The walls are closing in on Donald Trump. What did Pat Cipollone reveal about Trump's actions.

[meaner gene]

IF it was an armed attack, you would not have been able to get back into the

building. Drama Queen.

Having overwhelming firepower (machine guns) is how they took back the Capitol

You're welcome.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Schumer was in control of one SSA...

I can only call you an ignorant fool. Remember Mitch McConnell was in charge of the senate. He was the one who scheduled the impeachment trial, not Schummer.

Get your head out of your ass, and return to reality.

My apologies, you are correct.. The new congress was seated on Jan 3rd.. SO, it was Schumer.. But it makes little difference as they do not have the final say, Nancy does. It is ultimately on her. Nancy was aware the CHP was 50% below nominal manpower and she refused to deal with it by taking the offered NG troops. This was her decision alone to make. We know the CHP requested the manpower, but it stopped with Nancy..

 

[Billy_Bob]

Having overwhelming firepower (machine guns) is how they took back the Capitol

You're welcome.

NO one was armed... Put up the video... we know there is 14,000 hours of video footage. Where is it? Where are the arms you say you took? Even the FBI says they arrested no one with firearms on the premise.

 

[meaner gene]

My apologies, you are correct.. But it makes little difference as they do not have the final say, Nancy does. It is ultimately on her. Nancy was aware the CHP was 50% below nominal manpower and she refused to deal with it by taking the offered NG troops. This was her decision alone to make. We know the CHP requested the manpower, but it stopped with Nancy..

But it makes little difference as they do not have the final say, Nancy does.

Wrong again. The board is in charge of the Capitol Police. And the majority of that board were appointed and accountable to republicans.

Oversight

Learn how oversight ensures that the USCP meets the safety and security needs of the Capitol Complex

www.uscp.gov

The United States Capitol Police (USCP) is overseen by the Capitol Police Board

Capitol Police Board
Karen H. Gibson, United States Senate Sergeant at Arms (Member)
William J. Walker, U.S. House of Representatives Sergeant at Arms (Chair)
J. Brett Blanton, Architect of the Capitol (Member)
J. Thomas Manger, Chief of Police (Ex-Officio Member)

Fact check: Nancy Pelosi wasn't ‘in charge’ of Capitol Police on Jan. 6

The U.S. Capitol Police are overseen by a number of entities and individuals, none of whom are U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

www.usatoday.com

Fact check: Nancy Pelosi wasn't ‘in charge’ of Capitol Police on Jan. 6

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Not without violating the constitution.

Firearm Prohibitions in Washington DC

Research Washington DC laws on firearm prohibition, including what is regulated and what's not. Find related gun law details from Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence today.

giffords.org

 

[miketx]

The walls are closing in on Donald Trump. What did Pat Cipollone reveal about Trump's actions.
In 2024 will Trump be the Republican nominee for President or in jail or both.

Trump White House counsel Pat Cipollone agrees to testify behind closed doors with Jan. 6 committee

Cipollone, considered a critical witness whose testimony lawmakers have suggested is a missing link, previously met with committee investigators in April for an informal interview.

www.nbcnews.com

 

[meaner gene]

NO one was armed... Put up the video... we know there is 14,000 hours of video footage. Where is it? Where are the arms you say you took? Even the FBI says they arrested no one with firearms on the premise.

Indiana Man Pleads Guilty to Carrying a Gun and Assaulting Law Enforcement Officers in Jan. 6 Capitol Breach

WASHINGTON – An Indiana man pleaded guilty today to carrying a loaded gun on Capitol grounds and assaulting law enforcement officers during the breach of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. His and others’ actions disrupted a joint session of the U.S. Congress convened to ascertain and count the...

www.justice.gov

An Indiana man pleaded guilty today to carrying a loaded gun on Capitol grounds and assaulting law enforcement officers during the breach of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

Firearm Was Loaded with Shotgun Shells and Hollow-Point Bullets

Mark Andrew Mazza, 57, of Shelbyville, Indiana, pleaded guilty in the District of Columbia to assaulting, resisting, or impeding officers with a dangerous weapon and carrying a pistol without a license.

 

[Billy_Bob]

My apologies, you are correct.. But it makes little difference as they do not have the final say, Nancy does. It is ultimately on her. Nancy was aware the CHP was 50% below nominal manpower and she refused to deal with it by taking the offered NG troops. This was her decision alone to make. We know the CHP requested the manpower, but it stopped with Nancy..

But it makes little difference as they do not have the final say, Nancy does.

Wrong again. The board is in charge of the Capitol Police. And the majority of that board were appointed and accountable to republicans.

Oversight

Learn how oversight ensures that the USCP meets the safety and security needs of the Capitol Complex

www.uscp.gov

The United States Capitol Police (USCP) is overseen by the Capitol Police Board

Capitol Police Board
Karen H. Gibson, United States Senate Sergeant at Arms (Member)
William J. Walker, U.S. House of Representatives Sergeant at Arms (Chair)
J. Brett Blanton, Architect of the Capitol (Member)
J. Thomas Manger, Chief of Police (Ex-Officio Member)

Fact check: Nancy Pelosi wasn't ‘in charge’ of Capitol Police on Jan. 6

The U.S. Capitol Police are overseen by a number of entities and individuals, none of whom are U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

www.usatoday.com

Fact check: Nancy Pelosi wasn't ‘in charge’ of Capitol Police on Jan. 6

Actually, it was Schumer... The 117the congress was seated on Jan 3rd.

Again, you failed at Chain of command..

 

[meaner gene]

Firearm Prohibitions in Washington DC

Research Washington DC laws on firearm prohibition, including what is regulated and what's not. Find related gun law details from Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence today.

giffords.org

Law enforcement has to follow the 4th amendment protections. Without knowing specifically who (by name or other specific identifier) and presenting that information to a judge by sworn affidavit, they can't search anyone, except subject to arrest.

 

[meaner gene]

Actually, it was Schumer... The 117the congress was seated on Jan 3rd.

Again, you failed at Chain of command..

Didn't you learn from before. Schummer wasn't in charge of the Senate, that was Mitch McConnell. As I pointed out, McConnell controlled the senate, he scheduled the trial for Trumps impeachment. Democrats were in the minority until January 20th 2021 when VP Harris became the 51st vote.

 

[meaner gene]

I can't be any clearer. Schummer was not in charge

U.S. Senate: Complete List of Majority and Minority Leaders

www.senate.gov

From January 3 to January 20, 2021, with Republicans holding a majority with 51 senators, Mitch McConnell served as the majority leader and Charles Schumer remained the minority leader.

 

[BackAgain]

So, what IMO has been damning to trump

Hutchinson’s testimony that trump wanted the mags turned off and he didn’t care if they had weapons or not because they were not there to harm him.

No incrimination there at all. Aside from it being essentially hearsay, her testimony is largely debunked. And if he knew people were there with arms, he didn’t feel threatened by them. So?

Is Hutchinson telling the truth?

I don’t know. Maybe. But if so, I can’t gauge the veracity of who ever spoke to her. And it is irrelevant anyway.

I believe she is.

Irrelevant.

Why would she risk her career or life to testify under oath and fabricate a story about trump.
She wouldn’t. That’s why I believe her

Again. Irrelevant. If she’s lying she’s an idiot. Maybe she’s an idiot. Or maybe she is dutifully reporting what others said to her. And so what? I can’t assess their credibility at all. And again, it doesn’t matter because it’s of no significance.

Let’s see what Cipollone had to say in his testimony.

Yes. We should wait. Since we don’t know now, it surely doesn’t make sense to ask of the walls are closing in.

Fair enough?
Did I answer your question?

You answered. But it doesn’t amount to a blessed thing of any value.

Question?
What is damning?

Trump saying to turn off the mags, knowing they have weapons, and let them in, because his ego wanted more people at his little rally, and saying that they aren’t there to hurt him (me).

Not damning. It demonstrates that he felt no threat.

Then sending those same people, who he knows are armed, to March on down to the Capitol, and I’ll be there with you.

He didn’t send anybody. So much for that one.

You need someone, under oath, to tell there side or confirm her statement.

I don’t need anything. I’m not the one making a silly claim. Your problem is that there ain’t no “there,” there.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Law enforcement has to follow the 4th amendment protections. Without knowing specifically who (by name or other specific identifier) and presenting that information to a judge by sworn affidavit, they can't search anyone, except subject to arrest.

Not when they have probable cause.

 

[meaner gene]

Question?
What is damning?

Trump saying to turn off the mags, knowing they have weapons, and let them in, because his ego wanted more people at his little rally, and saying that they aren’t there to hurt him (me).

Then sending those same people, who he knows are armed, to March on down to the Capitol, and I’ll be there with you.

You need someone, under oath, to tell there side or confirm her statement.

We know Cipollone didn't refute anything Hutchinson testified to.

 

[Winco]

No incrimination there at all. Aside from it being essentially hearsay, her testimony is largely debunked. And if he knew people were there with arms, he didn’t feel threatened by them. So?

I don’t know. Maybe. But if so, I can’t gauge the veracity of who ever spoke to her. And it is irrelevant anyway.

Irrelevant.

Again. Irrelevant. If she’s lying she’s an idiot. Maybe she’s an idiot. Or maybe she is dutifully reporting what others said to her. And so what? I can’t assess their credibility at all. And again, it doesn’t matter because it’s of no significance.


Yes. We should wait. Since we don’t know now, it surely doesn’t make sense to ask of the walls are closing in.


You answered. But it doesn’t amount to a blessed thing of any value.


Not damning. It demonstrates that he felt no threat.

He didn’t send anybody. So much for that one.

I don’t need anything. I’m not the one making a silly claim. Your problem is that there ain’t no “there,” there.

Did Hutchinson say she directly heard trump say to turn off the mags because their not there to hurt me?

This Would not be hearsay.

Or

Did Hutchinson say she was told that story by someone else.

That would be hearsay.

 

[meaner gene]

Not when they have probable cause.

Probable cause requires knowledge of a specific person having a firearm.

Knowing there's a gun in a crowd, whether it's a crowd of two people, or 20,000 people. Police can't search anyone without a warrant. And they can't get a search warrant for a "crowd".

 

[meaner gene]

Did Hutchinson say she was told that story by someone else.

That would be hearsay.

This is a congressional hearing. Any evidence is admissible onto the record. That's why they subpoenaed Cipollone in order to get "best evidence" over the hearsay they already have on the record.

 

[BackAgain]

Did Hutchinson say she directly heard trump say to turn off the mags because their not there to hurt me?

This Would not be hearsay.

Or

Did Hutchinson say she was told that story by someone else.

That would be hearsay.

Was she there? Otherwise she simply heard about it from someone who was there.

And whether effectively hearsay or direct evidence, it remains of no significance or relevance.

 

[meaner gene]

Not when they have probable cause.

Probable Cause | Wex | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

Courts usually find probable cause when there is a reasonable basis for believing that a crime may have been committed (for an arrest) or when evidence of the crime is present in the place to be searched (for a search). Under exigent circumstances, probable cause can also justify a warrantless search or seizure.

 

[meaner gene]

Was she there? Otherwise she simply heard about it from someone who was there.

And whether effectively hearsay or direct evidence, it remains of no significance or relevance.

Wrong as usual. This is a congressional hearing, and it is another piece of evidence entered onto the record, from which they draw a conclusion.

Congress need only make a determination by preponderance of the evidence, they aren't required to determine beyond a reasonable doubt.