Cheney says January 6 committee could make multiple criminal referrals, including of Trump
By: Kevin Liptak and Morgan Rimmer (CNN)
Criminal referrals? A political body has subjected the American people to weeks of political theater in an attempt to engender public outrage - and - now they claim they can't do anything about it? The people's representatives are completely reliant upon an autocratic government agency choosing to do something?
The people's democracy is completely helpless under the current government. Only unelected autocrats have the power to do anything. Our elected representatives are telling us they can't do anything. And that's exactly what they are doing; nothing.
This is nothing more than chickenshit politics.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
The House select committee investigating the January 6 insurrection could make multiple criminal referrals, including of former President Donald Trump, the panel’s vice chair, Rep. Liz Cheney, said in an interview broadcast Sunday.
“We’ll make a decision as a committee about it,” the Wyoming Republican told ABC News when asked about the prospect of referring Trump for prosecution and saying “yes” when asked whether a referral of Trump was possible.
“The Justice Department doesn’t have to wait for the committee to make a criminal referral, and there could be more than one criminal referral,” Cheney said.
Cheney’s remarks come days after explosive testimony before the panel investigating the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol from former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson, who recalled being told of Trump’s anger when informed by his Secret Service detail he couldn’t accompany protesters to the Capitol on January 6.
Meanwhile, Illinois Rep. Adam Kinzinger, the other Republican serving on the January 6 committee besides Cheney, told CNN’s Dana Bash on Sunday that Cassidy’s testimony had “been inspiring for a lot of people,” and that more witnesses have come forward since her explosive revelations last week, adding “there will be way more information – and stay tuned,” without elaborating further.
Kinzinger said on “State of the Union” that he didn’t want to “get into who or any of those details” about potential new witnesses, but noted that “every day we get new people that come forward” to the committee.
In her testimony, Hutchinson said she was told by former White House deputy chief of staff Tony Ornato that Trump tried to grab the steering wheel of the car and lunged at Secret Service agent Bobby Engel on January 6 when he was told they were going back to the West Wing and not to the Capitol.
Since then, Hutchinson’s sworn testimony has been questioned by some Trump allies, not speaking under oath.
But two Secret Service sources told CNN that stories had circulated about the incident – including details that are similar to how Hutchinson described it to the January 6 committee. The Secret Service has said the agents involved in the described incident, some of whom were already interviewed by the panel, will be made available to testify again under oath.
When asked by Bash if Ornato would testify before the committee, Kinzinger responded that “there’s information I can’t say yet,” adding, “But we certainly would say that Cassidy Hutchinson has testified under oath. We find her credible and anybody that wants to cast disparagements on that, that was firsthand present, should come and also testify under oath.”
“What she said is this is what she heard. At no point did she say she was in the Beast with the President and saw this happen,” KInzinger added, noting that no one has come forward to dispute the fact that Trump wanted to go to the Capitol on January 6.
Criminal referrals
The January 6 committee has been split on the issue of criminal referrals, even as members are in wide agreement that Trump committed a crime when he pushed conspiracies about the 2020 election. Cheney told ABC News it was probable that the panel would take a stance on whether Trump should be prosecuted.
“We may well as a committee have a view on that,” she said. “If you just think about it from the perspective of: What kind of man knows that a mob is armed and sends the mob to attack the Capitol and further incites that mob when his own vice president is under threat?”
“It’s very chilling, and I think certainly we will continue to present to the American people what we’ve found,” she continued.
Cheney also said the committee had evidence corroborating Trump’s fury at being told he couldn’t go to the Capitol on January 6.
“The committee has significant evidence on a whole range of issues, including the President’s intense anger,” she said. “You will continue to see in coming days and weeks additional detail about the President’s activities and behavior on that day.”
Cheney, who has experienced significant blowback from fellow Republicans for her denunciations of Trump and her role leading the investigation into the January 6 riot, insisted the proceedings are not meant to politically disqualify Trump from running for president again.
Instead, she said they were intended to ensure the American people have an accounting of what happened that day, even as she acknowledged there wasn’t a “single thing” she’s learned that made her less concerned about Trump returning to the White House.
“A man as dangerous as Donald Trump can absolutely never be anywhere near the Oval Office ever again,” she said.
CNN has previously reported that Trump is anxiously mulling when, exactly, he should announce a 2024 presidential run – a decision that has become even more pressing as he tries to reclaim control of his image following the spate of damaging revelations by the January 6 committee.
Cheney, who is facing an uphill climb in her bid for reelection in Wyoming, said the Republican Party would not survive if Trump is selected as the GOP presidential nominee in 2024.
While she refused to rule out a presidential bid of her own, she said her focus was currently elsewhere.
“I haven’t made a decision about that yet, and I’m obviously very focused on my reelection, I’m very focused on the January 6 committee, I’m very focused on my obligations to do the job I have now,” she said. “And I’ll make a decision about ’24 down the road.”
Tags
Who is online
596 visitors
But, but, but ... Orange Man Bad.
If these politicians knew they couldn't do anything before they started the big show then why are they wasting the public's time? Bread and circuses? Chickenshit politics? A do nothing Congress has certainly demonstrated that it can do absolutely nothing. Vote early, vote often.
We've become completely reliant on autocrats defending democracy. Only in politics would such an oxymoron make sense.
Actually... you're right.
Actually... Orange Man Bad has been the only point of the political theater. There was never any intention to actually do something. The House committee has proven that democracy is utterly helpless; only autocratic government can defend democracy. So, why the uproar over democracy?
In other words "Only anarchy can bring order". That's bullshit!
Freedom will not be protected by surrender to totalitarianism.
That you propose utter nonsense is indicative of deception...
In the United States, anarchy would be democracy without a Constitution. Weakening the Constitution would be a step closer to anarchy.
Totalitarianism is established when the people's representatives have little or no power and authority to defend democracy. The people's representatives become subordinate to autocratic government.
For many reasons including for national security and as a matter of precedent America has gone to great pains not to have successive presidential administrations prosecute their predecessors for the crimes discovered by their successors. Trump made all of that impossible!
Trump's January 6th Insurrection went beyond the pale of history.
So, when do the people's representatives defend democracy by indicting and prosecuting Trump? Why is our democracy completely and utterly dependent upon autocratic government agencies for protection?
Congress begs District Courts and SCOTUS to act on its behalf quite frequently. Sometimes it seems Congress spends more time in courts than it does in session. Congress has become overly dependent upon autocratic government. If the people's representatives cannot do anything without the power and authority of autocratic government then what's the point of democracy?
Hyperbole. Did you just now learn that the DoJ is the body to indict and try Trump?
I hope they did engender public outrage; the public should be outraged at what Trump did in his Big Lie campaign.
Then why can't the people's representatives do something tangible about it? Why are the people's representatives completely and utterly helpless to defend democracy?
The press can engender public outrage and quite often does just that. The people's representatives are claiming to have no more power and authority to defend democracy than journalists. Protection of our democracy is totally dependent upon unelected, appointed officials with autocratic authority and power.
The House committee is demonstrating that our democracy is subservient to autocratic government. The people's representatives can do nothing; which is what they are really good at doing.
What about the role of the DoJ confuses you?
We have those who make law, those who interpret law and those who enforce law. The legislative branch makes law; it does not enforce it. The DoJ is concerned with criminal (and civil) cases in the interest of the USA.
You've outlined the Constitutional separation of authority and power between the branches of government. So, what law is the House committee going to make? That is their function as you have explained.
Since the legislative branch is constrained to making law by the Constitutional separations then why is the House committee encroaching upon the executive branches' function of enforcing law?
The judicial branch of government is completely autocratic; there is nothing democratic about the judicial branch. The judicial branch wields absolute power absolutely. The executive branch is also autocratic although managed by an elected official with considerable autocratic authority and power. Only the legislative branch represents the will of the people And the House committee has clearly and unequivocally told the country that the will of the people is completely helpless to defend democracy. Only the autocratic branches of government have the authority and power to defend democracy.
Only in politics would the oxymoron of autocrats defending democracy make any sense. Representatives of the will of the people are doing nothing tangible while claiming that doing nothing tangible is vitally important to defending democracy.
Nerm why do you ask stupid questions like this? The main function of the Legislative branch is to make laws (not execute laws). I stated that to illustrate that you should not expect this committee to execute laws and now you come back with this faux obtuse response that implies you do not comprehend that the Legislative branch engages in other functions other than strictly making new laws. Good grief man, I know you are aware of fact finding committees. Surely you have heard of the concept of a 'Select Committee'. This is a category of committee typically used to conduct investigations. This is nothing new and there is no requirement that legislation be the end result.
I can barely type this since the question is so over the top stupid yet you are not stupid. I just stated in my prior post that legislative committees do not enforce law. This committee has nothing to do with enforcing law. To what end do you engage in this tactic of asking stupid questions when you clearly already know that your question is absurd?
It's a question that directly responds to your argument. You claimed the function of the legislative branch is to make laws. That seemed to be a straightforward, unequivocal argument. So, your answer to my question 'what law is the House committee going to make?' is an equivocation?
If the House committee is not attempting to enforce law then what, exactly, is the House committee doing? Journalism?
We have arrived at a situation where the executive and judicial branches are making law while the legislative branch is enforcing law and interpreting the Constitutional meaning of law. The function of government has been turned upside down.
Already explained. You ignored the clearly stated fact that while the Legislative branch's main function is to make laws that they do more than that. Select committees are an example of this. What the Legislative branch does not do is enforce laws.
I just explained this to you and you ignored it and ask the same stupid questions in paraphrase. Why you engage in trollish tactics like this is beyond me but we are done.
According to your arguments the House committee is not making law and they're not enforcing law. So, what exactly is the House committee doing? Journalism? Influencing public opinion? Playing politics?
Already answered: gathering and communicating information. Look up 'Select Committees' and learn how our Legislative bodies work.
Look up political bullshit. Lying repeatedly. And trying desperately to get everyone to look away from high gas prices; inflation; rampant crime; our two tier justice system; Covid; the coming recession; US citizens still trapped in Afghanistan; our wide open southern border and the illegal immigrant invasion.
Only people taking the committee seriously are TDS driven trolls; that don't give a shit about anything except "Get Trump at all costs".
And yet, all people testifying are Republicans!
Get a grip.
Apply this advice to comment 3.1.8
Midterms are coming, there isn't anything Democrats can do about it.
"Deal with it"
So is Cheney; no wait- she isn't. But Democrats still are billing her as such.
“Personally, I am kind of overjoyed…”
And therein lies the crux of the problem.
Too many are more interested in making, scoring, or invalidating political points than talking to an issue and working together to address the issue. It is never an all or nothing proposition and expecting that is where we find ourselves today…no resolution, no action, no semblance of effective governance, and quickly approaching a point of no hope.
Exactly! In short: too many pure partisans.
I dont agree with your dire assessment of America life, but even if I did , it still doesnt justify apathy about the criminal Trump.
People used to be able to walk and chew gum at the same time. What are you afraid of ?
Why don't you try bringing a cogent argument for your position to the table?
Posit or Claim:
Evidence or observations:
Reasoning:
Conclusion:
And: Don't be a Fred. It is painful