House Dems and Republicans Strike a Deal on a 1/6 Commission—But There’s One Big Catch

Will it subpoena Republican witnesses?

John Minchillo/AP

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

On Friday morning, big news hit: Democrats and Republicans in the House had reached a compromise to set up a bipartisan, independent commission that would investigate the January 6 assault on the US Capitol. For weeks, GOPers had opposed a proposal from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to establish such a body, complaining it permitted Democrats to appoint a majority of the commissioners. But last month, she pitched a new deal with equal representation. And under the agreement concocted by Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), who chairs the Homeland Security Committee, and Rep. John Katko (R-N.Y.), the top Republican on the panel, the Democratic and Republican leaders of the House and Senate would each get to appoint five members of the 10-person body, which will be modeled on the 9/11 commission. (The Dems will name the chair, the Republicans the vice chair.) Yet there is one big wrinkle: Though this commission will have the power to subpoena witnesses, subpoenas must be approved by either the chair and vice-chair or by a majority of the commissioners. That means the Republicans on the commission will have the power to block any subpoena.

It is not hard to envision numerous scenarios in which the commission—which would have to be approved by the Senate—could become immersed in conflict over the question of who to interview, what information to seek, and which witnesses to subpoena. After all, there is no way for the commission to do its job thoroughly without fully scrutinizing the actions of various Republicans, pro-Trump activists, the Trump White House, and former President Donald Trump himself. And if some of these potential subjects refuse to voluntarily cooperate with the commission’s investigators, the only recourse will be subpoenas. But will Republican-appointed commissioners okay subpoenas for GOP witnesses? 

Let’s look at a partial list of obvious witnesses for the commission:

  • Former Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.). He was Trump’s White House chief of staff at the time and can explain what was happening at 1600 Pennsylvania during the seditious assault on Congress. That includes Trump’s own actions during the riot Trump incited. (Was Trump really excited to watch the violent throng try to stop the certification of the 2020 election?)
  • Reps. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.),  Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.), and Mo Brooks (R-Ala.). Ali Alexander, an organizer of the pro-Trump “Stop the Steal” movement, says that he worked with this trio of Trump devotees to create an event on January 6 that would put “maximum pressure” on Congress when it was voting to certify Joe Biden’s Electoral College victory. All three members should be grilled under oath. (Biggs and Brooks have denied this.)
  • Ali Alexander. See above and below. 
  • Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.). The House Republican leader reportedly had an angry, expletive-laced phone conversation with Trump during the attempted insurrection, and Trump indicated he would not call off the rioters. What truly occurred during this call? 
  • Kimberly Guilfoyle. On the night  of January 5, according to Alexander, he spoke with Guilfoyle, a former Trump campaign official and the girlfriend of Donald Trump Jr., and he suggested she encouraged him. What exactly did she say to him? Was she conveying a message from anyone else?
  • Roger Stone. Prior to the January 6 attack, Trump’s longtime adviser was repeatedly seen with people subsequently charged in the assault and accused of conspiring to mount the raid. In fact, several of them were providing security for Stone. Stone also worked to raise money for “private security” and equipment for events in Washington on January 5 and 6 that preceded the violent raid on the Capitol. (Warning to would-be commissioners: Stone was convicted of lying to Congress. His three-year-plus sentence was commuted by his pal Trump.) 
  •  Rudy Giuliani. The one-time personal lawyer and dirt-digger for Trump—whose Manhattan home and Park Avenue office were recently raided by the FBI—gave one of the most fiery speeches at the pre-riot rally. “Let’s have trial by combat,” he urged the crowd shortly before large parts of the audience headed toward Capitol Hill.
  • Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump. During the riot, McCarthy appealed to Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law and top aide, for help in stopping the assault, and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) phoned Ivanka Trump, the president’s daughter, to ask for assistance. What do this royal couple of Trumpland know about what occurred in the White House while the Trump mob was ransacking Capitol Hill? Ivanka was in the Oval Office at the time. 
  • Kellyanne Conway. The former Trump White House senior adviser called an aide who was standing at the president’s side while the attack was under way. What did she learn?
  • Kayleigh McEnany. Then the White House press secretary, McEnany was reportedly with Trump during the attack and implored him to speak out against the violence. How did Trump respond?
  • Mike Pence. The former vice president was the target of some of the rioters, who called for him to be hanged. While in hiding, Pence received calls from congressional leaders who were angry the National Guard had not been deployed. According to the Washington Post, he “spoke with legislative and military leaders, working to mobilize the soldiers and offering reassurance.” He never talked to Trump during the attack. But Marc Short, Pence’s chief of staff, was in contact with the White House. The ex-veep should have a lot to say. 
  • Donald Trump. Because it was his riot. 

There are plenty of other potential witnesses for a 1/6 commission. Several Republican members of Congress called White House aides during the melee and beseeched them to encourage Trump to call off the terrorists-for-Trump. Other White House officials saw what was transpiring in the West Wing during the attack. Their accounts could be valuable. Law enforcement and military officials ought to be questioned, including Chris Miller, who was the acting Defense secretary at the time. (He testified this week that he was reluctant to send in military to protect the Capitol prior to the January 6 attack because of the appearance of a “military coup.”) And leaders of assorted pro-Trump outfits—Women for America First, Turning Point Action, Tea Party Patriots, and others—who sponsored the rally that led to the insurrectionist raid should make the list.

The public deserves a complete, no-holds-bar accounting of the January 6 tragedy. But there is no way for any commission to fully uncover and report the whole truth without questioning Republicans and past and present members of Trump’s inner circle. This attack was a Trump production, and some of the most important eyewitnesses of that day are prominent Republicans and Trumpers. Should a commission be established—and it’s no done-deal yet—will Republican commissioners actually allow their gumshoes to haul in these sorts of witnesses? If not, this exercise could end up being yet another GOP assault on American democracy.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate