January 6th Commentary

A Commentary on the January 6th Insurrection

As we approach one year since the attempted coup d’etat at the United States Capitol Building, it is important to remember why the violent attacks on federal property really happened. Even now, details are still muddied, and the media continuously throws out acronyms and groups that many have never heard of, and the public has no way of being completely sure, especially with investigations still ongoing.

To paint a full picture, let’s start at the beginning. Why? What was the goal of these attacks?

The effort started as a “patriotic” means of expressing unrest at the near-validated results of the 2020 election, and took place while President Donald Trump was a lame duck, still in office and seemingly waiting it out until President Joe Biden took office mere weeks later. One individual, Kelly Meggs, compared this storming of the Capitol to the Boston Tea Party, a famous rebellion by American Colonists before the Revolutionary War. Meggs, a self proclaimed leader of the Florida chapter of the Oath Keepers (a far-right militia group that claims to “protect the constitution,”) posted “One if by Land, north side of Lincoln Memorial” on the Potomac River, creating a reference and comparison of these actions to those of Paul Revere and his famous midnight ride, one often described as saving the American Revolution. These comparisons to the Revolutionary War are frequently used and dense with arrogance and self-righteousness, an air that followed each of these “patriots” as they attacked, and bragged about attacking, their own government.

The riot did not come out of nowhere, there is no way to have a gathering of that magnitude, full of citizens from all across the country, without immense, intense planning. At this point in time, the United States were heavily divided, and passionate Americans were making it known. Both anti and pro-Trump protesters had been canvasing the Capitol for weeks, since the results of the 2020 The Metropolitan Police, or DC Metro, as they are commonly called, preemptively informed Capitol Police of “detailed plans to storm the Capitol,” and Mayor Muriel Bowser rejected DC Metro Chief’s suggestion to set a curfew on January 6th, instead keeping it as an option if protests became too violent. Anyone living in the DC area knew, though, long before the 6th, that these previously peaceful protests were culminating into violence soon, violence that had been brewing for months, and talks on social media by far-right groups, planning a nation-wide surge toward the Capitol confirmed these suspicions to the DC Metro.

So, the protest was planned. That much is clear.

But what about the violence?

The first person who broke into the building was 43 year old Michael Sparks, who did not have any affiliation with any groups involved, proving that some individual protesters had the same violent intentions as rioting groups. Other individual rioters would later claim that they came to the Capitol with no intention of attacking, however they took violent action when others did.

The groups that were present do not aid “protestors” in creating their attempted nonviolent image, what with the most infamous groups being the Oath Keepers, as previously mentioned, and the Proud Boys, a far-right, neo-fascist and supremacy group that prides itself on political violence.

The FBI would later find, in their investigation, messages in a Proud Boys group chat displaying the group’s intentions to “smash some pigs to dust,” in reference to police officers, and “burn that city to ash.”

With all these patriotic references flying around in defense of these “protestors,” I'd like to take this time to propose one of my own; a plan to “burn DC to ash” sounds awfully close to the British invasion of Washington City (which has since been renamed to Washington DC.) In the war of 1812. The British entered through Chesapeake Bay, infiltrated the city, and set fire to the President’s Mansion, the Capitol Building, thousands of works within the Library of Congress, and many other local landmarks. You cannot claim to be acting in the best interest of America, if you are doing no more than mimicking, mirroring the British troops that were setting fire to our democracy. That is not patriotic, and these rioters have no right to compare their actions to those of the founding fathers, fighting a tyrannical government for their right to live freely.

Meggs, in the same encrypted group chat that he referenced Paul Revere, posted a map of the city that emphasized two landing points near the Lincoln Memorial and near the tidal basin on Ohio Drive that were labeled as “QRF Rally points” where protesters could “pick up their long guns.”

What is a “QRF,” you might ask?

A QRF is a Quick Reaction Force, a term coined by the United States Armed Forces, whose job is to provide additional support in battle, providing extra guns as well as soldiers.

Why, pray tell, would a group of “protestors,” led by a self-described militia group, use military terminology as well as thorough gameplans leading to advanced weaponry, if they planned on having a peaceful protest? What was the point in carrying these guns in a surge to the Capitol if they did not plan to use them?

Some protestors may not have attended this protest with the knowledge that it would become an attack, an attempt at sacking the Capitol. There were, most likely, a decent amount of people who showed up believing they would be doing no more than peacefully canvassing Congress. Hell, buses traveled to East Capitol Street full of MAGA hat-clad and flag-waving protesters that had no plan to do anything besides yell a little bit and demand change, a right protected under the first amendment. The vast majority, however, was aware of the violent nature of these protests. The vast majority carried their own weapons; the vast majority knew that this protest would turn violent, and they went along with it.

So. There it is. Everything leading up to the attempted coup.

What happened inside the Capitol?

When the protests were still peaceful, Congress was in the process of clarifying the results of the 2020 Presidential election, and this event is known to be the reason that these protests culminated into violence when they did, rather than days earlier or later. On many senators’ accounts, though, their process was halted and became a building-wide lock down as soon as the first breach of the Capitol occurred. This process, however, took much longer for the House of Representatives to achieve. Congress did not have the opportunity to evacuate, as every exit was blocked by rioters, as they could accurately be called at this point, and were forced to shelter in place, staying locked into the Chambers and continuing their proceedings while they listened to the building being violently ransacked and destroyed. Eventually, lawmakers were evacuated, however by that point windows were being broken and rioters, such as Ashili Babbitt, were making moves towards lawmakers’ chambers in attempts to halt proceedings and potentially attack representatives.

But, Democracy is about the people, isn’t it? So, what were the people doing? What was running through their heads?

Rioters have since claimed they were just following the crowd; just as sheep are herded inside their pens, these rioters were guided to violence. This comparison may not be completely accurate, as there is no damage done by sheep in a field, however the idea that people following the government blindly are just sheep is commonly used by Pro-Trump activists while discussing left-leaning individuals, and this journalist loves irony.

Firsthand accounts, as well as photos and videos arrogantly posted by boasting rioters, are the only real insight we have into what happened. We know rioters were eager to defile property, vandalizing walls and breaking furniture. Some broke into congresspeople’s offices, stealing from the desks of either their idols or representatives that they vehemently despised. Some rioters attempted to break into Chambers of Congress. There are disparities among stories, however the common consensus is that it was violent.

Rioters have since tried to compare this riot to the Black Lives Matter protests that occurred the summer prior, however there is a fundamental difference between a protest for social justice that has turned violent on public streets and a planned, armed riot on federal property.

In the year since this horrific event occurred, 727 people have been indicted, and there are still more to come. Many face trial, many have not yet been found. In the year since the insurrection, there has been heavy debate as to the nature of the riot, whether rioters were in the right, if rioters were just “doing what needed to be done.”

These rioters did not make change. They did not change the outcome of a presidential election, they did not keep Donald Trump in office. These rioters did not help their cause and managed to damage their image by making their political party out to be violent and prone to overreaction. Nothing good has come of this riot, and a year later, we can only look back and pray that future rioters take this as a lesson. That future rioters understand the harms of armed protest.That this never happens again.

By: Elisa Drake