Pelosi Exposed: House Sergeant at Arms Accused of ‘Covering for Her’ on Capitol Riots Security

Written by Kyle Becker
Advertisements

Speaker Nancy Pelosi has carefully tried to stage-manage the fallout of the Capitol riots. She has proposed a 9/11-style commission, headed by a blatantly partisan general, in order to purportedly get to the bottom of what really happened on January 6th.

The decision came on the same day she was served notice by high-ranking Republicans that she herself has many serious questions to answer regarding the Capitol attacks.

The questions include what she knew about reports of a planned attack on the Capitol building; why security requests from the former Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund was turned down by the House and Senate Sergeant at Arms six times; and why the Capitol security was so woeful that police officers even held the doors open for rioters and gawked as unarmed miscreants took over the Senate chamber.

Speaker Pelosi is now being accused of having weakened security before and during the Capitol riots due to “optics.” A report from the Daily Caller citing multiple anonymous sources say the former House Sergeant at Arms is “covering for her.”

The Daily Caller provides a timeline that exposes the problematic timing of Irving reportedly being contacted on the request.

The New York Times previously reported that the Speaker’s office confirmed that the National Guard was approved around 1:43 pm. Sund said he sent a request for help from the National Guard to Irving around 1:09 p.m, according to CNN. Irving said he was contacted about the matter after 2:00 pm, Axios reported. Sources questioned how Irving got the request after 2 pm but Pelosi approved the request at 1:43 pm.

“If you believe Irving’s timeline that he testified under oath to, how could he ask for permission from the Speaker 20 minutes before he got the request?” one of the sources told the Daily Caller.

“Also if you believe his sworn testimony that he never had to run the request up the chain, why did the Speaker’s office confirm he did just that?” the same source continued.

“Irving is covering for Pelosi. There’s no doubt,” another said.

The Daily Caller explained why the sources are not currently public.

“The three sources who confirmed the discussion to the Daily Caller did so under the condition of anonymity, citing the fear of putting a chill on further witnesses to how the security situation unfolded Jan. 6,” the DC stated. “The discussion, if accurate, raises questions as to what role Pelosi’s office had in the security failures that resulted in the resignations of both Irving and former Chief of Capitol Police Steven Sund. Pelosi’s Deputy Chief of Staff Drew Hammill did not deny the allegations in a statement to the Daily Caller.”

The National Pulse reported that not only was there a delay getting approval, but that it took hours for more National Guard to be on the scene, despite supposedly being on ‘stand by.’

At 1:09pm, still before the President had finished speaking, Sund called the Sergeants-at-arms of the House and Senate. He told them it was time to call in the National Guard. He even said he wanted an emergency declaration. Both, however, said they would “run it up the chain” and get back to him.

At 1:50pm the Capitol itself was breached. Still before most Trump speech attendees could have arrived.

What happened after this point was a back and forth over hours between D.C. officials, Army officials, and Capitol police.

Eventually – at past 5pm – the National Guard arrived.

It is important to note that the questions are not merely about what happened during the confusion of the Capitol riots, but in the days prior.

Former Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund told the Congress six times there was a high risk of rioting days before the building assault. After Speaker Pelosi forced Sund to resign following the riot, he wrote her a letter explaining exactly what went wrong. The House and Sergeant at arms were forced to resign.

Advertisements

“Sund told the Post that House Sergeant-at-Arms Paul Irving was concerned with the ‘optics’ of declaring an emergency ahead of the protests and rejected a National Guard presence,” NPR reported. “He says Senate Sergeant-at-Arms Michael Stenger recommended that he informally request the Guard to be ready in case it was needed to maintain security.”

His requests for additional National Guard troops would be turned down.

“Former Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund said he requested that the National Guard be placed on standby in the days before the deadly riot at the U.S. Capitol, but House and Senate security officials turned him down,” the USA Today reported.

The risk of a violent riot breaking out at the January 6th Electoral College session of Congress, following a contested election that would see Donald Trump purportedly “incite” a protest, was anticipated in detail as early as last March.

This was revealed in a Time piece that exposes a full-out effort by radical groups, powerful corporations, and labor unions to “fortify” the U.S. election and keep it from being won by Donald Trump. The Time article also reveals coordination among these influential left-wing groups and radical activists to keep a low-profile at the riots.

Testimony was also entered into the Senate record today from J. Michael Waller, who attested that ‘agents provocateurs’ had infiltrated and agitated the Capitol Riots crowd.

Furthermore, concrete intelligence from early December suggesting foreign influence in the origins of the planned Capitol Building assault has since been reported by CBS News’ Catherine Herridge.

Everyone in D.C. had to have known it would be a powderkeg; just like it was following Donald Trump’s election and his inauguration in 2017, which also saw violent and destructive rioting.

In mid-November, Speaker Pelosi was asked about the propensity of Trump supporters for violence as long as the election objections continued.

Pelosi responded that the words of the president of the United States “weigh a ton,” and while President Trump did not create the problem of (right-wing) violence, “I think he fans the flames.”

“His words weigh a ton. They weigh a ton,” she said. “And people hear things in a way that could encourage some unfortunate situations, as they have done in the State of Michigan.” Pelosi was referring to a plot against Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer.

“There is this element in our country — I don’t think Donald Trump created it, but I think he fans the flames,” he added. “And I think that’s a dangerous situation.”

Earlier, on June 2, 2020, Pelosi called Trump a “fanner of the flames” after police had cleared protesters from outside the White House a day before.

Advertisements

Nancy Pelosi therefore knew and even spoke about the threat from extremists before the Capitol riots.

Despite Speaker Pelosi’s paranoia about Trump supporters and her track record of blaming them for violence, there was a glaring lack of security prior to the extremists’ planned attack on the Capitol building.

Why?

NOW READ:

Ex-Capitol Police Chief’s Testimony Blows Up Dem Narrative About Capitol Riot Attack


OPINION: This article contains commentary which reflects the author's opinion.