@wyldbill : They found that he engaged in a conspiracy to overthrow our government and hopefully he will be indicted although it it unlikely that he will go to jail because he will leave the US.
www.nytimes.com/2022 /06/14/opinion/futur e-criminal-case-agai nst-trump.html
Congress cannot bring criminal charges; the Justice Department must do so. And critics of the department are asking why it does not appear to be investigating these allegations. The hearings point to a potential answer: The committee is laying a foundation upon which prosecutors can build in a subsequent investigation.
And a subsequent investigation is virtually inevitable, given the evidence generated by the committee. How could Attorney General Merrick Garland ignore the facts the American people are now learning about?
Critics of the hearings who say they are too detailed and dry miss the multiple intended audiences. When I argue before the United States Supreme Court, there are several audiences. One is the nine justices. Another audience is the public - both in the courtroom and listeners online. And there's a third audience: history.
Whatever the immediate outcome, history can render a different judgment. The same is true for this committee. Twenty million people watched the first hearing, but the other two audiences - the immediate decision makers and the eyes of history - potentially will have an even more profound impact on our democracy.
Mr. Garland and other high officials at the Justice Department, not nine justices, are the immediate decision makers. Mr. Garland has in the past been cagey about whether there is an investigation into the former president. Yet it's unthinkable that the Justice Department should not pursue one.