OOTB's Political Thread . ..
- Thread starter BillyL
- Start date
Holy shit! Heels Noir makes yet another unfounded liberalesque insinuation but is forced to own up to it.
OUCH!
it was criminally incompetent imo to ignore the writing. Esp since we’re talking about the fuking capitol and all the implications therein. I’m gonna stop short of calling it intentional on the part of “dems”. But I’m with you ftmp.
It reminds me of the incompetence related to Pearl Harbor. You’re a history buff if I recall correctly, and so you may know the back story, but there were so many warning signs and intelligence ignored and so much incompetence with the placement of the fleet, planes in air fields lined up, one way in and out of the harbor and so on. all in all a very avoidable disaster and true to form, fodder for the conspiracy theorists who claimed it was a “false flag” to draw us in the war.
Pelosi: "Maga is dumb enough to conflate Trump with Jesus, crazy enough to believe pizzagate, they're making physical threats online, but let's drop our guard and let them invade the building where we're working to confirm OUR dem pres. Hey Repub controlled Senate, and can you help us ignore these threats?"
That people would insinuate the above while never insinuating that right-wing fbi/homeland/Senators/House did things to allow the chaos to happen is astounding. There are obviously major questions unanswered but this bias is funny to me.
That people would insinuate the above while never insinuating that right-wing fbi/homeland/Senators/House did things to allow the chaos to happen is astounding. There are obviously major questions unanswered but this bias is funny to me.
good enough analogy but for it to be spot on, there would have to have been a sighting and subsequent warning that a Japanese fleet of warships, including aircraft carriers, was closing in. That wouldn't be proof that an attack was imminent, but you would certainly have to expect one and make preparations to defend against one. Or mysteriously not.
We could start a thread on our missed opportunities and ignored warning signs and never run out of instances. I would probably lead with the insanity of ignoring the tremendous national debt that we're adding to at an insane rate. Either that or this one from the past....
lol, here's a major unanswered question...how could any reasonably intelligent person think that this suggestion of right-wingers 'doing things' offers a more logical explanation for the chaos at the capitol than what was NOT done by those who were not only responsible for security, but who raised the most concerns about it?
And who was responsible for security? PS Pelosi was no more in charge of Capitol security than Mitch McConnell was.
Stupidity and unconscious bias often work more damage than venality.
- Bertrand Russell
Constant negligence and incompetence starts to look intentional.
So, you respond to a genuine inquiry with a made-up, false whataboutism. Then, you admit the fiction and in another false diversion you refer to our former president's sons and their attendance at his trial. I feel pretty certain that we as taxpayers didn't provide for any of their travel expenses. Please show us otherwise.
Which gets back to the original inquiry of what justification is there for us to shell out over 200K to fly Phd Jill back from Europe to attend the trial of her step-son that has nothing to do with our current president (we are told), her husband and father of the defendant? I get the idea that we spend a crap ton on our presidents, but why are we paying for this type of personal travel for their spouse? If she decides she wants to go back to Paris for some shopping now that her show appearance at the trial is over, do we pay for that too?
that's disputed, but which one was raising all the concerns about security in the days leading up to Jan 6 and yet made no move to counter it? If the threat to your interests was so dire, would you sit back and say 'it isn't my job?'.
Let me see if I have this straight:
You're finger-pointing at the former Speaker because she wasn't prescient enough to mobilize the D.C. National Guard (a power she did not possess) but you're willing to give the man who should have activated them in the first place a free pass?
How cowardly.
My point was one of insincere sympathy for the Donald and his dysfunctional family who don't know what it means to have someone's back. I apologize if I confused your meager MAGA mind.
Last edited:
The D.C National Guard was formed in 1802 by President Thomas Jefferson to defend the newly created District of Columbia. As such, the Commanding General of the D.C. National Guard is subordinate solely to the President of the United States. This authority to activate the D.C. National Guard has been delegated, by the President, to the Secretary of Defense and further delegated to the Secretary of the Army. The D.C. National Guard is the only National Guard unit, out of all of the 54 states and territories, which reports only to the President.
and? Is the NG the only entity capable of providing security? If so, where is Pelosi's request to have them on hand after raising so much concern for the need?
what about this?
Trump offer of NG troops
"“The former J6 Select Committee apparently withheld Mr. Ornato’s critical witness testimony from the American people because it contradicted their pre-determined narrative," said Chairman Loudermilk. "Mr. Ornato's testimony proves what Mr. Meadows has said all along, President Trump did in fact offer 10,000 National Guard troops to secure the U.S. Capitol, which was turned down." "
Trump offer of NG troops
"“The former J6 Select Committee apparently withheld Mr. Ornato’s critical witness testimony from the American people because it contradicted their pre-determined narrative," said Chairman Loudermilk. "Mr. Ornato's testimony proves what Mr. Meadows has said all along, President Trump did in fact offer 10,000 National Guard troops to secure the U.S. Capitol, which was turned down." "
I guess she could have called in the Marines . . . oh, wait, she wasn't authorized to do that either.
Again, point your finger of guilt at her all you want but why can't you limp-wristed butt-slurpers take the man in charge to task for doing absolutely nothing once the Capitol was breached?
some examples of the quote you provided....
she could have called in other applicable units of law enforcement, and she could have accepted offers of the Guard being deployed beforehand. Your misplaced sarcasm only makes you look as stupid and dishonest as you are. And your crude substitute for reasoned argument in the second quote overlooks the actual subject, which is why added security wasn't put in place BEFORE the riots occurred.
Now do you want to keep contending that Trump did nothing after the riots began, or do want to continue being bitch-slapped?
THe chain of cmd is public. The calls for help from both Pelosi and McConnell are public too.
Yes the national debt. Never talked about it seems. It is absolutely insane. People don’t realize our economy is a house of cards because of it. All this debt and nothing to back our currency. We saw how fragile it was related to Covid which was just a hiccup compared to a real pandemic. God help us should we see something more serious or a long term disruption in oil or the very worst…an attack on the internet and phone service. We would go in absolute panic mode. Can’t get any cash. Can’t communicate. I’ve read 80% of all Americans have over $10k credit card debt, live pay check to paycheck and can’t handle a $2000 emergency. It’s grim af. But we’re told abortion and gays and guns are what’s destroying America. Lol.
Last edited:
I think you're talking about after the fact. WE are talking about having security in place to prevent the mayhem, not belatedly react to it.
It's the same chain o CMD, still public. And bosides knew potential chaos was coming, a few people on the maga side actually were involved in the disrupt-ceremony-plan, fake electors scheme etc.
Is this serious? Over half of women 18-29 who identify as libs have been told they’re mentally I’ll?
Easily half of them have TDS as of survey date (2020), probably higher now.
Well, in fairness, they were starting behind the 8-ball if some of those surveyed were men pretending to be women.
So going by the chart;It does seem a little low, right? I was thinking the same.
21% of con women that age
28% of mod women that age
52% of lib women that age
Assuming there’s 65 million women that age according to last census and taking some liberties guessing and rounding in breaking down by political preference (50% lib, 10% mod, 40% con) that’s 32, 6, and 24 million of each. Which according to the chart would mean 16+1+9 million rounded to nearest million. That’s 26 million out of 65. That means among all women 18-29 there’s around a 40% chance that any one has been told they’re mentally ill by a healthcare provider. Seems about right. Good luck out there guys.
Okay so hear me out, not trying to start some shyt, but just consider this. You seem to be believing the claim trump offered the troops based on confirmation of someone in the room. (Ornato) Is that fair to say? Now first of all it’s not clear even taking ornato at his word that trump floated the idea to protect the capitol or to protect him and his supporters. But even assuming he was genuinely worried about protecting the capitol and the electoral process from his supporters…you seem to be using ornato’s word as confirmation that trump offer ng troops and was turned down. Ornato being a former chief of staff. Which is fair. Nothing wrong with that whatsoever. Yet another former chief of staff (hall) that was “in the room” at another occasion of controversy for trump has confirmed that trump called dead veterans suckers and losers. Obviously they’re not mutually exclusive…either, both or neither could be lying and hall has not testified under oath, but to me their claims have the same credibility. And Fwiw I believe both.
Last edited:
I won't contest that bosides were aware of potential trouble because that has not been in question. The question you keep avoiding answering is why didn't the people screeching the loudest about it DO something about it. Hell, dude, we have a video of Pelosi admitting culpability..
they could have saved their money. We've been pointing it out for years now. Dang, just listen to them.
I'm agnostic by nature, I retain information but rarely use it to come to a solid conclusion because actually knowing something absolutely is impossible.. I might present it as fact, but in my mind I never feel my conjectures are absolute. And I say conjectures because what I understand and most people disregard is that none of us EVER have all there is to know about ANYthing. So I present the info I have for you to decide for yourself. while not hiding my own suppositions.
What I have provided here is that there IS evidence that Trump offered NG support, and I will have to add without substantiation that I had already gotten that impression long ago. If I had to bet large with nothing else at stake, I'd bet that he did. Hell, I'd bet the farm.
Here's what YOU might not be considering. It's almost completely undeniable that there has been an ongoing hook-or-by-crook effort to assassinate DJT's character, and in that effort a narrative has been formed and dishonestly supported. That dishonest support includes withholding and hiding info contradictory to that narrative. The piece I linked is evidence of that. There are many more instances and even as biased as you are against trump, I think you must know this to be true.
That filthy and disgustingly shameful telethon they put on is a glaring example. I kept calling it a dog and pony show since before it even started and that is exactly what it turned out to be. I mention this because how would I know it was going to be so bogus if I didn't know what was actually being attempted. How would I know what they were attempting if I hadn't been observing it for YEARS.. They would read a quote of Trump, for instance, that seemed to insinuate his blame in instigating the riot, while purposely failing to include verbiage from the same quote that indicated exactly the opposite. And on and on....huge investigations that in the end are deemed to have been bogus. Impeachments for political purpose. And on and on again. Prosecutions that are contrived and shabbily executed. And on and on and on and on...
So excuse me if I try to supply some balance, because there has been a huge thumb on the scales and it remains there. Trump might be the biggest scumbag there ever was but no reasonable person would reach that conclusion knowing how slanted the information presented has been. And the bigger point is that I don't care how big a scumbag he is. I care about him replacing the disaster now taking place and resuming the very good job he was doing for us previously.
Your question was respectful and I hope you can see that my response is as well.
The committee didn't "withhold". The Secret Service made Ornato available to the committee with the understanding that the transcript of his interview would not be released without the agency’s consent. Loudermilk is putting out bait for gullible biters like yourself.
Ornato's info wasn't news, many people had said similar things, which was that Trump had "floated the idea", not ordered it.
Anatomy of a Conspiracy Theory and a Smear: Still, No Evidence of Trump Order for 10,000 Guard on January 6th
Debunking a new conspiracy theory that Trump ordered the National Guard to be ready on January 6, and that the select committee withheld information.
www.justsecurity.org
and there it goes, over and over. The narrative keeps saying 'NO, Trump didn't ORDER blah blah blah'...when what is actually being posited is that he OFFERED to order them, even suggested it, but the offer was turned down.The committee didn't "withhold". The Secret Service made Ornato available to the committee with the understanding that the transcript of his interview would not be released without the agency’s consent. Loudermilk is putting out bait for gullible biters like yourself.
Ornato's info wasn't news, many people had said similar things, which was that Trump had "floated the idea", not ordered it.
Anatomy of a Conspiracy Theory and a Smear: Still, No Evidence of Trump Order for 10,000 Guard on January 6th
Debunking a new conspiracy theory that Trump ordered the National Guard to be ready on January 6, and that the select committee withheld information.
The other stuff you provided is propaganda that YOU willingly swallowed. The libdem entity is a propaganda machine, as I've been saying. How about reading the rest of the link you provided and then superimpose that on the actual hearing and tell me how such info was brought out. It was available is not the same as it was presented. All you've done here is remained faithful to that narrative that focuses on Trump instead of what we are actually talking about, which is the libdem inaction that gets blamed on anybody BUT them.
I like the part where it (your link) says 'oh, but NG troops that were suggested were for possible trouble elsewhere', meaning the rally as if that helps in any way other than to give your narrative verbiage to continue shifting the focus. Troops on the general site are all that matters in this regard.
House votes to hold Garland in contempt, refer him for criminal charges at own DOJ
House Republicans have aimed to hold Garland in contempt of Congress for his refusal to turn over audio tapes of Special Counsel Robert Hur's interview with President Biden.
Trump offered the NG, he was declined. That irrefutably puts the blame for insufficient security on the Dims. They knew the Pubs had no chance of preventing the exchange of power or “overthrowing the government” but allowing the appearance of that to happen was to the Dims’ benefit, as we’ve seen play out.
Otherwise, there is no excuse for the lack of security. None, regardless of how hard the Squad here try to spin it. None.
Otherwise, there is no excuse for the lack of security. None, regardless of how hard the Squad here try to spin it. None.
And this is what gets me. This only ever gets discussed in a context of trying to go to pound town on Trump, because it must all be made his fault since he is the enemy. Let's twist, spin, and lie repeatedly about how Trump never actually ordered the NG to prevent this, so it's got to be his fault, correct? And let's debate the suggestion that Trump ever offered the NG so that's on him too, because it's got to be his fault, correct?
Except for one thing:
Where's all that evidence that anyone, literally anyone, asked for NG or anything else under Trump's control, and he said no??????????? There is none and that's the initial responsibility that all the anti's never want to address. No one ever asked him for anything. Seems like had anyone actually asked in advance and he said no, that TV show they did might have had an entire episode about it.
Similar threads
