Protests at the Capital....

[Chuck Smith]

Another example of how Twitter and others are full of [email protected]#T.....

They didn't "ban" anyone who talked about assaulting Rand Paul.... or even the accounts of where people celebrated the assault on him or even talked about doing it again.

You see what I am talking about.... if it is violence against conservatives twitter hasn't done a thing. If it is violence against democrats.... people get suspened or kicked off.

Again... you can't have it one way and not the other. THAT IS THE ISSUE!!! I am all for it they were doing it on a level playing field. BUT THEY ARE NOT!!! This stuff with PARLER is showing that it is true. BTW.. Parler isn't just a conservative platform. It is open to everyone. What is sad is that the media is trying to tote it as "conservative". It is just the people who were getting banned on twitter moved over their.... and who was getting banned on twitter... CONSERVATIVES. It shows how the big companies want to "control" what information people can get. AGAIN THAT IS THE ISSUE!!!!

[Plainsman]

Now it gets worse. They say Parlor is a white supremesists site. Truth is the victim here.

[huntin1]

Trump needs to be impeached. Even if it goes beyond Jan 20. He needs to pay for incinerating a riot. There has to be consequences for his actions.

It would keep him from running for public office again.

Lose his retirement pay.

Lose his Health Insurance

Lose his Secret Service protection.

Except that he didn't incite a riot.

No, Trump Isn’t Guilty Of Incitement

By Jeffrey Scott Shapiro

House Democrats have drafted an article of impeachment that accuses President Trump of “incitement to insurrection.” Acting U.S. Attorney Michael Sherwin said Thursday that his office is “looking at all actors here and anyone that had a role” in the Capitol riot. Some reporters have construed that as including Mr. Trump. The president didn’t commit incitement or any other crime. I should know. As a Washington prosecutor I earned the nickname “protester prosecutor” from the antiwar group CodePink. In one trial, I convicted 31 protesters who disrupted congressional traffic by obstructing the Capitol Crypt. In another, I convicted a CodePink activist who smeared her hands with fake blood, charged at then-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in a House hearing room, and incited the audience to seize the secretary of state physically. In other cases, I dropped charges when the facts fell short of the legal standard for incitement. One such defendant was the antiwar activist Cindy Sheehan.

Hostile journalists and lawmakers have suggested Mr. Trump incited the riot when he told a rally that Republicans need to “fight much harder.” Mr. Trump suggested the crowd walk to the Capitol: “We’re going to cheer on brave senators and congressmen and -women, and we’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them. Because you’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength and you have to be strong.”

In the District of Columbia, it’s a crime to “intentionally or recklessly act in such a manner to cause another person to be in reasonable fear” and to “incite or provoke violence where there is a likelihood that such violence will ensue.” This language is based on Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), in which the Supreme Court set the standard for speech that could be prosecuted without violating the First Amendment. The justices held that a Ku Klux Klan leader’s calls for violence against blacks and Jews were protected speech. The court found that Clarence Brandenburg’s comments were “mere advocacy” of violence, not “directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action . . . likely to incite or produce such action.”

The president didn’t mention violence on Wednesday, much less provoke or incite it. He said, “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”

District law defines a riot as “a public disturbance . . . which by tumultuous and violent conduct or the threat thereof creates grave danger of damage or injury to property or persons.” When Mr. Trump spoke, there was no “public disturbance,” only a rally. The “disturbance” came later at the Capitol by a small minority who entered the perimeter and broke the law. They should be prosecuted.

The president’s critics want him charged for inflaming the emotions of angry Americans. That alone does not satisfy the elements of any criminal offense, and therefore his speech is protected by the Constitution that members of Congress are sworn to support and defend.

Mr. Shapiro served as an assistant attorney general of the District of Columbia, 2007-09. He is a White House appointed official at the U.S. Agency for Global Media.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/no-trump-i ... =djemITP_h


Damn, that pesky Constitution just keeps getting in the way, doesn't it.

Of course, as a general rule, the Democrats don't much care about the Constitution anymore.

[KEN W]

I'll tell you what.....I watch a lot of news programs....CNN, MSNBC, FOX, NEWSMAX, MSN, ABC,NBC.

I don't see what the problem is. I get both sides.


I see it differently and so do a whole lot of people. Breaking into the Capital and trying to get at the Senators and House members is a crime. Yelling "Hang Pense" There will be more coming out. Now the FBI is warning EVERY state that there is a threat of mob violence at every state Capital plus Washington on Jan 20.

These people were incited by Trump, family and personal lawyer. You can disagree and that's fine. We just see some things differently. I respect your point of view.

[huntin1]

There is no question in my mind that at least some of the people at the capital committed a crime. We clearly see people forcing their way in, breaking windows, etc. those are prosecutable crimes, and they should be prosecuted. But what President Trump said to his followers prior to the incident at the capital does not rise to the level of a crime. What he said to his followers while the incident was ongoing was not a crime, he repeatedly said to remain peaceful. Again, no crime. Their impeachment premise is based on crimes he did not commit.

You are correct, we see things differently, and I can respect your point of view, even though I don't understand how a logical person can see things that way.

[KEN W]

I'm not logical.

[Plainsman]

I see it differently and so do a whole lot of people. Breaking into the Capital and trying to get at the Senators and House members is a crime.

Ken if I rob a gas station they cant prosecute you for it. Especially of you told me not to. President Trump called for peaceful gathering at the white house. The actions of the left is pitchfork dark ages mentality.

Like hunt1 I agree the rioters should be prosecuted. The left said there was tens of thousands of rioters. Did you see that Ken?

Latest poll 77% of people think this is political spite, while 74% think they shoukd move on. Meanwhile democrats are calling to disbar any attorney that helped Trump. Defending Manson was ok, but not Trump.

I'm not logical

Face value from what you post I would say not politically.

[speckline]

I'm not logical.

I totally agree with your statement Ken

[KEN W]

I'm not logical.....Packers will win the Super Bowl.

[KEN W]

Patriots coach Bill Belichick has decided to decline the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

“Recently, I was offered the opportunity to receive the Presidential Medal of Freedom, which I was flattered by out of respect for what the honor represents and admiration for past recipients,” Belichick said in a statement issued Monday night. “Subsequently, the tragic events of last week occurred and the decision has been made not to move forward with the award.

“Above all, I am an American citizen with great reverence for our nation’s value, freedom and democracy. I know I also represent my family and the New England Patriots football team. Continuing those efforts while remaining true to the people, team and country I love outweigh the benefit of any individual award.”

Not a BB fan.....way to go Bill

[Chuck Smith]

I'm not logical.....Packers will win the Super Bowl.

Ken.... please go seek help ASAP.... You live in MN now and that is grounds for tar and feathering.... LOL


The whole impeachment issue will be a hard one to follow thru. Because like I have mentioned.... If Trump gets impeached because of what he said. Then so should Pelosi, Harris, etc. All of the elected officials who this past summer fanned the flames with words. Remember people were breaking into federal buildings, burning federal buildings, breaking into state buildings, burning state buildings, etc.

It should go both ways.... if Trump is "impeachable"... the so should the people i posted the pictures of with their quotes of things they said.

Edit:
Interesting somethings coming out right now.

The timeline of events. The start of the "breeching" or "riots" was 20 mins before Trumps speech ended that day. Dont know how accurate all of this is as of now. But things to consider when trying to place blame and to impeach.

Also the evidence of the pipe bombs that were placed at the RNC and DNC ahead of Trumps speech.

Again... all premeditated by idiots! But to say "trump is 100% at fault" or should be impeached.... things are getting found out that it might not be the case. Just nutbags being nutbags.

[KEN W]

Chuck.....you don't get it. Huntin said I was not logical. Not logical for me would pick the Packers.

[speckline]

Come on Ken, you know your a closet fan of the Packers!!!

[KEN W]

What's that old saying?????

COLD DAY IN HELL

[Chuck Smith]

Chuck.....you don't get it. Huntin said I was not logical. Not logical for me would pick the Packers.

Ken.... I did get what you were saying. I was just adding ontop of it.

[KEN W]

I always hope the Packers have a perfect season......0-16

[Chuck Smith]

I keep telling my friends who are Packer fans this....

I can't wait until they dont resign Rogers and he can come to the Vikings.....

And honestly... about when Cousins contract is up... is about when Rogers is up.....

[Chuck Smith]

https://twitter.com/Jim_Jordan/status/1 ... 6414272516

This is a good video of Jim Jordan talking about this whole issue.

back in 2017.... people objected to the electoral college vote. How republicans keep denouncing violence... but get blamed for things.


I will be honest... this all goes back to when the media, elected officals, and everyone... .BLAMED BUSH!!!! It hasn't stopped since then.... if something it wrong... Blame a republican. Instead of trying to really find the problems.

Remember all of the riots and stuff is about "racism".... when data shows racism in the USA has decreased! Police shootings of unarmed black people have DECREASED.... etc. Yet racism is a HUGE PROBLEM. It isn't a problem unless people are out looking to try and make it a problem.

[Plainsman]

It isn't a problem unless people are out looking to try and make it a problem.

That's the way with many things these days. There are professionals at it out looking constantly for something to be offended about.

I was watching a timeline today that was interesting. The riot happened 20 minutes before Trump talked about we need to fight etc.

[Chuck Smith]

Plainsman...

Right now congress people are turning what happened at the capital into something about racism. WHEN IT WAS ABOUT AN ELECTION....

This goes right along with what I was talking about... people are looking to turn everything into race issue. The people were at the capital because they thought the election was "stolen". Not because of RACE....

There could have been racists at the event. Nobody is denying this.... but not once did anyone bring up RACE.

[Plainsman]

Chuck I hope you didn't already post this and I missed it. It's a good read if your democrat or republican and really do care about this nation and truth.

Rush to judgement? Three crucial questions remain unanswered about Capitol siege. By John Solomon

https://justthenews.com/government/c...ain-unanswered

One thing recent history has taught America is the first storyline of major tragedies or controversies is never the most accurate.
Americans were told by the Bush administration that they were sucker-punched by a surprise attack on 9/11 by terrorists, only to learn the CIA and FBI had significant advance evidence of the plot and its players and failed to connect the dots.
Susan Rice originally told the nation that the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi was carried out spontaneously by a mob angered by an anti-Muslim video. The attack, it turned out, was pre-planned and carried out by an al-Qaeda-aligned terror group in Libya.
The country was assured Christopher Steele's dossier provided credible evidence of Donald Trump colluding with Russia, when in fact the CIA and FBI knew almost immediately it was uncorroborated and based in part on Russian disinformation.
And now just a week after the heinous and deadly siege of the U.S. Capitol, the final narrative of what actually happened is still being written, revised and unmasked.
Since the weekend, major bombshell revelations already have substantially revised the initial story of a spontaneous mob overrunning an unsuspecting Capitol police force.
The FBI admitted Tuesday it received information ahead of the Jan. 6 tragedy suggesting some participants were planning a "war" on the Capitol, including killing officers and distributing maps of the complex. It alerted Washington D.C. law enforcement through the joint terrorism task force alert system. It also "disrupted" the travel plans of some of the suspected trouble-makers.
"We developed some intelligence that a number of individuals were planning to travel to the D.C. area with intentions to cause violence," Assistant Director Steven M. D'Antuono said. "We immediately shared that information, and action was taken."
The New York Police Department is reported to have given the Capitol Police similar intelligence warnings of impending violence.
The chief federal prosecutor in Washington declared Tuesday he is pursuing conspiracy charges, signaling the attacks on the Capitol involved multiple acts and multiple conspirators working in concert with each other. The prosecutor talked about the planting of carefully constructed IEDs as one such act. In other words, there was pre-planning for some elements of last Wednesday's chaos.
And the official timeline of events constructed by the New York Times through videos shows protesters began breaching the perimeter of the Capitol a full 20 minutes before Trump finished his speech.
This new evidence raises the first compelling question that remains unanswered. How could Trump incite an attack that had already been pre-planned and was in motion before his speech ended?
A senior intelligence official told Just the News he has found no evidence that the president, the White House or the National Security Council was alerted in formal intelligence briefings to the pre-warnings or suspicions of violence the FBI and NYPD have admitted they had.
D'Antuono explained that one of the concerns the FBI had was trying to distinguish whether those writing "despicable things on the internet are just practicing keyboard bravado or they actually have the intent to do harm."
Former NYPD Commissioner Bernard Kerik told Just the News on Tuesday it appeared the FBI and NYPD did their job in alerting the Capitol Police, but the evidence of a pre-planned attack would undercut the current narrative that Trump had incited a spontaneous insurrection.
"By all accounts, the FBI, NYPD and other authorities did exactly what they should have done by conducting interviews and making notifications to the Washington D.C. authorities," Kerik said. "If these reports are true, you cannot incite a group that already pre-planned acts of violence by days or weeks, and it raises serious questions as to what security precautions were taken at the Capitol as a result."
Getting the facts to resolve this question is essential for congressional and federal investigators, both for the legacy of Trump and for learning how to avoid a repeat of the deadly tragedy that struck last Wednesday.
The second major question that remains unanswered is: What did House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the other leaders in Congress know — and when did they know it — about the possibility for violence and the Pentagon's pre-attack offer to send National Guardsmen to reinforce the Capitol Police?
The U.S. Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund, who resigned after the attack, told The Washington Post that security officials at the House and Senate rebuffed his early request to call in the National Guard ahead of a protest.
Sund alleged that House Sergeant-at-Arms Paul Irving was concerned with the "optics" of declaring an emergency ahead of the protests and rejected a National Guard presence. He says Senate Sergeant-at-Arms Michael Stenger recommended that he informally request the Guard to be ready in case it was needed to maintain security.
Irving and Stenger have not talked publicly. But their account will be essential to the final effort to assign accountability for the glaring security lapses exposed last Wednesday. The key questions for both men is whether they warned Pelosi or Senate Leaders Mitch McConnell and Chuck Schumer about the violence concerns or consulted with the leaders about the idea of activating the Guard.
Democrats for weeks were concerned by the pro-Trump rally and previously had criticized Trump for using National Guard to quell Black Lives Matter riots in the summer. The leadership's discussions with their security chiefs now becomes an essential investigative focus.
Finally, there is this troubling third question: Were there facilitators inside the Capitol and outside it who instigated or enabled the attack to be carried out?
Rep. James Clyburn (D-S.C.) one of the House's longest serving and most respected members, first raised this question a few days ago. He aptly noted that protesters were able to locate and penetrate his unlisted, unmarked office within minutes, raising the possibility they had inside help.
And video taken contemporaneously shows officers and other people opening doors to rushing rioters and some people — purported by the filming cameramen to be leftist anarchists —smashing windows and urging protesters to jump into the Capitol.
Identifying any insider help and the motives will be the final and perhaps most delicate task investigators face.

[Chuck Smith]

No I haven't seen that at all.

But there are questions that need to be answered.

You know what I always say..... We need to let things play out.

It could have been an "inside" job by many people.... elected officials on either side. By capital security who were upset with election results or who wanted to take down the president.... by crazy nut bags who just wore police uniforms and acted like they belonged and during chaos people are not looking closely at credentials or if what the uniform they are wearing is exactly to a T what others are wearing. Remember they called for "back up"... so new people were arriving.

Anyways... dont want to get a tin foil hat on and scream "conspiracy"... but there are things that need to be answered. The ANTIFA is a plausable thing. Look how many ANTIFA members dress... black, body armor/vests on, face masks, shields, etc. They look almost "SWAT" ready. Again not saying this happened.... but I could see in mass confusion other police thinking some ANTIFA dressed people if they had a "badge" on could do what people are saying. But it also goes to say a nut bag on the right could do the exact same thing.

That is why there should be an investigation. Just like the timeline issues that you have brought up and so have I. So the rush to impeachment wasn't the best move. Like I talked about this should scare everyone. Look how the House has acted the past 4 years. With 2 investigations that were based on crappy info and they kept going even though they knew it was crappy info. Then an impeachment with no evidence. Then this last impeachment with no investigation or hearing. So what to say will happen if the house loses seats and the Republicans take control?

