US Capitol attack

Subterms

    More stories

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      A Sacred Oath review: Mark Esper on Trump, missiles for Mexico and more

      by

      A Sacred Oath review: Mark Esper on Trump, missiles for Mexico and more The ex-defense secretary’s memoir is scary and sobering – but don’t expect Republican leaders or voters to heed his warningMark Esper was Donald Trump’s second defense secretary. Like James Mattis, his predecessor, he fell from Trump’s grace. Six days after the 2020 election, the 45th president fired him, via Twitter. Unlike Mattis, Esper now delivers a damning tell-all.This Will Not Pass review: Trump-Biden blockbuster is dire reading for DemocratsRead moreA Sacred Oath pulls no punches. It depicts Trump as unfit for office and a threat to democracy, a prisoner of wrath, impulse and appetite.Over 752 pages, Esper’s Memoirs of a Secretary of Defense During Extraordinary Times are surgically precise in their score-settling. This is not just another book to be tossed on the pyre of Trump-alumni revenge porn. It is scary and sobering.Esper is a West Point graduate and Gulf war veteran. No one confuses him with Omarosa Manigault Newman, Cliff Simms or Chris Christie. Esper ignores Trump counselor Kellyanne Conway and barely mentions Melania Trump. He is complimentary toward Jared Kushner.In general, Esper disliked what he saw. Trump’s fidelity to process was close to nonexistent, his strategy “narrow and incomplete”, his “manner” coarse and divisive. The ends Trump “often sought rarely survived the ways and means he typically pursued to accomplish them”.The book captures Trump’s rage when advised that Gen Mark Milley, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, lacked command authority over the active-duty and national guard troops Trump wanted to deploy against protesters in the aftermath of the murder of George Floyd.“‘You are losers!’ the president unloaded. ‘You are all fucking losers!’”In addition to Esper, Milley and William Barr, the attorney general, Trump also targeted Mike Pence.Esper writes: “He repeated the foul insults again, this time directing his venom at the vice-president as well, who sat quietly, stone-faced, in the chair at the far end of the semi-circle closest to the Rose Garden.“I never saw him yell at the vice-president before, so this really caught my attention.”Esper explains why he didn’t resign: “I didn’t think it was the right thing to do for our country.”His wife, Leah, framed it this way: “As your wife, please quit. As an American citizen, please stay.”The government attempted to censor A Sacred Oath, as it did The Room Where It Happened, a memoir by John Bolton, Trump’s third national security adviser. Fortunately, the powers that be buckled after Esper filed suit in federal court. Here and there, words are blacked out. The core of the story remains.At one point, Trump proposed launching “missiles into Mexico to destroy the drug labs”. The then-president said: “No one would know it was us.” He would simply deny responsibility. Esper looked at Trump. He was not joking.According to reports, the censors found this inflammatory. They did not, however, deny its veracity. Confronted with the story, Trump issued a “no comment”. Donald Trump Jr asked if his father’s scheme was “a bad thing”. Hunter Biden isn’t the only troublesome first son.Trump’s reliance on underlings who put their boss ahead of country distressed Esper too. Mark Meadows, Stephen Miller, Robert O’Brien and Ric Grenell all receive attention. Little is good.Esper found their bellicosity grating. After a meeting with Trump’s national security council, Esper commented to Milley about its lack of military experience and eagerness for war with Iran.“We couldn’t help but note … the irony that only two persons in the room that had ever gone to war were the ones least willing to risk doing so now.”Esper offers a full-throated defense of Trump’s decision to kill Qassem Suleimani. The Iranian general had American blood on his hands and was planning an attack on US diplomats and military personnel.Esper also writes about the state of the union.“I was worried for our democracy,” he says. “I had seen many red flags, many warnings, and many inconsistencies. But now we seemed on the verge of crossing a dark red line.”In the summer of 2020, the unrest that followed the murder of Floyd transported Trump to a Stygian realm. In the run-up to the election, Esper feared Trump would seek to use the military to stay in office.Esper met Milley and Gen Daniel Hokanson, the general in charge of the national guard, in an attempt to avert that outcome.“The essence of democracy was free and fair elections, followed by the peaceful transition of power,” Esper writes.Ultimately, Trump did not rely on the military to negate election results – a path advocated by Mike Flynn, his first national security adviser. Instead, the drama played out slowly. By early January 2021, Milley was telling aides the US was facing a “Reichstag moment” as Trump preached “the gospel of the führer”.On 6 January, Trump and his minions unleashed the insurrection.“It was the worst attack on the Capitol since the war of 1812,” Esper writes. “And maybe the worst assault on our democracy since the civil war.”The Presidency of Donald Trump review: the first draft of historyRead moreYet Trump and Trumpism remain firmly in the ascendant. In Ohio, in a crucial Senate primary, Trump’s endorsement of JD Vance proved decisive. In Pennsylvania, his support for Mehmet Oz may prove vital too.Down in Georgia, Herschel Walker, Trump’s choice, is on a glide path to nomination. Walker’s run-ins with domestic violence and death threats pose no problem for the faithful. Even Mitch McConnell, the Senate minority leader, has bought in.Days ago, Esper told the New York Times Trump was “an unprincipled person who, given his self-interest, should not be in the position of public service”.Most Republicans remain unmoved. Esper is only an author. Trump spearheads a movement.
      A Sacred Oath is published in the US by William Morrow
      TopicsBooksPolitics booksDonald TrumpTrump administrationUS national securityUS militaryUS foreign policyreviewsReuse this content More

    • 175 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Senate Democrats aim to reveal which Republicans oppose abortion ahead of midterms – live

      by

      US politics liveUS politicsSenate Democrats aim to reveal which Republicans oppose abortion ahead of midterms – live
      How GOP lawmakers are prepping to ban abortion as soon as possible
      Groups perpetuating Trump’s 2020 election lie face scrutiny and lawsuits
      Capitol attack panel moves closer to issuing subpoenas to Republicans
      Russia-Ukraine war – latest updates
      Sign up to receive First Thing – our daily briefing by email
      LIVE Updated 12m agoRichard LuscombeMon 9 May 2022 11.10 EDTFirst published on Mon 9 May 2022 09.21 EDT Show key events onlyLive feedShow key events onlyFrom More

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Capitol attack panel moves closer to issuing subpoenas to Republicans

      by

      Capitol attack panel moves closer to issuing subpoenas to Republicans Refusal to assist the investigation has caused the sentiment to turn towards taking near-unprecedented action, sources say Members on the House select committee investigating the Capitol attack on 6 January are moving closer to issuing subpoenas to Republican members of Congress to compel their cooperation in the inquiry – though it has started to dawn on them that they may be out of time.The panel is expected to make a final decision on the subpoena question over the next couple of weeks, according to sources directly familiar with internal deliberations, with House investigators needing to start wrapping up their work ahead of public hearings in June.While the members on the select committee remain undecided about whether to subpoena Republican members of Congress, their refusal to assist the investigation in any form has caused the sentiment to turn towards taking that near-unprecedented action, the sources said.The shifting view has come as a result of the dismay among the members in January, when House minority leader Kevin McCarthy and others turned down requests for voluntary cooperation, turning to anger after three more of Donald Trump’s allies last week refused to cooperate.What has changed in recent weeks in the select committee’s assessment is that they cannot ignore the deep involvement between some Republican members of Congress and the former president’s unlawful schemes to overturn the results of the 2020 election, the sources said.The recent letters to House Republicans Mo Brooks, Andy Biggs and Ronny Jackson – Trump’s former White House doctor – provided just a snapshot of the entanglement, the sources said, with the Trump White House, and potentially the militia groups that attacked the Capitol.House investigators are particularly interested in any potential connections between Republican members of Congress and the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys militia groups, the sources said, since those groups were actually involved in the riot element of January 6.The select committee wanted to interview Jackson, for instance, to establish how the Oath Keepers came to learn as they stormed the Capitol that he had “critical data to protect” and needed “protection”, according to text messages revealed in court filings.But the panel has been holding off compelling that information with subpoenas, anxious about the inevitable circus that would accompany such a move and, as the Guardian reported in January, embolden Republicans to subpoena Democrats if they take the House in 2022.The select committee told itself, the sources said, it might be able to avoid the issue altogether if it could get the information it needed from other places, like it did with Trump’s former chief of staff Mark Meadows when his aides provided testimony.But that has not happened, and especially not with respect to the issue of potential connections between Republican members of Congress and the militia groups, whose members are now largely unable to talk to the panel having been placed under criminal investigation by the DoJ.The trouble for the select committee is that it may have run out of time to go down the subpoena route.Even if the panel were now to issue a bevy of subpoenas to House Republicans, if their colleagues decide to ignore the subpoenas, the only real option it has to enforce the orders would be to pursue action through the slow-grinding cogs of the judicial system.That enforcement mechanism would likely take months, according to former prosecutors – an exercise potentially of little use to a panel that is seeking to start wrapping up depositions before public hearings in June and expects to publish a final report in September.But some members believe Republicans may just cooperate if they are subpoenaed, the sources said, since Republican subpoenas to Democrats in a future investigation would only have teeth if Republicans don’t defang the very congressional subpoenas first – by defying them.TopicsUS Capitol attackUS politicsDonald TrumpJoe BidenUS elections 2020RepublicansnewsReuse this content More

    • 113 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      San Francisco judge rejects Trump lawsuit challenging Twitter suspension

      by

      San Francisco judge rejects Trump lawsuit challenging Twitter suspensionThe former president was banned from from the social media platform after the deadly US Capitol attack A US judge on Friday dismissed Donald Trump’s lawsuit against Twitter that challenged his suspension from the platform.In a written ruling, US district judge James Donato in San Francisco rejected Trump’s argument that Twitter violated his right to freedom of speech guaranteed by the first amendment of the US constitution.Florida pension fund sues Elon Musk and Twitter to stop buyoutRead moreTwitter and other social media platforms banned Trump from their services after a mob of his supporters attacked the US Capitol in a deadly riot on 6 January2021 .That assault came after a speech by Trump in which he reiterated false claims that his election loss in November was because of widespread fraud, an assertion rejected by multiple courts and state election officials.Trump’s lawyers alleged in a court filing last year that Twitter “exercises a degree of power and control over political discourse in this country that is immeasurable, historically unprecedented, and profoundly dangerous to open democratic debate”.At the time of removing Trump’s account permanently, Twitter said his tweets had violated the platform’s policy barring “glorification of violence”. The company said then that Trump’s tweets that led to his removal were “highly likely” to encourage people to replicate what happened in the Capitol riots.Before he was blocked, Trump had more than 88 million followers on Twitter and used it as his social media megaphone.TopicsDonald TrumpTwitterUS Capitol attackSocial medianewsReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Marjorie Taylor Greene is qualified to run for re-election, Georgia official says

      by

      Marjorie Taylor Greene is qualified to run for re-election, Georgia official saysSecretary of state Brad Raffensperger accepts judge’s findings and says far-right congresswoman, a Trump ally, is eligible to run The Georgia secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger, has accepted a judge’s findings and said the far-right Republican congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene is qualified to run for re-election.Georgia sees first major test for a Republican defending democracy | The fight to voteRead moreA group of voters filed a challenge saying Greene should be barred under a seldom-invoked provision of the 14th amendment concerning insurrection, over her links to the January 6 attack on the US Capitol by supporters of Donald Trump.A state administrative law judge, Charles Beaudrot, last month held a hearing on the matter and found that Green was eligible. He sent his findings to Raffensperger, who was responsible for the final decision.It was an awkward position to be in for the secretary of state who drew the ire of Trump after he resisted pressure to overturn Joe Biden’s victory in Georgia.Greene has been a staunch Trump ally and has won his endorsement for her reelection bid while continuing to spread unproven claims about the 2020 election being “stolen”.Raffensperger has defended the integrity of the election in Georgia but is facing a tough primary challenge from a Trump-backed US congressman, Jody Hice.Beaudrot held a day-long hearing last month that included arguments from lawyers for the voters and for Greene and questioning of Greene herself.During the hearing, Ron Fein, a lawyer for the voters, noted that in a TV interview the day before the attack at the Capitol, Greene said the next day would be “our 1776 moment”.“In fact, it turned out to be an 1861 moment,” Fein said, alluding to the start of the civil war.Greene has become one of the GOP’s biggest fundraisers by stirring controversy and pushing baseless conspiracy theories. During the hearing, she was defiant and combative under oath.She repeated the unfounded claim that fraud led to Trump’s loss, said she didn’t recall incendiary statements and social media posts and denied supporting violence.While she acknowledged encouraging a rally to support Trump, she said she wasn’t aware of plans to storm the Capitol or to disrupt the electoral count using violence.Greene said she feared for her safety during the riot and used social media to encourage people to remain calm.Marjorie Taylor Greene accused of lying in hearing in Capitol attack caseRead moreThe challenge is based on a section of the 14th amendment that says no one can serve in Congress “who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress … to support the constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same”.Ratified after the civil war, it was meant in part to keep out representatives who had fought for the Confederacy.James Bopp, a lawyer for Greene, argued that his client engaged in protected political speech and was herself a victim of the Capitol attack. He also argued the administrative law proceeding was not the appropriate forum to address such weighty allegations.The challenge amounted to an attempt “to deny the right to vote to the thousands of people living in the 14th district of Georgia by removing Greene from the ballot”, Bopp said.TopicsUS Capitol attackRepublicansGeorgiaUS politicsThe far rightUS CongressHouse of RepresentativesnewsReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump ally Marjorie Taylor Greene can run for reelection, Georgia judge says

      by

      Marjorie Taylor Greene is qualified to run for re-election, Georgia official saysSecretary of state Brad Raffensperger accepts judge’s findings and says far-right congresswoman, a Trump ally, is eligible to run The Georgia secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger, has accepted a judge’s findings and said the far-right Republican congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene is qualified to run for re-election.Georgia sees first major test for a Republican defending democracy | The fight to voteRead moreA group of voters filed a challenge saying Greene should be barred under a seldom-invoked provision of the 14th amendment concerning insurrection, over her links to the January 6 attack on the US Capitol by supporters of Donald Trump.A state administrative law judge, Charles Beaudrot, last month held a hearing on the matter and found that Green was eligible. He sent his findings to Raffensperger, who was responsible for the final decision.It was an awkward position to be in for the secretary of state who drew the ire of Trump after he resisted pressure to overturn Joe Biden’s victory in Georgia.Greene has been a staunch Trump ally and has won his endorsement for her reelection bid while continuing to spread unproven claims about the 2020 election being “stolen”.Raffensperger has defended the integrity of the election in Georgia but is facing a tough primary challenge from a Trump-backed US congressman, Jody Hice.Beaudrot held a day-long hearing last month that included arguments from lawyers for the voters and for Greene and questioning of Greene herself.During the hearing, Ron Fein, a lawyer for the voters, noted that in a TV interview the day before the attack at the Capitol, Greene said the next day would be “our 1776 moment”.“In fact, it turned out to be an 1861 moment,” Fein said, alluding to the start of the civil war.Greene has become one of the GOP’s biggest fundraisers by stirring controversy and pushing baseless conspiracy theories. During the hearing, she was defiant and combative under oath.She repeated the unfounded claim that fraud led to Trump’s loss, said she didn’t recall incendiary statements and social media posts and denied supporting violence.While she acknowledged encouraging a rally to support Trump, she said she wasn’t aware of plans to storm the Capitol or to disrupt the electoral count using violence.Greene said she feared for her safety during the riot and used social media to encourage people to remain calm.Marjorie Taylor Greene accused of lying in hearing in Capitol attack caseRead moreThe challenge is based on a section of the 14th amendment that says no one can serve in Congress “who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress … to support the constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same”.Ratified after the civil war, it was meant in part to keep out representatives who had fought for the Confederacy.James Bopp, a lawyer for Greene, argued that his client engaged in protected political speech and was herself a victim of the Capitol attack. He also argued the administrative law proceeding was not the appropriate forum to address such weighty allegations.The challenge amounted to an attempt “to deny the right to vote to the thousands of people living in the 14th district of Georgia by removing Greene from the ballot”, Bopp said.TopicsUS Capitol attackRepublicansGeorgiaUS politicsThe far rightUS CongressHouse of RepresentativesnewsReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      New York judge’s son who stormed US Capitol gets prison sentence

      by

      New York judge’s son who stormed US Capitol gets prison sentenceAaron Mostofsky sentenced to eight months in prison and a year under federal supervision with 200 hours of community service A New York state judge’s son who dressed like a caveman and helped a pro-Donald Trump mob storm the US Capitol has received a prison sentence for his role in the 6 January 2021 attack.Aaron Mostofsky, 35, must spend eight months in prison – and after his release, he must spend a year under federal supervision while also performing 200 hours of community service, a US district court judge in Washington DC ruled Friday.Rudy Giuliani backs out of interview with Capitol attack committeeRead moreThe judge, James Boasberg, also ordered Mostofsky to pay $2,000 in restitution to the federal government, court documents show.According to prosecutors, Mostofsky donned a caveman costume and wielded a walking stick while forming part of a deadly insurrection by Trump supporters who broke past a line of police officers trying to protect the Capitol on the day that Congress had convened there to certify Joe Biden’s win in the 2020 presidential election.He broke into the Capitol through a door that was forced open, stole body armor and a riot shield from the police, and even gave an on-camera interview to a media reporter, prosecutors alleged in a summary of the case that Mostofsky endorsed.Mostofsky, in the video interview, repeated Trump supporters’ lies that Biden had won thanks to election fraud. “The election was stolen. … We were cheated. … I don’t think 75 million people voted for Trump. I think it was close to 85 million,” Mostofsky said during the interview, according to court documents.The government argued that Mostofsky’s theft of the police equipment left officers more vulnerable than they otherwise might have been.A bipartisan Senate report connected seven deaths to the attack, which temporarily delayed congressional certification of Biden’s win.Prosecutors have charged about 800 people in the attack. More than 250 have already pleaded guilty, mostly to misdemeanors, and about 160 have been sentenced.Mostofsky in February pleaded guilty to felony civil disorder as well as two misdemeanors: theft of government property and entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds. He technically faced up to seven years in prison when he appeared for his sentencing Friday in front of Boasberg, though defendants who plead guilty without going to trial generally don’t receive the harshest punishments available.Mostofsky’s father, Steven Mostofsky, is a judge in the Brooklyn-based New York supreme court’s second district.Attempts to contact an attorney for Aaron Mostofsky weren’t immediately successful Friday.TopicsUS Capitol attackNew YorknewsReuse this content More

    • 125 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Rudy Giuliani backs out of interview with Capitol attack committee

      by

      Rudy Giuliani backs out of interview with Capitol attack committeeFormer Trump lawyer was expected to appear at the interview on Friday, but canceled when the panel denied his request to record it Donald Trump’s former attorney Rudy Giuliani is not expected to appear at an interview scheduled for Friday with the House select committee investigating the January 6 Capitol attack, throwing into jeopardy the prospect of his cooperation, say sources familiar with the matter.US Capitol attack committee subpoenas Rudy Giuliani and other Trump lawyersRead moreThe move by Giuliani to cancel his appearance after the panel declined his request to record the interview means it may not secure documents and testimony from a central figure in Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election in time for public hearings in June.Giuliani was expected to have revealed his contacts with Republican members of Congress and other matters not covered by executive privilege or attorney-client privilege as part of a cooperation deal that his lawyer had been negotiating for months, the sources said.The former attorney to the president had also indicated to the select committee that he was prepared to turn over materials about Trump’s schemes to return himself to office on January 6 that House investigators had outlined in a subpoena issued earlier this year.But, as the Guardian first reported in February, Giuliani told the panel he would only appear for an interview if it was not pursuant to that subpoena – in part because he considered the investigation illegal – and does not have to violate any claims of privilege.The select committee has conceded that Giuliani cannot violate privilege, the sources said, making a deal attractive to Giuliani, who can avoid being held in contempt of Congress by providing information the panel could not otherwise get – while also not giving up Trump.But that delicate arrangement appeared to fall apart on Thursday, after Giuliani also asked to record the interview to ensure he might not be caught in a perjury trap in a potential subsequent investigation, according to another source close to Giuliani.The no-show by Giuliani could also presage the breakdown of the entire cooperation deal, the source said, and Giuliani is expected to wait for the panel’s response to decide next steps. Giuliani may reschedule the interview if the impasse is resolved.“Giuliani is an important witness to the conspiracy to overthrow the government and he remains under subpoena,” a spokesperson for the select committee said. “If he refuses to comply, the committee will consider all enforcement options.”House investigators have been particularly determined to get the cooperation from Giuliani, one of Trump’s closest advisers involved in efforts to overturn the 2020 election from the very start – and could provide unique insights into the events of January 6.Giuliani could speak to events such as a 18 December 2020 meeting in the Oval Office where Trump reviewed a draft executive order to seize voting machines and verbally agreed to install conspiracy theorist Sidney Powell as special counsel to investigate election fraud.The Guardian has reported that Giuliani then led the Trump “war room” at the Willard hotel in Washington DC when Trump called from the White House and discussed ways to stop Biden’s certification – and could speak to non-privileged elements of the plan.The cooperation deal would also technically involve Giuliani turning over documents in addition to appearing before the select committee, the sources said, but the logistics were unclear given the FBI last year seized his devices that he used on January 6.TopicsUS Capitol attackRudy GiulianiDonald TrumpnewsReuse this content More