"Insurrection"

[Primemuscle]

Exactly right. 

Check out this recent clip of Tucker Carlson.  This is why I love this guy.  He speaks the truth, without fear.  Start at 6 minutes (only an 8 minute clip). 

https://rumble.com/v2yp7v2-tucker-carlson-blows-the-doors-off-january-6th-lies..html

Just watched this clip. Tucker makes what seem like some valid points. One of them is about telling lies. I abhor liars and agree with him once someone tells you a lie it is difficult to believe anything they say from then on isn't also a lie. Lies very often take on a life of their own, because more lies are employed to cover-up the initial lie.

Thank you for posting it.

In my opinion there is less margin of error using OMR and OCR vote tallying and signature verification systems than in human signature verification and hand counting votes does.

[Dos Equis]

Just watched this clip. Tucker makes what seem like some valid points. One of them is about telling lies. I abhor liars and agree with him once someone tells you a lie it is difficult to believe anything they say from then on isn't also a lie. Lies very often take on a life of their own, because more lies are employed to cover-up the initial lie.

Thank you for posting it.

In my opinion there is less margin of error using OMR and OCR vote tallying and signature verification systems than in human signature verification and hand counting votes does.

I agree about liars.  Cannot stand them.

Glad you watched the clip.  You don't have to agree with things like this, but exposing yourself to alternative viewpoints will make you a more informed person. 

[Dos Equis]

Why didn't Jack Smith charge Donald Trump with insurrection?

[chaos]

Why didn't Jack Smith charge Donald Trump with insurrection?

Because Trumps charges are a deflection from the shitshow of Bidens administration. Democrats have made a martyr out of Trump, the most free press any Presidential candidate has ever had.

[Primemuscle]

Why didn't Jack Smith charge Donald Trump with insurrection?

Probably because folks referring to it as an insurrection and proving that it was in a court of law are vastly different. Have any of the defendants in the January 6th 'afternoon tea party at the Capitol' (LOL) been charged with insurrection?

[Dos Equis]

Because Trumps charges are a deflection from the shitshow of Bidens administration. Democrats have made a martyr out of Trump, the most free press any Presidential candidate has ever had.

Truth.

[Dos Equis]

Probably because folks referring to it as an insurrection and proving that it was in a court of law are vastly different. Have any of the defendants in the January 6th 'afternoon tea party at the Capitol' (LOL) been charged with insurrection?

No one has been charged with insurrection, because it wasn't an insurrection.  But that doesn't stop you folks from trying to create a false narrative. 

[LurkerNoMore]

No one has been charged with insurrection, because it wasn't an insurrection.  But that doesn't stop you folks from trying to create a false narrative.

Are you saying the charges listed in the indictment(s) are a "false narrative"?   

[Dos Equis]

Are you saying the charges listed in the indictment(s) are a "false narrative"?   

Can you read?  I specifically asked about insurrection.  The charges listed in the indictment do not include insurrection. 

[LurkerNoMore]

Can you read?  I specifically asked about insurrection.  The charges listed in the indictment do not include insurrection.

Then insurrection is not part of the narrative obviously. 

Might want to concentrate on making excuses about what is actually in the indictments rather than the things that are not.

[Primemuscle]

No one has been charged with insurrection, because it wasn't an insurrection.  But that doesn't stop you folks from trying to create a false narrative.

Redundant - I already alluded to this the post you are responding to. You say it is false narrative - I say it is a matter of perspective. Either way the charge of insurrection would likely not hold up in court.

[Dos Equis]

Then insurrection is not part of the narrative obviously. 

Might want to concentrate on making excuses about what is actually in the indictments rather than the things that are not.

It's like a little kid got access to a keyboard.  You go ahead and believe that the MSM, POTUS, and Congressional Democrats do not call January 6 an insurrection.

[Dos Equis]

Redundant - I already alluded to this the post you are responding to. You say it is false narrative - I say it is a matter of perspective. Either way the charge of insurrection would likely not hold up in court.

Oh BS.  It's not perspective.  Either January 6 was an insurrection or it was not.  You simply cannot come to grips with the fact that despite you people calling it an insurrection, not a single person (including Trump) has been charged with insurrection.  It "would likely not hold up in court" because it wasn't an insurrection. 

[LurkerNoMore]

It's like a little kid got access to a keyboard.  You go ahead and believe that the MSM, POTUS, and Congressional Democrats do not call January 6 an insurrection.

You go ahead and pretend the charges are anything different than what the indictment says.  That’s all that matters.  Unlike your opinion and excuses.

[LurkerNoMore]

Oh BS.  It's not perspective.  Either January 6 was an insurrection or it was not.  You simply cannot come to grips with the fact that despite you people calling it an insurrection, not a single person (including Trump) has been charged with insurrection.  It "would likely not hold up in court" because it wasn't an insurrection.

Ohhhhhh so the lack of an insurrection charge means the other charges are not valid and illegal on his behalf?   

Such a shame.  Make sure you write the courts and reveal your groundbreaking motion to get the case dismissed. 

[Dos Equis]

Ohhhhhh so the lack of an insurrection charge means the other charges are not valid and illegal on his behalf?   

Such a shame.  Make sure you write the courts and reveal your groundbreaking motion to get the case dismissed.

Against my better judgment, I am responding to this.  Focus.  I didn't say anything about the "other charges" being valid or invalid.  I am only talking about the lack of an insurrection charge against Trump or any of the January 6 defendants and how that blows up the false insurrection narrative. 

[LurkerNoMore]

Against my better judgment, I am responding to this.  Focus.  I didn't say anything about the "other charges" being valid or invalid.  I am only talking about the lack of an insurrection charge against Trump or any of the January 6 defendants and how that blows up the false insurrection narrative.

No.  You questioned why he wasn't charged with insurrection.  Since it was "our narrative".   Your only excuse is that he was not charged with insurrection.  You want to talk about what he was not charged with, but stay quiet as a mouse in regards to what he actually was charged with.

Want to address the actual charges?  There is only four. 

[Dos Equis]

No.  You questioned why he wasn't charged with insurrection.  Since it was "our narrative".   Your only excuse is that he was not charged with insurrection.  You want to talk about what he was not charged with, but stay quiet as a mouse in regards to what he actually was charged with.

Want to address the actual charges?  There is only four.

This makes no sense.  You're trying to disagree with me while parroting what I said, in part.  Yes I'm questioning why Trump was not charged with insurrection if January 6 was an insurrection.  In fact, no one has been charged with insurrection.  That's one of the main reasons I created this thread.  The issue is the false narrative. 

Trump wasn't charged with insurrection because January 6 was not an insurrection.  Pretty simple.

[LurkerNoMore]

This makes no sense.  You're trying to disagree with me while parroting what I said, in part.  Yes I'm questioning why Trump was not charged with insurrection if January 6 was an insurrection.  In fact, no one has been charged with insurrection.  That's one of the main reasons I created this thread.  The issue is the false narrative. 

Trump wasn't charged with insurrection because January 6 was not an insurrection.  Pretty simple.

The only narrative you may want to concern yourself with is the one contained in the four corners of that indictment.  Which you seem to trying to avoid.  There was no insurrection.  So what?  There doesn't have to be for that indictment to be stuck up his ass.

[Dos Equis]

Not a single of them was charged with insurrection. 

Full List of Capitol Rioters Jailed So Far and the Sentences They Are Serving
BY ALEKS PHILLIPS ON 9/12/23
https://www.newsweek.com/full-list-capitol-rioters-jailed-sentences-january-6-1826075

[Dos Equis]

Turley: January 6 Wasn’t Insurrection or Rebellion — 14th Amendment Doesn’t Apply
JEFF POOR   22 Dec 202336

Thursday on FNC’s “The Story,” network contributor Jonathan Turley questioned the merits of the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision to bar former President Donald Trump from the 2024 primary election ballot.

According to Turley, the 14th Amendment didn’t apply because January 6 was a riot, not an insurrection.

“It’s nonsense,” he said. “I mean, first of all, there’s really interesting analogies to go to Bush v. Gore, you know, a little over 20 years ago, they had another 4-3 decision by another state Supreme Court. And what the court did is they were uncomfortable with the ambiguous standards being used by Florida. This is even more so. When I read the 14th Amendment, I see the words insurrection or rebellion. This was neither. This was a riot. Most people in the public can see it that way. But it’s also not clear that this applies to the office of the presidency. They go through and they enumerate offices that notably does not include the presidency. So there’s a number of elements here that could result in this being overturned, as I expected, will be.”

“In order to get to this spot, these four justices had to adopt the most sweeping interpretations at every point in order to make this actually work,” he continued. “But I think it’s going to collapse in from the Supreme Court. And many of us are hoping that they do speak with one voice, that they speak with a voice for all of us, with the exception of what the people that you’ve just played, that you hear, particularly on other networks. Very few citizens are celebrating this, it’s the same core that has always celebrated every effort to bag Trump. And I’m not saying that they’re wrong in their criticism of Trump. What I’m saying is they’re wrong in their means. If you want to defend democracy, practice democracy, and that’s what’s the disconnect that’s happening here.”

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2023/12/22/turley-january-6-wasnt-insurrection-or-rebellion-14th-amendment-doesnt-apply/?utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR01x_PZAUcbSM3Ho4cz-lV4zTMBxrOjp2Xh27gvZiMRgqKcOUhXlX3EZOI

[Skeletor]

House Jan. 6 Committee deleted more than 100 encrypted files days before GOP took majority

The former House Select Committee on Jan. 6 deleted more than 100 encrypted files from its probe just days before Republicans took over the majority in the House of Representatives, Fox News Digital has learned.

The House Administration Committee's Oversight Subcommittee is leading an investigation into Jan. 6, 2021, led by Chairman Barry Loudermilk, R-Ga. The panel is investigating the security failures on that day, as well as the "actions" of the former select committee investigating the Capitol riot.

Sources familiar with Loudermilk’s investigation told Fox News Digital that, per House rules, the former select committee, which was chaired by Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., was required to turn over all documents from its investigation to the new, GOP-led panel, after Republicans secured the majority of the House of Representatives following the 2022 midterm elections.

Sources told Fox News Digital that Thompson had told Loudermilk that the select committee would turn over four terabytes of archived data, but that the new committee only received approximately two terabytes of data.

Fox News Digital has learned that Loudermilk’s committee hired a digital forensics team to scrape hard drives to determine what information they were not given.

The forensics team, according to sources familiar with their search, determined that 117 files were both deleted and encrypted. Sources said those files were deleted on Jan. 1, 2023 – just days before Thompson’s team was required to transfer the data to the new committee.

Fox News Digital has learned the forensics team has recovered all 117 deleted and encrypted files. Now, Loudermilk is demanding answers and passwords to access the data.

Meanwhile, Loudermilk also penned letters to White House general counsel and the general counsel of the Department of Homeland Security, requesting "unedited and unredacted transcripts" of White House and DHS testimony to the former select committee.

Loudermilk's committee knows the transcripts of these interviews exist, but said they were not turned over by the Thompson-led committee.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/house-committee-jan-6-deleted-encrypted-117-files-was-required-share-house-gop-sources

[deadz]

Turley: January 6 Wasn’t Insurrection or Rebellion — 14th Amendment Doesn’t Apply
JEFF POOR   22 Dec 202336

Thursday on FNC’s “The Story,” network contributor Jonathan Turley questioned the merits of the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision to bar former President Donald Trump from the 2024 primary election ballot.

According to Turley, the 14th Amendment didn’t apply because January 6 was a riot, not an insurrection.

“It’s nonsense,” he said. “I mean, first of all, there’s really interesting analogies to go to Bush v. Gore, you know, a little over 20 years ago, they had another 4-3 decision by another state Supreme Court. And what the court did is they were uncomfortable with the ambiguous standards being used by Florida. This is even more so. When I read the 14th Amendment, I see the words insurrection or rebellion. This was neither. This was a riot. Most people in the public can see it that way. But it’s also not clear that this applies to the office of the presidency. They go through and they enumerate offices that notably does not include the presidency. So there’s a number of elements here that could result in this being overturned, as I expected, will be.”

“In order to get to this spot, these four justices had to adopt the most sweeping interpretations at every point in order to make this actually work,” he continued. “But I think it’s going to collapse in from the Supreme Court. And many of us are hoping that they do speak with one voice, that they speak with a voice for all of us, with the exception of what the people that you’ve just played, that you hear, particularly on other networks. Very few citizens are celebrating this, it’s the same core that has always celebrated every effort to bag Trump. And I’m not saying that they’re wrong in their criticism of Trump. What I’m saying is they’re wrong in their means. If you want to defend democracy, practice democracy, and that’s what’s the disconnect that’s happening here.”

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2023/12/22/turley-january-6-wasnt-insurrection-or-rebellion-14th-amendment-doesnt-apply/?utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR01x_PZAUcbSM3Ho4cz-lV4zTMBxrOjp2Xh27gvZiMRgqKcOUhXlX3EZOI

Trump will pardon them all.

[Primemuscle]

Trump will pardon them all.

Maybe, maybe not... but not before he preemptively pardons himself. If he is convicted of a felony before the election and he wins that election, there will be a real legal and political conundrum. This FiveThirtyEight article explores the possibilities should this happen. Just so you know, I hope we never have to find out what would transpire.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/trump-convicted-before-election-day-what-if/

Not sure this NY Times link works if you don't have a subscription, but give it a try. Otherwise, Googling "what happens if Trump is convicted of a felony before he wins the presidency?" will bring up the a link that (at least for me) opened the article.
https://www.nytimes.com/article/trump-investigation-conviction.html#:~:text=Legally%2C%20Mr.%20Trump%20would%20remain,situation%2C”%20Professor%20Levinson%20said.

[Dos Equis]

House Jan. 6 Committee deleted more than 100 encrypted files days before GOP took majority

The former House Select Committee on Jan. 6 deleted more than 100 encrypted files from its probe just days before Republicans took over the majority in the House of Representatives, Fox News Digital has learned.

The House Administration Committee's Oversight Subcommittee is leading an investigation into Jan. 6, 2021, led by Chairman Barry Loudermilk, R-Ga. The panel is investigating the security failures on that day, as well as the "actions" of the former select committee investigating the Capitol riot.

Sources familiar with Loudermilk’s investigation told Fox News Digital that, per House rules, the former select committee, which was chaired by Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., was required to turn over all documents from its investigation to the new, GOP-led panel, after Republicans secured the majority of the House of Representatives following the 2022 midterm elections.

Sources told Fox News Digital that Thompson had told Loudermilk that the select committee would turn over four terabytes of archived data, but that the new committee only received approximately two terabytes of data.

Fox News Digital has learned that Loudermilk’s committee hired a digital forensics team to scrape hard drives to determine what information they were not given.

The forensics team, according to sources familiar with their search, determined that 117 files were both deleted and encrypted. Sources said those files were deleted on Jan. 1, 2023 – just days before Thompson’s team was required to transfer the data to the new committee.

Fox News Digital has learned the forensics team has recovered all 117 deleted and encrypted files. Now, Loudermilk is demanding answers and passwords to access the data.

Meanwhile, Loudermilk also penned letters to White House general counsel and the general counsel of the Department of Homeland Security, requesting "unedited and unredacted transcripts" of White House and DHS testimony to the former select committee.

Loudermilk's committee knows the transcripts of these interviews exist, but said they were not turned over by the Thompson-led committee.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/house-committee-jan-6-deleted-encrypted-117-files-was-required-share-house-gop-sources

Good luck getting answers.  They are just going to bend over and take it like they always do.