Jan. 6 Panel Vividly Detailed the Attack. Accountability Is Another Matter.

 

NEWS ANALYSIS

Jan. 6 Panel Vividly Detailed the Attack. Accountability Is Another Matter.

 

Over its nine public hearings, the committee has not moved the needle of public opinion of former President Donald J. Trump. But it may have laid the groundwork for criminal prosecution.

 

Peter Baker

By Peter Baker

Oct. 13, 2022, 6:58 p.m. ET

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/13/us/politics/jan-6-panel-accountability.html

 

WASHINGTON — If the goal was to essentially put former President Donald J. Trump on trial, the House committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol succeeded in presenting a powerful case full of damning testimony mainly from the defendant’s own advisers, allies and even relatives.

 

But as the panel wrapped up what was likely the last of its evidentiary hearings on Thursday, it was not at all clear that it had persuaded the jury. Americans who already blamed the rampage on Mr. Trump came away from four months of sensational and at times jaw-dropping hearings with more evidence for their belief, while those who started out in his camp largely remained there.

 

The relatively little movement in public opinion since the hearings opened in June, at least as measured by an array of polls, underscored the calcification of American politics in recent years. Many voters have been locked into their viewpoints, seemingly immune to contrary information. Mr. Trump’s supporters for the most part have remained loyal to him, brushing off the congressional investigation as the partisan exercise he claims it to be.

 

As a result, a former president who tried to overturn a demonstrably free and fair election to hang onto power in defiance of the voters, the Constitution and nearly two and a half centuries of democratic tradition remains the dominant figure in his political party and the odds-on favorite to win its nomination to run again. While the committee extensively documented the plot for history’s sake, it could not enforce accountability for it.

 

“Our nation cannot only punish the foot soldiers who stormed our Capitol,” said Representative Liz Cheney, the Wyoming Republican serving as vice chair of the committee. “Those who planned to overturn our election and brought us to the point of violence must also be accountable.

 

“With every effort to excuse or justify the conduct of the former president,” she added, “we chip away at the foundation of our republic. Indefensible conduct is defended. Inexcusable conduct is excused. Without accountability, it all becomes normal and it will recur.”

 

Over the course of its nine hearings, the panel established that Mr. Trump had been told repeatedly by his own advisers that he had lost the election to Joseph R. Biden Jr. but lied to the public anyway, advancing conspiracy theories and fantasies that had been debunked by his own team. The committee presented evidence on Thursday that Mr. Trump had planned months before the election to claim fraud if he lost, regardless of the facts.

 

To that end, the panel showed how he had used the power of his office to pressure governors, state officials and legislators, congressional allies, Justice Department leaders and his own vice president, Mike Pence, to put aside the judgment of the voters and keep him in office anyway. He encouraged the mob when he knew some of them were armed and did little to stop the attack once it was underway; he is even said to have reacted approvingly to some rioters’ call to hang Mr. Pence.

 

Since Mr. Trump pressed House Republican leaders not to participate in the committee, he had no defenders to offer any mitigating evidence or challenge witnesses over the last four months. But even outside the committee room he has offered no serious defense through statements, interviews or social media other than to insult former aides who testified and accuse the panel of being out to get him. He has not explained his actions nor backed off his false claims.

 

That seems to have been enough for him for now. His approval ratings remain roughly where they were before the hearings, and a strong majority of Republicans still believe the 2020 election was stolen. No major Republican officeholders have indicated they have changed their mind about Mr. Trump since the hearings began.

 

A Monmouth University poll last month found that 29 percent of Americans believe Mr. Biden won because of voter fraud — exactly the same as in June when the hearings opened. (Sixty-one percent of Republicans thought so.) And 38 percent of respondents last month held Mr. Trump “directly responsible” for Jan. 6, compared with 42 percent in June.

 

Still, there are signs of Trump erosion or fatigue among Republicans. In a recent poll, NBC News found that 33 percent of Republicans identified themselves more as supporters of Mr. Trump than of the party — still a high number and enough to potentially win a multicandidate primary, but the lowest since the network began asking the question in 2019.

 

Having fallen short of changing many minds, however, the committee may yet have influenced the thinking closer to home. It amassed an overwhelming collection of interviews, documents and other evidence that may have lit a fire at the Justice Department just half a dozen blocks from the Capitol, as federal prosecutors appeared to ratchet up their own investigation in recent months.

 

The real verdict, therefore, may still be months away. If Attorney General Merrick B. Garland ultimately pursues a criminal prosecution against Mr. Trump or his closest allies, the committee will have set the stage by airing the case in painstaking detail. And as they made their final arguments before next month’s midterm elections, the panel members on Thursday left little doubt what they think should happen but left any decision on criminal referrals until after the vote.

 

Still, to make that point, Ms. Cheney introduced a subpoena for Mr. Trump’s testimony, which was adopted unanimously by the panel of seven Democrats and two Republicans. Such an action, while rooted in some precedent, nonetheless represented a stark bid by the legislative branch to force a former executive to explain his actions.

 

A subpoena at this stage, of course, may be more symbolic than successful, issued too late to actually obtain the testimony it aims to secure. Assuming Mr. Trump refuses to comply and fights it in court, litigation could drag on beyond the Nov. 8 election, when the House is widely expected to change hands and a new Republican majority taking office in January would surely withdraw it.

 

But from the vantage of the committee members who have spent more than a year investigating how a mob of Trump supporters came to storm the Capitol to stop the transfer of power, the subpoena put the focus back where it should be, on Mr. Trump himself.

 

As Representative Bennie Thompson, Democrat of Mississippi and the committee chairman, put it: “He is the one person at the center of the story of what happened on Jan. 6.”

 

Peter Baker is the chief White House correspondent and has covered the last five presidents for The Times and The Washington Post. He is the author of seven books, most recently “The Divider: Trump in the White House, 2017-2021,” with Susan Glasser. @peterbakernyt • Facebook