House of Representatives

Subterms

    More stories

    • 163 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      After Adams Criticizes the Left, New York Democrats Try to Clear the Air

      by

      Representative Nydia Velázquez reminded Eric Adams to treat everyone with respect, and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez echoed her comments.When Eric Adams arrived on Capitol Hill on Wednesday, he received a warm welcome from members of the state’s congressional delegation — but also a pointed reminder about the importance of unity.At a closed-door meeting of New York Democratic elected officials, Representative Nydia M. Velázquez advised Mr. Adams, the Democratic nominee for mayor of New York City, to avoid any appearance of criticizing members of the delegation, according to seven people familiar with the exchange.“I said I wanted to remind him that in the age of social media and communications, that we needed to be careful as to what we say and that it is important that we treated everyone with respect,” said Ms. Velázquez, an emerging leader of the party’s progressive wing in the state, confirming the account.Her remarks came a day after The New York Post reported that Mr. Adams cast the Democratic Socialists of America as an archenemy at a recent fund-raiser. He did not mention Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez by name, the report said. But some nevertheless saw his remarks as implicit criticism of the congresswoman, who is closely associated with the democratic socialist group, particularly given Mr. Adams’s rebuke of her policing positions during the primary.“It was important to clear the air,” Ms. Velázquez said. “I said, ‘Look, we have disagreements, and we have different approaches, and we have different philosophies, but that doesn’t entitle anyone to be disrespectful to anyone.’ And I want for him to know that I am prepared to call people out when those things happen.”Rep. Nydia Velázquez has become an influential power broker in the Democratic Party’s progressive wing.Pool photo by Susan WalshIn a brief interview Wednesday evening, Ms. Ocasio-Cortez declined to discuss the meeting with Mr. Adams specifically but offered him a piece of advice.“It is always a good idea for any mayor to respect all of the members that are responsible for representing the delegation, and not just to respect us as individuals but to respect the communities that we represent,” she said. “I think it’s important to preserve that on a higher note.”The gathering illustrated both opportunities and perils for Mr. Adams, the brash Brooklyn borough president who is almost certain to become mayor of New York City, where registered Democrats vastly outnumber Republicans. He has a penchant for hyperbole and can veer into strikingly sharp criticism of opponents, as he sometimes did during the mayoral primary campaign. Ms. Velázquez’s admonition was a reminder that in her view, he risked doing a disservice to New York if he were to antagonize members of its delegation.But for now, delegation members and other national Democrats appear eager to embrace Mr. Adams, and several attendees said he reciprocated with strong interest in engaging with Washington and in resetting relationships after a bruising primary.“After Election Day, we’re no longer campaigning,” Mr. Adams said. “We’re governing.”Mr. Adams stressed to reporters after the meeting that he had not singled out Ms. Ocasio-Cortez by name as a political foe.The delegation meeting marked a significant day for Mr. Adams, who met with some of the highest-ranking Democrats in the nation, including Representative James E. Clyburn of South Carolina, the No. 3 House Democrat; Representative Hakeem Jeffries, New York’s top House Democrat; and the Senate majority leader, Chuck Schumer.“Eric is going to be a mayor for all New Yorkers, regardless of party or ideology,” said Evan Thies, Mr. Adams’s campaign spokesman. He did not dispute the attendees’ accounts of Mr. Adams’s exchange with Ms. Velázquez.Several lawmakers said that Mr. Adams approached the meeting hoping to engage Democratic lawmakers across the ideological spectrum, including those who opposed him in the primary.It was a chance, they said, to build strong working relationships as New York City navigates staggering challenges concerning public health, safety, education and the economy.Representative Ritchie Torres, an early backer of Andrew Yang’s mayoral campaign, said Mr. Adams “recognizes that the partnership between the New York City congressional delegation and the mayor is indispensable.”“He essentially said that he cannot succeed without the delegation,” said Mr. Torres outside the event. “The delegation is united in enabling him to govern New York as effectively as possible. Everything else is secondary.”Mr. Torres and others in attendance said Mr. Adams demonstrated humility and a clear eagerness to collaborate.Representative Jamaal Bowman, a left-wing lawmaker, dismissed primary season disagreements as “water under the bridge,” though he said he supported Ms. Velázquez’s remarks in the meeting. He said he and Mr. Adams found common ground around issues of education and ensuring students receive sufficient support. “We’ve got to work together to meet the needs of the city,” he said.Ms. Velázquez emphasized that they had also discussed issues including affordable housing, and she pledged to work with Mr. Adams “because it’s about the city of New York.”Mr. Adams, who also attended a meeting of the Congressional Black Caucus, was invited to the delegation gathering by Representative Jerrold Nadler, the dean of the congressional delegation, both men said.After the meeting, Mr. Adams said in a statement that attendees discussed issues including combating gun violence, doubling federal investment in the New York City Housing Authority, improving education and child care and battling climate change.He took several questions from the news media, flanked by Mr. Jeffries; Representative Sean Patrick Maloney, the chairman of the House Democratic campaign arm; and Representatives Adriano Espaillat and Thomas Suozzi, two significant endorsers.Mr. Adams, a former police captain who sought to combat police misconduct from within the system, ran for office promising to battle both violent crime and racial injustice. In the primary, Ms. Ocasio-Cortez endorsed Maya Wiley, a former counsel to Mayor Bill de Blasio who called for a narrower role for the police in public safety. After Ms. Ocasio-Cortez’s endorsement, Mr. Adams claimed that she and Ms. Wiley “would endanger the lives of New Yorkers” with their policies.After several of Ms. Wiley’s most progressive rivals for the nomination faltered, many left-wing New Yorkers coalesced behind her. Some of those Democrats looked askance at Mr. Adams’s policy positions, including his embrace of the business and real estate sectors and his support for charter schools. A former senior adviser to Justice Democrats, an organization that played a key role in elevating Ms. Ocasio-Cortez to Congress, led a small super PAC that campaigned for Ms. Wiley, and against Mr. Adams.As Mr. Adams’s meeting with the delegation wrapped up, there was one more show of unity between Ms. Velázquez and Ms. Ocasio-Cortez: Ms. Ocasio-Cortez put her arm around Ms. Velázquez, and they walked off in an extended embrace.Nicholas Fandos and Chris Cameron contributed reporting from Washington. More

    • 150 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘Such a moron’: Pelosi heaps disdain on McCarthy for criticizing mask guidance

      by

      Nancy Pelosi‘Such a moron’: Pelosi heaps disdain on McCarthy for criticizing mask guidanceKevin McCarthy: mask policy a political decision by DemocratsCapitol physician reimposes mask requirement for the House Hugo LowellWed 28 Jul 2021 14.53 EDTLast modified on Wed 28 Jul 2021 14.59 EDTThe House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, on Wednesday heaped disdain on the Republican minority leader’s criticism of Congress’s new mask requirement – a reversal of policy that reflected growing number of cases and fears about the highly-transmissible Covid-19 Delta variant at the Capitol.Bipartisan group reaches agreement on ‘major issues’ of infrastructure bill, Republican says – liveRead more“He’s such a moron,” Pelosi said of the House minority leader Kevin McCarthy, after he tweeted that the mandatory mask policy was not based on science but a political decision by Democrats. (Consensus among public health officials and scientists is that masks significantly lower transmission of Covid-19, especially in indoor settings.)The unusually abrupt remark from Pelosi came as the attending physician of the Capitol reimposed the mask requirement for the House of Representatives. At least two House lawmakers and a fully-vaccinated aide to Pelosi have tested positive for the coronavirus, while the Senate homeland security and governmental affairs committee postponed a hearing after some of its members were partially exposed. The House had dropped its months-long mask policy six weeks ago in a demonstration of its optimism that the US had largely defeated the pandemic, shortly before Joe Biden declared America’s so-called independence from Covid-19.The number of Covid-19 cases has also skyrocketed across the country, and the seven-day rolling average of new infections reached 40,246 on Wednesday – around four times the level just three weeks ago – fuelled largely by vaccine holdouts and the Delta variant.Capitol physician Dr Brian Monahan said in a memo to House lawmakers and congressional aides that he was reimposing the mask policy based on new CDC guidance and the unique nature of the Capitol, where thousands of people from across the country congregate each week.“All individuals should wear a well-fitted, medical-grade filtration mask (for example an ear loop surgical mask or a KN95 mask) when they are in an interior space,” Monahan said. “For meetings in an enclosed US House of Representatives controlled space, masks are REQUIRED.”The top doctor in Congress separately dispensed the same advice for the Senate but stopped short of pushing for a mask mandate. The Senate is far smaller than the House of Representatives, and most senators voluntarily adopted masks during the pandemic.But like the measures being considered by Joe Biden to increase vaccination rates in the US, the reintroduction of the mask requirement in the House has inflamed Republicans, who have seized on such policies as a supposed egregious overreach of government power by Democrats.The House minority leader McCarthy reacted testily to Pelosi’s remark on Tuesday, again questioning the basis of the mask mandate: “If she’s so brilliant, can she explain to me where the science in the building changes between the House and the Senate,” he said.House rules say that any member who refuses to wear masks on the floor of the House chamber and in specified areas of the Capitol can be fined $500 for a first offence and $2,500 for a second, with the penalties paid out directly from their salaries.Monahan’s memo says members will not be required to wear masks when they are alone in the Capitol complex, or when they are recognised to speak on the House floor. .Still, several Republicans have already vowed to defy the mask requirement, and firebrand congresswoman Lauren Boebert caused consternation when she walked onto the House floor without a mask and threw one back at a staffer when offered her a spare, CNN reported.TopicsNancy PelosiCoronavirusHouse of RepresentativesUS politicsRepublicansnewsReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      U.S. Declines to Defend Trump Ally in Lawsuit Over Jan. 6 Riot

      by

      The move could mean that the Justice Department is also unlikely to defend former President Donald J. Trump in the case.WASHINGTON — The Justice Department declined on Tuesday to defend a congressional ally of former President Donald J. Trump in a lawsuit accusing them both of inciting supporters at a rally in the hours before the Jan. 6 storming of the Capitol.Law enforcement officials determined that Representative Mo Brooks, Republican of Alabama, was acting outside the scope of his duties in an incendiary speech just before the attack, according to a court filing. Mr. Brooks had asked the department to certify that he was acting as a government employee during the rally; had it agreed to defend him, he would have been dismissed from the lawsuit and the United States substituted as a defendant.“The record indicates that Brooks’s appearance at the Jan. 6 rally was campaign activity, and it is no part of the business of the United States to pick sides among candidates in federal elections,” the Justice Department wrote.“Members of Congress are subject to a host of restrictions that carefully distinguish between their official functions, on the one hand, and campaign functions, on the other.”The Justice Department’s decision shows it is likely to also decline to provide legal protection for Mr. Trump in the lawsuit. Legal experts have closely watched the case because the Biden Justice Department has continued to fight for granting immunity to Mr. Trump in a 2019 defamation lawsuit where he denied allegations that he raped the writer E. Jean Carroll and said she accused him to get attention.Such a substitution provides broad protections for government officials and is generally reserved for government employees sued over actions that stem from their work. In the Carroll case, the department cited other defamation lawsuits as precedent.The Brooks decision also ran counter to the Justice Department’s longstanding broad view of actions taken in the scope of a federal employee’s employment, which has served to make it harder to use the courts to hold government employees accountable for wrongdoing.Mr. Brooks did not immediately respond to a request for comment.Lawyers for the House also said on Tuesday that they declined to defend Mr. Brooks in the lawsuit. Given that it “does not challenge any institutional action of the House,” a House lawyer wrote in a court filing, “it is not appropriate for it to participate in the litigation.”The Justice Department and House filed their briefs on Tuesday, the deadline set by Judge Amit P. Mehta of the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia. The lawsuit, filed in March by Representative Eric Swalwell, Democrat of California, accuses Mr. Brooks of inciting a riot and conspiring to prevent a person from holding office or performing official duties.Mr. Swalwell accused Mr. Brooks, Mr. Trump, his son Donald Trump Jr. and his onetime personal lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani of playing a key role in inciting the Jan 6. attack during a rally near the White House in the hours before the storming of the Capitol.Citing excerpts from their speeches, Mr. Swalwell accused the men of violating federal law by conspiring to prevent an elected official from holding office or from performing official duties, arguing that their speeches led Mr. Trump’s supporters to believe they were acting on orders to attack the Capitol.Mr. Swalwell alleged that their speeches encouraged Mr. Trump’s supporters to unlawfully force members of Congress from their chambers and destroy parts of the Capitol to keep lawmakers from performing their duties.During the rally, Mr. Brooks told attendees that the United States was “at risk unlike it has been in decades, and perhaps centuries.” He said that their ancestors “sacrificed their blood, their sweat, their tears, their fortunes and sometimes their lives” for the country.“Are you willing to do the same?” he asked the crowd. “Are you willing to do what it takes to fight for America?”Mr. Swalwell said defendants in his lawsuit had incited the mob and had continued to stoke false beliefs that the election was stolen.“As a direct and foreseeable consequence of the defendants’ false and incendiary allegations of fraud and theft, and in direct response to the defendants’ express calls for violence at the rally, a violent mob attacked the U.S. Capitol,” Mr. Swalwell said in his complaint. “Many participants in the attack have since revealed that they were acting on what they believed to be former President Trump’s orders in service of their country.”In June, Mr. Brooks asked that the Justice Department defend him in the case. He cited the Westfall Act, which essentially substitutes the Justice Department as the defendant when federal employees are sued for actions deemed within the scope of their employment, according to a court document.He described his speech on Jan. 6 as part of his job, saying that his duties include delivering speeches, making pronouncements on policy and persuading lawmakers.The Justice Department rejected that assertion.“Inciting or conspiring to foment a violent attack on the United States Congress is not within the scope of employment of a representative — or any federal employee — and thus is not the sort of conduct for which the United States is properly substituted as a defendant under the Westfall Act,” the department wrote. “Brooks does not argue otherwise. Instead, he denies the complaint’s allegations that he conspired to incite the attack on the Capitol.”Mr. Trump has not sought to have the government substitute for him as a defendant in the lawsuit under the Westfall Act. But he has argued in court filings that the statements he made on Jan. 6 are covered by broad immunity, that he could not be sued for making them and that the lawsuit violated his free speech rights.Should a judge deny Mr. Trump’s claims, he could ask the Justice Department to intervene on his behalf. But its decision in Mr. Brooks’s case lowered the chances that it would comply. More

    • 175 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump officials can testify to Congress about his role in Capitol attack, DoJ says

      by

      US Capitol attackTrump officials can testify to Congress about his role in Capitol attack, DoJ saysMove declines to assert executive privilege for then acting attorney general Jeffrey Rosen, clearing path for others to testify Hugo Lowell in WashingtonTue 27 Jul 2021 15.50 EDTLast modified on Tue 27 Jul 2021 17.26 EDTFormer Trump administration officials can testify to Congress about Donald Trump’s role in the deadly January attack on the Capitol and his efforts to subvert the results of the 2020 election, the justice department (DoJ) has said in a letter obtained by the Guardian.The move by the justice department declined to assert executive privilege for Trump’s acting attorney general, Jeffrey Rosen, clearing the path for other top former officials to also testify to congressional committees investigating the Capitol attack without fear of repercussions.The justice department authorised witnesses to appear specifically before the two committees. But a DoJ official, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive matters, said they expected that approval to extend to the 6 January select committee that began proceedings on Tuesday.Bennie Thompson, the chairman of the House select committee, told the Guardian in a recent interview that he would investigate both Trump and anyone who communicated with the former president on 6 January, raising the prospect of depositions with an array of Trump officials.Rosen and Trump administration witnesses can give “unrestricted testimony” to the Senate judiciary and House oversight committees, which are scrutinising the attempt by the Trump White House to stop Congress certifying Joe Biden’s 2020 election win, the letter said.The justice department’s decision marks a sharp departure from the Trump era, when the department repeatedly intervened on behalf of top White House officials to assert executive privilege and shield them from congressional investigations into the former president.It also represents a significant move by the White House Office of Legal Counsel under Biden, which in authorising the decision, pointedly noted that executive privilege protections exist to benefit the country, rather than a single individual.Trump has argued that conversations and deliberations involving the president are always protected by executive privilege. He can sue to block any testimony, which would force the courts to decide the extent of such protections.But the justice department said in the letter that Rosen and Trump administration officials can testify to Congress about Trump’s attempts to subvert the 2020 election because of the extraordinary nature of the circumstances.In his last weeks in office, Trump pressured justice department officials to use the vast powers of the federal government to undo his defeat, asking them to investigate baseless conspiracies of voter fraud and tampering that they had already determined to be false.“The extraordinary events in this matter constitute exceptional circumstances warranting an accommodation to Congress,” Bradley Weinsheimer, a senior career official in the office of the deputy attorney general, said in the letter.The justice department told Rosen and Trump administration officials that they could appear before Congress as long as their testimony was confined to the scope set forth by the committees and did not reveal grand jury or classified information, or pending criminal cases.Rosen’s approval letter, which was sent on Monday night according to a source familiar with the matter, comes after the Senate judiciary committee asked to interview several Trump administration officials as part of their oversight efforts started in January.Negotiations for their testimony were stalled as the justice department weighed how much information former officials could reveal, concerned that many of the conversations were covered by executive privilege, which keeps executive branch deliberations confidential.The justice department ultimately relented after consulting with the White House Office of Legal Counsel, which said it would not be appropriate to assert executive privilege over the specific topics in question, according to the letter.“It is the executive branch’s view that this presents an exceptional situation in which the congressional need for information outweighs the Executive Branch’s interest in maintaining confidentiality,” wrote Weinsheimer, citing Richard Nixon and Watergate.The Senate judiciary committee chairman, Dick Durbin, said on Twitter that he was working to now schedule interviews with the officials. The panel is also still receiving materials and documents from the justice department, the source said.The 6 January special committee – everything you need to knowRead moreThe House oversight committee chairwoman, Carolyn Maloney, said in a statement that she was pleased with the decision: “I am committed to getting to the bottom of the previous administration’s attempts to subvert the justice department and reverse a free and fair election.”Trump exerted significant pressure on the justice department to help him remain president. In one instance, Trump schemed with Jeffrey Clark, the former head of the DoJ’s civil division, to force Georgia to overturn their election results, the New York Times reported.The Senate judiciary and House oversight committees opened wide-ranging investigations into Trump and the justice department shortly after, with Durbin also demanding materials from the National Archives for records and communications concerning those efforts.TopicsUS Capitol attackTrump administrationHouse of RepresentativesDonald TrumpUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 213 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      What did Jim Jordan know about the insurrection and when did he know it? | Sidney Blumenthal

      by

      OpinionUS Capitol attackWhat did Jim Jordan know about the insurrection and when did he know it?Sidney BlumenthalI have some questions for the Republican congressman about events at the US Capitol on 6 January

