5 minutes ago, nauseus said:

An investigation with so much left out. How can this committee expect broad acceptance if its 'findings'?  

How would you know what's left out give your evident unfamiliarity with it?

1 minute ago, nauseus said:

Do you tango?

Your starting to limbo now.  Your a smart man, you understand what was written and how it pertains to your hero leading the insurrection by being a snake oil con man and getting all to do his dirty work as he egged them on.  Sort of like how you like to bait others into trying to make your point for you....

13 minutes ago, nauseus said:

An investigation with so much left out. How can this committee expect broad acceptance if its 'findings'?  

There were so many involved in the crimes and so much evidence collected it was not possible to explore every possible criminal act committed, so the committee focused on the most important crimes.

 

Although I suspect you wanted there to be more investigating of ways to blame the victims.

1 minute ago, heybruce said:

There were so many involved in the crimes and so much evidence collected it was not possible to explore every possible criminal act committed, so the committee focused on the most important crimes.

 

Although I suspect you wanted there to be more investigating of ways to blame the victims.

If there had been a full investigation instead of this farce, then that might have been useful, but this kangaroo committee was just after Trump. There has been no real investigation to reveal how, initially, relatively few rioters managed access the Capitol, especially after so many previous warning signs over the days prior to J6. They need to be able to stop this happening again but right now they can't really guarantee that. 

 

2 minutes ago, nauseus said:

If there had been a full investigation instead of this farce, then that might have been useful, but this kangaroo committee was just after Trump. There has been no real investigation to reveal how, initially, relatively few rioters managed access the Capitol, especially after so many previous warning signs over the days prior to J6. They need to be able to stop this happening again but right now they can't really guarantee that. 

 

No, they were after whoever instigated the insurrection. That just happens to be Trump.

 

To your point, I posted a link showing that the threat was dismissed by those who should have taken it seriously.

Edited January 3, 20233 yr by ozimoron

7 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

No, they were after whoever instigated the insurrection. That just happens to be Trump.

 

To your point, I posted a link showing that the threat was dismissed by those who should have taken it seriously.

This is the J6 official report title:

 

Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol

 

After so long, I was expecting to see detail on all relevant aspects, including security.

 

That is all. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1 minute ago, nauseus said:

This is the J6 official report title:

 

Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol

 

After so long, I was expecting to see detail on all relevant aspects, including security.

 

That is all.

I too would have been happy to see the National Guard out in force armed with machine guns. That would have taken someone to order them there who had the authority to do so. Nancy didn't. POTUS did.

32 minutes ago, nauseus said:

If there had been a full investigation instead of this farce, then that might have been useful, but this kangaroo committee was just after Trump. There has been no real investigation to reveal how, initially, relatively few rioters managed access the Capitol, especially after so many previous warning signs over the days prior to J6. They need to be able to stop this happening again but right now they can't really guarantee that. 

 

Oh yes the kangaroo committee that was after trump.....would that be the same committee that called witness after witness who were lifetime republicans who under oath told what they saw and heard regarding the Jan 6 coup attempt?   That kangaroo long ago left the barn.

45 minutes ago, nauseus said:

If there had been a full investigation instead of this farce, then that might have been useful, but this kangaroo committee was just after Trump. There has been no real investigation to reveal how, initially, relatively few rioters managed access the Capitol, especially after so many previous warning signs over the days prior to J6. They need to be able to stop this happening again but right now they can't really guarantee that. 

 

"relatively few rioters managed access the Capitol"

 

Could you clarify this?  Is over a thousand "relatively few"?

 

"Federal officials estimate that about ten thousand rioters entered the Capitol grounds,^[266] and the Secret Service and FBI have estimated that about 1,200 breached the building."  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/January_6_United_States_Capitol_attack

48 minutes ago, heybruce said:

"relatively few rioters managed access the Capitol"

 

Could you clarify this?  Is over a thousand "relatively few"?

 

"Federal officials estimate that about ten thousand rioters entered the Capitol grounds,^[266] and the Secret Service and FBI have estimated that about 1,200 breached the building."  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/January_6_United_States_Capitol_attack

Now you introduce facts in the discussion! That's not fair! ????

On 12/24/2022 at 7:08 AM, RichardColeman said:

A report led by the democrats says a republican candidate should be barred from running - go figure !

A report that included witness after witness of lifelong republicans who testified under oath to what they saw and heard regarding the Jan 6 coup attempt.  Go figure that.

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

This is the J6 official report title:

 

Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol

 

After so long, I was expecting to see detail on all relevant aspects, including security.

 

That is all. 

Hinting at conspiracies much? I am shocked. Shocked.

1 hour ago, heybruce said:

"relatively few rioters managed access the Capitol"

 

Could you clarify this?  Is over a thousand "relatively few"?

 

"Federal officials estimate that about ten thousand rioters entered the Capitol grounds,^[266] and the Secret Service and FBI have estimated that about 1,200 breached the building."  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/January_6_United_States_Capitol_attack

You conveniently misquoted me, importantly missing out the sword initially. 

1 minute ago, nauseus said:

You conveniently misquoted me, importantly missing out the sword initially. 

So what does that mean. You want an investigation into how only a few initially entered the Capitol building? That many entered moments later isn't an issue? Or are you implying some kind of false flag invasion of antifa protesters?

 

Put simply, it's not clear what the word "initially" is doing there.

Clarence Thomas Faces Fresh Investigation Calls Over 'Spousal Support'

 

Virginia 'Ginni' Thomas testified that she "never spoke" with her husband about former President Donald Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election, but some of her comments are raising eyebrows amongst her critics.

When asked about what she and her husband had talked about, she replied: "I wish I could remember but I have no memory of the specifics. My husband often administers spousal support to the wife that's upset.

 

https://www.newsweek.com/clarence-thomas-wife-ginni-january-6-testimony-1770691

 

 

2 hours ago, ozimoron said:

I too would have been happy to see the National Guard out in force armed with machine guns. That would have taken someone to order them there who had the authority to do so. Nancy didn't. POTUS did.

Well the question of Capitol security and responsibility for that is one question I'd like to see answered clearly.  

8 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

So what does that mean. You want an investigation into how only a few initially entered the Capitol building? That many entered moments later isn't an issue? Or are you implying some kind of false flag invasion of antifa protesters?

 

Put simply, it's not clear what the word "initially" is doing there.

I'm not implying anything. I do want to know why this relatively small first wave of rioters were allowed in. Larger groups of protesters seemed to just amble in later when it was evident that  there was no serious security. I'd like to know why, after numerous warnings in the preceding days, the security was so weak? 

6 minutes ago, nauseus said:

I'm not implying anything. I do want to know why this relatively small first wave of rioters were allowed in. Larger groups of protesters seemed to just amble in later when it was evident that  there was no serious security. I'd like to know why, after numerous warnings in the preceding days, the security was so weak? 

"Allowed in"? ????

1 hour ago, candide said:

Now you introduce facts in the discussion! That's not fair! ????

Yes and little by little they are being prosecuted, convicted and jailed.  Hundreds of more cases to be prosecuted. While the Jan 6th committee was after the root cause of the event and to find the responsible party for starting and guiding the insurrection......ergo the leader himself Trump.

31 minutes ago, nauseus said:

I'm not implying anything. I do want to know why this relatively small first wave of rioters were allowed in. Larger groups of protesters seemed to just amble in later when it was evident that  there was no serious security. I'd like to know why, after numerous warnings in the preceding days, the security was so weak? 

Here's a video of some of capitol hill as they "amble in"into the capitol building.

 

Kanye West up next for president...going to make Trump look as sane as sane gets....

16 minutes ago, candide said:

"Allowed in"? ????

Seemed like it as I watched on the TV - police at one door just opened it.

25 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Here's a video of some of capitol hill as they "amble in"into the capitol building.

 

That's not later.

3 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Seemed like it as I watched on the TV - police at one door just opened it.

It's been debunked some time ago already.

https://www.factcheck.org/2021/05/video-doesnt-prove-capitol-police-allowed-jan-6-protesters-to-enter-capitol/

On 12/24/2022 at 7:08 AM, RichardColeman said:

A report led by the democrats says a republican candidate should be barred from running - go figure !

So you take for granted that someone like De Santis will be easier to beat that Trump thing. I reckon that letting Trump run would give the Democrats heir best chance.

13 minutes ago, candide said:

It's been debunked some time ago already.

https://www.factcheck.org/2021/05/video-doesnt-prove-capitol-police-allowed-jan-6-protesters-to-enter-capitol/

A nice fact checked review and should help Mr. Nausea to realize where he went wrong.

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

I'm not implying anything. I do want to know why this relatively small first wave of rioters were allowed in. Larger groups of protesters seemed to just amble in later when it was evident that  there was no serious security. I'd like to know why, after numerous warnings in the preceding days, the security was so weak? 

Who allowed them in. Where's your link?

 

Again, do you never read MSM links? The question of who had authority and why the national guard was not called has been addressed here. Yet here you are asking the same question. That said, if you think an inquiry is going to find the dems at fault you really will be surprised and not in a good way. Why did Trump do nothing for 187 minutes? The security agencies did have prior warning that the well regulated militias were going to turn up and dismissed or hid the threat. That's what's going to be discovered in an inquiry. That's probably what been redacted from the transcripts and the reason will be that the special council is still investigating that issue. Surely you don't imagine that the issue of why the national guard wasn't there in numbers is going to be ignored? The dems are screaming for answers.

38 minutes ago, nauseus said:

That's not later.

Is that after a woman was shot?

39 minutes ago, nauseus said:

That's not later.

Do they look like they're being allowed in?

How to the Trump backers keep up with the conspiracy theory du jour?

 

Trump claims DOJ hiding documents showing Biden corruption as GOP takes over House

 

The former president unloaded another round of attack on Georgia election worker Ruby Freeman in a Tuesday morning Truth Social rant, and he then spread claims by a Colorado attorney that have been reported by the Daily Mail, New York Post and Fox Business host Maria Bartiromo.

“'Lawyer claims that the Department of Justice is hiding hundreds of records on Hunter and Jim Biden,' Maria Bartiromo," Trump posted. "These records lead to, and implicate, Joe Biden and the many millions of dollars that have been stolen over the years.

 

https://www.rawstory.com/kevin-evans-biden-justice/