• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Jan. 6 panel to vote on urging DOJ to prosecute Trump on at least three criminal charges

poweRob

USMC 1988-1996
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 18, 2011
Messages
88,714
Reaction score
65,726
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Socialist
Vote is on Monday.

Jan. 6 panel to vote on urging DOJ to prosecute Trump on at least 3 criminal charges

The report that the select panel is expected to consider Monday afternoon reflects some recommendations from a subcommittee that evaluated potential referrals.
www.politico.com

The Jan. 6 select committee is preparing to vote on urging the Justice Department to pursue at least three criminal charges against former President Donald Trump, including insurrection.

The report that the select panel is expected to consider on Monday afternoon, described to POLITICO by two people familiar with its contents, reflects some recommendations from a subcommittee that evaluated potential criminal referrals. Among the charges that subcommittee proposes for Trump: 18 U.S.C. 2383, insurrection; 18 U.S.C. 1512(c), obstruction of an official proceeding; and 18 U.S.C. 371, conspiracy to defraud the United States government.
 
I think they should vote to refer TFG - -put some pressure on the DOJ to move a little quicker
 
What are the odds of a really impartial jury for a trial?

If convicted, would the Secret Service accompany him to jail for protection?
 
prometeus said:
What are the odds of a really impartial jury for a trial?

If convicted, would the Secret Service accompany him to jail for protection?
Click to expand...
Although I don't think a jury will be a problem, he won't get actual jail time if convicted. He'll get that felony record along with house arrest. No way the SS would ever deal with him in a jail. I would also hope the senate would take up a resolution to prevent him from ever holding a political office again.

Case closed.
 
The AntiDonald said:
Although I don't think a jury will be a problem
Click to expand...
Why? It only takes one and there are lots of them.
I agree with that.
 
prometeus said:
What are the odds of a really impartial jury for a trial?

If convicted, would the Secret Service accompany him to jail for protection?
Click to expand...

In a large part of the world, he would have been strung up on the noose his mob brought.
 
prometeus said:
What are the odds of a really impartial jury for a trial?

If convicted, would the Secret Service accompany him to jail for protection?
Click to expand...
Some of them should be headed to prison anyway on their own for illegally destroying documents if you recall. Destroying all those texts after being instructed not to.
 
Based on what everyone knows, how could they not?
 

You beat me to the punch here in posting this, saving me the effort.

So now, what will be Monday's vote? I'm thinking with a Dem majority it's going to pass Committee.
 
prometeus said:
Why? It only takes one and there are lots of them.

I agree with that.
Click to expand...
Based on the conviction rate of juries related to 1-6, convincing a jury won't be a problem. Unless he gets a change of venue to Alabama. No judge has allowed that yet. And as far as I can tell, the conviction rates have been around 100%.
 
Chomsky said:
You beat me to the punch here in posting this, saving me the effort.

So now, what will be Monday's vote? I'm thinking with a Dem majority it's going to pass Committee.
Click to expand...
I'm wondering what Garland will do with it when he gets it.
 
Chomsky said:
You beat me to the punch here in posting this, saving me the effort.

So now, what will be Monday's vote? I'm thinking with a Dem majority it's going to pass Committee.
Click to expand...
Do you really have doubts about the outcome of the vote?
 
MaryP said:
I'm wondering what Garland will do with it when he gets it.
Click to expand...
Garland will be unswayed by the J-6 committee. This is more for the official record than the first step in Trump's prosecution. The man that has the most sway in all of this is Jack Smith. The DoJ will likely pursue the course he recommends.
 
The same goofs who impeached him twice. Gosh I wonder what they are going to do?
The last gasp of the dog and pony show!! A panel formed for one purpose... Get Trump!

Oh bye bye Cheney and Kinzinger. Your 15 minutes of fame are over!





 
upsideguy said:
Garland will be unswayed by the J-6 committee. This is more for the official record than the first step in Trump's prosecution. The man that has the most sway in all of this is Jack Smith. The DoJ will likely pursue the course he recommends.
Click to expand...

I would hope for the bolded.

Straight-up, I think Smith is no-nonsense and will pursue if the the evidence is there. I can't say I feel as confident in Garland signing-off on it.
 
MaryP said:
I'm wondering what Garland will do with it when he gets it.
Click to expand...
I imagine he'll hand it all off to Jack Smith and let him work with it. In the end, I believe Garland will abide by Smith's prosecutorial decisions. He may make some adjustments, but Trump is getting charged with crimes. No way he can slide on this.
 

Say what you want, those Committee hearings this summer played a part in Trump's midterm losses, which precipitated his current slide within his party.

So in political terms, the Committee may have been pivotal.
 
Chomsky said:
I would hope for the bolded.

Straight-up, I think Smith is no-nonsense and will pursue if the the evidence is there. I can't say I feel as confident in Garland signing-off on it.
Click to expand...
Garland will have no choice. Smith provides both the political and legal cover for his hesitancy. He will have done his homework.
 
Color me surprised.
 
Impeachment is a political process, not a legal one. The fact he was "acquitted" does not mean anything other than his supporters had more votes than his detractors: meaningless. Remember, in the 2nd impeachment, even those that voted to acquit said he was guilty.


Trump now faces legal consequences for his actions, not because the J6 committee says so, but because not on one or two or even three independent criminal investigations (at least five of them) will demand it. He is a private citizen now, without the power to have his people take care of things. There is no William Barr to deflect through summary memos that fail fairly represent an investigation; to sweep things under the rug. No, he is on his own to face the music.

As to the impeachments, again, they are political matters. They were righteous pursuits with plenty of foundation. They shall remain on the record for historians and history to judge. The fact that the Republicans lacked the political will do the right thing is all we saw. Actually, the Republicans were fools not to convict in the 2nd impeachment. They would have well ridded the party of this cancer had they acted then. Now, they face the consequences of their foolishness in 2024, which will likely cost them White House.
 
Last edited:
upsideguy said:
Garland will have no choice. Smith provides both the political and legal cover for his hesitancy. He will have done his homework.
Click to expand...

Garland always has a choice. So 'no', I won't try to predict him.

But if he does greenlight prosecution, 'yes' Smith will provide political cover. But more importantly, Smith will determine if the evidence is there!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…