Riot at the Capitol: a Review by our History Teachers

Written by Isabella Gao

Illustrated by Emilie Cooper

With quotes by Nathan Suggs and Matthew Leggett

Six days into the start of 2021, the United States Capitol building was swarmed by a group of protesters there to defend President Donald Trump, after they refused to accept his loss in the 2020 Presidential Election which had occurred on November 3rd of the previous year.

Animosity surrounding the 2020 Presidential Election has been tense, after questions of American public health amidst the SARS-COV 2 pandemic and racial injustices caused brutal debates between the two candidates, current President Trump, and former Vice President Biden. This is the first time since August 24th, 1814, that invaders marched into Washington and disturbed the Capitol building. Over two centuries ago, the invaders were armed British forces who were fighting the United States in the War of 1812. The incident that occurred at the beginning of this month was no move by foreign assailants, however. This was solely due to radial Trump supporters who refused to accept the Democratic victory.

Nate Suggs, a U.S. history teacher, discussed the riots with his classes in January, making many aware of the historical connotations of this event.

“In my view, while Americans have a Constitutionally-protected right and freedom to peacefully protest, those that breached the Capitol and/or participated in physical assault went beyond their protected Constitutional rights, not to mention simply exhibiting disregard for others’ rights and property. This was a clear effort to overthrow civil authority and disrupt the Democratic process (of certifying the election) by force.”

Similarly, Matthew Leggett, a world history teacher, also condemns the rioters heavily.

“Such violent actions have no place in U.S. politics or any other arena. I believe in the rule of law. The US Constitution guarantees the right to peaceably assemble to protest, but not to riot. Destroying property, assaulting law enforcement officers, and making threats is not protest; it is violence. While “domestic terrorists” could be a legitimate label, I think rioters is an appropriate term. While they may have seen themselves as patriots, I think patriots pursue their grievances according to the rule of law, not violence. Patriots don’t attack others while fulfilling their constitutional obligations.”

After reaching the press, the riot at the Capitol was immediately linked to President Trump’s speech at his Save America March, where he said “We’re going to walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women, because you’ll never take back our country with weakness.” Both Mr. Suggs and Mr. Leggett highly disapproved of his participation in the accumulation of aggression by the rioters.

“I have never experienced a presidential election in this country in which one of the candidates laid the groundwork for disputation and then claimed the election was rigged after he lost. His rhetoric and assertions that the election had been stolen stoked the anger of the rioters, and they did what they did for his sake. This means, as a leader, he had an obligation to speak out to quell the anger and stop the riots. Why did this happen? I think Donald Trump’s character will not allow him to concede defeat. And it seems truth, for him, is whatever serves his ends. It pains me to think this of our president, because my instincts are to trust that government officials are in it for the right reasons,” Mr. Leggett said.

Mr. Suggs reviewed the past elections of American history and determined that this one was unlike any other, even in regards to those where disbelief over the results and instigation occurred.

“There have been 3 previous presidents who didn’t attend their successor’s inauguration but none of those 3 implicitly or explicitly advocated violent retribution. This was a culmination of previous statements the outgoing president made that gave silent support to fringe groups and plain silence, which accounts to support, when those groups turned to violence. [Trump] should have accepted his defeat in the election much sooner before this ever became an option. Once this was planned, and it wasn’t a secret, he should have quieted the rumblings instead of feeding the flame with unsubstantiated claims.”

Was the riot an act of patriotism or an act of domestic terrorism? These two definitions of the act split the opinions of those at the riot with the majority of American watchers.

Mr. Leggett said, “While domestic terrorism is a possible description, I don’t think it was any of those; I think it was the act of a mindless mob, responding to a strong but vague desire to disrupt the proceedings. While some of the rioters conducted premeditated actions, there was not a coordinated attack. Once in the Capital, the rioters appeared to be milling about in an aimless fashion. I think the actions of the rioters were driven by fear and anger and a misguided desire to “do something” without much thought to the consequences of their actions. Did they really think they were going to overturn the election?”

Mr. Suggs believes it was definitely an act of domestic terrorism, but knows there are several people who believe in the opposite.

“There are always multiple viewpoints based on previous experiences, thoughts, and perceptions. It’s sometimes difficult to remember that another individual’s view is just as valid to them as our viewpoints are to us. It would be great if we could settle them with dignity and respect,” he said.

The pro Trump riots in Washington DC were linked with similar rallies in the Black Lives Matter movement last summer and fall, with some arguing that these rioters deserve the support that those in a different movement received.

Mr. Suggs said, “I personally don’t like the linking of the events because I think there are two different issues going on and with much different causes. But, there is a connection between the groups in that both perceive that they have been persecuted and were left with no other options. And perception tends to be reality to the person who perceives it, despite what it looks like from the outside. I feel like the real question here is, ‘Do we still have a long way to go in improving race relations in the United States?’ Yes, yes we do.”

Mr. Leggett said, “Given the riots we have seen in the last 7 months that were associated with the BLM movement, it is natural to see another riot in that context. Many rioters in the summer did attack law enforcement officers and government buildings, so this looks similar. Also, the images of the Washington D.C. riots come to us through the same medium—through a screen. We view both on the same electronic devices. This also gives them a similar cast. I think it is important for the individual to discern the differences and also decry the normalization of violence for political ends being used both the right and the left. I think it is important in any riot to remember the humanity of all of those who are there, no matter what color of their skin.”

Another conflict that quickly arose after the quenching of the riot was how to punish the rioters. Should they be condemned or was this act justifiable by revolutionaries?

Mr. Suggs said, “I actually think law enforcement acted in the best possible manner if the result was to keep violence at a minimum, especially since they were vastly outnumbered at the beginning of the event. That said, I found myself nodding vigorously when former Washington D.C. police chief Charles Ramsey wondered why, with 2,000 Capitol police officers and other law enforcement nearby, there weren’t more present at the beginning of the ‘protests’ when this was a well-publicized event and not a spontaneous rally.”

“I think they should do just what they are doing, hold the rioters accountable by arresting them, trying them in court, and dispensing justice as appropriate. [They should] deliberate in Congress and take appropriate action to hold the President accountable, such as impeachment or invoking Section 4 of the 25th Amendment, and increasing security around government buildings. But in any course of action, I think it is important to preserve Constitutional freedoms such as freedom of speech and freedom of assembly. If the result of the riots is to curtail these freedoms, the rioters have done real damage to our republic,” Mr. Leggett said.

The riots caused intense upheaval in the first month of 2021, causing Americans to question the election process like they’ve never had to in the past. Mr. Suggs and Mr. Leggett both believe the rioters should be punished, and this opinion is extremely common in the U.S. As Benjamin Franklin said, “Those who give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”