• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

January 6th Pelosi's Fault

A

Aaron

Member
Site Supporter
JonC

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
I was working HVAC and the homeowner had a stack of Democrat magazines. I couldn't help but notice on the cover an accusation that Bush and the GOP of assassination for shooting Paul Wellstone's plane down. The guy had highlighted the "evidence".

I guess both sides have their outlets and their sheeple.
 
A

AustinC

Well-Known Member
Aaron said:
‘January 6th Was Pelosi’s Fault’: House Republicans’ Investigative Report Unveils Counter Narrative Of U.S. Capitol Riot | The Daily Wire

Text messages and emails from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) office reveal her staff held regular meetings discussing security detail, helped edit authorities’ plans, and turned down several requests from federal law enforcement needed to protect the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021.​
Click to expand...
LOL, the alt right needs to suck it up and take the blame already instead of concocting conspiracy theory after conspiracy theory.
 
R

RighteousnessTemperance&

Well-Known Member
What they're unsurprisingly up against:

This report goes to great lengths to protect the identities of the line officers and analysts who participated in interviews. Sources who cooperated with this investigation described retaliation by USCP leadership for their participation in this investigation and other investigations into the events of January 6, 2021. Additionally, the Staff Director for the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol, David Buckley, has a track record of acting in a retaliatory manner against whistleblowers. For those reasons, this report uses “USCP source” to cite or otherwise refer to conversations with USCP employees who are not in leadership positions.​
 
R

RighteousnessTemperance&

Well-Known Member
Specifically, the leader of the USCP Intelligence and Interagency Coordination Division failed to warn USCP leadership and line officers about the threat of violence, despite the fact that IICD analysts gathered intelligence that clearly indicated a need for a hardened security posture. In fact, IICD’s leader—Julie Farnam—spent the weeks leading up to January 6, 2021 attempting to overhaul the division, including by reassigning expert intelligence analysts to new roles and creating new processes for synthesizing threat data. Information about planned protests and threats of violence were siloed and not properly analyzed and disseminated during this key period because of Farnam’s misplaced priorities. One IICD analyst testified to investigators: “That unit was disbanded by her almost on day one. We, at the time of January 6, we were not doing proactive searches of social media like we had been before. We were strictly reactive and responding to requests for information.” This is also substantiated by USCP’s own internal after-action report that was drafted in June of 2021.​
 
A

Aaron

Member
Site Supporter
Well, when you get a truthful report and analysis of the event as highlighted in the EpochTV documentary, scant room is left for any other conclusion that she didn't want the DC Police, DOJ and other Dem operatives impeded in their instigation of violence.
 
R

Revmitchell

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Aaron said:
‘January 6th Was Pelosi’s Fault’: House Republicans’ Investigative Report Unveils Counter Narrative Of U.S. Capitol Riot | The Daily Wire

Text messages and emails from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) office reveal her staff held regular meetings discussing security detail, helped edit authorities’ plans, and turned down several requests from federal law enforcement needed to protect the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021.​
Click to expand...

Notice those who mock the op have yet been unable to deal with the facts laid out in it. They just cry "Conspiracy Theory" with no support.

What is clear is that it was widely known that the speaker of the house had control of the security of the capitol. Questions were asked why Pelosi didn't do better with it. Those who asked that question were only mocked for doing so. This country is based on questioning our government. American government is, by its very nature, not trusted. It is not supposed to be trusted yet those who have no understanding of the founding of our country and only look for rulers and Kings, mock those who live by the founding of this country calling us names, leveling personal attacks, never presenting any facts. The left has nothing else to defend their often illegal and immoral behavior so that use the only tool they have.

The facts are Pelosi and the rest of the extreme far left said she had no control of the security of the Capitol of which an example is found here and here. Yet now we have facts that show:

"Text messages and emails from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) office reveal her staff held regular meetings discussing security detail, helped edit authorities’ plans, and turned down several requests from federal law enforcement needed to protect the United States Capitol on"

Further:

"Former Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund, who resigned after the riot, told The Washington Post that the House speaker’s authorities turned down requests for preemptive deployment of the National Guard six times before January 6."


So what they do is quickly create a narrative and then immediately work to quash any attempt to prove otherwise and in doing so cry out there is not evidence to support otherwise all the while working to stop and questions or investigations of the situations. It is intellectual dishonesty.
 
R

RighteousnessTemperance&

Well-Known Member
Revmitchell said:
…
Those who asked that question were only mocked for doing so. This country is based on questioning our government. American government is, by its very nature, not trusted. It is not supposed to be trusted yet those who have no understanding of the founding of our country and only look for rulers and Kings, mock those who live by the founding of this country calling us names, leveling personal attacks, never presenting any facts. …
Click to expand...
Yes, government by its very nature is not to be trusted. And Americanism, by definition, does not trust any government for that reason. It is our heritage and our obligation, and it is being thrown out, bathwater, baby, and tub.

But the problem goes even further, deeper.

Somehow, the American public transitioned itself into an unquestioning mass when it comes to mainstream news media. The level of uncritical thinking has become bizarre.

Getting some facts wrong is one thing. And degree of discernment will vary. But surrendering one’s thinking entirely to others is another matter. It is un-American, and definitely not Christian.
 
A

AustinC

Well-Known Member
RighteousnessTemperance& said:
Yes, government by its very nature is not to be trusted. And Americanism, by definition, does not trust any government for that reason. It is our heritage and our obligation, and it is being thrown out, bathwater, baby, and tub.

But the problem goes even further, deeper.

Somehow, the American public transitioned itself into an unquestioning mass when it comes to mainstream news media. The level of uncritical thinking has become bizarre.

Getting some facts wrong is one thing. And degree of discernment will vary. But surrendering one’s thinking entirely to others is another matter. It is un-American, and definitely not Christian.
Click to expand...
This is a narrative that you want to believe (that the majority don't question the news). People question the news that doesn't fit their narrative. Therefore, since your narrative is different from the mainstream news, you question it. If the mainstream news told your narrative, you would believe it and your opponents would complain about the mainstream news.

One thing communication companies have done well is to polarize people so that they can never agree on a narrative. It's great for them as they can generate much more $$$ when people argue. In fact, the owners of the BB love it when we argue because they get more clicks and more revenue. Even the BB enjoys arguing and we play right into the revenue stream.
 
R

RighteousnessTemperance&

Well-Known Member
AustinC said:
This is a narrative that you want to believe (that the majority don't question the news). People question the news that doesn't fit their narrative. Therefore, since your narrative is different from the mainstream news, you question it. If the mainstream news told your narrative, you would believe it and your opponents would complain about the mainstream news.

One thing communication companies have done well is to polarize people so that they can never agree on a narrative. It's great for them as they can generate much more $$$ when people argue. In fact, the owners of the BB love it when we argue because they get more clicks and more revenue. Even the BB enjoys arguing and we play right into the revenue stream.
Click to expand...
Stuff and nonsense.

No media source should be trusted entirely. (Believe me. :Wink) Ditto for other political entities.

The BB does not generate the controversy, and is blameless for our own.

Shallow, thoughtless responses are a deserved magnet for criticism. (And that’s a gotcha. :Wink)

Oh, and go for the truth rather than a narrative. That would cut down on the polarization "big league."
 
A

AustinC

Well-Known Member
RighteousnessTemperance& said:
Stuff and nonsense.

No media source should be trusted entirely. (Believe me. :Wink) Ditto for other political entities.

The BB does not generate the controversy, and is blameless for our own.

Shallow, thoughtless responses are a deserved magnet for criticism. (And that’s a gotcha. :Wink)

Oh, and go for the truth rather than a narrative. That would cut down on the polarization "big league."
Click to expand...
You certainly have a narrative that you have memorized and express. Even now you rail against a different narrative than your own.
 
R

RighteousnessTemperance&

Well-Known Member
AustinC said:
You certainly have a narrative that you have memorized and express. Even now you rail against a different narrative than your own.
Click to expand...
Well, I certainly would never claim I have no bias.

And I don't mind if you wish to counter my comments with some evidence against the BB.

Or if you have an unimpeachable news source that is always right in every point and presents the entirety of every issue it covers.

Or even if you wish to demonstrate narrative rather than truth at work in my last post.

How's that for railing? :Wink
 
P

percho

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Methinks there are millions of dollars spent on the free press.

Free?

Just who writes the narrative? How many sides are actually seen?

When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume, among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

Did they trust government? What does the second chapter of Daniel have to say; Is it a contrast of government of men and government of God? On the Earth?

BREAKING: Newly Uncovered Emails PROVE Pelosi DIRECTLY Involved in the J6 Riots 12-23-22 Next News N (bitchute.com)
 
JonC

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
All sides were to blame. I don't think Trump wanted the violence. But that did occur due to some of his blatantly false statements (like the Dominion fraud that turned out to be fake) and his spurring on nonsense (like his call for Pence to stop the procedure).

But the DNC also created the atmosphere with their false claims about Trump.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top