Trump Offered 10,000 National Guard Troops To Protect Capitol Multiple Times Before Jan 6 and His Offer was Rebuked Every Time
You’ve already heard all the lies about January 6 and what led up to a riot that broke out at the Capitol that day. The Democrats and their sycophants et. al. have used the riot, which consisted of no more than 10 percent of the people who were there to protest the stealing of an election, to go after Trump supporters and conservatives in general. The progressives have been accusing Trump of inciting the riot, even though there isn’t an ounce of evidence that shows it’s true. Now I think it’s time we hear some truth.
Questions were raised as to why was it so easy to breach the Capitol that day. How come security around the building was so lax? Many speculated that the Democrats wanted something to happen so that they could do exactly what they are doing now. The Sgt at Arms for the House reports directly to the Speaker of the House or Nancy Pelosi (D-CA). The Sgt at Arms for the Senate reported directly to the Senate Majority Leader, which at the time was Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY). Where were they and how come they turned down National Guard troops when Trump deployed them after the riot started? Who gave them the order to turn the Guard away?
We come to find out that former President Donald Trump had offered to deploy 10,000 National Guard troops in to the area of the Capitol in Washington DC before January 6, according to Mark Meadows the former White House chief of staff.
Meadows told Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures” host Maria Bartiromo that even though Trump was vocal about offering Capitol Police and National Guard presence at the Capitol on multiple occasions prior to January 6, his offers were rejected “every time.”
“We also know that in January, but also throughout the summer, that the president was very vocal in making sure that we had plenty of National Guard, plenty of additional support because he supports our rule of law and supports our law enforcement and offered additional help,” Meadows told Bartiromo.
“Even in January, that was a given, as many as 10,000 National Guard troops were told to be on the ready by the Secretary of Defense,” Meadows said. “That was a direct order from President Trump and yet here is what we see … all kinds of blame going around but yet not a whole lot of accountability.”
“That accountability needs to rest where it ultimately should be and that’s on Capitol Hill” Meadows added.
Democrats have accused Trump of inciting the violence that took place in the Capitol that day during a speech he gave near the White House. They said because he used the words “fight like hell” when referring to his legal team’s efforts for election integrity that he incited violence. The Democrats think you’re all stupid. I don’t think there is a prominent Democrat in DC who hasn’t used those exact words on many occasions.
House Democrats, joined by 10 cowardly Republicans, voted on January 13 to approve a single article of impeachment against the president for “incitement of insurrection,” making him the first president to be impeached twice. I think that speaks more to what kind of people the Democrats have become than Trump. And in an Orwellian atmosphere, thanks to Senate Democrats when the trial begins Trump will become the first former president to stand trial, which countless legal scholars have said it’s unconstitutional.
Meadows described the impeachment trial against a former president as “political theater.” Chief Justice Roberts agrees because he wants nothing to do with it.
“It’s really about Democrats trying to once again make a political point,” he said. “This whole impeachment is designed to remove someone from office. President Trump is a private citizen at this point. And yet they can’t stand it. They have to continue to go ahead and try to put forth some kind of narrative that scores political points.”
He added, “But we have seen it before. The American people are not going to have it. We have already had 45 senators say that this is unconstitutional. But it’s more than that. It’s a violation of due process. It’s not what our founding fathers set up. And it sets a very bad precedent of future officeholders.”
Trump’s lawyers who will defend him on Monday set out their defense making the argument that the Senate has no jurisdiction to try a former president and that the House’s article charge against Trump is deficient because the president was never afforded due process and his right to free speech was violated by the article of impeachment itself.
Democrats on Monday made the argument that the Founding Fathers were all for going after a president politically after he left office based on the argument that they never put into the Constitution that it wasn’t allowed. That’s what leftists do all the time. “What do you mean the Congress can’t appropriate money to build swimming pools at members’ homes? It doesn’t say in the Constitution that we can’t do it.” My question to these idiot savants minus the savant part is if the Founding Fathers really believed that Congress can hold an impeachment trial on a man who is no longer the president then why did they write “shall be removed from Office on Impeachment” in the Impeachment Clause in Article I, Section 3? If we were to use the logic of the idiots then we can say that the Impeachment clause does not say they can go after a former president. My God, do we really have to deal with these nitwits to this level?
“The Article of Impeachment presented by the House is unconstitutional for a variety of reasons, any of which alone would be grounds for immediate dismissal. Taken together, they demonstrate conclusively that indulging House Democrats’ hunger for this political theater is a danger to our Republic democracy and the rights that we hold dear,” the trial memo, authored by Bruce Castor, David Schoen, and Michael van der Veen, states.
So, in the end, we discover that Trump offered to move troops in, and if the Democrats hadn’t rejected the offer made multiple times there would not have been a riot and five Americans would not have lost their lives. Sounds like we got the wrong people on trial.