Why is it important that we the people keep our eye on the chain of command that directed the Capitol invasion on January 6? Why is it important to wonder why the Capitol wasn’t guarded by the same armored robs-cops that the BLM protesters faced off with in the Summer before? Who gave the orders to have a diminished security on January 6th, the day of the Trump “stop the steal’ rally at the Ellipse?
Demanding a full accounting for the events of January 6 can help us understand what happened. Monitoring the progress of congressional hearings, and any appointment of an investigatory commission, is important for defending our democracy. Citizens need to know what happened so they can petition grievances and protest malfeasance.
Looking beyond just the role of Mr. Trump in instigating the riot, one of the significant outcomes of the January 6th Capitol Riot / ‘Insurrection’ is that domestic terrorism is now a national priority and state surveillance apparatus has been deployed to round up hundreds of the rioters; in addition, a domestic terrorism law has been brought before Congress; the Capitol remains enclosed behind by an ugly security perimeter, which reinforces fear.
This was the end game for the Capitol Riot, to put on display evidence of American right wing terrorism and pass new laws and appropriations.
It appears as though Mr. Trump has functioned as a kind of pied piper to rally the hard right, gun loving activists into a trap. As an ironic reward for drinking the Trump Kool Aid / QAnon conspiracy, Trump followers got thrown under the bus, and the national security state establishment gets an opportunity to practice modern surveillance techniques and make a mass arrest, all in one fell swoop.
We can’t figure out if Mr. Trump is a leading participant in the operation to strengthen the hand of the security state, or if he was played for his reckless narcissism, or maybe there is a sick symbiosis between The Donald and the deep state, to stage an event that would rationalize increasing domestic security laws. We are not sure how to read it.
Nevertheless, without a doubt, Trump followers were duped into believing they were doing something meaningful for their leader, but in fact they were set up to take a fall. No sweeping pardon from the president, as many hoped. As a result, the state would have cause for a new round of domestic terrorism legislation similar to what was accomplished by the Patriot Act following the 9/11 event.
We need to ask ‘Cui bono,’ ‘who benefits,’ as a way to explain a motive, and construct a plausible explanation for what happened on January 6. What happened was not pure chance, an accident of events, but was a well planned riot. So, who are the winners and who the losers?
Based on numbers, the national security state is the actual winner. Now the FBI has arrested a number of rioters which requires each defendant to lawyer up; some will get public defenders, others private lawyers. But, the ranks of right wing militants have been seriously encumbered with legal woes. Will such woes reach up to the former president?
On the national security side of the ledger, proponents are advancing domestic terrorism legislation. Capitol police received over a billion dollars to retrofit security systems within the Capitol; but most significantly, the FBI now has a library of faces of de-facto trespassers, and more serious charges are being prepared for the ring leaders.The riot provided an opportunity to deploy modern digital forensic technology.
It remains to be seen if President Trump and his people who coordinated to help get the Jan. 6th event set up, will be prosecuted. So far, news reports highlight the arrest of frontline rioters but the media is silent about higher level personnel complicit in orchestrating the riot.
A shared script suggests coordination.
When the initial comments of the Capitol Police and Department of Army were reported, it revealed there was a shared language for a concern about the “optics” of national guard troops facing off with Trump supporters. That Capitol police chief and Department of Army initially used the same language to rhetorically spin the decision to not deploy troops as a concern with the ‘optics;’ shows coordination. The parroted line for ‘optics’ indicates a ‘script’ is being used and is a tell of a conspiracy to leave the Capitol perimeter unsecured so that the mob could break in easily.
Trump apologists are putting the blame for not posting National Guard on the morning of January 6 onto D.C. Mayor Bowser who in a letter to the Federal government objected to the heavy handed police tactics deployed in the summer and saying she did not want a repeat of that for the Trump rally. However, the January 4 memo from Assistant Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller limited National Guard to traffic duty and troops were forbidden to to face off with Trump followers, nor be equipped for riot control.
Miller told a congressional hearing that he was under orders from Mr. Trump to coordinate with Mayor Bowser and the Capitol Police regarding National Guard deployment. Miller denies he spoke with Mr. Trump on January 6th. However there was a hive of activity by lower level operatives.
Reporting posted on the Daily Kos examines the dithering to deploy National Guard troops at the Department of Defense and by Capitol police.
The report cites the curious connection that Mike Flynn’s brother, General Charles Flynn, is on hand at the time of deliberation suggesting a liaison to the White House and Department of Army. But there have been no reports that the Department of Army is being investigated, either by Congress or the FBI, for impeding the deployment of troops to secure the Capitol perimeter.
President Trump, is reported to have been pleased with the riot, giddily following the events closely on the TV after his speech at the Ellipse where he exhorted his followers about “going down to the Capitol” to ‘stop the steal.
But he did not succeed in stoping the steal nor holding onto the White House since Mike Pence refused to participate. So, what was it all really about? Was it just Mr. Trump giving the Congress a figurative kick in the balls?
From our vantage point of hindsight, it appears that Mr. Trump has served the very deep state the QAnon conspiracy claimed he opposed. On top of Mr. Trump grifting a final haul of campaign cash based on his ‘stop the steal’ claim, he delivered to the FBI several hundred white supremacists that are now designated domestic terrorists.
It is clear to us at CT that the Capitol Riot was more political theater than a serious attempt at an insurrection. Was it a false flag? At least it was a riotous act of vandalistic contempt for American democratic tradition; and it is a false flag in that the Deep State has made use of Mr. Trump’s shenanigans. Those that trespassed into the Capitol may end up paying a serious price. But Trump followers were played so that the state could have a fresh purpose to empower domestic security law.
But how high up the chain of command will the investigation into what happened actually go?
Will we learn the truth if a 9/11 style commission is assigned to investigate? Raising concerns of a cover up, Speaker Pelosi’s invocation of the 9/11 Commission as a model method for discerning the truth is a warning that we will get the opposite.
We take it as a matter of fact that the 9/11 Commission served to obfuscate, to cover up the true crime and close the book on September 11, 2001. The 9/11 Commission, like the Warren Commission, issued a false report and for the Speaker to invoke it is a tell for what to expect: another cover up.
However, the latest news indicates Mr. Trump is rallying his troops in the GOP to oppose a commission to investigate the 1/6 riot obviously concerned that it would endanger a Republican comeback in 2022.
Republicans clearly want to protect Mr. Trump and those that aided and abetted a weakened security perimeter act the Capitol. Indeed, MSM appears to be focusing attention on the corralling of the ring leaders of the riots but are stopping short of going to the top, to the Department of the Army and the White House.
As things stand, President Trump is subject to at least two civil law suits for his role in instigating the riot on the Capitol, but no criminal charges have been filed. Meanwhile, a few hundred of his followers are being prosecuted. We’ll see what happens, but we will be surprised if anything sticks to The Donald for his role in planning and inciting the riot. If a commission is not formed, an investigation could be advanced from the Justice Department; or Congress could develop a spine, build a jail in its basement and hold hearings subject to subpoena and sworn testimony, and jail time if found in contempt of Congress. There are a lot of people in Trump’s inner circle that deserve to testify under oath in front of a congressional sub-committee.
A Washington Post news report shows Proud Boys leader cursing President Trump for setting up his group and others for mass arrest associated with the January 6 Capitol Building riot.
Others close to Mr. Trump, Kash Patel, have made a Trump threw me ‘ under the bus’ claim, as reported in the Vanity Faire article that ironically provides Mr. Trump with cover from claims he directly advanced the riot on the Capitol. The article is interesting in that it appears to provide an official explanation for the Trump White House about what its people were doing around the lead up to the January 6 event. It exonerates the President of any wrong doing as well as Chris Miller and Kash Patel. The author writes for the national security circuit and appears to have high level clearance.
The NY Times reports “the Capitol Police and the city’s Metropolitan Police had rebuffed offers days before for more help from the National Guard beyond a relatively modest contingent to provide traffic control, so no additional troops had been placed on standby. It took just over four hours for them to arrive.” The Times will report a number of variables contributed to lax security around the Capitol, but suggests Capitol Police is partially to blame.
The headline of this article from NY Times sums up what we should anticipate will be the official version for shy the Capitol Riot occurred: “Muddled Intelligence hampered response to Capitol Riot.” What the article is silent on are discussions between January 4 and day of on January 6, and the discussions between Department of the Army and the White House and decisions to withhold security from the Capitol.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/10/us/politics/capitol-siege-security.html This article headline lays the blame for the Capitol Riot as the hands of multiple system failures on the part of domestic security apparatus; no mention of collusion at Pentagon on decision making; points to Muriel Bowser’s letter to feds about deploying overly militarized police in DC to deal with protesters.
https://www.alternet.org/2021/05/trump-mcconnell-mccarthy/ articles reports on Trump order to oppose commission to investigate Jan. 6.
Why a Commission will not work to reveal the truth of 1/6: