The Trump Riot Aftermath (Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes found guilty of seditious conspiracy. Proud Boys join the club)

[Corcaigh]

I don't think that will stick. The politicians will claim that they were involved only to support a large protest outside the Capitol to encourage other members of congress to delay the certification. Unless there is documentary evidence that they supported invasion and violence they will not be charged with anything.

 

Now a reasonable person would think that if you wanted to encourage peaceful protest then paramilitary groups wouldn't be your choice of ally, but the GoP is not willing to purge itself of these nutjobs and so it will go down along party lines.

[Larry]

4 hours ago, EmirOfShmo said:

And Gosar, who has been one of the most prominent defenders of the Jan. 6 rioters, allegedly took things a step further. Both sources say he dangled the possibility of a “blanket pardon” in an unrelated ongoing investigation to encourage them to plan the protests.

“Our impression was that it was a done deal,” the organizer says, “that he’d spoken to the president about it in the Oval … in a meeting about pardons and that our names came up. They were working on submitting the paperwork and getting members of the House Freedom Caucus to sign on as a show of support.”

The organizer claims the pair received “several assurances” about the “blanket pardon” from Gosar.

“I was just going over the list of pardons and we just wanted to tell you guys how much we appreciate all the hard work you’ve been doing,” Gosar said, according to the organizer.

 

Curiously, said conspirators didn't get paid.  I'm shocked.  

 

(Maybe they only got paid if they succeeded?)

[Corcaigh]

A fair question for Gosar and anyone else who mentioned a pardon is why anyone involved in a peaceful protest might need one.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

 

[Larry]

22 minutes ago, Corcaigh said:

I don't think that will stick. The politicians will claim that they were involved only to support a large protest outside the Capitol to encourage other members of congress to delay the certification. Unless there is documentary evidence that they supported invasion and violence they will not be charged with anything.

 

Now a reasonable person would think that if you wanted to encourage peaceful protest then paramilitary groups wouldn't be your choice of ally, but the GoP is not willing to purge itself of these nutjobs and so it will go down along party lines.

 

I never once used the exact words "we want you to kill all the Democrat members of the Senate".  

 

All I did was:  

 

1. Tell them over and over that Trump actually won the election.
2. Tell them over and over that the very survival of the nation depended on blocking the treasonous events that were about to take place.  
3. Recite inspirational slogans about the tree of Liberty needing the blood of partiots and tyrants.  
4. Give them a guided tour of the places where the destruction of our nation will be taking place, and the exact time it will be happening.   
5. Inflate their opinions of their own importance, by giving them such meetings, at all.  And arranging for other powerful people to do so, as well.  
6. Reassume them that blocking the results of an election and installing somebody else instead is perfectly legal, and will have no punishment.
   In fact, the people who do it will be hailed for generations, as heroes.  

 

And therefore I will refuse to accept any responsibility at all for what the people I did those things to, did.  

[Califan007 The Constipated]

 

 

^^^

 

Some are trying to say MTG is wearing the same shoes in the above video as the person who placed the pipe bombs lol...I'm not buying it but there's enough of a resemblance to at least cause her some public headaches for awhile:

 

 

[Ball Security]

7 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

 

^^^

 

Some are trying to say MTG is wearing the same shoes in the above video as the person who placed the pipe bombs lol...I'm not buying it but there's enough of a resemblance to at least cause her some public headaches for awhile:

 

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.ibtimes.sg/marjorie-taylor-greene-pipe-bomber-u-s-reps-prior-knowledge-explosive-devices-planted-dc-59202

 

I had not heard of this, but this theory has been around since July.

[EmirOfShmo]

51 minutes ago, Corcaigh said:

I don't think that will stick. The politicians will claim that they were involved only to support a large protest outside the Capitol to encourage other members of congress to delay the certification. Unless there is documentary evidence that they supported invasion and violence they will not be charged with anything.

 

Now a reasonable person would think that if you wanted to encourage peaceful protest then paramilitary groups wouldn't be your choice of ally, but the GoP is not willing to purge itself of these nutjobs and so it will go down along party lines.

Agreed. However, at the end of that Rolling Stones article there's this (my highlight). 

 

Rolling Stone separately confirmed a third person involved in the main Jan. 6 rally in D.C. has communicated with the committee. This is the first report that the committee is hearing major new allegations from potential cooperating witnesses. While there have been prior indications that members of Congress were involved, this is also the first account detailing their purported role and its scope. The two sources also claim they interacted with members of Trump’s team, including former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, who they describe as having had an opportunity to prevent the violence.

 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

10 minutes ago, Ball Security said:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.ibtimes.sg/marjorie-taylor-greene-pipe-bomber-u-s-reps-prior-knowledge-explosive-devices-planted-dc-59202

 

I had not heard of this, but this theory has been around since July.

 

 

"Marjorie Taylor Greene's recent tweet has led netizens to believe the Republican lawmaker had prior knowledge of the pimp bombs"

 

 

 

[Corcaigh]

6 minutes ago, EmirOfShmo said:

The two sources also claim they interacted with members of Trump’s team, including former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, who they describe as having had an opportunity to prevent the violence.

 

 

I wonder how they characterize this 'opportunity'? Was there a conversation between the sources and Mark Meadows that there was going to be violence?

[China]

Cowboys for Trump Founder Turns on Trump in Conference Speech Over Capitol Riot Charges

 

Cowboys for Trump founder Couy Griffin, who is facing charges in connection with the U.S. Capitol riot, has turned on the former president in a conference speech for abandoning January 6 rioters and failing to deliver on a campaign promise.

 

Griffin is facing misdemeanor criminal charges in the insurrection on the Capitol on January 6, where he was seen attempting to lead a crowd of rioters in prayer on an outdoor terrace. He supports Trump's baseless claims of widespread voter fraud, but denies that he knowingly entered restricted grounds to disrupt Congress certifying President Joe Biden's election win.

 

"We supported President Trump because of his fight for justice as well. And for four years we cried, 'Lock her up. Lock her up. Lock her up.' We know she's a criminal. What did the president tell us? 'If I was in charge of the law, you'd be in jail,'" Griffin said Sunday at a QAnon conference in Las Vegas, Nevada.

 

"Mr. President, you've been in charge of the law for four years," he added. "At the end of your four year time, the only ones locked up were men like me, and others like me, that have stood by the president the strongest."

 

Click on the link for the full article

[tshile]

40 minutes ago, China said:

"Mr. President, you've been in charge of the law for four years," he added. "At the end of your four year time, the only ones locked up were men like me, and others like me, that have stood by the president the strongest."

Ah! You do recognize patterns!

 

now, onto the next step…

[EmirOfShmo]

48 minutes ago, Corcaigh said:

 

I wonder how they characterize this 'opportunity'? Was there a conversation between the sources and Mark Meadows that there was going to be violence?

Great questions. I'm guessing some of the answers are in the communications of the leaders - inside & outside the government - of the attempted coup. Thus their reluctance to cooperate or turn over evidence. 

[China]

 

[LadySkinsFan]

17 minutes ago, China said:

 

 

I wish this includes the Congresspeople who voted to decertify thosr states' electors, including my Rep. John Carter TX-31.

[Corcaigh]

1 hour ago, tshile said:

Ah! You do recognize patterns!

 

now, onto the next step…

“As a result of your being an active member of the Cowboys for Trump organization you are now eligible to receive platinum executive membership of the exclusive Suckers for Trump club at the special promotional rate of only $99/month.”

[Larry]

2 hours ago, EmirOfShmo said:

Agreed. However, at the end of that Rolling Stones article there's this (my highlight). 

 

Rolling Stone separately confirmed a third person involved in the main Jan. 6 rally in D.C. has communicated with the committee. This is the first report that the committee is hearing major new allegations from potential cooperating witnesses. While there have been prior indications that members of Congress were involved, this is also the first account detailing their purported role and its scope. The two sources also claim they interacted with members of Trump’s team, including former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, who they describe as having had an opportunity to prevent the violence.

 

 

Lots of people had the opportunity to prevent the violence.  

 

For example, one Republican, or one person on Fox News, could have, I don't know, mentioned that Joe Biden won?  

[tshile]

I can’t be the only one who thinks:

as this goes on and it becomes obvious more and more people were involved in a coordinated effort here, it becomes less and less likely anything will come of it

 

?

 

I think ultimately we’re forced to just move forward knowing about half this country are traitors just looking for a reason to throw our whole government out the window and engage in a nasty civil war. And waiting for them to finally do it. 
 

this commission will have no teeth. We’ll get a report saying what we know it will say. And other than random people that entered the capital getting a trespassing charge, and a couple oath keepers getting caught up in a case seemingly no one cares about, there will be no punishment for this. 
 

and it will be tried again. 

[Llevron]

26 minutes ago, tshile said:

I can’t be the only one who thinks:

as this goes on and it becomes obvious more and more people were involved in a coordinated effort here, it becomes less and less likely anything will come of it

 

?

 

I think ultimately we’re forced to just move forward knowing about half this country are traitors just looking for a reason to throw our whole government out the window and engage in a nasty civil war. And waiting for them to finally do it. 
 

this commission will have no teeth. We’ll get a report saying what we know it will say. And other than random people that entered the capital getting a trespassing charge, and a couple oath keepers getting caught up in a case seemingly no one cares about, there will be no punishment for this. 
 

and it will be tried again. 

 

Exactly. If this was just one guy.......biiig maybe but maybe something happens. 

 

Four or five senators and a hand full of house reps? Absolutely zero chance the Democrats (currently in power) come to the table with anything other than mean tweets and public admonishments. And even if they do something.....what exactly is in their power? They cant pass a bill that 70% of the country is in favor for.....how are they going to punish people who have basically just as much power as they do? Past that, I have no faith the justice department will do anything either. They will stay as far away from politics as possible until someone forces them to do otherwise and that aint gonna be Joe Biden. So nothing will get done. 

 

Its 100% going to happen again at this rate. And it will be worse next time. 

[tshile]

4 minutes ago, Llevron said:

Its 100% going to happen again at this rate. And it will be worse next time. 

I’m guessing it’ll work next time. 
 

they really weren’t that far away from it working. A leader willing to actually ride on that ship (ie: sink with it if he must) is at the Capitol making things move faster. And really the only reason it wasn’t worse was because they moved so slow the people that really matter were evacuated in time (and barley at that)

 

even if ultimately they didn’t take over power, I firmly believe we were much closer than sitting members of Congress being executed on the steps of the Capitol than most want to admit. People want to hide behind the number of aimless people just wandering around, but there were plenty there that could have done more if someone else just gave the whole thing a nudge. 
 

and worse? Immediately following it something like 30% of republicans believed the election was stollen and the riots were the fault of someone other than trump. 78% now believe it was stolen in some way and the riots were Biden’s fault. 
 

all that’s going on right now is that side is galvanizing support and power within the country for legitimizing an overthrow of the government. 
 

we’re losing this battle. More people are coming to “their” side as time goes on. Not ours. And they’re using that. Growing that seed they already planted. 
 

all the need is a leader that isn’t such a **** he hedges in everything he does; one committed to the cause. 

[China]

Rep. Jones: ‘Expulsion has to be on the table' for lawmakers involved in Jan. 6

 

“Expulsion has to be on the table. It is one of the most severe consequences if not the most serious consequence that congress can engage in. And it is, I think, appropriate in such an instance,” says Rep. Mondaire Jones on members of Congress’ potential involvement in January 6. 

 

Click on the link for the video

 

-----------------------

 

First on CNN: Biden White House rejects more executive privilege claims by Trump

 

President Joe Biden has once again refused to assert executive privilege over more documents that former President Donald Trump has sought to keep out of the hands of the committee investigating the January 6 attack on the US Capitol.

 

According to a letter obtained by CNN, White House counsel Dana Remus informed National Archivist David Ferriero on Monday that Biden would not assert privilege over additional materials that Trump requested remain secret as a matter of executive privilege.

The former President has has already filed a lawsuit to stop the National Archives, the custodian of his administration's White House records, from giving documents to Congress that he believes are privileged, and the latest documents will likely become part of that lawsuit. The National Archives is set to begin turning over records to the House on November 12, unless Trump gets a court order.

"President Biden has considered the former President's assertion, and I have engaged in consultations with the Office of Legal Counsel at the Department of Justice," Remus wrote.

 

"President Biden has determined that an assertion of executive privilege is not in the best interests of the United States, and therefore is not justified, as to the documents provided to the White House on September 16, 2021, and September 23, 2021. Accordingly, President Biden does not uphold the former President's assertion of privilege."

 

Click on the link for the full article

Edited October 27, 2021 by China

[China]

 

[China]

Why some alleged Capitol rioters are acting as their own attorneys

 

In the 1980s, Laurie Levenson was an assistant U.S. attorney prosecuting a case in federal court in Los Angeles.

 

In that case, the defendant decided to go "pro se" and represent himself.

 

When it came time for the defendant to testify, the judge did not allow him to just give a speech in his own defense. Instead, the judge instructed the defendant to play both parts: attorney and witness.

 

"The defendant asked himself the question," Levenson recalled recently, "goes up on the witness stand, and then says, 'Can you repeat the question?'"

 

Levenson, who is now a professor at Loyola Law School, often mentions that story in class, not only because her students get a laugh, but because it illustrates how pro se cases have a tendency to create a circus atmosphere. Over the decades, prominent pro se defendants — from serial killer Ted Bundy to Washington, D.C., sniper John Allen Muhammad — have made headlines for courtroom spectacles.

 

"The system's not really built for people to represent themselves in felony-type cases," Levenson told NPR. "It certainly complicates things for everyone."

 

Of the more than 650 cases stemming from the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol, at least five defendants have decided to go down that complicated path. And though legal experts told NPR that representing oneself in court can be exceptionally risky, they acknowledged that politically motivated defendants might logically take that option, which is guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.

 

One might expect that prosecutors would relish the opportunity to face off against a defendant with zero legal experience.

 

Not so.

 

When defendants represent themselves in court, the results are often unpredictable and can lead down distracting rabbit holes that have little to do with the relevant legal questions. Prosecutors find it difficult, if not impossible, to negotiate plea agreements with a self-represented defendant, Levenson said.

 

Judges generally dislike such cases, too, because the court has to monitor carefully to ensure that the defense follows the proper legal procedure and safeguards the defendant's rights against self-incrimination.

 

Click on the link for the full article

[Llevron]

@PleaseBlitz Any experience with stuff like this ^^^ ? 

[PleaseBlitz]

3 minutes ago, Llevron said:

@PleaseBlitz Any experience with stuff like this ^^^ ? 

**** no. I don’t work for or adjacent to morons.  I bet the majority of Jan 6 pro se litigants just couldn’t find a lawyer that would give them he answers they wanted, like the Constitution gives them the right to smash up the Capital Building cause thats what they heard on Facebook/FoxNews/Qanon boards/Kkk meetings.