DSSO_J6 Case File: Documentary Filmmaker Nick Searcy: Everything That Happened on Jan 6 Benefited the Deep State, Dems

Disclosure: Some of the links below may contain affiliate links at no additional cost to you and may earn Liftable Media a commission on purchases. By making purchases through these links, you’ll be helping to support The Western Journal.

Published July 25, 2024 by jan6

Nick Searcy, producer and a star of the documentary film “The War on Truth” about the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol incursion, believes that much of what happened that day was a pre-planned operation.

“The War on Truth” is the sequel to the 2021 documentary film “Capitol Punishment.”

“It was absolutely pre-planned,” Searcy told The Western Journal in a recent interview regarding the incursion.

“The reason why, you know, people are still mystified. Why were the police on one side of the building trying to keep people out and on the other side, you are inviting people in? They wanted people inside the building because what was going on inside that building was exactly what the people who went to Washington on Jan. 6 wanted to happen.”

He noted that Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas had stood up along with GOP House members during the counting of the Electoral College voter to challenge the integrity of the results in Arizona. Other senators and House lawmakers planned to do the same thing for other key swing states, like Pennsylvania.

“They were challenging the vote. They were trying to send it back to the states for ten days to verify the count,” Searcy said. “That was exactly what everybody that was there [protesting] wanted except for the Democrats in power.”

As soon as people were reported in the building, the process stopped, and when the lawmakers reconvened later in the day, the argument that prevailed was, “It’s too dangerous. We can’t continue with this process. We’ve got to go ahead and certify Joe Biden as our president right now,” Searcy contended.

He concluded, “So everything that was done that day did not benefit the Jan. 6 protesters or the Republican side at all. Everything that was done that day benefited the deep state, benefited Joe Biden and the people who wanted him to be president.”

“The War on Truth” director Chris Burgard agreed.

“I’m a movie director, so I was there that day, and what we were watching was a movie. You would see people walking in doors being escorted in by the Capitol Police, and then you’d see a fight over window just 20 yards away. It made no sense,” he told The Western Journal.

Burgard, like Searcy, argued it “was designed and worked brilliantly to stop any of the investigation of the contested votes, ballots in the swing states.”

He pointed to the assessments of two experts appearing in the documentary, former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency Gen. (Ret.) Michael Flynn and retired military intelligence Col. (Ret.) Carol Stewart.

They “tell you in the movie, this is an operation. This is pre-scripted. You’re watching a movie,” Burgard said.

"The War on Truth" documentary film director Chis Burgard tells @WestJournalism some events that happened on Jan. 6 were scripted. pic.twitter.com/USxItMRDtK

— Randy DeSoto (@RandyDeSoto) July 24, 2024

Another person appearing in the “The War on Truth” said, “Every military guy, I know, every three-letter [federal agency] guy I know that was at Jan. 6 — we all saw the same things happening. We all knew that this was an operation.”

The documentary includes footage of a red signal flare going up over the Jan. 6 protest at 2:43 p.m.

Then soon thereafter someone pops a yellow smoke grenade, and “1 minute later Ray Epps and others push a Trump sign into police,” as footage shows.

Epps was an Arizona resident, who some accused of being an FBI informant because he was caught on camera urging people to “go in the Capitol.” Epps and the FBI denied he was working for them. He was later charged with misdemeanor disorderly conduct and given probation.

A red smoke grenade then goes off, and Epps, escorted by eight others, leaves the front lines of protest, moving away from the Capitol, according to the film.

Independent journalist Steve Baker, appearing in the documentary, recounted that a Special Forces individual told him that the red flare was an “avalanche” signal meaning time to “get out.”

“That was planned and coordinated,” Baker said.

“The War on Truth” also includes an exchange GOP Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky had with Attorney General Merrick Garland during a congressional hearing in September 2023, during which the AG would neither confirm nor deny the FBI had assets among the Jan. 6 protesters.

"The American public isn't buying it."

For three years the federal government has waged a war on truth. Now the truth fights back.

Who really died on J6 and why is the Federal Government lying about it to this day?

Who orchestrated and benefited by breaching the… pic.twitter.com/c54uoG0NYs

— The Western Journal (@WestJournalism) May 22, 2024

Similarly, in January 2022, Cruz questioned then-FBI Assistant Executive Director Jill Sanborn during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing about the role the bureau may have played in the Capitol incursion.

“How many FBI agents or confidential informants actively participated in the events of Jan. 6?” Cruz asked.

“Sir, I’m sure you can appreciate that I can’t go into the specifics of sources and methods,” Sanborn answered.

Cruz then asked a broader question: “Did any FBI agents or confidential informants actively participate in the events of Jan. 6? Yes or no?”

“Sir, I can’t answer that,” Sanborn replied.

CRUZ: "Did any FBI agents or confidential informants actively participate in the events of January 6th?"

"I can't answer that." pic.twitter.com/UgD9mQVLkP

— Townhall.com (@townhallcom) January 11, 2022

“The War on Truth” cited an ex-official in a September 2023 New York Post story headlined, “FBI lost count of how many paid informants were at Capitol on Jan. 6, and later performed audit to figure out exact number.”

Learn more and watch “The War on Truth” here.

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal. [SOURCE]

 

House GOP Report Faults Nancy Pelosi For Jan. 6 Security Failures

 House Sergeant at Arms Paul Irving was reportedly pressured by Pelosi for less security. James Keivom pic.

By Miranda Devine      
December 21, 2022 6:00pm
Updated

House Republicans issued a scathing report Wednesday exposing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s key role in the catastrophic security and intelligence failures that left the US Capitol vulnerable to a violent attack on January 6, 2021.

Days after Pelosi’s Jan. 6 select committee recommended insurrection charges against former president Donald Trump over the Capitol riot, Republicans have hit back with a counter-investigation apportioning blame for the internal security breakdown on Jan. 6 to Pelosi and a dysfunctional Capitol Police intelligence division.

“Leadership and law enforcement failures within the U.S. Capitol left the complex vulnerable on January 6, 2021,” says the report, which is based on a trove of texts and email messages, and testimony from Capitol Police leaders and rank-and-file officers.

House Sergeant at Arms Paul Irving, who answered to Pelosi as one of three voting members of the Capitol Police Board, “succumbed to political pressures from the Office of Speaker Pelosi and House Democrat leadership,” was “compromised by politics and did not adequately prepare for violence at the Capitol.”

Pelosi and her staff “coordinated closely” with Irving on security plans for the Joint Session of Congress on Jan. 6, but Republicans were deliberately left out of “important discussions related to security.” 

And, in an apparent attempt to hide from Republicans the fact that they were being excluded from discussions, Irving asked a senior Democratic staffer to “act surprised” when he sent “key information about plans for the Joint Session on Jan. 6, 2021, to him and his Republican counterpart.”

The staffer replied sardonically: “I’m startled!” 

The report also claims that “staff within the House Sergeant at Arms office emailed Paul Irving that January 6th was Pelosi’s fault,” although it provides no evidence for the assertion.

When Irving was forced to resign after the riot, an email from an unnamed staffer in his office criticized Pelosi’s “knee-jerk reaction to yesterday’s unprecedented event” and described his resignation as “spectacularly unjust, unfair, and unwarranted. This is not your fault. Or [Capitol Police chief Steven] Sund’s fault.”

The Republicans responsible for the withering report — Jim Banks (R-IN), Jim Jordan (R-OH), Rodney Davis (R-IL), Kelly Armstrong (R-ND) and Troy Nehls (R-TX) — are the five congressmen originally nominated to sit on the Jan. 6 committee, until Pelosi vetoed Banks and Jordan. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy pulled the rest of his nominees in protest. Pelosi then installed two Never Trump Republican outcasts, Liz Cheney, and Adam Kinzinger. 

Given Pelosi’s assiduous grooming of Cheney, no doubt it suited both their interests to focus the final Jan.6 committee report on Trump — and not on Pelosi’s culpability.

                          
House Republicans released a report which blamed Nancy Pelosi for the lack of security on Jan. 6. Michael Brochstein/SOPA Images/Shutterstock

But now the Republicans Pelosi rejected have skewered her in their rival report, dredging up some of what she tried to hide, despite complaining of obstruction from the personnel she controls.  

The report insinuates that the Speaker left the Capitol Police without backup on Jan. 6 because “widespread concern from Democratic leadership over ‘optics’ in the aftermath of the Summer 2020 ‘Black Lives Matter’ protests prevented early deployment of the National Guard.”

                         
 Irving was forced to resign following the riot. James Keivom pic.

Chief Sund begged repeatedly for troops but has testified that Irving rebuffed him over concern about “optics.” During the violence on Jan. 6, Sund repeated his request, but help was delayed until after the riot ended, because Irving needed to run it up the chain of command, a.k.a. Pelosi.

“The Speaker’s office was heavily involved in planning and decision-making before and during the events of Jan. 6, 2021, and micromanaged the Sergeant at Arms.” 

From early December 2020, Pelosi aides attended regular meetings with Irving and Sund to discuss the security plan. So hands-on was Pelosi’s chief of staff Terri McCullough that, at one point, she was editing details of parking, event timing and “language regarding official business visitors” for the Joint Session.

To illustrate the intense involvement of Pelosi’s office, on Jan. 6 alone, the report records 36 communications between Irving and Pelosi staffers, including 11 with McCullough, and 20 with Jamie Fleet, a Pelosi aide who doubled as a Democratic staff director. 

Pelosi’s repeated assertions that she has “no power over the Capitol Police” are rejected. 

“This is false,” says the report. “Documents provided by [current] House Sergeant at Arms show how then-House Sergeant at Arms Paul Irving carried out his duties in clear deference to the Speaker, her staff, and other Democratic staff . . .

“House Rules dictate . . . that the Sergeant at Arms is to report directly to the Speaker of the House.”

                            
Pelosi has repeatedly said she has no control over the Capitol Police. James Keivom pic.

Indeed, the report says that Pelosi regularly exercised her authority over security matters, “when she directed the use of magnetometers outside the House chamber in the name of safety . . . Similarly, she required masks in the House chamber [and] exerted influence on security protocols at the Capitol related to the perimeter fence . . . She also oversaw the fencing that was erected for a purported rally on September 18, 2021, that never materialized.”

The report of the Republican refuseniks is an appetizer to potential future investigations next year when they regain subpoena power. It makes sensible recommendations to prevent another disaster, including reform and oversight of the Capitol Police Board. 

Far from being a revenge ploy, it identifies security flaws it claims have not been remedied, including the breakdown of intelligence that had the Capitol Police (USCP) flying blind and hopelessly outnumbered when “criminal rioters assaulted police officers, broke into the U.S. Capitol, damaged property, and temporarily interfered with … the Joint Session of Congress.”

The Capitol Police Intelligence Division “failed to warn USCP leadership and line officers about the threat of violence,” despite having “obtained sufficient information from an array of channels to anticipate and prepare for the violence.”

In fact, the final intelligence threat assessment three days before the riot did warn of a violent scenario in which “Congress itself” could be attacked by armed Trump supporters. But the warning was buried towards the end of the 15-page document and was not included in the up-front summary, so was overlooked.  Nor was the warning mentioned in three subsequent daily intelligence reports.

                        
Pelosi reportedly wanted less police to preserve the optics following Black Lives Matter protests. James Keivom pic.

The Republicans blame much of the intelligence failure on the assistant director of the USCP intelligence division, Julie Farnam, who had joined the Capitol Police from the Department of Homeland Security only 10 weeks before the riot. 

Analysts testified that “the section became ‘nonfunctional’ immediately upon Farnam’s arrival as she tried to “consolidate power for herself to the detriment of the safety and security of the Capitol.” 

“Documents and testimony show that, immediately upon joining the USCP, and without time to acclimate, Farnam began to dismantle the systems that had kept the Capitol safe for so long,” the report alleges. 

“Information about planned protests and threats of violence were siloed and not properly analyzed and disseminated during this key period because of Farnam’s misplaced priorities.”

One analyst testified: “at the time of January 6, we were not doing proactive searches of social media like we had been before. We were strictly reactive.” 

As a result, USCP leadership “were not fully informed about the severity of the threats against the Joint Session of Congress on January 6, 2021”. 

However, Farnam told CBS this year that her team does not bear any responsibility for the attack on the Capitol and provided adequate threat assessments to police leadership before the riot.

“I think we did an excellent job . . . I am the one who has worked tirelessly . . . to right this ship.”

After cataloguing so many tragic failures, the report concludes on a poignant note with messages to Irving from friends in the aftermath of the attack on the Capitol. 

“You’re quite something to take this one for the team, Paul, as they say. I know how these things work and you know I do, too.” [SOURCE}