You have commented 358 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Government Corruption
As President Trump is indicted for January 6, more evidence emerges that it was a set-up.
2023-08-06
[American Thinker] Coincidentally, I’m sure, in the lead-up to his being taken off the air at Fox News, Tucker Carlson and his team were investigating events on January 6—the same events that are serving as the basis for Jack Smith’s creative indictment against Donald Trump. One of the things that Fox News prevented from airing was an interview with former Capitol Hill Police Chief Steven Sund, during which he told Tucker that the FBI had "a lot of operatives" in the crowd. There was more, and it all feeds into the reasonable belief that January 6 was a set-up.

January 6 has been enormously useful to the Democrats:

  • It allowed them to certify the electoral college votes without any objections. These objections (which Democrats have vigorously made over the years) are a prerequisite to challenging the count.
  • It allowed them to round up almost 1,000 Trump supporters and destroy their lives, a useful lesson to anyone else who might think about opposing the Biden regime...er, administration.
  • It allowed them to pretend that the lack of crowds in D.C. for Biden’s inauguration was due to security requirements rather than to the reality, which is that no one would have shown up anyway.
  • And, of course, most usefully at all, it’s just allowed them to indict Biden’s chief rival, President Donald Trump, in the lead-up to the 2024 election. The charge, while failing to use the word "insurrection," essentially alleges that Trump defrauded America by ignoring those of his advisors who believed in the 2020 election (many of whom have been outed as fervent Trump haters) and, instead, looking to evidence of election of fraud and believing that election.
    Knowing how useful January 6 was for Democrats—and considering that the "insurrection" narrative kicked in within fewer than 24 hours —it’s worth considering a very loose rundown of the timeline.

  • Trump announced a rally in D.C. on the day that the Senate was set to certify the election.
  • Trump asks for extra security in D.C. for that day, a request that is refused.
  • Trump tells those at the rally who "will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voice heard."
  • The crowd at the Capitol did not become agitated until the police, without any warning to the crowd to disperse, suddenly fired flash bangs into the crowd.
  • People in whom the FBI had no interest were filmed removing barriers and urging people into the Capitol. (See here and here.) Significantly, those who weren’t on the front lines would have had no idea that they weren’t being invited into the Capitol, especially because the Capitol police were welcoming them in (which should negate any charges that they were illegally trespassing).
  • Trump immediately issued tweets telling the crowd to remain peaceful and disperse. (See here and here.) Soon after, Twitter shut down his account, making his tweet inaccessible for posterity to revisit.
  • Trump tried to get to the Capitol to calm the crowd but was prevented from doing so.
  • Capitol police apparently beat one Trump supporter to death and shot to death an unarmed woman. Otherwise, no one suffered any serious injuries at the hands of the crowd—although Democrats lied relentlessly about Officer Sicknick, who emerged unscathed on January 6, only to die later from a stroke.
    In event after event, it’s the system, not Trump, that’s inexorably pulling the crowd into the Capitol. And in event after event, it was Trump who tried to put the brakes on things, only to be blocked.

    The previously hidden revelations from former Capitol Hill Police Chief Steven Sund are entirely consistent with the above facts:
    • Posted by:Besoeker

    #2  The J6 civil disobedience and political protest being hyper-exaggerated into an "insurrection"(albeit the only one in history where only the government had arms), and the show-trials and deceptive claims of illegal intent to question the election were the essential predicate behind the Smith Indictment. The trial and the almost certain conviction of President Trump for no actual crimes will create the justification for barring him from the ballot in 2024. As incredible as it may sound, the 14th Amendment, Section 3 language will be used to cast a "convicted" Trump as an insurrectionist, hence ineligible for the ballot.

    Undoubtedly, the entire sham will be overturned in due course, after every procedural delay in the DoJ playbook, by the US Supreme Court. But the timing will be such, that it will not have been vacated in time for the elections. The process is the blocking strategy, not the eventual outcome. Like Ted Stevens in Alaska, Trump will be eventually vindicated, but denied a return to the Presidency.

    XIV, Sec 3: "No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability. "
    Posted by: NoMoreBS   2023-08-06 14:05  

    #1  Half of the conspirators putting together the setup of Trump were in his administration.
    Posted by: Super Hose   2023-08-06 13:45  

    00:00