January 6, 2021: Insurrection or “normal tourist” visitation?

[old salt]

Transcript of the deposition of the criminal Michael Flynn:

https://january6th.house.gov/sites/demo ... 0Flynn.pdf

He takes the Fifth over 450 times.

The same with numerous bedfellows, like Roger Stone and Kelly Ward and others. As Neal Katyal says, maybe they aren't so much the party of the Second Amendment as the party of the Fifth.

... fine outstanding American citizens being persecuted by the Deep State.

Was Flynn included in the criminal referral to DoJ ? If not, it's just more harassment to run up his legal fees.
...& to produce a show trial video clip.

... your response makes no sense. He was there on Jan 6, A witness to events. He is wired into the Trump crime family. So asking for his testimony is harassment?? Just a fine upstanding citizen.

Where was Flynn on Jan 6th ? Precisely ? Source ?

If I had to guess, I would say he was on Nantucket Island

Was that Jan 6th ? Source ?

That's a Rolling Stone image. Where's the caption or a link to the story behind it ?

[Typical Lax Dad]

Mogadishu

[old salt]

Transcript of the deposition of the criminal Michael Flynn:

https://january6th.house.gov/sites/demo ... 0Flynn.pdf

He takes the Fifth over 450 times.

The same with numerous bedfellows, like Roger Stone and Kelly Ward and others. As Neal Katyal says, maybe they aren't so much the party of the Second Amendment as the party of the Fifth.

... fine outstanding American citizens being persecuted by the Deep State.

Was Flynn included in the criminal referral to DoJ ? If not, it's just more harassment to run up his legal fees.
...& to produce a show trial video clip.

... your response makes no sense. He was there on Jan 6, A witness to events. He is wired into the Trump crime family. So asking for his testimony is harassment?? Just a fine upstanding citizen.

Where was Flynn on Jan 6th ? Precisely ? Source ?

If I had to guess, I would say he was on Nantucket Island

Was that Jan 6th ? Source ?

That's a Rolling Stone image. Where's the caption or a link to the story behind it ?

That's Flynn, on Dec 12, at a DC rally. There are several photos of Flynn that day used to try to tie him to Jan 6th.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Transcript of the deposition of the criminal Michael Flynn:

https://january6th.house.gov/sites/demo ... 0Flynn.pdf

He takes the Fifth over 450 times.

The same with numerous bedfellows, like Roger Stone and Kelly Ward and others. As Neal Katyal says, maybe they aren't so much the party of the Second Amendment as the party of the Fifth.

... fine outstanding American citizens being persecuted by the Deep State.

Was Flynn included in the criminal referral to DoJ ? If not, it's just more harassment to run up his legal fees.
...& to produce a show trial video clip.

... your response makes no sense. He was there on Jan 6, A witness to events. He is wired into the Trump crime family. So asking for his testimony is harassment?? Just a fine upstanding citizen.

Where was Flynn on Jan 6th ? Precisely ? Source ?

If I had to guess, I would say he was on Nantucket Island

Was that Jan 6th ? Source ?

That's a Rolling Stone image. Where's the caption or a link to the story behind it ?

That's Flynn, on Dec 12, at a DC rally. There are several photos of Flynn that day used to try to tie him to Jan 6th.

And? His Rally on the 5th was good enough for me.

[Typical Lax Dad]

[old salt]

Transcript of the deposition of the criminal Michael Flynn:

https://january6th.house.gov/sites/demo ... 0Flynn.pdf

He takes the Fifth over 450 times.

The same with numerous bedfellows, like Roger Stone and Kelly Ward and others. As Neal Katyal says, maybe they aren't so much the party of the Second Amendment as the party of the Fifth.

... fine outstanding American citizens being persecuted by the Deep State.

Was Flynn included in the criminal referral to DoJ ? If not, it's just more harassment to run up his legal fees.
...& to produce a show trial video clip.

... your response makes no sense. He was there on Jan 6, A witness to events. He is wired into the Trump crime family. So asking for his testimony is harassment?? Just a fine upstanding citizen.

Where was Flynn on Jan 6th ? Precisely ? Source ?

If I had to guess, I would say he was on Nantucket Island

Was that Jan 6th ? Source ?

That's a Rolling Stone image. Where's the caption or a link to the story behind it ?

That's Flynn, on Dec 12, at a DC rally. There are several photos of Flynn that day used to try to tie him to Jan 6th.

And? His Rally on the 5th was good enough for me.

Sure thing. Just lock him up for participating in a peaceful protest.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Transcript of the deposition of the criminal Michael Flynn:

https://january6th.house.gov/sites/demo ... 0Flynn.pdf

He takes the Fifth over 450 times.

The same with numerous bedfellows, like Roger Stone and Kelly Ward and others. As Neal Katyal says, maybe they aren't so much the party of the Second Amendment as the party of the Fifth.

... fine outstanding American citizens being persecuted by the Deep State.

Was Flynn included in the criminal referral to DoJ ? If not, it's just more harassment to run up his legal fees.
...& to produce a show trial video clip.

... your response makes no sense. He was there on Jan 6, A witness to events. He is wired into the Trump crime family. So asking for his testimony is harassment?? Just a fine upstanding citizen.

Where was Flynn on Jan 6th ? Precisely ? Source ?

If I had to guess, I would say he was on Nantucket Island

Was that Jan 6th ? Source ?

That's a Rolling Stone image. Where's the caption or a link to the story behind it ?

That's Flynn, on Dec 12, at a DC rally. There are several photos of Flynn that day used to try to tie him to Jan 6th.

And? His Rally on the 5th was good enough for me.

Sure thing. Just lock him up for participating in a peaceful protest.

Let’s hope not.

[jhu72]

Looks like J6 investigation has proof of direct link between Trump and the fake Nevada electors.

[MDlaxfan76]

Transcript of the deposition of the criminal Michael Flynn:

https://january6th.house.gov/sites/demo ... 0Flynn.pdf

He takes the Fifth over 450 times.

The same with numerous bedfellows, like Roger Stone and Kelly Ward and others. As Neal Katyal says, maybe they aren't so much the party of the Second Amendment as the party of the Fifth.

... fine outstanding American citizens being persecuted by the Deep State.

Was Flynn included in the criminal referral to DoJ ? If not, it's just more harassment to run up his legal fees.
...& to produce a show trial video clip.

... your response makes no sense. He was there on Jan 6, A witness to events. He is wired into the Trump crime family. So asking for his testimony is harassment?? Just a fine upstanding citizen.

Where was Flynn on Jan 6th ? Precisely ? Source ?

If I had to guess, I would say he was on Nantucket Island

Was that Jan 6th ? Source ?

That's a Rolling Stone image. Where's the caption or a link to the story behind it ?

That's Flynn, on Dec 12, at a DC rally. There are several photos of Flynn that day used to try to tie him to Jan 6th.

And? His Rally on the 5th was good enough for me.

Sure thing. Just lock him up for participating in a peaceful protest.

just saw this back and forth.

Surely, if he wasn't involved in Jan 6 planning and incitement, for instance wasn't in DC, say at the Willard 'war room', he'd be happy to say so? Even if through an attorney, provide evidence that he was elsewhere?

Of course he should be under oath...the guy is a proven inveterate liar...but he certainly knows a lot.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Transcript of the deposition of the criminal Michael Flynn:

https://january6th.house.gov/sites/demo ... 0Flynn.pdf

He takes the Fifth over 450 times.

The same with numerous bedfellows, like Roger Stone and Kelly Ward and others. As Neal Katyal says, maybe they aren't so much the party of the Second Amendment as the party of the Fifth.

... fine outstanding American citizens being persecuted by the Deep State.

Was Flynn included in the criminal referral to DoJ ? If not, it's just more harassment to run up his legal fees.
...& to produce a show trial video clip.

... your response makes no sense. He was there on Jan 6, A witness to events. He is wired into the Trump crime family. So asking for his testimony is harassment?? Just a fine upstanding citizen.

Where was Flynn on Jan 6th ? Precisely ? Source ?

If I had to guess, I would say he was on Nantucket Island

Was that Jan 6th ? Source ?

That's a Rolling Stone image. Where's the caption or a link to the story behind it ?

That's Flynn, on Dec 12, at a DC rally. There are several photos of Flynn that day used to try to tie him to Jan 6th.

And? His Rally on the 5th was good enough for me.

Sure thing. Just lock him up for participating in a peaceful protest.

just saw this back and forth.

Surely, if he wasn't involved in Jan 6 planning and incitement, for instance wasn't in DC, say at the Willard 'war room', he'd be happy to say so? Even if through an attorney, provide evidence that he was elsewhere?

Of course he should be under oath...the guy is a proven inveterate liar...but he certainly knows a lot.

Given Flynn’s involvement, should not all of his military benefits be suspended since he was attempting to overthrow the duly elected government? Where else would parties to an attempted coup still collect checks on the government’s nickel?

[Typical Lax Dad]

An American Hero…..government just picking on him.

[CU88]

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/22/opin ... rrals.html


'With Mr. Rosen’s deputy, Richard Donoghue, also on the line, Mr. Trump launched into the same tired, disproved and discredited allegations he had propagated so often at rallies, during news conferences and on social media. None of it was true, and Mr. Donoghue told him so. According to Mr. Donoghue, Mr. Trump, exasperated that his own handpicked top appointees at the Justice Department would not affirm his baseless allegations, responded: “Just say that the election was corrupt and leave the rest to me and the Republican congressmen.”

DEPLORABLE

[Kismet]

Ari Melber's take on January 6



He's a lawyer by trade and not the usual lefty screamer but this piece is pretty stunning.
The ultimate plan was to get a disputed election with no officla majority of electoral votes into the House where there was a majority to re-elect the DOPUS.

Another excellent piece by Ruth Ben-Ghiat entitled Cassidy Hutchinson's Testimony: A Primer in Authoritarian Corruption
"The less you remember, the better." White House lawyer Passantino to Hutchinson before her testimony

https://lucid.substack.com/p/cassidy-hu ... y-a-primer

Omerta in real life practice

[njbill]

The conventional wisdom has been that if the 2020 race had been tossed to the House, Trump would’ve won. I’m not so sure. For starters, Liz Cheney certainly would’ve cast the sole Wyoming ballot for Biden. I haven’t looked at this in a while, but I think the Republicans only had a very slight edge in state delegations (26-24, 27-23?). Biden would have gotten Wyoming. I think at least several other delegations were close to 50-50. Perhaps enough Republican congressmen would have done the right thing and voted for Biden such that Biden would have won even if the race was sent to the House.

[Seacoaster(1)]

Terrific article on the Committee's work and report:

https://www.newyorker.com/news/american ... surrection

Warning: Requires reading words.

"January 6th was a phenomenon rooted both in the degraded era of Trump and in the radicalization of a major political party during the past generation. The very power of these developments explains why many people may approach this congressional report with a sense of fatigue, even denial. Part of Trump’s dark achievement has been to bludgeon the political attention of the country into submission.

When a nation has been subjected to that degree of cynicism—what is politely called “divisiveness”—it can lose its ability to experience outrage. As a result, the prospect of engaging with this congressional inquiry into Trump’s attempt to delegitimatize the machinery of electoral democracy is sometimes a challenge to the spirit. That is both understandable and a public danger. And yet a citizenry that can no longer bring itself to pay attention to such an investigation or to absorb its astonishing findings risks moving even farther toward a disturbing “new normal”: a post-truth, post-democratic America.

A republic is predicated on faith—not religious faith but a faith in the fundamental legitimacy of its political institutions and the decisions they issue. To concede the legitimacy of statutes, rulings, and election returns is not necessarily to favor them. It’s simply to participate in the basic system that gives them form and force; citizens can, through democratic machinery, seek to defeat or contest candidates they deplore, initiatives that offend them, court opinions they consider misguided. By contrast, the campaign that culminated in the Capitol attack of January 6th was, fatefully, against democracy itself. It sought to instill profound mistrust in the process of voting—the mechanism through which, even in highly imperfect democracies, accountability is ultimately secured.

The committee and its work were far from apolitical, and yet to dismiss the report as merely political would be a perilous act of resignation and defeatism. The questions that hovered over the inquiry from the start—what more is there to learn? who is really listening?—persisted and loomed over the midterm elections. When the hearings began, the polling outfit FiveThirtyEight reported that Trump’s approval rating was 41.9 per cent; when the hearings ended, it was 40.4 per cent, a minuscule dip. As Susan B. Glasser, of The New Yorker, wrote, “All that damning evidence, and the polls were basically unchanged. The straight line in the former President’s approval rating is the literal representation of the crisis in American democracy. There is an essentially immovable forty per cent of the country whose loyalty to Donald Trump cannot be shaken by anything.” And yet the Republicans failed in their promise to produce a “red wave” in the midterms. The Democrats maintained their slender hold on the Senate and lost far fewer seats in the House than was expected. And while the reasons behind the Republican failure were many, ranging from the imperilment of abortion rights to the dismal quality of so many of the Party’s candidates, it was clear that one of the principal reasons was a deep concern about the future of democracy.

The most urgent thing to learn is whether a two-and-a-half-century-old republic will resist future efforts to undercut its foundations—to steal, through concerted deception, the essential legitimacy of its constitutional order. The contents of the report insist that complacency is not an option. The report also insists on accountability, though that will ultimately be the responsibility of the Department of Justice and the American public. The report has provided the evidence, the truth. Now it remains to be seen if it will be acted upon."

[cradleandshoot]

Terrific article on the Committee's work and report:

https://www.newyorker.com/news/american ... surrection

Warning: Requires reading words.

"January 6th was a phenomenon rooted both in the degraded era of Trump and in the radicalization of a major political party during the past generation. The very power of these developments explains why many people may approach this congressional report with a sense of fatigue, even denial. Part of Trump’s dark achievement has been to bludgeon the political attention of the country into submission.

When a nation has been subjected to that degree of cynicism—what is politely called “divisiveness”—it can lose its ability to experience outrage. As a result, the prospect of engaging with this congressional inquiry into Trump’s attempt to delegitimatize the machinery of electoral democracy is sometimes a challenge to the spirit. That is both understandable and a public danger. And yet a citizenry that can no longer bring itself to pay attention to such an investigation or to absorb its astonishing findings risks moving even farther toward a disturbing “new normal”: a post-truth, post-democratic America.

A republic is predicated on faith—not religious faith but a faith in the fundamental legitimacy of its political institutions and the decisions they issue. To concede the legitimacy of statutes, rulings, and election returns is not necessarily to favor them. It’s simply to participate in the basic system that gives them form and force; citizens can, through democratic machinery, seek to defeat or contest candidates they deplore, initiatives that offend them, court opinions they consider misguided. By contrast, the campaign that culminated in the Capitol attack of January 6th was, fatefully, against democracy itself. It sought to instill profound mistrust in the process of voting—the mechanism through which, even in highly imperfect democracies, accountability is ultimately secured.

The committee and its work were far from apolitical, and yet to dismiss the report as merely political would be a perilous act of resignation and defeatism. The questions that hovered over the inquiry from the start—what more is there to learn? who is really listening?—persisted and loomed over the midterm elections. When the hearings began, the polling outfit FiveThirtyEight reported that Trump’s approval rating was 41.9 per cent; when the hearings ended, it was 40.4 per cent, a minuscule dip. As Susan B. Glasser, of The New Yorker, wrote, “All that damning evidence, and the polls were basically unchanged. The straight line in the former President’s approval rating is the literal representation of the crisis in American democracy. There is an essentially immovable forty per cent of the country whose loyalty to Donald Trump cannot be shaken by anything.” And yet the Republicans failed in their promise to produce a “red wave” in the midterms. The Democrats maintained their slender hold on the Senate and lost far fewer seats in the House than was expected. And while the reasons behind the Republican failure were many, ranging from the imperilment of abortion rights to the dismal quality of so many of the Party’s candidates, it was clear that one of the principal reasons was a deep concern about the future of democracy.

The most urgent thing to learn is whether a two-and-a-half-century-old republic will resist future efforts to undercut its foundations—to steal, through concerted deception, the essential legitimacy of its constitutional order. The contents of the report insist that complacency is not an option. The report also insists on accountability, though that will ultimately be the responsibility of the Department of Justice and the American public. The report has provided the evidence, the truth. Now it remains to be seen if it will be acted upon."

Thanks for the warning about reading. I have learned over time that if you pay attention that some words are not worth wasting your time reading. The attempt to enlighten naive people resorts to nothing more than political propaganda. That is my reasoning for keeping one particular poster on my ignore list. As far as the dumpster and the Jan 6 criminal referral to the DOJ.. it is going to boil down to a very simple interpretation of the 1st amendment. When trump urged the crowd at the rally on Jan.6 to " go and fight like hell to get your government back" can that be interpreted as urging these dumbasses to storm the capital? I'm certain that the dumpster purposefully used enough ambiguity to cover his fat ass. IMO the DOJ was just handed a live hand grenade and AG Garland has to figure out how to prosecute a case against trump. It could easily take his office months to figure out how to PROVE any case. The very worst case scenario possible for the DOJ would be a not guilty verdict against the dumpster. I have said this many times regarding any prosecution case... There is what you know, what you think you know and what you can prove in a court of law. The dumpster will have a small army of defense counsel with the cloak of the 1st amendment as their primary goal when establishing their case. It won't be a bi-partisan group of politicians passing judgement on the dumpster, it will be 12 jurors.

[Seacoaster(1)]

"As far as the dumpster and the Jan 6 criminal referral to the DOJ.. it is going to boil down to a very simple interpretation of the 1st amendment."

I think this is actually a pretty complicated issue. And I think the completely frivolous and unlawful "fake electors" scheme is potentially more potent and easier to navigate.

[cradleandshoot]

"As far as the dumpster and the Jan 6 criminal referral to the DOJ.. it is going to boil down to a very simple interpretation of the 1st amendment."

I think this is actually a pretty complicated issue. And I think the completely frivolous and unlawful "fake electors" scheme is potentially more potent and easier to navigate.

I agree that it is a very complicated case. My understanding is that most serious and most difficult charges to prove come from the claim that trump issued an order to assault the capital. That is where I believe MG has a lot of landmines to tip toe over to prove that to a jury. It is possible that any trial involving trump will not just be one charge. It could be 4 or 5 charges going to court at once.

[MDlaxfan76]

"As far as the dumpster and the Jan 6 criminal referral to the DOJ.. it is going to boil down to a very simple interpretation of the 1st amendment."

I think this is actually a pretty complicated issue. And I think the completely frivolous and unlawful "fake electors" scheme is potentially more potent and easier to navigate.

I agree that it is a very complicated case. My understanding is that most serious and most difficult charges to prove come from the claim that trump issued an order to assault the capital. That is where I believe MG has a lot of landmines to tip toe over to prove that to a jury. It is possible that any trial involving trump will not just be one charge. It could be 4 or 5 charges going to court at once.

no, aid and give comfort are not "issued an order"....

Don't listen to whoever you heard that they need to prove he gave an "order".

But yes, IMO too, pretty reasonable to expect there will be multiple violations of law charged.
Jan 6 Committee recommended 4 such.

[njbill]

It won't be a bi-partisan group of politicians passing judgement on the dumpster, it will be 12 jurors.

The jury will be comprised of 12 DC residents who likely will all have voted for Biden. If Trump is really lucky, he’ll get one Trump voter on the jury. And that one voter could well be disgusted with him by now.

His odds of winning an acquittal before a DC jury are not good, which I suspect he knows.

How many members of the Trump mafia have been acquitted by DC juries? Zero.