January 6 remains an enigma in American history. I think the conventional leftist take, i.e., "sedition", "insurrection", etc., is hyperbolic nonsense. This was not a coordinated, armed invasion of the Capitol. There is no doubt the a large mob overwhelmed an outnumbered Capitol Police staff, the crowd manhandled and assaulted police, and there was property damage. But the protestors had breached the Capitol roughly 2PM, and lawmakers were evacuated to safety within 20 or so minutes. Over the next 3 hours or so, arrangements are made to reinforce the Police, and the first National Guard members reach the Capitol. Two hours later, the Capitol is secured.
Make no mistake: I hold Trump responsible for the events that happened; he's the one who deliberately set the time and place of his rally on the day Congress was due to ratify Biden's election. He unambiguously wanted rallygoers to confront the Congress over the vote. I don't think he necessarily intended a physical breach of the Capitol, manhandling security, etc., but he knew that some of his supporters were very enthusiastic and would think they had his wink and a nod support. In fact, he retweeted a tweet before the rally reassuring him "the Calvary was coming". After all, Trump had a history of saying stuff like if his supporters roughed up protesters at his rallies, he would cover their legal bills. But he peppered his speech and tweets with enough "law and order" references for plausible deniability.
I have held Trump responsible for dereliction of duty and hence supported his impeachment and conviction, not so much on the Democrats' legally dubious incitement charge, although I think an argument can be made that the Congress has discretion in determining what constitutes a Constitutional crime. Trump as POTUS had a duty to ensure protection of the other branches of government through his Commander in Chief responsibilities, whether or not he agrees with their likely decisions.
Now I've made it clear (and this was behind the thread on which I was suspended by Twitter for using the R-word against a progressive troll) that the Congressional leadership should be held responsible for not approving a proactive request for National Guard assistance. The record shows even on the day of the attack, police chief Sund contacted Sergeants at Arms Irving and Stenger (members of the Capitol Police Board, which can approve National Guard assistance) around 1 PM. We know Irving gave his approval around 2:10 PM. But it would take roughly another hour-plus for Acting DoD Secretary Miller to issue approval for National Guard. Keep in mind DoD had put some bureaucratic obstacles in front of local National Guard deployment before Jan. 6, including direct approval by Miller or Army Secretary McCarthy. But Chief Sund clearly misled an inquiring Democratic Congressman that the Capitol Police were prepared, well-staffed, and the National Guard was on standby. Not to mention Trump had muddied the water by insisting that Miller do all he could do to protect his rallygoers, presumably from leftist/Antifa attacks. Even in the midst of the Jan. 6 invasion Trump tried to blame the Antifa bogeyman.
As House Sergeant Irving and DoD officials would later explain, there was a reluctance on the part of the Congress and the military for the optics of a military presence on Capitol Hill. Even in the cited timeline of Jan. 6 events, you read about discussions about workarounds like having National Guard troops substituting for area police who themselves would go to the Capitol.
Now let's be clear: there had been buzz in the media for some time that the Trump rally could go rogue. Sund quibbled on what exact intelligence had been shared with him.. But reports indicated the Pentagon reached out to offer National Guard assistance 3 days before the rally and the Justice Department had called to offer FBI assistance, and both offers were turned down. We do not need a conspiracy to explain bureaucratic inertia and incompetence, the unwillingness to step up, take initiative, and accept responsibility. I still feel strongly that the House and Senate leadership had a proactive responsibility to ensure adequate safety for their members on Jan. 6. Ultimately, Pelosi and McConnell bear responsibility for that. As I mention during the Twitter exchange, I don't hold Pelosi solely responsible. I don't know the specifics of what she was told or when. Did Irving wrongly assume she would have objected to National Guard on Capitol Hill? I do think if she had taken a proactive stand, she would have told Irving to accept the offer. And ultimately she must take responsibility for Irving's decision because he was accountable for her. I'm absolutely convinced if National Guard had been on the scene, there would have been no breach of the Capitol.
Now as to Babbitt and Hodgkins. my personal take is they were more bystanders swept up in the moment, not ringleaders, of the incursion. I am not aware of any assault or property damage for which they were responsible. Did they violate federal policies on access to the Capitol? Absolutely. Should they be accountable for that? Yes.
I'm more concerned about the use of deadly force by police against Babbitt, who was shot going through a broken window. Babbitt, a USAF veteran, shouldn't have trespassed and should have been held responsible for her actions, but I strongly disagree that trespass is a capital offense. Babbitt was unarmed and did not pose a mortal risk to the policeman who killed her. As a libertarian, I'm appalled--for much of the same reasons I objected to the unnecessary use of force against Eric Gardner and George Floyd.
The rank hypocrisy of Twitter partisan leftists commenting on Babbitt's execution is offensive. I do wish that Trump's making Babbitt out to be a martyr for his cause wasn't helpful. The fact that Babbitt was a Trumpkin is more than enough to earn Twitter attacks. I would have opposed Babbitt's homicide if she had been a Bidenkin. But I've seen countless tweets of the type that "Babbitt was an insurrectionist or guilty of sedition; she ignored the policeman's order to 'cease and desist', so she had it coming; cry me a river." Personally, I think Babbitt got caught up in the moment and probably never started the day thinking she would end up crawling through a broken window at the Capitol.
Finally, commenting on the Hodgkins' conviction, I'll simply point to an earlier blog clip of Ron Paul's recent discussion of the "show trial". Hodgkins was one of the rallygoers who got caught up in the euphoria of the Jan. 6 incursion and was caught in photographs having trespassed into the Senate. He has been cooperative, was sentenced to 8 months in prison and fined for a share of damages. But I had to toll my eyes at reading that pompous ass US District Judge Randolph Moss self-righteously rail against Hodgkins' crimes against democracy. Seriously, dude; this was more like a supersized frat house prank. you almost wish "Moonstruck" Cher would bitch-slap Ross and tell him to snap out of it.
