Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Lets ignore this..

---

And Miller emphatically agreed with this. He recognized that the DOD has a terrible record with civilian law enforcement and should only be used as an absolute last resort.

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

You sell the lie about no action, you then sell the lie about lack of evidence, you keep denying the obvious break down of enforcement outside of Trumps ability(DC Mayor, capital police, congress, the people Trump assigned to complete the tasks of ensuring the safety) but by all means keep doing you..

---

I don't even know what this means. No action as to what? Lack of evidence of what? Trump's ability to do what?

Any orders or requests that Trump might have given are only relevant for one reason: you want them to show that he was trying to protect the Capitol. The mayor, the police, the Congress, and everyone else could have been dumber than Joe Biden's pet rock and it wouldn't make one bit of difference to Trump's responsibility if Trump didn't do the right thing. Don't get carried away with victim-blaming and lose track of what little argument you have in his defense.

---

i dont want them to show anything, thats what they show..

He acted, it might have been wrong but it destroys the inaction narrative.

His responsibility is limited and you know it.

He acted by 2:38 pm which was way faster than the 187min window proclaimed by Jan 6th puppet theater show..

I surmise that He didnt mention lawmakers in early tweets because the crowd 1)hadnt gotten to that point yet where the rioters made it far enough to endanger them and 2) if he did, it would have been twisted as a dogwhistle to attack them or at least his opposition would say that..

ROFL- blaming the capital police and the DCPD are victims? Are Uvaldes police victims too?!

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Lets ignore this..

---

And Miller emphatically agreed with this. He recognized that the DOD has a terrible record with civilian law enforcement and should only be used as an absolute last resort.

---

based on the failures of the day, we were there.. Trump authorized and others failed to act to contain. Thanks for admitting that..

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

You sell the lie about no action, you then sell the lie about lack of evidence, you keep denying the obvious break down of enforcement outside of Trumps ability(DC Mayor, capital police, congress, the people Trump assigned to complete the tasks of ensuring the safety) but by all means keep doing you..

---

I don't even know what this means. No action as to what? Lack of evidence of what? Trump's ability to do what?

Any orders or requests that Trump might have given are only relevant for one reason: you want them to show that he was trying to protect the Capitol. The mayor, the police, the Congress, and everyone else could have been dumber than Joe Biden's pet rock and it wouldn't make one bit of difference to Trump's responsibility if Trump didn't do the right thing. Don't get carried away with victim-blaming and lose track of what little argument you have in his defense.

---

i dont want them to show anything, thats what they show..

He acted, it might have been wrong but it destroys the inaction narrative.

His responsibility is limited and you know it.

He acted by 2:38 pm which was way faster than the 187min window proclaimed by Jan 6th puppet theater show..

I surmise that He didnt mention lawmakers in early tweets because the crowd 1)hadnt gotten to that point yet where the rioters made it far enough to endanger them and 2) if he did, it would have been twisted as a dogwhistle to attack them or at least his opposition would say that..

ROFL- blaming the capital police and the DCPD are victims? Are Uvaldes police victims too?!

---

The victims I referred to were the politicians, who were the targets of the attack and whom you blame because the police didn't prevent it. The police acted bravely and suffered greatly in the politicians' defense. Comparing them to those at Uvalde is repugnant.

Trump's tweet at 2:38 PM was of no help because the mob knew exactly what it meant: try to go easy on police because they're not the real enemy.

---

4th and Inches said:

---

That was way more of an insurrection than jan 6th. Trump was protected in a bunker.. crickets from everybody

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

You sell the lie about no action, you then sell the lie about lack of evidence, you keep denying the obvious break down of enforcement outside of Trumps ability(DC Mayor, capital police, congress, the people Trump assigned to complete the tasks of ensuring the safety) but by all means keep doing you..

---

I don't even know what this means. No action as to what? Lack of evidence of what? Trump's ability to do what?

Any orders or requests that Trump might have given are only relevant for one reason: you want them to show that he was trying to protect the Capitol. The mayor, the police, the Congress, and everyone else could have been dumber than Joe Biden's pet rock and it wouldn't make one bit of difference to Trump's responsibility if Trump didn't do the right thing. Don't get carried away with victim-blaming and lose track of what little argument you have in his defense.

---

i dont want them to show anything, thats what they show..

He acted, it might have been wrong but it destroys the inaction narrative.

His responsibility is limited and you know it.

He acted by 2:38 pm which was way faster than the 187min window proclaimed by Jan 6th puppet theater show..

I surmise that He didnt mention lawmakers in early tweets because the crowd 1)hadnt gotten to that point yet where the rioters made it far enough to endanger them and 2) if he did, it would have been twisted as a dogwhistle to attack them or at least his opposition would say that..

ROFL- blaming the capital police and the DCPD are victims? Are Uvaldes police victims too?!

---

The victims I referred to were the politicians, who were the targets of the attack and whom you blame because the police didn't prevent it. The police acted bravely and suffered greatly in the politicians' defense. Comparing them to those at Uvalde is repugnant.

Trump's tweet at 2:38 PM was of no help because the mob knew exactly what it meant: try to go easy on police because they're not the real enemy.

---

your bias reads that.. as I said it would

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Lets ignore this..

---

And Miller emphatically agreed with this. He recognized that the DOD has a terrible record with civilian law enforcement and should only be used as an absolute last resort.

---

based on the failures of the day, we were there.. Trump authorized and others failed to act to contain. Thanks for admitting that..

---

I've just shown you that he did not and they did not.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

You sell the lie about no action, you then sell the lie about lack of evidence, you keep denying the obvious break down of enforcement outside of Trumps ability(DC Mayor, capital police, congress, the people Trump assigned to complete the tasks of ensuring the safety) but by all means keep doing you..

---

I don't even know what this means. No action as to what? Lack of evidence of what? Trump's ability to do what?

Any orders or requests that Trump might have given are only relevant for one reason: you want them to show that he was trying to protect the Capitol. The mayor, the police, the Congress, and everyone else could have been dumber than Joe Biden's pet rock and it wouldn't make one bit of difference to Trump's responsibility if Trump didn't do the right thing. Don't get carried away with victim-blaming and lose track of what little argument you have in his defense.

---

i dont want them to show anything, thats what they show..

He acted, it might have been wrong but it destroys the inaction narrative.

His responsibility is limited and you know it.

He acted by 2:38 pm which was way faster than the 187min window proclaimed by Jan 6th puppet theater show..

I surmise that He didnt mention lawmakers in early tweets because the crowd 1)hadnt gotten to that point yet where the rioters made it far enough to endanger them and 2) if he did, it would have been twisted as a dogwhistle to attack them or at least his opposition would say that..

ROFL- blaming the capital police and the DCPD are victims? Are Uvaldes police victims too?!

---

The victims I referred to were the politicians, who were the targets of the attack and whom you blame because the police didn't prevent it. The police acted bravely and suffered greatly in the politicians' defense. Comparing them to those at Uvalde is repugnant.

Trump's tweet at 2:38 PM was of no help because the mob knew exactly what it meant: try to go easy on police because they're not the real enemy.

---

your bias reads that.. as I said it would

---

Not my reading. The reading of the rioter on the scene who responded, "That's saying a lot by what he didn't say. He didn't say not to do anything to the congressmen."

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Lets ignore this..

---

And Miller emphatically agreed with this. He recognized that the DOD has a terrible record with civilian law enforcement and should only be used as an absolute last resort.

---

based on the failures of the day, we were there.. Trump authorized and others failed to act to contain. Thanks for admitting that..

---

I've just shown you that he did not and they did not.

---

you have shown? Your bias is allowing you to see things that arent there..

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

You sell the lie about no action, you then sell the lie about lack of evidence, you keep denying the obvious break down of enforcement outside of Trumps ability(DC Mayor, capital police, congress, the people Trump assigned to complete the tasks of ensuring the safety) but by all means keep doing you..

---

I don't even know what this means. No action as to what? Lack of evidence of what? Trump's ability to do what?

Any orders or requests that Trump might have given are only relevant for one reason: you want them to show that he was trying to protect the Capitol. The mayor, the police, the Congress, and everyone else could have been dumber than Joe Biden's pet rock and it wouldn't make one bit of difference to Trump's responsibility if Trump didn't do the right thing. Don't get carried away with victim-blaming and lose track of what little argument you have in his defense.

---

i dont want them to show anything, thats what they show..

He acted, it might have been wrong but it destroys the inaction narrative.

His responsibility is limited and you know it.

He acted by 2:38 pm which was way faster than the 187min window proclaimed by Jan 6th puppet theater show..

I surmise that He didnt mention lawmakers in early tweets because the crowd 1)hadnt gotten to that point yet where the rioters made it far enough to endanger them and 2) if he did, it would have been twisted as a dogwhistle to attack them or at least his opposition would say that..

ROFL- blaming the capital police and the DCPD are victims? Are Uvaldes police victims too?!

---

The victims I referred to were the politicians, who were the targets of the attack and whom you blame because the police didn't prevent it. The police acted bravely and suffered greatly in the politicians' defense. Comparing them to those at Uvalde is repugnant.

Trump's tweet at 2:38 PM was of no help because the mob knew exactly what it meant: try to go easy on police because they're not the real enemy.

---

your bias reads that.. as I said it would

---

Not my reading. The reading of the rioter on the scene who responded, "That's saying a lot by what he didn't say. He didn't say not to do anything to the congressmen."

---

approx 120k people at the protest, and maybe afew dozen took a tweet to say something it didnt say because they need mental help.. yeah, lets beleive that person!

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Lets ignore this..

---

And Miller emphatically agreed with this. He recognized that the DOD has a terrible record with civilian law enforcement and should only be used as an absolute last resort.

---

based on the failures of the day, we were there.. Trump authorized and others failed to act to contain. Thanks for admitting that..

---

I've just shown you that he did not and they did not.

---

you have shown? Your bias is allowing you to see things that arent there..

---

I see what's in Miller's statement. Read it. The narrative that you've been attributing to him is not there.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

You sell the lie about no action, you then sell the lie about lack of evidence, you keep denying the obvious break down of enforcement outside of Trumps ability(DC Mayor, capital police, congress, the people Trump assigned to complete the tasks of ensuring the safety) but by all means keep doing you..

---

I don't even know what this means. No action as to what? Lack of evidence of what? Trump's ability to do what?

Any orders or requests that Trump might have given are only relevant for one reason: you want them to show that he was trying to protect the Capitol. The mayor, the police, the Congress, and everyone else could have been dumber than Joe Biden's pet rock and it wouldn't make one bit of difference to Trump's responsibility if Trump didn't do the right thing. Don't get carried away with victim-blaming and lose track of what little argument you have in his defense.

---

i dont want them to show anything, thats what they show..

He acted, it might have been wrong but it destroys the inaction narrative.

His responsibility is limited and you know it.

He acted by 2:38 pm which was way faster than the 187min window proclaimed by Jan 6th puppet theater show..

I surmise that He didnt mention lawmakers in early tweets because the crowd 1)hadnt gotten to that point yet where the rioters made it far enough to endanger them and 2) if he did, it would have been twisted as a dogwhistle to attack them or at least his opposition would say that..

ROFL- blaming the capital police and the DCPD are victims? Are Uvaldes police victims too?!

---

The victims I referred to were the politicians, who were the targets of the attack and whom you blame because the police didn't prevent it. The police acted bravely and suffered greatly in the politicians' defense. Comparing them to those at Uvalde is repugnant.

Trump's tweet at 2:38 PM was of no help because the mob knew exactly what it meant: try to go easy on police because they're not the real enemy.

---

your bias reads that.. as I said it would

---

Not my reading. The reading of the rioter on the scene who responded, "That's saying a lot by what he didn't say. He didn't say not to do anything to the congressmen."

---

approx 120k people at the protest, and maybe afew dozen took a tweet to say something it didnt say because they need mental help.. yeah, lets beleive that person!

---

You can believe the whole group of rioters because they took it the same way. They didn't stop at 2:38. When Trump finally said to leave, that's when they left.

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Lets ignore this..

---

And Miller emphatically agreed with this. He recognized that the DOD has a terrible record with civilian law enforcement and should only be used as an absolute last resort.

---

based on the failures of the day, we were there.. Trump authorized and others failed to act to contain. Thanks for admitting that..

---

I've just shown you that he did not and they did not.

---

you have shown? Your bias is allowing you to see things that arent there..

---

I see what's in Miller's statement. Read it. The narrative that you've been attributing to him is not there.

---

Orange man bad!

I know you cant agree with what I am saying or the ability for Trump to be held accountable under section 3 of the 14th would fall apart

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

You sell the lie about no action, you then sell the lie about lack of evidence, you keep denying the obvious break down of enforcement outside of Trumps ability(DC Mayor, capital police, congress, the people Trump assigned to complete the tasks of ensuring the safety) but by all means keep doing you..

---

I don't even know what this means. No action as to what? Lack of evidence of what? Trump's ability to do what?

Any orders or requests that Trump might have given are only relevant for one reason: you want them to show that he was trying to protect the Capitol. The mayor, the police, the Congress, and everyone else could have been dumber than Joe Biden's pet rock and it wouldn't make one bit of difference to Trump's responsibility if Trump didn't do the right thing. Don't get carried away with victim-blaming and lose track of what little argument you have in his defense.

---

i dont want them to show anything, thats what they show..

He acted, it might have been wrong but it destroys the inaction narrative.

His responsibility is limited and you know it.

He acted by 2:38 pm which was way faster than the 187min window proclaimed by Jan 6th puppet theater show..

I surmise that He didnt mention lawmakers in early tweets because the crowd 1)hadnt gotten to that point yet where the rioters made it far enough to endanger them and 2) if he did, it would have been twisted as a dogwhistle to attack them or at least his opposition would say that..

ROFL- blaming the capital police and the DCPD are victims? Are Uvaldes police victims too?!

---

The victims I referred to were the politicians, who were the targets of the attack and whom you blame because the police didn't prevent it. The police acted bravely and suffered greatly in the politicians' defense. Comparing them to those at Uvalde is repugnant.

Trump's tweet at 2:38 PM was of no help because the mob knew exactly what it meant: try to go easy on police because they're not the real enemy.

---

your bias reads that.. as I said it would

---

Not my reading. The reading of the rioter on the scene who responded, "That's saying a lot by what he didn't say. He didn't say not to do anything to the congressmen."

---

approx 120k people at the protest, and maybe afew dozen took a tweet to say something it didnt say because they need mental help.. yeah, lets beleive that person!

---

You can believe the whole group of rioters because they took it the same way. They didn't stop at 2:38. When Trump finally said to leave, that's when they left.

---

at 150pm, the call was made from capital to prep the NG for additional support. Around 3pm Miller gave green light for all 1100 DCNG.. why so long? Took over 2 hours for NG to get to capital.. This wasnt on Trump..

He told them to have the guard there, 140 police officers wasnt enough for the 1000's of protesters. Social media showed it was going to be huge, failures of those in charge of security are not Trump's failures

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

You sell the lie about no action, you then sell the lie about lack of evidence, you keep denying the obvious break down of enforcement outside of Trumps ability(DC Mayor, capital police, congress, the people Trump assigned to complete the tasks of ensuring the safety) but by all means keep doing you..

---

I don't even know what this means. No action as to what? Lack of evidence of what? Trump's ability to do what?

Any orders or requests that Trump might have given are only relevant for one reason: you want them to show that he was trying to protect the Capitol. The mayor, the police, the Congress, and everyone else could have been dumber than Joe Biden's pet rock and it wouldn't make one bit of difference to Trump's responsibility if Trump didn't do the right thing. Don't get carried away with victim-blaming and lose track of what little argument you have in his defense.

---

i dont want them to show anything, thats what they show..

He acted, it might have been wrong but it destroys the inaction narrative.

His responsibility is limited and you know it.

He acted by 2:38 pm which was way faster than the 187min window proclaimed by Jan 6th puppet theater show..

I surmise that He didnt mention lawmakers in early tweets because the crowd 1)hadnt gotten to that point yet where the rioters made it far enough to endanger them and 2) if he did, it would have been twisted as a dogwhistle to attack them or at least his opposition would say that..

ROFL- blaming the capital police and the DCPD are victims? Are Uvaldes police victims too?!

---

The victims I referred to were the politicians, who were the targets of the attack and whom you blame because the police didn't prevent it. The police acted bravely and suffered greatly in the politicians' defense. Comparing them to those at Uvalde is repugnant.

Trump's tweet at 2:38 PM was of no help because the mob knew exactly what it meant: try to go easy on police because they're not the real enemy.

---

your bias reads that.. as I said it would

---

Not my reading. The reading of the rioter on the scene who responded, "That's saying a lot by what he didn't say. He didn't say not to do anything to the congressmen."

---

approx 120k people at the protest, and maybe afew dozen took a tweet to say something it didnt say because they need mental help.. yeah, lets beleive that person!

---

You can believe the whole group of rioters because they took it the same way. They didn't stop at 2:38. When Trump finally said to leave, that's when they left.

---

at 150pm, the call was made from capital to prep the NG for additional support. Around 3pm Miller gave green light for all 1100 DCNG.. why so long? Took over 2 hours for NG to get to capital.. This wasnt on Trump..

He told them to have the guard there, 140 police officers wasnt enough for the 1000's of protesters. Social media showed it was going to be huge, failures of those in charge of security are not Trump's failures

---

He did not tell them to have the Guard there. Even if you're counting the passing reference to 10K troops, it was in a context where the only thing that had been approved was to have them in other locations. There's no evidence that he was even thinking specifically about the Capitol.

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

You sell the lie about no action, you then sell the lie about lack of evidence, you keep denying the obvious break down of enforcement outside of Trumps ability(DC Mayor, capital police, congress, the people Trump assigned to complete the tasks of ensuring the safety) but by all means keep doing you..

---

I don't even know what this means. No action as to what? Lack of evidence of what? Trump's ability to do what?

Any orders or requests that Trump might have given are only relevant for one reason: you want them to show that he was trying to protect the Capitol. The mayor, the police, the Congress, and everyone else could have been dumber than Joe Biden's pet rock and it wouldn't make one bit of difference to Trump's responsibility if Trump didn't do the right thing. Don't get carried away with victim-blaming and lose track of what little argument you have in his defense.

---

i dont want them to show anything, thats what they show..

He acted, it might have been wrong but it destroys the inaction narrative.

His responsibility is limited and you know it.

He acted by 2:38 pm which was way faster than the 187min window proclaimed by Jan 6th puppet theater show..

I surmise that He didnt mention lawmakers in early tweets because the crowd 1)hadnt gotten to that point yet where the rioters made it far enough to endanger them and 2) if he did, it would have been twisted as a dogwhistle to attack them or at least his opposition would say that..

ROFL- blaming the capital police and the DCPD are victims? Are Uvaldes police victims too?!

---

The victims I referred to were the politicians, who were the targets of the attack and whom you blame because the police didn't prevent it. The police acted bravely and suffered greatly in the politicians' defense. Comparing them to those at Uvalde is repugnant.

Trump's tweet at 2:38 PM was of no help because the mob knew exactly what it meant: try to go easy on police because they're not the real enemy.

---

your bias reads that.. as I said it would

---

Not my reading. The reading of the rioter on the scene who responded, "That's saying a lot by what he didn't say. He didn't say not to do anything to the congressmen."

---

approx 120k people at the protest, and maybe afew dozen took a tweet to say something it didnt say because they need mental help.. yeah, lets beleive that person!

---

You can believe the whole group of rioters because they took it the same way. They didn't stop at 2:38. When Trump finally said to leave, that's when they left.

---

at 150pm, the call was made from capital to prep the NG for additional support. Around 3pm Miller gave green light for all 1100 DCNG.. why so long? Took over 2 hours for NG to get to capital.. This wasnt on Trump..

He told them to have the guard there, 140 police officers wasnt enough for the 1000's of protesters. Social media showed it was going to be huge, failures of those in charge of security are not Trump's failures

---

He did not tell them to have the Guard there. Even if you're counting the passing reference to 10K troops, it was in a context where the only thing that had been approved was to have them in other locations. There's no evidence that he was even thinking specifically about the Capitol.

---

Miller also testified that on January 5, Trump called him and told him that 10,000 National Guard troops would be needed for the next day.

"I took his comment to mean that a large force would be required to maintain order the following day," Miller said.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

That was way more of an insurrection than jan 6th. Trump was protected in a bunker.. crickets from everybody

---

What was the endgame?

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

That was way more of an insurrection than jan 6th. Trump was protected in a bunker.. crickets from everybody

---

What was the endgame?

---

It was to assassinate Trump and forcibly replace him with Hillary Clinton, who Democrats insisted was the legitimate victor of the 2016 election.

If you have evidence proving otherwise, please provide.
Until then, it was an insurrection.
And if you do try to prove otherwise, you're abetting an insurrection

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

I'm not mad about the time frame. The whole thing is a non-issue that's been played up to distract from the evidence.

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

I'm not mad about the time frame. The whole thing is a non-issue that's been played up to distract from the evidence.

---

What evidence? Evidence of what??? We have a lot of hear say, speculation and interpretation. If there was evidence, they would charge him.

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

That was way more of an insurrection than jan 6th. Trump was protected in a bunker.. crickets from everybody

---

What was the endgame?

---

It was to assassinate Trump and forcibly replace him with Hillary Clinton, who Democrats insisted was the legitimate victor of the 2016 election.

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

I'm not mad about the time frame. The whole thing is a non-issue that's been played up to distract from the evidence.

---

What evidence? Evidence of what??? We have a lot of hear say, speculation and interpretation. If there was evidence, they would charge him.

---

No, they wouldn't charge him and IMO, they shouldn't. Nixon wasn't prosecuted, H Clinton wasn't prosecuted, B. Clinton wasn't prosecuted. We are divided enough. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

If you don't see evidence, I can't help you.

---

If you see this crap show and think there is evidence there, God help you.

---

Osodecentx said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

I'm not mad about the time frame. The whole thing is a non-issue that's been played up to distract from the evidence.

---

What evidence? Evidence of what??? We have a lot of hear say, speculation and interpretation. If there was evidence, they would charge him.

---

No, they wouldn't charge him and IMO, they shouldn't. Nixon wasn't prosecuted, H Clinton wasn't prosecuted, B. Clinton wasn't prosecuted. We are divided enough. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

If you don't see evidence, I can't help you.

---

• He did not agree with the election outcome (Ok, he is a sore loser),
• Wanting the VP to reject the electors (which Pence did not do),
• He wanted to go to the Capitol (which I still don't see as how it is either a negative or positive),
• He wanted bigger crowds so he wanted mags turned off (they weren't, but massive ego. I get this one, it is a bad look but a non-issue nor illegal.),
• He threw his lunch when Barr told him there was no wide spread fraud (So, if throwing a tantrum when they get bad news was cause to not hold office 3/4s of "electeds" would be banned) point Trump,
• Response? Took too long? (Opinion, there is no definitive answer and there are points to be made on either side,)

RMF5630 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

I'm not mad about the time frame. The whole thing is a non-issue that's been played up to distract from the evidence.

---

What evidence? Evidence of what??? We have a lot of hear say, speculation and interpretation. If there was evidence, they would charge him.

---

No, they wouldn't charge him and IMO, they shouldn't. Nixon wasn't prosecuted, H Clinton wasn't prosecuted, B. Clinton wasn't prosecuted. We are divided enough. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

If you don't see evidence, I can't help you.

---

All your examples were or would have been (Nixon resigned) brought forward under a process that had rules and allowed for both sides to be told with a Judge (THE HEAD JUSTICE) to ensure protocol was followed. This is NOT THAT!!! That is the problem, there are no rules and Liz Cheney is the Judge!

Evidence of what? You guys keep saying evidence, Then, we discuss everything under the sun up to and including Trump's lunch!

• He did not agree with the election outcome (Ok, he is a sore loser),
• Wanting the VP to reject the electors (which Pence did not do),
• He wanted to go to the Capitol (which I still don't see as how it is either a negative or positive),
• He wanted bigger crowds so he wanted mags turned off (they weren't, but massive ego. I get this one, it is a bad look but a non-issue nor illegal.),
• He threw his lunch when Barr told him there was no wide spread fraud (So, if throwing a tantrum when they get bad news was cause to not hold office 3/4s of "electeds" would be banned) point Trump,
• Response? Took too long? (Opinion, there is no definitive answer and there are points to be made on either side,)

As I said, I am not seeing evidence to warrant this fiasco. Personally, I think he is political poison and if I were a Republican I would not want him as the nominee. But, banned for life or jail over what we have heard or seen? No way. .

---

Guy Noir said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

I'm not mad about the time frame. The whole thing is a non-issue that's been played up to distract from the evidence.

---

What evidence? Evidence of what??? We have a lot of hear say, speculation and interpretation. If there was evidence, they would charge him.

---

No, they wouldn't charge him and IMO, they shouldn't. Nixon wasn't prosecuted, H Clinton wasn't prosecuted, B. Clinton wasn't prosecuted. We are divided enough. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

If you don't see evidence, I can't help you.

---

All your examples were or would have been (Nixon resigned) brought forward under a process that had rules and allowed for both sides to be told with a Judge (THE HEAD JUSTICE) to ensure protocol was followed. This is NOT THAT!!! That is the problem, there are no rules and Liz Cheney is the Judge!

Evidence of what? You guys keep saying evidence, Then, we discuss everything under the sun up to and including Trump's lunch!

• He did not agree with the election outcome (Ok, he is a sore loser),
• Wanting the VP to reject the electors (which Pence did not do),
• He wanted to go to the Capitol (which I still don't see as how it is either a negative or positive),
• He wanted bigger crowds so he wanted mags turned off (they weren't, but massive ego. I get this one, it is a bad look but a non-issue nor illegal.),
• He threw his lunch when Barr told him there was no wide spread fraud (So, if throwing a tantrum when they get bad news was cause to not hold office 3/4s of "electeds" would be banned) point Trump,
• Response? Took too long? (Opinion, there is no definitive answer and there are points to be made on either side,)

As I said, I am not seeing evidence to warrant this fiasco. Personally, I think he is political poison and if I were a Republican I would not want him as the nominee. But, banned for life or jail over what we have heard or seen? No way. .

---

You make good points in your bullets, but the you discount the evidence as if it is not important. I think that is false.

First example: He did not agree with the election outcome. This shows motive on Trumps part. He had a desire to overturn the election.

Second Example: Wanting the VP to reject the electors. Whether Pense rejected the electors or not is on Pense. Asking Pense to do this was wrong in many ways. Trump was attempting to overturn the election. He was not successful in overturning the election, but he was trying to do something illegal.

Third example: He wanted bigger crowds so he wanted mags turned off. Turning the Mags off would have produced a vunerability that would allow weapons to be brought into the crowd.

Fourth example: Response? Took too long? Trump had encouraged this protest. When the protest went south, Congressional Members and staff were in a precarious situation. The USA people saw this on tv, but Trump was slow to take action to slow down a protest that had become a riot encouraged by him. I realize slow is a judgement call, but Trump was either very irresponsible, or he wanted some benefit from this riot.

---