Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

BruceWane

(384 posts)

20. A different criminal act

Reply to gab13by13 (Reply #1)

Wed May 11, 2022, 11:17 AM

May 2022

That referral was for contempt, following Meadow's refusal to comply with the committee's subpoena.

Completely separate from any potential indictment for criminal acts regarding participation in the insurrection.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

36 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

After the open hearings are completed there is a very good chance this will happen. [View all] fightforfreedom May 2022 OP

Day 147 since the select committee sent the Mark Meadows criminal referral. gab13by13 May 2022 #1

What's your point? fightforfreedom May 2022 #5

A different criminal act BruceWane May 2022 #20

Will the Committee make further criminal referrals once the hearings are completed? kentuck May 2022 #2

Well they took a pass on obstruction SoonerPride May 2022 #3

I do also but after midterms when its too late and the VERY EFFECITIVE MAGA anti voter laws ... uponit7771 May 2022 #4

I disagree as I don't think anything will change. LonePirate May 2022 #6

I do hope you're wrong LP DENVERPOPS May 2022 #26

This. BlackSkimmer May 2022 #28

Believe it when I see it. Hope it happens. boston bean May 2022 #7

Repeat after me NQAS May 2022 #8

Very good chance? GoodRaisin May 2022 #9

To get trump, Meadows, etc., they are going to have to come up with hard evidence of criminal Hoyt May 2022 #10

DOJ already passed twice on getting Trump, gab13by13 May 2022 #15

I wouldn't expect the Committee members to say "we've got nothing criminal." But if they have it, Hoyt May 2022 #18

Both of those happened when Trump was in power and had a crooked AG protecting him. fightforfreedom May 2022 #30

I hope you're right... but BlueIdaho May 2022 #11

Yes, I agree. MineralMan May 2022 #12

On this very board, in this very thread. MarineCombatEngineer May 2022 #22

Exactly. There is a process underway. MineralMan May 2022 #23

I understand Garland cannot indict on his own. fightforfreedom May 2022 #31

All that may be true... but the issue for Murikans in the fall will be the price of gas. SMFH!! nt albacore May 2022 #13

You have more faith BigMin28 May 2022 #14

I give Garland a hard time here, gab13by13 May 2022 #17

There is nothing that stops an institutionalist from indicting Whitehouse staff, lawyers, etc. fightforfreedom May 2022 #33

No. You are being naive. hamsterjill May 2022 #16

Every GQP politician is a member of the Putin Party. gab13by13 May 2022 #19

Damn good questions to ask hamsterjill May 2022 #21

Is the question you posed sarcastic/rhetorical Beastly Boy May 2022 #36

Boom. BlackSkimmer May 2022 #29

Oh brother. fightforfreedom May 2022 #34

I wonder who among the bunch of seditious bastards is going to willingly Javaman May 2022 #24

Nothing is going to happen. Tacan May 2022 #25

The Meadows subpoena issue was referred to him months ago and nothing has happened. LonePirate May 2022 #35

Garland, a cautious man, an institutionalist man. But is he the wrong man for the moment? jaxexpat May 2022 #27

Fun dayn moyl zu Got's oyem. maxsolomon May 2022 #32