Last updated on July 18th, 2023 at 01:44 pm
If one wanted the ideal legal expert to analyze Trump’s criminal exposure, it would be difficult to find one more qualified than former federal prosecutor Glenn Kirschner, who spent twenty years in the very office that would bring any possible indictment against Trump.Â
To get more stories like this, subscribe to our newsletter The Daily.
Kirschner sees a criminal proceeding emerging in the statements made by and released from the Select Committee as they describe Trump’s role in January 6th and the days leading up to the attempted coup. In simple language, the statements regarding the texts and messages seemed designed to fit the elements of certain crimes. Transcript from CNN:
As the House select committee investigation into the Capitol riot progresses, a vivid picture is emerging. It suggests many individuals, up to and including former President Donald Trump, worked hard to obstruct that official congressional proceeding. And I believe, as do other legal experts, that doing so constitutes a federal felony
“Trump’s conduct on Jan. 6 — whipping his supporters up into an angry frenzy by lying to them about stolen votes and a rigged election and telling them if they don’t ‘fight like hell,’ they ‘won’t have a country anymore’ — plainly constitutes an attempt to influence or impede the Electoral College vote count,
This would certainly be count one and was count one in the second impeachment. Merrick Garland, who seems reluctant to even investigate the matter really ought to review Mitch McConnell’s speech after voting “not-guilty” in which it was obvious that McConnell expected and wanted the matter investigated and then perhaps prosecuted by law enforcement. Garland can avoid a lot of political criticism by pointing to McConnell’s statement.
For now, we’re left to Congress, and they know it.
Much lies ahead in both the House select committee’s investigation and any possible criminal investigations and prosecutions. But by framing issues using the precise language of our federal criminal code, Cheney seems to be providing a road map for future criminal charges, including obstruction of official proceedings, next year.”
Even laypeople and lawyers who live hundreds of miles from Main Justice, DOJ’s offices in Washington, can plainly see that Garland has no intention of prosecuting anyone or thing in the Trump administration. This may infuriate Biden, but Biden is honoring the long followed code (until Trump) by staying out of decisions made by the A.G.
Additionally, the DOJ is under no obligation to prosecute a case referred by Congress, but it is far more difficult to ignore, especially when the evidence is laid out so cleanly. Liz Cheney must be all too aware of that historical fact, the same can be said of Schiff and Committee Leader Thompson.
The Committee (and near everyone else in both houses and the White House) seems to understand that Garland is either sympathetic to Trump (possible, but unlikely) or scared of his own shadow and wants to “look forward,” a very dangerous position because he may be setting the table for an even worse coup next time, given they “got away with it once already.”
Again, the Committee’s actions seemed designed to address this problem.
One last observation. Trump’s liability may not just be premised upon inciting the crowd. While every Republican in existence, including in the media texted Meadows, begging him to make Trump call it off Trump did nothing, even though it was his job to “do something” to prevent the obstruction of Congress. Only the president had the authority to send out the resources of the federal government, including the military and federal law enforcement like the Park Police.
Generally, one cannot be charged with a crime for failing to do something to stop a bad situation in any context (outside children and vulnerable adults). But if the committee found evidence that Trump agreed ahead of time to allow the rioters time to get into the building and rush Pence out of the building, then at that point Trump is liable for not doing anything because he becomes part of a conspiracy. He would not just be exposed to liability for inciting an act to obstruct Congress, but may also be liable as a conspirator to the attack itself. At least, that’s how this staff sees the issues aligning.
The Committee is surely aware of this fact, too. It is likely a bit too early to play that card in public, for now.
@JasonMiciak believes a day without learning is a day not lived. He is a political writer, features writer, author, and attorney. He is a Canadian-born dual citizen who spent his teen and college years in the Pacific Northwest and has since lived in seven states. He now enjoys life as a single dad of a young girl, writing from the beaches of the Gulf Coast. He loves crafting his flower pots, cooking, and currently studies philosophy of science, religion, and non-math principles behind quantum mechanics and cosmology. Please feel free to contact with any concerns.
