FEC moves toward potentially regulating AI deepfakes in campaign ads
The Federal Election Commission has begun a process to potentially regulate AI-generated deepfakes in political ads ahead of the 2024 election, a move advocates say would safeguard voters against a particularly insidious form of election disinformation. The FEC’s unanimous procedural vote on Thursday advances a petition asking it to regulate ads that use artificial intelligence to misrepresent political opponents as saying or doing something they didn’t — a stark issue that is already being highlighted in the current 2024 GOP presidential primary. Though the circulation of convincing fake images, videos, or audio clips is not new, innovative generative AI tools are making them cheaper, easier to use, and more likely to manipulate public perception. As a result, some presidential campaigns in the 2024 race — including that of Florida GOP Gov. Ron DeSantis — already are using them to persuade voters. The Republican National Committee in April released an entirely AI-generated ad meant to show the future of the United States if President Joe Biden is reelected. It employed fake but realistic photos showing boarded-up storefronts, armored military patrols in the streets, and waves of immigrants creating panic. In June, DeSantis’ campaign shared an attack ad against his GOP primary opponent Donald Trump that used AI-generated images of the former president hugging infectious disease expert Dr. Anthony Fauci. SOS America PAC, which supports Miami Mayor Francis Suarez, a Republican, also has experimented with generative AI, using a tool called VideoAsk to create an AI chatbot in his likeness. Thursday’s FEC meeting comes after the advocacy group Public Citizen asked the agency to clarify that an existing federal law against “fraudulent misrepresentation” in campaign communications applies to AI-generated deepfakes. The panel’s vote shows the agency’s intent to consider the question, but it will not decide whether to actually develop rules governing the ads until after a 60-day public comment window, which is likely to begin next week. In June, the FEC deadlocked on an earlier petition from the group, with some commissioners expressing skepticism that they had the authority to regulate AI ads. Public Citizen came back with a new petition identifying the fraudulent misrepresentation law and explaining it thought the FEC did have jurisdiction. A group of 50 Democratic lawmakers led by House Rep. Adam Schiff also wrote a letter to the FEC urging the agency to advance the petition, saying, “Quickly evolving AI technology makes it increasingly difficult for voters to accurately identify fraudulent video and audio material, which is increasingly troubling in the context of campaign advertisements.” Republican Commissioner Allen Dickerson said in Thursday’s meeting he remained unconvinced that the agency had the authority to regulate deepfake ads. “I’ll note that there’s absolutely nothing special about deepfakes or generative AI, the buzzwords of the day, in the context of this petition,” he said, adding that if the FEC had this authority, it would mean it also could punish other kinds of doctored media or lies in campaign ads. Dickerson argued the law doesn’t go that far, but noted the FEC has unanimously asked Congress for more authority. He also raised concerns the move would wrongly chill expression that’s protected under the First Amendment. Public Citizen President Robert Weissman disputed Dickerson’s points, arguing in an interview Thursday that deepfakes are different from other false statements or media because they fraudulently claim to speak on a candidate’s behalf in a way that’s convincing to the viewer. “The deepfake has an ability to fool the voter into believing that they are themselves seeing a person say or do something they didn’t say,” he said. “It’s a technological leap from prior existing tools.” Weissman said acknowledging deepfakes are fraud solves Dickerson’s First Amendment concerns, too — while false speech is protected, fraud is not. Lisa Gilbert, Public Citizen’s executive vice president, said under its proposal, candidates would also have the option to prominently disclose the use of artificial intelligence to misrepresent an opponent, rather than avoid the technology altogether. She argued action is needed because if a deepfake misleadingly impugning a candidate circulates without a disclaimer and doesn’t get publicly debunked, it could unfairly sway an election. For instance, the RNC disclosed the use of AI in its ad, but in small print that many viewers missed. Gilbert said the FEC could set guidelines on where, how and for how long campaigns and parties need to display these disclaimers. Even if the FEC decides to ban AI deepfakes in campaign ads, it wouldn’t cover all the threats they pose to elections. For example, the law on fraudulent misrepresentation wouldn’t enable the FEC to require outside groups, like PACs, to disclose when they imitate a candidate using artificial intelligence technology, Gilbert said. That means it wouldn’t cover an ad recently released by Never Back Down, a super PAC supporting DeSantis, that used an AI voice cloning tool to imitate Trump’s voice, making it seem like he narrated a social media post. It also wouldn’t stop individual social media users from creating and disseminating misleading content — as they long have — with both AI-generated falsehoods and other misrepresented media, often referred to as “cheap fakes.” Congress, however, could pass legislation creating guardrails for AI-generated deceptive content, and lawmakers, including Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, have expressed intent to do so. Several states also have discussed or passed legislation related to deepfake technology. Daniel Weiner, director of the Elections and Government Program at the Brennan Center for Justice, said misinformation about elections being fraudulently stolen is already a “potent force in American politics.” More sophisticated AI, he said, threatens to worsen that problem. “To what degree? You know, I think we’re still assessing,” he said. “But do I worry about it? Absolutely.” Republished with the permission of The Associated Press.
House censures Rep. Adam Schiff over Trump-Russia investigations
The House voted Wednesday to censure California Rep. Adam Schiff for comments he made several years ago about investigations into Donald Trump’s ties to Russia, rebuking the Democrat and frequent critic of the former president along party lines. Schiff, who will stand in front of the House while the resolution is read, becomes the 25th House lawmaker to be censured. He was defiant ahead of the vote, saying he will wear the formal disapproval as a “badge of honor” and charged his GOP colleagues of doing the former president’s bidding. “I will not yield,” Schiff, who is running for the Senate in his home state, said during debate over the measure. “Not one inch.” More than 20 Republicans voted with Democrats last week to block the censure resolution, but they changed their votes this week after the measure’s sponsor, Republican Rep. Anna Paulina Luna of Florida, removed a provision that could have fined Schiff $16 million if the House Ethics Committee determined he lied. Several of the Republicans who opposed the resolution last week said they opposed fining a member of Congress in that manner. The final vote was 213-209. The revised resolution says Schiff held positions of power during Trump’s presidency and “abused this trust by saying there was evidence of collusion between Trump’s campaign and Russia.” Schiff was one of the most outspoken critics of the former president as both the Justice Department and the Republican-led House launched investigations into Trump’s ties to Russia in 2017. Both investigations concluded that Russia intervened in the 2016 presidential election but neither found evidence of a criminal conspiracy. “Representative Schiff purposely deceived his Committee, Congress, and the American people,” the resolution said. Schiff, the former Democratic chairman of the House Intelligence Committee and the lead prosecutor in Trump’s first impeachment trial, has long been a top Republican political target. Soon after taking back the majority this year, Republicans blocked him from sitting on the intelligence panel. The House has only censured two other lawmakers in the last 20 years. Republican Rep. Paul Gosar of Arizona was censured in 2021 for tweeting an animated video that depicted him striking Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., with a sword. Former Democratic Rep. Charlie Rangel of New York was censured in 2010 for serious financial and campaign misconduct. The censure itself carries no practical effect, except to provide a historic footnote that marks a lawmaker’s career. But the GOP resolution would also launch an ethics investigation into Schiff’s conduct. While Schiff did not initiate the 2017 congressional investigation into Trump’s Russia ties — then-House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, a Republican who later became one of Trump’s most ardent defenders, started it — Republicans arguing in favor of his censure Wednesday blamed him for what they said was the fallout of that probe, and of the separate investigation started that same year by Trump’s own Justice Department. Luna said that Schiff’s comments that there was evidence against Trump “ripped apart American families across the country” and that he was “permanently destroying family relationships.” Several blamed him for the more than $30 million spent by then-special counsel Robert Mueller, who led the Justice Department probe. Schiff said the censure resolution “would accuse me of omnipotence, the leader of some a vast Deep State conspiracy, and of course, it is nonsense.” Democrats aggressively defended their colleague. Maryland Rep. Jamie Raskin, who led Trump’s second impeachment, called the effort an “embarrassing revenge tour on behalf of Donald Trump.” Mueller, who led the two-year Justice Department investigation, determined that Russia intervened on the campaign’s behalf and that Trump’s campaign welcomed the help. But Mueller’s team did not find that the campaign conspired to sway the election, and the Justice Department did not recommend any criminal charges. The House intelligence committee probe launched by Nunes similarly found that Russia intervened in the election but that there was no evidence of a criminal conspiracy. Schiff was the top Democrat on the panel at the time. Schiff said last week that the censure resolution was “red meat” that Speaker Kevin McCarthy was throwing to his conference amid squabbles over government spending. Republicans are trying to show their fealty to Trump, Schiff said. He said he warned the country during impeachment proceedings three years ago that Trump “would go on to do worse. And, of course, he did worse in the form of a violent attack on the Capitol.” After Democrats won the House majority in 2018, the House impeached Trump for abuse of power after he threatened to withhold military aid to Ukraine and urged the country’s president to investigate then-candidate Joe Biden. Schiff was the lead House prosecutor making the case for conviction to the Senate, arguing repeatedly that “right matters.” The Republican-led chamber ultimately acquitted him. Trump was impeached a second time a year later, after he had left office, for his role in the January 6, 2021, insurrection at the Capitol. The Senate again acquitted Trump. In the censure resolution against Schiff, Luna also cited a report released in May from special counsel John Durham that found that the FBI rushed into its investigation of Trump’s campaign and relied too much on raw and unconfirmed intelligence. Durham said investigators repeatedly relied on “confirmation bias,” ignoring or rationalizing away evidence that undercut their premise of a Trump-Russia conspiracy as they pushed the probe forward. But he did not allege that political bias or partisanship were guiding factors for the FBI’s actions. Trump had claimed that Durham’s report would reveal the “crime of the century” and expose a “deep state conspiracy” by high-ranking government officials to derail his candidacy and later his presidency. But the investigation yielded only one conviction — a guilty plea from a little-known FBI employee — and the only two other cases that were brought both ended in acquittals at trial. On Wednesday, just before the vote, Schiff’s campaign sent out a fundraising email that said Luna had introduced “yet ANOTHER resolution to censure me.” “The vote and debate will happen imminently,” the email read,
House GOP votes to oust Democrat Ilhan Omar from major committee
The Republican-led House voted after raucous debate Thursday to oust Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar from the chamber’s Foreign Affairs Committee, citing her anti-Israel comments, in a dramatic response to Democrats last session booting far-right GOP lawmakers over incendiary remarks. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy was able to solidify Republicans to take action against the Somali-born Muslim in the new Congress, although some GOP lawmakers had expressed reservations. Removal of lawmakers from House committees was essentially unprecedented until the Democratic ousters two years ago of hard-right Republican Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia and Paul Gosar of Arizona. The 218-211 vote, along party lines, came after a heated, voices-raised debate in which Democrats accused the GOP of going after Omar based on her race. Omar, who has apologized for 2019 remarks widely seen as antisemitic, defended herself on the House floor, asking if anyone was surprised she was being targeted. Democratic colleagues hugged her during the vote. “My voice will get louder and stronger, and my leadership will be celebrated around the world, as it has been,” Omar said in a closing speech. House Republicans focused on six statements she has made that “under the totality of the circumstances, disqualify her from serving on the Committee of Foreign Affairs,” said Rep. Michael Guest of Mississippi, the incoming chairman of the House Ethics Committee. “All members, both Republicans and Democrats alike who seek to serve on Foreign Affairs, should be held to the highest standard of conduct due to the international sensitivity and national security concerns under the jurisdiction of this committee,” Guest said. Republicans have clashed with Omar since she arrived in Congress, and former President Donald Trump frequently taunted her at his rallies in ways that appealed to his supporters. The resolution proposed by Rep. Max Miller, R-Ohio, a former official in the Trump administration, declared, “Omar’s comments have brought dishonor to the House of Representatives.” Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York said Omar has at times “made mistakes” and used antisemitic tropes that were condemned by House Democrats four years ago. But that’s not what Thursday’s vote was about, he said. “It’s about political revenge,” Jeffries said. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., went further, referring to the Sept. 11, 2001, attack as she called the GOP’s action part of one of the “disgusting legacies after 9/11, the targeting and racism against Muslim-Americans throughout the United States of America. And this is an extension of that legacy.” She added, “This is about targeting women of color.” McCarthy denied the Republican decision to oust Omar was a tit-for-tat after the Greene and Gosar removals under Democrats, though he had warned in late 2021 that such a response might be expected if Republicans won back the House majority. “This is nothing like the last Congress,” he said Thursday. He noted that Omar can remain on other panels, just not Foreign Affairs, after her anti-Israel comments. Omar is one of the first two Muslim women elected to Congress. She is also the first to wear a hijab in the House chamber after floor rules were changed to allow members to wear head coverings for religious reasons. She quickly generated controversy after joining Congress in 2019 with a pair of tweets that suggested lawmakers who supported Israel were motivated by money. In the first, she criticized the American Israel Public Affairs Committee or AIPAC. “It’s all about the Benjamins, baby,” she wrote, invoking slang about $100 bills. Asked on Twitter who she thought was paying members of Congress to support Israel, Omar responded, “AIPAC!” Omar’s remarks sparked a public rebuke from then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other Democrats who made clear that she had overstepped. She soon apologized. “We have to always be willing to step back and think through criticism, just as I expect people to hear me when others attack me about my identity,” Omar tweeted. “This is why I unequivocally apologize.” Also, in a May 2021 tweet, she made reference to Israel as “an apartheid state” over its treatment of Palestinians. Democrats rallied Thursday in a fiery defense of Omar and the experiences she brings to Congress. “This clearly isn’t about what Ilhan Omar said as much as who she is — being a smart, outspoken Black woman of the Muslim faith is apparently the issue,” said Rep. Mark Pocan, D-Wis. Black, Latino, and progressive lawmakers, in particular, spoke of her unique voice in the House and criticized Republicans for what they called a racist attack. “Racist gaslighting,” said Rep. Cori Bush, D-Mo. A “revenge resolution,” said Rep. Pramila Jayapal of Washington, the chair of the progressive caucus. “It’s so painful to watch,” said Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., who joined Congress with Omar as the first two female Muslims elected to the House. “To Congresswoman Omar, I am so sorry that our country is failing you today through this chamber,” Tlaib said through tears. “You belong on that committee.” In the weeks leading up to the vote, the chairman of the committee, Rep. Michael McCaul of Texas, argued for excluding Omar from the panel during a recent closed-door meeting with fellow Republicans. “It’s just that her worldview of Israel is so diametrically opposed to the committee’s,” McCaul told reporters in describing his stance. “I don’t mind having differences of opinion, but this goes beyond that.” At the White House, press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said of the ouster, “It’s a political stunt.” McCarthy has already blocked Reps. Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell, both California Democrats, from rejoining the House Intelligence Committee once the GOP took control of the chamber in January. While appointments to the intelligence panel are the prerogative of the speaker, the action on Omar required a House vote. Several Republicans skeptical of removing Omar wanted “due process” for lawmakers who face removal. McCarthy said he told them he would work with Democrats on creating a due process system, but acknowledged it’s still a work in progress. One Republican, Rep. David Joyce of Ohio, voted present. In the last Congress, several Republicans had joined Democrats in removing Greene and Gosar from
January 6 panel prepares to unveil final report on insurrection
An 800-page report set to be released Thursday by House investigators will conclude that then-President Donald Trump criminally plotted to overturn his 2020 election defeat and “provoked his supporters to violence” at the Capitol with false claims of widespread voter fraud. The resulting January 6, 2021, insurrection of Trump’s followers threatened democracy with “horrific” brutality toward law enforcement and “put the lives of American lawmakers at risk,” according to the report’s executive summary. “The central cause of January 6 was one man, former President Donald Trump, who many others followed,” reads the report from the House January 6 committee, which is expected to be released in full on Thursday. “None of the events of January 6 would have happened without him.” Ahead of the report’s release, the committee on Wednesday released 34 transcripts from the 1,000 interviews it conducted over the last 18 months. Included in the release is testimony from the onetime leaders of two extremist groups, the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers, both of whom were involved in planning ahead of the rioting. Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes was convicted last month of seditious conspiracy for his role in the planning, and former Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio and four other members of the extremist group are in court on similar charges this month. The report’s eight chapters of findings will largely mirror nine hearings this year that presented evidence from over 1,000 private interviews and millions of pages of documents. They tell the story of Trump’s extraordinary and unprecedented campaign to overturn his defeat and his pressure campaign on state officials, the Justice Department, members of Congress, and his own vice president to change the vote. A 154-page summary of the report released Monday detailed how Trump, a Republican, amplified the false claims on social media and in public appearances, encouraging his supporters to travel to Washington and protest Democrat Joe Biden’s presidential election win. And how he told them to “fight like hell” at a huge rally in front of the White House that morning and then did little to stop the violence as they beat police, broke into the Capitol, and sent lawmakers running for their lives. It was a “multi-part conspiracy,” the committee concludes. The massive, damning report comes as Trump is running again for the presidency and also facing multiple federal investigations, including probes of his role in the insurrection and the presence of classified documents at his Florida estate. A House committee is expected to release his tax returns in the coming days — documents he has fought for years to keep private. And he has been blamed by Republicans for a worse-than-expected showing in the midterm elections, leaving him in his most politically vulnerable state since he won the 2016 election. It is also a culmination of four years of a House Democratic majority that has spent much of its time and energy investigating Trump, and that is ceding power to Republicans in two weeks. Democrats impeached Trump twice — both times he was acquitted by the Senate — and investigated his finances, his businesses, his foreign ties, and his family. But the 18-month January 6 probe has been the most personal for the lawmakers, most of whom were in the Capitol when Trump’s supporters stormed the building and interrupted the certification of Biden’s victory. While the lasting impact of the probes remains to be seen — most Republicans have stayed loyal to the former president — the committee’s hearings were watched by tens of millions of people over the summer. And 44% of voters in November’s midterm elections said the future of democracy was their primary consideration at the polls, according to AP VoteCast, a national survey of the electorate. “This committee is nearing the end of its work, but as a country, we remain in strange and uncharted waters,” said the panel’s chairman, Democratic Rep. Bennie Thompson of Mississippi, at the meeting Monday to adopt the report and recommend criminal charges against Trump. “We’ve never had a president of the United States stir up a violent attempt to block the transfer of power. I believe nearly two years later, this is still a time of reflection and reckoning.” The “reckoning” committee members are hoping for is criminal charges against Trump and key allies. But only the Justice Department has the power to prosecute, so the panel sent referrals recommending the department investigate the former president on four crimes, including aiding an insurrection. While its main points are familiar, the January 6 report will provide new detail from the hundreds of interviews and thousands of documents the committee has collected. Transcripts and some video are expected to be released as well over the coming two weeks. Republicans take over the House on January 3, when the panel will be dissolved. “I guarantee there’ll be some very interesting new information in the report and even more so in the transcripts,” Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., told “CBS Mornings” on Wednesday. The summary of the report describes how Trump refused to accept the lawful result of the 2020 election and plotted to overturn his defeat. Trump pressured state legislators to hold votes invalidating Biden’s electors, sought to “corrupt the U.S. Department of Justice” by urging department officials to make false statements about the election, and repeatedly, personally tried to persuade Vice President Mike Pence to upend democracy with unprecedented objections at the joint congressional session, it says. Trump has tried to discredit the report, slamming committee members as “thugs and scoundrels” as he has continued to falsely dispute his 2020 loss. In response to the panel’s criminal referrals, Trump said that “These folks don’t get it that when they come after me, people who love freedom rally around me. It strengthens me.” The report will give minute-by-minute detail of what Trump was doing — and not doing — for around three hours as his supporters beat police and broke into the Capitol. Trump riled up the crowd at the rally that morning and then did little to stop his supporters for several hours as he watched the violence unfold on television inside the White House
January 6 panel urges Donald Trump prosecution with criminal referral
The House January 6 committee urged the Justice Department on Monday to bring criminal charges against Donald Trump for the violent 2021 Capitol insurrection, calling for accountability for the former president and “a time of reflection and reckoning.” After one of the most exhaustive and aggressive congressional probes in memory, the panel’s seven Democrats and two Republicans are recommending criminal charges against Trump and associates who helped him launch a wide-ranging pressure campaign to try to overturn his 2020 election loss. The panel also released a lengthy summary of its final report, with findings that Trump engaged in a “multi-part conspiracy” to thwart the will of voters. At a final meeting Monday, the committee alleged violations of four criminal statutes by Trump, in both the run-up to the riot and during the insurrection itself, as it recommended the former president for prosecution to the Justice Department. Among the charges they recommend for prosecution is aiding an insurrection — an effort to hold him directly accountable for his supporters who stormed the Capitol that day. The committee also voted to refer conservative lawyer John Eastman, who devised dubious legal maneuvers aimed at keeping Trump in power, for prosecution on two of the same statutes as Trump: conspiracy to defraud the United States and obstructing an official proceeding. While a criminal referral is mostly symbolic, with the Justice Department ultimately deciding whether to prosecute Trump or others, it is a decisive end to a probe that had an almost singular focus from the start. Chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., said Trump “broke the faith” that people have when they cast ballots in a democracy and that the criminal referrals could provide a “roadmap to justice” by using the committee’s work. “I believe nearly two years later, this is still a time of reflection and reckoning,” Thompson said. “If we are to survive as a nation of laws and democracy, this can never happen again.” Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney, the panel’s Republican vice chairwoman, said in her opening remarks that every president in American history has defended the orderly transfer of power, “except one.” The committee also voted 9-0 to approve its final report, which will include findings, interview transcripts, and legislative recommendations. The full report is expected to be released on Wednesday. The report’s 154-page summary, made public as the hearing ended, found that Trump engaged in a “multi-part conspiracy” to overturn the election. While the majority of the report’s main findings are not new, it altogether represents one of the most damning portraits of an American president in recent history, laying out in great detail Trump’s broad effort to overturn his own defeat and what the lawmakers say is his direct responsibility for the insurrection of his supporters. The panel, which will dissolve on January 3 with the new Republican-led House, has conducted more than 1,000 interviews, held ten well-watched public hearings, and collected more than a million documents since it launched in July 2021. As it has gathered the massive trove of evidence, the members have become emboldened in declaring that Trump, a Republican, is to blame for the violent attack on the Capitol by his supporters almost two years ago. After beating their way past police, injuring many of them, the January 6 rioters stormed the Capitol and interrupted the certification of Joe Biden’s presidential election win, echoing Trump’s lies about widespread election fraud and sending lawmakers and others running for their lives. The attack came after weeks of Trump’s efforts to overturn his defeat — a campaign that was extensively detailed by the committee in its multiple public hearings and laid out again by lawmakers on the panel at Monday’s meeting. Many of Trump’s former aides testified about his unprecedented pressure on states, federal officials, and Mike Pence to object to Biden’s win. The committee has also described in great detail how Trump riled up the crowd at a rally that morning and then did little to stop his supporters for several hours as he watched the violence unfold on television. The panel aired some new evidence at the meeting, including a recent interview with longtime Trump aide Hope Hicks. Describing a conversation she had with Trump around that time, she said he told her that no one would care about his legacy if he lost the election. Hicks told the committee that Trump told her, “The only thing that matters is winning.” Trump’s campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment, but the former president slammed members of the committee Sunday as “thugs and scoundrels” as he has continued to falsely dispute his 2020 loss. While a so-called criminal referral has no real legal standing, it is a forceful statement by the committee and adds to political pressure already on Attorney General Merrick Garland and special counsel Jack Smith, who is conducting an investigation into January 6 and Trump’s actions. On the recommendation to charge Trump with aiding an insurrection, the committee said in the report’s summary that the former president “was directly responsible for summoning what became a violent mob” and refused repeated entreaties from his aides to condemn the rioters or to encourage them to leave. For obstructing an official proceeding, the committee cites Trump’s relentless badgering of Vice President Mike Pence and others to prevent the certification of the election results on January 6. And his repeated lies about the election and efforts to undo the results open him up to a charge of conspiracy to defraud the United States, the panel said. The final charge recommended by the panel is conspiracy to make a false statement, citing the scheme by Trump and his allies to put forward slates of fake electors in battleground states won by President Joe Biden. Among the other charges contemplated but not approved by the committee was seditious conspiracy, the same allegation Justice Department prosecutors have used to target a subset of rioters belonging to far-right groups like the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys. Thompson said after the hearing that the seditious conspiracy charge is “something that the committee didn’t come to agreement on.” The panel was formed in the summer
Republicans notably silent, split as Donald Trump probe deepens
At first, Republicans were highly critical of the FBI search of Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort, but as new details emerge about the more than 100 classified documents the former president haphazardly stashed at his private club, Republicans have grown notably silent. The deepening investigation into Trump’s handling of sensitive government information has disclosed damaging and unsettling new details. With every court filing, there is new information about the cache of documents the former president took with him from the White House and the potential national security concerns. While the unprecedented search has galvanized many Republicans to Trump’s defense, others in the party are unwilling to speak up, often wary of crossing him. Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell declined to respond Wednesday when asked about the latest developments in the Justice Department’s probe. “I don’t have any observations about that,” McConnell told reporters in Kentucky. The silence speaks volumes for a party whose president won the White House after rousing voters in rally chants of “Lock Her Up!” Trump pilloried Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton for using a personal email account and server during her time as Secretary of State. She quickly complied with investigators and was not charged. The investigation also is posing a new test of Republican loyalty to Trump from lawmakers who are relying on him for their political livelihoods, particularly ahead of the midterm elections. Battle lines among Republicans infighting over Trump quickly emerged Wednesday after the latest court filing, in which Justice Department said that the FBI’s August 8 search had produced more than 100 documents with “classified markings” at Mar-a-Lago — twice as many as Trump’s team had turned over earlier this summer. In Tuesday’s late filing, the Justice Department laid out in stark detail how it had developed evidence “that government records were likely concealed and removed” from a storage room at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago. The filing described the lengthy process of trying to retrieve government documents taken when Trump left the White House in early 2021. The Justice Department explained how Trump’s legal team had said documents were only being kept in the storage room, but the search also found documents in the former president’s office. It said some of the newly found documents were so sensitive that even Justice Department attorneys and FBI counterintelligence personnel required additional clearances before they could review the material. The Justice Department said, “efforts were likely taken to obstruct the government’s investigation.” It produced a photograph of some of the classified documents found as evidence. The filing said flatly that the government believes “obstructive conduct” has occurred. Republican Rep. Liz Cheney — one of the former president’s fiercest critics, who recently lost her own primary for reelection — tweeted the photo: “Yet more indefensible conduct by Donald Trump revealed this morning.” But Republican Sen. Ted Cruz, once a rival to Trump for the White House, has saved his criticizing for federal law enforcement as he defended the former president. “The FBI’s raid was a horrific ‘abuse of power,’” Cruz tweeted just before the Tuesday filing. He said, “there needs to be ‘a complete housecleaning’ at FBI.” He was among several Republican lawmakers and congressional candidates who were fundraising this week off their complaints about the Justice Department. Cruz’s office did not respond to a request for fresh comments Wednesday. The Texas senator is not alone in turning his criticism away from Trump and onto the federal authorities conducting the investigation and search. The Republican Party that once stood for law and order has been cleaved by Trump’s actions, some in the starkest, most alarming tones. In the immediate aftermath of the search, Republicans largely rallied around Trump and demanded more information from the Justice Department. House and Senate Republicans, and some Democrats, sought hearings and briefings. But as new information emerges, including the court’s release last week of the federal affidavit supporting the search and Tuesday’s Justice Department filing, it may make it more difficult for Trump’s allies to defend the former president and his team’s actions. Some Republican supporters of Trump focused on the photograph of classified documents included as evidence in the Justice Department filing. Though the documents were shielded, the critics suggested if the information was so secret, it should not have been publicly released. “You people are so bad at this,” tweeted Trump ally Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., directing her criticism as much at Democrats and those sharing the image. The risks of the heated rhetoric against the nation’s law enforcement have been clear. A police shooting of a man who tried to breach the FBI’s Cincinnati field office showed the danger. FBI Director Christopher Wray criticized those attacking the agency and urged agents to be cautious in public. Ahead of the midterm elections, Trump’s ability to dominate the political stage is welcomed by House Republicans, who are relying on his presence to bolster voter enthusiasm and turnout as they try to win back majority control. Some have encouraged him to swiftly announce his own campaign to run again for the White House. Senate Republicans, however, are growing concerned that Trump is stealing the focus away from what they would prefer to be an election referendum on President Joe Biden’s performance in the White House. As Biden steps up his own efforts to help his party retain control of Congress, he is focusing on Trump-styled candidates in the Republican ranks, with a more aggressive tone and an emphasis on the risks to democracy that have become a motivating issue for Democrats. Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff of California, a former federal prosecutor, said the latest court filing was “devastating” for Trump. “What is most striking are the facts outlining how the former president and his team knowingly put our national security at risk,” Schiff wrote on Twitter. The congressman, who led Trump’s first impeachment, urged the Justice Department to continue its probe and “follow the facts.” Republished with the permission of The Associated Press.
January 6 committee votes to hold Dan Scavino, Peter Navarro in contempt
The House committee investigating the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol voted unanimously Monday night to hold former Trump advisers Peter Navarro and Dan Scavino in contempt of Congress for their monthslong refusal to comply with subpoenas. The committee made their case that Navarro, former President Donald Trump’s trade adviser, and Scavino, a White House communications aide under Trump, have been uncooperative in the congressional probe into the deadly 2021 insurrection and, as a result, are in contempt. “They’re not fooling anybody. They are obligated to comply with our investigation. They have refused to do so. And that’s a crime,” Mississippi Rep. Bennie Thompson, the committee’s Democratic chairman, said in his opening remarks. The recommendation of criminal charges now goes to the full House, where it is likely to be approved by the Democratic-majority chamber. Approval there would then send the charges to the Justice Department, which has the final say on the prosecution. At Monday’s meeting, lawmakers made yet another appeal to Attorney General Merrick Garland, who has not yet made a decision to pursue the contempt charges the House set forward in December on former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows. “We are upholding our responsibility,” Rep. Adam Schiff, a member of the committee, said in his remarks. “The Department of Justice must do the same.” The committee is investigating the circumstances surrounding January 6, when pro-Trump rioters stormed the Capitol, fueled by his false claims of a stolen election, in hopes of blocking Congress from certifying election results showing Democrat Joe Biden defeated Trump. Ahead of the committee’s vote, the panel scored a big legal victory in its quest for information from Trump lawyer John Eastman when a federal judge in California asserted Monday morning that it is “more likely than not” that Trump committed crimes in his attempt to stop the certification of the 2020 election. With that argument, U.S. District Court Judge David Carter, a Bill Clinton appointee, ordered the release of more than 100 emails from Eastman to the committee. Charles Burnham, an attorney representing Eastman, said in a statement Monday that his client has a responsibility to his attorney-client privilege, and his lawsuit against the committee “seeks to fulfill this responsibility.” Navarro, 72, was subpoenaed for his testimony in early February. The panel wants to question the Trump ally who promoted false claims of voter fraud in the 2020 election that the committee believes contributed to the attack. “He hasn’t been shy about his role in efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election and has even discussed the former President’s support for those plans,” Thompson, the committee’s Democratic chairman, said in a statement at the time. Though Navarro sought to use executive privilege to avoid cooperation, the Biden administration has denied claims from him, Scavino, and former national security adviser Michael Flynn, saying an assertion of executive privilege was not justified or in the national interest. On Thursday, Navarro called the committee vote “an unprecedented partisan assault on executive privilege,” and said, ”The committee knows full well that President Trump has invoked executive privilege, and it is not my privilege to waive.” In a statement Sunday night, Navarro said the committee “should negotiate this matter with President Trump.” He added, “If he waived the privilege, I will be happy to comply; but I see no effort by the Committee to clarify this matter with President Trump, which is bad faith and bad law.” In a subpoena issued to Scavino last fall, the committee cited reports that he was with Trump the day before the attack during a discussion about how to persuade members of Congress not to certify the election for Biden and with Trump again the day of the attack and may have “materials relevant to his videotaping and tweeting” messages that day. In the recent report, the committee said it also has reason to believe that due to the 46-year-old’s online presence, Scavino may have had advance warning about the potential for violence on January 6. Scavino and his counsel have received at least half a dozen extensions to comply with the subpoena, according to the committee. “Despite all these extensions, to date, Mr. Scavino has not produced a single document, nor has he appeared for testimony,” the report stated. A lawyer for Scavino did not return messages seeking comment. As the committee enforces its subpoena power, it is also continuing to branch out to others in Trump’s orbit. Lawmakers now plan to reach out to Virginia Thomas — known as Ginni — the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, in regards to her reported text messages with former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows on the day of the attack, according to two people familiar with the investigation who were granted anonymity to discuss the panel’s private deliberations. But the panel has not decided what their outreach to Thomas, a conservative activist, will look like and whether that will come in the form of a subpoena or a voluntary request to cooperate. Also, later this week, the committee plans to interview former Trump adviser and son-in-law Jared Kushner, one of the people said. The committee previously voted to recommend contempt charges against longtime Trump ally Steve Bannon after he defied a congressional subpoena, as well as against Meadows after he ceased cooperating with the panel. The full House then approved both contempt referrals. Bannon was later indicted by a federal grand jury and is awaiting prosecution by the Justice Department. The Justice Department has not taken any action against Meadows. The central facts of the January 6 insurrection are known but what the committee is hoping to do is fill in the remaining gaps about the attack on the Capitol, and lawmakers say they are committed to presenting a full accounting to make sure it never happens again. The panel is looking into every aspect of the riot, including what Trump himself was doing while it unfolded and any connections between the White House and the rioters who broke into the Capitol building. Republished with the permission
Dick Cheney: an unlikely bridge to partisan Congress divide
On a somber day of remembrance at the U.S. Capitol, it was the most unlikely of receiving lines: Democrats lining the floor of the House, waiting for their chance to greet Dick Cheney. Yet there he stood, the former Republican vice president that Democrats have fiercely opposed and frequently reviled, sharing warm moments after the House held a moment of silence to commemorate the deadly violence of one year ago in a building where he once served. That Cheney was the catalyst for rare bonhomie between Republicans and Democrats was a clear measure of how far his party has veered from the traditional GOP orthodoxy into the decidedly unorthodox grip of former President Donald Trump. Cheney and his daughter, Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo. were the only two Republicans to attend a pro forma session of the House on the anniversary of last year’s riot at the Capitol. They sat together in the front row on the Republican side of the chamber as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi thanked the U.S. Capitol Police for defending them on January 6 and allowing Congress to “defeat the insurrection.” Republican leaders were absent. The former vice president, who served in leadership in the House as a congressman from Wyoming in the 1980s, took note. “Well, it’s not a leadership that resembles any of the folks I knew when I was here for ten years,” Cheney told reporters afterward. Cheney’s daughter, Liz, has been ostracized by her fellow House Republicans for her criticism of Trump and her support for his impeachment after the insurrection. In May, the House GOP dumped her from the No. 3 leadership post for her persistent repudiation of Trump’s election falsehoods. Asked if he was disappointed by it, Dick Cheney replied: “My daughter can take care of herself.” Democrats this summer invited Liz Cheney to join the congressional committee investigating the January 6 insurrection, further angering Republican colleagues, and she quickly became a driving force as the panel’s vice-chair. She’s found common cause with Democrats like Rep. Adam Schiff, a Democrat on the panel who led Trump’s first impeachment. He was among those greeting the Cheneys on the floor. “I was talking to Liz, and she said, ‘this is my father.’ I didn’t recognize him with a mask on.” “We were discussing what a sad moment this is in the country, what a trying time it is, and the fact that things are more at risk in terms of our democracy now than a year ago. I told him how courageous his daughter had been and how much respect we have for her.” Other Democratic lawmakers also lined up to shake the former vice president’s hand. Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., spoke with the Cheneys at length. “I told him, thank you for being here, how proud I am of his daughter, and I know he is as well, for having the courage to stand up for truth,” Hoyer said. “We were appreciative of the fact he’s here supporting his daughter in what is otherwise a very significant minority position in the Republican Party, which is very sad,” Hoyer said. Pelosi also spoke with Cheney briefly in the House chamber. The two have waged scores of political battles over the years. She became the first female House speaker during President George W. Bush’s second term, and she sat on the dais next to the vice president as Bush proclaimed in 2007 that it was his pleasure to become the first president to begin a State of the Union address with the words “Madam Speaker.” “I was happy to welcome him back and to congratulate him on the courage of Liz Cheney,” Pelosi said. Dick Cheney also issued a formal statement after the House session, saying the importance of January 6 as a historic event cannot be overstated. “I was honored and proud to join my daughter on the House floor to recognize this anniversary, to commend the heroic actions of law enforcement that day, and to reaffirm our dedication to the Constitution,” Cheney said. “I am deeply disappointed at the failure of many members of my party to recognize the grave nature of the January 6 attacks and the ongoing threat to our nation.” Schiff said the appearance of the former vice president was a reminder of a different political era. “That was a time when there were broad policy differences, but there were no differences when it came to both parties’ devotion to the idea of democracy. And that seems like such a quaint time now.” “I look forward to the day when we get back to a Republican Party that’s once again a party of ideas and ideologies.” Republished with the permission of the Associated Press.
January 6 committee prepares to go public as findings mount
They’ve interviewed more than 300 witnesses, collected tens of thousands of documents, and traveled around the country to talk to election officials who were pressured by Donald Trump. Now, after six months of intense work, the House committee investigating the January 6 insurrection is preparing to go public. In the coming months, members of the panel will start to reveal their findings against the backdrop of the former president and his allies’ persistent efforts to whitewash the riots and reject suggestions that he helped instigate them. The committee also faces the burden of trying to persuade the American public that their conclusions are fact-based and credible. But the nine lawmakers — seven Democrats and two Republicans — are united in their commitment to tell the full story of January 6, and they are planning televised hearings and reports that will bring their findings out into the open. Their goal is not only to show the severity of the riot but also to make a clear connection between the attack and Trump’s brazen pressure on the states and Congress to overturn Joe Biden’s legitimate election as president. “The full picture is coming to light, despite President Trump’s ongoing efforts to hide the picture,” said Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney, the committee’s vice chairwoman and one of its two Republican members. “I don’t think there’s any area of this broader history in which we aren’t learning new things,” she said. While the fundamental facts of January 6 are known, the committee says the extraordinary trove of material they have collected — 35,000 pages of records so far, including texts, emails, and phone records from people close to Trump — is fleshing out critical details of the worst attack on the Capitol in two centuries, which played out on live television. They hope to fill in the blanks about the preparations before the attack, the financing behind the January 6 rally that preceded it, and the extensive White House campaign to overturn the 2020 election. They are also investigating what Trump himself was doing as his supporters fought their way into the Capitol. True accountability may be fleeting. Congressional investigations are not criminal cases, and lawmakers cannot dole out punishments. Even as the committee works, Trump and his allies continue to push lies about election fraud while working to place similarly minded officials at all levels of state and local government. “I think that the challenge that we face is that the attacks on our democracy are continuing — they didn’t come to an end on January 6,” said another panel member, Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., also chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. Still, the lawmakers hope they can present the public with a thorough accounting that captures what could have been “an even more serious and deeper constitutional crisis,” as Cheney put it. “I think this is one of the single most important congressional investigations in history,” Cheney said. The committee is up against the clock. Republicans could disband the investigation if they win the House majority in the November 2022 elections. The committee’s final report is expected before then, with a possible interim report coming in the spring or summer. In the hearings, which could start in the coming weeks, the committee wants to “bring the people who conducted the elections to Washington and tell their story,” said the panel’s chairman, Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss. Their testimony, he said, will further debunk Trump’s claims of election fraud. The committee has interviewed several election officials in battleground states, including Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, about Trump’s pressure campaign. In some cases, staff have traveled to those states to gather more information. The panel also is focusing on the preparations for the January 6 rally near the White House where Trump told his supporters to “fight like hell” — and how the rioters may have planned to block the electoral count if they had been able to get their hands on the electoral ballots. They need to amplify to the public, Thompson said, “that it was an organized effort to change the outcome of the election by bringing people to Washington … and ultimately if all else failed, weaponize the people who came by sending them to the Capitol.” About 90% of the witnesses called by the committee have cooperated, Thompson said, despite the defiance of high-profile Trump allies such as Steve Bannon and former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows. Lawmakers said they have been effective at gathering information from other sources in part because they share a unity of purpose rarely seen in a congressional investigation. House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy of California, a close Trump ally, decided not to appoint any GOP members to the committee after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., rejected two of his picks last summer. Pelosi, who created the select committee after Republican senators rejected an evenly bipartisan outside commission, subsequently appointed Republicans Cheney and Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, Trump critics who shared the Democrats’ desire to investigate the attack. “I think you can see that Kevin made an epic mistake,” Kinzinger said. “I think part of the reason we’ve gone so fast and have been so effective so far is because we’ve decided, and we have the ability to do this as a nonpartisan investigation.” Kinzinger said the investigation would be “a very different scene” if Republicans allied with Trump were participating and able to obstruct some of their work. “I think in five or ten years, when school kids learn about January 6, they’re going to get the accurate story,” Kinzinger said. “And I think that’s going to be dependent on what we do here.” Democrats say having two Republicans working with them has been an asset, especially as they try to reach conservative audiences who may still believe Trump’s falsehoods about a stolen election. “They bring to the table perspectives and ability to translate a little bit what is being reflected in conservative media, or how this might be viewed through a
Joe Biden holds to Kabul August 31 deadline despite criticism
U.S. President Joe Biden declared Tuesday he is sticking to his August 31 deadline for completing a risky airlift of Americans, endangered Afghans, and others seeking to escape Taliban-controlled Afghanistan. The decision defies allied leaders who want to give the evacuation more time and opens Biden to criticism that he caved to Taliban deadline demands. “Every day we’re on the ground is another day that we know ISIS-K is seeking to target the airport and attack both us and allied forces and innocent civilians,” Biden said at the White House, referring to the Islamic State group’s Afghanistan affiliate, which is known for staging suicide attacks on civilians. He said the Taliban are cooperating and security is holding despite a number of violent incidents. “But it’s a tenuous situation,” he said, adding, “We run a serious risk of it breaking down as time goes on.” The United States in recent days has ramped up its airlift amid new reports of rights abuses that fuel concern about the fate of thousands of people who fear retribution from the Taliban and are trying to flee the country. The Pentagon said 21,600 people had been evacuated in the 24 hours that ended Tuesday morning, and Biden said an additional 12,000 had been flown out in the 12 hours that followed. Those include flights operated by the U.S. military as well as other charter flights. Biden said he had asked the Pentagon and State Department for evacuation contingency plans that would adjust the timeline for full withdrawal should that become necessary. Pentagon officials expressed confidence the airlift, which started on August 14, can get all Americans out by next Tuesday, the deadline Biden had set long before the Taliban completed their takeover. But unknown thousands of other foreign nationals remain in Afghanistan and are struggling to get out. The Taliban, who have wrested control of the country back nearly 20 years after being ousted in a U.S.-led invasion after the 9/11 attacks insist the airlift must end on August 31. Any decision by Biden to stay longer could reignite a war between the militants and the approximately 5,800 American troops who are executing the airlift at Kabul airport. In Kabul, Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid told a news conference the U.S. must stick to its self-imposed deadline, saying “after that, we won’t let Afghans be taken out” on evacuation flights. He also said the Taliban would bar Afghans from accessing roads to the airport while allowing foreigners to pass in order to prevent large crowds from massing. At the Pentagon, spokesman John Kirby said Aug. 31 leaves enough time to get all Americans out, but he was less specific about completing the evacuation of all at-risk Afghans. He said about 4,000 American passport holders and their family members had been evacuated from Kabul as of Tuesday. “We expect that number to grow in coming days,” Kirby said. With the full U.S. withdrawal looming, the Pentagon said several hundred U.S. troops have been withdrawn because they are no longer needed to complete the evacuation mission. Kirby said these are headquarters staff, maintenance personnel, and others. “It will have no impact on the mission at hand,” he said. It’s unclear how many Americans who want to leave are still in the country, but their status is a hot political topic for Biden. Some Republicans bristled Tuesday at the U.S. seeming to comply with a Taliban edict. “We need to have the top priority to tell the Taliban that we’re going to get all of our people out, regardless of what timeline was initially set,” said Rep. Steve Scalise of Louisiana. And Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff of California, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, told reporters Monday that “it was hard for me to imagine” wrapping up the airlifts by the end of the month. One of the main refugee groups resettling Afghan evacuees in the United States said many people, including some American citizens, still were finding it impossible to get past Taliban checkpoints and crushing throngs outside the airport. “The United States cannot pat itself on the back for a job half-done,” said Krish O’Mara Vignarajah, president and CEO of Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service. Biden decided in April that he was ending the U.S. war, which began in October 2001. Former President Donald Trump had earlier agreed in negotiations with the Taliban to end the war in May. However, Biden waited until the Taliban had swept to power this month, following the collapse of the U.S.-backed government and its army, to begin executing an airlift. Tragic scenes at the airport have transfixed the world. Afghans poured onto the tarmac last week and some clung to a U.S. military transport plane as it took off, later plunging to their deaths. At least seven people died that day, and another seven died Sunday in a panicked stampede. An Afghan soldier was killed Monday in a gunfight. British Prime Minister Boris Johnson said the Group of Seven nations will not recognize a Taliban government unless it guarantees people can leave the country if they wish, both before and after the August deadline. A day earlier, the director of the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, William Burns, met with a top Taliban leader in Kabul. The extraordinary meeting reflected the gravity of the crisis and America’s need to coordinate with a Taliban group it has accused of gross human rights abuses. For now, the U.S. military coordinates all air traffic in and out of the Kabul airport, but the Taliban will take over thereafter the U.S. pullout. Meanwhile, a U.S. official said Burns, the CIA director, met with Taliban leader Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar — an extraordinary moment for the U.S. spy agency, which for two decades targeted the Taliban in paramilitary operations. It was not clear what exactly they discussed. The CIA partnered with Pakistani forces to arrest Baradar in 2010, and he spent eight years in a Pakistani prison before the Trump administration persuaded Pakistan to release him in 2018
Donald Trump faces ‘incitement of insurrection’ impeachment charge
As the House prepares for impeachment, President Donald Trump faces a single charge — “incitement of insurrection” — over the deadly riot at the U.S. Capitol, according to a draft of the articles obtained by The Associated Press. Lawmakers are set to introduce the legislation Monday, with voting mid-week. Pelosi’s leadership team also will seek a quick vote on a resolution calling on Vice President Mike Pence and Cabinet officials to invoke the 25th Amendment. The four-page impeachment bill draws from Trump’s own false statements about his election defeat to Democrat Joe Biden; his pressure on state officials in Georgia to “find” him more votes; and his White House rally ahead of the Capitol siege, in which he encouraged thousands of supporters to “fight like hell” before they stormed the building on Wednesday. A violent and largely white mob of Trump supporters overpowered police, broke through security lines and windows, and rampaged through the Capitol, forcing lawmakers to scatter as they were finalizing Biden’s victory over Trump in the Electoral College. “President Trump gravely endangered the security of the United States and its institutions of Government,” the legislation said. The bill from Reps. David Cicilline of Rhode Island, Ted Lieu of California, Jamie Raskin of Maryland, and Jerrold Nadler of New York, said Trump threatened “the integrity of the democratic system, interfered with the peaceful transition of power” and “betrayed” trust. “He will remain a threat to national security, democracy, and the Constitution if allowed to remain in office,” they wrote. Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Ca., said Monday on CBS, “We need to move forward with alacrity.” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says the House will proceed with legislation to impeach Trump as she pushes the vice president and the Cabinet to invoke constitutional authority to force him out, warning that Trump is a threat to democracy after the deadly assault on the Capitol. A Republican senator, Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania, joined Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska over the weekend in calling for Trump to “resign and go away as soon as possible.” Lawmakers warned of the damage the president could still do before Joe Biden is inaugurated Jan. 20. Trump, holed up at the White House, was increasingly isolated after a mob rioted in the Capitol in support of his false claims of election fraud. Judges across the country, including some nominated by Trump, repeatedly dismissed cases and Attorney General William Barr, a Trump ally, said there was no sign of any widespread fraud. “We will act with urgency, because this President represents an imminent threat,” Pelosi said in a letter late Sunday to colleagues emphasizing the need for quick action. “The horror of the ongoing assault on our democracy perpetrated by this President is intensified and so is the immediate need for action.” During an interview on “60 Minutes” aired Sunday, Pelosi invoked the Watergate era when Republicans in the Senate told President Richard Nixon, “It’s over.” “That’s what has to happen now,” she said. Pence has given no indication he would act on the 25th Amendment. If he does not, the House would move toward impeachment. Toomey said he doubted impeachment could be done before Biden is inaugurated, even though a growing number of lawmakers say that step is necessary to ensure Trump can never hold elected office again. “I think the president has disqualified himself from ever, certainly, serving in office again,” Toomey said. “I don’t think he is electable in any way.” Murkowski, long exasperated with the president, told the Anchorage Daily News on Friday that Trump simply “needs to get out.” A third, Sen. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., did not go that far, but on Sunday he warned Trump to be “very careful” in his final days in office. On impeachment, House Democrats would likely delay for 100 days sending articles of impeachment to the Senate for trial, to allow Biden to focus on other priorities. Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., said that instead of coming together, Democrats want to “talk about ridiculous things like ‘Let’s impeach a president’” with just days left in office. Still, some Republicans might be supportive. Nebraska Sen. Ben Sasse said he would take a look at any articles that the House sent over. Illinois Rep. Adam Kinzinger, a frequent Trump critic, said he would “vote the right way” if the matter were put in front of him. The Democratic effort to stamp Trump’s presidential record — for the second time — with the indelible mark of impeachment advanced rapidly after the riot. Rep. David Cicilline, D-R.I, a leader of the House effort to draft impeachment articles accusing Trump of inciting insurrection, said Sunday that his group had 200-plus co-sponsors. Potentially complicating Pelosi’s decision about impeachment was what it meant for Biden and the beginning of his presidency. While reiterating that he had long viewed Trump as unfit for office, Biden on Friday sidestepped a question about impeachment, saying what Congress did “is for them to decide.” Republished with the permission of the Associated Press.
Donald Trump pardons 15, commutes 5 sentences, including GOP allies
President Donald Trump on Tuesday pardoned 15 people, including a pair of congressional Republicans who were strong and early supporters, a 2016 campaign official ensnared in the Russia probe and former government contractors convicted in a 2007 massacre in Baghdad. Trump’s actions in his final weeks in office show a president who is wielding his executive power to reward loyalists and others who he believes have been wronged by a legal system he sees as biased against him and his allies. Trump issued the pardons — not an unusual act for an outgoing president — even as he refused to publicly acknowledge his election loss to Democrat Joe Biden, who will be sworn in on Jan. 20. Trump is likely to issue more pardons before then. He and his allies have discussed a range of other possibilities, including members of Trump’s family and his personal attorney Rudy Giuliani. Those pardoned on Tuesday included former Republican Reps. Duncan Hunter of California and Chris Collins of New York, two of the earliest GOP lawmakers to back Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign. Trump also commuted the sentences of five other people, including former Rep. Steve Stockman of Texas. Collins, the first member of Congress to endorse Trump to be president, was sentenced to two years and two months in federal prison after admitting he helped his son and others dodge $800,000 in stock market losses when he learned that a drug trial by a small pharmaceutical company had failed. Hunter was sentenced to 11 months in prison after pleading guilty to stealing campaign funds and spending the money on everything from outings with friends to his daughter’s birthday party. White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany said the pardons for Hunter and Collins were granted after “the request of many members of Congress.” She noted that Hunter served the nation in the U.S. Marines and saw combat in both Iraq and Afghanistan. In the group announced Tuesday night were four former government contractors convicted in a 2007 massacre in Baghdad that left more than a dozen Iraqi civilians dead and caused an international uproar over the use of private security guards in a war zone. Supporters of Nicholas Slatten, Paul Slough, Evan Liberty, and Dustin Heard, the former contractors at Blackwater Worldwide, had lobbied for pardons, arguing that the men had been excessively punished in an investigation and prosecution they said was tainted by problems and withheld exculpatory evidence. All four were serving lengthy prison sentences. The pardons reflected Trump’s apparent willingness to give the benefit of doubt to American service members and contractors when it comes to acts of violence in war zones against civilians. Last November, for instance, he pardoned a former U.S. Army commando who was set to stand trial next year in the killing of a suspected Afghan bomb-maker and a former Army lieutenant convicted of murder for ordering his men to fire upon three Afghans. Trump also announced pardons for two people entangled in special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation. One was for 2016 campaign adviser George Papadopoulos, who pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about a conversation in which he learned that Russia had dirt on Trump’s Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton. The president also pardoned Alex van der Zwaan, a Dutch lawyer who was sentenced to 30 days in prison for lying to investigators during the Mueller probe. Van der Zwaan and Papadopoulos are the third and fourth Russia investigation defendants granted clemency. By pardoning them, Trump once again took aim at Mueller’s inquiry and advanced a broader effort to undo the results of the investigation that yielded criminal charges against a half-dozen associates. The pardons drew criticism from top Democrats. Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., the chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, said the president was abusing his power. “Trump is doling out pardons, not on the basis of repentance, restitution or the interests of justice, but to reward his friends and political allies, to protect those who lie to cover up him, to shelter those guilty of killing civilians, and to undermine an investigation that uncovered massive wrongdoing,” Schiff said. Last month, Trump pardoned former national security adviser Michael Flynn, who had twice pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI, and months earlier commuted the sentence of another associate, Roger Stone, days before he was to report to prison. Trump has granted about 2% of requested pardons in his single term in office — just 27 before Tuesday’s announcement. By comparison, Barack Obama granted 212 or 6%, and George W. Bush granted about 7%, or 189. George H.W. Bush, another one-term president, granted 10% of requests. Also among those pardoned by Trump was Phil Lyman, a Utah state representative who led an ATV protest through restricted federal lands. Lyman was serving as a Utah county commissioner in 2014 when he led about 50 ATV riders in a canyon home to Native American cliff dwellings that officials closed to motorized traffic. The ride occurred amid a sputtering movement in the West pushing back against federal control of large swaths of land and came in the wake of an armed confrontation Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy had with Bureau of Land Management over grazing fees. Lyman spent 10 days in prison and was ordered to pay nearly $96,000 in restitution. The Trump administration in 2017 lifted a ban on motorized vehicles in parts of the canyon but left restrictions in place through other areas where Lyman led his ride. Two former U.S. Border Patrol agents were also pardoned, Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean, convicted of shooting and wounding a Mexican drug smuggler near El Paso, Texas, in 2005. Others on the list included a Pittsburgh dentist who pleaded guilty to health care fraud, two women convicted of drug crimes, and Alfred Lee Crum, now 89, who pleaded guilty in 1952 when he was 19 to helping his wife’s uncle illegally distill moonshine. Crum served three years of probation and paid a $250 fine. The White House
