Leaked Texts PROVE Trump Circle Tried To STOP Capitol Riot

originally posted by: Granitebones
If that had of been A largely peaceful BLM protest, statues would have toppled, furnishings would have been trashed, national treasures would have been looted and destroyed, bodily excretions would have been everywhere and the Capital building would have been set ablaze. That was my real point.
a reply to: UpThenDown

I think you missed the "two wrongs don't make a right" thing?

a reply to: Fryguy

infrastructure bill passed

bbb bill

hr 550
www.congress.gov...
lot of other stuff too

They have a lot more than trump bad to campaign on. If all your hearing is trump bad maybe those feeding you that narrative are trying to blind you.

Know they enemy.

a reply to: Granitebones

So a hypothetical was your point?

my point is if someone else does wrong its no excuse for me to copy their behaviour and then excuse my behaviour because they did worse, I am no defender of rioting on behalf of any of the BLM/oath keepers/proud boys etc alas in the UK we just have pissed idiots/football hooligans depositing their bodily excretions showing zero respect.

I wasnt disagreeing with your point. I just stated what likely would have been the case if BLM had stormed the Capitol. I'm also in the UK and Im well aware that we have our share of lowlifes. We also have statue topplers and looting in the guise of outrage over a cop that did the world a favour by offing a career criminal.
a reply to: UpThenDown

a reply to: 19Bones79

I know. It's truly dumbfounding how delusional people can be together. Sure, I always had my own world view and judged things wrong. I had a Left-leaning slant on many things. But whenever someone with sincerity argued I was wrong, I listened, and considered my world view was wrong. Whenever I encounter facts and evidence which opposed my view, I accepted it. It was painful, and sometimes scary, but isn't that just a part of growing up? We were all small-minded and naïve as children, but we came to learn little by little that the world was a larger and more complex place than we thought. It's normal to grow, learn, adjust, and expand our horizons.

This goes into a whole different discussion, and I may start a thread on this sometime, but it is bizarre to me how so many people can remain so closed-minded in the face of reality. It goes beyond cognitive dissonance. A great many people are locked into a sort of corporate media cult of comforting authoritarianism. 'It's OK, life is simple. The conservatives are the bad guys. The Government is here to protect you. Sacrifice your rights and freedoms for loyalty to your country--your country is the Government, apparently. Worship Daddy Government and Mommy Media blindly and it'll work out well in the end somehow.

But I digress...

The sad thing is he tweeted a very clear "go home peacefully " tweet which they allowed to go out, but Twitter blocked any ability to retweet or share his tweets. I remember it happening live. It was there, and you could go to his account and look at it, but nobody could share it.

originally posted by: Charliebrowndog
All this circle jerking around and one big piece of evidence that is out there and has never been released is the immense amount of hours of security footage of the building and grounds. The footage that is out there is damning enough in my opinion which shows security opening doors and moving barricades to allow the people into the building. I think everyday this keep going the more and more it is going to backfire on the committee.

The Republicans Kevin McCarthy Wanted to put on the committee would have shown that footage.

But the witch Nancy Pelosi would not allow those Republicans on the committee.

Instead, she personally chose anti-trump, anti-patriotic Republicans, like Liz Cheney.

originally posted by: MiddleInsite
If these guys have nothing to hide, and can defend their action, then testify. What's the problem?

I'm going to need you to put out a public statement and answer all of my questions regarding you beating your wife.

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: MiddleInsite
If these guys have nothing to hide, and can defend their action, then testify. What's the problem?

I'm going to need you to put out a public statement and answer all of my questions regarding you beating your wife.

I do not think he understands the meaning of a KANGAROO COURT. This commission is only reaching one decision and is ignoring all facts to get there.

a reply to: yuppa

I don't believe that poster understands much of anything based on their posting history. Can't carry an argument and certainly isn't changing any minds.

That aside, we've had a couple impeachment trials, attempted lawsuits and now this.

However I can't think of a single establishment D who has gone through the ringer.

originally posted by: 1947boomer

originally posted by: IndieA
It's also very important to realize that the riot stopped 6 states from contesting their election results. Arizona was the only state that managed to contest their election and submit over a thousand pieces of evidence of election irregularities to Congress.

The riot gave lawmakers an excuse to not follow the law and agree that there wouldn't be any contesting of the election.

The rioters were very likely allowed past barriers and maybe even into the Capital for that very reason.
The criminals in DC will stop at nothing to cover-up their crimes.

You've got it totally bass ackwards.

All the states--including the Red states and swing states--certified their votes on December 14 in complete accordance with the Constitution and the laws. Past that date, the only constitutional provision for contesting the election is for a Congress person to challenge it on the floor when Congress convenes to count the votes on Jan. 6. Ted Cruz did exactly that. Then Congress debates the challenge for two hours and votes to either sustain it or defeat it. That process was happening when the rioters stopped it by invading Congress. Congress was following the law. Interrupting that process was breaking the law.

Both officers Sund and Irving were fortunate to be allowed a disgraced resignation of their posts instead of being prosecuted for dereliction of duty. They failed their respective command. Quite curious that national guard wasn't summoned in spite of some apparent "due process" impeding the urgency of the situation, certainly seems like the sort of decisive action a president should take.

a reply to: LoneCloudHopper2

Sounds like Meadows will be scape goated at the least.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: LoneCloudHopper2

Sounds like Meadows will be scape goated at the least.

Yep and isn't that how our gubbmint works, somebody expendable gets scapegoated, and then we carry on. There are so many back-channel deals likely going on. Especially with a congress this evenly split

originally posted by: mikell
They want to charge the President with something to keep him from running again. The President sees it as good press for the Americans bad for the socialist Dems.

C’mon…there is video evidence where it shows trump giddy with excitement, and like Cheney said it lasted 183 minutes, she was on tv today telling the truth because she has bigger balls than any republican

It’s all coming out now, and you people got conned, by the way they found out that all that money sent in for “the wall”…a lot of that money went into bannons pocket directly…

originally posted by: Granitebones
I dont see what the problem was. Going by the BLM metric it was largely peaceful.

where in the constitution does it say riots have to be violent?

btw, who is in charge of security there? who turned down the national guard?

where is epps? get his and pelosi's text..

a reply to: sarahvital

Stenger and Sund made a joint decision on whether more guard with the assurance from the guard that they could be repurposed from other areas if necessary. Although, Christopher Miller made the decision that the guard was not
"To be issued weapons, ammunition, bayonets, batons, riot control agents or ballistic protection equipment such as helmets and body armor.

* To interact physically with protesters, except when necessary in self-defense or defense of others.

* Prohibited from sharing “equipment with law enforcement agencies” or seeking support from any non-DC National Guard units.

* Forbidden from conducting “searches, seizures, arrests, or other similar direct law enforcement activity.”

* Forbidden from using “Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance assets” or to conduct “Incident, Awareness and Assessment activities.”

* No helicopters or “any other air assets.”

And
"In a 36-page memo, Col. Earl Matthews, who held high-level National Security Council and Pentagon roles during the Trump administration, slams the Pentagon's inspector general for what he calls an error-riddled report that protects a top Army official(General Flynn) who argued against sending the National Guard to the Capitol on Jan. 6, delaying the insurrection response for hours."

a reply to: frogs453


Stop LYING.

Capitol Police, reporting to both nancy and dem DC Mayor, REFUSED any Guard assistance, BEFORE Antifa started their mayhem.

Most of the disagreements DURING the Antifa mayhem had to do with whether those two had since cancelled their objections, and how to actually get the Guard physically on site, since they had previously been banned and NO Guard was ready to deploy.


Meanwhile, Trump ASKED for the Guard to provide additional J6 security after the FBI reported to him about Antifa's plans.

Trump did so in writing.

To nancy, Capitol Police, and DC mayor.

Who all refused.


But sure, Trump planned an insurrection, with no weapons, and ASKED the National Guard to defend against that same 'insurrection'.

Repeatedly.

Do democrats have ANY functional brain cells left?


Do you honestly think that ANYONE not already brainwashed will, or has, EVER believed such lies?

Why do you continue with such BS?

a reply to: Ghostsdogood

Wow. You seriously believe this? I mean let's ignore these people who actually were there and know what occurred. I mean yeah Jim Jordan knows better.

You are too entrenched in the delusion to possibly see.

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: Ghostsdogood

Wow. You seriously believe this? I mean let's ignore these people who actually were there and know what occurred. I mean yeah Jim Jordan knows better.

You are too entrenched in the delusion to possibly see.

On what?

Enough with the deceptive defensive measures when your BS is called out.

Refute a single thing I stated

I triple dog dare you.

Even One.

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: mikell
They want to charge the President with something to keep him from running again. The President sees it as good press for the Americans bad for the socialist Dems.

C’mon…there is video evidence where it shows trump giddy with excitement, and like Cheney said it lasted 183 minutes, she was on tv today telling the truth because she has bigger balls than any republican

It’s all coming out now, and you people got conned, by the way they found out that all that money sent in for “the wall”…a lot of that money went into bannons pocket directly…

BS.

Trump was angry and trying to figure out wtf was going on.

DURING those 180 minutes when democrats had illegally eliminated most methods of communication for the President, AND were also illegally communicating with leaders of other countries in place of the president.

TREASON.

Why are you not mentioning that Trump's tweets were sent within SECONDS of twitter getting instructions from nancy to allow him to send a SINGLE tweet?

Because you are lying.

And not very well.



Let me guess...

You still think the Russia Hoax was non fiction?

Still think a president should be impeached over the rumor of a phone call?

Jussie was attacked by 2 maga?

And still think that schizophrenic (fk hippa, everyone knows) woman described anything other than her delusional imaginations about Kav?


Yeah, sounds like you are real grounded in reality.

Not.