A Timeline of What Trump Did—and Didn’t Do—on January 6

The January 6 committee details the president’s lack of response to the riots at the Capitol.

By
85

By the time Donald Trump concluded his speech at the Ellipse on January 6, 2021, members of the Proud Boys had already breached the Capitol complex’s outside perimeter—delineated by bike-rack fencing and manned by Capitol Police officers. According to former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson’s June 28 testimony before the House select committee investigating that day, Trump had been under the impression that he would be going to the Capitol with the crowd he had sent in that direction, and he was “irate” that his Secret Service detail prevented him from doing so.

Over the next three hours, protesters stormed the Capitol and came close to Vice President Mike Pence. All the while, Trump was at the White House, watching Fox News from the dining room next to the Oval Office and tweeting several times, asking an already violent mob to be “peaceful.”

The House select committee focused Thursday’s primetime hearing on the time period between 1:10, when  Trump’s speech ended, and 4:17, when he sent a tweet asking his supporters to go home—187 minutes of inaction, as the committee billed it.

“Doors have opened, new subpoenas have been issued, and the dam has begun to break,” committee vice chair Rep. Liz Cheney said in her opening statement. Cheney, who led the committee after Chairman Rep. Bennie Thompson tested positive for COVID on Tuesday, explained that the committee will continue to gather information in August before convening for further public hearings in September.

Keep reading with a free account
Create a free Dispatch account to keep reading Get Started ALREADY HAVE AN ACCOUNT? SIGN IN
85
By
Comments (85)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Avatar photo
    Bill Nelson

    Timeline: crowd forms, Trump speaks to them, crowd goes to the capital, crowd breaks into the capital, Trump enjoys the crowd for a while, crowd tires and goes to happy hour.
    It’s quite short.

    Collapse
  2. Avatar photo
    Michael Darwin

    Refusing to acknowledge the results of an election may be distasteful and disqualifying, but it isn't illegal. In Trump's case, it also isn't a secret so I don't get the focus on it now.

    As for wanting to lead the protests, well, yeah. He's a tv guy. He thought it would look good to his supporters. The only thing Trump loves half as much as himself are the people that love him, too. He knew he would be safe among them and loved the idea of standing before the Capitol protesting the certification. I certainly don't know the finer points of election law, but I don't know that any of that would be illegal either (though, again, distasteful and disqualifying).

    I also think his desire to join the march supports the idea that he did not want there to be violence or expect there would there be violence, as I simply cannot imagine that man actually putting himself in a situation where he might be harmed, even accidentally. I could be wrong on that.

    Myself and others have said since January 6th that if it could be shown that he just sat on his ass as the Capitol was stormed, that alone was impeachable. We knew who was in the White House then. There was ample opoprtunity to pull them into congress for the impeachment hearing. It is incomprehensible to me that anyone who wanted Trump out would not have put on a proper impeachment trial focusing on his very provable dereliction of duty. I am glad that the details are being brought to light now, but it still feels too little, too late.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Kizedek

      There’s a focus on it, because it’s been presented clearly that *everyone* in his inner circle told him the election was NOT stolen — *before Jan 6, 2020*!

      Well, apart from a couple of nutjobs in favor of whom he ignored everyone else.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        Michael Darwin

        That's the problem. It wasn't everyone, and it does not mean he believed them. You can dismiss the nutjobs, he didn't. It certainly calls his fitness into question, but it makes it more difficult to argue that he was of a criminal mindset in trying to overturn the election if he sincerely thought it was stolen. The tragedy is that he has a legion of rubes who believe along with him. The Emperor's New Clothes moment where the adoring crowds have the veil lifted from their eyes unfortunately never happened.

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photo
          Kizedek

          Well, certainly I can dismiss the "nutjobs" (Rudy, Sydney Powell, Mike Lindell, etc.). But I think the question isn't about them. It's about whether the "legion of Rubes" will persist in dismissing Mitchell, Barr, Pence, the DOJ, Ivanka, presidential aides, generals, etc., etc., in favour of these 2 or 3.

          The "Rubes" are definitely very committed to their beliefs -- we've seen that heart-breaking reality among friends and family for several years now, as many commenters attest.

          Nevertheless, it obviously has to come at a cost, whether that is credibility among (former) friends and family, or whatever. One has to hope that some of them, at some point, get a little introspective, and wonder why they have to put so many formerly credible Republicans/conservatives, and friends, "outside their fold" to be forever shunned. One can hope -- hence, "the focus" on narrowing the cadre of "true-believers" (and grifters and charlatans) in Trump's own circle.

          But, to your other point: I think the committee hearings also make clear that "criminal mindset" is no longer really in question. As David French wrote a week or two ago, "there is now a criminal case to be made". Trump's "sincere belief that the election was stolen" might be his "saving grace"... IF Jan 6th was some kind of one-off, spontaneous event that got a bit out of hand. As I think David has explained on Advisory Opinions, "intent" is important in certain charges -- like "incitement to violence" ...but, it is not important to prove it in transgressing many laws, like witness tampering and campaign funding violations and subversion of an elected official.

          Jan 6th is now clearly part of a much longer-running, larger thing. And some elements of it *were criminal*, such as soliciting "help" from Georgia's Secretary of State. It's clear, from testimony, of *Trump's own circle*, that he was warned many times: "You *CANNOT* do this or that, without consequences; we won't let you." And some asked for pardons.

          True, the "Emperor's New Clothes moment" hasn't happened, and may never happen for many "true believers"... but not because there is no evidence. It's because the "Rubes" have invested their identity in it; and because they have imbued all this tawdry politics with religious and spiritual significance.

          Collapse
  3. Retired Prosecutor

    Trump is a monomaniac. If and when Trump gets in the 2024 race, it will all be about "the steal," "how Ja n 6 was all about "true patriotism," and how the only way he can lose the next election is if it is "fixed." Unlike 2016, I think he will not pay much attention to current issues.

    Call it blind optimism, but I just think that massive buzz-kill, will depress his popularity numbers.

    Collapse
  4. Avatar photo
    Rjosephpaquette

    Trumps actions on January 6th are just the Cherry on top, of the multilayered dessert of reasons, he should never be president again.

    Collapse
  5. Arnold Curby

    Trump fiddled while Washington burned.

    Collapse
  6. Avatar photo
    Bill Dyer (aka Beldar)

    I was promised a timeline. There should have been a literal, or at least digital, timeline. A college sophomore marketing student or a 2L mock trial participant would have cranked up PowerPoint to make a timeline. There should have been many, many references, linking bits of testimony or video TO the timeline, to give it power and persuasive effect.

    There was no timeline.

    Collapse
  7. Ben P

    I love that, for the final episode of season 1, they announce that season 2 starts in September. I hope the intervening month turns up on the heat on those who are still dumb enough to be covering for Trump.

    And what a wonderful closing by Cheney. She should be the leader of the Republican party, but sadly it's currently beholden to clowns.

    Collapse
  8. Yoshi

    What would have happened if Mike Pence didn't intervene and excercise a presidential power he didn't actually have? How much worse would things have gotten? How many people would have died? That question alone should have prompted every senator to convict. But instead they hid behind disengenuous arguments and now there's a dangerous likelihood Trump will win the primary and this will happen again.

    Collapse
  9. Avatar photo
    Pat Riot

    By far the most disgusting and terrible and *foreboding* aspect of the trials was our likely future Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy. He called for Trump's removal from office and two weeks later reversed himself and now vows to *defend* the 1/6 attackers by going after the current investigators.

    And the depressing thing is that most Republicans don't even know these hearings are even happening, and/or only hear a bunch of lies about them.

    Collapse
    1. Ben P

      Him and McConnell. McConnell might be worse; he actually had the chance to get the asshole convicted and took a pass. Watching that video of him blaming Trump right after it happened just infuriated me. Those were some nice words, but the time for action came time Mitch didn't show up.

      Collapse
  10. Avatar photo
    Connie

    There are six things the Lord hates,
    seven that are detestable to him:
    haughty eyes,
    a lying tongue,
    hands that shed innocent blood,
    a heart that devises wicked schemes,
    feet that are quick to rush into evil,
    a false witness who pours out lies
    and a man who stirs up dissension among brothers.
    Proverbs 6:16-19

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Ted Gale

      . . . and from another tradition . . . one also integral to what we call Western Civilization:

      I am reading Paul Johnson's biography of Socrates, and just starting his discussion of Socrates' conception of justice, and need to act justly . . .

      “Victories in violation of justice are more despicable than morally righteous defeats.”

      Had Mr. Trump succeeded in their aims, it would have been despicable. Much better to have accepted the fact of a fairly narrow defeat (especially since margin of defeat was not quite as narrow as Mr. Trump's margin of victory four years earlier).




      Collapse
Load More