House Oversight Committee ranking member Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) discussed what might be coming for Trump with MSNBC's Jen Psaki. As we recently reported here, the former leader of the Proud Boys just threw Trump under the bus and backed over him a few times. Psaki rightfully wondered what that might mean for Dear Leader.

PSAKI: Four members of the Proud Boys were just convicted of seditious conspiracy this week and in their defense, they all pointed the finger at the former president. Is it conceivable that special counsel Jack Smith could be considering seditious conspiracy charges against Trump?

RASKIN: Absolutely. I mean, that’s not a defense. If you are accused of conspiracy to overthrow the government or put down the government of the United States, which is what seditious conspiracy means, it’s not a defense to say somebody else told me to do it or somebody else was involved in the conspiracy. Trump could very much have been part of the Proud Boys or the Oath Keepers conspiracy, he might have been involved in an overlapping concentric ring conspiracy with those conspiracies.

We don’t have a system of justice, I hope, as I said at the January six hearings, where the foot-soldiers and the ringleaders down below go to jail and the ringleaders above get a free pass and get to continue their insurrectionist assault on democratic institutions.

So, you know, we’ve seen a lot of justice take place here, the Department of Justice has been doing an excellent job, more than 1000 arrests, hundreds of convictions have taken place, more than a dozen people have been convicted of seditious conspiracy, completely refuting those who said, well, how could this be an insurrection if nobody was trying to overthrow the government? Well, now, they have their answer, more than a dozen people have been convicted of that.

And Donald Trump of course, was impeached by 232 vote margin in the House for inciting insurrection against the union. And 57 of the 100 senators agreed that he had incited an insurrection against the union. We did not reach the magic two-thirds number to convict the president, and yet, we had robust concurrent majorities of both houses of Congress declaring that that is precisely what he did as a matter of constitutional fact.

I would argue that he should have been charged a very long time ago, but maybe better late than never. We'll see how many of these guys flip.