The January 6th Public Hearings

Pelosi Congress Claims Sovereign Immunity in Federal Court to Keep Secret January 6 Videos and Emails

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced that it filed an opposition to the U.S. Capitol Police’s (USCP) effort to shut down Judicial Watch’s federal lawsuit for January 6 videos and emails. Through its police department, Congress argues that the videos and emails are not public records, there is no public interest in their release, and that “sovereign immunity” prevents citizens from suing for their release.

Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit under the common law right of access after the Capitol Police refused to provide any records in response to a January 21, 2021, request (Judicial Watch v. United States Capitol Police (No. 1:21-cv-00401)). Judicial Watch asks for:

- Email communications between the U.S. Capitol Police Executive Team and the Capitol Police Board concerning the security of the Capitol on January 6, 2021. The timeframe of this request is from January 1, 2021 through January 10, 2021.

- Email communications of the Capitol Police Board with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the U.S. Department of Justice, and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security concerning the security of the Capitol on January 6, 2021. The timeframe of this request is from January 1, 2021through January 10, 2021.

- All video footage from within the Capitol between 12 pm and 9 pm on January 6, 2021

Congress exempts itself from the Freedom of Information Act. Judicial Watch, therefore, brought its lawsuit under the common law right of access to public records. In opposing the broad assertion of secrecy, Judicial Watch details Supreme Court and other precedent that upholds the public’s right to know what “their government is up to:”

“In ‘the courts of this country’— including the federal courts—the common law bestows upon the public a right of access to public records and documents” … “the Supreme Court was unequivocal in stating that there is a federal common law right of access ‘to inspect and copy public records and documents.’” … “[T]he general rule is that all three branches of government, legislative, executive, and judicial, are subject to the common law right.” The right of access is “a precious common law right . . . that predates the Constitution itself.”

The Court of Appeals for this circuit has recognized that “openness in government has always been thought crucial to ensuring that the people remain in control of their government….” “Neither our elected nor our appointed representatives may abridge the free flow of information simply to protect their own activities from public scrutiny. An official policy of secrecy must be supported by some legitimate justification that serves the interest of the public office.”

“The Pelosi Congress (and its police department) is telling a federal court it is immune from all transparency under law and is trying to hide every second of its January 6 videos and countless emails,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The hypocrisy is rich, as this is the same Congress that is trying to jail witnesses who, citing privileges, object to providing documents to the Pelosi rump January 6 committee.”

In November 2021, Judicial Watch revealed multiple audio, visual and photo records from the DC Metropolitan Police Department about the shooting death of Ashli Babbitt on January 6, 2021, in the U.S. Capitol Building.  The records include a cell phone video of the shooting and an audio of a brief police interview of the shooter, Lt. Michael Byrd. In October, Judicial Watch released records, showing that multiple officers claimed they didn’t see a weapon in Babbitt’s hand before Byrd shot her, and that Byrd was visibly distraught afterward. One officer attested that he didn’t hear any verbal commands before Byrd shot Babbitt.

Also in November, Judicial Watch filed a response in opposition to the Department of Justice’s effort to block Judicial Watch’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit asking for records of communication between the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and several financial institutions about the reported transfer of financial transaction records of people in DC, Maryland and Virginia on January 5 and January 6, 2021. Judicial Watch argues that Justice Department should not be allowed to shield “improper activity.”

If she should be hiding anything it should be that butt ugly face of hers.

Secret Service tried to secure a motorcade route for Trump to go to the Capitol ahead of the January 6 riot: report
Brent D. Griffiths
Tue, June 7, 2022, 11:06 AM

Trump announced during his speech at the Ellipse that "we are going to the Capitol."

This came after Trump spent almost two weeks pressing the Secret Service to secure him a path to the Capitol.

Former President Donald Trump's vow on January 6 to "walk down to the Capitol" with his supporters led to a last-minute scramble to see if the president could indeed go to the Capitol where lawmakers were beginning the process of confirming his election loss, The Washington Post reported on Tuesday.

The Post reported that Trump's pledge led to the Secret Service contacting DC police in an effort to have key street intersections blocked off at the last minute. But local police declined the frantic request, saying they were already overwhelmed with protests unfolding throughout the city. The DC police would later assist in the retaking of the US Capitol after rioters delayed the certification for hours.

It was previously known that Trump made efforts to fulfill his promise to march with his supporters, but more details are coming out about the extent to which those around the president tried to accommodate him. Trump pressed the Secret Service to make a plan for him to visit the Capitol for almost two weeks leading up to January 6, the Post reported. Trump made it clear that his goal was to pressure Republican lawmakers who did not support his efforts to object to the certification of a handful of closely contested states.

Politico reporter Betsy Woodruff Swan reported on Tuesday that the committee interviewed multiple Secret Service agents, including Robert Engel, the most senior agent on Trump's detail on January 6.

Trump has previously said the Secret Service squashed his plans to go to the Capitol on January 6.

"Secret Service wouldn't let me," he told the Post in April. "I wanted to go. I wanted to go so badly. Secret Service says you can't go. I would have gone there in a minute."

Trump's security officials were surprised when Trump announced during his speech at the Ellipse that "we are going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue ... and we are going to the Capitol."

If Trump had arrived at the Capitol, it would have put him near Vice President Mike Pence, who on January 6 made it clear that he would not follow Trump's demands and would not unilaterally object or delay the certification of the results. Instead, Trump stayed at the White House while some of his supporters ransacked the Capitol and shouted that they wanted to "hang" Pence.

Tuesday's news comes just days before the House January 6 committee begins its public hearings. Lawmakers on the bipartisan panel have promised that the hearings will reveal new information about what led to the insurrection.

Spokespeople for Trump and the DC police department did not immediately respond to Insider's requests for comment.

Quote :

Tuesday's news comes just days before the House January 6 committee begins its public hearings.

WTF has this committee been doing all this time? .. I'm guessing *rehearsals* .. They probably have it all mapped out, who'll say what, when

A while ago i read a long article from a lady that was at the "inserection" .. She was there primarily to take photos ..She might have been a reporter but i don't think she was there as a reporter, but just someone interested .. Again, it was a while ago and i don't remember a lotta details ...Anyway

She and those around her walked to the capital under the impression that somebody(s) would be giving a speech(es) .. When they got there people just started walking in ..Nobody was trying to stop them .. She said a cop or some kinda security guy LED them down a hallway .. I guess things got hectic from there .. She got out and wasn't arrested for anything. She said the people she was in contact with around her weren't there as rioters or even to protest anything .. They thought they were gonna hear someone speak. .A lotta people there had no malicious intent ... They were just confused

When democrats started claiming it was worse than the attack on Pearl Harbor and 9/11 i just rolled my eyes and stopped paying attention to the blather about it .. Now, after 18 months or so, they're supposedly gonna let us all know what really happened .. They were prolly waiting for the Johnny Depp trial to conclude ...haa .. SMH

The Jan. 6 Committee Can’t Convict Trump—but It Could Help Bankrupt Him
Jose Pagliery
Wed, June 8, 2022, 7:07 PM

The Jan. 6 Committee begins its highly anticipated national reckoning Thursday night by calling attention to the brutality Capitol Police officers faced 18 months ago and diving into details about one of the gangs leading the violence on that dark day.

While it’s doubtful the hearings will meet the sky-high expectations of those who believed the committee would expose open-and-shut wrongdoing from some of the nation’s top officials, the prime-time hearings will deliver one thing: evidence for many of the lawsuits seeking to make former President Donald Trump and other election denialists actually pay for the violence.

“What the committee can't do is hold people accountable. But that’s where criminal prosecutions and civil litigation comes in,” said Edward G. Caspar, an attorney representing injured and traumatized Capitol Police officers who are suing Trump after the violence insurrection.

The Real Tragedy of Jan. 6 Is That It’s Still Not Over

That inability to hold Trump accountable with this special panel may sound surprising, given the certainty that committee leaders—Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS) and Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY)—have used in discussing how Trump advanced “a corrupt scheme to obstruct the counting of electoral college ballots and a conspiracy to impede the transfer of power.”

But that doesn’t mean there won’t be any consequences from the House’s Jan. 6th Committee work. After all, the committee has undertaken what investigator (and former Republican Rep. from Virginia) Denver Riggleman has called “the biggest data effort in the history of congressional investigations."

Still, one of the big challenges for the panel’s investigation—with its contentious lawsuits, secret interviews, and promises to expose the truth—is that it ultimately has no power to punish those who are responsible for last year’s attack on the Capitol.

So far, legal scholars and progressive activists have focused their exasperated calls for action on the Department of Justice. But the real action could come from lawsuits like the one Conrad Smith and seven fellow Capitol Police officers filed in August against Trump, his campaign, Stop the Steal election denial movement organizers like Ali Alexander and Roger Stone, and enforcer gangs like the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers militia.

“The committee is playing a critical role here for America,” Caspar said. “If you think of the three means of seeking accountability for those responsible for the attack—congressional hearings, criminal prosecution, civil litigation—they’re like a three-legged stool. The committee can shine a very bright light on the evidence and present it to the public. That’s something the others can't do.”

The committee has plenty of that.

According to the panel, it has interviewed more than 1,000 witnesses and collected at least 140,000 documents, obtained through subpoenas and delivered under oath. Attorneys working on cases against Trump are already considering how to get that evidence—in some cases, videos or interview transcripts—into a form that’s admissible in court for their cases. Luckily for those attorneys, the witnesses who spoke to the committee were already under oath when they testified.

McCarthy and Scalise Say They Won’t Be Watching First Jan. 6 Hearing

D.C. Attorney General Karl Racine—whose office in December sued the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers, as well as individual members of each militant group—has indicated to The Daily Beast that he will be closely watching the hearings to see what evidence comes out that would be helpful to its case.

In fact, the committee’s first hearing, which starts at 8 p.m. EDT on Thursday, is expected to touch on the role of the Proud Boys during the coordinated attack on the Capitol. The committee will hear from two witnesses: Nick Quested, a documentarian who was embedded with the Proud Boys around Jan. 6, and Caroline Edwards, a Capitol Police officer who suffered a traumatic brain injury that day.

The witnesses and the frenzy surrounding the first public hearing should make for somewhat compelling television—at least as compelling as congressional hearings can be. Even the choice of venue for the event has an element of TV drama; the committee is hosting the hearing in the rarely used Cannon Caucus room, ostensibly so it can accommodate more press but also to add an air of officialness to the proceedings, with the room’s Corinthian columns and ornate chandeliers.

But the evidence revealed by the committee will likely be far more pedestrian. No bombshells are expected Thursday night. And yet, prosecutors and attorneys representing clients in civil cases may not need bombshells. Instead, they just need enough legal fodder to drag certain people in the twice-impeached former president’s orbit—like Donald Trump Jr. and Rep. Mo Brooks (R-AL)—back into the judicial hot seat.

In March, for example, U.S. District Judge Amit P. Mehta dismissed Brooks as a defendant in the insurrection lawsuit that was brought by his congressional colleague, Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA).

One of the attorneys on Swalwell’s legal team, Phil Andonian, thinks new evidence might persuade the judge that there’s a strong enough case that the Republican congressman bore some responsibility for the damage at the Capitol.

Jan. 6 Committee Subpoena 5 GOP Congressmen Who Refused to Cooperate

It was already known that Brooks, a Trump loyalist who peddled all kinds of disproven voter fraud claims, wore a bulletproof vest on the morning of Jan. 6 when he told riled up protesters near the White House that their ancestors had “sacrificed their blood… and sometimes their lives.”

Brooks then asked the protesters, “Are you willing to do the same? Are you willing to do the same to fight for America?”

The Jan. 6 committee has obtained thousands of text messages from Trump White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows and others, including messages to Brooks that could further implicate the Republican congressman.

“This is going to be a good road map to discovery whenever we get to that. I'm certainly interested in a lot of the bit players we’ve identified,” Andonian told The Daily Beast. “It seems almost certain that we're going to get information [that] Mo Brooks, Donald Trump Jr., Rudy Giuliani were more involved than we were able to allege based on the public information we had at the time we filed the lawsuit.”

“We all know there was coordination and there were people within the campaign that were part of the rally and were talking,” Andonian continued. “That's only going to get stronger as this information makes its way out.”

Andonian expects that might require his team to refile the lawsuit, as opposed to merely amending it. But the end result would still be what they sought: accountability.

Until then, even those who strongly support the committee are aware of potential pitfalls.

Norm Eisen, an attorney and senior fellow at the Brookings Institution who recently authored a report on the committee’s role in saving the nation’s Republic, said this week that the committee has already done the incredibly difficult work of laying the groundwork to show that Trump and his associates knowingly committed crimes by trying to interrupt the peaceful transfer of power for the first time in the nation’s history. But he acknowledged that hearings might still fall flat with some Americans.

Trump Attorney John Eastman Ordered to Hand Over Batch of Emails and Documents to the Jan. 6 Committee

“If it's not bipartisan, that's a risk. But they have brought one of the most conservative members of the GOP caucus, Liz Cheney, as vice chair, a co-equal in managing this. Bipartisanship is a risk but they've hedged that,” he said. “The second risk is not having anything new to say.”

Doug Jones, the former senator and federal prosecutor from Alabama, said the committee has to be particularly cautious in its messaging right out the gate so as to not taint its findings with the perception that it’s driven purely by politics.

“Where the committee needs to be very careful is, if they forget the fact that they're factfinders,” Jones said. “They should not give the American public the perception that this is an attack on Donald Trump. They are finding facts. The facts are going to speak for themselves. They’re going to connect the dots.”

Those facts are still coming in.

Late Tuesday night, U.S. District Judge David O. Carter in California ordered John Eastman to turn over potentially damning documents to the committee. Eastman is the disgraced attorney who closely advised Trump on the ploy to remain in power by pressuring then-Vice President Mike Pence to not certify the electoral college results, and his emails—which the judge determined likely show evidence of an actual crime—were ordered to be delivered to the committee by 5 p.m. Wednesday.

Those emails, if made public by the committee, will only serve to fuel lawsuits against Trump’s inner circle. And even in the off chance that they’re not, attorneys suing Trump for monetary damages will still fight to get them—and expose them.

“Our cases will go forward, and we will be able to hold these people accountable in a way that's public and transparent and will inform the American public,” Caspar said.

TRUMP UNLEASHES A SCATHING REBUKE OF JAN. 6 HEARING
by Laura Ramirez June 9, 2022

President Donald Trump responded to the Jan. 6 Committee’s first public hearing set for Thursday, unleashing a string of Truths about the committee’s attempt to cast a shadow over Republicans and ignore serious election fraud concerns.

The highly partisan committee, composed of seven Democrats and two “Never Trump” Republicans, embarked on a long political witch hunt to blame Trump and Republicans for the events that occurred on Jan. 6 when protesters flooded the U.S. Capitol following the certification of the contested 2020 presidential results.

However, the “Unselect Committee,” as Trump calls it, fails to recognize that “January 6 was not simply a protest, it represented the greatest movement in the history of our Country to Make America Great Again,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

“It was about an Election that was Rigged and Stolen, and a Country that was about to go to HELL..& look at our Country now!” he added.



Trump also mentioned that he suggested deploying 20,000 National Guard troops in D.C. However, “Crazy Nancy Pelosi” and the mayor of D.C. rejected Trump’s offer. If they had not, Trump says, “there would have been no January 6.”

Dinesh D’Souza, creator of the “2000 Mules” documentary revealing widespread election fraud in key states, also shattered the media narrative about the Jan. 6 “insurrection,” maintaining that the “true insurrection” occurred on election night.



D’Souza stated that the evidence presented by the election integrity group True the Vote in the film has “blown up” the Jan. 6 Committee’s “underlying premise.”

“The 2020 election was demonstrably stolen by the Democrats. Patriots came to DC on January 6 to complain about that!” he tweeted.



After refusing to comply with the political witch hunt, Trump’s former chief strategist Steve Bannon and former advisor Peter Navarro were charged for withstanding the committee’s subpoenas.

Bannon, who is set to stand trial in July, recently issued subpoenas to Democrat leaders and all members of the Jan. 6 Committee, maintaining that the charges against him are politically motivated.

Following his arrest earlier this month, Navarro expressed his plan to represent himself, stating he does not “want to be dragged down into the muck, spending hundreds of thousands of dollars of my retirement savings on this kind of venture.”

Whether you like Marjorie Taylor Greene or not is irrelevant, as the points and facts she verbalizes regarding J6 are relevant. The dems again, as they did with Trump and the Russia lie, have used Congressional power to spend taxpayers money to play 'political theater'. Again, their high-stakes game is being played out with full knowledge that what they are doing is fraudulent and that it is being done to further divide the Country, while they dismantle our Republic piece by piece.

Many of the same actors that participated in the previous 40+ million 'dog and pony show' attacking a sitting President with manufactured lies are being showcased. All this propaganda at the expense of peoples' lives, just to entertain their enthralled brainwashed dupes, knowing that the corrupt establishment DC elite progressive regime (both dem and repub) will not allow them or those participants in the politicized DOJ/FBI to be punished for their crimes.

Temple wrote:

I was shocked, unbelievable--
I was not expecting all that and was taken shocked by it..

I doubt it's anything we haven't been hearing for the past year and a half ..Probably nothing much you haven't posted here .. Not that you read much of what you post

Quote :

What is to come in truly going to be astonished reveals-

Is that what they said, huh? .. Or is that what you're sayin? .. Anything the dems say or do at this point wouldn't shock mosta the country

Quote :

Trump, and the others, will do time, no doubt.

mm hmm ..and i suppose we'll hear about all the "indictments to come" for another year and a half ... Congress/that committee can't do shit ...yap about it and hurl accusations around. .. Most of us are just numb to it all anymore .. But I'm sure you'll keep us updated on your excitement

Capitol riot hearing: Trump accused of 'attempted coup'
By Jude Sheerin, BBC, Washington
Published53 minutes ago

Former US President Donald Trump orchestrated last year's Capitol riot in an "attempted coup", a congressional inquiry has heard as a prime-time hearing opened into the raid.

Liz Cheney, the Republican vice-chair of the committee, said Mr Trump had "lit the flame of this attack".

Bennie Thompson, a Democrat, said the riot endangered American democracy.

Trump supporters stormed Congress on 6 January 2021 as lawmakers met to certify Joe Biden's election victory.

After almost a year of investigation, the Democratic-led US House of Representatives select committee opened on Thursday evening by showing clips from interviews it conducted with members of Mr Trump's inner circle.

Footage was aired of testimony by former US Attorney General Bill Barr saying the former president's claims that the election was stolen were baseless.

"We can't live in a world where the incumbent administration stays in power based on its view, unsupported by specific evidence, that there was fraud in the election," said the former attorney general.

The hearing also featured a recording of testimony by Ivanka Trump, the ex-president's daughter, saying she "accepted" Mr Barr's rejection of her father's conspiracy theory.

What happened on 6 January at the Capitol riot?

Before the House inquiry opened on Thursday evening - the first of six hearings expected this month - Mr Trump dismissed it as a "political HOAX".

The former president has been publicly hinting about another White House run in 2024. He continues to peddle unsubstantiated claims that the last election was rigged by mass voter fraud.

Mr Thompson, the committee's chairman and a Mississippi lawmaker, told the hearing: "Jan 6 was the culmination of an attempted coup, a brazen attempt, as one writer put it shortly after Jan 6, to overthrow the government.

"The violence was no accident. It was Trump's last stand."

Ms Cheney, the vice-chair of the committee and a Wyoming congresswoman, said: "Those who invaded our Capitol and battled law enforcement for hours were motivated by what President Trump had told them: that the election was stolen and that he was the rightful president.

"President Trump summoned the mob, assembled the mob and lit the flame of this attack."
--------------------------------
Analysis box by Anthony Zurcher, North America reporter:

Running just over two hours, the unprecedented prime-time congressional hearing on the Capitol attack was a decidedly mixed bag.

The video evidence of the 6 January events, and the dramatic personal testimony of officer Caroline Edwards, were powerful reminders of the pain and suffering that day.

The extended statement by Liz Cheney - who has put her career in jeopardy with her criticism of the former president - was full of allegations and accusations but overly dense.

An American sitting down to watch the proceedings instead of their regular Thursday night entertainment may have not received the slickly packaged production that was promised.

But if they had forgotten what it was like on 6 January - the desperation and the drama - there was plenty to remind them.

What they do with that reminder, however, remains to be seen.

That's all the democrats have to campaign on? January 6th?

How cable news covered the Jan. 6 committee hearings: 'Absolutely devastating'
Bill Goodykoontz, Arizona Republic
Thu, June 9, 2022, 8:53 PM

There were so many surreal moments during the initial House Select Committee hearings investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection Thursday night that it’s hard to pick just one.

But not impossible.

ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN and MSNBC covered the hearing live. As well they should — this is by any reasonable definition news. And what transpired made it even more important to cover.

Reasonable being the operative word. Fox News did not broadcast them live, shunting coverage to Fox Business.

Fox News stuck with Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham

But there’s more to it than that. Fox News didn’t just stick with its prime-time lineup of Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham. Instead, it sought to actively undermine the hearings.

“The whole thing is insulting,” Carlson said at the beginning of his show. “In fact, it’s deranged. And we’re not playing along. This is the only hour on an American news channel that will not be carrying their propaganda live. They are lying and we are not going to help them do it.”

And just how devoted were they to undermining the validity of the hearings for its partisan audience? Fox News ran Carlson’s and Hannity's shows without commercials. That amounts to an investment in discrediting the hearings.

The chyron running beneath his show read, “The January 6th ‘show trial’ is underway.”

Later, it read, “Democrats will destroy anyone that opposes them.” And so on.

What to know: House Jan. 6 panel shows Ivanka Trump opposing claims of 2020 election fraud, in contrast to former President Donald Trump

OPINION: Betsy DeVos: Trump’s actions on Jan. 6 were ‘line in the sand’ that led to resignation

Never before seen footage was 'devastating'

That wasn’t the weirdest, or the worst, thing. As Carlson’s hour gave way to Hannity’s, the committee was in the process of showing a 12-minute video of the attack on the U.S. Capitol by an angry mob, urged on by former President Donald Trump, which included never-seen footage.

“An absolutely devastating film of footage, much of which we had never seen before,” Jake Tapper said on CNN.

“It just doesn’t get any easier to watch,” Hallie Jackson said on NBC. “That, I think, is part and parcel of what the committee wanted to get across.”

Yet while it played on every other channel, Hannity railed against the hearings, calling them boring, saying there’s nothing to see there, belittling “fake news CNN” and the other networks for covering the proceedings.

Open your eyes, man. It was impossible to watch this and not come to the reasonable conclusion that this was nothing less than an attempt to thwart the democratic process. It was absolutely terrifying.

Of course, knowing this would require that you actually watch it.

Scheduling the hearing for prime time was an unusual move, and a sign of the visibility the committee hoped to achieve. So much so, in fact, that they hired James Goldston, the former president of ABC News and the producer of shows like “20/20” and “Nightline,” as an adviser.

That’s also an unusual move. But all of these things are at heart television shows. This is a show seeking something more important than ratings, but TV is how we experience it.

This was incredible TV, gripping and important.

Rep. Liz Cheny told Trump loyalists, 'Your dishonor will remain'

This was incredible TV, gripping and important. If the video was the centerpiece of the first night of testimony, there were plenty of other big moments. Rep. Liz Cheney, one of two Republicans on the nine-person committee, went to great lengths during opening statements to detail what the committee would lay out over the course of the hearings.

And she said this, to Trump’s lackeys: “There will come a day when Donald Trump is gone, but your dishonor will remain.”

We also saw former U.S. Attorney General William Barr in taped testimony say that fraud claims involving Dominion Voting Systems were “complete nonsense,” “crazy stuff” and “a grave disservice to the country.” He also called the claims of fraud “bull----.”

Another compelling quote from taped testimony: “I respect Attorney General Barr. So I accepted what he was saying.”

What partisan Democrat uttered these words?

None. That was Ivanka Trump.

This was essential viewing — maddening, scary, revolting, infuriating — but essential nevertheless. How could it not be?

Ask Fox News, I guess. One of Carlson’s guests, Sean David, the CEO of the conservative publication the Federalist, said of the hearings, “I kind of feel like we are watching something akin to the dissolution of the republic.”

Funny, that’s how most reasonable people felt on Jan. 6.

MEMO CONFIRMS TRUMP ADMIN’S OFFER TO DEPLOY THE NATIONAL GUARD IN D.C. ON JAN. 6: REPORT
by Summer Lane June 10, 2022

Evidence has surfaced suggesting that the Trump administration indeed offered to deploy the National Guard to D.C. on Jan. 6, 2021, thanks to a new police report on the timeline of events. According to the report obtained by Just the News, the Trump Pentagon suggested sending National Guard troops to Washington D.C. four days before Jan. 6.

The Capitol Police’s official timeline states that “Carol Corbin (DOD) texts USCP Deputy Chief Sean Gallagher, Protective Service Bureau, to determine whether the USCP is considering a request for National Guard soldiers for January 6, 2021.”

President Trump has long said he recommended moving thousands of National Guard troops into the U.S. Capitol in January 2021, blaming Nancy Pelosi for blocking the attempt to secure D.C.

In a statement made in February, Trump stated, “There would have been no January 6, as we know it, if Nancy Pelosi heeded my recommendation to bring 10,000 soldiers, or the National Guard, into the Capitol. End the Unselect Committee January 6th Witch Hunt right now.”

Further, the report contends that the event “may lead to a significantly dangerous situation for law enforcement and public safety.”

Just the News reported that Gallagher stated via text that support for the National Guard was not “forthcoming.” Additionally, the official timeline states that on Tuesday, Jan. 5, 2021, “COP Sund informs SSAA and HSAA in separate discussions about the DC National Guard ability to provide 125 troops if necessary.”

However, based on the official report, DOD support via the Pentagon, which would have been provided in the form of National Guard troops, was allegedly refused.

Former chief of staff to President Trump, Kash Patel, told Just the News that this new, official timeline of events lends even more credibility to the notion that National Guard support was stonewalled by the House and Senate sergeant at arms, who “report to Pelosi.”

Ultimately, the National Guard was not deployed to the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 before the event, leading President Trump to post the following question: “Why is Crazy Nancy Pelosi and her files, which reportedly have been largely destroyed and deleted, not under investigation for not properly securing the Capitol with Soldiers or the National Guard that were strongly recommended to her by me and others?”