US Capitol attack

Subterms

    More stories

    • 175 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Corporate sedition is more damaging to America than the Capitol attack | Robert Reich

      by

      Corporate sedition is more damaging to America than the Capitol attackRobert ReichKyrsten Sinema receives millions from business and opposes progressive priorities. Republicans who voted to overturn an election still bag big bucks. Whose side are CEOs on? Capitalism and democracy are compatible only if democracy is in the driver’s seat.The US supreme court to Americans: tough luck if you get Covid at work | Robert ReichRead moreThat’s why I took some comfort just after the attack on the Capitol when many big corporations solemnly pledged they’d no longer finance the campaigns of the 147 lawmakers who voted to overturn election results.Well, those days are over. Turns out they were over the moment the public stopped paying attention.A report published last week by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington shows that over the past year, 717 companies and industry groups have donated more than $18m to 143 of those seditious lawmakers. Businesses that pledged to stop or pause their donations have given nearly $2.4m directly to their campaigns or political action committees (Pacs).But there’s a deeper issue here. The whole question of whether corporations do or don’t bankroll the seditionist caucus is a distraction from a much larger problem.The tsunami of money now flowing from corporations into the swamp of American politics is larger than ever. And this money – bankrolling almost all politicians and financing attacks on their opponents – is undermining American democracy as much as did the 147 seditionist members of Congress. Maybe more.The Democratic senator Kyrsten Sinema – whose vocal opposition to any change in the filibuster is on the verge of dooming voting rights – received almost $2m in campaign donations in 2021 even though she is not up for re-election until 2024. Most of it came from corporate donors outside Arizona, some of which have a history of donating largely to Republicans.Has the money influenced Sinema? You decide. Besides sandbagging voting rights, she voted down the $15 minimum wage increase, opposed tax increases on corporations and the wealthy and stalled on drug price reform – policies supported by a majority of Democratic senators as well as a majority of Arizonans.Over the last four decades, corporate Pac spending on congressional elections has more than quadrupled, even adjusting for inflation.Labor unions no longer provide a counterweight. Forty years ago, union Pacs contributed about as much as corporate Pacs. Now, corporations are outspending labor by more than three to one.According to a landmark study published in 2014 by the Princeton professor Martin Gilens and Northwestern professor Benjamin Page, the preferences of the typical American have no influence at all on legislation emerging from Congress.Gilens and Page analyzed 1,799 policy issues in detail, determining the relative influence of economic elites, business groups, mass-based interest groups and average citizens. Their conclusion: “The preferences of the average American appear to have only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy.” Lawmakers mainly listen to the policy demands of big business and wealthy individuals – those with the most lobbying prowess and deepest pockets to bankroll campaigns and promote their views.It’s probably far worse now. Gilens and Page’s data came from the period 1981 to 2002: before the supreme court opened the floodgates to big money in the Citizens United case, before Super Pacs, before “dark money” and before the Wall Street bailout.The corporate return on this mountain of money has been significant. Over the last 40 years, corporate tax rates have plunged. Regulatory protections for consumers, workers and the environment have been defanged. Antitrust has become so ineffectual that many big corporations face little or no competition.Corporations have fought off safety nets and public investments that are common in other advanced nations (most recently, Build Back Better). They’ve attacked labor laws, reducing the portion of private-sector workers belonging to a union from a third 40 years ago to just over 6% now.They’ve collected hundreds of billions in federal subsidies, bailouts, loan guarantees and sole-source contracts. Corporate welfare for big pharma, big oil, big tech, big ag, the largest military contractors and biggest banks now dwarfs the amount of welfare for people.The profits of big corporations just reached a 70-year high, even during a pandemic. The ratio of CEO pay in large companies to average workers has ballooned from 20-to-1 in the 1960s, to 320-to-1 now.Meanwhile, most Americans are going nowhere. The typical worker’s wage is only a bit higher today than it was 40 years ago, when adjusted for inflation.But the biggest casualty is public trust in democracy.In 1964, just 29% of voters believed government was “run by a few big interests looking out for themselves”. By 2013, 79% of Americans believed it.Corporate donations to seditious lawmakers are nothing compared with this 40-year record of corporate sedition.A large portion of the American public has become so frustrated and cynical about democracy they are willing to believe blatant lies of a self-described strongman, and willing to support a political party that no longer believes in democracy.As I said at the outset, capitalism is compatible with democracy only if democracy is in the driver’s seat. But the absence of democracy doesn’t strengthen capitalism. It fuels despotism.The true meaning of 6 January: we must answer Trump’s neofascism with hope | Robert ReichRead moreDespotism is bad for capitalism. Despots don’t respect property rights. They don’t honor the rule of law. They are arbitrary and unpredictable. All of this harms the owners of capital. Despotism also invites civil strife and conflict, which destabilize a society and an economy.My message to every CEO in America: you need democracy, but you’re actively undermining it.It’s time for you to join the pro-democracy movement. Get solidly behind voting rights. Actively lobby for the Freedom to Vote Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act.Use your lopsidedly large power in American democracy to protect American democracy – and do it soon. Otherwise, we may lose what’s left of it.
      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 politicsOpinionUS political financingRepublicansDemocratsUS CongressHouse of RepresentativesUS SenatecommentReuse this content More

    • 163 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Stewart Rhodes: how his arrest signals a new chapter in January 6 inquiry

      by

      Stewart Rhodes: how his arrest signals a new chapter in January 6 inquiryOath Keepers leader is one of the most high-profile arrests yet in the year-long investigation into the insurrection The arrest this week of Stewart Rhodes, the founder and leader of the Oath Keepers militia, marks one of the most significant moments thus far in the federal investigation into the January 6 Capitol attack.Rhodes, along with ten other associates, is charged with seditious conspiracy for plotting to violently overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election – the first sedition charges prosecutors have brought related to the insurrection.Rhodes is the one of the most high-profile arrests yet in the year-long investigation into the insurrection, which has charged more than 700 people and counting with crimes related to the attack. Many of these cases have involved minor charges and the majority of suspects have received light sentences, but the sedition charges facing militia members could carry up to 20 years in prison and signal a shift towards more complex cases targeting organized extremist groups.Guns, ammo … even a boat: how Oath Keepers plotted an armed coupRead moreThe conspiracy charges against Rhodes and other Oath Keepers members, as well as separate conspiracy to obstruct Congress cases involving Oath Keepers and Proud Boys extremists, are additionally significant because they may reveal the extent of planning that went into the attack. What level of prior coordination and plotting pro-Trump groups conducted prior to January 6 remains a key question, and one that is set to become a focal point of trials in the coming months.“We’ve had such a good unfolding and narrative of what folks on the ground were doing, but we’ve not yet had a definitive narrative emerge about the people in power behind it and who was organizing it,” said Melissa Ryan, CEO of CARD Strategies, a consulting firm that researches online extremism and disinformation.“Between what we see over the next few months from the justice department and whatever comes out of the select congressional investigation, hopefully a story is going to start to emerge.”Who are Rhodes and the Oath Keepers?Rhodes has been a prominent figure in the far-right for over a decade. Easily distinguishable by his dark eyepatch – the result of dropping a loaded handgun and shooting himself in the left eye during his 20s, according to an Atlantic investigation – Rhodes positioned himself at the forefront of the anti-government militia movement amid its resurgence after the 2008 election of Barack Obama.A former Army paratrooper and Yale Law School graduate, Rhodes announced the creation of the Oath Keepers at a 2009 rally on the site of a Revolutionary War battle. The group, which Rhodes marketed towards former and current law enforcement and military personnel, claimed to stand for defending the constitution and advocated for disobeying certain laws such as gun control legislation. Rhodes was careful to create a broad appeal for the organization, initially trying to distance it from more openly violent extremism and claiming that it wasn’t officially a militia.But the Oath Keepers soon became a leading group in the anti-government extremist militia movement, growing to thousands of members across the country. It became a visible presence at anti-government and anti-gun control rallies, while promoting far-right conspiracies about a totalitarian New World Order. Rhodes frequently told his followers that the US was entering a state of civil war and to arm themselves, a claim that became more frequent during the nationwide protests against racism and police killings in 2020. The Oath Keepers also became ardent supporters of Donald Trump and gained a foothold in the modern Republican party, including providing security for Trump’s longtime ally Roger Stone one day before the Capitol attack.In September of 2021, hackers released a membership list for the Oath Keepers that revealed the extent that the group had become embedded in state institutions. Its members included dozens of law enforcement, armed forces members and elected officials – some of whom used their government emails when signing up for the militia.“The Oath Keepers have just been building more and more political power within the GOP, taking positions at the local level, running for office,” Ryan said. “You have state senators who identify proudly as Oath Keepers. I would not be surprised if they had a member of Congress in the next couple cycles.”A shift in the investigationThe charges against the Oath Keepers are some of the most serious to date in the investigation, alleging a well-armed plot to undermine the democratic elections. Investigators also lay out a series of events that contradict the dominant narrative of January 6 among rightwing media figures and many Republican politicians, who have claimed the attack was a mostly peaceful political protest and pushed conspiracy theories that leftists or government agents were behind any violence.The charging documents involving Rhodes and ten associates accused of seditious conspiracy portray a group intent on overturning the results of the 2020 presidential election and willing to use violence to achieve their goals. Prosecutors allege the Oath Keepers conducted extensive planning and coordination, with encrypted messages between the members discussing government overthrow prior to the attack and making plans to form “quick reaction force” teams to move into the Capitol area with firearms.“They coordinated travel across the country to enter Washington DC, equipped themselves with a variety of weapons, donned combat and tactical gear, and were prepared to answer Rhodes’s call to take up arms,” the court documents state.In the weeks leading up to the attack, Rhodes allegedly spent more than $20,000 on weapons and tactical equipment, including on night vision goggles, a shotgun and cases of ammunition. Court documents state that on the morning of the insurrection, Rhodes suggested to other Oath Keepers in an encrypted group chat that armed quick reaction force teams were standing by. (As part of a plea deal last year, one Oath Keeper admitted to stashing an M4 rifle at a Comfort Inn hotel just outside the Capitol.)“We will have several well equipped QRF’s outside DC,” Rhodes texted the Oath Keepers’ group chat.Federal investigators had been circling Rhodes for some time, filing court papers in March that alleged he was in direct communication with Oath Keepers involved in the Capitol attack and then several months later using a warrant to seize his cell phone. Rhodes stated last year that, against the advice of his legal counsel, he sat for a three-hour interview with federal agents to discuss the role that he and the Oath Keepers played in the attack. He continually claimed that he had done nothing wrong.“I may go to jail soon, not for anything I actually did, but for made-up crimes,” Rhodes said in March of last year at a speech in Texas.None of the government’s conspiracy cases related to the Capitol attack have gone to trial yet, and researchers say sedition charges can be hard to prove. The government has charged a number of militia members with seditious conspiracy in the past only for those defendants to go free after the cases went to trial. In the late 1980s, a jury acquitted 13 white supremacists who prosecutors had charged with seditious conspiracy involving a plot to kill a federal judge and overthrow the government. More recently, nine Michigan militia members were acquitted in 2012 after authorities charged them with plotting to start an armed uprising against the government.It also remains unclear what Rhodes’ arrest and the charges facing numerous Oath Keepers means for the extremist organization as a whole. Since the insurrection, some members of the group have advocated for further engagement in local government and political activism. Meanwhile, researchers say they have benefited from a Republican whitewashing of the Capitol attack that has allowed them to continue operating with a degree of impunity.“A lot of us assumed that they would be weakened by January 6,” Ryan said. “It seems like the opposite has happened.”TopicsThe far rightUS Capitol attackUS politicsUS crimeUS justice systemfeaturesReuse this content More

    • 113 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Mike Pence equates voting rights protections with Capitol attack

      by

      Mike Pence equates voting rights protections with Capitol attackEx-vice-president says Democratic push to expand voter access and 6 January effort to overturn the election are both ‘power grabs’ Mike Pence has equated Democratic efforts to pass voting rights protections with the 6 January attack on the US Capitol, writing in a staggeringly misleading and inaccurate op-ed that both were “power grabs” which posed a threat to the US constitution.Guns, ammo … even a boat: how Oath Keepers plotted an armed coupRead moreAs vice-president to Donald Trump, Pence refused to overturn the 2020 election, rebuffing pressure to reject valid slates of electors at the Capitol on 6 January 2021.Such an effort would have amounted to a coup d’état, the rightful winner of the presidential election – Joe Biden – denied the Oval Office.Some rioters chanted “Hang Mike Pence” as they roamed the halls of Congress. Others erected a gallows outside.Fight to VoteSign up for the Guardian’s Fight to Vote newsletterBut in the Washington Post on Friday, Pence argued that Democratic proposals to expand voter access – such as requiring mail-in ballot drop boxes, loosening voter ID requirements and allowing for same-day registration and voter access – were just as unconstitutional as an attempt to upend constitutional procedure with violence.The other Democratic proposal Pence said was akin to the Capitol siege was a proposal to restore a key piece of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 that required places with a history of voting discrimination to get changes approved by the federal government before they go into effect.“Their plan to end the filibuster to allow Democrats to pass a bill nationalizing our elections would offend the founders’ intention that states conduct elections just as much as what some of our most ardent supporters would have had me do one year ago,” Pence wrote.“The notion that Congress would break the filibuster rule to pass a law equaling a wholesale takeover of elections by the federal government is inconsistent with our nation’s history and an affront to our constitution’s structure.”The characterization was inaccurate. The US constitution explicitly gives Congress a role in setting the rules for federal elections.Article I, Section IV reads: “The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations.”Pence also falsely wrote that Democratic proposals would require states to adopt “universal mail-in voting”, a term typically used to describe the process in states like Colorado and Washington that automatically mail ballots to registered voters.Legislation proposed by Democrats would require states to allow anyone who wants to vote by mail to be able to request a ballot, but would impose no requirement that states automatically send them to all voters.The former vice-president has previously downplayed the Capitol attack by saying there was too much focus on “one day in January”. In his column for the Post, he said: “Lives were lost and many were injured.”Seven people, law enforcement officers among them, died in connection with the attack. More than 100 officers were injured.More than 700 people have been charged in connection with the attack. On Thursday, 11 members of the Oath Keepers militia were charged with seditious conspiracy.Democrats charge that elections laws passed in Republican-run states since 6 January 2021 seek to restrict voting by groups liable to vote Democratic, African Americans prominent among them.Biden has spoken forcefully on the issue, saying federal voting rights protections are needed to counter such racist moves. Republicans have protested the president’s rhetoric.Republican legislators have also sought to make it easier to overturn election results, while Trump allies seek to fill key elections posts from which they would control the counting of votes in future elections.‘Breeding grounds for radicalization’: Capitol attack panel signals loss of patience with big techRead moreVoting rights bills proposed by Democrats would increase protections for election officials who have faced an unprecedented wave of harassment over the last year. They would also prevent partisan actors from removing elections officials without cause and make it easier for voters to go to court to ensure valid votes are not rejected.In short, Democrats aim to put in place legal standards to guarantee that no other vice-president is put in the position Pence was on 6 January 2021.While Biden has made a strong push in support of the voting rights legislation, its prospects look dim. Kyrsten Sinema and Joe Manchin, staunch defenders of the filibuster, the 60-vote rule required to advance most legislation in the Senate, said on Thursday they would not vote to amend the requirement.Because no Republicans support doing away with the filibuster, the Democratic voting rights bills cannot pass right now.TopicsUS voting rightsThe fight to voteMike PenceUS Capitol attacknewsReuse this content More

