ADVERTISEMENT

Jan 6... Open questions

04Watu

I.T.S. Redshirt Freshman
Jan 15, 2021
67
29
18
It appears that almost everyone except some in Congress and the DOJ have shrugged off the invasion of the Capitol to prevent Biden’s confirmation as no big deal.

There is, however, a lot we do not know about how it happened, the planning, and the response. Maybe no one cares, but the questions should be answered.

 
  • Like
Reactions: shon46
Facts point to this being a bipartisan effort to create the the groundwork to squash all future support for Trump. Friends who work in DC tell me there were 1.5 Mil people there protesting hence why some feel the need to keep the National Guard there. We know ANTIFA was there instigating because there is video of them being escorted in by city police as well as Jayden X (the leader of the Utah ANTIFA chapter) being arrested. I bet Pelosi and McConnell played a huge role in the lack of security and as we speak, an inquiry has been filed for the release of Pelosis conversation with Miley the day of the event. IMHO, this was no insurrection. This was a political setup. If 1.5 Mil people attending the event truly wanted an insurrection, Congress would not exist right now.
 
If they had stayed and took over the Capitol that would be an insurrection. This was more like a panty raid.
The word insurrection was chosen to describe this for a reason. There is something called The Insurrection Act that gives the President power to mobilize troops that they don't normally have. Trump could have invoked this over CHAZ, but he didn't. I think they changed the name to CHOP because the declaration of an autonomous zone is a true insurrection by definition.
Good luck finding out what really happened. If it doesn't make Trump look bad, you will never hear about it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: shon46
If they had stayed and took over the Capitol that would be an insurrection. This was more like a panty raid.
The word insurrection was chosen to describe this for a reason. There is something called The Insurrection Act that gives the President power to mobilize troops that they don't normally have. Trump could have invoked this over CHAZ, but he didn't. I think they changed the name to CHOP because the declaration of an autonomous zone is a true insurrection by definition.
Good luck finding out what really happened. If it doesn't make Trump look bad, you will never hear about it.
They disrupted a constitutionally mandated part of our election process. And they did so in efforts to supercede the voices of the majority (both in population and electors). They’re damn lucky that they don’t get tried for treason with this ‘panty raid’ of theirs. In the early days of the republic, people were tried and convicted of treason for much less.
 
  • Like
Reactions: watu05
Congress should function as God and the Constitution intended instead of creating these sham commissions where the majority party selects all the staff and pre-writes all the reports. The Commission absorbs all the political fall out and we are left with nothing but Kabuki theater with members asking scripted questions which cannot be answered in the time allotted so both parties have political cover at home.

It’s absurd to have this Commission with no inquiry into security planning failures. It’s no different than the Chinese refusing to investigate the possibility of a lab leak.
 
They interupped Congressional proceedings. oh no!!!
No they interrupted the entire electoral proceeding which is constitutionally mandated.

1. I would like you to imagine what would happen if you set off a fire sprinkler in a local gymnasium on Election Day to ruin the election process at a local precinct. What kinds of crimes would you be charged with? Now, I want you to inflate that violation to every precinct in every county, in every state, across the USA (and DC) and in during your transgression people died and many were injured trying to stop you on top of the cost to the government for the damage to property. How many years do you think you would be in jail?

2. Now imagine a couple elected officials are suspected to have pestered you into doing it... should the body they were apart of investigate the incident?

The answers you are looking for are

1. More years than I have left to live
2. Yes, yes they should.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Gmoney4WW
Quote Aston:

1. I would like you to imagine what would happen if you set off a fire sprinkler in a local gymnasium on Election Day to ruin the election process at a local precinct. What kinds of crimes would you be charged with? Now, I want you to inflate that violation to every precinct in every county, in every state, across the USA (and DC) and in during your transgression people died and many were injured trying to stop you on top of the cost to the government for the damage to property. How many years do you think you would be in jail?

I think you have outdone yourself with this.

What did happen was a disgrace and should not have happened and as I said above people died.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: watu05
Quote Aston:

1. I would like you to imagine what would happen if you set off a fire sprinkler in a local gymnasium on Election Day to ruin the election process at a local precinct. What kinds of crimes would you be charged with? Now, I want you to inflate that violation to every precinct in every county, in every state, across the USA (and DC) and in during your transgression people died and many were injured trying to stop you on top of the cost to the government for the damage to property. How many years do you think you would be in jail?

I think you have outdone yourself with this.

What did happen was a disgrace and should not have happened and as I said above people died.
Thank you for the compliment. I appreciate you putting aside politics and acknowledging the circumstances. Kudos to you
 
Congress should function as God and the Constitution intended instead of creating these sham commissions where the majority party selects all the staff and pre-writes all the reports. The Commission absorbs all the political fall out and we are left with nothing but Kabuki theater with members asking scripted questions which cannot be answered in the time allotted so both parties have political cover at home.

It’s absurd to have this Commission with no inquiry into security planning failures. It’s no different than the Chinese refusing to investigate the possibility of a lab leak.
I agree that security planning failures should be included. If anyone in relation to the capitol police or the city of DC or with the federal government is found to have known there was a clear and imminent danger and they purposefully chose not to protect the election proceedings (for whatever reason, ie to encourage an attack so D’s could publicly blame R’s or to allow for an attack for some kind of hope that the election results be changed) then they need to be charged criminally. I would just hope that no one on either side was so dumb / crooked as to purposefully do that.

I would also be surprised if someone so vein and self serving as Pelosi would (even in a small way) purposefully put their life in danger just to win a news battle for an election where they had already mostly won - besides the Georgia Senate runoff.
 
Last edited:
Were they Republicans or Democrats? That makes a big difference.
It makes no difference what so ever. Dead is permanent. Party can change. Some were law enforcement and their politics might not be available. Even if it is known it doesn't matter. They died because of this stupidness.

More people barely made it to safety. Including Pence who did by about a second. There were wounded. It wasn't going to work. It was a bad mark on American History.
 
it matter to the media. Republicans deserved it, Democrats are victims.
The one time this guy ^ doesn’t support someone being shot at whilst they help commit a violent crime. Apparently the castle doctrine should not apply once you’re a US congressman or their staff and you’re in the house of democracy.
 
Congress should function as God and the Constitution intended instead of creating these sham commissions where the majority party selects all the staff and pre-writes all the reports. The Commission absorbs all the political fall out and we are left with nothing but Kabuki theater with members asking scripted questions which cannot be answered in the time allotted so both parties have political cover at home.

It’s absurd to have this Commission with no inquiry into security planning failures. It’s no different than the Chinese refusing to investigate the possibility of a lab leak.
Like the Benghazi commission that called Hillary to testify repeatedly? 7 times? And she did under oath. There have been bi-partisan commissions such as the recent Senate one that found and described Russian meddling in the 2016 elections.

Jan 6 should be a bi-partisan commission and move forward, but it's easy to understand why the POT would refuse without being seen as refusing.
 
I will support an investigation into the capital protest when they investigate the antifa, blm, etal invasion and takeover of Seattle and Portland.
Why the hell do you care so much about what happens in Portland Oregon?
 
Portland is a case study in Trump's attempt to manufacture a violent event our of peaceful demonstrations.

"Local officials have also opposed the use of federal law enforcement officers in Portland in recent days.

“We do not need or want their help,” Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler said in comments last week. “The best thing they can do is stay inside their building, or leave Portland altogether.”

Oregon Gov. Kate Brown also said in a statement last week that she believes the use of federal law enforcement is part of an effort by Trump to provoke confrontations for political purposes.

“This political theater from President Trump has nothing to do with public safety,” Brown said in a statement. “The President is failing to lead this nation. Now he is deploying federal officers to patrol the streets of Portland in a blatant abuse of power by the federal government.”
 
Like the Benghazi commission that called Hillary to testify repeatedly? 7 times? And she did under oath. There have been bi-partisan commissions such as the recent Senate one that found and described Russian meddling in the 2016 elections.

Jan 6 should be a bi-partisan commission and move forward, but it's easy to understand why the POT would refuse without being seen as refusing.
Different animals. You are an exceptionally smart person, but under informed on this issue. Benghazi and the other you cite are select committee reports where they are still driven by the majority but they are technically bi-partisan and technically part of the normal functioning of the Congress and subject to their traditions and rules. Including staff and budget. Minority members retain questioning and speaking rights, can hire their own counsel and investigators and have the right to prep their own reports and engage in a limited amount of post publication follow up. None of those things are guaranteed under independent commissions and though non-partisan in make up on its face amongst voting members, the budget, staffs and the scope of the inquiry is frequently tilted in the particular direction of the ruling parties. It’s wrong no matter who is in charge or the subject and it’s just further proof Congress is able but unwilling to fulfill its constitutional duties at times.

Its difficult for lay people to swallow in this country, but when Congressional majority leaders say on television “I am calling for an independent bi-partisan commission of esteemed leaders and experts,” what they really mean is “I will not allow the Congress to function normally and allow the minority party to have its normal rights respected. I am now controlling the issues covered and where the money will be spent. The outcome of the commission will be controlled by me but if I do not like the result, I don’t want any binding action to take place. I’ll just spend hundreds of millions of dollars and ignore the final report.”

Its outrageous we allow our leadership, on both sides, to behave this way.
 
Last edited:
I just think Portland is a bunch of people who have gone too far... much like the people in DC did on the 6th. However; I don’t believe that those people have been encouraged repeatedly by people holding federal office to do what they’re doing, in fact, most of them said that it didn’t matter that Biden was elected when asked why they chose to keep doing what they were doing. They don’t want to fall in line because they don’t think that Biden represents change. Honestly, they’re probably right about that fact. But they do need to realize that sometimes you attract more flies with honey than you do with vinegar, and they’re more likely to see change if they work harder behind the scenes while the party that supports some of the same agenda is in power. They’re being counterproductive and are actually pushing change farther away.
 
I just think Portland is a bunch of people who have gone too far... much like the people in DC did on the 6th. However; I don’t believe that those people have been encouraged repeatedly by people holding federal office to do what they’re doing, in fact, most of them said that it didn’t matter that Biden was elected when asked why they chose to keep doing what they were doing. They don’t want to fall in line because they don’t think that Biden represents change. Honestly, they’re probably right about that fact. But they do need to realize that sometimes you attract more flies with honey than you do with vinegar, and they’re more likely to see change if they work harder behind the scenes while the party that supports some of the same agenda is in power. They’re being counterproductive and are actually pushing change farther away.
You forgetting Maxine Waters?
 
You forgetting Maxine Waters?
She hasn’t been to Portland to foment them that I’m aware of; however, if you think she should be removed from office and you can provide sufficient evidence to that point... be my guest. I would understand her removal. Now you can take half of the Republicans in Congress for doing similar things starting with Ted Cruz.
If I didn’t believe they would be replaced with someone just as bad, I would support getting 3/4ths of Congress being removed. You can have Feinstein as well.
 
Clearly you didn’t bother to read the report,
.
The foundation of the investigation was based on a false dossier from an agent of MI6. Let that sink in. A British Spy working for the UK gov, tried to sabotage a sitting US President and got caught. The Mueller report was built on multiple proven lies and when those lies were exposed, the report was irrelevant.
 
This is a good start on a response. It’s amazing what facts are actually uncovered and what flaws can be remedied when Congress is allowed to do its job on a majority/minority basis and some ridiculous one sided political side show is shelved, at least for awhile.

I’ll claim a little credit here for voicing the concerns addressed in this report, encouraging people to see the problems and find solutions, while the Capitol still burned and people on here were groundlessly accusing me of sedition.

 
Transforming January 6, Trump's newest twist: The heroic culmination of a righteous uprising.
(From New York Magazine)

"Last Thursday, Donald Trump announced a new theme, with all his customary blunt-force subtlety. “Who shot Ashli Babbitt?,” he wrote on his official pseudo-presidential stationery. Those four words were the entirety of the message.

Two days later, at his rally in Florida, he said more. “Who shot Ashli Babbitt? We all saw the hand. We saw the gun … You know, if that were on the other side, the person that did the shooting would be strung up and hung. Okay? Now, they don’t want to give the name … It’s a terrible thing, right? Shot. Boom. And it’s a terrible thing.”

And then, speaking Wednesday about his lawsuit challenging his social-media ban, Trump returned to the subject again. Asked about the insurrection, he changed the subject to the terrible people on the other side who were not being charged, and brought up Babbitt once again: “The person that shot Ashli Babbitt. Boom. Right through the head. Just, boom. There was no reason for that. And why isn’t that person being opened up, and why isn’t that being studied?”

Babbitt’s death, while tragic, occurred for a very good reason. The Air Force veteran, who had been fully converted into the most dangerous and fantastical pro-Trump conspiracy theories, had joined the aggressive vanguard of the January 6 insurrection. Babbitt died trying to squeeze through the smashed window of a barricaded door that led to the inner sanctum where members of Congress were hiding from the mob.

Talia Lavin’s profile of Babbitt, in the current issue of the magazine, notes her emergence as a martyr on the far right. As Lavin points out, Babbitt is not the only Trump supporter who lost her life during the insurrection. Rosanne Boyland also died, but the manner of her death — trampling by the mob — does not serve the same propagandistic purpose. The whole point of Babbitt’s centrality is that she was leading the mob violently forward toward its goal of threatening or killing officials who refused to cooperate with their objective of overturning the election result.

It is revealing that Trump has only taken up Babbitt’s cause now, six months after the insurrection. In the immediate aftermath of the riot, Republicans were briefly furious enough to contemplate writing Trump out of the party and even voting to impeach him. Then they decided not to expunge him, and to hope the ugly events simply faded from memory. A few months later, they decided to purge Liz Cheney, allegedly because she refused to let go of the insurrection. Shortly after that, the party voted to block a bipartisan investigation of the insurrection.

All the political momentum is on Trump’s side. He has slowly turned January 6 from a black mark that threatened to expunge him from Republican politics, to a regrettable episode that his allies preferred to leave behind, to a glorious uprising behind which he could rally his adherents.

Martyrs are the most potent symbols for a radical movement. The John Birch Society commemorated an American missionary killed by Chinese communists in 1945 (the first death of the Cold War, the society’s followers believed). Horst Wessel, a German storm trooper killed by communists in 1930, inspired an eponymous song that became a Nazi anthem.

The anti-anti-Trump right has dismissed the insurrection as overblown, a protest march gone bad, perhaps ill-considered but never posing any serious threat to the republic. The far right’s highlighting of Babbitt’s death sends a different message: The insurrection was good. Babbitt’s effort to penetrate the defensive barrier was brave, and the stopping of her charge a crime.

By throwing himself behind this message, Trump is endorsing the most radical interpretation of his presidency. January 6 was not a minor misstep after a successful era, as fans like Mike Pence and Lindsey Graham now say. It was the heroic culmination of a righteous uprising."
 
Transforming January 6, Trump's newest twist: The heroic culmination of a righteous uprising.
(From New York Magazine)

"Last Thursday, Donald Trump announced a new theme, with all his customary blunt-force subtlety. “Who shot Ashli Babbitt?,” he wrote on his official pseudo-presidential stationery. Those four words were the entirety of the message.

Two days later, at his rally in Florida, he said more. “Who shot Ashli Babbitt? We all saw the hand. We saw the gun … You know, if that were on the other side, the person that did the shooting would be strung up and hung. Okay? Now, they don’t want to give the name … It’s a terrible thing, right? Shot. Boom. And it’s a terrible thing.”

And then, speaking Wednesday about his lawsuit challenging his social-media ban, Trump returned to the subject again. Asked about the insurrection, he changed the subject to the terrible people on the other side who were not being charged, and brought up Babbitt once again: “The person that shot Ashli Babbitt. Boom. Right through the head. Just, boom. There was no reason for that. And why isn’t that person being opened up, and why isn’t that being studied?”

Babbitt’s death, while tragic, occurred for a very good reason. The Air Force veteran, who had been fully converted into the most dangerous and fantastical pro-Trump conspiracy theories, had joined the aggressive vanguard of the January 6 insurrection. Babbitt died trying to squeeze through the smashed window of a barricaded door that led to the inner sanctum where members of Congress were hiding from the mob.

Talia Lavin’s profile of Babbitt, in the current issue of the magazine, notes her emergence as a martyr on the far right. As Lavin points out, Babbitt is not the only Trump supporter who lost her life during the insurrection. Rosanne Boyland also died, but the manner of her death — trampling by the mob — does not serve the same propagandistic purpose. The whole point of Babbitt’s centrality is that she was leading the mob violently forward toward its goal of threatening or killing officials who refused to cooperate with their objective of overturning the election result.

It is revealing that Trump has only taken up Babbitt’s cause now, six months after the insurrection. In the immediate aftermath of the riot, Republicans were briefly furious enough to contemplate writing Trump out of the party and even voting to impeach him. Then they decided not to expunge him, and to hope the ugly events simply faded from memory. A few months later, they decided to purge Liz Cheney, allegedly because she refused to let go of the insurrection. Shortly after that, the party voted to block a bipartisan investigation of the insurrection.

All the political momentum is on Trump’s side. He has slowly turned January 6 from a black mark that threatened to expunge him from Republican politics, to a regrettable episode that his allies preferred to leave behind, to a glorious uprising behind which he could rally his adherents.

Martyrs are the most potent symbols for a radical movement. The John Birch Society commemorated an American missionary killed by Chinese communists in 1945 (the first death of the Cold War, the society’s followers believed). Horst Wessel, a German storm trooper killed by communists in 1930, inspired an eponymous song that became a Nazi anthem.

The anti-anti-Trump right has dismissed the insurrection as overblown, a protest march gone bad, perhaps ill-considered but never posing any serious threat to the republic. The far right’s highlighting of Babbitt’s death sends a different message: The insurrection was good. Babbitt’s effort to penetrate the defensive barrier was brave, and the stopping of her charge a crime.

By throwing himself behind this message, Trump is endorsing the most radical interpretation of his presidency. January 6 was not a minor misstep after a successful era, as fans like Mike Pence and Lindsey Graham now say. It was the heroic culmination of a righteous uprising."
When Putin asked the question of who killed Babbitt before the summit between Biden and Putin, people should have been connecting the dots and asking themselves why Putin was asking the question and what is Russia doing with this info? Trump echoing that question only solidifies to me that someone very very high up is being blackmailed outside of the Trumps circle. If Russia knows the answer to that question, you can best believe that other countries know whatever that is as well. Who else is blackmailing these high up individuals? Once that info comes out, what will happen to the establishment Dems and Republicans pushing this narrative? I got my popcorn 🍿 I’m just waiting for the house of cards to come tumbling down.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT