Coronavirus

Subterms

    More stories

    • 238 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump may be gone, but his big lie will linger. Here’s how we can fight it | Jonathan Freedland

      by

      The truth hurts, but lies kill. The past 12 months have demonstrated that with a terrifying clarity. Lies about Covid, insisting that it was a hoax cooked up by the deep state, led millions of people to drop their guard and get infected. And one big lie about the US election – claiming that Donald Trump had won, when he’d lost – led to the storming of the US Capitol and an eruption of violence that left five dead.The impact has been so swift, events rushing by in a blur, that it’s easy to miss the significance. On Wednesday, Donald Trump – already only the third US president in history to be impeached – was impeached again. In the first 222 years of the country’s existence, impeachment happened only once. Now that most severe, vanishingly rare of sanctions has struck twice in a single year.In the past, the impeachment process unfolded at a slow crawl: 11 months separated the day Bill Clinton vowed he’d never had “sexual relations” with Monica Lewinsky and the vote in the House of Representatives to try him for high crimes and misdemeanours. This time it happened in a week, the speed a function of two unusual circumstances: first, the accused has only days left in office; second, those House members were witnesses, Congress the scene of the crime.Unusual too is that this decision was not taken on wholly partisan lines. Ten Republicans broke ranks to put Trump in the dock. Though that only emphasises that 197 Republicans did not: they apparently find it acceptable for a president to incite a violent insurrection against the nation’s democratically elected assembly. Next comes a trial in the Senate. The conventional wisdom says that it will fail – that most Republican senators, terrified of their party’s Trump-worshipping base, will follow the lead of the 197 rather than the 10 – especially once Joe Biden is sworn in at noon on Wednesday and the urgent need to remove Trump from power has faded.Still, it’s possible that the cannier Senate Republicans will adopt the icy cynicism of Mitch McConnell – who briefed that he is open to convicting the president – and seize the chance to be rid of the Trump incubus once and for all. If enough of them vote guilty, then in a second vote the Senate can bar him from holding public office ever again. Ambitious Republicans, eyeing the 2024 contest, are already gaming out that scenario – some of them perhaps within Trump’s own family. Has Ivanka pulled out of attending Biden’s inauguration because she wants to remain viable with the base? If so, she’ll first have to contend with her brother, Donald Jr.And yet, even if Republican leaders manage both to banish Trump and prevent a dynastic succession, they will not be rid of him. It’s become a truism to say that Trumpism will linger, but there is an even more direct legacy that will hang around like a foul stench. That is the fiction that propelled those crowds to break into the halls of Congress: the big lie of the stolen election.“The lie outlasts the liar,” wrote the eminent historian of Nazism Timothy Snyder. If Trump’s supporters continue to believe that their man won big last November – and even now only 22% of Republicans consider the election free and fair – there is no reason why their anger at that theft should abate over the next four years. On the contrary, it will grow and fester, demanding payback in 2024, by force if necessary. Snyder notes darkly that 15 years separated the invention of the big lie that Germany lost the first world war thanks to a Jewish “stab in the back” and Adolf Hitler’s ascendancy to power. Myths endure.All of which raises a much bigger question than what to do with Donald Trump: what to do about the big lie and, more deeply, about the climate in which millions have come to believe it’s true. There has been much diagnosis of the post-truth phenomenon that Trump came to embody, but what about a remedy?A first requirement is to tailor the treatment. The philosopher Prof Quassim Cassam, author of a study of conspiracy theories and their appeal, distinguishes between the producers and consumers of such fictions. The pedlars of lies may have a casual, smirking insouciance towards the truth, but that’s not true of their audience. Those who stormed Congress were not dismissive of truth’s importance; on the contrary, they were prompted to act because of what they believed to have been a vital, hidden truth.The task, then, is not to restore public regard for veracity so much as to equip citizens to distinguish between what’s factually true and what is false. To that end, the philosopher has an unexpected suggestion. Get those who swallow conspiracy theories to ask of those supplying them the very questions they usually direct at the supposedly lying establishment: cui bono? Who benefits from this version of events? What’s their agenda? Except now they won’t be interrogating the BBC or the New York Times but the likes of Alex Jones and the disseminators of the QAnon fantasy. What exactly are they getting out of spinning these tales? A tidy profit, for one thing.Similarly, one might also ask the believers, what’s in it for you? How does believing the QAnon story that a Satan-worshipping ring of paedophiles controls the US government help you? How does it address any of the underlying problems in your life? If you feel life and opportunity have passed you by, how does subscribing to QAnon help? Perhaps it provides a spurious kind of explanation, but it doesn’t make your lot any better. Admittedly, a university professor is not perhaps the ideal carrier of that message. Better, says Cassam, might be a former conspiracy theorist, someone who has broken free.The most obvious corrective to lies are the facts that people can see with their own eyes. Few people still insist Covid is a hoax when they or a loved one are in intensive care. But the next best thing is verifiable information about your immediate community. It’s no accident that the rise of conspiracy thinking and post-truth has coincided with the decline of local news: 265 local titles have closed in the UK since 2005. Into that vacuum have rushed unverifiable, often abstract assertions about the state of the country or the world, spread by social media. With no full account of the reality around you to check against, those assertions can take root.The media is clearly central in all this. In the US, two separate epistemic universes now exist side by side – an MSNBC realm, in which Biden won fair and square; and a Fox News (and now Newsmax and One America News Network) one, in which Trump was robbed. In the US, it’s easy to succumb to nostalgia for the old “fairness doctrine” that demanded balance from the broadcast networks until it was scrapped under Ronald Reagan in 1987. If that were revived, and extended to cable, it might break down the divide, restoring at least a shared basis of agreed facts. Dream on, say the experts: that genie will not return to its bottle. Others suggest a more immediate fix: lobby advertisers to boycott fact-deniers such as Fox, starving them of funds.Still, cable news is only part of the story. Separate silos of knowledge exist and are entrenched just as much on Facebook and Twitter. A more realistic demand might be for external audits of those platforms, opening their algorithms in particular to public view, says the specialist in digital journalism Prof Emily Bell. Why not make transparent the process that ensures falsehoods spread six times faster than the truth on Twitter? While we’re at it, Bell suggests serious investment in the “civic infrastructure of knowledge”, from libraries to new forms of local reporting that might hold power to account.None of these ideas represents a perfect answer. The point is, the twin crises of Covid and Trump have exposed the mortal threat posed by lies and the long war on truth. Now the truth must defend itself – and fight back. More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      US suffers bleak January as Covid rages and vaccination campaign falters

      by

      More Americans are dying of Covid-19 than at any time during the pandemic, the most complex mass vaccination campaign in history is off to a rocky start, and more transmissible strains of the coronavirus are emergent. January is going to be a bleak month.The most pessimistic outlook published by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) predicts up to 438,000 people may be killed by Covid-19 by the end of the month in a staggering upward trend.However, even in this bleak outlook, epidemiologists said there are still reasons for optimism, buoyed by the power of changing human behavior.“My hope is this month will be the peak and things will start to look better in February,” said Caitlin Rivers, an assistant professor at Johns Hopkins University whose work focuses on pandemic response. “I don’t think it will be vaccination that will bend the curve. It will be washing your hands and staying home.”Predictions of a horrific death toll come from the CDC’s “ensemble” forecast, which takes in predictions from three dozen academic centers, all considering different criteria. Ensemble forecasts are known to be more accurate than single forecasts.It is this ensemble model which shows between 405,000 and 438,000 Americans may be killed by Covid-19 by the end of January. Predictions are made in four-week increments.Forecasting further into the future is considered unreliable, because the pandemic can change course so quickly. For example, majorities of Americans across the political spectrum are changing their behaviors to wear masks “every time” they leave the house, according to a recent tracking poll from the Kaiser Family Foundation.But growing discontent could undermine these improvements. In a counter example, some restaurants are breaking indoor dining bans in defiance of government regulations, arguing they cannot survive another lockdown. The CDC considers indoor dining “particularly high risk”.Further, a mass vaccination campaign now underway holds the promise of altering the pandemic, though it has stumbled. The vaccination campaign is not likely reflected in existing forecasts, because only about 3% of the population has been vaccinated.US officials had planned to vaccinate 20 million people before the end of 2020, a goal they have since walked back. To date, only about 9 million people have been vaccinated, representing about one-third of all vaccine doses distributed.Experts attribute this failure to a disengaged White House which pushed vaccine planning to states, a lack of timely federal funds, and failure to conduct public education campaigns to combat vaccine hesitancy. These failures have led to wide discrepancies between states.The differences are, “not a red versus blue state thing,” Dr Ashish K Jha, dean of the Brown University School of Public Health, said on Twitter. “It’s a lack of federal leadership thing.”Again, we’ve turned pandemic response into state by state effortAnd we see large gaps in how states are doingThe Dakotas, West Virginia each vaccinated >5% of their populationAlabama, GA, MS each under 2%Not Red vs Blue state thingIts a lack of federal leadership thing— Ashish K. Jha, MD, MPH (@ashishkjha) January 12, 2021
      Herd immunity, likely requiring near-universal vaccine uptake among US adults, is seen as the ultimate goal of the vaccination campaign. But a tipping point, when the vaccine has observable positive effect, is likely to come earlier. If the Biden-Harris administration can successfully speed up vaccinations, it is possible a reduction in deaths could be the first positive outcome of the vaccination campaign.“We will likely see the positive effects of the vaccination campaign in deaths before new cases,” said Rivers. That is because, “we are specifically targeting people who are at highest risk of severe illness” for vaccination.The Biden-Harris administration is also likely to have more vaccines at their disposal. Janssen Pharmaceuticals is expected to report clinical trial data at the end of January. That data could lead to emergency authorization.Further, a vaccine candidate developed by AstraZeneca and Oxford University which is already in use in the UK is expected to report trial data in February. If it is favorable, that could bring two more vaccines online in the US.The emergence of new, highly transmissible Covid-19 variants is likely to strain these optimistic developments. The B117 variant discovered in the UK is thought to be up to 70% more transmissible, and has been in the US perhaps as early as October. That will require even greater adherence to social distancing measures.“It’s very early days in the US, but we should expect this to be the dominant variant in certain areas of the US (eg, CA) within the next 6-8 weeks (late February/early March),” said Professor Kristian G Andersen, a professor of immunology at Scripps Research Institute on Twitter.While there are 72 lab-confirmed cases of B117 in the US according to the CDC, the true prevalence is unknown. To find that out, the US would need to have a systematic genomic sequencing surveillance program. That is not happening. And B117 is not the only variant of concern.“I’m also quite worried about B1351,” said Rivers. “There is early evidence it is more transmissible [than dominant strains] and we’re looking for that one even less than B117,” she said.The future of Covid-19 outbreaks in the long-term is difficult to predict. The majority of scientists believe Covid-19 will not be eliminated – right now it is too widespread and transmissible. However, several factors could influence the severity of future outbreaks.That includes unknowns, such as whether infection by other coronaviruses confers immunity or partial immunity to Covid-19, the length of time vaccines protect people against the coronavirus, and seasonal variations of the virus.Those unknowns may require, “prolonged or intermittent social distancing … into 2022.” More

    • 175 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      'We have to act now': Joe Biden presents $1.9tn coronavirus relief package – video

      by

      Joe Biden, the US president-elect, has unveiled a $1.9tn coronavirus stimulus package to tackle the virus and the economic crisis it has triggered.
      Vaccination and testing efforts in the US will be sustained with $160bn, a further $350bn will be issued for state and local government health programmes, and $1tn is to go families
      ‘No time to waste’: Biden unveils $1.9tn coronavirus stimulus package More

    • 163 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      The $2,000 stimulus cheques alone won't work – the US needs better infrastructure

      by

      With the Democrats’ stunning sweep of Georgia’s two Senate run-off elections giving them control of both houses of Congress as of 20 January, the idea of $2,000 stimulus cheques for every household is sure to be back on the agenda in the US. But although targeted relief for the unemployed should unquestionably be a priority, it is not clear that $2,000 cheques for all would in fact help to sustain the US economic recovery.One post-pandemic scenario is a vigorous demand-driven recovery as people gorge on restaurant meals and other pleasures they’ve missed for the past year. Many Americans have ample funds to finance a splurge. Personal savings rates soared following the disbursement of $1,200 cheques last spring. Many recipients now expect to save their recent $600 relief payments, either because they have been spared the worst of the recession or because spending opportunities remain locked down.So, when it’s safe to go out again, the spending floodgates will open, supercharging the recovery. The Fed has already promised to “look through” – that is, to disregard – any temporary inflation resulting from this euphoria.But we shouldn’t dismiss the possibility of an alternative scenario in which consumers instead display continued restraint, causing last year’s high savings rates to persist. Prior to the Covid-19 crisis, some two-thirds of US households lacked the savings to replace six weeks of take-home pay. Having reminded Americans of the precariousness of their world, the pandemic is precisely the type of searing experience that induces fundamental changes in behaviour.We know that living through a large economic shock, especially in young adulthood, can have an enduring impact on people’s beliefs, including those about the prevalence of future shocks. Such changes in outlook are consistent with psychological research showing that people rely on “availability heuristics” – intellectual shortcuts based on recalled experience – when assessing the likelihood of an event. For those parents unable to put food on the table during the pandemic, the experience will establish a heuristic that will be hard to forget.Moreover, neurological research shows that economic stress, including from large shocks, increases anabolic steroid hormone levels in the blood, which renders individuals more risk-averse. Neuroscientists have also documented that traumatic stress can cause permanent synaptic changes in the brain that further shape attitudes and behaviour, in this case plausibly in the direction of greater risk aversion.Though the pandemic is in some ways more akin to a natural disaster than an economic shock, natural disasters also can affect saving patterns: savings rates tend to be higher in countries with a greater incidence of earthquakes and hurricanes.This behavioural response is largest in developing countries, where weak construction standards amplify the impact of such disasters. One study of Indonesia, for example, found large increases in both the perceived risk of a future disaster and risk-averse behaviour among people who had recently experienced an earthquake or flood. While the response to natural disasters may be more moderate in advanced economies – where individuals expect that their government will compensate them – some lasting impact will almost certainly remain.The upshot is that we can’t count on a burst of US consumer spending to fuel the recovery once the rollout of Covid-19 vaccines is complete. And if private spending remains subdued, continued support from public spending will be necessary to sustain the recovery.But putting $2,000 cheques in people’s bank accounts won’t solve this problem because unspent money doesn’t stimulate demand. With interest rates already near zero, the availability of additional funding won’t even encourage investment. Sending out $2,000 cheques to everyone thus would be the fiscal equivalent of pushing on a string.Fortunately, there is an alternative: the president-elect Joe Biden’s $2tn infrastructure plan would mean additional jobs and spending, which is what the post-pandemic economy really needs. Better still, under the prevailing low interest rates, this option would stimulate job creation without crowding out private investment.Guardian business email sign-upAlthough Biden’s plan will require more government borrowing, infrastructure spending that has a rate of return of 2% will more than pay for itself when the yield on 10-year US treasury bonds is 1.15%. By raising output, such expenditure reduces rather than increases the burden on future generations. The International Monetary Fund estimates that, under current circumstances, well-targeted infrastructure investment pays for itself in just two years.Obviously, the “well targeted” part is important. President Donald Trump was right that the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act was loaded with pork, not least his own “three-martini lunch” tax deduction for businesses. There’s every reason to question whether Congress can do better when crafting an infrastructure bill.In response to this problem, countries such as New Zealand have established independent commissions to design and monitor infrastructure spending initiatives. If Covid-19 changes everything, then maybe it can change the way the US government organises infrastructure spending. Creating an independent infrastructure commission with real powers would go a long way toward reassuring the sceptics and insuring the recovery against the risks posed by the pandemic’s lingering behavioural effects. More

    • 125 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      'No time to waste': Biden unveils $1.9tn coronavirus stimulus package

      by

      Joe Biden has unveiled a $1.9tn coronavirus relief proposal, aimed at urgently combating the pandemic and the economic crisis it has triggered. As the US faces its deadliest stage of the pandemic, Biden described the moment as “a crisis of deep human suffering”.
      The ambitious, wide-ranging plan includes $160bn to bolster vaccination and testing efforts, and other health programs and $350bn for state and local governments, as well as $1tn in relief to families, via direct payments and unemployment insurance.
      “There’s no time to waste,” Biden said. “We have to act and we have to act now.”
      Details of the aid package had been released by Biden’s transition team earlier on Thursday.
      If adopted, the proposal would tack on $1,400 to the $600 in direct payments for individuals that Congress approved most recently. “We will finish the job of getting a total of $2,000 in relief to people who need it the most,” Biden said.
      Supplemental unemployment insurance would also increase to $400 a week from $300 a week and would be extended to September.
      “During this pandemic, millions of Americans, through no fault of their own, have lost the dignity and respect that comes with a job and a paycheck,” Biden said on Thursday, speaking from Wilmington, Delaware. “There is real pain overwhelming the real economy.”
      Biden ran on the promise that he would deliver Americans through the coronavirus crisis, and more recently has pledged to ramp up vaccination efforts, and oversee the administering of 100m covid-19 jabs during his first 100 days. More

    • 200 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Donald Trump becomes the first US president to be impeached for a second time – live

      by

      Key events

      Show

      4.36pm EST16:36
      Trump becomes the first US president to be impeached twice

      4.25pm EST16:25
      Article of impeachment reaches majority level of support

      3.54pm EST15:54
      House votes on article of impeachment against Trump

      3.51pm EST15:51
      Seventh House Republican says he will support impeachment

      3.37pm EST15:37
      McConnell indicates he is open to convicting Trump

      2.09pm EST14:09
      Statement from the president

      2.05pm EST14:05
      Afternoon summary

      Live feed

      Show

      4.48pm EST16:48

      The most surprising Republican “yes” vote on impeachment came from Tom Rice of South Carolina.
      Before the vote, Rice did not offer any indication that he was planning to support impeachment, and he was not considered one of the likely “yes” votes.
      Rice has not yet put out a statement explaining his vote, but this tweet from last week, sent during the violent riot at the Capitol, captures his frustration with Donald Trump.

      Congressman Tom Rice
      (@RepTomRice)
      To all my friends back home, I am fine. Capitol Police evacuated us from the Capitol Building. DC is in chaos. This will accomplish nothing.Where is the President!? He must ask people to disperse and restore calm now.

      January 6, 2021

      4.40pm EST16:40

      Here are the ten House Republicans who voted to impeach Donald Trump on the charge of incitement of insurrection:
      John Katko of New York.
      Liz Cheney of Wyoming.
      Adam Kinzinger of Illinois.
      Fred Upton of Michigan.
      Jaime Herrera Beutler of Washington state.
      Dan Newhouse of Washington state.
      Peter Meijer of Michigan.
      Tom Rice of South Carolina.
      Anthony Gonzalez of Ohio.
      David Valadao of California.
      The Republicans’ votes made this the most bipartisan presidential impeachment in history. In comparison, five Democrats voted to impeach Bill Clinton in 1998.

      4.36pm EST16:36

      Trump becomes the first US president to be impeached twice

      The House has voted to impeach Donald Trump on the charge of incitement of insurrection, after the president incited a violent mob to storm the Capitol last week, resulting in five deaths.
      The final vote was 232-197, with 10 House Republicans supporting the measure.
      Trump has become the first president in US history to ever be impeached by the House twice.
      The matter will now go before the Senate, which will decide whether Trump should be convicted and removed from office.
      The trial will likely conclude after Joe Biden takes office anyway, but a conviction would prevent Trump from running for president again.

      4.26pm EST16:26

      A tenth House Republican, David Valadao of California, has voted “yes” on the article of impeachment against Donald Trump.
      The vote currently stands at 229-195 in favor of impeachment.
      Nine members have not yet voted.

      4.25pm EST16:25

      Article of impeachment reaches majority level of support

      The article of impeachment has now reached a majority level of support, with at least 229 House members voting “yes” on impeaching Donald Trump for a second time.
      The vote currently stands at 229-194.
      But the vote is still ongoing, and members can change their votes until it is gaveled out. Stay tuned.

      4.21pm EST16:21

      Mike Gallagher of Wisconsin, Ann Wagner of Missouri and Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania have all voted “no” on impeachment.
      The three members were some of the last remaining Republicans who were considered possible “yes” votes, but they have apparently decided against impeaching the president for a second time.
      It’s looking like the total number of Republicans supporting impeachment will likely be nine, but we won’t know for sure until the vote is complete.

      4.14pm EST16:14

      Seven House Republicans have already voted “yes” on impeaching Donald Trump, and at least two more are expected to do so.
      Assuming no one charges their vote, this will be the most bipartisan presidential impeachment in US history, as a CBC News reporter noted.

      Alexander Panetta
      (@Alex_Panetta)
      BREAKING: This is now the most *bipartisan* presidential impeachment in American history.Six Republicans have already voted to impeach Trump – the most ever from one party again a president of that same party. Previous record: five Democrats vs Bill Clinton in 1998.

      January 13, 2021

      4.11pm EST16:11

      In his statement explaining his vote in support of impeachment, Anthony Gonzalez also accused Donald Trump of having “abandoned his post” amid the violence at the Capitol.
      Gonzalez argued that the president’s failure to act further endangered those present at the Capitol.
      The Republican congressman described the president’s actions as “fundamental threats” to American democracy.

      4.04pm EST16:04

      Two more House Republicans, Tom Rice of South Carolina and Anthony Gonzalez of Ohio, have voted “yes” on impeaching the president.
      Assuming they do not change their votes, they will be the eighth and ninth Republicans to support impeachment.
      In a statement, Gonzalez said he was supporting impeachment because Donald Trump “helped organize and incite a mob that attacked the United States Congress”.

      Rep. Anthony Gonzalez
      (@RepAGonzalez)
      See my full statement on impeachment below. pic.twitter.com/pBBYRI2RUP

      January 13, 2021

      3.54pm EST15:54

      House votes on article of impeachment against Trump

      The House has now concluded its two hours of debate on the article of impeachment against Donald Trump.
      The chamber has moved on to a roll-call vote on the article, incitement of insurrection.
      The measure is expected to pass with the support of all Democrats and at least seven Republicans.

      3.51pm EST15:51

      Seventh House Republican says he will support impeachment

      Peter Meijer, a Republican congressman from Michigan, has become the seventh Republican House member to say he will support the impeachment of Donald Trump.
      “The President betrayed his oath of office by seeking to undermine our constitutional process, and he bears responsibility for inciting the insurrection last week,” Meijer said in a statement. “With a heavy heart, I will vote to impeach President Donald J. Trump.”

      Rep. Peter Meijer
      (@RepMeijer)
      President Trump betrayed his oath of office by seeking to undermine our constitutional process, and he bears responsibility for inciting the insurrection we suffered last week. With a heavy heart, I will vote to impeach President Donald J. Trump. pic.twitter.com/SREfFp0nd2

      January 13, 2021

      Meijer, a freshman congressman, previously said he was considering supporting impeachment, but this is the first time he has clearly said he will do so.
      Seven Republicans have now said they will vote to impeach Trump, which means the president will be impeached in a bipartisan vote. When Trump was impeached the first time, only Democrats supported the measure.

      3.45pm EST15:45

      The debate on the article of impeachment against Donald Trump is now wrapping up, and the House will soon move on to the final vote on impeachment.
      Steve Scalise, the House minority whip, was the final Republican speaker, and he applauded the Capitol Police officers who work to protect lawmakers every day. Two Capitol Police officers have died since last week, when a violent, pro-Trump mob stormed the Capitol.
      House members in the chamber stood to applaud the fallen Capitol Police officers, marking a rare moment of bipartisanship during today’s contentious debate.
      The House majority leader, Steny Hoyer, is the final Democratic speaker, and he has repeatedly cited the words of Republican Liz Cheney, who has said she will support impeachment.
      “Will we stay silent, will we not stand up and say this is not acceptable?” Hoyer said. “Donald Trump has constructed a glass house of lies, fear-mongering and sedition.”

      3.37pm EST15:37

      McConnell indicates he is open to convicting Trump

      The Guardian’s Daniel Strauss reports:
      Mitch McConnell, the top-ranking Republican in the Senate, indicated to colleagues that he is undecided on how he would vote on impeachment.
      In a letter to his Senate colleagues sent out Wednesday afternoon, as members of the House moved forward with impeaching Donald Trump, the Kentucky Republican wrote, “while the press has been full of speculation, I have not made a final decision on how I will vote and I intend to listen to the legal arguments when they are presented to the Senate.”
      The line in his note to Senate colleagues follows The New York Times reporting Tuesday night that McConnell is pleased with Democrats’ move to impeach the president again and has been sharing that sentiment with associates.
      McConnell’s openness to impeaching the president, a fellow Republican, is the most significant sign so far that congressional Republican leaders are less resistant to Trump’s impeachment than the last time the president was impeached.
      In the House, congresswoman Liz Cheney of Wyoming, the House Republican Conference chair, said she would vote to impeach Trump. Five other House Republicans have also come out in support of impeachment.
      It’s unclear how Senate Republicans will vote. It’s also unclear if McConnell’s openness will offer cover for other Republicans who privately would like to see the president impeached. Two-thirds of senators would have to support conviction in order for him to be removed from office.

      3.33pm EST15:33

      Congressman Seth Moulton, a Massachusetts Democrat and a Marine Corps veteran, noted that there are currently more troops in Washington than in Afghanistan.

      Aaron Rupar
      (@atrupar)
      Rep. Moulton: “There are more troops right now in Washington DC than in Afghanistan. And they are here to defend us against the commander in chief, the POTUS and his mob.” pic.twitter.com/bpf9mdWhYi

      January 13, 2021

      “And they are here to defend us against the commander in chief, the president of the United States and his mob,” Moulton said.
      Moulton encouraged his colleagues to look at the National Guard members protecting the Capitol and search for “an ounce of their courage.”

      3.17pm EST15:17

      Young Kim, a freshman Republican congresswoman who flipped a California district that Donald Trump lost by 10 points, will vote against impeachment.

      Young Kim
      (@RepYoungKim)
      However, I believe impeaching the president now will fail to hold him accountable or allow us to move forward once President-elect Biden is sworn in. This process will only create more fissures in our country as we emerge from some of our darkest days. https://t.co/NK1EdO5xoN pic.twitter.com/IJIlb6oGva

      January 13, 2021

      “The violence we saw last week was disgusting. Our law enforcement was attacked, lives were lost and more were put in danger. These rioters must be held accountable. Words have consequences and I believe the president should also be held accountable,” Kim said in a statement.
      “However, I believe impeaching the president at this time will fail to hold him accountable or allow us to move forward once President-elect Biden is sworn in. This process will only create more fissures in our country as we emerge from some of our darkest days.”
      So far, only six House Republicans have signaled they intend to support the article of impeachment.

      3.09pm EST15:09

      It is now past 3 pm in Washington, but the House has not yet moved on to the final vote on the article of impeachment.
      The House majority leader, Steny Hoyer, said yesterday that the final vote would occur at roughly 3 pm, but there are about 20 minutes of debate left.
      Once the debate has concluded, the chamber will move on to voting on the article, which is expected to be approved.

      2.54pm EST14:54

      Chip Roy, a Republican of Texas who has criticized his colleagues’ efforts to cast baseless doubt upon the legitimacy of the presidential election, said he believed Donald Trump had committed “impeachable” offenses.
      “The president of the United States deserves universal condemnation for what was clearly, in my opinion, impeachable conduct, pressuring the vice president to violate his oath to the constitution.” Roy said in his speech.
      And yet Roy will not be supporting the article of impeachment. The congressman argued the article had been drafted in a manner that targeted political speech itself.
      Here’s what the article says, in part: “Donald John Trump engaged in high Crimes and Misdemeanors by inciting violence against the Government of the United States …
      “Donald John Trump, by such conduct, has demonstrated that he will remain a threat to national security, democracy, and the Constitution if allowed to remain in office[.]” More