Liz Cheney says Trump appears to have been ‘personally involved in planning’ 6 Jan insurrection

[NotfooledbyW]

ThisIsMe wrote: Between myself, you, and nfbw, I think I am the ONLY one interested in the truth, and a fair investigation. 21OCT30-POST#598

NFBW wrote: you have stated in defense of Trump and his believers that his belief that he won an election that he lost by 8 million votes only because it was stolen from him and that belief It’s just a big misunderstanding. Therefore don’t pass yourself off as some kind of non-partisan super intelligent truth seeker. You are not! - - - your political party, the once conservative party that respected the constitution above all else, has blocked every formal effort to get to the truth and your leaders stand by the former occupant and shit stain on the White House in his efforts to block the truth. When you stand by your party to block the truth you do not get to claim that you are seeking truth. The two Republicans on the committee are some of the few in your political party thet have the courage to seek the truth. All you’ve been doing that I can see is diminishing their integrity and accusing them of taking part in a fake committee. Because anything that does not bode well for the former slobberer in chief that you voted for and stand by is fake news, a witchhunt, lies and deep state conspiracy‘s. You are creating a world where there is no entity, no court, no law no legal recourse to question what DJT did. Until you side with Cheney and Kenzinger or at least quit trashing them. do not feed us your crap. 21OCT30-POST#601

 

[ThisIsMe]

No. The work of the committee is necessary and appropriate so it can never be considered wrong by a fair minded unbiased democracy loving American.

That is not a fact, period.

The committee members have not done anything wrong in being on the committee so they will never have to admit they are wrong for being on the committee.

They are not required to do so.

Yes.

Yes.

Until you can cite the use of irrelevant and made up "facts" presented in the finding I will withhold judgment on such a scenario.

Yes, sufficiently capable.

No akready explained why.

Yes and No in that order. I believe they are honorable people specifically Kinzinger.

I Don’t agree with your predisposed conclusion before the Committee is barely getting started . Your judgment is already shown to be flawed when you question the subpoena to Bannon because you said he was no longer involved with the President. He was in the Willard Hotel on riot eve. You have discredited yourself on this subject ThisIsMe. .

I’m certain they can because much of the case will undoubtedly be based on documented evidence and video recordings And because Cheney have put their careers and lives on the line to get to the truth for the country they love.

answered and I’m not interested in them finding Trump guilty.

No. I have answered your questions to the best if my ability and understanding of them. I dont care if DJT Is found guilty of a crime. His conduct after losing is unAmerican and deplorable, I want his private written communications unedited to be made public since he was supposed to be working for me but he worked so hard against me and against the Constitutional process of elections.

so there. what about that one.

No.,

No.

To investigate the political effort to overturn the election and the riot we all saw that happened because of it,

No. The work of the committee is necessary and appropriate so it can never be considered wrong by a fair minded unbiased democracy loving American.

That is not a fact, period.

The committee members have not done anything wrong in being on the committee so they will never have to admit they are wrong for being on the committee.

They are not required to do so.

Yes.

Yes.

Until you can cite the use of irrelevant and made up "facts" presented in the finding I will withhold judgment on such a scenario.

Yes, sufficiently capable.

No akready explained why.

Yes and No in that order. I believe they are honorable people specifically Kinzinger.

I Don’t agree with your predisposed conclusion before the Committee is barely getting started . Your judgment is already shown to be flawed when you question the subpoena to Bannon because you said he was no longer involved with the President. He was in the Willard Hotel on riot eve. You have discredited yourself on this subject ThisIsMe. .

I’m certain they can because much of the case will undoubtedly be based on documented evidence and video recordings And because Cheney have put their careers and lives on the line to get to the truth for the country they love.

answered and I’m not interested in them finding Trump guilty.

No. I have answered your questions to the best if my ability and understanding of them. I dont care if DJT Is found guilty of a crime. His conduct after losing is unAmerican and deplorable, I want his private written communications unedited to be made public since he was supposed to be working for me but he worked so hard against me and against the Constitutional process of elections.

so there. what about that one.

No.,

No.

To investigate the political effort to overturn the election and the riot we all saw that happened because of it,

No. The work of the committee is necessary and appropriate so it can never be considered wrong by a fair minded unbiased democracy loving American.

Changing the premise of the question to avoid answering. My question wasn't whether or not having the investigation was right or wrong, but if they couldn't find the evidence to prove Trump was guilty of planning and ordering the attack on the capitol, would they be able to admit it, and admit they were wrong about their accusations of trump.

That is not a fact, period

You believe the committee to be open minded, and capable of complete objectivity when it comes to this investigation? Is that your belief? They have no bias, no pressure conceived notions? They don't believe Trump is guilty and are all just waiting to see where the evidence takes them? I'm pretty sure most of them have already stated they think he is guilty, so, that the are predisposed to his guilt is fact.

The committee members have not done anything wrong in being on the committee so they will never have to admit they are wrong for being on the committee.

Again, changing the premise of the question. No offense, but I'm beginning to think you are a bot that hasn't been programmed to understand context. There have been many times you have answered a question that was based on a different premise than the question asked.

They are not required to do so

If the investigation leads to a place that they can't prove Trump guilty, yeah, i think they are required to tell the public of that.

Yes

I may have to use a computer to do some searching for when Hillary was on trial for Benghazi, I'm betting, if you commented on those threads, I could find posts of your condemning the republican committee for being biased and unfair. Will have to see what happens in the future when/if Biden is ever the subject of a committee investigation.

Obviously you havent been paying attention to the news if you think the dems can be fair. Nearly every one of them has already said he was guilty. Most of them have already said he should never be allowed to run for office again, many of them said he should be in jail. How can you expect they will be capable of being fair and objective?

Until you can cite the use of irrelevant and made up "facts" presented in the finding I will withhold judgment on such a scenario.

We will have to wait until the committee concludes and the report is released.

Yes and No in that order. I believe they are honorable people specifically Kinzinger.

You find kinzinger to be fair, though he already voted to impeach Trump? I don't share your optimism.

I Don’t agree with your predisposed conclusion before the Committee is barely getting started . Your judgment is already shown to be flawed when you question the subpoena to Bannon because you said he was no longer involved with the President. He was in the Willard Hotel on riot eve. You have discredited yourself on this subject

Bannons involvement has nothing to do with any of the questions I've asked you, which have l been about the committees fairness and objectivity.

I’m certain they can because much of the case will undoubtedly be based on documented evidence and video recordings And because Cheney have put their careers and lives on the line to get to the truth for the country they love.

I will await the results to see if they have video evidence. So far, however, we have seen no video evidence that Trump and company were involved with the planning and execution of the riot that attacked the capitol.

answered and I’m not interested in them finding Trump guilty.

Really? What are you looking for then? Are you suggesting that you dont already have your mind made up?

To investigate the political effort to overturn the election and the riot we all saw that happened because of it,

People didn't riot because of an effort to overturn the election, the rooted because they believed the election had been stolen. ..and before you say it, no, just because Trump told people the election had been stolen that he is guilty of planning and directing the attack.

Let's think about this for a moment. For Trump to actually plan and intend for there to be an attack.on the capitol, he would have had to have organized groups all planned out, otherwise, it would have boiled down to him hoping that enough people were angry enough to react, and not have just a few in on it, but the rest not up to it. He would have had to have know that there was a potential for people to be killed. He would have to had known that the entire world was watching, and staging a coup live on TV would never have worked, not in the US. He would have had to have know that there was no way that a rag tag group of people only armed with what...2 flag poles, could not possibly lay siege on the capitol, take control, and hold it, and continue to secure it for any period of time. He would have to have know that the majority of the US and the rest of the world would have never recognized him as the legitimate president.

There are a lot of flaws in any plan to try and lay siege to the congress. The FBI said there was no planning and no coordination. It was random people, many of whom were probably enticed by agitators in the days leading up to the riot.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

There have been many times you have answered a question that was based on a different premise than the question asked.

You make an accusation - cite it for me so I can respond.

 

[ThisIsMe]

You have been trying to cover for your actual position. That we now see.clearly.

You have been trying to cover for your actual position. That we now see.clearly.

No, I've made my position very clear, I've posted it many times. You want to believe that I'm trying to cover for something, so you refuse to see that I really am wanting the truth. Again, I think I'm the only one of us 3 that does.

I'm open to him being guilty of they find hard evidence, but you are already convinced that there is no possible way he could be innocent and you already have your mind made up that he is guilty, am I wrong on that?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

o, I've made my position very clear, I've posted it many times.

Yes let's review.

First, you lied about the original bipartisan committee and had to be corrected. You never did acknowledge that falsehood, even though your entire argument rested on it.

Second, you claim the investigation is pointless.

Third, you claim any facts they find will be "fake".

Fourth, you claim you already know the facts, like Bannon being in the clear. Despite your entire rant being against an investigation to find the facts, of which we are actually not yet aware. But you already know the real facts, and already know the facts they find will all be "fake".

Dude, it doesn't take a mindreader. You have tripped over yourself too many times, at this point.

 

[ThisIsMe]

ThisIsMe wrote: Between myself, you, and nfbw, I think I am the ONLY one interested in the truth, and a fair investigation. 21OCT30-POST#598

NFBW wrote: you have stated in defense of Trump and his believers that his belief that he won an election that he lost by 8 million votes only because it was stolen from him and that belief It’s just a big misunderstanding. Therefore don’t pass yourself off as some kind of non-partisan super intelligent truth seeker. You are not! - - - your political party, the once conservative party that respected the constitution above all else, has blocked every formal effort to get to the truth and your leaders stand by the former occupant and shit stain on the White House in his efforts to block the truth. When you stand by your party to block the truth you do not get to claim that you are seeking truth. The two Republicans on the committee are some of the few in your political party thet have the courage to seek the truth. All you’ve been doing that I can see is diminishing their integrity and accusing them of taking part in a fake committee. Because anything that does not bode well for the firmer slobberer in chief that you voted for and stand by is fake news, a witchhunt, lies and deep state conspiracy‘s. You are creating a world where there is no entity, no court, no law no legal recourse to question what DJ T did. Until you side with Cheney and Kenzinger or at least quit trashing them. do not feed us your crap. 21OCT30-POST#601

...and you say you're not interested in seeing him found guilty.......

you have stated in defense of Trump and his believers that his belief that he won an election that he lost by 8 million votes only because it was stolen from him and that belief It’s just a big misunderstanding

Yes, because if they actually believe that the election was stolen, it's not a lie, if they really believed it, that would be a misunderstanding.

Therefore don’t pass yourself off as some kind of non-partisan super intelligent truth seeker.

I've never once said I was super intelligent. I'm not perfect, but I try to be as non partisan as possible, and like to think I'm seeking the truth. I have stated....repeatedly, that I will stand beside you of they actually do come across some hard evidence.

The two Republicans on the committee are some of the few in your political party thet have the courage to seek the truth

No they're not. Both of them have already voted to impeach Trump, and I'm pretty sure Cheney has been outspoken about her disdain for Trump.

Because anything that does not bode well for the firmer slobberer in chief that you voted for and stand by is fake news, a witchhunt,

I didn't vote for him, and whats more, I've stated on several occasions that I am not a fan. I wish another of the republican candidates had won. I liked that he was unconventional and non establishment, but I didn't find him to be very "presidential". To me, he didn't act the part, which I think is important for a world leader.

Until you side with Cheney and Kenzinger or at least quit trashing them. do not feed us your crap.

Until I side with those who have already decided he is guilty before the investigation has concluded, do not feed you crap?

 

[ThisIsMe]

You make an accusation - cite it for me so I can respond.

I'm doing this on my phone so I don't have the ability to search like you do. Just go back and loom at any of the questions I've asked about if the committee couldn't find evidence of wrongdoing, would they admit they were wrong, and you responded with posts about how the committee conducting an investigation was not wrong. They are there.

 

[Faun]

Video Shows Fatal Shooting of Ashli Babbitt at U.S. Capitol

Footage taken inside the U.S. Capitol shows the moments leading up to the shooting of Ashli Babbitt as supporters of President Donald Trump rushed toward the Speaker’s Lobby. The video was licensed from a self-described civil rights activist.

www.nbcsandiego.com

That video shows the hallway in question, Faun! There is NOBODY in it right before Babbitt is shot! So where did you get yours? You really don't know shit about what happened there that day...do you?

Now you're lying about what I said and by intentionally, and deceptively, posting a video which doesn't include the lawmakers and others in that hallway as I said were there. Here it is...




Mob: Hurry, they're getting away!

Followed by smashing the windows right behind the cops...

Mob: They're leaving! They're leaving!

... which you absurdly described as...

The protesters rather calmly convince the Police officers in front of the door...

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I've asked about if the committee couldn't find evidence of wrongdoing, would they admit they were wrong

Who cares? Red herring. This is you trying to talk about ANYTHING but the facts,.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

ThisIsMe wrote: My question wasn't whether or not having the investigation was right or wrong, but if they couldn't find the evidence to prove Trump was guilty of planning and ordering the attack on the capitol, would they be able to admit it, and admit they were wrong about their accusations of trump. 21OCT30-POST#602

NFBW wrote: Your question is based on the false premise that the formation of the committee and the structure of it and the people in it is potentially wrong. It cannot be wrong. The members on the committee are gathering information, they have made no charges against DJT or any of his people other than Bannon, so far, who refuses to comply with the subpoena so they can gather information. - - - You wrote, “if they couldn't find the evidence to prove Trump was guilty of planning and ordering the attack on the capitol,” which is “if” for the reason that the committee members don’t have the information when they joined the committee to start looking for it. So if none turns up in the course of the investigation why in the hell do they have to say they were wrong to look for information. Your absurd method of questioning leaves only one solution that I can see, and that is to not have an investigation. At least do not have one question until you, a DJT voter approves the set up of the people that would be doing the investigation. And you should know by now that if Qanon, Roger Stone Alex Jones and Ivanka Trump formed a committee and finishing up an investigation and found that DJT didn’t pay a parking ticket DJT would call it a witchhunt. He’s built that way. He is what he is because that is the way that he is. So if you want to go through with your repetitive attack on the committee In order to protect DJT then I will continue to explain why you are wrong and you should not be doing it. That’s all for now. gonna watch the buckeyes beat Penn State. 21OCT30-POST#610

 

[Faun]

You backed up nothing. You talked some shit and seemed to pretend that words meant something they did not.

Meanwhile in the real world, 4 hours of rioting is not nearly as bad as four years of rioting.


You people are lying scum of the earth.

Liar. I quoted from the charging document where they planned to go inside with no arms while others waited armed outside. And the ones inside were caught on camera inside as they planned. But their plan failed because it relied on Antifa showing up and Antifa didn't.

 

[Orangecat]

Trump ‘appears to have been personally involved in planning’ Jan 6 riot, says Cheney

Bannon ‘appears’ to have had ‘substantial advance knowledge of the plans for January 6th’

www.independent.co.uk

She doesnt really provide a silver bullet in this statement but it really does look like that is the case. Bannon has an obligation to Trump and it is the logical conclusion.
I think that it might be alike that scene in A Few Good Men where Trump would want to scream at America.

"You cant handle the truth. SAD",

On a positive note it does appear that Liz and her friends have bollocks big enough to deal with this.

There was no insurrection on 1/6, planned or unplanned. F'n libtard drama queens.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

There was no insurrection on 1/6, planned or unplanned. F'n libtard drama queens.

Cry it all out. Orange man in trouble. Must be human shield for orange man.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Yes let's review.

First, you lied about the original bipartisan committee and had to be corrected. You never did acknowledge that falsehood, even though your entire argument rested on it.

Second, you claim the investigation is pointless.

Third, you claim any facts they find will be "fake".

Fourth, you claim you already know the facts, like Bannon being in the clear. Despite your entire rant being against an investigation to find the facts, of which we are actually not yet aware. But you already know the real facts, and already know the facts they find will all be "fake".

Dude, it doesn't take a mindreader. You have tripped over yourself too many times, at this point.

You never did acknowledge that falsehood, even though your entire argument rested on it.

Incorrect, I believe on at least 2 occasions I admitted that they should have taken Pelosi up on the original committee, and no, my entire argument was about THIS committee, not the original one.

Second, you claim the investigation is pointless

If the people doing the investigation already have a stated hatred of the subject of their investigation, then there is no chance for a non partisan, non biased investigation, so yes, at that point, the investigation is pointless. They already have their minds made up about his guilt, they should just bypass the investigation and write whatever report they want to write. He'll, I bet the report has probably already been written, they are just waiting for the "investigation" to condemning do they can release it.

Third, you claim any facts they find will be "fake".

No, I think I said that they would find "a lot of irrelevant and fake facts". I also said they could surprise me and release some hard evidence. Yes, I do admit that any evidence they find is going to be suspect, because you can prove someone guilty by showing evidence, but you can also make someone look guilty by not showing the evidence that could clear them.

Fourth, you claim you already know the facts, like Bannon being in the clear.

Did I say that? I don't believe I've said bannon was in the clear, please show me where I did, because that would be incorrect. What I did say is that I didn't think there was any point in a subpoena of bannon because he left the white house in 2017, but someone brought up the point about this Willard Hotel situation. So, if they get bannon to testify, then we will see where that goes.

But you already know the real facts, and already know the facts they find will all be "fake".

I don't know the facts, never said I did. I said I expect the committee to release a lot of out of context evidence and they will surpress any evidence that doesn't fit their desired outcome. But my whole point has been that I DONT know the evidence, neither do you, and neither does the committee, but because of their preconceived notions, and yours, YOU already have him pegged as guilty, I'm sure there are dozens if posts here that will show you saying that, and the committee is no different.

I have stated several times that I wish the committee could be fair and objective, and that we would find out what really happened. I also said that if they find HARD EVIDENCE that I will stand with you, because "wrong is wrong, no matter who does it" (I believe that is an exact quote of what I said), but I just don't believe that they are attempting to do anything but structure the investigation to reach the outcome they want. I've said this releatedly...I'm starting to sound like a skipping record.

You have tripped over yourself too many times, at this point.

No, I think I've been extremely consistent in my arguments.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Incorrect, I believe on at least 2 occasions I admitted that they should have taken Pelosi up on the original committee, and no, my entire argument was about THIS committee, not the original one

False. You very clearly said the original committee was also pointless, because Republicans would just be overruled at all times. You had to be corrected with information showing that was false

I am not going to do this with you. Find someone else to lie to.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

ThisIsMe wrote: You believe the committee to be open minded, and capable of complete objectivity when it comes to this investigation@ThisIsMe wrote: You believe the committee to be open minded, and capable of complete objectivity when it comes to this investigation? Is that your belief? ? Is that your belief? 21OCT30-POST#602.

NFBW wrote: Yes that is my belief. Specifically Kenzinger and Cheney. Just so she gets nowhere near any WMD Intel she will be just fine.

What I did say is that I didn't think there was any point in a subpoena of bannon because he left the white house in 2017, but someone brought up the point about this Willard Hotel situation.

and for the record you wrote :

ThisIsMe wrote: Again, as was previously mentioned, bannon left the white house years before the capitol riot, so, why even subpoena him? Why does schiff feel the need to threaten him, for something he had no part of? 21OCT12-POST#53

You accused Shiff of threatening Bannon for something he had no part in - when it WAS known for a long time that Bannon was in communication with DJT RIGHT Before the riot and Bannon was deep into the stop the steal movement.

 

[Orangecat]

Cry it all out.

Cry what out? Democrats are the imbeciles crying over a faux "insurrection".

Orange man in trouble. Must be human shield for orange man.

Fort man imbecile. Must be useful idiot for marxists.

 

[sartre play]

Attacking the capital was Wrong, there is no reasonable defense.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

ThisIsMe wrote: Yes, because if they actually believe that the election was stolen, it's not a lie, if they really believed it, that would be a misunderstanding 21OCT30-POST#606

NFBW wrote: I see you ThisIsMe believe in the George Costanza rule on lying. 21OCT30-POST#619

Correll wrote: If I honestly believe it, then I am telling the truth as I see it, when I say that. 21MAR05-POST-#948

George Costanza's advice to Jerry on the subject of lying: It's not a lie if you believe it's true

NFBW wrote: In the ThisIsMe George Constanza Correll world there need not be truth or understanding based on facts, law or objective reality. The only requirement for a self interest belief is that it is believed. No requirement for DJT to accept a landslide election loss when he can believe without evidence that where a lot of black people live in big cities voter fraud is the norm. In DJT’s own words 21OCT30-POST#619

“While it has long been understood that the Democrat political machine engages in voter fraud from Detroit to Philadelphia, to Milwaukee, Atlanta, so many other places”… 21DEC03/DJT Speech on fraud.

NFBW wrote: Who needs evidence when all you need to say “It is understood” or everybody believed it so it must be true 21OCT30-POST#619

 

[Colin norris]

This is gonna be fun...seriously...

Cheney should be president. She's got guts.