What We Now Know About January 6th
Nearly four years on, we’re still learning the details of what actually transpired on January 6th, 2021. With another election imminent and the same election-denying candidate (somehow) on the ballot once more, these are crucial details that illuminate a dark corner of the American political process.
This week, new unsealed court filings revealed what US federal prosecutors think actually happened on January 6th. We got new details about the timeline, the actors involved, and the extent to which Trump was involved in, essentially, planning a coup d’etat.
Here’s some highlights of allegations in the filings:
Trump allegedly acted “privately” in attempting to overturn the election, meaning that his actions leading up to and on January 6th were not official Presidential business (and therefore were not covered by any “presidential immunity”). The filings detail how he largely used private actors and private campaign infrastructure as opposed to government officials and powers in conducting the scheme.
Trump was allegedly told by VP Mike Pence that he’d lost the election and that he needed to concede before he told the Jan 6th crowd that Pence could fix it by refusing to certify the election.  Prosecutors claim he was informed that Pence was under security threat (as a result of Trump’s speech). He responded: “So what?”
Trump allegedly knew that his election fraud claims were false, and planned to declare victory far before the ballots were counted and any winner was projected. Trump agents were reportedly told to “find a reason” to reject ballots in Chicago, “even if” they were legitimate. The prosecutors allege that “private operatives sought to create chaos at polling stations.”
Trump agents were quoted as saying to “make them riot” over claims of election fraud, referring to the Jan 6th protestors.
This isn’t an official ruling, and it remains to be seen whether these allegations will bear out under further legal scrutiny. But the evidence is mounting that Trump, outside of his protected remit as President, privately deployed a number of different tactics to subvert the result of the election. When all else failed, he directed a violent and angry crowd into the centre of government. If these prosecutors make this case successfully, even the sympathetic Supreme Court may not be able to protect him.
Many forget, but this wasn’t America’s first run-in with election denial. The chaotic 2000 US election – which was a much closer contest than in 2020 – was also beset by violent riots and an (actually successful) scheme to sway the result. Here’s a good video explaining what happened back then.
The US is, increasingly, a deeply divided nation with a radical minority willing to violently subvert democratic institutions. The UK, while perhaps not as far along that path, has its own breed of violent far-right thuggery. Neither country has the democratic safeguards required to fend off threats of this scale.
For now, all we can do is watch with bated breath and hope that, should Trump lose the election next month, that Capitol security and America’s flimsy institutional safeguards hold out for one more cycle.
In other US election news…
Walz and JD Vance went head-to-head on Tuesday, in a bizarrely civil debate that increased both participants’ approval ratings. In one iconic moment, Vance whined about being fact-checked on his claim that illegal Haitian migrants were causing havoc in Ohio.
Analysts argue that escalating military tensions between Israel and Iran could be a boon to Trump in the last few weeks of the campaign – is this the famed “October surprise”?
According to some polling analysis, It’s not inconceivable that this election could result in a tie. It makes the concerns outlined above about election denial even more significant. Â
