World

Jan. 6 takeaways: Final revelations from investigation

Published

2 years ago

December 30, 2022

Jan. 6 takeaways: Final revelations from investigation

WASHINGTON (AP) — Destroyed paperwork. Ideas of pardoning violent rioters. Quiet talks amongst cupboard officers about whether or not then-President Donald Trump needs to be faraway from workplace.

Interview transcripts launched by Home investigators in current days — greater than 100 up to now — give additional perception into the Jan. 6, 2021, rebellion and the weeks main as much as it, as Trump tried to overturn his defeat within the presidential election. The nine-member committee performed greater than 1,000 interviews, and the lawmakers are progressively releasing a whole lot of transcripts after issuing a ultimate report final week. The panel will dissolve on Jan. 3 when the brand new Republican-led Home is sworn in.

Whereas among the witnesses have been extra forthcoming than others, the interviews altogether inform the total story of Trump’s unprecedented scheming, the bloody chaos of the assault on the Capitol and the fears of lawmakers and the previous president’s personal aides as he tried to upend democracy and the favored will.

Some highlights from the interview transcripts launched up to now:

WHITE HOUSE AIDE TELLS ALL

Beforehand little-known White Home aide Cassidy Hutchinson drew nationwide consideration when she testified in a shock listening to this summer time about Trump’s phrases and actions across the Jan. 6 assault — his rage after safety thwarted his efforts to go to the Capitol that day and the way he knew that a few of his supporters have been armed.

The committee has up to now launched 4 of her closed-door interviews, revealing new particulars about what she mentioned she noticed in her time as an aide to then-White Home Chief of Workers Mark Meadows. Amongst different revelations, Hutchinson advised the committee she had seen Meadows burning paperwork in his workplace hearth “roughly a dozen instances.” She mentioned she didn’t know what the paperwork have been or whether or not they have been objects that legally ought to have been preserved.

A spokesman for Meadows declined to touch upon Hutchinson’s testimony.

Hutchinson additionally spoke at size about her ethical struggles as she determined how a lot to reveal — even doing analysis on Watergate figures who equally testified about working in President Richard Nixon’s White Home.

“My character and my integrity imply extra to me than something,” Hutchinson says she determined, returning to the committee with a brand new lawyer in June after three earlier interviews.

PARDONS FOR EVERYONE?

After the rebellion, Trump floated the concept of a blanket pardon for all contributors, however the White Home counsel on the time, Pat Cipollone, discouraged the concept, in keeping with testimony from Johnny McEntee, an aide who served as director of the presidential personnel workplace and was interviewed by the panel in March.

Trump then requested about limiting pardons to solely these individuals who entered the Capitol however who didn’t have interaction in violence, however that concept was additionally met with some pushback, McEntee recalled. He mentioned Trump appeared persuaded by the recommendation and mentioned he was not conscious that the concept ever got here up once more.

Individually, McEntee mentioned that Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., advised him he was searching for a preemptive pardon from Trump as he confronted a federal youngster intercourse trafficking investigation. Gaetz didn’t obtain such a pardon and has not confronted any fees in connection to the probe.

Hutchinson testified that Meadows’ workplace grew to become so inundated with pardon requests that some turned to Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner to assist facilitate.

THE 25TH AMENDMENT

The panel interviewed a number of of Trump’s Cupboard secretaries about discussions of invoking Part 4 of the twenty fifth Modification — the forceful removing of Trump from energy by his personal Cupboard. Whereas some acknowledged it had been mentioned, it seems that it was by no means a probable situation.

Former Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin says he spoke fleetingly with then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in regards to the thought.

“It got here up very briefly in our dialog,” Mnuchin testified in July. “We each believed that one of the best final result was a traditional transition of energy, which was working, and neither one in every of us contemplated in any severe format the twenty fifth Modification.”

Military Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Workers, advised the committee he witnessed a short dialog between the 2 Cupboard secretaries within the White Home and heard the phrase “twenty fifth Modification.” His transcript has not but been launched, however investigators quoted Milley’s interview to each Pompeo and Mnuchin of their interviews.

Pompeo advised the committee he didn’t recall the dialog. “I’d have seen somebody talking in regards to the potential of invoking the twenty fifth Modification as simply completely preposterous.”

Vice President Mike Pence later dismissed the concept in a letter to Home Speaker Nancy Pelosi, saying the mechanism needs to be reserved for when a president is medically or mentally incapacitated. Pence chief of workers Mark Brief advised the panel that the discuss was “a political sport” and the method would have taken weeks to play out. “We had 10 days left within the administration,” Brief advised the panel.

TRUMP FAMILY TESTIFIES

The committee interviewed two of the previous president’s kids, Donald Trump Jr. and Ivanka Trump, about their conversations with their father throughout the Jan. 6 assault and within the days earlier than and after.

Trump Jr. didn’t reply lots of the committee’s questions, continuously saying he didn’t recall occasions or conversations. He did clarify why he texted Meadows the afternoon of Jan. 6, because the assault was unfolding, to say that his father wanted to “condemn this s—” instantly and that Trump’s tweets had not been sturdy sufficient. “My father doesn’t textual content,” Trump Jr. mentioned.

Ivanka Trump, who was within the White Home along with her father on Jan. 6, was additionally imprecise in a lot of her solutions. She spoke with the committee about working along with her father to write down his tweets that day, encouraging him to make a powerful assertion because the rioters broke into the Capitol. And he or she testified that she heard Trump’s facet of a “heated” telephone name with Pence that morning as her father tried to encourage Pence to object to the congressional certification that day. Pence refused to take action.

She additionally testified that she acquired a name and a textual content from Republican Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, who was within the Capitol and advised her that “the president must put out a really sturdy tweet telling individuals to go dwelling and to cease the violence now.”

‘GIVE ME FIVE DEAD VOTERS’

Trump lawyer Christina Bobb testified that Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, a prime ally of Trump, requested among the former president’s advisers for proof of fraud so he might “champion” it. Trump falsely claimed there was widespread fraud within the election, regardless of courtroom rulings and election officers in all 50 states who mentioned in any other case.

Graham advised attorneys he would like to assist the trigger.

“Don’t inform me every part as a result of it’s too overwhelming,” Bobb quotes Graham as saying. “Simply give me 5 lifeless voters; give me, you already know, an instance of illegals voting. Simply give me a really small snapshot that I can take and champion.”

He did nothing with the knowledge he was given, Bobb mentioned. Graham voted on Jan. 6 to certify President Joe Biden’s win.

NATIONAL GUARD FRUSTRATION

The mob that stormed the Capitol would have confronted a a lot harsher regulation enforcement response had it been comprised principally of African Individuals, testified retired Military Maj. Gen. William Walker, who led the D.C. Nationwide Guard on the time. Walker is now the Home Sergeant at Arms.

“I’m African American. Youngster of the sixties,” Walker testified. “I believe it could have been a vastly completely different response if these have been African Individuals making an attempt to breach the Capitol. As a profession regulation enforcement officer, part-time soldier … the regulation enforcement response would have been completely different.”

The Nationwide Guard didn’t arrive on the Capitol for a number of hours, leaving overwhelmed cops on the mercy of the violent mob as Pentagon officers mentioned they have been finding out the required approvals. Greater than 100 officers have been injured, many significantly, as Trump’s supporters beat them and ran over them to get inside.

Walker expressed deep frustration with the delays, however mentioned he didn’t assume that was as a result of the insurrectionists have been principally white.

“I don’t assume race was a part of the navy’s determination paralysis,” he mentioned in a single interview, including, “I believe they simply didn’t wish to do it.”

EXTREMIST GROUP LEADERS

Proud Boys chief Enrique Tarrio asserted his fifth Modification proper towards self-incrimination in response to some questions, together with his legal professional at instances telling investigators his consumer didn’t belong to the extremist group, whose associates at the moment are dealing with uncommon sedition fees in a federal case prosecuted by the Justice Division. However Tarrio himself advised investigators he grew to become chairman of the Proud Boys after there was a cut up vote amongst eight “elders” of the group. “I took that title for myself,” he mentioned.

Tarrio, who had been launched from jail on the eve of the rebellion, wasn’t current for the assault. However prosecutors declare he stored command over the Proud Boys who attacked the Capitol and cheered them on from afar.

He advised the panel that within the Proud Boys, the “first diploma of membership is that you’re a Western chauvinist” and that you just “refuse to apologize for creating the trendy world.”

Tarrio met Stewart Rhodes, the founding father of the extremist group Oath Keepers, in a storage the evening of Jan. 5, forward of the assault. “I nonetheless don’t like Stewart Rhodes,” Tarrio mentioned.

Rhodes, who was additionally interviewed by the panel, was convicted In November of seditious conspiracy for what prosecutors mentioned was a plot for an armed revolt to cease the switch of presidential energy. Rhodes, who amassed weapons forward of the assault, declined to reply many questions as nicely.

___

Related Press writers Nomaan Service provider, Farnoush Amiri, Lisa Mascaro and Michael Balsamo contributed to this report.

Click to comment

World

Trump’s Executive Order to End E.V. Subsidies Draws Pushback

Published

5 hours ago

January 21, 2025

Press Room

Trump’s Executive Order to End E.V. Subsidies Draws Pushback

If President Trump has his way, the auto industry’s transition to electric vehicles will soon slam into reverse. He will erase tax credits for electric-vehicle purchases, federal grants for chargers, and subsidies and loans to help retool assembly lines and build battery factories.

Executive orders issued by Mr. Trump on Inauguration Day amount to a sweeping repudiation of a centerpiece of former President Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s multibillion-dollar program to address climate change, which Republicans cast as a campaign to ban gasoline cars.

The orders also present a challenge to automakers that have invested billions of dollars in electric vehicles, in part because the Biden administration encouraged them to. But some of the orders appear to bypass Congress or federal rule-making procedures, which could make them vulnerable to lawsuits and even resistance from within the Republican Party.

While framed as a way to revive the American auto industry, the orders could cause U.S. carmakers to fall behind if they scale back their electric-vehicle programs while Asian and European automakers continue perfecting the technology, analysts say. Already, 50 percent of car sales in China are electric or plug-in hybrids, and Chinese automakers like BYD are selling more cars around the world, taking customers away from established car companies, including American manufacturers.

An executive order entitled “Unleashing American Energy” and signed by the president on Monday instructs federal agencies to immediately pause disbursement of funds allocated by Congress that were part of the Biden effort to push the auto industry toward vehicles with no tailpipe emissions.

Among other things, the funds helped states to install fast chargers along major highways and provided tax credits of up to $7,500 for buyers of new electric vehicles and $4,000 to buyers of used models. The credits effectively made the cost of buying some electric cars roughly on par with prices for cars with gasoline or diesel engines.

Mr. Trump also rescinded an aspirational Biden executive order that called for 50 percent of new vehicles sold in 2030 to be fully electric, plug-in hybrids or vehicles that run on hydrogen fuel cells.

And Mr. Trump said the administration would seek to revoke California’s authority to establish air-quality standards that are stricter than federal rules. That would have a broad effect. California is aiming for 100 percent of new-car sales to be electric by 2035, and some of its standards are copied by at least 17 other states.

“The impact of this will be significant,” said Shay Natarajan, a partner at Mobility Impact Partners, a private equity firm that invests in sustainable transportation.

If demand for electric vehicles flags, as it has in other countries like Germany that cut incentives, she noted, carmakers could be left with costly, underused electric-vehicle and battery factories.

“Federal funding for E.V. and battery manufacturing will be harder to access, increasing the risk of stranded capital for manufacturing projects already underway,” Ms. Natarajan said in an email.

Representatives of the fossil-fuel industry celebrated the president’s action, while environmentalists lamented what they said was a serious setback to efforts to cut greenhouse gas emissions and reduce urban air pollution caused by cars.

“This is a new day for American energy,” Mike Sommers, the president of the American Petroleum Institute, said in a statement, “and we applaud President Trump for moving swiftly to chart a new path where U.S. oil and natural gas are embraced, not restricted.”

Katherine García, a transportation expert at the Sierra Club, said: “Rolling back vehicle emission safeguards harms our health, our wallets and our climate. We will fight him at every turn of the road.”

But the end effect may not be as broad as the forceful language in Mr. Trump’s executive orders suggests.

Funds to encourage electric-vehicle sales and manufacturing were enshrined in legislation that the president cannot unilaterally repeal. Mr. Trump also cannot revoke rules that the Treasury Department and other government agencies established to determine how the money would be handed out merely with a stroke of the pen. Any attempt to short-circuit the laborious process of proposing new regulations that includes seeking comments from the public will almost surely invite credible legal challenges.

The Department of Energy has agreed to lend billions to carmakers like Rivian, which will receive $6 billion for a factory near Atlanta to produce electric sport utility vehicles. The loan agreements, some finalized in the waning days of the Biden administration, are binding contracts.

Much of the money has flowed to congressional districts in states like Georgia, Ohio, South Carolina and Tennessee where Republicans dominate local politics. Their representatives may hesitate to repeal laws that have brought their districts jobs and investment. That is a challenge for Republican leaders wrangling slim majorities in the House and Senate.

Ultimately, individuals and families will decide what cars they buy. Electric vehicles and plug-in hybrids are gaining market share not only because of subsidies, but also because they offer rapid acceleration and lower fuel costs. Cars that run on fossil fuels have been losing share, though that could change if financial incentives are removed from battery-powered cars and trucks.

The abrupt shift in political direction presents a quandary for automakers. Some may welcome promises by the president to rescind emissions and air-quality standards that force manufacturers to sell more electric cars than they might like. But elimination of federal subsidies could upset their financial planning when most are struggling to earn or increase profits.

The about-face on electric-vehicle policies adds to a climate of uncertainty and peril heightened by the president’s promise to impose 25 percent tariffs on goods from Canada and Mexico, which are major suppliers of cars and car parts to the United States.

The U.S. auto industry “will be shattered by tariffs on assembled vehicles or parts at this level,” Carl Weinberg, chief economist at High Frequency Economics, said in a note to clients Tuesday.

Some carmakers seemed to applaud the president’s actions, while others were noncommittal.

“President Trump’s clear focus on policies that support a robust and competitive manufacturing base in the United States is hugely positive,” Stellantis, which owns Dodge, Jeep, Ram, Chrysler and other brands, said in a statement.

Mary T. Barra, the chief executive of General Motors, congratulated Mr. Trump on Monday on X and said that the company “looks forward to working together on our shared goal of a strong U.S. automotive industry.”

There is no sign that Elon Musk — the chief executive of Tesla and head of what Mr. Trump is calling the Department of Government Efficiency — is using his influence to blunt the attack on electric vehicles. Tesla accounts for slightly less than half the electric cars sold in the United States, and almost all its vehicles qualify for $7,500 tax credits.

Four of the 16 cars and trucks that can be purchased with the help of that tax break are made by Tesla. G.M. is the only automaker that has more eligible models, at five. No other company has more than two qualifying vehicles.

Mr. Musk has previously said that the government should get rid of all subsidies and that Tesla would suffer less than other automakers. But analysts note that Tesla’s sales and profits would be hit hard if Mr. Trump successfully repealed or truncated the electric-vehicle tax credit, California’s clean-air waiver and other such policies.

Tesla did not respond to a request for comment.

During an appearance before Trump supporters in Washington on Monday, Mr. Musk, who is also the chief executive of SpaceX, exulted that the president had promised to send astronauts to Mars. “Can you imagine how awesome it will be to have astronauts plant the flag on another planet for the first time?” Mr. Musk said. He did not mention cars.

World

Israeli military chief steps down over October 7 Hamas massacre: 'Weighs on me every day'

Published

6 hours ago

January 21, 2025

Press Room

Israeli military chief steps down over October 7 Hamas massacre: 'Weighs on me every day'

Join Fox News for access to this content

Plus special access to select articles and other premium content with your account – free of charge.

By entering your email and pushing continue, you are agreeing to Fox News’ Terms of Use and Privacy Policy, which includes our Notice of Financial Incentive.

Please enter a valid email address.

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) chief of staff, Lt. Gen. Herzi Halevi, announced his resignation Tuesday, taking responsibility for the military’s failures during the Oct. 7 Hamas terrorist attacks.

His departure, set for March 2025, marks the end of a decorated four-decade military career and has ignited political turmoil, with opponents of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu calling on the Israeli leader to step down.

“On the morning of October 7, the IDF under my command failed in its mission to protect Israel’s citizens. This failure weighs on me every day and will do so for the rest of my life,” Halevi wrote in his resignation letter, addressing the IDF’s failure during the unprecedented assault by Hamas, which left over 1,400 Israelis dead and dozens abducted.

Despite the October 7 tragedy, Halevi highlighted the IDF’s achievements under his leadership, including operations that weakened Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran’s regional influence. “The IDF managed to rise from a very challenging starting point to conduct intense combat over more than a year and three months across seven theaters of operation,” he stated. “The military achievements of the IDF have transformed the Middle East.”

BITTERSWEET REJOICING AS FIRST HOSTAGES RETURN TO ISRAEL AFTER 471 DAYS IN CAPTIVITY

Lt. Gen. Herzi Halevi holds a situational assessment and discussion with reserve commanders on the Lebanese border. (IDF Spokesman’s Unit)

Halevi said, “The objectives of the war have not yet been fully achieved. The IDF will continue fighting to dismantle Hamas’s governing capabilities, secure the return of all hostages, and strengthen security conditions to ensure the safe return of residents to their homes.” He emphasized that his resignation followed the cease-fire and a new deal for hostage returns.

Prime Minister Netanyahu thanked Halevi for his service in a statement from his office: “The Prime Minister thanked the Chief of Staff for his many years of service and leadership during the War of Revival across seven fronts, which brought significant achievements to the State of Israel.” Defense Minister Israel Katz also praised Halevi’s contributions, noting, “He will continue to fulfill his duties and oversee an orderly transition process until the end of his tenure.”

Halevi’s resignation marks the most significant exit from Israel’s security establishment in the wake of the events of Oct. 7. Netanyahu has declined to take responsibility for those failures, repeatedly stating that accountability will come only after the war.

ISRAEL, HAMAS CEASE-FIRE DEAL COULD ENABLE REARMING OF GAZA TERRORISTS

Memorials at the site of the Oct. 7 Hamas terror attack on the Supernova music festival near Kibbutz Re’im, Israel, on May 27, 2024. (Kobi Wolf/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Opposition leaders used Halevi’s resignation to escalate criticism of Netanyahu. Opposition leader Yair Lapid stated, “I salute Lieutenant General Halevi for his integrity. Now it’s time for the Prime Minister and his disastrous government to take responsibility and resign.” Former Defense Minister Benny Gantz echoed this, calling Halevi’s decision ethical and commendable. “The government must follow his example and establish a state commission of inquiry to restore public trust,” he added. Avigdor Lieberman also urged Netanyahu and his cabinet to step down.

To date, the establishment of a state commission of inquiry into the events of Oct. 7 has not been approved by the Israeli government. Knesset member Orit Farkash-Hacohen announced that she will submit a bill on Wednesday to establish such a commission, following the resignation of the IDF chief of staff.

Families of Oct. 7 victims demanded accountability from both the military and government, calling for a state inquiry. “We will not rest until a commission is established to prevent future disasters,” they said in a statement.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Tuesday held meetings at Mount Hermon with senior defense and security officials. (IDF)

Halevi’s resignation adds to pressure on Netanyahu, whose government faces historically low approval from the public, according to recent opinion polls.

Speculation over Halevi’s successor has already begun, with leading candidates including Eyal Zamir, the current director-general of the Ministry of Defense who previously served as deputy chief of staff under former Chief of Staff Aviv Kochavi. Other candidates for the position include Northern Command Chief Maj. Gen. Uri Gordin and the current deputy chief of staff, Amir Baram, who reportedly asked Halevi to step down several weeks ago.

World

EU focus on Mediterranean ignores Canary Island, claims president

Published

7 hours ago

January 21, 2025

Press Room

EU focus on Mediterranean ignores Canary Island, claims president

Fernando Clavijo met Home Affairs Commissioner Magnus Brunner in Strasbourg. “When you close one door, migrants exit from another.”

The Canary Islands suffers from less focus from the EU than the Mediterranean in relation to irregular migration, despite experiencing the largest number ever of arrivals by sea, the island’s regional government’s President Fernando Clavijo said during a meeting with Home Affairs Commissioner Magnus Brunner in Strasbourg on Tuesday.

“We demand solidarity because migrants are not landing in the Canary Islands or Spain; they are landing in Europe,” Clavijo told Euronews before the meeting, during which Brunner assured him that he would travel to the Canary Islands to assess the situation.

In an interview with Euronews, the Spanish region’s president claimed that the EU has been focusing on addressing the migration issue in the Mediterranean Sea while ignoring his territory.

“This works like communicating vessels: the EU has shielded the Mediterranean, and when you close a door, migrants exit from another,” he argued. “Now we have an accumulation of people ready to sail from countries like Morocco, Gambia, Senegal, and especially Mauritania. We ask to be treated with the same measures adopted for the Mediterranean.”

Indeed, the so-called “Atlantic route” or “Western Africa route” saw almost 47,000 arrivals in 2024, an increase of 18% compared to 2023. According to NGO Caminando Fronteras, 9,757 people died in 2024 along this route, while the International Organization for Migration (IOM) recorded 1,062 victims.

This increase occurred as flows of irregular migrants decreased along several other routes to Europe, marking a significant 38% drop in irregular border crossings into the EU in 2024 compared to the previous year.

While some countries like Italy or Greece saw fewer people irregularly crossing their borders or landing on their shores, the Canary Islands face “absolute overflow”, as Clavijo described it.

Currently, migrants mainly arrive in El Hierro, the westernmost of the Canary Islands. Adults remain on average 10–15 days in the archipelago before being transferred to mainland Spain. However, unaccompanied minors are hosted where they arrive, as the Spanish constitution assigns responsibility for them to each regional community.

At present, Canary Islands authorities are hosting 5,812 unaccompanied minors, a thousand of whom are expected to be granted refugee status. “It is unfair that only one government has to bear all the pressure without knowing how many people will come or for how long,” Clavijo said, emphasizing that El Hierro Island has a population of 10,000 but saw almost 30,000 arrivals last year. “Although the Canarian people have a history of emigration and understand what it means, there is already some discontent.”

Distribution of migrants and Frontex on African shores

To alleviate pressure on his islands, Fernando Clavijo has specific requests for Madrid and Brussels. On a national level, he wants to establish an automatic distribution mechanism for migrants as soon as the reception capacity of a regional community is exceeded. Additionally, he calls for an “extraordinary distribution” to relocate a significant number of minors and the allocation of adequate financial resources from the central government to address the upcoming flows.

If Pedro Sánchez’s government fails to provide solutions, the relationship with Madrid will deteriorate, and tensions will rise, Clavijo warned. The Canary Islands government claims it only received €50 million to manage the hosting of unaccompanied minors, while the resources needed amount to €184 million, he claimed.

Clavijo belongs to the regional party Coalición Canaria, and his coalition includes the centre-right Partido Popular, while Prime Minister Sánchez leads PSOE, Spain’s socialist party.

At the European level, Clavijo’s main requests include redistributing migrants arriving in the Canary Islands among EU member states, deploying the European Border and Coast Guard (Frontex) to the Atlantic islands, and working with African countries to prevent departures. “Distributing 5,800 minors within Europe is a perfectly manageable number. But concentrating all of them in a fragmented and remote territory makes it impossible to adequately care for them,” he stated.

Clavijo hopes the EU can strike a deal with Western African countries, similar to agreements with Tunisia or Egypt. He noted that the €210 million promised to Mauritania by Ursula von der Leyen one year ago as part of a partnership has yet to reach the country.

In his view, these deals should focus more on developing local economies than merely preventing people from leaving their countries. “There will be no walls or border protections strong enough to stop people from seeking a future,” he said.

Clavijo also advocates for sending Frontex officials to Western African countries and Canary Island shores to save lives by preventing departures in the former and rescuing people at sea in the latter.

However, deploying the EU Coast Guard to a specific area requires a request from a competent national government, which Spain has yet to make. Brunner promised Clavijo he would discuss the matter with Spanish authorities at a meeting scheduled for February 17.

Frontex’s presence in a third country is more complex to arrange, as it requires a working agreement between the EU and the country, approved by the Council and the European Parliament. Currently, the only African states where Frontex can operate are Nigeria and Cape Verde.