No precedent! The Democratic senator is also a witness + juror + judge in the impeachment case of former President Trump.
Trump did not form a new party, “Never Trump” Republicans to form a party first.
The devil is in the details! The famous host Tucker Carlson said on his show that all five deaths in the Capitol Hill incident on Jan. 6 were Trump supporters. The Democrats’ claim about the only dead police officer is a lie from beginning to end, and it is the basis of their myth. Even more outrageous is the Democrats’ comparison of the incident to Pearl Harbor and to the Rwandan genocide.
The Biden administration called off the ban on overseas versions of WeChat, and the U.S. Justice Department declared Obamacare no longer unconstitutional.
No precedent! This senator is a witness + juror + judge in the impeachment case
Democratic U.S. Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont), as President Pro Tempore of the Senate, will participate as a witness, juror and judge in the second impeachment case against former President Trump, which began on the 9th; Trump’s lawyers protested against it, and Leahy promised to preside over it and give it a fair hearing in accordance with the law.
The first is that the 80-year-old Li Xi was also in the Senate during the congressional protests in January; the second is that he was one of the 100 senators who decided whether to convict Trump for “sedition”; and finally, as the most senior member of the majority party, he recently took over again as president pro tempore of the Senate, and the job of presiding over the impeachment trial also fell on him.
But Trump’s lawyers have a different view, arguing that Leahy’s participation in the trial proves their claim that the impeachment trial process is unconstitutional.
The memo filed by Trump’s lawyers on the 8th reads, “Today, the impeachment trial is being presided over not by the Chief Justice, but by a biased and partisan senator who is allegedly serving as a juror and also ruling on related issues.”
Trump lawyers say Leahy is involved in multiple roles in the Trump impeachment trial and that any conviction would pose a legal challenge.
Who presides over an official’s impeachment trial has always been a murky area; the Constitution is sparse on the subject, saying only that the chief justice of the Supreme Court should preside over the president’s impeachment trial.
The January 6 Capitol Hill incident in which all five deaths were Trump supporters
With a second impeachment trial against Trump underway, the Jan. 6 crowd storming Capitol Hill is once again in the spotlight. “The details make the difference,” and this Time, one can’t help but interrogate more details to find out the closest thing to the truth.
Fox News host Tucker Carlson took a stab at finding the truth through details on his Feb. 10 episode of “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” China Watch compiled.
On the show, Carlson said, “You heard about the five Americans who died in and around the Capitol on Jan. 6, but that doesn’t tell you anything. As always, it’s the details that matter. Who were these people, and how did they die? That determines how you understand what actually happened.”
Carlson continued, “With that in mind, here are the facts: four of the five people who died that day were Trump supporters. The fifth was a Capitol Hill police officer who apparently also supported Trump. Why is this relevant? Of course, the political views of the deceased shouldn’t matter, but unfortunately, in this case it does. New York State Assemblywoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, AOC, and many other elected Democrats claim that the mob was coming for them that day. However, the only documented casualties on Jan. 6 were ordinary people who voted for Trump.”
The first of these was a 34-year-old woman from Georgia named Rosanne Boyland. Authorities initially declared that Boyland died of a “medical emergency. Later video footage showed that she may have been accidentally trampled to death by the crowd. We’re still not sure, but that’s the best guess.
The second casualty was 55-year-old Kevin Greeson, who died of heart failure while talking to his wife on the phone outside the Capitol. His wife later said, “Kevin had a history of High blood pressure and in the excitement of it, had a heart attack.”
The third was Benjamin Phillips, 50, of Ringtown, Pennsylvania. Phillips, a Trump supporter, organized a bus trip to Washington for the rally that day. He died of a stroke on the grounds outside the Capitol. There is no evidence that Phillips rioted or was injured by the mob or even went inside the Capitol.
The fourth person to die was Ashli Babbitt, a 35-year-old Army veteran from San Diego, the only person to die from an intentional injury. Babbitt was wearing a Trump supporter’s cape when she was shot and killed by a Capitol Hill police lieutenant. Babbitt’s death was captured on video, so her death is the best documented of the day’s events. But surprisingly little is still known about it.
Babbitt, shot and killed while trying to climb through a broken window into the Speaker’s Hall of the Capitol, is the basics of what is known. Authorities have refused to name the person who shot her or reveal any details of the investigation they conducted, and people may never know exactly why the unnamed Capitol Hill police officer tried to kill her.
According to the officer’s attorney, “Looking at the evidence, one would just think he’s a hero.” Of course, people can’t actually see the evidence because they’re hiding it. People can’t even know who he is. Carlson questioned, “Killing an unarmed woman may be justified in certain specific circumstances, but since when is it heroic? When did the dead woman read the QAnon website? Republicans aren’t asking that question.”
Rep. Markwayne Mullin (D-Mass.) said he immediately hugged the officer who shot Babbitt and told him, “Look, you did what you had to do.”
But Carlson asked rhetorically, “Did that officer really have to do that? We don’t know. All we know is that Babbitt was unarmed when he was killed. However, during the impeachment trial this week, Rep. David Cicilline (D-Calif.), described what happened at the Capitol as an ‘armed rebellion.'”
The bizarre death of a Capitol police officer,What Democrats say is a lie from start to finish
In the hours following the riot, the New York Times reported that Trump supporters brutally beat Officer Snicker to death with a fire extinguisher. The news of Snick’s violent death was quickly picked up by countless other media outlets that repeatedly reported and exaggerated the story.
This narrative formed the basis of the myth constructed by Democrats around Jan. 6. Snicker’s body was laid to rest in the Capitol as a mark of respect. Carlson said sarcastically, “Politicians who a few months ago were telling us that the police were racist have been praising Snick as a hero. They’ve finally found a cop who serves their political purposes.”
Carlson asserted, “There’s just one problem: The story they’re telling is a lie from start to finish. Officer Snicker was not beaten to death with a fire extinguisher or anything else. According to a thorough and fascinating new analysis in Revolver News, there is no evidence that Snick was struck with a fire extinguisher at any time on Jan. 6. The officer’s body apparently showed no signs of trauma. In fact, Snik texted his brother from the police office on the night of Jan. 6, long after the rioters at the Capitol had been arrested or dispersed. According to his brother, Snik said he was ‘pepper sprayed twice’ but was otherwise ‘in good shape.’ 24 hours later, Officer Snik died.”
“How did he die? The head of the Capitol Hill police union said he had a stroke. His body was immediately cremated and authorities refused to release the results of his autopsy. No one has been charged or prosecuted for his death. Whatever happened to Snick is obviously tragic, but it’s also very different from what they’re telling us. They lied about his death, and they lied a lot.”
“This weekend, former Capitol Hill Police Chief Steven Sund, in a letter to House Speaker Pelosi, claimed that there was no intelligence that a riot might be imminent at the Capitol.”
“What we do know for sure is that the known facts of what happened on Jan. 6 are a very significant departure from the story that they are telling us now, including the story that Democrats are telling in the impeachment trial. In many places, the known facts bear no resemblance to the story they are telling. They’re just outright lying. There’s no question about that.”
Democrats Arbitrarily Exaggerate Capitol Hill Events
Carlson said the Democrats’ description of the events on Capitol Hill is simply unbelievable: “Some in Congress are comparing this day (Jan. 6) to 9/11. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) compared it to Pearl Harbor, which prompted the United States to enter World War II.”
“Every day we hear new and flashier comparisons from members of the Democratic Party. But on the night of Feb. 10, CNN outdid all of them by comparing what happened on Jan. 6 to the genocide in Rwanda (Rwanda).”
“Remember, nearly a million people were killed in Rwanda in 1994, about 70 percent of the country’s Tutsis (ethnic Tutsis). Entire towns were hacked to death with machetes. People were set on fire and crushed alive by bulldozers. Hundreds of thousands of women were raped. It was one of the most horrific crimes in human history.”
Contradictory to the facts House Democrats’ impeachment representative’s rhetoric struck out
The U.S. Senate has initiated impeachment of former President Trump, but much of the “evidence” presented by Democratic impeachment managers is uncorroborated “media information.
Photo: U.S. Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) refutes the prosecution’s allegations during a Senate meeting on Trump’s impeachment on Feb. 10.
Democratic House members impeaching Trump for “inciting a congressional riot” began presenting evidence on the Senate floor on Wednesday (Feb. 10). Democratic impeachment managers released multiple videos from inside Congress showing the disruptive activities and tensions in the Capitol on Jan. 6, but did not provide new credible evidence of “Trump inciting a riot.
In accusing Trump of “manipulating the riot,” the impeachment managers repeatedly cited “anonymous sources” from the media, including the New York Times, which reported that “Trump initially rejected a request to mobilize the National Guard The New York Times reported that “Trump initially rejected a request to mobilize the National Guard” and The Independent reported that “Trump’s social media operations group would never have been unaware of plans to attack the Capitol that were circulating online.
David Cicilline, one of the impeachment managers, quoted media sources as saying that on the night of Jan. 6, Trump called Republican Senator Mike Lee, who at the time he thought was with another senator, Tommy Tuberville. During the call, Trump did not mention the riots that afternoon, but asked Tuberville to “further oppose” the certification of the election results in order to delay the end.
As Cecilini concluded his remarks, Senator Lee stood up in court and asked the Democrats to withdraw the allegations that included him as an example. Lee said, “The statement involving the content of the conversation between Trump and Senator Tuberville on the phone, I did not say that, and that statement was not accurate.”
Lee then filed a motion to dismiss the allegations regarding the so-called “Trump phone call. The impeachment manager admitted that the information came from “a newspaper”, agreed to withdraw the accusation, and said the matter could be “resolved” in Thursday’s Senate trial.
Earlier, Lee told the media in response to reports of a “Trump phone call” that Trump had only tried to contact Tuberville during the Capitol storming, but dialed Lee’s number by mistake.
Trump did not form a new party, “Never Trump” Republicans want to form a party first
Last Friday, former officials from the Reagan administration, the Bush father and son administration and the Trump Administration, and more than 120 Republican strategists participated in a Zoom conference call to discuss a new organization. The group will run on a platform of “principled conservatism” and will field a number of candidates, as well as support right-of-center candidates, including independents and Democrats.
Iowa Republicans passed advance legislation on Feb. 9 aimed at cutting funding for schools that incorporate 1619 programs into their history curriculum. According to Chinese American scholar Qinglian He, this is called states helping themselves to prevent far-left falsification of American history.
The “1619 Project” was launched in 2019 by the New York Times in an attempt to present the Atlantic slave trade as a major factor in the founding of the United States, rather than ideas such as individual liberty and natural rights. It aims to distort the history of the United States.
U.S. Justice Department Declares Obamacare No Longer Unconstitutional
The U.S. Department of Justice told the Supreme Court on October 10 that it no longer considers the Affordable Care Act (ACA), also known as Obamacare, unconstitutional, and urged the court to uphold the health care law.
Photo: U.S. Department of Justice emblem
The official letter states, “As the executive branch has changed, the Department of Justice has reconsidered the government’s position in these cases. The purpose of this letter is to inform the Court that the United States is no longer complying with the findings in the previously submitted federal respondents’ briefs.”
The Trump administration had asked the Supreme Court to strike down the Obamacare bill on the grounds that the bill’s “individual mandate” was unconstitutional.
In the letter, Biden Administration officials detailed the Democrats’ position and told the court that it believes the mandate is constitutional.
Biden Administration Calls Off Ban on Overseas Versions of WeChat
On Feb. 11, the U.S. government asked a federal court to suspend the ban on WeChat, the overseas version of WeChat, in order to re-examine the mobile App‘s threat to U.S. national security.
In a statement, the U.S. Department of Justice said that after the Biden administration took office, the U.S. Department of Commerce began reviewing a series of previously issued decisions, including the ban on WeChat, the overseas version of WeChat, a mobile application.
Recent Comments