Capitol Riot Committee to seek charges for Trump

[LadyTevar]

BBC NEWS

Capitol riot: Committee to seek charges for Trump

The congressional inquiry into last year's Capitol riot will reportedly recommend three criminal charges against former President Donald Trump.

Trump supporters stormed Congress on 6 January 2021 in a bid to stop Joe Biden's certification as president.

The justice department - which is already investigating Mr Trump's role in the unrest - is not obliged to consider referrals from any congressional panel.

Mr Trump denies wrongdoing. On Friday his spokesman, Steven Cheung, said in a statement: "The January 6th un-Select Committee held show trials by Never Trump partisans who are a stain on this country's history."

The House of Representatives select committee will seek an unprecedented charge of insurrection against a former US president, according to US media. The select committee is scheduled to hold its final meeting on Monday when any charging recommendations would be unveiled.

As well as insurrection, according to various outlets, the panel will suggest Mr Trump be charged with obstructing an official proceeding and conspiracy to defraud the United States.

The nine panellists are expected to approve the final eight-chapter report, drawing on interviews with more than 1,000 witnesses, and submit it to the Department of Justice (DoJ).

The full report will be made public on Wednesday, said chairman Bennie Thompson, a Mississippi Democrat who is helming the select committee.
The panel is expected to publish its final report next week.

California congresswoman Zoe Lofgren, another member of the panel, told CNN on Friday that the lawmakers have "been very careful in crafting these [charging] recommendations and tethering them to the facts that we've uncovered".

The House select committee has argued Mr Trump spread claims that he knew were false about the 2020 presidential election being stolen, before pressuring state officials, the justice department and his own vice-president to help subvert his defeat. The panel accuses him of inciting the Capitol riot in a last-ditch bid to remain in power.

The DoJ is already investigating the then-Republican president's actions surrounding the riot.

Seven days after the raid on Congress, the House impeached Mr Trump for a second time on the grounds of incitement of insurrection.

Mr Trump, who is the only president to ever be impeached twice, was cleared by the US Senate.

Last month, Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed a former war crimes prosecutor to decide whether Mr Trump should be prosecuted.

Jack Smith is tasked with determining if the 2024 presidential candidate should be put on trial for mishandling classified files that were recovered during an FBI search of Mr Trump's Florida estate in August, or for encouraging the violent mob on 6 January 2021.

Hundreds of people have been charged with crimes in relation to the mass invasion of Congress.

Dozens of those have been convicted, including Doug Jensen - described as a "poster boy" of the riots by prosecutors as one of the first to breach the Capitol - and Stewart Rhodes, leader of the far-right militia the Oath Keepers.

[Rogue 9]

The hearing will be live at 1:00pm EST on Monday. We'll see exactly what they decide to do then.

[The_Saint]

Hypothetically, IF Trump is prosecuted and IF the charges stick (eg incitement to insurrection) .... could anyone else, being, Republican Representatives/Senators, Fox news etc who repeated Trumps claims be on the hook for incitement to insurrection or do they get the pass that they were just repeating the current El-Presidente's statements/claims?

[bilateralrope]

Hypothetically, IF Trump is prosecuted and IF the charges stick (eg incitement to insurrection) .... could anyone else, being, Republican Representatives/Senators, Fox news etc who repeated Trumps claims be on the hook for incitement to insurrection or do they get the pass that they were just repeating the current El-Presidente's statements/claims?

I think that would come down to exactly what each of them said.

[Ralin]

And it can be assumed they're going to err heavily on the side of not prosecuting people who weren't directly involved and in a position of authority for repeating what the president said.

[Lord Revan]

Yeah I suspect last thing the US Department of Justice wants this to seem like is a political purge of those the current president doesn't agree with. "Knowing" someone did something isn't the same as being able to prove it beyond reasonable doubt so I suspect the DoJ (or this committee) is being very careful to press charges only if there's a good chance of proving that they acted in bad faith.

After all the presumption of Innocence is core part of the US system(well the systems of most western countries to be fair) and pressing charges that would most likely to fail should they go to court would only make this whole thing seem like a witch hunt.

[Solauren]

And it can be assumed they're going to err heavily on the side of not prosecuting people who weren't directly involved and in a position of authority for repeating what the president said.

Especially since you'd have to prove they repeated it themselves, and it wasn't a bot or hireling just doing their job.

Which, would not be easy unless they repeated it on video.

[Raw Shark]

The sheer rage about that one girl getting shot to death among the redcap tribe that I work with is ridiculous. I have my disagreements with the Po-Po, but if they tell you to stop, you stop. They are a necessary part of an ordered society.

[Raw Shark]

(Unless it's just a traffic ticket, in which case... well, some of us are better at some things than others.) ;)

[LadyTevar]

The sheer rage about that one girl getting shot to death among the redcap tribe that I work with is ridiculous. I have my disagreements with the Po-Po, but if they tell you to stop, you stop. They are a necessary part of an ordered society.

Do you mean the woman who was physically breaking through the barred door into the Senate, and shot by Security when she wouldn't stop as ordered?

[Ralin]

The sheer rage about that one girl getting shot to death among the redcap tribe that I work with is ridiculous. I have my disagreements with the Po-Po, but if they tell you to stop, you stop. They are a necessary part of an ordered society.

Do you mean the woman who was physically breaking through the barred door into the Senate, and shot by Security when she wouldn't stop as ordered?

Yeah, but if instead of physically breaking through the barred door into the Senate and not stopping as ordered she was shot over a traffic ticket that would be pretty awful.

It's like how a lot of people laughed or said Chris Rock deserved it when Will Smith slapped him, but if Will Smith's hand was a 747 and Chris Rock was the World Trade Center then suddenly it wouldn't be so funny now would it?

[Raw Shark]

Posting from my phone so quotes are difficult, but yes, Tev, the woman who did that dumb shit is the one who I am referring to.

I am the last guy you will ever know who will always defend the police, because I do not. They act in the wrong frequently. We have a bit of history of hostility, in fact. But that girl earned what she got.

[Raw Shark]

I mean, maybe getting shot in the neck is not so fun, but there was a chain of events that led to it, y'know?

[bobalot]

The sheer rage about that one girl getting shot to death among the redcap tribe that I work with is ridiculous. I have my disagreements with the Po-Po, but if they tell you to stop, you stop. They are a necessary part of an ordered society.

It's because they think laws should only be selectively applied to those they disapprove of like minorities, LGBT, their political opponents, etc.

[Rogue 9]

The sheer rage about that one girl getting shot to death among the redcap tribe that I work with is ridiculous. I have my disagreements with the Po-Po, but if they tell you to stop, you stop. They are a necessary part of an ordered society.

Do you mean the woman who was physically breaking through the barred door into the Senate, and shot by Security when she wouldn't stop as ordered?

Ashli Babbit, and she was trying to climb through the broken glass into the still occupied House chamber with a screaming mob behind her. If they had let her through, they all would have followed. It was a righteous shoot if ever there was one.

[Raw Shark]

Most definitely. No objections here. She got what she asked for.

[LadyTevar]

Ashli Babbit, and she was trying to climb through the broken glass into the still occupied House chamber with a screaming mob behind her. If they had let her through, they all would have followed. It was a righteous shoot if ever there was one.

Agreed. As Shark said, she got what she asked for.

I fully believe seeing/hearing her get shot is one reason the mob backed off for the moment, and let the House finish evacuating. Nothing "Holy fuck they killed her!" to make the tag-alongs decide they didn't want to be the next ones shot. There were enough "do or die" idjits to continue the pressure, but IIRC that was when the mob first started breaking up.

[LadyTevar]

Ashli Babbit, and she was trying to climb through the broken glass into the still occupied House chamber with a screaming mob behind her. If they had let her through, they all would have followed. It was a righteous shoot if ever there was one.

Agreed. As Shark said, she got what she asked for.

I fully believe seeing/hearing her get shot is one reason the mob backed off for the moment, and let the House finish evacuating. Nothing like "Holy fuck they killed her!" to make the tag-alongs decide they didn't want to be the next ones shot. There were enough "do or die" idjits to continue the pressure, but IIRC that was when the mob first started breaking up.

[madd0c0t0r2]

Will Donald Trump be arrested before 2024? currently holding at 39% chance with 495 trades
https://manifold.markets/Dustin/will-do ... omlynGames

Note that "Will he be indicted in 2022?" started at 50% and has declined to an [overoptimistic] 6% chance today: https://manifold.markets/LivInTheLookin ... omlynGames

The updated "will he be indicted in 2023? " started at 75% and is still at 75% with 727 trades.

There's something odd here, probably related to word understanding. Here (https://legalbeagle.com/6010959-differe ... tment.html) indicates that "An indictment is a formal statement of criminal charges", while an arrest is an action "to place him under direct control and custody, depriving him of liberty." "Because an indicted person has already been charged, he will be arrested."

So if that is correct, if Trump is Indicted an arrest will follow shortly. Should we take the true odds as halfway between the 39% and the 75%, or do we take the gap as a 36% chance that Trump will flee before arrest?

[madd0c0t0r2]

Ghetto edit: lets find out: https://manifold.markets/CromlynGames/w ... omlynGames

[bilateralrope]

What is this manifold.markets site and what kind of accuracy do you expect from their predictions ?

[madd0c0t0r2]

What is this manifold.markets site and what kind of accuracy do you expect from their predictions ?

It's a "wisdom of crowds stick exchange" - a concept I first saw in 'the dervish house' novel. I've used it hear a couple of times here over the years, when arguing a prediction I've offered to put bet money down in escrow.

The manifold one is largely toy money, so is less likely to be accurate (and the gap between separate bets was something I was making a point of above. The positions have closed somewhat since). The thread attached to the questions to present evidence is good, and it offers various other financial options to limit bet, bail on a vet by selling the position and so on. Just a different type of nerd gladiator arena.

[madd0c0t0r2]

The committee final report is out. https://www.govinfo.gov/collection/janu ... l%20Report

[The_Saint]

The committee final report is out. https://www.govinfo.gov/collection/janu ... l%20Report

Well as obvious as everything is that is declared in there and as scathing as it is..... what now? I might be on the far side of the planet and haven't heard a peep on what this might mean going forward...

[LadyTevar]

The committee final report is out. https://www.govinfo.gov/collection/janu ... l%20Report

Well as obvious as everything is that is declared in there and as scathing as it is..... what now? I might be on the far side of the planet and haven't heard a peep on what this might mean going forward...

I know. Big Silence everywhere, no media coverage, no talking heads asking questions. It's like "It'd done, lets get on with 15 votes to elect a Speaker of the House!"

One can hope the radio silence is the DOJ getting their ducks in a row before the arrests start. But I'm not holding my breath.