One of the long-standing unanswered questions from the January 6th riot has been why the Capitol was so poorly prepared and defended on that day. A newly released transcript has caused a firestorm in Washington over allegations that the J6 Committee downplayed or even suppressed evidence that former President Donald Trump personally suggested the deployment of 10,000 national guard troops to prevent violence.
The transcript also includes contradictions of major allegations that ran wild in the media. That includes the claim that Trump tried to physically grab the steering wheel of the presidential limo, “The Beast,” when Secret Service refused to take him to the Capitol. Former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson was the source of the claim, which appeared in most of the media and was highlighted in her testimony. However, it appears that the J6 Committee had testimony of secret service agents directly contradicting that account, including the driver.
However, it is the National Guard question that is more weighty for historical purposes.
Trump has long claimed that he proposed the deployment of the National Guard troops (as was done previously at the White House during violent protests). The January 6th Committee said that was a lie.
The release of the transcript by Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R., Ga.) triggered attacks on the J6 Committee. The Federalist’s Mollie Hemingway wrote a column titled “Former Rep. Liz Cheney’s January 6 Committee suppressed evidence.”
That triggered an angry response from former co-chair Liz Cheney which led to an even angrier reply from commentator Mark Levin.
The anger is nothing new in a J6 investigation that seemed to produce more heat than light. Cheney’s spokesperson called the Federalist report “flatly false” and added “no transcripts were destroyed” while acknowledging that some material was not published “to allow the Secret Service to protect sensitive security information for interviews of its agents before preserving that testimony in the archives.”
The issue of the suppression or destruction of the evidence has drawn a lot of attention, but the more troubling question is the fact that such an offer was made and declined.
The Committee found “no evidence” that the Trump administration called for 10,000 National Guard members to Washington, D.C., to protect the Capitol.
That now stands contradicted and the question is whether Cheney or other members knew the public was being misled on the question. For example, the Washington Post “debunked” Trump’s comments with an award of “Four Pinocchios.”
The Post’s Glenn Kessler admitted that Trump raised the issue but noted that he might have been suggesting the troops “not because he wanted to protect the Capitol,” but to suggest that he and his supporters were being threatened. He added that “Trump brought up the issue on at least three occasions but in such vague and obtuse ways that no senior official regarded his words as an order.”
However, the issue is not whether Trump issued “an order” but made an offer that was declined. For those of us who were covering the event on that day, the question has always been prominent in our minds. I was critical of Trump’s speech while he was still giving it. However, before the Capitol was breached, I also noted that I had never seen the Capitol so thinly protected in a major protest.
We had just seen violent protests outside of the White House with a large number of police officers injured and extensive property damage, including arson. President Trump and his family had to be moved to a secure location out of concern of an imminent breach of the White House. National Guard were deployed and fencing installed.
Even without an offer, it remains unclear why the violence around the White House did not prompt Congress to install the same barriers and deploy the same troops. (They ultimately took both steps but only after the rioters gained entry into the Capitol).
Moreover, if an offer was clearly made, it undermines the allegations that Trump was actively seeking an insurrection. While he has never been charged with an insurrection or even incitement, that allegation was used more recently to support his disqualification from the ballots in Colorado, Maine, and Illinois.
The transcript contains the testimony of former White House Deputy Chief of Staff Anthony Ornato’s interview on January 2022 with Cheney present. Ornato states that he clearly recalled the offer of 10,000 troops being made by Trump in a conversation with D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser:
“I was there, and he was on the phone with her and wanted to make sure she had everything that she needed. Because I think it was the concern of anti and pro groups clashing is what I recall…I remember the number 10,000 coming up of, you know, the President wants to make sure that you have enough. You know, he is willing to ask for 10,000. I remember that number.”
Ornato said that Browser said that they would not need the troops. (She ultimately asked for only 300 troops). There are also reports that then Speaker Nancy Pelosi was worried about the “optics” of military reinforcements at the Capitol.
Ornato also said that he recalled that, after Bowser refused additional National Guard members, the White House requested the Defense Department have a “quick reaction force” ready on that day. He gave details on meetings with the Defense Department and follow up from Chief of Staff Mark Meadows.
Hemingway noted in her report that Ornato’s testimony was supported by former Trump administration aide Kash Patel. Cheney has attacked Patel as unreliable.
Ornato also testified that Meadows and others were frustrated by the delay in getting those troops to the Hill. The delay was blamed on the logistics, not some conspiracy to enable or facilitate an insurrection.
The Federalist article makes additional allegations, including that Cheney was behind an op-ed by her father, former Vice President Dick Cheney, opposing any use of national guard troops on January 6th.
However, even proving such duplicity would hardly be news for Washington. Likewise, it does not negate criticism over Trump’s comments on that day or his delay in publicly calling for supporters to withdraw.
Yet, again, what is more important historically is whether the J6 Committee had direct evidence that Trump made the offer of thousands of troops and that the White House pushed for rapid deployment troops on that day.
I have previously criticized the one-sided J6 Report and the biased framing of the hearings held by the members. The Committee could have been so much more than the echo chamber that it became. However, this latest transcript adds questions over the perplexing failure of Congress to take obvious steps to prevent a riot.
Had Congress simply installed the same fencing previously used at the White House and deployed such troops, the J6 riot would likely have never occurred. Given the cost and trauma to our nation, we should want to know the full story of what occurred on January 6th.
Cassidy Hutchinson lied. Under oath. Before Congress.
Hey Lizzie Cheney! You fraud….
We’ll wait for the same treatment UNDER THE LAW other J6’ers got uner your totalitarian regime…
We’ll wait for Cassidy Hutchinson to get: An FBI Morning Raid with Battering Ram; Full Shock Trauma Treatment; Full Perp Walk; Leg irons; Belly Chains; Strip Search; Prison Time; NO bail; NO charges; NO Due Process.
We’ll wait.
In the meantime: GFY Joe Biden, et al.
“Hutchinson” it is going to be difficult to convict Hutchinson of perjury. She did not testify as an eye witness, only as an ear witness.
it is going to be near impossible to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she did not hear the story she claimed to have,
only that the story that she claims to have heard was false.
Whether what she claims to have heard is true or false does not make her testimony perjury.
Proff that she did not hear or misunderstand something that she claims to have heard would prove perjury and that is really hard to do.
Follow up on my OT post re: Hur testimony. In the end, I have the same feeling that I had after listening to Comey re: Hillary in 2016. In both cases, all of the elements of a crime seemed to be met and a jury could have made a decision, but both prosecutors, while not exonerating, decided not to go further. Damning with faint praise? but leaving many questions unanswered.
Even though Trump was actually the President and had the power to declassify documents, “Justice” was extra heavy-handed in his case, which seems to be a pattern in the numerous Trump cases. He had documents for only 2 years, while Biden had his for somewhere between 14 and 50 years, or before Biden was VP (2009) and extending all the way back to his first federal job before he recently “discovered” them and “promptly handed them over” from 9 locations “voluntarily.” Sorry, that doesn’t hold water.
Biden was not entitled to remove documents before 2021. I know more about skiffs than SCIFs, but I assume that one has to sign out under penalty of perjury that nothing was removed. Documents were removed more than once — how many times over the years? He knowingly shared them at least with the ghostwriter years ago. Also, Biden has the Hunter issue; Hunter had full access to boxes of documents over many years. Were they used in the family business?
It feels like two standards of Justice. Hur could have just concluded that he would not prosecute Biden since the policy is that they don’t prosecute sitting Presidents. But he apparently felt strongly that the memory issue had to be emphasized.
The whole concept of a president who is too feeble-minded to be a witness in his own defense but is just fine to run the country is confusing. I have a relative with Alzheimer’s, and there are moments of lucidity. My relative is older than Biden and until recently, did not need anyone (like the Easter Bunny) to assist. One of the Representatives brought up the issue of why Biden is not a candidate for guardianship rather than running for President, which is what I wondered when I read the Hur report. Time will tell.
Accurate to a T!
In the military – and among defense contractors – the rules on classified information are likely fairly detailed, righid and scrupulously followed. and the consequences of failure severe.
I held a TS/SCI almost 2 decades ago. Not only was everything documented, but frankly it was near impossible to “checkout” a classified document. I had to read it in the SCIF.
But worse than that – if I took notes or just repeated the information or used the information from classified documents in my own work – that became classified.
But over the past decade we have heard ALOT about how classified docs are handled within the executive – particularly at the cabinet level.
And all of that has suggested that the whitehouse, and everyone in the cabinet as well as their immediate staff are incredibly reclkless with classified documents.
While Clinton’s bad conduct was egregious – even Colin Powel and Condelezza Rice were caught transmitting classified information in personal emails – just not thousands of times.
We have seen some convictions – Berger, Petreaus, Duetch, but these have all resulted in slap on the wrist.
Conversely if you are a peon in the military – and you do a tiny fraction of what cabinet officials do routinely – your in leavenworth for decades. Even lowerr level people in the executive branch Reality Winner, and a few others – get slammed.
What Clinton or Biden did – based on past cases would result in a minor conviction and probation for a Senator or VP.
It would result in a decade long sentence for a mid level executive branch employee and a life sentence in the military.
You can beleive Trump committed a crime, or that presidents are free to do exactly what he did.
But even if it was a crime – it NEVER would have been prosecuted against clinton or Obama or Biden. or any other president.
It appears that Robert Hur / Charlton Heston’s Judah Ben-Hur, whipped the snot out of Messala / Biden’s chariot and charioteers. How else to explain Joseph “Old Yeller” Biden neighing and whining like an old horse seen by some as ready for the glue factory? Not even Gore Vidal could write a script this good!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frE9rXnaHpE&t=168s
WeAreBreitbart on Instagram
[Link] instagram.com/wearebreitbart/
‘SPECIAL COUNSEL HUR: ‘I DID NOT EXONERATE’ BIDEN IN CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS CASE
https://www.instagram.com/wearebreitbart/p/C4bfT5PP9fp/
Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) attacked Special Counsel Robert Hur during his testimony at the House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday, insinuating that he had a political motive against President Joe Biden by suggesting he had a poor memory.
https://www.instagram.com/wearebreitbart/reel/C4bTj8qPaIr/
Meanwhile, “Say HUR name!” Wow! Burnt penises???
“But the transcripts show a Joe Biden who is definitely not fine. As The National Pulse reported on Tuesday, the President of the United States said that he “did not know,” “could not recall,” or “did not remember,” almost 150 times over the course of five hours. That is forgetfulness at an industrial level – almost once for every two minutes of testimony.
Biden forgot the name for a fax machine, went on unhinged, Abe Simpson-style rants about burnt penises, and even contradicted his own, February defense against the Special Counsel report wherein he claimed of the death of his son Beau: “How in the hell dare [the special counsel] raise that,” adding: “Frankly when I was asked the question, I thought to myself, it wasn’t any of their damn business.”
But Special Counsel Hur did not raise that. Joe Biden did. Just seven minutes into his October 23 interview. He did it multiple times throughout his testimony, often invoking Beau’s memory as an excuse for why he was busy, or couldn’t remember details, even when said events were years after – and utterly unrelated to – Beau’s passing.
The one thing Biden did seem to recall quite well was his acquisition of cash from the China-backed Penn Biden Center, which he told the Special Counsel he was using to hire staff such as his current Secretary of State, Antony Blinken. Just to be clear: the President of the United States willingly admitted that he was reliant on Chinese donor cash to fund his post-Vice Presidential policy aspirations, which included the hiring of the current Secretary of State of the United States.
https://thenationalpulse.com/analysis-post/kassam-the-biden-special-counsel-transcripts-are-beyond-damning/
umm..i dont see the drama over this…it was essentially reported in the dod ig report..:
Sunday, January 3, 2021
• DoD confirms with U.S. Capitol Police (USCP) that there is no request for DoD support.
• A/SD meets with select Cabinet Members to discuss DoD support to law enforcement
agencies and potential requirements for DoD support.
• A/SD and CJCS meet with the President. President concurs in activation of the DCNG to
support law enforcemen
Thje big deal is NOT that this is new. Anyone who has been paying attention knows that there are MULTIPLE sources – testimony and documentation confirming that the DCNG was offered, that the CP were inclinded to accept and that the congressional leadership nixed the DCNG.
What is the big Deal is that the J6 committee issued a report that said no such evidence existed.
Not that the evidence was not credible – which is Chenney;s claim now, but that the evidence did not exist.
The story here is that within the J6 committees OWN records is proof that suich evidence existed and that they KNEW about it.
These false claims were incorporated into articles of impeachment.
The issue here is not “is Trump innocent” – that is well established long ago.
It is proof that the J6 committee lied baldfaced in their report – which is findings of fact, and in their aritcles of impeachment.
But for the fact that congress is exempt that would be a number of very serious crimes.
That is making up evidence. That is hiding exculpatory evidence.
That is REALLY REALLY bad conduct.
That is DO NOT TRUST THOSE INVOLVED EVER ABOUT ANYTHING.
That’s correct: No evidence exists that Trump issued orders for deployment of the DC National Guard. Acting Secretary of the DOD Miller stated: “I was never given any director or order or knew of any plans of that nature” concerning deploying Guard units.
Jonathan: Every President takes an oath to protect and defend the Constitution. Right? The First Amendment is part of Constitution that guarantees “freedom of speech, or the press”. Right? So if DJT is re-elected he will take the same oath he took in Jan. 2017. Right so far?
