| What's next for the Jan. 6 congressional committee? This is a frequent question y'all have. At the least, we know its days are numbered. But the Jan. 6 committee is still very much in an active investigation, and its members (Democrat and Republican) say they're determined to do what they can to stop another Jan. 6 from happening — and stop Donald Trump from getting elected again. Here's what to expect in the next few months: - It will probably disband when the next Congress starts in January, especially if Republicans take control of the House. (Their leaders have expressed zero interest in investigating the attack.)
- Before then, the panel is trying to figure out how to force the top House Republican, Kevin McCarthy of California, to talk after he ignored a subpoena — and maybe even how to get former vice president Mike Pence to talk (probably in private). They also may extend an invitation to Trump, CNN reports, though he's not likely to take it.
- The committee will probably release thousands of pages of transcripts of interviews. That will be a massive amount of information that, once we sort through it all, could help the public make up their own minds on what the committee found — as opposed to having the committee present to us what they think is important.
- The panel will hold at least one more hearing, as soon as this month. It will be about how to prevent another attack, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) told Time.
- It will probably issue a report as well. Members will aim to make it the definitive take on what led to Jan. 6, what happened that day and who was responsible. And you can bet it will point the finger squarely at Trump, as well as much of the Republican Party. As Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.), who is losing her job after being on this committee, said to members of her party: "There will come a day when Donald Trump is gone, but your dishonor will remain."
- And it will decide whether to refer Trump for prosecution. Congress can't charge anyone with a crime, but this committee can make a formal recommendation to the Justice Department that it investigate Trump for his Jan. 6 activities. There's already an investigation ongoing around the president and Jan. 6, so this referral would be largely for the history books.
 The two Republicans on the Jan. 6 committee: Reps. Adam Kinzinger of Illinois and Liz Cheney of Wyoming. Neither will be a member of Congress come January. (J. Scott Applewhite/AP) | Why it matters that Trump hasn't proved he declassified documents The government and Trump's legal team continue to battle about whether to stop the investigation of government secrets at Trump's clubhouse while an outside expert digs through the files to see whether anything should go back to Trump. We're waiting for Judge Aileen Cannon to reconsider her decision to appoint a special master, if she does at all. | Instagram's daily time limit lets parents say how long teens can spend on our platform and set limits once supervision is set up.
The result? Teens can be more mindful about the amount of time they're online.
| |  | | | | We're also reading between the tea leaves of all these legal filings to learn more about the case and how Trump might defend himself. The Post's Aaron Blake pointed out today that former president's lawyers still haven't said Trump declassified documents before he took them to Mar-a-Lago. Why does that matter? A few reasons: - Trump could be caught in a lie: He has claimed he declassified the documents before he took them out of the White House. But his legal team still won't argue in court, where it's under oath, that the president declassified documents, Aaron noted. (They say that is "to be determined later.")
- Trump could lose some allies: Even some of his Republican supporters have hesitated on standing by Trump if it turns out he was keeping government secrets at Mar-a-Lago rather than under lock and key where they belong.
But the classification status of these documents also arguably doesn't matter, at least when it comes to whether the Justice Department will charge Trump or his allies with a crime. None of the potential crimes the FBI listed in its search warrant requires the documents to be classified, just that he or his allies took them from the government or had plans to do something he shouldn't have with them. Democrats' problematic boosting of Republican election deniers  Blake Masters is Republicans' nominee for U.S. Senate in Arizona, and an election denier. (Rick Scuteri/AP) | This November, there will be a lot of Republican candidates on the ballot who are 2020 election deniers, from wannabe U.S. senators, governors and secretaries of state on down to local election officials. FiveThirtyEight calculates that 60 percent of Americans will have an election denier somewhere on their ballot this November. Some of these — perhaps many of these — election deniers will win in November. How much of a hand will Democrats have had in it? They have spent millions of dollars during this primary season trying to support candidates who are actively denying the legitimate results of an election, reports The Washington Post's Annie Linskey. That's in House, Senate and governor's races from Nevada to New Hampshire, she reports. The thinking on the left is that Democrats will more easily beat these election deniers, even if it's a tough year overall for their party. Both sides play dirty to win. But how far is too far? President Biden is giving prime-time speeches warning that these kind of candidates "represent an extremism that threatens the very foundation of our republic." But his party is using donor money to boost some of them. (A number of Democrats are quite vocal that they disagree with this strategy, but it's happening anyway in some pretty high-profile races.) |
Email
No comments:
Post a Comment