“Much To Do About Nothing”: The Withdrawal Of The Lee Claim Has “Much To Do” With A Glaring Flaw In The House Case

At the end of its first day of argument, the Senate trial was thrown into chaos when a “juror” stood up like a scene out of Perry Mason to contest the veracity statements made by “prosecutors.” That moment came as the Senate was preparing to end for the day and Senator Mike Lee (R., Utah) jumped to his feet to object that a quote by House manager Rep. David Cicilline (D., R.I.) was false. Lee should know. They were purportedly his words.  After a frenzy on the floor and a delay of proceedings, lead House manager Rep. Jamie Raskin (D., Md) announced that it would withdraw Cicilline’s statements and that “this is much ado about nothing, because it’s not critical in anyway to our case.” In reality, it had much to do about the manager’s case and highlights a glaring problem in its case.  The House has elected to try this case of incitement of insurrection largely on circumstantial evidence and using media reports rather than witness testimony. It is trial by innuendo and implication rather than direct evidence of what Trump knew and intended on January 6th.

Raskin added that “So we’re happy to withdraw it on the grounds that it is not true and we are going to withdraw it this evening without any prejudice to the ability to resubmit if possible and then we could debate it if we need it.” It is not clear if the House will contest Lee’s point further on the second day of argument. However, such problems arise when you chose to litigate a case based on news reports as opposed to actual testimony.

Lee was aggrieved by Cicilline quoting him as to what Trump said in a conversation with Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) on Jan. 6. Trump mistakenly called Lee, who handed over the phone to his colleague.  Here is what Cicilline said in part: “Sen. Lee described it …Sen. Lee then confirmed that he stood by as Sen. Tuberville and President Trump spoke on the phone. And on that call, Donald Trump reportedly asked Sen. Tuberville to make additional objections to the certification process.”

That does not appear to true if the suggestion is that Lee confirmed that content of the call in the article. The source for the House managers was a story in Deseret News that only describes the miscall and awkward moment before Lee grabbed back his phone. Tuberville stated that he did not recall much of the brief call, but the article also states that Lee told the newspaper that when “Lee said when he later asked Tuberville about the conversation, he got the impression that Trump didn’t know about the chaos going on in the Senate chamber.” The House managers left out that part which directly contradicts its narrative that Trump knew about the riot and was relishing it as he was calling to further delay the electoral certification. If true, the House’s timeline argument would lose coherence, if not collapse entirely. The House repeatedly argued that Trump wanted the riot and then used its to delay the proceedings.  Yet, this call occurred  “shortly after 2 pm” and, according to Lee, Trump did not appear to the senator to be aware of the extent of the chaos. A few minutes later, at 2:38, Trump tweets, “Please support our Capitol Police and Law Enforcement. They are truly on the side of our Country. Stay peaceful!”

The main problem with the Lee objection however is that it highlights what is missing in the House case: witness testimony. I have been a critic of the House for using what I called a “snap impeachment” without even one day of hearings, investigation, or a formal opportunity for the President to respond.  It could have easily held a couple days of impeachment and still impeached Trump before he left office.  The House had from Jan. 6th to Jan. 20th to do so.  However, what is even more disturbing is what came next. Nothing at all. the House had weeks to call witnesses to lock in their testimony and create the public record missing in its impeachment. As with the first impeachment, it rushed through the vote as an urgent matter and then did nothing. It did not send the article to the Senate and it did not call witnesses before any committees. Even if the snap impeachment were justified, the failure to create a record after the vote was not.

The House knew that it would be difficult to get witnesses in the Senate. After all, such witnesses were denied in the first trial and even with Clinton (with the Republicans in control) only a couple of depositions were allowed by the Senate.

In the meantime, former officials were giving public interviews on what Trump said and did during these critical hours. They clearly could be called to testify since they were already speaking publicly.  This includes witnesses who could speak to the request for National Guard support like former Acting Secretary of Defense Chris Miller and his two closest aides, Kashyap “Kash” Patel and Ezra Cohen, and U.S. Capitol Police chief Yogananda D. Pittman. (Pittman gave non-public testimony on the riot itself). There is at least a dozen such officials who could have been called to lock in their testimony and give direct testimony on the underlying facts. The House could also have asked for confirmation of statements like those attributed to Senators Tuberville and Lee. Yet, the House let weeks go by without calling these witnesses in the House. Why?

It is honestly not clear to me why the House managers do not want to make a more solid and conventional case for incitement when these witnesses are available to remove doubts on these questions. With acquittal extremely likely, one would think that the House would seek hard testimony to force senators to reconsider their positions.

Instead, the House managers have been referencing media reports of what witnesses have said, including unidentified “senior aides.” Much of the first day repeated an account that Trump was delighted by the scenes of rioting while managers like Cicilline omitted statements in such articles that Trump might not have been fully aware of the situation until shortly before his 2:30 tweet telling people to stay peaceful and obey the police.

In reality, most of us have little idea of what Trump knew or how he was reacting at these critical moments. Such evidence is critical to the case before the Senate. Trump was not impeached for negligence. He was impeached for inciting an actual insurrection or rebellion against the United States. Yet, the House seems not only uninterested but willfully blind to the existence of witnesses who could supply that evidence. If Trump actively delayed the deployment of National Guard troops or celebrated the riot, it would have direct bearing on the case. Indeed, that is why the House managers keep referring to news reports that he seemed pleased by the scenes. Yet, it could have confirmed these reports by calling these witnesses rather than rely on anonymous sources in media reports.

The Lee kerfuffle was damaging not because it forced the House managers to withdraw Cicilline’s words. It was damaging because it highlights what is not in the House case. It has “much to do” with the credibility of the House case. Senators could conclude that the decision to rely on media reports rather than witnesses leaves the case inclusive and speculative on Trump’s state of mind or purpose. We know the public case against Trump, but not whether a legal case can be made against him. Or, to paraphrase Shakespeare, “we know what [the case is], but know not what [the case] may be” with direct evidence.

This column appeared on Fox.com.

212 thoughts on ““Much To Do About Nothing”: The Withdrawal Of The Lee Claim Has “Much To Do” With A Glaring Flaw In The House Case”

  1. It’s getting hard to take the federal judiciary seriously led by the black-robed weather vane, Roberts.

    Apparently screwing the FISA Court is no big matter. https://technofog.substack.com/p/judge-boasberg-the-clinesmith-lies

    Federal judges are beginning to look sorry even when compared to the famous Roland the Farter of King Henry II court. At least Roland the Farter did his job.and earned his estate. But I wonder how he did it so consistently? A Leap, A whistle, and A Fart each Christmas. Sounds demanding.

  2. While our elected and un-elected ‘elites’ focus on performing their Soviet Show Trial in the Senate a blog named Gateway Pundit is reporting that a hand count of paper ballots in part of New Hampshire showed that voting machines removed 6% of votes from every Republican candidate. This should be investigated to see if it is true. And I don’t think the FBI should show up and claim a dubious ‘jurisdiction’ and then destroy the evidence as reportedly they did in Georgia. Is there any law enforcement agency left in the country that can be trusted to conduct this investigation?

    https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/02/new-hampshire-update-dominion-owned-machines-removed-6-votes-windham-gop-candidate-machines-used-85-towns-video-report/

    Meanwhile, get on with your Commie show trial. Even Macron of France is fretting that the US government has gone berserker leftist. When it’s gotten to the point that FRANCE is warning you, you should know you are in trouble.

  3. This impeachment trial is not valid, legitimate, legal or constitutional.

    This egregiously false and erroneous impeachment trial is conclusively moot in the absence of the Chief Justice.

    Democrats have taken the law into their own hands, rewritten, engineered and violated the law, and seized power.

    America is lawless as an imposter Makes America Weak Again.

    The military in Myanmar honorably and patriotically seized power from criminal and corrupt politicians in order that the dominion of the law and the Constitution be restored.

    After the corruption of the 2020 presidential election and seizure of power by democrats, it is long past time for the Supreme Court and, in turn, the Joint Chiefs of Staff to act in support of law and in support of the

    Constitution.

  4. Regardless Of Sourcing,

    Trump’s Call To Tuberville Revealed His Lack Of Concern For Violence

    But Lee’s objection also served to highlight a subtly vital series of events from that day. The Tuberville call — regardless of the sourcing behind it — reinforces the readily apparent idea that Trump’s focus early in the riot was much more about his own political fate than the danger faced by lawmakers and Capitol staff.

    The call, after all, came well after the rioters had breached several barriers near the Capitol. It also came around the time Trump’s first tweet arrived, not calling for peace but instead criticizing Vice President Mike Pence for not unilaterally trying to overturn the election. The Washington Post and others reported that Trump spoke to Tuberville to discuss this topic and to talk about delaying the certification of the results.

    What’s more, the reported content of that call not only hasn’t been disputed; it’s actually reinforced by audio of a similar call to Lee by Trump lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani. Giuliani also called Lee while seeking Tuberville later that day, and he left a voice mail in which the content matches the reported content of Trump’s call.

    The Dispatch’s Steven Hayes reported on that call the night it happened, publishing a transcript.

    “I’m calling you because I want to discuss with you how they’re trying to rush this hearing and how we need you, our Republican friends, to try to just slow it down so we can get these legislatures to get more information to you,” Giuliani said in the voice mail.

    Giuliani added: “So if you could object to every state and, along with a congressman, get a hearing for every state, I know we would delay you a lot, but it would give us the opportunity to get the legislators who are very, very close to pulling their vote.…”

    Giuliani’s call came after the riot had died down that evening, but it’s readily apparent why Trump and Giuliani would seek Tuberville out specifically: He had been one of the dozen or so senators who said they would object to the election results in key states. There’s really no reason to call a freshman senator who had just been sworn in weeks earlier and has no real legislative heft if your intent is to talk about the riot. They were focused on gumming up the works to buy time.

    Thus far we have myriad evidence that Trump, at the very least, wasn’t terribly troubled by the events that day. The Post’s Rosalind Helderman and Josh Dawsey published a must-read story about that earlier this week, dissecting the Trump legal team’s claim that Trump was immediately “horrified” by the scenes.

    Trump’s delayed, mealy-mouthed call for the rioters to “go home” (while expressing his “love” for them), didn’t come till 4:17 p.m., more than two hours after the rioters broke into the Capitol. Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) acknowledged, “It took him a while to appreciate the gravity of the situation.” Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) went further, saying Trump “was walking around the White House confused about why other people on his team weren’t as excited as he was” about the riot.

    Trump allies and former White House staffers pleaded in real time — and even publicly on Twitter — for Trump to call off the mob. But Trump resisted for hours and then, in doing so, expressed sympathy for the rioters. If he was truly horrified, he sure had a funny way of showing it.

    What the Lee/Tuberville calls reinforce, though, is that Trump wasn’t just slow to appreciate the situation. He was, at the same time, very tuned in to one specific thing: his electoral fate. Even an hour after Capitol barricades were breached — something that played widely on cable news — we have no real evidence he was truly “horrified,” and plenty that he wasn’t.

    This far-flung and desperate effort, though, needed to proceed even as the Capitol was under siege. Even if the true danger of the situation wasn’t immediately apparent to Trump, it’s clear he was tuned in. And it lends credence to Democrats’ arguments that Trump’s initial shrug at the situation suggests a president who probably saw value in it.

    Edited from:  “The Important Thing About The Mike Lee Impeachment Trial Dust Up”

    Today’s Washington Post

    1. The Washing Tub Posthumous

      Not dissimilar to the municipal water treatment plant.

      “The Important Thing About The Mike Lee Impeachment Trial Dust Up” – A tempest in a tea pot – Gossip in a sewing circle – An exercise in futility – An exercise in insanity.

      There is no trial.

      A private citizen is not the president.

      The presiding officer is not the Chief Justice.

      Congress and the Senate cannot ignore the law and/or take the law into their own hands.

      This has evolved from comedy to crime – an egregious crime of malicious prosecution and treason against the Constitution.

      1. This is a Farce – as Cruz notes.

        It is something to be laughed at.

        it is an act of self harm by democrats.

        Raskin’s closing was damning.

        The Senate must convict because otherwise Trump could do it again.

        Correct – that is exactly what democrats are afraid of.

        That in a lawful and fair election Trump would win.

    2. All you are doing is repeating the same error over and over.

      The WaPo article is NOT news. It is oppinion journalism.

      You are free to beleive it if you wish.
      But you are not free to beleive it is evidence.

      Frankly, I do not care much.

      An attempt to violently overthrough a legitimate government is a revolution – not an insurrection.

  5. Here is yet another lie being propagated by the fake news media and the lying sociopathic Democrats in Congress: that officer Sicknick was “murdered.” No, he was not.

    “How and why did the media spend an entire month definitively affirming what appears to be a completely false story about the only person said to have been killed by the Capitol mob: Officer Brian Sicknick?

    Why do we not know how or even when he died?”

    ~glen greenwald

    1. Officer Brian Sicknick was a Trump supporter – Antifa agitated and incited the Capitol riot.
      ______________________________________________________________________

      Brian Sicknick: DC Police Officer Dies After Injuries at Capitol Riot

      Facebook Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick. died of injuries suffered when supporters of President Donald Trump invaded the U.S. Capitol building.

      Brian Sicknick was a Trump-supporting U.S. Capitol Police officer and military veteran…

      Heavy found a Twitter account in Sicknick’s name. It indicates that he was a Donald Trump supporter; the cover photo is Trump’s plane. The account has been temporarily restricted for “unusual activity.” On Facebook, his cover photo is of an American flag.

      Here’s what you need to know about the death of Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick:

      1. The Officer’s Social Media Featured Patriotic Themes & a Democratic Staffer Recalled How He Comforted Her After the 2016 Election Even Thought He Supported Trump & She Was in Tears

      “Officer Sicknick was the officer posted at the door of the Capitol I entered through every day for two years. He was mostly quiet, but always had jokes and a quick sense of humor,” wrote Caroline Behringer on Twitter. She’s worked for Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama. “he day that Trump won the election, I came to work in tears. When he saw me walking up, he had the other officers hold the doors open for me and help me inside. I collapsed in tears and he held me while I cried, even though I knew he supported Trump.”

      Facebook

      Visible posts on Sicknick’s private Facebook page featured American flags and patriotic themes. A 1998 article in the Central New Jersey Home News said that then Airman Brian D. Sicknick was the son of Charles and Gladys Sicknick of South River. At the time he was “a security-force apprentice assigned to the 108th Air Refueling Wing” at McGuire Air Force Base, the outlet reported. He was a 1997 graduate of Middlesex County Vocational Technical High School in East Brunswick.

      “Officer Sicknick was the officer posted at the door of the Capitol I entered through every day for two years. He was mostly quiet, but always had jokes and a quick sense of humor,” wrote Caroline Behringer on Twitter. She’s worked for Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama. “he day that Trump won the election, I came to work in tears. When he saw me walking up, he had the other officers hold the doors open for me and help me inside. I collapsed in tears and he held me while I cried, even though I knew he supported Trump.”

      – Heavy.com

      1. The loss of any Life is tragic….and Slcknick is different in that regard.

        What is tragic in his case is the Left is trying to present his death as a direct result of the events at the Capitol Building on January 6th….without waiting for the completed Investigation.

        At this point the Investigation has not surfaced direct evidence to link his death to anything or anyone at the event on that day.

        The Coroner’s Report determined a probable cause of death but did not find a manner of death.

        Until that Coroner Report is finalized at some point in the future….all assertions it was a homicide,manslaughter, or murder….are baseless.

        That he was a good Man, who is being missed by those in his family and those that knew him goes without saying….but his death should. not be politicized out of partisanship or false reporting.

        That only indicts the character of those who are doing that for that political gain.

        1. The fact that Sicknick was a Trump supporter mitigates against the use of his death as a political weapon by the communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs).

          All those who protect America and fight its battles are heroic and honorable.

          They are completely aware that they risk injury and that they may be required to give the last full measure.

          How many KIA has Nancy Pelosi held and attended services for?

          One.

          The one she exploits for her own, personal, abject political purposes.

          Shame on the lying, cheating, base and despicable communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs).

          God Bless America’s Protectors and War-Fighters.

          1. “Shame on the lying, cheating, base and despicable communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs).”

            Grow up.

            1. George is the one who uses the phrase “communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs).”

              He’s never going to stop.

              He also says that women should have the right to vote and that African Americans should be sent to Africa. He’s a sick person and extreme bigot.

        2. Todate there is only a single person whose death is directly attributable to Capital breakin.

          That is Alishi’s, and she was murdered by the capital police.

  6. One would hope by now, Mr. Turley, you could answer your own question on why the House is presenting their case without direct witness testimony: they know if this case was being tried in a criminal court they’d have no case at all.

    1. I think the House Managers would love to include direct witness testimony. That can only occur if the Senate agrees to it. Call your Senators and tell them you want testimony.

      It’s not a criminal trial, it’s an impeachment trial.

      1. It’s not a trial in any form.

        Trump is not the president.

        There is no Chief Justice presiding.

        This is purely a criminal act by all Congressmen and Senators who attend.

        1. “It’s not a trial in any form.”

          Wrong, it’s an impeachment trial, as stipulated by the Constitution: “The Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments.” (Article I, Section 4)

          “Trump is not the president.”

          Correct, he’s the former President, and he was impeached by the House while still in office for his actions in office.

          “There is no Chief Justice presiding.”

          There’s no requirement that the Chief Justice preside over the trial of a former president, only that he preside over the trial of a sitting president.

          “This is purely a criminal act by all Congressmen and Senators who attend.”

          Nope, nothing criminal about it.

      2. Pelosi and democrats completely control the house and the Senate – if they actually wanted witnesses they could have had them.

        Either in the house or the Senate or both.

  7. Why aren’t Democrats held to the same standard, and on trial for the Democrat violence that swept the nation for months?

    Why aren’t they under pressure to answer for Democrat BLM threatening to burn down DC the other day, or for Antifa laying seige to ICE?

    Trump calls for peaceful protest, he gets impeached for a pre-planned attack that went on while he was still speaking.

    Democrats burn, loot, and riot, and they get applauded for fighting the good fight.

    Biden brags on camera about a quid pro quo with Ukraine, in which he got the prosecutor fired who just so happened to be investigating Burisma, who paid millions of dollars to Hunter Biden, who’s only asset was his father the VP. Nothing happens. Joe Biden is not investigated for corruption.

    Trump inquires about it, and gets impeached.

    Hillary Clinton paid for a fake dossier that falsely portrayed Trump as a Russian asset in order to interfere with the election. The sub source admitted none of it was true. Nothing happened to her.

    Trump got investigated for years for allegedly working with the Russians and naive people STILL think he’s an asset. Meanwhile, Trump got blamed for meddling in an election.

    Big Tech accuses Trump and Republicans of election meddling and interference. Meanwhile, Google promotes stories that help Democrats or are injurious to Republicans, while burying stories injurious to Democrats or would help Republicans. Youtube, Facebook, and Twitter deplatform, demonetize, and otherwise censor conservatives in order to shove their thumb on the scale to meddle in elections.

    Trump was accused of not believing science, and interfering with his own Covid expert, for claiming that he could get the vaccines out by the end of the year. Which he accomplished.

    Trump got about a million vaccines distributed every day by the time he left office. The media gave Biden credit for it.

    Honestly, I am so fed up at this point.

    1. We are all fed up.

      The entire sham-peachment is a ruse for Democrats to keep going after Trump supporters who are now being called “lawbreaking violent insurgents” and “domestic terrorists” and “extremists” and “white supremacists” and “racists” who must all be expunged! Done away with! Crushed! Their “kind” must never “rise again”!

      Democrats and their media mouthpieces are pure evil.

      These sick, lying, sociopathic Democrats are underestimating the anger and rage THEY are stirring up. Democrats began the Biden “Unity” administration by fomenting more hate, more intolerance, more distrust, more anger, and more rage. The only “unity” we see from this is the “unified hate” coming from these sick Democrat sociopaths in Congress.

    2. Karen: You really ought to go shovel out the barn or something useful instead of proving the depth and extent of the lies you are willing to believe from a fat slob lifetime failure, cheater, misogynist, liar and serial bankrupter of businesses. BLM is a sentiment, not an organized party, like the Proud Boys, and it has nothing whatsoever to do with the Democratic Party. Just because some protests after the murder of George Floyd erupted in violence does not mean you should repeat the lie that Tucker, Levin or some other ultra right wing loser told you that it’s the fault of Democrats. Democrats didn’t incite anyone to violence, unlike the fat man you worship who lied even before the election that there would be fraud. He knew his defeat was coming because he lost the popular vote in 2016, he never got even a 50% approval rating, and all polls predicted he would lose. He cannot stand to lose, and would stop at nothing to prevent that humiliation. Democrats have nothing whatsoever to do with ANTIFA, either. The Steele Dossier had nothing to do with instigating Trump’s first impeachment–even his own head of intelligence got fired for saying that Russia helped Trump cheat. It’s in the Mueller Report. Read it. And, no one has refuted the Steele Dossier, either, which has nothing to do with Trump’s impeachment.

      Trump is not a conservative, because conservatives believe in personal integrity, marital fidelity and fiscal responsibility, none of which apply to Trump.Trump did muzzle the CDC doctors, and he had NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with vaccine development. Scientists did that, not your obese hero. And, he claimed the vaccines would be released before Election Day, as if that somehow would win him approval of the majority of Americans, which it did not and could not. And, he does not believe in science–pushed for emergency use authorization for Hydroxychloroquine, which is not only ineffective, it kills more COVID patients than those who didn’t take it. He also recommended ingesting bleach and putting lights inside the human body. For free publicity, he insisted on hogging attention at COVID updates, he discouraged wearing masks, lied about the extent and dangerousness of COVID, and made one false prediction after another–remember how 15 cases would soon be 0 cases, it would be over by summer, anyone who wants a test can get a test….on and on. Trump got nothing “distributed”. Trump “left office” right after the election–he did literally nothing substantive whatsoever other than plotting how to defeat the will of the American people, holed up in our White House, licking his wounds, going on “Stop the Steal” tours, lying to his faithful disciples that their rights were stolen away by election fraud, endless tweets at all hours of the day and night, 60+ lawsuits, pressuring and then threatening election officials and trying to bully Pence into denying the validity of the certified votes. The Trump Insurrection was his last stand–he thought he could get the faithful to force Congress not to accept the certified vote totals. Instead, 5 are dead and hundreds will do prison time. That pattern of lies is the reason for the Trump Insurrection, not the pre-insurrection speech. The faithful all say they were told to invade the Capitol because Trump told them to do so. Trump is being impeached the second time for fomenting an insurrection causing the deaths of 5 people. People like you are the ones who are naive.

      1. If Trump ever gets let back on twitter a condition should be he has to use this tag line:

        fat slob lifetime failure, cheater, misogynist, liar and serial bankrupter of businesses

        EB

        1. Trump will not be back on Twitter.

          My bet is that within a year we have P2P social media that is uncensorable.

      2. “BLM is a sentiment, not an organized party,”
        The capital protestors were a “sentiment” too.

        “and it has nothing whatsoever to do with the Democratic Party.”
        Not according tot he times article on the election.

        I would call the time article an Expose – except that the article reveled in rather than complained about the broad conspiracy that it shed light on.

        “Just because some protests after the murder of George Floyd erupted in violence does not mean you should repeat the lie ”
        And yet that is precisely what you are doing with impeachment.

        In the one instance we have mob violence triggered by the drug overdose death of a down and out druggie and counterfeitor.
        In the other we have people breaking down the doors to demand that their govenrment refuse to certify a probably fraudulent election.

        “Democrats didn’t incite anyone to violence, ”

        “I just don’t even know why there aren’t uprisings all over the country, and maybe there will be when people realize that this is a policy that they defend,”
        Pelosi

        “Michele (Bachmann), slit your wrist. Go ahead… or, do us all a better thing . Move that knife up about two feet. Start right at the collarbone.” — Montel Williams

        “That Scott down there that’s running for governor of Florida. Instead of running for governor of Florida, they ought to have him and shoot him. Put him against the wall and shoot him. He stole billions of dollars from the United States government and he’s running for governor of Florida. He’s a millionaire and a billionaire. He’s no hero. He’s a damn crook. It’s just we don’t prosecute big crooks.” — Rep. Paul Kanjorski, D-Pa

        “Cheney deserves same final end he gave Saddam. Hope there are cell cams.” — Rep. Chuck Kruger (D-Thomaston)

        Harris on violent protests.
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EIdbdSWR9_U

        “Democrats have nothing whatsoever to do with ANTIFA, either.”
        Then why did you bail them out ?

        “The Steele Dossier had nothing to do with instigating Trump’s first impeachment–even his own head of intelligence got fired for saying that Russia helped Trump cheat. It’s in the Mueller Report. Read it. And, no one has refuted the Steele Dossier, either, which has nothing to do with Trump’s impeachment.”
        This remark makes very little sense.

        Regardless, the Steele Dossier is inarguably Russian disinformation – actual information supplied by an actual russian spy to a russian useful idiot and then provided to clinton.

        If as you claim there is the tiniest bit of Truth to it – or even if there is not – then it is ALSO a clear effort by Putin to support Hillary over Trump.

        “conservatives believe in personal integrity, marital fidelity and fiscal responsibility”
        No one beleives that you beleive that.

        “he had NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with vaccine development.”
        Really ?

        “Scientists did that”
        That argument works for EVERYTHING – Government and government leaders have never had anything to do with anything that has ever been accomplished.

        BTW there was much more to the Vaccine development than “science” – Capitalists determined that it was in their interests to develop the vaccine. They also figured out how to produce it and test it in record speed.
        Do not give Trump credit – fine, but then you can not give government credit either.

        “he claimed the vaccines would be released before Election Day”
        And they could have been. In fact the vaccine was initially developed in February 2020. Everything after that was testing and production, and getting through vgovenrment red tape.

        “he does not believe in science”
        Science is not something you beleive in – that is religion.
        Science is a procress.

        “pushed for emergency use authorization for Hydroxychloroquine, which is not only ineffective, it kills more COVID patients than those who didn’t take it”
        Actually there is plenty of data – now Hundreds of studies that demonstrate HCQ is effective. And the study claiming it killed people was not by doctors and has been withdrawn.

        “He also recommended ingesting bleach”
        Yes, but you do not know what bleach is. There is study on an effective medical treatment for C19 that involved injecting a bleaching agent.
        That is a safe and effective treatment that has been used against C19 over 1000 times and other viruses many many times more

        This is called ACTUAL science.

        “and putting lights inside the human body.”
        We do that all the time.

        “For free publicity, he insisted on hogging attention at COVID updates”
        Sounds like every politician I know.
        “he discouraged wearing masks,”
        Actually he did not. But the results of ALL real world studies of masks are VERY discouraging.

        “lied about the extent and dangerousness of COVID”
        How many predictions have been right ?
        Almost none.

        “Instead, 5 are dead”
        So far there is a single protestor that is dead as a direct result of the protests in the capitYou l. Alishi who was murdered by the police.
        All other deaths were outside the capital and not thus far directly attributable to the capital protest.

        “hundreds will do prison time.”
        The left must have their blood.

        I have no doubt more people will spend more time in jail than all the people who rioted and burned this country all summer.
        That is an indictment of the left.
        That is what is wrong with YOU and this country.

        You are busy removing the mite from the eye of your brother, oblivious of the board in your own.

        “That pattern of lies is the reason for the Trump Insurrection”
        This was not an insurection – if it was – those protestors in and arround the capital with guns would have used them.
        They did not.

        But keep this nonsense up and you WILL get an insurection.

          1. I was responding to Natacha.

            My Response was driven by the idiocy of her remarks.

            BLM is no more of a Sentiment than Proud Boys.

            Science is not a beleif.

            Saying you beleive in science is stupid.

      3. Natacha;

        You are being politically incorrect, and racist.

        Science, like Math is racist. It is a product of the white male creatures of the enlightement.
        It starts with the greeks moves through rome and into Europe inexhorably lead by almost excludively white men – many of them obese.

        Even today – with women making up the majority of college graduates – STEM is dominated by white men. Women are under represented all other minorities except asians are almost extinct in Science.

        Aristotle, Archimedes, Galleleio, Faraday, Edison, Newton, Pasteur, Einstein, Telsa, Bohr – all white men.

  8. Sen. Lee is not a “juror.” None of the Senators are jurors. The Senate is the court, and the Senators are triers. Don’t take my word for it. Take Chief Justice Rehnquist’s statement about it when he presided over Clinton’s impeachment trial –
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/harkintext011599.htm

    “Lee should know. They were purportedly his words.”

    Lee actually didn’t specify what statements he was objecting to, and whether they were supposed to be Lee’s words versus something. else, such as a description of something Lee did.

    “such problems arise when you chose to litigate a case based on news reports as opposed to actual testimony.”

    It would be great for them to call Sen. Lee and Sen. Tuberville to testify.
    It would be great for them to call former VP Pence to testify.
    It would be great for them to call others to testify too.

    1. These Senators are not jurors.

      These Senators are not triers.

      Impeachment is not constitutional or legal.

      The Chief Justice declined to preside.

      This impeachment is moot.

      There is no trial.

      No verdict may be issued.

      No verdict will be legitimate or have the force of law.

      This is an illegal show trial and its participants are criminals committing an act in clear violation of fundamental law.

      Democrats are hysterical, incoherent and outside of the law.

      The judicial branch (i.e. Supreme Court) is derelict, negligent, abusing power, and usurping power by omission.

      America is lawless.

    2. I am not interested in a semantic debate over the labels for specific roles in this trial.

      They are not relevant to the discussion.

      Senate Impeachment trials do not map perfectly onto criminal or civil trials. The roles are blended.
      Senators are both collectivly Judge and individually Jurors concurrently.

      Semantics does not alter the argument.

    3. “Lee actually didn’t specify what statements he was objecting to, and whether they were supposed to be Lee’s words versus something. else, such as a description of something Lee did.”
      Does not matter. Only the words spoken by Lee, Tuberville, and Trump are evidence.
      The WaPo article is not evidence. The whole article is hearsay and inuendo. It is not evidence.

      such problems arise when you chose to litigate a case based on news reports as opposed to actual testimony.”

      “It would be great for them to call Sen. Lee and Sen. Tuberville to testify.
      It would be great for them to call former VP Pence to testify.
      It would be great for them to call others to testify too.”

      The house could have done so – we have been through this before.
      Regardless, what do you expect any of them to say ?

      The best you are going to get is Trump attempting to persuade them to choose not to certify the election.

      You do not seem to get – that there is nothing wrong with that. There is nothing wrong with Trump doing it, nor with protestors doing it.
      There would be bothing wrong with it – even if the election was lawfull – which it was not. there would be nothing wrong with it if the election was completely fraud free – which it was not.

      You are endeavoring to use government to punish speech you do not like, and you may not do that.

      I would further note that in doing so – you justify violence.

      1. Of course it matters. We need to know whether Lee was correct about what he was objecting to. I already gave you direct quotes from Lee that are consistent with what Cicilline quoted about Lee. For all we know, Lee either misheard or is lying (which is legal for him to do if he’s not under oath). You say “Lee has effectively testified by objecting,” which is BS. He wasn’t under oath when he objected.

        “you justify violence.”

        Nope. You’re making that false claim either out of ignorance or dishonesty.

        And if you’re following the trial, the Senate just voted to allow witnesses to be called. They have yet to decide who / how many.

        1. Trump Tweeted to protestors to Go Home prior to the video.

          BTW the Media was already reporting on the VIDEO asking protestors to go home By 4:32 – so your source is Full of Schiff.

          Again why are you to be trusted ?

        2. “Of course it matters. We need to know whether Lee was correct about what he was objecting to.”
          We know that Lee is likely correct because:
          1) He is one of 3 primary sources.
          2). House managers did not check with him first
          3). The story is obviously bogus because it did not check any of the actual sources.
          4). The story is an effort to admit an argument – spin as evidence. The house managers are free to argue everything in the story. They are NOT free to admit argument as fact. That is misconduct.

          ” I already gave you direct quotes from Lee that are consistent with what Cicilline quoted about Lee.”
          Wow, some parts of a lie are correct.

          If I say “You posted on Thursday that the House managers were transexuals” – would that be true because you posted on thursday ?

          “For all we know, Lee either misheard or is lying (which is legal for him to do if he’s not under oath).”
          Even if Lee “misheard” – the house managers are still Lying. Only Trump and Lee are sources for what Trump said to Lee.

          “You say “Lee has effectively testified by objecting,” which is BS. He wasn’t under oath when he objected.”
          Neither were the house managers – But BOTH are covered by the rules of professional ethics as lawyers, Both are covered by the senate rules on ethics.

          “And if you’re following the trial, the Senate just voted to allow witnesses to be called. They have yet to decide who / how many.”

          The House also closed their case without raising the issue again as you claimed they would.

          As to Senate Democrats – if they wish to prolong this foolishness – go for it.

          1. “Only Trump and Lee are sources for what Trump said to Lee.”

            And Lee already made a public statement about it, and I quoted it to you.

            “The House also closed their case without raising the issue again as you claimed they would.”

            I didn’t claim that. You’re being dishonest here. I’m not going to continue this exchange when you’re so dishonest.

            1. ““Only Trump and Lee are sources for what Trump said to Lee.”

              And Lee already made a public statement about it, and I quoted it to you.”
              And your quote demonstrates no problem with Trump’s remarks and is inconsistent with the article cited by the House managers.

              ““The House also closed their case without raising the issue again as you claimed they would.”

              I didn’t claim that.”

              Not interested in the revisionist history.
              The house managers dropped this lead balloon – because they were caught lying.
              They did not re-raise the issue – because it was a lie.

              They had a duty to make their case truthfully. They failed.

    4. Lee has effectively testified by objecting.

      Regardless the house rested and they did not raise the issue again.

      Either Sen. Lee or the house managers are lying. And the house managers backed down.
      In this instance the burdern was on the house managers. The evidence they were presenting was THEIRS, it was hearsay and they chose to present it with their most favorable spin. They did nothing to get confirmation of the Wapo story from a better source.

      I would further note this is not the first problem with their evidence. They have also misrepresented a tweet of one of the protestors – adding a blue check mark when there was none and painting it as being militia related when it was related to a prayer group.

      The house managers should be disbarred – but no one will ever hold the left accountable.

  9. First of all, having one of your submissions proven a falsehood on the first day of testimony is bad.

    Second, who in Hades cares of President Trump asked for particular objections to the certification made? Isn’t that what people do when they believe there to be a problem with an election?

    Democrats made frequent, prolonged, impassioned objections to the 2016 election. They have objected to the certification of the Electoral College repeatedly throughout the years. Al Gore’s loss comes to mind along with the Hanging Chad.

    It is absurd, strains credulity, that their own behavior is portrayed as ominous, illegal, or abuse of power when a Republican also objects to election results.

    And yet millions of Democrats nod their heads sagely, deny that Trump explicitly called for “peaceful protest” as was any American’s right, and obediently forget all about Democrats during “uprisings”, “make a crowd”, “get in their face”, “you’ve unleashed the whirlwind”, “beware because they won’t stop and they shouldn’t stop”, etc.

    Are they brainwashed? Where is their conscience? The rhetoric I’m hearing has nothing whatsoever to do with reality.

    1. “having one of your submissions proven a falsehood”

      It was not proven to be a falsehood. Lee alleged some unspecified statements in a newspaper story were false, and the House managers chose to withdraw the article from the record and perhaps reintroduce it later. Lee did not make his objection under oath.

      “who in Hades cares of President Trump asked for particular objections to the certification made?”

      Yeah, who cares whether Trump was trying to use the violent attack at the Capitol to arrange further delay of the certification instead of using that time to order the National Guard there and trying to interrupt the violence and destruction?

      Trump took an oath to faithfully execute all laws, yet there he was, trying to benefit from the violence. Why should anyone care? (sarc)

      “Are they brainwashed? Where is their conscience? The rhetoric I’m hearing has nothing whatsoever to do with reality.”

      You could ask the same about Republicans.

      1. ““having one of your submissions proven a falsehood”

        It was not proven to be a falsehood.”

        It was proven about as False as can be in a court.
        Lee challenged the Story as a misrepresnetation and the house managers backed down.

        The story itself is not even third hand WaPo has no witnesses to the conversation, and a first had witness challenged the statement as false.

        “Lee alleged some unspecified statements in a newspaper story were false,”
        There were no “unspecified statements” – the news paper article is available to read. It is not unspecific. Lee challenged it as a LIE, and Raskin withdrew it.

        “the House managers chose to withdraw the article from the record and perhaps reintroduce it later. ”
        And the house managers did not re-introduce it -as they would have had to face Lee’s objections again.

        Knowingly introducing false evidence is a violation of 18 USC 1983, it is also a violation of the rules of professional conduct.

        “Lee did not make his objection under oath.”

        He did make them in the context of a hearing in which the code of professional conduct applies.

        “Yeah, who cares whether Trump was trying to use the violent attack at the Capitol to arrange further delay of the certification instead of using that time to order the National Guard there and trying to interrupt the violence and destruction?”

        So now the claim is changing – now Trump did not orchestrate the attack, he merely tried to benefit from it.
        While that is false, it is also irrelevant. Trump is free to try to thwart certification.

        While Trump did call in the National Guard – as evidenced by the fact that they came – quite quickly, as opposed to the weeks of delays all summer – as well as times they were NEVER deployed ?

        Are you now Claiming that Sen. Cotton was correct – and Trump should have invoked the insurrection act this summer, and deployed the national guard as well as troops to our cities that were roiting ?

        Regardless, you have bizzare standards – in left wingnut world the Presidnet can not protect the white house or federal courts from violent protestorts – who burned a nearby church, nor a federal courthouse from protestors who attacked it and broke in and looted and burned, nor police stations accross the country from looters and arsonists and rioters, But he is obligated to call in the national guard instantly when the capital – which has 2400 of its own police force, is entered by protestors who broke in when they were improperly locked out.

        Did they lock the capital to protect it from Kavanaugh protestors ?

        “Trump took an oath to faithfully execute all laws, yet there he was, trying to benefit from the violence.”
        If that is your standard – then why haven’t Obama and Biden been impeached ? Both issued executive orders directing government to NOT enforce the law ? Both Obama and Biden ordered government to NOT enforce immigration laws.

        In this election – Governors and even courts ordered election officials to disobey their state constitutions as well as the law.

        Either the law means something to you or it does not

        If you beleive that your assumed short delay in calling the NG – a act of judgement, not a requirement of the law, is somehow impeachable,
        then why isn’t actual failure to uphold the law and constitution ?

        Why hasn’t congress impeached Obama and Biden ?

        Why haven’t state legislatures impeached their governors and supreme court judges ?

        If the law and constitution means so much to you – why aren’t those on the left being impeach wholesale for violating laws and constitutions ?

    2. The fundimental problem with the WaPo article being cited – and why News stories are not evidence.

      Is NOT the facts – though they might be in error, but that WaPo’s claims regarding intent were being introduced as fact.

      This happens constantly with those on the left.

      Reporters are NOT supposed to introduce subjective claims in straight news.
      Lawyers are not supposed to offer subjective claims as facts.

  10. A direct factual statement gets made and then is forced to withdrawal because it is not factual? Nobody sees a problem with this? I doubt that any one vote is changed, but it makes the prosecution look both bad and sloppy. The Democrats really need to think if this is what passes the muster for trying to pull down a President and is this what they want to face in the future. I hope they remember this day for when it is their turn.

    1. “A direct factual statement gets made and then is forced to withdrawal because it is not factual?”

      Lee didn’t specify what statements he objected to as false. Here’s the article that Rep. Cicilline partially read into the record and that Lee objected to –
      https://www.deseret.com/utah/2021/1/7/22218897/donald-trump-mike-lee-misdial-capitol-siege-congress-electoral-insurrection-moore-curtis-stewart

      I’ve seen statements that Lee or a spokesman confirmed this to the Deseret News on January 7th.

      On Jan. 8, CNN said “Lee’s spokesman said the calls from Trump and his attorney were intended for Sen. Tommy Tuberville, a newly elected Republican from Alabama.”

      If this reporting was wrong, why didn’t Lee make a statement clearing it up at the time?

      There’s a good way to clear it up now: have Sen. Lee and Sen. Tuberville testify about it under oath.

      1. Maybe the House should have called them to testify. As a matter of fact, maybe the House should have called somebody to testify. I have yet to see the call for armed insurrection shown. What I do see is the same kind of rhetoric the other side has used more than once. If the sauce is good the goose, it is good for the gander. I will say it again, the Democrats should be very careful.

      2. The evidence was presented by the House managers – it was THEIR obligation to assure that it was true in ALL respects.

        It is not Sen. Lee’s obligation to correct their error. It is THEIRS.

        You constantly fail to understand where the burden of proof lies.

        It is the obligation of prosecutors to ensure that the evidence they present is completely TRUE.

        It is also their obligation to separate facts from arguments or oppinions.

        Evidence is introduced to provide FACTS – not arguments. Prosecutors must make arguments on their own.

      3. This WAS cleared up.

        The house managers introduced this nonsense. Lee objected, the house managers withdrew and never attempted to reintroduce it.

        Absolutely it could have been cleared up by Witnesses or possibly other eividence.

        And the house managers had the option of doing so. Or the house could have had witnesses before (or after) submitted Faux Impeachment Deux.

        The left does this constantly – they present inuendo and lies as fact – and then claim it is the responsibility of others to prove them wrong.

        If YOU think that the Trump call was “evidence” PROVE IT.

    2. This is the problem with the entire way the lefts deals with everything.

      Facts, truth does not matter. Oppinion does.

    1. We can thank Obama’s “Organizing For Action” or OFA for “training” all these Antifa/BLM “storm troopers” that foment riots and violence on our city streets on behalf of Democrat “causes.”

  11. WaPo explains Lee/Tuberville call. It’s not what lapdog Turley claims:

    “….The call, after all, came well after the rioters had breached several barriers near the Capitol. It also came around the time Trump’s first tweet arrived, not calling for peace but instead criticizing Vice President Mike Pence for not unilaterally trying to overturn the election. The Washington Post and others reported that Trump spoke to Tuberville to discuss this topic and to talk about delaying the certification of the results.

    What’s more, the reported content of that call not only hasn’t been disputed; it’s actually reinforced by audio of a similar call to Lee by Trump lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani. Giuliani also called Lee while seeking Tuberville later that day, and he left a voice mail in which the content matches the reported content of Trump’s call…..

    ….Trump and Giuliani would seek Tuberville out specifically: He had been one of the dozen or so senators who said they would object to the election results in key states.There’s really no reason to call a freshman senator who had just been sworn in weeks earlier and has no real legislative heft if your intent is to talk about the riot. They were focused on gumming up the works to buy time….”

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/02/11/important-thing-about-mike-lee-impeachment-trial-dust-up/

    1. The Democrats SET THE STANDARD for this type of speech and conduct by their promoting of looting, burning, physically assaulting, and anti semitic actions by their failure to sanction officials as far back as Omar – while the Republicans were taking away committee assignments during that time.
      Trump’s speech and conduct was no worse than Schumer at the Supreme Court, Maxine Waters instructions to accost and assault, Kamallah Harris’s instructions to loot and burn, Joe Biden’s threat of physical assault, and Ilan Omar’s anti semitic remarks.
      Trump has not exceeded the DEMOCRAT SET STANDARD.

      Democrats: YOU BROKE IT YOU OWN IT.

    2. WaPo can “explain” all they want.

      They were not THERE. Lee was.
      Further, Trump talked primarily to Lee not Tuberville.

      Next, your WaPo reporting is obvious crap.

      WaPo engages in mind reading when it claims to KNOW why Trump would or would not want to talk to Tuberville. ‘

      Regardless what was CLEAR was that Trump was talking about what was happening on the Floor – not what was happening outside – that he was unaware of that.

      Once again we have the left conflating exculpatory evidence with inculpatory.

      This is why the House managers dropped this. They were in trouble. The relied on a reporter who could not have a credible source, and they were confronted by not merely a witness but the person on the call, and told they were lying.

      It is going to be damn hard to recover.

      In a real court they would risk sanctions.

  12. The American Oath of Office, to uphold the U.S. Constitution and the “constitutional rule of law”, may be America’s greatest check & balance on disloyal leaders and superiors. Our “indirect” loyalty oath is also what clearly separates Americans from despotic governments – foreign governments where government officials swear supreme loyalty to a single person or single party (ex: Nazi Germany or Communist block nations).

    Trump clearly was embracing a foreign model of government, not American government. The most disturbing part is the GOP members of Congress that swore to uphold the American Oath of Office promised to defend America from “domestic enemies of the U.S. Constitution”.

    Orchestrating a coup to subvert the constitutional results of the electoral college is a foreign concept – not American! They swore an oath to defend us from those types of domestic enemies to the “constitutional rule of law”. The impeachment’s shouldn’t end with Trump but also those that betrayed their Oath of Office.

    1. Your allegation that there was a coup is a lie. The only coup attempt that has been documented is the Democrats attempt to overthrow Trump since he got in office. There is no evidence of any wrongdoing anytime by Trump. You are delusional.

    2. The Democrats SET THE STANDARD for this type of speech and conduct by their promoting of looting, burning, physically assaulting, and anti semitic actions by their failure to sanction officials as far back as Omar – while the Republicans were taking away committee assignments during that time.
      Trump’s speech and conduct was no worse than Schumer at the Supreme Court, Maxine Waters instructions to accost and assault, Kamallah Harris’s instructions to loot and burn, Joe Biden’s threat of physical assault, and Ilan Omar’s anti semitic remarks.
      Trump has not exceeded the DEMOCRAT SET STANDARD.

      Democrats: YOU BROKE IT YOU OWN IT.

  13. Will this Kangaroo Trial change the minds of all the voters who choose President Trump? Very doubtful, and it may have a hardening effect. We shall see in two short years. I believe the Democratic leadership has gone plum MAD and may need Nurse Rachet’s intervention.

  14. If this were a murder trial, and the prosecution showed clear video of the defendant planning the murder, committing the murder, and disposing of the body – would you really need witnesses?

    Sure, you are not going to convince everyone. Certainly, there are a lot of people in the country who believe that Obama was not born in this country, that Hillary had a child sex ring at the Comet pizzeria, that Trump was about to bust an international pedophile ring of Democrats – but no sort of witnesses to anything are going to convince them of anything unless Trump, Tucker and Q tell them to believe it.

    1. Their Trump argument is, sure I planned the bank heist, sure I got the money from the bank, sure I got away, BUT, they didn’t catch me at the bank so………Lets move on.

        1. “Sentence first; verdict afterwards.” -Queen of Hearts”

          AOC for bank Robbery – we can look for evidence later.

      1. What is the crime ?

        Distinguish what Trump did from what Schumer did at the Supreme court ?

        Distinguish what protestors at the US capital did with
        what those at the Portland Federal court did over and over.
        what those at the Supreme court did with Schumer
        What those at the WI capital in 2011 did ?
        What the Kavanaugh Protestors did ?’

        We heard the left rant that Trump drove “peaceful” protestors away from Laffeyette Park and the Whitehouse.
        How was that different from locking the capital to prevent protestors from getting in ?

    2. First you must have an actual crime.

      It is not a crime to challenge and election.

      It is not a crime to protest.

      It is not a crime to ask people to protest

      It is not a crime to ask congressmen to do what the constitutional allows – and to vote no on certification.

      1. Exactly. If Democrats are trying to make it a crime to call for “peaceful protests”, and to question election integrity, then why aren’t they facing the same consequences for calling for violent protests, and questioning election integrity for years?

      2. “First you must have an actual crime.”

        You don’t need a statutory crime for impeachment, only a high crime or misdemeanor, which could instead be a common law crime. It’s a high crime to incite insurrection.

        1. “You don’t need a statutory crime for impeachment, only a high crime or misdemeanor, which could instead be a common law crime. It’s a high crime to incite insurrection.”

          So much to unpack.
          The constitution the notes from the convention on impeachment DO NOT support your claim.
          The founders explicitly rejected maladministration as well as politics as a basis for impeachment.

          High crimes and misdemeanors clearly does NOT mean anything is impeachable.
          It does not even mean any crime is impeachable. “High Crimes and misdemeanors” is a SUBSET of all crimes.

          Regardless, the constitution provides no check on the power of the house to impeach and the senate to convict
          Therefore whatever the words of the constitution – the meaning is whatever the house and senate decide.
          And later what voters decide.

          This BTW is a part of why election integrity is critical. An actual insurection requires an inarguably legitimate government.

          You do not have that.

          This country was born when militamen took up arms and killed the armed representatives of an illegitimate government.

          Common law crimes are tried in court and result in criminal sanctions.

          If you beleive that Trump committed a crime – then have DOJ try that crime.

    3. Twice as many democrats are familiar with Qanon as republicans.

      Qanon is another left wing nut snipe hunt – like the collusion delusion.

      Worse still the FBI is up to its eyeballs in Q.

      It was either fostering Q, or failing to inform.

      There is not a 3rd option.

      You do know that the core Q beleif is that there is a globalist Peodophile cabal that Trump was hunting down that was fighting him tooth and nail ?

      More democrats beleive Epstein was murdered than Republicans ?

    4. Witness: but that’s not what’s happened here. There is no evidence showing Trump planned a riot. Committed a riot. Or disposed of any riot bodies.

      There is PLENTY of evidence that Democrats spurred on riots. They are even on record bailing out rioters and looters. There is also evidence that the poor Capitol police officer was not, in fact, ever struck by those who broke into the Capitol. That rumor that they beat him with a fire extinguisher appears to be completely false.

      So, to make your analogy accurate, let’s say that there is plenty of evidence that Democrats planned months of insurrection against Republicans, but a Republican president was blamed for it. Democrats even stormed into the Capitol building and the Senate offices during the Kavanaugh trial. Remember that? Months of Leftist violence is excused and ignored. One single tiny group of Trump supporters, along with a few Antifa, broken into the Capitol building. Trump had nothing to do with it. His speech had nothing to do with it, as he was still talking 2 miles away when this happened. But Dems get away Scott free while Trump is held responsible for the actions of everyone who voted for him.

      If Democrats didn’t have a double standard, they’d have no standards at all.

      1. At this point we do not even know what Killed ofc. Sicknick as he was alive and told his brother he was fine hours after all of this.

        Todate there is only ONE preson who atually died as a part of the conflict at the capital – a Protestor – Alishi who was murdered by a capital police officer.

        We are told the protestors were armed – in fact it appears a few aimed weapons After the Officer shot Alishi.

        But no protestor shot anyone. The protestors clearly had far better gun discipline – understanding of their rights and laws regarding the use of firearms, than the capital police did.

Leave a Reply