The hearing is cued up and the popcorn is popped. What are your thoughts and observations regarding today's hearing of The Congressional January 6th Committee?
Just about everything trumpturd has done prior to this was/is a crime.
But everything from when he lost bigly in November with his months long incitement leading up to (and inside planning of 1/6/21) he incited his domestic terrorist mobs on to the Capitol where he watched it all unfold from the White House for hours (while watching and rewinding and re-watching the violent mobs he incited - knowing that they had weapons - yet 'weren't there to hurt me') - yet did nothing until hours later - when he told his domestic terrorist mobs that they were special and that they loved them.
I don't call that 'being irresponsibly late to act on a crime' I call that treason/sedition.
He's just lucky his final sentence won't be execution before a firing squad.
Dereliction of Duty, Insurrection, treason.... I dunno, ask the AG. He said the other day that they want to get this right: dotted t's and crossed eyes or some such
We can easily presume that the government will want to ensure they have the best possible case before they indict Trump. How much time is that supposed to take in your expert opinion?
Next, in your expert opinion, what are all the factors Garland must consider with respect to timing of an indictment and then criminal trial of a PotUS for the first time in our history? How do these factors affect the timetable?
And I also know that the only way to bear it is to turn all that anguish to purpose. So tonight, I ask all of America to join me — not in denying our pain or covering it over — but using it to compel our nation across this turbulent threshold into the next phase of progress, inclusion, and opportunity for our great democracy.We are a nation in pain, but we must not allow this pain to destroy us. We are a nation enraged, but we cannot allow our rage to consume us. We are a nation exhausted, but we will not allow our exhaustion to defeat us.
What is your issue with that request? Please be specific.
This is what your "right and necessary" snippet looks like in the adult world:
Protesting such brutality is right and necessary. It’s an utterly American response. But burning down communities and needless destruction is not. Violence that endangers lives is not. Violence that guts and shutters businesses that serve the community is not.
There's much more to Biden's statement but I doubt you'd want to read it because it doesn't bolster your agenda.
But that's Okay, he was just Running to Be President of "ALL" People back then !
What's not okay about the above quote? Again, be specific.
Actually, YOU are the one who pretended to know what Biden was thinking.
I made no such claim.
YOU stated:
Bidens advocating of Violent Protests against Government, any Government, is AOK !Biden advocated for Americans to "use" their Pain and keep ransacking and burning and looting, Even against Private Citizens.
You claim to know what Biden was 'advocating' for, yet you had to mischaracterize what he said to do it.
Now, do you have any answers to my questions or are you just trolling?
It is when you are president and the people are there at your request
If not a crime, most certainly a very good reason to never re-elect him again. Although there were plenty of reasons to come to that conclusion before his first election!
Biden was not advocating for violence. Period. But some people just cannot portray any action by Biden as being good or decent because they have a partisan axe to grind.
I feel that you offer about negative 100% credulity to any conversation.
You misrepresent the most simple of facts and statements and try to smear the objects of your dissatisfaction with lies and half truths [deleted]
But all of your comrades claim it is obvious. And don't forget what we learned via the Sussman trial: All Garland has to do is bring charges of any kind against Trump to a DC jury and he will have a conviction. What Garland fears is that such a conviction would be overturned on appeal, thus exposing the DOJ as BIASED & CORRUPT in a case involving a former President being investigated by the opposition party.
"What Garland fears is that such a conviction would be overturned on appeal, thus exposing the DOJ as BIASED & CORRUPT in a case involving a former President being investigated by the opposition party."
Where's John Durham and the promises of multiple indictments?
Still chasing McCabe, Hillary or Comey? Obama?
Durham convicted a lowly FBI lawyer of altering an official internal document. Clinesmith received probation and community service...
Sussman walked...
Following the precedent of past special counsels, Durham will likely release a final report with his findings. Garland has previously said he hopes to publicly release "as much as possible" of the eventual Durham report, after it goes through a Justice Department redaction process.
Trump has claimed that the probe will vindicate his claims of Watergate-level crimes against him and his allies. After three years, Durham is nowhere near delivering on those expectations.
And don't forget what we learned via the Sussman trial: All Garland has to do is bring charges of any kind against Trump to a DC jury and he will have a conviction.
Is this an example of your lessons on truth and ethics Vic?
Seriously, HOW does Sussman's acquittal teach us that Garland will get a conviction against Trump. Be specific.
You currently have at least three active articles/seeds trending on the FP yet you want to talk about the vote count of a comment I posted a week ago ?
So, merely "Attempting to kill" would have been fine by you?
No because that would be bullshit too. If they'd have wanted to, unfortunately , it may have happened. They were a bunch of pissed off dumbasses. PERIOD.
They were a bunch of pissed off dumbasses. PERIOD.
Haven't you seen any of the videos of the physical attacks on the Capitol police officers? Are you unaware that 140 officers were injured by the rioters on January 6th? They were savagely beaten.
They feel the same way about the attempted coup - they didn't actually get away with it - so no harm done - according to the trumpturd enablers/supporters.
This “committee” was supposed to be about finding the cause to make sure it doesn’t happen again. And again, it’s all fucking Trump and NOT the incompetent law enforcement of the capital to be fucking prepared
Don't give a flying fuck. That is NOT what this was purported to be about. It's about not letting it happen again. And the only thing they are trying to stop, is Trump from running again. PERIOD. Where is the goddamned questioning of the preparedness? If that had been present, the shit would not NEARLY have hit the fan as it did. Use your head woman.
WHY is that the question Vic? Jim insists it's all about making sure it doesn't happen again, you're insisting that it's all about proving a 'criminal act'. Which is it?
When the Chair said at the outset that these facts are "uncontested" it highlights the fact that there aren't any members present who would contest them.
One of the many members of Trump's administration has to have come forward to refute what was said last night right? Maybe one of those whose video was used as evidence said something to contest the assertions made in last night's hearing.
With your expertise with RW sources, you should have no problem posting some facts that can contest last night's testimony.
Please proceed.
Oh and I remind you again, McCarthy assigned Rep. Banks to do an independent investigation. Surely Banks has evidence that contests last night's testimony.
We can count on Banks to set the record straight, right?
Have you ever cited any specific projection, deflection, denial or lie that I've written - no. Baseless accusations that you copy n 'paste is what your good at.
It took until well after midnight for Congress to reconvene and to complete their Constitutional duties after Trump's mob stormed the United States Capital in a violent insurrection Jan 6th, 2020!
He put a target on his own VP's back? Drama Queens one and all. Oh, that's right. These are the same people that swore to God that Sarah Palin putting a target on Arizona was responsible for Gabby Giffords getting shot.
You're not going to get an answer to that because in reality NO it is not a crime. But that won't stop them from setting their hair on fire and freaking out about it.
In going thru this site, I cannot find mention of the Executive Branch. Perhaps you can find it.
The PotUS is the head of government. Ultimately he is responsible for the workings of the government. If the PotUS is informed that the US capitol is under siege, do you expect him to say:
Well, gee, I do not see capitol security or 'talking down my supporters' as part of my job description so I will just ignore this.
In reality, Snuffy, in government and in business (and elsewhere even) authority and responsibility are delegated down the chain but those who do the delegating remain ultimately responsible and ultimately hold the authority to act.
So if something in your realm of authority is not being addressed it is ultimately up to you to ensure that it is. 'The buck stops here' and all that.
In this case Trump was directly informed of the violence and criminal activity and was directly informed that it was his supporters engaging in this bad behavior and was pleaded, repeatedly, by advisors, family and 'friends' to act yet he did not tell them to go home until 187 minutes into the insurrection.
I have a question for all the right wingers currently polluting this seed. Trump watched the riot on television, knew it had turned violent, and yet did nothing , even though he was being asked repeatedly to send a messsage to his followers to ask them to leave the capitol. Didnt Trump have a responsibilty, as president, to do everything he could to end the attck on the capitol?
There is a tweet that Trump made at 2:25, well after it was clear a riot was taking place and the rioters were trying to breach the congressional chambers.
“Mike Pence didn't have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our Country and our Constitution, giving States a chance to certify a corrected set of facts, not the fraudulent or inaccurate ones which they were asked to previously certify. USA demands truth!”
Trump sent that tweet , which was seen by thousands of the rioters, even though he knew that Mike Pence was in danger at that moment. This is blatant dereliction of duty.
For hours Trump continued to diddle and to cheer on His Mob...
Bullshit. He cheered/communicated nothing for over three hours. Isn't that the narrative? How can you transmit cheering on while sitting on your ass and not saying a damned thing?
This is still a LOT of hearsay...............................
He cheered/communicated nothing for over three hours
That is not correct. At 2:24 p.m., while the riot was going on, Trump tweeted his famous tweet where he stated: "Pence didn't have the courage to do what should have been done..." That tweet can be seen as an attempt to further incite the mob.
"That is not correct. At 2:24 p.m., while the riot was going on, Trump tweeted his famous tweet where he stated: "Pence didn't have the courage to do what should have been done..." That tweet can be seen as an attempt to further incite the mob."
That's exactly what it was after he had incited his domestic terrorist mobs for months
Actually NO, that isn't the 'narrative' Jim. If you had bothered to watch the hearing, you would know that Trump was tweeting during that time.
Hell, anyone that doesn't know that Trump sent the following tweet is willfully ignorant:
2:24 PM [10 minutes AFTER the first insurrectionist entered the Capitol and 9 minutes AFTER Pence was removed from the Senate floor and the Senate was recessed]Mike Pence didn't have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our Country and our Constitution, giving States a chance to certify a corrected set of facts, not the fraudulent or inaccurate ones which they were asked to previously certify. USA demands the truth!
14 minutes later, Trump tweeted this:
Please support our Capitol Police and Law Enforcement. They are truly on the side of our Country. Stay peaceful!
14 minutes after that, Trump tweeted this:
I am asking for everyone at the U.S. Capitol to remain peaceful. No violence! Remember, WE are the Party of Law & Order – respect the Law and our great men and women in Blue. Thank you!
Trump's next tweet was 74 minutes later and it was his video.
Trump's awkward Jan. 7 video outtakes reveal his behavior behind the scenes as he argued with Ivanka, slammed the podium, and fumbled over his words
Cheryl Teh
Fri, July 22, 2022 at 4:31 AM
The January 6 panel revealed a new video showing how Trump melted down while recording a message on January 7, 2021. January 6 House Select Committee
A new video from the January 6 panel shows Trump's anger and frustration while recording a message.
The recording from January 7, 2021, showed Trump banging on the podium and gesturing angrily.
He was also heard debating with his daughter Ivanka about the content of the nationwide address.
A series of video clips shown by House committee investigating the Capitol riot gave shocking insight into former President Donald Trump's behavior behind the scenes.
The video from January 7 last year — around 24 hours after rioters swarmed the Capitol in an effort to overturn the election — was played during the January 6 panel's eighth public hearing on Thursday.
In the video, Trump was seen taking more than 10 seconds after being cued to adjust his posture and facial expression, before beginning with his statement: "I would like to begin by addressing the heinous attack yesterday."
Trump looked around uncertainly and spent 10 seconds appearing to adjust his posture, strike a pose, and steel himself before launching into his address. Januay 6 Select Committee
However, this was but one of multiple takes Trump went through to record his nationwide address. Right after the first pause, Trump appeared to signal for a do-over.
In the second video shown by the panel, Trump stopped in the middle of recording after appearing to struggle with disavowing the violence during the riot.
"You can't say that," Trump remarked, highlighting the phrase "you broke the law," which was presumably displayed on the teleprompter at the time.
"I'm not gonna — I already said 'you will pay,'" he said in the clip.
In another video, the former president was seen banging on the podium in frustration after failing to say the word "defiled."
"Demonstraters who infiltrated the Capitol — have defied the seat — it's defiled, right?" Trump said. "See, I can't see it very well. Ok. I'll do this! I'm gonna do this. Let's go."
The former president stopped recording his statement during one take because he had trouble saying the word "yesterday." January 6 Select Committee
In the fourth clip played by the panel, Trump paused partway through his address and began debating the language with his daughter Ivanka. He refused to say four words suggested by aides: "The election is over."
Trump read off the teleprompter: "But this election is now over. Congress has certified the results."
He then paused and backpedaled.
"I don't want to say the election is over," Trump said. "I just want to say Congress certified the results announcing the election is over, OK?"
On more than one occasion, Ivanka Trump interjected to give suggestions on what her father should say. January 6 Select Committee
His daughter Ivanka was then heard prompting him: "But, Congress has certified…"
"Now — I didn't say over — Go to the paragraph before," Trump said.
The panel's fifth video clip showed Trump flapping his arms and puffing up his chest. This time, however, he stumbled on the word "yesterday."
"I wanna begin by addressing the heinous attack yesterday," Trump said, before stopping again.
"Yesterday's a hard word for me," he commented.
"Just take it out," Ivanka said.
Ivanka Trump suggested that her father simply omit the word "yesterday," which he had trouble saying in the video. January 6 Select Committee
"Good, take the word 'yesterday' out. Cause, it doesn't work with — the heinous attack — on our country. Say, 'on our country.' Wanna say that?" he said.
"No, keep it," Ivanka said in the video.
In the committee's sixth clip, Trump grimaced while attempting to make it through a line stating that his goal was to "ensure the integrity of the vote." And in the following video, he slammed the podium in frustration after failing to get through the same line again.
Trump was seen grimacing, frowning, and signaling abruptly for a re-take of his speech after fumbling lines. January 6 Select Committee
These videos of Trump struggling with reading from a teleprompter underscore the hypocrisy of the attacks by Trump and other right-wing figures on President Joe Biden's own teleprompter gaffes.
The January 6 committee has played testimony of several former Trump staffers recounting his unhinged behavior before, during, and after the Capitol riot.
All of you stupid fucking assholes who deny the graveness of January 6th are the ones Still stupidly held tight. Release yourselves from the thrall and let the truth set you free.
Two of our fellow NTers from the once upon a time republican narrative don't really give a shyte if Donald goes down. In fact, they would like nothing more. That they are throwing slop into the wind is more likely out of a now decades old Skinner Box than anything else. Defending Trump must be a tiresome task and especially so when it involves cheering some "RINO" nonsense whenever one of them gets unceremoniously tossed under the proverbial thrump-a-thrump.
This is vastly worse than Watergate. As usual, you can see in real time how many Trump supporters and voters and mouthpieces and propagandists are pivoting their focus on other topics to deflect the base onto something else.
Perpetual blame gaming, perpetual victimhood, perpetual excuses and perpetual avoidance of any responsibility for the likes of Nixon, or Bush or Trump. Not their fault for standing by their man or voting for them or carrying their baggage?
They are never, ever, ever going to admit any wrong for believing lies, spreading lies, or avoiding their votes for lies and liars.
All that is going to happen is the non-stop pivot to other topics and rage baiting as a deflection and every single solitary last Republican voter will do nothing but for all eternity check that "R" box at the ballot box no matter what lie or bad policy is being pushed on them.
They are a lost cause and will always vote party line regardless.
To deem the evidence presented by these hearings to be a nothing burger is staggering. After all, one can illustrate the insanity of this using only evidence from the last session which shows that Trump knew his supporters were engaging in an armed breaking & entering of the US Capitol building and he refused all the pleas from advisors, family and friends to step in until 187 minutes after it started.
How can anyone deem it a 'nothing burger' for a PotUS to literally refuse to stop an insurrection of the US Capitol??
The question ... 'Is it a dereliction of duty and violation of the oath of office for a CiC/PotUS to refuse to take any action to curtail an insurrection of the US Capitol?' ... is one that (prior to Trump's Big Lie campaign) one would expect everyone to answer: 'of course'.
Not in Trump-land — an alternate reality where this (and much more) is collectively a nothing burger.
It's not Trump's job to stop a riot, especially one he did not instigate. It's not his fault a bunch of idiots did what they did. Bottom line is you hold THEM accountable for their actions, not Trump. It was the Capitol police. Because Pelosi failed to get National Guard there to protect the Capitol, much blame lies with her.
Most evidence shows Trump called for a safe and peaceful protest and memos from the Pentagon shows even Milley admitted Trump ordered the Capitol to stay secure and safe. Even if he went on TV to tell the idiots to stop right away, how many of them would know it because they were outside or in the Capitol?
Best guess?
Zero
Like I mentioned in a previous post.
When a leftist can show that another prominent leftist called for the condemnation of any riot in Summer of 2020 within a 187 minutes, and told THOSE idiots to stop doing what they were doing, even in federal buildings in Oregon, then I will condemn Trump for not doing anything within the 187 minutes.
You reactionaries like to pretend that Trump didn't instigate the January 6th insurrection. That's a pathetic joke. No one with more than half a brain believes the reactionary B.S
The phony propaganda that "Trump didn't do anything for 187 minutes" is more crap. The facts show that he continued to incite his storm troopers during the riot.
You reactionaries can B.S. yourselves, but no one else is buying the reactionary fraud.
It's not Trump's job to stop a riot, especially one he did not instigate.
Interesting. The Capitol of the USA is attacked by an armed mob who break and enter the premises and disrupt the proceedings. This mob was told by Trump to march on the Capitol. Yet you actually argue that the president of the USA, the CiC, the person who is the head of government should not be asked to speak to his supporters and tell them to stop the insurrection because it is 'not his job'.
This is your defense of Trump? You think this makes any sense? That anyone would be persuaded by such nonsense?
Advisors, family and 'friends' pleaded with Trump to take action. He could have been on national media within minutes of deciding to do so. He had the most powerful megaphone on the planet and was the top authority in government — the highest political office in our government ... the place where the buck stops.
Yet you claim it was not his job? How does one even attempt to reason with such a distorted understanding of reality?
Even if he went on TV to tell the idiots to stop right away, how many of them would know it because they were outside or in the Capitol? Best guess? Zero
So your second pathetic defense for Trump is that nobody would have listened to the PotUS when he tells his supporters to cease and desist. They will listen to him when he makes an outrageous lie that the election was rigged, that he won, that their votes were disenfranchised, that Pence was doing something wrong, etc. but all of a sudden they will ignore his commands to leave??
... then I will condemn Trump for not doing anything within the 187 minutes
And now we have the third utterly stupid point. You will condemn Trump for his failure, but only if you get someone to make a political concession? Such a stark admission of pure partisan blindness.
So you are equating any and all ‘leftists’ and your perceived lack of condemnation with the POTUS and his 187 minutes of infamy? That is quite the conflation, obfuscation, and deliberate deflection.
Nowhere am I defending Trump, you seem to want to claim that of everyone that does not think and bleet as you do.
I never said no one would listen to him if he went on tv. Of course, you being a far leftist, are being disingenuous with your accusations. Read the post again, as I can't help if you are unable to understand.
Also, you, being a far leftist, immediately ignore that Rump told his supporters to go peacefully to the Capitol. We understand that one little sentence blows away the group think of other far leftists.
Once again, when a high profile leftist such condemn the riots, murder, arson that happened during the 2020 summer, then I will condemn Trump for his 197 minute inaction.
The rest of your blather is not work responding to.
when a high profile leftist such condemn the riots, murder, arson that happened during the 2020 summer, then I will condemn Trump for his 197 minute inaction
What is really sad is the sheer stupidity in comparing the two events, like they were the same, or about the same things.
Somehow he thinks calling someone 'far left' is an insult.
I take that as a point of pride as it puts me in a camp so far away from these magats that they can only see poodle skirts and roller-skates with keys...
If you think TiG is far left you must be off the rail far right!
No, I am right on the money, like always. Most of those that lean left on here are truly leaning to the far left. Their posts prove it. We don't have to accuse anything.
Nowhere am I defending Trump, you seem to want to claim that of everyone that does not think and bleet as you do.
Excusing Trump for not acting is defending Trump. Who could possibly not see that? Good grief man have you no shame?
... you being a far leftist, ...
And to further solidify your lack of credibility we have the above. Although you probably think Cheney is a far leftist too ... "I see leftists everywhere...". Suffice it to say, your comments are absurd.
The rest of your blather is not work responding to.
I doubt you are fooling anyone by refusing to deal with what I wrote and instead dismissing it as 'blather' as you run away attempting to hurl insults.
If you think TiG is far left you must be off the rail far right!
I think that is part of it, JBB. The other part, the main part, is that he is engaging in childish name-calling. He knows that I find it offensive to label me as a leftist (or a rightie for that matter) so he is striking out at me in lieu of being able to offer a cogent, mature rebuttal.
It is like a child who has no rebuttal and thus calls his opponent a poo poo head and then leaves.
Somehow he thinks calling someone 'far left' is an insult.
Given I am not 'far left' I find it offensive. But I also consider the source. Sometimes the offensiveness does not materialize because I am more entertained by the utter ridiculousness of a comment and just cannot bring myself to give the author any credibility or respect.
What the hell do you think would happen if he said anything?
Absolutely nothing. The idiots that rioted on the Capitol did what they did because they wanted to, not because Trump told them to.
Now, post an exact quote of Trump telling those idiots to ravage the Capitol.
I already know the answer. You won't because you can't.
By meme with Cheney and the nothingburger?
Truer now than it was an hour ago,
BTW...By your posts and hatred of anyone not in lock step to loon leftists ideas, you have been fully identified as a far leftist. Not our fault you don't see it.
The funny thing is, I wouldn't even consider donald a right winger.
He is a con man that would pretend to be anything to further himself (and dumb assholes follow him without question).
Like with him courting the religious right. He is in no way a religious person yet he panders to them and tells them what they want to hear and they call him God.
Same with deep conservatives. All one has to do is say what they want to hear and they jump all over it, no questions asked...
What the hell do you think would happen if he said anything?
Another stupid question. Trump told them to march on the capitol. If Trump told them to stop there would be an immediate group (probably the majority) that would stop as soon as they heard him. Others will take more time. Some might not stop no matter what.
Your claim is that Trump telling them to stop would accomplish nothing. Magically the Trump supporters who believe everything the liar states will all suddenly wake up and ignore him? Give us all a break with such utter nonsense.
Now, post an exact quote of Trump telling those idiots to ravage the Capitol.
What a stupid demand; I have not claimed Trump told them to ravage the capitol. Get a grip.
I already know the answer. You won't because you can't.
Well of course not, Trump never said that and I never said that he did. Think, man. I could just as easily tell you to deliver a quote where Barr states that he never told Trump that his claims were bullshit. You won't because you can't. But I would never do that because you never claimed otherwise.
See how this works? Wait for someone to make a claim before demanding they evidence same.
... you have been fully identified as a far leftist ...
Is it official now bugsy? Such a pathetic act of futility.
Trump told them to march on the capitol. If Trump told them to stop there would be an immediate group (probably the majority) that would stop as soon as they heard him. Others will take more time. Some might not stop no matter what.
Just a long way to say I am correct.
Your belief is that Trump told those idiots to march on the Capitol. That is correct, however, you keep babbling on that Trump was the cause of these same idiots to riot inside the Capitol.
THAT is where you are seriously wrong, and where your biases start.
Now, to repeat something that has been asked of you repeatedly.
Why has Garland not filed charges against Trump? I know you think he is just taking his time, but the end game of loons on left is to get Donald at all costs. If he is indicted on anything, a loon left jury in DC will easily convict him, so why not just do it. They will not need evidence. Just the fact that he is Donald Trump would be enough for them.
BTW...your little friends on here are not helping you one bit. Might want to tell them to scurry off.
So you think my comment means: "What the hell do you think would happen if he [Trump] said anything? Absolutely nothing."? Desperate much? Hint: you are demonstrably wrong.
Your belief is that Trump told those idiots to march on the Capitol. That is correct, however, you keep babbling on that Trump was the cause of these same idiots to riot inside the Capitol.
Well I have not actually stated that here, but the evidence does indeed indicate that Trump is culpable ... that his words encouraged his supporters to do what they did. I do not think anyone has suggested that Trump wanted his supporters to literally break and enter the capitol, but one would have to be truly blind to not recognize that he absolutely inspired them to fight for what is right. There is video proof of supporters stating that they engaged in their activities because that is what they thought Trump wanted. So, in summary, regardless of Trump's intent, the evidence thus far suggests that his words were a critical component of the insurrection.
Why has Garland not filed charges against Trump?
Good grief, you really need to find a new question. Nobody knows except Garland.
I know you think he is just taking his time, but the end game of loons on left is to get Donald at all costs.
I do not know why. I can only speculate. In response to stupid questions like yours, I have speculated. That is the best I can offer.
If he is indicted on anything, a loon left jury in DC will easily convict him, so why not just do it. They will not need evidence. Just the fact that he is Donald Trump would be enough for them.
So what are you trying to say ... that Trump really is innocent ... that Garland does not feel he has a strong case?
BTW...your little friends on here are not helping you one bit. Might want to tell them to scurry off.
Look, it is well known that your mind is made up that Trump is guilty of everything under the sun...just because his name is Donald Trump. Nothing will ever change that thought process.
The problem is your little last resort to get Trump called the January 6 commission has absolutely nothing on him.
It is well known that those on the commission made up their minds, like you, that Trump was guilty, even before the hearings started. I understand they are not a trial, but by not letting dissenting voices that have come forward speak publicly, and edit their recorded testimony to make it look like they said something they did not, shows the hatred of Trump and has nothing to do with the actual reason for the failure of the security of the Capitol.
Look, it is well known that your mind is made up that Trump is guilty of everything under the sun...just because his name is Donald Trump. Nothing will ever change that thought process.
You have already demonstrated that you are no authority on how I think and what I believe. Cut the personal crap and try to make an argument.
The problem is your little last resort to get Trump called the January 6 commission has absolutely nothing on him.
That is really an incredible thing for someone to write.
It is well known that those on the commission made up their minds, like you, that Trump was guilty, even before the hearings started.
You know bugsy, it was obvious before the hearings started that Trump engaged in a two month con-job where he lied to the world that the US electoral system was rigged and that his supporters were disenfranchised. It was also known that Trump did not tell his supporters to go home until hours after the insurrection started and that he knew that they had broken and entered the building. The committee is providing testimony that fleshes this out. The question really is how you could possibly not see this.
I understand they are not a trial, but by not letting dissenting voices that have come forward speak publicly, and edit their recorded testimony to make it look like they said something they did not, shows the hatred of Trump and has nothing to do with the actual reason for the failure of the security of the Capitol.
You have the option to evaluate each under-oath testimony by high-ranking, connected Republicans who have compromised their careers by testifying. You can factor in that there is likely other evidence that would be presented by a Trump defense team, etc. Why would you reject these testimonies and not include them into your base of working facts?
your mind is made up that Trump is guilty of everything under the sun
So let's take all the facts that the January 6th commission has revealed and just flip the script.
What if it had been Hillary Clinton in 2016 that refused to concede and continued to claim that the election was stolen and claimed widespread voter fraud (without evidence) claiming old white racists were voting multiple times and their dead relatives votes were being counted and President Obama himself was pushing these claims and refusing to start the transition of power to Trump who was officially called the winner. Obama and Hillary then spent nearly two months with numerous press conferences challenging the election results in multiple States, filed nearly 70 lawsuits with virtually all of them being thrown out for lack of evidence. And Obama was tweeting almost daily about the huge fraud committed by Republicans and how they were trying to destroy America. Then a close advisor of Obama's got in contact with two left wing extremist militia groups and coordinated with them to come to Washington for an upcoming rally before the election certification.
Then on January 6th, 2017 President Obama and Hillary Clinton held a "Stop the Steal" rally a few blocks from the Capital where the VP Biden was about to certify the election results and Obama and his attorneys were pressuring Biden privately and publicly to reject the electors and accept fake electors giving the win to Hillary. At the rally Obama and Hillary whip the liberal crowd into a frenzy, a crowd they knew to be armed, and told them to march to the Capital to "Stop the Steal" and told them "We fight like hell. And if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore,". He even tells them that he and Hillary will be joining them at the Capital to stop the certification.
Then, after the rally, the large armed crowd flying Hillary and Obama flags marches to the capital and begins attacking capital police, beating them with flag poles, seriously injuring over 150 officers, breaking into the capital building, vandalizing the building and interior, breaking through doors, chasing, with zip ties in hand, legislators who were planning to certify Trumps 2016 election victory, calling to hang Joe Biden for refusing to stop the election certification calling him a traitor even though he was Obama's VP, the insurrectionists coming within 40 ft of a fleeing VP and his secret service detail who were so fearful for their lives some called home to say their goodbyes.
During this attack President Obama was in the white house dining room watching the live footage of the chaos and violence being caused by his and Hillary's supporters and as everyone is desperately trying to get him to come out and tell the crowd to stop and leave the capital and allow the peaceful transfer of power he waits for over 3 hours apparently hoping that his supporters/insurrectionists he had incited can get the job done and stop the certification of Trumps election win. Then after 3 hours, when its clear the attempted insurrection had failed, Obama comes out in a video to tell the crowd to go home, but that he understands their pain and that they are good people that he loves them.
Is there really any conservative Republican who wouldn't be demanding both Obama and Hillary's arrest if those were the facts presented? Would any of them be questioning whether a crime had been committed? Or at the very minimum a complete and utter dereliction of duty. Would any of them not be calling that an attempted insurrection perpetrated by leftist Democrats? Would any of them be criticizing the committee investigating it claiming there should be more pro-Obama legislators invited so they can attempt to muddy the process and hinder the investigation with constant complaints and a cooked up alternate narrative that the Obama attorneys come up with to try and pin the blame on a handful of left wing extremists like ANTIFA and claim Obama had nothing to do with it and that it wasn't really his responsibility to keep the capital safe even though he was the sitting President at the time of the attack and the attackers were flying "Obama" flags as they beat capital police unconscious? Really?
If any right wing conservative has even an atom of honesty left in them they know how they would have reacted to those facts. But lets be honest, facts don't matter to some in this deeply partisan divided America, some are likely disappointed that the insurrection failed. Thankfully, facts and reality do still matter to many, even republicans like Liz Cheney, but to those who have been so convinced of their own righteousness and so convinced of their opponents evil and corruption, facts and reality aren't worth any more than the dirt on their shoes and would likely only lead to headaches in the minds of the poorly educated and easily indoctrinated right wing religious conservatives.
I think few right wing religious conservatives accept any news anymore that doesn't come from their extreme rightwing biased sources which is how they can live in such a backwards alternate universe where clearly being a hypocrite is seen as a good things as long as they see it as a win for their side of the culture war. With liberals and progressives, they have the mostly non-partisan news (AP, Reuters, BBC, PBS) and their more leftwing partisan opinion news like MSNBC and CNN. With right wing religious conservatives, they accuse the mostly non-partisan news outlets of being far left extremist 'MSM' and thus they reject pretty much anything left of Fox News which has become their 'most moderate' source of news even though it's clearly miles right of center.
If this were a teeter totter you'd have the majority of Americans (60%+) spread pretty evenly from just right of center all the way to extremist left. Then you'd have this pile of about 36-40% of Americans way out on the right well past the middle point between center and right wing extremist that have barricaded themselves away from any and all information and media that doesn't continually reinforce their right wing ideology and religious conservative universe. Anything that doesn't make them out to be the heroes and demonize their mortal enemies, the supposedly godless secularist liberals and progressives, is considered "fake news" and rejected out of hand.
Well hopefully there are still some on the right that can be reasoned with by putting the facts in a context they could imagine. Perhaps that would trigger some epiphany, but you're probably right, those that don't live in reality anymore simply aren't capable of thinking, rationalizing and reasoning for themselves, they are compelled like a mindless drone to support their Orange Hulk and can but give one brainless response to facts and reality, "Trump Smash!".
McConnell was the mnjority leader and I believe he, too was in dereliction of duty to protect the Capitol, just like Pelosi.
At this late date, anyone who still thinks that the Speaker of the House or the Majority leader of the Senate are responsible for protecting the Capitol is willfully ignorant.
Here We Go, AGAIN!
“…and the popcorn is popped.”
Yup. All the phony indignation and overly dramatic expression of a high school play.
No shit
Are the one hundred fifty police officers injured Jan 6th phonies?
#45 thought Barr was his consigliere and the DOJ his own firm of attorneys.
We await the promised new and "compelling" evidence of criminal conduct by Donald Trump
Donald Trump piddled while The US Capital was under siege...
Again is being irresponsibly late to act a crime?
It is when you are president and the people are there at your request
How long would you watch someone drown before helping?
Would an hour be too long? Two hours? What about three?
That's not an answer. Is an irresponsible action a crime?
What is that crime called?
Why hasn't Garland acted on it. After all the President asked all those people to be there. Where's the indictment for whatever that's called?
So it's the Nero crime?
Where do I find that?
Just about everything trumpturd has done prior to this was/is a crime.
But everything from when he lost bigly in November with his months long incitement leading up to (and inside planning of 1/6/21) he incited his domestic terrorist mobs on to the Capitol where he watched it all unfold from the White House for hours (while watching and rewinding and re-watching the violent mobs he incited - knowing that they had weapons - yet 'weren't there to hurt me') - yet did nothing until hours later - when he told his domestic terrorist mobs that they were special and that they loved them.
I don't call that 'being irresponsibly late to act on a crime' I call that treason/sedition.
He's just lucky his final sentence won't be execution before a firing squad.
For Fucks' Sake.
Dereliction of Duty, Insurrection, treason.... I dunno, ask the AG. He said the other day that they want to get this right: dotted t's and crossed eyes or some such
Duhhhhhhhhhhhhh. Gotta Scooby snack?
Your entire post was about an entirely different event and was not related to the subject at hand.
We can easily presume that the government will want to ensure they have the best possible case before they indict Trump. How much time is that supposed to take in your expert opinion?
Next, in your expert opinion, what are all the factors Garland must consider with respect to timing of an indictment and then criminal trial of a PotUS for the first time in our history? How do these factors affect the timetable?
Yes, HERE is what Biden requested that day:
What is your issue with that request? Please be specific.
This is what your "right and necessary" snippet looks like in the adult world:
There's much more to Biden's statement but I doubt you'd want to read it because it doesn't bolster your agenda.
What's not okay about the above quote? Again, be specific.
What didn't you understand about the statements I quoted?
Perhaps if you had invested the time to read his whole statement, your question would be answered.
Now are you going to answer my questions?
Actually, YOU are the one who pretended to know what Biden was thinking.
I made no such claim.
YOU stated:
You claim to know what Biden was 'advocating' for, yet you had to mischaracterize what he said to do it.
Now, do you have any answers to my questions or are you just trolling?
If not a crime, most certainly a very good reason to never re-elect him again. Although there were plenty of reasons to come to that conclusion before his first election!
Ha ha ha ha ha.....giggle.
[deleted]
Biden was not advocating for violence. Period. But some people just cannot portray any action by Biden as being good or decent because they have a partisan axe to grind.
I feel that you offer about negative 100% credulity to any conversation.
You misrepresent the most simple of facts and statements and try to smear the objects of your dissatisfaction with lies and half truths [deleted]
[Fuck off.]
Any thinking member of this forum can see for themselves that claim is bullshit.
I haven't asked you to 'explain' a fucking thing to me.
Here are the 3 questions I asked:
That illustrates that it is YOU who either can't read or are intentionally misrepresenting what I posted. Which is it?
Oh and BTFW, you use of quotation marks is also intentionally misleading.
Care to go for your 3rd strike?
Oh hell, there's 2 more questions you won't answer.
Part of this thread was removed for no value.
It can be but that is not the case is it?
We are talking about inaction being a crime.
Withholding medical care or nutrition is a criminal act.
Failure to report a crime or abuse of a child or elder is a crime.
Failure to fulfill a legal duty to act is a crime.
Failure for a government official to violate their oath to the Constitution
violates the "take care" clause of the Constitution to faithfully execute
the Law.
My god. He tried to overthrow the republic. That's the highest of high crimes.
Where's Garland and the indictment?
Pat's video is from just a day ago.
But all of your comrades claim it is obvious. And don't forget what we learned via the Sussman trial: All Garland has to do is bring charges of any kind against Trump to a DC jury and he will have a conviction. What Garland fears is that such a conviction would be overturned on appeal, thus exposing the DOJ as BIASED & CORRUPT in a case involving a former President being investigated by the opposition party.
But you said he tried to overthrow the Republic.
That would be a slam dunk.
So maybe that would be a hard sell?
Take a few minutes and think it over.
Where's John Durham and the promises of multiple indictments?
Still chasing McCabe, Hillary or Comey? Obama?
Durham convicted a lowly FBI lawyer of altering an official internal document. Clinesmith received probation and community service...
Sussman walked...
Is this an example of your lessons on truth and ethics Vic?
Seriously, HOW does Sussman's acquittal teach us that Garland will get a conviction against Trump. Be specific.
[deleted]
You have 3 so far.
What does it have to do with Garland not prosecuting Trump?
You currently have at least three active articles/seeds trending on the FP yet you want to talk about the vote count of a comment I posted a week ago ?
Again, one slap on the wrist for Clinesmith, Sussman acquitted and another lying charge against a foreign national after three years?
I repeat, why the extraordinary patience with Durham but not Garland?
It just highlights your self advertised biases.
You promised us readers that Durham would bring down the high and mighty of the
Democratic party for high crimes, not some petty office workers.
I guess it's a rule violation. Who knew?
We're still waiting on those Durham indictments on the entire Obama administration
Now their only deflection is Hunter Biden
Not to mention the fact that there is a plethora of questions that he has avoided right here in this seed.
Well then, by your standard, Garland has over 700 indictments after only 18 months.
When was that promised and who promised it Vic?
First lie. “Heavily armed”. Second, “savagely beating and killing law enforcement officers”
clown show alert!!!
Then how do you figure 150 Capital Police sustained serious injuries?
How many were fucking killed? Don't be a fool on your own thread/seed. He said killed FFS.
So, merely "Attempting to kill" would have been fine by you?
But was "killing law enforcement officers" the term?
No because that would be bullshit too. If they'd have wanted to, unfortunately , it may have happened. They were a bunch of pissed off dumbasses. PERIOD.
Haven't you seen any of the videos of the physical attacks on the Capitol police officers? Are you unaware that 140 officers were injured by the rioters on January 6th? They were savagely beaten.
The attempt was fine. As long as they didn't actually kill them.
"Blue Lives Matter" until those "blue lives" are going against something they believe in.
Yes, very hypocrticial
They feel the same way about the attempted coup - they didn't actually get away with it - so no harm done - according to the trumpturd enablers/supporters.
This “committee” was supposed to be about finding the cause to make sure it doesn’t happen again. And again, it’s all fucking Trump and NOT the incompetent law enforcement of the capital to be fucking prepared
Trump caused it. Trump summoned the mob and directed them to storm the Capital to "Stop The Steal"! It was a multi-part conspiracy!
That's what was in his mind, you mean?
You really should be paying closer attention to the hearings!
Don't give a flying fuck. That is NOT what this was purported to be about. It's about not letting it happen again. And the only thing they are trying to stop, is Trump from running again. PERIOD. Where is the goddamned questioning of the preparedness? If that had been present, the shit would not NEARLY have hit the fan as it did. Use your head woman.
It is plain you don't give a fuck about Trump's insurrection!
It's actions that will get the criminal complaint.
That would be a criminal act and you haven't proved it!
He and everyone who planned it need to be gone. All those who voted to overturn the election included. From trumpturd on down.
Stephen Miller and others planned all this prior (Ginni Thomas husband, I mean wife, of Token Thomas included)
Adam Schiff has promised that "what you will see on Thursday will be significant."
Was what you saw insignificant Vic?
We all know that Trump took a long time in calling for his supporters to leave the Capitol.
The question: is the failure to act promptly and responsibly a criminal act ?
WHY is that the question Vic? Jim insists it's all about making sure it doesn't happen again, you're insisting that it's all about proving a 'criminal act'. Which is it?
When the Chair said at the outset that these facts are "uncontested" it highlights the fact that there aren't any members present who would contest them.
You cannot contest what everyone saw themselves!
You mean he is only talking about the riot? What about everything else that's being said?
That is what all these republican witnesses are testifying about!
What they are saying could be contested if McCarty's choices were placed.
No, the witnesses tonight were all inside the WH on Jan 6th.
And that makes them immune from questions?
Do you find the witnesses tonight truthful and trustworthy?
No. They seem to be answering just fine.
You mean the chosen snippets from the taped depositions? If Roy Cohn were alive, I'm sure he'd be very impressed with that!
No, I am talking about the Republican witnesses' testimony!
I can't believe he brought up that mob lawyer/former friend of trumpturd
I hate phones. Apparently, it is called "The Trial" by Pink Floyd
It's the next day Vic.
One of the many members of Trump's administration has to have come forward to refute what was said last night right? Maybe one of those whose video was used as evidence said something to contest the assertions made in last night's hearing.
With your expertise with RW sources, you should have no problem posting some facts that can contest last night's testimony.
Please proceed.
Oh and I remind you again, McCarthy assigned Rep. Banks to do an independent investigation. Surely Banks has evidence that contests last night's testimony.
We can count on Banks to set the record straight, right?
Did Adam Kinzinger say that he thinks it’s a “smoking gun” that Trump watched TV during the January 6 Capitol incursion?
Well shit then I'm complacent too...................damn. Give me some AOC Smollett invisible handcuffs and fine me the same $35.00
Devil,where art thou?
MILLIONS of us are complacent. They can just email me my subpoena. I MIGHT show up. I MIGHT be as honest as the committee members.
Two Words - Steve Bannon...
And that has to do with.....?
Bannon is GUILTY of Contempt of Congress for your attitude!
More projecting, deflecting, denying, and lying.
[Deleted]
See how the poster at 9.1.6 is a fan of mine.
And again, that has to do with....? Oh. That's right it's a deflection. it has NOTHING to do with a goddamn thing I said.
Pay no mind to JFNC or DOTW
They are the ones who project, deflect, deny, and lie.
Have you ever cited any specific projection, deflection, denial or lie that I've written - no. Baseless accusations that you copy n 'paste is what your good at.
60 seconds? She's full of shit
I hope they have more than Trump waited 187 minutes to act. They have us all excited about a criminal act.
It took until well after midnight for Congress to reconvene and to complete their Constitutional duties after Trump's mob stormed the United States Capital in a violent insurrection Jan 6th, 2020!
What? Only 187 minutes? On. Gosh, that's no time at all when you are rooting for them.
If it's not criminal to foment an insurrection... and we think driving drunk is a big deal, people on Cluster-Trumps level play for the big money....
Criminal Acts? Bannon is GUILTY and Michael Sussman innocent!
Word just handed down. This will not be the final hearings. More will come in September - just before midterms.
Right from the horses mouth
Good thing Merrick Garland is a lifelong old school Republican, Huh?
Is that why both Obama & Biden chose him?
Do you deny that Merrick Garland is a lifelong Republican?
So what?
Tucker Carlson is a democrat.
You love him now, right?
Tucker Carlson is about as far right wing as anybody can get.
He figured he could make more money lying to right wingers than to dems.
A final fatal bleeding grasp to distract from the shitty way Democrats have been running the country.
Don't they realize how obvious it all is?
That's what happens when you let your emotions override common sense and logic. We've been watching it happen since 2016.
[deleted]
He put a target on his own VP's back? Drama Queens one and all. Oh, that's right. These are the same people that swore to God that Sarah Palin putting a target on Arizona was responsible for Gabby Giffords getting shot.
Well, I guess that is better than holding a paper plate over your ass and saying "Hey, Baby. Watch this "
And this woman is saying what he SHOULD HAVE done. LMMFAO
That's still not getting us to criminality
Ex fucking zactly
I'm very disappointed.
Oh look another "Republican."
Steve Bannon is GUILTY and Michael Sussman is INNOCENT!
The trolling is running wild on this seed.
Now it is. Thanks for chiming in
I have questions, starting with post 7.
Nice to hear from you. I'm glad they took a recess so all the eyes could come unglued from the tv sets.
You're not going to get an answer to that because in reality NO it is not a crime. But that won't stop them from setting their hair on fire and freaking out about it.
No, "trolling" implies some level of intelligence. Anxiety-ridden blathering is more like it.
As the insults arrive, I depart.
I've seen enough.
Have a good night.
[Deleted]
My comment to John was general in nature [Deleted]
You brought them.
[If John has a complaint about trolling, he would do well to flag it.]
[Deleted]
Ensure the security of the capital grounds? LMMFA off. That belongs to the capital police and sergeant at arms not the PotUS
A President's oath/duty is to support and defend The Constitution!
"Hmnmmmn. I am President. I told these people to be here. Gosh! I wonder why? "
"Ohhhhhhh,that's right! "
If he can't even secure the Capitol grounds.... Well, that doesn't sound good
What organization is responsible for securing the Capital grounds, what branch of government do they belong to and who do they report to?
In going thru this site, I cannot find mention of the Executive Branch. Perhaps you can find it.
The PotUS is the head of government. Ultimately he is responsible for the workings of the government. If the PotUS is informed that the US capitol is under siege, do you expect him to say:
Well, gee, I do not see capitol security or 'talking down my supporters' as part of my job description so I will just ignore this.
In reality, Snuffy, in government and in business (and elsewhere even) authority and responsibility are delegated down the chain but those who do the delegating remain ultimately responsible and ultimately hold the authority to act.
So if something in your realm of authority is not being addressed it is ultimately up to you to ensure that it is. 'The buck stops here' and all that.
In this case Trump was directly informed of the violence and criminal activity and was directly informed that it was his supporters engaging in this bad behavior and was pleaded, repeatedly, by advisors, family and 'friends' to act yet he did not tell them to go home until 187 minutes into the insurrection.
Oh Recess!
Chaney says they have new info, but we have to wait until September.
[removed]
I have a question for all the right wingers currently polluting this seed. Trump watched the riot on television, knew it had turned violent, and yet did nothing , even though he was being asked repeatedly to send a messsage to his followers to ask them to leave the capitol. Didnt Trump have a responsibilty, as president, to do everything he could to end the attck on the capitol?
There is a tweet that Trump made at 2:25, well after it was clear a riot was taking place and the rioters were trying to breach the congressional chambers.
Trump sent that tweet , which was seen by thousands of the rioters, even though he knew that Mike Pence was in danger at that moment. This is blatant dereliction of duty.
[Deleted]
[Deleted]
But, John, then his supporters wouldn't have had the chance to succeed in overturning the legitimate election results. ....
For hours Trump continued to diddle and to cheer on His Mob...
Instead of telling His Mob that He summoned and He let loose to leave Trump Tweeted "Stay peaceful" and "Remain peaceful". Get It?
Bullshit. He cheered/communicated nothing for over three hours. Isn't that the narrative? How can you transmit cheering on while sitting on your ass and not saying a damned thing?
This is still a LOT of hearsay...............................
That is not correct. At 2:24 p.m., while the riot was going on, Trump tweeted his famous tweet where he stated: "Pence didn't have the courage to do what should have been done..." That tweet can be seen as an attempt to further incite the mob.
Are Trump's tweets and emails and phone calls and all the eye witness testimony hearsay? No, not by any definitions I know of!
See 18.2.
That's exactly what it was after he had incited his domestic terrorist mobs for months
Actually NO, that isn't the 'narrative' Jim. If you had bothered to watch the hearing, you would know that Trump was tweeting during that time.
Hell, anyone that doesn't know that Trump sent the following tweet is willfully ignorant:
14 minutes later, Trump tweeted this:
14 minutes after that, Trump tweeted this:
Trump's next tweet was 74 minutes later and it was his video.
THAT is the narrative Jim.
A new video from the January 6 panel shows Trump's anger and frustration while recording a message.
The recording from January 7, 2021, showed Trump banging on the podium and gesturing angrily.
He was also heard debating with his daughter Ivanka about the content of the nationwide address.
A series of video clips shown by House committee investigating the Capitol riot gave shocking insight into former President Donald Trump's behavior behind the scenes.
The video from January 7 last year — around 24 hours after rioters swarmed the Capitol in an effort to overturn the election — was played during the January 6 panel's eighth public hearing on Thursday.
However, this was but one of multiple takes Trump went through to record his nationwide address. Right after the first pause, Trump appeared to signal for a do-over.
In the second video shown by the panel, Trump stopped in the middle of recording after appearing to struggle with disavowing the violence during the riot.
"You can't say that," Trump remarked, highlighting the phrase "you broke the law," which was presumably displayed on the teleprompter at the time.
"I'm not gonna — I already said 'you will pay,'" he said in the clip.
In another video, the former president was seen banging on the podium in frustration after failing to say the word "defiled."
"Demonstraters who infiltrated the Capitol — have defied the seat — it's defiled, right?" Trump said. "See, I can't see it very well. Ok. I'll do this! I'm gonna do this. Let's go."
In the fourth clip played by the panel, Trump paused partway through his address and began debating the language with his daughter Ivanka. He refused to say four words suggested by aides: "The election is over."
Trump read off the teleprompter: "But this election is now over. Congress has certified the results."
He then paused and backpedaled.
"I don't want to say the election is over," Trump said. "I just want to say Congress certified the results announcing the election is over, OK?"
His daughter Ivanka was then heard prompting him: "But, Congress has certified…"
"Now — I didn't say over — Go to the paragraph before," Trump said.
The panel's fifth video clip showed Trump flapping his arms and puffing up his chest. This time, however, he stumbled on the word "yesterday."
"I wanna begin by addressing the heinous attack yesterday," Trump said, before stopping again.
"Yesterday's a hard word for me," he commented.
"Just take it out," Ivanka said.
"Good, take the word 'yesterday' out. Cause, it doesn't work with — the heinous attack — on our country. Say, 'on our country.' Wanna say that?" he said.
"No, keep it," Ivanka said in the video.
In the committee's sixth clip, Trump grimaced while attempting to make it through a line stating that his goal was to "ensure the integrity of the vote." And in the following video, he slammed the podium in frustration after failing to get through the same line again.
The former President eventually did make it through the entire speech, which ended up being a two-and-a-half minute address .
The panel also showed two clips of Trump struggling to make it through a speech in the Rose Garden on January 6. According to testimonies from former Trump staffers, Trump had gone off-script when he called the Capitol protesters "very special" while asking them to "go home."
Trump has repeatedly insulted Biden's mental faculties with his campaign ads , calling him "sleepy Joe" and baselessly accusing him of using performance-enhancing drugs on the campaign trail.
The January 6 committee has played testimony of several former Trump staffers recounting his unhinged behavior before, during, and after the Capitol riot.
For instance, former Trump White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson testified that Trump had once thrown his lunch against the wall in a fit of anger. She also said that Trump had a physical altercation with a Secret Service agent after his request to visit the Capitol during the riot was denied.
Trump has denied both claims, saying that hurling his food in anger was "not my thing" and that it would have been very hard for him to attack a Secret Service agent because they can "lift 350 pounds."
Trump's post-presidential press office did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Insider.
Read the original article on Business Insider
Come on Jim.
You claimed that Trump didn't say a damn thing. I posted his tweets from that time period.
Are you still claiming it's a LOT of heresay?
The spell is still upon them.
It has not been broken.
The dark lands are not bright.
The Wraith screams his defiance
Still holding many tight.
All of you stupid fucking assholes who deny the graveness of January 6th are the ones Still stupidly held tight. Release yourselves from the thrall and let the truth set you free.
Or else....
Two of our fellow NTers from the once upon a time republican narrative don't really give a shyte if Donald goes down. In fact, they would like nothing more. That they are throwing slop into the wind is more likely out of a now decades old Skinner Box than anything else. Defending Trump must be a tiresome task and especially so when it involves cheering some "RINO" nonsense whenever one of them gets unceremoniously tossed under the proverbial thrump-a-thrump.
This is vastly worse than Watergate. As usual, you can see in real time how many Trump supporters and voters and mouthpieces and propagandists are pivoting their focus on other topics to deflect the base onto something else.
Perpetual blame gaming, perpetual victimhood, perpetual excuses and perpetual avoidance of any responsibility for the likes of Nixon, or Bush or Trump. Not their fault for standing by their man or voting for them or carrying their baggage?
They are never, ever, ever going to admit any wrong for believing lies, spreading lies, or avoiding their votes for lies and liars.
All that is going to happen is the non-stop pivot to other topics and rage baiting as a deflection and every single solitary last Republican voter will do nothing but for all eternity check that "R" box at the ballot box no matter what lie or bad policy is being pushed on them.
They are a lost cause and will always vote party line regardless.
[Deleted]
I do not want to hear any more bitching from you when I post memes!
No, see....
My memes are humorous.......and true,
Yours?
Just dumb
To deem the evidence presented by these hearings to be a nothing burger is staggering. After all, one can illustrate the insanity of this using only evidence from the last session which shows that Trump knew his supporters were engaging in an armed breaking & entering of the US Capitol building and he refused all the pleas from advisors, family and friends to step in until 187 minutes after it started.
How can anyone deem it a 'nothing burger' for a PotUS to literally refuse to stop an insurrection of the US Capitol??
The question ... 'Is it a dereliction of duty and violation of the oath of office for a CiC/PotUS to refuse to take any action to curtail an insurrection of the US Capitol?' ... is one that (prior to Trump's Big Lie campaign) one would expect everyone to answer: 'of course'.
Not in Trump-land — an alternate reality where this (and much more) is collectively a nothing burger.
We, this is an easy answer.
It's not Trump's job to stop a riot, especially one he did not instigate. It's not his fault a bunch of idiots did what they did. Bottom line is you hold THEM accountable for their actions, not Trump. It was the Capitol police. Because Pelosi failed to get National Guard there to protect the Capitol, much blame lies with her.
Most evidence shows Trump called for a safe and peaceful protest and memos from the Pentagon shows even Milley admitted Trump ordered the Capitol to stay secure and safe. Even if he went on TV to tell the idiots to stop right away, how many of them would know it because they were outside or in the Capitol?
Best guess?
Zero
Like I mentioned in a previous post.
When a leftist can show that another prominent leftist called for the condemnation of any riot in Summer of 2020 within a 187 minutes, and told THOSE idiots to stop doing what they were doing, even in federal buildings in Oregon, then I will condemn Trump for not doing anything within the 187 minutes.
You leftists can't have it both ways.
You reactionaries like to pretend that Trump didn't instigate the January 6th insurrection. That's a pathetic joke. No one with more than half a brain believes the reactionary B.S
The phony propaganda that "Trump didn't do anything for 187 minutes" is more crap. The facts show that he continued to incite his storm troopers during the riot.
You reactionaries can B.S. yourselves, but no one else is buying the reactionary fraud.
Interesting. The Capitol of the USA is attacked by an armed mob who break and enter the premises and disrupt the proceedings. This mob was told by Trump to march on the Capitol. Yet you actually argue that the president of the USA, the CiC, the person who is the head of government should not be asked to speak to his supporters and tell them to stop the insurrection because it is 'not his job'.
This is your defense of Trump? You think this makes any sense? That anyone would be persuaded by such nonsense?
Advisors, family and 'friends' pleaded with Trump to take action. He could have been on national media within minutes of deciding to do so. He had the most powerful megaphone on the planet and was the top authority in government — the highest political office in our government ... the place where the buck stops.
Yet you claim it was not his job? How does one even attempt to reason with such a distorted understanding of reality?
So your second pathetic defense for Trump is that nobody would have listened to the PotUS when he tells his supporters to cease and desist. They will listen to him when he makes an outrageous lie that the election was rigged, that he won, that their votes were disenfranchised, that Pence was doing something wrong, etc. but all of a sudden they will ignore his commands to leave??
And now we have the third utterly stupid point. You will condemn Trump for his failure, but only if you get someone to make a political concession? Such a stark admission of pure partisan blindness.
“You leftists can't have it both ways.”
Interesting take.
So you are equating any and all ‘leftists’ and your perceived lack of condemnation with the POTUS and his 187 minutes of infamy? That is quite the conflation, obfuscation, and deliberate deflection.
You apologists can’t have it any ways.
This whole post reeks of far left biases.
Nowhere am I defending Trump, you seem to want to claim that of everyone that does not think and bleet as you do.
I never said no one would listen to him if he went on tv. Of course, you being a far leftist, are being disingenuous with your accusations. Read the post again, as I can't help if you are unable to understand.
Also, you, being a far leftist, immediately ignore that Rump told his supporters to go peacefully to the Capitol. We understand that one little sentence blows away the group think of other far leftists.
Once again, when a high profile leftist such condemn the riots, murder, arson that happened during the 2020 summer, then I will condemn Trump for his 197 minute inaction.
The rest of your blather is not work responding to.
Read my post [Deleted] above. The same applies to you.
If you think TiG is far left you must be off the rail far right!
What is really sad is the sheer stupidity in comparing the two events, like they were the same, or about the same things.
Willful ignorance.
Somehow he thinks calling someone 'far left' is an insult.
I take that as a point of pride as it puts me in a camp so far away from these magats that they can only see poodle skirts and roller-skates with keys...
For those who know how to think, they, too, would feel the same.
No one with half a brain cell would consider themselves far left.
No, I am right on the money, like always. Most of those that lean left on here are truly leaning to the far left. Their posts prove it. We don't have to accuse anything.
So I guess it takes absolutely zero brain cells to be a magat.
Gee, Ender, when you post stupid shit, you don't play around, do you.
Hey, I follow the amount of stupid shit posted before me. Don't like the replies to stupid shit, don't post stupid shit.
Excusing Trump for not acting is defending Trump. Who could possibly not see that? Good grief man have you no shame?
And to further solidify your lack of credibility we have the above. Although you probably think Cheney is a far leftist too ... "I see leftists everywhere...". Suffice it to say, your comments are absurd.
I doubt you are fooling anyone by refusing to deal with what I wrote and instead dismissing it as 'blather' as you run away attempting to hurl insults.
I think that is part of it, JBB. The other part, the main part, is that he is engaging in childish name-calling. He knows that I find it offensive to label me as a leftist (or a rightie for that matter) so he is striking out at me in lieu of being able to offer a cogent, mature rebuttal.
It is like a child who has no rebuttal and thus calls his opponent a poo poo head and then leaves.
Given I am not 'far left' I find it offensive. But I also consider the source. Sometimes the offensiveness does not materialize because I am more entertained by the utter ridiculousness of a comment and just cannot bring myself to give the author any credibility or respect.
I don't think it is offensive. I would rather be called left than a today's right.
I am not 'far' left yet to some of these people, anyone that goes against their idiotic ideas is a leftist.
What the hell do you think would happen if he said anything?
Absolutely nothing. The idiots that rioted on the Capitol did what they did because they wanted to, not because Trump told them to.
Now, post an exact quote of Trump telling those idiots to ravage the Capitol.
I already know the answer. You won't because you can't.
By meme with Cheney and the nothingburger?
Truer now than it was an hour ago,
BTW...By your posts and hatred of anyone not in lock step to loon leftists ideas, you have been fully identified as a far leftist. Not our fault you don't see it.
You really should take your own advice.
Considering I never gave out any....
meh, from their perspective anybody 1 degree to the left of trump is far left...
Well, you did, but you be you.
The funny thing is, I wouldn't even consider donald a right winger.
He is a con man that would pretend to be anything to further himself (and dumb assholes follow him without question).
Like with him courting the religious right. He is in no way a religious person yet he panders to them and tells them what they want to hear and they call him God.
Same with deep conservatives. All one has to do is say what they want to hear and they jump all over it, no questions asked...
Show me where I gave anyone advice. Point it out.
Another stupid question. Trump told them to march on the capitol. If Trump told them to stop there would be an immediate group (probably the majority) that would stop as soon as they heard him. Others will take more time. Some might not stop no matter what.
Your claim is that Trump telling them to stop would accomplish nothing. Magically the Trump supporters who believe everything the liar states will all suddenly wake up and ignore him? Give us all a break with such utter nonsense.
What a stupid demand; I have not claimed Trump told them to ravage the capitol. Get a grip.
Well of course not, Trump never said that and I never said that he did. Think, man. I could just as easily tell you to deliver a quote where Barr states that he never told Trump that his claims were bullshit. You won't because you can't. But I would never do that because you never claimed otherwise.
See how this works? Wait for someone to make a claim before demanding they evidence same.
Is it official now bugsy? Such a pathetic act of futility.
"Don't like the replies to stupid shit, don't post stupid shit."
Is this not you in 24.2.14? Looks like advice to me
Maybe a doppelganger?
I agree, this con man has no ideology, religion or philosophy beyond self-enrichment and self-aggrandizement.
Just a long way to say I am correct.
Your belief is that Trump told those idiots to march on the Capitol. That is correct, however, you keep babbling on that Trump was the cause of these same idiots to riot inside the Capitol.
THAT is where you are seriously wrong, and where your biases start.
Now, to repeat something that has been asked of you repeatedly.
Why has Garland not filed charges against Trump? I know you think he is just taking his time, but the end game of loons on left is to get Donald at all costs. If he is indicted on anything, a loon left jury in DC will easily convict him, so why not just do it. They will not need evidence. Just the fact that he is Donald Trump would be enough for them.
BTW...your little friends on here are not helping you one bit. Might want to tell them to scurry off.
He does, but that does not mean he should be held responsible for a bunch of grown assed adults who made their choices and need to live with them.
Those who hate Trump simply because he is Trump can't seem to get that through their thick skulls.
So you think my comment means: "What the hell do you think would happen if he [Trump] said anything? Absolutely nothing."? Desperate much? Hint: you are demonstrably wrong.
Well I have not actually stated that here, but the evidence does indeed indicate that Trump is culpable ... that his words encouraged his supporters to do what they did. I do not think anyone has suggested that Trump wanted his supporters to literally break and enter the capitol, but one would have to be truly blind to not recognize that he absolutely inspired them to fight for what is right. There is video proof of supporters stating that they engaged in their activities because that is what they thought Trump wanted. So, in summary, regardless of Trump's intent, the evidence thus far suggests that his words were a critical component of the insurrection.
Good grief, you really need to find a new question. Nobody knows except Garland.
I do not know why. I can only speculate. In response to stupid questions like yours, I have speculated. That is the best I can offer.
So what are you trying to say ... that Trump really is innocent ... that Garland does not feel he has a strong case?
I recommend you ease back on your trolling a tad.
Look, it is well known that your mind is made up that Trump is guilty of everything under the sun...just because his name is Donald Trump. Nothing will ever change that thought process.
The problem is your little last resort to get Trump called the January 6 commission has absolutely nothing on him.
It is well known that those on the commission made up their minds, like you, that Trump was guilty, even before the hearings started. I understand they are not a trial, but by not letting dissenting voices that have come forward speak publicly, and edit their recorded testimony to make it look like they said something they did not, shows the hatred of Trump and has nothing to do with the actual reason for the failure of the security of the Capitol.
Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer.
You have already demonstrated that you are no authority on how I think and what I believe. Cut the personal crap and try to make an argument.
That is really an incredible thing for someone to write.
You know bugsy, it was obvious before the hearings started that Trump engaged in a two month con-job where he lied to the world that the US electoral system was rigged and that his supporters were disenfranchised. It was also known that Trump did not tell his supporters to go home until hours after the insurrection started and that he knew that they had broken and entered the building. The committee is providing testimony that fleshes this out. The question really is how you could possibly not see this.
You have the option to evaluate each under-oath testimony by high-ranking, connected Republicans who have compromised their careers by testifying. You can factor in that there is likely other evidence that would be presented by a Trump defense team, etc. Why would you reject these testimonies and not include them into your base of working facts?
Reactionaries blame Schumer because on January 6th he was... the Senate MINORITY Leader. Think about that one.
Bug is never correct and is making shit up. I pay no attention to his deflections and dog whistles
Credibility?
That was never in question. There is absolutely ZERO
That one just makes up shit and lies and insults.
The arrogance and ignorance is trumpturdian in its magnitude
Agree.
Yea I admit I made a mistake with that one.
McConnell was the mnjority leader and I believe he, too was in dereliction of duty to protect the Capitol, just like Pelosi.
They wanted the riot to happen/
But yet you respond to almost all of them.
Woof woof
Please stop PNing me. I have told you several times [deleted] is not my type.
Why do you want to date me????
[removed]
So let's take all the facts that the January 6th commission has revealed and just flip the script.
What if it had been Hillary Clinton in 2016 that refused to concede and continued to claim that the election was stolen and claimed widespread voter fraud (without evidence) claiming old white racists were voting multiple times and their dead relatives votes were being counted and President Obama himself was pushing these claims and refusing to start the transition of power to Trump who was officially called the winner. Obama and Hillary then spent nearly two months with numerous press conferences challenging the election results in multiple States, filed nearly 70 lawsuits with virtually all of them being thrown out for lack of evidence. And Obama was tweeting almost daily about the huge fraud committed by Republicans and how they were trying to destroy America. Then a close advisor of Obama's got in contact with two left wing extremist militia groups and coordinated with them to come to Washington for an upcoming rally before the election certification.
Then on January 6th, 2017 President Obama and Hillary Clinton held a "Stop the Steal" rally a few blocks from the Capital where the VP Biden was about to certify the election results and Obama and his attorneys were pressuring Biden privately and publicly to reject the electors and accept fake electors giving the win to Hillary. At the rally Obama and Hillary whip the liberal crowd into a frenzy, a crowd they knew to be armed, and told them to march to the Capital to "Stop the Steal" and told them "We fight like hell. And if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore,". He even tells them that he and Hillary will be joining them at the Capital to stop the certification.
Then, after the rally, the large armed crowd flying Hillary and Obama flags marches to the capital and begins attacking capital police, beating them with flag poles, seriously injuring over 150 officers, breaking into the capital building, vandalizing the building and interior, breaking through doors, chasing, with zip ties in hand, legislators who were planning to certify Trumps 2016 election victory, calling to hang Joe Biden for refusing to stop the election certification calling him a traitor even though he was Obama's VP, the insurrectionists coming within 40 ft of a fleeing VP and his secret service detail who were so fearful for their lives some called home to say their goodbyes.
During this attack President Obama was in the white house dining room watching the live footage of the chaos and violence being caused by his and Hillary's supporters and as everyone is desperately trying to get him to come out and tell the crowd to stop and leave the capital and allow the peaceful transfer of power he waits for over 3 hours apparently hoping that his supporters/insurrectionists he had incited can get the job done and stop the certification of Trumps election win. Then after 3 hours, when its clear the attempted insurrection had failed, Obama comes out in a video to tell the crowd to go home, but that he understands their pain and that they are good people that he loves them.
Is there really any conservative Republican who wouldn't be demanding both Obama and Hillary's arrest if those were the facts presented? Would any of them be questioning whether a crime had been committed? Or at the very minimum a complete and utter dereliction of duty. Would any of them not be calling that an attempted insurrection perpetrated by leftist Democrats? Would any of them be criticizing the committee investigating it claiming there should be more pro-Obama legislators invited so they can attempt to muddy the process and hinder the investigation with constant complaints and a cooked up alternate narrative that the Obama attorneys come up with to try and pin the blame on a handful of left wing extremists like ANTIFA and claim Obama had nothing to do with it and that it wasn't really his responsibility to keep the capital safe even though he was the sitting President at the time of the attack and the attackers were flying "Obama" flags as they beat capital police unconscious? Really?
If any right wing conservative has even an atom of honesty left in them they know how they would have reacted to those facts. But lets be honest, facts don't matter to some in this deeply partisan divided America, some are likely disappointed that the insurrection failed. Thankfully, facts and reality do still matter to many, even republicans like Liz Cheney, but to those who have been so convinced of their own righteousness and so convinced of their opponents evil and corruption, facts and reality aren't worth any more than the dirt on their shoes and would likely only lead to headaches in the minds of the poorly educated and easily indoctrinated right wing religious conservatives.
I think few right wing religious conservatives accept any news anymore that doesn't come from their extreme rightwing biased sources which is how they can live in such a backwards alternate universe where clearly being a hypocrite is seen as a good things as long as they see it as a win for their side of the culture war. With liberals and progressives, they have the mostly non-partisan news (AP, Reuters, BBC, PBS) and their more leftwing partisan opinion news like MSNBC and CNN. With right wing religious conservatives, they accuse the mostly non-partisan news outlets of being far left extremist 'MSM' and thus they reject pretty much anything left of Fox News which has become their 'most moderate' source of news even though it's clearly miles right of center.
If this were a teeter totter you'd have the majority of Americans (60%+) spread pretty evenly from just right of center all the way to extremist left. Then you'd have this pile of about 36-40% of Americans way out on the right well past the middle point between center and right wing extremist that have barricaded themselves away from any and all information and media that doesn't continually reinforce their right wing ideology and religious conservative universe. Anything that doesn't make them out to be the heroes and demonize their mortal enemies, the supposedly godless secularist liberals and progressives, is considered "fake news" and rejected out of hand.
Nice post, but you're dreaming if you think Bugsy cares about even one sentence of that.
Well hopefully there are still some on the right that can be reasoned with by putting the facts in a context they could imagine. Perhaps that would trigger some epiphany, but you're probably right, those that don't live in reality anymore simply aren't capable of thinking, rationalizing and reasoning for themselves, they are compelled like a mindless drone to support their Orange Hulk and can but give one brainless response to facts and reality, "Trump Smash!".
I agree with JR, your post is very likely to not even be read.
The opening (extreme nonsense) quote you provided suggests that your intended reader is not likely to consider your comment objectively.
By the way, I offered the same basic scenario to the same individual only I used Biden instead of Clinton.
I doubt you will get a response, but if you do I will be fascinated by it.
At this late date, anyone who still thinks that the Speaker of the House or the Majority leader of the Senate are responsible for protecting the Capitol is willfully ignorant.
The same scenario was presented by [removed] yesterday, but nowhere near as long and boring.
I answered the two questions as my opinion, [removed]
It might behoove you to read my reply to him and apply it to your post.
[Deleted]
Well there you go DP. The response was that your post was 'boring' (and that you also will be spewed with emotional name-calling and labeling).
I doubt anyone likes their faces shoved in their own hypocritical shit piles...
I'm danger close on tickets this month so I won't describe here what she did on chat with me.
Let me guess--based on experience.
References were made regarding something along the lines of "go fuck yourself" or "go suck off somebody"? Perhaps something about your mother or wife?
Usually that plus the normal "racist white boy".