The best for anti-democracy, right wing pawns.
Right wing disinformation.
RF isn't a fellowship site for right wing extremists, so I'm not sure why you think you can post these non-facts and believe it won't make you look foolish.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Appeals court: 'There is a direct linkage' between Trump and Capitol riots
- Thread starter anna.
- Start date
RF isn't a fellowship site for right wing extremists, so I'm not sure why you think you can post these non-facts and believe it won't make you look foolish.
ecco
Veteran Member
And now there is this...
Meadows texts show Hannity, Don Jr. wanted Trump to stop Jan. 6 riot
BY SCOTT WONG AND MIKE LILLIS - 12/13/21 07:43 PM EST
As rioters stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, several leading Fox News pundits and Donald Trump’s eldest son all voiced desperate concerns that the former president was doing nothing to quell the violence and protect those in the building, according to damning text messages unveiled Monday night by the select committee investigating the attack.
The stunning messages, submitted to the panel by Mark Meadows, Trump’s former chief of staff, revealed that Sean Hannity, Brian Kilmeade and Laura Ingraham — all superstar Fox personalities with enormous conservative followings — and Donald Trump, Jr. were all pressing Meadows to convince the president to intervene during the early hours of the siege.
“He's got to condemn this **** ASAP,” Donald Trump Jr. texted Meadows as the attack was underway.
“I'm pushing it hard. I agree,” Meadows replied.
But when the president still did not act, his eldest son reached out again to Trump’s chief of staff, according to Jan. 6 Committee Vice Chair Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.), who read the series of texts during a hearing Monday night.
“We need an Oval Office address. He has to lead now. It has gone too far and gotten out of hand,” Trump Jr. texted.
BY SCOTT WONG AND MIKE LILLIS - 12/13/21 07:43 PM EST
As rioters stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, several leading Fox News pundits and Donald Trump’s eldest son all voiced desperate concerns that the former president was doing nothing to quell the violence and protect those in the building, according to damning text messages unveiled Monday night by the select committee investigating the attack.
The stunning messages, submitted to the panel by Mark Meadows, Trump’s former chief of staff, revealed that Sean Hannity, Brian Kilmeade and Laura Ingraham — all superstar Fox personalities with enormous conservative followings — and Donald Trump, Jr. were all pressing Meadows to convince the president to intervene during the early hours of the siege.
“He's got to condemn this **** ASAP,” Donald Trump Jr. texted Meadows as the attack was underway.
“I'm pushing it hard. I agree,” Meadows replied.
But when the president still did not act, his eldest son reached out again to Trump’s chief of staff, according to Jan. 6 Committee Vice Chair Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.), who read the series of texts during a hearing Monday night.
“We need an Oval Office address. He has to lead now. It has gone too far and gotten out of hand,” Trump Jr. texted.
anna.
but mostly it's the same
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse:
"The appeals court’s decision allowing the House 1/6 Commission access to Archives records over Trump’s objection is notable in at least two ways. First, on pages 6-9 it provides a forceful factual recitation of what took place that day, that is now an official U.S. judicial finding of fact. Four powerful pages. Second, it coldly takes down Trump’s arguments. I’m glad I’m not his lawyers reading this!"
"The appeals court’s decision allowing the House 1/6 Commission access to Archives records over Trump’s objection is notable in at least two ways. First, on pages 6-9 it provides a forceful factual recitation of what took place that day, that is now an official U.S. judicial finding of fact. Four powerful pages. Second, it coldly takes down Trump’s arguments. I’m glad I’m not his lawyers reading this!"
anna.
but mostly it's the same
CHENEY: "These non-privileged texts are further evidence that President Trump's supreme dereliction of duty during those 187 minutes and Mr. Meadows' testimony will bear on another key question before this committee. Did Donald Trump, through action or inaction, corruptly seek to obstruct or impede congress' official proceedings to count electoral votes?"
ecco
Veteran Member
IOW: You ain't got no case!
The findings are very similar to what the courts found regarding his rigged election claims - all 60 of them.
Sgt. Pepper
All you need is love.
Sorry, but your assertion about Donald Trump isn't a fact, but rather a subjective personal opinion. According to the recent C-SPAN survey, the Presidential Historians Survey 2021, Trump ranked among the worst presidents in American history. He is ranked at No. 41 overall out of 44 presidents, which is the lowest ranking of any president in the past 150 years. In fact, the only presidents who ranked lower than him were Franklin Pierce, Andrew Johnson, and James Buchanan (my source: Historians rank Trump among worst presidents in US history, new C-SPAN survey shows). This survey also ranks Trump: Experts rank best and worst presidents.
If you post an accusatory claim like this against President Biden, and his son, then you need to substantiate it with actual facts from reliable news sources, that aren't far-right Trump-loving QAnon propaganda sites or forums. Otherwise, it won't be taken seriously.
Last edited:
ecco
Veteran Member
Hmm, no response. That's not surprising in the least.
Sgt. Pepper
All you need is love.
It doesn't surprise me, either. Ignoring uncomfortable facts that undeniably contradict their stated opinions seems to be a common occurrence with Trump supporters. As a matter of fact, I'm being ignored by another Trump supporter on this forum, who blasted the Democrats by accusing them of mistreating LGBT people, but I simply reminded him (twice in the same thread) that LGBT rights were constantly under attack while Trump was the president. In fact, a number of laws were passed while he was the president that endangered LGBT rights. I basically told this person that I thought it was disingenuous of him to criticize the Democrats about their poor treatment of LGBT people when he doesn't criticize Trump for implementing anti-LGBT legislation. Of course, I haven't heard a word from this person yet about my posts, and I don't expect to, either. The articles below are the ones I linked in my other posts.
A timeline of Trump’s anti-LGBTQ actions
How Trump Made 2017 a Horrific Year for LGBT Rights
Trump Attacked LGBT Rights in 2018, and He’s Far From Done
Here Are the Worst Anti-LGBT Bills to Watch for in 2019
Trump finalizes rollback of LGBTQ patient protections (2020)
First 100 Days: How President Trump Has Impacted LGBTQ Rights
Trump administration rolls back protections for transgender students
Trump promised to be LGBTQ-friendly. His first year in office proved it was a giant con
The Discrimination Administration: Trump’s record of action against transgender people
Trump’s record on LGBTQ rights has been vile from the moment he took office. We kept a list.
Last edited:
Wandering Monk
Well-Known Member
CHENEY: "These non-privileged texts are further evidence that President Trump's supreme dereliction of duty during those 187 minutes and Mr. Meadows' testimony will bear on another key question before this committee. Did Donald Trump, through action or inaction, corruptly seek to obstruct or impede congress' official proceedings to count electoral votes?"
I think this is an allusion to Federal Law: Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees
1727. Protection Of Government Processes -- Omnibus Clause -- 18 U.S.C. 1505
anna.
but mostly it's the same
Yes, I think so, I don't understand all the legalese, but from WaPo there was this referencing
"18 U.S. Code § 1512":
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/12/14/liz-cheney-trump-crime/