US Capitol attack

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘Morally bankrupt’: outrage after pro-Israel group backs insurrectionist Republicans

      by

      ‘Morally bankrupt’: outrage after pro-Israel group backs insurrectionist Republicans Aipac defends move by saying that support for the Jewish state overrides other issues as it faces a storm of criticismThe US’s most powerful pro-Israel lobby group has been accused of putting support for Israel before American democracy after it declared its backing for the election campaigns of three dozen Republican members of Congress who tried to block President Biden’s presidential victory.But the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (Aipac) has defended the move by saying that support for the Jewish state overrides other issues and that it is “no moment for the pro-Israel movement to become selective about its friends”.In December, Aipac launched a political action committee that enables it for the first time to spend money directly supporting congressional candidates in this year’s midterm elections. Earlier this month the committee released a list of 120 political endorsements that includes 37 Republicans who voted against certifying Biden’s victory following the January 6 2021 storming of the Capitol.Among them are two members of Congress, Jim Jordan and Scott Perry, who plotted with Trump’s White House to overturn the election result. Perry has also publicly promoted racist “white replacement” conspiracy theories.The lobby group’s move has been met by a storm of criticism, including from other pro-Israel organizations.“Aipac’s support for these candidates endangers American democracy and undermines the true interests and values of millions of American Jews and pro-Israel Americans who they often claim to represent,” said the more moderate but less influential pro-Israel lobby group, J Street. “Whatever their views on Israel, elected officials who threaten the very future of our country should be completely beyond the pale.”Richard Haass, the president of the Council on Foreign Relations, described the endorsement of politicians who “undermine democracy” as “morally bankrupt and short-sighted”.“What ties the 2 countries is a commitment to democracy. An undemocratic America could easily distance itself from the Jewish state,” he tweeted.The former head of the strongly pro-Israel Anti-Defamation League, Abe Foxman, described the endorsements as a “sad mistake”. The former US ambassador to Israel, Dan Kurtzer, called on Aipac to reconsider the move and “do the right thing for America”.Halie Soifer, CEO of the Jewish Democratic Council of America and a former national security adviser to then Senator Kamala Harris, said that Aipac’s endorsements suggest that, at times, “one must compromise support of America’s democracy to support Israel”.“This is a patently false dichotomy rejected by the overwhelming majority of American Jews,” she wrote in the Israeli newspaper, Haaretz.In the face of the growing criticism, Aipac’s leaders last week sent a letter to the group’s members defending the endorsements.“This is no moment for the pro-Israel movement to become selective about its friends,” said the letter, obtained by the Jewish Insider.“The one thing that guarantees Israel’s ability to defend itself is the enduring support of the United States. When we launched our political action committee last year, we decided that we would base decisions about political contributions on only one thing: whether a political candidate supports the US-Israel relationship.”Aipac broke with more than 70 years of standing back from individual political campaigns to launch the political action committee (Pac) that permits it to directly fund favoured candidates within limits. It also founded a second so-called “super Pac” that allows unlimited funding for advertising in support of campaigns but not direct donations. The super Pac is reported to have raised $10m already, including $8.5m from Aipac itself.The list of endorsements includes Democrats with a record of strong backing for Israel at a time when opinion polls show declining support among the party’s voters. A poll last year found found that half of Democrats want Washington to shift policy toward more support for the Palestinians.Although Aipac presents itself as bipartisan, that position has been increasingly tested. It openly opposed President Obama’s demand that Israel freeze expansion of settlements in the occupied territories, widely considered illegal under international law. The group also lobbied Congress on behalf of Israel against Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran.In his memoir, A Promised Land, Obama wrote that “members of both parties worried about crossing” Aipac.“Those who criticized Israeli policy too loudly risked being tagged as ‘anti-Israel’ (and possibly antisemitic) and confronted with a well-funded opponent in the next election,” he wrote.Aipac’s move also comes amid stiffening criticism of Israel from human rights groups, including Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, which have both recently accused the country of maintaining a form of apartheid over the Palestinians.The head of Amnesty International’s US office, Paul O’Brien, recently said that when the organisation met with members of congress to discuss its new report, Israel’s Apartheid Against Palestinians, it found that Aipac had got there first.“It was an interesting experience for us to introduce a report that was about to be launched in public a week later and to get in 80 different congressional offices a public statement dissociating themselves from the findings of the report in which none of those 80 statements actually disputed the findings of the report, except to say, in broad strokes, we do not believe that this report is motivated for the right reasons or reaches the right conclusions,” he said.TopicsRepublicansSuper PacsIsraelUS Capitol attackUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Cowboys for Trump creator found guilty in second US Capitol attack trial

      by

      Cowboys for Trump creator found guilty in second US Capitol attack trialJudge declares Couy Griffin guilty of one of the two offenses, bolstering a key theory from lawyers in hundreds of related cases A New Mexico county commissioner who founded a group called Cowboys for Trump was found guilty by a judge on Tuesday of breaching the US Capitol during the January 6 riot, a second consecutive win at trial for the US Department of Justice.Kid Rock says Donald Trump sought his advice on North Korea and Islamic StateRead moreFollowing a two-day non-jury trial, the US district judge Trevor McFadden said the defendant, Couy Griffin, was guilty of one of the two misdemeanor offenses.The ruling bolsters a key theory from prosecutors in hundreds of related cases.They argued that the Capitol grounds were strictly off-limits on 6 January 2021, and that should have been apparent to the thousands of Donald Trump supporters who breached them in an attempt to stop Congress certifying Joe Biden’s election.The judge found Griffin guilty of entering a restricted area protected by the US Secret Service but cleared him of disorderly conduct.McFadden said Griffin should have known not to scale walls and enter the Capitol grounds, but said Griffin was innocent of disorderly conduct because he never tried to rile up the crowd at the Capitol or engage in violence.McFadden scheduled a June sentencing hearing for Griffin, who faces up to a year behind bars.Before the mob stormed the Capitol, Trump gave a fiery speech in which he falsely claimed his election defeat was the result of widespread fraud, an assertion rejected by multiple courts, state election officials and members of his own administration.About 800 people face criminal charges relating to the riot, which sent the then-vice-president, Mike Pence, and members of Congress running for their lives. Some 200 have already pleaded guilty.Griffin’s bench trial is seen as an important test case as the DoJ attempts to secure convictions of the hundreds of defendants who have not taken plea deals.The first jury trial for a 6 January defendant ended in a decisive victory for prosecutors earlier this month. After a quick deliberation, a jury unanimously found a Texas man guilty on all five of the felony charges he faced, including bringing a gun onto the Capitol grounds and obstructing an official proceeding.TopicsUS Capitol attackNew MexicoDonald TrumpUS politicsLaw (US)US crimeReuse this content More

    • 125 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      US Capitol attack trial begins for Cowboys for Trump founder

      by

      US Capitol attack trial begins for Cowboys for Trump founderTrial of Couy Griffin is the second among hundreds of people charged with federal crimes related to the January 6 riot An elected official from New Mexico went on trial on Monday with a judge, not a jury, set to decide if he is guilty of charges that he illegally entered the US Capitol grounds on the day a pro-Trump mob disrupted the certification of Joe Biden’s presidential election victory.That’s not the only unusual feature of the case against Otero County Commissioner Couy Griffin, an Otero county commissioner, whose trial in Washington DC, is the second among the hundreds of people charged with federal crimes related to the January 6 riot.Griffin is one of the few defendants not accused of entering the Capitol or engaging in violent or destructive behavior. He claims he has been prosecuted for his political views.One of three members of the county commission in southern New Mexico, he is among a handful of defendants who either held public office or ran for a government post in the years before the attack.He is among only three defendants who have asked for a bench trial, which means a judge will decide his case without a jury. A US district court judge, Trevor McFadden, was scheduled to hear one day of testimony.Griffin, a 48-year-old former rodeo rider and pastor, helped found a political committee called Cowboys for Trump. He vowed to arrive at the courthouse on horseback. Instead, he showed up on Monday as a passenger in a pickup truck that had a horse trailer on the back.Griffin is charged with two misdemeanors: entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds and disorderly and disruptive conduct in a restricted building or grounds. His attorney, Nicholas Smith, said prosecutors apparently believe Griffin engaged in disorderly conduct by peacefully leading a prayer on the Capitol steps.“That is offensive and wrong,” Smith told the judge in brief opening statements.Prosecutors didn’t give any opening statements. Their first witness was Matthew Struck, who joined Griffin at the Capitol as his videographer. Struck has an immunity deal with prosecutors.In a court filing, prosecutors called Griffin “an inflammatory provocateur and fabulist who engages in racist invective and propounds baseless conspiracy theories, including that communist China stole the 2020 presidential election”.Griffin’s attorneys say hundreds if not thousands of other people did exactly what Griffin did on January 6 and have not been charged.“The evidence will show that the government selected Griffin for prosecution based on the fact that he gave a speech and led a prayer at the Capitol, that is, selected him based on protected expression,” they wrote.More than 770 people have been charged with federal crimes. More than 230 have pleaded guilty, mostly to misdemeanors, and at least 127 have been sentenced. About 100 others have trial dates.Earlier this month, a jury convicted a Texas man, Guy Wesley Reffitt, of storming the Capitol with a holstered handgun in the first trial for a riot defendant. Jurors also convicted him of obstructing Congress, of interfering with police officers guarding the Capitol and of threatening his two children if they reported him to law enforcement.Reffitt’s conviction could give prosecutors more leverage in negotiating plea deals or discourage other defendants from going to trial. The outcome of Griffin’s trial also could have a ripple effect, helping others decide whether to let a judge or a jury decide their case.In a video taken in a parking lot outside the Capitol on 5 January, Griffin said he came to Washington for “possibly the most historic day for our country in my lifetime” and trusted that the vice-president, Mike Pence, would “do the right thing” and stop certification of Biden’s win.After attending Donald Trump’s “Stop the Steal” rally, Griffin and Struck walked over barriers and up a staircase to enter a stage under construction on the Capitol’s Lower West Terrace for Biden’s inauguration, according to prosecutors.Struck is listed as one of three government witnesses. Prosecutors also intend to call a Capitol police inspector and a US Secret Service inspector. Prosecutors want to use Griffin’s own words against him. They plan to play video recordings of his statements and actions in Washington.After climbing over a stone wall and entering a restricted area, Griffin said: “This is our house. We should all be armed.” He called it “a great day for America” and added: “The people are showing that they have had enough,” prosecutors said.A key question is whether he entered a restricted area while Pence was on Capitol grounds, a prerequisite for the US Secret Service to invoke access restrictions. Griffin’s attorneys say Pence had departed before Griffin could have entered a restricted area.“The government responds that the vice-president’s precise location ultimately doesn’t matter,” the judge wrote on Friday. “Perhaps, although the lack of clarity about the metes and bounds of the restricted area and the vice-president’s movements on January 6 undermine this argument.”TopicsUS Capitol attackNew MexicoMike PenceUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 175 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Trump White House aide was secret author of report used to push ‘big lie’

      by

      Trump White House aide was secret author of report used to push ‘big lie’Report on Dominion voting machines produced after 2020 election was not the work of volunteer in Trump’s post-election legal team Weeks after the 2020 election, at least one Trump White House aide was named as secretly producing a report that alleged Donald Trump lost to Joe Biden because of Dominion Voting Systems – research that formed the basis of the former president’s wider efforts to overturn the election.The Dominion report, subtitled “OVERVIEW 12/2/20 – History, Executives, Vote Manipulation Ability and Design, Foreign Ties”, was initially prepared so that it could be sent to legislatures in states where the Trump White House was trying to have Biden’s win reversed.Trump lawyer knew plan to delay Biden certification was unlawful, emails showRead moreBut top Trump officials would also use the research that stemmed from the White House aide-produced report to weigh other options to return Trump to the presidency, including having the former president sign off on executive orders to authorize sweeping emergency powers.The previously unreported involvement of the Trump White House aide in the preparation of the Dominion report raises the extraordinary situation of at least one administration official being among the original sources of Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election.The publicly available version of the Dominion report, which first surfaced in early December 2020 on the conservative outlet the Gateway Pundit, names on the cover and in metadata as its author Katherine Friess, a volunteer on the Trump post-election legal team.But the Dominion report was in fact produced by the senior Trump White House policy aide Joanna Miller, according to the original version of the document reviewed by the Guardian and a source familiar with the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.The original version of the Dominion report named Miller – who worked for the senior Trump adviser Peter Navarro – as the author on the cover page, until her name was abruptly replaced with that of Friess before the document was to be released publicly, the source said.The involvement of a number of other Trump White House aides who worked in Navarro’s office was also scrubbed around that time, the source said. Friess has told the Daily Beast that she had nothing to do with the report and did not know how her name came to be on the document.It was not clear why Miller’s name was removed from the report, which was sent to Trump’s former attorney Rudy Giuliani on 29 November 2020, or why the White House aide’s involvement was obfuscated in the final 2 December version. Miller did not immediately respond to a request for comment.The Dominion report made a number of unsubstantiated allegations that claimed Dominion Voting Systems corruptly ensured there could be “technology glitches which resulted in thousands of votes being added to Joe Biden’s total ballot count”.Citing unnamed Venezuelan officials, the report also pushed the conspiracy theory that Dominion Voting Systems used software from the election company Smartmatic and had ties to “state-run Venezuelan software and telecommunications companies”.After the Dominion report became public, Navarro incorporated the claims into his own three-part report, produced with assistance from his aides at the White House, including Miller and another policy aide, Garrett Ziegler, the source said.Ziegler has also said on a rightwing podcast that he and others in Navarro’s office – seemingly referring to Trump White House aides Christopher Abbott and Hannah Robertson – started working on Navarro’s report about two weeks before the 2020 election took place.“Two weeks before the election, we were doing those reports hoping that we would pepper the swing states with those,” Ziegler said of the three-part Navarro report in an appearance last July on The Professor’s Record with David K Clements.The research in the Dominion report also formed the backbone of foreign election interference claims by the former Trump lawyer and conspiracy theorist Sidney Powell, who argued Trump could, as a result, assume emergency presidential powers and suspend normal law.That included Trump’s executive order 13848, which authorized sweeping powers in the event of foreign election interference, as well as a draft executive order that would have authorized the seizure of voting machines, the Guardian has previously reported.The claims about Venezuela in the Dominion report appear to have spurred Powell to ask Trump at a 18 December 2020 meeting at the White House – coincidentally facilitated by Ziegler – that she be appointed special counsel to investigate election fraud.Miller’s authorship of the Dominion report was not the last time the Trump White House, or individuals in the administration, prepared materials to advance the former president’s claims about a stolen election and efforts to return himself to office.The House select committee investigating the January 6 Capitol attack revealed last year it had found evidence the White House Communications Agency produced a letter for the Trump justice department official Jeffrey Clark to use to pressure states to decertify Biden’s election win.TopicsUS elections 2020Trump administrationUS Capitol attacknewsReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Proud Boys leader had plans to ‘storm’ government buildings on 6 January

      by

      Proud Boys leader had plans to ‘storm’ government buildings on 6 JanuaryEnrique Tarrio possessed document titled ‘1776 Returns’, with details to invade and occupy seven buildings, New York Times says The former leader of the Proud Boys, a violent far-right nationalist group whose members were prominent in the January 6 riot, was found in possession of comprehensive plans to “surveil and storm” government buildings, prosecutors have said.Mug shot: Republican Josh Hawley told to stop using January 6 fist salute photoRead moreEnrique Tarrio, the group’s former chairman who was arrested last week and charged with conspiracy over the deadly attack, had a nine-page document entitled “1776 Returns”, named for the year of American independence, the New York Times reported.The document, mentioned only in general terms in Tarrio’s indictment, contained details of a complex plan for supporters of Donald Trump to invade and occupy at least seven House and Senate office buildings on the afternoon Congress met to certify Joe Biden’s election victory, according to Times sources.Trump has promoted the lie that the election was stolen and incited the attack on Congress as part of a wider effort to have the result overturned.The document features five sections, the Times reported: infiltrate, execution, distract, occupy and sit-in. The plan called for the recruiting of at least 50 Proud Boys and other Trump supporters to enter and occupy each building, “causing trouble” for security personnel who tried to stop them.Once inside, the instructions stated, the activists would be encouraged to chant slogans such as “We the People” and “No Trump, no America”. Supporters unable to gain access to the buildings would be encouraged to distract law enforcement and other authorities by “pulling fire alarms at nearby stores, hotels and museums”.In the days before 6 January, Proud Boys were to undertake reconnaissance of roads near the seven buildings, looking out for roadblocks and other obstacles.Questions remain over the origin of the document and whether Tarrio, 38, shared it with any of the individuals charged alongside him.They are Ethan Nordean, 31, of Auburn, Washington; Joseph Biggs, 38, of Ormond Beach, Florida; Zachary Rehl, 36, of Philadelphia; Charles Donohoe, 34, of Kernersville, North Carolina; and Dominic Pezzola, 44, of Rochester, New York.But its existence lends context to the US justice department’s decision to charge Tarrio with conspiracy, even though he was not in Washington on the day of the riot.According to the indictment, Tarrio “nonetheless continued to direct and encourage the Proud Boys prior to and during the events of 6 January 2021” and later “claimed credit for what had happened on social media and in an encrypted chat room during and after the attack”.Tarrio has denied involvement in planning the riot. His lawyer, Nayib Hassan, declined comment to the Times.More than 770 people have been charged in connection with the Capitol riot, at least 30 members of the Proud Boys, court records show.Tarrio, from Miami, recently stood down as chair of the group, after being sentenced last year to five months in prison for burning a Black Lives Matter banner and unlawfully bringing weapons to a Washington protest.He was also exposed last year as a long-time informant for the FBI and local law enforcement agencies.TopicsUS Capitol attackThe far rightUS politicsUS crimeDonald TrumpnewsReuse this content More

    • 175 Shares109 Views

      in Elections

      Mug shot: Republican Josh Hawley told to stop using January 6 fist salute photo

      by

      Mug shot: Republican Josh Hawley told to stop using January 6 fist salute photoThe mug featured prominently on Hawley’s website on Tuesday despite a cease and desist letter issued by Politico The Republican senator Josh Hawley must stop using an infamous picture of him raising his fist to protesters at the US Capitol on January 6 on campaign merchandise, the news site Politico said.Trump accused of campaign finance violations in FEC complaintRead moreThe shot was taken on 6 January 2021 as Hawley, from Missouri, made his way into the Capitol for the certification of electoral college results in Joe Biden’s victory over Donald Trump.Supporters Trump told to “fight like hell” in defense of his lie about electoral fraud attacked the Capitol. The attempt to stop certification failed but Hawley was one of 147 Republicans to lodge objections regardless.A bipartisan Senate report connected seven deaths to the riot. Trump was impeached.12:30PM: Senator Josh Hawley pumps his fist at pro-Trump crowd gathered at the east side of the Capitol before heading into the joint session of Congress. #Jan6NeverAgain #TheBigLie pic.twitter.com/rEFsfLY4x9— The Lincoln Project (@ProjectLincoln) April 16, 2021
      In February, Hawley’s campaign started selling $20 mugs featuring the picture, with the caption “Show-Me Strong”, a play on Missouri’s “Show-Me State” nickname.The picture was taken by E&E News, which Politico bought in December. On Monday, Politico said it had sent a cease and desist letter and said: “We do not authorize [the picture’s] use by the Hawley campaign for the purpose of political fundraising, which the campaign has been put on notice of by legal counsel.“We are eagerly awaiting a response, but in the interim again respectfully ask that the campaign immediately cease and desist unauthorized use of the image.”A spokesperson for Hawley said: “We haven’t received any correspondence from Politico or anyone else, but we are in full compliance with the law. Perhaps Politico can show us the correspondence they sent to the many liberal groups who also used the photo.”Politico has allowed the Associated Press to use the photograph for editorial purposes.On Tuesday morning, the mug featured on the front of Hawley’s website.As reported by E&E News, a fundraising email in February said: “Liberals are so easily triggered, and this new mug is really whipping the left into a frenzy!”It also said the mug was “the perfect way to enjoy coffee, tea, or liberal tears! Check it out below, and order one for yourself or any woke friend or family member that you want to trigger!”Hawley told the Huffington Post: “It is not a pro-riot mug. This was not me encouraging rioters.”He also said he was not condoning violence when he raised his fist.“At the time that we were out there,” he said, “folks were gathered peacefully to protest, and they have a right to do that. They do not have a right to assault cops.”Hawley was widely criticised for the gesture, and in the aftermath of the riot saw Simon & Schuster cancel plans to publish his book.Josh Hawley attacks ‘woke capitalism’ and claims to be victim of cancel cultureRead moreIn the book, The Tyranny of Big Tech, Hawley said he had been “branded a ‘seditionist’ and worse. But like many others attacked by the corporations and the left, my real crime was to have challenged the reign of the woke capitalists”.Responding to a Guardian report, he wrote: “Oh dear. I’ve offended the delicate sensibilities of the Guardian! I didn’t get their approval before I wrote my book. Order a copy today and own the libs.”The book was released by a rightwing imprint distributed by Simon & Schuster.As the Guardian reported, according to public financial disclosure records, Hawley turned out to have “invested potentially tens of thousands of dollars in the very companies he denounces”.TopicsUS Capitol attackRepublicansnewsReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Ginni Thomas, wife of Clarence Thomas, attended rally preceding Capitol attack

      by

      Ginni Thomas, wife of Clarence Thomas, attended rally preceding Capitol attackConservative activist who runs a political lobbying firm, says she briefly attended rally but left before Trump addressed crowd Virginia “Ginni” Thomas, wife of the supreme court justice Clarence Thomas, has admitted attending a rally which preceded the January 6 attack on the US Capitol but denied helping to plan it.Critics accuse CPAC of becoming pay-to-play as Trump loyalists gain powerRead moreIn an interview with the Washington Free Beacon, Thomas, a conservative activist who runs a political lobbying firm, said she briefly attended the rally near the White House on 6 January 2021 but left before Donald Trump addressed the crowd.Trump used his address to tell supporters to “fight like hell” in support of his lie that his defeat by Joe Biden was the result of electoral fraud. A bipartisan Senate report said seven deaths were connected to the assault on Congress which followed.Thomas said brief attendance at the rally was the full extent of her involvement.“I was disappointed and frustrated that there was violence that happened following a peaceful gathering of Trump supporters on the Ellipse on 6 January,” she told the Free Beacon, a conservative site.Investigations by the New York Times and the New Yorker have raised questions about Thomas’s ties to organizers of the January 6 rally.According to the Times, Thomas sits on the board of a rightwing group that circulated “action steps” after the 2020 election, in an attempt to keep Trump in power.One of the organizers of the rally told the Times Thomas was a peacekeeper between various factions. Thomas denied those allegations.“I played no role with those who were planning and leading the 6 January events,” she said.The Times told the Free Beacon it stood by its “fair and accurate” reporting.Thomas, who has been involved in conservative activism for decades, also categorically rejected any suggestion her political activities present a conflict of interest for her husband. Some judicial ethics experts have called on Clarence Thomas to recuse himself from cases involving causes with which his wife has been involved.However, Ginni Thomas’s comments on the morning of 6 January only intensified questions about her husband’s possible conflicts of interest.In a series of Facebook posts that are no longer visible, Thomas said “LOVE MAGA people!!!!” and “GOD BLESS EACH OF YOU STANDING UP or PRAYING!”She later added a note that the posts were written before the attack on the Capitol, according to Slate.Clarence Thomas: supreme court could be ‘compromised’ by politicsRead moreThomas has insisted her activism has no bearing on her husband’s rulings, saying they have kept their careers separate since he was confirmed in 1991.“Like so many married couples, we share many of the same ideals, principles and aspirations for America,” Thomas told the Free Beacon. “But we have our own separate careers and our own ideas and opinions too. Clarence doesn’t discuss his work with me and I don’t involve him in my work.”Justice Thomas’s critics will closely scrutinize his work related to the Capitol attack.In January, he provided an early hint about his opinion of efforts to investigate January 6. The supreme court rejected Trump’s request to stop a House select committee accessing his White House records.Only one justice dissented: Clarence Thomas.TopicsClarence ThomasUS supreme courtLaw (US)US politicsUS Capitol attacknewsReuse this content More

    • 113 Shares149 Views

      in US Politics

      Likelihood of criminal charges against Trump rising, experts say

      by

      Likelihood of criminal charges against Trump rising, experts saySome ex-prosecutors call on DoJ to accelerate investigation after House panel’s allegations Trump broke laws to overturn election The likelihood of a criminal investigation and charges against Donald Trump are rising due to allegations by a House panel of a “criminal conspiracy” involving his aggressive drive to overturn the 2020 election results, coupled with a justice department (DoJ) inquiry of a “false electors” scheme Trump loyalists devised to block Joe Biden’s election.Former federal prosecutors say evidence is mounting of criminal conduct by Trump that may yield charges against the ex- president for obstructing an official proceeding of Congress on 6 January or defrauding the US government, stemming from his weeks-long drive with top allies to thwart Biden’s election by pushing false claims of fraud.Trump lawyer knew plan to delay Biden certification was unlawful, emails showRead moreA 2 March court filing by the House January 6 panel implicated Trump in a “criminal conspiracy” to block Congress from certifying Biden’s win, and Trump faces legal threats from justice department investigations under way into a “false electors” ploy, and seditious conspiracy charges filed against Oath Keepers who attacked the Capitol, say department veterans.The filing by the House panel investigating the 6 January assault on the Capitol by a mob of pro-Trump supporters stated that it has “a good-faith basis for concluding that the president and members of his campaign engaged in a criminal conspiracy to defraud the United States”.The panel’s hard-hitting findings about Trump’s criminal schemes were contained in a federal court filing involving top Trump lawyer John Eastman, who has fought on attorney client privilege grounds turning over a large cache of documents including emails sought by the committee.Back in January, the deputy attorney general, Lisa Monaco, also revealed a criminal investigation was being launched into a far reaching scheme in seven states that Biden won which was reportedly overseen by Trump’s ex-lawyer Rudy Giuliani to replace legitimate electors with false ones pledged to Trump.But the House panel’s blockbuster allegations that Trump broke laws to overturn the election have prompted some ex-prosecutors to call on the justice department to quickly accelerate its investigations to focus on the multiple avenues that Trump used to nullify the election results in tandem with top allies like Giuliani.“The compelling evidence of criminal activity by Trump revealed by the committee in its recent 61-page court filing should spur DoJ to act expeditiously,” Paul Pelletier, a former acting chief of DoJ’s fraud section, told the Guardian.“Given the gravity of the revelations, the department should consider a strike force or even a special counsel to coalesce sufficient resources to focus on these criminal attacks that strike at the heart of our democracy,” Pelletier added. “There is no time to waste now that the House committee has provided the clearest view yet into how Trump and his campaign apparently schemed to upend our democracy.”Other ex-prosecutors say the House panel and the justice department seem poised to increase legal heat on Trump.“A pincer-movement is emerging in the January 6 investigations of those who conspired to overturn the election,” said Dennis Aftergut, a former federal prosecutor. “The justice department and the House select committee investigating the Capitol siege have turned up the heat on Trump’s inner circle that could ensnare Trump himself.”Trump and his lawyers have fought unsuccessfully to keep White House records from the panel on executive privilege grounds, and Trump last month sparked strong criticism by calling for massive protests in DC, Atlanta and New York if “vicious” and “racist” prosecutors in those cities probing his political and business activities “do anything illegal”.Former prosecutors note that the justice department has at least two key criminal investigations under way that could be instrumental in bringing criminal charges against Trump himself.The criminal inquiry into “false electors” came after referrals by state attorneys general in Michigan and New Mexico where phony slates of electors were assembled with help from the Trump campaign and key loyalists like Giuliani who has also been subpoenaed by the House panel to testify and provide documents.In addition, the department announced this month it struck a plea deal with one of about a dozen Oath Keepers who had been charged with seditious conspiracy for the attack on Congress on 6 January aimed at disrupting Biden’s certification.Further in another legal track threatening Trump, a special grand jury in Georgia has been convened by the Fulton county district attorney to investigate Trump’s high-pressure call to the Georgia secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger, on 2 January urging him to “find” 11,780 votes to overturn Biden’s win in the state.These federal and state investigations could gain momentum given the House panel’s allegations that Trump and his campaign engaged in a criminal conspiracy to block Biden from taking office. Some ex-prosecutors say the panel’s detailed allegations could lead to a criminal referral to the justice department that prosecutors would probably examine seriously.“The committee’s sworn, evidence-based allegation that former president Trump conspired to overturn the election sends an unmistakable message,” Aftergut said. “The train heading toward a criminal referral to the DoJ is leaving the station.”Aftergut in a 9 March Washington Post op-ed co written with Harvard Law professor Laurence Tribe called for the attorney general, Merrick Garland, to name a special counsel to lead a Trump related-investigation as the best way to reassure the country that “justice is non-partisan, and fears of political fallout will not determine the decision on whether to bring charges”.Other former prosecutors say the House panel’s 2 March evidence that Trump broke laws in a criminal conspiracy, coupled with the justice department investigations that are moving forward, could fuel criminal charges against Trump and his top allies.“The seditious conspiracy charges and the newly announced investigation of fake electors indicate that the government is increasingly investigating more serious and significant charges above and beyond the violent events of the day,” said Paul Rosenzweig, a former federal prosecutor who worked on Ken Starr’s team during the impeachment of Bill Clinton.“These developments, along with the ongoing investigation of Trump confidants like Rudy Giuliani, suggest that more charges are likely,” Rosenzweig added. “I assume that as part of the ongoing investigation into January 6, the department already has a dedicated task force looking into potential criminal charges against Trump and his top loyalists. If they do not, they should.”Aftergut said that the House panel had amassed substantial evidence that should benefit prosecutors investigating criminal charges against Trump. “In the course of interviewing more than 600 witnesses, the committee has developed a mountain of evidence that could greatly enhance prosecutors’ efforts,” he said.TopicsDonald TrumpUS Capitol attackUS politicsnewsReuse this content More