Who here still supports Jan 6 attack?

[Hardcore troubadour 12,678]

New rule. When a “whistleblower “ like Vindman allegedly overhears one part of a conversation that we wasn’t privy to be listening in on and manages to squeeze his fat ass in his uniform, that he hadn’t worn in years, and testifies in front of congress, his testimony is to be taken with the utmost serious.  When an actual whistleblower that was in the room and on the phone calls and authorized to be there wears his uniform in front of congress and testifies about Jan 6, pay no mind. 

[Fnord 1,143]

1 hour ago, jerryskids said:

I'll flaunt my ignorance here and ask:  was he specifically asked to order in the NG from his experts, and didn't do it?  I honestly don't know, but that doesn't seem the case from the article I posted.

I'll break that into two parts:  the time leading up to 1/6, and as the SHTF on the day.

The answers significantly impacts my opinion.

He had numerous lawmakers calling him telling him to dispatch. Among them: McCarthy, Pelosi, Schumer, Pence. In states, the governor controls the NG. In DC, it is under the jurisdiction of POTUS and the SECDEF. Copied from this AP Article:

The decision on whether to call National Guard troops to the Capitol is made by what is known as the Capitol Police Board, which is made up of the House Sergeant at Arms, the Senate Sergeant at Arms and the Architect of the Capitol. The board decided not to call the guard ahead of the insurrection but did eventually request assistance after the rioting had already begun, and the troops arrived several hours later.

The House Sergeant at Arms reports to Pelosi and the Senate Sergeant at Arms reported to McConnell, a Republican who was then Senate Majority Leader. There is no evidence that either directed the security officials not to call the guard beforehand, and Hammill said after the insurrection that Pelosi was never informed of such a request.

Let's assume that Trump was on the level that day and had nothing to do with the rioting. As CIC, you witness that attack, and you have the means with which to deal with it, quickly. Shouldn't he have immediately dispatched every resource at his fingertips to quell it? He did nothing. Nothing. Ultimately, Pence made the call to bring them in, and I have read articles stating that even then there was a delay while those in charge fought about the "optics" of Pence being in charge as opposed to Donald. Ultimately they decided to honor Pence's request because no one could reach POTUS, so they determined that functionally he was incapacitated and that Pence therefore had authority. Fun fact though: Trump was on the phone with a bunch of people that day (using a burner for much of it... why?). He just wouldn't respond to any of the calls begging for help. 

This to me is the entirety of the case. CIC refused to act while the US capitol was attacked. 

I'm in a time crunch and can't go as deep as I'd like to here, or spend time looking for links, sorry. If you want further explanation, just ask. Appreciate you, Jerry!

 

1 hour ago, jonmx said:

Trump can not send the National Guard to locations he lacks jurisdiction, which is most anywhere inside this country.  Trump offered them, and the Mayor and Pelosi turned it down due to 'optics'.  

This is flat out untrue. He has the jurisdiction in DC. Initially the mayor turned it down, but the troops were close by. Meadows even referenced that they were there to support the Trumpers and protect them from violence, not the other way around. And that's why Trump never called in NG. He just didn't fuking want to. What he wanted was for the mob to delay just a bit longer to try to get the fake elector scheme on more solid footing. Anyone claiming that people believe the mob was going to "take over the country" is a dupe. No one believes that. It was a stall tactic, not an invasion.

[jerryskids 5,213]

2 hours ago, Fnord said:

He had numerous lawmakers calling him telling him to dispatch. Among them: McCarthy, Pelosi, Schumer, Pence. In states, the governor controls the NG. In DC, it is under the jurisdiction of POTUS and the SECDEF. Copied from this AP Article:

The decision on whether to call National Guard troops to the Capitol is made by what is known as the Capitol Police Board, which is made up of the House Sergeant at Arms, the Senate Sergeant at Arms and the Architect of the Capitol. The board decided not to call the guard ahead of the insurrection but did eventually request assistance after the rioting had already begun, and the troops arrived several hours later.

The House Sergeant at Arms reports to Pelosi and the Senate Sergeant at Arms reported to McConnell, a Republican who was then Senate Majority Leader. There is no evidence that either directed the security officials not to call the guard beforehand, and Hammill said after the insurrection that Pelosi was never informed of such a request.

Let's assume that Trump was on the level that day and had nothing to do with the rioting. As CIC, you witness that attack, and you have the means with which to deal with it, quickly. Shouldn't he have immediately dispatched every resource at his fingertips to quell it? He did nothing. Nothing. Ultimately, Pence made the call to bring them in, and I have read articles stating that even then there was a delay while those in charge fought about the "optics" of Pence being in charge as opposed to Donald. Ultimately they decided to honor Pence's request because no one could reach POTUS, so they determined that functionally he was incapacitated and that Pence therefore had authority. Fun fact though: Trump was on the phone with a bunch of people that day (using a burner for much of it... why?). He just wouldn't respond to any of the calls begging for help. 

This to me is the entirety of the case. CIC refused to act while the US capitol was attacked. 

I'm in a time crunch and can't go as deep as I'd like to here, or spend time looking for links, sorry. If you want further explanation, just ask. Appreciate you, Jerry!

 

Appreciate you, Fnord!

So let's parse this, and in particular, the bolded.  It's obvious from this post that there was no explicit request directly to Trump to unleash the NG, so your point is that he should have done so on his own.  And I had just posted how requests were made that day but were cancelled by other folks, which is corroborated by your post.

So let's get a yes/no on this:  do you believe that the POTUS, a civilian who makes final decisions on CIC recommendations from his advisors, should have sent in the NG that day without the advice of military/security expert advisers?  (McCarthy, Pelosi, Schumer, Pence don't qualify as such experts)

Another yes/no:  what should happen to Then-Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy for sitting on the request, and Lt. Gen Piatt for his priority of optics?

Furthermore, should a former POTUS and current adversarial candidate to the current regime be under criminal indictment for not following the lack of advice from such advisers?

[Ron_Artest 686]

 

[BeachGuy23 516]

15 minutes ago, Ron_Artest said:

 

Disgusting, anti-american animals.

Defend this cultist, I dare you.

Such cucks to your idiot, orange master...SMH

[double tour 89]

14 minutes ago, BeachGuy23 said:

Disgusting, anti-american animals.

Defend this cultist, I dare you.

Such cucks to your idiot, orange master...SMH

TDS provides no peace for those inflicted. So early in the morning and so upset already. 

'Boyo' 

[Fnord 1,143]

On 4/18/2024 at 7:34 PM, jerryskids said:

So let's get a yes/no on this:  do you believe that the POTUS, a civilian who makes final decisions on CIC recommendations from his advisors, should have sent in the NG that day without the advice of military/security expert advisers?  (McCarthy, Pelosi, Schumer, Pence don't qualify as such experts)

Another yes/no:  what should happen to Then-Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy for sitting on the request, and Lt. Gen Piatt for his priority of optics?

Furthermore, should a former POTUS and current adversarial candidate to the current regime be under criminal indictment for not following the lack of advice from such advisers?

1. Yes, absolutely. The Capitol was under attack during election certification. Some things are so simple as to not require an expert to weigh in. When I go sideways at high speed on a slippery highway I don't consult my mechanic or passenger as to how to handle it. There is a clear situation that needs to be dealt with NOW. I act accordingly. Let's not pretend that "experts" should have been consulted when you have lawmakers calling you fearing for their lives. 

2. McCarthy and Piatt should be investigated and interviewed with lawyers present. I believe they acted (or didn't act, as is the case here) either on explicit orders from Trump or, more likely, based on what they thought he would want, i.e. not unleashing the NG on Trump’s people. The lack of information on this front is really frustrating.

3. Yes, based on evidence specific to the case. That is not a one size fits all answer. If the evidence doesn't point in the right direction, then no. There is enough evidence here to justify it. Trump’s position on the political spectrum or his status as a current or former candidate or office holder should have NO bearing on how the case is treated.

If Trump was innocent of all this he could've cleared things up himself by testifying to the J6 committee. I can't imagine why he wouldn't, given how furiously he's being "persecuted."

[Fnord 1,143]

6 hours ago, BeachGuy23 said:

Disgusting, anti-american animals.

Defend this cultist, I dare you.

Such cucks to your idiot, orange master...SMH

There is no defense. Only deflection and projection. It's the only alternative they have.

[jerryskids 5,213]

15 minutes ago, Fnord said:

1. Yes, absolutely. The Capitol was under attack during election certification. Some things are so simple as to not require an expert to weigh in. When I go sideways at high speed on a slippery highway I don't consult my mechanic or passenger as to how to handle it. There is a clear situation that needs to be dealt with NOW. I act accordingly. Let's not pretend that "experts" should have been consulted when you have lawmakers calling you fearing for their lives. 

2. McCarthy and Piatt should be investigated and interviewed with lawyers present. I believe they acted (or didn't act, as is the case here) either on explicit orders from Trump or, more likely, based on what they thought he would want, i.e. not unleashing the NG on Trump’s people. The lack of information on this front is really frustrating.

3. Yes, based on evidence specific to the case. That is not a one size fits all answer. If the evidence doesn't point in the right direction, then no. There is enough evidence here to justify it. Trump’s position on the political spectrum or his status as a current or former candidate or office holder should have NO bearing on how the case is treated.

If Trump was innocent of all this he could've cleared things up himself by testifying to the J6 committee. I can't imagine why he wouldn't, given how furiously he's being "persecuted."

Quote

This authority to activate the D.C. National Guard has been delegated, by the President, to the Secretary of Defense and further delegated to the Secretary of the Army. The D.C. National Guard is the only National Guard unit, out of all of the 54 states and territories, which reports only to the President.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree that you should criminally prosecute the then POTUS and current candidate for POTUS for disregarding the guidance of the Secretary of the Army and instead not following the clear suggestion of an HR manager from upstate New York.  

And your analogy is absurd.

We're not talking about water cooler debates on what should have been done, we're talking criminal prosecution, when nobody has formally talked to McCarthy and Piatt.  

I can't believe I'm typing these words, but here we are.

[Fnord 1,143]

1 hour ago, jerryskids said:

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree that you should criminally prosecute the then POTUS and current candidate for POTUS for disregarding the guidance of the Secretary of the Army and instead not following the clear suggestion of an HR manager from upstate New York.  

And your analogy is absurd.

We're not talking about water cooler debates on what should have been done, we're talking criminal prosecution, when nobody has formally talked to McCarthy and Piatt.  

I can't believe I'm typing these words, but here we are.

DC NG reports directly to POTUS and both he and Secretary of the Army can dispatch. That's right on the NG website, which I attempted to link the other day but couldn't access, for some reason.

I think you're delusional if you really believe no one has had conversations with McCarthy and Piatt. What's really strange is that no one has published or talked about what they've said. I'd sure like to know.

Didn't have you pegged for someone that would excuse a sitting POTUS for doing NOTHING for HOURS while the Capitol was attacked based on him not hearing from "experts." Sounds like the exact opposite of what most prefer in leadership, which is decisiveness, empathy, and, yaknow, doing their focking job. There's a time to listen to experts (Covid comes to mind) and a time to just do what needs to be done. Trump is an all-around failure it would seem.

[Ron_Artest 686]

18 minutes ago, Fnord said:

DC NG reports directly to POTUS and both he and Secretary of the Army can dispatch. That's right on the NG website, which I attempted to link the other day but couldn't access, for some reason.

I think you're delusional if you really believe no one has had conversations with McCarthy and Piatt. What's really strange is that no one has published or talked about what they've said. I'd sure like to know.

Didn't have you pegged for someone that would excuse a sitting POTUS for doing NOTHING for HOURS while the Capitol was attacked based on him not hearing from "experts." Sounds like the exact opposite of what most prefer in leadership, which is decisiveness, empathy, and, yaknow, doing their focking job. There's a time to listen to experts (Covid comes to mind) and a time to just do what needs to be done. Trump is an all-around failure it would seem.

Calling him a failure would be simple and ignorant.  He was a willing accomplice.  He sat there and watched it all on TV, after telling the rioters that he would be there with him.  He sat, watching it all, while everyone around him told him to do something, and he sat there and waited, because deep down he wanted something big to happen to keep him in office.

[jerryskids 5,213]

14 minutes ago, Fnord said:

DC NG reports directly to POTUS and both he and Secretary of the Army can dispatch. That's right on the NG website, which I attempted to link the other day but couldn't access, for some reason.

I think you're delusional if you really believe no one has had conversations with McCarthy and Piatt. What's really strange is that no one has published or talked about what they've said. I'd sure like to know.

Didn't have you pegged for someone that would excuse a sitting POTUS for doing NOTHING for HOURS while the Capitol was attacked based on him not hearing from "experts." Sounds like the exact opposite of what most prefer in leadership, which is decisiveness, empathy, and, yaknow, doing their focking job. There's a time to listen to experts (Covid comes to mind) and a time to just do what needs to be done. Trump is an all-around failure it would seem.

Didn't have you pegged for someone who encourages Donald Trump to make decisions against his advisors.   

Anyway, regarding the troops, this came up recently:

Quote

Jan. 6 committee kept a lid on testimony Trump pushed for extra troops at Capitol

By Kerry Picket - The Washington Times - Monday, March 11, 2024

The Democrat-run House Jan. 6 committee suppressed testimony about President Trump pushing for National Guard troops to protect the U.S. Capitol on the day of the riot.

Newly revealed interview transcripts show the former White House Deputy Chief of Staff Anthony Ornato told the now-defunct select committee that Mr. Trump wanted 10,000 National Guard troops to protect the nation’s capital on Jan. 6, 2021.

The Committee on House Administration’s subcommittee on oversight, which investigated how the Jan. 6 committee operated, released the transcript of the interview.

The interview, first reported by the Federalist, happened in January 2022, but the Jan. 6 committee never made it public.

The interview also recounts frustration within the Trump White House over the slow deployment of National Guard troops.

The lawmakers who led the Jan. 6 committee — Reps. Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi Democrat, and former Rep. Liz Cheney, Wyoming Republican — did not respond to a request for comment from The Washington Times.

“The former J6 Select Committee apparently withheld Mr. Ornato’s critical witness testimony from the American people because it contradicted their pre-determined narrative,” said Rep. Barry Loudermilk, the Georgia Republican who chairs the oversight subcommittee.

“Mr. Ornato’s testimony proves what Mr. Meadows has said all along, President Trump did in fact offer 10,000 National Guard troops to secure the U.S. Capitol, which was turned down.”

Rep. Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi Democrat, who chaired the Jan. 6 committee, said the new criticism of the committee was “dishonest.” 

“The Select Committee’s final report took into account the testimony of all witnesses, including the transcript that was released today,” he said. “All the evidence points to the same conclusion: Donald Trump wanted to join his violent mob as it marched on the Capitol, and he was irate when his security detail told him he couldn’t go.”

Mr. Thompson said his committee was obligated to send transcripts such as the interview of Mr. Ornato to the executive branch for review and the information Mr. Ornato provided was already well known.

“The Select Committee was obligated to take these steps in order to protect sensitive information as well as the privacy of witnesses,” Mr. Thompson said.

According to the transcript, a Jan. 6 committee staffer asked Mr. Ornato, “When it comes to the National Guard statement about having 10,000 troops or any other number of troops, do you recall any discussion prior to the 6th about whether and how many National Guard troops to deploy on Jan. 6?”

Mr. Ornato said he remembered a conversation between White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows and D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser.

“He was on the phone with her and wanted to make sure she had everything that she needed,” he said. “I remember the number 10,000 coming up, you know, ‘The president wants to make sure that you have enough.’ You know, ‘He is willing to ask for 10,000.’”

Mr. Ornato said that Ms. Bowser replied she was all set and already had about 350 guardsmen for intersection control, which is not a law enforcement capacity.

Ms. Bowser ultimately rejected Mr. Trump’s offer for 10,000 National Guard troops and asked for only several hundred to serve in a limited role.

Mr. Ornato said the White House then requested a “quick reaction force” from the Defense Department in case it was needed.

“I remember Chief Meadows talking to DOD about that, I believe, I remember Chief Meadows letting me know that, ‘Hey, there was going to be National Guard that’s going to be at Joint Base Andrews,” he said.

Once the Capitol was breached, the Trump White House pushed for immediate help from Acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller and grew frustrated at the slow deployment of that help, according to the testimony.

“So then I remember the chief saying, ‘Hey, I’m calling the secretary of defense to get that [quick reaction force] in here,” Mr. Ornato said. Later he said, “I remember the chief telling Miller, ‘Get them in here, get them in here to secure the Capitol now.’”

The House Administration Committee’s oversight panel has issued its initial report on its investigation into the events of Jan. 6, 2021.

On Tuesday, the committee will launch a series of hearings examining the events of Jan. 6, beginning with the investigation into pipe bombs placed that day outside the Washington headquarters of the Democratic and Republican parties.

According to the committee, a final report will be released later this year.

• Kerry Picket can be reached at kpicket@washingtontimes.com.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2024/mar/11/jan-6-committee-kept-lid-on-testimony-donald-trump/

So, Trump did indeed offer troops beforehand, which were deemed unnecessary.  

And Trump's people were working with the DoD to get deployment once the Capitol was breached, and were frustrated by the slow deployment.

And the J6 committee was a farcical kangaroo court which ignored evidence to draw the conclusion they were convened to draw.

Still criminally prosecute?

[Hardcore troubadour 12,678]

Now I’m feeling different. Let’s get this to trail. And subpoena all the players. Nancy included. Should be fun. 

[Fnord 1,143]

2 hours ago, jerryskids said:

Didn't have you pegged for someone who encourages Donald Trump to make decisions against his advisors.   

Anyway, regarding the troops, this came up recently:

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2024/mar/11/jan-6-committee-kept-lid-on-testimony-donald-trump/

So, Trump did indeed offer troops beforehand, which were deemed unnecessary.  

And Trump's people were working with the DoD to get deployment once the Capitol was breached, and were frustrated by the slow deployment.

And the J6 committee was a farcical kangaroo court which ignored evidence to draw the conclusion they were convened to draw.

Still criminally prosecute?

Yes.

There's been a lot of noise over this. Sources say this, experts claim that. I do believe Trump had talked about having the NG on hand that day to protect his supporters. From what or whom I couldn't say. So, yeah. In that capacity they sure as fock were unnecessary. 

What does "Trump’s people were working with the DoD to get deployment once the Capitol was breached, and were frustrated by the slow deployment" look like? I'm calling bullshit on that. During the hours of the attack, it's well documented that dozens of people were trying to contact Trump. He was universally recognized as the only person that could halt the attack, either by calling in NG, or just telling them all to go home (which is eventually what  stopped it, BTW). He did none of it. Ya think it may have gone differently if antifa was protesting Trump being certified? Bet they would have showed up in record time. I think the whole thing is obfuscation by Trump and his merry band of power hungry zealots trying not to wind up in prison. Ornato and Meadows may very well be covering their own asses, as they are both legally exposed.

[Fnord 1,143]

2 hours ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Now I’m feeling different. Let’s get this to trail. And subpoena all the players. Nancy included. Should be fun. 

I think everyone would love to see this. Trump will never take the stand though. Zero chance he wouldn't perjure himself.

[jerryskids 5,213]

10 minutes ago, Fnord said:

Yes.

There's been a lot of noise over this. Sources say this, experts claim that. I do believe Trump had talked about having the NG on hand that day to protect his supporters. From what or whom I couldn't say. So, yeah. In that capacity they sure as fock were unnecessary. 

What does "Trump’s people were working with the DoD to get deployment once the Capitol was breached, and were frustrated by the slow deployment" look like? I'm calling bullshit on that. During the hours of the attack, it's well documented that dozens of people were trying to contact Trump. He was universally recognized as the only person that could halt the attack, either by calling in NG, or just telling them all to go home (which is eventually what  stopped it, BTW). He did none of it. Ya think it may have gone differently if antifa was protesting Trump being certified? Bet they would have showed up in record time. I think the whole thing is obfuscation by Trump and his merry band of power hungry zealots trying not to wind up in prison. Ornato and Meadows may very well be covering their own asses, as they are both legally exposed.

Amazing.

Your quoted part was my summary of this from the article:

Quote

Once the Capitol was breached, the Trump White House pushed for immediate help from Acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller and grew frustrated at the slow deployment of that help, according to the testimony.

This should be easy enough to confirm with Miller.  And the SecDef, along with Secretary of the Army (who we discussed earlier), are the delegated people who can call the NG.  One would presume that, were Trump himself to do it, he would go through one of these people like his staff did, unless you believe he has a bat phone directly to the head of the NG.

Also, perhaps Trump thought it was his protesters that needed protection.  That doesn't mean that if the NG were there, it wouldn't have dissuaded the riot, and had the riot started anyway, they would have been there to squelch it (unless you think they'd have joined in, which would be laughable).

The Feds had infiltrated these groups.  I'm not getting into to what extent they may have goaded on the riot, but they certainly knew it was more than possible that something would happen.  And yet no troops were deployed, and it wasn't because of Trump.

It saddens me that so many Americans like yourself don't have all kinds of problems with this, and instead think it is perfectly acceptable for the 1/6 committee to just issue an 11 minute curated video and conclude "orange man bad" without doing their alleged job.

[edjr 5,576]

27 minutes ago, Fnord said:

I think everyone would love to see this. Trump will never take the stand though. Zero chance he wouldn't perjure himself.

Perjury is okay now. 

[Ron_Artest 686]

What saddens me is so many Americans continue to make excuses or just tell flat out lies about Jan 6.  Trump organized the crowd, whipped them into a frenzy, told them the election was stolen and the needed to fight like Hell, then went back to the white house and watched it all unfold.  And so called Americans are going to say that he didn't want a riot or that he tried to get the NG there is quell the crowd that he whipped into a frenzy to fight against the stolen election.  Give me a focking break.  Trump did everything he could to start a riot so spare me the BS of how he didn't want a riot.

[double tour 89]

5 minutes ago, Ron_Artest said:

What saddens me is so many Americans continue to make excuses or just tell flat out lies about Jan 6.  

Well, stop telling lies then boyo. Easy peasy, no?

Not for you TDS infected sucklings. 

[jonmx 1,599]

20 minutes ago, Ron_Artest said:

What saddens me is so many Americans continue to make excuses or just tell flat out lies about Jan 6.  

No doubt.  So many lies:

Lie #1:  Trump did not offer 10,000 national gaurd troops to the mayor and Pelosi.

Lie #2:  it was an armed insurrection.

Lie #3:  it was a coordinated attack to prevent the peaceful transfer of power.

Lie #4:  The feds were caught completely off gaurd and there were not a 100 federal assets in the crowd instigating the insurrection.

Lie #5.  The defendants were not put in solitary confinement and treated like terrorist, even peaceful ones.

Lie #6.  Laws enacted for document destruction in response to Enron apply to anyone who disrupts an official proceeding.  

Lie #7.  The Pelosi Jan 6th hearing accurately reflected what went on that day.

Yeah, me too. I am fuking sick of the low-life bootlickers who kiss the butt of their athoritarian masters and are at was against freedom-loving citizens...fuk those guys. 

 

[Fnord 1,143]

15 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

Amazing.

Your quoted part was my summary of this from the article:

This should be easy enough to confirm with Miller.  And the SecDef, along with Secretary of the Army (who we discussed earlier), are the delegated people who can call the NG.  One would presume that, were Trump himself to do it, he would go through one of these people like his staff did, unless you believe he has a bat phone directly to the head of the NG.

Also, perhaps Trump thought it was his protesters that needed protection.  That doesn't mean that if the NG were there, it wouldn't have dissuaded the riot, and had the riot started anyway, they would have been there to squelch it (unless you think they'd have joined in, which would be laughable).

The Feds had infiltrated these groups.  I'm not getting into to what extent they may have goaded on the riot, but they certainly knew it was more than possible that something would happen.  And yet no troops were deployed, and it wasn't because of Trump.

It saddens me that so many Americans like yourself don't have all kinds of problems with this, and instead think it is perfectly acceptable for the 1/6 committee to just issue an 11 minute curated video and conclude "orange man bad" without doing their alleged job.

That's why I want a trial. The committee was a good start. It brought a lot of unknown information into the light. Now let's finish the job. Part of that is uncovering what, if anything, the committee may have covered up for their "narrative." FWIW, they showed a lot of videos, so I'm not sure what 11 minute recording you're referring to.

You can rationalize this up and down, like you are. If you're determined to place blame somewhere else, you will. And you have. Sorry, I'm not buying it. You have valid questions I'd like to see answered, but ultimately, I do not believe that Trump, had he wanted the NG there, wouldn't have found a way to get them there. Same with the Secretary of the Army and SECDEF. They wouldn't make the order because they knew damn well Trump didn't want the order made. To think anything else, with all of the other known information, is to gaslight oneself, IMO.

I also have a gigantic fundamental problem with ANYONE being able to unilaterally halt investigations into themselves, as Trump hopes to do. I very much hope this goes to trial. I will live with whatever the verdict is.

[jonmx 1,599]

6 minutes ago, Fnord said:

That's why I want a trial. The committee was a good start. It brought a lot of unknown information into the light. Now let's finish the job. Part of that is uncovering what, if anything, the committee may have covered up for their "narrative." FWIW, they showed a lot of videos, so I'm not sure what 11 minute recording you're referring to.

You can rationalize this up and down, like you are. If you're determined to place blame somewhere else, you will. And you have. Sorry, I'm not buying it. You have valid questions I'd like to see answered, but ultimately, I do not believe that Trump, had he wanted the NG there, wouldn't have found a way to get them there. Same with the Secretary of the Army and SECDEF. They wouldn't make the order because they knew damn well Trump didn't want the order made. To think anything else, with all of the other known information, is to gaslight oneself, IMO.

I also have a gigantic fundamental problem with ANYONE being able to unilaterally halt investigations into themselves, as Trump hopes to do. I very much hope this goes to trial. I will live with whatever the verdict is.

As long as the FBI can keep their files secret and lie to protect their 'sources' and 'methods', we will never know the truth.   Too many of our agencies are allowed to operate in darkness with zero accountability for their corrupt and evil deeds. 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,678]

1 minute ago, jonmx said:

As long as the FBI can keep their files secret and lie to protect their 'sources' and 'methods', we will never know the truth.   Too many of our agencies are allowed to operate in darkness with zero accountability for their corrupt and evil deeds. 

Another reason Trump must be defeated at all costs. All costs. 

[Dozer FBG 251]

23 minutes ago, jonmx said:

No doubt.  So many lies:

Lie #1:  Trump did not offer 10,000 national gaurd troops to the mayor and Pelosi.

Lie #2:  it was an armed insurrection.

Lie #3:  it was a coordinated attack to prevent the peaceful transfer of power.

Lie #4:  The feds were caught completely off gaurd and there were not a 100 federal assets in the crowd instigating the insurrection.

Lie #5.  The defendants were not put in solitary confinement and treated like terrorist, even peaceful ones.

Lie #6.  Laws enacted for document destruction in response to Enron apply to anyone who disrupts an official proceeding.  

Lie #7.  The Pelosi Jan 6th hearing accurately reflected what went on that day.

Yeah, me too. I am fuking sick of the low-life bootlickers who kiss the butt of their athoritarian masters and are at was against freedom-loving citizens...fuk those guys. 

 

THE ABOVE IS 100% BULLSHIT

JON THE FASCIST IS A DELUSIONAL IDIOT.

[jonmx 1,599]

3 minutes ago, Dozer FBG said:

THE ABOVE IS 100% BULLSHIT

JON THE FASCIST IS A DELUSIONAL IDIOT.

Says the bootlicker who wants to put freedom-loving Americans in gas chambers.  Fuk you.  Everything I stated was true.  You would be the biggest brownshirt in Germany.  

[double tour 89]

The selfiefest was definitely wortth all this quality entertainment of watching the TDS infected liberal's heads exploding. 

[double tour 89]

33 minutes ago, jonmx said:

No doubt.  So many lies:

Lie #1:  Trump did not offer 10,000 national gaurd troops to the mayor and Pelosi.

Lie #2:  it was an armed insurrection.

Lie #3:  it was a coordinated attack to prevent the peaceful transfer of power.

Lie #4:  The feds were caught completely off gaurd and there were not a 100 federal assets in the crowd instigating the insurrection.

Lie #5.  The defendants were not put in solitary confinement and treated like terrorist, even peaceful ones.

Lie #6.  Laws enacted for document destruction in response to Enron apply to anyone who disrupts an official proceeding.  

Lie #7.  The Pelosi Jan 6th hearing accurately reflected what went on that day.

Yeah, me too. I am fuking sick of the low-life bootlickers who kiss the butt of their athoritarian masters and are at was against freedom-loving citizens...fuk those guys. 

 

[Dozer FBG 251]

1 minute ago, jonmx said:

Says the bootlicker who wants to put freedom-loving Americans in gas chambers.  Fuk you.  Everything I stated was true.  You would be the biggest brownshirt in Germany.  

Blah blah blah…

You are a shitty American. The worst of us.

[jonmx 1,599]

4 minutes ago, Dozer FBG said:

Blah blah blah…

You are a shitty American. The worst of us.

You don't know what it means to be American.  You butttlick your authoritarian masters.

[jerryskids 5,213]

29 minutes ago, Fnord said:

That's why I want a trial. The committee was a good start. It brought a lot of unknown information into the light. Now let's finish the job. Part of that is uncovering what, if anything, the committee may have covered up for their "narrative." FWIW, they showed a lot of videos, so I'm not sure what 11 minute recording you're referring to.

You can rationalize this up and down, like you are. If you're determined to place blame somewhere else, you will. And you have. Sorry, I'm not buying it. You have valid questions I'd like to see answered, but ultimately, I do not believe that Trump, had he wanted the NG there, wouldn't have found a way to get them there. Same with the Secretary of the Army and SECDEF. They wouldn't make the order because they knew damn well Trump didn't want the order made. To think anything else, with all of the other known information, is to gaslight oneself, IMO.

I also have a gigantic fundamental problem with ANYONE being able to unilaterally halt investigations into themselves, as Trump hopes to do. I very much hope this goes to trial. I will live with whatever the verdict is.

Good to know that you recognize the committee was not a fact-finding effort, but rather a banana republic proceeding.  We need a trial to figure out what they are hiding?  I don't even know what to say to that.   

[jerryskids 5,213]

15 minutes ago, Dozer FBG said:

THE ABOVE IS 100% BULLSHIT

JON THE FASCIST IS A DELUSIONAL IDIOT.

Well, we know #1, 5, 6, and 7 to be true, and their are parts of the others with truths.

 

[Dozer FBG 251]

3 minutes ago, jonmx said:

You don't know what it means to be American.  You butttlick your authoritarian masters.

Oh, great line Jon. How’d you ever come up with that? James O’Keef give you that?

You live in a self imposed cocoon of fantasy where your leaders are saintly and your foes are sub-human. You are exactly what you hate. You are a follower. You are lucky you are an American, where you are free to voice your sick opinions.

[Beaker15 113]

34 minutes ago, Dozer FBG said:

THE ABOVE IS 100% BULLSHIT

JON THE FASCIST IS A DELUSIONAL IDIOT.

Every time I see your avator I know a stupid post will follow.  

[double tour 89]

20 minutes ago, jonmx said:

You don't know what it means to be American.  You butttlick your authoritarian masters.

That's a rather consistent description of all liberals these days. It's sad. 

[jonmx 1,599]

11 minutes ago, Dozer FBG said:

Oh, great line Jon. How’d you ever come up with that? James O’Keef give you that?

 

 

No, just describing what I see.  Your ilk disgust me to the core.   You do not value freedom and are too fuking stupid to realize you are being controlled.  The way you cheerlead average being unfairly prosecuted and put in jail for virtually nothing is sickening.   Seriously, you are the lowest of the low in my book.

[Ron_Artest 686]

24 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

Well, we know #1, 5, 6, and 7 to be true, and their are parts of the others with truths.

 

Offer of 10k troops to pelosi is true?  Really?

Link please?

[jonmx 1,599]

6 minutes ago, Ron_Artest said:

Offer of 10k troops to pelosi is true?  Really?

Link please?

 

https://cha.house.gov/2024/3/chairman-loudermilk-publishes-never-before-released-anthony-ornato-transcribed-interview

WASHINGTON - Today, Committee on House Administration's Subcommittee on Oversight Chairman Barry Loudermilk (GA-11) released a transcribed interview the January 6 Select Committee conducted with President Trump's former White House Deputy Chief of Staff Anthony Ornato, which shows President Donald Trump pushed for 10,000 National Guard troops to protect the nation’s capital.

The interview also shows White House frustration with slow deployment of assistance. The Select Committee conducted this interview in January of 2022, but never released it.

[Gepetto 988]

I don't think it would be safe for someone to write on this public forum that they support the Jan 6th happenings, as they could potentially be fired from their job and/or arrested, the way this country vilifies anyone who questions the validity and potential fraud of the 2020 US Presidential election. Very sad times in America.

[Ron_Artest 686]

17 minutes ago, jonmx said:

 

https://cha.house.gov/2024/3/chairman-loudermilk-publishes-never-before-released-anthony-ornato-transcribed-interview

WASHINGTON - Today, Committee on House Administration's Subcommittee on Oversight Chairman Barry Loudermilk (GA-11) released a transcribed interview the January 6 Select Committee conducted with President Trump's former White House Deputy Chief of Staff Anthony Ornato, which shows President Donald Trump pushed for 10,000 National Guard troops to protect the nation’s capital.

The interview also shows White House frustration with slow deployment of assistance. The Select Committee conducted this interview in January of 2022, but never released it.

So no pelosi, right?

Also this request was made in the event that Trump would walk down to the capitol with the mob and they would protect him, not the capitol.

https://www.justsecurity.org/93316/anatomy-of-a-conspiracy-theory-and-a-smear-still-no-evidence-of-trump-order-for-10000-guard-on-january-6th/

It makes no sense that Trump would want 10k nat guard to protect the capitol against a mob he brought there.

[jerryskids 5,213]

36 minutes ago, Ron_Artest said:

Offer of 10k troops to pelosi is true?  Really?

Link please?

Maybe read the thread first, instead of just jumping in?