Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
afcjets
Posts: 4069
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Wed Jun 22, 2022 9:49 pm

Avatar2go wrote:
afcjets wrote:

It is not categorically false. First off there was more than one entry point and this was not a coordinated effort (by Trump or his supporters at least). You can watch the videos below and believe and spin however you want.

"The optics are striking: Capitol police stood around as protesters entered the Senate chambers and made speeches. Dozens entered the Capitol building after literally having the door held open for them, and then merely walked in a single file line and took pictures.


This is false. All of the entrances of the building were locked, and all were forced. Officers were outnumbered and unable to stop the mob, so they moved back into the building or tried to maintain order. In the investigation of officer actions that day, none were charged with aiding and abetting the protestors, because it didn't happen.

afcjets wrote:

In fact, the FBI has not charged any of the protesters with “insurrection” or “treason”; the most widespread investigation in U.S. history, according to the bureau, has been unable to turn up any evidence of a centralized plot to install Donald Trump.


This is false. In January and June of 2022, members of the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys have been charged with sedition. Further, both groups have said they answered the call from Trump to converge on the Capitol, and they came armed, organized, and prepared to do so. The goal was to disrupt the electoral vote certification, which is why it was scheduled for January 6th. As Trump had repeatedly called upon supporters to advocate.

afcjets wrote:

“The FBI has found scant evidence that the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol was the result of an organized plot to overturn the presidential election result, according to four current and former law enforcement officials,” Reuters reported.

“Though federal officials have arrested more than 570 alleged participants, the FBI at this point believes the violence was not centrally coordinated by far-right groups or prominent supporters of then-President Donald Trump, according to the sources, who have been either directly involved in or briefed regularly on the wide-ranging investigations,” the report continued.

“Ninety to ninety-five percent of these are one-off cases,” said a former senior law enforcement official with knowledge of the investigation. “Then you have five percent, maybe, of these militia groups that were more closely organized. But there was no grand scheme with Roger Stone and Alex Jones and all of these people to storm the Capitol and take hostages.”


This is true, but disengenous. The Trump team did not directly organize the riot in advance. But they did ask protestors to come to the Capitol on January 6, and they did then incite the crowd to march on the Capitol, and they did then publicly identify the VP as a traitor, and they did then imply that the election was being stolen with action needed, and they did not take action to stop the violence once it had begun, because it was their full intent.

afcjets wrote:

Then there were also fringe extremists who caused disruption and chaos, but not necessarily with the aim to install Donald Trump by force.


This is false. Almost all the arrested protestors have said they understood Trump's statements to be a call to action, to prevent the election certification from happening. That is why they stormed the building and sought out the chambers where the proceedings we're taking place.

The effort to install Trump as president was separate from the riot, it was based on the VP rejecting the legal slates of electors. But when Pence refused, the riots ensued as a direct result.


You provide no sources. Of course the protestors are going to give them want they want. Trump is their ultimate target so you better say Trump made you do it if you want any chance of being set free is what I would be thinking if I were one of them or their attorney. No one had been charged with insurrection, treason or sedition when the article was written late last year and with our current polarizing attorney general, it shouldn't be any surprise a few were ultimately charged.
 
FGITD
Posts: 2127
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 1:44 pm

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Wed Jun 22, 2022 9:59 pm

afcjets wrote:
FGITD wrote:
That’s not a source. That’s a right wing extremist website.

Or does this seem like unbiased reporting?

“WTPC Calls for President to Invoke Limited Martial Law to Hold New Election to Protect our Vote, in Full Page Washington Times Ad, if Legislators, Courts and Congress Do Not Follow the Constitution”

See! The guys who did it say they totally didn’t do it! Disproved all the libs lies


I've heard the same thing about Fox News. Nonetheless your point is irrelevant because they're quoting Reuters which is definitely not right wing.



The source for the article you linked was the world tribune. Another right wing, conspiracy peddling rag that is rated poorly because they don’t cite sources or offer proof of claims
 
Avatar2go
Posts: 1024
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2022 3:41 am

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Wed Jun 22, 2022 10:30 pm

afcjets wrote:
Avatar2go wrote:
afcjets wrote:

It is not categorically false. First off there was more than one entry point and this was not a coordinated effort (by Trump or his supporters at least). You can watch the videos below and believe and spin however you want.

"The optics are striking: Capitol police stood around as protesters entered the Senate chambers and made speeches. Dozens entered the Capitol building after literally having the door held open for them, and then merely walked in a single file line and took pictures.


This is false. All of the entrances of the building were locked, and all were forced. Officers were outnumbered and unable to stop the mob, so they moved back into the building or tried to maintain order. In the investigation of officer actions that day, none were charged with aiding and abetting the protestors, because it didn't happen.

afcjets wrote:

In fact, the FBI has not charged any of the protesters with “insurrection” or “treason”; the most widespread investigation in U.S. history, according to the bureau, has been unable to turn up any evidence of a centralized plot to install Donald Trump.


This is false. In January and June of 2022, members of the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys have been charged with sedition. Further, both groups have said they answered the call from Trump to converge on the Capitol, and they came armed, organized, and prepared to do so. The goal was to disrupt the electoral vote certification, which is why it was scheduled for January 6th. As Trump had repeatedly called upon supporters to advocate.

afcjets wrote:

“The FBI has found scant evidence that the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol was the result of an organized plot to overturn the presidential election result, according to four current and former law enforcement officials,” Reuters reported.

“Though federal officials have arrested more than 570 alleged participants, the FBI at this point believes the violence was not centrally coordinated by far-right groups or prominent supporters of then-President Donald Trump, according to the sources, who have been either directly involved in or briefed regularly on the wide-ranging investigations,” the report continued.

“Ninety to ninety-five percent of these are one-off cases,” said a former senior law enforcement official with knowledge of the investigation. “Then you have five percent, maybe, of these militia groups that were more closely organized. But there was no grand scheme with Roger Stone and Alex Jones and all of these people to storm the Capitol and take hostages.”


This is true, but disengenous. The Trump team did not directly organize the riot in advance. But they did ask protestors to come to the Capitol on January 6, and they did then incite the crowd to march on the Capitol, and they did then publicly identify the VP as a traitor, and they did then imply that the election was being stolen with action needed, and they did not take action to stop the violence once it had begun, because it was their full intent.

afcjets wrote:

Then there were also fringe extremists who caused disruption and chaos, but not necessarily with the aim to install Donald Trump by force.


This is false. Almost all the arrested protestors have said they understood Trump's statements to be a call to action, to prevent the election certification from happening. That is why they stormed the building and sought out the chambers where the proceedings we're taking place.

The effort to install Trump as president was separate from the riot, it was based on the VP rejecting the legal slates of electors. But when Pence refused, the riots ensued as a direct result.


You provide no sources. Of course the protestors are going to give them want they want. Trump is their ultimate target so you better say Trump made you do it if you want any chance of being set free is what I would be thinking if I were one of them or their attorney. No one had been charged with insurrection, treason or sedition when the article was written late last year and with our current polarizing attorney general, it shouldn't be any surprise a few were ultimately charged.


No sources are needed because the information provided is common knowledge, is freely available, with sources listed here numerous times in the past, as well as in the hearings. You are welcome to dispute with other factual information. You have not done so yet.

As far as there being forced or coerced implications about Trump from the defendants, that is laughable. Those people are telling the truth, because doing so is an exculpatory factor in their reasons for being at the Capitol that day, crossing state lines and being far from home (they did so because the President asked them to).

As I said, that has been the consistent defense. Are you suggesting that all these people randomly decided to go to Washington on that specific day?

The FBI has estimated that over 2,000 people entered the Capitol building on January 6. Those people also randomly decided to give themselves a self-guided tour on that day?

Conspiracy theories are not truth, and will always collide with truth. That is what's happening in the hearings, and in this discussion as well.
 
QF7
Posts: 85
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2019 11:42 pm

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Wed Jun 22, 2022 10:30 pm

afcjets wrote:
In fact, the FBI has not charged any of the protesters with “insurrection” or “treason”; the most widespread investigation in U.S. history, according to the bureau, has been unable to turn up any evidence of a centralized plot to install Donald Trump…

But there were disparate groups at the Capitol building on January 6: One was a group of Trump supporters who were let into the Capitol building and who were later charged with “trespassing” and “parading.”


Not sure what argument this supports. Being charged and convicted of a lesser crime still means a crime was committed. At a minimum these peoples’ presence in the Capitol was disrupting an official government proceeding.

Then there were also fringe extremists who caused disruption and chaos, but not necessarily with the aim to install Donald Trump by force."


Again, not sure what argument this supports. Just a group of rowdies who wanted to break a few windows and steal a few lecterns and whatnot? Nothing to see here, move on?

McConnell and McCarthy both knew and made public statements in their respective chambers that Trump had incited the attack, intrusion, call it what you will. By his own recorded words he attacked Pence’s lack of “courage.” Now that we know what Eastman and Giuliani and Company were attempting to orchestrate behind the scenes it’s perfectly obvious what Trump was hoping would occur. One does not need any ideological filter to see that.

The specific motivations of any particular “insurrectionist” are irrelevant. They all contributed to this larger objective, even if unwittingly.

QF7
 
afcjets
Posts: 4069
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Wed Jun 22, 2022 10:32 pm

FGITD wrote:
afcjets wrote:
FGITD wrote:
That’s not a source. That’s a right wing extremist website.

Or does this seem like unbiased reporting?

“WTPC Calls for President to Invoke Limited Martial Law to Hold New Election to Protect our Vote, in Full Page Washington Times Ad, if Legislators, Courts and Congress Do Not Follow the Constitution”

See! The guys who did it say they totally didn’t do it! Disproved all the libs lies


I've heard the same thing about Fox News. Nonetheless your point is irrelevant because they're quoting Reuters which is definitely not right wing.



The source for the article you linked was the world tribune. Another right wing, conspiracy peddling rag that is rated poorly because they don’t cite sources or offer proof of claims


Yet you provide no source. It's just your opinion without one. As mentioned before, they did cite their source, Reuters which is definitely not right wing. More importantly, I copied the wrong link. Here it is and the Reuters link.

"WASHINGTON, Aug 20 (Reuters) - The FBI has found scant evidence that the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol was the result of an organized plot to overturn the presidential election result, according to four current and former law enforcement officials.

Though federal officials have arrested more than 570 alleged participants, the FBI at this point believes the violence was not centrally coordinated by far-right groups or prominent supporters of then-President Donald Trump, according to the sources, who have been either directly involved in or briefed regularly on the wide-ranging investigations.

"Ninety to ninety-five percent of these are one-off cases," said a former senior law enforcement official with knowledge of the investigation. "Then you have five percent, maybe, of these militia groups that were more closely organized. But there was no grand scheme with Roger Stone and Alex Jones and all of these people to storm the Capitol and take hostages.""

https://trendingpolitics.com/watch-jan- ... ding-knab/

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/exclus ... 021-08-20/
 
bhill
Posts: 1921
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2001 8:28 am

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Wed Jun 22, 2022 10:39 pm

victrola wrote:
jetwet1 wrote:
Meanwhile, on Fox News......Democrats want to take your guns followed by Benghazi, the greatest moments of the 33 hearings ending with "how to bury your head in the sand".


Interesting how you mention Benghazi. I seem to recall that Hilary Clinton showed up to testify at the Benghazi hearings. Why can't republicans like Jim Jordan, Kevin McCarthy, and Trump himself have the guts to testify?


Becuase their mouths will get too dry pleading the 5th too many times..
 
FGITD
Posts: 2127
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 1:44 pm

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Wed Jun 22, 2022 10:41 pm

afcjets wrote:
FGITD wrote:
afcjets wrote:

I've heard the same thing about Fox News. Nonetheless your point is irrelevant because they're quoting Reuters which is definitely not right wing.



The source for the article you linked was the world tribune. Another right wing, conspiracy peddling rag that is rated poorly because they don’t cite sources or offer proof of claims


Yet you provide no source. It's just your opinion without one. As mentioned before, they did cite their source, Reuters which is definitely not right wing. More importantly, I copied the wrong link. Here it is and the Reuters link.

"WASHINGTON, Aug 20 (Reuters) - The FBI has found scant evidence that the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol was the result of an organized plot to overturn the presidential election result, according to four current and former law enforcement officials.

Though federal officials have arrested more than 570 alleged participants, the FBI at this point believes the violence was not centrally coordinated by far-right groups or prominent supporters of then-President Donald Trump, according to the sources, who have been either directly involved in or briefed regularly on the wide-ranging investigations.

"Ninety to ninety-five percent of these are one-off cases," said a former senior law enforcement official with knowledge of the investigation. "Then you have five percent, maybe, of these militia groups that were more closely organized. But there was no grand scheme with Roger Stone and Alex Jones and all of these people to storm the Capitol and take hostages.""

https://trendingpolitics.com/watch-jan- ... ding-knab/

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/exclus ... 021-08-20/


I didn’t provide a source because I’m not the one making any claims. What source do you want? My source that all your sources are garbage?

Sure, why not. Your source trending politics is considered questionable at best.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/trending-politics/


Your Reuters article is valid, but horribly out of date. Here’s one that’s still out of date, but more recent than yours and seems to contradict what you claim.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/exclus ... 022-02-08/



Here’s the thing about sourcing your arguments. If it’s current affairs, you can’t use old articles because the topic in question is still evolving. The article I cited is already outdated and it’s 4 months old. For example…I’m sure in 1930s Germany you could probably find a number of articles claiming that Hitler was doing some great things for Germany. Would you cite those same articles these days? Probably not.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 17993
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Wed Jun 22, 2022 10:49 pm

afcjets wrote:
Avatar2go wrote:
afcjets wrote:

It is not categorically false. First off there was more than one entry point and this was not a coordinated effort (by Trump or his supporters at least). You can watch the videos below and believe and spin however you want.

"The optics are striking: Capitol police stood around as protesters entered the Senate chambers and made speeches. Dozens entered the Capitol building after literally having the door held open for them, and then merely walked in a single file line and took pictures.


This is false. All of the entrances of the building were locked, and all were forced. Officers were outnumbered and unable to stop the mob, so they moved back into the building or tried to maintain order. In the investigation of officer actions that day, none were charged with aiding and abetting the protestors, because it didn't happen.

afcjets wrote:

In fact, the FBI has not charged any of the protesters with “insurrection” or “treason”; the most widespread investigation in U.S. history, according to the bureau, has been unable to turn up any evidence of a centralized plot to install Donald Trump.


This is false. In January and June of 2022, members of the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys have been charged with sedition. Further, both groups have said they answered the call from Trump to converge on the Capitol, and they came armed, organized, and prepared to do so. The goal was to disrupt the electoral vote certification, which is why it was scheduled for January 6th. As Trump had repeatedly called upon supporters to advocate.

afcjets wrote:

“The FBI has found scant evidence that the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol was the result of an organized plot to overturn the presidential election result, according to four current and former law enforcement officials,” Reuters reported.

“Though federal officials have arrested more than 570 alleged participants, the FBI at this point believes the violence was not centrally coordinated by far-right groups or prominent supporters of then-President Donald Trump, according to the sources, who have been either directly involved in or briefed regularly on the wide-ranging investigations,” the report continued.

“Ninety to ninety-five percent of these are one-off cases,” said a former senior law enforcement official with knowledge of the investigation. “Then you have five percent, maybe, of these militia groups that were more closely organized. But there was no grand scheme with Roger Stone and Alex Jones and all of these people to storm the Capitol and take hostages.”


This is true, but disengenous. The Trump team did not directly organize the riot in advance. But they did ask protestors to come to the Capitol on January 6, and they did then incite the crowd to march on the Capitol, and they did then publicly identify the VP as a traitor, and they did then imply that the election was being stolen with action needed, and they did not take action to stop the violence once it had begun, because it was their full intent.

afcjets wrote:

Then there were also fringe extremists who caused disruption and chaos, but not necessarily with the aim to install Donald Trump by force.


This is false. Almost all the arrested protestors have said they understood Trump's statements to be a call to action, to prevent the election certification from happening. That is why they stormed the building and sought out the chambers where the proceedings we're taking place.

The effort to install Trump as president was separate from the riot, it was based on the VP rejecting the legal slates of electors. But when Pence refused, the riots ensued as a direct result.


You provide no sources. Of course the protestors are going to give them want they want. Trump is their ultimate target so you better say Trump made you do it if you want any chance of being set free is what I would be thinking if I were one of them or their attorney. No one had been charged with insurrection, treason or sedition when the article was written late last year and with our current polarizing attorney general, it shouldn't be any surprise a few were ultimately charged.



Are. you. ok? AG Garland is polarizing?? He is criticized by left and right precisely because he is one of the most down-the-middle centrist AGs in years. That is the opposite meaning of polarizing.
 
afcjets
Posts: 4069
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Wed Jun 22, 2022 10:50 pm

Avatar2go wrote:

No sources are needed because the information provided is common knowledge, is freely available, with sources listed here numerous times in the past, as well as in the hearings. You are welcome to dispute with other factual information. You have not done so yet.


You can't provide a source because none exists that says every entry point into the US Capitol on 1/6 was forced. The Capitol is a large building and the 2000 people who entered it were mostly one-offs, according to the FBI source mentioned in the Reuters link above and could not all possibly be of the same temperament. YouTube once had a video of protestors praying and singing inside the Capitol lobby walking calmly in a circle holding hands as Capitol police officers stood by and talked amongst themselves. I would link it but of course it got removed quickly.


Avatar2go wrote:
As far as there being forced or coerced implications about Trump from the defendants, that is laughable. Those people are telling the truth, because doing so is an exculpatory factor in their reasons for being at the Capitol that day, crossing state lines and being far from home (they did so because the President asked them to).

As I said, that has been the consistent defense. Are you suggesting that all these people randomly decided to go to Washington on that specific day?

The FBI has estimated that over 2,000 people entered the Capitol building on January 6. Those people also randomly decided to give themselves a self-guided tour on that day?

Conspiracy theories are not truth, and will always collide with truth. That is what's happening in the hearings, and in this discussion as well.


Of course their trip to DC wasn't random and they were invited by Trump to protest. Conspiracy theories are no different than other theories, some are true, some aren't. Your feelings about the term are irrelevant and have no bearing on what's true or false.
 
QF7
Posts: 85
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2019 11:42 pm

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Wed Jun 22, 2022 11:11 pm

afcjets wrote:
Of course their trip to DC wasn't random and they were invited by Trump to protest. Conspiracy theories are no different than other theories, some are true, some aren't.

So what’s true?

Would you agree that no matter how well-intentioned, patriotic, and peaceful some protesters may have been, there is no way anyone in the vicinity of the Capitol that day could not have been aware that a large-scale “demonstration” (to put it euphemistically) was underway? And that even if some number of such folks entered the Capitol by unforced means their very presence in the building was contributing to the disruption of an official government proceeding?

QF7
 
afcjets
Posts: 4069
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Wed Jun 22, 2022 11:14 pm

FGITD wrote:
afcjets wrote:
FGITD wrote:


The source for the article you linked was the world tribune. Another right wing, conspiracy peddling rag that is rated poorly because they don’t cite sources or offer proof of claims


Yet you provide no source. It's just your opinion without one. As mentioned before, they did cite their source, Reuters which is definitely not right wing. More importantly, I copied the wrong link. Here it is and the Reuters link.

"WASHINGTON, Aug 20 (Reuters) - The FBI has found scant evidence that the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol was the result of an organized plot to overturn the presidential election result, according to four current and former law enforcement officials.

Though federal officials have arrested more than 570 alleged participants, the FBI at this point believes the violence was not centrally coordinated by far-right groups or prominent supporters of then-President Donald Trump, according to the sources, who have been either directly involved in or briefed regularly on the wide-ranging investigations.

"Ninety to ninety-five percent of these are one-off cases," said a former senior law enforcement official with knowledge of the investigation. "Then you have five percent, maybe, of these militia groups that were more closely organized. But there was no grand scheme with Roger Stone and Alex Jones and all of these people to storm the Capitol and take hostages.""

https://trendingpolitics.com/watch-jan- ... ding-knab/

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/exclus ... 021-08-20/


I didn’t provide a source because I’m not the one making any claims. What source do you want? My source that all your sources are garbage?

Sure, why not. Your source trending politics is considered questionable at best.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/trending-politics/
.


They give CNN, MSNBC and Fox the same rating. Such is the world we live in today.
 
Kent350787
Posts: 2466
Joined: Wed May 28, 2008 12:06 am

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Wed Jun 22, 2022 11:30 pm

afcjets wrote:
FGITD wrote:
afcjets wrote:

Yet you provide no source. It's just your opinion without one. As mentioned before, they did cite their source, Reuters which is definitely not right wing. More importantly, I copied the wrong link. Here it is and the Reuters link.

"WASHINGTON, Aug 20 (Reuters) - The FBI has found scant evidence that the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol was the result of an organized plot to overturn the presidential election result, according to four current and former law enforcement officials.

Though federal officials have arrested more than 570 alleged participants, the FBI at this point believes the violence was not centrally coordinated by far-right groups or prominent supporters of then-President Donald Trump, according to the sources, who have been either directly involved in or briefed regularly on the wide-ranging investigations.

"Ninety to ninety-five percent of these are one-off cases," said a former senior law enforcement official with knowledge of the investigation. "Then you have five percent, maybe, of these militia groups that were more closely organized. But there was no grand scheme with Roger Stone and Alex Jones and all of these people to storm the Capitol and take hostages.""

https://trendingpolitics.com/watch-jan- ... ding-knab/

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/exclus ... 021-08-20/


I didn’t provide a source because I’m not the one making any claims. What source do you want? My source that all your sources are garbage?

Sure, why not. Your source trending politics is considered questionable at best.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/trending-politics/
.


They give CNN, MSNBC and Fox the same rating. Such is the world we live in today.


They actually don't. There is an important difference between a "medium credibility" rating for those outlets, and a "low credibility" rating for trending politics.

But back to the evidence being presented in these current hearings, a range of it appears to be damning. It will be very interesting to see how things continue, and then what prosecutions, if any, result.

The rest of the developed world is still aghast, BTW. I'm only following high credibility outlets for my information.
 
afcjets
Posts: 4069
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Wed Jun 22, 2022 11:35 pm

QF7 wrote:
afcjets wrote:
Of course their trip to DC wasn't random and they were invited by Trump to protest. Conspiracy theories are no different than other theories, some are true, some aren't.

So what’s true?

Would you agree that no matter how well-intentioned, patriotic, and peaceful some protesters may have been, there is no way anyone in the vicinity of the Capitol that day could not have been aware that a large-scale “demonstration” (to put it euphemistically) was underway? And that even if some number of such folks entered the Capitol by unforced means their very presence in the building was contributing to the disruption of an official government proceeding?

QF7


I actually do believe this woman thought it was a demonstration and was unaware of the chaos at another part of the building. Here is a four minute interview with her.

https://video.foxnews.com/v/6260923294001
 
Avatar2go
Posts: 1024
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2022 3:41 am

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Wed Jun 22, 2022 11:37 pm

afcjets wrote:
Avatar2go wrote:

No sources are needed because the information provided is common knowledge, is freely available, with sources listed here numerous times in the past, as well as in the hearings. You are welcome to dispute with other factual information. You have not done so yet.


You can't provide a source because none exists that says every entry point into the US Capitol on 1/6 was forced. The Capitol is a large building and the 2000 people who entered it were mostly one-offs, according to the FBI source mentioned in the Reuters link above and could not all possibly be of the same temperament. YouTube once had a video of protestors praying and singing inside the Capitol lobby walking calmly in a circle holding hands as Capitol police officers stood by and talked amongst themselves. I would link it but of course it got removed quickly.


This is false. Here are the events according to the testimony of the Chiefs of the Capitol and D.C police, before Congress on February 23, 2021:

1:09 p.m. Capitol Police Chief Sund says in his Feb. 23 testimony that he notified the two sergeants at arms that he "urgently needed support and asked them to declare a State of Emergency and authorize the National Guard."

1:11 p.m. Trump finishes his remarks.

1:34 p.m. Mayor Bowser asks Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy for additional Guard forces, according to a Pentagon timeline.

1:49 p.m. Capitol Police Chief Sund speaks with the commanding general of the D.C. National Guard Maj. Gen. William Walker by phone and requests immediate assistance.

By 1:50 p.m., MPD (D.C. Police) declared the assembly at the Capitol to be a riot.

1:51 p.m. Sund requests assistance from law enforcement agencies from the National Capital Region. Over 1,700 officers from 18 law enforcement agencies respond.

2:10 p.m. Capitol Police send an alert that all buildings in the Capitol complex are on lockdown due to "an external security threat located on the West Front of the U.S. Capitol Building. ... [S]tay away from exterior windows and doors. If you are outside, seek cover."

2-2:30 p.m. At the Senate terrace, protesters are smashing the door of the Capitol to gain entry, as Capitol Police inside work to push them back.


Thus the building was secured & locked as the riot began, and was subsequently and necessarily broken into by the protestors. There is no doubt whatsoever that this occurred. None. At all. Further, here is this description from sworn testimony of the Chief himself:

Shortly after MPD officers arrived on the scene, I was able to stand on the west front of the Capitol to get a broad view of the riot as many of MPD’s brave officers made their way to the front line. Our police officers were under attack, the Capitol – hallowed ground for our country – was under attack, and the constitutional electoral process – the very foundation of our democracy – was under attack. MPD’s police officers were engaged in a literal battle for hours. Many were forced into hand-to-hand combat to prevent more rioters from gaining entry into the Capitol. This was not a peaceful protest; this was not a crowd trying to express their first amendment rights – rights which we are proud to protect regardless of belief. At the end of the day, this was an assault on our democracy, and MPD officers held the line.


Thus the assertion that protestors entered the building with the consent of the police, is completely and totally false. As is widely reported across multiple news sources, all the security services, and by Congress itself.

afcjets wrote:

Of course their trip to DC wasn't random and they were invited by Trump to protest. Conspiracy theories are no different than other theories, some are true, some aren't. Your feelings about the term are irrelevant and have no bearing on what's true or false.


This is an attack on the very notion of truth itself. Truth is not a belief, truth is established fact. Truth does not require your belief, it stands independently. Nor is truth diminished by your disbelief. Conspiracy theories are by definition, untruthful. There are none that are true. If they were, there would be no need for the conspiracy. Your're making the same false equivalence here, as you do in your other arguments. Which I guess is essential for you, in order to sustain your false beliefs. But surely you must recognize that others will not accept that, and will look for the truth instead.
Last edited by Avatar2go on Wed Jun 22, 2022 11:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
afcjets
Posts: 4069
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Wed Jun 22, 2022 11:55 pm

Avatar2go wrote:
This is false. Here are the events according to the testimony of the Chiefs of the Capitol and D.C police, before Congress on February 23, 2021:

1:09 p.m. Capitol Police Chief Sund says in his Feb. 23 testimony that he notified the two sergeants at arms that he "urgently needed support and asked them to declare a State of Emergency and authorize the National Guard."

1:11 p.m. Trump finishes his remarks.

1:34 p.m. Mayor Bowser asks Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy for additional Guard forces, according to a Pentagon timeline.

1:49 p.m. Capitol Police Chief Sund speaks with the commanding general of the D.C. National Guard Maj. Gen. William Walker by phone and requests immediate assistance.

By 1:50 p.m., MPD (D.C. Police) declared the assembly at the Capitol to be a riot.

1:51 p.m. Sund requests assistance from law enforcement agencies from the National Capital Region. Over 1,700 officers from 18 law enforcement agencies respond.

2-2:30 p.m. At the Senate terrace, protesters are smashing the door of the Capitol to gain entry, as Capitol Police inside work to push them back.

2:10 p.m. Capitol Police send an alert that all buildings in the Capitol complex are on lockdown due to "an external security threat located on the West Front of the U.S. Capitol Building. ... [S]tay away from exterior windows and doors. If you are outside, seek cover."


Thus the building was secured & locked as the riot began, and were subsequently and necessarily broken into by the protestors. There is no doubt whatsoever that this occurred. None. At all. Further, here is this description from sworn testimony of the Chief himself:

Shortly after MPD officers arrived on the scene, I was able to stand on the west front of the Capitol to get a broad view of the riot as many of MPD’s brave officers made their way to the front line. Our police officers were under attack, the Capitol – hallowed ground for our country – was under attack, and the constitutional electoral process – the very foundation of our democracy – was under attack. MPD’s police officers were engaged in a literal battle for hours. Many were forced into hand-to-hand combat to prevent more rioters from gaining entry into the Capitol. This was not a peaceful protest; this was not a crowd trying to express their first amendment rights – rights which we are proud to protect regardless of belief. At the end of the day, this was an assault on our
democracy, and MPD officers held the line.


Thus the assertion that protestors entered the building with the consent of the police, is completely and totally false. As is widely reported across multiple news sources, all the security services, and by Congress itself.

This does nothing to prove that every entry into the Capitol was by force and from the moment the first protestor or rioter entered the Capitol. This is the equivalent of saying there's no way it was sunny in Dallas at 3p because a tornado touched down in Fort Worth at 330.


Avatar2go wrote:
This is an attack on the very notion of truth itself. Truth is not a belief, truth is established fact. Truth does not require your belief, it stands independently. Nor is truth diminished by your disbelief. Conspiracy theories are by definition, untruthful. There are none that are true. If they were there would be no need for the conspiracy. Your're making the same false equivalence here, as you do in your other arguments. Which I guess is essential for you, in order to sustain your false beliefs. But surely you must recognize that others will not accept that, and will look for the truth instead.


Most of this a strawmen argument except when you say conspiracy theories by definition are untruthful. Two of the biggest news stories from 2021 were dubbed "conspiracy theories" by the media. So I'm not accused of whataboutism I will be vague. One involved a laptop and the other involved a lab.
 
Avatar2go
Posts: 1024
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2022 3:41 am

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Thu Jun 23, 2022 12:17 am

afcjets wrote:

Most of this a strawmen argument except when you say conspiracy theories by definition are untruthful. Two of the biggest news stories from 2021 were dubbed "conspiracy theories" by the media. So I'm not accused of whataboutism I will be vague. One involved a laptop and the other involved a lab.


There is no strawman argument here. These are facts that you consistently have refused to answer or refute, instead deflecting by bringing up other unrelated issues, as you have here again. As others have noted, you have covered the complete spectrum of conservative deflections. That method is known as the "Gish Gallop", and is employed when the person is unable to argue on the basis of fact. Which is true of you here as well.

And for the record, the Hunter laptop conspiracy theory was not that it existed, but that it contained evidence that implicated a presidential nominee in illegal activity. As reported by the FBI after investigating, that allegation was false, and they are not investigating the President, nor any aspect related aspect to the 2020 election. Yet conservatives continue to push the issue, which is why it is a conspiracy theory.

The Chinese lab-leak theory continues to be a conspiracy theory, because it cannot be proven either way. The best that can be said, is that we don't know if the virus passed through the lab or not. The genetic evidence that we have suggests natural origins, which means it did not need to pass through the lab. But we don't know, and may never know, because the Chinese are not cooperating, and likely never will. The one chance we have of answering the question, is if the chain of intermediate hosts can be established. If it is shown that the virus fully emerged in the wild, then lab involvement becomes irrelevant. So research continues on that issue around the world. In the past, it has taken years to identify the hosts, so there is some hope that can be repeated here.
 
Avatar2go
Posts: 1024
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2022 3:41 am

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Thu Jun 23, 2022 12:30 am

afcjets wrote:

This does nothing to prove that every entry into the Capitol was by force and from the moment the first protestor or rioter entered the Capitol. This is the equivalent of saying there's no way it was sunny in Dallas at 3p because a tornado touched down in Fort Worth at 330.


Yes, because the word "lockdown" implies that some entrances are locked and guarded by police, while at other entrances, those same police are welcoming random people into the building, completely unchecked. And that protestors battled police to forcibly enter at one entrance, because they didn't know they would be welcomed at another entrance (facepalm).

I wonder if you even listen or hear yourself here, as I could not imagine a more ridiculous statement.in the face of the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Just wow.
 
afcjets
Posts: 4069
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Thu Jun 23, 2022 12:40 am

Avatar2go wrote:
afcjets wrote:

Most of this a strawmen argument except when you say conspiracy theories by definition are untruthful. Two of the biggest news stories from 2021 were dubbed "conspiracy theories" by the media. So I'm not accused of whataboutism I will be vague. One involved a laptop and the other involved a lab.


There is no strawman argument here. These are facts that you consistently have refused to answer or refute, instead deflecting by bringing up other unrelated issues, as you have here again. As others have noted, you have covered the complete spectrum of conservative deflections. That method is known as the "Gish Gallop", and is employed when the person is unable to argue on the basis of fact. Which is true of you here as well.

And for the record, the Hunter laptop conspiracy theory was not that it existed, but that it contained evidence that implicated a presidential nominee in illegal activity. As reported by the FBI after investigating, that allegation was false, and they are not investigating the President, nor any aspect related aspect to the 2020 election. Yet conservatives continue to push the issue, which is why it is a conspiracy theory.

The Chinese lab-leak theory continues to be a conspiracy theory, because it cannot be proven either way. The best that can be said, is that we don't know if the virus passed through the lab or not. The genetic evidence that we have suggests natural origins, which means it did not need to pass through the lab. But we don't know, and may never know, because the Chinese are not cooperating, and likely never will. The one chance we have of answering the question, is if the chain of intermediate hosts can be established. If it is shown that the virus fully emerged in the wild, then lab involvement becomes irrelevant. So research continues on that issue around the world. In the past, it has taken years to identify the hosts, so there is some hope that can be repeated here.


The strawman argument was clearly your lecture on the objectivity of truth, which is exactly what I responded to and quoted from. Once again I have not once defected in this topic, other than responding to a joke about corruption in Chicago with a joke about Hillary being from Chicago and the two things you elaborated on (and which the media moved the goal posts on) were nothing more than two recent high profile examples of "conspiracy theories" where the media has been forced to change their initial reporting. The purpose wasn't to debate those subjects but just to show the conspiracy theory label has no bearing on whether one is proven true or not.
 
afcjets
Posts: 4069
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Thu Jun 23, 2022 12:50 am

Avatar2go wrote:
afcjets wrote:

This does nothing to prove that every entry into the Capitol was by force and from the moment the first protestor or rioter entered the Capitol. This is the equivalent of saying there's no way it was sunny in Dallas at 3p because a tornado touched down in Fort Worth at 330.


Yes, because the word "lockdown" implies that some entrances are locked and guarded by police, while at other entrances, those same police are welcoming random people into the building, completely unchecked. And that protestors battled police to forcibly enter at one entrance, because they didn't know they would be welcomed at another entrance (facepalm).

I wonder if you even listen or hear yourself here, as I could not imagine a more ridiculous statement.in the face of the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Just wow.


I wonder the same about you. I'm not sure why you're not comprehending that protestors and rioters entering the Capitol is perhaps what actually triggered the lockdown.
 
Avatar2go
Posts: 1024
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2022 3:41 am

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Thu Jun 23, 2022 1:03 am

afcjets wrote:

The strawman argument was clearly your lecture on the objectivity of truth, which is exactly what I responded to and quoted from. Once again I have not once defected in this topic, other than responding to a joke about corruption in Chicago with a joke about Hillary being from Chicago and the two things you elaborated on (and which the media moved the goal posts on) were nothing more than two recent high profile examples of "conspiracy theories" where the media has been forced to change their initial reporting. The purpose wasn't to debate those subjects but just to show the conspiracy theory label has no bearing on whether one is proven true or not.


So again, there is no strawman argument. By definition, a conspiracy theory is not true. If it were true, it would not be a conspiracy theory. I refuted your claim that there is a equivalence between the two, as there is not.

A conspiracy theory is an explanation for an event or situation that invokes a conspiracy by sinister and powerful groups, often political in motivation, when other explanations are more probable. The term has a negative connotation, implying that the appeal to a conspiracy is based on prejudice or insufficient evidence. A conspiracy theory refers to a hypothesized conspiracy with specific characteristics, such as an opposition to the mainstream consensus among those people (such as scientists or historians) who are qualified to evaluate its accuracy.

Conspiracy theories resist falsification and are reinforced by circular reasoning: both evidence against the conspiracy and an absence of evidence for it are re-interpreted as evidence of its truth, whereby the conspiracy becomes a matter of faith rather than something that can be proven or disproven


And again, as noted by many here, you have deflected many times in your posts. When the discussion descends into denial of even things that are readily evident from your statements, there is really nothing else to add. It's just an exercise in contradiction.
 
afcjets
Posts: 4069
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Thu Jun 23, 2022 1:45 am

Avatar2go wrote:
So again, there is no strawman argument. By definition, a conspiracy theory is not true. If it were true, it would not be a conspiracy theory. I refuted your claim that there is a equivalence between the two, as there is not.

A conspiracy theory is an explanation for an event or situation that invokes a conspiracy by sinister and powerful groups, often political in motivation, when other explanations are more probable. The term has a negative connotation, implying that the appeal to a conspiracy is based on prejudice or insufficient evidence. A conspiracy theory refers to a hypothesized conspiracy with specific characteristics, such as an opposition to the mainstream consensus among those people (such as scientists or historians) who are qualified to evaluate its accuracy.

Conspiracy theories resist falsification and are reinforced by circular reasoning: both evidence against the conspiracy and an absence of evidence for it are re-interpreted as evidence of its truth, whereby the conspiracy becomes a matter of faith rather than something that can be proven or disproven

When you quote something it would be helpful if you provided a link. IMO this is the problem with the left calling everything they reject a conspiracy theory, similar to how they call others
they disagree with a racist. The terms lose their meaning. In the case of conspiracy theories we now have two recent examples of things that at one time by some definitions as undeniably false are now true or potentially true.


Avatar2go wrote:
And again, as noted by many here, you have deflected many times in your posts. When the discussion descends into denial of even things that are readily evident from your statements, there is really nothing else to add. It's just an exercise in contradiction.

Perhaps you're conflating me with another poster(s).
 
Avatar2go
Posts: 1024
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2022 3:41 am

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Thu Jun 23, 2022 2:20 am

afcjets wrote:
I wonder the same about you. I'm not sure why you're not comprehending that protestors and rioters entering the Capitol is perhaps what actually triggered the lockdown.


Again from the posted timeline, the riot was declared, request for assistance was made, and lockdown initiated before the rioters broke into the building. No rioter entered the building with the consent of the police. You are welcome to confirm this from the many sources available. To even suggest otherwise, is ridiculous. As I pointed out, all you're doing now is contradicting the facts, and insisting on things that are neither reasonable nor rational.

So I leave you with this skit from Monty Python, which at least puts a humorous twist on what you're doing here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohDB5gbtaEQ
 
afcjets
Posts: 4069
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Thu Jun 23, 2022 3:07 am

Avatar2go wrote:
afcjets wrote:
I wonder the same about you. I'm not sure why you're not comprehending that protestors and rioters entering the Capitol is perhaps what actually triggered the lockdown.

Again from the posted timeline, the riot was declared, request for assistance was made, and lockdown initiated before the rioters broke into the building. No rioter entered the building with the consent of the police. You are welcome to confirm this from the many sources available. To even suggest otherwise, is ridiculous. As I pointed out, all you're doing now is contradicting the facts, and insisting on things that are neither reasonable nor rational.


Your timeline doesn't state that. Neither do others...


Avatar2go wrote:
Thus the building was secured & locked as the riot began, and was subsequently and necessarily broken into by the protestors. There is no doubt whatsoever that this occurred. None. At all.


False. The timeline shows the exact opposite of what you state.

"Shortly after 2 p.m.
Protesters break windows and climb into the Capitol. They open doors for others to follow.


2:20 p.m.
The Senate is called to recess, and the House is called to recess shortly after.

The building goes into lockdown.
"

https://www.npr.org/2022/01/05/10699774 ... t-and-when
 
Avatar2go
Posts: 1024
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2022 3:41 am

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Thu Jun 23, 2022 4:21 am

afcjets wrote:

False. The timeline shows the exact opposite of what you state.

"Shortly after 2 p.m.
Protesters break windows and climb into the Capitol. They open doors for others to follow.

2:20 p.m.
The Senate is called to recess, and the House is called to recess shortly after.

The building goes into lockdown.
"

https://www.npr.org/2022/01/05/10699774 ... t-and-when


You are willfully taking the article out of context. It says that initial entry was gained by protestors breaking windows and climbing though, at 2:13 pm, around the same time that protestors attacked the entrance. That cannot be construed as anything other than unlawful entry. Which debunks your claim that protestors entered through other unlocked entrances. There is no evidence for that whatsoever.

Further, more precise video timelines pin down the exact times that the first entrance was opened. There are two sets of doors at that entrance, with a vestibule in between. The outer heavy "Columbus" doors swing inwards with openers and are not locked. That occurred at approximately 2:08 pm.

The inner doors, which swing outwards, were secured by maglocks. These cannot be opened without destruction of the door. But they have electronic safeguards so that even when locked, they can be opened from the inside, by applying pressure for 3 seconds continuously. This is a fire safety feature, and there is a sign posted at the doorway with these instructions. Protestors bashed these doors from outside for about 15 minutes without success, until 2:24 pm, when one of the protestors who climbed through the window, opened the doors from the inside. It appears that protestors saw the sign and opened these doors with pressure while they were locked.

Note that this first breach of the entrance, at 2:24, occurred after the 2:16 pm declaration of lockdown, which was initiated when protestors broke out the windows and appeared in the halls. The entrances had been secured and locked long before that, when the riot was declared at 1:50.

Further the riot was declared when protestors surged forward and broke through the barriers erected around the building. So there was no access and no entry before that moment. The Capitol police Chief reported at 1:59 pm, that the rioters had reached the entrances and windows and were trying to break in. You don't need to break in through unlocked entrances. That claim is just complete and utter nonsense.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_ ... ry_6,_2021

https://www.newsweek.com/was-us-capitol ... nt-1716136

1:50 p.m.: D.C. Metropolitan Police on-scene incident commander Robert Glover declares a riot.
1:58 p.m.: Along the east side of the Capitol, police retreat from a mob removing a barrier along the northeast corner of the building.
1:59 p.m.: Chief Sund receives the first reports that rioters had reached the Capitol's doors and windows and were trying to break in.
2:00 p.m.: The east side mob removes the last barrier protecting the east side of the Capitol.
2:10 p.m.: The west side mob chase police up the steps, breaching the final barricade and approach an entrance directly below the Senate chamber.
2:11 p.m.: Rioter Dominic Pezzola breaks a window on the northwest side of the Capitol with a plastic shield.
2:12 p.m.: The first rioter enters the Capitol through the broken window, later opening a door for others.
2:13 p.m.: Vice President Pence is removed from the Senate chamber to a nearby office. The Senate is gaveled into recess.
2:16 p.m.: Federal Protective Service officers report that the House and Senate are being locked down.
2:20 p.m.: The House is gaveled into recess and starts to evacuate.

 
FGITD
Posts: 2127
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 1:44 pm

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Thu Jun 23, 2022 5:26 am

Avatar2go wrote:

Further the riot was declared when protestors surged forward and broke through the barriers erected around the building. So there was no access and no entry before that moment. The Capitol police Chief reported at 1:59 pm, that the rioters had reached the entrances and windows and were trying to break in. You don't need to break in through unlocked entrances. That claim is just complete and utter nonsense.


That’s a fun detail that seems to be left out often. There were barriers to pass before reaching the building itself. Apparently this peaceful demonstration must have somehow gone through them

But while I admire your patience in proving your point, unfortunately you’re arguing with someone who’s entire retort will consist of “but I don’t feel like that’s what happened because I don’t like it “ followed by a citation to a year old article posted on jan6wasatotallylegitimateprotestanddemsarestupid. com by a user named @Trumpshouldbeking
 
Avatar2go
Posts: 1024
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2022 3:41 am

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Thu Jun 23, 2022 5:50 am

FGITD wrote:

That’s a fun detail that seems to be left out often. There were barriers to pass before reaching the building itself. Apparently this peaceful demonstration must have somehow gone through them

But while I admire your patience in proving your point, unfortunately you’re arguing with someone who’s entire retort will consist of “but I don’t feel like that’s what happened because I don’t like it “ followed by a citation to a year old article posted on jan6wasatotallylegitimateprotestanddemsarestupid. com by a user named @Trumpshouldbeking


I realize I won't alter his views, but it's still important to post the truth in opposition to misinformation. If the latter appears, the former must also.

The reason misinformation becomes established in conservative circles, is that it's not challenged within those circles. Which allows it to become a belief system. That's essential so that people are inoculated from the truth when they interact with the real world. Too late in his case, but for people who aren't members of those circles, it's still worthwhile to expose the truth. That's the purpose of the Jan 6th hearings as well.
 
GDB
Posts: 15402
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Thu Jun 23, 2022 8:14 am

I almost feel sorry for those on here doing their absurd mental gymnastics to try and show the sun sets in the morning, rises in the evening, illuminating a flat Earth. That’s the level you are at. Would be funny if not for all the hate groups well represented (remember all those neo Nazi images and t-shirts celebrating the Holocaust), that attempt to block a legitimate election because, like the overgrown spoiled brats they are (in the image of their guru Trump), they did not get the result they wanted.
Poor you, wrong country and the wrong time for you, not 1930’s Germany or even the old ole days of Jim Crow.
(The Texas GOP, of course, backed a motion recently to totally repeal the Voting Rights Act).
 
art
Posts: 4864
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:46 am

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Thu Jun 23, 2022 8:34 am

GDB wrote:
I almost feel sorry for those on here doing their absurd mental gymnastics to try and show the sun sets in the morning, rises in the evening, illuminating a flat Earth. That’s the level you are at. Would be funny if not for all the hate groups well represented (remember all those neo Nazi images and t-shirts celebrating the Holocaust), that attempt to block a legitimate election because, like the overgrown spoiled brats they are (in the image of their guru Trump), they did not get the result they wanted.


Admirably put.
 
emperortk
Posts: 190
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 2:01 pm

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Thu Jun 23, 2022 11:28 am

afcjets wrote:
Avatar2go wrote:
afcjets wrote:
I wonder the same about you. I'm not sure why you're not comprehending that protestors and rioters entering the Capitol is perhaps what actually triggered the lockdown.

Again from the posted timeline, the riot was declared, request for assistance was made, and lockdown initiated before the rioters broke into the building. No rioter entered the building with the consent of the police. You are welcome to confirm this from the many sources available. To even suggest otherwise, is ridiculous. As I pointed out, all you're doing now is contradicting the facts, and insisting on things that are neither reasonable nor rational.


Your timeline doesn't state that. Neither do others...


Avatar2go wrote:
Thus the building was secured & locked as the riot began, and was subsequently and necessarily broken into by the protestors. There is no doubt whatsoever that this occurred. None. At all.


False. The timeline shows the exact opposite of what you state.

"Shortly after 2 p.m.
Protesters break windows and climb into the Capitol. They open doors for others to follow.


2:20 p.m.
The Senate is called to recess, and the House is called to recess shortly after.

The building goes into lockdown.
"

https://www.npr.org/2022/01/05/10699774 ... t-and-when


I suggest you look up the meaning of lockdown. I work in a secure facility where unauthorized access would result in trespassing charges. That doesn't mean it's constantly in a state of lockdown. Were this facility to go into "lockdown" no one would be permitted to enter or exit regardless of authorization to access, and it would mean there was some kind of threat to the facility or occupants.

Lack of lockdown status for a building, campus, facility, etc doesn't bestow access permission for everyone. It doesn't follow that rioters had permission to enter the Capitol prior to a state of lockdown being declared at 2:20. As someone else pointed out, rioters already breached an outer perimeter before approaching the building itself.

This is pretty basic stuff.
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 24663
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Thu Jun 23, 2022 5:52 pm

NIKV69 wrote:
casinterest wrote:
Reality Check. Show your work on the Illegitimate .


OK
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... story.html

https://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/wat ... 4824003696

https://www.npr.org/2019/06/28/73700878 ... -president

A past Dem president, Hillary and John Lewis all called him illegitimate.. Think that is enough?


Russia interfered with our elections vs. our guy lost but Russian interference is fine. Got it.
 
User avatar
DIRECTFLT
Posts: 2966
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 3:00 am

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Thu Jun 23, 2022 9:54 pm

Investigators: Pelosi Responsible For Jan. 6 Security Breakdown At U.S. Capitol

https://thefederalist.com/2022/06/23/in ... s-capitol/

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi shoulders much of the blame for the security breakdown at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, a preliminary report from Republican investigators Reps. Jim Banks and Rodney Davis determined.

The Capitol Police (USCP) were half-staffed on Jan. 6, Pelosi’s House Sergeant at Arms denied multiple requests for National Guard assistance from the Pentagon and the USCP Chief in the days leading up to Jan. 6, officers were poorly equipped and had insufficient riot shields and helmets, and they were never trained to handle a riot even after the riots of 2020, the investigation shows, according to Banks.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 17993
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Thu Jun 23, 2022 9:59 pm

DIRECTFLT wrote:
Investigators: Pelosi Responsible For Jan. 6 Security Breakdown At U.S. Capitol

https://thefederalist.com/2022/06/23/in ... s-capitol/

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi shoulders much of the blame for the security breakdown at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, a preliminary report from Republican investigators Reps. Jim Banks and Rodney Davis determined.

The Capitol Police (USCP) were half-staffed on Jan. 6, Pelosi’s House Sergeant at Arms denied multiple requests for National Guard assistance from the Pentagon and the USCP Chief in the days leading up to Jan. 6, officers were poorly equipped and had insufficient riot shields and helmets, and they were never trained to handle a riot even after the riots of 2020, the investigation shows, according to Banks.


A private investigation by two acolyte representatives? Sure, why not? Sounds credible already.
 
M564038
Posts: 1123
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 11:16 am

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Thu Jun 23, 2022 9:59 pm

Seems legit.

DIRECTFLT wrote:
Investigators: Pelosi Responsible For Jan. 6 Security Breakdown At U.S. Capitol

https://thefederalist.com/2022/06/23/in ... s-capitol/

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi shoulders much of the blame for the security breakdown at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, a preliminary report from Republican investigators Reps. Jim Banks and Rodney Davis determined.

The Capitol Police (USCP) were half-staffed on Jan. 6, Pelosi’s House Sergeant at Arms denied multiple requests for National Guard assistance from the Pentagon and the USCP Chief in the days leading up to Jan. 6, officers were poorly equipped and had insufficient riot shields and helmets, and they were never trained to handle a riot even after the riots of 2020, the investigation shows, according to Banks.
 
emperortk
Posts: 190
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 2:01 pm

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Thu Jun 23, 2022 10:01 pm

DIRECTFLT wrote:
Investigators: Pelosi Responsible For Jan. 6 Security Breakdown At U.S. Capitol

https://thefederalist.com/2022/06/23/in ... s-capitol/

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi shoulders much of the blame for the security breakdown at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, a preliminary report from Republican investigators Reps. Jim Banks and Rodney Davis determined.

The Capitol Police (USCP) were half-staffed on Jan. 6, Pelosi’s House Sergeant at Arms denied multiple requests for National Guard assistance from the Pentagon and the USCP Chief in the days leading up to Jan. 6, officers were poorly equipped and had insufficient riot shields and helmets, and they were never trained to handle a riot even after the riots of 2020, the investigation shows, according to Banks.


:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

If only the nation had a chief law enforcement officer who could've done something that day to restore law and order! You know, a commander-in-chief or something like that... someone who could've done something more than say "we love you" to the rioters. Oh well.


In more interesting developments, looks like Jeffrey Clark may be joining John Eastman in prison. Wonder who's next, Perry, Gaetz?
 
Newark727
Posts: 3004
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 6:42 pm

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Thu Jun 23, 2022 10:03 pm

Reps. Banks and Davis went on to say that their investigation confirms that Republicans are rubber and Democrats are glue, and whatever is said about them bounces off and sticks to the other party.
 
Avatar2go
Posts: 1024
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2022 3:41 am

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Thu Jun 23, 2022 10:24 pm

DIRECTFLT wrote:
Investigators: Pelosi Responsible For Jan. 6 Security Breakdown At U.S. Capitol

https://thefederalist.com/2022/06/23/in ... s-capitol/

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi shoulders much of the blame for the security breakdown at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, a preliminary report from Republican investigators Reps. Jim Banks and Rodney Davis determined.

The Capitol Police (USCP) were half-staffed on Jan. 6, Pelosi’s House Sergeant at Arms denied multiple requests for National Guard assistance from the Pentagon and the USCP Chief in the days leading up to Jan. 6, officers were poorly equipped and had insufficient riot shields and helmets, and they were never trained to handle a riot even after the riots of 2020, the investigation shows, according to Banks.


This is the ultimate possible example of victim blaming. The fault does not lie with the group that criminally assaulted the Capitol, the fault lies with the Capitol for being unable to defend again the criminal assault.

If an attacker breaks into your home, and then tells the judge that it was your fault for not having adequately defended against him, would the judge accept that and let him go free?

No, because the entire concept is ludicrous and laughable. Unless you are a conservative true believer, in which case you will dutifully swallow any lie presented to you.

Even if the Capitol was under-staffed and under-equipped to handle a riot of more than 5,000 people, that is not a crime. Assaulting the Capitol, breaking into the building, assaulting the police officers guarding it, vandalizing and looting, threatening the VP and members of Congress, those are the crimes, for which people are rightly going to jail.
 
Avatar2go
Posts: 1024
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2022 3:41 am

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Thu Jun 23, 2022 10:47 pm

The hearing today revealed the meeting held on January 3rd, wherein Trump tried to replace Acting Attorney General Rosen, with the environmental attorney Jeff Clark. The testimony reads like an episode of "The Apprentice".

Trump favored Clark because he had proposed a letter to the state legislatures, authorizing them to submit alternate slates of electors prepared by the Trump campaign, to the Jan 6 Congressional election certification. The authorization was based on the unfounded suspicion of election fraud, and was clearly both illegal and unconstitutional.

At the DoJ, three tiers of the leadership had opposed the letter and threatened to resign over it, on the basis of it being a lie, and far beyond the purview of the department. Leaving Trump with the sole option to appoint Clark as AG, in order to send out the letter.

Trump did not yield, despite the three highest officials at DoJ telling him that the letter was false, illegal, and unConsitutional. But he did yield when they pointed out he would look like a fool, as the DoJ would become a graveyard with an incompetent & inexperienced lawyer at the helm. They described the letter as a murder-suicide pact, since no one who touched it would be left standing.

At that point, when Trump realized his image was at stake, he dumped Clark. But continued to allege election fraud over the next several days, culminating in the Capitol riots.
 
luckyone
Posts: 4459
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:50 pm

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Thu Jun 23, 2022 11:02 pm

Let’s assume that further investigation finds shortcomings on the part of the Capitol police — there always are in the things. Here’s what doesn’t change:

1. None of those shortcomings changed anything that Trump and his clowns did in the days and weeks prior
2. The Capitol police still potentially saved the lives of a few lawmakers.
3. Some idiot would use a more robust Capitol police defense as an example of how the Democrats knew they were stealing the election and LOOK HOW THEY SMACKED DOWN A PEACEFUL PROTEST. And they would’ve posted an article by some troll as evidence.
 
Avatar2go
Posts: 1024
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2022 3:41 am

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Fri Jun 24, 2022 5:46 am

Here are the Republicans that asked Trump for a pardon to cover their actions to overturn the results of the 2020 election:

Rep. Mo Brooks, Alabama
Rep. Matt Gaetz, Florida

(These two requested a blanket pardon for all members of Congress who voted against certifying slates of electors, and also for those members who attended a December 21, 2020 White House meeting to strategize actions for the Jan 6th certification)

Rep. Andy Biggs, Arizona
Rep. Louie Gohmert, Texas
Rep. Scott Perry, Pennsylvania
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, Georgia
 
ltbewr
Topic Author
Posts: 16239
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Fri Jun 24, 2022 10:20 am

Avatar2go wrote:
The hearing today revealed the meeting held on January 3rd, wherein Trump tried to replace Acting Attorney General Rosen, with the environmental attorney Jeff Clark. The testimony reads like an episode of "The Apprentice".
Trump favored Clark because he had proposed a letter to the state legislatures, authorizing them to submit alternate slates of electors prepared by the Trump campaign, to the Jan 6 Congressional election certification. The authorization was based on the unfounded suspicion of election fraud, and was clearly both illegal and unconstitutional.
At the DoJ, three tiers of the leadership had opposed the letter and threatened to resign over it, on the basis of it being a lie, and far beyond the purview of the department. Leaving Trump with the sole option to appoint Clark as AG, in order to send out the letter.
Trump did not yield, despite the three highest officials at DoJ telling him that the letter was false, illegal, and unConsitutional. But he did yield when they pointed out he would look like a fool, as the DoJ would become a graveyard with an incompetent & inexperienced lawyer at the helm. They described the letter as a murder-suicide pact, since no one who touched it would be left standing.
At that point, when Trump realized his image was at stake, he dumped Clark. But continued to allege election fraud over the next several days, culminating in the Capitol riots.


Trump failed to get election officials in key states to throw out ballots on weak or non-existent claims of fraud. Those attempts included mob violence, threats and ruin of people's lives and fortunately didn't work. He tried throughout December 2020 and to 1/3/21 to intimidate the DOJ to find fraudulent votes in key states and districts in them to shift the EC vote to him. AG Barr resigned as wouldn't do it. By 1/3/21 that thankfully failed due to threats of DOJ leaders to resign in mass if he was able to put in bootlicker Jeffrey Clark to take over as Acting AG. Trump kept his terrorist mob that had already attacked state capitols, state and election officials on standby, to prepare to assemble in DC on 1/6/21 to try to prevent the last step of the officiating of the Presidential election. The then had his infamous rally on 1/6/21 and give the orders of the loosely organized mob to go to the Capitol to 'stop the steal'. The accepted that challenge, blind to supporting Trump personally, not to their country and did the obscene terror attacks that day.much like how Adolph Hitler had small mobs destroy the German Parliament building and forcing the Parliament to transfer power to Hitler.

On or about 5 AM Wednesday, Federal agents served a search warrant and seized all electronic devices at the home of to me traitor Jeffrey Clark.
I just hope Clark and many others who willing to break the Constitution for Trump and Trump himself go to jail for their crimes.
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 24663
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Fri Jun 24, 2022 5:51 pm

I am wondering if there will be any right wing outrage over this?

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/jan-6- ... s-escalate
https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/22/tech/onl ... index.html
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol ... 708982001/

Answer: no, of course not.

Members of the Jan. 6 Committee are receiving death threats from right wing groups and supporters.
 
bpatus297
Posts: 812
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2016 4:51 am

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Fri Jun 24, 2022 5:53 pm

seb146 wrote:
I am wondering if there will be any right wing outrage over this?

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/jan-6- ... s-escalate
https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/22/tech/onl ... index.html
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol ... 708982001/

Answer: no, of course not.

Members of the Jan. 6 Committee are receiving death threats from right wing groups and supporters.


Of course it's wrong. What else would you like to hear to make you happy?
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 24663
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Fri Jun 24, 2022 5:57 pm

bpatus297 wrote:
seb146 wrote:
I am wondering if there will be any right wing outrage over this?

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/jan-6- ... s-escalate
https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/22/tech/onl ... index.html
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol ... 708982001/

Answer: no, of course not.

Members of the Jan. 6 Committee are receiving death threats from right wing groups and supporters.


Of course it's wrong. What else would you like to hear to make you happy?


The truth is being laid out in the January 6 hearings. Charges would be wonderful. But, there are people who don't believe their own eyes and ears hearing the truth. Their party tried to overthrow the government. Nice pivot, BTW. Nothing about threats against members of Congress in your post.
 
Avatar2go
Posts: 1024
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2022 3:41 am

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Fri Jun 24, 2022 6:00 pm

bpatus297 wrote:
seb146 wrote:
I am wondering if there will be any right wing outrage over this?

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/jan-6- ... s-escalate
https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/22/tech/onl ... index.html
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol ... 708982001/

Answer: no, of course not.

Members of the Jan. 6 Committee are receiving death threats from right wing groups and supporters.


Of course it's wrong. What else would you like to hear to make you happy?


I think the issue is that this is being fed by lies, that the conservatives know to be lies, yet they persist anyway. The goal is to energize the base, and unfortunately, death threats are an indicator of successful energization. Which is also what happened with poll workers, and with state election officials who resisted coercive pressure. As the hearings have revealed in stark detail. So now we get threats against the people running the hearings. Not really a surprise.
 
bpatus297
Posts: 812
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2016 4:51 am

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Fri Jun 24, 2022 6:04 pm

seb146 wrote:
bpatus297 wrote:
seb146 wrote:
I am wondering if there will be any right wing outrage over this?

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/jan-6- ... s-escalate
https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/22/tech/onl ... index.html
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol ... 708982001/

Answer: no, of course not.

Members of the Jan. 6 Committee are receiving death threats from right wing groups and supporters.


Of course it's wrong. What else would you like to hear to make you happy?


The truth is being laid out in the January 6 hearings. Charges would be wonderful. But, there are people who don't believe their own eyes and ears hearing the truth. Their party tried to overthrow the government. Nice pivot, BTW. Nothing about threats against members of Congress in your post.


I didn't pivot, I answered your question. The death threats are wrong.
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 24663
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Mon Jun 27, 2022 5:49 pm

All these Republicans complaining the election was stolen and ballots were forged and ballots mishandled.... does that mean their own victories are null and void?
 
ltbewr
Topic Author
Posts: 16239
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Mon Jun 27, 2022 6:30 pm

The January 6 Committee will be holding on short notice a public hearing tomorrow, 6/28 from 1 PM to present testimony by an undisclosed witness. The committee had said last week they would not hold public sessions until after the July 4 holiday recess. Guessing is that the info is so critical in the set up of the 1/6/21 terror attack on the Capital that it had to be done ASAP. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... uxbndlbing
 
Avatar2go
Posts: 1024
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2022 3:41 am

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Tue Jun 28, 2022 5:04 pm

The surprise witness for today's hearing is Cassidy Hutchinson, who is the 25-year-old former assistant to Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows. She has new legal representation and is willing to provide more information.
 
Avatar2go
Posts: 1024
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2022 3:41 am

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Tue Jun 28, 2022 7:24 pm

Cassidy Hutchinson testified in the hearing today, that Trump tried to commandeer the Beast to go to the Capitol with the protestors, grabbing the steering wheel. He was furious at being driven back to the White House against his will. Then she said he threw his lunch plate against the wall in the White House dining room.

Also, she testified Trump requested that armed individuals be allowed though the security checkpoints for his Jan 6 rally, to increase the crowd size, saying "they're not here to hurt me".
 
ltbewr
Topic Author
Posts: 16239
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

Re: January 6 Committee public presentations and hearings

Tue Jun 28, 2022 7:35 pm

Ms Hutchinson's testimony today was shocking, chilling, stomach churning and anger inducing in describing the behaviors of then President Trump and in particular her boss Mark Meadows and others close to the President just before and on 1/6/21 she personally saw and learned by others with first hand knowledge. She testified that Trump literally acted like a spoiled brat, put himself in danger, was totally delusional as to losing the election, was willing to violate the Constitution, had no issues with VP Pence being killed by his terrorist mob. From seeing food spewed on the walls of the President's dining area tossed by him in anger AG Barr saying he lost the election, trying to take the steering wheel of the car he was in wanting to go to the Capitol after his infamous rally to call his followers to commit a terror attack on the Capitol to 'stop the steal', his obscene behaviors as the terror attack took place, the too late, too little and perverse comments as the attack on the Capital was winding down, it all came out and verified by Ms. Hutchinson.

Today's hearing also touched on the pardon requests to Trump by some in his WH staff who feared they might face criminal charges for their actions or lack of them on 1/6/21. That and related issues will be discussed in later hearings.

To me today's hearing was to encourage witnesses who have rejected being interviewed or subpoenas to testify to the Committee to end their holdouts, for the Committee to see justice for the country, prevent Trump from ever running for public office again, and to keep the narrative in its favor, not Trump's or his supporters.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Airontario, Avatar2go, Braybuddy, GalaxyFlyer, GDB, johns624, leader1, NIKV69, tmu101 and 23 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos