BillsFanNC
-
Posts
23,500 -
Joined
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by BillsFanNC
-
-
3 hours ago, ChiGoose said:
Here ya go: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/25/us/politics/capitol-riot-fbi-informant.htmlOnly Republicans have testified before the committee. The real divider isn’t between Dems and the GOP, it’s between who will testify under oath and who won’t.
The people who agree with you are all lying so they won’t testify. And when they do, they either say different things than they do in public or they plead the fifth. Because they are lying to you. And they know it.
And you obviously care about the committee because you are spending so much time here on PPP talking about it.
You’re game is weak as hell, man. Just give it up.
So you're going with the FBI is incompetent then. Im shocked. The FBI, the world's premier law enforcement agency, knows the plans of a dangerous group of unarmed "insurrectionists" ahead of time, yet they were powerless to stop them from marching to the Capitol in the first place, then breach the restricted area and finally against all odds actually break into the Capitol?
How about $5MM for that oceanfront Nebraska property?
You have no game. Zero.
-
There seems to be many on the left who remain unaware of the political shift that occurred in the GOP post 2016.
From the moment Trump won the GOP nomination the party spilt. You had traditional Republicans and then Rinos/Never Trumpers.
Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger are and always have been squarely in the Rino/NeverTrump camp.
Rinos/NeverTrumpers oppose and hold in contempt Trump and his supporters every single bit as much as Democrats do.
So you can play word games and call this sham committee "bipartisan" all you wish. It's simply yet another example in a long line of examples of where you've been had, bamboozled, hoodwinked, duped, scammed etc..
The reality is that this committee is uber partisan on the only issue that matters: Disdain for Trump and anyone who aligns with him.
This is why not only is it not working, it's backfiring. The majority of Americans are more likely to believe the opposite of whatever stories this committee weaves.
-
1
-
-
-
And to think that we just had the most secure election in US history!
-
5 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:
You’re the one jumping to conclusions all the time, here. We have a bunch of people saying essentially “let’s see what the committee has” and you’re out here implying the FBI was in on it and that you already know everything they are going to present all while castigating others for jumping to conclusions.Mmmhmm. Again, any comment on "The Old Gray Lady" reporting on at least one FBI informant being present with the proud boys in DC as they were in the pre-process of an insurrection? Or are you waiting on the committee to tell you why the FBI could be so spectacularly incompetent?
It's on you if you're going to wait for a partisan sham committee to tell you what to think before "jumping to conclusions"
I don't give a rats ass what this sham committee says.
It ain't working dude.
-
-
10 hours ago, L Ron Burgundy said:
How does it not compute? Some that were there were peaceful and along for the ride others, oathkeepers and proud twatz had a more sinister agenda. It's not that difficult. A lot of detail still needs to be provided, certainly why more security wasn't present.
Ok. So then maybe the rhetoric of it being the worst attack on our democracy since the Civil War was just a smidgen overblown? Jumping to crazy conclusions just a bit?
Also, any comment on why the FBI was unable to thwart the dangerous Proud Boys when they had at least one informant in their midst that day texting the FBI real time updates as they marched towards the Capitol?
They knew they were coming to stage a coup and the friggin FBI couldn't thwart it? Please.
Let's talk about that Nebraska ocean front property.
-
2 hours ago, reddogblitz said:
One thing I find interesting about this Ray Epps thing is he said the day before we must go into the Capital. Then he is right there when the first baracade was breached. Yet he didn't go in. Why not?
Maybe only certain fed CHS's were authorized to enter the Capitol without fear of being charged. Like this one.
-
7 hours ago, DRsGhost said:
Oh.
https://news.yahoo.com/proud-boys-member-fbi-informant-153441490.html
The records appear to show the FBI had advanced knowledge that Proud Boys members were headed toward the Capitol.
So let's get this straight, the FBI had informants among the proud boys providing them with information that they were heading to the Capitol to stage an INSURRECTION!
And yet they were helpless to thwart it. The FBI with all of its vast resources couldn't stop a rag tag bunch of LARPers from storming the US Capitol and staging an "insurrection" ?
So again either the FBI is extraordinarily incompetent.....
Or far more likely they were in on it. You know like in Michigan with the attempted "kidnapping" of Whitmer.
I suppose the NYT and Yahoo are not credible sources and provide "nothing of substance" here either.
No comments yet?
Fed informant with the proud boys on J6.
Knowledge in real time before they got there that they were marching to storm the Capitol and do the insurrection.
And the FBI failed to stop it.
How can this be? I mean cmon the FBI man!
I'm certain that the commission will address this as part of the law enforcement failures as well.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:
One of the five investigative teams on the committee has a specific task of investigating the law enforcement failures.
So I would expect to see something about this at some point.
And that video I linked to above I 100% guarantee you will not be part of the story.
You can't have it both ways and call it an insurrection and the most violent attack on our democracy since the Civil War and also show videos like that and others. The qanon shaman is one of the poster boys for the "violent insurrection" and then you watch that video....
Im sorry, it does not compute. Quite the conundrum indeed.
-
Interesting too how that scene is being described as law enforcement being "overrun" by "insurrectionists" who simply stood there calmly discussing things with the police about remaining peaceful.
Such conspiracy theories!
-
2 hours ago, ChiGoose said:
Everyone has pulled out their jump to conclusions mat, assuming they know the answers to ongoing investigations.
I don’t know why some officers were standing around. Maybe since they were so outnumbered and overwhelmed at that point, they decided just to try to prevent violence instead of pushing people out. Maybe they were rooting for the rioters. Maybe they were incompetent.
I would like to see what, if anything, the committee has on this. I would like to know what, if anything, the DoJ is doing about it.
But what I’m not going to do is assume I know all of the information gathered in these investigations before it’s released or the hearings are done. Because that would just be partisan nonsense.
52 minutes ago, L Ron Burgundy said:I think the most logical explanation for why some of those scumbags were let in is just as you pointed out, they were already outnumbered and overrun. There was no way they could have kept people out.
Of course I'm sure we'll hear 10 more conspiracies about what happened there before all is said and done.
We know multiple requests for extra security were denied before and during J6.
So then logically both of you agree that the commission will ask hard questions and provide solid answers as to why multiple requests for additional security were denied given that the security on J6 at the Capitol proved insuffucient. This is unacceptable, right?
I mean they were overrun, that shouldn't ever be allowed to happen and yet we know requests were denied. I'm sure we'll get answers though!
2 hours ago, ChiGoose said:
Everyone has pulled out their jump to conclusions mat, assuming they know the answers to ongoing investigations.
I don’t know why some officers were standing around. Maybe since they were so outnumbered and overwhelmed at that point, they decided just to try to prevent violence instead of pushing people out. Maybe they were rooting for the rioters. Maybe they were incompetent.
I would like to see what, if anything, the committee has on this. I would like to know what, if anything, the DoJ is doing about it.
But what I’m not going to do is assume I know all of the information gathered in these investigations before it’s released or the hearings are done. Because that would just be partisan nonsense.
52 minutes ago, L Ron Burgundy said:I think the most logical explanation for why some of those scumbags were let in is just as you pointed out, they were already outnumbered and overrun. There was no way they could have kept people out.
Of course I'm sure we'll hear 10 more conspiracies about what happened there before all is said and done.
We know multiple requests for extra security were denied before and during J6.
So then logically both of you agree that the commission will ask hard questions and provide solid answers as to why multiple requests for additional security were denied given that the security on J6 at the Capitol proved insuffucient. This is unacceptable, right?
I mean they were overrun, that shouldn't ever be allowed to happen and yet we know requests were denied. I'm sure we'll get answers though!
-
1 hour ago, ChiGoose said:
The committee is divided into five teams with different goals. One of those teams is focused solely on the law enforcement failures.
So far in the hearings, they’ve mostly been focused on the events leading up to Jan 6, with only limited testimony on the events during the riot.
I would expect that they get to the report out from the law enforcement team in one of the upcoming hearings.
😀
Don't hold your breath.
And by law enforcement should be "disciplined" you mean arrested and charged for aiding an insurrection, right?
I mean we've been told this was the worst attack on our country since the Civil War, right?
I don't recall stories of US soldiers standing around doing nothing at Pearl Harbor, do you?
I also don't recall many scenes from 9/11 where police and first responders stood around doing nothing, do you?
Why haven't these police officers been arrested and charged with aiding the insurrection?
-
12 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:
If police or others let them in, they should be disciplined too.And maybe questioned by this committee? Nah, let's leave that part out of the narrative.
I see several officers in the background standing around doing absolutely nothing to expel the "insurrectionists"
Why?
-
19 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:
If he got into the chamber by force, then yes.You mean this guy?
Where you see a police officer allow them in as long as they "remain peaceful"?
You've all been had.
https://rumble.com/vh52u9-watch-u.s.-capitol-police-gave-protesters-ok-to-enter-capitol.html
-
So let's recap some recent coverage of the Proud Boys and the integral role that they played in the "insurrection".....with at least one FBI informant in their midst. The informant, as the NYT has reported, apparently relayed information well ahead of time that would allow, in any sane reality, the world's premier law enforcement outfit to thwart any ideas of an "insurrection"
Yet they weren't able to. Why?
It seems to me that this would be something the committee might ask about?
-
13 hours ago, Jauronimo said:
Insurrectionist is a direct reference to the source documents and interview with Nichols wife you linked.
https://amgreatness.com/2021/11/18/terror-in-the-capitol-tunnel/
God forbid I use the same language they do....when quoting them!
More cop outs. Can't stand by your ***** arguments. See you next time you peddle more drivel from AmericanGreatfarce.com. Next time, make sure you read the ***** you post so you recognize it when its quoted.
You forgot the " " around insurrectionist.
Maybe you're not aware, but in context insurrectionist is not the same as "insurrectionist"
You seem a little peeved. Aren't we having fun here?
-
1
-
-
14 hours ago, B-Man said:
Pssssssssst.
Hey Ghost,
Find out what the Official Juaronagoatski Approved list of sites we can use.
Only the ones that provide the "substance" that feed his confirmation bias.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Doc said:
Very very interesting.
Given the two choices here...
1. The FBI is incredibly incompetent.
Or.
2. They were in on it and wanted events to unfold as they did.
Our leftist friends are going to continue handwaving their way around #1.
-
Might as well put this in the "insurrection" thread too.
Ladies and gentlemen your FBI. Provided with knowledge beforehand, via an informant, that the dangerous, insurrectionist Proud Boys were marching to the Capitol
And yet still those unarmed, ferocious Proud Boys were able to storm the Capitol and nearly perform a successful coup!
-
1
-
-
Oh.
https://news.yahoo.com/proud-boys-member-fbi-informant-153441490.html
The records appear to show the FBI had advanced knowledge that Proud Boys members were headed toward the Capitol.
So let's get this straight, the FBI had informants among the proud boys providing them with information that they were heading to the Capitol to stage an INSURRECTION!
And yet they were helpless to thwart it. The FBI with all of its vast resources couldn't stop a rag tag bunch of LARPers from storming the US Capitol and staging an "insurrection" ?
So again either the FBI is extraordinarily incompetent.....
Or far more likely they were in on it. You know like in Michigan with the attempted "kidnapping" of Whitmer.
I suppose the NYT and Yahoo are not credible sources and provide "nothing of substance" here either.
-
17 minutes ago, LeGOATski said:
☝🏻️ This is a guy just having fun. Not taking this personally at all.
He apparently doesn't like Twitter, but constantly posts Tweets.
A guy who tells us that he doesn't use Twitter knows zero about how Twitter works. I'm shocked.
Here's some news for you, I don't care what platform or source you use for news. They all lie to you. Fox and right leaning sources included.
But carry on with all that you "know" about what you don't know.
I'm having a blast. Are you?
-
3 minutes ago, Jauronimo said:
Julie describes the event as Nichols just minding his own business who was then compelled to action by the brutality of police. Its exactly as I laid it out. Innocent bystander trying to save a little old lady who was apparently on a lot of methamphetamine. A quote from the Julie masterpiece you linked:
Thats a fanciful story and unfortunately it yet again minimizes his actions and omits most of the facts of what he did that day and why he is facing charges.
Believing everything Julie tells you is really working out well. It is fun to watch you squirm and try to wriggle your way out of yet another untenable position and preserve what little dignity you have left. Tossing out "strawman", total deflection, and appeals to emotion. Its unbecoming.
I don't care about his wife's sob story. Did it tug on your heartstrings? Dude was caught on tape, red handed and documented his crimes on social media. Notice neither his lawyer or his wife deny any of the charges. They just stick to the script that hes a veteran and couldn't possibly be an insurrectionist. He's far from the only vet facing charges. Jail sucks. I would not advise pursuing a course of action that lands you there.
Start a prison reform thread and show some concern for the 2 million other people serving hard time in the country with the highest incarceration rates in the world. Check out these political prisoners held without bail for years.
Insurrectionist.
Dude you're lost.
I take back my billstime comparison from earlier. You are a broken record.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, LeGOATski said:
You seem like you're having so much fun...
Because Twitter tells him it is.
Oh I am. It's fun having TDS morons like yourself show up from time to time to play with.
Lol. Twitter tells me. A leftist telling me that Twitter, friggin Twitter is telling me anything but leftist propaganda 95% of the time.
Good one dude. You got me.
-
1
-
The January 6th Commission To Investigate The Insurrection
in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
Posted
What part of the committee has less credibility than an Alex Jones Rachel Maddow lovechild don't you understand?
The fact that you're waiting on them to come to your conclusions tells everyone here all they need to know.
You aren't a serious poster.
And yet you arrived here all high falootin about being above it all.