Secret Service participation in 1/6 coup attempt

[Benjamin Cole]

10 hours ago, Chuck Schwartz said:

I vote for this option..or it may have been the spearpoint of a deluded and sick group seeking to overthrow the election---an attempted insurrection. Trump was the leader. In my opinion, this is the truth. I am still waiting for a decent governmental investigation into who killed JFK.  In my opinion,  JFK was killed by right wing fascists who believed in the Domino theory {if Vietmam goes communist, all of Asia will go communist). Anti - Castro Cubans may have been involved and certain mafia figures may have played a role. 

It may be that the House select committee investigation reports as you believe...that there was an insurrection planned by Trump. 

Unfortunately for all of us, the select committee is a highly political body. Their report may be no better or worse than the old HUAC reports, the Warren Commission, the HSCA or the 9/11 commission. 

 

 

[Guest]

10 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Unfortunately for all of us, the select committee is a highly political body. Their report may be no better or worse than the old HUAC reports, the Warren Commission, the HSCA or the 9/11 commission. 

 

We'll just be watching those two commission scenes in The Parallax View. 

[Benjamin Cole]

1 hour ago, Chris Barnard said:

We'll just be watching those two commission scenes in The Parallax View. 

Let me ask you this: If Liz Cheney had been on the old HUAC, or the WC, or the 9/1/ commission, or the HSCA....how do you think she would have tilted the investigation? 

Now Liz Cheney sits on the 1/6 select committee...

Edited August 8, 2021 by Benjamin Cole
typo

[Guest]

46 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Let me ask you this: If Liz Cheney had been on the old HUAC, or the WC, or the 9/1/ commission, or the HSCA....how do you think she would have tilted the investigation? 

Now Liz Cheney sits on the 1/6 select committee...

Surprised Philip Zelicow didn’t get another nod. 
 

Would a public jury type situation not be better? Picked at random, a person without a criminal record from each state? Does that seem fairer? One lawyer from the prosecution and defence presenting? Or am I hoping for utopia? 

[Benjamin Cole]

1 hour ago, Chris Barnard said:

Surprised Philip Zelicow didn’t get another nod. 
 

Would a public jury type situation not be better? Picked at random, a person without a criminal record from each state? Does that seem fairer? One lawyer from the prosecution and defence presenting? Or am I hoping for utopia? 

Probably no select committee or commission is the best idea, and let the Justice Department try to prove a case in an open court of law, before a jury of peers, wherein defendants have counsel.

You still have a problem that if defense counsel wanted to call people from the intel community, they might simply not appear or would fearlessly dissemble. 

Right now, the case is clear against individuals in the scrum---they broke the law.  Many appear to be mentally challenged. 

One question is whether there were instigators in the crowd, and who the instigators worked for.  

Presently Jan, 6 select committee appears intent on blaming Trump for inciting the scrum, through a speech he gave that day. They may have a problem in that Trump said in this speech, 

I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.

But the select committee does not have prove its case before a jury, they only have to state that their investigation has found Trump instigated the riot/occupation of the Capitol.

We do not know if the select committee has more information, of actual Trump actors working with, or instigating members of the scrum to occupy the Capitol. 

We also do not know if non-Trump government infiltrators, plants, informants or assets played in a role in provoking the events of Jan 6.

Evidently, reporters are saying the kidnap plot of Governor Whitmer would have never happened, that it was in fact enabled, by the involvement of federal agents and informants. So we know the FBI is actively infiltrating groups, often providing financing and even planning. 

Egads, that reminds of case now decades old, and how wide the berth is for "entrapment." 

On October 19, 1982, (John) DeLorean was charged by the US government with trafficking cocaine following a videotaped sting operation in which he was recorded by undercover federal agents agreeing to bankroll a cocaine smuggling operation.^[5] 

You may remember the odd stainless-steel cars DeLorean made. Anyway, there he was on film planning to be a bigtime dope dealer, and I assumed he would doing hard time. He got off, on "entrapment." 

If it turns out some of the half-wit participants in the Jan. 6 scrum were encouraged or financed by intel agents...

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 8, 2021 by Benjamin Cole

[Paul Brancato]

I have no faith in congressional select committees. A public trial would be much more direct.

Trump’s tax returns have still not seen the light of day. He’s still ‘objecting’. NY Attorneys have been  ‘investigating’ Trump for nearly two decades. He remains uncharged. This doesn’t prevent me from concluding he is a criminal hiding behind his phalanx of lawyers. One could say the same about many corporate criminals. They literally get away with murder. That’s our justice system at work, ineffectual. 

[W. Niederhut]

1 hour ago, Paul Brancato said:

I have no faith in congressional select committees. A public trial would be much more direct.

Trump’s tax returns have still not seen the light of day. He’s still ‘objecting’. NY Attorneys have been  ‘investigating’ Trump for nearly two decades. He remains uncharged. This doesn’t prevent me from concluding he is a criminal hiding behind his phalanx of lawyers. One could say the same about many corporate criminals. They literally get away with murder. That’s our justice system at work, ineffectual. 

     Indeed.  It's amazing to see how effectively Trump's lawyers have succeeded in suppressing any evidence of his alleged crimes through endless court appeals, gag orders, etc.

     Remember when Trump announced before the 2016 election that he would release his tax returns after the audit was completed?

     That was five years ago.

     Most recently, someone leaked Jennifer Weisselberg's New York grand jury testimony about Donald Trump allegedly telling her, in person, about his scheme to commit tax fraud.

     The only subsequent news was that the judge imposed a gag order on Ms. Weisselberg. 🤥

[Matt Allison]

I would suggest that some of you might be underestimating the anger, and determination to get to the truth, of the members of this committee, all of whom had to be evacuated that day. The facts will speak for themselves just fine.

Edited August 8, 2021 by Matt Allison

[Mark Knight]

We must remember that, prior to the creation of the House Select Committee investigating the January 6th insurrection attempt, Congress attempted to create an INDEPENDENT COMMISSION to investigate.

And Republican Senators killed that attempt.

Which begs the question: did they not want the incident investigated...or did they WANT a partisan investigation that they could denounce?

Either way, it appears obvious that the LAST thing they wanted was the TRUTH to come out.

[Chris Davidson]

The preponderance of "coup" evidence keeps growing and growing.

https://news.yahoo.com/trump-loyalist-jeffrey-clark-shut-045937632.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall

https://twitter.com/alex_mallin/status/1422728769584906242

 

Edited August 8, 2021 by Chris Davidson

[Benjamin Cole]

6 hours ago, Mark Knight said:

We must remember that, prior to the creation of the House Select Committee investigating the January 6th insurrection attempt, Congress attempted to create an INDEPENDENT COMMISSION to investigate.

And Republican Senators killed that attempt.

Which begs the question: did they not want the incident investigated...or did they WANT a partisan investigation that they could denounce?

Either way, it appears obvious that the LAST thing they wanted was the TRUTH to come out.

I am shocked---shocked!---that one or both of our two major political parties wants to obscure the truth. 

[Benjamin Cole]

7 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

     Indeed.  It's amazing to see how effectively Trump's lawyers have succeeded in suppressing any evidence of his alleged crimes through endless court appeals, gag orders, etc.

     Remember when Trump announced before the 2016 election that he would release his tax returns after the audit was completed?

     That was five years ago.

     Most recently, someone leaked Jennifer Weisselberg's New York grand jury testimony about Donald Trump allegedly telling her, in person, about his scheme to commit tax fraud.

     The only subsequent news was that the judge imposed a gag order on Ms. Weisselberg. 🤥

Trump lacks any moral fiber. 

Still, the national security state is happy to install and work with people lacking any moral fiber--or uninstall them if desired. 

Did JFK lack moral fiber, and that is the national security state installed LBJ? 

The bigger point---why did the national security go after Trump from even before he set foot in office? 

From Nancy Pelosi's webpage:

The United States works to combat global terror by working with our allies to protect human rights and prevent radicalization.

To move our nation forward in uncertain times, Congress will work to preserve our alliances abroad and ensure our national security at home by promoting peace, progress, and prosperity across the globe.

That works out nicely for the globalist-multinationals, no? 

 

[W. Niederhut]

46 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

The bigger point---why did the national security go after Trump from even before he set foot in office?

Let me take a wild guess, Ben.

Did it have anything to do with the multiple contacts that Trump's advisors and campaign associates had with Kremlin officials in 2016 -- e.g., Veselnitskaya, Kilimnik, Lavrov, et.al.?  🤥

The last time I checked, Spy-gate, Obama-gate, and Nunes-Memo-gate all turned out to be nothing burgers cooked up by Trump to deflect attention away from his involvement with the Kremlin.

As for the subject of this thread, Rosen's recent Senate testimony, apparently, implicates Trump in a very serious plot to overturn the election.

[Benjamin Cole]

1 minute ago, W. Niederhut said:

Let me take a wild guess, Ben.

Did it have anything to do with the multiple contacts that Trump's advisors and campaign associates had with Kremlin officials in 2016 -- e.g., Veselnitskaya, Kilimnik, Lavrov, et.al.?  🤥

The last time I checked, Spy-gate, Obama-gate, and Nunes-Memo-gate all turned out to be nothing burgers cooked up by Trump to deflect attention away from his involvement with the Kremlin.

As for the subject of this thread, Rosen's recent Senate testimony, apparently, implicates Trump in a very serious plot to overturn the election.

W.--

There seems to be a vast range of opinions on "Russiagate"---Aaron Mate, Matt Taibbi and Glenn Greenwald, probably the three best DC reporters going---say that Russiagate amounts to nothing. 

Are meetings and contacts mere variations of the old "guilt by association" standard? 

I am no friend of Paul Manafort. If he was a Russian agent...why was he charged not with espionage or sedition, or some such crime? As I recall, Manafort was charged with tax evasion, lying on on a loan application and for failing to register as a foreign lobbyist (the latter charge leading to a rush of such registrations in DC). 

Do we have an "guilty until proven innocent" standard for Manafort, when it comes to whether he was a Russian agent or not? 

---30---

 

The story on the financing of the 

is worth a look.

It appears the money to finance the Penn Biden Center came from mainland China.

https://www.thedp.com/article/2020/05/penn-biden-center-china-undisclosed-donations-complaint-millions

The student newspaper, and Philly papers, before Biden became the D Party nominee, ran op-eds asking why Biden was getting so much money from U Penn for doing nothing. 

https://www.inquirer.com/news/joe-biden-penn-salary-lectures-20190712.html

OK, we can connect dots, if we are so inclined. 

The CCP gives money to the U Penn to create the Penn Biden Center. And U Penn gives Biden more than $900k. 

Money is a fungible commodity. Did the CCP essentially give Biden $900k? 

The answer to that question is entirely a matter of perspective, and in the US, partisan politics. 

It is a variation of the guilt by association routine. We can say Biden is bought off by the CCP, or we can declare the money has no effect on Biden's policy making. 

I consider Biden innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

 

[Benjamin Cole]

1 hour ago, W. Niederhut said:

Let me take a wild guess, Ben.

Did it have anything to do with the multiple contacts that Trump's advisors and campaign associates had with Kremlin officials in 2016 -- e.g., Veselnitskaya, Kilimnik, Lavrov, et.al.?  🤥

The last time I checked, Spy-gate, Obama-gate, and Nunes-Memo-gate all turned out to be nothing burgers cooked up by Trump to deflect attention away from his involvement with the Kremlin.

As for the subject of this thread, Rosen's recent Senate testimony, apparently, implicates Trump in a very serious plot to overturn the election.

W.--

I do not know if you are a "neoliberal" or not, and that is fine, whatever your views are.  

Personally, I am a non-interventionist, more in the JFK line. 

For me, it is unsettling to read how the Biden Penn Center promotes itself. 

 

Of course, I am dubious about buzz words, such as "American global engagement." Such phrases could be quite benign, or could signal support for a global military establishment, that is a global guard service for multinationals. The Deep State-globalist combine. 

 

 

So, China is benign, and the Russians are bad, bad, bad. 

I happen to think Putin is a thug, but Xitler...probably worse.