Search the Community

JFC. It's in the USCP memo in black and white. The memo in its entirety is linked in the Solomon piece above. He quotes from the USCP memo timeline as follows, with direct quote from USCP memo bolded. The Capitol Police official timeline provides the most succinct summary of a series of events around Sund's request, some of which have been disputed and at times misreported in the news media. "COP Sund asks Senate Sergeant at Arms (SSAA) Michael Stenger and House Sergeant at Arms (HSAA) Paul Irving for authority to have National Guard to assist with security for the January 6, 2021 event based on briefing with law enforcement partner and revised intelligence Assessment," the timeline recorded. "COP Sund's request is denied. SSAA and HSAA tell COP Sund to contact General Walker at DC National Guard to discuss the guard's ability to support a request if needed." And here is Kash Patel once again reiterating how he testified under oath to the J6 committee. Why can't we read his testimony? If he lied under oath there's another Trump crony that can be locked up, right? "We went to the Capitol Police and the Secret Service and law enforcement agencies and Mayor Bowser days before January 6, and asked them, 'Do you want thousands of National Guardsmen and women for January 6?'" Patel said in a detailed interview earlier this year. "They all said no. Why did we do that? The law requires them to request it before we can deploy them. And the DOD IG found we did not delay, we actually prepared in a preemptive fashion, which is what we do at DOD." Patel told Just the News on Wednesday night that the police timeline validated the account he has given to Congress. "The Capitol Police timeline shows what we have been saying for the last year — that DOD support via the National Guard was refused by the House and Senate sergeant at arms, who report to Pelosi," Patel said. "Now we have it in their own writing, days before Jan. 6. And despite the FBI warning of potential for serious disturbance, no perimeter was established, no agents put on the street, and no fence put up."

The Capitol police memo shows that the DoD under Trump made national guard request and it was turned down multiple times. For the intellectually impaired like @BillStime, the pdf of the memo is linked in the story below so you can read it yourself, not that words in black and white would make an difference in his case. Additionally, the LAW requires that Pelosi or Bowser to formally request the National Guard. Trump or any President CANNOT deploy them unilaterally.

So you've got some on the left saying it was planned in advance. Makes sense that Trump asked for national guard troops prior to 1/6 and was denied. Masterful 4D chess by Trump. Then you've got those who say he incited an impromptu insurrection on 1/6. This is where the left utilize their tactic of randomly redefining words to fit their narrative. Clearly when Trump said "march to the capitol to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard" he actually meant "go storm the capitol and stage a coup."

Release ALL the J6 security footage. All of it. Who is responsible for denying Trump admin request for national guard troops? Why haven't we heard a single thing about the suspect who planted pipe bombs at DNC / RNC headquarters? An update would sure be nice. How about we hear from Ray Epps? You want Trump and others communications from J5-J7th? Fine. Let's get Pelosis, Schiffs etc. as well. Until they at minimum do the above this whole thing is a political clown show sham and I'm shocked that the usual suspects here have fallen for it hook, line and sinker

A few things we have known... Sund confirms that by LAW the house/senate sergeants at arms must grant approval to deploy the national guard. @John from Riverside From his first request on J6 to house SAA Irving for NG assistance approval and his ELEVEN subsequent calls until approval was finally given, 71 minutes elapsed. On the first request for help, Irving told Sund he'd have to "run it up the chain".... who is the last rung in the chain above Irving, @ChiGoose? Pelosi. A tidbit I hadn't yet heard.. The NG finally arrived at the Capitol at 6 pm. There were police officers from NEW JERSEY that arrived at the Capitol before the NG did. I encourage every non useful idiot to watch this interview. Sund was the friggin chief of Capitol police, he should be the very first person you'd want to hear from if you really wanted to get to the bottom of J6. Curiously he had to beg to give testimony and almost the entire media outside of Tucker has zero interest in interviewing him. I wonder why?

Reading comprehension dude. The memo and the exact timeline of the denials you were not aware of. Has the committee shared that the Trump administration formally asked for up to 20k national guard troops in the days before J6 and the request was denied on multiple fronts? Why hasnt the committee in search of truth shared that information? They certainly must have had access to the very same memo. Gee, I wonder why they wouldn't share information that is exculpatory.....that's a tough one!

Oh. Link to actual memo included.in story. The Capitol Police official timeline provides the most succinct summary of a series of events around Sund's request, some of which have been disputed and at times misreported in the news media. "COP Sund asks Senate Sergeant at Arms (SSAA) Michael Stenger and House Sergeant at Arms (HSAA) Paul Irving for authority to have National Guard to assist with security for the January 6, 2021 event based on briefing with law enforcement partner and revised intelligence Assessment," the timeline recorded. "COP Sund's request is denied. SSAA and HSAA tell COP Sund to contact General Walker at DC National Guard to discuss the guard's ability to support a request if needed." The Capitol Police timeline shows what we have been saying for the last year — that DOD support via the National Guard was refused by the House and Senate sergeant at arms, who report to Pelosi," Patel said. "Now we have it in their own writing, days before Jan. 6. And despite the FBI warning of potential for serious disturbance, no perimeter was established, no agents put on the street, and no fence put up." Gee, I wonder why we haven't heard any of Patels testimony to the J6 committee? Cmon @ChiGoose do we have a deal?

Facts. Inconvenient facts. 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. 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. 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.

We have documentation that shows that Trump pre=authorized the national guard on J6 should any of the parties, required by law to deploy the NG, request it. We have documentation that shows that any individual among those required by law to request the NG in DC (house, senate sergeant at arms; DC mayor) all refused to make the request for NG presence on J6 when asked. They declined to make the request multiple times despite having intelligence that indicated the need for more law enforcement presence on J6. The only reason we've heard thus far as to why the NG was declined repeatedly was out of concern for the poor optics on display if a large NG presence was observed at the Capitol that day. In other words they declined the NG because politics. None of the above was included in the J6 committee report. If you don't have serious questions about the above documented facts then you quite simply are not a serious person who wants the full picture around the events of J6.

That's not what I said. I asked why her suspicions are legitimate grounds in making ANY decision? This isn't hard dude. Oh fact checkers! From USA Today? You've got me. It's too bad we actually have the Capitol police memos made public that tell us exactly how things went down. I mean that's your thing right? Just read the documents, right? Or is it USA Today fact checkers? Cue the Kash Patel grifter crap despite all this being directly from the Capitol police memos themselves. "The Capitol Police timeline shows what we have been saying for the last year — that DOD support via the National Guard was refused by the House and Senate sergeant at arms, who report to Pelosi," Patel said. "Now we have it in their own writing, days before Jan. 6. And despite the FBI warning of potential for serious disturbance, no perimeter was established, no agents put on the street, and no fence put up."

Oh so Pelosi suspected Jordan and Banks were involved? Oh my. Well now if Nancy Pelosi has suspicions then stop the presses! Why are Nancy Pelosi’s suspicions legitimate grounds for well anything at all? The same Nancy Pelosi who rejected national guard assistance prior to J6 has suspicions about OTHER members of congress involvement in J6? Partisan hack says what again?

Why wasn't national guard deployed? Because those who are required BY LAW for their deployment refused the request multiple times.

A Capitol Police timeline obtained by Just the News shows the Trump Pentagon first offered National Guard troops to the Capitol Police on Jan. 2, 2021, four full days before the event. The police turned down the offer but then began to have second thoughts. The Capitol Police then asked their political minders — the House sergeant at arms chief among them — for permission to accept the troops on Jan. 4 but were turned down on the ground that such a show of force would create bad "optics," the records show. But the most compelling piece of evidence that Trump wanted to thwart — rather than incite —violence is contained in a lengthy memo written by the Pentagon inspector general that chronicled the assistance the Defense Department offered Congress both ahead of and during the riot. The complete passage — hardly mentioned by Democrats at the hearings or the news media covering them — is worth absorbing in its entirety. "Mr. Miller and GEN Milley met with the President at the White House at 5:30 p.m.," the IG reported. "The primary topic they discussed was unrelated to the scheduled rally. GEN Milley told us that at the end of the meeting, the President told Mr. Miller that there would be a large number of protestors on January 6, 2021, and Mr. Miller should ensure sufficient National Guard or Soldiers would be there to make sure it was a safe event. Gen Milley told us that Mr. Miller responded, 'We've got a plan and we've got it covered.'" You can read that memo here:

So the medical examiner stated he died of natural causes and that there is no evidence that chemicals or injuries played a role in his death. Then we get his and other pathologists speculation, that you take apparently as fact, despite the statement above that was made based on evidence from the autopsy. Got it. Let's pull that thread a bit more then. If Trumps request to deploy the National Guard had been signed off on, as required by law, by either Pelosi or Bowser then Sicknick and the other four are likely still alive. Again, just saying she's a conservative doesn't prove she's lying although that seems to be the order of the day with the left. When she said the only people who died at the Capitol on J6 were four Trump supporters that was a statement of fact. Sicknick died the next day J7 from a stroke. He texted with his brother on the night of J6 and told him that he was fine although he had been sprayed.

Every single person on J6 who entered the Capitol illegally should be charged and face the appropriate consequences of their actions. Key word being appropriate. I've stated this numerous times. Undoubtedly it was a dark day for our country to see what happened at the Capitol. I'm simply not buying that it was an "insurrection." My question to you is do you want to know the truth and lay all the evidence out there or do you want to have a committee that has already concluded that Trump is guilty and just backfills cherry picked evidence and witnesses (who aren't cross-examined) that supports the already arrived at conclusion during a prime time show trial? 14,000 hours of unreleased Capitol surveillance video would certainly be a great place to start in piecing together exactly what happened in and around the Capitol on J6. The committee however is uninterested in this video. What could possibly be the reasoning behind not looking at all the video for "the worst attack on democracy since the Civil War" to help bring every single person involved to justice? And I'll state this again because these facts are undeniable and can be backed up by documents in the public domain. Trump authorized up to 20,000 national guard troops to be deployed on J6 His authorization alone is insufficient to deploy troops. The law requires that a local authority make an official request for NG troops. The local authorities in this case would be the House/Senate sergeant at arms or DC Mayor Bowser. All of the above local authorities refused, in writing, to make that request. If we are looking to assign blame for what actually happened and why on J6 asking those local authorities why they chose to not request the NG probably should be part of an all encompassing investigation. But that's just me. Are you willing to look beyond the narrative a sham partisan committee feeds you or are you wanting them to consider all the evidence? Great. But I think you're still missing just how nefarious this whole thing was. First of all the letter signed by 50 former intelligence officials specifically stated that they had absolutely no evidence that the laptop was actually Russian disinformation, just that they had suspicions that it might be. How did the vast majority of the media take that information in their reporting? They reported that it WAS russian disinformation despite the letter explicitly stating that they had no evidence to support it. It gets worse. The NY Post broke the laptop story, one of the oldest newspapers in the country and what did Twitter do? Twitter locked the account of the NY Post. Because 50 former intelligence officials had a "gut feeling" and absolutely zero proof that it was Russian disinformation. Then Twitter and Facebook took it further and blocked any sharing of the NY Post story on their platforms. This is truly a massive scandal. I'm not sure what we do about the media, but I do know nothing gets fixed on many levels without breaking up big tech. If they are allowed to continue unabated with brute censoring of accurate reporting because it hurts politicians on their side then it's over for our republic.