Garland doesn’t rule out indicting Trump

Definitely informative but do you think all news outlets subscribe to the same methods? I’ve read some very libbie stuff from the journal.

 

yes, authored, reviewed, and approved by the editorial board, not a guest writer. It reflects the opinion of the entire board.

 

maybe from a guest writer but not from the editorial board. Big difference

 

We’ll that’s cool. I learned something tonight. Thanks for not shoving it in my face with a nasty snarky comment attached. Maybe that’s the way it should work around here.
Probably not as much fun though….lol.

 

As the point was made earlier, CNN has conservatives on staff and other media also employ staff members who differ in opinion from the majority on given issues. As we all need challenges to keep us factually knowledgeable and objective, staff with opinions differing from the majority will be hired and their articles and opinions will be published. Those opinions and positions will possibly be in opposition to those of a publication's editorial board.

Any publication worth reading or media worth hearing will, imo, give space or time to those with opposing views.

 

Every damn one of you on this board knows that Trump is a career criminal and that he tried to end democracy back in January of 2021. All your false protestations to the contrary are nothing more than your continuing support for fascism, bigotry, and racial hatred. You know the truth, that's the key, and because you know the truth it is obvious that you simply want a Trump led fascist government in our country.

Yes, I wrote it and I mean it: since you know the obvious truth, your defenses of Trump and all the other Trump led garbage is nothing more than your continuing support for fascism.

 

Since you didn't come back:

1. The Muriel Bowser Letter:

Mayor Muriel Bowser on Twitter: "To be clear, the District of Columbia is not requesting other federal law enforcement personnel and discourages any additional deployment without immediate notification to, and consultation with, MPD if such plans are underway. https://t.co/FhnNe1dWeJ" / Twitter

2. The Bipartisan Senate Report:

Jan 6 HSGAC Rules Report.pdf (senate.gov)

3. The DOD Report:

J6R Draft ROI mcg (documentcloud.org)

 

Your claim:

Here are direct quotes from the Senate report that you linked:

She also mentions that group in her letter.

As to Trump's involvement:

So that report certainly doesn't back your claim. Can you provide the quote that backs your claim?

 

The reports identify the intelligence failures; the FBI and intelligence services did not report the failures and the Capital Police didn’t recognize them. We know this. Those reports have been cited here as debunking the stupidity that the security situation that day was Nancy Pelosi’s fault is they that subject is even worth investigating.

 

. Not a word of any communication or order from Trump to respond to tie Capital after the intrusion. The reports underscore the need for a direct presidential order to cut through the communicating confusion while Trump sat on his ass and the response was delayed for hours. And the DOD OIG report is quite self serving:

 

That's incorrect. The agency of the executive branch in charge on 1/6, it's in the reports, was the DOJ. I guess they had more important things to do following up with their embedded agents in the Proud Boys and their other agents on the scene doing nothing while the riot was being incited during Trump's speech 1 1/2 miles away.

An executive order would have been seen as crossing the line into martial law. Given the crapola Trump is dumped on with today, maybe he should have done it. You would have been the first to complain about it. Trump had no winning play once the riot kicked off.

 

I see, Nancy Pelosi is above the law, off limits as she is now. Put her under oath to testify to who on the house side rejected the capitol police request for increased security on the morning of 1/6. No, Nancy Pelosi is not above the law. Indeed, as she often has stated, nobody is above the law. That includes Nancy Pelosi.

 

BS… everyone would have seen Trump deploying the National Guard with orders to protect and secure the Capitol as a proper action. But the fact is that Trump purposely started the riot and wanted to see if it played out the way he had hoped, so he sat on his ass and did nothing.

 

Impossible to respond directly the way you handled your post so I'll do the best I can.

1. Until you read and acknowledge Muriel Bowser's letter date 1/5/2021, you are wasting your time quoting anything concerning her requests date 12/20/2020. Bowser is referring to the 2000 DC national guard troops at her disposal. She used them for traffic control of people on foot and traffic control around the city, glorified traffic cops. Her letter dated 1/5 made clear that additional guard troops were not need or requested.

2. From the DOD report:

Page 16: Jan. 3, 2021, Mr. Miller and GEN Milley attend a White House meeting. At the end of the meeting, the President asks about election protest preparations and Mr. Miller tells him, “We’ve got a plan, and we’ve got it covered.”

Page 31: Mr. Miller and GEN Milley met with the President at the White House at 5:30 p.m. The primary topic they discussed was unrelated to the scheduled rally. GEN Milley told us that at the end of the meeting, the President told Mr. Miller that there would be a large number of protestors on January 6, 2021, and Mr. Miller should ensure sufficient National Guard or Soldiers would be there to make sure it was a safe event. Gen Milley told us that Mr. Miller responded, “We’ve got a plan and we’ve got it covered.”

 

Trump would have been vilified had he called national guard troops to the capitol. Nobody knew a riot would be instigated by militants of questionable origin.

Trump started a riot when he was 1 1/2 miles away speaking to many 10s of thousands of people. The riot started before he was done. That was a neat trick.

You probably are a bible believer in NBC News so let's watch what they covered as Trump ended his speech:

Trump Encourages Those At His Rally To March To The Capitol | NBC News NOW - YouTube

Now let's watch what Trump actually said about marching peacefully and patriotically to the capitol:

Trump Explicitly Exhorts Marchers to Proceed 'Peacefully and Patriotically' on January 6, 2021 - YouTube

If anyone ever had any doubt about NBC being fake news, this is a prime example to prove it. They edited out Trump's comment about being peaceful and patriotic.

 

The guards let/led the people into the Capital Building... end of insurrection/story.

Trump never said break into any building... and he has the 1rst Amendment right to question any election. Questions or statements of deeds ARE NOT DEEDS. Nothing concrete/physically was done to alter or change the questionable election results.

It's all just words... Protected words under the 1rst Amendment of The Constitution of The United States of America.

The duly elected President has that right to question everything and anything. END OF STORY.

 

The lie Trump had 10,000 troops at the ready should be put to bed. Christopher Meadows testified under oath that previous statements were false.

As to Trump's speech, not all speech is protected under the law. Including speech that incites imminent lawless action. And to date, over 840 Jan 6 arrests and 330 guilty pleads or convictions.

But it's not just Trump's one speech that could lead to charges. The entire Jan 6 events, including the fake electors, the riot, and everything else could lead to charges of seditious conspiracy. The speech is only one part.

 

I read it. It pointed out that she had requested and received DC national guard. At no point did it say Trump offered additional soldiers.

Gen. Milley is not the claim that you made before. Nor does this indicate that the President offered more soldiers.

Still doesn't come close to your claim that he offered troops and they were turned down by the Mayor or by people in the House and Senate.

Would you like to provide evidence to back those particular claims?

 

Not a chance. Trump did nothing criminal in any way. The dems pulled all sorts of crapola in 2000, 2004, and 2016 doing many of the same things Trump did.

 

So why were they breaking through the windows then?