Red Gauntlet , SASS 60619 971 Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/joint-chiefs-call-riot-a-direct-assault-on-the-constitutional-process-affirm-biden-as-next-commander-in-chief/ar-BB1cHmsR?ocid=msedgdhp&li=BBnb7Kz Link to post Share on other sites
Larsen E. Pettifogger, SASS #32933 1,427 Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 They had to if they want to keep their jobs or stay in the military. That is why even when non-liberals are in office you will never hear an up and coming military man talk about gay rights, transgender, etc. Dems have long memories and will purge them from the ranks. Sort of like what is already starting to happen with the Internet. 2 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Blackwater 53393 5,987 Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 I haven’t seen any such statements concerning the attacks on federal buildings and other federal facilities by Antifa or BLM!! These are no less wrong and are an affront no less reprehensible than last Wednesday’s event!! 3 2 Link to post Share on other sites
Kid Rich 868 Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 And there were a whole lot more of them for a much longer period of time with a much higher resulting loss of life and property. kR 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Ace_of_Hearts 1,142 Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 When the military starts making public statements without the approval of the Commander in Chief they are overstepping their authority. Someone needs a good kick in the A__! 7 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Smokin Gator SASS #29736 493 Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 The Metoo people took over Capitol offices, pounded on the doors of the Supreme Court and stood all over the front of the building. If it is treasonous now to occupy the capital it was treasonous then. The difference is that liberal politicians were complicit with not stopping the Metoo protesters during the ridiculous Kavanaugh hearings from occupying the Capitol building. By the liberals own standard, they have committed treason. Who knows what would have happened if they used force to stop the Metoo occupation? 3 2 Link to post Share on other sites
Dirty Dan Dawkins 895 Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 (edited) For four years, we've killed some bad guys, brought a lot of good men back home, and no new foreign entanglements , despite some bad hombres advising our dear President. Curious to see how long peace will last before we ship our men back out to some other God-forsaken cause. Edited January 12 by Dirty Dan Dawkins 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Utah Bob #35998 16,321 Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 No comment. 2 Link to post Share on other sites
Larsen E. Pettifogger, SASS #32933 1,427 Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 I Like Ike. It was a good campaign slogan and true. 3 Link to post Share on other sites
Pat Riot, SASS #13748 25,834 Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 Oh, I have comments...I choose to not write them here as they would be quite profane and decidedly one sided. 3 Link to post Share on other sites
Red Gauntlet , SASS 60619 971 Posted January 12 Author Share Posted January 12 I'm glad of the statement, but not of the circumstances that brought it forth. Link to post Share on other sites
Utah Bob #35998 16,321 Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 19 minutes ago, Pat Riot, SASS #13748 said: Oh, I have comments...I choose to not write them here as they would be quite profane and decidedly one sided. I can do it without profanity. But they definitely would be Political. 3 Link to post Share on other sites
Raylan 8,571 Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 Gee, I must have missed the part of the Consititution where the military has any say in who the president is or is not or where their opinion on the matter has any relevance. They really need to keep their ___________ noses out of domestic politics. In fact I think as I remember it they are explicitly supposed to avoid politics. I find their statement to be both pathetic and disturbing. 4 1 Link to post Share on other sites
J-BAR #18287 6,307 Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 I don’t see a Constitutional crisis in these events. The election was held, the courts did not find sufficient evidence to overturn the results, the election was certified and the newly elected officials will assume their duties. Noise and protest do not define a Constitutional crisis. The Constitution worked. The responsibilities of the Speaker of the House, outlined in Section 1 Article 2 of the Constitution do not include limiting voter choices in future elections. Using impeachment to prevent a person she doesn’t like from running for office again disenfranchises over 70 million people whose choice may not coincide with hers. That right there might be a Constitutional crisis. 5 2 Link to post Share on other sites
Red Gauntlet , SASS 60619 971 Posted January 13 Author Share Posted January 13 I think it's simply to avoid confusion that may exist in some minds after Jan. 20th. Since no such confusion ever existed before, it wasn't an issue. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Blackwater 53393 5,987 Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 I forgot about the METOOs! They rushed the capitol and pounded on the doors of the legislature!! TREASON!! I tell ya’!! TREASON!!! 2 Link to post Share on other sites
Mister Badly 525 Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 I like the statement. Support and defend the constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Pretty simple 2 Link to post Share on other sites
Dirty Dan Dawkins 895 Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 Too bad those (your favorite expletive here) didn’t have anything to say when a federal courthouse was under siege, or when law enforcement was barricaded or chained into buildings with attempts to set said building on fire. If they really give a (your favorite expletive here), they would have stayed the (your favorite expletive here) shut up. Now they can just kiss my (your preferred body part here). 2 Link to post Share on other sites
Dirty Dan Dawkins 895 Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 The term pearl clutching comes to mind 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Mister Badly 525 Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 I think they were just saying they were going to support the duly elected president who was confirmed by congress as their oath requires them to. In case there was any confusion. 3 Link to post Share on other sites
Dirty Dan Dawkins 895 Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 I thought that as part of the job , that went without sayin’ Just sayin’ Link to post Share on other sites
Mister Badly 525 Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 Well, after the debacle the other day it appears they felt the need to inform domestic enemies of the constitution they would be facing the United States Armed Forces if there was a next time. 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Pat Riot, SASS #13748 25,834 Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 Please...The enemies if the Constitution are on the door steps. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Blackwater 53393 5,987 Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 (edited) 1 hour ago, Mister Badly said: Well, after the debacle the other day it appears they felt the need to inform domestic enemies of the constitution they would be facing the United States Armed Forces if there was a next time. More enemies of the Constitution were and are on the floor of both houses than there were on the steps of the Capitol last week!! The protesters, by and large, were more peaceful and are more patriotic than any other group, (mob is a better word for those other protesters) that has been assembled all last year!! Pelousy and Scummer andtheir chums are the true enemies of the Constitution and all the baloney the media spews cannot conceal that!! No political opinion here. Just observing the facts!!! Edited January 13 by Blackwater 53393 3 Link to post Share on other sites
Mister Badly 525 Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2021/01/parlers-amateur-coding-could-come-back-to-haunt-capitol-hill-rioters/ Link to post Share on other sites
Bad Bascomb, SASS # 47,494 862 Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 The Joint Chiefs were busily doing what most higher-echelon brass do best--- kissing the ass of the new boss. Link to post Share on other sites
Smokin Gator SASS #29736 493 Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 They announced they will be searching social media to identify participants but made no effort to do so during months of burning, looting, destroying black owned businesses and murdering black small business owners. 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Tennessee williams 2,421 Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 I just don't understand it. How can internet providers refuse to allow Parler to function because essentially they disagree with them, but a Christian baker can't refuse to bake a cake for someone for because they essentially disagree with them for religious reasons? How can certain folks in DC condone and indeed encourage rioting, looting, and bullying for 4 years but one of them can't say let's peacefully go down to the Capitol and tell them what's on your mind? Yep, he said "peacefully", I actually listened to it. Just makes no sense to be. It's almost like a double standard or something. 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Red Gauntlet , SASS 60619 971 Posted January 13 Author Share Posted January 13 1 hour ago, Smokin Gator SASS #29736 said: They announced they will be searching social media to identify participants but made no effort to do so during months of burning, looting, destroying black owned businesses and murdering black small business owners. It's the old "why me, when the other guy got away with it" defense; most LEOs and lawyers have heard it often. It flyeth not, nor ever hath it flown. It would have been so much better not to have done the same thing....and in the Houses of Congress, no less... Link to post Share on other sites
