Jackie Speier The insurrection and the

MOB RULE WAS A BIG FEAR OF THE

American Founding Fathers. On January 6, 2021—almost 245 years after the country’s founding and 232 years since the Constitution came into force—a mob incited by the president attacked the U.S. Capitol, disrupting ratification of the Electoral College votes. Bay Area U.S. congresswoman Jackie Speier discusses the violent insurrection and the aftermath. From the January 11, 2021, online program “Representative Jackie Speier: How Damaged Is Our Democracy?” JACKIE SPEIER, U.S. Representative (CA 14th District) LADORIS CORDELL, Retired California Superior Court Judge; Member, Commonwealth Club Board of Governors—Moderator

LADORIS CORDELL: The horrifying attack on the U.S. Capitol has raised many issues about American democracy and the state of the country. People are feeling stunned, scared and angry. What do we make of the attack and what it represents? How damaged is American democracy, and what needs to be fixed? What will America look like after January 20, and can the divisions in the country be mitigated?

We’re pleased to have Representative Speier with us to delve into these questions at this crucial point in history. She has served in Congress since 2008 and was present during the attack on the capitol.

My first question to you is how are you doing? In 1978, you were pinned down on a tarmac; you were shot five times when fleeing an attack by gunmen in Jonestown. And 43 years later—Wednesday, January 6—you were pinned down at our nation’s capitol during an armed insurrection. Was it deja vu all over again for you? JACKIE SPEIER: Yeah. In many respects, it was. I was seated in the gallery

The storming of the U.S. Capitol was accompanied by a large rally on Capitol grounds. (Photo by Tyler Merbler.)

and chose to hear the opening remarks and debate on the Arizona vote and whether or not it would be accepted, whether or not the resolution to overturn it would be accepted. As we were sitting there, all of a sudden I saw the Speaker [of the House Nancy Pelosi] exit the chamber. Not that she hasn’t done that many times before, but there was an urgency to her walking out. Then shortly thereafter, the majority whip, Steny Hoyer, was escorted out. Then I knew that something was up. Shortly thereafter, one of the sergeants of the capitol police stood at the podium and said, “The capitol has been breached.”

You know, even when I say that now, there’s kind of shivers that run down my spine, because it is such a desecration of the symbol of democracy in our country. As we sat there, he said, “There’s a pouch underneath your chair.” Now, I’ve sat in the gallery many times. I never knew that there were canvas pouches under the chairs, but there was. We were told to unzip them. There was then an aluminum foil type packet inside. You had to tear that open. There was the gas mask. As soon as you pulled it out, it started operating. We were told to not put it on, [to] wait. There was pounding on the doors. They locked all of the doors to the gallery. Then they asked us to start moving.

There’s brass railings on each of the galleries, so it’s intended that you can’t move from one to the other. We were bending down, kind of crouched, trying to get through. Then we finally got to the other side, and it seemed like the most secure place to be was up against that wall, so if they entered and were shooting, they would have to turn around to get to us. As we were over in that corner, the pounding and the breaking of the glass kind of shocked us all. They told us to get down. I laid down on that cold marble, and then there was a shot that rang out. When that shot rang out, it really took me back in time.

I laid my cheek on this cold marble. I’ll never forget that. There was almost a sense of resignation that overcame me, because I was crouched down not on the first level, where there was a wall of sorts, but on the second level, where the only thing between me and a gunman was the back of a chair, so some fabric and some wood. I realized that this could in fact be the end. It was traumatizing for all of us frankly that were in that gallery. Since then, we’ve created a group of us called the Gallery Group, where we talk to each other. We actually had a conversation with a health-care professional on Sunday, who helped us observe what we should do in terms of the self-care necessary to overcome something as traumatic as that and the PTSD associated with it. We all process that kind of an experience differently.

I’ll tell you a funny story. I remember getting on the plane the next morning very early. The plane was packed, and it was packed with all of these Trump supporters, all of these members of that rally. I sort of sat meekly in my chair, kind of couched on the window side. As I got off that plane in Chicago, my thighs were aching. I thought to myself, “Did I sit improperly?” They ached all through the day. Then I realized, when I talked to some of my colleagues who were there as well, there was that adrenaline rush that happens. We were crouched down. We were moving through these various galleries, so our muscles were activated. It took a couple of doses of Ibuprofen to relieve that, but it was all part of the experience. CORDELL: Wow. There is video of at least one police officer taking a selfie with the mob and another of officers removing barriers to allow the mob to freely enter the capitol. History is important. In Nazi Germany, a private security detail cleared the halls of Hitler’s opponents during his rallies, and those security forces became the Nazi Stormtroopers. There’s very strong implications that there are mob sympathizers, right-wing extremists, embedded in the Capitol Police Department. This certainly doesn’t bode well for the inauguration.

In a letter dated January 8 to Speaker Pelosi, you have called for the creation of an independent commission to investigate the security failures at the U.S. Capitol. I read your letter, and it listed 18 areas of inquiry. Can you tell us maybe what are some of those areas that you want looked into, and what is your take on the failure of security to protect the capitol? SPEIER: Well, it’s a very serious question. I think all of us have spent a fair amount of time conversing among ourselves about the lack of security. There was a decision made not to use lethal force. You saw officers being bludgeoned, one with a fire extinguisher, who ultimately died because of it. Murder took place in the capitol.

There is a need I believe to do an independent review of experts to look at what did take place. Now, as chair of the Military Personnel Subcommiteee, I had a hearing last year on violent extremism that has infiltrated the military. They not only recruit them; they also recruit veterans who have served, because they want the talent of those who have been trained in military activity, use of guns, use of various techniques, and plans to actually conduct missions.

I’m deeply concerned about potential infiltration. I’m concerned about the lack of sophistication in assessing what was going to take place. There was a person, actually

“If you went on Parler . . . , you would see that it was not just a march that was contemplated, that they intended to do damage, that there was vengeance in their hearts, that they wanted to overthrow the election and actually our government.”

Even after the violent attack, some protestors remained into the evening, though they then faced beefed up security and riot police. (Photo by Tyler Merbler.)

a lawyer out of Florida, who tweeted the day after. He says, “I knew 17 days before the event what was taking place.” If you went on Parler just kind of casually, you would see that it was not just a march that was contemplated, that they intended to do damage, that there was vengeance in their hearts, that they wanted to overthrow the election and actually our government. CORDELL: Who was it who said, “No lethal weapons. You’re not to be armed”? Do you know who gave that order? SPEIER: I believe it was the sergeant of arms, who has now resigned. I think there was this sense that there was not an interest in wanting to create an environment much like existed when they were marching last year and tear gas was used on peaceful protesters. These were not peaceful protesters, as we saw. I mean, they defaced the House of Representatives. They broke glass. They stormed in. They went into the Speaker’s office and damaged parts of her office, and broke down doors, and sat at her desk, and took a laptop and also correspondence. This was not a peaceful protest. Now, many have also suggested because this was a group of white people, were they treated differently because they were white? I think that’s a question that has to be answered. CORDELL: Yeah. There are a lot of people who have been asking that question, and particularly those who have been involved in protests for Black Lives Matter. I, in my gut, say, yeah, there is a difference and there was a double standard. But as you said, you have a commission. Let’s hope they get into it. Do you know who is going to be on that commission and how that’s going to be put together? SPEIER: Well, I don’t know if the Speaker has agreed to it. She has texted me that it is something that she wants to explore further.

I actually think we need two commissions. I’ve written a letter on security asking for an independent commission. I think we have to do an independent commission on the domestic terrorism that took place and the groups associated with them. This is the beginning of an effort by these people to do harm to our country. This is their watershed moment. CORDELL: Let’s pick up on that a little more. I looked up domestic terrorism as defined by federal law. It’s a long section, but let me just read you a part of it. It’s activities that involve acts of—the one section I want to get to—“they appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion or to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination or kidnapping.” That’s part of the federal definition. Now, what I was surprised to learn, however, is that domestic terrorism is not a federal crime. International terrorism if a federal crime, but there is no crime for domestic terrorism.

Is it time to consider introducing legislation to make domestic terrorism a federal crime, or,. because there is an argument on the other side that says maybe it’s best not to, since if it’s a federal crime, a president could pardon anyone charged or convicted of domestic terrorism. Finally, do you think that there would even be Republican support for a law that made domestic terrorism a crime? SPEIER: I don’t think there’s any question that we have to explore whether or not to make it a crime. I had attempted in the last National Defense Authorization Act to make violent extremism a crime under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Now, ironically, that passed in the House and it was taken out in the Senate, in part at the request of the Department of Defense. I do believe that it is a serious offense, it is going to be with us for foreseeable future, and we have to be prepared to bring actions against those who engage in that conduct. CORDELL: Wow. Would you be willing to put forward that kind of legislation? SPEIER: I certainly will explore that effort. CORDELL: Great. Impeachment, we know the resolution is officially on the table now. Things are moving. I’m wondering if there should be consideration of the 14th Amendment. It’s Article 3 in the 14th Amendment, the third clause, to expel lawmakers who fomented the insurrection. I have a view that it’s important to work for unity, but with unity comes accountability. There are people I believe, lawmakers, who should be held accountable. This idea has been floated by some progressives in the Democratic Party in the House. The section I’m talking about basically says, this is in the 14th Amendment, “No person should be a senator, or representative in Congress, or elector of president and vice president, or hold any office, civil or military, who shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion or given aid or comfort to the enemy.”

The question is, Is this something that should be talked about, utilizing the 14th Amendment? Laurence Tribe, who is an expert on constitutional law, has said, don’t do it. He has absolutely warned against it. I’m not sure what his reasoning is, but I did see something this morning where he

has weighed in and said, “That is not the direction that we should be going.” Do you have any thoughts about that? SPEIER: Well, I think expelling members who are aiding and abetting would be hard to make the case for. Censure may be a more appropriate action to take. Unfortunately, what we’re dealing with is the cult of personality of Donald Trump and the political and emotional control he has over not just the mob that we saw on Wednesday, but the members of Congress.

After that horrific act, we then came back to do our duty to ceremoniously accept the certificates of the election by the electors and to open them. That was our role under the Constitution. The Republicans in the House and again in the Senate wanted to challenge that resolution and did so, and outlined what they saw were all of these instances of fraud. Two thirds of them, including the minority leader, Kevin McCarthy, voted to overturn the election in Arizona and Pennsylvania.

Can you censure two thirds of the members of the House? I don’t believe you can. You certainly I don’t believe can expel them. But I think what we’re seeing around the country is quite fascinating. You’ve seen Twitter shut down Trump. You’ve seen the apps for Parler in Google and Apple shut down. All of a sudden, that megaphone doesn’t exist, which really speaks to how social media has been used by this far-right minority to really overtake this country in a way that is truly profound. I think that watching all of that and then watching Goldman Sachs and some of the CEOs of these companies now contemplate not providing campaign contributions to these very people that would promote this falsehood—I mean, there is a big lie that has been promoted by this president for four years and actually been accepted and embraced by two thirds of the Republicans in the House. CORDELL: You raise an interesting issue about how to maybe stop this craziness. Yes. Trump has been banned from Twitter. The Facebook ban is not permanent. I don’t know why they haven’t done that. But you raise the issue that there are now these corporate executives that in response to all of this, are going to the wallet and saying, “Okay. We’re just going to withhold money from the very people who have been promoting this.” Maybe that’s the way that change happens, that we look at economic sanctions. I’m thinking analogously to South Africa, apartheid. Nothing worked, but then when sanctions were imposed and then when the U.S. came on-board and other countries [joined the effort], we saw an end to apartheid. I’m thinking maybe that’s what has to happen somehow to get those who have heretofore been funneling money to people promoting the big lie to get them to stop doing it. What do you think? Do you think this is something that it’s going to spread throughout the country? SPEIER: I hope so, because it does not appear that we can heal ourselves within Congress. It’s a very sad thing to have to say, but what prompted these members to say and do what they said was personal. It was their interest in wanting to retain their positions, to be able to garner support from Donald Trump in the future, and to fundraise. They were using that opportunity to go to their bases and go to the Trump base generally and say, “See, I wanted to overthrow this fraudulent election.” If you get to the base, the real base of what we’re talking about, it’s self-preservation in office. That’s why you had so many members take the positions that they did.

You had great heroism by people like [Illinois Republican U.S. Representative] Adam Kinzinger, who said, “You know, you can’t do this.” Look at [Wyoming Republican U.S. Representative] Liz Cheney. I must tell you, I went to her and said, “Liz, I’m really impressed by your courage here and by your willingness to speak out.” I think there is some growing concern within the Republican caucus that the leadership, with Steve Scalise and Kevin McCarthy, did a great disservice to their brand and that they mishandled the situation on the 6th. CORDELL: We’re getting some very good questions coming into the chatroom from those who are viewing. One question that has come through [involves] more security, so let’s talk about January 20. Do you think that the inauguration should happen in Washington or, as some people are saying, it should be in an undisclosed location and maybe just live streamed? What are your thoughts on that? SPEIER: It’s a tough question to answer. Certainly President Elect [Joe] Biden has the ultimate decision to make, but if we do this in an undisclosed location, isn’t the mob winning? Isn’t it showing them that we’re afraid of them? We can’t do that. What I believe will happen is that there’s going to be a hardening of the perimeter. We’re going to be prepared, the National Guard will be deployed, all the elements necessary to protect the president-elect, and the vice president-elect, and the membership of Congress, as we witness what we intend to make sure is a peaceful transition of power. CORDELL: What are your thoughts about after Donald Trump is out of the White House, of pursuing him for his behavior, either federal and/or state prosecutions? Do you think that should happen? There are others who say, “No. Maybe for the sake of unity we should just kind of move forward.” What are your thoughts on going after Mr. Trump once he is out of office? SPEIER: I think that those decisions will be made by state attorneys generals and U.S. attorney generals. I certainly get the impression from President-Elect Biden that he wants the country to heal. He wants to be able to move forward. We have such horrific issues separate and distinct from what just happened, with 375,000 Americans dead from COVID, that we’ve got to keep our eye on what’s the most important. While some of that may take place and nobody is above the law, and the president has for four years conducted himself as if he is, because he’s had the protection of an attorney general opinion some decades ago that you cannot charge a seated president, well, once he’s a regular U.S. citizen again, I think he’s going to be subject to the laws, just like everyone else.

I remember sitting in that committee hearing when [former Trump attorney] Michael Cohen testified, and I think Michael Cohen had it right. If you go back and listen to any of his testimony, it’s actually pretty prescient about how Donald Trump would not accept a peaceful transition of power, that he had engaged in tax evasion, insurance fraud, bank fraud. I think all of those will come true, that we will find all of that. He is who he is. Whether it’s being a charlatan and a barker for Trump University or his foundation, everything about him is fraudulent. We’ve got to be willing to come forward and say it. CORDELL: We got another question in from the chatroom. It’s been suggested by congressman [James] Clyburn that the impeachment could be delayed until after the first 100 days of President Biden’s term. What do you think about delaying it, as opposed to moving forward now? SPEIER: I actually think it’s an interesting idea. I think it’s our obligation to impeach. We are taking that action. The Senate obligation is to try and convict if appropriate, and they can take that action when they

deem it’s appropriate. I think the transition of power, getting this new administration up, is really critical, so making sure that he can move forward with his appointments to the cabinet is very important. I would certainly be willing to see that step taken. CORDELL: Let’s talk a little bit about the Electoral College. On January 6, [Congress] met to conclude the presidential election. Just as a reminder to the people that the Electoral College has 538 members, one for each U.S. senator and representative and three for the District of Columbia. The Electoral College indirectly elects the president of the United States. Just as a bit of history, the college was a compromise between those who wanted Congress to elect the president and those who wanted the popular vote to elect the president. But determining exactly how many electors to assign to each state produced a divide between slave-owning

Above left: U.S. Rep. Alex Mooney tweeted this picture of himself holding the gas mask provided to members of Congress during the attack. (Photo by Alex Mooney.) Above right: Thank yous to Capitol Police in a congressional hallway. (Photo by Steve Daines.) Left: In the days and weeks following the attack, the FBI sought information from the public on people involved in the violent attack. (Photo by Elvert Barnes.)

and non-slave-owning states. The result was the controversial Three Fifths Compromise that the enslaved would be counted as three fifths of a person for the purpose of allocating representatives and electors and calculating federal taxes.

Recently, calls have been renewed to abolish the Electoral College and to elect the president with a direct popular vote. Do you think this is a good idea or not to get rid of the Electoral College? I’m wondering is it even possible to do so? What do you think? SPEIER: As we were sitting there listening to the debate, the Republicans were making the case to get rid of the Electoral College and move to a popular vote election. If you look at it historically, there is only one election in which the Republicans were successful in both the Electoral College and the popular vote in the last 30 years. As populations move to each of the coasts and they get focused there, it means that many of these smaller states have a power that really violates this one-person, one-vote law that we’ve always embraced. But the problem is of course that these smaller states recognize this great power they have, and they’re not about to relinquish it. No one wants to relinquish power, so they’re unwilling. The only way you can really move forward I think with that is to dangle some carrot in front of them. I don’t know what the carrot is; it’s always probably money. But that would be the only way I think we’re going to be successful in the near term. CORDELL: I think it’s an idea that should stay alive, and we should keep talking about it. Of course, I’m troubled more by the underpinnings of it, how it even came to be. But I think it’s something that I know a lot of people now are writing about it, talking about it more, but it’s certainly a major issue as we go forward.

More than 70 million people voted for Donald Trump. Now, the big lie told by Trump, that the election was a fraud, has led to this armed insurrection. The divisions in our country are as stark as they were during the Civil War, maybe even more so.

There’s also this grand delusion that COVID-19 is a hoax. For example, it’s estimated that maybe only 5 percent of the mob wore masks on January 6. There’s also footage from the insurrection of a noose, Confederate flags, and let’s not forget some of those in the mob at the capitol wearing anti-Semitic shirts with “Camp Auschwitz” and one with “6MNE”—6 million Jews murdered, not enough. Trump’s endless repetition of lies has not only made fiction plausible, but made criminal conduct the norm.

My question to you, congresswoman, is, Should the focus be on mending fences and trying to engage with Trump supporters, or is this a divide too wide to bridge? Should we just focus on the Biden/Harris agenda full speed ahead and cross our fingers?

ON THE SCENE First-Person Report from the Capitol Attack

Former Club staff member recounts the momentous events

When rioters breached the security of the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, one of the people inside was Haley Talbot, an NBC News associate producer covering Congress. Talbot served as Traverse Fellow at The Commonwealth Club before joining NBC. She says she knew it was going to be a “wild” day even before the tragic events, because of the unprecedented level of planned Electoral College objections; but as she prepared her team in the House of Representatives chamber, she learned how much “wild” was an understatement.

After the joint session of Congress was interrupted and then resumed, people in the chamber were “agitated and nervous. It was clear parts of the complex were not safe and the mob outside was more threatening than the police had anticipated,” Talbot wrote on NBCNews.com on January 9. She says she was still unaware of the extent of the threat, but that changed when everyone in the chamber was told to grab the gas masks.

“And then the glass shattered,” Talbot wrote. “A pane in the glass of the intricate doors to the Speaker’s Lobby were smashed through by rioters as they tried to make it onto the House floor and attack the very center of democracy in America. I caught glimpses of the standoff below as officers barricaded the door and drew their guns to defend the dozens of people inside. “I started to hear the quiet whispering of prayer. A congresswoman I often see but didn’t recognize was holding the hands of other members as she crouched down and was praying over the group.”

Eventually the members of Congress and the media Talbot was with were able to escape from the House gallery and found refuge in other parts of the building. Talbot and some other journalists were given refuge by Rep. Ruben Gallego (D-AZ) in his office, and there they spent the time until it was safe to return to the chamber. “I felt better once we were inside the congressman’s office. He did not need to help us like that, especially amid a raging pandemic that has killed hundreds of thousands.

“Gallego entertained us with war stories, raided the cafeteria and vending machines for us and made us feel calm amidst the chaos that was still ensuing just outside the door. . . . For several hours we shared a single phone charger. I joked after the fact it only worked out because we were all women.

“Gallego and dozens of others made it very clear there was only one option: they had to return to work,” Talbot wrote. “He told us they couldn’t be intimidated and he was firm in that the American people must know the insurrectionists did not win that day.”

SPEIER: That’s the ultimate question, isn’t it? I would say this. If you look at who made up this mob, it was made up of anarchists, white supremacists and anti-Semitics. They used Donald Trump to give their voice amplification. He used them for his interest in wanting to retain power. It is a toxic brew that really needs to be diluted. I think that we need to move forward with the Biden/ Harris agenda. I also think that Democrats rightfully have been criticized for losing touch with working Americans. There was a book written by . . . Thomas Frank about Listen, Liberal. In it he talks about how during the Clinton administration, the president then became very infatuated with Wall Street. Then in the Obama administration, he became very infatuated with the Ivy League schools. Meanwhile, you have many Americans feeling that the Democratic Party that they once were proud members [of] had left them.

I do think we need to do some soul searching. I’m working with congresswoman Marcy Kaptur about what we do with what we used to call the Rust Belt, which is offensive to people that live in the Midwest, that we should call it the Opportunity Belt. We need to reconnect with them. I’ve done some reading. There’s a great book by Arlie Hochschild called Strangers In Their Own Land. She’s a professor at UC Berkeley. After the Tea Party took hold [she] went and spent time in the St. Charles Parish in Louisiana, and spent Sunday dinners with them, and went to church with them, and over a course of many months tried to get a sense of what was moving them into this Tea Party group, which I think has now evolved into the Trumps and this mob gathering. She talked about line cutters. Now, most of these people just thought that everyone else cut in line so they couldn’t get ahead. We’ve got to do a better job of connecting with rural America and working class Americans. CORDELL: Here’s a question from one of our viewers. Will increasing the study of history and civics in this country make a difference going forward? SPEIER: Boy, I think that is so important. I think that I’ve talked to many communities in San Mateo County on a call last week thinking we need to create Civics 101 on a community level and start having these conversations, so people understand what this democracy is and how to protect it. We are very cavalier about our government somehow, that we think it’s just always going to be there. It is, as we know historically, not the case, that democracies fall, that they crumble sometimes from their own actions. But we have a responsibility I think to reinvigorate civics as a community effort, not just in the schools, but for all of us as adults. CORDELL: I have heard it said by some leaders—local, state, federal—that in the aftermath of the insurrection, I’ve heard this phrase, “This is not who we are. This is not America. This is not who we are.” I really take issue with that, because I think this is who we are, that when we say that, I think we’re kind of saying, going back, hearkening to this message of we here, the U.S., we have this standard of excellence. We’re just kind of above everybody, and so this is who we are versus this is not who we are. I really look at what happened on January the 6th and everything that has preceded it, going back to Memorial Day 2020, George Floyd, and way before that. I mean, I have parents who came up in the Great Migration and lived under Jim Crow. When I hear people say that, “This is not who we are,” I’m thinking, “This is not who we want to be, ought to be, but it is who we are.” I’d love to hear your thinking about that. SPEIER: I bristle when we talk about the exceptionalism in the United States. There’s an arrogance to that that I find personally offensive. I mean, we are imperfect. It is an imperfect union, but one that we aspire to make more perfect. We’ve made many mistakes over the history of this country, obviously slavery being the most egregious.

But we can look even more recently to see how we [have done wrong]. How do you cage babies on the border? How do you do that? I made two trips to the border to try and shine a bright light on that kind of conduct. We have so much repairing to do. When you look at how willing we were to basically shut off any movement of refugees into this country, how do you have the Statue of Liberty and then cut the number of refugees per year from 120,000 down to 18,000? That’s what President Trump did.

I would agree with you, LaDoris. It is who we are. There’s a horrible video of [Democratic U.S. Representative] Lou Correa, who is a colleague from California, who was at the airport and was getting ready to get on a plane to come home right after the events of January 6. Listening to the voices of those men and women badgering him is worthy of all of us to view, because it is who we are, and we’ve got a lot of work to do. CORDELL: Let’s talk about the Thomases. There’s Clarence Thomas and there’s Ginni Thomas, his spouse. Recently, information has been disclosed that Ginni Thomas was a strong supporter of, if not actively involved in, this insurrection, this whole mob gathering. I saw one thing on social media. Again, I don’t know if it’s true or not. There was one indication that she had actually financed and paid for some of the buses that brought some of these folks in to try to tear down the capitol. If indeed all of this were true . . . that she engaged in all these behaviors, the question is what does that mean with respect to Clarence Thomas’s tenure on the Supreme Court?

There are some people who may say, “Well, what do you mean? They’re two different things. She’s doing that. He’s on the court.” But there are these rules about conflicts of interest that say, for example, if I were on the bench and I had a close relative who was doing something that had something to do with litigation coming into my court, I’d have to disclose that and then decide whether or not to recuse myself. There are these kinds of things, conflicts of interest, the appearance of conflicts of interest or actual conflict. Do you have any thoughts about that? She is, we all know, that’s pretty clear, that she’s on the extreme right. But if it’s the case that she was actively involved in promoting all this, do you think this should have any repercussions regarding Clarence Thomas’s tenure? SPEIER: That is something that is subject to a factual review. If she was funding this, then it would appear that he is conflicted and would at the very least have to recuse himself on cases that dealt with any of the conduct by these individuals. He has been a less than productive member of the Supreme Court. I certainly would like to see what his colleagues on the Supreme Court say and do about his conduct. I wonder to what extent they have the ability to provide some kind of regulatory function over his conduct moving forward. CORDELL: If you were Joe Biden and you’re getting ready to be sworn in, what are among the first things you would do to ease the tensions in this country? SPEIER: That’s a very good question. I think that Joe Biden is more prepared to do that than I am actually. I think that his 30-plus years in the Senate have given him great experiential abilities. By nature, he is a person that wants to get to yes. We certainly should give him the opportunity to attempt it. I guess I’ve become more cynical in watching the Republicans generally to think that they’re not interested in that. Certainly in the House they can taste regaining the majority. Much of what I think Kevin McCarthy was doing with his pugnacious nature when he introduced the Speaker on the day that we were sworn in was kind of messaging all of that to the base and to Donald Trump, so that they could move forward with that.

In terms of healing our country, I think we have to do a lot more listening. I mean, as much as I find everything that was done by that mob despicable, we’ve got to find out, what is it that motivates them, besides hatred, and bigotry, and anti-Semitism? What is their core?

Just days after the deadly attack, the U.S. House of Representatives impeached President Donald Trump for the second time, citing his role in inciting the insurrection. (Photo by U.S. House of Representatives.)

“We need to create Civics 101 on a community level . . . so people understand what this democracy is and how to protect it.”