At a meeting earlier this month to discuss the task force’s recommendations, McCarthy blew Honoré in front of his team and rebuked them for the meeting via Zoom when Pelosi had a personal meeting and accused the task force of working to Pelosi’s wishes to be met. McCarthy also read out a few tweets from Honoré, who was critical of Republicans. Honoré said he wrote the tweets before knowing he would receive the most important security brief, according to sources familiar with the matter.
“He called out in front of everyone,” said a Republican from the House, who asked not to be named to discuss the private exchange between McCarthy and Blodgett.
Democrats say their GOP colleagues in the House have no reason to complain after a majority of them voted to overturn the two-state election results – even after the rioters stormed the Capitol for Joe Biden’s certification to stop victory, and left death and destruction in their wake.
After an initial spate of hearings on the attack, the next steps for the congressional inquiry into the failures on January 6 appear bleak. Several house committees are conducting a joint investigation into the attack, which is ongoing and seems widespread. A congressman said more information sessions on the attack and domestic terrorism were underway and the committees were still receiving documents.
The Senate Homeland Security Committee’s inquiry appears to be the furthest in any room, as staff say the panel intends to pursue a month-long look at the National Guard’s delayed response. and the division of intelligence that led to the uprising.
“I would not be interested”
Pelosi reiterated this week that she should investigate an outside commission after the January 6 attack, saying that the commission “should learn the truth about how the assault happened on January 6” and that it should be twofold.
“It is essential that we work in a dual way to have a respected outcome,” Pelosi wrote.
When Pelosi initially announced her plans for a commission last month, Democrats were optimistic that it would be adopted quickly. Steny Hoyer, leader of the majority of the House, said he hopes the House will vote on the commission this month, a scenario that now seems almost impossible with discussions stalling.
But there are still disputes over the partisan composition of the commission and what it should investigate – including the role Trump played – that threaten to thwart any kind of dual agreement.
McCarthy told reporters on Tuesday that House leaders were stuck over negotiations over the formulation of the independent commission.
“Based on what she offered and what she said before, I would not be interested,” McCarthy said.
Rep. Rodney Davis, the top Republican on the House Administration Committee, said Pelosi’s proposal suggested she was ‘not serious about it’.
“And if she did, she would negotiate whether there would be a biased act or not, or one that even the 9/11 Commission’s chairman and vice – chairman said, this commission should be a very dual one,” said Davis. CNN. ‘You can not call what she proposed a 9/11 style commission. It’s not even close. ‘
But Democrats say it is Republicans who are playing games on the issue to fully account for the role Trump – and some of their members – played in spreading lies about the election results.
Several hurdles with assignment
The questions about the creation of the commission are twofold: the partisan composition of the membership of the commission and what it should investigate.
Pelosi’s draft proposal will include seven Democratic appointments for four IDP members, with House and Senate leaders electing two members each and the White House two and the chairman. McCarthy reiterated Tuesday that he would not decide on anything less than an even split.
But the bigger hang-up is the extent of what the commission will investigate and whether it should investigate Trump’s role leading to the attack, as well as the increase in domestic extremism among the groups that took part in the January uprising at the Capitol 6.
Pelosi told CNN on Wednesday that the dispute over the commission’s membership was ‘accidental’, suggesting she was open to a more equitable balance between the two parties.
“The problem is the scope – are we going to look for the truth?” she said.
Republicans resisted by arguing that the commission should also investigate the violence and riots that took place last year around protests against police brutality.
At his press conference on Thursday, McCarthy again criticized Honoré, saying the commission should have equal membership and not start with established findings.
“If you start with the premise that you just want it to be one-sided, you understand what the outcome is going to be,” McCarthy said.
Last month, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell rejected Pelosi’s proposed commission concept, accusing her of conducting a “cherry-picking” investigation that would investigate domestic extremism after Jan. 6, but not violence. around protest against police brutality.
“We can do something narrow looking at the Capitol, or we can do something broader to analyze the full extent of political violence here in our country,” McConnell said. “We can not end up halfway on an artificially politicized ground.”
McConnell’s opposition is significant because Senate Republicans can have a veto over legislation to establish the commission if they filibuster it.
New Jersey Democratic Representative Mikie Sherrill, who introduced co-legislation on what a commission to investigate Jan. 6 looks like, told CNN on Wednesday that she had spoken to Pelosi about the need for the commission to be dual.
Sherrill said: “I have been striving, as far as it is concerned, to be twofold. ‘Because I believe it is critical that we do this, that the American people have confidence in the results,’ and I think the only way to see it as a reliable enterprise by a large section of the population is if it were a fully dual commission. ‘
Nevertheless, a long delay before a commission is set up to investigate January 6 will not set a precedent at the 9/11 Commission. While the Democrats urged the rapid establishment of an independent commission to work with the various ongoing congressional investigations, the 9/11 commission was only set up more than a year after the September 11, 2001 attacks.
There was resistance within the White House of George W. Bush and in Congress to establish the commission, which was finally signed in November 2002 amid pressure from families of the victims for an independent, complete report of the terrorist attacks.
Dual anger against the extended security of the Capitol
There is one area where dual agreement has arisen: the security situation at the Capitol needs to change.
Lawmakers in both parties have expressed frustration over the continued security situation at the Capitol and have issued dual statements criticizing the expansion of the National Guard implementation and the razor wire fence enclosing the Capitol complex, while there is still no clear threat to the Capitol was not. .
According to lawmakers, the lack of information from Capitol police about the reason behind his decision to continue the fence and extend the deployment of the guard contributed to the frustration surrounding the response to the January 6 attacks.
Last week, Rep. Mike Rogers of Alabama, the leading Republican on the Armed Services Committee, met with Honoré, the Capitol police and security officials. A committee assistant said during the meeting: “No one can or wants to provide clear information that necessitates the expansion of the National Guard.”
Later that week, Rogers chairman and House Armed Services chairman Adam Smith, a Washington Democrat, issued a joint statement calling for the withdrawal of National Guard troops.
This week, the acting Sergeant at Arms announced a change, telling lawmakers that some fencing will begin to take off and reduce the presence of the National Guard in the coming weeks.
Daniella Diaz of CNN contributed to this report.