There is evidence of Biden doing some things.... evidence of his family.... etc. How about evidence of Harris "insighting" stuff. because she did this summer..... same rehtoric as Trump but even more direct about causing damage. Just think about it.... the rush job isn't good. Plus if you noticed some of the new Republican's getting elected are sick of this and sick of taking the "high road". The next 4 years could be ugly in DC.

[Chuck Smith]

The U.S. Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund, who resigned after the attack, told The Washington Post that security officials at the House and Senate rebuffed his early request to call in the National Guard ahead of a protest.
Sund alleged that House Sergeant-at-Arms Paul Irving was concerned with the "optics" of declaring an emergency ahead of the protests and rejected a National Guard presence. He says Senate Sergeant-at-Arms Michael Stenger recommended that he informally request the Guard to be ready in case it was needed to maintain security.
Irving and Stenger have not talked publicly. But their account will be essential to the final effort to assign accountability for the glaring security lapses exposed last Wednesday. The key questions for both men is whether they warned Pelosi or Senate Leaders Mitch McConnell and Chuck Schumer about the violence concerns or consulted with the leaders about the idea of activating the Guard.
Democrats for weeks were concerned by the pro-Trump rally and previously had criticized Trump for using National Guard to quell Black Lives Matter riots in the summer. The leadership's discussions with their security chiefs now becomes an essential investigative focus.

Everyone should re-read this part of what plainsman posted.

One guy said.... we dont need the National Gaurd... the other said.. Lets get them on the ready. Then look at who is "incharge" of each of those houses... one is a Dem the other is a Rep. But that shows you THEY KNEW SOMETHING WAS UP.

Then read about how all summer about how many Dem's were outspoken about BLM and ANTIFA protests/riots and how they should be handled....ie: use police or national gaurd or not use them. Remember how i keep saying.... the police have been neutered by the elected officials.... You see all of this plays a part. Also remember how I stated if "biden" wins it will give groups the "balls" to go further... i had ANTIFA in mind... .but goes on the other side as well. If one group sees how police are not doing things to another group. What should make them think the police will act any different towards them... and HONESTLY they police can't because of the law suits. If the police started to crack the skulls of Neo Nazis and not BLM.... the NEO Nazi group would win in a land slide in a court battle. Sad but True.

[huntin1]

Unfortunately, none of this matters because it does not coincide with the Dems agenda. The Democrats have their own version of the facts and since they have the national media in their back pockets the majority of Americans will only hear whatever information the Democrats want us to hear. With the help of Facebook, Twitter and most all of the major news sources the Democrats have assured that the only message getting through is their version of the facts. History has shown us that from Hitler's Nazi Germany to every communist/socialist nation in the world, if you control the media, you control the message. If you control the message, you control the people.

[Chuck Smith]

History has shown us that from Hitler's Nazi Germany to every communist/socialist nation in the world, if you control the media, you control the message. If you control the message, you control the people.

This is what I keep talking about. I also say when people call conservatives or republican "NAZI's".... who is actually controlling the information and media... It isn't the conservatives/republicans.

Also.... did anyone watch the interview with Jacob Blake.

HE ADMITTED TO HAVING A KNIFE ON HIM WHILE HE WAS WRESTLING WITH POLICE..... HE ADMITTED HE DROPPED IT WHILE WRESTLING WITH THEM AND PICKED IT BACK UP.... but what did the media report and still his lawyer stated.. HE WAS UNARMED!!!

Didn't this mis-information and lie start riots and a city burned. Plus people lost their lives because of the lies spread by the media. Also didn't elected officials also say to go protest and "make your voices heard"... didn't some state to RISE UP..... etc.

Hmmmmm....... funny how facts that come out are totally different than what gets reported. Still waiting for the media to put a front page saying.... WE WERE WRONG.

[Chuck Smith]

https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/ ... 4455575554

Here is a video of Don Lemon and Chris Cuomo basically saying... anyone who voted for Trump is with the KKK and is a Racist....

WRONG... you dont think this is dangerous speech. Dont they know black people voted for Trump... hispanics... Asia... gay....trans... etc.

