Trump says Nancy Pelosi Responsible for J6 Riot

[domer76]

No runny dog turd, he sure didn't.

You're a pathological little cunt - but I don't think you are actually sentient. So can you be held responsible for your incessant lies?

How many hours did Orangetweet watch the riot on TV? 2? 3? More?

Fiddling. Bigly.

 

[BartenderElite]

So now you are a psychiatrist and a bartender.

Why do you think someone has to be a trained psychiatrist to identify clear derangement in another individual?

 

[Uncensored2008]

How many hours did Orangetweet watch the riot on TV? 2? 3? More?

Fiddling. Bigly.

How many hours did you watch?

Why didn't you stop it?

How many hours did Kamaltoe watch the actual insurrection at CHAZ? Before she contributed to the insurrectionists?

You are an artificial stupidity subroutine. You are not sentient.

 

[domer76]

How many hours did you watch?

Why didn't you stop it?

How many hours did Kamaltoe watch the actual insurrection at CHAZ? Before she contributed to the insurrectionists?

You are an artificial stupidity subroutine. You are not sentient.

How long did I watch live? Zero.

I neither incited it nor had the power to stop it. Trump did.

He fiddled, trifecta. Bigly.

And guess what, bitch? His followers are headed to prison for up to 20 years. He was impeached for it. And his day in criminal court is coming. As well as a possible 14th Amendment penalty.

 

[Uncensored2008]

How long did I watch live? Zero.

I neither incited it nor had the power to stop it.

Nor did Trump

Trump did.

He fiddled, trifecta. Bigly.

No runny dog shit, he didn't.

You are hate filled and stupid, and lying through your tooth. (normally teeth, but with you Cletus....)

And guess what, bitch? His followers are headed to prison for up to 20 years. He was impeached for it. And his day in criminal court is coming. As well as a possible 14th Amendment penalty.

Ohh, you Nazis put an end to the whole constitution thing, and the rule of law.

20 years for protesting against the Nazi democrat party.

How much for the armed overthrow of American territory?

Oh, no penalty for that - because Sieg Heil.

You have raped and murdered the rule of law - and you think it's cute.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

How long did I watch live? Zero.

I neither incited it nor had the power to stop it. Trump did.

He fiddled, trifecta. Bigly.

And guess what, bitch? His followers are headed to prison for up to 20 years. He was impeached for it. And his day in criminal court is coming. As well as a possible 14th Amendment penalty.

Agreed Trump sat and watched his plot unfold for hours. 187 minutes, according to sworn testimony.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us...-trump-supporters-three-hour-rage-2022-07-21/
Trump watched Jan. 6 U.S. Capitol riot unfold on TV, ignored pleas to call for peace
Donald Trump sat for hours watching the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol unfold on live TV, ignoring pleas by his children and other close advisers to urge his supporters to stop the violence, witnesses told a congressional hearing on Thursday.

The House of Representatives Select Committee used its eighth hearing this summer to detail what members said was Trump's refusal to act for the 187 minutes between the end of his inflammatory speech at a rally urging supporters to march on the Capitol, and the release of a video telling them to go home.

Nor did Trump...

If you weren't such a Down Under dumbass, you'd know that Trump was the President and the Commander-in-Chief of the US military. He did, indeed, have the power to stop it. Both because he was the President and because he was the one who called the rioters together, spun them up and launched them at Congress.

 

[domer76]

Nor did Trump



No runny dog shit, he didn't.

You are hate filled and stupid, and lying through your tooth. (normally teeth, but with you Cletus....)



Ohh, you Nazis put an end to the whole constitution thing, and the rule of law.

20 years for protesting against the Nazi democrat party.

How much for the armed overthrow of American territory?

Oh, no penalty for that - because Sieg Heil.

You have raped and murdered the rule of law - and you think it's cute.

He watched with glee, motherfucker. His own kid called him and begged him to put a stop to it.

20 years for sedition, trifecta. And Trump’s days in court are coming. 91 felony counts, bitch.

 

[Uncensored2008]

He watched with glee, motherfucker. His own kid called him and begged him to put a stop to it.

20 years for sedition, trifecta. And Trump’s days in court are coming. 91 felony counts, bitch.

You watched with glee as America burned from coast to coast, traitor.

dumber - you think your rape and murder of the rule of law makes you "better?"

Your name suits you, dumber.

 

[domer76]

You watched with glee as America burned from coast to coast, traitor.

dumber - you think your rape and murder of the rule of law makes you "better?"

Your name suits you, dumber.

I don’t watch TV, trifecta.

Illiterate
Stupid
Liar

One thing this forum can count on, trifecta. At least you’re consistent.

 

[BidenPresident]

I don’t watch TV, trifecta.

Illiterate
Stupid
Liar

One thing this forum can count on, trifecta. At least you’re consistent.

ISL

 

[Walt]

"The Deployment of National Guard troops at the capitol can only occur by request of the Sargent At Arms of the Capitol Police"

That quote is nowhere in your link, and is completely false. I believe you made it up, and hoped no one would notice.

There is no such thing as a "Sargent At Arms of the Capitol Police", and never has been. There is a Sargent at Arms of the House, and a Sargent at Arms of the Senate. The Sargent at Arms of the Senate(a Republican at the time) controlled access to the chamber, and could deny access to the National Guard. The Capitol Police could have denied access to the building. There is no one who could deny a Presidential deployment outside the building.

Except that the Sargent At Arms reports directly to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and serves at their pleasure.

The Sargent at Arms of the House can be removed by the majority of the House, but not by the Speaker of the House. The Speaker has even less control over the Sargent at Arms of the Senate.

It's either true or it isn't. Does the Sargent At Arms of the Capitol Police report directly to the Speaker of the House? Yes, or No?

There is no such positions, so no... Nor do unicorns report directly to Pelosi.

there is an act called "POSSE COMITATUS" that prohibits the CiC from deploying troops domestically.

Posse Comitatus Act specifically exempts the National Guard, because they are a law enforcement agency under state command. Their Commander-in-Chief is not the President, but the governor. The President acts as governor of DC, and in this role can order the DC National Guard to act as law enforcement. Congress can do nothing about that, short of cutting the National Guard budget.

The Posse Comitatus Act does not prevent any other troops from being deployed domestically, they just cannot do police duties.

The Commander in Chief is forbidden by law from dispatching troops on US Soil.

The majority of US troops are on US soil, so I do not know where you get your fantasy. The Commander-in-Chiefs of the National Guard use them for law enforcement all the time. The Commander-in-Chiefs of the National Guard are the governors of the states. In the case of DC, it is the President. In DC, the President has military command of the law enforcement organization known as the DC National Guard. He can order them into the streets with no regard to anyone.

 

[Walt]

Who do the Capitol police report to, lying dumbass?

The Capitol Police report to the Chief of Police who in turn reports to a board made up of the Sergeant at Arms of the House, the Sergeant of Arms of the Senate, and the Architect of the Capitol. At the time, two out of three of those were Republicans. The Sergeant of Arms of the Senate was appointed by the Republican majority in the Senate, and the Architect of the Capitol was appointed by trump, and confirmed by the Republican majority in the Senate.

Who does the National Guard report to, lying dumbass?

The Commander-in-Chief of the National Guard is the governor of the state. They can be federalized, and wrapped into the federal military command structure, and can get training from the federal government, but in the normal course of business, especially when doing law enforcement, they are under the command of the governor. In the case of DC, the President acts as governor, and so can command the National Guard to do any law enforcement he considers necessary.

The Capitol Police can deny the National Guard access to the building, just like you can deny police access to your home, but trump could deploy the National Guard in a law enforcement capacity outside the building.

Under the 1807 Act you cited the President can't call out the National Guard to go after bank robbers.

You are mistaken. The governor can order the National Guard in his state to intervene in a bank robbery. The National Guard is the original law enforcement organization, back when it was the colonial militias, and still does that duty.

The President cannot order the National Guard to do law enforcement, EXCEPT IN DC, where he acts as the governor.

Not true, as it pertains to DC, the President has control, and Trump has done it in the past as when he ordered the National Guard into DC during the Floyd demonstrations, don’t you remember the infamous upside down Bible in his photo shot

You are 100% correct. The President is the Commander-in-Chief of the DC National Guard, and is allowed to order them to do whatever he deems necessary in law enforcement. He is not the Commander-in-Chief of the Virginia National Guard.

 

[martin]

You are mistaken. The governor can order the National Guard in his state to intervene in a bank robbery. The National Guard is the original law enforcement organization, back when it was the colonial militias, and still does that duty.

The President cannot order the National Guard to do law enforcement, EXCEPT IN DC, where he acts as the governor.

Original law enforcement in the Colonial period and early years of the states was comprised of constables and sheriffs; later police departments, not militias. The President acts under his Constitutional Presidential powers and in cases of
civil unrest and emergencies.

 

[Walt]

Original law enforcement in the Colonial period and early years of the states was comprised of constables and sheriffs; later police departments, not militias. The President acts under his Constitutional Presidential powers and in cases of
civil unrest and emergencies.

Constables and sheriffs are actually later inventions. Originally law enforcement was regular citizens. The citizens were organized into militias.

 

[martin]

Constables and sheriffs are actually later inventions. Originally law enforcement was regular citizens. The citizens were organized into militias.

Militias there were, you're right. They existed as a defense against Indians, excuse the word, and only that as far as I know until 1775.

"The development of law enforcement in colonial America was similar to that of England during the same time period. Law enforcement in colonial America was considered a local responsibility. As in England, the colonies established a system of night watch to guard cities against fire, crime, and disorder. In addition to night watch systems, there were sheriffs appointed by the governor and constables elected by the people."

https://law.jrank.org/pages/1640/Police-History-Early-policing-in-colonial-America.html

 

[Walt]

Militias there were, you're right. They existed as a defense against Indians, excuse the word, and only that as far as I know until 1775.

"The development of law enforcement in colonial America was similar to that of England during the same time period. Law enforcement in colonial America was considered a local responsibility. As in England, the colonies established a system of night watch to guard cities against fire, crime, and disorder. In addition to night watch systems, there were sheriffs appointed by the governor and constables elected by the people."

https://law.jrank.org/pages/1640/Police-History-Early-policing-in-colonial-America.html

The militias were extensions of the night watches.

 

[martin]

The militias were extensions of the night watches.

turning this into a quibble, an irrelevant one at that, militias being not the same as sheriffs and constables?

 

[Uncensored2008]

That quote is nowhere in your link, and is completely false. I believe you made it up, and hoped no one would notice.

There is no such thing as a "Sargent At Arms of the Capitol Police", and never has been. There is a Sargent at Arms of the House, and a Sargent at Arms of the Senate. The Sargent at Arms of the Senate(a Republican at the time) controlled access to the chamber, and could deny access to the National Guard. The Capitol Police could have denied access to the building. There is no one who could deny a Presidential deployment outside the building.

I posted a dozen times that both house and senate have a Sargent At Arms.

Beyond that, you vomit out false information that has been refuted dozens of times, all cited.

The National Guard MUST be requested in order to be deployed on Capitol Grounds. It doesn't matter how much you lie, this remains the fact.

The Sargent at Arms of the House can be removed by the majority of the House, but not by the Speaker of the House. The Speaker has even less control over the Sargent at Arms of the Senate.

Utterly false.

The Capitol Police Board, comprised of Speaker of the House, Senate Majority Leader, The Sargent at Arms of the House, and the Sargent at Arms of the Senate have full authority over the leadership of the Capitol Police.

You're just making shit up to try and support your party and the witch hunt you are engaged in.

There is no such positions, so no... Nor do unicorns report directly to Pelosi.



Posse Comitatus Act specifically exempts the National Guard, because they are a law enforcement agency under state command. Their Commander-in-Chief is not the President, but the governor. The President acts as governor of DC, and in this role can order the DC National Guard to act as law enforcement. Congress can do nothing about that, short of cutting the National Guard budget.

The Posse Comitatus Act does not prevent any other troops from being deployed domestically, they just cannot do police duties.



The majority of US troops are on US soil, so I do not know where you get your fantasy. The Commander-in-Chiefs of the National Guard use them for law enforcement all the time. The Commander-in-Chiefs of the National Guard are the governors of the states. In the case of DC, it is the President. In DC, the President has military command of the law enforcement organization known as the DC National Guard. He can order them into the streets with no regard to anyone.

Again, you spew complete falsehoods.

You don't know what "deployment" means. Soldiers housed at US bases in North America are not "deployed."

The fact remains - regardless of how you lie - that the CiC is PROHBITED by Posse Commitatus from deploying troops on US Soil. To deploy the guard on federal grounds a request from the authority of those areas must be formally submitted. For the Capitol this is the Capitol Police. Lie all you please, reality doesn't change.

 

[Walt]

I posted a dozen times that both house and senate have a Sargent At Arms.

Which one of them is the "Sargent At Arms of the Capitol Police"? There is no such position, and you invented the fake quote.

The National Guard MUST be requested in order to be deployed on Capitol Grounds.

Any police force must request entry from the controllers of a building to enter it. That would not have kept the National Guard from being out on the street.

The Sargent at Arms of the House can be removed by the majority of the House, but not by the Speaker of the House. The Speaker has even less control over the Sargent at Arms of the Senate.

Utterly false.

The Capitol Police Board, comprised of Speaker of the House, Senate Majority Leader, The Sargent at Arms of the House, and the Sargent at Arms of the Senate have full authority over the leadership of the Capitol Police.

Neither the Sargent at Arms of the House, nor the Sargent at Arms of the Senate are part of the Capitol Police, so cannot be removed by the Capitol Police Board. It requires a vote of the chamber they are Sargent at Arms for. They do not serve at the pleasure of the Speaker of the House. In fact, the Speaker of the House has absolutely no say in the Sargent at Arms of the Senate.

You are also incorrect about who is on the Capitol Police Board. It has three voting members, the Sargent at Arms of the House, the Sargent at Arms of the Senate(at the time a Republican), and the Architect of the Capitol(at the time a Republican).

that the CiC is PROHBITED by Posse Commitatus from deploying troops on US Soil.

You are mistaken, but more importantly, the Posse Comitatus Act does not apply to the National Guard doing the police duties.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

The militias were extensions of the night watches.

Every person and every community has a right to self-defense. The important thing about community groups is that they coordinate so the wrong people don't get shot.

Most of those who call themselves "militias" are not about community defense. They are about terrorism; violently imposing their will and ideology upon others to further a political agenda.

https://www.fbi.gov/investigate/terrorism
Terrorism Definitions
International terrorism: Violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/or groups who are inspired by, or associated with, designated foreign terrorist organizations or nations (state-sponsored).

Domestic terrorism: Violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/or groups to further ideological goals stemming from domestic influences, such as those of a political, religious, social, racial, or environmental nature.