THE JAN. 6 HEARINGS SHOULD FOLLOW 5 BASIC RULES
Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., a prominent member of the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection, has promised blockbuster hearings that will “blow the roof off” Congress. The committee is planning at least eight hearings beginning June 9, some during prime-time hours, that TV networks would be making a grave error not to broadcast in their entirety given their importance to our democracy. Let’s look at what we can expect and what rules should guide the committee. The Washington Post reports:
“The precise format of the hearings and featured witnesses have yet to be announced, but The Post previously reported that committee members and staffers are seeking to televise blockbuster hearings that actually garner public interest.
“On Thursday, committee chairman Bennie G. Thompson, D -Miss., told reporters on the Hill that the committee will ‘tell the story about what happened.
“‘We will use a combination of witnesses, exhibits, and things that we have,’ Thompson said. ‘We have tens of thousands of exhibits … as well as hundreds of witnesses we’ve deposed or talked to in general. It will give the public the benefit of what more than a year’s worth of investigation has borne to the committee.’”
If Thompson and Raskin are correct, the hearings should provide a blow-by-blow account of the coup attempt, beginning with the election (or even beforehand, when then-President Donald Trump began discrediting mail-in ballots). If the committee gets only one prime-time hearing, it should make certain to tell the complete story, like an opening argument. It can then spend subsequent hearings filling in the details.
Beyond that, the committee would be wise to keep in mind five points:
› First, the committee should explain what the “crime” was and what role Trump played in it. Did he attempt to coordinate a nonviolent coup by pressuring the Justice Department and states into fabricating an air of fraudulence and then cajoling the vice president to throw out electoral votes for President Biden? Did Trump also unleash the crowd on Jan. 6 with the intent to rampage violently and disrupt electoral vote certification? We need to hear evidence that he knew he lost the election but wanted to prevent Biden from taking office regardless.
› Second, what role did other elected or appointed officials play? The committee should identify any members of Congress who abetted the coup plot and, if appropriate, recommend their disqualification from holding office under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. Executive branch officials who may have prepared to seize voting machines, cook up fraudulent slates of electors or engage in other shenanigans to overthrow the election must likewise be identified.
› Third, the committee must spoon-feed the story to the media and viewers. The committee should make ample use of slides with bullet points to introduce each session and to sum them up at the end of each day. It should not stint on charts, timelines or video material. Live testimony must be concise and seamless. If more than one person questions witnesses, the committee must avoid needless repetition. The committee should not imitate granular courtroom testimony, which can take days to present a complete picture. Each hearing session should be kept to a couple of hours. The evidence to support each factual assertion can be provided in the final report or in hearing summaries.
› Fourth, the committee must ensure the public understands how close we came to political disaster and what reforms are needed to ensure it never happens again. The committee has to avoid legal jargon such as the “independent state legislature doctrine”; instead, it should use common-sense terms (e.g., the attempt to “steal the election” or “ignore the will of voters”). Where are the weak points in the system that future candidates could exploit to steal an election? Contrary to scheming by people such as Trump lawyer John Eastman and Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, the committee must be clear that it is never acceptable for state legislatures to contradict the expressed will of the people in choosing their president.
› Fifth, the committee should present the most widely disseminated lies and offer simple rebuttals grounded in evidence. These would include items such as the false claims of election fraud or that “Jan. 6 was peaceful.”
The committee has three audiences: rational Americans, the Justice Department and history. Each must receive a compelling account demonstrating Trump and his minions committed grave offenses, coming within a whisker of stealing the election. The case should be so convincing that it builds public support for reforms and deprives foot-draggers and skeptics in the Justice Department of any legitimate rationale for avoiding prosecution. It’s time to once and for all debunk the “big lie” and to hold all those involved in the coup attempt accountable.