So what happens after DJT takes the oath in Jan. 2025? Will he finally abide by the Constitution or will he ignore our almost sacred document as he did during his first four years? I ask this Q because it’s pretty clear DJT doesn’t respect the Fourth Estate. During his administration DJT expected the press to be obedient and fawn over his every statement and policy. Fox News and the rest of the right-wing press complied by providing support and an echo chamber for DJT’s views and policies.
But the rest of the Fourth Estate didn’t comply. So DJT sued the press–the NY Times and the Washington Post for being critical. He lost all those cases and had to pay the attorney fees of the other side. And last week a judge in Great Britain dismissed DJT’s libel suit against Christopher Steele–ordering DJT to pay over $380K to Steele. Seems DJT has an uninterrupted string of losses in suing the media. But DJT has a strategy of sorts–file SLAP suits, tying the media up with litigation–hoping they will think twice about publishing something critical about him. Seems that strategy hasn’t worked.
So fast forward. Now DJT says that if he gets back in the WH he will only be “dictator” for one day. Nobody thinks it will be just a brief stint. Since DJT realizes he can’t just sue the press, he now has other plans for the press he hates. In a campaign rally recently DJT told his adoring audience: “You take the writer and or the publisher of the paper, and you say, whose the leaker? National Security. And they {DJT] say, that’s OK, you’re going to jail. And when this person realizes that he is going to be the bride of another prisoner very shortly, well…” The audience applauded loudly.
At another MAGA rally DJT’s supporters were OK with DJT being a “dictator”. One said: “This country needs a dictator”. Another said: “I’d rather have Donald Trump as a dictator for four years”. Only one problem. Dictators infrequently resign after four years. Yet another said: “He could stand on the front steps of the White House and commit murder and I’m with him!”.
So there you have it. The MAGA crowd are all in with dictators and murderers!
He’s really got you going!
Dennis – please specify how Trump “ignored our almost sacred document”. In Joe Biden’s case, it would be easy to answer this question.
It is noteworthy that you and the other trolls are spending a lot of your time attacking Trump supporters. It is a little like 2016 when Bernie Sanders supporters were attacked as “Bernie bro’s.” It also reminds us of Hillary’s “basket of deplorables” line. It is not a winning strategy, but perhaps that is all you have.
+100
This is incredible.
“So what happens after DJT takes the oath in Jan. 2025?”
RETRIBUTION.
All the criminals are going to prison.
Rule of Law will be reestablished.
75% of the Bureaucracy will be sent packing: You’re Fired!
Meanwhile, the Left will BURN AMERICA TO THE GROUND.
Make No Mistake About What is Coming: WAR
Denny — Is Joe Biden’s regime acting like a Dictator?
We lived thru 4 years of Trump and it was NOTHING LIKE THIS.
Biden has delievered a LAWLESS TOTALITARIAN REGIME. Period.
WAKE the EFF up, dumfuk.
+100
Then first amendment includes no guarantees of respect. Trump is free to piss all over the press – just as Biden does.
What he is not free to do is to censor them. There appear to be at most a handful of instances in which the Trump WH asked SM to censor something.
I absolutely condemn that.
There are THOUSANDS of instances in which the Biden WH has, or in which the DOJ/DHS/FBI/… censored covid information and information derogatory to Biden or beneficial to Trump – both during the Trump presidency and during the biden presidency – that violates the constitution. Those who did so should never hold public office again. While the Trump WH appears to have done som a hadful of times out of 100s of thousands of govenrment requests. There is no evidence that Trump did.
I fully expect that as he does right now. Trump will thoroughtly chastize and disrepect the press.
The first amendment does not promise people respect for what they express, only that they can not be criminally prosecuted of censored.
By tradition we try to avoid requiring the press to divulge sources – but the first amendment protects the presses right to publish, they have no right to keep sources secret. Just in the past 20 years there have been atleast a dozen cases in which members of the press faced contempt charges if they did not provide sources.
You may not like Trump’s language, but it accurately states the law and constitution.
I think it is appropriate that we avoid demanding sources from the press except when it is absolutely critical.
But there is no RIGHT to keep your sources private.
Trump’s supporters take Trump seriously but not literally.
YOU have made a carreer of misquoting Trump. selectively editing him and then taking him literally but not seriously.
I expect a whole raft of Executive orders From Trump on Day one. These will have been prepared well in advance and he may well start singing them in the limo on the way to the WH after taking the oath of office.
I expect that left wing nuts will call these EO’s fascist.
I suspect that a FEW federal courts will take issue with some delaying their implimentation.
I expect that SCOTUS will find every single one constitutional.
I expect that there will be mass firings on Day one. I do not think very many Biden appointees will continue even temporarily after the inauguration. There will be no Sally Yates at the start of Trump II. The acting director of many govenrment agencies will likely be carreer federal employees – because every single political appointment above them has been dismissed.
These people are NOT dangerous – absent partisan political appointees to lead them. They are likely to be rapidly antiTrump,
But they are also ostriches who will NOT stick their heads out.
I would have to check the constitution – but Trump may well have a small army of people that he can appoint immediately to acting positions – prior to senate confirmation. There are a whole lot of constitutional complexities regarding the appointing of acting officers of the United States. But I am sure that Trump and his legal advisors will make sure they do that correctly.
That is the difference between taking Trump seriously but not litterally.
Aside from the fact that Trump did not violate the constitution or peoples rights as the 45th president,
if he did as the 47th – the courts would reign him in.
Even if he does not – some courts are going to actively interfere in perfectly constitutional actions.
What is it that you think Trump did as 45 or will do as 47 that is unconstitutional ?
Dennis –
Is President Biden “abiding by the Constitution”? No.
Is Biden protecting the border and our states from invasion? No.
Is Biden respecting the rulings of the Supreme Court? No.
Is Biden ignoring the authority of the Supreme Court while threatening them, “you won’t stop me”? Yes.
Is Biden adhering to his oath of office? Hell no.
Is Biden trying to throw his political enemies in prison? Yes.
Is Biden Family “Business” breaking U.S. laws? Yes.
Is Biden’s son breaking laws? Yes.
Is Biden himself knowingly breaking laws, for decades, with total impunity? Yes.
Is Biden maliciously, vindictively, lawlessly prosecuting his political enemies? Yes.
Is Biden weaponizing all levers of government against U.S. citizens? Yes.
Is Biden lying to the citizens of this country? Yes.
Is Biden lying to the media? Yes.
Is the media lying to protect Biden? Yes.
Is Biden making every citizen in this country less safe and unsafe? Yes.
Is Biden leading us into World War 3? Yes.
Is Biden running a lawless government gangster administration? Yes.
Is Biden running this country into the ground? Yes.
Is Biden actually running the country? Hell no.
Readers,
Do you own research! There was no conspiracy to suppress evidence.
