Is the Trump Subpoena Vote Just a Political Stunt?

The House Select Committee investigating the January 6 attack has been accused of carrying out a political stunt by waiting until its possibly final live hearing to vote to subpoena Donald Trump.

During its ninth public presentation on Thursday, the panel looking into the events which led up to the insurrection unanimously voted to issue a congressional subpoena against the former president to testify about the Capitol attack.

The likelihood of Trump complying with the subpoena or choosing not to invoke the Fifth Amendment if he does agree to answer questions are minimal at best.

The Department of Justice (DoJ) may not even decide to charge Trump for refusing to comply with the congressional subpoena, a step it didn't take with former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows and ex-deputy chief of staff Dan Scavino, due to the potential fallout of indicting a former president with a relatively minor offense.

The timing of the vote has also been raised into question. Should the Republican Party retake control of the House in November's midterms, the GOP would almost certainly drop the committee's probe into the January 6 attack at the start of the next congressional term in January 2023 and would likely not recommend the DoJ bring charges against the former president.

Trump would also just need to fight the subpoena in the courts and delay proceedings for a couple of months, a tactic he is adept at carrying out, until the case can be dropped.

Barbara McQuade, a University of Michigan law professor and former U.S attorney, told Newsweek that timing of the subpoena at the end of the hearings and just before the midterms "gives it the whiff of a political stunt."

Following the subpoena vote, Trump himself asked "why didn't the Unselect Committee ask me to testify months ago?" in a post on Truth Social.

"Why did they wait until the very end, the final moments of their last meeting? Because the Committee is a total 'BUST' that has only served to further divide our Country which, by the way, is doing very badly," Trump added. "A laughing stock all over the World?"

Michael Binder, a professor of political science at the University of North Florida, defended the committee's decision to wait until its ninth public hearing to vote on whether to subpoena Trump, likening the move to how investigators operate in a criminal investigation.

"Criminal investigators when putting together the cases, particularly complicated federal cases, will often slowly circle their target gathering as much evidence as possible," Binder told Newsweek.

"Then, once they've essentially got their target 'dead to rights' they'll interview them, knowing full well what the 'truth' of the situation is."

Binder said it would have been more of a political stunt if the panel had opted to subpoena Trump months ago as it would have given the courts time to work through the executive privilege arguments.

"[B]y the time the legal challenges play out it'll be January and Republicans will be in control of the House. And once that happens, this whole process ends. That's why, if this was truly targeted at political gain, this should have happened months ago so you could allow the courts to work through the executive privilege arguments," he added.

"Besides, even under an entirely delusional prism that he testifies prior to November 8, there's already over a million votes cast in this election. It would take a couple weeks to get schedules situated, and by then more than half the people will have already voted," Binder said.

"It's nice the committee says they're going to subpoena him, but I just don't see a scenario where he actually testifies under oath—whether that's on live TV or behind closed doors."

Prior to Thursday's hearing, former federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani said to Newsweek that the committee's work had "largely been political theater" rather than a genuine attempt to convince the DoJ to bring criminal charges against Trump.

Lisa Kern Griffin, a professor at Duke University School of Law, told Bloomberg that vote to subpoena Trump on the panel's final hearing was more "symbolic" than anything.

"It is understandable that they would make that move, and it underscores their point that he was the driver behind the violence and aware of all of the efforts to overturn the election," said Griffin.

"But subpoenaing him is a gesture. It will not result in any testimony from the former president."

Trump hit out at the House Select Committee following its Thursday hearing, accusing it of being a "Charade and Witch Hunt" without mentioning whether he will comply with the subpoena or not.