This article was added by the user . TheWorldNews is not responsible for the content of the platform.

These are the factors that are likely to make Garland heavier when Garland is charging his playing cards.

TDonald Trump lost the 2020 elections to the House Commission investigating the January 6 attack on the Capitol. Despite knowing that, he spread lies about election fraud as part of extensive efforts to overturn Joe Biden's victory, pressured state voters to change the outcome, and fake elections. A winner who organized an effort to send a person to Washington and used multiple tactics to convince Vice President Mike Pence to nominate Trump, including instigating a mob to chase him.

As the hearing continues, the spotlight on the Justice Department is brightening, and there is also interest in whether Attorney General Merrick Garland chooses to prosecute the former president. A new subpoena was issued by federal prosecutors investigating attacks in Georgia and Virginia on Wednesday, theWashington Postreported, and the Justice Department expanded the scope of the proceedings. May indicate that you are. In another investigation by Georgia's Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, a grand jury was appointed and asked Georgia Secretary of State Bradrafence Purger to "find" enough votes for Trump to win. At times, it seems that Trump is investigating whether he has violated state law.

However, despite all the bombs the Commission has announced about Trump's efforts, legal experts say there are many thresholds that the Justice Department must meet before prosecuting the former president. The people of the world notice.

Former Deputy said that in order to prosecute Trump in connection with the Capitol attack, he needed to show evidence that he knew in advance about certain plans to defeat the Capitol and interfere with the procedure. Independent prosecutor Solomon L. Wisenberg says. Whitewater survey during the Clinton era. "It's a horizontal bar," says Wisenberg. "What did Trump do? Did he plot a plot? Did he know in advance that this would be attempted if he did not succeed in persuading Vice President Pence?"

Garland has not been working on the Department of Justice earlier this year, and the Department of Justice continues to commit to detaining all January 6 perpetrators under the law at all levels. I have. "

Like most complex criminal investigations, prosecutors started with what they consider to be the frontline actors of crime. He suspends the certification of election results. The Justice Department has arrested more than 840 people and prosecuted hundreds in connection with the attack. This includes more than 280 defendants charged with fraudulently obstructing, influencing, or attempting to interfere with official proceedings. Federal prosecutors have also charged members of the far-right group with the Proud Boys in a sedition-related plot related to the Capitol attack, the trial of which is expected to proceed later this year.

Federal prosecutors consider whether there is sufficient evidence to accuse Trump of incendiary plots or other allegations such as plots that deceive the United States and interfere with formal proceedings. can do.

It is a crime to disrupt Congress's proceedings, Wisenberg says. "So who knew it, helped it, and planned it. That's a big problem, and that's what Garland should pay attention to. And how these indictments came about. If you look at Proud Boys and others, I think they're building it from bottom to top. "

Former federal prosecutor and now a government watchdog, American Oversight. Senior adviser Melanie Sloan said it would be "shocking" if the Justice Department did not prosecute people around Trump. , The Commission has shown that it was coordinating efforts to overturn the election results. Previous indictments have targeted "lowest-level players, those who are completely responsible for their actions to enter the Capitol, but are manipulated by much higher people," Sloan said. In the end, he added that he needed to pursue those "higher people" as well.

"It would be completely wrong that those people would not be held criminally liable for their actions," she says.

The key to proceeding against Trump may beJohn Eastman. This is a lawyer who advised Trump after the election and insisted that he should send an alternative slate of voters to Washington to have Trump vote in the election. "The best way DOJ has is to file a proceeding against Eastman and turn him over to Mr. Trump," said former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti.

However, as the investigation moves away from physical attacks on the Capitol, it becomes more difficult to gather evidence to prove the intent of the crime. For example, it would be difficult for prosecutors to prove that non-lawyer Trump was in a position to assess the legality of Eastman's plan to seat fake voters, Mariotti said.

Wisenberg says it would be difficult to charge Eastman by giving legal advice on how to overturn the election results. For one thing, supporting a constitutional interpretation can be seen as protected speech, even if it is not widely shared. "I'm very skeptical of efforts to turn the mere idea that you're not following the voter law or advising Vice President Pence to have the power to refuse proof into a crime," Wisenberg said. say.

Watergate scandal response

Fifty years ago, prosecutors investigating the criminal activity of the Nixon administration used the Senate's investigation into Nixon's Watergate scandal as a starting point. Richard Ben Beniste, a former special counsel in Watergate, said the January 6 Commission's investigation could serve a similar function and provide the Justice Department with valuable information that Garland's team could expand. It states that there is.

"At Watergate, it was built on evidence gathered by the Senate Selection Committee on Watergate, but we can go further with compelling testimony, of course. Most surprisingly, we were able to obtain important evidence in the form of apresidential tape recording, "says Ben Beniste.

At four dramatic hearings, the January 6 Commission will consider whether prosecutors will file criminal charges against Trump for supporting the plot. Announced possible new details. Liz Cheney, a Republican and vice-chairman of the Commission in Wyoming, said on June 9at the first hearingthat Trump's White House staff broke the Capitol. He said he was asking him to stop the mob. Trump initially refused, saying the mob was "doing what they were supposed to do."

The Commission tried to prove that he knew that Trump was dishonest when he lied publicly about election fraud. This can help establish criminal intent on the part of Trump. At the hearing held on June 13, Trump continued to be accused of fraudulent elections by Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen and Deputy Attorney General Richard Donahue, who were involved in the campaign. It was shown that he continued to lie about winning the election. It was disproved by the Justice Ministry.

At the Commission's third hearing on June 16, lawmakers haveEastman block Trump fromand Pence from proving the Electoral College's vote in Congress. He revealed evidence that Eastman's own plan was illegal. testimony. The Commission also asked Eastman to later contact Trump's private attorney, Rudy Giuliani, for apresidential amnesty"if it is still in progress, I should be on the amnesty list. I decided that. " According to the email received by the house panel, he wrote.

On June 21, the Commission shows a recorded deposit from Republican National Committee Chairman Ronna McDaniel, Trump is on the phone, and RNC collects fake voters' slate. He said he was asked to help. Direct involvement in the plan.

When a federal prosecutor investigates exposure from a hearing, he can potentially dig deeper using methods not available to the Parliamentary Commission. “For example, a department can force a passive individual's testimony through a subpoena and, if necessary, give an immunity,” says Ben Beniste.

Granting Immunity is "a very powerful arrow in the federal prosecutor's quiver," he says.

Trump's next move

In all the calculations Garland had to make when considering prosecuting the former president, he also said that Trump was. Will run again in the coming weeks, in conflict withspeculation that he may announce his intentions. If the Justice Department chooses to prosecute Trump, such a move raises potential fallout and raises concerns that it may be involved in elections. It can encourage Garland to appoint a special counsel to investigate Trump in order to avoid recognition of conflicts of interest.

However, Maryland Democrat Jamie Raskin, a member of the January 6 committee, said such fears could have committed a crime that Trump could have committed. He told TIME that the judiciary should not discourage scrutiny. He suggested that other course of action would set a terrifying precedent. "If so, defense lawyers across the country need to understand what the murder and rape clients should do first: announce to the president," Ruskin said.

Norm Eisen, senior lawyer at the Brookings Institution and special counsel for House's first impeachment of Trump, is convinced that Garland will not chase Trump. Is called. "I think it's too early to say that I'm reluctant," he says. "People who feel reluctant just don't understand the pace of federal criminal investigations."

Indeed, the House Commission continues to secure more evidence. .. Mississippi Democratic Party Rep. Benny Thompson and the Commission's chairman told reporters Wednesday that they needed time to review the new material the Commission received, so Proud Boys and Oath scheduled for Monday. He said he would postpone hearings about the keeper's actions. According to Thompson,more hearingsare scheduled for July.

There are also signs that federal prosecutors want to dig deeper into what the House Commission has revealed.On June 15, a federal prosecutor wrote to Timothy Heaphy, Chief Investigator of the House Select Commission, asking him to speed up plans to hand over records of all Witness interviews conducted by the Commission. ..


Contact usLetters @ time. com