| "Those who say the election was affected by widespread voter fraud are lying." That's Chairman Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) on Thursday, sharing the bottom line of the House Jan. 6 congressional committee's takeaways after it held it's fifth and final hearing — for this month at least. It focused on how President Donald Trump pressured Justice Department officials to support his efforts to overturn the 2020 election, with high-ranking agency officials testifying. Here are some takeaways from The Post's Aaron Blake, with more of his analysis here. 1. The pardon picture, filled out: "The committee has repeatedly previewed evidence that certain key players in Trump's plot sought pardons. Last week, one of them was revealed to be Trump lawyer John Eastman, who asked to be put on 'the pardon list.' The implication from that email was that there was indeed a list which seemingly might have other names. The committee on Thursday built out its own list, by adding several House Republicans to it." 2. A new link between Trump and Justice Department plotters?: "The committee indicated for apparently the first time that there might have been coordination in the plotting between Trump's legal team and certain members of the Justice Department. ... We know elements of both Trump's legal team and the DOJ plotted in different ways. But this suggests there might have been more coordination in the entire plot than we know. That's particularly remarkable, given how much this effort within the DOJ wasn't sanctioned by superiors and how it would amount to government lawyers working with political aides to subvert democracy." 3. Everyone hates Jeffrey Clark: "The plot was spearheaded within the DOJ by an official named Jeffrey Clark, whose home federal agents searched Wednesday in a significant development that reflects the increasing legal jeopardy faced by Trump's allies and perhaps Trump himself. ... [Former White House lawyer Eric] Herschmann said in a video clip: 'I thought Jeff's proposal was nuts. I said, at a certain point, "Listen, the best I can tell is the only thing you know about environmental and elections challenges is they both start with E. And based on your answers tonight, I'm not even sure if you know that."' "  Jeffrey Clark, in September 2020. (Susan Walsh/Pool/AP) | The Supreme Court struck down limits on who can carry guns in public Also on Thursday, the conservative majority on the Supreme Court took down one of the nation's oldest and most restrictive gun-control laws, potentially unraveling laws across the nation that restrict who can carry guns in public. The tax credits that 13 million people currently receive to help lower premiums are set to expire. Blue Cross and Blue Shield companies are working with Congress to ensure everyone has access to affordable care, for the health of America. | | | | | For 108 years, New York has said that anyone who wants to carry a gun in public must apply for a license that shows a demonstrated need to carry the gun beyond average public safety fears. This is known as "proper cause." Supporters of these laws argue that they're necessary in high-density areas and that the Constitution allows states to govern themselves. Why conservatives knocked that down: Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the deciding opinion for the 6-to-3 majority, saying that the Second Amendment allows people to carry guns outside their home for self-defense and that they should not have to "demonstrate some special need" to the government to exercise that right. Justice Stephen G. Breyer wrote in a dissent that the decision ignores states' rights to address gun violence: "Many States have tried to address some of the dangers of gun violence … by passing laws that limit, in various ways, who may purchase, carry, or use firearms of different kinds. The Court today severely burdens States' efforts to do so." What this means for gun laws: It's likely that liberal states across the nation will have to drop their stricter-than-normal rules on who can carry a gun in public. One pro-gun lawyer I talked to, Jerold Levine of New York City, called this the "holy grail" of gun laws: "This has been the greatest limitation for gun owners now for over 100 years," Levine said. | 
Email
No comments:
Post a Comment