A heated public exchange has erupted between former U.S. Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund and former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, reviving debates about leadership failures and security breakdowns tied to the January 6 Capitol riot. The confrontation began when Pelosi criticized former President Trump’s new federal law enforcement initiative in Washington D.C., drawing parallels to his response during the Capitol attack. Pelosi accused Trump of delaying National Guard deployment on January 6, framing his current actions as politically motivated.
Sund quickly pushed back, issuing a detailed rebuttal. He claimed that, contrary to Pelosi’s remarks, he requested National Guard assistance as early as January 3, 2021, but that the request was rejected by the House Sergeant at Arms, an official who reported directly to Pelosi. Sund emphasized that federal law required approval from congressional leadership before the Guard could be deployed, limiting his authority to act independently.
According to Sund, even when violence escalated on January 6, his urgent pleas for National Guard support were stalled for more than an hour. He argued that bureaucratic delays and leadership decisions—not a lack of intelligence—were at the heart of the security failure. He further accused Pelosi of hypocrisy, pointing out that extensive military-style security, including fencing and thousands of Guard troops, was ordered after the riot.
The clash highlights ongoing questions about how Capitol security decisions are made and who holds accountability during emergencies. Sund’s claims suggest that congressional structures requiring political approval for security actions may have contributed directly to the failures of that day. As lawmakers continue to debate reforms, the Pelosi–Sund exchange underscores unresolved tensions over January 6 and raises broader questions about the balance between political oversight and professional security expertise in protecting the nation’s institutions.
