US Capitol attack

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares149 Views

      in US Politics

      Republican media blitz aims to discredit Capitol attack hearings

      by

      Republican media blitz aims to discredit Capitol attack hearingsTrump loyalists to flood airwaves with claims inquiry lacks legitimacy, indicating their concern, pundits say Republican politicians are preparing a media onslaught to deflect, discredit and delegitimise Thursday’s opening hearing of the House of Representatives panel investigating the January 6 insurrection at the US Capitol.While major TV networks broadcast the first session live in prime time, Rupert Murdoch’s Fox News will stick with its usual show, Tucker Carlson Tonight, which has long pushed Donald Trump’s talking points.Trump loyalists are expected to flood the airwaves with claims that the January 6 select committee lacks credibility and Democrats are out of touch with more pressing concerns such as inflation, crime, border security and baby formula shortages.Elise Stefanik, chair of the House Republican Conference, told reporters on Capitol Hill on Wednesday: “They are scrambling to change the headlines, praying that the nation will focus on their partisan witch-hunt instead of our pocketbooks. It will not work.”In what amounted to an attempt at a prebuttal, Stefanik described the January 6 committee as “unconstitutional” and “illegitimate” and designed to “punish” the House speaker Nancy Pelosi’s opponents. She criticised its decision to hire James Goldston, the former president of ABC News, to help make its presentation compelling.“This further solidifies what we have known from day one: this committee is not about seeking the truth – it’s a smear campaign against President Donald Trump, against Republican members of Congress, and against Trump voters across this country.”The comments set the template for Republican counter-programming on conservative media such as Fox News, Newsmax, the One America News Network, Steve Bannon’s “War Room” podcast and other outlets that will seek to portray the hearings as a sinister show trial in which Trump supporters are the victims.Congress’s January hearings aim to be TV spectacular that ‘blows the roof off’Read moreJim Jordan, the top Republican on the House judiciary committee, wrote on the Federalist website: “The committee’s real goal, and what it hopes to achieve with its unprecedented subpoenas and its bright-light hearings, is a repudiation of conservatism and all those who hold conservative values.”For their part, Democrats hope that the hearings will cut through a crowded news agenda much more successfully than the former special counsel Robert Mueller’s turgid testimony about Trump’s ties to Russia. After an investigation entailing more than 100 subpoenas, 1,000 interviews and 100,000 documents, they are likely to characterise the riot as not a spontaneous gathering but part of a broader conspiracy.Congressman Jamie Raskin, a Democrat on the committee, promised in April: “The hearings will tell a story that will really blow the roof off the House. Because it is a story of the most heinous and dastardly political offence ever organised by a president and his followers and his entourage in the history of the United States.”Trump, whose “big lie” falsely claims that he won the 2020 election, was impeached by the House for his role in encouraging the assault on democracy. Dozens of the insurrectionists have been brought to justice, many having been convicted or pleading guilty to serious crimes.But Republicans, who previously rejected an independent September 11-style bipartisan commission, have sought to downplay the attack and deny the legitimacy of the committee, alleging that it is driven by political motivations to abolish the electoral college and prevent Trump’s re-election.They complain that Jordan of Ohio and his colleague Jim Banks of Indiana were barred from taking part by Pelosi. Democrats say the pair were disqualified because they backed Trump’s efforts to overturn the election and sought to block any investigation.Banks said at a press conference on Wednesday: “Speaker Pelosi blocked us because she’s afraid of what a real investigation would uncover.” Along with seven Democrats, the committee does have two Republicans but both are staunch Trump critics: Liz Cheney of Wyoming, daughter of the former vice-president Dick Cheney, and Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, who is not seeking re-election. Both were censured by the Republican party in February.Kinzinger responded to Fox News’s lack of planned coverage by tweeting: “If you work for @FoxNews and want to maintain your credibility as a journalist, now is a good time to speak out, or quit. Enough is enough.”News coverage of the hearings will be relegated from Fox News to its sister channel, Fox Business Network, which has much lower ratings. Carlson, who will go head to head with the hearing at 8pm on Thursday, has claimed the insurrection “barely rates as a footnote” and described the committee as “wholly illegitimate”. US networks to air January 6 hearings – but Fox News sticks with Tucker CarlsonRead moreTara Setmayer, a former Republican communications director on Capitol Hill turned Trump critic, said: “The Republican party and rightwing media is no longer interested in telling the truth, which is why they’re avoiding showing the hearings.“Democrats need to consistently hammer home to the American people the importance of what they’re doing and let the facts speak for themselves and not be distracted by the kabuki theatre that Republicans will try to put on to distract from the truth.”Setmayer added: “The truth is s so damning for the Republican party and they know it. We’re hearing about everything else because they know they can’t stand on the merits of the other side. That’s why we’re hearing about caravans and crime and all of the hot-button cultural issues that fuel the Republican party and get their people riled up instead of the truth of January 6. They can’t handle it.”Having sought to downplay the deadly insurrection for 17 months, Republicans know the sheer magnitude of Thursday night’s media coverage – aspiring to that of the Watergate hearings that dominated the national conversation in the 1970s – will make it difficult to ignore. It is possible that Trump himself will be stung into speaking out and denouncing the proceedings.Charlie Sykes, founder and editor-at-large of the Bulwark website and author of How the Right Lost Its Mind, said: “There’s going to be a full-court press to delegitimise the hearings, to throw up as much smoke and dust as possible, which is interesting to me. The conventional wisdom is that these hearings are not likely to move a lot of votes or change the midterm elections but Donald Trump and the Republicans are certainly acting as if they pose a threat. Otherwise, why would they be mobilising like this?“Obviously they see the hearings as somewhat dangerous. From Trump’s point of view, what he is most concerned about is the fact that it’s going to be on primetime television. He’s a television guy and he understands the power of this and I’m guessing the fact that they’ve hired a guy who’s a documentary maker really got his attention down at Mar-a-Lago.”TopicsUS Capitol attackUS CongressRepublicansDemocratsUS politicsfeaturesReuse this content More

    • 125 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Washington coach defends comparing Floyd protests to January 6 riots

      by

      Washington coach defends comparing Floyd protests to January 6 riotsJack Del Rio referred to Capitol riots as ‘dust-up’ in tweetWashington defensive coordinator joined staff in 2020 Washington Commanders assistant coach Jack Del Rio defended a recent tweet comparing the protests in the wake of the death of George Floyd to the insurrection at the US Capitol on January 6, 2021.Walmart heir Rob Walton pays record $4.65bn for NFL’s Denver BroncosRead moreWhen asked Wednesday about how players might react to it, the defensive coordinator said he was asking a “simple question” why the summer of 2020 protests were not receiving the same scrutiny.“People’s livelihoods are being destroyed, businesses are being burned down, no problem,” Del Rio said. “And then we have a dust-up at the Capitol, nothing burned down, and we’re going to make that a major deal. I just think it’s kind of two standards.”Commanders DC Jack Del Rio on his recent tweet (https://t.co/odv7zr4BOn) at today’s media session “Businesses are being burned down, no problem… and then we have a dust-up at the Capitol, nothing burned down… and we’re gonna make that a major deal.”@nbcwashington pic.twitter.com/zH39iSqHM8— NBC4 Sports (@NBC4Sports) June 8, 2022
      His comments followed a post to Twitter Monday night in which he said, “Would love to understand ‘the whole story’ about why the summer of riots, looting, burning and the destruction of personal property is never discussed but this is ???” He was responding to a tweet about the Congressional hearings into January 6.Del Rio and coach Ron Rivera say they aren’t concerned how that opinion will go over among players, many of whom are Black and spoke out about police brutality and racism in the wake of Floyd’s killing two years ago.“If they are and they want to talk about it, I’d talk about it with anybody,” Del Rio said. “No problem. At any time. But they’re not. I’m just expressing myself and I think we all as Americans have a right to express ourselves, especially if you’re being respectful. I’m being respectful.”Cornerback Kendall Fuller, who is Black, said he was not aware of Del Rio’s tweet. After a reporter read it to him, Fuller said: “I don’t have a reaction right now. If I have a reaction, a feeling, towards something, I’ll express that with him.”Del Rio, 59, has posted conservative opinions to his verified Twitter account numerous times since joining Rivera’s staff in Washington in 2020.“Anything that I ever say or write, I’d be comfortable saying or writing in front of everybody that I work with, players and coaches,” he said after an offseason workout. “I express myself as an American. We have that ability. I love this country and I believe what I believe and I’ve said what I want to say. Every now and then, there’s some people that get offended by it.”Rivera, who hired Rivera to run Washington’s defense, said he would not discuss anything he talks to his staff about.“Everybody’s entitled to their opinion, though,” Rivera said. “If it ever becomes an issue or a situation, we’ll have that discussion. Right now, it’s something that I will deal with when it comes up.”Defensive captain Jonathan Allen told NBC Sports Washington: “I don’t care about his opinion. As long as he shows up every day and he works hard, that’s what I want from my defensive coordinator.”Del Rio played 11 NFL seasons as a linebacker from 1985 through 1995. He has coached in the league since 1997, including stints as the head coach of the Jacksonville Jaguars from 2003-11 and Oakland Raiders from 2015-17.TopicsWashington CommandersNFLUS Capitol attackUS politicsUS sportsReuse this content More

    • 163 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Inaugural January 6 hearing to track activities of Proud Boys during Capitol attack

      by

      Inaugural January 6 hearing to track activities of Proud Boys during Capitol attackThe House select committee investigating the insurrection will examine several crucial stages in the lead up to the first breach of the Capitol The House select committee investigating the January 6 Capitol attack is scheduled to hold its inaugural hearing on Thursday and according to the running order obtained by the Guardian, the panel will track the activities of the far-right Proud Boys group before and during the insurrection.At the start of the hearing, the panel’s chairman Bennie Thompson and vice-chair Liz Cheney will make a series of opening arguments before outlining a general roadmap of how each of the six Watergate-style hearings are expected to unfold.For the second hour, Thompson and Cheney will hand control of the hearing to Tim Heaphy, the chief investigative counsel for the select committee, who will lead the questioning of two witnesses and walk through the key moments of the Capitol attack.The select committee is expected to start the questioning with testimony from Nick Quested, a British documentary film-maker who was embedded with the far-right Proud Boys group in the days and weeks leading up to January 6 and caught their activities on camera.Can televised hearings bring the truth about January 6 to the US public?Read moreQuested, appearing pursuant to a subpoena, is likely to deliver his own opening remarks and testify about how the Proud Boys planned their January 6 operation in detail in the weeks before the Capitol attack, narrating and analysing the footage that he recorded.By examining several crucial stages in the lead up to the first breach of the Capitol by the pro-Trump mob – such as the march to the Capitol from the Ellipse and a short stop at the Statue of Peace at the foot of Capitol Hill – the panel will show how the attack came to pass.The select committee is then expected to focus on the moment that Joseph Biggs, a member of the Proud Boys charged with seditious conspiracy on Monday, had a brief exchange with a man in the crowd near the statue just before the march morphed into the Capitol attack.Biggs’ exchange with that man, Ryan Samsel, is widely seen as the tipping point that precipitated the riot. Samsel, who has been charged with attacking police, then walks up alone to the barricade and confronts US Capitol Police officers before pushing it over.The select committee will illustrate Quested’s testimony about how that incident unfolded by playing footage leading up to that moment and a photo Quested took of the moment that Samsel is about to confront and then push past the officers.Heaphy is expected at that point to have the second witness, US Capitol Police officer Caroline Edwards, testify about her recollections of those key minutes during which she was assaulted by another man who had been speaking with the Proud Boy member.The testimony by Edwards, who was the first officer injured in the attack, is expected to be harrowing. Edwards, the New York Times reported, was knocked backwards into concrete steps by the surging pro-Trump mob that overturned the bike rack-like barricade on to her.Heaphy is expected to return to Quested to have him analyse other moments that he caught on camera as the Proud Boys led the charge up to the inaugural platform elected for Biden’s swearing-in weeks later, and then smashed a window in order to enter the Capitol.But in a notable omission, the select committee is not expected to use Quested’s footage of Enrique Tarrio, the leader of the Proud Boys, meeting with Stewart Rhodes, the leader of the far-right Oath Keepers militia group, at a secret rendezvous the night before.The justice department has cited that meeting, which took place in an underground parking garage near the Capitol, in seditious conspiracy indictments against Tarrio, Rhodes, and other members of both the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers groups.Quested is considered the star witness in the select committee’s inaugural hearing, which will be covered live by most of the major US cable news networks, including MSNBC, CNN, CBS and ABC. Fox News will have its top-rated host Tucker Carlson deliver counter-programming.The Emmy award-winning documentary film-maker spent much of the post 2020 election period filming Tarrio and the Proud Boys – with their permission – and has testified multiple times to the panel in closed-door depositions.Quested had accompanied the Proud Boys to a number of pro-Trump rallies in Washington DC in November and December 2020, and was with the Proud Boys as some of its members stormed the Capitol. He also filmed Tarrio’s reaction to the riot later on January 6 in Baltimore, MD.TopicsUS Capitol attackUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 125 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Pelosi and other top Democrats subpoenaed over Bannon contempt case

      by

      Pelosi and other top Democrats subpoenaed over Bannon contempt caseLawyers for ex-Trump adviser request details of Capitol attack panel’s decision-making process that led to contempt ruling Top House Democrats, including speaker Nancy Pelosi, and the members of the House select committee investigating the January 6 Capitol attack, have been subpoenaed to testify in court in connection with the criminal contempt case against Donald Trump’s one-time chief strategist Steve Bannon.The subpoenas – which were accepted by the House counsel, Doug Letter, last Friday, according to a source familiar with the matter – compel the handover of documents and testimony about internal decision-making that led to Bannon’s contempt case.John Kerry commits to look into case of missing British journalist in BrazilRead moreBut whether the subpoenas stand depends on how Judge Carl Nichols rules at a hearing next week, where he will asses pre-trial motions. Nichols could decide the testimony of members of Congress, for instance, is inadmissible because of protections like the so-called speech and debate clause.Bannon’s lawyers are seeking cooperation from top Democrats including Pelosi, the House majority leader Steny Hoyer, the House majority whip Jim Clyburn, all members of the select committee and three select committee counsels, as well as Letter.The subpoenas request materials that Bannon’s lawyers believe will provide evidence that the select committee did not follow House rules in issuing its subpoena to Bannon last year, and that federal prosecutors violated justice department rules in filing charges.It was not clear on Tuesday whether Letter, the House counsel, would move to quash the trial subpoenas. Letter, through a spokesman for the select committee, could not be reached for comment.Letter could also move to reach an arrangement with David Schoen, the lead lawyer defending Bannon in his contempt case. Schoen told the Guardian he would be prepared to discuss the matter in the hope that Letter would not move to dismiss the subpoenas.“The subpoenas are asking for materials that belong to the American people. It would be pretty ironic for the committee to quash the subpoenas when they issued a subpoena demanding materials from Bannon, where Trump asserted executive privilege,” Schoen said.Bannon’s lawyers are making a multi-pronged defense to try and save Bannon from being convicted of criminal contempt of Congress after he was referred to the justice department for prosecution for failing to comply with a subpoena in the congressional January 6 inquiry.The main thrust of Bannon’s argument is that he cannot be held in wilful contempt because he could reasonably believe the subpoena was invalid when the select committee failed to allow a Trump lawyer to attend his deposition, after Trump asserted executive privilege.The argument rests on a 2019 justice department office of legal counsel opinion that says congressional subpoenas that prevent executive branch counsel from accompanying executive branch employees to depositions are “legally invalid” and not enforceable.Bannon’s lawyers are also making the case that the select committee in violation of House rules made no effort to grant a one-week extension to reply to the subpoena after his attorney asked for time to review Trump’s related lawsuit against the panel.The defense that Bannon is advancing – using broad readings of parts of the justice department’s own positions and amalgamating them into a wider argument – is controversial, but it underscores the complexities facing federal prosecutors in pursuing the case.“Bannon’s trying to use the OLC opinions as a shield that doesn’t quite cover him, but gives him enough of a defense to fend off the DoJ’s necessity of proving criminal intent,” Jonathan Shaub, a University of Kentucky law professor and a former OLC attorney-adviser, previously told the Guardian.TopicsSteve BannonUS Capitol attackUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 188 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      US networks to air January 6 hearings – but Fox News sticks with Tucker Carlson

      by

      US networks to air January 6 hearings – but Fox News sticks with Tucker CarlsonPublic hearings by House committee investigating Capitol attack will be broadcast live on all main TV networks except Fox News The public hearings by the House committee investigation into the January 6 insurrection at the US Capitol, which start on Thursday, will be broadcast live by all main TV networks and cable channels in America bar one – Fox News.The historic proceedings kick off at 8pm New York time, and in Watergate style will attract near-blanket live coverage on ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC and more. By contrast, the most-watched TV news channel, Fox News, will stick with its primetime show, Tucker Carlson Tonight.The decision pits Carlson’s introductory monologue against the opening remarks of the January 6 committee’s chairman, Bennie Thompson, as the latter outlines how Donald Trump tried to undermine the 2020 election in order to hang on to power. Carlson has used his platform consistently to belittle the investigation and to downplay the significance of the Capitol attack that led to the deaths of seven people and forced the then vice-president, Mike Pence, to flee a violent mob.On the anniversary of the attacks, Carlson said on air that the insurrection “barely rates as a footnote”. He has championed false conspiracy theories about it, including the claim that the attack was a “false flag” operation spearheaded by federal officials to discredit conservatives.News coverage of the hearings will be relegated from Fox News to its sister channel, Fox Business Network. As CNN’s Brian Stelter pointed out, Fox News is the leading cable news network at prime time with more than 3 million viewers while Fox Business on average attracts fewer than 100,000.The scheduling plan drew fire from members of the January 6 committee. Adam Kinzinger, one of two Republican members of the committee who are participating in the hearings in defiance of their party, accused Fox News of hiding the truth “if it disagrees with your narrative”.Kinzinger, a representative from Illinois, made a direct appeal to Fox News staff: “If you work for Fox News and want to maintain your credibility as a journalist, now is a good time to speak out, or quit. Enough is enough.”The relentless efforts of Fox News stars to diminish the significance of January 6 stands in contrast to what some of them said on the day itself. As hundreds of Trump supporters were storming the Capitol building, Laura Ingraham sent a text to the then White House chief of staff, Mark Meadows, saying “the president needs to tell people in the Capitol to go home. This is hurting all of us. He is destroying his legacy.”Later that night, Ingraham used her show, The Ingraham Angle, to blame the violence on antifa.Brian Kilmeade, co-host of the morning show Fox & Friends, and primetime star Sean Hannity, privately made similarly frantic appeals to Meadows as January 6 unfolded.Fox News’s response to the congressional hearings forms part of wider counter-programming against the proceedings being waged by the right. Top Republicans including the House minority leader, Kevin McCarthy, are planning aggressive pushback, including a rapid response unit and talking points that describe the proceedings as “rigged”.Republican leaders and others who remain loyal to Trump are also hoping that “January 6 fatigue” will have set in, and that large sections of the American public will fail to tune in.TopicsFox NewsUS Capitol attackTV newsUS television industryTelevision industryUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Proud Boys leaders charged with seditious conspiracy in 6 January riot

