TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

A congresswoman questioned where the money would come from to cover deployments within the limited budget. The speaker responded by recalling 2020 when Minnesota Governor Walz abandoned a police precinct and allowed it to be burned, leading to days of chaos in Minneapolis. Because of this, the National Guard mobilization was too late. The speaker stated that President Trump recognized that such situations are bad for citizens. The speaker believes ICE has the right to safely conduct operations in any state, especially after 21,000,000 illegals crossed the border under the previous administration. The congresswoman reiterated her budget question. The speaker stated that the National Guard and Marines were deployed to protect ICE in Los Angeles so they can enforce immigration law, unlike what Governor Walz did in 2020.

National Guard troops were authorized by former President Donald Trump on January 4. However, the deployment of these troops to the Capitol requires the Capitol Police Board to issue a state of emergency. The board consists of the architect of the Capitol, the heads of Senate and House Security, and the chief of the Capitol Police. Three out of four of these individuals report to the Speaker of the House, who at the time was Nancy Pelosi. Therefore, the decision to limit the National Guard's presence at the Capitol falls under the Speaker's authority, not the President's.

A speaker expressed severe concern about the deployment of the National Guard in Los Angeles without consulting the state of California, claiming troops were sleeping on the floor without food, fuel, or water provided by the DOD. They asked how long the deployment would last and why the DOD was unprepared to provide basic necessities. The Secretary of Defense responded that the commanders and troops were well-prepared and responded rapidly to a deteriorating situation. While acknowledging that there may be moments where troops have to "make do," the Secretary stated that they are ensuring troops are housed, fed, and watered in real-time. The Secretary stated that it is a "disingenuous attack" to say that they don't care about the troops, and that nobody cares more about the troops than the Secretary and the Chairman.

The discussion centers on why the National Guard was not deployed to the Capitol on the morning of January 6. The explanation given involves a two-step process for authorization: first, authorization by the commander in chief, which had been obtained, and second, a request by the local governing body, specifically the mayor and the Capitol Police Bureau. Mister Patel confirms that there was a letter from Mayor Muriel Bowser dated January 5 to the Department of Defense stating that she would not be requesting any additional National Guard troops. Consequently, they were on standby but not activated due to the mayor’s declination of the request. Speaker 0 presses the point, implying that there was an offering or possibility to deploy the National Guard that was not executed, and suggests contacting the Mayor of Washington, DC to understand other outreach to police departments. The conversation repeats that the National Guard was not initially deployed and questions why they were blocked or not prepared from the outset. Mister Patel reiterates the key facts: the authority came through the commander in chief, the local governing body had declined to request additional National Guard, and thus there was no immediate deployment. Speaker 0 takes responsibility for not having the National Guard ready, suggesting a need to prepare more in the future. The exchange emphasizes the procedural sequence—authorization, local request, and the mayor’s declination—along with implications about preparedness and the perceived blocking or absence of National Guard deployment at the outset.

Witnesses claim they met with President Trump on January 4th, and that he offered 20,000 National Guard troops to protect the Capitol on January 6th, but the offer was rejected. According to Trump's acting secretary of defense, Chris Miller, Donald Trump never issued any order to deploy the guard to protect the Capitol. Four interviewees confirm that on January 4th in the Oval Office, they heard Donald Trump authorize up to 20,000 troops, two days before January 6th. Trump authorized up to 20,000 National Guardsmen and women for utilization should the request come in, but those requests never did. This was stated under oath under the threat of a penalty of perjury. The meeting was about a foreign threat directed towards the United States. The president then brought up January 6th, and was doing exactly what a commander in chief should do.

The speaker's team found a previously missing interview where a witness testified that Mark Meadows offered up to 10,000 troops. The speaker cites a Vanity Fair article from early January reporting that Trump authorized Secretary Miller to ready the National Guard. The speaker also references White House transcribed interviews where an employee stated that Trump's immediate response upon hearing about the Capitol attack was to get Pelosi and Milley on the phone to see what help they needed. The speaker claims there is on-the-record evidence that Trump offered the National Guard, but Pelosi and Bowser turned down the offer.

There are two types of forces: domestic soil and the National Guard. The president deploys the National Guard in DC, but governors deploy them in other states unless the president invokes the Insurrectionary Act. The speaker suggests a campaign urging Democratic governors to commit to deploying the National Guard only to protect people from white supremacists and rogue police, not against the people. The speaker, who has been anti-military, believes this is preferable to civilians facing armed conflict. Drawing on a past success in the 80s where a governor refused to send the National Guard to Central America, the speaker suggests engaging with National Guard members, who are often working-class, and believes they may be less entrenched than the police. The goal is to consider how the National Guard might be deployed on behalf of the people instead of against them.

Felicia Ashley has given us some good reporting about their role in Washington DC since August because it has been, contentious to some. There are plenty of people who did not like the National Guard being here in the city. We don't know if that's the case as why this person acted the way they did talking about the gunman. But nonetheless, as Michelle, as you've pointed out, this is a struggle that's been going on in cities across the country right now where there is a lot of push back from some others welcoming them with open arms, but about sending the National Guard as the president would like to multiple cities to try and what he says, cut down on crime. I was in Portland, Oregon just earlier this month reporting on on some of the pushback there as members didn't like the idea. Members of the political parties there didn't like the idea of the National Guard coming in. But Memphis, Chicago, there are plenty of other places where there's a a genuine debate, and you can only imagine that that debate is gonna get much stronger and intensify over the next few days. And and then the the the quick reaction from Pete Hegseth over at the Pentagon, the secretary of war, to say, okay. We're sending 500 more National Guard into Washington DC in light of what just happened. Shows you that there certainly won't be a scaling back. Yeah, and there's a question of whether that will agitate more. Incidents like this. We don't know. But that is something that we will be following in the days ahead. But right now, top of mind is this investigation. With this case playing out in Downtown DC. Our Christian Flores standing by. Christian, you have new information for us. I'll keep it on. You know, just wanna kind of take you back to what we're looking at right now. I mean, again, it's just an absolutely packed scene still several hours later. I mean, look, we've been talking about it pretty much throughout the entire afternoon. We're so close to the White House. You're used to seeing just more amped up police presence and security presence around this area. But, of course, you have a shooting and not just a shooting, but a shooting targeting two National Guard troops, and it's just gonna be amped up to eleven. I mean, earlier this afternoon, we spoke with someone who saw the aftermath. He didn't see the shooting, but he saw the aftermath. All of the first responders rushed to the scene. People, you know, trying to get some help to the scene. And he said he hasn't seen a police presence like this since, really, 09:11. And he's been here for a number of decades. Now, obviously, those are gonna be very, very different levels of police presence.

On January 4th, in the Oval Office, Donald Trump authorized up to 20,000 troops, as confirmed by the four individuals interviewed. The meeting involved the Secretary of Defense, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Chief of Staff to the President, and the President himself. They discussed national security threats and preparations for January 6th. Trump unequivocally approved the use of National Guardsmen and women if requested, but those requests never came. The individuals testified under oath about this meeting. They emphasized that the purpose of the meeting was not solely focused on January 6th, but rather on broader threats to the United States.

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.

The secretary was asked to justify using the military for civilian law enforcement in Los Angeles. The secretary stated every American deserves to live in a safe community, and ICE agents need to be able to do their job of deporting illegal criminals. He said President Trump believes in law and order and has the authority to mobilize the National Guard or active duty troops to protect federal agents. When asked which authority justifies the use, the secretary stated it sounds like all three, citing millions of illegals waving flags from foreign countries and assaulting officers. He said the governor of California has failed to protect his people, along with the mayor of Los Angeles, so President Trump will protect the agents. When told orders for these purposes should be issued through governors, the secretary stated President Trump has all the authorities necessary.

Speaker 0 asked Secretary Hagsteth about a memo circulating on social media detailing the establishment of a National Guard Response Force trained in crowd control and civil unrest and deployed in all 50 states by April 2026, requesting verification of authenticity and more information on operations. Speaker 1 responded that they will not answer particulars on something that may be in the planning process, but noted that there are multiple layers of National Guard Response Forces, including in each state, regionally, and across Title 10 active duty and Washington DC. He stated there are a lot of different ways constitutionally and legally to employ Title X and Title 32 forces, and they will do so when necessary.

The speaker's team found a previously missing interview where a witness testified that Mark Meadows offered up to 10,000 troops. The speaker cites a Vanity Fair article from early January reporting that Trump authorized Secretary Miller to ready the National Guard. A White House employee testified that Trump's immediate response upon hearing about the Capitol attack was to get Pelosi and Milley on the phone to see what help they needed. The speaker claims there is on-the-record evidence that Trump offered the National Guard, but Pelosi and Bowser turned down the offer.

An interviewer asks if it's true that President Trump offered 20,000 National Guard troops to protect the Capitol on January 6th, but the offer was rejected. One speaker says Trump's acting secretary of defense, Chris Miller, testified that Trump never issued an order to deploy the guard. Kash Patel and another individual confirm under oath that on January 4th in the Oval Office, they heard Donald Trump authorize up to 20,000 troops for January 6th. They state the Secretary of Defense, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, and President Trump were present. They claim Trump authorized the troops to be utilized should a request come in, but those requests never did. One speaker clarifies the meeting was primarily about a foreign threat to the U.S., and the discussion about January 6th occurred at the end. They believe Trump was acting as any commander-in-chief would.

The speaker's team found a previously missing interview where a witness testified that Mark Meadows offered up to 10,000 troops. The speaker cites a Vanity Fair article from early January reporting that Trump authorized Secretary Miller to ready the National Guard. A White House employee testified that Trump's immediate response upon hearing of the Capitol attack was to get Pelosi and Milley on the phone to see what help they needed. The speaker claims there is on-the-record evidence that Trump offered the National Guard, but Pelosi and Bowser turned down the offer.

The speaker's team found a previously missing interview where a witness testified that Mark Meadows offered up to 10,000 troops. The speaker cites a Vanity Fair article from early January reporting that Trump authorized Secretary Miller to ready the National Guard. The speaker also references White House transcribed interviews where an employee stated that Trump's immediate response upon hearing about the Capitol attack was to get Pelosi and Milley on the phone to see what help they needed. The speaker claims there is on-the-record evidence that Trump offered the National Guard, but Pelosi and Bowser turned down the offer.

An interviewer asks if it's true that President Trump offered 20,000 National Guard troops to protect the Capitol on January 6th, but the offer was rejected. One speaker references Trump's acting secretary of defense, Chris Miller, who testified that Trump never issued an order to deploy the Guard. Two interviewees claim that on January 4th in the Oval Office, they heard Donald Trump authorize up to 20,000 troops. One speaker states that Secretary of Defense Chris Miller, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley, Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, and President Trump were in the Oval Office discussing serious national security threats before pivoting to January 6th. Trump authorized up to 20,000 National Guard troops for use, should the request come in, but those requests never did. One interviewee clarifies the January 4th meeting was primarily about a foreign threat to the U.S. and that Trump brought up January 6th at the end of the meeting.

The speaker's team found a previously missing interview where a witness testified that Mark Meadows offered up to 10,000 troops. The speaker cites a Vanity Fair article from early January reporting that Trump authorized Secretary Miller to ready the National Guard. A White House employee testified that Trump's immediate response upon hearing of the Capitol attack was to get Pelosi and Milley on the phone to see what help they needed. The speaker claims there is on-the-record evidence that Trump offered the National Guard, but Pelosi and Bowser turned down the offer.

The speaker's team found a previously missing interview where a witness testified that Mark Meadows offered up to 10,000 troops. The speaker cites a Vanity Fair article from early January reporting that Trump authorized Secretary Miller to ready the National Guard. A White House employee testified that Trump's immediate response upon hearing of the Capitol attack was to get Pelosi and Milley on the phone to see what help they needed. The speaker claims there is on-the-record evidence that Trump offered the National Guard, but Pelosi and Bowser turned down the offer.

Support will be provided at the southern border through various military statuses, including state active duty, Title 32, or Title 10. This marks a shift in how operations are typically conducted. The Department of Defense is committed to protecting the territorial integrity of the United States, involving reservists, the National Guard, and active duty personnel, all in accordance with the Constitution and directives from the commander in chief. Discussions about invoking the Insurrection Act will be determined by the White House. We are prepared to take necessary actions to secure the southern border.

Governor Newsom did not request federal assistance from the National Guard in California, which has 9,000 local law enforcement officers. The National Guard operates under the governor's supervision. However, during the Iraq War, the Bush administration requested National Guard troops, resources, equipment, weapons, and vehicles. Coordination is key, and it's important to work together to solve problems, regardless of who initiates the request.

The National Guard and Marines are being stationed at federal buildings across the country where riots are taking place, not deployed against US citizens. They remain on federal property to provide security for those buildings. If people do not storm the federal building or attack the National Guard, they will not be attacked. As an investigative journalist who covers protests, the speaker says they stood two inches from the National Guard, who did nothing. The National Guard is not allowed to operate in a law enforcement capacity because the cities will not allow it.

General William Walker, the commanding general of the District of Columbia National Guard, assures that they have everything they need to counter the current threat level. The National Guard's role is to assist law enforcement, particularly in civil disturbance situations. They serve as a layered defense alongside the Secret Service, Capitol Police, Metropolitan Police Department, and United States Park Police to ensure a peaceful transfer of power. The National Guard members are screened for insider threats through a credentialing process involving background checks and multiple screenings. General Walker expresses confidence in their ability to handle the situation.

The United States military, including Secretary of Defense Miller and General Milley, discussed locking down Washington DC due to concerns of violence at the Capitol on January 6th. They considered revoking permits for demonstrations on Capitol Hill. However, I, the one who issues these permits, was not informed. Instead, on January 4th, Miller restricted the National Guard from carrying any weapons or civil disobedience equipment, which doesn't make sense. So, the military expresses worry about potential violence but simultaneously limits the National Guard's ability to take an aggressive stance.