Breaking 1-06-21: MAGA terrorist attack on Capitol

The whole bunch of you people are such relentless, aggressive, unconscionable liars. Nothing you say of any import can be trusted.

The conduct of these hearings has been a complete disgrace to our country. So they got some liars up to speak. I wonder how much they paid them to do that. This is Christine Blasey Ford, take 2.

 

You're still talking about the least important part of one witness.

I'm talking about documentation, and witness corroboration regarding the planning ahead of time about what happened on January 6th.

The rioters planned ahead of time scouted out and stationed themselves to breach the capitol.

It is in the evidence. You have falsely tried to claim it was hearsay but you've not provided one single thing that refutes the evidence.

All you've done is call people names. I'm inviting you to to put forward anything at all that refutes that evidence and testimony from the hearings.

Go ahead. You'll be the first Trump defender to do it.

These witnesses aren't partisan opponents of Trump. They were part of his and his inner ciecle's staff. They were eyewitnesses and have testified under oath.

 

I'm searching on YouTube for clips from the hearings where they interview Steven Sund, the Capitol police chief. Anyone who's been watching the hearings have any links?

 

I don't remember them interviewing Sund. They interviewed other officers from the scene. They may have entered some stuff from Sund that wasn't testimony. I'm not sure.

 

all I'm seeing is his submitted written testimony from February. that's it.

 

That might be all there was.

 

which seems a bit odd if they're trying to capture and convey the full picture.

 

Not really. They have entered multiple police correspondence from the day, interviewed officers live, played audio of police communication. And if they have his written testimony, I'm not sure what additional they would have gotten from live testimony.

 

I'm not sure the testimony of the cops who were on the street Jan 6 tells us very much about how the Capitol Police force and other law enforcement agencies prepared for Jan 6 ahead of time. The perspectives of the leadership of the police and the officers on the street have to be very different I would think.

 

for example, here is the coverage from that week.

'Unfathomable': Capitol Police security breakdown prompts chief's resignation

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...n-prompts-call-chiefs-resignation/6579012002/

excerpt:

Among the most striking images of law enforcement futility, on a day when chaos convulsed the U.S. Capitol, was of a lone, shirt-sleeved officer in retreat waving a baton at an advancing mob that had breached the Senate side of the building.

Flag-waving rioters appeared to stalk the officer who bounded up one stairway after another – with no immediate back-up to be found.

The stunning sight was just one in an ugly collage that laid bare a jarring breakdown of security at one of the country’s most iconic institutions, prompting the abrupt resignation of Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund.

Sund's resignation, effective Jan. 16, came just hours after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called for him step down.

More unnerving, perhaps, is that the attackers took their target with such remarkable ease nearly two decades after the 9/11 attacks prompted federal authorities to spend millions to bolster defenses across the capital to repel such assaults.
​

more at the link

I would think that Sund's perspective in June 2022 might be significantly different nearly six months later. Why would the committee not wish to hear from him in person? Why would they not want him to appear on national television in primetime?

 

Perhaps they could investigate about the communication between the agencies based on what at least some of them knew beforehand.

But the prime time stuff will definitely be the ways those in charge tried to abuse the system to stay on power.

I mentioned that I was amazed how many people chose constitution over Trump. But what is even more shocking and a far greater number are the people in top positions that were willing to act on ways they knew were illegal and dishonest in an attempt to cheat democracy and cast aside result of the election.

That part of the picture is much more important than the other. So I would encourage them to look at ways to physically improve security should something like that happen again. But it isn't prime time stuff

 

if the police had been better prepared and better organized, the breach would never have happened, and none of us in all likelihood would be talking about this right now, most likely. So to me that's part of the story, an important part of the story

 

It's good that we are talking about it. It's insane to think that a sitting president of the United States and numerous members of his staff and cabinet were trying to knowingly nullify a free election to hold on to power. He also wanted to and in some cases did succeed in replacing those that wouldn't go along with it. He currently campaigns for those who are on record in supporting that attempt.

That is more important than the logistical reasons capitol police didn't have a larger security presence.

Securing the capitol in case of future insurrection is important, but not as important as trying to make sure there aren't future insurrections.

And also, the solution is pretty clear. Put in stronger barricades and more officers. The solution to making sure the president doesn't try and stop an election from being certified in order to stay in power doesn't have as clear cut solution. That deserves more investigation and attention.

 

This is wrong. Both the driver and the person the witness heard the story from testified behind closed doors. Supposedly they denied everything the lady claimed.


https://www.foxnews.com/politics/to...rump-tried-lunge-secret-service-agent-sources

 

Bless your heart.

 

Beefing up the security of gov buildings is important (and has already been done because of 1/6 - see Congress, Supreme Court, WH). Quick lesson learned and mostly solved.

The root cause is still open and unresolved. It's extremely likely an attempted self-coup. In addition to solving that root cause (accountability), there are many things that can be done to workaround/prevent future attempts (and should be done). Republicans aren't generally interested in either of these. Trump supporters actively want the root cause to remain unclear and unsolved. These people do not care about the rule of the law or the Constitution. Now, some Republicans (many of whom supported the President) still support the Constitution. But you simply can't do both and it's time to choose. As Cheney said yesterday at the Regan Library: “We have to choose because Republicans cannot both be loyal to Donald Trump and loyal to the Constitution."

 

Bobby Engel's Testimony Consistent With Cassidy Hutchinson—Legal Expert (newsweek.com)

Ryan Goodman, professor of law at New York University School of Law, said it is "legally significant" that some of Engel's testimony is "consistent" with Hutchinson.

"Trump wanted to join at Capitol even as violence unfolded, Trump raised privately with Engel, Engel disagreed, drove back to WH," Goodman tweeted while highlighting key passages from the Politico report.

 

Spoiler

Sat

 

Right. The hearing does well to focus on the issues they are.

 

Cassidy Hutchinson testimony set audience record for a daytime Jan. 6 hearing


https://news.yahoo.com/cassidy-hutchinson-testimony-set-audience-225925410.html

More than 13 million Americans tuned in to watch bombshell testimony from a former White House aide this week, making the Jan. 6 committee's latest hearing its second-most-viewed thus far.

This total topped the previous four hearings, which won audiences of about 10 million to 11 million people. The first Jan. 6 hearing, on June 9, drew about 20 million viewers, but it aired in prime time.


Lake said that according to her research, 80% of Americans want accountability for those involved in the Jan. 6 violence, including elected officials. The hearings may affect how Americans vote in upcoming elections too, she said.

"There is an evolving narrative. People see it as a crime, but they also see it as a criminal conspiracy," she said. "They demand accountability, and they're very serious about what they consider accountability. And we are seeing these numbers increase quite dramatically over the course of the hearings, including with independents who traditionally don't pay very much attention."