Thursday’s hearing hewed to this theory of liability, with members of the panel emphasizing Trump’s “dereliction of duty”—that is, his special duty to act paired with his firm refusal to act—when his supporters, whom he had previously summoned to Washington, D.C., and then directed to march to the Capitol and to “fight like hell,” proceeded to invade the building, assault police officers, causing injury and death, and seek to harm Vice-President Mike Pence and members of Congress as they fled. The evidence showed that Trump watched the siege conducted in his name on live television, fully aware of the violence that his armed supporters were unleashing, and that he refused to do anything to try to stop it, for more than three hours.
[T]he concept is important as a possible path for establishing Trump’s criminal responsibility for the harm that he caused, precisely by not acting when he had a duty to try to stop his supporters. And this route may offer more promise than the other possible criminal charges that have been widely discussed in past months.
Trump’s false view about the election, whether he believed it or not, was irrelevant to his duty to attempt to stop the violence at the Capitol. Quite apart from his role as the Chief Executive and the Commander-in-Chief, Trump knew that his armed supporters were marauding, assaulting, and even seeking to kill, in his name. His instructions to them placed the armed mob at the Capitol, and put people inside the building in harm’s way. That gave Trump a legal duty, as a person responsible for creating physical danger to those in the Capitol, to help stop his supporters once he saw that they had become violent. It is indisputable that he did nothing to stop them for more than three hours, and, if anything, spurred them on with his angry tweets about Pence. Potential charges, then, could include assault and homicide.
[L]ast Thursday’s [J6 Committee] hearing revealed how the simple fact of Trump’s inaction exposed him to liability, under basic criminal-law principles, for more ordinary wrongs, such as destruction of property and assault with a deadly weapon—crimes for which hundreds of his supporters have already been charged or convicted.
The authorities of the Kherson region blocked traffic on the Antonovsky bridge after a missile attack by Ukrainian troops, Deputy Head of the Regional Administration Kirill Stremousov told RIA Novosti.
He clarified that the Armed Forces of Ukraine fired more than ten shells from various artillery systems, most of which were reflected by the air defense system.
The shelling of the Antonovsky bridge may slightly complicate the life of the civilian population of the region, but "it will not affect the outcome of hostilities in any way," Stremousov continued. He stressed that the military has already built several ferry crossings and pontoons, food will be delivered on time.
Holt: “The indictment of a former president, and perhaps a candidate for president, would arguably tear the country apart. Is that your concern as you make your decision down the road here, do you have to think about things like that?”
Garland: “We intend to hold everyone, anyone who was criminally responsible for the events surrounding Jan. 6, for any attempt to interfere with the lawful transfer of power from one administration to another, accountable. That’s what we do. We don’t pay any attention to other issues with respect to that.”
Andrey Sidorov, deputy dean of world politics at Moscow State University, explained why he considered Trump’s presidency to have been particularly useful to Russia: “From my point of view, Trump was engaged in a very positive endeavor: He was destroying the leadership of the United States in the world. He questioned the very structure of global relationships built by his predecessors, along with their partners and allies… He wanted to turn those into commercial relationships and Europe didn’t like it at all.”
Sidorov opined that “a total internal breakdown,” in the United States was needed to overcome an otherwise incredibly strong system of government. Solovyov expressed hope that Trump was exactly the kind of person who could deliver such a shock to the nation: “When a person rolls in like an elephant in a china shop—like Trump—he tears down and aggravates the situation… He consolidates the opponents and supporters, prompting a confrontation.”
Military expert Alexander Artamonov concluded: “The worse, the better. It’s beneficial for us… We’ll put an end to the existence of the old world and start a new era, a new phase—headed by Russia, in my opinion.” Concurring, [show host Vladimir] Solovyov recited a partial verse from Alexander Blok’s poem, “The Twelve,” ominously predicting: “We’ll set the world on fire.”
“Good afternoon, Your Honor. Alvin Bragg for the People. The People move to vacate the conviction and dismiss the indictment of Steven Lopez.
“Mr. Lopez was charged and pleaded guilty in the face of false statements, unreliable forensic analysis and immense external pressure.
“The People’s reinvestigation was completed by our Post-Conviction Justice Unit in collaboration with Mr. Lopez and his counsel.
“Your Honor has our written motion. I would respectfully highlight here two key issues. First, the People concluded that the hair sample comparisons used at the time of the incident were unreliable. Therefore, there remains no physical evidence connecting Mr. Lopez to the charged conduct.
“Second, the statements by the other young men at the time linking Mr. Lopez to the crime have since been recanted. Statements by some of these witnesses previously led to other vacated convictions arising from the same indictment.
“All of the factors taken together – as set forth in our motion papers – show what the people believe are unique circumstances, combined with Mr. Lopez’s youth, made his plea involuntary – and therefore unconstitutional.
“A conviction based on an unconstitutional plea cannot stand.
“Accordingly, the People of the State of New York, together with Mr. Lopez – through his counsel Mr. Renfroe – jointly move to vacate this conviction and to dismiss indictment number 4762/1989 against him.
“Thank you, Your Honor.”
“Enemy shelled X” or “The enemy fired at our positions in X” means Ukraine controls X. “Enemy tried to advance in the direction of X” means all the towns behind X are in Russian hands. Ukraine’s General Staff will never actually announce the loss of a town, they’ll just report Russia’s new advances beyond that town.