>

Even if he does go to trial and he is convicted, unfortunately I don’t think we will ever see Trump do the “perp walk” in a prison jumpsuit. At worst, it will probably be a comfortable house arrest, a fine, and a disbarment from running from office. Hardly the fate a treasonous piece of human trash like him deserves.
The panel also recommended that John Eastman, a lawyer who was essential to Trump’s plan to stop the election certification, be prosecuted for obstruction and conspiracy to defraud the country.

The DOJ has no legal obligation to act on the referrals, but the Jan. 6 committee already has a sense of where things are going.
Eastman had two search warrants executed by the FBI months ago and is being targeted by the DOJ and Fulton grand juries. He's also been the center of a lawsuit where a federal judge has said that Eastman and Trump "likely committed" multiple felonies.
Many correspondences revealed/leaked from Eastman's team show that they knew their actions were illegal, and there is a very important piece of evidence regarding Trump's intent:

“Although the President signed a verification for [the state court filing] back on Dec. 1, he has since been made aware that some of the allegations (and evidence proffered by the experts) has been inaccurate. For him to sign a new verification with that knowledge (and incorporation by reference) would not be accurate,” Eastman said.
“President Trump and his attorneys ultimately filed the complaint with the same inaccurate numbers without rectifying, clarifying, or otherwise changing them,” Carter wrote. “President Trump, moreover, signed a verification swearing under oath that the incorporated, inaccurate numbers ‘are true and correct’ or ‘believed to be true and correct to the best of his knowledge and belief.’”

If the DOJ brings the Jan. 6 investigation to trial, I think obstruction and conspiracy will take center stage. Incitement/insurrection may come into play, but will have a much higher bar for intent.
Eastman, Clark, Navarro, Giuliani (all of which have had search warrants by the FBI), along with the fake elector scheme and state pressure campaigns - will be huge pieces in a potential prosecution. >

What do you think the bar might be for intent? True that there is very little case law, but I can’t say any reasonable person would say that a President doing absolutely nothing over the course of three hours to stop an insurrection while it is taking place, and speaking of pardons after the fact don’t fit the definition of providing aid and comfort. >

The insurrection charge would be tough to prosecute. I think they would almost need written directives to spur violence or something similar to make it airtight.
When they try to piece together statements like "fight like hell" and "be wild!" , Trump's inaction, and invoke the existence of pardons, it becomes a somewhat disjointed, broad narrative. There are a lot of witnesses that might testify against Trump's malicious intent, as well.
Any sensible person knows Trump is responsible for Jan. 6 for an array of reasons.
But convincing a jury of undeniable intent along with, like you said, little precedence - is probably enough unease to make prosecutors question that angle.
The obstruction charge has already been used on ~300 Jan. 6 defendants and carries up to 20 years. The conspiracy charge has a lot of supporting evidence and potentially flipped witnesses. I think they might keep it narrow and stick to what they have the best chances of securing convictions on. >

For the same reason its hard to charge a Mafia kingpin. Everything is strongly implied, never written down, and vague.
Unless someone turns tail and testifies. >

We the people want justice for the crimes committed by this traitor. >

Lock ~~Her~~ Him Up!
Isn't it amazing how a simple change in pronoun can ruin someone's life! >

Literally everything he has accused others of doing, him and his followers have committed. It's just ridiculous.
So yes, lock HIM up! >

We need to lock up the politicians that enable this behavior.  They are just as guilty. >

Article:
In one of its final acts, the January 6 committee on Monday recommended that the Justice Department criminally charge Donald Trump over his efforts to overturn the 2020 election, which culminated in the attack on the U.S. Capitol
The House panel voted 9-0 to issue criminal referrals against the former president, alleging he committed four crimes: conspiracy to defraud the United States, obstruction of an official proceeding, conspiracy to make a false statement, and inciting an insurrection. The panel also recommended that John Eastman, a lawyer who was essential to Trump’s plan to stop the election certification, be prosecuted for obstruction and conspiracy to defraud the country.
Although the committee’s recommendations are largely symbolic in nature, they send a clear message about its monthslong investigation: Trump bears responsibility for the siege that occurred January 6, 2021.
“Ours is not a system of justice where foot soldiers go to jail and the masterminds and ringleaders get a free pass,” said Representative Jamie Raskin, one of the committee’s members.
The committee also referred four Republican congressmen to the House Ethics Committee for their lack of compliance with the panel’s subpoenas: Jim Jordan, Andy Biggs, Scott Perry, and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy. But with the House of Representatives set to change party hands in a matter of weeks, those lawmakers will not be facing consequences anytime soon.
During its last public meeting Monday, members reviewed the committee’s findings from its multiple hearings, airing past footage and clips of testimony from newer witnesses including former Trump aides Hope Hicks and Kellyanne Conway.
The video presentation cited Trump’s nonstop promotion of lies about the election and his consistent pressuring of the Justice Department and Vice-President Mike Pence to support his aims.
The Justice Department is already deep into its investigation of Trump and his associates with the newly appointed special counsel Jack Smith taking over the probe last month on orders from Attorney General Merrick Garland.
A final report of the committee’s findings is expected to be released by the end of the week >

Ok, now we can return to sitting on our hands, can’t we? >


“Ours is not a system of justice where foot soldiers go to jail and the masterminds and ringleaders get a free pass,” said Representative Jamie Raskin, one of the committee’s members.

It certainly seems like that's our system of justice. I haven't seen it proved otherwise. Especially when the masterminds and ringleaders have money. >

That cry is going to be heard at rallies starting next year.  It will reverberate throughout the United States.  Reaching a crescendo sometime in 2024.  Perhaps it will be chanted to him as he is escorted to jail for any number of federal crimes.  I for one will be chanting that as I watch the FBI chain walk him to a Federal penitentiary on national TV.  A great movement forward for our democracy. >

How much closer to the definition of 'obstruction of an official proceeding, conspiracy... and inciting an insurrection' is it possible to be?! >

How it started: lock her up!
How it's going: lock him up! >

See, Republicans? This is how it's done. You can't just chant it at political rallies. You need to investigate, and then summarize all of the evidence that you've collected into a referral to the Justice Department. >

When will anyone do anything about this? >

Never is my guess. >

The problem is that Trump needs to be locked up for what he did while President. >

Paywalled >

What's  fascinating about this is that the Republicans only defense of Trump is to keep yelling that the January 6th committee was a political hack job out to get him. Their hope and belief is that their fellow Republicans will ignore certain facts. Facts like, there were no Democrats that testified, only Republicans. Republicans who  were close and around  Trump, including the ones in his inner circle. All of whom knew exactly what happened or some of what happened. The January 6th committee was a platform that showcased those that were willing to tell the truth, those who didn't want to tell the truth and those who avoided the truth by pleading the Fifth Amendment >

You know, everyone has been saying this for years. But since the committee is saying this, now I’m interested 
/s >

Hey, so question: what will it mean if absolutely nothing comes of this? >

It means politicians will be emboldened by precedent to behave even more badly. >

Lock him up >

Lock him up