(05-29-2023, 10:52 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]A significant portion? There were estimates that 120,000 people showed up to DC that day, and they only got a dozen cops? That's not really a significant number.
Aside from that, you guys still won't acknowledge that there were multiple, disingenuous agitators there that day. Ray Epps should be in jail. Period. There is no reason this guy is still unprosecuted unless he's protected. He's on video giving a command to two young men to remove the barriers. We know from multiple trials that the FBI was there undercover. We know there were some known ANTIFA affiliates present. We have, on video, some type of undercover personnel changing out of plain clothes and being welcomed into the building by other police, and they were claiming to be dressed as ANTIFA agents.
You ignore ALL of this. Why is it hard to admit that the government may have played a role in what happened that day?
Bolded:
I'm talking about all of the recorded communications between the 3 different domestic terrorist groups that were on hand and had clear agendas once they were inside the building. Including kidnapping. You're focusing on the wrong (or at least different) thing in regard to that reference I made.
Regarding the red: anything that I've seen that appears even remotely reliable on this front is inconsequential compared to the overwhelming mob of protestors turned insurrectionists and their actions.
The immediate leap to invoke Antifa or some Soros backed plot every time someone(s) on the right are caught up in some hot water is incredibly tiresome. I can't believe how easily folks eat that narrative up. I do not accept that lame explanation. "Those angry conservatives were actually liberal terrorists dressed up as angry conservatives" has got to be getting old by now, no?
It's also really wild how so many on the right have readily turned on the FBI because Trump told you to do so.
Wow.
I truly don't understand the fealty.
And the Bureau was being run by a Trump appointee, was it not??
FBI=Evil was not something I thought folks would eat up with such appetite.
I also don't understand how any of the practical movements made by security that day (when faced with clearly overwhelming numbers that woild not allow them to man their posts with any effectiveness) get labeled as a conspiracy or a "welcoming."
C'mon. You really think 4 capitol cops on security detail standing behind 2 little pieces of bike rack barricade are gonna stop hundreds of people as the ones out front jab at them with flagpoles and swing baseball bats?
Of course there were positions that were conceded. Eventually all of them were - except for the speakers lobby detail where the shooting occurred.
I am for the prosecution of anyone or any organization that actively or purposefully wanted to cause harm or break the law. I have already acknowledged there were some Trump supporters there who got out of control. I am simply saying there is WAY more to that story than conservatives gone wild, which is the narrative that the MSM junkies love to repeat. No matter how you spin it, you cannot claim they made up a significant portion of the 120,000 people who were there that day. They were a very small group. MOST of the people caught up in the January 6th narrative were just angry about the election results.
Again, for a person who gets pissy when I "assume" things about your intentions, you are quick to say things like "You believe x because of Trump," or equate ANTIFA and Soros while dismissing evidence like known ANTIFA members on camera talking via social media. I never mentioned Soros or said ALL agitators were ANTIFA. I said that there is way more going on that day than you will acknowledge. And I'm right about that. There is more to this story than Trump and his supporters. Why were there only "4 capitol cops on security standing behind 2 little pieces of bike rack barricade?"
We know the FBI and CIA did [BLEEP] up stuff in the 50's, 60's, and 70's. These are indisputable facts thanks to records that have been unsealed. You expect me to believe that without any rule changes or further oversight, that just went away? Ok, lol. I would love to wait for the new abuses to be unsealed, but by the time I can tell you I was right, it won't matter and neither of us will care.
(05-29-2023, 04:22 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]I am for the prosecution of anyone or any organization that actively or purposefully wanted to cause harm or break the law. I have already acknowledged there were some Trump supporters there who got out of control. I am simply saying there is WAY more to that story than conservatives gone wild, which is the narrative that the MSM junkies love to repeat. No matter how you spin it, you cannot claim they made up a significant portion of the 120,000 people who were there that day. They were a very small group. MOST of the people caught up in the January 6th narrative were just angry about the election results.
My "significant number" comment was specifically referring to the number of "would be bad actors" identified when their communications that day through 4chan and other methods were transcribed, intercepted, or made public of their own volition. It is estimated that just over 2000 protestors entered the actual bldg that day. As many as 600 of them were affiliated with a militia group like Oath Keepers, Proud Boys, 3 percenters, Groypers and I believe there were at least two others I'm not recalling the names of. Of those several groups, at least 3 of them documented with clear intent to take a hostage, kidnap a lawmaker, or somehow disrupt the election's validation. These are the folks I'm referencing.
