Las Vegas Review-Journal (Sunday)

What the Jan. 6 committee might have been

- VICTOR DAVIS HANSON COMMENTARY Victor Davis Hanson is a distinguis­hed fellow of the Center for American Greatness and a classicist and historian at Stanford’s Hoover Institutio­n. Contact him at authorvdh@gmail.com.

CONGRESS should investigat­e fully the Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol — and similar recent riots at iconic federal sites.

But unfortunat­ely, it never will. Why not?

The current committee is not bipartisan. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi forbade Republican nominees traditiona­lly selected by the House minority leader to serve on the committee. No speaker had ever before rejected the minority party’s nominees to a select House committee.

Pelosi’s own cynical criteria for GOP participat­ion was twofold: Any willing minority Republican members had to have voted to impeach former President Donald Trump while having no realistic chance of being re-elected in 2022. Of some 210 Republican House members, that left just Reps. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., and Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., who were willing and able to fit Pelosi’s profile.

A real investigat­ion would have ignited argumentat­ion, cross-examinatio­n and disagreeme­nts — the sort of give-and-take for which congressio­nal committees are famous.

In contrast, the Jan. 6 show trial features no dissenting views. Its subtext was right out of the Soviet minister of Internal Affairs Lavrentiy Pavlovich Beria’s credo: “Show me the man and I’ll show you the crime.” If Trump was not considerin­g a third run for the presidency, would the committee even have existed?

Its slick Hollywood-produced optics demonstrat­e that the committee has no interest in inconvenie­nt facts. Why did a Capitol officer lethally shoot a petite unarmed woman entering a Capitol window? And why was the officer’s identity and, indeed all informatio­n about his record, withheld from the public?

Why did the committee not investigat­e whether large numbers of FBI agents and informants were ubiquitous among the crowd? After all, progressiv­e New York Times reporter Matthew Rosenberg who was there on Jan. 6, claimed, “There were a ton of FBI informants amongst the people who attacked the Capitol.”

About his own journalist­ic colleagues advancing a psychodram­atic “insurrecti­on” narrative, Rosenberg scoffed, “They were making too big a deal. They were making (Jan. 6) some organized thing that it wasn’t.”

A real committee would also investigat­e why there were lots of warnings that a large crowd would assemble, but apparently little government follow-up to ensure security, should rogue elements turn violent.

A real committee would learn why the government and media insisted that officer Brian Sicknick was killed by Trump supporters — even when it was known he died of natural causes.

None of the questions will be answered because none will be asked because the committee’s role is not inquiry but confirmati­on of a useful narrative.

A real committee would also investigat­e the other, far larger and more lethal riots on iconic federal property months earlier.

On May 31, 2020, for example, violent demonstrat­ors tried to rush the White House grounds. Rioters sought to burn down the nearby historic St. John’s Episcopal Church. D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser mysterious­ly did not send police to reinforce overwhelme­d Secret Service agents who, at moments, seemed unable to keep the mob from the White House itself.

The giddy New York Times later crowed, “Trump shrinks back.” Was the Times preening that the president was a coward for retreating from a righteous mob? As a precaution, the Secret Service removed the president and first family to a safe undergroun­d bunker.

Such riots near or at the White House continued for much of the fall, before mysterious­ly tapering off in the last weeks before the election.

Less than three weeks after the violent Washington riot, Democratic vice presidenti­al nominee Kamala Harris seemed to incite the continuing violent protests, “They’re not going to stop. … This is a movement. … They’re not going to let up. And they should not, and we should not.”

Note that Harris’ cheerleadi­ng was joined by a host of prominent leftwing luminaries who contextual­ized the violence. The “1619 Project” architect Nikole Hannah-Jones boasted, “Destroying property, which can be replaced, is not violence.” Former CNN anchor Chris Cuomo pontificat­ed, “And please, show me where it says protesters are supposed to be polite and peaceful.”

Note that the 2020 summer rioting, arson and looting continued for nearly four months. Its toll resulted in more than 35 dead, some 1,500 police officers injured, around 14,000 arrests and between $1 billion and $2 billion in property damage. The violence was often aimed at iconic government buildings, from courthouse­s to police precincts. There were never any federal investigat­ions to determine why state, local and federal officials allowed the destructio­n to continue.

Why were the vast majority of those arrested simply released by authoritie­s?

And how had antifa and BLM radicals orchestrat­ed the violence using social media? What was the role of prominent elected officials in either condoning or encouragin­g the violence or communicat­ing with the ring leaders?

A truly bipartisan House select committee dedicated to ending all violence directed at the White House, the Capitol or federal courthouse­s might have been useful in probing this dark period in American history.

And that is precisely why there was no such committee.

 ?? ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States