6 Jan Issues Again Surface

For John, BLUF:  Some wish to make 6 january into a terrible tragedy and a threat to our way of Governmnent.  I am not sure they are convincing.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Liz Cheney, Jan. 6 Committee suppressed key evidence of Trump pushing for 10,000 National Guard troops to protect Capitol: Report

From Blaze Media, by Reporter Paul Sacca, 10 March 2024.

Here is the lede plus six:

Former Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) and the January 6 Committee suppressed key evidence that former President Donald Trump pushed for 10,000 National Guard troops to protect the U.S. Capitol building ahead of the riots, according to a report.

Cheney and the Democratic-led House Select Committee on January 6 contended that there was "no evidence" to support Trump officials' claims the White House had pressed for 10,000 National Guard troops ahead of the protests in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 6, 2021.

However, a transcribed interview conducted by the committee from January 2022 appears to show evidence that Trump urged Democrat leadership to bring in thousands of National Guard troops to prevent any widespread violence on Jan. 6, according to a new report from The Federalist.

Then-Deputy Chief of Staff Anthony Ornato was interviewed by the committee on Jan. 28, 2022.  The transcripts show that he told Cheney and other investigators that he overheard White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows urge Democrat D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser to request as many National Guard troops as she needed to protect the city before the demonstrations centered around the results of the 2020 presidential election.

By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, and agree to receive content that may sometimes include advertisements.  You may opt out at any time. Ornato testified that Meadows "wanted to know if she need[ed] any more guardsmen."

"And I remember the number 10,000 coming up of, you know, 'The president wants to make sure that you have enough.'  You know, 'He is willing to ask for 10,000.'  I remember that number," Ornato told the January 6 Committee.  "Now that you said it, it reminded me of it.  And that she was all set.  She had, I think it was like 350 or so for intersection control, and those types of things not in the law enforcement capacity at the time."

Mollie Ziegler Hemingway wrote, "Not only did the committee not accurately characterize the interview, they suppressed the transcript from public review.  On top of that, committee allies began publishing critical stories and even conspiracy theories about Ornato ahead of follow-up interviews with him.  Ornato was a career Secret Service official who had been detailed to the security position in the White House."

President Biden's State of the Union characterization of our political ssituation is dire:

Not since President Lincoln and the Civil War have freedom and democracy been under assault here at home as they are today.

Do we believe that, aside from the persecution of Donald Trump by a form of Lawfare,♠ that our political system is in trouble?  I am not so sure.  How does it compare to the Palmer Raids or the 47,000 who showed up for the Bonus March?  What about the shoot-up of the House of Representatives, wounding four Congressmen, back on 1 March 1954, just over 70 years ago?

A for the 6 January 2021 event itself, there is too much hand waving to satisfy me.  For example, the murder of Ashley Babbitt.  The pipe bombs.  The Capitol Police waving in visitors.  The failure to release hours of video.  The fact that arrests in the wake of of 6 January are increasing today, rather than decreasing.♥ However, there are certain time limits.  U.S. Attorney for D.C. Matt Graves says the statutes of limitations for many of the charges used by prosecutors will expire on 5 January 2026 – "on the eve of the riot's five-year anniversary."

If then Speaker Nancy Pelosi has not appeared to stack the Special Committee I would be more trusting of the cohnclusions.  As it is, it appears tainted and that is on Ms Pelosi.

Regards  —  Cliff
♠  The thing most glaring to me is the way DoJ has passed over Preside4nbt Biden's mishandling of classified information from when he was a Senator and Vice president, but prosecution of President Trump for like offenses, from when Mr Trump was President, when he had vastly greater powers.  while some don't see it, it screams at me. ♥  Is this some form of political intimidation?

Sloppy Work on the 6 January Events

For John, BLUF:  The events and outcomes from 6 January 2021 are still not clear to a lot of us.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Whatever happened to “independent journalist” John Sullivan, who filmed the killing of Ashli Babbitt?

From Neo, by Neo, September 21, 2023.♠

Here is the lede plus three:

In connection with yesterdays’ thread about a man claiming to be an “independent journalist” who has been convicted for the Capitol breach on J6, commenter “gallchobhair” has this question:

Does anyone happen to remember what ultimately happened to “journalist” John Sullivan, who gleefully filmed the Ashli Babbitt murder? If I recall correctly, he got off pretty much scot free.

I hadn’t thought of him in a long while, but he certainly got a lot of attention at the time. Most of the articles about him were written in the initial weeks after the event. But I found an update from this past August:

John Earl Sullivan, arrested in Salt Lake City, no date listed. Indicted on 2/3/21 and pleaded not guilty to six counts. Remains free on personal recognizance.

And then Neo goers on to talk about the situation.

Two things strike me abnout this.  The first is that our justice system is so inefficient that we are still conducting prosecutions against all these clearly dangerous and dasterdly people who demonstrated at our nation's Capitol on 6 January 2021, two and a half years ago.  It is a good thing for our Republic that they weren't an orgnized revolutionary body or they would have finished the job long ago.

The second thing that strikes me is the uneven way in which justice is being administered by the Department of Justice with regard to the totality of participants on 6 January 2021.  The level of punishment seems uneven to me

Then, there is the sense some of us have that the House Commission on the events of 6 January was weak and uneven, leaving a lot of questions unanswered, with misinformation filling in the gaps.  For exsmple, a friend of mine is convinced that National Guard Troops were available thaz day, but never called upon.  I, on the other hand, believe thst National Guard Troops were offerred, but rejected by the authorities on Capitol Hill.  Both views can not be correct, can they?

I think this is a fail for Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi, but also a fail for Attorney General Merrick Garland.  We will just have to wait for the revisionist historians to get around to revealing the truth.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  Who is Neo?  Just another Conservative living near here and surrounded by Progresives.

A Fair Trial

For John, BLUF:  I am thinking she didn't really mean what she wrote, but the first part of the sentence seized her brain into completing it this way..  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Here is what InstaPundit Blogger Robert Shibley posted:

I ASSUMED THIS WAS FAKE, BUT IT’S NOT. Super-professional highlighting mine.

What is she?  French?.

We have a legal system derived from Anglo-Saxon law.  One is innocent until proven guilty by a jury of our peers.

The Epoch Times had an article on this,

I wonder if former Speaker Nancy Pelosi subscribes to Blackstone's ratio, "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."  Which we attribute to English jurist William Blackstone, back in the 1760s.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Alternate View of Speaker Contest

For John, BLUF:  It is easy to take something at face value, but sometimes it is deeper, as with the Contest for House Speaker.  Those 20 Republican House Members really are interested in changing how the House does business, to move away from the more Massachusetts General Court approach of the Pelosi era.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

A Significant Majority of Republican Voters Agree With the GOP Rebels

From Pajama Media, by Reporter Stacey Lennox, 4 January 2023, 1:36 PM.

Here is the lede plus two:

The Republican establishment that still believes they can manage voters’ expectations to maintain the status quo may want to do a reality check.  The base had high expectations in 2022, and the elections did not meet those expectations.  Many voters suspect that at least some establishment Republicans put a greater emphasis on ensuring that candidates tied to President Trump did not win than on winning back the Senate and a more significant majority in the House.

Then, the GOP members they did manage to elect voted to keep the wildly unpopular Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) as Senate Republican Leader.  Then, with a RealClearPolitics average favorability rating of -33%, McConnell turned around and betrayed Republican voters by helping Democrats pass a $1.7 trillion Omnibus package along with 17 of his colleagues.

No one should be surprised that Republican voters are fed up.  They organized the Tea Party and elected candidates who promised fiscal responsibility.  When that did not work, they elected a reality television star as president.  Yet the incumbents in Washington still don’t learn.  So while CNN wrings its hands about Republican chaos and Karl Rove lectures the Freedom Caucus on TV, voters want change and are getting ready to close their wallets.

This all looks like 20 Republican representatives mad at Houose Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, of San Diego.  However, that is a surface analysis.  As I said on City Life (or was it The Dawn Patrol) this moorning, they re really mad at our own Rep, Ms Lori Trahan (D-MA).  She, and a lot of Democrats, and 17 Republican Senators, raided the Pork Barrel last month to give us a 1.7. TRILLION dollar Omnibus Spending Bill, when our Budget deficit and national debt are both out of control.♠

The Omnibus spending bill is the grab bag of what is supposed to be a dozen different appropriations of discretionary spending.♥

Part of the problem with the National Debt is the need to be paying the annual interest.  This is happening in a borrowing market where the interest keeps going up.  Several media sources (e.g., CBN News) say things to the effect:  "In fact federal interest payments are on track to cost more than the defense budget in the coming years."

Regards  —  Cliff
♠  According to the U.S. Treasury Department, the current national debt of the U.S. is $31.3 trillion.   Roughly 12% of total government spending for the year, or $48 billion, was employed in maintaining the U.S. national debt as of October 2022.
♥  FedSmith dot Com described the bill thusly:  The Omnibus Spending Bill (Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2023) is a monster bill. It is a 4,000+ page amalgamation of a wide variety of topics, many of which could not get passed as individual bills in Congress. Some of these bills are inserted together in one large bill and passed into law as the government budget has to be passed for the federal government to continue to function. It was not read before it passed. No amendments were considered.

Bar Rep Adam Schiff

For John, BLUF:  California Representative Adam Schiff, ooriginally from Massschusetts, is a national problem.  Whst shoould we do about him?  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Wannabe authoritarian Adam Schiff should sit on no committees

From The Washington Examiner, by Commentary Writer Zachary Faria, 4 January 2023, 02:22 PM.

Here is the lede plus three:

While House Republicans continue to broadcast their incompetence to the country, other promises may end up being forgotten.  Some should not, including the promise to bar Rep. Adam Schiff from House committees.

Schiff, the California Democrat who served as the chairman of the Intelligence Committee, may be the most destructive member of the House.  While the bigotry of Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) and Rep. Eric Swalwell’s (D-CA) association with a Chinese spy have drawn the most ridicule, it is Schiff’s tenure as the appointed intelligence master of the Democratic Party that raises the most concerns.

Most recently, journalist Matt Taibbi revealed that Schiff demanded Twitter censor and remove several of the site’s users, including banning accounts, deleting tweets, suppressing search results, and reducing the visibility of tweets.  The demands were so drastic that censor-happy Twitter balked at all of them, even Schiff’s demands to take action against the “harassment” of his staff.

Schiff used his position as a congressman and the chairman of the Intelligence Committee (and the implicit threat of government action that comes with it) to demand that Twitter censor people.  That is how Schiff views the role of government.

I see the Writer's point.  On the other hand, I was thrilled to see Rep Schiff on the 6 January Committee.  With his promises of revelations about then President Trump, which never emerged, he was in essence a Denier of the 2016 Election outcome.  An especially dishonest politician, willing to impeach President Trump so as to reverse the outcome of 2016.  It made the House 6 January Committee appear to me as a total farce.  Just another example of Speaker Nancy Pelosi's mindless animosity toward President Trump, like ripping up a State of the Union report, in public, as an example of distain.

That being said, I can see the value of implementing this Demoocratic Party initiative against Rep Schiff.  His actions as a Congressman indicate that Mr Schiff is not worthy of being on any Congressional Committees.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

2020 Election Campaign Reexmined

For John, BLUF:  It is not possible to go back and say what would have happened if information had come to light before an election, but it should make us careful to ensure such information manipulation is reduced in the future, which falls on the Press and other media.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Kash Patel wants to know about the role of Wray and Barr in the FBI and DOJ liaison with Twitter

From The New Neo, by Herself, 14 December 2022.

Mr Kash Patel asks sojme questions. Here is the lede, a tweet:

The Dirty Truth (Josh)
@AKA_RealDirty

#KashPatel: The only way there would be this level of engagement from the FBI/DOJ with Twitter is if Bill Barr and Christopher Wray personally authorized it. If @elonmusk doesn’t release, everything subpoenas need to go out because nothing is ever deleted at the FBI.

Further down she writes:

I would guess that Wray and Barr would say the briefings were to warn about “Russian disinformation” that might affect the 2020 election. But weekly face-to-face meetings? Seems like a lot more must have discussed than that.

What are the legal ramifications of what happened between Twitter and the government actors, whomever they were? Philip Hamburger writes about it in the WSJ (I can’t read the whole thing because of the paywall, but Instapundit has a hefty excerpt):

Cooperation between government officials and private parties to suppress speech could be considered a criminal conspiracy to violate civil rights. The current administration won’t entertain such a theory, but a future one might.

The fundmentl question for the Voters is if the 2020 Election was perverted by forces inside our Federal Government.

As far back as August of this year The New York Post headlined:  "79% say ‘truthful’ coverage of Hunter Biden’s laptop would have changed 2020 election".

And, one wonders how the political science professors in academia are looking at this?  Are their Progrewsive views at war with any insights that President Trump would have won if a cabal had not suppressed the truth about the Hunter Biden Laptop?  I don't believe the likes of Speaker Nsncy Pelosi give a fig for clean and fair process, but it could come back to bite them if other parties adopt the same approach to elections.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Nancy to Step Down in January

For John, BLUF:  I caught the last portuon of her decision speech to the House at noon this day.  She was refined and generous, towering over the President and Vice President.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

BREAKING: Nancy Pelosi Announces Her Future in Politics

From PJ Media, by Reporter Chris Queen, 17 November 2022, 12:45 PM.

Here is the lede plus two:

With the balance of power in Congress in question through the 2022 midterm election season, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) declined to speculate on her future. Now that Republicans have secured a House majority, Pelosi announced that she will not seek re-election to leadership among the Democratic caucus.

Pelosi has led the Democrats in the House since 2003 and is one of the longest-serving leaders in either party.  She first ascended to House Speaker in 2007, and she served until 2011, when Republicans took a majority.  When the Democrats achieved a majority eight years later, she became Speaker of the House again.

“After leading the Democrats for the last two decades, the House Speaker announced Thursday that she will step down next year from her spot at the top of the party, closing a momentous run for the most powerful woman in U.S. history while clearing the way for a younger generation of up-and-coming lawmakers to climb into the leadership ranks,” writes Mike Lillis at The Hill.

There is no doubt that Ms Pelosi has been an historic figure in American hisory.  Here tenure as Speaker alone is enough for the record books.  On top of that are her accomplishments as Speaker.

On the other hand, she is pretty petty when it comes to Republicans

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Possible Bad Times Ahead

For John, BLUF:  The Democratic Party dominated January 6th (J6) hearings are becoming (have become) a threat to our First Amendment rights.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

RNC Fights Back Against Partisan J6 Committee, Files Lawsuit

From Pajama News, by Mr Matt Margolis, 10 March 2022, 9:19 AM ET.

Here is the lede plus two:

After many months of the January 6 committee’s partisan overreach, on Wednesday, the Republican National Committee filed a lawsuit against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the January 6 committee over their efforts to subpoena RNC databases.

“The RNC has sued to stop the January 6th Committee from unlawfully seizing confidential information about the internal activities of the Republican Party and millions of its supporters which is completely unrelated to the attack on the Capitol,” RNC chief counsel Justin Riemer said in a statement.

“The select panel has subpoenaed Salesforce.com for the data it maintains for the RNC.  Those digital communications enable political parties and other nonprofit organizations to operate and allow for organizations to interact with millions of online users,” reports the Washington Times.”

If the Rpublican Party takes control of the House of Representatived in January 2023 there could be a reserval of fortunes regarding the House J6 Commission.

And it could be worse.  It seems Veritas ran a honey trap against a reporter regarding the 6 January 2021 Capitol Hill Riots.

New York Times reporter Matthew Rosenberg, the Pulitzer-prize winning National Security correspondent for one of the nation’s largest newspapers, has admitted on an undercover video what most of us have long known: the lefty news media is blowing the events of Jan. 6, 2021, out of proportion.

. . .

Rosenberg also states that there were a “ton of FBI informants” in the Capitol [that day].

I am hoping the FBI was not involved in the 6 January activities.  However, I would not be shocked to find out it was so.

We need a way to accept that the Capitol Hill riots happened, they were, early on, encouraged by the reactions of the Capitol Police and that the net impact was near zero.  In the mean time we are eating away at our Rights and our Democratic Institutions.  That is not good.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Comparing Riots

For John, BLUF:  Some of us think the "Worst since…" rhetoric regarding Occupy Capitol Hill is a little overblown.  My comparison is the 1 March 1954 shoorup of the House floor (30 shots fired).  The Blogger linked below picks the May 2020 assault on the White House.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Flashback May 2020 Assault On The White House:  60 Secret Service Agents Wounded, President Trump Taken to Secure Bunker

Here is the sub-headline:

Let’s put this crazy J6 “insurrection” lunacy into perspective.

From Legal Insurrection, by Fuzzy Slippers, 8 January 2022, 07:30 PM.

Here is the lede plus three:

The Democrats’ January 6 clown show was worse than even I expected.  Their hysterical, pearl-clutching, lie-filled response to the events on January 6th, what Democrats are clearly hoping will be their transformative Reichstag moment, is unseemly, phony to its core, and purely and solely political.

We know this because there was no outrage over the leftist rioters who attempted to stop the peaceful transition of power during President Trump’s inauguration.  Not only did anti-Trump leftists riot, attack and injure police, set cars and buildings on fire, but they were later rewarded for this attempt to “subvert Democracy” to the tune of $1.6 million in taxpayer money.

Do you know how many Congressional Democrats (or Republicans for that matter) wailed about our “democracy” on the brink?  Do you know how many of these inauguration rioters were hunted down by the FBI, arrested, beaten and mistreated, and held as political prisoners for over a year?  Do you know how many of them were harboring blueprints of the Capitol building . . . or wait, that was an unconstructed, still boxed, Lego set not a “model” used for terroristic purposes or whatever random lunacy the FBI preened at that time.  If you said zero, you’re right on all counts.

And honestly, I think this clear two levels of justice—one for “righteous” protesters, including those who burned, looted, and murdered their way through Democrat-run cities in 2020, and one for J6 “terrorists”—is the reason that Democrats will never amass anything close to majority support for their January 6th witch hunt.

. . .

Nor did they condemn the multi-day May, 2020 assault on the White House that left at least 60 Secret Service agents wounded and forced President Trump to be whisked away to a bunker for his personal safety.

On 6 January demonstrators urned into rioters.  Rioting is bad, and should receive appropriate punishment.  The fact that it was Speaker Nancy Pelosi who was worried, rather than the Wife of Joe Sixpack, in Seattle or Portland or Kanosha or Waukesha should make no difference.  Ms Pelosi carries no title of nobility.

As to if 6 January was an Insurrection, if it was it was one of the worst in history.  No one brought weapons, not even pitch forks.  Who was going to run things?  Apparently not the man with the horned helmut.  Some people need some perspective.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Assaults on Congress

For John, BLUF:  I think that the 6 Janaury 2021 riot on Capitol Hill was wrong and an example of how crowds can get out of control.  I also think that Democrts are playing it for all it is worth, and then some.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Aaron Burr Summoned From The Dead By Speaker Pelosi

For What?

To Testify to a Former Vice President committing treason and getting away with it?

From The InstaPundit, by Law Professor Glenn Reynolds, 7 January 2022, 2:31 pm.

Here is the blog post, with link:

I THINK THE STUPID AND CRINGEY BIT IS THE WORST PART, BUT YEAH:  The Bigger Problem With The Hamilton Performance At the Capitol On January 6: “Dear Theodosia” is sung by Aaron Burr, who was an accused insurrectionist.  “In any event, celebrating an accused insurrectionist is not the right symbolism for January 6.”  Or maybe it is.  You know, all of the Framers were “insurrectionists,” actually.

Yes.  The riot on Capitol Hill on 6 January 2021 was wrong and those who incited it at the scene or caused property damage should get some jail time.  Those who just wandered through the Capitol Building, wandered through and exited, should be given community service for their tresspass.

But, inviting Aaron Burr to the first anniversary?  Chief Justice John Marshall ensured he was not convicted, but President Thomas Jefferson was sure convinced of former Vice President Burr's guilt.

Serious things happened on 6 January 2021, but Speaker Pelosi is staging theater to try to gain political advantage for the mid-term elections.  How else to explain the less than open House Select Committee on the 6 January riot on Capitol Hill.  I am not expecting a complete revelation of the facts from that particular theater production.

A lack of historic memory seems to be endemic amongst the Democrats.  They reach back to 9/11 and to Pearl Harbor and to the War of 1812.  They conveniently forget Mr James Hodgkinson shooting up the Republican Congressional Baseball team, back in 2017.  Four wounded, oone seriously.  And they forget 1 March 1954, when four dommestic terrorists fired 30 rounds from the Ladies' Gallery overlooking the floor of the House of Representatives.  Five Reprexsentatives were wounded, one of them seriously.

I don't think I woould go as far as Cartoonist Scott Adams, but his is an interesting idea.  The question of Mr Ray Epps and how he has been dropped as an FBI suspect is an interesting one.

Finally there is the actions of President Bidon to bring us all together.  My Middle Brother might tell me that the "Right" can't be brought together with the rest of America, but if that is so, why did Candidate Biden promise to do it?

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Michael Flynn Pushes Back

For John, BLUF:  And why shouldn't he, after the way he has been treated by the DC Establiahment?  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

The Morning Briefing:  Michael Flynn vs. Granny Boxwine—Make Extra Popcorn

From PJ Media, by Columnist Stephen Cruiser, 22 December 2021, 2:39 AM ET.

Here are three key paragraphs:

It’s been a slog watching Granny Boxwine preside over her revenge-porn January 6 kangaroo trial. Some of the higher-profile people she’s harassed have pushed back a little, which has just made her want to play the strongarm game even more. The whole thing was getting a little stale. Enter one Michael Thomas Flynn. Flynn introduced a little spice into the proceedings on Tuesday by filing a restraining order against Nancy Pelosi, which Robert [Spencer] wrote about:

No, she isn’t stalking him, but it is almost as bad: Gen. Michael Flynn, who knows a thing or two about witch hunts, is taking action to stop the latest one.  Naming all the members of the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol as defendants, he has filed a complaint intended to stop a subpoena from that committee.  At the same time, according to the Western Journal, Flynn “filed a motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction specifically” against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Smirnoff).  It is always refreshing, and far too rare, to see someone fighting back against this latter-day American version of the Stalinist show trials.

Remember: Flynn served as Trump’s National Security Adviser for less than a month before he resigned under a cloud in Feb. 2017, having become a central focus of the Russian collusion hoax. He wasn’t serving in the Trump administration in any capacity on Jan. 6, 2020, and had not done so for nearly three years.  But that didn’t stop the rabid partisans of the Jan. 6 committee from trying to rope him into something he had absolutely nothing to do with.

Yes, it looks like a fishing expedition.

Then there is this, from Rasmussen, on the 22nd.

Most Voters Think Capitol Riot Committee Is ‘Partisan’

While Democratic voters strongly support the House Select Committee’s investigation of the January 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol, most Republicans and independents believe the committee has become a partisan weapon.

A new national telephone and online survey by Rasmussen Reports finds that 59% of Likely U.S. voters believe the congressional investigation of the riot at the Capitol by supporters of former President Donald Trump is important, including 43% who say it is Very Important.  Thirty-nine percent (39%) don’t think the investigation is important, including 21% who say it is Not At All Important.  (To see survey question wording, click here.)

I would think that part of the proble3m for the House Select Committee on 6 January is that the term "insurrection" has been used in a fairly indiscriminate way.  Only one person was shot and killed in the incident, and that ws a rioter, who was deliberately shot by a Capitol Policeman.♠  At this point there doesn't appear to have been a plan to take over the Governent.  This was not Oliver Cromwell replacing the king.  This was not the Long Parliament, which was a precident to the American Revolution.  This was a bunch of rambuctious Citizens, tired of being lied to by politicians and media that the November election was "perfect".  What might have caused it not to happen might have been a little humility, which was, unfortunately, in short supply on the Democratic side, and the Republican.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  Fortunately, for the shooter the victim was Caucasian and he is Black.  I expect there would have been quite a hue and cry had it been otherwise.

Occupy Capitol Hill

For John, BLUF:  I suspect this scab will be picked at a lot between now and the Anniversary, in a couple of weeks.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Another Lawsuit Holds The Key To Trump’s Best Defense Against The Jan. 6 Committee

Here is the sub-headline:

Because House Speaker Nancy Pelosi failed to appoint the requisite number of members, the Jan. 6 committee is arguably invalid under its own authorizing resolution.

From The Federalist, by Reporter Margot Cleveland, 10 December 2021.

Here are the four key paragraphs:

House Resolution 503 created the January 6, 2021, Select Committee, Meadows’s argument begins, then stressing that Section 2(a) of that resolution requires House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to “appoint 13 Members to the Select Committee, 5 of whom shall be appointed after consultation with the minority leader.” But “Speaker Pelosi has appointed only nine members to the Select Committee: seven Democrats and two Republicans,” the complaint alleges.  “None of these members was appointed from the selection of five GOP congressman put forth by Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy,” Meadows’s lawsuit continues.

Because Speaker Pelosi failed to appoint the requisite number of members, as mandated by House Resolution 503, it was “not a duly constituted Select Committee,” Meadows’s lawsuit argues.  Without establishing a duly constituted Select Committee, as mandated in the Resolution, the nine members lack the authority to act under House Resolution 503, the argument continues, including by issuing subpoenas under Section 5(c)(6) of House Resolution 503.

The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ignored the problem caused by Pelosi’s unprecedented refusal to seat Republican Reps. Jim Jordan and Jim Banks, which led to only two representatives with Rs behind their names, Liz Cheney of Wyoming and Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, agreeing to serve on the committee.

Further, while House Resolution 503 provides for business to be conducted by a quorum of members, the problem here is not the number of members participating but the number of congressmen appointed to the committee.  Also, because House Resolution 503 requires the appointment of 13 members, Pelosi’s failure to appoint the requisite number of committee members means the select committee was never properly constituted.  That failure, Meadows’ lawsuit argues, renders the Select Committee invalid and without the authority to issue subpoenas.

This whole House Select Committee strikes me as more therater than factfinding.

I hope that all of us can focus on protecting our Republic and retain a little trust in our fellow Americans.  All of them.

One thing we can do iseschew the use of Insurrection.  If that was an insurrection, then the riots of 2020 were also an attempt to bring down the US Government.  A sense of proportion would be good.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Nancy For Ever

For John, BLUF:  I thought she had earlier decided to retire, not that I think she is too old.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Now We Know What Nancy Pelosi's 2022 Plans Are

From PJ Media, by Reporter Matt Margolis, 13 December 2021, 4:33 PM ET.

Here is the lede plus three:

Rumors have been going around for months that Nancy Pelosi was planning to retire.

Back in October, she refused to confirm to CNN’s Jake Tapper whether she would seek reelection, saying she had to have that conversation with her family first.

Well, I suppose she’s had the conversation, and if you were hoping Nancy would retire, I hate to break it to you, but according to CNN, she plans to stay at least until after the 2022 midterms.

“And sources familiar with Pelosi’s thinking say she isn’t ruling out the possibility of trying to stay in leadership after 2022, despite her original vow to leave as the top House Democrat,” CNN reports. “She’ll devote much of next year to raising money for Democrats as they try to hold their narrow majority, those sources tell CNN, adding to the nearly $1 billion her office calculates she has already raised for Democrats in her time as leader.”

While Speaker Pelosi is likely going to be reelected from her California District, I am doubtful the Democrats will hope a majority in the House in January 2023.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Confusion in DC

For John, BLUF:  It appears that there is not a strong voice in the Executive Branch, guiding policy.  Thus we have gridlock.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Klain in Vain

Here is the sub-headline:

#43: Did Biden's chief of staff make a fateful blunder?

From Kaus Files, by Political Analyst Mickey Kaus, 2 November 2021.

Here is the lede plus two:

There’s a remote—but increasingly less remote— possibility that Dems will wind up with neither of their two big spending bills:  1) the bipartisan “BIF” hard infrastructure (bridges, roads, etc.) bill and 2) the partisan Dem social spending laundry list, aka “Build Back Better” (BBB).

Why would that happen?  Because Terry McAuliffe’s upset loss in Virginia could freak out vulnerable Dems, who then bail from the second, BBB bill — the way an Eric Cantor loss in Virginia freaked Congress out about “comprehensive immigration reform” and sank that legislation in 2014.  But if BBB dies … well, since many progressives only support the bipartisan “hard” infrastructure bill if it’s twinned with BBB, it’s possible enough of them might vote against the bipartisan bill to sink it too.  (It would only take 4 or 5, out of a “Progressive Caucus” of 94 members, to do that.) Biden’s agenda dies in a Tarantino gunfight.

Still an unlikely scenario, as it’s always been almost inconceivable that the Democrats would screw things up so badly they’d end up passing nothing.  But this achievement is now within reach, and if it happens, it looks like there will be an obvious fall guy: Ron Klain, President Biden’s chief of staff.

I find it hard to believe that the Troika (Biden, Pelosi and Schumer) can't make it happen.  Surely the staffs will eventually get together and find a compromise.  Compromise is what the system is set up to force on the elected officials.  So why isn't it happening?  If you think the system is hard broke then you take an all or nothing position.  I would describe it as a repudiation of our American experiment.

On the other hand, if President Biden is not exercising a strong hand, then power is fragmented in the Executive Branch.  There is not a clear voice, a certain trumpet, as the Good Book says, and we will have problems.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Trouble in San Francisco

For John, BLUF:  The homeless problem and the lack of prosecution of petty crimes is creating a downward spiral, one Speaker Nancy Pelosi isn't likely to reverse.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

San Francisco residents don't 'feel safe,' turn to private security amid crime spree

From The Blaze, by Reporter Chris Pandolfo, 25 October 2021.

Here is the lede plus three:

With crime spiraling out of control in their city, residents of San Francisco's Marina District have turned to private security to patrol the streets and protect their families, with some saying they don't feel safe in their own neighborhoods.

"We don't feel safe in our neighborhood," resident Kate Lyons told KPIX-TV.  "And we have an alarm, we have cameras on our property, but we want the extra security of having someone have eyes on our place."

Lyons and 150 other residents in the Marina District have hired the services of patrol special officer Alan Byard, who provides a measure of added security by patrolling the streets amid a surge in car break-ins and home burglaries.

"It's a nice area down here, people are afraid of what's been going on," Byard told KPIX.  "They want a safe place to raise their kids.  In the last year, I've had 10 of my clients move out of the city."

The article managed to mention San Francisco Mayor London Breed, however, it skipped over the likely villan, District Attorney Chesa Boudin.  I guess there is the role of Mr George Soros.

Can San Francisco come back?  And what paths for recovery are available?  My suspicion is it won't involve Socialism.  Not even European style Socialism.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Wait! What?

For John, BLUF:  The bruhaha surreounding the events of 6 Janauary 2021 suggest the kind of mindless activites of the French Revolution or Europe Post-WWI.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Garland confirms no one who participated in January 6th has been charged with insurrection

From The New Neo, by Herself, 22 October 2021.

Here is the lede plus three:

Or rather, he sort of confirms it:

But, when asked by Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) if any of the individuals who have been arrested for participating in the riot have been charged with “insurrection,” Garland told him “I don’t believe so.”

“Has any defendant involved in the January 6th events been charged with insurrection?” Gohmert asked.

“I don’t believe so,” Garland responded.

First off, if Representative Adam Schiff (D-CA) suggests anything, one needs to pause and examine alternative answers  It is possible that Representative Schiff holds the record in Congress for being on the wrong side of any given issue.

It appears to me that Speaker Nancy Pelosi is using the 6 January events as part of her campaign to elect Democrats, by tying Republicans to this myth of an Insurrection on that day.  And, it continues her total distain for President Donald J Trump.  I expect she is disappointed in Attorney General Merrick Garland for not coming up with anybody who can be charged with insurrection.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

A Red Flag

For John, BLUF:  We, as a nation, are filing in our efforts to have our People vaccinated against COVID-19.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

First Workers, Now Blacks:  Democrats’ Betrayals For Big Business Are Piling Up, But Can Republicans Seize It?

Here is the sub-headline:

Now roughly 72 percent of black New York City residents aged 18-44 are banned -- banned -- from entering dining establishments.

From The Federalist, by Christopher Bedford, 1 October 2021.

Picking up on the subheadline:

At a practical level, fighting the virus, I can almost imagine the value of the mandate, except it suggests an underlying problem.  Our Federal Government is not able to sell the solution.  Over the last year and a half they have squandered their reputation.

Worse, the President is a cranky old man who will not tolerate anyone thinking differently from him.  That is not just a bad personality trait. It will work against the success of our Democracy.

And, quoting The Federalist, “Now roughly 72 percent of black New York City residents aged 18-44 are banned -- banned -- from entering dining establishments.”  That sounds like a problem unsolved.  Why are we unable to reach out to our Black Brothers and Sisters and help them see value in Vaccinations?  Or, are the Unvaccinated right and we are wrong and the Vax is bad and we are stupid.  If it was 32% it would be one thing, but it is 72% who haven’t had the jab.  This should be a big red flag and should be causing the Federal Government to rethink its approach.  Alas, ’tint happening.  I think the House Speaker is just as stubborn as the President.  Stubborn leaders are not leaders.  They are dictators..

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

The General Milley imbroglio

For John, BLUF:  Here is a view of the imbroglio swirling around Joint Chiefs Chairman, GEN Mak Milley.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Deep State, Deep Trouble

Here is the sub-headline:

America’s woke generals and the Military-Industrial Complex must be purged to save the nation.

From The Ame3rican Mind, by Mr Josiah Lippincott, 15 September 2021.

Here is the lede plus three:

Revelations from a new book, Peril, by Bob Woodward and Rob Costa, reveal just how deep the spiritual rot in the military goes.  In the days after the January 6 protest, General Mark Milley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, promised, in the event of a war, to give aid and comfort to China.  According to the Washington Post, after the Capitol protest, Milley sent secret communiques to the head of the People’s Liberation Army, promising that “If we’re going to attack, I’m going to call you ahead of time.  It’s not going to be a surprise.”

In a decent country such a brazen act of collusion with a foreign power by one of the most prominent leaders of the armed forces would be met with immediate and unrelenting backlash.  Instead, this betrayer of the Constitution and the principle of civilian leadership of the military is a liberal darling.  At the inauguration, Joe Biden thanked Milley for undermining President Trump in the final weeks of his presidency.

Milley, before reaching out to China, sat down with the service’s top officers and demanded from them what amounted to an oath—none of them would launch a nuclear weapon without his approval.  The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff went behind the President’s back to secure control over the nation’s most important weapons.

Our generals are losers abroad, and grifters at home.  They parrot MSNBC talking points on Twitter and grovel before Fauci. This is bad enough.  But Milley’s actions show that America’s top military officers have reached another level of delusion.  They fancy themselves a new praetorian guard to protect the nation—as construed by elite editorial boards—from the people’s elected representatives.

A new Praetorian Guard?  The idea of a Praetorian Guard is anamthma to the the traditions of our Republic.  We should not encourage this kind of bureaucratic approach in our Nation's Capitol.  We should not even encourage talk about it.  Even applause for GEN Milley and his actions during the twilight days of the Trump Administration is encouraging the wrong way to go, for the implications for the future.  No matter how much you may have disliked President Trump, the idea of the military "keeping an eye on him" should be anathma to you.

Another view on this issue can be found at the Lawfire Blog, by retired Air Force Major General Charlie Dunlap, "America needs to know exactly what General Milley said to his 'Chinese counterpart'”.  When he was a student at National War College then Colonel Dunlap won the Chairman's Essay Competition (co-won), with "The Origins of the American Military Coup of 2012".♠  Professor Dunlap has studied this issue for some time and is an expert in the field.

My guess is that this will quietly slip away, with no adverse action against anyone.  That is fine, as long as we don't have repeats.  None.♥

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  Interestingly enough, this paper was the co-winner of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff 1991-92 Strategy Essay Competition.  I was lucky enough to be the "thesis" advisor, which involved no work on my part.
♥  For sure, if President Trump comes back in 2024, he will have this in the back of his mind and make appointments accordingly.  Promising careers may be crushed, but then that happens every four years anyway.

Trespass or Treason?

For John, BLUF:  I think the Democratic Leadership in the US House needs to be careful to not create the tensions it claims to be investigating.  There are smart History PhD Candidates, 20 Years on, who will replay the tape and hear a different story.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Regime vs. Regime

Here is the sub-headline:

We who swear to uphold the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic owe no allegiance whatever to the oligarchy that now runs this country.

From American Greatness, by Commentator Angelo Codevilla, 20 May 2021.

Here is the lede plus four:

The attempt of America’s ruling class to convict 455 persons of “armed insurrection”—i.e. of waging war against the United States, a species of treason—for protesting insufficient scrutiny of the 2020 election on January 6 in the Capitol, while at the same time it excuses and even cheers the burning and looting of courthouses, police stations, and downtowns all over America, is not the exercise of a “double standard.”

The people in and out of government who do this are not corrupt. Instead, acting as part of the regime—the oligarchy—they are replacing the American republic and waging war to crush its remains.

The sooner Americans realize that we are being governed by people at war with our Constitution and contemptuous of ourselves, the sooner those people may be treated as the enemies they are.

In the Washington Post, the Justice Department explained why the words of its indictments of those it claims trespassed on the Capitol will not result in the severe prison sentences they imply.  Those words try to fit acts prima facie of mostly peaceful protest into the Democratic Party’s and associated oligarchy’s narrative of “armed insurrection against our democracy.”  But in the Post story these “legal experts” mention regretfully that, their best efforts notwithstanding, what remains of the U.S. legal system cannot wholly erase the fact that “trespassing is still only trespassing, even in the U.S. Capitol,” and that “a misdemeanor is still only a misdemeanor.”  Drat, still!

Nevertheless, these prosecutors and friendly experts fill most of the article with how they combine unlimited pretrial detention under harsh circumstances and limitation of legal assistance to press the accused to accept maximum penalties and to forgo bringing cases to juries.

The Speaker is playing with fire, and could get burned.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Show Trial on Capitol Hill

For John, BLUF:  This is old, but pertinent.&nhsp; There isn't much of a case for the Lego Insurrection, that is not going to stop the bien-pensant from pressing forward and damaging as many Trump supports as they can.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

DOJ quietly acknowledges there was no sedition at the US Capitol

Here is the sub-headline:

Media hyperbole was the root cause of fabricating crimes that didn't exist

From The Law Officer Blog, by "Law Officer, 30 March 2021.

Here is the lede plus three:

Despite all the outrage and the threats of charging “insurrectionists” with sedition—the act of attempting to overthrow the government—proving them based upon actual facts and evidence seems to be increasingly unlikely.  For example, Michael Cantrell reported on America’s Sheriff that:

“Many of the trials for individuals involved in the Capitol riot of January 6th have started and much to the chagrin of liberals everywhere, the charges these folks are facing aren’t quite as serious as we were all led to believe they would be.  In fact, the Justice Department has now said that the body of evidence in these cases is not as damaging as it was previously thought to be.”

Further, developing reports indicate that none of the 400 people who have been arrested for their involvement in the riot have been charged with sedition, according to the Post Millennial.  The most serious charge that has been brought against a defendant in this incident has been assault.  To be clear, there is quite a leap between the charges of assault—and the charges of conspiring to overthrow the government.

Even more perplexing, while others have been charged with conspiracy and obstruction, there’s a rather inconvenient fact that prosecutors must reckon.  As the Post Millenial explained: “Others have been charged with conspiracy, and obstruction. While five people lost their lives during the riot, only one was killed with a weapon, and that was Ashli Babbit, who died after being shot by an unnamed Capitol Police Officer.”

Yes, this is old but the narrative is going one way and the actual story another, as the first day of House Hearings on the Lego Inurrection shows.

It seems unlikely to me that the trajectory of the House Hearings will change.  It seems equally unlikely that we will get to the historic truth, as opposed to the "truth" that Speaker Pelosi wishs to put forward.  This is like a Soviet Show Trial, and that is sad.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff