Connect with us


Samsung confirms everything it will present on August 5

A little more than a week is left for the celebration of the next Samsung event, and the South Korean brand has



A little more than a week is left for the celebration of the next event, and the South Korean brand has started to warm up with a trailer that summarizes what awaits us on August 5.

Like the product presentations of the last months, Samsung’s Unpacked 2020 will be a totally virtual event , the first that the brand celebrates without an audience and outside its usual setting. 

For this reason, the company has decided to give it a closer and personal touch. As you can see in the trailer that we leave you below, the brand will not only present only its new products, with the Galaxy Note 20 as the protagonist. In addition, it will also exclusively share stories from the designers and developers of the devices.

Therefore, apart from knowing first-hand the new Samsung products for the second half of 2020, this Unpacked will offer us a window into the company so that we can better know what the process of creating the devices is.

The last image of the trailer comes to confirm what we can see on August 5 in the online event. Samsung has not listed the products that we will know, but due to their silhouette, engraved in the characteristic Mystic Bronze color, they can be clearly recognized. 

You can see them in the opening image of this news. The first from the right is the protagonist of the Unpacked 2020, the Galaxy Note 20 , which is perfectly distinguished with the stylus resting on it. The second from the right is the Galaxy Z Fold 2 , the successor to the company’s first folding screen phone.

Thirdly we have the Galaxy Watch 3, which is located next to the Galaxy Buds Live , both devices widely leaked. Finally, behind them we can appreciate the silhouette of the Galaxy Tab S7 , the new premium tablet from Samsung that, if the rumors are correct, will come accompanied by an advanced version, the Galaxy Tab S7 +. 

Now we just have to wait until August 5 to know the details of all the devices. Has the brand had an ace up its sleeve?

Nirbhaya has been interested in doing something on his own from the days when he was in college. But, things didn’t favour him in the beginning, and he had to work for others. Later, he finally started as a news portal, and then never looked back. The website is gaining popularity every day. He puts all of his skills into his work and making his dream come true. He covers Tech and General news on this website.

Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Republicans oppose the $15 minimum wage target as an expense that would hurt businesses and cost jobs



The House approved a $1.9 trillion pandemic relief bill early Saturday in a win for President Joe Biden, even as top Democrats tried assuring agitated progressives that they’d revive their derailed drive to boost the minimum wage.

The new president’s vision for flushing cash to individuals, businesses, states and cities battered by COVID-19 passed on a near party-line 219-212 vote. That ships the massive measure to the Senate, where Democrats seem bent on resuscitating their minimum wage push and fights could erupt over state aid and other issues.

Democrats said the still-faltering economy and the half-million American lives lost demanded quick, decisive action. GOP lawmakers, they said, were out of step with a public that polling shows largely views the bill favorably.

“I am a happy camper tonight,” Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., said Friday. “This is what America needs. Republicans, you ought to be a part of this. But if you’re not, we’re going without you.”

Republicans said the bill was too expensive and said too few education dollars would be spent quickly to immediately reopen schools. They said it was laden with gifts to Democratic constituencies like labor unions and funneled money to Democratic-run states they suggested didn’t need it because their budgets had bounced back.

“To my colleagues who say this bill is bold, I say it’s bloated,” said House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif. “To those who say it’s urgent, I say it’s unfocused. To those who say it’s popular, I say it is entirely partisan.”

Moderate Democratic Reps. Jared Golden of Maine and Kurt Schrader of Oregon were the only two lawmakers to cross party lines. That sharp partisan divide is making the fight a showdown over who voters will reward for heaping more federal spending to combat the coronavirus and revive the economy atop the $4 trillion approved last year.

The battle is also emerging as an early test of Biden’s ability to hold together his party’s fragile congressional majorities — just 10 votes in the House and an evenly divided 50-50 Senate.

At the same time, Democrats were trying to figure out how to assuage progressives who lost their top priority in a jarring Senate setback Thursday.

That chamber’s nonpartisan parliamentarian, Elizabeth MacDonough, said Senate rules require that a federal minimum wage increase would have to be dropped from the COVID-19 bill, leaving the proposal on life support. The measure would gradually lift that minimum to $15 hourly by 2025, doubling the current $7.25 floor in effect since 2009.

Hoping to revive the effort in some form, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., is considering adding a provision to the Senate version of the COVID-19 relief bill that would penalize large companies that don’t pay workers at least $15 an hour, said a senior Democratic aide who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal conversations.–161557766/

That was in line with ideas floated Thursday night by Sens. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., a chief sponsor of the $15 plan, and Senate Finance Committee Chair Ron Wyden, D-Ore., to boost taxes on corporations that don’t hit certain minimum wage targets.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., offered encouragement, too, calling a minimum wage increase “a financial necessity for our families, a great stimulus for our economy and a moral imperative for our country.” She said the House would “absolutely” approve a final version of the relief bill because of its widespread benefits, even if it lacked progressives’ treasured goal.

While Democratic leaders were eager to signal to rank-and-file progressives and liberal voters that they would not yield on the minimum wage fight, their pathway was unclear because of GOP opposition and questions over whether they had enough Democratic support.

House Ways and Means Committee Chair Richard Neal, D-Mass., sidestepped a question on taxing companies that don’t boost pay, saying of Senate Democrats, “I hesitate to say anything until they decide on a strategy.”

Progressives were demanding that the Senate press ahead anyway on the minimum wage increase, even if it meant changing that chamber’s rules and eliminating the filibuster, a tactic that requires 60 votes for a bill to move forward.

“We’re going to have to reform the filibuster because we have to be able to deliver,” said Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., a progressive leader.

Republicans have continued to embrace the myth of a stolen election the annual rightwing conclave of the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), underscoring how the party continues to sustain the baseless idea months after Donald Trump’s loss in the 2020 race and the deadly assault on the Capitol.

This year’s gathering of some of the party’s most fervent supporters has a staggering seven sessions focused on voter fraud and election-related issues. Several have inflammatory titles. “Other culprits, why judges and media refuse to look at the evidence,” was the name of one panel discussion on Friday. “The left pulled the strings, covered it up, and even admits it,” was another. “Failed states (GA, PA, NV, oh my!)” is the title of another scheduled for this weekend.

‘The base is solidly behind him’: Trumpism expected to thrive at CPAC
Read more
Several speakers on Friday repeated debunked falsehoods about the election. Deroy Murdock, a Fox News contributor, repeated the lie that there were “mysterious late-night ballot dumps” that swung the election for Joe Biden and that there were vehicles with out-of-state license plates unloading ballots in the early hours of the election. Both of those claims have been debunked.

Stoking fears about fraud and advocating for stricter voting rules has become commonplace among Republicans in recent years, but in the wake of Trump’s presidency – and his loss to Biden – it has become a common rallying cry in the party. Even so, some observers said the focus on fanning the flames of the conspiracy theory at CPAC was still alarming.

“One program on lessons learned from voting in 2020 is appropriate to restore trust for half of America, but not seven!” said Eric Johnson, a former Republican lawmaker in Georgia who advised Kelly Loeffler’s US Senate campaign.

“Donald Trump convinced his base – a majority of Republicans, if polls are to be believed – that the election was stolen. Though the CPAC organizers likely know it’s false, they’re using this as a wedge issue to excite the base and sell more tickets,” said Nick Pasternak, who recently left the Republican party after working on several GOP campaigns.

He added: “CPAC’s willingness to make the election lie such a big issue this year is a concerning symbol of what many in the party think – and what they’ll do.”

Even though dozens of judges across the country, including several appointed by Donald Trump, rejected claims of fraud after the election, Murdock and other speakers at CPAC accused judges of being unwilling to examine evidence of fraud.

Progressives are willing to accept defeat on the minimum wage for now and vote for President Joe Biden’s coronavirus relief package. But they’re channeling their energy into a renewed push to kill the filibuster.

One day after the Senate parliamentarian effectively forced a $15 minimum wage hike out of Democrats’ coronavirus relief package, leading liberal activists are racing to turn their bitter setback into opportunity. The need to sacrifice a key Biden priority in order to ensure the Covid aid bill can pass the Senate with a simple majority has handed progressive lawmakers and their allied groups a new talking point in their long-running quest to eliminate the legislative filibuster.

“We promised a $15 minimum wage,” said Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. “So if that $15 minimum wage isn’t in this package, we are going to have to figure out a way to get it through. And if that means reforming the filibuster, then we should reform the filibuster.”

Democrats pushed hard to raise the minimum wage as part of the pandemic relief measure, which the Senate can pass with just 51 votes thanks to the protections of the arcane budget reconciliation process. But now that the chamber’s parliamentarian has ruled out adding the wage hike to the coronavirus bill, progressives see nuking the filibuster outright as their best — and perhaps only — chance of getting to $15 an hour.

Minimum wage

Democrats short of a backup plan after minimum wage ruling

Very few Senate Democrats believe that the left’s demands to toss the chamber’s 60-vote threshold will have any effect on the dynamic in their 50-member caucus, where there’s currently not enough support for eliminating the filibuster. Still, pressure from progressives on and off the Hill — who turned the filibuster into a wedge issue during the Democratic presidential primary — is rapidly intensifying in only the second month of Biden’s tenure.

With Democrats preparing to take up other high-priority legislation, including a landmark voting rights bill and police reform, liberals’ clamor to end the filibuster is bound to cause new political headaches for party leaders.

Thursday night’s setback on the minimum wage is the first of many potential stressors to come as Democrats rethink the future of the legislative filibuster. Few of the party’s major policy priorities stand a real chance of passing the Senate without eliminating the tool that requires a 60-vote margin of approval for most measures.

“It’s going to take a few more issues that get momentarily frustrated for it to fully come to a head but we’re getting closer by the day,” said Brian Fallon, executive director of the liberal group Demand Justice.

Exactly which agenda item might constitute the Democratic breaking point is unclear, as the party pushes for a voting rights expansion, immigration reform and more.

Former Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada ended the filibuster for executive-branch and some judicial nominees in 2013, a move known as the “nuclear option,” and current GOP leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky continued down the path in 2017 by ending the filibuster for Supreme Court nominees.

“It may be that you have to demonstrate for the American people how grave a challenge it is to get major change done that affects their lives when you’ve got the blockade that the filibuster allows,” said Sen Bob Casey (D-Pa.), noting that he and other Senate Democrats who wouldn’t have supported ending the filibuster “are much more open to it” now.

Biden has consistently resisted calls to go nuclear and his press secretary reiterated that position after he took office. But he’s now confronting an aligned array of progressives in the House, Senate and outside advocacy groups newly emboldened to agitate against what they consider an arcane rule that’s a relic of the Jim Crow-era.

“The filibuster was never in the constitution, originated mostly by accident, and has historically been used to block civil rights,” tweeted Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) shortly after the Senate parliamentarian’s ruling. “It’s time to trash the Jim Crow filibuster.”

Schatz acknowledged in an interview Friday that Democrats currently “don’t have the votes to get rid of the filibuster,” but said the party can’t just throw up its hands and accept gridlock. “This is a monumental change, this is a necessary change,” he said.

Failing to fulfill the party’s promise of passing a $15 minimum wage could have dire consequences for Democrats at the ballot box, progressive lawmakers argue. Biden campaigned on increasing the hourly wage for the first time in a decade. The issue is also a longtime priority for key Democratic constituencies, including labor unions.

The pressure is particularly intense in the House, where leaders of the Congressional Progressive Caucus have long expected that the minimum wage battle would turn into a broader debate on the filibuster. Some have privately been girding to have this exact fight with Senate institutionalists at this exact time.

Some on the left still believe their party could take up a fight with the parliamentarian, the Senate’s chief rules referee, to force the minimum wage provision into the bill. But most believe it’s a longshot, and are are eyeing the legislative filibuster as the bigger problem.

The U.S. Department of State is seen.
U.S. diplomat openly calls for Christian nation-states, rails against Jews
Progressives push to squash Senate filibuster after minimum wage defeat
‘Nobody Listened To Me’: The Quest to Be MTG
Trump pardon unwinds some Manafort forfeitures
‘Hard to see the path out’: Cuomo besieged as crises grow

“Our immediate options on this specific issue [are] to do something about this parliamentary obstacle or abolish the filibuster,” said Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.).

“We hope that the senators, the administration, fight as hard as we’ve been fighting,” added Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.). “I think it is time that we stop coming up with excuses to do the right thing.”

Even if the filibuster were eliminated, however, it’s unclear if the $15 minimum wage would actually pass the Senate. Sens. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) and Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) have said they do not support increasing the minimum wage to $15 as part of the coronavirus relief package. Manchin has said he supports an $11 minimum wage, which Ocasio-Cortez and others on the left have declared a nonstarter.

And when a group of Senate Republicans introduced a proposal this week to increase the minimum wage to $10, progressives blared their objections. Asked if she’d accept a compromise below $15, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass) responded: “We need $15 an hour. That’s where I am.”


A daily play-by-play of congressional news in your inbox.

By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or updates from POLITICO and you agree to our privacy policy and terms of service. You can unsubscribe at any time and you can contact us here. This sign-up form is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Senate Republicans, meanwhile, are vocally opposing calls to eliminate the legislative filibuster. During negotiations on a power sharing agreement for the 50-50 Senate, McConnell insisted that Democrats commit to keeping the 60-vote threshold, a proposal that Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer rejected. And Republicans are quick to remind Democrats that they resisted pressure from then-President Donald Trump to do away with it when they controlled Washington in 2017.

Liberal activists have continually pressured skeptical Democrats on abolishing the legislative filibuster, mounting ad campaigns targeting Schumer — who is up for reelection next year — and others. Since Thursday’s ruling on the minimum wage hike, social justice groups such as Ultraviolet, Women’s March and the Sunrise Movement have called on Biden and Senate Democrats to get rid of the 60-vote margin.

“Everything the voters voted for that helped place Joe Biden in the White House requires the Senate to be able to fully function,” Rahna Epting, executive director of MoveOn, said in an interview.

Nina Turner, an ally of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) who is running for an open House seat in Ohio, said progressives have no plans to let up on their opposition to the filibuster.

“The people who were hired to do the people’s bidding are going to have to get the courage to do away with it,” said Turner. “A breaking point is coming. I just don’t know the what or the when.”

Hans von Spakovsky, a well-known conservative who has agitated for more restrictive voting policies for years, claimed that judges were reluctant to look at evidence because they feared they would be attacked. “When it becomes an extraordinary election contest, one with national implications and one in which they risk being attacked by one of the political parties, the news media, their reluctance gets even greater,” he said.

Pressed whether judges were afraid to look at the evidence, Von Spakovsky added: “I think in some cases that is true, in other cases they might have had valid procedural grounds, but it sure didn’t look like it to me.”

Asked how much evidence of fraud there was now, Murdock falsely said: “It may be shredded by now.”

Jesse Binnall, an attorney who represented the Trump campaign in Nevada, complained about the short deadline lawyers had to put together a case after the election and claimed judges were pressured by media reporting that noted voter fraud was not a widespread problem. “Right or wrong, they never tried to dig into the facts about voter fraud,” he said. “Our legs were cut off before we even walked into the courthouse.”

Litigants in American courts have to meet procedural thresholds to advance their case, something that prevents courts from having to hear frivolous claims. Again and again, Trump and his allies failed to convince courts that they cleared those bars.

“One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption,” Matthew Braun, a federal judge in Pennsylvania, wrote in December as he tossed out an effort from Trump and his allies to block certification of the election results there. “Instead, this court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations … unsupported by the evidence.”

The comments at CPAC underscore how Republicans continue to stoke uncertainty about the election – even after judges and Republican and Democratic elected officials alike repeatedly examined allegations of wrongdoing and did not find fraud, they continue to insist that there is unexamined evidence. In state legislatures across the country, are pushing new restrictions on voting. There are at least 253 pending bills to restrict voting across the United States, according to a tally by the Brennan Center for Justice.

In his remarks on Friday, Von Spakovsky expressed support for efforts to restrict voting by mail and said HR1, the bill pending in Congress that would require automatic and same-day registration, among other reforms, “the most anti-democratic bill I’ve ever seen during my 20 years in Washington”.

Jay Williams, a Republican strategist in Georgia, said the focus on elections was a way to gin up support among the party’s faithful base, which remains largely loyal to Trump and his allies.

“I would not equate ‘the party’ with CPAC so I wouldn’t put much stock in it from that perspective,” he said. “CPAC exists to make money and so it’s no surprise to me the organizers have jumped on to this issue as a way to drive engagement of their target market.”

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., another high-profile progressive, also said Senate rules must be changed, telling reporters that when Democrats meet with their constituents, “We can’t tell them that this didn’t get done because of an unelected parliamentarian.”

Traditionalists of both parties — including Biden, who served as a senator for 36 years — have opposed eliminating filibusters because they protect parties’ interests when they are in the Senate minority. Biden said weeks ago that he didn’t expect the minimum wage increase to survive the Senate’s rules.

Pelosi, too, seemed to shy away from dismantling Senate procedures, saying, “We will seek a solution consistent with Senate rules, and we will do so soon.”

The House COVID-19 bill includes the minimum wage increase, so the real battle over its fate will occur when the Senate debates its version over the next two weeks.

The overall relief bill would provide $1,400 payments to individuals, extend emergency unemployment benefits through August and increase tax credits for children and federal subsidies for health insurance.

It also provides billions for schools and colleges, state and local governments, COVID-19 vaccines and testing, renters, food producers and struggling industries like airlines, restaurants, bars and concert venues.

Democrats are pushing the relief measure through Congress under special rules that will let them avoid a Senate GOP filibuster, meaning that if they are united they won’t need any Republican votes.

It also lets the bill move faster, a top priority for Democrats who want the bill on Biden’s desk before the most recent emergency jobless benefits end on March 14.

But those same Senate rules prohibit provisions with only an “incidental” impact on the federal budget because they are chiefly driven by other policy purposes. MacDonough decided that the minimum wage provision failed that test.

Republicans oppose the $15 minimum wage target as an expense that would hurt businesses and cost jobs.

Continue Reading


IRTC BREAKING ALERT: ROSEN, A LEADING LAW FIRM, Encourages iRhythm Technologies, Inc. Investors to Secure Counsel Before Important Deadline – IRTC



NEW YORK, Feb. 27, 2021 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — WHY: Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, reminds purchasers of the securities of iRhythm Technologies, Inc. (NASDAQ: IRTC) between August 4, 2020 and January 28, 2021, inclusive (the “Class Period”), of the important April 2, 2021 lead plaintiff deadline.

SO WHAT: If you purchased iRhythm securities during the Class Period you may be entitled to compensation without payment of any out of pocket fees or costs through a contingency fee arrangement.

WHAT TO DO NEXT: To join the iRhythm class action, go to or call Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email [email protected] or [email protected] for information on the class action. A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than April 2, 2021. A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation.

WHY ROSEN LAW: We encourage investors to select qualified counsel with a track record of success in leadership roles. Often, firms issuing notices do not have comparable experience or resources. The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe, concentrating its practice in securities class actions and shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm has achieved the largest ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese Company. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1 by ISS Securities Class Action Services for number of securities class action settlements in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the top 3 each year since 2013 and has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors. In 2019 alone the firm secured over $438 million for investors. In 2020 founding partner Laurence Rosen was named by law360 as a Titan of Plaintiffs’ Bar. Many of the firm’s attorneys have been recognized by Lawdragon and Super Lawyers.

DETAILS OF THE CASE: The complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) iRhythm’s business would suffer as a result of the U.S. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services’ (“CMS”) rulemaking; (2) reimbursement rates would in fact plummet; (3) a lack of national pricing in the CMS rule and fee schedule would cause uncertainty and weakness in iRhythm’s business; and (4) as a result of the foregoing, defendants’ public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages.

To join the iRhythm class action, go to or call Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email [email protected] or [email protected] for information on the class action.

No Class Has Been Certified. Until a class is certified, you are not represented by counsel unless you retain one. You may select counsel of your choice. You may also remain an absent class member and do nothing at this point. An investor’s ability to share in any potential future recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff.

Continue Reading


Senators Press Capitol Police On Security Breakdowns Before Jan. 6 Riot



WASHINGTON – Arizona Sen. Kyrsten Sinema joined other senators asking police officials Tuesday how it is that an FBI report warning of the deadly Jan. 6 assault on the Capitol did not reach the right people before the attack.

The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee heard from five witnesses involved in Capitol security planning – three of whom resigned after the riot – who described a series of crossed signals, missed opportunities and planning that underestimated the violence to come.

The missed signals included an FBI report warning of likely violent confrontations following former President Donald Trump’s rally, a report that one official said was sent to planners’ email inboxes the night before the assault and another said he only learned of in the last 24 hours.

“That is a systemic and leadership failure on the part of our security officials, from the FBI and Department of Homeland Security, to the security leadership on the ground at the Capitol, and it must be addressed,” said Sen. Gary Peters, D-Mich., in opening remarks to the hearing.

Most senators at the hearing were like Sinema, who said she was “trying to understand … how it did not get to the higher levels to make preparation” before the assault.

The assault on the Capitol followed a “Stop the Steal” rally on the National Mall on the day Congress was set to certify the Electoral College vote electing President Joe Biden and ousting Trump, who claimed for months before and after the election that it was rigged.

Trump addressed the rally, urging the crowd to march on the Capitol. Thousands did so and, once there overwhelmed Capitol Police in an attack that left five dead, including one Capitol Police officer, and 140 officers injured. Two officers died by suicide in the days that followed.

Witnesses at Tuesday’s hearing said they planned their security based on the information they had at the time, which indicated a protest more along the lines of two Make America Great Again rallies in the preceding weeks that surrounded the Supreme Court and led to sporadic violence.

“For each of the days leading up to Jan. 6 – and indeed, on Jan. 6 itself – the USCP (U.S. Capitol Police) issued a daily intelligence report in which it assessed the potential for civil disobedience and arrests as ‘remote’ to ‘improbable,'” said Paul Irving, the former House sergeant-at-arms, in his opening statement.

But Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., emphasized alerts that were seen across social media, including tweets by Trump himself urging people to show up for a “wild” event. She pointed to “public reporting by the Washington Post, (that) the FBI Norfolk field office issued a threat report on Jan. 5.”

This report “detailed specific calls for violence online in connection with Jan. 6, including that protestors ‘be ready to fight,’ and ‘go there ready for war,'” Klobuchar said.

But when she asked former Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund about the FBI report, he said it never got to him. The last intelligence report any planners received came Jan. 3, three days before the assault, he said.

Sund testified that he “just in the last 24 hours was informed by the department that they actually had received that report” which was received by a member of the Joint Terrorism Taskforce – a group of FBI and local officials – before it was forwarded to Capitol Police headquarters.”

“It did not go any further than that,” Sund said.

Irving and former Senate Sergeant-at-Arms Michael Stenger also testified that they did not receive the report before the attack.

Acting Metropolitan Police Chief Robert Contee testified federal and local police agencies in the region held “a series of several meetings,” including phone calls and virtual meetings, in the weeks leading up to Jan. 6.

But he testified that the FBI report from Norfolk was not sent to email inboxes until the evening of Jan. 5, the night before the attack, which many officials never saw. Contee said it is not enough to send an email when officials like him are available for calls on their cell phones 24/7.

“I am not really relying on technology in the form of email, in hopes the information makes it to where it needs to be,” Contee said.

“It deserves additional focus,” Sund said.

Faulty intelligence was just one in a string of problems outlined by witnesses.

Sund testified that Capitol Police did not have all the riot gear they needed, saying COVID-19 had delayed deliveries that would have made helmets available to all Capitol Police officers and not just those in the civil disturbance units.

He said Metropolitan Police were standing by and showed up, along with officers from other police departments in the region, relatively quickly after they were called for help. But requests for National Guard troops were delayed by the need to get approval from several different levels, eventually reaching the secretary of the Army – Contee noted that the mayor of Washington does not have authority to call out the D.C. Guard, which is under federal control.

The one thing all the lawmakers and the witnesses agreed on is that it should never happen again. Sund called it “essential that Congress take the steps necessary to ensure that something like this never happens again.”

That was echoed by Klobuchar.

“We owe it to the American people to figure out how the United States Capitol, the preeminent symbol of democracy around the world, could be overtaken by an angry, violent mob,” she said.

Continue Reading


Recent Posts