• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

AIDE DETAILS TRUMP’S RAGE ON JAN. 6He Knew Crowd Was Armed, but Tried to Loosen Security, Testimony Recounts

No, the Secret Service doesn't even call it that. "Beast" is a media creation. Another indication that the story was made up.
She's not Secret Service. That's just quibbling.:rolleyes:
All the guy has to do is make a statement under oath like she did.
 
The Eastman plan wasn't illegal, you are confusing a bad legal argument for illegality.

Where does it say that the VP can decide which EC slates can be rejected?
 
"If the actions are found to have violated federal law" ... That's not much of an argument. THat's like calling you a criminal and when you ask for evidence I say "If you are found to have violated federal law..."
Eastman literally called it a violation of the electoral college act. In writing. In the same email he was telling someone to do it.
 
No, the Secret Service doesn't even call it that. "Beast" is a media creation. Another indication that the story was made up.

What new excuse are you going to make up when the story about trump wanting to lead his riot are confirmed?

I guess you’ll wait for Traitor Carlson to tell you what to say.
 
For all the boohooing about this being one sided.

There is an easy answer. Those on "the other side" testify under oath. Easy peasy.
Yeah, where are the Trump supporters willing to testify under oath in his defense? The closest we got was Ginni Thomas who talked a big game about telling the real truth and then backed out.
 
The real question is: why are these posters twisting themselves into pretzels trying to defend overturning an election by definitely sleazy and likely illegal means?
Because that's what they want. They want to steal the election, because winning is more important to them than democracy. They want power and will do whatever it takes to get it.
 
You're deliberately mischaracterizing our point. It's not hard to understand, so the confusion is deliberate on your part. You're trying hard to pretend to miss our point entirely. It's not working....

I'm not mischaracterizing your point. I've watched cpwill, and now you, drift all over the map trying to find ways to justify your assumptions using thin evidence with wide chasms between it and your crazy assertions and pretending that crazier assertions bridge the gaps.

I've honestly had enough of the 5 years of delusional bullshit that you folks swallow and then think you can regurgitate it like it's mana from heaven. Your arguments are full of shit spun from delusional assumptions. We are just on the Nth case of "the walls are closing in" and no doubt when you get disappointed by reality again you'll move on to the next narrative, and on and on ad nauseum.

I'm not wasting any more of my time on this branch of TDS and the DC show trial.
 
Rule 803 does not apply in Congressional hearings. Period. Consider your talking point refuted


It was not my talking point, if you bothered to follow the conversation.

You refuted nothing
 
She's not Secret Service. That's just quibbling.:rolleyes:
All the guy has to do is make a statement under oath like she did.
Again, she said that he said they were in the "Beast". They were not in that car, and the agent wouldn't call it that. Double lie.
 
What new excuse are you going to make up when the story about trump wanting to lead his riot are confirmed?

I guess you’ll wait for Traitor Carlson to tell you what to say.
Excuse? For her getting the car wrong and calling the wrong car by the wrong name? That's your department. I'd love to hear it.
 
Just like every plane that the POTUS travels in is Air Force One, whether its the 747 or the 757, or even if he were in a Piper Cub.
Nope, they don't call it that, the media does, not the Secret Service.
 
Again, she said that he said they were in the "Beast". They were not in that car, and the agent wouldn't call it that. Double lie.
What does any of that^ have to do with the thread topic, which is "Trump knew the crowd was armed, but 'tried' to loosen security." Why are you repeatedly avoiding addressing the 'actual' thread topic, and deflecting to what may, or may not have occurred in the vehicle? Time to come clean as to your repeated talk about off thread topic matters.
 
Nope, they don't call it that, the media does, not the Secret Service.

What does the SS call it ?

  • Technically, “Air Force One” is used to designate any Air Force aircraft carrying the President, but it is now standard practice to use the term to refer to specific planes that are equipped to transport the Commander-in-Chief.
 
What does any of that^ have to do with the thread topic, which is "Trump knew the crowd was armed, but 'tried' to loosen security." Why are you repeatedly avoiding addressing the 'actual' thread topic, and deflecting to what may, or may not have occurred in the vehicle? Time to come clean as to your repeated talk about off thread topic matters.
It's simple in his mind. Because she called the SUV "the Beast" that means her entire testimony can be thrown out. :rolleyes:
 
She's not Secret Service. That's just quibbling.:rolleyes:
All the guy has to do is make a statement under oath like she did.
"The guy" has testified under oath. Does it make you wonder why they haven't released his testimony?
 
It's simple in his mind. Because she called the SUV "the Beast" that means her entire testimony can be thrown out. :rolleyes:
On that note, she can correct her misspeak in the 'criminal' trial the DOJ will be filing/conducting in a court of law sometime in the future.
 
What does any of that^ have to do with the thread topic, which is "Trump knew the crowd was armed, but 'tried' to loosen security." Why are you repeatedly avoiding addressing the 'actual' thread topic, and deflecting to what may, or may not have occurred in the vehicle? Time to come clean as to your repeated talk about off thread topic matters.
Jeez, talk about deflecting... You are concerned about the thread topic? LOL! One of the best defections ever. Where was he supposedly in a rage about going to? LOL!

It's just so funny when libs have no answer, but feel they MUST answer with something.
 
What does the SS call it ?

  • Technically, “Air Force One” is used to designate any Air Force aircraft carrying the President, but it is now standard practice to use the term to refer to specific planes that are equipped to transport the Commander-in-Chief.
Sorry, that's classified. Well, it's not, but I'd have to go check, and it doesn't matter anyway, they still don't ever call it the Beast.
 
Jeez, talk about deflecting... You are concerned about the thread topic? LOL! One of the best defections ever. Where was he supposedly in a rage about going to? LOL!

It's just so funny when libs have no answer, but feel they MUST answer with something.

Do you admit that you were wrong on how "Air Force One is used"?
see post 2266.
 
She's not Secret Service. That's just quibbling.:rolleyes:
All the guy has to do is make a statement under oath like she did.
The Secret Service said their agents are available to testify. The committee doesn't want to ask them anything that would contradict CH's testimony.
 
Back
Top Bottom