Inside the plot to overthrow the 2020 election.
 | By Jyoti Thottam Editorials Editor |
Like so many others in America, I have been avidly watching the hearings of the House Select Committee on the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol. It reminds me of the summer of 1987, when I spent a few weeks of my school vacation in front of the television, transfixed not by sitcom reruns but by the political drama and bizarre details of the Iran-contra hearings. |
Like those earlier televised hearings, the Jan. 6 proceedings are meant to investigate the limits of power, attempts to abuse it and the role that elected leaders, ordinary citizens and otherwise anonymous public servants play in either protecting democracy from those abuses or enabling them. |
On Thursday afternoon, the committee looked closely at an unlikely weapon in this struggle: the Electoral Count Act of 1887, a federal law that sets out the process for counting electoral votes. It was, until recently, considered obscure even for constitutional scholars. But it was at the center of Trump's attempt to overturn the 2020 election, and the Times editorial board has called for it to be reformed. J. Michael Luttig, a retired conservative judge and one of the committee's witnesses, also supports reform. The first sentence of his recent essay for Times Opinion was quoted at Thursday's hearing: |
The clear and present danger to our democracy now is that former President Donald Trump and his political allies appear prepared to exploit the Electoral Count Act of 1887, the law governing the counting of votes for president and vice president, to seize the presidency in 2024 if Mr. Trump or his anointed candidate is not elected by the American people. |
My colleagues in Opinion have been looking at the Jan. 6 hearings from many perspectives this week. Alex Kingsbury, a member of the editorial board, called out certain companies for donating to politicians who are 2020 election deniers. Another colleague on the board, Michelle Cottle, scrutinized the Trump allies who are trying to absolve themselves of responsibility. Charles Blow, one of our columnists, argued that the belief in lies and conspiracy theories about the 2020 election is part of a phenomenon of "political mass hysteria." And Neal Katyal, a former acting U.S. Solicitor General, wrote a guest essay in which he weighed the possibility of a criminal case against the former president by the Justice Department. |
In different ways, they are all exploring what is at stake as the committee completes its work: the future of American democracy. I urge you to continue following our coverage. |
Here's what we're focusing on today: |
Forward this newsletter to friends to share ideas and perspectives that will help inform their lives. They can sign up here. Do you have feedback? Email us at opiniontoday@nytimes.com. |
Contact us if you have questions about your Times account, delivery problems or other issues, visit our Help Page or contact The Times. |
|
No comments:
Post a Comment