subpoena

The House select committee investigating the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol, released a statement Friday giving former President Donald Trump more time to turn over documents it subpoenaed but offering little explanation as to why the extension was granted.

It’s clear that a lot of Americans fell for the lie that the election was stolen and that they were willing to engage in acts of violence to furtherance of it, which is a national shame.

In Trump’s lawsuit, his attorneys argued, “the Subpoena’s request for testimony and documents from President Trump is an unwarranted intrusion upon the institution of the Presidency because there are other sources of the requested information, including the thousand-plus witnesses the Committee has contacted and one million documents that the Committee has collected.”

“We are obligated to seek answers directly from the man who set this all in motion,” she said. “All of us are entitled to those answers, so we can act now to protect our republic.”

And select committee Chairman Bennie Thompson, a Mississippi Democrat, argued that Trump “is the one person at the center of the story of what happened on January 6th. So we want to hear from him.”

That’s because if Republicans take back control of the House, which they’re favored to do, the January 6 committee as it’s currently constructed will cease to exist – giving the panel less than three months to issue a final report of its findings.

During the hearing, the panel labeled the footage as showing lawmakers at an “undisclosed location.” It has been public knowledge since January 6, 2021, that senior congressional leaders from both parties took refuge at Fort McNair, while the Capitol was overrun.

Rep. Jamie Raskin, a Maryland Democrat, said during the hearing that the footage highlights how Trump administration officials and congressional leaders worked around Trump to put down the riot that he had incited. The committee showed these clips to make good on their promise to present new material to the public on January 6.

The footage also showed two phone calls between Pelosi and then-Vice President Mike Pence, who took on an impromptu leadership role on January 6, coordinating the emergency response.

The new footage showed Schumer dressing down then-acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen. During their heated phone call, Schumer implored Rosen to intervene directly with Trump, and tell Trump to call off the mob. During the call, Pelosi told Rosen that the pro-Trump rioters were “breaking the law… at the instigation of the President of the United States.”

CNN reported in August that Chao, who is also the wife of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, had met with the committee. But after condemning the attack in her resignation letter in early 2021, Chao has largely stayed out of the national spotlight, with her recent comments to the committee providing fresh insight into her thinking on the deadly attack.

“And at a particular point, the events were such that it was impossible for me to continue, given my personal values and my philosophy. I arrived in this country as an immigrant. I think in this country. I believe in a peaceful transfer of power. I believe in democracy. And so I was – it was a decision that I made on my own,” she said.

Apologizing to the White House: “I know he lost the election” (the testimony of Hutchinson and Meadows)

The committee was given testimony by the former top aide to the White House chief of staff, Cassidy Hutchinson, who claimed that Trump acknowledged he lost the election.

I remember talking to Mark and telling him we were not going to pull it off. Like, that call was crazy.’ And he looked at me and just started shaking his head. And he said he knew it was over. He knows he lost. But we’re going to keep trying,’” Hutchinson told the committee.

Hutchinson also said that she witnessed a conversation between Meadows and Trump where he was furious the Supreme Court had rejected a lawsuit seeking to overturn the election result.

“The President said … something to the effect of, ‘I don’t want people to know we lost, Mark. This is embarrassing. Make a plan out of it. We have to figure it out. I don’t want people to know that we lost,’” Hutchinson said.

Members of the Joint Committee on Electoral Investigation (JEP 2019): Phone Records Hearings, Tweets, Emails, and Constraints

While these witnesses and some others successfully blocked the committee from obtaining their phone records, the panel was able to access unprecedented amounts of information in their investigation, including through other phone records subpoenas, other document requests and witness interviews. Some of that information was on display in a series of public hearings over the summer.

The committee states that on January 6, one Secret Service agent sent a text saying, With so many weapons found so far, you wonder how many are unknown. I could be sporty after dark.

Days before January Trump’s communication adviser, Jason Miller, boasted to Meadows that he “got the base FIRED UP,” and shared a link to a pro-Trump webpage containing hundreds of threatening comments about killing lawmakers if they went ahead with certifying Joe Biden’s legitimate electoral victory, according to a new text message the panel showed Thursday.

There were online threats against Vice President Mike Pence that the Secret Service heard about ahead of the insurrection at the Capitol, according to the congressman.

The deposition of Greg Jacob was played by the committee. Jacob describes how he and Short had prepared for Trump to proclaim victory on Election Night, regardless of the results.

The committee presented the first memo it got from the National Archives on Thursday, after getting it from Jacob after their conversation in November 2020.

The Vice President should not be seen as having decided questions about disputed electoral votes before the full facts come to light, according to the memo.

The committee also revealed new emails conservative legal activist Tom Fitton sent to two Trump advisers a few days before the election. A draft statement for Donald Trump to give on Election Night is contained in one email.

The last hearing before the election of committee members was not featuring the testimony of Ginni Thomas after she was interviewed last month.

She didn’t show up due to the fact the panel used testimonies from several other famous people who had been interviewed since the committee’s most recent hearing.

The Ex-President’s High-Year-Old Legal Peril: The Trump-Smith Showdown over the January 6 Committee Report and the 2020 White House Campaign

The ex-president has not been charged in either investigation, and there’s no indication that he will be. But the sense that Trump is approaching a moment of maximum legal peril is being driven both by signs of an increasingly aggressive investigation by special counsel Jack Smith and the realities of a calendar that offers limited time for any potential prosecutions before the 2024 campaign is in full swing. Trump’s already questionable hopes of winning a national election, meanwhile, could absorb new blows with the unveiling of the January 6 committee’s final report next week and its possible criminal referrals to the Department of Justice.

Donald Trump is heading for a period of maximum legal and political risk over his role in the US Capitol insurrection and hoarding of classified documents that will collide with his efforts to electrify a low wattage 2024 White House bid.

As the House select committee hearing went on, the Supreme Court sent word from across the road that it’s got no interest in getting sucked into Trump’s bid to derail a Justice Department probe into classified material he kept at Mar-a-Lago.

The court turned down his emergency request to intervene, which could have delayed the case, without explaining why. No dissents were noted, including from conservative justices Trump elevated to the bench and whom he often seems to believe owe him a debt of loyalty.

For all the political drama that surrounds the continuing revelations over one of the darkest days in modern American history on January 6, it’s the showdown over classified documents that appears to represent the ex-President’s most clear cut and immediate threat of true criminal exposure.

The panel is debating whether to make criminal referrals of Trump and those around him to the Department of Justice over their actions around January 6. The January 6 case, and the classified documents storm, are the most significant areas of criminal liability for the ex- President, as well as prosecutors in Georgia, who are investigating attempts by Trump and his allies to overthrow the 2020 election.

A man who worked for then-Vice President Mike Pence was spotted leaving a DC courthouse. A person close to the matter said that Short was subpoenaed to testify for the second time. Another Trump adviser, former national security aide Kash Patel, was also seen walking into an area where the grand jury meets. Patel would not tell reporters what he was doing.

According to CNN, a Trump employee told the FBI that the ex-president ordered him to move boxes in a basement at his Florida club after the legal team received a subpoena for classified documents. The FBI also has surveillance footage showing a staffer moving the boxes.

On the face of it, this development is troubling since it could suggest a pattern of deception that plays into a possible obstruction of justice charge. On the initial search warrant before the FBI showed up at Trump’s home in August, the bureau told a judge there could be “evidence of obstruction” at the resort.

The details of what happened in Mar-a-Lago did not seem to amount to an obstruction of justice case, as stated by David Schoen who was Trump’s defense lawyer in his second impeachment.

He said that if President Trump knew that they didn’t have right to have the documents in their possession, they would either hide them or disobey the subpoena.

The Trump Organization was asked by the New York Attorney General to be stopped from moving assets and continuing to perpetrate a decades-long fraud.

“There is every reason to believe that the Defendants will continue to engage in similar fraudulent conduct right up to trial unless checked by order of this Court,” James wrote in an application for a preliminary injunction linked to her $250 million suit against Trump, his three eldest children and his firm.

Given its tone and direction, it would be something of a surprise if the panel did not recommend the House refer Trump, among other aides, to the Justice Department for criminal prosecution when it wraps up. Such a step would be merely symbolic, however, as the committee has no power to level charges itself. The DOJ does not need to act on any recommendations. Its own investigations would have to resolve the question of whether professional prosecutors agreed with the conclusions of Congress acting in its constitutional oversight role.

There are other probes that are connected to Trump. There has been another investigation in Georgia regarding attempts by the former President and his allies to undermine the 2020 election in a critical swing state.

The Trump Campaign Revisited: Why the Unselect Committee voted to Subpoena the Ex-President for Documents and Evidence?

One of those days when the seriousness of a crisis can be seen by the rhetoric he uses to respond, Trump came out fighting on Thursday.

First Trump spokesman Taylor Budowich mocked the unanimous 9-0 vote in the select committee to subpoena the former President for documents and testimony.

“Pres Trump will not be intimidate(d) by their meritless rhetoric or un-American actions. Trump-endorsed candidates will sweep the Midterms, and America First leadership & solutions will be restored,” Budowich wrote on Twitter.

The former President had a post on his Truth Social network that failed to answer the accusations against him but that was designed to cause a political reaction from his supporters.

Why was the Unselect Committee not asking me to testify months ago? Why did they wait until the very end, the final moments of their last meeting? Because the Committee is a total ‘BUST,’” Trump wrote.

Given the ex-President’s history of obstructing efforts to examine his tumultuous presidency, it would be a surprise if he does not fight the subpoena, although there might be part of him that would relish a primetime spot in a live hearing.

Trump’s attorney, David Warrington, said in a statement with the release of the lawsuit in part that “long-held precedent and practice maintain that separation of powers prohibits Congress from compelling a President to testify before it.”

Many will see the vote to target the ex-President as yet another theatrical flourish in a set of slickly produced hearings that often looked like a television courtroom drama, given the slim chance of Trump complying with a congressional subpoena.

Republican vice chair Liz Cheney said that the investigation was more than just what happened on January 6, it was about the future.

The lawmaker from Wyoming who lost her primary contest this summer to a Trump-backed challenger said that we chip away at the foundation of our republic with every attempt to excuse or justify the actions of the former President.

