Fishing expedition by 1/6 commission

The Democratic party is going berserk to make the mostly peaceful January 6th rally a National catastrophe threatening the very foundations of our Republic. But there are several historical footnotes that have been conveniently overlooked. The instances below make a mockery of the Democratic hyperbolic bombastic claims that the January 6th rally was worse than Watergate or Pearl Harbor. The citations below are minimal and incomplete, but they do provide a "taste" that Carter, Clinton, and Obama (all Democrats) have been lenient concerning far left radicals who have, on occasion, actually attacked the Capital with guns and bombs.
The nationalists, identified as Lolita Lebrón, Rafael Cancel Miranda, Andres Figueroa Cordero, and Irvin Flores Rodríguez, unfurled a Puerto Rican flag and began shooting at Representatives in the 83rd Congress, who were debating an immigration bill. Five Representatives were wounded, one seriously, but all recovered. The assailants were arrested, tried and convicted in federal court, and given long sentences, amounting to life imprisonment. In 1978 and 1979, their sentences were commuted by President Jimmy Carter. All four returned to Puerto Rico.
Click to expand...

Most of the members who went above ground following the reckoning of the FBI's illegal acts received large fines and short stints of probation. In 1980, Bill Ayers turned himself in. All of his charges were dropped.​

Click to expand...
Those responsible for the crime were arrested in May 1988 and charged with the bombing. An investigation also uncovered the group’s ties to related bombings of Fort McNair and the Washington Navy Yard which occurred April 25, 1983, and April 20, 1984.
...
Susan Lisa Rosenberg’s spent 16 years in prison, but kindhearted President Bill Clinton commuted her sentence on January 20, 2001, his last day in office.
Click to expand...

Former Weather Underground terrorist group leader Bill Ayers on Tuesday said he was on an airplane “dancing in the aisles” over news that President Obama commuted the sentence of FALN activist Oscar López Rivera, whose group was linked to over 100 bombs placed in U.S. cities in the 1970s and 1980s.
Click to expand...
 
moke123 said:
And which President pardoned all his friends?
Click to expand...
Not the point. Democrats make a big stink about the so-called "attack" on the Capital, yet they are the ones who appear "soft" on terrorists who have actually attacked the Capital with bombs and guns. Democrats are all about optics and political theater. Democrats are the threat to democracy.
 
Trump is the only one who can command the DC national guard. So it doesn't matter what pelosi or bowers say.
Click to expand...
Of course it matters what they say. What would have been the narrative if Trump had called up the guard without their approval? Think about it for just a split second before you tell me Pelosi wouldn't have been screaming about Trump trying to take over the government. Certainly with all those troops on site, there wouldn't have been any incursion so there wouldn't have been a need for the guard so it must be an attempt by Trump to overthrow the government. Trump was not falling into that trap.

Now that you mention it, I do recall hearing that Epps testified that the video was from the day before and of course he wasn't being paid by the FBI. It is pretty amazing that the FBI actually believed a MAGA "supporter" and let him go because he told the truth under oath. Has there ever been another MAGA supporter since 2015 that the FBI believed was telling the truth under oath? I have a bridge in Brooklyn for sale. Any takers?
 
Last edited:
piano_playr said:
Yes. Perjury is a crime. If he says he is not an agent of the federal government under oath, I believe him. Isn't that enough?
Click to expand...
I see. So you've selected exactly a total of one person to believe their testimony and you feel that's dispositive of the issue. But nobody from the other side. How positively odd. Well, at least thanks for being honest with us! That's funny, but at least it reveals with breathtaking clarity what is going on here.
 
AngelSpeaks said:
Bill Clinton.
Click to expand...
Well that's technically only half true. Half of them were pardoned, the other half all committed suicide immediately before releasing dirt on the Clintons
But I suppose the Democrats believe that is a totally democratic process.
 
Isaac said:
Well that's technically only half true. Half of them were pardoned, the other half all committed suicide immediately before releasing dirt on the Clintons
But I suppose the Democrats believe that is a totally democratic process.
Click to expand...

1657030251699.png
 
Isaac said:
I see. So you've selected exactly a total of one person to believe their testimony and you feel that's dispositive of the issue. But nobody from the other side. How positively odd. Well, at least thanks for being honest with us! That's funny, but at least it reveals with breathtaking clarity what is going on here.
Click to expand...
But nobody from the other side of what? The truth? Has anyone with knowledge come forward to dispute that fact? Are you relying on the chants of 10 or so people, who most likely didn't even know Epps? Who in that crowd has publicly explained why they were chanting Fed? Do you believe it was a false flag deep state conspiracy for the FBI to list him as a person of interest? Do you not think that any effort was made to corroborate his story?
 
NauticalGent said:
No. People lie. Under oath. An oath is only as good as a person's integrity and if that was all that was needed, then we would not be having this conversation.
Click to expand...

Amber Heard was under oath too! LOL - I rest my case.
By the time the evidence was piled up, it was clear to the whole world - and the jury - that she, not Johnny, had been the primary abuser.

Maybe piano player wasn't to start a new movement, yet more fashionable than MeToo: Its mantra will be Believe All People.
That's it! Just that simple.

@piano_playr Have you noticed generally in life that people do things even that are illegal?
 
Isaac said:
Amber Heard was under oath too! LOL - I rest my case.
By the time the evidence was piled up, it was clear to the whole world - and the jury - that she, not Johnny, had been the primary abuser.

Maybe piano player wasn't to start a new movement, yet more fashionable than MeToo: Its mantra will be Believe All People.
That's it! Just that simple.

@piano_playr Have you noticed generally in life that people do things even that are illegal?
Click to expand...
I just loved how Amber insisted that pledging on donating the money she got from Johnny in the divorce was the same as an actual donation.
 
I can clarify that I have no trouble agreeing that some people did illegal things on jan 6th and need to be prosecuted. But all of that was done in the first few weeks. Two wrongs don't make a right, but, I think fair-minded people instinctively yearn for some degree of parity in prosecution.
If you looked the other way during 999 murders out of a 1000 during a year, then aggressively and never-ending-ly prosecuted the 1000th one six ways to sunday - AND that 1000th one was from your opposing political party, the average person would stand up and say "Hey, something's clearly wrong here"

It is completely understandable, and indeed, the only reasonable position I think, that Republicans are saying that about the Jan 6th prosecutions.

After witnessing BLM and left wingers in general burn down cities across America, and even forcibly OCCUPY entire swaths of major cities while Democrats looked the other way and even sought to appease them and donated enormous amounts of money to groups who were bailing them out - any one of these events being 10 times as serious as January 6th, and numbering in the hundreds if not thousands - I think we simply find it a bit disingenuous to see the Democrats suddenly find their prosecutorial spirit come alive for the first time in regards to this issue. Obviously complete BS - and that's why they can't convince most Americans to agree that this is a huge issue that desperately needs yet more fleshing out. Move on, or else start taking all the rest of it seriously too. Pure opportunistic calculated politics.

(And I haven't even started yet on the Democrat's general position of not prosecuting crimes! - and those are crimes where real, actual, innocent people get hurt).

Put it all together, and you get a gigantic YAWN from the voters, who are likely going to create a Red Wave in November DESPITE the Jan 6th hearings incessant drivel and their constant parading of glamorous star witnesses who tell salacious stories of Trump doing bizarre things "Then he turned around, mooned me and stuck a pretzel in my ear!! [while weeping, if a minority]" - yeah ok thanks anyway, we're watching Netflix.
 
NauticalGent said:
No. People lie. Under oath. An oath is only as good as a person's integrity and if that was all that was needed, then we would not be having this conversation.
Click to expand...
They do. Some people even lie 21 times a day.
www.independent.co.uk

Trump told 30,000 untruths during presidency, say analysts

Former president made almost 21 untrue statements a day while in office, analysis suggests
www.independent.co.uk www.independent.co.uk

The difference between the BLM protests/riots and the Jan 6th protest/insurrection is that the BLM protests were based on a demonstrable truth whereas the Jan 6th incident was based on a demonstrable lie.
 
moke123 said:
The difference between the BLM protests/riots and the Jan 6th protest/insurrection is that the BLM protests were based on a demonstrable truth
Click to expand...

You mean the demonstrable truth of the additional thousands of minority people who have DIED as a direct result of BLM's influence on policing, especially in the area of traffic deaths? Or another one?

Further, BLM's stated "reason" for burning, injuring, occupying, disrupting, intimidating, maiming and killing people has absolutely nothing to do with anything. When you go out and do illegal things which hurt your community, your "reason" has nothing to do with the price of tea in China.
We can agree to disagree on the level of "truth" that minority victimization ideology contains as it's not much use arguing something so subjective. Just remember, it leads to Waukesha white-hating terrorist acts just as much as right-wing conversations can lead to black-hating Buffalo events. Food for thought.
 
Are you relying on the chants of 10 or so people, who most likely didn't even know Epps?
Click to expand...
I am relying on personal accounts of people who saw Epps ON THE SIXTH. And he was not the only person mascaraing as MAGA trying to cause a problem.

@moke123 You just love your "fact" checkers. Did any of them count the number of lies Biden has told so far? If they haven't, then you need to stop drinking the kool aid and open your eyes to the reality of who is lying to whom.

Four of my favorite Biden lies
1. If you take the vaccine, you can't catch COVID.
2. If you take the vaccine, you can't spread COVID.
3. I never talked to my son about his business dealings with the people who were paying him for no show jobs so Hunter could support me and the foreign entities could tell me how to vote.
4. I followed Trump's distribution plan for the COVID vaccine.

Every time Trump said something that someone somewhere disagreed with, it was a LIE and a CRIME. If Trump said the crowd at his rally was 25,000, they would scurry around for pictures and video and they would painstakingly count every single head. When they got to 24, 995, they would call Trump a LIAR. Trump never over/under estimated anything, he was never entitled to his own opinion. Any time a single person disagreed, the result was a universal hew and cry that he was a LIAR. If Trump said his shirt was pink someone would say it was mauve and Trump was lying again. If an aid didn't like his phone call, he leaked his opinion and the news cycle went crazy. No one even questioned the leak. No one cared that the leaker was not elected and nobody gave a flying f*** about HIS opinion.

God knows I hate to justify anything Trump says because he has said some truly stupid things. But apparently no politician in the history of the world has ever said anything stupid, especially good ol' Joe. The fact that he lies continuously about his past is just shrugged off. They shrug off his plagiarism also. Why does Joe get a pass for outright lies and Trump get brutalized because his opinions differ from someone in the press?

How about my favorite Obama LIES? We know they were lies because we have testimony from the people who briefed Obama that he knew what the actual truth was.
1. If you like your plan, you can keep your plan
2. If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.

Please tell me if you can of any lie (aside from something top secret due to national security) where Trump lied to the public and they made bad decisions based on that lie?
 
Last edited:
The never-ending race to see "who lies most" is so utterly ridiculous. Most media companies are pro-Democrat, and it shows when they decide who and when and how to fact-check, obviously.

My current "favorite" (not really) lie is the one the Democrats and those-who-do-their-bidding are constantly saying right now (yes @moke123 and @piano_playr probably even 21 times a day somewhere!) - and that is, statements that suggest that abortion restrictions will not allow ectopic pregnancies to be safely handled or will require births where the mother's life is in danger. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

But they go even further. They actually go to great lengths to frame their statement in such a way that it is utterly deceptive and at the same time, they have a plausible defense if confronted with the truth - (now that's a level of deception Trump never really got to, I don't think).
For example, Democrats are running around saying that some abortion restrictions "have no exception for the mother's life in danger".
Which of course, totally false in most cases. But exactly how is it false? Well, technically speaking, they could say "but I don't see an explicit exception if the mother's life is in danger" - meaning they expect to see those exact words, verbatim, the way they've dreamed them up.

What they don't tell you (if you watch liberal mainstream media), is that the law might, for example, specifically define abortion in such a way that it completely excludes ectopic pregnancies from even IN SCOPE of an "abortion" in the first place. (Why? The reason will astound you if you were looking for lies on the Republican side: Because they're not actually abortions, pretty simple).

As I always say, just one more example of how conservative principles are much more congruent and consistent than liberals. Liberals throw stuff up to see what sticks, in the meantime contradictions abound.

So the Democrats are going around fear mongering about women being forced to die in ectopic pregnancies due to Republican laws.
And yet, the abortion restrictions even pre-Roe didn't do that - and neither are they now.

Which is remarkably consistent. Human life is human life, period.

See the Democrats struggle to win arguments based on the truth so they must cheat in order to win.

Roe v. Wade gave Democrats the luxury of never having to debate the merits of abortion with the American people. "It's legal because the supreme court said so", period.
Now that the issue has been fairly and democratically returned TO the people, they are going to have to debate the issue on its actual merits.

Which, given the abundance of false and misleading claims they are currently making, they don't seem to expect to be able to do.
 
I wasn't intending to get into a "who lies most". Remember the joke - How do you know a politician (or lawyer) is lying? His lips are moving. Just remember that Trump is neither a politician nor a lawyer:) And Biden is BOTH:):)

I was trying to instill some understanding of the totally unfair way that Trump is treated. Most of the time when a person speaks, he is offering an opinion. Even history teachers offer opinions rather than facts on occasion. YOU, as an intelligent human being should be able to tell facts from opinions in context. If I say the glass is half-full. Is that a fact or an opinion? The answer is "yes". I am attempting to impart information but my personal bias might have influenced my response. A negative person might say that the glass is half empty. Is that different from half-full, not in reality. It is a matter of perspective. The point is, that no matter what Trump says, the Trump-hating media and the left always assume the worst possible interpretation of his words rather than assuming the best as they do for politicians they like or at least giving Trump the benefit of the doubt. There is a Yiddish word for this that is escaping me at the moment. I have two very good friends that are both 12 years older than I am and they and their immediate families were lucky to escape with their lives from Germany and Hungary during WWII. That where I get my Yiddish phrases from:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Steve R.
Biden Refuses to Protect Executive Privilege
Replies
7
Views
1,053
Pat Hartman
P

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top Bottom