Saturday, January 16, 2021

Walgreens and Pfizer become the latest corporations to suspend political donations to Republican lawmakers who objected to Biden's presidential win

|
© Provided by Business Insider
 A customer walks out of a Walgreens pharmacy store in Austin, Texas 
Reuters

Walgreens has suspended contributions to the 147 Republican lawmakers who opposed the certification of president-elect Joe Biden.

The pharmaceutical corporation Pfizer has also reportedly decided to also suspend contributions to those lawmakers for six months. 

The two corporations join Amazon, Marriott, AT&T and others in suspending donations to GOP lawmakers who tried to overturn the election. 

Some corporations are choosing to suspend all political donations instead of to just the senators and representatives who objected to Biden's certification. 


After the violent pro-Trump riot on Capitol Hill last week, some businesses began cutting ties with President Donald Trump, while some corporations decided to suspend political donations to one or both political parties.

Walgreens and Pfizer are two of the most recent companies to suspend PAC contributions to the 147 Republican lawmakers who opposed the certification of Democrat Joe Biden as the next president.

Walgreens confirmed to Insider on Saturday that it has suspended contributions to the GOP members of congress who voted to overturn the election results.

"Walgreens holds in high regard the role of government and the peaceful transition of power that is core to our democracy. As such, our political action committee suspended contributions to members of Congress who voted to object the certification of U.S. electoral college votes," Walgreens wrote in a statemen. "As Walgreens continues to deliver the essential testing and vaccinations that will help America end the COVID-19 pandemic, we value the importance of unity as a means for addressing the many challenges we face together as one great nation."

Read more: We analyzed Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey's thread on barring Trump for life. Here's why it missed the mark.

Video: GOP Sen. Murkowski says it would be 'appropriate' to bar Trump from holding office again (FOX News)

Pfizer will also reportedly suspend political contributions to the 147 lawmakers who moved to object to Biden's Electoral College victory. The 139 representatives and eight senators continued with a plan to try and overturn the election results even after the deadly siege on the US Capitol by Trump supporters who had been fueled by baseless allegations of voter fraud.

Judd Legum, who writes the political newsletter Popular Information, posted an internal memo from Pfizer on Twitter that says the COVID-19 vaccine-maker was halting donations to the GOP lawmakers for six months. It will review how it will proceed after that time.

Pfizer isn't the only healthcare corporation to pause contributions to the Republican lawmakers. News-site Stat wrote PhRMA, Blue Cross Blue Shield Association, and American Hospital Association will suspend contributions to those who opposed the certification. Stat notes that initially American Hospital Association announced it would stop all political contributions.

Quartz also lists Pfizer as one of the 33 companies part of S&P 500 "that have stopped PAC contributions to politicians who voted against election certification." The same Quartz story notes that there are 77 companies part of S&P 500 that have stopped all contributions to politicians.

Pfizer did not immediately respond to Insider for comment.

Walgreens and Pfizer join a growing list of corporations who have shared they will stop political contributions to the GOP lawmakers involved in the objection. Other corporations include Amazon, Marriott and Walmart. Some companies, like Microsoft and Facebook, have paused all political donations to both Republicans and Democrats.

The American Bankers Association, the second-biggest PAC donor to the 147 senators and representatives, is one organization that told Insider it is pausing political donations. Insider's Grace Dean wrote it "hasn't announced plans to halt any funding."

AT&T and Comcast who are also big donors to these lawmakers have already said they would halt contributions to those who voted to overturn the results.
Read the original article on Business Insider
Oil giant splits from powerful lobbying group over climate change

The American Petroleum Institute, the nation's largest and most powerful oil lobby, is losing one of its biggest members over a disagreement about addressing the climate crisis.
An automobile passes storage silos at the Total SE petrochemical plant in Le Havre, France, on Sunday, Sept. 6, 2020. President Emmanuel Macron's government last week unveiled the long-awaited 100 billion-euro ($118 billion) stimulus plan the French president is betting on to transform the economy and his political fortunes with less than two years to go until elections. 
Photographer: Nathan Laine/Bloomberg via Getty Images

France's Total announced Friday it is quitting the API because of the lobby's stances on regulation and carbon pricing as well as its support for politicians who oppose the Paris climate agreement. The move makes Total the first major oil company to leave the API because of the climate crisis.

The exit underscores the divide in the oil industry over how to respond to climate change. Top European oil companies including Total and BP have made more aggressive promises to slash carbon emissions and invest in clean energy than ExxonMobil, Chevron and other US firms.

The move also comes amid a broader reckoning in Corporate America over political contributions following the insurrection at the US Capitol.

"This is a serious blow for API, whose influence largely stems from its claim to be the voice of the entire oil and gas industry," Andrew Logan, director of oil and gas at sustainability nonprofit Ceres, said in a statement. He added the split is "likely to mark the beginning of an exodus from the trade group."

Founded in 1919, the API now has more than 600 members, including ExxonMobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, BP and Shell.

'Hostile' to climate policy

Total has helped lead the industry response to the climate crisis. Last year, Total announced a goal to get to net-zero emissions by 2050. Importantly, that goal included the so-called scope 3 emissions from the products it sells, namely gasoline, jet fuel and diesel. For major oil-and-gas companies, scope 3 can comprise as much as 85% of total emissions, according to S&P Global Market Intelligence.

"We are committed to ensuring, in a transparent manner, that the industry associations of which we are a member adopt positions and messages that are aligned with those of the group in the fight against climate change," Patrick Pouyanne, Total's CEO, said in a statement.

Total said a "detailed analysis" of API's climate positions revealed the lobby is only "partially aligned" with the company. Total cited several "divergences," including API's support for rolling back US regulation on methane emissions, which the company opposed in November 2019. Total also noted that API is part of the Transportation Fairness Alliance, which is opposed to providing subsidies for electric vehicles.

Additionally, Total said that during the recent elections, API supported candidates who opposed the United States' participation in the Paris climate agreement. President-elect Joe Biden has promised to swiftly return the nation to the accord.


Indeed, InfluenceMap, a London-based think tank focused on energy and climate change, said the API "appears to be broadly hostile to progressive climate policy." The group gives the API an "F" in terms of how aligned its climate policy is to the Paris agreement.

API says it wants to work with Biden

In a statement, the API defended its climate record and thanked Total for its membership.

"We believe that the world's energy and environmental challenges are large enough that many different approaches are necessary to solve them, and we benefit from a diversity of views," an API spokesperson said.

The API said it supports the "ambitions of the Paris Agreement, including global action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and alleviate poverty around the globe."

Mike Sommers, API's CEO, said during a call with reporters this week that the group wants to work with President-elect Biden and the EPA on reducing methane emissions. "We're open to the possibility of further regulation in this space," Sommers said, adding that the Biden administration should collaborate with the industry to come up with regulation that can "actually survive judicial scrutiny."

Will BP and Shell follow suit?

Edward Collins, director of corporate climate lobbying at InfluenceMap, said Total's departure will "place pressure on BP and Shell to seriously examine their own memberships."

Both European oil companies have promised to overhaul their businesses as they transition to low-carbon energy. And they both plan to get to net-zero emissions by 2050.

In a statement, BP said it "actively" monitors its membership in trade associations, "especially those we view as only 'partially aligned' with us on climate-related issues."

"We remain committed to trying to influence those associations from within," BP said, adding that it plans to publish a trade association update in the second quarter.

Shell said that it regularly reviews its membership in industry associations, but it signaled no imminent exit from the API.

"Specific to climate, API is moving closer to Shell's own stated views," a Shell spokesman told CNN Business. "As a result, we feel it's beneficial to remain a member so that we can continue to advocate for change from within."

CANADIEN COLONY
Haiti braces for unrest as opposition demands new president
© Provided by The Canadian Press

PORT-AU-PRINCE, Haiti — Flying rocks. Burning tires. Acrid smoke.

Haiti braced for a fresh round of widespread protests starting Friday, with opposition leaders demanding that President Jovenel Moïse step down next month, worried he is amassing too much power as he enters his second year of rule by decree.

“The priority right now is to put in place another economic, social and political system,” André Michel, of the opposition coalition Democratic and Popular Sector, said by phone. “It is clear that Moïse is hanging on to power.”

Hundreds of people in Port-au-Prince, Cap-Haitien, Jacmel, Saint-Marc and Gonaives marched in support of the opposition, with dozens of demonstrators briefly clashing with police in the capital although the protests remained largely peaceful.

Opposition leaders are demanding Moïse’s resignation and legislative elections to restart a Parliament dissolved a year ago.

They claim that Moïse’s five-year term is legally ending — that it began when former President Michel Martelly's term expired in February 2016. But Moïse maintains his term began when he actually took office in early 2017, an inauguration delayed by a chaotic election process that forced the appointment of a provisional president to serve during a year-long gap.

Haiti's international backers have echoed some of the opposition’s concerns, calling for parliamentary elections as soon as possible. They were originally scheduled for October 2019 but were delayed by political gridlock and protests that paralyzed much of the country, forcing schools, businesses and several government offices to close for weeks at a time.

Some in the international community also condemned several of Moïse's decrees.

One of those limited the powers of a court that audits government contracts and had accused Moïse and other officials of embezzlement and fraud involving a Venezuelan program which provided cheap oil. Moïse and others have rejected those accusations.

Moïse also decreed that acts such as robbery, arson and blocking public roads — a common ploy during protests — would be classed as terrorism and subject to heavy penalties. He also created an intelligence agency that answers only to the president.

The Core Group, which includes officials from the United Nations, U.S., Canada and France, questioned those moves.

“The decree creating the National Intelligence Agency gives the agents of this institution quasi-immunity, thus opening up the possibility of abuse," the group said in a recent statement. “These two presidential decrees, issued in areas that fall within the competence of a Parliament, do not seem to conform to certain fundamental principles of democracy, the rule of law, and the civil and political rights of citizens.”

Moïse has dismissed such concerns and vowed to move forward at his own pace.

In a New Year’s tweet, he called 2021 “a very important year for the future of the country.” He has called for a constitutional referendum in April followed by parliamentary and presidential elections in September, with runoffs scheduled for November.




“There is no doubt elections will happen,” Foreign Minister Claude Joseph told The Associated Press, rejecting calls that Moïse step down in February. “Haiti cannot afford another transition. We need to let democracy work the way it should.”

Joseph said Moïse remains open to dialogue and is ready to meet anytime with opposition leaders to solve the political stalemate.

He also said the constitutional referendum won't give Moïse more power but said changes are needed to the 1987 document.

“It is a source of instability. It does not have checks and balances. It gives extraordinary power to the Parliament that abuses this power over and over,” Joseph said. “It’s not the president’s own personal project. It’s a national project.”

While officials haven't released details of the referendum, one of the members of the consulting committee, Louis Naud Pierre, told radio station Magik9 last week that proposals include creating a unicameral Parliament to replace the current Senate and Chamber of Deputies, extending parliamentary terms and giving Haitians who live abroad more power.

The referendum and flurry of decrees are frustrating many Haitians, including Rose-Ducast Dupont, a mother of three who sells perfumes on the sidewalks of Delmas, a neighbourhood in the capital.

“The political problems in my country have been dragging on for too long,” she said. “They are never able to find a solution for the nation. ... We are the ones suffering.”

The nation of more than 11 million people has grown increasingly unstable under Moïse, who received more than 50% of the vote but with only 21% voter turnout.

Haiti is still trying to recover from the devastating 2010 earthquake and Hurricane Matthew that struck in 2016. Its economic, political and social woes have deepened, with gang violence resurging, inflation spiraling and food and fuel becoming more scarce at times in a country where 60% of the population makes less than $2 a day.

“I don’t have a life,” said Jean-Marc François, who wants Moïse gone. “I don’t have any savings. I have three kids. I have to survive day by day with no guarantee that I’ll come home with bread to put on the table.”

Some days he works in construction; others he does yardwork or disposes of garbage or moves boxes at warehouses, which sometimes pays 500 gourdes ($7) a day.

François said he won't take part in the “circus act” of voting in the referendum or elections.

“We’re talking about voting for a new president? A new constitution? Deputies and senators? They’re all going to be the same,” he said. “This is a country of corruption.”

Moïse has faced numerous calls for resignation since taking office, with protests roiling Haiti since late 2017. The demonstrations have been fueled largely by demands for better living conditions and anger over crime, corruption allegations and price increases after the government ended fuel subsidies.

The most violent protests occurred in 2019, with dozens killed, and some worry about even more violence as the opposition steps up its demands that Moïse resign amid fears that elections will be delayed once more.

“Can the current status quo continue for another year?” said Jake Johnston, senior research associate at the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington. “Moïse can announce an electoral calendar ... but what signs are there that that’s going to actually happen?”

___

Associated Press writer Evens Sanon reported this story in Port-au-Prince and AP writer Danica Coto reported from San Juan, Puerto Rico.

Evens Sanon And DáNica Coto, The Associated Press
Fresh protests in France against controversial security bill

Tens of thousands of protesters marched across France Saturday to denounce a security bill critics say would restrict the filming of police and posting images to social media, notably to document cases of police brutality.
© Sebastien SALOM-GOMIS Many protesters are also angry at what they say is the disproportionate use of force by police
© Justin DAVIS Thousands march in Paris against a controversial security bill

Thousands marched in Paris and cities across France, many of them angry about they say was the "disproportionate" response by police when they broke up an illegal New Year's rave in Brittany that attracted some 2,400 people.


Thousands march in Paris against a controversial security bill


Estimates of the turnout varied widely between the authorities and the activists: while police put the total turnout across the country at 34,000, organisers insisted it was closer to 200,000.

In Paris, the marchers came out despite a rare snowfall, carrying banners with slogans such as "Police everywhere, justice nowhere", and "State of emergency, police state."

"It's a strange dictatorship, one asks how far they will go with this law," said one marcher in the northern city of Lille, who identified himself only by his first name Francois.

"If this is the case in the country of the rights of man and freedom, then I'm ashamed to be French!" he added.

Police arrested 75 people across the country, 24 of them in Paris, said Interior Minister Gerard Darmanin, while 12 police officers and paramilitary officers were injured.

Police also intervened to break up an illegal rave near the Paris demonstration, Darmanin said in a tweet.

Footage of white police beating up an unarmed black music producer in his Paris studio on November 21 has amplified anger over the legislation, condemned by many as signalling a rightward lurch by President Emmanuel Macron.

Other recent incidents caught on camera have shown Paris police using violence to tear down a migrant camp.

The protesters are also against the use of ramped-up surveillance tools like drones and pedestrian cameras.

In the face of mounting protests, Macron's ruling LREM party has announced it will rewrite the bill's controversial Article 24 that deals with filming the police.

But left-wing protesters and rights groups insist the law should be completely withdrawn.

The "marches for freedom" have been called by an umbrella grouping that includes Amnesty International and several unions, including those gathering journalists and film directors.

The proposal, which has already been approved by the National Assembly, will be examined by the Senate, France's upper parliamentary chamber, in March.

burs-so/ach/jj
Wild pigs take over police station 
in small Pakistan city

© Klaus-Dietmar Gabbert/picture alliance via Getty Images
 A wild boar is shown in this Nov. 17, 2020 file photo.

Two pigs briefly took over a police station in Pakistan earlier this week, forcing officers to evacuate the building while the porky pair ran amok indoors.

The incident happened in the city of Moro in Pakistan's Sindh province, according to the Pakistan-based Express Tribune and The Current news outlets.

It was not immediately clear where the pigs came from, or how long they spent wallowing in their victory over the police.

Read more: Fishermen save naked fugitive from crocodile-infested waters in Australia

Authorities ultimately enlisted help from some locals to retake the station, broadcaster ARY News reports.

The anti-pig posse drove out one of the animals and restrained the other, according to the station house officer.

It was the latest in a years-long run of bizarre wild pig stories, as the animals have become an increasingly challenging problem in many parts of the world.

The hefty, hungry and intelligent animals often band together and can cause havoc in urban and rural settings.

Video: Wild pigs an ‘ecological train wreck’ for Canada, especially in the Prairies: study

Last year, for example, a wild boar wandered into a German nudist park and snatched a naked man's laptop bag, touching off a bizarre chase that one bystander captured on camera.

Read more: Cheeky boars lead nudist on a wild chase for his laptop

Wildlife officials in Alberta, Saskatchewan and neighbouring U.S. states have also struggled with the threat of wild pigs, which can ruin farmland and spread disease to valuable livestock.

Denmark addressed a similar problem in 2019 by trotting out a border wall with Germany.

Wild pigs are also a widespread nuisance in the city of Hong Kong, where they feast on garbage and frighten citizens with their tremendous size.

Police in Pakistan did not say how the two swine managed to break into their station in the first place — but perhaps they can get the captured pig to squeal.
he Republican Party Has Distanced Itself From The Capitol Riot. But Local GOP Officials Fueled Supporters' Rage Ahead of Jan. 6

Ali Alexander, the organizer of the Stop the Steal movement promoting President Trump’s baseless conspiracy theory that widespread voter fraud cost him the 2020 election, tweeted on Dec. 7, that he was “willing to give [his] life for this fight.” The next day, the Arizona Republican Party’s official account retweeted Alexander, with the note: “he is. Are you?”

© Christopher Lee for TIME Supporters of President Donald Trump gather around the Washington Monument for a rally protesting the results of the presidential election in Washington, D.C. on Jan. 6, 2021.

Less than a month later, on Jan. 6, pro-Trump rioters overtook the U.S. Capitol by force, smashing windows and forcing lawmakers into hiding in a violent insurrection that resulted in the death of five people, including a Capitol Hill police officer. In the aftermath of the violence, Republicans have scrambled to distance themselves from the mob. The Republican National Committee condemned the attack and on Jan. 13, 10 Congressional Republicans voted to impeach Trump for his role in inciting the riot.

But the vocal backlash belies a much more uncomfortable reality: the Republican Party —including local, state and federal lawmakers and elected officials, and dozens of local Republican Party chapters—actively supported the Jan. 6 rally, both logistically and by leveraging their institutional platforms to promote falsehoods and encourage Trump supporters’ grievances. More than two dozen Republican lawmakers and other elected officials personally attended the rally, and at least one was caught on video storming the Capitol building during the riot. Many of these Republican Party members remain fervent Trump supporters and continue to repeat and amplify his baseless claims.

Dozens of local Republican Party chapters used their social media platforms to promote bus trips to Washington, D.C., on Jan. 6, according to reviews conducted by TIME and social media posts collected by media watchdog group Media Matters for America. Numerous posts encouraged Trump supporters to go to their state and federal capitol buildings to “fight,” “take America back,” and even “occupy” the government.

Several official Republican Party accounts, for example, posted a promotional flyer that referred to the Jan. 6 rally as “Operation Occupy the Capitol” and included slogans like #WeAreTheStorm, which are used by QAnon conspiracy theorists. The same flyer was found in fringe rightwing internet circles where the term “Operation Occupy the Capitol” had become something of a rallying cry, says Julie Millican, the vice president of Media Matters for America.
© Provided by Meredith Corporation A screenshot, captured Jan. 15, illustrating a post on one local Republican Party chapter's Facebook page“This is a call to ALL patriots from Donald J Trump for a BIG protest in Washington DC! TAKE AMERICA BACK! BE THERE, WILL BE WILD!” read Dec. 28 posts on both the Facebook page of the New Hanover County GOP in North Carolina and the public group for the Horry County Republican Party in South Carolina, promoting a bus trip from Willmington, N.C. to Washington, DC.

“FIGHT BACK! Stop the Steal MAGA Bus Trip… Tell Congress – DO NOT CERTIFY THIS VOTE,” also read a Jan. 4 Facebook post from the Bergen County Republican Organization in N.J. The post encouraged supporters to contact the Lodi Republican County Committeewoman to join a group bus trip to the Capitol on Jan. 6. Tickets were $65.00.

Republican lawmakers and other elected officials, including state senators and representatives, state school board members, mayors, town councilors and sheriffs from at least 18 states, also traveled themselves to D.C. on Jan. 6, where they tweeted and posted on social media in front of the Capitol. Just before the protests turned violent, U.S. Rep. Paul Gosar of Arizona tweeted, “Biden should concede. I want his concession on my desk tomorrow morning. Don’t make me come over there,” with a photo of the thousands of Trump supporters on the national mall.

Republican state Sen. Amanda Chase of Virginia, who is also a gubernatorial candidate, gave a calm but conspiracy-laden speech to a crowd assembled outside the Capitol ahead of the rally. In previous days, she’d shared contact information for groups helping Virginians travel to D.C., according to a screenshot of her now-suspended Facebook page collected by Democratic super PAC American Bridge.

A few hours later, just as rioters were ransacking Congressional offices, Republican state lawmaker Daniel Cox of Maryland tweeted, “Pence is a traitor.” Cox also helped organize buses for his constituents to attend, according to local news site Maryland Matters.

In perhaps the most extreme example, newly-elected Republican State Del. Derrick Evans of West Virginia live streamed himself on Jan. 6 gleefully pushing into the Capitol building, surrounded by a group of other cheering Trump supporters. And while Evans resigned on Jan. 9 after he was arrested for his part in the riot, plenty of other Republican officials have defended their attendance on Jan. 6 and fought back against attempts by colleagues to censure them this week, signaling that they will continue to be an important part of the Republican Party even after Trump leaves office on Jan. 20.
‘It wasn’t something that was supposed to be acidic’

Like some prominent national Republican lawmakers, many of the state and local Republican party officials who promoted the Jan. 6 event later denounced the violence. In interviews with TIME, they claimed they did not know about, or approve of, plans to breach the Capitol building.

Vincent Sammons, the county chairman of the Republican Central Committee of Cecil County in Maryland, who promoted what became a 15 bus trip to attend the Jan. 6 rally through a post on Cecil County Republican Club’s Facebook page, says he did not intend to fuel a riot. “It wasn’t something that was supposed to be acidic,” he told TIME. “It was something that was supposed to be a rally to motivate people to get their voices heard… you know, trying to express your freedom of speech.”

© Christopher Lee for TIME A view of Pro-Trump rioters in front of the Capitol in Washington, D.C. on Jan. 6, 2021.

Other local Republican leaders also emphasized that their Republican Party social media platforms were only used to help grassroots organizers’ efforts to support the President. Several Republican officials denied offering financial support to the protesters and described their role as simply helping to fill buses.

In Greenville, S.C., Kaaren Mann asked a friend with the Greenville County Republican Party to promote her bus trip on the party’s Facebook page and email list. In Ohio, Cathy Lukasko, auxiliary chair of the Trumbull County GOP, posted a flyer seeking attendees for a private bus trip that was shared on the Facebook pages for at least three counties’ GOP chapters before she combined forces with another Ohio Republican activist to fill a bus. The Northern Kentucky Tea Party, which advertised a bus trip that left from a local church, according to a since-deleted web page saved by American Bridge, filled two buses in a similar manner. Jane Brady, the Chairwoman of the Delaware Republican Party, posted about what became a three bus trip on the party’s official Facebook page. In more than half a dozen interviews, local Republican party members and Republican organizers maintained that they were not aware of anyone in their groups committing violence.

But many other Republican officials have either stopped short of condemning the rioters’ actions, or attempted to walk a fine rhetorical line—condemning the violence, while continuing to promote the same false grievances that incited it in the first place. Many have doubled down on their support for Trump himself.

Virginia Sen. Chase, for instance, publicly denied participating in the riots, but refused to criticize the Trump supporters who did until pressed in an interview with TIME on Jan. 14. “I’ve always condemned any type of violence, no matter what rally you’re at,” Chase told TIME. She then added that she “understand[s] the frustration of the people” and that “they believe the insurrection honestly occurred back on Election Day.” Chase also repeated the baseless claim, circulated by far-right extremists and conservative media, that at least some of those who stormed the Capitol were members of antifa, the loosely organized movement of anti-fascist activists.

The Arizona Republican Party has amplified the same baseless claim. “Several dozen, including members of Antifa, made the reprehensible decision to riot,” the Arizona Republican Party tweeted Jan. 11. “Punish the perps, stop gaslighting the innocents.” The tweet is now pinned to the top of the party’s timeline.

Maryland delegate Cox also denied participating in the riots and denounced the “mob violence” in a statement to TIME. But in a letter to Maryland General Assembly’s Joint Committee on Legislative Ethics that was published by the Washington Post, Cox maintained that Pence’s decision to confirm Biden’s victory was a “betrayal of us his voters.”

These elected officials’ political two-step is likely a reflection of their Republican constituents’ beliefs. A Vox/Data for Progress poll conducted Jan. 8-11, just days after the riots, found that 72% of likely Republican voters said they still do not trust the 2020 election results. And an Ipsos-Axios poll conducted Jan. 11-13 and focused on the Capitol riots found 63% of Republicans said they support Trump’s “recent behavior.”

“It doesn’t surprise me at all that MAGA has kind of taken over Republican held seats in legislatures or in certain governorships, in large part because they’re reflecting what the base is,” says Elizabeth Neumann, who resigned from leading the Department of Homeland Security’s office overseeing responses to violent extremism last April. She explains that local officials often play an especially crucial role in shaping their constituents’s beliefs, since people tend to trust local representatives more than national ones.

“Somebody who’s already on that radicalization pathway,” Neumann says, “and you have a trusted voice, like your local legislator, or councilman or governor kind of endorse this path that they’re on, they’re more likely to continue on that path.”

© Christopher Lee for TIME Pro-Trump rioters attempt to push through a barrier outside of the Capitol building in Washington, D.C. 


An American tinderbox

The Jan. 6 riot was not a standalone event. It marked the culmination of more than a year of growing frustration and increasingly virulent ideas.

The rally brought together people from across the country who believe in a host of typically separate conspiracy theories, noted Brian Levin, director of the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism at California State University, San Bernardino. As Trump encouraged supporters to oppose coronavirus-related lockdowns last year, the “liberate” movement and protests at state capitols throughout 2020, “provided an elastic reservoir to meet others with grievance against the government,” Levin says. That helped bring more establishment Republican activists on the ground into contact with QAnon supporters, Proud Boys and white supremacists.

Far-right extremists talking about violence, and even civil war, is not a new phenomenon, says Lawrence Rosenthal, chair of the Berkeley Center for Right-Wing Studies, but it didn’t have a significant impact at the national level until Trump. In the past, “there’s always a sense of a spark” that would start the violence, he adds. “What’s different today is that the spark is the leadership of the President of the United States.”

Several right wing groups, including Women for American First, Turning Point USA and Phyllis Schlafly Eagles also helped promote the rally. Women for American First was granted a permit for the event on Jan. 4, per ABC News. It also hosted a multi-state bus tour across the U.S. encouraging people to attend the rally.

WHRE DID THE INSURRECTIONISTS GET THE COP SHIELDS?
© Christopher Lee for TIME Pro-Trump rioter uses a Capitol Police shield to break a window of the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C. Christopher Lee for TIME

Phyllis Schlafly Eagles—a group launched by the former president of Schlafly’s longtime group Eagle Forum amid infighting in 2016—promoted the event on its website and social media, likening the rally to D-Day in one post, according to research provided by American Bridge. And Charlie Kirk, the founder of Turning Point USA and Students for Trump, claimed, in a since deleted tweet, that he sent more than 80 buses to the event, according to Kristen Doerer, the managing editor of Right Wing Watch. (A Turning Point spokesman later told the New York Times that the organization sent just seven buses to DC.)

The leaders of those organizations belong to the highly influential conservative political organization the Council for National Policy, which has close ties to the Trump administration and whose past members include former Trump White House staffers Kellyanne Conway and Steve Bannon.

The Trump Administration will come to an end next week, but security officials say the threat presented by the President’s fanning of conspiracy theories and anti-democratic fury will remain. The extremism that leaders in Washington now say threaten American democracy have permeated all levels of the Republican Party. “The concern that we have from a security perspective is that this problem doesn’t go away with Trump,” says Neumann.

State and federal law enforcement officers are preparing for potential violence from rightwing extremists and militant Trump supporters before and during Joe Biden’s inauguration.
Online far-right movements fracture in wake of Capitol riot over 'gullible' QAnon believers

Online far-right movements are splintering in the wake of last week’s Capitol riot, as some radical anti-government movements show signs of disillusionment with the relatively hands-off approach of some QAnon conspiracy theorists amid warnings of future violence.© Provided by NBC News

Users on forums that openly helped coordinate the Jan. 6 riot and called for insurrection, including 4chan and TheDonald, have become increasingly agitated with QAnon supporters, who are largely still in denial that President Donald Trump will no longer be in the Oval Office after Jan. 20.


QAnon adherents, who believe Trump is secretly saving the world from a cabal of child-eating Satanists, have identified Inauguration Day as a last stand, and falsely think he will force a 10-day, countrywide blackout that ends in the mass execution of his political enemies and a second Trump term.

Several QAnon supporters were arrested after storming the Capitol last week, including Jacob Chansley, whose lawyer said his client believed he was “answering the call of our president.”

QAnon believers have spent the last week forwarding chain letters on Facebook and via text message, often removing the conspiracy theory’s QAnon origins, in an effort to prepare friends and family for what they believe to be the upcoming judgment day.

According to researchers who study the real-life effects of the QAnon movement, the false belief in a secret plan for Jan. 20 is irking militant pro-Trump and anti-government groups, who believe the magical thinking is counterproductive to future insurrections.

Travis View, who hosts the QAnon-debunking podcast QAnon Anonymous, said Q supporters are waiting for a “miracle that prevents Biden from being inaugurated,” and it is beginning to grate on those anxious for more real-world conflict.

“I have seen some Trump supporters chastising people promoting QAnon-like conspiracy theories," he said. "It seems some Trump supporters are reassessing their coalition and laying judgment on the QAnon wing."

The split has become apparent on extremist forums like TheDonald, from which QAnon adherents have fled to an identical sister site due to constant pillorying for their fantastical thinking on the original site. The new website is named after The Great Awakening, the mythical judgment day of mass arrests and executions.

It is also apparent on viral TikToks and Facebook posts on the more mainstream parts of the web.

“I can’t believe the number of the gullible people who are still out there saying Q is going to run to the rescue in the next five days and you’re going to see military tribunals,” a user in one viral TikTok video said. “Look, I’m a full Trump supporter and I enjoyed reading all the stuff about the deep state and I believe most of it.”

Conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, who has frequently quibbled with QAnon supporters, also lashed out at believers of the conspiracy theory in a viral video earlier this week.

QAnon supporters have predicted blackouts for years, citing posts from “Q,” the false digital prophet at the center of the conspiracy theory. Q frequently posted about routine outages of major services, alluding to them as potential warning signs of the Great Awakening. In August 2018, Q posted three times about outages on the video game service Xbox Live, wondering “Anybody have problems with their X-Box Live accounts?” to the conspiracy theory’s followers.

While several specific doomsdays have passed without any prophecies coming true, experts who study QAnon believe another failed prophecy on Inauguration Day could further decimate the movement.

Fredrick Brennan, who created the website 8chan where “Q” posts and has spent the last two years attempting to have the site removed from the internet for its ties to white supremacist terror attacks, said he believes reality may devastate the movement on Inauguration Day.

“This week has been hugely demoralizing so far and that will be the final straw,” he said. “Even though Q is at the moment based on Donald Trump, it is certainly possible for a significant faction to rise up that believes he was in the deep state all along and foiled the plan.”
MSM FINALLY ADMITS THE PUBLIC SECRET OF POLICING 
It's not just your perception. Police are tougher on left-wing protests than right-wing ones


President Donald Trump's supporters were still rampaging through the US Capitol when the question arose: If these had been Black Lives Matter demonstrators instead of overwhelmingly White, militant Trump backers, how different would the police response have been?
© Natalie Behring/AFP/Getty Images Police are seen in a cloud from a smoke bomb during a protest to oppose the right-wing group Patriot Prayer, which was rallying in Portland, Oregon on September 10, 2017.

The Black Lives Matter Global Network hit the question hard in a statement following the Capitol siege.

"When Black people protest for our lives, we are all too often met by National Guard troops or police equipped with assault rifles, shields, tear gas and battle helmets," the group said in a statement. "Make no mistake, if the protesters were Black, we would have been tear gassed, battered, and perhaps shot."

Black Lives Matter protesters -- Black and White, old and young -- were indeed tear gassed on June 1 -- to clear an area around the White House so President Trump could walk to a nearby church to have his picture taken.

But police response to protests in the Trump era may depend as much on the politics of the demonstrators as on their race, experts say.

And demonstrators on both the right and the left see police as siding with right-wing protestors, according to a policing expert.

"The right-leaning protesters will say police used force against Black Lives Matter and not them because they are on the 'right' side, the same side -- they 'back the blue,' they are pro-police," said Ed Maguire, a criminal justice professor at Arizona State University. "The left-leaning protesters believe the same thing: that the police are on the side politically of the right."












"What we saw with the Black Lives Matter protests was a really massive over-response, and what we saw at the Capitol was a similarly massive under-response," he said.


The conduct of some police officers during the Capitol siege highlights Maguire's point.

At least two Capitol police officers were suspended for their behavior during the incident. According to Democratic Rep. Tim Ryan of Ohio, one of the suspended officers took a selfie with members of the mob, while another wore a "Make America Great Again" hat and directed people around the Capitol building.

At least two off-duty police officers from Virginia have been arrested in connection with the breach of the Capitol and face federal charges, including "violent entry and disorderly conduct on Capitol grounds."

Officers from New York, Philadelphia, Seattle and Texas are also under investigation by their departments.




















Ten times as many arrests

Left-leaning protesters are significantly more likely to be arrested than right-leaning ones, according to a 2020 study from Lesley Wood, an associate professor of sociology at York University in Toronto.

Wood studied media reports of arrests at 64 demonstrations in the United States in 2017 and 2018.

She bracketed anti-abortion demonstrations and those backing Confederate statues, White supremacy and President Trump, for example, as being right-wing, while considering demonstrations in favor of gun control, immigration and civil rights, among others, to be left-wing.

She focused on protests that face counter-protests because they are "more likely to be violent, and present special challenges for the police," she wrote in the study, "Policing Counter-Protest," published in the journal Sociology Compass in 2020.

She found that 10 times as many left-wing protesters were arrested as right-wing protesters: 279 from the left and 26 on the right. The political identity of the other 38 people arrested in the 2017-2018 US demonstrations was unknown.

"Police in North Carolina, Virginia and Louisiana were more likely to arrest those condemning Confederate statues than those protecting them," Wood wrote. "Police in Georgia arrested anti-fascists rather than neo-Nazis; and across the country arrested anti-racists and Trump opponents rather than Islamaphobes [sic] and Trump supporters."

The size of demonstrations is often contested, but the left-wing protests Wood studied tended to be larger than the right-wing ones. Even with the size of protests difficult to pin down exactly, left-leaning activists appeared to be about two-and-a-half times more likely than right-leaning ones to be arrested, she told CNN.














"It is really striking that you see that left-wingers are arrested at a much greater level," she said.

Wood underlined a key factor: Police have different views of right-leaning and left-leaning demonstrators.

"The logic of policing protest has been one of threat assessment, and they tend to see left-wing protest as more threatening than right-wing," she said in an interview with CNN.

"That is tied to many things, such as race," Wood wrote. "Groups that are critical of the police are seen as more threatening. That helps explain why Black Lives Matter, which was critical of the police and black-led, was seen as threatening."




Police outreach

Wood wrote that police agencies aim to be "professional, cost-effective and legitimate" in protest situations, valuing "political neutrality, permits and negotiation between police and organizers."

Months of demonstrations and counter-demonstrations by the right-wing Patriot Prayer group and left-wing groups including antifa and members of religious and human rights organizations in Portland, Oregon, in 2017 and 2018 provided a case study for Wood.

"While the Patriot Prayer activists worked with the police, the police had no success in communicating with the anti-fascist leadership," she wrote. "Police perceive protesters who refuse to negotiate, do not have a centralized leader, and hide their identity from police, as more threatening."

"Because police repress on the basis of their understanding of threat, it means that left-wing protesters, racialized protesters, protesters who are seen as ideological or irrational, are more likely to be arrested and have militarized tactics used against them, such as tear gas and pepper spray," Wood told CNN.

But Bill Johnson, executive director of the National Association of Police Organizations, questioned some of Wood's conclusions.


"The author explains that leftist counter-protesters deliberately utilize the tactic of 'no platforming,' which is defined thus: 'No Platforming means disrupting rallies that aim to promote racist or fascist ideologies by organizing such large counter protests that the planned speeches cannot be heard,'" Johnson told CNN by email.

"If I'm reading the study correctly, leftist counter-protesters are thus more likely to be arrested because by definition they are breaking the law by deliberately trying to shut down lawfully permitted rightist demonstrations," Johnson said.


Johnson also pointed out that the left-wing protesters include, in Wood's words, "communist, anarchist and socialist antifascists."



Those ideologies, Johnson said, "share a common thread of wishing to tear down an existing legal/political/social structure and replace it with something else. By definition, then, we would expect protesters who are adherents of those ideologies to overtly present anti-social behavior to a greater degree and extent than other groups who do not share that same wish. And thus we would expect more arrests."

And he noted that Wood's paper includes little data about the reason for protester arrests or the results.

"There is no indication of the judicial disposition of the charges: Were they sustained? Shown to be false? That would seem to be an important bit of data," Johnson said.


A history of imbalanced policing

The United States has a history of policing Black-led events more than White-led ones.

A landmark study of more than 15,000 US protests during the Civil Rights period and the decades after it found that, at some points in that era, police were more likely to be present and to take action at Black-led events than predominantly White ones.

But the paper, "Protesting While Black? The Differential Policing of American Activism, 1960 to 1990," published in the American Sociological Review in 2011, also found that in many years, the race of protesters appeared to make no difference to policing.

Police arrested 61 people on January 6, the day the Capitol was overrun by Trump supporters. More people have been arrested in connection with the storming of the building since then.

A CNN analysis found no less than nine occasions when police arrested more Washington demonstrators in a single day than they did on January 6, ranging from 133 LGBTQ activists at the Supreme Court in October 2019, to 575 protesters against Trump Administration immigration policy in June 2018.

On June 1, 2020 -- the day of President Trump's photo op at the church near the White House -- police arrested 316 people.

CNN's list is not comprehensive, but all nine demonstrations share a common factor: they were left-leaning demonstrations.






Capitol rioters included highly trained ex-military and cops

















WASHINGTON — As President Donald Trump’s supporters massed outside the Capitol last week and sang the national anthem, a line of men wearing olive-drab helmets and body armour trudged purposefully up the marble stairs in a single-file line, each man holding the jacket collar of the one ahead.

The formation, known as “Ranger File,” is standard operating procedure for a combat team that is “stacking up” to breach a building — instantly recognizable to any U.S. soldier or Marine who served in Iraq and Afghanistan. It was a chilling sign that many at the vanguard of the mob that stormed the seat of American democracy either had military training or were trained by those who did.

