Liz Cheney says Trump appears to have been ‘personally involved in planning’ 6 Jan insurrection

[NotfooledbyW]

So, you have me at a disadvantage here because you are quoting posts from August from another thread, and I'm posting from my phone, there is no link to click so I can go back and read my old post and understand what context I was posting in.

I will gladly provide the links shortly. Thanks for requesting them.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

HERE IS THE LINK

In the second impeachment, again, you took circumstance and used it as the basis for impeachment. You omitted "peacefully and patriotically", and pasted a bunch of unrelated statements together to fabricate a narrative

So, you have me at a disadvantage here because you are quoting posts from August from another thread, and I'm posting from my phone, there is no link to click so I can go back and read my old post and understand what context I was posting in.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

ThisIsMe wrote: Millions of Republican voters actually think the election was stolen, probably including Trump. Doesn't mean it was a lie, they just didn't like what they saw. 21OCT28-POST#478

MarathonMike wrote: The Democrat Wall Of Denial grows higher and wider. All that is accomplishing is more division in our country and a complete loss of faith in our election system. Nicely done Democrats, enjoy your 'WIN'. 20DEC29-POST#15

NFBW wrote: on behalf of trying to avoid any risk of a misunderstanding between you and me, I’d like to use MarathonMike as a typical example of a Trump voter who has the big misunderstanding that the election was stolen from DJT. DJT Won? Do you agree that not all Republicans share affection for the same big misunderstanding that MM has that DJT won and it can be proven with unlimited time. That should make it an agreeable fact that probably 70% of the American people do not have the same misunderstanding that MM has. Do you agree that the two above points are relatively secure as truth and matter of fact and that MM’s big misunderstanding is therefore a complete opposite of truth and not a matter of fact? And what is the opposite of true? 21OCT28-POST#483

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

They will only allow the evidence that supports their predisposed agenda to be divulged.

Irrelevant and basically made up. Facts are facts. If it is a fact that Trump was planning for and hoping for exactly what happened that day, and we find out... You are saying you don't care, because you may not have heard other facts, too. A weak equivocation. Very transparent.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

ThisIsMe wrote: Millions of Republican voters actually think the election was stolen, probably including Trump. Doesn't mean it was a lie, they just didn't like what they saw. 21OCT28-POST#478

NFBW wrote: And Matthew Thomas Purse, let’s call him MTP just didn’t like what he saw in November 2020 and DJT helped MTP try to shit on the 81 million voters that voted for Joe Biden’s vision of America, not DJT and MarathonMike and Matthew Thomas Purse’s vision for America 21OCT28-POST#485

“”” On Jan. 6 Matthew Thomas Purse, a 45-year-old Navy veteran from Irvine, California, arrived at the Capitol with a red patch reading “DON’T SHOOT — PRESS”

He Dressed Up As Press To Storm The Capitol. Now We Know He Runs A White Nationalist Website.

Matthew Purse was one of the most malevolent characters in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 6. The horrifying extent of his extremism has gone unreported, until now.

www.huffpost.com

His presence also undercuts the revisionist right-wing narrative that the rioters were merely a group of bumbling MAGA tourists, as opposed to what they really were: the vanguard of a dangerous, racist mass movement hellbent on destroying what exists of American democracy. - - - He Dressed As Press To Storm The Capitol. Now We Know He Runs A White Nationalist Website. - - - Matthew Purse was one of the most malevolent characters in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 6. The horrifying extent of his extremism has gone unreported, until now.
By Christopher Mathias 10/28/2021 “””

 

[NotfooledbyW]

ThisIsMe wrote: Millions of Republican voters actually think the election was stolen, probably including Trump. Doesn't mean it was a lie, they just didn't like what they saw. 21OCT28-POST#478

NFBW wrote: Without evidence why do you think they are not lying to themselves about what they think they saw? - - - Why did DJT suck a couple hundred $million from election fraud believers and not use it to bring lawsuits
to prove in court all the election fraud he thinks he saw? If for other reason than to convict those who did it so they can’t do it next time. - - - The only one I think really believes Biden stole the election from DJT is that MyPillowGuy. But he is bat shit crazy and high on Jesus. 21OCT28-POST#

 

[NotfooledbyW]

ThisIsMe wrote: I agree, if trumps intent was to have pence de certify the election, that wasn't a good idea, they should have gone through the courts. 21OCT28-POST#478

NFBW wrote: The fact is by January 5th there was no place in any court to go because all fifty states certified their electors by December 14 which put them Constitutionally in “safe harbor” to never be challenged or changed - - - So you have no reason ThisIsMe to say “IF” trumps intent was to have Pence de -certify the election by sending it to the House where Trump/Pence wins, because on January 5 DJT put the following statement in writing on his campaign letterhead. - - - "Mike Pence is in total agreement that on Jan. 6, the election should be overturned and he should move it to the House." - - - The statement was not true. Pence did not agree to abide by the Eastman plan to overturn the certified results of the election. We need to find out why DJT published a false statement about Pence the night before some of the militants and the crowd he invited to be in DC on that date went after “coward” Mike PENCE in the Capitol wanting to hang him. 21OCT28-POST#487

 

[NotfooledbyW]

ThisIsMe wrote: I agree, if trumps intent was to have pence de certify the election, that wasn't a good idea, they should have gone through the courts. 21OCT28-POST#478

Why are you ThisIsMe saying “ if trumps intent” …? what more evidence do you need? See what DJT said on Jan6 . - - - “John” is John Eastman who gave DJT the plan to have Pence pull off some anti-democracy scheme that would award himself and DJT the victory. DJT proclaimed it on Jan6 while the riot to get it done was just getting started. 21OCT28-POST#488

https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2021-01-13/transcript-of-trumps-speech-at-rally-before-us-capitol-riot?context=amp

Trump rallying the forces at noon January 6, 2021: - - - “John is one of the most brilliant lawyers in the country, and he looked at this and he said, “What an absolute disgrace that this can be happening to our Constitution.”
And he looked at Mike Pence, and I hope Mike is going to do the right thing. I hope so. I hope so. - - - Because if Mike Pence does the right thing, we win the election. All he has to do, all this is, this is from the number one, or certainly one of the top, Constitutional lawyers in our country. He has the absolute right to do it. We’re supposed to protect our country, support our country, support our Constitution, and protect our constitution. - - - States want to revote. The states got defrauded, They were given false information. They voted on it. Now they want to recertify. They want it back. All Vice President Pence has to do is send it back to the states to recertify and we become president and you are the happiest people.” 21JAN06-DJT-jEASTMAN

 

[ThisIsMe]

ThisIsMe wrote: Remember when all these states were entering into that national vote compact? You know, the one where these states would give their electoral votes to the national popular vote, regardless of how their state voted? 21OCT28-POST#464

NFBW wrote: No. Please provide a few clues. I don’t believe however that it has anything to do with election law, the Constitution or State law or why DJT actual lost the Electoral College vote in 2020 or why trying change the way the winner is decided after losing would be ok with an American who believes in Democracy. You can clarify the latter as well or we can write that point off as meaningless chatter just as well. 21OCT28-POST#480

No. Please provide a few clues

OK.

Map: These are the states that have agreed to a plan to replace the Electoral College

Colorado became the latest state to join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, now one of 15 states and D.C.

www.nbcnews.com

So, there were at least 15 states that signed on to it, including the district of Columbia. The idea being that, regardless of how the citizens of those states voted, those states would award their electoral votes to whomever won the national popular vote. When all of that was happening, many dems defended it and supported it.

I bring it up because it is an example of where the will of the people would have been subverted. Regardless of how the state actually voted, they would send the electors based on the national popular vote. It would have been very similar to what pence would have done if he would have done what he's being accused of. That is ignoring the will of the voters, and sending the election back to the states, and having them submit an alternate set of electors.

BOTH scenarios are wrong, but when it could have benefitted the dems, they cheered and supported it.

 

[ThisIsMe]

ThisIsMe wrote: I agree, if trumps intent was to have pence de certify the election, that wasn't a good idea, they should have gone through the courts. 21OCT28-POST#478

Why are you ThisIsMe saying “ if trumps intent” …? what more evidence do you need? See what DJT said on Jan6 . - - - “John” is John Eastman who gave DJT the plan to have Pence pull off some anti-democracy scheme that would award himself and DJT the victory. DJT proclaimed it on Jan6 while the riot to get it done was just getting started. 21OCT28-POST#488

https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2021-01-13/transcript-of-trumps-speech-at-rally-before-us-capitol-riot?context=amp

Trump rallying the forces at noon January 6, 2021: - - - “John is one of the most brilliant lawyers in the country, and he looked at this and he said, “What an absolute disgrace that this can be happening to our Constitution.”
And he looked at Mike Pence, and I hope Mike is going to do the right thing. I hope so. I hope so. - - - Because if Mike Pence does the right thing, we win the election. All he has to do, all this is, this is from the number one, or certainly one of the top, Constitutional lawyers in our country. He has the absolute right to do it. We’re supposed to protect our country, support our country, support our Constitution, and protect our constitution. - - - States want to revote. The states got defrauded, They were given false information. They voted on it. Now they want to recertify. They want it back. All Vice President Pence has to do is send it back to the states to recertify and we become president and you are the happiest people.” 21JAN06-DJT-jEASTMAN

So, you seem to be pulling our conversation away from it's original premise. There's no need to litigate the jan6 riot, the select committee is already looking in to that, as has already the FBI.

My question was, do you feel the dems are capable of being honest and fair and objective.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Irrelevant and basically made up. Facts are facts.

I agree, there will be a lot of irrelevant and made up "facts". It's why I asked if you felt the dems could be objective and honest.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

ThisIsMe wrote: There's no need to litigate the jan6 riot, the select committee is already looking in to that, as has already the FBI. 21OCT28-POST#490

NFBW wrote: I’m not litigating the Jan6 political attempt to overturn the election nor am I litigating the militant violent attempt to support the political operation. I’m trying to find out why you are trying so hard to normalize DJT’s abnormalities with regard to his losing an election and his key role in inciting a riot whether he intended his militant people to assault a live session of Congress or not. It says s lot about DJT’s normalizers when they refuse to discuss certain aspects of the DJT abnormalities but want to talk about the character of the good Americans who actually are in office as a check and balance to corrupted presidential power. And already you are suggesting our conversation has gone out of bounds. I say nothing is off the table if we stick to a discussion based on facts. SO If my facts are off - let me know why, 21OCT28-POST#492

 

[Oldestyle]

Yeah, but that investigation didn't conclude with the results they wanted, so they have to dispose of those facts, and start a new investigation. This time, they will get a guilty verdict, so those will be the facts they are looking for!

Here's the problem with a "guilty" verdict coming from this commission, ThisIsMe! Since it's completely stacked with people that hate Trump, will anyone take what it says seriously? Why would they?
I see this going down like this. The committee will keep alleging things...usually from anonymous sources...right up to the midterms in an attempt to give the liberal media SOMETHING to talk about other than how bad the border is...how much it costs to fill up your vehicle or your home heating tank...how empty shelves are as an unprecedented shipping bottleneck drags on...or how FUBARED the Middle East is once again becoming!
Once the election has come and gone this whole thing blows away like a fart in the wind! Why? Because there is no THERE...there! It was a protest that got out of hand. One that never should have been allowed to get out of hand! It was never an "insurrection"! That's always been hyperbole. Congress was back in session less than 24 hours after the protest. Our "Democracy" was never in danger of being lost forever!

 

[NotfooledbyW]

So, you seem to be pulling our conversation away from it's original premise.

NFBW wrote: I don’t think so. A brief summary FYI ThisIsMe

ThisIsMe wrote: Do you believe the democrats are capable of being completely objective and unbiased? 21OCT27-POST#423

NFBW wrote: I am exceedingly convinced that facts do not allow or condone bias and when laid bare they are the most objective source of information available to all of us. Why are you bothering with redundant questions? 21OCT27-POST#425.

NFBW wrote: What do you, ThisIsMe , think of these facts and timeline. Are you impressed with DJT’s conduct as POTUS when his VP and Members of Congress, their staff and Police Officers were attacked by the mob that DJT helped incite? 21OCT27-POST#427

ThisIsMe wrote: Facts are only credible if they are presented in context. 21OCT27-POST#451

ThisIsMe wrote: Generally, no. I was never a fan of trump. 21OCT27-POST#464

NFBW wrote: Why, “generally”? Why no judgment on DJT’s conduct specifically in that timeline of those four hours on Jan6 when there was a real attempt by the loser of the 2020 Presidential election to unconstitutionally make himself the winner based on his fabulously unAmerican big lie that he really won it but it was stolen. 21OCT28-POST#473

 

[Oldestyle]

ThisIsMe wrote: There's no need to litigate the jan6 riot, the select committee is already looking in to that, as has already the FBI. 21OCT28-POST#490

NFBW wrote: I’m not litigating the Jan6 political attempt to overturn the election nor am I litigating the militant violent attempt to support the political operation. I’m trying to find out why you are trying so hard to normalize DJT’s abnormalities with regard to his losing an election and his key role in inciting a riot whether he intended his militant people to assault a live session of Congress or not. It says s lot about DJT’s normalizers when they refuse to discuss certain aspects of the DJT abnormalities but want to talk about the character of the good Americans who actually are in office as a check and balance to corrupted presidential power. And already you are suggesting our conversation has gone out of bounds. I say nothing is off the table if we stick to a discussion based on facts. SO If my facts are off - let me know why, 21OCT28-POST#492

In the same sentence you accuse Trump of having a "key role in inciting a riot" and then then follow that up by saying "whether he intended his militant people to assault a live session of Congress or not."

Quite obviously if he never intended his supporters to assault a live session of Congress than he obviously isn't guilty of inciting a riot! If his intention was for them to protest peacefully...which is what he told them to do...then how can you claim he incited ANYTHING? What he incited was a peaceful protest! What happened was piss poor security at the Capitol allowed a protest to get out of hand and breach the Capitol.

You say you want to stick to the facts buy your very own post doesn't seem to be able to make up it's mind what the facts consist of!

 

[Shareprofit]

The President is allowed to plan for a rally and protest.

So what? He told everyone to go home peacefully.

But you Nazis want to keep inventing some real threat. Jan 6th was your Reichstag Fire and you’re going to use it to attack your political opponents and to take away people’s rights.

How bloody deceiptful, it wasn't a rally but a carefully planned violent insurrection. You're a traitor mate, if you like Russian influences that much go there.

 

[Oldestyle]

How bloody deceiptful, it wasn't a rally but a carefully planned violent insurrection. You're a traitor mate, if you like Russian influences that much go there.

Carefully planned to do what exactly? Pose for pictures with Nancy Pelosi's lecturn? How do you carefully plan what took place that day? What did the protesters gain from getting into the Capital? With all due respect, Share...the FBI found almost no planning to breach the Capital taking place before the protests that day. It appears to be something that was spontaneous when the protesters saw how unprepared the Capital Police were for that number of people. You've got a bunch of people milling around Capital offices taking selfies. That's not some organized group with a plan to take down the US government...that some people that ended up inside of the Capital and didn't know what to do next!

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Oldestyle wrote: Carefully planned to do what exactly? 21OCT28-POST#497

NFBW wrote: Those in on the plan thought they could force then-Vice President Mike Pence to subvert the Constitution and throw out the 2020 election results so the HOUSE Republicans could anoint DJT President. Those not in on the plan were likely hyped up last minute when DJT told them about the Eastman Plan right before the riot started 21OCT28-POST#498

Trump rallying the forces at noon January 6, 2021: - - - “””” “John is one of the most brilliant lawyers in the country, and he looked at this and he said, “What an absolute disgrace that this can be happening to our Constitution.”
And he looked at Mike Pence, and I hope Mike is going to do the right thing. I hope so. I hope so. - - - Because if Mike Pence does the right thing, we win the election. All he has to do, all this is, this is from the number one, or certainly one of the top, Constitutional lawyers in our country. He has the absolute right to do it. We’re supposed to protect our country, support our country, support our Constitution, and protect our constitution. - - - States want to revote. The states got defrauded, They were given false information. They voted on it. Now they want to recertify. They want it back. All Vice President Pence has to do is send it back to the states to recertify and we become president and you are the happiest people.” 21JAN06-DJT-jEASTMAN “””

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Oldestyle wrote: Quite obviously if he never intended his supporters to assault a live session of Congress than he obviously isn't guilty of inciting a riot! 21OCT28-POST#497

NFBW wrote: Is it possible for DJT to have had a key role in inciting rioters who had the same objective as his political objective for Jan6 to stop Biden from being inaugurated so he gets a second one? - - - DJT’s BIG hyper-inflated misunderstanding that his WIN was stolen from him was the driving force behind the riot. DJT owns the attempt to politically steal the election from 81 million Democrats. DJT owns the riot to violently steal the election from 81 million Democrats. His ownership may not make DJT criminally liable but DJT incited that riot. 21OCT29-POST#499

 

[Oldestyle]

Oldestyle wrote: Quite obviously if he never intended his supporters to assault a live session of Congress than he obviously isn't guilty of inciting a riot! 21OCT28-POST#497

NFBW wrote: Is it possible for DJT to have had a key role in inciting rioters who had the same objective as his political objective for Jan6 to stop Biden from being inaugurated so he gets a second one? - - - DJT’s BIG hyper-inflated misunderstanding that his WIN was stolen from him was the driving force behind the riot. DJT owns the attempt to politically steal the election from 81 million Democrats. DJT owns the riot to violently steal the election from 81 million Democrats. His ownership may not make DJT criminally liable but DJT incited that riot. 21OCT29-POST#499

It was the driving force behind the "protest", Not Fooled! Not the riot. The driving force behind the riot was how unprepared the Capital Police were to handle the protest. Donald Trump told those protesters to be peaceful. He doesn't own the riot.