adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

Politics

The Capitol riot hearings are designed to shape contemporary American politics, but will they make a difference? – The Globe and Mail

Published

 on


A video of former White House Senior Advisor Jared Kushner speaking is shown on a screen as the House select committee tasked with investigating the January 6th attack on the Capitol hold a hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington on June 13.JABIN BOTSFORD/AFP/Getty Images

The United States is engaged in a consequential large-scale clinical test: What exactly is the country’s attention span for a vital matter in its civic life, one freighted with critical, stunning revelations that go to the heart of its political culture?

In the early years of the Republic, Americans were accustomed to lengthy declamations. Daniel Webster’s famous 1830 speech about the sanctity of the Union went on for two days, and about 15,000 people stood for two hours in 1863 to hear Edward Everett give an oration that in essence was an introduction to Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address.

Both occurred at dangerous moments when the character of the country was in jeopardy. So, too, is this moment, when the essential element of its political life – the peaceful transfer of power, a trademark aspect of American democracy since the Democratic-Republican candidate Thomas Jefferson succeeded the Federalist John Adams in 1801 – is facing its most formidable test.

Which is why the congressional committee examining the Jan. 6, 2021, rampage on Capitol Hill has scheduled at least four more sessions to follow last week’s prime-time hearing and Monday’s marathon session.

These sessions are in part for the historical record. But they also are designed to shape contemporary American politics, which hinge on questions about the legitimacy of Joe Biden’s presidency and the future political prospects of his predecessor, Donald Trump, who may be preparing an effort to regain the White House in 2024. And like the episode they are designed to examine, these sessions prompt questions of great significance, among them: How many hearings are necessary? Will they make a difference?

“We have a population with a relatively short attention span,” said Mark Satta, a professor of philosophy at Wayne State University in Detroit who is studying the hearings. “It’s hard to know what will get something to stick in people’s mind. One advantage of doing multiple events is to give the committee a chance to provide lots of different chances to have a tide-turning moment. It could come in the fifth hearing.”

Monday’s session included several striking revelations: Former attorney-general William Barr, the country’s chief law-enforcement official, said that Mr. Trump claimed there was fraud on election night as soon as it became apparent he could lose; that the claim was “crazy stuff” that did a “great disservice to the country”; and that the president was “detached from reality.”

Moreover, Trump adviser Eric Herschmann said that he “never saw any evidence whatsoever to sustain’’ the allegations of a stolen election and that Mr. Trump’s effort to challenge Mr. Biden’s victory was “nuts.” Former mayor of New York Rudolph Giuliani, a proponent of the stolen-election argument, was “definitively intoxicated” as the election returns were being reported, according to former senior Trump campaign lawyer Jason Miller. And the president defied campaign manager Bill Stepien’s counsel that it was “too early to call the race.’’

Mr. Stepien also testified that the effort to overturn the election was “not necessarily honest or professional.”

This testimony prompted Democratic Representative Zoe Lofgren of California, a member of the committee, to describe Mr. Trump’s action as “an attack on the American people by trying to rob you of your voice in American democracy.”

And while Mr. Trump went where no president has gone before, these hearings are prompting his opponents to say – perhaps with a plan in mind, perhaps hoping, as Shakespeare wrote in Henry IV, Part 2, that the wish might be the father to the thought – that prosecutors could put the former American chief executive in a situation where no president has been before: the target of a criminal lawsuit.

In line with the Shakespearean nature of this entire episode – the collision of fate and justice – those notions are met even among Mr. Trump’s most fervent critics, with warnings that such a prospect might inflame his supporters, render him a martyr to their cause and further empower him in a 2024 presidential campaign.

The hearings continue Wednesday morning, when the committee plans to show recorded testimony of Mr. Herschmann arguing that the only issue that remained after the election was, in his words, “orderly transition,” Further testimony is also expected from lesser-known figures.

Because it isn’t just the big fish who matter in the ecosystem of this episode. It is the krill and the algal blooms and the jellyfish and the minnows who count and who, in the broader biology of this political biosphere, may be just as important, as amplifiers of events or, perhaps, as sources of fresh evidence.

That was the lesson of the Watergate hearings, which consumed an entire summer and captivated the country, with the average American household watching about 30 hours of the hearings.

“The challenge is that January 6th is a story where it is very hard for the American people to assemble the pieces,” Garrett Graff, the author of Watergate: A New History, published in February, said in an interview. “Those pieces have come out drip by drip over 18 months. The opportunity for the hearing is to tell the story clearly and comprehensively so people can understand just how serious the events of Jan. 6 were and how close Donald Trump came to fomenting a coup. It’s a chance to put all this up on a national billboard.”

In video testimony aired on Monday, Donald Trump’s former Attorney-General William Barr bluntly dismissed claims of election fraud, saying in a Dec. 14, 2020 meeting ‘I was somewhat demoralized because I thought boy if he really believes this stuff he has… he’s become detached from reality.’

Reuters

Our Morning Update and Evening Update newsletters are written by Globe editors, giving you a concise summary of the day’s most important headlines. Sign up today.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Politics

Moe visiting Yorkton as Saskatchewan election campaign continues

Published

 on

 

Saskatchewan Party Leader Scott Moe is set to be on the road today as the provincial election campaign continues.

Moe is set to speak in the city of Yorkton about affordability measures this morning before travelling to the nearby village of Theodore for an event with the local Saskatchewan Party candidate.

NDP Leader Carla Beck doesn’t have any events scheduled, though several party candidates are to hold press conferences.

On Thursday, Moe promised a directive banning “biological boys” from using school changing rooms with “biological girls” if re-elected.

The NDP said the Saskatchewan Party was punching down on vulnerable children.

Election day is Oct. 28.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Oct. 18, 2024.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Saskatchewan Party’s Moe pledges change room ban in schools; Beck calls it desperate

Published

 on

 

REGINA – Saskatchewan Party Leader Scott Moe is promising a directive banning “biological boys” from using school changing rooms with “biological girls” if re-elected, a move the NDP’s Carla Beck says weaponizes vulnerable kids.

Moe made the pledge Thursday at a campaign stop in Regina. He said it was in response to a complaint that two biological males had changed for gym class with girls at a school in southeast Saskatchewan.

He said the ban would be his first order of business if he’s voted again as premier on Oct. 28.

It was not previously included in his party’s campaign platform document.

“I’ll be very clear, there will be a directive that would come from the minister of education that would say that biological boys will not be in the change room with biological girls,” Moe said.

He added school divisions should already have change room policies, but a provincial directive would ensure all have the rule in place.

Asked about the rights of gender-diverse youth, Moe said other children also have rights.

“What about the rights of all the other girls that are changing in that very change room? They have rights as well,” he said, followed by cheers and claps.

The complaint was made at a school with the Prairie Valley School Division. The division said in a statement it doesn’t comment on specific situations that could jeopardize student privacy and safety.

“We believe all students should have the opportunity to learn and grow in a safe and welcoming learning environment,” it said.

“Our policies and procedures align with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Saskatchewan Human Rights Code.”

Asked about Moe’s proposal, Beck said it would make vulnerable kids more vulnerable.

Moe is desperate to stoke fear and division after having a bad night during Wednesday’s televised leaders’ debate, she said.

“Saskatchewan people, when we’re at our best, are people that come together and deliver results, not divisive, ugly politics like we’ve seen time and again from Scott Moe and the Sask. Party,” Beck said.

“If you see leaders holding so much power choosing to punch down on vulnerable kids, that tells you everything you need to know about them.”

Beck said voters have more pressing education issues on their minds, including the need for smaller classrooms, more teaching staff and increased supports for students.

People also want better health care and to be able to afford gas and groceries, she added.

“We don’t have to agree to understand Saskatchewan people deserve better,” Beck said.

The Saskatchewan Party government passed legislation last year that requires parents consent to children under 16 using different names or pronouns at school.

The law has faced backlash from some LGBTQ+ advocates, who argue it violates Charter rights and could cause teachers to out or misgender children.

Beck has said if elected her party would repeal that legislation.

Heather Kuttai, a former commissioner with the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission who resigned last year in protest of the law, said Moe is trying to sway right-wing voters.

She said a change room directive would put more pressure on teachers who already don’t have enough educational support.

“It sounds like desperation to me,” she said.

“It sounds like Scott Moe is nervous about the election and is turning to homophobic and transphobic rhetoric to appeal to far-right voters.

“It’s divisive politics, which is a shame.”

She said she worries about the future of gender-affirming care in a province that once led in human rights.

“We’re the kind of people who dig each other out of snowbanks and not spew hatred about each other,” she said. “At least that’s what I want to still believe.”

Also Thursday, two former Saskatchewan Party government members announced they’re endorsing Beck — Mark Docherty, who retired last year and was a Speaker, and Glen Hart, who retired in 2020.

Ian Hanna, a speech writer and senior political adviser to former Saskatchewan Party premier Brad Wall, also endorsed Beck.

Earlier in the campaign, Beck received support from former Speaker Randy Weekes, who quit the Saskatchewan Party earlier this year after accusing caucus members of bullying.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Oct. 17, 2024.

— With files from Aaron Sousa in Edmonton

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Promise tracker: What the Saskatchewan Party and NDP pledge to do if they win Oct. 28

Published

 on

 

REGINA – Saskatchewan‘s provincial election is on Oct. 28. Here’s a look at some of the campaign promises made by the two major parties:

Saskatchewan Party

— Continue withholding federal carbon levy payments to Ottawa on natural gas until the end of 2025.

— Reduce personal income tax rates over four years; a family of four would save $3,400.

— Double the Active Families Benefit to $300 per child per year and the benefit for children with disabilities to $400 a year.

— Direct all school divisions to ban “biological boys” from girls’ change rooms in schools.

— Increase the First-Time Homebuyers Tax Credit to $15,000 from $10,000.

— Reintroduce the Home Renovation Tax Credit, allowing homeowners to claim up to $4,000 in renovation costs on their income taxes; seniors could claim up to $5,000.

— Extend coverage for insulin pumps and diabetes supplies to seniors and young adults

— Provide a 50 per cent refundable tax credit — up to $10,000 — to help cover the cost of a first fertility treatment.

— Hire 100 new municipal officers and 70 more officers with the Saskatchewan Marshals Service.

— Amend legislation to provide police with more authority to address intoxication, vandalism and disturbances on public property.

— Platform cost of $1.2 billion, with deficits in the first three years and a small surplus in 2027.

NDP

— Pause the 15-cent-a-litre gas tax for six months, saving an average family about $350.

— Remove the provincial sales tax from children’s clothes and ready-to-eat grocery items like rotisserie chickens and granola bars.

— Pass legislation to limit how often and how much landlords can raise rent.

— Repeal the law that requires parental consent when children under 16 want to change their names or pronouns at school.

— Launch a provincewide school nutrition program.

— Build more schools and reduce classroom sizes.

— Hire 800 front-line health-care workers in areas most in need.

— Launch an accountability commission to investigate cost overruns for government projects.

— Scrap the marshals service.

— Hire 100 Mounties and expand detox services.

— Platform cost of $3.5 billion, with small deficits in the first three years and a small surplus in the fourth year.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Oct .17, 2024.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending