Below is my column in The Hill on new evidence released by the House related to the January 6th riot. The J6 Committee fueled doubts about the official accounts by using only Democratically-appointed members and skewing the evidence. The new information further undermines the narrative pushed by both members and the media.
Here is the column:
On Jan. 6, 2021, the nation was rocked by the disruption of the certification of Joe Biden as our next president. With Donald Trump set to return to the White House in 2025, it is astonishing how much of that day remains a matter of intense debate.
Those divisions are likely only to deepen after a slew of recent reports that have challenged the selective release of information from the House January 6 Committee.
January 6 remains as much a political litmus test as it is a historical event. Whether you refer to that day as a riot or an insurrection puts you on one side or the other of a giant political chasm. I viewed the attack on that day as a desecration of our constitutional process, but I did not view it as an insurrection. I still don’t.
It was a protest that became a riot when a woefully insufficient security plan collapsed. And that is a view shared by most Americans. One year after the riot, a CBS poll showed that 76 percent viewed it as a “protest gone too far.”
A Harvard study also found that those arrested on that day were motivated by loyalty to Trump rather than support for an insurrection.
A recent poll found that almost half of the public (43 percent) felt that “too much is being made” of the riot and that it is “time to move on.” Of course, that still leaves a little over half who view the day as “an attack on democracy.”
The continued distrust of the official accounts of Jan. 6 reflects a failure of the House Democrats, and specifically former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), to guarantee a credible and comprehensive investigation.
The House Select Committee to investigate January 6 was comprised of Democrat-selected members who offered only one possible view: that January 6 was an attempt to overthrow our democracy by Trump and his supporters. The committee hired a former ABC News producer to create a slick, made-for-television production that barred opposing views and countervailing evidence. The members, including Republican Vice Chair Liz Cheney, played edited videotapes of Trump’s speech that removed the portion where Trump called on his supporters to protest “peacefully.”
The committee fostered false accounts, including the claim that there was a violent episode with Trump trying to wrestle control of the presidential limousine. The Committee knew that the key Secret Service driver directly contradicted that account offered by former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson.
While the Democrats insisted that Trump’s speech constituted criminal incitement, he was never charged with that crime — not even by the motivated prosecutors who pledged to pursue such charges. The reason is that Trump’s speech was entirely protected under the First Amendment. Such a charge of criminal incitement would have quickly collapsed in court.
Nevertheless, the Washington Post, NPR, other media and the committee members called Jan. 6 an “insurrection” engineered by Trump. Figures such as Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) insisted the committee had evidence that Trump organized a “coup” on Jan. 6, 2021. That evidence never materialized.
The lack of adequate security measures that day has long puzzled many of us. After all, there had been a violent riot at the White House before January 6, in which more officers were injured and Trump had to be moved to a secure location. The National Guard had to be called out to protect the White House, but those same measures (including a fence) were not ordered at the Capitol.
Two of the recent reports offered new details related to those questions.
One report confirmed that Trump did, in fact, offer the deployment of the National Guard in anticipation of the protest. The Jan. 6 Committee repeatedly dismissed this claim. After all, it would be a rather curious attempt at an insurrection if Trump was suggesting the use of thousands of troops to prevent any breach of Congress. The committee specifically found “no evidence” that the Trump administration called for 10,000 National Guard members to be sent to Washington, D.C., to protect the Capitol. The Washington Post even supposedly “debunked” Trump’s comments with an award of “Four Pinocchios.”
Yet evidence now shows that Trump personally suggested the deployment of 10,000 National Guard troops to prevent violence. For example, a transcript includes the testimony of former White House Deputy Chief of Staff Anthony Ornato in January 2022 with Liz Cheney present. Ornato states that he clearly recalled Trump’s offer of 10,000 troops.
Videotapes have also emerged showing Pelosi privately admitting that she and Democratic leadership were responsible for the security failure on Jan. 6.
Another new report from Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.), who chairs the House Administration’s Subcommittee on Oversight, shows that it was the Defense Department that delayed the eventual deployment of National Guard in the critical hours of the riot.
The evidence shows that, at 3:18 p.m., Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy “tells sheltering Members of Congress that he is not blocking the deployment of the National Guard and, while referencing the D.C. National Guard, shares that ‘We have the green light. We are moving.’” However, the secretary of the Army’s own timeline indicates that the DCNG did not physically leave the Armory until 5 pm.
That was the critical period for the riot. Around 2:10 p.m., people surged up the Capitol steps. Just an hour later, McCarthy said troops were on their way. At 4:17 p.m., Trump made his public statement asking rioters to stop — roughly an hour and a half later. Yet it was not until 5 pm that the troops actually left for the Capitol.
The House is also under greater scrutiny this week for new information on the shooting of the only person to die on Jan. 6. While Democrats have referred to many deaths on that day, the only person who died in the riot itself was Ashli Babbitt, a protester shot by Capitol Police.
I have long disagreed with the findings of investigations by the Capitol Police and the Justice Department in clearing Captain Michael Byrd for this shooting. The media lionized Byrd and, in sharp contrast to other police shootings during that period, blamed the deceased. Again, an unjustified shooting of a protester would not fit the media narrative.
The concerns over the shooting were heightened by the Justice Department’s bizarre review and report, which notably did not state that the shooting was justified. Instead, it declared that it could not prove “a bad purpose to disregard the law” and that “evidence that an officer acted out of fear, mistake, panic, misperception, negligence, or even poor judgment cannot establish the high level of intent.”
Babbitt, 35, was an Air Force veteran who was clearly committing criminal acts of trespass, property damage and other offenses at the time she was shot. However, Babbitt was unarmed when she tried to climb through a broken window.
Byrd stated “I could not fully see her hands or what was in the backpack or what the intentions are.” In other words, Byrd admitted he did not see a weapon. He took Babbitt’s effort to crawl through the window as sufficient justification to kill her. It was not. And it is worth noting that Byrd could just as well have hit the officers standing just behind Babbitt.
The new report confirms that Byrd had prior disciplinary and training issues, including “a failed shotgun qualification test, a failed FBI background check for a weapon’s purchase, a 33-day suspension for a lost weapon and referral to Maryland state prosecutors for firing his gun at a stolen car fleeing his neighborhood.” In one incident, detailed in a letter from Loudermilk, Byrd was suspected of lying about the circumstances under which he shot at the fleeing car.
None of this means that Trump or even Babbitt are without fault in this matter. Trump’s speech was clearly “reckless and wrong,” and Babbitt herself was involved in that riot. However, these reports only further highlight what we still do not know about that day.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
I have a slightly different view of Jan 6 events.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_fO-usAlqak
Prior to the 2020 election, the Left demonstrated to the nation who they were and how powerful their “civilian army” could be. Remember Antifa and BLM riots? It looked like the collapse of a banana republic.
One purpose of the display: what judge would want to hear a case questioning election integrity if it would bring those malatov hurling criminals right to their doorstep?
The Right’s demonstration of their “civilian army” on Jan 6 was telegraphed so clearly that it gave the Left time to plan their approach. They were moderately successful at manipulating the event and labeling Jan 6 as an “armed insurrection”. Clearly it was not even close. What I saw was that the Right’s “army”, was larger and mostly civilized.
The Left should be afraid because while they had a bunch of goons of chaos at their command the Right looks like it has better potential to wield a disciplined tactical force.
I still think things will have to get worse before they can get better.
A new administration’s access to previous administration investigative documents is governed by various laws and regulations. The Presidential Records Act (PRA) of 1978, as amended, governs the management of presidential records, including investigative documents.
The PRA states that presidential records are the property of the United States and must be managed in accordance with the Act. The Act requires the President to take all practical steps to file personal records separately from presidential records.
The PRA allows the incumbent President to access presidential records created by the previous administration, including investigative documents. However, the Act also establishes procedures for Congress, courts, and subsequent administrations to obtain special access to records that remain closed to the public.
Access to investigative documents may be restricted if disclosure would:
Interfere with law enforcement investigations or judicial proceedings
Deprive a person of the right to a fair trial or impartial adjudication
Identify a confidential source or disclose confidential information about a criminal investigation
Reveal criminal investigative techniques or procedures
Freedom of Information Act
The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) also governs access to investigative documents. FOIA requires federal agencies to disclose records to the public upon request, unless the records are exempt from disclosure.
FOIA exemptions include records that are:
Classified for national security reasons
Related to internal agency personnel rules and practices
Specifically exempted by statute
Trade secrets or confidential commercial information
Personal and medical information
New Administration’s Access
A new administration’s access to previous administration investigative documents is subject to the restrictions and exemptions outlined above. The new administration may request access to these documents, but the request must be made in accordance with the PRA and FOIA.
THANK YOU MR. TURLEY
WHAT CAN BE DONE LEGALLY TO MAKE ALL THOSE INVOLVED FOR THE SHAM JAN 6 COMMITTEE, TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE?
As an aside, my husband and I watched “Hang ‘Em High” this past Saturday night – does that mean anything?
If anyone has noticed, there seems to be a continual and purposeful disconnect between Democrats and the truth.
A disconnect is probably a decent description. The Left is goal-orientd. where the tryth serves them, they’ll use it. Where it is deleterious to their narrative they casually replace it with their own “truth.” Often their fabrications are so sophmoric as to be laughable and yet they insist🤣
“The Left is goal-orientd. where the tryth serves them, they’ll use it. Where it is deleterious to their narrative they casually replace it with their own “truth.””
Translation: any presence of truthful statements in the narratives of the left is purely coincidental.
I would say “accidental” rather than “coincidental”.
Their ruse as to what is the truth is perpetuated by our legacy media and rogue progressive outlets such as this new Bluesky network that is to counter the real truths finally being aired on X. If we are to win this whole thing we must better educate those willing to learn and keep a close eye on those too far indoctrinated to reach at this point.
Often their fabrications are so sophmoric as to be laughable and yet they insist
Paging Gigi… Paging Gigi.
Whimsicalmama,
A simple, yet wholly accurate statement.
I would only add “a real continual and purposeful disconnect between Democrats and reality.” It is one of the reasons among many, that sane and normal people have been rejecting them as of late.
We know the truth of it but what frightens me the most is how to eradicate the pernicious and purposefully created horde of (I refer to them as dead heads) those so indoctrinated at this point as to not be able to logically comprehend the depth of their own brainwashing and will never admit that they are mere tools for the elite progressives. These young people have very fragile egos because of their upbringing and are truly not capable of undoing their total miseducation.
What do we do with them and are we just to closely observe them and just let them age out? They are a fickle and volatile group that can cause great chaos and harm because they truly have no strong moral core or sense of civilized behavior other than their own concept of what they think is right and wrong but based on no long-standing set of principles.
Whimsicalmama,
“how to eradicate the pernicious and purposefully created horde of (I refer to them as dead heads) those so indoctrinated at this point as to not be able to logically comprehend the depth of their own brainwashing and will never admit that they are mere tools for the elite progressives.”
We know they do not reproduce. And by their actions, they will award themselves the Darwin Award in short order. Or, they will just sit and seeth in their self misery while the rest of us sane and normal people go on to lead productive, happy lives.
That is the beat scenario but I am afraid that these types, bored as they will be, will willingly follow any calls for protests (even though they do not quite comprehend just what the subject of their protests might be) and add an ever-present level of potential mayhem upon which the prog/left will rely as needed.
* As Mr. Ten Percent would say “If we ain’t lyin’, then we ain’t really tryin'”
whimsicalmama, I no longer notice Democrats telling lies. That’s now their baseline. That is so expected from them, that when they do speak the truth, it comes as a shocking breath of fresh air.
“it comes as a shocking breath of fresh air.” but we still won’t ever believe anything they say – they have lost trust and it cannot be regained by them.
mama, there’s two very important distinctions here. 1. We need to recognize the truth when it is said. Truth does not make someone trustworthy?
OLLY,
I beg to differ. While it is shocking, it generally is not fresh and the air is coming out of the other end.
Democrats are obvious fascists using Lawfare! if we don’t clean it up…we LOSE the USA
Jail Criminal Democrats/RINOs by 1000’s across gov., (DOJ, Judges, congress, etc), media, healthcare, tech, etc for their crimes
1) Lawfare of Trump and his people
2) helping Illegals
3) protecting Bidens and their people
4) Sex change of minors
5) Cheating on voting
6) Taking Bribes
7) COVID
The Epoch Times produced a documentary about Jan 6 with a bunch of FOIA’d video, some of it showing Ashli Babbitt outside the Capitol. Behind her were two men dressed in black, bashing the window. In front of her was a policeman, gun on hip, watching passively. She pleads with the policeman to stop the guys bashing in the window. At about that point, they break through the window, turn around, pick her up, and shove her through the window. She did not damage property or willingly breach the Capitol. That’s something that people need to know, along with the fact that Capitol police broke the law multiple times that day, beginning mid-morning by firing rubber bullets from the Capitol parapet, down onto a peaceful crowd. One of those rubber bullets put a man’s eye out, and the man standing next to him, who witnessed it, had a heart attack. Most of the crowd were older, they were not doing anything wrong – and even if they had been, it’s against the law to fire rubber bullets above the chest. It seems that Capitol police were deliberately provoking the crowd. They then deployed tear gas in the Capitol tunnel, also against the law, which led to a young woman being trampled. People in the crowd carried her to the doors of the Capitol and pleaded with police to get her medical help. The police refused – also against the law, since law enforcement is required to call for medical help any time it’s needed, even for someone who has committed a crime. Meanwhile the FBI has refused to arrest Ray Epps, known to have previously been an FBI operative, who is on video clearly inciting the crowd to be violent. They can’t tell us how many of their own agents were embedded in the crowd – were they the two guys dressed in black who pushed Babbitt through the window, where a police stood waiting, gun already drawn, to shoot her? We need an answer to that question, among many others.
Truth is always the first victim in any event involving the progressive left. They are proving a greater threat to america than the old USSR, the Chinese, Islamic radicalism and even millions of illegal criminals flooding our borders. We need to purge this progressive ideology from our culture if we want to survive.
Whimsicalmama,
I think we are purging progressive insanity from our culture and they themselves are the chief architects of their own down fall. As plainly evident, by voting for Trump is voting for normalcy, common sense, decency. People are no longer afraid to say the quiet part out loud without fearing the woke leftist screed of “Your a -ist!!!!!” It is okay to say, out loud, biological males should not be in women’s sport, women’s locker rooms, women’s bath rooms. It is okay to say out loud teaching sex to six year olds is wrong. It is okay to say out loud pornography in elementary school libraries is wrong. It is okay to say out loud DEI and CRT causes division and teaches hate. It is okay to say out loud this pronoun thing is just plain dumb. It is okay to say out loud that is a guy in a dress. It is okay to say out loud I dont want you teaching my children or anywhere near them.
It might be OK to say those things but NY State, as is many a blue urban cesspool is still controlled by hordes of unhinged prog/leftist who will still threaten the right – just look at how many mayors and governors are defying the constitution daily concerning sanctuary cities and ICE. No, we need do a great deal more to disinfect this nation and we had best begin with the media/education industry.
“The Epoch Times produced a documentary about Jan 6 with a bunch of FOIA’d video,”
I would be very interested in a link to that documentary. I suspect others here would be, as well.
I found a link on Epoch TImes TV site to purchase the DVD for “The Real Story of January 6”. There is actually a Part I and a Part II. Unfortunately the links to purchase were broken, or at least would not function in my browser. I have sent a request to Epoch Times customer service asking for clarification. I will report any results here. If it were most any other outfit, I would suspect that some kind of intimidation resulted in their making the video unavailable, but considering that ET and the religion it represents, Falun Gong, has been the target of every possible kind of vicious attack that the Chinese Communist Party could muster for decades, I seriously doubt that our Fedgov successfully intimidated them. I don’t always agree with the ET editorial POV, but I certainly respect their (and FG’s) courage and resilience.
I posted the comment above
The reply from Epoch Times indicated that the DVDs are available @ $19.99 ea, but cannot be ordered from their merchandising site because of “low inventory”. They are supposed to call me to allow me to purchase. I intend to do so. After I purchase, I will compare the contents with what is available for live viewing on the web (YouTube, etc.) If the full contents are freely available for viewing, I will post links to it. If not, I will most likely upload the content from my purchased copy somewhere, and provide links to that. If I do that, I will also provide links to make donations to Epoch Times. I have no intention of depriving them of revenue in compensation for their efforts, but I am concerned that they might be limiting availability in response to nefarious political pressure of some kind. Their claim of low inventory doesn’t make a lot of sense to me. Duplicating DVDs is trivially cheap, and at $40 for 2 DVDs, distribution should be *very* profitable. All else equal, low inventory would seem to reflect high demand. The only other factor I can think of justifying the low supply is if the complete content was so widely available for free as to impair sales, and my initial searches did not indicate that to be the case, hence my intention to compare after procuring the media. I might even consider setting up a site with these videos, along with the complete set of Jan 6 surveillance cam videos released buy the House, developing and posting tables of contents to particularly interesting and salient parts of those videos. If you have viewed any of those, you know that finding scenes of interest requires an immense amount of time spent slogging through meaningless detail. Yes, this is now nearly 4 years in the past, and Trump won the 2024 election with a mandate, BUT I think that the despicable conduct of Fedgov operatives during the January 6, 2021 demonstrations is a lesson that should be preserved for posterity. To be continued.
these are the same videos i saw as well. the woman who was trampled was also repeatedly hit by a caital police woman as she lay defenseless. this captal police woman later gets some kind of bravery award that was filmed and shown on tv. as i watched the very first videos that were played live i found it really odd that all these men”dressed in black ” were opening up crowd control gates for the protesters to go through. i never saw that footage again. i was alwas suspicious after i saw that video footage.
Do the events of 1/6/2021 even rise to the level of a riot? The crowd was unruly on occasion, but destruction was confined to a couple of broken windows, and eyewitness accounts of those indicate that those doing the breaking were most likely interlopers who were there to provoke misbehavior, and not really part of the protest. The activities of that day certainly don’t rise to the level of the “fiery but mostly peaceful protests” of the previous summer.
“Do the events of 1/6/2021 even rise to the level of a riot? The crowd was unruly on occasion, but destruction was confined to a couple of broken windows, and eyewitness accounts of those indicate that those doing the breaking were most likely interlopers who were there to provoke misbehavior, and not really part of the protest. ”
If the critical incidents resulted from the efforts of government provocateurs, which I find to be a credible proposition, you have answered your own question in the negative.
What we do know now is that everything that was done after the riot started was malfeasance by those in control of the security of the Capitol. Then the cover-up of that malfeasance kicked into overdrive with the “committee” members and staff destroying devices and records. That in itself is an entire other article Professor……
Who has the responsibility for the security of the capitol? Was security maintained? Why Wasn’t it maintained? Who was responsible for the failure to maintain? This committee was a fraud from the start because it wasn’t set up according to the procedures of the house. When has one party picked all members of a committee?
“Who has the responsibility for the security of the capitol? Was security maintained? Why Wasn’t it maintained?”
Incompetence was almost certainly one factor, and could explain much, but almost certainly not all…
Then the cover-up of that malfeasance kicked into overdrive with the “committee” members and staff destroying devices and records. That in itself is an entire other article Professor……
For all the value Professor Turley provides with his insights and opinions on legal matters, you are never going to see Professor Turley similarly describe those events is yet another event that he would similarly label a “consecration of our constitutional process” as he once again labels the three hour long J6 riot.
When it comes to critically examining his fellow members of the profession of law concerning malfeasance and criminality as he does private citizens engaged in the J6 riot, Professor Turley uses a completely different standard. He will never label their conduct as something he sees as a consecration of our constitutional process.
For Merrick Garland, James Comey, and his fellow lawyers involved in both the J6 Committee, Jack Smith’s return to replay how he took out Governor McDonnell years earlier to protect Obama’s reelection, etc… all Professor Turley can manage is mewling soft soap objections.
Don’t hold your breath waiting for Professor Turley to write those articles you hope to see. After all, he’s had ample evidence to work with on writing such articles for years now.
Appreciate his blog for what it is, provided free of charge. But don’t expect one uniform standard applied to all – he is a Democrat, after all, and it’s just how they are. Leopards don’t change their spots.
He’s also a lawyer and that, in and of itself, is cause for caution.
Professor Turley, why let the truth get in the way of the ‘correct’ narrative? I am waiting for the first s@@tlib to call you a ‘nazi’ for this posting.
antonio
The number of FBI or other federal informants/agents, and the role they played, remains concealed. The Trump administration should reveal this information when it comes into office.
Byrd should be the subject of a proper investigation for homicide not requiring wilfulness, as does the crime of deprivation of rights which is all that the DoJ commented on.
We know that the D.C. mayor rejected the National Guard troops when offered them before J6 but the decision by Pelosi to do so remains murky. That should be investigated.
“The number of FBI or other federal informants/agents, and the role they played, remains concealed. The Trump administration should reveal this information when it comes into office. ”
What convinces you that any documentation of that nature hasn’t already been shredded on instructions from Wray or Garland?
Jan 6th Left Wing Radical DEM led and handpicked jury and witnesses was a “KANGROO COURT” 100% biased, and the verdict was all set in stone before they began. They even paid some Hollywood type to help with the production. Pelosi, Milley, DEM leadership etc have a lot to answer, Trump should set up a committee to investigate and restore those reputations and $$$ many suffered at the hands of J6 Committee. Cheney and Company need to be held accountable for their actions and must suffer legal and financial punishment and all those who suffered should be able to sue each and every member and those who provided false testimony. As well as all those who pushed Russia gate and Russian agents, such as Clinton etc. Members of the press who helped should suffer legal and financial consequences.
So, trump didn’t just sit in the Oval Office dining room watch the rioters invade and damage the capitol for 183 minutes? So, trump wasn’t the CiC on 1/6/2021?? Trump should be prosecuted for dereliction of duty.
Hey Wally, why do you think that the Democrats that prosecuted Trump for anything and everything didn’t prosecute him for “dereliction of duty”? Why do you not think that Pelosi and Marion Bowser, the two people as Speaker and Mayor of DC and the two people in charge of security, shouldn’t be charged? I know why, because you are a pathetic little partisan hack.
Hey Wally, how does it feel to lose? And keep on losing? How does it feel to be wrong on so many things?
By your own logic, the entire democrat party should be tried for dereliction of duty in light of our open border and our purposeful invasion by illegals from all over the world. Where is you cry for that prosecution????
Oh, and California is still counting ballots. Hmmm!
I think each ballot has to be certified by Mrs. Pelosi.
If Mrs Pelosi and Liz Cheney had been interested in truth then the whole committee would have met publicly and all testimony would have been public, and they would have accepted the Republican members appointed by the Republican minority. But they did not do that. Instead of a fact finding committee that could assess all the evidence and point out shortcomings and blame, in a public manner, Pelosi and Cheney decided to empanel a Star Chamber or Drumhead Court Martial (if you like the military version) all to wring the most partisan aspects they could get out of the proceeding. Obviously they failed because the object of this entire sordid mess is now going to be President again with both houses of congress, and a Conservative Supreme Court.
That is a spectacular failure when they should have been building from a position of strength. I think that is called over-reach (you know when you reach for something distant and only get half your arms back, if you’re lucky).
Involving Hollywood in this was even worse because about the only thing much of the people hate worse than D.C. is Hollywood. And they also forgot that that probably close to a majority or more of the people also don’t trust the media. Things like the J6 committee are effective only when you control all the media and the news outlets.
J6 was a riot but the attempted hijacking of the message was and continues to be as big or not bigger a crime.
Lastly the J6 rioters in prison have dealt with a criminal justice system that feels it has no bounds in prosecuting them. Wonder what that justice system could accomplish if turned toward Antifa, the Drug Cartels, the Border Coyotes, the South American Gangs and other miscreants that the Biden Admin has turned loose on the country.
And lastly-Biden has had a screw loose from the day he was elected president. Anyone with half a brain could recognize that he was a kindred soul. Those with a whole brain should have declared him incompetent as soon as he took the oath, except they would have had a worse problem to deal with. Kamala with a whole brain vs Biden with half a brain – which way would the arrow tilt?
GEB,
Great comment! Especially the “J6 was a riot but the attempted hijacking of the message was and continues to be as big or not bigger a crime.” For which we have MSM and DNC dupes to thank. Fortunately those of us with a degree of critical thinking saw right through the farce.
“J6 was a riot”
I think there is a very important question that has yet to be definitively answered, which is:
“Absent deliberate acts of provocation and incitement by government assets, would J6 have been a riot, or would it merely have been a relatively orderly demonstration?”
I’m still waiting to hear who placed the cocaine in the White House.
Turley has resumed his usual pattern of misleading narratives. While he claims there is evidence that Trump suggested using National Guard troops for security, he fails to provide any actual evidence. He references transcripts but does not include a link to them, which is bizarre. The only “evidence” he presents is hearsay. There is no direct evidence to support the claim that Trump suggested deploying 10,000 troops for security. He claims there is a transcript, but does not produce it. It is unreasonable to expect Pelosi to anticipate riots and have security measures in place. Turley implies that riots should have been expected because there were riots at the White House, but that is a totally different context. The riots at the White House were related to the George Floyd protests, not the election.
Trump’s speech was undeniably “reckless and wrong.” While he frequently claims to have denounced the speech in real-time, he never explains why it was reckless and wrong. The truth is obvious: he incited the crowd urging them to “fight like hell” and promised to lead them to the Capitol. Isolating the phrase “to march peacefully” does nothing to change the fact that the overarching message of the speech was both inciting and furious. This is crucially omitted by Turley. The crowd had already been stirred up and restless, and Trump’s implied encouragement to storm the Capitol only fueled their anger. His failure to intervene while the riot escalated—resulting in threats against Congress members, the Vice President, and assaults on law enforcement—underscores the intent behind his words, something Turley is clearly aware of. He probably fears the intense backlash that might arise from even hinting at this reality.
Bombshell transcripts: Trump urged use of troops to protect Capitol on Jan. 6 , but was rebuffed
“Gen. Mark Milley, the former chairman of the Joints Chief of Staff, confirmed to the Pentagon inspector general three years ago that during a Jan. 3, 2021, Oval Office meeting Trump pre-approved the use of National Guard or active duty troops to keep peace in the nation’s capital on the day Congress was to certify the results of the 2020 election.”
https://justthenews.com/accountability/watchdogs/bombshell-transcripts-trump-urged-use-troops-protect-capitol-jan-6-was?utm_source=referral&utm_medium=offthepress&utm_campaign=home
Good job Upstate. That’s how you deal with bad speech (dis & misinformation). George (Svelaz) jumped on JT earlier than usual today. Must have been triggered by more truth than he could handle.
OLLY,
The slow and stupid one is also lazy in his lame attempts to attack the good professor. It is so easy to debunk the slow one.
I thought it was common knowledge that Trump did it?
whimsicalmama posted: I thought it was common knowledge that Trump did it?
The Democrat Memory Hole that George, Pelosi, Schumer, Biden, Harris, Gigi etc depend on while making their pronouncements is supposed to disappear the fact that Trump preauthorized the National Guard and Pelosi and the Washington Mayor refused to use them.
Just as the Soviet Democrat-Marxist Mainstream Media Propaganda Complex joins with the above in depending on the Democrat Memory Hole to erase the fact that a few months prior to J6 there was a similar “insurrection” involving an assault on the White House with rioters attempting to murder Capitol Police and Secret Service while attempting to gain entry to the White House to murder President Trump.
Sadly, the Democrat Memory Hole has pretty much been successful in erased comparisons of the response to the day long assault on the White House to the three hours of J6 a couple of months after that.
Particularly comparisons of how the DoJ and prosecutors now hunting down every single J6 granny who took a selfie on the Senate lawn have ignored that riot by the Democrats’ murderous street thugs both before J6 and ever since.
I do hope Musk buys MSNBC as that will be one major function of that democrat memory hole that would be gone…
The Trump Restoration will be glorious.
….gloriously bad. He’s hiring unqualified people.
Wally, Did Biden hire qualified people? If so what qualified them? Certainly not working for Obama.
Yeah Wally, not as qualified as Mayorkas, Mayor Pete, Blinken, Austin, Garland, Yellen, Grenholm, etc etc.
And any of Biden’s picks were qualified? You know, a guy in a dress. Another one that wears dresses and steals luggage. Mayorkas performance screams unqualified by all the illegals coming in, all those drugs, all that human trafficking.
….gloriously bad.
You are so right, Wally. You and your ilk’s near destruction of this country is now halted. (Bad for you) Then in 56 days, the America First restoration begins. (Gloriously bad for you).
You can thank us later.
More qualified than the guy in the red dress, red lipstick, bald head and a mustache caught stealing women’s luggage? Or how about the dude in a dress working for the executive branch. And what about ole Pete, just a small town mayor with no experience but handed a Department of Transportation gig just to fill a DEI hire? You must think everyone on the right is blind to these hypocritical appointments?
He’s hiring unqualified people.
Wally’s idea of qualified people are a tranny Admiral like Rachael Levin working in the public health sector – telling Americans that men like her can actually menstruate and get pregnant. Or go through menopause…
The Transportation Secretary, The Reverend Mrs. Pete Buttagieg, AWOL for months to practice “chest feeding” while on maternity leave while the people of East Palestine were left on their own to deal with that transportation disaster.
A Secretary of Defense who went AWOL, with not even the Commander In Chief Big Guy unaware that he was missing. Same Sec Defense who supported letting a spy balloon belonging to The Big Guy’s ChiCom customers do detailed military intelligence gathering floating above America for days. Same Sec Defense who approved of leaving Taliban terrorists enough weapons to arm a small NATO nation.
And top of Wally’s list of qualified people: Bribery Biden, who can’t even win a battle with a teleprompter while being lead around by the hand by foreign leaders and his equally qualified and brilliant Vice President DEI Hire, the Border Czar who together have given us a secured southern border.
On the other hand…. Wally could be a Woke Marxist Useful Idiot. One of Jerry’s Kids; straight off the short bus. Totally unqualified to be considered one of the adults in the room.
IIRC there were two Chinese spy balloons. One was dealt with significantly more quickly than the other, but imo neither one should have penetrated US air space, and both should have evoked a stern rebuke and warning to China.
1. Get with it Turley, “videotape” was last century. Surely you are more up to date on technology. 2. How many FBI “informants”/provocateurs were present? The FBI won’t s wont say. 3. Who planted the pipe bomb?
“3. Who planted the pipe bomb?”
Video does not prove that the bomb(s) was planted by a DC cop, but certainly suggests that as a possibility, and does prove that either one particular DC cop was either aware of it/them, or exhibited an amazing and culpable failure of diligence.
“The new report confirms that Byrd had prior disciplinary and training issues, including “a failed shotgun qualification test…”
How do you fail a shotgun qualification test? I mean, unless you’re Tim Walz…
There has been an attempted coup alright- totally instigated by the left and MARK MY WORDS (as my 6th grade nun Sister Roberta always used to say) they are not over yet…the next 4 years are going to be a bumpy ride and I hope Trump just treats all their nuisances as just that- nuisances. Do not give them the time of day- they are like little pesky mosquitoes, on an otherwise beautiful summer day.
Are you f-ing kidding me!? “Trump’s speech was reckless and wrong” What kind of f-ing moron are you? Did you ever bother to listen to it??? SMDH Not only are you 4 f-ing years late to the party, but, you get as much “wrong” as the lying leftards and Media who colluded to steel an election! I suspect your writing in the Hill, is tainted by your biases. 🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕
Your lack of education is obvious and sanity … “steel an election” … negates your elloquent diatribe. This country needs a dept. of mental health.
This + this + this + this + this + this + this = There is absolutely no reasonable doubt about what happened on January 6th, 2021.