FIRST, please review Chapter 6 of the J6 Report: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-J6-REPORT/html-submitted/ch6.html
Chapter 6 of the committee’s final report puts Trump’s suggestion that 10,000 National Guardsmen may be needed into proper context. It reads (footnotes omitted, emphasis added):
“President Trump wanted to personally accompany his supporters on the march from the Ellipse to the U.S. Capitol. During a January 4th meeting with staffers and event organizer Katrina Pierson, President Trump emphasized his desire to march with his supporters. “Well, I should walk with the people,” Pierson recalled President Trump saying. Though Pierson said that she did not take him “seriously,” she knew that “he would absolutely want to be with the people.” Pierson pointed out that President Trump “did the drive-by the first time and the flyover the second time” — a reference to the November and December 2020 protests in Washington, DC. During these previous events, President Trump made cameo appearances to fire up his supporters. Now, as January 6th approached, the President again wanted to be there, on the ground, as his supporters marched on the U.S. Capitol.
The President’s advisors tried to talk him out of it. White House Senior Advisor Max Miller “shot it down immediately” because of concerns about the President’s safety. Pierson agreed. But President Trump was persistent, and he FLOATED THE IDEA OF HAVING 10,000 NATIONAL GUARDSMEN DEPLOYED TO PROTECT HIM AND HIS SUPPORTERS from any supposed threats by leftwing counter-protestors. Miller again rejected the President’s idea, saying that the National Guard was not necessary for the event. Miller testified that there was no further conversation on the matter. After the meeting, Miller texted Pierson, “Just glad we killed the national guard and a procession.” That is, President Trump briefly considered having the National Guard oversee his procession to the U.S. Capitol. The President did not order the National Guard to protect the U.S. Capitol, or to secure the joint session proceedings.”
As the testimony above makes clear, Trump was primarily concerned with ensuring that he and his supporters were protected during their procession to the U.S. Capitol. Trump did not ultimately march to the Capitol himself – nor did he order the deployment of 10,000 National Guardsmen.
SECOND, the transcripts corroborate precisely what was documented in the J6 Report, namely the following:
1. Ornato was not aware of any “order” to deploy the National Guard on J6 – See p92 of the transcript: “And you were not aware if there was any order of deployment of troops, 10,000 troops by the White House on that morning?” Ornato replied: “No.”
2. Ornato said that Meadows offered the National Guard’s assistance to Mayor Bowser because of concerns about violence “out on the mall area or at the event” but “not anywhere near the Capitol.” See p.78 of the transcript.
THIRD, there was no conspiracy to “suppress” Ornato’s transcript. The Secret Service made Ornato available to the committee with the understanding that the transcript would not be released without the agency’s consent. Page 6 of Oranto’s January 2022 interview, Secret Service Chief Counsel Thomas Huse explained that the Secret Service and the Department of Homeland Security “have made available to the committee … information and records that would not be publicly released.” Huse added that the “transcript [of Ornato’s testimony] and any attachments are protected from further dissemination to the same extent as the documents and information that they are based on.” Huse added that the committee should “consult with the Secret Service and the Department [DHS] prior to any public release or disclosure of that information.”
The January 6th Committee made the terms of its agreement with the Secret Service and DHS known in a publicly released letter dated Dec. 30, 2022. The committee explained that it had agreed “to maintain the confidentiality of any of these transcripts and related security information” and that it was providing its transcripts of interviews with Secret Service personnel to DHS for “for appropriate review, timely return, and designation of instructions for proper handling by the Archives.” The committee also noted in the letter that it was releasing the transcript of Ornato’s Nov. 2022 interview (with some redactions), because he “was not functioning as a Secret Service Agent on January 6th.” (More on that transcript in a moment.)
In her piece for The Federalist, Hemingway did not inform readers of the agreement between the Secret Service and the January 6th Committee – even though it was specifically addressed in the transcript she erroneously claims was “suppressed” and clearly set forth in the committee’s public letter. Instead, she falsely led readers to believe something sinister was afoot. In addition, Loudermilk certainly knows of the agreement between the January 6th Committee and the DHS/Secret Service. In a “report” released on Monday, Loudermilk criticized DHS for taking too long to review transcripts of the Secret Service employees’ testimony.
Conclusion: Mollie Hemmingway is a hack job.
The above comment was mistakenly marked by the system as spam: Restored.
Sounds like spam to me.
Anonymous – You quote the highly partison J6 report as saying: “The President did not order the National Guard to protect the U.S. Capitol,” As has been noted below, the President does not “order” the National Guard to do anything. What is clear is that Trump raised the issue of calling out the National Guard with Mayor Bowser and she shot down the suggestioin. We also know from Sund that he raised the issue of calling in the National Guard with Nancy Pelosi and she shot down the suggestion. The IG notes show that Trump “concurred” with idea of calling in the NG. There is no reason to believe that Trump was only concerned with the well-being of the demonstrators; that is a picture that the Kangeroo Court of the J6 Committee wanted to create. But if that is the sole reason for his suggestion, it would have well justified in light of the earlier BLM and Antifa violence in DC. Whomever the NG was supposed to protect, their presence would have deterred the violence from Trump’s demonstrators, from the FBI agent-provocateurs, and from the Capitol Police, The failure on that day to defend the Capitol is soley laid at the feet of Pelosi and Bowser.
Trump’s reasons for wanting the NG are irrelevant. It is highly likely he had MANY reasons – some of which the left will not like.
Regardless, one of the big issues here is that the President has the authority to send the NG absolutely anywhere in the US entirely on their own EXCEPT the capitol and capitol grounds. The president has no jurisdiction over those.
If we are following the letter of the law – Congress must request the NG, and the president must then order the NG to go to the capitol.
As a practical matter – the reverse is accepted – the president can authorize the deployment of the NG to the capitol, to take effect only when Congress requests them.
It is Well documented that Pelosi spent hours in her bunker begging the governors of Virgina, Maryland and NJ to send the NG.
The problem with that is only the president can send the NG outside of a state. And DC is NOT part part of maryland or Virginia.
Pelosi is not stupid, she KNEW the answer would be NO.
What she did NOT do was call ANY of the people who could help her.
She did NOT call the Comandant of the DC NG – who could have been to the capitol enforce in minutes – there were several hundred NG within a couple of hundred yards of the Capitol all day waiting for orders.
She could have called the assistant Sec Def, the Sec Def all of whom had been previously order to make the NG available to the capitol BY TRUMP.
She could have called Trump.
She did NONE OF THE ABOVE for HOURS.
The problem with what you cite is that it is incompete.
You presume that because the people whose testimony you cite are unaware that Trump authorized the DCNG to be released to DN and the Capitol, that it did not happen – there is MASSIVE evident that it did, numorous people – as well as emails and documents confirm that was done.
You also confuse order and authorize. The president CAN NOT order the NG to go to the capitol – while he can order them to go almost anywhere else in the US. But the capitol itself and its grounds are under the exclusive control of congress.
Either Pelosi or Schumer could have contacted the DC comandant, or the Sec Def or the assistant Sec Def or Trump and requested the NG – and they would have proceded to the capitol immediately. The DC NG comandant as well as several others in DoD have testified that Trump authorized the NG to be released to the capital DAYS ahead of J6 and that all tat was necescary for that to be put into effect was a requiest by Pelosi or Schumer.
Not only has this been confirmed by many people in DoD, but also by the house sargent at arms who did not call the WH to ask for the NG, but called Pelosi’s offices, repeatedly asking if they had given permission to the NG to come.
Miller ios NOT part of the chain of command leading to the commandant of the DC NG.
Miller’s testimoney is likely completely truthful, but at the same time factually incorrect.
Miller can only testify to what he observed. not what occured that did not involve him.
It is Well documented what ACTUALLY happened.
I have no idea what Onoratoria was aware of = regardless, he too is not part of the chain of command leading to the DC NG.
Any order would not involve him.
Meadows has actually confirmed – as well as I beleive Miley and the assistant Sec. Def that Trump ordered the DC NG to be available on the request of the congressional leadership.
The president can not order the NG to depoly to the Capitol. He can only authorize them to go when requested. Which trump did
DAYS before J6. This is well documented – not merely by those present in the Oval when the order was given – DAYS AHEAD.
But by Sund – the House sargent of ARms who was aware of that order and KNEW that he needed Polosi or Schumer to request the NG to actually get them. Send has testified that he spent HOURS – not contacting the WH or DoD – though he did talk to them in the off chance Pelosi contacted them directly and requested them. But mostly begging Pelosi’s office to request the NG.
it is also Well documented that Pelosi did Request the NG – but not the DC NG, but the MD, NJ and VA NG – she requested them from those govornors – who have absolutely no power to deploy the NG outside of their state.
And unless Pelosi is as demented as Joe – she KNOWS this.
So your argument is that he J6 copmmittee agreement with the SS required them to LIE ?
Do you think before you post ?
A correct Text for the J6 report that keeps the agreement with the SS would be.
“The J6 committee confirmed from miltiple sources that the DC NG was made available to the CP, that they were ordered to deploy to the Capitol in the request of the Congressional leadership. ”
and
“Hutchinson’s hearsay testimoney conflicts with the testimony of multiple other sources many of which where eyewitnesses”.
As to the “supression” claim – much of these transcripts and testimony are from the 2TB of material from the J6 committee that was engrprted and then deleted by the Democrats prior to turning it over to the Republican house.
That is called SUPRESSED.
The J6 committee does not have the power to bind future congresses.
Nice strawman. You have done a good job of erecting the illusion of being on topic, and at the same time totaly ignoring any substance. Lots of detail that has nothing to do with the topic.
Facts are clear that President Trump suggested the presences of 10,000 National Guard Troops for Jan 6th 2021
Pelosi and Bowser, refused the offer.
The President does not have the Constitutional power on his own to force the National Guard on Governors or DC Mayor.
Professor Turley Writes:
“Given the cost and trauma to our nation, we should want to know the full story of what occurred on January 6th.”
…………………………………
Here one agrees with Professor Turley. We need to know the full story of January 6th BEFORE the 2024 election!!
If indeed Donald Trump had requested 10,000 troops, that should be known. Donald Trump should have the chance to clear his name.
But just yesterday Professor Turley told us that any effort to put Trump on trial before the election is ‘election interference. The idea seems to be that if Trump is tied up in a courtroom, he won’t have time to campaign.
Yet today we learn Trump’s real strategy here. He can’t be bothered with a trial because that would be ‘election interference’. Instead Trump wants to stay on the campaign trail, while claiming, at every rally, that he requested 10,000 troops on January 6th!
The beauty of this strategy is that Trump doesn’t have to sit for cross-examination in a court of law. Nor does Mark Meadows or anyone else mouthing this claim.
See, when Turley says, “We should want to know the full story of what occurred on January 6th”, he means that Liz Cheny, Nancy Pelosi, Muriel Bowser and Cassidy Hutchinson should have to answer to a House committee chaired by Barry Loudermilk, of all people.
That’s the same Barry Loudermilk accused of giving a tour of Capitol acess points to possible rioters the day before before January 6th. Yeah, that’s how ironic this scheme is!
And notice how women are always the ‘fall guys’ for Donald Trump. It’s part of a pattern that never deviates. Some dizzy dame is always the culprit when Donald Trump can’t be held accountable. Only in this case we have a whole group of dizzy dames to blame for January 6th.
Presumably that’s the reason Republicans are so opposed to reproductive rights. ‘Because dames are so dizzy they don’t know if they want the baby, or not’.
I was going to reply, then I realized there is nothing worthwhile in this post.
Anonymous: Right to the point as usual. Saves me time in put in my two cents worth!
It is election interference because the result, if negative, will be used to harm Trump. That is the whole point of all these prosecutions and lawsuits.
Ashlie Babbit was a woman and she was not the victim of Donald Trump.
ATS – Trump like every other criminal defendant is entitled to whatever strategy he pleases.
Turley’s posts is NOT proof that Trump authorized the DC NG prior to J6 – that PROOF has been available for a LONG time from MANY sources. Meadows, Miley, the Assist Sec Def, have all already testified that Trump ordered the DC NG to be made available on Pelosi’s request.
Emails between Sund and the Assist Sec. Def confirm that. Further Send has both testified and spoke publicly that he was in constant communication with Pelosi’s office BEGGING them to ask for the DC NG – because Sund was already aware they had been pre-autorized.
Further the Office Capitol Police Timeline – what was published 3 years ago documents this.
I have no idea whether Trump or Meadows will testify. But Meadows AND others have already confirmed Trump’s order.
The NEWS is NOT that Trump ordered the DC NG to be made available on request by the CP,
But that the J6 committee LIED when they said no such evidence existed – because their own transcripts confirm otherwise.
A part of the basis for Smith’s J6 indictiment is the J6 committee finding of Facts.
And Hemmingway has just demonstrated those finding of facts are DELIBERATE AND KNOWING FRAUD.
John, this is an excellent summary of what was presented to this list with documentation more than once. Everyone should notice how anonymous trolls intentionally forget all the prior information provided. It’s hard today to differentiate ATS from The Bug because his primary reference is whatever garbage ATS posts. The Bug is unable to say anything unless provided to him by another leftist.
The one thing the leftist anonymous posters prove daily is that whatever they say is likely the opposite of the truth.
Wouldn’t Ornato’s j6 testimony about overhearing that telephone call be hearsay?
Q to determine intellectual honesty:
Is Hutchinson’s j6 testimony about everything that she claims Ornato told her hearsay?
If your answers don’t match, why not?
Hearsay rules do not apply to congressional hearings, so the issue is moot.
That being said, generally the answer is … it depends. Generally, the parts, where the individual (whether Hutchinson or Ornato) is testifying about what that individual actually heard are not hearsay, while the parts where they are testifying about what another person saw/heard are hearsay. That being said, the hearsay rule is riddled with exceptions, likely making a lot of it admissible. For example, Hutchison’s testimony regarding what Ornato told her would likely still be admissible in a criminal trial.
If he testifies as to what he heard Trump say that is not hearsay. If he tested that something Trump said is true, that would be hearsay. For example, if heard Trump ask for National Guard assistance, then that is not hearsay. It is something that he personally witnessed.
The problem is he asked Nikki Hayley for the troops.
Knowing J6 was a deepstate/blob setup the day after it happened, and now reading articles from learned people just starting to realize this recently, makes me feel as if I’m taking crazy pills.
Turley voted for Joetard in fhs 2020 election. And he’s been a Trump-hater at least since Trump ran against Hillary, for whom Turley also voted.
It’s hardly surprising that he’s only now beginning to get of few of the facts straight regarding J6 — facts that have been known since before Joetard was sworn in as Fake President.
By 2030 Turley might understand half of what happened in 2021. But it’s more likely that he’ll revert again to being a typical Chicago-democrat bot.
@Anonymous
Same here. I suspect they knew it would all come out, too. They only needed time and interference, though, and they were happy to wreak destruction to procure it. It is the *actual* coup, and it is unacceptable. Our modern dem party are a regime, period.
Professor Turley (and every reader, who believes Mollie Hemingway is a reliable source),
Do you own research! There was no conspiracy to suppress evidence.
FIRST, please review Chapter 6 of the J6 Report: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-J6-REPORT/html-submitted/ch6.html
Chapter 6 of the committee’s final report puts Trump’s suggestion that 10,000 National Guardsmen may be needed into proper context. It reads (footnotes omitted, emphasis added):
“President Trump wanted to personally accompany his supporters on the march from the Ellipse to the U.S. Capitol. During a January 4th meeting with staffers and event organizer Katrina Pierson, President Trump emphasized his desire to march with his supporters. “Well, I should walk with the people,” Pierson recalled President Trump saying. Though Pierson said that she did not take him “seriously,” she knew that “he would absolutely want to be with the people.” Pierson pointed out that President Trump “did the drive-by the first time and the flyover the second time” — a reference to the November and December 2020 protests in Washington, DC. During these previous events, President Trump made cameo appearances to fire up his supporters. Now, as January 6th approached, the President again wanted to be there, on the ground, as his supporters marched on the U.S. Capitol.
The President’s advisors tried to talk him out of it. White House Senior Advisor Max Miller “shot it down immediately” because of concerns about the President’s safety. Pierson agreed. But President Trump was persistent, and he FLOATED THE IDEA OF HAVING 10,000 NATIONAL GUARDSMEN DEPLOYED TO PROTECT HIM AND HIS SUPPORTERS from any supposed threats by leftwing counter-protestors. Miller again rejected the President’s idea, saying that the National Guard was not necessary for the event. Miller testified that there was no further conversation on the matter. After the meeting, Miller texted Pierson, “Just glad we killed the national guard and a procession.” That is, President Trump briefly considered having the National Guard oversee his procession to the U.S. Capitol. The President did not order the National Guard to protect the U.S. Capitol, or to secure the joint session proceedings.”
As the testimony above makes clear, Trump was primarily concerned with ensuring that he and his supporters were protected during their procession to the U.S. Capitol. Trump did not ultimately march to the Capitol himself – nor did he order the deployment of 10,000 National Guardsmen.
SECOND, the transcripts corroborate precisely what was documented in the J6 Report, namely the following:
1. Ornato was not aware of any “order” to deploy the National Guard on J6 – See p92 of the transcript: “And you were not aware if there was any order of deployment of troops, 10,000 troops by the White House on that morning?” Ornato replied: “No.”
2. Ornato said that Meadows offered the National Guard’s assistance to Mayor Bowser because of concerns about violence “out on the mall area or at the event” but “not anywhere near the Capitol.” See p.78 of the transcript.
THIRD, there was no conspiracy to “suppress” Ornato’s transcript. The Secret Service made Ornato available to the committee with the understanding that the transcript would not be released without the agency’s consent. Page 6 of Oranto’s January 2022 interview, Secret Service Chief Counsel Thomas Huse explained that the Secret Service and the Department of Homeland Security “have made available to the committee … information and records that would not be publicly released.” Huse added that the “transcript [of Ornato’s testimony] and any attachments are protected from further dissemination to the same extent as the documents and information that they are based on.” Huse added that the committee should “consult with the Secret Service and the Department [DHS] prior to any public release or disclosure of that information.”
The January 6th Committee made the terms of its agreement with the Secret Service and DHS known in a publicly released letter dated Dec. 30, 2022. The committee explained that it had agreed “to maintain the confidentiality of any of these transcripts and related security information” and that it was providing its transcripts of interviews with Secret Service personnel to DHS for “for appropriate review, timely return, and designation of instructions for proper handling by the Archives.” The committee also noted in the letter that it was releasing the transcript of Ornato’s Nov. 2022 interview (with some redactions), because he “was not functioning as a Secret Service Agent on January 6th.” (More on that transcript in a moment.)
In her piece for The Federalist, Hemingway did not inform readers of the agreement between the Secret Service and the January 6th Committee – even though it was specifically addressed in the transcript she erroneously claims was “suppressed” and clearly set forth in the committee’s public letter. Instead, she falsely led readers to believe something sinister was afoot. In addition, Loudermilk certainly knows of the agreement between the January 6th Committee and the DHS/Secret Service. In a “report” released on Monday, Loudermilk criticized DHS for taking too long to review transcripts of the Secret Service employees’ testimony.
Conclusion: Mollie Hemmingway is a hack job.
The above comment was mistakenly marked by the system as spam: Restored.
It’s spam. Anonymous gets scrolled by.
Anonymous – You state: “The Secret Service made Ornato available to the committee with the understanding that the transcript would not be released without the agency’s consent.” I suspect this is a cover story. Please let us know what legal privilege prevented the J6 Committee from serving a subpoean on Ornato?
You know it’s a troll when you reply and it never posts. GigiDennisAnon..
Or, when they just repeat the same spiel ad infinitum, even when corrected multiple times. If they are not being paid to do this, they (or maybe just one person) are some sick puppies. One of the Anonymi has said a couple of times, that he/she/it used to post here, under its real name, but was banned or something. So who knows, psychologically speaking, what their major malfunction is??? Cyber-stalking or cyber-harassment, either one is indicative of a sick mind. IMHO.
Typical lying Turley trash troll says what?
Twat???
Did you Trump fans notice the Turley hedge words? “Report” “seemed” “claim”. And, WHO are those now saying Trump “offered” 10,000 troops? Ornato and Kash Patel–both lap dogs of Trump, and neither of whom has any credibility. There’s no paper trail to back up the BS about this offer, and if Trump was really concerned, why did he go around the country pushing for “Stop the Steal”? Think about those words–HOW do people “stop the steal”, assuming there was a “steal” in the first place, after 60+ lawsuits failed for lack of evidence? The only way was with violence, which is exactly what Trump wanted them to do: “fight like hell or you’re not going to have a country any more”. Turley also thinks it’s a big deal that the Secret Service driver denies Cassidy Hutchison’s testimony that she was told Trump lunged for the steering wheel. She made clear that she did not have first-hand knowledge–but was TOLD this. That the Secret Service driver denies this does not make her a liar. Some members of the Secret Service are Trump fans.
Turley thinks this ALLEGED “offer” is imiportant for history, but the overarching question for the history books is: WHY DID THESE PEOPLE ATTACK THE CAPITOL IN THE FIRST PLACE? The issue for January 6th isn’t the number of guards to protect the Capitol, but the REASON why these people committed crimes in the first place–the reason is THE BIG LIE, told by a malignant narcissist who cannot handle the fact that he lost a free and fair election, that he couldn’t bully Secretaries of State to falsify vote totals based on nothing, who paid $750K for an investigation that proved his claims of voter fraud were baseless, but who keeps on lying nonetheless, who got people in several swing states to falsify Electoral College documents, who tried to bully the VP into refusing to do his Constitutional duty, and when all else failed, had his fans attempt a coup to stop Biden’s victory from being acknowledged. Jan 6th WAS a coup–it was a planned-for invasion of the Capitol to try to stop Congress from accepting certified vote totals– not a spontaneous “protest” that got out of control. There were planning meetings at the Willard Hotel. AND, not less than 5 Trump insurrectionists were armed with guns–more were waiting in a hotel room across the Potomac for their exalted leader to give the call to arms.
Natasha,
That is some serious mind reading and crystal ball reading you are doing.
Planning meetings at the Willard Hotel? Really? What did they say? What plans did they have? What were they going to do?
Insurrectionists armed? But even the FBI admits there were no firearms found inside the Capitol building that day? How does one conduct an insurrection without firearms?
And five, count them! 5! Five Trump insurrectionists had guns at their hotel room across the Potomac for Trump to give that call to arms that never happened?
Dang, Natasha. If our country was that close to an insurrection, an complete and total overthrow of the American government from five, count them! 5! Trump insurrectionists, we were oh, so close to the end of democracy.
Do you even think before you comment?
Or are you that much of a DNC cultist, zealot, who just repeats what MSNBC, CNN, WaPo, NYT tells you?
So much for critical thinking, reason, common sense, and logic with people like you.
But please! Keep it up! Gives all the rest of us normal people a good laugh! 😉
You didn’t watch the J6 hearings, did you? If you had, you would heard the testimony direct from the mouths of witnesses about reconnaissance missions and planning meetings before January 6th. The only reason Trump didn’t give the call to arms is because the Secret Service forced him to return to the White House. Have you seen the photos of the cache of arms at that hotel room? Proof of all of this is available on line. But, you prefer to accuse people of mental processing flaws from which you yourself suffer.
The evidence of the cache of weapons was from testimony presented at a trial of an Oath Keeper. Look it up. The planning meetings at the Willard Hotel were attended by Giuliani and other Trump attorneys. Look it up. It’s all on line.
Gigi, your thoughts on Clinton’s refusal even to acknowledge the holocaust spreading thru Rwanda claiming a million lives. Your take on his lies. Your opinion as to why you and your leftist, pinko traiters run from addressing his aiding and abetting the bloodthirsty savages responsible for genocide.
Thank you so much for ignoring these tragic failures. It proves you and your likeminded traitors have no desire for honest communication. None. You should be removed from this, the greatest nation on earth.
Natasha,
Again, I just want to point out that you think a total of five people, 5! Were going to over throw the entire American government? Those five, 5! People were going to take on the entire Capitol PD, the entire DC PD, the entire American military and thereby some how counter dict the rest of national, state and even the SC of the US?
Man. Those five, count them! 5! People have a lot of power.
God like, even.
And even if you expand it to all of the so-called “insurrectionists,” people walking around the Capitol, no firearms, taking selfies, given walking tours by Capitol PD, they were going to over throw the entire American government?
How stupid are you?
She is a rather large moron.
Stop calling me “Natasha”. Trump LIES at every one of his rallies by claiming that NONE of his fans had guns on Jan 6th–that’s just not true. Five of those who were arrested had guns, which is illegal in DC. Everyone who was there did NOT get arrested. AND, others were armed with other weapons, like bear spray. Now, why would someone bring guns or bear spray, if all they planned to do was “protest”? What were they “protesting”–the fact that Trump lost? Why were they shouting “Hang Mike Pence”? What did he do to deserve being murdered? They were also after Nancy Pelosi–what did she do to deserve being murdered by an angry mob? WHY did Trump wait for over 3 hours, until it was clear that Pence couldn’t be cajoled into leaving Washington, to call off his army of insurrectionists? Trump’s army of insurrectionists were waiting for the call to arms by their leader–they had stashed weapons across the Potomac in a hotel room. Look it up online–there are plenty of photos. Some of them, including the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys, were in military regalia, including helmets and flak vests, and after overcoming Capitol Police, proceeded in military formation to the door of the Capitol, to break down the doors and windows. Now, WHY would anyone come to “protest” wearing helmets and flak vests if this was just a “peaceful rally”, and how and when did they practice their military formation? WHY did they attack the Capitol Police and invade the Capitol building in the first place? There were plenty of cameras to record their “protest”, if that was their only goal. They were there to take over Congress and to stop Biden’s victory from being certified because they believed: 1. the Big Lie’ and 2. that Trump would come to lead them, at which time they would get their brothers in arms to deliver the weapons they had stored. Thank God for the sake of American democracy that the Secret Service stopped Trump, leaving his fans to swing in the wind. How stupid are YOU? You can keep on believing the lies put out by MAGA media that the FBI was really behind the insurrection, but the facts prove they are lying. Hundreds of them have been arrested, and most of them blame Trump and his lie for their legal troubles and now, a criminal record. One of them is dead–Ashli Babbitt. Trump is completely responsible for her death. Why doesn’t MTG demand that HE “say her name”? Do you think for one minute that Trump cares that a young woman died because of his ego?
Hey Natasha, as soon as you acknowledge that aiding and abetting the savages who slaughtered a million Rwandans because your lover-boy, that former president who failed to show an ounce of courage except when he attempted to look up women’s dresses, refused to lead, we’ll consider calling you something other than your real name.
Compare your silliness with the 1 million innocent Rwandans who were butchered as slick played with himself.
Yes, those of us not unhinged left wing nuts tend not to make absolute claims based solely on breaking news reports.
Fanni Willis is Alleged to have perjured herself.
Nathan Wade is alleged to have perjured himself.
Bradley is alleged to have perjured himself.
Fanni Willis is alleged to have obstructed justice.
Fanni Willis is alleged to have taken kick backs.
Fanni Willis is alleged to have hired her incompetent lover as a Prosecutor and paid him nearly $1m in public funds
Fanni Willis is alleged to have misappropriated federal Covid funds
Fanni Willis is alleged to have misappropriated federal grant money for at risk teens to buy perqs for office staff.
and on and on.
Most of these are reasonably well established – they are at the very least more likely than not.
Many of them are established beyond a reasonable doubt.
But unlike progressive nut jobs – we do not wholely trust rpeorting – even reporting that conforms to our expectations.
So we use words like alleged to make clear that something is highly probable rather than certain.
With respect to Turley’s article – AT THE MOMENT, we have a claim by more one member of the house or representatives
stating they have read these transcripts.
Soon enough the transcripts will be made public.
I would note that Former Rep Chenney is NOT denying that this testimony took place.
She is just using her on weasel words to claim it was not significant, and no, no one attempted to destroy it or hide it.
Separately Turley is making a big deal of this – which it is.
But this was actually reported more than a year ago. What is KNEW is that we no longer have leaks or personal accounts of what people testified to.
What we have is members of the house stating that transcripts confirming this exist and will be made public soon.
I would further note this is NOT the only evidence of these claims.
We have had the timeline from the house sargent of arms for more than 3 years. That confirms that Trump offered the NG and house/senate leadership overruled the sargent of arms and rejected the offer of NG.
At this time there are atleast half a dozen different witnesses or documents that confirm that Trump offered the NG several Days prior, and that Trump WANTED the NG present.
There are 2 or three witnesses that have contradicted Hutchinsens testimony – atleast one of those an Eye witness – Hutchineson was realying hearsay.
Plausible, but not probable. #BabyLivesMatter (BLM)
Washington mayor Bowser declined troops in writing on J5. https://twitter.com/MayorBowser/status/1346530358674792466/photo/1
Local authorities must request National Guard troops. They are not unilaterally dispatched. Also the head of the Capitol Police said he requested National Guard in advance of j6 but was denied by Congressional leadership due to “optics.”
These things are more than “said” there are emails between the CP and the WH/DOD startging on J2 specifically regarding the NG and these protests.
Trump wanted the NG – pelosi did not.
The entire J6 nonsense is typical of left wing nuts trying to spin everything backwards.
Putin Wanted Clinton not Trump, He wanted/Wants Biden not Trump.
The laptop is real
250 years of practice, as well as the constitution and the case law on the PRA mean that WH papers belong to the president and expresidents can do as they please with them – classified or not.
President have the unilateral power to classify and declassify. You can not pass a law or EO to change the power of presidents regarding classified materials. You can not put rules in place. If you want to change that – you must amend the constitution.
A14S3 is not self executing.
Presidents do have immunity.
Misinformation, disinformation and out right lies are protected by the first amendment. There is very very little content based censorship that is not unconstitutional.
And on and on.
If the left says up – the truth is down.
5 whole people with guns….my god, that sounds like an insurrection.
It’s as if you insist on not being taken seriously,
You’re like the Babylon Bee of the Turley blog.
It is a shame that Turley doesn’t at least require the “I am a human” Captcha button….
There’s no paper trail to back up the BS about this offer,
Gigi,
This has been explained everyday since Jan 7th 2021
The President can only make a request (paper trail) AFTER a Governor. or in this case, a Mayor makes a request to the President of the United States.
No Governor, (Maryland, Virginia) or Mayor (Washington DC) The missing ‘paper work’ would be from one of those three.
Gigi the retard shows up to prance about displaying her ignorance, proudly.
Reading through today’s comments here on the good professor’s blog, been fun to watch all our leftist friends try to spin, deflect and add their ever so lame legal analysis.
They are clearly in desperation to deny, deflect, as their narratives continue to fall or fail in epic fashion.
I have noted a few of our good leftist friends have had the common sense to just not comment, like Bob, in the face of overwhelming evidence of their failing narrative whereas we can count on dupes like Sammy to double or triple down on their own lies.
Thank you!
The fact that you spend all day every day loitering in this comment section, Captain “Well said,” along with a few other hired, lying Turley trolls on both the left and right is one of the biggest reasons that this comment section is the prefabricated joke that it is.
The fact that you notice that Captain “Well said” is here every day only proves the fact that you also, are here every day, reading through all the comments and ready to pounce, but instead, making us laugh. You must spend lots and lots of hours here, because you come back, morning, noon, and night.
Falsehood will fly, as it were, on the wings of the wind, and carry its tales to every corner of the earth; whilst truth lags behind; her steps, though sure, are slow and solemn, and she has neither vigour nor activity enough to pursue and overtake her enemy… Thomas Franklin
Had Republicans not taken back the House, the pursuit would have ended.
And that is their primary motivation, isn’t it? The Blob knows that it’s political army (Democratic party) must control Congress to preserve its power. Their scheme is unraveling, piece by piece. We are going to see some serious gaslighting over the next 8 months.
The Commander in chief ASKING the mayor of DC if troops are needed to protect Congress from his mob? Wow, what a strong and decisive leader Trump was. And now he wants to do it again.
We do not yet have the transcripts, but what witness have SAID they testified to long ago, is tht Trump wanted the NG to PROTECT protestors from Antifa Thugs and Counter protestors, and because he did not Trust Pelosi who controlled the Capitol police not to deliberately try to create a conflict.
As it is we KNOW there was no violence until the CP first accidentally teargasded themselves and THEN “accidentially” tear gassed peaceful protestors, and the effort to flea the Tear Gas pushed the protestors and CP into each other. There is video from several locations of this should you doubt it.
What is also evident is that either the CP is thoroughly incompetent at managing large scale protests – which I doubt or they were given orders and rules of engagement contrary to best practices for managing a protest.
What is abundantly evident now that we have all the video is that the J6 protestors were quite easy to manage.
Had Pelosi not stupidly locked down the capitol. Had protestors been allowed to march through the public areas of the Capitol, the CP would have been able to easily secure the private areas and keep the protestors and congress separate. While allowing peaceful protests.
Further So long as the CP did not trigger violence – which they did with the Tear Gass, they were more than capable of maintaining order – because 99% of these protestors were peaceful and compliant. And of the few who were not – it is unlikely ANY would have been violent if they had not been teargassed while protesting peacefully.
The left is constantly ranting about J6 – but again and again it is increasingly evident that J6 was inconsequential compared to the left wing nut protests at the White house that resulted in almost no one being arrested – much less going to prison. or any night in 2020 in Portland.
Or any BLM protest anywhere.
It was a DNC/Pelosi political hit job. Even Ray Charles could see this one.
Gateway Pundit is report that Fani Willis Conspired with Liz Cheney’s Faux J6 Committee – J6 Committee Shared Video Recordings with Fani Willis But Then Deleted the Video to Prevent Republican Lawmakers from Gaining Access To It.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/03/new-report-fani-willis-conspired-liz-cheneys-faux/