President-Elect Donald Trump gave President Joe Biden and his critics a major boost this weekend by stating on NBC’s Meet The Press that he believes that the entire J6 Committee “should go to jail.” Despite weeks of saying that he did not plan any campaign of retribution and “success will be my revenge,” Trump undermined those statements with the statement, which the media is now playing up as proof that he is going to unleash a vengeance campaign. Many in the media are also omitting that Trump immediately said “no” to whether he would direct either the Attorney General or the FBI director to indict or investigate. The fact, however, is that there is no viable criminal case to be made against the J6 Committee members for their investigation or report. We need to move beyond the rage rhetoric if this country is going to come together to face the tough challenges ahead.
In the Sunday interview, Trump was referring to how Cheney and the “committee of political thugs” deleted all the evidence from their investigation: “Cheney did something that’s inexcusable, along with [Chair Bennie] Thompson and the people on the un-select committee of political thugs and, you know, creeps.”
He added, “Cheney was behind it. And so was Bennie Thompson and everybody on that committee. For what they did, honestly, they should go to jail.”
I have been one of the most vocal critics of the J6 Committee, having written over a dozen columns on their misrepresentation of evidence, false claims, burying of evidence, and political bias. I consider the J6 Committee to be not just a colossal failure but a missed opportunity for a bipartisan look at that tragic day. I also fully support the effort of the House committees to finish its own investigation into the security failure at the Capitol and the record of the J6 Committee.
Having said that, these are ethical and political failings, not criminal violations. Politicians routinely distort facts on both sides of scandals, including Presidents Biden, Trump, and Obama. We have elections to allow the public to hold such politicians accountable. In the case of Liz Cheney, the people of Wyoming overwhelmingly removed her from office.
Cheney’s work on the committee was rife with false claims and the manipulation of evidence. What could have been her finest hour in forcing a balanced and honest approach to the investigation proved to be her undoing (at least with her prior political base).
Members, however, are protected from prosecution for expressing their opinions or advancing legislative measures. This includes Article I, Section 6, Clause 1, which states that members of Congress “shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony, and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their attendance at the Session of their Respective Houses, and in going to and from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.”
The Supreme Court has held that “to the extent that [congressional officers] serve legislative functions, the performance of which would be immune . . . if done by Congressmen, these officials enjoy the protection[s] of the Speech or Debate Clause.” Doe v. McMillan, 412 U.S. 306, 320 (1973).
More importantly, the omissions and unfairness of the process do not constitute crimes.
That brings us to the focus of Trump’s remarks: the alleged destruction of evidence by the Committee. Over a hundred files were allegedly destroyed, though Thompson insists that they were not required to be preserved.
It does appear that the Committee may have violated the House’s archiving rules. However, this is not ordinarily a case for criminal prosecution. These rules have sufficient room for interpretation to make any such claim difficult to prosecute. Moreover, the responsibility of any given member of the Committee for such violations is doubly difficult to establish.
Clearly, a false statement to federal investigators or an effort to obstruct an investigation can be separate criminal violations, but there is no indication of such allegations.
Most importantly, presidents do not send people to jail. Juries and judges do that. We have the oldest and most successful constitution in history. J6 Committee members, like all citizens, are fully protected under that system.
Trump’s statement, however, has given a boost to his critics who are trying to preserve the narrative that blanket preemptive pardons are needed to protect his political opponents. As I recently wrote, some are suggesting up to thousands of such pardons.
In a statement to The New York Times, Cheney immediately used Trump’s statement to keep the narrative alive:
“This was the worst breach of our Constitution by any president in our nation’s history. Donald Trump’s suggestion that members of Congress who later investigated his illegal and unconstitutional actions should be jailed is a continuation of his assault on the rule of law and the foundations of our republic.”
The media is widely reporting Trump’s statement and omitting his prior insistence that he was not going to unleash a retributive campaign against political opponents.
Trump gave his critics a windfall benefit, which they can now cite as the basis for the blanket pardons. The press and pundits have been dreading the rather awkward prospect of democracy not ending as predicted or the chance that this is not (as figures like Cheney claimed) our last election. The “white knight pardons” are a way of arguing that Biden prevented the collapse.
In my book, “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage,” I discuss how “rage rhetoric” has long been a part of our political debates and elections. The danger is that “rage rhetoric” can become state rage, as shown repeatedly throughout history.
President Trump just won not just both houses of Congress with the White House, but also the popular vote. That victory was not the result of rage rhetoric, but the promise to move beyond these divisions to achieve progress on issues ranging from the border to the economy. Trump can now cement such a legacy or destroy it by fueling our divisions.
The J6 Committee is not going to jail. The question is where our country will be going and whether President Trump can use this election to help unify this country.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
I respectfully disagree. The J6 Committee destroyed evidence and records (in excess of 1 TB of data and a year’s worth of transcribed witness interviews) that they were legally required to preserve. That’s a felony, and its commission is beyond dispute. The open question is WHICH individuals among the J6 Committee and staff committed that felony, and should therefore go to jail.
“the J6 Committee and staff committed that felony, and should therefore go to jail”
Both you and Professor Turley have skipped a crucial step. Neither of you (nor Trump, nor I) are entitled to decide whether or not some or all of the J6 committee members deserve to be imprisoned for the crime of destroying that evidence. What we *are* entitled to is a thorough, transparent, and nonpartisan investigation to determine if any of those members should be charged with such a crime. Once charges are brought (my assumption) it would be up to a jury to decide guilt or innocence, and a judge to determine the terms of imprisonment for those found guilty. On the other hand, I think that it is possible that the overall conduct of at least certain members of the J6 committee with respect to investigating the events of that day constitutes a clear violation of the oath they took to uphold the Constitution. I think that as a nation, we have been sadly remiss in holding violators of that oath accountable for intentionally disregarding it. Perhaps the members of the J6 committee present a good opportunity for beginning to address that issue.
The whole talk about evidence being “destroyed” is just a baseless rumor. Seriously, who’s seen it? Where’s the proof? These claims are just fueling more anger from Trump supporters, and Turley can’t pretend he’s not part of that. He’s definitely played a role in it before. As time goes on, Turley is going to find himself getting on Trump’s case more since all the blame for policies and what comes from them will land on the Republican party and Trump himself.
Baseless rumor: “These claims are just fueling more anger from Trump supporters,”
Baseless rumor: “…and Turley can’t pretend he’s not part of that.”
Baseless rumor: “He’s [Turley] definitely played a role in it before.”
Baseless rumor: “…Turley is going to find himself getting on Trump’s case more…”
You see how that goes, “George?”
Lin,
Brilliant! What a way to own the slow and dumb one!!
LIn, WHO witnessed the destruction of documents? Nobody is saying ‘whistleblower” or “anonymous witnesses allege.”
Brainless repetition does not prove it occurred. Even Turley can’t be himself to support the allegation. He can only “infer” it to others by merely “reporting” on what was being “reported.” That’s how unsubstantiated rumors feed the rage Turley whines about.
George says: “He [Turley] can only ‘infer’ it to others by merely ‘reporting’ on what was being “reported.”
People do not “infer” things to others. They “imply” it. –The others “infer” what was meant or implied.
George, please give it a rest, instead of “implying” that you represent an authoritative view or opinion on something. anything.
Thanking you in advance.
Lin, why do you imply that I am an authority on particular views? You infer too much.
Trump never said he wouldn’t let his DOJ or FBI prosecute his political enemies. He doesn’t have to direct them to do anything. He can simply let it happen so that when it does, he can claim, “I had nothing to do with it.”
Turley isn’t that naive. Is he?
Lin,
HAHAHAHAHAHAAHAH!!! Another great “own” of George!!! Simply awesome!
Upstate,
HAHAHAHAHAHAAHAH!!! Another time showing how NEEDY you are!
How marvelous!!!
Upstate, to prove your point, George says “Lin, why do you imply that I am an authority on particular views?”
But Looks like what Lin actually sayd was “George, please give it a rest, instead of ‘implying’ that you represent an authoritative view or opinion”
Looks like Georgie has some real reading comprehension problems, eh?
Hey George,
Easy: subpoena every member of the J6 Committee, every witness, and all support staff to produce their records.
I’d love to watch the fallout when USAG Bondi or a House or Senate committee starts that process.
We all know the pernicious, partisan, and swamp-like nature of this “committee” and while they may have just skirted the letter of the law in their lack of ethics; the cure for this comes via “We The People” at the next ballot box opportunity. Our largest threat, as a federal republic of states, is the mis-education, lack of education and just plain apathy of the citizenry. Unless we become a nation of well-informed and patriotic peoples who understand and revere the constitution, eventually the prog/left will win just by sheer demographics.
I hold my tongue on what activity by Democrats and operatives actually rose to the level of “criminal”and is therefore pardonable.
But has there ever been a more disgusting group of conniving, calculating, colluding transgressors, -united in common to “Get Trump” before he rocked their boat and/or dislodged them from their self-erected pedestals?
And who started it all? I’m not a Trump devotee (and he is not the first to have said/done some wince-worthy things), but in my opinion, it was the Clinton campaign, starting in pre-election 2016, attempting to continue Obama’s hold on politics; -presidential candidate Hillary- no longer SOS since 2013, -but still unofficially showing up at the Munich Security Conference to do more than her fair share to destroy and discredit him in the eyes of the world and to trash him to all the world leaders.
Soooo… now on the World Stage, they’ve cast Trump as a Satanist destroyer of “democracy.” They’ve made our government look like a New Year’s Eve party rich with cloak-room shenanigans. And they have prostituted the very ideal of America, reducing it to Tabloid Territory in European media.
It didn’t hurt Trump. It hurt America.
When Trump shoots his mouth off as much as he does, he inspires his loyal supporters to infer the worst and lets them know he’s doing exactly what you accuse Democrats of doing.
Wrong again.
“… We need to move beyond the rage rhetoric if this country is going to come together to face the tough challenges ahead. …”
Yes indeed, We all need to prepare for World War III – A War is a terrible thing to waste. Let Us forget about the past 12 years and focus on the War Economy ahead and how to deal with the ‘Fallout’.
We are beyond the point of no return. The Markets and Debts are at a pinnacle, Market Capitulation is inevitable – It’s time for War!
So much for the past … forget-about-it, What goes on in the District of Columbia, stays in the District of Columbia, you don’t need to know about it.
Wolf Blitzer needs a new pair of shoes!
Jail? No. A through investigation into what a sham it was? Yes. We all know it was a sham. But I would rather see evidence that proved beyond reasonable doubt of what a sham it was. Then let history be the judge of them.
Trump is right. Move forward. Let God sort it out.
Romans 12:19
Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.
But that is not what Trump is saying, or did you not read the column? And I am not so cowardly as to call myself “Anonymous.”
JJ
You stated, “And I am not so cowardly as to call myself “Anonymous.”
“John Johnson” your icon says profile not found. Another sock puppet.
So what is Trump saying JJ?
No crime? Huh? Check out 18 USC 1505, Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees:
“Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication influences, obstructs, or impedes or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede the due and proper administration of the law under which any pending proceeding is being had before any department or agency of the United States, or the due and proper exercise of the power of inquiry under which any inquiry or investigation is being had by either House, or any committee of either House or any joint committee of the Congress- Shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both.” [emphasis added]
JJC says, disregard [emphasis added]. The highlight didn’t come through when copied and pasted to this blogsite.
So the obstruction of some or all of the members of the J6 committee is a crime? Cool!
I voted for Trump three times and have the utmost respect for Turley’s legal opinions!
The only individual that had a reasonable opinion about Turly’s Post, said “should go to jail” was a personal opinion, not an edict!
When asked would he direct the DoJ to Indict, he answered “No!”
Personally, I wish he would not be so honest about his personal feelings, but the fact is… no matter what he says, his opponents will twist it to fit their narrative!
“The committee should go to jail for their destruction of vital archival history.” “That was deplorable but not indictible, President Trump. There is no Federal crime.” “All right, AG Bondi, let’s move on.”
The truth is that Trump is ignorant, vindictive, and hateful. It is wonderful that Jonathan has not become like other FoxNews sell-outs and can still utter some truth, but the minions will despise him.
What he didn’t say was that he would stop any attempted prosecutions if his DOJ or FBI chose to go on that path. Trump knows when to go vague when he doesn’t elaborate.
Turley may have his hands full when Trump starts shooting his mouth off again and his cabinet starts overreaching and going too far. Trump will conveniently distance himself from anything his administration does if it’s going to make him look bad.
He wouldn’t direct, but he wouldn’t stop them if they went ahead and started investigations and prosecutions.
The only individual that had a reasonable opinion about Turly’s Post, said “should go to jail” was a personal opinion, not an edict!
That’s exactly right, Terry. The media still has not figured out what makes Trump so successful. His base elected him because he speaks in their language. The weaponization of our federal bureaucracies has not gone unnoticed by them. What Trump stated is an opinion shared by millions and if anyone is butthurt that the incoming administration might conduct investigations into potential criminal wrongdoing, then they should have not engaged in activities that warrant investigations. Time will tell how this plays out. I wouldn’t be surprised if Trump defines success by chronicling through facts and evidence exactly how the bureaucracies have been weaponized, who is implicated in this corruption and then use that as justification for overhauling the bureaucracies and then leave it up to the voters in the midterm to run those “that should go to jail” out on a rail.
It’s the same game they’ve always played with Trump, taking him out of context. He said they should go to jail, not that he intended to jail them. He is not incorrect about their malfeasance, punishable by law or not, though, and we all know it.
The modern left are too sick to save. They still do not seem to grasp how weary we are of them. We need to double defeat them in 2026, and as voters we cannot permit anything like Biden’s term to ever happen again.
I think you are playing at semantics .
@Maplady
Never before seen poster, I think you are either a troll, or have TDS when you would likely give literally anyone else on earth the benefit of the doubt. You are entitled to your opinion, I am entitled to mine. Trump already served a full term and the country has been very demonstrably worse under Biden. You may say, not so! But the dems controlled both houses of Congress when Trump was last POTUS, and they blocked him at every turn. I don’t know how to help a modern liberal except to vote them into oblivion.
“maplady”
I have seen that moniker here before, albeit not often. My best recollection is that it is just another sock puppet head for the (new)George/Gigi/Dennis M hydra.
The House Select Committee investigating the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol made criminal referrals against former President Donald Trump and others134. The committee voted to recommend that the Justice Department pursue criminal charges against Trump for his role in efforts to overturn the 2020 election and the events of January 6, 2021….The committee recommended four specific criminal charges against Trump:
Conspiracy to defraud the United States
Obstruction of an official proceeding
Conspiracy to make a false statement
“Inciting,” “assisting,” or “aiding and comforting” an insurrection
The committee also issued a criminal referral for conservative attorney John Eastman, who was involved in the scheme to pressure then-Vice President Mike Pence to reject states’ electoral votes. (via Perplexity).
I do not understand how, once the referrals were made, the evidence was destroyed without violation of law.
If it isn’t unlawful, it should be, especially in a highly partisan context. Remember how the slick film and narrative carefully portrayed Sen. Hawley as a lone coward fleeing the mob, when in fact Hawley and many others (edited out) of both parties were reacting to directions of Capitol Police?
Dear Mr. Turley, I think you may have this one wrong. The J6 committee was a huge “get Trump” operation under the guise of calling themselves “The January 6th Commitee”. This gave the Left so much more fodder against Mr. Trump than you are suggesting he gave them with the quote you mentioned. Things do eventually come “out in the wash” and someday we will learn the truth of all of the backroom deals that were made to cause Mr. Trump to appear in the worse possible light.
Trump was careful to couch his words in the subjuctive form of the actuion verb: should. The subjunctive form of a verb is used when speaking about hypothetical situations. He said, “For what they did, honestly, they should go to jail.” I’m surprised that Turley, a lawyer, missed this nuanced meaning of the president-elect’s words. In the context given, it is an important difference, akin to one being active in radio versus one being radioactive. I watched the interview and Trump was very clear and refused the host’s attempt to trap him into saying something. He ended all statements of future happenings with either a subjunctive expression or by saying he would leave matters up to his highly qualified FBI director and attorney general. This is a non-story and Turley’s usual evenhanded lawyering is faulty in this one.
“Should”, a weasly word.
Turley didn’t miss the nuance. He was providing an excuse to infer reasonable doubt.
…Turley, been following you for years, but this time you are in the batshit crazy league if you think the J6 Comm did not violate the Constitutional Rights of many American citizens…
Q: Wouldn’t our culture be more enjoyable and tasteful if our adults refrained from public coarse, crude adolescent alley talk using the “f” and “s” words?
A: of course!!
I would be grateful for your opinion, Professor Turley, of whether Trump widespread pardons of January 6th rioters are warranted.
* The difference between “should” and “will” is yuge. I think I should have steak for dinner.
If Cheney were, let’s say the prosecutor in the Daniel Penny case, and pulled the stunts that she did of withholding or distorting evidence would you expect there to be consequences? I say put her on trial and let a jury of her peers decide.
Lock her up! Smiley.
If not indictible, the J6 committee members SHOULD be highly criticized for the deplorable manner in which they presented their results and destroyed evidence.
The members of the J6 committee are protected by the speech and debate clause, and cannot be successfully prosecuted. But if Biden pardons them anyway, it would be a massive troll, and a confirmation that they are wrongdoers.
If no one goes after the J6 committee, the Democrats will have learned no lesson except that, once again, they can get away with stuff. The Democrats are at war with Conservatives … Conservatives need to respond with war or they will lose.
With all due respect, it should be noted that the J6 committee, at a bare minimum, excluded exculpatory evidence and destroyed its records. Maybe execution would a little extreme, but there must be some cost for these yahoos running a political hit job from Congress, funded by taxpayers. Who will watch the watchers?
Since they have absolute immunity under the speech and debate clause for official acts, the punishment must be political. It might be the best thing if Biden gives them a pardon and they accept it. That would confirm that they are wrongdoers. Then the Republican Party must properly organize against them for 2026 and 2028.
To prove a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2) — a provision of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act — the government must establish that the defendant impaired the availability or integrity for use in an official proceeding of records, documents, objects, or other things used in an official proceeding, or attempted to do so. (Fischer vs. US, 2024). J6 Committee members and staff absolutely did that (though it remains TBD which individuals ordered and carried out the destruction of the records and interview transcriptions). I cannot beleive that the speech and debate clause gives them free reign to obstruct justice in this manner, any more than I could believe that the SCOTUS ruling on POTUS immunity would allow a POTUS to commit murder or order murder for hire.
Surely not our Watchdogs of the Media, who, when Democrats are involved, shy away from being engaged.