Steve Baker - TPC
News • Politics • Writing
Thanks for visiting the TPC Locals community. We're in the fight for Constitutional liberties and small government, for the long haul. We hope you'll join us.
Interested? Want to learn more about the community?
For Those Keeping Score (Not the World Cup . . . the Oath Keepers Trial)

Below are the 13 Counts for which each of the defendants in the Oath Keepers trials are charged. You'll note that Counts 7 - 13, (Tampering with Documents or Proceedings and Aiding and Abetting), are a catch-all of basically the same charge, varying only in what type of "document" or electronic message a particular defendant is alleged to have deleted or tried to hide after January 6, 2021.

You'll also note that not everyone is identically charged, and some of the counts are not applied to the defendants in this trial, as they are charged against other of the Oath Keepers in the second, upcoming trial -- which are all listed in this linked indictment: https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/case-multi-defendant/file/1514876/download

One thing I've found curious since the superseding indictment was issued, is that none of those who actually entered the Capitol Building have been charged with what I call the "glorified trespassing" crime. In fact, none of the four common misdemeanor charges -- which the overwhelming number of J6 defendants face -- have been applied against the defendants in this trial, though they certainly should have been . . . if Lady Justice were in fact blind and impartial. Those four misdemeanors not applied in this case:

-Entering and Remaining in a Restricted Building or Grounds
-Disorderly and Disruptive Conduct in a Restricted Building or Grounds
-Disorderly Conduct in a Capitol Building
-Parading, Demonstrating, or Picketing in a Capitol Building

It's almost as if the DOJ didn't want to give the jury a "way out" of convicting these guys of anything other than the listed felony charges. (Hmmm.) For instance, Ken Harrelson was originally charged with "Entering and Remaining in a Restricted Building or Grounds," but that charge was dropped once he was folded into the superseding "Elmer Stewart Rhodes III, et al" seditious conspiracy indictment.

As some "verdict watchers" are predicting the jury will come back with their verdicts after lunch, today, I thought I'd better get my blank scorecard ready. Here it is. (I'll add "guilty" or "not guilty" as each are read):

Elmer Stewart Rhodes III

1 - Seditious Conspiracy
2 - Conspiracy to Obstruct and Official Proceeding
3 - Obstruction of an Official Proceeding and Aiding and Abetting
4 - Conspiracy to Prevent an Officer from Discharging any Duties
7 - Tampering with Documents or Proceedings and Aiding and Abetting

Kelly Meggs

1 - Seditious Conspiracy
2 - Conspiracy to Obstruct and Official Proceeding
3 - Obstruction of an Official Proceeding and Aiding and Abetting
4 - Conspiracy to Prevent an Officer from Discharging any Duties
5 - Destruction of Government Property and Aiding and Abetting
8 - Tampering with Documents or Proceedings and Aiding and Abetting

Kenneth Harrelson

1 - Seditious Conspiracy
2 - Conspiracy to Obstruct and Official Proceeding
3 - Obstruction of an Official Proceeding and Aiding and Abetting
4 - Conspiracy to Prevent an Officer from Discharging any Duties
5 - Destruction of Government Property and Aiding and Abetting
9 - Tampering with Documents or Proceedings and Aiding and Abetting

Jessica Watkins

1 - Seditious Conspiracy
2 - Conspiracy to Obstruct and Official Proceeding
3 - Obstruction of an Official Proceeding and Aiding and Abetting
4 - Conspiracy to Prevent an Officer from Discharging any Duties
5 - Destruction of Government Property and Aiding and Abetting
6 - Civil Disorder and Aiding and Abetting

Thomas Caldwell

1 - Seditious Conspiracy
2 - Conspiracy to Obstruct and Official Proceeding
3 - Obstruction of an Official Proceeding and Aiding and Abetting
4 - Conspiracy to Prevent an Officer from Discharging any Duties
13 - Tampering with Documents or Proceedings and Aiding and Abetting

post photo preview
Interested? Want to learn more about the community?
What else you may like…
Videos
Podcasts
Posts
Articles
48 Seconds of J6 Reality

This is 48 seconds of the most instructive video I took on January 6, 2021. This short look at my walk from the Washington Monument lawn to the Capitol Building was shot at 1:10 p.m. Six minutes before Trump left The Ellipse stage. Thousands of people are already making their way down the various boulevards to the legally-permitted events and marches that were scheduled on and around the Capitol.

If you do a frame-by-frame look, you'll see the heart of middle America. Senior and middle-aged citizens, children, and far too many typically overweight folks struggling to make the mile-to-mile-and-a-half walk in the cold and windy conditions. There are also a few things you won't see:

Those who intended violence and criminal deeds are not among them. You see no gas masks, helmets, or blunt-force objects. You don't see professional photographers with their expensive gear. They, and those who intended violence, as well as their agents provocateur were already gathered on the lower west terrace ...

00:00:47
Live Streamed on December 16, 2022 6:00 PM ET
Supporter Exclusive Live Stream at 6pm-ET

I hope you can join me for this quick update on all that is going on. Especially, significant updates on my involvement in J6-related investigations. (I was in 'up to my neck' . . . then I thought I could wade out to 'waist-deep' . . . but I'm now back up to my eyebrows. Ha!)

Even if you can't join live, please be sure to watch the recorded playback, ASAP.

See you at 6pm-ET!

00:49:58
pdf preview
live_stream.pdf
Live Streamed on December 7, 2022 9:00 PM ET
Open Forum Live Stream, TONIGHT - 9pm-ET

Let's all jump on a live stream tonight, with no script or agenda from me, whatsoever. Not that I don't have a million things on my mind, but I want to talk about what YOU want to talk about . . . or at least hear what I think about what YOU are most interested in.

Bring your questions, at 9pm-ET. No holds barred. Nothing off limits. Ask TPC . . . anything.

See you then!!

00:49:33
pdf preview
live_stream.pdf
In Case You Missed It . . .

Here's my interview with Dan Newman, from yesterday's TNN Live. I'm keeping this one as a Locals exclusive. You'll understand why, after listening. I got a tad 'excited.' 😏

In Case You Missed It . . .
My Appearance This Morning on TNN Live w/ Dan Newman

A quick update on the current chaotic state of affairs with the Oath Keepers trial.

My Appearance This Morning on TNN Live w/ Dan Newman
Good Morning from the Swamp!

I tried - twice last night - to record a Day 10 of OKs trial podcast update. 33 minutes into my second attempt, I just mentally cracked. It's just exhaustion and info-overload. But, I do have the link to my TNN interview yesterday, (audio file attached here).

I'm also being interviewed by Julie Kelly tonight. She's been following and sharing my daily Tweetstorm. That may also have to serve as my Day 11 report.

Anyway . . . I am posting my raw Tweetstorm notes here, everyday now, for those of you who aren't TL;DR.

Time to get to work!

Steve

Good Morning from the Swamp!

World War III?

San Antonio Needs to Remember the Alamo

Looks like we need some modern day Bowies and Crocketts to ride to Cantu’s defense. Surely Texans will surround Moses Rose’s Hideout when the time comes, and prevent the dripping irony of San Antonio’s eminent domain designs from succeeding?

Just like my new friends at The Big Board in D.C. — a restaurant that defied mask and vaccine mandates imposed by the city — sometimes a principled ‘last stand’ is necessary.

Governmental abuses of this nature really get my juices flowing. If the time comes, and they aim the bulldozers at the Hideout . . . I’ll ride.

Join me? It would be one hellaciously fun TPC Meet-up! (And hopefully we’d fair better than Crockett, Bowie & company.)

https://reason.com/2023/01/25/the-alamo-is-trying-to-eminent-domain-this-mans-bar-to-make-way-for-museum-honoring-alamo-defenders/

14 hours ago

Ok, who needs a laugh this morning?

post photo preview
post photo preview
Capitol Police Were Sacrificial Pawns on Jan. 6 - (Part 2)
The Purposeful Under-Deployment of Capitol Police Resulted in Cascading Tragedies

Despite U.S. Capitol Police (USCP) and Congressional investigators' claims to the contrary, evidence is slowly emerging that USCP officers were purposefully under-deployed on January 6, 2021. (Something this writer has suspected and investigated for over two years.)

Recent testimonies by USCP officers in the various J6 trials, newly-acquired access to USCP radio transmissions, and USCP whistleblower statements are giving us direct answers to that question. They are also revealing the very real possibility there has been a cover-up to keep this hidden from the American public.

There have been less than 300 J6 rioters charged with criminal violence against police. Arguably, had the USCP been "all hands on deck" that day, there would have been no breach of the Capitol Building. As such, Ashli Babbit and three other protestors would likely still be alive. Four members of the USCP and DC Metro Police, along with a growing number of J6'ers, (those being federally prosecuted for their actions on January 6), might not have taken their own lives in the aftermath.

Then, of course, there are the stories of those hundreds of "accidental tourists" who have had their lives thrown into chaos, even ruined, just for walking through an open Capitol Building door. Maybe even . . . one of those doors that was held open by a USCP officer.

——

Much of the phenomena surrounding PDS, (police derangement syndrome), that I mentioned in Part 1 of this series played out in my social media threads after posting that story. Despite my long-term and ongoing belief that many of the unfolding events of January 6 were pre-planned, organized, manipulated, and allowed to proceed . . . there are quite a few who are convinced the frontline, uniformed USCP officers were knowingly complicit. Here's a sampling of the comments:

‘The Capitol Police were willing participants by following those D.C. fascists’ orders. I have no sympathy for them or their families.”

