Investigating the Jan 6 th Uprising.

Trump's former campaign manager blamed his rhetoric: The impact of Trump's speech at the ellipse was apparent to his former campaign manager Brad Parscale, according to copies of texts he exchanged with rally organizer Katrina Pierson on the evening of Jan. 6.

He described the situation as "a sitting president asking for civil war," adding that "This week I feel guilty for helping him win" in 2016.

Pierson responded that he did what he felt right at the time, to which Parscale replied, "Yeah. But a woman is dead."

"If I was Trump and knew my rhetoric killed someone," he later wrote. Pierson responded that it wasn't the rhetoric.

"Katrina," he texted. "Yes it was."

https://www.npr.org/2022/07/12/1109999639/jan-6-hearing-livestream-how-to-watch-live-updates​

It seems that Trump's former campaign manager doesn't buy the whole "but Trump said 'peaceful' once, so it wasn't incitement!" argument.

 

I honestly don't understand how anyone with a soul can view this any other way.

 

The Latest Variant of DeSantis Syndrome?

 

Yeah the Constitution is Big Deal, yes elections have consequences and it doesn't seem as Big a Deal anymore. How shall we deal with that especially when your party is not in power?

 

Since you don't address any of the points I made, I don't see any value in addressing a new set of points.

 

Kudos. You just saved yourself about 12 migraines.

 

Ron II: "We have taken action to protect the integrity of our elections by making ballot harvesting a felony, strengthening voter ID, eliminating drop boxes, and banning Zuckerbucks."

Facebook won't be able to help Dems steal Florida.

​

While Dems focus on Trump Revenge Porn and J6, voters have a message for them #SHUTUPANDFIXINFLATION!

 

That's easy: many of us have lost complete trust in the government to do anything right, including conducting an election. It should be an easy time to get a mob organized (and it has been).

Was it more important after 9/11 to delve into the minds of the hijackers, or to practically fix what we could to prevent more of it? If the NG showed up in force like during the BLM protests, none of this happens; there's your practical fix.

I believe that the absence of NG was intentional. They knew these groups were planning something, and I believe Democrats decided to let it play out in order to set up Trump. I believe they had government agents in the crowd to encourage a breach.

 

Still giving your side Ariz and Ga?? Don't go holding your breath on those 2...

What are you going to say if Stacey beats Kemp this year? That will be 4 straight statewide elections going Blue....

 

There was obviously more than one cause for the riot. Lack of troops, yes. But following on from your rationale, who organised the mob? Trump. Who sent them to the Capitol? Trump. You could say "He told them to be peaceful". I'll be generous and grant you that without bringing in any other context. The simple fact he waited hours before telling the rioters to leave the Capitol was a further cause for the continuing violence. I've seen people argue here he had no influence to stop them. Well that idiocy was dismantled yesterday by one of the witnesses - as soon as Trump told the rioters to leave they all started talking about it and acquiesced. If Trump had condemned the invasion as soon as it started and told the rioters he didn't want them to be violent on his behalf, Ashli Babbitt would probably be alive today and a lot of police officers would have avoided injury.

Short of evidence, this is meaningless speculation.

 

Lack of troops isn't a "cause" for the riot... it's just a reason it was successful...

 

Maybe so; depends how narrowly you want to consider the semantics. "Contributory factor" is probably more precise.

 

That witness didn't dismantle anything. Now if I could have heard someone besides Raskin ask him questions, and his demeanor and answers seemed truthful, or complete, even under cross examination, then yes, he could have dismantled something. But that's not what you got here.

 

Taken at face value, what he said demolished the claim that Trump had no influence over the protestors. Do you have any reason to think he was lying? And do you have any comment on Trump not telling the protestors to leave until after 4pm?

 

Who did you have in mind?

 

I saw the video of the guy walking into the Capitol. So even if believed, they proved that a nonviolent protester would have went home.

I'm more interested in the motivations of people like John Sullivan, who had been at many BLM protests, and who was at Jan 6 using his experience to encourage people over the barricades and through the doors, smooth talking the police into giving up, and was right behind Ashli when she was shot. Even my amateur eyes spotted him in the footage and questioned his motivations on day 1, right here on this forum. He was obviously acting as a professional provocateur. Yeah, let's hear how Trump's tweets influenced that guy.

 

Not just him. He said that the general mood changed and people left. That you would minimise what he said is telling.

Evidence for the bolded parts?
And still no comment on why Trump didn't ask people to leave earlier?

 

Which ones did I miss? You seem to be not wanting to respond to mine.

 

Good points. Let's revisit after we see the results of the Kemp/Stacy.

 

You ignored the point about how much less significant the Kavanaugh protest was, and my suggestion the security weren't 'managing to keep them out'. You simply stated an equivalence between the 2 protests and then moved onto other protests. If your point is "Why isn't this also being investigated?" then you surely have to address the first point.

 

I just had to leave this here. Personally, I'd be embarrassed to say he is an alpha dog. He whines too much, is paranoid, stupid, hypersensitive, scared of his own shadow and is a bully. None of that is appealing in the least bit. No wonder he has to pay for it.

 

Well how much insurrection is OK? The Kavanaugh insurrection was to shutdown an official proceeding which had to be stopped and members evacuated out of the chambers, one getting trapped in an elevator. Yes I gave you several other and could give you more so stop trying to pretend or swallow the Dem story this is the first time there was ever a protest at the Capitol or one side trying to shut down a proceeding.

 

I wish I could figure out how to go back to posts more than a year ago. I'm trying to sift through them, because I know I posted my concern over this Sullivan guy in week one, maybe day one. The evidence is the footage played over and over in the media. It was clear that Sullivan was the primary instigator of chaos wherever he was, and that he knew what he was doing (although I didn't discover his name until a month or 2 later).

There is no comment on that question because Trump wasn't allowed to have someone ask questions and make statements to maybe explain what he was thinking. I just have to take the Dems narrative at face value. How can I comment on that?

BTW, I believe it was week one that I posted: maybe dereliction of duty, not insurrection. My position has not changed.

 

I did see some footage ages ago from the night before the riot, I think; the guy said something about going into the Capitol(?) and people started chanting "Fed" at him. From that video it seemed unclear to me what the truth of the situation was. I've not been able to find video showing the bolded parts from your previous post. If you want to suggest he was the primary instigator of the chaos, you need some pretty good evidence for that.

You don't need Republicans on the committee to consider why it took Trump hours to ask rioters to leave. It was a big deal on the day - why isn't he condemning this? Personally I think the evidence is far from showing he was involved in planning an insurrection. But dereliction of duty seems to me an unavoidable conclusion.

 

Obviously no amount of insurrection/rioting is OK, but that's a deflection. If you want to know why there's an investigation into 1/6 and not into the Kavanaugh protests, look at the comparative severity of the events.