Benjamin Cole Posted February 15, 2021 Share Posted February 15, 2021 19 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said: A related issue is the Trump administration's apparent thwarting of security measures in D.C. on January 6th. Perhaps these matters will be brought to light by future investigations. But the evidence may have very little impact on Trump's base, since 44% of Republicans in a recent poll, apparently, approved of the January 6th attack on the Capitol! OK--- “The insurrectionists killed a Capitol Police officer by striking him in the head with a fire extinguisher,” the House impeachment managers stated in their pretrial memo. " Indeed, this version seems to be the one most people accept. But--- ..... “According to one law enforcement official, medical examiners did not find signs that the officer sustained any blunt force trauma, so investigators believe that early reports that he was fatally struck by a fire extinguisher are not true,” CNN reported. BTW, I am not a Donk or 'Phant, and I do not support violence of any kind. But you realize, House managers presented a falsehood as a fact, and the establishment-media version of what happened to Brian Sicknick is that he died of blunt force trauma. I cannot fault readers and citizens for being leery, even deeply suspicious, of the establishment media. In the "old days," it was the loosely defined "left wing" that thought the establishment media lied. Today it is the "right wing." So? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dennis Berube Posted February 15, 2021 Share Posted February 15, 2021 This interview was an absolute mess. I'm not quite sure what to make of it. Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Cole Posted February 16, 2021 Share Posted February 16, 2021 On 2/15/2021 at 8:00 AM, Benjamin Cole said: OK--- “The insurrectionists killed a Capitol Police officer by striking him in the head with a fire extinguisher,” the House impeachment managers stated in their pretrial memo. " Indeed, this version seems to be the one most people accept. But--- ..... “According to one law enforcement official, medical examiners did not find signs that the officer sustained any blunt force trauma, so investigators believe that early reports that he was fatally struck by a fire extinguisher are not true,” CNN reported. BTW, I am not a Donk or 'Phant, and I do not support violence of any kind. But you realize, House managers presented a falsehood as a fact, and the establishment-media version of what happened to Brian Sicknick is that he died of blunt force trauma. I cannot fault readers and citizens for being leery, even deeply suspicious, of the establishment media. In the "old days," it was the loosely defined "left wing" that thought the establishment media lied. Today it is the "right wing." So? Add on: The New York Times Retracts the Story Asserting Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick was Killed by a Trump Supporter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dennis Berube Posted February 17, 2021 Share Posted February 17, 2021 On 1/30/2021 at 3:49 PM, James DiEugenio said: We tend to think of the present as being a constant, for the reason that past horrors have a tendency to recede in memory. This country has not been fortunate in its choice of presidents in recent years. But to hold up Trump as the poster child is, I think, ignoring history i.e. the above. In my position, I cannot do that. Well said Jim, but please, don't slander the Gallagher brothers. Regarding the LA protest. This brief article is worth a read. https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/dear-the-defender-media-wrong-about-dodger-stadium-protest/ Also, regarding Jan 6; I'm sure there is more (or perhaps far less) to the story, but it certainly looks like this Antifa guy was pretending to be a pro-Trumper on Jan 6. It's on many different sites at this point. https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/02/raises-serious-red-flags-cnn-nbc-paid-black-lives-matter-leader-john-sullivan-35000-piece-us-capitol-riot-footage/ https://meaww.com/cnn-nbc-pay-insurrectionist-john-sullivan-35000-each-capitol-riot-footage-internet-reactions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Prutsok Posted February 17, 2021 Share Posted February 17, 2021 He's not an "Antifa guy." He was posing as one as Max Blumenthal exposed here: https://thegrayzone.com/2021/01/12/chaos-agent-right-wing-us-capitol-riot-black-lives-matter/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dennis Berube Posted March 2, 2021 Share Posted March 2, 2021 Apparently, Trump had asked for 10,000 national guard for January 6th. The story about why they were not called is not clear and involves Pelosi claiming "optics" apparently as an excuse. That is not very credible considering everyone knew there was going to be a sizable crowd that thought the election was a selection. Jim, was this talked about at all during the trial? https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/01/embedding-with-pentagon-leadership-in-trumps-chaotic-last-week https://thenationalpulse.com/breaking/pelosi-capitol-police-chief-natl-guard/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted March 2, 2021 Share Posted March 2, 2021 7 minutes ago, Dennis Berube said: Apparently, Trump had asked for 10,000 national guard for January 6th. The story about why they were not called is not clear and involves Pelosi claiming "optics" apparently as an excuse. You’ve fallen for another Trumpistani Big Lie, apparently. https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-afs:Content:9909210228 https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/feb/25/facebook-posts/no-capitol-security-not-only-pelosis-responsibilit/ News reports indicate that in the days before the attack, House sergeant-at-arms Paul Irving resisted calls from the Capitol Police to bring in the National Guard for extra security at the Capitol because of “optics.” Irving later testified that intelligence reports didn’t show the need for the extra security, not that he rejected it because of optics. 7 minutes ago, Dennis Berube said: That is not very credible considering everyone knew there was going to be a sizable crowd that thought the election was a selection. Your Trumpistani sources are pathological prevaricators. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dennis Berube Posted March 2, 2021 Share Posted March 2, 2021 Ap fact checker, really Cliff? I do enjoy some good humor... Pelosi did not say that on Jan 6, supposedly she mentioned optics to Irving in the months leading up to it, which he cited as one excuse. Miller, who approved the final request, is the one saying Trump told him they would need 10,000. Pelosi may well be a victim of circumstance in this case, but no matter how you look at it, the lack of security was almost comical. What do you think the response would have been if the protesters stormed Ft Dietrich or a Raytheon research facility? Between Irving and Sund, someone is apparently lying about the 1:09pm request from Sund to Irving. Pelosi's office claimed she "approved" the request at 1:43. Irving says he didnt even get a request until after 2pm. Pelsoi then told her staff to contact McConnell for approval. Considering the 9/11 style treatment this event has been receiving, it is likely that the truth will suffer in some fashion. https://dailycaller.com/2021/02/27/sources-nancy-pelosi-sergeant-at-arms-paul-irving-national-guard-capitol-riot/ https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/21/us/politics/capitol-riot-security-delays.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted March 2, 2021 Share Posted March 2, 2021 54 minutes ago, Dennis Berube said: Ap fact checker, really Cliff? I do enjoy some good humor... I do enjoy a fact based debate, but contentless dismissals don’t cut it. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/key-capitol-security-officials-be-grilled-about-what-went-wrong-n1258530 Irving pushed back against Sund's account, saying he didn't recall speaking to him at that time, had no record of any phone calls or text messages from Sund and never said he had to run Sund's request up the chain of command. He also denied that he'd voiced any concern about "optics." "That is categorically false," Irving said. "'Optics,' as portrayed in the media, did not determine our security posture. Safety was always paramount when evaluating security for January 6. We did discuss whether the intelligence warranted having troops at the Capitol, and our collective judgment at that time was no, the intelligence did not warrant that." Quote Pelosi did not say that on Jan 6, supposedly she mentioned optics to Irving in the months leading up to it, which he cited as one excuse. Categorically false. Quote Miller, who approved the final request, is the one saying Trump told him they would need 10,000. Pelosi may well be a victim of circumstance in this case, Right out of the 1933 Poopoo Playbook. Burn the Reichstag, blame leftists. Run amok in the Capitol, blame leftists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now