The vote in the House of Commons vote puts the House of Commons to a vote of no-confidence motion against former Trump’s trade adviser Peter Navarro and Trump’s longtime social media guru Dan Scavino over the crackdown. to the selection committee on 6 January. If a majority in Parliament voted in favor of prosecuting Navarro and Scavino, it would make them the third and fourth former Trump advisers to be charged in connection with the Capitol attack investigation. Navarro and Scavino did not immediately respond to requests for comment Monday night on the Committee’s vote. Dan Scavino Jr., White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Communications during the Trump administration. (Daniel Acker / Bloomberg via Getty Images) The chairman of the House Rules Committee, MP Jim McGovern, D-Mass., Deplored the fact that the resolution to despise Navarro and Scavino in Congress will inevitably face opposition from some Republican members of Parliament. “I’m confused by the fact that there does not seem to be a global outcry not only about what happened but also about what we continue to learn, thanks in large part to your committee’s efforts,” McGovern told the select committee. which voted unanimously last week to despise Scavino and Navarro. “This lack of curiosity about the truth is amazing to me.” McGovern said the fact that more than 750 witnesses volunteered to investigate the selection committee meant “we will get to the truth”, but warned that “turning a blind eye” to those who refuse to comply with calls could create a dangerous precedent. . “I just want to remind everyone: I think history is watching us right now,” he said. “And it’s better to do it right for the sake of our country.” MP Liz Cheney, R-Wyo, who serves as vice chairwoman of the Jan. 6 selection committee, also expressed frustration with the lack of support received by members of her own party for the inquiry. The story goes on “One of the most frustrating things about this period of the last 14 months has been the extent to which, when the brands were low, my colleagues did not take the test into account.… When you were asked to do what you know is right, instead “You played politics and you continue to do it here today,” said Cheney, who testified on behalf of the Jan. 6 commission. “Do not be political about being despised.” The jury said Scavino and Navarro had information related to their investigation into the events that led to the violent January 6 attack on the Capitol, which left five dead and more than 140 police officers injured. The committee is working quickly to complete its work, setting an informal deadline for the expected Republican takeover in November. Lawmakers on the selection committee have expressed frustration with Attorney General Merrick Garland and the Justice Department in recent days over concerns that key figures in the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol could escape justice. “Attorney General Garland, do your job so we can do ours,” said Elaine Luria, D-Va. and a member of the selection committee, he said last week. Trump’s former trade adviser, Peter Navarro, speaks to members of the media outside the White House in 2020. (Stefani Reynolds / Sipa / Bloomberg via Getty Images) Last week, the commission released a 34-page report outlining its case against Scavino and Navarro for failing to comply with summonses and documents detailing their role in Trump’s attempt to overturn the presidential election results. Both men have argued that because they worked for the White House at the time of the uprising, the information sought by the committee is protected by an executive order. Scavino, a staunch ally of Trump who served as one of the former president’s campaign leaders before becoming deputy White House Chief of Staff, also managed the former president’s social media accounts. According to the committee, Scavino “was responsible for the former president’s social media and communication strategy, including in connection with Trump’s post-election efforts to challenge the 2020 election results.” “Sir. Scavino reportedly attended several meetings with the President to discuss election challenges,” the commission said in a statement. “Scavino also monitored social media on behalf of President Trump, and did so at a time when the sites that Mr. Scavino allegedly frequented suggested the possibility of violence on January 6.” The report cites news articles about Scavino monitoring sites, such as TheDonald.win, which he describes as “an online forum frequented by people who openly supported and planned the violence in the weeks leading up to January 6th.” The report states that “Mr Scavino may have warned in advance of the violence on 6 January.” The commission also said that Navarro had refused to provide any information about her investigation, despite speaking candidly in media interviews about his role in planning to help overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. The former White House trade adviser said he was working with Steve Bannon and other Trump allies to develop a plan they called the “Green Bay Sweep” to delay a formal congressional vote count by Congress to gain time for to change the result. . Navarro even described the so-called operation in his book “In Trump Time”, which was released in November. The commission says it informed Navarro that many of the issues he wanted to discuss with him were not protected by executive privileges, such as notes that Navarro had already written in detail in his book. At Monday’s House Rules Committee, Kelly Armstrong, RN.D., a longtime Trump ally, spoke out against the scandal, echoing Scavino’s attorney’s arguments accusing Parliament of acting inappropriately to coerce her. “The inappropriate methods of the Selection Committee undermine the legal principle that every person anywhere in the country has a legal right to object to a summons,” Armstrong said. “The Selection Committee has publicly denied that the recipient of the summons has any choice but to fully comply with his requests. “Anything less will be covered by a criminal referral.” Of the referrals issued by the Jan. 6 selection committee, only one issued to former Trump aide Steve Bannon led to a federal indictment for criminal contempt of Congress. The Justice Department is still considering whether to prosecute former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows. The full House voted in favor of his dismissal on charges of contempt in December. The committee also voted to pass another petition of contempt for former Justice Department official Jeffrey Clark in November, but the petition never reached the House after Clark agreed to attend an interview with the committee. on Fifth Amendment more than 100 times.
