GOING TO PRISON? Jan. 6 Committee Says It Has Evidence of Trump Crimes

22
FILE - Violent insurrectionists loyal to President Donald Trump stand outside the U.S. Capitol in Washington on Jan. 6, 2021. The public hearings of the House committee investigating the insurrection pose a challenge to Democrats seeking to maintain narrow control of Congress. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana, File)

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

A member of the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol says investigators have uncovered enough evidence of a nefarious Trump plot to charge him with crimes.

Rep. Adam Schiff told CNN’s “State of the Union” program Sunday that the committee has evidence that Trump and his associates actively planned to send fake electors to Congress in a bid to have the election stolen away from Biden at the last moment.

“We will show evidence of the president’s involvement in this scheme,” Schiff said. “We will also again show evidence about what his own lawyers came to think about this scheme, and we’ll show courageous state officials who stood up and said they wouldn’t go along with this plan to either call legislatures back into session or decertify the results for Joe Biden.”

Schiff’s comments came as the committee prepares to hold another public hearing into the Jan. 6 riot on Tuesday.

Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco of the federal Justice Department previously said that the DOJ has received information regarding fake slates of electoral voters that Trump supporters had put together in various states and planned to send to Congress.

(YWN World Headquarters – NYC)


22 COMMENTS

  1. One might wonder how all those anti-Trump books from alleged “insiders” completely missed this alleged plot allegedly involving Trump.

  2. Why, out of the entire committee, is it this man who is claiming they have evidence of a crime, and why is YWN reporting on this?

    This man has lost his ne’emanus and he has become the boy who cried Wolf and a full-fledged Shakran. He makes these statements in front of cameras because of a desire for self-publicity but repeatedly is unable to produce any evidence he claims he has.

    Why is YWN giving him the attention he seeks by reporting this story?

  3. Just because you lift a story from the leftist lamestream media and give it your own byline, doesn’t mean that it’s true .

    Nothing is going to happen to President Trump. In fact I will bet that something will probably happen faster to the Democrats and to Adam Shifty Schiff then what would happen to the president. The left knows their days are numbered as far as this committee is concerned. They have 6 months, not even over the are crazy enough to do stupid things past election day 2022, to wrap up this charade. It’s highly doubtful they’ll get anywhere during that time.

    Anyone who hasn’t figured it out yet that this is a bunch of garbage, seriously needs their head examined. It’s clear this is one-sided and even factless for the most part.

    But if the Dumocrats are interested in going down this road, that’s perfectly fine. They might think the numbers are in their favor based on insane polling that they’ve done, when you pull 100% Democrats and get a six out of 10 degree It’s kind of pointless, but the truth is they have nothing. The writing is on the wall for them. They realize they’re going to get trounced in the election. The only way they’re not going to get trans is if they cheat and rob and steal AGAIN (something they definitely might do as they have done it before a number of times).

  4. This is the same same Schiff who repeatedly lied and said he had evidence of Trump’s alleged Russia collusion. He is a pathological liar. If you want to discredit this committee’s investigation, letting Schiff lead it is the way to go.

  5. Schiff-for-brains is the same liar who repeatedly claimed to have evidence that Trump had conspired with Putin to swing the 2016 election in his favor. Of course he was lying through his filthy teeth.

    Of course had that charge been true it would not have been a crime. So he wasn’t accusing Trump of anything criminal, just politically embarrassing, and possible grounds for impeachment. Now he explicitly accuses him of crimes, and yet his claims have the same fatal flaw: Besides being unproven and likely untrue, if true this would not be a crime.

    He is alleging that Trump tried to persuade some state legislatures to certify new slates of electors and send their votes in to Congress. That is not illegal. The legislatures were certainly entitled to do that if they chose to. The constitution says each state’s electors should be chosen as the state legislature directs. If a state’s legislature wishes not to have an election, and have the electors chosen a different way, that is its right. And in any event, whether a legislature can or can’t do something, lobbying it to do so is explicitly protected by the first amendment. So even if everything this piece of Schiff alleges were true there’s no crime being alleged.

  6. Remember, that this is the same guy who said EVERY DAY on CNN, for 2 years (!), that he had ABSOLUTE EVIDENCE of trump collusion with Russia.

  7. Bottom line. . We! The average Americans that you claim to care about, are struggling to pay our bills because of Biden’s economy, and instead of taking care of that, you are busy with your vendetta to get Donald Trump. You Democrats are our of control. Trump has loads of flaws and is very egotistical, but under him our country and its people thrived.

  8. Millhouse: the argument that this was legal is based on very spurious legal argument. By way of example, just because a burglar relied on creative argument before the crime that it’s OK to break into a house, it doesn’t mean he shouldn’t go to jail. One can argue anything! We’ll see what the evidence is, but if Trump’s own lawyers thought the legal argument was silly and possibly criminal, and if they show that Trump still ACTIVELY pursued this, well that’s pretty bad. Even with the crazy theory that a state can change the vote of the people (in the case of an emergency), there’s a 2nd Act that says it cannot be done after election day. Period.

  9. Every American should be outraged at Trump’s concerted efforts to undermine democracy and the peaceful transfer of power. The Jan 6th committee is doing great work. We can disagree on policy but democracy and peaceful transfer of power are sacrosanct..The presidency is not Trump’s toy. He must be held accountable for his actions.

  10. I agree with all of the above comments. It is simply not possible for Donald Trump to have committed any crime, now or ever. However, it might be a crime against humanity to suggest that he has.

  11. Chaylev: your comment is a perfect example of how if you trust Trump to define the narrative and give you the news, you will be more supportive. Mueller made clear the investigation was not about whether their was “collusion,” since that’s not a defined crime. If you bothered reading the report you will find ample examples of collusion with Russia by Trump’s campaign. Mueller said he found nothing that amounted to a criminal conspiracy by Trump (many others were prosecuted, however). But the reason he found no conspiracy by Trump was because Trump refused to cooperate with Mueller. If it was anyone but the president, Mueller would have concluded this amounted to obstruction of justice. But in line with our tradition, he didn’t feel it was proper to say whether a president can obstructed justice, and felt it was a better handled by the legislature. Instead of explaining that to us, Trump said, “see? no collusion.” But that was never the issue. And so your mistrust of Schiff is based on misinformation. Or perhaps because your leader can do no wrong?

  12. The memory of disabling the US by Adam Shifty Shift is still nauseating fresh. Anything he says or does is by association is dispicible as the above commentators say.

  13. Er, there is nothing spurious about the legal argument. That state legislatures have absolute control over how their state’s electors are chosen is beyond dispute. Just because they choose to do so by holding an election doesn’t mean they can’t decide otherwise later. NO ACT OF CONGRESS CAN CHANGE THAT. Congress has no power to make any law that contradicts the constitution.

    But all that aside, even if the argument was completely wrong, it CANNOT be a crime for a legislature to do whatever it likes. Legislative acts are by definition lawful, even if they are invalid. And it certainly can’t be a crime to lobby a legislature to do something — even something it can’t actually do. Lobbying is explicitly protected by the first amendment. End of story. Anyone who claims it can be illegal is a traitor to the constitution and engaged in a real insurrection, not the fake one they’re accusing Trump of.

  14. Please note that Millhouse’s response is utterly uneducated. You are entertaining a crazy theory that argues a State legislature can nullify the vote whenever they want on the basis of a federal law that lets the states decide the “manner” of its elections. Even if you were to win that one (you won’t) another Federal Act (3 U.S. Code Sec. 1) says the State would have to do this by the 1st Monday in November. They missed it by months. And even without that law, it’s a violation of the 14th amendment to take away someone’s vote without due process.

    The statement is also un-American. Why would you be OK with the government to choose our president by overriding the state vote in any circumstance, and at the bidding of a wanna-be dictator no less? I thought republicans favor personal rights and disfavor government involvement? Can you name a present-day country ruled by a dictator you wouldn’t mind living in today?

    Whether there was a crime, we need to wait of course to see what evidence is brought and what it suggests Trump or his campaign might have done.

  15. ER, that state legislatures have the right to decide how their state’s electors are chosen is THE US CONSTITUTION. No act of congress can override that. Talk about uneducated! Any act of congress that dictates to states how they shall choose their electors is NOT A LAW. End of story. You are not entitled to your own facts, so you are not entitled to disagree with that.

  16. um, I didn’t state any facts. I only stated the law. In doing so I even included a constitutional law why you cannot be right. Do you also reject the 14th amendment? Also please kindly answer a present-day country you wouldn’t mind living in where the government can nullify votes at its will. If anybody reading this can think of any such country I am genuinely interested.

  17. You idiot. You cited a federal law, as if it could override the constitution. The constitution EXPLICITLY gives the state legislatures the full right to decide how their electors are to be chosen. How can you claim a federal law can change that?

    Your claim about the 14th amendment is simply a lie, and further proof of your profound ignorance. It is NOT a violation of the 14th amendment to take away someone’s vote without due process; on the contrary, there is no constitutional right to vote at all, and states can take it away whenever they like, with limitations imposed by the 15th and subsequent amendments. In fact the 14th explicitly recognized that states could deny black people the vote, and yet it didn’t ban that. That’s why there’s a 15th amendment, which does. But even that says states can take away people’s vote for any reason EXCEPT race. Later amendments imposed more restrictions. But subject to those restrictions the states still control the franchise.

  18. I am not an idiot. Look at the legal memos Trump’s team produced to the committee. These memos also acknowledge they have virtually no way of winning these shaky arguments. In fact, emails show the Trump team made a decision NOT to make any these arguments in court in the aftermath of the election because losing the argument in court will more certainly establish that their subsequent acts would be considered criminal by ignoring the ruling and continuing to attempt to reject voters through the legislatures. It would be best for you to apologize for name-calling.

    A respectful suggestion to the moderators: It’s OK to blast each other’s ideas but name-calling should not be permitted on this site. Also: I get that it’s not popular with this crowd to ban speech, but I and many others do understand first hand the frustration when clearly debunked views, nonsensical conspiracies, and denial of reality is given a platform. While I personally would rather not indulge in this sheker, if all of the collective reasonable and unreasonable views are no longer posted (leaving the site with only the SUPREMELY unreasonable views), your site becomes something that I don’t think YWN wants to stand for and something that threatens to portray the Jewish people as fringe radicals.