Capitol insurrection hearings.

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I spelled it out in the first post you replied to, are you so senile you can't remember?

.

Guess so! Knowing you, i am certain it wasn't complicated. Could you just state it again?

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Yeah. Like I said. I’ve brought it up a bunch of times and none of y’all ever want to actually address it.

You know I’m right.

Next time you are right will be the first

 

[woodwork201]

I'm confused

I probably have read quite a few more history books than you have. In none of them I have found that there is a mechanism that allows people in the US to ignore the rule of law when they don't like an election outcome. I have read that the last time it happened a civil war broke out and over 500000 people got killed.

Revolutions happen, and out of revolutions nations are destroyed and rebuilt. In the very best of those in the history of humanity, the American Revolution led to the creation of the greatest nation in the history of mankind.

Yes, revolutions are a tool that sometimes are the right tool for the job.

What some people need to remember is that any government put in place in the United states, outside of the constitutionally defined process of elections, would be illegitimate and would not actually be the United States. Any government put in place by force would not be a legitimate government.

Our current government, the Biden administration, is in my opinion illegitimate but the solution is in the courts or in the next election. Things happen all the time that violate the Constitution; they don't automatically invalidate our government or nation or the Constitution itself. We go to court. If we don't like the outcome of court we engage our elected officials and try to change the law. If we don't like the outcome we can peacefully protest to put more pressure on our elected officials to change the law.

But we don't use force. Force ends our nation and ends the rule of our Constitution. There are no provisions in the Constitution that tell us how to continue government changed by force, therefore the new government would not be our constitutional government and no government formed by force can claim the authority or protections of the Constitution.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Our current government, the Biden administration, is in my opinion illegitimate but the solution is in the courts or in the next election

Yep. I might add: until you produce mountains of this evidence in court, you and your opinion can go sit in the corner with the alien abductees and the spoonbenders.

 

[MisterBeale]

produce mountains of this evidence in court

. .. so you think the law system and the courts aren't stake holders huh?

That's cute.

Lawyers / Law Firms Summary

Opensecret's money profile for the Lawyers / Law Firms industry/interest group. See contributions and lobbying history.

www.opensecrets.org

 

[basquebromance]

 

[iceberg]

It's not an "out."

I don't pretend to have knowledge that I do not have.

Apparently you are omniscient.

I am so glad we are graced to have you as our moderator. Thank you for controlling the truth here at USMB.

Ouch.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

.

so you think the law system and the courts aren't stake holders huh?

Oh stfu already. When team trump was ordered to produce its evidence in court, they withdrew thei fraud claims and then got laughed out of court. So take your weird cult fantasies and peddle them maybe to someone who just woke up from a 10 year coma.

 

[MisterBeale]

I did a search of the number of police injured, and strangely enough two interesting things came up.

Most of those "injured officer," reports came out nearly a month after the riot? Why so long after?

. . . and second, the numbers tended to vary depending on the source one read. Why the discrepancy?

 

[excalibur]

I did a search of the number of police injured, and strangely enough two interesting things came up.

Most of those "injured officer," reports came out nearly a month after the riot? Why so long after?

There were multiple days of riots outside the White House over one weekend and into that Monday. The number of injured were released at the time.

50 Secret Service agents injured in White House riots as Donald Trump is taken to 'terror attack' bunker

MORE than 50 Secret Service agents have been injured during ugly clashes outside the White House on a sixth night of violence sparked by the death of George Floyd. The attacks came after President …

www.thesun.co.uk

At least 60 Secret Service members injured during George Floyd protests in DC

More than 60 Secret Service officers and special agents sustained multiple injuries in three days worth of violent clashes stemming from protests demanding justice for George Floyd in Washington, D.C.

www.foxnews.com

More than 60 Secret Service officers and agents were injured near the White House this weekend

Protests following the death of George Floyd, a black man who pleaded that he couldn't breathe while he was held down with a knee by a Minneapolis police officer, have spread nationwide. Follow here for the latest updates.

www.cnn.com

 

[toobfreak]

I’ve identified different stakeholders in Capitol riots, multiple times. You have people who came just to hear Trump’s rally, you had people who felt called to action by their president, you people who got swept into it due to mob energy, and you people who stopped short short of breaking tbe law.

Exactly. And hasn't that always been the real point about 1/6? Most people there came for a simple Trump rally and ended up at the Capitol for no particular nefarious reason other than everyone else was going there, and some few were bad actors with premeditated plans looking to exploit the situation.

That is why I never will subscribe to this bull about Trump or his supporters all being evil insurrectionists and white supreme domestic terrors who tried to "overturn democracy." Mistakes were made on all sides: mistakes made by some of the people there and they will pay for that, mistakes made by the capitol police, mistakes made by those who run things there who told the NG two miles down the road not to come, and obviously, mistakes by Trump.

But I don't think any except maybe a few key instigators there ever thought, wanted nor expected the day to turn out quite as it did . . .

 

[lantern2814]

The actions on Jen. 6th were terrorist acts.

The definition of "terrorism" according to US Code:
from: https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title18/part1/chapter113B&edition=prelim
"§2331. Definitions
As used in this chapter—

(1) the term "international terrorism" means activities that—

(A) involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State, or that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or of any State;

(B) appear to be intended—

(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;

(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or

(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping;"


The expressed purpose of the actions on January 6th was to stop the confirmation of the electoral count.

Yet no insurrection or terrorism charges. Try again.....and fail again

 

[MisterBeale]

Oh stfu already. When team trump was ordered to produce its evidence in court, they withdrew thei fraud claims and then got laughed out of court. So take your weird cult fantasies and peddle them maybe to someone who just woke up from a 10 year coma.

Honestly? I never followed the election suits that closely, but I do think you have this wrong.

Most of the controversy that they televised for media consumption, did not have to do with the evidence being presented in court, it had to do with whether they COULD present their evidence in court.

. . . and, based on the arguments presented by both sides, from what I am to understand, since elections are a STATE matter, these courts ruled that the Trump campaign never provided enough proof of CONSPIRACY, NOT ELECTION FRAUD.

Election Fraud made no difference to the courts, in their minds? Cities, States, and Municipalities have, and do have every right to conduct elections however they want, and the only ones that have standing to challenge election fraud under those circumstances are those that have their votes invalidated or watered down, this is addressed under the Voting Rights Act.

OTH? For the Federal Candidate, for him to have standing, vis-à-vis, the various State run elections, he would have to prove a wide ranging conspiracy against him. At the time of these suites? No such evidence could give him standing, there was only circumstantial evidence.

The STATE & the Courts had no compelling Constitutional reason to overturn the various state elections. And conservatives that are against activist courts were being hypocrites to advocate anything otherwise.

IOW? If the DNC cheated? They did so fair and square. The evidence for vote fraud is clearly there, for anyone paying attention. But for a wide ranging coordinated conspiracy, which is NOT just circumstantial proof? Nope, that evidence, at that time of the cases, just did not exist. I am not sure it exists now.

Standing

Definition of Standing in the Legal Dictionary by The Free Dictionary

legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com

". . . A defendant must be the party responsible for perpetrating the alleged legal wrong.

Most standing issues arise over the enforcement of an allegedly unconstitutional statute, ordinance, or policy. One may challenge a law or policy on constitutional grounds if he can show that enforcement of the law or implementation of the policy infringes on an individual constitutional right, such as Freedom of Speech. For example, in tinker v. des moines independent community school district, 393 U.S. 503, 89 S. Ct. 733, 21 L. Ed. 2d 731 (1969), high school officials in Des Moines, Iowa, had suspended students for wearing black armbands to school to protest U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War. There was no question that the parents of the students had standing to challenge the restrictions on the wearing of armbands. Mere ideological opposition to a particular government policy, such as the Vietnam War, however, is not sufficient grounds to challenge that policy in court.

<snip>

The issue of standing is more than a technical aspect of the judicial process. A grant or denial of standing determines who may challenge government policies and what types of policies may be challenged. Those who believe that the federal courts should not increase their power generally believe standing should be used to limit access to the courts by persons or groups seeking to change public policy. They believe the legislative branch should deal with these types of issues. Opponents of a strict standing test complain that plaintiffs never get a chance to prove their case in court. They believe that justice should not be denied by the application of judicially created doctrines such as standing. . . ."


So what did the various DNC and GOP jurisdictions do that was unconstitutional? And where is the proof of that?

As you can see, this can be a subjective test, as I posted before, by the stake holders in the system. . . say, if they do not wish to see big changes, or. . . have their homes burned to the ground.

 

[lantern2814]

So you lied about the video. Gotcha.

You also are now walking back the "prosecutor looking into his crackhead son".

Two lies.

Want to keep going or are you done lying?

You are the liar assclown. Video evidence. But keep lying. It’s all you ever do.

 

[woodwork201]

Bwhaaaa! Pelosi NEVER wanted ANY input from Republicans or their witnesses…that’s a fact.

And, Cheney, and little Adam Kitzinger are just waiting til after the midterms to change their party affiliations to Democrats…

I don't understand why they didn't have all their committee memberships stripped after going against their party and constituents.

 

[woodwork201]

Ashli died because she didn’t realize what a liar our President was

She died because she got swept up in an FBI staged riot. She should have stood by her values and not let FBI plants convince her to do stupid stuff.

 

[woodwork201]

Total LIE.

Pelosi wanted a serious, bipartisan, independent commission to investigate, YOUR SCUM reneged and shot it down.

Pelosi is the one that has fought tooth and nail for an investigation.

YOUR SIDE are scared shitless of any investigation.... They fear the truth, will melt them!

Pelosi doesn't want a fair or unbiased investigation because she intentionally colluded to make it happen.

 

[lantern2814]

I'm not a moron. You're ignorant.

Trump’s Own Officials Label His Ukraine Theory As Russian Election Interference

A Ukrainian lawmaker with Russian ties was sanctioned for trying to hurt Biden with a false smear — a smear Trump, his lawyer and his favorite TV network still push.

www.huffpost.com

Russian targeted the US with disinformation about Biden in an effort to help Trump and hurt Biden. You believe the propaganda.

The Huffington Post?! And you have the audacity to call ANYBODY else a liar? You best just leave now before you completely embarrass yourself.

 

[toobfreak]

THE UNAVOIDABLE COMPARISON----

I just can't get over this stark disparity:

Why are the democrats so compelled like Russia, Russia, Russia to get to the bottom of THIS one thing at any expense:

Yet not even the SLIGHTEST bit interested in looking into THIS?

I've heard because it was the CAPITOL, dag nab it, but didn't Joe fix all that with some fence, barbed wire, a few restrictions and barricades?

But the damage caused by CHAZ/CHOP/OCCUPY, and 8,000 riots in 350 cities with 2000 police injured or killed, innumerable properties damaged, police quitting, untold businesses looted, highways blocked, billions in losses, soaring crime rates now, and lives disrupted is not nearly as easy to fix, not as easy to get over, not as easy to excuse or forget, but doesn't make for NEARLY as good fill for on the Nightly News.

 

[lantern2814]

January 6th was based on the false claim that the election was stolen, "stop the steal", not the riots IMO. And ironically, they were treated much more harshly than the Capitol rioters.

You need to just shut up and stop lying. Released without bail and no charges is being treated more harshly? More proof of you being unfit for your position.