Why Exclude Flawed Evidence? Ron Johnson Defends His January 6th Conspiracy Theories
Many Republicans have been quick to absolve Donald Trump from any blame for the January 6th insurrection. No one has done so more vociferously than Ron Johnson. The Wisconsin senator has repeatedly pushed the conspiracy theories that the mob was actually made up of “fake Trump supporters.”
And while Johnson was mocked by many for his assertions, he doesn’t seem willing to stop pushing them. In a recent interview with the New York Times, the GOP lawmaker asked why flawed evidence should be excluded.
Johnson was specifically referring to Federalist piece written by J. Michael Waller. The article is titled, “I Saw Provocateurs At The Capitol Riot on January 6th.
When asked about Waller’s writings, Johnson said:
“I’m not questioning his veracity. I believe he’s probably telling the truth. That’s what he saw. I’m not agreeing with any conclusions. I’m not sure he’s really making too many conclusions, other than he concluded he saw four individual types of groups that stood out from the crowd.
It might be a flawed part of the evidence, but why exclude it? Just because it doesn’t necessarily tie into whatever narrative somebody else wants to tell about the day? I’m not interested in the narratives, I’m interested in the truth.”
In the Times article, Johnson also repeated his claim that this was not an armed insurrection. “If it’s properly termed an ‘armed insurrection,’ it was a pretty ragtag one,” the senator said. “I don’t dispute the destruction, or destructive capability of things like flagpoles and bats and that type of thing, but again, words have meaning.”