Five bombshells the January 6 committee forgot to mention

When our Founders designed the US Constitution, the January 6 investigation and promotional extravaganza was exactly the type of heresy they intended to outlaw.

Lies and propaganda are despots’ preferred tender. But, with the legacy media acting as the committee’s promotional arm it’s hard to discover truth. These highlights from an interview with one of the select committee’s witnesses reveals facts it seems the committee would rather forget.

The subpoenaing of Kash Patel before the January 6 committee

Kash Patel is a former public defender, Justice Department trial attorney, and senior counsel on counterterrorism for the House Intelligence Committee. In November 2020, Patel was made Chief of Staff to the acting defense secretary.

Because of his role in the DOD, Patel was integrally involved in the transfer of power from Trump to Biden and was subpoenaed to appear before the January 6 select committee.

The National Guard acts as a joint activity comprised of reservists from multiple armed forces under the Department of Defense. This is key to understanding the explosiveness of Patel’s testimony.

This is what Patel told the select committee under oath, that so far, has not been reported:

I. Use of National Guard

The DOD’s job is to secure federal buildings, American citizens, and members of Congress. It has nothing to do with voter integrity or election laws.

On January 4th Patel and several senior staff members met with the President in the Oval office and informed him there would be a lot of people attending January 6th and additional security may be needed. Trump brought up the idea of utilizing the National Guard.

(The law under posse comitatus requires two conditions before the National Guard can be deployed.)

1. Presidential authorization,
2. A formal request from a federal agency, mayor, or governor.

Without these two requirements being satisfied, the National Guard cannot be deployed.)

Trump immediately, at that meeting, authorized use of the National Guard.

The Capitol Police’ J6 timeline shows the DOD reached out to the Capitol police four times prior to the Jan 6 events to ask if they needed National Guard Assistance. DC Mayor Bowser, the Sergeant at Arms for the Senate (under Schumer), and the Sergeant at Arms for the House (under Pelosi) all rejected President Trump’s offer.

Lacking the required official requests from local authorities, by law the administration was blocked from deploying the National Guard.

II. Congress’ Request

The DOD sent multiple requests via the Secretary of the Army to Congress and even offered to put up a perimeter fence. All were rejected. On the afternoon of January 6 when the demonstration got out of hand, Congress who had previously rejected a perimeter fence and help from the National Guard, then requested the DOD supply crew-served weapons. These included machine guns, armor-plated Humvees, sniper rifles, plus Abrams tanks to be deployed on Pennsylvania Avenue. The DOD denied what they felt was an excessive use of military force that could endanger the lives of Americans. Some felt it was a politically motivated move designed to create optics.

III. A coup? How did Trump manage that in light of this…

“The idea that Trump wanted to interfere with the transition of power makes no sense”, Patel says. The transition between administrations is managed by the DOD under direct orders from the President. Our orders from Trump were to create a safe transition. We executed the largest presidential transition in U.S. history in what directly contradicts the attempted coup stories.

Even the Biden administration’s own Inspector General praised the Trump DOD’s transition efficiency.

It is literally impossible for a coup to occur when the Commander-in-Chief at the White House says, “Execute a presidential transition and I am giving you 20,000 National Guardsmen and Women to secure January 6.”Kash Patel

IV. The January 6 committee wanted to omit key evidence from their report

Patel was one of the first people subpoenaed. After 6 hours of testimony an approximately 200-page transcript was created. Fifty pages dealt with January 6. The remaining 150 pages had little to do with the January 6 event. They involved Afghanistan, Somalia, Trump, the media, and Russia-Gate, and personal questions about how Patel managed to get so much information on Adam Schiff.

Patel provided the following exhibits to the committee for inclusion in their report:

• A DOD timeline signed off on by the Sec. of Defense, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Secretary of the Army, and 30 officers of the U.S. military.
• The articles, memorandums, and delegation of authorities related to January 6.
• The Biden Administration Inspector General report stating that the Trump DOD acted “appropriately, without failure, and without delay” in completing the transition

This was the proof supporting Patel’s comments. The committee did not want the exculpatory exhibits entered in the transcript. Patel insisted and asked the information be released to the public. It is unclear if the committee will include the substantiating documents.

V. General Mark Milley got orders from whom to do what?

Mark Milley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff told the January 6 committee he received “unambiguous” orders from Vice President Pence to send the National Guard to the Capital when the demonstrations escalated. This was ostensibly to fill the gap since they mistakenly assumed Trump had not acted to deploy National Guard troops.

There is something drastically with his comment.

• Legally, the Vice President is not in the chain of command covering the National Guard and therefore has no authority to give orders to deploy them. General Milley and the VP must have known this.
• It is unconstitutional for the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs (Milley) to give any direct orders over the U.S. Military. According to 10 U.S. Code § 163 – Role of Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff:

The Secretary of Defense may assign to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff responsibility for overseeing the activities of the combatant commands. Such assignment by the Secretary to the Chairman does not confer any command authority on the Chairman and does not alter the responsibility of the commanders of the combatant commands prescribed in section 164(b)(2) of this title.

You can watch Kash Patel’s full interview with the Epoch Times here.

From Sustainable Freedom Lab; appears here by permission.

Readers should also read or download this Resource Guide.