A friend and coworker asked me a bunch of questions related to the capitol event, and I decided to post my replies here for everyone to read:


For the majority of those who attended, what do think the purpose was for the march in DC?

For the majority of people who were there, I got the sense via both on-the-spot interviews compliments of "The Epoch Times" coverage and via my own feelings and the sense of like-minded others around me in my own life, that it was an exhibition of pure frustration.

The Left are constantly putting out their yards signs, their bumper stickers, standing around en masse with signs, while Conservatives by contrast sit in their houses and stew. A critical mass of people on the Right have had enough of this sensation that they're not being heard: that's why they showed up in the tens of thousands to Trump's rallies over the past few years, and that's why they made their way to DC.

I've seen the mainstream media describe the events as an "insurrection", which is absolutely hilarious: an "insurrection" is an attempt to completely take over an institution and install an interim government-- not spend five minutes taking selfies with your foot on Pelosi's desk, and then leaving.

What do you think the expected outcomes were for this? Any attempt to influence voting?

I don't get the sense that the average person there had a specific expectation at all: they just wanted to show up and be seen. Most Conservatives I talk to, and I share this attitude myself, are pretty "black pilled" regarding the prospect of future elections being any less fixed than this one appeared to be.

Mostly, I think people just wanted to do something, and to be heard. A couple of people I heard interviewed on location thought that election reform might be possible, but that it would be uphill sledding given the current Republican leadership.

What do you think Trump's expectation was for the march in DC?

Certainly not violence of any kind: for four years the mainstream media has tried to paint Trump as some kind of dangerous, coup-prone revolutionary, but in reality he was a Democrat most of his life, and his policy positions aren't that different from Bill Clinton's in the 90's, or even Bernie Sanders's populism from just a handful of years ago. There was never any chance that Trump was going to park tanks on the lawn of the White House.

Today our CEO said it was essentially about failed leadership that caused the 'rioting' in the Capitol. In your eyes, does Trump have anything to do with the breaching the Capitol building?

No, I don't think so, on two counts.

First, Trump never explicitly called for violence, and in fact told people to go home and stay peaceful. In fact, I wish he would have been more forceful in his language, like that astonishing "truth-to-power" speech he gave in 2016. If Trump proved anything it's that people value honesty, and "go home and peacefully wait for the next election" is a dishonest message: in the word choices of Martin Luther King Jr., we're at a juncture where "direct action" is needed, as the election system is provably broken.

Second, Trump never even implicitly invited violence: he'd been having peaceful rallies and other events across the country for the past four years, and since all of the violence in the country recently has been perpetrated by people on the Left, specifically "Black Lives Matter" and "Antifa" who have been burning down entire swathes of cities with the active support of governors, mayors, and multi-billion dollar corporations and their CEOs, it's unclear to me how anyone, including Donald Trump, could have anticipated his supporters getting into the capitol building.

And on that note specifically, video evidence strongly suggests that the "breaching" was executed by a combination of "Antifa" plants, and complicit security forces who combined were trying to put Trump supporters into tempting and compromising situations, where the optics for the movement would look bad.

For all of their pearl clutching, Democrat leadership and CNN anchors would have been privately beside themselves with joy had Trump supporters set the building on fire: it would have meant the political death of Right-wing populism. Instead, those corrupt power brokers got selfies, which is why they've sounded so absurd in their overplaying and exaggeration of the events.

Do you believe that there were any 'bad actors' that caused this riot to happen?

Absolutely. I've watched dozens of Trump events over these past four years, and my mother and brother even went to a rally here in Minneapolis. I have never seen a Trump supporter break windows, or push police officers, or scale walls like a real-life Sam Fisher, or scatter papers all across office floors.

Once the doors were opened, many actual Trump supporters made their way inside: most of them walked neatly on the carpet between the velvet posted areas, while some did engage in totally harmless and actually quite humorous antics, like taking selfies carrying the lectern around, or propping Trump flags on the statues.

After the harmless fun, they walked out of the building and went home.

Do you think there was a setup to allow this to happen?

I've watched lots of video footage of that day, and it appears that not only did security open a gate allowing people to approach the building, but that people were more broadly allowed inside. On this, there is agreement from both the Left and the Right-- but the explanations are different.

Because the Left blames everything on "racism", they explain the obviously lax security on racially-oriented "pro-white" sentiments, even though the primary guard who seemed to be quasi-leading people throughout the building was a black guy. A more plausible hypothesis is that the people were let in, so they could compromise their own optics. That is a very common tactic, dating all the way back from antiquity, so it wouldn't surprise me if it was employed here.

A third and more innocent option is that the complete lack of past violence from Trump supporters led to the weak security in this instance. But I find that difficult to believe, considering Congress was actually in session, and we're discussing the captitol building of the United States, for Pete's sake.

If you were writing the headlines for last week, how would you write them?

"Capitol Building Breached" would be a sufficient headline, since it more or less objectively describes what did happen. As part of the news story's contents, I would have interviewed as many protestors, counter-protestors, people who obviously appeared to be plants, security guards, and police officers as possible, and then try to paint as clear and as objective of a picture as I could.


My Friend's Thoughts

Here are the thoughts my friend shared:


"All I know is that the core Republicans did not want and did not support Trump from the beginning and now through the end. He certainly wasn't perfect but how can you be when you are the only one fighting. After last week, I can't really blame the guy for wanting to essentially walk away from this mess.

It's funny that the Republicans seem to think things will go back to 'normal' after Trump is gone. That piling on or distancing themselves from the fight will somehow make things better. In my opinion, I think the Republican Party is finished. Many voters saw them as the path to fight against Obamacare, illegal aliens, high tax rates, uncontrolled spending/borrowing, etc. What everyone has seen is that, there are virtually no elected Republicans that showed up to fight for the most important fight of all - fair & honest elections.

As you pointed out, if that contract between the elected and represented in broken, what use is a paper document called the Constitution. For the majority of Republicans, they look at the election losses just like any other losses (i.e you win some, you lose some).

As imperfect as Trump was, he has been really the only Republican who actually fought for the American people and against the Democrats & their propaganda media. That's why I don't see Trump supporters voting for any Republican again. It's like watching Charlie Brown and Lucy with the football!

There really is a swamp and it's likely not possible to drain. By the time people realize how bad things are, it will be too late to do anything about it (look how quickly Venezuela went down)."