J6 Committee vs Criminal trial.

[Phoenix61]

The J6 committee can release any information they want.
Members of the committee can go on tv and talk about the days hearing or even tomorrows hearing.
They can subpoena people and have them testify on camera.
They picked their own time line for the public hearings.
None of the above happens during a criminal trial.
Judges get annoyed when attorneys release information and go on tv during a trial. Some even issue gag orders. Witnesses are prohibited from discussing the case with anyone. While subpoenas are regularly issued the general pubic isn’t privy to the information learned. Time lines are subject the legal process.
If Garland had brought charges we wouldn’t learn anything until the case was settled and I promise you it would be after the midterms at minimum.
Letting the J6 committee release the facts to the public was the only way people were going to learn what happened before the mid-terms.

[Fiendish Thingy]

1. Not true- once a trial begins, the transcripts are part of the public record

Marcy Wheeler has been reporting on and analyzing the transcripts from the trials of the insurrectionists for months.

Yes, gag orders happen sometimes to prevent trying the case in the media, but a judge can’t gag the official record.

The secrecy you describe applies to investigations and grand jury hearings, not trials.

[H2O Man]

2. Right.

Sealed indictments can happen, but most are public record by trial time. The numerous examples of one or more lawyers speaking publicly before and during a trial is vast. And you are 100% correct about investigations and grand juries.

I do agree with the OP that some potential, perhaps probable indictments will come after the mid-terms.