Investigating the Jan 6 th Uprising.

This investigative committee is vindictive and overtly hostile. Not the kind of people I would lend any cooperation to. They would twist anything they could to make you look bad. It would be extremely foolish of DT to cooperate with this committee under any circumstances.

 

Fair enough. You believe I bought a bunch of hooey and I believe with all my heart that you have.

 

Looking bad is a result of being bad and DT brought that into the picture vividly and obscenely!

 

Perhaps but that is not always the case. It would look a lot better if this committee didn't come across as such a partisan witch hunt instead of a group who was truly looking for the truth.

 

Which explains the user name "Heartburn"?
Sorry, couldn't resist......

 

'Not sure how you measure "coming across". I think they are "coming across" just fine.

 

They can't come up with any real complaint or criticism, so they have to resort to basically saying nothing but "seems sus."

 

I suppose if you have an agenda of getting someone as opposed to going wherever the truth leads. For example, here is a list of questions that have been submitted that the committee refuses to even entertain because they don't further their agenda. They refused to allow anyone on the committee that would not go along with their agenda.

• When then-USCP Chief Steven Sund made a request for national guard support on January 4th, why was that request denied?

• Did Sergeant at Arms Paul Irving get permission or instruction from your staff on January 4th prior to denying Chief Sund’s request for the national guard?

• What conversations and what guidance did you and your staff give the Sergeant at Arms leading up to January 6th specific to the security posture of the campus?

• What conversations did you have during the attack on the Capitol and what response did you give security officials on January 6th when Chief Sund requested National Guard support that required your approval?

• Why are your House Officers refusing to comply with preservation and production requests to turn over requested materials relevant to the events of January 6th?

 

Haven't you heard the latest headlines? The committee has attributed three precise felonies to DT and coconspirators in latest pleading to D.C. Judge Carter(?) to force Eastman to surrender the other tranche of 1000's of his emails, those he deemed privileged.

 

Awesome! Hopefully the DOJ follows up. I know they are hesitant to take any action against a former president, but enough is enough.

 

It is a well-accepted fact and confirmed by top DOD generals that they (the generals) blocked the deployment of National Guardsmen because it was feared that DT would assert, as commander-in-chief of the armed forces, to redirect said guardsmen to do his (DT's) bidding and possibly reinforce the rioting or otherwise make matters more lop-sided in favor of the certification process being halted for that fateful day. Thank goodness those at the very top kept good sense about things, eh??

 

Look forward to another fizzle like the Mueller report. Not to worry, the Democrats will invent another bogus reason to investigate Trump.

 

So attempting to overthrow our democratic elections is okay in your book. Good to know. I personally like that whole Constitution thingie. Not sure why Trump and his followers hate it so much.

 

You dislike protest against the government. Not surprising, liberals love licking the boots of fascist bureaucrats, and hate any righteous anger against abusive government. Government is god.

 

I believe the three were (1) conspiracy to hinder/stymie a government process i.e. the vote certification and (2) conspiracy to defraud the United States of America under federal statutes and (3) ditto the previous but under D.C. local statutes

 

It's going to be difficult to prove intent. Trump has something akin to a stupidity/insanity defense going. But it sounds like there's lots of documentation that he was TOLD by his own people that he was acting on false information and continued anyway, so maybe that will help. We'll see. I hope he's under investigation federally (and he may be already, I think that's something people keep missing) and, individually, in every state he tried to overturn. We know he is in Georgia.

Also, I see where my previous post created some confusion. I was trying to say that Congress's critics here have nothing to criticize the panel with other than "this seems sus," not that this was all the panel had on Trump.

 

Lol, buddy, you need to read posts before "responding." I've never objected to protesting. I've donated to the defense of protestors with whom I disagree. Catch up. Trump didn't just try to protest. You'd know that if you read the Eastman memo, which of course you haven't. Spoiler alert: it had nothing to do with protesting and everything to do with trying to steal an election.

But keep celebrating and defending dictatorship while pretending you have a problem with government overreach. It's really ****ing cute.

 

Fortunately, they don't seem to need his shitty cooperation....

 

That there is some tin-foil hat stuff. They did eventually show up and DT didn't direct them to do anything. But this committee won't even ask any questions on this critical topic because it is off script.

"The commanding general of the District of Columbia National Guard, told members of Congress Wednesday that he had troops ready to deploy immediately to the Capitol on Jan. 6, but it took more than three hours for the Defense Department to give the green light."

D.C. National Guard chief: Pentagon took 3 hours to greenlight troops during Capitol assault (nbcnews.com)

 

If anybody has ever set themselves up for an insanity defense, it's this tool....

He was told he was barking at the moon by some people, but he was also told he was "on to something" by other people... and these idiots persist to this day (See Wisconsin this week)

He's a massively confused person to begin with, but getting mixed messages in his level 1.0 brain could certainly cause a short in the system...

 

Ho hum? You see presidents accused of committing felonies by a Congressional committee every day in court documents, do ya?

I don't...

 

Never happened. That’s a democrat wet dream that didn’t occur. All this is more nothing burgers that will go no where.

 

Here are some real sick burns from the DOJ/Jeffrey Clark part of the seditious conspiracy, from that California filing...

SNIP
The deposition details the lawyers' brutal assessments of Clark's abilities.

"I made the point that Jeff Clark is not even competent to serve as the Attorney General. He's never been a criminal attorney. He's never conducted a criminal investigation in his life. He's never been in front of a grand jury, much less a trial jury. And he kind of retorted by saying, 'Well, I've done a lot of very complicated appeals and civil litigation, environmental litigation, and things like that.' And I said, 'That's right. You're an environmental lawyer. How about you go back to your office, and we'll call you when there's an oil spill,'" Donoghue said.

"I remember saying at some point that, you know, Jeff wouldn't even know how to find his way to Chris Wray's office, much less march in there and direct the FBI what to do, and that, 'If you walked into Chris Wray's office, he wouldn't even know who you are. So we had these conversations that went around and around and were very blunt and direct," he said.
ENDSNIP

https://www.yahoo.com/news/anger-insults-documents-show-doj-200611455.html

I cannot tell if the Jeffrey Clark part of the overall sedition attempt is actually illegal, but it sure stinks, like the rest of the former administration...

 

This must be about the hundredth time Democrats have tried to get Trump on something, anything, and failed. Looking forward to another failure. All of this could have been avoided, you know, if Democrats had just left him alone to do his job as President instead of going full on lunatic.

 

Caring about the Constitution and about our elections is now "lunatic" in your eyes, then. Thank you for clarifying that don't care about either.