An Associated Press review of public records, social media posts and videos shows at least 22 current or former members of the U.S. military or law enforcement have been identified as being at or near the Capitol riot, with more than a dozen others under investigation but not yet named. In many cases, those who stormed the Capitol appeared to employ tactics, body armour and technology such as two-way radio headsets that were similar to those of the very police they were confronting.

Experts in homegrown extremism have warned for years about efforts by far-right militants and white-supremacist groups to radicalize and recruit people with military and law enforcement training, and they say the Jan. 6 insurrection that left five people dead saw some of their worst fears realized.

“ISIS and al-Qaida would drool over having someone with the training and experience of a U.S. military officer,” said Michael German, a former FBI agent and fellow with the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University. “These people have training and capabilities that far exceed what any foreign terrorist group can do. Foreign terrorist groups don’t have any members who have badges.”

Among the most prominent to emerge is a retired Air Force lieutenant colonel and decorated combat veteran from Texas who was arrested after he was photographed wearing a helmet and body armour on the floor of the Senate, holding a pair of zip-tie handcuffs.

Another Air Force veteran from San Diego was shot and killed by a Capitol Police officer as she tried to leap through a barricade near the House chamber. A retired Navy SEAL, among the most elite special warfare operators in the military, posted a Facebook video about travelling from his Ohio home to the rally and seemingly approving of the invasion of "our building, our house.”

Two police officers from a small Virginia town, both of them former infantrymen, were arrested by the FBI after posting a selfie of themselves inside the Capitol, one flashing his middle finger at the camera.

Also under scrutiny is an active-duty psychological warfare captain from North Carolina who organized three busloads of people who headed to Washington for the “Save America” rally in support the president’s false claim that the November election was stolen from him.

While the Pentagon declined to provide an estimate for how many other active-duty military personnel are under investigation, the military’s top leaders were concerned enough ahead of President-elect Joe Biden’s inauguration that they issued a highly unusual warning to all service members this week that the right to free speech gives no one the right to commit violence.

The chief of the U.S. Capitol Police was forced to resign following the breach and several officers have been suspended pending the outcome of investigations into their conduct, including one who posed for a selfie with a rioter and another who was seen wearing one of Trump’s red “Make America Great Again” caps.

The AP’s review of hundreds of videos and photos from the insurrectionist riot shows scores of people mixed in the crowd who were wearing military-style gear, including helmets, body armour, rucksacks and two-way radios. Dozens carried canisters of bear spray, baseball bats, hockey sticks and pro-Trump flags attached to stout poles later used to bash police officers.

A close examination of the group marching up the steps to help breach the Capitol shows they wore military-style patches that read “MILITIA” and “OATHKEEPER.” Others were wearing patches and insignias representing far-right militant groups, including the Proud Boys, the Three Percenters and various self-styled state militias.

The Oath Keepers, which claims to count thousands of current and former law enforcement officials and military veterans as members, have become fixtures at protests and counter-protests across the country, often heavily armed with semi-automatic carbines and tactical shotguns.

Stewart Rhodes, an Army veteran who founded the Oath Keepers in 2009 as a reaction to the presidency of Barack Obama, had been saying for weeks before the Capitol riot that his group was preparing for a civil war and was “armed, prepared to go in if the president calls us up.”

Adam Newbold, the retired Navy SEAL from Lisbon, Ohio, whose more than two-decade military career includes multiple combat awards for valour, said in a Jan. 5 Facebook video, “We are just very prepared, very capable and very skilled patriots ready for a fight.”

He later posted a since-deleted follow-up video after the riot saying he was “proud” of the assault.

Newbold, 45, did not respond to multiple messages from the AP but in an interview with the Task & Purpose website he denied ever going inside the Capitol. He added that because of the fallout from the videos he has resigned from a program that helps prepare potential SEAL applicants.

Retired Air Force Lt. Col. Larry Rendall Brock Jr. of Texas was released to home confinement Thursday after a prosecutor alleged the former fighter pilot had zip-tie handcuffs on the Senate floor because he planned to take hostages.

“He means to kidnap, restrain, perhaps try, perhaps execute members of the U.S. government,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Jay Weimer said. “His prior experience and training make him all the more dangerous.”

Federal authorities on Friday also arrested Dominic Pezzola, a 43-year-old former Marine from New York who identified himself on social media as being a member of the Proud Boys.

The FBI identified Pezzola as the bearded man seen in widely shared video shattering an exterior Capitol window with a stolen Capitol Police riot shield before he and others climbed inside. He also appears in a second video taken inside the building that shows him smoking a cigar in what he calls a “victory smoke,” according to a court filing.

In an online biography, Pezzola, whose nickname is “Spazzo,” describes himself as “Marine vet/ boxer/ patriot/ Proud Boy.” Service records show he served six years stateside as an infantryman and was discharged in 2005 at the rank of corporal.

According to court filings, an unidentified witness told the FBI that Pezzola was with a group at the Capitol whose members said they would have killed “anyone they got their hands on,” including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The witness further stated that members of this group said they would have killed (Vice-President) Mike Pence if given the chance,” the affidavit said.

Army commanders at Fort Bragg in North Carolina are investigating the possible involvement of Capt. Emily Rainey, the 30-year-old psychological operations officer and Afghanistan war veteran who told the AP she travelled with 100 others to Washington to “stand against election fraud.” She insisted she acted within Army regulations and that no one in her group entered the Capitol or broke the law.

“I was a private citizen and doing everything right and within my rights,” Rainey said.

More than 125 people have been arrested so far on charges related to the Capitol riot, ranging from curfew violations to serious federal felonies related to theft and weapons possession.

Brian Harrell, who served as the assistant secretary for infrastructure protection at the Department of Homeland Security until last year, said it is “obviously problematic” when “extremist bad actors” have military and law enforcement backgrounds.

“Many have specialized training, some have seen combat, and nearly all have been fed disinformation and propaganda from illegitimate sources,” Harrell said. “They are fueled by conspiracy theories, feel as if something is being stolen from them, and they are not interested in debate. This is a powder keg cocktail waiting to blow.”

The FBI is warning of the potential for more bloodshed. In an internal bulletin issued Sunday, the bureau warned of plans for armed protests at all 50 state capitals and in Washington, D.C., in the coming weeks.

Meanwhile, police departments in such major cities as New York, Los Angeles, Las Vegas, Houston and Philadelphia announced they were investigating whether members of their agencies participated in the Capitol riot. The Philadelphia area's transit authority is also investigating whether seven of its police officers who attended Trump’s rally in Washington broke any laws.

A Texas sheriff announced last week that he had reported one of his lieutenants to the FBI after she posted photos of herself on social media with a crowd outside the Capitol. Bexar County Sheriff Javier Salazar said Lt. Roxanne Mathai, a 46-year-old jailer, had the right to attend the rally but he’s investigating whether she may have broken the law.

One of the posts Mathai shared was a photo that appeared to be taken Jan. 6 from among the mass of Trump supporters outside the Capitol, captioned: “Not gonna lie. ... aside from my kids, this was, indeed, the best day of my life. And it’s not over yet.”

A lawyer for Mathai, a mother and longtime San Antonio resident, said she attended the Trump rally but never entered the Capitol.

In Houston, Police Chief Art Acevedo said an 18-year veteran of the department suspected of joining the mob that breached the Capitol resigned before a disciplinary hearing that was set for Friday.

“There is no excuse for criminal activity, especially from a police officer,” Acevedo said. “I can’t tell you the anger I feel at the thought of a police officer, and other police officers, thinking they get to storm the Capitol.”

___

Bleiberg reported from Dallas and LaPorta from in Delray Beach, Florida. Robert Burns and Michael Balsamo in Washington; Jim Mustian, Michael R. Sisak and Thalia Beaty in New York; Michael Kunzelman in College Park, Maryland; Juan A. Lozano in Houston; Claudia Lauer in Philadelphia; Martha Bellisle in Seattle; Stefanie Dazio in Los Angeles; and Carolyn Thompson in Buffalo, New York, contributed.

___

Follow Associated Press Investigative Reporter Michael Biesecker at http://twitter.com/mbieseck; Jake Bleiberg at http://twitter.com/JZBleiberg; and James LaPorta at http://twitter.com/JimLaPorta

___

Contact AP’s global investigative team at Investigative@ap.org

Michael Biesecker, Jake Bleiberg And James Laporta, The Associated Press
Rare sedition charge gains interest after Capitol attack

“Those who started a riot have no idea just how oppressive the government can actually be and they are about to find out,” 
they will pay “a substantial price, certainly a price none of them ever expected.”

SEPARATED AT BIRTH 










NEW YORK — A Civil War-era sedition law being dusted off for potential use in the mob attack on the U.S. Capitol was last successfully deployed a quarter-century ago in the prosecution of Islamic militants who plotted to bomb New York City landmarks.

An Egyptian cleric, Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman, and nine followers were convicted in 1995 of seditious conspiracy and other charges in a plot to blow up the United Nations, the FBI’s building, and two tunnels and a bridge linking New York and New Jersey.

Applications of the law making it a crime to conspire to overthrow or forcefully destroy the government of the United States have been scant. But its use is being considered against the mob that killed a police officer and rampaged through the U.S. Capitol last week.

Michael Sherwin, acting U.S. attorney for D.C., has said “all options are on the table,” including sedition charges, against the Capitol invaders.

“Certainly if you have an organized armed assault on the Capitol, or any government installation, it’s absolutely a charge that can be brought,” said Andrew McCarthy, a former federal prosecutor who secured convictions at Abdel-Rahman’s 1995 trial.

The challenge, he said, is whether prosecutors can prove people conspired to use force.

“In our case, conspiracy was a layup because of the nature of the terrorist cell we were targeting. In this case, can they show conspiratorial activity or was it one of these things that spontaneously combusted, which makes conspiracy harder to prove?” McCarthy said.

Karen Greenberg, director of the Center on National Security at the Fordham University School of Law, said sedition charges in an attack against the centre of U.S. government are even more appropriate than in the New York bombing plot.

“Of course we should use it here. That’s what this is, seditious conspiracy,” she said.

Prosecutors had scant evidence against Abdel-Rahman when they arrested him months after a bomb exploded in February 1993 at the World Trade Center, killing six people.

Then-Manhattan U.S. Attorney Mary Jo White went to Washington to convince the FBI and Attorney General Janet Reno that Abdel-Rahman should be charged with seditious conspiracy, a law enacted after the Civil War to arrest Southerners who might keep fighting the U.S. government.

The law’s hefty penalty — up to 20 years — boosted its value before terrorism laws were overhauled in 1996, McCarthy said.

Prosecutors offered jurors Abdel-Rahman’s fiery speeches, witness testimony and a recording of his conversation with an FBI informant in which the sheikh said U.S. military installations could be attacked.

Abdel-Rahman argued on appeal that he was never involved in planning actual attacks against the U.S. and his hostile rhetoric was protected free speech. His conviction was upheld and the so-called “Blind Sheikh” died in prison in 2017 at 78.

In another case, Oscar Lopez Rivera — a former leader of a Puerto Rican independence group that orchestrated a bombing campaign that left dozens of people dead or maimed in the 1970s and 1980s — spent 35 years in prison for seditious conspiracy before President Barack Obama commuted his sentence in 2017.

In 2012, U.S. District Judge Victoria A. Roberts in Detroit dismissed seditious conspiracy charges brought against a militia group’s members who spoke of engaging local, state and federal law enforcement in combat.

While considering bail in the case, the judge said “their right to engage in hate filled, venomous speech, is a right that deserves First Amendment protection.” She also wrote that the group’s rhetoric spoke of “reclaiming America, not overthrowing the United States Government.”

Before the Capitol attack, federal prosecutors talked about using the seditious conspiracy statute in cases involving protests against police brutality, though none were brought.

In a Sept. 17 memorandum, Jeffrey A. Rosen, now the acting U.S. Attorney General, urged prosecutors nationwide to consider filing seditious conspiracy charges against what he called “violent rioters” during racial injustice demonstrations sparked by the police killing of George Floyd.

Rosen wrote that the law didn’t require proof of a plot to overthrow the U.S. government.

Lawyers interviewed by The Associated Press agreed that it would be stretch to try to put President Donald Trump or lawyer Rudolph Giuliani on trial for sedition for what some have criticized as incendiary rhetoric at the rally preceding the mob attack on the Capitol.

McCarthy labeled Trump’s actions that day reprehensible, but said “you would never be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he intended force to be used.”

Carl Tobias, a University of Richmond law professor, said prosecuting Trump for urging people to march to the Capitol and not be “weak” or other statements would be a problem.

“I think people who work in the area of criminal procedure would say it has a checkered history,” Tobias said of seditious conspiracy law, which has drawn criticism for targeting those with unpopular views and chilling free speech.

“People who are absolutists about the First Amendment would be troubled by it and civil libertarians on either end of the spectrum,” he said.

New York civil rights lawyer Ron Kuby, who represented Abdel-Rahman for a time, predicted that with or without a sedition charge, the people who committed the most serious offences at the Capitol will pay “a substantial price, certainly a price none of them ever expected.”

“Those who started a riot have no idea just how oppressive the government can actually be and they are about to find out,” Kuby said.

Larry Neumeister, The Associated Press