Gaslighting the Patriot Movement: The False Narrative of January 6th (Pt. 3)

(This is a four article series to help discover the truth behind what took place at the US Capitol one year ago on January 6, 2021)

Previously in this series, we’ve shared with you a narrative that runs contrary to propagandist media (PM). We’ve shared evidence through independent journalist accounts, Tucker Carlson’s breakout documentary, Patriot Purge, that goes beyond the typical reporting about January 6, and shared details of other potential disrupters that may have caused the riot that took place prior to the end of the president’s speech near the Ellipse.

The next question(s) we want to address is this:

Did Donald J. Trump incite and implore supporters to storm the Capitol Building through violent insurrection, or was there evidence that he was telling his supporters something else?

Before I can answer this one, keep in mind that the president had a long list of enemies. So his opponents will never give him the benefit of the doubt when choosing his words. Another thing to keep in mind, whether you’re listening to an interview, an infomercial, or in this case, an historic speech on one of the most historic days in our nation’s short history, you must keep the words being spoken in context. Lastly, the opposition to the president, again, is a long of list of people. The ideology of that segment of the population believes they are incapable of conspiracy theories. They have gaslit us even to believe that such things don’t exist in their “sophisticated” worldview. But you and I know it most certainly does. I’ll circle back to this in the final analysis.

Here is why these opponents are absolutely certain that Donald J. Trump, in his own words, caused a mob of his supporters to riot at the Capitol. And no, it was not a deadly insurrection! We’ve dispelled that myth. But if you’re not satisfied, I will outline all of those things before I’m through. So, be patient.

In Trump’s speech we see and hear many of the same themes as you’d witness at a Trump rally since he was a candidate. The rhetoric, however, was ramped up considerably. But it had to be since he, I, and mostly all that supported the president believe that there was election interference that deliberately caused him to lose the election- at least in the tally we were presented. I will tell you that I sounded the alarm all through 2020 about this being a grave concern. You can read it both here and here if you need evidence. But evidence is all relative when millions believe Trump must be stopped at all cost. So, to be fair, the rhetoric was high from every corner. But none higher than on Big Tech platforms and PM. But, I digress.

Why opponents and many in Congress who oppose the president (and have from day one) believe he caused violence and rioting inside the Capital Building on January 6:

  1. His insistence throughout the second half of 2020 that they are going to remove him from office, and he would not back down.
  2. The characterization of Donald J. Trump as a fascist and comparisons to other past tyrants.
  3. The inflammatory words of his speech at the Ellipse that day.

As early as the first pandemic relief bill, Nancy Pelosi, Trump’s sworn enemy in the House of Representatives, demanded funding for Mail-in Ballots and voting. Pelosi insisted that these were no different than absentee ballots. This was not true. And even I was sounding the alarm over this because of the danger of these types of ballots and the way in which they were handled, to be vulnerable to ballot harvesting. Trump was advised to share his concern about this, and did throughout the campaign.

But the PM, those journalist that were offended by Trump’s characterization of them as ‘Enemy of the People’, gaslit this as well to make it seem like “tyrant Trump” was the one trying to fix the election in his favor. The media histrionics worked. And as the saying goes “if you repeat a lie enough it begins to sound like the truth”. But it wasn’t true. Again, highly subjective depending on your position on Trump.

The next on the list is simply subjective again depending on how you view Trump. This amounts to more Democrat rhetoric that’s been used for half a century towards republicans. “They’re all fascists!” But that is not consistent at all if you review the issues he defends and the Bill of Rights he supports. It’s a foundational reason why many that have been lukewarm about past Republican candidates, were on fire for Trump!

Now we’re back to The Speech. There is one portion of this speech that opponents point to over and over again. Let’s review it. And if you need a refresher, I’ve included the speech in it’s entirety as well:

President Donald J. Trump, on January 6, 2021.

“And we fight. We fight like hell! And if we don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country any more.”

Before I address the flaws in this conclusion, let me share the voices that have been silenced in all of this one-sided reporting. The voice of many people that made the trek to hear their president defend his position regarding the election fraud, and the decision whether to certify the votes for all 50 states. Many of which came to witness history, and in turn, witnessed something that was never discussed that day due to the events taking place down the road at the Capitol Building.

“We went there to see history, not to be history,” Eden Stotts, a restaurateur from Spokane, WA, told me in an interview about that day. She took her son and met with her brother and sister, for the purpose of supporting her president in what they believed to be a stolen election. “I went there to pray-in Trump,” Judith Cutlip, Eden’s sister, shared, “I went there to pray for God to intervene. It was just really important to go there and be part of the prayer team.” Not the sound of insurrectionist.

Judith continues: “It was like a big church service. People singing and happy, hugging each other. It was beautiful.” When I asked If there was any talk of doing harm or storming the Capitol from people in the crowd or by Trump they both resolutely stated in no way was any words about such spoken. In fact, quite the opposite.

Both of them believed this to be an election that was stolen through nefarious and deceptive practices. And both voted for the president. Eden shared an interesting take, however, that was unique from the narrative of the typical Trump supporter. Listen…

“I voted for Trump. But I am a patriot first,” Eden explains. “regardless of who is running for office, my allegiance is to my country, not to any man or woman…Trump is the only one who actually kept his promises and then some. So I am absolutely a Trump supporter, however he is temporal in his position. Therefore I would consider myself a patriot.

We went there to see history. Not to be history.”

Eden Stotts of Spokane, WA, who was there on January 6 to support Trump and pray for the election outcome to be overturned.

“We grew up with the Constitution in one hand and the Bill of Rights in the other. I carry a pocket size of both in my purse at all times. I fully stand on the words that “All men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights” – the key to this for me is “creator” – Our rights and freedoms were given to us by God, not the government. … so that is what I mean by “I am a patriot” first and foremost, and because I align with Trump’s values and ideas, I am a Trump supporter.” Eden’s convictions were echoed by many from the Lincoln Memorial to the US Capitol Building.

So the group made the slow trek toward the Capitol, where the vote was taking place as to whether or not the 2020 election would be certified, or whether it would be sent back to the states. Later on we will share more of Eden and Judith’s testimony. But we have unfinished business.

We must deal with the intent of Trump’s words from his speech that is believed to have incited the crowd to insurrection. In order to make a proper determination of intent, we must consider the entire passage in context, something the propagandist media (PM) is often allergic to doing.

The proper context of that passage was election integrity. Therefore the fighting he referred to was a legal battle of fighting the results. And his supporters would fight these results in their home states by challenging the massive irregularities as mentioned in one of my past articles. For added reinforcement, we must also look at the text that immediately preceded the “fighting” portion:

“…and I know that everyone here will be marching over to the Capitol Building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.” How predictable that the insurrection narrations conveniently left that part out.

A peaceful group of protestors march toward the Capitol on January, 6, 2021

Given the testimony mentioned here and Trump’s speech in full context, it’s hard to imagine that he was responsible for the actions of the people that rioted at the Capitol. But clearly there was a riot. Clearly there was violence that we know of, both on the steps and inside the US Capitol. So who and what was responsible if it wasn’t Trump? And it clearly wasn’t a very large majority of his supporters.

Tomorrow, we will share what appears to have been the catalyst behind the Capitol riots. But today, I would ask all Americans to reflect on what happened with sorrow and remembrance for those that were harmed and the one, Ashli Babbitt, that was lost as a result of this event. Violence is not the answer in a place that is meant for our representative system of government, to do what they were sent to do that day. And to be clear, Ashli Babbitt did not display violence. She is the reason I mourn.

Whether I agree with the decisions on Capitol Hill or not, we are never to interfere with this process of government that is meant to be handled with civility and dignity. Bloody battles were waged to make that moment possible. And it is my hope that they never have to be waged again. But January 6, 2021 should never have been interrupted by violence and chaos. That is why every citizen needs answers. And I intend to find those answers with you. Pray for our nation. 🙏

(Chris Gaines is an author and editor for

Sources: Wall St. Journal, “Trump’s Full Speech at DC Rally on January 6”, 2.7.21

Photo sources: NY Post,, and Judith Cutlip

3 thoughts on “Gaslighting the Patriot Movement: The False Narrative of January 6th (Pt. 3)

  1. Media bias is clear when you compare headlines from the January 6th demonstration to the actual BLM riots last year. Let’s not forget how “peaceful” those riots were (despite the well-documented and widespread death and destruction across the nation)!

    There is clear evidence that there were peaceful attendees at the Capital that day, yet the media bundles them all into one label – violent, white-supremacists. How many people lost their jobs, were wrongfully prosecuted, or publicly shamed for peacefully expressing their rights? The media should be held accountable!

    After reading this, it is clear, despite media headlines, that there is no link between President Trump’s words and any violence/insurrection.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I provided a caption as sort of an homage to the PM’s use of the term “peaceful protests” when reporting on riots, looting and total anarchy in the summer of 2020. As far as the other labels falsely placed on the peaceful protestors of January 6, I have much to say about this when wrapping up my series. Come back for the finale and you may be pleased by what you read.

      As far as the media being held accountable for this, that will be addressed in the proper tone in the last potion of this series as well.

      Look forward to your thoughts then. Take care!

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Historically, I’m the last one in the room to shout “Conspiracy”, but I do see an elephant in the room. The left failed to remove Donald Trump from the White House twice via ginned up impeachments. They needed something more potent than a Russian collaboration hoax or a phone call. What could better suit this need than if the President of the United States personally organized an overthrow of the government? That’s the implication here. That ought a do it, right? Well, how do you pull off such a stunt? You’d need people trained in this sort of stuff. Hey, how about covert operatives that already work for the government? We’ll give them one more chance after botching up the Russian Hoax to “mortally wound” the president. Strike one was the Russian Hoax, strike two was a phone call to Ukraine and here comes strike three, the “Insurrection”. You’re OUT.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this:
search previous next tag category expand menu location phone mail time cart zoom edit close