Republican amendments to bill to make District of Columbia the 51st state. Vote scheduled for TOMORROW: (1/5)
Requires DC to instead be "given" to Maryland
GOP amendment to DC statehood bill requires DC to "singlehandedly" pay the cost of changing the US Flag to 51 stars
GOP amendment to DC statehood bill requires the US Justice Dept to prosecute any corruption by DC government officials before statehood begins
GOP amendment to DC statehood bill to pay back federal taxpayer for costs of running DC courts and US Marshals
GOP amendment to DC statehood bill requires DC to take back and incarcerate thousands of federal prison inmates who were convicted of crimes in District of Columbia
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
FLASH: Sen Thom Tillis (R-NC) is on Senate floor and he's about to make a motion for "unanimous consent" to expedite the hanging of the January 6th plaque at the Capitol
To honor the police heroes
Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR) speaks first: "In 2022, we passed a law .. saying we'd hang this plaque"
"I'm here to team up with my colleague from North Carolina to have a strategy to make sure we *do* have this plaque up"
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) is now speaking. He recalls that he was on floor in Senate chamber on Jan 6.
Tillis says prior law requiring Jan 6 plaque had a "technical" issue that requires clarity. He says issue can be quickly cured
Some pardoned rioters are retracing their march from the Ellipse to the Capitol
Some victims are part of a 10am hearing organized by House Democrats
And: Anger, toxicity and confrontation continue to define Jan 6. Still.
Poltico Playbook on Jan 6 just now:
“Today D.C., and much of America, is deeply divided about what happened.
That lack of consensus represents a triumph, of sorts, for Donald Trump, and stands as testament to his unmatched ability both to reshape political narratives and to carry his supporters to extraordinary positions”
Injured DC police officer Dan Hodges says the Jan 6 denialism remains rampant
“Everything on January 6 occurred exactly as it appeared to. There’s no conspiracy here, there’s no, it wasn’t a “Fed-surrection”
NEW: House Speaker Mike Johnson – after two years of deflecting questions on the matter – is now arguing that the legally-required January 6 plaque must be re-considered
(more)
In a statement tonight, a spokesperson for Speaker Johnson says:
"As written, the statute authorizing this plaque is not implementable, and proposed alternatives devised by Democrat House staff, not members, also do not comply with the statute. If Democrats are serious about commemorating the work of USCP officers, they are free to work with the appropriate committees of jurisdiction to develop a framework for proper vetting and consideration, just as the House does for Congressional Gold Medals, commemorative gold coins, and similar ceremonial responsibilities”
Federal law required the Jan 6 plaque to be hung on Capitol grounds by March 2023
ALERT: House Judiciary Committee releases 250+ page transcript of its interview of Special Counsel Jack Smith
Smith testified: "January 6th was an attack on the structure of our democracy in which over 140 heroic law enforcement officers were assaulted. Over 160 individuals later pled guilty to assaulting police that day. Exploiting that violence, President Trump and his associates tried to call Members of Congress in furtherance of their criminal scheme, urging them to further delay certification of the 2020 election. I did not choose those Members, President Trump did"
(MORE)
Special Counsel Jack Smith interview w/ House Judiciary Committee (MORE)
Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH): "You just made some pretty definitive statements about your belief that President Trump was guilty of these charges. Is that correct?"
Jack Smith: "Yes, I believe we had proof beyond a reasonable doubt in both cases"
Jordan: "And doesn't the Justice Manual prohibit prosecutors from asserting that a defendant is guilty of something before a jury makes a determination?"
Smith: "When a case is pending, yes."
When he was asked about other election disputes (including 2000 election), Jack Smith told House Judiciary Cmte:
"There is no historical analog for what President Trump did in this case. As we said in the indictment, he was free to say that he thought he won the election. He was even free to say falsely that he won the election"