Replies

bitt wrote:

“
https://freerepublic.com/focus/news/3924824/posts?page=1

Rush to judgement? Three crucial questions remain unanswered about Capitol siege
justthenews.com ^ | 1/13/2021 | john Solomon
“

See post #18 quoting the article:

.. The U.S. Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund, who resigned after the attack, told The Washington Post that security officials at the House and Senate rebuffed his early request to call in the National Guard ahead of a protest.

Sund alleged that House Sergeant-at-Arms Paul Irving was concerned with the “optics” of declaring an emergency ahead of the protests and rejected a National Guard presence. He says Senate Sergeant-at-Arms Michael Stenger recommended that he informally request the Guard to be ready in case it was needed to maintain security.

Irving and Stenger have not talked publicly. But their account will be essential to the final effort to assign accountability for the glaring security lapses exposed last Wednesday. The key questions for both men is whether they warned Pelosi or Senate Leaders Mitch McConnell and Chuck Schumer about the violence concerns or consulted with the leaders about the idea of activating the Guard.

Democrats for weeks were concerned by the pro-Trump rally and previously had criticized Trump for using National Guard to quell Black Lives Matter riots in the summer. The leadership’s discussions with their security chiefs now becomes an essential investigative focus....

Also see post #29:

“It may be the level the Dems claim but not in the way they claim or by the people they claim. According to this, it looks like those behind not the rally where Trump was speaking, but rather, behind the mob already in action at the capital, consisted of more than one group, and both the FBI and NYPD knew enough about some of these groups to disrupt at least some of these groups’ travel plans to prevent them from reaching the area or carrying out their goals.

What is not known is if Pelosi and Mitch were given this info.

The question we and the media should be curious about is which groups were known aforehand to be involved in planning or participating in this attack [which was designed to disrupt proceedings right as the Republicans were about to present their side] , and which of the groups were planning on using intelligence gathered about the building by unknown individuals [scouts, or else insiders] and had in mind individual targets whose locations should not have been generally known and harder to reach.

I’m thinking Pelosi’s panic could be her possibly knowing the disruption plans were made well before Trump’s speech, were never carried out in full because they had been discovered, and, not knowing what an investigaion is going to eventually turn up, got scared. If this was a Dem op, or an assault planned by groups dems have supported in the past openly or discretely, it is critical for the dems to consolidate power quickly so as to neutralize the investigation before it gets rolling too far, and fire and replace as many investigators as possible.

The riot was supposed to be much bigger than it was but some groups didn’t arrive to join in. Were these groups conservative or liberal, anarchists, domestic tinfoil conspiracy nuts, or backed by foreigners? Awaits to be seen.”