Bear Pit: now the sole domicile of politics at LuLa

[TechTalk]

Don't you think your points are the same set of talking points that circle around?

No, I think that I've exhausted a good deal of time and effort trying to offer factual evidence from credible sources to counter the enormous amounts of misinformation that proliferates (and reproduces like rabbits) all over the internet, including here.

[TechTalk]

An interesting timeline of the January 6th insurrection at the Capitol from NPR.

https://www.npr.org/2022/01/05/1069977469/a-timeline-of-how-the-jan-6-attack-unfolded-including-who-said-what-and-when

A timeline of how the Jan. 6 attack unfolded — including who said what and when - January 5, 2022

[Alan Klein]

Your understanding of U.S. law is on a par with your knowledge of U.S. history.  I recommend that you take time out from posting to read James Madison's notes on the Philadelphia constitutional convention and the relevant Second Amendment case law, then come back here and offer the other forum members your informed misinterpretations of both.

Actually, the original states relinquished their sovereignty when they ratified the constitution of 1787 and the subsequent ones when they became part of the United States.

The states maintain internal sovereignty.  They gave up external sovereignty rights as you stated like making war, printing money, making treaties, etc.  But a majority of rules and regulations are ratified by each of the individual states. These include criminal laws like murder, rape, stealing; civil laws like marriage, divorce, contracts not superseded by Federal interstate rules on commerce.  Local laws like building codes, speed limits, hunting rules, and regulations.   Each state has their own militia, police forces, taxes.  Each has heir own judicial, legislature, and executive branches. They're mini-nations just without the aforementioned powers granted to the Federal government.  As stated in the 10th Amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

[digitaldog]

We're up to page 664.  How many new ideas have you expressed on all those pages?  Don't you think your points are the same set of talking points that circle around?

It is rude to silence a fool, and cruelty to let him go on. 

[Alan Klein]

No, I think that I've exhausted a good deal of time and effort trying to offer factual evidence from credible sources to counter the enormous amounts of misinformation that proliferates (and reproduces like rabbits) all over the internet, including here.

You've been a good advocate for your views.  But you can't deny others their views because you disagree with them.

[Alan Klein]

An interesting timeline of the January 6th insurrection at the Capitol from NPR.

https://www.npr.org/2022/01/05/1069977469/a-timeline-of-how-the-jan-6-attack-unfolded-including-who-said-what-and-when

A timeline of how the Jan. 6 attack unfolded — including who said what and when - January 5, 2022

Why did the Capitol Police refuse assistance offered before the demonstration?   Who ordered it? Did anyone from Congress who controls the Capitol Police order or wink at a stand-down to the Commander?

[TechTalk]

But you can't deny others their views because you disagree with them.

When have I ever? I'm certainly free to comment on and critique the views of others as well as their basis and methodology by which they're expressed. It's free speech.

[TechTalk]

Why did the Capitol Police refuse assistance offered before the demonstration?   Who ordered it? Did anyone from Congress who controls the Capitol Police order or wink at a stand-down to the Commander?

Been there... done that.

[digitaldog]

You've been a good advocate for your views.  But you can't deny others their views because you disagree with them.

Worth repeating:

"If I see you make a fool out of yourself, I owe it to you to point that out to you." - Jackee Mason

You are free to continue your foolishness and you will.

[Peter McLennan]

... But you can't deny others their views because you disagree with them.

Nobody's denying you the right to air your views, Alan.  We're simply pointing out your errors of logic, reason and knowledge.  If you find that painful, then stop making those errors.

We're referring to errors like you attempting to conflate the BLM protests with the attempt to thwart by violence the peaceful transition of power in your democracy.

As others have pointed out, the BLM protests had a reason, a legitimate source for the dissent.  Namely the public murder of a citizen by a policeman.

The insurrectionists had no legitimate reason for their protest.  Please note the use of the term "legitimate".

[Robert Roaldi]

We're up to page 664.  How many new ideas have you expressed on all those pages?  ...

Many, many, many times.

[James Clark]

The states maintain internal sovereignty.  They gave up external sovereignty rights as you stated like making war, printing money, making treaties, etc.  But a majority of rules and regulations are ratified by each of the individual states. These include criminal laws like murder, rape, stealing; civil laws like marriage, divorce, contracts not superseded by Federal interstate rules on commerce.  Local laws like building codes, speed limits, hunting rules, and regulations.   Each state has their own militia, police forces, taxes.  Each has heir own judicial, legislature, and executive branches. They're mini-nations just without the aforementioned powers granted to the Federal government.  As stated in the 10th Amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Supremacy - Article 6, Sec. 2

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

[TechTalk]

Each state has their own militia...

...which is regulated by Congress under the Constitution's Militia Clauses...

Article I, Section 8, Clause 15: The Congress shall have Power... To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions.

Article I, Section 8, Clause 16: The Congress shall have Power... To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress.

https://law.justia.com/constitution/us/article-1/58-the-militia-clauses

... and protected by the Second Amendment to maintain the security of the states and the nation.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State...

[TechTalk]

One sad note, regarding the insurrection on January 6th, is that because Washington D.C. is not a state, it was unable to authorize its own National Guard to go to the Capitol. That duty fell to the President, who sat on his fat ass watching the siege of the Capitol on television. He did so from the comfort of the White House after telling the "Save America Rally" crowd: "Now it is up to Congress to confront this egregious assault on our democracy. And after this, we're going to walk down and I'll be there with you."

1:30 p.m.
On the steps on the backside of the Capitol, protesters overcome the police, who run back into the building. Protesters watching from the sidelines cheer as a mob breaks through the final police barricades.

Shortly after 2:00 p.m.
Protesters break windows and climb into the Capitol. They open doors for others to follow.

2:20 p.m.
The Senate is called to recess, and the House is called to recess shortly after.

The building goes into lockdown.

Around this same time, Capitol Police officer Eugene Goodman saves the Senate from a very close call, waving Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, to safety and then diverting protesters who were steps from the Senate chamber.

2:24 p.m.
Trump tweets: "Mike Pence didn't have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our Country and our Constitution."

He continues with more baseless claims about a fraudulent election.

Shortly before 3:00 p.m.
Rioters break into the Senate chamber. Many jump from the balcony to the floor below. They climb onto the podium and take photos and selfies, and they rifle through papers lawmakers left behind.

3:11 p.m.
Rep. Mike Gallagher, R-Wis., tweets a video while sheltering in his office, saying that this was the cost of telling people they could overturn the election.

"Mr. President, you have got to stop this. You are the only person who can call this off. Call it off," Gallagher implores. "The election is over. Call it off."

Around the same time, a swarm of rioters chanting, "Break it down! Break it down!" overwhelms Capitol Police officers guarding the Speaker's Lobby, where lawmakers are sheltered.

3:36 p.m.
More than two hours after protesters first breached the Capitol grounds, White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany tweets that Trump has ordered the National Guard to the Capitol.

Shortly before 6:00 p.m.
Almost five hours after the rioting began, police start to clear the Capitol and eventually secure the interior.

6:01 p.m.
Trump tweets again.

"These are the things and events that happen when a sacred landslide election victory is so unceremoniously & viciously stripped away from great patriots who have been badly & unfairly treated for so long. Go home with love & in peace. Remember this day forever!"

[Peter McLennan]

My favourite line of Trump's:

"I'll be there with you."

[TechTalk]

The governors of Maryland and Virginia were ready to send their National Guard to the Capitol, but their guard troops couldn't operate outside of their state borders without an order from the pass-me-the-popcorn-President watching it unfold on TV.

If there was ever as great a dereliction of duty by a president, I'm not sure what it would be at the moment.

[Peter McLennan]

If there was ever as great a dereliction of duty by a president, I'm not sure what it would be at the moment.

A third impeachment trial would probably be a waste of resources.  Shackles would be more appropriate.

[Manoli]

Interesting commentary/thread on Merrick Garland’s speech yesterday relating to the Jan-6 insurrection of 2021.
https://twitter.com/sethabramson/status/1478822419175456773?s=21

Extracted:

8/ Instead, the criticism DOJ is facing that matters most—criticism that comes from those who understand how criminal investigations and prosecutions work—is that there is *no evidence whatsoever* that DOJ is conducting *any* large-scale investigation of high-level coup plotters.

9/ We have seen no court filings from DOJ to this effect. No cooperation deals. No raids. No subpoenas. No document demands. No device seizures. No interrogations. No howling from powerful Trumpists that they are being "targeted" simply for being... seditious insurrectionists.

10/ The conspiracy charges Garland spoke of today haven't led to cooperation deals that could reach Trump or top-tier agents—and we already know the names of 15-20 who helped coordinate what happened on January 6—and this failure lies in the shadow of DOJ's Trump-Russia failures.

11/ Moreover, one thing current or former federal criminal investigators like me know is that there's a *time* value in *all* investigations—and that testimonial evidence from cooperators is only *one type* of evidence. Even if such secret deals have been cut, it *isn't enough*.

12/ What Robert Mueller declared on pg. 10 of his first Trump-Russia report was that Trumpists had hidden and destroyed evidence, rejected all requests for cooperation, and obstructed his probe to the point that he couldn't possibly know if he had anything like all the evidence.

13/ But Garland didn't need Mueller to tell him that when dealing with Trumpist criminals you must get testimony and evidence—documentary, trace, material and otherwise—as quickly as possible, lest it be destroyed even as false testimony is encouraged, concocted and synchronized.

14/ Trumpists criminals aren't much different from *other* white-collar criminals—they don't believe the law applies to them and will tamper with, hide, destroy, miscast and otherwise pervert evidence (testimonial or physical) with a sense of impunity. So he needed to act *fast*.

[Alan Klein]

Supremacy - Article 6, Sec. 2

James, Supremacy relates to laws both can make that may be in conflict.  The Federal law would have supremacy.  But the Federal government only has enumerated powers.  So if those powers are not granted to it in a specific area, then the States have the power to write and enforce laws regarding those things, or if not such as restricting speech, those rights flow to the people who can act or not act according to their own desires.  No one can tell you which camera format to shoot, for example or which college to attend.

An example of supremacy that I can think of is California's automobile pollution laws.  All states have to comply with Federal standards.  I believe those were constitutionally allowed under their right to regulate interstate commerce.  But California's rules are higher.  But no state could write a law making them lower than federal's. 

But there are other areas internal to the states where the Federal government has no power granted to it that would override state powers.  So in that sense states have sovereignty in those internal areas.  An example would be parking regulations in your town.

[Alan Klein]

When have I ever? I'm certainly free to comment on and critique the views of others as well as their basis and methodology by which they're expressed. It's free speech.

Just as in a trial, we both pick the evidence and facts we believe support our points of view.  The problem is you often claim only your evidence and facts are valid, that I should be silenced because my evidence is false.  There's a lot of that going around from the left, Twitter, Facebook, media, etc.  They're not willing to allow people they disagree with to present their views.  They want to shut down free speech; silence opposing views.  They believe only their views are "truth".