in US Politics
Two decades after 9/11, the real threat to the US is our own far right | Harsha Panduranga
OpinionSeptember 11 2001Two decades after 9/11, the real threat to the US is our own far rightH More
September 11 2001
Subterms
More stories
- in US Politics
9/11: Inside the President’s War Room review – astonishing and petrifying
TV reviewTelevision9/11: Inside the President’s War Room review – astonishing and petrifying This remarkable documentary shows exactly how 9/11 unfolded for George W Bush, from the multiple prayer breaks to the anti-anthrax pills – and the vow to ‘kick ass’ before he knew whose ass to kickJack SealeTue 31 Aug 2021 17.00 EDTLast modified on Tue 31 Aug 2021 17.26 EDTThere is a particular kind of political documentary that tries to put us “in the room”, to tell us how historic decisions were made and how the fallible humans who made them felt. But on 11 September 2001, when planes hijacked by al-Qaida terrorists destroyed the twin towers of New York’s World Trade Center and took the lives of nearly 3,000 Americans, the chaos was such that there was no single “room”. President George W Bush and his advisers, afraid for their own safety and constantly searching for information, were on the move all day and had to conduct their business in airbase bunkers, the back room of a school and aboard the president’s jet, Air Force One.Nevertheless, 9/11: Inside the President’s War Room (BBC One) gives the sensation of being in the room in a way that few documentaries ever have. That day has often been described as a disaster movie no screenwriter would dare imagine. Here, it is a horrifyingly tragic but also propulsive story, with twin narratives following the president’s movements and the developing carnage on the ground, minute by minute.The film’s archive footage has plenty of Adam Curtis moments, such as Bush killing a fly on the Oval Office desk, seconds before giving the gravest speech of his life, to underline that every moment of 11 September had something odd or terrifying in it. But as every relevant government official shares their recollections on camera, the vivid pictures are outstripped by personal anecdotes. We hear from the situation room captain, who recalls having to brace herself against the president’s desk as Air Force One made a steep emergency takeoff – “I went partially weightless. I was petrified” – and the deputy communications director, who got flustered when Bush’s doctor handed out anti-anthrax pills and took his whole week’s ration in one hit.Chiefly, though, this is an insight into the mind of the star interviewee: George W Bush. At first, we see his notorious folksy simplicity, apparent in his eerily counterintuitive decision to ignore, for several long minutes, the news about the second tower being hit, for fear of being impolite to a class of Florida seven-year-olds having a presidential visit. Bush also called for those around him to stop and pray, more than once, while still in the eye of a storm of unknown lethality and proportion. “Prayer can be very comforting,” he says here.Such reactions could be read as bizarre in the face of doom, or natural responses to a situation where what could immediately be achieved was unclear. One interviewee says that, while analyses of Churchill or Roosevelt in wartime look at actions that took weeks to complete, Bush on 9/11 is a study of a leader being forced to make epic choices on the hop.This is where Inside the President’s War Room is most revealing. We hear how anger became the strongest of Bush’s conflicting emotions: fear and sorrow and a determination to safeguard US citizens had to make room for the desire to, in Bush’s words, “kick their ass”, before it was known whose ass or how. By that evening, the president had publicly formulated the “Bush doctrine”, which said harbouring terrorists was to be treated as the equivalent of perpetrating terror. A new American pathology, the “war on terror”, was born in haste.The consequences of this are clear from the fact that this documentary, marking 20 years since 9/11, airs just as the ensuing military intervention in Afghanistan concludes. The thought of that war and, moreover, the US and its allies’ 2003 attack on Iraq, hangs over the whole piece, making the simplest emotional moments complex. The politician expressing the helpless horror of seeing the twin towers fall on TV is Karl Rove. The bowed head, overcome by the emotion of remembering the dilemma over whether or not to shoot down United Flight 93, belongs to Dick Cheney.Are those moments still affecting, knowing that those men went on to wreak horrors of their own? Yes, but to its credit, Inside the President’s War Room makes sure that context is explicit. Being in the room doesn’t stop us looking beyond.TopicsTelevisionTV reviewUS politicsSeptember 11 2001George BushreviewsReuse this content More
- in US Politics
In the post-9/11 era, America's greatest threat isn’t jihadist terrorism any more | Michael German, Elizabeth Goitein and Faiza Patel
OpinionUS politicsIn the post-9/11 era, America’s greatest threat isn’t jihadist terrorism any moreMichael German, Elizabeth Goitein and Faiza PatelTwenty years after 9/11, it’s time to set priorities based on reason instead of fear – and talk about the true cost of ‘national security’ Tue 17 Aug 2021 06.00 EDTLast modified on Tue 17 Aug 2021 10.36 EDTThe 20th anniversary of the September 11 attacks is a natural time to assess our nation’s response over the last two decades and chart a course for the future. Our single-minded focus on defeating terrorist groups claiming to act in the name of Islam over all other priorities, international or domestic, has allowed vulnerabilities to fester.FBI offer to release some Saudi files not enough, 9/11 families sayRead moreThe biggest problems our nation faces today have little to do with the terrorist groups that have consumed so much of our attention. Far-right militants launched a deadly attack on the US Capitol. Systemic racism continues, vividly illustrated by the killing of unarmed Black men by police. The mishandled coronavirus pandemic killed more than half a million Americans and put millions out of work. The opioid epidemic has claimed more than 500,000 lives, while 2020 saw a record number of gun deaths. Climate change drove natural disasters costing a record $22bn across the US in 2020.Few people would likely argue that they feel more secure today than they did on 10 September 2001. It is time to recalibrate our priorities to ensure that we are protecting all Americans effectively from the most significant threats to their health, safety and wellbeing.Defining our prioritiesWhen government officials claim that national security demands a particular action, few interrogate how national security is defined. Is it the territorial integrity of the nation? The physical safety of its people? Or something less tangible, such as the preservation of constitutional rights, economic prosperity, or the institutions of democracy?Absent a clear definition, the “national security” label is often affixed in ways that seem arbitrary, inconsistent, or politically driven. And yet the invocation automatically elevates the issue’s priority of the issue, triggering increased government attention and resources regardless of any objective measure of the threat’s magnitude.After 9/11, “national security” became nearly synonymous with preventing attacks from groups such as al-Qaida and Isis and any individuals who identified with these groups’ stated goals. Congress practically threw money at counter-terrorism efforts – by some estimates, the United States spent $2.8tn on counter-terrorism between 2002 and 2017. In the meantime, white supremacist violence was often treated as a civil rights or violent crime problem, far lower on the government’s list of priorities, even though this type of terrorism kills more Americans most years than any other. Only recently has the government labeled it a national security threat, with the attendant resources and attention.Moreover, terrorist acts of all kinds are prioritized over problems that are generally not viewed through a national security lens but are far more damaging to public health and safety. Terrorism is typically responsible for fewer than 100 fatalities a year – smaller than the number of Americans killed in bathtub accidents. In comparison, there are over 16,000 annual homicides, mostly by firearms. And the homicide numbers pale in comparison to estimates of American deaths due to environmental pollution, substandard healthcare, and poverty.The ‘liberty versus security’ paradigmWhen something is labeled a “national security” threat, it is often assumed that the response will require extraordinary assertions of executive power and diminished protections for civil rights and civil liberties. This assumption has dominated our government’s response to 9/11. Yet it is rarely tested, as few counter-terrorism tactics have been evaluated for effectiveness using scientific, evidence-based methods. Indeed, in many instances, there is reason to believe these heavy-handed responses have been ineffective or even harmful.Examples abound. The US invaded Afghanistan and Iraq ostensibly to stem terrorism. Instead, the wars destabilized the regions, allowing new terrorist groups to flourish. Our 20-year military presence in Afghanistan neither crippled the Taliban nor gave the Afghan government the means to resist it, as recent events have shown. Tactics that the military and CIA deployed in the name of counter-terrorism – including kidnapping, indefinite detention, torture, and targeted killing – tarnished America’s reputation as a champion of human rights, damaged relationships with allies, and provided fodder for terrorist group recruitment.At home, terrorism prevention efforts have included mass surveillance, bloated and inaccurate watchlists, and racial, religious and ethnic profiling. The benefits of these approaches have been assumed rather than proven. In the few instances where a cost-benefit analysis was conducted, programs designed to identify terrorists were found to be ineffectual or counterproductive.For instance, two independent reviews of the NSA’s program to collect Americans’ phone records in bulk concluded that it resulted in little to no counter-terrorism benefit. A congressional review of fusion centers – information-sharing hubs that try to turn state and local police into intelligence agents – found that they are wasteful and do not produce valuable intelligence. Government reviews of domestic terrorist attacks, such as the 2009 mass shooting at Fort Hood, concluded that important threat information had been missed because it was buried in a flood of collected data.At the same time, these initiatives have imposed heavy costs, not only on the nation’s treasury but on our democratic society and vulnerable communities. Islamophobic and nativist counter-terrorism training materials and countering violent extremism programs have stigmatized American Muslims and immigrants. Ubiquitous “see something, say something” programs have trained Americans to be constantly suspicious of one another. These efforts have exacerbated existing divisions in the country and directly undermined the security of the communities they target.Looking beyond national securityGoing forward, we must take a holistic approach to protecting our country and our people – one that prioritizes the welfare of all Americans in accordance with an objective measurement of the threats we face. The billions wasted on military and intelligence programs that do not demonstrably make Americans safer need to be reinvested in evidence-based solutions to our nation’s biggest problems.This new approach goes beyond shifting resources within the category of threats traditionally considered “national security” issues, or even bringing new categories under that umbrella. Instead, it situates national security threats – however designated – in the broader context of challenges to the health and resilience of our nation.In his 1953 Chance for Peace speech, President Dwight Eisenhower warned about the opportunity costs of war: “Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies … a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children.” His words are equally salient today.Traditional “national security” issues – terrorism, cybersecurity threats, espionage – will continue to require serious attention and responses. But an evidence-based approach to our problems will almost certainly entail rightsizing our bloated national security establishment. Investing a fraction of the funds that were devoted to terrorism prevention over the last 20 years into the health, education, and welfare of the American people over the next 20 is the best way to build a society that is stronger and more secure.
Elizabeth Goitein and Faiza Patel are co-directors and Michael German is a fellow at the Liberty & National Security Program at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law
This essay is co-published with the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law as part of a series exploring new approaches to national security 20 years after 9/11
TopicsUS politicsOpinionSeptember 11 2001US militarycommentReuse this content More - in US Politics
Reign of Terror review: from 9/11 to Trump by way of Snowden and Iraq
BooksReign of Terror review: from 9/11 to Trump by way of Snowden and IraqSpencer Ackerman, once of the Guardian, displays a masterful command of the facts but sometimes lets his prejudice show Lloyd GreenSun 8 Aug 2021 02.00 EDTLast modified on Sun 8 Aug 2021 02.01 EDTThis 11 September will be the 20th anniversary of the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon and the crash of Flight 93. Two wars have left 6,700 Americans dead and more than 53,000 wounded. After the Trump presidency, America roils in a cold civil war. In Afghanistan, the Taliban is on the move again. Saddam Hussein is dead and gone but Iraq remains “not free”.‘A madman with millions of followers’: what the new Trump books tell usRead moreIn other words, the war on terror has produced little for the US to brag about. In an April Pew poll, two-thirds of respondents rated international terror as a “big” problem, albeit one that trailed healthcare, Covid, unemployment and 10 more.Against this bleak backdrop, Spencer Ackerman delivers his first book under the subtitle “How the 9/11 Era Destabilized America and Produced Trump”. It is part-chronicle, part-polemic. The author’s anger is understandable, to a point.Ackerman displays a masterful command of facts. No surprise. In 2014, he was part of the Guardian team that won a Pulitzer for reporting on Edward Snowden’s leaks about the National Security Agency.Ackerman stuck with the topic. A contributing editor at the Daily Beast, he has also been its senior national security writer. Ackerman is fluent in discussing the so-called security state, and how it is a creature of both political parties.In the face of Snowden’s revelations, congressional leaders came out for the status quo. According to Harry Reid, then the Democratic Senate majority leader, senators who complained about being left in the dark about the NSA had only themselves to blame. All other Americans were to sit down and shut up.Nancy Pelosi, then House minority leader and a persistent critic of the Patriot Act, a chief vehicle for surveillance powers, declined to criticize Barack Obama or high-tech intrusion in general. Instead, she called for Snowden’s prosecution. He made Russia his home.Ackerman notes that the American Civil Liberties Union and Rand Paul, Kentucky’s junior senator, were notable exceptions to the rule. At the time, Paul remarked: “When you collect it from a billion phone calls a day, even if you say you’re going to keep the name private, the possibility for abuse is enormous.”Ackerman also shines a light on how the far right played an outsized role in domestic terrorism before and after 9/11, reminding us of Timothy McVeigh and the Oklahoma City bombing, teasing out McVeigh’s ties to other white nationalists.The attack on the US Capitol on 6 January this year is one more chapter in the story. Trump falsely claimed Antifa, leftwing radicals, were the real culprits. The roster of those under indictment reveals a very different story.In congressional testimony in April, Merrick Garland, the attorney general, and Alejandro Mayorkas, the homeland security secretary, described “racially or ethnically motivated violent extremists” as the greatest domestic threat. Garland also singled out “those who advocate for the superiority of the white race”.Chad Wolf, Trump’s acting homeland security chief, made a similar point last fall. Of course, his boss wasn’t listening.Ackerman delves meticulously into the blowback resulting from the war on terror. Unfortunately, he downplays how the grudges and enmities of the old country have been magnified by key social forces, immigration chief among them.Joe Biden, then vice-president, condemned the Boston Marathon bombers as “knock-off jihadists”. But Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev had received asylum. The immigrant population stands near a record high and the US fertility rate is in retrograde. On the right, that is a combustible combination. When Tucker Carlson is in Hungary, singing the praises of Viktor Orbán, the past is never too far away.In his effort to draw as straight a line as possible between the war on terror and the rise of Trump, Ackerman can overplay his hand. Racism, nativism and disdain for the other were not the sole drivers of Trump’s win, much as Islamophobia was not the sole cause of the Iraq war, a conflict Ackerman acknowledges he initially supported.Trump’s victory was also about an uneven economic recovery and, when it came to America’s wars, who did the fighting and dying. Overwhelmingly, it wasn’t the offspring of coastal elites. In 2016, there was a notable correlation between battlefield casualties and support for Trump.According to Douglas L Kriner of Boston University and Francis X Shen of the University of Minnesota, “Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan could very well have been winners for [Hillary] Clinton if their war casualties were lower.” Residents of red states are more than 20% more likely to join the military. Denizens of blue America punch way above their weight when it comes to going to college.Ackerman, a graduate of New York’s hyper-meritocratic Bronx High School of Science, bares his own class prejudices much in the way Clinton did at a notorious Wall Street fundraiser. Hillary dunked on the “Deplorables”. Ackerman goes after those he sees as socially undesirable.In his telling, Trump is “an amalgam of no less than four of the worst kinds of New Yorkers”. According to his taxonomy, those are “outer-borough whites”, wealth vampires, dignity-free media strivers and landlords.I Alone Can Fix It: Carol Leonnig and Philip Rucker on their Trump bestsellerRead moreThis year, many of those “outer-borough whites” voted for a Black candidate, Eric Adams, in the Democratic mayoral primary. Adams, Brooklyn’s borough president, is a former police captain.The real estate industry is a critical part of the city economy. Strivers have been here since the Dutch came onshore. As for “wealth vampires” – come on, really?The city’s economy reels. Murder is way up. Law and order matters. Ackerman’s disdain is misdirected.Nationally, the security state is not going to just disappear. But not all is gloom and doom. In a break with Obama and Trump, the Biden White House has pledged to no longer go gunning for reporters over leaks.The US is leaving Afghanistan. Unlike Trump, Biden was not dissuaded. And last Wednesday, the Senate foreign relations committee voted to end the 1991 and 2002 authorizations of use of military force in Iraq. Even the leviathan can budge.TopicsBooksSeptember 11 2001Donald TrumpTrump administrationUS politicsRepublicansDemocratsreviewsReuse this content More
- in US Politics
‘Democracy’s loss:’ 9/11 commission chief on Republican 6 January rejection
The head of the 9/11 Commission has told the Guardian senators’ failure to launch a similar investigation into the 6 January insurrection at the US Capitol is “democracy’s loss”.Thomas Kean led a bipartisan team that held public hearings, studied classified intelligence, interviewed two presidents and chased down conspiracy theories in producing a 567-page report on the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington.The former Republican governor of New Jersey argued for an equivalent commission to study the Capitol riot but that effort was thwarted on Friday when Senate Republicans used their first legislative filibuster of Joe Biden’s presidency, stopping Democrats obtaining the 60-vote majority needed to set up the panel.“It saddens me because there was no real public reason for turning it down,” Kean, 86, said by phone from Far Hills, New Jersey. “I guess some people were scared of what they’d find out. That’s not a good reason for turning it down.“I think if it’s done right, the methodology of the 9/11 Commission works and could have worked to find out all about this particular event. Why these people invaded the Capitol, who they were, who they were allied with. Was it a big conspiracy? Was there any plan to do anything in the future? Why wasn’t the Capitol better defended?”Kean added: “These are all questions we may never have the answer to. It’s time we found out about it and I’m sorry we’re not going to. It’s a mistake and it’s a country’s loss and a democracy’s loss.”Kean was appointed chairman of the 9/11 Commission by George W Bush. Most of its recommendations were implemented by Congress, including the need for greater intelligence sharing between agencies, under a single national director.Kean believes the commission’s work, including cooperation between Democrats and Republicans, offered a valuable blueprint.“I think when you find something that works,” he said, “it’s not a bad thing to replicate it. There are lots of things that don’t work and haven’t worked – they shouldn’t be replicated – but this is one that did work.“We told the history of the 9/11 attacks, which is now used as a college textbook, and nobody’s really contradicted any of the major facts in it.“We made 41 recommendations, most of which were enacted by the Congress. We had the largest reorganisation of government in years and the bottom line is there hasn’t been anything like that attack since. The structure we set up seems to work.”Kean also supports efforts to create a Covid-19 commission to learn lessons from America’s mishandling of the pandemic. But he suspects it might eventually be done by the private sector rather than government.Some commentators have described 6 January 2021 as America’s darkest day since 11 September 2001. The nation was stunned when a mob of Donald Trump supporters stormed the Capitol building in an attempt to disrupt the certification of Biden as winner of the presidential election. Five people died.Democrats pushed for a commission that would scrutinise law enforcement decisions on the day, intelligence and security planning failures and the response of the Pentagon, along with Trump’s role before and during the chaos.In a speech near the White House on 6 January, Trump told supporters to “fight like hell” in support of his lie that his defeat was the result of electoral fraud. He was impeached on a charge of inciting an insurrection but was acquitted when only seven Republican senators voted for his guilt.Legislation to create the commission passed the House with 35 Republican supporters but on Friday only six Republican senators voted in favour. Five of the six also voted to convict Trump in his impeachment trial. The outcome of the attempt to establish the 6 January commission immediately fuelled criticism that the Republican party has put fealty to Trump ahead of healing democracy. More
- in Elections
9/11 United Congress. The Capitol Riot on 1/6 Has Deepened the Divide
#masthead-section-label, #masthead-bar-one { display: none }Capitol Riot FalloutliveLatest UpdatesInside the SiegeVisual TimelineNotable ArrestsIncitement to Riot?AdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyOn WashingtonCongress United After 9/11, but 1/6 Has Deepened the DivideMany Democrats are in no mood for calls for unity, pushing instead for accountability for Republicans who refused to recognize the election result and fueled divisions that erupted in the Capitol riot.Shattered glass remained on the doors to the House chamber on Tuesday after a mob of Trump supporters attacked the Capitol last week.Credit…Erin Schaff/The New York TimesJan. 12, 2021Updated 9:55 p.m. ETRead more on Trump and Pence’s blowupWASHINGTON — As the Senate majority leader on Sept. 11, 2001, Tom Daschle was among those hurriedly evacuated in the chaos of an expected attack on the Capitol, only to return later that evening for a bipartisan show of unity and resolve on the marble steps many had used to flee just hours earlier.“We all joined together after 9/11 and professed ourselves to be Americans, not just Republicans and Democrats, as we sang ‘God Bless America’ on those same Capitol steps and returned to business the next morning,” Mr. Daschle, the former Democratic senator from South Dakota, recalled this week.But like many Democrats, Mr. Daschle is not in a unifying mood in the wake of the assault on the Capitol by a pro-Trump mob last week, and Jan. 6 is not proving to be a Sept. 11 moment.This time, the menace to Congress was not from 19 shadowy hijackers from overseas but from within — fellow Americans and colleagues taking their usual places in the House and Senate chambers to try to overturn President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s victory and stoke President Trump’s false claims of a stolen election, which inspired the violent rioting that chased lawmakers from the House and the Senate.“On 9/11 we were united as Americans against a common enemy, a foreign enemy, foreign terrorists,” said Senator Susan Collins, the Maine Republican who was on Capitol Hill for both shattering events. “On Jan. 6, America was divided against itself.”Outraged at the conduct of Republicans who perpetuated Mr. Trump’s bogus allegations of widespread voting fraud, Democrats are determined to impeach the president a second time, to try to expel and censure members who sought to overturn the presidential election even after the mob assault on the Capitol, and to ostracize Republicans who do not acknowledge and apologize for their role.The 2001 terrorist attacks on Washington and New York — and the recognition that a horrific assault on the Capitol was prevented only by courageous passengers who brought down Flight 93 in Pennsylvania — led to an extraordinary period of congressional comity and cooperation.Both parties immediately pulled together in a show of strength despite lingering Democratic resentment over the Supreme Court decision that had given the presidency to George W. Bush just months earlier. Democrats and Republicans set aside their very real differences — including concern among some Democrats that the new administration had failed to heed warnings about the attack — to present an impenetrable front to the country and the world.“This Congress is united — Democrats, independents, Republicans,” Representative Richard Gephardt of Missouri, the Democratic leader, declared during somber but angry proceedings on Sept. 12 as Congress passed a resolution condemning the attacks and promising national unity in the face of such threats. “There is no light or air between us. We stand shoulder to shoulder.”Tom Daschle, far left, and a bipartisan group of congressional lawmakers praying in front of the Capitol on Sept. 11, 2001.Credit…Kenneth Lambert/Associated PressToday, there is outright hostility among members of Congress, emotions that will be hard to contain even as Mr. Biden plans an inauguration with the theme of “America United” — an admirable goal, but one that seems difficult if not impossible to attain at the moment.Democrats say a considerable number of their Republican colleagues, by whipping up Mr. Trump’s supporters and their own with weeks of baseless claims about election fraud, are accomplices to the president in inciting the attack on the Capitol. The assault put at risk the safety of lawmakers, law enforcement, staff workers and members of the news media while undermining the most basic tenets of American democracy. Now, Democratic lawmakers are reporting testing positive for the coronavirus after being isolated in secure rooms with Republicans who refused to wear masks, adding to their fury.They are particularly incensed that the same Republican lawmakers who refused to recognize Mr. Biden’s election and fueled the divisions over the result are now pleading for Democrats to drop their push to impeach Mr. Trump and punish complicit Republicans, in a belated appeal for national unity.“They don’t want unity. They want absolution,” said Representative Ruben Gallego, Democrat of Arizona, still angry at the Republican challenge to his state’s vote count. “They want us to forgive them for their crimes and cowardice that have occurred under Donald Trump. They would rather feed that monster than defend the Constitution of the United States and our democracy.”Mr. Gallego, who said he would lead a natural resources subcommittee, said he and other Democrats were exploring ways to marginalize Republicans who did not recognize the consequences of their actions should Congress not take steps to try to oust those who were most outspoken against counting the electoral ballots for Mr. Biden.“I am contemplating not allowing any Republican bills to go to the floor if you are one of the people who voted to not recognize the votes of Arizona,” said Mr. Gallego, who said he had routinely advanced Republican bills in the past. “I don’t know if I can look at any of these members in the same way unless there is some good level of contrition.”For a brief period last Wednesday, there was a glimmer of hope for Sept. 11-style unity as the House and the Senate reconvened in the same chambers ransacked by the mob just hours before, determined to demonstrate that the rioters would not halt the counting of the electoral votes. Lawmakers struck a defiant tone reminiscent of the singing on the Capitol steps, which this time had been occupied by hundreds of insurrectionists intent on denying Congress the opportunity to tabulate the legitimate presidential votes.Representative Ruben Gallego, Democrat of Arizona, standing on a chair in the House chamber as lawmakers prepared to evacuate during the riot last week.Credit…J. Scott Applewhite/Associated Press“The United States Senate will not be intimidated,” said Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky and the majority leader. “We will not be kept out of this chamber by thugs, mobs or threats.”.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;}Capitol Riot FalloutFrom Riot to ImpeachmentThe riot inside the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday, Jan. 6, followed a rally at which President Trump made an inflammatory speech to his supporters, questioning the results of the election. Here’s a look at what happened and 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.At the same time, some Senate Republicans, notably Kelly Loeffler of Georgia, backed off their plans to challenge the electoral vote. But other Republicans, despite the havoc that the election challenge had just wrought on the Capitol and the fact that they were certain to fail, pushed ahead with their objections, one of which was supported by seven Republican senators and 138 House members.“I give both the Senate and House leadership great credit for returning to business hours afterward, but I am shocked by the fact that a majority of House Republicans voted to overturn the election results,” said Mr. Daschle, who recommended ethics inquiries in both chambers. “Truly amazing and deeply troubling. My contempt for them and those in the Senate who led the effort could not be greater.”Republicans protested that Democrats were trying to exploit the riot for political advantage and risking more violence themselves by moving ahead with impeachment.“Why continue this?” Representative Debbie Lesko, Republican of Arizona, pressed Democrats on Tuesday at a tense meeting of the Rules Committee before the House was to take up a measure calling on Vice President Mike Pence to strip Mr. Trump’s powers under the 25th Amendment. “It is just likely to cause more divisiveness. Chalk up your wins and let’s move on.”Democrats scoffed, noting that Republicans still refused to concede that the election was not stolen or that Mr. Biden’s win was not the result of widespread fraud.Without some sincere acknowledgment by relevant Republicans that they were instigators and enablers of the Jan. 6 mayhem, Democrats were nowhere near ready to move on, demanding accountability for the attack on the Capitol that has shaken Washington.For now, the political unity that came to be a defining characteristic of the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks will remain far out of reach.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More
- in Elections
Trump Incentives for Signing Peace Accords With Israel Could Be at Risk
@media (pointer: coarse) {
.nytslm_outerContainer {
overflow-x: scroll;
-webkit-overflow-scrolling: touch;
}
}.nytslm_outerContainer {
display: flex;
align-items: center;
/* Fixes IE */
overflow-x: auto;
box-shadow: -6px 0 white, 6px 0 white, 1px 3px 6px rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.15);
padding: 10px 1.25em 10px;
transition: all 250ms;
-ms-overflow-style: none;
/* IE 10+ */
scrollbar-width: none;
/* Firefox */
background: white;
margin-bottom: 20px;
z-index: 1000;
}@media (min-width: 1024px) {
.nytslm_outerContainer {
margin-bottom: 0px;
padding: 13px 1.25em 10px;
}
}.nytslm::-webkit-scrollbar {
display: none;
/* Safari and Chrome */
}.nytslm_innerContainer {
margin: unset;
display: flex;
align-items: center;
}@media (min-width: 600px) {
.nytslm_innerContainer {
margin: auto;
min-width: 600px;
}
}.nytslm_title {
padding-right: 1em;
border-right: 1px solid #ccc;
}@media (min-width: 740px) {
.nytslm_title {
max-width: none;
font-size: 1.0625rem;
line-height: 1.25rem;
}
}.nytslm_spacer {
width: 0;
border-right: 1px solid #E2E2E2;
height: 45px;
margin: 0 1.4em;
}.nytslm_list {
font-family: nyt-franklin, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;
display: flex;
width: auto;
list-style: none;
padding-left: 1em;
flex-shrink: 0;
align-items: baseline;
justify-content: center;
}.nytslm_li {
margin-right: 1.4em;
flex-shrink: 0;
font-size: 0.8125rem;
line-height: 0.8125rem;
font-weight: 600;
padding: 1em 0;
}#nytslm .nytslm_li a {
color: #121212;
text-decoration: none;
}#nytslm .nytsmenu_li_current,
#nytslm .nytslm_li a:hover,
#nytslm .nytslm_li a:active,
#nytslm .nytslm_li a:focus {
color: #121212;
border-bottom: 2px solid #121212;
padding-bottom: 2px;
}.nytslm_li_live_loud:after {
content: ‘LIVE’
}.nytslm_li_live_loud {
background-color: #d0021b;
color: white;
border-radius: 3px;
padding: 4px 6px 2px 6px;
margin-right: 2px;
display: inline-block;
letter-spacing: 0.03rem;
font-weight: 700;
}.nytslm_li_upcoming_loud {
border: 1px solid #d0021b;
color: #d0021b;
border-radius: 3px;
padding: 4px 6px 2px 6px;
margin-right: 2px;
display: inline-block;
letter-spacing: 0.03rem;
font-weight: 700;
}.nytslm_li_upcoming_loud:before {
content: ‘Upcoming’
}.nytslm_li_loud a:hover,
.nytslm_li_loud a:active,
.nytslm_li_loud a:focus {
border-bottom: 2px solid;
padding-bottom: 2px;
}.nytslm_li_updated {
color: #777;
}#masthead-bar-one {
display: none;
}.electionNavbar__logoSvg {
width: 80px;
align-self: center;
display: flex;
}@media(min-width: 600px) {
.electionNavbar__logoSvg {
width: 100px;
}
}.nytslm_notification {
border-left: 1px solid #ccc;
font-family: nyt-franklin, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;
padding-left: 1em;
}.nytslm_notification_label {
color: #D0021B;
text-transform: uppercase;
font-weight: 700;
font-size: 0.6875rem;
margin-bottom: 0.2em;
letter-spacing: 0.02em;
}.nytslm_notification_link {
font-weight: 600;
color: #121212;
display: flex;
align-items: center;
}.nytslm_notification_headline {
font-size: 0.875rem;
line-height: 1.0625rem;
}.nytslm_notification_image_wrapper {
position: relative;
max-width: 75px;
margin-left: 10px;
flex-shrink: 0;
}.nytslm_notification_image {
max-width: 100%;
}.nytslm_notification_image_live_bug {
position: absolute;
text-transform: uppercase;
bottom: 7px;
left: 2px;font-size: 0.5rem;
background-color: #d0021b;
color: white;
border-radius: 3px;
padding: 4px 4px 2px 4px;
font-weight: 700;
margin-right: 2px;
letter-spacing: 0.03rem;
}/* No hover state on in app */
.Hybrid .nytslm_li a:hover,
.Hybrid .nytslm_li_loud a:hover {
border-bottom: none;
padding-bottom: 0;
}.Hybrid #TOP_BANNER_REGION {
display: none;
}.nytslm_st0 {
fill: #f4564a;
}.nytslm_st1 {
fill: #ffffff;
}.nytslm_st2 {
fill: #2b8ad8;
}Electoral College Results
Election Disinformation
Full Results
Biden Transition Updates
“),e+=””+b+””,e+=””,d&&(e+=””,e+=””,e+=”Live”,e+=””),e+=””,e}function getVariant(){var a=window.NYTD&&window.NYTD.Abra&&window.NYTD.Abra.getAbraSync&&window.NYTD.Abra.getAbraSync(“STYLN_elections_notifications”);// Only actually have control situation in prd and stg
return[“www.nytimes.com”,”www.stg.nytimes.com”].includes(window.location.hostname)||(a=”STYLN_elections_notifications”),a||”0_control”}function reportData(){if(window.dataLayer){var a;try{a=dataLayer.find(function(a){return!!a.user}).user}catch(a){}var b={abtest:{test:”styln-elections-notifications”,variant:getVariant()},module:{name:”styln-elections-notifications”,label:getVariant(),region:”TOP_BANNER”},user:a};window.dataLayer.push(Object.assign({},b,{event:”ab-alloc”})),window.dataLayer.push(Object.assign({},b,{event:”ab-expose”})),window.dataLayer.push(Object.assign({},b,{event:”impression”}))}}function insertNotification(a,b){// Bail here if the user is in control
if(reportData(),”0_control”!==getVariant()){// Remove menu bar items or previous notification
var c=document.querySelector(“.nytslm_innerContainer”);if(c&&1 30 * 60 * 1000) return restoreMenuIfNecessary();
// Do not update DOM if the content won’t change
if(currentNotificationContents!==a.text&&window.localStorage.getItem(“stylnelecs”)!==a.timestamp)// Do not show if user has interacted with this link
// if (Cookie.get(‘stylnelecs’) === data.timestamp) return;
{expireLocalStorage(“stylnelecs”),currentNotificationContents=a.text;// Construct URL for tracking
var b=a.link.split(“#”),c=b[0]+”?action=click&pgtype=Article&state=default&module=styln-elections-notifications&variant=1_election_notifications®ion=TOP_BANNER&context=Menu#”+b[1],d=formatNotification(c,a.text,a.kicker,a.image);insertNotification(d,function(){var b=document.querySelector(“.nytslm_notification_link”);return b?void(b.onclick=function(){window.localStorage.setItem(“stylnelecs”,a.timestamp)}):null})}})}(function(){navigator.userAgent.includes(“nytios”)||navigator.userAgent.includes(“nyt_android”)||window.stylnelecsHasLoaded||(// setInterval(getUpdate, 5000);
window.stylnelecsHasLoaded=!0)})(),function(){try{if(navigator.userAgent.includes(“nytios”)||navigator.userAgent.includes(“nyt_android”)){var a=document.getElementsByClassName(“nytslm_title”)[0];a.style.pointerEvents=”none”}}catch(a){}}(); More - in US Politics
Only man convicted over 9/11 says he is renouncing terrorism and Bin Laden
Zacarias Moussaoui serving life sentence in US federal prison Prosecutors said Moussaoui lied to FBI about knowledge of plot Zacarias Moussaoui wrote in a court motion filed last month: ‘I denounce, repudiate Osama bin Laden as a useful idiot of the CIA/Saudi.’ Photograph: AP The only man ever convicted in a US court for a […] More
