Communists Gonna Communist

[Spock]

Since the Democrats hired an ABC News producer to help jazz up their Primetime (Thursday Evening) January 6th Hearings-

https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/06/politics ... index.html

Isn't that by definition a Show Trial?

[flockofseagulls104]

What else have they got? Might as well make it a show.
Is it gonna be on all the networks, too?

[Bob78164]

What else have they got? Might as well make it a show.
Is it gonna be on all the networks, too?

Interesting that you're willing to give so much credence to True the Vote's claims when it's refusing to release its "evidence," based on a "documentary" that was obviously produced in order to manipulate opinion, but you appear to have prejudged the actual evidence a Congressional Committee is about to show the American people.

To answer your question, it'll be on all the networks. Except Fox. Fox is going to pretend it's not happening. --Bob

[flockofseagulls104]

What else have they got? Might as well make it a show.
Is it gonna be on all the networks, too?

Interesting that you're willing to give so much credence to True the Vote's claims when it's refusing to release its "evidence," based on a "documentary" that was obviously produced in order to manipulate opinion, but you appear to have prejudged the actual evidence a Congressional Committee is about to show the American people.

To answer your question, it'll be on all the networks. Except Fox. Fox is going to pretend it's not happening. --Bob

I have no interest in what you find interesting.
Will this 'committee' address in any way the allegations presented in 2000 Mules? If they had any interest in fairness, they would, but they won't. It's just a continuation of the BIG LIE against trump. It IS A SHOW TRIAL. But guess what, bob. I will probably watch this circus directed at useful idiots to get their dander up. It will be the pinnacle of propaganda ever seen in the US. So I will have standing when I criticize it. But it will be painful.

Big surprise about Fox News. They are pretending 2000 Mules doesn't exist as well.

[Bob78164]

What else have they got? Might as well make it a show.
Is it gonna be on all the networks, too?

Interesting that you're willing to give so much credence to True the Vote's claims when it's refusing to release its "evidence," based on a "documentary" that was obviously produced in order to manipulate opinion, but you appear to have prejudged the actual evidence a Congressional Committee is about to show the American people.

To answer your question, it'll be on all the networks. Except Fox. Fox is going to pretend it's not happening. --Bob

I have no interest in what you find interesting.
Will this 'committee' address in any way the allegations presented in 2000 Mules? If they had any interest in fairness, they would, but they won't. It's just a continuation of the BIG LIE against trump. It IS A SHOW TRIAL. But guess what, bob. I will probably watch this circus directed at useful idiots to get their dander up. It will be the pinnacle of propaganda ever seen in the US. So I will have standing when I criticize it. But it will be painful.

Big surprise about Fox News. They are pretending 2000 Mules doesn't exist as well.

The Committee will not address the fake voter-fraud contentions. It also won't address the Lindbergh kidnapping. And for the same reason. Neither has anything to do with an armed insurrection that interfered with and delayed (albeit only by a few hours) the peaceful transfer of power. --Bob

[flockofseagulls104]

Interesting that you're willing to give so much credence to True the Vote's claims when it's refusing to release its "evidence," based on a "documentary" that was obviously produced in order to manipulate opinion, but you appear to have prejudged the actual evidence a Congressional Committee is about to show the American people.

To answer your question, it'll be on all the networks. Except Fox. Fox is going to pretend it's not happening. --Bob

I have no interest in what you find interesting.
Will this 'committee' address in any way the allegations presented in 2000 Mules? If they had any interest in fairness, they would, but they won't. It's just a continuation of the BIG LIE against trump. It IS A SHOW TRIAL. But guess what, bob. I will probably watch this circus directed at useful idiots to get their dander up. It will be the pinnacle of propaganda ever seen in the US. So I will have standing when I criticize it. But it will be painful.

Big surprise about Fox News. They are pretending 2000 Mules doesn't exist as well.

The Committee will not address the fake voter-fraud contentions. It also won't address the Lindbergh kidnapping. And for the same reason. Neither has anything to do with an armed insurrection that interfered with and delayed (albeit only by a few hours) the peaceful transfer of power. --Bob

Maybe I missed it, but who was armed? Except for the guy who shot and killed Ashli Babbit? This is a transparent political circus for the benefit of the democrat party. Nothing more. You'd be great there, bob. You could showcase your righteous indignation and sanctimonious outrage while doing your lawyerly lying bit that you practice so much here. Can you do it in person? Or can you only do it using a keyboard? There are many professionals at that who will be performing for an Oscar tomorrow. Or is it an Emmy? I forget.

