So When Do REPUBS IMPEACH BIDEN?

Please read my posts before blabbing a reply. I said Pelosi's permission is explicitly required to dispatch Guard to the Capitol. I didn't say anything about DC. Pelosi has nothing to do or say about Guard being dispatched to DC.

 

Another source-- like you, perhaps?


As far as sources, Both I and @Lee Atwater , have provided you loads, and you have offered squat. So it's not hard to know which side of this debate is the one sorely lacking in "more explicit and complete" sources.

 

Prove it. You do know the Capital is located in DC, right?

In a statement provided to FactCheck.org, Jane L. Campbell, president and CEO of the U.S. Capitol Historical Society, said: “The Speaker of the House does not oversee security of the U.S. Capitol, the Capitol Police Board does, and the Speaker does not oversee the Board. The Board consists of three voting members: the Senate Sergeant at Arms, the House Sergeant at Arms, and the Architect of the Capitol; together with one non-voting member, the Chief of the Capitol Police.”

In a Feb. 1 letter to Pelosi, Sund, the former Capitol Police chief — who was hired by the Capitol Police Board in June 2019 — wrote that on Jan. 4, two days before the riot, he “approached the two Sergeants at Arms to request the assistance of the National Guard, as I had no authority to do so without an Emergency Declaration by the Capitol Police Board (CPB).”

(According to a 2017 Government Accountability Office report, the Capitol Police Board “has authority for security decisions, as well as certain human capital and personnel matters, including the approval of officer terminations.”)

 

And how long will it take you?

 

RodB is correct and you are wrong... again...

https://www.uscp.gov/the-department/oversight

 

Here... let the people in the know tell you the way it works... instead of the fake hog wash the MSM are trying to put in your head.. and yes it would be illegal for Trump to send in the guard without the request of the Capitol Police...

Kash Patel

https://rumble.com/v1exo4j-kash-pat...on-request-for-20000-national-guard-lead.html

 

Let someone in the know tell you who should be held responsible....

Again, a former speaker, I was deeply offended that anybody would do what they did on the Capitol grounds. But as a former speaker, I was also really offended that the current speaker, Pelosi, failed so totally in her job, which was to make sure this didn’t happen. This is a totally nutty environment that we’re currently operating in, and historians will look back on it as a period that’s kind of mildly insane.
Well, I think she’s the person who is most responsible for what happened. It was her job to ensure that there was adequate police and if they didn’t have adequate police it was her job to ensure that the National Guard was there. So a lot of this I think is a dance by the Democrats who don’t want us to look very closely at what actually happened. If you’ll notice, the political committee they have created is, in fact, only looking at political things. They are not looking at the various ringleaders who have not been arrested. They are not at a lot of the details about whether or not the FBI was as involved as provocateurs.

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/newt-gi...on-who-is-most-responsible-for-what-happened/

 

The national guard is NOT other federal law enforcement agencies. Do you know what other federal law enforcement agencies mean Popscott?

 

A. Opinion by two blowhards who would blame Nancy Pelosi when they defecate in their own undergarments.
B. No evidence has been provided. Trying to blame someone who neither had the legal responsibility nor was in the direct line chain of command will not work. It will fall on its face.
C. This is all an attempt to sway the views of the public away from what DJT did and not do.

 

Your link does not prove RodB right, nor does it contradict what I have already said (it actually corroborates my position). RodB claims that the House Speaker, is directly in charge of the Capitol Police Force. What you "snipped," in very small print, made no mention of the Speaker of the House (fyi).


Further, in this instance, the entire Capitol Force, was insufficient; National Guard (or other police) were required. RodB's position is that these Guards were offered to Pelosi, & she turned them down; so your link would not even mention that circumstance.

Lastly, RodB makes the ridiculous assertion that-- directly contradicting the highly- convincing video evidence, presented in the final, 2 hour J6 Committee's summation hearing (which you guys who haven't seen it, should watch, if you expect to be able to speak with any authority, or even credibility)-- Trump ordered the troops, as soon as Pelosi requested them.

IOW, your tiny blurb, is a joke.

No surprise, there.

 

Pelosi's permission was not required by law.

Trump would have been justified in sending DC Metro Police and/or the DC National Guard to restore order.

 

Trump didn't. He deserted his post.

Yes, and the Capitol riot was an extreme circumstance.

He does not need the Speaker's permission to order out the DC National Guard. Of course, the forces he sends can't do anything they might like if basic rights are violated.

Rather than pretend there are restrictions on the President that clearly aren't written into Insurrection Act, we should come up with laws that SCOTUS won't reject as unconstitutional. Our essential liberties might one day depend on us having checks on the government.

 

Note the date--January 5, 2021. Did Bowser have information about the risk to the Capitol than Trump had? What did Pelosi, McConnell know about the risk. We should look into the actions of all these people. What did they know and when did they know it?

Anyway, it doesn't matter than Bowser didn't want extraordinary measures taken.

 

excellent idea....let's look into the FBI infiltrating the Proud Boys and why they were directly involved in Jan 6... Pelosi already stated in her little photo op "she knew it was going to happen, that they were going to trespass" how revealing was that... all her records and communication before during and after should be seized and gone through.
Her statement right there questions why she did not request the guard Trump had already authorized...

 

The government of the city of Washington DC has no -- as in none, zero, zilch -- jurisdiction over the Capitol grounds.

 

What's your concern about the Proud Boys and the FBI? Are you saying the FBI did something wrong? That they should not investigated the Proud Boys? That they didn't investigated them soon enough?

An investigation looks at everyone involved. Pelosi's perception of the threat is important. Ditto for McConnell. What did the Senators and Representatives know? Were any of them either encouraging or inciting the rioters?

Trump, as Commander-in-Chief of our armed forces and commander of the DC National Guard, was responsible for protecting the Capitol regardless of what Pelosi said or did. Pelosi's responsibility is a separate matter.

 

I've already done it. I learned how it operates and who is in the chain of command and told you such. If you don't want to believe me, that is perfectly fine with me because I don't care. If you want to believe some flake telling FactCheck parts about it, I couldn't care less.

 

Man, this beating my head against a brick wall is starting to hurt. The executive branch cannot do anything at the Capitol without the legislative branch's explicit permission. Just like the legislative branch cannot do anything at the white house without the executive branch's permission. Finally the president has no jurisdiction or authority whatsoever to direct the Metro Police to do anything.

 

Why would a president ask for Metro police help with something the Metro police were already up to their neck helping???

It would sure be nice if you read my posts before refuting them. I said extreme circumstances in "states and cities". This may come as news to you but the Capitol, home of an independent and separate branch of the federal government, is neither a city or a state.

 

And DC has no police authority over Capitol property in DC. Thats Capitol police domain.

 

Trump has to have local request to dispatch the guard to perform police actions. He cant do it on his own authority. The Capitol Police, under the authority of Pelosi as the Speaker, or the DC Police under the Authority of the mayor COULD of made such a request. Trump, ANTICIPATING such request let it be known in the weeks before 1/6 to DC and Capitol police that he has authorized in advance the use of 16,000 National Guard troops in response to such requests. They both turned down the offers.

Then Trump told those gathered to "peacefully march" to the Capitol, so their "voices could be heard". Then they impeached Trump for inciting an insurrection intended to overthrow the US government with the pointy ends of flag poles. Really is absurd. An extra 50 National guard troops in riot helmets and pads with shields could of stopped 1/6 from becoming anything more than an unruly protest outside the Capitol. In my mind at best Pelosi and the capitol police are criminally negligent, at worse it was their intent to damage Trump

 

The DC Metro Police jurisdiction extends to the entirety of the District of Columbia.

I provided you with evidence to support my views. Where's the evidence on your side?

 

No, he needs no such request. Please read about the Posse Comitatus Act and the Insurrection Act. Regarding the Insurrection Act:

"Under normal circumstances, the Posse Comitatus Act forbids the U.S. military — including federal armed forces and National Guard troops who have been called into federal service — from taking part in civilian law enforcement. This prohibition reflects an American tradition that views military interference in civilian government as being inherently dangerous to liberty.

Invoking the Insurrection Act temporarily suspends the Posse Comitatus rule and allows the president to deploy the military to assist civilian authorities with law enforcement. That might involve soldiers doing anything from enforcing a federal court order to suppressing an uprising against the government. Of course, not every domestic use of the military involves law enforcement activity. Other laws, such as the Stafford Act, allow the military to be used to respond to natural disasters, public health crises, and other similar events without waiving the restrictions of the Posse Comitatus Act."​

And...

"Troops can be deployed under three sections of the Insurrection Act. Each of these sections is designed for a different set of situations. Unfortunately, the law’s requirements are poorly explained and leave virtually everything up to the discretion of the president.

Section 251 allows the president to deploy troops if a state’s legislature (or governor if the legislature is unavailable) requests federal aid to suppress an insurrection in that state. This provision is the oldest part of the law, and the one that has most often been invoked.

While Section 251 requires state consent, Sections 252 and 253 allow the president to deploy troops without a request from the affected state, even against the state’s wishes. Section 252 permits deployment in order to “enforce the laws” of the United States or to 'suppress rebellion' whenever 'unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages, or rebellion' make it 'impracticable' to enforce federal law in that state by the 'ordinary course of judicial proceedings.'

Section 253 has two parts. The first allows the president to use the military in a state to suppress 'any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy' that 'so hinders the execution of the laws' that any portion of the state’s inhabitants are deprived of a constitutional right and state authorities are unable or unwilling to protect that right. Presidents Dwight D. Eisenhower and John F. Kennedy relied on this provision to deploy troops to desegregate schools in the South after the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Brown v. Board of Education."​

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/insurrection-act-explained

According to my source, the President can.

I'm holding off on discussing the DC Metro Police until you show a willingness to discuss my sources and/or back up your opinion with evidence.

 

for the umpteenth time the Metro police have no jurisdiction at the Capitol, the white house, or any federal building. They might have hot pursuit authority to enter a federal building like county sherriffs have. I assume there is a standing agreement with the feds that grant permission to enger a federal building for specified reasons, but I don't know what they are. Besides congress has plenary and absolute power and authority over everything in DC (and that is explicit in the Constitution). The president has none.

What dies the Posse Comitatus Act and the Insurrection Act say that prohibits Pelosi from dispatching the Capitol Police to bust down the white house doors and detain senior staff members, or to send the Capitol Police to confiscate presidential documents? Try the Constitution, and don't ballyhoo that nothing explicit is in it that spells out what the separation of independent powers means and entails. The framers felt no need at all to spell out the self evident and obvious. The Constitution does not explicitly say people have a right to vote either, although four amendments clarify the people's self evident and obvious right.

 

Wrong…
the CP And overseers Pelosi and ilk are responsible for security at the Capitol…not Trump ….they failed… no excuses…. They are to blame for allowing Jan 6 to happen.