OP
- Reaction score
- 10,215
@Midwest
I am not trying to throw up conspiracy, merely pointing out the facts and the way the media is ignoring them to paint a very different picture.
You are a logical thinking educated person so answer this -
The first wave of violence started at 12.40pm
Trump's speech finished at 1.11pm
Trump made his speech 2miles away and as the roads were blocked off the only way to capitol hill was to walk, due to the crowd size it is estimated they would have arrived about 1.45pm - 2.15pm long after the violence broke out.
So the question is - given the violence was well underway about 12.45pm how can these people be incited by Trump's speech, is one to say they were simultaneously listening to the speech on headphones while engaging violently with law enforcement?..
This timeline was expressed numerous times publically by local media and there is no way Pelosi was unaware of the inconsistencies of her claims and it is based on these claims that she is pushing for impeachment still to this day, this is simply a political move to try stop Trump running again in 4yrs time and facts are been ignored, the media is playing Pelosi's song across the globe, even our BBC were blaming it on the contents of his speech, again it is simply false.
Regarding the lack of security and police - the now resigned Capitol police chief requested additional help and to have the national guard on stand by, his request had to go through Pelosi and Mconnell's Sergeant at arms who refused.
This is from an interview with (now ex) Capitol police chief Sund -
(The first wave of protesters arrived at the Capitol about 12:40 p.m.
Ex-Capitol Police Chief Says Pelosi, McConnell's Sergeants-at-Arms Refused Security Measures
“As soon as they hit the fence line, the fight was on,” Sund said. “Violent confrontations from the start. They came with riot helmets, gas masks, shields, pepper spray, fireworks, climbing gear — climbing gear! — explosives, metal pipes, baseball bats. I have never seen anything like it in 30 years of events in Washington.”
Using video footage from the Capitol and radio transmissions from his incident commanders, Sund could see his officers trying to hold the line. But the rioters immediately yanked the barricade fence out of the way and threw it at his officers’ heads.
“I realized at 1 p.m., things aren’t going well,” he said. “I’m watching my people getting slammed.”
Sund immediately called Contee, who sent 100 officers to the scene, with some arriving within 10 minutes. But at 1:09 p.m., Sund said he called Irving and Stenger, telling them it was time to call in the Guard. He wanted an emergency declaration. Both men said they would “run it up the chain” and get back to him, he said.
Minutes later, aides to the top congressional leaders were called to Stenger’s office for an update on the situation — and were infuriated to learn that the sergeants at arms had not yet called in the National Guard or any other reinforcements, as was their responsibility to do without seeking approval from leaders.)
PS - the national guard arrived several hours later after the damage was done.
I am not pushing conspiracy here, we have evidence the FBI new in advance of the threats yet did nothing.
We see the Sund pleading for national guard to be on immediate standby, he initially was refused then after further requests they said they would contact their superiors, the didn't contact anyone leaving it to get out of control.
When you are having to consult the leader of the house Pelosi's Sergeant of Arms to help bring in the national guard and you are refused then further requests ignored are you telling me I am trying to spin conspiracy when you also factor in the next step that Pelosi takes in a second Impeachment claiming Trump's speech started this whole thing, we already know that was a lie and even if you give her the benefit of the doubt and say she was misinformed or got it wrong then how is it weeks later she is still pushing for that same impeachment on the same grounds when we all now know that it could not have possibly been the speech for reasons above and the fact the FBI acknowledges this now.
You need to realise the US politics is not like ours, using political strength in numbers to ignore law and people's legal rights is commonplace when a party has a lot to gain or lose, Trump been president has brought the worst out in the Democrats where even the hardest left news groups are saying nancy does not have a case on Trump here... meanwhile the BBC pushes the same false claims to this day.
'
I am not trying to throw up conspiracy, merely pointing out the facts and the way the media is ignoring them to paint a very different picture.
You are a logical thinking educated person so answer this -
The first wave of violence started at 12.40pm
Trump's speech finished at 1.11pm
Trump made his speech 2miles away and as the roads were blocked off the only way to capitol hill was to walk, due to the crowd size it is estimated they would have arrived about 1.45pm - 2.15pm long after the violence broke out.
So the question is - given the violence was well underway about 12.45pm how can these people be incited by Trump's speech, is one to say they were simultaneously listening to the speech on headphones while engaging violently with law enforcement?..
This timeline was expressed numerous times publically by local media and there is no way Pelosi was unaware of the inconsistencies of her claims and it is based on these claims that she is pushing for impeachment still to this day, this is simply a political move to try stop Trump running again in 4yrs time and facts are been ignored, the media is playing Pelosi's song across the globe, even our BBC were blaming it on the contents of his speech, again it is simply false.
Regarding the lack of security and police - the now resigned Capitol police chief requested additional help and to have the national guard on stand by, his request had to go through Pelosi and Mconnell's Sergeant at arms who refused.
This is from an interview with (now ex) Capitol police chief Sund -
(The first wave of protesters arrived at the Capitol about 12:40 p.m.
Ex-Capitol Police Chief Says Pelosi, McConnell's Sergeants-at-Arms Refused Security Measures
“As soon as they hit the fence line, the fight was on,” Sund said. “Violent confrontations from the start. They came with riot helmets, gas masks, shields, pepper spray, fireworks, climbing gear — climbing gear! — explosives, metal pipes, baseball bats. I have never seen anything like it in 30 years of events in Washington.”
Using video footage from the Capitol and radio transmissions from his incident commanders, Sund could see his officers trying to hold the line. But the rioters immediately yanked the barricade fence out of the way and threw it at his officers’ heads.
“I realized at 1 p.m., things aren’t going well,” he said. “I’m watching my people getting slammed.”
Sund immediately called Contee, who sent 100 officers to the scene, with some arriving within 10 minutes. But at 1:09 p.m., Sund said he called Irving and Stenger, telling them it was time to call in the Guard. He wanted an emergency declaration. Both men said they would “run it up the chain” and get back to him, he said.
Minutes later, aides to the top congressional leaders were called to Stenger’s office for an update on the situation — and were infuriated to learn that the sergeants at arms had not yet called in the National Guard or any other reinforcements, as was their responsibility to do without seeking approval from leaders.)
PS - the national guard arrived several hours later after the damage was done.
I am not pushing conspiracy here, we have evidence the FBI new in advance of the threats yet did nothing.
We see the Sund pleading for national guard to be on immediate standby, he initially was refused then after further requests they said they would contact their superiors, the didn't contact anyone leaving it to get out of control.
When you are having to consult the leader of the house Pelosi's Sergeant of Arms to help bring in the national guard and you are refused then further requests ignored are you telling me I am trying to spin conspiracy when you also factor in the next step that Pelosi takes in a second Impeachment claiming Trump's speech started this whole thing, we already know that was a lie and even if you give her the benefit of the doubt and say she was misinformed or got it wrong then how is it weeks later she is still pushing for that same impeachment on the same grounds when we all now know that it could not have possibly been the speech for reasons above and the fact the FBI acknowledges this now.
You need to realise the US politics is not like ours, using political strength in numbers to ignore law and people's legal rights is commonplace when a party has a lot to gain or lose, Trump been president has brought the worst out in the Democrats where even the hardest left news groups are saying nancy does not have a case on Trump here... meanwhile the BBC pushes the same false claims to this day.
'
