Former DOJ officials who served under GOP presidents say the January 6 committee has made the case

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

to prosecute Trump: 'The evidence is now overwhelming'

Former Justice Department officials who served in Republican administrations, issued a call on Friday for the DOJ to prosecute Donald Trump, arguing that the January 6 committee has uncovered sufficient evidence for the unprecedented prosecution of a former president.

"The evidence is now overwhelming that Donald Trump was the driving force behind a massive criminal conspiracy to interfere with the official January 6 congressional proceeding and to defraud the United States of a fair election outcome," the trio of Donald Ayer, Stuart M. Gerson, and Dennis Aftergut wrote in an opinion piece for The Atlantic.

Ayer and Gerson worked in the Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations. Gerson also briefly served as the acting attorney general under President Bill Clinton, while Aftergut is a former federal prosecutor and former chief assistant city attorney for San Francisco.

They wrote that it is abundantly clear how unusual it would be to charge a former president and someone who is the leading candidate for the 2024 GOP nomination but warned that "the damage to America's future that would be inflicted by giving him a pass far outweighs the risks of prosecuting him."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/former-doj-officials-who-served-under-republican-presidents-say-the-january-6-committee-has-made-the-case-to-prosecute-trump-the-evidence-is-now-overwhelming/ar-AAZCETj

[emulatorloo]

1. Link to their op-ed

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/07/prosecute-trump-january-6-doj/670511/

Snip ——-

As many have pointed out, deterrence requires that the quest for accountability succeed in achieving a conviction before a jury—here most likely made up of citizens of the District of Columbia. And the Department’s regulations make the odds of the prosecution’s success an important consideration in determining whether to go forward. In the case of a person who has made a career out of escaping the consequences of his misconduct, this is no small issue for the attorney general to take into account.

But as former prosecutors, we have faith that the evidence of personal culpability is so overwhelming that the case can be made to the satisfaction of such a jury. One of us—Gerson—has tried many difficult cases before D.C. juries with success. As a defendant, Donald Trump would open the door to all sorts of things that wouldn’t come into a normal trial, and the prosecutor could have a field day in argument about how this would-be tyrant tried to overthrow the government that has kept our nation free for two and a quarter centuries. Bottom line: Given what is at stake, even with the risk of a hung jury—leaving room for a second trial—there is no realistic alternative but to go forward.

Any argument that Donald Trump lacked provable criminal intent is contradicted by the facts elicited by the January 6 committee. And the tradition of not prosecuting a former president must yield to the manifest need to protect our constitutional form of government and to ensure that the violent effort to overthrow it is never repeated.

——— snip

[Funtatlaguy]

2. "THE DRIVING FORCE". Yes, he was.

[lpbk2713]

3. They should revoke his passport.

Trump will definitely leave the country if he thinks it is his best option.