In the first of seven hearings to be broadcast to the public, the January 6 Committee on Thursday evening, June 9, presented its opening arguments in what appears to be a singular condemnation of former President Donald Trump. The big news story, however, is what was not brought up in the hearings. As is often the case, the greatest sin was that of omission.
The event sought to paint a portrait of a president intent on destruction, but missing from the hearing was the other side of the story. In fact, not only was evidence that presented a contrary argument absent from the proceedings but also a willingness to engage in deceptive editing was clearly on display.
Documents Show Otherwise
The crux of the committee’s argument against the former president is that he “wanted” his supporters to “storm” the Capitol building. The facts, unfortunately for the Democrat-led effort, do not match the narrative.
According to Representative Rodney Davis (R-IL), Trump attempted to ensure the whole area was adequately protected well in advance of the events in question. Speaking to John Solomon at Just The News, he noted:
“Trump took steps to try to protect the Capitol before the riot, such as having his Pentagon offer National Guard troops to Capitol Police on Jan. 2, 2021, and signing an order on Jan. 4 to deploy 20,000 Guardsmen if requested by Congress.”
Davis is in a unique position; his role as ranking member of the House Administration Committee means he has delved through all the evidence available regarding Capitol security. So why were Trump’s offers not accepted?
The Capitol police initially rejected the then-president’s offer of national guardsmen, but when former Police Chief Steve Sund changed his mind, his plea was rejected by the House sergeant at arms due to worries about political “optics.” Davis also states that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s assertions that she had nothing to do with the rejection of the National Guard proposal are “demonstrably false.”
Cheney Swings and Misses
As one of two Republicans accepted onto the committee by Pelosi, Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY) was supposed to act as a balance to dispel any notion of partisanship. That other representatives were rejected from taking their places does not support that narrative. Cheney came out swinging at the former president.
She presented a Trump tweet as evidence that he advocated for an attack on the Capitol, quoting, “these are the things and events that happen when a sacred landslide election victory is so unceremoniously and viciously stripped away from great patriots who have been badly and unfairly treated for so long.” And then she stopped reading.
Why, one wonders, would she stop there? Could it be because the words that concluded Trump’s message don’t fit the narrative being crafted? In reality, Trump finished that tweet by writing, “Go home with love and in peace. Remember this day forever.”
“Go home.” “In peace.” These are not the words of someone who wants events to continue – and that is why Cheney omitted them.
The Greatest Show On Earth?
That this whole circus is being stage-managed by James Goldston, the former president of ABC News and a very experienced television producer, should be a warning signal to those who expected to see something that befits the dignity of Congress. It is a theater of the absurd in which the players appear willing to engage in omission, factual editing, and faux passion to achieve their goal.
But what more can a nation expect from politicians who see any obstacle to their hold on power as an affront to democracy?
