US Capitol attack

Subterms

    More stories

    • 200 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      The true meaning of 6 January: we must answer Trump’s neofascism with hope | Robert Reich

      by

      The true meaning of 6 January: we must answer Trump’s neofascism with hopeRobert ReichAs the first anniversary of the Capitol attack nears, all decent Americans must commit to deprogram this Republican cult. Doing so will mean paying attention to those we left behind 6 January will be the first anniversary one of the most shameful days in American history. On that date in 2021, the United States Capitol was attacked by thousands of armed loyalists to Donald Trump, some intent on killing members of Congress. About 140 officers were injured. Five people died.Capitol panel to investigate Trump call to Willard hotel in hours before attackRead moreEven now, almost a year later, Americans remain confused and divided about the significance of what occurred. Let me offer four basic truths:1. Trump incited the attack on the CapitolFor weeks before the attack, Trump urged supporters to come to Washington for a “Save America March” on 6 January, when Congress was to ceremonially count the electoral votes of Joe Biden’s win.“Big protest in DC on 6 January. Be there, will be wild!” he tweeted on 19 December. Then on 26 December: “See you in Washington DC on 6 January. Don’t miss it. Information to follow.” On 30 December: “JANUARY SIXTH, SEE YOU IN DC!” On 1 January: “The BIG Protest Rally in Washington DC will take place at 11am on 6 January. Locational details to follow. StopTheSteal!”At a rally just before the violence, Trump repeated his falsehoods about how the election was stolen.“We will never give up,” he said. “We will never concede. It will never happen. You don’t concede when there’s theft involved. Our country has had enough. We will not take it anymore.”He told the crowd Republicans were constantly fighting like a boxer with his hands tied behind his back, respectful of everyone – “including bad people”.But, he said, “we’re going to have to fight much harder … 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, because you’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength, and you have to be strong … We fight like hell. And if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.”He then told the crowd that “different rules” applied to them.“When you catch somebody in a fraud, you are allowed to go by very different rules. So I hope Mike [Pence] has the courage to do what he has to do, and I hope he doesn’t listen to the Rinos [Republicans in Name Only] and the stupid people that he’s listening to.”Then he dispatched the crowd to the Capitol as the electoral count was about to start. The attack came immediately after.2. The events of 6 January capped two months during which Trump sought to reverse the outcome of the electionShortly after the election, Trump summoned to the White House Republican lawmakers from Pennsylvania and Michigan, to inquire about how they might alter election results. He even called two local canvassing board officials in Wayne county, Michigan’s most populous county and one that overwhelmingly favored Biden.He asked Georgia’s Republican secretary of state to “find 11,780 votes”, according to a recording of that conversation, adding: “The people of Georgia are angry, the people of the country are angry. And there’s nothing wrong with saying that, you know, um, that you’ve recalculated.”He suggested that the secretary of state would be criminally prosecuted if he did not do as Trump told him: “You know what they did and you’re not reporting it. You know, that’s a criminal – that’s a criminal offense. And you know, you can’t let that happen. That’s a big risk to you and to Ryan, your lawyer. That’s a big risk.”He pressed the acting US attorney general and deputy attorney general to declare the election fraudulent. When the deputy said the department had found no evidence of widespread fraud and warned that it had no power to change the outcome of the election, Trump replied: “Just say that the election was corrupt + leave the rest to me” and his congressional allies.Trump and those allies continued to harangue the attorney general and top justice department officials nearly every day until 6 January. Trump plotted with an assistant attorney general to oust the acting attorney general and pressure lawmakers in Georgia to overturn election results. But Trump ultimately decided against it, after department leaders pledged to resign en masse.Presumably, more details of Trump’s attempted coup will emerge after the House select committee on 6 January gathers more evidence and deposes more witnesses.3. Trump’s attempted coup continuesTrump still refuses to concede the election and continues to say it was stolen. He presides over a network of loyalists and allies who have sought to overturn the election (and erode public confidence in it) by mounting partisan state “audits” and escalating attacks on state election officials. When asked recently about the fraudulent claims and increasingly incendiary rhetoric, a Trump spokesperson said the former president “supports any patriotic American who dedicates their time and effort to exposing the rigged 2020 presidential election”.Last week, Trump announced he will be hosting a news conference at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida on 6 January.“Remember,” he said, “the insurrection took place on 3 November. It was the completely unarmed protest of the rigged election that took place on 6 January.” (Reminder: they were armed.)He then referred to the House investigation: “Why isn’t the Unselect Committee of highly partisan political hacks investigating the CAUSE of the 6 January protest, which was the rigged presidential election of 2020?”He went on to castigate “Rinos”, presumably referring to his opponents within the party, such as representatives Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, who sit on the 6 January committee.“In many ways a Rino is worse than a Radical Left Democrat,” Trump said, “because you don’t know where they are coming from and you have no idea how bad they really are for our country.”He added: “The good news is there are fewer and fewer Rinos left as we elect strong patriots who love America.”Trump has endorsed a primary challenger to Cheney, while Kinzinger will leave Congress at the next election. Trump and other Republicans have also moved to punish 13 House Republicans who bucked party leadership and voted for a bipartisan infrastructure bill in November.4. All of this exposes a deeper problem with which America must dealTrump and his co-conspirators must be held accountable, of course. Hopefully, the select committee’s report will be used by the justice department in criminal prosecutions of Trump and his accomplices.But this in itself will not solve the underlying problem: a belligerent and narcissistic authoritarian has gained a powerful hold over a large portion of America. As many as 60% of Republican voters continue to believe his lies. Many remain intensely loyal. The Republican party is close to becoming a cult whose central animating idea is that the 2020 election was stolen from Trump.Capitol rioter in Michael Fanone assault asks judge to let him use dating websitesRead moreTrump has had help, of course. Fox News hosts and Facebook groups have promoted and amplified his ravings for their own purposes. Republicans in Congress and in the states have played along.But Trump’s attempted coup could not get as far as it has without a deepening anger and despair in a substantial portion of the population that has made such Americans susceptible to his swagger and lies.It is too simplistic to attribute this anger solely to racism or xenophobia. America has harbored white supremacist and anti-immigrant sentiments since its founding. The anger Trump has channeled is more closely connected to a profound loss of identity, dignity and purpose, especially among Americans who have been left behind – without college degrees, without good jobs, in places that have been hollowed out, economically abandoned, and disdained by much of the rest of the country.Trump filled a void in a part of America that continues to yearn for a strongman who will deliver it from despair. A similar void haunts other nations where democracy is imperiled. The challenge ahead for the US as elsewhere is to fill that void with hope rather than neofascism. This is the real meaning of 6 January.
      Robert Reich, a former US secretary of labor, is professor of public policy at the University of California at Berkeley and the author of Saving Capitalism: For the Many, Not the Few and The Common Good. His new book, The System: Who Rigged It, How We Fix It, is out now. He is a Guardian US columnist. His newsletter is at robertreich.substack.com
      TopicsUS Capitol attackOpinionUS politicsUS CongressDonald TrumpRepublicansThe far rightUS voting rightscommentReuse this content More

