Senate

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      McConnell Privately Backs Impeachment as House Moves to Charge Trump

      by

      #masthead-section-label, #masthead-bar-one { display: none }The Trump ImpeachmentliveLatest UpdatesHouse Introduces ChargeMcConnell Said to Support ChargeHow Impeachment Might Work25th Amendment ExplainedAdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyMcConnell Privately Backs Impeachment as House Moves to Charge TrumpThe House was poised to formally call on Vice President Mike Pence to move to wrest power from the president, as Republican support built for impeaching him of inciting violence against the nation.Senator Mitch McConnell, the majority leader, walking past security forces to his office during a break in the Senate session that reconvened last week after a mob of Trump supporters attacked the Capitol.Credit…Anna Moneymaker for The New York TimesJonathan Martin, Maggie Haberman and Jan. 12, 2021Updated 9:40 p.m. ETWASHINGTON — Senator Mitch McConnell has concluded that President Trump committed impeachable offenses and believes that Democrats’ move to impeach him will make it easier to purge Mr. Trump from the party, according to people familiar with Mr. McConnell’s thinking.The private assessment of Mr. McConnell, the most powerful Republican in Congress, emerged on the eve of a House vote to formally charge Mr. Trump with inciting violence against the country for his role in whipping up a mob of his supporters who stormed the Capitol while lawmakers met to formalize President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s victory.In a sign that the dam could be breaking against Mr. Trump in a party that has long been unfailingly loyal to him, Representative Liz Cheney of Wyoming, the No. 3 Republican in the House, announced her intention to support the single charge of high crimes and misdemeanors, as other party leaders declined to formally lobby rank-and-file lawmakers to oppose it.“The president of the United States summoned this mob, assembled the mob, and lit the flame of this attack,” Ms. Cheney said in a statement. “There has never been a greater betrayal by a president of the United States of his office and his oath to the Constitution.”Even before Mr. McConnell’s position was known and Ms. Cheney had announced her plans, advisers to the Senate Republican leader had already privately speculated that a dozen Republican senators — and possibly more — could ultimately vote to convict Mr. Trump in a Senate trial that would follow his impeachment by the House. Seventeen Republicans would most likely be needed to join Democrats in finding him guilty. After that, it would take a simple majority to disqualify Mr. Trump from ever again holding public office.In the House, Representative Kevin McCarthy, the minority leader and one of Mr. Trump’s most steadfast allies in Congress, has asked other Republicans whether he ought to call on Mr. Trump to resign in the aftermath of last week’s riot at the Capitol, according to three Republican officials briefed on the conversations. While he has said he is personally opposed to impeachment, he and other party leaders did not mount an official effort to defeat the push, and Mr. McCarthy was working on Tuesday to build support for a censure resolution to rebuke the president for his actions.Taken together, the stances of Congress’s two top Republicans — neither of whom has said publicly that Mr. Trump should resign or be impeached — reflected the politically fraught and fast-moving nature of the crisis the party faces. After four years of backing the president at nearly every turn and refusing to condemn even his most extreme behavior, party leaders were racing to distance themselves from a president many of them now regard as a political and constitutional threat.Mr. McCarthy backed the electoral challenges Republicans lodged last week during Congress’s electoral count, voting twice to overturn Mr. Biden’s victory in key swing states even after the siege at the Capitol. Mr. McConnell had broken with Mr. Trump just as the rioters were breaching the building, warning of a descent into a “death spiral” for democracy if the efforts were to prevail.Mr. Trump has shown no trace of contrition. On Tuesday, in his first public appearance since the siege of the Capitol, he told reporters that his remarks to supporters at a rally that day — in which he exhorted them to go to the Capitol and “fight” so Republicans would reject the election results — had been “totally appropriate.” It was the specter of his impeachment, he said, that was “causing tremendous anger.” But with Twitter having suspended his account for good, Mr. Trump no longer has his favorite weapon to train on lawmakers who cross him, which could curtail the blowback they face for voting against him.Nonetheless, Mr. Trump’s advisers used their own Twitter feeds to highlight his hold on the party’s voters to keep Republicans in line. Jason Miller, a senior adviser, tweeted from an internal poll: “80% of Trump voters and 76% of Republicans in Battleground states are less likely to vote for a Member of Congress/U.S. Senator who votes for impeachment.”The Republican Party’s rapid turn against Mr. Trump unfolded as the House met into the night on Tuesday to debate and vote on a resolution formally calling on Vice President Mike Pence to invoke the 25th Amendment to strip the president of his powers, a move that Mr. Pence shot down hours before the House planned its action.In a letter to Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Mr. Pence argued that the amendment was meant to address medical emergencies or presidential “incapacity” and that using it as “a means of punishment or usurpation” would set a “terrible precedent.” In a veiled reference to impeachment, he urged Congress “to avoid actions that would further divide and inflame the passions of the moment” and pledged work in “good faith” with Mr. Biden’s transition team.“Last week, I did not yield to pressure to exert power beyond my constitutional authority to determine the outcome of the election, and I will not now yield to efforts in the House of Representatives to play political games at a time so serious in the life of our nation,” Mr. Pence wrote.With Mr. Pence refusing their call, Democrats planned a Wednesday vote on a single article of impeachment charging Mr. Trump with “inciting violence against the government of the United States.”The White House expected roughly two dozen Republicans to support the charge, according to a senior administration official who insisted on anonymity to share a private assessment. Along with Ms. Cheney, Representatives John Katko of New York, Adam Kinzinger of Illinois and Fred Upton of Michigan announced they would support the charge. Just over a year ago, House Republicans rallied unanimously against Democrats’ first impeachment of Mr. Trump.Forgoing a lengthy investigation, Democrats released a 76-page report collecting public information about the attack — including social media posts, news articles and other statements — and laying out a legal justification for impeachment.“It is true that the president’s remaining term is limited — but a president capable of fomenting a violent insurrection in the Capitol is capable of greater dangers still,” they wrote. “He must be removed from office as swiftly as the Constitution allows. He must also be disqualified to prevent the recurrence of the extraordinary threat he presents.”In the clearest sign to date that Ms. Pelosi plans to press the case to trial just as quickly as she brought it, she named nine Democrats as “managers” to serve as prosecutors in the Senate. Representative Jamie Raskin, Democrat of Maryland, will be the lead manager, she said. He will be joined by Representatives Diana DeGette of Colorado, David Cicilline of Rhode Island, Joaquin Castro of Texas, Eric Swalwell of California, Ted Lieu of California, Stacey Plaskett of the Virgin Islands, Joe Neguse of Colorado and Madeleine Dean of Pennsylvania.Mr. McConnell has indicated he wants to see the specific article of impeachment that the House is set to approve on Wednesday, and to hear the eventual arguments in the Senate. But the Senate Republican leader has made clear in private discussions that he believes now is the moment to move on from Mr. Trump, whom he blames for causing Republicans to lose the Senate. Mr. McConnell has not spoken to Mr. Trump since mid-December, when the senator informed the president he would be recognizing Mr. Biden as president-elect after the Electoral College certified it.David Popp, a spokesman for Mr. McConnell, declined to comment on Tuesday, instead pointing a reporter to a speech the Kentucky Republican made when he returned to the Senate floor after Wednesday’s siege.“This failed attempt to obstruct the Congress, this failed insurrection, only underscores how crucial the task before us is for our republic,” Mr. McConnell said as the Senate reconvened to complete the electoral count disrupted by the mob. “Our nation was founded precisely so that the free choice of the American people is what shapes our self-government and determines the destiny of our nation.”President Trump told reporters on Tuesday that his remarks to supporters had been “totally appropriate,” and that it was the specter of his impeaching that was “causing tremendous anger.”Credit…Doug Mills/The New York TimesOn Monday, Mr. Biden telephoned Mr. McConnell to ask whether it would be possible to set up a dual track that would allow the Senate to confirm Mr. Biden’s cabinet nominees and hold a Senate trial at the same time, according to officials briefed on the conversation who disclosed it on the condition of anonymity. Far from avoiding the topic of impeaching Mr. Trump, Mr. McConnell said it was a question for the Senate parliamentarian, and promised Mr. Biden a quick answer.After whipping votes to ensure Mr. Trump was not found guilty in the impeachment trial last year, Mr. McConnell has turned sharply against Mr. Trump. Last week, in a memo to Senate Republicans, he indicated it would be difficult to hold a trial before Jan. 20, but notably did not defend the president..css-1xzcza9{list-style-type:disc;padding-inline-start:1em;}.css-c7gg1r{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:700;font-size:0.875rem;line-height:0.875rem;margin-bottom:15px;color:#121212 !important;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-c7gg1r{font-size:0.9375rem;line-height:0.9375rem;}}.css-rqynmc{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:0.9375rem;line-height:1.25rem;color:#333;margin-bottom:0.78125rem;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-rqynmc{font-size:1.0625rem;line-height:1.5rem;margin-bottom:0.9375rem;}}.css-rqynmc strong{font-weight:600;}.css-rqynmc em{font-style:italic;}.css-yoay6m{margin:0 auto 5px;font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.125rem;line-height:1.3125rem;color:#121212;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-yoay6m{font-size:1.25rem;line-height:1.4375rem;}}.css-1dg6kl4{margin-top:5px;margin-bottom:15px;}.css-16ed7iq{width:100%;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;-webkit-box-pack:center;-webkit-justify-content:center;-ms-flex-pack:center;justify-content:center;padding:10px 0;background-color:white;}.css-pmm6ed{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;}.css-pmm6ed > :not(:first-child){margin-left:5px;}.css-5gimkt{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:0.8125rem;font-weight:700;-webkit-letter-spacing:0.03em;-moz-letter-spacing:0.03em;-ms-letter-spacing:0.03em;letter-spacing:0.03em;text-transform:uppercase;color:#333;}.css-5gimkt:after{content:’Collapse’;}.css-rdoyk0{-webkit-transition:all 0.5s ease;transition:all 0.5s ease;-webkit-transform:rotate(180deg);-ms-transform:rotate(180deg);transform:rotate(180deg);}.css-eb027h{max-height:5000px;-webkit-transition:max-height 0.5s ease;transition:max-height 0.5s ease;}.css-6mllg9{-webkit-transition:all 0.5s ease;transition:all 0.5s ease;position:relative;opacity:0;}.css-6mllg9:before{content:”;background-image:linear-gradient(180deg,transparent,#ffffff);background-image:-webkit-linear-gradient(270deg,rgba(255,255,255,0),#ffffff);height:80px;width:100%;position:absolute;bottom:0px;pointer-events:none;}#masthead-bar-one{display:none;}#masthead-bar-one{display:none;}.css-1cs27wo{background-color:white;border:1px solid #e2e2e2;width:calc(100% – 40px);max-width:600px;margin:1.5rem auto 1.9rem;padding:15px;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-1cs27wo{padding:20px;}}.css-1cs27wo:focus{outline:1px solid #e2e2e2;}.css-1cs27wo[data-truncated] .css-rdoyk0{-webkit-transform:rotate(0deg);-ms-transform:rotate(0deg);transform:rotate(0deg);}.css-1cs27wo[data-truncated] .css-eb027h{max-height:300px;overflow:hidden;-webkit-transition:none;transition:none;}.css-1cs27wo[data-truncated] .css-5gimkt:after{content:’See more’;}.css-1cs27wo[data-truncated] .css-6mllg9{opacity:1;}.css-k9atqk{margin:0 auto;overflow:hidden;}.css-k9atqk strong{font-weight:700;}.css-k9atqk em{font-style:italic;}.css-k9atqk a{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;border-bottom:1px solid #ccd9e3;}.css-k9atqk a:visited{color:#333;-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;border-bottom:1px solid #ddd;}.css-k9atqk a:hover{border-bottom:none;}The Trump ImpeachmentFrom Riot to ImpeachmentThe riot inside the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday, Jan. 6, followed a rally at which President Trump made an inflammatory speech to his supporters, questioning the results of the election. Here’s a look at what happened and at the ongoing fallout:This video takes a look inside the siege on the capitol. This timeline shows how a crucial two hour period turned a rally into the riot.Several Trump administration officials, including cabinet members Betsy DeVos and Elaine Chao, announced that they were stepping down as a result of the riot.Federal prosecutors have charged more than 70 people, including some who appeared in viral photos and videos of the riot. Officials expect to eventually charge hundreds of others.House Democrats have begun impeachment proceedings. A look at how they might work.Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the Democratic leader, called on Mr. McConnell to use emergency powers to call the Senate back for a trial as soon as the articles were adopted.“The bottom line is that Leader McConnell has the ability to call us back into session and we can then move to convict Donald Trump, draw on the impeachment trial and try him,” Mr. Schumer told reporters in New York. “And that’s what we hope McConnell will do.”But because the Senate is in recess, the two leaders must agree to do so or else a trial would begin no sooner than Jan. 19, when they return. The next day, with Mr. Biden’s inauguration, Democrats will take operational control of the Senate, where they will have a working majority by dint of Vice President-elect Kamala Harris’s power to cast tiebreaking votes.For Mr. McConnell and other Republicans, the crisis offered an opportunity to bar Mr. Trump from seeking the presidency again in 2024, as he has repeatedly mused with allies about doing.“Congressional Republicans must evaluate this latest Trump situation and look at the best long-term solutions for the country,” said Scott Reed, a longtime Republican strategist. “This is now totally about Trump, not his supporters, and a permanent purge must be on the table.”But that prospect has created a conundrum for Republicans who, understanding the deep affection for Mr. Trump among a powerful segment of their party’s core supporters, are concerned they could pay a steep political price for abandoning him.In the days since the attack, Mr. McCarthy has veered from asking Republican colleagues if he should call on Mr. Trump to resign to privately floating impeachment to his current posture, opposed to impeachment but open to a censure. After he and over 100 other House Republicans opposed the certification of the Electoral College, Mr. McCarthy is now finding anger and regret among his Republican colleagues and is moving to take a tougher line with the president.Reports emerged Monday from Axios that the House Republican leader had had an intense conversation with Mr. Trump, during which the president floated conspiracy theories about the rioters and Mr. McCarthy pushed back forcefully.Unlike Mr. McCarthy, Mr. McConnell strongly opposed the effort by Senators Josh Hawley of Missouri and Ted Cruz of Texas to object to electoral votes from certain states.Representative Kevin McCarthy, the minority leader, voted to oppose the certification of the Electoral College, along with well over half of his House Republicans colleagues.Credit…Stefani Reynolds for The New York TimesThe two senators have received a hefty share of criticism from across the ideological spectrum, but there has been fallout for other Republicans who joined their ranks as well.A number Republican lawmakers and aides were worried that Senator Rick Scott of Florida, who is taking over the party’s Senate campaign arm, would find it highly difficult to raise money with corporate America moving to freeze out Republicans who refused to certify the Electoral College. Americans for Prosperity and its political action committee, funded by the influential conservative Koch network, will evaluate future support of politicians based on their actions last week, its chief executive told The Wall Street Journal.Mr. Biden has made clear, in public and private, that he will not oppose the Democratic push to impeach Mr. Trump, even though his advisers and some lawmakers in his party are concerned about the impact it could have on his first days in office.When he spoke with Mr. McConnell about the matter, the Senate leader left Mr. Biden with a bit of welcome news.Mr. McConnell, who led the 2016 blockade against confirming Judge Merrick B. Garland when he was President Barack Obama’s nominee for the Supreme Court, told Mr. Biden that he would vote to confirm Judge Garland as attorney general.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

    • 63 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Ted Cruz’s Communications Director Resigns

      by

      #masthead-section-label, #masthead-bar-one { display: none }Capitol Riot FalloutliveLatest UpdatesInside the SiegeVisual TimelineNotable ArrestsIncitement to Riot?AdvertisementContinue reading the main storyCapitol Riot Fallout: F.B.I. Warned of Violence Before Siege; More Arrests MadeSenator Cruz’s communications director resigns.Jan. 12, 2021, 2:43 p.m. ETJan. 12, 2021, 2:43 p.m. ETMaggie Astor, Catie Edmondson and Senator Ted Cruz last week formally challenged President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s victories in Arizona and Pennsylvania.Credit…Jonathan Ernst/ReutersSenator Ted Cruz’s communications director, Lauren Blair Bianchi, has resigned in response to Mr. Cruz’s efforts to overturn the results of the presidential election.Mr. Cruz’s office confirmed Ms. Bianchi’s resignation, which was first reported by Punchbowl News.“Senator Cruz and Lauren agreed that it would be best to part ways,” the office said in a statement. “He thanks her for her service and wishes her the best.”A person familiar with Ms. Bianchi’s decision said she had made it because of Mr. Cruz’s actions last week, when he and Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri formally challenged President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s victories in Arizona and Pennsylvania, promoting false claims of election fraud even as a pro-Trump mob motivated by those claims stormed the Capitol.Ms. Bianchi, who did not respond to an email seeking comment on Tuesday, “was unhappy with the direction the office had taken,” the person familiar with her decision said.The events of last week sent a shudder through Mr. Cruz’s and Mr. Hawley’s offices, with many staff members, especially junior aides, discussing whether their bosses’ behavior should compel them to quit, according to several aides close to both offices.So far, Mr. Hawley, who has sought to reassure his aides, has not suffered any defections. The atmosphere is more tense in the office of Mr. Cruz, who is known to cycle through staffers even during calmer times.At least one prominent former supporter of Mr. Cruz — the chairman of his 2016 presidential campaign, Chad Sweet — has also broken with him since the attack on the Capitol, and he and Mr. Hawley have become increasingly isolated even within the Senate Republican caucus.“Donald Trump and those who aided and abetted him in his relentless undermining of our democracy — including Senators Josh Hawley and Ted Cruz — must be denounced,” Mr. Sweet wrote in a statement on Friday. “In particular, I made it clear to Senator Cruz, whom I have known for years, before the joint session of Congress, that if he proceeded to object to the electoral count of the legitimate slates of delegates certified by the states, I could no longer support him.”In the House, a senior Republican aide on the Armed Services Committee also resigned, calling out lawmakers on the panel who had voted to overturn the election on Wednesday hours after the rioters stormed the Capitol.“Anyone who watched those horrible hours unfold should have been galvanized to rebuke these insurrectionists in the strongest terms,” the aide, Jason Schmid, wrote in a searing resignation letter. “Instead, some members whom I believed to be leaders in the defense of the nation chose to put political theater ahead of the defense of the Constitution and the Republic.”He called the Republicans who objected to the election results “congressional enablers of this mob” who had “made future foreign conflict more likely, not less.” The letter, sent to committee staff members and obtained by The New York Times, was first reported by Politico.Mr. Schmid reported to Representative Mike Rogers of Alabama, the highest-ranking Republican on the committee, who voted to reject the election results. He had also worked closely with Representative Elise Stefanik of New York, a rising Republican star who also voted to overturn the results and was removed on Tuesday from a Harvard political advisory committee.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

    • 63 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      The Bogusness of Anti-Impeachment Republicans

      by

      AdvertisementContinue reading the main storyOpinionSupported byContinue reading the main storyThe Bogusness of Anti-Impeachment RepublicansSuddenly they like “unity” and fear “divisiveness.” Where was that spirit when election results were being counted?Opinion ColumnistJan. 12, 2021, 5:00 a.m. ETPolice caution tape blocking a stairwell inside the U.S Capitol Building on Jan. 9.Credit…Anna Moneymaker for The New York TimesThe Republican Party has devised its response to the push to impeach the president over his role in the attack on the Capitol last week, and it is so cynical as to shock the conscience.“Now the Democrats are going to try to remove the president from office just seven days before he is set to leave anyway,” said Representative Jim Jordan of Ohio, who voted with 146 other Republicans in Congress not to accept the results of the 2020 presidential election. “I do not see how this unifies the country.”The House minority leader, Kevin McCarthy, also said that impeaching the president “will only divide our country more.”“As leaders, we must call on our better angels and refocus our efforts on working directly for the American people,” McCarthy said in a statement given two days after he also voted not to accept the results of a free and fair election in which his favored candidate lost.Senator Ted Cruz of Texas helped lead the Senate attempt to object to Joe Biden’s victory. “My view is Congress should fulfill our responsibility under the Constitution to consider serious claims of voter fraud,” he said last Monday. Now, he too wants unity. “The attack at the Capitol was a despicable act of terrorism and a shocking assault on our democratic system,” he said in the aftermath of the violence, as calls to impeach the president grew louder and louder. “We must come together and put this anger and division behind us.”I’m reminded, here, of one particular passage from Abraham Lincoln’s 1860 address at Cooper Union in Manhattan, in which he criticized the political brinkmanship of Southern elites who blamed their Northern opponents for their own threats to break the union over slavery.But you will not abide the election of a Republican president! In that supposed event, you say, you will destroy the Union; and then, you say, the great crime of having destroyed it will be upon us! That is cool. A highwayman holds a pistol to my ear, and mutters through his teeth, “Stand and deliver, or I shall kill you, and then you will be a murderer!”There are a handful of Senate Republicans, like Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania, who are open to impeachment. But much of the Republican response is exactly this kind of threat: If you hold President Trump accountable for his actions, then we won’t help you unify the country.Or, as another Republican, Representative Kevin Brady of Texas, said on Twitter,Those calling for impeachment or invoking the 25th Amendment in response to President Trump’s rhetoric this week are themselves engaging in intemperate and inflammatory language and calling for action that is equally irresponsible and could well incite further violence.These cries of divisiveness aren’t just the crocodile tears of bad-faith actors. They serve a purpose, which is to pre-emptively blame Democrats for the Republican partisan rancor that will follow after Joe Biden is inaugurated next week. It is another way of saying that they, meaning Democrats, shot first, so we, meaning Republicans, are absolved of any responsibility for our actions. If Democrats want some semblance of normalcy — if they want to be able to govern — then the price for Republicans is impunity for Trump.House Democrats have already introduced their resolution to impeach the president, formally charging President Trump with “incitement of insurrection” for his role in the attack on the Capitol. There is still a ways to go in this process, but it is a stronger start than I expected. But there may still be some hesitation about taking the most aggressive stance, as evidenced by Majority Whip James Clyburn’s proposal to hold off on a trial until after the first 100 days of the Biden administration.This would be a mistake.There is no way past this crisis — and yes, we are living through a crisis — except through it. The best way to push forward is as aggressively as possible. Anything less sends the signal that this moment isn’t as urgent as it actually is. And as we move closer to consequences for those responsible, we should continue to ignore the cries that accountability is “divisive.” Not because they’re false, but because they’re true.Accountability is divisive. That’s the point. If there is a faction of the Republican Party that sees democracy itself as a threat to its power and influence, then it has to be cut off from the body politic. It needs to be divided from the rest of us, lest it threaten the integrity of the American republic more than it already has. Marginalizing that faction — casting Trump and Trumpism into the ash heap of history — will be divisive, but it is the only choice we have.This does not mean we must cast out the 74 million Americans who voted for the president, but it does mean we must repudiate the lies, cruelty and cult of personality on which Trump built his movement. It means Republicans have to acknowledge the truth — that Joe Biden won in a free and fair election — and apologize to their voters and to the country for helping to stoke the madness that struck at the Capitol.The alternative is a false unity that leaves the wound of last Wednesday to fester until the infection gets even worse than it already is.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

    • 75 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      The Roots of Josh Hawley’s Rage

      by

      AdvertisementContinue reading the main storyOpinionSupported byContinue reading the main storyThe Roots of Josh Hawley’s RageWhy do so many Republicans appear to be at war with both truth and democracy?Ms. Stewart has reported on the religious right for more than a decade. She is the author of “The Power Worshippers: Inside the Dangerous Rise of Religious Nationalism.”Jan. 11, 2021, 5:00 a.m. ETSenator Josh Hawley on Wednesday, as the crowd that would storm the Capitol marched.Credit…Francis Chung/E&E News and Politico, via Associated PressIn today’s Republican Party, the path to power is to build up a lie in order to overturn democracy. At least that is what Senator Josh Hawley was telling us when he offered a clenched-fist salute to the pro-Trump mob before it ransacked the Capitol, and it is the same message he delivered on the floor of the Senate in the aftermath of the attack, when he doubled down on the lies about electoral fraud that incited the insurrection in the first place. How did we get to the point where one of the bright young stars of the Republican Party appears to be at war with both truth and democracy?Mr. Hawley himself, as it happens, has been making the answer plain for some time. It’s just a matter of listening to what he has been saying.In multiple speeches, an interview and a widely shared article for Christianity Today, Mr. Hawley has explained that the blame for society’s ills traces all the way back to Pelagius — a British-born monk who lived 17 centuries ago. In a 2019 commencement address at The King’s College, a small conservative Christian college devoted to “a biblical worldview,” Mr. Hawley denounced Pelagius for teaching that human beings have the freedom to choose how they live their lives and that grace comes to those who do good things, as opposed to those who believe the right doctrines.The most eloquent summary of the Pelagian vision, Mr. Hawley went on to say, can be found in the Supreme Court’s 1992 opinion in Planned Parenthood v. Casey. Mr. Hawley specifically cited Justice Anthony Kennedy’s words reprovingly: “At the heart of liberty,” Kennedy wrote, “is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.” The fifth century church fathers were right to condemn this terrifying variety of heresy, Mr. Hawley argued: “Replacing it and repairing the harm it has caused is one of the challenges of our day.”In other words, Mr. Hawley’s idea of freedom is the freedom to conform to what he and his preferred religious authorities know to be right. Mr. Hawley is not shy about making the point explicit. In a 2017 speech to the American Renewal Project, he declared — paraphrasing the Dutch Reformed theologian and onetime prime minister Abraham Kuyper — “There is not one square inch of all creation over which Jesus Christ is not Lord.” Mr. Kuyper is perhaps best known for his claim that Christianity has sole legitimate authority over all aspects of human life.“We are called to take that message into every sphere of life that we touch, including the political realm,” Mr. Hawley said. “That is our charge. To take the Lordship of Christ, that message, into the public realm, and to seek the obedience of the nations. Of our nation!”Mr. Hawley has built his political career among people who believe that Shariah is just around the corner even as they attempt to secure privileges for their preferred religious groups to discriminate against those of whom they disapprove. Before he won election as a senator, he worked for Becket, a legal advocacy group that often coordinates with the right-wing legal juggernaut the Alliance Defending Freedom. He is a familiar presence on the Christian right media circuit.The American Renewal Project, which hosted the event where Mr. Hawley delivered the speech I mentioned earlier, was founded by David Lane, a political organizer who has long worked behind the scenes to connect conservative pastors and Christian nationalist figures with politicians. The choice America faces, according to Mr. Lane, is “to be faithful to Jesus or to pagan secularism.”The line of thought here is starkly binary and nihilistic. It says that human existence in an inevitably pluralistic, modern society committed to equality is inherently worthless. It comes with the idea that a right-minded elite of religiously pure individuals should aim to capture the levers of government, then use that power to rescue society from eternal darkness and reshape it in accord with a divinely-approved view of righteousness.At the heart of Mr. Hawley’s condemnation of our terrifyingly Pelagian world lies a dark conclusion about the achievements of modern, liberal, pluralistic societies. When he was still attorney general, William Barr articulated this conclusion in a speech at the University of Notre Dame Law School, where he blamed “the growing ascendancy of secularism” for amplifying “virtually every measure of social pathology,” and maintained that “free government was only suitable and sustainable for a religious people.”Christian nationalists’ acceptance of President Trump’s spectacular turpitude these past four years was a good measure of just how dire they think our situation is. Even a corrupt sociopath was better, in their eyes, than the horrifying freedom that religious moderates and liberals, along with the many Americans who don’t happen to be religious, offer the world.That this neo-medieval vision is incompatible with constitutional democracy is clear. But in case you’re in doubt, consider where some of the most militant and coordinated support for Mr. Trump’s postelection assault on the American constitutional system has come from. The Conservative Action Project, a group associated with the Council for National Policy, which serves as a networking organization for America’s religious and economic right-wing elite, made its position clear in a statement issued a week before the insurrection.It called for members of the Senate to “contest the electoral votes” from Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan and other states that were the focus of Republicans’ baseless allegations. Among the signatories was Cleta Mitchell, the lawyer who advised Mr. Trump and participated in the president’s call on Jan. 2 with Brad Raffensperger, Georgia’s secretary of state. Cosignatories to this disinformation exercise included Bob McEwen, the executive director of the Council for National Policy; Morton C. Blackwell of The Leadership Institute; Alfred S. Regnery, the former publisher; Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council; Thomas Fitton of Judicial Watch; and more than a dozen others.Although many of the foot soldiers in the assault on the Capitol appear to have been white males aligned with white supremacist movements, it would be a mistake to overlook the powerful role of the rhetoric of religious nationalism in their ranks. At a rally in Washington on Jan. 5, on the eve of Electoral College certification, the right-wing pastor Greg Locke said that God is raising up “an army of patriots.” Another pastor, Brian Gibson, put it this way: “The church of the Lord Jesus Christ started America,” and added, “We’re going to take our nation back!”In the aftermath of the Jan. 6 insurrection, a number of Christian nationalist leaders issued statements condemning violence — on both sides. How very kind of them. But few if any appear willing to acknowledge the instrumental role they played in perpetuating the fraudulent allegations of a stolen election that were at the root of the insurrection.They seem, like Mr. Hawley himself, to live in a post-truth environment. And this gets to the core of the Hawley enigma. The brash young senator styles himself not just a deep thinker who ruminates about late-Roman era heretics, but a man of the people, a champion of “the great American middle,” as he wrote in an article for The American Conservative, and a foe of the “ruling elite.” Mr. Hawley has even managed to turn a few progressive heads with his economic populism, including his attacks on tech monopolies.Yet Mr. Hawley isn’t against elites per se. He is all for an elite, provided that it is a religiously righteous elite. He is a graduate of Stanford University and Yale Law School and he clerked for John Roberts, the chief justice. Mr. Hawley, in other words, is a successful meritocrat of the Federalist Society variety. His greatest rival in that department is the Princeton debater Ted Cruz. They are résumé jockeys in a system that rewards those who do the best job of mobilizing fear and irrationalism. They are what happens when callow ambition meets the grotesque inequalities and injustices of our age.Over the past few days, following his participation in the failed efforts to overturn the election, Mr. Hawley’s career prospects may have dimmed. Two of his home state newspapers have called for his resignation; his political mentor, John C. Danforth, a former Republican senator from Missouri, has described his earlier support for Mr. Hawley as “the biggest mistake I’ve ever made”; and Simon & Schuster dropped his book. On the other hand, there is some reporting that suggests his complicity in efforts to overturn the election may have boosted his standing with Mr. Trump’s base. But the question that matters is not whether Mr. Hawley stays or goes, but whether he is simply replaced by the next wannabe demagogue in line. We are about to find out whether there are leaders of principle left in today’s Republican Party.Make no mistake: Mr. Hawley is a symptom, not a cause. He is a product of the same underlying forces that brought us President Trump and the present crisis of American democracy. Unless we find a way to address these forces and the fundamental pathologies that drive them, then next month or next year we will be forced to contend with a new and perhaps more successful version of Mr. Hawley.Katherine Stewart (@kathsstewart) is the author of “The Power Worshippers: Inside the Dangerous Rise of Religious Nationalism.”The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

    • 75 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Never Forget What Ted Cruz Did

      by

      AdvertisementContinue reading the main storyOpinionSupported byContinue reading the main storyNever Forget What Ted Cruz DidThe senator has been able to use his Ivy League pedigree as a cudgel. After last week, his credentials should condemn him.Contributing Opinion WriterJan. 11, 2021, 5:00 a.m. ETCredit…Pool photo by Olivier DoulieryWhen I was growing up, I was often reminded that people with fancy educations and elite degrees “put their pants on one leg at a time just like the rest of us.” This was back in the early 1960s, before so many rich Texans started sending their kids to Ivy League schools, when mistrust of Eastern educated folks — or any highly educated folks — was part of the state’s deep rooted anti-intellectualism. Beware of those who lorded their smarts over you, was the warning. Don’t fall for their high-toned airs.Since I’ve been lucky enough to get a fancy enough education, I’ve often found myself on the other side of that warning. But then came Jan. 6, when I watched my Ivy League-educated senator, Ted Cruz, try to pull yet another fast one on the American people as he fought — not long before the certification process was disrupted by a mob of Trump supporters storming the Capitol and forcing their way into the Senate chamber — to challenge the election results.In the unctuous, patronizing style he is famous for, Mr. Cruz cited the aftermath of the 1876 presidential election between Rutherford Hayes and Samuel Tilden. It was contentious and involved actual disputes about voter fraud and electoral mayhem, and a committee was formed to sort it out. Mr. Cruz’s idea was to urge the creation of a committee to investigate invented claims of widespread voter fraud — figments of the imaginations of Mr. Trump and minions like Mr. Cruz — in the election of Joe Biden. It was, for Mr. Cruz, a typical, too-clever-by-half bit of nonsense, a cynical ploy to paper over the reality of his subversion on behalf of President Trump. (The horse trading after the 1876 election helped bring about the end of Reconstruction; maybe Mr. Cruz thought evoking that subject was a good idea, too.)But this tidbit was just one of many hideous contributions from Mr. Cruz in recent weeks. It happened, for instance, after he supported a lawsuit from Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (under indictment since 2015 for securities fraud) in an attempt to overturn election results in critical states (it was supported by other Texan miscreants like Representative Louie Gohmert).The esoteric exhortations of Jan. 6 from Mr. Cruz, supposedly in support of preserving democracy, also just happened to occur while a fund-raising message was dispatched in his name. (“Ted Cruz here. I’m leading the fight to reject electors from key states unless there is an emergency audit of the election results. Will you stand with me?”) The message went out around the time that the Capitol was breached by those who probably believed Mr. Cruz’s relentless, phony allegations.Until last Wednesday, I wasn’t sure that anything or anyone could ever put an end to this man’s self-serving sins and long trail of deceptions and obfuscations. As we all know, they have left his wife, his father and numerous colleagues flattened under one bus or another in the service of his ambition. (History may note that Senator Lindsey Graham, himself a breathtaking hypocrite, once joked, “If you killed Ted Cruz on the floor of the Senate, and the trial was in the Senate, nobody would convict you.”)But maybe, just maybe, Mr. Cruz has finally overreached with this latest power grab, which is correctly seen as an attempt to corral Mr. Trump’s base for his own 2024 presidential ambitions. This time, however, Mr. Cruz was spinning, obfuscating and demagoguing to assist in efforts to overturn the will of the voters for his own ends.Mr. Cruz has been able to use his pseudo-intellectualism and his Ivy League pedigree as a cudgel. He may be a snake, his supporters (might) admit, but he could go toe to toe with liberal elites because he, too, went to Princeton (cum laude), went to Harvard Law School (magna cum laude), was an editor of the Harvard Law Review and clerked for Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist. Mr. Cruz was not some seditionist in a MAGA hat (or a Viking costume); he styled himself as a deep thinker who could get the better of lefties from those pointy headed schools. He could straddle both worlds — ivory towers and Tea Party confabs — and exploit both to his advantage.Today, though, his credentials aren’t just useless; they condemn him. Any decent soul might ask: If you are so smart, how come you are using that fancy education to subvert the Constitution you’ve long purported to love? Shouldn’t you have known better? But, of course, Mr. Cruz did know better; he just didn’t care. And he believed, wrongly I hope, that his supporters wouldn’t either.I was heartened to see that our senior senator, John Cornyn, benched himself during this recent play by Team Crazy. So did seven of Texas’ over 20 Republican members of the House — including Chip Roy, a former chief of staff for Mr. Cruz. (Seven counts as good news in my book.)I’m curious to see what happens with Mr. Cruz’s check-writing enablers in Texas’ wealthier Republican-leaning suburbs. Historically, they’ve stood by him. But will they want to ally themselves with the mob that vandalized our nation’s Capitol and embarrassed the United States before the world? Will they realize that Mr. Cruz, like President Trump and the mini-Cruz, Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri, would risk destroying the country in the hope of someday leading it?Or maybe, just maybe, they will finally see — as I did growing up — that a thug in a sharp suit with an Ivy League degree is still a thug.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      House Moves to Force Trump Out, Vowing Impeachment if Pence Won’t Act

      by

      #masthead-section-label, #masthead-bar-one { display: none }The Presidential TransitionLatest UpdatesHouse Moves to Remove TrumpHow Impeachment Might WorkBiden Focuses on CrisesCabinet PicksAdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyHouse Moves to Force Trump Out, Vowing Impeachment if Pence Won’t ActSpeaker Nancy Pelosi said the House would formally call on Vice President Mike Pence to invoke the 25th Amendment to strip President Trump of power, and move to impeach the president if he refused.House Democrats effectively gave the vice president a final ultimatum: use his power under the Constitution to force President Trump aside or make him the first president in American history to be impeached twice.Credit…Anna Moneymaker for The New York TimesNicholas Fandos, Peter Baker and Jan. 10, 2021Updated 10:18 p.m. ETWASHINGTON — The House moved on two fronts on Sunday to try to force President Trump from office, escalating pressure on the vice president to strip him of power and committing to quickly begin impeachment proceedings against him for inciting a mob that violently attacked the seat of American government.In a letter to colleagues, Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California said the House would move forward on Monday with a resolution calling on Vice President Mike Pence and the cabinet to invoke the 25th Amendment, and wrest the powers of the presidency. She called on Mr. Pence to respond “within 24 hours” and indicated she expected a Tuesday vote on the resolution.Next, she said, the House would bring an impeachment case to the floor. Though she did not specify how quickly it would move, leading Democrats have suggested they could press forward on a remarkably quick timetable, charging Mr. Trump by midweek with “high crimes and misdemeanors.”“In protecting our Constitution and our democracy, we will act with urgency, because this president represents an imminent threat to both,” she wrote. “As the days go by, the horror of the ongoing assault on our democracy perpetrated by this president is intensified and so is the immediate need for action.”Ms. Pelosi’s actions effectively gave Mr. Pence, who is said to be opposed to the idea, an ultimatum: use his power under the Constitution to force Mr. Trump out by declaring him unable to discharge his duties, or make him the first president in American history to be impeached twice.Far from capitulating, Mr. Trump made plans to proceed as if the last five earth-shattering days had simply not happened at all. But momentum in Washington was shifting decisively against him.More than 210 of the 222 Democrats in the House — nearly a majority — had already signed on to an impeachment resolution by Sunday afternoon, registering support for a measure that asserted that Mr. Trump would “remain a threat to national security, democracy, and the Constitution” if he was not removed in the final 10 days of his term. A second Republican senator, Patrick J. Toomey of Pennsylvania, said he should resign immediately, joining Lisa Murkowski of Alaska. And a Republican House member hinted more clearly than before that he could vote to impeach, even as he cautioned that it could backfire and further galvanize Mr. Trump’s supporters.With few Democrats hopeful Mr. Pence would act, Representative James E. Clyburn of South Carolina, the party’s No. 3, said the House could vote to impeach Mr. Trump by Wednesday, one week before Inauguration Day. Lawmakers were put on notice to return to Washington, and their leaders consulted with the Federal Air Marshal Service and police on how to safely move them back into a Capitol that was ransacked in a shocking security failure less than a week ago.“If we are the people’s house, let’s do the people’s work and let’s vote to impeach this president,” Mr. Clyburn said on “Fox News Sunday.” “The Senate will decide later what to do with that — an impeachment.”Representative James E. Clyburn of South Carolina, the No. 3 Democrat in the House, said the House could vote to impeach by midweek.Credit…Stefani Reynolds for The New York TimesMr. Clyburn argued in favor of delaying the start of any Senate trial for several months to allow President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr. to take office without the cloud of an all-consuming impeachment drama. It would be nearly impossible to start a trial before Jan. 20, and delaying it further would allow the House to deliver a stinging indictment of the president without impeding Mr. Biden’s ability to form a cabinet and confront the spiraling coronavirus crisis.“Let’s give President-elect Biden the 100 days he needs to get his agenda off and running,” Mr. Clyburn, an influential ally of Mr. Biden, said in another interview on CNN.The uncertainty underscored how little precedent those seeking to contain the president had to guide them. No president has been impeached in the final days of his term, or with the prospect of a trial after he leaves office — and certainly not just days after lawmakers themselves were attacked.A two-thirds majority is needed to convict and remove a president in the Senate. But if he were found guilty, a simple majority of the Senate could then bar Mr. Trump from holding office in the future.Mr. Biden has tried to keep a distance from the impeachment issue. He spoke privately Friday with Ms. Pelosi and Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the top Senate Democrat. But publicly he has said that the decision rests with Congress, and that he intends to remain focused on the work of taking over the White House and the government’s coronavirus response.“In 10 days, we move forward and rebuild — together,” Mr. Biden wrote on Twitter on Sunday.At the White House, Mr. Trump remained out of sight for a fourth straight day and made no public comment on either the assault on the Capitol or the brewing impeachment threat. The White House announced instead that he would travel on Tuesday to Alamo, Texas, to promote his border wall as part of a series of activities highlighting what he sees as the achievements of the last four years.Otherwise, the basic work of the final days of a presidential term had essentially been halted. A slew of pardons that were under discussion were put on hold after the riot, according to people informed about the deliberations. And around the White House, the president’s advisers hoped he would let go of giving himself a pardon, saying it would look terrible given what had taken place.Among those said to be furious with the president was Melania Trump, the first lady. While she has stayed quiet publicly, people close to the situation said she was upset with her husband for what had taken place, as well as his decision not to attend Mr. Biden’s inauguration.The hearse carrying Officer Brian Sicknick of the U.S. Capitol Police, who was killed in the Capitol riot, passing in front of the White House on Sunday.Credit…Erin Scott for The New York TimesOther than a video message he posted on Thursday night, Mr. Trump has said nothing about the attack since its conclusion and taken no responsibility for it, nor has he said anything publicly about the U.S. Capitol Police officer killed by the mob. Only after much criticism did he order flags lowered to half-staff at the White House and other federal facilities on Sunday in honor of the officer and another who Capitol Police said had died off duty days after responding to the riot at the Capitol.In past furors, any anger within his own party tended to fade with passing days, but this time, the disenchantment among many Republicans appeared to be hardening, particularly with new videos emerging, including one showing the mob dragging a police officer down the steps outside the Capitol and beating him.“The more time, images, and stories removed from Wednesday the worse it gets,” Josh Holmes, a longtime adviser to Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, wrote on Twitter. “If you’re not in a white hot rage over what happened by now you’re not paying attention.”It was that fury driving Democrats forward with stunning speed.The four-page impeachment article that had gained overwhelming support among Democrats — written by Representatives David Cicilline of Rhode Island, Jamie Raskin of Maryland and Ted Lieu of California — was narrowly tailored to Mr. Trump’s role “willfully inciting violence against the government of the United States.” Democrats involved in the process said they had drafted the text with input from some Republicans, though they declined to name them.None were expected to join as a co-sponsor before it was introduced on Monday, but Democrats said multiple House Republicans were privately discussing voting to impeach. When the House impeached Mr. Trump in 2019 for a pressure campaign on Ukraine to smear Mr. Biden, not a single Republican supported the charges.“I’ll vote the right way, you know, if I’m presented with that,” said Representative Adam Kinzinger of Illinois.The House indictment, which lawmakers and aides cautioned was still subject to change, would squarely blame for the rampage on Mr. Trump, stating that his encouragement was “consistent” with prior efforts to “subvert and obstruct” the election certification. That would include a Jan. 2 phone call pressuring Georgia’s secretary of state to “find” the votes he needed to claim victory in a state Mr. Biden clearly and legally won.“It was an attack on our country and our democracy,” Mr. Cicilline said in an interview. “We simply cannot just allow this to stand unaddressed.”More details emerged on Sunday about Mr. Trump’s role, which could shape the debate about impeachment. The president was deeply involved in the planning of the rally on Wednesday where he exhorted thousands of followers to march to the Capitol and demonstrate strength. He personally helped select who would speak and what music would play, according to people briefed on how the event came together.Mr. Trump’s supporters as he spoke before they stormed the Capitol on Wednesday.Credit…Pete Marovich for The New York TimesThe president had been excited about the event for days, more focused on that and trying to overturn the Electoral College vote count than anything else. Heading into Wednesday, some advisers privately said Mr. Trump appeared to believe that Mr. Pence could legally hand him the election in his role presiding over the vote count.At one point, Mr. Trump told the vice president that he had spoken with Mark Martin, the former chief justice of the North Carolina Supreme Court, who he said had told him that Mr. Pence had that power. Mr. Pence had assured Mr. Trump that he did not. Mr. Trump made the vice president defend his rationale in a meeting with lawyers that Rudolph W. Giuliani had helped line up.Both parties conceded they had no clear picture of how many senators in the party might ultimately vote to convict Mr. Trump.Mr. Toomey said Mr. Trump had “spiraled down into a kind of madness” since the election and had effectively “disqualified himself” from ever running for office again. But a day after he called Mr. Trump’s conduct “impeachable,” Mr. Toomey argued an impeachment would be impractical with Mr. Trump already headed for the exit.“I think the best way for our country, Chuck, is for the president to resign and go away as soon as possible,” he told the host Chuck Todd on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “I acknowledge that may not be likely, but I think that would be best.”In speaking with associates about the prospect of another impeachment, Mr. Trump was hit with the reality that few people from his defense team in last year’s Senate trial would be part of any new proceeding.Jay Sekulow, who has served as his lead personal lawyer, and two other private lawyers, Marty Raskin and Jane Raskin, will not participate in a future impeachment defense, according to a person briefed on the planning, nor will Pat A. Cipollone, the White House counsel, or Patrick F. Philbin, his deputy.This time, only a few of his allies on Capitol Hill have offered to speak up in defense as well. Among those who have, many have used calls for “unity” to argue against impeachment or calling for Mr. Trump’s resignation. In most cases, the lawmakers adamant that Democrats should let the country “move on” were among those who, even after Wednesday’s violence, voted to toss out electoral results in key swing states Mr. Biden won based on claims of widespread voter fraud that courts and the states themselves said were bogus.“The Democrats are going to try to remove the president from office just seven days before he is set to leave anyway,” Representative Jim Jordan, Republican of Ohio, said on Fox News. “I do not see how that unifies the country.”Michael D. Shear More

