The Justice Department “will pay close attention to what is happening, who the witnesses are and what they have to say,” said Richard Ben-Veniste, who has served as one of the attorneys general at the Watergate Special Prosecutor’s Office. 1970s. Glenn Kirsner, a former assistant U.S. attorney general for the District of Columbia, said he would certainly attend Thursday night’s hearing “if I were still a federal attorney involved in investigating the insurgency.” The US House Select Committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol building held its first public hearing to reveal the findings of a year-long investigation. The commission has conducted more than 1,000 interviews with people involved in the siege and has collected more than 140,000 documents.
More than 840 arrests
Meanwhile, the Department of Justice (DOJ) is conducting its own investigation. According to its website, the department has made more than 840 arrests, filed hundreds of charges and recorded more than 300 indictments, including three who pleaded guilty to federal charges of rioting. Only the Ministry of Justice can prosecute, but the House panel can send criminal referrals to the department. On Thursday night, on high-frequency television, the panel presented its initial findings, while accusing former US President Donald Trump of leading a multi-step conspiracy aimed at overturning the results of the 2020 presidential election. A large screen has been set up to display video exhibits in front of a panel of the US House of Representatives investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol in Washington. The commission has conducted more than 1,000 interviews with people involved in the siege and has collected more than 140,000 documents. (J. Scott Applewhite / The Associated Press) The audition contained videos he had never seen before with police brutally beating and right-wing extremists leading the crowds to the Capitol. But it also included video testimony from former U.S. Attorney General William Barr and others who said they told Trump at the time that his allegations of election fraud had no value. Randall Eliasson, a former U.S. Assistant Attorney General for the District of Columbia, said there was always the possibility that commission investigators had found something that the Department of Justice had not yet discovered. “The potential is there, I guess. I do not feel it is very likely that the DOJ will learn much that it does not already know,” Eliason said. “I think the Department of Justice knows a lot more than we do. I tend to doubt that the Department of Justice will learn some new bomb information.” Kirschner said he believes some, but relatively few, of what was presented Thursday night were a revelation to the Justice Department.
“You want to have every detail nailed”
However, the hearings could certainly have an impact on the department’s investigation – as a media story could prompt further investigation by law enforcement, Kirschner said. “The media can report something, and that is where a criminal investigation begins. We can get information from any source that suggests a crime has been committed, that we may need to look into. The same is true of these congressional hearings. “ The Justice Department and, in particular, Attorney General Merrick Garland have been criticized for the slow pace of their investigation into the Capitol uprising. The department has made more than 840 arrests, filed hundreds of charges and recorded more than 300 indictments (Alex Brandon / The Associated Press) David Levine, a law professor at the University of California, Hastings College of the Law in San Francisco, said it was certainly possible that there was material that the House committee had uncovered that members of the Department of Justice were unaware of and that this material could provide new potential customers. Levine said the commission could also provide the missing piece of evidence from the puzzle that ultimately allows the Justice Department to prosecute a high-profile figure involved in some stage of the uprising. “You want every detail to be clarified. You do not want any ambiguity. And you may end up with prosecutors saying, well, we do not have it completely proven,” he said. “So what the details of the congressional committee can do is tie things up enough to allow the Department of Justice to look for potential evidence.” The department and, in particular, Attorney General Merrick Garland have been criticized for the slow pace of their investigation. Eliason, however, defended the pace of their investigation, saying it was moving as fast as might be expected, given its size and unprecedented nature.
Consider speeding up the schedule
Kirschner said the hearings could affect the speed with which the investigation progresses. “The line of the party I have lived with for decades … is that we do not let public opinion influence the pace or nature of our criminal investigation,” he said. “But let me tell you, the people in the Department of Justice are also people. And when we sit there and watch public hearings … how can people not be moved by this and at least think that we need to speed up a TIME?” It is not uncommon for hearings and investigations by the Political Committee to take place at the same time as criminal investigations. During the Watergate scandal, a special prosecutor was appointed by the Department of Justice to investigate alleged Nixon White House crimes. The bureau conducted its investigation and prosecuted cases at the same time as the Senate committee and the censure proceedings. CLOCKS Snapshots they had not seen before since the January 6 uprising give a timeline, new details:
The hearing showed footage that had not previously appeared about the “January 6 violence”.
Combining pieces of footage they had never seen since the January 6, 2021 attack on the US Capitol, the committee created a video detailing the timing and events of that day. This video may contain graphic language and content. These minutes of the public hearing by the Senate select committee were, “in fact, useful to us, and we relied on them,” said former Attorney General Ben-Veniste. He said that while the work of the Senate committee was being monitored, there was no direct communication with its members. There is probably no formal interaction between the House committee and the Justice Department, Ben-Veniste said. However, he added that there will be some “turning points” – situations where officials of the Ministry of Justice would like to be informed about the actions of the committee. For example, if the House committee was considering granting immunity to certain witnesses, the Department of Justice might want to have the opportunity to object if such a move would jeopardize anything underway or expected in its investigation, he said. Ben-Veniste.
The request of the Ministry of Justice was rejected
Last month, a parliamentary panel rejected a request by the Ministry of Justice for access to the committee’s interviews. Democrat Bennie Thompson, chairman of the committee, said it was “premature” for the committee to share its work on this point because the committee’s inquiry is ongoing. However, Kirschner said he believes there is still informal communication between the two groups. “If one believes that there is not much coordination and communication – correct, ethical, honest, appropriate communication – between [House] The committee and the prosecutors at the Ministry of Justice, therefore, do not know the people involved “.