“Don’t sign up to collect a paycheck defending a corrupt government.”

“They're a disgrace to the Uniform and America. How f-ing dare they.”

Another, directed at me and my investigations, specifically:

“You're being played.”

The far left was not silent, either. They generally express the sentiment that every USCP officer should have replicated Lt. Michael Byrd’s lone shot and created a thousand more Ashli Babbitts. Unlike much of recent history, most of the modern left is oddly all-in on Back the Blue as far as January 6 is concerned.

Still . . . well over 90% of those who read Part 1 offered positive feedback. (Thank you.)

An important point made in Part 1, is that I have often been forced to reevaluate initial assumptions about what I saw as more evidence is either revealed or clarified. For instance, in my first article about January 6, posted on January 13, 2021, I misidentified the “fluorescent-sleeved jackets of . . . officers racing down steps toward the first upper tier above street level,” as “Capitol Police.” They were not. Those were members of the D.C. Metropolitan Police (MPD). Many of those who negatively responded to Part 1, were also misidentifying the actions of certain law enforcement officers as those from the USCP, when in fact they were part of the MPD.

This might seem a minor distinction — especially amongst the All Cops Are Bastards (ACAB) crowd — but these details are eminently important for us to get exactly right as we work our way toward discovering, and then eventually presenting to the American people, the topmost truth about the day. Namely . . . who it was ‘up the chain,’ that either set up, orchestrated, or allowed those events to transpire.

To the many as yet unanswered questions, curious events, and suspiciously-unindicted characters, we don’t have to agree on the detailed interpretation of each of these. We also don’t have to agree on every single event, video capture, or behavior of each police officer to come to a mutual agreement on a point I’ve made many times regarding January 6: 

“I saw bad people doing bad things, good people doing good things, and even good people who did really stupid things.”

This applies to both individual protestors and individual police officers, alike.

My video captured no police presence at
Washington Monument lawn on January 6th

My questions about the deployment, orders, and actions of the U.S. Capitol Police (USCP) on January 6 began in my first published article. From the moment my Uber driver dropped me off at the Washington Monument, (at approximately 9:30 a.m.), and until I arrived at the lower west terrace of the Capitol Building, (at exactly 1:19 p.m.), I never saw, nor did my camera capture the presence of a single law enforcement officer.

As that crowd grew from tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands, can you imagine not seeing any police presence mingled with such a throng, in the nation’s Capital? There were most certainly police and Secret Service at The Ellipse — where the president would be speaking — but the density of the crowd prevented me from getting into that area. When I began my walk toward Capitol Hill, again, not a single police officer was seen. As I approached the Peace Monument, I could hear sirens signaling the arrival of MPD units. At the reflection pool, I could then see the fluorescent jackets of MPD officers streaming down steps to the lower west terrace.

That’s when I heard the first flash-bang grenades and saw the release of tear gas in the distance. No barricades or police lines were inhibiting my approach — as they’d already been removed by the initial agitators and provocateurs — so I broke out in a run to that lower terrace and began capturing the unfolding violence at exactly 1:19 p.m. (Only three minutes after President Trump exited The Ellipse stage.)

For a solid year, I publicly asked, “Why wasn’t there a police presence at the Monument lawn?” “Why didn’t I see any police on the mile-long walk to the Capitol?” “Why were there so few USCP officers on duty at the Capitol, itself . . . considering the planned rally, marches, and events scheduled on the Capitol lawn that day?”

I initially estimated that fewer than 200 USCP officers were at the Capitol Building on January 6. A year later, on the first anniversary of the event, I returned to D.C. and attempted to get some of these questions answered. I tried to ask USCP officers those questions, and I also wanted to know what their orders were that day. I was especially interested in what I perceived to be a stand-down order at approximately 2:00 p.m. None of the officers I queried would answer.

They wouldn’t speak to me, at all, about anything.

On December 16, 2021, Forbes made a convoluted attempt to answer the question about USCP deployment at the Capitol on January 6:

“USCP documents show that at 2pm on that day, only 1,214 officers were ‘on site’ across the Capitol complex of buildings. Congressional investigators concluded, however, that USCP could only account for 417 officers and could not account for the whereabouts of the remaining 797 officers.”

Hmmm.

When I met with the former USCP officer turned whistleblower, Lt. Tarik Johnson, he told me that as the first wave of violence began on J6, my initially-published estimate of “less than 200“ USCP officers at the Capitol Building was very close to the mark. 

Johnson further explained that during all previously scheduled protest events, the standard operating procedure was for the USCP to be in an “all hands on deck” stance. On those kinds of days, officers working the night shift were required to stay over and remain on duty through the next day. But on January 6, USCP command was sending those officers home once they’d completed their shifts.

In a follow-up phone conversation I had with Johnson -- just today -- he went even deeper into revealing the specific deceptions the USCP has floated about force deployment on January 6. Concerning those USCP “documents” and “Congressional investigators” that were said to conclude, “could not account for the whereabouts of the remaining 797 officers,” Johnson clarified thusly: 

“It’s a bald-faced lie, and you can quote me on that.”

Johnson explained to me that all USCP officers, upon reporting for duty and after every shift, electronically “clock in” and “clock out.” Upon clocking in, every officer is then tracked during their tour of duty and it’s therefore impossible for USCP commanders to not know the whereabouts of those officers. Furthermore, that information should still be available on USCP computer logs. (Assuming they’ve not been purged.)

Why would the USCP cover up information about force deployment that day? Johnson answered:

“Because they don’t want to tell you where they [USCP officers] were, or what they were doing. They don’t want anyone to know how many of our officers were on ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE that day.”  [CAPS mine]

To that statement, I responded:

“So, you’re telling me . . . on a day when the USCP command had themselves issued permits for protests on the Capitol grounds, they had hundreds of officers on administrative leave, and were also sending officers home that morning?”

Johnson:

“You said it, exactly.”

There is also the issue of the “big diversion,” when those two pipe bombs were coincidentally discovered at almost the exact moment the first provocateurs were arriving at the west Capitol barricade line. The discoveries took place at both the Republican National Committee and Democratic National Committee headquarters — both of those being part of the near-20 buildings under the USCP’s watch.

Johnson was unable to give me an estimate of how many of their officers would have been diverted to both the RNC and DNC, but this emergency response to those pipe bombs doesn’t explain the unknown “whereabouts of the remaining 797 officers.” He says the exact records of how many, and exactly who were diverted would also be readily retrievable from USCP computer records.

In the first Oath Keepers trial, Stephen Brown, a Florida-based event planner, was hired by Ali Alexander (Trump supporter and founder of Stop the Steal.) Brown’s job was to secure permits from the USCP for an event to be held on the Capitol grounds, organize the staging and PA system, and coordinate the scheduling of VIP speakers and stage security, (by members of the Oath Keepers). Brown testified that he’d previously been the planner for many protest events in the nation’s capital, ranging from 5,000 to 300,000 in attendance.

Under direct examination by the defense attorney Stanley Woodward, Brown also described the surprisingly small presence of USCP officers on location while the staging and PA system were being delivered and set up. He went on to describe that at previous events he’d organized on Capitol grounds, he’d seen, “three, four, even five times the size of police presence, including SWAT teams,” than were there on January 6.

The inconvenient truth of the day is that my camera, the testimony of Stephen Brown, and the statements made to me by former USCP Lt. Johnson reveals what appears to be a purposeful under-deployment of their officers that day. A day in which we now know, as I wrote in Part 1 of this series:

“USCP Chief Steven Sund, Asst. Chief Yogananda Pittman, (head of protective and intelligence operations), the MPD, the United States Park Police, the White House, the Pentagon, the National Guard, both the Senate and House of Representative Sergeants-at-Arms, Nancy Pelosi, Mitch McConnell, the FBI, and other federal agencies all knew that tens of thousands of protestors would be descending upon the Capitol grounds that day.”

An unnamed USCP officer, just days after the melee, told the Associated Press, “During the 4th of July concerts and the Memorial Day concerts, we don’t have people come up and say, ‘We’re going to seize the Capitol. But yet, you bring EVERYBODY in, you meet before. That never happened for this event.” [CAPS mine]

An event for which . . . 

“. . . an FBI office in Virginia issued an explicit warning that extremists were preparing to travel to Washington to commit violence and ‘war,’ according to an internal document reviewed by The Washington Post . . .”

Instead of “all hands on deck,” frontline USCP officers were somewhere between one-tenth to one-fifth strength when it came time to respond to what was coming their way. An operational failure(?) that set up not just the breach of the Capitol Building, but also the delay in evacuating the House of Representatives. A situation that most certainly resulted in the death of Ashli Babbitt.

In an exclusive statement given to me by former USCP Lt. Tarik Johnson — which I released on Monday — he said:

“I recently made the decision to leave the Democratic Party to be Unaffiliated for now, for various reasons I choose not to get into at the present time. I submitted my application for this purpose today through my state’s website. I hope and pray that the new Republican-led Congress can uncover what really occurred on J6. I thank Senator Ron Johnson for his call for a ‘Full Accounting’ of the ‘Highly Concerning’ Capitol Police failures for the delayed J6 Evacuations.”

Capitol Police officer Tarik Johnson leads other police officers behind
Oath Keeper Michael Nichols, bottom right, with megaphone, on Jan. 6.
(
Christopher Morris / VII / Redux)

Responding to Part 1 of this series, one of my PDS-afflicted readers commented:

“Sounds like another exceptional conspiracy theory.”

Tell that to the USCP union members who gave Asst. Chief Yogananda Pittman a 92% “no-confidence” vote following her curiously absent leadership from their command center on January 6.

Part 3 to follow, shortly . . . 

Read full Article
post photo preview
Capitol Police Were Sacrificial Pawns on Jan. 6 - (Part 1)
Despite Ample Intel, Capitol Leadership Chose Not to Inform Frontline Officers About What Was Coming

When I met with former United States Capitol Police Lt. Tarik Johnson, I told him I'd previously written that he and his fellow officers were set up as "sacrificial pawns" on January 6. He pointed his finger toward my face and said:

"That's exactly right. They didn't give a sh-t what happened to us that day."

——

Imagine, if you will, that you were a United States Capitol Police (USCP) officer who showed up to work on January 6, 2021, with no anticipation or expectation of anything other than a normal day at the office. Whether you were a rookie officer, or one with 20 years experience in the USCP — and regardless of your specialized position and training, your on-the-job experience before had been not much more than performing the operations of a glorified tour guide for both VIP visitors and general public tourists to the nation’s seat of government. 

That’s an oversimplification, given the various units of the USCP consist of Long-Gun Certified Officers, a Civil Disturbance Unit, Criminal Investigation, Intelligence Unit, Dignitary Protection Unit, Containment Emergency Response Team (SWAT unit), Hazardous Devices Team, and several other specialized units.

Skipping past the initial westside barricade breach — at which USCP officer Caroline Edwards was knocked unconscious when shoved down by the first violent perpetrators, hitting her head on the concrete steps — imagine that you were one of the few dozen USCP officers being ordered to relocate and defend the lower west side Capitol terrace against those initial agitators. Many of them were arriving wearing gas masks, carrying and using blunt force objects, and canisters of a variety of types of pepper spray. (What else might they be carrying, concealed under heavy winter clothing?)

As yet unindicted and removed from FBI Most Wanted List,
Luke Robinson was photographed carrying a handgun on January 6

You’d heard over radio comms that these unexpected visitors had already overrun outer barricades. They are now pushing and pulling against the barricade line you’ve just arrived to defend. Some of those rioters are breaking apart permanent black-metal fencing, turning the various pieces into clubs and projectile spears. You’re wearing no protective gear — no helmet, no eye protection, no gas mask — but your job is to now prevent further incursion toward the Capitol Building itself, where the entire Congress and Vice President of the United States are currently in session to ratify the Electoral College vote.

Already outnumbered by the initial arrival of provocateurs, imagine looking over those heads and shoulders and seeing thousands of other protesters marching toward your position, having no idea of their intentions. As you’re defending that line, being shoved, hit with flag poles and broken pieces of fencing, and assaulted by OC spray, you have no idea whether or not those thousands you see approaching also intend violence or might be carrying more lethal weapons.

You might rightly assume the possibility you’d never again be going home to your family. USCP Lt. Tarik Johnson told Joe Hanneman of The Epoch Times and myself, that very thing. At one point during the initial violence and chaos of January 6, Johnson phoned his wife to tell her he might not make it home alive.

——

When one has a crossover conservative/libertarian readership, like my own, a small handful of topics present no-win scenarios. Issues upon which, if I take one side or the other, half my readers blast me in the comment sections. If I present a more nuanced, middle-of-the-road — dare I say, a pragmatic position — I risk the ire of both sides.

The most obvious topic is anything related to our most recent former president. Trump Derangement Syndrome is real, and as I often point out, it cuts both ways. Another — and the underlying topic of this screed — is all things related to law enforcement.

Both the libertarian-ish anarchists, on what I define as the far right of the political spectrum, (though they will argue with me on that designation), as well as the faux-anarchists of the far left, (see: Antifa), both subscribe to the acronym we see scrawled on buildings after many riots, ACAB: all cops are bastards. 

The most extreme of these see no justification for any form of local or federal policing. Purist constitutionalists often interpret all police agencies as “standing armies,” and therefore antithetical to founding principles. Many who acquiesce to some justification for police forces are still automatically knee-jerk to blaming the cops when any violent or deadly force is used against private citizens — even before evidence of justification is presented. 

Then, of course, there are those — mostly from the right — who invariably “Back the Blue” . . . even when evidence is presented of unjustifiable use of force. All sides have their rationalizations to defend their respective positions.

For this narrative, I would ask all my readers to set aside their own biases and predispositions toward law enforcement. Particularly as related to the actions of the USCP on January 6. I’ll briefly reference the behaviors of the D.C. Metropolitan Police (MPD) and other agencies, but my study and investigations into those other agencies' actions that day are far exceeded by that of my analysis of the USCP.

——

Two years hence, many of my initial perspectives have been challenged by increasingly available evidence. For instance, on the evening of January 6 — upon return to my Arlington, VA hotel room — I posted a video to YouTube, where I specifically said I’d witnessed the majority of the violence being committed by Trump supporters. Then, upon my return home, I sequestered myself away for five days of frame-by-frame analysis of my own videos, taken of the Capitol’s west terrace battle line, then continuing into and through the Capitol Building. Time and again in that analysis I experienced “W(hat)TF? and W(ho)TF? was that” moments in those video frames.

By the time I published my first story about what I’d seen that day, all my initial preconceptions, from the day itself, were challenged. I even concluded that I have a new life axiom:

“I’ll never again believe anything I don’t see with my own eyes. Even then, consult the videotape.”

Our own eyes can deceive us in such a highly kinetic, violent event. It’s why every law enforcement officer knows that a dozen eyewitnesses to a violent crime will give a dozen different versions of what occurred. Unless one has ample experience in such events, the shock of unexpected violence causes different peoples’ minds to register and process the episode in diverse and often contradictory ways.

I now know — beyond a reasonable doubt — many of those frontline agitators and provocateurs, who I initially assumed to be Trump supporters, were anything but. Were there right-wing militias present? Yes. Left-wing anarchists? (Antifa?) Most certainly. Did I observe crowd manipulation tactics from professional provocateurs, experienced in rallying violence and coordinating movements of large groups? Definitely. Do I know, with absolute certainty whom these provocateurs worked for? No. (And neither do you. Not yet.)

What we do know, is that the late Senate Sergeant-at-Arms Michael Stenger, in his last testimony before Congress on February 23, 2021, said, “There is an opportunity to learn lessons from the events of January 6th. Investigations should be considered as to funding and travel of what appears to be professional agitators.”

More recently, in the trial of Richard "Bigo" Barnett — who infamously posed for a photo with his feet up on Nancy Pelosi’s desk — USCP Captain Carneysha Mendoza was asked by defense attorney Bradford Geyer if the provocateurs she observed on January 6 were, “Highly trained violent people who work and coordinate together?” Mendoza answered, “Yes.”

In the lead-up to my second story about January 6 — published on February 24, 2021 — my investigations led me to discover and report that several federal agencies, including Army special forces operatives, were embedded in the crowd that day. This was later confirmed by a Newsweek story on January 3, 2022, entitled, “Secret Commandos with Shoot-to-Kill Authority Were at the Capitol.”

I know that’s a lot of preliminary groundwork laid before getting into the USCP’s response and actions on January 6, but you’ll hopefully understand why it was necessary before I proceed. Now, I ask you to set aside your understanding of what you believe transpired that day, in addition to your biases about law enforcement in general.

——

You’re now back on that Capitol lower west terrace battle line . . .

From testimony given in the first Oath Keepers trial, we learned — as a uniformed USCP officer — that it was likely you received no notification from your commanders that there were any planned protest events scheduled and permitted, (by the USCP itself), on the Capitol grounds that day.

USCP officer Ryan Salke testified in the Oath Keepers trial that he was only aware something was, “Going on at the White House that day.” This is even though the evidence was presented of the actual applications and permits issued by USCP authorities for staging, PA systems, and VIP speakers on the Capitol grounds for January 6th. Including speeches by members of Congress. 

Congress members . . . actual USCP protectees . . . scheduled to speak on USCP permitted stages . . . and you, a USCP officer charged with their security, have no knowledge this was to take place during that day’s tour of duty.

Additionally, ample advertising in the form of flyers and internet postings were seen by millions of Americans, about not only the rally at The Ellipse — for the president’s and others’ speeches —  but also scheduled marches to and around the Capitol Building, those speeches on the Capitol lawn, and even a protest on the “steps” of the Capitol.

USCP Chief Steven Sund, Asst. Chief Yogananda Pittman, (head of protective and intelligence operations), the MPD, the United States Park Police, the White House, the Pentagon, the National Guard, both the Senate and House of Representative Sergeants-at-Arms, Nancy Pelosi, Mitch McConnell, the FBI, and other federal agencies all knew that tens of thousands of protestors would be descending upon the Capitol grounds that day. Yet, the frontline USCP officers were neither notified nor prepared for what was to come.

——

I arrived at the lower west terrace battle line at exactly 1:19 p.m. The first thing my camera captured was both protestors and police officers receiving first aid. The next thing I registered with my own eyes was the shock and fear in the eyes of those officers defending the barricade line. They were taken by surprise, and unprepared, and the USCP in particular, were obviously and woefully untrained for what was taking place. 

The arrival of reinforcements by the MPD was another story. They had far more experience in dealing with violent protests in our nation’s Capital. Most recently from numerous riots initiated by left-wing groups — Antifa and BLM — post-George Floyd’s death. The look in their eyes was different, many of whom seemed to relish the engagement and enjoy knocking heads.

After an hour of violence, and when the violent insurgents were successfully breaching the lower west terrace police line, USCP Lt. Tarik Johnson was desperately radioing for decontamination tents, water supplies as first aid, reinforcements, redeployment of understaffed USCP units, and operational direction from Chief Sund and Asst. Chief Pittman — both of whom were in the Command Center — but Johnson’s calls for a plan . . . any plan . . . were being ignored.

From both audio recordings and transcripts of USCP radio transmissions — obtained by The Epoch Times, that I was also made privy to in our collaboration for their story published on January 10th of this year — we can hear Lt. Johnson’s voice:

If you’re not able to get units out here at a certain point, can you advise, unit 400, if you want me to push everybody inside of the lower terrace door and lock it . . . If we can’t get any help on the north side, we’re gonna have to bring everybody in and we will have to lock the doors.” (1:53 p.m.)

Former USCP Lt. Tarik Johnson on January 6, 2021

No response from Command. Lt. Johnson takes the initiative — and not for the first time that day:

Be sure that there are no weapons left on the lower west terrace, bring them all inside the doors now, any weapons that we have, bring them inside . . . Anyone on the lower terrace now, I need you to fall back and I need you to respond to the attack, we’re not going to use lethal force, we can’t risk them taking the M4s [automatic rifles] from us, so if you have an M4, I need you to respond on the lower terrace door now . . . We are not going to be able to keep these people out, all the M4s need to be inside the terrace doors now, no M4s out.” (1:54 p.m.)

No response from Command. Johnson, again:

“Advising you that all situations here are dire, we’re going to prepare to evacuate the lower west terrace and everybody’s about to go inside, I’ll advise in about two minutes.” (1:58 p.m.)

At exactly 2:00 p.m., Asst. Chief Pittman’s voice can be heard for the first time, all day:

“Unit two, at this time, we're ordering a lockdown of the Capitol building, lock down the Capitol building.”

USCP Inspector Thomas Lloyd immediately responds to Pittman’s order, (rather derisively), “That was done a long time ago,” as he’d previously issued that order almost an hour earlier.

Then, Lt. Johnson urgently begs:

“Can we get in the lower terrace door first, before you lock it down?”

No response from command.

At 2:08 p.m., Lt. Johnson radios, urgently requesting command to give them much-needed direction:

“I’m telling you what we need. We need some kind of a tactical plan just to divert these breachers, so we can get everybody in the lower west terrace door. We do not have any hard gear up here. We need a plan to get these people, these officers back in the building. They’re coming, and [we] can’t stop them from breaching.”

Asst. Chief Pittman is heard on the radio again, with the following feckless order:

“Unit two, at this time, we are ordering a campus-wide lockdown. A campus-wide lockdown. Please simulcast.”

Nothing else coming from Pittman could have been more incompetent or utterly useless. By this time, the entire Capitol campus was overrun on all sides, by thousands of protestors with unknown intentions. She could see this on her CCTV screens. All her officers had already been ordered to retreat inside the Capitol, (by Lt. Johnson, himself). None were left amongst the already-gathered throng to execute her “campus-wide lockdown” command, as tens of thousands of additional rally attendees continued to arrive from The Ellipse.

The USCP’s beleaguered officers were being ignored by their top commanders. Former Chief Sund has testified that he was busy on the phone with the Sergeants-at-Arms, the National Guard, and other agency heads, while Asst. Chief Pittman could see and hear all that was taking place from her command center CCTV videos and radio comms . . . but she was providing no leadership while issuing scant and ultimately impotent directives. 

The under-manned USCP officers were on their own. At 2:13 p.m., the Capitol’s northwest Senate windows and door were breached by the lead provocateurs, while many of those officers had been locked outside. Panicked calls are made on radio comms, notifying command that protestors were inside the Capitol Building.

Some of those made their way toward the occupied Senate and House chambers, while others were working their way to the east side Columbus doors, to open those from the inside.

With no direction coming from the command center, who will lead the evacuation of the Senate and House members? Did individual USCP officers behave appropriately or did their actions incite the crowd to more violent acts? Was the lack of leadership and alleged intelligence failures the result of incompetence or something more nefarious? Could the entire event and subsequent tragedies been averted, were they allowed to happen, or were they planned?

Part 2 to follow . . . 

Read full Article
post photo preview
Hamlin's On Field Collapse Was the Result of . . . the NFL's Systemic Racism?
Scientific American Stretches Credulity in Trying to Blame Football's Violence and Injuries on the Exploitation of Black Athletes

Let’s just cut to the chase, shall we? According to “the science” — as espoused by Scientific American (SA) — Damar Hamlin’s on field collapse in last Monday’s NFL game was the result of . . . . . . racism. You might as well just go ahead and file this one under “Sh-t You Can’t Make Up,” because it only gets worse from here. In the words of most any local news station’s sports anchor, “Let’s go straight to the videotape…” (Er . . . article.)

“This ordinary violence has always riddled the sport and it affects all players. But Black players are disproportionately affected. While Black men are severely underrepresented in positions of power across football organizations, such as coaching and management, they are overrepresented on the gridiron.”

(AP Photo/Jeff Dean)
(AP Photo/Jeff Dean)

I hope you caught that, on your own: Black men, “are overrepresented on the gridiron?”

That’s where we are now? Damned if you do, damned if you don’t hire enough Black men? The very next sentence of the article admits, “Non-white players account for 70 percent of the NFL . . .,” and everyone reading this commentary knows that if that number were reversed, the theme of the SA article would be how underrepresented the NFL is by BIPOC folk. Because . . . racism.

More from “the science”:

“While this form of entertainment [excessive violence] has been normalized, Hamlin’s injury demonstrates that ordinary violence has potentially deadly consequences, and highlights how Black men’s athletic labor sustains this brutal system.”

Most everyone knows the name Jackie Robinson, the first Black man to play on a Major League Baseball team, (1947), but almost no one knows that in 1920, Fritz Pollard became the first Black man to play in the NFL. There then followed a 12-year moratorium on the signing of any other Blacks in the NFL, until the barrier was permanently broken in 1946. But the insinuation of this article is that the brutality of the American football game is only sustained by the exploitation of Black athletes. Never you mind the talent . . . or the multi-million dollar contracts . . . or the incomparable level of personal, voluntary, longterm dedication, and hard work required to become an athlete in such rare and elite demand.

By the 1960s, the Green Bay Packers’ Black players especially loved their coach -- the late-great Vince Lombardi. David Maraniss, who wrote the definitive Lombardi biography, When Pride Still Mattered, detailed several reasons for those players’ enduring affection. 

Because Green Bay’s only Black population of the 1960s was that of the team’s players, themselves, there were no barber shops that knew how to cut and style his Black players’ hair. Once a week, Lombardi would send them, on the team bus down to Milwaukee, for haircuts. When playing away games in southern cities, Lombardi forcefully refused to allow his Black players to be segregated or discriminated against by those hotels and restaurants. In fact, if he learned any restaurant or bar wouldn't serve his Black players, he declared those establishments "off limits" to all his players.

Green Bay Coach Vince Lombardi with team's rookies before Packers-Bears game at
Milwaukee County Stadium on Aug. 23, 1963.

Lombardi was also known to treat Black players fairly and equitably in contract negotiations. He was as even-handedly — and famously — a hard-ass on everyone . . . White or Black. Lombardi set the standard, both on and off the field of play, and the dye was cast in the NFL for full integration and recognition of talent and financial worth, regardless of skin color.

SA continues:

“On these playing fields, ones that sociologist Billy Hawkins would argue are never theoretically far from plantation fields, financial stakeholders value Black bodies for their productive potential and physical prowess.”

There you have it. The football fields are never far removed from the “plantation fields” for those with “Black bodies.” Remember when former NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick compared the NFL Draft process to slavery? I mean . . . minus the fact no African slave trader had ever violently rounded him up, placed him in chains, sold him to a European slave trader — against his will — and then shipped him over to be assessed and sold to NFL team owners through their annual draft combine?

“The science” does admit:

“While I am not aware of research that compares the rate of injury between Black and white football players, heatstrokes, ACL and labrum tears, ankle sprains, bone breaks, and concussions are just a few of the consequences of how these bodies are used.”

My own guess would be — given 70% of NFL players are not White — Blacks sustain a higher percentage of those injuries. (Duh.)

Then “the science” really goes off the  . . . uh . . . plantation, in describing how both college and professional athletes were forced to perform during the COVID lockdowns:

“Players in all five major Division I conferences risked their health with an unpredictable and sometimes deadly virus to play a high-contact sport in almost empty stadiums to satisfy their universities, as well as television fans and the broadcasters who capitalize off their viewership . . . [calling] to mind ‘the history of slavery and the plantation economy.’ The anti-Blackness of the system is inescapable.”

Here, “the science” of American football’s racism collides with the alleged “science” of COVID. A virus which is statistically less deadly to the age range and health of those athletes, than is their car ride to school, is correlated into “the history of slavery and the plantation economy.” 

The article concludes with the usual disclaimer:

This is an opinion and analysis article, and the views expressed by the author or authors are not necessarily those of Scientific American.”

Given Scientific American’s demonstrably leftist stances on climate change and the COVID vaccines, I’d venture to say the views expressed by this article are also right up their editorial staff's alley.

Read full Article
See More
Available Now
app store google store
Powered by Locals