Watch the hearing above. It is scheduled to begin at 1:00 p.m. ET.

The Jan. 6 committee is highlighting the way violent far-right extremists answered Donald Trump's "siren call" to come to Washington for a big rally, as some now face rare sedition charges over the deadly U.S. Capitol attack and effort to overturn the 2020 presidential election.

Read live, time-stamped updates from the hearing below:

12:50 p.m. ET

The Jan. 6 House panel's hearing is set to begin in 10 minutes.

The House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol announced Tuesday that it had postponed a hearing scheduled for Wednesday as a hurricane hurtled toward the Florida coast.

Related video above: Footage of Trump recording an address to the nation a day after Capitol attack shown at last Jan. 6 committee hearing

The committee had planned to hold what was likely to be its final investigative hearing Wednesday afternoon, but members decided at the last minute to delay it as it became clear that Hurricane Ian was churning on a collision course toward Florida, where it was expected to strengthen into a catastrophic Category 4 storm.

“We’re praying for the safety of all those in the storm’s path," committee chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., and vice chair Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., said in a statement Tuesday afternoon. "The Select Committee’s investigation goes forward and we will soon announce a date for the postponed proceedings.”

The committee had not yet provided a specific agenda for the Wednesday hearing, but Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., said over the weekend it would “tell the story about a key element of Donald Trump’s plot to overturn the election.”

This week's hearing was intended to close the series of public hearings the nine-member panel embarked on in early June. Throughout eight hearings, the committee — comprised of seven Democrats and two Republicans — sought to show the American public in great detail how former President Trump ignored many of his closest advisers and amplified his false claims of election fraud after he lost the 2020 election to Joe Biden.

Some of the more than 1,000 witnesses interviewed by the panel — a number of them Trump’s closest allies — recounted in videotaped testimony how the former president declined to act when hundreds of his supporters violently attacked the Capitol as Congress certified Biden’s victory on Jan. 6, 2021. But the committee has said its work isn't done.

During the August recess, congressional investigators continued to interview witnesses, including several of Trump's cabinet members, some of whom had discussed invoking the constitutional process in the 25th Amendment to remove Trump from office after the insurrection.

Cheney had previously said the committee “has far more evidence to share with the American people and more to gather.”

There are also many questions surrounding the effort to overturn the election that remain unanswered as the committee goes into its final three months of work.

Panel members still want to get to the bottom of missing Secret Service texts from Jan. 5-6, 2021, which could shed further light on Trump’s actions during the insurrection, particularly after earlier testimony about his confrontation with security as he tried to join supporters at the Capitol. Thompson said earlier this month that the committee has recently obtained “thousands” of documents from the Secret Service.

Last week, the committee was able to secure an interview with conservative activist Virginia “Ginni” Thomas, who’s married to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. Lawmakers want to know more about her role in trying to help Trump overturn the election. She contacted lawmakers in Arizona and Wisconsin as part of that effort.

And the last, but possibly most consequential decision left on the committee's plate is how aggressively to pursue testimony from Trump and former Vice President Mike Pence.

The panel will have to wrap up these loose ends by the end of the year, when the select committee status expires. If Republicans take the majority in November’s elections, as they are favored to do, they are expected to dissolve the committee in January. So the panel is planning to issue a final report by the end of December that will include legislative reforms to help prevent future attempts to subvert democracy.

WASHINGTON — On Friday, a federal judge sentenced a father and son from Butler County to 12 months probation for illegally demonstrating in the United States Capitol during the riot on Jan. 6, 2021.

The charge is a misdemeanor.

Paul Seymour Jr. held a Trump flag as he and his father, Paul Seymour Sr., walked inside the breached Capitol with rioters, and posed for a photo next to a statue of Confederate hero Robert E. Lee, according to documents filed by the U.S. Attorney's office in the District of Columbia.

United States Attorney for the District of Columbia

"I apologize," Seymour Jr. told U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta. "My ignorance is inexcusable."

The Seymours didn't damage property or physically hurt anyone that day, according to court records.

According to the Department of Justice, the Seymours are among about 900 people charged in the massive federal investigation.

"A riot cannot occur without rioters, and each rioter’s actions — from the most mundane to the most violent — contributed, directly and indirectly, to the violence and destruction of that day," Asst. U.S. Attorney Anita Eve wrote in the government's sentencing memo.

Like thousands of protesters that day, the Seymours traveled to Washington, D.C. to attend the "Stop the Steal" rally near the White House to show support for then-President Donald Trump, who claimed without proof that the election was stolen from him.

According to federal prosecutors, the Seymours entered the Capitol building "through broken Senate Wing Doors," after some rioters assaulted officers, and officers had used pepper spray to disperse the crowd and ordered them to leave.

The Seymours were inside the Capitol for "almost 30 minutes parading through the building at will," according to the prosecution's sentencing memo. "After it had grown dark in Washington, D.C. on January 6, the Seymours finally left the restricted grounds of the Capitol. Seymour Jr. posed for a photograph taken of himself in front of a line of police officers who had formed a perimeter outside the Capitol."

Lot Tan

Former U.S. Attorney David DeVillers — a partner with Barnes & Thornburg in Columbus — said this case is another example of the consistent approach prosecutors are using in the massive investigation.

"We don't want anyone to do this again," DeVillers said. "And we're going to send the message that we're going to prosecute everyone for every misdemeanor, for every felony that we can if we can establish that there's probable cause to do so."

The U.S. Attorney's Office in D.C. asked the judge to sentence the Seymours to 90 days home confinement and three years probation.

But Judge Mehta said the Seymours hadn't made threats, damaged property, entered anyone's office or physically hurt people. So, that combined with additional factors convinced the judge to hand down a much lighter sentence.

Like his son, Paul Seymour Sr. also apologized during his sentencing hearing.

“I shouldn’t have been there, period," he told the judge.

Seymour Sr. said after he and his son posed for a photo in the Capitol, he told his son, "it's time to walk out of here."

In addition to their probation, the Seymours are also required to perform 60 hours of community service.

WASHINGTON (AP) — A Kentucky man with a long criminal record was sentenced Friday to a record-setting 14 years in prison for attacking police officers with pepper spray and a chair as he stormed the U.S. Capitol with his wife.

Peter Schwartz’s prison sentence is the longest so far among hundreds of Capitol riot cases. The judge who sentenced Schwartz also handed down the previous longest sentence — 10 years — to a retired New York Police Department officer who assaulted a police officer outside the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

Prosecutors had recommended a prison sentence of 24 years and 6 months for Schwartz, a welder.

U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta sentenced Schwartz to 14 years and two months in prison, followed by three years of supervised release.

Mehta said Schwartz was a “soldier against democracy” who participated in “the kind of mayhem, chaos that had never been seen in the country's history.”

“You are not a political prisoner,” the judge told hm. “You're not somebody who is standing up against injustice or fighting against an autocratic regime.”

Schwartz briefly addressed the judge before learning his sentence, saying, “I do sincerely regret the damage that Jan. 6 has caused to so many people and their lives.”

The judge said he didn't believe Schwartz's statement, noting his lack of remorse.

“You took it upon yourself to try and injure multiple police officers that day,” Mehta said.

Schwartz was armed with a wooden tire knocker when he and his then-wife, Shelly Stallings, joined other rioters in overwhelming a line of police officers on the Capitol’s Lower West Terrace, where he threw a folding chair at officers.

“By throwing that chair, Schwartz directly contributed to the fall of the police line that enabled rioters to flood forward and take over the entire terrace,” prosecutor Jocelyn Bond wrote in a court filing.

Schwartz, 49, also armed himself with a police-issued “super soaker” canister of pepper spray and sprayed it at retreating officers. Advancing to a tunnel entrance, Schwartz coordinated with two other rioters, Markus Maly and Jeffrey Brown, to spray an orange liquid toward officers clashing with the mob.

“While the stream of liquid did not directly hit any officer, its effect was to heighten the danger to the officers in that tunnel,” Bond wrote.

Before leaving, Schwartz joined a “heave ho” push against police in the tunnel.

Stallings pleaded guilty last year to riot-related charges and was sentenced last month to two years of incarceration.

Schwartz was tried with co-defendants Maly and Brown. In December, a jury convicted all three of assault charges and other felony offenses.

Mehta sentenced Brown last Friday to four years and six months in prison. Maly is scheduled to be sentenced June 9.

Schwartz’s attorneys requested a prison sentence of four years and six months. They said his actions on Jan. 6 were motivated by a “misunderstanding” about the 2020 presidential election. Then-President Donald Trump and his allies spread baseless conspiracy theories that Democrats stole the election from the Republican incumbent.

“There remain many grifters out there who remain free to continue propagating the ‘great lie’ that Trump won the election, Donald Trump being among the most prominent. Mr. Schwartz is not one of these individuals; he knows he was wrong,” his defense lawyers wrote.

Prosecutors said Schwartz has bragged about his participation in the riot, shown no remorse and claimed that his prosecution was politically motivated. He referred to the Capitol attack as the “opening of a war” in a Facebook post a day after the riot.

“I was there and whether people will acknowledge it or not we are now at war,” Schwartz wrote.

Schwartz has raised over $71,000 from an online campaign entitled “Patriot Pete Political Prisoner in DC.” Prosecutors asked Mehta to order Schwartz to pay a fine equaling the amount raised by his campaign, arguing that he shouldn’t profit from participating in the riot.

Schwartz was on probation when he joined the Jan. 6 riot. His criminal record includes a “jaw-dropping” 38 prior convictions since 1991, “several of which involved assaulting or threatening officers or other authority figures,” Bond wrote.

Schwartz was working as a welder in Uniontown, Pennsylvania, before his arrest in February 2021, but he considers his home to be in Owensboro, Kentucky, according to his attorneys.

More than 100 police officers were injured during the riot. More than 1,000 people have been charged with federal crimes related to Jan. 6. Nearly 500 of them have been sentenced, with over half getting terms of imprisonment.

The 10-year prison sentence that Mehta handed down in September to retired NYPD officer Thomas Webster had remained the longest until Friday. Webster had used a metal flagpole to assault an officer and then tackled the same officer as the mob advanced toward the Capitol.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ybs_2-1dyyM

WASHINGTON —

Democrats are mounting an impassioned bid to overhaul Senate rules that stand in the way of their sweeping voting legislation, arguing dark forces unleashed by Donald Trump’s falsehoods about the 2020 election demand an extraordinary response.

In fiery speeches and interviews, President Joe Biden and top congressional Democrats have seized on the one-year anniversary of the Jan. 6 insurrection as a reason to advance their long-stalled voting, ethics and elections package. Senate Republicans, who have repeatedly blocked the legislation, excoriate the measures as a “partisan power grab” and warn that any rule changes will haunt Democrats someday under a GOP majority.

Trump’s false claims of a stolen election not only incited the mob that stormed the Capitol, Democrats say. His unrelenting campaign of disinformation also sparked a GOP effort to pass new state laws that have made it more difficult to vote, while in some cases rendering the administration of elections more susceptible to political influence.

Democrats’ voting legislation would usher in the biggest overhaul of U.S. elections in a generation, striking down hurdles to voting enacted in the name of election security, reducing the influence of big money in politics and limiting partisan influence over the drawing of congressional districts. The package would create national election standards that would trump the state-level GOP laws. It would also restore the ability of the Justice Department to police election laws in states with a history of discrimination.

Many Democrats say the moment has come to act decisively in what they view as the civil rights fight of the era. Changing Senate rules early in 2022 offers perhaps the last best chance to counteract Republicans' state-level push before the midterm elections, when Democrats' House majority and slim hold in the 50-50 Senate could be wiped out.

“If Republicans continue to hijack the rules of the chamber to prevent us from protecting our democracy, then the Senate will debate and consider changes to the rules,” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said Friday.

Yet what action they will take remains highly uncertain, depending on the often elusive support of Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va. Key Democrats have been meeting with Manchin for weeks, brainstorming options while also enlisting outside allies to lobby his support.

Manchin has made no firm commitments. He has repeatedly said he will not support lowering the filibuster's 60-vote threshold for passing most legislation, a stance shared by fellow centrist Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz. Until the threshold is lowered, enacting election legislation could prove difficult, if not impossible.

But Democrats say they are focused on what's achievable now, amid escalating pressure from allies for action. Even modest changes to Senate rules, they say, would be a significant step forward.

Leaning into the fight, Biden is set to deliver a speech in Atlanta on Tuesday focused on voting rights. And Schumer has added to the civil rights symbolism by setting the Martin Luther King Jr. holiday, on Jan. 17, as the deadline to either pass the voting legislation or consider revising the rules. The Senate is likely to hold a series of test votes this week intended to underscore Republican opposition.

“I'm not going to say ‘yes’ or ‘no,’ because I don’t know what votes will come to the floor," Manchin said last week, noting that he has supported some changes to Senate rules in the past. One proposal Democrats are discussing would eliminate the filibuster on the so-called “motion to proceed” that is needed before a bill can be debated on the Senate floor.

Republicans say invoking the Jan. 6 insurrection is offensive. The voting bills, they say, were largely written before the attack and include a liberal wish list of priorities that will do little to combat vulnerabilities in the law exposed by Trump's attempts to overturn the election.

“It is beyond distasteful for some of our colleagues to ham-fistedly invoke the Jan. 6 anniversary to advance these aims," said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. “The fact that violent criminals broke the law does not entitle Senate Democrats to break the Senate.”

The renewed focus on voting rights comes as much of Biden's agenda has stalled out in Congress. Before Christmas, Manchin singlehandedly halted work on Biden's roughly $2 trillion package of social and environmental initiatives, delaying the bill indefinitely.

Civil rights activists are deeply frustrated by the turn of events, saying precious months have been wasted. They view the GOP-backed changes in voting laws as a subtler form of ballot restrictions like literacy tests and poll taxes once used to disenfranchise Black voters, a key Democratic constituency.

“Unfortunately many policymakers have not truly appreciated the gravity of where we are in this nation at this moment,” NAACP President Derrick Johnson said in an interview, singling out both Biden's White House as well as Senate Democrats. “African Americans have seen this before. We've experienced this before. We must get beyond procedural conversations and get to the substance of protecting this fragile thing called democracy.”

McConnell has ridiculed "scary stories that liberal activists keep repeating about how democracy is at death’s door.” He recently dangled the possibility of narrower bipartisan action to shore up a convoluted 19th century law called the Electoral Count Act that governs the certification of presidential elections — a law Trump sought to exploit to overthrow his 2020 defeat. A compromise on that could be attractive to Manchin, who has said any election legislation ought to be enacted on a bipartisan basis.

Last week, Republican Sen. Susan Collins of Maine held bipartisan talks with Republican Sens. Roger Wicker of Mississippi, Thom Tillis of North Carolina and Mitt Romney of Utah, as well as Manchin and fellow Democrats Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona. An update to the Electoral Count Act was part of the discussion, according to a person familiar with the discussion who insisted on anonymity to reveal details about the deliberations.

Democrats have blasted the GOP overture on the Electoral Count Act as a “cynical” political maneuver aimed at doing the bare minimum at the federal level while leaving laws in place in GOP-controlled swing states like Georgia.

“What good is it to certify the election, if I don’t get to cast my vote in the first place?” said Democratic Sen. Raphael Warnock, the first African American to represent Georgia in the Senate. He is up for reelection this year.

Republicans warn that Democrats will come to regret any changes to the filibuster, which is intended to foster compromise by making legislation intentionally difficult to pass.

“They barely have a majority now,” said Sen. John Thune, of South Dakota, the chamber's No. 2 Republican. “Even the strongest majorities eventually end up back in the minority.”

More subpoenas in the Jan. 6 congressional investigation were issued Tuesday.

Subpoenas were issued for Proud Boys International, L.L.C., Oath Keepers, Henry "Enrique" Tarrio, Elmer Stewart Rhodes and Robert Patrick Lewis.

"Members of Proud Boys International, L.L.C., called for violence leading up to January 6th, and at least 34 individuals affiliated with the Proud Boys have been indicted by the Department of Justice in relation to the January 6th attack on the Capitol," the select committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol said in a statement.

The committee alleges the Oath Keepers were also involved in planning and participating in the attack.

Tarrio and Rhodes both had leadership roles with the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers, according to the committee.

Robert Patrick Lewis is reportedly the chairman of the 1st Amendment Praetorian, which the committee says provided security for rallies that led up to the Jan. 6 insurrection.

“The Select Committee is seeking information from individuals and organizations reportedly involved with planning the attack, with the violent mob that stormed the Capitol on January 6th, or with efforts to overturn the results of the election," Chairman Bennie G. Thompson. "We believe the individuals and organizations we subpoenaed today have relevant information about how violence erupted at the Capitol and the preparation leading up to this violent attack."

Video above: Executive privilege move won't open a Pandora's box, White House says

Former President Donald Trump on Monday sought to block the release of documents related to the Jan. 6 insurrection to the congressional committee investigating the attack, challenging the decision of President Joe Biden.

In a federal lawsuit, Trump said the committee request was "almost limitless in scope," and sought records with no reasonable connection to that day. He alleged the committee is seeking potentially millions of presidential records that he asserts are covered by a broad range of privileges, including those that cover presidential communications and conversations between lawyers and a client.

The committee’s request was a "vexatious, illegal fishing expedition," unprecedented in scope and "untethered from any legitimate legislative purpose," the lawsuit said.

The lawsuit takes aim at the core oversight functions of Congress, saying the records being sought by lawmakers are not for "legitimate legislative purpose" and the committee does not have the powers of a law enforcement agency. It seeks an injunction to bar the archivist from producing them. Biden has said he would not block the release to the committee, because the Jan. 6 attack was such an unprecedented event that executive privilege should not factor in.

Lawmakers are seeking the documents as part of its investigation into how a mob of Trump supporters stormed the Capitol building on Jan. 6 in an effort to halt the certification of Biden’s win.

The committee demanded a broad range of executive branch papers related to intelligence gathered before the attack, security preparations during and before the siege, the pro-Trump rallies held that day and Trump’s false claims that he won the election, among other matters.

Trump's lawsuit says the "boundless requests included over fifty individual requests for documents and information, and mentioned more than thirty individuals, including those working inside and outside government." The suit says the request could include "conversations with (or about) foreign leaders, attorney work product, the most sensitive of national security secrets, along with any and all privileged communications among a pool of potentially hundreds of people."

The lawsuit was filed by Jesse Binnall, an attorney based in Alexandria, Virginia, who represented Trump in an unsuccessful lawsuit late last year seeking to overturn Biden’s victory in Nevada. Trump and his allies have continued to make baseless claims about voter fraud in the 2020 election.

WASHINGTON —

The House committee investigating the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol has issued a subpoena to a former Justice Department lawyer who positioned himself as an ally of Donald Trump and aided the Republican president's efforts to challenge the results of the 2020 election.

The subpoena to Jeffrey Clark, revealed Wednesday, came amid signs of a rapidly escalating congressional inquiry. At least three of the people who were involved in organizing and running the rally that preceded the violent riot have handed over documents in response to subpoenas from the committee.

The demands for documents and testimony from Clark reflect the committee's efforts to probe not only the deadly insurrection but also the tumult that roiled the Justice Department in the weeks leading up to it as Trump and his allies leaned on government lawyers to advance his baseless claims that the election results were fraudulent. Trump loyalists stormed the Capitol in an effort to disrupt the congressional certification of Democrat Joe Biden's victory

Clark, an assistant attorney general in the Trump administration, has emerged as a pivotal character in that saga. A Senate committee report issued last week shows how he championed Trump's efforts to undo the election results inside the Justice Department and clashed as a result with superiors who resisted the pressure, culminating in a dramatic White House meeting at which Trump floated the idea of elevating Clark to attorney general.

"The Select Committee's investigation has revealed credible evidence that you attempted to involve the Department of Justice in efforts to interrupt the peaceful transfer of power," the chairman of the committee, Democratic Rep. Bennie Thompson of Mississippi, wrote in a letter to Clark announcing the subpoena.

While Trump ultimately did not appoint Clark acting attorney general, Clark's "efforts risked involving the Department of Justice in actions that lacked evidentiary foundation and threatened to subvert the rule of law," Thompson added.

The committee has scheduled a deposition for Oct. 29 and demanded documents by the same date. A lawyer for Clark declined to comment.

The Jan. 6 panel has so far sought testimony from a broad cast of witnesses, but its demands of Trump aides and associates are potentially complicated by Trump's vow to fight their cooperation on grounds of executive privilege.

Already one witness, Steve Bannon, has told the committee that he will not cooperate based on Trump's directive, though the committee has said it was "engaging" with two other Trump officials — former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows and former Defense Department official Kashyap Patel. It is also unclear whether Dan Scavino, Trump's longtime social media director and one of his most loyal aides, will cooperate.

Biden formally rejected Trump's claim of executive privilege surrounding a tranche of documents requested from the former president's time in the White House, and set up their potential release to Congress in mid-November. White House counsel Dana Remus wrote to the National Archives in a letter released Wednesday that Biden believes that "an assertion of executive privilege is not in the best interests of the United States."

Others, though, are cooperating, including some of the 11 who organized or staffed the Trump rally that preceded the riot. They were given a Wednesday deadline to turn over documents and records, and have also been asked to appear at separate depositions the committee has scheduled beginning this month.

Among those responding to the Wednesday deadline was Lyndon Brentnall, whose firm was hired to provide event security that day. "All the documents and communications requested by the subpoena were handed in," he told The Associated Press.

Brentnall had previously said his firm had "every intention" of complying with the select committee. "As far as we're concerned, we ran security at a legally permitted event run in conjunction with the U.S. Secret Service and the Park Police," he said.

Two longtime Trump campaign and White House staffers, Megan Powers and Hannah Salem, who were listed on the Jan 6. rally permit as "operations manager for scheduling and guidance" and "operations manager for logistics and communications," have also provided documents or are planning to do so.

Powers, who served as the Trump reelection campaign's director of operations, intends to provide the requested documentation and to meet with the committee — though it remains unclear what form such meetings will take, according to a person familiar with her response who spoke on condition of anonymity.

Many of the rioters who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6 marched up the National Mall after attending at least part of Trump's rally, where he had repeated his meritless claims of election fraud and implored the crowd to "fight like hell."

The results of the election were confirmed by state officials and upheld by the courts. Trump's own attorney general, William Barr, had said the Justice Department found no evidence of widespread fraud that could have overturned the results.

It remains unclear whether the others who were subpoenaed intend to cooperate. A committee spokesperson declined to comment Wednesday on the responses it had received and how many of the 11 were complying.

Members of the committee, including Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney, the panel's Republican vice chairwoman, have threatened to pursue criminal contempt charges against subpoenaed witnesses who refuse to comply. A House vote would send those charges to the Department of Justice, which would then decide whether to prosecute.

The subpoena to Clark follows the release of a Senate Judiciary Committee report that documented extraordinary tensions within the senior ranks of the Justice Department in December and January as Trump and his allies prodded the law enforcement agency to help him in undoing the election.

The report from the committee's Democratic majority depicts Clark as a relentless advocate inside the building for Trump's efforts, even presenting colleagues with a draft letter pushing Georgia officials to convene a special legislative session on the election results. Clark wanted the letter sent, but superiors at the Justice Department refused.

"We need to understand Mr. Clark's role in these efforts at the Justice Department and learn who was involved across the administration," Thompson wrote.

Two additional organizers, Ali Alexander and Nathan Martin, as well as their "Stop the Steal" organization, were also subpoenaed for documents, which are due Oct. 21.

Alexander wrote in a Telegram post Monday that the committee was "subpoenaing people in bad faith."

"So maybe this Select Committee is bogus?" he added. "Everyone is waiting to see what I'll do."

__

Colvin reported from New York and Smith from Providence, Rhode Island. Associated Press writers Farnoush Amiri and Zeke Miller in Washington contributed to this report.

Video above: The AP sits down with the new chief of the Capitol Police

A whistleblower identifying as a former high-ranking U.S. Capitol Police official excoriated the department's leadership before, during and after the deadly Jan. 6 insurrection in a new letter to Congress.

The 16-page letter, obtained by CNN and first reported by Politico, claims two Capitol Police officials — assistant chief Yogananda Pittman and acting assistant chief Sean Gallagher — did not share vital intelligence with other police leadership and did not act to help officers once the violence began on Jan. 6, but haven't seen any consequences in the months since. The letter, dated Sept. 28, addresses leaders of the U.S. House and Senate.

The whistleblower said they are a former high-ranking officer with more than 30 years of service at the department who worked there at the time of the attack.

Some of the allegations in the letter mirror criticism contained in reports from the Senate Judiciary Committee and the inspector general. But the letter takes particular aim at department leadership — and accuses some congressional leaders of having "purposefully failed" to tell the truth about the department's failures.

The alleged failures of Pittman and Gallagher, the former department official wrote, have been "marginalized, negligibly investigated, categorically underreported and without accountability. In fact, as pointed out by many they have been restored to their exact same positions as if they were not responsible for the single greatest intelligence failure in the history of the U.S. Capitol Police is astounding."

The former department official alleges that the pair didn't share intelligence information with the department that would have "changed the paradigm of that day" and that during the attack, "they did not try to help or assist as officers and officials were literally fighting for each other, their lives and the Congress."

"What I observed was them mostly sitting there, blankly looking at the TV screens showing real-time footage of the officers and officials fighting for the Congress and their lives," the former department official, who said they were in the command center for part of the attack, wrote.

A law enforcement source defended Pittman and Gallagher to CNN, saying they did not fail to act, but instead were focused on successfully ensuring the protection of lawmakers, who were all evacuated without harm.

Still, the letter underscored the ways in which the Capitol Police department continues to grapple with the fallout of the Jan. 6 insurrection more than nine months after the attack. The mere shock of the event, and the criticism of the department that followed, has led the department to make some quick changes, like rank-and-file officers now getting daily intelligence alerts on their cell phones.

The Capitol Police executive team, which includes Pittman and Gallagher, said in a statement to CNN that "a lot has changed since Jan. 6" and though "there is more work to do, many of the problems described in the letter have been addressed."

"USCP leaders, under new Chief Tom Manger, are committed to learning from prior mistakes and protecting our brave officers, who fought valiantly on Jan. 6, so we can continue to carry out the Department's critical mission," the statement said.

"The men and women of this Department are committed to that critical mission. Our goal is to work as a team, to move forward, and advance the work that keeps the U.S. Capitol and the people who work here safe."

Both Pittman and Gallagher were among the force's top leadership that received a vote of no confidence from members of the department one month after the attack.

A vote of no confidence was among the most adversarial actions the union could take to express displeasure in leadership. The move signified USCP officers' deep frustrations with management and sent the loudest message officers can issue as a unified group.

WASHINGTON — While the election may have ended in November, technically it ends Wednesday. That's because Congress still has to certify the Electoral College vote, which took place last month.

WHAT TO EXPECT?

A joint session of Congress will begin at 1 p.m. ET Wednesday with Vice President Mike Pence presiding in what is considered a ceremonial role. Pence presides because he is president of the Senate.

Each state's Electoral College result will be read out loud and in alphabetical order. Any member of Congress can object to a result.

However, in order for an objection to be deemed valid, it must be in writing and signed by a member of the House of Representatives and a member of the United States Senate. If an objection is deemed valid, each chamber will then have two hours to debate the objection. After that, a vote takes place with a simple majority winning.

WHY IT WILL TAKE LONGER THAN USUAL?

Dozens of Republicans who are loyal to President Donald Trump are expected to object but Trump does not have the votes to win any objection. A majority in both chambers would be needed for that to happen.

What's unclear is how many states Republicans will object. A handful will push the vote into the early evening hours because each valid objection is entitled to two hours of debate.

Pence, who is under pressure from Trump to change the election result, could at any time step down from presiding on his own and be replaced by the President Pro-Tempore Chuck Grassley of Iowa.

WILL ANYTHING CHANGE?

Because Trump doesn't have a majority of votes in either chamber, he cannot win any objection. Republicans could potentially use parliamentary rules and tactics to delay the vote but that is to be determined.

Outside the Capitol, thousands of Trump supporters are expected to gather on the National Mall. Trump is expected to speak there and D.C.'s mayor has asked the National Guard to be deployed for extra security.

The Department of Homeland Security says it's aware of a "small number of recent online threats of violence" connected to Saturday's far-right rally in Washington, D.C.

Its local director said no one wants a repeat of the January 6th insurrection when thousands of rioters stormed the Capitol.

"We do not tolerate hate, violence, or the criminal actions of those who committed the insurrection on January 6th," said director Christopher Rodriguez.

About 700 people are expected to attend the "Justice for J-6" rally in support of the protesters who were arrested after attacking the U.S. Capitol back in January.

As a precautionary measure, temporary fencing has been reinstalled and police have requested that national guard troops remain on standby.

This story was originally reported by Newsy.com.

Facebook’s Oversight Board is asking the public to submit comments about the social platform’s suspension on former President Donald Trump’s account.

“We recognise the level of interest in our case regarding former US President Trump. We encourage people and organizations to share their insights through our public comments process,” the board tweeted.

Facebook suspended the former president’s account after removing two posts from Jan. 6, the day pro-Trump rioters stormed the U.S. Capitol.

Facebook cited the use of their platform to "incite violent insurrection against a democratically elected government."

After issuing the temporary suspension, Facebook submitted the case to their newly created oversight board to determine if the social media platform was correct to take action.

The 20-member board was formed just last year to oversee difficult content decisions made by the tech company. Facebook and Instagram’s CEO Mark Zuckerberg cannot overrule a decision by the board.

“We believe our decision was necessary and right,” Facebook Vice President of Global Affairs and Communications Nick Clegg said in a statement. “Given its significance, we think it is important for the board to review it and reach an independent judgment on whether it should be upheld.”

They are now requesting "observations or recommendations on suspensions when the user is a political leader."

To submit a comment, there are several requirements, including being written in English, no more than 2 pages in Times New Roman 12pt font, address the issues at hand, include a full name and/or organization, and meet the deadline of 10 a.m. ET on Monday, February 8.

Click here for more details on how to submit a comment.

Senate is in recess

WARNING: This live video may contain violent images and strong or coarse language. Viewer discretion is advised.

1:40 p.m.

Senator Majority Leader Chuck Schumer calls for a 15 minute recess. The trial will resume shortly.

---

1:30 p.m.

House Democrats prosecuting Donald Trump's impeachment trial are methodically tracing his monthslong effort to undermine his supporters’ faith in the election results. They say they will show he is responsible for last month’s deadly riot at the U.S. Capitol.

During arguments Wednesday, impeachment managers showed a flurry of excerpts from Trump speeches in which the then-president told supporters the only way he could lose is if the election results were rigged.

The effort to challenge the results continued after the election, with Trump telling his supporters the election had been stolen and that they shouldn’t accept the results.

Impeachment managers also pushed back at defense team arguments that Trump’s words were protected by the First Amendment. They said the case was not about protected political speech but rather about Trump’s incitement of violence.

---

1 p.m.

One of the House impeachment managers on Wednesday showed videos, some filmed by the Capitol rioters themselves, who said they were heeding a call from former President Donald Trump when they descended upon the complex that January day.

One rioter said he was "invited by the president of the United States." Others later told investigators and participated in interviews where they said that they were motivated by Trump’s words at a rally before the storming occurred.

House impeachment manager Rep. Joe Neguse also showed photos of samples from some of the 200 criminal cases stemming from the insurrection, specifically quoting people who said they were inspired by Trump to storm the Capitol.

Trump knew very well what would happen when he took to the microphone at the outdoor White House rally that day, almost to the hour that Congress gaveled in to certify Biden’s win, said Neguse.

“This was not just a speech,” he said.

Trump’s supporters were prepped and armed, ready to descend on the Capitol, Neguse said. “When they heard his speech, they understood his words.”

---

12:30 p.m.

In his opening argument for the conviction of former President Donald Trump, lead impeachment manager Rep. Jaime Raskin called Trump the "inciter-in-chief," placing blame on the former president for the deadly Capitol riot.

"[This trial will show that Donald Trump surrendered his role as commander-in-chief and became the inciter-in-chief of a dangerous insurrection, and this was as one of our colleagues put it so cogently on Jan. 6 itself, the greatest betrayal of the presidential oath in the history of the United States," Raskin said.

Raskin also played videos from Trump's now-suspended Twitter account, where Trump called the rioters "very special."

"He watched it on TV like a reality show. He reveled in it," Raskin added. "He did nothing to help us as commander-in-chief. Instead, he served as the inciter-in-chief sending tweets that only further incited the rampaging mob."

---

Noon

Opening arguments in the second impeachment trial of former President Donald Trump are underway. House impeachment managers will start first, making their case for the former president's conviction. Senate leaders reached an agreement Monday, giving the impeachment managers and Trump's lawyers up to 16 hours each to present their cases and creating the option for a debate and vote to call witnesses if the House impeachment managers seek it.

---

Original story below

Opening arguments will begin in Donald Trump's impeachment trial after an emotional first day ended with the Senate voting to hear the case for convicting the former president of inciting the riot at the U.S. Capitol even though he is no longer in office.

On Wednesday, House Democrats prosecuting the case and the former president’s attorneys will lay out their opposing arguments before the senators, who are serving as jurors. The defense lost the vote seeking to halt the trial on constitutional grounds, 56-44, leaving Trump fuming over his lawyers' performance and allies questioning the defense strategy. Some called for yet another shakeup to his legal team.

House prosecutors on Tuesday wrenched senators and the nation back to the deadly attack on Congress, showing a graphic video of the Jan. 6 mob violence that stunned the the world as hundreds of rioters ransacked the building to try to stop the certification of Democrat Joe Biden’s victory. Five people died.

That detailed and emotional presentation by Democrats was followed by meandering and occasionally confrontational arguments from the Trump team, which insisted that his remarks were protected by the First Amendment and asserted that he cannot be convicted as a former president. Even Trump’s backers in the Senate winced, several saying his lawyers were not helpful to his case.

Senators, many of whom fled for safety themselves the day of the attack, watched and listened, unable to avoid the jarring video of Trump supporters battling past police to storm the halls, Trump flags waving. More video is expected Wednesday, including some that hasn't been seen before.

The heavy emotional weight of the trial punctuates Trump’s enduring legacy as the first president to face impeachment trial after leaving office and the first to be twice impeached. While many minds are made up, the senators will face their own moment to decide whether to convict or acquit Trump of the sole charge of “incitement of insurrection.”

“That’s a high crime and misdemeanor,” Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., declared in opening remarks. “If that’s not an impeachable offense, then there’s no such thing.”

Trump’s lawyers insist he is not guilty, his fiery words just figures of speech.

Security remained extremely tight at the Capitol, a changed place after the attack, fenced off with razor wire and with armed National Guard troops on patrol. The nine House managers walked across the shuttered building to prosecute the case before the Senate.

White House press secretary Jen Psaki said Biden would not be watching the trial of his predecessor.

“Joe Biden is the president, he’s not a pundit, he’s not going to opine on back and forth arguments,” she said.

With senators sworn to deliver impartial justice, the trial started with the Democratic House managers' gripping recollections, as they described police officers maimed in the chaos and rioters parading in the very chamber where the trial was being held.

Trump’s team countered that the Constitution doesn’t allow impeachment at this late date. Though the trial now proceeds, that’s a legal issue that could resonate with Republicans eager to acquit Trump without being seen as condoning his behavior.

Lead defense lawyer Bruce Castor said he shifted his planned approach after hearing the prosecutors’ opening and instead spoke conversationally to the senators, saying Trump’s team would do nothing but denounce the “repugnant” attack and “in the strongest possible way denounce the rioters.” He appealed to the senators as “patriots first,” and encouraged them to be “cool headed” as they assess the arguments.

Trump attorney David Schoen turned the trial toward starkly partisan tones, saying the Democrats were fueled by a “base hatred” of the former president.

The early defense struggles also underscored the uphill battle that Trump’s lawyers face in defending conduct that preceded an insurrection that senators themselves personally experienced. Though they will almost certainly win Trump’s acquittal — by virtue of the composition of the Senate — they nonetheless face a challenge of defanging the emotion from a trial centered on events that remain raw and visceral, even for Republicans.

Republicans made it clear that they were unhappy with Trump’s defense, many of them saying they didn’t understand where it was going — particularly Castor’s opening. Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy, who voted with Democrats to move forward with the trial, said that Trump’s team did a “terrible job.” Maine Sen. Susan Collins, who also voted with Democrats, said she was “perplexed.” Sen. Lisa Murkowki of Alaska said it was a “missed opportunity” for the defense.

While the 56-44 vote affirmed the Senate’s authority under the Constitution to decide the case even after the president had left office, the total was still far from the two-thirds threshold of 67 votes that would be needed for conviction.

The six Republicans who joined with Democrats to pursue the trial was one more than on a similar vote last week. Cassidy joined Collins, Murkowski, Mitt Romney of Utah, Ben Sasse of Nebraska and Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania.

At one pivotal point, Raskin told his personal story of bringing his family to the Capitol that day to witness the certification of the Electoral College vote, only to have his daughter and son-in-law hiding in an office, fearing for their lives.

“Senators, this cannot be our future,” Raskin said through tears. “This cannot be the future of America.”

The House prosecutors had argued there is no “January exception” for a president to avoid impeachment on his way out the door. Rep. Joe Neguse, D-Colo., referred to the corruption case of William Belknap, a war secretary in the Grant administration, who was impeached, tried and ultimately acquitted by the Senate after leaving office.

If Congress stands by, “it would invite future presidents to use their power without any fear of accountability," he said.

It appears unlikely that the House prosecutors will call witnesses, and Trump has declined a request to testify.

The trial is expected to continue into the weekend.

Trump's second impeachment trial is expected to diverge from the lengthy, complicated affair of a year ago. In that case, Trump was charged with having privately pressured Ukraine to dig up dirt on Biden, then a Democratic rival for the presidency.

This time, Trump's “stop the steal” rally rhetoric and the storming of the Capitol played out for the world to see.

The Democratic-led House impeached the president swiftly, one week after the attack. Of the five who died, one was a woman shot by police inside the building and another a police officer who died the next day of his injuries.

CNN contributed to this report.

CNN —

The Department of Homeland Security warned state and local authorities Friday about an increase in calls for violence online tied to election-related conspiracy theories, according to a law enforcement source.

In an effort to prevent online threats from manifesting in violent acts, DHS issued a public safety notification to reach law enforcement throughout the United States.

"[D]HS is providing awareness of reports regarding an increasing but modest level of activity online calling for violence in response to unsubstantiated claims of fraud related to the 2020 election and the alleged 'reinstatement' of former President Trump," the public safety notification said, according to the source.

The notification was first reported by ABC News.

The warning, which does not contain a specific threat, comes amid a resurgence of false claims about the 2020 election, pushed in part by Mike Lindell, MyPillow CEO and a close ally of former President Donald Trump, who has emerged as one of the most vocal proponents of these conspiracy theories.

"As public visibility of the narratives increases, we are concerned about more calls to violence. Reporting indicates that the timing of these actives may occur during August 2021, although we lack information on specific plots or planned actions," the notification says, according to the source.

For weeks, the federal government has been aware of online narratives focused on reinstatement, particularly on platforms associated with promoting conspiracy theories, like QAnon, and forums where extremists tend to engage, the source said.

While "modest," there is a concern that those conspiracy theories are being "woven into calls for violence," the source added, pointing to the need for greater awareness of the issue throughout the U.S.

In the current threat environment, DHS is especially concerned that lone offenders and small groups of individuals would potentially view these narratives as justification to act out violently, according to the source.

Some of the online rhetoric directly references Jan. 6. There are also calls for violence in Washington, D.C., and state capitols across the country, the source said.

In additional to the Lindell-backed false claims, another conspiracy theory relates to the upcoming FEMA test of the nationwide emergency alert system, according to the source, with some viewing it as a so-called "go code."

The notification is based on the department's "assessment of the current threat environment in its similarity to situations to 2020 and 2021 that manifested in acts of violence and destructive behavior by individuals and groups, including the 6 January 2021 breach of the US Capitol," according to the source.

Dissemination of the notification will be followed up with additional meetings between the FBI, DHS and state and local law enforcement to evaluate the threat and assess whether more is needed to mitigate the risk, the source said.

A New Jersey gym owner and a Washington state man on Friday became the first people charged in the January 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol to plead guilty to assaulting a law enforcement officer during the insurrection.

The pair of plea deals with federal prosecutors could be a benchmark for dozens of other cases in which Capitol rioters are charged with attacking police as part of an effort to halt the certification of President Joe Biden’s election victory. 

Both defendants face more than three years in prison if a judge adheres to estimated sentencing guidelines spelled out in the plea agreements.

The pleas come less than two weeks after a group of police officers testified at a congressional hearing about their harrowing confrontations with the mob of insurrectionists. Five officers who were at the Capitol that day have died, four of them by suicide.

SEE MORE: 2 More Officers Who Responded To Jan. 6 Capitol Attack Dead By Suicide

The Justice Department has said rioters assaulted approximately 140 police officers on January 6.

About 80 of them were U.S. Capitol Police officers and about 60 were from the Washington, D.C., Metropolitan Police Department.

More than 560 people have been charged with federal crimes, and authorities are still searching for hundreds more. 

At least 165 defendants have been charged with assaulting, resisting or impeding officers or Capitol employees, including more than 50 people charged with using a deadly or dangerous weapon or causing serious bodily injury to an officer, the Justice Department said in July.U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth set a sentencing date of Sept. 27 for both men.

Additional reporting by the Associated Press.

This story was originally reported by Jay Strubberg on Newsy.com

Senate Republicans are poised to block the creation of a special commission to study the deadly Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, dashing hopes for a bipartisan panel amid a GOP push to put the violent insurrection by Donald Trump’s supporters behind them.

Broad Republican opposition was expected in what would be the first successful Senate filibuster of the Biden presidency, even as the family of a Capitol Police officer who collapsed and died after the siege and other officers who battled rioters went office to office asking GOP senators to support the commission. The insurrection was the worst attack on the Capitol in 200 years and interrupted the certification of Democrat Joe Biden's win over Trump.

A vote on the procedural motion was bumped to Friday after delays on an unrelated bill to boost scientific research and development pushed back the schedule.

Though the Jan. 6 commission bill passed the House earlier this month with the support of almost three dozen Republicans, GOP senators said they believe the commission would eventually be used against them politically. And former President Trump, who still has a firm hold on the party, has called it a “Democrat trap.”

The expected vote is emblematic of the profound mistrust between the two parties since the siege, which has sowed deeper divisions on Capitol Hill even though lawmakers in the two parties fled together from the rioters that day. The events of Jan. 6 have become an increasingly fraught topic among Republicans as some in the party have downplayed the violence and defended the rioters who supported Trump and his false insistence that the election was stolen from him.

While initially saying he was open to the idea of the commission, which would be modeled after an investigation of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell turned firmly against it in recent days. He has said he believes the panel's investigation would be partisan despite the even split among party members.

McConnell, who once said Trump was responsible for provoking the mob attack on the Capitol, said of Democrats, “They’d like to continue to litigate the former president, into the future.”

Still, a handful of Republicans — if not enough to save it — were expected to vote to move forward with the bill. Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski has said she will support the legislation because she needs to know more about what happened that day and why.

“Truth is hard stuff, but we’ve got a responsibility to it,” she told reporters Thursday evening. “We just can’t pretend that nothing bad happened, or that people just got too excitable. Something bad happened. And it’s important to lay that out.”

Of her colleagues opposing the commission, Murkowski said some are concerned that “we don’t want to rock the boat.”

The Republican opposition to the bipartisan panel has revived Democratic pressure to do away with the filibuster, a time-honored Senate tradition that requires a vote by 60 of the 100 senators to cut off debate and advance a bill. With the Senate evenly split 50-50, Democrats need support of 10 Republicans to move to the commission bill, sparking fresh debate over whether the time has come to change the rules and lower the threshold to 51 votes to take up legislation.

The Republicans' political arguments over the violent siege — which is still raw for many in the Capitol, almost five months later — have frustrated not only Democrats but also those who fought off the rioters.

Michael Fanone, a Metropolitan Police Department officer who responded to the attack, said between meetings with Republican senators that a commission is “necessary for us to heal as a nation from the trauma that we all experienced that day.” Fanone has described being dragged down the Capitol steps by rioters who shocked him with a stun gun and beat him.

Sandra Garza, the girlfriend of Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick, who collapsed and died after battling the rioters, said of the Republican senators, “You know they are here today and with their families and comfortable because of the actions of law enforcement that day."

“So I don’t understand why they would resist getting to the bottom of what happened that day and fully understanding how to prevent it. Just boggles my mind,” she said.

Video of the rioting shows two men spraying Sicknick and another officer with a chemical, but the Washington medical examiner said he suffered a stroke and died from natural causes.

Garza attended the meetings with Sicknick’s mother, Gladys Sicknick. In a statement Wednesday, Mrs. Sicknick suggested the opponents of the commission "visit my son’s grave in Arlington National Cemetery and, while there, think about what their hurtful decisions will do to those officers who will be there for them going forward.”

Dozens of other police officers were injured as the rioters pushed past them, breaking through windows and doors and hunting for lawmakers. The protesters constructed a mock gallows in front of the Capitol and called for the hanging of Vice President Mike Pence, who was overseeing the certification of the presidential vote. Four protesters died, including a woman who was shot and killed by police as she tried to break into the House chamber with lawmakers still inside.

“We have a mob overtake the Capitol, and we can’t get the Republicans to join us in making historic record of that event? That is sad,” said Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the No. 2 Senate Democrat. “That tells you what’s wrong with the Senate and what’s wrong with the filibuster.”

Many Democrats are warning that if Republicans are willing to use the filibuster to stop an arguably popular measure, it shows the limits of trying to broker compromises, particularly on bills related to election reforms or other aspects of the Democrats' agenda.

For now, though, Democrats don't have the votes to change the rule. West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin and Arizona Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, both moderate Democrats, have said they want to preserve the filibuster.

Biden, asked about the commission at a stop in Cleveland, said Thursday, “I can’t imagine anyone voting against” it.

Republican Texas Sen. John Cornyn, who once supported the idea of the commission, said he now believes Democrats are trying to use it as a political tool.

“I don’t think this is the only way to get to the bottom of what happened,” Cornyn said, noting that Senate committees are also looking at the siege.

___

Associated Press writers Alan Fram, Colleen Long and Padmananda Rama contributed to this report.

Some of those accused of smashing through police barriers and storming the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 are now saying their part in the riot wasn't their fault.

At least a dozen Capitol riot defendants identified by the Associated Press say their presence among the mob was an accident; that they were "caught up" and pushed inside by force, not as supporters of the fight.

The defense is partly a tactic for some to restore reputations after being part of the event, while others are trying to defend themselves at trial or for sentencing.

More than 400 people have been charged in connection to the riot — the largest prosecution in the Justice Department's history. Federal prosecutors are expecting to charge at least 100 more.

One man, who was accused of helping break a glass door to the House chamber, said he never planned to storm the building.

Another said he was overwhelmed by a moment sparked by then-President Donald Trump.

"He would never have anticipated finding himself in the situation, but for the president and the rally and the way everything went down," the suspect's lawyer said. "We’ve heard ‘mob mentality’ — and he describes it to a T."

That's what many are saying — that participants acted in ways they wouldn't have naturally, but the crowd of like-minded people changed their ways. But that defense of outside influences and a blame-the-crowd point of view is typically rejected in court.

While plea negotiations are underway in some cases, the amount of evidence — including that from other rioters themselves — is making it hard for many to cut deals with prosecutors for lighter punishments.

This story was originally published by Alex Arger for Newsy.