January 6 for Non-Dummies

American Thinker ^ | 13 Jun, 2022 | Julie Kelly

[MtnClimber]

The January 6 committee is pure political theater intended to crush the MAGA movement once and for all.

During another public hearing on Monday, the January 6 select committee featured a witness so irrelevant that his appearance should prompt even the most ardent defender of Nancy Pelosi’s illegitimate inquisition to question the committee’s real purpose. Former Fox News talking head Chris Stirewalt, fired by the network shortly after the Capitol protest for calling the state of Arizona for Joe Biden early on election night, told his sob story to a presumably slim viewing audience.

The washed-up commentator, however, is the last person with any insight into the events of January 6, 2021. Stirewalt’s performance—similar to the overwrought speechifying by committee members last Thursday—is another headfake designed to turn attention away from the truth about what happened that day and in the months leading up to the brief disturbance that resulted in the deaths of four Trump supporters.

A well-oiled fog machine operated by the Department of Justice, congressional Democrats, NeverTrumpers, and the national news media is once again pumping lie after lie into the body politic in a last-gasp attempt to destroy Trump and the powerful political movement he created.

For nearly 18 months, American Greatness has covered this issue like no other outlet. So, as the committee continues its dog-and-pony show on Capitol Hill this month with an eye toward producing a long list of legislative “fixes,” the Justice Department inexorably moves to criminally charge Donald Trump for his alleged involvement, and the media takes another extended nap on its purported fact-checking duties, American Greatness here provides the definitive list of what people need to know about January 6, 2021, and related hype.

Congress and D.C. city officials, not Donald Trump, were responsible for protecting the Capitol: It is the primary duty of the Capitol Police board—made up of the sergeant-at-arms for the Senate and the House and the architect of the Capitol—to secure the sprawling complex. The federal police force, with a budget of more than half a billion dollars, employs at least 2,000 officers and houses numerous bureaus, including an intelligence unit; the Capitol building should have been well-protected on January 6 during a controversial joint session of Congress with Vice President Michael Pence presiding.

But Paul Irving, Nancy Pelosi’s sergeant-at-arms at the time, and Michael Stenger, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s sergeant-at-arms, repeatedly denied requests by the Capitol police chief for extra help days before the Capitol protest. As the chaos unfolded that afternoon, Irving and Stenger continued to delay numerous pleas to deploy the National Guard. Although more than 1,000 guardsmen were stationed at the D.C. armory on the morning of January 6, they were not summoned to the Capitol complex until well after 5:00 p.m.

D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser also refused to activate a significant number of guardsmen on January 6. Instead, Bowser authorized a few hundred guardsmen for traffic and pedestrian control. D.C. Metro police officers arrived at the Capitol shortly after the joint session convened at 1:00 p.m.

It does not appear that the January 6 select committee has interviewed Irving, Stenger, or Bowser. (Irving and Stenger conveniently resigned on January 7; Irving refused to testify before the Senate committee investigating the “attack.”) In addition, Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) has announced Pelosi’s records related to January 6 were “off-limits.”

Committee members and the media insist Trump bears some culpability for lax security on January 6; according to Kash Patel, chief of staff for the acting secretary of defense during the final weeks of the Trump Administration, the president on January 4 authorized the use of 20,000 guardsmen. But the activation of those troops would have required a formal request by either Capitol Police or Bowser’s office

And contrary to another widely-accepted narrative, Capitol police at several vantage points allowed protesters into the building and, without warning, the building was closed.

No police officers died on January 6 or as a result of the protest: Four supporters of Donald Trump—Ashli Babbitt, Rosanne Boyland, Kevin Greeson, and Benjamin Phillips—died on January 6. Babbitt, an unarmed veteran who posed no lethal threat, was shot and killed by Capitol police officer Michael Byrd around 2:45 p.m. near the Speaker’s Lobby. Boyland died around 4:30 p.m. outside the lower west terrace tunnel where D.C. and Capitol police were engaged in violent confrontations with protesters. Witnesses say Greeson and Phillips suffered fatal heart attacks after being hit with stun grenades, an explosive device used by police outside the building that afternoon.

Eyewitness accounts and extensive video footage show police attacking people peacefully assembled on Capitol grounds shortly after 1 p.m. A Capitol official testified during a recent trial that the department used non-lethal munitions for the first time in history on January 6.

Despite claims by everyone from Joe Biden to local news reporters, no police officer died on January 6. For months, Capitol police and the media lied about the death of Officer Brian Sicknick; the New York Times reported on January 8, 2021, that Sicknick had been bludgeoned to death with a fire extinguisher, an allegation that was included in the House Democrats’ official impeachment memo. But the report was false; the Times retracted the account a month later. After a lengthy delay, the D.C. coroner finally issued his finding that Sicknick died of natural causes—a stroke caused by two blood clots near his brain.

Four police officers reportedly took their lives after January 6; two Capitol police officers committed suicide in the days following the protest and two D.C. officers killed themselves months later but there’s no proof any of those suicides is tied to the events of that day.

No one carried firearms into the building: On January 7, 2021, Pelosi described the previous day as an “armed insurrection,” a narrative that persisted for months. The public was led to believe gun-toting Trump supporters “stormed” the building with intent to harm or even kill lawmakers in an attempt to overthrow the government.

Now, nearly 18 months later, no one has been charged with carrying a firearm into the building on January 6. Four men were charged with possessing or carrying a firearm on Capitol grounds, including one man who was arrested that evening after the protest ended.

The only person who used a gun on January 6 was Lt. Michael Byrd, the cop who executed Ashli Babbitt at near-point blank range. Byrd was exonerated by the Justice Department and Capitol Police officials; he remains on the job.

The FBI refuses to disclose information pertaining to the use of undercover agents and informants: Numerous court motions filed by January 6 defense attorneys refer to unknown federal agents present at the Capitol throughout the day. The New York Times reported last September that the FBI embedded at least two informants in the Proud Boys months before the Capitol protest; Newsweek recently revealed that Jeffrey Rosen, the acting attorney general at the time, summoned hundreds of elite FBI agents, including the Hostage Rescue Team, to Quantico the weekend before January 6. Contrary to Rosen’s public testimony, according to Newsweek, those agents were deployed to downtown D.C. the morning of January 6 and some had “shoot-to-kill” authority if necessary.

During her Senate testimony on the one-year anniversary of the protest, FBI counterterrorism chief Jill Sanborn rebuffed questions about whether FBI agents or informants engaged in or provoked violent behavior on January 6. She also refused to explain why Ray Epps, a man seen multiple times on video exhorting people to go inside the Capitol, was removed from the agency’s most-wanted list and has so far evaded arrest. The FBI continues to ignore congressional inquiries into her testimony.

As the Whitmer “kidnapping” hoax demonstrated, the FBI is deeply involved in the surveillance and set up of Americans the agency considers “anti-government” extremists. (A Michigan jury in April acquitted two men charged in the hoax after defense attorneys successfully argued they were entrapped by the FBI; the jury could not reach a verdict on two other defendants who now face a second trial.) Further, Steven D’Antuono, head of the Michigan FBI field office primarily responsible for the hoax, was promoted to head of the D.C. FBI field office in mid-October 2020, right after his agents arrested the fake kidnappers and several weeks before the Capitol protest. His office is the lead investigatory agency in the Justice Department’s prosecution of more than 800 Americans now charged for their involvement in January 6.

It does not appear that D’Antuono or FBI Director Christopher Wray have been interviewed by the committee.

The FBI also appears to have lost interest in the so-called “pipe bomber” who allegedly planted explosives outside the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee and Republican National Committee on the evening of January 5. News of the bombs prompted the first evacuation of adjacent House buildings and set off panic in the city and news media. The FBI claimed it would conduct an investigation and offered a reward for the bomber’s capture. Nearly 18 months later, not only has the suspect not been caught, the FBI refuses to release any information pertaining to an investigation. Further, the pipe bombs have not been mentioned by committee members or the focus of any public hearings.

The January 6 committee is pure political theater intended to crush the MAGA movement once and for all. And like so many attempts before—the Russian collusion hoax, the first impeachment trial, the stolen 2020 election, the second impeachment trial—Democrats and the media are successfully brainwashing millions of their cult-like disciples who allow themselves to be duped time and again by the likes of Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.).

Facts, as they say, do matter—and the aforementioned list is just a handful of indisputable truths related to January 6, 2021, that the other side doesn’t want the American people to see. So share it widely.

Twitter Facebook Parler

[MtnClimber]

The left does not seem to care that their show trial is so obvious.

[Gay State Conservative]

January 6th was,at worst,a mass "tresspassing" exercise featuring a guy in moose antlers,a Maoist barmaid who,despite being miles away,claimed to have been traumatized...and an honorably discharged,unarmed,Air Force veteran who was shot in the neck.

The nation's Commander-In-Chief offered Bella Pelosi thousands of National Guard troops...but,curiously,she wasn't interested.

[Sacajaweau]

The last thing that Trump wanted was any kind of violence. That’s not in his DNA.

[Susquehanna Patriot]

It would be great if an elected GOP Representative would read this article on the floor of the House and into the Congressional Record.

[zeestephen]

Re: "Trump offered Bella Pelosi thousands of National Guard troops...but, curiously, she wasn't interested."

Judicial Watch has obtained documents from the Washington D.C. Police Department in regard to the shooting of Ashli Babbitt.

One document states that the Capitol Police (Pelosi Police) were more than 50% understaffed for a normal joint session of Congress, because of Covid and other issues.

[Sacajaweau]

The big clue will always be that they would not seat the Republican choices....Jordan and Jim Banks.

[OKSooner]

Stirewalt got fired?

One didn't know that... one just hasn't missed him, let's put it that way. Dana Perino and Brett Baier probably miss him because they be his good buddies.

Why didn't Sandra Smith get fired? She was the one who actually had to have it explained to her live on worldwide broadcast that just because Fox News had "called" a state, that didn't make it so.

She's a graduate of a university in Louisiana, just to narrow it down some... don't want to tar all those tigers with the same brush. They tend to be fun-loving people in their own style, and one assumes that the vast majority of them CAN Understand Normal Thinking.

[Regulator]

Actually there were significant incidents of people attacking police outside so they could get past the barriers.

But what’s interesting is that those people looked like instigators - likely ANTIFA wearing MAGA gear. Hats on backwards, small daypacks, young guys oddly dressed. When they attacked, other people would yell at them to stop. Those were the real Trump suppoerters.

Recall that in the days prior there was social media posts by ANTIFA related people and groups encouraging this behavior. No one has investigated that - in fact, Chris Wray claimed at the time that he saw no ANTIFA involvement. But there were many people who did see the coordination typical of Leftist rioters, and it’s absurd to suggest that they would not have taken the opportunity to smear Trump.

Most likely, Wray is covering up his sponsorship of ANTIFA attacks.

Trump rallies are usually examples of mass good behavior - except for this one. What’s different? The involvement of covert instigators.

Clearly something the Inquisitors don’t want to point out, much less investigate.

[PghBaldy]

I also recall skinny young people scaling the outside of the building. I turned on coverage after a nap and immediately assumed they were Antifa. Did not look like normal Trump supporters.

[nathanbedford]

Facts, as they say, do matter

That expresses the irony inherent in this show trial. The Democrats have assembled some facts concerning the invalidity of allegations of fraud in the 2020 election but mostly they have paraded a series of people voicing opinions that there was no fraud. More, they assert that Trump was informed that there was no fraud leaving us to draw the inference that a reasonable man would have concluded that there was no fraud and so Trump acted criminally or at least malevolently.

The difficulty for Republicans derives from the fact that this is a political proceeding so it is not up to the Democrats to prove the negative. In other words, the Democrats don't have to prove the absence of fraud but the proponents of fraud must proof its existence in this bizarre proceeding.

That is to say that in a criminal case the burden for proving the absence of fraud and the knowledge of it's absence on the part of Trump would fall squarely on the prosecution but this show trial is not that. The Republicans either by indifference, misfeasance or because of the logical dilemma facing them, have refrained from making a counterfactual case. They have not set out to prove fraud in the election.

Rather, the Republican reaction to the January 6, hearings is that they are illegitimate, they are improperly staffed, they are undertaking an improper legislative function and they have abandoned any attachment to due process. Further and somewhat collateral to the point of election fraud, they claim that the Democrats themselves are responsible for inadequate security of the capital.

Note, these are not for the most part substantive rebuttals.

My view is Donald Trump will not be indicted and if indicted he will not be convicted because to do so would be to utterly criminalize our time honored political process and be repugnant to the Bill of Rights.

However, the recent dispute between chairman Benny Thompson who says there will probably be no referral for an indictment against Donald Trump and the position of Liz Cheney to the contrary, illustrates that some committee members at least have essentially political rather than criminal objectives in mind.

Whether they will succeed in their object remains to be seen but they are rather successfully so far conflating a political narrative with a criminal narrative and that has the clear potential to influence public opinion and votes. The general public is unlikely to distinguish between the mens rea required to prove a crime and the constitutionally protected exercise of robust First Amendment speech rights in the petitioning of governments for redress. The public is liable to conclude that Trump is guilty of something because he was unreasonable, greedy or power mad and, guilty or innocent of an actual crime, he is unworthy of office.

So the Republicans had to make a hard choice how to defend in these hearings when they would be forced into the position of proving the impossible- the negative. Even more daunting, to advance a defensive argument that the elements of a crime have not been proven, even as the Democrats champion arguments that Trump is evil, offer the risk of losing the war even if skirmish after skirmish is won.

Compound this anomalous situation with the fact that we are in a virtual star chamber proceeding and a negative public outcome for Republicans is not unlikely.

[july4thfreedomfoundation]

Right here on FreeRepublic, in December 2020, it was stated that BLM and Antifa agitators were going to don MAGA gear and cause problems on January 6th.

No doubt egged on by the FBI instigators.

[drSteve78]

I want to know about Roy Epps, and whoever else he was working with, and the fake Maga hat wearing John Sullivan video guy….

And i want to hear from none of the BS fact checkers from the propaganda media.

[euram]

We recently learned that the Capitol Police were only at half strength that day, why hasn’t anyone even asked how that came about?

It should also be noted that there had been two massive pro-Trump rallies in DC BEFORE January 6th. Both these rallies had about 250,000 people and both passed off peacefully. The ONLY violence came after the rallies when Antifa and Black Lies Matter thugs attacked older people and women with children who were returning to their hotels. The DC police stood by and did nothing to prevent those attacks.

[Regulator]

They carefully don’t mention things like that.

Omission is more effective then lying.

They depend on people’s bad memories.