Jump to content

The January 6th Commission To Investigate The Insurrection


Tiberius
 Share

Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, LeGOATski said:

Me too, and? This game of "I know your are but what am I" goes nowhere.

I'm always willing to stop the game, but after the 4+ years of Russia and things like the Kavanaugh debacle, I simply say "Let's stop the game and work toward unity....but you first.".  Not you specifically, but, well, you know. 

24 minutes ago, LeGOATski said:

It's looking like he's going to run. Do you think that's good for the party?

"Good for the party"...I'm don't know.  I didn't think he was good for the party to begin with--and in spite of his flaws I enjoyed the persona, The Apprentice etc.  I was driving near Springfield, Mass when he announces and thought it was just classic Trump with the rebrand.   At the same time, I was disillusioned with R leadership and the thought of Jeb Bush being the nominee sickened me.  Another Clinton was a non-starter for me..and I was at the point where I viewed the D/R leadership as just one big party with a few special interests one way or the other. 

 

So, I think people underestimate the Trump effect.  In spite of 5 years of hammering about what a treasonous person he was, he garnered nearly 75,000,000 votes.   I would think the 1/6 issue will cost him very few of those voters, and that all other thing being equal, Biden might drive many, many more to vote for him. 

 

The truth is, before COVID, he appeared to be in a very good position to win re-election.  The economy was humming, money long held offshore due to onerous tax law was being repatriated, and there was optimism in spite of his own antics, and the intention of the mainstream media outlets to tie everything bad with the world to him.  

 

I think there may be a better way to go about things moving forward.  I don't claim to know a ton about DeSantis, his legendary status and his 'he's the demon seed' reputation are likely both vastly overstated.  I think a more well-disciplined candidate, with a reputation for cutting through the b*llshit, calling out his enemies and throwing shots back at them is a better answer at this point given Trump's age at that point.   

 

I do know that regardless of the choice, the dems will attempt to savage him/her with every accusation under the sun.  A buddy of mine is a believer in Clinton, a hater of Trump, and suggested that he never really hated Bush the W.   The reality is that he did, he used to drip with scorn discussing him, how America "looked" on the international stage, etc etc.  It wasn't until W morphed from a war criminal as President to lovable old Gampy Bush, painter in retirement that the edge came off. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

I'm always willing to stop the game, but after the 4+ years of Russia and things like the Kavanaugh debacle, I simply say "Let's stop the game and work toward unity....but you first.".  Not you specifically, but, well, you know. 

"Good for the party"...I'm don't know.  I didn't think he was good for the party to begin with--and in spite of his flaws I enjoyed the persona, The Apprentice etc.  I was driving near Springfield, Mass when he announces and thought it was just classic Trump with the rebrand.   At the same time, I was disillusioned with R leadership and the thought of Jeb Bush being the nominee sickened me.  Another Clinton was a non-starter for me..and I was at the point where I viewed the D/R leadership as just one big party with a few special interests one way or the other. 

 

So, I think people underestimate the Trump effect.  In spite of 5 years of hammering about what a treasonous person he was, he garnered nearly 75,000,000 votes.   I would think the 1/6 issue will cost him very few of those voters, and that all other thing being equal, Biden might drive many, many more to vote for him. 

 

The truth is, before COVID, he appeared to be in a very good position to win re-election.  The economy was humming, money long held offshore due to onerous tax law was being repatriated, and there was optimism in spite of his own antics, and the intention of the mainstream media outlets to tie everything bad with the world to him.  

 

I think there may be a better way to go about things moving forward.  I don't claim to know a ton about DeSantis, his legendary status and his 'he's the demon seed' reputation are likely both vastly overstated.  I think a more well-disciplined candidate, with a reputation for cutting through the b*llshit, calling out his enemies and throwing shots back at them is a better answer at this point given Trump's age at that point.   

 

I do know that regardless of the choice, the dems will attempt to savage him/her with every accusation under the sun.  A buddy of mine is a believer in Clinton, a hater of Trump, and suggested that he never really hated Bush the W.   The reality is that he did, he used to drip with scorn discussing him, how America "looked" on the international stage, etc etc.  It wasn't until W morphed from a war criminal as President to lovable old Gampy Bush, painter in retirement that the edge came off. 

 

 

 

I think there is virtually nothing he can do that will cost him too many votes.  Which is frightening.  

 

After watching the Democrats paint Romney (who is by nearly every account a stand-up, decent man) as the anti-christ I felt like they actually deserved 4 years of Don.  Its funny how they forgot about that era.  Don gave them much needed perspective.  Can you even imagine horse ownership or putting a dog kennel on a roof rack registering as a scandal these days? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LeGOATski said:

Personally, I think those riots were more about not wanting Trump and I would wager that close to 100% of them still don't want Trump. He didn't do himself any favors while in office and he can't depend on the failures of the succeeding president to win him back voters.

 

I thought it was a general "more people didn't want Trump than didn't want Biden" in the election.  If you were just talking about the rioters, yeah, I'd agree with you. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Doc said:

 

I thought it was a general "more people didn't want Trump than didn't want Biden" in the election.  If you were just talking about the rioters, yeah, I'd agree with you. 


Young people pushed Biden over the top in 2020 and will do it again (no matter who runs for the D or R) in 2024.

 

You best do what you’re cult is good at pass more voter suppression laws QDoc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LeGOATski said:

So, it gives us a picture of the cover page (thanks? Still no link to a report) And then says this before going into speculation:

 

According to the Department of Justice website, “A CDU is composed of law enforcement officers who are trained to respond to protests, demonstrations, and civil disturbances for the purpose of preventing violence, destruction of property, and unlawful interference with persons exercising their rights under law.”

The objective of MPD was “to assist with the safe execution of any First Amendment demonstration and ensure the safety of the participants, public, and the officers.” CDU personnel and Special Operations Division  (SOD) members were to “monitor for any demonstration and/or violent activity and respond accordingly,” according to the report.

There has been speculation that federal agents and Capitol Police were involved in instigating acts of violence during the protests for the purposes of entrapment. As Red State reported in October 2021, “multiple surveillance videos show masked men opening up the doors to the U.S. Capitol Building to allow protesters to enter. In fact, one video shows them entering while Capitol Police officers simply stand around. Yet, we have no idea who those men are.”

 

So, in your own words @B-Man, what are your conclusions from this?

 

 

Links to multiple articles, right and left, will not do, because I can't find a link to the year and a half old police report.  That's the stand that you want to take.

 

The report shows that were indeed federal agents at the protest turned riot on Jan. 6th, as to their role I am certain that we differ.

 

I think that they help "push" some rioters into more than they would have (based on several federal actions seen in the past 2 years)

 

Others feel that the agents were just their to observe and act only if need be.

 

 

The police report (as reported) confirms that those agents were there, it does NOT state what their roles were, or certainly it would be widespread everywhere.

 

I hope that scratches your itch.

 

 

.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, B-Man said:

Links to multiple articles, right and left, will not do, because I can't find a link to the year and a half old police report.  That's the stand that you want to take.

 

The report shows that were indeed federal agents at the protest turned riot on Jan. 6th, as to their role I am certain that we differ.

 

I think that they help "push" some rioters into more than they would have (based on several federal actions seen in the past 2 years)

 

Others feel that the agents were just their to observe and act only if need be.

 

 

The police report (as reported) confirms that those agents were there, it does NOT state what their roles were, or certainly it would be widespread everywhere.

 

I hope that scratches your itch.

 

They were obviously there to watch and do nothing.  The question (no one is asking) is "why?"

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

But no matter.  Independents have (finally) caught onto the ways of the Dems.  No more believing fake scandals or promises to do X and then doing Y or "shutting down" something while campaigning from your basement.

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

The truth is, before COVID, he appeared to be in a very good position to win re-election.  The economy was humming, money long held offshore due to onerous tax law was being repatriated, and there was optimism in spite of his own antics, and the intention of the mainstream media outlets to tie everything bad with the world to him.  

 

I think there may be a better way to go about things moving forward.  I don't claim to know a ton about DeSantis, his legendary status and his 'he's the demon seed' reputation are likely both vastly overstated.  I think a more well-disciplined candidate, with a reputation for cutting through the b*llshit, calling out his enemies and throwing shots back at them is a better answer at this point given Trump's age at that point.   

I can't relate to the part of someone's character that enjoys Trump's persona, but I like the rest of this. There has to be a better leader in the Republican party somewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, LeGOATski said:

I can't relate to the part of someone's character that enjoys Trump's persona, but I like the rest of this. There has to be a better leader in the Republican party somewhere.

 

The same can be said for the Democratic Party.  They have no one.  

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

Links to multiple articles, right and left, will not do, because I can't find a link to the year and a half old police report.  That's the stand that you want to take.

 

The report shows that were indeed federal agents at the protest turned riot on Jan. 6th, as to their role I am certain that we differ.

 

I think that they help "push" some rioters into more than they would have (based on several federal actions seen in the past 2 years)

 

Others feel that the agents were just their to observe and act only if need be.

 

 

The police report (as reported) confirms that those agents were there, it does NOT state what their roles were, or certainly it would be widespread everywhere.

 

I hope that scratches your itch.

 

 

.

 

 

You have no idea what's in the report. And you have no desire to see any source material. That's what I'm getting at. The headline is good enough to serve the purpose of feeding your speculation.

 

And that's exactly what the article does. It takes a quote which outlines a process that is common practice for a police department (which I also have some first hand knowledge of because I work for one) and which is a completely transparent practice (they're not hiding it from anyone; the policy is literally published on their public website) and it flips it with an attempt to portray it as some weird conspiracy. Then you contribute all this speculation to it as if it's some sort of smoking gun report.

 

You understand this, right?

4 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

The same can be said for the Democratic Party.  They have no one.  

Totally. America is in desperate need of a real leader.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, LeGOATski said:

You have no idea what's in the report. And you have no desire to see any source material. That's what I'm getting at. The headline is good enough to serve the purpose of feeding your speculation.

 

And that's exactly what the article does. It takes a quote which outlines a process that is common practice for a police department (which I also have some first hand knowledge of because I work for one) and which is a completely transparent practice (they're not hiding it from anyone; the policy is literally published on their public website) and it flips it with an attempt to portray it as some weird conspiracy. Then you contribute all this speculation to it as if it's some sort of smoking gun report.

 

You understand this, right?

Totally. America is in desperate need of a real leader.

 

 

No.

 

People who have read the report (right and left) have written articles about what it says.

 

You (in a vain attempt) to divert from the lack of any substance coming out about the "insurrection"  (remember when people called it that)

 

want to say that it is claiming a weird conspiracy and that I am looking at it as a smoking gun.

 

This is just your own misconception, you are wrongly assuming what I am posting for. Viewing my posts through your own bias filter.

 

You understand this right.

 

 

 

That's okay though. I have run across this type of response all too often in the decade that I have been posting here.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

No.

 

People who have read the report (right and left) have written articles about what it says.

 

You (in a vain attempt) to divert from the lack of any substance coming out about the "insurrection"  (remember when people called it that)

 

want to say that it is claiming a weird conspiracy and that I am looking at it as a smoking gun.

 

This is just your own misconception, you are wrongly assuming what I am posting for. Viewing my posts through your own bias filter.

 

You understand this right.

 

 

 

That's okay though. I have run across this type of response all too often in the decade that I have been posting here.

 

 

 

☝🏻️ Straight out of the conspiracy theorist's playbook.

 

Tell me some well-known fact about a completely transparent process and I'll flip it into some kind of deviant act to feed my fears.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BillStime said:


Young people pushed Biden over the top in 2020 and will do it again (no matter who runs for the D or R) in 2024.

 

You best do what you’re cult is good at pass more voter suppression laws QDoc.

Are young people sitting out 2022? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Jauronimo said:

I think there is virtually nothing he can do that will cost him too many votes.  Which is frightening.  

 

After watching the Democrats paint Romney (who is by nearly every account a stand-up, decent man) as the anti-christ I felt like they actually deserved 4 years of Don.  Its funny how they forgot about that era.  Don gave them much needed perspective.  Can you even imagine horse ownership or putting a dog kennel on a roof rack registering as a scandal these days? 

Lots of people are frightened when the other guy is in office, it’s the nature of the beast. People have different reasons for being concerned, but it’s actually a pretty pedestrian human emotion.  “Oh no…” the heart claims “this guy is so freaking out there the **** is going to hit the fan!!!”.  
 

Then of course, it’s 15 months later, the guy in the Clan of the Cave Bear costume is dealt with, and the guy some are convinced was the moronic yet incredibly cunning and secret genius behind it all is golfing at Pebble Beach (again). 
 

Anyway, your point on Mitt Romney.  Mitt comes around in 2024, a new improved scandal unfolds.   My guess would be “complicit in 1/6 insurrection/secret co-conspirator”.  Personally, I think he’s an empty suit, a bobble head who lacks the intestinal fortitude to play the game on the level it must be played.  
 

Here’s an example:    Mitt Romney, Republican, claims he would have voted to confirm Brett Kavanaugh and says the confirmation process is “awful”.   
 

https://nypost.com/2018/10/10/romney-calls-supreme-court-confirmation-process-awful/

 

“Awful”.  Wow, there’s a deep, intellectual and visceral response to a group of opposition senators painting a distinguished jurist with decades on the court as a serial sexual predator.  The opposition leadership attempted to destroy the man, his reputation and his family simply for being a conservative.  
 

Me?  I use “awful” to describe the service when the server brings my Reuben out and it’s cold and the bread is soggy on the plate.   
 

Mitt is the most presidential looking guy of the group, but he’s soft as butter and inspires no confidence from the base.  He did at one time, but that ship has sailed.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, LeGOATski said:

I can't relate to the part of someone's character that enjoys Trump's persona, but I like the rest of this. There has to be a better leader in the Republican party somewhere.

That’s interesting.  I find differences in perspective pretty cool, and find people to be pretty relatable if I hold myself accountable to being open-minded.  
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...