Phx-Suns.Net

It was extra suspicious when thousands of Trump supporters stormed the Capital but, once again let’s try to make it about the investigators instead. Same game plan always.

So they got all this new evidence against the Jan 6 committee? Super suspicious! All these tetra bytes of evidence they uncovered that show how evil and corrupt they are. What is all this new evidence? They don’t mention anything about it. They got their headline. Suspicious Jan 6 committee must be hiding important info that exonerates Trump.

Nodack wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 22, 2024 10:08 am

It was extra suspicious when thousands of Trump supporters stormed the Capital but, once again let’s try to make it about the investigators instead. Same game plan always.

So they got all this new evidence against the Jan 6 committee? Super suspicious! All these tetra bytes of evidence they uncovered that show how evil and corrupt they are. What is all this new evidence? They don’t mention anything about it. They got their headline. Suspicious Jan 6 committee must be hiding important info that exonerates Trump.

In the ideal world created by Nodack, what should have happened? Should there be an explaination?

Why lie if everything is on the level? Will they be held accountable?


- Thanks to new House Speaker Mike Johnson, We now have permission to release Capitol CCTV footage proving that a member of Nancy Pelosi's security detail, Special Agent David Lazarus, perjured himself on the stand during the Oath Keepers trial.

- Lazarus was brought in to corroborate another Capitol police officer's account claiming that he had antagonistic encounter with the Oath Keepers. But footage of Lazarus proves that he was lying.

- These lies, spread unquestioningly by the media and Democrat politicians, were used to put innocent people in prison, ruining their lives and the lives of their families. They and their attorneys did not have access to the footage at trial that Blaze Media is releasing today.

- Instead, Harry Dunn was made a hero by Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi, and as a result of his and David Lazarus's false testimony, there are innocent people in prison.

- The government lied about this. What else are they lying about?

This also seems bad. Am I undermining US institutions to call out what looks like bs, or when a citizen does it, it is holding those institutions to accountability? Once again, why lie about it? What's the point of lying? Does lying in court, to the media and by the media matter?

In2ition wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 22, 2024 10:39 am

Nodack wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 22, 2024 10:08 am

It was extra suspicious when thousands of Trump supporters stormed the Capital but, once again let’s try to make it about the investigators instead. Same game plan always.

So they got all this new evidence against the Jan 6 committee? Super suspicious! All these tetra bytes of evidence they uncovered that show how evil and corrupt they are. What is all this new evidence? They don’t mention anything about it. They got their headline. Suspicious Jan 6 committee must be hiding important info that exonerates Trump.

In the ideal world created by Nodack, what should have happened? Should there be an explaination?

You couldn’t get a Republican to even acknowledge the first, second impeachment hearings or the Jan 6 hearings. Now they are interested? Pfft.

Nodack wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 23, 2024 12:10 am

In2ition wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 22, 2024 10:39 am

Nodack wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 22, 2024 10:08 am

It was extra suspicious when thousands of Trump supporters stormed the Capital but, once again let’s try to make it about the investigators instead. Same game plan always.

So they got all this new evidence against the Jan 6 committee? Super suspicious! All these tetra bytes of evidence they uncovered that show how evil and corrupt they are. What is all this new evidence? They don’t mention anything about it. They got their headline. Suspicious Jan 6 committee must be hiding important info that exonerates Trump.

In the ideal world created by Nodack, what should have happened? Should there be an explaination?

You couldn’t get a Republican to even acknowledge the first, second impeachment hearings or the Jan 6 hearings. Now they are interested? Pfft.

It seems you are misunderstanding this. Both were complete bs, just like everything that comes out of their mouth. If it was all above board and the Dems are just innocent babies, why would they need to delete evidence? Why would they need to manipulate and doctor evidence? Why would they need to hide evidence? Like the video that exonerates defendants in court. Why do they seem to always fabricate it? Just like the evidence to get the FISA warrant and got caught doing it. Why would they have a perjure themselves during court testimonies? If the charges are legit, it should be a slam dunk, no? You cross all your "T"s and dot your "i"s. It's like they never went to ethics class in law school.

The charges were legit. They had mountains of evidence. No Republican would even look at the evidence. They claimed all the witnesses were Dem plants including the Republican ones of course. The Jan 6 hearings were long and extensive and covered all the bases extremely well. They had a LOT of witnesses and ALL of them were Republicans and almost all of them were Trump employees, his election team, lawyers, family. Everyone told him he lost and he just refused to accept it and went right into everything is fake mode and went right to the crazy lawyer team of Rudy and Powel and ignored all the rest.

The charges weren't legit, in part because they would never hold their own to the same standards. If you only use the "evidence" for against him and do not look at the evidence that exonerates him, sure you would feel that way. That's why you usually are allowed to defend yourself and bring evidence to the contrary in your defense.

In2ition wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 23, 2024 12:19 pm

The charges weren't legit, in part because they would never hold their own to the same standards. If you only use the "evidence" for against him and do not look at the evidence that exonerates him, sure you would feel that way. That's why you usually are allowed to defend yourself and bring evidence to the contrary in your defense.

There is no evidence that exonerates him. He was welcomed to testify. He refused. They subpoenaed a bunch of Republicans to tell their side and they all refused. Hillary testified in her defense. Everyone knows you can’t put Trump on the stand because he would bury himself.

Nodack wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 23, 2024 12:39 pm

In2ition wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 23, 2024 12:19 pm

The charges weren't legit, in part because they would never hold their own to the same standards. If you only use the "evidence" for against him and do not look at the evidence that exonerates him, sure you would feel that way. That's why you usually are allowed to defend yourself and bring evidence to the contrary in your defense.

There is no evidence that exonerates him. He was welcomed to testify. He refused. They subpoenaed a bunch of Republicans to tell their side and they all refused. Hillary testified in her defense. Everyone knows you can’t put Trump on the stand because he would bury himself.

There was evidence that exonerated him, as it was presented at the show trial, but you wouldn't think so, because of course.

Feel free to post all the evidence that exonerates Trump.

How are the cartels getting US military weapons?
"Now, Mexican Foreign Relations Secretary Alicia Bárcena says that the country's Defense Department "has warned the United States about weapons entering Mexico that are for the exclusive use of the U.S. Army," per AP — which notes cartel members have shared images of the weapons on social media."

Mexico urges investigation after cartels found with U.S. Army weapons
headshot
Rebecca Falconer

Mexico's government is demanding American officials urgently investigate why drug cartels in the country have U.S. military-grade weapons.

Why it matters: It's estimated that up to half a million weapons are smuggled every year from the U.S. to Mexico, which has seen spiking gun violence despite strict regulations.
https://www.axios.com/2024/01/23/mexico ... s-smuggled

I don’t know how they get their weapons. I read up on the insurrection of 1938 or 9 and they managed to stockpile military grade weapons from people in the military who were sympathetic to their cause. I would imagine today the cause would be money in the pocket of some military personnel making money on the side.

So let me get this straight, you think it's some 'Radar' type person in the military that is misappropriating weapons and diverting them to the cartels?

In2ition wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 24, 2024 7:05 am

So let me get this straight, you think it's some 'Radar' type person in the military that is misappropriating weapons and diverting them to the cartels?

I don’t know. I was just throwing out a scenario that has happened in the past. Knowing you, I would guess that you think it was Biden who did it somehow.

Guys, the guns were all shoved inside Hunter Bidens laptop.


Obviously.

I actually don't think it was Biden that gave them the weapons. It could have come from several possible sources. We did leave an awful lot of weapons in Afghanistan. I have no doubt that those weapons have made their way across the world in hands of different entities and bad actors. Have you ever heard of Operation Fast and Furious which was run by the ATF? That got shut down, but it may have been restarted by the CIA without oversight. Bottom line is that someone is sending or selling them to who should be considered on the Terrorist list.

I am sure there is a team of people trying to figure that out as we speak.

Or figuring out how to cover it up.

Of course….