Navarro's indictment was very limited and narrow.

[gab13by13]

Navarro's indictment had nothing to do with his involvement in the Green Bay sweep, his indictment was solely based on his refusal to obey 2 select committee referrals. If convicted Navarro can get from 2 months to 2 years jail time.

This I heard from every legal expert on MSNBC for the past 3 hours.

As an aside, the select committee is frustrated with DOJ regarding the Mark Meadows criminal referral. The committee has asked DOJ when it will decide on his referral, DOJ has not responded to the select committee. Meadows is one of the key players in organizing the coup. Since Garland is an institutionalist I expect that he will honor the private conversations that Meadows had with Trump. DOJ isn't going to go near Meadows, JMO.

[asiliveandbreathe]

1. Post in another thread.I'll take it..is narrow..I wouldn't want a GJ returning 2 indictments

of contempt of congress..

As detailed in the indictment, on Feb. 9, 2022, the Select Committee issued a subpoena to Navarro. The subpoena required him to appear and produce documents to the Select Committee on Feb. 23, 2022, and to appear for a deposition before the Select Committee on March 2, 2022. According to the indictment, Navarro refused to appear to give testimony as required by subpoena and refused to produce documents in compliance with a subpoena.

https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/peter-navarro-indicted-contempt-congress

[fightforfreedom]

2. Nothing is happening, even when something happens?

He was indicted for refusing to appear, give documents to the committee who is investigating the Green bay Sweep, the coup. So of course this has nothing to do with the Green Bay Sweep. Your logic is unique, very selective.

You are also trying to tell us Garland is involved in a cover up protecting Meadows. Your posts are funny.

[WarGamer]

3. He will stretch the legal system to the max... then produce the docs.

[Trueblue Texan]

5. By this logic, DOJ is only...

...interested in making a show of investigating because Garland is an institutionalist and won't touch big dogs. Sorry. I don't buy that. Just because he's not out getting attention for everything he's up to like those in the former administration did, doesn't mean he's not deep into investigating the conspiracy to overthrow the election and willing to deal fairly with perpetrators. Also unlike the previous administration, he's not out there trying to control the narrative about the facts that are going to come out when the investigations are done.

[Novara]

6. The DOJ is not touching Meadows because of his former status ...

... as chief of staff. There is a lot of precedent for this. In this case that's unfortunate, but there's precedent.

But this does not mean that the DOJ won't go after him for something other than giving the middle finger to a subpoena, because remember, that's the gist of why he was referred to the DOJ - because he ignored a subpoena. The DOJ may have bigger fish to fry here.

Wait and see. There's so much we still don't know. So much. I know second-guessing is a favorite past-time of several of you, but wait and see. It's entirely possible the J6 hearings will illustrate Meadows' complicity in the whole mess and the DOJ will act on that. We simply don't know yet and it's too early to tell. The J6 committee STILL isn't done yet. And they haven't presented their information to the public yet, nor have they submitted their final report to the DOJ. There's so much we still do not know.