Said Donald Trump, quoted in "Trump calls Capitol attack an ‘insurrection hoax’ as public hearings set to begin/Former president intensifies attacks on Liz Cheney at Wyoming rally and endorses her Republican primary challenger in midterm elections" (The Guardian).
I believe what he was calling a hoax was the "insurrection" characterization. That's why he said "the so-called word insurrection." Now, that's a bit inarticulate. Obviously, "insurrection" is really a word. The point is that entry into the Capitol doesn't fit the definition of an "insurrection," which isn't a surprising assertion. Trump gets back at his accusers by calling the "insurrection" characterization "a grotesquely false, fabricated, hysterical partisan narrative."
Has anyone on the Cheney side ever explained how it could be possible to think that overrunning the building could overthrow the government? I wish people on both sides would use accurate language, but of course, they won't.
পোস্টগুলি
৯১টি মন্তব্য:
"I believe what he was calling a hoax was the "insurrection" characterization. That's why he said "the so-called word insurrection." Now, that's a bit inarticulate."
And yet, you understood him. Now, do Biden.
Trump gets back at his accusers by calling the "insurrection" characterization "a grotesquely false, fabricated, hysterical partisan narrative.
A sometime Republican has pounced!
It seems to me, given what we all know actually happened on Jan. 6 and we all know the language that the media and the Democrat side have used to describe what happened, that Trump's statement is simply factual.
i've just finished the pod cast: Revolutions, by Mike Duncan.
One thing that was common, in EVERY revolution he covered; was the revolution wasn't:
The police opened up the Doors, and waved people in..
The people walked in, and took some selfies..
The people then all walked out.. Except for the one the police Murdered
REAL insurrections have, At Least; pitchforks, and tar and feathers
I am very critical of calling it an insurrection, but the argument I understand is that the attempt to get Mike Pence -- by force if necessary (according to the argument) -- to throw out slates of electors, and thereby affect the final count of approved electors, was the core insurrectionary act.
It seems to me that, just as the counting and ratification proceeded as expected later on January 6th, any such coerced count would have been rejected or overridden later. Courts would not have upheld the coerced count (because it's a nonjudiciable controversy). If any other official act tried to use the coerced count rather than the official slates of electors, that seems like it -- and not the riot and invasion of the Capitol on January 6th -- would have been the true insurrection or attempted coup.
So, to the extent I correctly understand the "insurrection" argument, I think it falls well short of being convincing.
“ Has anyone on the Cheney side ever explained how it could be possible to think that overrunning the building could overthrow the government? I wish people on both sides would use accurate language, but of course, they won't.”
I took a Creighton law professor to task on Twitter for her imprecise use of that word. The Dean defended her. She blocked me. That’s part of the reason why Creighton Law is now in the third tier. And I’m sick about it.
"Has anyone on the Cheney side ever explained how it could be possible to think that overrunning the building could overthrow the government?"
And unarmed. I've yet to find an insurrection anywhere in history where the insurrectionists were unarmed, and had no weapons of any sort. Unless a Buffalo head is weapon enough.
I'm with you Ann. both sides use horrendously bad descriptions.
The left use wholesale lies to spread their propaganda.
If you are trying to con people, start with word definitions. It is all in the Newspeak sections of "1984".
"Has anyone on the Cheney side ever explained how it could be possible to think that overrunning the building could overthrow the government?"
Althouse marks herself for cancellation.
Liz has a date with destiny: bird hunting with a shotgun-toting Daddy Cheney…
One can dream…
I wish people on both sides would use accurate language, but of course, they won't.
Democrats just assume higher degree of fondness for living in an interesting narrative in their base than Republicans do. Though the Republicans are developing their own soap opera now as well, probably to attract women, whose vote is the balance of power.
If you walked thru an open door and stood there and took some photos - the FBI(D) hounded and harassed until suicide.
Leftists smile.
I smile that leftist are now on team Bush-Cheney.
Isn’t it interesting that Cheney and the Democrats on the special committee promised America “Watergate-like” televised hearings in the summer. Well, June is here and not a peep. That speaks volumes about their ability to substantiate their insurrection narrative.
Dem polls also show very low interest in the hearings and a high level of suspicion that they are just a political ploy without merit.
Yeah, both sides use inaccrurate language, except ONE side controls the law, academia, and 95 percent of the media, including 6 out of 7 TV networks, and the WaPo, NYT, and almost every major newspaper and magazine except the NY Post and maybe the WSJ Oped page (partly).
The word "Insurrection" was used because Jan 6th was no different than the BLM/Antifa riots or the Leftwing riots on inaugeral day 2017, or the attacks on the White House or the Portland Federal Building. THe liberal/left was in a box, after calling anti-trump riots "Peaceful Protests" how could they make the Pro-Trump riot seem awful and beyond the pale?
Hence, "Insurrection". Notice that all the republican DC Dumbshits, like Miss Lindsey, Mittens, Ted cruz, and Mtich McConnnell used the word too. Partly to get in good with the MSM, but mostly because they hate Trump AND his supporters.
Cheney MAY lose her primary. Democrats can vote in the R Primary and there is an organized effort on the part of Democrats to save her. In any case, She will probably run as an Independent in the General election if she loses. And if she loses her seat, look for her to change parties and run for the Seante.
"Has anyone on the Cheney side ever explained how it could be possible to think that overrunning the building could overthrow the government?"
Funny stuff.
Anything could be possible if it serves prog purposes.
If it was an insurrection it was one of the worst in recorded history. I have heard nothing about plans to seize communications centers. There seemed to have been no plan for sustaining an occupation of the Capitol Building. The number of armed participants seemed small. Yes, we need more of a Wikipedia definition of insurrection than a Dictionary version. On the other hand, the Post-6 January judicial process seems slow, ineffective, vindictive and avoiding of any deep dive.
Regards — Cliff
In his intitial remarks about the January 6 riot, Biden was one of the first to characterize it as an insurrection ("It’s not protest. It’s insurrection"), and then the media ran with it.
The insurrectionists took selfies and left voluntarily. Worst insurrection ever.
Has anyone on the Cheney side ever explained how it could be possible to think that overrunning the building could overthrow the government?
Now, now. Let's not interfere with the gathering of "facts".
"Has anyone on the Cheney side ever explained how it could be possible to think that overrunning the building could overthrow the government?"
Exactly. I wonder if the nighttime janitorial staff at the capital realizes the power that they wield.
I, for one, don't understand Cheney's antipathy toward Trump. Romney I understand. He wanted a fat administration job and was turned down. I have not heard Trump criticize her father, except in criticizing the Iraq War.
An invitation to a peaceful assembly, until an unarmed woman was aborted in a prone position, then the rug was summarily withdrawn by Capitol and DC police who forced a riot. A probable Whitmer-event.
I wish people on both sides would use accurate language, but of course, they won't.
I wish people like Ann would stop enabling the people in this Regime who are constantly lying with her "They are both bad" rationalizations. Out of thousands of words Trump said something "inarticulate" and this allows Ann her chance to judge him inadequate and write off what he is saying.
It is lazy thinking.
The people pushing the January 6th "Insurrection" lies are STILL lying about police being killed. Joe Biden just said that Trump supporters killed 2 police officers on January 6th.
This is a disgusting blood libel and a complete lie. Trump using inarticulate language in a speech that had 1000's of words in a contemporaneous style without a teleprompter is not the same as the bald faced lies Cheney and the other Democrats are telling.
But Ann reads the NYT's and WAPO and they aren't melting down so everything is OK. It is NORMAL. Ann and the other Regime supporters just like their nice little normal lies.
Both sides in this are not the same. The democrats and their BLM thugs actually burned down buildings, businesses, and killed people with violence in hundreds of cities. The left has been routinely violent.
This post is bullshit. Deal with what he actually said.
A semi-automatic rifle is now an assault weapon. The language and labeling serve an agenda. Knives are murder weapons far more often than rifles are, but a kitchen knife isn't called an assault weapon.
No one has ever told me why January 6 was so different from all of the other times that protestors have entered the Capitol building. Especially when it was more peaceful and caused less damage than most.
Somewhat curious that nobody who took part in the "insurrection" has been charged with the crime of insurrection.
"overrunning the building"
Ann, how do you "overrun" a building you were invited into by the Capitol police? The Capitol police (I have read) allowed people into the building and they did so, many of the police taking selfies with the protestors. (She did that to entrap the protestors.) I saw many of these folks walking behind velvet ropes and such.
In October of 2019 Jane Fonda and Sam Waterston were arrested on the steps of the Capitol protesting something or other. I've linked the NBC news coverage of their story below. Whatever happened to that case? Were they prosecuted? Were they leading an insurrection? Was she interfering with the business of the Congress? Was she trespassing? Did she languish in a DC jail for a year while her case came up in court? If she was committing no crime, then why was she arrested? If she was committing a crime, why wasn't she prosecuted and punished?
Why is our judicial system so misused by so eager many?
Why is it that some selected performers may use this stage but not others? Didn't we pay for the stage?
These are the questions we should ponder on Memorial Day, when we remember those who died to ensure our rights to protest our own government remain sacrosanct, but which have been eviscerated instead.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/jane-fonda-sam-waterston-arrested-u-s-capitol-climate-protest-n1068841
Do insurrections have that many embedded FBI agents actively egging on bad behavior?
The Jan 6 hoaxers seem to think that Mike Pence just needed Buffalo Guy near him to declare Trump as President for life or something.
Thank you do much for wondering how January 6th can be called an insurrection. So strange that otherwise intelligent people actually believe, or profess to believe, that those people were seriously a threat to overthrow the government. I guess our new leader would have been the guy with Viking horns.
I don't believe that they were armed with knives or firearms.
It was all theater and symbolic. And much less threatening or destructive than all those George Floyd riots.
It wasn't any serious coup. Edward Luttwak, who wrote the book on coups d'etat, recognized that. In popular mythology, though, the seizure of buildings -- the Bastille, the Winter Palace, the General Post Office -- plays a major role. Some people out there probably have convinced themselves that coups and insurrections are as simple as taking over a building.
I believe what he was calling a hoax was the "insurrection" characterization. That's why he said "the so-called word insurrection." Now, that's a bit inarticulate. Obviously, "insurrection" is really a word. The point is that entry into the Capitol doesn't fit the definition of an "insurrection," which isn't a surprising assertion.
Well, "surprising" or not, it's clearly a true statement on Trump's part
Among them, the people who "invaded" the Capitol on 1/6/21 owed hundreds of guns. The fact that they didn't bring those guns with them, and didn't shoot any of the people in their way, is solid proof that this was not, Ande was not intended to be, an "insurrection".
To claim otherwise is to be thoughtless, pitifully ignorant, or dishonest
The Jan 6 event wasn't an "insurrection" just a fairly benign "protest". But leftists making this protest sound dangerous is consistent with insisting their truly violent riots were mere "protests".
Nothing new here, much easier to lie for political expediency than speak about facts or truth.
Liz Cheney's a swamp creature like dear old dad. The GOP has to shead dinosaurs like this if it wants to survive.
I'm sure she has a sweet Boeing or Raytheon lobbyist post waiting for her as she gets her ass tossed in the primaries this year.
There is a cohort of the public who will believe what they want to believe, facts be damned, and they are put into that place by the inaccurate word. And they like that place. Cannot thereafter be moved.
It’s possible to “think” anything. I mean I still think the election might’ve been stolen. I just don’t have any convincing evidence.
"The Cheney side"? You mean every single member of the Democrat coalition, including the MSM? No, they have repeated the absurd accusation of "insurrection" over and over for more than a year now, including arguing in a court of law that Marjorie Taylor Greene was ineligible to run for federal office because of participating in an "insurrection". Understand, if they can get a judge or jury to agree with their absurd assertion, they will imprison as many people as they can. They have already essentially eliminated the right to speedy trial and the right to any exculpatory evidence in government hands for anyone caught up in their DC police state. We are watching a slow-motion coup. They are trying on various justifications, looking for one they can use to finalize their seizure of power. The FBI is a Reighstag Fire looking for a patsy. Whether rule by law will survive is seriously in doubt.
