Page:Introductory Material to the Final Report of the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol.pdf/144

 after that come out. . . As soon as that come out, everybody started talking about it. . . it definitely dispersed a lot of the crowd. . . . We left.”). See supra at _____.

583 Order Re Privilege of Documents Dated January 4-7, 2021 at 3-16, Eastman v. Thompson et al., 594 F. Supp. 3d 1156, (C.D. Cal. March 28, 2022) (No. 8:22-cv-99-DOC-DFM).

584 Order Re Privilege of Documents Dated January 4-7, 2021 at 53-53, 58, Eastman v. Thompson et al., 594 F. Supp. 3d 1156, (C.D. Cal. March 28, 2022) (No. 8:22-cv-99-DOC-DFM) (referring to two Federal criminal statutes).

585 Order Re Privilege of 599 Documents Dated November 3, 2020 – January 20, 2021 at 24, Eastman v. Thompson et al., No. 8:22-cv-99-DOC-DFM, (C.D. Cal. June 7, 2022), ECF No. 24.

586 Order Re Privilege of Documents Dated January 4-7, 2021 at 63-64, Eastman v. Thompson et al., 594 F. Supp. 3d 1156, (C.D. Cal. March 28, 2022) (No. 8:22-cv-99-DOC-DFM).

587 Order Re Privilege of Documents Dated January 4-7, 2021 at 64, Eastman v. Thompson et al., 594 F. Supp. 3d 1156, (C.D. Cal. March 28, 2022) (No. 8:22-cv-99-DOC-DFM).

588 See “23 Months Since the January 6th Attack on the Capitol,” Department of Justice, (Dec. 8, 2022), available at https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/23-months-january-6-attack-capitol.

589 Kyle Cheney, "Rep. Scott Perry Suing to Block DOJ Access to His Cell Phone," Politico, (Aug. 24, 2022), available at https://www.politico.com/news/2022/08/24/rep-scott-perry-suing-to-block-doj-access-to-his-cell-phone00053486; Betsy Woodruff Swan, Josh Gerstein, and Kyle Cheney, "DOJ Searches Home of Former Official Who Aided Alleged Pro-Trump ‘Coup’," Politico, (June 23, 2022), available at https://www.politico.com/news/2022/06/23/law-enforcement-trump-official-coup-00041767.

590 See, e.g., Sarah Murray, Evan Perez, and Katelyn Polantz, “Federal Judge Orders Former Top Lawyers in Trump’s White House to Testify in Criminal Grand Jury Probe,” CNN, (Dec. 1, 2022), available at https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/01/politics/cipollone-philbin-trump-lawyers-testify.

591 Sara Murray and Jason Morris, "Fulton County Prosecutor Investigating Trump Aims for Indictments as Soon as December," CNN, (Oct. 6, 2022), available at https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/06/politics/fani-willis-georgiaprosecutor-trump-indictments-december/index.html.

592 The Special Counsel is to oversee the Department’s ongoing investigation “into whether any person or entity unlawfully interfered with the transfer of power following the 2020 Presidential election or the certification of the Electoral College vote held on or about January 6, 2021.” “Appointment of a Special Counsel,” Department of Justice, (Nov. 18, 2022), available at https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/appointment-special-counsel-0. In addition, the Special Counsel is to oversee the Department’s “ongoing investigation involving classified documents and other Presidential records, as well as the possible obstruction of that investigation. . . .” Id.

593 The House of Representatives held Meadows in contempt for refusing to testify before the Committee, 167 Cong. Rec. H7814-7815 (daily ed. Dec. 14, 2021), but DOJ declined to prosecute him. See Josh Gerstein, Kyle Cheny, and Nicholas Wu, “DOJ Declines to Charge Meadows, Scavino with Contempt of Congress for Defying Jan. 6 Committee,” Politico, (June 3, 2022), available at https://www.politico.com/news/2022/06/03/doj-declines-to-chargemeadows-scavino-with-contempt-of-congress-for-defying-jan-6-committee-00037230.

594 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2).

595 According to DOJ, “[a] conviction under Section 1512(c)(2) requires proof that”: (1) “the natural and probable effect of the defendant’s actions were to obstruct [influence or impede] the official proceeding;” (2) “that [defendant] knew that his actions were likely to obstruct [influence or impede] that proceeding;” and (3) “that he acted with the wrongful or improper purpose of delaying or stopping the official proceeding.” United States v. Andries, No. 21-93 (RC), 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44794 at *37 n.8 (D.D.C. Mar. 14, 2022) (quoting Government’s Response to Defendant’s Second Supplemental Brief at 6); see United States v. Aguilar; 515 U.S. 593, 616 (1995) (Scalia, J., concurring in part, dissenting in part) (describing the “longstanding and well-accepted meaning” of “corruptly” as denoting “an act done with an intent to give some advantage inconsistent with official duty and the rights of others” (quoting United States v. Ogle, 613 F.2d 233, 238 (10th Cir. 1979))).

596 See, e.g., United States v. Gillespie, No. 22-CR-60 (BAH), 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 214833, at *7-8 (D.D.C. Nov. 29, 2022); United States v. Seefried, No. 1:21-cr-287 (TNM), 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 196980, at *2-3 (D.D.C. Oct. 29, 2022); United States v. Miller, 589 F. Supp. 3d 60, 67 (D.D.C. 2022), reconsideration denied, No. 1:21-CR-119 (CJN), 589 F. Supp. 3d 60 (D.D.C. May 27, 2022); United States v. Puma, No. 1:21-CR-454 (PLF), 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48875, at *10 (D.D.C. Mar. 19, 2022); United States v. McHugh, 583 F. Supp. 3d 1, 14-15 (D.D.C. 2022). See also T. Kanefield, “January 6 Defendants Are Raising a Creative Defense. It Isn’t Working,” Washington Post, (Feb. 15, 2022), available at https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2022/02/15/jan-6-official-proceeding/.