Could you cite a source for that? Trump has no control over security for the Capital building, so I'm not sure how that would work.He even wanted the metal detectors shut off so his mob could be armed.
Could you cite a source for that? Trump has no control over security for the Capital building, so I'm not sure how that would work.He even wanted the metal detectors shut off so his mob could be armed.
Here was testimony during the J6 hearings from a former aide to then Chief of Staff Mark Meadows who claimed to have knowledge of this.Could you cite a source for that? Trump has no control over security for the Capital building, so I'm not sure how that would work.
Are you kidding me, Trump did not send a bunch of lawyers to the Capital to argue his case, He even wanted the metal detectors shut off so his mob could be armed. How could you watch what happened on 1/6 and not call it a coup d'atat. I just hope they will allow cameras in the court room so we can hear the witness describe what happeded
From Forbes.Could you cite a source for that? Trump has no control over security for the Capital building, so I'm not sure how that would work.
I would count myself among that group. Especially if this person's megalomania didn't result in the loss of Republican majority in the US Senate.Seems to me a lot of people that disfavor Trump like his policy they just want someone else to carry on with them.
And they couldn't attend the rally because the were carrying guns so he wanted them turned offHere was testimony during the J6 hearings from a former aide to then Chief of Staff Mark Meadows who claimed to have knowledge of this.
https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-weapons-january-6-crowd-dont-****ing-care-2022-6
It's not exactly true that he wanted them to be shut off so "his mob could be armed" He wanted them to be able to attend his rally.
No, but it was a call to let armed people in. the purpose of the detectors was they did not want armed people at the capital. Evidently Trump didIt wasn't call for them to be armed.
Citations, pleaseAre you kidding me, Trump did not send a bunch of lawyers to the Capital to argue his case, He even wanted the metal detectors shut off so his mob could be armed. How could you watch what happened on 1/6 and not call it a coup d'atat. I just hope they will allow cameras in the court room so we can hear the witness describe what happeded
That link you quote is brokenAnd they couldn't attend the rally because the were carrying guns so he wanted them turned off
According to testimony it was to make the attendance for his speech to be larger more than anything else by increasing the crowd numbers. "He wanted a larger audience."And they couldn't attend the rally because the were carrying guns so he wanted them turned off
And she also testified he said "there not there to hurt me" SO who were they there yo hurt??According to testimony it was to make the attendance for his speech to be larger more than anything else by increasing the crowd numbers. "He wanted a larger audience."
WASHINGTON (CN) — President Trump was repeatedly warned about armed rallygoers on Jan. 6, and he responded by calling for the Secret Service to reduce security so he could have a larger audience for his speech."
"Cassidy Hutchinson, who was the top aide to Trump’s chief of staff Mark Meadows, testified this afternoon that, during Trump's Jan. 6 rally at the Ellipse that devolved into a war zone, Trump was angry attendance was not at capacity."
Who were they there to hurt exactly? Were they even there with the intent to hurt anyone? No one to my knowledge was threatened or shot by anyone allegedly armed with a firearm at the rally or at the capitol. There is no indication that they were carrying with the intent to harm anyone. You seem to be implying something that never materialized.And she also testified he said "there not there to hurt me" SO who were they there yo hurt??
False dichotomy. Does not wanting to hurt Trump mean they must want to hurt someone else?And she also testified he said "there not there to hurt me" SO who were they there yo hurt??
Really man, try decaf or something. Sheesh.Are you kidding me, Trump did not send a bunch of lawyers to the Capital to argue his case, He even wanted the metal detectors shut off so his mob could be armed. How could you watch what happened on 1/6 and not call it a coup d'atat. I just hope they will allow cameras in the court room so we can hear the witness describe what happeded
And they couldn't attend the rally because the were carrying guns so he wanted them turned off
No, but it was a call to let armed people in. the purpose of the detectors was they did not want armed people at the capital. Evidently Trump did
And they couldn't attend the rally because the were carrying guns so he wanted them turned off
Seriously man, this is crazy stuff. NO ONE WAS ARMED. It's DC.No, but it was a call to let armed people in. the purpose of the detectors was they did not want armed people at the capital. Evidently Trump did
Are you kidding me, Trump did not send a bunch of lawyers to the Capital to argue his case, He even wanted the metal detectors shut off so his mob could be armed. How could you watch what happened on 1/6 and not call it a coup d'atat. I just hope they will allow cameras in the court room so we can hear the witness describe what happeded
I have no idea what substance he's on, but man that's some slate level nonsense. Trump wanted the metal detectors off? He has nothing to do with the Capitol. That was all on the Speaker of the House and Senate Majority Leader. And they were told about the intelligence that said there might be violence. They let it happen.Really man, try decaf or something. Sheesh.
Slate would be my guess. Or something left of MSNBC. I don't think even Rachel Maddow used that lie.Could you cite a source for that? Trump has no control over security for the Capital building, so I'm not sure how that would work.
Seriously man, this is crazy stuff. NO ONE WAS ARMED. It's DC.
Seriously man, this is crazy stuff. NO ONE WAS ARMED. It's DC.
My bet would be bidet never gets the nomination…What about Trump v Newsom? That’s looking possible since something has obviously changed in what Democrats are willing to report now. Typically they’d be covering for the administration when stuff like then Hunter Biden texts come out. But it may be that they’re moving on from him. Could be that he’s done and we don’t know it yet.