According to an article published on April 30 by Business Insider New York Times writers Alexander Burns and Jonathan Martin report in a new book that, some days before the January 6, 2021, riot at the US Capitol, Rep. Abigail Spanberger warned fellow Democrat lawmaker Rep. Alexandra Ocaso-Cortez that she should take steps to make herself less of a target in case of violence instigated by the expected gathering of Trump supporters on the Mall.
A former intelligence officer, Democratic Rep. Abigail Spanberger of Virginia worried about possible violence in the days leading up to January 6, 2021.
At the time, supporters of then-President Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the election were planning to demonstrate that day outside the US Capitol as Congress carried out a typically pro forma duty, certifying Joe Biden as the winner of the 2020 presidential election.
Spanberger worried that fellow Democrats would be targeted and she was especially concerned about “highly recognizable progressive women,” including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York and others who had been “demonized by the right,” according to a forthcoming book “This Will Not Pass,” by New York Times reporters Alexander Burns and Jonathan Martin. Insider obtained an advance copy of the book ahead of its Tuesday publication.
The Virginia Democrat called Ocasio-Cortez to urge her to take precautions, a notable gesture given the two women represent “the enormous gulf within the Democratic Party” between centrists and left-wingers, respectively, Burns and Martin wrote.
“You are a very recognizable target,” Spanberger said she told Ocasio-Cortez. “Drive to work, and make sure that you dress in a way where you are less recognizable as you could possibly be.”
“Wear sneakers, dress down — don’t look like you,” she recounted for the authors.
This invites the question. Had former intelligence officer Spanberger been informed of intelligence that indicated organized violence directed towards lawmakers?
About a month after January 6, 2021, Spanberger recounted her experience in the US Capitol that day. She explained that she has anticipated trouble and come to work prepared.
When I was a federal agent, I was weapons trained. I had anticipated that it might be a day of heightened engagement, so I had dressed accordingly, in slacks. Old CIA mentality. If needed, I could be undiscernable by just taking off my blazer. At that point, I had taken off my pink blazer and was trying to take cover in between the seats of the gallery.
A spokesperson explained to Business Insider that Rep. Spanberger had been concerned about violence for several days prior to January 6.
“In the days before January 6, 2021, Rep. Spanberger was concerned about the potential for violence around the Capitol. She had conversations with multiple colleagues about staying safe, in the event of the conspiracy theory-fueled ‘Stop the Steal’ rally becoming dangerous,” the spokesperson said in a statement, adding that the lawmaker extended the advice to “dress down” to her office staff.
In contrast, Spanberger has not been reported to have expressed any concern before or after Black Lives Matter protests that turned violent. In June 2020, She participated in a peaceful march in the Richmond suburb of Chesterfield County, but seems not to have anticipated or issued warnings to constituents or colleagues before the 3 nights of violent BLM rioting in Richmond or the violent riots in Washington, DC. Despite the best efforts of some to downplay the looting, burning, and general mayhem that accompanied many of the protests, intelligence briefings were not required to find plenty of reasons to anticipate violence would break out at “peaceful protests” in the wake of George Floyd’s death. A Princeton study in the aftermath of the BLM riots found 570 violent demonstrations in 220 locations nationwide.
In contrast, Spanberger has not been reported to have expressed any concern before or after Black Lives Matter protests that turned violent.
In June 2020, she participated in a peaceful march in the Richmond suburb of Chesterfield County, but seems not to have anticipated or issued warnings to constituents or colleagues before the 3 nights of violent BLM rioting in Richmond or the violent riots in Washington, DC.
Despite the best efforts of some to downplay the looting, burning, and general mayhem that accompanied many of the protests, intelligence briefings were not required to find plenty of reasons to anticipate violence would break out at “peaceful protests” in the wake of George Floyd’s death. A Princeton study in the aftermath of the BLM riots found 570 violent demonstrations in 220 locations nationwide.
So were Rep. Spanberger’s pre-January 6 concerns just a hunch based on a world view in which Trump supporters are violent ideologues? Or did she have information that caused her to expect violence on that day?
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has been accused of deliberately le[aving] the Capitol vulnerable by a failure to agree to a request from the Capitol Police to prepare for “pre-emptive reinforcement from the National Guard” (see also here and here).
Perhaps Speaker Pelosi was relying on FBI surveillance intelligence which found plenty of evidence that large crowds of pro-Trump protestors would descend on DC on January 6, but little evidence of planned violence or intra-group coordination (here, here, and here).
But Pelosi’s refusal to agree to enhanced security measures combined with the admitted presence of federal agents and “assets” embedded with protestors (here and here) as well as the embarrassing “let’s kidnap Michigan Governor Whitmer” FBI entrapment scheme has resulted in questions about whether some of the Capital rioters were also set-up.
There are similarities between the kidnapping plot and January 6 that could be just coincidental, or could be evidence of a similar FBI plan: the FBI agent who ran the Detroit field office at the time of the kidnapping plot was transferred to DC where he oversaw January 6 agency operations. And the same groups were involved:
I don’t think we can ignore the parallels between Michigan and January 6. Same plot: storming the capital. The Michigan people, the Wolverine Watchmen, the 3 Percenters who were associated with this failed entrapment operation, stormed the Michigan state capital. Same plot. Same militia groups. The Three Percenters, which is associated with many of the defendants in this case is one of the three main militia groups also linked to January 6.
That the FBI had little evidence of a pre-planned, coordinated attack on the Capitol on January 6 combined with House leadership declining to beef up security for the day suggests that Rep. Spanberger’s concerns in the days before January 6 either is a demonstration of a well-tuned nose for trouble or an indication that she was clued into an operation not known to others.
The new New York Times book singles out a call made to Rep. Ocasio-Cortez by Rep. Spanberger with a warning of her premonition of violence. If Rep. Spanberger was part of a pre-planned psychological operation to advance the narrative that Trump supporters are violent ideologues, then warning a darling of the press corps known for overdramatizing the smallest of perceived slights that she could be in danger would, if violence in fact occurred, result in saturation coverage.
Indeed, AOC lived up to her reputation by declaring “I thought I was going to die,” maintaining the fantasy even after it became clear that she was not even in the same building as the rioters.
Not every anomaly hides a dark conspiracy. Perhaps there really is nothing to see here except laudable foresight. But since millions of dollars and man-hours are being spent investigating every aspect of the events of January 6, delving into former CIA employee Abigail Spanberger’s pre-January 6 concerns and who received warning calls seems warranted if only for the sake of completeness.