The January 6th Commission To Investigate The Insurrection

[B-Man]

1 hour ago, BillStime said:

We all know when Bonnie super spams the board it’s a given he is on the wrong side of the issue…

 

 

Odd response, when I have posted on 7 or 8 different issues today.

 

Well, maybe not so odd, when you remember BillZtime has no real arguments

 

 

 

[BillStime]

19 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

Odd response, when I have posted on 7 or 8 different issues today.

 

Well, maybe not so odd, when you remember BillZtime has no real arguments

 

 

 

Thank you for proving my point. 
 

 

[Governor]

37 minutes ago, Bidens_basement said:

Any libs know how many guns were confiscated on the the worst attack on this country on 1/6?

 

Any libs want to answer that?

It was 12 or more, not counting the bombs and other stuff.

Edited July 13, 2021 by Governor

[John Adams]

On 7/9/2021 at 4:09 PM, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Here’s the issue, law enforcement officials face this sort of danger on almost a daily basis.  The riotous behavior of folks acting just like this, or worse was largely ignored by the msm all last summer.  

 

Whataboutism.

 

Quote

Officers are being ambushed, shot, wounded and killed, yet we hear about mostly peaceful protests.  

 

Whataboutism.

 

 

Quote

A guy like Michael Brown, who met his fate in a way that was tragically quite predictable is a martyr, the officer who shot him portrayed as a villain. 

 

 

Whataboutism.

 

Quote

 

In the world of leftists, these a$$holes are typically described as “unarmed”.  
 

 

Whataboutism.

 

Quote

 

Btw, video is readily available showing gangs of masked antifa scumbags assaulting people on the streets, broad daylight, with nothing being done about it.

 

Whataboutism.

 

Quote

  The video you shared is sick,

 

Relevant.

 

Quote

the videos of other people being assaulted fall directly into that category as well.  

 

Whataboutism.

Edited July 13, 2021 by John Adams

[B-Man]

15 minutes ago, BillStime said:

Thank you for proving my point. 
 

 

Lack of comprehension Alert .....

 

 

 

[John Adams]

38 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

Odd response, when I have posted on 7 or 8 different issues today.

 

 

Don't sell yourself short. I'm sure you've posted in 20 threads in the last 12 minutes. 

[Westside]

15 minutes ago, Governor said:

It was 12 or more, not counting the bombs and other stuff.

Wrong, there was only one Gun found, which not near the incident and that was a legal gun owner. You really need to do your own research.

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

1 hour ago, John Adams said:

 

Whataboutism.

 

 

Whataboutism.

 

 

 

Whataboutism.

 

 

Whataboutism.

 

 

Whataboutism.

 

 

Relevant.

 

 

Whataboutism.

Don’t you have some bully’s homework to do? 

[SoCal Deek]

So let get this straight. We have a fully stocked, trained and staffed military, but it costs us more money when we 'need' them to actually do something as opposed to drilling for a potential event that would cause them to use their stocked, trained and staffed resources.  Nice! Anyone else think the American Taxpayer is being fleeced? 

[Governor]

4 hours ago, Bidens_basement said:

Wrong, there was only one Gun found, which not near the incident and that was a legal gun owner. You really need to do your own research.

Incorrect.

 

Before and after the storming of the Capitol, NBC News reported,police seized a dozen firearms, including an assault rifle, and thousands of rounds of ammunition from seven people attending the rally for President Donald Trump in Washington, D.C. Other weapons included a crossbow, a stun gun and 11 Molotov cocktails.

Edited July 13, 2021 by Governor

[All_Pro_Bills]

4 hours ago, Governor said:

It was 12 or more, not counting the bombs and other stuff.

Other stuff?  Like nuclear weapons and some fighter jets?  A few tanks?  Even our senile and ancient President said you're not going to over throw the US government with just guns.  Of course in that situation he was talking about plans to restrict 2nd amendment protections and not the 1/6 protest riots.  But in a brief moment of clarity and honesty his point is well placed and correct.  The insurrection narrative gets the amp'ed up threat to democracy version.

 

So if they had all these weapons how did a bunch Capitol Police which are one step up from mall cops stop their plan?  Why didn't the protesters shoot anybody?  Why bring a bomb to a riot if your not going to set it off? Why didn't they track down and capture the Senators and Representatives that were the target of their anger and objective?  Or do much worse to them? Why didn't they burn down the Capitol or something like that?  That would have most certainly delayed the House certification of the election results.  Why can't proponents of the insurrection hoax story that have no answer to this question admit it wasn't an insurrection?  And that angle is just for scoring political points? 

 

I've asked this question about why they didn't carry out their plan given absolutely little to no resistance several times and have been left disappointed as no intelligent or logical explanation is posted.  All I get is nonsense and deflection.  And some tit-for-tat anti-Trump story line.  Truth is there is no logical explanation because there was no planned insurrection.  Truth is none of us that think the narrative is all BS think you believe it either.  We think you are just unwilling to admit to the truth.  And given my perception of your intelligence level I can't see how you could believe such a transparent lie.

[Governor]

30 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

Other stuff?  Like nuclear weapons and some fighter jets?  A few tanks?  Even our senile and ancient President said you're not going to over throw the US government with just guns.  Of course in that situation he was talking about plans to restrict 2nd amendment protections and not the 1/6 protest riots.  But in a brief moment of clarity and honesty his point is well placed and correct.  The insurrection narrative gets the amp'ed up threat to democracy version.

 

So if they had all these weapons how did a bunch Capitol Police which are one step up from mall cops stop their plan?  Why didn't the protesters shoot anybody?  Why bring a bomb to a riot if your not going to set it off? Why didn't they track down and capture the Senators and Representatives that were the target of their anger and objective?  Or do much worse to them? Why didn't they burn down the Capitol or something like that?  That would have most certainly delayed the House certification of the election results.  Why can't proponents of the insurrection hoax story that have no answer to this question admit it wasn't an insurrection?  And that angle is just for scoring political points? 

 

I've asked this question about why they didn't carry out their plan given absolutely little to no resistance several times and have been left disappointed as no intelligent or logical explanation is posted.  All I get is nonsense and deflection.  And some tit-for-tat anti-Trump story line.  Truth is there is no logical explanation because there was no planned insurrection.  Truth is none of us that think the narrative is all BS think you believe it either.  We think you are just unwilling to admit to the truth.  And given my perception of your intelligence level I can't see how you could believe such a transparent lie.

All of your questions will be answered by the bi-partisan commission over the next year.

[Doc]

36 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

Other stuff?  Like nuclear weapons and some fighter jets?  A few tanks?  Even our senile and ancient President said you're not going to over throw the US government with just guns.  Of course in that situation he was talking about plans to restrict 2nd amendment protections and not the 1/6 protest riots.  But in a brief moment of clarity and honesty his point is well placed and correct.  The insurrection narrative gets the amp'ed up threat to democracy version.

 

So if they had all these weapons how did a bunch Capitol Police which are one step up from mall cops stop their plan?  Why didn't the protesters shoot anybody?  Why bring a bomb to a riot if your not going to set it off? Why didn't they track down and capture the Senators and Representatives that were the target of their anger and objective?  Or do much worse to them? Why didn't they burn down the Capitol or something like that?  That would have most certainly delayed the House certification of the election results.  Why can't proponents of the insurrection hoax story that have no answer to this question admit it wasn't an insurrection?  And that angle is just for scoring political points? 

 

I've asked this question about why they didn't carry out their plan given absolutely little to no resistance several times and have been left disappointed as no intelligent or logical explanation is posted.  All I get is nonsense and deflection.  And some tit-for-tat anti-Trump story line.  Truth is there is no logical explanation because there was no planned insurrection.  Truth is none of us that think the narrative is all BS think you believe it either.  We think you are just unwilling to admit to the truth.  And given my perception of your intelligence level I can't see how you could believe such a transparent lie.

 

The more evidence (or lack thereof) I see, the more I think I want the commission to go forward.  Let everyone hear about how no one inside the Capitol was armed, much less charged with possession, and no one was charged with insurrection/sedition.  Then we can hear how there is no link between the idiots who went inside and Trump.  We can also hear about why there was nothing more than the Capitol police, many of who were letting people in, to keep the peace when they knew tens of thousands of people would be showing up.

[BillStime]

31 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

The more evidence (or lack thereof) I see, the more I think I want the commission to go forward.  Let everyone hear about how no one inside the Capitol was armed, much less charged with possession, and no one was charged with insurrection/sedition.  Then we can hear how there is no link between the idiots who went inside and Trump.  We can also hear about why there was nothing more than the Capitol police, many of who were letting people in, to keep the peace when they knew tens of thousands of people would be showing up.

Bring it

 

 

[Chef Jim]

Just now, BillStime said:

Bring it

 

 

Depends.  Who they beatin’ on?  

[Doc Brown]

15 hours ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

A good summation but what's missing is context.  And I'll keep my comments to setting that context.

 

And that context is these protesters have experienced the opposition lying, cheating, and stealing for 4 1/2 years.  Breaking all kinds of laws like falsifying warrants, falsifying intelligence, leaking sensitive national security information, planting false stories in the press, letting sympathetic protest groups get away with murder, and so much more.  And yet not a single person has been charged, tried, or convicting of anything.  Like "made men" in the mob these wrongdoers are protected by the system.  While they are not.   

 

They've watched the corporate media lie about everything, ignore other things, and dismiss anything that didn't fit their narratives. They've witnessed big tech weaponizing social media against them, suppressing and censoring all opposition ideas.  And in a lot of cases these platforms have spread lies and misinformation themselves. All without consequences. 

 

They've sat through two impeachment hearings authorized on the flimsiest of charges all for political show.  They've heard officials like Maxine Waters telling her supporters to "get in people's faces" and to get "confrontational" and see her get away unquestioned by the media.  The same media that descended on Trump when he spoke in similar fashion charging he was inciting violence.  They've watched BLM and Antifa groups burn, loot, destroy, steal, beat and kill people and get away with all of it by friendly state and local governments knowing damn well if they participated in that behavior they'd see the full weight of the law come down on them.  

 

Basically, they've watched the administration they supported get screwed up and down by the embedded powers inside and outside the government during the entire 4 year term.  And then defeated in an election almost half the country believes was fixed.  

 

That's the context.  And given all that telling them here to play nice and follow all the rules.  

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Context seems a little one sided.  Even if I took everything you said at face value I’d still expect the sitting POTUS to rise above it instead of whining about imaginary rigged communist backed voting machines.

Edited July 14, 2021 by Doc Brown

[Westside]

2 hours ago, Governor said:

Incorrect.

 

Before and after the storming of the Capitol, NBC News reported,police seized a dozen firearms, including an assault rifle, and thousands of rounds of ammunition from seven people attending the rally for President Donald Trump in Washington, D.C. Other weapons included a crossbow, a stun gun and 11 Molotov cocktails.

I’m talking about the people who illegally entered the federal building. It’s kind of hard to overthrow a government without any weapons.

2 hours ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

Other stuff?  Like nuclear weapons and some fighter jets?  A few tanks?  Even our senile and ancient President said you're not going to over throw the US government with just guns.  Of course in that situation he was talking about plans to restrict 2nd amendment protections and not the 1/6 protest riots.  But in a brief moment of clarity and honesty his point is well placed and correct.  The insurrection narrative gets the amp'ed up threat to democracy version.

 

So if they had all these weapons how did a bunch Capitol Police which are one step up from mall cops stop their plan?  Why didn't the protesters shoot anybody?  Why bring a bomb to a riot if your not going to set it off? Why didn't they track down and capture the Senators and Representatives that were the target of their anger and objective?  Or do much worse to them? Why didn't they burn down the Capitol or something like that?  That would have most certainly delayed the House certification of the election results.  Why can't proponents of the insurrection hoax story that have no answer to this question admit it wasn't an insurrection?  And that angle is just for scoring political points? 

 

I've asked this question about why they didn't carry out their plan given absolutely little to no resistance several times and have been left disappointed as no intelligent or logical explanation is posted.  All I get is nonsense and deflection.  And some tit-for-tat anti-Trump story line.  Truth is there is no logical explanation because there was no planned insurrection.  Truth is none of us that think the narrative is all BS think you believe it either.  We think you are just unwilling to admit to the truth.  And given my perception of your intelligence level I can't see how you could believe such a transparent lie.

Because they had to catch the 6:30 bus. 

[Doc]

17 minutes ago, Bidens_basement said:

I’m talking about the people who illegally entered the federal building. It’s kind of hard to overthrow a government without any weapons.

Because they had to catch the 6:30 bus. 

 

Hell, it's kind of hard to overthrow a government with any weapons.  At least ones you can easily obtain and carry into a building.  Just ask Joey.

[B-Man]

 

 

Republicans are not supporting the democrat's Capitol Police funding bill, guess why ?

 

The usual leftists reason.

 

Leahy's angry rant to reporters about the Senate's capitol security funding bill is... something

 

 

The Senate appropriations committee released a $3.7B bill to fund the U.S. Capitol Police Monday evening. That dollar amount is more than the $2B House approved bill. Republican members of the committee, including ranking member Senator Richard Shelby, are not on board with the increase. This has put Chairman Patrick Leahy into a tizzy. He vented his frustrations to reporters and the audiotape was released in this morning’s edition of Punchbowl News.

 

The audio can be heard here if you have a little more than two minutes to spare. It’s not the best quality but you can hear most of it pretty clearly. A reporter eggs Leahy on by bringing up the ranking Republican, Shelby, and Leahy calls Shelby’s proposal “stupid”. He says Democrats waited “weeks and weeks and weeks” for it and it’s just too small. He says he will put up his own bill if he can’t get better support from Republicans.

 

{snip}

 

Here’s the thing- Senator Shelby says the bill is going in the wrong direction. He’s right. The bill is meant to fund Capitol Police. It is not meant to fund the items added by Leahy and the Democrats in the committee.

 

Leahy’s bill includes money for lots of priorities that have nothing to do with the U.S. Capitol Police. He added $425 million to “address unmet needs due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic placed on organizations providing services to domestic violence and sexual assault survivors and victims of child abuse;” “$1.3 billion in emergency funding to address COVID impacts at the Department of Defense;” and $100 million for emergency aid for Afghan refugees.

 

All of those things may be worthy of their own funding but not as additions to this bill. Let those items be debated on their own and present Capitol Police funding as a stand-alone bill. Stop trying to Christmas tree every bill that comes up.

 

Senator Shelby offered a stripped-down $633 million dollar proposal that would solve the funding crisis for Capitol Police and the National Guard. It allows more time to separately negotiate on the other items. Shelby issued a statement on the bill.

 

“We all agree we must provide desperately-needed funding for the Capitol Police and National Guard. My bill answers these needs. I urge my Democrat colleagues to join me in passing this bill without further delay. Funding for the Capitol Police and National Guard must not be held hostage because the Democrats insist on billions more in spending that lacks full support at this time,” Shelby said. “The clock is ticking. Let’s pass what we all agree on.”

 

 

There is a need for the Senate to move in a timely manner. The Capitol Police department is in financial trouble. It may have to furlough employees. Part of the reason for its financial problems is the overtime costs post-January 6 riot. The police department can shift funds around for a while but funding runs out by mid-August. Both sides will point the finger at the other side if an agreement can’t be made by that time.

 

Let’s hope that Republicans stay firm and a bill that fulfills its mission is voted on, not one loaded up with more slush fund money.

 

 

https://hotair.com/karen-townsend/2021/07/13/leahys-angry-rant-to-reporters-about-the-senates-capitol-security-funding-bill-is-something-n401990

[B-Man]

 

 

Not much of an insurrection    😄

 

 

No treason or sedition charges for January 6 rioters

 

The number of people who have been charged in connection with the January 6th riot at the Capitol Building has now grown to over 500. Few of the accused have achieved the level of “fame” that Jake Angeli, the so-called Qanon shaman has achieved, but they are all facing a variety of charges ranging from disturbing the peace to vandalism, with a smaller number facing assault raps.

 

Plea deals are being struck already, with some of the participants agreeing to cop to lesser charges to avoid a trial. But Michael Tarm of the Associated Press thinks he sees something missing from all of these proceedings. Why, he asks, has nobody been charged with sedition or treason?

 

{snip}

 

The events of January 6th were a travesty and the actions of many who broke into the building (as opposed to those who remained out in the streets and simply protested) were clearly criminal. But did they actually rise to the level of treason, or even sedition? Rioting, even on government property, doesn’t really sound like it rises to those levels or else we’d have a lot more treason and sedition cases going to court than we do these days. But let’s give Mr. Tarm the benefit of the doubt and explore this for a moment.

 

The definition of treason is pretty straightforward. It comes straight from the Constitution and is defined in Title 18 as “Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere.” This is broadly understood to mean engaging in acts of war against the United States in support of our enemies. Both the terms “act of war” and “enemies” are considered by some to be vague enough to leave at least some room for interpretation, but I would argue not nearly as much as would be required here.

 

Treason isn’t typically understood to include “all enemies foreign or domestic.” It refers to actual warfare, which takes place between countries or organized subsets of countries in the case of civil war. Those are the “enemies” that come to mind when you throw around words like treason. If a couple of hundred people throwing bottles at the police and breaking into a building qualifies as war, then pretty much every BLM riot over the last couple of years was an act of war. And since they frequently attacked police stations and the police themselves – part of the executive branch of government – then they were all traitors too.

 

Sedition may be another matter, though. Seditious Conspiracy, as defined by code, covers a lot of territory. It begins by describing a situation where “two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States.” While the rioters were, at least in some cases, working in concert with each other, their apparent goal was to prevent the certification of the 2020 election results. I somehow doubt you could make a very good argument in court that trying to force a different outcome to an election is the same as trying to completely overthrow or destroy the government attempting to hold that election.

 

But the code goes a bit further. Seditious Conspiracy can also be charged if two or more people “oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States.” That’s actually such a generic description that sedition could apply to a wide swath of criminal activities. If two people attempt to prevent a police officer from apprehending a suspect, allowing them to escape, that could be considered sedition, but we almost never charge anyone with that. (In 2010, members of the Hutaree militia in Michigan were charged with Seditious Conspiracy, but those charges were eventually thrown out.)

 

There are plenty of crimes associated with rioting that can be brought, not that you would know it from the curious lack of prosecutions and convictions of BLM rioters. And those are most likely the ones you’ll see going forward with these defendants.

 

https://hotair.com/jazz-shaw/2021/07/13/no-treason-or-sedition-charges-for-january-6-rioters-n401954

[John Adams]

2 hours ago, B-Man said:

 

 

Not much of an insurrection    😄

 

 

No treason or sedition charges for January 6 rioters

 

The number of people who have been charged in connection with the January 6th riot at the Capitol Building has now grown to over 500. Few of the accused have achieved the level of “fame” that Jake Angeli, the so-called Qanon shaman has achieved, but they are all facing a variety of charges ranging from disturbing the peace to vandalism, with a smaller number facing assault raps.

 

Plea deals are being struck already, with some of the participants agreeing to cop to lesser charges to avoid a trial. But Michael Tarm of the Associated Press thinks he sees something missing from all of these proceedings. Why, he asks, has nobody been charged with sedition or treason?

 

{snip}

 

The events of January 6th were a travesty and the actions of many who broke into the building (as opposed to those who remained out in the streets and simply protested) were clearly criminal. But did they actually rise to the level of treason, or even sedition? Rioting, even on government property, doesn’t really sound like it rises to those levels or else we’d have a lot more treason and sedition cases going to court than we do these days. But let’s give Mr. Tarm the benefit of the doubt and explore this for a moment.

 

The definition of treason is pretty straightforward. It comes straight from the Constitution and is defined in Title 18 as “Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere.” This is broadly understood to mean engaging in acts of war against the United States in support of our enemies. Both the terms “act of war” and “enemies” are considered by some to be vague enough to leave at least some room for interpretation, but I would argue not nearly as much as would be required here.

 

Treason isn’t typically understood to include “all enemies foreign or domestic.” It refers to actual warfare, which takes place between countries or organized subsets of countries in the case of civil war. Those are the “enemies” that come to mind when you throw around words like treason. If a couple of hundred people throwing bottles at the police and breaking into a building qualifies as war, then pretty much every BLM riot over the last couple of years was an act of war. And since they frequently attacked police stations and the police themselves – part of the executive branch of government – then they were all traitors too.

 

Sedition may be another matter, though. Seditious Conspiracy, as defined by code, covers a lot of territory. It begins by describing a situation where “two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States.” While the rioters were, at least in some cases, working in concert with each other, their apparent goal was to prevent the certification of the 2020 election results. I somehow doubt you could make a very good argument in court that trying to force a different outcome to an election is the same as trying to completely overthrow or destroy the government attempting to hold that election.

 

But the code goes a bit further. Seditious Conspiracy can also be charged if two or more people “oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States.” That’s actually such a generic description that sedition could apply to a wide swath of criminal activities. If two people attempt to prevent a police officer from apprehending a suspect, allowing them to escape, that could be considered sedition, but we almost never charge anyone with that. (In 2010, members of the Hutaree militia in Michigan were charged with Seditious Conspiracy, but those charges were eventually thrown out.)

 

There are plenty of crimes associated with rioting that can be brought, not that you would know it from the curious lack of prosecutions and convictions of BLM rioters. And those are most likely the ones you’ll see going forward with these defendants.

 

https://hotair.com/jazz-shaw/2021/07/13/no-treason-or-sedition-charges-for-january-6-rioters-n401954

 

Any part of this article that you didn't paste? 

[BillStime]

 

 

[BillStime]

 

[Beach]

try a day without twitter.  its actually wonderful.  

[B-Man]

 

 

The actual reason for making an insurrection out of a riot,

 

 

 

[B-Man]

 

[Chef Jim]

5 hours ago, Beach said:

try a day without twitter.  its actually wonderful.  

 

I do every day.  Well except for the cavalcade of Twits shared here all day every day. 

13 hours ago, BillStime said:

 

 

And what dangerous orders are we actually talking about here? 

[Westside]

5 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

 

I do every day.  Well except for the cavalcade of Twits shared here all day every day. 

 

And what dangerous orders are we actually talking about here? 

Liberalism is a disease 

[All_Pro_Bills]

1 hour ago, Chef Jim said:

 

I do every day.  Well except for the cavalcade of Twits shared here all day every day. 

 

And what dangerous orders are we actually talking about here? 

Dangerous order was telling the generals to go out and actually win a war this century. 

[B-Man]

They're like Nazis, except for the fact that they were idiot droogs wearing Viking horns rather than the a government-backed armed force?

 

We were on the verge of a coup, except not a single person in the entire military chain of command supported Trump's supposed aspirations?

 

[BillStime]

We should find out, right?

 

 

[B-Man]

 

 

It's not just a semantic quibble.

 

The fact that nobody has been charged with fomenting insurrection doesn't stop them from using the term.

 

That's because it's crucial to keep fear levels elevated to justify the full range of authoritarian measures they're undertaking in its name.

 

 

[Westside]

44 minutes ago, BillStime said:

We should find out, right?

 

 

Let’s just waste more money. At this point, does it even matter?

[BillStime]

26 minutes ago, Bidens_basement said:

Let’s just waste more money. At this point, does it even matter?

Some investments pay dividends.

[Westside]

1 minute ago, BillStime said:

Some investments pay dividends.

You’re beating a dead horse for political purpose with tax payers money.

[Doc]

2 hours ago, B-Man said:

 

 

It's not just a semantic quibble.

 

The fact that nobody has been charged with fomenting insurrection doesn't stop them from using the term.

 

That's because it's crucial to keep fear levels elevated to justify the full range of authoritarian measures they're undertaking in its name.

 

Anything the Repubs do is the worst thing ever.  It's beyond stupid at this point.

[BillStime]

1 hour ago, Bidens_basement said:

You’re beating a dead horse for political purpose with tax payers money.

Not if it prevents Trumps next coup.

And…. don’t ever talk about spending tax dollars after the multi year GQP politically admitted Benghazi investigation.

 

 

[Westside]

6 minutes ago, BillStime said:

Not if it prevents Trumps next coup.

And…. don’t ever talk about spending tax dollars after the multi year GQP politically admitted Benghazi investigation.

 

 

Benghazi was nothing compared to the phony impeachment cost

[B-Man]

 

 

[BillStime]

19 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

 

Disgusting