Tucker Carlson talks exclusively with key Capitol Police officer ignored by Jan. 6 panel amid footage release (Tarik Johnson)

Tucker Carlson sat down with a former Capitol Police officer who was ignored by the House Jan. 6 Select Committee despite the pivotal role he had that day.

Tarik Johnson, a 22-year veteran on the Capitol Hill force, was tasked with securing the certification of the 2020 presidential election.

"My voice is one of the first ones you hear on the audio transmission, so I did expect to get an interview sometime, but it didn't happen." Johnson told "Tucker Carlson Tonight" about the House Select Committee in an interview aired Tuesday. "I guess the focus was on Donald Trump."

Despite pleas for help on Jan. 6, Johnson said he did not hear anything, not even from Capitol Police chief assistant Yogananda Pittman, who allegedly kept vital information about the protests from him. The federal intel and law enforcement agencies knew about the warnings of a massive disturbance at the Capitol on Jan. 6, Carlson said, but the frontline officers on duty that day did not know.

However, his career came to a screeching halt after he was spotted outside the Capitol wearing a Make America Great Again hat, which received national attention.

Johnson, a Biden voter, said a Trump supporter placed the MAGA hat on his head. He decided to keep wearing it for self-preservation as he navigated the pro-Trump crowd outside. Johnson was put on an indefinite suspension for doing so and later resigned and lost his pension.

"I couldn't say what would have happened walking through that crowd without it," Johnson said.

Yogananda Pittman went on to be elevated by then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., to be acting chief of Capitol Police. She later took a post as head of security at the University of California Berkeley, right outside of Pelosi's congressional district.

People have been cruelly imprisoned for years or convicted due to lack of exculpatory evidence, and you begrudge this can of worms being opened?

Begrudge this opening? No, after two years I am heartened by it because I am actually frightened by the assault on our rule of law and our Bill of Rights waged by our own government under the bogus charge of insurrection.

But if we want to free more of these unconstitutionally incarcerated citizens who by bad luck happened to be in the capital on January 6 pursuing their constitutional right to petition their government for redress of grievances, we must show factually (repeat, factually) that the government violated their constitutional rights by failing to proffer relevant (repeat, relevant) evidence exonerating or mitigating the offense.

Tucker Carlson did a magnificent job on behalf of Chewbacca demonstrating that evidence relevant to his behavior was not provided to defense counsel. Presumably it can be shown that the prosecution knew or should have known of this evidence in that case.

But what of the other thousand or so defendants who have been railroaded through the DC chamber of kangaroo courts? Where is justice for them? The deficiency is that most of the program presented by Carlson does not provide justiciable evidence of mitigation or exoneration of individual crimes. By way of example, because some people did not violently enter the capital but were peacefully ushered in by law officers, does not exonerate individuals who were no doubt shown on video but not shown being ushered in.

I readily grant the emotional and therefore political impact of what Carlson is presenting but I want us to understand there is very little new here. I am delighted that the Democrats are reacting so violently, it makes the matter more important and it will be unlikely for the media to brush it off as trivial, they are stuck with the argument that it is racist or a threat to national security. These arguments are preposterous on their face. More important, Tucker Carlson has put pressure on the prosecutors and the judges to investigate whether exculpatory videos exist. For two years they have unilaterally turned their faces from their constitutional duty.

There are 14,000 hours of videos and there may be thousands of hours exonerating the thousands of railroaded defendants whose incarceration is a living rebuke to our Bill of Rights but the deal has not yet been closed.

Conclusionary observations by Tucker Carlson, while reasonable extrapolations from the videos he has shown, do not prove the argument either for individual defendants or for the nature of the January 6 protests definitionally. In other words, Carlson says it was mostly peaceful with some exceptions of violent actors while Democrats say it was a mob out of control, violent, indeed deadly, bent on obstructing the constitutional transfer of power by the government. So far they have their videos and we had few. Tucker, although offering few newer videos of the 14,000 so far, has now made it impossible to deny the rest.

In some particulars Tucker Carlson in has moved the argument from, "he said she said" to, " let's go to the videotape." For example, he's gone a long way to debunk Democrat charges that the riot was deadly. More must be done.

Bravo Tucker! Let us understand what we have so far.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.