Garland says he and the prosecutor are watching the January 6 hearing

Garland faces increasing pressure to pursue criminal proceedings from the Democratic Party Former President Donald Trump And his allies were associated with the January 6 attack. The House Committee, which has held two hearings so far this month, will announce a number of findings during June.

Commission Vice-Chairman Liz Cheney said last week that the hearing would include Trump’s plans to replace the then Attorney General and his efforts to put pressure on him. At that time-Vice President Mike Pence To not prove the election result. The Wyoming Republican Party also said the commission would provide “evidence that President Trump has fraudulently pressured state legislators and election officials to change election results.”

on monday, Panel details How people around the president at the time told him he lost the 2020 election-but he refused to hear and instead accepted the false allegation that his lawyer Rudy Giuliani had stolen the election. I relied on you.

After the midterm elections, before getting caught up in the joke of the 2024 presidential election, which will begin later this year, Garland may have missed the moment to file a criminal prosecution against the top executives of the Trump administration, a major at the time. Twenty Democrats told CNN.

Quietly, long-time federal judge Garland has said he hasn’t avoided political affairs, but has vowed to keep politics away from decision-making at the Justice Department. And if the judiciary decides to prosecute a crime related to efforts to overturn the election results, he says there is still plenty of time in President Joe Biden’s administration.

The Ministry of Justice has traditionally postponed political charges with a 60-day grace period before the election day. This will set a deadline in early September. However, this usually applies only to those who are on the ballot in the next election.

Garland declined to comment on the new evidence provided by the Commission and pointed out the long-standing Justice Department’s operational procedure of not commenting on ongoing investigations. “We do it both for the feasibility of the investigation and for what is right about the civil liberties of the people under investigation,” he said.