Monday, February 15, 2021

Impeachment Hearings, Day 2

All right, after watching day 2 of the impeachment hearings, I must say logos, ethos and pathos were the last things on my mind.  Boring it was not!  It had me sitting on the edge of my seat in rapt attention.  So what happened?

It began again with Jamie Raskin, saying that the issue of jurisdiction was now over and we were on to facts, and briefly explaining that inciting a mob is not constitutionally protected free speech. Nerguse then gave a roadmap of what would be presented that day.

And then it began, first setting out to show that Donald Trump had been inciting for months ahead of time.  Joaquin Castro began, describing how well ahead of the election Trump as preparing the ground, insisting that if he lost it could only be because of fraud, and how he continued crying fraud in the immediate aftermath of his defeat.  Eric Salwell took up the theme, discussing how Trump continued to cry fraud and run ads saying there was fraud long after the vote was certified and even after electors were chosen, and to push for the rally the date the election was to be certified.  Both men pointed out that everyone present had the experience of running for office and understood the importance of everyone respecting the results.  Castro also commented that many members had probably experienced come-from-behind victories before (or defeats).  Imagine if the candidate who was ahead got to stop the count if it started to turn the other way!  Only after these two presentations di Madeleine Dean proceed to show all Trump's attempts to use government machinery to overturn the election, first by lawsuits and then by pressure on state legislatures and election officials to overturn the results.  Ted Lieu took up the thread, discussing pressure on the Department of Justice to find fraud, Congress not to certify, and Vice President Pence to throw out the results.  One thing he did not mention was Michael Flynn's proposal to declare martial law and redo the election, presumably because the evidence of that conversation was weak. Lieu went out of his way to emphasize Mike Pence's heroism in resisting this pressure, which looks like a bid to appeal to Republicans.

I must say, though, I probably would not have gone in that order.  Why?  Because beginning by quoting Trump tweets on election fraud without context lends them some degree of legitimacy.  I would probably have begun with Castro showing how Trump began even before the election making clear that he would not accept defeat as legitimate and claiming fraud.  Then I would have put on Dean and Lieu to show Trump's attempts to overturn the election through the machinery of government and emphasized each time that each method failed because there was no fraud.  I would have hammered on the election being fair over and over.  Only then would I have taken up Trump's simultaneous attempt to stir up his supporters to bring pressure on government officials and shown his resort to the mob was a last, desperate attempt to block a legitimate outcome.  

Next on was Stacey Plaskett, who was the true star of the day.  And she was not even a Representative.  Plaskett is a Delegate from the Virgin Islands.  Delegates are elected from U.S. Territories and are allowed to speak for their territories, but not to vote.  Plaskett began with that critical question -- what did the president know and when did he know it. She discussed his usual approval and encouragement of violence, from telling the Proud Boys to "stand back and stand by," to applauding attempts by supporters to run a Biden bus off the road.  She pointed out that the previous "Stop the Steal" rally in Washington, D.C. (December 12, 2020) had ended in violence, so he must at least of been aware of the possibility.  She then noted that Trump worked with the same rally organizers (Women for America First) for his January 6 rally, invited some of the same speakers who incited violence, moved the date from post-Inauguration to the more provocative date of certification, and changed the plans from a stationary rally to a march to the Capitol.

But all of this could be put down to extreme negligence.  More seriously still, social media was abuzz with various protesters planning a violent assault on the Capitol. This was public enough the Fox reported on January 2 that the Proud Boys would be showing up. The Capitol Hill police warned that Congress might be targeted on January 3.  The Washington Post and NBC reported chatter on January 5.  The FBI also warned of threats of violence on January 5, and the Mayor of D.C. warned residents to stay out of the downtown area because of possible violence.  Several arrests were made ahead of the rally.

The obvious question is, how much of this would Trump be aware of and how much is simply what is obvious in hindsight.  Clearly, if mainstream press outlets were picking up social media chatter, it could not have been all that secret.  With any other president, I would say that if it was in the Washington Post and NBC, he would have known.  But Trump is famous for not reading mainstream journalism. Presumably he would at least have been aware of the Fox report about the Proud Boys showing up and the D.C. mayor's warning.  But I suppose he could argue that he did not assume the mere presence of Proud Boys automatically meant violence, and that the mayor was simply trying to avoid clashes between protesters and counter-protesters.

Plaskett quotes an unnamed insider quoted in the British newspaper The Independent as saying that the Trump operation monitored pro-Trump websites, some of them quite far into wingnut territory.  That seems most plausible, but I would still like to see better confirmation than a single anonymous insider. 

Finally, Plaskett quotes one of these sources as saying that the president can order the National Guard to stand down, but does not control the Capitol Police.  That is good insider information an accurate.  So far, though, the impeachment managers have not presented any evidence that Trump did order the National Guard to stand down. 

Next, Madeleine Dean put on a presentation about how incendiary Trump's January 6 speech was (no quarrel there), and how upsetting the experience was.  Then a break.

After the break, Plaskett and Salwell gave an account of the actual attack, with times, places, and video.  It was interesting, although I would have to read a timeline and see a diagram to full absorb it.  The account did refute the claim that Trump could not have incited the insurrection because it began before he finished his speech.  People started heading over the the Capitol well before he finished. (Not an unusual situation).  The mob breached the outer fence at 12:53, about 12 minutes before the joint session began.  The police put up extraordinary resistance and it was not until 1:45 that the mob broke into the Capitol through the west door.  The west door is the door facing the White House. The mob broke in on the first floor (of course).  Congress meets in the second floor.  As Officer Gene Goodman went to meet the mob, he saw Mitt Romney in the hall and warned him to get inside. Goodman then (famously) led the mob away from the Senate chambers to where reinforcements were ready.  The mob on the video does not look like anyone you want to mess with.

Mike Pence was evacuated from the Senate around 2:14, but remained hidden, with his family, near the chamber.  Nancy Pelosi was evacuated, not just from the House, but from the Capitol grounds at 2:15.  Both chambers attempted to continue without their leaders. Lest you take offense at this sort of privilege, recall that both Pence and Pelosi were prime targets for the mob.  Both bodies recessed and started evacuating around 2:30 as the mob reached their outer doors.  

The Ashli Babbitt shooting apparently took place during the siege of the House. Members were in the process of evacuating, but had not finished.  In particular, due to COVID distancing rules, many members who were not voting at the time were in the gallery, along with journalists and a few other visitors.  It is very difficult to see what is happening in the video. It shows heavily barricaded glass doors with wooden frames and a man behind them holding a gun.  The rioters smash windows and try to break down the doors.  Then the man with a gun steps forward and fires and we see someone, apparently Babbitt, fall. It appears she was trying to lead a charge through a broken window.  It will take a good deal more than the video to determine whether the shooting was justified.  Evacuation of the House finished only minutes before the mob overran it.  

The violence continued long after Congress had been taken to safety.  Salwell finished with graphic footage of violence against law enforcement, much of it long after Congress was gone.  In particular, the infamous footage of an officer crushed in a door, screaming in pain was taken at 4:30, an hour and a half after the House was fully evacuated.

No comments:

Post a Comment