House Republicans gathered a trove of text and email messages showing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s office was directly involved in the creation and editing of the Capitol security
plan that failed during the Jan. 6, 2021 riot and that security officials later declared they had been “denied again and again” the resources needed to protect one of the nation’s most sensitive buildings.
You can read the full report, which was first reported by John Solomon of Just the News, through this link.
Mr. Solomon’s reporting concludes the Capitol was left vulnerable on Jan. 6 as a result of failures by the Democratic leadership in the House and law enforcement leaders in the Capitol Police who allowed concerns about the “optics” of having armed officers and National Guardsmen visible to the public to override the need for enhanced security.
“Leadership and law enforcement failures within the U.S. Capitol left the complex vulnerable on January 6, 2021. The Democrat-led investigation in the House of Representatives, however, has disregarded those institutional failings that exposed the Capitol to violence that day,” the report concluded.
It also corroborated prior reporting by Just the News that Capitol Police began receiving specific warnings in mid-December that there could be significant violence planned against the Capitol and lawmakers by protesters planning to attend the certification of the 2020 election results.
“Prior to that day, the U.S. Capitol Police (USCP) had obtained sufficient information from an array of channels to anticipate and prepare for the violence that occurred,” the report noted.
The report making public the Pelosi team's damning internal communications was compiled by Republican Reps. Rodney Davis, Jim Banks, Troy Nehls, Jim Jordan and Kelly Armstrong that encompasses the results of months of investigation they did of evidence that had been ignored by the Democrat-led Jan. 6 committee. The lawmakers were authorized by Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy to do their own probe.
It is particularly noteworthy that the report goes to great lengths to protect the identities of the line officers and analysts who participated in interviews. Sources who cooperated with this investigation described retaliation by USCP leadership for their participation in this investigation and other investigations into the events of January 6, 2021. Additionally, the Staff Director for the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol, David Buckley, has a track record of acting in a retaliatory manner against whistleblowers. For those reasons, this report uses “USCP source” to cite or otherwise refer to conversations with USCP employees who are not in leadership positions.
Also of note was the revelation that rather than address these systemic issues, USCP leadership ramped up its intelligence gathering work as it relates to private citizens who meet with Members of Congress and Senators, including extensive research on private residences and other meeting venues. This investigation found that the information collected against private citizens exercising their constitutional rights with respect to meeting Members of Congress is not in fact used for security purposes in some cases.
This issue, and others – especially those that touch on the constitutional rights of private citizens – require additional scrutiny by the relevant committees of Congress. We urge CHQ readers and friends to read the full report, which may be accessed through this link.
Here’s just one crucial finding of the report regarding former Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s culpability for the J6 protest turning into breach of the Capitol:
On February 9, 2022, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi said, “I have no power over the Capitol Police.” This is false. Documents provided by the House Sergeant at Arms show how then-House Sergeant at Arms Paul Irving carried out his duties in clear deference to the Speaker, her staff, and other Democratic staff. The Speaker’s statement created uncertainty and confusion with respect to the historical reporting structure for the HSAA and USCP.
House Rules dictate in several circumstances that the Sergeant at Arms (SAA) is to report directly to the Speaker of the House, including when the House is in session for, the Sergeant at Arms is to “maintain order under the direction of the Speaker and other
presiding officer” and “execute the commands of the House, and all processes issued by authority thereof, directed to the Sergeant at Arms by the Speaker.”
Pursuant to the House Rules and for other reasons, the Sergeant at Arms in practice serves under the direction of the Speaker. Accordingly, the Speaker and other Democratic staff routinely have meetings with the Sergeant at Arms and staff. This dynamic is not unique to this Speaker or this House Sergeant at Arms. Indeed, because the Speaker is the highest ranking Constitutional Officer of the first branch of Government, this structure is neither novel nor controversial. What is novel, however, is a Speaker who denies the relationship and ignores her office’s obligation to secure the Capitol, perhaps in an effort to shift blame.
Indeed, Speaker Pelosi exercised her authority with respect to the safety and security of the House of Representatives when she directed the use of magnetometers outside the House chamber in the name of safety. She announced the use of punitive fines for Members who refused to go through the metal detectors. Similarly, she required masks in the House chamber and around the House Office Buildings.
The Speaker also exerted influence on security protocols at the Capitol related to the
perimeter fence. Following January 6, 2021, the fence was quickly erected and remained up until July of that year when Congressional leaders started getting pressure to take it down.
Again, we urge CHQ readers and friends to read the full report, which may be accessed through this link.
January 6 protest
capitol security plan
2020 election certification
House Sergeant at arms