Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Chris Buckley <alan@sabir.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: Nebula Finalists 2016
Date: 8 Jan 2025 15:47:03 GMT
Lines: 91
Message-ID: <lu7kvnFe6f2U1@mid.individual.net>
References: <vkufo3$49n$1@reader2.panix.com> <vkvmjg$1tvnm$1@dont-email.me>
 <hf68njles236fbk844h7pdib96h8fh8tcf@4ax.com> <vl255r$2fp0f$1@dont-email.me>
 <cspanj11p80g66pir330tnnm3b89efgadr@4ax.com> <vl77ns$3ice5$1@dont-email.me>
 <oc3gnjd4roo941tug2dci8sg4pajhlbh7h@4ax.com> <vl9l2g$3623$1@dont-email.me>
 <uboinjll82lm4unpgcjl9b8j14ostm46oq@4ax.com>
 <lu2em1Fj3dhU1@mid.individual.net>
 <1qkqnjhj03regmd1rtp9a9mr8kb3it4it4@4ax.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net lhx4aBv9/J1t6Q+aopeeSwRzIg2juMh7/9SeiaeslmLPTW4aki
Cancel-Lock: sha1:TI/r7TAqgHiFs6voMlAjnkN7z9A= sha256:Gxe/Y/OWXLySibR5jnCEdiK5CMfP39W8G3Zytp9noNs=
User-Agent: slrn/1.0.3 (Linux)
Bytes: 5419

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?

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.

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.

Chris