Former U.S. Capitol Police Chief Steve Sund has publicly disputed former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s statements regarding the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot. Sund released a detailed timeline outlining delays in National Guard support and alleging that his requests for assistance were denied by congressional security officials under Pelosi’s oversight.
Tensions escalated after Pelosi was confronted by a reporter about claims she delayed National Guard deployment. She strongly denied any refusal and instead attributed responsibility to then-President Donald Trump. In response, Sund posted a statement asserting that his repeated requests for support were blocked by the Speaker’s Sergeant at Arms, even during the riot, while they waited for leadership approval.
Sund emphasized that he lacked the authority to accept National Guard help without congressional authorization, citing federal law. He claimed that these delays severely impacted law enforcement’s ability to respond as violence escalated. His statement also noted that the Pentagon had offered assistance, but approval processes slowed coordination.
The January 6 attack resulted in multiple deaths and extensive damage, prompting multiple investigations into security breakdowns. Sund’s timeline revives questions about command structure and communication during the event, adding a new layer to ongoing debates about accountability among congressional and law enforcement officials.
Pelosi has consistently defended her office’s actions, stating that they operated within procedural constraints. Legal and security analysts note the complexity of the situation, where overlapping jurisdictions and protocols may have contributed to delayed responses. Sund’s account points to the need for more efficient emergency response frameworks within congressional security systems.
As investigations continue, Sund’s statements may influence future reviews of Capitol security practices. The incident underscores the need for clearer authority during crises, and how differing narratives — from lawmakers and law enforcement alike — can shape the historical understanding of critical national events.
