There are dozens of unanswered questions about the January 6 breach of #theCapitol that need to be answered, before the so called post Presidency Senate impeachment trial of a former president. None covered by the hundreds of videos shot during the events. Who will answer them?
If the breach of #theCapitol on January 6 -that millions of Americans & people worldwide have seen from A to Z- was an #insurgency, therefore organized, what is the perpetrators' organization?
What is its name?
Who are its leaders?
When was it founded?
When was it launched?
What is its name?
Who are its leaders?
When was it founded?
When was it launched?
In preparation for the #SenateImpeachmentTrial of former President #Trump, more questions about #thecapitol breach: if this was an "armed insurrection,"
1. What kind of weapons were used?
2. Who are the individuals who used them?
3. Who were the victims?
1. What kind of weapons were used?
2. Who are the individuals who used them?
3. Who were the victims?
Re the #SenateImpeachmentTrial of former Pres #Trump, more questions re #thecapitol breach: if this was an "armed insurrection,"
1. What was the tactical goal of the so-called "insurgents"?
2. Occupy the #Capitol?
3. How?
4. With what?
5. How long?
1. What was the tactical goal of the so-called "insurgents"?
2. Occupy the #Capitol?
3. How?
4. With what?
5. How long?
An "armed insurgency" has a press release to inform its followers and the public of "its actions."
Where is it?
Where was it published?
Posted?
Broadcast?
"Mum insurgencies" do not exist...
Where is it?
Where was it published?
Posted?
Broadcast?
"Mum insurgencies" do not exist...
What Constitution & laws were the lawmakers using on January 6 during their argumentation about certification?
U.S.
Were the chairs of sessions in the House & Senate, the Vice President & the Speaker recognizing them to raise their dispute arguments?
Yes
All by the book? Yes
U.S.
Were the chairs of sessions in the House & Senate, the Vice President & the Speaker recognizing them to raise their dispute arguments?
Yes
All by the book? Yes
Were the so called "breachers" of #theCapitol "connected" to the lawmakers engaged in a delicate exercise of legal argumentation during the constitutionally sanctioned sessions?
(Regardless of chances of success or not)
Was there a "coordination"?
Any evidence available?
No
(Regardless of chances of success or not)
Was there a "coordination"?
Any evidence available?
No
Did the illegal breach of #theCapitol on Jan 6 & its violence advance or harm the process of argumentation by lawmakers about the electoral dispute?
(Regardless of the chances of the dispute or its debate making any difference)
In short the breach crumbled the dispute process.
(Regardless of the chances of the dispute or its debate making any difference)
In short the breach crumbled the dispute process.
Now comes the core question regarding the so called Senate impeachment session: was there a "command and control mechanism" between President Trump and the "breachers" of #theCapitol? Was he in communication with them?
Any evidence? None so far.
Any evidence? None so far.
And the core of the core: did Pres Trump order, guide or encourage the "breachers" of #theCapitol to execute the breach?
If so, for what specific goal? Chaos? To achieve what exactly?
The collapse of the legal constitutional process lawmakers were engaged in to dispute results?🤔
If so, for what specific goal? Chaos? To achieve what exactly?
The collapse of the legal constitutional process lawmakers were engaged in to dispute results?🤔
Everyone under the sun knows that any breach of #theCapitol would be met with maximum force at some point and be swiftly removed. Why would anyone organize a raid for any reason other than momentary chaos? Just to create a chaos...with consequences..
The perturbing video played by the impeachment managers in the Senate shows violent attempts by rioters to breach #theCapitol on Jan 6, breaking laws & disrupting a democratic constitutional procedure underway, conducted by lawmakers.
#theCapitol rioters & breachers perpetrated the same type of urban violence American cities endured during the summer when violent riots burned federal buildings and claimed victims across the nation. Both types of riots broke the law & harmed law enforcement.
During the summer riots, there were peaceful protesters & violent rioters--as was the case on January 6 at #theCapitol. There cannot be 2 laws in 1 land. Those who broke the law will meet justice & those who practiced their constitutional rights are protected by its articles.
Many words of former President #Trump during his speech on January 6 are of the same nature as words used by another former president and many politicians, calling on the public to protest against perceived claims. All these words are on tape, heard by the public over months.
