Vice President of the Jan. 6 Commission Says There Are Enough “Criminal References” to Prosecute Former President for Insurrection
The commission investigating the attack on the Washington Capitol has found “more than one criminal reference” for which former President Donald Trump could face charges of insurrection. This has been revealed by the commission’s vice president, Liz Cheney, in her first interview since public scrutiny began on the turbulent January 6, 2021, when an extremist demonstration stormed Congressional headquarters and dealt an unprecedented blow to democracy. in the United States. The Republican congresswoman told the ABC television network that the committee has not yet made a decision on the case, but “it is possible” that criminal charges will be brought against the magnate.
The committee’s work has been revolutionized since Cassidy Hutchinson, 25, an aide to White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, stated on March 29 that Trump’s intention was to put himself at the head of the hundreds. radicals raiding the capital. The aide talked about the monumental tantrum the Republican leader had when his intelligence agency returned him to the White House against his will to avoid mixing with protesters, many of whom were carrying weapons. Hutchinson, from a position that gives her privileged witness status, also assured that on Jan. 2 she began hearing initial comments about the attack that would take place four days later, coming from Trump’s attorney Rudy Giuliani and others. the Meadows themselves, which would guarantee that the coup was not spontaneous.
While former acolytes and members of the former president’s “praetorian guard” have attempted in recent days to disprove these claims, the commission considers, based on evidence and previous testimony from politicians and judicial officials, sufficient “criminal” elements to be credible. are to Trump on the brink of sedition.
In fact, Cheney believes that the Justice Department does not need the result of the congressional investigation, but could only promote an indictment with the material that has already come to light. One of the alleged elements of the indictment is one worthy of the finest American fiction: the aggression allegedly perpetrated by the former president against one of his associates in order to gain control of the vehicle in which he was taken back to the White House. If proven, this behavior would demonstrate the Republican leader’s degree of alienation and his determination to march with the radicals on Capitol Hill in a bid to avoid Democrat Joe Biden’s presidential nomination.
The January 6 Commission has come of age. On the road from its origins to here, it has morphed from disdain for the Republican majority, which it set up as a political body destined to impeach Trump and tarnish the party’s name, to a sort of parallel prosecutor’s office. It has earned respect and credibility for conducting a survey characterized by rigor, the quality of the respondents and the effort to leave no loose ends, and to disregard the political diatribe despite its mixed Democrat-Republican makeup.
His next sessions promise. After proving the extremist profile of the attackers, the violence of their attack, the coordination to carry it out – denying that it was a spontaneous act committed by dispersed radicals – and the possible involvement of the former president, congressmen are trying to now to confirm the origin of the financing of the mutiny. They are convinced that huge sums of money were needed to mobilize the mob and that the backers will help show who was behind the plot. Commission sources say Cassidy Hutchinson’s statement has encouraged others to come forward to testify in the investigation.
For the time being, the results have already caused problems for the Ministry of Justice. Several editorials published in recent hours consider it very difficult for the judiciary to be deaf or not to launch its own investigation with the evidence gathered; not even with the justification that a criminal case against Trump would lead to unprecedented social and political fragmentation in American society. Such an abstraction would mean for Americans that the president is above the courts and his own electoral decisions, in a gesture closer to authoritarianism than democracy.
All of this is happening at a time when the United States anxiously awaits what decision Trump will make regarding his participation in the 2024 presidential election. Some sources predict that he could use such an emblematic date as this July 4 to mark his candidacy. in an effort not only to float his leadership among broad sectors of conservatism, but to take advantage of the journey and make criminal charges more difficult. For this reason, he would have decided not to wait until 2023 and to make his announcement on January 6 before the Commission releases its final conclusions. According to Liz Chenney, the candidacy hypothesis makes judicial intervention more necessary. “A man as dangerous as Donald Trump can never be near the Oval Office again,” the commission’s vice president said in the interview, convinced the Republican Party would not survive if they saw the former president as its own. would place a new candidate.
Source: La Verdad
I am an experienced and passionate journalist with a strong track record in news website reporting. I specialize in technology coverage, breaking stories on the latest developments and trends from around the world. Working for Today Times Live has given me the opportunity to write thought-provoking pieces that have caught the attention of many readers.
