Jan. 6 select committee Chair Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS) on Sunday didn’t rule out the possibility of the panel subpoenaing former President Trump days after the House moved to hold Steve Bannon in criminal contempt of Congress as a result of his subpoena defiance.
Asked during an interview on CBS whether the panel issued looking to issue a subpoena to the former president, Thompson replied that “nobody’s off limits.”
“We will be on an ongoing basis issuing subpoenas to various individuals around the country,” Thompson said. “If we have enough evidence, and obviously we are pursuing evidence, but if the evidence leads to former President Trump or anyone else, the committee is not resonant in pushing back on it. We will go forward with it.”
Thompson stressed that it’s an ongoing investigation and that the panel is “not trying to get ahead” of it.
“We’ll follow the facts and circumstances as they present themselves,” Thompson said.
Despite Thompson signaling that Trump isn’t in the clear of the panel’s subpoenas, Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL), who serves on the Jan. 6 select committee, has expressed that he is unsure about subpoenaing Trump. During an interview on CNN earlier this month, Kinzinger argued that it would “become kind of a circus” and therefore the panel wouldn’t want to do so upfront, but that if the former president has pieces of information that it needs, then they “certainly will” issue a subpoena for him.
Late last month, the committee subpoenaed four former Trump administration officials: Bannon, Meadows, Patel and former White House deputy chief of staff Dan Scavino. The panel also subpoenaed Jeffrey Clark, a former Trump administration Justice Department official who attempted to use DOJ resources to bolster Trump’s election fraud falsehoods, earlier this month.
After Bannon’s lawyer told the committee that his client will defy its subpoena after Trump asked former aides and advisers to invoke executive immunity in order to avoid handing over documents or giving testimony, the committee announced contempt proceedings against Bannon.
Last week, the House voted 229-202 to hold Bannon in criminal contempt of Congress. Bannon will be referred to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia for potential prosecution over his refusal to comply with the subpoena issued by the Jan. 6 Committee.
Watch Thompson’s remarks below:
Kinzinger is right. Subpoenaing Trump would likely distract from the overall investigation and has the potential to backfire spectacularly. I realize that a lot of people would love to see Trump behind bars, if only for contempt of Congress, but I don’t think it’s worth the risk.
Hard disagree.
Moreover, this is not about an actual issuance–it’s about sending a message+. It’s how you flip a Mob family.
Watch how Donald reacts. Watch what the committee DOES.
[e/t/a] + e.g., “Flip now, motherfuckers. Or do time later.”
I cannot comment on the legality of Chairman Thompson’s efforts.
But I can comment on the significant achievement of Trump having been elected as The President of the United States, an Office which combines the symbolisms of a Head of State and a Monarch.
That symbolic duality pushes against treating Trump’s malfeasance like the malfeasance of others not having held that Office.
And although the fucker could never articulate why this is so, his cunning, corrupt, devious, sadistic criminal mind knew it to be absolutely true.
And, yet, because of the enormous damage this man has done across a range of American norms, law, values and, yes, lives, there needs to be an accounting.
I am not sure what all the committee has simmering. There are LOTS of things Chump could be charged with even though we may not be able to get actual smoking gun Coup admissions…such as he personally orchestrated and committed the insurrection. There are lots of campaign violations, and election tampering, and - The Political Coercion Act 18 USC 610
Getting subpoenas for all those documents and calls and witnesses might necessarily require, or have no downside, subpoenaing Chump. Then, of course, there is the high probability he refuses to comply and gets a DOJ prosecution on black-letter law. You defy a duly issued congressional subpoena, you get found guilty and likely go to jail. I don’t know how it all plays out as a net + or - distraction wise, but if it doesn’t take too much effort or time from the committee to issue the subpoena, and vote to refer him for prosecution when he rejects it; that doesn’t seem like too much of a distraction.
Yeah I want them to dangle this possibility over him for a minute before any decisions get made, too. In general I agree with you.