CRBC News
Politics

Marco Rubio’s 2021 Jan. 6 Tweets Resurface as White House’s New Jan. 6 Page Draws Fire

Marco Rubio’s 2021 Jan. 6 Tweets Resurface as White House’s New Jan. 6 Page Draws Fire
Marco Rubio

The White House’s newly posted Jan. 6 page has provoked criticism for allegedly minimizing former President Trump’s role and promoting misleading accounts of the Capitol attack. Marco Rubio — who as a senator publicly condemned the violence on Jan. 6, 2021 — saw his tweets and Senate remarks from that period widely reshared after the page’s release. Rubio urged action to restore order on Jan. 6, rejected false claims about Vice President Mike Pence’s authority, and more recently has been largely silent on his social accounts.

“Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.”

“Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.”

— George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four

On January 6, 2021, then-Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) publicly condemned the attack on the U.S. Capitol, posting multiple tweets that sharply criticized the violence as it unfolded.

Five years later, the political debate around that day flared again after the White House published a new page on Jan. 6 (www.whitehouse.gov/j6) that critics say downplays former President Donald Trump’s role and advances misleading narratives about the events. The page prompted immediate backlash and prompted online researchers to resurface statements from public officials in the riot’s aftermath — including Rubio’s 2021 remarks.

Critics Say White House Page Minimizes Trump, Shifts Blame

Opponents of the White House presentation argue the page omits or glosses over several key facts about Trump’s conduct: repeated false claims that the 2020 election was stolen, rhetoric that helped inflame rioters’ anger toward then‑Vice President Mike Pence, and delays in publicly urging the crowd to disperse. They say the page instead emphasizes alternative explanations, at times placing responsibility on then‑Speaker Nancy Pelosi, other critics of Trump, and even Capitol Police actions described as “provocative” or “aggressive.”

Some critics also note passages that appear to characterize rioters as uniformly “peaceful,” question whether Pence could or should have blocked certification of Electoral College votes, and repeat disputed claims that the election was stolen — all positions that many fact-checkers and officials have rejected.

Rubio’s 2021 Messages Resurface

Rubio became a focal point for social media users reposting archival material. On the afternoon of Jan. 6, 2021, while the attack was ongoing, Rubio tweeted: “There is nothing patriotic about what is occurring on Capitol Hill. This is 3rd world style anti‑American anarchy.” Minutes later he urged then‑President Trump to act: it was “crucial” to “help restore order by sending resources to assist the police and ask those doing this to stand down.”

The next day, Rubio rejected false narratives about the vice president’s authority, tweeting that some had misled the public about Pence’s ability to “reject ballots” or use objections as leverage. “They knew the truth but thought it was a great way to get attention & raise money,” Rubio wrote.

Video clips also circulated of Rubio addressing the Senate floor the evening after the riot, angrily denouncing the violence and comparing it to coup attempts seen in other countries. The resurfacing of those statements drew attention because Rubio now serves as U.S. Secretary of State and has been less publicly active on social media in early January 2026: his personal account, @marcorubio, had not posted since Jan. 4, and his State Department account, @SecRubio, had not posted since Jan. 5, as of the time these archival posts circulated.

Public Reaction And Context

The release of the White House page and the resurfacing of 2021 statements underscore how memory and messaging about Jan. 6 remain politically contested. Supporters of the administration’s page say it presents an alternative account; critics say it rewrites or obscures central facts about what led to the violence. The renewed attention to officials’ past statements highlights how quickly archived comments can reenter political debate.

Note: This article summarizes widely circulated reactions and archival material; readers should consult the White House page and primary-source tweets and videos for full context.

Help us improve.

Related Articles

Trending