US Capitol attack

Subterms

    More stories

    • 188 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Donald Trump could face charges for trying to obstruct certification of election, legal experts say

      by

      Trump could face charges for trying to obstruct certification of election, legal experts say Analysis: charges could be well founded given Trump’s incendiary remarks to a rally before the Capitol attack and aggressive pressuring of officials Expectation is growing that Donald Trump might face charges for trying to obstruct Congress from certifying Joe Biden’s election this year as a House panel collects more evidence into the 6 January attack on the Capitol, former prosecutors and other experts say.Speculation about possible charges against the former US president has been heightened by a recent rhetorical bombshell from Republican representative and 6 January panel vice-chair Liz Cheney suggesting the House panel is looking at whether Trump broke a law that bars obstruction of “official proceedings”.Former prosecutors say if the panel finds new evidence about Trump’s role interfering with Congress’ job to certify Biden’s election, that could help buttress a potential case by the Department of Justice.In varying ways, Cheney’s comments have been echoed by two other members of the House select committee, Republican Adam Kinzinger and Democrat Jamie Raskin, spurring talk of how an obstruction statute could apply to Trump, which would entail the panel making a criminal referral of evidence for the justice department to investigate, say DoJ veterans.Cheney’s remarks raising the specter of criminal charges against Trump came twice earlier this month at hearings of the committee. Experts believe the charges could be well founded given Trump’s actions on 6 January, including incendiary remarks to a rally before the Capitol attack and failure to act for hours to stop the riot, say former justice department officials.“Based on what is already in the public domain, there is powerful evidence that numerous people, in and out of government, attempted to obstruct – and did obstruct, at least for a while – an official proceeding – i.e., the certification of the Presidential election,” said former DOJ inspector general and former prosecutor Michael Bromwich in a statement to the Guardian. “That is a crime.”Although a House panel referral of obstruction by Trump would not force DOJ to open a criminal case against him, it could help provide more evidence for one, and build pressure on the justice department to move forward, say former prosecutors.Attorneygeneral Merrick Garland has declined to say so far whether his department may be investigating Trump and his top allies already for their roles in the Capitol assault.The panel has amassed significant evidence, including more than 30,000 records and interviews with more than 300 people, among whom were some key White House staff.The evidence against Trump himself could include his actions at the “Stop the Steal” rally not far from the White House, where he urged backers to march to the Capitol and “fight like hell [or] you’re not going to have a country any more”. Trump then resisted multiple pleas for hours from Republicans and others to urge his violent supporters to stop the attack.Recent rulings by Trump-appointed district court judges have supported using the obstruction statute, which federal prosecutors have cited in about 200 cases involving rioters charged by DOJ for their roles in the Capitol assault that injured about 140 police officers and left five dead.Still, experts note that the House panel’s mission has been to assemble a comprehensive report of what took place on 6 January and work on legislation to avoid such assaults on democracy. They caution that any criminal referral to DOJ documenting Trump’s obstruction of Congress will take time and more evidence to help bolster a DOJ investigation.Some DOJ veterans say that any referral to DOJ by the House panel for a criminal case against Trump – and perhaps top allies such as ex chief of staff Mark Meadows, whom the House last week cited for criminal contempt for refusing to be deposed – might also include Trump’s aggressive pressuring of federal and state officials before 6 January to block Biden’s win with baseless charges of fraud.Bromwich stressed that “the evidence is steadily accumulating that would prove obstruction beyond a reasonable doubt. The ultimate question is who the defendants would be in such an obstruction case. Evidence is growing that, as a matter of law and fact, that could include Trump, Meadows and other members of Trump’s inner circle.”Cheney teed up the issue about Trump’s potential culpability first at a House panel hearing last week, when she urged that Meadows be held in contempt for refusing to be deposed, and then hit Trump with a rhetorical bombshell.“We know hours passed with no action by the president to defend the Congress of the United States from an assault while we were counting electoral votes,” Cheney said.“Did Donald Trump, through action or inaction, corruptly seek to obstruct or impede Congress’ official proceeding to count electoral votes?” Cheney’s comments about Trump were very precise, including language from the criminal obstruction statute, and she stated that her question is a “key’ one for the panel’s legislative tasks.Raskin too has told Politico that the issue of whether Trump broke the law by obstructing an official proceeding is “clearly one of the things on the mind of some of the members of the committee”.“The possibility of obstruction charges is legally valid,” said Paul Rosenzweig, a former DOJ prosecutor who worked on Ken Starr’s team during the impeachment of former President Bill Clinton, noting that two district judges appointed by Trump “have recently said that the statute covers the efforts on January 6 to stop the electoral count”.For instance, Judge Dabney Friedrich in a recent opinion rejected the claim by some defendants who were challenging the DOJ view that the 6 January meeting of Congress fit the legal definition of an “official proceeding”.Rosenzweig posited that given Trump’s various attempts before 6 January to undermine the election results, a broader conspiracy case may be another option for prosecutors to pursue. Should DOJ look at broader conspiracy charges, Trump’s persistent pressures on acting attorney general Jeffrey Rosen and his top deputy for help blocking Biden’s victory wouldprobably be relevant, say ex-prosecutors.On one call on 27 December 2020, Trump pressed Rosen and his deputy to falsely state the election “illegal” and “corrupt” despite the fact that the DOJ had not found any evidence of widespread voter fraud.Paul Pelletier, a former acting chief of the fraud section at DOJ, said that Cheney’s statements were “carefully crafted and obviously based upon evidence the committee had seen. Should Congress ultimately refer the case to DOJ for investigation and prosecution, the DOJ’s investigation would not be limited to a single obstruction charge, but would more likely investigate broader conspiracy charges potentially involving Trump and other key loyalists.”The panel has accelerated its pace recently by sending out dozens of subpoenas for documents and depositions, some to close Trump aides. Meadows has become a central focus of the inquiry, in part over tweets he received on and near the insurrection that are among approximately 9,000 documents he gave the panel, much to Trump’s chagrin.As Trump’s efforts to thwart the panel from moving forward have had limited success, he has relied on sending out splenetic email attacks, including one last month that read: “The Unselect Committee itself is Rigged, stacked with Never Trumpers, Republican enemies, and two disgraced RINOs, Cheney and Kinzinger, who couldn’t get elected ‘dog catcher’ in their districts.”Despite Trump’s angry attacks on the panel, some ex-prosecutors say that prosecuting Trump – if enough evidence is found to merit charges – is important for the health of American democracy.Former Georgia US attorney Michael J Moore told the Guardian: “I hate to think of a legal system that would allow the most powerful person in the country to go unchallenged when he has abdicated his highest priority, that being to keep our citizens safe. Trump’s conduct that day was not unlike a mob boss.”TopicsUS Capitol attackDonald TrumpUS politicsanalysisReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump asks supreme court to block release of 6 January records

      by

      Trump asks supreme court to block release of 6 January recordsAn appeals court ruled against the former US president two weeks ago but prohibited documents from being turned over Donald Trump turned to the supreme court Thursday in a last-ditch effort to keep documents away from the House committee investigating the 6 January insurrection at the Capitol.A federal appeals court ruled against the former US president two weeks ago, but prohibited documents held by the National Archives from being turned over before the supreme court had a chance to weigh in. Trump appointed three of the nine justices.Michael Flynn sues Capitol attack committee in bid to block subpoenaRead moreTrump is claiming that as a former president he has right to assert executive privilege over the records, arguing that releasing them would damage the presidency in the future.But Joe Biden determined that the documents were in the public interest and that executive privilege should therefore not be invoked.The documents include presidential diaries, visitor logs, speech drafts, handwritten notes “concerning the events of January 6” from the files of former chief of staff Mark Meadows, and “a draft executive order on the topic of election integrity”, the Archives has said.The House committee has said the records are vital to its investigation into the run-up to the deadly riot that was aimed at overturning the results of the 2020 presidential election.TopicsDonald TrumpUS Capitol attackUS politicsUS supreme courtLaw (US)newsReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Capitol rioters hit with severe sentences and sharp reprimands from judges

      by

      Capitol rioters hit with severe sentences and sharp reprimands from judgesSome of the longest sentences have gone to rioters charged with ‘assaulting a police officer with a dangerous weapon’ Judges across the US have been handing down stiff sentences and hard words in recent weeks for extremist supporters of Donald Trump who took part in the 6 January insurrection at the US Capitol.Since a federal judge sentenced Jacob Chansley, the US Capitol rioter nicknamed the “QAnon shaman” for his horned headdress, to 41 months in prison last month, more US judges have been delivering strict sentences to defendants charged over their roles in the attacks earlier this year.Since the riots, federal prosecutors have brought cases against 727 individuals over their involvement in the deadly riots. With hundreds facing criminal charges, Trump has come under growing scrutiny from the House select committee investigating the attacks.The longest sentence so far was handed down to a Florida man who threw a wooden plank and fire extinguisher at police officers during the riots. On 17 December, Judge Tanya Chutkan sentenced Robert Palmer to 63 months of jail time, describing the prison term as “the consequence of those actions”.According to Chutkan, individuals who attempted to “violently overthrow the government” and “stop the peaceful transition of power” would be met with “absolutely certain punishment”.At his hearing, Palmer said he was “really, really ashamed” of his behavior, adding that he was “absolutely devastated” to see the “coldness and calculation” that he used to attack Capitol police.On Tuesday, a Washington state man was sentenced to 46 months of prison time for assaulting police officers with a speaker and a metal baton during the riots. According to court documents, Devlyn Thompson helped move police shields up against a line of rioters in a tunnel, as well as hit police officers.US District Judge Royce Lamberth told Thompson, “The violence that happened that day was such a blatant disregard to the institutions of government … You’re shoving and pushing … and participating in this riot for hours.”Thompson is the second rioter, after Palmer, to be sentenced for the felony of assaulting a police officer with a dangerous weapon. More than 140 other rioters face the same charge.Lamberth also sentenced an 81-year-old Army veteran on the same day to three years of probation for illegally breaching the Capitol.Gary Wickersham, one of the oldest of more than 700 rioters facing charges, was sentenced to 90 days of home detention, and will also have to pay a $2,000 fine and $500 for building damage.Defense lawyers argued against any confinement, saying that Wickersham would be unable to visit his grandchildren during his “golden years”.During his hearing, Wickersham asked for “mercy” from Lamberth and explained that he went to the Capitol because “you get bored” sitting at home.“Mr Wickersham, I appreciate what you’ve done here. I think you have led the way for others to recognize that the jig is up,” said Lamberth. The 78-year-old judge also told Wickersham that he is “the first defendant I’ve had that’s older than me in quite some time”.On Tuesday, a Pennsylvania man was also sentenced over his involvement in the riots after his wife accidentally implicated him in a Facebook status. US District Judge James Boasberg sentenced Gary Edwards to one year of probation, 200 hours of community service, as well as a $2,500 fine and $500 in damage fees.In a since deleted Facebook post, Edward’s wife wrote, “Okay ladies, let me tell you what happened as my husband was there inside the Capitol,” adding, “these were people who watched their rights being taken away, their votes stolen from them, their state officials violating the constitution of their country.”According to authorities, Edwards took pictures, helped teargassed protesters and entered an office of an unidentified congressional official.“There really is no more serious and profound action democracy takes than the certifying of a lawful and fair election,” Boasberg said. “And to the extent anyone would interfere with that, particularly with force of violence, they strike at the root of democracy,” he added.That message would seem to go for organizers of the 6 January events as well as participants in the violence.On 22 November, US District Judge Royce Lamberth sentenced Capitol rioter Frank Scavo to 60 days in prison, one of the strictest sentences handed down to a misdemeanor defendant and more than four times the prosecutor’s recommendation of two weeks.Scavo, a Trump supporter from Pennsylvania and former school board official, was found guilty of chartering buses to transport approximately 200 residents from Pennsylvania to the Capitol on 6 January.TopicsUS Capitol attackSentencingnewsReuse this content More

    • 125 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      Capitol attack committee seeks appearance by Trump ally Jim Jordan

      by

      Capitol attack committee seeks appearance by Trump ally Jim JordanPanel writes to Republican congressman from Ohio, calling for meeting next month The House committee investigating the events around the 6 January attack on the US Capitol has asked the congressman and close Trump ally Jim Jordan to make an appearance before the panel.Jordan is a conservative Republican from Ohio who is seen as a close confidant of the former US president.“We write to seek your voluntary co-operation in advancing our investigation,” the committee said in a letter to Jordan, asking for an appearance early in January.The letter revealed that the panel was seeking to ask Jordan about the role Trump might have played as the attack unfolded. The mob of pro-Trump supporters had stormed the Capitol in a bid to stop the certification of Joe Biden’s victory in the 2020 election.“We understand that you had at least one and possibly multiple communications with President Trump on January 6th. We would like to discuss each such communication with you in detail,” it said.The letter also revealed its interests were wider than the attack itself and included the activities of Trump allies and aides holed up in a Washington hotel. “We also wish to inquire about any communications you had on January 5th or 6th with those in the Willard War Room, the Trump legal team, White House personnel or others involved in organizing or planning the actions and strategies for January 6th,” the letter read.The request is the second by the nine-member panel this week to go after a sitting Republican congressman and launches a new phase for the panel.Michael Flynn sues Capitol attack committee in bid to block subpoenaRead moreScott Perry, a Pennsylvania Republican, has also been asked by the panel to provide documents and sit for an interview. But on Tuesday Perry said he would not comply with the panel.Perry’s refusal to appear set up a potentially fraught battle if the panel decides to subpoena him and he – like other Trump allies – decides to ignore that, too. Jordan is widely expected to decline to cooperate.Jordan, a staunch Trump ally, has been identified as the Republican lawmaker who sent a message to Trump’s chief of staff Mark Meadows the day before the Capitol attack outlining a plan to stop Biden from reaching the White House.The panel has been looking at numerous messages sent to Meadows, many of which were urging Trump to call off a mob of his supporters as they ransacked the Capitol building.Jordan forwarded a text message to Meadows on 5 January, one of the congressman’s aides has confirmed, containing details of the plot to block Biden.The message was sent to Jordan by Joseph Schmitz, a former US defense department inspector general, who outlined a “draft proposal” to pressure the then vice-president, Mike Pence, to refuse to certify audited election returns on 6 January.A portion of the message was revealed by the Democratic committee member and congressman Adam Schiff. It read: “On January 6, 2021, Vice-President Mike Pence, as president of the Senate, should call out all electoral votes that he believes are unconstitutional as no electoral votes at all.”TopicsUS Capitol attackUS politicsHouse of RepresentativesUS CongressDonald TrumpnewsReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Michael Flynn sues Capitol attack committee in bid to block subpoena

      by

      Michael Flynn sues Capitol attack committee in bid to block subpoenaLawsuit filed by longtime adviser to Donald Trump is the latest in a flood of litigation by targets of the committee Michael Flynn, a longtime adviser to Donald Trump, has sued the congressional committee investigating the deadly 6 January attack on the US Capitol in hopes of blocking it from obtaining his phone records.Flynn alleged in a lawsuit, filed in federal court in Florida, that a subpoena issued to him by the House of Representatives select committee was too broad in scope and punishes him for constitutionally protected speech as a private citizen.Flynn also alleged in the lawsuit that the committee “has no authority to conduct business because it is not a duly constituted select committee”.An appeals court has rejected that argument, ruling on 9 December that the committee was valid and entitled to see White House records Trump has tried to shield.The committee issued a subpoena to Flynn, Trump’s short-lived former national security adviser, in November, seeking testimony and documents about a “command center” at Washington’s Willard Hotel set up to steer efforts to deny Joe Biden his November 2020 election victory.After the election Flynn urged Trump to deploy the military to overturn the results and gave speeches sowing doubts about the vote.The select committee did not comment.Flynn’s lawsuit is the latest in a flood of litigation by targets of the committee, seeking to prevent it from enforcing its subpoenas.Alex Jones, the conspiracy theorist and founder of the rightwing website Infowars, filed a similar case on Monday.Trump has similarly sought to block the committee from obtaining his White House records from 6 January and the preceding days, asserting they are protected by a legal doctrine called executive privilege. An appeals court rejected Trump’s arguments last week. He is expected to appeal to the supreme court.Flynn was previously charged as part of former special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian influence on the 2016 presidential election won by Trump.Flynn, a retired Army general, pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about interactions he had with Russia’s ambassador to the US in January 2017. Trump later pardoned him.TopicsMichael FlynnUS Capitol attackDonald TrumpUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 113 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Republican congressman refuses to cooperate with Capitol attack panel

      by

      Republican congressman refuses to cooperate with Capitol attack panelScott Perry is first sitting member of Congress to get request for interview as Trump announces 6 January press conference Scott Perry, a Pennsylvania Republican and the first sitting member of Congress to be requested to provide documents and sit for an interview with the committee investigating the Capitol riot, said on Tuesday he would not comply with the panel.Why Trump appears deeply unnerved as Capitol attack investigation closes inRead moreThe news came shortly after Donald Trump provocatively announced that he will hold a press conference at his Mar-a-Lago resort on 6 January, the first anniversary of the deadly attack on Congress.Perry’s refusal to appear sets up a potentially fraught battle if the panel decides to subpoena him and he – like other Trump allies – decides to ignore that too.The committee has already recommended other no-shows, such as Trump aide Steve Bannon, be prosecuted for their non-compliance.Perry claimed the 6 January committee was “illegitimate, and not duly constituted under the rules of the US House of Representatives”.Successive court rulings have said that the committee was properly formed and does have the investigative powers it is using.The House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, rejected an attempt by the minority leader, Kevin McCarthy, to put Republicans including Jim Jordan of Ohio – a close Trump ally and a subject of investigation regarding the Capitol attack – on to the 6 January committee. Only two Republicans, Trump critics Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, are now part of its work.Trump announced his press conference in a statement replete with familiar invective and lies about supposed electoral fraud and the House committee.“I will be having a news conference on 6 January [2022] at Mar-a-Lago to discuss all of these points, and more,” he said.“Until then, remember, the insurrection took place on 3 November, it was the completely unarmed protest of the rigged election that took place on 6 January.”Five people, including a Trump supporter shot by law enforcement and a Capitol police officer, died around the events of 6 January 2021, when a pro-Trump mob stormed Congress after he told supporters to “fight like hell” to overturn his defeat by Joe Biden.More than 700 people have been charged with offenses connected to the riot. Most rioters were not armed with guns but attacked police with other weapons. Guns and explosives were found and bombs planted. On Monday, one rioter who attacked police was sentenced to more than five years in jail.Trump was impeached for inciting an insurrection but acquitted at his Senate trial when enough Republicans stayed loyal.His continued presence in national politics and apparent intention to run for president again has stoked jagged divides which some observers fear point the US towards serious discord or even civil war.On Monday night the disgraced former Fox News host Bill O’Reilly, with whom the former president has staged an arena tour, said Trump was “gonna run again”.“I’m trying to tell President Trump, run on your record,” O’Reilly told NewsNation. “He’s gonna run again. I said, Run on your record, because your record’s pretty darn good.’”Trump seems determined to run, or merely to retain control of the Republican party, through stoking division and anger with false claims about the election and the most serious attack on the US Capitol since the war of 1812.In stark contrast, Pelosi has announced that Congress will mark the first anniversary of 6 January in a spirit of “solemn observance”.“Preparations are under way for a full program of events,” she said, “including a discussion among historians about the narrative of that day; an opportunity for members to share their experiences and reflections from that day; and a prayerful vigil in the evening.”The 6 January committee also expects to stage events in the new year, with public hearings as it closes in on Trump’s role in the riot. On Sunday, Kinzinger said the panel would determine if Trump committed a crime.“Nobody is above the law,” he said. “He’s not a king. Former presidents, they aren’t former kings.”Trump has sued, so far unsuccessfully, to stop the committee accessing White House documents from his time in power. Two of his closest aides are in serious legal jeopardy for taking similar stands.Bannon has pleaded not guilty to contempt of Congress for refusing to cooperate with the 6 January committee. He faces a fine and jail time if convicted.The House has recommended the same criminal charge for Mark Meadows, Trump’s last chief of staff and a former congressman.US ‘closer to civil war’ than most would like to believe, new book saysRead moreOn Monday, citing sources close to Trump, the Guardian revealed his deepening fear as the 6 January committee continues its work.“The former president’s anger largely mirrors the kind of expletives he once directed at the Russia inquiry and the special counsel investigation [led by Robert Mueller] when he occupied the White House,” the Guardian reported.“But the rapidly accelerating investigation into whether Trump and top aides unlawfully conspired to stop the certification of Joe Biden’s victory at the 6 January joint session appears to be unnerving him deeply.”On Twitter, Peter Strzok, a former FBI agent and member of the special counsel’s team, wrote: “Almost as if – what did he say about Mueller? – ‘I’m fucked.’”TopicsUS Capitol attackRepublicansUS CongressDonald TrumpUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 113 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      US Capitol attack panel seeks interview with Scott Perry

