Those watching Democrats’ impeachment mulligan this week were treated to hours of recycled tweets and heavily edited footage of the Jan. 6 uprising at the US Capitol, alongside a melodramatic narration of the events by partisan House managers.
Not surprisingly, seeing the footage onscreen left media hacks like ABC News’s George Stephanopoulos “visibly shaken” according to eyewitness reports. Clearly, that translates to guilt for former president Donald Trump, who is accused of inciting the so-called riot.
But amid all the tedium, as is often the case with Democrat hoaxes, the devil was really in the details.
Among those was the bizarre decision to lump two suicides (to date) and several tangential medical emergencies with the casualties that resulted directly from confrontations at the Capitol.
“The riots that day left at least seven people dead,” Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Colo., falsely claimed, yet again, on Thursday.
The Left’s insistence on pushing this dubious narrative raises further questions about how motivated Trump’s political adversaries may have been to establish it in the first place.
Might the need to neutralize Trump in 2024 have compelled them to rely upon the modus operandi typically reserved for large-scale cover-up operations like those involving Seth Rich and Jeffrey Epstein?
Following months of rhetoric in which their radical base frequently called for violence against law-enforcement, would leftists in Congress have thought twice about dispatching with officers who could lay down their lives in service of the greater globalist good?
Most coverage of House Democrats’ impeachment case focused on allegations that Trump “incited” political violence apropos of nothing, ignoring prior Democratic actions that violated the constitution or rhetorically raised the national barometer.
Repeatedly, they hammered the phrase “the Big Lie,” borrowed from socialist leader Adolf Hitler, as a sort of slight-of-hand to distract the public—and the senators sitting in judgment—from their actual strategy.
Meanwhile, true to their Chinese overlords, Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., and others used the “death by a thousand cuts” method to warp the narrative entirely through multiple minor distortions of fact that would seem so trivial and insignificant—or else so verboten due to sensitivity—that nobody would challenge them.
For example, they built their “harrowing” timeline around the close calls that lawmakers had—being minutes or feet away from the unruly mob—while ignoring the fact that many of those let into the Capitol behaved civilly and orderly once inside.
The strategy clearly was intended to elicit an emotional response rather than an objective, fact-driven one—despite lead impeachment manager Jamie Raskin‘s early promises to focus only on facts.
But just because members of Congress and their security details responded as if they were in imminent danger while nearly being exposed to the general public, that does not change the fact that no members of Congress were ever, realistically, put in harm’s way.
Moreover, there is precedent—including Democrats’ disruption of the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation proceedings—that would justify disorderly conduct within the Capitol building as a First Amendment exercise.
While none of this excuses the handful of people who broke the law by committing acts of violence or vandalism, it does shatter the case for incitement of a riot.
Thus, in order to feed the narrative of an imminent threat to democracy’s well-being, Democrats desperately needed to establish that the “mob” of MAGA supporters actually posed a danger—and to do so, they needed victims.
The early reporting about the death of Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick, himself a Trump supporter, eerily resembled the suspicious vote counting that occurred on Nov. 3 last year, during which urban centers in several battleground states pretended to halt their counts in the presence of observers, only to resume them later.
Media began inquiring about Sicknick’s death even before his family was notified, but amid a nebulous bombardment of fake-news reporting, it turned out some had jumped the gun: Sicknick was not dead yet, as noted in a recent retrospective by Revolver.
After Sicknick’s death came to pass, as prophesied by the media, revised reports surfaced that, contrary to the unsourced claims of the New York Times, he had not suffered blunt-force trauma by being bludgeoned with a fire hydrant. Instead, he had a stroke.
Since medical reports and criminal charges have yet to surface, it seems that the media may have finally learned its lesson about jumping the gun—but only after pushing the initial misinformation, which some, including Raskin, have failed to correct during the impeachment trial.
Yet, even as Democrats double-down on the deception over Sicknick, it would be easy enough for skeptics to apply the tourniquet of truth by forcing the left-wing propagandists to focus on the facts.
Thus, as seen during the Kavanaugh case—in which increasingly vaguer and more outlandish allegations of sexual assault began cropping up after Christine Blasey Ford’s initial, uncorroborated accusation—Sicknick’s death merely laid the groundwork for a whack-a-mole of specious claims with ever-more tenuous ties to the Jan. 6 protest.
Capitol Police Officer Howie Liebengood allegedly killed himself three days afterward, and Metro Police Officer Jeffrey Smith allegedly committed suicide in late January.
While details remain sparse on the circumstances of the two tragic losses, neither has yet been linked directly to what transpired at the US Capitol, and the motives remain unknown to the general public.
But, once again, Democrats have exploited these crises for their own political advantage.
The dearth of evidence in the investigations calls to mind yet another Democrat-driven conspiracy theory: the 2016 murder of Democratic National Committee staffer Seth Rich.
Although DC police quickly ruled it a robbery-related homicide, Rich’s possible role in leaking damaging DNC files to Wikileaks—along with the fact that nothing of material value was taken from him—led to lingering questions of a cover-up by the Hillary Clinton campaign.
Democrats’ unwavering refusal to provide a good-faith examination of the facts has only helped to fuel the suspicions in unsolved matters like the Rich case and another Clinton-linked probe into the supposed 2019 suicide of millionaire pedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
Until further evidence presents itself to rule out foul play, one can only look to the logical motives and draw the necessary inferences, often with damning implications for the leftists who are insisting that the public look the other way.
And in the lamentable cases of officers Sicknick, Liebengood and Smith, those unanswered questions certainly would be enough to make top Democrat leaders such as Raskin, Swalwell and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi persons of extreme interest.