    • 163 Shares109 Views

      in Elections

      Capitol panel to investigate Trump call to Willard hotel in hours before attack

      by

      Capitol panel to investigate Trump call to Willard hotel in hours before attack Committee to request contents of the call seeking to stop Biden’s certification and may subpoena Rudy Giuliani Congressman Bennie Thompson, the chairman of the House select committee investigating the Capitol attack, has said the panel will open an inquiry into Donald Trump’s phone call seeking to stop Joe Biden’s certification from taking place on 6 January hours before the insurrection.The chairman said the select committee intended to scrutinize the phone call – revealed last month by the Guardian – should they prevail in their legal effort to obtain Trump White House records over the former president’s objections of executive privilege.“That’s right,” Thompson said when asked by the Guardian whether the select committee would look into Trump’s phone call, and suggested House investigators had already started to consider ways to investigate Trump’s demand that Biden not be certified as president on 6 January.Thompson said the select committee could not ask the National Archives for records about specific calls, but noted “if we say we want all White House calls made on January 5 and 6, if he made it on a White House phone, then obviously we would look at it there.”The Guardian reported last month that Trump, according to multiple sources, called lieutenants based at the Willard hotel in Washington DC from the White House in the late hours of 5 January and sought ways to stop Biden’s certification from taking place on 6 January.Trump first told the lieutenants his vice-president, Mike Pence, was reluctant to go along with the plan to commandeer his ceremonial role at the joint session of Congress in a way that would allow Trump to retain the presidency for a second term, the sources said.But as Trump relayed to them the situation with Pence, the sources said, on at least one call, he pressed his lieutenants about how to stop Biden’s certification from taking place on 6 January in a scheme to get alternate slates of electors for Trump sent to Congress.The former president’s remarks came as part of wider discussions he had with the lieutenants at the Willard – a team led by Trump lawyers Rudy Giuliani, John Eastman, Boris Epshteyn and Trump strategist Steve Bannon – about delaying the certification, the sources said.House investigators in recent months have pursued an initial investigation into Trump’s contacts with lieutenants at the Willard, issuing a flurry of subpoenas compelling documents and testimony to crucial witnesses, including Bannon and Eastman.But Thompson said that the select committee would now also investigate both the contents of Trump’s phone calls to the Willard and the White House’s potential involvement, in a move certain to intensify the pressure on the former president’s inner circle.“If we get the information that we requested,” Thompson said of the select committee’s demands for records from the Trump White House and Trump aides, “those calls potentially will be reflected to the Willard hotel and whomever.”A spokesperson for the select committee declined to comment about what else such a line of inquiry might involve. But a subpoena to Giuliani, the lead Trump lawyer at the Willard, is understood to be in the offing, according to a source familiar with the matter.The Guardian reported that the night before the Capitol attack, Trump called the lawyers and non-lawyers at the Willard separately, because Giuliani did not want to have non-lawyers participate on sensitive calls and jeopardize claims to attorney-client privilege.It was not clear whether Giulaini might invoke attorney-client privilege as a way to escape cooperating with the investigation in the event of a subpoena, but Congressman Jamie Raskin, a member of the select committee, noted the protection does not confer broad immunity.“The attorney-client privilege does not operate to shield participants in a crime from an investigation into a crime,” Raskin said. “If it did, then all you would have to do to rob a bank is bring a lawyer with you, and be asking for advice along the way.”The Guardian also reported Trump made several calls the day before the Capitol attack from both the White House residence, his preferred place to work, as well as the West Wing, but it was not certain from which location he phoned his top lieutenants at the Willard.The distinction is significant as phone calls placed from the White House residence, even from a landline desk phone, are not automatically memorialized in records sent to the National Archives after the end of an administration.That means even if the select committee succeeds in its litigation to pry free Trump’s call detail records from the National Archives, without testimony from people with knowledge of what was said, House investigators might only learn the target and time of the calls.TopicsUS Capitol attackDonald TrumpUS politicsRepublicansnewsReuse this content More

    • 175 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Capitol rioter in Michael Fanone assault asks judge to let him use dating websites

      by

      Capitol rioter in Michael Fanone assault asks judge to let him use dating websitesLawyer for Thomas Sibick tells judge he can be trusted to use social media to seek job and love during confinement at parents’ house A New York man charged with assaulting a police officer during the deadly Capitol riot has asked a judge for permission to use dating websites while confined at his parents’ house.Donald Trump could face charges for trying to obstruct certification of election, legal experts say Read moreThomas Sibick, of Buffalo, was part of a pro-Trump mob the then president urged to “fight like hell” to overturn his election defeat by Joe Biden.Five people died around events at the Capitol on 6 January, including a police officer and a rioter shot by law enforcement.Lawmakers hid or were hustled to safety as some rioters sought figures including Vice-President Mike Pence to capture or possibly kill.Sibick, 36, awaits trial. He is alleged to have taken part in an “ongoing violent assault” of the former Washington police officer Michael Fanone, “ripping off [his] radio – his lifeline for help – and his badge”.Fanone was seriously injured and has become a leading voice seeking accountability for the rioters and those who urged them on, giving emotional testimony to the House select committee investigating the attack.He announced last week that he had resigned as a police officer, to join CNN.02:36Earlier this year, Sibick sought to escape the company of other Capitol rioters in a Washington jail, even volunteering for solitary confinement.In October, Judge Amy Berman Jackson ordered Sibick to enter home confinement under supervision of his parents. He is not allowed to attend political rallies, use social media or watch talk shows on cable news.“There will only be one chance,” Judge Jackson said then. “If you violate my conditions, it will indicate my trust was misplaced.”Nonetheless, in a Christmas Day filing first reported by Business Insider, Sibick sought permission to use social media to look for a job and to “interact with members of the opposite gender for the purpose of establishing a friendship”.His attorney, Stephen Brennwald, wrote: “He is not seeking to use any social media application for any prohibited purpose, such as for political engagement, news reading, or any other activity that would violate not only the letter, but the spirit, of his release conditions.“Mr Sibick realises that if he were to meet someone on a social media site, he would be unable to leave his home for the purpose of going to dinner or to participate in other events. He does, however, feel the need to establish some sort of connection with someone (if possible, in light of his situation).”Sibick has said he now views the Capitol attack as “without question unconscionable”, a “disgrace to our nation” and “a scar Trump is ultimately responsible for”.But he is among more than 700 people charged. Earlier this month, a man who attacked officers with a fire extinguisher was sentenced to more than five years in prison, the longest sentence yet handed down.Capitol rioters hit with severe sentences and sharp reprimands from judgesRead moreRobert Palmer, 54 and from Florida, told a judge he now recognised that Trump and others stoked the riot by “spitting out the false narrative about a stolen election and how it was ‘our duty’ to stand up to tyranny”.“Little did I realise that they were the tyrannical ones desperate to hold on to power at any cost,” Palmer said, “even by creating the chaos they knew would happen with such rhetoric”.Trump was impeached for a second time, for inciting an insurrection. Ten House Republicans and seven senators turned against him but he was still acquitted.Members of the House 6 January committee have indicated that they could recommend Trump be criminally charged.TopicsUS Capitol attackUS politicsUS policingnewsReuse this content More

    • 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