Was Jan 6th instigated by feds?

[Juxtapose]

[hahahmm]

30 years ago some a wise man told me that young guys (like me then) should avoid getting involved in protests because anytime there's violence it's almost always a government op and the arrest record will mess up your life. I later saw first hand how if you're in a group of say 20+ people and 1 guy is urging everybody else to do violence or 'step it up', that guy is actually a paid informant working for the government. You might not see the evidence of this till years later but experience teaches you.

[Juxtapose]

@goaded

This is what I'm fucking talking about man.

[Juxtapose]

Thank you for sharing that, it should be common knowledge by now.

[goaded]

It's good advice, but it still doesn't mean that it's always "the feds", which is why the leader of the Oath Keepers is going to prison for a very long time.

[Juxtapose]

@goaded I wish Antifa and BLM would be prosecuted with the same fervor

[Juxtapose]

The leaders of BLM actually committed fraud.

[goaded]

Were they part of a seditious conspiracy? Was their fraud as bad as Bannon's Build a Wall scam?

[Juxtapose]

"Cullors’s statements come after she claimed to have “never misappropriated funds” related to the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation’s (BLMGNF) purchase of a $6 million Malibu home with donor funds."

www.google.com/.../blm-co-founder-admits-she-held-parties-at-mansion-bought-with-donor-funds-black-lives-matter-patrisse-cullors-malibu-florida-global-network-foundation-blmgnf

And then another dude stole 10 million straight up.

www.google.com/.../rcna46481

[goaded]

That second one was someone stealing from the BLM foundation, the former is about someone using a building owned by the BLM foundation. Trump had to pardon Bannon for his part in the We Build the Wall scam.

[Juxtapose]

@goaded come on man, why do you think they bought that mansion?

[hahahmm]

@goaded George Floyd's mom came forward to denounce BLM. She said she went to an event & there they claimed to be raising money for her but none of them recognized her because they never bothered to meet her and it was a lie. She said at the time she was afraid to speak out because she knew she would be attacked for telling the truth.

Although I always knew it was a scam from day 1 because it was founded by socialist man hating lesbians. Like they would give a F about a man. Especially a black man.

[Juxtapose]

^^ exactly. They are sjw thugs.

[goaded]

OMG: "George Floyd's mom came forward to denounce BLM"? Really?

That's amazing, considering "Floyd’s mother, Larcenia Floyd, died May 30, 2018.".

That's not just a lie you're repeating, it's an utterly shameless one.

time.com/.../

[hahahmm]

@goaded Sorry, I mean t Breonna Taylor's mom. Go look it up. And she's not the only mother of a victim who has denounced them either.

[goaded]

So Breonna Taylor's mom, Tamika Palmer, denounced BLM as a fraud? The whole organisation?

[goaded]

(It was only the local "chapter".)

[hahahmm]

@goaded Keep grasping at straws & making excuses.

[Lliam]

No doubt. And assisted by capital police who opened gates and doors, and ushered people inside.

[AFretiredTXn]

Yah that is why so many of them were breaking windows and doors and trampelling every in their way to get in. I didn't see many police drop their weapons and bowing to the invaders.

[Lliam]

@AFretiredTXn. Then you only saw the videos that the Democrats wanted you to see.
No doubt you didn't even bother to watch the video that was posted to this question. I did, but it was nothing new to be because I had seen that stuff and more shortly after the day it happened.

[Lliam]

Thanks for the MHO, brother.

[AFretiredTXn]

@Lliam Then you must have only watched FOX network all the time.

[Lliam]

@AFretiredTXn. Naturally you would assume that because the only sources of information you are even aware of are msm. How sad.
I haven't watched TV for 20 years and I don't read corporate publications unless someone posts them to show the absurdity of what the general public is being fed.

[AFretiredTXn]

@Lliam No I watch all Major national networks including CNN.

[Lliam]

@AFretiredTXn. Oh, ALL major national news networks. LMAO No wonder you don't have one single clue about context, history or events that lead up to current times. Have you ever read a book?

[Juxtapose]

Hahaha imagine unironically trusting mainstream media sources.

[OatmealMuffin]

Yes, of course. And it's now unfolding. The left never cared about the insurrections that occurred during the summer of rioting, but they came unglued over this poorly orchestrated sham.

[OatmealMuffin]

Thanks for the MHO.

[lightbulb27]

not so sure:

Agent at glass window: No, I don't buy what the host said. The agent taking out glass could be doing that to avoid risk to other people and pushing the other guy [with the flag] away whom looked like he was going to intrude. So BS!

FBI not answering question... we'll, that's a problem.

Td Cruz testimony: yea, smells like some FBI hiding... what BS is that... so if someone gets called to congress they can just say "I don't know"? cmon...

I'm sure if the Pres is there, people walk on the capitol... FBI going to be there.

I stopped watching at that point.

[exitseven]

Yes, they let protestors into the Capitol and gave then a grand tour. Pelosi denied Presidernt Trump's request to call the National Guard to help with crown control, people like AOL lied about what happened. She was not even there. The fake news said it was the biggest thing since 9/11. It was a total bag job.

[NYCQuestions1976]

https://www.youtube.com/embed/ZpemBreLCXc

Might very well be true. I do know that the mainstream media is having a meltdown over transparency and information sharing. Specifically video footage sharing. I can't imagine why...

[goaded]

If it was about "transparency and information sharing", access would have been granted to all major media outlets, not just a propaganda show on a channel that works hand in hand with Trump and the Republican party to lie to their viewers.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded You mean "major media outlets" like MSNBC and CNN? 🤔

https://youtu.be/nsQUQaftLvI

https://youtu.be/mt6VKURIF0Q

[Juxtapose]

They would be way worse than Fox News and doctor it up like you would not believe.

[goaded]

IDGAF if they're all liars, transparency would still be giving all of them access, not just the extention of the Republican party that is Fox News and their chief propagandist Tucker "There really isn't an upside to Trump." Carlson.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded @Juxtapose I actually would give all of the video footage to the rest of mainstream media, because I have no doubt that the vast majority of them wouldn't even bother showing any of it (or they'd cherrypick, like Schiff), which would further highlight their bias. Force them to either fess up, or continue their lying.

[goaded]

Funnily enough, I don't find identifying the parts that show laws being broken or the hypocrisy of Republican lawmakers running away from events they encouraged "cherry-picking", I consider that exposing the truth.

" Addressing the video Carlson played of Chansley walking with officers in the building, prosecutors wrote that “it is true that a sole officer, who was trying to de-escalate the situation, was with Chansley as he made his way to the Senate floor after initially breaching the Chamber.”

“But the televised footage fails to show that Chansley subsequently refused to be escorted out by this lone officer and instead left the Capitol only after additional officers arrived and forcibly escorted him out,” prosecutors say."

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded That's nice that "prosecutors wrote" and "prosecutors say". If that account is accurate, where's the video footage of that?

[goaded]

That would be the part of the 41,999.5 hours that Carlson didn't show you, but was shown to the grand jury in the Shaman's case.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded All the video footage needs to be made available to everyone. Unedited, uncensored, and without redactions. With that as a given, Schiff had his opportunity to show that portion of the video footage to which you are referring. Instead he wasted time, and more importantly, my tax dollars on the Hearsay Olympics. Go be mad at him.

[goaded]

Why? Do you show a jury a month's worth of CCTV footage to prove an armed robbery took place? No, you show the part that shows the crime, the rest is irrelevant.

[Juxtapose]

@goaded dude we all know it was a fucking setup by the feds. Trump wanted Pelosi to mobilize the national guard but she didn't do shit. AOC lied, everyone that spung this fucking January 6th narrative fucking lied.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded All video footage from that day is evidence. Hearsay testimony is not evidence.

[Juxtapose]

Makes you wonder why the Democrats wanted to hide that footage so fucking badly, huh?

[goaded]

"dude we all know it was a fucking setup by the feds" No, we don't. Because it wasn't. Repeating lies people have told you over and over will never make them true. All it might do is get people to believe they are.

@NYCQuestions1976 Yes, but only the video showing people committing crimes is really interesting. As to hearsay, that's still proof that the people said those things, it's just not proof that the things they said were true. What you then do is get testimony from the person who you now know said it. That's how investigations (which is what the Jan 6 committee was undertaking) work.

For example, I could testify under oath that @Juxtapose told us "it was a fucking setup by the feds". That would be admissible proof that he said it, absolutely not proof that it was true.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded "For example, I could testify under oath that @Juxtapose told us "it was a fucking setup by the feds". That would be admissible proof that he said it, absolutely not proof that it was true."

No! That is 100% an exact textbook example of hearsay! In this example, you testifying under oath that @Juxtapose told you something specific isn't admissible, because you yourself could be lying. The only time that's not the case is if @Juxtapose was one of the litigants in this example.

That's why the Cassidy Hutchinson testimony was nothing more than a soap opera and a complete waste of time. She testified that she overheard a conversation about a phone call that somebody else was on. It's at least triple hearsay, and totally inadmissible. Then, to make it even more laughable, when two of the Secret Service agents who were actually there offered to testify, they were never called to testify, because their first-hand testimony would've completely rebutted Hutchinson's triple hearsay. The entire thing, from soup to nuts, is all a giant sham.

[goaded]

Sorry, but you're wrong.

"Hearsay is a statement, other than one made by the declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted." (US Federal Rules of Evidence).

If "the matter asserted" is "it was a fucking setup by the feds", my statement could not be used to prove the truth of that matter in court because that would be hearsay.

However, if the matter being asserted is that "@Juxtapose told us "it was a fucking setup by the feds"", that's not hearsay, because it is my testimony that he told us that. See?

There are also a ton of exceptions to the hearsay rule that allow that sort of thing to be used in evidence in court.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded You're arguing in *support* of inadmissible triple hearsay testimony in a criminal hearing and *against* admissible video footage of the actual event in a criminal hearing. Your mind has taken a walk off the map.

[goaded]

No, I'm trying to explain what makes something hearsay or not. It's not really that difficult to understand: If I testify under oath that "Fred said it was raining", that is admissable evidence that Fred said it was raining, but it is not admissable evidence that it was raining because that falls under the hearsay rules.

In the context of an investigation, the statement is useful because it can lead to Fred being asked to testify whether it was in fact raining or not.

I expect it could also be used if Fred claims he never said it was raining, which would be his word against mine.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded In all of the combined scenarios from above, "Fred" would be the two Secret Service agents who were actually there and they actually offered to testify under oath. Yet for some reason, they were never asked by Schiff or the rest of the Peanut Gallery to appear under oath and testify. Hutchinson's testimony under oath was triple hearsay and is inadmissible in a criminal hearing or trial, thus the Hearsay Olympics were a waste of time and a waste of my tax dollars.

[goaded]

Why do you keep talking about non-existent "triple hearsay", when you've seen how hearsay actually works? (Not to mention pretending this one thing was the whole of her testimony.)

Hutchinson's testimony that she was told that story is absolutely not hearsay and would be admissible in a court. It does not prove the truth of the story itself, which would require the secret service agents' testimony. That's the hearsay rule.

Setting up a deposition under oath from anyone is not a five minute thing, it's entirely likely that they had other things that were more important in the investigation. Nobody, by the way, has disputed that Trump wanted to be driven to the Capitol where a riot was going on. Why do you think he would feel safe in such a situation?

While we're at it, you never talk about the forged documents purporting to be "alternate slates" of electors coming from Republican states Trump lost, or the decision to try to get Pence to ignore the votes of millions of Americans so that the Republican dominated House could install Trump as president, even though they knew Trump had lost, and that the plan was illegal. Why is that?

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded So they had time to set up for testimony from someone who heard someone else talking about a phone conversation about something that allegedly happened somewhere else (triple hearsay), but had no time to set up for testimony from two eye witnesses who were there with the litigant and volunteering to fully cooperate? You're naïve, gullible, and borderline dangerous.

[goaded]

Sigh. You're clearly going to keep ignoring the facts of hearsay, and all the other wrongdoing exposed by the committee.

When is it acceptable to forge documents to pretend to be duly appointed Electoral College electors for a state?

When is it acceptable for legislators or the Vice President to use those forgeries as an excuse to take the election away from the people and hand it to a Republican dominated House?

When is it acceptable for a president to knowingly lie about the result of the election that would oust them from power?

When is it acceptable to use those lies to gather an armed mob and send them to the Capitol to fight like hell?

Hutchinson's sworn testimony that she was told the story about Trump trying to seize the wheel would be hearsay if used as proof that Trump tried to seize the wheel, but it is admissible proof that she was told the story. Likewise (assuming you're not misrepresenting the situation), it's a fact that in your example it's proof that she heard someone talking about a phone conversation. Nobody is taking that as proof that the phone conversation occurred or was accurately reported, but it is useful information to an investigation.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded How many hugs did Liz Cheney promise you?

[goaded]

So you do know that all those things are true and exposed by the Jan 6 committee, you're just pretending that the only important thing is corroborating a single story about how Trump behaved when he demanded to be taken into the middle of a riot he clearly knew he'd be completely safe in because they were his people.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded There's no point in me continuing on with this non-productive conversation in any serious manner. You don't have a proper legal grasp on the hearsay laws in this country (especially under oath in a criminal hearing, where the threshold is "beyond a reasonable doubt") and are actively trying to explain away actual video footage of the event in question.

[goaded]

Reasonable doubt has nothing to do with testimony, let alone hearsay. You're just making crap up and hoping it distracts from all your other nonsense.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded She literally testified that she overheard someone having a conversation about someone else who had a phone conversation about an event. That's triple hearsay. Or a high school gossip ring. "I overheard Johnny say that Tommy heard that Billy wrote in his notebook ThAt He LiKeS mE! EEEEEEEEEE!"

[goaded]

It's amazing the lengths you will go to to avoid talking about the other very clear evidence. It's almost as if you don't want to talk about the conspiracy of lies, forgery, misrepresentation, and the armed mob that was gathered on the basis of those lies and sent to attack the Capitol, all in an effort to steal the presidency.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded There's 41,000 hours of video footage to watch and admit into evidence. No one important and/or competent needs to rely on triple hearsay and/or needs your interpretation of what transpired to prove a case.

[goaded]

It's almost as if you don't want to talk about the conspiracy of lies, forgery, misrepresentation, and the armed mob that was gathered on the basis of those lies and sent to attack the Capitol, all in an effort to steal the presidency, isn't it?

You can keep pretending that the one piece of testimony you can manufacture the slightest complaint about is what the investigation's findings "rely on". Trump was still demanding to go to the Capitol while there was a riot going on because they were his armed rioters.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded Maybe if Squidward Schiff didn't waste his time (and my tax dollars) listening to triple hearsay testimony, someone could've been able to prove all of that, instead of hoping it's all true, like you're doing. You should consider contacting Liz Cheney for some hugs. She has a lot of free time now (rightfully so) because of her faith in the Hearsay Olympics.

[goaded]

The Jan 6th committee investigation wasn't a waste of time or money because it exposed the conspiracy of lies, forgery, misrepresentation, lawlessness, and violence, all in an effort to steal the presidency.

You're pretending to be obsessed by one minor point in one minor aspect of the investigation (based on a misunderstanding of how hearsay works) because you know that there was a genuine attempt to steal the presidency that very nearly succeeded.

It involved lies, forgery, bogus lawsuits, knowingly breaking the law and, when all that failed, sending a violent armed mob to the Capitol including people who'd planned in advance to do just breach the building. If you'd actually followed the investigation rather than just trying to manufacture outrage and pretending that anything depends on any of the statements you call "hearsay", you'd know that.

There's one reason, and one reason only, that Trump would have wanted to go to a place where violence was taking place, and that's that he knew they were on his side. Same as when he didn't care about people being armed.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded If you've got verified provable documented admissible evidence about all of this you're yammering on about, send it to Liz Cheney. I'm sure it's worth a few hugs.

[goaded]

Go read the Jan 6 committee report, it's all in there in great detail.

If you'd actually followed the investigation rather than just trying to manufacture outrage and pretending that anything, let alone everything, depends on any of the statements you call "hearsay", you'd know that.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded They wasted my tax dollars writing a report based on hearsay, speculation, and other "evidence" that's completely inadmissible in a criminal trial? That's so nice of them. Did you send them gold stars and some muffins?

[goaded]

hEaRSaY! What about the forged documents? Was that hearsay? What about the fact that Trump knew he'd lost and lied anyway? What about the fact that Trump knew the mob was armed when he sent them to the Capitol?

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded There's a strong possibility that you need a rabies shot.

[goaded]

So, that's your answer to my question about the documents forged by Republicans to steal the presidency? That I might "need a rabies shot". Well done!

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded Yes, because you're foaming at the mouth over things that you've got no actual tangible evidence of occurring, trying to link things where there's no link, and/or no actual tangible evidence that can be used in a court of law. You're just hoping that if you continue to say 2 + 2 = 5, you'll somehow eventually be correct. However that's never going to happen. You've got no factual proof about anything you've been yammering on about for YEARS now. So yes... you need a rabies shot. Or at least a hobby.

[goaded]

There are the actual forged documents that were sent to the National Archives! The ones that were part of the plan to steal the presidency by avoiding the electoral college (initially by having Pence pretend the fake documents meant the states' results were genuinely disputed, and when that failed by sending an armed mob to the Capitol to stop the count by force) and just having the House, with its Republican majority of states install Trump as president.

Time for you to say HeARsaY again.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded Did you tell Liz Cheney? Maybe she'll give you some hugs. I'm no longer paying her salary, so I couldn't care less how she chooses to waste her time now.

[goaded]

You're funny. Just read the report. It's got all the information anyone needs to see that there was a plan to steal the presidency by avoiding the electoral college which Biden clearly won and just having the House, with its Republican majority of states install Trump as president.

I'm proud of you for coming up with the cunning plan to alternate hUGz with HeARsaY! Nobody could have seen that coming!

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded The fact that you wasted your time reading a hearsay report put together by lying clowns makes me feel pity for you.

[goaded]

Ah, you're back to HeArSaY! Say HuGZ, next! Then deny the reality of the attempt to steal the election from the American people by having the majority Republican states vote for Trump when the Electoral College vote had been (peacefully or violently, but still illegally) nullified.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded You probably still believe Jussie Smollett also. Get a hobby. Get a rabies shot. Get therapy.

[goaded]

You didn't say HeArSaY or HuGZ! And you didn't deny the reality of the attempt to steal the election from the American people by having the majority Republican states vote for Trump when the Electoral College vote had been (peacefully or violently, but still illegally) nullified.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded Are you okay? You seem to be having a stroke or some other sort of mental health emergency.

[goaded]

Ah, a new approach to avoid admitting reality. Specifically that the Jan 6 committee found an awful lot of evidence that Trump tried to steal the presidency.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded Adam Schiff wrote a high school book report. That's not evidence.

[goaded]

You're really never going to engage on the basis of facts, are you? What were the forged documents for, if not to attempt to steal the presidency for Trump?

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded Schiff isn't a reliable source of factual reality. Go find something else to do with your life.

[Juxtapose]

[NYCQuestions1976]

@Juxtapose *Alvin Bragg has entered the chat.*

[goaded]

"Schiff isn't a reliable source of factual reality."
So now we're going with ad hominem? He's not the source, nor is anyone else on the committee, the documents, phone records, witnesses, and other evidence are the source. And the conclusion is that Trump and other Republicans conspired to attempt to keep him in office illegally using everything from lies to violence. And it almost worked.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded It's a good thing that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was there to save the day. Oh wait... she wasn't there. She lied about being there. Just like Adam Schiff lied throughout his entire soap opera investigation. You're like a big adult baby fascinated by a jingling keychain.

[goaded]

You jump from lie to lie without ever addressing the facts, don't you? Like that the whole plan to steal the presidency by manipulating the system until a Republican majority could install Trump as president against the will of the people was laid out in full in the Jan 6 committee report.

You're using a textbook straw man argument about AOC, she never claimed to have been in danger, just that she felt she was and that serious harm could have come to her.
www.snopes.com/fact-check/aoc-capitol-attack/

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded Serious harm from her imagination?

[goaded]

Do you get dizzy from bouncing from lie to lie without ever addressing the facts? Like the fact that the whole plan to steal the presidency by manipulating the system until a Republican majority could install Trump as president against the will of the people was laid out in full in the Jan 6 committee report.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded 😂😂😂 @ "Jan 6 committee report". It's a soap opera script put together by a handful of dingbats. Get a clue.

Maybe you should see if Cortez will give you some hugs. Not going to lie... I'd take some hugs from her... maybe more. Crazy women are carnival rides in bed. 😂😂😂

[goaded]

Aw, you're back to saying hUgZ again! Cute. I'd ask you to respond to the content, but we both know you've got nothing compared to all the evidence that Trump and his cronies attempted to steal the presidency by manipulating the system until a Republican majority could install Trump as president against the will of the people.

Why did Republicans forge documents and pretend to be real electors? Why did Trump try to pressure Pence to treat those forgeries as an excuse to throw out states' election results? Why did Trump knowingly send an armed mob to the Capitol when Pence refused?

Examples:



"On Dec. 14, 2020, Republicans in seven battleground states issued false Electoral College certificates declaring then-President Donald Trump and Vice President Mike Pence the winner of the presidential election in their respective states – despite Joe Biden having won the state. In each of the seven states (Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, New Mexico, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin), the groups filed their false certifications with the National Archives."
www.justsecurity.org/.../

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded The "Just Security" site? That's where you get your "facts"? Really? HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!

You're an idiot.

[goaded]

So, these forged documents don't exist because their image was on a site you don't like? Those people didn't sign those forgeries because the images were on a site you don't like? I'm sorry, but the facts don't care about your feelings.




I really don't understand why the people who signed those (and the other states' forgeries) aren't in prison right now, unless they've testified against Trump for a lesser sentence.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded My liking or disliking of a site is irrelevant. They're not a source of actual factual reality, which is very relevant.

They're not in prison because they're not real, no matter what Adam Schiff says. Anyone could create that nonsense with Microsoft Word and the Times New Roman font. I can create a document for you certifying that you're Liz Cheney's bitch. What's your e-mail address? 🤔😂

[goaded]

Well, it isn't irrelevant because the images are of actual, factual reality. And they were not unimportant because they were sent to the National Archives, which is the body that receives the real slates of electors, like the one below. The point isn't that they were impressive or realistic, the point is that they were an excuse to claim the state's results were contested, ignore them, and pass the choice of president to the House on a 2 votes per state basis, which would be majority Republican. And that might have worked, if Pence had played along with the illegal plan, or if he'd been removed from the Capitol until the session was over.



President Trump engaged in a massive effort to spread false and fraudulent information to the American public claiming the 2020 election was stolen from him.
President Trump corruptly planned to replace the Acting Attorney General, so that the Department of Justice would support his fake election claims.
President Trump corruptly pressured Vice President Pence to refuse to count certified electoral votes in violation of the US Constitution and the law.
President Trump corruptly pressured state election officials, and state legislators, to change election results.
President Trump’s legal team and other Trump associates instructed Republicans in multiple states to create false electoral slates and transmit those slates to Congress and the National Archives.
President Trump summoned and assembled a violent mob in Washington and directed them to march on the US Capitol.
As the violence was underway, President Trump ignored multiple pleas for assistance and failed to take immediate action to stop the violence and instruct his supporters to leave the Capitol.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded You smoke too much marijuana.

[goaded]

You eat too much bullshit.

President Trump engaged in a massive effort to spread false and fraudulent information to the American public claiming the 2020 election was stolen from him.
President Trump corruptly planned to replace the Acting Attorney General, so that the Department of Justice would support his fake election claims.
President Trump corruptly pressured Vice President Pence to refuse to count certified electoral votes in violation of the US Constitution and the law.
President Trump corruptly pressured state election officials, and state legislators, to change election results.
President Trump’s legal team and other Trump associates instructed Republicans in multiple states to create false electoral slates and transmit those slates to Congress and the National Archives.
President Trump summoned and assembled a violent mob in Washington and directed them to march on the US Capitol.
As the violence was underway, President Trump ignored multiple pleas for assistance and failed to take immediate action to stop the violence and instruct his supporters to leave the Capitol.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded Now you're just copying and pasting things. 😂

[goaded]

Yes, because you ignore what I post and post a single line that helps no-one. It's still far more information per post. Which of the seven items would you like to pretend didn't happen?

President Trump engaged in a massive effort to spread false and fraudulent information to the American public claiming the 2020 election was stolen from him.
President Trump corruptly planned to replace the Acting Attorney General, so that the Department of Justice would support his fake election claims.
President Trump corruptly pressured Vice President Pence to refuse to count certified electoral votes in violation of the US Constitution and the law.
President Trump corruptly pressured state election officials, and state legislators, to change election results.
President Trump’s legal team and other Trump associates instructed Republicans in multiple states to create false electoral slates and transmit those slates to Congress and the National Archives.
President Trump summoned and assembled a violent mob in Washington and directed them to march on the US Capitol.
As the violence was underway, President Trump ignored multiple pleas for assistance and failed to take immediate action to stop the violence and instruct his supporters to leave the Capitol.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded I ignore what you post because it's all yammering gibberish.

[goaded]

No, you post one line responses to avoid the truth being the last thing said.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded No. The reality is, you're droning on about irrelevant nonsense, and no one intelligent and important cares.

[goaded]

You'd love the facts and evidence showing Trump trying to steal the presidency to be "irrelevant nonsense", wouldn't you? Fortunately, anybody with a functioning brain knows it is extremely important.

And now he's trying to get morons to repeat Jan 6, this time to obstruct justice and do something about his totally justified indictment.

[Juxtapose]

I can't wait to come back here when this is revealed to be another hoax. The Democrats were hiding that footage for a reason, they know they were full of shit

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded A "totally justified indictment", huh? Just like all the other socialist nitwits on this planet, you never learn. Alvin Bragg has no jurisdiction to bring an indictment. If you had more than a bowl of oatmeal in your head, you'd know that. All the stupid Soros-sponsored socialists in this country are going to turn Trump into Obi-Wan Kenobi ahead of the 2024 election, and I'm going to laugh my ass off.

[Juxtapose]

The guy prosecuting Trump is doing it out of malicious political reasons while letting criminals roam the streets. Funded by George Soros by the way 🤣

[goaded]

Yeah, Soros pays taxes in New York, so I suppose it's kind of true that he's funding it. But then again, so does Trump. So Trump's funding his own prosecution! (Although he cheats on his taxes.)

Trump's totally asking for more useful idiots to riot and go to prison on his behalf.

[Juxtapose]

@goaded that just goes to show that you don't know who's paying who!

Now you are starting to get it. We can't even protest in America anymore because the FBI infiltrates these events and makes them violent on purpose to sabotage the protests. I won't be surprised if they used to do this against the blacks back in the day.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@Juxtapose Bragg also doesn't have jurisdiction. He's the Manhattan District Attorney. For what's being alleged (malicious or not), the prosecution would need to come from the New York State Attorney General or the United States Attorney General. It's a political joke, and it's going backfire stupendously. It's going to be hilarious to watch unfold.

[goaded]

2020, you mean? Like Umbrella Man?

[Juxtapose]

Who's going to reign in these criminal prosecutors?

[goaded]

@NYCQuestions1976 You expect us to believe that the AG made such a simple mistake?

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded Bragg isn't the Attorney General of New York.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded @Juxtapose
https://youtu.be/HH_xdI-OBiM
That video was supposed to go here. Oh well. Same difference.

[Leopard23]

This is what is done in other countries so why not the US.

[FilmGuy93]

Let me put it like this. They certainly didn't do a lot to prevent it.

[goaded]

No, and Jimmy Dore decided the money was on the right severl years ago.

[Juxtapose]

He actually lost a lot of money versus what he could have made by staying on TYT lol.

TYT are the sellouts.

[goaded]

You mean he failed at doing a Tim Pool and monetising his supposed left-wing credentials?

[Juxtapose]

Tim Pool, Joe Rogan, Dave Rubin..

They are all liberals dude. You guys are just so whacked out and so far left that the old school liberals seem right wing to you.

Even Bill Maher thinks you're crazy.

[goaded]

No, they're not any more. They've successfully used that reputation to get huge amounts of money from the right. Glenn Greenwald, too.

Even Tim Pool's dad says he's full of crap.

[Juxtapose]

Dude my dad's an asshole who says all kinds of things but he didn't even help his daughter when she was in need, I don't care what someone else's dad says.

Wow you're even talking shit about Glenn Greenwald, you really have lost it. You believe tyt are angels while Tim Pool is part of the evil right wing don't you?

Cenk was the one to sell out man, he sold out to the fake liberals.

And look at you with that Ukrainian flag. You should be ashamed as a German, America bombed the north stream pipeline and I know Europe used to get 40% of its natural gas from Russia. This war has been nothing but trouble for Germany and NATO is playing with nuclear fire.

[goaded]

I know what I see, which is formerly left-wing people spouting right-wing talking points and getting well paid for it.

Glenn Greenwald used to work for the Guardian, now he spends his time on Fox News. "Greenwald had appeared on Fox News 72 times from December 2017 to June 2021, including 40 times on Carlson's program and 14 appearances with host Laura Ingraham."

That doesn't happen to left-wingers.

Nordstrom was already shut off when it was attacked. Russia had stopped sending gas through it. In less than a year, Germany has found alternative sources which aren't actively attacking Europe. Also, you don't know it was America, nobody except the sabateurs know who it was for sure. nymag.com/.../...peline-suspects-and-theories.html

[Juxtapose]

Really? What I see is the same positions people of always held in the left suddenly being viewed as right wing because the left has gone so far in a very strange direction. Especially with the identity politics and the obsession about race and gender.

It's because Fox News is one of the only networks that will have anti-establishment people on it 😂 Jimmy Dore can tell you all about how he would love to go on other news networks but they won't have him or anyone with a single shred of integrity on!

Russia was shutting it off for leverage and it was 100% America dude. Biden all but admits it!

Either way, that still doesn't change the fact that you're advocating for something that will lead to nuclear annihilation. NATO encroaching on Russia's border is of course not going to be cool with Putin. If I was Putin I would not be cool with it.

[goaded]

"you're advocating for something that will lead to nuclear annihilation"
So you're saying the west shouldn't have supported Ukraine at all and let their country be overrun by Russia and their culture wiped out?

Followed by Finland and Sweden.

[Juxtapose]

Literally all that had to be done was for NATO to back the fuck off lol. Do you think the United States would let Russia somehow put Canada in a coalition formed strictly to oppose the United States? Because NATO was formed strictly to oppose the Soviet Union.

[Juxtapose]

But yes, withdraw all support from Ukraine and leave them to rot. I don't think the USA should be involved overseas like that at all. I am sick of all these forever wars, these proxy wars and so on. I want my country to defend its borders and let the rest of the world sort itself out.

[goaded]

NATO was designed to counter Soviet aggression, not to invade. Once countries were free to choose many of them chose to join NATO so that they would be safe from Russian aggression. The ones that didn't have just found out that not joining was a bad idea.

[Juxtapose]

It's not very smart to get a country right next to Russia to join NATO. If I was Putin I would not tolerate that because NATO is actively hostile towards Russia.

I don't buy that NATO is exclusively there just to protect other countries from Russia out of the goodness of their hearts.

[goaded]

I disagree. Russia has a long history of invading its neighbours. There's a reason Ukraine was invaded and Poland wasn't. There's a different reason why Belarus wasn't, it's essentially under the complete control of Russia.

Nobody said anything about NATO doing anything "out of the goodness of their hearts", it's all about keeping democratic countries free from invasion and dictatorships, which is better for everyone.

[Juxtapose]

I don't believe that for a second. The USA personally props up dictatorships by toppling democracies.

Sure Russia is not the best neighbor but is that really any of our concern? Why is my country sending billions upon billions to Ukraine when it's super corrupt and going to get funneled to Nazis anyway?

[goaded]

The USA might, but the USA is not NATO. And you're swallowing Russian propaganda about Ukraine as well. Yes, there are Nazis in Ukraine, but there are in the USA as well; they're not running the place in either country.

[Juxtapose]

You cannot compare the Nazi problem in Ukraine to the Nazi problem in the USA meaningfully.

www.reuters.com/.../commentary-ukraines-neo-nazi-problem-idUSKBN1GV2TY

Other countries are just as corrupt as the USA.

[goaded]

Are you serious? Right wing groups trying to undermine democracy and install a president by force would never happen in the US?

What's the date on that article? They would have been a problem for the government to deal with, not the people running the government.

[Juxtapose]

That never happened actually, the claims of the January 6th zealots is based on what the federal government tried to incite the protesters to do themselves. You don't want to see what a group of people who are trained and dedicated to violence could do to the white house. They would be stealthy, covert and make plentiful use of misdirection because you're not going to take over the government just by marching the White House guns. Government is not managed in the white house and it's not dependent on the white house. The gov can be managed remotely.

[Juxtapose]

*matching in the white house with guns

[goaded]

Wrong building, and the intent was to stop the official EC count so that the House would be allowed to vote for president instead. It would have been two votes per state, which would have meant a Republican majority. It nearly worked.

[Juxtapose]

That would have never happened lol. They can vote remotely dude.

[goaded]

Without the VP there? Besides, no, they couldn't have voted remotely, the Senate never adopted remote voting and it was a joint session. Republicans came really close to stealing the presidency on Jan 6th.

"While the Senate has allowed for remote hearings, Senate leadership hasn’t taken a similar step for floor votes. Senators are required to vote in person from the Senate chamber, where they tell their vote — either verbally or frequently with the point of a finger or thumbs down — to Senate floor staff. " April 2021 thehill.com/.../

[Juxtapose]

Give me a break dude. The government isn't going to let itself get taken over because of some stupid rules they could easily ignore like they do many other rules.

The government is fully capable of being run remotely and taking over a building poses no threat to taking over the government.

[goaded]

Have you not heard of the rule of law? Stopping the count and having it pass to a Republican majority to vote on would at least have had a veneer of legitimacy and could only have been overcome by honourable Republicans voting to install Biden. Remember, 147 Republican legislators voted to stop Biden taking power even after the attack on the Capitol.

Trump and his supporters nearly stole the presidency that day and people like you have been refusing to understand that or lying about it ever since.

There was no legal way to run the Electoral College vote count remotely. That's why it was attacked.

Forged documents were created by Republicans in states Trump lost to give cover to potentially throw out those states' votes and throw the decision to a Republican majority House vote. Once that plan fell through, violence was the only option to steal the presidency.

[Juxtapose]

Good luck selling that case in court with a prosecutor who doesn't have jurisdiction along with the public knowing that crucial footage was withheld by the Democrats for political reasons.

[goaded]

Aw, look at that! You and @NYCQuestions1976 have both moved on to your next talking point at the same time! Isn't that precious.

[goaded]

Not to mention that there are at least three ongoing investigations into Trump and the NY one has nothing to do with the insurrection. Georgia should be fun, though, with all those recorded phone calls.

[Juxtapose]

Says the traitor to Germany with your Ukrainian flag.

We will see if justice is actually served or if the political witch hunt is successful.

[goaded]

You're sounding desperate.

[Juxtapose]

I could say the same to you.

[NYCQuestions1976]

@goaded @Juxtapose
https://youtu.be/HH_xdI-OBiM

[Juxtapose]

@NYCQuestions1976 that they did!

[Anonymous]

Of course it was. It’s blatantly obvious and always has been.

[NostalgiaSenpi]

Wouldn't put it past them.

[Jamie05rhs]

Duh. Everyone knows that.

[gorydetails]

💯. Glows brighter than Rudolph’s nose

[AFretiredTXn]

Hell no, Trump did it.

[OddBeMe]

You’ve gone off the deep end, my friend.