November 23, 2022

The 1/6 Committee answered to Peter Navarro’s accusation of contempt of Congress by way of asking why Mark Meadows was once additionally now not charged.

Committee needs solutions from 1/6 Merrick Garland

This was once mentioned by way of Committee Chairman Benny Thompson (D-MS) and Vice President Liz Cheney (R-WY). joint observation:

Whilst nowadays’s indictment of Peter Navarro was once the proper choice of the Justice Division, we discover the verdict to praise Mark Meadows and Dan Scavino for his or her relentless attack at the rule of legislation. Mr. Meadows and Mr. Scavino are indisputably neatly conscious about President Trump’s function within the 2020 election and efforts to forestall the occasions of January sixth. We are hoping that the dep. will deliver extra readability to this factor.

If the dep.’s place is that one or either one of those people are utterly exempt from talking ahead of Congress as a result of their former positions within the Trump management, then that factor is the focal point of the approaching trial. Because the District Court docket’s variety committee mentioned, Mark Meadows’ declare that he’s eligible for complete immunity, in accordance with memos from the Place of work of Felony Recommend on the Division of Justice, is fake or false. no person is above the legislation.

Why wasn’t Mark Meadows charged?

In Meadows’ case, the Justice Division seems to be fascinated with Trump’s declare of govt privileges from his former leader of group of workers, however govt privileges duvet criminality. This isn’t a jail unlock card.

Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro are miniature culmination of those that were prosecuted. There are robust arguments in choose of a in charge verdict of contempt for either one of them.

On the other hand, the circumstances of Mark Meadows and Dan Scavino constitute extra essential problems associated with the reaffirmation of the ability of Congress and the truth that no person is above the legislation.

Legal professional Basic Garland and the DOJ want to give an explanation for one thing to Committee 1/6 as a result of what is going on with referrals does not make sense.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *