President TRUMP Authorized Ten Thousand Troops to Protect the Capitol - DJT is Totally Exonerated.

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: Dandandat3
a reply to: Boomer1947

So the scene Trump was trying to secretly set in place was for him to deliver his speech at the Ellipse to fire up his crowd and then march with his fired up crowd to the Capitol accompanied by 10,000 National Guard under his command as Commander in Chief (a number the Mayor said she did not need for crowd control), and arrive there just as Congress was to begin the process of counting the votes.

The offer was made to the mayor of DC, and she declined it. Nancy Pelosi had nothing to do with it.

So, Donald Trump wanted to bring the national guard to the Capitol, where everyone knew days before that there could be trouble, but the Democrat machine stopped that from happening?


And you think that vilifies Trump because your imagination is running whild by thinking the national guard would have engaged in a military coup?

Specifically Flynn, Pelosi, and Bowser. Military, executive and local federal instrument. There may be others but those are the big names with direct oversight and thus criminally negligent, at best. But they won't be prosecuted or even investigated because it's (d)ifferent from how Trump had every intention of asserting his constitutional authority to assemble necessary police resources and defend the capitol from ba(d) actors who desperately wanted to ignite the powder keg and frame Mr Trump. If not for patriotic keyboard sleuths, independent media channels and the 1st amendment protecting both, they would have gotten away with it. Just like the pandemic.

If it can be proven that Jan 6th was a set up, then it exonerates Trump in a large way for a good bit of the current legal battles. They can't have that. So it must be denied BAMN. There is no other option.

General Milley testified that he called China to let them know he would alert them, if President Trump decided to launch in attack... to start a war...to stay in power.

Anyone want to guess what Joe Biden is likely to do, if he loses in November?

a reply to: network dude

One of the biggest gaslighting operations since WMD in Iraq. But it was perpetrated on our own society and that's what makes it especially sordid.

originally posted by: WeMustCare
General Milley testified that he called China to let them know he would alert them, if President Trump decided to launch in attack... to start a war...to stay in power.

Anyone want to guess what Joe Biden is likely to do, if he loses in November?

I know that call was a big deal to many people who speak out both sides of their mouth, but I honestly respect him for trying to be diplomatic. That's the same message Trump keeps sending to audiences, he would rather play soft ball because he has to kick a field goal, it's going between the legs every single time, glancing off the groin on its way home like a Scott Sterling skit. Nobody wants that except people who criticize Chinese alliances while sending jobs to China and importing Chinese products that use Chinese software and even selling US land to Chinese interests. Sometimes the fence rides you.

a reply to: WeMustCare

Exculpatory evidence.

We all knew it was Nasty Nancy Plastic Pelosi, who orchestrated the whole J6 bs with their own "coup d'état".

Also for the record, President Trump was still the sitting President during the speech. A President can not commit an insurrection, because he's the President.

Democrats committed an false flag insurrection, as cover for their Coup D'état!

Learn how words are Weaponized.

a reply to: BlueBaby1

Why lie? I just don't get it. Are you a Trump supporter looking to make people on the left look bad? A cursory search of this event shows local news covering it (you said they didn't), that the venue is a 4500 person capacity (you said 1000) and that people had lined up at 7 am as local pd reported about 4000 off the street went through their security check point in a city of 31000 (you said less than 1000.)

I don't really like Trump and this kind of misinfo just makes his side look better. If you are actually anti-Trump stop giving their side ammo and empowering them.

originally posted by: ADVISOR
a reply to: WeMustCare

Exculpatory evidence.

We all knew it was Nasty Nancy Plastic Pelosi, who orchestrated the whole J6 bs with their own "coup d'état".

Also for the record, President Trump was still the sitting President during the speech. A President can not commit an insurrection, because he's the President.

Democrats committed an false flag insurrection, as cover for their Coup D'état!

Learn how words are Weaponized.

A sitting president can obstruct transfer of power, through violent means such as armed and hostile militia, to dissuade or intimidate a federal assembly. But it would have to be visible and therefore demonstrable. Visibly he was nowhere close to the rabble being roused, and his remarks were nowhere close to being violent in nature. It would seem the DNC weren't quite clever enough to realize that separating him from the protest was crippling to their witch hunt because there's no causality, only correlation and the keen minds in congress insist on causality before they agree to convict.

To the people going but dictator for life...

Why did the commission suppress the testimony?

dont say what you think trump meant to do, ponder why this wasnt front and center as evidence he was committing insurrection.

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: Boomer1947
a reply to: WeMustCare

You are undoubtedly the most prolific and shameless liar on this site.

.

Washington DC is not a state and is completely under control of Congress.

The presiding Speaker of the House is the ultimate authority (over the mayor) as to what Washington DC does, in terms of security and the National Guard.

Try again.

That's incorrect the Home Rule Act passed in Congressin 1973, and District residents approved it in a special referendum the following year. so since 1974 the mayor and city council control the city and its employees ie police. What congress does do is approve any laws made by thr DC council within 30 to 60 days depending on the type of legislation.

So this means in this instant it was strickly the mayors decision as to accepting federal troops. Now that doesn't mean she didn't talk with the mayor however it wasn't her decision to make.

The capitol police is directly controlled by congress however no aid was offered to them. And the national guard was for streets and not protecting the capitol.

a reply to: TzarChasm

He wasn't completely innocent either. He did try to get a group of alternate electors approved by state houses. They all refused the white house request and Biden kept his electors in the electorial college. When he saw that his alternate electors couldn't vote he tries to get Mike Pence to recognize Trumps new electors he refused to do so and Biden electors where certified.

This however was not illegal and in fact still isnt, Its just underhanded as you circumvent the will of the people and cause the house to vote on presidential candidates. This is what happens when you listen to people like Julliani who has zero morals.

Ha ha ha, Wanna make a bet?

I am sure you are going to be crying.

a reply to: BlueBaby1

That was legal, Next. What you got for real?

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: TzarChasm

He wasn't completely innocent either. He did try to get a group of alternate electors approved by state houses. They all refused the white house request and Biden kept his electors in the electorial college. When he saw that his alternate electors couldn't vote he tries to get Mike Pence to recognize Trumps new electors he refused to do so and Biden electors where certified.

This however was not illegal and in fact still isnt, Its just underhanded as you circumvent the will of the people and cause the house to vote on presidential candidates. This is what happens when you listen to people like Julliani who has zero morals.

a reply to: WeMustCare

Query?

So he DID believe it was an insurrection? And he was gonna send troops against HIS MAGA supporters ( otherwise then, agreed they were "insurrectionists....of HIS supporters)?

Wait. Ohhhh

originally posted by: mysterioustranger
a reply to: WeMustCare

Query?

So he DID believe it was an insurrection? And he was gonna send troops against HIS MAGA supporters ( otherwise then, agreed they were "insurrectionists....of HIS supporters)?

Wait. Ohhhh

No he recommended troops because large crowds brings a few bad eggs. Come on do you even care about America or are you like the democrats, trying to change America into a failed socialist state. This event was simple not an insurrection no matter how bad you and the people working on destroying the foundation this nation was built on want to label it as one.

a reply to: mysterioustranger

so you ARE carrying an alien baby in your stomach and will be giving birth to Kermit the Frog in the coming weeks?

(that's as nuts as your rendition of that post)

Trump asked for 10,000 NG troops to protect his supporters from ANTIFA, but they were denied. So the entire narrative about Trump being at fault for the lack of security and his being the architect of the riot that slow folks claim was an "insurrection" have been shown to be false.

originally posted by: mysterioustranger
a reply to: WeMustCare

Query?

So he DID believe it was an insurrection? And he was gonna send troops against HIS MAGA supporters ( otherwise then, agreed they were "insurrectionists....of HIS supporters)?

Wait. Ohhhh

He may have also known Democrat Agents Provocateurs were infiltrating the "crowds". 😃

Can't be too careful now can we.

Just remember, they denied 10k for 1/6 but there were over 26k just weeks later for the inauguration.

Link

Nothing Happened. We all remember the days following Trumps inauguration. DC and many cities around the US were on fire. For weeks.

There was intel, some which was withheld from the POTUS, expressing concern on 1/6 regarding issues from both sides of the aisle. So, our president asked for troops to protect US citizens who would be there. Why is this so hard to understand?

They did not screw Trump. They screwed the citizens of the US.

Each paper posted a different numbers, from 3500 to 5000. The venue strictly holds 1000. Look it up. Even trump mentioned they wanted a bigger venue. It was small. And the lawn outside only had a couple of hundred people. Facts. We drove right up Broad St, nothing.....

originally posted by: BigDuckEnergy
a reply to: BlueBaby1

Why lie? I just don't get it. Are you a Trump supporter looking to make people on the left look bad? A cursory search of this event shows local news covering it (you said they didn't), that the venue is a 4500 person capacity (you said 1000) and that people had lined up at 7 am as local pd reported about 4000 off the street went through their security check point in a city of 31000 (you said less than 1000.)

I don't really like Trump and this kind of misinfo just makes his side look better. If you are actually anti-Trump stop giving their side ammo and empowering them.

a reply to: BlueBaby1

en.m.wikipedia.org...

2.1k for sporting events. 3.1k for other sporting events. 3.9k for concerts. 4.4k for trade shows with a stage.

Again... why lie?

a reply to: dragonridr

He wasn't completely innocent either. He did try to get a group of alternate electors approved by state houses. They all refused the white house request and Biden kept his electors in the electorial college. When he saw that his alternate electors couldn't vote he tries to get Mike Pence to recognize Trumps new electors he refused to do so and Biden electors where certified.

What a lot of people fail to realize about January 6th is that, 6 swing States were planning on contesting their electors and submitting evidence of election irregularities, malfeasance, and fraud, that would have triggered two hours of debate for each contest, in an effort to convince Pence to put a short hold on certifying the election, so these States could further investigate the evidence and resolve their issues.

Arizona was successful in contesting their electors, and both chambers went into debate, shortly before the breach.

You can watch Arizona contest their electors and some of the debate that follows, starting around the 15:00 minute mark.



If you have States that want to contest their electors because they weren't chosen lawfully, or for other reasons, it makes sense to have alternate electors at the ready.