What is the January 6 committee trying to prove?

What is the January 6 committee trying to prove?
Sinister plot or dumb rabble-rousing? A well-thought-through coup attempt that nearly succeeded or the chaotic flailing of a president incapable of accepting defeat? This tension has been at the heart of the conversation over January 6, 2021 ever since pro-Trump protesters made their way into the Capitol that day.

At times, this debate can get pointlessly pedantic and frustratingly circular. After all, 2020’s post-election frenzy can be more than one thing at once. Some plots are dumb; coup attempts can be chaotic. Politics, however, isn’t quite so literal…

What is the January 6 committee trying to prove?

Sinister plot or dumb rabble-rousing? A well-thought-through coup attempt that nearly succeeded or the chaotic flailing of a president incapable of accepting defeat? This tension has been at the heart of the conversation over January 6, 2021 ever since pro-Trump protesters made their way into the Capitol that day.

At times, this debate can get pointlessly pedantic and frustratingly circular. After all, 2020’s post-election frenzy can be more than one thing at once. Some plots are dumb; coup attempts can be chaotic. Politics, however, isn’t quite so literal minded an endeavor. And the lasting impact of January 6 and the subsequent investigations into Donald Trump depend on what America understands to be the essential character of the events of that day.

With the summer run of televised House January 6 hearings now wrapped up, exactly how do the committee members want January 6 to be remembered? They have offered plenty of evidence, some of it uncorroborated, all of it made slightly less persuasive by the committee’s one-sidedness. Thanks to their interviews and investigations, we know more than we did about Trump’s conduct that day, the president’s aides’ (mostly very low) opinion of that behavior, and the wider context of Trump’s bizarro band of lawyers trying to find a way to overturn the results of the 2020 election. But what does it all amount to?

Generally speaking, the committee members want to tie a clear (potentially criminal) connection between Trump and the mob. They also want to make everything from the stop the steal to the storming of the Capitol seem premeditated, planned and coordinated. But the most politically damaging evidence they displayed last night portrayed Trump as feckless and impotent. As the Capitol was under assault, the president did, well, nothing. He sulked in his dining room, gawping at Fox News. He froze. When aides suggested he do something, he had a tantrum. This was, as the committee members and numerous witnesses claimed, an appalling dereliction of duty — and one that made him look more dangerously out of his depth than dangerous.

An effort to simply make sure Trump is never elected president again would focus on that. It would focus on the fact that almost no one around him could defend his behavior that day. It would make clear that the president allied himself with an absurdly amateur band of delusional lawyers in a foolish attempt to cling onto power. But the committee wants more. It wants criminal culpability, a far harder thing to prove.

Writing for The Spectator, Freddy Gray previews a Trump 2024 comeback and argues that the January 6 committee hearings are seen by the public as “just another faintly ridiculous attempt to prosecute Trump.” He speculated that, “after Russiagate, Ukrainegate, the impeachments and the investigations into his finances, Americans surely have ‘Trump inquiry fatigue.’”

That final point may be prove to be correct. But it’s possible for Americans to be deeply cynical about the inquiries into the former president and deeply bored by the former president’s stolen election hang ups. In other words, the next election should — and, I suspect, will — belong to whichever candidate isn’t obsessing over the last one.

*** Sign up to receive the DC Diary in your inbox on weekdays ***

Common sense might prevail on the Electoral Count Act

With the House January 6 hearings as a backdrop, a group of bipartisan senators this week finally put forward constructive measures capable of doing something to minimize post-election uncertainty. The package of laws would make it harder for lawmakers to challenge electoral votes, make clear that the vice-president’s role in election certification is “solely ministerial,” expedite lawsuits over elections and increase punishments for the intimidation of election officials. These improvements on the Electoral Count Act are long overdue and have the support of at least nine Republican senators. In other words, lawmakers may actually be about to take a low-key but tangible step towards securing the peaceful transfer of power in US elections. Let’s hope they do.

Biden tests positive

The president has tested positive for Covid. It seems he did get something out of his Middle East tour after all. According to a White House statement, he is experiencing mild symptoms and Biden says he is “keeping busy.” The administration is understandably (and thankfully) determined to project normalcy and has no interest in using Biden’s illness as an opportunity for pandemic scolding. Here’s hoping Biden makes a speedy recovery.