Jan. 6, 2021, marked a very dark day in our nation. As the Electoral College was meeting to choose our president for the next four years, 200 or so hooligans unleashed their pre-determined assault on the Capitol.
They were a mere .0002% of the hundreds of thousands gathered in D.C. to peacefully and patriotically protest. But this ugliness does not compare to the vitriolic attack levied by the Democrats, the media and Gig Tech against President Donald Trump. Even more tragic is the attack on the Constitution. I submit the following for the readers’ consideration.
It must be noted that references to the legal aspects are from some of America’s greatest legal minds. They include Prof Emeritus at Law Alan Dershowitz, Mark Levin, Jonathan Turley, Jeffrey Scott Shapiro, Jay Sekulow with the American Center for Law & Justice and Kenneth Starr. Where these men have diverse political opinions, they do share a common thread in that they believe in the Constitution as written. They are also defenders of the word of law, where the legal system treats everyone equally.
Trump is accused of inciting an insurrection or a riot. Please listen, again, to his speech of Jan. 6 with an open mind. Listen to what he said and did not say. Listen to his voice inflections and voice tones. Note his facial expressions and read his body language. This statement is the gist of what he said: “I know that everyone here will soon be marching to the Capitol to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”
Debunking the accusation
The speech Dershowitz said, “Nothing in the president’s speech came close to inciting a riot and was not an impeachable offense. It was completely protected by Amendment One of the U.S. Constitution. To say that he had anything to do with the violence beforehand or during his speech is ludicrous, disingenuous and without merit.”
Levin put it this way. “He did not advocate acts of violence or destruction. He did not direct the protesters to breach security, attack police officers, threaten lawmakers, commit acts of looting and vandalism or rioting. He did none of that. There is a difference in advocating protests and citing public unrest.”
The timeline also indicates President Trump. The New York Times, CNN’s Wolf Blitzer and Don Lemon, ABC’s David Muir, and two CBS Evening News persons reported with documentation that there was a lot of preparations done by groups intending to “wage war” in D.C. on Jan. 6. The FBI knew it days before. This begs answers to a series of questions. Why did the FBI not notify the Washington Metro Police, the Capitol Police, and the respective sergeants-at-arms of the House and Senate? And why did the FBI not alert the Secret Service, knowing that the president was to speak on the mall that day? And why did numerous pleas for the National Guard go unheeded?
John Solomon, CEO and editor-in-chief of Just the News and an accomplished investigative journalist, found that the attack on the Capitol commenced 20 minutes before the president ended his speech.
The ‘snap’ impeachment
There was an immediate rush to “justice” with the logic and fervor of a lynching. The House of Representatives led by Speaker Nancy Pelosi immediately began their dastardly charade to impeach the president for the second time in his first term and with only nine days left to serve! Why? What were the motives for such a rush job?
The motivations behind this “bovine scatology” is quite apparent. They are to destroy the legacy of Trump. They are to destroy the person Donald Trump. They are to wipe out the MAGA doctrine and to thwart the Keep America Great polity started by Trump. But most of all, it was an attempt to disqualify his running for president again. The Dems know that they will not be able to beat him in 2024 after four years of failed Socialist Democrat policies. In other words, drive the final nail into Trump’s political coffin.
Editor’s note: Look for the second part of this column in Sunday’s News-Journal.