Republicans

Subterms

    More stories

    • 163 Shares149 Views

      in US Politics

      Jan 6 committee hearings live: Cheney describes possible witness tampering after ex-aide’s testimony

      by

      Liz Cheney, the Republican vice-chair of the January 6 committee, applauded Cassidy Hutchinson’s willingness to testify about what she witnessed in the Trump White House, but she also criticized Hutchinson’s colleagues who have refused to do so.“While our committee has seen many witnesses, including many Republicans, testify fully and forthrightly, this has not been true of every witness,” Cheney said at the end of today’s hearing.She added, “We have received evidence of one particular practice that raises significant concern.”Cheney noted that the committee regularly asks witnesses whether they have been contacted by any of their former colleagues or anyone else who may attempt to influence their testimony.We commonly ask witnesses connected to Trump whether they have been contacted by anyone attempting to impact testimony.Below are examples of answers we have received to this question. pic.twitter.com/pwxyJBf7Kl— January 6th Committee (@January6thCmte) June 28, 2022
      Cheney read aloud from the testimony of two witnesses who said they had recently spoken to people who encouraged them to stay in Donald Trump’s good graces with their comments to the committee.One witness told investigators, “What they said to me is, as long as I continue to be a team player, they know that I’m on the right team. I’m doing the right thing, I’m protecting who I need to protect. … They have reminded me a couple of times that Trump does read transcripts and just to keep that in mind as I proceed through my depositions and interviews with the committee.”Cheney’s comments point to the possibility of witness intimidation impacting the investigation, although it will ultimately be up to the justice department to determine what (if any) criminal charges stem from the committee’s findings.That’s it from me, after a historic day in Washington. Here’s how the January 6 committee’s sixth public hearing unfolded:
      A former senior White House aide testified that Donald Trump knew some of his supporters were armed on January 6 and still encouraged them to march on the Capitol. Cassidy Hutchinson, a former senior adviser to White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, said she overheard a conversation with Trump shortly before he addressed a rally crowd on January 6. “I don’t f’ing care that they have weapons. They’re not here to hurt me,” Trump said, according to Hutchinson. “Let my people in. They can march to the Capitol from here.” The rally where Trump spoke culminated in the insurrection, which resulted in several deaths.
      Liz Cheney described potential witness tampering among Trump’s allies in connection to the January 6 investigation. Cheney, the Republican vice-chair of the committee, quoted testimony from two witnesses who said they were advised to remain loyal to Trump in their comments to investigators. “I think most Americans know that attempting to influence witnesses to testify untruthfully presents very serious concerns,” Cheney said. “We will be discussing these issues as a committee, carefully considering our next steps.”
      Trump wanted to go to the Capitol with his supporters on January 6, so much so that he tried to redirect his car when aides told him they would be returning to the White House. Hutchinson said Tony Ornato, the White House deputy chief of staff, told her that Trump was “irate” when he was informed he would not be going to the Capitol. Already inside a car with his aides, Trump tried to grab for the vehicle’s steering wheel and then lunged at the throat of a Secret Service agent, Hutchinson said.
      Meadows told Hutchinson that Trump had endorsed insurrectionists’ chants of “Hang Mike Pence!” on January 6. As Trump’s supporters stormed the Capitol, Hutchinson was involved in a conversation with Meadows and Pat Cipollone, the White House counsel. According to Hutchinson, Cipollone told Meadows, “Mark, we need to do something more. They’re literally calling for the vice-president to be f-ing hung.” Meadows replied, “You heard [Trump], Pat. He thinks Mike deserves it. He doesn’t think they are doing anything wrong.”
      Some of Trump’s closest advisers, including Meadows, expressed fear days before the insurrection that January 6 could turn violent. Hutchinson said Rudy Giuliani, one of Trump’s campaign lawyers, asked her on January 2 whether she was “excited” for January 6, the day that Congress was scheduled to certify Joe Biden’s victory in the 2020 election. When Hutchinson asked Meadows about Giuliani’s comments, he said, “There’s a lot going on, Cass, but I don’t know. Things might get real, real bad on January 6.”
      Meadows and Giuliani both inquired about presidential pardons after January 6, Hutchinson told the committee. She previously testified that several Republican members of Congress also reached out about pardons in connection to their involvement with the insurrection.
      The blog will be back tomorrow with more analysis of today’s January 6 hearing and news from the supreme court, which still has four decisions left to announce before wrapping up its term. See you then.Democrat Jamie Raskin, a member of the January 6 committee, said the panel would continue to investigate possible witness tampering among Donald Trump’s allies.At the end of today’s hearing, Liz Cheney, the Republican vice-chair of the committee, quoted testimony from two witnesses who said they had been told to remain loyal to Trump in their comments to investigators.“It’s a crime to tamper with witnesses. It’s a form of obstructing justice. The committee won’t tolerate it,” Raskin told reporters after the hearing concluded.He emphasized that the committee’s investigation is ongoing, saying, “We haven’t had the chance to fully investigate it or fully discuss it, but it’s something on our agenda.”Jan. 6 committee member Rep. Jamie Raskin, after today’s hearing, said the committee will continue to investigate possible witness tampering, after texts Rep. Cheney presented appeared to show that.”It’s a crime to tamper with witnesses…The committee won’t tolerate it.” pic.twitter.com/t74KZvmEC0— CBS News (@CBSNews) June 28, 2022
      The Guardian’s Lauren Gambino and Hugo Lowell have a full writeup of Cassidy Hutchinson’s shocking testimony before the January 6 committee:In explosive public testimony, a former White House aide on Tuesday told the committee investigating the January 6 insurrection that Donald Trump knowingly directed armed supporters to march to the US Capitol in a last-gasp effort to invalidate the results of the 2020 presidential election that he lost.Appearing at a hastily scheduled hearing on Capitol Hill, Cassidy Hutchinson, a former aide to Trump’s final chief of staff, Mark Meadows, also painted a devastating portrait of a president spiraling out of control and a White House staff often ambivalent about the violence building around them.Hutchinson also offered extraordinary new details that the White House – and the former US president – were aware that the rally on January 6 could turn violent days before Trump stepped on stage at a rally on the Ellipse and urged his supporters to “fight like hell” to keep him in power.“I felt like I was watching a bad car accident about to happen, where you cannot stop it,” Hutchinson, a conservative Republican who worked just steps from the Oval Office, testified at the panel’s sixth and most revealing hearing to date.Over the course of two hours, Hutchinson offered a shocking view into the West Wing in the moments before, during and after the siege of the US Capitol.Read the Guardian’s full report on the history-making hearing:Ex-White House aide delivers explosive public testimony to January 6 panelRead moreFox News host Bret Baier acknowledged that Cassidy Hutchinson’s detailed testimony about Donald Trump’s actions on January 6 could have far-reaching consequences.While noting that he wished that some of Trump’s congressional allies were serving on the January 6 committee, Baier said of today’s hearing, “The testimony in and of itself is really, really powerful.”Baier’s words were met with a long pause from his colleagues, prompting fellow host John Roberts to ask co-anchor Sandra Smith, “Can you still hear?”This post-hearing moment of awkward silence on Fox kinda says a lot. pic.twitter.com/5yRNJ0btKd— Brian Stelter (@brianstelter) June 28, 2022
      Liz Cheney, the Republican vice-chair of the January 6 committee, indicated that the panel may return to the issue of potential witness tampering in future hearings.Cheney concluded her remarks at today’s hearing by reading aloud from the testimony of two witnesses who said they were advised to remain loyal to Donald Trump when speaking to investigators..@RepLizCheney (R-WY): “I think most Americans know that attempting to influence witnesses to testify untruthfully presents very serious concerns.” pic.twitter.com/xlsUwnAGPr— CSPAN (@cspan) June 28, 2022
      “I think most Americans know that attempting to influence witnesses to testify untruthfully presents very serious concerns,” Cheney said. “We will be discussing these issues as a committee, carefully considering our next steps.”As of now, the January 6 committee is expected to resume its hearings when the House returns from its recess on 12 July.The committee’s evidence of potential witness tampering could also be used by the department of justice if federal prosecutors choose to pursue charges in connection to the allegations.Some members of Congress reacted with outrage as they listened to Cassidy Hutchinson recount how Donald Trump was informed that some of his supporters at his January 6 rally were carrying weapons.According to Hutchinson, Trump responded to that information by saying, “I don’t f’ing care that they have weapons. They’re not here to hurt me.”The rally that Trump spoke at on January 6 culminated in the Capitol insurrection, which resulted in several deaths and many serious injuries for US Capitol Police officers.“It was a set up. They set up the Capitol Police and Congress to to get overrun,” congressman Ruben Gallego, a Democrat of Arizona, said on Twitter. He went on to insult Mark Meadows, Trump’s chief of staff and Hutchinson’s boss, as a “traitorous fuck”.It was a set up. They set up the Capitol Police and Congress to to get overrun. @MarkMeadows you traitorous fuck.— Ruben Gallego (@RubenGallego) June 28, 2022
      Some of Cassidy Hutchinson’s former White House colleagues have applauded her willingness to testify publicly before the January 6 committee.They have also pushed back against suggestions from Donald Trump and some of his allies that Hutchinson, who served as a senior adviser to the White House chief of staff, was an unimportant staffer in the administration.“Anyone downplaying Cassidy Hutchinson’s role or her access in the West Wing either doesn’t understand how the Trump WH worked or is attempting to discredit her because they’re scared of how damning this testimony is,” said Sarah Matthews, who served as deputy White House press secretary in the Trump administration.Matthews added, “For those complaining of ‘hearsay,’ I imagine the Jan. 6 committee would welcome any of those involved to deny these allegations under oath.”Anyone downplaying Cassidy Hutchinson’s role or her access in the West Wing either doesn’t understand how the Trump WH worked or is attempting to discredit her because they’re scared of how damning this testimony is.— Sarah Matthews (@SarahAMatthews1) June 28, 2022
      Trump’s former White House communications director, Alyssa Farah Griffin, echoed that suggestion, while applauding Hutchinson’s “courage [and] integrity”.“Cassidy Hutchinson is my friend. I knew her testimony would be damning. I had no idea it’d be THIS damning,” Griffin said on Twitter. “To anyone who would try to impugn her character, I’d be glad to put you in touch w/@January6thCmte to appear UNDER OATH.”Cassidy Hutchinson is my friend. I knew her testimony would be damning. I had no idea it’d be THIS damning.I am so grateful for her courage & integrity. To anyone who would try to impugn her character, I’d be glad to put you in touch w/ @January6thCmte to appear UNDER OATH.— Alyssa Farah Griffin 🇺🇸 (@Alyssafarah) June 28, 2022
      Mick Mulvaney, who previously served as Donald Trump’s acting chief of staff, said Liz Cheney’s closing remarks at today’s hearing indicate the January 6 committee has evidence of witness tampering.Cheney’s closing is stunning: they think they have evidence of witness tampering and obstruction of justice.There is an old maxim: it’s never the crime, it’s always the coverup.Things went very badly for the former President today. My guess is that it will get worse from here— Mick Mulvaney (@MickMulvaney) June 28, 2022
      “Cheney’s closing is stunning: they think they have evidence of witness tampering and obstruction of justice. There is an old maxim: it’s never the crime, it’s always the coverup,” Mulvaney said on Twitter.“Things went very badly for the former President today. My guess is that it will get worse from here.”The committee is currently set to resume its hearings next month, after the House returns from its recess on 12 July.Liz Cheney, the Republican vice-chair of the January 6 committee, applauded Cassidy Hutchinson’s willingness to testify about what she witnessed in the Trump White House, but she also criticized Hutchinson’s colleagues who have refused to do so.“While our committee has seen many witnesses, including many Republicans, testify fully and forthrightly, this has not been true of every witness,” Cheney said at the end of today’s hearing.She added, “We have received evidence of one particular practice that raises significant concern.”Cheney noted that the committee regularly asks witnesses whether they have been contacted by any of their former colleagues or anyone else who may attempt to influence their testimony.We commonly ask witnesses connected to Trump whether they have been contacted by anyone attempting to impact testimony.Below are examples of answers we have received to this question. pic.twitter.com/pwxyJBf7Kl— January 6th Committee (@January6thCmte) June 28, 2022
      Cheney read aloud from the testimony of two witnesses who said they had recently spoken to people who encouraged them to stay in Donald Trump’s good graces with their comments to the committee.One witness told investigators, “What they said to me is, as long as I continue to be a team player, they know that I’m on the right team. I’m doing the right thing, I’m protecting who I need to protect. … They have reminded me a couple of times that Trump does read transcripts and just to keep that in mind as I proceed through my depositions and interviews with the committee.”Cheney’s comments point to the possibility of witness intimidation impacting the investigation, although it will ultimately be up to the justice department to determine what (if any) criminal charges stem from the committee’s findings.The January 6 committee hearing, which featured explosive testimony from former Trump White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson, has now concluded after nearly two hours.In her closing statement, Liz Cheney, the Republican vice-chair of the committee, thanked Hutchinson for her courage in speaking out about Donald Trump’s actions on the day of the Capitol insurrection.“Our nation is preserved by those who abide by their oaths to our Constitution. Our nation is preserved by those who know the fundamental difference between right and wrong,” Cheney said. “I want all Americans to know that what Miss Hutchinson has done today is not easy. The easy course is to hide from the spotlight, to refuse to come forward, to attempt to downplay or deny what happened.”Cassidy Hutchinson said that both Mark Meadows, the White House chief of staff, and Rudy Giuliani, one of Donald Trump’s campaign lawyers, sought presidential pardons after January 6.Hutchinson previously testified to investigators that several Republican members of Congress also reached out to inquire about potential pardons in connection to their involvement in the Capitol attack.According to Hutchinson, Trump even wanted to add a line to his January 7 speech about potential pardons for the Capitol insurrectionists, but he ultimately did not do so.Cassidy Hutchinson said she was horrified by Donald Trump’s tweet pressuring Mike Pence to disrupt the congressional certification of Joe Biden’s victory in the 2020 election.At 2.24pm on January 6, as insurrectionists stormed the Capitol, Trump tweeted, “Mike Pence didn’t have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our Country and our Constitution.”Asked for her response to that tweet, Hutchinson said, “As an American, I was disgusted. It was unpatriotic. It was un-American. We were watching the Capitol building get defaced over a lie.” Cassidy Hutchinson witnessed a conversation between Mark Meadows, the White House chief of staff, and Pat Cipollone, the White House counsel, about the insurrectionists’ chants of “Hang Mike Pence!”The committee has previously demonstrated how those who attacked the Capitol threatened Pence, as the vice-president oversaw the certification of Joe Biden’s victory in the 2020 election. Donald Trump himself repeatedly pressured Pence to disrupt the certification process.According to Hutchinson, Cipollone said something to Meadows along the lines of, “Mark, we need to do something more. They’re literally calling for the vice-president to be f-ing hung.” Referring to Trump, Meadows replied, “You heard him, Pat. He thinks Mike deserves it. He doesn’t think they are doing anything wrong.” After a brief break, the January 6 committee hearing has resumed, and the panel shared a clip from Michael Flynn’s testimony with investigators.Flynn, Donald Trump’s former national security adviser and a close ally, repeatedly invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination to avoid answering the committee’s questions about the January 6 insurrection.Among other things, Flynn would not answer a question from Liz Cheney, the committee’s Republican vice-chair, about whether he believes in the peaceful transfer of power. More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Former Trump aide says president knew demonstrators were armed – video

      by

      Cassidy Hutchinson testified that Donald Trump was aware that demonstrators on January 6 were armed. Hutchinson said she overheard Trump say ‘I don’t f’ing care that they have weapons. They’re not here to hurt me. Take the f’ing mags [metal detectors] away. Let my people in. They can march the Capitol from here. Let the f’ing people in. Take the mags away.’ Trump instructed the crowd to head towards Capitol Hill, telling them he’d be there with them, Hutchinson said. 

      Trump knew supporters had guns when he urged march on Capitol, aide testifies
      Jan 6 committee hearings live: Trump tried to grab car steering wheel to go to Capitol, ex-aide testifies More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Ex-White House aide delivers explosive public testimony to January 6 panel

      by

      Ex-White House aide delivers explosive public testimony to January 6 panelCassidy Hutchinson tells committee Trump knowingly directed armed supporters to march to the Capitol02:44In explosive public testimony, a former White House aide told the January 6 committee Donald Trump knowingly directed armed supporters to march to the US Capitol in a last-gasp effort to overturn the 2020 presidential election.Appearing at a hastily scheduled hearing, Cassidy Hutchinson, a former aide to Trump’s final chief of staff, Mark Meadows, painted a devastating portrait of a raging president spiraling out of control and a White House often too ambivalent to stop him.Angry, violent, reckless: testimony paints shocking portrait of Trump Read moreHutchinson also offered stunning new details that Trump and key aides were aware that a rally on 6 January 2021 could turn violent days before Trump urged supporters to “fight like hell” to keep him in power.“Things might get real, real bad on 6 January,” Hutchinson recalled Meadows telling her on 2 January.“That evening was the first moment that I remember feeling scared and nervous about what could happen on January 6,” she said.The hearing concluded with another extraordinary disclosure: the committee vice-chair, Liz Cheney, suggested Trump allies have sought to “influence or impact” witnesses.“I think most Americans know that attempting to influence witnesses to testify untruthfully presents very serious concerns,” Cheney said, adding that the committee was “carefully considering our next steps”.Over nearly two hours, Hutchinson offered a shocking view into the West Wing before, during and after the Capitol attack. In gripping detail, she described Trump throwing his lunch against the wall, lunging for a secret service agent’s throat and insisting armed supporters be allowed entrance to the rally that preceded the riot.“I felt like I was watching a bad car accident about to happen, where you cannot stop it,” said Hutchinson, a conservative Republican who worked just steps from the Oval Office.On the morning of 6 January, Hutchinson was present for a briefing with Meadows in which they were informed by Tony Ornato, the deputy chief of staff, that members of the crowd in Washington were carrying knives, guns, rifles, bear spray, body armor and spears. Asked if Trump had been briefed, Meadows affirmed that he had.When they arrived at the Ellipse, Hutchinson said, Trump was furious that the crowd was not at capacity and demanded Secret Service loosen security precautions to let in supporters who did not want to go through metal detectors. She recalled overhearing him say, “They’re not here to hurt me.”Back at the White House, she recalled a disturbing conversation with Ornato, who rode in the presidential limousine with Trump after his remarks. Ornato told her Trump became “irate” when told he would return to the White House instead of going to the Capitol. Hutchinson testified that Trump told a Secret Service agent: “I’m the effing president, take me up to the Capitol now.”When the agent said he could not, Trump lunged for the steering wheel and when that failed, grabbed at the agent’s throat, she said. She said the agent, Robert Engel, was present when Ornato described the altercation to Hutchinson and did not dispute his account.Trump was so enraged that he threw his lunch at the wall. It wasn’t the first time Hutchinson had witnessed such an outburst. Weeks before, Trump threw his lunch against the wall after his attorney general, William Barr, said the president’s claims of a stolen election were without merit.“There was ketchup dripping down the wall, and there was a shattered porcelain plate on the floor,” Hutchinson recalled.As Trump’s supporters inched closer to the Capitol on 6 January, Hutchinson said she sought to sound the alarm at the White House. But instead of seeking to calm the situation, Trump sent a tweet saying Mike Pence lacked the “courage” to stop the electoral count.“As an American, I was disgusted,” Hutchinson said. “It was unpatriotic. It was un-American. We were watching the Capitol building get defaced over a lie.”Capitol police officers engaged in hand-to-hand combat, trying to stop the mob as lawmakers and the vice-president were rushed to safety. An early hearing revealed that the rioters chanting “hang Mike Pence” had come with 40ft of him. Trump refused to condemn the violence or issue a statement urging supporters to go home. He even expressed approval of the chants about Pence, Hutchinson said.Pat Cipollone, the former White House counsel, implored Meadows to “do more” to stop the violence, saying: “They’re literally calling for the vice-president to be effing hung.”“You heard him, Pat,” Meadows replied. “He thinks Mike deserves it. He doesn’t think they are doing anything wrong.”Having said it would next hold hearings in July, the committee scheduled Hutchinson’s appearance abruptly. Opening the hearing, the committee chair, Bennie Thompson, said it was “important that the American people hear that information immediately”.Trump sought to discredit Hutchinson on his social media platform, calling her a “phony” and a “bullshit artist”. But former Trump aides who broke with him over January 6 praised her courage.Few Trump loyalists were left unscathed by Tuesday’s hearing, including Michael Flynn, the former national security adviser.The committee played a montage of Flynn invoking his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. In one revealing exchange, the retired general declined to answer when asked if he believed in the peaceful transfer of power.The committee had previously relied on Hutchinson’s testimony to reveal that several far-right members of Congress who attempted to stop certification of Biden’s victory sought pardons after the attack.On Tuesday, Hutchinson recalled walking Trump’s lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, to his car on the evening of 2 January. He told her Trump was planning to be with his allies on Capitol Hill during the certification. When she reported this to Meadows, she said he replied something to the effect of: “Things might get real, real bad on January 6.”She also told the committee she recalled mentions of the far-right groups the Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys when Giuliani was around at the White House in the days leading up to January 6.Hutchinson said Meadows and Giuliani sought presidential pardons. She also told the committee members of Trump’s cabinet discussed invoking the 25th amendment, which allows for the forced removal of a president.Tuesday’s hearing came as a surprise but the committee has said its public sessions are prompting more witnesses to come forward, helping uncover new evidence about what Thompson said was the “culmination of an attempted coup”.‘He thinks Mike deserves it’: Trump said rioters were right to call for vice-president’s deathRead moreIn its episodic presentation, the committee has made use of recorded depositions, blending tapes with moving public testimony and dramatic speech-making from lawmakers and staff.At least two more hearings are expected next month, to explore how far-right and paramilitary groups organized and prepared for the January 6 attack and Trump’s abdication of leadership during the hours-long siege of the Capitol.The panel’s leaders praised Hutchinson for not taking the “easy course” and remaining silent. Cheney urged others who have so far declined to speak to the panel, Cipollone among them, to follow Hutchinson’s example.“Our nation is preserved by those who abide by their oaths to our constitution,” she said in closing. “Our nation is preserved by those who know the fundamental difference between right and wrong.”TopicsJanuary 6 hearingsUS Capitol attackDonald TrumpUS politicsRepublicansnewsReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      January 6 hearing: former aide to Mark Meadows to testify – live

      by

      It’s worth noting that Cassidy Hutchinson recently changed her legal representation in connection to the January 6 investigation.Hutchinson’s decision to replace her former lawyer, Stefan Passantino, with Jody Hunt of the law firm Alston Bird was interpreted as a signal of her increased willingness to cooperate with the January 6 committee’s requests for information.Politico reported earlier this month:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;} Hutchinson’s former attorney, Stefan Passantino, has deep Trump World connections. Her new lawyer, Jody Hunt, is a longtime close ally of Jeff Sessions and served as his chief of staff when the former attorney general enraged Trump by recusing from the Russia probe. …
      Passantino, Hutchinson’s former attorney, was the Trump White House’s chief ethics lawyer. And Passantino’s firm, Michael Best, has Trump World connections; its president is former White House chief of staff Reince Priebus, and Justin Clark — also a top Trump World lawyer — is currently on leave from the firm, according to its website.Today’s testimony from Cassidy Hutchinson could also reveal more details about Donald Trump’s response to insurrectionists’ chants of “Hang Mike Pence!” on January 6.At the January 6 committee’s first public hearing earlier this month, Liz Cheney, the Republican vice-chair of the panel, said witness testimony indicated Trump was informed of the chants and reacted approvingly to them.“You will hear that President Trump was yelling and ‘really angry’ at advisers who told him he needed to be doing something more,” Cheney said at the first hearing. “And aware of the rioters’ chants to hang Mike Pence, the president responded with this sentiment, ‘Maybe our supporters have the right idea.’ Mike Pence ‘deserves it.’”According to CNN, Hutchinson was the witness who provided the committee with that information, so today’s hearing could give her an opportunity to offer valuable new insight into how Trump reacted as January 6 turned violent. The House committee investigating the January 6 insurrection is expected to hear live public testimony on Tuesday from Cassidy Hutchinson, a former top aide to Mark Meadows, the last chief of staff to Donald Trump, according to a source familiar with the matter.The committee on Monday abruptly scheduled a hearing for Tuesday, suggesting a sense of urgency to disclose what it said was “recently obtained evidence”. The committee had previously said it would not hold any more hearings until next month.It is the sixth public hearing held by the committee after a year-long investigation into the Capitol attack. Two more hearings are expected next month.The hearings next month are expected to delve into the role of far-right and paramilitary groups organized and prepared for the January 6 attack and Trump’s abdication of leadership during the hours-long siege of the Capitol.January 6 committee schedules surprise session to hear new evidenceRead moreJoe Biden will meet tomorrow with Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, the president of Turkey, as the two leaders attend the Nato summit in Madrid, Spain.The White House announced the planned meeting during the daily press briefing, which was held today aboard Air Force One as Biden flew from Germany, where he attended the G7 summit, to Spain.Biden has just arrived in Madrid, where he will soon meet with the Spanish prime minister, Pedro Sánchez, and King Felipe VI.The exact format and timing of the Erdoğan meeting is still unclear, but Jake Sullivan, Biden’s national security adviser, told reporters that the focus of the discussion would be on US-Turkish relations and the bids from Finland and Sweden to join Nato.Turkey has raised objections to Finland and Sweden’s bids, which were submitted in response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Erdoğan has specifically accused Sweden of being a “hatchery” for terrorist organizations, per Reuters.The meeting tomorrow could give Biden an opportunity to press Erdoğan on those reservations and attempt to convince him to support Nato membership for Finland and Sweden.It remains unclear what new information Cassidy Hutchinson, former senior aide to Trump White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, might provide in her testimony today before the January 6 committee.But according to Brendan Buck, a longtime adviser to former Republican House speaker Paul Ryan, Hutchinson joined every meeting that Meadows participated in as a congressman. (Meadows served in the House from 2013 to 2020.)“I don’t know Cassidy Hutchinson, and I can’t speak to how things worked at the White House, but when Meadows was on the Hill he always insisted that she be in *every* meeting he had, no matter how small,” Buck said on Twitter. “It was odd then, and [doesn’t] seem to be working out for him now.”I don’t know Cassidy Hutchinson, and I can’t speak to how things worked at the White House, but when Meadows was on the Hill he always insisted that she be in *every* meeting he had, no matter how small. It was odd then, and doesnt seem to be working out for him now.— Brendan Buck (@BrendanBuck) June 28, 2022
      The House select committee investigating the January 6 Capitol attack is closely focused on phone calls and conversations among Donald Trump’s children and top aides captured by a documentary film-maker weeks before the 2020 election, say sources familiar with the matter.The calls among Trump’s children and top aides took place at an invitation-only event at the Trump International hotel in Washington that took place the night of the first presidential debate on 29 September 2020, the sources said.The select committee is interested in the calls, the sources said, since the footage is understood to show the former president’s children, including Donald Jr and Eric Trump, privately discussing strategies about the election at a crucial time in the presidential campaign.House investigators first learned about the event, hosted by the Trump campaign, and the existence of the footage through British film-maker Alex Holder, who testified about what he and his crew recorded during a two-hour interview last week, the sources said.Read the Guardian’s full report:January 6 committee focuses on phone calls among Trump’s children and aidesRead moreGreetings from Washington, live blog readers.The House select committee investigating the January 6 insurrection will hold its sixth public hearing of the month at 1pm ET, after the panel surprisingly announced the event yesterday.According to multiple reports, the star witness for today’s surprise hearing will be Cassidy Hutchinson, a former aide to Mark Meadows, who served as Donald Trump’s White House chief of staff. (Punchbowl News first reported Hutchinson’s expected appearance.)Hutchinson has already spoken to investigators behind closed doors, and she provided the committee with some of its most damning evidence about the Trump White House’s ties to the attack on the Capitol.In a clip of her private testimony played at a hearing last week, Hutchinson named several Republican members of Congress who sought president pardons in connection to their involvement in the insurrection.Today could give Hutchinson her first opportunity to speak directly to the American people about what she witnessed in the White House on January 6 and in the aftermath of that violent day.The hearing will kick off in a few hours, and the blog will have updates and analysis once it starts. Stay tuned.And here’s what else is happening today:
      Joe Biden is traveling from Germany to Spain. Biden is participating in the final day of the G7 summit in Schloss Elmau, Germany, before traveling on to Madrid, Spain, for the start of the Nato summit.
      Karine Jean-Pierre will gaggle with reporters aboard Air Force One en route to Madrid. The White House press secretary will be joined by Jake Sullivan, Biden’s national security adviser.
      Today marks the 10th anniversary of the supreme court’s decision to uphold key portions of the Affordable Care Act. The anniversary comes as the country awaits the court’s final four decisions of the term, which has already seen conservative justices overturn Roe v Wade and deliver a major victory to gun rights groups.
      The blog will have more coming up, so stick around. More

    • 188 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      January 6 committee focuses on phone calls among Trump’s children and aides weeks before election

      by

      January 6 committee focuses on phone calls among Trump’s children and aides weeks before electionFootage captured by documentary film-maker understood to show former president’s children privately discussing election strategies The House select committee investigating the January 6 Capitol attack is closely focused on phone calls and conversations among Donald Trump’s children and top aides captured by a documentary film-maker weeks before the 2020 election, say sources familiar with the matter.The calls among Trump’s children and top aides took place at an invitation-only event at the Trump International hotel in Washington DC that took place the night of the first presidential debate on 29 September 2020, the sources said.The select committee is interested in the calls, the sources said, since the footage is understood to show the former president’s children, including Donald Jr and Eric Trump, privately discussing strategies about the election at a crucial time in the presidential campaign.‘Watergate for streaming era’: how the January 6 panel created gripping hearingsRead moreHouse investigators first learned about the event, hosted by the Trump campaign, and the existence of the footage through British film-maker Alex Holder, who testified about what he and his crew recorded during a two-hour interview last week, the sources said.The film-maker testified that he had recorded around seven hours of one-to-one interviews with Trump, then-vice president Mike Pence, Trump’s adult children and Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, the sources said, as well as around 110 hours of footage from the campaign.But one part of Holder’s testimony that particularly piqued the interest of the members of the select committee and chief investigative counsel Tim Heaphy was when he disclosed that he had managed to record discussions at the 29 September 2020 event.The select committee is closely focused on the footage of the event – in addition to the content of the one-on-one interviews with Trump and Ivanka – because the discussions about strategies mirror similar conversations at that time by top Trump advisors.On the night of the first presidential debate, Trump’s top former strategist Steve Bannon said in an interview with HBO’s The Circus that the outcome of the 2020 election would be decided at the state level and eventually at the congressional certification on January 6.“They’re going to try and overturn this election with uncertified votes,” Bannon said. Asked how he expects the election to end, Bannon said: “Right before noon on the 20th, in a vote in the House, Trump will win the presidency.”The select committee believes that ideas such as Bannon’s were communicated to advisors to Donald Jr and his fiancee, Kimberly Guilfoyle, even before the 2020 election had taken place, the sources said – leading House investigators to want to review the Trump hotel footage.What appears to interest the panel is whether Trump and his children had planned to somehow stop the certification of the election on January 6 – a potential violation of federal law – and to force a contingent election if Trump lost as early as September.The event was not open to the public, Holder is said to have testified, and the documentary film-maker was waved into the Trump hotel by Eric Trump. At some point after Holder caught the calls on tape, he is said to have been asked to leave by Donald Jr.Among the conversations captured on film was Eric Trump on the phone to an unidentified person saying, according to one source familiar: “Hopefully you’re voting in Florida as opposed to the other state you’ve mentioned.”January 6 hearings: if Republicans did nothing wrong, why were pardons sought?Read moreThe phone call – a clip of which was reviewed by the Guardian – was one of several by some of the people closest to Trump that Holder memorialized in his film, titled Unprecedented, which is due to be released in a three-part series later this year on Discovery+.Holder also testified to the select committee, the sources said, about the content of the interviews. Holder interviewed Trump in early December 2020 at the White House, and then twice a few months after the Capitol attack both at Mar-a-Lago and his Bedminster golf club.The select committee found Holder’s testimony and material more explosive than they had expected, the sources said. Holder, for instance, showed the panel a discrepancy between Ivanka Trump’s testimony to the panel and Holder’s camera.In her interview in December 2020, the New York Times earlier reported, Ivanka said her father should “continue to fight until every legal remedy is exhausted” because people were questioning “the sanctity of our elections”.That interview was recorded nine days after former attorney general William Barr told Trump there was no evidence of election fraud. But in her interview with the select committee, Ivanka said she had “accepted” what Barr had said.TopicsJanuary 6 hearingsUS Capitol attackUS politicsDonald TrumpRepublicansDonald Trump JrSteve BannonnewsReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      January 6 committee focuses on phone calls among Trump’s children and aides

      by

      January 6 committee focuses on phone calls among Trump’s children and aidesFootage captured by documentary film-maker understood to show ex-president’s children privately discussing election strategies The House select committee investigating the January 6 Capitol attack is closely focused on phone calls and conversations among Donald Trump’s children and top aides captured by a documentary film-maker weeks before the 2020 election, say sources familiar with the matter.The calls among Trump’s children and top aides took place at an invitation-only event at the Trump International hotel in Washington that took place the night of the first presidential debate on 29 September 2020, the sources said.The select committee is interested in the calls, the sources said, since the footage is understood to show the former president’s children, including Donald Jr and Eric Trump, privately discussing strategies about the election at a crucial time in the presidential campaign.‘Watergate for streaming era’: how the January 6 panel created gripping hearingsRead moreHouse investigators first learned about the event, hosted by the Trump campaign, and the existence of the footage through British film-maker Alex Holder, who testified about what he and his crew recorded during a two-hour interview last week, the sources said.The film-maker testified that he had recorded around seven hours of one-to-one interviews with Trump, then-vice president Mike Pence, Trump’s adult children and Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, the sources said, as well as around 110 hours of footage from the campaign.But one part of Holder’s testimony that particularly piqued the interest of the members of the select committee and chief investigative counsel Tim Heaphy was when he disclosed that he had managed to record discussions at the 29 September event.The select committee is closely focused on the footage of the event – in addition to the content of the one-on-one interviews with Trump and Ivanka – because the discussions about strategies mirror similar conversations at that time by top Trump advisors.On the night of the first presidential debate, Trump’s top former strategist Steve Bannon said in an interview with The Circus on Showtime that the outcome of the election would be decided at the state level and eventually at the congressional certification on January 6.“They’re going to try and overturn this election with uncertified votes,” Bannon said. Asked how he expects the election to end, Bannon said: “Right before noon on the 20th, in a vote in the House, Trump will win the presidency.”The select committee believes that ideas such as Bannon’s were communicated to advisers to Donald Jr and his fiancee, Kimberly Guilfoyle, even before the 2020 election had taken place, the sources said – leading House investigators to want to review the Trump hotel footage.What appears to interest the panel is whether Trump and his children had planned to somehow stop the certification of the election on January 6 – a potential violation of federal law – and to force a contingent election if Trump lost as early as September.The event was not open to the public, Holder is said to have testified, and the documentary film-maker was waved into the Trump hotel by Eric Trump. At some point after Holder caught the calls on tape, he is said to have been asked to leave by Donald Jr.Among the conversations captured on film was Eric Trump on the phone to an unidentified person saying, according to one source familiar: “Hopefully you’re voting in Florida as opposed to the other state you’ve mentioned.”January 6 hearings: if Republicans did nothing wrong, why were pardons sought?Read moreThe phone call – a clip of which was reviewed by the Guardian – was one of several by some of the people closest to Trump that Holder memorialized in his film, titled Unprecedented, which is due to be released in a three-part series later this year on Discovery+.Holder also testified to the select committee, the sources said, about the content of the interviews. Holder interviewed Trump in early December 2020 at the White House, and then twice a few months after the Capitol attack both at Mar-a-Lago and his Bedminster golf club in New Jersey.The select committee found Holder’s testimony and material more explosive than they had expected, the sources said. Holder, for instance, showed the panel a discrepancy between Ivanka Trump’s testimony to the panel and Holder’s camera.In her interview in December 2020, the New York Times earlier reported, Ivanka said her father should “continue to fight until every legal remedy is exhausted” because people were questioning “the sanctity of our elections”.That interview was recorded nine days after former attorney general William Barr told Trump there was no evidence of election fraud. But in her interview with the select committee, Ivanka said she had “accepted” what Barr had said.TopicsJanuary 6 hearingsUS Capitol attackUS politicsDonald TrumpRepublicansDonald Trump JrSteve BannonnewsReuse this content More

    • 125 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Lauren Boebert: could the rightwing extremist be re-elected to Congress?

      by

      Lauren Boebert: could the rightwing extremist be re-elected to Congress? The controversial House member from Colorado is facing a challenger from the center, complicating her hopes of a smooth sailing primary“The tip of the spear”, that’s how Lauren Boebert described herself, on a bluebird Saturday in June, to a group of her supporters at a small town Republican party barbecue. Other members of the GOP shy away from the most inflammatory issues and controversial fights, she said – but not her.Extremists like Marjorie Taylor Greene are the future of the Republican party | Thomas ZimmerRead moreBoebert’s extreme rightwing stances range from absolute opposition to gun control to questioning the effectiveness of vaccines and the outcome of the 2020 presidential elections. All are conveyed by a social media persona fine-tuned to inflame the culture wars.It was sweltering inside the gazebo, even with the windows and doors thrown open, but the first-term congresswoman seemed unfazed. Dressed in jeans, a black ballcap and several-inch high heels, she guided her supporters through a litany of inflammatory talking points including immigration, critical race theory, gender transitions and Joe Biden’s mental capacity. The crowd was captivated, with regular shouts of approval and cheering when Boebert paused her careering delivery for effect.“I’m proud to have brought home 100% conservative voting records to each and every one of you,” she told the crowd at the June barbecue. “From gun rights, to immigration, to border security, to life.”In just two years in Congress, Boebert has become one of America’s most famous political figures. Along with Marjorie Taylor Greene, Josh Hawley, JD Vance and others, she is among a vanguard of younger, stridently conservative politicians following former president Donald Trump’s path to prominence.Boebert’s public battles against Colorado’s Covid-19 business shutdowns at her restaurant, Shooter’s Grill, in the small town of Rifle (the servers carry sidearms), catapulted her to local fame, helping her unseat several-term incumbent Scott Tipton in the 2020 Republican primary. She won the general election for Colorado’s third congressional district that fall.Upon arriving in Washington DC she pledged to carry her handgun on to the floor of Congress, heckled President Biden during his first State of the Union, and was censured by the House for racist remarks made about the Minnesota representative Ilhan Omar. In a May debate, Boebert said she was proud of her attempt to block the certification of President Biden’s election.At the June rally, Boebert spoke to an adoring crowd of core GOP primary voters. If this group and their peers across western Colorado were the sole voters Boebert needed to capture Tuesday’s 2022 Republican primary, she would be a lock. But they are not.Colorado holds what are known as open primaries. This means independent voters automatically receive election ballots for both Republican and Democratic party elections. These unaffiliated voters outnumber both Republicans and Democrats in Colorado’s third district, making up about 44% of active voters. With the Democratic party’s failure to come up with a high-profile candidate, there has been a concerted anti-Boebert push among quietly dissenting Republicans, angry unaffiliated voters and even Democrats who renounce their party registration to vote in the GOP primary against Boebert.“Boebert is an embarrassment to our district,” said Susan Reed, a retired cultural archeologist, who decided to change her registration from Democrat to unaffiliated. This was a first for Reed, but Boebert offends her. “We need a legislator and not a Fox News personality,” she said.Reed is not alone. Across the district, Democrats are de-registering in some numbers. According to an analysis by Colorado Public Radio, the Democratic party lost about 3,700 registered voters between February and May in Boebert’s congressional district (Boebert won the primary two years ago by fewer than 10,000 votes). None of Colorado’s other House districts saw a comparable shift.Tomorrow, these voters will cast their votes for Don Coram, a 74-year-old state senator from the small, conservative town of Montrose. Coram’s family has ranched in the arid Uncompahgre valley for generations, where, today, he grows hemp, in addition to running cattle. He is well-known in this deeply red part of the state, an important source of votes for Boebert’s dark horse primary win two years ago. He has a reputation for expertise in water and mineral policy, as well as for moderation and frequent deal-making with Democrats.“My politics are very similar to my driving,” Coram said at a recent campaign event. “To the chagrin of both my wife and my Republican colleagues, I tend to crowd the center line and sometimes I veer over a bit.”Colorado’s third congressional district is enormous, blanketing the state’s entire western half. High in the Rockies near the Continental Divide, there are posh, well-educated ski towns that attract the wealthiest people in America and vote blue. Several thousand feet of elevation down and to the west are some of Colorado’s most impoverished and least populated areas. The district includes some of Colorado’s most intensely conservative counties. There are two sovereign tribal nations, the Ute Mountain Indian and Southern Ute Indian tribes. The seat is also nearly a quarter Hispanic.Western Colorado includes the state’s last active coalmines, many oil and gas wells, and millions of acres of federal public land. Outdoor recreation and tourism on these public lands have become enormously important revenue sources. The Colorado River’s headwaters emerge here, on the western slope of the Rockies, making water policy existentially important, not only locally, but for the entire south-western US.Truly representing the interests of such a complex assortment of people and communities would be hard for any politician. But Boebert’s critics argue that she does an especially poor job. Voting analyses consistently rank her as one of the most conservative and least bipartisan members of Congress.Coram’s primary challenge rests on the idea that western Colorado voters feel inadequately represented by this hard-right stance. His campaign touts his centrist reputation developed during his 11 years as a state politician. Coram has been an important Republican backer of bipartisan bills on rural hospitals, broadband and water conservation. “The ‘R’ next to my name stands for rural,” he said during a phone interview.At times, Coram’s politics veer beyond the normal GOP boundaries. In 2015, he helped write a bill to provide millions in state funding to provide free contraceptives to teenagers. Coram opposes abortions. Preventing them, in his view, requires easily available contraception. While promoting his bill in the state capitol, Coram wore an IUD pinned to his lapel. “It was rather funny,” he said in a phone interview, “because a lot of my redneck Republican friends looked at me and said, ‘is that some kind of a fishing lure?’”Boebert has seized on these and other votes as evidence that her opponent is a liberal in disguise, an accusation that Coram brushes off – to an extent.“We’re concentrating on what we refer to as kitchen table Republicans, the more moderate Republicans that aren’t all driven by theories and agendas,” he said. “We’re concentrated on them and the unaffiliated vote.”In 2020, Boebert won the general election with 51.4% of the vote, suggesting a competitive seat. After the district’s boundaries shifted last year, Republicans now hold a 9% advantage. J Miles Coleman, an election analyst with the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics, said that between this redistricting and a tough national atmosphere for Democrats, Boebert is likely to be re-elected – if she wins tomorrow’s primary, as Coleman thinks she will.Three candidates are competing in the Democratic primary: Sol Sandoval, Adam Frisch and Alex Walker. All are seen as long shots against Boebert.“It’s a conservative seat with a libertarian streak, especially on guns, taxes and government regulation,” he said. “Boebert checks a lot of those boxes.”Not so long ago, though, Democrats were competitive, even successful. The third district was represented for years by Democrat John Salazar, who lost in 2010. His brother, Ken, did well in the area during his successful 2004 Senate campaign. Another Democrat, Ben Nighthorse Campbell, held the seat for several terms in the late 1980s and early 90s. Part of the issue, as Coleman noted, is that the Hispanic vote is no longer staunchly blue. Pueblo county, which is 43% Hispanic or Latino, voted for Trump in 2016 after going for Obama in both elections. Biden barely clawed the county back in 2020.Based on numerous interviews with western Colorado Democrats, there’s a clear sense of frustration with the state party leadership, overwhelmingly concentrated in the Denver area, hundreds of miles away on the other side of the Continental Divide.“National and state Democrats have lost virtually every line of communication with working-class voters in places like the western slope,” said Joel Dyar a longtime community organizer in Grand Junction (Dyar co-founded a Super Pac that opposes Boebert). “They’ve had three decades to work on strategies and they still have no real strategies. There’s no storytelling, no cultural competence, no ladders for new rural talent. They’ve got to make big, brave, generational investments in rural organizing.”Kathleen Sullivan Kelley encountered this obstacle in the 1980s, when, as a young, single woman in her 20s, she unseated an incumbent Republican state senator in one of the most deeply conservative parts of western Colorado.“It was a problem back when I ran for the legislature,” she said in a phone interview. “The Democratic party didn’t want to spend money on this area.”Kelley would eventually lose her seat and return home to Rio Blanco county, where she bought some of her family’s ranch and went into regenerative agriculture. In 2020, the county voted 82% for Donald Trump. Even so, she sees opportunity for Democrats, if only someone would seize it, especially in fighting consolidation and monopoly power in agricultural markets.For the upcoming primary, she dropped her party registration, in part so she could vote for Coram, but also out of frustration with the Democratic party.“I think any Democrat who would get in their pickup truck and get out there and knock on doors and show the heck up would have a shot,” she said. “There are so many people in this district who are embarrassed by what is going on.”Boebert remains the strong favorite against Coram. She has a more than $4m fundraising advantage, on top of a bedrock of support, even beyond registered Republicans. An analysis of the 2020 election by the Colorado Sun found that western Colorado unaffiliated voters have a noticeably conservative bent.Coram’s uphill battle was evident in early June, at a campaign event he held at a coffee shop he co-owns with his son. Dressed in cowboy boots and a pink shirt with his name and state senate seat stitched on the front, Coram chatted casually with a number of supporters, framing himself as a pragmatic deal-maker.But one young woman seemed skeptical. She pressed him repeatedly on core GOP issues like abortion and gun control. A student at Colorado Christian University who wants to enter the air force, Marissa Archuletta said later that she wanted a more partisan Republican stance from Coram. On abortion, she said, he promised to work with both sides, “but he never really said that he would work with Republicans”. Archuletta would not reveal which candidate she planned to vote for, but said of Boebert, “I like what she’s doing.”Among liberal Democrats, there’s an impulse to doubt that public support for candidates like Boebert is sincere and deeply held. But Coleman, the election analyst, explained that the median Republican primary voter today is much more aligned with Boebert than Coram. Her success is not an illusion. She wins because she’s doing what voters want her to do.Some Republicans are privately frustrated. One state-level elected official praised Boebert’s energy, but wishes it would be directed toward useful things. “I can’t put my finger on anything she’s done to help,” the official said. “She’s hard to take very seriously.” I asked if they have any hope that she might improve with more time in office. “Well, no,” the official said with a laugh. They spoke on the condition of anonymity, because of Boebert’s popularity among the GOP base.This was evident at the small town Republican event that Boebert headlined. That she angers and offends Democrats is intrinsic to her appeal. During her speech, Boebert recounted several instances of fighting Democratic legislation in Congress – at one point, she took some credit for killing a bill that in fact passed the House and stalled in the Senate. (The campaign did not respond to a list of questions sent by the Guardian). “I led the tweets,” Boebert said more than once. “I got loud,” she said repeatedly.At the end of the speech, a woman took the microphone and stood to praise her congresswoman’s work in office. “I don’t have time to waste my vote on a centrist,” the woman told Boebert. “I want a fighter.”TopicsColoradoRepublicansUS politicsThe far rightfeaturesReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘Watergate for streaming era’: how the January 6 panel created gripping hearings

      by

      ‘Watergate for streaming era’: how the January 6 panel created gripping hearingsThe committee have put on hearings that feel more like a Hollywood prestige limited series than a congressional inquiry There is a certain kind of ritual that has come to define a blockbuster congressional hearing in Washington.The star witnesses take their seats facing the dias, swamped by photographers. The committee chairman gives a solemn opening statement, followed by a statement from the ranking member of the minority party. There is some bickering over the rules for the hearing, whether it is a sham, sometimes followed by a theatrical effort to postpone the session. Eventually, the star witness gets to speak, and parries questions from the committee members, each party asking either friendly or aggressive questions, depending on the politics. The whole thing often lasts hours and can get somewhat confusing to follow. At the end of the day, newscasts are filled with highlight reels of the can’t miss moments.Get the latest updates on voting rights in the Guardian’s Fight to vote newsletterBut over the last few weeks, the committee investigating the January 6 attack on the US capitol has broken that mold.Instead of just presenting the facts from their investigation, the committee has generated a clear narrative, teasing how each piece will connect to the next at a future hearing. They have promised and delivered on new sensational details making the hearings can’t miss television. The committee, which is getting advice from a former ABC News executive, have put on hearings that felt more like a Hollywood prestige limited series than a congressional inquiry.“They have put on the Watergate hearings for the streaming era,” said Norman Eisen, who served as special counsel to the House judiciary committee during Trump’s first impeachment.The committee has done this in a few key ways. They’ve broken up the hearings into several pieces, keeping each hearing to just a few hours (short by Congress’s standards) and focused on a particular topic. A single member of the committee, or professional staff, has handled the questioning, without interruptions from the opposing party. And the committee has placed a beating heart at the center of its investigation, featuring testimony from police officers, elected officials, and election workers who have all emotionally laid out the severe consequences of Trump’s investigative work.“What they’ve done brilliantly is use video, kind of the newest techniques of presenting narrative through video, with the most traditional, but powerful approach of having live witnesses. And they’ve blended the two and managed to tell a gripping account of a criminal conspiracy,” said Eisen, who now serves as a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution.Perhaps most significantly, the committee has made extraordinary use of over a year of investigative work. They frequently play video clips of government officials at the highest levels of government and in Trump’s inner circle detailing what was going on behind the scenes as Trump tried to overturn the election. In many of those clips, the officials have said they knew Trump’s claims about massive fraud were bunk and told him so. Their close ties to Trump make their words all the more damning.“Video is the top of the pyramid of what gets people’s attention,” said David Litt, a former speechwriter for Barack Obama. “The same set of words, if it’s a quote, it’s less valuable than audio, and audio is less valuable than video. I think they understood that.”The committee has also done a good job of feeding the appetite for constant new information by carefully meting out and teasing bombshell information, Litt said. During the first impeachment hearing, for example, Liz Cheney said that multiple Republican congressman sought presidential pardons, but didn’t reveal who. Cheney opened another hearing by saying that Rudy Giuliani was “apparently inebriated”, before later playing a clip of Jason Miller, a senior Trump adviser telling investigators that was the case. At one hearing, the committee also teased a video in which Eric Herchmann says he told John Eastman: “I’m going to give you the best free legal advice you’re ever getting in your life: get a great fucking criminal defense lawyer.”“They went out and they got the receipts and now they’re deploying them in a smart way where there’s this constant drip,” Litt said. “They understand that the drip drip drip is what holds interest in a story. Unfortunately we’ve seen this time and time again where there’s a bombshell, but someone just waits it out because all the shoes drop at once.”Some of the committee’s biggest success may also be the result of a strategic error by Republicans. After Nancy Pelosi blocked two Republicans who voted to overturn the election from serving on the January 6 committee last year, Kevin McCarthy, the Republican said he wouldn’t appoint any Republicans to the panel. That decision left Trump without any allies on the commission to challenge the committee’s inquiries or throw out distracting questions to muddy the water during hearings. Trump has said in recent days that McCarthy’s decision was a mistake.Now, the committee has shown a remarkable discipline in its effort to investigate witnesses without having to worry about sideshows. Republican witnesses who might otherwise have been reluctant to testify publicly and face grandstanding from Republican members, might now feel more comfortable coming forward, Litt said.But even though the committee has succeeded in creating remarkably compelling hearings, will the hearings actually break through? Part of that depends on who the audience is. In one sense, the entire investigation has a very specific audience, the US justice department, which is weighing whether to bring criminal charges against Trump and allies. And it’s difficult to say whether the hearings will sway Attorney General Merrick Garland and other justice department officials one way or the other.For another audience, the committee’s work may be succeeding. The committee’s work is never going to convince diehard Trump supporters that the election wasn’t stolen, Litt noted. But more than a year and a half after January 6, the committee is forcing the events of January 6 to be at the center of America’s political discourse.“When I was writing speeches, the important thing I used to say is that you can’t tell people what to think, but you can tell them what to think about,” Litt said. “And a large percentage of the most influential people in American media, business and politics are thinking about what happened on January 6 and why. And whether the people responsible have been held accountable.”TopicsJanuary 6 hearingsUS politicsUS Capitol attackDonald TrumpRepublicansfeaturesReuse this content More