Categories
Politics

How Hopes for a Bipartisan Jan. 6 Fee Fell Aside

The Republicans have so far shown no will or a way to oust Donald Trump from his position as the party’s de facto leader. And for now, that means they have to block for him.

Just a few weeks ago, it looked like a solid part of Republican lawmakers would be ready to support a commission to investigate the January 6th uprising in the Capitol.

Some established GOP strategists and former lawmakers have stated that they see this as an opportunity to make a clean break with Trump (although, admittedly, we’ve heard this before) by giving a full account of the role he is and his allies have played the events surrounding the violence in the Capitol.

But just as the bill released the Democratically controlled house yesterday, with the support of a small but significant minority of Republicans, the party leadership stepped into the opposition.

Suddenly it seems unlikely to pass the Senate where it will take 60 votes to override the filibuster threat. It’s the latest, and possibly the clearest, sign that Trump is firmly in control of the party’s direction. And that old obstructive approach by Senator Mitch McConnell, which he refined into an art form during the Obama presidency, might be the surest way to keep it going.

Republican lawmakers who fled for their lives as rioters and stormed the halls of Congress, including some who argued a few weeks ago that Trump must answer for his role in provoking the attack, are now against investigation.

Just before yesterday’s House vote, McConnell, the Republican leader, spoke out against the commission, painting it as partisan maneuvers just days after saying it was open to a launch.

“I made the decision to oppose the House Democrats’ weird and unbalanced proposal for another commission to investigate the January 6th events,” he said in the Senate, complaining that the deal reached in the House did not include an investigation into left violence.

It was a far cry from the harsh words McConnell uttered in the immediate aftermath of the Capitol attack, but this is not the first time the minority leader stepped in at the eleventh hour to stop an action that could possibly be Trump’s role at the provocation of Trump could expose the January 6 uprising. In February, he waited until shortly before a vote on Trump’s second impeachment to declare he would oppose it and effectively secured the former president’s acquittal on January 6th indictment.

In March, a poll by Monmouth University found that a solid majority of Americans believed that an independent commission should be set up to investigate the attacks. Only 37 percent prefer to have other “internal investigations” carried out. About half of Republicans supported a full independent investigation.

But in the weeks since then, Republican lawmakers and Conservative pundits have teamed up as Trump only got the party tighter under control before halfway through 2022. A number of other polls show that while Trump’s favoritism ratings across the country continued to decline, he retained broad Republican support.

This month House Republicans voted to remove Representative Liz Cheney from her post as conference chair for refusing to stop criticizing Trump’s false claims about the 2020 election. (Yesterday she was one of 35 Republicans in the House who voted for the commission.) The party’s leadership is now firmly behind Trump’s distortions.

Commentators on the conservative fringe played down the January 6 uprising before the blood in the Capitol ran dry, and sometimes floated conspiracy theories to justify it. More recently, top Republicans have begun to rely more heavily on this narrative.

“The fact calls it insurrection, it wasn’t,” Wisconsin Senator Ron Johnson, a staunch ally of Trump, told Fox News yesterday.

“By and large, the protests were peaceful, except that there were a number of people, basically agitators, who whipped the crowd and broke through the Capitol.”

Senator Chuck Schumer, the Democratic leader, denounced Johnson’s comments in the Senate today. “If there was ever any justification for creating a bipartisan commission to investigate and report on the truth behind the January 6th attack, this senator’s comments provide it,” Schumer said. “Republicans in both chambers are trying to rewrite history loyalty or fear of former President Donald Trump.”

As planned, the investigation would be largely based on the 9/11 Commission, which was approved in 2002 with broad support from both parties. Its work was publicly announced upon its completion in 2004, and its leaders endorsed the idea of ​​a similar commission of inquiry Jan. 6. This new investigation would include 10 commissioners appointed by both Democratic and Republican congressional leaders and empowered to To issue subpoenas. It would deliver results by December 31st.

Knowing that the party’s grassroots remain committed to Trump, Republicans want to portray the commission as partisans. Indeed, this could become a self-fulfilling lawsuit.

If the bipartisan commission does not pass the Senate, Democratic Committee leaders in both houses of Congress could continue investigating the January 6th events.

And House Democrats are already threatening to take an unqualified approach through existing committees or through the creation of new elected committees. Of course, such a strategy would better support the Republican argument that the Democrats are conducting a partisan investigation.

