THE JANUARY 6 INSURRECTION INVESTIGATION: WHERE WE STAND

Investigations into the January 6 insurrection plod

along with three unmistakable  characteristics. In some ways, these characteristics typify and symbolize the state of our politics. They show the strengths and weaknesses of American democracy in 2021.

·     Democrats and a few brave Republicans in Congress keep moving methodically toward uncovering the truth, using tried and true tools and processes that fit the circumstances.

·     The courts are handling January 6 prosecutions as we’d expect – on a case-by-case basis, balancing the societal interest in holding those responsible accountable with individual rights afforded every criminal defendant, despite claims those  defendants are political prisoners.

·     Republican politicians stand in the way. The fact that’s happening –as odd as it is – represents a good starting place for an evaluation of where the investigation stands, nearly nine months after the deadly attack on the capitol.

 

The GOP Strategy: You Didn’t Really See 

WhatYou Thought You Saw

One remarkable thing stands out about the January 6 insurrection – we saw it on television.Republicans, however, continue their effort at convincing Americans it wasn’t what it looked like. In addition to outlandish statements from Republican members ofCongress about capitol rioters resembling tourists, the overall GOP strategy rests on the notion that if Republicans keep saying there’s nothing worth seeing, Americans will agree and lose interest.

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy probably had that in mind when he threatened telecomcompanies asked to preserve phone records. Those records might show that Republican members of Congress helped facilitate the attack. McCarthy said those companies shouldn’t comply with document requests made by the bipartisan House Select Committee that’s conducting a probe into January 6. He claimed complying would violate federal law andRepublicans would remember that, presumably with dire consequences, if and when the GOP retakes the House of Representatives. McCarthy no doubt wants to minimize the importance of the investigation and make complying not normal. After all, what people thought they saw wasn’t big a deal. Wasn’t much to see, right?

Then there’s the matter of prematurely exonerating former President Donald Trump. Select CommitteeChairman Bennie Thompson and Vice Chair Liz Cheney, early in September, dismissed as “baseless” McCarthy’s claim that various federal agencies, including the Justice Department, had concluded Trump didn’t incite or provoke the January 6 violence. Many reasons exist for believing he did. It appears McCarthy thought he could give the public another reason for seeing the investigation as overblown and unnecessary. There’s just not much there, right?

 

Democrats (and two Republicans) Keep Doing

the Right Thing

While the Republican side show and misinformation campaign continue, the Select

Committee keeps moving the investigation forward methodically.  Federal agencies and private companies have now responded to the committee’s first round of requests for documents. Thompson indicated the panel needs more information from social media companies. Documents the committee wants could show the involvement of Trump, White House aides, Trump family members, and GOP legislators in the planning and execution of the insurrection.

                                    

It’s known, for example, that Trump talkedon January 6 with several Republican members of Congress while the insurrection remained in progress.  If it takes a little longer to get the documents that may lead to confirmation of the substance of those communications, so be it. Tracking down such facts requires painstaking investigation and analysis. The committee is doing that, as it should, using tools common to this kind of work. If the president of the United States committed treason against the American government, we want to know the details of that, right?

 

The Courts and Their Balancing Act

Some Americans no doubt would prefer the criminal cases against the January 6 insurrectionists move faster. More than 600 defendants have been charged with various crimes in connection with the attack. Most of them are not being held in jail while they await trial.  Some, however, have had their release conditions revoked because judges have concluded, in individual cases, that those defendants pose a threat. One, a former police officer, bought 37 guns after his arrest. That individual disrupted a court hearing and accosted a probation officer. A magistrate judge decided he should remain in jail.

That situation demonstrates how courts have balanced individual rights and concerns about

January 6 defendants who continue creating havoc. That’s the nature of the criminal justice system and things are likely to continue moving along that way for a long time to come. Meantime, Trump supporters and far rights groups spent a weekend demonstrating in Washington and elsewhere claiming the insurrectionists were just protesters exercising their constitutional rights and are being held wrongfully. Oh, really?

                                      

As much as everyone might hope the process of investigating January 6 and holding those responsible accountable might proceed differently or move faster, the current state of affairs seems like what we’ll have for a while. Republican

politicians have shown no interest in unearthing what happened. McCarthy once said the GOP would conduct its own investigation and seek “real answers.” No evidence exists that’s happening now or that it will happen. McCarthy and other Republicans

will likely continue doing  what they’re doing now – getting in the way, making disingenuous or outright false statements, and claiming nothing important happened.

Meantime, the Select Committee, which includes

only two Republicans, and the courts will keep

doing what they’re doing -- their jobs.

AMERICA’S CLOSE CALL WITH LOSING DEMOCRACY: THE 2020 ELECTION STORY THAT’S BARELY BEEN TOLD

         

At first, we thought the end of the impeachment trial marked a good time for turning the page on Donald Trump and the 2020 election. The new administration certainly has turned the page, as President Biden’s recent Wisconsin and Michigan trips, his first since taking office, indicate. Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris revved up their campaign to build support for the administration’s $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief package. It appears they’re making headway. Polls showed Biden’s approval rating over 60% and support for the virus legislation nearing 70%.

One thing, however, caught our attention and made

us consider something about the election we can’t ignore –the danger democracy faced and escaped. The February 15/February 22 issue of Time Magazine includes a stunning report about the unprecedented effort by Americans of all political stripes to save the 2020 election. These Americans, first and foremost, wanted a fair election. Their objective was not engineering a victory for either side. The story hasn’t gotten the attention it deserves. According to Time, the key participants say they “want the secret history of the 2020 election told,” so we decided we’d help them get it out.

Molly Ball wrote “How Close We Came: The Secret History of the Shadow Campaign that Saved the Election.” She details how business interests, labor unions, and social activists made “sort of an implicit bargain” in which they came together to“keep the peace and oppose Trump’s assault on democracy.” It started with a man few people have heard of, Mike Podhorzer, and wound up involving hundreds of Americans from different political orientations.

Beginnings – Fall 2019 

Podhorzer’s political roots grew in union soil. He served as senior adviser to the leadership of the

AFL-CIO and developed a reputation for using scientific methods in campaigns. In late 2019, he realized a disaster loomed with the 2020 vote because Trump could try to “disrupt the election.” Podhorzer found others, especially in voting rights and civil rights organizations, who shared his fears. He began communicating with them and in March 2020 put his thoughts into a confidential memorandum that outlined how Trump might use right wing media and social media in claiming he’d won the election, even if he lost.

Four major concerns appeared early: (1)attacks on 

voters, (2) attacks on election administration,

(3) attacks on Trump’s political opponents, and

(4) attempts at reversing a Democratic victory. 

Podhorzer's group began working on these

problems before Biden clinched the Democratic

nomination and the Biden campaign never had a

real role in his efforts.

The COVID Bugaboo

Once the pandemic hit, it became clear conducting the 2020 election would pose special problems. States including Ohio, New York, and Wisconsin experienced turmoil in primaries because of poll-worker shortages, lack of polling places, and delayed vote counts.

           

The pandemic presented the first opportunity for real cooperation between the liberal activists sounding alarm bells about the election and business groups, many of whose members supported Trump, yet wanted a free, fair election. Business feared the impact on the economy of prolonged civil disturbances that might follow a disputed contest. Many states and localities didn’t have adequate funding for a pandemic-stricken election. Congress provided some money, but it wasn’t enough. Private donations, many from the business community, filled the gap, helping local election officials purchase protective gloves, masks, and hand sanitizer.

The pandemic dictated a major mail-in

ballot effort. Podhorzer’s group focused attention on helping states prepare for that, something many had minimal experience with. Additionally, they worked at (1) helping the public understand counting the votes might take longer than usual, (2) fighting disinformation on social media by getting the platforms to enforce their rules, and (3) encouraging both left-leaning activists and business groups to buy-in and avoid inflaming the situation. Meantime, Democratic lawyers vigorously fought court battles against Trump’s false claims, before and after the election.  

Alliances

Ball writes extensively about the “strange bedfellows” the effort attracted. She notes that the 

AFL-CIO and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce (along with some religious groups) issued a joint statement on election day calling on the media, the candidates, and voters to “exercise patience with the process and trust in our system,” even if they didn’t agree on a preferred outcome.

Once Trump’s post-election fraud claims went into overdrive, members of the group encouraged support from former elected officials for election administrators. In Michigan, for example, three former governors, Republicans John Engler and Rick Snyder and Democrat Jennifer Granholm, joined in calling for an electoral college tally free of White House pressure.

End Game

The Time story makes clear Podhorzer’s informal group anticipated the January 6 effort Trump and his supporters made to interfere with the congressional tally of electoral college votes. The left-leaning activists who were part of the alliance made things easier by standing down in the face of the insurrection. They didn’t confront Trump’s mob with a counter protest, which only would have made things worse, in part by letting the right wing media offer a false equivalency narrative.

In the end, the informal group Podhorzer spearheaded narrowly pulled out a victory. Ball’s story reported that they (and the country) “won by the skin of [our] teeth.”  That the  United States

needed the kind of effort reported by Time both depresses and encourages. It depresses, of course, that we had such a close call. It encourages because Americans of all political persuasions stepped up and preserved our democracy. The Time story is worth reading.