There was only one real surprise in the January 6 TV show trial

OK, I watched it.  And if there's anything about the first of the so-called "hearings" on the alleged "insurrection" of January 6, 2021 that surprised me, it wasn't the predictably kangaroo-court nature of the affair, or even the Democrats' brazen lying and selective omissions.  What still managed to surprise me was the media's complicity.

It certainly didn't surprise me to see the same video clip that had been played at President Trump's second impeachment trial.  That was the one showing Trump urging demonstrators to march to the Capitol, but conveniently edited to omit his telling them to "peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard."

I wasn't surprised by the complete lack of subtlety in the way the cynical purpose behind this theatrical production was revealed.  Rather than even purporting to "let the people watch and draw their own conclusions," the folks putting on this duplicitous production repeatedly uttered statements that would have raised objections in an actual trial because they assumed facts not in evidence and certainly not yet proven.  Objections would have also been raised for leading witnesses.

There was also the fact that there was no opposing counsel.  Certain questions of witnesses were conspicuous because of what the interlocutors never asked.  I kept waiting, futilely, for a witness to be asked, "And what manner of weapons did you observe these 'insurrectionists' carrying or employing?"

(Despite the repeated characterization of that day's events as "deadly," only one person was unquestionably killed, and that was Ashli Babbitt, a veteran of 14 years in the Air Force, shot by a Capitol policeman.  Neither her name nor her death was mentioned in the hearing.)

I wasn't surprised at Democrats' unity in perpetuating their narrative about the events of January 6 — namely, that the evil Donald Trump orchestrated "an attempted violent overthrow of our government."  Nor was I surprised that ostensible Republicans and supposed erstwhile Trump loyalists had been trotted out in an attempt to lend a non-partisan artifice to the proceedings, with Liz Cheney (whose name almost rhymes with "chicanery") at the forefront.

Image: January 6 hearing CBS coverage. YouTube screen grab.

No, what did surprise me, though, was how thoroughly corrupt, complicit, and in cahoots with the Democrats and how thoroughly on board with this charade America's so-called journalistic establishment has revealed itself to be.  Talking heads across all the channels lined up to parrot the talking points and reinforce the narrative, every one of them having apparently received the same memo and having apparently sworn the same loyalty oath.

Having observed for some time the way in which "news" is managed, this shouldn't have surprised me, but the sheer seamlessness of the way the Democrats and their committed propagandists coalesced to advance a common agenda was, in its way, rather impressive.  Like the Democrats, the so-called journalists have abandoned any subtlety or pretense about their loyalties or their agenda.  They are masters of propaganda who would make Dr. Goebbels look like a mere tyro, and they're past caring who knows it.

As Michael Savage has often said, "The Fourth Estate is now the Fifth Column."

Was January 6 a Reichstag moment?

I remember listening to the way the events of January 6 were reported at the actual time they were happening.  And while my own cynical nature had already expected the Democrat regime to stage some sort of Reichstag moment, a false-flag op calculated to discredit Trump and his supporters, one alleged occurrence, in particular, convinced me that, while genuine Trump-supporters had been caught up in the storming of the Capitol, the breaching of the barricades and the breaking and entering had been calculated, provoked, instigated, fomented, and enabled by agents provocateurs (possibly even including members of some of those "3-letter" agencies that had traditionally been considered incorruptible and above reproach).

And that alleged occurrence, as I noted it at the time, was this:

5:45 P.M. EST: Juan Williams (that genius and paragon of modern journalism!) is reporting that the "mobs breaching the Capitol" (characterized as "Trump supporters") have entered Mitch McConnell's office and "have taken down the American flag and put up a Trump flag."  EXCUSE ME?!  Does that sound like something patriots and people who revere America and its Constitution would do?  Or does it sound like a Reichstag moment, a (literal) false-flag op perpetrated by Antifa and its ilk?

(For anyone who needs a historical refresher, Hitler, the recently appointed chancellor, blamed the communists for the February 27, 1933, Reichstag fire, an arson attack on Germany's parliament.  He then used the event to consolidate his power, invoking an act that abolished freedom of speech, assembly, and privacy (legalizing surveillance of telephone calls and mail), and suspended the autonomy of federated states.  He had some 4,000 people arrested by his "Stormtroopers," party members whom Hitler had enrolled as "auxiliary police" to infiltrate existing law enforcement, all for "Protection of the People and State."

That conveniently timed act of arson — whether perpetrated by the Nazis or merely exploited by them — enabled Hitler to "fundamentally transform" Germany.)

Juan Williams's claim, just like the political theater piece to which we were treated Thursday night, pegged the needle on my BS meter right into the red zone.

Stu Tarlowe has, since 2010, contributed well over 150 pieces to American Thinker.  For some 15 years, he was the personal editor for the late Barry Farber, who is in Stu's personal pantheon of heroes and role models (along with Jean Shepherd, Long John Nebel, Aristide Bruant, Col. Jeff Cooper, Rabbi Meir Kahane and G. Gordon Liddy).  Recently employed as a staff writer for a magazine forecasting political, financial, and societal trends, when Stu had to be hospitalized for COVID, he was replaced.  Having recovered, he now writes on a variety of topics (political and personal) in his newsletter at and is seeking another gig as a writer/editor/proofreader.

If you experience technical problems, please write to