PELOSI EXPOSED! Former Capitol Police Chief Sund Testifies Against Her…with Receipts!

Former U.S. Capitol Police Chief Steven A. Sund has come forward with damning testimony that is sending shockwaves through the Washington establishment. His revelations regarding House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s actions before and during the January 6th incident have exposed a web of deceit and raised serious questions about her involvement in the security failures that day.

The Hearing: Assessing Security Failures on January 6, 2021

On Tuesday, the House Administration Subcommittee on Oversight conducted a hearing titled “Oversight of United States Capitol Security: Assessing Security Failures on January 6, 2021.” Chaired by Rep. Barry Loudermilk, the subcommittee provided a platform for Chief Sund to present his account of the events that unfolded on that fateful day. Sund’s testimony has since become a focal point of controversy, as it directly contradicts Pelosi’s narrative.

Pelosi’s Refusal to Call in the National Guard

One of the most startling revelations from Chief Sund’s testimony was Pelosi’s refusal to call in the National Guard despite multiple warnings of potential violence. It has been widely reported that President Trump had requested the National Guard three days in advance of January 6th, but Pelosi turned him down. This decision raises serious concerns about whether Pelosi intentionally allowed the security breach to occur.

Pelosi’s Obstruction of Investigation

Adding to the mounting evidence against Pelosi, Chief Sund revealed that she withheld crucial information about her role in the security breakdown during the January 6th riot. For over a year, Pelosi refused to cooperate with congressional investigators and attempted to hide her culpability. It is now clear that she was aware of her own responsibility for the attack but chose to deflect blame onto others, including Chief Sund.

Pelosi’s Attempts to Scapegoat Chief Sund

Chief Sund’s testimony also shed light on Pelosi’s attempts to use him as a scapegoat for the security failures on January 6th. He revealed that Pelosi forced him to step down as Police Chief, effectively sacrificing him to protect her own reputation. This calculated move by Pelosi further highlights her willingness to deceive and manipulate the situation for her own benefit.

Pelosi’s False Statements Exposed

During the hearing, Chief Sund directly refuted Pelosi’s claim that she never spoke with him on January 6th. He revealed that he had not one, not two, but three phone calls with Pelosi that day. The first call took place when he went to brief Vice President Pence, and Pelosi was present. The second call occurred when he was walking to the Senate to brief its members, and Pelosi reached out to question the information he had given to Vice President Pence. The third call happened later in the evening when he was at the Senate, and he briefed all of the leadership, including Pelosi, on the plans to resume congressional activities. Pelosi’s public denial of these conversations raises serious doubts about her honesty and integrity.

Pelosi’s Potential Motives for Deception

The question that arises from Chief Sund’s testimony is why Pelosi would lie about her interactions with him on January 6th if she had nothing to hide. It is clear that she was aware of her own involvement in the security breakdown and wanted to distance herself from any responsibility. By denying her conversations with Chief Sund, Pelosi attempted to portray herself as an innocent bystander rather than a key player in the events of that day. This deliberate deception warrants further investigation and raises concerns about Pelosi’s fitness for leadership.

The January 6 Committee’s Failure to Call Pelosi

One would expect that the January 6 Committee, which claims to be conducting a thorough investigation into the events of that day, would have called Pelosi in to testify. However, their failure to do so suggests a lack of impartiality and a disregard for the truth. The committee’s selective approach to witnesses and evidence undermines its credibility and raises questions about its true intentions.

More Reading

Post navigation

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *