January 6 Capitol Attack: Security Failures and Political Accountability

The committee aims to investigate security failures during the January 6 Capitol attack to prevent future occurrences.

### Examining the Events of January 6: Security Failures and Political Accountability
* 🗣 The discussion centers around the differences in objections raised during elections by Democrats and Republicans, emphasizing that the **Capitol was not attacked** prior to the speaker's objection on January 6.
* 📞 Speaker Pelosi's public statements regarding her communication with security officials are called into question, as it is revealed that there were **three calls** between her and a security official on the evening of the Capitol attack.
* 🔍 The dialogue highlights the need to investigate the **lack of security measures**, specifically the **absence of the National Guard** on January 6, and the implications of **political leadership** in these decisions.
* 🚨 The testimony reveals that the House Sergeant at Arms, appointed by Speaker Pelosi, was responsible for security and indicated concerns about the **"optics" of calling in the National Guard** during the chaos.
* 🤔 The conversation shifts to the former president's involvement, with questions about whether there was **coordination to overturn the election results**, which the witness **denies**.
* 📺 Vice Chair Cheney is praised for her **commitment to uncovering the truth** about the events of January 6, stressing the **importance of accountability to prevent future attacks on democracy**.
* ⚖ The dialogue also touches upon the **double standards perceived** in how political violence is addressed, contrasting reactions to the **January 6 events** with those from **summer protests**.
* 📅 Ultimately, the discussion serves as a reminder of the **ongoing need to address security failures** and the **political ramifications of the Capitol attack** to ensure such events do not occur again in the future.

and I briefed all of the leadership of the plans to get them back into chambers. That would have been call number three with Speaker Pelosi. So you didn't have one call, you didn't have two calls, you had three calls. So Speaker Pelosi's comments that she didn't speak to are inaccurate. That is correct, sir. Today we're here to discuss the security failures that occurred on January 6, 2021, and how we can prevent these failures from occurring again. Want to dive into the questions. Chief, in your transcribed interview, you mentioned that you met with the House Sergeant at Arms regarding the National Guard prior to January 6th. Is that correct? Yes, sir. And who was the House Sergeant at Arms leading up to and on January 6th? That would be Paul Irving. And the House Sergeant at Arms is appointed by who? Was appointed at that time by Speaker Pelosi. And in your transcribed interview, you mentioned that when you first brought up the National Guard to the House Sergeant at Arms in the days leading up to

January 6, uh, that Mr. Irving said he, quote, didn't like the optics, end quote. Is that correct? That is correct. He referenced being concerned for optics. And on January 6, when he went to Mr. Irving to get his approval to call in the guard, Mr. Irving said he would, quote, run it up the chain, end quote. Is that correct? Uh, yes, sir. That was a telephone call. I didn't see in person when I first made that request. The House Sergeant at Arms is considered probably the most senior security official on the House side. Uh, when Mr. Irving says he has to, quote, run it up the chain, end quote, what did that mean? Uh, I took that to mean his leadership chain. And who would be his leadership chain? If he's functionally the most senior, uh, security official on the House side, correct? That's his title. That's part of the title, the senior, um, law enforcement official for the House of Representatives. But he would have been referring to the leadership team that

goes up to Speaker Pelosi, so the political leadership team, meaning elected officials, not another security official. Is that correct, sir? He's the top security official for the House, so running up the chain would most likely, in your opinion, is through the speaker's office and possibly to Speaker Pelosi. That would be where it ends, yes. Okay, so let's park that there and then let's jump to a second set here. In a press conference on January 7th, Speaker Pelosi called for your resignation on national television. Speaker Pelosi also stated that she had not talked to you since the initial breach of the Capitol, but according to your transcribed interview, you're on the phone with Speaker Pelosi a few times. Can you explain that discrepancy? Yeah, that is correct. I spoke to Speaker Pelosi three times that evening, and she went on national TV and said I'd never spoken to her, but I spoke to her three times. The three

