TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

After leaving a location, I had three calls with Speaker Pelosi about getting people back into chambers. Speaker Pelosi's claim of not speaking with me is inaccurate. I cannot comment on whether Capitol security was politicized. I wish Speaker Pelosi had considered the challenges I faced before calling for my resignation. Former Sergeant at Arms believed we were prepared for a typical demonstration, not for the events that unfolded. We did not anticipate a member of Congress inciting the crowd.

The speaker demands the resignation of the director of the Secret Service due to security failures during an event where President Trump was shot. Questions are raised about why the threat was not neutralized sooner, despite warnings from the crowd. The director is pressed on whether there was a stand-down order or conspiracy. The director states an investigation is ongoing, but the speaker insists on her resignation.

The transcript centers on discussions about security failures on January 6, 2021, and the steps taken to address them, including the involvement of the House Sergeant at Arms and Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Key points: - Initiating discussions on National Guard: The witness confirms meeting with the House Sergeant at Arms regarding the National Guard prior to January 6. The House Sergeant at Arms was Paul Irving, appointed by Speaker Pelosi at that time. Irving reportedly stated he “didn’t like the optics” when the National Guard was first raised. - Run it up the chain and approval process: On January 6, when the witness sought approval to call in the National Guard, Irving indicated he would “run it up the chain,” understood as the leadership chain, leading toward the Speaker’s office and Speaker Pelosi. The witness clarified that the leadership chain on the House side comprises the top security official and the elected leadership team up to Speaker Pelosi. - How it ends up with Pelosi’s office: The witness stated that running up the chain would likely end with the Speaker’s office and possibly Speaker Pelosi, describing the path as through the speaker’s office. - Three calls with Pelosi on January 6: During a January 7 press conference, Pelosi claimed she had not talked to the witness since the breach and called for the witness’s resignation. The witness asserts that Pelosi’s claim was inaccurate, stating he spoke with Pelosi three times that evening. The three calls were: 1) First call: When the witness went to brief Vice President Pence at the secure location; he briefed Irving about returning to the chambers and the timing. Irving called Pelosi on the witness’s cell phone around 05:34 to have Pelosi on the line. 2) Second call: After walking away from Pence briefing, the witness met with Stenger and headed to brief the Senate. Jennifer Hemingway handed him Emily Barrett’s phone, and Pelosi was on the line as they discussed the information given to Pence about when the Capitol could be back in session; the witness stated he assured Pelosi the information was correct and that the chambers could be reoccupied by 7 PM. The call ended. 3) Third call: While at the Senate, on a cell phone, using another official’s cell line, the witness briefed leadership off-site at a secure location about plans to get them back into chambers. Pelosi participated in this third call as part of briefing leadership. - Pelosi’s comment and resignation: The witness concurs with Pelosi’s claim that he spoke three times, contradicting Pelosi’s assertion of no contact since the breach. The witness expresses a wish that Pelosi had considered the challenges faced and the efforts to bring in outside resources on January 6 before she called for his resignation. - Additional clarifications: When asked if Pelosi’s office or Pelosi herself politicized capital security, the witness said he had no idea. He also offered a closing remark hoping Pelosi would consider the witness’s efforts and the steps taken to reinforce security that day.

Speaker 0 expresses intent to storm the Capitol. Speaker 1 discusses Reyes' actions before the Capitol breach. The mob storms the Capitol. Questions arise about Reyes' involvement in inciting the violence. No clear answers are given.

The speaker, who is the chief of police, expresses frustration over the law that prevents them from bringing in the national guard without approval. They recount the events of the attack on the Capitol and their efforts to request assistance. They made multiple calls to different agencies, including the sergeant in arms and the chairman of the Capitol Police Board, but authorization was delayed for 71 minutes. Finally, at 2:09, they received approval and immediately informed their colleague. The speaker emphasizes their anger and marks the time as 2:10 when they finally got approval for the National Guard.

Nancy Pelosi blamed Capitol Police leadership and called for my resignation on national TV the day after we gained control of the capital. Yogananda Pittman, who was the head of intelligence for Capitol Police, was then appointed as acting chief. However, she received a vote of no confidence from the police officers due to their dissatisfaction with the events. Pittman is now the chief of police for the University of California, Berkeley, located near Pelosi's district. It seems that she was given a secret leave to start her new job while still being employed by Capitol Police. Many whistleblowers within the unit were punished and forced to resign.

Following an armed insurrection, the speaker calls for the resignation of the Capitol Police chief but wants the focus to remain on the President. There will be an after-action review, but the speaker does not want the review to be on par with the insurrection and impeachment. Schumer is reportedly going to fire the Senate Sergeant at Arms. The speaker states that they can pull the card out for Q&A if Audrey finishes the card. They can say they will call for something, but they don't know because they don't have all the blue dogs with them on this subject. Someone mentions that a person briefed on a plan with numbers and stakeholders signed off on it. Another person says that in a conversation, someone was very transparent about underestimating the crowd size and the president's influence. The speaker asks if they will stay there all day or until the National Guard arrives.

Speaker 1 states they are waiting to punch someone and will be happy to go to jail for it. Speaker 1 says, "We're trespassing when the cat will go." Speaker 0 says Speaker 1 said she has been trespassing on the Capitol. Speaker 1 repeats they are waiting to punch someone. Speaker 0 says that if Speaker 1 has been waiting for this, why did she deny Donald Trump's request? Speaker 0 claims it wasn't just negligence in forgetting the request, but that she denied the sergeant at arms from supplying the request.

Speaker 1 states they are waiting to punch someone and will be happy to go to jail for it. Speaker 1 says, "We're trespassing when the cat will go." Speaker 0 says Speaker 1 stated, "I've been trespassing on the capitol." Speaker 1 repeats they are waiting to punch someone. Speaker 0 says if Speaker 1 has been waiting for this, why did she deny the sergeant at arms from supplying Donald Trump's request? Speaker 0 claims it wasn't just negligence, but that she denied the request.

The discussion centers on the security failures during the January 6, 2021, Capitol breach. It is clarified that there were three calls between the Chief and Speaker Pelosi on that day, contradicting her claim of no communication. The Chief expressed concerns about the House Sergeant at Arms, Paul Irving, who prioritized optics over security, delaying the National Guard's deployment. The conversation shifts to political implications, with accusations that Speaker Pelosi politicized security issues. Several speakers criticize the focus on January 6 rather than pressing issues like crime and inflation. They emphasize the need for serious discussions about security and governance, expressing frustration over perceived political gamesmanship. The dialogue also touches on the treatment of January 6 detainees and the use of force by correctional officers, highlighting concerns about civil rights violations.

The speaker urgently called General Walker to request the National Guard's assistance at the Capitol. Despite the imminent danger, the speaker faced resistance from higher-ups who didn't like the optics of the National Guard's presence. The speaker pleaded for help, but was denied multiple times. Eventually, shots were fired, and the speaker had to hang up to handle the situation. The National Guard didn't arrive until 6 PM, and instead of being deployed at the Capitol, they were driven back to the DC Army. The speaker felt betrayed and questioned if there was a conspiracy against protecting the Capitol. The systematic denial of intelligence and support from various agencies led to the baffling conclusion of not protecting the capital.

Speaker Pelosi claimed on national television that she had not spoken to the individual since the initial breach of the Capitol and that there had been no communications with him that evening. The individual, referred to as Speaker 1, confirmed that he spoke to Speaker Pelosi three times that evening, contradicting her statement. First call (approximately 05:34 PM): The individual went to brief Vice President Pence at a secure location and to conduct a personal assessment of the Capitol, with House Sergeant at Arms Irving informed that he was going over to brief the Vice President. Irving wanted to get Speaker Pelosi on the phone. The first call to Speaker Pelosi occurred during this briefing, establishing direct contact while the briefing was underway. Second call (during departure from the initial location): As the individual left the area and was walking toward the Senate with Mr. Stenger, Jennifer Hemingway handed him Emily Barrett’s cell phone, and it was Speaker Pelosi on the line. This second call concerned the information provided to Vice President Pence about when the Capitol could be returned to the chambers, and the individual reassured Pelosi that the information was correct and that they could get back into the chambers by 7:00 PM. The call ended after this confirmation. Third call (06:25 PM): While at the Senate, away from the initial secure location, using Robert Karam’s cell phone, the individual dialed leadership who were off-site at a secure location to brief them. He briefed all of the leadership on the plans to get them back into the chambers, which constituted the third call with Speaker Pelosi. In summary, Speaker 1 asserts that there were three separate conversations with Speaker Pelosi on January 7, each addressing the situation and the plan to restore operations in the chambers, including confirmation of the timeline to return by 7:00 PM. He states that Pelosi’s claim of not speaking with him is inaccurate, affirming that he did indeed have three conversations with her that evening.

The speaker explains that the handling of the event was different from previous situations. They mention that the decision was made by the intelligence agency and the military. According to a federal law, the speaker was required to request federal resources like the National Guard in advance from the Capitol Police Board. However, they were denied twice due to optics and lack of intelligence support. The decision was made by Paul Irving and Mike Stenger, who work for Pelosi and McConnell respectively.

Speaker 0: Some Republicans argue that Nancy Pelosi staged January 6 and the select committee covered it up. Based on what you know, what are the verifiable events in the lead ups? Speaker 1: I was DoD chief of staff on January 6. We deployed National Guard; in the Oval Office the president, president Trump at the time, authorized pursuant to law up to 10 to 20,000 National Guard. We took that authorization because the law's second part required a request from who? Nancy Pelosi and the Metropolitan Police and the mayor at the time. And what did they say? No. And remember what happened for the next two years? They say, Oh, Kash is lying. Trump’s lying. And what do we find? Letters of their declination of the National Guard refusing to have the National Guard show up. Nancy Pelosi and her team were busy filming a movie on January 6 while this so caused chaos around her was going down. If she had just look at it this way. If she had said yes to the National Guard and we had 10,000 uniformed military officers establish a secure perimeter, do you think January 6 would have gone differently? Speaker 0: It is intriguing that 02/1950 FBI plain clothed agents were inside the Capitol on January 6. Speaker 1: This is a great example of the president's initiative to solve all the answers on January 6, and it's another example of our transparency efforts. Pursuant to the president, we investigated the matter and found out why FBI agents were placed there in the first place. And it turns out, we found documentation and witnesses and whistleblowers that said we were forced to go there to do riot control. Armstrong, do you know what the FBI does not do ever? Riot control. Speaker 0: And you believe them? That's their word, not mine.

On January 6, 2021, the House Sergeant at Arms, Paul Irving, appointed by Speaker Pelosi, expressed concerns about the "optics" of deploying the National Guard. When Chief Sun requested the Guard, Irving said he'd "run it up the chain," implying Pelosi's office. Pelosi stated she hadn't spoken to Chief Sun since the initial breach, but Sun says he spoke with her three times that evening. He briefed her on plans to get everyone back into chambers. Prior to January 6, Sun requested National Guard assistance from Irving and Senate Sergeant at Arms Michael Stenger. Irving didn't like the optics and Stenger suggested Sun contact General Walker about availability. Stenger later told Sun that Irving had forewarned him, saying Pelosi would never approve the Guard. During a call on January 6, military personnel recommended against Sun's request for the National Guard. Chief Conte of the Metropolitan Police Department questioned this denial. General Milley did not share intelligence about violent rhetoric and threats with Chief Sun. The Capitol Police requested National Guard assistance at 1:49 PM, but approval from the acting Secretary of Defense didn't come until 5:08 PM. The Guard arrived at the Capitol by 5:20 PM.

Speaker Pelosi called for the resignation of the Chief of the Capitol Police, Mr. Sund, and Mr. Irving confirmed his resignation. Speaker Pelosi claimed she hadn't spoken to the speaker since the breach, but the speaker clarified that he had spoken to her three times. The first call was to brief Vice President Pence, the second call was to confirm information about returning to chambers, and the third call was to brief all leadership on the plans. Speaker Pelosi's statement about not speaking to the speaker was inaccurate. The speaker also praised the bravery of the Capitol Police.

Yogananda Pittman, the former assistant chief for intelligence and security, was appointed as acting chief of the Capitol Police after the January 6 incident. The speaker expresses uncertainty about Pittman's knowledge and responsibility for any intelligence failure. The speaker also mentions that Nancy Pelosi blamed the leadership and called for their resignation, leading to Pittman's appointment. Pittman later received a vote of no confidence from police officers and is now the chief of police for the University of California, Berkeley, located in Nancy Pelosi's district.

Speaker is asked if they agree with congressional Republicans' call for resignation, but does not respond when pressed by the speaker of the house.

Speaker 0 asks why Paul Irving, who had the authority, didn't give the okay. Speaker 1 explains that he testified at the Senate hearing in 2021 and disagreed with Speaker 1's recollection. Speaker 1 turned over his phone records and fought to testify. Speaker 0 questions why Speaker 1 wasn't allowed to testify since he was the chief of Capitol Police on January 6th. Speaker 1 explains that initially, the hearing was only for current employees, excluding the top 3 people in security. Speaker 1 called someone on the rules committee to request testifying and promised to show up in person. Speaker 0 highlights the denial of Speaker 1's request for national guardsmen, which was a pivotal moment.

The denial of the request for national guardsmen on January 6th was a pivotal moment. The person who made that decision has not answered why. Representative Bennie Thompson stated that Speaker Pelosi was off limits to the inquiries of the January 6th committee. However, if we truly want to find out what happened, everyone's records should be examined. The speaker emphasizes that they have been forthright and provided their phone records. They made numerous calls to request approval and called multiple police agencies and officers to help regain control of the Capitol. The speaker's recollection is detailed and precise.

Speaker Pelosi called for the resignation of the Chief of the Capitol Police, Mr. Sund, and Mr. Irving confirmed his resignation. Speaker Pelosi claimed she hadn't spoken to him since the breach, but he clarified that he had spoken to her three times. The first call was to brief Vice President Pence and Speaker Pelosi was on the line. The second call was when he left to brief the Senate, and Speaker Pelosi questioned the information he gave to Vice President Pence. The third call was to brief all the leadership on the plans to return to the chambers. Speaker Pelosi's comments about not speaking to him were inaccurate.

We had a responsibility that we failed to meet, and there was a lack of accountability for the situation. It’s absurd to question whether we should call the Capitol Police or National Guard after the breach occurred. The National Guard should have been present from the start, as the assessment of the situation was clearly inadequate. I take responsibility for not ensuring they were prepared for potential issues.

Speaker 1 argues that Jack Smith’s request to prevent evidence about security or intelligence failures before January 6 is unacceptable, claiming it would excuse Nancy Pelosi and the mayor of DC for failures. He asserts Pelosi was responsible for January 6 because she did not accept the security help offered, stating that 10,000 troops or National Guard were available if needed before the event, and that the event would have been different if 500 or 200 people had been used; he emphasizes that he offered 10,000 troops and that January 6 would not have happened with a larger deployment. He notes that he personally attended and gave a speech, and claims the audience included the largest number he has spoken to, contrasting with the smaller group that he says went down to the Capitol. Speaker 1 contends that the party should be allowed to introduce evidence showing that there were security and intelligence shortcomings, including the assertion that Pelosi “did not take the security that we offered her,” with the offer of 10,000 troops and the fact that “you had far fewer people than that.” He mentions that the unselect committee did not discuss or include references to “peacefully and patriotically” behaving crowds and says this group was not highlighted by the committee or in their words. He criticizes the prosecutor, calling Jack Smith a “deranged human being, unattractive both inside and out,” and accuses Smith of wanting to suppress testimony because the committee “illegally destroyed everything” and deleted evidence related to Pelosi’s decisions about troop deployment. He asserts that much evidence indicated Pelosi did not want the troops and that a letter from the mayor contradicted Pelosi’s stance. Speaker 0 acknowledges the point but keeps the dialogue focused; Speaker 0 reminds that Capitol Police Chief Steve Sun said January 6 was a preventable event if the intelligence and resources requested had been provided, noting that Speaker 0 sees this as an amazing point and confirms that the offer of troops was in writing. Speaker 1 reiterates that he offered 10,000 troops for January 6 and emphasizes that this fact is in writing, arguing that the prosecution is attempting to suppress relevant evidence. He maintains that Pelosi’s leadership and decisions about security are central to the discussion, and he reiterates the claim that the offer of security was not acted upon. The conversation pivots back to the assertion that the Capitol Police Chief’s past statements support the claim that January 6 was preventable with proper intelligence and resources.

Speaker 0 expressed confusion about the lack of answers regarding two significant events on January 6. Firstly, other federal agencies withheld crucial information from the speaker, who was in charge of security at the Capitol. Secondly, despite the situation escalating for 71 minutes, Speaker Pelosi denied permission to bring in the National Guard. The speaker questioned why there is a lack of investigation into these matters, suggesting a lack of interest in uncovering the truth. The situation is described as worsening beyond these events.

Speaker Pelosi called for the resignation of the Capitol Police chief and received notice of the resignation of Mr. Irving. Speaker Pelosi claimed she hadn't spoken to the speaker since the initial breach, but the speaker clarified that he had spoken to her three times. The first call was to brief Vice President Pence, the second call was when he left the location and spoke to Speaker Pelosi about getting back into chambers, and the third call was to brief all the leadership on the plans. Speaker Pelosi's comments about not speaking to the speaker were inaccurate. The speaker also praised the bravery of the Capitol Police.