Fmr Capitol Police Chief Gives Pelosi a ‘Reminder’ About J6 After She Blamed Trump
Nancy Pelosi just got a very public “fact check” from the man who was in charge of Capitol security on January 6 — and it’s not a good look for the former House Speaker.
The California Democrat unloaded on President Donald Trump Monday after he announced a sweeping federal crime crackdown in Washington, D.C., taking direct control of the Metropolitan Police Department and activating the D.C. National Guard to patrol the streets.
“Donald Trump delayed deploying the National Guard on January 6th when our Capitol was under violent attack and lives were at stake,” Pelosi fumed. “Now, he’s activating the D.C. Guard to distract from his incompetent mishandling of tariffs, health care, education and immigration — just to name a few blunders.”
It didn’t take long for former U.S. Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund — who resigned after the Jan. 6 riot — to hit back, and hard.
“Ma’am, it is long past time to be honest with the American people,” Sund said in a scathing statement. He recounted how on January 3, 2021, just three days before the riot, he formally requested National Guard support. That request, he says, was shot down by Pelosi’s own Sergeant at Arms.
“Under federal law (2 U.S.C. §1970), I was prohibited from calling them in without specific approval,” Sund explained. “That same day, Carol Corbin at the Pentagon offered National Guard support, but I was forced to decline because I lacked the legal authority.”
When January 6 arrived and chaos erupted, Sund said he begged again for the Guard — and was stalled for over an hour. “While the Capitol was under attack and despite my repeated calls, your Sergeant at Arms again denied my urgent requests for over 70 agonizing minutes, ‘running it up the chain’ for your approval,” Sund wrote.
He then accused Pelosi of hypocrisy: “When I needed assistance, it was denied. Yet when it suited you, you ordered fencing topped with concertina wire and surrounded the Capitol with thousands of armed National Guard troops.”
Pelosi’s own daughter showed the Speaker on Jan. 6 telling aides she wanted Trump to come to the Capitol so she could “punch him out” and “go to jail… happy.”
The remarks were caught on camera for an HBO documentary and aired by CNN. In the clip, Pelosi’s staff told her the Secret Service had dissuaded Trump from coming due to security concerns, but Pelosi replied, “I hope he comes. This is my moment. I’ve been waiting for this.”
It is still a mystery why she wasn’t “waiting” to authorize the National Guard to secure the Capitol through the House Sergeant at Arms, as former Chief Sund highlights.
Trump on Monday called his D.C. crime crackdown “liberation day” for the capital, vowing to rid the city of violent gangs, roving mobs, and “drugged-out maniacs.” The move gives the president full control of the MPD for 30 days under the Home Rule Act, and he warned that New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles could be next.
“Our capital city has been overtaken by violent gangs and bloodthirsty criminals… and we’re not going to take it anymore,” Trump declared at the White House. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Guard troops from D.C. and other states will be deployed within days as “force multipliers” for local and federal officers.
D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser, calling the takeover “unsettling and unprecedented,” said she would nonetheless comply, adding, “Everybody should follow the law, the police and the community.”
It is odd that Mayor Bowser doesn’t find it “unsettling” that she failed to secure the Capitol ahead of January 6, despite the repeated warnings. Bowser addressed a letter to acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen, Secretary of the Army Ryan McCarthy and acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller prior to the January 6 riot.
“To be clear, the District of Columbia is not requesting other federal law enforcement personnel and discourages any additional deployment without immediate notification to, and consultation with, MPD if such plans are underway,” she wrote in the letter.
The irony wasn’t lost on political observers: Trump is now deploying the very D.C. Guard he has been accused of withholding on Jan. 6 — and the former Capitol Police Chief is now on record saying it wasn’t him who blocked them at all.
Sund’s remarks revive a bitter political fight over who bears responsibility for the Guard delay that day. Democrats have long blamed Trump personally, suggesting he refused to send reinforcements as the riot unfolded. Trump and his allies counter that security planning for the Capitol fell under congressional leadership — meaning Pelosi’s office was at the center of the decision-making process.
In addition, it is a documented fact that Trump instructed the Pentagon to secure the capitol, ahead of expected election objections, and that included a pre-authorization for as many as 10,000 National Guard troops.
With Trump once again in the Oval Office and now exercising emergency control over the capital’s streets, the battle over the truth about January 6 is front-page politics all over again. And judging by Sund’s blunt words, he’s not letting Pelosi rewrite the record to fit her political narratives.
Nearly 150,000 California Mail Ballots Rejected In Primary
California election officials are examining why nearly 150,000 mail-in ballots were rejected during the state’s June primary, with late-arriving ballots accounting for most of the increase.
The higher rejection rate comes despite years of election law changes designed to make voting more accessible and ensure more ballots are ultimately counted.
According to data compiled by the California Secretary of State’s office, 148,241 mail-in ballots were rejected during the June primary, representing 1.73% of all mail ballots returned.
That marks an increase from the 2024 primary, when 108,982 ballots were rejected, or 1.56% of all mail ballots cast.
The largest reason for rejection was ballots arriving too late to qualify under California law.
State data shows that 93,479 ballots were rejected because they failed to meet the state’s deadline requirements.
California allows mail ballots to arrive up to seven days after Election Day, provided they are postmarked on or before Election Day.
Voting experts believe many of the rejected ballots received postmarks dated after Election Day, making them ineligible to be counted even if they arrived within the seven-day grace period.
Kim Alexander, president of the nonpartisan California Voter Foundation, said the timing of postal processing appears to be a significant concern.
“Ballots rejected due to lateness are caused primarily to being postmarked too late to count, not because they arrived too late to count,” Alexander said.
Election experts have questioned whether recent operational changes within the U.S. Postal Service may be contributing to delayed postmarks.
Earlier this year, a group of mostly Democratic U.S. senators wrote to the Postal Service expressing concern that mail-processing changes could affect ballot handling during federal elections.
Updated Postal Service procedures mean postmarks may reflect when mail is processed at regional facilities rather than when it first enters the mail system.
Because processing centers have been consolidated in some areas, election officials have warned that postmark timing could be affected.
Before the June primary, California election officials encouraged voters to mail ballots as early as possible because of potential postal delays.
The June election also featured a highly competitive race for governor, which some experts believe encouraged many voters to wait until the final days before casting ballots.
In addition to late-arriving ballots, approximately 44,000 ballots were rejected because election officials determined the voter’s signature did not match the signature on file.
Another 8,300 ballots were rejected because the return envelope did not contain a signature.
State records also show that 743 ballots were rejected because those voters had already cast another ballot.
Other rejected ballots involved missing ballots inside return envelopes or multiple ballots submitted in a single envelope.
The highest rejection rate in the state occurred in Tulare County, where 3.52% of returned mail ballots were rejected.
Alpine County and Merced County followed closely, each recording rejection rates of 3.36%.
California has frequently faced criticism for taking weeks to complete vote counting after major elections, largely because state law permits ballots meeting certain requirements to continue arriving after Election Day.
Following the June primary, President Donald Trump again criticized California’s election system, while the Department of Justice opened an investigation into election administration in Los Angeles County.
Election experts emphasize that the increase in rejected ballots should not be interpreted as evidence of widespread voter fraud.
A 2025 report by the Brookings Institution found documented cases of mail ballot fraud remained extremely rare, estimating roughly four cases for every 10 million mail ballots cast, The Associated Press reported.
State officials have not identified evidence of widespread fraud connected to the June primary, but the increase in rejected ballots is expected to receive additional scrutiny as election administrators evaluate whether changes in postal operations, voter behavior or election procedures contributed to the higher rejection rate.
