Posted on 02/17/2021 5:02:27 AM PST by Kaslin
Speaker Nancy Pelosi says the House will vote to create an independent commission to investigate the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol. There's no doubt there needs to be an extensive investigation of the events surrounding the riot. But what is striking is that, even as Pelosi calls for an investigation, a number of government agencies are stonewalling the public on some of the most basic information about the events of Jan. 6.
The public should not have to wait for an investigation to learn how many police officers were injured in the riot, and the severity of their injuries. It should not have to wait to find out the cause of death of Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick. It should not have to wait to find out if authorities confiscated firearms from rioters, and, if so, how many and what type. It should not have to wait to learn details of the shooting of Ashli Babbitt.
The public should not have to wait to learn what officials knew about the possibility of violence before the riot. What did the Capitol Police know? What did the House and Senate sergeants-at-arms know? What did Speaker Pelosi and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy know? Senate leaders Chuck Schumer and Mitch McConnell? The White House? National Guard officials?
Americans could, and should, know more about these topics right now. But significant parts of the Capitol riot are now shrouded in official secrecy. And the existence of multiple investigations will only make that worse, giving officials an excuse not to speak publicly because there is an active investigation going on. So before the big commission is formed and begins its work, how about Americans learn some of those basic facts about the riot?
Now, a number of top House Republicans -- Rodney Davis, ranking minority member on the House Administration Committee, Jim Jordan, ranking member on the Judiciary Committee; James Comer, ranking member on the Government Oversight and Reform Committee; and Devin Nunes, ranking member on the Intelligence Committee, have sent a letter to Pelosi asking for answers for some key questions about security preparations in the days before Jan. 6. The questions have a partisan edge -- nothing unusual for Capitol Hill -- but they cover things Americans need to know.
For example, the lawmakers want to know about discussions in the days before the riot about using the National Guard to increase security. What did law enforcement agencies tell Capitol Hill leaders about the possibility of violence? And what did those leaders do about it?
Obviously, there are questions about President Trump's actions before and during the riot. Many of those were touched upon during the recently ended impeachment trial. There is no danger those questions will be ignored, either by a commission or by the media. On the other hand, the questions that House Republicans have posed need answers, too.
Finally, one last word on the description of the still-unformed commission. It is universally referred to as a "9/11-style" commission. Pelosi undoubtedly likes that because it helps cement in the public's mind an equivalence between the riot and the worst terrorist attack in U.S. history. In both, Democrats say terrorists attacked America. But be reasonable. There is simply no comparison in scale, motivation or anything else between Sept. 11 and Jan. 6.
In case anyone has forgotten, the 9/11 al-Qaida attacks killed roughly 3,000 people, brought down New York's tallest skyscrapers, destroyed part of the Pentagon, crashed four passenger jetliners and changed U.S. foreign policy for decades. The Jan. 6 riot led to the so-far unexplained death of one Capitol Police officer, the death of one rioter at the hands of police, the stampeding death of another rioter and the natural causes deaths of two more. Parts of the Capitol were ransacked, but not seriously enough that Congress could not meet and finish its work on the night of the riot. It was appalling, but nothing like Sept. 11. (To visualize the difference, imagine that, on the night of the 9/11 attacks, there was a convention that went on as scheduled at the World Trade Center.)
So bring on the investigations. They should be exhaustive. And that will take time. But there are things Americans need to know right now, too.
Any commission that gets Nancy’s approval will be partisan and absolutely corrupt. We don’t need another echo chamber to validate liberal lies.
The 9/11 Commission didn’t get anywhere near the truth, so it makes sense the uniparty would like to see another one.
Somebody had to pay the actors in the fake shooting.
Keeps the false narrative going
Where are our $2,000 checks Nancy?
Sure, why not? That way 19 years later they can finally admit that it was the Saudi’s all along.
Call it the “Capital skirmish”. Riot is hyperbole.
YES——TAXPAYERS DEMAND A 911-TYPE INVESTIGATION
INTO SPEAKER PELOSI’S ACTIVITIES LEADING UP TO JAN 6.
TAXPAYERS DEMAND PELOSI GIVE ANSWERS AS TO WHY SHE DID NOT PROTECT OUR HOUSE ON JAN 6.
<><> ** What conversations did she or her staff give Sergeant at Arms Paul Irving specific to January 6th?
<><>** What response did Pelosi give tax-paid security officials when tax-paid National Guard support was initially requested?
<><> ** Why is Pelosi Refusing to Turn Over tax-paid Official Public Documents WRT US Capitol Security?
<><> ** Why are tax-paid House Officers refusing to turn over tax-paid documents relevant to that day?
Representatives Jim Jordan (R-OH), Devin Nunes (R-CA), Rodney Davis (R-IL) and James Comer (R-KY)
are asking Speaker Pelosi to explain her decision to deny tax-paid National Guard support on January 4th.
REFERENCE-—PRE-JAN 6 WARNINGS WERE EVIDENT A massive crowd of 200,000 (plus the likelihood of counter-demonstrators), prompted pre-event warnings of planned violence. This should have warranted a sizeable security presence. Instead, people who had attended previous rallies and demonstrations in DC said that security was well BELOW normal. Not only security, but amenities like trash bins and porta-potties were below normal standards.
Appears “some people” WANTED trouble so that they could use it for political advantage. Clearly, the violence was at least partially triggered by leftist or Deep State provocateurs......not merely voters who believed their votes were compromised by massive voter fraud.
If they tried to impeach a president over it why didn’t they dothe commissionfirst?
If they tried to impeach a president over it why didn’t they dothe commissionfirst?
bump
Stop spending our money on BS. And quit holding out our checks. Already said we would get them.
It certainly appears NAZI Pelosi, Schumer, McConnell knew about the “attack” before hand and are continuing to block efforts to expose the fake “attack”.
NO, the uniparty doesn’t want it investigated unless it can be used against Trump.
No, unless they want to do it pro bono. I didn’t get to see the Durham report I spent $7,000,000 on.
The 9/11 Commission was a whitewash.
The Dem’s don’t know what they’re asking for; the lies they tried to present during Trump’s farce of an impeachment trial should have told them that.
“an independent commission”
Composed of Pelosi, Schiff, Kitzinger, McConnell, and the 7 who voted to convict Trump.
..... This would definitely need to be an independant Commission not controlled by either Party ... This is clearly an attempt to set up an investigation who’s sole purpose would be to find and destroy any incriminating evidence against the Swamp and set up and plant manufactured incriminating evidence to finish of the Trump movement ....
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.