MovieChat Forums > Politics > GOP releases Jan. 6 clip of Pelosi sayin...

GOP releases Jan. 6 clip of Pelosi saying 'I take responsibility' as she discussed National Guard absence


https://www.foxnews.com/politics/unearthed-jan-6-clip-shows-pelosi-saying-i-take-responsibility-capitol-police-being-unprepared-mob

'It's stupid that we should be in a situation like this,' Pelosi says in the video"

A previously-unreleased video taken on Jan. 6, 2021 shows then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., saying she takes "responsibility" for law enforcement's lack of preparedness when a mob stormed the U.S. Capitol that day.

A Tweet on X by a House Republican panel contains video that appears to show a frustrated Pelosi being evacuated from the Capitol complex and in intense conversation with Chief of Staff Terri McCullough about how the evacuation was conducted.

"We have responsibility, Terri. We did not have any accountability for what was going on there. And we should have," Pelosi says in the video, which was reviewed in its original form by Fox News Digital. "This is ridiculous. You’re going to ask me in the middle of the thing when they’ve already breached…that, should we call the Capitol Police? I mean the National Guard? Why weren’t the National Guard there to begin with?"

Her aide appeared to reply that Capitol security did believe they were prepared, to which Pelosi continued, "They clearly didn’t know, and I take responsibility for not having them just prepared for more."

Oh Boy!!! Here we go folks.. 🤣 Sort of looks like Pelosi is more to blame for Jan 6th than Former and soon to be our 47th President in November.. Well folks?? How about it?? This is a pretty big deal here??

reply

LOL!

reply

Now are you laughing at Pelosi making this revelation which really, is a pretty big deal or are you simply trolling as usual and have 0 to offer by way of discussion?? 🙄

reply

Wrong
Trump incited the riots and watched it on TV for three hours.
The trial will be epic in length and so will the sentencing

reply

That is an outright lie.

reply

Epic trial, please watch and stay informed

reply

Do you swallow every maggot lie?

reply

Like you believe every mainstream media lie??? I don't need lies, I have eyes, ears and a functioning brain. You douchebags need to be spoonfed everything, stop projecting.

reply

I've seen your posts before. Who won the 2020 election?

reply

If it hadn't have been for mainstream media lies that fools like you believed without question, Trump would've won by a landslide and no amount of cheating would've changed that.

reply

People KNEW that tRump was a pathological liar. 1)The election was rigged, 2)inject bleach to fight covid, 3)his inauguration crowd was the biggest in history, 4)we will build a wall and Mexico will pay for it, 5)I was totally exonerated by the Mueller report, 6)You will see our health-care plan in 2 weeks, 7)I will release my tax returns when they are finished being under audit, 8)I was named Man of the Year in Michigan, 9)My father was born in Germany, 10)I brought back Big Ten football. I could go on and on and on, but you don't care, you love him for his lies. His appeal is to the down-and-out, the christo-fascists, and the deplorables among us.

reply

That's a good example of how your brain has been poisoned.

reply

Which of those lies did he not make?

reply

He made all of those false statements, but you just won't admit it, because you're a maga fool.

reply

He was completely exonerated by the Mueller report.

reply

That's his claim, of course. Mueller followed with a statement specifically refuting that lie. You can look it up.

reply

Mueller found nothing to justify the shit talk of the dems, nor the expense of his massive investigation.

He spun some... vague... spin, to give the worst of the partisan hacks some cover to avoid admitting that, but no one not willfully blind, bought it for a second.

reply

You will most likely believe in your "Mueller found nothing" fairytale forever, but this is what the history books will say:

From ACSLAW.com:
The Mueller Report states that if the Special Counsel’s Office felt they could clear the president of wrongdoing, they would have said so. Instead, the Report explicitly states that it “does not exonerate” the President[10] and explains that the Office of Special Counsel “accepted” the Department of Justice policy that a sitting President cannot be indicted.[11]
The Mueller report details multiple episodes in which there is evidence that the President obstructed justice. The pattern of conduct and the manner in which the President sought to impede investigations—including through one-on-one meetings with senior officials—is damning to the President.

reply

The accusation was collusion between Trump and Russia.

Mueller job was to find any evidence to support that accusation.

He did not find any.

The rest is spin spun so that hard core partisans could comfort themselves with cope.

reply

You really need to improve your reading comprehension skills.

reply

The purpose was to investigate the accusations of collusion.

They did not find evidence or, god forbid, PROOF of collusion.

All that talk of "not being able" to prove a negative?

That's just SPIN, to give hard core haters something to delude themselves with.

reply

Trump offered 10,000 National Guard Troops to the Mayor. The Mayor declined. This is on record.

reply

Wrong again
https://www.justsecurity.org/93316/anatomy-of-a-conspiracy-theory-and-a-smear-still-no-evidence-of-trump-order-for-10000-guard-on-january-6th/

reply

your fake news is fake

A January 6 committee staffer asked Ornato, “When it comes to the National Guard statement about having 10,000 troops or any other number of troops, do you recall any discussion prior to the 6th about whether and how many National Guard troops to deploy on January 6th?” Ornato surprised the committee by noting he did recall a conversation between Meadows and Bowser: “He was on the phone with her and wanted to make sure she had everything that she needed,” Ornato told investigators.



Meadows “wanted to know if she need any more guardsmen,” Ornato testified. “And I remember the number 10,000 coming up of, you know, ‘The president wants to make sure that you have enough.’ You know, ‘He is willing to ask for 10,000.’ I remember that number. Now that you said it, it reminded me of it. And that she was all set. She had, I think it was like 350 or so for intersection control, and those types of things not in the law enforcement capacity at the time.” Ornato was correct. Bowser declined the offer, asking only for a few hundred National Guard and requiring them to serve in a very limited capacity.



Bowser’s decision to decline help from the White House did not end the Trump team’s efforts to secure troops ahead of the protest. When the D.C. mayor declined Trump’s offer of 10,000 troops, Ornato said the White House requested a “quick reaction force” out of the Defense Department in case it was needed.



Once the Capitol was breached, the Trump White House pushed for immediate help from Acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller and grew frustrated at the slow deployment of that help, according to the testimony. “So then I remember the chief saying, ‘Hey, I’m calling secretary of defense to get that [quick reaction force] in here,” Ornato said. Later he said, “And then I remember the chief telling Miller, ‘Get them in here, get them in here to secure the Capitol now.'”


reply

Cheney and her committee falsely claimed they had “no evidence” to support Trump officials’ claims the White House had communicated its desire for 10,000 National Guard troops. In fact, an early transcribed interview conducted by the committee included precisely that evidence from a key source. The interview, which Cheney attended and personally participated in, was suppressed from public release until now.

https://cha.house.gov/2024/3/chairman-loudermilk-publishes-never-before-released-anthony-ornato-transcribed-interview

reply

👖 on 🔥

reply

Yup, Trump asked her to call in the NG but she refused. That would have interrupted the feds plan.

reply

It would have been better if Trump hadnt assembled his army of rabid dogs for no fucking reason at all other than to fight for him to stay in power after being voted out.

Should he have said "Hey Nancy , best get the national guard up in here because me and my asshole followers gonna smash this crib up!"

In hindsight they should have - you just dont expect to have to use the fucking army to get an outgoing president to leave the Whitehouse

reply

Show me what authority or power did the protestors have to keep Trump in the white house.

Don't forget your fact checkers or propaganda scriptures.

reply

"what authority or power did the protestors have "

none! thats how insurrection works , they take the power

reply

You obviously don't know what an insurrection is other than what the fake MSM tells you.

reply

Insurrection. Seriously. You're only using that word because they told you to.

It was a protest that got out of hand. It wasn't right but it wasn't "insurrection".

reply

They overthrow the government with no weapons?

reply

Trump Supporters are Schrodinger's Political Army. They are simultaneously an unstoppable force capable of overthrowing the US Government unarmed, and also complete braindead cultists that cant tie a shoe...

🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️

reply

That never happened as Pelosi didn't have the power to the call up the National Guard to the Capitol. It was up to the Capitol police to do that. It's doesn't matter, millions of Americans watched live on TV what exactly happened on Jan. 6. That's why just one reason Trump will never be president again.

reply

Sort of looks like Pelosi is more to blame for Jan 6th

What a totally fucking ridiculous notion.
Trump CAUSED this ( and could have stopped it but didnt)

Its like Lee Harvey Oswald blaming the FBI for JFK because they didnt catch him.

reply

No, it's not ridiculous when you consider Trump warned her about this prior to Jan 6th, that it would be smart for her to call in the National Guard and she flat out didn't and you can't defend this and if you try, you'll look foolish. Not only that and I've mentioned this quite often and for a reason: Don't be surprised that when the time comes for the U.S Supreme Court to rule on Jan 6th, that they determine Jan 6th was not, NOT an Insurrection, but merely a "Riot" because Trump wasn't present that day, therefore, it's a riot and just because you a along with the left says it is?? Doesn't make it so. It's coming and there will be Epic meltdowns over it too

reply

Trump warned her about the situation he had spent many months inciting and inflaming.

reply

Anything like 8 months of looting, pillaging, burning and murdering by democrats?

Nope.

reply

Those were the real insurrections, hundreds of them.

reply

Yep! Rioting is only insurrection when we do it. When they do it, it's mostly peaceful.

As they burn down cities and cause billions in damage over the death of a drug addict felon.

reply

And instead of them getting jail time, they are paid millions in settlements.
That's some ass backwards and upside down bullshit.

reply

It is. Funny how they're the only ones killing people. How many murders during the summer of love? Ashli Babbit?

Except St. Rittenhouse.

reply

Two completely different situations. And I'll await for evidence that those people were specifically goaded on by senior democrat politicians.

And no, mass vandalism and riots, however awful, is not the same as an insurrection. Insurrections have specific meanings.

reply

Once again you lard up your demands with weasel words like "senior democrat politicians". Then, when someone points out an example like Maxine Waters urging rioters to "stay on the street" or telling protesters to "get more confrontational" if Derek Chauvin were to be acquitted, you'll say, "well, she's just a Congressman, not a "senior" democrat politician!"

You're the type who would say, "there's no evidence Stalin himself publicly ordered those show trials!" But the people underneath him understood exactly what was expected of them.

reply

>You're the type who would say, "there's no evidence Stalin himself publicly ordered those show trials!" But the people underneath him understood exactly what was expected of them.

The people underneath Stalin engaging in the purges were actually appointed party officials in a totalitarian state. Protesters across the USA are not all democrat officials. This comparison makes no sense.This is you noting politicians egging on (and not great quote from her at all) protests that could escalate into unpleasantness.

reply

I pointed out that habit the other day as well. I'm glad that others are catching on to these tactics.

reply

Are you fucking retarded??? There's tons of examples of democrats inciting violence, enabling violence and making excuses for it.

Not an insurrection? You really are dumber than shit. You obviously believe every stupid lie they feed you.

reply

>Not an insurrection? You really are dumber than shit. You obviously believe every stupid lie they feed you.

An insurrection is specifically is a revolt designed to tear down the government in power. Just violence and rioting is not by definition an insurrection.

reply

"An insurrection is specifically is a revolt designed to tear down the government in power."

Exactly.

reply

Riots in cities nowhere near Washington over perceptions of racial injustice weren't that, chief.

reply

to be fair. antifa rioted for 4 years and then magically stopped in Jan 2021.

reply

Trump offered 10,000 National Guard Troops to the Mayor. The Mayor declined. This is on record.

reply

You might be right that its deemed not an insurrection , but I dont think "because Trump wasn't present that day" is a factor.
I bet Hitler wasnt personally present when his troops rolled into Poland but its still an invasion.
Also you could count his big orange face on the TV instructing the masses as "present"

reply

You retards just can't help but make Hitler references. While you endorse the jailing of political opposition.

reply

yeah sorry about that , i thought that at the time and didnt want to use hitler , but no other examples of classic invasions came to mind . I thought of the invasion of kuwait later on .
I couldnt think of any actual coup / insurrections as they are quite rare

reply

Seriously? Human history is 10,000yrs of war. I guess it's proof of how ignorant you people are of you own history.

reply

The Speaker is the House fits not have authority over the National Guard. The DC National Guard reports solely to the POTUS.

reply

She has authority over the house, and she can request the national guard. She simply didn’t, because she thought he would weaponize them.

reply

Trump asked her several times to call in the NG but she refused. Why?

reply

they did give reasons back in the day , cant remember .
I'll google it for you later .

reply

What a totally fucking ridiculous notion.
Trump CAUSED this ( and could have stopped it but didnt)


He organized a protest, nothing more.

“I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard."

When it got out of hand, he did try and end it

https://youtu.be/ZB8kjR4nYzk?si=ykwgglf9villUgFu


reply

Please.... TRump told his cult come on down and it "will be wild" after lying to them about a stolen election.

reply

You are arguing with quotes. He said what said. March to the capital building peacefully.

Will be wild in that context just means fun or exciting, he was building hype for his event.

Here is the transcript of his entire speech, quote the call for violence, or inciting a riot.

https://www.npr.org/2021/02/10/966396848/read-trumps-jan-6-speech-a-key-part-of-impeachment-trial

reply

In the end it's going to be up to the jury to decide what role Trump had in J6, and there's tons of contrary evidence besides that speech.
Also, how you and I decode Trumps ramblings is VERY different to how the Proud Boys,Oath keepers & Qanon etc.decode his ramblings.

reply

A previously-unreleased video taken on Jan. 6, 2021 shows then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., saying she takes "responsibility" for law enforcement's lack of preparedness when a mob stormed the U.S. Capitol that day.

A Tweet on X by a House Republican panel contains video that appears to show a frustrated Pelosi being evacuated from the Capitol complex and in intense conversation with Chief of Staff Terri McCullough about how the evacuation was conducted.

"We have responsibility, Terri. We did not have any accountability for what was going on there. And we should have," Pelosi says in the video, which was reviewed in its original form by Fox News Digital. "This is ridiculous. You’re going to ask me in the middle of the thing when they’ve already breached…that, should we call the Capitol Police? I mean the National Guard? Why weren’t the National Guard there to begin with?"

"Pelosi’s J6 Select Committee spent taxpayer’s money chasing false political narratives and using Hollywood producers for their ‘investigation.’ Her admission of responsibility directly contradicts their own narrative," tweeted Rep. Barry Loudermilk, R-Ga., chair the House Administration Subcommittee on Oversight."

Wow!! It took 3 years but finally the truth is out now and Nancy Pelosi should be charged with this 🤔

reply

We always suspected that she was one of the guilty J6 conspirators.

reply

I find it odd they can track down all these people who were at the capital, but still cant find the person who left the bombs. Well Im sure the government is being truthful. I really do trust them.

reply

We all know she did this on purpose to usher in the Authoritarian Biden Regime.

reply

💯

reply

Trumpers confused by a LEADER willing to take responsibility when something goes wrong, even if they aren't at fault.

reply

But she didn't!! She didn't take responsibility and sorry lib, but the woman didn't do her fucking job and sorry it has to be this way, but she really is the one at fault for Jan 6th, not Trump who wasn't even there for Christ sake!! 🙄

reply

This the new angle - that Trump wasn't there - is ridiculously weak. Where was he?
Did his presence at the White House preclude him from doing his duty?

reply

The man wasn't there and I've told you probably several times that if and when the U.S Supreme Court decide to tell the masses that Jan 6th wasn't an Insurrection but nothing more than a Riot because Trump wasn't present that day, you'll lose your minds over this and it's coming. What part of this are you simply not comprehending or wanting to accept??

reply

He did his duty when he offered national guard troops.

The Dems turned the extra help down.

Someone needs to ask the capitol police how they thought they had enough security.

reply

He offered? It's up to him to order them into action! He did not

reply

No, it's not. He offered and was refused. The President is not in charge of the security of the capitol building. Pelosi is.

There were hundreds of riots during the Trump Years. Why did the Capitol Police not take the obvious steps to get more security?

reply

It's too bad there wasn't some way to parse through all these opposing claims regarding J6 and establish a solid timeline of events. Something like, idk, a trial maybe? Where evidence is presented and refuted. Witnesses are called & cross examined. Supena Nancy Pelosi, Bannon, Mark Meadows, Pence. Maybe then we could get to the bottom of it all to determine who bears accountability for what, if any. Tanya Chutkan is ready to go but SCOTUS is slow walking rulling on the immunity claim. Almost like they don't want this trial to take place before the election. Shouldn't we be allowed to learn about the people seeking to win the Oval Office before November? It's probably too late at this point. I put some blame on Garland for his own glacial pace.

reply

The POTUS is solely in control of the DC National Guard.

There is nothing to indicate that Pelosi refused it once violence broke out.

reply

"ONce violence broke out"?

It's takes DAYS to mobilize the National Guard. Surely you know that?

The 1/6 riot lasts a couple of hours.


Trump, RIGHTLY, made his offer IN ADVANCE. That is how planning works.

He was aware that his presidency was a period of increasing political conflict and violence and that people were very angry and made the offer of additional forces to Pelosi, IN ADVANCE, when it could have done some good.

The proper question to ask is, why was a situation that was so clearly dangerous that even an ex reality tv star could see extra security was a good idea,

and the PROFESSIONAL POLICE supposedly could not?





reply

If it takes "days" how did National Guard respond after several hours?

It because they were at the ready. There were Guard assigned to traffic control and a rapid response team at Andrews. They were awaiting orders from their chain of command (which does not include the Speaker of the House) to engage. Trump delayed the command.

reply

And to remind you, before Trump was defeated and refused to admit defeat, the recording of the b Electoral College vote in congress had never been an event needing military support.

reply

Trump offered militar support for the security of the event.

That action makes no sense in your pretense that he was trying to use the riot to overthrow the government.

Your panic mongering makes no sense.

reply

You are all over the place. There was military support or not? The commander at the pentagon has said he was waiting for an order from POTUS and considering if he should give the order on his own.

reply

Did you really get confused about my point about Trump offering military support?

Of course you didn't.

You know that Trump offering military support for security makes any panic mongering about Trump wanting to use force to stop the cetification, look like the complete nonsense it is.

But by playing dumb you were able to DODGE responding honestly or seriously to my point.


We republicans were pretty angry about the election. Some people were entraped and incited into a riot. ONE short riot with hte only death being one of the rioters.

Meanwhile your side during the same time period had over 400 riots with dozens of deaths and whole communities devastated.


And today your side is going after those few republican rioters with the full power of the US government, while the vastly more numerous democrat rioters are just sort of glossed over and ignored.

reply

"Your side." You talk about the Floyd protests (some of which turned into riots) as if they were completely invalid, without any legit cause. Floyd was killed because of police brutality, it happened, it's true. The reasons behind why ppl protested on J6 were false.

Also some of us believe that police brutality regularly & disproportionately happening to our fellow citizens on our country's soil affects all of us.

reply

Your support of lefty street violence is noted.

reply

meanwhile your side during the same time period had over 400 riots
I guess you guys will never stop parroting that shit

J6 was explicitly a political protest / riot / whatever perpetrated and explicitly for the benefit of the republican party .

BLM protesting / rioting about police brutality has nothing to do with either party.
For all we know it could have been 100% republicans doing the BLM rioting as it is not affiliated / affected by / in the name of / benefitting
either party.

reply

Antifa and blm are both far left organizations that are allied with the Dem Party.

Your denial is silly.

My point stands. Trump offered military support for Capitol security, which was refused.

The question should be, why was it refused.

reply

"blm are both far left organizations"

Do the right have any organizations whose aim is to promote racial equality?
or do they just not give a shit?

reply

Well, the Republican Party, since it's foundation has been pushing civil rights, and every republican president has had a pro-civil rights platform.

I think just about every group on the right is for racial equality.

Which is not surprising. This country has had a bi-partisan consensus on racial equality for minorities since the mid 60s. Both parties have been in agreement on that. THe discussion has only been on HOW to best do it.


reply

For all we know it could have been 100% republicans doing the BLM rioting

Did you join the BlueAnon cult?

reply

The fact that they link the two , totally different things, unmasked the racism in their hearts.

reply

IKR ?

reply

She's lying and we all know it.

reply

So, what she says in the video is a lie?

reply

How?? How so?? How is she lying?? What?? A.I did this and Pelosi actually didn't say this?? 🙄

reply

Take responsibility? They buried this video for 3+ years and you can bet they wish it hadn't been unearthed now. In fact, San Fran Nan says that her video taped words are "revisionist history."

Reacting to this, former Capitol Police chief Steven Sund said, "Pelosi was surprised we didn’t have National Guard on Jan6?? I was denied National Guard support multiple times before January 6, and repeatedly for 71 minutes ON January 6."

https://x.com/ChiefSund/status/1800285299211428233?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1800285299211428233%7Ctwgr%5Eb30113cd984ca2ca85fa74a30e5b859af16c642c%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fredstate.com%2Fnick-arama%2F2024%2F06%2F11%2Fpelosi-and-sund-reaction-to-the-video-n2175311

reply


Trumpers confused by a LEADER willing to take responsibility when something goes wrong, even if they aren't at fault.


So why has she never come out publicly and done this? Why is she only taking responsibility in a leaked video in front on 2 other people?

reply