Sol Rosenberg
Girthy Member
- Thread starter
- #141
The difference between testifying and Foxylying.
Coup Coup Catchyou!
- Thread starter Sol Rosenberg
- Start date
Surfer7
Member
- 331
- 98
Thanks for posting that. Trump could only make the offer to supply the troops. That offer was turned down by the Senate, the House Sergeants at Arms, and Mayor Bowser. Trump could not then force the troops to be present.
Surfer7
Member
- 331
- 98
PolitiFact - No, Capitol security is not only Pelosi’s responsibility, but she bears some
More than six weeks after supporters of then-President Donald Trump stormed the U.S. Capitol, posts spread on Facebook c
www.politifact.com
PolitiFact - No, Capitol security is not only Pelosi’s responsibility, but she bears some
More than six weeks after supporters of then-President Donald Trump stormed the U.S. Capitol, posts spread on Facebook c
www.politifact.com
- Capitol security is not solely the responsibility of the House speaker. It is provided by the sergeants-at-arms of the House and Senate, and by the Capitol Police.
- The House sergeant-at-arms reports to the House speaker, or Pelosi at the time of the attack. The Senate sergeant-at-arms reports to the Senate majority leader — on Jan. 6, Sen. Mitch McConnell.
- News reports indicate that in the days before the attack, House sergeant-at-arms Paul Irving resisted calls from the Capitol Police to bring in the National Guard for extra security at the Capitol because of “optics.” Irving later testified that intelligence reports didn’t show the need for the extra security, not that he rejected it because of optics.
Last edited:
Surfer7
Member
- 331
- 98
To summarize:
1) The Jan 6 Capitol siege was no coup attempt, that is simply absurd. What chance did that crowd of misfits who entered the Capitol without even one gun have against the armed Capitol police. Not to mention the US military who could have been called in eventually.
2) The Jan6 committee is a sham because there are no real Republicans participating. There is no cross examination of witnesses and testimony. It is pure political theater that will be stretched out as long as possible by Pelosi to try to keep Trump from getting reelected in 2024.
3) The National Guard was offered well in advance to assure something like the Capitol incursion would not occur. Trump himself was one of the people recommending it. It is unclear why that obviously needed help was officially turned down. Trump could not then force the National Guard to show up when that had been officially turned down by those reporting to Pelosi, McConnel, and by Bowser.
1) The Jan 6 Capitol siege was no coup attempt, that is simply absurd. What chance did that crowd of misfits who entered the Capitol without even one gun have against the armed Capitol police. Not to mention the US military who could have been called in eventually.
2) The Jan6 committee is a sham because there are no real Republicans participating. There is no cross examination of witnesses and testimony. It is pure political theater that will be stretched out as long as possible by Pelosi to try to keep Trump from getting reelected in 2024.
3) The National Guard was offered well in advance to assure something like the Capitol incursion would not occur. Trump himself was one of the people recommending it. It is unclear why that obviously needed help was officially turned down. Trump could not then force the National Guard to show up when that had been officially turned down by those reporting to Pelosi, McConnel, and by Bowser.
Sol Rosenberg
Girthy Member
- Thread starter
- #145
Would you look at that, Bullshitters. Lawsuit brought by Congressmen against the Pride of the GOP under the Klan act can proceed. Get ready for more testimony under oath, bullshitters. Buckle up, treasonous shitbags. You can bullshit, you can run, but you cannot hide.
The judge's order:
The story:
www.politico.com
In a 112-page ruling, U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta said the evidence suggests Trump assembled the crowd and then instructed the rally goers to march on the Capitol, despite knowing that the crowd likely included violent and destructive elements.
And Trump’s Twitter attack amid the violence on then-Vice President Mike Pence, who was presiding over the counting of electoral votes that would finalize President Joe Biden’s victory, suggests a “tacit agreement” with those who stormed the Capitol and sent Pence and lawmakers fleeing for safety, Mehta wrote.
“It is reasonable to infer that the President would have understood the impact of his tweet, since he had told rally-goers earlier that, in effect, the Vice President was the last line of defense against a stolen election outcome,” ruled Mehta, an appointee of President Barack Obama.
The ruling leaves Trump’s inner circle — and possibly the former president himself — vulnerable to another flurry of deposition subpoenas and document demands. The ruling also declares Trump potentially liable for conduct while he was the sitting president, a rare and momentous legal decision.
“To deny a President immunity from civil damages is no small step,” Mehta wrote. “The court well understands the gravity of its decision. But the alleged facts of this case are without precedent, and the court believes that its decision is consistent with the purposes behind such immunity.”
The judge's order:
The story:
Judge rejects Trump effort to toss lawsuits accusing him of Jan. 6 conspiracy
In a 112-page ruling, the judge said the evidence suggests Trump assembled the crowd and then instructed the rally-goers to march on the Capitol.
www.politico.com
And Trump’s Twitter attack amid the violence on then-Vice President Mike Pence, who was presiding over the counting of electoral votes that would finalize President Joe Biden’s victory, suggests a “tacit agreement” with those who stormed the Capitol and sent Pence and lawmakers fleeing for safety, Mehta wrote.
“It is reasonable to infer that the President would have understood the impact of his tweet, since he had told rally-goers earlier that, in effect, the Vice President was the last line of defense against a stolen election outcome,” ruled Mehta, an appointee of President Barack Obama.
The ruling leaves Trump’s inner circle — and possibly the former president himself — vulnerable to another flurry of deposition subpoenas and document demands. The ruling also declares Trump potentially liable for conduct while he was the sitting president, a rare and momentous legal decision.
“To deny a President immunity from civil damages is no small step,” Mehta wrote. “The court well understands the gravity of its decision. But the alleged facts of this case are without precedent, and the court believes that its decision is consistent with the purposes behind such immunity.”
Calling Elvis
Member
PolitiFact - No, Capitol security is not only Pelosi’s responsibility, but she bears some
More than six weeks after supporters of then-President Donald Trump stormed the U.S. Capitol, posts spread on Facebook c[edit] IMO Irving was trying a CYA with that last sentence. Even Trump knew that this would be an event that would likely attract a large crowd (no law against peacefully demonstrating outside the Capitol, which is what Trump asked for). And Trump and others knew or should have known the potential for that crowd to get out of control. Irving was lying about the intelligence reports
- Capitol security is not solely the responsibility of the House speaker. It is provided by the sergeants-at-arms of the House and Senate, and by the Capitol Police.
- The House sergeant-at-arms reports to the House speaker, or Pelosi at the time of the attack. The Senate sergeant-at-arms reports to the Senate majority leader — on Jan. 6, Sen. Mitch McConnell.
- News reports indicate that in the days before the attack, House sergeant-at-arms Paul Irving resisted calls from the Capitol Police to bring in the National Guard for extra security at the Capitol because of “optics.” Irving later testified that intelligence reports didn’t show the need for the extra security, not that he rejected it because of optics.
Read the below, but if you're short on time, here's the short of it - "By law, the D.C. National Guard serves exclusively under the command of the president." The president could've at least ordered the DC Guard to the capital at any point, and he did not.
Even if he had, it does not stop every other element of the coup attempt, it doesn't even necessarily stop people from entering the Capital, it just means added security for the Capital. The 10,000 (or 20,000) troop thing is just the latest RW deflection, and it has been debunked.
\https://www.brennancenter.org/our-w...d-be-controlled-its-mayor-not-president-trump
d'ranger
Super Anarchist
- 30,207
- 5,189
inSurferable7 should get those voices in his head checked for cites. As in they are missing. I was ruminating this morning about those who believe PA is such a terrible place and once again knowing its because when you show up with bullshit and dead shrimp nobody is buying it and pointing out it stinks.
It never ends.
It never ends.
Surfer7
Member
- 331
- 98
Mehta, an Obama appointee, has been trying to nail Trump for at least 3 years on various charges. No success on Mehta's part. No surprise Mehta is still trying.Would you look at that, Bullshitters. Lawsuit brought by Congressmen against the Pride of the GOP under the Klan act can proceed. Get ready for more testimony under oath, bullshitters. Buckle up, treasonous shitbags. You can bullshit, you can run, but you cannot hide.
The judge's order:
The story:
In a 112-page ruling, U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta said the evidence suggests Trump assembled the crowd and then instructed the rally goers to march on the Capitol, despite knowing that the crowd likely included violent and destructive elements.Judge rejects Trump effort to toss lawsuits accusing him of Jan. 6 conspiracy
In a 112-page ruling, the judge said the evidence suggests Trump assembled the crowd and then instructed the rally-goers to march on the Capitol.
And Trump’s Twitter attack amid the violence on then-Vice President Mike Pence, who was presiding over the counting of electoral votes that would finalize President Joe Biden’s victory, suggests a “tacit agreement” with those who stormed the Capitol and sent Pence and lawmakers fleeing for safety, Mehta wrote.
“It is reasonable to infer that the President would have understood the impact of his tweet, since he had told rally-goers earlier that, in effect, the Vice President was the last line of defense against a stolen election outcome,” ruled Mehta, an appointee of President Barack Obama.
The ruling leaves Trump’s inner circle — and possibly the former president himself — vulnerable to another flurry of deposition subpoenas and document demands. The ruling also declares Trump potentially liable for conduct while he was the sitting president, a rare and momentous legal decision.
“To deny a President immunity from civil damages is no small step,” Mehta wrote. “The court well understands the gravity of its decision. But the alleged facts of this case are without precedent, and the court believes that its decision is consistent with the purposes behind such immunity.”
Marching to the Capitol to peacefully protest is not only not illegal, it is an extremely American and patriotic thing to do.
So this judge is able to read other men's minds and know what they were thinking, now and in the past? That is laughable.
Better lock up Schumer and Waters:
phillysailor
Super Anarchist
- 9,706
- 4,471
If only there was testimony under oath saying there was a plan to assemble near the ellipse, attack the Capitol, practice and use military tactics to improve the chances of success and display efforts afterwards to cover up their efforts.
And if only there were communications between those groups and close advisors to the president.
It would help if there were evidence of bureaucratic maneuvers and phone calls taken in concert with the riot to alter the result of counting the electoral votes.
Or if the president at the time knew the crowd had weapons, yet wanted them to come closer to him and to accompany him to the Capitol.
Or if folks have been arrested, tried and convicted of having a firearm while taking part in a conspiracy to attack the Capitol and threatening his kids if they turned him in.
Unless we have that kind of evidence, we really can’t think Jan6 was anything other than political protesting and tourism.
And if only there were communications between those groups and close advisors to the president.
It would help if there were evidence of bureaucratic maneuvers and phone calls taken in concert with the riot to alter the result of counting the electoral votes.
Or if the president at the time knew the crowd had weapons, yet wanted them to come closer to him and to accompany him to the Capitol.
Or if folks have been arrested, tried and convicted of having a firearm while taking part in a conspiracy to attack the Capitol and threatening his kids if they turned him in.
Unless we have that kind of evidence, we really can’t think Jan6 was anything other than political protesting and tourism.
jocal505
moderate, informed, ex-gunowner
The military was very reluctant to activate the National Guard, who could then be directed by the rogue President. Milley has talked about it.
Surfer7
Member
- 331
- 98
Your source does not square with various other sources. Someone is not telling the straight story.
All the more reason for the Jan6 committee to get to the truth. But they are not doing that, nor will they.
Olsonist
Disgusting Liberal Elitist
It's why we have a safe space for conservatives, GA. It's where they can say what they want but if you try to present a counter argument, you're told to take it to PA.
d'ranger
Super Anarchist
- 30,207
- 5,189
Goebbels and others knew if a lie is repeated often enough it becomes the truth. Has to be repeated a lot when it is flagrantly wrong and easily debunked. Our current nutjob either doesn't know or care - for a lie to work it has to have at minimum a kernel of truth so attempting to shove the cob up peoples asses just doesn't work.
Put the sock back in the drawer asshole. Unless you showed up to again be a warning to others.
Put the sock back in the drawer asshole. Unless you showed up to again be a warning to others.
Steam Flyer
Sophisticated Yet Humble
All of whom were guilty of colluding/conspiring with Trump to overthrow the election.
Guess what, we didn't give the Japanese any seats on the Pearl Harbor investigating committee, either.
Every single person whose testimony has been made public is a Republican. Their statements are made under penalty of perjury. What's the penalty for lying on Foxy News?
Oh and I still haven't heard from Mark Levin's lawyer about testifying in court as to his broadcast statements. WTF? Did you forget to call him?
SloopJonB
Super Anarchist
d'ranger
Super Anarchist
- 30,207
- 5,189
Not surprising since you are not able to see the truth even when it is sitting on your face
.... at least I didn't quote the wanker.
OK, buzzkill
.... at least I didn't quote the wanker.
These days you can quote them, and it's STILL invisible. Makes some of the conversations a little hard to follow, but I can tell that insufferable7 is just being a dick again.Not surprising since you are not able to see the truth even when it is sitting on your face
OK, buzzkill
Bus Driver
Bacon Quality Control Specialist
When others put you on their "Ignore" list, it blocks you from seeing their posts.