      From the archive: The martyrdom of Mike Pence
      Tue 27 Jul 2021 06.00 EDTLast modified on Tue 27 Jul 2021 08.57 EDT“That fucking guy Jim Jordan. That son of a bitch,” Liz Cheney, a Republican congresswoman from Wyoming, told the chairman of the joint chiefs, Gen Mark Milley, about the Republican congressman from Ohio, according to I Alone Can Fix It, by Washington Post reporters Carol Leonnig and Philip Rucker.House begins Capitol attack inquiry as Republicans set to boycott proceedingsRead more“While these maniacs are going through the place,” said Cheney, about the insurrection at the Capitol on 6 January, “I’m standing in the aisle and he said, ‘We need to get the ladies away from the aisle. Let me help you.’ I smacked his hand away and told him, ‘Get away from me. You fucking did this.’”When the House Republican leader, Kevin McCarthy, a congressman from California, named Jordan and Jim Banks, of Indiana, both of whom challenged the legitimacy of Joe Biden’s victory, to join the 13-member select committee on the Capitol insurrection, Speaker Nancy Pelosi rejected the two men.“With respect for the integrity of the investigation, with an insistence on the truth and with concern about statements made and actions taken by these members, I must reject the recommendations of Representatives Banks and Jordan to the select committee,” Pelosi stated.Jordan had said: “Americans instinctively know there was something wrong with this election.”Banks had questioned “the legality of some votes cast in the 2020 election” and charged: “Make no mistake, Nancy Pelosi created this committee solely to malign conservatives and to justify the left’s authoritarian agenda.”McCarthy responded by withdrawing all of his five Republicans from participation in the investigation.Jim Jordan is a wiry, hyperactive bundle of nerves who tosses off his suit jacket, coiled to leap into the ring and twist the arms of his opponents. The former college wrestling champion in the 134lb class represents the locker-room jock culture in the House of Representatives, snapping his towel in committee hearings to show off his primacy as an alpha big man on campus. Jordan’s political moves are drawn from his wrestling repertoire: the leg shot, the half-nelson and the slam.From 1987 to 1995, Jordan was an assistant wrestling coach at the Ohio State University, where many athletes claim he knew about and turned a blind eye to Dr Richard Strauss’s sexual abuse of at least 177 students. Jordan has denied that he engaged in a cover-up. One of the abused wrestlers, Mark Coleman, who was a close friend and roommate of Jordan and became an Ultimate Fighting Champion, told the Wall Street Journal (in comments he would later retract): “There’s no way unless he’s got dementia or something that he’s got no recollection of what was going on at Ohio State.” Another abused wrestler, Dunyasha Yetts, said: “If Jordan says he didn’t know about it then he’s lying.” Jordan refused to cooperate with the university’s investigation: goodbye, Columbus.The report on the abuse, issued in 2019 by the law firm hired by OSU to conduct the investigation, Perkins Coie, concluded that Strauss’s predatory sexual behavior was an “open secret”, according to students, and that “coaches, trainers and other team physicians were fully aware of Strauss’ activities, and yet few seemed inclined to do anything to stop it.” (Strauss killed himself in 2005.)At a hearing held by the Ohio state legislature’s civil justice committee, in February 2020, Adam DiSabato, an OSU wrestling champion, testified that Jordan tried to get him to persuade his brother, another OSU wrestler, Mike DiSabato, who was a whistleblower about the abuse, to withdraw his statement. Every year as assistant coach, Jordan awarded a “King of Sauna” certificate to the wrestler “who talked the most smack”, reported the Columbus Dispatch. According to Mike DiSabato, Jordan was in the sauna daily, where much of the sexual molestation took place. “Jim Jordan called me crying, crying, groveling, on the Fourth of July … begging me to go against my brother, begging me, crying for half an hour,” Adam DiSabato said at the hearing. “That’s the kind of cover-up that’s going on here. He’s a coward. He’s a coward.”After serving in the Ohio legislature, Jordan entered national politics in the interregnum of rightwing extremism between the fall of Newt Gingrich and the rise of the Tea Party. He was elected to the House in 2006, during a midterm Democratic sweep that put them into the majority, but the backbencher vaulted suddenly into prominence when the Republicans captured the House in the reaction to the Obama administration in 2010. Elected by the emboldened conservative faction to head the Republican Study Group, he sought to trip up the Republican speaker of the House, John Boehner, eventually forcing the federal government shutdown of 2013, which Boehner denounced as “fucking stupid”.I Alone Can Fix It: Carol Leonnig and Philip Rucker on their Trump bestsellerRead moreJordan founded the House Freedom Caucus, more radical than the Republican Study Group, to push Boehner out. “Anarchists,” Boehner called them. “They want total chaos.” He singled out Jordan as “a legislative terrorist”. Boehner quit under the pressure in 2015. In an interview with CBS about his memoir published this year, On the House, Boehner remarked about Jordan: “I just never saw a guy who spent more time tearing things apart – never building anything, never putting anything together.”Liz Cheney, who Pelosi has appointed to the select committee, and was stripped of her position as chair of the House Republican Conference in an effort led by Jordan, said McCarthy named Jordan to the committee in order to sabotage it.“At every opportunity, the minority leader has attempted to prevent the American people from understanding what happened, to block this investigation,” she stated. Jordan, she pointed out, could also not serve on the committee because he “may well be a material witness to events that led to that day, that led to 6 January”.The questions that Jordan may be asked if he were to testify would cover his knowledge and involvement in the planning, organization and funding of the insurrection, as well as his participation in the concerted effort to prevent the constitutional certification of the presidential election and the propagation of Trump’s “big lie” that the election was a fraud and stolen.1) On 20 October, Jim Jordan tweeted: “Democrats are trying to steal the election, before the election.” He objected to the Pennsylvania supreme court’s decision to allow the counting of ballots postmarked on or before but received up to three days after election day, as an attempt “to steal the election”. (Pennsylvania never did count those ballots in determining certification of Biden as the winner of the state and the total votes affected by the procedure were minuscule compared with the margin of victory.)What does Jordan know about the creation of the “stop the steal” myth? Were his statements about a fraudulent election and attacking the Pennsylvania supreme court for its role in “stealing the election” made in coordination with anyone at the White House or known to them in advance? If he got marching orders, where did he get them from?2) Two days after the election, Jordan was a speaker of a “Stop the Steal” rally in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, before the state capitol. The rally was organized by Scott Presler, a former field director for the Virginia Republican party, speaker at the 2020 Conservative Political Action Conference, and activist for ACT for America, cited by the Anti-Defamation League as an anti-Muslim hate group and labeled an “extremist hate group” by the Southern Poverty Law Center.“The private Facebook page used to organize the events was full of extreme anti-Muslim and white nationalist rhetoric and went unpoliced despite the fact that new ACT hire Scott Presler was an administrator for the group,” the SPLC reported.Presler mobilized support for the 6 January “Stop the Steal” rally. “I will 100% be in DC on January 6th to support President Trump. Who’s going?” he posted on his Facebook page on 22 December. He tweeted a video showing his presence in the crowd on 6 January before the Capitol.Who funded the Harrisburg rally? What is Jordan’s relationship to Scott Presler? What are the communications between Jordan, his staff and Presler?3) On 11 January, the same day an article of impeachment was filed in the House against Donald Trump for “incitement of insurrection”, Trump awarded Jordan the Presidential Medal of Freedom in a closed ceremony at the White House.The White House cited his defense of Trump in the investigation conducted by the former FBI director Robert Mueller into Russian influence to elect Trump in the 2016 campaign and in the first impeachment of Trump for seeking to bribe the government of Ukraine in exchange for fabricated political dirt about Joe Biden.Jordan was being honored, according to the White House statement, because he had “worked to unmask the Russia hoax and take on deep state corruption – confronting senior justice department officials for obstructing Congress and exposing the fraudulent origins of the Russia collusion lie”, and had “led the effort to confront the impeachment witch hunt”.What conversations did Jordan have at the ceremony with Trump or others about overturning the election and how to defend Trump?4) On 18 November, Jordan called on Congress to investigate the election “amid troubling reports of irregularities and improprieties” – though he presented no factual evidence. On 4 December, Jordan tweeted: “Over 50 million Americans think this election was stolen. That’s more than one third of the electorate. For that reason alone, we owe it to the country to investigate election integrity.”During an interview with CNN on 7 December, Jordan was asked whether Trump should concede the election.“No. No way, no way, no way,” he replied. He claimed there were “all kinds of crazy things happening in Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin, all these in Nevada.” He stated no facts. During an interview on Fox News on 9 December, Jordan said: “I don’t know how you can ever convince me that President Trump didn’t actually win this thing based on all the things you see.” He offered nothing that anyone had seen.Did Jordan coordinate his statements with Trump, the White House staff, other Republican House members, or Trump’s legal team led by Rudy Giuliani?5) On 21 December, Jordan attended private meetings at the White House with Trump and several other Republican House members “where they strategized over a last-ditch effort to overturn the election results”, Politico reported. “It was a back-and-forth concerning the planning and strategy for 6 January,” said Representative Mo Brooks, a Republican congressman from Alabama.What was said at that meeting? What were those plans? Was the rally discussed? Was the idea discussed of sending Trump supporters to intimidate and interrupt members of Congress in the certification process? Was Jordan’s role on the House floor on 6 January against certification raised at that meeting? What did Jordan say?6) On Saturday night, 2 January, Jordan participated in a call organized by the White House chief of staff, Mark Meadows, with Trump and 50 House members and senators “to address their goal of overturning certain states’ electoral college results on Wednesday”, according to Fox News. On Sunday morning, 3 January, Jordan and Brooks appeared together on Fox News to discuss their strategy. Jordan stated that Republican members of Congress were the “ultimate arbiter here, the ultimate check and balance”, on the “unconstitutional” certification of the election results on 6 January. Again, Jordan presented no evidence of fraud. Senator Mitt Romney, a Republican from Utah, called the actions led by Jordan and others an “egregious ploy”.Did Jordan broadcast falsehoods in order to encourage Trump supporters to come to Washington on 6 January?7) On 5 January, Brian Jack, the political director in the White House, called Mo Brooks to ask him to address the “Stop the Steal” rally on 6 January. “Today is the day American patriots start taking down names and kicking ass,” Brooks shouted at the 6 January rally “Are you willing to do what it takes to fight for America? Louder! Will you fight for America?” Subsequently, Kevin McCarthy hired Brian Jack as his political director.What does Jordan know about Brian Jack’s role in the organization of the January rally? Did he speak with Brian Jack about the planning and the rally? Has he spoken to him since about the events of 6 January?8) On 5 January, Adam Piper, the executive director of the Republican Attorneys General Association (Raga), participated in a call organized by the White House to help plan the rally and events of 6 January. The non-profit arm of Raga, the Rule of Law Defense Fund, promoted attendance at the rally through robocalls to Republican activists. “At 1pm, we will march to the Capitol building and call on Congress to stop the steal,” said the robocall, according to the investigative organization Documented. “We are hoping patriots like you will join us to continue to fight to protect the integrity of our elections.”What does Jordan know about Raga’s involvement? Did Jordan speak with any donors or groups about funding or participating in the events of 6 January? Did anyone ask him to raise money or speak with anyone organizing for 6 January?9) For several days before 6 January, Democratic members of the House said they observed a number of Republican members giving what appeared to be tours of the Capitol to groups of people who may have later participated in the insurrection. Representative Mikie Sherrill, a Democrat from New Jersey, said she witnessed Republican House members on 5 January conducting what she described as a walk-through for “reconnaissance for the next day”.“Those members of Congress who had groups coming through the Capitol that I saw on 5 January, a reconnaissance for the next day, those members of Congress that incited this violent crowd,” Sherrill said, “those members who attempted to help our president undermine our democracy, I’m going to see that they’re held accountable.”On 13 January, 30 Democratic House members signed a letter calling for an investigation of these “tours” by the House and Senate sergeant-at-arms and the Capitol police. “Members of the group that attacked the Capitol seemed to have an unusually detailed knowledge of the layout of the Capitol complex. The presence of these groups within the Capitol complex was indeed suspicious,” they stated. “Given the events of 6 January, the ties between these groups inside the Capitol complex and the attacks on the Capitol need to be investigated.”Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a Democratic congresswoman from Florida, said: “I do know that, yes, there were members that gave tours to individuals who participated in the riot.”Steve Cohen, a Democrat from Tennessee, stated he and John Yarmouth, a Democrat from Kentucky, saw Lauren Boebert, a Republican congresswoman from Colorado, a far-right advocate of antisemitic QAnon conspiracies who has equated vaccinations with Nazism, leading a “large group” through the Capitol complex in the days before the insurrection. She denied she had led any such “tours”.Tim Ryan, a Democratic congressman from Ohio, disclosed that federal prosecutors are “reviewing the footage” of video taken within the Capitol to determine if any House members engaged in “reconnaissance” missions with insurrectionists.“Today is 1776,” Boebert tweeted on the morning of 6 January. On 24 July, Jim Jordan appeared at a fundraising event with Boebert in her district at the Mesa county Republican party, which in June posted on its Facebook page a conspiracy theory that George Floyd’s murder was a hoax.Congressman Bennie Thompson, a Democrat from Mississippi and chair of the House select committee, was asked if he would depose members of the Congress about their involvement. He replied: “Absolutely. Nothing is off limits.”Does Jordan support the select committee deposing House Republican members and others to determine whether they conducted “reconnaissance” of the Capitol with leaders of the insurrection before 6 January? Has he discussed 6 January with Boebert?10) On the morning of 6 January, as Trump supporters gathered at the Ellipse near the White House for the “Stop the Steal” rally, Jordan rose in the House chamber to object to accepting the presidential electors certified by Arizona.There was, he claimed, “something wrong with this election … Somehow the guy who never left his house wins the election? Sixty million Americans think it was stolen.” He rattled off a series of conspiracy theories. “All the Democrats care about is making sure that President Trump isn’t president. For four and a half years that’s all they’ve cared about.”Frankly, We Did Win This Election review: a devastating dispatch from TrumpworldRead moreHe mentioned a former FBI director: “Jim Comey opens an investigation on the president based on nothing.” He referred to Robert Mueller: “The Russia hoax … for nothing.” He raised the impeachment of Trump, “based on an anonymous whistleblower who worked for Joe Biden”. It was all, Jordan said, “a pattern” that “violated the constitution … an end run around the constitution”.In conclusion, he called for the Arizona electors to be disqualified. The Republicans cheered. As the Congress began debating the objection, at 1.30pm, the mob breached police lines and invaded the Capitol. They chanted “Hang Mike Pence” and shortly after 2pm started to force their way into the House chamber.As members raced to evacuate, Cheney states that Jordan grabbed her arm, saying: “We need to get the ladies away from the aisle. Let me help you.” After the violence was quelled and order restored, leaving five dead and many of the police injured, and when the proceeding resumed that evening with Pence presiding, Jordan voted with 138 other representatives to overturn the election results.Did the Trump White House or his legal team review his speech before it was delivered? Did he communicate with anyone at the White House in the hours between the suspension of the certification and its resumption?11) On 12 January, in a hearing of the House rules committee, the chair, Jim McGovern, a Democrat from Massachusetts, said to Jordan: “I’m glad that all it took for you to call for unity was for our democracy to be attacked, but the last several months the gentleman from Ohio and others have given oxygen to the president’s conspiracy theories … people came to the Capitol building to launch a coup … I’m asking you to make a statement that Joe Biden and Kamala Harris won fair and square.”Jordan replied: “He is President-elect Joe Biden … in some states the rules were changed in unconstitutional fashion.”“You refuse to answer that question,” said McGovern. “That is not the question I asked.”Jordan finally claimed: “I never once said that this thing was stolen.”Why, then, did he tweet that the election was being stolen before it had occurred, appear at a “Stop the Steal” rally and claim that “crazy things” had changed the vote in swing states in addition to many other statements?12) On 13 January, Jordan joined with Paul Gosar from Arizona to call for Cheney’s removal as chair of the House Republican conference, for supporting the impeachment of Donald Trump for inciting the insurrection. According to Ali Alexander, a far-right activist and conspiracy theorist, he, Gosar, Mo Brooks and Andy Biggs, from Arizona, conceived of the idea of the January rally.“We four schemed up of putting maximum pressure on Congress while they were voting,” Alexander said.Gosar appeared at more than a dozen “Stop the Steal” rallies and just after noon on 6 January he tweeted a photograph of the mob massed at the Capitol and this message: “Biden should concede. I want his concession on my desk tomorrow morning. Don’t make me come over there.”On 10 March, Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal, a Democrat from Washington, sent a letter to the Office of Congressional Ethics requesting an investigation of Boebert, Brooks and Gosar for “instigating and aiding” the insurrection.Does Jim Jordan support this investigation and would he approve the select committee deposing Gosar, Brooks and Biggs?13) On 9 February, Jordan posted an op-ed on the Fox News website stating: “President Trump did not incite the violence of 6 January.” He wrote: “At the end of the day, Democrats don’t want President Trump to run for office again. Hopefully, one day, he’ll get to do it again.”Is Jordan trying to protect Trump’s political viability for the 2024 election? Does Jordan object to the select committee deposing Trump?14) On 15 February, Jordan tweeted: “Capitol police requested national guard help prior to 6 January. That request was denied by Speaker Pelosi and her Sergeant at Arms.” His assertion was flatly false.“Instead, public testimony shows she did not even hear about the request until two days later,” wrote Glenn Kessler of the Washington Post. He awarded Jordan’s claim “four Pinocchios”. Can Jordan explain how this misinformation was manufactured?15) On 20 May, Liz Cheney was questioned on ABC News’s This Week about whether Kevin McCarthy should be subpoenaed by the investigating committee. “He absolutely should, and I wouldn’t be surprised if he were subpoenaed,” she said. According to Jaime Herrera Beutler, a Republican from Washington, McCarthy called Trump during the siege of the Capitol to ask him publicly to call off the rioters.“Well, Kevin, I guess these people are more upset about the election than you are,” Trump was quoted as saying. McCarthy reportedly responded, “Who the fuck do you think you’re talking to?” Yet, on 12 January, on the eve of Trump’s second impeachment, McCarthy told Fox News: “President Trump won this election, so everyone who’s listening, do not be quiet. We cannot allow this to happen before our very eyes … join together and let’s stop this.”I Alone Can Fix It review: Donald Trump as wannabe Führer – in another riveting readRead moreDoes Jordan support the select committee deposing Beutler and McCarthy to answer questions about this incident?16) Jim Jordan told the Washington Post that he should not testify about 6 January.“I think this commission is ridiculous, and why would they subpoena me? I didn’t do anything wrong – I talked to the president. I talk to the president all the time. I just think that’s – you know where I’m at on this commission – this is all about going after President Trump. That seems obvious.”Did Jordan speak with Trump on 6 January during the insurrection? Did he speak with him about it after about the event? Will Jordan cooperate with the select committee as a witness or will he stonewall it as he did the investigation into the sexual abuse at OSU? Will he honor a subpoena or force the sergeant-at-arms to wrestle with him to enforce it?
      Sidney Blumenthal, former senior adviser to President Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton, has published three books of a projected five-volume political life of Abraham Lincoln: A Self-Made Man, Wrestling With His Angel and All the Powers of Earth
      TopicsUS Capitol attackOpinionUS politicsRepublicansUS CongressHouse of RepresentativescommentReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      House begins Capitol attack inquiry as Republicans set to boycott proceedings

      by

      US Capitol attackHouse begins Capitol attack inquiry as Republicans set to boycott proceedingsCommittee established by Pelosi features two Republicans, Cheney and Kinzinger, after McCarthy withdrew his nominees Tue 27 Jul 2021 03.00 EDTLast modified on Tue 27 Jul 2021 03.02 EDTThe much-anticipated House investigation into the January attack on the US Capitol begins on Tuesday, with Republicans set to boycott proceedings in an attempt to undermine any findings.A special committee established by the Democratic House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, will convene to investigate the circumstances surrounding the deadly insurrection in Washington DC, when hundreds of Donald Trump’s supporters stormed the Capitol in an attempt to interrupt the certification of Joe Biden as president.Capitol attack committee chair vows to investigate Trump: ‘Nothing is off limits’Read moreThe committee, which will feature just two Republicans after the GOP leadership refused to participate, will hear this week from police officers who battled rioters during the attack.The investigation into the 6 January attack has become a fiercely partisan issue in Washington. The House voted in May for an independent investigation that would have been evenly split between Democrats and Republicans, but the Senate blocked the move.That left Pelosi to create a select committee to conduct the investigation. Kevin McCarthy, the Republican House minority leader, picked five Republicans to sit on the committee, but Pelosi rejected Jim Jordan and Jim Banks’ nominations, prompting McCarthy to withdraw all five nominees. Both Jordan and Banks are staunch Trump allies who deny his role in the attack and objected to the certification of Biden’s win.Liz Cheney, a Republican congresswoman from Wyoming, had already been named to the panel by Pelosi, and on Sunday Pelosi went around McCarthy again to appoint Representative Adam Kinzinger, who like Cheney is a critic of Trump, to the committee.Pelosi said Kinzinger “and other Republicans have expressed an interest to serve on the select committee. And I wanted to appoint three of them that Leader McCarthy suggested. But he withdrew their names. The two that I would not appoint are people who would jeopardise the integrity of the investigation, and there’s no way I would tolerate their antics as we seek the truth.”Kinzinger and Cheney were among the 10 House Republicans who voted for Trump’s second impeachment, and the pair were the only Republicans who voted to form the special committee. Both have cited Trump’s false claims of election fraud as a factor in the insurrection.“For months, lies and conspiracy theories have been spread, threatening our self-governance,” Kinzinger said on Sunday.“For months, I have said that the American people deserve transparency and truth on how and why thousands showed up to attack our democracy. I will work diligently to ensure we get to the truth and hold those responsible for the attack fully accountable.”Democrat Bennie Thompson will chair the committee, which on Tuesday will hear from four police officers who were on duty on 6 January. They are expected to testify about their experiences that day, including the physical and verbal abuse they were subjected to as hundreds of people swarmed the Capitol.“We have to get it right,” Thompson said on Monday. He said if the committee could find ways to prevent anything like it from happening again, “then I would have made what I think is the most valuable contribution to this great democracy”.Last week a Florida man became the first person to be sentenced to prison for his role in the January attack. More than 570 people have been charged with taking part in the riot, during and after which seven people died.TopicsUS Capitol attackHouse of RepresentativesNancy PelosiUS politicsDemocratsRepublicansnewsReuse this content More