"The Capitol Police were very friendly, hugging and kissing"
July 27, 2021 7:10 AM   Subscribe

 
Jennifer Taub live tweets here
posted by stevil at 7:32 AM on July 27 [4 favorites]


The police officers' testimony is incredibly moving.
posted by essexjan at 7:38 AM on July 27 [5 favorites]


I'm working and not able to stream the testimony, but from the tweets this is powerful stuff. I am so angry right now.
posted by gauche at 7:49 AM on July 27 [8 favorites]


Also, good choice of four very diverse officers, who probably don't have a lot in common outside the job, but who are all united in their strength of feeling about what happened to them.
posted by essexjan at 7:54 AM on July 27 [5 favorites]


Here's the video (content warning) that Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS) shared as part of his opening statement.

It ends with one insurrectionist saying 'That's what we fucking need to have, 30,000 guns up here.' Another replies 'Next trip.'
posted by box at 8:09 AM on July 27 [6 favorites]


Officer Gonell (who is still undergoing medical treatment for injuries sustained during the Insurrection) is asked about Trump's claim that there was 'a lot of love' in the crowd: "I'm still recovering from those hugs and kisses"
posted by essexjan at 8:16 AM on July 27 [33 favorites]


Surely this...

I’d love to see this phrase retired. Maybe these hearings will mean something. Maybe they won’t. But it’s tiresome to see the knee jerk cynicism straight outta the gate.

Considering how much effort the GOP leadership has put towards preventing or derailing these hearings, even they think it will leave a mark.
posted by Teegeeack AV Club Secretary at 8:31 AM on July 27 [70 favorites]


We really are in danger of losing the country. Or at least, a Civil War level threat America. We're living in this moment of calm with Biden as a quietly competent president and the Congress basically hamstrung. But that's going to be disrupted in next year's election and could blow up entirely in 2024.

I appreciate Kinzinger's rational, calm, clear op/ed. When he says "Without question, the work of this committee needs to be a nonpartisan effort" I absolutely agree with him. But there's only one party acting as a barrier to that. What's weird is the day or two after the coup attempt even the Republican leadership like McConnell were saying "this attack is terrible we need to figure this out and stop it". But they've long since chosen to embrace sedition instead.
posted by Nelson at 8:42 AM on July 27 [40 favorites]


Yeah, I too can be cynical/skeptical about what may come of this. But the testimony itself is important and the fact that it's happening at all, when it easily could not have, is also important.
posted by feckless at 8:54 AM on July 27 [8 favorites]


I’d love to see this phrase retired. Maybe these hearings will mean something. Maybe they won’t. But it’s tiresome to see the knee jerk cynicism straight outta the gate.

OMFG are you having a laugh? This is a bullshit legislature sort-of-but-not-quite investigating itself - and, if it produces any result, half of the USA will reject it because it wasn't not produced by their team.

Perhaps my feelings about the US Congress is a 'knee-jerk', but, like a knee-jerk, that would be a reaction inculcated for Reasons.
posted by pompomtom at 8:56 AM on July 27 [16 favorites]


and, if it produces any result, half of the USA will reject it because it wasn't not produced by their team

Republicans don't represent a majority of this country, not even half. That's the point -- they need to rely on fascist tactics because they no longer have a hope of persuading a majority of Americans to vote for them.
posted by Gelatin at 9:06 AM on July 27 [57 favorites]


The hearings are important, but I won't consider them to be effective so long as that little jail in the basement of the Capitol remains unoccupied.

(Or if subpoenas actually carry some weight again, whichever comes first)
posted by RonButNotStupid at 9:09 AM on July 27 [5 favorites]


The hearings are important. But: there was an attack on congress on live TV, which people all over the world watched. It was instigated by the then president of the USA. And yet a significant minority of the American people and large minorities in both houses deny it was an insurgency. The insanity of this is so immense, that even though I have had months to process it, I still can't.
posted by mumimor at 9:17 AM on July 27 [75 favorites]


Considering how much effort the GOP leadership has put towards preventing or derailing these hearings, even they think it will leave a mark.

Quoted for truth. They've said openly how damaging they feel anything other than a complete whitewash would be to their midterm prospects.

