OK, so, I rare if ever will do this, but there is some (and by some, I mean miniscule amount) of truth in the idea that the Jan 6th Riot and the attack on 9/11 were similar. Not in effect or in lives lost, but a lot of people forget that the 9/11 attacks were chosen for their symbolism, not for the amount of damage they would cause.
The World Trade Center, the Pentagon, the US Capital - those are the targets of the hijacked planes on 9/11. Two were hit, while one survived because common everyday flyover Americans said ENOUGH. But they were chosen for their symbolic value, they represent the three legs upon which American Empire and Power stand: Economic Power, Military Power, and Governmental Power*.
As such, the 9/11 attacks were specifically meant to symbolically destroy and attack those three things. Interestingly, from a symbolic standpoint, they systemically failed in some respects, but planted the seeds of the destruction of two of the three.
You see, the US economy has always been robust, and while destroying the World Trade Center was a blow, nobody ever thinks of the US economy as being indestructible. We had all grown up with stories of the Great Depression and the Stagflation of the 70s, so the destruction of the World Trade Center, in many ways, fits into the long narrative of the US Economy, it's destruction noteworthy, but in many ways just a part of the rises and falls that make the economic history of the US so grand. Thus the attack failed to harm confidence in the idea of the American Economy because, well, nobody expects the US Economy to be Invincible.
The strike on the Pentagon also symbolically failed because it became a farce. The plane hit
a section of the building that had been undergoing renovations for the past few months and so was basically unused. Those that died in the strike were mostly contractors and workers who were doing building renovation. The strike put a scar on the building, but didn't inhibit actual business of the Pentagon... the Pentagon itself as a structure was simply to large and strong to be so negatively impacted by the strike. Thus what looked initially like a strong symbolic blow against the US Military turned into a joke.
As to the third, that blow never landed. The potentially very potent symbol of America's House burning, the Rotunda Shattered by an enemy, an act unheard of in US History... failed. Failed because common Americans stood up and wrested control of the plane from the enemy, sacrificing themselves to protect others. Instead what was meant to be a powerful attack against the ideal of the strength of American Government turned into a message of hope for Americans and a symbol of the ability of the common American to overcome evil, and in a way, because of what that flight was meant to attack, it became the symbol of the common American defending the Institutional America.
However, this did seed fear into America, and the Institutions took that Fear and used it to entrench a military-intelligence complex within the government the likes of which we'd not seen since WW2. The invasion of Afghanistan, initially one supported by all Americans and easily accomplished... stretched into a fiasco. The Intelligent apparatus of the US, initially formed to try and counter outside terror plots, got turned more and more on the common Americans who were not liking how the Institutions were using the power given them.
This all culminated in the 1/6 Riot. Here's the thing, the people gathered on 1/6 were the "Common Americans" the "Flyover Americans", the type of Americans who, on 9/11, literally sacrificed their lives to PROTECT this building. Others had attacked the Capital before, but they were never "Common Americans", they were leftwing extremists whom nobody would confuse with the average American (IE the bombing of the US Capital in the 80s, which is often brought up, was performed by a far left Puerto Rican independence group... people whom nobody would confuse with being core constituents of America). No, these were the same type and kind of Americans whom 20 years earlier had laid down their lives to protect the capital, now attacking it, in much the same way as they had saved it, haphazardly, without a plan, reacting to circumstances.
Thus 1/6 is a symbol of one of the most potent losses of the War on Terror: the loyalty and trust of the American People. This is why to so many in media and government 1/6 is worse than 9/11. 9/11 was an outside group attacking the US. 1/6 was those people the government is supposed to serve indicating they have lost faith in the government. It is a terrifying thing for them to behold. It represents a symbolic loss of legitimacy that has not been faced by the government in modern times. It means that they can no longer take for granted the trust and support of the common American, which is why they are flailing in their response to it and lashing out. They don't know how to fix it, for all they know how to do is exercise power, not actually win trust.
This is where this idea that 1/6 is akin to 9/11 his its roots. It is not in the type of attack, or the number of lives lost, but in the symbolic nature of the event. What they so fail to realize is that so many in the US understand there is a difference between being attack by an outside enemy as al-Qaida was, and the nature of what happened on 1/6. When American citizens lash out at the government, they do not deserve to be treated as enemies of America, and the more the government does so the more illegitimate it is going to look to others.
-------------
* Note, by this I don't mean the level of control or influence the US Government has, but the Power of the IDEAL of the US Government. A government that has since 1776 seen continual stable governance, continued peaceful transitions of power, and representative democracy.