Newly uncovered emails have revealed that House Democrats pressured the U.S. Capitol Police (USCP) to provide extraordinary financial and professional support to Lt. Michael Byrd, the officer who fatally shot unarmed protester Ashli Babbitt during the Capitol riot on January 6, 2021. The documents, reviewed by Just the News, detail efforts to secure benefits and a promotion for Byrd, far surpassing assistance given to other officers involved in the riot.
The revelations have sparked criticism from Republican lawmakers and further polarized public opinion on the incident, with many questioning the unequal treatment within the ranks of the USCP.
Internal emails show that prominent Democrats, including staff for then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi and then-Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, pushed Capitol Police leadership to ensure Byrd received extensive benefits. These included a $37,000 retention bonus, security upgrades worth $21,899 for his Maryland home, and assistance in raising over $164,000 through a GoFundMe campaign.
Additionally, Byrd was offered a promotion to captain in 2023, despite not meeting eligibility requirements and having a documented history of disciplinary issues. This promotion and financial support have drawn sharp criticism, especially when compared to the few thousand dollars granted to officers who directly faced violence during the riot.
“This is not equitable treatment,” said Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-GA), chairman of the House Administration Oversight Subcommittee, who is leading the investigation into the matter.
Emails between congressional aides and USCP officials reveal frustration and urgency in accommodating Byrd’s demands. In one instance, a senior aide to then-House Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Tim Ryan (D-OH) wrote in November 2021, “He is very upset about how he is being treated. He wants us to figure this out and now.”
Despite the extensive assistance provided, Byrd expressed dissatisfaction with the pace and scope of support. In one email exchange, Byrd complained to USCP General Counsel Thomas DiBiase, saying it was “blatantly wrong to treat us like this” and objected to being “grouped in with everyone else.”
The Capitol Police defended their decisions, with DiBiase pointing out that financial assistance given to Byrd was comparable to amounts received by officers injured during the 2017 congressional baseball game shooting.
Rep. Loudermilk has expressed outrage over the unequal treatment. “The Capitol Police went to extremes to help Byrd, while frontline officers who risked their lives during the riot received far less,” he said.
Loudermilk also raised concerns about Byrd’s promotion to captain, citing his disciplinary record. “I think people should really be considering whether he should have been on the force at all,” Loudermilk added.
The investigation highlights disparities in how officers are treated based on political circumstances, with Byrd receiving preferential treatment for actions celebrated by some Democratic lawmakers.
The treatment of Lt. Byrd has become a flashpoint in the broader debate over law enforcement and political accountability. Democrats have largely defended Byrd’s actions during the Capitol riot, with some celebrating his decision to shoot Babbitt, while others mocked her death as justified.
The reaction stands in stark contrast to the typical outcry when police fatally shoot unarmed individuals, particularly in cases involving Black victims. Critics argue that the deference shown to Byrd exposes hypocrisy in how law enforcement is treated depending on the political affiliations of those involved.
“Democrats immediately began backing the blue when it suited their narrative,” said a Republican lawmaker. “When the victim was a White Trump supporter, deadly force suddenly became acceptable—even celebrated.”
Ashli Babbitt, an unarmed Air Force veteran, was shot by Byrd as she attempted to climb through a broken window near the Speaker’s Lobby during the Capitol riot. Byrd’s defenders argue that his actions were necessary to protect lawmakers and staff from the violent mob. However, critics contend that Babbitt posed no immediate threat and that Byrd’s use of lethal force was unwarranted.
The unequal treatment of Byrd compared to other officers injured during the riot has only fueled skepticism about the motivations behind the decisions made by Capitol Police and Democratic lawmakers.
The investigation into Byrd’s preferential treatment underscores the politicization of law enforcement actions surrounding January 6. With emails revealing extraordinary efforts to shield and reward Byrd, questions about fairness and accountability within the Capitol Police remain unanswered.
The House Administration Oversight Subcommittee’s findings are likely to deepen divisions over the Capitol riot and its aftermath, as both sides of the political aisle grapple with the implications of these revelations.
