Re: Nebula Finalists 2016

On 8 Jan 2025 15:47:03 GMT, Chris Buckley <alan@sabir.com> wrote:

On 2025-01-07, Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:

On 6 Jan 2025 16:28:50 GMT, Chris Buckley <alan@sabir.com> wrote:
>

On 2025-01-04, Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:

Next up: Jan 6
>
I've seen reports of planned demonstrations. Let's hope Biden ensures
tight-enough security to prevent any intrusions.
>
And show the Republicans how a /real/ President protects critical
events.

>
Paul, as I'm sure you know from the massive statements of the Jan 6
Committee (what? They didn't publicize this? How ... strange), the
House Sergeant-at-Arms, Paul Irving, had primary responsibility for
the security of all members of Congress.
>
Irving and the Senate Sergeant-at-Arms are also in charge of the
Capitol Police, with any request for things like National Guard
support having to get approved by them before being forwarded.  On
January 4th, the Capitol Police chief requested the National Guard be
put on emergency standby but Irving said no, he didn't like the way it
would look and he would have to get approval from his boss, Nancy Pelosi
(Democratic Speaker of the House).  That never happened.
>
Pelosi on January 6th privately took responsibility for the Capitol Police
not having the resources to stop the riot.
 https://x.com/OversightAdmn/status/1800207258514575730?mx=2
Somehow, that was never investigated or reported by the January 6th Committee.
How...strange.
>
Security on January 6th was definitely looked at at the highest levels,
including in meetings with Trump. A transcript of the Chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Mark Milley, includes
https://app.box.com/s/w1mdlicby1o9wrcpfhtdoxi9aljwptos/file/1640163916382
   ?[January 3, 2021] The President just says, ?Hey, look at
   this. There?s going to be a large amount of protesters here on the
   6th, make sure that you have sufficient National Guard or Soldiers
   to make sure it?s a safe event.? And [Acting SecDef] Miller
   responds by saying, "Hey, we've got a plan, and we've got it
   covered'"
This is the first time I've looked at some of the transcripts. They
really were considering threats, including locations and capabilities
of people like the Proud Boys in the Joint Chiefs of Staff meetings when
talking about preparations for January 6th.
>
So what should a "real" president do, Paul? Do Pelosi's job for her?

>
If that's what it took.

>
You must live in a fantasy world where all riots can be predicted.
>

If a State Governor can call out the National Guard to guard
something, POTUS can do ... a lot more.
>
And it is strange, is it not, that in all the excuses and wrangling
after Jan 6 2021 not one Republican, not even Donald Trump, /ever/
claimed that he had ordered to US Army to make sure it was a safe
event.
>
No, we had to find out about from a DOD IG Report -- which some
Republicans are, now that they are aware of it, claiming was an "order
from the CiC of the US Army" and threatening Milley with prosecution.
>
Because /any/ excuse will do when someone lies like a rug.

>
Absolutely nobody at the time interpreted those comments as
orders. Not Trump, not the Generals present, not the Secretary of
Defense.  It was just a discussion of security and Trump checking that
it was being handled properly; it turns out it wasn't. It was not his
bailiwick or responsibility to issue security orders (and it was
Pelosi's, as Speaker of the House with the Capitol Police being under
her). How exactly is it strange?

Thanks for confirming that General Milley is /not/, despite Republican
claims, subject to trial for not obeying the non-orders.

But POTUS /is/ responsible for everything the US Govt does. That is
what it is to be in charge.

It's actually very clear that if those comments had been viewed as
orders, they would not have been obeyed, given the circumstances.
Eg, there was a major op-ed in the Washington Post on January 3rd from the
every former Secretary of Defenses saying that there was no place for
soldiers in all this commotion.

Well, I would say he was wrong. Beefing up security might have made
for a more peaceful transition. And reduced the caseload of the DC
Federal Court system.

January 6th was an epic security failure. But Pelosi did not want it
viewed as that.  She was very explicit (privately) on January
6th. They were not going to go after the security hierarchy (which included
her) and the Capitol Police. That would merely divert attention. They
were going to go after Donald Trump himself. And so they did.

And will continue to do, as long as Trump keeps bragging about it.

Pardoning the Jan 6 rioters will be the biggest mistake of his career.
Particularly those convicted of insurrection. He will admit to being
an insurrectionist the moment he does so. Bigger even than separating
families was -- and /that/ produced enough pushback from all sides to
end the policy very quickly.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"