Capitol Insurrection / rebellion thread

[Edge-]

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/0...perry-00035411

Then-White House chief of staff Mark Meadows burned papers in his office after meeting with a House Republican who was working to challenge the 2020 election, according to testimony the Jan. 6 select committee has heard from one of his former aides.

Cassidy Hutchinson, who worked under Meadows when he was former President Donald Trump’s chief of staff, told the panel investigating the Capitol attack that she saw Meadows incinerate documents after a meeting in his office with Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.). A person familiar with the testimony described it on condition of anonymity.

Isn't this illegal?

[some guy]

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/0...perry-00035411



Isn't this illegal?

Only when the democrats do it.

[Verdugo]

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/0...perry-00035411



Isn't this illegal?

IsnT tHIS beTRAying the pUBlic TRUST?

[Edge-]

https://apnews.com/article/californi...02eb5cccd4e686

A California man pleaded guilty Friday to plotting to blow up the state Democratic Party’s headquarters in what prosecutors said was the first in a planned series of politically-motivated attacks after the defeat of former President Donald Trump.

Ian Benjamin Rogers, 46, of Napa, pleaded guilty to conspiring to destroy a building by fire or explosives, possessing an explosive device and possessing a machine gun under a plea agreement that could bring him seven to nine years in federal prison.

U.S. prosecutors in San Francisco charged Rogers and Jarrod Copeland with conspiring to attack targets they associated with Democrats after Trump’s defeat in the November 2020 presidential election.

The pair “hoped their attacks would prompt a movement,” prosecutors said when they announced the charges in July.

Copeland, 38, previously pleaded guilty to conspiracy and destruction of records.

More on the attempts of Republicans to engage in political violence in pursuit of "The Big Lie".

[gondrin]

Well, seems like jury trials for these folks are going to be a bad thing.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...253e9e75163644

U.S. prosecutors get guilty verdict in Capitol riot case, extending win streak

The U.S. Justice Department on Friday extended its streak of victories in jury trials against rioters who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, securing a guilty verdict in its prosecution of a New Jersey man facing a felony charge.

After less than a day of deliberation, a federal jury in the District of Columbia found Timothy Hale-Cusanelli guilty of all five counts he faced, including obstruction of an official proceeding, a felony carrying a statutory maximum penalty of 20 years in prison.

U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden will sentence Hale-Cusanelli on Sept. 16.

Hale-Cusanelli is a former member of the U.S. Army Reserves who works as a Navy contractor with a “secret” security clearance and access to weapons, prosecutors said.

An informant told investigators that Hale-Cusanelli was “an avowed white supremacist and Nazi sympathizer” who posts online videos espousing extreme political opinions, the Justice Department alleged in court filings.

Hale-Cusanelli was the fifth Capitol riot defendant to take his case to a jury trial. The Justice Department has secured convictions in all five cases.

Prosecutors have been less successful in the two cases to culminate in non-jury trials. Both of those trials were overseen by McFadden, who partially acquitted one defendant while fully acquitting another.

Video footage from the riot showed Hale-Cusanelli yelling at police officers outside the Capitol complex and entering the building after it was breached.

Hale-Cusanelli's defense lawyer argued that his client did not realize Congress was counting electoral votes on Jan. 6, 2021, and therefore lacked a criminal intent.

Thousands of people stormed the Capitol that day to try to keep Congress from certifying current President Joe Biden’s victory over then-President Donald Trump, a Republican. More than 800 face criminal charges.

[Edge-]

Well, seems like jury trials for these folks are going to be a bad thing.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...253e9e75163644

Hale-Cusanelli's defense lawyer argued that his client did not realize Congress was counting electoral votes on Jan. 6, 2021, and therefore lacked a criminal intent.

Lol, that was literally the whole fuckin point of the riot.

[Fugus]

Lol, that was literally the whole fuckin point of the riot.

This is also relevant with how he was an avowed nazi and white supremacist on the government payroll while I literally made a thread with how the Republican's just blocked a bill that would have required the government not employ such mentally damaged individuals with one of them even saying that refusing to employee them and monitoring these hate groups would be a form of thought police.

[Edge-]

This is also relevant with how he was an avowed nazi and white supremacist on the government payroll while I literally made a thread with how the Republican's just blocked a bill that would have required the government not employ such mentally damaged individuals with one of them even saying that refusing to employee them and monitoring these hate groups would be a form of thought police.

Add language in the bill about monitoring for "ANTIFA" and/or SEA ARE TEA have another crack at it. Let's see Republicans complain about it then.

[Fugus]

Add language in the bill about monitoring for "ANTIFA" and/or SEA ARE TEA have another crack at it. Let's see Republicans complain about it then.

They would try and amend away the language targeting nazi's and white supremacists while trying to do it with a vote where their individual votes weren't recorded and then block it if it failed.

[Edge-]

They would try and amend away the language targeting nazi's and white supremacists while trying to do it with a vote where their individual votes weren't recorded and then block it if it failed.

It's an all or nothing deal. Either they care about it or they don't, and if they don't then highlight how every Republican voted against legislation to try to keep ANTIFA out of the federal government.

The greatest threat to a politician, especially a Republican, is the threat of losing their seat. Make that a perpetual threat for every Republican no matter how, until they start trying to be a functional political party with a coherent ideology and a desire to actually govern.

[Fugus]

It's an all or nothing deal. Either they care about it or they don't, and if they don't then highlight how every Republican voted against legislation to try to keep ANTIFA out of the federal government.

The greatest threat to a politician, especially a Republican, is the threat of losing their seat. Make that a perpetual threat for every Republican no matter how, until they start trying to be a functional political party with a coherent ideology and a desire to actually govern.

I so wish it could come down to that, but the GOP knows that, even if they were to go after ANTIFA, they would be going after a red herring at best and it wouldn't be politically worth it if it meant kicking their supporters out of government positions as that would also cause a massive run to find out which of them were both fascists and antifacists which would work against them far more than it worked for them.

They would vote down the bill and create their own version that intentionally excluded the nazi's and supremacists before they willingly allowed one to actually target them.

[Endus]

I so wish it could come down to that, but the GOP knows that, even if they were to go after ANTIFA, they would be going after a red herring at best and it wouldn't be politically worth it if it meant kicking their supporters out of government positions as that would also cause a massive run to find out which of them were both fascists and antifacists which would work against them far more than it worked for them.

Regarding the bold; that's super easy.

Do you oppose Antifa and antifascism? Yes?

Then you're a fascist.

It's like trying to determine who's a democrat (small-D) and who's opposed to democracy as a concept. It's a binary question.

And sure, there's room for a "Who? What? Fuck off and let me eat my Skittles in peace" option in and around that binary. But if you've got a stance, you're gonna fall into one of the two camps without any real room for confusion as to which camp that is.

Not that "Meh, I don't care if fascists take over, I'm eating Skittles leave me alone" is that laudable a stance, but I wanted to be clear they're not fascists, themselves. Just those who watch fascist takeovers happen without opposition because they're supremely self-interested.

[cubby]

For everyone who thought the DoJ was ignoring the big fish we have our first confirmation that they most assuredly are not.

Peter Navarro, a former White House aide to Donald Trump, says he’s been served a grand jury subpoena by federal prosecutors probing the Jan. 6 insurrection — and claims they have asked for records of “any communications” with the former president.

In a draft lawsuit that Navarro began circulating Monday, the former Trump trade adviser said “two FBI special agents banged loudly on my door in the early morning hours” on May 26 and served him a subpoena signed by Matthew Graves, the U.S. attorney for Washington, D.C.

Navarro declined to provide a copy of the subpoena and claimed in the draft lawsuit that it was connected to his refusal to testify to the Jan. 6 select committee, which issued a congressional subpoena for his testimony in February. The House in April recommended that the Justice Department charge Navarro with contempt of Congress. But it would be unusual if a grand jury subpoena were related to his potential contempt case, since he would likely be the target of such a probe and less likely to be asked for testimony.

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/0...trump-00035904

That Grand Jury subpoena has nothing to do with his Jan 6 Committee testimony, in case anyone was wondering.

[Edge-]

https://thehill.com/policy/national-...committee-doj/

Former Trump White House economic adviser Peter Navarro formally filed suit Tuesday against the Jan. 6 committee and the Department of Justice (DOJ) in a case where he will be acting as his own attorney.

The filing comes after Navarro released a draft of the suit Monday evening, revealing he has likewise been the subject of a grand jury subpoena by Matthew Graves, the U.S. attorney for D.C.

According to Navarro, the latest subpoena from the DOJ seeks largely the same set of materials as a February subpoena from the House committee investigating the attack, which asked about his communications with former President Trump as well as his work promoting his claims of widespread election fraud.

Navarro said his lawsuit is mainly directed at the committee, but he included DOJ in his suit after being served the subpoena early Monday morning as he was finalizing his lawsuit.

This isn't Tom Cotton, but lets see if this bold strategy pays off for him all the same.

[Edge-]

Miss the above posts?

Apparently, yes.

[postman1782]

For everyone who thought the DoJ was ignoring the big fish we have our first confirmation that they most assuredly are not.



https://www.politico.com/news/2022/0...trump-00035904

What is really funny, is that he, not a lawyer, tried to write an 88 page reason why he couldn't come to the grand jury, because the January 6th committee is "unlawful and therefore any subpoena issued to him is unenforceable under current law". lol

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...b62_story.html

[Edge-]

What is really funny, is that he, not a lawyer, tried to write an 88 page reason why he couldn't come to the grand jury, because the January 6th committee is "unlawful and therefore any subpoena issued to him is unenforceable under current law". lol

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...b62_story.html

Never seen an economist defend themselves in court, but I'm kinda curious to see how this plays out. If it even makes it to court.

[postman1782]

Never seen an economist defend themselves in court, but I'm kinda curious to see how this plays out. If it even makes it to court.

There is no way this makes it to the SCOTUS likes he wants it to. They won't even hear it.

[wunksta]

The Select Committee to Investigate the January 6 Attack on the United States Capitol on Tuesday gave Champaign County’s Jim Jordan until June 11 to answer its questions about his role in former President Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.

In doing so, it provided a timeline of Jordan’s “meetings, calls and communications” with Trump administration officials to pursue that goal.

On Nov. 6, 2020 - the day before the election was called for Democrat Joe Biden - it says Jordan requested a call with then-Attorney General William Barr and communicated with White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows “regarding efforts to pressure Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolfe to audit his state’s election results.”

On Nov. 9, 2020, it says he participated in a meeting with senior White House officials where he developed a “blueprint” for the Trump campaign’s post-election strategy: hammering home the idea that the election was tainted, announcing legal actions taken by the campaign and bolstering the case with allegations of fraud.

On Nov. 14, 2020, it says he participated in a meeting between Trump campaign officials and Members of Congress where Rudy Giuliani told attendees that the campaign’s messaging would “cast doubt on the election by calling Democrats ‘crooks,” linking Dominion Voting Systems to Hugo Chavez and Nicolas Maduro and characterizing Dominion’s CEO as an ‘Antifa donor.’”

In December 2020, it says President Trump told others that he was “trying to find out what happened” with respect to various election fraud allegations.

On Dec. 21, 2020, it says he participated in a meeting with Trump, Vice President Mike Pence, Trump’s legal team and more than a dozen federal legislators about the planning and strategy for challenging the electoral certification.

On Jan. 5, 2021, it says he communicated with Meadows to pass along advice that Pence should “call out al the electoral votes that he believes are unconstitutional as no electoral votes at all.”

On the day of the riot, it says Jordan spoke to Trump for ten minutes at 9:24 a.m. and at least once after congressional leaders were evacuated to a secure location after the U.S. Capitol was attacked. That afternoon, he also told Meadows that Trump’s “various congressional supporters seemed increasingly less excited now that their revolt would be covered only by C-SPAN.”

https://www.cleveland.com/news/2022/...n-results.html

[postman1782]

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/jus...an-6-rcna30355

I don't know if anyone has posted this, since this happened 4 days ago. The government as the video from the "documentary film crew" and their audio, of Enrique Tarrio, the leader of the Proud Boys, meeting with Stewart Rhodes, in the days before January 6th, where all of them, including lawyers for Oathkeepers were literally conspiring to overthrow the government. I am trying to find a video of them all together, but almost all of them have been behind paywalls for some fucking reason.

I found a little bit of it, obviously from before the arrest of Stewart Rhodes, but you can clearly see them planning the attacks.
https://twitter.com/iamgabesanchez/s...28215063670784

And while I was looking on Twitter for the supposed footage I saw on Tiktok, I will see if I can link that too, I found this little gem from Peter Strzok, who has a reason to want to take Trump down. https://twitter.com/petestrzok/statu...06702094401539

What is pictured in Strzok's photo linked there, is Roger Stone, and he is texting a LOT OF PEOPLE on January 6th, this is from another "documentary", not sure if it is the same company following the other traitors, but it is showing that Roger Stone was messaging Joel Greenberg of the pedophile case with Matt Gaetz, might be why it keeps getting pushed back for his sentencing, and of course Stewart Rhodes and Enrique Tarrio. But there are other people that should be on that seditious conspiracy list.

Several of them are listed in the replies to Strzok, like Pastor Mark burns who was giving out orders on a bullhorn, a PAC called Palm Beach Patriots PAC, wonder if they are some sort of white nationalist group.

My only question is, why isn't Roger Stone in the cells next to Tarrio and Rhodes? Since he was clearly in on the fucking conspiracy.