Lessons From the January 6th Committee
By Sean Evans, Chair and Professor of Political Science
Dec 28, 2022 -
On Monday, the January 6th Committee held its final public hearing and made four criminal referrals to the Department of Justice. After two years of investigations and ten public hearings, what are the lessons we can learn from the committee?
Overall, the committee provided fresh details about what everyone already knew. Former President Donald Trump is morally responsible for the attack on the U.S. Capitol because he repeatedly made baseless accusations – still unproven two years later – that Democrats stole the election, called his supporters to Washington for a rally, and encouraged supporters to march on the Capitol. Special Counsel Jack Smith must decide if there is evidence that meets a legal criminal standard and if it is prudent to indict a former president and current presidential candidate.
Beyond potential illegality, the evidence paints a disturbing picture of Trump’s decision-making. A successful president must appoint talented individuals who will provide him with the information he needs to make good decisions and not just what he wants to hear. Yet, Trump combined this type of advisor with a set of grifters, yes men, and conspiracy theorists who played to his ego, encouraged his worst instincts, and used Trump to advance their personal interests. By surrounding himself with this latter group, incorrectly processing the evidence about voter fraud, and putting his fear of being a loser over the country’s interest, Trump showed that he lacks the temperament for high office.
However, the committee’s political goal of disqualifying Trump from holding future public office in the public’s mind failed. Trump’s favorability ratings barely moved during and after the public hearings. After eight years of Trump, almost all Americans had already made up their mind about Trump and new information did not alter those opinions. At most, the hearings created a historical narrative and contributed to Trump fatigue among Republicans who like his policies but dislike his personality.
In fact, political failure harmed Trump more than the January 6th Committee as Trump’s Republican support dropped after the November elections because Republicans justifiably blame him for the GOP’s underperformance due to his support of flawed candidates in competitive races. Post-election, most Republicans consider themselves a supporter of the GOP more than Trump, most Republicans want someone other than Trump to run, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis is beating him in head-to-head polls, and Trump is losing to President Biden in most polls.
The potential greater concern is that the committee may be criminalizing the violation of democratic norms. Democratic norms are unwritten rules for how politicians should behave that promote a stable, legitimate political system. One basic democratic norm is accepting election results. While Trump was wrong to lie about losing the election, prosecuting Trump for lying opens Democrats who falsely accused Trump of the still unproven Russian collusion during the 2016 election to a similar prosecution. The problem is that criminalizing political disagreement chills the free speech necessary for citizens to deliberate about policies and candidates, assumes politically appointed prosecutors will value truth over political expediency, and potentially politicizes the judicial system in a way that undermines the rule of law.
The solution is to hold all political sides to the same standard, distinguish between the national and partisan interests, and prioritize the nation’s interest. We get the government that we deserve. If we expect better government, we must demand it and support basic norms of political conduct.
This column appeared in The Jackson Sun