Again, for a person who gets pissy when I "assume" things about your intentions, you are quick to say things like "You believe x because of Trump," or equate ANTIFA and Soros while dismissing evidence like known ANTIFA members on camera talking via social media. I never mentioned Soros or said ALL agitators were ANTIFA. I said that there is way more going on that day than you will acknowledge. And I'm right about that. There is more to this story than Trump and his supporters. Why were there only "4 capitol cops on security standing behind 2 little pieces of bike rack barricade?" Sorry, YOU may not have responded to Trump and I don't doubt that. He did, in fact, go on quite the diatribe railing against the FBI and has continued to do so. It was indeed a departure from the mainstream messaging we saw from him and other Republicans at that time. Many conservatives adopted this freshly minted edition of distrust of "the Feds." Maybe not you personally, but... it happened.
We know the FBI and CIA did [BLEEP] up stuff in the 50's, 60's, and 70's. These are indisputable facts thanks to records that have been unsealed. You expect me to believe that without any rule changes or further oversight, that just went away? Ok, lol. I would love to wait for the new abuses to be unsealed, but by the time I can tell you I was right, it won't matter and neither of us will care.
Not trying to paint the FBI as angelic by any stretch, but they weren't being demonized widely by the right until they were accused by Trump and his supporters of a number of different things. None of which we have any actual proof of happening of course.
Adding some clarification from my end in green above.
Added note on the FBI bit -
No, it wouldn't shock me if the FBI or another agency were somehow employed in efforts to aid or hinder certain efforts by various politicians or political movements, but I don't really see how or why the FBI would have been doing most of the things they've been accused of by Trump, especially when they were being run by his appointee. Seems like they were just a convenient scapegoat for a narrative that's likely false to begin with, to me.
(05-29-2023, 05:30 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ] (05-29-2023, 04:22 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]I am for the prosecution of anyone or any organization that actively or purposefully wanted to cause harm or break the law. I have already acknowledged there were some Trump supporters there who got out of control. I am simply saying there is WAY more to that story than conservatives gone wild, which is the narrative that the MSM junkies love to repeat. No matter how you spin it, you cannot claim they made up a significant portion of the 120,000 people who were there that day. They were a very small group. MOST of the people caught up in the January 6th narrative were just angry about the election results.
My "significant number" comment was specifically referring to the number of "would be bad actors" identified when their communications that day through 4chan and other methods were transcribed, intercepted, or made public of their own volition. It is estimated that just over 2000 protestors entered the actual bldg that day. As many as 600 of them were affiliated with a militia group like Oath Keepers, Proud Boys, 3 percenters, Groypers and I believe there were at least two others I'm not recalling the names of. Of those several groups, at least 3 of them documented with clear intent to take a hostage, kidnap a lawmaker, or somehow disrupt the election's validation. These are the folks I'm referencing.
Again, for a person who gets pissy when I "assume" things about your intentions, you are quick to say things like "You believe x because of Trump," or equate ANTIFA and Soros while dismissing evidence like known ANTIFA members on camera talking via social media. I never mentioned Soros or said ALL agitators were ANTIFA. I said that there is way more going on that day than you will acknowledge. And I'm right about that. There is more to this story than Trump and his supporters. Why were there only "4 capitol cops on security standing behind 2 little pieces of bike rack barricade?" Sorry, YOU may not have responded to Trump and I don't doubt that. He did, in fact, go on quite the diatribe railing against the FBI and has continued to do so. It was indeed a departure from the mainstream messaging we saw from him and other Republicans at that time. Many conservatives adopted this freshly minted edition of distrust of "the Feds." Maybe not you personally, but... it happened.
We know the FBI and CIA did [BLEEP] up stuff in the 50's, 60's, and 70's. These are indisputable facts thanks to records that have been unsealed. You expect me to believe that without any rule changes or further oversight, that just went away? Ok, lol. I would love to wait for the new abuses to be unsealed, but by the time I can tell you I was right, it won't matter and neither of us will care.
Not trying to paint the FBI as angelic by any stretch, but they weren't being demonized widely by the right until they were accused by Trump and his supporters of a number of different things. None of which we have any actual proof of happening of course.
Adding some clarification from my end in green above.
Added note on the FBI bit -
No, it wouldn't shock me if the FBI or another agency were somehow employed in efforts to aid or hinder certain efforts by various politicians or political movements, but I don't really see how or why the FBI would have been doing most of the things they've been accused of by Trump, especially when they were being run by his appointee. Seems like they were just a convenient scapegoat for a narrative that's likely false to begin with, to me.
It is interesting that you take that stance on the FBI when we now know that they were integral in spreading the completely false narrative of Russian Collusion. Whether you support Trump or not this should enrage every American. It is very clear that we cannot trust anything coming out of DC or any of the alphabet soup departments that reside there.
(05-29-2023, 05:59 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ] (05-29-2023, 05:30 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]Adding some clarification from my end in green above.
Added note on the FBI bit -
No, it wouldn't shock me if the FBI or another agency were somehow employed in efforts to aid or hinder certain efforts by various politicians or political movements, but I don't really see how or why the FBI would have been doing most of the things they've been accused of by Trump, especially when they were being run by his appointee. Seems like they were just a convenient scapegoat for a narrative that's likely false to begin with, to me.
It is interesting that you take that stance on the FBI when we now know that they were integral in spreading the completely false narrative of Russian Collusion. Whether you support Trump or not this should enrage every American. It is very clear that we cannot trust anything coming out of DC or any of the alphabet soup departments that reside there.
They also kept the Hillary's emails story in the news longer than it would have been otherwise.
They are either (a) honest but confused men doing their best at a hard job, or (b) hopelessly corrupt men that play both sides due either (b1) a lack of unity at every level or (b2) some bizarre elite scheme that transcends party and even national labels.
(a) is the most likely answer per Hanlon's razor.
Even if we eliminate (a) because it's naive or offensive or whatever other reason motivated minds may dream up, (b1) is still more likely than (b2). (b1) requires very little coordination at the top and (b2) requires complete, total, leak-free coordination between multiple governments and corporations. If you've ever watched survivor or the real world or just lived at least 2 decades of life as a human, specifically an American human, you know (b2) is impossible. People don't coordinate like that. They sell their brothers out for a fresh pot of stew. Yet that's the one Trump wants you to believe.
This is because Trump is more a religious figure than a political one. He didn't engage our rational minds. He engaged our religious minds. I've said this to you in plain language many times but your ears are still stopped up because I'm using simple logic and reason. You weren't reasoned into supporting and defending Trump and you won't be reasoned out of it. Not until it actually hurts you. Even then you might find a way to blame someone else.
(05-29-2023, 06:54 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (05-29-2023, 05:59 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]It is interesting that you take that stance on the FBI when we now know that they were integral in spreading the completely false narrative of Russian Collusion. Whether you support Trump or not this should enrage every American. It is very clear that we cannot trust anything coming out of DC or any of the alphabet soup departments that reside there.
They also kept the Hillary's emails story in the news longer than it would have been otherwise.
They are either (a) honest but confused men doing their best at a hard job, or (b) hopelessly corrupt men that play both sides due either (b1) a lack of unity at every level or (b2) some bizarre elite scheme that transcends party and even national labels.
(a) is the most likely answer per Hanlon's razor.
Even if we eliminate (a) because it's naive or offensive or whatever other reason motivated minds may dream up, (b1) is still more likely than (b2). (b1) requires very little coordination at the top and (b2) requires complete, total, leak-free coordination between multiple governments and corporations. If you've ever watched survivor or the real world or just lived at least 2 decades of life as a human, specifically an American human, you know (b2) is impossible. People don't coordinate like that. They sell their brothers out for a fresh pot of stew. Yet that's the one Trump wants you to believe.
This is because Trump is more a religious figure than a political one. He didn't engage our rational minds. He engaged our religious minds. I've said this to you in plain language many times but your ears are still stopped up because I'm using simple logic and reason. You weren't reasoned into supporting and defending Trump and you won't be reasoned out of it. Not until it actually hurts you. Even then you might find a way to blame someone else.
You are still making this about Trump. You need to evict him from your head.
(05-29-2023, 05:30 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ] (05-29-2023, 04:22 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]I am for the prosecution of anyone or any organization that actively or purposefully wanted to cause harm or break the law. I have already acknowledged there were some Trump supporters there who got out of control. I am simply saying there is WAY more to that story than conservatives gone wild, which is the narrative that the MSM junkies love to repeat. No matter how you spin it, you cannot claim they made up a significant portion of the 120,000 people who were there that day. They were a very small group. MOST of the people caught up in the January 6th narrative were just angry about the election results.
My "significant number" comment was specifically referring to the number of "would be bad actors" identified when their communications that day through 4chan and other methods were transcribed, intercepted, or made public of their own volition. It is estimated that just over 2000 protestors entered the actual bldg that day. As many as 600 of them were affiliated with a militia group like Oath Keepers, Proud Boys, 3 percenters, Groypers and I believe there were at least two others I'm not recalling the names of. Of those several groups, at least 3 of them documented with clear intent to take a hostage, kidnap a lawmaker, or somehow disrupt the election's validation. These are the folks I'm referencing.
Again, for a person who gets pissy when I "assume" things about your intentions, you are quick to say things like "You believe x because of Trump," or equate ANTIFA and Soros while dismissing evidence like known ANTIFA members on camera talking via social media. I never mentioned Soros or said ALL agitators were ANTIFA. I said that there is way more going on that day than you will acknowledge. And I'm right about that. There is more to this story than Trump and his supporters. Why were there only "4 capitol cops on security standing behind 2 little pieces of bike rack barricade?" Sorry, YOU may not have responded to Trump and I don't doubt that. He did, in fact, go on quite the diatribe railing against the FBI and has continued to do so. It was indeed a departure from the mainstream messaging we saw from him and other Republicans at that time. Many conservatives adopted this freshly minted edition of distrust of "the Feds." Maybe not you personally, but... it happened.
We know the FBI and CIA did [BLEEP] up stuff in the 50's, 60's, and 70's. These are indisputable facts thanks to records that have been unsealed. You expect me to believe that without any rule changes or further oversight, that just went away? Ok, lol. I would love to wait for the new abuses to be unsealed, but by the time I can tell you I was right, it won't matter and neither of us will care.
Not trying to paint the FBI as angelic by any stretch, but they weren't being demonized widely by the right until they were accused by Trump and his supporters of a number of different things. None of which we have any actual proof of happening of course.
Adding some clarification from my end in green above.
Added note on the FBI bit -
No, it wouldn't shock me if the FBI or another agency were somehow employed in efforts to aid or hinder certain efforts by various politicians or political movements, but I don't really see how or why the FBI would have been doing most of the things they've been accused of by Trump, especially when they were being run by his appointee. Seems like they were just a convenient scapegoat for a narrative that's likely false to begin with, to me.
This is fine. I tend to speak in absolutes, so I can appreciate that clarification. I have no problem prosecuting those who committed criminal acts (not counting entering the Capitol building as a criminal act) or clearly intended to commit criminal acts.
As to the FBI, I have long been beating the drum that they are abusing their power. If my memory serves me correctly, I said on this board that I thought the AutoZone vandalism in response to George Floyd was also committed by a three-letter agency. I just think they have gotten far too comfortable targeting US citizens. This all started spiraling out of control because of the "War on Terror." They entrapped a Muslim dude. Then guys with the Whitmer "kidnapping." I'm pretty sure they stoked the flames for BLM, and I think they did it again on January 6th. Three of those 4 can be verified via courtroom hearings, with the only exception being BLM, and I only mention it to show that I don't just consider it to be a "right" issue.
I do agree that it wasn't popularized on the right until Trump, but people tend to ignore injustice until it happens to them. The right has long accepted the idea that the media is heavily slanted left, but they are starting to feel the scales of justice tipping against them. Honestly, it makes me laugh (dark humor) how much the disenfranchised right has with the disenfranchised blacks in this country. I feel like all of the poor in this country is basically that SNL Black Jeopardy sketch with Tom Hanks and they just can't see it yet.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7VaXlMvAvk
(05-29-2023, 08:12 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ] (05-29-2023, 06:54 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]They also kept the Hillary's emails story in the news longer than it would have been otherwise.
They are either (a) honest but confused men doing their best at a hard job, or (b) hopelessly corrupt men that play both sides due either (b1) a lack of unity at every level or (b2) some bizarre elite scheme that transcends party and even national labels.
(a) is the most likely answer per Hanlon's razor.
Even if we eliminate (a) because it's naive or offensive or whatever other reason motivated minds may dream up, (b1) is still more likely than (b2). (b1) requires very little coordination at the top and (b2) requires complete, total, leak-free coordination between multiple governments and corporations. If you've ever watched survivor or the real world or just lived at least 2 decades of life as a human, specifically an American human, you know (b2) is impossible. People don't coordinate like that. They sell their brothers out for a fresh pot of stew. Yet that's the one Trump wants you to believe.
This is because Trump is more a religious figure than a political one. He didn't engage our rational minds. He engaged our religious minds. I've said this to you in plain language many times but your ears are still stopped up because I'm using simple logic and reason. You weren't reasoned into supporting and defending Trump and you won't be reasoned out of it. Not until it actually hurts you. Even then you might find a way to blame someone else.
You are still making this about Trump. You need to evict him from your head.
You spoke his name first. Don't be like L2L, man. Don't blame me for your problems.
(05-29-2023, 10:28 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (05-29-2023, 08:12 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]You are still making this about Trump. You need to evict him from your head.
You spoke his name first. Don't be like L2L, man. Don't blame me for your problems.
You prove my point. I mentioned him as a comparison and you spiral out of control. For being the smartest man on the interwebs the fact that you can’t see this is astounding.
(05-29-2023, 05:30 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ] (05-29-2023, 04:22 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]I am for the prosecution of anyone or any organization that actively or purposefully wanted to cause harm or break the law. I have already acknowledged there were some Trump supporters there who got out of control. I am simply saying there is WAY more to that story than conservatives gone wild, which is the narrative that the MSM junkies love to repeat. No matter how you spin it, you cannot claim they made up a significant portion of the 120,000 people who were there that day. They were a very small group. MOST of the people caught up in the January 6th narrative were just angry about the election results.
My "significant number" comment was specifically referring to the number of "would be bad actors" identified when their communications that day through 4chan and other methods were transcribed, intercepted, or made public of their own volition. It is estimated that just over 2000 protestors entered the actual bldg that day. As many as 600 of them were affiliated with a militia group like Oath Keepers, Proud Boys, 3 percenters, Groypers and I believe there were at least two others I'm not recalling the names of. Of those several groups, at least 3 of them documented with clear intent to take a hostage, kidnap a lawmaker, or somehow disrupt the election's validation. These are the folks I'm referencing.
Again, for a person who gets pissy when I "assume" things about your intentions, you are quick to say things like "You believe x because of Trump," or equate ANTIFA and Soros while dismissing evidence like known ANTIFA members on camera talking via social media. I never mentioned Soros or said ALL agitators were ANTIFA. I said that there is way more going on that day than you will acknowledge. And I'm right about that. There is more to this story than Trump and his supporters. Why were there only "4 capitol cops on security standing behind 2 little pieces of bike rack barricade?" Sorry, YOU may not have responded to Trump and I don't doubt that. He did, in fact, go on quite the diatribe railing against the FBI and has continued to do so. It was indeed a departure from the mainstream messaging we saw from him and other Republicans at that time. Many conservatives adopted this freshly minted edition of distrust of "the Feds." Maybe not you personally, but... it happened.
We know the FBI and CIA did [BLEEP] up stuff in the 50's, 60's, and 70's. These are indisputable facts thanks to records that have been unsealed. You expect me to believe that without any rule changes or further oversight, that just went away? Ok, lol. I would love to wait for the new abuses to be unsealed, but by the time I can tell you I was right, it won't matter and neither of us will care.
Not trying to paint the FBI as angelic by any stretch, but they weren't being demonized widely by the right until they were accused by Trump and his supporters of a number of different things. None of which we have any actual proof of happening of course.
Adding some clarification from my end in green above.
Added note on the FBI bit -
No, it wouldn't shock me if the FBI or another agency were somehow employed in efforts to aid or hinder certain efforts by various politicians or political movements, but I don't really see how or why the FBI would have been doing most of the things they've been accused of by Trump, especially when they were being run by his appointee. Seems like they were just a convenient scapegoat for a narrative that's likely false to begin with, to me.
You need read about how people are nominated and who controls it. If you think Trump was free to select anyone he wanted, you are mistaken. It goes back to them basically creating the 4th branch and controlling who can take leadership regardless of who the president is.
How do you get rid of the swamp if the swamp has to approve your pick before it even gets to congress?
On the trial stuff, there were lots of feds in the group. The evidence was some talking but no actual actions. The feds once again entrap them and the feds won't even reveal who/how many there were. There is video of them talking about doing the complete opposite of what you are saying. Did the fed members talk back and forth and bring the ideas up?
The entire thing is circus and we aren't being allowed to see the truth of it.
Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk
(05-30-2023, 01:15 AM)p_rushing Wrote: [ -> ] (05-29-2023, 05:30 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]Adding some clarification from my end in green above.
Added note on the FBI bit -
No, it wouldn't shock me if the FBI or another agency were somehow employed in efforts to aid or hinder certain efforts by various politicians or political movements, but I don't really see how or why the FBI would have been doing most of the things they've been accused of by Trump, especially when they were being run by his appointee. Seems like they were just a convenient scapegoat for a narrative that's likely false to begin with, to me.
You need read about how people are nominated and who controls it. If you think Trump was free to select anyone he wanted, you are mistaken. It goes back to them basically creating the 4th branch and controlling who can take leadership regardless of who the president is.
How do you get rid of the swamp if the swamp has to approve your pick before it even gets to congress?
On the trial stuff, there were lots of feds in the group. The evidence was some talking but no actual actions. The feds once again entrap them and the feds won't even reveal who/how many there were. There is video of them talking about doing the complete opposite of what you are saying. Did the fed members talk back and forth and bring the ideas up?
The entire thing is circus and we aren't being allowed to see the truth of it.
Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk
What? You can't just say something like that ad try to assign us homework. What was preventing him from selecting someone he wanted or firing Wray anytime he wanted?
(05-30-2023, 12:29 AM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ] (05-29-2023, 10:28 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]You spoke his name first. Don't be like L2L, man. Don't blame me for your problems.
You prove my point. I mentioned him as a comparison and you spiral out of control. For being the smartest man on the interwebs the fact that you can’t see this is astounding.
My post wasn't about Trump any more than yours was. My post was also about the FBI mainly.
Then I pivoted to point out that your ears are stopped up, preventing you from taking in any negative information about Trump, and you say I'm spiraling out of control. This proves my point. Instead of trying to attack my logic, you just attack me for presenting it to you.
(05-30-2023, 04:04 AM)jj82284 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-30-2023, 01:15 AM)p_rushing Wrote: [ -> ]You need read about how people are nominated and who controls it. If you think Trump was free to select anyone he wanted, you are mistaken. It goes back to them basically creating the 4th branch and controlling who can take leadership regardless of who the president is.
How do you get rid of the swamp if the swamp has to approve your pick before it even gets to congress?
On the trial stuff, there were lots of feds in the group. The evidence was some talking but no actual actions. The feds once again entrap them and the feds won't even reveal who/how many there were. There is video of them talking about doing the complete opposite of what you are saying. Did the fed members talk back and forth and bring the ideas up?
The entire thing is circus and we aren't being allowed to see the truth of it.
Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk
What? You can't just say something like that ad try to assign us homework. What was preventing him from selecting someone he wanted or firing Wray anytime he wanted?
Youre right. A quick Google search tells me that the Senate rejected 3 of Trump's proposed appointments during his 4 years in office. Trump wasn't afraid of nominating men he wasn't "supposed to" nominate. Therefore, Trump is either innocent and stupid for appointing a swamp creature that hates him as FBI leader, or Wray is a competent and unbiased man who can not avoid prosecuting criminals like the January 6th participants. Neither interpretation reflects well on 45. Pick one.
(05-29-2023, 09:07 AM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ] (05-28-2023, 10:50 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]The hell they did, they were welcomed and the whole [BLEEP] government shut down for them. Because the left is the favored class and when the right does the same things they have to be jailed or killed for it. Because the left is in power and will do anything or kill anyone to keep it.
The dozens of cops who were maced, trampled, and bludgeoned were "welcoming" them?
Or do you have some alternative facts on that stuff as well?
How do you just spin away from stark reality so casually?
A significant percentage of trump's little rabble had very bad intentions that day and it is very well documented.
The rest of these grown adults along for the ride should have damn well known better.
THEY MADE THEIR BEDS
Let em lie in them.
I'm speaking of the numerous instances where lefties entered federal (and state) government buildings and shut them down with sit-ins and the like and we barely heard a blip about it. The Kavanaugh Mostly Peaceful Insurrection was one recently as was the Pro Baby Killing one where AOC mugged for the cameras. They lay in those nice, soft, comfy beds the law made for them instead of getting the wood shampoos the right side protesters get in the same circumstances. Of course there weren't any Fed instigators or ANTIFA thugs in disguise in their groups to make trouble like in the J6 crowd. Only the right wing gets the benefit of government agents starting riots on their behalf.
(05-30-2023, 10:22 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (05-29-2023, 09:07 AM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]The dozens of cops who were maced, trampled, and bludgeoned were "welcoming" them?
Or do you have some alternative facts on that stuff as well?
How do you just spin away from stark reality so casually?
A significant percentage of trump's little rabble had very bad intentions that day and it is very well documented.
The rest of these grown adults along for the ride should have damn well known better.
THEY MADE THEIR BEDS
Let em lie in them.
I'm speaking of the numerous instances where lefties entered federal (and state) government buildings and shut them down with sit-ins and the like and we barely heard a blip about it. The Kavanaugh Mostly Peaceful Insurrection was one recently as was the Pro Baby Killing one where AOC mugged for the cameras. They lay in those nice, soft, comfy beds the law made for them instead of getting the wood shampoos the right side protesters get in the same circumstances. Of course there weren't any Fed instigators or ANTIFA thugs in disguise in their groups to make trouble like in the J6 crowd. Only the right wing gets the benefit of government agents starting riots on their behalf.
You might have a point depending on how specific you want to get. Just saying "numerous instances" is hand waving.
In any of the incidents you want us to consider, did the protestors/insurrectionists bypass metal detectors while entering a secured area? If they did, we should presume some of them were armed and dangerous. If they did not, they were not.
Did all of these protestors/insurrectionists escape justice, or were some of them arrested later the way the J6 insurrectionists were?
Were any government workers or officials prevented from doing their jobs due to the protest? For how long? How important to the continuation of the Constitution was their job at that time?
Also, I'm not sure why you are only talking about the left. The protestors/insurrectionists who shut down Lansing for a few days in 2020 were right wingers, and the media and authorities also treated them with kid gloves.
(05-29-2023, 08:31 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ] (05-29-2023, 05:30 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]Adding some clarification from my end in green above.
Added note on the FBI bit -
No, it wouldn't shock me if the FBI or another agency were somehow employed in efforts to aid or hinder certain efforts by various politicians or political movements, but I don't really see how or why the FBI would have been doing most of the things they've been accused of by Trump, especially when they were being run by his appointee. Seems like they were just a convenient scapegoat for a narrative that's likely false to begin with, to me.
This is fine. I tend to speak in absolutes, so I can appreciate that clarification. I have no problem prosecuting those who committed criminal acts (not counting entering the Capitol building as a criminal act) or clearly intended to commit criminal acts.
As to the FBI, I have long been beating the drum that they are abusing their power. If my memory serves me correctly, I said on this board that I thought the AutoZone vandalism in response to George Floyd was also committed by a three-letter agency. I just think they have gotten far too comfortable targeting US citizens. This all started spiraling out of control because of the "War on Terror." They entrapped a Muslim dude. Then guys with the Whitmer "kidnapping." I'm pretty sure they stoked the flames for BLM, and I think they did it again on January 6th. Three of those 4 can be verified via courtroom hearings, with the only exception being BLM, and I only mention it to show that I don't just consider it to be a "right" issue.
I do agree that it wasn't popularized on the right until Trump, but people tend to ignore injustice until it happens to them. The right has long accepted the idea that the media is heavily slanted left, but they are starting to feel the scales of justice tipping against them. Honestly, it makes me laugh (dark humor) how much the disenfranchised right has with the disenfranchised blacks in this country. I feel like all of the poor in this country is basically that SNL Black Jeopardy sketch with Tom Hanks and they just can't see it yet.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7VaXlMvAvk
Yeah I like that SNL skit. Even though I don't go in for conspiracy theories like the three characters in the skit, it's obvious that the less wealthy half of America has a massive amount in common. And they know it. Until you mention racial issues and feelings get hurt. On both sides. I think Democrats need this dynamic. I think a more shrewd Republican would work to end it. Trump and Bush recognized it should be done, but were not able to do it. DeSantis is deliberately pushing the other way. Sad!
(05-30-2023, 11:42 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (05-30-2023, 10:22 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]I'm speaking of the numerous instances where lefties entered federal (and state) government buildings and shut them down with sit-ins and the like and we barely heard a blip about it. The Kavanaugh Mostly Peaceful Insurrection was one recently as was the Pro Baby Killing one where AOC mugged for the cameras. They lay in those nice, soft, comfy beds the law made for them instead of getting the wood shampoos the right side protesters get in the same circumstances. Of course there weren't any Fed instigators or ANTIFA thugs in disguise in their groups to make trouble like in the J6 crowd. Only the right wing gets the benefit of government agents starting riots on their behalf.
You might have a point depending on how specific you want to get. Just saying "numerous instances" is hand waving.
In any of the incidents you want us to consider, did the protestors/insurrectionists bypass metal detectors while entering a secured area? If they did, we should presume some of them were armed and dangerous. If they did not, they were not.
Did all of these protestors/insurrectionists escape justice, or were some of them arrested later the way the J6 insurrectionists were?
Were any government workers or officials prevented from doing their jobs due to the protest? For how long? How important to the continuation of the Constitution was their job at that time?
Also, I'm not sure why you are only talking about the left. The protestors/insurrectionists who shut down Lansing for a few days in 2020 were right wingers, and the media and authorities also treated them with kid gloves.
Were there 86 on-site officers and 65 metro cops injured while "welcoming" these "lefties" to their sit ins, or nah?
Did their sit ins halt the validation of a presidential election?
Are we comparing apples to ball bearings?
(05-30-2023, 04:04 AM)jj82284 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-30-2023, 01:15 AM)p_rushing Wrote: [ -> ]You need read about how people are nominated and who controls it. If you think Trump was free to select anyone he wanted, you are mistaken. It goes back to them basically creating the 4th branch and controlling who can take leadership regardless of who the president is.
How do you get rid of the swamp if the swamp has to approve your pick before it even gets to congress?
On the trial stuff, there were lots of feds in the group. The evidence was some talking but no actual actions. The feds once again entrap them and the feds won't even reveal who/how many there were. There is video of them talking about doing the complete opposite of what you are saying. Did the fed members talk back and forth and bring the ideas up?
The entire thing is circus and we aren't being allowed to see the truth of it.
Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk
What? You can't just say something like that ad try to assign us homework. What was preventing him from selecting someone he wanted or firing Wray anytime he wanted?
The intelligence community starting under Obama set themselves up to basically be the 4th branch of government that has no oversight from the other branches. Congress technically controls their budget but they also can fund themselves now.
In additon to the funding, there are certain people that have to sign-off on the nomination before it even goes to congress for a vote. I don't remember what the power structure is but unless the intelligence leadership signs off on the person, they won't get a confirmation vote.
I read a detailed article on it but don't remember where. You can find the info somewhere on one of the conservative news sites. It wasn't barried on an independent journalist substack.
Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk
(05-30-2023, 06:49 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (05-30-2023, 12:29 AM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]You prove my point. I mentioned him as a comparison and you spiral out of control. For being the smartest man on the interwebs the fact that you can’t see this is astounding.
My post want about Trump any more than yours was. My post was also about the FBI mainly.
Then I pivoted to point out that your ears are stopped up, preventing you from taking in any negative information about Trump, and you say I'm spiraling out of control. This proves my point. Instead of trying to attack my logic, you just attack me for presenting it to you.
You make me laugh, what logic? The topic at hand is our alphabet agencies are out of control. I offered an example and invoked a certain former presidents name and you got side tracked over that trigger name. Let me try a different example, did Obama weaponize the IRS to go after certain conservative groups while he occupied the White House? Did the FBI have sufficient evidence to have Hillary Clinton prosecuted over the aforementioned email scandal?