Former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi recently attempted to criticize President Trump for deploying National Guard troops in Washington, D.C., but her claims drew strong pushback. The context of her remarks is crucial. Many on the right, especially within the MAGA movement, assert that Pelosi bears some responsibility for the events of January 6, 2021. They argue she failed to ensure the National Guard was prepared to respond to potential chaos, a narrative that makes her attempts to attack Trump particularly problematic.
In her recent post on X, Pelosi accused Trump of delaying the deployment of National Guard troops during the January 6 riots, stating, “Donald Trump delayed deploying the National Guard on January 6th when our Capitol was under violent attack and lives were at stake.” However, this assertion was met with immediate criticism from former Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund, who has consistently challenged her version of events.
Sund responded sharply to Pelosi’s claims, stating, “Ma’am, it is long past time to be honest with the American people.” He detailed how he had requested National Guard assistance on January 3, only to be met with denial from Pelosi’s Sergeant at Arms. Sund noted, “Under federal law (2 U.S.C. §1970), I was prohibited from calling them in without specific approval.” His comments underscore a significant point: he lacked the authority to deploy troops without approval from House leadership, with evidence showing that such requests were repeatedly denied on the day of the attack.
Reflecting on the urgency of that day, Sund recalled, “On January 6, while the Capitol was under attack and despite my repeated calls, your Sergeant at Arms again denied my urgent requests for over 70 agonizing minutes.” His detailed account of the timeline highlights a failure in leadership that critics argue points back to Pelosi herself.
Sund’s accusations play a central role in the ongoing discourse around responsibility for the attack. He raised the issue of how Capitol security measures changed after the disruption, stating, “Yet when it suited you, you ordered fencing topped with concertina wire and surrounded the Capitol with thousands of armed National Guard troops.” This statement speaks volumes about the perceived hypocrisy in Pelosi’s narrative regarding her actions post-January 6.
The matter does not end here. FBI Director Kash Patel has echoed similar sentiments, arguing that the National Guard was available but not deployed due to a lack of authorization from the Sergeant at Arms. During a Senate hearing, Patel asserted that, contrary to Pelosi’s narrative, there were measures in place to secure the Capitol that were not acted upon appropriately.
The fallout from this exchange is indicative of the broader political battle over the events of January 6 and its aftermath. Pelosi’s attempts to shift blame reflect a struggle to control the narrative surrounding one of the most turbulent days in recent U.S. history. As she continues to face intense scrutiny, the responses from Sund and Patel serve to reinforce a narrative that challenges her credibility.
In the wake of these developments, the question remains: how will Pelosi address these mounting accusations, and will her critics’ assertions find wider acceptance in public discourse? The examination of her actions and the leadership dynamics on that fateful day intensifies, underscoring the ongoing ramifications of January 6 on American politics.
"*" indicates required fields