This is what many have been talking about.

It also goes the same way when people say... if you voted for Biden you are a communist. But you dont see people saying those words on FOX.... interesting isn't it.

Here is the deal.... I can half way see what Don Lemon is trying to say. IE: If you are voting or thinking the same way as someone that is a KKK member... maybe you are in the wrong. But here is the deal.... KKK believes in God... so are they wrong? KKK are against abortion... are they wrong? KKK believes in marriage is between a man and a woman.... are they wrong?

You can agree with people on something but not all. Don Lemon is trying to group everyone in the same boat.

Just like I said above.... it is like saying every liberal is a communist or if you voted for Biden your a communist.... no they are not. Some people who are liberal or voted for Biden don't agree with abortion.... some people who are liberal or voted for Biden believe in god... people who voted for Biden believe marriage is between a man and a woman.... Hmmm... those are the same things the KKK believe in... so are these people also KLAN MEMBERS... that is what Don Lemon referring too. Because they hold simular beliefs.

If you dont think the media is driving the hate and divide in the country.... you need to wake up or I got some ocean side property for you in Colorado.

[Chuck Smith]

https://twitter.com/RealOmarNavarro/sta ... 4664928257

Look at this video of the montage of what elected officals have stated and celebrities/influencers.

But this is all of TRUMPS FAULT...

[Chuck Smith]

https://www.fox13now.com/news/local-new ... itol-riots

Lets put this there.


BTW... a little back ground on Mr. John Sullivan...

Arrested before during BLM and ANTIFA riots during the summer.
Was in DC in August screaming... Rip Trump from the WHITEHOUSE.
Was seen in all major riots...in Minneapolis, Kenosha, DC, etc. for this past summer for BLM and ANTIFA
Is a leader in both BLM and ANTIFA

So was it only Trump Supporters who caused all the chaos at the Capital??????

Like I say... let the investigation happen and see what unfolds. But it wont do anything about the fact that the House rushed to IMPEACH without an investigation and proper hearing. Scary to think what the future holds for whom ever has the house chair.

[Plainsman]

He needs to pay for incinerating a riot.

I would liked to have seen that. Was he like John Sullivan and calling for someone to burn those MF people up?

[Chuck Smith]

Isn't it funny if you let things play out what is coming to light.

Again... not say there wasn't Trump supporters who rushed and stormed the capital... there was.

But there was also others who were aggitators, instigators, etc. There were ANTI-TRUMP PEOPLE as well.

Honestly what should scare the hell out of the Democratic party is that I saw on Twitter a flyer from ANTIFA that stated some along the lines of.... F-Biden, we want our land back. It was on Andy Ngo's page. It was an ANTIFA "youth" group website.

So now if you get "trump supporters" aligning with ANTIFA... whom many Democrats supported all summer because they were "anti-trump".... what will happen? Hopefully they will do what Trump wanted is LAW AND ORDER. What I really hope is that any conservative or republican who see's the democrats shift to this... shows videos of Trump saying the exact same thing they are... but earlier.

Just look at Gov. Cuomo... now wanting to open things up in NYC... along with some other govenors... just wait... after the 20th... Newsom will start to open things in CA.

[Chuck Smith]

Another Mayor is coming out saying ... .OPEN ASAP.... Chicago mayor. Look what she said a few months ago... quite the opposite.

Funny how this is happening.... and I believe I stated this before the election even happened....

If you hear Pelosi, Schummer or other higher ups start to say... OPEN UP.... that would put the icying on the cake for YOU GOT TO BE KIDDING ME....

But Cuomo is a big sprinkle on that Cake.... litterally only a month ago he was saying more lock downs.

[KEN W]

FBI Washington Field Office Assistant Director in Charge Steven D'Antuono.....

"To those of you who took part in the violence, here’s something you should know: Every FBI field office in the country is looking for you.

As a matter of fact, even your friends and family are tipping us off. So you might want to consider turning yourself in instead of wondering when we’re going to come knocking on your door—because we will."

[Plainsman]

Hope thats right Ken, and not only a fishing game.

[Plainsman]

https://youtu.be/YtLnrRHw9PA