That article is actually hilarious.
The author spends three paragraphs complaining about the claim that Jan 6 was "the deadliest attack on the capitol in two centuries." Essentially, he points out that five people died at the capitol (I'll ignore the phrase "Babbitt..... posed no immediate physical harm to him or anybody else," even though "immediate" is doing a LOT of heavy lifting there), then lists two terrorist attacks, one of which killed no one, and the other killed two. Last time I checked, 5>2>0. So immediately we're off to a bad start.
It's also very strange (read: transparent) that those who call the commission "partisan" completely ignore the fact that the Senate rejected a push to have a bipartisan, independent commission, which forced Pelosi to control it on her own.
Next, the author counters the claim that rioters planned on "overturning a democratic election," by arguing that they had no means to do so. No ****. That doesn't mean the intention wasn't there, or that it was less dangerous considering that it could happen again (but more organized this time). Then he says that Obama, Comey, and Mueller wanted to "overturn" the election (his quotes, not mine). Grade-A reach right there. Democrats are 2/2 on the truth so far.
Next, they say that the tear-jerking was hyperbole and incorrect. No, it couldn't have been the greatest attack on our democracy in 100 years, because congresspeople were more in danger in a 1998 attack than on January 6 (debatable). This pivot is bad on two levels: it fails to prove that people in the capitol actually were not fearful for their lives, AND it fails to prove that it wasn't the worst attack on our democracy in 100 years! You would have to prove that the 1998 attack was more dangerous to democracy than thousands of crazy fascists storming the capitol to kill congresspeople and overturn the election. But wait, there's more. He then says that the Mueller investigation, which worked through the legal code of law, and the FBI holding rioters without bail are worse assaults on Democracy. Once again, colossal stretch there, but also, if you think holding people in jail for little to no crime is an assault on democracy, boy, do I got bad news for you. Actually, holding 1/6 rioters without bail is the greatest demonstration of "equality under the law" that you could find. Democrats still batting 1.000, Thornton 0/3
The author concludes the article by compalining about Democrats assaulting democracy because they apparently want to repeal the Constitution, "rights," and balance of powers; of course no specifics were mentioned, nor does he mention that Barr, Trump's former AG, doesn't believe in the separation of powers, or that it is in fact conservatives who pose a greater threat to individual rights and freedoms.
Finally, he urges Republicans to never compromise with Democrats on anything and unilaterally reject every Democratic bill unconditionally in a ploy to hopefully win the midterms. What a great sign for Democracy!!!!
There's nothing that makes me more confident in progressivism than reading conservative "think-pieces" and opinion columns. What a clown show.