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.
BREAKING NOW: 'National Emergency' Declared, Trump Called In
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Secretary of State Marco Rubio told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that the United States has imposed a blockade preventing Iranian ships from transiting the Strait of Hormuz after Iran moved to restrict passage for other vessels.
Rubio stated that the measure has already cost Iran hundreds of millions of dollars in lost revenue. He said the decision followed Iran’s failure to reach an agreement on reopening the waterway to all shipping.
Rubio described the current talks with Iran as distinct from negotiations with other countries, noting that the Iranian decision-making process is slow and fragmented.
He said the regime has recently agreed to discuss aspects of its nuclear program that it had previously refused to address. At the same time, he indicated that U.S. patience is limited and that further progress is required on nuclear issues and the status of the Strait of Hormuz.
Iranian state media reported that Tehran had suspended talks with the United States, citing Israeli strikes on Hezbollah in Lebanon. President Trump stated on social media that negotiations between the two countries remain ongoing.
Rubio’s testimony did not directly address the Iranian media reports but emphasized that any agreement would need to include verifiable steps on Iran’s nuclear activities and the restoration of open passage through the Strait of Hormuz.
The blockade and the status of talks come as the United States continues to enforce export controls and sanctions related to Iran’s nuclear program and regional activities.
Administration officials have described the current approach as combining diplomatic engagement with measures to increase pressure on Tehran. Rubio’s remarks before the committee provided the most detailed public update on the status of the discussions in recent days.
The situation remains fluid, with both sides continuing to exchange messages through diplomatic channels. No timeline for further rounds of talks or specific next steps was announced during the hearing. Congressional committees are expected to continue monitoring developments related to Iran policy in the coming weeks.
Vote To Remove Minnesota Representative Ilhan Omar From Congress Being Considered By Republican Congressman
In a closely divided 5-3 vote that fell one short of the required threshold, Minnesota House Republicans failed to secure a subpoena compelling U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar to testify and produce documents tied to the Feeding Our Future fraud scandal.
The outcome on May 5 marked the dramatic conclusion of months of mounting scrutiny over the congresswoman’s legislative actions and community outreach during the pandemic-era program at the center of one of the largest federal fraud investigations in recent Minnesota history. The House Fraud Prevention and State Agency Oversight Committee, operating under a bipartisan agreement that demands six votes to authorize a subpoena, saw every Republican member support the measure while all three Democrats opposed it.
Committee Chair Kristin Robbins (R-Maple Grove) argued that the subpoena had become the only remaining tool after Omar repeatedly declined invitations to appear and failed to respond to formal document requests.
“We have reached out to Representative Ilhan Omar on multiple occasions, inviting her to testify and inviting and requesting documents,” Robbins said ahead of the vote. “The only tool left for us as a committee if we want to get these documents is to issue a subpoena.”
Republicans on the panel have focused on Omar’s sponsorship of the federal MEALS Act, enacted in March 2020. They contend the legislation loosened critical oversight requirements in federal child nutrition programs and helped create the conditions that enabled large-scale fraud.
“Representative Omar had some role, whether inadvertent or not,” Robbins said. “She passed the MEALS Act in March of 2020, and that took the guardrails off the federal school nutrition program which created the conditions for Feeding Our Future.”
The Feeding Our Future scandal stands as one of Minnesota’s most significant public corruption cases in recent decades. Federal prosecutors allege that organizers and associates diverted hundreds of millions of dollars intended to feed low-income children through fabricated meal claims, shell nonprofit organizations, and fraudulent reimbursement requests. Dozens of individuals have been charged, including nonprofit founder Aimee Bock and multiple business operators connected to Minnesota’s Somali community.
Committee Republicans specifically sought communications between Omar’s office and several individuals named in the federal investigation, along with records related to her public promotion of Safari Restaurant in Minneapolis, a business later linked to the scandal. Robbins also referenced a Somali-language television appearance in which Omar highlighted the restaurant as a meal distribution site during the pandemic.
“We thought it’d be very helpful to understand from Rep. Omar’s perspective how she thought the MEALS Act impacted the community, why she brought it, what communication she had with the fraudsters,” Robbins said during the hearing.
Democrats on the committee strongly opposed the effort, accusing Republicans of politicizing the investigation and targeting Omar for partisan advantage. Dave Pinto, the committee’s lead Democrat, questioned both the timing and practical purpose of pursuing a subpoena with only days remaining in the legislative session.
“Even if Omar were to testify or information is received, I do not see the committee doing anything with that information,” Pinto argued.
Pinto further referenced broader concerns about investigations involving political opponents under the current federal administration.
“We know the president and federal administration have got no hesitation going after political enemies and investigating them in all sorts of ways,” he said during the hearing.
The failed vote effectively prevents the Minnesota House committee from compelling Omar’s testimony or documents before the legislative session ends later this month. Nevertheless, Robbins signaled that Republicans are exploring alternative avenues to continue the pursuit.
“They’re fading,” Robbins said. “But I’ll certainly talk to our friends in Congress to see if they would be willing to issue a subpoena.”
Robbins noted that federal authorities retain “a whole menu of legal options” because Omar is a sitting member of Congress. The controversy unfolds amid broader Republican efforts at both state and national levels to highlight waste, fraud, and inadequate oversight in federal spending programs enacted during the COVID-19 pandemic.
