Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Barr rendered his legal opinion in the form of a resignation, including a statement that he saw no evidence of voter fraud - the day after this draft Executive Order was being circulated.

This is evidence Trump knew the effor was illegal.

And yet, Barr sat on his thumbs.

He said today that Barr has already been speaking to the committee, so this would be additional questioning about the voting machines. Interesting.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Barr rendered his legal opinion in the form of a resignation, including a statement that he saw no evidence of voter fraud - the day after this draft Executive Order was being circulated.

This is evidence Trump knew the effor was illegal.

And yet, Barr sat on his thumbs.

Layers and layers.

GOP AG Association
Congressmen
Senators
Militias
Lawyers

You name it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Scavino is ducking service:

Freeze his credit cards and bank accounts as part of the investigation. He’ll turn up.

+1

Unless we start acting like insurrection and undermining our democracy mean something, there won't be a democracy to undermine.

They finally served him but he’s fighting the subpoena for his phone records. How bad can they be?

At this point I’m assuming that there is layer upon layer of treason, even more than we’ve learned about already. Perhaps ongoing coordination. Perhaps they tip their hands of awareness of foreign governments having people among the insurrectionists.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Scavino is ducking service:

Freeze his credit cards and bank accounts as part of the investigation. He’ll turn up.

+1

Unless we start acting like insurrection and undermining our democracy mean something, there won't be a democracy to undermine.

They finally served him but he’s fighting the subpoena for his phone records. How bad can they be?

I don’t believe Paxton’s records have been sought by the 1/6 Commission, but the fact that he’s refused to provide them to the Travis County Attorney’s Office in violation of the law really says something. Paxton and his wife both attended the rally that day and Paxton spoke.

“Last week, the Travis County district attorney’s office had set a four-day deadline for Paxton to turn over the records involving the Jan. 6, 2021, rally or face a lawsuit accusing him of violating the state open records law. But in a letter to the district attorney’s office Friday, the attorney general’s office denied any violations and rejected the office’s demands.” https://www.kwtx.com/2022/01/22/texas-attorney-general-refuses-hand-over-jan-6-records/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the call to Georgia officials is still the most damning evidence of POTUS criminal liability for the seditious conspiracy. I’m sure there’s more of that kind of evidence that we haven’t seen yet. The rabble rousing on the hill was just the tip of the iceberg so to speak.

Correct, because it's easier to prove his intent was to force election fraud. Trump's involvement in Jan 6 will be harder to prove in terms of intent. I don't think we'll find a smoking gun among the docs given to the Committee - plenty of circumstantial evidence, of course, but nothing that rises to the level of "find me X number of votes that I am short of".

Actually I think his actions in the Georgia case ARE the evidence of his intent on the 6th. It’s all part of the same thing.

Yes. One big dot as they say.

Also significant that the executive order deputized the DoD to order the military to seize voting machines, when he completely hollowed out the DoD leadership starting days after the election and filled it with incompetent loyalists.

Significant and chilling.

And, I will add—there is an angle not really being discussed related to the use of military force over the summer during the protests. That all seemed like a drill of some sort, or a test.

+1 Lots of prescience in this thread, from some of us and from Rep. Slotkin. https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/924925.page
Some in here, too. https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/937601.page

Lots of gaslighting in there, too, and it’s still ongoing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the call to Georgia officials is still the most damning evidence of POTUS criminal liability for the seditious conspiracy. I’m sure there’s more of that kind of evidence that we haven’t seen yet. The rabble rousing on the hill was just the tip of the iceberg so to speak.

Correct, because it's easier to prove his intent was to force election fraud. Trump's involvement in Jan 6 will be harder to prove in terms of intent. I don't think we'll find a smoking gun among the docs given to the Committee - plenty of circumstantial evidence, of course, but nothing that rises to the level of "find me X number of votes that I am short of".

Actually I think his actions in the Georgia case ARE the evidence of his intent on the 6th. It’s all part of the same thing.

Yes. One big dot as they say.

Also significant that the executive order deputized the DoD to order the military to seize voting machines, when he completely hollowed out the DoD leadership starting days after the election and filled it with incompetent loyalists.

Significant and chilling.

And, I will add—there is an angle not really being discussed related to the use of military force over the summer during the protests. That all seemed like a drill of some sort, or a test.

+1 Lots of prescience in this thread, from some of us and from Rep. Slotkin. https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/924925.page
Some in here, too. https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/937601.page

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the call to Georgia officials is still the most damning evidence of POTUS criminal liability for the seditious conspiracy. I’m sure there’s more of that kind of evidence that we haven’t seen yet. The rabble rousing on the hill was just the tip of the iceberg so to speak.

Correct, because it's easier to prove his intent was to force election fraud. Trump's involvement in Jan 6 will be harder to prove in terms of intent. I don't think we'll find a smoking gun among the docs given to the Committee - plenty of circumstantial evidence, of course, but nothing that rises to the level of "find me X number of votes that I am short of".

Actually I think his actions in the Georgia case ARE the evidence of his intent on the 6th. It’s all part of the same thing.

Yes. One big dot as they say.

Also significant that the executive order deputized the DoD to order the military to seize voting machines, when he completely hollowed out the DoD leadership starting days after the election and filled it with incompetent loyalists.

Significant and chilling.

And, I will add—there is an angle not really being discussed related to the use of military force over the summer during the protests. That all seemed like a drill of some sort, or a test.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the call to Georgia officials is still the most damning evidence of POTUS criminal liability for the seditious conspiracy. I’m sure there’s more of that kind of evidence that we haven’t seen yet. The rabble rousing on the hill was just the tip of the iceberg so to speak.

Correct, because it's easier to prove his intent was to force election fraud. Trump's involvement in Jan 6 will be harder to prove in terms of intent. I don't think we'll find a smoking gun among the docs given to the Committee - plenty of circumstantial evidence, of course, but nothing that rises to the level of "find me X number of votes that I am short of".

Actually I think his actions in the Georgia case ARE the evidence of his intent on the 6th. It’s all part of the same thing.

Yes. One big dot as they say.

Also significant that the executive order deputized the DoD to order the military to seize voting machines, when he completely hollowed out the DoD leadership starting days after the election and filled it with incompetent loyalists.

Significant and chilling.

Anonymous wrote:Not a good week for Rudy

They want to throw Rudy under the bus for all of it, as if Rudy concocted all of this entirely on his own and did it over everyone's objections and nobody else had any part in it...

Yeah right. Rudy was involved, yes. But he was not the sole mastermind.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the call to Georgia officials is still the most damning evidence of POTUS criminal liability for the seditious conspiracy. I’m sure there’s more of that kind of evidence that we haven’t seen yet. The rabble rousing on the hill was just the tip of the iceberg so to speak.

Correct, because it's easier to prove his intent was to force election fraud. Trump's involvement in Jan 6 will be harder to prove in terms of intent. I don't think we'll find a smoking gun among the docs given to the Committee - plenty of circumstantial evidence, of course, but nothing that rises to the level of "find me X number of votes that I am short of".

Actually I think his actions in the Georgia case ARE the evidence of his intent on the 6th. It’s all part of the same thing.

Yes. One big dot as they say.

Also significant that the executive order deputized the DoD to order the military to seize voting machines, when he completely hollowed out the DoD leadership starting days after the election and filled it with incompetent loyalists.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the call to Georgia officials is still the most damning evidence of POTUS criminal liability for the seditious conspiracy. I’m sure there’s more of that kind of evidence that we haven’t seen yet. The rabble rousing on the hill was just the tip of the iceberg so to speak.

Correct, because it's easier to prove his intent was to force election fraud. Trump's involvement in Jan 6 will be harder to prove in terms of intent. I don't think we'll find a smoking gun among the docs given to the Committee - plenty of circumstantial evidence, of course, but nothing that rises to the level of "find me X number of votes that I am short of".

Actually I think his actions in the Georgia case ARE the evidence of his intent on the 6th. It’s all part of the same thing.

Not a good week for Rudy

Anonymous wrote:

Barr rendered his legal opinion in the form of a resignation, including a statement that he saw no evidence of voter fraud - the day after this draft Executive Order was being circulated.

This is evidence Trump knew the effor was illegal.

And yet, Barr sat on his thumbs.