[silverscreenselect]

The Committee will not address the fake voter-fraud contentions. It also won't address the Lindbergh kidnapping. And for the same reason. Neither has anything to do with an armed insurrection that interfered with and delayed (albeit only by a few hours) the peaceful transfer of power. --Bob

The so-called voter fraud contentions are being heard by the entity responsible for doing so in Georgia, the State Elections Board and the Secretary of State's Office. The difference is that witnesses are testifying under oath before Congress and supplying documents and records, while potential witnesses in Georgia are refusing subpoenas and offering excuses about not testifying.

[wbtravis007]

What else have they got? Might as well make it a show.
Is it gonna be on all the networks, too?

You sure do miss out on a lot of news.

Course, that's been pretty obvious for quite a while.

Might have something to do with your obsession with this board.

A little diversification might be a good idea.

[silverscreenselect]

Maybe I missed it, but who was armed?

This guy for one:

A North Carolina man is accused of striking a police officer with a large metal pole and punching others with his fists during the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol. For David Gietzen, however, that may have only been Act One. After joining the unprecedented mob assault on U.S. democracy on Jan. 6, the 38-year-old Sanford man returned to the Capitol two weeks later on Inauguration Day planning to take part in a second violent attempt to keep Donald Trump in office, according to a report received by the FBI.

In an affidavit unsealed this month, the FBI says it got word 10 days after the Capitol attack that Gietzen and his unidentified brother intended to return to Washington for President Joe Biden’s swearing-in on Jan. 20. Once there, according to report, the brothers hoped to join others in a repeat assault on the Capitol to force Congress into ordering a new election, the affidavit alleges. When FBI agents contacted Gietzen by phone on Jan. 19, 2021, he told them that he and his brother already were en route to D.C.., but that “he had no intentions of committing any acts of violence,” the affidavit says.

The FBI document does not include any details of Gietzen’s behavior the next day. However, he was arrested this month on eight charges, including two felony counts of assaulting police. One of those assault charges involved the use of a deadly weapon, presumably the large metal pole Gietzen carried in several photographs included in the affidavit.

Overall, more than 810 U.S. citizens have been arrested in connection with the attack on the Capitol by Trump supporters to stop congressional certification of the ex-president’s election defeat. The mob, which numbered in the thousands, was enraged by Trump’s baseless claims that he had lost the election due to voting fraud.

How many Jan. 6 rioters returned to the Capitol for the Inauguration is unknown. However, a Florida man was arrested in Washington on Jan. 20, and charged with Jan. 6 crimes. Gietzen is the first publicly identified N.C. defendant to have been in Washington for both Trump’s “Stop the Steal” rally on Jan. 6, 2021 and the inauguration two weeks later. He has not been charged with any crimes connected to his inaugural visit. His brother, who was unidentified in court documents, remains uncharged up to now.

https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/ ... 05027.html

Note that the FBI contacted this guy before he arrived for the inauguration. That may have led him to avoid doing anything at the inauguration. This article was written on May 22, and it's just the first of many that came up in a google search. Note that the article predates yesterday's indictments against the Proud Boys. Interesting that Flock's outrage doesn't extend to attempts to subvert the electoral process through slates of fake electors.

[flockofseagulls104]

What else have they got? Might as well make it a show.
Is it gonna be on all the networks, too?

You sure do miss out on a lot of news.

Course, that's been pretty obvious for quite a while.

Might have something to do with your obsession with this board.

A little diversification might be a good idea.

I don't keep up with the broadcast networks as much as you seem to do. I cut the cord a couple months ago when Direct TV decided to go woke. I think the only reason I had to watch anything there was This Is Us, but that's over. No reason I can think of to switch to my antenna feed. As for their 'news', Scott Pelley's so-called 'reporting' cured me of that habit a few years ago.
Your obsession with personally trolling me when you know NOTHING about me might be something for you to look at.

[Bob Juch]

What else have they got? Might as well make it a show.
Is it gonna be on all the networks, too?

You sure do miss out on a lot of news.

Course, that's been pretty obvious for quite a while.

Might have something to do with your obsession with this board.

A little diversification might be a good idea.

I don't keep up with the broadcast networks as much as you seem to do. I cut the cord a couple months ago when Direct TV decided to go woke. I think the only reason I had to watch anything there was This Is Us, but that's over. No reason I can think of to switch to my antenna feed. As for their 'news', Scott Pelley's so-called 'reporting' cured me of that habit a few years ago.
Your obsession with personally trolling me when you know NOTHING about me might be something for you to look at.

Ah, so you were watching OAN? That explains things.

[silverscreenselect]

Your obsession with personally trolling me when you know NOTHING about me might be something for you to look at.

You're the easiest person on this Bored to read. You never contribute to any non-political thread, and all your political posts are strict party line with a healthy dose of personal aggrievement.

[silverscreenselect]

Flock might be interested in watching the hearings in two weeks. Brad Raffensperger and his top assistant will be testifying about Donald Trump's efforts to overturn the results of the election in Georgia. I know how much Flock values the integrity of the electoral process here in Georgia.

[flockofseagulls104]

CONWAY, AR—When his bi-weekly sedan fill-up exceeded $120 for the 10th time, local man Matthew Standridge found himself wondering if the Jan 6 “insurrection” was really such a tragedy.

"I’m not, like, an existential threat to democracy or anything, but it does feel like this whole thing with Biden isn't going well," said Stanbridge with a pained look on his face as he prepared to swipe his debit card and wipe out his bank account. "Are we sure he didn't—I dunno—steal the election? Is it too late to overturn it? Is it racist to ask that?”

Sources add that Standridge tried to shake the troubling thoughts from his mind, getting back on the road for his 10-minute commute that drains his gas tank each week.

“I’m not some far-right-wing extremist. I pay my taxes, I believe all elections, and all women, and I hold most of the approved views…I just wonder if those protesters knew something I don’t,” Standridge told his wife. “At this point, I think it’s time Jacob entered the workforce. I know he’s only eight, but we need to put food on the table and I don't think Kamala will do it for us like she said she would.”

At publishing time, Mr. Standridge was found inside a Spirit Halloween store purchasing a buffalo hat and red-white-and-blue face paint and was unavailable for comment.

[flockofseagulls104]

Tonight's extravaganza will be a long-form commercial whose purpose will be to try and prevent Donald Trump from running for President in 2024. Starring, probably, that spellbinding personality with a double digit IQ, Adam Shiff and soon-to-be outgoing RINO representative Liz Cheney.

They will use the tried and true format last used against Brett Kavanaugh (who released the whirlwind and is now not knowing what will hit him, courtesy of Chuck Schumer), but spiced up for primetime by James Goldston, former head of ABC News. It will be televised by all the left-controlled networks, who wouldn't give three minutes of prime time if aliens from another galaxy landed on earth.

They will attempt to 'prove' that Donald Trump organized and ordered several hundred people to enter the US Capitol, inciting an 'insurrection'. Since it is very unlikely that there is any physical evidence that is the case, they will rely on third-party testimony from TDS sufferers to make their case. They will try, through sanctimonious lies, passionately verbalized bullshit and outright slander, to bypass the hurdle of not having any proof. In order to fit all the hot air they need to present, no opposing or questioning voices will be heard. Prime Time is a valuable commodity. They can't waste it for anything as trivial as truth.

But the truth is, despite the insistence of the left-controlled media and the democrat party, that the 2020 election is tainted. There are MANY unanswered and unexplored questions about it, and just because the press and democrats don't want to acknowledge that fact, does not mean it is NOT a fact. And it will remain tainted forever. But don't expect anyone tonight to acknowledge that fact. Only to disparage and defame Donald Trump and anyone who might support him and what he accomplished as President.

I expect to be completely disheartened and angered by the circus show they will put on tonight. But I will watch it, hoping I can control the impulse to throw things at the TV screen. I suspect I cannot afford to buy a new one. I expect the price of a comparable TV will have doubled or tripled since the democrats took over control of all 3 branches of the federal government. But that's beside the point.

It's so good to have adults in charge.

[flockofseagulls104]

WASHINGTON, D.C.—The nation is abuzz with anticipation of the televised January 6 Committee hearing making its prime time debut at 8 p.m. ET. To top off the excitement of the House select committee's investigation, producers of the star-studded extravaganza have announced that Miley Cyrus will be the featured performer during the hearing's halftime show.

