Newsweek: Capitol Police Lt. on J6 Says it Was Set-Up-"You guys were all set up 100%"

“You people”. Just so we know…who are you talking about?
“You People” (your side) - The side that supports people burning, looting, and beating throughout US cities when a court decision, election, legislative bill, or law enforcement action does not go their way.
 


Wow, Tucker just had Darren Beattie of Revolver News on with some new footage regarding the famous "pipe bombs" found on J6.

This is more solid evidence that the events of the day were staged. It was another inside job very much like 911
 
You’re describing your 1/6 brethren there.
Really? Those that participated in 1/6/21 event at the US Capitol were the same ones who burned and looted American businesses and beat innocents or threw rocks at police througout 2020 in cities such as Minneapolis, St. Louis, Chicago, Washington DC, New York, Seattle, Denver, Portland???

According to you, these are 1/6 participants in 2020:

IMG_1907.jpeg


IMG_1908.jpeg


IMG_1909.jpeg
 
Pelosi made sure she would not have to testify her role or non-role in accepting resources to protect the Capitol leading up to January 6th. Had she done that, it would have provided more credibility to the Committee mission and objective. Had she welcomed the opportunity to testify, I would be pushing for Trump to testify.
You can’t equate the two. Pelosi isn’t being charged with a felony. Trump is. Trump’s DOJ didn‘t look at an insurrection and blame the democrats. REPUBLICANS DID. THEY EVEN SAID TRUMP WAS RESPONSIBLE.
 
You can’t equate the two. Pelosi isn’t being charged with a felony. Trump is. Trump’s DOJ didn‘t look at an insurrection and blame the democrats. REPUBLICANS DID. THEY EVEN SAID TRUMP WAS RESPONSIBLE.
My intention is not to equate the two. I find it less than credible when the one bringing the charges and creating the committee goes out of her way to make sure she does not have to testify. If she was so certain about Trump, why the extra effort to make it a rule of the Committee that she not have to testify?
 
My intention is not to equate the two. I find it less than credible when the one bringing the charges and creating the committee goes out of her way to make sure she does not have to testify. If she was so certain about Trump, why the extra effort to make it a rule of the Committee that she not have to testify?
Speaker of the house McCarthy along with Reps. Scott Perry (R-Pa.), Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) and Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.). all spoke with Trump on January 6th. And they defied subpoenas to find out relevant information.
 
Speaker of the house McCarthy along with Reps. Scott Perry (R-Pa.), Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) and Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.). all spoke with Trump on January 6th. And they defied subpoenas to find out relevant information.
And? How relevant is that compared to the one setting up the committee and making rules to exempt herself from testifying?
 
And? How relevant is that compared to the one setting up the committee and making rules to exempt herself from testifying?
First off, they set up a bi-partisan committee structure with equal numbers of republicans and democrats, but McCarthy rejected the offer. The final form was because republicans nominated congressmen who were likely to be subpoenaed as witnesses to Trumps role. And who may have been part of the conspiracy.
 
First off, they set up a bi-partisan committee structure with equal numbers of republicans and democrats, but McCarthy rejected the offer. The final form was because republicans nominated congressmen who were likely to be subpoenaed as witnesses to Trumps role. And who may have been part of the conspiracy.
Never let foxes setup the judge's tribunal in the henhouse
 
First off, they set up a bi-partisan committee structure with equal numbers of republicans and democrats, but McCarthy rejected the offer. The final form was because republicans nominated congressmen who were likely to be subpoenaed as witnesses to Trumps role. And who may have been part of the conspiracy.
Again, why did the speaker make rules to prohibit her having to testify?
 
Another thread saying it’s ya’ll’s fault Jan 6 happened cuz we didn’t stop you? Fuck off.
 
Really? Those that participated in 1/6/21 event at the US Capitol were the same ones who burned and looted American businesses and beat innocents or threw rocks at police througout 2020 in cities such as Minneapolis, St. Louis, Chicago, Washington DC, New York, Seattle, Denver, Portland???

According to you, these are 1/6 participants in 2020:

View attachment 890803

View attachment 890804

View attachment 890805

Again, why did the speaker make rules to prohibit her having to testify?
She is not charged with felonies, so step off. No one will answer if you ask again.
 
My intention is not to equate the two. I find it less than credible when the one bringing the charges and creating the committee goes out of her way to make sure she does not have to testify. If she was so certain about Trump, why the extra effort to make it a rule of the Committee that she not have to testify?
Ha ha….
I guess you’re pointing out how incompetent republicans are. A plethora of Republican congressmen have flat refused to comply with a subpoena to testify. It’s standard fare among republicans involved in aiding the attempted take over.
 
Last edited:
My intention is not to equate the two. I find it less than credible when the one bringing the charges and creating the committee goes out of her way to make sure she does not have to testify. If she was so certain about Trump, why the extra effort to make it a rule of the Committee that she not have to testify?
Hilarious, your tds for the man!
You still have the hots for Hillary….HDS.
 

Forum List

Back
Top