Posted on 12/24/2022 11:02:40 AM PST by SoConPubbie
In what is considered a historic move, the Jan. 6 select House committee this week voted to send a criminal referral to the U.S. Department of Justice concerning former President Donald Trump and the role the committee believed he played in sparking the Capitol incursion on Jan. 6, 2021.
According to CNBC, in a unanimous vote Monday, the committee determined that it believes ample evidence exists for an investigation and potential criminal action against the former president for “obstructing an official proceeding, conspiracy to defraud the government, making knowingly and willfully materially false statements to the federal government, and inciting or assisting an insurrection.”
However, it appears that reasonable people on both sides of the political aisle believe the criminal referral isn’t worth the paper it was written on.
Michael Tracey, a left-leaning writer, wrote a lengthy Twitter thread regarding why he believes the committee’s referral to the DOJ isn’t what many believe it to be. And he didn’t hold anything back in the process.
“What’s being called a “criminal referral” by the Jan 6 committee carries just as much legal weight as a letter written in magic marker by Bozo the Clown. Has no basis at all in any statute or House rule, they just put out a Word document and made up a serious-sounding name for it,” Tracey’s tweet thread began.
What’s being called a “criminal referral” by the Jan 6 committee carries just as much legal weight as a letter written in magic marker by Bozo the Clown. Has no basis at all in any statute or House rule, they just put out a Word document and made up a serious-sounding name for it
— Michael Tracey (@mtracey) December 19, 2022
(Excerpt) Read more at westernjournal.com ...
They didn’t even attempt to invoke the one statutory authority they do potentially have at their disposal, the criminal contempt statute (2 USC § 194). So they just wrote their equivalent of a long Substack screed, and hoped the phrase “criminal referral” would get people excited
It’s all hate. The Rats couldn’t find anything real so they punted to the DOJ to see if they could find something.
“conspiracy to defraud the government, making knowingly and willfully materially false statements to the federal government”
Idiots, at that time Trump WAS the gov’t. So he lied against himself.
Read the Republican’s full report here, proving Pelosi was the one responsible for the breach and it was all a set up....in other words, what the “tens-of-millions-of-dollars” sham committee neglected to tell us.......https://justthenews.com/government/congress/pelosis-jan-6-story-unravels-evidence-mounts-capitol-breach-was-preventable?fbclid=IwAR30SQrwhI7BlgiZ9m8cS5xyWj6ze9aAph-an0nRY8MPzQf_f2sL3H-6fls
But it accomplished their mission, it got Trump out of the picture.
More readable version of twitter thread https://en.rattibha.com/thread/1605004049694457856
“ According to CNBC, in a unanimous vote Monday, the committee determined that it believes ample evidence exists for an investigation and potential criminal action against the former president for “obstructing an official proceeding, conspiracy to defraud the government, making knowingly and willfully materially false statements to the federal government, and inciting or assisting an insurrection.””
They are aware that all they have to do is present the evidence and its game, set and match? I really don’t see what the issue is. Present the hard evidence to authorities, they’ll get the warrants, indictments and whatever to put Trump in prison. And destroy the Republican Party and the foundation of this great country forever. Game. Set. Match.
“It only took six years to determine that there is “ample evidence” to proceed with “further investigating” Trump for potential crimes.”
Every Republican should have run that ad in November with the tagline, “if you buy this BS, you may be a Democrat.
How so?
Merry Christmas.
Why do writers completely quote a Tweet just before they duplicate the text by pasting the original Tweet?
I just know from talking to a lot of former Trump supporters who are finished with him. And I mean they used to love the guy. It shook me up to hear them say that.
Now I will say, if they are foolish enough to try to actually arrest Trump or something like that, you may see a lot of those people reconsider.
1. vicious lies against him in 2016 election campaign
2. totally unfounded first impeachment farce of a show
3. totally unfounded second impeachment farce show
4. totally unfounded “criminal” charge (without a single actual law being cited) now
and so it goes.
the DemoNaziCommies have so thoroughly denigrated and polluted our public square and mass media with their gross and disgusting lies that they’ve rendered any kind of genuine “democracy” or election process impossible.
Which, of course, has been their scheme all along.
Someone is giving the 1/6 gaggle way too much credit.
🎅🤶👍❄
It’s the 64K question I’ve been pondering as well!
It’s the 64K question I’ve been pondering as well!
The lot of them should be hanged, drawn and quartered.
Display their heads on the Capitol steps as a reminder to all
that nonsensical lawsuits are not to be brought upon persons who the “Committee” dislike.
Butt, the question is down to about $20k in value now.
🎅🤶❄👍
“making knowingly and willfully materially false statements to the federal government”
Isn’t that EXACTLY what Schiff did to create the whole false Russian influence investigation in the first place?
What about Hunter lying about his illegal drug use on the federal form?
etc, etc.
I saw “Magic Marker” and thought it was going to be a screed about the democrats wanting to impeach Trump when he used a marker to draw a hurricane path on a weather map.
I truly believe that if the DOJ files criminal charges against Trump he will immediately go to the USSC, which has original authority to consider matters of constitutional questions, and argue that the Federal Government had its chance to convict him on all of the alleged charges during the impeachment trial II and failed to obtain a conviction.
Thus, any indictment on the same or similar/associated charges are forbidden by the constitution under double jeopardy. The claims are that the events claimed in any “indictment” occurred while he was still in office and were charged, in the form of impeachment, prior to his exiting office, (even though the trial was held post presidency), and that the constitutionally proscribed method of dealing with those charges was the trial in the Senate, which occurred and a not guilty verdict rendered.
The Government may argue that they did not have all the evidence before the impeachment and that the impeachment had to happen before he left office, but I think the court will tell them that, if that is true, then they, (congress/house), should have waited until later, (after he left office), to have an investigation done to determine the facts instead of going to trial without the needed evidence to prove their case.
It is not the defendants responsibility to provide the state with the evidence they claim to need to prove their case, (except for subpoenas lawfully issued), but it is their responsibility to have their case ready for trial prior to filing the charges and going to trial.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.