On Politics is also available as a newsletter. Sign up here to have it delivered to your inbox.

Is there anything you think we are missing? Do you want to see more? We’d love to hear from you. Email us at onpolitics@nytimes.com.

Categories
Politics

Home Backs Jan. 6 Fee, however Senate Path Dims

WASHINGTON – A sharply divided house voted on Wednesday to establish an independent commission to investigate the January 6th Capitol attack to overcome Republican opposition determined to halt high-profile coverage of the deadly pro-Trump uprising.

But even as the bill passed the House, top Republicans shut down arms to freak it in the Senate and protect former President Donald J. Trump and her party from re-examining their role in that day’s events.

The 252-175 votes in the House of Representatives, with four-fifths of Republicans opposed, indicated the difficult road ahead for the Senate proposal. Thirty-five Republicans resisted their leadership to support the bill.

The vote came hours after Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader, declared his opposition to the plan. Mr McConnell had only said the day before that he was open to voting in favor and that he previously had both Mr Trump’s role in sparking the attack and some Republicans’ efforts on Jan. 6 to block the certification of, loudly condemns the 2020 election results.

His reversal reflected broader efforts by the party to politically move beyond the attack on the Capitol – or to recast the riots as a largely peaceful protest – under pressure from Mr Trump and over concerns about the issue they were facing in the mid-term elections Tracked in 2022.

Proponents hailed the move to establish the commission as an ethical and practical imperative to fully understand the most violent attack on Congress in two centuries, and Mr Trump’s election lie that fueled it. Following the example of the panel that investigated the September 11, 2001 attacks, the 10-member commission would conduct an investigation from the convention halls and deliver results by December 31.

“I was on the floor of the Capitol with the spokesman in the chair and a howling mob attacked the United States Capitol,” said representative Zoe Lofgren, a California Democrat and chair of a committee that had already investigated the attack lively roll call before voting. She reminded colleagues of the “knocking on doors” and the “mutilated police officers”.

“We have to get to the bottom of this, not only to understand what happened before the sixth, but how we can prevent it from happening again – how we can protect the world’s oldest democracy in the future,” said Ms Lofgren.

However, the prospects for Senate passage deteriorated significantly after Mr. McConnell, along with his counterpart, Representative Kevin McCarthy of California, and Mr. Trump considered the Democratic and moderate Republican proposal of the House to be overly partisan and a duplicate of the ongoing law enforcement action Justice Department and close Congressional investigations.

“After careful consideration, I have decided to oppose the House Democrats’ weird and unbalanced proposal for another commission to investigate the January 6th,” said McConnell in the Senate.

Many ordinary Republican senators who had flirted with support for the commission idea also quickly agreed, arguing that the proposal wasn’t really bipartisan and that the investigation would take too long and learn too little. Their positions made it less likely that Democrats could win the 10 Republican votes they would need to hit the 60-vote threshold required to pass the bill in the evenly-divided Senate.

Republican leaders who witnessed the January 6 events and fled for their lives when an armed mob overtook their jobs had briefly considered supporting the commission out of fairness. The 9/11 Commission was adopted almost unanimously two decades ago, and its work was widely publicized.

Their recent opposition pointed to a colder political calculation propelling the Republican approach through 2022: Better to avoid a potentially uncontrollable reckoning centered on Mr Trump and the false claims of electoral fraud that he continues to proclaim.

“I want our medium-term message to address the issues that the American people are dealing with – jobs and wages and the economy, national security, safe roads, strong borders and such issues,” said Senator John Thune of South Dakota, Mr. McConnell’s No. 2. “Don’t Religious the 2020 Elections.”

After a bipartisan negotiation approved by Mr McCarthy, the outcome was disheartening to those who believed that Mr Trump’s resignation from the public scene and the reality of an assault on the seat of government could help ease strained Republican relations and democrats.

The two parties are expected to stall again on Thursday if Democrats over a 1, four months after the deaths of at least five people in connection with the invasion, which injured nearly 140 people and injured dozen of people. Vote $ 9 billion spending plan to strengthen Capitol defenses Millions of dollars in damage to the Capitol complex.

Democrats were furious. They had made several concessions to Mr McCarthy, believing that he would support the deal only to see he slammed it publicly for not investigating unrelated “political violence” on the left. Some Democrats said the episode only pointed out to them that there was no point in negotiating with Republicans over one of the big issues dividing the parties, including President Biden’s infrastructure proposal.

