Trump demanded Secret Service let rally attendees in with weapons

Yes, it was Trump's idea to get out of Afghanistan. The cowardly, dishonorable and disgraceful execution of this idea, in particularly the fleeing from Bagram Airport without notification of our allied Afghan government is totally the responsibility of Joe Biden. You know, this guy.

 

rube
roo͞b
noun

1. An unsophisticated country person.
2. A person of rural heritage; a yokel.
3. An uninformed, unsophisticated, or unintelligent person.

 

I have little doubt the Garland/Biden DOJ will bring just another charge against Trump as we have seen for almost SEVEN years now. You did notice the NY supreme court dismissed the contempt citation against him because the State has dropped those investigations and persecutions.

And you might want to wait and see what McCarthy has to say after the rebuttal to the Secret Service hearsay. He added this little caveat you seemed to have missed

"I asked McCarthy if he thought the Justice Department would bring a prosecution against Trump in light of the new evidence presented by the Jan. 6 committee.

“I do,” McCarthy said. “I want to be clear, my saying that I think it’s likely doesn’t mean it’s a good idea.”"

 

"Investigations" such as this one...................YES

"The Supreme Court has recognized Congress’s power to issue subpoenas, saying in order to write laws it also needs to be able to investigate.

Congress’ power to issue subpoenas, while broad, is not unlimited. The high court has said Congress is not a law enforcement agency, and cannot investigate someone purely to expose wrongdoing or damaging information about them for political gain. A subpoena must potentially further some “legitimate legislative purpose,” the court has said."
https://thefederalistpapers.org/us/explainer-can-congress-enforce-subpoena

"According to the committee’s own enabling resolution, which was passed by the House of Representatives in June of 2021, the purpose of the committee is purely investigatory. None of the three stated purposes mention legislation a single time. Instead, the language of the enabling resolution states that the purpose of the committee is to “investigate and report” the facts surrounding the January 6 riot, “examine” evidence collected, and to “build upon” other investigations.

The three stated functions of the committee, per the resolution, are to “investigate the facts” surrounding the riot, “identify” lessons learned, and “issue a final report” on the committee’s investigation. Not only does the enabling resolution not provide any legislative goals for the committee, it explicitly bans the committee from marking up any legislation whatsoever."
https://thefederalist.com/2021/09/2...-major-court-battle-over-executive-privilege/

As I have cited Congressional subpoenas must be for LEGISLATIVE purposes.

"....may wonder whether Congress had authority to issue that subpoena. Yesterday, the United States Supreme Court shed light on that question in its decision in Trump v. Mazars USA, LLP, Nos. 19-715 & 19-760.

The Court’s Decision After describing the history of how subpoena-based disputes between Congress and various presidents have been resolved, the Court discussed the basis for—and limits to—Congress’s subpoena power. Specifically, the Court affirmed that Congress’s subpoena power cannot be used for law enforcement purposes. In other words, Congress cannot use its subpoena authority to put someone on trial for a crime or wrongdoing, nor does Congress have the “power to expose for the sake of exposure.” Slip Op. at 12. Indeed, the Court confirmed that congressional investigations used solely to “punish” those investigated would be “indefensible.” Not only that, the Court reinforced the limitations to the subpoena power, including that the subpoena must serve a “valid legislative purpose,” and is proper only if it is “related to, and in furtherance of, a legitimate task of Congress.” Slip Op. at 11. In addition, the Court reaffirmed that those subject to a congressional subpoena have both constitutional and common law privileges—including attorney-client privilege—against the subpoena."
https://jenner.com/system/assets/pu...s_Congressional_Subpoena_Power.pdf?1594417043

And this is an inquisition not an investigation.

 

Did you support use getting out of the War in Afghanistan or did you want us to stay there and continue?

 

OUR RIGHTS ARE NOW BUNK!!! Just so you can satisfy your overwhelming urge to seek vengeance against Trump? I gave you the law.

Again

Does the Fifth Amendment apply outside of criminal trials?
Yes. Although the terms “witness” and “criminal case” naturally evoke visions of a criminal trial, the Supreme Court has long held that the Fifth Amendment applies outside a criminal courtroom.

It applies any time a person is forced to make a statement that could be used to incriminate him. A (non-exhaustive) list of situations where the Fifth Amendment applies outside a criminal trial includes: traffic stops, police interrogations, grand jury proceedings, arrests, civil depositions, civil trials, and testimony before the Unite States Congress. "
https://www.burnhamgorokhov.com/criminal-defense-resources/fifth-amendment/

 

How can such a great defender of the Constitution be so soft on crime?

 

Looks like you should have been on the legal teams that challenged the jurisdiction and legitimacy of the committee. The ones that lost in court.
Dude, your arguments have been made and failed. Give it up.

 

Yes, the 5th does apply outside criminal trials. People can invoke it in many circumstances.

However, there is no right not to have that held against you outside criminal trials.

Anyway, the point of this thread is that trump knew his crowd was armed and wanted to let them keep their weapons. Then he whipped them into a frenzy with lies, told them to march to the Capitol and fight.

That’s horrendous for anyone to do, let alone a sitting president. It’s inexcusable. That won’t prevent you free m making excuses for him.

 

Maybe it’s been noted before but the “mags” Trump wanted to remove were the magnetic metal detectors. Not magazines of ammunition.

 

0 evidence of any crime committed by Trump. Yet, the left clings to the hope.

 

"Take away their mags", didn't realize people were walking around with magnetometers. Once again I guess it depends on who told her the story if she got the quote right.

 

That would be the mags - magnetic metal detectors - that people had to walk through to get into the rally.
The rally where he lied to people about the election being stolen, worked them into a frenzy, told them to march to the Capitol and fight.
He wanted to remove the “mags” so people could walk into his rally fully armed. Then go from there to the Capitol.

 

Yeah, that's interesting (and ultra Fascist), but I didn't find it the meat of her testimony.... There were likely hundreds of armed people directly outside the rally space ready to march, with NO INTENTION of entering the space. The fact that they didn't physically get into the "rally space" ultimately means nothing. They could hear live (or follow on streaming) his speech directions from right outside the space....

I fully believe her other claim that he mostly wanted bodies so it wouldn't appear to be another Tulsa...

 

Geez, eh? Rinse and repeat every day and all day trying to re-write history with B/S.

 

Yeah, T**** had every idea ever, but he followed through on little.... why do you suppose that was??

The answer is pretty easy for anybody with knowledge of his history and that of the Republican Party since @ 2000

 

Well if we are going to stick to the topic of Afghanistan, the answer regarding follow through is you people elected Joe Biden.

 

And see what happened???

Something....

Little tutorial about governing... just having "ideas" doesn't cut it...

 

None of that is true except the description of "mags" , It is kind of a thing with the Left, the opposite of what they say is true. BTW.. according to the SS , every President complains about the "mags", it congests entry and number of people entering, which, of course, they all wanted the big showing of supporters.

 

You've yet to present a crime.

 

In ALL official proceedings your rights are protected including your 5th amendment rights and that includes protection from any investigator or official declaring you guilty because you do invoke it. It applies EVERYWHERE.

But then the anti-Trumpers have never been about constitutional rights.

 

I have read both rulings and in both thenjudges are quite clear they do no care about the constitutional rights of those being accused or the separation of powers.

 

When it comes to Trump, you lose touch with reality.

That's one of the consequences of being part of a cult.

 

Show us the legislation or case law to say that such a presumption cannot be made by a congressional committee.

 

Those judgements are the law until they’re overturned on appeal.
So … you’re wrong.