Leaked Texts PROVE Trump Circle Tried To STOP Capitol Riot

a reply to: Ghostsdogood

Sigh...Miller appointed by Trump testified that he was concerned in the days before Jan. 6 that sending National Guard troops to Washington would fan fears of a military coup or that Trump advisers were advocating martial law.

And Sund stated he “approached the two Sergeants at Arms to request the assistance of the National Guard, as he had no authority to do so without an Emergency Declaration by the Capitol Police Board (CPB).” which he then got assurance that they could be reassigned from other areas if necessary.

Again we have Miller having an unprepared guard within the city itself and now we have emails from Meadow that state the guard should "protect" the protesters.

But sure, they are all lying and it's Pelosi’s fault. It's not a matter of not wanting to refute what you say, it's a matter of it being factually incorrect and when I respond, you will give a big "LIES!" response. There really is no point in responding as you will twist whatever to keep your delusion going, as I said it's too far gone to let it go now. The Former guy has been working on you for almost two years to believe it's all a huge plan to take the election away from him.

a reply to: Ghostsdogood

Omg Pelosi controls Twitter now? Trump was certainly in contact with people, we are starting to see the messages and more are coming.

What does Smollett have to do with Jan 6th? He's a loser too and obviously a bad actor. You're all over the place and seem highly upset.

a reply to: frogs453


Who cares what they thought or even discussed?

The President ASKED for NG protection IN WRITING, and nancy very publicly refused.

With capitol police chief and DC mayor standing at her side.

So spin all the lies you want.

None will have ANY effect on the unbrainwashed.

Because neither you or nancy have any ability to change FACTS.

So please stop repeating nancy's LIES.

a reply to: Ghostsdogood

I forgot that part. Can you provide a link where he requested it writing? I did see that on Sunday, Jan. 3, Miller and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Mark Milley, met with Trump. According to the memo, the president “concurs in activation” of the National Guard to “support law enforcement.” Miller approved the activation of 340 Guard members the following day.

Bowser had made the request on Jan 1, which was then approved as noted above. But oddly the guard was prevented from carrying weapons, helmets, body armor etc. If you've seen pics of the Capitol during a blm march in the summer, the guard was fully equipped, yet again for some reason after the meeting with Trump,Miller wrote the memo that the guard should not be similarly equipped. Weird.

And who cares what they discussed? Umm that is the whole point? What they discussed is what occurred. Look, I've provided info for everything you've asked, I've provided additional info. I get it. You do not want to believe. That's fine, but really there is no reason to keep on. You can give me one more "LIES, and NANCY! And have a good evening or morning or whatever time it is there.

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: Ghostsdogood

Omg Pelosi controls Twitter now? Trump was certainly in contact with people, we are starting to see the messages and more are coming.

What does Smollett have to do with Jan 6th? He's a loser too and obviously a bad actor. You're all over the place and seem highly upset.

I am NEVER upset.

Why do you keep using this tactic?

Has NEVER worked for anyone else.

THIS is what it looks like when a fearless patriot stands right up in your face and calls you a LIAR.

Should probably get used to it.

Or stop lying, that would be much preferable.


All were examples of delusional democrat fantasies (LIES) that nearly every democrat believed were 100% factual.

And ALL are now known LIES.

After all the lies and hoaxes from democrats over the last 5 years (this was only a partial list) why would ANYONE believe their current hoax with such blind determination?


So STILL not able to refute a SINGLE thing I'v said?

Don't worry, I'll keep posting reminders until you either make an attempt or admit that you were lying all along.

a reply to: Ghostsdogood

One more post. I've refuted everything you said, numerous times with more info each time. You haven't even linked the "written" order by Trump.

What the heck? Ohh little ol female me is supposed to be intimidated by a "fearless Patriot"? Yes, I get "Liar" everything seems to be a lie to you. And I'm sorry you do seem rather umm fervent about it all.

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: Ghostsdogood

I forgot that part. Can you provide a link where he requested it writing? I did see that on Sunday, Jan. 3, Miller and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Mark Milley, met with Trump. According to the memo, the president “concurs in activation” of the National Guard to “support law enforcement.” Miller approved the activation of 340 Guard members the following day.

Bowser had made the request on Jan 1, which was then approved as noted above. But oddly the guard was prevented from carrying weapons, helmets, body armor etc. If you've seen pics of the Capitol during a blm march in the summer, the guard was fully equipped, yet again for some reason after the meeting with Trump,Miller wrote the memo that the guard should not be similarly equipped. Weird.

And who cares what they discussed? Umm that is the whole point? What they discussed is what occurred. Look, I've provided info for everything you've asked, I've provided additional info. I get it. You do not want to believe. That's fine, but really there is no reason to keep on. You can give me one more "LIES, and NANCY! And have a good evening or morning or whatever time it is there.

Suggest you go ask nancy where that document she was waving while refusing Trump's NG Guard request is currently located.

SHE is the one hiding it.

Here is an excerpt of Miller's testimony on the subject:

republicanwire.org...


And another with head of Capitol Police discussing HIS separate requests for NG assistance, that were ALSO denied by nancy.

www.npr.org...


So you were LYING all along?

Or gonna try to spin out of it again like a good little democrat?

a reply to: frogs453


You have refuted NOTHING.

You only attempted to belittle by calling me delusional and upset.

Gonna lie about this too?

Pathetic.

I made MANY specific claims about your specific lies.

The only one you even questioned was whether Trump requested NG BEFORE j6.

You now have links with BOTH sides saying that was the case.

You lied.

Intentionally.


Wanna try refuting another of my claims?

a reply to: frogs453


Better.

But still incorrect.

Trump asked asked for 10,000 troops on Jan 1, after learning of Antifa's plans.

The 340 conversations were AFTER nancy refused Trump's request.

Gleefully.

On camera.

Because the chief knew damn well that he had nowhere near enough manpower for an event that large.

So was hoping to get nancy to agree to at least a few unarmed troops.

Which NEVER could have made a difference in the first place.

But 10,000 certainly would.

a reply to: MiddleInsite

One problem to start with, the court has ruled already, Congress is not constitutionally tasked with investigating crime. They can only use supeona power in connection with crafting legislation.

I bet you haven’t much to hide, but dont want your texts shared on national tv. .

originally posted by: BrujaRebooted
a reply to: MiddleInsite

One problem to start with, the court has ruled already, Congress is not constitutionally tasked with investigating crime. They can only use supeona power in connection with crafting legislation.

I bet you haven’t much to hide, but dont want your texts shared on national tv. .

In addition to the FACT that biden's FBI already conducted an extremely thorough investigation and found ZERO evidence of planned insurrection.

ZERO.

Lets Go Nancy!

a reply to: LoneCloudHopper2

It takes a big heart to reevaluate firmly held positions in the face of contrarian evidence.

Most people don't want to see the danger of blind obedience because deep down they hope their obedience will be rewarded with a return to normalcy.

Even when the globalists are promising them a dystopian future!

a reply to: Granitebones

Not sure if you are referring to George Floyd as I am not aware of a case in the UK you could be referring to.

Either way though no police officer should be using deadly force unless other members of the public are in immediate danger.

I much prefer the approach our police have and no matter what anyone’s criminal history is they should be tried by a judge and jury or would you prefer police to have access to people’s criminal records while on the beat and eliminate people who they think deserve it.

I gotta say this all must be so exciting for the left! They get to pretend that the bad ol' times are here again - mean tweets, ORANGE MAN BAD, horror in the White House, great economy, life is good, no inflation, mostly peaceful protests destroying major cities, etc.

The press must be excited because they don't have to cover the dumpster fire they helped lie into the White House.

a reply to: LoneCloudHopper2
How so?
I think it shows they were aware of the severity of the situation while it was occurring.
The weird thing is how they seemed to have forgotten what they felt in the moment and now frame this as a sight seeing tour.

a reply to: carewemust
Doesn't he already have it?

Between him, Trump and Meadows, Clark and Miller they should be able to piece together everything the committee has.
Or they can read their own books lol.

a reply to: frogs453

What the heck? Ohh little ol female me is supposed to be intimidated by a "fearless Patriot"? Yes, I get "Liar" everything seems to be a lie to you. And I'm sorry you do seem rather umm fervent about it all.

Yeah what the heck?!? Your gender does not matter. Pulling the gender card in an argument, that's pathetic. Admittance to loosing an argument.

originally posted by: Karen657
a reply to: LoneCloudHopper2
How so?
I think it shows they were aware of the severity of the situation while it was occurring.
The weird thing is how they seemed to have forgotten what they felt in the moment and now frame this as a sight seeing tour.

Because when you look at the actual videos, that's what it looks like for 99% of them. (Not counting the doofus with the horned hat.)

Besides, the capitol police freely allowed them inside, and most of the protestors left when they were asked to. Again, refer to the publicly-available videos for proof. By definition, you are not trespassing if you have been allowed in.

a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

Unfortunately for your version, there are many more videos of people breaking windows and then opening doors to let others in. There are videos of people spraying something at the police who were trying to hold them back. There is video of people beating police with flag poles and fire extinguishers.
This whole"They were invited in" scenario just doesn't fly in the face of recorded video evidence.

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan
This is why we call it Trump Derangement Syndrome, because it is absolutely a mental illness. The allegedly "bombshell" evidence they are claiming to have shows the exact opposite of what they claim it does. They say they have evidence of a conspiracy -- their evidence shows inarguably that there wasn't any conspiracy. They say they have evidence of Trump encouraging violence -- their evidence shows inarguably that everyone was concerned about the violence and wanted Trump to make stronger statements against it. (And he did.) This is delusion, plain & simple. They are too blinded by hatred to be able to apply any degree of rational thinking.

It's either that, or Liz, like Adam Schiff, is a pathological liar who knows full well that what she's saying isn't true.

They have trump trying to get the SOS of Georgia to add approx. 12,000 votes in a phone call which is a felony. The call has been played over and over on
TV… and yet…you say “nothing is true”, and that’s off the top of my head. All of this is out in the open, and in instances. Trumps own words
So you are either lying, or ignorant of trumps own words