BillStime Posted August 4, 2023 Share Posted August 4, 2023 3 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: What do you mean? That happens all the time. This also happened in the very same election, and the first in US history, where more votes were counted by mail than in person. Even when the dude they kneel before, the God of Science, Fauci, said himself there was no reason to not have in person voting. Strange how that worked out, isn't it? Wow - more people voted by mail during a global pandemic? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Callahan Posted August 4, 2023 Share Posted August 4, 2023 5 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: What do you mean? That happens all the time. This also happened in the very same election, and the first in US history, where more votes were counted by mail than in person. Even when the dude they kneel before, the God of Science, Fauci, said himself there was no reason to not have in person voting. Strange how that worked out, isn't it? since it worked, there will be a constant push for more mail voting, ballot harvesting going forward. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted August 4, 2023 Share Posted August 4, 2023 17 hours ago, Unforgiven said: My gut tells me the election was rigged, just based on the fact that those four states in sync closed the vote counting down early. Can you provide a source for this? I must have missed this… 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted August 4, 2023 Author Share Posted August 4, 2023 Wait so the media, DOJ, FBI and J6 committee all tried to craft a narrative around J6 that turned out to be mostly exaggerated and fake? No way! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted August 4, 2023 Share Posted August 4, 2023 24 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: Wait so the media, DOJ, FBI and J6 committee all tried to craft a narrative around J6 that turned out to be mostly exaggerated and fake? No way! The Capitol Police were gonna zip tie all of the insurrectionists but decided against it when they all finished taking selfies, got bored, and went home. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted August 4, 2023 Share Posted August 4, 2023 53 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: The Capitol Police were gonna zip tie all of the insurrectionists but decided against it when they all finished taking selfies, got bored, and went home. Or maybe they were for bundling wires/cables so people wouldn't trip over them when the CP were escorting them around the building? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted August 5, 2023 Author Share Posted August 5, 2023 Great question Chief Sund! I wonder why the J6 committee never asked it? So if the Department of Defense, which makes up nine of the eighteen Intelligence Community (IC) agencies, had such damn concerning intelligence regarding violence against lawmakers and my officers on Capitol Hill on January 6, why didn’t they implement a Duty to Warn as required by the Director of National Intelligence’s Intelligence Community Directive 191. J6 COULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted August 5, 2023 Share Posted August 5, 2023 10 hours ago, BillsFanNC said: Great question Chief Sund! I wonder why the J6 committee never asked it? So if the Department of Defense, which makes up nine of the eighteen Intelligence Community (IC) agencies, had such damn concerning intelligence regarding violence against lawmakers and my officers on Capitol Hill on January 6, why didn’t they implement a Duty to Warn as required by the Director of National Intelligence’s Intelligence Community Directive 191. J6 COULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED Sund better watch out. He might get a bullet to the back of the head while jogging at night in a botched robbery attempt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted August 5, 2023 Author Share Posted August 5, 2023 Now that you're listening, let’s go over the facts: Excerpts from my book, Courage Under Fire... p. 280-281: “Later on the fourth, during an interagency conference call, Miller and General Milley both raised their growing concerns about violence. Specifically, they were concerned about the demonstration permits that had been issued at the US Capitol. According to Miller’s testimony, their concern about the permitted groups at the Capitol was so great that both Miller and Milley inquired about the ability to revoke the permits. They must have known that was an overreach, but the mere fact they were discussing the possibility of revoking permits for First Amendment activities on Capitol grounds should give everyone pause. During the call, General Milley also suggested locking down the city to control the violence that he believed to be coming. For the highest-ranking military officer in the country to recommend locking down the nation’s capital in order to control violence, they must have had some pretty damned concerning information!” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All_Pro_Bills Posted August 5, 2023 Share Posted August 5, 2023 (edited) 10 hours ago, BillsFanNC said: Great question Chief Sund! I wonder why the J6 committee never asked it? So if the Department of Defense, which makes up nine of the eighteen Intelligence Community (IC) agencies, had such damn concerning intelligence regarding violence against lawmakers and my officers on Capitol Hill on January 6, why didn’t they implement a Duty to Warn as required by the Director of National Intelligence’s Intelligence Community Directive 191. J6 COULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED This is a topic the J6 committee avoided like the plague. Because they didn't want the answer. They allowed violence to happen in order to create the pretext for instituting a series of actions and hearings to highlight the dangers of MAGA extremists to the nation. Look how much political mileage they've gotten. Hearing, arrests, trials. None of which would have been generated by not allowing it to happen by deploying more security that day. I'd call it the American Reichstag fire. Edited August 5, 2023 by All_Pro_Bills 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted August 5, 2023 Share Posted August 5, 2023 10 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said: They allowed it to happen in order to create the pretext for instituting a series of actions and hearings to highlight the dangers of MAGA extremists to the nation. Look how much political mileage they've gotten. Hearing, arrests, trials. None of which would have been generated by not allowing it to happen by deploying more security that day. I'd call it the American Reichstag fire. One could have argued that no one could have predicted what would happen that day, but Sund lays that theory to waste. So all efforts to stand-down security that day lends credence to the belief that they wanted something to happen, but not necessarily breaking-into the Capitol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted August 5, 2023 Author Share Posted August 5, 2023 I don't think allowed is the right word here. Facilitated or encouraged is better. You've got the guy cutting down the restricted area fencing. Has yet to be captured. You've got the guy on the scaffolding yammering on a megaphone imploring people to move forward and eventually to go inside and fill the Capitol. Has yet to be captured. You've got doors left unlocked, some that can only be unlocked from the inside. No answers as to why. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted August 10, 2023 Author Share Posted August 10, 2023 Another day. More lies exposed. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted August 11, 2023 Author Share Posted August 11, 2023 @John from Riverside Wrong again. Shocker. On January 6, even while we’re under attack, I was restricted by federal law (2 U.S. Code § 1970 Assistance by Executive departments and agencies) from bringing in federal assistance, to include the National Guard, without FIRST obtaining approval from the House and Senate Sergeants at Arms. (Irving was the House SAA. Stenger was the Senate SAA) Courage Under Fire p. 137: “Between 12:58 and when I finally receive approval for the National Guard at 2:09, I have made thirty-two calls to coordinate response support for my officers, including at least eleven calls to the sergeants at arms regarding my request for the National Guard.” 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted August 11, 2023 Share Posted August 11, 2023 10 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: @John from Riverside Wrong again. Shocker. On January 6, even while we’re under attack, I was restricted by federal law (2 U.S. Code § 1970 Assistance by Executive departments and agencies) from bringing in federal assistance, to include the National Guard, without FIRST obtaining approval from the House and Senate Sergeants at Arms. (Irving was the House SAA. Stenger was the Senate SAA) Courage Under Fire p. 137: “Between 12:58 and when I finally receive approval for the National Guard at 2:09, I have made thirty-two calls to coordinate response support for my officers, including at least eleven calls to the sergeants at arms regarding my request for the National Guard.” Whether true or not this is a textbook example of just how constipated our system of overlapping checks and balances can become. The Capitol building is clearly under attack and yet those charged with protecting and responding have to make dozens of phone calls. Unbelievable! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted August 11, 2023 Author Share Posted August 11, 2023 2 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: Whether true or not this is a textbook example of just how constipated our system of overlapping checks and balances can become. The Capitol building is clearly under attack and yet those charged with protecting and responding have to make dozens of phone calls. Unbelievable! Keep in mind this was only the requests denied while the Capitol was under attack on J6. Multiple requests for NG presence, already pre-approved for up to 20k troops by Trump, in the days before J6 were also denied. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted August 11, 2023 Share Posted August 11, 2023 1 minute ago, BillsFanNC said: Keep in mind this was only the requests denied while the Capitol was under attack on J6. Multiple requests for NG presence, already pre-approved for up to 20k troops by Trump, in the days before J6 were also denied. I’m aware. My comment still stands. The real story behind J6 was not the protest that went too far. What ALL Americans should be upset about was the utterly abysmal failure of law enforcement to restore order. But…as usual, nobody is even looking into the failure. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted August 11, 2023 Author Share Posted August 11, 2023 Just now, SoCal Deek said: I’m aware. My comment still stands. The real story behind J6 was not the protest that went too far. What ALL Americans should be upset about was the utterly abysmal failure of law enforcement to restore order. But…as usual, nobody is even looking into the failure. If you watch the interview with Sund and all the firsts, anomalies and non sharing of key intelligence reports that he talks about, I think it's really hard to characterize it as a law enforcement failure, but instead as a complete set up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted August 11, 2023 Share Posted August 11, 2023 1 minute ago, BillsFanNC said: If you watch the interview with Sund and all the firsts, anomalies and non sharing of key intelligence reports that he talks about, I think it's really hard to characterize it as a law enforcement failure, but instead as a complete set up. Whichever it was….THAT is the real story of the day. And again nobody is even looking into it. So it makes you wonder how much danger any of these elected officials really felt they were in. If law enforcement never came when a mob was attacking YOUR office do you think your after the fact response would be “oh well, I’m sure they’ll do better next time”. Probably not. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted August 11, 2023 Author Share Posted August 11, 2023 3 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: Whichever it was….THAT is the real story of the day. And again nobody is even looking into it. So it makes you wonder how much danger any of these elected officials really felt they were in. If law enforcement never came when a mob was attacking YOUR office do you think your after the fact response would be “oh well, I’m sure they’ll do better next time”. Probably not. What do you mean? The J6 committee looked into it, right? We've been told their only goal was getting to the truth... And to @SoCal Deek point.. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts