Split Thread A second impeachment

[DevilsAdvocate]

Well, I didn't know it, and neither did the writer, who says he's a long-time student of nuclear control issues. And he doesn't mention any extra footballs. I doubt they keep spares in the hall closet.

That's odd. That information has been publicly reported for at least 15-20 years. I'm no expert on nuclear control issues. Just a guy on a skeptics message board who has looked into posts with questions about the nuclear football. I thought this was common knowledge. It certainly has been public knowledge for many years.

 

[Bob001]

It's something larger than that. After the attack Graham condemned Trump and said he was through with it. Even after the election McConnell was obviously gunning to kick Trump to the curb and regain control of the Republican party. Other Republicans appeared to be poised to go against Trump even before January 6.

But then the Senate went into recess and suddenly they all come out with obviously orchestrated talking points about unity and impeachment in unconstitutional and it's a waste of time and we need to move on.

They suddenly all started saying the same things. There was a meeting. Something happened.
.....

I think it's likely that when they went home after Jan. 6, their constituents told them that they were still behind Dear Leader, and they better get in line and stay there. In interviews today, Sen. Cassidy, who is at least trying to sound rational, says a large percentage of his voters in Louisiana think Biden stole the election.

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

I think it's likely that when they went home after Jan. 6, their constituents told them that they were still behind Dear Leader, and they better get in line and stay there. In interviews today, Sen. Cassidy, who is at least trying to sound rational, says a large percentage of his voters in Louisiana think Biden stole the election.

My guess is that, like most things, there is no single answer. Different people are motivated by different things.

I do think they had a meeting and determined that overall they could not get enough Republicans to convict for one reason or another. They aren't going to risk losing support from the Trump base when their vote won't change anything anyway.

I am somewhat surprised that McConnell and others could not drum up support from 17 Senators. I'm sure there are at least 17 Republican Senators who would like the kick Trump out. But apparently there are concerns over donors and voters where they are not willing to take that risk.

 

[Venom]

Something I have been thinking about for the past few days is that we know exactly what Republicans would do if there were accusations that a Democrat lied to the American people to influence the outcome of an election and there was a protest that turned into a riot that was actually a planned terrorist attack to storm a United States building that resulted in the deaths of several Americans with suspicions that the administration intentionally failed to provide adequate security at that building.

See page 3.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=12846791

 

[Bubba]

by Bubba View Post
Before Jan 6, the FBI and Pelosi's Capitol Police chief had warnings that troublemakers were coming.

Pelosi declined Trump's advance offer of 10K National Guardsmen for protecting the Capitol.

Trump said "... have a peaceful protest"

There is clear footage of Capitol guards allowing the mob access by moving barricades aside.

When that actual footage was posted on this site, a fake skeptic saw it and said: "What the actual ****...?"

It was a set up.

Lies.

Wrong.

Grade: D minus.


The truth actually is that you have swallowed lots and lots of lies (lies by omission).

The important lesson here is that your "sources" did not tell you (omission) what is true.

By lying to you this way, your "sources" cause you to appear misinformed, ignorant, and dumb.

Plus, since you replied with "Lies", you can add arrogant to how you appear.....Note that ignorance combined with arrogance never look good on anyone.

Big picture: ...the learning opportunity for you now is that this instance is merely one example of how your "sources" have disinformed, mislead, and dumbed you down, and will continue doing, every day that you continue to trust them.

Good luck.

FBI report warned of ‘war’ at Capitol, contradicting claims there was no indication of looming violence

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...d12748-546b-11eb-a817-e5e7f8a406d6_story.html

Washington Post: FBI warned of violent 'war' at Capitol in internal report issued day before deadly riot


https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/12/politics/fbi-report-warning-capitol-riot/index.html

FBI Says It Warned About Prospect Of Violence Ahead Of US Capitol Riot

https://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2021...rospect-of-violence-ahead-of-us-capitol-riot/

FBI, NYPD told Capitol Police about possibility of violence before riot, senior officials say...

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/crime-...out-possibility-violence-riot-senior-n1253646

Capitol Police REJECTED offers of National Guard help days before...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ffers-National-Guard-help-days-MAGA-riot.html

by SezMe


What was a set up? Be specific and back it up with citations.

See above.

Good luck with your "sources". The corrupt MSM is very bad news. Look into who controls it.

 

[Aridas]

The Senate needs to get back to regular business.

Last seen... before McConnell became Majority Leader.

Fixed that for you.

ETA: A Democratic president would sooooo have been impeachable.

If a Democratic Party President did the kind of crap Trump did, he'd have been impeached AND removed in the first couple months. It would have never been allowed to constantly escalate like the GOP let it.

Does anyone recall how so many House and Senate Republicans went ape when four Americans got killed in at the Benghazi consulate when Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State?

And now that Trump got five Americans killed in the US Capitol who were protecting the Congress, now just about all of those very same Republicans could care less about these five Americans.

Correction. One American died protecting the US Capitol. The other four were invaders who clearly had no intention of actually protecting the US Capitol.

Lies.

Not convinced. Bubba has a long history of falling for really friggin' dumb claims and attempted spins en masse, after all. Either way, the remarkable unpreparedness to handle the events of Jan 6 honestly do look like a setup... a setup to maximize the chances of the attempted coup's success.

I am somewhat surprised that McConnell and others could not drum up support from 17 Senators. I'm sure there are at least 17 Republican Senators who would like the kick Trump out. But apparently there are concerns over donors and voters where they are not willing to take that risk.

Related to that - Republican state parties stand ready to rip any GOP senator who betrays Trump

Of some interest in relation to the impeachment, either way...

Thanks to Mike Lee's odd objection, one thing is now clear: Donald Trump tried to murder Mike Pence

And a bit more tangential...

FBI Provides Proof of Incitement

In a court filing regarding Jessica Watkins, one of the insurrectionists.

 

[Aridas]

The truth actually is that you have swallowed lots and lots of lies (lies by omission).

More specifically, YOU are trying to use lies of omission like crazy in your claims there. It's fair to say that you weren't directly lying, for most of that, though. Just cherry picking to try to paint a picture that was much the opposite of reality.

The important lesson here is that your "sources" did not tell you (omission) what is true.

Good luck with your "sources". The corrupt MSM is very bad news. Look into who controls it.

FWIW, the MSM did cover such. You outright quoted and linked to CNN and NBC News, for that matter.

By lying to you this way, your "sources" cause you to appear misinformed, ignorant, and dumb.

It's not all that often that I see such obvious self-destruction in a single post.

 

[Bob001]

Wrong.

Grade: D minus.


The truth actually is that you have swallowed lots and lots of lies (lies by omission).

The important lesson here is that your "sources" did not tell you (omission) what is true.

By lying to you this way, your "sources" cause you to appear misinformed, ignorant, and dumb.
....
Good luck with your "sources". The corrupt MSM is very bad news. Look into who controls it.

All of your links are from "mainstream media." I guess they're not such bad news after all. There's no dispute that there were numerous advance warnings about the Capitol insurrection. But the Capitol Hill police chief, more than anybody else, chose to disregard them. And nobody predicted that the Capitol would order his cultists to "march to the Capitol and fight." It's a big jump from bad judgment to massive conspiratorial plot.

 

[Bob001]

.....
I am somewhat surprised that McConnell and others could not drum up support from 17 Senators. I'm sure there are at least 17 Republican Senators who would like the kick Trump out. But apparently there are concerns over donors and voters where they are not willing to take that risk.

Mitch McConnell runs a notoriously tight ship. I have no doubt that if he said "I'm voting to convict, and I expect you to do the same," a large percentage of Repubs would salute.

 

[Matthew Ellard]

It was a set up.

Sooooooo....Bubba? How did ANTIFA trick all those Qanon lunatics and Proud Boys freaks to go to the Capitol in the first place?

Did the tooth fairy tell you that ANTIFA controls Trump and ANTIFA told Trump to host the rally?

Doesn't that contradict your previous Qanon religious claim, that Trump was secretly going to arrest Biden?

 

[Matthew Ellard]

The truth actually is that you have swallowed lots and lots of lies

Biden will never be inaugurated as President.

Golly Gosh. Were you lying to us three weeks ago?

The corrupt MSM is very bad news. Look into who controls it.

Rupert "Fox News" Murdoch from Australia? I'll tell him your opinion when next time we go to the pub for a beer.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

it is the typical fascist enemy, as described by Ecco: both incompetent and all-powerful, weak-minded but always ten steps ahead.

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

See page 3.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=12846791

I don't understand. That link takes me to a post that says:

Without good ole 'Merican Ketchup!

Oh, and even worse, he wore a bike helmet when riding a bike, unlike Putin who rode wild bulls, shirtless, all while wrestling Eurasian Brown Bears!

I don't see the relevance or meaning.

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

Mitch McConnell runs a notoriously tight ship. I have no doubt that if he said "I'm voting to convict, and I expect you to do the same," a large percentage of Repubs would salute.

After the election and before January 6 and even for a few days after January 6 McConnell was certainly positioning to rid himself of Trump and take return to a traditional Republican party. It is quite obvious that is what he wanted. He obviously failed. But I don't know why.

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

Pelosi declined Trump's advance offer of 10K National Guardsmen for protecting the Capitol.

You have made a number of posts after I asked for evidence of this claim. Do you or do you not have evidence to support this claim?

 

[Stacyhs]

Before Jan 6, the FBI and Pelosi's Capitol Police chief had warnings that troublemakers were coming.

As already stated, it's not "Pelosi's" Capitol Police. I'm deducting points for such an obvious and amateur tactic besides being factually incorrect.

Pelosi declined Trump's advance offer of 10K National Guardsmen for protecting the Capitol.

"Pelosi" declined nothing. It was Capt. Sund who rejected the offer. More points deducted. "Trump" offered nothing. More points deducted.

Trump said "... have a peaceful protest"

Trump used the word "peaceful", or any form of the word, exactly once. He used the word "fight" 23 times, "fraud" 22 times, "rigged" 4 times, "cheated" once, "corrupt" 10 times, illegal/illegally 23 times, and told them he'd be there "with you" as they walked to the Capitol "because you'll never take back our country with weakness". Only he wasn't because he hightailed it back to the WH to watch it on TV.

There is clear footage of Capitol guards allowing the mob access by moving barricades aside.

When that actual footage was posted on this site, a fake skeptic saw it and said: "What the actual ****...?"

Not according to Snopes who rated it "Unproven". Let me guess: Snopes is part of the Deep State.

In sum, while it was true video footage showed police at the U.S. Capitol seemingly giving up on barricades designed to block trespassers from entering the federal building, the clip did not provide enough evidence to determine who exactly moved the iron barricades, extremists or police. Additionally, the video’s producer described the scene as rioters “pushing” past police, not as officers moving physical barricades. For those reasons, we rate this claim “Unproven.”

It was a set up.

And here I thought the standard CT excuse was "They were ANTIFA!" I do wish you CTers and Trump apologists would get your stories straight.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

McConnnell has made more than one attempt to rid himself of Trump and so far he has failed.
He could make an actual effort, calling in favors and putting on pressure, and maybe get a conviction.
But since he can't be certain that that would work, he won't.

 

[Mumbles]

Wrong.

Grade: D minus.

(snip)

See above.

Good luck with your "sources". The corrupt MSM is very bad news. Look into who controls it.

Whoops.

What you found is evidence that the FBI warned of violence. Which - good for them, everyone online knew of it.

What you're looking for, specifically, is evidence that Dolt 45 offered National Guard protection to Speaker Pelosi, and that she rejected it.

And I'm guessing you won't find it.

Apropos of nothing, here's the memo in which acting Defense Secretary Christopher Miller, who answers to the president, then Toupee Fiasco, demanded the DC national guard not use any riot gear, crowd control, or look to any intelligence report in their planning for Jan. 6th. This is specifically in response to a request from the DC government for assistance, by the way.

 

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
Mitch McConnell runs a notoriously tight ship. I have no doubt that if he said "I'm voting to convict, and I expect you to do the same," a large percentage of Repubs would salute.

After the election and before January 6 and even for a few days after January 6 McConnell was certainly positioning to rid himself of Trump and take return to a traditional Republican party. It is quite obvious that is what he wanted. He obviously failed. But I don't know why.

I agree. When McConnell first said that Trump has committed an impeachable offence I thought "That's it! Trump's done". But no...something happened and The Turtle has done an about face. I'm sure one day, maybe not for years from now, it will all come out. But something happened to change his direction because McConnell hates Trump and would get rid of him in a heartbeat if he could.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

It's something larger than that. After the attack Graham condemned Trump and said he was through with it. Even after the election McConnell was obviously gunning to kick Trump to the curb and regain control of the Republican party. Other Republicans appeared to be poised to go against Trump even before January 6.

But then the Senate went into recess and suddenly they all come out with obviously orchestrated talking points about unity and impeachment in unconstitutional and it's a waste of time and we need to move on.

They suddenly all started saying the same things. There was a meeting. Something happened.

I don't know what drove that decision. Big donors? Data analysists? Strategists? Or maybe even not being able to convince enough Republican Senators to get on board.

For whatever reason, they determined that they wouldn't or couldn't get enough for conviction and agreed that without that assurance going against Trump would give them no possible gain and substantial loss. So they focused on strategy to push against conviction.

I would really like to know what it was that drove that decision, because so powerful Republicans were clearly going the other way and then suddenly flipped. Of course flipping makes sense if they won't actually get a conviction. Turning on Trump is only beneficial if it gets rid of Trump, but bad if it doesn't. But I don't know what turned the tide.

Follow the money.