Capitol Insurrection / rebellion thread

[postman1782]

Nothing says American Patriot like Gohmert giving flag flown over Congress to a convicted Insurrectionist.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/10/polit...edium=news_tab

I am glad that fucker is out of congress come January.

[Kaleredar]

Nothing says American Patriot like Gohmert giving flag flown over Congress to a convicted Insurrectionist.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/10/polit...edium=news_tab

They’re rapidly trying to rewrite the insurrection as a “patriotic display.”

I don’t think history will remember it like such.

[Edge-]

Nothing says American Patriot like Gohmert giving flag flown over Congress to a convicted Insurrectionist.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/10/polit...edium=news_tab

I'm fairly sure this is a false flag operation as I'm very skeptical he has the flag that was flown on Jan. 6 in his possession.

[bladeXcrasher]

I'm fairly sure this is a false flag operation as I'm very skeptical he has the flag that was flown on Jan. 6 in his possession.

Article just says recently flown flag, not from that day.

[Edge-]

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/tucke...b046aa02385c9b

Ah yes, the Jan. 6 "election justice protest". Not an assault on the Capitol. Not an insurrection. Not an attempted revolution with Elizabeth from Knoxville at the vanguard, getting pepper sprayed in the face.

But an "election justice protest".

Conservative rebranding and fiction continues to really really suck.

[Edge-]

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/0...-term-00057110

"Camp Auschwitz" guy goes to jail for 75 days.

Brennwald added that Packer was offended and angry to be labeled a white supremacist “because he doesn’t see himself that way at all.” The defense lawyer said Packer wanted him to sue House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for linking him to white supremacy during a press conference several days after the riot

I mean...if you're wearing Nazi shit yeah, you're a white supremacist. And a Nazi. Surely he's a nice guy though, right?

Packer is a self-employed pipe fitter. Prosecutors say he has a lengthy criminal record, with approximately 21 convictions, mostly for drunken driving and other motor vehicle violations.

Oh...well maybe still, but he's a troubled "nice guy"?

Nah, probably not. Anyone who casually wears Nazi shit is not a nice person. Ever.

[postman1782]

https://twitter.com/January6thCmte/s...19072319709184

January 6th recording of the Oathkeepers threatening to kill sitting members of congress, simply because Trump didn't say to not attack them like he said to not attack the Capitol Police. Every single one of these dumbasses needs to be in prison, for not only fucking seditious conspiracy, but literal terrorism and treason.

[Edge-]

https://twitter.com/January6thCmte/s...19072319709184

January 6th recording of the Oathkeepers threatening to kill sitting members of congress, simply because Trump didn't say to not attack them like he said to not attack the Capitol Police. Every single one of these dumbasses needs to be in prison, for not only fucking seditious conspiracy, but literal terrorism and treason.

They just so desperately want to be allowed to kill people without consequence.

These are the types of people who need some kind of system or institution to prevent them from doing things like murdering and raping, because without the threat of natural or supernatural punishment they'd go all murder-rapey all the time.

Meanwhile the rest of us sit here like...not wanting to kill people without needing to be scared into that behavior by natural or supernatural powers.

[gondrin]

This could belong in multiple threads, I'll post it to this one too since it fits here also. The GOP are 4 states away from having enough to be able to call a Constitutional Convention to be able to dramatically change the founding document of the US.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...edcb1283a521c9

“Closer than most people realize”: Alarm over GOP plot to “drastically change the Constitution”

Government watchdogs are warning that the Republican takeover of state legislatures in recent years could imminently have major implications for the United States, as a right-wing effort to hold a new constitutional convention appears closer than ever to being realized.

On Monday, former Democratic U.S. Sen. Russ Feingold wrote in an op-ed at The Guardian that Article 5 of the U.S. Constitution allows the document to be amended, either with amendments being proposed by two-thirds of Congress and ratified by three-quarters of the states, or through a method that has never been tested: the establishment of a new constitutional convention.

To hold a new convention, two-thirds of all state legislatures—34 total—must apply to hold the gathering, where lawmakers would have broad freedom to change the Constitution however they saw fit. Three-quarters of states would have to ratify their proposed amendments.

"The right has already packed the Supreme Court and is reaping the rewards, with decisions from Dobbs to Bruen that radically reinterpret the Constitution in defiance of precedent and sound legal reasoning," wrote Feingold, referencing recent rulings on abortion rights and gun control. "But factions of the right are not satisfied to wait for the court to reinterpret the constitution. Instead, they have set their sights on literally rewriting our foundational document."

Feingold—now president of the American Constitution Society—is among those warning that a new constitutional convention is "closer to reality than most people realize," as The New York Times reported earlier this month.

As the Democratic Party expended considerable effort on passing federal legislation during the Obama administration, ACLU communications strategist Rotimi Adeoye wrote at The Daily Beast last month, Republicans focused on taking control at the state and local level, with Democrats losing 13 governorships and 816 legislative seats between 2008 and 2016.

As a result, Republicans now just need control of four more states to reach the threshold needed to call a second constitutional convention.


Feingold noted that if right-wing advocates for a new convention like the Convention of States Project and the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) get their way, there would be few limits on how Republicans could change the constitution:

There is nothing in the Constitution about how delegates would be selected, how they would be apportioned, or how amendments would be proposed or agreed to by delegates. And there is little useful historical precedent that lends insight to these important questions. This means that nearly any amendment could be proposed at such a convention, giving delegates enormous power to engage in political and constitutional redrafting.

"The framers left no rules," wrote Feingold in his new book, The Constitution in Jeopardy. "In this uncertainty lies great danger and, possibly, great power."

The former Wisconsin senator wrote at The Guardian that Republicans could use a new convention to craft an amendment banning abortion care, strip Americans of voting rights, gut federal anti-poverty programs, and further threaten people's right to be safe from gun violence by enshrining "their interpretation of the Second Amendment."

On Sunday, Common Cause president Karen Hobert Flynn told MSNBC that in the hands of Republicans, a second constitutional convention could "put all of our constitutional rights up for grabs."

Feingold noted that a national policy discussion regarding the "founding failures of the Constitution" is warranted.

"That said, any conversation about how to go about amending the Constitution needs to be transparent, inclusive, and informed," he wrote at The Guardian. "What factions of the right are pursuing is anything but. They are pursuing exclusively partisan outcomes and have sought to keep their efforts opaque. They do not seem interested in a representative, democratic process."

The Convention of States Project has received millions of dollars from the right-wing Donors Capital Fund and has been endorsed by Republican Govs. Ron DeSantis of Florida and Greg Abbott of Texas, Sens. Rand Paul, R-Ky., and Marco Rubio, R-Fla., and influential conservative commentators Sean Hannity and Ben Shapiro.

Rep. Jodey Arrington, R-Texas, a strong proponent of a new constitutional convention, recently proposed legislation to direct the National Archives to conduct an official count of all the states that have called for a convention at various times.

"Democrats should take the threat seriously," Amanda Litman, co-founder of progressive group Run for Something, told The Daily Beast. "Republicans always tell us what they want to do. We should believe them and think broadly and in the long term of where we should be working to stop this from happening."

With the midterm elections fast approaching, wrote Adeoye, "Democrats must emphasize to voters that Republicans still control most state legislatures, and if they remain in power, they can drastically change the Constitution."

[cubby]

This could belong in multiple threads, I'll post it to this one too since it fits here also. The GOP are 4 states away from having enough to be able to call a Constitutional Convention to be able to dramatically change the founding document of the US.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...edcb1283a521c9

On Monday, former Democratic U.S. Sen. Russ Feingold wrote in an op-ed at The Guardian that Article 5 of the U.S. Constitution allows the document to be amended, either with amendments being proposed by two-thirds of Congress and ratified by three-quarters of the states, or through a method that has never been tested: the establishment of a new constitutional convention.

To hold a new convention, two-thirds of all state legislatures—34 total—must apply to hold the gathering, where lawmakers would have broad freedom to change the Constitution however they saw fit. Three-quarters of states would have to ratify their proposed amendments.

"The right has already packed the Supreme Court and is reaping the rewards, with decisions from Dobbs to Bruen that radically reinterpret the Constitution in defiance of precedent and sound legal reasoning," wrote Feingold, referencing recent rulings on abortion rights and gun control. "But factions of the right are not satisfied to wait for the court to reinterpret the constitution. Instead, they have set their sights on literally rewriting our foundational document."

Feingold—now president of the American Constitution Society—is among those warning that a new constitutional convention is "closer to reality than most people realize," as The New York Times reported earlier this month.

As the Democratic Party expended considerable effort on passing federal legislation during the Obama administration, ACLU communications strategist Rotimi Adeoye wrote at The Daily Beast last month, Republicans focused on taking control at the state and local level, with Democrats losing 13 governorships and 816 legislative seats between 2008 and 2016.

As a result, Republicans now just need control of four more states to reach the threshold needed to call a second constitutional convention.

I'll be looking for information on how close the next four closest state legislatures are to falling red.

[Edge-]

https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/21/polit...iew/index.html

The House select committee investigating January 6, 2021, has come to an agreement with Ginni Thomas, the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, to be interviewed by the panel in the coming weeks, according to a source close to the committee.

That's the news.

[Kokolums]

This could belong in multiple threads, I'll post it to this one too since it fits here also. The GOP are 4 states away from having enough to be able to call a Constitutional Convention to be able to dramatically change the founding document of the US.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...edcb1283a521c9

Your a bit inaccurate in your assessment of the situation. While 34 state legislatures are required to CALL a Constitution Convention, 38 are needed to ratify any changes. However, browsing the list of state legislatures, 38 is a number the republicans CAN reach.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...e_legislatures

GOP needs 8 more legislatures overall:

Virginia: needs 2 more senators
Alaska: needs 2 more House reps.
Minnesota: needs 4 more House reps
Oregon: needs 8 more House reps and 4 more senators
Colorado: needs 9 more House reps and 4 more senators
Nevada: needs 6 more House reps and 2 more senators
Washington: needs 9 & 5
Maine: 20 & 4

There is 8

Next would be New Mexico at 21 & 12

[Edge-]

https://thehill.com/policy/national-...ember-hearing/

The House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack has formally announced its first fall hearing for Sept. 28.

Committee members have declined to elaborate on the topic for the hearing, slated for 1 p.m. that day.

Next public hearing has a date and time, but no subject.

Thompson also said the hearing – though perhaps not its final one — would likely be the last before the November midterms.

Doubt this will have anything to do with Ginni, at least for now.

[cubby]

Your a bit inaccurate in your assessment of the situation. While 34 state legislatures are required to CALL a Constitution Convention, 38 are needed to ratify any changes. However, browsing the list of state legislatures, 38 is a number the republicans CAN reach.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...e_legislatures

GOP needs 8 more legislatures overall:

Virginia: needs 2 more senators
Alaska: needs 2 more House reps.
Minnesota: needs 4 more House reps
Oregon: needs 8 more House reps and 4 more senators
Colorado: needs 9 more House reps and 4 more senators
Nevada: needs 6 more House reps and 2 more senators
Washington: needs 9 & 5
Maine: 20 & 4

There is 8

Next would be New Mexico at 21 & 12

You're actually arguing with the Senator, not @gondrin, just to be clear. And in the entire aarticle, the Senator delineates between the number of states needed to call a Convention and the number needed to ratify any new amendments from that Convention.

To hold a new convention, two-thirds of all state legislatures—34 total—must apply to hold the gathering, where lawmakers would have broad freedom to change the Constitution however they saw fit. Three-quarters of states would have to ratify their proposed amendments.

That being said, thanks for posting the state legislator numbers/factions. Good info. Will be curious to see how this plays out in the Nov elections.

- - - Updated - - -

https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/21/polit...iew/index.html

The House select committee investigating January 6, 2021, has come to an agreement with Ginni Thomas, the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, to be interviewed by the panel in the coming weeks, according to a source close to the committee.

That's the news.

Will be interesting to see what she admits to.

Reminder for all: Ginny was actually brainwashed earlier in her life, having been deeply involved and ensconced in a cult. She "recovered" and saw the light, or whatever, and is "better now". Seems she found a new cult.

God only knows what craziness she pours into Thomas' head, and vice versa.

[Kokolums]

You're actually arguing with the Senator, not @gondrin, just to be clear.

no i was talking about gondrin who said they could "dramatically ch ange the founding document" with just 34. they need 34 to call the convention, but 38 to change stuff.

[gondrin]

no i was talking about gondrin who said they could "dramatically ch ange the founding document" with just 34. they need 34 to call the convention, but 38 to change stuff.

I never said only 34 were needed to change it. I will quote myself:

This could belong in multiple threads, I'll post it to this one too since it fits here also. The GOP are 4 states away from having enough to be able to call a Constitutional Convention to be able to dramatically change the founding document of the US.

I stated that they are 4 states away from being able to call a Constitutional Convention. This is where they would be able to submit amendments for the Constitution that would then go to the states to be voted on to be ratified or not. It is easier to get amendments passed to go to the states to be ratified this way than the traditional way of going through Congress.

[Breccia]

Timothy Hale sentenced to four years and $2,000 for being part of a murderous insurrection, obstruction of justice, and being a Nazi motherfucker in general.

"Oh please, how much of a Nazi could--"

In a statement of facts provided by an agent for the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) in January 2021, the agent said Hale-Cusanelli described himself as "a white supremacist and Nazi sympathizer" during a meeting six days after the riot.

"Okay, but to be a real--"

Federal prosecutors said in a filing in March 2021 that a NCIS investigation into Hale-Cusanelli revealed that 34 of his interviewed colleagues agreed that he held “extremist or radical views pertaining to the Jewish people, minorities, and women.”

"...okay, but at least he didn't emulate Hitl--"

One of the colleagues said he had at one point "shaved his facial hair into a 'Hitler mustache,'" and prosecutors extracted photos of the alleged mustache from his phone.

"God dammit."

It could have been worse, apparently, he had some kind of military weapon clearance and could potentially have stolen literal weapons of war for the treason attempt.

[Edge-]

My favorite part was he apparently claimed he didn't know Congress convened in the Capitol building.

"We're too stupid to have committed a crime!" continues to be the strongest defense these people can muster.

[postman1782]

Timothy Hale sentenced to four years and $2,000 for being part of a murderous insurrection, obstruction of justice, and being a Nazi motherfucker in general.

"Oh please, how much of a Nazi could--"



"Okay, but to be a real--"



"...okay, but at least he didn't emulate Hitl--"



"God dammit."

It could have been worse, apparently, he had some kind of military weapon clearance and could potentially have stolen literal weapons of war for the treason attempt.

This is the same dumbass that his mother was allowed to speak at a Trump rally, claiming he was a "good boy".

[Edge-]

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/denver-...nkId=182781555

Former senior technical adviser for the January 6 Committee, Denver Riggleman, said the White House switchboard connected a phone call to a Capitol rioter on January 6, 2021.

"You get a real 'a-ha' moment when you see that the White House switchboard had connected to a rioter's phone while it's happening," Riggleman told 60 Minutes correspondent Bill Whitaker. "That's a big, pretty big 'a-ha' moment."

Riggleman, an ex-military intelligence officer and former Republican congressman from Virginia, oversaw a data-driven operation for the January 6 committee, pursuing phone records and other digital clues tied to the attack on the Capitol. He stopped working for the committee in April.

"I only know one end of that call," Riggleman said. "I don't know the White House end, which I believe is more important. But the thing is the American people need to know that there are link connections that need to be explored more."

Well there's a more direct connection between the administration and the insurrectionists. Who was calling and who was on the receiving end? Seems fairly significant and indicates there was indeed direct communication during the attack, and depending on who the recipient of the call was it could show coordination.

Now, "It could have been a misdial!" I hear shouted from...well, somewhere.

"Is there a simple, innocent explanation for that?" Whitaker asked.

"Was it an accidental call?" Riggleman responded. "When the White House just happened to call numbers that somebody misdialed a rioter that day, on January 6th? Probably not."

He seems skeptical and that makes sense, it would be a helluva coincidence and he seems to have some experience in this area.