Ramaswamy disputes CNN on January 6 riot’s ‘Inside Job’ claim
Entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy Engages in Heated Debate with CNN’s Abby Phillip Over January 6 Riot
During a Wednesday night town hall on CNN, Vivek Ramaswamy, a prominent entrepreneur, found himself in a fiery exchange with Abby Phillip regarding his controversial remarks about the January 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C.
Phillip wasted no time in questioning Ramaswamy about his previous statements during a Republican presidential primary debate, where he suggested that the riot was an inside job.
“Alan Hostetter, a convicted Capitol rioter, brought your comments to light during his sentencing,” Phillip pointed out. “He is now facing 11 years in prison for threatening members of Congress and carrying dangerous weapons to the Capitol, including a hatchet, knives, pepper spray, stun batons, and tactical gear.”
Concerned about the association between Ramaswamy’s remarks and a convicted felon, Phillip asked, “Are you worried that someone like Hostetter is now using your comments to defend himself in court?”
Ramaswamy responded by acknowledging his previous skepticism about the idea of the riot being an inside job. He explained, “Before I entered the political arena, I dismissed any talk of January 6 being an inside job as crazy talk and fringe conspiracy theory nonsense.”
However, Ramaswamy’s perspective has since changed. He stated, “Now, having delved deeper into this issue, I can confidently say that it’s not just baseless speculation. The reality is that our government and technology have systematically lied to us over the years, from the origin of COVID-19 to the Hunter Biden laptop.”
He continued, “We’ve seen it with the Trump-Russia collusion hoax as well. And now, when it comes to January 6, we know for a fact that there were federal law enforcement agents present. The question is, how many?”
The intense debate between the two continued for several minutes, with neither side backing down.
Stay Informed with the DailyWire+ App
Don’t miss out on the latest news and analysis. Download the DailyWire+ app here.
Watch the intense exchange below:
Too bad for CNN, we’ll take the TRUTH on Jan. 6 mainstream. There is clear evidence that there was at the very least entrapment of peaceful protestors, similar to the fake Gretchen Whitmer kidnapping plot & countless other cases. The FBI won’t admit how many undercover officers… pic.twitter.com/SBuc6nnymg
— Vivek Ramaswamy (@VivekGRamaswamy) December 14, 2023
How did Ramaswamy explain his remarks during the presidential primary debate?
Ging the seriousness of the charges against Hostetter but clarified his position on the matter. He stated, “I want to make it clear that I in no way condone or support the actions of those who participated in the riot on January 6. It was a tragic event that should never have happened.”
Ramaswamy went on to explain that his remarks during the presidential primary debate were focused on questioning the role and potential involvement of certain individuals within the government. He emphasized the need for a thorough and unbiased investigation into the events leading up to the riot.
“I believe that the American people deserve transparency and accountability,” Ramaswamy stated. “We should not jump to conclusions or accept easy answers. It is our duty to ensure the truth is uncovered and justice is served.”
Phillip pressed further, questioning whether Ramaswamy’s statements were irresponsibly spreading misinformation and contributing to the ongoing polarization within the country.
Ramaswamy remained steadfast in his position, asserting that his intent was to encourage critical thinking and challenge the official narrative. He argued that an open dialogue and the exploration of different perspectives are essential for a healthy democracy.
“The purpose of my remarks was to spark a conversation and raise important questions,” Ramaswamy explained. “We must be willing to examine all angles and consider alternative explanations. That is how progress is made.”
The exchange between Ramaswamy and Phillip became increasingly heated, with both individuals firmly defending their viewpoints. Despite their differences, the town hall offered a platform for an important discussion on the role of free speech, the limits of personal responsibility, and the impact of rhetoric in shaping public opinion.
As the conversation concluded, Ramaswamy expressed his hope for unity and finding common ground. He acknowledged the complexity of the issue at hand and the need for respectful dialogue in order to move forward as a society.
“I believe that by coming together, listening to one another, and engaging in constructive debates, we can find solutions to the challenges we face as a nation,” Ramaswamy concluded.
The town hall served as a reminder of the importance of civil discourse and the responsibility of individuals, particularly those in positions of influence, to use their platform wisely. It also highlighted the need for media outlets to foster an environment that encourages diverse perspectives while promoting accurate and unbiased reporting.
While the debate may have ended without a clear resolution, the discussions sparked by individuals like Ramaswamy and Phillip contribute to a better understanding of the complex issues surrounding the events of January 6 and their broader implications for American democracy.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...