Brainstorming about Jan 6

Coup to seize power or masquerade to discredit an opponent? You decide.
(Saul Loeb / AFP – Getty Images)

The 2020 US elections were discussed by Trump. He suspected electoral fraud and called for audits and investigation. Failing to get so, he called for a demonstration in front of the Capitol to put pressure on the political class, to make them see that there was a huge social response to the lack of guarantees in the vote.

Knowing that the demonstration would be massive, before the event, Trump asked Pelosi, who was responsible for the security of the Capitol, to increase the protection of the building. Something she refused.

During the demonstration, protesters invaded the Capitol. With little police resistance, everything to be said. Even so, the what happened is very serious and there was even one death from a police shot. A not very justified shot but in an undoubtedly tense environment.

Trump’s reaction on Twitter, a few minutes after the assault, was to demand that his followers respect Law and order and obey policemen. But after the second message from him in this line his account was blocked, so very few people could receive the messages.

These are the main facts, to my understanding.

/*/

I see three possibilities:

1. Trump’s intention was to invade the Capitol and he prepare it.
2. Trump was reckless in summoning the people before the Capitol and the invasion was spontaneous. So Trump would bear important responsibility for what happened.
3. It was not prepared by Trump nor spontaneous. That is to say, that there were others who promoted the assault to take place. Others opposed to Trump, of course, who took advantage of the demonstration to severely erode Trump’s image.

/*/

The first option, Trump’s intention to assault the Capitol, makes no sense to me. Trump only got harmed, he had nothing to gain from it. The riot only made it easy for everyone to reject supporting Trump’s audit and investigation claims.

I know that many play with the idea that Trump is a potential coup leader but I don’t think that goes beyond propaganda. He has held power for four years and nothing suggests that possibility. And even less his response when the invasion occurred or his previous request of extra security.

/*/

The second possibility, the assault occurring spontaneously, can not be completely ruled out. But I don’t see it as really plausible either.

The atmosphere that is perceived is more similar to that of an open day than to a really violent invasion. And it is not credible that it is so easy to enter the Capitol, without anyone planning and leading it.

/*/

That leaves me only the third possibility, that it was intentional but not by Trump. And since some nonentities would not have had the capacity either, we would only be left with those who really oppose Trump. They would have taken advantage of the demonstration to make Trump supporters screw up. As the bullfighter encourages the bull to charge.

That, in addition, would make understandable Pelosi’s refusal to increase security, the police’s lack of forcefulness, and even the blocking of Trump on Twitter and the media, in order to maintain the fiction that the assault was being promoted by Trump. Trump has many enemies, Democratic Party, Media and Big Tech, maybe in some US institutions like FBI and even the Intelligence of many other countries.

/*/

Without a doubt, this last third option is the one that seems most plausible to me. In the absence of conclusive evidence (there aren’t any is there hasn’t been a trial) with this I will stay: Jan 6 Capitol invasion probably was an inside job against Trump.

And the really scarce media coverage of this possibility, the most plausible, I can only explain it to me by a conjunction of partisanship and lack of pluralism.

/***/

P.S.1 (March 7, 2023) Now, with Republican control of Congress after midterms, we can see the videos of the Capitol cameras.