Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Jan. 6 hearings remind reformers of Trump’s pattern of disregarding democracy

Jan. 6 committee hearing

A video of former President Donald Trump is seen on a screen during a hearing to Investigate the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol.

Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty Images

Former President Donald Trump’s disregard of legitimate electoral outcomes has been on public display for the past week, conjuring memories of his first impeachment and reminding democracy advocates of his willingness to break democratic norms.

On Monday, the House committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the Capitol held its second public hearing, as some Trump allies and members of his campaign team testified that they had advised him to not declare a victory on election night.

Trump nevertheless went on to claim the election had been stolen from him and held a “Stop the steal” rally the day Congress was scheduled to certify the election. The insurrection followed on the heels of that rally.

“Trump’s lies continued to stoke the anger of his staunchest supporters – anger that he would turn loose on the Capitol on January 6, in an effort to overturn the election he lost by force,” said Common Cause President Karen Hobert Flynn.

Others drew a parallel between Trump’s unfounded claims of fraud and his dealings with Ukraine in July 2019.


Trump’s first impeachment centered on an inquiry into his phone call to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in which he appeared to have asked for assistance finding information on Joe Biden in exchange for military support. Although he was acquitted, Trump’s actions as president would continue to raise allegations of corruption, including possible tax evasion and election tampering.

In fact, the Jan. 6 hearings are the third attempt to investigate possible corruption by the former president.

“His entire presidency is a clear indication that he believes himself to be above the law,” said Lisa Gilbert, vice president and co-founder of the Not Above the Law Coalition. The call to Ukraine was “one of the numerous instances of [Trump’s] breaking of ethical norms and mores.”

McGeehee, who was executive director of the crosspartisan advocacy group Issue One before launching her own consulting firm, said “the Ukrainian call became part of a pattern where we had a president who really failed in that aspect” of putting the interests of the nation over his own.

While the Jan. 6 hearings are intended to hold him accountable in a political sense where the two impeachments failed, McGeehee believes that any attempt to criminally indict Trump could end disastrously for a deeply divided country. Trump’s supporters believe themselves to be on “a moral crusade” for the former president.

In the aftermath of the Trump presidency and in the midst of a pandemic, public trust is at a low point, with about three-fourths of U.S. adults concerned about American democracy, according to a recent poll by YouGov. McGeehee highlighted that fragile state of democracy, explaining that high inflation and extreme polarization are historical markers of instability but noted that Republicans are participating in the hearings too.

“There's a reason that this is bipartisan, this hearing,” she said. “You know, people on both sides of the aisle understand that it is incredibly problematic to tell lies in the public square, and to in turn, have those lies incite violence.”

Gilbert, who is also the executive vice president of progressive consumer rights advocacy group Public Citizen, also found some solace in the committee’s work.

“I think that the importance of these hearings is showing bipartisan cooperation and sharing facts, shocking facts, with regular people,” she said, hoping the hearings will “lead to accountability for the bad actors, as well as reforms to improve our system moving forward.”

The committee had been planning to hold another hearing Wednesday but it was delayed by technical issues. The next hearing will be conducted Thursday.


Read More

Marco Rubio: 2028 Presidential Contender?

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio arrives to testify during a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing in the Dirksen Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill on January 28, 2026 in Washington, DC. This is the first time Rubio has testified before Congress since the Trump administration attacked Venezuela and seized President Nicolas Maduro, bringing him to the United States to stand trial.

(Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

Marco Rubio: 2028 Presidential Contender?

Marco Rubio’s Senate testimony this week showcased a disciplined, media‑savvy operator — but does that make him a viable 2028 presidential contender? The short answer: maybe, if Republicans prioritize steadiness and foreign‑policy credibility; unlikely, if the party seeks a fresh face untainted by the Trump administration’s controversies.

"There is no war against Venezuela, and we did not occupy a country. There are no U.S. troops on the ground," Rubio said, portraying the mission as a narrowly focused law‑enforcement operation, not a military intervention.

Keep ReadingShow less
The map of the U.S. broken into pieces.

In Donald Trump's interview with Reuters on Jan. 24, he portrayed himself as an "I don't care" president, an attitude that is not compatible with leadership in a constitutional democracy.

Getty Images

Donald Trump’s “I Don’t Care” Philosophy Undermines Democracy

On January 14, President Trump sat down for a thirty-minute interview with Reuters, the latest in a series of interviews with major news outlets. The interview covered a wide range of subjects, from Ukraine and Iran to inflation at home and dissent within his own party.

As is often the case with the president, he didn’t hold back. He offered many opinions without substantiating any of them and, talking about the 2026 congressional elections, said, “When you think of it, we shouldn’t even have an election.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Facts about Alex Pretti’s death are undeniable. The White House is denying them anyway

A rosary adorns a framed photo Alex Pretti that was left at a makeshift memorial in the area where Pretti was shot dead a day earlier by federal immigration agents in Minneapolis, on Jan. 25, 2026.

(Tribune Content Agency)

Facts about Alex Pretti’s death are undeniable. The White House is denying them anyway

The killing of Alex Pretti was unjust and unjustified. While protesting — aka “observing” or “interfering with” — deportation operations, the VA hospital ICU nurse came to the aid of two protesters, one of whom had been slammed to the ground by a U.S. Customs and Border Protection agent. With a phone in one hand, Pretti used the other hand, in vain, to protect his eyes while being pepper sprayed. Knocked to the ground, Pretti was repeatedly smashed in the face with the spray can, pummeled by multiple agents, disarmed of his holstered legal firearm and then shot nine or 10 times.

Note the sequence. He was disarmed and then he was shot.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Deadly Shooting in Minneapolis and How It Impacts the Rights of All Americans

A portrait of Renee Good is placed at a memorial near the site where she was killed a week ago, on January 14, 2026 in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Good was fatally shot by an immigration enforcement agent during an incident in south Minneapolis on January 7.

(Photo by Stephen Maturen/Getty Images)

The Deadly Shooting in Minneapolis and How It Impacts the Rights of All Americans

Thomas Paine famously wrote, "These are the times that try men's souls," when writing about the American Revolution. One could say that every week of Donald Trump's second administration has been such a time for much of the country.

One of the most important questions of the moment is: Was the ICE agent who shot Renee Good guilty of excessive use of force or murder, or was he acting in self-defense because Good was attempting to run him over, as claimed by the Trump administration? Local police and other Minneapolis authorities dispute the government's version of the events.

Keep ReadingShow less