Analysis | The new Jan. 6 video, and the other baseless GOP claim about Pelosi - The Washington Post

The main assertion astir Pelosi has been that she denied National Guard assistance before Jan. 6. Except determination remains nary grounds of that. As fact-checkers astatine The Washington Post and elsewhere have noted, Pelosi doesn’t power the National Guard. And the House sergeant-at-arms has testified that helium made nary specified petition to Pelosi up of Jan. 6.

“It was not until the 6th that I alerted enactment that we mightiness beryllium making a request,” then-Sergeant-at-Arms Paul Irving testified.

Some apical Republicans person occasionally offered a antithetic but related mentation of that main claim: that Pelosi mightiness person delayed the National Guard adjacent after the unrest began.

This assertion is besides baseless. And the Jan. 6 committee connected Thursday played caller video showing Pelosi and different starring Democrats were so rather keen connected getting the National Guard in. In aggregate scenes, they are shown pushing hard for a effect arsenic the Capitol is besieged.

At 1 point, Pelosi makes specified a plea portion House Minority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) looks on. But backmost successful June, Scalise encouraged Rep. Jim Banks (R-Ind.), aft Banks had suggested Pelosi mightiness person delayed the Guard.

So however overmuch does the caller footage undercut the claim? And wherever does the assertion adjacent travel from?

The archetypal happening to enactment is that the assertion has been amorphous. Republicans mostly haven’t elaborate precisely what they’re referring to. And it’s often been raised successful the benignant of just-asking-questions mode meant to works seeds of uncertainty without immoderate existent evidence.

A sampling:

In the video played by the Jan. 6 committee connected Thursday, Scalise is seen looking connected arsenic Pelosi joins others successful pushing for assistance. Pelosi asks that the concern beryllium treated arsenic though the Pentagon oregon the White House were nether siege.

The call, according to the committee, took spot astatine 3:46 p.m. And the video besides includes earlier calls successful which Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) inquire for assistance, arsenic aboriginal arsenic 3 p.m.

On Friday, Banks indicated his party’s claims and questions really pertained to an earlier period, betwixt erstwhile the propulsion for the National Guard began and erstwhile connection of its last support came — a play mostly taking spot successful the 1 o’clock hr (depending upon the account). That would way with Stefanik’s notation to Pelosi being handed a note, which took spot astatine 1:43 p.m.

The timeline of the Guard requests is murky. Capitol Police Chief Yogananda Pittman testified that erstwhile Capitol Police main Steven Sund “first reached retired for National Guard enactment to the House sergeant-at-arms” astatine 12:58 p.m., citing telephone records. But Sund testified that his archetypal petition was astatine 1:09 p.m. And Irving, past the sergeant-at-arms, testified helium didn’t person specified a petition until aft 2 p.m. — that earlier conversations didn’t see nonstop requests.

What we cognize is that Irving yet informed Sund that legislature leaders had approved the petition astatine 2:10 p.m. And Banks says that spread raises questions.

For the purposes of the Republicans’ claims and suggestions, though, what matters is erstwhile Pelosi was consulted. And determination is nary existent grounds that she was fixed a petition and past hesitated.

During this clip period, concern was inactive being conducted, and Pelosi was successful the House chamber. Video shows Pelosi’s main of staff, Terri McCullough, approaching her astatine 1:43 p.m., and Pelosi’s bureau has said the talker approved the petition then. The New York Times reported she besides asked whether Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) needed to beryllium consulted; McCullough said she asked.

So depending connected whether Pittman’s oregon Sund’s timeline is accurate, determination were either 45 oregon 34 minutes betwixt erstwhile Sund initially requested the Guard and erstwhile Pelosi was approached and, according to her office, approved it.

Banks tweeted his ain timeline Friday, but it’s misleading. For one, helium says Pelosi “finally” approved the petition astatine 2:10 p.m., but that’s really the constituent erstwhile Irving told Sund that petition had been approved — not needfully erstwhile Pelosi herself approved it. Banks’s tweet besides refers to Irving arsenic “Pelosi’s staff,” but it’s a presumption nominated by the talker that serves the full House (and which the full House votes to approve).

And determination remains nary grounds that she dithered erstwhile Irving really approached her; nor is determination grounds she was approached earlier. As noted, she was connected the House level during this period. While footage doesn’t ever amusement the dais, determination is nary grounds of her being approached astir this earlier 1:43 p.m.

Indeed, the Times reported that “it appears that Mr. Irving, who had told Chief Sund days earlier that helium did not privation National Guard troops astatine the Capitol connected Jan. 6 due to the fact that of atrocious ‘optics,’ waited 30 minutes aft proceeding from the Capitol Police main earlier approaching Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s staff.”

At this point, the rioters had yet to breach the Capitol itself (that happened around 2:15 p.m.), meaning determination mightiness person been somewhat little urgency successful that moment.

What this yet boils down to is simply a clump of guesswork and surmising — on with immoderate attempts to bid the absorption elsewhere. But mostly speaking, erstwhile you rise specified questions, determination should beryllium immoderate affirmative crushed to fishy that what’s being suggested oregon alleged could beryllium true.

Scalise’s bureau said Friday that the whip’s comments astir Banks’s questions pertained to what happened earlier Jan. 6, alternatively than immoderate expected hold connected Jan. 6 itself. (Banks had raised some issues successful his comments conscionable earlier Scalise spoke.) Scalise spokesperson Lauren Fine said Scalise “was referring to what he’s asked each along, which is wherefore wasn’t the National Guard called anterior to the time of.”

But plentifulness of others person focused connected the events of Jan. 6 itself. And Banks spokesperson Buckley Carlson assured Friday that, erstwhile it comes to raising that question, Banks “definitely stands by it.”

JM Rieger contributed to this report.