Friday, May 28, 2021

Republicans Vote To Cover Up Worst Terrorist Attack On Nation's Capital In 200+ Years (While Stoking Anger For The Next Attack By Telling Supporters Of Their "Obligation" To "Use" The Second Amendment In "Armed Rebellion Against The Government")

An overwhelming majority of Republicans, having vowed fealty to their twice-impeached, sociopathic leader who incited, supported, and celebrated the worst terrorist attack on the US Capitol in more than 200 years*, voted against the creation of an independent and nonpartisan investigation into (and supporting a cover-up of) the January 6, 2021 deadly insurrection.

*: In August 1814, the British Army burned parts of the White House, the Capitol, and other buildings. (Not Canada, you fucking idiot. And while on the subject of your seemingly infinite ignorance, the influenza pandemic of 1918 (not 1917) did not end World War II, which began in 1939. (Good fucking lord.))

The bill was defeated 54-35, falling six votes short of passage.

                  Democrats     Republicans
In Favour:            48              6
Against:               0             35
Refused to Vote:       2              9 

Nine days ago, 35 Republicans voted in favour of the creation of a January 6 commission. But today, only six — Senators Bill Cassidy (Louisiana), Susan Collins (Maine), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), Rob Portman (Ohio), Mitt Romney (Utah), and Ben Sasse (Nebraska) — voted today in support of that same commission.

Olbermann Doesn't Forget To Slam The Always-Spineless Democrats Terrorist sympathizer and Spineless Trump Toady Mitch McConnell (who earlier this month admitted his only mission is stopping anything President Biden supports, even if it helps most Americans (before cowardly walking back his true statement)) went door-to-door earlier this week, begging his fellow Seditionists to kill the bill.

As Nicholas Fandos (New York Times) reported, Republicans were terrified that any scrutiny of the January 6 attack would "enrage a former president they are intent on appeasing". One Democrat estimated McConnell was able to convince about eight Republicans to change their vote, enough to defeat the bill.

Several Republicans have extremely personal reasons for opposing the commission. They would be potential witnesses (who would have to testify under oath) to what Donald Trump (and his aides) said and did during the insurrection, how responsive Trump was to pleas for help in stopping the attack, and whether Trump blocked or delayed any response.

Jamie Gorelick, a former member of the 9/11 Commission, said it was "exceedingly unusual" for potential witnesses to be the ones deciding whether there should be a commission. . . . Yeah, no shit. How often are criminals given the final and absolute say in whether law enforcement investigates their crimes?

Numerous reports since January 6 leave absolutely no doubt that Trump was utterly deaf to pleas for help (while at the same time inciting the mob to murder the Vice President, House Speaker, and others) and he delayed any response from the military or National Guard while the attack was in progress. A few hours after the attack, Trump released a video declaring his love for his army of armed terrorists.

An anonymous Republican aide: "What really happened that day — and everyone knows it — is that the president was not interested in doing anything as the country was under attack. The commission could prove that."

[Trump's non-response was identical to that of the US military on September 11, 2001. On that morning, the military did absolutely nothing but twiddle its thumbs until the attacks were over. Then, and only then, were fighter jets given the okay to take off.]

Karoun Demirjian, Washington Post, May 28, 2021 (my emphasis):
Former president Donald Trump, whose most zealous supporters carried out the attack, has cast a long shadow over the GOP as lawmakers have wrestled with the proposal to establish a 10-person panel of nongovernment experts charged with finding answers — and accountability. The proposal called for five members, including the chair, to be appointed by Democrats and another five, including the vice chair, to be appointed by Republicans. The commission would have had the power to issue subpoenas on a bipartisan basis, which some Democrats warned — and many Republicans worried — could have been used to force the former president, and his allies in Congress, to testify under oath.

Over the past week, GOP senators voiced concern that . . . if the commission did not produce a final report before the end of the year, Republican lawmakers would have to spend much of the 2022 campaign season responding to its revelations about Trump's past ills and trying to sidestep his outbursts . . .

Trump entered the fray last week, warning that the commission was a "Democrat trap" and excoriating the "35 wayward Republicans" who supported the proposal in the House.

"Sometimes there are consequences to being ineffective and weak," he said in a statement, issuing a personal challenge to McConnell and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) to heed his warnings. . . .

The GOP's votes stood in sharp contrast to its prevailing rhetoric at the time, which was sharply critical of Trump. McConnell, immediately after voting to acquit the former president, blamed him for inciting the insurrection. Yet in recent weeks . . . Republicans muzzled anti-Trump sentiment within their ranks . . .

On Thursday, the family and friends of Capitol Police Officer Brian D. Sicknick [who suffered two strokes and died the day after he confronted rioters at the insurrection] attempted to make a personal moral appeal to GOP senators . . . But after meeting with 15 senators, Sandra Garza, the late officer's partner, emerged deflated.

"Why would they not want to get to the bottom of such horrific violence?" she said to reporters. "It just boggles my mind."
The Republican/Seditionist party doesn't want to "get to the bottom of such horrific violence" because they support "such horrific violence". That becomes obvious when we read about various GQP members actively attempting to re-write the history of January 6 ("a normal tourist visit"), while also stoking anger and fears for the next armed insurrection.

One day after a mass shooting in Silicon Valley, Matt Gaetz (Q-Florida), currently under federal investigation for child sex trafficking and a host of other crimes, voiced his opinion that the Second Amendment is a license to murder people who "suppress us, discourage us" and disgruntled Americans have "an obligation" to use it:
The Silicon Valley can't cancel this movement, or this rally, or this congressman. We have a Second Amendment in this country, and I think we have an obligation to use it.
Gaetz also tweeted:
The Second Amendment is about the ability to maintain, within the citizenry, an armed rebellion against the government if that becomes necessary. I hope it never does.
"I hope it never does." (wink wink nudge nudge)

It Must Be Extremely Hard Work To Continually Be As Stupid As Marjorie Taylor "I Was
Allowed To Believe Things That Weren't True" Greene (Perhaps She Is Naturally Gifted)
at

1 comment:

  1. laura kMonday, May 31, 2021 8:58:00 AM

    *: In August 1814, the British Army burned parts of the White House, the Capitol, and other buildings. (Not Canada, you fucking idiot. And while on the subject of your seemingly infinite ignorance, the influenza pandemic of 1918 (not 1917) did not end World War II, which began in 1939. (Good fucking lord.))

    I enjoyed this. :)

    To be fair, most Canadians would say Canada did that burning, too. But no, in 1812, Canada (British North America) was just a gleam in the Empire's eye, a giant source of timber, fur, and cheap labour, a dumping grounds for undesireables, and an escape hatch for second-born sons.

    ReplyDelete