It seems Dana Rohrabacher was at the Capitol on January 6, 2021.
Not as a working congressman; he was bounced from the House in the 2018 “blue wave” election.
“I marched to protest, and I thought the election was fraudulent and it should be investigated, and I wanted to express that and be supportive of that demand,” hetold a Maine newspaper on Monday, June 14, 2021, after (as CNN puts it) “amateur internet sleuths who have helped identify the insurrectionists” spotted him in the crowd. (Read CNN’s story here.)
He also said this: “But I was not there to make a scene and do things that were unacceptable for anyone to do.” Rohrabacher says he didn’t go into the building, and said this about those who did: “”By going into the building, they gave the left the ability to direct the discussion of what was going on in a way that was harmful to the things we believe in.”
Uh, okay. People have a right to protest peacefully, even if they’re full of it, which Rohrabacher and everyone else who claims the election was “fraudulent” and “should be investigated” is. There’s no evidence it was tainted by fraud, a claim rejected by dozens of judges, the news media, and every election official in the country. Investigated how? The way Arizona Republicans are “investigating” Democratic-leaning Maricopa County’s ballots? By putting on a circus real election experts condemn as a sham, featuring allegations of “bamboo ballots” flown in from China, which now serves as a template for Republicans from other states also eager to undermine democracy by casting aspersions on what experts have called the most secure election in American history?
Rohrabacher’s assertion that the violent assault on the Capitol aimed at preventing the counting of electoral votes was bad because it “gave the left the ability to direct the discussion” also is, shall we say, problematical.
It was bad because it was an attempt to violently overthrow our government. And also because, by all appearances, the insurrectionists intended to kidnap and kill government leaders.
Neither of which Rohrabacher mentions. In fact, nowhere does he stick up for democracy. Or elections. Or not murdering public officials for doing their jobs.
Even by the low standards of Republican congressmen in general, Rohrabacher is a piece of work. His Wikipedia bio says (here), “Rohrabacher has expressed strong pro-Russia and pro-Putin opinions, which have raised questions about his relationship with Vladimir Putin and the Russian government.”
In common with many other Republicans of his generation, military service is absent from Rohrabacher’s biography, but I did find this (you have to read most of the way to the bottom before he’s mentioned, but trust me, it’s worth the time and effort).
At least Rohrabacher is consistent: He was a lousy congressman; and now, as a private citizen, he’s a lousy citizen, too.
I dig his hat, though.