(06-10-2022 12:40 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: They should have been categorized as a coup to overturn a federal election because they establish an Autonomous Zone?
You'll have to walk me through the logic of how that act could be construed as being an attempted coup.
Who said a &%$@ thing about an election? Moving the goalposts again?
They wanted to replace the US government with their own.
C'mon OO, there's no goal post moving here and you know it. January 6 is being described as a coup attempt because it was trying to overturn the result of an election - that was made abundantly clear in the hearing last night. So overturning a federal election is inherently part of discussing the argument that January 6 was an attempted coup. If you think I'm moving goal posts, please give me a better explanation as to why you think it is.
Speaking to the Autonomous Zone - someone wanting to replace the US government is different than someone trying to replace the US government. Can you walk me through how the Autonomous Zone tried to replace the US government? What concrete steps were taken to do so? And then, how does that scale compare to what the committee is saying took place on Jan 6?
My comment above relates to that - the committee made it clear that they have evidence that will explain how the Trump admin had a plan that they tried to execute that would have replaced the US government (i.e., incoming Biden administration).
As I see it, what you're arguing is akin to comparing someone saying they wish the president was dead is the same as Lee Harvey assassinating JFK. Just miles and miles and miles apart. It also ignores that the Autonomous Zone was not a hallmark of all (or even most) BLM protests, so it comes a bit out of left field when trying to compare the BLM riots to the Capitol riots.
The funny thing is that most will spot you that at least a few individuals went to the Capitol with the intent of stopping a validation of the electoral college votes.
I will readily grant you that somewhere between a dozen and 30 people did this.
But somehow that will be greatly exaggerated to much, much, much, much more than that. Well ignore the future potential tense -- based on *your* own comments above that is what all of your gnashing is.
Charge 'em, send 'em away. But somehow since it is politically advantageous for progressives to inflate those actions of a very small few to somehow a current, urgent, moral criss --- it is inflated as such. Much as you do in this thread.
Maybe if you bang the drum enough you might attract some more adherents to the Chicken Little act you keep bringing forth.
What are you referring to specifically with the “Chicken Little act”?
Is it that I’m thinking the committee will make a case that the sitting president tried to overturn the election?
I think they will make exactly that case - just not with facts. They will do it with editing and innuendo, just like last time. I bet they announce it on the Jimmy Kimmel News Hour.
These hearings are nothing more than a hyperpartisan witch hunt. They won't produce any actual evidence, but they will write a report that suggests all sorts of violations. There is not an ounce of integrity among the entire committee membership.
(This post was last modified: 06-10-2022 08:09 PM by Owl 69/70/75.)
Quote:Top Voter Midterm Issues
All U.S. Likely Voters
Rasmussen Reports
June 7, 2022
1 -- Inflation -- 87% Concerned, 60% Very Concerned 2 -- Election Integrity -- 83% Concerned, 61% Very Concerned 3 -- Violent Crime -- 83% Concerned, 51% Very Concerned 4 -- Rising Gas Prices -- 82% Concerned, 60% Very Concerned 5 -- Illegal Immigration -- 77% Concerned, 50% Very Concerned 6 -- School Issues -- 76% Concerned, 58% Very Concerned
U.S. Legacy Media Top Midterm Issues
All U.S. Likely Voters
Rasmussen Reports
June 7, 2022
1 -- Abortion 'Rights' -- 63% Concerned, 42% Very Concerned 2 -- Capitol 'Riot' "Investigation" -- 59% Important, 43% Very Important 3 -- COVID-19 -- 57% Concerned, 22% Very Concerned 4 -- Climate Change -- 54% Concerned, 32% Very Concerned 5 -- LBGTQ 'Issues' -- 23% Support, 60% Strongly Support 6 -- Ukraine -- "Which do you consider more important to America's national interests?"
Defending the Ukraine against Russian invasion -- 36%
Defending the U.S. Southern Border against Illegal Immigration -- 53%
Don't forget, YOUR Tax dollars are being taken away from you and given to these folks...yep, more free stuff for illegal boder-crossers and more government welfare payments to them from YOUR wallet while YOU SUFFER the high inflation costs that make it harder to keep food on your table....
Even worse, American taxpayers are once again footing the bill for their own replacement. Federal funds will be used to bolster capacity at shelters in cities away from the border, as well as house them “before they go to their final destinations.”
In other words, once they get to wherever the feds drop them, they are free to do as they please – on your dime, of course.
I'm sure this Demokkkrat policy will "help" crime...
Hey, LOOK! The Demokkkrats are bussing illegals farther into the country...but not near their houses? Maybe they could be dropped of at Nancy's in SF for sme gourmet ice cream? Hmmmmm.....
Quote:Texas power grid operator ERCOT (Electric Reliability Council of Texas) is bracing for extreme temperatures forecasted for the upcoming days.
ERCOT manages electric power to more than 26 million Texas customers and represents 90% of the state’s electric load, according to the company.
A Southwest heat wave is on the way and places like Texas, California and Arizona are bracing for temps to soar into the triple digits.
Temperatures in Texas are forecast to reach 110+ degrees with the heat index.
ERCOT said while it can handle the record demand for the latest heat wave, Texans will pay DOUBLE the rates to stay cool.
According to so-called experts, the rare cold snap that hit Texas in February 2021 caused the storage levels of natural gas to drop to ‘mid-level’ – this drop in storage levels is now causing the energy rates to double.
Yeah, look at the "insurrection", look at the shiny "insurrection", to he77 with your wallets...Demokkkrats HATE YOU! And you're TOO STUPID to Care! The Answer must be Mo' Gubmint! Trust the Demokkkrats! Just wait, they'll make it even "better." Yeah, that's the ticket...
(This post was last modified: 06-10-2022 09:46 PM by GoodOwl.)
(06-10-2022 01:34 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: What should be the actions of Americans if they think an election has been stolen? Meek acceptance?
I must agree that making up false claims and creating false evidence, as the Dems did in 2016, is preferable to armed conflict or violence of any kind. But I don't think there was much in the way of arms in the Jan. 6 riot. I think few, if any, went there expecting to overthrow the government by force.
I think there were also a lot of BLM protesters who did not go to the protests in anticipation of looting stores. But things develop in those kinds of situations.
I agree that the simple act of rioting in the Capitol would not be described as a coup attempt. But once again, it seems like the committee has found evidence to describe January 6 as a coup attempt.
For someone who is arguing that the outcome was drafted ahead of the committee investigation, you seem to be dead set on an outcome.
I was rather shocked that the committee was willing to call this an attempted coup, and I want to know why.
What would shock you more:
1. The committee finds that there was an attempted coup led/enabled by Trump and his family and team
2. The committee finds that there was no attempted coup involving Truump, his family, and team.
I think that committee's findings have been baked into the cake since before the committee existed. I would be happy to be proven wrong.
Especially given the chairman’s comments, I think the whole world would be shocked if the committee came to any conclusion other than it was an attempt to overthrow the government, led and planned by Trump. It is the whole raison d’etre for the the committee.
(This post was last modified: 06-11-2022 08:57 AM by OptimisticOwl.)
The January 6 hearings will:
1) Fail to produce any substantive evidence linking the events of January 6, 2021, to a) an attempt to overthrow the government, or b) Donald Trump.
2) Conclude that the events of January 6, 2021, were an attempt to overthrow the government, planned and led by Donald Trump.
There is not so much as a smidgeon of honesty or integrity among the members of the investigating committee.
The January 6 hearings will:
1) Fail to produce any substantive evidence linking the events of January 6, 2021, to a) an attempt to overthrow the government, or b) Donald Trump.
2) Conclude that the events of January 6, 2021, were an attempt to overthrow the government, planned and led by Donald Trump.
There is not so much as a smidgeon of honesty or integrity among the members of the investigating committee.
(06-11-2022 11:13 AM)tanqtonic Wrote: I was busy on Thurs night and didnt catch all of the televised production of the 1-6 hearings. I heard Miley Cyrus played halftime, good show?
The January 6 hearings will:
1) Fail to produce any substantive evidence linking the events of January 6, 2021, to a) an attempt to overthrow the government, or b) Donald Trump.
2) Conclude that the events of January 6, 2021, were an attempt to overthrow the government, planned and led by Donald Trump.
There is not so much as a smidgeon of honesty or integrity among the members of the investigating committee.
I tend to think the two Republicans are duped by their own misplaced beliefs.
Ironically, Kissinger was gerrymandered out by the Democrats. C
Henry may be primaried out.
(06-10-2022 01:34 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: What should be the actions of Americans if they think an election has been stolen? Meek acceptance?
I must agree that making up false claims and creating false evidence, as the Dems did in 2016, is preferable to armed conflict or violence of any kind. But I don't think there was much in the way of arms in the Jan. 6 riot. I think few, if any, went there expecting to overthrow the government by force.
I think there were also a lot of BLM protesters who did not go to the protests in anticipation of looting stores. But things develop in those kinds of situations.
I agree that the simple act of rioting in the Capitol would not be described as a coup attempt. But once again, it seems like the committee has found evidence to describe January 6 as a coup attempt.
For someone who is arguing that the outcome was drafted ahead of the committee investigation, you seem to be dead set on an outcome.
I was rather shocked that the committee was willing to call this an attempted coup, and I want to know why.
I am rather shocked that you think the committee was formed for any fundamental purpose other than calling it an attempted coup.
The hearings may or may not turn up evidence one way or the other. That evidence (or lack of it) may even affect some people's opinions. But make no mistake: it probably s fore-ordained that the formal conclusion of the committee will be exactly what you have already stated, because pronouncing that conclusion under the imprimatur of Congressional process was the precise purpose for which the committee was formed.
It is perhaps analogous to the Joint Committee on the Conduct of the War in the 1860s, whose purpose was not to objectively evaluate the US war effort, but to provide a forum for the Radical wing of the Republican Party along with failed but politically connected generals to attack the Lincoln Administration. There were useful findings in its volumes of documents, but its slanted purposed and approach were at the core of its being.
Bottom line: I'd be reluctant to put any stock in the "conclusions" of this committee (which really means of the majority-party members of the committee) or of the opinions offered during its hearings. The responsible thing is to listen to and read, as objectively as possible, any facts that are presented (to they extent they can be sifted out from the rhetoric and opinion). But that's something I expect almost no one will do.
(06-10-2022 01:34 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: What should be the actions of Americans if they think an election has been stolen? Meek acceptance?
I must agree that making up false claims and creating false evidence, as the Dems did in 2016, is preferable to armed conflict or violence of any kind. But I don't think there was much in the way of arms in the Jan. 6 riot. I think few, if any, went there expecting to overthrow the government by force.
I think there were also a lot of BLM protesters who did not go to the protests in anticipation of looting stores. But things develop in those kinds of situations.
I agree that the simple act of rioting in the Capitol would not be described as a coup attempt. But once again, it seems like the committee has found evidence to describe January 6 as a coup attempt.
For someone who is arguing that the outcome was drafted ahead of the committee investigation, you seem to be dead set on an outcome.
I was rather shocked that the committee was willing to call this an attempted coup, and I want to know why.
I am rather shocked that you think the committee was formed for any fundamental purpose other than calling it an attempted coup.
The hearings may or may not turn up evidence one way or the other. That evidence (or lack of it) may even affect some people's opinions. But make no mistake: it probably s fore-ordained that the formal conclusion of the committee will be exactly what you have already stated, because pronouncing that conclusion under the imprimatur of Congressional process was the precise purpose for which the committee was formed.
It is perhaps analogous to the Joint Committee on the Conduct of the War in the 1860s, whose purpose was not to objectively evaluate the US war effort, but to provide a forum for the Radical wing of the Republican Party along with failed but politically connected generals to attack the Lincoln Administration. There were useful findings in its volumes of documents, but its slanted purposed and approach were at the core of its being.
Bottom line: I'd be reluctant to put any stock in the "conclusions" of this committee (which really means of the majority-party members of the committee) or of the opinions offered during its hearings. The responsible thing is to listen to and read, as objectively as possible, any facts that are presented (to they extent they can be sifted out from the rhetoric and opinion). But that's something I expect almost no one will do.
Agreed on looking at the facts presented and forming one’s own opinion, as opposed to relying on the interpretation of the committee. I actually am surprised, and rather shocked, that the committee has openly called the actions of Trump and his inner circle an attempted coup, given how serious of an allegation that is. I hope that there is ample evidence provided to formally make such a claim - given that this is a formal investigation, that accusation carries more heft than a random Representative making the claim, and it should be backed up with a substantial amount of evidence.
To be frank, prior to hearing that, while I disagreed with Trump’s actions around Jan 6, and the legal actions he took (I believe he was lying about the outcome of the election), I was not thinking of or calling his actions a coup of any sort. It seemed like a sore loser and an incredibly poor standard to set with regards to the peaceful transition of power.
(06-11-2022 12:55 PM)georgewebb Wrote: I am rather shocked that you think the committee was formed for any fundamental purpose other than calling it an attempted coup.
... it probably s fore-ordained that the formal conclusion of the committee will be exactly what you have already stated, because pronouncing that conclusion under the imprimatur of Congressional process was the precise purpose for which the committee was formed.
Well said. I understand Britney Griner is facing a similar trial.
Look it up. Executive Order 13990 signed by Former Vice prezdon't Biden* on 1/20/2021 put us in this mess. It revoked 8 prior EOs six of which addressed infrastructure, pipelines and energy independence through drilling on federal land and offshore.
The public name of EO 13990 is "Protecting Public Health and the Environment and Restoring Science To Tackle the Climate Crisis" ... ain't that a hoot?
Who else ot there would welcome some mean tweets right now AND A RETURN TO $1.89 GAS! #LGBFJB #DemokkkratsHateYOU!
It's interesting to hear "Oh these hearing are a complete joke. The committee is completely biased. The fix is in!" from some who were, OTOH, lecturing me on how I should keep an open mind and evaluate GoodOwl's links based on the information contained and without a jaundiced eye.
(FTR Thursday night's presentation seemed way too biased for my tastes as well)
(This post was last modified: 06-11-2022 05:49 PM by Rice93.)
(06-11-2022 05:48 PM)Rice93 Wrote: It's interesting to hear "Oh these hearing are a complete joke. The committee is completely biased. The fix is in!" from some who were, OTOH, lecturing me on how I should keep an open mind and evaluate GoodOwl's links based on the information contained and without a jaundiced eye.
(FTR Thursday night's presentation seemed way too biased for my tastes as well)
93, you can refer to me by name, rather than as "some".
I knew these hearings were heading to a pre-determined conclusion as soon as they were mentioned. I don't need GoodOwl or Donald Trump or anybody else to help me to that conclusion. Two impeachments and the Russia/Trump hoax and six years of Trump hysteria are enough to help me to that conclusion. Democrats are going to do as they always do - lie and cheat. I don't need GO to point that out.
On Jan. 6, when the protest spilled into the Capitol, I facepalmed myself, knowing what was to come. The DNC was not going to let this opportunity go to waste. And they have not. This kangaroo court will come to the preapproved conclusion, as the chairman as indicated. As I told Lad, I will be shocked with any other outcome.
The Warren Commission sold its theory. This commission will sell its.
Truth is, only those true blues who will believe anything bad about the GOP will swallow this. The Joy Behar types.
(06-11-2022 05:48 PM)Rice93 Wrote: It's interesting to hear "Oh these hearing are a complete joke. The committee is completely biased. The fix is in!" from some who were, OTOH, lecturing me on how I should keep an open mind and evaluate GoodOwl's links based on the information contained and without a jaundiced eye.
(FTR Thursday night's presentation seemed way too biased for my tastes as well)
93, you can refer to me by name, rather than as "some".
I knew these hearings were heading to a pre-determined conclusion as soon as they were mentioned. I don't need GoodOwl or Donald Trump or anybody else to help me to that conclusion. Two impeachments and the Russia/Trump hoax and six years of Trump hysteria are enough to help me to that conclusion. Democrats are going to do as they always do - lie and cheat. I don't need GO to point that out.
On Jan. 6, when the protest spilled into the Capitol, I facepalmed myself, knowing what was to come. The DNC was not going to let this opportunity go to waste. And they have not. This kangaroo court will come to the preapproved conclusion, as the chairman as indicated. As I told Lad, I will be shocked with any other outcome.
The Warren Commission sold its theory. This commission will sell its.
Truth is, only those true blues who will believe anything bad about the GOP will swallow this. The Joy Behar types.
So a completely biased organization whose data is best ignored due to the obvious lack of objectivity? Does that sound right?
(06-11-2022 05:48 PM)Rice93 Wrote: It's interesting to hear "Oh these hearing are a complete joke. The committee is completely biased. The fix is in!" from some who were, OTOH, lecturing me on how I should keep an open mind and evaluate GoodOwl's links based on the information contained and without a jaundiced eye.
(FTR Thursday night's presentation seemed way too biased for my tastes as well)
93, you can refer to me by name, rather than as "some".
I knew these hearings were heading to a pre-determined conclusion as soon as they were mentioned. I don't need GoodOwl or Donald Trump or anybody else to help me to that conclusion. Two impeachments and the Russia/Trump hoax and six years of Trump hysteria are enough to help me to that conclusion. Democrats are going to do as they always do - lie and cheat. I don't need GO to point that out.
On Jan. 6, when the protest spilled into the Capitol, I facepalmed myself, knowing what was to come. The DNC was not going to let this opportunity go to waste. And they have not. This kangaroo court will come to the preapproved conclusion, as the chairman as indicated. As I told Lad, I will be shocked with any other outcome.
The Warren Commission sold its theory. This commission will sell its.
Truth is, only those true blues who will believe anything bad about the GOP will swallow this. The Joy Behar types.
So a completely biased organization whose data is best ignored due to the obvious lack of objectivity? Does that sound right?
Key word there is organization. I am very familiar with the Democratic organization and it’s methods. Are you saying you were familiar with the organizations GO quoted? My impression was was that you ignored them because GO quoted them.
(06-11-2022 05:48 PM)Rice93 Wrote: It's interesting to hear "Oh these hearing are a complete joke. The committee is completely biased. The fix is in!" from some who were, OTOH, lecturing me on how I should keep an open mind and evaluate GoodOwl's links based on the information contained and without a jaundiced eye.
(FTR Thursday night's presentation seemed way too biased for my tastes as well)
93, you can refer to me by name, rather than as "some".
I knew these hearings were heading to a pre-determined conclusion as soon as they were mentioned. I don't need GoodOwl or Donald Trump or anybody else to help me to that conclusion. Two impeachments and the Russia/Trump hoax and six years of Trump hysteria are enough to help me to that conclusion. Democrats are going to do as they always do - lie and cheat. I don't need GO to point that out.
On Jan. 6, when the protest spilled into the Capitol, I facepalmed myself, knowing what was to come. The DNC was not going to let this opportunity go to waste. And they have not. This kangaroo court will come to the preapproved conclusion, as the chairman as indicated. As I told Lad, I will be shocked with any other outcome.
The Warren Commission sold its theory. This commission will sell its.
Truth is, only those true blues who will believe anything bad about the GOP will swallow this. The Joy Behar types.
So a completely biased organization whose data is best ignored due to the obvious lack of objectivity? Does that sound right?
And speaking of biased organizations, I nominate CNN, MSNBC, and the Jan. 6 Commission.
(06-11-2022 05:48 PM)Rice93 Wrote: It's interesting to hear "Oh these hearing are a complete joke. The committee is completely biased. The fix is in!" from some who were, OTOH, lecturing me on how I should keep an open mind and evaluate GoodOwl's links based on the information contained and without a jaundiced eye.
(FTR Thursday night's presentation seemed way too biased for my tastes as well)
93, you can refer to me by name, rather than as "some".
I knew these hearings were heading to a pre-determined conclusion as soon as they were mentioned. I don't need GoodOwl or Donald Trump or anybody else to help me to that conclusion. Two impeachments and the Russia/Trump hoax and six years of Trump hysteria are enough to help me to that conclusion. Democrats are going to do as they always do - lie and cheat. I don't need GO to point that out.
On Jan. 6, when the protest spilled into the Capitol, I facepalmed myself, knowing what was to come. The DNC was not going to let this opportunity go to waste. And they have not. This kangaroo court will come to the preapproved conclusion, as the chairman as indicated. As I told Lad, I will be shocked with any other outcome.
The Warren Commission sold its theory. This commission will sell its.
Truth is, only those true blues who will believe anything bad about the GOP will swallow this. The Joy Behar types.
So a completely biased organization whose data is best ignored due to the obvious lack of objectivity? Does that sound right?
I would treat the items presented by the committee with the same eye I would look at a judicial criminal proceeding where a defense attorney is prohibited from participating.
What about that sounds wrong to you?
At least with Good Owl, his items are put up to the acid test of actually having a contrary issue being presented to them. Which many times you do.
In the case of the '1/6 Committee', there is none of that ability to counter embedded within the framework of that body, is there? No challenge to anything presented is even allowed. And this is what you are defending? Seriously?
![[Image: Screenshot_20210918-130240_Twitter-913x479.jpg]](https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/Screenshot_20210918-130240_Twitter-913x479.jpg)