three times were the first time when I went over to brief uh president vice president Pence at the secure location. Um, I had called uh um house Sergeant arms Irving, told him I was going over to brief the vice president. I was also going over to do a personal assessment of the capital. At that point, things were getting under control. Uh, went over there, briefed him on when we can get them back into Chambers with, you know, Mr. Irving being fully aware. Uh, he said he wanted to get speaker Pelosi on the phone. He made a phone call from his cell phone at approximately 534. Uh, where I first briefed speaker Pelosi. Uh, the second call was when I left that location. As I was walking away, I met up with Mr. Stinger, and we started walking over to the Senate to go brief the Senate when uh, Jennifer Hemingway, I believe it was Jennifer Hemingway, handed me his cell phone, and it was Emily Barrett's cell calling her, and it was speaker Py on the other line. This is my second call was speaker Py questioning.

the information I'd given to Vice President Pence about when we can get back into Chambers. I assured her that information was correct. I could get them back into Chambers by 7 p.m. and the call ended. That was call number two. Call number three was 6:25 p.m. I was over at the Senate from the secure location, I mean from where the Senate had been sequestered, and on a cell phone using Robert Carum's cell phone. They dialed leadership who was over off-site, a secure location, and I briefed all of the leadership of the plans to get them back into Chambers. That would have been call number three with Speaker Pelosi. So, you didn't have one call, you didn't have two calls, you had three calls. So, Speaker Pelosi's comments that she didn't speak to are inaccurate. That is correct, sir. Let me let me sh gar go back as it relates to the optics of bringing people up to Capitol Hill and running things up the chain of command.

ultimately to the speaker's office. Do you think Speaker Pelosi's office or Speaker Pelosi herself, um, politicized Capitol Security? Um, I have no idea on that, sir. Okay, uh, any other clarifications you'd like to make as it relates to Speaker Pelosi's comments that you didn't speak to her? Um, I just, you know, wish he had considered that, wish he had considered some of the stuff that I faced and the efforts I went through, uh, to bring in the outside resources on that day before she called for our resignation. Thank you very much for being here. I yield back since that interview to go back and check the record. So when did you speak with the former president on January 6? Did you to the former president before, during, or after the attack on the Capitol? Of course, I've talked to the Pres. Of course, I've talked to the president. I've been clear about that. I talked to him all the time. Um, this is not about me, Mr. Chairman. I know you want to make it about me. You

want to make it about individuals, other individuals, but this is about the lack of a proper security presence that day. That's what this committee, if this commit going to do something that's worthwhile, that's what they should be investigating. Of course, I talked to the president. I talked to him that day. I've been clear about that. I don't recall the number of times, but it's not about me. I know you want to make it about that, but this is about the why wasn't. How about this? Why wasn't the National Guard here that day? Mr. chairman, if I can reclaim my time, I just want if you ask that question, if you asked the speaker, why wasn't the National Guard here? No, my question to you. I'm asking the question to you, and the question, did you talk to the president, former president, before, during, or after the attack on the capital, or was it all three? The reason I asked is, you know, you had 84 days since you said you couldn't.

remember and you would check. So if you could just clarify the record, was it before, during, or after the attack on talking to President after the attack. So not before or during, right? Okay. And you U and you not been clear about that. Well, but here let me ask you a question. You brought up January six. All right. But yeah, but my understanding is that you said to a reporter from political that you spoke to him during. So is now after the attack. Are you during? No, I did not speak to the president during the attack. Um, so you admitted to speaking to the former president on January 6, the same day you voted to overturn the election. You know, facts be damned. And although you've routinely suggested that you're just another member of Congress speaking with the president, your name comes up again and again in regards to efforts to overturn the election. Um, and um, there is even reporting that back on December 27th, then President Trump spoke with then Acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen and others to discuss how

to reverse Biden's win an official who was on that call Richard Dunu notes you Mr. Jordan as a lawmaker who was referenced this is the same meeting where President Trump told the Justice Department according to handwritten notes by Mr. Dyu and I quote just say that the election was corrupt and quote leave the rest to me and the uh and and and the and the and the and the our Congressman did you discuss with President Trump a coordinated effort to overturn the results of the election I have no idea what you're talking about I have no idea what that of course not but you brought up January 6 Mr. Chairman what you brought up January 6 and you said we tried to overturn the results of the election by simply objecting no I just know I said by by objecting I here's what here's what I know say I and I I I don't know okay well I hope I get a chance to respond I just don't know of another member of Congress who is as deeply meshed in all of this as you are.

and apparently you're unwilling to give some of the more specific answers to this committee today. Um, I guess are you willing to tell the select committee what you know about events leading up to during. I've been clear all along. I've got nothing to hide. I've been straightforward all along and just and just so you know. I mean I um I'm looking here um this is a political story here. Uh quote you says look I definitely spoke to the president that day. I don't recall. I know it was more than once. I just don't recall the times. This is to Olivia Beavers and you later said that I'm sure that one of the Trump involved calls took place in the safe room because we were in that room forever. I mean that's what you yeah after the think that's what I said but what does this have to do with what does this have to do with Steve Bannon. What does this have to do with Steve Benn's. I'm just you you I thought that's why we were

here yeah well in your in your opening you didn't mention stanning Mr. Gates. No, I mentioned, I guess I did mention Bon's name. I mentioned you very first about inflation. I no, I didn't. I said there are four batches of subpoena. The first batch Bannon Meadows Patel SC first name I mentioned. You got to go back. I'm sure the reporter can bring up the record. Yeah, I think, I think what I come away listening to your opening statement is that you're more outraged by people asking questions, not at all, than police being beat. I'm more outraged by the attack on people's First Amendment liberties, beaten here on January 6th, and lives of the people who work for all of us being at risk. And so January 6, Mr. Chairman, if can I respond to something? Yeah, you may. January 6, 2017, guess who the first person was to object to counting the Electoral College results for Mr. Trump? Guess who it was? It was me. It was you. Guess which state.

Alabama, which state? Alabama, a state President Trump won by 30 points. So, you can object to Alabama on January 6, 2017, and for 4 years, you guys can go after President Trump, the Trump-Russia investigation. You can do that for 4 years. In October of 2020, Hillary Clinton said just weeks before the election, she said the 2016 election was stolen. So, you guys can investigate that all based on lies for four years. We're not allowed to ask questions for 4 minutes about the 2020 election. We're not allowed to object in Pennsylvania where they unconstitutionally changed their election law. But you can object to Alabama? No. Well, I'm glad you raised that issue. All right, Mr. Rasin can object. So, all right, it's my time now. So, I raised the issue of Russian interference in our election. I also raised the issue of voter suppression, which was a real concern in that election. I took the action, and I said at the time, it's a

symbolic action. I had no Senator to join with me, but I wanted to make sure that the issue of voter suppression and potential... excuse me, please, that there's a difference here. I did not organize a rally or have meetings to actually plan to undermine an election, and the Capitol wasn't attacked before I made my objection. There's a difference, the difference being Democrats are allowed, but Republicans... if you don't want to testify here, you're free to leave. You keep saying all kinds of things, don't give me a chance to respond. Seriously, I... well, I've given you a chance to respond, you won't let me get a question out. All right, go ahead, ask your question. The Capitol wasn't attacked before, after I made my objection. The Vice President wasn't rushed to a secure location, his life wasn't threatened. President Obama at the time, you know, didn't tweet out a video saying he loved rioters. There wasn't even a vote on my objection, so there's a false equivalency here, is an attempt to...

whitewash what happened on that terrible, terrible day. I was the last person off the floor on January 6th, and I came face to face with these people in the speaker gallery. And I will tell you, if you want me to describe what evil looks like, it's looking into those faces, those people who, while three police officers were in front of the door trying to protect all of us, were smashing the windows open to get at people. And so, you know, the notion that there's all this outrage today over people asking questions, and there's not outrage over the fact that the police, the Capitol police, who are here to protect us and who do protect us every day, were beaten. You know, people lost their lives, other lives were threatened. The fact that somehow we are asking questions about trying to figure out why did this happen, who is responsible, that somehow that is a bad thing. Give me a break. Give me a break. I mean, and I, you know, I and I you

know someone. One of you mentioned political theater. You know, I don't know if this is a political theater. I don't know what is, but let me just say one of the most genuine statements that I have heard uttered in the capital was by Vice Chair Cheney, who to her credit is embracing the truth and asking her Republican colleagues to join with her in making sure that the questions are answered in a way so we, the American people, know what happens so it never, ever, ever happens again. I mean, all of us are concerned about the future of our democracy in the aftermath of what happened. We don't want to see that happen again. So that's what this is all about. So we could talk about inflation, we could talk about the border, you could talk about whatever you want to talk about, fine, you're at the rules committee, you can talk about whatever the hell you want to talk about, but the bottom line is I think what we're doing here today is absolutely

necessary. Can I respond? You may. I'm not trying to whitewash anything. Republicans have been consistent. We have condemned violence every stinking time it happened. We condemned it on January 6, and 600 people are being prosecuted and held accountable for what they did wrong, as well they should be. But it would have been nice if you guys would have condemned the violence in the summer of 2020 instead of making statements like my colleague just read. It would have been nice instead of the Vice President of the United States raising money to bail rioters out of jail. It would have been nice if you'd have done that. No, no, no. This double standard. You guys get to say all the things you did about Trump for four years. You get to have the summer of 2020 and call it peaceful protest. We condemn violence every single time. It had been nice if you guys have done the same. I am so sick of the double standard. Americans are so sick of the double standard. Well, I think

Many of us did condemn violence wherever it may occur. But you know, let me just say this: you can yell and scream as much as you want. The bottom line is no, I'm not yelling, screaming. I'm reflecting where the American people are. They had it with the double. American people saw you're allowed to object. We're not. No, you could object. That's not the issue. The issue is not whether or not you raised an objection, Mr. Jordan. The issue is what transpired that day. The issue is that we had nothing. Is that after, well, well, we'll see what the investigation leads. But after all of this time still, you know, you cannot say those five words that the election was not stolen. Um, with that, I'm happy to yield to the gentleman from um, uh, Oklahoma.

Whole Room ERUPTS as Capitol Police Chief REVEALS Pelosi's SECRETS role in Jan. 6 protest

Mony Tatsch

The discussion revolves around the security failures that occurred on January 6, 2021, with a focus on the lack of a proper security presence and the National Guard's absence.

The House Sergeant at Arms, Paul Irving, was appointed by Speaker Pelosi and was involved in the discussions about the National Guard prior to the event.

The conversation also highlights the double standard in condemning violence and the differing responses to protests in 2020.

Briefing the Vice President and Calls on January 6

The speaker briefed Vice President Pence and assessed the Capitol's situation, with Mr.

The speaker then received a call from Speaker Pye while walking to brief the Senate.

There was confusion about the timing of the speaker's call with the former president, and Mr.

Irving expressed concern about the optics of calling in the National Guard.

Jordan was referenced in a call with President Trump, who urged the Justice Department to declare the election corrupt.

The Congressman denies any involvement in a coordinated effort to overturn the election results.

Multiple calls were made to brief leadership on getting back into the Chambers, contradicting Speaker Pelosi's comments about not being in contact.

Testimony on January 6th Events and Political Theater

The speaker asserts they have been transparent about their interactions with the president on January 6th, mentioning multiple calls and a prolonged stay in the safe room.

They express concern about the future of democracy and the importance of answering questions about the events to prevent a recurrence.

The speaker criticizes the selective questioning and investigations related to the 2020 election, highlighting the issue of Russian interference and voter suppression as significant concerns.

Tensions Surrounding the January 6th Incident

The speaker expresses outrage over the attack on First Amendment liberties and the risk to people's lives on January 6th.

They highlight their role in objecting to the Electoral College results for Trump in 2017.

The discussion revolves around the controversy of objecting to the election results and the violence that occurred that day.

Testimony on Capitol Attack and Voter Suppression

The speaker emphasizes the difference between their actions and those of Republicans, denying any intention to undermine the election.

They clarify that the Capitol was not attacked before their objection and that there was no vote on it.

The speaker also addresses the discrepancy between their communication with Speaker Pelosi and her public statements, expressing frustration over the call for their resignation.