Why Was the Stop-the-Steal Rally Different?
[politics
society
coup
]
My jaw dropped midway through reading the WaPo article “Outgoing Capitol Police chief: House, Senate security officials hamstrung efforts to call in National Guard”, by Carol D. Leonnig, Aaron C. Davis, Peter Hermann, and Karoun Demirjian.
Reading the article, you’re listening to the former Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund review what happened on January 6th and talk about why law enforcement was caught flat footed by the insurrectionists. How did they miss the possibility of an attack?
“We knew it would be bigger,” Sund said. “We looked at the intelligence. We knew we would have large crowds, the potential for some violent altercations. I had nothing indicating we would have a large mob seize the Capitol.”
Sure, there were claims that alt-right instigators had discussed storming the building and targeting lawmakers. But Sund said such threats had surfaced in the past.
“You might see rhetoric on social media. We had seen that many times before,” he said. “People say a lot of things online.”
Right-win rhetoric burn much hotter than their hateful actions. So a reasonable person woudl look to history and discount the rumors of an attack. But this were different on the 6th.
The Fuhrer had stood behind the rally podium 8000 people away and said the word ‘fight’ fifteen times. He fired them up. He stoked their righteous (misled) anger. He sent them charging into the halls of Congress.
This is clear and strong evidence of his direct role in sedition and murder.1
-
Apparently even White House Counsel Pat Cippilone thought so, and had Trump make his terrible video message that evening. ↩