The Jan 6 Investigation (2) - Page 3

Warp12 · 30th June 2022, 04:33 PM

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

Your "I'm not a Trump supporter" schtick got old a long time ago. We know pee from rain when we see it.

I'm not a Trump supporter. I'm hoping this committee sinks him sooner than later, and with solid evidence, not tabloid-quality gossip.

Stacyhs · 30th June 2022, 04:34 PM

Originally Posted by dudalb

Pat Cipollone,formeraly an attorney for Trump, has been supoened by the commitee.

This should be interesting. What people don't do can be just as illuminating as what the actually do. Refusing to appear before the J6C or pulling a Flynn's 5th Symphony say a lot. And none of it is good for Trump.

slyjoe · 30th June 2022, 04:43 PM

Originally Posted by dudalb

Pat Cipollone,formeraly an attorney for Trump, has been supoened by the commitee.

Just a nit - he was the White House Counsel, actually representing the WH. He was not an attorney for Trump.

smartcooky · 30th June 2022, 04:48 PM

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

This should be interesting. What people don't do can be just as illuminating as what the actually do. Refusing to appear before the J6C or pulling a Flynn's 5th Symphony say a lot. And none of it is good for Trump.

We're not supposed to make judgements about guilt and innocence when people invoke their fifth amendment rights (although notably, The Fat Orange Turd did just that) but Jesus H. Tapdancing Christ! When Mike Flynn, a former general in the US Army, takes the fifth when asked if he believes in the peaceful transfer of power, you have to reconsider that way of thinking!

Stacyhs · 30th June 2022, 04:54 PM

Originally Posted by Warp12

I'm not a Trump supporter. I'm hoping this committee sinks him sooner than later, and with solid evidence, not tabloid-quality gossip.

Uh-huh.

Which of the following has Trump claimed "I don't know/I hardly know/never met/don't know anything about " when he actually has/does? Fill in the blank:____

a) Lev Parnas
b) Gordan Sondland
c) Jeffrey Epstein
d) George Conway
e) George Papadopoulos
f) Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman
g) Matthew Whitaker
h) Paul Manafort
i) Stormy Daniels
j) William Taylor
k) Marie Yovanovitch
l) Anthony Scaramucci
m) Rachel Crooks
n) Serge F. Kovaleski
o) Bob Casey
p) Vladimir Putin
q) All the above

Stacyhs · 30th June 2022, 04:57 PM

Originally Posted by smartcooky

We're not supposed to make judgements about guilt and innocence when people invoke their fifth amendment rights (although notably, The Fat Orange Turd did just that) but Jesus H. Tapdancing Christ! When Mike Flynn, a former general in the US Army, takes the fifth when asked if he believes in the peaceful transfer of power, you have to reconsider that way of thinking!

Not supposed to, but we do ...and for a very good reason.

ZiprHead · 30th June 2022, 05:28 PM

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

People should keep in mind the right wing is knowingly using this business about hearsay, especially the focus on supposed Suburban incident to distract from the actual issue: there is a lot of evidence of pre-planning and what Drumpf's fantasy plan* was leading a 'army' into Congress so he could stop the certification process Pence wouldn't stop.

The best way to refute hearsay is to testify in court, under oath. Yet so many do not want to do that.

dudalb · 30th June 2022, 05:39 PM

Originally Posted by smartcooky

We're not supposed to make judgements about guilt and innocence when people invoke their fifth amendment rights (although notably, The Fat Orange Turd did just that) but Jesus H. Tapdancing Christ! When Mike Flynn, a former general in the US Army, takes the fifth when asked if he believes in the peaceful transfer of power, you have to reconsider that way of thinking!

I remember that footage of a Mafia boss on the stand during a congressional investigation into organized crime who took the fifth for almost every question he was asked. What were people supposed to think.

dudalb · 30th June 2022, 05:41 PM

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

Uh-huh.

Which of the following has Trump claimed "I don't know/I hardly know/never met/don't know anything about " when he actually has/does? Fill in the blank:____

a) Lev Parnas
b) Gordan Sondland
c) Jeffrey Epstein
d) George Conway
e) George Papadopoulos
f) Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman
g) Matthew Whitaker
h) Paul Manafort
i) Stormy Daniels
j) William Taylor
k) Marie Yovanovitch
l) Anthony Scaramucci
m) Rachel Crooks
n) Serge F. Kovaleski
o) Bob Casey
p) Vladimir Putin
q) All the above

Man, he has a bad memory.....

dudalb · 30th June 2022, 05:42 PM

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

Your "I'm not a Trump supporter" schtick got old a long time ago. We know pee from rain when we see it.

Warp is not the only one doing this shtick.

Stacyhs · 30th June 2022, 05:45 PM

Trump on Newsmax about Hutchinson:

Quote:

"This lady, yesterday — is there something wrong with her? She said I jumped from a car, I started strangling a Secret Service agent? I grabbed the steering wheel of a car? Said I wanted guns at my rally? I didn't want guns. I have to speak, too."

Lie. She never said any of that.

Quote:

"The woman is living in fantasy land," said Trump.

Every accusation is an admission.

Quote:

"She's a social climber, if you call that social.

Now he's confusing Hutchinson with his wife.

Quote:

I think it's just a shame that this is happening to this country, and we don't have any Republicans up there to dispute it. We have one who quit [Adam] Kinzinger, we have another one who's down by 35 points in Wyoming [Rep. Liz Cheney]. "

And whose fault is that, Numbnutz?

Quote:

She's a total disaster, she's a train wreck, but think of it. Nobody to cross-examine.

Every accusation is an admission.

Quote:

"They put her on, and they don't even confirm it with the Secret Service. The Secret Service people in the car said this didn't happen, but you don't even need that.

No, the SS has not denied it. One reporter said a source told him they denied it

Quote:

Who would do that? I would grab a Secret Service person by the throat?"

Why not? You're a frigging mental case. I can totally see you doing that.

Quote:

Trump also slammed Hutchinson personally, pointing out that she was a "big Trump fan" who wanted to work for him in Florida after he left the White House but "we chose not to bring her down."

I thought you barely knew who she was?

Quote:

"Numerous people called up, said she's not good," Trump said. "I won't say why she's not good but there's plenty of reasons. She was not respected by the people in the White House, and they thought she shouldn't go down."I was going down to Florida with a group of people. A great group of people, patriots, her name was thrown out there and they said, 'Keep away from her.' They said bad things about her."

Sure, Donnie. And you're naturally that lovely shade of orange. Did all these people start their denunciations of her with "Sir,"?

Quote:

Trump added that he "hardly knows who she is," but then he saw her "getting up and she's making up stories, one after another, and the craziest of all was that I tried to commandeer a car with Secret Service agents, telling them to take us down to the Capitol. It was totally false, that a person can get away with it."

Your denial is evidence it happened, you sack of ....

Quote:

Further, he said, the mainstream media does not talk about how Hutchinson was "discredited."

"It's a bad thing that this was allowed to take place, in our country, that somebody can just get there without cross-examination and with no Republicans on the committee, which I think was a mistake … they have to ask her, Why did you want to go so badly with the Trump organization to Florida? She was all set to go, and then we determined that we didn't want her."

Uh-huh. Right.

Quote:

He said he hopes the Secret Service agents can testify, but meanwhile, with Hutchinson,

They certainly can. I'm sure the J6C would be thrilled to be able to ask them questions directly under oath.

Quote:

"she's got serious problems, let me put it that way. Mental problems."

Not enough laughing emojis for that one!

Stacyhs · 30th June 2022, 05:46 PM

Originally Posted by dudalb

Man, he has a bad memory.....

Wrong! He has one of the greatest memories of all time!

stanfr · 30th June 2022, 05:50 PM

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

Not supposed to, but we do ...and for a very good reason.

Well we do unfortunately have an adversarial legal system where the goal is not to discover the truth, but to win. So with the Miranda admonition that "anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law" the prudent thing to do almost always is to shut up, since the opposition will stop at nothing to turn your words against you. But when a pattern emerges of people who are clearly involved in suspicious activity all conveniently refusing to speak under oath, it certainly seems suggestive of a scheme to avoid prosecution. The irony is that T himself will never invoke the fifth--you heard it here first! He is incapable of shutting up; if a lawyer tells him to that lawyer will quickly lose his job. He will simply continue to lie, say that all of his actions were "perfect" and rely on his status and power to avoid repercussions. It has worked so far, one wonders how long he can sustain it.

Warp12 · 30th June 2022, 05:59 PM

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

Your "I'm not a Trump supporter" schtick got old a long time ago. We know pee from rain when we see it.

Originally Posted by dudalb

Warp is not the only one doing this shtick.

I'm going to suggest that if you are confident that I am a "Trump supporter", the others you also suspect may not be Trump supporters at all. I have only seen a few around this place that I would consider such.

Stacyhs · 30th June 2022, 06:02 PM

Originally Posted by stanfr

Well we do unfortunately have an adversarial legal system where the goal is not to discover the truth, but to win. So with the Miranda admonition that "anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law" the prudent thing to do almost always is to shut up, since the opposition will stop at nothing to turn your words against you. But when a pattern emerges of people who are clearly involved in suspicious activity all conveniently refusing to speak under oath, it certainly seems suggestive of a scheme to avoid prosecution. The irony is that T himself will never invoke the fifth--you heard it here first! He is incapable of shutting up; if a lawyer tells him to that lawyer will quickly lose his job. He will simply continue to lie, say that all of his actions were "perfect" and rely on his status and power to avoid repercussions. It has worked so far, one wonders how long he can sustain it.

I agree. A good prosecutor can get a defendant to become so flustered that no matter what they say, it looks like they're lying or backtracking.

Skeptic Ginger · 30th June 2022, 06:13 PM

Originally Posted by Warp12

If you had to pick just one piece of evidence from her testimony as being the most solid and significant, what would it be?

The fact there was a lot of pre-planning the insurrection a week out that involved everything from the fake electors to Drumpf calling Stone who I imagine there is evidence Stone was the go-between with the Proud Boys and Oathkeepers

Skeptic Ginger · 30th June 2022, 06:20 PM

Originally Posted by Warp12

That is not solid testimony, imo.

"But another leading reason and likely...". That sounds like her interpretation, and nothing more.

She heard "something to the effect of"...while "in the vicinity of"...again, not very solid.

Like I said, could all be true...but sounds like gossip more than hard facts without something to bolster her account. Maybe she will get a book deal, though. It's all got a "juicy" ring to it.

I can see why some may not find her testimony convincing.

"To the effect" and "in the vicinity" was as accurate as you can get without remembering complete quotes. You want exact quotes?

Or do you just need a man to be included?

She was very credible, sorry. That's just a fact.

Skeptic Ginger · 30th June 2022, 06:27 PM

Originally Posted by ZiprHead

The best way to refute hearsay is to testify in court, under oath. Yet so many do not want to do that.

Did you miss my point?

Crying "hearsay" and focusing on the account of Drumpf grabbing the steering wheel are purposeful, talking-points-memo distractions. Don't let yourself be distracted.

slyjoe · 1st July 2022, 04:08 PM

Looks like more secret service agents are coming out, at least to CNN.

Quote:

Like Hutchinson, one source, a longtime Secret Service employee, told CNN that the agents relaying the story described Trump as “demanding” and that the former President said something similar to: “I’m the f**king President of the United States, you can’t tell me what to do.” The source said he originally heard that kind of language was used shortly after the incident.

“He had sort of lunged forward – it was unclear from the conversations I had that he actually made physical contact, but he might have. I don’t know,” the source said. “Nobody said Trump assaulted him; they said he tried to lunge over the seat – for what reason, nobody had any idea.”

https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/01/polit...ent/index.html

Stacyhs · 1st July 2022, 04:47 PM

The only one claiming Hutchinson said Trumpie 'assaulted' anyone is Trumpie:

Trumpie: "She said I jumped from a car, I started strangling a Secret Service agent? "

Hutchinson: ""The president reached up towards the front of the vehicle to grab at the steering wheel," she said during her testimony. "Mr. Engel grabbed his arm, said, 'Sir, you need to take your hand off the steering wheel, we're going back to the West Wing, we're not going to the Capitol.' Mr. Trump then used his free hand to lunge towards Bobby Engel," Hutchinson said, adding that Ornato "motioned towards his clavicles" when recounting the story."

Apparently, it was The Beast and not a regular SUV:

Quote:

"I noticed the head of Mr. Trump's security detail sitting in a chair, looking somewhat discombobulated, a little lost," Hutchinson testified. "I looked at Tony, he said, 'Did you effing hear what happened in the Beast?' I said, 'No, Tony, I just got back, what happened?'

"Tony proceeded to tell me that when the president got in the Beast, he was under the impression from Mr. Meadows that the off-the-record movement to the Capitol was still possible and likely to happen but that Bobby had more information," Hutchinson continued.

slyjoe · 1st July 2022, 05:05 PM

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

The only one claiming Hutchinson said Trumpie 'assaulted' anyone is Trumpie:

Trumpie: "She said I jumped from a car, I started strangling a Secret Service agent? "

Hutchinson: ""The president reached up towards the front of the vehicle to grab at the steering wheel," she said during her testimony. "Mr. Engel grabbed his arm, said, 'Sir, you need to take your hand off the steering wheel, we're going back to the West Wing, we're not going to the Capitol.' Mr. Trump then used his free hand to lunge towards Bobby Engel," Hutchinson said, adding that Ornato "motioned towards his clavicles" when recounting the story."

Apparently, it was The Beast and not a regular SUV:

She is incorrect - there was video. He was in an SUV.

ETA: Or the SS agent misspoke.

Mike! · 1st July 2022, 05:10 PM

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

The only one claiming Hutchinson said Trumpie 'assaulted' anyone is Trumpie:

Trumpie: "She said I jumped from a car, I started strangling a Secret Service agent? "

Hutchinson: ""The president reached up towards the front of the vehicle to grab at the steering wheel," she said during her testimony. "Mr. Engel grabbed his arm, said, 'Sir, you need to take your hand off the steering wheel, we're going back to the West Wing, we're not going to the Capitol.' Mr. Trump then used his free hand to lunge towards Bobby Engel," Hutchinson said, adding that Ornato "motioned towards his clavicles" when recounting the story."

Apparently, it was The Beast and not a regular SUV:

Originally Posted by slyjoe

She is incorrect - there was video. He was in an SUV.

ETA: Or the SS agent misspoke.

Maybe it's like a four wheeled version of Air Force One, and whatever vehicle he's in is called, "The Beast"?

Stacyhs · 1st July 2022, 05:41 PM

Originally Posted by slyjoe

She is incorrect - there was video. He was in an SUV.

ETA: Or the SS agent misspoke.

No, it was the Beast. Compare the pics.

Originally Posted by Mike!

Maybe it's like a four wheeled version of Air Force One, and whatever vehicle he's in is called, "The Beast"?

There is more than one Beast but it's a title given to a specific type of car, not just any car the POTUS is riding in.

slyjoe · 1st July 2022, 06:02 PM

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

No, it was the Beast. Compare the pics.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...f9435e8a02.jpg

There is more than one Beast but it's a title given to a specific type of car, not just any car the POTUS is riding in.

There is a much clearer picture at this twitter link:
https://twitter.com/josh_wingrove/st...610048/photo/1

ETA: I would also argue anyone interested should watch the video of the vehicle leaving the ellipse. The tail end of the sure looks like an SUV to me.

ZiprHead · 1st July 2022, 06:50 PM

Originally Posted by slyjoe

There is a much clearer picture at this twitter link:
https://twitter.com/josh_wingrove/st...610048/photo/1

ETA: I would also argue anyone interested should watch the video of the vehicle leaving the ellipse. The tail end of the sure looks like an SUV to me.

It's a Chevy Suburban, obviously armored.

Bob001 · 1st July 2022, 07:53 PM

Originally Posted by ZiprHead

It's a Chevy Suburban, obviously armored.

Yep.

Quote:

The use of the large sport utility vehicles for transporting the President and Vice President began in the early 2000s. Now they are a largely interchangeable staple, along with iconic Beast limousines, for many of POTUS' and VPOTUS' trips.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...tial-limousine

smartcooky · 1st July 2022, 08:24 PM

Originally Posted by slyjoe

Looks like more secret service agents are coming out, at least to CNN.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/01/polit...ent/index.html

Whether these comments are from people supporting what Ms Hutchinson said, or whether they oppose what she said, is neither here nor there. Even if they are first hand accounts made by people who were there at the time, they don't mean squat unless those people come forward and make those comments as testiony under oath.

alfaniner · 1st July 2022, 08:44 PM

I can't believe we've only been shown the one video of the SUV leaving. I'd think it would be one of the most phone-recorded things ever. You can see some vague movement but I'm sure there must be better footage somewhere.

Babbylonian · 1st July 2022, 10:30 PM

Originally Posted by smartcooky

Whether these comments are from people supporting what Ms Hutchinson said, or whether they oppose what she said, is neither here nor there. Even if they are first hand accounts made by people who were there at the time, they don't mean squat unless those people come forward and make those comments as testiony under oath.

Even if they do come forward in public to say that her story wasn't true, it doesn't make Hutchinson a liar. After all, she was repeating what she was told and didn't claim to witness that particular incident. Given the anonymous information provided CNN, I'd call the story "tentatively confirmed."

Stacyhs · 1st July 2022, 10:39 PM

Originally Posted by ZiprHead

It's a Chevy Suburban, obviously armored.

I think you're right after all. Car identification is not one of my strong points. To me it's a Big Black Car.

The Great Zaganza · 1st July 2022, 10:54 PM

I would be surprised if, asking around other (non ss) White House employees, it wasn't normal to call whatever SS car POTUS is in "the Beast".
they only need to know which car of the convoy he is in, not the make and model.

Skeptic Ginger · 1st July 2022, 11:42 PM

Too many posts sidetracked by irrelevant stuff. I'm telling you it's a talking-points-memo sent out by the GOP to use as a distraction from the issues that matter:

Drumpf knew the crowd was armed.
He wanted them to march on the Capitol.
And he wanted to go with them.

Other important testimony, much of it we know was corroborated by Meadow's text records. I'm sure more of it is corroborated as well:

The attack on the Capitol was planned.
Drumpf was involved directly.

And a safe assumption:

Drumpf fantasized if he could just stop the certification of the EC count he would remain in power.

No need to waste time on the events in the Suburban. The GOP loves to sidetrack people with irrelevant stuff.

Crazy Chainsaw · 2nd July 2022, 04:24 AM

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Too many posts sidetracked by irrelevant stuff. I'm telling you it's a talking-points-memo sent out by the GOP to use as a distraction from the issues that matter:

Drumpf knew the crowd was armed.
He wanted them to march on the Capitol.
And he wanted to go with them.

Other important testimony, much of it we know was corroborated by Meadow's text records. I'm sure more of it is corroborated as well:

The attack on the Capitol was planned.
Drumpf was involved directly.

And a safe assumption:

Drumpf fantasized if he could just stop the certification of the EC count he would remain in power.

No need to waste time on the events in the Suburban. The GOP loves to sidetrack people with irrelevant stuff.

That was Donnie Doofus's plan B. Plan A failed because BLM was prewarned of the plan, and was told to stay out of Washington DC. On the 6th of January.
Plan A was to blame the Riot on BLM, and Antifa, pressure on Pense, and possibly Declare the Insurrection Act. Without BLM and Antifa in Washington Trump's plan was well there is a term for it, that starts with C and Ends with D, and is often used by the Military, for Organized failures.
Stewart Rhodes discussed a simular attack on the Capitol in 2008 on MySpace, as he Put it, "too throw out that Dirty Muslim Obama, who isn't even American. " Stewart was a Ron Paul Waco Whacko birther from Infowars.

Ladewig · 2nd July 2022, 07:29 AM

Originally Posted by Crazy Chainsaw

. Without BLM and Antifa in Washington Trump's plan was well there is a term for it, that starts with C and Ends with D, and is often used by the Military, for Organized failures.

Can I buy a vowel because I have no idea what you are talking about

Skeptic Ginger · 2nd July 2022, 08:41 AM

Originally Posted by Crazy Chainsaw

That was Donnie Doofus's plan B. Plan A failed because BLM was prewarned of the plan, and was told to stay out of Washington DC. On the 6th of January.
Plan A was to blame the Riot on BLM, and Antifa, pressure on Pense, and possibly Declare the Insurrection Act. Without BLM and Antifa in Washington Trump's plan was well there is a term for it, that starts with C and Ends with D, and is often used by the Military, for Organized failures.
Stewart Rhodes discussed a simular attack on the Capitol in 2008 on MySpace, as he Put it, "too throw out that Dirty Muslim Obama, who isn't even American. " Stewart was a Ron Paul Waco Whacko birther from Infowars.

While I don't doubt this could have been an alternate plan and that it was always planned to blame the riot on the BLM and 'antifa', so far I've not seen any evidence this was the plan.

And I don't understand why Drumpf would want to be there as opposed to being safely in the White House where he could make the same declaration. And if the riot was big enough, maybe Drumpf thought he could declare martial law, etc.

If OTOH Drumpf wanted to lead the charge into the Capitol building he could have imagined himself telling the Capitol Police to step aside and let Drumpf and his army into the building.

Is that the least bit believable? No, but neither was stopping the EC count leading to him staying in power. IOW, it was Drumpf's fantasy.

Maybe we'll find out what was discussed in the "war room" included a riot with BLM/antifa. But they haven't reliably shown up to counter-protest related demonstrations elsewhere.

Skeptic Ginger · 2nd July 2022, 08:44 AM

Originally Posted by Ladewig

Can I buy a vowel because I have no idea what you are talking about

It's in another thread asking something to the effect of 'Who is Mr X?'.

Paul2 · 2nd July 2022, 10:41 AM

Originally Posted by stanfr

Well we do unfortunately have an adversarial legal system where the goal is not to discover the truth, but to win.

Maybe for the defense, but not for the prosecution. If the prosecution learns that the defendant is innocent, they are obligated to drop the case, even if they think they can win it.

alfaniner · 2nd July 2022, 12:04 PM

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Too many posts sidetracked by irrelevant stuff. I'm telling you it's a talking-points-memo sent out by the GOP to use as a distraction from the issues that matter:

Drumpf knew the crowd was armed.
He wanted them to march on the Capitol.
And he wanted to go with them.

Other important testimony, much of it we know was corroborated by Meadow's text records. I'm sure more of it is corroborated as well:

The attack on the Capitol was planned.
Drumpf was involved directly.

And a safe assumption:

Drumpf fantasized if he could just stop the certification of the EC count he would remain in power.

No need to waste time on the events in the Suburban. The GOP loves to sidetrack people with irrelevant stuff.

Well, CNN has sure taken the bait. They keep leading with "SteeringWheelGate". I for one think there are better (worse) things to focus on.

Stacyhs · 2nd July 2022, 12:50 PM

I don't think 'steeringwheelgate' is unimportant at all: it demonstrates just how determined and serious Trump was to be driven to the Capitol and how angry he was when he wasn't.
Ketchupgate adds even more evidence to just how volatile and mentally unstable his is.

Skeptic Ginger · 2nd July 2022, 12:58 PM

Originally Posted by alfaniner

Well, CNN has sure taken the bait. They keep leading with "SteeringWheelGate". I for one think there are better (worse) things to focus on.

Unfortunately that not only is all too common for the news media, the GOP knows it and targets the news media market specifically.

The news media sells scandal, controversy and sensation. They don't sell 'information' so to speak. The Democrats haven't figured out how to use that to their advantage. Fortunately the J6 hearings have been sensational on their own.

30th June 2022, 04:33 PM	#81
Warp12 Suspended Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: USA Posts: 5,941	Originally Posted by Stacyhs Your "I'm not a Trump supporter" schtick got old a long time ago. We know pee from rain when we see it. I'm not a Trump supporter. I'm hoping this committee sinks him sooner than later, and with solid evidence, not tabloid-quality gossip.
	Last edited by Warp12; 30th June 2022 at 04:34 PM.

30th June 2022, 04:43 PM	#83
slyjoe Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Near Harmonica Virgins, AZ Posts: 3,240	Originally Posted by dudalb Pat Cipollone,formeraly an attorney for Trump, has been supoened by the commitee. Just a nit - he was the White House Counsel, actually representing the WH. He was not an attorney for Trump.
	__________________ "You have done nothing to demonstrate an understanding of scientific methodology or modern skepticism, both of which are, by necessity, driven by the facts and evidence, not by preconceptions, and both of which are strengthened by, and rely upon, change." - Arkan Wolfshade

30th June 2022, 04:48 PM	#84
smartcooky Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Nelson, New Zealand Posts: 21,807	Originally Posted by Stacyhs This should be interesting. What people don't do can be just as illuminating as what the actually do. Refusing to appear before the J6C or pulling a Flynn's 5th Symphony say a lot. And none of it is good for Trump. We're not supposed to make judgements about guilt and innocence when people invoke their fifth amendment rights (although notably, The Fat Orange Turd did just that) but Jesus H. Tapdancing Christ! When Mike Flynn, a former general in the US Army, takes the fifth when asked if he believes in the peaceful transfer of power, you have to reconsider that way of thinking!
	__________________ Science supplies evidence, invites you to analyse and evaluate that evidence, and then to draw conclusions from that Religion supplies no evidence, demands you have faith, and expects you to uncritically and automatically believe that something is true simply because "the Bible tells you so" If you don't like my posts, opinions, or directness then put me on your ignore list!

30th June 2022, 05:28 PM	#87
ZiprHead Muse Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Sag-Nasty Posts: 679	Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger People should keep in mind the right wing is knowingly using this business about hearsay, especially the focus on supposed Suburban incident to distract from the actual issue: there is a lot of evidence of pre-planning and what Drumpf's fantasy plan* was leading a 'army' into Congress so he could stop the certification process Pence wouldn't stop. The best way to refute hearsay is to testify in court, under oath. Yet so many do not want to do that.
	__________________ When conservatives realize they cannot win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will abandon democracy. IIDB is back, baby!

30th June 2022, 05:39 PM	#88
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Sacramento Posts: 55,922	Originally Posted by smartcooky We're not supposed to make judgements about guilt and innocence when people invoke their fifth amendment rights (although notably, The Fat Orange Turd did just that) but Jesus H. Tapdancing Christ! When Mike Flynn, a former general in the US Army, takes the fifth when asked if he believes in the peaceful transfer of power, you have to reconsider that way of thinking! I remember that footage of a Mafia boss on the stand during a congressional investigation into organized crime who took the fifth for almost every question he was asked. What were people supposed to think.
	__________________ Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty. Robert Heinlein.

30th June 2022, 04:34 PM	#82
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 25,936	Originally Posted by dudalb Pat Cipollone,formeraly an attorney for Trump, has been supoened by the commitee. This should be interesting. What people don't do can be just as illuminating as what the actually do. Refusing to appear before the J6C or pulling a Flynn's 5th Symphony say a lot. And none of it is good for Trump.

30th June 2022, 04:54 PM	#85
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 25,936	Originally Posted by Warp12 I'm not a Trump supporter. I'm hoping this committee sinks him sooner than later, and with solid evidence, not tabloid-quality gossip. Uh-huh. Which of the following has Trump claimed "I don't know/I hardly know/never met/don't know anything about " when he actually has/does? Fill in the blank:____ a) Lev Parnas b) Gordan Sondland c) Jeffrey Epstein d) George Conway e) George Papadopoulos f) Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman g) Matthew Whitaker h) Paul Manafort i) Stormy Daniels j) William Taylor k) Marie Yovanovitch l) Anthony Scaramucci m) Rachel Crooks n) Serge F. Kovaleski o) Bob Casey p) Vladimir Putin q) All the above

30th June 2022, 04:57 PM	#86
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 25,936	Originally Posted by smartcooky We're not supposed to make judgements about guilt and innocence when people invoke their fifth amendment rights (although notably, The Fat Orange Turd did just that) but Jesus H. Tapdancing Christ! When Mike Flynn, a former general in the US Army, takes the fifth when asked if he believes in the peaceful transfer of power, you have to reconsider that way of thinking! Not supposed to, but we do ...and for a very good reason.

30th June 2022, 05:41 PM	#89
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Sacramento Posts: 55,922	Originally Posted by Stacyhs Uh-huh. Which of the following has Trump claimed "I don't know/I hardly know/never met/don't know anything about " when he actually has/does? Fill in the blank:____ a) Lev Parnas b) Gordan Sondland c) Jeffrey Epstein d) George Conway e) George Papadopoulos f) Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman g) Matthew Whitaker h) Paul Manafort i) Stormy Daniels j) William Taylor k) Marie Yovanovitch l) Anthony Scaramucci m) Rachel Crooks n) Serge F. Kovaleski o) Bob Casey p) Vladimir Putin q) All the above Man, he has a bad memory.....
	__________________ Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty. Robert Heinlein.

30th June 2022, 05:42 PM	#90
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Sacramento Posts: 55,922	Originally Posted by Stacyhs Your "I'm not a Trump supporter" schtick got old a long time ago. We know pee from rain when we see it. Warp is not the only one doing this shtick.
	__________________ Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty. Robert Heinlein.

30th June 2022, 05:45 PM	#91
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 25,936	Trump on Newsmax about Hutchinson: Quote: "This lady, yesterday — is there something wrong with her? She said I jumped from a car, I started strangling a Secret Service agent? I grabbed the steering wheel of a car? Said I wanted guns at my rally? I didn't want guns. I have to speak, too." Lie. She never said any of that. Quote: "The woman is living in fantasy land," said Trump. Every accusation is an admission. Quote: "She's a social climber, if you call that social. Now he's confusing Hutchinson with his wife. Quote: I think it's just a shame that this is happening to this country, and we don't have any Republicans up there to dispute it. We have one who quit [Adam] Kinzinger, we have another one who's down by 35 points in Wyoming [Rep. Liz Cheney]. " And whose fault is that, Numbnutz? Quote: She's a total disaster, she's a train wreck, but think of it. Nobody to cross-examine. Every accusation is an admission. Quote: "They put her on, and they don't even confirm it with the Secret Service. The Secret Service people in the car said this didn't happen, but you don't even need that. No, the SS has not denied it. One reporter said a source told him they denied it Quote: Who would do that? I would grab a Secret Service person by the throat?" Why not? You're a frigging mental case. I can totally see you doing that. Quote: Trump also slammed Hutchinson personally, pointing out that she was a "big Trump fan" who wanted to work for him in Florida after he left the White House but "we chose not to bring her down." I thought you barely knew who she was? Quote: "Numerous people called up, said she's not good," Trump said. "I won't say why she's not good but there's plenty of reasons. She was not respected by the people in the White House, and they thought she shouldn't go down."I was going down to Florida with a group of people. A great group of people, patriots, her name was thrown out there and they said, 'Keep away from her.' They said bad things about her." Sure, Donnie. And you're naturally that lovely shade of orange. Did all these people start their denunciations of her with "Sir,"? Quote: Trump added that he "hardly knows who she is," but then he saw her "getting up and she's making up stories, one after another, and the craziest of all was that I tried to commandeer a car with Secret Service agents, telling them to take us down to the Capitol. It was totally false, that a person can get away with it." Your denial is evidence it happened, you sack of .... Quote: Further, he said, the mainstream media does not talk about how Hutchinson was "discredited." "It's a bad thing that this was allowed to take place, in our country, that somebody can just get there without cross-examination and with no Republicans on the committee, which I think was a mistake … they have to ask her, Why did you want to go so badly with the Trump organization to Florida? She was all set to go, and then we determined that we didn't want her." Uh-huh. Right. Quote: He said he hopes the Secret Service agents can testify, but meanwhile, with Hutchinson, They certainly can. I'm sure the J6C would be thrilled to be able to ask them questions directly under oath. Quote: "she's got serious problems, let me put it that way. Mental problems." Not enough laughing emojis for that one!

30th June 2022, 05:46 PM	#92
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 25,936	Originally Posted by dudalb Man, he has a bad memory..... Wrong! He has one of the greatest memories of all time!

30th June 2022, 05:50 PM	#93
stanfr Master Poster Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 2,068	Originally Posted by Stacyhs Not supposed to, but we do ...and for a very good reason. Well we do unfortunately have an adversarial legal system where the goal is not to discover the truth, but to win. So with the Miranda admonition that "anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law" the prudent thing to do almost always is to shut up, since the opposition will stop at nothing to turn your words against you. But when a pattern emerges of people who are clearly involved in suspicious activity all conveniently refusing to speak under oath, it certainly seems suggestive of a scheme to avoid prosecution. The irony is that T himself will never invoke the fifth--you heard it here first! He is incapable of shutting up; if a lawyer tells him to that lawyer will quickly lose his job. He will simply continue to lie, say that all of his actions were "perfect" and rely on his status and power to avoid repercussions. It has worked so far, one wonders how long he can sustain it.
stanfr Master Poster Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 2,068

30th June 2022, 05:59 PM	#94
Warp12 Suspended Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: USA Posts: 5,941	Originally Posted by Stacyhs Your "I'm not a Trump supporter" schtick got old a long time ago. We know pee from rain when we see it. Originally Posted by dudalb Warp is not the only one doing this shtick. I'm going to suggest that if you are confident that I am a "Trump supporter", the others you also suspect may not be Trump supporters at all. I have only seen a few around this place that I would consider such.
	Last edited by Warp12; 30th June 2022 at 06:05 PM.

30th June 2022, 06:02 PM	#95
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 25,936	Originally Posted by stanfr Well we do unfortunately have an adversarial legal system where the goal is not to discover the truth, but to win. So with the Miranda admonition that "anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law" the prudent thing to do almost always is to shut up, since the opposition will stop at nothing to turn your words against you. But when a pattern emerges of people who are clearly involved in suspicious activity all conveniently refusing to speak under oath, it certainly seems suggestive of a scheme to avoid prosecution. The irony is that T himself will never invoke the fifth--you heard it here first! He is incapable of shutting up; if a lawyer tells him to that lawyer will quickly lose his job. He will simply continue to lie, say that all of his actions were "perfect" and rely on his status and power to avoid repercussions. It has worked so far, one wonders how long he can sustain it. I agree. A good prosecutor can get a defendant to become so flustered that no matter what they say, it looks like they're lying or backtracking.

30th June 2022, 06:13 PM	#96
Skeptic Ginger Nasty Woman Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 92,445	Originally Posted by Warp12 If you had to pick just one piece of evidence from her testimony as being the most solid and significant, what would it be? The fact there was a lot of pre-planning the insurrection a week out that involved everything from the fake electors to Drumpf calling Stone who I imagine there is evidence Stone was the go-between with the Proud Boys and Oathkeepers

30th June 2022, 06:20 PM	#97
Skeptic Ginger Nasty Woman Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 92,445	Originally Posted by Warp12 That is not solid testimony, imo. "But another leading reason and likely...". That sounds like her interpretation, and nothing more. She heard "something to the effect of"...while "in the vicinity of"...again, not very solid. Like I said, could all be true...but sounds like gossip more than hard facts without something to bolster her account. Maybe she will get a book deal, though. It's all got a "juicy" ring to it. I can see why some may not find her testimony convincing. "To the effect" and "in the vicinity" was as accurate as you can get without remembering complete quotes. You want exact quotes? Or do you just need a man to be included? She was very credible, sorry. That's just a fact.

30th June 2022, 06:27 PM	#98
Skeptic Ginger Nasty Woman Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 92,445	Originally Posted by ZiprHead The best way to refute hearsay is to testify in court, under oath. Yet so many do not want to do that. Did you miss my point? Crying "hearsay" and focusing on the account of Drumpf grabbing the steering wheel are purposeful, talking-points-memo distractions. Don't let yourself be distracted.

1st July 2022, 04:08 PM	#99
slyjoe Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Near Harmonica Virgins, AZ Posts: 3,240	Looks like more secret service agents are coming out, at least to CNN. Quote: Like Hutchinson, one source, a longtime Secret Service employee, told CNN that the agents relaying the story described Trump as “demanding” and that the former President said something similar to: “I’m the f**king President of the United States, you can’t tell me what to do.” The source said he originally heard that kind of language was used shortly after the incident. “He had sort of lunged forward – it was unclear from the conversations I had that he actually made physical contact, but he might have. I don’t know,” the source said. “Nobody said Trump assaulted him; they said he tried to lunge over the seat – for what reason, nobody had any idea.” https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/01/polit...ent/index.html
	__________________ "You have done nothing to demonstrate an understanding of scientific methodology or modern skepticism, both of which are, by necessity, driven by the facts and evidence, not by preconceptions, and both of which are strengthened by, and rely upon, change." - Arkan Wolfshade

1st July 2022, 04:47 PM	#100
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 25,936	The only one claiming Hutchinson said Trumpie 'assaulted' anyone is Trumpie: Trumpie: "She said I jumped from a car, I started strangling a Secret Service agent? " Hutchinson: ""The president reached up towards the front of the vehicle to grab at the steering wheel," she said during her testimony. "Mr. Engel grabbed his arm, said, 'Sir, you need to take your hand off the steering wheel, we're going back to the West Wing, we're not going to the Capitol.' Mr. Trump then used his free hand to lunge towards Bobby Engel," Hutchinson said, adding that Ornato "motioned towards his clavicles" when recounting the story." Apparently, it was The Beast and not a regular SUV: Quote: "I noticed the head of Mr. Trump's security detail sitting in a chair, looking somewhat discombobulated, a little lost," Hutchinson testified. "I looked at Tony, he said, 'Did you effing hear what happened in the Beast?' I said, 'No, Tony, I just got back, what happened?' "Tony proceeded to tell me that when the president got in the Beast, he was under the impression from Mr. Meadows that the off-the-record movement to the Capitol was still possible and likely to happen but that Bobby had more information," Hutchinson continued.

1st July 2022, 05:05 PM	#101
slyjoe Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Near Harmonica Virgins, AZ Posts: 3,240	Originally Posted by Stacyhs The only one claiming Hutchinson said Trumpie 'assaulted' anyone is Trumpie: Trumpie: "She said I jumped from a car, I started strangling a Secret Service agent? " Hutchinson: ""The president reached up towards the front of the vehicle to grab at the steering wheel," she said during her testimony. "Mr. Engel grabbed his arm, said, 'Sir, you need to take your hand off the steering wheel, we're going back to the West Wing, we're not going to the Capitol.' Mr. Trump then used his free hand to lunge towards Bobby Engel," Hutchinson said, adding that Ornato "motioned towards his clavicles" when recounting the story." Apparently, it was The Beast and not a regular SUV: She is incorrect - there was video. He was in an SUV. ETA: Or the SS agent misspoke.
	__________________ "You have done nothing to demonstrate an understanding of scientific methodology or modern skepticism, both of which are, by necessity, driven by the facts and evidence, not by preconceptions, and both of which are strengthened by, and rely upon, change." - Arkan Wolfshade

1st July 2022, 05:10 PM	#102
Mike! Official Ponylandistanian National Treasure. Respect it! Join Date: May 2010 Location: Ponylandistan! Where the bacon grows on trees! Can it get any better than that? I submit it can not! Posts: 46,496	Originally Posted by Stacyhs The only one claiming Hutchinson said Trumpie 'assaulted' anyone is Trumpie: Trumpie: "She said I jumped from a car, I started strangling a Secret Service agent? " Hutchinson: ""The president reached up towards the front of the vehicle to grab at the steering wheel," she said during her testimony. "Mr. Engel grabbed his arm, said, 'Sir, you need to take your hand off the steering wheel, we're going back to the West Wing, we're not going to the Capitol.' Mr. Trump then used his free hand to lunge towards Bobby Engel," Hutchinson said, adding that Ornato "motioned towards his clavicles" when recounting the story." Apparently, it was The Beast and not a regular SUV: Originally Posted by slyjoe She is incorrect - there was video. He was in an SUV. ETA: Or the SS agent misspoke. Maybe it's like a four wheeled version of Air Force One, and whatever vehicle he's in is called, "The Beast"?
	__________________ "Never judge a man until you’ve walked a mile in his shoes... Because then it won't really matter, you’ll be a mile away and have his shoes."

1st July 2022, 05:41 PM	#103
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 25,936	Originally Posted by slyjoe She is incorrect - there was video. He was in an SUV. ETA: Or the SS agent misspoke. No, it was the Beast. Compare the pics. Originally Posted by Mike! Maybe it's like a four wheeled version of Air Force One, and whatever vehicle he's in is called, "The Beast"? There is more than one Beast but it's a title given to a specific type of car, not just any car the POTUS is riding in.

1st July 2022, 06:02 PM	#104
slyjoe Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Near Harmonica Virgins, AZ Posts: 3,240	Originally Posted by Stacyhs No, it was the Beast. Compare the pics. http://www.internationalskeptics.com...f9435e8a02.jpg There is more than one Beast but it's a title given to a specific type of car, not just any car the POTUS is riding in. There is a much clearer picture at this twitter link: https://twitter.com/josh_wingrove/st...610048/photo/1 ETA: I would also argue anyone interested should watch the video of the vehicle leaving the ellipse. The tail end of the sure looks like an SUV to me.
	__________________ "You have done nothing to demonstrate an understanding of scientific methodology or modern skepticism, both of which are, by necessity, driven by the facts and evidence, not by preconceptions, and both of which are strengthened by, and rely upon, change." - Arkan Wolfshade Last edited by slyjoe; 1st July 2022 at 06:11 PM.

1st July 2022, 06:50 PM	#105
ZiprHead Muse Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Sag-Nasty Posts: 679	Originally Posted by slyjoe There is a much clearer picture at this twitter link: https://twitter.com/josh_wingrove/st...610048/photo/1 ETA: I would also argue anyone interested should watch the video of the vehicle leaving the ellipse. The tail end of the sure looks like an SUV to me. It's a Chevy Suburban, obviously armored.
	__________________ When conservatives realize they cannot win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will abandon democracy. IIDB is back, baby!

1st July 2022, 07:53 PM	#106
Bob001 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: US of A Posts: 15,621	Originally Posted by ZiprHead It's a Chevy Suburban, obviously armored. Yep. Quote: The use of the large sport utility vehicles for transporting the President and Vice President began in the early 2000s. Now they are a largely interchangeable staple, along with iconic Beast limousines, for many of POTUS' and VPOTUS' trips. https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...tial-limousine

1st July 2022, 08:24 PM	#107
smartcooky Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Nelson, New Zealand Posts: 21,807	Originally Posted by slyjoe Looks like more secret service agents are coming out, at least to CNN. https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/01/polit...ent/index.html Whether these comments are from people supporting what Ms Hutchinson said, or whether they oppose what she said, is neither here nor there. Even if they are first hand accounts made by people who were there at the time, they don't mean squat unless those people come forward and make those comments as testiony under oath.
	__________________ Science supplies evidence, invites you to analyse and evaluate that evidence, and then to draw conclusions from that Religion supplies no evidence, demands you have faith, and expects you to uncritically and automatically believe that something is true simply because "the Bible tells you so" If you don't like my posts, opinions, or directness then put me on your ignore list!

1st July 2022, 08:44 PM	#108
alfaniner Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Sorth Dakonsin Posts: 26,836	I can't believe we've only been shown the one video of the SUV leaving. I'd think it would be one of the most phone-recorded things ever. You can see some vague movement but I'm sure there must be better footage somewhere.
	__________________ Science is self-correcting. Woo is self-contradicting.

1st July 2022, 10:30 PM	#109
Babbylonian Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 13,939	Originally Posted by smartcooky Whether these comments are from people supporting what Ms Hutchinson said, or whether they oppose what she said, is neither here nor there. Even if they are first hand accounts made by people who were there at the time, they don't mean squat unless those people come forward and make those comments as testiony under oath. Even if they do come forward in public to say that her story wasn't true, it doesn't make Hutchinson a liar. After all, she was repeating what she was told and didn't claim to witness that particular incident. Given the anonymous information provided CNN, I'd call the story "tentatively confirmed."

1st July 2022, 10:39 PM	#110
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 25,936	Originally Posted by ZiprHead It's a Chevy Suburban, obviously armored. I think you're right after all. Car identification is not one of my strong points. To me it's a Big Black Car.

1st July 2022, 10:54 PM	#111
The Great Zaganza Maledictorian Join Date: Aug 2016 Posts: 18,306	I would be surprised if, asking around other (non ss) White House employees, it wasn't normal to call whatever SS car POTUS is in "the Beast". they only need to know which car of the convoy he is in, not the make and model.
	__________________ "When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realised that the Lord doesn't work that way so I stole one and asked Him to forgive me." - Emo Philips

1st July 2022, 11:42 PM	#112
Skeptic Ginger Nasty Woman Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 92,445	Too many posts sidetracked by irrelevant stuff. I'm telling you it's a talking-points-memo sent out by the GOP to use as a distraction from the issues that matter: Drumpf knew the crowd was armed. He wanted them to march on the Capitol. And he wanted to go with them. Other important testimony, much of it we know was corroborated by Meadow's text records. I'm sure more of it is corroborated as well: The attack on the Capitol was planned. Drumpf was involved directly. And a safe assumption: Drumpf fantasized if he could just stop the certification of the EC count he would remain in power. No need to waste time on the events in the Suburban. The GOP loves to sidetrack people with irrelevant stuff.
	Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 1st July 2022 at 11:44 PM.

2nd July 2022, 04:24 AM	#113
Crazy Chainsaw Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 6,788	Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger Too many posts sidetracked by irrelevant stuff. I'm telling you it's a talking-points-memo sent out by the GOP to use as a distraction from the issues that matter: Drumpf knew the crowd was armed. He wanted them to march on the Capitol. And he wanted to go with them. Other important testimony, much of it we know was corroborated by Meadow's text records. I'm sure more of it is corroborated as well: The attack on the Capitol was planned. Drumpf was involved directly. And a safe assumption: Drumpf fantasized if he could just stop the certification of the EC count he would remain in power. No need to waste time on the events in the Suburban. The GOP loves to sidetrack people with irrelevant stuff. That was Donnie Doofus's plan B. Plan A failed because BLM was prewarned of the plan, and was told to stay out of Washington DC. On the 6th of January. Plan A was to blame the Riot on BLM, and Antifa, pressure on Pense, and possibly Declare the Insurrection Act. Without BLM and Antifa in Washington Trump's plan was well there is a term for it, that starts with C and Ends with D, and is often used by the Military, for Organized failures. Stewart Rhodes discussed a simular attack on the Capitol in 2008 on MySpace, as he Put it, "too throw out that Dirty Muslim Obama, who isn't even American. " Stewart was a Ron Paul Waco Whacko birther from Infowars.

2nd July 2022, 07:29 AM	#114
Ladewig I lost an avatar bet. Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 28,518	Originally Posted by Crazy Chainsaw . Without BLM and Antifa in Washington Trump's plan was well there is a term for it, that starts with C and Ends with D, and is often used by the Military, for Organized failures. Can I buy a vowel because I have no idea what you are talking about
	__________________ I lost an avatar bet to Doghouse Reilly.

2nd July 2022, 08:41 AM	#115
Skeptic Ginger Nasty Woman Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 92,445	Originally Posted by Crazy Chainsaw That was Donnie Doofus's plan B. Plan A failed because BLM was prewarned of the plan, and was told to stay out of Washington DC. On the 6th of January. Plan A was to blame the Riot on BLM, and Antifa, pressure on Pense, and possibly Declare the Insurrection Act. Without BLM and Antifa in Washington Trump's plan was well there is a term for it, that starts with C and Ends with D, and is often used by the Military, for Organized failures. Stewart Rhodes discussed a simular attack on the Capitol in 2008 on MySpace, as he Put it, "too throw out that Dirty Muslim Obama, who isn't even American. " Stewart was a Ron Paul Waco Whacko birther from Infowars. While I don't doubt this could have been an alternate plan and that it was always planned to blame the riot on the BLM and 'antifa', so far I've not seen any evidence this was the plan. And I don't understand why Drumpf would want to be there as opposed to being safely in the White House where he could make the same declaration. And if the riot was big enough, maybe Drumpf thought he could declare martial law, etc. If OTOH Drumpf wanted to lead the charge into the Capitol building he could have imagined himself telling the Capitol Police to step aside and let Drumpf and his army into the building. Is that the least bit believable? No, but neither was stopping the EC count leading to him staying in power. IOW, it was Drumpf's fantasy. Maybe we'll find out what was discussed in the "war room" included a riot with BLM/antifa. But they haven't reliably shown up to counter-protest related demonstrations elsewhere.
	Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 2nd July 2022 at 08:43 AM.