    • 163 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Guns, ammo … even a boat: how Oath Keepers plotted an armed coup

      by

      Guns, ammo … even a boat: how Oath Keepers plotted an armed coupUnsealed court documents provide the most detailed account to date of the alleged level of planning by far-right militia The seditious conspiracy charges against the leader of the Oath Keepers militia and 10 others related to the January 6 Capitol attack have revealed an armed plot against American democracy that involved tactical planning and a formidable arsenal of weapons.Court documents unsealed on Thursday provide the most detailed account to date of the level of planning by the far-right militia in the assault on the Capitol that was aimed at scuppering the certification of Joe Biden’s election win.‘The Timothy McVeighs are still there’: fears over extremism in US militaryRead moreThe documents describe the creation of rapid-response teams of armed militia members, the deployment of tactical gear and the stockpiling of weapons in a deliberate attempt to overturn the election of Democrat Joe Biden, who beat Donald Trump.On January 6 thousands of pro-Trump rioters stormed the building injuring police officers and sending lawmakers fleeing. Five people died around the events, including a Capitol police officer and a Trump supporter shot by law enforcement. The attempt to stop Biden from becoming president failed.The federal indictment alleges Stewart Rhodes, founder of the Oath Keepers, a far-right extremist group, conspired with 10 other members to oppose by force the lawful transfer of presidential power. The group stationed armed members on the outskirts of Washington to serve as so-called “quick reaction force” teams. Rhodes has pleaded not guilty to seditious conspiracy charges.The Oath Keepers even discussed a naval operation to ferry in guns to the militia. One Oath Keeper, Thomas Caldwell, asked fellow members if anyone had a boat that could handle crossing the Potomac River. “If we had someone standing by at a dock ramp (one near the Pentagon for sure) we could have our Quick Response Team with the heavy weapons standing by, quickly load them and ferry them across the river to our waiting arms,” the documents quoted him as saying.Rhodes went on a buying spree in the days leading up to the attack, spending more than $20,000 on guns and equipment for the attack. In December Rhodes bought two pairs of night-vision goggles and a weapons sight for about $7,000 and shipped them to Virginia. In January he spent another $5,000 on a shotgun, scope, magazine, sights, optics, a bipod, a mount, a case of ammunition and gun cleaning supplies. Two days later he spent $6,000 more, and then about $4,500 the next day.In group chats the Oath Keepers discussed how their quick reaction force (QRF) teams would set up at the Comfort Inn in Ballston Arlington, Virginia, to “use as its base of operations for January 6, 2021”. They reserved three rooms; one was occupied by the so-called North Carolina “QRF” team while Arizona and Florida “QRF teams” stayed in the two others. They used the hotel rooms to store firearms and ammunition.“It’s easy to dismiss a lot of what is in the indictment as fantasy, as projection of what the Oath Keepers would like to see, but the events of January 6 remind us that these things can become reality very quickly,” said Devin Burghart, executive director of Institute for Research & Education on Human Rights, a group that monitors far-right extremist groups.“The dangers are there irrespective of their ability to bring all of their fantasies to fruition,” said Burghart.The planning for some kind of operation appeared to begin right after the election last November, as Trump baselessly disputed the results of the election. Two days after the election Rhodes invited some members of the Oath Keepers to a group chat on Signal, an encrypted messaging app, that was titled “Leadership intel sharing secured”.Rhodes texted the group: “We aren’t getting through this without a civil war. Too late for that. Prepare your mind, body and spirit.”On 7 November 2020, when Trump was finally projected to have lost the election, Rhodes began plotting, texting the group chat: “We must now do what the people of Serbia did when Milosevic stole their election. Refuse to accept it and march en-mass on the nations Capitol.” Rhodes then shared a video on Bitchute, an alt-tech video platform, of a step-by-step procedure of how to overthrow a government based on the Serbian example.Two days later Rhodes held an online conference with Oath Keepers members outlining a plan to overturn the election. Two days later after that a member of the group, Caldwell, reached out to Rhodes to share the results of a “recce” – a military colloquialism for reconnaissance operation – to Washington and begin planning for an upcoming “op” to the Capitol.From there members began working together. In late November, the Florida chapter of the Oath Keepers held a training on “unconventional warfare”. “It will be a bloody and desperate fight. We are going to have a fight. That can’t be avoided,” Rhodes wrote in a group chat with members in December.On 21 December 2020, Oath Keepers mentioned January 6 for the first time. James Wakins, one of the 11 Oath Keepers charged in the case, texted the signal chat about a “National call to action for DC Jan 6th” and said Oath Keepers from three states were mobilizing “Everyone in this channel should understand the magnitude of what I just said,” Wakins wrote.Rhodes told a regional Oath Keeper leader that if Biden assumed the presidency, “We will have to do a bloody, massively bloody revolution against them. That’s whats going to have to happen.”At 6.27am on the morning of January 6 Rhodes texted the group chat: “We will have several well equipped QRF’s outside D.C.” At about 8.30am Rhodes and other Oath Keepers left from their hotel and drove to the Capitol in Washington DC.The teams that stayed behind in a hotel in Virginia discussed the possibility of “armed conflict” and “guerrilla war”.At the Capitol, Oath Keepers marched in formation wearing tactical gear including protective vests, helmets and eye goggles as they carried radios, chemical sprays and hard-knuckle gloves. In the group chat one member shared the rumor that it was leftwing groups that had breached the Capitol. “Nope I’m right here, these are Patriots,” replied Rhodes.Rhodes never entered the Capitol, but other members of the Oath Keepers did. Jessica Watkins texted in one of the Oath Keepers group chats: “We are in the main dome right now. We are rocking it. They are throwing grenades, they are freaking shooting people with paint balls. But we are in here.” Another member replied with enthusiastic expletives that this what they “trained for”.The indictment reads that Watkins and other Oath Keepers in one formation joined a mob pushing against a line of law enforcement officers in a hallway containing the Rotunda to the Senate chamber, Watkins commanded those around her to “Push, push, push … get in there, get in there.”TopicsUS Capitol attackThe far rightnewsReuse this content More

    • 175 Shares149 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘Breeding grounds for radicalization’: Capitol attack panel signals loss of patience with big tech

      by

      ‘Breeding grounds for radicalization’: Capitol attack panel signals loss of patience with big techSubpoenas are an escalation in the committee’s efforts for answers as companies ignored information requests The House select committee investigating the January 6 insurrection at the Capitol has ordered several social media firms to hand over data relating to the attack, asignificant step toward transparency that could have broader privacy implications.Facebook whistleblower to claim company contributed to Capitol attackRead moreThe committee on Thursday subpoenaed Twitter, Meta, Alphabet and Reddit for private messages exchanged on the platforms about the attack aas well as information regarding moderation policies that allowed communities to remain online even as they incited violence in early 2021.Congressman Bennie Thompson, the chairman of the select committee, said the committee is seeking to answer two key questions: how the spread of misinformation contributed to the violent attack, and what steps social media companies took to prevent their platforms from “being breeding grounds for radicalizing people to violence”.The subpoenas mark an escalation in the committee’s efforts to get answers from the tech companies. Thompson added in his letter that the subpoenas came after “months of engagement” with the firms and that the four companies have so far ignored requests for information.“We cannot allow our important work to be delayed any further,” he said.The panel in August asked 15 tech companies, including the four subpoenaed on Thursday as well as TikTok, Snapchat, Parler and 4chan, for records related to the riot.In letters sent this week the tech firms, Thompson lamented their lack of response. In a letter to Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Thompson said that “despite repeated and specific requests for documents” related to Facebook’s practices on election misinformation and violent content, the committee had still not received these materials.Following the January 6 attack, social media platforms have been scrutinized for amplifying calls to violence, spreading misinformation and serving as an organizing tool for the rioters.Last March, lawmakers grilled the CEOs of Google, Twitter and Facebook about the platforms’ role in the Capitol riot. And in the months since, the major platforms have all announced initiatives to curb the spread of misinformation through their products.But still, much about the content moderation policies of major tech firms remains black box, with executives slow to reveal details of how misinformation and hate speech is moderated and how many resources are dedicated to mitigating such issues. Now, increased transparency could come by means of subpoena.For lawmakers, the problem came even more acutely into focus with papers leaked by whistleblower Frances Haugen in October 2021, which showed how Facebook failed to enforce policies that would rein in hate speech because they were detrimental to its bottom line. Speaking to Congress, Haugen called for more transparency from Facebook and other companies, including an independent oversight board.In a letter to Zuckerberg, the select committee cited revelations from Haugen, requesting access to the company’s internal analyses of the spread of misinformation and calls to violence relating to the 2020 election.In particular, the committee requested more information on the “Stop the Steal” movement and how it was regulated. A “Stop the Steal” Facebook group amassed hundreds of thousands of members and was used to coordinate some of the actions on January 6. While Facebook eventually took it down, other related pages stayed online, said Imran Ahmed, CEO of the Center for Countering Digital Hate.“It is absolutely crucial to understand the decision making process that led to them to leave those pages online – how they executed enforcement of their policies against violence, encouraging violence, intimidation, extremism and hate.”Similarly, Reddit has been requested to provide information on its community r/The_Donald, which was used to plan the January 6 action before it was banned weeks later on 27 January.Lawmakers were also seeking materials from Alphabet, the parent company of YouTube, because the video platform hosted significant communications by key players in the Capitol attack, including Trump’s former chief strategist Steve Bannon and rioters livestreaming their movements on January 6.Activists say the need to hold companies accountable for how their policies contributed to the Capitol riots should be held in balance with civil rights and privacy protections.The subpoenas may bring up privacy concerns, said Evan Greer, deputy director of digital rights group Fight for the Future. “Forcing companies to hand over private messages of its users could have major privacy implications,” Greer said.“It’s essential to remember that government surveillance and demands for data from private companies are primarily weaponized against marginalized communities,” they said. “The white supremacists who stormed the Capitol deserve to be held accountable, but we should never cheer on expansions of surveillance or government overreach.”Twitter, Meta, Alphabet and Reddit did not immediately respond to the Guardian’s request for comment. TopicsUS Capitol attackUS politicsFacebookMetaTwitterAlphabetRedditfeaturesReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      Capitol attack panel subpoenas Google, Facebook and Twitter for digital records

      by

      Capitol attack panel subpoenas Google, Facebook and Twitter for digital recordsSelect committee seeks records related to January 6 attackMove suggests panel is ramping up inquiry of social media posts The House select committee investigating the Capitol attack subpoenaed Twitter, Meta, Alphabet and Reddit on Thursday for records related to the 6 January insurrection, as it seeks to review data that could potentially incriminate the Trump White House.Facebook is part of Meta and Google is part of Alphabet.The move by the select committee suggests the panel is ramping up its examination of social media posts and messages that could provide evidentiary evidence as to who might have been in contact with the Trump White House around 6 January, one source said.Congressman Bennie Thompson, the chairman of the select committee, said in a statement that he authorized the four subpoenas since those platforms were used to communicate plans about the Capitol attack, and yet the social media companies ignored earlier requests.The subpoenas to the four social media companies were the last straw for the select committee after repeated engagements with the platforms went unheeded, Thompson said in letters that amounted to stinging rebukes over the platforms’ lack of cooperation.Thompson said in the subpoena letter to Twitter that the select committee was interested in obtaining key documents House investigators suspect the company is withholding that could shed light on how users used the platform to plan and execute the Capitol attack.The chairman said the select committee was interested in records from Reddit, since the “r/The_Donald” subreddit that eventually migrated to a website of the same name hosted significant discussion and planning related to the Capitol attack.Thompson said House investigators were seeking materials from Alphabet, the parent company of YouTube, which was a platform for significant communications by its users who played key roles in the Capitol attack.The select committee has been examining digital fingerprints left by the Trump White House and other individuals connected to the Capitol attack since the outset of the investigation, on everything from posts that show geolocations to metadata, the source said.To that end, the select committee issued data preservation requests to 35 telecom and social media companies in August, demanding that they save the materials in the event the panel’s technical team required their release, the source said.The Guardian first reported that month that the select committee, among other individuals, had requested the telecom and social media firms preserve the records of the former Trump White House chief of staff Mark Meadows in addition to a dozen House Republicans.The select committee gave the social media companies a 27 January deadline to comply with the subpoenas, but it was not clear whether the organizations would comply. A spokesperson for Twitter and Meta did not immediately respond to requests for comment.Congressman Kevin McCarthy, the Republican House minority leader who refused a request for cooperation late on Wednesday by the select committee, has previously threatened telecom and social media companies if they comply with the bipartisan panel’s investigation.“If these companies comply with the Democrat order to turn over private information, they are in violation of federal law,” McCarthy said at the time in August. “A Republican majority will not forget and will stand with Americans to hold them fully accountable under the law.”TopicsUS Capitol attackFacebookGoogleUS politicsSocial networkingAlphabetnewsReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Leader of Oath Keepers militia group faces sedition charge over Capitol attack

      by

      Leader of Oath Keepers militia group faces sedition charge over Capitol attackStewart Rhodes and 10 others face 20-year prison sentences as the first charged with seditious conspiracy in January 6 insurrection

      US politics – live coverage
      Stewart Rhodes, the founder and leader of the far-right Oath Keepers militia group, has been arrested and charged with seditious conspiracy in the 6 January attack on the US Capitol, the Department of Justice said on Thursday.Ten others face the same charge, which carries a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison.Announcing the first seditious conspiracy charges brought in connection with the Capitol attack, the justice department said members of the extremist group came to Washington intent on stopping the certification of Joe Biden’s victory over Donald Trump in the presidential election.Rhodes, 56 and from Granbury, Texas, is the highest-ranking member of any extremist group to be arrested in relation to the attack.Extremist groups continue to ‘metastasize and recruit’ after Capitol attack, study findsRead moreThe justice department said Rhodes and Edward Vallejo, 63, of Phoenix, Arizona, were “being charged for the first time in connection with events leading up to and including 6 January. Rhodes was arrested this morning in Little Elm, Texas, and Vallejo was arrested this morning in Phoenix.”The nine others already faced charges in connection with the Capitol attack, among more than 725 individuals to do so.In its statement, the justice department described the Oath Keepers as “a large but loosely organised collection of individuals, some of whom are associated with militias.“Though the Oath Keepers will accept anyone as members, they explicitly focus on recruiting current and former military, law enforcement and first-responder personnel. Members and affiliates of the Oath Keepers were among the individuals and groups who forcibly entered the Capitol on 6 January 2021.”Rhodes did not enter the Capitol but is accused of helping put into motion violence that disrupted the certification process.Thousands of pro-Trump rioters stormed past police barriers and smashed windows, entering the building, injuring dozens of officers and sending lawmakers into hiding. Five people died, including a Capitol police officer and a Trump supporter shot by law enforcement.Some in the mob erected a gallows outside the Capitol. Some chanted “Hang Mike Pence” as they searched for the vice-president, who was presiding over certification.Pence rejected pressure from Trump and advisers who said it was within his power to block certification, citing unfounded claims of electoral fraud in battleground states, and throw the election to the US House.Scenes from the attack on the Capitol were broadcast around the world. The justice department release described one of the most indelible moments.At approximately 2.30pm, it said, some of the men now charged with seditious conspiracy and other “Oath Keepers and affiliates – many wearing paramilitary clothing and patches with the Oath Keepers name, logo, and insignia – marched in a ‘stack’ formation up the east steps of the Capitol, joined a mob, and made their way into the Capitol.“Later, another group of Oath Keepers and associates … formed a second ‘stack’ and breached the Capitol grounds, marching from the west side to the east side of the Capitol building and up the east stairs and into the building.“While certain Oath Keepers members and affiliates breached the Capitol grounds and building, others remained stationed just outside of the city in quick reaction force (QRF) teams. According to the indictment, the QRF teams were prepared to rapidly transport firearms and other weapons into Washington DC in support of operations aimed at using force to stop the lawful transfer of presidential power.“The indictment alleges that the teams were coordinated, in part, by [Thomas] Caldwell [67 and of Berryville, Virginia] and Vallejo.”The attempt to stop certification failed. Though more than 700 people have been charged over the riot, no politician has yet been formally punished.Steve Bannon, an adviser to Trump, has pleaded not guilty to a charge of criminal contempt of Congress, for refusing to cooperate with the House committee investigating the attack. Mark Meadows, Trump’s last White House chief of staff, could face the same charge.Trump himself was impeached for a second time over the riot but acquitted of inciting the insurrection when enough Republican senators stayed loyal. Senior House Republicans including the minority leader, Kevin McCarthy, have refused to cooperate with the select committee.Amid reaction to the charges against the Oath Keepers on Thursday, Matthew Miller, a political analyst and former justice department official, wrote: “The seditious conspiracy charges are important for a lot of reasons, but in my mind the most important is that, should they be convicted, the Oath Keepers will be forever branded as traitors to their country.”Regarding the arrest of Rhodes, the Lincoln Project, a group of Republican anti-Trump operatives, said: “Alternative headline: Key GOP Coalition Leader Arrested in 6 January Investigation.”TopicsUS Capitol attackThe far rightUS crimenewsReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      US Capitol attack panel asks Kevin McCarthy to cooperate with inquiry

      by

      US Capitol attack panel asks Kevin McCarthy to cooperate with inquiryThe House committee chairman has written to the Republican minority leader, escalating pressure on Trump’s allies in Congress The House select committee investigating the Capitol attack formally asked the Republican House minority leader, Kevin McCarthy, on Wednesday to cooperate with its inquiry into the January 6 insurrection, escalating the pressure on Donald Trump’s top allies in Congress.The committee said in a letter to McCarthy that the panel is seeking details about his conversations with the Trump White House and the former president in the days leading up to and during the Capitol attack, as well as discussions in its aftermath.“We also must learn about how the President’s plans for January 6th came together, and all the other ways he attempted to alter the results of the election,” Congressman Bennie Thompson, the chairman of the select committee, said in the letter.Capitol attack panel closes in on Trump inner circle with three new subpoenasRead moreThompson said that McCarthy was of particular interest to investigators as he spoke to Trump directly as the former president’s supporters stormed the Capitol to stop the certification of Joe Biden’s election win.The select committee’s request to McCarthy marks a significant political moment for the investigation and demonstrates their resolve to pursue testimony from the highest-ranking Republican in Congress as they examine potential criminal conduct by the former president.It also set the stage for a bitter political showdown after McCarthy said late on Wednesday he would not cooperate with the investigation, accusing the panel of “an abuse of power” and of “not serving any legislative purpose” – an argument rejected by multiple federal courts.Thompson said in the letter that the committee is, in the first instance, interested in McCarthy’s phone call to Trump on 6 January during which he unsuccessfully begged the former president to call off the pro-Trump mob as it stormed the Capitol in his name.According to an account of that call presented at Trump’s second impeachment last year, the former president sided with the rioters and in refusing to take action, told McCarthy that they were evidently more upset about the election than the House Republican leader.“You have acknowledged speaking directly with the former President while the violence was underway on January 6,” Thompson wrote. “This information bears directly on President Trump’s state of mind during the January 6 attack as the violence was underway.”The chairman said that House investigators wanted to ask McCarthy about why he still objected to Biden’s election certification even after the Capitol attack took place, and even though he appeared to recognize that Trump was responsible for the insurrection.“The select committee wishes to question you regarding communications you may have had with President Trump, President Trump’s legal team, Representative [Jim] Jordan, and others at the time on that topic,” Thompson wrote.The select committee’s request to McCarthy about his contacts with Jordan comes days after Jordan, another of Trump’s top allies on Capitol Hill, suggested that he would ignore a request for an interview he received from the panel in December.Thompson said that the committee was also seeking details about McCarthy’s conversations with Trump and Trump’s former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows before 6 January, suggesting an inquiry into what McCarthy knew of plans to stop Biden’s certification.“We also must learn about how the president’s plans for January 6 came together,” Thompson said in the letter. “You reportedly explained to Mark Meadows and the former president that objections to the certification of the electoral votes on January 6 ‘was doomed to fail.’”Having already established that McCarthy had informed Trump and Meadows before 6 January that the plan to stop Biden’s certification would not work, investigators want to learn why they were still “so confident the election result would be overturned”, Thompson said.The Guardian first reported last week that the committee has in its possession messages turned over by Meadows and others suggesting the Trump White House coordinated with Republican lawmakers to stop Biden’s certification, according to sources familiar with the matter.Thompson said that the committee was also interested in McCarthy’s communications with Trump in the week after the Capitol attack, including the possibility that Trump could have faced a censure resolution, impeachment and removal under the 25th amendment.Thompson added that the panel was not interested in McCarthy’s political conversations with Trump when he visited the former president at Mar-a-Lago on 28 January, but was taking an interest in why his characterization of Trump’s culpability changed so dramatically.“Did President Trump or his representatives discuss or suggest what you should say publicly, during the impeachment trial (if called as a witness), or in any later investigation about your conversations with him on January 6?” Thompson said in the letter.The chairman also revealed for the first time that the select committee has contemporaneous messages showing McCarthy talked to Trump about his immediate resignation, among a number of other potential consequences he may have faced for inciting the Capitol attack.“A full and accurate accounting of what happened on January 6th is critical to the select committee’s legislative recommendations. And the American people deserve to understand all the relevant details,” Thompson said, suggesting an interview in the first week of February.…TopicsUS Capitol attackRepublicansUS politicsDonald TrumpUS CongressnewsReuse this content More