House of Representatives

Subterms

    More stories

    • 150 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Jan. 6 Committee Appears to Lay Out Road Map for Prosecuting Trump

      by

      The first prime-time hearing into the Jan. 6 attack confronted the fundamental question that has haunted Donald J. Trump since he left office: Should he be prosecuted in a criminal court?He had means, motive and opportunity. But did Donald J. Trump commit a crime?A House committee explicitly declared that he did by conspiring to overturn an election. The attorney general, however, has not weighed in. And a jury of his peers may never hear the case.The first prime-time hearing into the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol this past week confronted the fundamental question that has haunted Mr. Trump, the 45th president, ever since he left office: Should he be prosecuted in a criminal court for his relentless efforts to defy the will of the voters and hang on to power?For two hours on Thursday night, the House committee investigating the Capitol attack detailed what it called Mr. Trump’s “illegal” and “unconstitutional” seven-part plan to prevent the transfer of power. The panel invoked the Justice Department, citing charges of seditious conspiracy filed against some of the attackers, and seemed to be laying out a road map for Attorney General Merrick B. Garland to their central target.Several former prosecutors and veteran lawyers said afterward that the hearing offered the makings of a credible criminal case for conspiracy to commit fraud or obstruction of the work of Congress.In presenting her summary of the evidence, Representative Liz Cheney, Republican of Wyoming and the committee’s vice chairwoman, demonstrated that Mr. Trump was told repeatedly by his own advisers that he had lost the election yet repeatedly lied to the country by claiming it had been stolen. He pressured state and federal officials, members of Congress and even his own vice president to disregard vote tallies in key states. And he encouraged the mob led by extremist groups like the Proud Boys while making no serious effort to stop the attack once it began.“I think the committee, especially Liz Cheney, outlined a powerful criminal case against the former president,” said Neal K. Katyal, a former acting solicitor general under President Barack Obama.“A crime requires two things — a bad act and criminal intent,” Mr. Katyal said. By citing testimony by Mr. Trump’s own attorney general, a lawyer for his campaign and others who told him that he had lost and then documenting his failure to act once supporters stormed the Capitol, Mr. Katyal said, the panel addressed both of those requirements.At the hearing, Representative Liz Cheney demonstrated that Mr. Trump was told repeatedly by his own advisers that he had lost the election.Doug Mills/The New York TimesA congressional hearing, however, is not a court of law, and because there was no one there to defend Mr. Trump, witnesses were not cross-examined and evidence was not tested. The committee offered just a selection of the more than 1,000 interviews it has conducted and the more than 140,000 documents it has collected. But it remains to be seen what contrary or mitigating information may be contained in the vast research it has not released yet.Mr. Trump’s allies have dismissed the hearings as a partisan effort to damage him before the 2024 election when he may run for president again. And legal defenders argued that the facts presented by the panel did not support the conclusions that it drew.Read More on the Jan. 6 House Committee HearingsThe Meaning of the Hearings: While the public sessions aren’t going to unite the country, they could significantly affect public opinion.An Unsettling Narrative: During the first hearing, the House panel presented a gripping story with a sprawling cast of characters, but only three main players: Donald Trump, the Proud Boys and a Capitol Police officer.Trump’s Depiction: Former president Donald J. Trump was portrayed as a would-be autocrat willing to shred the Constitution to hang onto power. Liz Cheney: The vice chairwoman of the House committee has been unrepentant in continuing to blame Mr. Trump for stoking the attack on Jan. 6, 2021.“Unless there’s more evidence to come that we don’t know about, I don’t see a criminal case against the former president,” said Robert W. Ray, a former independent counsel who investigated President Bill Clinton and later served as a defense lawyer for Mr. Trump at his first Senate impeachment trial.“Whatever the Proud Boys had in mind when they stormed the Capitol, I don’t see how you’d be able to prove that Trump knew that that was the purpose of the conspiracy,” Mr. Ray added. “Whether or not he ‘lit the fuse’ that caused that to happen, the government would have to prove he knowingly joined that conspiracy with that objective.”Beyond the legal requirements of making a criminal case, the prospect of prosecuting a former president also would entail far deeper considerations and broader consequences. Criminal charges against Mr. Trump brought by the administration of the man who defeated him would further inflame an already polarized country. It would consume national attention for months or longer and potentially set a precedent for less meritorious cases against future presidents by successors of the opposite party.“That’s a hill that no federal prosecutor has tried to climb, prosecuting a former president,” said John Q. Barrett, a former associate independent counsel in the Iran-contra investigation. “It’s very fraught,” he said. “It’s a massive undertaking as an investigation, as a trial, as a national saga and trauma.” But he added that accountability was important and that “the threat to the continuity of our government is about as grave as it gets.”All of which is almost certainly going through the mind of Mr. Garland, a mild-mannered, highly deliberative former federal appeals court judge who has largely kept mum about his thinking. A Justice Department spokesman said Mr. Garland watched the hearing but would not elaborate.Democrats have attacked the attorney general for not already prosecuting Mr. Trump, even though a federal judge opined in March in a related civil case that the former president and a lawyer who advised him had most likely broken the law by trying to overturn the election. Mr. Garland has resisted the pressure. While he has called the investigation into the Jan. 6 attack the most urgent work in the history of his department, he has refused to forecast where the inquiry will go as investigators continue evaluating evidence.“We are not avoiding cases that are political or cases that are controversial or sensitive,” he told NPR in March. “What we are avoiding is making decisions on a political basis, on a partisan basis.”Democrats have attacked Attorney General Merrick B. Garland for not already prosecuting Mr. Trump, deeming it a miscarriage of justice.Sarah Silbiger for The New York TimesMany officials and rank-and-file prosecutors scattered throughout the 115,000-person Justice Department have long believed that Mr. Trump acted corruptly, particularly in pressuring their own department to parrot his baseless claims of election fraud, according to several people involved in such conversations who were not authorized to discuss the matter publicly.But some career employees expressed fear that as the hearings continued, they would raise expectations for a prosecution that may not be met.The committee “was good at making the case that Donald Trump’s actions were completely horrific and that he deserves to be held accountable for them,” said Matthew Miller, a former Justice Department spokesman during the Obama administration. “But an open-and-shut case on television is different from proving someone violated a criminal statute.”With public attention fixated on Mr. Trump, the Justice Department’s work has proceeded along three tracks: charge the people who attacked the Capitol; piece together larger conspiracies, including sedition, involving some of the assailants; and identify possible crimes that took place before the assault.In the 17 months since the attack, more than 840 defendants from nearly all 50 states have been arrested. Of those, about 250 have been charged with assaulting, resisting or impeding the police, and members of two far-right groups have been charged with seditious conspiracy, a rare accusation that represents the most serious criminal charges brought in the department’s sprawling investigation.Prosecutors are scrutinizing the plan by Mr. Trump’s allies to create alternate slates of pro-Trump electors to overturn Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s victory in key swing states, with a federal grand jury issuing subpoenas to people involved. That investigation brings federal prosecutors closer to Mr. Trump’s inner circle than any other inquiry. Mr. Trump also faces the threat of prosecution by a local Georgia prosecutor investigating his efforts to overturn the state’s vote.No sitting or former president has ever been put on trial. Aaron Burr was charged with treason after leaving office as vice president in a highly politicized case directed from the White House by President Thomas Jefferson, but he was acquitted after a sensational trial. Ulysses S. Grant, while president, was arrested for speeding in his horse and buggy. Spiro T. Agnew resigned as vice president as part of a plea bargain in a corruption case.The closest a former president came to indictment was after Richard M. Nixon resigned in the Watergate scandal in 1974, but his successor, Gerald R. Ford, short-circuited the investigation by preemptively pardoning him, reasoning that the country had to move on. Mr. Clinton, to avoid perjury charges after leaving office, agreed on his last full day in the White House to a deal with Mr. Ray in which he admitted giving false testimony under oath about his affair with Monica S. Lewinsky, temporarily surrendered his law license and paid a $25,000 fine.Should the Justice Department indict Mr. Trump, a trial would be vastly different from House hearings in ways that affect the scope and pace of any inquiry. Investigators would have to scour thousands of hours of video footage and the full contents of devices and online accounts they have accessed for evidence bolstering their case, as well as anything that a defense lawyer could use to knock it down. Federal prosecutors would probably also have to convince appeals court judges and a majority of Supreme Court justices of the validity of their case.For all of the pressure that the House committee has put on the Justice Department to act, it has resisted sharing information. In April, the department asked the committee for transcripts of witness interviews, but the panel has not agreed to turn over the documents because its work is continuing.Although critics have faulted Mr. Garland, attorneys general do not generally drive the day-to-day work of investigations. Mr. Garland is briefed nearly every day on the inquiry’s progress, but it is being led by Matthew M. Graves, the U.S. attorney in Washington, who is working with national security and criminal division officials. Lisa O. Monaco, the deputy attorney general, broadly oversees the investigation.“Whether fair or not, Garland’s tenure will be defined by whether or not he indicts Trump,” Mr. Miller said. “The Justice Department may not indict Trump. Prosecutors may not believe they have the evidence to secure a conviction. But that will now be interpreted as a choice by Garland, not as a reality that was forced upon him by the facts of the investigation.” More

    • 138 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘Enough is enough’: thousands rally across US in gun control protests

      by

      ‘Enough is enough’: thousands rally across US in gun control protestsThe March for Our Lives rallies come after mass shootings in Uvalde, Texas and Buffalo, New York

      New Yorkers join march for gun reform
      01:59Rallies for gun reform were held in Washington, New York, other US cities and around the world on Saturday, seeking to increase pressure on Congress to act following a spate of mass shootings.‘Caring and giving’: funeral for Uvalde victim held amid gun law protestsRead moreIn Washington, the son of an 86-year-old victim in the Buffalo supermarket shooting said: “Enough is enough. We will not go quietly into the night.”The March for Our Lives rallies came less than a month after 10 people were killed in the racist attack in Buffalo, New York and 19 children and two teachers were killed at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas.Other mass shootings, widely defined as shootings in which four people or more excluding the shooter are hurt or killed, have also helped put the issue center-stage.March for Our Lives was formed in 2018 after a shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas high school in Parkland, Florida, in which 14 students and three adults were killed. Organisers estimated a million people, mostly young, joined protests then.The group helped force Republicans in Florida to enact reforms including raising the age to buy long guns, including AR-15-style rifles, from 18 to 21; enacting a three-day gap between purchase and access; allowing trained school staff to carry guns; and putting $400m into mental health services and school security.Florida lawmakers also approved a “red flag law” that can deny firearms to individuals believed to pose a danger to themselves or others.Organisers on Saturday were focusing on smaller marches at more locations. The DC protest was expected to draw 50,000. The 2018 march filled downtown Washington with more than 200,000 people.By noon on Saturday, thousands had gathered around the Washington Monument. Protestors held signs demanding justice for the victims of Uvalde and Buffalo. Speakers included activists, family members of those killed and shooting survivors.Garnell Whitfield, son of Ruth Whitfield, an 86-year-old killed in Buffalo, told the crowd he and his family were “still in a state of shock”. When she was killed, Ruth Whitfield was buying groceries after visiting her husband at a nursing home.Happening now: March for our Lives in Buffalo #MarchForOurLivesJune11 pic.twitter.com/QHPtmTzbor— Gabriel Elizondo (@elizondogabriel) June 11, 2022
      “We are being naive to think that it couldn’t happen to us,” Garnell Whitfield said. “Enough is enough. We will not go quietly into the night as victims. We hear a lot about prayer, and prayer is wonderful and we thank you for your prayers. But prayer is not a noun, it’s a verb. It’s an action. You pray, then you get up and you work.”The parents of Joaquin Oliver, a 17-year-old killed in the Parkland shooting, wore shirts bearing a picture of their son.“I was hoping to avoid attending a march like this ever again,” Manuel Oliver said, standing next to his wife, Patricia. “Our elected officials betrayed us and have avoided the responsibility to end gun violence.”The crowd heard from two founders of March for Our Lives, David Hogg and X Gonzalez, both Parkland survivors.“All Americans have a right to not be shot, a right to safety,” Hogg said. “Nowhere in the constitution is unrestricted access to weapons of war a guaranteed right.“We’ve seen the damage AR-15s do. When we look at the innocent children of Uvalde, tiny coffins horrify us. Tiny coffins filled with small, mutilated and decapitated bodies. That should fill us with rage and demands for change.”Hogg emphasized state and local gun legislation passed since 2018. He noted a red flag law that saw a court-ordered disarming of an individual who sent his mother a death threat. He encouraged the crowd to bring the issue of gun control to the polls.“If our government can’t do anything to stop 19 kids from being killed and slaughtered in their own school and decapitated, it’s time to change who is in government,” Hogg said.Gonzalez gave an impassioned rebuke to Congress.“I’ve spent these past four years doing my best to keep my rage in check. To keep my profanity at a minimum so everyone can understand and appreciate the arguments I’m trying to make, but I have reached my fucking limit. We are being murdered. Cursing will not rob us of our innocence.“You say that children are the future, and you never listen to what we say once we’re old enough to disagree with you, you decaying degenerates. You really want to protect children, pass some fucking gun laws.”Gonzalez said Congress had started treating mass shootings as a “fact of life”, like natural disasters. She criticized politicians for their relationships with gun lobbyists, saying: “We saw you cash those fucking checks. We as children did the heavy lifting for you. Act your age, not your shoe-size, Congress. You ought to be ashamed.”Yolanda King, who spoke at the 2018 March for Our Lives rally when she was nine, spoke of hope for action after Uvalde and Buffalo. Now 14, she evoked her grandfather, Martin Luther King Jr.“My grandfather was taken from the world by gun violence. Six years after his death, his mother, my great-grandmother, was killed in church during Sunday service. We have all been touched by tragedy, we have all been lifted up by hope.“Today we’re telling Congress, we’re telling the gun lobby and we’re telling the world this time is different. This time is different because we’ve had enough. We’ve had enough of having more guns than people here in America. Together, we can carve that stone of love and hope out of that mountain of death and despair. Together we can build a gun-free world for all people.Dozens of other rallies saw protesters call for stronger legislation. In Buffalo, hundreds protested outside the supermarket where the shooting happened. The group held a moment of silence and chanted “Not one more”.March for Our Lives has called for an assault weapons ban, universal background checks for gun purchases and a national licensing system.The US House has passed bills that would raise the age limit to buy semi-automatic weapons and establish a federal “red flag” law. But previous such initiatives have stalled or been watered down in the Senate. The new marches were to take place a day after senators left Washington without reaching agreement in guns talks.On Saturday, Joe Biden tweeted his support.“I join them by repeating my call to Congress: do something,” the president said, adding that Congress must ban assault weapons, strengthen background checks, pass red flag laws and repeal gun manufacturers’ immunity to liability.“We can’t fail the American people again,” the president wrote. More

    • 188 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      El comité sobre el ataque al Capitolio muestra a Trump como un aspirante a autócrata

      by

      Según el comité que investiga el ataque al Capitolio del 6 de enero, Donald Trump llevó a cabo una conspiración en siete partes para anular una elección democrática libre y justa.Es muy probable que en los 246 años de historia de Estados Unidos nunca se haya hecho una acusación más comprometedora contra un presidente estadounidense que la presentada el jueves por la noche en una sala de audiencias cavernosa del Congreso, donde el futuro de la democracia parecía estar en juego.A otros mandatarios se les ha acusado de actuar mal, incluso de cometer delitos e infracciones, pero el caso en contra de Donald Trump formulado por la comisión bipartidista de la Cámara de Representantes que investiga el ataque al Capitolio del 6 de enero de 2021 no solo describe a un presidente deshonesto, sino a un aspirante a autócrata dispuesto a violar la Constitución para aferrarse al poder a toda costa.Como lo describió la comisión durante su audiencia televisada, a la hora de mayor audiencia, Trump ejecutó una conspiración en siete partes para anular una elección democrática libre y justa. Según el panel, le mintió al pueblo estadounidense, ignoró todas las pruebas que refutaban sus falsas denuncias de fraude, presionó a los funcionarios estatales y federales para que anularan los resultados de las elecciones que favorecían a su contrincante, alentó a una turba violenta a atacar el Capitolio e incluso señaló su apoyo a la ejecución de su propio vicepresidente.“El 6 de enero fue la culminación de un intento de golpe de Estado, un intento descarado, como dijo uno de los alborotadores poco después del 6 de enero, de derrocar al gobierno”, dijo el representante demócrata por Misisipi, Bennie Thompson, presidente de la comisión especial. “La violencia no fue un accidente. Representa la última oportunidad de Trump, la más desesperada, para detener la transferencia de poder”.Representatives Bennie Thompson, Democrat of Mississippi, and Liz Cheney, Republican of Wyoming, led the first hearing on the attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, which included testimony from a Capitol police officer and a documentary filmmaker.Kenny Holston for The New York TimesLas palabras de los propios asesores y personajes nombrados por Trump fueron las más incriminatorias. Se proyectaron en video en una pantalla gigante sobre el estrado de la comisión y se transmitieron a una audiencia de televisión nacional. Se pudo ver cómo su propio fiscal general le dijo a Trump que sus denuncias de una elección falsa eran “patrañas”. Su abogado de campaña testificó que no había suficientes pruebas de fraude para cambiar el resultado. Hasta su propia hija, Ivanka Trump, reconoció haber aceptado la conclusión de que la elección no fue robada, como su padre seguía afirmando.Read More on the Jan. 6 House Committee HearingsThe Meaning of the Hearings: While the public sessions aren’t going to unite the country, they could significantly affect public opinion.An Unsettling Narrative: During the first hearing, the House panel presented a gripping story with a sprawling cast of characters, but only three main players: Donald Trump, the Proud Boys and a Capitol Police officer.Trump’s Depiction: Former president Donald J. Trump was portrayed as a would-be autocrat willing to shred the Constitution to hang onto power. Liz Cheney: The vice chairwoman of the House committee has been unrepentant in continuing to blame Mr. Trump for stoking the attack on Jan. 6, 2021.Buena parte de las pruebas fueron presentadas por la principal figura republicana en la comisión, la representante por Wyoming Liz Cheney, quien ha sido condenada al ostracismo por Trump y por buena parte de su partido por condenar una y otra vez las acciones del entonces presidente después de la elección. Cheney planteó con firmeza el caso y luego se dirigió a sus compañeros republicanos que han optado por apoyar a su derrotado expresidente y justificar sus acciones.“A mis colegas republicanos que defienden lo indefendible les digo: llegará el día en el que Donald Trump se haya ido, pero el deshonor de ustedes permanecerá”, declaró.Muchos de los detalles ya se habían dado a conocer y muchas interrogantes sobre las acciones de Trump quedaron sin respuesta por ahora, pero Cheney resumió los hallazgos de la comisión de una forma implacable y acusadora.Un grupo de personas en Washington que se reunió para ver la audiencia, escuchaba a la representante Liz Cheney, republicana por Wyoming.Shuran Huang para The New York TimesAlgunas de las nuevas revelaciones y las confirmaciones de las noticias recientes fueron suficientes para provocar exclamaciones de asombro en el recinto y, tal vez, en las salas de todo el país. Se informó que luego de que se le dijo que la multitud del 6 de enero coreaba “Cuelguen a Mike Pence”, el vicepresidente que desafió las presiones del presidente para bloquear la transferencia de poder, Trump respondió: “Quizá nuestros seguidores tengan la idea correcta”. Mike Pence, agregó, “se lo merece”.Cheney, vicepresidenta del panel, informó que en la víspera del ataque del 6 de enero, miembros del propio gabinete de Trump hablaron de invocar la Vigésima Quinta Enmienda para destituir al entonces presidente del cargo. Reveló que el representante por Pensilvania Scott Perry y “otros congresistas republicanos” que habían participado en el intento de anular la elección buscaron obtener indultos de Trump durante sus últimos días en el cargo.Cheney reprodujo un video en el que se veía a Jared Kushner, yerno del exmandatario y asesor principal que después de la elección se ausentó en lugar de enfrentar a los teóricos de la conspiración que incitaban a Trump, desechar con displicencia las amenazas de Pat A. Cipollone, consejero de la Casa Blanca, y otros abogados de presentar su renuncia en señal de protesta. “Me pareció que solo eran lloriqueos, para ser sincero”, declaró Kushner.También la vicepresidenta del comité señaló que mientras Pence tomó medidas reiteradas para buscar asistencia y detener a la turba el 6 de enero, el presidente no hizo tal esfuerzo. En cambio, su jefe de gabinete de la Casa Blanca, Mark Meadows, trató de convencer al general Mark A. Milley, presidente del Estado Mayor Conjunto, de fingir que Trump estaba activamente involucrado.“Dijo: ‘Tenemos que eliminar el relato de que el vicepresidente está tomando todas las decisiones’”, dijo el general Milley en un testimonio grabado en video. “‘Necesitamos imponer la versión de que el presidente todavía está a cargo, y que las cosas están firmes o estables’, o palabras en ese sentido. Inmediatamente interpreté eso como política, política, política”.Trump no tuvo aliados en la comisión de nueve integrantes de la Cámara de Representantes y él y sus seguidores rechazaron el trabajo del panel con el argumento de que es un intento partidista para desprestigiarlo. En Fox News, que optó por no transmitir la audiencia, Sean Hannity se esmeraba por cambiar el tema y atacó a la comisión por no centrarse en las violaciones de seguridad del Capitolio, de las que culpa principalmente a la presidenta de la Cámara de Representantes, Nancy Pelosi, aunque el senador por Kentucky Mitch McConnell, entonces líder de la mayoría republicana, compartía con ella el control del edificio en ese momento.Antes de la audiencia, Trump trató una vez más de reescribir la historia al presentar el ataque al Capitolio como una manifestación legítima de agravio público contra unas elecciones robadas. “El 6 de enero no fue solo una protesta, sino que representó el mayor movimiento en la historia de nuestro país para hacer a Estados Unidos grandioso de nuevo”, escribió en su nuevo sitio de redes sociales.El panel reprodujo un video de Ivanka Trump, la hija de Trump y exasesora de la Casa Blanca, testificando a puerta cerrada.Kenny Holston para The New York TimesTrump no es el primer presidente que ha sido señalado por mala conducta, infracción de la ley o incluso violación de la Constitución. Andrew Johnson y Bill Clinton fueron acusados ​​por la Cámara de Representantes, aunque absueltos por el Senado. John Tyler se puso del lado de la Confederación durante la Guerra de Secesión. Richard M. Nixon renunció bajo amenaza de juicio político por abusar de su poder para encubrir actividades corruptas de campaña. Warren G. Harding tuvo el escándalo del Teapot Dome y Ronald Reagan el caso Irán-Contras.Pero los delitos alegados en la mayoría de esos casos palidecen en comparación con las acusaciones contra Trump, y aunque Tyler se puso en contra del país que una vez dirigió, murió antes de que pudiera rendir cuentas. Nixon enfrentó audiencias durante Watergate no muy diferentes a las que comenzaron el jueves por la noche y estuvo involucrado en otros escándalos más allá del robo que finalmente derivó en su salida. Pero la deshonestidad flagrante y la incitación a la violencia expuestas el jueves eclipsaron incluso sus fechorías, según diversos académicos.Trump, por supuesto, ya fue impugnado en dos ocasiones y absuelto otras dos, la segunda por su involucramiento en el ataque del 6 de enero. Pero, aun así, el caso en su contra ahora es mucho más amplio y expansivo, después de que la comisión llevó a cabo unas 1000 entrevistas y obtuvo más de 100.000 páginas de documentos.Lo que el comité intentaba demostrar era que no se trataba de un presidente con preocupaciones razonables sobre el fraude o una protesta que se salió de control. En cambio, el panel estaba tratando de obtener las pruebas de que Trump formó parte de una conspiración criminal contra la democracia; que sabía que no había un fraude generalizado porque su propio entorno se lo dijo, que, de manera intencional, convocó a una turba para que detuviera la entrega del poder a Joseph R. Biden Jr. y se quedó cruzado de brazos sin hacer casi nada cuando el ataque comenzó.Aún no sabemos si el panel puede cambiar las opiniones públicas sobre esos acontecimientos, pero muchos estrategas y analistas políticos piensan que es poco probable. Con medios más fragmentados y una sociedad más polarizada, la mayoría de los estadounidenses ya tienen una opinión sobre el 6 de enero y solo escuchan a quienes la comparten.Sin embargo, había otro espectador de las audiencias, el fiscal general Merrick B. Garland. Si la comisión estaba exponiendo lo que consideraba una acusación formal contra el expresidente, parecía estar invitando al Departamento de Justicia a seguir el caso de verdad con un gran jurado y en un tribunal de justicia.Al adelantar la historia que se contará en las próximas semanas, Cheney casi le escribió el guion a Garland. La representante dijo: “Van a escuchar sobre complots para cometer conspiración sediciosa el 6 de enero, un delito definido en nuestras leyes como conspirar para derrocar, destituir o destruir por la fuerza el gobierno de Estados Unidos u oponerse por la fuerza a la autoridad del mismo”.Pero si Garland no está de acuerdo y las audiencias de este mes resultan ser el único juicio al que se enfrente Trump por sus esfuerzos para anular las elecciones, Cheney y sus compañeros de la comisión estaban decididos a asegurarse de que, al menos, sea condenado por el jurado de la historia.Peter Baker es el corresponsal jefe de la Casa Blanca y ha cubierto a los últimos cinco presidentes para el Times y The Washington Post. También es autor de seis libros, el más reciente The Man Who Ran Washington: The Life and Times of James A. Baker III. @peterbakernyt • Facebook More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Ocasio-Cortez Turns a New York Brawl into a National Democratic Proxy Battle

      by

      Sean Patrick Maloney is a Democratic Party stalwart who declares himself a “practical, mainstream guy.”Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is a political outsider-turned-left-wing star with a powerful social media megaphone.Perhaps no two House Democrats better represent the dueling factions of a party at war with itself — over matters of ideology and institutions, how to amass power and, most of all, how to beat Republicans. Mr. Maloney, who represents a Hudson Valley-area district, is the chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, tasked with protecting incumbents and making him a pillar of the establishment. Ms. Ocasio-Cortez, who represents the Bronx and Queens, has made it her mission to push that establishment to the left, one endorsement of a liberal challenger at a time.The two forces collided this week when Ms. Ocasio-Cortez handed her endorsement to Mr. Maloney’s primary opponent, Alessandra Biaggi, a left-leaning state senator with a political pedigree. It is often frowned upon for incumbents of the same party to back primary challengers, and it is especially unusual within a state’s delegation. But Ms. Ocasio-Cortez, who toppled a Democratic incumbent herself in 2018, has never been one to abide by such rules, and her muscle and fund-raising savvy could be a major factor in the race.The move turned a contest already filled with powerful New Yorkers and divided loyalties into a messy national Democratic proxy battle. There are clear tensions on issues that have divided the moderate and left wings of the party, including public safety, Medicare for All and fund-raising tactics. Driving those disputes are more existential questions, like how to pursue political survival in a climate that appears increasingly catastrophic for the party in power.Representative Sean Patrick Maloney of New York at the Capitol in 2021. Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images“It’s a fight between two Democrats: one is younger and dynamic and wants to make changes quickly,” said former Governor David Paterson, for whom Mr. Maloney once worked and who has remained neutral in the race. By contrast, he said, Mr. Maloney “is now emerging in the leadership of the House, and is thinking more about the entire party and how things will go in November this year.”The fight will play out in New York’s 17th District, which under new boundaries includes parts of wealthy Westchester County, outside New York City, and conservative Hudson Valley hamlets. The district was recently redrawn as part of a redistricting fight that left some Democrats seething at Mr. Maloney. It also left the 17th District more competitive — raising the stakes for a primary fight that may turn on which candidate voters think can hold the seat. Mike Lawler, a state assemblyman, is expected to be the Republican front-runner in the primary on Aug. 23.“We have an incredible opportunity to be able to win against Republicans in November by being bold on our positions for working people,” Ms. Biaggi said in an interview.But that may not happen with an Ocasio-Cortez endorsement, warned Suzanne Berger, the chairwoman of the Westchester County Democratic Committee, who is backing Mr. Maloney.“They misjudged the voters of New York-17 if they think that is helpful to winning in November, which is the main point,” she said. “Republicans will use that endorsement as a weapon in November.”Ms. Ocasio-Cortez declined an interview request. Her spokeswoman, Lauren Hitt, said that the district would be competitive regardless and that “with Roe and gun safety on voters’ minds, Senator Biaggi’s record makes her uniquely positioned to drive out enthusiastic voters in the midterms.”Ms. Biaggi and Ms. Ocasio-Cortez have been political allies since they both rose to prominence by defeating Democratic incumbents in 2018. Ms. Biaggi, 36, is the granddaughter of Mario Biaggi, who was a 10-term congressman from New York. Hillary Clinton, whose Chappaqua home is now in the district, helped lead Ms. Biaggi’s wedding ceremony. Mr. Maloney, 55, has his own Clinton connections. He worked in former President Bill Clinton’s White House as a staff secretary, and he recently marched with Mrs. Clinton in a Memorial Day parade in Chappaqua, according to a photo he posted on Twitter. Spokesmen for the Clintons had no comment on their plans to endorse in the race.Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez hugging Alessandra Biaggi in the Bronx on Election Day in 2020.Desiree Rios for The New York TimesMr. Maloney, who calls himself a “pragmatic progressive who gets things done,” is regarded as the favorite in the race, though local party officials say both candidates have work to do in introducing themselves across a newly configured district. Ms. Biaggi, for her part, argued that Mr. Maloney had been too timid on issues like health care — she supports Medicare for All and said that “ideally private insurance would not be part of that.” She casts Mr. Maloney as too close to corporate interests.And, at a moment of overlapping national crises and frequent stalemate on Capitol Hill, where Democrats hold narrow majorities, she suggested that voters were in the mood for candidates who would “fight like hell for them.”When Mr. Maloney first arrived in Congress after flipping a Republican seat in 2012, he was unquestionably more of a centrist. But his allies now dismiss the idea that the congressman — New York’s first openly gay member of Congress who has long fought for L.G.B.T.Q. rights and supported climate proposals backed by Ms. Ocasio-Cortez — is a moderate.In an interview, he said he believed “in mainstream policies that can get done right now, on things like protecting our kids from gun violence, protecting reproductive freedom and climate change.” (The Senate has stymied most of those priorities.)He noted several times that he had “nothing but respect” or “tremendous respect” for Ms. Ocasio-Cortez, despite her endorsement of Ms. Biaggi.“I’m an original co-sponsor of the Green New Deal, and we have spoken about that — I speak to her all the time,” he said.But as of Thursday, he confirmed, they had not spoken since she raised the prospect last month that he should step aside as D.C.C.C. chairman, amid a battle over redistricting that threatened to tear the delegation apart. According to people in and around the delegation, who were granted anonymity to discuss private conversations, there have not been efforts to mediate between the two representatives.Ms. Hitt, Ms. Ocasio-Cortez’s spokeswoman, said that they were “collegial despite their differences.”After the state’s high court struck down a congressional map drawn by Democrats and a new map was announced, Mr. Maloney declared that he would be running not in the redrawn version of his current 18th Congressional District but in the slightly safer 17th District. He lives there — and Ms. Biaggi does not, although she is planning to move to it — but the area is largely represented by Representative Mondaire Jones.State Senator Alessandra Biaggi of New York speaking outside Rikers Island prison last year in support of legislation aimed at reducing the prison population.Juan Arredondo for The New York TimesThe leader of the campaign committee entertaining a challenge to a fellow incumbent drew explosive backlash, and Ms. Ocasio-Cortez, citing a conflict of interest, suggested that Mr. Maloney should step down as chairman should he pursue such a challenge. Ultimately, Mr. Jones decided to run in a different district and a primary was averted, but some members still privately bristle at the episode.Asked about his message to disgruntled colleagues, Mr. Maloney acknowledged that he “could have done things better,” even as he stressed that the district he selected was only marginally safer for Democrats than the alternative.“I also thought there was a way for it to work out and avoid a primary between members and that’s just what we did,” he said.He also promised that, as chairman of the committee, his “heart” and his “focus” would be on protecting the Democratic majority even as he navigated his own race.At the same time, Mr. Maloney noted that he ended a policy that blacklisted consultants or political groups that backed candidates who ran against incumbents. The policy had been a point of contention between left-leaning members and the D.C.C.C.Ms. Ocasio-Cortez has backed several challengers this year — one lost and one narrowly trails in a race that is headed to a recount — much to the annoyance of some Democrats.“New York’s post-redistricting fiasco is a clear demonstration of why a sitting member of Congress should not lead the political arm of the Democratic Party,” said Representative Kathleen Rice of New York. But she also seemed to criticize Ms. Ocasio-Cortez, complaining about “certain members with their own long history of challenging incumbents” who are stirring the pot.“When the stakes are this high, Democrats should be coming together to keep the majority, rather than promoting Dem-on-Dem violence,” she said.Asked about criticism that Ms. Ocasio-Cortez is overly eager to take on her colleagues, Ms. Hitt said that the congresswoman believed that no one was entitled to re-election “by default.”Some nationally prominent House Democrats have rallied around Mr. Maloney, who is close to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The list includes the chairwoman of the Congressional Black Caucus, Representative Joyce Beatty of Ohio, who said in an interview Thursday that she was supporting him.Some of the criticism Mr. Maloney is getting, she noted, comes with the job.“You’re never going to make everybody happy, and you’re judged on victory,” she said.Representative Hakeem Jeffries of New York, the chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, called Mr. Maloney “a hard-working and well-respected member of Congress who has won multiple hotly contested elections,” and expressed confidence that voters “will once again send him back to Washington.”Asked if that was an endorsement, he said only that the comment spoke for itself. But it reflected an unmistakable sign of encouragement from party leadership.The primary is scheduled for August. But for all the drama around the contest, some Democrats in the delegation and beyond are already consumed by bigger problems amid an ever-worsening political climate.“When you’re facing the possibility of a tornado,” said former Representative Steve Israel, a former D.C.C.C. chairman, “the angry breezes don’t really matter.” More

    • 188 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden says forces behind January 6 attack ‘remain at work today’ – as it happened

      by

      Joe Biden warned that the forces behind the January 6 attack had not been defeated, and said no one should be able to hold “a dagger at the throat of our democracy.”Speaking in Los Angeles the day after the committee investigating the insurrection held a closely watched hearing, the president said he remained worried about the fallout from the events at the Capitol.“It’s important the American people understand what truly happened, and to understand that the same forces that led January 6 remain at work today,” Biden said. “We’re seeing how the battle for the soul of America has been far from won. But I know together, and I mean this, we can unite and defend this nation, Democrat and Republican, allow no one to place a dagger at the throat of our democracy.”The president said he did not end up watching the hearing, which will continue on Monday.The US politics blog is closing down after a day that saw Washington react to new revelations about what went on during the January 6 attack, while the Biden administration was rocked by inflation numbers that showed prices rising faster than expected last month. Senators are meanwhile still trying to reach an agreement on bipartisan gun control legislation, but no deal was announced.Here’s a rundown of what happened today:
      President Joe Biden said in a speech that the forces behind the Capitol insurrection “remain at work today”.
      The January 6 committee’s decision to broadcast in primetime appears to have paid off, with more than 19 million people having tuned in, a number that’s expected to grow.
      The bad inflation numbers were good news for Republicans, who used them to hammer the Biden administration as midterms that could put them in control of one or both houses of Congress draw ever nearer. The White House meanwhile said it is “doing everything we can” to stop prices from rising.
      The filibuster only frustrates voters, former president Barack Obama said in a speech in which he also shared his opinions on big tech and issues of race in American society today.
      The blog returns on Monday, as does the January 6 committee, which will hold its next hearing at 10 am eastern.A coach for the Washington Commanders football team is going to pay — literally — for his comments casting doubt on the severity of the January 6 insurrection.The team announced Jack Del Rio, an assistant coach who coordinates defense for the team in the nation’s capital, will pay a $100,000 fine after questioning why the protests that followed George Floyd’s death in 2020 didn’t get as much scrutiny as the Capitol attack, which he called a “dust-up”.pic.twitter.com/86bJREVDsq— Washington Commanders (@Commanders) June 10, 2022
      Read more about it here:Washington Commanders coach sorry after calling Capitol attack a ‘dust-up’Read moreThe number of viewers of last night’s January 6 committee hearing has topped 19 million, The New York Times reports, a figure that’s nowhere near what the state of the union address or presidential debates get, but still much more than the average congressional hearing.According to the Times:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}That number will grow in the coming hours, as more networks are tallied and out-of-home viewing is factored in. Nielsen is expected to have a final viewership figure on Friday evening.
      By scheduling a congressional hearing for 8 to 10 p.m., committee members and Democrats were hoping to make the case to the biggest audience possible. ABC, CBS and NBC pre-empted their prime-time programming and went into special-report mode to cover it live.
      Though the Thursday night figure pales next to presidential debates (63 million to 73 million) or this year’s State of the Union address (38 million), it’s still much larger than the audience that would normally watch a daytime congressional hearing. And it’s in the ballpark of television events like a big “Sunday Night Football” game or the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade.The Washington Post has published more details about the activities around the 2020 election of Ginni Thomas, wife of conservative supreme court justice Clarence Thomas.The newspaper’s latest report said she sent 29 Republican state lawmakers in Arizona form emails encouraging them to “choose” their own presidential electors and ignore Joe Biden’s victory in the state.According to the Post:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}The message, just days after media organizations called the race for Biden in Arizona and nationwide, urged lawmakers to “stand strong in the face of political and media pressure” and claimed that the responsibility to choose electors was “yours and yours alone.” They had “power to fight back against fraud” and “ensure that a clean slate of Electors is chosen,” the email said.
      Among the lawmakers who received the email was then-Rep. Anthony Kern, a Stop the Steal supporter who lost his reelection bid in November 2020 and then joined U.S. Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Tex.) and others as a plaintiff in a lawsuit against Vice President Mike Pence, a last-ditch effort to overturn Biden’s victory. Kern was photographed outside the Capitol during the riot on Jan. 6 but has said he did not enter the building, according to local media reports.
      Kern did not immediately respond to a request for comment Friday. He is seeking his party’s nomination for a seat in the Arizona state Senate and has been endorsed by former president Donald Trump.
      On Dec. 13, the day before members of the electoral college were slated to cast their votes and seal Biden’s victory, Thomas emailed 22 House members and one senator. “Before you choose your state’s Electors … consider what will happen to the nation we all love if you don’t stand up and lead,” the email said. It linked to a video of a man urging swing-state lawmakers to “put things right” and “not give in to cowardice.”
      Speaker of the House Russell “Rusty” Bowers and Rep. Shawnna Bolick, the two recipients previously identified, told The Post in May that the outreach from Thomas had no bearing on their decisions about how to handle claims of election fraud.
      But the revelation that Ginni Thomas was directly involved in pressing them to override the popular vote — an act that would have been without precedent in the modern era — intensified questions about whether her husband should recuse himself from cases related to the 2020 presidential election and attempts to subvert it. Ginni Thomas’s status as a leading conservative political activist has set her apart from other spouses of Supreme Court justices.Today has been a packed news day, except on one topic: gun control. Senators in Washington are still negotiating over a measure to respond to the recent mass shootings in Uvalde, Texas and Buffalo, New York that can win bipartisan support, but have yet to announce a deal.Pressure mounts on Senate to act on gun safety amid Republican resistanceRead moreThe chamber’s top Democrat was as recently as yesterday sounding optimistic about a deal’s prospects, but gun legislation is extremely difficult to find a consensus on in Congress, and previous negotiations have collapsed unexpectedly.In Oregon, things are moving a bit faster. The Associated Press reports that a signature campaign to put an initiative before voters that would tighten down on gun access has seen a surge in interest following the shootings:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}When Raevahnna Richardson spotted a woman standing outside a library in Salem, Oregon, gathering signatures for a gun-safety initiative, she made a beeline to her and added her name.
      “I signed it to keep our kids safe, because something needs to change. I have a kid that’s going to be in first grade this upcoming season, and I don’t want her to have to be scared at school,” Richardson said.
      “To keep our kids safe.” It’s something that so many parents across the United States are worried about after the horrific massacre of 19 children and two teachers in Uvalde, Texas. That mass shooting has given the Oregon ballot initiative huge momentum, with the number of volunteers doubling to 1,200 and signatures increasing exponentially, organizers said.
      With the U.S. Senate unlikely to pass a “red flag” bill and the majority of state legislatures having taken no action on gun safety in recent years, or moving in the opposite direction, activists see voter-driven initiatives as a viable alternative.Monday will also bring testimony from Eugene Goodman, the Capitol police officer who famously confronted rioters on January 6, CNN reports.Goodman’s testimony will come in the federal court trial of rioter Kevin Seefried, who paraded a Confederate flag around the Capitol, not before the hearing of the January 6 committee in Congress.US Capitol Police Officer Eugene Goodman will testify on Monday against two Jan 6 defendants, one of whom carried a Confederate flag thru the Capitol.Goodman tells me this will be his first public testimony. You’ll remember he deftly steered a mob away from the Senate chamber. pic.twitter.com/ABSTT3WnlL— Kristin Wilson (@kristin__wilson) June 10, 2022
      Want to make this clear here, and also in another tweet: Officer Goodman testifying on Monday in US District Court for DC — in the bench trial for Kevin Seefried and his son.It’s not before the January 6th Committee.— Kristin Wilson (@kristin__wilson) June 10, 2022
      US Capitol police officer Eugene Goodman awarded Congressional Gold MedalRead moreA one-time acting US attorney general and a former Fox News editor are among the guests expected at the upcoming January 6 committee hearings, NBC News reports.Jeffrey Rosen, who took over as attorney general for the final week’s of Donald Trump’s term following William Barr’s resignation from the post, will appear at the committee’s third hearing next Wednesday, alongside Richard Donoghue, a former acting deputy attorney general, and Steve Engel, a former assistant attorney general. According to NBC, the “hearing will offer evidence about Trump’s unsuccessful plan to oust Rosen and replace him with another DOJ official who was more supportive of Trump’s fraud claims.”For the committee’s second hearing on Monday of next week, ex-Fox News political editor Chris Stirewalt will be among the guests. He made the decision to call the crucial state of Arizona for Biden in the 2020 election, and said he was subjected to “murderous rage” from Trump supporters for it.Monday and Wednesday’s hearings both begin at 10 am eastern time.Joe Biden warned that the forces behind the January 6 attack had not been defeated, and said no one should be able to hold “a dagger at the throat of our democracy.”Speaking in Los Angeles the day after the committee investigating the insurrection held a closely watched hearing, the president said he remained worried about the fallout from the events at the Capitol.“It’s important the American people understand what truly happened, and to understand that the same forces that led January 6 remain at work today,” Biden said. “We’re seeing how the battle for the soul of America has been far from won. But I know together, and I mean this, we can unite and defend this nation, Democrat and Republican, allow no one to place a dagger at the throat of our democracy.”The president said he did not end up watching the hearing, which will continue on Monday.The new Air Force Ones will probably look like the old Air Force Ones after all. Politico reports that the Biden administration has opted to scrap a paint scheme chosen by Trump during his time in the White House for the next batch of presidential jets due to overheating problems.From their report:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;} The darker paint scheme would have required additional modifications to cool some of the components, potentially driving up costs, the Air Force said.
      For this reason, the White House ultimately chose to scrap the Trump plan.
      “The Trump paint scheme is not being considered because it could drive additional engineering, time and cost,” said the administration official, who asked for anonymity to discuss an internal issue.
      While the White House has not released a mock-up of the new Air Force Ones, which will consist of two modified Boeing 747-8s, it is likely they will revert to the classic JFK-era light blue and white scheme. The new planes aren’t expected to fly until 2026, according to Air Force budget documents.
      The new paint decision is good news for Boeing, which would have had to pay out-of-pocket to fix the heating problem. The company on Friday referred questions on the paint job to the Air Force.President Joe Biden defended his administration’s approach to fighting inflation following this morning’s release of numbers that were much worse than predicted.In a statement, the president directed blame towards Russian leader Vladimir Putin and his invasion of Ukraine, which has caused prices for commodities like oil and food to spike:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;} Putin’s Price Hike hit hard in May here and around the world: high gas prices at the pump, energy, and food prices accounted for around half of the monthly price increases, and gas pump prices are up by $2 a gallon in many places since Russian troops began to threaten Ukraine. Even as we continue our work to defend freedom in Ukraine, we must do more—and quickly—to get prices down here in the United States.Biden also made a pitch for action on his own legislative priorities:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;} I call on Congress to pass a bill to cut shipping costs this month, and get it to my desk, so we can lower the price of goods. And, I call on Congress to pass legislation to cut costs for families like energy bills and prescription drugs. The deficit has come down more under my watch as President than at any time in history, but if Congress would pass tax reform to make the wealthiest Americans and big corporations pay their fair share, we could reduce this inflationary pressure even more.Much of Congress’s energy right now is dedicated to finding a bipartisan compromise on gun control following a spate of recent mass shootings, and some legislation that appeared to have momentum in recent months has already fallen by the wayside.Michelle Obama is making fresh exhortations to people to “double down” on efforts to protect abortion rights in the US, ahead of an expected final ruling in the next few weeks from the US Supreme Court on a key abortion case out of Mississippi that also directly asks the court to overturn Roe v Wade.“As we prepare for the decision from the supreme court on the fate of Roe v Wade, I know so many of us are anxious and wondering if there’s anything we can do. Let’s be clear: this potential decision would be the culmination of a decades-long strategy to take away a woman’s right to make decisions about her own health,” she wrote on Instagram later on yesterday.She added: “So we’ve got to get to work today. We’ve got to press our elected leaders at every level to pull every lever they can to protect the right to safe, legal abortion – right now. And we’ve got to make sure that everyone we know is voting … in every single election … for decades if that’s what it takes.”Former president Barack Obama and the former first lady had released a joint statement after the leak [of the court’s draft opinion favoring striking down Roe] criticizing the opinion, saying it would “relegate the most intensely personal decision someone can make to the whims of politicians and ideologues,” the Hill reported on Thursday.Michelle Obama continued in her post, in part: “We can’t afford to get cynical or throw our hands up and walk away. We have to double down, get even more organized and join the activists who’ve been doing this work away from the spotlight for so long. And we’ve got to do it not just for ourselves but for the next generation.”US shaken to its core by supreme court draft that would overturn Roe v WadeRead moreThe United States rolled out a raft of actions to support migrants on Friday as president Joe Biden and fellow leaders prepare to issue a joint declaration on migration on the final day of an Americas summit beset by diplomatic squabbling, Reuters reports.The Biden administration pledged hundreds of millions of aid to Venezuelan migrants across the Western Hemisphere, as well as programs to support temporary family-based visas for Cubans and Haitians and ease the hiring of Central American workers on Friday.The announcements are set to accompany a US-led pact dubbed the “Los Angeles Declaration” that aims to create incentives for countries taking in large numbers of migrants and spread responsibility across the region. But some analysts are skeptical there will be many meaningful commitments.The plan caps the Summit of the Americas hosted by Biden in Los Angeles that was designed to reassert US leadership and counter China’s growing economic footprint in the region.However, that message was clouded by a partial boycott by leaders, including Mexico’s president, in protest at Washington’s exclusion of US antagonists Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua from the gathering.At the summit’s opening session on Thursday, leaders from Argentina and tiny Belize took to the podium to rebuke Biden face-to-face over the guest list, underscoring the challenge the global superpower faces in restoring its influence among poorer neighbors.The declaration, due to be presented by Biden and other leaders later on Friday, will call on governments in the region to expand their own temporary worker programs, said a senior US official who previewed the plan.Some countries are unlikely to endorse the migrant declaration, according to a person familiar with the matter. Some Caribbean states would not approve it, an official at the summit said.Today has been dominated by the aftermath of Thursday evening’s January 6 committee hearings, which began building the case that Trump played a major role in orchestrating the assault on the Capitol, while shedding light on the other forces at work in Washington that day.Meanwhile, Republicans have seized on a worryingly high inflation reading to press their case for being in charge.Here’s what else is going on today:
      The January 6 hearing cut through propaganda that’s been spread about the insurrection, said Jamie Raskin, a Democratic lawmaker on the committee.
      Trump responded to his daughter Ivanka Trump’s statement that she never really believed the 2020 election was stolen.
      The bad inflation numbers were good news for Republicans, who used them to hammer the Biden administration as midterms that could put them in control of one or both houses of Congress draw ever nearer.
      The filibuster only frustrates voters, former president Barack Obama said in a speech in which he also shared his opinions on big tech and issues of race in American society today.
      There’s only one group of Americans left who can’t access Covid-19 vaccines: kids under five. Next week, a series of hearings and decisions may offer clarity on when young children will get access to the shots, and give parents nationwide a path back to normalcy.The Associated Press has a look at what to expect:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}On Wednesday, both Moderna and Pfizer will have to convince what’s essentially a science court — advisers to the Food and Drug Administration — that their shots work well in babies, toddlers and preschoolers.
      Kids under 5 are the only group not yet eligible for COVID-19 vaccination in the U.S. If the agency’s advisers endorse one or both shots for them — and the FDA agrees — there’s still another hurdle. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention must recommend whether all tots need immunization or just those at high risk from the virus.
      Adding to the complexity, each company is offering different dose sizes and number of shots. And the week won’t even start with the littlest kid debate: Moderna first will ask FDA’s advisers to support its vaccine for older children.
      Only a handful of countries, including China and Cuba, have offered different types of COVID-19 vaccinations to children younger than 5.Former president Barack Obama has taken aim at the filibuster, saying the Senate procedure so frustrates the legislative process that it makes Americans feel like voting is futile.Obama has plenty of experience with the filibuster, which Republicans used repeatedly to block his legislative priorities during his two terms in office, though he did have notable successes such as the landmark Obamacare health care overhaul.From Obama’s speech at the Copenhagen Democracy Summit:Former President Obama hits at Senate filibuster during summit in Copenhagen.He says it had “effectively made it almost impossible for either party … to get anything substantially through the Senate and passed and signed into law … People start wondering, ‘why bother?'” pic.twitter.com/UAgs5sDFdv— The Recount (@therecount) June 10, 2022
      He also discussed race:Former President Obama calls emotions around culture war issues “powerful” and “legitimate.””The original identity politics is racism and sexism and homophobia. That’s nothing if not identity politics. And it’s done a lot more harm than some tweet from an aggrieved liberal.” pic.twitter.com/uOa5E4BilY— The Recount (@therecount) June 10, 2022
      And big tech:Former President Barack Obama:”Technology companies have to accept a degree of democratic oversight and accountability.” pic.twitter.com/9EVrN6E1AP— The Recount (@therecount) June 10, 2022 More

    • 188 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      US grapples with Trump’s role in Capitol attack after House panel airs evidence – live

      by

      If there was one takeaway from last night’s January 6 committee hearings, it could be: all roads lead back to Trump.The committee showed evidence that centered on what happened at the Capitol, while taking testimony from two people who had no affiliation with the White House. But the former president nonetheless cast a long shadow over the crowded hearing room.Liz Cheney, one of the committee’s two Republican members, aired evidence that the former president endorsed calls to hang his vice-president, Mike Pence, for refusing to block the certification of Joe Biden’s election win.The lawmakers also revealed that top Trump officials didn’t even believe the then-president’s claims. Attorney general William Barr, it turns out, thought the fraud allegations were “bullshit”. So did Trump’s daughter, drawing a response from the former president on his social network today.Then there were the insurrectionists themselves. Robert Schornak, who has been sentenced to 36 months of probation for his role in the insurrection, summed up their sentiment well: “Trump has only asked me for two things. He asked me for my vote, and he asked me to come on January 6.”The committee will meet again on June 13th, at 10 am eastern. You can read more about last night’s events in The Guardian’s coverage here:House January 6 panel shows it still has surprises in store in televised hearingRead moreDid the January 6 committee really cut through the “thick fog of propaganda” around the attack? Not if you watched Fox News, which didn’t broadcast the hearing. my colleague Adam Gabbatt took a look at what they showed in its place:The millions of people who tuned into America’s main television channels on Thursday heard how the January 6 insurrection was “the culmination of an attempted coup”, a “siege” where violent Trump supporters mercilessly attacked police, causing politicians and staffers to run for their lives.On the Fox News channel, however, there was a different take on the historic congressional hearings exploring the attack on the Capitol in Washington DC.The deadly riot was, according to the channel’s primetime host Tucker Carlson, “an outbreak of mob violence, a forgettably minor outbreak by recent standards, that took place more than a year and a half ago”.This was the alternate reality that Carlson, Fox News’ most-watched host, presented as he opened his hour-long show. He followed it up with a boast: the rightwing network would not be covering one of the most consequential political hearings in recent American history.As America watched Capitol attack testimony, Fox News gave an alternate realityRead moreJamie Raskin, a prominent lawmaker on the committee, said last night’s hearing dispelled the “thick fog of propaganda” around the insurrection.In an interview with MSNBC, he also contrasted the Republican reaction to the attack with their professed support for law enforcement:Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) says last night’s January 6th hearing “dispelled the thick fog of propaganda”:“You have a party which now claims to be on the side of law enforcement … and yet are turning a total blind eye to the most vicious, massive assault on police officers.” pic.twitter.com/2w6aHDYrDO— The Recount (@therecount) June 10, 2022
      Police who were on the scene that day and their families have been increasingly outspoken againt Trump. In an interview with CNN, the brothers of Brian Sicknick, a Capitol police officer who died in the attack, said they never received condolences from the then-president:JUST NOW: Brian Sicknick’s brothers tell @NewDay Mike Pence called after Brian’s death to offer condolences. Pres. Trump did not.”Not one tweet, not one note, not one card, nothing from him because he knows. He knows he is the cause of the whole thing.”pic.twitter.com/poxyPgsxpi— John Berman (@JohnBerman) June 10, 2022
      Meanwhile, the January 6 Committee has compared Trump’s actions with those of Abraham Lincoln, a Republican:In 1864, Lincoln understood that he would likely lose his reelection bid. In anticipation, he wrote a memo detailing the importance of one of our most basic democratic principles: the peaceful transfer of power.This precedent stood for 220 years— until Donald Trump. pic.twitter.com/Nz7ip78jhM— January 6th Committee (@January6thCmte) June 10, 2022
      If there was one takeaway from last night’s January 6 committee hearings, it could be: all roads lead back to Trump.The committee showed evidence that centered on what happened at the Capitol, while taking testimony from two people who had no affiliation with the White House. But the former president nonetheless cast a long shadow over the crowded hearing room.Liz Cheney, one of the committee’s two Republican members, aired evidence that the former president endorsed calls to hang his vice-president, Mike Pence, for refusing to block the certification of Joe Biden’s election win.The lawmakers also revealed that top Trump officials didn’t even believe the then-president’s claims. Attorney general William Barr, it turns out, thought the fraud allegations were “bullshit”. So did Trump’s daughter, drawing a response from the former president on his social network today.Then there were the insurrectionists themselves. Robert Schornak, who has been sentenced to 36 months of probation for his role in the insurrection, summed up their sentiment well: “Trump has only asked me for two things. He asked me for my vote, and he asked me to come on January 6.”The committee will meet again on June 13th, at 10 am eastern. You can read more about last night’s events in The Guardian’s coverage here:House January 6 panel shows it still has surprises in store in televised hearingRead moreReactions are also trickling out from Republicans to last night’s January 6 committee hearing, in which House lawmakers took direct aim at Trump and his actions before and during that day.On his Truth Social network, the former president commented on his daughter Ivanka Trump’s admission, shown at the hearing, that she believed the 2020 election was not tampered with:Trump responds to his daughter’s testimony that AG Barr saying there no evidence of widespread election fraud: “It affected my perspective. I respect Attorney General Barr. So I accepted what he was saying.” pic.twitter.com/QrhPZ5QpYZ— Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) June 10, 2022
      House Representative Jim Banks, whom House Speaker Nancy Pelosi barred from sitting on the committee, called the hearing a “dud”:1) GOP IN Rep Banks on Fox on 1/6 cmte hrng: Last night’s hearing was a primetime dud. Nothing came out of it that we didn’t know before..it didn’t change anybody’s minds..his committee is trying to prosecute Donald Trump for crimes that he did not commit— Chad Pergram (@ChadPergram) June 10, 2022
      2) Banks: We also learned from the reports over the weekend that this committee is actually going to come out and recommend for abolishing the Electoral College and to advance the radical election agenda of the Democrats, to nationalize, federalize elections— Chad Pergram (@ChadPergram) June 10, 2022
      Republicans have seized on the rough inflation report to press their message that they are a better choice when it comes to the economy than Biden and the Democrats.Here’s Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell:Another devastating inflation report for American workers and families. Another new 40-year high. Grocery prices off the charts, worst increase since the 1970s. Rent, gas, and electricity all way up.The Democrats’ inflation has handed the average American a 3.9% real pay cut.— Leader McConnell (@LeaderMcConnell) June 10, 2022
      Mike Crapo, the top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, alludes to the Biden administration’s now-stalled “Build Back Better” proposal that would have spent big on fighting climate change, expanding social services and making a wide variety of other priorities a reality:Inflation remains painfully high, gas prices have been setting all-time highs and families are choosing to cut expenses to make ends meet. In the face of growing risks of recession and stagflation, notions of increasing taxes or massive new spending bills must be rejected pic.twitter.com/QD1iSMG5uV— Senator Mike Crapo (@MikeCrapo) June 10, 2022
      The Republican party’s Twitter account keeps its message to voters simple:Want lower gas prices? Vote Republican.— GOP (@GOP) June 10, 2022
      The message from the May inflation data released earlier today is simple: prices are continuing to increase in the world’s largest economy, meaning Biden’s public support will likely suffer even more than it already has.Inflation has proven to have a potently negative effect on the president’s approval, swamping it among a wide swath of the population, particularly when it comes to the economy.The latest consumer price index data from the labor department is unlikely to change that dynamic. If anything, it could make it worse. Here are a few reasons why:
      Economists expected month-on-month inflation to accelerate compared to April and it did, but by one percent, which was a bigger rise than expected.
      That pushed prices compared to May 2021 up by 8.6 percent, its biggest gain since the 12-month period ending in December 1981.
      Most importantly, the year-on-year growth was evidence that the current inflation wave has not peaked, as some had hoped after the April data showed a deceleration in the price increases. Instead, the wave continues to rise, as this chart makes clear.
      Perhaps the most important takeaway from the data is that costs are accelerating for things American cannot avoid buying. Prices for groceries are up 1.4 percent compared to last month and 11.9 percent compared to May 2021. Gasoline prices have risen 4.1 percent from April and a whopping 48.7 percent compared to a year ago. Costs for Shelter — the category including rents one might pay for an apartment or house, and a particularly important contributor to overall inflation — are up 0.6 percent from last month and 5.5 percent compared to last year.
      Biden has been trying to convince Americans the economy is better than it appears, pointing to much more positive trends in employment. But with the Federal Reserve committed to a campaign of potentially sharp interest rate increases to cut into inflation, the fear now is that the US economy is heading into a recession — a concern that has already triggered sharp selloffs on Wall Street.The Biden administration will today announce the end of its requirement that people entering the country test negative for Covid-19, CNN is reporting, citing a senior administration official.According to the network:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;} The move will go into effect for US-bound air travelers at midnight on Sunday.
      The CDC is lifting the restriction that the travel industry had lobbied against for months after determining it was no longer necessary “based on the science and data,” the official said. The CDC will reassess its decision in 90 days and if officials decide they need to reinstate it, because of a concerning new variant, for example, will do so. The measure has been in place since January 2021.
      The official said the Biden administration plans to work with airlines to ensure a smooth transition with the change, but it will likely be a welcome move for most in the industry.
      Travel industry officials have been increasingly critical of the requirement in recent weeks and directly urged the Biden administration to end the measure, arguing it was having a chilling effect on an already fragile economy, according to Airlines for America chief Nick Calio, whose group met recently with White House officials.
      The travel industry, and some scientific experts, said the policy had been out of date for months.
      Lawmakers, including Democrats, had also advocated for lifting the requirement in recent weeks.
      Nevada Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto said, “I’m glad CDC suspended the burdensome coronavirus testing requirement for international travelers, and I’ll continue to do all I can to support the strong recovery of our hospitality industry.”For those who were caught up in the insurrection, the January 6 committee hearing was a particularly difficult experience, The Guardian’s David Smith reports:It was too much to take. Too much for a second time.As the cavernous room filled with ugly cries and chants, police radio pleas for help, images of a human herd driven by a crazed impulse to beat police, smash windows and storm the US Capitol, survivors of that day held hands and wept.Several members of the House of Representatives, who were trapped on a balcony in the chamber as the attack unfolded on 6 January 2021, sat together at Thursday’s opening public hearing held by the select committee investigating the insurrection.When a carefully crafted video of that day’s carnage was played, Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal watched haunted and spellbound and wiped a tear from her eye. When her colleague Cori Bush broke down, a tissue was passed along the line so she could wipe her eyes.Vivid retelling brings horror of January 6 back to scene of the crimeRead moreWashington politicians are going to spend a lot of time today reacting to last night’s blockbuster January 6 committee hearing, which was jam-packed with details of what happened that day. Maanvi Singh has this rundown to bring you up to speed:The first primetime hearing from the House select committee investigating January 6 presented gut-wrenching footage of the insurrection, and a range of testimony to build a case that the attack on the Capitol was a planned coup fomented by Donald Trump.After a year and half investigation, the committee sought to emphasize the horror of the attack and hold the former president and his allies accountable.Here are some key takeaways from the night:Attack on January 6 was the ‘culmination of an attempted coup’Presenting an overview of the hearing and the ones to come, House select committee chair Bennie Thompson and vice-chair Liz Cheney presented their findings that the violent mob that descended on the Capitol was no spontaneous occurrence.Video testimony from Donald Trump’s attorney general, his daughter, and other allies make the case that the former president was working to undermine the 2020 election results and foment backlash. “Any legal jargon you hear about ‘seditious conspiracy’, ‘obstruction of an official proceeding’, ‘conspiracy to defraud the United States’ boils down to this,” Thompson said. “January 6 was the culmination of an attempted coup. A brazen attempt, as one rioter put it shortly after January 6, to overthrow the government. Violence was no accident. It represented Trump’s last stand, most desperate chance to halt the transfer of power.”January 6 hearing: five key takeaways from the first primetime Capitol attack inquiryRead moreGood morning, US Politics blog readers. Yesterday evening, the January 6 committee released a slew of new evidence showing how Donald Trump acted during and in the run-up to the attack on the Capitol. If you missed the hearing, you can watch it here.The aftermath of those revelations will be one of today’s main stories, but that’s not all that’s going on:
      The labor department has released horrid inflation numbers that were worse than expected and sure to fuel public discontent with Joe Biden, whose approval is languishing at record lows.
      The president is meanwhile in Los Angeles and expected to sign a declaration on migration during his visit to the Summit of Americas, before heading to fundraising events with Democrats.
      Top state department official Erik Woodhouse will discuss the effectiveness of the western sanctions campaign against Russia at an event hosted by the Atlantic Council.
      Celebrity chef Jose Andres will be appearing on Capitol Hill for a hearing looking at the humanitarian response to the Ukraine war. More

    • 188 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Is Depicted as a Would-Be Autocrat Seeking to Hang Onto Power at All Costs

      by

      As the Jan. 6 committee outlined during its prime-time hearing, Donald J. Trump executed a seven-part conspiracy to overturn a free and fair democratic election.In the entire 246-year history of the United States, there was surely never a more damning indictment presented against an American president than outlined on Thursday night in a cavernous congressional hearing room where the future of democracy felt on the line.Other presidents have been accused of wrongdoing, even high crimes and misdemeanors, but the case against Donald J. Trump mounted by the bipartisan House committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol described not just a rogue president but a would-be autocrat willing to shred the Constitution to hang onto power at all costs.As the committee portrayed it during its prime-time televised hearing, Mr. Trump executed a seven-part conspiracy to overturn a free and fair democratic election. According to the panel, he lied to the American people, ignored all evidence refuting his false fraud claims, pressured state and federal officials to throw out election results favoring his challenger, encouraged a violent mob to storm the Capitol and even signaled support for the execution of his own vice president.“Jan. 6 was the culmination of an attempted coup, a brazen attempt, as one rioter put it shortly after Jan. 6, to overthrow the government,” said Representative Bennie Thompson, Democrat of Mississippi and the chairman of the select committee. “The violence was no accident. It represents Trump’s last stand, most desperate chance to halt the transfer of power.”Representatives Bennie Thompson, Democrat of Mississippi, and Liz Cheney, Republican of Wyoming, led the first hearing on the attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, which included testimony from a Capitol police officer and a documentary filmmaker.Kenny Holston for The New York TimesMost incriminating were the words of Mr. Trump’s own advisers and appointees, played over video on a giant screen above the committee dais and beamed out to a national television audience. There was his own attorney general who told him that his false election claims were “bullshit.” There was his own campaign lawyer who testified that there was no evidence of fraud sufficient to change the outcome. And there was his own daughter, Ivanka Trump, who acknowledged that she accepted the conclusion that the election was not, in fact, stolen as her father kept claiming.Much of the evidence was outlined by the lead Republican on the committee, Representative Liz Cheney of Wyoming, who has been ostracized by Mr. Trump and much of her own party for consistently denouncing his actions after the election. Unwavering, she sketched out the case and then addressed her fellow Republicans who have chosen to stand by their defeated former president and excuse his actions.Read More on the Jan. 6 House Committee HearingsThe Meaning of the Hearings: While the public sessions aren’t going to unite the country, they could significantly affect public opinion.An Unsettling Narrative: During the first hearing, the House panel presented a gripping story with a sprawling cast of characters, but only three main players: Donald Trump, the Proud Boys and a Capitol Police officer.Trump’s Depiction: Former president Donald J. Trump was portrayed as a would-be autocrat willing to shred the Constitution to hang onto power. Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump: In videos shown during the hearing, Mr.Trump’s daughter and son-in-law were stripped of their carefully managed images.“I say this to my Republican colleagues who are defending the indefensible: There will come a day when Donald Trump is gone but your dishonor will remain,” she said.Many of the details were previously reported, and many questions about Mr. Trump’s actions were left unanswered for now, but Ms. Cheney pulled together the committee’s central findings in relentless, prosecutorial fashion.People at a viewing party in Washington watching Representative Liz Cheney, Republican of Wyoming, speak during the hearing.Shuran Huang for The New York TimesSome of the new revelations and the confirmations of recent news reports were enough to prompt gasps in the room and, perhaps, in living rooms across the country. Told that the crowd on Jan. 6 was chanting “Hang Mike Pence,” the vice president who defied the president’s pressure to single-handedly block the transfer of power, Mr. Trump was quoted responding, “Maybe our supporters have the right idea.” Mike Pence, he added, “deserves it.”Ms. Cheney, the panel’s vice chairwoman, reported that in the wake of the Jan. 6 attack, members of Mr. Trump’s own cabinet discussed invoking the 25th Amendment to remove the president from office. She disclosed that Representative Scott Perry of Pennsylvania and “multiple other Republican congressmen” involved in trying to overturn the election sought pardons from Mr. Trump in his final days in office.She played a video clip of Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law and senior adviser who absented himself after the election rather than fight the conspiracy theorists egging on Mr. Trump, cavalierly dismissing threats by Pat A. Cipollone, the White House counsel, and other lawyers to resign in protest. “I took it up to just be whining, to be honest with you,” Mr. Kushner testified.And she noted that while Mr. Pence repeatedly took action to summon help to stop the mob on Jan. 6, the president himself made no such effort. Instead, his White House chief of staff, Mark Meadows, tried to convince Gen. Mark A. Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to pretend that Mr. Trump was actively involved.“He said, ‘We have to kill the narrative that the vice president is making all the decisions,’” General Milley said in videotaped testimony. “‘We need to establish the narrative that the president is still in charge, and that things are steady or stable,’ or words to that effect. I immediately interpreted that as politics, politics, politics.”Mr. Trump had no allies on the nine-member House committee, and he and his supporters have dismissed the panel’s work as a partisan smear attempt. On Fox News, which opted not to show the hearing, Sean Hannity was busy changing the subject, attacking the committee for not focusing on the breakdown in security at the Capitol, which he mainly blamed on Speaker Nancy Pelosi even though Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, then the Republican majority leader, shared control of the building with her at the time.Before the hearing, Mr. Trump tried again to rewrite history by casting the attack on the Capitol as a legitimate manifestation of public grievance against a stolen election. “January 6th was not simply a protest, it represented the greatest movement in the history of our Country to Make America Great Again,” he wrote on his new social media site.The panel played a video of Ivanka Trump, Mr. Trump’s daughter and former White House adviser, testifying behind closed doors.Kenny Holston for The New York TimesMr. Trump is hardly the first president reproached for misconduct, lawbreaking or even violating the Constitution. Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton were both impeached by the House, although acquitted by the Senate. John Tyler sided with the Confederacy during the Civil War. Richard M. Nixon resigned under the threat of impeachment for abusing his power to cover up corrupt campaign activities. Warren G. Harding had the Teapot Dome scandal and Ronald Reagan the Iran-contra affair.But the crimes alleged in most of those cases paled in comparison to what Mr. Trump is accused of, and while Mr. Tyler turned on the country he once led, he died before he could be held accountable. Mr. Nixon faced hearings during Watergate not unlike those that began on Thursday night and was involved in other scandals beyond the burglary that ultimately resulted in his downfall. But the brazen dishonesty and incitement of violence put on display on Thursday eclipsed even his misdeeds, according to many scholars.Mr. Trump, of course, was impeached twice already, and acquitted twice, the second time for his role in the Jan. 6 attack. But even so, the case against him now is far more extensive and expansive, after the committee conducted some 1,000 interviews and obtained more than 100,000 pages of documents.What the committee was trying to prove was that this was not a president with reasonable concerns about fraud or a protest that got out of control. Instead, the panel was trying to build the case that Mr. Trump was involved in a criminal conspiracy against democracy — that he knew there was no widespread fraud because his own people told him, that he intentionally summoned a mob to stop the transfer of power to Joseph R. Biden Jr. and that he sat by and did virtually nothing once the attack commenced.Whether the panel can change public views of those events remains unclear, but many political strategists and analysts consider it unlikely. With a more fragmented media and a more polarized society, most Americans have decided what they think about Jan. 6 and are only listening to those who share their attitudes. Still, there was another audience for the hearings as they got underway, and that was Attorney General Merrick B. Garland. If the committee was laying out what it considered an indictment against the former president, it seemed to be inviting the Justice Department to pursue the real kind in a grand jury and court of law.As she previewed the story that will be told in the weeks to come, Ms. Cheney all but wrote the script for Mr. Garland. “You will hear about plots to commit seditious conspiracy on Jan. 6,” she said, “a crime defined in our laws as conspiring to overthrow, put down or destroy by force the government of the United States or to oppose by force the authority thereof.”But if Mr. Garland disagrees and the hearings this month turn out to be the only trial Mr. Trump ever faces for his efforts to overturn the election, Ms. Cheney and her fellow committee members were resolved to make sure that they will at least win a conviction with the jury of history. More