WASHINGTON – The explosive testimony of a former Trump aide at the White House on Tuesday may have increased the likelihood of new prosecutions stemming from the attack on the Capitol, but also revealed ongoing conflicts between the Department of Justice and Congressional investigators.
Federal prosecutors working on the case watched the aide appear before a House of Representatives committee investigating the January 6, 2021 riot, and were equally amazed by her account of the increasingly desperate experience of former President Donald J. Trump to retain power, as well as other viewers. According to several officials, the committee did not provide them with videos or transcripts of her recorded interviews with committee members, making them feel blinded.
The testimony of Assistant Cassidy Hutchinson, who works for Mr Trump’s last chief of staff, Mark Meadows, came at a critical time in parallel investigations that will soon converge and are likely to collide as the commission completes a public inquiry into maximum political effect and the department is stepping up a high-stakes investigation aimed at securing convictions.
Members of the commission have repeatedly suggested that Attorney General Merrick B. Garland was not moving fast enough to follow their trail. But for reasons that aren’t entirely clear – classic bureaucratic territorialism in Washington, the department’s reluctance to share information or its desire to organize a successful public forum – members are reluctant to hand over hundreds of transcripts until they’re done.
Senior Justice Ministry officials say this has delayed their investigation. Ms. Hutchinson’s name has not yet appeared in subpoenas and other court documents related to their investigation into the cancellation efforts in the 2020 elections, and she does not appear to have been a key witness before the hearings.
The Commission and its supporters say its independence has allowed it to set up a roadmap for investigations into the department’s subsequent investigations, even if members remain divided over whether to make a formal criminal complaint against Mr Garland.
“It is fair to view this series of recent hearings as referring to a delayed cadence in terms of conduct that guarantees the least criminal investigation and potential prosecution,” said David H. Laufman, a former federal prosecutor and senior ministry official. justice. “They didn’t keep anything.”
At each of its hearings this month, the commission presents evidence that members believe could be used to step up a criminal investigation. The commission has provided new details on cases that could be built around a conspiracy to defraud the American people and Mr Trump’s own donors, as well as plans to present fake voter lists to the National Archives and obstruct the formal congressional process.
At Tuesday’s hearing, the commission set out how Mr. Trump warned of violence, allowed a mob of his faithful to attack the Capitol, and actually agreed to what they were doing.
A person familiar with the commission’s work said Liz Cheney, a Republican from Wyoming and vice president of the commission, had taken the lead in overseeing the team investigating Mr. Trump’s inner circle and had played an important role in organizing at the surprise hearing with Mrs Hutchinson.
Over the past month, the commission has leaked hours of testimony – no more significant than Ms. Hutchinson’s account of Mr Trump’s actions on the day of the attack – which legal experts believe has backed a potential criminal case against Mr Trump for inciting the crowd or trying to disrupt a special session of Congress.
This in turn escalates the already intense pressure on Mr Garland and his top aides. The now-familiar meme – urging Mr Garland to do his “job” by accusing Mr Trump – began appearing on social media before Ms Hutchinson left the hearing room.
“We need some action from the Department of Justice and we need it now,” said spokesman Ruben Galego, an Arizona Democrat. “We are in a time crisis now. Every day these criminals are released is another day in which they evade justice. As we approach the midterm elections, I fear that inaction will only give more power to Republicans who are allies if they take power. “
For their part, committee members have repeatedly and publicly called on Mr Garland to do more, although the committee has denied the Ministry of Justice access to his transcripts. (A spokesman for the commission said the commission was negotiating with the Ministry of Justice and could submit its transcripts as early as July, when it closed its public hearings.)
“I still haven’t seen any signs that the former president himself is under investigation,” said Adam B. Schiff, a Democrat from California and a member of the NBC’s Meet The Press committee, adding: “It’s not a difficult decision to investigate. when there is evidence before you. “
This was followed by a constant drumbeat from similar statements by committee members calling on the Justice Department to investigate Mr Trump and to accuse his allies of not cooperating in the commission’s investigation.
Mr Garland and his senior advisers have repeatedly declined to comment on the details of their investigations, except to say they will follow him wherever the evidence leads. His spokesman did not comment on Ms. Hutchinson’s testimony and what it meant for the work of the Department of Justice.
In recent weeks, the commission has been openly discussing whether it should step up further pressure on the department by issuing a criminal reference at the end of the investigation.
After Representative Benny Thompson, a Mississippi Democrat and chairman of the committee, told Capitol Hill reporters that the group was unlikely to do so, other members, including Mr. Schiff and Ms. Cheney, quickly challenged the claim.
“The election committee did not issue a conclusion on potential crimes on January 6,” Ms. Cheney wrote on Twitter this month. “We will announce a decision on this at an appropriate time.”
Key revelations from the January 6 hearings
The Commission also alleges that Mr Trump and unnamed people close to him have been implicated in improperly influencing witnesses.
Its members speculate, for example, that the former president may have influenced MP Kevin McCarthy, a Republican leader in the House of Representatives, when he refused to cooperate with the investigation.
On Tuesday, Ms. Cheney showed two examples of unnamed Trump aides trying to influence witnesses. One witness was told to “protect” certain people in order to “remain in good graces in the world of Trump.” In the other case, a witness was encouraged to remain “loyal”.
“Most people know that trying to persuade witnesses to testify falsely is a very serious concern,” Ms Cheney said. “We will discuss these issues as a committee and we will carefully consider our next steps.
According to Punchbowl News, Ms. Hutchinson received such a warning. A person familiar with the commission’s investigation confirmed this account. Her lawyer did not respond to a message with a request for comment.
The allegations are reminiscent of other issues that have arisen about the use of intimidation by Mr. Trump and his allies to prevent witnesses from involving Mr. Trump.
During the investigation in Russia, Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer, John Dowd, pardoned Mr. Trump’s former national security adviser, Michael T. Flynn.
Trump later pardoned Mr. Flynn after he stopped cooperating with investigators. Mr Trump himself has taken similar initiatives with his personal lawyer and mediator, Michael D. Cohen.
Add Comment