US Elites Clutch Their Pearls on the Capital Hill Riots So Hard They Break Their Necklaces

Executive Summary

• The political and economic elites have been virtue signaling like crazy after the Capital Riot.
• This article discusses how ridiculous this pearl-clutching is.

Introduction

The corrupt elite’s statements have been amazing for how they miss their role in driving the US political system into the dirt.

See our references for this article and related articles at this link.

The Trump Speech

This one hour and 13-minute speech is a marathon of lies. It is the most irresponsible speech any US President has given, at least in my adult lifetime. He proposes to the audience that there is tremendous evidence that he won the election and that they can contest the result. 

If you don’t want to watch the video, you can read the transcript here.

Did Trump Think Through What He Was Doing?

This entire speech was poorly thought out in terms of the outcomes it would cause.

He told his audience to march down to the Capitol and let their voices be heard. However, what did Trump think would be accomplished by marching down to the capital? He stated that all that was necessary was for Pence to refute the results, and the decision would be handed to the states, which Trump said that the states wanted. However, they do not want this, and if Pence had done this, the states would have returned the same results. Trump’s claims are delusional on many different levels. Reuters called Trump a “pied piper” in terms of how he misled his followers. This seems like an accurate description of what he did.

One also wonders how much of this is driven by Trump not wanting to leave office as he faces legal consequences when he is no longer president.

For years Trump has used his presidential position to escape numerous lawsuits and criminal probes. This is clearly the behavior of a desperate man, so one wonders about this desperation’s motivation.

Did Trump Incite Violence?

Trump massively lied about his accomplishments in the speech, and the speech is most definitely delusional. However, I was told by the media coverage that Trump incited violence with his speech. Violence did follow his speech. But the question that should be answered is whether his speech can be interpreted as calling out violence.

I could find nowhere in his speech, where he incited violence. I heard him say that “peacefully.” However, that was not presented in much of the media coverage. I feel this was designed to make the speech appear to be more aggressive than it actually was.

Let us review a presentation by Reuters on the speech.

About two hours after Kremer’s speech, Trump took the same rally stage and exhorted this volatile mix of supporters repeatedly to “fight” – using the word more than 20 times – and “not take it any longer.” He ridiculed “weak” and “pathetic” Republicans and told the crowd they must “be strong” before dispatching the “patriots” on a march to the Capitol.

What Reuters is leaving out is Trump normally talks this way. And it does not lead to violence. But the second part of this paragraph is seemingly deliberately cherry-picking the speech. Trump said, “peacefully and patriotically.” Why would Reuters choose to leave this out?

And it is not only Reuters but all of the major establishment media that seemed to do this.

Now, look at what Reuters says about who died during the Capital riot.

Five people died in connection with the Capitol violence, including a police officer, as well as a protester shot by police.

Why are the other three deaths left out? Let us look at how these three people died to see why Reuters may have decided not to mention their cause of death.

Death #3:

Kevin D. Greeson, 55, of Athens, Ala., was standing in a throng of fellow Trump loyalists on the west side of the Capitol when he suffered a heart attack and fell to the sidewalk. He was talking on the phone with his wife at the time.

Death #4:

Rosanne Boyland, 34, of Kennesaw, Ga., posted fervently in support of President Trump on social media. How she died remained unclear on Monday. Family members and friends said they had heard from a friend who was with her that Ms. Boyland had been trampled inside the Capitol during clashes between rioters and the police. But a sister told the A.P. that she had been told by a police detective that Ms. Boyland had collapsed while standing in the Capitol Rotunda.

Another point is that Rosanne was recovering from drug addiction. This may have given her underlying health conditions exacerbated by the stress of the riot and violence.

Death #5:

Benjamin Philips, 50, the founder of a pro-Trump website called Trumparoo. Mr. Philips died of a stroke in Washington, those who accompanied him to the Capitol told the newspaper. The exact circumstances of his death were still unclear, and his family could not be reached for comment.

The omission of these deaths, which appears to be due not to violence but these individuals’ underlying health conditions, is either lying by omission or very close to it. By hiding the cause of death of 3/5ths of the casualties, establishment media sources can make the riot seem more violent than it was. It appears that Reuters, and many other media outlets, would like readers to assume that these three people died in violent combat with Capital police.

Furthermore, when I originally wrote this article, but when I looked into the death of Brian Sicknick, which media sources had proposed had been verified as being

“beaten to death with a fire extinguisher,”

I found that even close to two weeks after his death (I am adjusting this article on Jan 28) no one actually knows how he died. This is hence chalked up to another hysterical claim by media sources interested in creating a story, rather than reporting on a story. 

I should go without saying that you should not report on the cause of death if you don’t know. And I should also point out that if a person is beaten to death with a fire extinguisher, it’s not very difficult to determine the cause of death. This is because being beaten to death leaves signs of trauma. If after two weeks, they still have no idea, then this leans towards Brian Sicknick having died of something else. 

If this death was not at the hands of rioters (which again no one appears presently to know), then the violence by the rioters would be zero. Yes, George Stephanapolis called the Capital riot..

The worst act of domestic terrorism in American history.  

At the 16:20 mark of the video of his speech above, Trump states the following.

I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the capitol building to peacefully and patriotically (emphasis added) make your voices heard. Today we will see if Republicans stand strong, for the integrity of our elections.  – Trump

At the end of the video, while wrapping up, he states the following.

We fight. And we fight like hell. And if you don’t fight like hell, you won’t have a country anymore. Our exciting adventures and boldest endeavors have not yet begun. My fellow Americans for our children and for our beloved country. And I say this despite all that has happened. The best is yet to come. So we are going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue. We are going to the Capitol and we are going to try to give our Republicans, the weak ones because the strong ones don’t need our help. We are going to try to give them the kind of pride and boldness to recapture our country. – Trump

The only part of this speech that could reasonably be interpreted as inciting violence was this sentence’s first part. However, the problem is that “to fight” is commonly used in as much a way of asserting one’s will against a force as it is to fight in the physical sense. Furthermore, Trump always has a very coarse way of speaking. And he has been speaking in this coarse manner since he began running for the presidency.

Let us look at his debate performance.

This is how Trump has always spoken. It is direct and confrontational. (the point he is making here happens to be true). This has led to rude and presidential events ranging from comments on US war dead (referring to them as “losers”) to arguments with reporters. That is it, is nothing out of the ordinary for Trump. 

The point is that Trump has spoken in the same manner at Trump rallies for 4 years, and it never led to violence. At one rally, he said that a protester should have his “ass kicked.” Again no violence resulted from this.

In fact, this comment explains how authorities viewed Trump supporters before the Capital riot.

Some law enforcement officials took the view that protesters who support Trump are generally known for over-the-top rhetoric but not much violence, and therefore the event did not pose a particularly serious risk, according to people familiar with the security discussions leading up to Jan. 6. – Washington Post

So why is this speech being viewed as inciting violence? If this riot had not happened, I would never have interpreted this section of the speech “fight like hell” as literal.

Outside of telling the audience to march down to the Capitol, it was a standard Trump speech. This is normally just his bragging about fake or exaggerated accomplishments and talks about how bad his opponents.

The speech was in bad taste and was extremely childish. It was packed with lies. It was also dishonest because it made his audience feel like they could do something to alter the outcome, which they couldn’t.

Does A Wild Protest = A Violent Protest?

Another supposed piece of evidence used by politicians and the establishment media that Trump incited violence is the fact that he tweeted the protests would be “wild.” Here is the quote from Reuters.

“Be there, will be wild!,” the president tweeted on Dec. 19, one of several tweets touting the event.

In what universe does wild translate to violent?

There is a video series called “Girls Gone Wild.” Under Reuter’s interpretation of the term wild, that video series has a whole new meaning. The term “wild” normally is used to describe a festive and madcap experience. The first thought that comes to mind when I hear the term “wild” is water parks, as many of them have wild in their names.

This is a promotional poster for the Wild Water Adventure Park in Fresno. But according to Reuters, this water park is inciting violence among its young patrons. 

Who Did Incite Violence?

I finally did find a person who was guilty of inciting violence. And it was Giuliani. I did not find this reported in the original coverage, which is surprising, considering the importance and undeniably of the claim.

Let us look at Giuliani’s quote.

“If we are wrong, we will be made fools of, but if we’re right, a lot of them will go to jail. So let’s have trial by combat.” He told the MAGA crowd shortly before they proceeded…” – AVClub

Here it is in the video.

It sounds more in jest than serious, but this is a problem. Why would you say that? And the comment has to be taken in the context of repeated speakers coming forward and telling the audience they had been cheated. This is several hours of speeches, all saying the same thing and something false. Another problem is stating that “a lot of them would go to jail.” Giuliani knew this was not true.

I think there is some issue with Giuliani being Trump’s lawyer. Like he is in Trump’s chain of command. That is an odd thing for a lawyer to say. Is that where we are going now?

Giuliani is a former District Attorney, but he supports trial by combat now? The implication is bizarre. It would mean we would decide elections based on combat.

Giuliani tried to weasel out of responsibility by saying what he said and only referring to Game of Thrones. However, trial by combat is in Game of Thrones, but it exactly what it sounds like. So it is difficult to see how this gets Giuliani out of hot water.

My analysis of Guiliani’s behavior over several years is that he should be disbarred as he is no longer mentally of sound. However, as I have found, attorneys are never disbarred without first having been convicted of a crime.

What is the Standard of Incitement to Violence?

I don’t like Guliani’s statement, and he should not have said it. However, what is the standard of incitement to violence?

Here are just a few comments from BLM protesters.

Those chilling words echo the rhetoric we hear from BLM founders and members, who make clear that a prime objective of BLM is to “Kill Cops.” Up until now, this has been kept well enough under wraps to ­deceive major corporations, professional sports leagues, and countless well-meaning Americans.

A Black Lives Matter protestor told a cheering crowd in Portland that she wanted “filthy, disgusting animal” cops to “fry like bacon” — as she declared a “war” where militants should “shoot back” in a disturbing speech captured on video.

“This is a war, guys … We’re getting ready to get armored up around here,” declared Letha Winston, whose son, Patrick Kimmons, was shot dead by cops in 2018 as he charged toward them seconds after he shot two men.

“I will continue with my mission by any means necessary,” she added — repeating “by any means necessary” several times as she spoke for more than an hour Sunday in front of the Oregon city’s Justice Center.– New York Post

These types of comments have been going on in BLM protests for many months. Yet I don’t recall anyone stating that BLM protesters need to be charged with inciting a riot. Take Guliani’s phrase, and compare it to many BLM protesters, that actively call for police to be murdered (and police have been murdered at BLM protests), and one has to wonder what standard is being applied.

Many BLM murals like this describe the US police as some type of Nazi SS force. No one says maybe these have gone too far. Furthermore, the math of murder by police shows this claim to be completely false. 

Not only are BLM protestors able to use violent language, media-sources have not challenged their claims. BLM protests are a hotbed of false claims. 

The Lack of Evidence Provided for His Claims

It goes without saying that Trump either should have brought evidence of a rigged the election or conceded long ago.

This video explains that Trump has lost all of his legal challenges to the election. 

The 2020 election was rigged. However, it was rigged during the Democratic primary, when competitors to Biden were given backroom deals. The donors and Obama rallied around Biden as the best way to defeat any progressive forces that were supporting Bernie Sanders. And that is not the rigging that Trump is referring to. Trump supporters are correct that Big Tech and Big Media did hide the Hunter Biden email scandal. This most likely would have turned the election as it was so close. But I have not seen evidence that the votes themselves were incorrectly counted, or at least any more that any other election. However, the coverage of the riot, and the coverage of the inauguration of Biden has drawn comparisons to the coverage of the North Korean media.

I am not a Trump supporter (I like some things he did and disliked others) and do not support the Democrats. However, it cannot be a dispute that Big Tech and Big Media are aligned with the Democratic Party and have no interest in presenting either a conservative or a progressive view. 

Trump is also correct that the US elections do not meet the standards of international elections. But again, that is nothing related to this specific election. Trump himself disfavors fair elections. He is a con man who has spent his entire adult life lying and cheating.

The Capital Riot Was Racist?

In another example of projection, the riot was said to be racist. This is curious because nothing in Trump’s speech dealt with race, and this appears to be a projection based upon not the content what the rioters said they were angry about “a stolen election,” but was about race. And the projection appears to be that a high percentage of the protesters/rioters were white.

Rashida Tlaib, a Muslim to believes that all non-Muslims are inferior to Muslims and that they need to be fought until they submit to Allah or pay the jizyah, and believes in a system where Muslims are in a superior legal position to non-Muslims, led her comments by calling Trump a racist. 

Why is that the first statement that she made? Were all of the rioters racists, according to Tlaib? Were they more or less racist than, say, Muslims? How about violence? Is Trump more or less violent than the Prophet Mohammed? Let us check a quote directly from Mohammed.

Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold forbidden that which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. – Quran 9:29

And this modern interpretation.

In 2016, a scholar at Egypt’s al-Azhar, the most prestigious Islamic school in the Sunni world, stated that non-Muslim women could be captured in a time of war become “property” and can be raped “in order to humiliate them.”

In Islam, any Muslim to denies anything said by Mohammed is immediately an apostate. So Tlaib must support this passage and all of the other Islamic passages. And when Mohammed stated “fight,” he meant in the physical sense, not in the political sense as we often do today.

Let us see what ISIS says about fighting the non-believer who is lower than a dog or pig.

“We will conquer your Rome, break your crosses, and enslave your women,” Adnani, the spokesman, promised in one of his periodic valentines to the West. “If we do not reach that time, then our children and grandchildren will reach it, and they will sell your sons as slaves at the slave market.” – ISIS

And what is the mainline Muslim view of non-believers? Let us see in the following quote.

Sharia does not contain the concept of citizenship, for which there was not word in Arabic. In its terms, the inequality between believers and unbelievers appears to be unbridgeable. This is evident from the rigid discrimination against non-Muslims in Saudi Arabia, a Sharia state, and in the vulgarly expressed opinions of Islamists like Abu Hamza, who wishes to impose Sharia in Great Britain. He declared, “Only the most ignorant and animal minded individuals would insist that prophet killer (Jews) and Jesus worshipers (Christians) deserve the same rights as us.” As mentioned before, Islam is considered the din al-fitra, the religion that is “natural” to man. It was Adam’s religion and would be everyone’s religion were they not converted as children to apostasy in their upbringing by Christians, Jews, Hindus, or others. Therefore, restoring everyone to Islam is the only path to true “equality.” – The Closing of the Muslim Mind 

Is there any quote from Trump that matches this in its discriminatory view of other groups? Is Tlaib or any other Muslim, for that matter, in a good position to lecture others on inclusiveness and non-bigotry?

No More Logos of the Punisher?

Some noted that many of the rioters had symbols of comic book character The Punisher on their clothing. This was somehow viewed as more evidence that the rioters were racist, even though the Punisher was never presented as a racist in the comic books.

How did a wholesome comic character like The Punisher become converted into a sick representation of hate? It is a mystery. 

The Punisher has always represented vengeance. The entire character is based around his conversion into a killer due to his family being murdered.

However, many WOKE individuals now see The Punisher skull symbol as being associated with white supremacy. They say a way to reclaim the character is perhaps to make the character black. The problem with this Batman also is a representation of vengeance. And if whites begin wearing the bat symbol on their clothing, soon Batman’s character may have to become Chinese.

And there is another problem, many groups have appropriated The Punisher logo.

The usage of the Punisher generally began with Chris Kyle, the late Navy SEAL and author of the book American Sniper (adapted into a 2014 film by Clint Eastwood), who used the Punisher logo during his deployment. “We all thought what the Punisher did was cool: He righted wrongs,” Kyle wrote in his 2012 book. “So we adapted his symbol — a skull — and made it our own. – Inverse

But wait? Isn’t Chris Kyle, an American hero? The Punisher logo has been adopted widely among the US military. So isn’t opposing the logo now denigrating our brave fighting soldiers?

This is the problem with trying to project racism onto symbols. Many people may be using the symbol in a way that does not fit with your projection.

What Happened with Security During the Capital Riot?

The response by those responsible for providing security at the Capitol building has been to remove themselves from any responsibility. Is the US able to secure the building where Congress meets? It would seem like something the US could do.

When researching this, it was interesting to find that this is not the first time the legislators needed to flee the building.

After adopting the Articles of Confederation in York, Pennsylvania, the Congress of the Confederation was formed and convened in Philadelphia from March 1781 until June 1783, when a mob of angry soldiers converged upon Independence Hall, demanding payment for their service during the American Revolutionary War. Congress requested that John Dickinson, the Governor of Pennsylvania, call up the militia to defend Congress from attacks by the protesters. In what became known as the Pennsylvania Mutiny of 1783, Dickinson sympathized with the protesters and refused to remove them from Philadelphia. As a result, Congress was forced to flee to Princeton, New Jersey, on June 21, 1783 – Wikipedia

The Hill brought up the point that Homeland Security does not want to talk about how it occurred.

The former Chief of the LAPD stated that there are 2300 officers to defend one square mile around the Capital. Where did all these officers go? How many officers were at the Dunkin Donuts while this was going on? The former LAPD Chief considers the riot’s outcome to be incompetent, considering law enforcement resources not only in the Capital but also in very close proximity to the Capital. 

This video from The Hill indicates that the FBI warned Capitol security about potential violence from this event, and Capitol security apparently did nothing. How could so many officers in DC not be brought to bear on the Capital?

Observe that this FBI warning was given with significant lead time before Trump gave his speech. People who were part of the riot shared maps of the Capitol and other plans and discussed violent acts. This is explained in the following quotations.

A day before rioters stormed Congress, an FBI office in Virginia issued an explicit warning that extremists were preparing to travel to Washington to commit violence and “war,” according to an internal document reviewed by The Washington Post that contradicts a senior official’s declaration the bureau had no intelligence indicating anyone at last week’s demonstrations in support of President Trump planned to do harm.

“As of 5 January 2021, FBI Norfolk received information indicating calls for violence in response to ‘unlawful lockdowns’ to begin on 6 January 2021 in Washington, D.C.,” the document says. “An online thread discussed specific calls for violence to include stating ‘Be ready to fight. Congress needs to hear glass breaking, doors being kicked in, and blood from their BLM and Pantifa slave soldiers being spilled. Get violent. Stop calling this a march, or rally, or a protest. Go there ready for war. We get our President or we die. NOTHING else will achieve this goal.”

The warning is the starkest evidence yet of the sizable intelligence failure that preceded the mayhem, which claimed the lives of five people, although one law enforcement official, speaking on the condition of anonymity to avoid disciplinary action, said the failure was not one of intelligence but of acting on the intelligence.

The document notes that one online comment advised, “if Antifa or BLM get violent, leave them dead in the street,” while another said they need “people on standby to provide supplies, including water and medical, to the front lines. The individual also discussed the need to evacuate noncombatants and wounded to medical care.”

A few questions naturally arise.

• If this were all planned weeks, how can Trump’s speech be blamed for inciting this riot?
• If those accused Trump of inciting the riot, why are they not observing the planning that went into this event?

If a group of people has electronic correspondence going back and forth for weeks, they declare their intent to rob a bank on a certain day, and they bring the equipment to rob the bank that day. Then they attend a speech. How much is the speech considered responsible for “inciting” the bank robbery?

Schwarzenegger Compares Trump to Hitler

As for the analogy presented here — it is not clear to me that it is that strong. Those that oppose Trump have a strong desire to compare him to Hitler, but it’s hard to see the correlation. Now Arnold is doing it.

Did Trump gain power by instigating the riot?

No, he lost power.

Furthermore, most of the media is going bananas over the event because they are trying to fan the flames by telling people what they want to hear.

Watching this video on Kristallnacht, I wonder how much Schwarzenegger read up on this event before making the comparison. Kristallnacht was about mass violence and stipping one group, Jews, of their citizenship rights. Is that what happened at the Capital riot? What group got their rights taken? Four of the five casualties were taken on the side of the rioters. 

Whipping Up Crazies on Both Sides

This confirmation bias is the same thing that, in part, drove the riot. Trump whipped up his crazies, and now NBC and CNN are whipping up their crazies as they clutch their pearls. NBC and CNN are a major part of the problem. They are not “passive bystanders just reporting the news.” Still, They are using the event to try to push up their Democratic allies by using PR and exaggerating the event’s importance. The coverage by CNN was so shrill I thought an asteroid had hit the earth.  

Sargon of Akkad

Sargon of Akkad made the following video describing the inconsistent response between the BLM riots and the Capital riot.

Like Sargon, I am lost as to why we put up with BLM riots for many months with no one challenging them, even though their entire story they presented was based upon easily verifiable false math about black killings by police. Now everyone is so angry about the single Capital Hill Riot. 

Secondly, the elites in this country are more responsible for our problems than the bozos at the Capital Hill riot. The elites have taken control of the system and then complain only about a thing like the Capital Hill Riot. What about their role in nearly entirely stopping public input into legislation?

Biden is now going to lead?

His cabinet will be as corrupt as Trump’s.

And how did Biden win the primary? As I said, but having the primary rigged for him. Now he wants to discuss the importance of “democracy.” Right.

Neither side has any concern for public participation in the process. To hear enormous sleaze buckets like Mulvaney and Pelosi and McConnell say they were disgusted by the riot was ridiculous hypocrisy. Every day Washington DC is swarmed with lobbyists who help the politicians do things to screw over the population to the corporations’ benefit. All of the people mentioned think it is great. We now don’t regulate companies, and they instead regulate the US Government. McConnell and Pelosi tell the politicians in their parties HOW to vote to such a degree that I wonder why we even send 535 senators and Congress members to Washington DC. Why not just shrink the senate to 5 people and get it over with.

Our Most Disgusting and Corrupt Recoiling in Disgust?

In their view, as long as the current corrupt system continues, it’s all good, but one day of a riot, and THAT is where they say they are disgusted? Here is a tip. If you are personally corrupt and disgusting and massively on the take, you don’t get to be disgusted.

The Hill did a great job in this segment, calling out the elites to ruin the US’s political environment and not let them off the hook or accept their story that the only problem is Trump. 

This second excellent video explains Big Tech’s problem using the Capital riot to censor voices that it opposes politically. 

Force the Vote! But Not on Single Payer, Only On Impeaching Trump

AOC fought against forcing a vote to show who was in favor of single-payer health care. However, she was very much in favor of forcing a vote on Trump’s impeachment. This is because she is much more willing to engage in political theater than stand up against her donors. 

Similarly, Nancy Pelosi could not wait to talk about how disgusted she was with Trump. As with AOC, when it comes to standing up against donors and doing something for the US population, both AOC and Pelosi are very “muted.” Normally saying the “time is not right,” however, they suddenly become quite animated when it comes to repudiating Trump. This type of event is “The Super Bowl” for Pelosi. It allows her to virtue signal while taking no risk. It is amusing to hear repeated politicians talk about “speaking truth to power,” who would never stand up to their donors. 

No More Elite Support

The elites have been happy to support Trump. However, now apparently, Trump is untouchable. The elites who receive no-interest loans, reduced regulation, and rigged government contracts that rob the rest of the population as a profession need to signal that they will not support Trump! See the following video from The Hill that explains how the elites are abandoning Trump and getting ready to suck up to the next administration.

Conclusion

There is no evidence that Trump incited violence in his speech. There is evidence that Guliani did. This is not to say that Trump’s speech was not irresponsible.

However, the elites clutching their pearls at the riot are ridiculous as they have no standards themselves. And the passion they are showing for this topic, versus the acceptance they show regarding corruption, and how they dissemble on the topics of regulating companies or reducing income inequality is quite apparent. These are the same elites who fully support the current system where over 12,000 lobbyists make policy that supports monopolies and force-feed taxpayer money into the largest corporations, which is converted into legislation through a rubber-stamping process that is managed in the political buildings like the Capital.

The Capital riot did not change the validation of the election result. It was a miscalculation on the part of Trump, who often does not realize his actions’ outcomes. It had no impact on the outcome of the election results and never could have had any outcome on election results.