Monday, January 11, 2021

"Enabling President's Unhinged, Unstable, and Deranged Acts": GOP Blocks Measure Urging Pence to Invoke 25th Amendment

"Their complicity endangers America, erodes our democracy, and it must end."

Published on Monday, January 11, 2021 by Common Dreams

Rep. Alex Mooney (R-W.Va.) and members of the House Freedom Caucus conduct a news conference outside the Capitol on Thursday, December 3, 2020. (Photo: Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

A Republican congressman from West Virginia on Monday blocked a resolution calling on Vice President Mike Pence to invoke the 25th Amendment and remove President Donald Trump from office, a move that came as Democratic lawmakers unveiled articles of impeachment against the president that are expected to receive a vote later this week.

In a brief session Monday morning, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) requested unanimous consent to pass a measure (pdf) urging Pence to "convene and mobilize the principal officers of the executive departments of the Cabinet to activate section 4 of the 25th Amendment to declare [Trump] incapable of executing the duties of his office."

Rep. Alex Mooney (R-W.Va.)—one of more than 100 House Republicans who voted last week to toss Arizona and Pennsylvania's electoral votes—objected to the request.

In response to Mooney's objection, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said in a statement that House Republicans are "enabling the president's unhinged, unstable, and deranged acts of sedition to continue."

"Their complicity endangers America, erodes our democracy, and it must end," Pelosi added.

.@LeaderHoyer asks for Unanimous Consent on H.R. 21 calling on @VP Pence to convene and mobilize the cabinet to invoke Section 4 of the 25th amendment. @RepAlexMooney objects. pic.twitter.com/IoEoOfuUxj
— CSPAN (@cspan) January 11, 2021

Having failed to pass the measure by unanimous consent, House Democrats are expected to bring the 25th Amendment resolution to the floor for a full vote on Tuesday, followed by a vote on articles of impeachment as soon as Wednesday.

As Politico reported Monday, at least 218 House Democrats have signed on to Rep. David Cicilline's (D-R.I.) impeachment article, which charges Trump with "inciting violence against the government of the United States."

"Tomorrow, the House will vote on [the 25th Amendment] resolution in person and we expect it to pass," Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) tweeted Monday. "Then on Wednesday, we expect to vote on impeachment articles, which we also expect to pass. There can be no healing without accountability."

While Pelosi has committed to holding a vote to impeach Trump if Pence refuses to act, critics have chastised Democratic leaders for not moving more swiftly and forcefully in the wake of the deadly mob attack on the U.S. Capitol last week.

Murshed Zaheed, managing principal at progressive media firm Megaphone Strategies, argued that the unanimous consent request for the 25th Amendment measure was "an idiotic move that was going to fail with no upside" and called Democratic leaders "lollygaggers."

"Pelosi just wasted another day when she should have moved on this front immediately following the insurrection," said Zaheed, who is hardly the only progressive criticizing the speed with which House Democrats have moved on articles of impeachment.

There is no time to wait. Donald Trump must be impeached immediately. My statement on behalf of @MoveOn: pic.twitter.com/TmNnT2FC2Q
— Rahna Epting (@rahnamepting) January 11, 2021

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said Monday that pressuring Pence and members of the Cabinet to take action against Trump is a lost cause and called on members of Congress to act as quickly as possible to impeach and remove the president.

"Pence isn't going to do the right thing, so we must," said Jayapal. "We need to impeach Donald Trump right now.

7,000+ Lawyers, Law Students Demand Hawley and Cruz Resign for Inciting 'Violence and Terror'

"Hawley and Cruz directly incited the January 6th insurrection, repeating dangerous and unsubstantiated statements regarding the election and abetting the lawless behavior of President Trump."

by Brett Wilkins, staff writer

Published on Monday, January 11, 2021
by Common Dreams

Republican Sens. Ted Cruz (Texas; center, fist-bumping) and Josh Hawley (Mo., directly behind Cruz) are facing growing calls for their resignation for inciting last week's deadly mob attack on the U.S. Capitol. (Photo: Erin Schaff/AFP via Getty Images)

A petition circulating among lawyers and law students calling for the disbarment of Republican Sens. Josh Hawley and Ted Cruz for their roles in inciting last week's deadly attack on the U.S. Capitol has received more than 7,000 signatures as of Monday afternoon, including over 1,000 members of the Missouri and Texas bar associations.

"In leading the efforts to undermine the peaceful transition of power after a free and fair election, Sens. Hawley [Mo.] and Cruz [Texas] attacked the foundations of our democracy," the petition reads. "Hawley and Cruz directly incited the January 6th insurrection, repeating dangerous and unsubstantiated statements regarding the election and abetting the lawless behavior of President [Donald] Trump."

"In leading the efforts to undermine the peaceful transition of power after a free and fair election, Sens. Hawley and Cruz attacked the foundations of our democracy."
—Lawyers' and law students' petition

"A violent mob attacked the U.S. Capitol," the petition continues. "Five people have died. The nation and the world watched as rioters took over the very halls and chambers that embody our democracy."

"Yet after the violence and terror of the day's events, Sens. Hawley and Cruz still chose to stand in the chamber of the U.S. Senate and persist in their baseless objections to the will of the people," it adds.

The Washington Post reports prominent signatories of the petition include former U.S. Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) and constitutional scholar Lawrence Tribe, a professor at Harvard Law School, Cruz's alma mater.

In less than 72 hours, thousands of lawyers and law students have called for the disbarment of Sens. Hawley and Cruz.

Lawyers—even U.S. Senators—must defend our democracy, not sabotage it. Join the movement, sign the petition, and share widely.https://t.co/mYcXJ2VWhh

— Daniel Ki (@danielrki) January 10, 2021

The petition was started by seven students at Yale Law School, where Hawley earned his juris doctorate. One of the students, Daniel Ki, told the Post that "we thought it was important to speak up."

"We decided to ask other law students and members of the bar to join in the call to begin immediate disbarment proceedings against Sens. Hawley and Cruz and have been inspired and heartened by the overwhelming response," said Ki.

The petition follows calls by Democratic Sens. Sherrod Brown (Ohio), Chris Coons (Del.), Patty Murray (Wash.), and Ron Wyden (Ore.) for Hawley and Cruz to step down. Murray on Friday accused the pair of having "broken their oath of office."

Even Republicans have strongly condemned the senators, with Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) on Sunday calling them "complicit in the big lie" that the 2020 presidential election was "stolen" or plagued with "widespread fraud." Toomey, however, stopped short of calling on the senators to resign.

Across the nation, people still reeling from what they saw unfold last week on live television joined in the chorus of condemnation of the senators and demanded their immediate resignation. Several hundred protesters braved subfreezing temperatures and the Covid-19 pandemic to take to the streets of downtown St. Louis on Saturday, chanting, "No Hawley. No KKK. No fascist USA" and painting "RESIGN HAWLEY" in the street in front of the historic Old Courthouse.

Photos: Hundreds gather in St. Louis calling for Hawley to resign https://t.co/Emrur73K7I via @pd_shutterspeed pic.twitter.com/OlzIpkWNPv

— St. Louis Post-Dispatch (@stltoday) January 10, 2021

The petition comes as the House of Representatives on Monday moved closer to impeaching Trump for inciting insurrection after Republican lawmakers blocked a House resolution calling on Vice President Mike Pence to invoke the 25th Amendment to remove the president from office.

The vice president—who was apparently marked by some of the Capitol insurrectionists for possible execution due to his perceived disloyalty to Trump—has given no indication that he would consider such a constitutional remedy.

Yes It Was Attempted by Wingnuts, But It Was a Coup Attempt Just the Same

Over 140 Republican congressmen and 8 senators joined the attempt to overturn the election even after the mob tried to kill or kidnap them.

by Juan Cole

A protester sits in the Senate Chamber on January 06, 2021 in Washington, DC. Congress held a joint session today to ratify President-elect Joe Biden's 306-232 Electoral College win over President Donald Trump. Pro-Trump protesters have entered the U.S. Capitol building after mass demonstrations in the nation's capital. (Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)

Wednesday 1/6 was clearly an attempted coup on Trump’s part. There is some controversy about this, depending on how analysts define a “coup.” It was of course not a successful coup d’état inasmuch as it failed to overturn the government or even to permanently install an elected president as an emperor for life. But that it was an attempted coup seems to me clear.

Trump had a three prong strategy to overturn the election of Biden. Part 1 was a propaganda campaign maintaining that he had won the election and it was stolen from him by irregularities in the swing states of Arizona, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Georgia. In all those states, minorities, coded by Trump and Trumpies as not real Americans, provided the margin of victory to Biden. The claim of electoral fraud was therefore in part a racist dog whistle.

It is a terrifying success, that Trump could hypnotize a population the size of the fifth continent into fervently believing a rank falsehood without a shred of truth to it.

Trump spread around his propaganda that Biden actually lost with his vast and effective communications machine. He reached his 70 million myrmidons on Twitter directly and frequently. He gave televised speeches carried on mass media like CNN in which he said he had won by a landslide. CNN tried to contextualize the lie, but video of a president speaking is more powerful than the tut-tutting of television reporters. The fascist media put in his service by the billionaires whose taxes he cut– Breitbart, Newsmax, Fox News, OAN all cast doubt on Biden’s legitimacy. Much of the Republican Party state and national leadership adopted Trump’s Big Lie, including House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy and over 140 members of Congress. Even non-crazy Republicans adopted the mantra of irregularities, as in Pennsylvania, questioning the ruling of that state’s Supreme Court. You can argue the court made a bad ruling. You can’t argue that its ruling is not the law of the land.

The propaganda campaign was so successful that half of Republicans believe the big lie, some 23 million people, nearly the population of all of Australia.

It is a terrifying success, that Trump could hypnotize a population the size of the fifth continent into fervently believing a rank falsehood without a shred of truth to it.

Part II of the coup was to threaten, browbeat, and menace Republican officials in the four swing states into refusing to certify the Biden win. Monica Palmer and William Hartman, the two Republican canvassers for Wayne County in Michigan, initially refused to certify the results, in accordance with Trump’s wish, threatening to hold up the declaration of Biden’s win there. Only a massive public outcry made them back down. Trump then called Republicans from the Michigan state legislature to the White House for consultations, urging them to refuse to certify Biden. Trump repeatedly called the Georgia secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger, and other officials in that state, using organized-crime code words to intimate that something bad would happen to them if they didn’t “find” the 11,000-some votes he needed to beat Biden. Raffensperger, to protect himself from any Trump retaliation, made and released a tape of the threatening conversation.

When the Republican state officials and legislators defied Trump and certified Biden’s election, Trump turned his attention to Congress. He worked the phones like a maniac, cajoling and threatening. He menaced any senators or congressmen who refused to vote against certifying the state tallies in the four swing states with being primaried. He told Kelly Loeffler, a Republican candidate for the senate in Georgia, that he would “do a number on her” if she didn’t reject Biden’s win in her state.

Trump’s scenario appears to have been this: Enough Republicans in the House and the Senate would reject the results in the four swing states to raise serious questions about a Biden win. Then Mike Pence, the president of the senate, would use this substantial dissent about the results to cast doubt on the results. Trump crony Michael Flynn suggested that Trump at that point use the military to “rerun the election,” according to the NYT. It became clear to Trump, however, that Pence would not play ball, and that he could only count on twelve Republican senators to try to overturn Biden’s election. He needed some way of applying even more pressure or of sowing enough turmoil to create an opening for some sort of decisive action on his part.

Part 3 of the coup attempt was to put pressure on Congress to challenge the Biden win through a massive rally of the far Right before the Capitol on January 6. Trump called for the rally, and came to address it in the late morning. Although he urged them to be peaceful, he did say “We fight like hell, and if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.”

Trump had done a dry run for this mob action in Michigan. When, last spring, Gov. Gretchen Whitmer imposed an economic lockdown to combat the rapid spread of the coronavirus, Trump tweeted out “LIBERATE MICHIGAN.” In response, an assemblage of white supremacists, conspiracy theorists, gun nuts and restaurateurs (!?) showed up at the state capitol in Lansing. Guess what? They invaded the statehouse and the lawmakers had to suspend their work that day. Trump’s attacks on Whitmer also had the effect of encouraging a far right domestic terror cell to make a plan to kidnap and possibly kill her.

