American Politics

[Chris P]

Why? Why did Mitch McConnel direct over a senate GOP vote of 2 for, 35 against, and 9 Chicken-Shit Republican Senators who abstained to block a bill on May 28th to to create an independent inquiry to investigate the deadly January 6 Capitol Hill riot.

The Chicken-Shit republican party has failed you, Chris P.

Because an independent inquiry should be held for events such as 9/11, in which planes were flown into the WTC and Pentagon, thousands killed and billions of dollars of damage done; or the the last year of communist antifa / BLM riots, burnings, lootings, and violent attacks on federal buildings, in which law and order collapsed, multiple lives were lost, and billions of dollars of damage were done.

Not for a couple of broken windows and some people walking peacefully through open doors into a building. The only reason January 6 was "deadly" is that a security officer shot dead the unarmed protester Ashli Babbitt. Nobody else was killed in the entire event.

Babbitt's murder should be publicly investigated, as should the curious case of the dozens of unexplained unindicted co-conspirators. (Why are the feds not charging them? Are they informants or undercover agents? What did the feds know about the plans to enter the Capitol?) But that does not come near the level of a huge public inquiry. The democrats and fake news want that in order to use it as a tool to attack conservative white people who are not on board with the GloboHomo agenda.

P.S. Your final sentence is actually true, but not for the reasons you think.

[Chris P]

But let's say you're right about these "unindicted co-conspirators". Why would the QOP, virtually to a member, vote against a commission?

Because, o ye of little brain, there is no need for a vast, expansive commission, whose real aim is to turn conservative white men into the new kulaks in the neo-bolshevik state that openly anti-white individuals like Kristen Clarke want to replace America with. The idea that you want to completely ignore the carnage, rioting, looting, burning, attacks on federal courthouses and the White House by your far-left communist antifa / BLM buddies over the past year, yet start a "commission" over some trespassing in which a couple of windows were broken, show how utterly and completely brainwashed and morally bankrupt you are.

You have a huge, deep investigation when planes are flown into the WTC and Pentagon, thousands killed and billions of dollars of damage done. You don't have one for one casualty (an unarmed protester) and a couple of broken windows.

It is extremely simple to find out about these unnamed, unindicted co-conspirators. Congress hauls in the top brass of the FBI and asks them.

It may be that the FBI leadership will say under oath that they had no informants and no undercover agents in the tiny splinter groups that planned to trespass in the Capitol, and they had absolutely no idea that it was about to happen. But it may be that they do not. Let's bring them in and find out: that's what Congress is for.

We know that the feds have been rounding up and charging everyone that they could possibly identify, including old grandmas who simply walked into the Capitol through open doors and left after a few minutes. They have even been scouring people's social media and encouraging acquaintances to snitch. This is a full court press by the Deep State to crush absolutely anyone who dared to enter the building.

Yet at the same time, there are dozens of people whose identity they know, and yet whom they have neither charged nor named. Why not? What is the difference between these people and the hundreds of others they have descended upon for walking into the building?

Again, the FBI leadership needs to be brought in and questioned under oath. When the GOP wins back the Congress next year, with a de-RINO'd intake, this will happen and we will get some answers.

[Paulie97]

You aren't, of course, which I'll prove later.

But let's say you're right about these "unindicted co-conspirators". Why would the QOP, virtually to a member, vote against a commission? Wouldn't they want all this to come to light? Of course they would! So voting against bringing these "atrocities" into view was, in essence, voting against their own self-interests. And sine, according to you, the QOP are the smartest MFs around, this doesn't make sense.

As to why you're wrong, well, the primary reason is a complete and utter misunderstanding of what constitutes an "unindicted co-conspirator". Fux "News" and Tucker "You an idiot if you believe anything I say" Carlson first proposed this lunacy. The only people who believe it are trumpers and trump's clown-show legal team.

https://thedispatch.com/p/the-new-january-6-scapegoats

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ot/7753276002/

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/18/t...itol-riot.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...ing-fbi-jan-6/

This seems to be the gist of the matter. It's truly a game of whack a mole when dealing with wingnuts. Once one kooky conspiracy theory is knocked down another pops up. And all so Tucker and other fake news sources can continue to line their pockets drawing crowds of gullible people who need to re-write history and explain away a humiliating election defeat.

"The first thing to emphasize is that Carlson's theory is based on a report in Revolver News. The site is run by Darren Beattie, who appeared on Carlson's show shortly after the above monologue. If that name sounds familiar, it's because Beattie is a former Trump White House speechwriter who was fired in 2018 over a past appearance on a panel with a white nationalist, Peter Brimelow, at a conference attended by well-known white nationalists.

The second and perhaps most important point is that the basis of Carlson's theory — that the unindicted co-conspirators are either likely or must be government agents — is extremely shaky.

Legal experts say the government literally cannot name an undercover agent as an unindicted co-conspirator.

'There are many reasons why an indictment would reference unindicted co-conspirators, but their status as FBI agents is not one of them,' said Jens David Ohlin, a criminal law professor at Cornell Law School.

Added Lisa Kern Griffin of Duke University Law School: 'Undercover officers and informants can't be 'co-conspirators' for the purposes of establishing an agreement to violate the law, because they are only pretending to agree to do so. . An unindicted co-conspirator has committed the crime of conspiracy, and investigative agents doing their jobs undercover are not committing crimes.'

Among the other possible reasons someone might be listed as an unindicted co-conspirator:

The government doesn't know who they are.

The government doesn't have sufficient evidence to indict them and wants to avoid impugning their reputations or compromising ongoing investigations.

They have secured leniency from the government for cooperation with investigations into others.

While all of these are plausible, that last one seems like a distinct possibility. We already know that a founding member of the Oath Keepers, Jon Ryan Schaffer, has agreed to cooperate. "

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...ing-fbi-jan-6/

[PVMonger]

Still no explanation for the dozens of unnamed, unindicted co-conspirators in the centre of the small group that organised and carried out the Capitol trespassing.

They were proven to have been heavily involved in the planning and inside the Capitol on Jan 6, yet they have not only been spared arrest, they have not been named.

Why has federal law enforcement given these guys a total free pass?

Is it because they are FBI undercover agents and informants? If so, the FBI knew exactly what was being planned. Indeed, in many cases the unindicted, unnamed co-conpirators planned it themselves.

The FBI and other Washington Deep State organisations knew that there was a plan to invade the Capitol building. They encouraged it (some would say they plotted it) and at best allowed it to happen.

Why did they not ensure greater security at the building given that they knew what was going to happen? Is it because they wanted to use it as a pretext to attack Trump and conservatives, in conjunction with fake news media, social media, democrats and RINOs?

We need to know who the dozens of unnamed, unindicted co-conspirators are, what their relationship to the FBI and other federal intelligence agencies is, and what their role in the planning was.

You aren't, of course, which I'll prove later.

But let's say you're right about these "unindicted co-conspirators". Why would the QOP, virtually to a member, vote against a commission? Wouldn't they want all this to come to light? Of course they would! So voting against bringing these "atrocities" into view was, in essence, voting against their own self-interests. And sine, according to you, the QOP are the smartest MFs around, this doesn't make sense.

As to why you're wrong, well, the primary reason is a complete and utter misunderstanding of what constitutes an "unindicted co-conspirator". Fux "News" and Tucker "You an idiot if you believe anything I say" Carlson first proposed this lunacy. The only people who believe it are trumpers and trump's clown-show legal team.

https://thedispatch.com/p/the-new-january-6-scapegoats

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ot/7753276002/

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/18/t...itol-riot.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...ing-fbi-jan-6/

[ScatManDoo]

Still no explanation for the dozens of unnamed, unindicted co-conspirators in the centre of the small group that organised and carried out the Capitol trespassing.

They were proven to have been heavily involved in the planning and inside the Capitol on Jan 6, yet they have not only been spared arrest, they have not been named.

Why has federal law enforcement given these guys a total free pass?

Is it because they are FBI undercover agents and informants? If so, the FBI knew exactly what was being planned. Indeed, in many cases the unindicted, unnamed co-conpirators planned it themselves.

The FBI and other Washington Deep State organisations knew that there was a plan to invade the Capitol building. They encouraged it (some would say they plotted it) and at best allowed it to happen.