      by

      Proud Boys leaders charged with seditious conspiracy in 6 January riotEnrique Tarrio and four other members accused of plotting to attack the US Capitol Top leaders of the far-right Proud Boys group, including its national chairman, Enrique Tarrio, have been charged with seditious conspiracy for plotting to storm the US Capitol to obstruct the certification of Joe Biden’s election win over Donald Trump on 6 January 2021.Capitol attack panel to unveil new evidence against Trump at public hearingsRead moreThe move by federal prosecutors to charge Tarrio and four other Proud Boys leaders with seditious conspiracy – in addition to previous charges of obstructing a congressional proceeding – marks a major development in the criminal investigation into the Capitol attack.In the 33-page indictment unsealed in Washington DC on Monday, the justice department said Tarrio and his co-defendants Joseph Biggs, Ethan Nordean, Zachary Rehl and Dominic Pezzola for months used encrypted messaging apps to stop Biden’s certification by force.The new charges against the proud Boys leadership come days before the parallel congressional inquiry into the Capitol attack is scheduled to start televised hearings that are expected to examine, in part, Trump’s personal culpability in the events of January 6.Seditious conspiracy, which is challenging to prove, requires federal prosecutors to show beyond a reasonable doubt that at least two people agreed to use force to overthrow the government or to interfere with the execution of a US law.The new indictment is the latest involving seditious conspiracy, after the justice department filed identical charges earlier this year against top members of the far-right Oath Keepers militia group, including its founder Stewart Rhodes, over the Capitol attack.A bipartisan US Senate report linked seven deaths to the attack on the Capitol, which failed to stop certification of Biden’s win. Trump was impeached for inciting an insurrection but acquitted when enough Senate Republicans stayed loyal.In adding on the seditious conspiracy charges, the justice department appeared to indicate that it has learned new information in recent weeks about the Proud Boys’ plans ahead of 6 January as a result of several significant developments.One of the Proud Boys, who was originally charged with Tarrio and the other co-defendants for obstructing a congressional proceeding, Charles Donoghue pleaded guilty in April and accepted a plea deal to cooperate with the criminal investigation into the group.Meanwhile, though the indictment also identified unindicted co-conspirators – “Person 1” is understood to be Jeremy Bertino and “Person 2” is likely Aaron Whallon Wolkind – neither of those men have been charged. A third top Proud Boy leader, John Stewart, also remains uncharged.The government said in the indictment that on 20 December 2020, Tarrio created a chat called “MOSD Leaders Group” – described by Tarrio as a “national rally planning committee” – that included Nordean, Biggs, Rehl and other individuals who were not identified.Through the rest of December, the government said, Proud Boys leaders used additional MOSD group chats to plan a “DC trip” and communicate to group members that they should go to the capital not wearing their familiar black and yellow colours but travel “incognito” instead.The government said in the indictment that on 30 and 31 December 2020, Tarrio communicated with an individual – whose identity is known only to a grand jury – who sent him a nine-page document, called “1776 returns” in reference to the year of American independence from Britain. It laid out a plan to occupy “crucial buildings” on 6 January.The document broadly outlined a plan to reconnoiter and storm crucial government buildings in Washington DC on 6 January, though not the Capitol itself, the New York Times earlier reported.Tarrio is said to have received the “1776 returns” document from one of his girlfriends, who compared the plan to storming the Winter palace in St Petersburg that sparked the Russian Revolution in 1917, the New York Times reported.The indictment cited a reference to that moment in the new indictment, drawing upon what appeared to be newly-uncovered text messages. After the Capitol attack ended, Bertino messaged Tarrio, “1776,” to which Tarrio responded: “The Winter Palace.”Three days before the Capitol attack, a Proud Boy referred to only as “Person-3” posted a voice message in the MOSD Leaders Group that stated the “main operating theater should be out in front of the House of Representatives”, according to the indictment.“That’s where the vote is taking place with all of the objections,” the person said, according to the indictment. “Plan the operations based around the front entrance to the Capitol building. I strongly recommend you use the National Mall and not Pennsylvania Avenue.”The new pieces of evidence in the latest indictment were messages Bertino sent to Tarrio after the attack. “You know we made this happen,” Bertino said. Referring to the implications of obstructing Biden’s win, Bertino added: “They HAVE to certify today. Or it’s invalid.”Tarrio was not in Washington DC on 6 January 2021, having been ordered to leave the capital by a judge after being arrested the day before for burning a Black Lives Matter banner at a church during a pro-Trump rally in December.But the justice department has said that even though Tarrio was not accused of “physically taking part in the breach of the Capitol”, he “led the advance planning and remained in contact with other members of the Proud Boys during” the attack.Eleven members of the Oath Keepers militia are also charged with seditious conspiracy.Lawyers for Tarrio and the other four Proud Boys leaders have said there is no evidence they conspired to storm the Capitol, and that the MOSD group chats and the acquisition of tactical gear before 6 January were measures to protect themselves in case of potential altercations.TopicsUS Capitol attackThe far rightnewsReuse this content More

    • 188 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Proud Boys leader charged with seditious conspiracy related to Capitol attack – as it happened

      by

      Former leader of the Proud Boys far-right nationalist group Enrique Tarrio and four of his closest associates have been charged with seditious conspiracy related to the January 6 attack, according to a Justice Department filing released Monday.The rare charge against Tarrio as well as Ethan Nordean, Joseph Biggs, Zachary Rehl, Charles Donohoe, and Dominic Pezzola builds on conspiracy charges filed by the government earlier this year.In January, the Justice Department leveled seditious conspiracy charges against 11 members of another far-right group, the Oath Keepers militia, over their involvement in the assault on the Capitol as lawmakers were meeting to certify Joe Biden’s 2020 election win.Tarrio, 38, is also facing counts of conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding and obstruction of an official proceeding, and two counts each of assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers and destruction of government property.That’s it from us today. Here’s how another eventful day in Washington unfolded:
      The former leader of the Proud Boys, far-right nationalist group Enrique Tarrio, and four of his closest associates have been charged with seditious conspiracy related to the January 6 attack, according to a Justice Department filing released Monday. The rare charge against Tarrio as well as Ethan Nordean, Joseph Biggs, Zachary Rehl, Charles Donohoe and Dominic Pezzola builds on conspiracy charges filed by the government earlier this year.
      The January 6 committee is preparing to hold its first primetime hearing on Thursday. According to Axios, the committee has enlisted James Goldston, a former ABC News president who ran the shows “Nightline” and “Good Morning America,” to advise the committee on how to televise the hearing. The panel is expected to share never-before-seen photos taken inside the White House as the Capitol attack unfolded.
      A Democratic member of the January 6 committee said the panel’s hearings would demonstrate the extensive planning conducted by those who carried out the attack. “The committee has found evidence of concerted planning and premeditated activity,” Jamie Raskin said in a virtual discussion with the Washington Post today. “The idea that all of this was just a rowdy demonstration that spontaneously got a little out of control is absurd. You don’t almost knock over the US government by accident.”
      The Senate is trying to find a bipartisan compromise on gun-control legislation in the wake of the Uvalde massacre. Democratic senators are trying to find 10 Republicans to join them in supporting tougher gun laws, but that will be a heavy lift in the evenly divided chamber. Joe Manchin, the centrist Democrat who could play a key role in negotiations, said he would support raising the minimum age required to purchase semi-automatic weapons from 18 to 21. Manchin also signaled openness to an assault weapons ban, but that proposal is unlikely to win enough Republican support to be included in the final bill.
      The supreme court released more decisions this morning, but the country is still waiting to hear whether justices will move forward with their initial ruling to overturn Roe v Wade. The abortion case is one of dozens of decisions that the court still needs to release in the coming weeks. The court has announced that its next round of rulings will be released on Wednesday.
      Thanks for following along with our coverage today. The blog will be back tomorrow morning, with more updates on the January 6 committee and the Senate negotiations over gun-control. Back in Congress, a group of 10 “frontline” Democratic House lawmakers, who are considered the most vulnerable to getting ousted in the November midterms, have written a letter to the chamber’s leaders asking for votes on bills that would fight inflation.The letter reported by Punchbowl News comes as the country faces an ongoing wave of price increases for essentials like gasoline, as well as a shortage of baby formula that has rattled the Biden administration.Addressed to House speaker Nancy Pelosi and majority leader Steny Hoyer, the letter doesn’t name specific bills, and acknowledges that many proposals the chamber already passed haven’t been brought up in the Senate. The lawmakers nonetheless call for votes:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;} With the time that remains in the 117th Congress after the important upcoming votes on gun violence prevention – and particularly in the few months that remain before the late summer district work period – we urge you to prioritize bills that would lower costs for working families, address rising inflation and resolve supply chain challenges. To be clear, we know that many such bills have already received affirmative votes in the House and now await Senate action. However, we believe that more must be done to ensure that this body remains laser focused on addressing the most urgent challenges that continue to impact our constituents.Consumer prices have been rising over the past year at rates not seen since the 1980s, fueling public discontent with the Biden administration. The Federal Reserve is hiking interest rates to tame the price increases, but much of the inflation has been caused by factors beyond their control such as global supply chain snarls and the war in Ukraine. Some economists fear the combination of higher rates and global supply shocks will put the economy into a recession — perhaps next year, just as campaign season for the 2024 presidential election kicks off.Meanwhile in the UK, members of parliament have spent the day voting on whether to boot Prime Minister Boris Johnson from office, and the verdict is in: Johnson survives his no-confidence vote, 211 to 148.That means he stays as prime minister, leader of the Conservatives and Joe Biden’s counterpart in one of America’s closest allies. The Guardian’s Andrew Sparrow has been keeping a meticulous live blog of the historic day.Former leader of the Proud Boys far-right nationalist group Enrique Tarrio and four of his closest associates have been charged with seditious conspiracy related to the January 6 attack, according to a Justice Department filing released Monday.The rare charge against Tarrio as well as Ethan Nordean, Joseph Biggs, Zachary Rehl, Charles Donohoe, and Dominic Pezzola builds on conspiracy charges filed by the government earlier this year.In January, the Justice Department leveled seditious conspiracy charges against 11 members of another far-right group, the Oath Keepers militia, over their involvement in the assault on the Capitol as lawmakers were meeting to certify Joe Biden’s 2020 election win.Tarrio, 38, is also facing counts of conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding and obstruction of an official proceeding, and two counts each of assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers and destruction of government property.Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has signaled a deal between Democrat and Republican lawmakers on a new gun control bill could be reached this week.MCCONNELL on whether senate negotiators will strike a gun deal by the end of the week: “oh I hope so”— Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) June 6, 2022
      More MCCONNELL on guns. “We’re trying to get a bipartisan outcome here that makes a difference. And hopefully, sometime this week, we’ll come together.”— Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) June 6, 2022
      Republican Senator John Cornyn and Democratic Senator Chris Murphy have been leading negotiations in the evenly divided chamber to introduce some kind of legislation that could restrict gun purchases following a recent wave of mass shootings in Buffalo, New York, Uvalde, Texas and elsewhere.The January 6 committee will hold its second hearing on Monday, June 13, at 10am ET, the House panel has just announced.The first hearing is happening on Thursday at 8pm ET, and it is expected to attract worldwide news coverage, but the second hearing is not scheduled for the evening.The select committee has reportedly enlisted the help of James Goldston, a former ABC News president, to assist in the planning of the primetime event.Speaking to the Washington Post earlier today, a Democratic member of the committee, Jamie Raskin, said investigators had “found evidence of concerted planning and premeditated activity”.“The idea that all of this was just a rowdy demonstration that spontaneously got a little out of control is absurd,” Raskin said. “You don’t almost knock over the US government by accident.” The supreme court will now issue opinions on Wednesday, June 8, according to its website.The justice have 30 cases to release decisions on, with the workload possible extending into next month. Several of these may be extremely consequential, including an environmental case out of West Virginia, a gun rights case stemming from New York, an immigration case via Texas involving the US-Mexico border and the pivotal Mississippi abortion case that also includes the state authorities asking Scotus to overturn Roe v Wade.Nearly half of Republican voters think the US just has to live with mass shootings, according to a poll released in the aftermath of the Texas elementary school murders last month and as politicians in Washington negotiate for gun reform.The CBS and YouGov poll returned familiar results, including 62% support for a nationwide ban on semi-automatic rifles, the kind of gun used in Uvalde, Texas.Nineteen young children and two adults were killed at Robb elementary school on 24 May by an 18-year-old who bought his weapon legally.But clear national support for a ban on such rifles or changes to purchasing ages and background checks is not mirrored in Congress. Most Republicans, supported financially by the powerful gun lobby, remain implacably opposed to most gun reform.Read the Guardian’s full report:Nearly half of Republicans think US has to live with mass shootings, poll findsRead moreAn end to abortion rights would create yet another crisis for Biden, whose presidency has been increasingly defined by a list problems, annoyances and calamities that seems to only grow longer. From high inflation to the chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan to nationwide mass shootings, my colleague Lauren Gambino has an excellent piece on how Biden has become a crisis president — whether he wants to or not:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}In his third run for president, Joe Biden’s pitch to Americans was simple: after half a century in elected office, including eight years as vice-president, he understood the demands of what is arguably the hardest job in the world. It was a point Biden stressed on the campaign trail, in his own folksy way: “Everything landed on the president’s desk but locusts.”
      Nearly a year and a half into his presidency, Biden now appraises his own fortunes differently. “I used to say in Barack’s administration: ‘Everything landed on his desk but locusts,’” he told Democratic donors in Oregon. “Well, they landed on my desk.”
      Successive mass shootings, including a racist attack at a grocery store in Buffalo, New York, and a massacre at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, that left 19 elementary school students and their teachers dead, present just the latest test for a president desperate to act but constrained, once again, by the limits of his own power.Biden entered office facing daunting crises – only to be hit with more crises Read moreThe White House has released a statement condemning legislation introduced in Louisiana that would make abortion a crime of murder.“Louisiana’s extreme bill will criminalize abortion with no exceptions for rape or incest and punish reproductive healthcare professionals with up to ten years in prison,” said Karine Jean-Pierre, the White House press secretary, in a statement.“The president is committed to protecting the constitutional rights of Americans afforded by Roe for nearly 50 years, and ensuring that women can make their own choices about their lives, bodies, and families. An overwhelming majority of the American people agree and reject these kinds of radical measures.”Louisiana Republicans advance bill to make abortion a crime of murderRead moreSupporters of the bill admit it’s unconstitutional, but only as long as the Roe v Wade decision that enshrines abortion rights in the United States remains law. That decision’s days appear to be numbered, according to a draft of a supreme court opinion that was leaked last month.Located just across the street from the Capitol, the supreme court has found itself sucked into the inquiry over January 6 as investigators eye the actions of Ginni Thomas, wife of conservative justice Clarence Thomas.In March, my colleague Ed Pilkington reported on the calls for conflict-of-interest rules that erupted after revelations that Ginni Thomas pressed then-president Donald Trump’s chief of staff to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election:Ginni Thomas texts spark ethical storm about husband’s supreme court roleRead moreThe Guardian’s Hugo Lowell reported later that month that committee members have weighed asking Thomas to cooperate either voluntarily or with a subpoena, but no decision has yet been made.House January 6 panel members weigh seeking cooperation from Ginni ThomasRead moreMore revelations about Thomas’s actions around the time of the insurrection have trickled out since then, including that she pressed Republicans in Arizona to overturn Biden’s victory there, as first reported in The Washington Post last month.January 6 committee member Jamie Raskin hinted to The Washington Post that lawmakers have discovered Donald Trump more than just incited the attack on the Capitol. Raskin did not elaborate on what the House committee found, but the actions of the former president have been at the center of the inquiry from the start.“The select committee has found evidence about a lot more than incitement here, and we’re gonna be laying out the evidence about all of the actors who were pivotal to what took place on Jan 6,” Raskin said.“Donald Trump and the White House were at the center of these events. That’s the only way really of making sense of them all,” the Democratic House representative added.Trump was impeached by the Democrat-controlled House immediately following the insurrection, but the Republican-led Senate decided not to convict and remove him from office, allowing Trump to remain in the White House for the final weeks of his term..@RepRaskin on Jan. 6: “Donald Trump and the White House were at the center of these events. That’s the only way really of making sense of them all.” #PostLive pic.twitter.com/gIJJxqPWsx— Washington Post Live (@PostLive) June 6, 2022
      A Democratic member of the January 6 committee, Jamie Raskin, said the panel’s hearings would demonstrate the extensive planning conducted by those who carried out the attack on the Capitol.“The committee has found evidence of concerted planning and premeditated activity,” Raskin said in a virtual discussion with the Washington Post today.“The idea that all of this was just a rowdy demonstration that spontaneously got a little out of control is absurd. You don’t almost knock over the US government by accident.” Rep. Liz Cheney talks about the GOP’s “cult of personality” around Trump, and what the hearings will reveal about the threat to democracy. https://t.co/kFhs30uzzC pic.twitter.com/TrqMfQ0Qjs— CBS Sunday Morning 🌞 (@CBSSunday) June 6, 2022
      Raskin said the committee would use the hearings to outline all the evidence it has collected and provide recommendations on how to avoid future coups that could threaten the security of the US government.Raskin’s comments echo those of Liz Cheney, the Republican vice-chair of the committee, who said yesterday that she considers the January 6 attack to be a conspiracy.“It is extremely broad,” Cheney told CBS News. “It’s extremely well-organized. It’s really chilling.”Warning of the danger of Trump’s hold on the Republican party, Cheney added, “I mean, it is fundamentally antithetical, it is contrary to everything conservatives believe, to embrace a personality cult. And yet, that is what so many in my party are doing today.”The January 6 committee has enlisted James Goldston, a former ABC News president who ran the shows “Nightline” and “Good Morning America,” to advise the committee on how to televise its hearings beginning Thursday, according to Axios.Axios reports:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;} I’m told Goldston is busily producing Thursday’s 8 p.m. ET hearing as if it were a blockbuster investigative special.
      He plans to make it raw enough so that skeptical journalists will find the material fresh, and chew over the disclosures in future coverage.
      And he wants it to draw the eyeballs of Americans who haven’t followed the ins and outs of the Capitol riot probe.Goldston will apparently have a lot of material to work with. The committee reportedly plans to show never-before-seen photos from inside the White House on January 6, and new security-camera footage from the Capitol, taken as the insurrection occurred, will also be shared.The committee has already conducted more than 1,000 depositions and interviews as part of its investigation, and clips from those conversations are expected to be played during the hearing.Meanwhile, Republicans are busy planning a counter-messaging program to challenge the committee’s findings. According to Axios, House Republican leaders and outside conservative groups will paint the panel as hyperpartisan to try to discredit their conclusions.Joe Manchin, the centrist Democrat who could play a key role in reaching a Senate compromise on a gun-control bill, outlined what he would like to see in the legislation.The West Virginia senator told CNN that he would support raising the minimum age required to purchase semi-automatic weapons from 18 to 21. The gunman who carried out the Uvalde shooting was 18.Manchin also indicated he would support some version of a red-flag provision, as long as the policy allowed for due process for those blocked from purchasing guns.Manchin told me that a final deal should include two things: Raising the age to 21 for purchasing semi-automatic weapons and standards for state red flag laws. He’s also open to an assault weapons ban. On people needing AR-15s? “I never felt I needed something of that magnitude.” pic.twitter.com/GYUlx1Nhkp— Manu Raju (@mkraju) June 6, 2022
      “We know we can do something that would have prevented this — raising the age,” Manchin said of Uvalde. “And the second thing is that we know that the red-flag laws do work, as long as there’s due process.”On the question of enacting a ban on assault weapons, Manchin said he would be open to the idea, but that proposal faces stiff opposition from Senate Republicans.“I never thought I had a need for that type of high-capacity automatic weapon,” Manchin said. “I like to shoot. I like to go out and hunt. I like to go out sports shooting. I do all that. But I’ve never felt I needed something of that magnitude.”While there were no major decisions made by the supreme court today, the justices did opt not to review legal sanctions against Republican Senate candidate Mark McCloskey and his wife Patricia, who pointed guns at protesters during racial justice protesters in Missouri two years ago.CNN reports that the McCloskeys, both attorneys, pled guilty to misdemeanors over the incident, which were later pardoned by Missouri’s governor. However the state’s supreme court later sanctioned them, calling their actions “moral turpitude.”The McCloskeys contested the penalties, citing the constitution’s second amendment, but CNN reported the argument didn’t have much chance of success.Mark McCloskey is a candidate in the Republican senate primary in Missouri to succeed Roy Blunt, who is retiring, but a SurveyUSA poll released last month did not find him among the race’s frontrunners. As the Senate tries to find compromise on gun control, Joe Biden is using the presidential bully pulpit to urge Congress to take action to prevent more tragedies like Uvalde.“After Columbine, after Sandy Hook, after Charleston, after Orlando, after Las Vegas, after Parkland, nothing has been done,” Biden said on Twitter. “This time, that can’t be true. This time, we must actually do something.”Biden offered the same message to the nation last week, when he delivered a primetime address on the need to enact stricter gun laws.He proposed expanding background checks and banning assault weapons. If Congress cannot approve an assault weapons ban, which seems unlikely given Republicans’ opposition to the idea, then the minimum age required to purchase those guns should be raised from 18 to 21, Biden said.After Columbine,after Sandy Hook,after Charleston,after Orlando,after Las Vegas,after Parkland,nothing has been done.This time, that can’t be true. This time, we must actually do something.— President Biden (@POTUS) June 6, 2022
      The House has already passed several gun-control bills, and Biden called on the Senate to act as well in the wake of the Uvalde massacre. However, that will be difficult when the upper chamber is evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans, and the filibuster rules requires 60 votes to advance most legislation.“I support the bipartisan efforts that include a small group of Democrats and Republican senators trying to find a way,” Biden said last Thursday. “But my God, the fact that the majority of the Senate Republicans don’t want any of these proposals even to be debated or come up for a vote, I find unconscionable. We can’t fail the American people again.”This week will provide some key clues as to whether any gun-control bill can pass the Senate. More

    • 175 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      Bipartisan US lawmakers ramp up gun control talks amid crisis of violence – live

      by

      The US Senate is back in session today after its latest recess and there will be close attention on a bipartisan group of senators that is exuding increased confidence that a package of gun control measures can advance and make it into law.Connecticut Democrat Chris Murphy is fond of the word significant. Just days ago, less than a week after the mass shooting at Robb elementary school in Uvalde, Texas that killed 19 young children and two teachers, he talked of “an opportunity right now to pass something significant”. Murphy yesterday added: “The possibility of success is better than ever before. But I think the consequences of failure for our entire democracy are more significant than ever.”Murphy believes measures passed in Florida following the 2018 high school shooting in Parkland could attract Republican support and provide a workable template for action in Congress.Chris Murphy of Connecticut, speaking on CNN’s State of the Union, said he was optimistic that recent mass shootings in Buffalo, New York, and Uvalde, Texas, could finally prompt enough bipartisan support for legislation that has previously proven elusive.Florida, a Republican-controlled state, acted swiftly after the murders of 17 students and staff at Marjory Stoneman Douglas high school in February 2018, passing red flag laws and raising the age requirement for buying, but not owning, firearms from 18 to 21, among other steps. The Parkland gunman was 19.In his address to the nation last week, Joe Biden called for a federal ban on semi-automatic weapons, and raising the age requirement if that couldn’t be done.Murphy acknowledged the Florida actions and said “there is interest in taking a look at that age range, 18 to 21” during bipartisan discussions about possible legislation, led on the Republican side by Texas senator John Cornyn.Read more here.The founder of the People of Praise, a secretive charismatic Christian group that counts supreme court justice Amy Coney Barrett as a member, was described in a sworn affidavit filed in the 1990s as exerting almost total control over one of the group’s female members, including making all decisions about her finances and dating relationships.The court documents also described alleged instances of a sexualized atmosphere in the home of the founder, Kevin Ranaghan, and his wife, Dorothy Ranaghan.The description of the Ranaghans and accusations involving their intimate behavior were contained in a 1993 proceeding in which a woman, Cynthia Carnick, said that she did not want her five minor children to have visitations with their father, John Roger Carnick, who was then a member of the People of Praise, in the Ranaghan household or in their presence, because she believed it was not in her children’s “best interest”. Cynthia Carnick also described inappropriate incidents involving the couple and the Ranaghan children. The matter was eventually settled between the parties.Read the Guardian’s full report:Legal claims shed light on founder of faith group tied to Amy Coney BarrettRead moreNo more opinions are due today from the US Supreme Court, with all the biggest decisions still awaited. We’ll be keeping an eye on the court’s calendar and on the indispensable Scotusblog for upcoming dates and the rulings issued on those dates. For anyone curious to know a bit more about how this works, the Scotusblog FAQ page is handy, here. The court doesn’t give lots of notice about which will be opinion days in June and, likely, edging into July with such a big caseload. And the public isn’t told what opinions are coming down until they land. However, of course there was the early May bombshell leak of the draft opinion in the Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization case out of Mississippi, which explicitly includes a request from the state authorities to the court to overturn the pivotal 1973 Roe v Wade decision that afforded the constitutional right to an abortion in the US.The final opinion is awaited… US shaken to its core by supreme court draft that would overturn Roe v WadeRead moreThis blog is now handing over to the Guardian’s new US politics blogger Chris Stein, based in Washington, and our colleague there Joanie Greve, who was at the helm of the blog but in recent months took on her new role as one of our senior politics reporters. They’ll take you through the rest of today’s politics news. For all the breaking news on UK politics today involving a no-confidence vote in prime minister Boris Johnson, please follow our London team here as they bring you the events as they happen there, in the UK politics live blog.Here’s Supreme Court justice Clarence Thomas again, this time putting his name to a decision in the case of Southwest Airlines v Saxon.In an eight to zero opinion (Amy Coney Barrett was recused from this case), Thomas issued the decision that the court essentially said an airline worker is not required to go to arbitration over her pay dispute with Southwest and can fight her case in the courts.The Supreme Court adopts a broad interpretation of an important exception in the Federal Arbitration Act. The upshot of the 8-0 ruling is that an airport worker (and others similarly situated) can bring a claim for overtime pay in court, rather than being forced into arbitration.— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) June 6, 2022
      The Bloomberg Law site notes that the case could have a wide impact on worker arbitration rights. It explained that Latrice Saxon:.css-knbk2a{height:1em;width:1.5em;margin-right:3px;vertical-align:baseline;fill:#C70000;}Sued the airline in 2019, alleging it failed to pay her and hundreds of current and former ramp supervisors time-and-a-half earned for their overtime work. The Dallas-based carrier countered that its employee was contractually bound to bring the claim in arbitration, rather than in court. While a federal district judge agreed with the airline, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit did not. The supreme court took up the case.The US supreme court has issued three opinions today, moments ago, although they are not the cases the nation is on the edge of its proverbial seat about – abortion and gun rights.The court just ruled that the Florida authorities can recoup $300,000 in medical expenses out of a settlement paid in the case of Gianinna Gallardo, who suffered appalling injuries at 13, in 2008, when she was hit by a truck after getting off a school bus. A 7-2 majority, with the opinion written by Clarence Thomas and joined by liberal-leaning Elena Kagan, opined for the state over the Gallardo family.A few minutes prior, the court ruled in a case, Siegel v Fitzgerald, about the constitutionality of increased US Trustee’s fees charged to companies in chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.Details on the third ruling in a tick.The Supreme Court strikes down Congress’ decision to increase bankruptcy fees in most states while leaving a different system in place in two states. SCOTUS unanimously holds that the two different fee systems violates the Constitution’s requirement of “uniform” bankruptcy laws.— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) June 6, 2022
      The US supreme court is about to issue ruling(s) on cases decided in the current term.We’ll keep you up to date on what happens, when the opinion(s) are handed down at 10am ET.As Scotusblog notes, there’s a lot for the bench to get to:We’re live now:https://t.co/S5A4KeL5nQ https://t.co/ddml8iKgtC— SCOTUSblog (@SCOTUSblog) June 6, 2022
      The four big cases we at the Guardian are watching most closely are an environmental case out of West Virginia, a gun rights case stemming from New York, an immigration case via Texas involving the US-Mexico border and the pivotal Mississippi abortion case that also includes the state authorities asking Scotus to overturn Roe v Wade.The US Senate is back in session today after its latest recess and there will be close attention on a bipartisan group of senators that is exuding increased confidence that a package of gun control measures can advance and make it into law.Connecticut Democrat Chris Murphy is fond of the word significant. Just days ago, less than a week after the mass shooting at Robb elementary school in Uvalde, Texas that killed 19 young children and two teachers, he talked of “an opportunity right now to pass something significant”. Murphy yesterday added: “The possibility of success is better than ever before. But I think the consequences of failure for our entire democracy are more significant than ever.”Murphy believes measures passed in Florida following the 2018 high school shooting in Parkland could attract Republican support and provide a workable template for action in Congress.Chris Murphy of Connecticut, speaking on CNN’s State of the Union, said he was optimistic that recent mass shootings in Buffalo, New York, and Uvalde, Texas, could finally prompt enough bipartisan support for legislation that has previously proven elusive.Florida, a Republican-controlled state, acted swiftly after the murders of 17 students and staff at Marjory Stoneman Douglas high school in February 2018, passing red flag laws and raising the age requirement for buying, but not owning, firearms from 18 to 21, among other steps. The Parkland gunman was 19.In his address to the nation last week, Joe Biden called for a federal ban on semi-automatic weapons, and raising the age requirement if that couldn’t be done.Murphy acknowledged the Florida actions and said “there is interest in taking a look at that age range, 18 to 21” during bipartisan discussions about possible legislation, led on the Republican side by Texas senator John Cornyn.Read more here.Good morning, US politics blog readers, it’s going to be an exceptionally busy, high-stakes week in Washington with Americans’ constitutional rights and democracy itself under the spotlight.Here’s what’s on the agenda.
      The US Senate is back in session on the Hill today after its latest recess and a bipartisan group of senators is exuding confidence that a package of gun control measures can make progress, while the leading lawmaker in talks warns of “significant” consequences of failure.
      Talks continue amid another series of deadly shootings at the weekend, following grotesquely on the heels of the school massacre in Uvalde, Texas and the racist killing of Black Americans in a supermarket in Buffalo.
      New measures under discussion do not include the demands of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris for a ban on assault weapons, following the recent carnage, but there is more progress being made right now on legislative talks than there has been for years.
      The US Supreme Court is due to issue opinions today and Thursday, June being the crunch month for decisions arising in cases from the current term and with more than 30 decision to be declared. The public (and press) are not party to which cases will be announced until the bench speaks up.
      Last but not least for this briefing note: the special House committee investigating events on and around the January 6, 2021 insurrection at the US Capitol by extremist supporters of then-president Donald Trump is in final preparations for its first public hearing, this Thursday in prime time – and the right is already revving up its riposte. More