With the Michigan example before him, it is impossible that Trump was unaware that his dog whistles to the far right, his demonization of leaders who defied him, could produce violence.

The mob of black shirts he assembled was intended to intimidate Pence and the legislators and to create chaos, of which he clearly thought he could take advantage. He used them to make clear to the Republican senators and representatives that the party faithful (the QAnon/ white supremacist mob) would not put up with anything else and that not only their careers but their very lives hung in the balance. Hence his glee when the Capitol was invaded.

Elements of the mob who invaded the Capitol were chanting “Hang Mike Pence,” and others wanted to get Nancy Pelosi. The politicians were in real danger, and it was only the efficiency of the Capitol police in whisking them away to safe rooms or the basement that saved their lives. Had Pence or Pelosi been kidnapped, wounded or killed, it would have halted the Biden certification process for some time, giving Trump the opportunity to find a way to remain in office. It is not that Trump himself urged or planned the breach of the Capitol or the infliction of harm on the legislators, it is that he was attempting to create an unnamed chaos, which he viewed as advantageous to his efforts to remain in office.

The unusual lightness of the police presence in DC compared to all the other demonstrations held in the past year raises questions about whether Trump’s security officials were attempting to make sure the mob was not interfered with. Gov. Larry Hogan said that it took 90 minutes for the Pentagon to give him permission to send in the Maryland National Guard once he asked. This was at a time when thugs were roaming the Capitol chanting “Hang Mike Pence.” An hour and a half response time seems a little slow under the circumstances.

It was a coup attempt of sorts. It reminds me of the much more successful 1953 CIA coup against Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh in Iran. CIA field officer Kermit Roosevelt bought mobs with millions of dollars in the capital to intimidate parliament and encourage anti-democratic forces to depose the prime minister.

Trump’s was a crackpot conspiracy-theory coup attempt, though. It was never plausible except in very fevered minds like those of Trump, Alex Jones and other exotic flora and fauna. But over 140 congressmen and 8 senators did join the attempt to overturn the election even after the mob tried to kill or kidnap them, which means it wasn’t as implausible as I wish it was. And the buy-in Trump has in the Republican Party for this coup attempt signals severe trouble ahead.

Juan Cole teaches Middle Eastern and South Asian history at the University of Michigan. His newest book, "Muhammad: Prophet of Peace Amid the Clash of Empires" was published in 2020. He is also the author of "The New Arabs: How the Millennial Generation Is Changing the Middle East " (2015) and "Napoleon's Egypt: Invading the Middle East" (2008). He has appeared widely on television, radio, and on op-ed pages as a commentator on Middle East affairs, and has a regular column at Salon.com. He has written, edited, or translated 14 books and has authored 60 journal articles.
© 2021 Juan Cole

As 'Dark Stain' of Guantánamo Begins 20th Year, Groups Demand Biden Close Offshore Prison

"Biden must reaffirm his commitment to closure and take the necessary action to accomplish it before we have to mark the 20th anniversary next year," says the Center for Constitutional Rights.

by Jessica Corbett, staff writer
Published on Monday, January 11, 2021
by Common Dreams

t

For several years, critics of the Guantánamo Bay detention camp have dressed in orange jumpsuits at demonstrations calling for its immediate closure. (Photo: Amnesty International)

Less than two weeks before President-elect Joe Biden is set to take office, human rights advocates marked the 19th anniversary of the opening of the U.S. military prison at the Guantánamo Bay Naval Station in Cuba with impassioned demands for the next U.S. leader to prioritize urgently closing what has long been called a "dark stain" on the nation.

For nearly two decades of the seemingly endless so-called War on Terror—under three presidents—the U.S. government has indefinitely detained scores of men at Gitmo without trial or access to due process. The torture and detention conditions of the prisoners have drawn fierce criticism from around the world. Forty men remain detained at the prison.

An Amnesty International petition declares that "the treatment and imprisonment in Guantánamo are glaring human rights violations that the Biden administration must end now."

The human rights group circulated the petition and a video on Twitter Monday:

Today marks 19 years since #Guantánamo opened, and 40 Muslim men remain there today. We’re calling on USA President-Elect Joe Biden to close it immediately https://t.co/SnjFi23Rwg pic.twitter.com/EUa2Di2OhJ

— Amnesty International (@amnesty) January 11, 2021

During his eight years in office, former President Barack Obama, for whom Biden served as vice president, ultimately failed to deliver on his campaign promise to close the detention camp, established in 2002 under former President George W. Bush.

As a candidate, President Donald Trump vowed to keep Gitmo open and "load it up with some bad dudes." In January 2018, he signed an executive order to revoke an Obama order calling for the prison's closure. As HuffPost reported at the time:

Trump's move is more of a political statement than a practical change... Obama's 2009 executive order to close the prison, which he warned was a recruiting ground for terrorist groups at the expense of taxpayers, faced strong opposition in Congress that prevented him from transferring detainees to the United States.

The Obama administration managed to transfer nearly 200 inmates from the facility.

Since Trump's order, "no new detainees have come in and one has been transferred out," Amnesty pointed out Monday. "Biden has an opportunity to roll back this harmful policy and close the detention center."

In a statement Monday, the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), also called on the incoming Biden administration to close detention center. The organization represents six men who are still imprisoned there: Sufyian Barhoumi, Sharqawi Al Hajj, Mohammed al Qahtani, Abdul Razak Ali, Guled Hassan Duran, and Majid Khan.

"Today marks the beginning of the 20th shameful year of Muslim men being unlawfully imprisoned at Guantánamo," said the CCR, which organized a virtual vigil on Monday. "Even in a national landscape of brutal and extreme incarceration, the detentions of the men at Guantánamo—all of whom face life imprisonment without charge or fair trial—are unprecedented and yet largely invisible by now."

At 1 pm, join us, @dcmuslimjustice, @WitnessTorture, and @amnestyusa for a virtual vigil to mark the 19th anniversary of the opening of the detention facility at Guantánamo Bay.

Details:https://t.co/RLgI8UQx24 pic.twitter.com/Vz1IB4rOPW

— The CCR (@theCCR) January 11, 2021

The group explained that for all Gitmo detainees, "including our six clients—one of whom has been cleared for release for years, another of whom the United States openly acknowledged it tortured, and yet another who cut his wrists out of desperation about his fate—Guantánamo is an active site of trauma and despair. Yet, despite all that our clients have endured, they dare to hope for a life beyond Guantánamo, and we must fight for that. As the country transitions to a new administration, it is more vital than ever that closing Guantánamo once again becomes a policy priority.

"President Biden can and must take immediate action on the prison: appoint senior officials to carry out the mandate of closure release the men the government has not charged by now, starting with the six men already cleared for transfer; abandon the military commissions system; and bring existing cases of men who have been charged to federal court," the CCR concluded. "Biden must reaffirm his commitment to closure and take the necessary action to accomplish it before we have to mark the 20th anniversary next year."

Oldest Play in the Book': Critics Warn New Domestic Terror Laws Aimed at Pro-Trump Mob Would Be Used Against Legitimate Protest

"History shows that legislation going after 'domestic terrorism' will primarily be used to target Black organizers, Muslim communities, immigrant communities."

Jake Johnson, staff writer

A Capitol Police officer stands with members of the National Guard behind a crowd-control fence surrounding Capitol Hill a day after a pro-Trump mob broke into the U.S. Capitol on January 7, 2021, in Washington, D.C. (Photo: Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty Images)

Hearing ominous echoes of the post-9/11 crackdown on civil liberties, progressives are warning of the serious dangers posed by the renewed push for fresh laws targeting "domestic terrorism" in the wake of the deadly assault on the U.S. Capitol last week by a mob of President Donald Trump's fanatical supporters.

While acknowledging the threat posed by right-wing extremists across the nation and affirming the need for forceful action in response to last week's attack, observers noted that existing federal laws are more than sufficient to hold the insurrectionists to account for invading the halls of Congress with possible intent to hold lawmakers hostage, attempting to topple the U.S. government, and potentially committing murder.

"There are already plenty of tools at the government's disposal to crack down on far-right insurrection," The Week's Ryan Cooper wrote in a column on Sunday.

"Whatever powers Biden creates today can be used by the enemies of democracy tomorrow. Our civil liberties are simply too fragile, and the risk is much too great."
—Sarah Jones, New York magazine

The problem, Cooper argued, is not a lack of laws but rather a deficiency of will from "police departments and security agencies [that] are composed largely of conservative Republicans, and not a few open fascists." Putting new laws in place would only hand law enforcement agencies additional weapons to wield against the left, Cooper wrote.

"If you just charge the existing agencies with breaking up domestic insurgent networks, at best they will shirk, delay, and drag their feet, and at worst they will completely ignore the fascists while turning any new tools against Black Lives Matter and other left-wing protesters," said Cooper. "Indeed, this is already happening—so far, the charges against the fascist mob have been trespassing or other minor crimes, rather than the felony riot charges the leftist J20 defendants faced for simply being near minor property destruction in downtown D.C. on the day of Trump's inauguration."

As the Wall Street Journal reported last Thursday, President-elect Joe Biden "has said he plans to make a priority of passing a law against domestic terrorism, and he has been urged to create a White House post overseeing the fight against ideologically inspired violent extremists and increasing funding to combat them."

Biden made a point of identifying members of the Trump mob as "domestic terrorists" in remarks following last week's attack, which he condemned as an "all-out assault on our institutions of democracy" led by the incumbent president.

Not long after the mob stormed Capitol Hill, some commentators began calling on Congress to begin work on a specific statute targeting "domestic terrorism"; as ProPublica explained last week, "while federal statutes provide a definition of domestic terrorism, there is not a specific law outlawing it."

The call drew swift pushback from Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), who tweeted Saturday that "as the vice chair of the Oversight subcommittee who ran investigations into domestic terror laws, I respectfully disagree."

"Our problems on Wednesday weren't that there weren't enough laws, resources, or intelligence," said the New York Democrat. "We had them, and they were not used. It's time to find out why."

Diala Shamas, a staff attorney with the Center for Constitutional Rights, echoed that point, telling The Intercept Sunday that "anyone familiar with the scope of surveillance and targeting of Black political dissents, or Muslim communities, knows that law enforcement has all the tools it needs to aggressively disrupt and hold accountable those who planned and participated in the storming of the Capitol."

"Why they didn't raises serious questions, but it was not because their hands were tied," said Shamas. "We don't need new terrorism designations."

Predictably, Biden falls for it. I'll say it again: history shows that legislation going after "domestic terrorism" will primarily be used to target Black organizers, Muslim communities, immigrant communities. It's the oldest play in the book. https://t.co/NEvW4AO6av pic.twitter.com/ZM1f2jv3cd
— Diala Shamas (@dialash) January 8, 2021

The notorious 2001 Patriot Act, passed in the wake of the 9/11 attacks with Biden's support, provides an expansive definition of "domestic terrorism" that—as the ACLU warned—was "broad enough to encompass the activities of several prominent activist campaigns and organizations," including "Greenpeace, Operation Rescue, Vieques Island, and [World Trade Organization] protesters and the Environmental Liberation Front."

The fears of civil liberties advocates were realized when, as predicted, law enforcement agencies proceeded to surveil and pursue animal rights advocates and environmentalists as well as Muslim Americans.

Warning Biden against enacting additional draconian measures in response to last week's mob attack, New York magazine's Sarah Jones wrote that the "state does not lack teeth" but "has too many at its disposal already." What's really missing in the way law enforcement and prosecutors handle protest—or violent uprisings—is lack of "discretion, and all sense of proportion" when they respond, Jones argued.

"Whatever powers Biden creates today can be used by the enemies of democracy tomorrow," warned Jones. "Our civil liberties are simply too fragile, and the risk is much too great."

The Bipartisan Neoliberal Regime Is No Alternative to Trumpism and the Far-Right

The first reason for this crisis is that the US political system is not a "democracy" at all, but rather an oligarchy run by the unchecked power of corporate bribery.

Jonathan Rich

Pro-Trump supporters storm the U.S. Capitol following a rally with President Donald Trump on January 6, 2021 in Washington, DC. Trump supporters gathered in the nation's capital today to protest the ratification of President-elect Joe Biden's Electoral College victory over President Trump in the 2020 election. (Photo by Samuel Corum/Getty Images)

On January 6th, as congressional representatives gathered in Washington to certify the Electoral College vote, a mob of thousands of far-right protestors descended upon the US Capitol in a desperate campaign to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. The Trump loyalists stormed the Capitol building as panicked congressional representatives fled, wreaking havoc and chaos for several hours until they were dispersed by the National Guard. In the aftermath, five people were dead and countless more injured.

The rally appears to have been made-up of a coterie of some of the most reactionary elements of Trump's far-right social base, including groups such as QAnon, Proud Boys, neo-Confederates, and even some disaffected members of the working-class. The participants at the riot were united in their contention that the November 2020 election was "stolen" from Trump due to massive voter fraud.

However, the aftermath has not been very favorable to Trump or his reactionary supporters.

The attempt to stop the certification of the Electoral College vote failed miserably, with Congress reconvening on January 7th to officially confirm Joe Biden's victory. As a result, Trump was forced to acknowledge, for the first time, that he would transfer power to the Biden administration.

The storming of the US Capitol elicited widespread condemnation across the political spectrum. A Reuters poll found that 79% of all respondents—including two thirds of Trump voters—described the rioters as "criminal." Several high-ranking Trump administration officials, such as Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, resigned in protest over his actions.

The reaction from Democrats was even more severe. Congressional Democrats discussed various procedures to remove Trump from office, describing him as an "imminent threat." Several House Democrats moved to invoke the 25th Amendment to replace Trump with Vice President Pence, while House Speaker Nancy Pelosi moved towards impeachment.

The corporate sector weighed in as well, with the National Association of Manufacturers—a business lobby representing several powerful companies such as ExxonMobil, General Motors, and Raytheon—accusing Trump of "sedition" and demanding his resignation.

The rioters also faced a swift backlash. Major media outlets soon began posting photographs of the participants, calling on readers to find information that could lead to their identification and arrest. Several leading politicians—including Joe Biden—described them as "white supremacist domestic terrorists" and began advocating for an expansion of new anti-terrorism measures.

The backlash reached a crescendo when Twitter took the unprecedented move of permanently banning Trump from their social media platform. This was based on concerns over Trump's use of the platform to "incite violence."

Indeed, the specter of far-right political violence, instability, and authoritarianism weighed heavily on the public's conscience.

This led several political figures to use war metaphors to describe the storming of the Capitol. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer likened the events to Pearl Harbor, while Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez described it as an "attack on our country." Several commentators referred to the riot as an "insurrection," an act of "sedition," and a "coup attempt."

The threat of far-right political violence is real and steps must be taken to combat it. However, framing the unrest at the Capitol as a coup runs the risk of both misdiagnosing the problem and pointing us towards misguided solutions that will only make the problem worse.

The latest polls show that the majority of the country places blame squarely on the shoulders of Donald Trump for the riot at the Capitol. And while Trump deserves to be held responsible, isolating the blame exclusively on him misses the much larger picture of what's happening.

Trump is not the root cause of the problem. He is a symptom of a much larger crisis of legitimacy that US political system is experiencing after four decades of neoliberal policies of austerity, deregulation, and privatization that have hollowed out our state institutions. This bipartisan neoliberal consensus was carried out through the policies of Reagan, Clinton, Bush, and Obama and has generated a growing "anti-establishment" mood among the public, leading to a lack of confidence in the legitimacy of major institutions.

As a classic demagogue, Trump plays to the very real grievances felt among the voters and channels their grievances towards false scapegoats. In response, Democrats attack Trump's demagoguery while leaving the underlying grievances unaddressed.

The battle over the 2020 presidential election results must be understood in this context.

The left has portrayed Trump's attempt to undermine the election as an aberration from the norms of American democracy. His claims of mail-in voter fraud have been widely debunked as false. Taken in isolation, Trump's actions seem to be a deranged conspiracy designed to undermine the will of the people. However, Trump's actions did not occur in a vacuum. Rather, they are a symptom of a deeper crisis in electoral politics that has been growing for several years.

The first reason for this crisis is that the US political system is not a "democracy" at all, but rather an oligarchy run by the unchecked power of corporate bribery. A 2014 Princeton study, for example, found that ordinary working people have virtually no say in government decisions.

A second reason for the political crisis is the Electoral College, which violates the basic democratic principle of "one person, one vote," and is deeply unpopular. In the past 20 years alone, the Electoral College resulted in two presidential candidates being elected despite losing the popular vote.

Trump's attempts to overturn the election, then, cannot be divorced from the broader crisis of the US political system and the Democratic establishment's subtle (but more successful!) efforts at undermining democracy.

But perhaps the most salient reason for the crisis is the electoral fraud committed by the Democratic Party establishment in recent primary campaigns.

In 2016, the Clinton campaign relied on "Super Delegates" and other undemocratic maneuvers to rig the election against her opponent: Bernie Sanders. Then, the Democrats further undermined the general election by peddling the conspiracy that Trump was "installed" into power by Russia. The dirty tricks continued in the 2020 primaries, where the establishment candidates orchestrated a coup on Super Tuesday to secure the nomination for Biden. This was followed by the removal of Green Party candidates from the ballots in several key states.

Democrats can remove Trump from office. Big Tech can ban him from their platforms. And Trump's supporters can be arrested on domestic terrorism charges. But these actions only address the symptoms and leave the underlying disease unchecked.

As long as the bipartisan neoliberal consensus remains in place, far-right political violence and instability will continue to fester.

Jonathan Rich is a PhD student in Sociology at University of California, Riverside. He teaches at Grossmont Community College in San Diego, and he is a member of the American Federation of Teachers local 1931.

Trump's Top Ten Billionaire Enablers

Trump didn’t get here on his own. Many have enabled him, especially the billionaires who funneled money his way and then stood by as he damaged our democracy.

Chuck Collins, Omar Ocampo

Blackstone CEO Steve Schwarzman. (Photo: Jim Watson/AFP/Getty Images)

We've heard plenty about the GOP members of Congress and Trump political appointees who have “enabled” Donald Trump over these four years, failing to act to stem his excesses.

But what about the billionaire donors to Trump’s campaign and his victory PACs? Especially those who gave substantial donations in 2019 and 2020, when it was clear that Trump was causing a crisis in our democracy?

Unlike those who gave to the 2016 campaign but distanced themselves from Trump after seeing him in action, will there be any accountability for these most recent billionaire enablers of Donald Trump who saw what damage he caused–but still stood by him?

These are the billionaires who already received their whopping individual and corporate tax cuts in 2017. Yet, empowered with their money, continued to contribute to Trump for four more years.

Watch for our forthcoming IPS report and reporting on “Trump’s Billionaire Enablers.” But here are a few initial findings:

The Institute for Policy Studies identified 63 U.S. billionaires who gave a combined $33 million to the Trump Victory Fund in the last two years. Trump Victory was a joint fundraising account for the Trump 2020 campaign and the Republican National Committee.

Chuck Collins is a senior scholar at the Institute for Policy Studies where he co-edits Inequality.org, and is author of the new book, "Born on Third Base: A One Percenter Makes the Case for Tackling Inequality, Bringing Wealth Home, and Committing to the Common Good." He is co-founder of Wealth for the Common Good, recently merged with the Patriotic Millionaires. He is co-author of "99 to 1: The Moral Measure of the Economy" and, with Bill Gates Sr., of "Wealth and Our Commonwealth: Why America Should Tax Accumulated Fortunes."

Omar Ocampo is a researcher for the Program on Inequality and the Common Good. He graduated from the University ofMassachusetts Boston with a B.A. in Political Science and holds a Masters in International Relations from the American University in Cairo. His thesis focused on the politics of international oil and humanitarian intervention in Libya.

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment

Monday, January 11, 2021

Oldest Play in the Book': Critics Warn New Domestic Terror Laws Aimed at Pro-Trump Mob Would Be Used Against Legitimate Protest

Trump's Top Ten Billionaire Enablers

About Me