The Washington Post - USA (2022-06-12)

SUNDAY, JUNE 12 , 2022. THE WASHINGTON POST EZ RE A21

T

he U.S. presidential election of

1800 was and remains the most

important election in world his-

tory — the first in which an

incumbent party peacefully transferred

power to the party that had defeated it.

Perhaps the second-most important elec-

tion, it is mortifying to acknowledge, was

that of 2020. Twenty-two decades after

this nation gave the world a glimpse of

glittering political possibilities, this na-

tion saw how perishable democratic

manners are, even where they first

p revailed.

The congressional committee investi-

gating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the

Capitol, and the planning of it, can pre-

sent facts crucial to Congress’s perform-

ing this legitimate function: supplying

the public with information indispen-

sable to understanding itself. The infor-

mation’s importance can be, but need not

be, related to some legislative purpose.

Telling an important story can be suffi-

cient. Assembling the narrative of Presi-

dent John F. Kennedy’s assassination,

thereby dispelling conspiracy theories

corrosive of social trust, was a sufficient

justification for the 1963-1964 Warren

Commission.

The Jan. 6 committee will forfeit the

public’s limited trust in it — and the

public’s limited interest in it — if mem-

bers pursue preexisting progressive agen-

das, such as abolition of the electoral

college or other changes to election law.

Furthermore, Congress has neither a con-

stitutional power nor an institutional

aptitude for building a criminal case

against Donald Trump. If the committee

attempts this, it will sink into the quick-

sand of fascinating but legally problemat-

ic definitions of “conspiracy,” and of

speech that becomes illegal by “inciting”

illegality.

Pre-television, perhaps the most flam-

boyant congressional hearings were

those of the Senate Munitions Committee

under Sen. Gerald P. Nye of North Dakota,

the progressive Republican and fervid

isolationist chosen by the Senate’s Demo-

cratic majority to investigate suspicions

that munitions makers — stigmatized as

“merchants of death” — were to blame for

U.S. entry into World War I. After 93 hear-

ings, which began in 1934, the committee

was abruptly defunded in 1936 because

Nye suggested that President Woodrow

Wilson had withheld pertinent informa-

tion as Congress considered declaring

war. The Senate’s official webpage says

Democratic leaders assailed Nye, with

Sen. Carter Glass of Virginia decrying

him for “dirt-daubing the sepulcher of

Woodrow Wilson.” The webpage contin-

ues: “Standing before cheering col-

leagues in a packed Senate Chamber,

Glass slammed his fist onto his desk until

blood dripped from his knuckles.”

Then came television, and congres-

sional hearings as spectacles, some use-

ful, some inadvertently so. From 1950 to

1951, television turned Sen. Estes Kefau-

ver’s Special Committee on Organized

Crime in Interstate Commerce into na-

tional entertainment and turned the Ten-

nessee Democrat into a presidential aspi-

rant. (He would be the Democrats’ 1956

vice-presidential nominee.) Again, the

Senate webpage: “Schools dismissed stu-

dents to watch the hearings. Blood banks

ran low on donations, prompting one...

to install a television and tune in to the

hearings, and donations shot up 100 per-

cent.” When Kefauver’s committee was

due to expire in February 1951, protests

from an addicted public got it extended

until September. Two years later, Repub-

lican Sen. Joseph McCarthy of Wisconsin,

chairing the televised 1953-1954 investi-

gation of supposed communist influence

in the Army, committed political suicide

by being repulsive in front of a national

audience that had hitherto only read

about him.

Select committees have riveted the

nation by informing it about the Water-

gate (1973) and Iran-contra (1987) scan-

dals. But in those bygone days, before

political tribalism suffocated many

Americans’ capacity for independent

judgment, there was broad agreement

that something deplorable had occurred

in each case. And the hearings broadened

agreement about that.

Today, Republicans have almost entire-

ly shunned the Jan. 6 committee, and the

Republican National Committee has de-

scribed as “legitimate political discourse”

the mob action that included smearing

interior surfaces of the Capitol with feces.

Furthermore, the comportment of sena-

tors of both parties during televised con-

firmation hearings for Supreme Court

nominees indicates that many people

now in Congress are incapable of disin-

terested inquiries. Americans, numbed

by the dregs of U.S. society behaving

badly in high political offices, will not pay

protracted attention to the committee.

Still, the committee can usefully pro-

vide testimony about how on that day the

president — surrounded by lickspittle

mediocrities and allied with many such

in both houses of Congress — reaped

what he and they had sown: chaos. But

the committee’s first, most important and

sufficient task is to show what happened.

Video cameras are ubiquitous: Even

the rioters carried smartphones as well as

stupid banners. Today, most people ab-

sorb most of what they learn about public

matters from pictures. By disseminating

the graphic record of Jan. 6, the commit-

tee can serve the nation by deepening its

embarrassment, which is a necessary first

step toward the recovery of its dignity.

GEORGE F. WILL

Show us, don’t

tell us, what

happened

T

he Jan. 6 committee’s riveting

televised opening night

might not have converted the

pro-Trump revisionists, but it

has left them without excuses. The

evidence is overwhelming that a sit-

ting president gathered a violent mob

and charged it with intimidating

members of Congress and his own

vice president into illegally reversing

the outcome of a presidential election

on the basis of an obvious lie.

There is only one narrative about

Jan. 6 that history will accept: the

evidence meticulously gathered and

presented by the House select

c ommittee.

In some ways, pressing the case

against former president Donald

Trump is not hard, because he con-

firms its general outlines. He still

seems to regard the riot as the highest

expression of MAGA loyalty to his

person. He still insists he should be

reinstated as president. He still seems

to believe then-Vice President Mike

Pence was a weak-kneed traitor for

refusing to overturn the constitution-

al order. Because Trump can’t admit

error, he often effectively admits guilt.

The response of congressional Re-

publican leaders to Thursday’s hear-

ing — that it is more important to

focus on inflation than sedition — has

demonstrated their vast political and

moral shallowness. The juxtaposition

of testimony by U.S. Capitol Police

officer Caroline Edwards (“I was slip-

ping in people’s blood”) and a tweet

from Republicans on the House Judi-

ciary Committee account (“All. Old.

News.”) was telling.

One imagines a 20-something GOP

staffer straining (and failing) to be

clever. The contrast between the po-

lice officer’s sacrifice and the tweet-

er’s infantile partisanship raises some

questions: Is anyone teaching young

Republicans that public service can

be honorable and costly? Why doesn’t

some mature public official shake

these shills and urge silence in the

presence of patriotic virtues they

don’t possess?

Another comparison was obvious

throughout the committee hearing:

Trump and Pence. In his rambling,

over an hour-long remarks to the

“Stop the Steal” crowd, Trump pres-

sured Pence to reverse the election’s

outcome more than 10 times — then

continued doing the same on Twitter.

As the committee revealed, one of

those tweets was relayed, via bull-

horn, to the rioters, who took up the

chant “Hang Mike Pence.” According

to the committee’s vice chair, Rep. Liz

Cheney (R-Wyo.), Trump was pleased

by their stated intention. (The former

president denied having said that.)

For several hours on that fateful

day, Trump ceased to be the American

president. He was an insurrectionary

leader watching his work unfold in

coordinated violence. He refused to

take the advice of some of his closest

advisers, who urged him to recall his

forces from their assault on the Capi-

tol. The chairman of the Joint Chiefs

of Staff, Gen. Mark A. Milley, noted

Trump’s absence in the chain of com-

mand. At a key moment, Trump was

interested only in serving his wildly

implausible mission of retaining

power, not protecting the legislators,

staff and police officers at the Capitol.

In contrast, Pence attempted to take

charge and fill the gap of leadership.

It is hard to heap praise on Pence.

He was the loyal lieutenant to the

worst president in history. But

b eneath a quivering mass of compro-

mise, there was a core of principle,

particularly in defending the

C onstitution. The same might be said

of the otherwise egregious Attorney

General William P. Barr, who dis-

missed the claim of widespread

e lection fraud to Trump as so

much barnyard excrement. Or White

House Counsel Pat Cipollone, who

repeatedly threatened resignation

over the worst Trump excesses.

What are we to make of such highly

flawed men, driven at last to unex-

pected integrity? However we view

them, the problem with a second

Trump administration would be their

absence. Over time, Trump grew bet-

ter at purging officials who showed

signs of independence and character.

In a second term, officials would be

screened for total loyalty — to Trump

rather than the republic.

The final contrast highlighted in

the first hearing was between Cheney

and the absent House Minority Lead-

er Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.). McCar-

thy, you might remember, initially

held Trump responsible for the attack

on the Capitol and told colleagues he

would raise the prospect of resigna-

tion with the president. This was

followed by an abject and humiliating

apology visit with Trump, McCarthy’s

opposition to the Jan. 6 committee

and his refusal to comply with a

committee subpoena.

One darkly humorous moment in

the evening’s video presentation

came in the clip of McCarthy’s leader-

ship office staffers fleeing in fear as

the insurrection unfolded. It was the

symbolic representation of a leader

who stands for fear. Fear of provoking

Trump’s ever-shifting anger. Fear of

offending the MAGA lunatics in his

own caucus. Fear of showing the

slightest hint of independent

thought, which might cost him a

chance at the House speaker’s crown.

Whatever his political future, McCar-

thy will be remembered as his genera-

tion’s most pathetic, unprincipled

and contemptible political figure.

Compare him with Cheney during

the hearing. She was calm, methodi-

cal, factual and morally grounded —

fully aware of the political risks that

may come on the road of duty, and

courageously prepared to accept

them. She is our indomitable, irre-

placeable, unsinkable Liz.

MICHAEL GERSON

History will accept only one

Jan. 6 narrative — the panel’s

JONATHAN ERNST/REUTERS

Chairman Bennie G. Thompson and Vice Chairwoman Liz Cheney at the Jan. 6 committee hearing Thursday.

quently compared with the Senate

Watergate committee, but there are

stark differences. The Watergate com-

mittee, made up of four Democrats and

three Republicans, included some mem-

bers who were either allies of President

Richard Nixon’s or were at least relative-

ly neutral. Few believed at the start of the

hearings that their work would lead to

the president’s being seriously wound-

ed, let alone forced from office.

By contrast, these hearings seem

overtly partisan. Some pundits praised

the strategy of having Rep. Liz Cheney

(R-Wyo.) play a leading role in Thurs-

day’s hearing. She and Rep. Adam

K inzinger (R-Ill.) give the Democrat-

dominated committee a “bipartisan”

sheen, they claim. But most Republicans

likely view Cheney and Kinzinger as

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s hand-

picked GOP substitutes for the Republi-

cans originally proposed by House GOP

leader Kevin McCarthy (Calif.).

Pelosi (D-Calif.), citing the “integrity

of the investigation,” took the highly

unusual step of refusing to include two

of McCarthy’s picks, Trump allies

Reps. Jim Jordan (Ohio) and Jim Banks

(Ind.). In response, McCarthy, not sur-

prisingly, pulled his other three recom-

mendations, leading Pelosi to seat

Cheney and Kinzinger, two Republicans

who were high-profile Trump critics

willing to buck their party leadership.

Kinzinger is not seeking reelection, and

Cheney is deep underwater in Wyoming

primary polling. Most Republicans will

be unimpressed by their participation.

The Watergate hearings seemed built

to dig into the facts without a presump-

tion of guilt, while the Jan. 6 committee

appeared from the outset to be a pros-

ecution team building a case against

Trump and his supporters to score politi-

cal points with voters. As a recent New

B

y Jan. 6, 2021, Donald Trump’s

assault on American democracy

had been building for weeks

through the then-president’s re-

fusal to accept defeat after the 2020

election. It culminated on that fateful

day, with Trump exhorting thousands of

supporters gathered in Washington to

“show strength,” “fight much harder”

and “take back our country,” and then

pointing them to the U.S. Capitol, where

hundreds breached the building to dis-

rupt a constitutional counting of elector-

al votes certifying Joe Biden as

p resident-elect.

Anyone witnessing those events but

somehow dismissing them as unimport-

ant or exaggerated is likely immune to

being moved by anything offered in

Thursday’s prime-time televised hearing

held by the House select committee

investigating the Jan. 6 attack. The pre-

sentation was almost entirely composed

of previously reported events — al-

though told in compelling fashion, espe-

cially as the committee detailed the

violence, mayhem and terror of the Capi-

tol incursion.

There was much focus on the actions

of the militant Proud Boys and Oath

Keepers. If the committee’s purpose was

to convict those groups of planning and

carrying out the Capitol incursion, they

may have succeeded. If the goal was to

prove that they were acting at Trump’s

direction — even if they convinced them-

selves that they were through inferences

and assumptions based on Trump’s ran-

dom tweets — the committee failed. The

sometimes convoluted efforts by

Rep. Bennie G. Thompson (D-Miss.), the

committee’s chairman, to connect the

dots, and video editing that synced

Trump’s comments with various insur-

rectionist acts, were ineffective.

The Jan. 6 committee has been fre-

York Times headline put it, “Jan. 6 Hear-

ings Give Democrats a Chance to Recast

Midterm Message.”

Is the intended audience of these

hearings even paying attention? For one

thing, Fox News didn’t carry Thursday

night’s hearing. And unlike the Water-

gate hearings of the pre-internet,

p re-cable-news age, the Jan. 6 commit-

tee hearings are not only competing with

multiple avenues of information but also

with other significant matters that many

Americans consider urgent, including

runaway inflation and gas prices, the

pandemic, fallout from a pending high

court decision on Roe v. Wade , the war in

Ukraine, the baby formula shortage, and

recent mass shootings that are again

focusing attention on gun laws.

All of those issues are pressing, but

few more so than a blatant attack on

democracy itself. So how did subverting

democracy get lost in the shuffle? Much

of the blame lies with news platforms

that, in the competition for viewers and

clicks, have in recent years presented

everything big and small as “breaking

news.” Chris Licht, the new CNN chair-

man, has promised to change that cul-

ture, a decision that will hopefully begin

a snowball effect across the board. May-

be someday, if democracy is again under

attack, such a horrific event will seem

more urgent than a verdict in the Johnny

Depp-Amber Heard trial.

But helping Americans better discern

the crucial from the trivial is a goal for

the future. There are more hearings to

come, but for now, those who hoped that

Thursday’s prime-time production

would elevate the events of Jan. 6 in the

eyes of more Americans as a calamity on

par with Watergate or 9/11 — and a

major step toward leaving Trump on the

ash heap of history — will probably be

greatly disappointed.

GARY ABERNATHY

Trump may be bruised, but he’s still standing

B

ack in the wispy-willowed past,

before the tea party and its many

offspring, Republican Party loyal-

ists were mainly focused on hunt-

ing down what they called RINOs, or

Republicans in Name Only. That is, elect-

ed officials who didn’t regurgitate every

GOP talking point or bend to the litmus

gods of True Conservatism — defined,

more or less, as what angry White men

want.

Fast-forward through the Obama years

— a relatively breezy rest stop on Ameri-

ca’s hell-fired highway to Trump Town —

and truth became the new RINO. Under

Donald Trump, who never met a lie he

wouldn’t, you know, grab, truth was the

enemy and truth tellers were apostates.

But truth is nothing if not relentless, and it

dogged Trump all the way to his failed

2020 reelection, whereupon he invented

the “big lie.” ( Hey, little lies are for

chumps!)

He didn’t lose to Joe Biden, Trump told

himself. The election was stolen! It was

voter fraud!

Those who didn’t subscribe to the “big

lie” weren’t to be banished — that would

have been too gentle a punishment. Trai-

tors such as his own vice president, Mike

Pence, should be hanged — and Trump

said so, according to testimony Thursday

from the committee investigating the

Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection. Pence’s offense

was refusing to violate the Constitution

and overturn Biden’s election victory.

“Mike Pence deserves it,” Trump report-

edly said when he saw rioters on TV chant-

ing “Hang Mike Pence.” (The former presi-

dent denied having said that.) This isn’t

quite the same as ordering his death, of

course, but it’s further evidence that the

unhinged commander in chief by then had

lost any sense of reality. Several people in

the Oval Office at the time begged Trump

to stop the assault. Others repeatedly told

him that his imaginary stolen election was

a lie. Then-Attorney General William P.

Barr bluntly said it was “bulls---.”

Testimony by insiders and even family

members, as well as film and video foot-

age from Jan. 6, revealed a more hostile

and organized attack on the Capitol than

most Americans had previously under-

stood. Oath Keepers and Proud Boys

helped spearhead the assault, and some

Proud Boys had cased the Capitol to find

the best entry points. They arrived at the

“peaceful protest” dressed for war, wear-

ing helmets, bulletproof vests and riot

gear. Oath Keepers stashed weapons

around the area in case they were needed.

Much of this is now familiar to people

who watched the first hearing live on

Thursday night. Unfortunately, a large

portion of the TV-viewing public knows

nothing of the sort. They are parked in-

stead around their favorite baptismal font

at the Church of Tucker Carlson, where

untruths are dispensed from a barking

head that alternates between expressions

of utter confusion and manic hilarity.

Carlson’s minions wouldn’t have heard a

word from the committee on Fox News

because Carlson and Sean Hannity in the

following hour wouldn’t allow it.

Instead, Carlson spent his hour — unin-

terrupted by commercials lest anyone

switch channels — trying to convince

viewers that what happened on Jan. 6

“was not an insurrection.”

The violence that day, he said, was

“forgettably minor” and “vandalism” at

worst.

I don’t want to lock horns with Tucker

because, oh my, Mr. Carlson, what big

horns you have! But if what happened on

Jan. 6 amounts to a quarrel over seman-

tics, then the “big lie” must be bothering

Tucker more than I reckoned. I defer to

Merriam-Webster, which defines “insur-

rection” as “an act or instance of revolting

against civil authority or an established

government.”

In a nutshell, as they say. And we didn’t

even have to make a frowny face or squint

our eyes.

Carlson’s mocking dismissal of the

committee — and Hannity’s thereafter —

was as removed from reality as the previ-

ous president was during most of his time

in the Oval Office.

And there was nothing “forgettably mi-

nor” about those hours for the terrified

people trapped inside the building, or for

the traumatized officers who essentially

were forced to engage in hand-to-hand

combat to protect the Capitol and all who

were inside.

Irony, I hear, has a corner suite at Fox

News, where a few honest people do still

work. But Carlson must have been pro-

jecting when he said that the Jan. 6 com-

mittee was trying to create an authoritari-

an state. It was Carlson’s show, after all,

that blocked advertising (free markets

and all that) to ensure that no inconven-

ient facts from outside his bunker leaked

through.

In authoritarian Russia, where Carlson

was briefly a pro-Putin poster boy, white-

washed, state-controlled news is all Rus-

sians get to hear, too. And uninformed

Russians, who’ve remained ignorant

about the destruction of neighboring

Ukraine, think Vladimir Putin is the

bomb.

KATHLEEN PARKER

Truth is the

new RINO

The violence that day,

Tucker Carlson said, was

“forgettably minor” and

“vandalism” at worst.