      by

      US Capitol attack panel seeks interview with Scott Perry Republican pushed Justice officials to overturn election and met Trump before attack, say investigators The House panel investigating the US Capitol insurrection on 6 January has requested an interview and documents from Scott Perry, the Republican representative of Pennsylvania, marking the first time the committee has publicly sought to interview a sitting member of Congress.The latest request launches a new phase for the lawmakers on the committee, who have so far resisted reaching out to one of their own as they investigate the insurrection by former president Donald Trump’s supporters and his efforts to overturn the election.Why Trump appears deeply unnerved as Capitol attack investigation closes inRead morePerry and other congressional Republicans met Trump before the attack and strategised about how they could block the results at the 6 January electoral count.In a letter to Perry, Mississippi Rep Bennie Thompson, the Democratic chairman of the panel, said the panel had received evidence from multiple witnesses, including the then-acting attorney general, Jeffrey Rosen, and the then-acting deputy attorney general, Richard Donoghue, that Perry had “an important role” in efforts to install Justice Department official Jeffrey Clark as acting attorney general.The letter requests an interview with Perry, who pushed the Justice Department to overturn the election and met Trump ahead of the violent attack, according to investigators. The panel also asked for any documents and correspondence between Perry and Trump, his legal team or anyone involved in the planning of the events of 6 January.A request for comment left with Perry’s office was not immediately returned.The lawmaker representing Pennsylvania’s 10th District was cited more than 50 times in a Senate Judiciary report released in October outlining how Trump’s effort to overturn his 2020 election defeat brought the Justice Department to the brink of chaos and prompted top officials there and at the White House to threaten to resign.Perry, who has continuously disputed the validity of Joe Biden’s victory in Pennsylvania, has said he obliged Trump’s request for an introduction to Clark, then an assistant attorney general whom Perry knew from unrelated legislative matters. The three men went on to discuss their shared concerns about the election, Perry has said.The Justice Department found no evidence of widespread fraud in Pennsylvania or any other state, and senior Justice officials dismissed Perry’s claimsThe recent Senate report outlined a call Perry made to Donoghue last December to say the department was failing to do its job with respect to the elections. Perry encouraged Donoghue to elicit Clark’s help because he’s “the kind of guy who could really get in there and do something about this”, the report said.Perry had previously said his “official communications” with Justice Department officials were consistent with the law.The letter sent on Monday night is the first time the panel has publicly released a request to a fellow member of Congress as it investigates Trump’s communications with his Republican allies. But the panel notably did not subpoena Perry, as it has other witnesses close to Trump whom lawmakers believe have relevant information.In his letter to Perry, Thompson added that the panel “has tremendous respect for the prerogatives of Congress and the privacy of its members. At the same time, we have a solemn responsibility to investigate fully all of these facts and circumstances.”The panel voted in November to hold Clark in contempt after he showed up for a deposition yet declined to answer questions. But Thompson has said he will hold off pursuing the charges and allow Clark to attend another deposition and try again. Clark’s lawyer has said Clark intends to assert his fifth amendment right not to incriminate himself, but the deposition has been repeatedly postponed as Clark has dealt with an unidentified medical condition.The panel has already interviewed about 300 people as it seeks to create a comprehensive record of the attack and the events leading up to it.Trump at the time was pushing false claims of widespread voter fraud and lobbying the vice-president, Mike Pence, and Republican members of Congress to try to overturn the count at the 6 January congressional certification. Election officials across the country, along with the courts, had repeatedly dismissed Trump’s claims.An angry mob of Trump supporters were echoing his false claims as they clashed with Capitol police and broke into the building that day, interrupting the certification of Biden’s victory.In his request for a meeting with Perry, Thompson wrote: “We would like to meet with you soon to discuss these topics, but we also want to accommodate your schedule.”TopicsUS Capitol attackUS politicsRepublicansDonald TrumpDemocratsnewsReuse this content More

    • 175 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      US ‘closer to civil war’ than most would like to believe, new book says

      by

      US ‘closer to civil war’ than most would like to believe, new book saysAcademic and member of CIA advisory panel says analysis applied to other countries shows US has ‘entered very dangerous territory’

      Robert Reich: Beware the big lie, big anger and big money
      The US is “closer to civil war than any of us would like to believe”, a member of a key CIA advisory panel has said.The analysis by Barbara F Walter, a political science professor at the University of California at San Diego who sits on the Political Instability Task Force, is contained in a book due out next year and first reported by the Washington Post.Why Trump appears deeply unnerved as Capitol attack investigation closes inRead moreIt comes amid growing concern about jagged political divisions deepened by former president Donald Trump’s refusal to accept defeat in the 2020 election.Trump’s lie that his defeat by Joe Biden was caused by mass electoral fraud stoked the deadly attack on the US Capitol on 6 January, over which Trump was impeached and acquitted a second time, leaving him free to run for office again.The “big lie” is also fueling moves among Republicans to restrict voting by groups that lean Democratic and to make it easier to overturn election results.Such moves remain without counter from Democrats seeking a federal response but stymied by the filibuster, the Senate rule that demands supermajorities for most legislation.In addition, though Republican presidential nominees have won the popular vote only once since 1988, the GOP has by playing political hardball stocked the supreme court with conservatives, who outnumber liberals 6-3.All such factors and more – including a pandemic which has stoked resistance to government – have contributed to the divide Walter has studied.Last month, she tweeted: “The CIA actually has a taskforce designed to try to predict where and when political instability and conflict is likely to break out around the world. It’s just not legally allowed to look at the US. That means we are blind to the risk factors that are rapidly emerging here.”The book in which Walter looks at those risk factors in the US, How Civil Wars Start, will be published in January. According to the Post, Walter writes: “No one wants to believe that their beloved democracy is in decline, or headed toward war.But “if you were an analyst in a foreign country looking at events in America – the same way you’d look at events in Ukraine or Ivory Coast or Venezuela – you would go down a checklist, assessing each of the conditions that make civil war likely”.Capitol attack panel will determine if Trump committed crime – RepublicanRead more“And what you would find is that the United States, a democracy founded more than two centuries ago, has entered very dangerous territory.”Walter, the Post said, concludes that the US has passed through stages of “pre-insurgency” and “incipient conflict” and may now be in “open conflict”, beginning with the Capitol riot.Citing analytics used by the Center for Systemic Peace, Walter also says the US has become an “anocracy” – “somewhere between a democracy and an autocratic state”.The US has fought a civil war, from 1861 to 1865 and against states which seceded in an attempt to maintain slavery.Estimates of the death toll vary. The American Battlefield Trust puts it at 620,000 and says: “Taken as a percentage of today’s population, the toll would have risen as high as 6 million souls.”On Sunday, Sidney Blumenthal, a former Clinton adviser turned biographer of Abraham Lincoln and Guardian contributor, said: “The secessionists in 1861 accepted Lincoln’s election as fair and legitimate.”The current situation, he said, “is the opposite. Trump’s questioning of the election, which was at first rejected by Republican leaders after the attack on the Capitol, has led to a crisis a genuine crisis of legitimacy.”With Republicans’ hold on the levers of power while in the electoral minority a contributing factor, Blumenthal said, “This crisis metastasises, throughout the system over time, so that it’s possible any close election will be claimed to be false and fraudulent.”Blumenthal said he did not expect the US to pitch into outright civil war, “section against section” and involving the fielding of armies.If rightwing militia groups were to seek to mimic the secessionists of the 1860s and attempt to “seize federal forts and offices by force”, he said, “I think you’d have quite a confidence it would be over very, very quickly [given] a very strong and firm sense at the top of the US military of its constitutional, non-political role.“… But given the proliferation of guns, there could be any number of seemingly random acts of violence that come from these organised militias, which are really vigilantes and with partisan agendas, and we haven’t entered that phase.“The real nightmare would be that kind of low-intensity conflict.”Among academics, Walter is not alone in diagnosing severe problems with US democracy. In November, the International IDEA thinktank, based in Sweden, added the US to a list of “backsliding” democracies, thanks to a “visible deterioration” it dated to 2019.Republicans are shamelessly working to subvert democracy. Are Democrats paying attention? Read moreIt also identified “a historic turning point … in 2020-21 when former president Donald Trump questioned the legitimacy of the 2020 election results”.Polling has revealed similar worries – and warnings. In November, the Public Religion Research Institute asked voters if they agreed with a statement: “Because things have gotten so far off track, true American patriots may have to resort to violence in order to save our country.”The poll found that 18% of respondents agreed. Among Republicans, however, the figure was 30%.On Twitter, Walter thanked the Post for covering her book. She also said: “I wish I had better news for the world but I couldn’t stay silent knowing what I know.”TopicsUS politicsRepublicansDonald TrumpUS Capitol attackUS crimeAmerican civil warnewsReuse this content More