What's new
By:
Filters

Protestors storm capital

Al-O-Meter said:
'Those who believe this' see that one investigation is being carried out by a party friendly to the head of the agency alleged to have failed while the other is being carried out by a party adversarial to to the head of the agency alleged to have failed. 'Those who believe this' see a value in the checks and balances that come from the involvement of adversarial parties.
Click to expand...
That's the problem in all of this. I have no problem with a FULL bi-partisan look into Jan 6th, I think there was a lot more going on than anybody knows.

The problem is, the Marxists on this board have no problem with a full year of assualt on two cities, Portland and Seattle. We've seen the video of protesters being let in the Capitol, we've also seen video where it looks like some are breaking in....Yet you have a full year of assaults on federal buildings in Portland and Seattle, tearing down of statues, and none of these commie bastards have anything to say about that. It's laughable, it's like I'm watching a bad movie with these moronic Millennials.
 
The Thriller said:
Republicans and their propagandists are nothing more than arsonists who set fire to the capitol and now blame the fire dept for not putting out the fire fast enough. January 6 doesn’t happen if Trump acts like a democratic leader and steps down in a peaceful transition of power. January 6 doesn’t happen if Fox News and other right wing media don’t promote the Big Lie. January 6 doesn’t happen if Republican leaders stand up to the president and their most ridiculous supporters and squash the Big Lie.

George Will said this a while back and he couldn’t have been more right. The inmates are running the asylum.
Click to expand...
This

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
fishonjazz said:
Does the president, a pretty powerful individual imo, have no responsibility to make sure whatever he says at his rally to an angry mob didn't spiral into uncontrolled criminal activity at the Capitol?
Click to expand...
The President has a responsibility if he made a direct instruction to imminently commit a criminal act. The standard set for responsibility of speech set by Brandenburg v. Ohio is pretty high. It can't be vague. It can't require interpretation. The specific instruction has to be for the instructed act to be carried out immediately. You may not like that standard but legally the answer is 'no'.

That said, we already know what Trump said. It has been detailed and dissected endlessly already. What I want to know is what we don't yet know. Why did the Capitol Police not have more of their 2,000+ officers there that day? That is information I don't have and this investigation is the perfect place to find that out.
 
Hax0rs said:
That's the problem in all of this. I have no problem with a FULL bi-partisan look into Jan 6th, I think there was a lot more going on than anybody knows.

The problem is, the Marxists on this board have no problem with a full year of assualt on two cities, Portland and Seattle. We've seen the video of protesters being let in the Capitol, we've also seen video where it looks like some are breaking in....Yet you have a full year of assaults on federal buildings in Portland and Seattle, tearing down of statues, and none of these commie bastards have anything to say about that. It's laughable, it's like I'm watching a bad movie with these moronic Millennials.
Click to expand...
I don't know if I'm one of Marxists you speak of (don't know what Marxist even means tbh) but I hated all the looting and rioting that was happening across the united states last summer. I hated much of what happened to our country while trump was president.

I'm glad that many many (I think the number was like 14,000) of those scumbags were arrested.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
Last edited:
Al-O-Meter said:
The President has a responsibility if he made a direct instruction to imminently commit a criminal act. The standard set for responsibility of speech set by Brandenburg v. Ohio is pretty high. It can't be vague. It can't require interpretation. The specific instruction has to be for the instructed act to be carried out immediately. You may not like that standard but legally the answer is 'no'.

That said, we already know what Trump said. It has been detailed and dissected endlessly already. What I want to know is what we don't yet know. Why did the Capitol Police not have more of their 2,000+ officers there that day? That is information I don't have and this investigation is the perfect place to find that out.
Click to expand...

Do they typically have tons of officers at the Capitol when they are verifying election results?

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
fishonjazz said:
but I hated all the looting and rioting that was happening across the united states last summer. I hated much of what happened to our country while trump was president.
Click to expand...
Thats funny considering Trump offered those democratic governors National Guard assistance and they refused. Democrat ran cities were allowed to burn and be attacked by democrat officials, ya'll didn't say ****, that was okay.
 
fishonjazz said:
Do they typically have tons of officers at the Capitol when they are verifying election results?
Click to expand...
That is a good question and one that should be asked during an investigation. What was the thinking going in to that day? I know that immediately afterward Pelosi fired the Chief of the Capitol Police so there obviously were failures but there seems to be a shroud thrown over the issue to cover up the details. I think the American people deserve to know what those details are.
 
Hax0rs said:
Thats funny considering Trump offered those democratic governors National Guard assistance and they refused. Democrat ran cities were allowed to burn and be attacked by democrat officials, ya'll didn't say ****, that was okay.
Click to expand...
I said plenty. I'm not a politician though so admittedly my words didn't have a big effect on anything.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
Al-O-Meter said:
That is a good question and one that should be asked during an investigation. What was the thinking going in to that day? I know that immediately afterward Pelosi fired the Chief of the Capitol Police so there obviously were failures but there seems to be a shroud thrown over the issue to cover up the details. I think the American people deserve to know what those details are.
Click to expand...
The thinking going into that day SHOULD be ho hum normal election certification process.

Unfortunately our president was a **** head and deserves ALL the blame for what happened. Remove trump from the equation, the incident never happens and we don't need to even question how many officers are there or whatever.

This is trump and his supporters (both in office and regular voters) mess.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
You can tell whos merely regurgitating right wing propaganda and who’s actually looking to find an answer as to who’s responsible for the capitol police.

Those wanting to blame Pelosi are consuming right wing disinformation. She and the S of Arms are responsible for House security but she isn’t in charge of Capitol security. Same goes for Mcconnell and the Senate. They work together with the Capitol architect (appointed by the executive branch) to oversee the security of the Capitol. Perhaps this needs to be reformed and streamlined?

apnews.com

Posts falsely cite Pelosi as responsible for security during Capitol insurrection

CLAIM: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who is in charge of overseeing the Capitol Police, is responsible for security failures that allowed the Jan...
apnews.com apnews.com

What is undeniable is that the national guard was ready to deploy but were delayed for several hours. Why? Did Donald Trump want to see how this would play out first?

Why were the Capitol police’s not one not two but SIX requests for help denied???

www.npr.org

Ex-Capitol Police Chief Says Requests For National Guard Denied 6 Times In Riots

Steven Sund contradicts reports that help was not requested, saying security officials at the House and Senate rebuffed calls for assistance ahead of and during the attack on the Capitol.
www.npr.org www.npr.org

Again, let’s not score political points here. We should be seeking for the truth, no matter how damning they might be for Dear Leader and his cult.
 
Last edited:
One Brow said:
I didn't realize Pelosi and Trump were so friendly. Do go on.
Click to expand...
Pelosi should be there to challenge Trump, but those hostile to Pelosi should also be there to challenge Pelosi. I would have had the same objection if Trump had handpicked the Senators allowed to see the Mueller Report or preside over impeachment. Pelosi has kicked off anyone who could steer things in an uncomfortable direction. It is unprecedented and has delegitimized the whole proceeding.
 
Al-O-Meter said:
Pelosi should be there to challenge Trump, but those hostile to Pelosi should also be there to challenge Pelosi. I would have had the same objection if Trump had handpicked the Senators allowed to see the Mueller Report or preside over impeachment. Pelosi has kicked off anyone who could steer things in an uncomfortable direction. It is unprecedented and has delegitimized the whole proceeding.
Click to expand...
I agree Pelosi's committee needs to have people hostile to Pelosi politically, and she does also (by appointing Republicans herself). That's very different from appointing people committed to a specific narrative regardless of the facts.
 
We realized that Republicans decided to forfeit their choice of choosing a bipartisan commission to investigate this, right?
We also realize that even right now the commission is bipartisan, with Cheney and Kinzinger. Both of whom are much more conservative than Trump

Facts matter.

I can’t find the clip online and I don’t want to post the entire hearing but officer Fanone said something important in his closing testimony. He said how the FBI is investigating the microcosms of the insurrection, the individual crimes. However, they aren’t investigating the causes, who planned it, and how to ultimately prevent this from happening again. That’s what this commission is doing.

If Repubs really do believe that they were innocent, that it was antifa, and a love fest between tourists and police, then I hope that Brooks, McCarthy, Gosar, Gym Jordan, Guiliani, and Donald all willingly come forward and testify. Let’s clear this whole thing up!
 
One Brow said:
I agree Pelosi's committee needs to have people hostile to Pelosi politically, and she does also (by appointing Republicans herself). That's very different from appointing people committed to a specific narrative regardless of the facts.
Click to expand...
Correct. Pelosi and Cheney are pilar opposites politically.
 
Are we really so stupid that we think this guy needed to serve in this investigation for the investigation to be fair? Why are we setting such a silly standard? My god we’re ****ed.
1627411504786.jpeg
 
Last edited:
fishonjazz said:
Unfortunately our president was a **** head and deserves ALL the blame for what happened. Remove trump from the equation, the incident never happens and we don't need to even question how many officers are there or whatever.
Click to expand...
If this is all already known , do you believe this "investigation" is a waste of everyone's time and money? If everything is known from the beginning, is it then an investigation at all or is it simply a show?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top