Author Topic: Insurrection (Including J6) and the Second American Civil War  (Read 196050 times)

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69127
    • View Profile
WSJ
« Reply #1550 on: June 16, 2022, 04:07:23 PM »
The Jan. 6 Committee’s Missing Reform
Pence saved the day, but where’s a bill so the next Vice President won’t have to?
By The Editorial BoardFollow
June 16, 2022 6:44 pm ET



‘Crazy.” “Nutty.” That’s what President Trump’s legal advisers thought of his plan on Jan. 6 to pressure Vice President Mike Pence into overturning the 2020 election, according to audio testimony played Thursday by the House committee investigating the Capitol riot. The scheme was never likely to work, not that Mr. Trump apparently thought past the first step.


For one thing, Mr. Pence truly believes in the Constitution. In the tumult of Jan. 6, he was the indispensable man, standing his ground no matter the political cost. The committee lauded Mr. Pence’s “courage.” This is worth doing, though it is amusing to watch Democrats praise Mr. Pence after they spent years portraying him as a lackey and religious weirdo.

On the law, Mr. Pence is right: The Constitution does not give the Vice President unilateral power to reject electoral votes. The argument to the contrary came from law professor John Eastman, who exploded his legal reputation in the process. The 12th Amendment says when Congress meets to count the Electoral College, the VP shall “open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted.” Does that mean Al Gore could have tossed out Florida’s electors in 2000 and waltzed into the Oval Office?

Of course not. Mr. Pence consulted a former federal appeals judge, the conservative J. Michael Luttig. “There was no basis in the Constitution or laws of the United States at all for the theory espoused by Mr. Eastman,” he testified Thursday. Greg Jacob, a lawyer for Mr. Pence, agreed. “We examined every single electoral vote count that had happened in Congress since the beginning of the country,” he said. “No Vice President in 230 years of history had ever claimed to have that kind of authority.”


The Electoral Count Act, passed after the disputed 1876 presidential contest, purports to let Congress reject electoral votes. Mr. Luttig thinks it’s unconstitutional, and we agree. In any case, there was no bona fide dispute in 2020 about the electoral votes. No state Legislature attempted to appoint electors directly. Mr. Trump’s supporters in some places organized pretend electors to cast fake electoral votes, but they had no legal validity.

Even if Mr. Pence had gone along with Mr. Eastman’s scheme, the chances of success were virtually nil. The 12th Amendment says the electoral votes shall be counted “in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives.”

Did Mr. Trump think Speaker Nancy Pelosi would have stood by dumbfounded as the Vice President reversed the 2020 result? Instead she might have ordered the Senate to immediately vacate the House chamber.

Mr. Jacob said he told Mr. Eastman it could have devolved into “a standoff” between Congress and the White House, a “constitutional jump ball.” The President’s term ends at noon on Jan. 20. If Congress never validly counted the Electoral College, the order of succession says that next in line is the Speaker of the House. President Pelosi? Was that the plan? More likely, the Supreme Court would have intervened. Mr. Jacob thinks the Justices would have ruled 9-0 against Mr. Trump. So do we.

***
If Democrats want to prevent such shenanigans in the future, the obvious move is to repeal the Electoral Count Act and clarify that neither the Vice President nor Congress can adjudicate disputes on electors. That’s a job for the courts, and a better law might provide expedited review by the Supreme Court. The President shouldn’t be picked by the Vice President, but the Founders didn’t want Congress to do so either, except in the express case of no candidate getting a majority of electoral votes.

Democrats didn’t move swiftly on the Electoral Count Act after Jan. 6, because they were more interested in trying to pass H.R.1 to take over voting laws nationwide. But perhaps the Jan. 6 inquiry is focusing some liberal minds. There isn’t much time before 2024.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Insurrection and the Second American Civil War
« Reply #1551 on: June 16, 2022, 08:22:09 PM »
Damaging Trump was one of the goals of the deep state operation to remove him from office.


Disagreeing with Eastman's legal theory, particular when surrounded by the legal fumes of Sidney Powell and Lynn Wood's grifting operations, does not make one a Deep State scumbag.

OTOH it will add to the political reality that Trump is damaged goods.




Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69127
    • View Profile
Re: Insurrection and the Second American Civil War
« Reply #1555 on: June 19, 2022, 08:35:45 AM »


How does America win if people such as him are enemies?

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Insurrection and the Second American Civil War
« Reply #1556 on: June 19, 2022, 08:46:44 AM »


How does America win if people such as him are enemies?

https://twitter.com/repdancrenshaw/status/1158059710609788929?lang=en

What America do you mean?

The one you grew up in?

Deader than canned tuna.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69127
    • View Profile
Re: Insurrection and the Second American Civil War
« Reply #1557 on: June 19, 2022, 08:50:43 AM »
Oppose him politically on red flag?  By all means!

But street thuggery by Proud Boys (associated now in the public mind with Trump) against a USN SEAL who has lost an eye in battle while serving our country serves only to persuade many that we are fukking nuts.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Insurrection and the Second American Civil War
« Reply #1558 on: June 19, 2022, 08:57:40 AM »
By the same coastal elites that sneer at military service? Mock patriotism as they fly Pedo and BLM flags?

https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/medal-of-honor-recipient-daniel-inouye

Serving as an honorable warrior on the battlefield doesn't make you immune to the corruption of the DC swamp.





Oppose him politically on red flag?  By all means!

But street thuggery by Proud Boys (associated now in the public mind with Trump) against a USN SEAL who has lost an eye in battle while serving our country serves only to persuade many that we are fukking nuts.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69127
    • View Profile
Re: Insurrection and the Second American Civil War
« Reply #1559 on: June 19, 2022, 08:59:50 AM »
Let's stay on point. 

I'm talking about the effects on everyday Americans of the Proud Boys brawling with Crenshaw.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Insurrection and the Second American Civil War
« Reply #1560 on: June 19, 2022, 09:03:37 AM »
Obviously Trump ordered the hit from Mar-a-Lago.

 :roll:

Remember when the Proud Boys burned all those American cities a few years ago?



Let's stay on point. 

I'm talking about the effects on everyday Americans of the Proud Boys brawling with Crenshaw.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69127
    • View Profile
Re: Insurrection and the Second American Civil War
« Reply #1561 on: June 19, 2022, 12:01:08 PM »
Let's stay on point.

PB's laying hands on DC isL

a) wrong; and
b) bad politics for our side.

Yes?

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69127
    • View Profile
MI orders lead GOP gov candidate disarmed.
« Reply #1562 on: June 19, 2022, 03:20:01 PM »
Michigan Judge Orders GOP Candidate for Governor to Surrender Guns
By Jack Phillips June 19, 2022 Updated: June 19, 2022biggersmaller Print

0:00
2:38



1

Michigan Republican candidate for governor Ryan Kelley will have to surrender his guns while he awaits trial on misdemeanor criminal charges in connection with the Jan. 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol breach, a judge ruled on June 16.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Robin Meriweather made the ruling even as Kelley’s attorney argued he needs to carry a concealed weapon for self-defense as he makes campaign appearances in Michigan, local media reported. The judge also said Kelley can’t leave the state while awaiting trial and must surrender his passport.

Kelley is “a bit of a high-profile candidate in Michigan” as recent polls showed that he was the front-runner among GOP gubernatorial candidates, his lawyer, Gary Springstead, said. Kelley, who has a license to carry a concealed weapon, “asked that he be permitted to carry his firearm for his own self-defense, during the campaign,” Springstead added.

About a week ago, Kelley was arrested in Michigan and charged with participating in the Jan. 6 breach of the Capitol, federal prosecutors said in a court filing in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

The complaint noted that Kelley didn’t actually enter the Capitol building on Jan. 6, and instead is being charged with entering and remaining within a “restricted building or grounds without lawful authority,” disorderly conduct in a restricted building or grounds, knowingly engaging in an act of physical violence against a person or property on restricted grounds, and willfully injuring or committing any depredation against any property of the United States government.

“The whole thing with Jan. 6, it’s another Democrat show trying to do power control,” Kelley said at an event last week, MLive reported. “They obviously have no real solutions. Look at the price of gas, look at the price of food; we have baby formula shortages.”

Michigan Republican Party co-Chairs Ron Weiser and Meshawn Maddock said that Kelley’s arrest is proof that top Democrats are “weaponizing our justice system” to obtain their political goals. Other GOP gubernatorial candidates spoke out about the arrest, echoing Weiser’s and Maddock’s concerns.

Meanwhile, some analysts suggest that Kelley’s arrest could actually benefit his campaign. Adolph Mongo, a political consultant who worked for former Democratic Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick while the mayor was under federal investigation, said Kelley should run with the misdemeanor charges.

“I would say lean into it,” Mongo told MLive. “Don’t go into hiding, go out on the campaign trail. He can raise a lot of money.”

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Insurrection and the Second American Civil War
« Reply #1563 on: June 19, 2022, 08:50:43 PM »
Let's stay on point.

PB's laying hands on DC isL

a) wrong; and
b) bad politics for our side.

Yes?

a) Of course, only the left is free to use violence at will to pursue a political objective.

b) Sure, the lefty suburban women with the transgender toddlers were totally going to vote for republicans until they heard about this on NPR!

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Let's go to the video...
« Reply #1564 on: June 19, 2022, 10:55:41 PM »
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/06/video-proves-dan-crenshaws-squad-assaulted-conservative-comedian-alex-stein-media-lied-cover/

Let's stay on point.

PB's laying hands on DC isL

a) wrong; and
b) bad politics for our side.

Yes?

a) Of course, only the left is free to use violence at will to pursue a political objective.

b) Sure, the lefty suburban women with the transgender toddlers were totally going to vote for republicans until they heard about this on NPR!

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Second American Civil War- FBI and MPD at 1/6
« Reply #1565 on: June 20, 2022, 09:49:33 PM »
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/police-report-proves-plainclothes-electronic-surveillance-unit-members-were-embedded

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/20-federal-assets-embedded-capitol-jan-6-court-filing-says

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/nyt-reporter-says-ton-fbi-informants-were-j6-calls-traumatized-fellow-journos-biches

You.

Don't.

Say.



There is ZERO doubt there were FBI U/C and CIs there running the classic COINTELPRO ops.

GM:

We are agreed that the FBI has a scurrilous history of entrapment and false flags.  We are agreed that is has gotten worse and that the accusations of the FBI fomenting Jan 6 are plausible.

That said, because our cause includes logic and integrity, we also need to acknowledge the validity of AMcC's criticism of Tucker's claim that unindicted co-conspirator means that they were FBI agents.  It just ain't so.
« Last Edit: June 21, 2022, 08:29:04 AM by G M »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18353
    • View Profile
Justice Thomas
« Reply #1566 on: June 24, 2022, 09:53:58 AM »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69127
    • View Profile
Re: Insurrection and the Second American Civil War
« Reply #1567 on: June 25, 2022, 12:15:49 AM »
I've only read Thomas's concurrence once, but given the firestorm it is igniting I will likely do so again.  That said, from my one reading what I took his point to be was that the 14th Amendment jurisprudence known as "substantive due process" is inherently flawed and should be dropped. 

In that SDP is now the basis of beloved holdings of the cases of this lineage, the uproar on the back of the abortion of Roe , , ,

You guys may remember that I have always said I preferred a Natural Law (see "endowed by their Creator", "laws of Nature and of Nature's God" and our Ninth Amendment itself) as a basis for Privacy, Self-defense, Parental Rights and other rights "not otherwise enumerated".

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Try it.
« Reply #1568 on: June 26, 2022, 08:23:35 AM »

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Try it.
« Reply #1569 on: June 26, 2022, 09:09:11 PM »
https://twitter.com/stillgray/status/1540931658978775041

https://areaocho.com/bad-plan/

Every leftist has a name and an address, as does every part of the deep state.

Keep pushing.



DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18129
    • View Profile
Re: They seem to think they are immune to this
« Reply #1572 on: June 27, 2022, 12:50:34 PM »
https://justthenews.com/nation/states/center-square/individuals-call-assassination-justice-clarence-thomas-after-roe-v-wade

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"calls for Clarence Thomas’ assassination spread across social media"
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

insurrection
ĭn″sə-rĕk′shən
noun
The act or an instance of open revolt against civil authority or a constituted government.

Funny, the definition of insurrection clearly covers this but nothing about walking unarmed through the halls of Congress.

How cold it spread?  Wouldn't they be kicked off 'social media' - permanently?



Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69127
    • View Profile
AMCC: DOJ is engaged in subterfuge
« Reply #1575 on: June 28, 2022, 07:27:52 PM »


The Stealth Inspector-General Investigation of Donald Trump

By ANDREW C. MCCARTHY
June 28, 2022 12:54 PM

The Justice Department is engaged in subterfuge to conceal its focus on the former president.

In the last week, the Biden Justice Department has taken aggressive investigative actions against former Trump administration officials and advisers. What is going on could not be more obvious: Egged on by the House January 6 committee and progressive Democrats who want former president Donald Trump to be criminally charged in connection with the Capitol riot, the department has obtained search warrants to raid the home of former Trump Justice Department official Jeffrey Clark and seize the cellphone of John Eastman, one of Trump’s private lawyers.

The Justice Department does not want to say that Trump — Biden’s political rival — is the target of a criminal investigation, particularly after House Democrats impeached Trump for encouraging Ukraine to investigate Biden. So the DOJ’s pretext is that these searches are merely part of an internal inspector-general probe of Clark. Yet Clark has not worked at the Justice Department for over a year. And as for Eastman, who was never a DOJ employee at all, well: Are we really to believe that the DOJ went to the trouble of applying to a court for authorization to confiscate his phone as part of its IG’s scrutiny of Clark, rather than as part of a criminal investigation of Eastman himself and Trump?

Yeah, sure.

Understand: The Justice Department knows that Clark and Eastman are represented by counsel. It could easily have issued grand-jury subpoenas for Clark and Eastman and delivered those subpoenas to their lawyers, with instructions that whatever materials were sought be promptly surrendered to the FBI. That would be the normal procedure when government lawyers are dealing with investigative subjects who are not suspected of violent crimes and have alerted the government that they have attorneys. Here, instead, the Justice Department went covertly to federal judges — in this case, the DOJ would have been able to forum-shop, since it knew when each of those judges would be on search-warrant duty — and obtained warrants that enabled federal agents to rifle through the belongings of these Trump associates, only after subjecting them to the humiliation of temporary arrest and frisk, without notifying their lawyers.

So, what is legally necessary for a search warrant to be authorized by a federal judge?

The Justice Department or one of its investigative agencies, typically the FBI, must provide the court with a sworn application showing probable cause to believe that a serious violation of federal law has occurred and that evidence of that crime is likely to be found in the place or on the person targeted in the search warrant.

That being the case, upon learning of the Clark and Eastman search warrants, I was initially prepared to title this piece “The Justice Department Will Soon Indict Donald Trump.” Why? Because if the Justice Department and the FBI were telling federal judges that there was probable cause to believe Clark and Eastman had committed crimes, this had to be related to their collaboration with then-president Trump in the scheme to reverse the result of the 2020 election — not coincidentally, the subject of the House January 6 committee’s sessions last week. (The Justice Department is leveraging the committee’s probe to boost its investigation, while the committee is pressuring the Justice Department to charge Trump with a crime.)

As you can see, that is not the title of this post. Why not? Because the Justice Department is engaged in subterfuge to conceal that Trump is the target of its criminal investigation.

Significant criminal investigations are generally carried out by the FBI under the supervision of the U.S. attorney’s office in the district where the alleged crime is thought to have occurred. (Prosecutions related to the events of January 6, for instance, are being handled by the U.S. attorney’s office for the District of Columbia.) When prosecutors from a U.S. attorney’s office seek a search warrant in court, they must describe the evidence they expect to seize from the person or property targeted in the warrant. That description usually tells us the alleged crime(s) the court has found probable cause of, based on the sworn application submitted under seal by the prosecutors and agents. (The warrant application is not unsealed and disclosed unless or until charges are filed.)

Yet as the New York Times reports, the FBI agents who accosted Eastman as he was leaving a New Mexico restaurant last Wednesday evening purported to be working on behalf of the Justice Department’s Office of Inspector General, not a district U.S. attorney’s office. According to Eastman, “the warrant does not even mention, much less describe with specificity, any particular crime for which evidence sought by the warrant might be relevant.” (If Eastman told the media what evidence the warrant expressly sought, the Times does not report this. Generally, we can infer what crimes the court has found probable cause to suspect occurred by the warrant’s description of the evidence for which the agents are authorized to search.)

Understand: Unlike district U.S. attorney’s offices around the country, the DOJ inspector-general’s office does not have wide-ranging jurisdiction to enforce federal criminal law. The IG’s very narrow jurisdiction is “to detect and deter waste, fraud, abuse, and misconduct involving DOJ programs and personnel, and promote economy and efficiency in DOJ operations.”

How, exactly, does that give the OIG legitimate cause to target John Eastman? He was not a government employee in 2020, much less a Justice Department employee. For many years, he has been an academic and private lawyer. So how on earth does he come under the investigative purview of the Justice Department’s IG, who is only authorized to investigate the abuse of DOJ programs? It must be because Eastman collaborated with Jeffrey Clark, who was acting head of DOJ’s Criminal Division when President Trump enticed him into the “stop the steal” campaign — which (again, not coincidentally) was the subject of the January 6 committee’s hearing last Friday.

The day before that hearing, in the early morning hours and fully 17 months after the relevant events, the FBI executed a court-authorized search warrant at Clark’s home in northern Virginia — reportedly forcing him out onto the street in his pajamas as a dozen agents tossed his residence for over three hours and seized his electronic devices.

According to the Times, “the search at Mr. Clark’s home was a significant step in the Justice Department’s many-tentacled inquiry into the efforts to subvert the democratic process after the 2020 election.” Really? The Justice Department’s IG has no authority to conduct such an investigation. To repeat, the IG is confined to probing misconduct by Justice Department employees that undermines Justice Department programs. It is not the IG’s mission to investigate — much less obtain search warrants to probe — such felony federal violations as obstruction of Congress and seditious conspiracy.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69127
    • View Profile
WT: Gohmert calls for deposition that alleged pardon requests
« Reply #1576 on: June 29, 2022, 07:58:24 AM »
Gohmert calls for full deposition alleging request for pardons

Congressman: Clips were either edited or witness was mistaken

BY KERRY PICKET AND JOSEPH CLARK THE WASHINGTON TIMES

Rep. Louie Gohmert called on the January 6 Select Committee to release the full deposition of former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson in which she claimed that Mr. Gohmert, and other GOP lawmakers, sought presidential pardons in late 2020.

The Texas Republican flatly denies seeking a pardon for himself. But Mr. Gohmert said he made several pardon requests for U.S. service members whom he says were wrongfully convicted of crimes while deployed in war zones.

Mr. Gohmert said that either the committee deceptively edited clips of the deposition to make it appear as if Ms. Hutchinson told the panel he requested a personal pardon rather than pardons for others, or that Ms. Hutchinson was mistaken.

“The way the video testimony was presented makes it sound like my pardon requests for very deserving military members, former military, and one civilian servant in late 2020 in written letters and packages of information was asking for a pardon for myself,” Mr. Gohmert said in a statement this week to The Washington Times.

“Not only have I never asked for a pardon for myself, I have not done anything for which I need a pardon,” he said.

The committee and Ms. Hutchinson’s counsel did not respond to requests for comment. Mr. Gohmert wants the panel to release the full raw video and transcript of her testimony.

Mr. Gohmert and 11 other GOP lawmakers, including Rep. Scott Perry of Pennsylvania and Rep. Paul Gosar of Arizona, were part of the Congressional Justice for Warriors Caucus and first sent a pardon request to the White House in February 2020 on behalf of Army National Guardsman Sgt. Derrick Miller.

Miller was released on parole in 2019 after being convicted of murdering an Afghan civilian during a battlefield interrogation in Afghanistan in 2010.

The letter, along with pardon requests for other military service members which The Washington Times viewed, was part of a pardon package that was sent again to the congressional White House liaison on Dec. 4, 2020.

Mr. Gohmert’s staff said he hand-delivered the same pardon package to then-President Trump at a Dec. 21, 2020, meeting.

The Jan. 6 Committee displayed during last Thursday’s hearing an email from Rep. Mo Brooks, Alabama Republican, to Mr. Trump with the subject line “Pardons,” in which Mr. Brooks requested pardons for “every congressman or senator who voted to reject the electoral college vote submissions of Arizona and Pennsylvania.”

The committee then aired a videotaped deposition in which Ms. Hutchinson testified that Mr. Brooks “advocated for there to be a blanket pardon from members” involved in the Dec. 21, 2020, meeting. The lawmakers were supporting Mr. Trump’s efforts to get Congress to reject the certifi cation of votes of swing states won by President Biden.

The committee then pressed during the deposition whether any other members asked for pardons.

“Mr. Gohmert asked for one as well,” Ms. Hutchinson replied.

In addition to calling on the committee to release the full tape of the deposition, Mr. Gohmert also wants Ms. Hutchinson to “publicly clarify her comments if she feels her words were misrepresented or her deposition was inappropriately edited.”

“If she simply made a mistake in her recollection, then a public apology would be the least she could do given the vicious attacks and smears that have arisen from her deposition,” he said.

Mr. Gohmert said he also wants “a retraction and clarification from the January 6th Committee as well as an apology,” and says that it is not only “unprofessional” but also “potentially actionably illegal to facilitate these malicious lies about anyone.”

He asserted possible “criminality” involved in how the Jan. 6 committee attempted to “pervert justice,” and said the action should be investigated by a new Attorney General who is “concerned about principled justice.” Thursday’s hearing was part of a series of public appearances to unveil findings after the committee’s nearly yearlong investigation.

During its prime-time debut earlier this month, Rep. Liz Cheney, Wyoming Republican and the committee’s vice chair, said Mr. Perry was among “multiple” Republican lawmakers who sought presidential pardons in the weeks following the attack on the Capitol.

“Representative Perry contacted the White House in the weeks after January 6th to seek a presidential pardon,” she said. “Multiple other Republican congressmen also sought presidential pardons for their roles in attempting to overturn the 2020 election.”

Mr. Perry’s spokesman called Ms. Cheney’s claims a “laughable, ludicrous, and a thoroughly soulless lie.”

The committee held another hearing Tuesday to release what it calls newly uncovered evidence about the Jan. 6 riot.


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69127
    • View Profile
J6 defendant denied conducting media interviews
« Reply #1577 on: June 29, 2022, 08:00:02 AM »
Jan. 6 defendant accuses DOJ of denying news interviews

BY JOSEPH CLARK THE WASHINGTON TIMES

The Department of Justice is restricting Capitol riot defendant Edward Jacob Lang from conducting media interviews while in pre-trial detention. Mr. Lang told The Washington Times that he received a “notice of media violation” from the Alexandria, Virginia, detention facility where he is being held after conducting an over-the-phone interview with The Epoch Times.

The notice said the interview was “a violation of U.S. Marshal’s policy,” according to Mr. Lang, who co-produced the documentary “The Truth About January 6th.”

The notice, he said, warned that “conducting media interviews via phone, in person, or by video” without prior approval “may result in disciplinary action” and further restrictions on Mr. Lang’s privileges while in detention.

“This is a constitutional issue at its very core,” Mr. Lang said in a phone interview which presumably could result in disciplinary action against him. “A real human being is being silenced in America like never before.”

Mr. Lang was arrested 10 days after the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol and is being held in pre-trial detention without bail at the Alexandria Detention Center, a jail operated by the Alexandria Sheriff that houses federal inmates through a contract with the U.S. Marshals Service.

He said the notice he received Monday threatens to restrict his phone and inperson visitation privileges with his family if he conducts further interviews with media outlets without obtaining approval.

Before receiving the notice, Mr. Lang said he had not been warned that conducting media interviews was a violation of policy.

A spokesperson from the U.S. Marshals office was not able to provide the Times with the written policy stating that Mr. Lang was required to obtain approval before contacting or conducting interviews with media outlets.

Mr. Lang read the full notice during the interview on Monday.

An official from the detention facility confirmed on Tuesday that Mr. Lang had been notified in writing that he had violated the U.S. Marshals media policy, though was unable to speak to specific disciplinary measures for inmates.

“Restricting phone privileges is an option for any inmate, but it is very rare,” the official said.

The official noted that “at the request of the Marshals,” Mr. Lang had been previously notified that “it is the responsibility of the media representative” to obtain approval from “the U.S. Attorney, the judge, the prisoner, the defense attorney, and the management of the detention facility where the prisoner is located.”

The U.S. Marshals denied the Times’ request last week to visit Mr. Lang at the detention facility.

The facility previously told the Times that neither Mr. Lang nor journalists require prior approval to speak over the phone, but that journalists required preapproval to conduct in-person interviews after the facility lifted its COVID-19 restrictions on visits earlier this month.

The facility also provided a copy of the “Alexandria Sheriff’s Office General Order,” which states, “If an inmate wishes to telephone a media representative and provide information, he or she is permitted to do so at his or her expense or at the expense of the media outlet, unless this poses a security threat to the Detention Center.”

“If such an interview is denied by Sheriff’s Office staff, the Sheriff will be notified via an Incident Report through the chain of command,” the policy reads.

On Tuesday, the same offi cial who provided the policy said that inmates were free to contact media outlets by phone without prior approval.

Mr. Lang, who is facing charges ranging from civil disorder to assaulting, resisting or impeding officers during the Capitol riot has been outspoken about the treatment of himself and others detained in connection with the Capitol riot.

Earlier this month, Mr. Lang wrote to Alexandria’s mayor and city council detailing the “deplorable and subhuman” conditions at the detention facility.

“I have been discriminated against severely because of my political affiliations,” he wrote in a handwritten letter. “Because I am a conservative/ Republican, I have been especially singled out and subjected to horrendous treatment.”

In the letter, he said that he has been held in solitary confinement for 22 hours per day for more than 70 days, despite having no documented disciplinary infractions and qualifying for placement in the general population.

“I have been informed by Chief [Deputy Sherriff Shelbert] Williams that because of my political affiliations I have to remain in solitary confinement,” he wrote.

He said while in solitary confinement, he is forced to eat meals on the floor. He also says the light in his room remains on 24 hours per day which he says causes “sleep deprivation.”

He said he has also been deprived of access to legal research, recreation facilities and religious services. He also said he has been refused health care services “numerous times” and had “hundreds” of pieces of his mail rejected.

He signed the letter, “Political prisoner of the Biden regime.”

While in prison, Mr. Lang also co-produced and narrated “The Truth About January 6th,” a documentary that is billed as “the full story” of the events of Jan. 6 “beyond the censored lens of mainstream media.”

“It is the raw and uncut truth of January 6th,” Mr. Lang says in his narration, which he recorded over the phone from his detention facility. “The day when free men and women stood unarmed against tyranny — who were brutalized, beat and even murdered on the steps of our own Capitol. The patriotic event of the century — where brave Americans came together to defend the Constitution and free and fair elections.”

In an interview Monday, Mr. Lang said the restrictions on his access to media are a violation of his First Amendment rights.

“It’s un-American what’s happening to me, and the American people should be outraged at the core,” he said. “This is not a partisan issue.”

He also compared his situation to the media attention showered on the House Jan. 6 committee.

“They get full access to every single media station in the country,” he said. “Just little Jake here, sitting in solitary confinement try to get bits and pieces of what happened, his testimony of January 6th, and the entire power of the United States government is raining down on me to try to silence me.”


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18353
    • View Profile
Re: Insurrection and the Second American Civil War
« Reply #1579 on: June 30, 2022, 07:50:53 AM »
I am thinking that lets say Trump did get to the Capital on 1/6

and not driven back to the safety of the WH

I strongly believe he would have gotten in front and PREVENTED people from breaking in to the Capital

he did CLEARLY  say "PEACEFULLY " march to the Capital .

He said that that if they were armed they were not going to hurt him because he was trying to convince the SS to let him go there

not because he thought or wanted them to use any arms to hurt anyone
which it turns out did not happen anyway

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69127
    • View Profile
POTP: How close Trump came to joining on J6
« Reply #1580 on: July 01, 2022, 05:26:04 PM »
‘Take me up to the Capitol now’: How close Trump came to joining rioters
Trump’s demands to lead a march to Capitol Hill sheds new light on his mindset as the siege began.
By Isaac Arnsdorf, Josh Dawsey and Carol D. Leonnig
July 1, 2022 at 6:00 a.m. EDT

Trump supporters make their way up Constitution Avenue toward the Capitol after President Donald Trump gave a speech at the Ellipse and encouraged them to go on Jan. 6, 2021. (Michael S. Williamson/The Washington Post)

Comment
Add to your saved stories
Save

Gift Article

Share
Toward the end of 2020, then-President Donald Trump began raising a new idea with aides: that he would personally lead a march to the Capitol on the following Jan. 6.

Trump brought it up repeatedly with key advisers in the Oval Office, according to a person who talked with him about it. The president told others he wanted a dramatic, made-for-TV moment that could pressure Republican lawmakers to support his demand to throw out the electoral college results showing that Joe Biden had defeated him, the person said.

The excursion that almost happened came into clearer focus this week, as the House committee investigating the attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021 presented explosive testimony and records detailing Trump’s fervent demands to lead his supporters mobbing the seat of government. Though Trump’s trip was ultimately thwarted by his own security officers, the new evidence cuts closer to the critical question of what he knew about the violence in store for that day.

Trump has acknowledged his foiled effort to reach the Capitol. “Secret Service wouldn’t let me,” he told The Washington Post in April. “I wanted to go. I wanted to go so badly. Secret Service says you can’t go. I would have gone there in a minute.”

But as Trump repeatedly floated the idea in the weeks leading up to Jan. 6, several of his advisers doubted he meant it or didn’t take the suggestion seriously. One senior administration official said Trump raised the prospect repeatedly but in a “joking manner.”

As a result, the White House staff never turned Trump’s stated desires into concrete plans. Press officers made no preparations for a detour to the Capitol, such as scheduling an additional stop for the motorcade and the pool of reporters who follow the president’s movements. There was no operational advance plan drafted for the visit. No speech was written for him to deliver on the Hill, and it wasn’t clear exactly what Trump would do when he got there, said the person who talked with Trump about the idea.


The bombshell sixth Jan. 6 hearing in 3 minutes
2:57
Former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson testified on June 28 about President Donald Trump’s actions surrounding the Jan. 6 Capitol attack. (Video: JM Rieger/The Washington Post, Photo: Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post)
This account of Trump’s ceaseless plotting to join the mob at the Capitol on Jan. 6 is based on committee testimony and evidence as well as 15 former officials, aides, law enforcement officials and others, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to reveal internal details.


Aides did not know where Trump got the idea, this person said, but it wasn’t from inside the White House. The chief of staff, Mark Meadows, discussed plans to bring Trump to the Capitol with Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.) and lawyer Rudy Giuliani, who was leading the campaign’s efforts to overturn the election results, according to testimony from Cassidy Hutchinson, a close aide to Meadows.

Trump call on Jan. 6 to 'walk down to the Capitol' prompted Secret Service scramble

“I remember hearing a few different ideas discussed between Mark and Scott Perry, Mark and Rudy Giuliani,” Hutchinson said in videotaped testimony to the Jan. 6 committee played during Tuesday’s hearing. “I know that there were discussions about him having another speech outside of the Capitol before going in. I know that there is a conversation about him going into the House chamber at one point.”

Meadows declined to comment through his attorney. Giuliani and a spokeswoman for Perry did not respond to requests for comment.

Hutchinson’s attorneys said Wednesday that she “stands by all of the testimony she provided yesterday, under oath.”


This exhibit from video released by the House Jan. 6 committee shows a photo of former president Donald Trump talking to his chief of staff Mark Meadows as Donald Trump Jr. looks on before a rally on the Ellipse on Jan. 6, 2021. (AP)
Hutchinson’s account was supported by other testimony played at the hearing. “He brought it up, he said, ‘I want to go down to the Capitol,” Max Miller, a White House aide now running for Congress in Ohio, said in taped testimony. But Miller’s entire testimony wasn’t played, where he suggested it was a short-lived idea, according to people familiar with the matter.


Some White House officials were out of the loop. Ordinarily, the White House’s legislative affairs staffers would be involved in a visit to Capitol Hill, but they were not briefed on any plans for him to go on Jan. 6, according to two senior administration officials. Aides to Vice President Mike Pence heard secondhand from other White House advisers that Trump wanted to go to the Capitol, but they were never given a formal plan and did not expect him to follow through, according to a Pence adviser with direct knowledge of their plans.

“There was no plan for what to do if Trump showed up,” the Pence adviser said. “Frankly, we didn’t think it was going to happen.”

Press Enter to skip to end of carousel
More on the Capitol riot


‘Take me up to the Capitol now’: How close Trump came to joining rioters
‘Take me up to the Capitol now’: How close Trump came to joining rioters
Meet the 7 Hill Republicans willing to hold Trump accountable for Jan. 6
Meet the 7 Hill Republicans willing to hold Trump accountable for Jan. 6
Analysis
The Attack: Before, During and After
The Attack: Before, During and After
Images from Jan. 6 depict the U.S. Capitol under attack
Images from Jan. 6 depict the U.S. Capitol under attack
41 minutes of fear: A video timeline from inside the Capitol siege
41 minutes of fear: A video timeline from inside the Capitol siege
Capitol Police officer Caroline Edwards recounts Jan. 6 ‘war scene’
Capitol Police officer Caroline Edwards recounts Jan. 6 ‘war scene’
Warnings of Jan. 6 violence preceded the Capitol riot
Warnings of Jan. 6 violence preceded the Capitol riot
What happened on Jan. 6: Trump stands back as rioters breach Capitol
What happened on Jan. 6: Trump stands back as rioters breach Capitol
After Jan. 6, threats and disinformation take hold across the U.S.
After Jan. 6, threats and disinformation take hold across the U.S.
‘No pictures, no pictures’: The enduring images from Jan. 6
‘No pictures, no pictures’: The enduring images from Jan. 6
Jan. 6 White House logs given to House show 7-hour gap in Trump calls
Jan. 6 White House logs given to House show 7-hour gap in Trump calls
How Ashli Babbitt went from Capitol rioter to Trump-embraced ‘martyr’
How Ashli Babbitt went from Capitol rioter to Trump-embraced ‘martyr’
Desperate, angry, destructive: How Americans morphed into a mob
Desperate, angry, destructive: How Americans morphed into a mob
Virginia Thomas urged White House chief to pursue unrelenting efforts to overturn the 2020 election, texts show
Virginia Thomas urged White House chief to pursue unrelenting efforts to ov...
How one of America’s ugliest days unraveled inside and outside the Capitol
How one of America’s ugliest days unraveled inside and outside the Capitol
End of carousel
Some of his allies said Trump never brought up the idea of going to the Capitol with them, even as he bandied it about internally with his aides and Secret Service team. “Not to my knowledge was he ever coming up here,” said Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.), who regularly talked with Trump in the days leading up to Jan. 6. “To me, I don’t see him going to a riot.”


On Jan. 4, Trump raised the issue with several White House aides again, but Secret Service and senior staff warned him it would be logistically impossible and dangerous, a person familiar with the discussion said. Another adviser said the Secret Service was particularly skittish about a trip to the Capitol because a trip in November — when Trump went into a crowd of election fraud protesters in Washington — was viewed as nightmarish and difficult to manage.

Before, During and After: The Attack on the U.S. Capitol

The next day, on the eve of the rally, Tony Ornato, the White House deputy chief of staff for operations, told a senior staffer there was no possibility they were going to the Capitol, saying, “That is not part of the plan,” the staffer recalled.

Trump, though, seemed to have other ideas. Just before he addressed the rally on the Ellipse, Trump gathered with family members and close aides in a tent backstage. As Trump looked at monitors showing a video feed of the crowd, Hutchinson testified that she overheard him complaining about unoccupied space in the shot and wanting more people to enter. According to her testimony, Ornato explained to Trump that some people in the crowd couldn’t go through the security screening because they had weapons.


Supporters of President Trump wait for him to speak at the Ellipse on Jan. 6, 2021. (Carlos Barria/Reuters)
“I overheard the president say something to the effect of, ‘I don’t care that they have weapons, they’re not here to hurt me,'” Hutchinson testified. She also recalled hearing Trump say, “Let my people in. They can march to the Capitol after the rally’s over.”


The moment was captured in photographs that the committee obtained from the National Archives and displayed during the hearing. The scene in the tent also appeared in a video recorded by Donald Trump Jr., showing the president looking at the screens and talking to Meadows and his daughter Ivanka while Kimberly Guilfoyle danced to Laura Branigan’s “Gloria.”

Other people in the tent at the time did not respond to requests for comment or declined to corroborate or dispute Hutchinson’s account on the record. Some Secret Service officials told the committee they did not recall Trump saying he wanted to admit more people despite being warned of weapons in the crowd, according to a person briefed on their testimony.

Trump denied wanting to let in people with guns. “Who would ever want that? Not me!” he posted on his Truth Social platform.


When Trump took the stage, he told the rally, “We’re going to walk down and I’ll be there with you.” The remark stunned staffers who didn’t understand that to be the plan.

“I told people we were not really going to the Capitol,” recalled the senior staffer who has spoken with Ornato. “It never crossed my mind that was legitimate.”

But as Trump left the stage, he made clear he was serious. That’s when his personal assistant, Nick Luna, first became aware of Trump’s desire to go to the Capitol, according to his taped testimony played at Tuesday’s hearing.

Hutchinson testified that she overheard Meadows tell the president he was still working on arranging the trip up Capitol Hill. According to Hutchinson, she told Meadows that Ornato said the movement wasn’t possible, and Meadows responded, “Okay,” before getting into the motorcade.

Echoes of Watergate: Trump's appointees reveal his push to topple the Justice Dept.

“MOGUL’s going to the Capital [sic] … they are clearing a route now,” a National Security Council staffer posted to an internal chat obtained by the committee, using Trump’s Secret Service code name.


“They are begging him to reconsider,” another message said. When a planned route was posted to the chat, the log shows a staffer responding, “So this is happening.”

Inside the presidential SUV, Trump’s demands to go to the Capitol culminated in a dramatic showdown, according to Hutchinson, who said Ornato described the incident to her shortly afterward. By her account, Trump was under the impression from Meadows that his surprise trip to the Capitol was about to happen. In the car, Secret Service agent Bobby Engel told Trump the route to the Capitol could not be secured and they would return to the West Wing, Hutchinson said.

“The president had a very strong, very angry response to that,” she testified. “Tony described him as being irate. The president said something to the effect of, ‘I’m the f-ing president. Take me up to the Capitol now.’”


President Donald Trump cheers supporters from The Ellipse. (Brendan Smialowski/AFP/Getty Images)
When Engel insisted that the car was instead bound for the White House, Hutchinson said Trump reached toward the steering wheel. Engel grabbed his arm, Hutchinson testified, and 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.”


According to Hutchinson’s testimony about Ornato’s account to her, Trump used his other hand to lunge toward Engel. When Ornato told this story to Hutchinson, with Engel in the room, she said, he gestured toward his collarbones. When Hutchinson recounted this at the hearing, she placed a hand at the base of her neck.

Trump denied trying to grab the steering wheel, calling Hutchinson’s testimony “'sick' and fraudulent.” Ornato and Engel were not asked about the incident when they testified to the committee, the person briefed on the Secret Service testimony said.

Trump spokesman Taylor Budowich dismissed Hutchinson’s testimony in a statement Thursday: “The fact that The Washington Post is still trying to peddle testimony from a witness who has been widely discredited, and who many believe perjured herself — which is a felony — is an absolute embarrassment.”

Three agents who accompanied Trump on Jan. 6 are disputing that Trump assaulted or grabbed at Engel and/or the steering wheel, according to one current and one former law enforcement official familiar with their accounts. The three agents, Engle and Ornato are also willing to testify under oath to the committee about their recollection of events on Jan. 6 in the Secret Service vehicle, the two people said. The three agents do not dispute that Trump was furious that the agents would not take him to the Capitol.

Even after the car returned Trump to the West Wing, he still wouldn’t let go of wanting to reach the Capitol.


Tear gas is fired at supporters of President Trump who stormed the United States Capitol building. (Evelyn Hockstein/For The Washington Post)
“When we got back to the White House, he said he wanted to physically walk with the marchers, and according to my notes, he then said he’d be fine with just riding the Beast,” former press secretary Kayleigh McEnany said in videotaped testimony to the committee, referring to the nickname for the fortified presidential limo. “He wanted to be a part of the march in some fashion.”

Trump was furious with Meadows for failing to make the trip happen, Hutchinson testified that Meadows told her. By the time they were back in the West Wing, the televisions were showing live coverage of the rioters overpowering police and getting closer to the Capitol’s doors and windows. Hutchinson testified that she entered Meadows’s office and asked him if he was watching.

“The rioters are getting really close,” she recalled asking the chief of staff. “Have you talked to the president?”

“No,” Meadows answered, while scrolling and texting on his phone, according to Hutchinson’s testimony, “he wants to be alone right now.”

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: POTP: How close Trump came to joining on J6
« Reply #1581 on: July 01, 2022, 09:48:32 PM »
 :roll:

‘Take me up to the Capitol now’: How close Trump came to joining rioters
Trump’s demands to lead a march to Capitol Hill sheds new light on his mindset as the siege began.
By Isaac Arnsdorf, Josh Dawsey and Carol D. Leonnig
July 1, 2022 at 6:00 a.m. EDT

Trump supporters make their way up Constitution Avenue toward the Capitol after President Donald Trump gave a speech at the Ellipse and encouraged them to go on Jan. 6, 2021. (Michael S. Williamson/The Washington Post)

Comment
Add to your saved stories
Save

Gift Article

Share
Toward the end of 2020, then-President Donald Trump began raising a new idea with aides: that he would personally lead a march to the Capitol on the following Jan. 6.

Trump brought it up repeatedly with key advisers in the Oval Office, according to a person who talked with him about it. The president told others he wanted a dramatic, made-for-TV moment that could pressure Republican lawmakers to support his demand to throw out the electoral college results showing that Joe Biden had defeated him, the person said.

The excursion that almost happened came into clearer focus this week, as the House committee investigating the attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021 presented explosive testimony and records detailing Trump’s fervent demands to lead his supporters mobbing the seat of government. Though Trump’s trip was ultimately thwarted by his own security officers, the new evidence cuts closer to the critical question of what he knew about the violence in store for that day.

Trump has acknowledged his foiled effort to reach the Capitol. “Secret Service wouldn’t let me,” he told The Washington Post in April. “I wanted to go. I wanted to go so badly. Secret Service says you can’t go. I would have gone there in a minute.”

But as Trump repeatedly floated the idea in the weeks leading up to Jan. 6, several of his advisers doubted he meant it or didn’t take the suggestion seriously. One senior administration official said Trump raised the prospect repeatedly but in a “joking manner.”

As a result, the White House staff never turned Trump’s stated desires into concrete plans. Press officers made no preparations for a detour to the Capitol, such as scheduling an additional stop for the motorcade and the pool of reporters who follow the president’s movements. There was no operational advance plan drafted for the visit. No speech was written for him to deliver on the Hill, and it wasn’t clear exactly what Trump would do when he got there, said the person who talked with Trump about the idea.


The bombshell sixth Jan. 6 hearing in 3 minutes
2:57
Former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson testified on June 28 about President Donald Trump’s actions surrounding the Jan. 6 Capitol attack. (Video: JM Rieger/The Washington Post, Photo: Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post)
This account of Trump’s ceaseless plotting to join the mob at the Capitol on Jan. 6 is based on committee testimony and evidence as well as 15 former officials, aides, law enforcement officials and others, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to reveal internal details.


Aides did not know where Trump got the idea, this person said, but it wasn’t from inside the White House. The chief of staff, Mark Meadows, discussed plans to bring Trump to the Capitol with Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.) and lawyer Rudy Giuliani, who was leading the campaign’s efforts to overturn the election results, according to testimony from Cassidy Hutchinson, a close aide to Meadows.

Trump call on Jan. 6 to 'walk down to the Capitol' prompted Secret Service scramble

“I remember hearing a few different ideas discussed between Mark and Scott Perry, Mark and Rudy Giuliani,” Hutchinson said in videotaped testimony to the Jan. 6 committee played during Tuesday’s hearing. “I know that there were discussions about him having another speech outside of the Capitol before going in. I know that there is a conversation about him going into the House chamber at one point.”

Meadows declined to comment through his attorney. Giuliani and a spokeswoman for Perry did not respond to requests for comment.

Hutchinson’s attorneys said Wednesday that she “stands by all of the testimony she provided yesterday, under oath.”


This exhibit from video released by the House Jan. 6 committee shows a photo of former president Donald Trump talking to his chief of staff Mark Meadows as Donald Trump Jr. looks on before a rally on the Ellipse on Jan. 6, 2021. (AP)
Hutchinson’s account was supported by other testimony played at the hearing. “He brought it up, he said, ‘I want to go down to the Capitol,” Max Miller, a White House aide now running for Congress in Ohio, said in taped testimony. But Miller’s entire testimony wasn’t played, where he suggested it was a short-lived idea, according to people familiar with the matter.


Some White House officials were out of the loop. Ordinarily, the White House’s legislative affairs staffers would be involved in a visit to Capitol Hill, but they were not briefed on any plans for him to go on Jan. 6, according to two senior administration officials. Aides to Vice President Mike Pence heard secondhand from other White House advisers that Trump wanted to go to the Capitol, but they were never given a formal plan and did not expect him to follow through, according to a Pence adviser with direct knowledge of their plans.

“There was no plan for what to do if Trump showed up,” the Pence adviser said. “Frankly, we didn’t think it was going to happen.”

Press Enter to skip to end of carousel
More on the Capitol riot


‘Take me up to the Capitol now’: How close Trump came to joining rioters
‘Take me up to the Capitol now’: How close Trump came to joining rioters
Meet the 7 Hill Republicans willing to hold Trump accountable for Jan. 6
Meet the 7 Hill Republicans willing to hold Trump accountable for Jan. 6
Analysis
The Attack: Before, During and After
The Attack: Before, During and After
Images from Jan. 6 depict the U.S. Capitol under attack
Images from Jan. 6 depict the U.S. Capitol under attack
41 minutes of fear: A video timeline from inside the Capitol siege
41 minutes of fear: A video timeline from inside the Capitol siege
Capitol Police officer Caroline Edwards recounts Jan. 6 ‘war scene’
Capitol Police officer Caroline Edwards recounts Jan. 6 ‘war scene’
Warnings of Jan. 6 violence preceded the Capitol riot
Warnings of Jan. 6 violence preceded the Capitol riot
What happened on Jan. 6: Trump stands back as rioters breach Capitol
What happened on Jan. 6: Trump stands back as rioters breach Capitol
After Jan. 6, threats and disinformation take hold across the U.S.
After Jan. 6, threats and disinformation take hold across the U.S.
‘No pictures, no pictures’: The enduring images from Jan. 6
‘No pictures, no pictures’: The enduring images from Jan. 6
Jan. 6 White House logs given to House show 7-hour gap in Trump calls
Jan. 6 White House logs given to House show 7-hour gap in Trump calls
How Ashli Babbitt went from Capitol rioter to Trump-embraced ‘martyr’
How Ashli Babbitt went from Capitol rioter to Trump-embraced ‘martyr’
Desperate, angry, destructive: How Americans morphed into a mob
Desperate, angry, destructive: How Americans morphed into a mob
Virginia Thomas urged White House chief to pursue unrelenting efforts to overturn the 2020 election, texts show
Virginia Thomas urged White House chief to pursue unrelenting efforts to ov...
How one of America’s ugliest days unraveled inside and outside the Capitol
How one of America’s ugliest days unraveled inside and outside the Capitol
End of carousel
Some of his allies said Trump never brought up the idea of going to the Capitol with them, even as he bandied it about internally with his aides and Secret Service team. “Not to my knowledge was he ever coming up here,” said Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.), who regularly talked with Trump in the days leading up to Jan. 6. “To me, I don’t see him going to a riot.”


On Jan. 4, Trump raised the issue with several White House aides again, but Secret Service and senior staff warned him it would be logistically impossible and dangerous, a person familiar with the discussion said. Another adviser said the Secret Service was particularly skittish about a trip to the Capitol because a trip in November — when Trump went into a crowd of election fraud protesters in Washington — was viewed as nightmarish and difficult to manage.

Before, During and After: The Attack on the U.S. Capitol

The next day, on the eve of the rally, Tony Ornato, the White House deputy chief of staff for operations, told a senior staffer there was no possibility they were going to the Capitol, saying, “That is not part of the plan,” the staffer recalled.

Trump, though, seemed to have other ideas. Just before he addressed the rally on the Ellipse, Trump gathered with family members and close aides in a tent backstage. As Trump looked at monitors showing a video feed of the crowd, Hutchinson testified that she overheard him complaining about unoccupied space in the shot and wanting more people to enter. According to her testimony, Ornato explained to Trump that some people in the crowd couldn’t go through the security screening because they had weapons.


Supporters of President Trump wait for him to speak at the Ellipse on Jan. 6, 2021. (Carlos Barria/Reuters)
“I overheard the president say something to the effect of, ‘I don’t care that they have weapons, they’re not here to hurt me,'” Hutchinson testified. She also recalled hearing Trump say, “Let my people in. They can march to the Capitol after the rally’s over.”


The moment was captured in photographs that the committee obtained from the National Archives and displayed during the hearing. The scene in the tent also appeared in a video recorded by Donald Trump Jr., showing the president looking at the screens and talking to Meadows and his daughter Ivanka while Kimberly Guilfoyle danced to Laura Branigan’s “Gloria.”

Other people in the tent at the time did not respond to requests for comment or declined to corroborate or dispute Hutchinson’s account on the record. Some Secret Service officials told the committee they did not recall Trump saying he wanted to admit more people despite being warned of weapons in the crowd, according to a person briefed on their testimony.

Trump denied wanting to let in people with guns. “Who would ever want that? Not me!” he posted on his Truth Social platform.


When Trump took the stage, he told the rally, “We’re going to walk down and I’ll be there with you.” The remark stunned staffers who didn’t understand that to be the plan.

“I told people we were not really going to the Capitol,” recalled the senior staffer who has spoken with Ornato. “It never crossed my mind that was legitimate.”

But as Trump left the stage, he made clear he was serious. That’s when his personal assistant, Nick Luna, first became aware of Trump’s desire to go to the Capitol, according to his taped testimony played at Tuesday’s hearing.

Hutchinson testified that she overheard Meadows tell the president he was still working on arranging the trip up Capitol Hill. According to Hutchinson, she told Meadows that Ornato said the movement wasn’t possible, and Meadows responded, “Okay,” before getting into the motorcade.

Echoes of Watergate: Trump's appointees reveal his push to topple the Justice Dept.

“MOGUL’s going to the Capital [sic] … they are clearing a route now,” a National Security Council staffer posted to an internal chat obtained by the committee, using Trump’s Secret Service code name.


“They are begging him to reconsider,” another message said. When a planned route was posted to the chat, the log shows a staffer responding, “So this is happening.”

Inside the presidential SUV, Trump’s demands to go to the Capitol culminated in a dramatic showdown, according to Hutchinson, who said Ornato described the incident to her shortly afterward. By her account, Trump was under the impression from Meadows that his surprise trip to the Capitol was about to happen. In the car, Secret Service agent Bobby Engel told Trump the route to the Capitol could not be secured and they would return to the West Wing, Hutchinson said.

“The president had a very strong, very angry response to that,” she testified. “Tony described him as being irate. The president said something to the effect of, ‘I’m the f-ing president. Take me up to the Capitol now.’”


President Donald Trump cheers supporters from The Ellipse. (Brendan Smialowski/AFP/Getty Images)
When Engel insisted that the car was instead bound for the White House, Hutchinson said Trump reached toward the steering wheel. Engel grabbed his arm, Hutchinson testified, and 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.”


According to Hutchinson’s testimony about Ornato’s account to her, Trump used his other hand to lunge toward Engel. When Ornato told this story to Hutchinson, with Engel in the room, she said, he gestured toward his collarbones. When Hutchinson recounted this at the hearing, she placed a hand at the base of her neck.

Trump denied trying to grab the steering wheel, calling Hutchinson’s testimony “'sick' and fraudulent.” Ornato and Engel were not asked about the incident when they testified to the committee, the person briefed on the Secret Service testimony said.

Trump spokesman Taylor Budowich dismissed Hutchinson’s testimony in a statement Thursday: “The fact that The Washington Post is still trying to peddle testimony from a witness who has been widely discredited, and who many believe perjured herself — which is a felony — is an absolute embarrassment.”

Three agents who accompanied Trump on Jan. 6 are disputing that Trump assaulted or grabbed at Engel and/or the steering wheel, according to one current and one former law enforcement official familiar with their accounts. The three agents, Engle and Ornato are also willing to testify under oath to the committee about their recollection of events on Jan. 6 in the Secret Service vehicle, the two people said. The three agents do not dispute that Trump was furious that the agents would not take him to the Capitol.

Even after the car returned Trump to the West Wing, he still wouldn’t let go of wanting to reach the Capitol.


Tear gas is fired at supporters of President Trump who stormed the United States Capitol building. (Evelyn Hockstein/For The Washington Post)
“When we got back to the White House, he said he wanted to physically walk with the marchers, and according to my notes, he then said he’d be fine with just riding the Beast,” former press secretary Kayleigh McEnany said in videotaped testimony to the committee, referring to the nickname for the fortified presidential limo. “He wanted to be a part of the march in some fashion.”

Trump was furious with Meadows for failing to make the trip happen, Hutchinson testified that Meadows told her. By the time they were back in the West Wing, the televisions were showing live coverage of the rioters overpowering police and getting closer to the Capitol’s doors and windows. Hutchinson testified that she entered Meadows’s office and asked him if he was watching.

“The rioters are getting really close,” she recalled asking the chief of staff. “Have you talked to the president?”

“No,” Meadows answered, while scrolling and texting on his phone, according to Hutchinson’s testimony, “he wants to be alone right now.”

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69127
    • View Profile
Re: Insurrection and the Second American Civil War
« Reply #1582 on: July 02, 2022, 03:58:05 AM »
I know, I know,


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18129
    • View Profile
« Last Edit: July 02, 2022, 05:21:26 AM by DougMacG »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18129
    • View Profile
Re: Insurrection and the Second American Civil War
« Reply #1585 on: July 02, 2022, 05:35:42 AM »
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jun/30/poll-americans-guns-against-government

A quarter of Americans open to taking up arms against government, poll says
Survey of 1,000 registered US voters also reveals that most Americans agree government is ‘corrupt and rigged’

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Insurrection and the Second American Civil War
« Reply #1586 on: July 02, 2022, 07:16:11 AM »
Imagine what the real number is.

Roughly 3% fought the King's government in what was to become the American Revolution.


https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jun/30/poll-americans-guns-against-government

A quarter of Americans open to taking up arms against government, poll says
Survey of 1,000 registered US voters also reveals that most Americans agree government is ‘corrupt and rigged’

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18353
    • View Profile
VDH the Left's hypocracy
« Reply #1587 on: July 02, 2022, 10:24:04 AM »
as always he sums it up in classic brilliant style:

https://nypost.com/2022/06/30/supreme-court-strikes-a-blow-on-bureaucrats/

Like this one:

"And what if conservatives showed up screaming at the gates of one of Barack Obama’s three mansions?"

VDH: The genius farmer  8-)




Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69127
    • View Profile
Before J6, there was this , , ,
« Reply #1591 on: July 06, 2022, 05:22:12 AM »

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
What is lost?
« Reply #1593 on: July 06, 2022, 11:49:13 AM »
https://jrnyquist.blog/2022/07/05/what-is-lost/

What is Lost?

In the fifth century storm upon storm out of the dark North swept away in a great deluge of barbarism all the civilization of the western half of the Roman Empire. From the Atlantic to Constantinople, and from the Rhine to the Danube to the deserts of Africa, all that was learned and cultivated, all that was artistic and beautiful, was overwhelmed in an avalanche of ruin in which not only the triumphs of architecture, literature, and art, produced by many centuries of a high civilization, but also those who could create such things afresh, were involved in one general destruction.

G.F. YOUNG
Civilization is fragile. It can swept away in a very short time. In fact, Forces are gathering right now to sweep it away. Those who should have been defending our civilization have tended to join with the destroyers: politicians, professors, artists, writers, even scientists. They don’t seem to know what they are doing.

Although we are threatened with the nuclear arsenals of Russia and China, we are not threatened — as the Romans were — with “storm upon storm out of the dark North in a great deluge of barbarism.” We are threatened with a savagery of spirit and a barbarism of mind. We are threatened with that “coldest of all cold monsters,” the state. We are threatened with a perverted intellectuality. We are threatened with the self-deluded mediocrity of our “experts,” pundits and politicians We are threatened by fake science parading as “consensus” science (as if real science could ever occur without challenging the “consensus”). We are threatened by lies that remain uncorrected, corruption that is not properly investigated, and a cowardice that won’t rally.

A year ago last fall Nancy Pelosi said Joe Biden was going to be inaugurated president regardless. Well, he was. The Constitution is observed in theory but not in practice. When the Supreme Court overturns Roe vs. Wade the decision of the Court is said to be “illegitimate.” The ruling political party no longer cares for checks and balances, fair elections or the Bill of Rights.

Those without respect, without reverence, without piety, want to reorder society to their liking. They are careful to avoid the word “socialist,” but that is the system they want. They are against the free market. They oppose capitalism. They hate Christianity. They are trying to eliminate freedom of speech. But most of all, they hate America. They absolutely, down to their bones, hate America.

The country is said to be polarized between left and right. In fact, the left is becoming a totalitarian formation. Its goals and ambitions are no longer compatible with free speech or free elections. Socialism sees itself as more important than the rule of law, superior to republican institutions. Anti-socialism is counted more and more as an absolute evil, signifying racism, sexism and classism. Thus, the very basis for party competition under free elections is in free fall.

The left is becoming the victim of its own shadow, projecting its own dictatorial ambitions onto the right. This is plain for all to see. They talk a good game when it comes to democracy, but as Nancy Pelosi demonstrated in 2020, the actual vote doesn’t matter. Biden will be inaugurated “regardless.”

This situation cannot continue indefinitely. The country is getting tired of it, and the Biden administration has worn out its welcome. As the spell of each successive falsification breaks, however, the masses are vulnerable to new narratives featuring new falsifications. The country never seems to arrive at the truth. The shopping mall regime offers us pajamas in our favorite colors. The peddlers of conspiracy theory offer many flavors to choose from. You can blame the invisible Illuminati, the Jews, the Vatican, or the CIA. Who dares to name the real malefactors — the communists? You can believe a missile hit the Pentagon, or that Ukraine is the aggressor rather than the country that invaded Ukraine. You can believe the wicked American “military-industrial” complex is responsible for the world’s woes, or that 9/11 was an inside job. Buried underneath a great mass of nonsense the truth remains hidden: Russia and China are allied, they are coming after us, and the communists are their fifth column.

The Democrats pretend to support Ukraine in the war, but their support is token. For every artillery shell the Ukrainians fire, the Russians are firing ten. NATO pretends to increase its readiness for war, but NATO is not ready. On every side a demoralizing propaganda attends. We must overcome this. And only the truth will suffice if Providence is willing.

Greatness in leadership, argued Thomas Carlyle, is very simple. Those who are the instruments of Providence are effective only insofar as they see the truth of their time and are able to act in accordance with that truth. That this is a rare thing; for most men are the dupes of wishful thinking. As Gustave Le Bon famously said: “Mankind prefers fiction to truth.”

Therefore, if regard for the truth coincides with the work of Providence (as envisioned by Carlyle), then disregard for the truth guarantees a bungled course of corruption ending in defeat. Undoubtedly, this politics of ours is a politics of mediocrity and decline because it is a politics built on insincerity.

The avalanche of ruin we face today is not from barbarian tribes threatening to cross the Rhine and the Danube. The avalanche of today is the result of an inner emptiness and want of moral seriousness. Demosthenes held that the most persuasive oratory was ethical. Only by appealing to truth and justice can we turn the tide. Of course, an oratory of fake truth and fake justice can be heard on every side.

As a lover of art and culture, G.F. Young expressed what was lost in the collapse of Roman civilization in the fifth century. He did so as one who felt the loss deeply. He called what followed a night of “two hundred years” in which barbarians fought over civilization’s corpse. Then came the eighth century and Charlemagne, who brought forty years of flickering light. Afterwards there came another hundred and fifty years of battling as “the Mohamedans” swept out of Arabia with another deluge of war and pillage. “At length,” he recounts, “in the twelfth century the re-civilization of the West is begun by the discovery in Italy of the code of the Roman law.”

Two centuries later, a “miracle” occurs. Dante, Giotto and Petrarch appear. Great literature in the classic form reappears. We see the first rendering of the classical spirit since Boëthius penned that last meditation on truth, The Consolation of Philosophy. Young wrote: “out of the very grave of that old civilization of Rome, buried nine centuries before, comes the new inspiration, the Re-birth.” Thus began the Renaissance. The flower would bloom again.

But now, the flower of that greatest of all civilizations, known as “the West,” has withered. Barbarism makes itself felt as learning turns against the classical spirit — turns against beauty in art, nobility in manners, morality in daily life. The downside of the cycle comes again. A terrible battle approaches us in our decadence. Can we reform and revive our dying world?

The truth is the key.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18353
    • View Profile
Re: Insurrection and the Second American Civil War
« Reply #1594 on: July 06, 2022, 01:02:55 PM »
"The left is becoming the victim of its own shadow, projecting its own dictatorial ambitions onto the right."

I would only add to this it is not a subconscious defense mechanism
but a conscious effort to blame the other side for its misdeeds.

Perhaps the author already meant this.

Democrats do not "threaten Democracy". -  screams the Dem politicians through the media echo chamber - we do

yeah right. :roll:


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18129
    • View Profile

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18353
    • View Profile
VDH the *REAL* insurrectionists
« Reply #1596 on: July 10, 2022, 06:42:45 AM »
yes

all the while the shysters are hard at work with the DNC MSM complex at calling *US* the insurrectionists and the "THREAT TO DEMOCRACY'

just like Stalin and crew

rape murder steal cheat lie and then state whoever opposes them is a threat to the nation

history repeats

but it ain't over till its over stated the three time MVP MLB player .  :x

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69127
    • View Profile
Tucker on Ray Epps
« Reply #1598 on: July 15, 2022, 06:38:19 AM »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18129
    • View Profile
Re: Tucker on Ray Epps
« Reply #1599 on: July 15, 2022, 09:09:22 AM »
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylYF6-sZkgM

So strange.  Makes the rest of the hearings and investigation look like a farce.

If I understand correctly, Trump offered National Guard troops to Nancy Pelosi to strengthen the Capitol Police force prior to Jan 6, 2020.  She declined.

"Fact checkers" in name only say no "formal request" was made, debunking straw, but a memo from the Defense Dpt to the Capitol Police proves the claim true:
https://justthenews.com/government/congress/trump-pentagon-first-offered-national-guard-capitol-four-days-jan-6-riots-memo

Jump forward to the "hearings".  I watched a few moments the first day they were televised in prime time.  Democrat* Liz Cheney spewed out a list of things Trump did not do on the day of the Capitol breach.  Dishonest on that list was she ignored all the things Trump did do, like saying, "go peacefully", and offering troops. 

Lying by omission. 

Following the rant by Democrat* Liz Cheney, no Republican rebuttal was allowed.

The right to confront your accusers is a right guaranteed in the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution.  That right is not always recognized in a kangeroo court.