Fringe Groups and Movements

Subterms

    More stories

    • 150 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Can France’s Far Right Win Over the ‘Beavers’? One Mayor Shows How

      by

      AdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyCan France’s Far Right Win Over the ‘Beavers’? One Mayor Shows HowIn the southern city of Perpignan, voters who had long built a dam against the far right turned in the last election. Some wonder whether it’s a harbinger of things to come.Last year Perpignan became the largest city to come under the control of the National Rally, the far-right party led by Marine Le Pen.Credit…Dmitry Kostyukov for The New York TimesNorimitsu Onishi and March 13, 2021, 5:28 a.m. ETLire en françaisPERPIGNAN, France — Riding high in the polls ahead of the next presidential election, feeling they’ve won the battle over ideas, smelling blood in the Élysée Palace, leaders of France’s far right cocked their eyes across the land at perhaps the one thing standing between them and power: beavers.That is what some French call the voters who, time and again, have cast political differences aside and put in power anyone but far-right candidates — raising a dam against them as real beavers do against predators. Voters did precisely that in 2014 in Perpignan, a medieval city of pastel-color buildings on the Mediterranean near the border with Spain.But last year, the dam broke and Perpignan became the largest city under the control of the National Rally, the far-right party led by Marine Le Pen. Today the city of more than 120,000 is being closely watched as an incubator of far-right strategy and as a potential harbinger of what a presidential election rematch pitting Ms. Le Pen against President Emmanuel Macron could look like.A victory for Ms. Le Pen would be earth-shattering for France, and all of Europe. It has been an article of faith in France that a party whose leadership has long shown flashes of anti-Semitism, Nazi nostalgia and anti-immigrant bigotry would never make it through the country’s two-stage presidential electoral juggernaut.But steadily her party has advanced farther than many French have been prepared to countenance, and Ms. Le Pen’s debut in the final round of France’s last presidential election in 2017 came as a shock to the system.She may still be a relative long shot, given the party’s history in France, but for now perhaps not as long as she once was. Recent polls show her matching Mr. Macron in the first round of next year’s presidential contest and trailing by a few points in a second-round runoff. In a poll released Thursday, 48 percent of respondents said Ms. Le Pen would probably be France’s next president, up 7 percent compared with half a year ago.“They’ve been forming dams since 2002 now,” said Louis Aliot, the mayor of Perpignan and a longtime National Rally leader. “So to ask them again to form a dam with Macron — but what’s changed? Nothing at all.” Voter-built dams were no longer effective, unlike those made by the animal, he said, adding, “When beavers build dams, it works.”The mayor of Perpignan, Louis Aliot, succeeded in softening the party’s image in Perpignan.Credit…Dmitry Kostyukov for The New York TimesIn 2014, many voters on the left and right had successfully united in a “Republican front” against Mr. Aliot — the same way they raised a dam against Ms. Le Pen in the 2017 presidential election won by Mr. Macron.But in the intervening years, Mr. Aliot succeeded in softening the party’s image in Perpignan and won new converts, even as disillusioned beavers stayed home or left blank ballots on voting day in 2020. Mr. Aliot won handily — in a rematch against his opponent of 2014 who, like Mr. Macron, had tilted rightward and marketed himself as the best check against the far right.Nationally, Ms. Le Pen, who was Mr. Aliot’s common-law partner for a decade until 2019, has hewed to the same playbook in sanitizing her party’s image, even amid questions about the depth and sincerity of those efforts.She has softened the party’s longtime populist economic agenda — for instance, by dropping a proposal to exit the euro and by promoting green reindustrialization — while holding onto or even toughening the party’s core, hard-line positions on immigration, Islam and security.The effort by the party to wade into the mainstream has presented a special quandary for Mr. Macron. Sensing the political threat, and lacking a real challenge on his left, he has tried to fight the National Rally on its own turf — moving to the right to vie for voters who might be tempted to defect to it. Doing so, Mr. Macron hopes to keep the far right at bay.But the shift also helps destigmatize the far right, or at least many of its messages, argue National Rally leaders, some members of Mr. Macron’s own party and political analysts. Mr. Macron’s strategy may have the unintended consequence of helping the National Rally in its decades-long struggle to become a normal party, they say. “It legitimizes what we’ve been saying,” Mr. Aliot said. “These are the people who’ve been saying for 30 years: Be careful, they’re nasty, they’re fascists, because they target Muslims. All of a sudden, they’re talking like us.”Mr. Macron and his ministers, in recent months, have tried to appropriate the extreme right’s issues with new policies and dog whistles, talking tough on crime and pushing through security bills to try to limit filming of the police, which was dropped after protests, and crack down on what they call Islamist separatism. In a recent televised debate, the interior minister, Gérald Darmanin, even accused Ms. Le Pen of being “shaky” and “softer than we are” on Islamism.President Emmanuel Macron has tried to fight the National Rally on its own turf — moving to the right to vie for voters who might be tempted to defect to it.Credit…Pool photo by Thomas CoexMarine Le Pen has been sanitizing her party’s image, even amid questions about the depth and sincerity of those efforts.Credit…Alain Jocard/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesThey have turned to identity politics, ordering an investigation into “Islamo-leftism” at French universities and other so-called American-inspired ideas that they say threaten to undermine French values.“The more we go on their ground, the stronger we make them,” Jean-Michel Mis, a national lawmaker from Mr. Macron’s party, said of the National Rally. “So their leaders are very pleased because, in the end, we’re legitimizing their campaign themes.”Nicolas Lebourg, a political scientist specializing on the National Rally, said that adopting the far right’s themes has often backfired. “What they’re currently doing is campaigning for Marine Le Pen,” he said.Even as Mr. Macron has portrayed himself as the best candidate to protect France from the far right, polls show voters may be growing weary of being asked to vote against a candidate, rather than for one.Among the former beavers of Perpignan were Jacques and Régine Talau, a retired couple who had always voted for the mainstream right, helping build the dam against the far right in Perpignan in 2014 and in the presidential election of 2017.Historically conservative and economically depressed, Perpignan was perhaps naturally receptive to Ms. Le Pen’s party, which had won smaller, struggling cities in the south and north in recent years. But winning over the Talaus of Perpignan was a tipping point.Their neighborhood, Mas Llaro, an area of stately homes on large plots amid vineyards on the city’s eastern fringe, is Perpignan’s wealthiest. In 2020, more than 60 percent of its residents voted for Mr. Aliot — 7 percentage points higher than his overall tally and 10 percentage points more than in 2014.Among the former “beavers” of Perpignan were Jacques Talau, left, and his wife, Régine, center, a retired couple who had always voted for the mainstream right.Credit…Dmitry Kostyukov for The New York TimesMas Llaro had always voted for the mainstream right.But disillusioned and weary of the status quo, the Talaus, like many others, voted for the first time for the far right last year, drawn by Mr. Aliot’s emphasis on cleanliness and crime, saying their home had been broken into twice.Though satisfied with the mayor’s performance, Mr. Talau said he would still join the dam against the far right in next year’s presidential contest and hold his nose to vote for Mr. Macron. But Ms. Talau was now considering casting a ballot for Ms. Le Pen.“She’s put water in her wine,” Ms. Talau said, adding that Mr. Macron was not “tough enough.”Mr. Aliot’s opponent in 2014 and 2020, a center-right politician named Jean-Marc Pujol, had pressed further to the right in an unsuccessful move to fend off the far right. He increased the number of police officers, giving Perpignan the highest number per capita of any large city in France, according to government data.Even so, many of his core supporters appeared to trust the far right more on crime and still defected, while many left-leaning beavers complained that they had been ignored and refused to take part in dam-building again, said Agnès Langevine, who represented the Greens and the Socialists in the 2020 mayoral election.“And they told us, ‘In 2022, if it’s between Macron and Le Pen, I won’t do it again,’ ” she added.Mr. Lebourg, the political scientist, said that Mr. Aliot had also won over conservative, upper-income voters by adopting a mainstream economic message — the same strategy adopted by Ms. Le Pen.Since taking over the party a decade ago, she has worked hard at “dédiabolisation” — or “de-demonizing” — the party.A war memorial in Perpignan, a conservative and economically depressed city that has been receptive to the National Rally party’s message.Credit…Dmitry Kostyukov for The New York TimesIn 2015, Ms. Le Pen expelled her own father, Jean-Marie Le Pen, who founded the party and had a long history of playing down the Holocaust.While she popularized dog whistles like “turning savage,” she consciously stayed clear of explosive language conjuring up a supposed “great replacement” of France’s white population by African and Muslim immigrants. In 2018, she rebranded the National Front as the more inclusive “Rally.”Still, the party wants to toughen migration policies for foreign students and reduce net immigration by twentyfold.It also wants to ban the public wearing of the Muslim veil and limit the “presence of ostentatious elements” outside religious buildings if they clash with the environment, in an apparent reference to minarets.In Perpignan, Mr. Aliot has focused on crime, spending $9.5 million to hire 30 new police officers, open new stations, and set up bicycle and nighttime patrols, responding to an increase in drug trafficking.Jeanne Mercier, 24, a left-leaning voter, said many around her had been “seduced” by the far-right mayor.Camille Rosa, left, a left-leaning voter, said she doesn’t know whether she would join again in building a dam against Ms. Le Pen in presidential elections next year.Credit…Dmitry Kostyukov for The New York Times“We’re the test to show France that the National Front is making things work and that people are rallying and are happy,” she said, referring to the party by its old name. “In the end, it’s not the devil that we imagined.”Camille Rosa, 35, said she doesn’t know whether she would join again in building a dam against Ms. Le Pen next year. The attacks by the president’s ministers against “Islamo-leftism” and scholars on feminism, gender and race had fundamentally changed her view of the government of Mr. Macron.“I have the impression that their enemies are no longer the extreme right at all,” she said, “but it’s us, people on the left.”AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

    • 75 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      À Perpignan, l’extrême-droite rallie ‘les castors’

      by

      AdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyÀ Perpignan, l’extrême-droite rallie ‘les castors’Dans cette ville méridionale, des électeurs qui avaient longtemps fait barrage à l’extrême-droite ont basculé aux dernières municipales. Un signe avant-coureur pour la prochaine présidentielle?Perpignan est devenue l’an dernier la plus grande ville de France à passer sous contrôle  du Rassemblement National, le parti d’extrême-droite dirigé par Marine Le Pen.Credit…Dmitry Kostyukov pour The New York TimesNorimitsu Onishi and March 13, 2021, 5:28 a.m. ETRead in EnglishPERPIGNAN, France — Forts de bons sondages en amont de la prochaine élection présidentielle, estimant avoir gagné la bataille des idées et sentant le vent tourner à l’Élysée, les leaders de l’extrême-droite française n’ont peut-être plus qu’un obstacle entre eux et le pouvoir: les castors.C’est ainsi que certains en France surnomment ceux qui, d’un scrutin à l’autre, laissant de côté leurs différences politiques, choisissent d’élire n’importe qui plutôt que les candidats d’extrême-droite — érigeant un barrage contre ces derniers comme le font les vrais castors pour se protéger des prédateurs. C’est précisément ce qu’ont fait, aux municipales de 2014, les électeurs de Perpignan, cette ville médiévale méditerranéenne aux bâtisses couleur pastel située non loin de la frontière espagnole.Mais l’année dernière le barrage a cédé, et Perpignan est devenue la plus grande ville à passer sous contrôle du Rassemblement National d’extrême-droite que dirige Marine Le Pen. Aujourd’hui, cette ville de plus de 120 000 habitants est scrutée avec attention : elle est un incubateur de la stratégie de l’extrême-droite et un potentiel signe avant-coureur de ce à quoi pourrait ressembler le deuxième match présidentiel opposant Marine Le Pen à Emmanuel Macron.Une victoire de Mme Le Pen bouleverserait la France et l’Europe entière. Il a longtemps été considéré comme un principe acquis qu’un parti dont la direction a montré des signes d’antisémitisme, de nostalgie du nazisme et d’intolérance anti-immigrés n’arriverait jamais à remporter l’élection présidentielle.Mais petit à petit, son parti a progressé bien plus que beaucoup de Français n’étaient prêts à l’admettre. L’arrivée de Mme Le Pen au second tour de la dernière présidentielle française, en 2017, a été un électrochoc pour le système.Son combat est loin d’être gagné, vu l’historique de son parti en France, mais peut–être s’est-elle rapprochée de la ligne d’arrivée. Un sondage récent lui attribue un score égal à celui de M. Macron au premier tour de l’élection présidentielle de l’année prochaine, et une défaite par quelques points seulement au second. D’après un sondage publié jeudi dernier, 48% des Français estiment probable la victoire de Marine Le Pen à la présidentielle, soit 7% de plus qu’il y a six mois.“Ils ont fait barrage depuis 2002 maintenant”, dit Louis Aliot, maire de Perpignan et cacique de longue date du Rassemblement National. “Alors leur redemander de faire barrage avec Macron, mais qu’est-ce qui a changé? Rien du tout.” Les barrages des électeurs ne sont plus efficaces, contrairement à ceux de l’animal, estime-t-il. “Les castors, quand ils construisent des barrages, ça marche.”Le maire de Perpignan, Louis Aliot, a réussi à modérer l’image de son parti  à Perpignan.Credit…Dmitry Kostyukov pour The New York TimesEn 2014, de nombreux électeurs de gauche comme de droite avaient formé avec succès un “front républicain” contre M. Aliot — de la même manière qu’ils avaient fait barrage à Mme Le Pen pour l’élection présidentielle de 2017 remportée par M. Macron.Mais depuis lors, M. Aliot a réussi à adoucir l’image du parti à Perpignan et à convertir de nouveaux électeurs, tandis que certains castors désabusés sont restés chez eux ou ont voté blanc le jour de l’élection en 2020. M. Aliot a gagné haut la main — une forme de revanche contre le même adversaire qu’en 2014 qui, comme M. Macron, avait viré à droite et s’était présenté comme le meilleur rempart contre l’extrême-droite.À l’échelle nationale, Mme Le Pen, qui fut pendant dix ans, jusqu’en 2019, la partenaire au civil de M. Aliot, adopte la même tactique d’assainissement de l’image de son parti, même si des questions demeurent quant à la réalité et la sincérité de ses efforts.Elle a modéré le programme économique longtemps populiste de son parti — en renonçant par exemple à la proposition d’abandonner l’euro et en promouvant la réindustrialisation verte — tout en perpétuant, voire en durcissant, les positions-clés et fermes du parti sur l’immigration, l’islam et la sécurité.Les efforts que déploie le parti pour se fondre dans les courants politiques traditionnels mettent M. Macron face à un dilemme. Sentant le danger politique à droite et sans réel challenger à sa gauche, il tente de combattre le Rassemblement National sur son propre terrain — en opérant un glissement vers la droite pour disputer à ce dernier les électeurs tentés de changer de camp. Ce faisant, M. Macron espère tenir l’extrême-droite à distance.Mais ce changement a aussi contribué à destigmatiser l’extrême-droite, tout du moins nombre de ses propositions, selon les leaders du Rassemblement National, des membres du propre parti de M. Macron, et des politologues. La stratégie de M. Macron pourrait avoir la conséquence imprévue d’aider le Rassemblement National dans son combat de plusieurs décennies pour devenir un parti normal, préviennent-ils.“Ça légitime ce qu’on dit”, dit M Aliot. “C’est des gens qui vous ont dit pendant 30 ans : attention, ceux-là ils sont méchants, ce sont des fachos, parce qu’ils s’en prennent aux musulmans. Tout d’un coup ils parlent comme nous.”Ces derniers mois, M. Macron et ses ministres ont tenté de s’approprier des thèmes chers à l’extrême-droite au moyen de politiques et d’expressions nouvelles. Ils ont adopté une posture ferme sur la criminalité, proposé des lois pour limiter la diffusion des images de policiers — abandonnées suite à des manifestations — et sévi sur ce qu’ils nomment le séparatisme islamiste. Lors d’un récent débat télévisé face à Marine Le Pen, le ministre de l’Intérieur Gérald Darmanin accusait celle-ci d’être “branlante” et “plus molle” sur l’islamisme que le gouvernement.Emmanuel Macron entreprend de combattre le Rassemblement National sur son propre terrain — glissant vers la droite pour disputer à ce dernier les électeurs tentés de faire défection.Credit…Pool photo by Thomas CoexMarine Le Pen tente d’assainissement l’image de son parti, même si des questions demeurent quant à la réalité et la sincérité de ses efforts.Credit…Alain Jocard/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesIls ont adopté une stratégie identitaire, commandant une enquête sur “l’islamo-gauchisme” dans les universités françaises et d’autres idées supposées d’inspiration américaine qu’ils accusent de saper les valeurs françaises.“Plus on va sur leur terrain, plus on les renforce”, estime Jean-Michel Mis, un député de La République En Marche, au sujet du Rassemblement National. “Donc leurs dirigeants sont très contents parce que finalement on légitime leurs thèmes de campagne.”Pour Nicolas Lebourg, un politologue spécialiste du Rassemblement National, l’adoption des thèmes de l’extrême-droite est souvent contre-productive. “Ce qu’ils sont en train de faire, c’est faire la campagne de Marine Le Pen,” explique-t-il.Alors que M. Macron se présente comme le meilleur candidat pour protéger la France de l’extrême-droite, les sondages démontrent que les électeurs sont de plus en plus las d’être toujours appelés à voter contre, plutôt que pour, un candidat.Jacques et Régine Talau comptent parmi les anciens castors de Perpignan. Ce couple de retraités avait toujours voté pour la droite classique et avait contribué au barrage contre l’extrême-droite lors des municipales de 2014, puis des élections présidentielles de 2017.Historiquement à droite et en proie aux difficultés économiques, Perpignan était sans doute un terrain naturel pour le parti de Mme Le Pen qui, ces dernières années, avait remporté de petites villes sinistrées dans le sud et le nord du pays. Mais le ralliement du couple Talau a marqué un tournant.Leur quartier, le Mas Llaro, une succession de demeures cossues construites sur de larges parcelles au milieu des vignobles, à la périphérie est de la ville, est la plus riche de Perpignan. En 2020, plus de 60% de ses résidents ont voté pour M Aliot — 7 points de plus que sa moyenne dans la ville et 10 de plus qu’en 2014.Parmi les anciens castors de Perpignan, il y a Jacques Talau, à gauche, et sa femme Régine, des retraités qui votaient toujours pour la droite classique.Credit…Dmitry Kostyukov pour The New York TimesLe Mas Llaro a toujours voté pour la droite traditionnelle.Mais, désabusés et lassés du statu quo, les Talaus, comme bien d’autres, ont voté pour la première fois pour l’extrême-droite l’année dernière, séduits par l’accent mis par M. Aliot sur la propreté et la criminalité. Leur maison a été cambriolée deux fois, disent-ils.Bien que satisfait du bilan du maire, M. Talau indique qu’il se ralliera quand même au barrage contre l’extrême-droite pour la prochaine présidentielle et votera Macron en se bouchant le nez. En revanche, Mme Talau envisage désormais de voter pour Marine Le Pen.“Elle a mis de l’eau dans son vin”, estime Mme Talau, ajoutant que M. Macron n’est “pas assez dur”.L’adversaire de M. Aliot en 2014 et 2020, Jean-Marc Pujol, candidate du centre-droit, avait viré davantage vers la droite pour tenter, sans succès, de contrer l’extrême-droite. Il avait gonflé les effectifs de la police, d’après les statistiques gouvernementales, faisant de Perpignan la grande ville de France avec le plus grand nombre de policiers par habitant. Malgré cela, nombre de ses partisans historiques semblent avoir davantage fait confiance à l’extrême droite sur le sujet de la criminalité, et fait défection. De nombreux de castors à gauche se sont plaints d’avoir été ignorés et ont refusé de participer une nouvelle fois à la construction de barrages, dit Agnès Langevine, la candidate des Verts et des Socialistes aux municipales de 2020.“Et ils nous disaient : en 2022, si c’est un Macron-Le Pen, je ne ferai pas plus,” ajoute-t-elle.M. Lebourg, le politologue, estime que M. Aliot a aussi gagné le vote des riches électeurs conservateurs comme les Talaus en adoptant un message économique classique — la même stratégie qu’adopte Mme Le Pen.. Depuis qu’elle a pris les rênes du parti il y a dix ans, Mme Le Pen travaille dur pour “dédiaboliser” le parti.Un monument aux morts à Perpignan, une ville historiquement à droite, en proie à des difficultés économiques, et sensible à la rhétorique du Ralliement National. Credit…Dmitry Kostyukov for The New York TimesEn 2015, elle a expulsé son propre père, Jean-Marie Le Pen, qui avait fondé le parti et a longtemps minimisé l’Holocauste.Tout en popularisant des expressions comme “l’ensauvagement”, elle a consciemment évité tout langage explosif évoquant un supposé “grand remplacement” de la population française blanche par les immigrants africains et musulmans. En 2018, elle a rebaptisé le Front National du nom plus inclusif de “Rassemblement”.Le parti veut cependant durcir les politiques migratoires pour les étudiants étrangers et diviser le solde migratoire par vingt.Il veut aussi interdire le port du voile musulman en public et limiter la “présence d’éléments ostentatoires” à l’extérieur des lieux de culte s’ils ne s’accordent pas avec l’environnement, dans une référence apparente aux minarets.À Perpignan, M. Aliot s’est concentré sur la criminalité, dépensant 8 millions d’euros pour l’embauche de 30 nouveaux policiers, l’ouverture de nouveaux commissariats et la mise en place de patrouilles à vélo et nocturnes, en réponse à une augmentation du trafic de drogues.Jeanne Mercier, une électrice de gauche âgée de 24 ans, dit que beaucoup gens autour d’elle ont été “séduits” par le maire d’extrême-droite.Camille Rosa, à gauche, vote à gauche, mais ne sait pas si elle fera de nouveau barrage contre Marine Le Pen lors des élections présidentielles de 2022.Credit…Dmitry Kostyukov pour The New York Times“On est le test pour montrer à la France que le FN fonctionne et les gens adhèrent et sont contents”, dit-t-elle, utilisant l’ancien nom du parti. “Finalement c’est pas tant le diable que ça.”Camille Rosa, 35 ans, ne sait pas si elle fera à nouveau barrage contre Mme Le Pen l’année prochaine. Les attaques des ministres du président contre “l’islamo-gauchisme” et les universitaires spécialistes du féminisme, du genre ou des questions raciales ont changé son regard sur le gouvernement de M Macron.“J’ai l’impression que leurs ennemis, ce n’est plus du tout l’extrême-droite”, dit-elle, “mais c’est nous, les personnes de gauche”.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

    • 163 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      Capitol Police Warn of Threat on Thursday, and House Cancels the Day’s Session

      by

      #masthead-section-label, #masthead-bar-one { display: none }Capitol Riot FalloutTracking the ArrestsVisual TimelineInside the SiegeThe Lost HoursThe Oath KeepersAdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyCapitol Police Warn of Threat on Thursday, and House Cancels the Day’s SessionThe agency, responding to what the force called “a possible plot to breach the Capitol,” again sounded the alarm that pro-Trump conspirators may be planning an attack.Capitol Police officers in front of the building on Wednesday. The agency said it is reaching out local, state and federal law enforcement agencies to prepare further.Credit…Anna Moneymaker for The New York TimesZolan Kanno-Youngs and March 3, 2021Updated 9:13 p.m. ETWASHINGTON — The Capitol Police force is preparing for another assault on the Capitol building on Thursday after obtaining intelligence of a potential plot by a militia group, just two months after a mob of Trump loyalists and extremists attacked the building, leaving five dead and hundreds injured.Leaving nothing to chance, House leaders on Wednesday abruptly moved a vote on policing legislation from Thursday to Wednesday night, so lawmakers could leave town, according to a senior Democratic aide familiar with the planning.The “possible” plot, as described by the Capitol Police, appeared to be inspired by the pro-Trump conspiracy theory known as QAnon, according to a senior administration official who reviewed the intelligence warning. Intelligence analysts had spent weeks tracking online chatter by some QAnon adherents who have latched on to March 4 — the original inauguration date set in the Constitution — as the day Donald J. Trump would be restored to the presidency and renew his crusade against America’s enemies.Some federal officials described the threats as more “aspirational” than operational. The militia group was not named, and even many influential QAnon followers, who believe the United States is dominated by a cabal of Satan-worshiping pedophiles, have cast March 4 as a “deep state” plot to incite the movement’s adherents and provoke a nationwide crackdown.But after being caught flat-footed by rioters on Jan. 6, the Capitol Police and members of Congress appeared to be taking no chances. Representative Michael McCaul of Texas, a senior Republican on the House Homeland Security Committee, pleaded on CNN on Wednesday: “President Trump has a responsibility to tell them to stand down. This threat is credible. It’s real. It’s a right-wing militia group.”The perimeter of the Capitol had already been ringed with new fencing, topped with razor wire. The Capitol Police said the agency is now reaching out to local, state and federal law enforcement agencies to prepare further.“We have obtained intelligence that shows a possible plot to breach the Capitol by an identified militia group on Thursday, March 4,” the force said in a statement. “We are taking the intelligence seriously.”Skittish lawmakers, many still rattled by the January attack that sent them fleeing, were given plenty of warning this time. Yogananda D. Pittman, the acting chief of the Capitol Police, told lawmakers on Wednesday that the agency had received “concerning” intelligence about possible threats against the Capitol on March 4, adding that threats against lawmakers were “through the roof.” The Capitol Police later sent an alert to lawmakers warning that the force was “monitoring various reports referencing potential First Amendment activities from March 4 to March 6.”Melissa Smislova, the acting under secretary of the Department of Homeland Security’s intelligence branch, told senators on Wednesday that the department and the F.B.I. had the night before issued an intelligence bulletin about “extremists discussing March 4 and March 6.”While the warning did not definitively say militia groups planned to come to Washington, the analysts said that continued false statements of election fraud and narratives elevated by QAnon “may contribute” to extremists turning to violence. Those extremists were inspired to target March 4 by QAnon conspiracists who said Mr. Trump would be inaugurated on that date and eventually “return to power,” according to an official who requested anonymity to discuss the warning.Two federal law enforcement officials said broad concerns about potential violence were warranted, given the online chatter around the QAnon conspiracy and talk of an attack. But they said they had not seen or been briefed on any specific, credible threat of an attack on politicians, the Capitol or other symbols of government.While they felt it was unlikely that an organized militia group would be able to execute the kind of attack on the Capitol described in the Capitol Police bulletin, particularly given the fortifications around Washington, they did not rule out the possibility that “lone wolf” attackers could try to wreak havoc.National Guard troops have been stationed at the Capitol since the mob attack on Jan. 6. Credit…Anna Moneymaker for The New York TimesIntelligence officials are struggling to determine whether suspicious online chatter should prompt public warnings about an attack that may not come to fruition. The issue is thorny given that much of that kind of chatter is protected by the First Amendment.Federal officials decided this time to have a more “forward leaning” approach to information sharing after federal agencies faced widespread backlash for the failed security response on Jan. 6, according to the official.The warning shared with the Capitol Police emphasized what top federal law enforcement officials have repeatedly said since Jan. 6: that the United States generally faces an elevated threat from domestic extremists emboldened by the attack on Congress.Ms. Pittman said threats against lawmakers had risen nearly 94 percent in the first two months of the year compared with the first two months of 2020. She assured members of Congress that the police force would be ready for any potential violence on March 4.Christopher A. Wray, the F.B.I. director, told senators on Tuesday that the Jan. 6 attack was domestic terrorism and that such a threat was “metastasizing across the country.” In a rare terrorism bulletin in January, the Homeland Security Department warned that the attack would not be an isolated episode and that extremists were motivated by “the presidential transition, as well as other perceived grievances fueled by false narratives,” a clear reference to the accusations made by Mr. Trump.At the Conservative Political Action Conference on Sunday, his first public appearance since leaving office, Mr. Trump repeated his false claim that he had won the November election.Officials did not specify which militia group they believed was plotting to attack the Capitol on Thursday. The Capitol Police are asking for almost $620 million for the agency’s budget, an increase of nearly 21 percent over current levels, to pay for new equipment, training and an additional 212 officers for assignments such as a permanent backup force to respond to events like the Jan. 6 riot. Ms. Pittman told the lawmakers that she would be working with the architect of the Capitol to design more “physical hardening” of the building after it was overrun by the rioters.“The U.S.C.P. is steadfast in ensuring that an incident of this nature will never occur again,” she said, adding that “a similar incident occurring in the current environment is a very real and present danger.”QAnon’s central tenet is that Mr. Trump was elected to take on a cabal of Democrats, international financiers and deep-state bureaucrats who worship Satan, abuse children and seek to dominate the world. When that did not come to pass while Mr. Trump was in office, some QAnon adherents began spinning elaborate conspiracy theories around March 4. The theory, like much associated with QAnon, is convoluted and takes on various forms, at times including secret pardons issued by President Barack Obama, the Banking Act of 1871, the Emergency Broadcast System and Mr. Trump taking the helm of a newly restored republic. And those are not even the most outlandish elements.The theory is far from universally accepted among QAnon adherents. A number of the movement’s most influential voices have cast the March 4 theory as a conspiracy within a conspiracy, insisting it was a trap set by the movement’s enemies.“March 4 is the media’s baby. Nothing will happen,” one QAnon influencer wrote Tuesday on the messaging app Telegram.Other QAnon followers encouraged their compatriots to be patient. “In time, you’ll feel and see the uprisings around you, You’ll know when it’s safe,” one wrote on Telegram. “March 4 in DC is not safe.”One meme making the rounds on social media asserted that China’s Communist Party — a favorite QAnon target — and other “bad guys” were spreading the March 4 rumors to incite QAnon followers. “Don’t fall for that. They’ll make sure to turn any peaceful protest into a riot,” it reads.The meme also plays on the thoroughly debunked notion that anti-Trump forces staged the Jan. 6 attack. “Don’t let them fabricate another ‘Capitol Riot,’” the meme says. “Alert others.”But in a sign that at least some people believe there is a reason to be in Washington on Thursday, rates at the Trump International Hotel for March 3 and 4 have spiked to three or four times their usual prices, much as they did before Jan. 6.Reporting was contributed by More