The committees ultimate purpose, which is to prevent the ex president from ever being president, is something Liz Cheney is not likely to give up when the House GOP majority takes over.

Donald Trump and his movement have posed new challenges to accountability, free elections and the rule of law, in a period of political turmoil.

Trump dropped his clearest hint yet Saturday of a new White House run at a moment when he’s on a new collision course with the Biden administration, the courts and facts.

It was not the usual for Trump to be prominent on the political scene. One-term presidents typically fade fairly fast into history. It’s a testament to his hold on the GOP that he remains a key player nearly two years after losing reelection. And while there is growing talk about whether his thicket of legal and political controversies could convince some GOP primary voters it’s time to move on, Trump still seems to have plenty of juice.

The ex- President’s claims of political persecution could affect his potential 2020 Presidential campaign, which could cause more upheaval than he did during his four years in office.

While fierce differences are emerging between Democrats and Republicans on the economy, abortion, foreign policy, and crime, voters will be more focused on the ex-presidents future and what he might do for the country than on the economy, abortion, or foreign policy.

Trump’s back-and-forth with the House followed by the lawsuit will make it much harder for the committee to enforce the subpoena – and the dispute essentially will be unresolvable before the current Congress expires in January.

Kari Lake, the Trump Organization and the ex-President’s AZ office: The state of affairs in the 21st century

In Arizona, one of the ex-President’s favorite candidates, GOP gubernatorial hopeful Kari Lake – a serial spreader of voter fraud falsehoods – is again raising doubts about the election system. Lake told AZTV7 on Sunday that it probably is not going to be fair.

There’s a rising prospect next month’s election will install a Republican majority in the House that will effectively mean a return of Trumpism to political power given the hold the ex-President maintains over the House GOP. Some leading “Make America Great Again” Republicans are already speaking of a possible drive to impeach Biden and have already signaled they will use their powers to investigate to rough up Biden for a possible clash with Trump in 2024.

An already pro-Trump Republican presence in Washington is likely to expand after the midterms. There are dozens of Trump-endorsed candidates running in 2020 who campaign on a platform of election fraud, raising questions about whether they will accept the results if they lose their races.

On Monday, the Trump Organization is going to go on trial in New York. The ex-president has not been charged, but the trial could impact his business empire and cause him to say that he is being persecuted for political reasons, thus injecting yet another contentious element into election season. In a separate civil case, New York Attorney General Letitia James, a Democrat, has filed a $250 million civil suit against Trump, three of his adult children and the Trump Organization, alleging that they ran tax and insurance fraud schemes to enrich themselves for years.

Democrats have tried to return Trump to the center of attention. President Joe Biden compared followers of the right-wing political group to Nazis and some campaigns have been trying to frighten suburban voters by warning about the danger of pro-Trump candidates.

Source: https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/24/politics/donald-trump-circus-analysis/index.html

The Investigative Committee on the Ex-President’s Case for Creating a Circus and Damning the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers

But raging inflation and spikes in gasoline prices appear to be a far more potent concern before voters head to the polls, which could spell bad news for the party in power in Washington.

The ex-President told supporters at a rally in Texas on Saturday regarding the possibility of a new White House bid, “I will probably have to do it again.”

It could take multiple days, and it will be done with a level of rigor and discipline that it deserves, Cheney said.

This is not going to be his first debate against Joe Biden, and the food fight that occurred was going to be the reason. This is a very serious set of issues.

The prospect of video testimony over an intense period of days or hours is likely to be unappealing to the former President because it would be harder for him to dictate the terms of the exchanges and control how his testimony might be used.

Garland would be faced with a dilemma over whether the national interest was paramount, or if the consequences of prosecuting a former president in a political battle could tear the country apart.

A decision to charge an ex-president running for a non-consecutive second White House term would undoubtedly cause a firestorm. If he was spared from accountability if there was evidence of a crime, it would send a signal to future presidents that are strongman instincts.

Cheney said that the committee is not going to be put at Donald Trump’s mercy in regards to his efforts to create a circus.

The former president may not give the documents by the end of the day. The committee has been lenient when it comes to deadlines in the past, at least when there’s ongoing communication with a subject’s legal team.

The Southern Poverty Law Center has designated both the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers as far-right extremists. The committee wants to know if any conversations between Trump and either group took place before or after September 2020.

Other high-profile people found in the committee’s order include Roger Stone, Stephen Bannon, retired U.S. Army Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, Jeffrey Clark, John Eastman, Rudolph Giuliani and more.

The House Select Committee Investigating the 2016 Presidential Campaign: Trump’s legal team sued to challenge its subpoena for documents and his testimony

The committee has been working in a collaborative way and she thinks that we won’t have disagreements about that. We will have to make those decisions as we go along.

On the same day that the House committee ordered Trump to turn over the documents and testify, U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols sentenced Steve Bannon, Trump’s political advisor, to four months in prison for criminal contempt of Congress after failing to comply with a different committee subpoena.

The committee also said it “received correspondence from the former President and his counsel in connection with the Select Committee’s subpoena” but did not provide additional information.

Former President Donald Trump has sued the House select committee investigating January 6, 2021, as a way to challenge its subpoena for documents and his testimony, according to filings in a federal court in Florida.

Multiple courts have upheld the legitimacy of the committee, but Trump is challenging it as well as claiming he should not be forced to testify about his time in office.

Lawyers for the President have been in contact with the House over the last week and a half, offering to be agreeable to written questions about the majority of the document requests.

Trump said the House’s demands, if he met them, would violate privilege protections around the executive branch, including revealing conversations he had with Justice Department officials and members of Congress about the 2020 election and “pending governmental business.”

The lawsuit raises protections for the presidency that haven’t been tested by appeals courts, and is brought in a court that hasn’t taken a stance on his standoffs with House Democrats over the years.

But Trump’s legal team responded to the House this week that Trump “voluntarily directed a reasonable search for documents in his possession” that could fit those two categories. The search found nothing, his lawyers said.

Subpoenas, Subprimes, and the Trump-Copy Investigation into the 2020 US Capitol Attack and Jan. 6 Insurrection

The committee can hold testimony in contempt of Congress, but can not force witnesses to comply with subpoenas quickly through the courts.

“Given the timing and nature of your letter – without any acknowledgment that Mr. Trump will ultimately comply with the subpoena – your approach on his behalf appears to be a delay tactic,” Thompson wrote.

“The truth is that Donald Trump, like several of his closest allies, is hiding from the Select Committee’s investigation and refusing to do what more than a thousand other witnesses have done,” Thompson and Cheney wrote. Donald Trump plotted to overturn the election and prevent the transfer of power. He is obligated to answer questions for the American people.

Trump and his company deny any wrongdoing or criminality in all matters, state and federal, and have aggressively maintained innocence. Trump has also won dismissals of two lawsuits this week in cases brought by his niece and his former attorney.

Legal experts say that the one about classified documents may move forward the fastest, because of several failed attempts by Trump to delay it. A judge on Monday formally dismissed Trump’s case challenging the Mar-a-Lago evidence collection and in which she had appointed a special master. That means the Justice Department has full access to tens of thousands of records and other items that were found in Trump’s private office and beach club.

2020 Election and Jan. 6 insurrection: Justice Department investigation: The Justice Department has an investigation of its own into the post-2020 election period. During the quiet period leading up to the elections, a grand jury in Washington has been hearing testimony from witnesses. The Department of Justice was looking to compel additional testimony from Pat Cipollone and Patrick Philbin.

CNN reported that the panel had considered criminal referrals for a number of Trump’s close associates including, for example, former White House chief of staff MarkMeadows and ex- Justice Department official Jeffrey Clark.

While the criminal referrals would largely be symbolic in nature – as the DOJ has already undertaken a sprawling investigation into the US Capitol attack and efforts to overturn the 2020 election – committee members have stressed that the move serves as a way to document their views for the record.

Committee Chairman Rep. Bennie Thompson, a Mississippi Democrat, said Thursday that committee members are expected to reach a decision on criminal referrals when members meet virtually on Sunday.

Subcommittee Report on Criminal Referrals to the Joint Task Force on the Commission on Investigating Crime against President Donald Trump and Other Activists

“I think the more we looked at the body of evidence that we had collected, we just felt that while we’re not in the business of investigating people for criminal activities, we just couldn’t overlook some of them.”

The subcommittee that Jamie took over on January 6 is tasked with presenting recommendation on criminal referrals to the committee, and he believes that anyone who engages in criminal actions needs to be held accountable. And we are going to write it down for you.

The “gravest offense in constitutional terms is the attempt to overthrow a presidential election and subvert the constitutional order”, said Jamie Raskin, who is leading the January 6 subcommittee that presents recommendations on criminal referrals. Subsidiary to all of that are a whole host of statutory offenses, which support the gravity and magnitude of that violent assault on America.”

Raskin, along with Democratic Reps. Adam Schiff and Zoe Lofgren, both of California, and the panel’s vice chair, GOP Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming, comprised the subcommittee tasked with providing the full panel with referral recommendations that will be adopted on Monday.

Meadows did not turn over other documents he had, and the House committee voted to hold him in criminal contempt of Congress for it and for his refusal to testify, referring the matter to the Justice Department. The Justice Department has declined to indict Meadows for evading his subpoena, given his high level position in the Trump West Wing and claims of executive privilege.

The panel handles criminal referrals differently if there are previous referrals to DOJ for contempt of Congress.

“We are as a subcommittee, several of us that were charged with making the recommendations about referrals, going to be making that recommendation to the full committee today,” panel member Rep. Adam Schiff said prior to the meeting on CBS “Face the Nation.” Members on the committee would then need to approve the recommendations.

The 2020 Commission on Investigations into a Central Figure in the Campaign to Overturn the 2020 Election Results: a Hearing During Trump’s Expansion

In a hearing over the summer, revelations about the central figure in the effort to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election were presented by the panel. The pressure campaign was led by Eastman and it was intended to bring about a plan to overturn the election results.

In the hearing, the committee walked through how Eastman put forward a legal theory that Pence could unilaterally block certification of the election – a theory that was roundly rejected by Trump’s White House attorneys and Pence’s team, but was nevertheless embraced by the former President.

The former DOJ official was facing a criminal contempt of congress referral after he refused to answer questions at a previous deposition. The referral was never sent to DOJ because on the day the committee voted on the contempt referral, Clark’s lawyer informed the committee that he planned to invoke his Fifth Amendment right to not answer questions on the grounds it may incriminate him.

The panel focused on the role that Clark played in the final months of Trump’s presidency as part of a plan to overturn the 2020 election and stay in power.

The committee zeroed in on the efforts of Rep. Scott perry, who connected Clark to the White House.

CNN has previously reported on the role that Harris played, as well as texting messages between him and the committee in court filings about Clark.

“He wanted Mr. Clark – Mr. Jeff Clark to take over the Department of Justice,” Cassidy Hutchinson, a former Meadows aide, said about Perry in a clip of her deposition that was played at that hearing.

The panel met with Giuliani in May for more than nine hours to discuss his attempt to overturn the 2020 election results.

It is unclear whether the full panel adopted the recommendations that were presented at the virtual meeting. A source described the meeting as “successful” but did not elaborate.

The decision has loomed large over the committee. In their hearings, members of the panel have stated that Trump and some of his closest allies have committed a crime by trying to prevent a peaceful transfer of power. They don’t know what to do about it.

Schiff reiterated Sunday that he believes there is evidence that Trump committed criminal offenses related to his efforts to overturn the 2020 election.

The Changing of Georgia: Under Jack Smith After the Insurrection and the 2020 Presidential Insight into the Political Aspects of Democracy

He said it is an important decision if we go forward with it. And one that the Department should take into account.

There is a warning that the future threat to truth and democracy remains acute even though slow burning efforts to work through the trauma of the post election period are heating up. Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, who is one of the most prominent Republicans in the incoming House majority, is in the middle of another controversy over the insurrection.

The Georgia Republican believes that the mob that smashed into the Capitol would have been armed if she had her way. She then rebuffed White House condemnations of her comments by insisting she was joking. This came days after the ex-president stepped up his voter fraud falsehoods by demanding the termination of the Constitution in a sign of how his potential second term might unfold if he wins the 2024 election and returns to the White House.

It is astounding how much the presidential election tried to change is still being held by Washington politics, even if some Americans are concerned with feeding their families and paying rent. And Trump’s campaign of lies is having a damaging impact. Even after Republicans won the House last month, a new CNN/SSRS poll published Monday found that only 34% of Republican-aligned adults are even somewhat confident that elections reflect the will of the people – down from 43% in October.

Smith is speeding forward on investigations into Trump’s role in an effort to sabotage the peaceful transfer of power in 2020 and his storage of classified documents at his residence and resort, according to CNN. It emerged Monday that Smith’s team subpoenaed Georgia’s Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, who was on the other end of the then-president’s phone call designed to convince him to “find” sufficient votes to overturn Joe Biden’s win in the Peach State in 2020. Smith has also issued a flurry of grand jury subpoenas since Thanksgiving, including to ex-Trump adviser Stephen Miller and two former White legal counsels.

700 days has passed since the Washington Post published the full hour audio of the phone call, and the DOJ is still waiting to subpoena him. When does it happen? Under Jack Smith.”

If Trump’s legal team believed that Smith’s appointment after a period spent abroad meant he was less likely to be influenced by the politicized aftermath of the January 6 attack and that a fresh mind wouldn’t support indictments, they might be guilty of wishful thinking.

Preet Bharara, a former US attorney for the Southern District of New York, said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” Sunday that Smith’s appointment and his assembling of a high-powered team of experienced prosecutors represented bad news for Trump.

“I don’t think they would’ve left their former positions, both in government and private practice, unless there was a serious possibility that the Justice Department was on a path to charge. He thinks it will happen in a month.

Attorney General Merrick Garland has vowed that no one is above the law and that investigations will go where the evidence leads. But the reality of the legal process means that any trials would take considerable time to prepare and conduct. The prospect of a prosecution of a former president and current presidential candidate is so politically explosive that it would be optimal for any proceedings to take place well before the climax of the 2024 White House race.

If the case is brought, it will be a challenge to finish it before the election, according to a CNN legal analyst.

Rodgers said that if they can it will be brought on the documents side and that it will probably take more time.

The political context makes it more important that the DOJ show Americans that it had no choice but to conduct the search at the ex-president’s home.

One consideration to bear in mind is that the committee’s highly choreographed televised hearings did not include any cross examination of witnesses, so it’s hard to tell how some of the most incriminating testimony about Trump’s behavior would hold up under the far higher evidentiary standard required in a court of law. The transcripts of the report could be used to flesh out any criminal case by the special counsel, and in preparing the public for the possibility of Smith charging Trump.

As the year begins to wind down and the early months of the next decade begin, it will look like there will be a turning point for Trump and the people who are investigating him.

The final report may include new charges for Trump, according to the source. It will provide justification from the committee’s investigation for recommending the charges.

A spokesman for Trump lashed out at the committee in a statement, saying that it held shows trials by Never Trump partisans who were a stain on the country’s history.

Rep. Zoe Lofgren, a member of the committee, told CNN’s Jake Tapper Friday that the panel has “been very careful in crafting these recommendations and tethering them to the facts that we’ve uncovered.”

“We spent a huge amount of time not just on what the code sections are and the bottom line recommendation, but the facts – and I think it’s really important when we discuss whatever it is we are going to do and we’ll have a vote on it, that people understand the facts behind the conclusions we reach,” the California Democrat said on “The Lead.”

Senate Select Committee on Ethics Investigations of the January 6, 2021, Capitol Attack: a Report on the Investigating Subpoenas

The Justice Department has largely focused on criminal statutes related to the violence, for obstructing a congressional proceeding and in some limited cases for seditious conspiracy, when charging defendants in connection with the attack on the US Capitol.

The committee could also release the full report of its investigation on Monday. The transcripts and appendices could be released on Wednesday.

Rep. Adam Schiff, a member of the House select committee investigating the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol, said Sunday the panel is considering how to hold accountable the GOP lawmakers who defied their subpoenas.

California Democrat Barbara Boxer said on CNN that the appropriate remedy for members of Congress who ignore a congressional subpoena would be decided in the coming weeks.

GOP leader Kevin McCarthy, as well as Reps. Jim Jordan, MoBrooks, Andy Biggs, and Scott Perry, have been subpoenaed.

The impact House referrals could have remains unclear because the Department of Justice special counsel investigation is already examining Trump in its extensive probe into January 6.

“Censure was something that we have considered. The decision about ethics referrals will be made by the committee on Monday.

What will we learn from the January 6 committee on “insurrection and anti-government” misconduct? The case for an apology to the House and other committees

“This is someone who, in multiple ways, tried to pressure state officials to find votes that didn’t exist. This person was trying to interfere and inciting a mob to attack the Capitol. If that’s not criminal, then I don’t know what is,” he added.

He thinks Trump committed multiple criminal statutes, including one for insurrection, but he wouldn’t say if the committee would refer the charges to the Justice Department.

I think the president has committed crimes. And I think you have to be treated like any other American who breaks the law, and that is, you have to be prosecuted,” he said.

And while we won’t know everything that’s to come from the January 6 committee this week until it unfolds, here’s what you need to know about what’s expected, what’s not, and where this could all lead.

It is anticipated that at least three criminal charges will be referred to the Justice Department when the public meeting takes place on Monday.

But whether the department brings charges will depend on whether the facts and the evidence support a prosecution, Garland, who will make the ultimate call on charging decisions, has said.

A House referral for an insurrection charge would be a more aggressive move. It is a crime to help or engage in any rebellion against the authority of the United States or the laws. The judges used the term “insurrection” to describe the attack on Congress.

The panel has weighed whether it is better to criminally refer members of Congress to other parts of the government or if Congress should police itself, so that will be something we will be considering tomorrow.

Five to six categories of referrals beyond the criminal one can be issued, such as ethics referrals to the House Ethics Committee, bar Discipline referrals and campaign finance referrals, according to Thompson.

The January 6 panel’s approval of a referral would be meaningless since it wouldn’t obligate federal prosecutors to bring the case.

The Select Committee Report on Insurrection, Obstruction and Conspiracy in the Trump-McKenna-Olesen Era

With the federal investigation now being led by special counsel Jack Smith, it appears Justice Department investigators are already looking at much of the conduct that the select committee has highlighted.

Among them are insurrection, obstruction of an official proceeding and conspiracy to defraud the federal government, according to a source familiar with the matter.

For the latter two, the lawmakers can rely on an opinion from a federal judge in California, who wrote earlier this year that there was evidence that Trump and his allies were plotting to defraud the US government and to obstruct an official proceeding. The opinion came from US District Judge David O. Carter and was given in a dispute over whether the House could look at certain emails.

Through blockbuster hearings, interviews with some of the former president’s closest allies and court battles to free up documents, the committee sought to tell the definitive narrative of what happened in the lead up to and on January 6.

The recommendations match the allegations the House select committee made against Trump and his elections attorney John Eastman in a previous court proceeding seeking Eastman’s emails.

The meeting – which, unlike previous gatherings of the committee, is not a hearing with witnesses – will include a presentation and cover the names of people facing criminal and other referrals, as will as the basis for those referrals, Thompson said last week.

It would be good if the last thing I do was something less dramatic, but he emphasized that the report will be one.

The panel will release transcripts from more than 1000 interviews it conducted during its investigation once the report is out, Thompson said.

‘What does this matter?’ Committee Summary of the Jan. 6 attack on the 2020 presidential election by J. Eastman and Kenneth Chesebro

What does this matter? This is the culmination of a lengthy investigation into the attack on Jan. 6. Members of the committee argued that the weaknesses of the electoral system enabled Trump and his allies to try to take the presidency away from Hillary Clinton in the 2020 election. The panel will make policy recommendations aimed at better protecting democratic institutions and processes, including reforming the Electoral Count Act.

It’s long. Thompson previously told NPR the final report could be eight chapters and 1,000 pages long. The report from Robert Muller was 400 pages and was related to the 2016 election.

Elaine Luria, a member of the committee, said that she was shocked by the plan to create a big lie and pull every lever of government to corrupt an election.

