More stories

  • in

    The Capitol Attack and the Myth of American Innocence

    AdvertisementContinue reading the main storyOpinionSupported byContinue reading the main storyThe Myth of American InnocenceThe Capitol attack shows the danger of forgetting America’s history.Mr. Staples is a member of the editorial board.Jan. 9, 2021The mob assault on the Capitol was an outgrowth of what came before.Credit…Erin Schaff/The New York TimesThe history of the United States is rife with episodes of political violence far bloodier and more destructive than the one President Trump incited at the Capitol on Wednesday. Nevertheless, ignorance of a grisly past well documented by historians like W.E.B. DuBois, John Hope Franklin and Richard Hofstadter was painfully evident in the aftermath of this week’s mob invasion of Congress. Talking heads queued up to tell the country again and again that the carnage was an aberration and “not who we are” as a people.This willful act of forgetting — compounded by the myth of American innocence — has shown itself to be dangerous on a variety of counts. For starters, it allowed many Americans to view the president’s insistence that he had won an election in which he was actually trounced, and his simultaneous embrace of right-wing extremism, as political theater that will pass uneventfully from the stage when Joe Biden is inaugurated.“What’s the harm in humoring him?” the argument went. “Mr. Trump will soon be gone.” As it turns out, Republicans in Congress who played along with the ruse encouraged a mob weaned on presidential lies to believe the fiction that Mr. Trump had been robbed of a victory. The resulting invasion of the government — which has thus far reportedly taken at least five lives — should make clear to everyone that the potential for political violence is a proverbial river of gasoline, waiting for a demagogue like Mr. Trump to drop the lighted match.The circumstances that led up to the sacking of the Capitol are reminiscent of the 19th century, when Southerners rolled back the period of Black self-determination known as Reconstruction, unleashing a reign of racial tyranny. During the November election, Mr. Trump echoed Southern white supremacists of a bygone era when he falsely asserted that there had been widespread voting fraud in majority-Black cities.The nation’s history of violence against Black citizens echoed in the rampage.Credit…Joseph Prezioso/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesThis month, a coalition of Republican senators led by Ted Cruz of Texas summoned up this blood-drenched history when they parroted the voting fraud lie and demanded that Congress appoint an electoral commission to sort out the 2020 election.Mr. Cruz inappropriately cited as a precedent a commission created to adjudicate the election of 1876. At the time, it was unclear who had won the election; some states submitted multiple election returns, a set for the Republican, Rutherford B. Hayes, and a set for the Democrat, Samuel J. Tilden.Mr. Cruz’s analogy was dishonest on its face, given that there is no valid dispute about electoral votes today. But by bringing up 1876, the senator unwittingly pointed to the ancestry of the voter suppression practices in which his party is heavily invested. The 1876 election, as the historians Rachel Shelden and Erik B. Alexander noted this week in The Washington Post, was riddled with bloodshed and intimidation. White terror organizations targeted African-Americans throughout the South in the run-up to Election Day. In the Black stronghold of Hamburg, S.C., the authors write, “hundreds of gun-toting whites from South Carolina and nearby Georgia descended on the town, executing members of the militia and ransacking Black homes and shops.”The federal government eventually withdrew the troops that were protecting Black rights in the South. This set the stage for the system of slavery by another name that persisted until the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.The days leading up to the mob invasion of the Capitol presented several echoes of the intricately planned coup d’état carried out against the city government of Wilmington, N.C., in 1898. White supremacists overthrew a government that had been elected through an alliance that included African-Americans and white progressives.As Mr. Hofstadter and Michael Wallace report in “American Violence: A Documentary History,” military units poured into Wilmington from other places to assist the new regime: “African continued to cringe before Caucasian as the troops paraded the streets, as the guns barked and the bayonets flared, for a new municipal administration of the ‘White Supremacy’ persuasion.”Untold numbers of Black citizens were killed, and well-known Wilmingtonians were banished from the city under pain of death. As was the case at the Capitol on Wednesday, the Wilmington mob was especially keen to silence journalists who had resisted the rising tide of racism. To that end, the marauders burned the Black-owned Daily Record, whose editor, Alexander Manly, fled the city.White supremacists eventually took control of the state, bringing down the curtain on Black political participation. Given this history, it is in no way a coincidence that North Carolina remains a battleground where African-Americans continue to struggle against the effects of gerrymandering and other forms of suppression.Large and small, these violent assaults on Black self-determination continued into the 20th century. While sometimes expressly intended to destroy Black electoral power, they were just as often deployed to crush Black economic independence by destroying homes and, particularly, businesses that competed with white-owned ones in the marketplace.Perhaps the most pointed example of such an assault was the Tulsa Race Massacre of 1921 in Oklahoma. A white mob unleashed partly by the Tulsa police murdered at will while incinerating 35 square blocks of the Black enclave of Greenwood, reducing to ashes a muscular business strip known as the Negro Wall Street.As the historian Jelani Cobb noted in The New Yorker two months before the election, America’s record of willfully ignoring the violent suppression of Black voting rights is much more extensive than its record of protecting Black voters. While the public tends to view instances of election violence “as a static record of the past,” he wrote, “historians tend to look at them the way that meteorologists look at hurricanes: as a predictable outcome when a number of recognizable variables align in familiar ways.” As Mr. Cobb said last fall — when political violence was clearly trending upward — the metaphorical hurricane was close at hand indeed.The mob assault on the Capitol was an outgrowth of what came before. It followed a heavily racialized campaign by a president who falsely portrayed African-American cities as hot spots of voting fraud, while endearing himself to white supremacists. Republicans who subscribe to this toxic strategy deserve to be held responsible for the chaos it reaps. For shades of things to come, they need look no further than the damaged Capitol and the dead and injured who were hauled away on gurneys.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

  • in

    Trump’s Legacy: Voters Who Reject Democracy and Any Politics but Their Own

    #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 storyTrump’s Legacy: Voters Who Reject Democracy and Any Politics but Their OwnThe mob attack on the Capitol, and interviews with Trump voters this week, show that the president’s subversion of democratic values will have enduring influence within the Republican Party.Candy Grossi, a supporter of President Trump, said she was fed up with most elected Republicans and trusted only information from One America News Network, the far-right channel.Credit…Audra Melton for The New York TimesJan. 9, 2021Updated 9:54 a.m. ETThe sight of a violent mob inspired by President Trump smashing its way into the Capitol was more than just a shocking spectacle. It also highlighted one of the most dangerous parts of Mr. Trump’s legacy: the disbelief in democracy that has metastasized among many of his supporters.While the turmoil on Wednesday has divided Republican officials, with some resigning or calling for Mr. Trump to leave office and others rallying behind him, there are few signs of division among these voters who fervently back Mr. Trump. In lengthy interviews with some of them this week, they expressed sympathy with what they said were the motives of the mob — to stop the counting of Electoral College results in Congress, under the false premise that widespread fraud had deprived the president of re-election.The adherence of Mr. Trump’s base to his groundless claims of a “sacred landslide” victory, and their rejection of a routine Constitutional process — a position abetted by 147 Congressional Republicans who objected to certifying Mr. Biden’s election — suggests that a core part of the Republican Party, both voters and some officials, is dead-set on rejecting the legitimacy of any politics or party but their own.Trump supporters clashed with police during the riots at the Capitol on Wednesday.Credit…Kenny Holston for The New York Times“Yes, they’re raising Cain,’’ Candy Grossi, a grandmother in Georgia, said of her fellow Trump supporters as rioters breached the Capitol on Wednesday, offering a running commentary on what she was seeing on television.“We are fed up. There are so many people fed up with how crooked it is,” she said. “I really don’t have respect for our Congress anymore. They deep-sixed the president. It’s the first time in history I’ve seen one’s own party treat their president the way they did — it’s shameful.’’Ms. Grossi, 65, a retired apartment manager and a self-published author, said she did not condone the violence in the Capitol, which left an officer and a rioter dead. But she shared the mob’s rage over what she, and they, falsely called a stolen election, and their powerlessness to stop the presidency of Joseph R. Biden Jr.“People are tired,’’ she said. “It doesn’t seem to matter what we do.”In the interviews, Trump supporters adamantly clung to what they called evidence of a fraudulent election, engaged in so-called whataboutism to play down the scenes of destruction in Washington and accused the news media of being overly melodramatic in describing events as a historic inflection.Mitchell Hoyt, a Trump voter in Wisconsin, objected when a reporter referred to the “storming” of the Capitol.“The people didn’t show up with guns trying to overthrow the government, but the media likes to spin it that way,’’ he said. Though he said he believed the break-in and vandalism at the Capitol were “not a good representation of conservatism in this country,” he added: “I don’t think those people should be demonized. They’re angry and when people don’t think they have a voice that can be heard, stuff like this happens.”Mr. Hoyt, a commercial producer of maple syrup in northern Wisconsin, claimed the mainstream news media and the left used a double standard in what he called uncritical coverage last year of the protests over police killings of Black Americans that included episodes of burning and looting.“It’s not palatable,’’ he said. “People are not going to accept it.”Since Mr. Trump first ran for president more than five years ago, his critics have been predicting that one or another of his norm-shattering acts would send droves of his supporters fleeing. It has never happened. The interviews with Trump voters suggest that even his assault on the most bedrock norm of American democracy — the peaceful transition of power — may still not bring about mass defections.For these voters, the lack of allegiance to small “d” democratic values seemed to stem, in part, from the shift among many Republicans to imbibing information from sources that offer propaganda rather than news and facts. The share of Republicans who trust the mass media has plunged in the Trump years to 10 percent, according to Gallup. A majority of Republicans believe Mr. Trump was robbed of the election.The Presidential TransitionLatest UpdatesUpdated Jan. 8, 2021, 10:32 p.m. ETMore national security officials resign from a White House in turmoil.A judge has blocked Trump’s sweeping restrictions on asylum applications.Josh Hawley faces blowback for role in spurious challenge of election results.Mr. Hoyt praised The Epoch Times, a leading purveyor of right-wing misinformation, because “they just give you the facts of what’s happening.” For Ms. Grossi, One America News Network, the far-right channel that spreads conspiracy theories, is the only information source she trusts. She also follows QAnon, the baseless conspiracy movement that links top Democrats to child sex trafficking.But she is also fed up with most elected Republicans. “All of them were anti-Trump — except for the American public,’’ she said.On Friday, at Ronald Reagan National Airport in Washington, a group of die-hard Trump supporters yelled “traitor” and “liar” at Senator Lindsey Graham, the South Carolina Republican, for failing to more aggressively back the president’s claims of a rigged election.Another likely factor that leads to delegitimizing political opponents among Trump supporters is the scorched-earth attacks on Democratic candidates during elections. Most recently, Mr. Biden and his vice-presidential running mate, Kamala Harris, were falsely tied to “socialism” and the most far-left positions on energy policy and health care.Eileen Lelich, a retired dental assistant in western Pennsylvania, disagreed that the storming of the Capitol was an “insurrection incited by the president,’’ as Senator Mitt Romney of Utah, the 2012 Republican presidential nominee, described it.“I wouldn’t say that,’’ said Ms. Lelich, who called herself a staunch backer of the president. “The Trump supporters are Trump supporters. They want answers. They want to know what happened” with the election. Despite more than 60 court cases dismissing the president’s claims of fraud or misconduct by election officials, Ms. Lelich did not believe Mr. Biden had won her state. She credulously absorbed the Republican attacks on the Democratic ticket, in which Mr. Biden was portrayed as doddering and Ms. Harris as a left-wing extremist.“Biden’s not a bad guy, he’s a good person,’’ Ms. Lelich, 60, said. “But if Kamala Harris takes over, I don’t know what’s going to happen.”“I’m very worried about our world,’’ she added. “I don’t want to go into socialism.’’A legacy of the Trump era is a core of the G.O.P. who reject the tenets of democracy and the legitimacy of any politics or party but their own.Credit…Jason Andrew for The New York TimesSome members of the president’s base said they would view Mr. Biden as illegitimately occupying the Oval Office, a further polarization of Americans after years when some Democrats questioned or denied Mr. Trump’s legitimacy. In the view of many Trump supporters, the president was never given a chance to govern — he was besieged from Day 1 by claims of Russian collusion, fierce obstruction of his priorities and, ultimately, an impeachment.“If they do get Joe Biden sworn in, I think we’re in for a very turbulent time because I don’t think many people are going to accept it,’’ said Jacob Hanna, a Trump supporter in northeast Pennsylvania. “We had dead people voting, illegal aliens voting, and we’re supposed to sit here and say he’s a legitimate president — it’s just not right.’’Mr. Hanna, 19, was a poll worker in his rural township not far from Mr. Biden’s birth city of Scranton, and he cannot accept that Mr. Biden won honestly.“We were swamped, we had over 250 people in line,’’ he said, adding confidently that few were Biden backers. “It’s mind-boggling for me to believe we go to bed 800,000 votes ahead and we wake up, and after these magic ballots dumped overnight, we’re somehow losing.”Such disinformation, which has spread widely online, has been debunked by election analysts, who explain that mail-in ballots counted more slowly over several days heavily favored Mr. Biden after the president made their use toxic to his supporters.Robert Fuller of Georgia remained so furious about the election that he foresaw an America casting off from its deepest moorings. “We’ll be lucky if we still have a country left after this,’’ he said, citing false claims of election fraud that the president had ranted about over the weekend on a recorded call to Georgia’s top election official, a Republican.“I foresee a civil war coming, Republicans against Democrats,’’ Mr. Fuller said. “You know as well as I do they stuffed the ballots in the states of Georgia, Nevada, Arizona and Michigan.”In Georgia’s Senate runoff elections on Tuesday, Mr. Fuller, 65, supported the Republicans Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue, both of whom lost. The victors — the Rev. Raphael Warnock, who will be the first Black senator from Georgia, and Jon Ossoff, who will be the Senate’s youngest member — secured control of the chamber for Democrats.Mr. Fuller does not consider either winner legitimate. Not because they didn’t win the most votes, but because of their political views, which were caricatured during the race as far left of center.“If they were legitimate Democrats it wouldn’t be a problem, but they’re not legitimate,’’ he said. Parroting comments that Mr. Trump made at a rally in Georgia on the eve of the election, he added: “Warnock is a Marxist and Ossoff is a communist, as far as I’m concerned. Might as well let the Chinese take over the country the way things are going.’’AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

  • in

    The G.O.P.’s New Distancing Policy

    #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 storyOn Politics With Lisa LererThe G.O.P.’s New Distancing PolicyAfter years of excusing or ignoring President Trump’s most inflammatory rhetoric, many Republicans are backing away at the last minute.Jan. 9, 2021, 7:00 a.m. ETHi. Welcome to On Politics, your wrap-up of the week in national politics. I’m Lisa Lerer, your host.Sign up here to get On Politics in your inbox every weekday.“Enough is enough,” says Senator Lindsey Graham.Credit…Jonathan Ernst/ReutersFirst came the mob’s deadly rioting. Then the G.O.P.’s reputation laundering.With less than two weeks left in the Trump administration, a number of Republicans are experiencing some last-minute revelations about the president’s character, inflammatory rhetoric and polarizing leadership of the country.“All I can say is, count me out. Enough is enough. I’ve tried to be helpful,” said Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, one of President Trump’s strongest allies, who once promised “earth-shattering” revelations of voter fraud that he falsely argued had cost Mr. Trump the election. Now, after the violent breach of the Capitol this past week, Mr. Graham is refusing to rule out using the 25th Amendment to strip his former friend of his presidential powers.Mr. Graham is far from alone in scurrying away from all the praise he’s lavished on the president over the past four years. As a shaken Washington recovered from the violent attack on the Capitol, Republicans embraced the traditional tools of political self-preservation, offering resignations and strongly worded letters, anonymously sourced accounts of shouting matches and after-the-fact public condemnations.Administration officials anonymously spread the word, through Axios, that they would defy any requests from Mr. Trump that “they believe would put the nation at risk or break the law,” raising the obvious question of whether they would have carried out illegal or dangerous orders over the past four years.Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao and Education Secretary Betsy DeVos quit their posts, saying they were “deeply troubled” by the president’s handling of the riot. Ms. Chao, it’s worth noting, stood next to Mr. Trump at the 2017 news conference where he insisted that “both sides” deserved blame after white supremacists incited deadly violence in Charlottesville, Va.At least seven lower-ranking members of the Trump administration also resigned, while many more fretted that they would be unemployable.“Now it will always be, ‘Oh yeah, you work for the guy who tried to overtake the government,’” said Mick Mulvaney, the president’s former acting chief of staff who resigned Wednesday as special envoy to Northern Ireland.Mr. Mulvaney told CNBC that the president was “not the same as he was eight months ago,” when they spoke more frequently. Left unstated was whether Mr. Trump was the same as he was four years ago, when Mr. Mulvaney called him a “terrible human being” ahead of the 2016 election.Mr. Mulvaney’s journey with the president highlights one of the most striking features of the ongoing Republican revisionism. Many in the G.O.P. warned publicly during the 2016 campaign that Mr. Trump was fomenting exactly the kind of violence that the country witnessed on Wednesday — concerns that were quickly set aside once he took office.The Presidential TransitionLatest UpdatesUpdated Jan. 8, 2021, 10:32 p.m. ETMore national security officials resign from a White House in turmoil.A judge has blocked Trump’s sweeping restrictions on asylum applications.Josh Hawley faces blowback for role in spurious challenge of election results.Of course, some Republican officials may be truly horrified by Mr. Trump’s egging on of his supporters on Wednesday and his refusal to take immediate action to stop a violent takeover of the Capitol. Many of those same Republicans frequently offered private condemnations of his actions throughout his presidency — objections they studiously kept off the record.But with less than 275 hours left in the Trump presidency, it’s hard not to see the political posturing embedded in their now-public condemnations.Many inside and outside Washington are setting their sights on the new political reality to come with a Democratic-controlled government. After years of declining to police Mr. Trump’s falsehood-filled and threatening social media posts, Twitter on Friday permanently suspended his @realDonaldTrump account “due to the risk of further incitement of violence.” Mark Zuckerberg had earlier barred the president from Facebook and Instagram through at least the end of his term.Many of Mr. Zuckerberg’s employees noted that Democrats had secured control of the Senate before he took the action.But at this point, it’s an open question whether any powerful Republicans will pay a serious price for their implicit or explicit support of Mr. Trump’s inflammatory rhetoric and dalliances with violence. So far, the penalties seem to be measured mostly in bad media coverage.Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri, who championed efforts to overturn the results of the presidential election, was publicly disowned by his political mentor, disavowed by some of his donors and dropped by his book publisher — a move he blamed on a “woke mob.” Other elected Republicans were condemned by their hometown newspapers in scathing editorials. Cracks even emerged in Rupert Murdoch’s media empire as The Wall Street Journal’s editorial page, which has been a regular Trump cheerleader for years, called on the president to resign.Meanwhile, Democrats are pressing for resignations and permanent bans from the public sector for Trump aides, supporters and allies. Many would like to see criminal prosecutions once President-elect Joe Biden takes office. Some are even pushing to rid the federal government of all political appointees and civil servants who supported Mr. Trump.It’s unclear whether Mr. Biden will back such efforts. Tough investigations into the previous administration could complicate his campaign promise to unite the country and his ability to get Republican support for his legislative goals. On Friday, he avoided expressing views on specific punitive actions, saying that he’d leave those judgments to his Justice Department and that voters should determine the future of politicians like Mr. Hawley and Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, another Trump ally who backed the effort to overturn the election results.For all the Republicans attempting to distance themselves from the president, 147 of them still voted to reject the results even after the siege of the Capitol. Since then, a segment of the party has embarked upon an effort to reshape reality, downplaying the violence and suggesting that far-left activists had infiltrated the crowd and posed as fans of the president.This is obviously ridiculous: The rioters discussed plans to invade the Capitol for weeks in public social media posts. And Mr. Trump didn’t blame antifa for the rampage — instead, he told the mob, “We love you.” Still, those claims will echo through right-wing media, major news sources for the large number of activists and voters who remain loyal to Mr. Trump.Some Republicans may be trying to jump off the Trump train at the final station. But they’ve already spent years helping fuel the engine.Were you forwarded this newsletter? Sign up here to get it delivered to your inbox.Thanks for reading. On Politics is your guide to the political news cycle, delivering clarity from the chaos.Is there anything you think we’re missing? Anything you want to see more of? We’d love to hear from you. Email us at onpolitics@nytimes.com.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

  • in

    Democrats Ready Impeachment Charge Against Trump for Inciting Capitol Mob

    #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

  • in

    Josh Hawley Faces Blowback After Capitol Riot

    #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 storyHawley Faces Blowback for Role in Challenging Election ResultsThe junior senator from Missouri drew widespread condemnation but defended his decision to object to Congress’s certification of the election results.Senator Josh Hawley, Republican of Missouri, objected to Pennsylvania’s slate of electors just hours after a mob attacked the Capitol.Credit…Erin Schaff/The New York TimesJan. 8, 2021, 7:42 p.m. ETWASHINGTON — The day after Josh Hawley became the first Republican senator to say he would indulge President Trump’s demand that lawmakers try to overturn the election, a reporter asked if he thought the gambit would make him unpopular with his colleagues.“More than I already am?” he retorted.Even before Mr. Hawley lodged what was certain to be a futile objection to Congress’s certification of the results, the 41-year-old senator — regarded as a rising Republican star who could one day run for president — was far from the chamber’s most popular lawmaker.His insistence on pressing the challenge after a violent mob egged on by Mr. Trump stormed the Capitol to protest President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s victory, endangering the entire Congress and the vice president in a day of terror that left at least five people dead, has earned him pariah status in Washington.But while Mr. Hawley’s role in the riot may have left him shunned — at least for now — in official circles, it may only have improved his stock with his party’s base in his home state, which remains deeply loyal to Mr. Trump.His fellow Republicans in the Senate lined up to blame Mr. Hawley for the riot. The editorial boards of major newspapers in Missouri accused him of having “blood on his hands” and called on him to resign. His publisher canceled his book deal and his erstwhile mentor called his efforts to get Mr. Hawley elected to the Senate “the biggest mistake I’ve ever made.”“But for him, it wouldn’t have happened,” former Senator John C. Danforth of Missouri, the Republican elder statesman, told The Kansas City Star of his former protégé’s role in the riot.Mr. Hawley has remained defiant, arguing Wednesday evening that the electoral count in Congress was the proper venue to debate his concerns about fraud in the balloting, though he never made a specific charge of wrongdoing.“I will never apologize for giving voice to the millions of Missourians and Americans who have concerns about the integrity of our elections,” Mr. Hawley said in a statement. “That’s my job, and I will keep doing it.”But many Republicans dismissed his effort as grandstanding intended to further his own political ambitions. Some Democratic senators demanded his resignation. And on Friday, Mr. Biden said that Mr. Hawley and Senator Ted Cruz, Republican of Texas, were part of “the big lie” that had animated Mr. Trump’s refusal to concede, invoking Joseph Goebbels, Nazi Germany’s minister of propaganda.Mr. Hawley lashed out at Mr. Biden, accusing him of “undignified, immature, and intemperate behavior” and calling on him to “retract these sick comments.”Hours after the mob was cleared from the Capitol on Wednesday, Mr. Hawley refused to drop his challenge to the election results, objecting to Pennsylvania’s slate of electors and forcing both chambers into a two-hour debate on his call to throw out millions of the state’s votes.An image of Senator Mitt Romney, Republican of Utah, sitting behind Mr. Hawley and glaring as the Missourian gazed into television cameras and made his case from the Senate floor became an instant meme. Mr. Hawley’s challenge was rejected by broad bipartisan margins, with only six Republican senators joining him in supporting it.By Thursday, the fallout reached beyond the scorn of his colleagues. The publisher Simon & Schuster said it was canceling publication of his book “The Tyranny of Big Tech,” citing “his role in what became a dangerous threat.” Mr. Hawley responded with an angry statement that called his former publisher a “woke mob” and described their decision as “a direct assault on the First Amendment.”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.“This could not be more Orwellian,” Mr. Hawley said. “This is the left trying to cancel everyone they don’t approve of.”Yet some of the harshest criticism came from his own party. His bid was in direct defiance of Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, who had implored his members not to challenge the election results and force a divisive vote when there was no chance of changing the outcome. Searing blowback came from other Republicans who are also considered 2024 presidential contenders and could find themselves running against Mr. Hawley in a crowded primary.“Senator Hawley was doing something that was really dumbass,” Senator Ben Sasse, Republican of Nebraska, told NPR. “This was a stunt. It was a terrible, terrible idea. And you don’t lie to the American people. And that’s what’s been going on.”Senator Tom Cotton, Republican of Arkansas, also lashed out at Mr. Hawley in a Fox News interview on Thursday — though he did not call him out by name — for indulging the effort to overturn the election.“You have some senators who, for political advantage, were giving false hope to their supporters, misleading them into thinking that somehow yesterday’s actions in Congress could reverse the results of the election,” Mr. Cotton said in a clip circulated by his office. “That was never going to happen, yet these senators, as insurrectionists literally stormed the Capitol, were sending out fund-raising emails. That shouldn’t have happened, and it’s got to stop now.”Scott Jennings, a Republican strategist and former aide to Mr. McConnell, said in an interview that he believed Mr. Hawley’s decision to raise his objection to Pennsylvania’s electors hours after the mob stormed the Capitol was a “disqualifying” display of judgment.“Once the Capitol had been literally occupied, how can you give quarter to the viewpoint that caused the occupation?” Mr. Jennings said. “What would it have taken for Josh Hawley to withdraw his objection? How do you come back from that?”Some Democrats said Mr. Hawley never could. Senators Patty Murray of Washington, the No. 3 Democrat, and Chris Coons of Delaware, one of Mr. Biden’s closest allies in the chamber, demanded that Mr. Hawley resign. Senator Tim Kaine, Democrat of Virginia, argued that the Senate should censure him.“Any senator who stands up and supports the power of force over the power of democracy has broken their oath of office,” Ms. Murray said in a statement.Still, as Republicans struggled to recover from an episode that has exposed deep rifts in their ranks, there was evidence that Mr. Hawley’s actions on Wednesday had boosted his standing with influential elements of his party.The Senate Conservatives Fund, a political action committee founded by former Senator Jim DeMint of South Carolina, defended Mr. Hawley and urged its members to donate to his campaign.“The junior senator from Missouri’s decision to object to the election results showed tremendous courage,” the fund-raising pitch, signed by Mary Vought, the fund’s executive director, said. “Conservatives should stand shoulder to shoulder with him in defending our cherished values.”Christian Morgan, a St. Louis-based strategist and former top aide to Representative Ann Wagner, Republican of Missouri, also defended Mr. Hawley.“Bernie Sanders did not cause the attempted mass assassination of Republican Members of Congress, James Hodgkinson did,” Mr. Morgan wrote on Twitter, referring to a liberal activist who opened fire on Republican lawmakers during a softball practice in 2017. “Josh Hawley & Ted Cruz did not cause an angry mob to invade the Capitol and murder a Capitol Police.”Leaders of the Missouri Republican Party did not respond to interview requests on Friday. But their most recent Facebook post — celebrating National Missouri Day and written before the chaos on Wednesday — started drawing comments suggesting that party leaders begin searching for a candidate to mount a primary challenge to Roy Blunt, Missouri’s senior Republican senator, who voted to certify the election results.The former head of Missouri’s Republican Party, Jean Evans, said that she resigned from the position before the events on Wednesday in response to people demanding that the party bus people to protest in Washington and calling for violent behavior.“I was concerned and alarmed by what I was hearing from certain elements within the party calling for a coup,” Ms. Evans told a local television station.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

  • in

    Stop Pretending ‘This Is Not Who We Are’

    Opinion Video features innovative video journalism commentary — argued essays, Op-Ed videos, documentaries, and fact-based explanation of current affairs. The videos are produced by both outside video makers and The Times’s Opinion Video team.Opinion Video features innovative video journalism commentary — argued essays, Op-Ed videos, documentaries, and fact-based explanation of current affairs. The videos are produced by both outside video makers and The Times’s Opinion Video team. More

  • in

    We Need a Second Great Migration

    AdvertisementContinue reading the main storyOpinionSupported byContinue reading the main storyWe Need a Second Great MigrationGeorgia illuminates the path to Black power. It lies in the South. Follow me there.Opinion ColumnistJan. 8, 2021A young supporter at a rally for Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff in Atlanta in December.Credit…Damon Winter/The New York TimesATLANTA — A year ago this week, I packed some bags and left New York City for Atlanta.I’d lived in New York for 26 years. The city made me feel awake and alive — buildings tickling the sky, trains snaking underfoot. There was a seductive muscularity to the city, a feeling of riding the razor between your destiny and your demise.I had become a New Yorker, a Brooklyn boy. There I had raised my children. There I planned to live out my days.But the exquisite fierceness of the city, its blur of ambition and ingenuity, didn’t hide the fact that many of my fellow Black New Yorkers were locked in perpetual oppression — geographically, economically and politically isolated. All around the North, Black power, if it existed, was mostly municipal, or confined to regional representation. Black people were not serving as the dominant force in electing governors or senators or securing Electoral College votes.Bryan Stevenson, the executive director of the Equal Justice Initiative, calls migrants of the Great Migration “refugees and exiles of terror.” By extension, many Black communities in Northern cities, abandoned by the Black elite and spurned by white progressives, have become, functionally, permanent refugee camps.I had an idea to change that. An idea about Black self-determination. Simply put, my proposition was this: that Black people reverse the Great Migration — the mass migration of millions of African-Americans largely from the rural South to cities primarily in the North and West that spanned from 1916 to 1970. That they return to the states where they had been at or near the majority after the Civil War, and to the states where Black people currently constitute large percentages of the population. In effect, Black people could colonize the states they would have controlled if they had not fled them.In the first census after the Civil War, three Southern states — South Carolina, Mississippi and Louisiana — were majority Black. In Florida, Blacks were less than two percentage points away from constituting a majority; in Alabama, it was less than three points; in Georgia, just under four.Credit…Library of CongressBut the Great Migration hit the South like a bomb, siphoning off many of the youngest, brightest and most ambitious. In South Carolina, the Black share of the population declined from 55 percent to about 30 percent. Over six decades, six million people left the South.Reversing that tide would create dense Black communities, and that density would translate into statewide political power.Generally speaking, mass movements are largely for the young and unencumbered. Moving is expensive and psychologically taxing, displacing one from home, community and comforts. But I believe those obstacles are outweighed by opportunity. All who are able should consider this journey. That, it became clear, included me.I chose Atlanta because many of my friends were already there, having moved to the “hot” Southern city after college, and because I saw Georgia as on the cusp of transformational change. Little did I know that this election cycle would be a proof of concept for my proposal.In November, Georgia voted blue for the first time since Bill Clinton won the state in 1992. A majority of those who voted for Joe Biden were Black. This week, Georgia elected its first Black senator in state history — indeed the first popularly elected Black senator from the whole South: Raphael Warnock, a pastor at Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, where Martin Luther King Jr. once preached. Georgia also elected its first Jewish senator — only the second from the South since the 1880s: Jon Ossoff.The Rev. Raphael Warnock on Tuesday.Credit…Lynsey Weatherspoon for The New York TimesPerhaps most striking, the Warnock win was the first time in American history that a Black senator was popularly elected by a majority-Black coalition. It was a momentous flex of Black power.It was jarring to see that news almost immediately overshadowed by the vision of white rioters marauding through the Capitol on Wednesday. It was an affront, an attack. We must remember that while modern wails of white power may be expressed by a man in face paint and furs shouting from a purloined podium, Black power must materialize the way it did in Georgia.The success of the Democratic Party’s gains there were in part due to a massive voter enfranchisement effort led by Stacey Abrams, the former candidate for governor, whose group Fair Fight helped register 800,000 new voters in the state in just two years. But it was also attributable to a rise in the state’s Black population.In the early 1990s, Black people constituted a little over a quarter of the population; now they constitute about a third of it. The Atlanta metro area saw an increase of 251,000 Black people between 2010 and 2016. In 2018, The Atlantic magazine described this area as the “epicenter of what demographers are calling the ‘reverse Great Migration’” of Black people to the South.Credit…Sheila Pree BrightBiden carried the state by only around 12,000 votes. With this election, Georgia became the model for how Black people can experience true power in this country and alter the political landscape.I realize that I am proposing nothing short of the most audacious power play by Black America in the history of the country. This may seem an odd turn for me. I am not an activist. I am a newspaperman. I interpret. I bear witness.The moment that I realized that I could be more than an observer came in 2013. I was at the Ford Foundation for a series of lectures on civil rights when Harry Belafonte addressed the room. He spoke in a low-but-sure raspy voice, diminished by age, but deepened in solemnity. He was erudite and searing, and I was mesmerized. He posed a question: “Where are the radical thinkers?”That question kept replaying in my head, and it occurred to me that I had been thinking too small, all my life, about my approach to being in the world. I realized that a big idea could change the course of history.This proposition is my big idea.Many of the issues that have driven racial justice activists to organize and resist over the last few years — criminal justice, mass incarceration, voting rights and education and health policies — are controlled at the state level. The vast majority of people incarcerated in America, for example, are in state prisons: 1.3 million. Only about a sixth as many are in federal prisons. States have natural resources and indigenous industries. Someone has to control who is granted the right to exploit, and profit from, those resources. Why not Black people?Of course questions — and doubts — abound about such a proposal. Questions like: Isn’t the proposal racist on its face?No. The point here is not to impose a new racial hierarchy, but to remove an existing one. Race, as we have come to understand it, is a fiction; but, racism, as we have come to live it, is a fact. After centuries of waiting for white majorities to overturn white supremacy, it has fallen to Black people to do it themselves.I am unapologetically pro-Black, not because I believe in Black supremacy, which is as false and reckless a notion as white supremacy, but rather because I insist upon Black equity and equality. In a society and system in which white supremacy is ubiquitous and inveterate, Black people need fierce advocates to help restore the balance — or more precisely, to establish that balance in the first place.My call for Black power through Black majorities isn’t intended to exclude white people. Black majority doesn’t mean Black only. Even in the three states that once held Black majorities after the Civil War — South Carolina, Mississippi and Louisiana — those majorities were far from overwhelming, peaking at 61 percent, 59 percent and 52 percent.Nor does a majority-Black population mean a Blacks-only power structure. There are cities in the Northeast and Midwest, like Detroit, Philadelphia and Saint Louis, that have a Black majority or plurality and yet have white mayors. The point is not to create racial devotion, but rather race-conscious accountability.Others have objected: Isn’t the North just better for Black people than the South?Many Black people are leery of the South, if not afraid of it. They still have in their minds a retrograde South: dirty and dusty, overgrown and underdeveloped, a third-world region in a first-world country. They see a region that is unenlightened and repressive, overrun by religious zealots and open racists. The caricatures have calcified: hillbillies and banjos, Confederate flags and the Ku Klux Klan.To be sure, all of that is here. But racism is more evenly distributed across the country than we are willing to admit.It is true that in surveys, people in the North express support for fewer racially biased ideas than those in the South, but such surveys reveal only which biases people confess to, not the ones they subconsciously possess. So I asked the researchers at Project Implicit to run an analysis of their massive data set to see if there were regional differences in pro-white or anti-Black prejudice. The result, which one of the researchers described as “slightly surprising,” was that there was almost no difference in the level of bias between white people in the South and those in the Northeast or Midwest. (The bias of white people in the West was slightly lower.)White people outside the South are more likely to say the right words, but many possess the same bigotry. Racism is everywhere. And if that’s the case, wouldn’t you rather have some real political power to address that racism? And a yard!For decades Northern liberals have maintained the illusion of their moral superiority to justify their lack of progress in terms of racial equality. The North’s arrogant insistence that it had no race problem, or at least a minimal one, allowed a racialized police militarism to take root. It allowed housing and education segregation to flourish in supposedly “diverse” cities. It allowed for the rise of Black ghettos and concentrated poverty as well as white flight and urban disinvestment.Credit…Joshua Lott for The New York TimesThe supposed egalitarianism of Northern cities is a flimsy disguise for a white supremacy that diverges from its Southern counterpart only in style, not substance.And, while the North has been stuck in its self-righteous stasis, the savagery of the South has in some ways softened, or morphed. I am careful not to position this progress as fully redemptive or restorative. White supremacy clearly still exists here, corrupting everything from criminal justice to electoral access. The “New South” — with its thriving Black middle class and increasing political power — is still more aspiration than reality.But the wishful idealizing of a New South is no more naïve than a willful blindness to the transgressions of the Now North. As the author Jesmyn Ward wrote in 2018 in Time about her decision to leave Stanford and move back to Mississippi, American racism is an “infinite room”: “It is the bedrock beneath the soil. Racial violence and subjugation happen on the streets of St. Louis, on the sidewalks of New York City and in the BART stations of Oakland.”Protesting against police brutality in New York in June.Credit…Demetrius Freeman for The New York TimesBlack people have traversed this country in search of a place where the hand of oppression was lightest and the spirit of prosperity was greatest, but have had to learn a bitter lesson: Racism is everywhere.Finally: Won’t this idea encounter powerful opposition, even from liberals?Well, when has revolution ever been easy? When has a ruling class humbly handed over power or an insurgent class comfortably acquired it? Revolution, even a peaceful one, is frightening, and dangerous, because those with power will view any attempt at divestiture as an act of war.The opposition will most likely manifest in many ways. There will no doubt be opposition from the Black Establishment in the North, and those in the political class whose offices will be in jeopardy if the Black populations in their cities shrink.This is a very real concern. There may be some fluctuation in Black political representation during the course of a reverse migration, and, in the beginning, positions added in the South may not balance out those lost in the North. This is a function of how political machines operate, the way regions are gerrymandered, the way parties horse-trade, the way the establishment grooms ascendant stars, and the way voter suppression is inflicted. But, in the end, the benefit and abundance of Black political power would be to the good.Even some white liberals, those who call themselves allies, may shrink from the notion of Black power, drawing a false equivalence to the concept of racial superiority espoused by the white power movement. They recoil from the very mention of Black power even as they live out their lives in a world designed by and for white power, not only the hooded and hailing, but also the robed and badged.Others may simply mourn the notion of a path to Black equality that doesn’t feature a starring role for white liberal guilt, one that doesn’t center on their capacity for growth and evolution, but skips over them altogether.Still others may simply hesitate because it sounds like I’m throwing in the towel on the grand experiment of multiculturalism. I sought for months to put this proposal to Bill Clinton, someone I thought had deftly navigated the racial minefields in the South. I got my chance in the wee hours of a summer night on Martha’s Vineyard in 2019. He responded with curiosity but not endorsement. The lack of approval was not deflating, because it had not been requested. Black people need no permission to seek their own liberation.The idea received a more enthusiastic reception from the Rev. William Barber, the father of the Moral Monday civil rights protests, who in 2018 reactivated the Poor People’s Campaign, the multiracial project Martin Luther King was organizing when he was assassinated. Barber, a staunch believer in what he calls “fusion coalition” and cross-racial alliance, pointed out that most of the people who marched with him in the Moral Monday protests were white. And yet he was open to the concept of reverse migration.Atlantans gathered outside the Georgia State Capitol building in June.Credit…Alyssa Pointer/Atlanta Journal-Constitution, via Associated Press“From state up is the only way,” he told me. “If you change the South, you change the entire nation.” This is not surprising coming from Barber, whose own parents were reverse migrants who moved back South to fight racism.All these objections are to say nothing of the backlash to come from conservatives, of course. One lesson that history teaches is that the system reacts forcefully, often violently, when whiteness faces the threat of a diminution of its power. And that’s exactly what we saw in this week’s storming of the Capitol by supporters of the white power president Donald J. Trump, in concert with his efforts to overturn the election.For 150 years, Black Americans have been hoping and waiting. We have marched and resisted. Many of our most prominent leaders have appeased and kowtowed. We have seen our hard-earned gains eroded by an evolving white supremacy, while at the same time we have been told that true and full equality was imminent. But, there is no more guarantee of that today than there was a century ago.I say to Black people: Return to the South, cast down your anchor and create an environment in which racial oppression has no place.As Frederick Douglass once wrote about escaping slavery, “I prayed for 20 years but received no answer until I prayed with my legs.”Black people must once again pray with their legs.This is an adaptation from the forthcoming, “The Devil You Know: A Black Power Manifesto.”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 and Twitter (@NYTopinion), and Instagram.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

  • in

    Running Out the Clock on Trump Is Cowardly and Dangerous

    AdvertisementContinue reading the main storyOpinionSupported byContinue reading the main storyRunning Out the Clock on Trump Is Cowardly and DangerousForget the 25th Amendment. It’s Congress that was attacked and Congress that must act.Opinion ColumnistJan. 8, 2021Members of the National Guard early on the morning after the Capitol was attacked.Credit…Todd Heisler/The New York TimesThe most shocking thing about Wednesday’s assault on the Capitol is that it happened. A mob of Trump supporters, some of them armed, stormed and vandalized both chambers of Congress, sending duly-elected lawmakers into hiding and interrupting the peaceful transition of power from one administration to the next.That this was whipped up by the president — “We’re going to walk down to the Capitol and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women and we’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them” — makes it an actual attack on the separation of powers: an attempt, by the executive, to subvert the legislature by force and undermine the foundation of constitutional government.Nearly as shocking as the attack itself has been the response from Congress. On Wednesday night, its members resumed their count of the electoral vote and certified Joe Biden as the next president of the United States. So far so good. But then they adjourned into recess. It was Thursday afternoon before the Democratic leadership — Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the soon-to-be Senate Majority leader, Chuck Schumer — called for the president’s removal. And even then, they urged the vice president, Mike Pence, to use the 25th Amendment to do it, with impeachment as a backstop.This is backward. A physical attack on Congress by violent Trump supporters egged on by the president demands a direct response from Congress itself. Impeachment and conviction is that response. To rely on the executive branch to get Trump out of the White House is to abdicate the legislature’s constitutional responsibility to check presidential lawbreaking.There’s also the question of those members of Congress, like Senators Ted Cruz of Texas and Josh Hawley of Missouri, who helped bring the president’s mob into fruition by backing the effort to contest and overturn the electoral vote, an effort they carried on even after the Capitol was breached and terrorized Wednesday. Even if it’s just a motion to censure, Congress needs to act.The alternative — to go slow, or worse, to take no action at all — will only create a sense of impunity. And American history offers ample evidence of how impunity in the face of mob violence can lead to something much worse than the chaos and mayhem on Wednesday. As it is, five people have died as a direct result of the mob attack on the Capitol.On Sept. 14, 1874, more than 3,500 members of the White League — a paramilitary force of ex-Confederates and Democratic partisans — seized control of the Louisiana state house in New Orleans, as well as the city hall and the arsenal. They aimed to depose Gov. William Pitt Kellogg, a Republican, and install his Democratic opponent from the previous election in 1872.It almost worked. White Leaguers overwhelmed an opposing force of Black state militia (led by James Longstreet, a Confederate general turned staunch supporter of the state’s Reconstruction government), took control of the city and even held an inauguration for the man, John McEnery, who would lead a “redeemed” Louisiana. Within days, however, news of the coup reached Washington, where an enraged President Ulysses S. Grant ordered troops to New Orleans. Rather than fight a pitched battle for control of the city, the White League surrendered, allowing Kellogg to return as governor shortly thereafter.There was no punishment for the men who planned this attempted coup. So there was no reason not to try again. After the 1876 election, the White League seized New Orleans for a second time, ensuring victory for Francis T. Nicholls, the Democratic candidate for governor, and effectively ending Reconstruction in the state.Just as important, the White League became a model for others in the South who sought an end to “Negro rule” in their states. In 1875, “White-Line” Democrats in Mississippi began a campaign of terror ahead of an election for state treasurer. They targeted Republican officials for assassination, sparked riots where Black citizens were beaten and killed, and sent armed vigilantes to break up campaign meetings and drive Black voters away from the polls. “Carry the election peaceably if we can,” declared one Democratic newspaper editor in the state, “forcibly if we must.”The next year, in South Carolina, white Democrats used a similar approach — violence, fraud and intimidation — to “redeem” the state from Republican control and to try to deliver its electoral votes to Samuel Tilden, the Democratic nominee for president.The toppling of Reconstruction was not the inevitable result of white racism. It was contingent on any number of factors, with uncontrolled violence near the top of the list. The vigilantes and paramilitaries — the White Leagues and Red shirts — operated with virtual impunity as they beat, killed and terrorized Black voters and their Republican allies. They demonstrated, again and again, that the state was weak and could be challenged and taken.Despite its violence, the mob on Wednesday was, in many respects, very silly. Once inside the Capitol, they took selfies with police and posed for photos with each other. There were livestreams and a few people even wore costumes. They also took the time to grab souvenirs; a podium here, a letter from the Speaker’s office there. It was a big game, a lark.But a lark can still have serious consequences. This particular mob successfully breached the Capitol in an effort, however inchoate, to install Donald Trump as president for a second time, against the will of the majority of voters and their electors. The mob failed to change the outcome of the election, but it showed the world what was possible. If the mob and its enablers — the president and his allies — walk away unpunished, then the mob will return.Again, five people are dead who were alive when Wednesday began. Next time, it might be dozens. Or hundreds. Next time, our government might not bounce back so easily. Here, Congress doesn’t need courage. It just needs a sense of self-preservation.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