    • 113 Shares109 Views

      in Elections

      Ron Johnson Says He Still Has Many Unanswered Questions

      by

      #masthead-section-label, #masthead-bar-one { display: none }Capitol Riot FalloutTracking the ArrestsVisual TimelineInside the SiegeThe Lost HoursThe Oath KeepersAdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyRon Johnson Says He Still Has Many Unanswered QuestionsThe Republican senator from Wisconsin is known for regularly promoting fringe theories favored by the right, most recently questioning the fact that pro-Trump rioters attacked the Capitol.Senator Ron Johnson, Republican of Wisconsin, has not decided if he will seek re-election in 2022.Credit…Anna Moneymaker for The New York TimesMarch 1, 2021, 3:00 a.m. ETSenator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin has been on the forefront of elevating fringe theories about President Biden’s son Hunter, the coronavirus and the results of the 2020 election.In recent weeks he has come under renewed scrutiny for claiming in a series of radio interviews in his home state that the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol was not an “armed insurrection” and for using his time during a Senate hearing to read a first-person account that posited “provocateurs” and “fake Trump supporters” were behind the attack.Mr. Johnson has a reputation for being among the most accessible, high-profile Republicans in Washington, regularly defending his views to the mainstream news media — something many of his G.O.P. colleagues do not do.He spoke with The New York Times on Thursday about his theories of who was responsible for the attack on the Capitol and what he would like to see included in the congressional investigation of it. The interview has been lightly edited and condensed.You were on the radio recently talking about how it wasn’t an armed insurrection. I was curious what the origin of that perspective was for you.When I think armed, I think firearms. And yeah, we don’t know. I have no idea. That’s one of the questions I’ve got is, how many firearms were seen, were confiscated? How many shots were fired? I believe the only ones that were fired were from law enforcement. And I’ve said I’ll defend law enforcement for taking action. I don’t understand what the uproar is. But apparently, there’s uproar somewhere. Somebody takes offense to it.And I would say, if it’s properly termed an “armed insurrection,” it was a pretty ragtag one. And again, I don’t dispute the destruction, or destructive capability of things like flagpoles and bats and that type of thing, but again, words have meaning.Well, what’s your feeling about who made up the group that stormed the Capitol?I don’t know, and I’m asking the question. I’m making no assumptions.There are just so many unanswered questions, which seems to be kind of the basic situation in so many things I’m trying to get to the bottom of. But here we are almost two months later, and there are just basic pieces of information that are missing here.In the Senate hearing the other day, you read the piece from The Federalist that suggested there were sort of provocateurs and “fake Trump supporters” that had designs on generating trouble from the crowd. And I wondered, do you share that analysis?I think it’s important, if we’re going to really get the whole truth, to understand exactly what happened, we need to look at different vantage points, different perspectives.I read that article, I think, as soon as it was published, which was shortly after Jan. 6. And I was intrigued by it. Because here was an individual that, again, I didn’t know him at the time. I actually spoke to him yesterday for the first time. But I didn’t know who he was. It just looks like he had a pretty good background. This is an instructor, focusing on this type of psychological type of warfare and that type of thing. So he seemed to be a knowledgeable observer.And I was just fascinated by the fact that he wrote down his thoughts, about 14, 15 pages, without looking at any news. So it’s kind of an unblemished accounting. And that’s really kind of the eyewitness accounts you want to examine. I’m not saying you accept everything. You don’t necessarily accept his conclusions. I think you kind of have to take at face value what he said he saw.Do you believe that, as the Federalist author Michael Waller wrote, that there were fake Trump protesters in the crowd?That’s what he said he thought he saw. I think later in the article, he didn’t see any who he would have thought were fake Trump protesters, he didn’t see them engage in any violence. I think he writes that in his article. Yeah. I’m letting his testimony stand on its own. I wasn’t there.Again, I’m drawing no conclusions whatsoever. Again, a lot of press reports are assuming, imputing all kinds of conclusions. They’re saying I’m saying things that I’m not saying at all. All I’m saying at this point in time is we need to ask a lot of questions.I wonder why you think there is merit to giving an audience to Mr. Waller’s assertions that there were either provocateurs or fake Trump supporters in the crowd, given the lack of evidence.I’m not questioning his veracity. I believe he’s probably telling the truth. That’s what he saw. I’m not agreeing with any conclusions. I’m not sure he’s really making too many conclusions, other than he concluded he saw four individual types of groups that stood out from the crowd.It might be a flawed part of the evidence, but why exclude it? Just because it doesn’t necessarily tie into whatever narrative somebody else wants to tell about the day? I’m not interested in the narratives, I’m interested in the truth.There’s been a lot of talk among some of your Republican colleagues in Congress about antifa or Black Lives Matter being involved in instigating what happened. Do you share that belief?It doesn’t really seem like that was the issue. It appears, again, this is all early, I haven’t drawn any conclusions, but it appears if there was any preplanning by groups, it was white supremacist groups, like the Proud Boys or the Oath Keepers, that type of thing. That’s what it appears..css-1xzcza9{list-style-type:disc;padding-inline-start:1em;}.css-rqynmc{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:0.9375rem;line-height:1.25rem;color:#333;margin-bottom:0.78125rem;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-rqynmc{font-size:1.0625rem;line-height:1.5rem;margin-bottom:0.9375rem;}}.css-rqynmc strong{font-weight:600;}.css-rqynmc em{font-style:italic;}.css-yoay6m{margin:0 auto 5px;font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.125rem;line-height:1.3125rem;color:#121212;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-yoay6m{font-size:1.25rem;line-height:1.4375rem;}}.css-1dg6kl4{margin-top:5px;margin-bottom:15px;}.css-16ed7iq{width:100%;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;-webkit-box-pack:center;-webkit-justify-content:center;-ms-flex-pack:center;justify-content:center;padding:10px 0;background-color:white;}.css-pmm6ed{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;}.css-pmm6ed > :not(:first-child){margin-left:5px;}.css-5gimkt{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:0.8125rem;font-weight:700;-webkit-letter-spacing:0.03em;-moz-letter-spacing:0.03em;-ms-letter-spacing:0.03em;letter-spacing:0.03em;text-transform:uppercase;color:#333;}.css-5gimkt:after{content:’Collapse’;}.css-rdoyk0{-webkit-transition:all 0.5s ease;transition:all 0.5s ease;-webkit-transform:rotate(180deg);-ms-transform:rotate(180deg);transform:rotate(180deg);}.css-eb027h{max-height:5000px;-webkit-transition:max-height 0.5s ease;transition:max-height 0.5s ease;}.css-6mllg9{-webkit-transition:all 0.5s ease;transition:all 0.5s ease;position:relative;opacity:0;}.css-6mllg9:before{content:”;background-image:linear-gradient(180deg,transparent,#ffffff);background-image:-webkit-linear-gradient(270deg,rgba(255,255,255,0),#ffffff);height:80px;width:100%;position:absolute;bottom:0px;pointer-events:none;}#masthead-bar-one{display:none;}#masthead-bar-one{display:none;}.css-1pd7fgo{background-color:white;border:1px solid #e2e2e2;width:calc(100% – 40px);max-width:600px;margin:1.5rem auto 1.9rem;padding:15px;box-sizing:border-box;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-1pd7fgo{padding:20px;width:100%;}}.css-1pd7fgo:focus{outline:1px solid #e2e2e2;}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-1pd7fgo{border:none;padding:20px 0 0;border-top:1px solid #121212;}.css-1pd7fgo[data-truncated] .css-rdoyk0{-webkit-transform:rotate(0deg);-ms-transform:rotate(0deg);transform:rotate(0deg);}.css-1pd7fgo[data-truncated] .css-eb027h{max-height:300px;overflow:hidden;-webkit-transition:none;transition:none;}.css-1pd7fgo[data-truncated] .css-5gimkt:after{content:’See more’;}.css-1pd7fgo[data-truncated] .css-6mllg9{opacity:1;}.css-k9atqk{margin:0 auto;overflow:hidden;}.css-k9atqk strong{font-weight:700;}.css-k9atqk em{font-style:italic;}.css-k9atqk a{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;border-bottom:1px solid #ccd9e3;}.css-k9atqk a:visited{color:#333;-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;border-bottom:1px solid #ddd;}.css-k9atqk a:hover{border-bottom:none;}From Riot to ImpeachmentThe riot inside the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday, Jan. 6, followed a rally at which President Trump made an inflammatory speech to his supporters, questioning the results of the election. Here’s a look at what happened and the ongoing fallout:As this video shows, poor planning and a restive crowd encouraged by President Trump set the stage for the riot.A two hour period was crucial to turning the rally into the riot.Several Trump administration officials, including cabinet members Betsy DeVos and Elaine Chao, announced that they were stepping down as a result of the riot.Federal prosecutors have charged more than 70 people, including some who appeared in viral photos and videos of the riot. Officials expect to eventually charge hundreds of others.The House voted to impeach the president on charges of “inciting an insurrection” that led to the rampage by his supporters.I’ve seen videos of other people claiming to be antifa in their hotel rooms. I don’t know if any of that’s been verified. But no, again, I am drawing no conclusions at all. But right now, it appears that there were provocateurs or agitators. It would appear it would probably be from the white supremacist groups that have already been named. But I haven’t talked to the F.B.I.You were on with Maria Bartiromo and talked about being against violent extremists from the left or the right. And it sounds like you’ve sort of landed on the position that these were right-wing groups that were involved in organizing what happened on Jan. 6. Is that right?It seems like those white supremacist groups seem to be responsible for this. I really condemn it. I mean, I’m not happy with it.I’ve attended a lot of Trump rallies. You talk to a lot of people. You see the mood in those crowds. And it is festive. It is joyful. You’re loving America. And it’s definitely pro-law enforcement and anti-breaking the law. Which is, again, why I certainly do not suspect, even a large pro-Trump crowd, I did not expect any violence from them.You said you want what you say to be accurate. And you read Mr. Waller’s piece, but without necessarily doing any due diligence to see whether what he was saying checked out.What do you mean, checked out? It’s his eyewitness account. What else is there to check out about it? I read what his credentials were, where he was teaching, at Fort Bragg. I mean, you can see in the article what his credentials are. He seemed to be pretty solid.A couple days later The Washington Post wrote an article that was very close to kind of describing things as Mr. Waller did, too. So that added further credence, from my standpoint, that what he saw, other people kind of saw and noticed and drew similar types of conclusions. Again, it’s just one piece of information that needs to be looked at, needs to be considered, needs to be tested, needs to be verified, compared against other things.Again, I’m not afraid of information. I’m amazed at how many people are. And how quick people are to put the conspiracy theory label on something, or call it disinformation.You’ve said tens of millions of Americans didn’t trust the election results. I wonder, how much do you think that’s because Republican leaders, from President Trump on down, told them not to trust the election results?I think that there’s a range of reasons why. But I’d say the main reason is that they saw their TV screens, observers not being able to observe. They see in states where all these other counties can turn in millions of votes, but in a few large counties in swing states, they just can’t get the vote totals in by 10 o’clock at night, for some reason. It just raises a level of suspicion.Well, in Wisconsin that’s because —It’s unfortunate the mainstream media’s revealed themselves to be so unbelievably biased that people on the other side of the aisle, the other side of the political spectrum, simply don’t trust them anymore. That’s part of the issue, too.One last thing. Where are you on running for re-election next year?Haven’t decided. Don’t need to decide for a while.Do you have a timeline for that?Yeah. But I’m not necessarily going to reveal it to you.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

    • 213 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      Police Forces Have Long Tried to Weed Out Extremists in the Ranks. Then Came the Capitol Riot.

      by

      #masthead-section-label, #masthead-bar-one { display: none }Capitol Riot FalloutTracking the ArrestsVisual TimelineInside the SiegeMurder Charges?The Oath KeepersAdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyPolice Forces Have Long Tried to Weed Out Extremists in the Ranks. Then Came the Capitol Riot.At least 30 law enforcement officers from around the country took part in the rally on Jan. 6 that preceded the riot. Many are now being investigated.Protestors storming the Senate side of the Capitol on Jan. 6 after a rally at which President Donald J. Trump spoke.Credit…Jason Andrew for The New York TimesFeb. 16, 2021, 5:00 a.m. ETFor more than three decades, Sheriff Chris West of Canadian County, Okla., a large man whose uniform often includes a Stetson hat, a vest and a gold star badge, devoted his life to law enforcement.A U.S. Marine Corps veteran, he spent 28 years as a highway patrolman in Oklahoma, working his way up to captain before being elected sheriff of his native county in 2017. He earned the accolade “Oklahoma Sheriff of the Year” in 2019, and won a second term last fall, after running unopposed.Then came Jan. 6.Mr. West said he set his badge and his official role aside when he drove to Washington to support President Donald J. Trump. “I went as a citizen, as Chris West, the individual,” he told a news conference in El Reno, the county seat, after he returned.By his own account, he marched on the Capitol waving a Trump flag and hollering slogans like “Stop the Steal!” and “We love Trump!” But he said that he did not participate in the storming of the Capitol, and he condemned the attack.His actions have divided Canadian County, which includes parts of Oklahoma City and the rural areas to its west, with several thousand people signing a petition demanding his removal and even more endorsing a counterclaim supporting him.He is one of at least 30 police or other law enforcement officers who attended the demonstration on Jan. 6. Many are now facing internal investigations and three have thus far been arrested on federal charges related to breaching the Capitol.Sheriff Chris West confirmed he marched on the Capitol, but rejected allegations as “crazy talk” that he had stormed the building.Credit…Sue Ogrocki/Associated PressTheir presence has brought to a boil questions that have been simmering for years: How many law enforcement officers nationwide subscribe to extreme or anti-government beliefs, and how, precisely, can agencies weed them out? Leaders in law enforcement say that public servants must be held to a higher standard than private individuals when it comes to accepting the results of an election and performing their duties.Police chiefs from the largest North American cities, meeting in an online conference this past week, agreed to work together to try and block members of far-right organizations or others with radical views from entering their ranks.“There is zero room, not only in society, but more so in professions of public trust and service, for people to have extremist views, regardless of ideology,” said Art Acevedo, the Houston police chief and president of the Major Cities Chiefs Association, which includes senior police officials from almost 90 American and Canadian cities. President Biden’s goal of addressing domestic extremism will partly hinge on the ability to curb its spread in police departments and the military, experts noted.Concerns about extremism in police ranks have long existed, but after Sept. 11 chasing jihadists took priority over chasing domestic threats, senior police officials and law enforcement experts said.In recent years, police or other agencies in Virginia, Florida, Nebraska, Louisiana, Michigan and Texas have all fired officers belonging to the Ku Klux Klan. In Philadelphia in 2019, the Police Department announced that 13 officers would be dismissed among the 72 who were placed on administrative leave because of racist Facebook posts.For decades, Los Angeles County has downplayed accusations that sheriff’s deputies repeatedly organized secret white-supremacist groups with their own tattoos and hand signs. But a recent study by the office of the Los Angeles County Counsel concluded that the county has paid out some $55 million to settle lawsuits accusing such groups of malign influence.Sometimes groups opposed to the government emerge within law enforcement itself. Hundreds have joined the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, for example, which claims that sheriffs have the last word on whether any U.S. or local law is constitutional and should be enforced or not.During his presidency, Mr. Trump often declared himself a friend of the police, and many police unions endorsed him. Police officers enjoy the same rights as all citizens in supporting political candidates, but the problem comes when they take it a step further into anti-government activism, senior police officials and law enforcement experts said.Recently, during protests prompted by the death of George Floyd in police custody, far-right organizers, eager to recruit police or military veterans, portrayed themselves as allies to law enforcement, said Brian Levin, a former policeman and the director of the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism at California State University, San Bernardino.Various organizations talked about helping to preserve law and order while amplifying distorted claims about election fraud or chaos at Black Lives Matter protests. It was a “false alliance,” Mr. Levin said, not least because such organizations seek to undermine the government. At protests members of these groups often exhibited the Thin Blue Line flag — a black-and-white American flag with one navy blue stripe down the middle meant to symbolize solidarity with the police.Some rioters brandished that flag on Jan. 6 even as Capitol Police officers were assaulted and one killed. The flag “has been hijacked by extremists,” Mr. Acevedo said. “These people act like they are so pro-police, yet they are beating cops.”Capitol protesters, holding a Thin Blue Line flag meant to show solidarity with the police, clashed with a Metropolitan Police officer outside of the Capitol on Jan. 6.Credit…Shannon Stapleton/ReutersOne Houston police officer, Tam Dinh Pham, an 18-year veteran, resigned just before he was arrested on Jan. 19 on charges of illegally entering the Capitol. Mr. Pham, 48, first denied it, then told F.B.I. agents that he wanted to “see history,” according to the criminal complaint. Two officers in a small Virginia town who were charged were fired.Mr. Pham has not been linked to any extremist organization, but Mr. Acevedo used his example to conduct an animated call and response with police cadets on their first day of training last month. The Houston Police published a video of the exchange, including these excerpts:“If anyone in this room right now believes that anyone needed to be in that Capitol building, you need to check out now! Do you understand me?”“Yes, sir!”“Because you will not survive in this department with that mind-set. You understand that?”“Yes, sir!”“Is there room for hate?”“No, sir!”“Is there room for discrimination?”“No, sir!”“Is there room for a militia in this department or any other police department?”“No, sir!”He questioned the cadets, asking four times whether they understood that they must report any officer with extremist sympathies. Recently a cadet who bragged about belonging to the Aryan Brotherhood, a neo-Nazi criminal gang, was reported by a fellow cadet and dismissed.“I think we are all pretty pissed off right now because we had cops thinking it’s OK to storm our nation’s Capitol,” Mr. Acevedo told the cadets. “Those people are absolute traitors to our nation, to our oath of office.”The number of extremists within law enforcement is unknown, with the police calling them a fringe, just as in the general public. With 18,000 law enforcement agencies nationwide, many of them small and lacking resources, there is a patchwork of rules and practices for how to weed out people perceived as threats. Dismissal is not automatic..css-1xzcza9{list-style-type:disc;padding-inline-start:1em;}.css-c7gg1r{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:700;font-size:0.875rem;line-height:0.875rem;margin-bottom:15px;color:#121212 !important;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-c7gg1r{font-size:0.9375rem;line-height:0.9375rem;}}.css-rqynmc{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:0.9375rem;line-height:1.25rem;color:#333;margin-bottom:0.78125rem;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-rqynmc{font-size:1.0625rem;line-height:1.5rem;margin-bottom:0.9375rem;}}.css-rqynmc strong{font-weight:600;}.css-rqynmc em{font-style:italic;}.css-yoay6m{margin:0 auto 5px;font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.125rem;line-height:1.3125rem;color:#121212;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-yoay6m{font-size:1.25rem;line-height:1.4375rem;}}.css-1dg6kl4{margin-top:5px;margin-bottom:15px;}.css-16ed7iq{width:100%;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;-webkit-box-pack:center;-webkit-justify-content:center;-ms-flex-pack:center;justify-content:center;padding:10px 0;background-color:white;}.css-pmm6ed{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;}.css-pmm6ed > :not(:first-child){margin-left:5px;}.css-5gimkt{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:0.8125rem;font-weight:700;-webkit-letter-spacing:0.03em;-moz-letter-spacing:0.03em;-ms-letter-spacing:0.03em;letter-spacing:0.03em;text-transform:uppercase;color:#333;}.css-5gimkt:after{content:’Collapse’;}.css-rdoyk0{-webkit-transition:all 0.5s ease;transition:all 0.5s ease;-webkit-transform:rotate(180deg);-ms-transform:rotate(180deg);transform:rotate(180deg);}.css-eb027h{max-height:5000px;-webkit-transition:max-height 0.5s ease;transition:max-height 0.5s ease;}.css-6mllg9{-webkit-transition:all 0.5s ease;transition:all 0.5s ease;position:relative;opacity:0;}.css-6mllg9:before{content:”;background-image:linear-gradient(180deg,transparent,#ffffff);background-image:-webkit-linear-gradient(270deg,rgba(255,255,255,0),#ffffff);height:80px;width:100%;position:absolute;bottom:0px;pointer-events:none;}#masthead-bar-one{display:none;}#masthead-bar-one{display:none;}.css-1amoy78{background-color:white;border:1px solid #e2e2e2;width:calc(100% – 40px);max-width:600px;margin:1.5rem auto 1.9rem;padding:15px;box-sizing:border-box;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-1amoy78{padding:20px;width:100%;}}.css-1amoy78:focus{outline:1px solid #e2e2e2;}.css-1amoy78[data-truncated] .css-rdoyk0{-webkit-transform:rotate(0deg);-ms-transform:rotate(0deg);transform:rotate(0deg);}.css-1amoy78[data-truncated] .css-eb027h{max-height:300px;overflow:hidden;-webkit-transition:none;transition:none;}.css-1amoy78[data-truncated] .css-5gimkt:after{content:’See more’;}.css-1amoy78[data-truncated] .css-6mllg9{opacity:1;}.css-k9atqk{margin:0 auto;overflow:hidden;}.css-k9atqk strong{font-weight:700;}.css-k9atqk em{font-style:italic;}.css-k9atqk a{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;border-bottom:1px solid #ccd9e3;}.css-k9atqk a:visited{color:#333;-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;border-bottom:1px solid #ddd;}.css-k9atqk a:hover{border-bottom:none;}Capitol Riot FalloutFrom Riot to ImpeachmentThe riot inside the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday, Jan. 6, followed a rally at which President Trump made an inflammatory speech to his supporters, questioning the results of the election. Here’s a look at what happened and the ongoing fallout:As this video shows, poor planning and a restive crowd encouraged by President Trump set the stage for the riot.A two hour period was crucial to turning the rally into the riot.Several Trump administration officials, including cabinet members Betsy DeVos and Elaine Chao, announced that they were stepping down as a result of the riot.Federal prosecutors have charged more than 70 people, including some who appeared in viral photos and videos of the riot. Officials expect to eventually charge hundreds of others.The House voted to impeach the president on charges of “inciting an insurrection” that led to the rampage by his supporters.A Philadelphia police officer photographed with what appeared to be a Nazi tattoo in 2016 was not fired partly because the department had no stated policy on such tattoos. In 2019 it barred officers from displaying tattoos advocating violence or deemed lewd, among other restrictions.The Supreme Court has narrowed free speech rights for public servants speaking in an official capacity on matters of public interest, experts noted, and in those instances when the public good outweighs that of the individual. But Los Angeles County sheriff’s deputies who contested being fired over gang membership, for example, were sometimes reinstated.Patrick Yoes, the national president of the Fraternal Order of Police, said that people with extreme views are likely to exist in law enforcement just as in society. “While there may be a perception that we have a major problem across the country, it does not fit into what my observations have been,” he said.Still, he and many others expect there will be more robust screening. Polygraph tests for Houston police candidates that focus on past drug use or criminal activity will be expanded to include anti-government views, Mr. Acevedo said.Art Acevedo, the Houston police chief, said there was no room for extremists within his department. “Those people are absolute traitors to our nation, to our oath of office,” he said.Credit…Godofredo A. Vásquez/Houston Chronicle, via Associated PressThe F.B.I. has called domestic extremism a significant threat, but has failed to develop a response to adherents in law enforcement, said Michael German, a former F.B.I. agent who works on law enforcement reform at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University.Officers know who holds far-right views, he and others noted, but tend to protect each other.Another key issue is balancing First Amendment rights against the potential fallout for any agency.“I don’t see there is a challenge with people having their own political beliefs — it becomes a challenge when those beliefs become all-consuming and go beyond politics to actions that can harm others,” said Mitchell R. Davis III, the police chief of Hazel Crest, a village on the outskirts of Chicago, and a veteran member of the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives.In Franklin County, Ky., five public defenders asked the local sheriff to investigate Jeff Farmer, a deputy sheriff, after he attended the Jan. 6 rally.The officer supported the false claim that the election results were fake and attended a protest brimming with “offensive symbols” like a gallows and the Confederate flag, said Nathan Goodrich, one of the public defenders. “I think police departments should make sure that their officers’ credibility is not questionable,” he said.Mr. Farmer, who was placed on administrative leave while he was investigated, did not respond to a telephone message seeking comment. He was later cleared of any criminal wrongdoing and told not to post anything on social media that would reflect badly on the sheriff’s office.In Oklahoma, critics of Sheriff West said that he had for months adopted overtly political positions. That included refusing to put in effect the Oklahoma City mask mandate aimed at reducing the spread of Covid-19 and forming a civilian “posse” to maintain order at public events, which his opponents considered a paramilitary organization. The riot came a few months later.Sheriff David Mahoney, president of the National Sheriffs’ Association, said that he passed to the F.B.I. for investigation information he had received that Sheriff West had made a celebratory telephone call from inside the Capitol.Sheriff West did not return calls seeking comment, and three main authors of the petition supporting him also declined to speak.Brandy Becerra, the main organizer of the petition against the sheriff, acknowledged that she has long been at loggerheads with Trump supporters in the county, including the sheriff. But she questioned his judgment in marching on the Capitol given that the goal was to intimidate lawmakers or worse.“I think people have a right to be worried about this sheriff,” she said.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      U.S. Will Examine Giving F.B.I. More Resources to Counter Domestic Extremism

      by

      AdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyU.S. Will Examine Giving F.B.I. More Resources to Counter Domestic ExtremismThe issue of violent extremist groups in the United States has come to the top of the agenda since a mob of far-right groups stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6.The F.B.I. headquarters in Washington.Credit…Stefani Reynolds for The New York TimesJulian E. Barnes and Feb. 5, 2021, 6:22 p.m. ETWASHINGTON — The Biden administration will examine if additional F.B.I. agents are needed at the bureau’s field offices to address the threat of domestic violent extremism, a senior administration official said on Friday.Last month, the White House ordered a review of the threat of domestic violent extremism, led by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. That assessment will inform a policy review that will consider F.B.I. resources, additional authorities, foreign influence operations and other questions.The senior administration official said that the assessment and initial policy review would take about 100 days. The official spoke on a conference call with reporters on ground rules of anonymity to broach current policy discussions.The issue of violent extremist groups in the United States has come to the top of the agenda since a mob of far-right extremist organizations stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6. The assault, which aimed to stop the counting of Electoral College votes and halt the transition of power to the Biden administration, has led to a string of federal charges against the rioters.Since the attack, there have been a series of questions about the intelligence gathered before Jan. 6, and whether the federal government was taking the threat of violence and extremist groups seriously enough.There is broad interest across the government in the issue of violent domestic groups. On Thursday, both Democrats and Republicans on the House Homeland Security Committee expressed support for new domestic terrorism laws intended to stop violence similar to the attack on the Capitol. And Senator Mark Warner, Democrat of Virgina, who is the new chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said this week that he had bipartisan support for his panel to investigate the matter.In a letter last month to President Biden, Senator John Cornyn, Republican of Texas and a member of the intelligence committee, backed the administration’s assessment request and asked that the role of foreign adversaries be examined.“It is crucial we understand the full extent of the threat facing our nation to ensure the tragic events of Jan. 6, 2021, never happen again,” Mr. Cornyn wrote.The administration official said the bulk of the intelligence review would fall to the intelligence arms of the F.B.I. and Department of Homeland Security, but it is the role of the director of national intelligence to coordinate assessments that involve multiple departments.However, an element of the review will look at potential links between domestic groups and foreign networks and organizations, the official added. That part of the review will involve intelligence agencies, including the C.I.A. and National Security Agency, which are restricted in their collection of intelligence on Americans.White House officials expect that as part of the policy review, the F.B.I. will seek additional resources to deal with domestic violent extremism. The official noted that a Department of Homeland Security examination found that white supremacist terrorism was the most lethal domestic threat from 2018 to 2020.While some F.B.I. field offices have a squad of agents who deal primarily with the threat of domestic extremist groups, not all of them have a full contingent of resources dedicated to the fight. However, former F.B.I. officials say the domestic terrorism threat can vary from state to state.But the official said another part of the review would look at whether the bureau’s Joint Terrorism Task Forces were structured to address the threat of American extremist groups and antigovernmental organizations. The review will look at whether the task forces are capable of reporting episodes of domestic violent extremism and track the groups that are involved, the official said.International terrorist groups, like Al Qaeda, are far more hierarchical. In contrast, the official said, domestic extremist groups are more loosely organized. Membership can shift, and different groups can come together, as they did during the Capitol attack, and then split apart.Adam Goldman More

    • 100 Shares109 Views

      in Elections

      Marjorie Taylor Greene Knows Exactly What She’s Doing

      by

      AdvertisementContinue reading the main storyOpinionSupported byContinue reading the main storyMarjorie Taylor Greene Knows Exactly What She’s DoingThe once-porous border between the right and the far right has dissolved.Feb. 5, 2021, 5:27 a.m. ETMarjorie Taylor Greene during the playing of the national anthem at a Second Amendment rally in Georgia on Sept. 19, 2020. Credit…C.B. Schmelter/Chattanooga Times Free Press, via Associated PressMarjorie Taylor Greene is the QAnon congresswoman, a far-right influencer and gun fanatic who dabbles in anti-Semitism and anti-Muslim bigotry. She endorsed violence against congressional leaders, claimed that the Parkland and Sandy Hook shootings were faked and once shared an anti-refugee video in which a Holocaust denier says that “Zionist supremacists have schemed to promote immigration and miscegenation.”She showed a little contrition on Wednesday with a qualified apology to her Republican colleagues. For this, she received a standing ovation. On Thursday, after an afternoon of deliberation, the House of Representatives voted to strip Greene of her committee assignments. Or rather, Democrats voted to strip her of her committee assignments. All but 11 Republicans voted in her favor.Although it is tempting to make this episode another parable exemplifying the “Trumpification” of the Republican Party, it’s better understood as yet another chapter in an ongoing story: the two-step between the far right and the Republican Party and the degree to which the former is never actually that far from the latter.There’s a story conservatives tell about themselves and their movement. It goes like this: In the mid-1960s, William F. Buckley Jr., the founder of National Review, made a decisive break with the John Birch Society, an ultra-right-wing advocacy organization whose popular co-founder, Robert Welch, believed that the United States was threatened by a far-reaching “Communist conspiracy” whose agents included former President Dwight Eisenhower and Chief Justice Earl Warren.“How can the John Birch Society be an effective political instrument while it is led by a man whose views on current affairs are, at so many critical points, so critically different from their own, and, for that matter, so far removed from common sense?” Buckley asked of Welch in a blistering 1962 essay. “There are, as we say, great things that need doing, the winning of a national election, the re-education of the governing class. John Birch chapters can do much to forward these aims, but only as they dissipate the fog of confusion that issues from Mr. Welch’s smoking typewriter.”This attack on Welch, if not the John Birch Society itself, continued into the 1964 presidential election. Birchers helped carry Senator Barry Goldwater of Arizona to victory in the Republican primary with skillful moves on the convention floor, in what would be their greatest display of strength before a final repudiation from Buckley and other leading lights of the conservative movement the following year. “I am not a member” of the group, Ronald Reagan declared in September 1965, “I have no intention of becoming a member. I am not going to solicit their support.”With this, Welch and the John Birch Society were pushed to the fringe. The conservative movement would win elections and power with an appeal to the mainstream of American society.Or so goes the story.Welch and the John Birch Society were pushed to the margins. The extremist tag, as Lisa McGirr notes in “Suburban Warriors: The Origins of the New American Right,” did real damage to the organization’s ability to sustain itself: “The society was simply too strongly identified with minoritarian utterances and outdated conspiracies to remain an important vehicle for channeling the new majoritarian conservatism.” However, she continues, “The sentiments, grievances, and ideas the organization helped to define mobilize lived on and were championed by organizations and political leaders who thrust forth a new populist conservatism.”A campaign button for Barry Goldwater’s 1964 presidential bid quotes from his speech accepting the Republican nomination.Credit…David J. & Janice L. Frent/Corbis, via Getty ImagesThe hard right wasn’t at the front of the charge, but it wasn’t purged either. Instead, it served as part of the mass base of activists and voters who propelled conservative leaders to prominence and conservative politicians to victory. If there were boundaries between the mainstream and the extreme right, they were — as Daniel Schlozman and Sam Rosenfeld argue in “The Long New Right and the World It Made” — “porous,” with movement from one to the other and back again. Several key figures of the New Right and the Christian Right of the 1970s and ’80s were, Sara Diamond points out in “Roads to Dominion: Right-Wing Movements and Political Power in the United States,” “veterans of the 1964 Goldwater campaign” who were “steeped in the conservative movement’s dual strategy of forming wide-ranging political organizations and activism based on more specific issues.”To illustrate their point about the porousness of the conservative movement, Schlozman and Rosenfeld highlight a series of interviews in which a “who’s who of the right of the late 1970s and early 1980s” sat for wide-ranging discussions with The Review of the News, a front publication of the John Birch Society. Figures from inside the Reagan administration, like Jeane Kirkpatrick and Anne Gorsuch (mother of Neil), then the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, made an appearance, as did lawmakers like Jesse Helms of North Carolina, Dick Cheney of Wyoming and Chuck Grassley of Iowa.This is a column, and I may be flattening some of the nuances here for the sake of brevity. But the essential point is sound: Extremism has always had a place in mainstream conservative politics, and this is especially true at the grass-roots level.What’s distinctive right now isn’t the fact that someone like Greene exists but that no one has emerged to play the role of Buckley. A longtime Republican leader like Mitch McConnell can try — he denounced Greene’s “loony lies and conspiracy theories” as a “cancer” on the party — but after he served four years as an ally to Donald Trump, his words aren’t worth much.Those once-porous borders, in other words, now appear to be nonexistent, and there’s no one in the Republican Party or its intellectual orbit to police the extreme right. Representative Greene is the first QAnon member of Congress, but she won’t be the last and she may not even ultimately be the worst.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

    • 88 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Senate Intelligence Committee to Examine Antigovernment Extremists

      by

      #masthead-section-label, #masthead-bar-one { display: none }Capitol Riot FalloutTracking the ArrestsVisual TimelineInside the SiegeMurder Charges?The Oath KeepersAdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storySenate Intelligence Committee to Examine Antigovernment ExtremistsSenator Mark Warner, the committee’s new chairman, said he hoped to lead a bipartisan investigation of the groups, their overseas ties and amplification of their message by foreign powers.Senator Mark Warner of Virginia said it was vitally important for the Senate Intelligence Committee to do a “significant dive” into antigovernment extremism in the United States.Credit…Anna Moneymaker for The New York TimesJulian E. Barnes and Feb. 4, 2021Updated 7:59 p.m. ETWASHINGTON — The Senate Intelligence Committee will examine the influence of Russia and other foreign powers on antigovernment extremist groups like the ones that helped mobilize the deadly attack on the Capitol last month, the panel’s new chairman said in an interview this week.As the executive branch undertakes a nationwide manhunt to hold members of the mob accountable, Senator Mark Warner, Democrat of Virgina, said it would be vitally important for the influential committee to do a “significant dive” into antigovernment extremism in the United States, the ties those groups have to organizations in Europe and Russia’s amplification of their message.With the power-sharing agreement between Democrats and Republicans in place, Mr. Warner took over this week as the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, after four years as its vice chairman. In an interview on Wednesday, Mr. Warner outlined his priorities, such as the spread of disinformation, the rise of antigovernment extremist groups, Chinese domination of key technologies, Russia’s widespread hacking of government computer networks and strengthening watchdog protections in the intelligence agencies.The White House has ordered the Office of the Director of National Intelligence to work with the Department of Homeland Security and the F.B.I. on a new analysis of the threat from domestic extremist groups and the support they receive from foreign powers or overseas organizations.Those antigovernment extremists include QAnon, the conspiracy movement, and the Proud Boys, a far-right organization that Canada named as a terrorist group on Wednesday. Supporters of those groups and others were part of the attack on the Capitol building on Jan. 6, which aimed to stop the transfer of power to the Biden administration.The issue is a difficult one for the intelligence community. By law, the most influential agencies, including the C.I.A. and the National Security Agency, are not allowed to collect information domestically. But Avril D. Haines, the director of national intelligence, has some oversight of the intelligence arms of the F.B.I. and the Department of Homeland Security, which can collect information domestically. Other intelligence agencies look at foreign attempts to influence American groups.While preliminary work by Ms. Haines’s office is underway, administration officials said that analysis was unlikely to be completed before April. But there appears to be significant interest in moving quickly on the issue in the Senate. At Ms. Haines’s confirmation hearing last month, a number of lawmakers raised the subject of domestic extremist groups. The Senate Intelligence Committee will examine both white supremacist groups on the right, and antifascist, or antifa, groups on the left, though Mr. Warner was quick to say that the danger the groups posed was not the same. “I don’t want to make a false equivalency argument here,” he said, “because the vast preponderance of them are on the right.”Like the intelligence community, Mr. Warner’s panel could face its own jurisdictional challenges as a handful of other House and Senate groups jockey to play a role in studying the aftermath of the Capitol assault and congressional leaders contemplate setting up an independent commission.For the past four years, the committee has done extensive work on disinformation efforts. Mr. Warner said that experience could guide the panel as it looks at how extremists groups spread propaganda and how foreign powers amplify it.Unlike most corners of Capitol Hill, and unlike the House Intelligence Committee, Mr. Warner’s panel has managed to operate, for the most part, with bipartisan agreement. All but one senator on the committee backed its five-volume report on Russian interference. Completed last year, the Senate investigation was perhaps the definitive word on Moscow’s interference efforts and found that Russia had disrupted the 2016 election to help Donald J. Trump become president.Mr. Warner said on Wednesday that the bipartisan record of the committee was important for him to preserve, and that he intended to begin work with closed-door meetings to make the case to other committee members about the threat the groups represent and how they could be exploited by outside powers.Democrats and Republicans on the committee have expressed interest in examining antigovernment extremist groups, Mr. Warner said. But he acknowledged the political sensitivities after the Capitol attack and Mr. Trump’s support among far-right factions of those groups. Making the case that antigovernment groups are a problem not only in the United States but also in Europe is one way to build consensus on the issue. The committee, Mr. Warner said, will begin its discussions in private sessions so lawmakers can have a candid and less political conversation.Beyond an investigation of antigovernment extremism and foreign efforts to promote it, Mr. Warner said the committee would work on pushing for new protections for whistle-blowers and making it more difficult to dismiss inspectors general, government officials charged with finding waste, fraud and abuse..css-1xzcza9{list-style-type:disc;padding-inline-start:1em;}.css-c7gg1r{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:700;font-size:0.875rem;line-height:0.875rem;margin-bottom:15px;color:#121212 !important;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-c7gg1r{font-size:0.9375rem;line-height:0.9375rem;}}.css-rqynmc{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:0.9375rem;line-height:1.25rem;color:#333;margin-bottom:0.78125rem;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-rqynmc{font-size:1.0625rem;line-height:1.5rem;margin-bottom:0.9375rem;}}.css-rqynmc strong{font-weight:600;}.css-rqynmc em{font-style:italic;}.css-yoay6m{margin:0 auto 5px;font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.125rem;line-height:1.3125rem;color:#121212;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-yoay6m{font-size:1.25rem;line-height:1.4375rem;}}.css-1dg6kl4{margin-top:5px;margin-bottom:15px;}.css-16ed7iq{width:100%;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;-webkit-box-pack:center;-webkit-justify-content:center;-ms-flex-pack:center;justify-content:center;padding:10px 0;background-color:white;}.css-pmm6ed{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;}.css-pmm6ed > :not(:first-child){margin-left:5px;}.css-5gimkt{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:0.8125rem;font-weight:700;-webkit-letter-spacing:0.03em;-moz-letter-spacing:0.03em;-ms-letter-spacing:0.03em;letter-spacing:0.03em;text-transform:uppercase;color:#333;}.css-5gimkt:after{content:’Collapse’;}.css-rdoyk0{-webkit-transition:all 0.5s ease;transition:all 0.5s ease;-webkit-transform:rotate(180deg);-ms-transform:rotate(180deg);transform:rotate(180deg);}.css-eb027h{max-height:5000px;-webkit-transition:max-height 0.5s ease;transition:max-height 0.5s ease;}.css-6mllg9{-webkit-transition:all 0.5s ease;transition:all 0.5s ease;position:relative;opacity:0;}.css-6mllg9:before{content:”;background-image:linear-gradient(180deg,transparent,#ffffff);background-image:-webkit-linear-gradient(270deg,rgba(255,255,255,0),#ffffff);height:80px;width:100%;position:absolute;bottom:0px;pointer-events:none;}#masthead-bar-one{display:none;}#masthead-bar-one{display:none;}.css-1amoy78{background-color:white;border:1px solid #e2e2e2;width:calc(100% – 40px);max-width:600px;margin:1.5rem auto 1.9rem;padding:15px;box-sizing:border-box;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-1amoy78{padding:20px;width:100%;}}.css-1amoy78:focus{outline:1px solid #e2e2e2;}.css-1amoy78[data-truncated] .css-rdoyk0{-webkit-transform:rotate(0deg);-ms-transform:rotate(0deg);transform:rotate(0deg);}.css-1amoy78[data-truncated] .css-eb027h{max-height:300px;overflow:hidden;-webkit-transition:none;transition:none;}.css-1amoy78[data-truncated] .css-5gimkt:after{content:’See more’;}.css-1amoy78[data-truncated] .css-6mllg9{opacity:1;}.css-k9atqk{margin:0 auto;overflow:hidden;}.css-k9atqk strong{font-weight:700;}.css-k9atqk em{font-style:italic;}.css-k9atqk a{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;border-bottom:1px solid #ccd9e3;}.css-k9atqk a:visited{color:#333;-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;border-bottom:1px solid #ddd;}.css-k9atqk a:hover{border-bottom:none;}Capitol Riot FalloutFrom Riot to ImpeachmentThe riot inside the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday, Jan. 6, followed a rally at which President Trump made an inflammatory speech to his supporters, questioning the results of the election. Here’s a look at what happened and the ongoing fallout:As this video shows, poor planning and a restive crowd encouraged by President Trump set the stage for the riot.A two hour period was crucial to turning the rally into the riot.Several Trump administration officials, including cabinet members Betsy DeVos and Elaine Chao, announced that they were stepping down as a result of the riot.Federal prosecutors have charged more than 70 people, including some who appeared in viral photos and videos of the riot. Officials expect to eventually charge hundreds of others.The House voted to impeach the president on charges of “inciting an insurrection” that led to the rampage by his supporters.Mr. Trump last year fired Michael K. Atkinson, the inspector general of the intelligence community. It was Mr. Atkinson who investigated the whistle-blower complaint about Mr. Trump’s call with his Ukrainian counterpart in 2019 and ultimately delivered that report to Congress.At Ms. Haines’s confirmation hearing last month, Mr. Warner began his questioning by describing how his own views on the Chinese government had changed, thoughts he repeated in his interview. He said he was wrong to have believed that China would democratize the more it was brought into the world order.“I will astonish you and acknowledge that directionally, Trump was right,” Mr. Warner said on Wednesday.Mr. Warner said he disagreed with John Ratcliffe, Mr. Trump’s final director of national intelligence, who had argued that China was trying to interfere with the election. But Mr. Warner said he believed China had “a very, very sophisticated effort to influence American policy.”The Senate committee will also look at Chinese technological investments, building on the work members of Congress have done on Beijing’s dominance of 5G, the next generation of mobile phone networks, Mr. Warner said. He said the United States needed to carefully assess its technology compared with China’s on artificial intelligence, facial recognition and quantum computing.Having a government role in bringing some manufacturing back to the United States from China was an area of bipartisan agreement, Mr. Warner said, mentioning Senator Tom Cotton, Republican of Arkansas and a member of the Intelligence Committee.“There is a coalition of the willing to take on the challenge of China,” Mr. Warner said. “China has taken the best lessons of British imperialism and American imperialism, and we find them in a kind of authoritarian capitalism model.”AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More