January 6 Committee Gets Started

The select committee to investigate the January 6 attack held their first hearing on Tuesday, ...

By
51

The select committee to investigate the January 6 attack held their first hearing on Tuesday, our hosts are here to discuss the substance and politics of what we heard. Plus, the CDC is out with new guidelines recommending vaccinated Americans wear masks indoors in certain parts of the county. Can Jonah contain his anger at the CDC’s messaging? And why are opinions on Simone Biles’ decision to withdraw from competition a race to the bottom?

Show Notes:

You're out of free articles
Create an account to unlock 1 more articles
By signing up with your email, you agree to The Dispatch’s privacy policy and terms and conditions
Already have an account? Sign In
By
Comments (51)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Avatar photo
    Ben Connelly

    Good analysis, but I must admit I doubt Sarah’s right that the mainstream media won’t cover the hearings. They’ll cover anything that’s bad for Trump or Republicans. Even when there was no news at all about the Russia-Mueller stuff they would come up with a reason to lead with that. So I think they will cover these hearings even if there’s no disagreement. That said I think this investigation is more serious than all the Russia nonsense.

    Collapse
  2. Avatar photo
    Simon J. Dodd

    Why in the world that 15% continues to stay, and how they look themselves in the mirror knowing they're complicit everywhere the bus driven by the 75% goes, I will never understand. Just. Walk. Away.

    Collapse
  3. Avatar photo
    Elizabeth

    Can we all acknowledge that Simone Biles could destroy any of the "tough guy conservatives" whining on twitter about her?

    Collapse
  4. Rodney Rubert

    Sarah, how many children 4 and under have been hospitalized with COVID?

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      George.Skinner

      1237.

      https://gis.cdc.gov/grasp/COVIDNet/COVID19_5.html

      Collapse
      1. Rodney Rubert

        Very nice data source, thank you. I don't think a peak of 40 per month nationwide deserves the attention Sarah was giving it concerning her Brisket......

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photo
          George.Skinner

          Yeah….
          Here’s the thing about mothers, though - that number isn’t zero, either.

          Collapse
  5. Avatar photo
    Craig Chaney

    Quick fact check: In the famous picture of Kerri Strug she is being carried by her coach, Bela Karolyi. He is not Dr. Nassar, who is the convicted sexual abuser of so many of the USA gymnasts. However, Karolyi has been accused of fostering a verbally and emotionally abusive environment and certainly appears to be part of the problem that is USA Gymnastics, Inc.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photocircle-angle-nib
      Sarah Isgur vertical-nib Author

      I think he meant this one: https://images.app.goo.gl/a4fxBQKeYRZdv7mv9

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        Jason Gibson

        I was thinking the same thing....thank you for the clarification. However for once (it doesn't happen often) I failed to see David's point here. Unless Kerri Strug has actually stated that she was pushed into pushing through due to predation I don't think that's a fair point.

        That being said I agree with everyone else (at the dispatch) about Simone Biles. I was watching an interview of her on NBC (maybe the day before) and it occurred to me how much pressure was being put on her. She was being referred to as the goat, as the face of courage regarding Nasser (a very personal experience being discussed in an interview in front of EVERYONE), race of course always comes up, and it occurred to me that this remarkable athlete who is actually very soft spoken and kind (everything Tom Brady is not) was being placed on a level she deserved, but few would actually want

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photo
          Aylene Wright

          That's what annoys me about the "Kerri Strug was a victim, not a hero" revisionist take. At best, it totally ignores Strug's own comments. At worst, it basically assumes she was brainwashed, or even deliberately lying.

          In general, the condescending "but you ARE a victim, you just don't realize it yet" attitude annoys me to no end, and it doesn't only come from the left side of the aisle. The AATs who are constantly telling anti-Trump conservatives "the Left will never love you" have a very similar mentality.

          That being said, if Strug herself eventually issues some statement that agrees with the revisionist take, I would accept that.

          Collapse
  6. R. James

    The GOP's reaction to Kinsinger and Cheney's participation just underscores how the only principle that matters for Republicans anymore is loyalty to Trump. I agree that the Commission will need to uncover more information in order to break through to median voter or even those right of center people who voted for Trump in 2020. I think the more interesting questions lie not on what happened on January 6th but what was the Trump Campaigns role in getting that crowd to capitol on January 6th in the first place and was there any coordination between the Trump campaign and the Proud Boys, Three Percenters or Oath Keepers leading up to January 6th. If they can make that link, it's going force a lot of people to pay attention. I disagree with Sarah's take on Kinsinger and Cheney. They have no duty to carry water for the Republican narrative. What is the conservative positiib on an attempt to overthrow a duly elected government? A conservative would be against the coup attempt. That's the viewpoint Cheney and Kinsinger are presenting. If McCarthy and his clown car wants to present their alternative position, they can seat their five representatives. This is the downside to pulling your own representatives from the committee.

    Collapse
  7. Lylegruby

    Concerning Sarah’s point about how the January 6th Commission won’t matter because it doesn’t have credibility with Republicans. I agree that it won’t matter to a big swath of GOP’ers. But I do think it will matter to moderates and non-Trumper GOP’ers. And, I don’t think the GOP can get very far without those people. So, it seems like it will ultimately matter to the GOP.

    Collapse
  8. Jason Runyan

    When David gave the numbers of favorablity of Liz Cheney vs the others, I felt like I was steel-toed kicked in the nu... guts. How depressing that our country has fallen into such a toilet.

    My response to the whataboutism, "You're correct, the Republican party no longer has the moral high ground when it comes to mobs attacking police and destroying property. Congratulations!"

    I agree that Nancy Pelosi may share SOME of the blame for not preparing the police for the riot, maybe 20%. But to her defense, this has historically not been a republican "thing". Historically they have been respectful. What is disgraceful is that republicans are quick to bring up Ashley Babbitt, a tragically brainwashed QANON supporter (as Greg Gutfeld and others like to bring up, although fail to mention her QANON support) as a way to excoriate the police, after months of criticizing BLM / Antifa attacks against police and private property, yet NEVER mention that the NUMBER ONE person that could have saved her and stopped the entire thing hours earlier, and was the man who lied and incited the mob was Donald Trump. He could have stopped it any any time, but chose to allow it to stroke his own ego. That is the crime that needs to be investigated. I know I should be compassionate for people that are in a brainwashed cult, like the Manson Family, the Order of the Solar Temple, the people that forced women to feed their babies cyanide for Jim Jones, and the people that put sarin in the Tokyo subway for Shoko Asahara, but I find it very difficult.

    Regarding what Sarah said, I also watched it start to finish (watching hearings is sort of a hobby), and while Jim Jordan, who pre-Trump was one of my favorite people to watch in hearings, would have turned this from a committee to find the truth, into a Trump defending, partisan clown show. I like how the hearing was respectful and wasn't a circus. One of the only hearings I have seen that happen recently. Much more like the 9/11 commission and some of the others like in the old days.

    Collapse
  9. Avatar photo
    E7a56c3893

    Love Sarah but have to disagree with her on the Liz/Adam criticism. The Republican caucus made their choice the night of the insurrection by choosing to not certify our legitimate, closely contested election. Then the caucus attacked Cheney and replaced her with Stefanik. And somehow after all this Liz owes it to her caucus to "represent their concerns" when it isn't even clear what would constitute a "legitimate" concern, other than the concern of how culpable the GOP is in fomenting a lethal narrative.

    I for one applaud Liz's principled stand and support her in her renegade mission to embarrass her peers, the very same peers who were quick to abandon her in public but sheepishly apologize in private. Just because the GOP chooses to surrender itself to one shameful, pathetic excuse for a man does not mean it is her duty to do the same. If the caucus is so concerned, then they can call off their dogs on Fox News and Newsmax who belittle traumatized capitol officers and instead dedicate airtime to discussing these "fair concerns".

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Aylene Wright

      I think that if Cheney was still in House leadership, the idea that she had some responsibility to represent her caucus actually would have some validity. But she's not, and it's obvious that McCarthy has totally washed his hands of her by writing her off as a "Pelosi Republican". I don't blame her for doing the same.

      Collapse
    2. Avatar photo
      Bryan Myrick

      Agree. I always appreciate Sarah's point-of-view, and at times she's a balancing voice of realism, but in order to finish off her criticism of Cheney she does need to do some itemizing of the list of "legitimate" concerns of Republicans that Cheney is supposed to carry into the commission. So much of the Republican concern has been to promote ancillary issues (e.g., security preparations prior to 1/6) as center-stage in order to shift focus. Should it be a matter in the commission's factfinding and final report? Absolutely, and if it isn't the entire process will have been a sham.

      Ultimately, I think Sarah's premise is off-base. The commission's work isn't to function as a clearinghouse for dueling partisan narratives; their purpose of to assemble facts and find truth about an absolutely non-partisan attack on the Congress. Now, the 1/6 insurrection wasn't 9/11 -- not even close. It was, though, similar in the sense that the horror of 9/11, from the point of the victims and the broader target -- the psyches of the entire American populace -- was universally felt to have no partisan political component. The same should be true of 1/6. It was an attack on a process and an institution that we all have a share in, and it the fact that there were (and are) partisan actors cheering it on is sort of irrelevant. So, back to the 9/11 Commission and Jamie Gorelick...

      Now, on the criticism of Pelosi's strategic blunder of not getting out of Jim Jordan's way when he was clearly (based on his recent performances on other high-profile committees) headed toward an epic beclowning of himself, and that could have been a moment for "middle America" (or at least the few independent voters who may watch these hearings) to do what they always do: pick their side by avoiding the crazy. Pelosi outfoxed herself, just as she did on the matter of impeachment when giving air to a "Republican-friendly" case for removing Trump from office might have done some good. But short of what might appear on her list of legitimate Republican points about 1/6, there isn't any good served by Sarah's idea that Cheney's role is to act as an avatar of whatever Jim Jordan might have said had he been seated.

      Collapse
    3. Avatar photo
      Rajeev

      She's the rare congress member in the Republican Party that has represented her constituents. She's done so by telling them the truth. It's the other members that have made up election fantasies that have added to the tension Trump wanted. They are the ones that are abandoning their constituents by creating waves of hysteria and playing to the worst instincts of their party. The fact that only two house Republicans are willing to stand up for these officers that protect them but an overwhelming majority of them are willing to overturn a legitimate election tells you the extent of the rot in the party and it is only getting worse.

      Collapse
  10. James D

    To Sarah's point regarding Pelosi nixing nominees, I must disagree. I completely agree that Pelosi is a huge partisan who puts partisan politics before the common good, but I don't think that having Jordan on the panel is a net good for the investigation. Sure, he would beclown himself, but what does that accomplish? Trump beclowned himself on a nearly daily basis for 4 years and the GOP base loved it. The kind of people Sarah wants Pelosi to reach are not, I think, inclined to view Jordan beclowning himself as actually beclowning himself, but rather as him "owning the libs", at which point you've permitted Jordan to sabotage the actual proceedings of the committee for no gain of support on the right.

    One thing I thought was a bit under-discussed is the interesting implications of Cheney's 15% approval. To me, this is actually much higher than I would have thought, and, given that it dovetails very closely with the Trump 16% disapprove, signals a big problem for the GOP.

    As Jonah noted, the GOP is currently a minoritarian party reliant on the EC to win victories despite a popular vote loss, and thus the people it loses at the margins matter deeply. If even ~10-15% of the GOP is emphatically *not* on board the Trump Train, it makes any 2024 run for Trump potentially disastrous for the GOP.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Rajeev

      Yeah the clown shows cheapen the investigation because it becomes like the first impeachment. People tune out because the Steve Bannon strategy works. Most people couldn't follow the first impeachment not just because the issues can be complicated but because tuning in means you have to watch the sideshows that cheapen the proceedings.

      Collapse
    2. GregS

      Yes - exactly. Sarah mentioned earlier how it was such a pleasant shock to see a committee perform its job like adults without any showboating or clownish behavior. And then she said that Pelosi should have let Jordan on the committee so he could be a clown.
      No.
      For once, let's actually try to do a good job and not let people who openly say they want to destroy an institution be in a position of power within that institution. Trump really took this to the next level, appointing lots of cabinet secretaries and undersecretaries who explicitly wanted to undermine their own departments. Letting Jordan or Banks onto the committee would have been more of the same.

      Collapse
Load More