The avalanche of evidence that we’ve seen dumped in daylight (as opposed to what the committee has not shown us) has produced a lot of fodder for television analysts, and some analysts are better than others.

Today, a very good analyst, former U.S. Attorney Barbara McQuade said that some of the evidence coming out against Trump could prove a case all the way from conspiracy to obstruct justice to seditious conspiracy.

McQuade appeared on Andrea Mitchell’s MSNBC show and Mitchell asked about the evidence pouring forth about Trump doing nothing on January 6th despite pleas from everyone around him.

Mitchell introduced an important question:

“Congresswoman Cheney was saying that there are several criminal statutes in play as to whether or not there could be some enhanced penalties or some issue regarding the former president’s actions that day.

“What laws do you think could be used against the former president if it’s approved that he was criminally negligent by not calling off the rioters or do you think new laws would have to be enacted?“

First of all, you cannot enact new laws to convict someone of something they’ve already done, that’s called an ex-post facto law and is unconstitutional. Second, there are very very few criminally “negligent” crimes that apply anywhere, especially here.

McQuade finally gave an answer that equates to what we’ve been writing here for weeks:

“No, I think there are current laws on the books that could be applied there. I don’t know that negligence alone is going to be enough.

We are interpreting this as “Negligence is not in play. Him not doing anything about the riot isn’t enough.” McQuade then said:

But as Congresswoman Cheney has recited on occasion, there is a crime making it illegal to corruptly impede or obstruct an official proceeding, which includes proceedings before Congress. If he [Trump] had the power to stop that riot from happening and to permit the vote to go forward, his failure to do that could be that effort to corruptly obstruct the official proceeding. It may be, you know.

Stop the riot from happening. That would be something done before the riot even started. If Trump had the power to veto a plan to get the crowd to riot (which we think was planned), but did not, and permitted it to go forward, thereby agreeing with it, then it may be…

We’ve got this 187 minutes when he sat and did nothing despite the fact that he knew that this violence and destruction was occurring. Is it because it was all part of a larger plan? So I think, in addition to that obstruction statute that Congresswoman Cheney has mentioned, I think we could also look at conspiracy to defraud the United States — that just means trying to impede the normal functioning of government — all the way up to seditious conspiracy. I think all of those potential crimes are in play.”

“Conspiracy” is the keyword. For weeks we have been writing that there are very few crimes that apply to something that you could have done to stop something and didn’t do.

But, as we’ve said repeatedly, it is about what he knew before the riot. If there was a plan to start a riot, or a plan to obstruct Congress in any way, and Trump knew of the plan and agreed, and then took one action in furtherance of that plan, then one can look at seditious conspiracy. 

McQuade is saying that if Trump could have stopped the riot (we suspect she meant “before it started, by calling everything off), and chose not to do so because he wanted it – as part of a plan that has NOT been proven yet – and then sat there while others told him to do something, that could be considered an act to further the plan. His speech could also be considered an act in furtherance of that plan.

If the Committee got ahold of evidence regarding what Trump knew, if anything, about Peter Navarro’s “Operation Green Bay Sweep,” and learned that Trump knew that they intended to foment a riot to interfere with the Congress… then McQuade is correct and the charges could be extremely serious.

When it comes to charging Trump, it is not about him sitting on his ass watching while people said “Do something!” It is about what Trump knew that others were planning before and if Trump agreed with them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45Bx6vJQEyU

****

[email protected] and Substack:Much Ado About Everything

The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of LeftScoop.news. Contact us for guidelines on submitting your own commentary.