Information, Please

​For all the understandable attention on getting Steve Bannon to testify before the January 6 House Select Committee – and for Mark Meadows to testify, and Roger Stone and all – I’m not sure it’s as critical an issue as the headlines make it appear.

I have a feeling that the Select Committee has TONS of information, overwhelmingly more than we have any idea.  So much that they don’t even actually need the testimony of the Bannons, Meadows, Stones and their like, because they already know so much from others and documents of what they’d say – if they testified openly and honestly, that is.  However, it’s still important that they either testify (even if just taking the Fifth) or are held in contempt.

I also suspect that if the House Select Committee has the information, so does the Department of Justice.  I don’t know that for certain, of course, but I don’t see why they wouldn’t.  For all I know, in fact, the DOJ may even have more information.

I say that despite the perception by many that the DOJ isn’t doing anything.  But two things are important to keep in mind.  The first is we have no idea what the DOJ is investigating behind the scenes, since they never comment on such things.  And second, we know that the way prosecutors build such cases is by first going after the smaller players, getting evidence, getting them to flip, and building up their cases step-by-step.  In fact, I’ve been very encouraged by how it appears the January 6 Select Committee is doing just that.  And so, I have to believe that the DOJ is doing the same.  I find it near-impossible to think they aren’t.  That doesn’t mean that they’ll find the evidence they need in order to make indictments, but – I think – they know how politically explosive this is, and that if they indict anyone Really Big, they better have every single “I” dotted and every “t” crossed EXACTLY right with no mistakes, and can make their case without any room for the slightest doubt among sane people.

The larger question with the DOJ is what they will do. 

I’m certain the DOJ knows what’s at stake, and knows how urgent much of the country thinks the matter is, though I don’t think they generally care much about public reaction when building or not building a case.  What I’m not certain of is whether Merrick Garland’s natural even-handedness and thoughtfulness which would have been brilliant as a Supreme Court Justice is the best attitude as an Attorney General.  That said, I’m sure they’re investigating and seeing if they can build a prosecutable case.  And that’s the critical point:  the Select Committee has a different standard to meet in issuing their report that the DOJ does to indict someone.  That’s what remains to be seen.

But I’m encouraged by all the public information we know that has become available.  And there one other encouragement:  the more information it’s clear the Select Committee has, the more that people will be falling over themselves to testify and get deals than be caught.

We’ll see.