“We’ve seen petty criminals who’ve been charged with misdemeanors for trespassing be held accountable, but not the masterminds of this, who really did try to corrupt the government and its processes,” Luria said.

“We’re not piling onto existing prosecutions,” Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., said of upcoming criminal referrals. We want to make sure the most serious crimes of the most serious gravity are attended to.

The committee has evidence against those who helped push the strategy of derailing the certification of the election.

Goldman said the impeachment panel could have criminal proof that the Justice Department wouldn’t have if they didn’t refer it. The panel could be considering referrals for witness intimidation, obstruction of justice and false statements made under oath, Goldman suggested.

Goldman said that the department of justice wants to make sure that everything they’ve found is included in their evaluation of whether a crime was committed or not.

NPR obtained a small portion of a draft script for the Monday meeting that shows the panel intends to accuse lawyers John Eastman and Kenneth Chesebro of being tied to the conspiracy to overturn the 2020 presidential election.

There was a plot to subvert President Biden’s win by having a group of fake Trump electors in many states that voted for him.

Source: https://www.npr.org/2022/12/19/1143415487/the-jan-6-committee-is-about-to-have-its-last-hearing-heres-what-to-expect

Subpoenas from the Select Committee on Capitol Investigating the Capitol Riot: Oath Keepers, Citizens’ Litigations, and the House Select Committee’s Legacy

“They could be subject of both criminal referrals, but also referrals to their state bar association to review whether or not they should continue to have their bar license if they are making blatant misrepresentations in court filings or otherwise,” Goldman said.

McCarthy denied that he and his colleagues might face criminal referrals at last week’s press conference. We did not do anything wrong.

More than 900 people have been charged with crimes related to the attack. In the past year, law enforcement has arrested alleged rioters in almost all of the 50 states.

The House select committee investigating the Capitol riot is dropping several of its pursuits for Jan. 6-related phone records, according to court filings last week, as the panel winds down before it expires at the end of this year.

The committee sent out dozens of subpoenas as part of its investigation of Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election. But several Trump allies sued, contesting the committee’s authority, and Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile agreed not to turn over any data to the House while those lawsuits were litigated in court. Few of the cases have been resolved.

Lawyers representing members of the Oath Keepers, who were subpoenaed by the Select Committee, wrote in a recent request to drop a lawsuit that they were informed on December 12th, 2022, that the committee will be withdrawing the subpoena.

The Congresswoman’s Report to the Committee on Investigations of the January 6 Congressional Insurrection – Will Trump Ever Face Accountable For His Conduct?

CNN will cover the meeting in a special way, with special coverage from 12PM to 12PM. It will stream live on CNN.com, CNN OTT and mobile apps, and CNNgo from 12 pm to 5 pm.

More broadly, the committee has now sketched the most urgent framing of a perennial question about Trump’s riotous careers in business and politics: Will he ever face accountability for his rule-breaking conduct? The question is especially acute given that the norm crushed this time almost toppled US democracy.

The issue of accountability is at the center of the comment about foot soldiers, since many of those who trashed the Capitol have already been convicted and jailed. And since winning the White House in 2016, Trump repeatedly avoided paying political and legal prices as the ultimate example of a “ringleader” who skips past judgment. The trove of evidence showing that Trump obstructed the Russia investigation was unearthed by the former Special Counsel Robert Muller and he decided not to make a finding that Trump committed crimes. Most of the Republicans in the Senate found no reason to convict Trump in both impeachments.

Specifically, the panel said Trump should be charged with giving aid or comfort to an insurrection, obstructing an official proceeding, defrauding the US and making false statements. In an executive summary of its forthcoming final report, the committee argued: “The central cause of January 6 was one man, former President Donald Trump. … None of the events of January 6 would have happened without him.”

The committee cites Section 1512 (c) (2) of Title 18 of the US code, which makes it a crime to “corruptly” obstruct, influence or impede any official proceeding or attempt to do so. According to the panel presentation, it seems like Trump did everything he could to destroy the will of voters in the lead up to the mob attack on Congress.

The insurrection that Trump aided: muddying the case and finding a guilty plea to the charges of Jack Smith and Jack Garland

The DOJ has its own investigation into the events surrounding the insurrection and will have to weigh whether the case stands up as well in a court of law as it seemed to in the Capitol Hill committee room on Monday afternoon.

Andrew McCabe, who was the deputy FBI director, said on CNN that the Justice Department had to go further with each and every one of the people who had been interviewed by the committee.

One particular complication for the Justice Department is that the nature of the insurrection and the involvement of a former president makes this an unprecedented case. A good defense team can attempt to muddy the issue of whether or not there was fraud in the election, by reframing Trump’s true intent. They could also claim that in telling supporters to “fight like hell” to save their country, he was simply exercising his constitutional rights to free speech. If Jack Smith and Garland decided to prosecute, they would have to satisfy themselves that there was a high likelihood of obtaining a conviction, after considering the thrust of the Trump defense.

The most serious referral would likely be against the First Amendment because it would accuse Trump of giving aid and comfort to an insurrection.

The Department is required to prove that the president made a specific reference to lawless action. In other words, they’d actually have to prove he intended for a mob to engage in violent activity. That would make it difficult to prosecute him under that charge.

The DOJ is facing enormous pressure to investigate Trump, which intensified when he declared his bid last month, so it appears that Monday’s events will not add to the burden. Garland would be sure to infuriate Democrats who think the Department has been slow to pursue Trump if he disregards multiple referrals.

In the event that DOJ agrees with one of the lesser charges, the political earthquake caused by a prosecution might not be much different from if Smith believed Trump had aided an insurrection. America has never known a scenario in which the administration of a sitting president indicted a successor who is engaged in a bid to topple him. And of course, if no case is made over January 6, Trump is also facing the possibility of charges in another Justice Department investigation – into his hoarding of classified material at his Mar-a-Lago resort after he left office.

One way that the committee depiction could help Smith is to prepare the public for the chance that a former president will be brought to trial because of Trump’s behavior. Attempted coups are, after all, more akin to fragile developing world democracies and dictatorships.

“No man who would behave that way at that moment in time can ever serve in any position of authority in our nation again. He is not fit for office, said the Wyoming Republican.

The December 6 January Committee on Criminal Reports: The Doomsday Countdown of Donald Trump, the New York Times, and the Investigative Report

The author of the book “OK Boomer, Let’s Talk” is a journalist based in New York. Follow her on Twitter @JillFilipovic. The opinions expressed in this commentary are her own. CNN has more opinion on it.

Exactly two years later on January 6, 2020, Donald Trump sent a late- night message to his supporters that he would come to Washington, DC to speak to them, promising it would be wild.

But the committee’s findings are about a shocking attack on American democracy, one with which the nation has not fully reckoned. How strong are our democratic institutions if those who attempt to level them can walk away without being held accountable? Can a democracy thrive if attempts to topple it are simply washed away?

The January 6 committee recommended that Department of Justice prosecutors proceed with four criminal charges: assisting or aiding an insurrection, conspiring to defraud the United States, conspiring to make false statements and obstructing an official proceeding of Congress. It will provide justification for its recommended charges in its final report, but that does not mean it needs the Justice Department to act.

It’s a damning story. The witnesses testified that Trump was told multiple times to ask the rioters to leave after the January 6 protest turned violent. Even as he watched the carnage on television, he didn’t do it for hours.

The evidence showed that Trump was repeatedly told there wasn’t any evidence of election fraud. Yet he continued to claim that the election was stolen — and raised $250 million from his fans on these false claims, according to the committee.

Source: https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/20/opinions/criminal-referrals-jan-6-committee-filipovic/index.html

What Will Happen If a Former President Had a Problem? Liz Cheney of Wyoming, Dec. 21, 2020 — The Case against Donald J. Adams

Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming laid out the weight of what happened that day. The United States has been a great democratic experiment, and since George Washington turned the office of the president over to John Adams, the American tradition of the peaceful transfer of power has been an integral part of our nation’s stability and well-being.

Cheney said that no President had ever tried to install himself in office by denying the results of a free and fair election.

That a former president would encourage his followers to subvert American democracy and break our national tradition of peaceful handover is something for which there are political and legal solutions.

In that most basic sense, I do not want Trump to be indicted. It’s not good for a nation to be trying to destroy its former leaders. There is also the risk that charging Trump with crimes would create a cycle of recrimination and revenge from Republicans.

But it’s worse to allow a former leader to destroy the nation’s trust in elections and its democratic processes. What will stop others from doing the same if there is no penalty?

There is no evidence that Trump regrets his actions. He continues to spread the lie that the 2020 election was stolen, and even before the 2022 midterms, he was planning to replay his election fraud claim if his favored candidates lost. He is running for President again, and if he wins, he may use his power to destroy American democracy as we know it.

Source: https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/20/opinions/criminal-referrals-jan-6-committee-filipovic/index.html

A report on the Mueller investigation of the 2016 epoch of terrorism in the US, and a proposal for a new hearing on the FBI investigation

In the era of Trump, parts of the Republican party have been turned into sanctuaries for conspiracy theorists, antisemites and liars.

The GOP has become so intellectually bankrupt that it didn’t even bother with a platform in the last presidential election, instead essentially saying that its policy positions are whatever Trump wants. Some Republican politicians and voters seem to be fine with an America run by a dictator, as long as it is their guy.

But other Republicans understand just how big a monster they’ve created and don’t like where this horror story is going. The US justice system has a job to do.

There is no sure way to handle such a situation. But nations that have undergone major traumas need truth and reconciliation. They don’t paper over and forget what happened.

The January 6 committee’s findings, and its referral to the Department of Justice, are the first step. The justice system of the US, where defendants are presumed innocent and the prosecution has to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, is the right place to take the case.

The committee is in the middle of a key week. During the final public meeting of the panel members voted on at least four criminal charges against President Donald Trump. The panel is slated to release its full final report on Wednesday.

California Democratic Rep. Zoe Lofgren, a member of the committee, said on CNN on Monday, “We’ve actually given some transcripts to the Department of Justice during the last month,” adding that the committee would begin making transcripts public on Wednesday.

The panel has also started to share transcripts of witness interviews pertaining to the false slates of electors and the pressure campaign by Trump and his allies on certain states to overturn the 2020 election results.