Dems still want Jan. 6 commission with broad powers to investigate conservatives
WASHINGTON, June 7, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — Following the crumbled narrative of an “armed insurrection” at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, Democrats are not only seeking to double-down, but likely intend to use it as a pretext for the persecution of law-abiding Americans, and the utter destruction of the conservative movement, including their enemies in the Republican party.
On May 19, the Democrat-led U.S. House of Representatives voted to create a special January 6 Commission for investigating the roughly four-hour afternoon riot, providing it with virtually unlimited authority to subpoena even the internal records, communications and donor lists of conservative organizations with full access to any and all data held by any department of the Federal government, including the National Security Agency (NSA), the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), and the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI).
The bill elevates this “breach” of the Capital grounds to a “domestic terrorist attack” and authorizes the Commission to investigate the incident itself and “the influencing factors that fomented such [an] attack.” The purview of the investigation, one observer wrote, is thus limited only to “the imagination of the Democrat appointees,” as “influencing factors” may include any and all individuals and organizations who happened to be skeptical that Joe Biden was actually duly elected and had the temerity to communicate those ideas to others.
Republican Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (CA) released a statement opposing the bill charging House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) with refusing to “negotiate in good faith on basic parameters that would govern a commission.” He also pointed out investigations are being conducted by two bi-partisan Senate committees, the Office of Architect of the Capitol, and, of course, law enforcement agencies including the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and the Department of Justice which had made at least 445 arrests with many more to follow.
This initiative by the Democrats in the House, he said, also “ignores the political violence that has struck American cities [in 2020].”
As Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) explained in a recent speech on the floor of the House, left-wing Antifa and Black Lives Matter (BLM) “domestic terrorists … did a horrific and jaw-dropping amount of damage to cities across America during 2020,” including 2,385 looting incidences, 624 arsons, 97 burned police vehicles, over 2,000 injured police officers, a death toll of 25 Americans, and a bill of $2 billion.
“Despite all of this damage, there is no investigation into [this] domestic terrorism from Congress,” she chided. “We have no commission launched to investigate the funding of Antifa. There’s no investigation into the funding of BLM.”
Yet, by contrast, in providing a purview of authority so broad, the proposed January 6 Commission would be able to legally demand such information from any and all conservative organizations. The Reactionary published an analysis in March demonstrating the Democratic Party’s past and future “roadmap” of “investigative abuse to further [its] political goals,” including the inflicting of maximum political damage on their enemies. Examples included lies regarding Donald Trump Jr.’s communications with Wikileaks, the Carter Page FISA applications, and the alleged “collusion” between the Trump campaign and Russia.
Having recalled the tactics of the Democrats, the anonymous attorney author of the analysis highlights one recent example of the types of subpoenas which may be issued by this January 6 Commission in relation to not only any politician, but any organization, corporation, or individual they wish to target.
In early February, Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), serving as Chairwoman of the House Committee on Oversight and Reform, wrote a letter to the Chief Operating Officer of the social media platform Parler and accused the company of “facilitating Russia’s campaign to sow chaos in the American electorate.”
Maloney bragged about her having introduced legislation that would require corporate entities being investigated in relation to “the assault on the Capitol on January 6” to be forthcoming with all sorts of internal information lest individuals “be allowed to hide behind the veil of anonymity provided by shell companies.”
Though lacking subpoena power, the committee was nonetheless undeterred from requesting Parler provide comprehensive documents including lists of all individuals who have “direct or indirect ownership interests in Parler” along with a “shareholder register,” a “list of all individuals and entities who have or had any control over Parler,” a full report on their creditors including amounts owed, and more.
The author, under the pen name “Techno Fog,” goes on to warn, that with the subpoena power of the January 6 Commission, requests like this will become binding demands and will go well beyond Parler, certainly impacting other platforms like Gab, and even possibly requiring the identification of anonymous individuals on these platforms.
“Next will be the investigations of conservative political groups and those who exercised their First Amendment right (whether correct or not, it’s still protected speech) to speak out about the 2020 election. There will be efforts to obtain documents concerning leadership and internal communications, as well as donor lists,” he writes.
“Techno Fog” provides one example of how in 2014 the office of California Attorney General Kamala Harris demanded donor lists from conservative nonprofits to “chill” their free speech.
Individuals and their personal communications will also be vulnerable, beginning with President Trump and his staff. “Anyone who disputed the election results or questioned the fairness of the election will be fair game” as well, he writes.
“If you question the seriousness of the game they’re playing,” he writes, “just look at the security around the Capitol. Currently, over 5,000 National Guard troops, along with fencing and razor wire, protect against a non-existent threat.” Like exaggerated media claims about that day, the military at the Capitol “is theater to make January 6 more than what it was to justify what is to come.”
At the end of May, the attempt to establish the commission failed in the Senate with Republicans exercising their filibuster option. “The final vote Friday was 54-35, but Republicans withheld the votes necessary to bring the bill up for debate,” NPR reported. “Just six GOP senators joined with the Democrats, leaving the measure short of the 60 votes needed to proceed.”
Yet pressure is ramping up on Democrats in the Senate to remove the filibuster. On Thursday, a coalition of more than 100 leftist organizations issued a letter calling on the Democrats to overturn the rule. With the GOP senators blocking the bill on the Jan. 6 Commission, “it is clearer than ever that the filibuster needs to be eliminated,” they wrote.
In order to overturn the rule, Democrats will need their full caucus of 50 to hand the tie-breaking vote to Vice President Kamala Harris.
Standing in the way, however, are two Democrat senators who have been explicitly opposed to changing the filibuster rule: Sens. Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ) and Joe Manchin (D-WV). The latter said in April, “There is no circumstance in which I will vote to eliminate or weaken the filibuster.”
Commenting on these dynamics, former presidential candidate Pat Buchanan writes, “As for Manchin, he is sitting in the catbird seat in the Democratic Party … [If he] holds his ground this June, he will prevail, the filibuster will survive,” the Democrat agenda, including the January 6 Commission, “will die a deserved death, and Joe will become legend in West Virginia.”