January 6 committee releases final report, says Trump should be barred from office

[ozimoron]

President Joe Biden lauds 'heroes' of January 6 US Capitol attack on second anniversary of riot

 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-01-07/biden-lauds-heroes-of-jan-6-attacks-on-second-anniversary/101834934

[candide]

39 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

President Joe Biden lauds 'heroes' of January 6 US Capitol attack on second anniversary of riot

 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-01-07/biden-lauds-heroes-of-jan-6-attacks-on-second-anniversary/101834934

I am surprised that Trump hasn't already distributed chocolate medals to those who assaulted the Capitol! ????

Edited January 7, 2023 by candide

[candide]

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

Do you read palms too?

I don't know what your motivation for this particular issue is. It may be genuine curiosity.

 

However, the reason why other posters such as ThailandRyan are raising a different assumption, is that the GOP, and in particular the MAGA component (ex Jim Jordan) have a clear tactic of trying to divert attention from the real issue by focusing on security rather than assault. And also to indirectly give credibility a few fake news, such as the imaginary responsibility of Pelosi for refusing the imaginary offer of 20,000 national guards to defend the Capitol.

 

Knowing your record of supporting GOP and MAGA positions, it is not surprising that they may come up with such an assumption.

[nauseus]

53 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

That doesn't excuse the woman who got shot forcing her way in. Or the hundreds of officers injured trying to keep them out. You focus on one spurious and debatable incident as some kind of proof. And then you ignore their actions once inside.

If you actually look at what I've said then you might see that I have not condoned nor tried to excuse any behaviour that led to death or injury. Just because I've recently been focusing on one aspect of the day, that doesn't mean I'm ignoring all of the others. 

[ozimoron]

2 minutes ago, nauseus said:

If you actually look at what I've said then you might see that I have not condoned nor tried to excuse any behaviour that led to death or injury. Just because I've recently been focusing on one aspect of the day, that doesn't mean I'm ignoring all of the others. 

But somehow you focused on a trivial incident to the exclusion of far more serious incidents. It's a reasonable conclusion that you are deflecting.

[ThailandRyan]

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

I  responded to your links claim already with: Nothing here disproves what I saw. The VDO segments that do open are different scenes. The particular issue I'd like resolved concerns the question of Capitol security arrangements on the day and who was responsible for those. End of.

There is a link I posted which refutes your claim and the video which was from a different angle.

[Bkk Brian]

Just now, ThailandRyan said:

There is a link I posted which refutes your claim and the video which was from a different angle.

He knows that of course but chooses to ignore that particular link.

[placeholder]

21 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

He knows that of course but chooses to ignore that particular link.

What's going on is essentially the same activity that Trump supporters engage in about the 2020 election. They don't say that the election was stolen. They just say that they have questions about it.

Edited January 7, 2023 by placeholder

[nauseus]

4 minutes ago, candide said:

I don't know what your . It may be genuine curiosity.

 

However, the reason why other posters such as ThailandRyan are raising a different assumption, is that the GOP, and in particular the MAGA component (ex Jim Jordan) have a clear tactic of trying to divert attention from the real issue by focusing on security rather than assault. And also to indirectly give credibility a few fake news, such as the imaginary responsibility of Pelosi for refusing the imaginary offer of 20,000 national guards to defend the Capitol.

 

Knowing your record of supporting GOP and MAGA positions, it is not surprising that they may come up with such an assumption.

My motivation for this particular issue is that the presence of even a modestly larger security detail, better prepared, equipped and with significant backup/reinforcements available standing by close at hand would have probably controlled the situation and prevented the breech of the Capitol, along with the death, injury and damage that it caused.                               

 

Is my "record" of supporting GOP and MAGA positions on file somewhere? Oh Jeepers! Here is my position:

 

I am not signed up or allied to the GOP. MAGA is a gimmick but I have no problem with America being great - I see that greatness as a necessary foil to the other "great" contenders in the world right now.

 

I was not a real fan of Trump before 2016 but I was certainly no fan of the alternative then, at all. I think as President, Trump did better job than Biden has done or will do but right after the 2020 election, I think that Trump would have done much better to just concede and prepare to hand over - I've said this on here already but maybe that detail is missing from my "record". 

 

It is not surprising that these "other posters" come up with assumptions. That's what they do all the time!

 

 

[nauseus]

49 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

But somehow you focused on a trivial incident to the exclusion of far more serious incidents. It's a reasonable conclusion that you are deflecting.

Can't you see that's exactly what you are doing now? 

 

Trivial? See my post above where I say this:

My motivation for this particular issue is that the presence of even a modestly larger security detail, better prepared, equipped and with significant backup/reinforcements available standing by close at hand would have probably controlled the situation and prevented the breech of the Capitol, along with the death, injury and damage that it caused.   

Edited January 7, 2023 by nauseus

[nauseus]

48 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

He knows that of course but chooses to ignore that particular link.

I did not ignore it. It was a different scene, as I have said. 

 

  

[stevenl]

10 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Can't you see that's exactly what you are doing now? 

 

Trivial? See my post above where I say this:

My motivation for this particular issue is that the presence of even a modestly larger security detail, better prepared, equipped and with significant backup/reinforcements available standing by close at hand would have probably controlled the situation and prevented the breech of the Capitol, along with the death, injury and damage that it caused.   

A security camera can prevent a burglary, but the burglar is to blame.

[Bkk Brian]

3 minutes ago, nauseus said:

I did not ignore it. It was a different scene, as I have said. 

A lesson to be had when making claims in the news section is to have a link to hand to substantiate them. Its the rules.

 

The first link given by @ThailandRyan described what you said.

 

However as is always the case, people spend time on you providing links only for you to dismiss them.

 

[nauseus]

21 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

A lesson to be had when making claims in the news section is to have a link to hand to substantiate them. Its the rules.

 

The first link given by @ThailandRyan described what you said.

 

However as is always the case, people spend time on you providing links only for you to dismiss them.

 

I did not dismiss it - I said it was a different scene - the scene I watched is no longer available on the internet. That's it.

[nauseus]

27 minutes ago, stevenl said:

A security camera can prevent a burglary, but the burglar is to blame.

Oh no. The return of Confucius. I'm away for my wine. Goodnight boys and girls.

[Bkk Brian]

1 minute ago, nauseus said:

I did not dismiss it - I said it was a different scene - the scene I watched is no longer available on the internet. That's it.

There is no video scene in the first link, its a description of the events. 

 

You bringing up claims with no links to back them up is exactly why people have spent worthless time on you.

[nauseus]

7 hours ago, Bkk Brian said:

There is no video scene in the first link, its a description of the events. 

 

You bringing up claims with no links to back them up is exactly why people have spent worthless time on you.

Well that post has disappeared too now so I can't check.   

 

OK think I found the post - again, there is no vdo or description in there that matches what I saw on the day.

Edited January 7, 2023 by nauseus

[thaibeachlovers]

7 hours ago, nauseus said:

It is not surprising that these "other posters" come up with assumptions. That's what they do all the time!

Agree about that. I sometimes get quoted with a reply that has nothing to do with the quoted words. Also the ones assuming they know what I'm thinking.

[nauseus]

8 hours ago, ozimoron said:

But somehow you focused on a trivial incident to the exclusion of far more serious incidents. It's a reasonable conclusion that you are deflecting.

Two years on but no desire to learn lessons from this. Hopeless. 

[Saanim]

9 hours ago, nauseus said:

Two years on but no desire to learn lessons from this. Hopeless. 

No learned lessons from this? Actually, There haven't been any more incursions into the Congress. So, perhaps the lessons have been learned.  Wondering whether other countries will learned it either?   

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, Saanim said:

No learned lessons from this? Actually, There haven't been any more incursions into the Congress. So, perhaps the lessons have been learned.  Wondering whether other countries will learned it either?   

There haven't been any more presidential elections either.

[ozimoron]

18 hours ago, nauseus said:

My motivation for this particular issue is that the presence of even a modestly larger security detail, better prepared, equipped and with significant backup/reinforcements available standing by close at hand would have probably controlled the situation and prevented the breech of the Capitol, along with the death, injury and damage that it caused.                               

 

Is my "record" of supporting GOP and MAGA positions on file somewhere? Oh Jeepers! Here is my position:

 

I am not signed up or allied to the GOP. MAGA is a gimmick but I have no problem with America being great - I see that greatness as a necessary foil to the other "great" contenders in the world right now.

 

I was not a real fan of Trump before 2016 but I was certainly no fan of the alternative then, at all. I think as President, Trump did better job than Biden has done or will do but right after the 2020 election, I think that Trump would have done much better to just concede and prepare to hand over - I've said this on here already but maybe that detail is missing from my "record". 

 

It is not surprising that these "other posters" come up with assumptions. That's what they do all the time!

 

 

Do you think there's anybody ever been alive (Americans and allies) who don't want to see America great? They take exception with the word "again".

 

Was America ever great and if it was when did it stop being great? Was that just because a liberal was elected president?

[candide]

What a bunch of hypocrites pretending to care about security.

 

Former DC Metropolitan Police Department officer Michael Fanone says it's 'disgraceful' that only one GOP congressman appeared at a Capitol Hill event commemorating January 6

https://news.yahoo.com/former-dc-metropolitan-police-department-170521611.html

 

 

[ozimoron]

4 minutes ago, candide said:

What a bunch of hypocrites pretending to care about security.

 

Former DC Metropolitan Police Department officer Michael Fanone says it's 'disgraceful' that only one GOP congressman appeared at a Capitol Hill event commemorating January 6

https://news.yahoo.com/former-dc-metropolitan-police-department-170521611.html

All traitors. Not a decent bone in their body.

[ozimoron]

14 minutes ago, candide said:

What a bunch of hypocrites pretending to care about security.

 

Former DC Metropolitan Police Department officer Michael Fanone says it's 'disgraceful' that only one GOP congressman appeared at a Capitol Hill event commemorating January 6

https://news.yahoo.com/former-dc-metropolitan-police-department-170521611.html

You can bet that if the GOP win the presidency again then they will pardon every one of the insurrectionists jailed over this and pin the same medals on them all.

[placeholder]

2 hours ago, Saanim said:

No learned lessons from this? Actually, There haven't been any more incursions into the Congress. So, perhaps the lessons have been learned.  Wondering whether other countries will learned it either?   

Actually, it won't be known until the next Presidential elections are held. But I imagine there will be plenty of reinforcements on hand and a President who is willing to use them.

[candide]

2 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Actually, it won't be known until the next Presidential elections are held. But I imagine there will be plenty of reinforcements on hand and a President who is willing to use them.

It is also very likely that Biden will not call a violent mob to march on the Capitol.

[Saanim]

2 hours ago, nauseus said:

There haven't been any more presidential elections either.

Such insurgency or even a parliament storming sometimes happens not only because of a presidential election results. There are many other cases anywhere, however, they are not always classified so serious... 

[placeholder]

2 hours ago, Saanim said:

Such insurgency or even a parliament storming sometimes happens not only because of a presidential election results. There are many other cases anywhere, however, they are not always classified so serious... 

When has the Capitol been stormed and invaded before by insurrectionists? And it wasn't just about trespass, was it. They attempted to put a halt to the Constitutionally sanctioned transfer of power due to a false narrative promoted by a certain loser.

[Jingthing]

7 hours ago, placeholder said:

When has the Capitol been stormed and invaded before by insurrectionists? And it wasn't just about trespass, was it. They attempted to put a halt to the Constitutionally sanctioned transfer of power due to a false narrative promoted by a certain loser.

Never but there were these events which were not insurrectionist and not related to stopping the transfer of power.

 

4 historic attacks at the U.S. Capitol | CBC News

 

Not to forget the British in 1814 which was part of a foreign invasion, not internal. 

The Burning of the Capitol in 1814 | US House of Representatives: History, Art & Archives