    • 125 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Democrats Ready Impeachment Charge Against Trump for Inciting Capitol Mob

      by

      #masthead-section-label, #masthead-bar-one { display: none }The Presidential TransitionliveLatest UpdatesCalls for Impeachment25th Amendment ExplainedTrump Officials ResignHow Mob Stormed CapitolAdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyDemocrats Ready Impeachment Charge Against Trump for Inciting Capitol MobSpeaker Nancy Pelosi threatened decisive action against the president for his role in the insurrection against Congress if he refused to resign.“If the president does not leave office imminently and willingly, the Congress will proceed with our action,” Speaker Nancy Pelosi wrote in a letter on Friday.Credit…Anna Moneymaker for The New York TimesNicholas Fandos, Maggie Haberman and Jan. 8, 2021Updated 10:08 p.m. ETWASHINGTON — Democrats laid the groundwork on Friday for impeaching President Trump a second time, as Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California threatened to bring him up on formal charges if he did not resign “immediately” over his role in inciting a violent mob attack on the Capitol this week.The threat was part of an all-out effort by furious Democrats, backed by a handful of Republicans, to pressure Mr. Trump to leave office in disgrace after the hourslong siege by his supporters on Wednesday on Capitol Hill. Although he has only 12 days left in the White House, they argued he was a direct danger to the nation.Ms. Pelosi and other top Democratic leaders continued to press Vice President Mike Pence and the cabinet to invoke the 25th Amendment to wrest power from Mr. Trump, though Mr. Pence was said to be against it. The speaker urged Republican lawmakers to pressure the president to resign immediately. And she took the unusual step of calling Gen. Mark A. Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to discuss how to limit Mr. Trump’s access to the nation’s nuclear codes and then publicized it.“If the president does not leave office imminently and willingly, the Congress will proceed with our action,” Ms. Pelosi wrote in a letter to colleagues.At least one Republican, Senator Lisa Murkowski, Republican of Alaska, followed Ms. Pelosi’s lead and told The Anchorage Daily News that she was considering leaving the Republican Party altogether because of Mr. Trump.“I want him out,” she said. “He has caused enough damage.”At the White House, Mr. Trump struck a defiant tone, insisting that he would remain a potent force in American politics as aides and allies abandoned him and his post-presidential prospects turned increasingly bleak. Behind closed doors, he made clear that he would not resign and expressed regret about releasing a video on Thursday committing to a peaceful transition of power and condemning the violence at the Capitol that he had egged on a day before.He said on Twitter on Friday morning that he would not attend President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s inauguration, the first incumbent in 150 years to skip his successor’s swearing-in. Hours later, Twitter “permanently suspended” his beloved account, which had more than 88 million followers, “due to the risk of further incitement of violence.”Federal law enforcement officials announced charges against at least 13 people in connection with the storming of the Capitol, including Richard Barnett, 60, of Gravette, Ark., who had posted a picture of himself on social media sitting at Ms. Pelosi’s desk during the mayhem with his feet up on her desk, and a Republican state delegate from West Virginia.Among enraged Democrats, an expedited impeachment appeared to be the most attractive option to remove Mr. Trump and register their outrage at his role in encouraging what became an insurrection. Roughly 170 of them in the House had signed onto a single article that Representatives David Cicilline of Rhode Island, Ted Lieu of California, Jamie Raskin of Maryland and others intended to introduce on Monday, charging the president with “willfully inciting violence against the government of the United States.”Democratic senators weighed in with support, and some Republicans appeared newly open to the idea. Senator Ben Sasse of Nebraska indicated he would be amenable to considering articles of impeachment at a trial. A spokesman for Senator Susan Collins of Maine said she was “outraged” by Mr. Trump’s role in the violence, but could not comment on an impeachment case given the possibility she could soon be sitting in the jury.Even Senator Mitch McConnell, the majority leader and one of Mr. Trump’s most influential allies for the past four years, told confidants he was done with Donald Trump. Mr. McConnell did not directly weigh on a possible impeachment case, but he circulated a memo to senators making clear that under the Senate’s current rules, no trial could effectively be convened before Jan. 20, after Mr. Trump leaves office and Mr. Biden is sworn in, unless all 100 senators agreed to allow it sooner.It was a fitting denouement for a president who, despite years of norm-shattering behavior, has acted largely without consequence throughout his presidency, showing no impulse to change his ways, despite being impeached in Congress, defeated at the ballot box and now belatedly shunned by some members of his own party.By Friday evening, Ms. Pelosi had not made a final decision on whether to proceed with impeachment and was wary of rushing into such a momentous step. She issued a statement saying she had instructed the House Rules Committee to be ready to move ahead with either an impeachment resolution or legislation creating a nonpartisan panel of experts envisaged in the 25th Amendment to consult with Mr. Pence about the president’s fitness to serve.Democrats agreed it was logistically possible to vote on articles of impeachment as soon as next week, but they were weighing how to justify bypassing the usual monthslong deliberative process of collecting documents, witnesses and the president’s defense. Others worried that Mr. Trump’s base would rally more forcefully around him if Democrats pushed forward with impeaching him again, undermining their goal of relegating the 45th president to the ash heap of history.Republicans who only days before had led the charge to overturn Mr. Trump’s electoral defeat said impeaching him now would shatter the unity that was called for after the Capitol siege.Workers on Friday in the Capitol preparing for President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s inauguration ceremony.Credit…Anna Moneymaker for The New York Times“Impeaching the president with just 12 days left in his term will only divide our country more,” said Representative Kevin McCarthy of California, the Republican leader, just a day after he voted twice to overturn Mr. Biden’s legitimate victory in key swing states.Judd Deere, a White House spokesman, issued a nearly identical statement.Democrats, too, were concerned about plunging Washington into a divisive, time-consuming and politically fraught drama that would overshadow and constrain Mr. Biden’s agenda and stomp on his attempt to unify the country.The Presidential TransitionLatest UpdatesUpdated Jan. 8, 2021, 9:42 p.m. ETA judge has blocked Trump’s sweeping restrictions on asylum applications.Josh Hawley faces blowback for role in spurious challenge of election results.Read the draft of a leading article of impeachment against Trump.During an appearance in Wilmington, Del., Mr. Biden declined to directly weigh in on plans to impeach Mr. Trump saying, “What the Congress decides to do is for them to decide.” But he made clear his energies were being spent elsewhere. “If we were six months out, we should be moving everything to get him out of office — impeaching him again, trying to invoke the 25th Amendment, whatever it took to get him out of office,” Mr. Biden said. “But I am focused now on us taking control as president and vice president on the 20th and get our agenda moving as quickly as we can.”Mr. Trump had told advisers in the days before the march that he wanted to join his supporters in going to the Capitol, but White House officials said no, according to people briefed on the discussions. The president had also expressed interest beforehand in calling in the National Guard to hold off anti-Trump counterprotesters who might show up, the people said, only to turn around and resist calls for bringing those troops in after the rioting by his loyalists broke out.On Friday, Mr. Biden had harsh criticism for Senators Josh Hawley of Missouri and Ted Cruz of Texas, Republicans who had lodged objections to his Electoral College victory on Wednesday amid the mayhem at the Capitol. As some leading Senate Democrats called on them to resign, Mr. Biden said the pair had perpetuated the “big lie” that his election had been fraudulent, comparing it to the work of the Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels.The recriminations played out on a day when workers in the Capitol were literally repairing the damage that had been done two days before, when a mob of supporters, egged on by Mr. Trump, stormed the Capitol as lawmakers were formalizing Mr. Biden’s electoral victory. Lawmakers mourned the death of a Capitol Police officer who succumbed to injuries sustained while defending the building.From the same office ransacked by the mob, Ms. Pelosi was working furiously on Friday to try to contain Mr. Trump. She urged Republicans to follow the model of Watergate, when members of their party prevailed upon President Richard M. Nixon to resign and avoid the ignominy of an impeachment.She also said she had spoken with General Milley about “preventing an unstable president from initiating military hostilities or accessing the launch codes.”A spokesman for General Milley, Col. Dave Butler, confirmed that the two had spoken and said the general had “answered her questions regarding the process of nuclear command authority.” But some Defense Department officials have privately expressed anger that political leaders seemed to be trying to get the Pentagon to do the work of Congress and cabinet secretaries, who have legal options to remove a president.While military officials can refuse to carry out orders they view as illegal, they cannot proactively remove the president from the chain of command. That would be a military coup, these officials said.Ms. Pelosi elaborated on her thinking in a private call with House Democrats, indicating she was particularly concerned about Mr. Trump’s behavior while he remained commander in chief of the armed forces, with the authority to order nuclear strikes.“He’s unhinged,” Ms. Pelosi, according to Democrats familiar with her remarks. “We aren’t talking about anything besides an unhinged person.”She added: “We can’t move on. If we think we can move on then we are failing the American people.”Democrats appeared to be largely united after the call, which lasted more than three hours, that the chamber needed to send a strong message to Americans and the world that Mr. Trump’s rhetoric and the violence that resulted from it would not go unanswered.Ms. Pelosi had asked one of her most trusted deputies who prosecuted Democrats’ first impeachment case against Mr. Trump, Representative Adam B. Schiff of California, to give a frank assessment of the potential drawbacks of impeachment during the session.Mr. Schiff did so, but later issued a statement saying, “Congress should act to begin impeachment proceedings as the only instrument wholly within our power to remove a president who has so manifestly and repeatedly violated the Constitution and put our nation at grave risk.”At least one Democrat, Representative Kurt Schrader, a centrist from Oregon, argued against impeachment, likening the move to an “old-fashioned lynching” of Mr. Trump, and arguing it would turn the president into a martyr. He later apologized for the analogy.A bipartisan group of centrist senators, including several who helped draft a stimulus compromise last month, discussed the possibility of drafting a formal censure resolution against Mr. Trump. But it was unclear if a meaningful attempt to build support for censure would get off the ground, especially with Democrats pushing for a stiffer punishment.After years of deference to the president, leading Republicans in Congress made no effort to defend him, and some offered stinging rebukes. At least a few appeared open to the possibility of impeachment, which if successful could also disqualify Mr. Trump from holding political office in the future.Mr. Sasse said he would “definitely consider whatever articles they might move because I believe the president has disregarded his oath of office.”“He swore an oath to the American people to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution — he acted against that,” Mr. Sasse said on CBS. “What he did was wicked.”Senior Republican aides predicted other senators could adopt a similar posture, so deep was their fury at Mr. Trump. But they held back publicly, waiting to better understand a volatile and rapidly evolving situation.If the House did impeach, and the Senate put Mr. Trump on trial, 17 Republicans or more would most likely have to join Democrats to win a conviction. That was a politically perilous and unlikely decision given his continued hold on millions of the party’s voters.At the same time Republicans in Washington were chastising Mr. Trump, the Republican National Committee re-elected Ronna McDaniel, a Trump ally and his handpicked candidate, as its chairwoman for another term, and Tommy Hicks Jr., a close friend of Donald Trump Jr.’s, as the co-chairman.Political risks for Republicans breaking ranks were also on vivid display on Friday at National Airport near Washington, where several dozen jeering supporters of Mr. Trump accosted Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, angrily denouncing the Republican as a “traitor” and a “liar” for voting to formalize Mr. Biden’s victory.“It’s going to be like this forever, wherever you go, for the rest of your life,” one woman taunted to Mr. Graham, who had been one of Mr. Trump’s leading Senate allies and had initially humored his baseless claims of widespread election fraud.Nicholas Fandos More

    • 175 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Trump incites mob at the Capitol on the same day as Democrats take Georgia

      by

      AdvertisementContinue reading the main storyThe ArgumentSubscribe:Apple PodcastsGoogle PodcastsThe 46th: The End of Trump or the End of American Democracy?In the wake of the attack on the Capitol, Michelle Cottle joins Ross and Michelle to look at what comes next.With Ross Douthat and Michelle GoldbergMore episodes ofThe ArgumentJanuary 8, 2021  •  More