The direct result of the "breachers" on January 6: collapse of the constitutional work by lawmakers attempting to correct election results they and former Pres Trump believed should be corrected. How can he inspire, guide or organize a move to undermine his own interests. 🤔
President Macron often says in his speeches: "on va se battre, c'est un combat." Many leaders in democracies, including in the US, "call for a fight." Obama, Clinton, Bush, Reagan, Kennedy. Only in this politically motivated impeachment do we hear politicians call this "violence"
Unfortunately, the Senate impeachment managers are treating the entire American public as 2nd graders, trying to teach them what's in a Tweet. It's obvious what the words in a Tweet mean. That is not serious work on behalf of the people. Get serious evidence or end this show!
Senate impeachment managers need to decide: Is this about relitigating the election dispute one more time? Or is it about trying to prove that a president ordered or inspired violence?
Release of ads calling on supporters to protest is part of a legal democratic process that all parties practice
Calling for a rally in DC to protest any matter is very legal. Timing is debatable, but right to rally is protected
No evidence of link between a Pres & violence, yet
Calling for a rally in DC to protest any matter is very legal. Timing is debatable, but right to rally is protected
No evidence of link between a Pres & violence, yet
The relation between a President and his supporters is totally irrelevant to this Senate impeachment trial focusing on violence by breachers at #thecapitol on January 6. Either the managers can prove a deliberate direct order, a "clear" incitement, or even a plan, or they can't.
If u compare slogans 2 slogans, there were worse calls for violence during the summer riots, including to "burn the whole thing down" & politicians endorsed them & businesses financially supported them. Yet it was all catalogued as protected by 1st Amendment. Illogism is rampant.
And let it be clear it is not about #Trump at this point. Even critics of his & Adm policies are not buying the so-called evidence offered so far by the managers. For if the bar in US justice becomes mere chimeric accusations w hollow substance, justice will become the problem.
"Building a mob" is a political accusation. Same accusation could be leveled by an opposing party about building (politically & financially) many mobs who perpetrated lots of violence over many months last summer. Not gonna fly.
So far, from the file presented by the managers of the impeachment, we've seen the same Tweets seen by 100 millions months ago & watched fragments of videos we've watched before (some on live TV). The rest is psychological imputations. Anything more substantive to prove the case?
اليوم الثاني لجلسات مجلس الشيوخ في الشكوى ضد ترامب. حتى الان تم عرض فيديوات لاحداث شاهدها عشرات الملايين من قبل، و تغريدات قرأها مئات الملايين سابقاً. بالاضافة الى تحاليل نفسية. و لكن لا وجود لادلة مادية على علاقة مباشرة باحداث ٦ يناير. لا شيء حتى الان...
#Trump disputed the election results? Duh, of course. He asked political allies to use every constitutional recourse? Obviously. He urged Republicans to help him? Who else was he going to ask? He encouraged supporters to protest & rally? Yes he did. All we know he did was legal.
The slogan "stop the steal" even if wrong, is legal.
عملياً و رقمياً لن يتمكن الفريق الاتهامي من حشد ٦٥ سيناتورليصوتوا على حكم ضد ترامب ليمنعوه من الترشح من جديد. وبالتالي، فان الرئيس السابق، على الرغم من موجات من القضايا التي ستستهدفه، سيتحول الي قائد للمعارضة الاميركية، بعد زمن قصير
#Trump made bad decisions? Yes he did & he said he did. His Adm made mistakes? Yes, a long list we can discuss. But Donald Trump did not order and launch an armed insurgency against the #USCapitol. Nor did he stage a bureaucratic coup, unlike others have been perceived as doing.
I am still puzzled that no serious investigating team, on either side, has advanced the credible, now very plausible, theory that the breach of January 6 was a "complex event" with a high possibility that a 3d camp or a sub camp manipulated both parties into an irreversible trap.
Reducing the entire web of events of Jan 6 to a behavioral matter attributed to frmr Pres Trump and a supposed mysterious "link" to so called "supporters" reads like an #AgathaChristie thriller, or an oversimplified cartoonesque tale, not like reality. Bring in the professionals.
Professionals would look into:
1.The "actual" faction that executed the breach
2. Its prep activities for the event
3. Who in DC was briefed about it if any
4. Whether the group used "decoys" to manipulate leaders
5. Who remote controlled the breachers
Dozens of serious questions
1.The "actual" faction that executed the breach
2. Its prep activities for the event
3. Who in DC was briefed about it if any
4. Whether the group used "decoys" to manipulate leaders
5. Who remote controlled the breachers
Dozens of serious questions
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
