Jan. 6 panel could make multiple criminal referrals of Trump to DOJ, Cheney says

[riversedge]

Source: nbc news



"There could be more than one criminal referral,” said Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., vice chair of the committee. “We’ll make a decision as a committee.”



July 3, 2022, 2:29 PM CDT
By Peter Nicholas

WASHINGTON — House Jan. 6 committee members said Sunday that they may make criminal referrals to federal prosecutors involving former President Donald Trump and his efforts to overturn the 2020 election results.

....................


Asked whether she was worried about prosecuting a former president who may soon announce another presidential bid in 2024, Cheney said: “I have greater concern about what it would mean if people weren’t held accountable for what’s happened here.”

The panel has been conflicted over whether to refer its findings to the Justice Department. Last month, the committee chairman, Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., told reporters that "we do not have authority" when he was pressed about whether the panel had ruled out the possibility of referring criminal charges for Trump.

As the committee continues to gather new evidence, other members seem to be coalescing behind a referral, which would ratchet up pressure on the Justice Department to investigate Trump’s actions. So far, the department has said federal prosecutors were looking into the scheme to push slates of bogus Electoral College members declaring Trump the winner of states that Joe Biden won..............................................

Read more: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/jan-6-panel-make-multiple-criminal-referrals-trump-doj-cheney-says-rcna36517

---

I really wonder if the committee will make a criminal referral.

Link to tweet

?s=20&t=9gtTVfJFaBmii1kvxz7JCg



Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., questions Cassidy Hutchinson, a top former aide to Trump White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, as she testifies on June 28, 2022.

[BigmanPigman]

1. Nixon was never held accountable so the GQP continued its criminal legacy...

"Asked whether she was worried about prosecuting a former president who may soon announce another presidential bid in 2024, Cheney said: “I have greater concern about what it would mean if people weren’t held accountable for what’s happened here.”

[J_William_Ryan]

2. Justice may not want to establish such a precedent.

A fundamental tenet of our democratic institutions is that political opponents are not subject to criminal prosecution – that’s the stuff of dictatorships and authoritarian regimes, such as Russia.

Trump and his supporters calling for Hilary Clinton to be ‘locked up’ is an example of that and the right’s contempt for our democratic institutions.

In addition, a future Republican administration could likely subject former President Biden to criminal prosecution; such a prosecution would be purely partisan and devoid of merit, of course, but the precedent would nonetheless exist, available to Republicans for political revenge.

Moreover, prosecuting a former president could undermine a serving president’s efforts to address terrorist and other national security threats – such as ordering the killing of a US citizen living abroad planning a terrorist attack against America and its allies.

Some will respond that we shouldn’t allow the above from preventing us seeking justice against Trump and his fellow criminals, that if warranted they should be punished for their crimes, and by doing so would be in the service of justice and preservation of our democratic institutions.

[pnwmom]

3. Yes, all that is true. But it is also a fundamental tenet that no one can wage an armed insurrection

without criminal consequences.

What sort of message are we sending if we tell any future wannabe dictator that there will be no consequences no matter what he does?

[bucolic_frolic]

4. Countless other countries have indicted former presidents, it's actually very common

The State must protect itself first and foremost. There are crimes, and then there are crimes against the State itself. You can't politicize a non-crime and make it stick in court. But you also can't politicize an actual crime to make any charges go away. Whitewash doesn't fix anything, it just erodes the State.

We have no laws, no justice, no country if we let treason go unfettered.

[PJMcK]

5. BS

Trump's actions were not POLITICAL they were CRIMINAL.

Do you understand the difference?

Do you really think we, as a nation of laws and not people, should worry about what might happen if we do the right thing in pursuit of Justice? Should we really worry about a "what-if" while Trump & CO. try to dismantle our democratic republic?

Let the chips fall where they may. If Republicans are able to regain power and want to retaliate, let's deal with that if it happens. Worrying about a potential problem when we are facing an existential attack seems pathetic because if we don't hold Trump accountable, we don't have much of a country left anyway.

I wholly endorse your last paragraph but the rest is fearful nonsense.

[durablend]

7. A Republican in high office wouldn't hesitate to do it

Lack of precedent or 'tradition' be damned.

[calimary]

9. MAN, is THAT ever true!

A Republican DEFINITELY wouldn't hesitate to nail a Democrat if that Repub thought there was any way to make it stick.

[Botany]

6. "Asked whether she was worried about prosecuting a former president ....

“I have greater concern about what it would mean if people weren’t held accountable for what’s happened here.”

Liz's dad should have been prosecuted for starting a war so he could steal Iraq's oil but that is never going
to happen so if she nails Trump's hide to the wall now all I can say is; Go LiZ Go!

[PoliticAverse]

8. Tell us when they make one. n/t

[tclambert]

10. The guy's committed like 500 crimes, some on live TV. I wish SOMEBODY would arrest him already!