Ace_of_Hearts 1,142 Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 1 hour ago, Tennessee williams said: I just don't understand it. How can internet providers refuse to allow Parler to function because essentially they disagree with them, but a Christian baker can't refuse to bake a cake for someone for because they essentially disagree with them for religious reasons? How can certain folks in DC condone and indeed encourage rioting, looting, and bullying for 4 years but one of them can't say let's peacefully go down to the Capitol and tell them what's on your mind? Yep, he said "peacefully", I actually listened to it. Just makes no sense to be. It's almost like a double standard or something. When you are in charge, you get to make the rules. That is the concept of Communism/Socialism/Marxism. Or as they have named it...... Progressive. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Smokin Gator SASS #29736 493 Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 34 minutes ago, Red Gauntlet , SASS 60619 said: It's the old "why me, when the other guy got away with it" defense; most LEOs and lawyers have heard it often. It flyeth not, nor ever hath it flown. It would have been so much better not to have done the same thing....and in the Houses of Congress, no less... We aren't talking about complaining about getting a speeding ticket while someone else got away with it. The actual destruction the left has done in recent months without penalty is many magnitudes greater then anything the right has done. Not even remotely close. They've dropped nearly all charges for any leftist arrests including damaging over 100 federal buildings and a couple of billion dollars in property damage. It would be great if none of it happened, sure. But this is reality right now. Your comment that "it flyeth not" is not true for the left who are excused by district attorneys, politicians and the media and others, obviously. 2 3 Link to post Share on other sites
Charlie Harley, #14153 3,211 Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 I’m going to refill my popcorn bowl and watch this thread play out. 2 Link to post Share on other sites
Charlie Harley, #14153 3,211 Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 On second thought, I will weigh in and declare my belief that the statement by the Joint Chiefs of Staff was completely appropriate and showed great leadership. Their oath as commissioned officers includes the obligation to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic“. That is exactly what they did with their statement. There is no moral or legal equivalency between the riots this past summer, and what took place on and inside the Capitol on January 6. The riots were wrong, and the law enforcement agencies in charge of controlling them handled the situation extremely poorly. But these were law enforcement situations, and there was never a threat to a Constitutional process. Since election day, the Constitutional process of selecting the president for the next four years has been taking place. Individual votes were cast, counted, and re-counted as appropriate in the respective states. Legal challenges were raised in the court system, evaluated by a wide spectrum of judges appointed by a variety of administrations, and allowed to proceed as they showed merit. States certified their vote counts, electors cast their votes, and on January 6 those votes were preparing to be counted on the floor of the United States Senate. During this period, Donald Trump and his supporters planned and organized a rally at the White House to take place the morning of January 6. I am fully aware of bias in nearly every media source, so I found the official video of the entire 3+ hours of the rally and its speeches. I listened to it all to fully understand and judge what was said. Every speaker repeated some form of the lie that Vice President Pence had the authority to overturn or dismiss the votes of the electors. He does not have that authority. It is not in the Constitution, nor anywhere in any subsequent law. Every speaker encouraged the crowd to be strong and take action to change the course of events that were to take place in the Senate that day, without placing limits on what those actions should be. Rudy Giuliani exhorted the crowd by saying that it was time for “trial by combat“. Only once did Donald Trump mention a peaceful protest. For the remainder of his hour speech he encouraged using “strength” and “fight” to accomplish his goal of influencing the Constitutional process which was occurring in the Senate, and changing the outcome in his favor. What followed was violence and intimidation in a failed attempt to change the outcome. This meets the definition of an attempted insurrection and domestic terrorism. The Joint Chiefs of Staff recognized January 6 as a direct threat to the Constitution which they swore to uphold and defend. I believe their statement is a clear and appropriate response to the situation. It sends a clear message to the entire armed forces as to what is expected going forward. 4 2 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Pat Riot, SASS #13748 25,834 Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 This thread needs closing. Link to post Share on other sites
Matthew Duncan 1,540 Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 Defund the Fed 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts