WASHINGTON – The explosive testimony of a former Trump White House aide Tuesday may have increased the likelihood of new prosecutions stemming from the Capitol attack, but it also exposed ongoing conflicts between the Department of Justice and congressional investigators.
The federal prosecutors working on the case watched the assistant’s appearance before the House Committee investigating the January 6, 2021 riot, and were equally surprised by her version of former President Donald J. Trump’s increasingly desperate attempt to stay in power. than other viewers. The panel, according to several officials, did not provide them in advance with videos or transcripts of her interviews on tape with committee members, which left them blind.
The testimony of the assistant, Cassidy Hutchinson, given to Mr. Trump’s last chief of staff, Mark Meadows, has come at a critical moment in parallel investigations that will soon converge, and possibly clash, while the committee concludes a public inquiry aimed at maximizing political impact and intensifying the department ‘ a high-interest investigation aimed at securing airtight convictions.
Committee members have repeatedly suggested that Attorney General Merrick B. Garland did not move fast enough to follow up on their investigative clues. But for reasons not entirely clear – classic Washington bureaucratic territorialism, the department’s unwillingness to share information or the desire to run a successful public forum – members opposed turning over hundreds of transcripts until they were done. is with their work.
Senior Justice Department officials say they have delayed their investigation. Me. Hutchinson’s name has not yet appeared on subpoenas and other court documents related to their investigation into the attempt to overthrow the 2020 election, and it appeared she was not a primary witness before the trials.
The committee and its supporters say its independence has enabled it to create an investigative roadmap for the department’s subsequent inquiries, even as members remain divided over whether to make an official criminal referral to Mr. Garland must make.
“It is fair to view this series of most recent hearings as a slow-motion reference in light of behaviors that warrant at least criminal investigation and potential prosecution,” said David H. Laufman, a former federal prosecutor and senior official of the Department of Justice. “They did not hold anything back.”
At each of its hearings this month, the panel provided evidence that members believe could be used to bolster a criminal investigation. The committee has provided new details on issues that could be built around a conspiracy to oust the American people and Mr. To defraud Trump’s own donors, as well as plans to submit false voter lists to the National Archives and obstruct an official proceedings of Congress.
During its hearing on Tuesday, the committee set out how Mr. Trump warned in advance of violence, allowed a crowd of his loyalists to attack the Capitol and in fact agreed with what they were doing.
A person familiar with the panel’s work said Representative Liz Cheney, Republican of Wyoming and vice chair of the committee, had a leading role in overseeing the team that Mr. Trump’s inner circle investigated and was instrumental in organizing the surprise trial with Ms. Hutchinson.
Over the past month, the committee has aired hours of testimony – nothing more significant than Ms. Hutchinson’s account of Mr. Trump’s actions on the day of the attack – which legal experts believe a possible criminal case against Mr. Trump stepped up for inciting the crowd. or trying to impede the special session of Congress.
This in turn put the already intense pressure on Mr. Garland and his top assistants increase. The now well-known meme – admonishes mr. Garland to do his “job” by mr. Trump’s accusation – started appearing on social media even before me. Hutchinson left the trial room.
“We need some action from the DOJ, and we need it now,” Arizona Democrat Representative Ruben Gallego said in an interview. “We are now in a time crisis. Every day that these criminals walk free is another day in which they evade justice. As we get closer to the midterm elections, I’m afraid of failing to act, will only empower the Republican Republicans more if they take power. ”
In turn, members of the committee repeatedly and publicly demanded that Mr. Garland should do more, even if the panel denied the Justice Department access to his transcripts. A committee spokesman said the panel was negotiating with the Justice Department and could return his transcripts as early as July when he completed his public hearings.
“I have yet to see any indication that the former president is being investigated himself,” California Rep. Adam B. Schiff, a member of the committee, said recently on “Meet The Press” on NBC, adding: ” It is not a difficult decision to investigate when there is evidence in front of you. ”
This followed a steady drum beat of similar statements by members of the panel who encouraged the Department of Justice to Investigate Trump and charge his allies who will not cooperate with the committee’s investigation.
Mr. Garland and his top advisers have repeatedly refused to comment on the details of their investigations, except to say they will follow wherever the evidence leads them. His spokesman had no comment on Ms. Hutchinson’s testimony and what it meant for the Justice Department’s work.
The panel has openly debated over the past few weeks whether to increase additional pressure on the department by issuing a criminal reference at the end of its investigation.
After Mississippi Democrat Representative Bennie Thompson and the committee’s chairperson indicated to reporters on Capitol Hill that the panel was unlikely to do so, other members, including Mr. Schiff and me. Cheney, that claim is quickly disputed.
“The Select Committee of January 6 did not draw a conclusion on potential criminal references,” she said. Cheney wrote on Twitter this month. “We will announce a decision on this at an appropriate time.”
Key revelations of the January 6 hearings
The panel also suggested that Mr. Trump and unnamed people close to him were involved in the inappropriate influence of witnesses.
Its members suggested, for example, that the former president may have swung Representative Kevin McCarthy, the House Republican leader, when he refused to cooperate with the investigation.
Me. Cheney on Tuesday showed what she said were two examples of unnamed Trump associates trying to influence witnesses. One witness was told to “protect” certain individuals to “remain in good grace in Trump World.” In the other case, a witness was encouraged to remain “loyal”.
“Most people know that trying to influence witnesses to testify falsely presents very serious concerns,” she said. Cheney said. “We will discuss these issues as a committee and carefully consider our next steps.”
According to Punchbowl News, Ms Hutchinson received such a warning. A person familiar with the committee’s investigation confirmed this version. Her lawyer did not respond to a request for comment.
The allegations were reminiscent of other questions that arose about Mr. Trump and his allies’ use of intimidation to stop witnesses from killing Mr. To imply Trump.
During the Russia investigation, Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer, John Dowd, made a pardon to Mr. Trump’s former national security adviser, Michael T. Flynn, has been hanged.
Mr. Trump later called Mr. Flynn pardoned after he stopped working with investigators. Mr. Trump himself had similar assignments made to his personal lawyer and fixer, Michael D. Cohen.