'The sights were unimaginable, and there was a complete loss of control'

In the first—and possibly last—bipartisan review of the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, a Senate investigation found that a broad intelligence breakdown across several agencies, along with widespread law enforcement and military failures, allowed hundreds of Trump supporters to push violently past security lines that day, temporarily interrupting the certification of Joe Biden's presidential election victory. The report does not, however, delve into the root causes of the attack, including Donald Trump's role in calling for his supporters to "fight like hell" to overturn his election defeat.

• — There were clear warnings—but little planning. Ahead of the insurrection, there were countless social media posts from right-wing extremist groups and others indicating that Trump supporters were openly planning to "storm the Capitol" with weapons and possibly infiltrate the tunnel system underneath the building. But although the police intelligence unit was aware of them, that information never made it up to top leadership.
•  
• — Capitol Police were compromised by a lack of leadership. The report is heavily critical of the Capitol Police Board, a three-member panel whose members did not understand their own authority or the requirements for requesting National Guard assistance. The Guard was delayed for hours, as officials in multiple agencies took bureaucratic steps to release troops. The report details desperate calls between officials in the Capitol and the Pentagon, as former Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund begged for help.
•  
• — Officers sustained "absolutely brutal" abuse. From physical assaults, to racial epithets, to death threats, the insurrectionists attacked the Capitol Police officers repeatedly, resulting in multiple severe injuries. The report recommends forming a consolidated intelligence unit within the Capitol Police to prevent a repeat of the calamity. In a statement, Capitol Police acknowledged the need for such improvements. "Law enforcement agencies across the country rely on intelligence, and the quality of that intelligence can mean the difference between life and death," the statement said. —Associated Press

A unanimous ruling from SCOTUS

The Supreme Court ruled yesterday that immigrants allowed to stay in the U.S. temporarily for humanitarian reasons may not apply for green cards if they entered the country unlawfully. The case was brought by Jose Sanchez and Sonia Gonzalez, El Salvador natives who entered the U.S. illegally in the late 1990s. In 2001, after earthquakes devastated El Salvador, the U.S. granted them and other El Salvadorans "temporary protected status," or TPS. Sanchez and Gonzalez later applied for lawful permanent residency in 2014. After their application was denied, they sued. "Lawful status and admission...are distinct concepts in immigration law: Establishing one does not necessarily establish the other," Justice Elena Kagan wrote. "Because a grant of TPS does not come with a ticket of admission, it does not eliminate the disqualifying effect of an unlawful entry." —The New York Times

MORE: How two new Republicans want to reshape the GOP's immigration agenda —Politico

Isaacs & Toj: Guatemala is the key to fixing immigration

"[T]he U.S. needs to break a pattern in which foreign assistance is channeled through government contractors with too little transparency, too much overhead, and scant connection to community priorities. We should seize the opportunity to work directly with local communities to fund sustainable development projects. If the Biden Administration is serious about curbing undocumented immigration, it should insist that the Guatemalan government provide the resources and expertise its rural poor so desperately need. Rather than partnering with the same old cast of business executives, Washington should seek out Guatemalan entrepreneurs who favor greater economic inclusion and are willing to pay taxes, invest capital, lend expertise, and share market access." —Anita Isaacs and Jorge Morales Toj in The New York Times

Anita Isaacs is a professor of political science at Haverford College and a co-director of migrationencounters.org. Jorge Morales Toj is a Maya K'iche leader, human rights lawyer, and specialist in rural agricultural development.

MORE: Harris tells migrants: 'Do not come, do not come' —The Hill

Corruption = national security threat

President Biden is putting global anti-corruption efforts at the center of his foreign policy, according to a National Security Study Memorandum released just ahead of his trip to Europe. The memo directs federal agencies to prioritize corruption as a national security interest. The agencies must devise recommendations on how the U.S. can best use its resources to combat forms of corruption, including "tax havens and illicit financing that contribute to income inequality, fund terrorism, and generate pernicious foreign influence," as well as "loopholes exploited...to interfere in democratic processes in the U.S. and abroad." In an accompanying statement, Biden said, "Fighting corruption is not just good governance. It is self-defense. It is patriotism, and it's essential to the preservation of our democracy and our future." —Organized Crime & Corruption Reporting Project

MORE: Austin Sarat & Dennis Aftergut: Biden's anti-corruption memo is good news—and essential to U.S. national security —The Hill

Butler: AG should release Barr's Mueller memo

"[Attorney General Merrick] Garland's DOJ is standing by [former Attorney General Bill] Barr's DOJ—it released a heavily redacted version of Barr's memo and is appealing a judge's order to provide the entire document to the public. There is a fine line between protecting the confidentiality of important records and shielding corrupt officials. Garland is walking on the wrong side of that line. Nine Democratic senators recently wrote to him asking for the release the memo 'to help rebuild the nation's trust in DOJ's independence after four years of turmoil.' Instead, the Justice Department doubled down." —Paul Butler in The Washington Post

Paul Butler is a Washington Post contributing columnist, focusing on criminal justice and race, and the Albert Brick Professor in Law at Georgetown University Law Center. He previously served as a federal prosecutor with the U.S. Justice Department, where his specialty was public corruption.

MORE: Biden's Justice Department moves to defend Trump in defamation suit from accuser E. Jean Carroll —NBC News

Focus on voting rights

Vermont Gov. Phil Scott signed legislation yesterday that requires all registered voters in the state to receive mail-in ballots, and allows voters to fix, or "cure," a ballot that was deemed defective. What makes this particularly extraordinary is that Scott is a Republican, and his signing the bill runs counter to the movement among Republicans in other states to restrict voting rights. Scott said he signed the bill "because I believe making sure voting is easy and accessible, and increasing voter participation, is important." We agree. Kudos to Gov. Scott. —The New York Times

• — Nevada. Nevada Gov. Steve Sisolak signed a new bill expanding mail-in voting into law last week. Under the new law, every active registered voter in the state will now be automatically sent a mail-in ballot for elections unless they explicitly opt out. The law makes permanent a change that the state temporarily implemented amid the COVID-19 pandemic, which was opposed in court but upheld. —Forbes
•  
• — Illinois. Good and bad news in Illinois. Legislators made changes to the state's voting laws in the final hours of their legislative session this past week that affirm or expand democratic practices. The legislation breezed through the Democratic-controlled assembly, on strictly partisan votes, and Gov. J.B. Pritzker is expected to sign it. Pritzker, however, was criticized on Friday for signing into law new gerrymandered districts for the General Assembly and state Supreme Court, after vowing as a candidate to veto any partisan redistricting plan. —Associated Press
•  
• — Florida. The Gulf-coast city of Clearwater, Fla., may be the next to adopt ranked-choice voting. Earlier this year, City Council member Hoyt Hamilton proposed a move to an alternative voting structure for its elections, so the council listened to a presentation by the Florida League of Cities about the different forms of voting. On Thursday, the council voted 4-1 for city attorney Pam Akin to craft a referendum for voters to decide whether to adopt RCV. The council will vote on the final language by December in order for it to be placed on the March ballot. —Tampa Bay Times

Patrick: Biden's overseas challenge

"The United States is 'back,' proclaims President Biden, seemingly as often as he can. The coming week will show if the same is true of the West. At successive summits of the G-7, NATO, and the European Union, Biden and fellow leaders will confront a dual task: reviving the community of advanced market democracies and showing that the West is capable of resolving today's complex transnational challenges." —Stewart Patrick in World Politics Review

Stewart Patrick is the James H. Binger senior fellow in global governance and director of the International Institutions and Global Governance Program at the Council on Foreign Relations. He is the author of "The Sovereignty Wars: Reconciling America with the World" and "Weak Links: Fragile States, Global Threats, and International Security."

MORE: G-7 must do more to stand up for democracy, top EU official says —Bloomberg

As an 83-year-old American man and a veteran, I've felt and experienced, over the years, fear, frustration, anger, and happiness. Fear during World War II, when, in grammar school, we had air-raid drills in preparation for a Japanese attack on the California West Coast. Fear during the Cold War, in intermediate and high school, with the drop-and-cover drills in case of a nuclear attack. I've felt disappointed with the political decisions made during the Korean and Vietnam conflicts and everything in between. I have felt anger over Vietnam vets returning home and being demeaned by the American population for their required military draft service. I've felt anger with our politicians over errors in judgment, political decisions, and mistakes that affected each American citizen financially as well as morally. The ongoing racial inequities as well as the radicalization of certain groups of Americans that were condoned by our past president. The ongoing conflicts in the last 30 years have, in my opinion, not taught our politicians, or many of our fellow American citizens, how fortunate we are to be Americans and the true value of immigrants in the diversified functionality of our democratic society.

In all my years here on earth, now is the first time I have ever felt shame to the world for our previous American president and his selfish approach to life. To watch this political debacle of a man and past president, as well as his Republican minions that surround him, attempting to further their wealth and political power all for their personal benefit and not the benefit of our democracy, our American citizens, or the world. The destruction of our ecosystems, our wildlife, as well as the world's survival for the benefit of the petroleum industry and large corporations' bottom line. All have shamed me as an American. Hopefully that will change with Joe Biden and Kamala Harris and the few Republicans standing tall, as well as the Democratic Party. The American citizens that are considered our past president's base frustrate me due to their refusal to recognize the lies, deceit, and manipulation of their fears by this man, his family, his Republican minions, and the Russian and Chinese propaganda being used to question our freedom to vote safely and confidently.

I do not sleep well at night with concern for my family and what could happen to our democracy, as well as our society, if lies and manipulation will continue to be used to affect our 2022 and 2024 freedom to vote. "A great society is not conquered from without until it has destroyed itself from within" (Will Durant). —Kerry S., California

The views expressed in "What's Your Take?" are submitted by readers and do not necessarily reflect the views of the editorial staff or the Stand Up Republic Foundation.