In the House of Representatives, Democratic leaders threatened to launch a more partisan investigation on January 6 through existing congressional committees or through the creation of a new selection committee if the commission’s proposal dies.

Democratic lawmakers and even some Republicans speculated that Mr McCarthy’s reluctance may have been driven in part by efforts to prevent harmful information about his own conversations with Mr Trump from coming to light around Jan. 6, at a time when he tries to help his party take back the house and become a spokesman.

“You have to ask them what they are afraid of,” California spokeswoman Nancy Pelosi told reporters. “But it sounds like they are afraid of the truth, and that is extremely unfortunate.”

New York Democrat Senator Chuck Schumer and majority leader, pledged to hold a Senate vote in the coming weeks to force Republicans to take a public position, despite not offering a specific date.

“The American people will see for themselves whether our Republican friends are on the side of the truth or on the side of Donald Trump’s great lie,” he said.

During the floor of the House debate, the Republicans who backed the panel tried repeatedly to make it a replay of the 9/11 commission whose leaders endorsed the new effort. Although the impeachment proceedings against the Senate and a handful of congressional committees have already produced a detailed report on that day, important questions remain, particularly about Mr Trump’s conduct and the roots of intelligence and security deficiencies.

“Make no mistake, it’s about the facts, it’s not partisan politics,” said Republican John Katko, Republican of New York, who was negotiating legislation to create the commission with Representative Bennie Thompson, Democrat of Mississippi.

“Jan. 6 will haunt this institution for a long time, ”said Michigan representative Fred Upton, another Republican who voted to set up the commission. “Five months later, we still have no answers to the basic questions: who knew what, when, and what did they do about it?”

Among the Republicans who voted for the commission was a well-known group of moderate and staunch critics of Mr Trump, many of whom either voted to charge him with the January 6 attack or otherwise condemned his actions. Most notable was the Wyoming representative Liz Cheney, who was fired from the party leadership last week for refusing to stop criticizing Mr Trump for his attempts to overthrow the election.

The supporters also counted a large number of established Republicans from conservative districts who, despite the politics, were shaken by the attack and want a thorough investigation.

Among the votes against were Republican Greg Pence, Republican of Indiana, and the brother of former Vice President Mike Pence, whose opposition to the freeze on the confirmation of the election results made him one of the main targets of pro-Trump rioters, of whom some erected a gallows outside the Capitol. In a statement, Representative Pence said Ms. Pelosi had attempted to appoint herself a “hanging judge” in order to carry out a “pretended political execution of Donald Trump”.

The scale of the Republican spills in Wednesday’s vote embarrassed Mr McCarthy at a time when he was vowing to unite the party and few Republicans were ready to defend their opposition during the debate. Mr Katko’s allies were particularly outraged that the minority leader stood in for him to make a deal and then released him when he did.

Democrats attempted to further embarrass Republicans by distributing an unusual letter from Capitol police officers expressing “deep disappointment” with Mr. McCarthy and Mr. McConnell.

“It is incomprehensible to believe that anyone could suggest that we move forward and get over it,” the officials wrote in the unsigned letter.

In the Senate, a small group of moderate Republicans suggested Wednesday that they would continue to be interested in running a commission, albeit with changes to staff appointments. But Mr. McConnell left very little chance that his executive team could come to yes.

Mr. McConnell had emerged as one of the most outspoken Republican critics of Mr. Trump on Jan. 6. He blamed him for the loss of the House, Senate, and White House, and inspired the deadliest attack on Congress in 200 years. But in the months since Mr. Trump regained control of the party, Mr. McConnell has been increasingly reluctant to stir his anger.

On Wednesday, he insisted that he believed he could get to the bottom of what had happened, but argued that the ongoing investigation by the Justice Department and non-partisan Senate committees was sufficient. In reality, the scope of this work is likely to be much narrower than what a commission could investigate.

“The facts have come out,” said McConnell, “and they will come out.”

Categories
Politics

January 6 U.S. Capitol assault: Home passes fee invoice

The House passed bipartisan bill on Wednesday to set up an independent commission to investigate the January 6th uprising in the U.S. Capitol, while GOP leaders opposed its passage.

The plan called for a panel to investigate the attack on lawmakers by a crowd of Trump supporters that killed five people, including a Capitol police officer. Democratic and Republican leaders would each appoint five people to the 10-person commission, which would issue a report upon completion of its investigation. The panel would have the power to summon.

The Democratic House, with the support of the GOP, passed the move on a 252-175 vote when lawmakers sought more information on what had led to the violent attempt to disrupt the transfer of power to President Joe Biden. Kevin McCarthy, minority chairman of the House of Representatives, R-Calif., Opposed the plan and his leadership team officially called on Republicans to vote against it. 35 GOP representatives supported the measure, while 175 Republicans voted against.

The bill will have a harder time getting through the Senate. While Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, DN.Y., plans to vote on it, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., Announced his opposition on Wednesday. Democrats would only need 10 GOP votes to approve the Senate move, but McConnell’s stance is a blow to his prospects.

“It’s not at all clear what new facts or additional investigation another commission could actually build on the existing efforts of law enforcement and Congress,” McConnell said. “The facts have come out and they will come out.”

CNBC policy

Read more about CNBC’s political coverage:

Ahead of Wednesday’s vote, Schumer said the Chamber’s Republican leaders “are giving in to Donald Trump and proving that the Republican Party is still drunk on the big lie.”

A crowd of former President Donald Trump’s supporters, fueled by his unsubstantiated claims that widespread fraud drove Biden’s 2020 election victory, overran the Capitol while lawmakers officially counted the president’s victory. The rioters came within moments of reaching members of Congress and former Vice President Mike Pence – who rejected Trump’s pressure to use his ceremonial role in the process to reverse the election result and chants of “Hang Mike Pence!”

House Democrats, along with 10 Republicans, indicted Trump for instigating a riot in his final days in office. The Senate acquitted the former president after he left the White House. All 50 members of the Democratic caucus and seven Republicans voted to condemn him.

Trump supporters near the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021 in Washington, DC.

Shay Horse | NurPhoto | Getty Images

Republican criticism of the commission agreement comes from the fact that much of the party is trying to downplay attempts to disrupt the transfer of power or to compare it with other political violence or property damage. House Republicans in particular have set themselves the goal of curbing criticism of Trump – their party’s most popular figure – as they seek to regain control of the House in next year’s midterm elections.

In his statement announcing his rejection of the commission agreement on Tuesday, McCarthy suggested that the panel should have a broader scope. He also said he feared this could redouble the investigative efforts of the congressional committees and the Justice Department.

“Given the political misdirections that have undermined this process, given the now dual and potentially counterproductive nature of these efforts, and the short-sighted scope of the speaker who did not examine the interrelated forms of political violence in America, I cannot support this legislation,” said McCarthy. Who voted against counting Arizona and Pennsylvania certified election results for 2020, said.

House of Representatives Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy speaks on the day the House of Representatives is expected to vote on laws to provide $ 1.9 trillion new coronavirus relief at the U.S. Capitol in Washington on February 26, 2021.

Kevin Lemarque | Reuters

Prior to Wednesday’s vote, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., Accused Republicans of comparing armed disruption of power to other violence. He said the GOP appeared to have tried “to get the issue so confused that we lose sight of the January 6 uprising”.

Hoyer added that he “knows of no other case that corresponds to the attack on the Capitol during his four decades in Congress.”

Republicans’ concerns come after a bilateral legislature, Homeland Security Committee chairman Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., And senior member, Rep. John Katko, RN.Y. brokered the deal. Katko responded Wednesday to concerns from his party that Democrats might use the panel for political purposes.

“I ask my colleagues to take into account the fact that this commission is built for work, is being depoliticized and getting the results we need,” he said.

House spokeswoman Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., Has also criticized GOP lawmakers for speaking out against the commission agreement. Commenting on NBC News, she said she saw “cowardice on the part of some Republicans” for not “trying to find the truth.”

Before Wednesday’s vote, she called the commission, which she said was vital to understanding the attack on the Capitol.

“This legislation is about something bigger than the Commission, as important as the Commission is. This legislation is about our democracy,” Pelosi said.

Subscribe to CNBC on YouTube.

Categories
Politics

Home reaches deal on fee

Homeland Security Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson (D-MS) interviewed witnesses during a hearing on “Global Threats to the Homeland” at the Rayburn House office building on Capitol Hill September 17, 2020 in Washington, DC.

Chip Somodevilla | Getty Images

Key House members announced on Friday an agreement to form an independent commission to investigate the Jan. 6 uprising in the U.S. Capitol as lawmakers attempt to understand the shortcomings that allowed a pro-Trump mob to do the Overrun buildings.

The panel will investigate the circumstances surrounding the attack and the factors that led to it, according to Homeland Security Committee chairman Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., And Senior Member John Katko, RN.Y., of the Negotiated deal.

The commission will consist of 10 members who cannot be current government officials. The majority of Democrats will elect five, including the chairman, and Republicans will elect five, including the vice chairman.

The group has subpoena powers and issues a report when the investigation is complete. The House is expected to vote on a draft law to set up the commission as early as next week.

“Inaction – or just moving on – is just not an option,” Thompson said in a statement. “In creating this commission, we are taking responsibility for protecting the US Capitol.”

In a separate statement, Katko said, “I believe we have a fair, solid bill that provides responses to the federal response and a willingness to ensure that something like this never happens again.”

CNBC policy

Read more about CNBC’s political coverage:

Supporters of former President Donald Trump stormed the Capitol in January while lawmakers counted President Joe Biden’s election victory. Five people, including a Capitol police officer, died in the attack.

The mob entered the legislature after weeks of unsubstantiated claims by the former president that widespread fraud cost them the president’s race against Biden. The House indicted Trump during his final days in the White House for instigating a riot. The Senate acquitted him after he resigned from office.

Democrats and some Republicans have insisted that lawmakers better understand what led to the violent attempt to disrupt the transfer of power. They questioned how insurgents and security breaches allowed rioters to sing “Hang Mike Pence” and visit House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to find the best government officials in a matter of moments.

Many Republicans – some of whom voted not to count the certified state election results after Congress withdrew from the mob – have questioned the need for a commission to investigate the events of the January 6 insurrection or play down the attack.

Supporters of US President Donald Trump climb against a wall during a protest against the confirmation of the results of the 2020 presidential election by Congress at the Capitol in Washington on January 6, 2021.

Jim Urquhart | Reuters

Kevin McCarthy, minority chairman of the House of Representatives, Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., Spoke to reporters Friday morning and called it “very worrying” that the panel is only investigating Capitol security in the context of January 6 and not Good Friday should when a man rammed a car into a checkpoint and killed a Capitol policeman.

McCarthy said he hadn’t read the announced agreement.

In a statement on Friday, Pelosi said: “It is imperative that we seek the truth about what happened on January 6th with an independent, bipartisan 9/11 commission to clarify the facts, causes and security to investigate and report on the terrorist mob attack. ” The California Democrat reiterated that the House expects to come up with a separate bill to provide additional funding for the security of the Capitol.

The commission’s announcement comes days after House Republicans removed MP Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., From her leadership position when she pounded Trump for spreading conspiracy theories about the elections. Cheney, one of ten Republicans in the House of Representatives who voted for the indictment against the former president, joined McCarthy in breaking off support for a commission that was supposed to focus only on the January 6 insurrection.

A hearing earlier this week also underscored the Republicans’ efforts to minimize the attack on the Capitol. Rep. Andrew Clyde, R-Ga., Claimed it was not a riot but a “normal tourist visit”.

Subscribe to CNBC on YouTube.

Categories
Politics

California asks Federal Maritime Fee to take motion on delivery delays

A container ship enters the port of Los Angeles on February 1, 2021 in San Pedro, California.

Mario Tama | Getty Images

Just a week after CNBC’s two-month investigation into shipping companies’ rejection of US agricultural exports, California is urging the Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) to take immediate action. A letter to the FMC was signed by several state officials requesting immediate action to review the airlines’ export policies.

Shipping companies turned down hundreds of millions of dollars in US agricultural export containers in October and November and instead sent empty containers to China to fill with more profitable Chinese exports, according to the CNBC investigation.

In the letter received from CNBC, state officials said, “We seek your assistance in addressing the current delays and ongoing shipping problems in California ports, which are having a significant impact on the business of companies across the state. In particular, the business of our The Agriculture Sector, who is heavily dependent on the export markets is badly affected. “

California, the letter reads, is the country’s largest agricultural exporter and producer, with more than $ 21 billion in annual agricultural exports requiring and supporting an estimated 157,800 full-time jobs. These exports benefit the economy directly by generating $ 25 billion in additional economic activity.

The call for proposals letter comes after FMC announced in November an investigation into trade with key ports in California, New York, and New Jersey to determine whether airlines’ refusal to ship US exports was a violation against the Shipping Act.

The law makes it unlawful for air carriers to “improperly refuse to do business or negotiate,” “boycott or take other concerted action that will result in an improper refusal” or “engage in behavior that involves the use of intermodal services inappropriately restrict “.

The FMC declined to comment.

The World Shipping Council (WSC), whose members control approximately 90 percent of the global container fleet, and the Pacific Merchant Shipping Association (PMSA) responded to California officials and urged better communication between them compared to the involvement of the FMC.

In a two-page letter to CNBC, the two groups accused the record surge in imports from China as a catalyst for the port’s efficiency and the associated fees that importers and exporters pay.

The WSC and PMSA listed the export sales of the various farms exported from the Port of Los Angeles, saying they were “up significantly” year over year. The group then called it a “false impression that California’s agricultural exports are being excluded from access to the international supply chain”.

CNBC previously reported that while agricultural export volumes for 2020 were larger than 2019 due to the U.S. Phase One trade agreement with China, purchases fell short of targets. According to the Peterson Institute for International Economics, China imported $ 100 billion of the U.S. goods agreed under the deal – roughly 58% of the targeted $ 173.1 billion. Exports are only official once they have been transported and processed in the country of destination. However, the increase in agricultural exports pales in comparison to the increased ration of empty export containers.

CNBC launched its own review of import and export data, and concluded that the airlines rejected an estimated 177,938 containers, called TEUs (20-foot equivalents), in October and November. This was the result of an analysis of the data compiled by the Census Bureau and the ports of Los Angeles, Long Beach, California and New York and New Jersey. The total value of lost export trade from these ports is $ 632 million.

Prioritize empty export containers

The data showing the increase in empty containers being shipped back to China corresponds to the timing of the carriers who informed agricultural exporters in mid-October that they would prioritize empty export containers over agricultural exports.

The air carriers also said they would raise prices on US agricultural exports if the goods were moved. The rise in agricultural export fees continues. Last week, ZIM Integrated Shipping Services announced agricultural exporters that they would be introducing surcharges for all cargo from the US to China and other Asian countries between $ 150 and $ 500 per container starting Feb.17.

CNBC asked ZIM for a comment.

According to the CNBC investigation, the total export container deficit for the ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles was 136,392 TEU. An estimated 41,546 TEU were denied from the ports of New York and New Jersey.

To calculate the value of the potential trade loss resulting from the rejection of agricultural exports, CNBC used the containerized agricultural export price for soybeans / oilseeds / grain in the Port of Los Angeles, which can be found on the US Census website, USA Trade Online.

The value of this export is USD 3,552 per TEU. The value of the lost trade is likely to be higher as the value of the Ag’s raw materials fluctuates widely. Soybeans are at the lower end of the commercial value spectrum.

This balance was calculated using the difference between the actual empty exports in 2020 and the share of export empty in 2019.

However, CNBC analysis shows that the pattern of the growing US export container deficit extends beyond October and November.

Based on the trade data, empty container exports began to rise as early as June for Los Angeles, July for Long Beach, and August for New York and New Jersey. From July to November a total of 297,997 TEU from the ports of Los Angeles, Long Beach as well as New York and New Jersey were denied a container deficit of USD 1.1 billion.

“The core problem is that a rapidly recovering China has revived its export economy and pays huge premiums for containers, which makes it more profitable to send them back empty than to refill them,” said Peter Friedmann, executive director of the Agriculture Transportation Coalition. “In the Port of Los Angeles, three out of four boxes returning to Asia are empty, compared to the normal rate of 50%. Food is piling up in the wrong places.”

Read the full letter:

Categories
Politics

Trump’s 1776 Fee Critiques Liberalism in Report Derided by Historians

WASHINGTON – The White House released the President’s Commission Report of 1776 Monday, a sweeping attack on liberal thinking and activism calling for a “patriotic upbringing.” He defends America’s founding against allegations of slavery and compares progressivism with fascism.

In the heat of his September re-election campaign, President Trump formed the 18-person commission, made up of a range of conservative activists, politicians and intellectuals rather than professional historians, as he defended American traditional heritage against “radical liberals. Previously not known for his interest in American history or education, Mr. Trump insisted that the nation’s schools had been infiltrated by anti-American thinking and required a new “pro-American” curriculum.

The commission was part of Mr. Trump’s larger response to the anti-racism protests, some of which were violent, that followed the murder of George Floyd, a black man, by a white policeman in Minneapolis in June.

In his remarks in the National Archives, in which the formation of the commission was announced, Trump said: “The unrest and chaos of the left are the direct result of decades of indoctrination of the left in our schools.”

The Commission’s report is quick to ridicule many mainstream historians for indoctrinating Americans with false criticism of the nation’s founding and identity, including the role of slavery in its history.

“Historical revisionism, which tramples on honest scholarship and historical truth, puts Americans to shame by only highlighting the sins of their ancestors, and teaches claims of systemic racism that can only be eradicated through more discrimination, is an ideology that manipulates opinions more than should educate the mind. ” the report says.

The report was heavily criticized by historians, some of whom noted that the commission, although made up of conservative educators, did not include a single professional historian from the United States.

James Grossman, the executive director of the American Historical Association, said the report was not a work of history but “cynical politics”.

“This report skillfully interweaves myths, biases, deliberate silence, and misinterpretations of evidence, both overt and subtle, to produce a narrative and argument that few respected professional historians would find plausible, whether or not even on a wide range of interpretations convince or not. ” he said.

“They use what they call history to foment culture wars,” he said.

The commission’s report shows a nation where liberals seething with hatred of their own country, and whose divisions over its history and importance are a reminder of those who led to the American Revolution and Civil War.

It depicts an America whose institutions have been infiltrated by radical leftists whose views match those of recent totalitarian movements, and argues that progressives have created an unchecked “fourth branch” or “shadow government” in the so-called administrative state.

And American universities, the report says, “are often hotbeds of anti-Americanism, slander, and censorship that arouse at least contempt and, at worst, total hatred of the country among students and the wider culture.”

The report compares the progressive American movement of the early 20th century to the fascism of leaders like Benito Mussolini, who “sought to centralize power under the guidance of so-called experts”.

“The biggest statement in the 1776 report is that he includes ‘progressivism’ along with ‘slavery’ and ‘fascism’ in his list of ‘Challenges to America’s Principles’,” wrote Thomas Sugrue, a historian at New York University, on Twitter . “Time to rewrite my lectures to say that ending child labor and regulating meat packaging = Hitlerism.”

The report, published on Martin Luther King’s birthday, even targets the legacy of the civil rights movement, stating that it was “almost immediately focused on programs that ran counter to the high ideals of the founders.”

Some of the strongest criticisms related to the report’s treatment of slavery, which the report said was an unfortunate reality around the world that was swept away in America by the forces sparked by the American Revolution that it called “a dramatic change in the sea.” becomes moral sensitivity. “

The report’s authors condemn the allegation that the American founders were hypocrites who preached equality, despite the fact that they codified this in the constitution and kept slaves themselves.

“This accusation is false and has caused enormous damage, especially in recent years, with devastating effects on our civil unity and our social fabric,” they write. Men like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison, while owning hundreds of enslaved people, abhorred slavery, the report said.

“The White House report of 1776 seems to consider it worse for the country to label the founders as hypocritical of slavery than actual slavery,” wrote Seth Masket, professor of political science at the University of Denver, on Twitter.

And on a line that has been particularly ignited by historians, the report names John C. Calhoun “perhaps the leading precursor” of identity politics.

“Like today’s proponents of identity politics,” she claims, “Calhoun believed that it was impossible to achieve unity through rational considerations and political compromises. Majority groups only use the political process to suppress minority groups.”

The commission is chaired by Larry Arnn, an ally of Trump and president of the conservative Hillsdale College. Its co-chair is Carol Swain, a prominent black conservative and former law professor at Vanderbilt University. Other members include former Republican Mississippi Governor Phil Bryant; the conservative activist Ned Ryan; Mr. Trump’s former domestic policy adviser Brooke Rollins; and Charles Kesler, editor of the influential conservative publication The Claremont Review of Books.

The commission and its report are in part a rebuke for the New York Times Magazine’s 1619 project to refresh American history of the consequences of slavery and the contributions of black Americans. The report denounces the project, as does Mr Trump in his September speech announcing the commission.

“This project is rewriting American history to teach our children that we were founded on the principle of oppression, not freedom,” Trump said at the time.

Mr Trump’s commission submitted its report just four months after it was drawn up and less than a month after Mr Trump publicly announced its members. In contrast, a Race Commission appointed by President Bill Clinton in June 1997 published its first report 15 months later.

Although the report was billed as “final” by the White House, it did not contain any scientific footnotes or citations, nor was it clear who its main authors were.