Why did they not ensure greater security at the building given that they knew what was going to happen? Is it because they wanted to use it as a pretext to attack Trump and conservatives, in conjunction with fake news media, social media, democrats and RINOs?.

They were proven to have been heavily involved in the planning and inside the Capitol on Jan 6, yet they have not only been spared arrest, they have not been named.

Why has federal law enforcement given these guys a total free pass?

Why? Why did Mitch McConnel direct over a senate GOP vote of 2 for, 35 against, and 9 Chicken-Shit Republican Senators who abstained to block a bill on May 28th to to create an independent inquiry to investigate the deadly January 6 Capitol Hill riot.

The nine Chicken-Shit republicans that hid instead of voting were:

Republican Sen. Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee.

Republican Sen. Roy Blunt of Missouri.

Republican Sen. Mike Braun of Indiana.

Republican Sen. Richard Burr of North Carolina.

Republican Sen. Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma.

Democratic Sen. Patty Murray of Washington.

Republican Sen. Mike Rounds of South Dakota.

Republican Sen. James Risch of Idaho.

Republican Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama.

Democratic Sen. Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona.

Republican Sen. Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania.

The Chicken-Shit republican party has failed you, Chris P.

[Beno69]

Where is your evidence that most visa overstays are white?

For our brainwashed Chris. Friend of Q: https://media.patriotssoar.com/pdf/TrumpInDays.pdf.

Sooo funny. Soon they will have Civil war in this great country.

[EihTooms]

Trump and Reagan probably the two most patriotic presidents that we had in the last 40 years. Both made America better and created great economies. I know every anti American, unpatriotic, hating USA democrat on this forum will deny it.

Now we have the weakest anti police, open border loving president ever. A joke to the rest of the world. Trump and Reagan were respected. Biden is the laughing stock.

Reagan's policies plunged America into the worst economic decline since the Great Republican Crash and Depression of the late 1920's and early 1930's. But only for a while. The George W. Bush Crash and Recession took the 2nd worst place spot a couple of decades later and that meant Reagan's slipped down to 3rd place. But only for a while. When all the calculations on job losses, business destruction and the hundreds of thousands of American deaths due to his economic decisions are in, the Trump Crash and Recession will likely have replaced W's, Reagan's and even that of the Repubs of the 1920s as the worst Great Republican Crash and Depression/Recession of all time.

Whether Trump's takes 1st or 2nd place, Reagan's Crash and Recession will fall to 4th place as the worst Crash and Recession of the past 100 years. So there's something you can be proud of as a Democratic Party hater and Republican Party supporter.

I submit that all the BLM, "antifa", race-riot, illegal immigrant, Traitor Trump Insurrection and big city gun violence for the past century combined have not produced nearly as much economic damage, destruction and deaths in the USA as the policies and agenda of the Republicans elected to high political office by the likes of Barney, Aunt Bee, Goober, Earnest T and, well, you in quiet little hamlets like Hooterville and Pixley.

Yes, Reagan's war whoop against America with his favorite message that this government of, by and for the American people is "the problem, not the solution" was one giant step toward Trump's violent anti-America insurrection mob attack on American democracy. So, you're right, there was definitely a kinship between Reagan and Trump in terms of "patriotism" to some country somewhere. But apparently not for America.

[Chris P]

The history that I read was that all these immigrants that you are talking about that came in the early 1900's came in legally through legal channels. I don't think they bypassed the border crosses and snuck it to the USA illegally. All the immigrants came in legally.

Maybe your history shows that they came illegally.

You are correct as usual. The migrants who came from the 19th Century to the mid-1920's came legally through Ellis Island. Then in 1924 Congress decided we had enough people and stopped further immigration.

For over 40 years from 1924, America effectively had zero immigration. Even after the great betrayal of the 1965 LBJ / Chappaquidick Ted Immigration Bill, the effects were not seen for at least a couple of decades.

Obviously, the country didn't achieve anything of note between the 1920's and 1980's, and we desperately needed third world illegals to turn America into a superpower. (Obvious mockery, but it wouldn't surprise me to learn that's actually what woke teaching unions are brainwashing kids with these days, alongside the "evil whitey" crap).

[Chris P]

The history that I read was that all these immigrants that you are talking about that came in the early 1900's came in legally through legal channels. I don't think they bypassed the border crosses and snuck it to the USA illegally. All the immigrants came in legally.

Maybe your history shows that they came illegally.

You are correct as usual. The migrants who came from the 19th Century to the mid-1920's came legally through Ellis Island. Then in 1924 Congress decided we had enough people and stopped further immigration.

For over 40 years from 1924, America effectively had zero immigration. Even after the great betrayal of the 1965 LBJ / Chappaquidick Ted Immigration Bill, the effects were not seen for at least a couple of decades.

Obviously, the country didn't achieve anything of note between the 1920's and 1980's, and we desperately needed third world illegals to turn America into a superpower. (Obvious mockery, but it wouldn't surprise me to learn that's actually what woke teaching unions are brainwashing kids with these days, alongside the "evil whitey" crap).

[Chris P]

California leads the US in farm revenue

California is a huge state, and much of its interior is solidly conservative Republican. Unfortunately they are now outweighed by the torrent of third world illegals, along with their anchor babies and chain migration, that have been pouring in for the past 40 years. They will be happy to leave Gibsmedatistan behind and join the New America. You can keep the coast, and see how well you can live off failing hollyweird movies and buggy apps.

[Chris P]

Emma Lazarus

Was a Jewish communist, like most of the early Bolsheviks in Russia who murdered millions. She and her fellow travellers would have happily done the same to Americans a hundred years ago, and indeed will do the same in the near future if they get their chance.

Police defunded and terrified to arrest non-white criminals; citizens disarmed in the face of antifa and BLM mobs setting fire to their property; a fraudulently installed VP (soon to be POTUS as Biden's dementia worsens daily) cheering it on alongside other anti-white ideologues like the openly white-hating Kristen Clarke, head of the DoJ "Civil Rights" division. The future they want for heritage Americans is dark, if they even intend for us to have one.

As to your point about Little Italy, as I replied earlier, how many Italian-Americans today speak Italian? How many Polish-Americans speak Polish? None. They have entirely integrated. Italian and Polish areas don't even exist any more.

On the contrary, how many Guatemalans still speak Spanish better than English (if they speak English at all)? How many Somalis still speak Arabic better than English while organising their welfare scams in Minnesota? They still live in their tightly sealed ethnic enclaves, full of various forms of crime and hostile to white people, just like the third world immigrants in places like Sweden and Belgium.

[Villainy]

In your comparison to Little Italy are you suggesting that all sections in New York like Little Italy the immigrants came into the USA illegally? I am for immigrants to legally come to the USA but I am not for open borders or traffickers bringing in illegal immigrants. With legal immigration the USA does background checks and criminal checks on the immigrants. With illegal immigration which democrats support criminals and terrorists can enter unchecked. Increasing crime in USA maybe suggests criminals are coming in.

I understand you feel you need to contribute something. Anything. But it would help if you boned up on your reading skills.

No the ethnic enclaves in New York didn't arrive in the US illegally. We had open borders then. As long as an immigrant passed a very superficial health examination they were allowed in the US. Most of those immigrants entered through Ellis Island (which is next to Liberty Island) in New York harbor.

The point (if you had bothered to read) was that not all immigrants assimilated the new language by the second generation. My point was that many (in fact I would dare say a majority) of 2nd generation immigrants were bilingual. Why? They spoke their parents native language in the home and English in schools and the workplace. It wouldn't be until the 3rd and 4th generations before the grandchildren and great grandchildren of immigrants would lose their family language and become completely "assimilated".

Since you really enjoy emersing yourself in these arguments, it would really help if you actually read what was being discussed before sticking your big goose into the discussion. Eh?

[Beijing4987]

Chrispy, like Tuckkker Kkkarlson has many questions, but no answers or smoking gun. "Why is that" Tuckkker would muse. Getting the last word important to him and Kkkanada. Deep State is watching all of us, as Snowden proved. They have a habit of setting fire to their adversaries. Oops, Waco, Move In Philadelphia, Robert Mathews (The Order) on Whidbey Island, Washington

[PVMonger]

Where is your evidence that most visa overstays are white?

Why should I prove anything? Virtually everything that you've posted is without proof.

[Chris P]

Oh, right, those "visa overstays" are mostly white.

Where is your evidence that most visa overstays are white?