As another data point, consider hacks like Chris Cilliza maintaining that since Pelosi rejected the obvious ringers like Gym Jordan, the panel won't be "perceived" as bipartisan despite having other Republicans on it. Hot takes like these are a weak front put up by useless media people who fear they won't be left with a lazy "both sides do it" frame because they know it's only the Trumpists.
posted by Gelatin at 9:18 AM on July 27 [15 favorites]


We really are in danger of losing the country. Or at least, a Civil War level threat America.

Well, a Civil War is exactly what the far-right has been telling us is coming, and have been preparing for, for the past 40 or so years. Many on the left have been dismissive of, if not outright laughing at, their claim, but the warning that they seriously intend violent revolt has been pretty clear.
posted by Thorzdad at 9:38 AM on July 27 [19 favorites]


(paraphrasing)
raskin: officer hodges, why do you call them terrorists, when others are insisting they are tourists?
hodges: if that's tourism, i can see why other countries don't like american tourists. [then reads 18 U.S.C. Sec. 2331(5)].
posted by 20 year lurk at 9:41 AM on July 27 [65 favorites]


I definitely want them to test whether or not Congress still has the ability to enforce a subpoena. I suspect that they are afraid of the answer, but not trying presents the answer anyway.
posted by diogenes at 9:52 AM on July 27 [7 favorites]


I'm glad they're about to take a break, I've found that quite emotional and draining. I need to watch Darcey & Stacey now as an antidote.
posted by essexjan at 10:00 AM on July 27


Republicans don't represent a majority of this country, not even half.

I hope you're right correct. It doesn't seem that way from the outside.
posted by pompomtom at 10:00 AM on July 27 [3 favorites]


I hope you're correct. It doesn't seem that way from the outside.

What do you mean? The percentage of Republicans isn't something we have to deduce. We have that data.
posted by diogenes at 10:06 AM on July 27 [19 favorites]


I hope you're right correct. It doesn't seem that way from the outside.

Republicans wouldn't be working so furiously to restrict voting if they were confident they could consistently appeal to a majority.
posted by Gelatin at 10:07 AM on July 27 [51 favorites]


There are many comparisons to be made (contemporary and historic) but the efforts of the Nazi party leading up to 1934 really hit home for the degree to which they got organized, persisted, and shifted public perceptions. I'm not taking any great measure of comfort from whether we're talking a minority.. a great deal of the threat seems to come from the lengths some groups are willing to take, and the complacency and distractions keeping so many others frozen and/or ineffective. Hitler started with a goal to violently take power and ended with the legal usurpation of the democratic process, he and his circle broke the system from within. All while violence--the threat and the active display--underscored their machinations. Reading "Parallel Lives" (Hitler and Stalin) and it's something to see how things finally tilted, and then everything seemed to change/collapse.
posted by elkevelvet at 10:19 AM on July 27 [13 favorites]


What do you mean? The percentage of Republicans isn't something we have to deduce. We have that data.

And they all get two or three votes compared to anyone living in a city, no? We have the data. The US (as a legal concept) is designed to empower rural whites.
posted by pompomtom at 10:30 AM on July 27 [5 favorites]


Look I hope I'm wrong and the US Congress can un-fascist America or something. I really do.
posted by pompomtom at 10:37 AM on July 27 [5 favorites]


I really hope the grill (as in with fire) the Generals that are nominally responsible for the most secure city on the face of the Earth, as in they can scramble hundreds of fighter jets in minutes but they could not call the National Guard for hours.
posted by sammyo at 10:45 AM on July 27 [17 favorites]


Meanwhile, the usual suspects are out there decrying the testifying officers as "cowards," "a whiny little Stasi" and "crisis actors." Holding press conferences at the DoJ to decry the "unfair treatment" of "Jan. 6th prisoners." Demanding that the focus be on "the one murder that took place on Jan. 6th, Ashli Babbitt" and screaming for the name of the officer responsible. Claiming that this committee is authoritarian and invalid and corrupt because one of those responsible for the insurrection was not allowed to join the committee investigating said insurrection. Insisting that the real focus should be on police injuries suffered in "BLM/Antifa riots that burned American cities to the ground," despite the continued unburned existence of said cities. Declaring that the REAL person responsible for the 1/6 tragedies was... Nancy Pelosi.

I do despair of the grand "Once Trump is gone, we'll be back to normal" reawakening.
posted by delfin at 10:48 AM on July 27 [18 favorites]


I personally do not see a "Civil War 2.0" happening, but an electoral coup is always possible.

The infamous German federal election of 1933, in which the Nazis seized power, saw Hitler win with only 33.1% of the vote. This was possible because the remainder of the electorate was split between the SPD (20.4%) and KPD (16.9%). It doesn't take a ton of imagination to see how the US left's tendency towards factionalization and infighting could do something similar here.

However, based on the most recent poll that I could find, only about 24% of the US electorate identify as Republicans anymore (compared to 30% Democrats and 44% independents, so don't get too excited). But pompomtom is correct to note that voting power in the US isn't exactly distributed equally, by design.
posted by Kadin2048 at 10:49 AM on July 27 [9 favorites]


...the Generals that are nominally responsible for the most secure city on the face of the Earth...

One of those being General Charles Flynn brother of Gen Michael Flynn (yes that Michael Flynn).
posted by PenDevil at 10:52 AM on July 27 [1 favorite]


As another data point, consider hacks like Chris Cilliza maintaining that since Pelosi rejected the obvious ringers like Gym Jordan, the panel won't be "perceived" as bipartisan despite having other Republicans on it.

And they had a bipartisan deal for a 5D-5R committee...

that the Republican leadership blew up! They literally had a golden opportunity to agree to an evenly-split investigative committee (and with all the power that implies) and they wouldn't even take it.
posted by BungaDunga at 10:52 AM on July 27 [12 favorites]


And they all get two or three votes compared to anyone living in a city, no? We have the data. The US (as a legal concept) is designed to empower rural whites.

Correct, but the original post was about the majority, not about political power specifically. Honestly pompomtom I get that you're super invested in this but I think you're being super reactive in this thread already and it's keeping you from responding to what is actually being said. I fully share your frustrations and and doubts about this country, but imo we lose a lot of good discourse when we respond to the feelings folks trigger and not their actual words. (That last statement is not a defense of ignoring dog whistles and clear subtext tho!)
posted by wemayfreeze at 10:53 AM on July 27 [14 favorites]


Officer Dunn: “If a hit man is hired & he kills somebody the hit man goes to jail, but not only does the hit man go to jail but the person who hired him does. There was an attack committed on Jan. 6 & a hit man sent them. I want you to get to the bottom of that. Thank you.”
5:10 PM · Jul 27, 2021·Twitter for iPhone
posted by Ahmad Khani at 10:54 AM on July 27 [55 favorites]


Demanding that the focus be on "the one murder that took place on Jan. 6th, Ashli Babbitt" and screaming for the name of the officer responsible.

Wanting the name of a cop who killed someone is a pretty reasonable ask.
posted by Cezar Golescu at 11:05 AM on July 27 [1 favorite]


Wanting the name of a cop who killed someone is a pretty reasonable ask.

When asked consistently.
posted by sainttoad at 11:11 AM on July 27 [16 favorites]


Demanding that the focus be on "the one murder that took place on Jan. 6th, Ashli Babbitt" and screaming for the name of the officer responsible.

Wanting the name of a cop who killed someone is a pretty reasonable ask.


Speaking of that, I think you’ll find a lot of the people calling for an investigation into Babbitt’s situation have employed the phrase “he should have just obeyed the cop” in the deaths of, well, people from different demographics than Babbitt.
posted by ricochet biscuit at 11:12 AM on July 27 [53 favorites]


Though, in this particular case, we know precisely _why_ they want it. It's not to hold an investigation as to that officer's conduct, since that's already happened.
posted by delfin at 11:12 AM on July 27 [5 favorites]


Wanting the name of a cop who killed someone is a pretty reasonable ask.

Intention matters
posted by Ahmad Khani at 11:14 AM on July 27 [17 favorites]


Intention matters

Not really. The names of cops who kill people should be public.
posted by Cezar Golescu at 11:17 AM on July 27 [2 favorites]


If the officer's name becomes public, he will be in danger. When an angry, authoritarian mob is pointed at someone, that someone is not safe. They want his name because his name is a weapon. Yes, transparency in policing is vital. In this case, there is no doubt about the circumstances of the shooting; the minimal benefit of transparency is vastly outweighed (IMO, but come on) by the risk to him and his loved ones if his name is released.
posted by dbx at 11:32 AM on July 27 [28 favorites]


Not really.
Normally I'd agree entirely but it seems this situation is an outlier, with the authoritarian individual who orchestrated the riot asking for the cop's details.
posted by Ahmad Khani at 11:34 AM on July 27 [23 favorites]


Not to mention the increased risk to democracy if, on top of not wanting to police the armed far-right, police officers also fear doing so.

Nuance is not a capitalist trick.
posted by howfar at 11:37 AM on July 27 [9 favorites]


Whether to release the name of the officer can be debated without turning it into an obstacle blocking investigation of everything else that went on that day. Committees can multitask and obstructionism only helps those who instigated the insurrection.
posted by at by at 11:38 AM on July 27 [12 favorites]


Anything that requires me to assume good faith by Republicans is a non-starter.
posted by diogenes at 11:44 AM on July 27 [39 favorites]


luckily, we have the focus and resolve to resist being baited by the opposition's bad-faith sideshows
posted by 20 year lurk at 11:44 AM on July 27 [11 favorites]


Along with the crime of reporting to terrorists the location of legislators who are in the presidential line of succession, I want to see Boebart and Greene, in particular, brought up as defendants who are alleged to have given guided tours to those same terrorists, who appeared to be organised enough to know some places where to go to find said legislators. There needs to be some serious fucking prison time for those pancake-faced traitors.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 11:48 AM on July 27 [37 favorites]


It is not as if it is a secret _to those who need to know_ who shot Ashli Babbitt. The DoJ conducted an investigation, found no criminal intent or wrongdoing, closed the investigation and informed Babbitt's family of their findings.

Is the Department of Justice under Biden capable of making this determination fairly? You tell me. But there is a distinct difference between an investigation of an event under such a national microscope and, say, the kinds of targeted violence against minorities that led to the Black Lives Matter movement becoming prominent. (Unless you believe that Babbitt either was or was being led by covert Communist BLM FBI Antifa agents, in which case kindly wait out in the hallway for now.)

There is seeking a name so that justice can be served, and there is seeking a name so that revenge may be dealt.
posted by delfin at 11:50 AM on July 27 [18 favorites]


Wanting the name of a cop who killed someone is a pretty reasonable ask.

The name of the individual directly responsible for that person's death is Donald J. Trump. There, you have his name now.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 11:52 AM on July 27 [93 favorites]


Meanwhile, the usual suspects are out there decrying the testifying officers as "cowards," "a whiny little Stasi" and "crisis actors."

Here's a reminder -- because the so-called "liberal media" fails to mention it -- that the term "crisis actor" is an admission that one's story is a compelling reason to oppose Republican policies, so compelling that they have no answer to it but to call it fake. No matter that it's on video.


It's a frank admission of bad faith.
posted by Gelatin at 12:06 PM on July 27 [20 favorites]


there was an attack on congress on live TV, which people all over the world watched. It was instigated by the then president of the USA. And yet a significant minority of the American people and large minorities in both houses deny it was an insurgency.

The tv networks that they watch didn't show those parts of the attack on the capital, so it's not like this significant minority of Americans is forming different interpretations of the same reality as the rest of us, or would necessarily support the actions of those attempting a coup on January 6 if they were adequately and accurately informed. Though the skewed reporting and lying-by-omission of said networks is going to be a large part of the problem moving forward too, of course. And some of this significant minority will indeed make up their own or quickly accept others' post hoc rationalizations rather than change political allegiance or admit (to themselves or others) that they were wrong, while some others will not find a white supremacist coup attempt to conflict with their values in the first place, unfortunately.
posted by eviemath at 1:10 PM on July 27 [4 favorites]


The people who are up in arms about this committee are the ones who've been told by various dingbats that:

* the rally was entirely peaceful
* Donald Trump did not, in fact, direct rallygoers to enter the Capitol in any way, even by inference
* Congresspeople who claimed that they were threatened are lying about their experiences
* It was a "boisterous walkthrough, no worse than many campus occupations"
* the intrusion was led by undercover FBI agents, trying to entrap patriots and to blame for all violence
* the intrusion was led by undercover BLM members, etc.
* the intrusion was led by undercover Antifa members, etc.
* Nancy Pelosi is personally responsible for the lack of adequate security.
* Ashli Babbitt was shot for no reason by a cop hiding in the shadows
* this building is paid for by taxpayers' money, so they had every right to be there
* it is a patriot's duty to stop an unjust and unlawful electoral process
* the only violent acts were performed by Capitol police
* Officer Sicknick died of a stroke (technically true) that had NOTHING TO DO WHATSOEVER with what had happened to him on the grounds on 1/6
* the election was in fact stolen, justifying any response

Not once, not by one source alone, but repeatedly by multiple sources within the Mirror Universe Media. They have Congresspeople _themselves_ claiming that Babbitt was murdered in cold blood, that the FBI entrapped all arrestees, and that subsequent security measures by the White House (fencing, etc.) are proof that they know that the election was invalid and that patriots will be coming for them.

The significant minority of Americans have been lied to, repeatedly. The minority in both houses, along with the media that props them up, are the liars.
posted by delfin at 1:20 PM on July 27 [28 favorites]


There's a reason people refer to Trump's claims that sparked the insurrection as the Big Lie, and it's spawned a lot of others in its wake.
posted by Gelatin at 1:25 PM on July 27 [4 favorites]


And note that many of the things the Republican tribe has been told about the insurrection don't even make sense among themselves. There's no way the intrusion would have been led by both the FBI and Antifa, for one thing. But in the spirit of the Big Lie, the fact that it doesn't make sense is part if it. It forces the listener to suspend their disbelief for the sake of tribal identification, after which admitting the truth becomes a lot harder.
posted by Gelatin at 1:27 PM on July 27 [5 favorites]


There's no way the intrusion would have been led by both the FBI and Antifa, for one thing.

Actually it was led by the FBI, Antifa, and heroic American patriot Ashli Babbitt.
posted by diogenes at 1:38 PM on July 27 [14 favorites]


and some tour guide
posted by mbo at 2:11 PM on July 27 [4 favorites]


Officer Dunn: “If a hit man is hired & he kills somebody the hit man goes to jail, but not only does the hit man go to jail but the person who hired him does. There was an attack committed on Jan. 6 & a hit man sent them. I want you to get to the bottom of that. Thank you.”

FINALLY! FINALLY! FINALLY!

I've heard and read and watched so much about "what happened on Jan. 6th". I can tell you: we know what happened on Jan 6th. I have no more questions about Jan 6th.

Jan 5th, on the other hand -- I have questions about what happened on that day. So, so many questions.

That insurrection was not spontaneous, but it seems like all of Congress is so far carrying forward the fiction that it was, and we just need to find out what sparked a spontaneous fire. Not why and how there was so very much kindling and explosives piled up in one place.

There was months if not years' worth of planning and organizing and funding that went into that event. That's what I really care about. If we just send a bunch of MAGAhat lemmings to prison and call it "justice" -- the organizers will consider the whole thing a successful training exercise.
posted by Dashy at 2:40 PM on July 27 [30 favorites]


That insurrection was not spontaneous,

You might be right.
posted by ricochet biscuit at 3:00 PM on July 27 [2 favorites]


Anyone who was paying attention to the online scuttlebutt knew what was planned for Jan 6th. I remember commenting to my wife the night before how concerned I was.

It is baffling to me that we're all just pretending none of that happened. I know people scraped parler et al for data and got a fair bit before people started deleting. Where is all that evidence?
posted by a power-tie-wearing she-capitalist at 3:34 PM on July 27 [18 favorites]


Trump said it prior to that day! I can't believe that isn't repeated more. "wild"
posted by tiny frying pan at 3:40 PM on July 27 [2 favorites]


Jennifer Taub’s tweet thread broke a few times, here’s a complete thread reader archive.
posted by danhon at 3:43 PM on July 27 [8 favorites]


The person who shot Babbitt was an officer of the law, defending duly elected politicians of both sides from a mob who had broken into a secured government building, with every intention of stopping legal government proceedings because Trump said to. The fact that Babbitt was on the front lines of terrorist insurrection attempting to violate an election is a (utterly avoidable) tragedy.... The fact that she got shot breaking the law unsurprising.

Who shot Babbitt? Trump. Who would have encouraged more violence, as shown by his entire campaign? Trump. Who actually did their job when they pulled the trigger isn't relevant. This isn't some police officer who shot children or a transgender person of color for existing. This is not a police officer who abused and murderers a restrained prisoner. This was someone doing their job because Trump forced them to. Why in the world would anyone not out to hurt that individual need their name? Why? Transparency is great. I'm all for it. But not at the cost of exposing someone defending the capitol from a mob to that exact mob.
posted by Jacen at 5:07 PM on July 27 [22 favorites]


Kadin2048: The infamous German federal election of 1933, in which the Nazis seized power, saw Hitler win with only 33.1% of the vote. This was possible because the remainder of the electorate was split between the SPD (20.4%) and KPD (16.9%). It doesn't take a ton of imagination to see how the US left's tendency towards factionalization and infighting could do something similar here.

It’s pretty egregious to imply that the “US left” will be to blame when literally in your link is this sentence:
Nazi stormtroopers had unleashed a widespread campaign of violence against the Communist Party (KPD), left-wingers, trade unionists, the Social Democratic Party of Germany, and the Centre Party.
Me and my friends spent the past 5 years battling the right-wing street fighting contingent who continuously invaded our city and attacked our friends, including 150+ straight days of protests in 2020 against the police and federal agencies, but please, go on about how our tendency toward factionalism and infighting will be the cause of fascism :)
posted by gucci mane at 5:57 PM on July 27 [47 favorites]


What will really come out of this? Just trying to see if this changes anything in any real way. From all that I see, the republicans are still expected to take the house come mid-terms and bring the currently slow proceedings to a total halt.
posted by asra at 5:58 PM on July 27


We can't know what the ultimate effect of the hearings will be until sometime far in the future. Speculating on how useless they might be seems unhelpful, and indeed actively harmful.

It is important to ME that they're being held. It is important to the members of the House committee. It is important to the four officers who testified today.

I hope there will be proportionate consequences for everyone who contributed to the January 6 terrorist attack, including life sentences in prison and a massive political backlash against the treacherous, anti-American minority party. But even if those consequences don't materialize, I think the hearings are important, and valuable, and necessary.

Recent history is full of change wrought by people who had no reason to believe they would ever actually succeed in making a difference: King. Gandhi. Havel. Mandela. Lewis. Thunberg.

You don't do it because you're assured of success. You do it because you believe it ought to be done; and sometimes, you do succeed in bringing change.

Pessimism is not going to change a single anti-American vote - not your ranting uncle's vote, not Murkowski's vote. Holding these hearings is the right thing to do, and has a better chance than cynicism of making at least a small change .

The arc of history is long. Let's do the right thing in the brief, precious moments we have, and persist, and resist, for as long as we possibly can.
posted by kristi at 6:34 PM on July 27 [48 favorites]


What do you mean? The percentage of Republicans isn't something we have to deduce. We have that data.

And in a sane world, the % of DJT supporters woudl be closer to 0.4% than 40%. The fact that it's anywhere near 40% (de jure, or defacto) is fucking terrifying.

COVID slammed this home for me: Prior, I had been willing to give "a pass" to many people for being "good hearted but misinformed" - now? fuck that shit. These MOFOs are actively trying to kill us all. Toddlers playing with plutonium.
posted by soylent00FF00 at 6:50 PM on July 27 [22 favorites]


What will really come out of this? Just trying to see if this changes anything in any real way. From all that I see, the republicans are still expected to take the house come mid-terms and bring the currently slow proceedings to a total halt.

In practical terms... I, too, am curious as to what (if any) actions the committee can take in response to testimony and evidence. A Strong Report To Follow, of course, but what else? My expectation (though I am welcoming correction) is that, if criminal activity is uncovered or strongly suspected, they cannot say "arrest these men and women" or "The DOJ must prosecute these men and women," but can strongly suggest in their report that the DoJ should take a close look at the individuals' conduct and determine whether prosecution is appropriate, HINT HINT.

With regard to the active members of Congress who are involved, expulsion is out of the question; that requires a 2/3 vote in either house. Censure is a bit more viable, but is toothless.

As for outsiders (Trump, Rudy, the kids, etc.), the likelihood of them honoring a subpoena is... open to debate. I'll be charitable.

Does a history of this event, its planning and its perpetrators need to be told, investigated and recorded for posterity? Damn right it does. That alone makes this process worthwhile. But I am not buying any Committeemas Cards, so to speak. I have enough Muellermas cards left over already.
posted by delfin at 7:08 PM on July 27 [6 favorites]


Let's get these Confederate flag-waving, Trump-voting motherfuckers in the spotlight and put it all down on the official record what they did. Another Reichstag fire might be set down the road, but at least we can make sure their acts can't be erased from the books easily.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 7:10 PM on July 27 [8 favorites]


I think you'll run into problems forcing testimony to congress through subpoenas, then turning around and prosecuting the witnesses.
posted by ryanrs at 10:43 PM on July 27 [1 favorite]


A request: when talking about the Republican party, use the term fascist. It is a political term of art, and it accurately describes the current state of the party.
Even though not all Republican party members are technically fascists, the party as a functioning entity is using fascist techniques and rhetoric. It is actively pursuing the creation of a single party state.
Using less graphic language provides cover for the ongoing seditious attempt to end democratic government in the United States. It minimizes and normalizes the existential threat to the Constitution posed by fascist Republican forces. Not using accurate language cedes too much rhetorical power to the enemies of democracy.
posted by Metacircular at 2:20 AM on July 28 [12 favorites]


What did Jim Jordan know about the insurrection and when did he know it?
The Guardian Opinion by Sidney Blumenthal

There are so many questions, I could quote the whole long piece. This stood out to me as something I didn't know /hadn't noticed:
5) On 21 December, Jordan attended private meetings at the White House with Trump and several other Republican House members “where they strategized over a last-ditch effort to overturn the election results”, Politico reported. “It was a back-and-forth concerning the planning and strategy for 6 January,” said Representative Mo Brooks, a Republican congressman from Alabama.
What was said at that meeting? What were those plans? Was the rally discussed? Was the idea discussed of sending Trump supporters to intimidate and interrupt members of Congress in the certification process? Was Jordan’s role on the House floor on 6 January against certification raised at that meeting? What did Jordan say?
posted by mumimor at 4:21 AM on July 28 [17 favorites]


Damon Linker has a terrifying recap of a recent Michael Anton podcast: "The intellectual right contemplates an 'American Caesar' - Jan. 6 was a badly planned rehearsal for the real deal."
posted by PhineasGage at 7:06 AM on July 28 [10 favorites]


Just in case you're wondering how Fox News is covering it, they went with the headline:

Cops blame Trump, Republicans for allegedly inspiring and then downplaying Jan. 6 Capitol attack
posted by box at 7:09 AM on July 28 [3 favorites]


This is not entirely on the subject, but I'm putting it in here because I think John Oliver is expressing what a lot of us who have been or are immigrants to the US are discovering these years. It's not that I didn't know there was racism in the US, and it's not that we don't have racism in Europe, we have plenty, thanks. To the contrary, when I returned to Europe, I was shocked by the new racism in the wake of 1989, because stuff was said out loud in a way that wasn't at all acceptable in the US.
It's that whole white culture that is so weird and that many of us probably didn't understand to begin with, not least because immigrants are not invited in much, regardless of their skin color.
Everything about January 6th just reeks of "it's OK because I'm white". I know there were a few Black and Latino rioters and there is nothing I can say about them that is fit for the internet.
In a way, this comment and the link is a reply to the suggestion that we call the Republicans fascists. I get it. But at this point, "Republican" already means "Fascist". Most Republicans are people who prefer authoritarian rule to democracy in order to protect white supremacy. There is nothing else to it. Some are social conservatives, some are fiscal conservatives. Some want to pay people to have kids. All are corrupt. Apart from corruption, the one thing they have in common is racism.
posted by mumimor at 9:59 AM on July 28 [12 favorites]


I think you'll run into problems forcing testimony to congress through subpoenas, then turning around and prosecuting the witnesses.

This is what scuttled Oliver North's and John Poindexter's prosecutions.

Technically, Congress can force people to testify under "use immunity", and they can still be prosecuted, but after Iran-Contra it's substantially harder than you might expect. The law is supposed to allow subsequent prosecution (as long as you don't use the precise information testified to under immunity) but I'm not sure it's ever been successfully done.
posted by BungaDunga at 12:29 PM on July 28 [5 favorites]


And in ordinary times, conspiring or inciting to insurrection should make one a pariah, regardless of prosecutability. But these days it runs the risk of making them "heroes".
posted by Dashy at 12:41 PM on July 28 [1 favorite]


And in ordinary times, conspiring or inciting to insurrection should make one a pariah, regardless of prosecutability. But these days it runs the risk of making them "heroes".

One of the likely reasons so-called conservatives rail so against "cancel culture" is that people really do have a right to refuse to associate with rapists, violent criminals, and traitors.
posted by Gelatin at 12:52 PM on July 28 [7 favorites]


Technically, Congress can force people to testify under "use immunity", and they can still be prosecuted, but after Iran-Contra it's substantially harder than you might expect. The law is supposed to allow subsequent prosecution (as long as you don't use the precise information testified to under immunity) but I'm not sure it's ever been successfully done.

In which case, they should be offered a chance to play America's favorite courtroom game show, Flip, Flop or Fry.

* Flip on your fellow conspirators and provide meaningful dirt for use-immunity purposes,
* Flop behind your desk and pray that no one Flips and gives enough to get you prosecuted, or
* Fry when they do.
posted by delfin at 2:16 PM on July 28 [2 favorites]


Demanding that the focus be on "the one murder that took place on Jan. 6th, Ashli Babbitt" and screaming for the name of the officer responsible.

They are hoping (or already know) that the officer that shot Ashli Babbitt while she "and others were attempting to breach a barricaded door inside the Capitol" and force their way into the House Chamber is black, so they can enflame more racial tension.
posted by kirkaracha at 3:29 PM on July 28 [1 favorite]


The infamous German federal election of 1933, in which the Nazis seized power, saw Hitler win with only 33.1% of the vote.

A major problem in drawing comparisons with the Nazis is that most people look at them from a post-WWII perspective, so it's easy to dismiss comparisons by saying Trumpublicans haven't set up concentration camps or invaded the Soviet Union or dressed up in snazzy Hugo Boss uniforms.

If you know anything about the rise of the Nazi party, the similarities are frightening. Hitler Youth and brownshirts in the street, violent riots, and the Big Lie.
posted by kirkaracha at 3:41 PM on July 28 [9 favorites]


They are hoping (or already know) that the officer that shot Ashli Babbitt while she "and others were attempting to breach a barricaded door inside the Capitol" and force their way into the House Chamber is black, so they can enflame more racial tension.

There’s video from within the House Chamber of the group of officers who were on the other side of that door, and if I recall correctly they were all white? (I mean, not that that necessarily matters here, given we’re talking about the same general group of people who are looking for bamboo threads in Arizona ballots as if that would be proof of Chinese tampering /eye roll/.)
posted by eviemath at 6:08 AM on July 29


"The District of Columbia's police department on Monday said two more police officers who responded to the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol have died by suicide, bringing to four the number of known suicides by officers who guarded the building that day." (Reuters / Yahoo News)
posted by Iris Gambol at 8:53 AM on August 3 [4 favorites]


550 charged so far in Capitol riot case, while 27 have pleaded guilty (CBS, updated Aug. 2, 2021). [On July 30, USA Today's count was 555 while Insider had 599; both sites have searchable databases, as does justice.gov.]

Yesterday, at approx. 12:50 p.m., the United States Capitol Police seized two loaded guns near the U.S. Capitol. "USCP Officer Spots Gun, Arrests Couple on Multiple Weapons Charges" (Carrying a Pistol without a License [x2], Unregistered Firearm [x2], Unlawful Possession of Ammunition[x2], Unlawful Transportation of a Firearm and Possession of a Large Capacity Feeding Device)
posted by Iris Gambol at 10:55 AM on August 3 [3 favorites]


And meanwhile Tucker Carlson is in Hungary literally learning how to fascist better so he can rile up people like this even more.
posted by PhineasGage at 11:09 AM on August 3 [1 favorite]


Last week, on Steve Bannon's podcast, Matt Braynard [data chief for Trump’s 2016 campaign, more recently getting paid and serving Trump via the Voter Integrity Project] announced "Justice for J6," a rally set for Sept. 18 at the Capitol to protest on behalf of “political prisoners” charged in the Jan. 6 insurrection. Braynard's group Look Ahead America is coordinating it. Despite multiple dramatic videos of scenes to the contrary, Braynard told Bannon the crowd that day was “largely peaceful” — and simply “egged on in many cases by the Capitol Police.” [...] Braynard said he has already obtained permission for the rally from the Metropolitan Police Department, pending final checks the day of the protest. Look Ahead America held a small rally outside the D.C. jail on July 17, protesting about 50 people who are being held [...] who they called “nonviolent American patriots.”

How the GOP Is Turning Capitol Rioters Into ‘Political Prisoners’
posted by Iris Gambol at 2:23 PM on August 6 [3 favorites]


« Older Peachaaay   |   Remembering Bob Moses, 1935–2021 Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments