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.

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.

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.”

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

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

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?

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/

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.

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.

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.

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.

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/
.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.