Positive
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Even Fox News analysts say Donald Trump should face criminal charges as channel starts airing Jan 6 hearings

One analyst says Trump may have crossed a ‘legal line’ by making ‘false statements in conjunction with the certification of an election’

Fox News analysts have said evidence from the January 6 House select committee showed Donald Trump’s “unfitness” to lead the country and that he may be guilty of a crime.

Analysing the fourth hearing by the panel investigating the Capitol insurrection, former assistant US attorney Andy McCarthy told Fox News host Anita Vogel when asked if the panel was trying to charge the former president with “conspiracy to defraud the United States”.

“No, I don’t think so, I think the most plausible crime is obstruction of Congress,” Mr McCarthy replied.

He said the committee was “relying heavily on the opinion of a federal district judge in California, David Carter, a Clinton appointee who once ran for public office as a Democrat, a lot of bombastic rhetoric in that opinion, not surprising they are relying on it.

He argued: “What I would just say is that if you had a different perspective being presented here, I don’t think that would be very helpful to President Trump, per se, because the evidence pretty clearly shows his unfitness.”

“It even suggests that he may be guilty of a crime, maybe, maybe not, there are arguments on both sides, but I would highlight here is the plausible gap, a scheme that attacked every tier of government versus how likely it was to succeed,” he added.

It came as Fox News walked back on its previous plans of not airing the primetime hearings which made it the only major American outlet to not air the hearings for a short while.

The conservative channel did not air the first hearing live, but joined other networks for the subsequent ones.

Fox News host Neil Cavuto also remarked on the revelations from the hearings, saying they made Mr Trump “look awful. Just awful”.

“If you knowingly make statements you know aren’t true and they’re proven untrue and yet you still make the statements – maybe because you’re totally and personally convinced you’re on the right and they’re on the wrong – at what point does that cross a constitutional line and maybe a legal one?” he asked legal expert Thomas Dupree on the discussion panel.

“Tom, you’re a lawyer and a great one,” Cavuto began. “And I’m not, but this just seems to make Donald Trump look awful. Just awful.”

Mr Dupree, who earlier served in the Justice Department under George W Bush, said Mr Trump could be in legal trouble and that he can cross a “legal line if you’re making those false statements in conjunction with the certification of an election or you’re trying to corrupt the count or things of that nature”.

Tuesday’s hearing focused on Mr Trump and his legal team’s efforts to pressure lawmakers and state officials in Georgia and Arizona to halt the certification of Joe Biden’s victory and appoint Trump-voting electors to flip their respective states’s electoral college votes in his favour.

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/even-fox-news-analysts-trump-123233241.html
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
sunsporter1649 · 70-79, M
LOL, when does the cross-examination of the witnesses begin?
dancingtongue · 80-89, M
@sunsporter1649 1. It is a hearing to identify what led to the events of that day, not a trial nor even an indictment.
2. What we are watching is a summation of what the committee has uncovered to date, based on thousands of depositions. Those being interviewed had legal counsel when being deposed, and the few testifying live in the telecast hearings have counsel with them.
3. If you want to cross-exam, you have to participate in the process. Trump, McConnell, and McCarthy refused to go along with a bi-partisan commission outside of Congress similar to 9/11. McCarthy tried to sabotage the committee by naming mostly House members who already were identified as persons of interest to be deposed by the committee rather than Republicans, including Trump supporters, who were not potential candidates to be deposed. And some of the Trumpists with the most critical information and insights are fighting the subpoenas which would give them their opportunity to present their side of things.
sunsporter1649 · 70-79, M
@dancingtongue LOL, 11 prosecution attorneys on the panel, but it's not a trial, eh?

And just where is the cross-examination?

And of course, nancy picked the members of the panel, and Kevin McCarthy selected the members for the opposition, just like the rules demand, right.

C'mon man, you can do better than that
dancingtongue · 80-89, M
@sunsporter1649 McCarthy submitted his picks. She accepted a majority of them, rejecting only the two who were on the list to be subpoenaed as material witnesses. McCarthy then pulled all of his nominees and refused to participate. Even so, Pelosi made an effort to include Republicans on the committee

There is no judge, there is no jury, there is no request for an indictment. It is information gathering, and Trump and his loyalists are being offered the opportunities to present their sides. No need for cross-examination.
@sunsporter1649
by law thay have to give it to him too ..lolz 🍿
sunsporter1649 · 70-79, M
@dancingtongue LOL, you keep peddling that bullschiff somebody might believe it someday.

dancingtongue · 80-89, M
@TheOneyouwerewarnedabout That's part of Trump's problem -- they have been playing the numerous videos of what he has said, reading the even more copious Tweets he sent out, even read into the record his 12-page rebuttal to the first 3 hearings. He's getting equal time in his own words and they are the most damning.
sunsporter1649 · 70-79, M
@dancingtongue When is the cross-examination of the "witnesses"?
@dancingtongue lolz ok…

I’m literally surprised you lot keep believing the exact same ppl every time they say they got the goods..

maybe this time right? 🍿🍿

I bet adam schiffs whistleblowers holding onto all the evidence? 🤷‍♂️
ididntknow · 51-55, M
@TheOneyouwerewarnedabout Adam Schiff, the failed Hollywood script writer,