I would normally never read or recommend an article from the New York Times because they are extremely biased.
That newspaper falsely accused President Trump of Russian collusion for over four years with zero evidence.
After at least four investigations, and still zero evidence, we found out what I speculated in late 2016 -- Russian collusion was a fake story concocted by Hillary Clinton and her campaign staff.
Today I read, and am recommending, a New York Times online article about the January 6, 2021 riot, with lots of pictures and graphics.
The New York Times confirms that many people were at the Capitol building before Trump's speech, two miles away, for planned and unplanned protests.
In addition, two pipe bombs were found during Trump's speech, one in front of the Republican National Committee building, and the other in front of the Democrat National Committee building.
Those acts of terrorism were planned in advance, and had nothing to do with Trump's speech.
Some people left Trump's speech early, before he encouraged a peaceful protest at the Capitol building.
So It is impossible to claim that speech alone caused them to walk two miles in 40 degree F. weather BEFORE a peaceful protest at the Capitol was even mentioned.
The only people who could have decided to protest at the Capitol building, as a result of Trump's speech encouraging them to protest peacefully, are those who heard him say that, and then walked over to the Capitol building.
They would have arrived after 2pm, adding to the crowd that was already there.
