Ginni Thomas agrees to January 6 Committee Interview

Why? What crime, what legislative purpose. She didn't work for nor was a part of the Trump administration and she had nothing to do with the groups that came to riot and did so. Should everyone in the country who thought the election was stolen be investigated and towards what criminal charge and why is CONGRESS doing it that is UNCONSTITUTIONAL?

As I have posted before

"According to the committee’s own enabling resolution, which was passed by the House of Representatives in June of 2021, the purpose of the committee is purely investigatory. None of the three stated purposes mention legislation a single time. Instead, the language of the enabling resolution states that the purpose of the committee is to “investigate and report” the facts surrounding the January 6 riot, “examine” evidence collected, and to “build upon” other investigations.

The three stated functions of the committee, per the resolution, are to “investigate the facts” surrounding the riot, “identify” lessons learned, and “issue a final report” on the committee’s investigation. Not only does the enabling resolution not provide any legislative goals for the committee, it explicitly bans the committee from marking up any legislation whatsoever."
https://thefederalist.com/2021/09/2...-major-court-battle-over-executive-privilege/

As I have cited Congressional subpoenas must be for LEGISLATIVE purposes.

"....may wonder whether Congress had authority to issue that subpoena. Yesterday, the United States Supreme Court shed light on that question in its decision in Trump v. Mazars USA, LLP, Nos. 19-715 & 19-760.

The Court’s Decision After describing the history of how subpoena-based disputes between Congress and various presidents have been resolved, the Court discussed the basis for—and limits to—Congress’s subpoena power. Specifically, the Court affirmed that Congress’s subpoena power cannot be used for law enforcement purposes. In other words, Congress cannot use its subpoena authority to put someone on trial for a crime or wrongdoing, nor does Congress have the “power to expose for the sake of exposure.” Slip Op. at 12. Indeed, the Court confirmed that congressional investigations used solely to “punish” those investigated would be “indefensible.” Not only that, the Court reinforced the limitations to the subpoena power, including that the subpoena must serve a “valid legislative purpose,” and is proper only if it is “related to, and in furtherance of, a legitimate task of Congress.” Slip Op. at 11. In addition, the Court reaffirmed that those subject to a congressional subpoena have both constitutional and common law privileges—including attorney-client privilege—against the subpoena."
https://jenner.com/system/assets/pu...s_Congressional_Subpoena_Power.pdf?1594417043