DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus January 6th Fallout p4

Your video was unavailable.

Strange... that will be the third time it's disappeared from youtube. Last time it magically became someone playing a video game.

Nothing to see here folks!

And as far as all the "debunked" talk. Most of it is "no dramatic proof" = "false", you know, guilty until proven innocent. I usually don't even bother, not sure why I am now. No one wants the truth anyway. That video has people from the DOD, capital police, etc, etc, all saying the same thing. Everyone on the right -- 100% liars, everyone on the left, well, they all take truth serum before they walk out the door in the morning. Not convincing anyone on DT to even entertain the thought anyway lol.

Associated Press

Former Trump acting attorney general Jeffrey Rosen reportedly set to testify at Jan. 6 committee hearing on Wednesday

Last Updated: June 10, 2022 at 7:52 p.m. ET
First Published: June 10, 2022 at 6:38 p.m. ET

The House select committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol siege and the events leading up to and following will hear live testimony on Wednesday from the highest levels of the late-Trump-era Department of Justice — acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen; his top deputy, Richard Donoghue; and Steven Engel, the former head of the department’s Office of Legal Counsel — according to a person familiar with the situation and granted anonymity to discuss their appearances.

The testimony from the three former Justice Department officials is expected to center on a chaotic stretch in the final weeks of the administration when Trump openly weighed the idea of replacing Rosen with a lower-ranking official, Jeffrey Clark, who was seen as more willing to champion in court the president’s false claims of voter fraud.

The situation came to a head in an hours-long meeting at the White House on Jan. 3, 2021, attended by Rosen, Donoghue, Engel and Clark, when top Justice Department officials and White House lawyers told Trump they would resign if he went ahead with his plan to replace Rosen.

Trump ultimately allowed Rosen to finish out the administration as acting attorney general.

Wednesday is Day 3 of the select committee’s currently scheduled June public hearings. Day 2, on Monday, reportedly will seek to demonstrate how Trump “engaged in a massive effort to spread false and fraudulent information” that the election had been stolen — even though advisers and allies told him repeatedly he had lost.


https://www.marketwatch.com/story/f...g-on-wednesday-01654900700?siteid=yhoof2

Trump says January 6 'represented the greatest movement in the history of our Country' ahead of the House committee's first public hearing
Brent D. Griffiths Jun 9, 2022, 10:23 AM


Trump repeated his attacks against the January 6, 2021, committee ahead of its first public hearing.

He added that January 6 represented "the greatest movement in the history of our Country."

Trump and his allies have scrambled to form a defense ahead of the January 6 committee hearings.


Ahead of the first public House hearings on the insurrection, former President Donald Trump on Thursday defended his "Save America" rally on January 6, 2021, which morphed into the Capitol riot, calling it "the greatest movement in the history of our Country."

"The Un select Committee didn't spend one minute studying the reason that people went to Washington, D.C., in massive numbers, far greater than the Fake News Media is willing to report, or that the Unselects are willing to even mention, because January 6th was not simply a protest, it represented the greatest movement in the history of our Country to Make America Great Again," Trump wrote on his Truth social platform, repeating his favored line of attacking the bipartisan select committee as the "unselect" panel.

Trump and his allies' reactions are being closely watched as lawmakers begin a series of public hearings into the Capitol attack and the former president's broader efforts to overturn the results.

Top Democrats on the panel have promised jaw-dropping information will be disclosed. Republicans have little insight into what will come out but are trying to mount a preemptive defense. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy is also leading the preparation of an alternative report on the riot.

Trump continues to falsely claim that he won the 2020 election and that there was "massive" voter fraud, despite even some of his top advisors admitting that Joe Biden won. The former president also repeated his debunked claim that he ordered 10,000 National Guard troops to protect the Capitol. He increased the number to 20,000 in his statement.

"The Unselect Committee has now learned that I, as President, suggested & offered up to 20,000 National Guard, or troops, be deployed in D.C. because it was felt that the crowd was going to be very large," Trump wrote.

The Washington Post found no evidence of such an order as far back as December.

Rather, the source of the claim appears to be Trump telling then-acting Defense Secretary Christopher Miller that he was "going to need like 10,000 people" ahead of the rally. But the Defense Department simply interpreted this as Trump blustering, and it went no further, The Post reported. As the outlet pointed out, Trump knew how to go about executing an order. Biden's Defense Department later told The Post that it found no record of such an order.

Further evidence also shows that those troops may not have protected just the Capitol. Mark Meadows, the White House chief of staff at the time, wrote in a January 5, 2021, email that Guard members were on standby to "protect pro-Trump people."




https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-january-6-greatest-movement-in-history-hearing-congress-2022-6

'Ashli Babbitt's widower speaks out on January 6 hearing, claims committee ignores her death
Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., was one of few lawmakers to reach out with condolences following the incident, Aaron Babbitt said.
By Charles Creitz | Fox News

Following the January 6 Committee's first primetime hearing, Ashli Babbitt's widower spoke out to Fox News about members of the panel and criticized the Capitol police officer who shot and killed her.

Babbitt, a veteran and unarmed Trump supporter, was fatally shot in the neck by Lt. Michael Byrd on the day of the riot as protesters amassed on the other side of a door from the lawman.

In a subsequent interview, Byrd claimed "I know that day I saved countless lives," while Fox News host Tucker Carlson separately reported Byrd previously went unpunished for accidentally leaving a loaded sidearm in a men's bathroom at the complex.

Aaron Babbitt told Carlson he understood his late wife was never mentioned in Thursday's hearing, adding one Republican member of the committee previously donated to a GoFundMe supporting Byrd and advertised it on social media.

Rep. Adam Kinzinger of Illinois wrote in November the fundraiser was a "worthy cause as this man has faced quite an onslaught of misinformation and extreme threats."

"I had no intentions of watching [the hearing] in the first place," Aaron Babbitt said, subsequently criticizing Kinzinger's statement.

"And, we can go back to last week when I was listening to Mayor Giuliani's radio show. And when he was getting questioned by them, he straight up asked them, ‘Are you going to talk about Ashli Babbitt?’ -- And he said, everybody just blankly stared at him, looked down and looked like they were following a fly around the room."

That comment, he said, proved the panel wasn't interested in probing the circumstances of Ashli's death.

"I truly believe in my heart that they know it's t it's murder, so they can't admit to it. And so they have to just bypass it and blow by it and just act like it never happened."

Carlson asked whether Babbitt has ever heard from Kinzinger or any other lawmakers. Babbitt said that for the most part he has not heard, noting one exception to be Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., who reportedly called him with condolences.

He and Carlson also discussed new video from the day of the riot that they said showed Ashli Babbitt attempting to quell some of the more incensed activists and telling them to calm down and avoid causing property damage.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/ashli-babbitts-widower-speaks-out-on-january-6-hearing

Not trying to be argumentative with you, but the claim of 10,000 National Guard troops had been around for awhile.

What Was Said

“Was Speaker Pelosi involved in the decision to delay National Guard assistance on Jan. 6? Those are serious and real questions that this committee refuses to even ask. Speaker Pelosi doesn’t want to answer those questions because she knows that the answers to those questions leave a trail of bread crumbs right back to her office, underscoring her negligence, her lack of leadership as the speaker of the House.” — Mr. Banks, at the same news conference

This is misleading. For over a year, Republican and conservative commentators have repeatedly and misleadingly blamed Ms. Pelosi for the delay in deploying the National Guard to the Capitol on Jan. 6.

There is no evidence that Ms. Pelosi’s office rejected a request to deploy the National Guard, or even played a role in any delays over approval. The decision lies with the Capitol Police Board, which includes the House and Senate sergeants-at-arms and the architect of the Capitol.

A report by two bipartisan Senate committees investigating the Jan. 6 attack attributed delays in requesting the National Guard to “opaque processes.” It noted that the members of the Capitol Police Board were not familiar with the approval process, and gave conflicting accounts of when assistance was first requested.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/09/us/politics/republicans-jan-6-committee-claims.html

Here is the USCP January 6th timeline report and the lead up. On January 4th, USCP Chief of Police Sund requests National Guard support from both the House and Senate Sargent -At-Arms and both deny his request. All three resign after Jan. 6th.

https://docs.google.com/viewerng/vi...ault/files/2022-06/USCPJan.6Timeline.pdf

Setting any media bias aside, if the Trump administration or DoD at the time, formally requested 10,000, now 20,000 National Guard troops to the Capitol ahead of the Jan 6th rally and Nancy Pelosi rejected the request ahead of the Jan 6th rally, certainly this would be in writing and the documents would be all the evidence needed. The Trump admin, after the fallout from Jan 6th, could have easily held a press conference, distributed copies to members of the press and shown the documents on live TV that both illustrate the formal request for National Guard troops and the rejection of National Guard troops by Nancy Pelosi if said claim was true. This would be huge news and easy to prove if the evidence existed and a significant political victory.

Many of them didn't even watch the hearing on TV... They want to tell us "it ain't so" and they don't want to see the proof.. Something I'm still waiting for from the crowd that insists the election was a fraud.... 60 some hearing on the subject and the Trump crowd LOST every single one...

At least for me, I am more interested in what they are doing about inflation and crime in the streets.

JMO

That's the excuse the "can't walk and chew gum at the same time" crowd says. "Let's ignore that because other things are going on".

Milk and others gave you the reasons I didn't waste my time. All of the things that were in your video have been debunked over and over again. They feed you the same lies in an ever revolving door and you never bother to see if they're true. It's like you just post their crap and expect everyone else to dig for the answers that prove they're lying. Then you become shocked when media sites delete the lies and claim they're trying to hide the truth. It all gets exhausting after a while.

Lol. Yep. One side is 100% honest, the other is all lies... but we already knew that.

Fact check both sides. Something you obviously didn't do in this case.

Not sure who said that. But you've denied Jan 6th being a serious event based on what is a Trump lie. There is - to me at least - compelling testimony from many, including guys like Barr who have unequivocally stated that 'The Big lie' is B.S .... and that's the very basis for all of the events that led to Jan 6th. You have the wife of a SCJ pressuring officials to overturn elections and promoting wild, wild crazy wild baboon ass theories... You have what was a horrifying, violent ordeal that got morphed into "just like another tourist event" .... Security was manipulated before the event. The list of issues is long and deep. And it's not hearsay.

It might not be top of your agenda - you might think some of this is political, hell maybe you think it's all political. But I think it was a truly terrible event, The peaceful transition of power was deliberately planned to be prevented. I'd like to get to the bottom of it. Thinking this was some random event - or dismissing it as just like a BLM protest is misguided at best imo.

Calling it political is just a way they can justify refusing to hear or listen to the facts presented. Never mind that many of these facts come from Trump's own people and people within his own administration.

Look at all the stuff you and your ignore.

There are now 2 sets of Laws in Amerika.

One set for the Left and one set for the rest of us.

It is against the Law for the rest of us to intimidate Judges by protesting around their homes.

But it is permissible for the Left to do so.

The Left's own Attorney General, Merrick Garland, refuses to enforce those laws against his own people.

Trolls be trollin'. There are definately not two sets of laws. Nobody is victimizing you due to your douchebaggery, other than yourself. Come back to reality and join the human race again, maybe you can still redeem yourself.

I stopped reading here because that is 100% [censored]. I demand receipts.

I finished reading... You're a SNOWFLAKE.

So you believe that the National Guard gets discussed and orders based on phone calls with no paper trail? And you believe the absence of proof of the request for the National Guard is "Proof". You believe the word of a pathological liar when any shred of logic dictates there would be something somewhere in writing - even a damn text or email. . . . Because Pelosi and Trump spoke so often right?

And I guess you believe Jan 6th was random and just a little tourist visit like any other.

Good for you. With your head buried so deep in the earth for so long - make sure your butt has sun screen, I don't want you to get sun burn.

Well, I guess it's ok to change topics... At least for me it is,,, watch that in other threads....LOL

Of course I'm interested on those things as well... But to allow this insurrection to go without punishment is lame... You know, for some of us, it's possible to do more than one thing at a time... it doesn't have to be either/or.

Did you watch the hearing last week? did you see the evidence they plan on bringing forth?

I got a kick out of some folks on TV and Radio.. They were complaining that the videos were incomplete/edited...OF COURSE THEY WERE... The Panel was bringing forth what they intend to deliver over the course of the rest of the televised hearings... That was the plan...

If you aren't afraid of what you might see, why not watch it. It's history we are living through..

Yet you appear to be the one having a melt down.

What have we "ignored"? That there is terrible inflation? No. So what exactly is it we're ignoring? Some false claim that the entire economy has collapsed because of only 18 months of economic policies? Even you know better than that.

Every major country has inflation issues.. They all have high gas prices.. But somehow, it's bidens fault here, but how could it be there.

https://www.statista.com/chart/27094/uk-fuel-petrol-price-timeline/


https://www.google.com/search?q=Gas+price+over+time++USA+chart&rlz=1C1GCEA_enUS959US959&sxsrf=ALiCzsbhXK21USp9aOPiJK7GI48-CDzXJw:1655073406100&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjhnsrz_Kj4AhXkm44IHSyeDfwQ_AUoAXoECAEQAw&biw=1536&bih=722&dpr=1.25#imgrc=04hr3dRaKFBFXM

It's not an exact comp - but it looks like the UK has it as bad or worse. I know the papers have been up in arms blaming Biden for that.

jc

The problem is the party of making crap up to justify crap we made up... That's the good thing about having actual facts in common, because you can't refute stone cold hard facts.

That be all good - but troll don't care.

true.

That's the problem.. Trump and the Right have a machine that puts out one lie after another... about anything that would, if true, make the left look bad.. That's the plan..

But by the time the facts come out, it's too late, Trumps followers and far rightwingers have made up their mind.

My impression from a lot of the response on the right to very far right for this issue specifically is that there is often mitigation, deflection or denial as an underlying reaction to something that shows the people you uphold did something very wrong, and the people who you abhor were on the right side of the issue. You see it with things like Jack Del Rio’s response. I think he referred to it as a “dust up” like when parents try to downplay the fact that their kid is a bully on the playground. The inconvenience of the events that occurred is honestly too hard for some to bear in their own minds.

I, for one, actually assumed the same type of tone that Chris Wallace did beforehand. While I don’t think anything that went down will overwhelmingly change any minds, I thought the airing exceeded my expectations. I thought Liz Cheney presented what - to me - was a very compelling and organized layout of the events that occurred. I also have to objectively ask what incentive her and Kinzinger had to join this panel? She got booted from her high-ranking position and he’s basically out of office after this term. Looking at them and the other reps (like Gonzo) who did something contrary to their own career ambitions it’s very much going against the grain of the vast majority of what all politicians - from both sides - do. On the far right, it’s pretty clear that bending the knee gets people to perpetuate their careers, at least for the short term (see Vance, JD). This panel of Republicans and those few others did not do that. All coupled by the fact people close to the campaign and part of the actual cabinet have provided compelling testimony.

That being said, I don’t “rah rah” the airing as the be all end all that many on the left side of the media seem to do, but the response from the avid Trump supporting side, while not unsurprising, is much more pervasively unobjective.

Wow, today's hearing is pretty damning for Trump. They seem to have proved Trump knew he lost and tried to take advantage of the 'red mirage' phenomena on election days to sew doubt and launch his big lie campaign. Witnesses are mostly republican, Trump campaign staff, and Bill Barr.

They'll just label them as RINO's and haters then move on. They aren't interested in hearing the truth. Even when it comes to people from their own party.

Jan. 6 panel: Trump campaign used 'Big Lie' to raise millions from supporters

Christopher Wilson·Senior Writer
Mon, June 13, 2022, 12:37 PM·4 min read
link


The committee investigating the Jan. 6 Capitol riot said that former President Trump’s campaign fundraised off of baseless allegations of election fraud but spent very little of the money on legal action.

Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Cal., said Monday morning that the House committee would show “that the Trump campaign used these false claims of election fraud to raise hundreds of millions of dollars from supporters who were told their donations were for the legal fight in the courts. But the Trump campaign didn’t use the money for that. The Big Lie was also a big ripoff.”

“We’ll present evidence that Mr. Trump’s claims of election fraud were false, that he and his closest advisers knew those claims were false but that they continued to peddle them anyway right up until the moment a mob of Trump supporters attacked the Capitol," Lofgren said.

During the hearing, a senior investigative counsel for the committee said that Trump supporters received upwards of 25 emails a day urging them to donate to an election defense fund that did not exist.

“The Trump campaign knew that these claims of voter fraud were false yet they continued to barrage small-dollar donors with emails encouraging them to donate to something called the ‘Official Election Defense Fund,’” Amanda Wick said. “The select committee discovered no such fund existed.”

In a taped deposition, former Trump campaign staffer Hanna Allred said, “I don’t believe there is actually a fund called the Election Defense Fund” while the campaign’s digital director agreed that the Election Defense Fund was a “marketing tactic.”

Wick noted that much of the money went to the Save America PAC, which was created on Nov. 9, two days after the election was called for Biden. That PAC then routed $1 million to two separate organizations tied to Trump staffers, $204,857 to the Trump Hotel Collection and $5 million for the company that organized the Jan. 6 rally that preceded the violence at the Capitol, according to Wick.

The committee investigating the Jan. 6 Capitol riot said that former President Trump’s campaign fundraised off of baseless allegations of election fraud but spent very little of the money on legal action.

Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Cal., said Monday morning that the House committee would show “that the Trump campaign used these false claims of election fraud to raise hundreds of millions of dollars from supporters who were told their donations were for the legal fight in the courts. But the Trump campaign didn’t use the money for that. The Big Lie was also a big ripoff.”

“We’ll present evidence that Mr. Trump’s claims of election fraud were false, that he and his closest advisers knew those claims were false but that they continued to peddle them anyway right up until the moment a mob of Trump supporters attacked the Capitol," Lofgren said.

During the hearing, a senior investigative counsel for the committee said that Trump supporters received upwards of 25 emails a day urging them to donate to an election defense fund that did not exist.

“The Trump campaign knew that these claims of voter fraud were false yet they continued to barrage small-dollar donors with emails encouraging them to donate to something called the ‘Official Election Defense Fund,’” Amanda Wick said. “The select committee discovered no such fund existed.”

In a taped deposition, former Trump campaign staffer Hanna Allred said, “I don’t believe there is actually a fund called the Election Defense Fund” while the campaign’s digital director agreed that the Election Defense Fund was a “marketing tactic.”

Wick noted that much of the money went to the Save America PAC, which was created on Nov. 9, two days after the election was called for Biden. That PAC then routed $1 million to two separate organizations tied to Trump staffers, $204,857 to the Trump Hotel Collection and $5 million for the company that organized the Jan. 6 rally that preceded the violence at the Capitol, according to Wick.

A February 2021 analysis from ABC News found that in the three months that followed the election when Trump and his allies were peddling the conspiracy theory that the race was stolen, the Trump campaign and Republican National Committee raised $280 million dollars. Only $13 million of that was spent on legal expenses, with more than $100 million going toward “various fundraising expenses and advertising efforts aimed at raising even more money.”

Former Fox News political editor Chris Stirewalt, who was involved in the network’s decision desk that called the race for Joe Biden, testified later in the hearing that the Trump campaign’s strategy of overturning multiple races was nearly impossible.

"Ahead of today, I thought about what are the largest margins that could ever be overturned by a recount," Stirewalt said. "In modern history, you're talking about 1,000-1,500 votes, at the way, way outside. Normally, you're talking about hundreds of votes, maybe 300 votes that will change."

"So the idea that through any normal process in any of these states — remember he had to do it thrice. He needed three of these states to change,” Stirewalt said, adding, “You're better off to play the Powerball than to have that come in.”

Monday’s hearing was the second public panel from the Jan. 6 House committee following last week’s primetime debut in which vice chair Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., said Trump had “a sophisticated seven-part plan to overturn the presidential election and prevent the transfer of presidential power.”

Is it a con if they are willing participants and know he was lying?

82% of Fox News, 97% of OANN, Newsmax Viewers Believe Trump's Stolen Election Claim: Poll

https://www.newsweek.com/82-fox-new...rumps-stolen-election-claim-poll-1644756

Most of those that donated didn't know. Many of them still don't know and there is no amount of facts that can or ever will make them believe differently. If you repeat a lie often enough people will believe it. At least those who want to.

Yup, that's what it looks like, also, keeping the big lie alive netted Trump's campaign and his PAC a Quarter Billion bucks.. I'm wondering if that's a case of fraud..... I mean, he clearly knew he lost, but used the lie to get donations to a entity called "save our election" (or something like that) that, as it turned out, didn't exist. Instead the money went into his PAC. The PAC donated a Million to Mark Meadows charity fund and $200K to some Trump properties among others things.

Can't wait until Wednesday for Part 3.

I also found it interesting that FOX news showed the hearing today... Not sure what comments they made or if they edited it. If they played the whole thing, Fox viewers got an ear and eye full..