[ad_1]
Editor’s note: Nicole Hemmer is Associate Professor of History and Director of the Carolyn T. and Robert M. Rogers Center for the Study of the Presidency at Vanderbilt University. She is the author of Messengers of the Right: The Conservative Media and the Transformation of American Politics and the forthcoming Partisans: The Conservative Revolutionaries Who Reshaped American Politics in the 1990s. She co-hosts the history podcasts ‘Past Present’ and ‘This Day in Esoteric Political History’. Her views expressed in this commentary are her own. View more opinions on CNN.
CNN
—
Late Thursday night, the House Select Committee investigating the Jan. 6 riots released its final report, a massive 845-page account of the months-long effort to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. announced. In its detailed account, the commission found that former President Donald Trump and his supporters inside and outside the government used a combination of intimidation, lies, threats of violence, and political intrigue to defeat Joe Biden’s election to the presidency. It shows how you tried to prevent authentication. .
The committee has now referred several cases of Trump and other criminals to the Justice Department and several Republicans to the House Ethics Committee for failing to comply with subpoenas. (Trump denounced a “very partisan unselected committee report” in a Truth Social post, calling it a “witch hunt.”)
After nine TV sessions that drew in millions of viewers, the final report might feel like crossing the t and dotting the i. By now, many Americans are skeptical of this effort, from carefully constructed lies about voter fraud, to arming state officials, to increasingly ridiculous legal tactics, to deadly violence in the U.S. Capitol. I know the outline. That may be why the commission released more testimony from former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson this week. But written reports offer a way to dig deeper. A compelling reading supported by extensive endnotes shows how serious Trump and his supporters were about overturning the election, and how close they came.
But it would be wrong to think of this report as the riot and its demise. Instead, it represents another test for the judicial system, elected officials, and the American people. Whether or not it was an invitation to danger depends on how each responds to the report.
The report now joins a long line of government reports meant to persuade the public, promote reform and advocate accountability. Such reports are the first in the half-century since Watergate, as task force and independent prosecutors have battled with investigative journalists to hold the executive branch, especially the president and the intelligence services, accountable for corruption and failure. Because the post-Watergate era showed the potential for reform, Congress in the mid-1970s was a hive of activity and the potential for political retaliation as it created new constraints and oversight mechanisms. There was a nature
These high-profile reports often drew public attention to the exposed secrets. The Church Commission report, the result of an intelligence agency investigation in the mid-1970s, exposed a wide range of wrongdoings, including assassination attempts, sponsorship of international coups, drug testing, and domestic espionage. Then-President Gerald Ford issued an executive order banning political assassinations, breaking the rule of secrecy that allowed intelligence operatives to act in lawless and often bizarre ways.
Reports often found a devoted audience, partly because of the explosive revelations, but partly because of the style. The Star Report, which covered then-President Bill Clinton’s investigation into sexual relations and his efforts to cover it up, combined the lewd details of presidential liaisons with a keyhole-peek-through tone. became. Like his 9/11 Commission report, which presents the details of the terrorist attacks and their causes in very compelling detail, it not only sold well, but was a finalist for the National Book Awards. (A report on the Attica prison uprising written for a state-level commission in 1972 was also a finalist for the prestigious award.)
But sales and awards, while indications of public interest and literary value, are not the best measures of a report’s success. In the case of church committees, intelligence agencies such as the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the National Security Agency were cornered. But in the case of the Tower Commission and Independent Lawyers’ reports following the Iran-Contra case, accountability was short-sighted.
Despite a congressional ban, the Reagan administration’s illegal hostage arms deal that funded rebel groups in Nicaragua initially resulted in a number of resignations, indictments, and convictions. But waning public interest and a flurry of presidential pardons left some of the government officials involved not only free to act, but also able to return to high-profile careers within the Republican and conservative movements. rice field. (“The Iran-Contra cover-up that lasted more than six years is now complete,” the special counsel said in response to the pardon.)
For the January 6th Commission, this is really dangerous. Trump has already suggested that if he is re-elected president, he would seriously consider amnesty for those involved in the riots.
This is a reminder that when it comes to accountability and reform, the work extends far beyond the Commission’s lifespan. The protection of democratic systems now rests with various groups. The Justice Department must decide whether to act on the commission’s referral, including the historic criminal referral against Trump. Congress, too, stands post-Watergate and is acutely aware of the need to impose more legal restrictions and bring consequences for government misconduct. The recent passage of the Electoral College Reform Act is a step in that direction. More awaits.
But if Congress faces a post-Watergate-style reckoning, it will only do so if the post-Watergate majority does not have a reform mandate. This is a reminder that Americans have a role to play in the work that follows the House Select Committee’s report. Its role involves more than just opposing pro-riot politicians or voting for reform-minded candidates. It requires continued organization and action to demonstrate and advocate for representative democracy. This shows that Americans see the value in defending democracy through the slow, often small-scale work of political engagement.
In a newly released testimony, Hutchinson reflected on his journey to becoming one of the hearing’s star witnesses. She said that her first two depositions were for avoidance because she claimed that she could not recall answering most of the commission’s questions, following the instructions of her attorney. was an exercise. The problem for Hutchinson was that she could remember. She had a clear memory of much of the planning leading up to the riot, and a detailed memory of the events that unfolded that day.
It led to a crisis when, in a personality-defining moment, she realized she had failed what she called the “mirror test,” the ability to look in the mirror and be proud of who you were. “I was disappointed in myself,” she told the committee. I became someone I never thought I would be.
For Hutchinson, that moment brought her back to the committee to provide the detailed and shocking testimony she shared at hearings this summer. The January 6th Commission Report provides a detailed account of a deliberate and carefully planned attack on democratic governance, and that account will serve Americans who want that form of government to continue. It is a duty-giving, mirror test of government agencies that serve 330 million people and serve them.
[ad_2]
Source link