Liz Cheney is simply paraphrasing that perpetual prevaricator Pelosi. That is when she is not simulating the speech of Shifty Schiff.
I frankly don't know why or how Trump gets into the minds of folks like Cheney and Kinzinger--or the Stay Puft Doughboy Light Kernel (it's hard to think of him as an officer) Vindaman.
"Has anyone on the Cheney side ever explained how it could be possible to think that overrunning the building could overthrow the government?"
Yes. The theory is that they intended to somehow force the Congress not to certify the election. And there may well be enough evidence to convince a DC jury. Hell, there's enough evidence in your fridge to convince a DC jury you're a serial killer.
First, they have to overrun the building, not be invited in.
They know that it's not. The "insurrection" angle is to attempt to play on patriotism and suppress any debate about the actual way that the 2020 election was conducted. It also serves as justification for trying to block Trump and other GOP candidates from the ballot. I expect that in 24 we'll see blue states or blue county officials openly refuse to count Trump votes, I'd not an attempt by the DOJ prior to then to indict Trump on some bullshit charge.
Good. The Republicans who have been promoting the Democratic characterization should be held to account. What the Dems are doing is just politics. What people like Cheney and Romney are doing is a betrayal of their voters.
I wish people on both sides would use accurate language, but of course, they won't.
You’re missing the major cultural shift from thoughts to feelings.
“I just feel” removes the possibility of outside intervention or criticism from what follows.
The Democrats spent years baiting Trump supporters into “insurrection” at the capital. There is no way they can let this go to waste. The George Floyd riots were far worse but those went down the memory hole as soon as the first person got waved into the capital.
There is no way Cheney can win her primary.
If turnout was 100%...
And Cheney got 100% of non-GOP votes...
And the top two other candidates split the GOP vote 50-50...
Cheney would still come in third more than 10,000 votes behind those other two candidates.
With her polling it's simply mathematically impossible for her to eke out a win any kind of way. Turnout won't be 100%, the GOP vote won't be split perfectly, she will get some small percentage of the GOP vote, she won't get anywhere near 100% of the non-GOP vote showing up and voting for her.
Hageman will get above 50%, Cheney will be fighting to come in less than 10% behind second place. The two pro-Trump candidates will get combined around 75% of the primary vote.
rcocean shows he doesn't know much about Wyoming, when he said...
Cheney MAY lose her primary. Democrats can vote in the R Primary
How many Democrats, do you think there ARE in Wyoming?? We ain't talking about Montana
In any case, She will probably run as an Independent in the General election if she loses.
How many Independents, do you think there ARE in Wyoming??
And if she loses her seat, look for her to change parties and run for the Seante.
in the 2020 Senate election, Cynthia Lummis won by about 125,000 votes.. Might not sound like much to you;
but it was 72.85% of the 271,937 cast. (198,100 to 72,766; so NOT QUITE 3 to 1)
The Other Senator, John Barrasso, last won by 67% to 30%
There Aren't many people in Wyoming.. But there Aren't ANY democrats.
Lizard Cheney is NOT a Wyoming Resident (just ask Wyoming Fish and Game)
She's Spent her Entire Life in Northern Virginia. But Wait! it gets worse (much worse!)
She was born in Madison Wisconsin... Can Anyone thing of ANY good that has EVER come out of there?
Not one person has been charged with insurrection. Says all you need to know.
As someone who voted for Trump twice, I never regarded him as particularly articulate. Obama was articulate. I didn't see that as getting us much.
Q: When is the committee going to ask Pelosi what she knew and when she knew it?
A: January 4, 2023, after the Dems become the minority party.
Q: When is the committee going to ask Pelosi what she told the Capital Police to do?
A: See above.
Q: When is the committee going to ask the FBI/DEA/CIA, etc. what they were doing prior to the invasion of the Capital?
A: See above.
If she loses Wyoming has a sore loser law that prevents her from being on the ballot as an indie or another party.
If she loses the repo Primary she's legally toast.
Unclear if she can run a write in campaign but I think yes
Could she win?
About 10 of the state population turned out to see our president emeritus speak. That's a pretty big headwind to fight
John LGKTQ Henry
>Has anyone on the Cheney side ever explained how it could be possible to think that overrunning the building could overthrow the government?
Zip-tie handcuffs, a makeshift gallows, and chants of "Hang Mike Pence" are an odd way of overrunning a building.
"Has anyone on the Cheney side ever explained how it could be possible to think that overrunning the building could overthrow the government?"
Neither the first nor the second. A bunch of tourists taking self portraits, and, with rare exception, milling to and fro inside the lines. Get off my lawn! and you little dog, too.
’I guess our new leader would have been the guy with Viking horns.’
He couldn’t possibly be worse than Biden.
Was James Hodgkinson's attempt to assassinate multiple Republican House members considered an Insurrection? Seems much closer to the definition than the "mostly peaceful" Capital protest.
"...how it could be possible to think that overrunning the building could overthrow the government?"
They think that was intent of the MAGA morons, who didn't know any better, and perhaps of Trump himself, as his civic knowledge is rather limited.
Like, maybe, maybe, maybe...
The Whiskey Rebellion (1791-94) was an armed assault on federal officials sent to western Pennsylvania to collect a new tax on whiskey. It is called an insurrection by the online legal dictionary. Wikipedia called it a violent protest. There were 2 civilian deaths and 4 deaths on the rebel side. None on the militia side. After the rebellion was put down by George Washington himself as commander of the combined militia, many of the Scots-Irish rebels came down the Great Wagon Road to the Appalachian South where they continue to make their un-taxed whiskey. However, my point is that it took a military force to put down the insurrection. How was the Jan 6 "insurrection" put down?
Many people gave sworn testimony about election fraud. If election fraud didnt exist why isnt badass Merrick going after them? Hundreds of them. Why arent they brought up on charges of lying under oath. Theres no he said/she said. Its all documented.
Its because they didnt lie.
In June of 1864 Lee had General Jubal Early conduct a raid on Washington DC. Lee was an insurrectionist who was fighting a war against the US Government. Lee recognized that if Early had broken the defenses of Washington City and installed Davis in the White House, Lincoln and his government would have long taken the train to Independence Hall in Philadelphia and continued the war.
The Democrats want us to believe that Beiden, Pelosi, Schumer, and the Supreme Court would have been subject to the physical demands of a guy in a Buffalo hat, like General Wainright was subject to Hirohito at Corrigador.
You know these people are stupid, right?
So far, 846 insurrectionists have been charged with multiple charges related to the Jan 6 attack on the U.S Capitol building and the elected legislators and staff who were meeting on official government business. So far 298 of the charged nutcases have either pleaded guilty or have been found guilty by the court. More charges are being made as time passes. We know that nine people died, and 150 or so police were injured. No stats have been given on total rioters injured among the estimated 2500 who participated in the illegal trespassing of the Capitol. Most importantly, the leaders of the attack have to be brought to justice. I think that begins with TFG who tells yet another HUGE lie about the insurrection being a hoax and who was let off the hook for the second time by our dishonest GOP Senators.
The scary part of this incident is the number of AR-15 weapons that could have been fired by riot police and the military defending our government. And indeed the militarists on the wrong side had some nasty firearms concealed as well.
Lem said...
It’s possible to “think” anything. I mean I still think the election might’ve been stolen. I just don’t have any convincing evidence.
Poll workers don't block poll watchers from doing their job, unless the poll workers are committing vote fraud.
Because if you are NOT stealing the election, you're not going to do things that make it look like you ARE stealing the election, since that hurts the legitimacy of your victory.
Democrat poll workers in Milwaukee, Detroit, Philadelphia, and Atlanta all blocked Trump campaign poll watchers from being able to do their jobs.
The only reasonable assumption is that they did so because they were committing vote fraud, and stealing the election for Biden
No names, please said...
Zip-tie handcuffs?
You mean, the ones someone grabbed when she ran across them while wandering around the building?
I can see why you don't want to supply a name, if you're going to make claims that stupid
As for "mock gallows", if we can go arrest every leftie who ever hung anyone "in effigy", please do let us know
Butkus51 said...
Many people gave sworn testimony about election fraud. If election fraud didn't exist why isn't badass Merrick going after them? Hundreds of them. Why aren't they brought up on charges of lying under oath? There's no he said/she said. It's all documented.
It's because they didn't lie.
Sixty-eight judges heard testimony about election fraud and disposed of the claims without further ado. The testimony was made up out of thin air. No substantiated proof was given anywhere.
Why no charges for lying? Perhaps because General Merrick is chasing violent insurrectionists instead. But the word is out that the state GOP officials who signed documents illegally declaring that they were the legal electors in the contested states that Biden won, will be charged.
Buckwheathikes says "Ann, how do you "overrun" a building you were invited into by the Capitol police? The Capitol police (I have read) allowed people into the building and they did so, many of the police taking selfies with the protestors. (She did that to entrap the protestors.) I saw many of these folks walking behind velvet ropes and such."
Psst. You may not know this but there is actually video of the Capitol Police urging the tourists to smash and climb in through the windows. So what you have read Buck matches with reality. The police also told the tourists to beat the shit out of them. I saw it with my own eyes. Lots of masochists on the force apparently.
Pettifogger said...
As someone who voted for Trump twice, I never regarded him as particularly articulate. Obama was articulate. I didn't see that as getting us much.
Obama was good at reading a teleprompter. When he was speaking extemporaneously he sounded like an idiot and was the definition of inarticulate.
Trump gets up and speaks extemporaneously for hours with no teleprompter.
Trump is better at reading a teleprompter when he does that as well. He just doesn't do it that often.
Obama was a complete mediocrity in every way. Comparing them in any honest way shows that Trump is more intelligent and talented a speaker when you compare apples to apples.
Says right here in the rulebook, under Rule 18.1.1. Victory Conditions: "Occupation of the Capitol Building"
If the MAGA Player occupies the Capitol Building (hexes 137 and 138) at the end of any MAGA Crowd Movement Subphase, the game ends immediately with a MAGA Player Decisive Victory.
If the MAGA Player occupies either hex of the Capitol Building (137 OR 138) and has control of the Pelosi Counter at the end of any MAGA Crowd Movement Subphase, the game ends immediately with a MAGA Player Substantive Victory.
If the MAGA Player fails to occcupy either hex of the Capitol Building at the end of the 12th turn, but has control of the Pelosi Counter, the game ends with with a MAGA Player Marginal Victory.
If the MAGA Player ends the game in possession of the Pelosi, AOC, and Cheney Counters, the game is scored as a Decisive Deepstate Victory."
But you old gamers know there will be errata in 6 to 12 months.
My guess is that Trump wanted to do to Biden what the Democrats did to him at the beginning of his term as President, to undermine the legitamality of his election. The pro-Hillary Party used the phony "dossier" to undermine Trump's ability to govern during his crucial first two years. So Trump wanted to undermine the legitimacy of the Biden Presidency (which, frankly, does look questionable). But to do that you need the media and the FBI-CIA-etc. establishment on your side. Trump will NEVER have that. And his post-defeat behavior doesn't give any sense that he is able to move into a new political scene.
Trump should step aside and support Gov. DeSantis for President. (Yes, I understand that Biden and Harris are low-hanging fruit, but we need to focus on what's best for the country.)
The word hoax is Donald Trump’s tell. When he calls something he is accused of doing a hoax, you can be sure it’s true.
Jupiter said...
"Has anyone on the Cheney side ever explained how it could be possible to think that overrunning the building could overthrow the government?"
Yes. The theory is that they intended to somehow force the Congress not to certify the election.
>>>>>>> Whose theory? Based on what criminal actions? "Somehow" doesn't cut it. You need at least one overt act in support of a conspiracy, and just milling around the Capitol doesn't come close.
" And there may well be enough evidence to convince a DC jury"
>>>>>>>What evidence? To prove what criminal offenses? To this day no one has been charged with sedition or an illegal conspiracy.
"Hell, there's enough evidence in your fridge to convince a DC jury you're a serial killer."
>>>>>> Evidence to prove exactly what criminal offense(s)?
>>>>>>Even "ham sandwich nation" requires indictments.
Or saying “word” is a way of quoting. Ever hear a math teacher say “x plus y quantity squared”? Quantity there is marking punctuation, (x+y)^2
“Has anyone on the Cheney side ever explained how it could be possible to think that overrunning the building could overthrow the government?”
You are being inarticulate too. Your question may be suggesting that it is inaccurate to call it an insurrection because Trump had to know that it couldn’t work (a questionable definition of insurrection, with many historical counter examples). Or your question may be suggesting Donald Trump was crazy to think his plan would work (true, but still scary and unconstitutional).
I do think a reasonable case can be made, based on the information that has come to light so far, that’s Trump’s intention on the morning of January 6 was not to overthrow the election results, but rather to punish Mike Pence, Mitch McConnell, and Kevin McCarthy for failing to support his scheme to reject enough electoral votes to prevent the certification of Joe Biden’s victory.
Mike Pence’s future political prospects were effectively destroyed, Mitch McConnell had already been deprived of his majority leadership in the U.S. Senate by Trump blowing the two George runoffs, Kevin McCarthy was forced to bend his knee to Donald Trump, and state election laws have been rewritten to favor Trump in 2024. Trump May very well be back within the same electoral vote counting playbook. It’s too soon to say that his plan didn’t work, let alone that it couldn’t work.
Trump is consigned to his own form of hell, reliving the last election until the end of his days. Barry Manilow is in residence in Vegas at Westgate. Where will Trump take up residence or is he always going to be on tour?
Trump is consigned to his own form of hell, reliving the last election until the end of his days.
Now do Gore and Hillary....
" ... how it could be possible to think that overrunning the building could overthrow the government?" Hasn't that been the unasked question all along?
One interesting solution would have been to make sure all the workers were outside the building and then lock the "insurrectionists" inside with no electricity, no water and no food. They would have surrendered once all their batteries ran out of juice.
Come to think of it, that would make a great play.
So many “insurrectionists”, so few charges of insurrection. Lots of charges of “parading in the Capitol”, though. I enjoyed our Memorial Day parade in our small Michigan town yesterday. Is parading a bad thing? Only in the Capitol.
This was a riot in and around the Capitol building in favor of Donald Trump. During the prior year there were lots of riots in honor of St. George Floyd in many cities around the country. The powers that be aren’t too upset about them, are they?
This Jan 6-ism by people like Cheney is phony concern. That is why she is on her way out. Maybe the Dems can conjure some magic in the most Republican state in the country, but if so, it won’t benefit anyone except the Swamp Creatures that infest DC.
Bah!
"I wish people on both sides would use accurate language, but of course, they won't."
It's hard to use accurate language when speaking extemporaneously; even harder when you're dissembling. I don’t see a lot of moral equivalency between the former (Trump) and the latter (Cheney).
It was a trap.
1. People were gathering in protest.
2. The completely understaffed Capitol police incited the crowd by firing bullets, using tear gas, physically engaging individuals …
3. The presence of counter groups masquerading as Trump supporters were causing mayhem- trying to break windows, picking fights …
4. Capitol police opening doors and allowing people into “the building”, moving barriers
5. All filmed by Sullivan- proclaimed antifa member
6. FBI agents undercover documented
Insurrection?
“Trump gets back at his accusers by calling the "insurrection" characterization "a grotesquely false, fabricated, hysterical partisan narrative."
Precise language present and accounted for.
"Has anyone on the Cheney side ever explained how it could be possible to think that overrunning the building could overthrow the government? I wish people on both sides would use accurate language, but of course, they won't."
Has anyone ever explained how it would be possible to think that one could overthrow the government without any weapons? Or military?
Achilles said:
"Both sides in this are not the same."
For once we agree. The January 6 tourists, egged on by their Supreme Leader, succeeded in prevented a peaceful transfer of power from the certified loser to the certified winner. First time that has happened in this great nation.
"Trump gets up and speaks extemporaneously for hours with no teleprompter."
Said the narcissist: "I've spoken long enough about myself. It's time for someone else to speak about me." Castro would regularly give speeches over 5 hours extemporarily. Same with Chavez. Hitler was pretty good at the long orations. Compare with George Washington, whose 2nd inaugural address 135 words. And the Gettysburg address was 272 words.
"Has anyone on the Cheney side ever explained how it could be possible to think that overrunning the building could overthrow the government? I wish people on both sides would use accurate language, but of course, they won't."
Has anyone ever explained how it would be possible to think that one could overthrow the government without any weapons? Or military?
"The word hoax is Donald Trump’s tell. When he calls something he is accused of doing a hoax, you can be sure it’s true."
Like, for example, "Russia collusion hoax?"
Yes, the idea that a bunch of yahoos and nitwits crowding into the building was or could ever have been any sort of "insurrection" is laughable. If those pouring into the building had all been armed with firearms, it could have been seen as something approaching an attempt at an insurrection, but one doomed to failure. The Dems' pushing this narrative are simply undermining their own position, assuming their base will buy it and carry them to future electoral victories. It shows how badly they are out of touch with reality, and how barren they are of any substantive policies and programs to serve the needs of the nation.
Alpha males will give the facts. Beta males will use hyperbole. Biden voters,(the real ones), tend towards beta males. The women. Karens. Just look at what the usual suspects contribute and tell me I'm wrong.
jim5301 said...
For once we agree. The January 6 tourists, egged on by their Supreme Leader, succeeded in prevented a peaceful transfer of power from the certified loser to the certified winner.
Do you actually work at being this incoherent?
We expect to see Democrats pretending that 1/6 was an insurrection--it suits their agenda and we don't expect their sort to have any compunction against using BS like that.
On the other hand, we fully expect elected Republicans to call BS on the whole narrative. Especially if they happen to be a Republican from a hard-core Republican state like Wyoming. I mean, WTF? Why can't we expect to have a non RINO from Wyoming?
How lucious. We republicans will get to excise the Bush/Cheney strain from our party. George P. Bush went down in flames in Texas and so will Cheney unless the democrats resurrect her cold dead political body.
McConnell is next.
Did anyone solicit Liz Cheney's position on Clinton and Obama both releasing FALN terrorists who actually killed people, or Carter pardoning an earlier iteration of the group, which attempted to assassinate a president and sprayed Congress with bullets, severely wounding several congressmen? Has she ever spoken out about the pardons of multiple Weather and BLA murderers of police, bombers of the Capitol building, etc.? How about Obama refusing to make the return of prolific terrorist cop assassin Assata Shakur a precondition of normalizing relations with Cuba? What of the forced entry of radical leftists who disrupted Congressional hearings repeatedly, with the full assistance of the DNC and Congressional Democrats? Nope. Crickets from daddy and daughter. Also crickets when Trump fully pardoned Dick Cheney's Chief of Staff, Scooter Libby, who had previously had his sentence commuted by Clinton.
gadfly said...
So far, 846 insurrectionists have been charged with multiple charges related to the Jan 6 attack on the U.S Capitol building and the elected legislators and staff who were meeting on official government business
Got a breakdown of those charges? Is ANYONE actually charged with "insurrection"?
Or are you just lying when you call them "insurrectionists"?
So far 298 of the charged nutcases have either pleaded guilty or have been found guilty by the court.
So, what have they been found guilty of? Any "insurrection" charges? Or are you lying about that?
We know that nine people died
Love that passive voice. How many were killed by the cops?
The scary part of this incident is the number of AR-15 weapons that could have been fired by riot police and the military defending our government.
The military carries M16 or some other actual assault rifle, not an AR-15
And indeed the militarists on the wrong side had some nasty firearms concealed as well.
really? You got some links to back that up? So weapons charges in court?
Or is that just more lies?
A very efficient insurrection. They overturned the government in less than a day.
It took Occupy Wall Street two months to destroy Capitalism.
So is insurrection ALWAYS a bad thing? If you answer "yes," what the hell will you be celebrating on July 4th?
একটি মন্তব্য পোস্ট করুন