Other performers during the bedazzling spectacle will include Neil Young, Bruce Springsteen, Demi Lovato, and the ghost of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

"If you thought the Depp-Heard trial was exciting, wait until you get a load of this baby," said James Goldston, a former ABC News executive hired by the Democrat-led committee to really "wow" the American people with a multimedia presentation aimed at objectively and judiciously seeking the truth of what really happened that fateful day.

Republican lawmakers have pounced on the House select committee, accusing them of putting on a politicized, narrative-driven stunt rather than seeking truth. In response, GOP lawmakers have sworn to make their own January 6 Committee with cool, Republican members, lots of American flags, and a concert on Mt. Rushmore featuring Toby Keith and Morgan Wallen.

The January 6 Committee said the opening ceremony of the hearing will include previously-unseen video footage of the Capitol riots, followed by a ritual burning of Trump in effigy.

[Bob78164]

But the truth is, despite the insistence of the left-controlled media and the democrat party, that the 2020 election is tainted.

It's good to know just what you mean by waiting to hear the evidence in connection with True the Vote before reaching a conclusion. And it's the Democratic Party. --Bob

[flockofseagulls104]

But the truth is, despite the insistence of the left-controlled media and the democrat party, that the 2020 election is tainted.

It's good to know just what you mean by waiting to hear the evidence in connection with True the Vote before reaching a conclusion. And it's the Democratic Party. --Bob

If it's donny to you, it's democrat to me, bob. And although I have no great love for the republicans, I have total disrespect for the corrupt democrat party.
I, unlike you for 2000 Mules, am going to watch the circus, even though I know there's no evidence to what they are trying to argue, and that they won't even allow anyone to question anything they are presenting. Just so, if I choose to criticize any specific point, at least I know what I'm talking about. That is beneath you, I assume. Example: Are they going to acknowledge the fact that, as President, Trump offered up to 20,000 National Guard members to be available for the occasion, and Nancy and the Mayor of DC both refused it?

I doubt this will be shown:

https://wethepeopleconvention.org/artic ... to-Capitol

[Bob Juch]

Adam Shiff graduated with distinction from Stanford and got his Juris Doctor, graduating cum laude from Harvard. He doesn't have a double-digit IQ.

[Bob Juch]

But the truth is, despite the insistence of the left-controlled media and the democrat party, that the 2020 election is tainted.

It's good to know just what you mean by waiting to hear the evidence in connection with True the Vote before reaching a conclusion. And it's the Democratic Party. --Bob

If it's donny to you, it's democrat to me, bob. And although I have no great love for the republicans, I have total disrespect for the corrupt democrat party.
I, unlike you for 2000 Mules, am going to watch the circus, even though I know there's no evidence to what they are trying to argue, and that they won't even allow anyone to question anything they are presenting. Just so, if I choose to criticize any specific point, at least I know what I'm talking about. That is beneath you, I assume. Example: Are they going to acknowledge the fact that, as President, Trump offered up to 20,000 National Guard members to be available for the occasion, and Nancy and the Mayor of DC both refused it?

I doubt this will be shown:

https://wethepeopleconvention.org/artic ... to-Capitol

Why the hell are you still repeating fake news?

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2 ... ps-jan-6-/

[flockofseagulls104]

It's good to know just what you mean by waiting to hear the evidence in connection with True the Vote before reaching a conclusion. And it's the Democratic Party. --Bob

If it's donny to you, it's democrat to me, bob. And although I have no great love for the republicans, I have total disrespect for the corrupt democrat party.
I, unlike you for 2000 Mules, am going to watch the circus, even though I know there's no evidence to what they are trying to argue, and that they won't even allow anyone to question anything they are presenting. Just so, if I choose to criticize any specific point, at least I know what I'm talking about. That is beneath you, I assume. Example: Are they going to acknowledge the fact that, as President, Trump offered up to 20,000 National Guard members to be available for the occasion, and Nancy and the Mayor of DC both refused it?

I doubt this will be shown:

https://wethepeopleconvention.org/artic ... to-Capitol

Why the hell are you still repeating fake news?

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2 ... ps-jan-6-/

Why the hell do you ASSUME politifact is telling you the truth? Politifact is a left leaning propaganda tool, BJ. And they are wrong according to this account, which at least cites a source that can be verified. Politifact goes with the old leftist saw; "no evidence'. They are the fake news.

https://justthenews.com/government/cong ... riots-memo

The Pentagon first raised the possibility of sending National Guard troops to the U.S. Capitol four days before the Jan. 6 riots, setting in motion a series of rejections by Capitol Police and Democrats that left Congress vulnerable as threats of violence were rising, according to government memos that validate Trump administration officials' long-held claims.

An official timeline of the Jan. 6 tragedy assembled by Capitol Police shows that a Defense Department official reached out to a Capitol Police deputy chief, Sean Gallagher, on Jan. 2, 2021 to see if a request for troops was forthcoming, but the offer was quickly rejected after a consultation with then-Chief Steve Sund.

What about the video, BJ? Does politifact say there's no evidence that Capitol Police LET people into the Capitol? Perhaps it is a fake video created by Russian Hackers?

[Bob78164]

If it's donny to you, it's democrat to me, bob. And although I have no great love for the republicans, I have total disrespect for the corrupt democrat party.
I, unlike you for 2000 Mules, am going to watch the circus, even though I know there's no evidence to what they are trying to argue, and that they won't even allow anyone to question anything they are presenting. Just so, if I choose to criticize any specific point, at least I know what I'm talking about. That is beneath you, I assume. Example: Are they going to acknowledge the fact that, as President, Trump offered up to 20,000 National Guard members to be available for the occasion, and Nancy and the Mayor of DC both refused it?

I doubt this will be shown:

https://wethepeopleconvention.org/artic ... to-Capitol

Why the hell are you still repeating fake news?

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2 ... ps-jan-6-/

Why the hell do you ASSUME politifact is telling you the truth? Politifact is a left leaning propaganda tool, BJ. And they are wrong according to this account, which at least cites a source that can be verified. Politifact goes with the old leftist saw; "no evidence'. They are the fake news.

https://justthenews.com/government/cong ... riots-memo

The Pentagon first raised the possibility of sending National Guard troops to the U.S. Capitol four days before the Jan. 6 riots, setting in motion a series of rejections by Capitol Police and Democrats that left Congress vulnerable as threats of violence were rising, according to government memos that validate Trump administration officials' long-held claims.

An official timeline of the Jan. 6 tragedy assembled by Capitol Police shows that a Defense Department official reached out to a Capitol Police deputy chief, Sean Gallagher, on Jan. 2, 2021 to see if a request for troops was forthcoming, but the offer was quickly rejected after a consultation with then-Chief Steve Sund.

What about the video, BJ? Does politifact say there's no evidence that Capitol Police LET people into the Capitol? Perhaps it is a fake video created by Russian Hackers?

Which words in the article you linked, or the memorandum it links, support either of your claims that (a) Donny offered up to 20,000 National Guard troops, or (b) Speaker Pelosi rejected the offer? Please quote the exact language you're relying on. Because I can't find a particle of support for either of your claims there. --Bob

[flockofseagulls104]

Why the hell are you still repeating fake news?

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2 ... ps-jan-6-/

Why the hell do you ASSUME politifact is telling you the truth? Politifact is a left leaning propaganda tool, BJ. And they are wrong according to this account, which at least cites a source that can be verified. Politifact goes with the old leftist saw; "no evidence'. They are the fake news.

https://justthenews.com/government/cong ... riots-memo

The Pentagon first raised the possibility of sending National Guard troops to the U.S. Capitol four days before the Jan. 6 riots, setting in motion a series of rejections by Capitol Police and Democrats that left Congress vulnerable as threats of violence were rising, according to government memos that validate Trump administration officials' long-held claims.

An official timeline of the Jan. 6 tragedy assembled by Capitol Police shows that a Defense Department official reached out to a Capitol Police deputy chief, Sean Gallagher, on Jan. 2, 2021 to see if a request for troops was forthcoming, but the offer was quickly rejected after a consultation with then-Chief Steve Sund.

What about the video, BJ? Does politifact say there's no evidence that Capitol Police LET people into the Capitol? Perhaps it is a fake video created by Russian Hackers?

Which words in the article you linked, or the memorandum it links, support either of your claims that (a) Donny offered up to 20,000 National Guard troops, or (b) Speaker Pelosi rejected the offer? Please quote the exact language you're relying on. Because I can't find a particle of support for either of your claims there. --Bob

Yeah bob. You would have to read it first and comprehend it before you could find anything.

bob, please refer to the timeline that is attached to the article. In that document the Capitol Police recorded the FACT that the DOD (a department under the command of President Trump) texted the Capitol Police Deputy Chief on Saturday Jan 2nd, asking them whether they want National Guard Soldiers for the Jan 6th event.

On Sunday Jan 3rd, the next entry says that they won't be requesting any National Guard soldiers at this time after consulting with Capitol Police - Chief of Police Steven Sund. The Capitol Police are fully under the command of the House Speaker, who would be Nancy Pelosi. BTW, Steven Sund resigned on Jan 16th.

Now I'm a skeptic. I suppose that the document linked to could be a wholesale fabrication from Russia. But I will give them more credibility than Politifact, which does not even mention this document and relies on the 'no evidence' bullshit and statements from those who would incriminate themselves if they were to admit they were offered National Guard help.

Now anything else you want to nit-pick? Seems pretty straightforward to me. But I'm not a lawyer who specializes in nit-picking and fogging up the truth when he (I'm sorry, THEY) have to defend lies.

You never stop, do you?

[silverscreenselect]

The Capitol Police are fully under the command of the House Speaker, who would be Nancy Pelosi.

You never stop, do you?

Wrong again, Flock. The Capitol Police are not under the command of Nancy Pelosi. As USA Today describes it:

The Capitol Police are overseen by a number of entities and individuals, none of whom are Pelosi. In March, Capitol Police spokesperson John Stolnis told USA TODAY that the agency is overseen by the Capitol Police Board. Several congressional committees also oversee the agency, including the House and Senate appropriations committees, the House administration commitee and the Senate rules committee.

The Capitol Police Board is made up of the House and Senate sergeants-at-arms, as well as the Capitol architect. The Capitol Police chief serves in a non-voting capacity on the board, according to the Capitol Police website. Pelosi was not a chair or administrator of any committee supervising the Capitol Police at the time of the insurrection. She's not listed on any of those committees' websites today, either. Jane L. Campbell, president of the U.S. Capitol Historical Society, told CNN "the Speaker of the House does not oversee security of the U.S. Capitol, nor does this official oversee the Capitol Police Board."

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/fac ... 082088002/

You're the one who never stops, Flock. You continue to circulate debunked claims and then say that the fact checkers who debunked them are biased, when you never bother to do any research to see if the claims are true.

[earendel]

Why the hell do you ASSUME politifact is telling you the truth? Politifact is a left leaning propaganda tool, BJ. And they are wrong according to this account, which at least cites a source that can be verified. Politifact goes with the old leftist saw; "no evidence'. They are the fake news.

https://justthenews.com/government/cong ... riots-memo

Which words in the article you linked, or the memorandum it links, support either of your claims that (a) Donny offered up to 20,000 National Guard troops, or (b) Speaker Pelosi rejected the offer? Please quote the exact language you're relying on. Because I can't find a particle of support for either of your claims there. --Bob

Yeah bob. You would have to read it first and comprehend it before you could find anything.

bob, please refer to the timeline that is attached to the article. In that document the Capitol Police recorded the FACT that the DOD (a department under the command of President Trump) texted the Capitol Police Deputy Chief on Saturday Jan 2nd, asking them whether they want National Guard Soldiers for the Jan 6th event.

On Sunday Jan 3rd, the next entry says that they won't be requesting any National Guard soldiers at this time after consulting with Capitol Police - Chief of Police Steven Sund. The Capitol Police are fully under the command of the House Speaker, who would be Nancy Pelosi. BTW, Steven Sund resigned on Jan 16th.

Now I'm a skeptic. I suppose that the document linked to could be a wholesale fabrication from Russia. But I will give them more credibility than Politifact, which does not even mention this document and relies on the 'no evidence' bullshit and statements from those who would incriminate themselves if they were to admit they were offered National Guard help.

Now anything else you want to nit-pick? Seems pretty straightforward to me. But I'm not a lawyer who specializes in nit-picking and fogging up the truth when he (I'm sorry, THEY) have to defend lies.

You never stop, do you?

I have to agree with Bob on this one. It's apples and oranges as I see it. Politifact says that there is no evidence that the president personally offered National Guard troops and no evidence that Speaker Pelosi personally turned it down. The article you quote says that someone in DoD offered, and someone in the Capitol security apparatus turned it down. I don't doubt that the timeline in the article is correct, but it isn't the same thing.