quote:

Originally posted by Steve Bertram:

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:

quote:

Originally posted by LongDistanceOperator:
It’s amazing that so many people are this brainwashed. Either that or they are lying and expect everyone else to believe their lies.

So, you are voting red from now on?

Tell us again how you are not a Trump supporter Honey?

Comical, at best.

yay, supplyside stevie is back into the the cookies again -

I didn't vote for him (trump) , I voted for Oliver - some folks, though, they questions others veracity when their own is questionable ... but, if you tell me that you voted for harris, i'll believe you

careful though, jines will be along, telling you how you only contribute to be condescending.. no, wait, you spout liberal babble... he won't notice

You are an exspurt on babble. Typo intended.

Still is supply side too.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

quote:

The Russian Collusion Hoax - it will go down in history as the biggest hoax ever perpetrated on the American public.

The hoax was convincing so many that it was a hoax. Of course you didn't need convincing since you believed the fiction that it was a hoax all along.

It won't go down in history as the biggest. That is reserved for the BIG LIE trump told about the election he lost.

It was a hoax me…proven through and through. It amazes me you still argue otherwise.

I tried to find enough information to agree with the hoax claim. But in that regard, I failed. I did find enough information to defeat the hoax claim.

https://www.cato.org/blog/durh...t-trumps-vindication

CATO Institute

May 16, 2023 4:06PM
The Durham Report: Trump’s Vindication?

So what are the key takeaways from the Durham Report?

The best-case interpretation is that a handful of clearly anti-Trump FBI agents and lawyers, suffering from a severe case of confirmation bias, managed to open and steer a totally unfounded counterintelligence investigation against an American presidential candidate and his campaign. The worst-case interpretation is that the senior most FBI leadership was at least tacitly okay with that approach, while proceeding far more cautiously and carefully with an investigation into his chief political opponent.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mueller_report#Findings
The Mueller Report Findings

(excerpts)

Volume I starts on page 1 of the report and focuses on Russian interference and allegations of "conspiracy" or "coordination" between Trump's presidential campaign and Russia, "not the concept of 'collusion'".[74]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...ination_vs_collusion

Conspiracy or coordination vs collusion
See also: Links between Trump associates and Russian officials and spies and Mueller special counsel investigation § Conspiracy vs collusion

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...nd_Russian_officials
Links between Trump associates and Russian officials

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...ng_conspiracy_theory

Durham special counsel investigation Motivated by right-wing conspiracy theory

Excerpt:

Durham did not present evidence to support allegations of Obama spying on Trump.[112]

Although Durham insinuated Clinton involvement that fueled speculation in conservative media, he did not find evidence to bring charges against her.[117][118]

The investigation cost more than $6.5 million.[113] In his transmittal letter to the attorney general, Durham thanked Garland for "permitting our inquiry to proceed independently."[114]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...estigation#Reactions

Reactions

Excerpt:

Frank Figliuzzi, a former assistant director of the FBI Counterintelligence Division, said:

"Really, the most malignant interpretation of this report is Durham was tasked with doing something that was not only unnecessary to do because the [inspector general] had already done it, but tasked with doing whatever he could to destroy the origins of the Crossfire Hurricane original case ... If the goal was to wrack [sic] up many indictments and prove all of this "Russia, Russia, Russia" stuff, as Trump says, wrong, he's failed miserably. But if the goal, at least the consolation prize, was to hand over a politically tainted document that can be used in sound bites over and over again on Fox News and other platforms, already congressman Jim Jordan has publicly stated he's going to call Durham to testify in congress and I'll note as others have done, John Durham should be Exhibit A in the so-called "Weaponization of Government Subcommittee" because he was weaponized by Bill Barr and turned against the very institutions that he comes out of."[119]

Former federal prosecutor Shan Wu criticized Durham and demanded an apology from him:[120]

I find Durham's investigation to be a complete waste of taxpayer dollars... Durham failed to produce any evidence of what Trump promised to be 'the crime of the century'—presumably involving the 'deep-state conspiracy' mantra of Trump supporters—and sent no one to jail.... [The report] reads like a plagiarized version of the 2019 [Inspector General's report]... Durham also lacks any moral authority to lecture the FBI or anyone else about concerns over political bias when his entire investigation originated with Barr's efforts to politically weaponize the DOJ. Durham's investigation was so compromised that his own top aide, a respected career prosecutor, resigned in protest.

Wow, Ledvm, you're drunk on the Kool Aid again. In fact, there was plenty of reason to open an investigation of Trump's dealings with Russia.

He went around saying in public that he'd accept help from any country, and called on Russia to hack his opponent's email.

During the investigation, the Mueller report documents, the FBI discovered several clandestine meetings between Trump's people and Russian agents.

Don't make me go dredge up the Mueller report and post relevant sections here--again! You're just being boneheaded on this.

Liz Cheney has been accused of witness tampering, obstruction of justice, and evidence destruction to name a few. Whether any of the allegations can be proved is another matter. Corrupt DOJ and FBI upper management make it difficult. That is why you can't believe shit that comes out of either. They both have been caught fabricating evidence and lying. This is a matter of public record.

Of course, it's immaterial that the accusers "have been caught" fabricating and lying lots.

There are many examples of the accusers I'm talking about make sketchy claims and conspiracy theories knowing they are making it up specifically for a diversion narrative and knowing their target audience will believe their shit.

The odd thing, to me at least, is the targeted audience are serial believers when to non-believers the claims are transparent BS.

ME,
Did you read Matt Taibbi’s compilation of post Meuller investigative reporting he put on the Twitter now X? If not, your not fully informed. In fact, you are not really informed at all.

quote:

Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:
Wow, Ledvm, you're drunk on the Kool Aid again. In fact, there was plenty of reason to open an investigation of Trump's dealings with Russia.

He went around saying in public that he'd accept help from any country, and called on Russia to hack his opponent's email.

During the investigation, the Mueller report documents, the FBI discovered several clandestine meetings between Trump's people and Russian agents.

Don't make me go dredge up the Mueller report and post relevant sections here--again! You're just being boneheaded on this.

If you choose to continue to believe in the hoax, be my guest. I hear there are adults that still believe in Santa Claus as well. I am sure you can live happily in fantasy land…just don’t try to drag me in.

Dredge up Mueller if you wish. There was nothing scathing in it at all. Even the initial opening of the FBI investigation was based false pretenses used to dupe FISA.

With all the post-Mueller and post-Durham reporting out, not even the most dimwitted Democratic Politician goes down the road of Russian collusion any longer. Everyone who keeps up (key words there Roland) knows it was total bullshit.

Mainly Matt Taibbi but also Catherine Herridge and Mollie Hemingway have documented it (the whole of the Russian Collusion narrative) pretty well. You just have to go outside of CBS, ABC, NBC, PBS to find it. But people who look for reality have been doing that since the turn of the 21st century.

Roland, your TDS is showing.
Hillary had thousands of emails destroyed in violation of the law and had a server in a bathroom closet that was about as secured as Kamala’s grundies, again in violation of the law. The Russians had phished it and most probably already hacked it. Trump was asked a question by a reporter and his comment simply poked fun at the security debacle Hillary had created. Just go to YouTube, and view the incident. Enjoy the pretty darn funny joke come out of Trumps mouth (and not from some humorless and dishonest political hack trying to influence the portion of the public who chose to be uninformed).

https://youtu.be/3kxG8uJUsWU?si=lWAKe4I-FE6VVJl2

It’s a pretty good jab at the MSM for giving Hillary a pass, isn’t it.

Alas, with TDS, you’ll probably miss the joke.

Secondly, don’t you believe in Santa. He’s the guy who Democrats look to for “free” stuff for illegal aliens.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:
Wow, Ledvm, you're drunk on the Kool Aid again. In fact, there was plenty of reason to open an investigation of Trump's dealings with Russia.

He went around saying in public that he'd accept help from any country, and called on Russia to hack his opponent's email.

During the investigation, the Mueller report documents, the FBI discovered several clandestine meetings between Trump's people and Russian agents.

Don't make me go dredge up the Mueller report and post relevant sections here--again! You're just being boneheaded on this.

If you choose to continue to believe in the hoax, be my guest. I hear there are adults that still believe in Santa Claus as well. I am sure you can live happily in fantasy land…just don’t try to drag me in.

Dredge up Mueller if you wish. There was nothing scathing in it at all. Even the initial opening of the FBI investigation was based false pretenses used to dupe FISA.

With all the post-Mueller and post-Durham reporting out, not even the most dimwitted Democratic Politician goes down the road of Russian collusion any longer. Everyone who keeps up (key words there Roland) knows it was total bullshit.

Mainly Matt Taibbi but also Catherine Herridge and Mollie Hemingway have documented it (the whole of the Russian Collusion narrative) pretty well. You just have to go outside of CBS, ABC, NBC, PBS to find it. But people who look for reality have been doing that since the turn of the 21st century.

The Duram investigation and report was confirmation bias itself, looking to prove confirmation bias. Investigate the investigation and the investigators is the GOPer's ploy. Trump learned it from Roy Cohen and taught it to GOPers. Dirt is a valuable item in GOPer world.

The one thing to count on about GOPers is whenever they make accusations it's a psycho projection. Any accusation of obstruction, bias, weaponizing, practically everything, they are projecting stuff they are doing.

Russia, Russia, Russia, collusion - all a hoax per GOPers. The projection of hoax is the real hoax.

Take the criminal case in Georgia for example. GOPers couldn't beat the case itself, so they went after the prosecution, and they got her removed from the case. GOPers are looking hard for "irregularities" in the NY case as well. Prosecution bias doesn't mean the accused didn't do the deeds accused. Yea, the FBI is bias. They are bias against career con artists and criminals, and their so-deemed bias is really intuition and skill. Trump's case screams corruption.

All that doesn't mean that Trump and GOPers didn't do what they are accused of. They are just looking to beat the rap any way they can. And if they can't beat it with technicalities, they will just make up BS.

GOPers won't participate in a legit investigation on one of their own or cause. But they will wait and investigate the investigation and if that isn't enough, they will investigate the investigators, So, they can't even be counted on to ethically investigate anything. And those appointed members in GOPer congress are known grossly bias liars.

Ye with clean hands cast the first stone. If confirmation bias makes for dirty hands, and no stones may be cast by dirty hands, ----- you can finish the thought yourself. It goes both ways.

But I see difference enough to say it's not equivalence. Accusing the so-deemed Dem justice system of weaponizing - lawfare - to get Trump in particular is almost pure psycho projection. In addition, inventing the hoax claim is a projection too. Also, a big clue re projection is that the righteousness of it allows justifications, tit for tat, for weaponizing lawfare.

It's mind games, the masses are the target, spinning truth and even reality itself. Maybe I just wasn't paying attention over the years, until Trump(ism) came forth. But, this seems new to me. And lo and behold, it's a winning formula. There is no way this formula is consistent with the Founding principles.

Also:
TDS and BIF (belief in fiction) are related, and reciprocal cause and effect.

Wait a minuet Kabob.
The Judges took the FBI to task after the report for lying to them. The FBI fired and re-appointed people, and tightened loop holes they said were unacceptable after the report. But now you are claiming Durhams report was a fraud? Where is your proof since you just made that claim.

quote:

But now you are claiming Durhams report was a fraud?

I didn't say that, so I don't have to prove it was fraud.

I said that the Durham investigation and report, all 6.5 million $ and several years of time invested, was confirmation bias itself. And according to a reliable source the report was in large part plagiarized from another report, different source. Barr and Durham were chasing conspiracy theories, which they finally managed to partially prove as true.

But they didn't prove that the Russia, Russia, Russia thing, nor collusion, nor Mueller's report, was a hoax. And hoax is not what Durham reported. That's the made-up part. Hoax is a catch-word, and not the truth.

Poor Mags; lives in a house of mirrors.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
Of course, it's immaterial that the accusers "have been caught" fabricating and lying lots.

There are many examples of the accusers I'm talking about make sketchy claims and conspiracy theories knowing they are making it up specifically for a diversion narrative and knowing their target audience will believe their shit.

The odd thing, to me at least, is the targeted audience are serial believers when to non-believers the claims are transparent BS.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
The Duram investigation and report was confirmation bias itself, looking to prove confirmation bias. Investigate the investigation and the investigators is the GOPer's ploy. Trump learned it from Roy Cohen and taught it to GOPers. Dirt is a valuable item in GOPer world.

The one thing to count on about GOPers is whenever they make accusations it's a psycho projection. Any accusation of obstruction, bias, weaponizing, practically everything, they are projecting stuff they are doing.

Russia, Russia, Russia, collusion - all a hoax per GOPers. The projection of hoax is the real hoax.

Take the criminal case in Georgia for example. GOPers couldn't beat the case itself, so they went after the prosecution, and they got her removed from the case. GOPers are looking hard for "irregularities" in the NY case as well. Prosecution bias doesn't mean the accused didn't do the deeds accused. Yea, the FBI is bias. They are bias against career con artists and criminals, and their so-deemed bias is really intuition and skill. Trump's case screams corruption.

All that doesn't mean that Trump and GOPers didn't do what they are accused of. They are just looking to beat the rap any way they can. And if they can't beat it with technicalities, they will just make up BS.

GOPers won't participate in a legit investigation on one of their own or cause. But they will wait and investigate the investigation and if that isn't enough, they will investigate the investigators, So, they can't even be counted on to ethically investigate anything. And those appointed members in GOPer congress are known grossly bias liars.

Ye with clean hands cast the first stone. If confirmation bias makes for dirty hands, and no stones may be cast by dirty hands, ----- you can finish the thought yourself. It goes both ways.

But I see difference enough to say it's not equivalence. Accusing the so-deemed Dem justice system of weaponizing - lawfare - to get Trump in particular is almost pure psycho projection. In addition, inventing the hoax claim is a projection too. Also, a big clue re projection is that the righteousness of it allows justifications, tit for tat, for weaponizing lawfare.

It's mind games, the masses are the target, spinning truth and even reality itself. Maybe I just wasn't paying attention over the years, until Trump(ism) came forth. But, this seems new to me. And lo and behold, it's a winning formula. There is no way this formula is consistent with the Founding principles.

Also:
TDS and BIF (belief in fiction) are related, and reciprocal cause and effect.

Blah blah blah…yadi yadi yada

The data/known information says Russia Collusion was a hoax cooked up by Clintons. Some of it verged on criminality.

The known information says that if anyone actually colluded (not a crime in itself) with Russia…it was the Clintons.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

quote:

But now you are claiming Durhams report was a fraud?

I didn't say that, so I don't have to prove it was fraud.

I said that the Durham investigation and report, all 6.5 million $ and several years of time invested, was confirmation bias itself. And according to a reliable source the report was in large part plagiarized from another report, different source. Barr and Durham were chasing conspiracy theories, which they finally managed to partially prove as true.

But they didn't prove that the Russia, Russia, Russia thing, nor collusion, nor Mueller's report, was a hoax. And hoax is not what Durham reported. That's the made-up part. Hoax is a catch-word, and not the truth.

But Matt Taibbi went on and did. It was a hoax. Unless of course you were looking to prove Hillary/Russia collusion…which was real—just not really a crime.

One of the main sub-lies of the Big Lie (Russia Russia Russia) was that “collusion” was a crime in itself.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

quote:

But now you are claiming Durhams report was a fraud?

I didn't say that, so I don't have to prove it was fraud.

I said that the Durham investigation and report, all 6.5 million $ and several years of time invested, was confirmation bias itself. And according to a reliable source the report was in large part plagiarized from another report, different source. Barr and Durham were chasing conspiracy theories, which they finally managed to partially prove as true.

But they didn't prove that the Russia, Russia, Russia thing, nor collusion, nor Mueller's report, was a hoax. And hoax is not what Durham reported. That's the made-up part. Hoax is a catch-word, and not the truth.

Money spent on Durham would not have been necessary had the Clintons not perpetrated the biggest hoax ever sprung on the American people and spent the money on Mueller.

quote:

Originally posted by LongDistanceOperator:
It’s amazing that so many people are this brainwashed. Either that or they are lying and expect everyone else to believe their lies.

Looked in a mirror lately????


.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

quote:

But now you are claiming Durhams report was a fraud?

I didn't say that, so I don't have to prove it was fraud.

I said that the Durham investigation and report, all 6.5 million $ and several years of time invested, was confirmation bias itself. And according to a reliable source the report was in large part plagiarized from another report, different source. Barr and Durham were chasing conspiracy theories, which they finally managed to partially prove as true.

But they didn't prove that the Russia, Russia, Russia thing, nor collusion, nor Mueller's report, was a hoax. And hoax is not what Durham reported. That's the made-up part. Hoax is a catch-word, and not the truth.

Money spent on Durham would not have been necessary had the Clintons not perpetrated the biggest hoax ever sprung on the American people and spent the money on Mueller.

Ain't that the truth!

.

quote:

Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:
Wow, Ledvm, you're drunk on the Kool Aid again. In fact, there was plenty of reason to open an investigation of Trump's dealings with Russia.

He went around saying in public that he'd accept help from any country, and called on Russia to hack his opponent's email.

During the investigation, the Mueller report documents, the FBI discovered several clandestine meetings between Trump's people and Russian agents.

Don't make me go dredge up the Mueller report and post relevant sections here--again! You're just being boneheaded on this.

Yeah, roland, we know you are projecting about your drinking habits -

steele dossier lead to mueller lead to durham -- sequence matters, sweetie

with the root beingclinton paying for steele dossier .. which leads to fisa court lies

to be clearn, killary's server had over 33k messages on it, it was illegal, per comer, and contained THOUSANDS of secret/top secret emails, on her personal device. the server was "in her bathroom" and rather than preserve the evidence, it was destroyed using bleachbits, and further, rather than turn over her personal devices, she destroyed them with a hammer -

oh, was the DNC phished, then hacked? yeppers - which means they weren't following the most basic protections, as these are easily prevented

So, you're finally admitting, per my coaxing, that collusion isn't what Mueller was chasing.

It's not prosecutable. Coordinated Conspiracy is if the prosecution's burden of proof is met. Mueller was obstructed from getting enough proof - you know, the silence for pardon quid pro-quo thing.

But Mueller did report much evidence of collusion.

Unlike GOPers, a good, decent, self-respecting conspiracy theory has SOME element of truth.

We knew that already. So, Durham didn't need to spend years and 6.5 million dollars on something we already knew.

It was a fishing expedition, and in the end, he caught guppies and plagiarized previous reports to the extent of bias confirmation but excluding other previous significant findings.

BTW, Durham thanked Garland for not interfering in his investigation.

quote:

was the DNC phished, then hacked? yeppers - which means they weren't following the most basic protections, as these are easily prevented

From memory, I could be wrong, GOPers were hacked too. But the info wasn't utilized like the hacked Dem info was.

Intent - collusion - coordination, hummm.

Some of the other dots you connected don't connect either.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/p...the-2016-us-election

Senate panel finds Russia interfered in the 2016 U.S. election
Politics Aug 18, 2020 4:49 AM EST

Excerpt:

The report also delved into areas of great interest to Trump that were not explored by Mueller. Those include the FBI’s reliance on opposition research on Trump’s ties to Russia that was compiled by a former British spy, Christopher Steele, whose work was financed by Democrats.

The committee found the FBI gave Steele’s “allegations unjustified credence” as it relied on the dossier of research to seek court approval to wiretap former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page. It says many of the dossier’s allegations remain uncorroborated “nearly four years after Steele delivered the first of these memos.”

A separate investigation by the Justice Department’s inspector general also faulted the FBI for errors and omissions related to the Steele dossier as it sought surveillance warrants.

Rubio said in a statement that the committee was troubled the FBI had been willing to use the dossier “without verifying its methodology or sourcing.”

=================================

That is the source of Durham's plagiarizing. Something already reported upon.

===================================

This is part of what Durham didn't report on:

Links between Trump associates and Russian officials and spies

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/..._officials_and_spies

Excerpt:

During the 2016 presidential campaign and up to his inauguration, Donald J. Trump and at least 18 campaign officials and advisers had numerous contacts with Russian nationals, WikiLeaks, or intermediaries between the two. As of January 28, The New York Times had tallied more than 140 in-person meetings, phone calls, text messages, emails and private messages between the Trump campaign and Russians or WikiLeaks.[414]

Main Article:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...nd_Russian_officials

Links between Trump associates and Russian officials

quote:

It was a fishing expedition,

A fishing expedition that was predicated on malfeasance by the FBI that caught some minnows there were TOTALLY unrelated to 2016 election.

It was a hoax from the inception — meant to pull the wool over you and your ilk’s eyes.

I do have to question that if they are keeping documents the president doodles on in meetings, how in god's green acres could the 1/6 committee get away with destroying meeting minutes, records of testimony, etc? That's what I hear is a question.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...e-report/ar-BB1h4udT

I also hear that the committee heads deny any wrongdoing.

Sounds to me like an investigation is something that should happen.

quote:

A fishing expedition that was predicated on malfeasance by the FBI that caught some minnows there were TOTALLY unrelated to 2016 election.

Finally, something we can agree on.

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
I do have to question that if they are keeping documents the president doodles on in meetings, how in god's green acres could the 1/6 committee get away with destroying meeting minutes, records of testimony, etc? That's what I hear is a question.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...e-report/ar-BB1h4udT

I also hear that the committee heads deny any wrongdoing.

Sounds to me like an investigation is something that should happen.

Another investigates the investigation. What needs investigation is the lying GOPers in congress.

It's interesting to me that when I searched on that claim the articles found all were from rightist media sources.

But when I changed the search question to include "fact check":

(Excerpt)

https://www.factcheck.org/2024...-destroyed-evidence/

Meme Rehashes Old, False Claim That J6 Committee Destroyed Evidence
By Saranac Hale Spencer

Posted on October 15, 2024

Quick Take
The House committee that investigated the attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, issued a more than 800-page report presenting and analyzing the evidence about what happened that day. It also released videos, transcribed interviews, depositions and other documents. But some high-profile conservatives are now making the false claim that the committee destroyed “all the evidence.”

The claim that the committee destroyed evidence appears to be a reprise of a talking point we wrote about last year. Republican Rep. Barry Loudermilk, of Georgia, had told Fox News in a story published on Aug. 8, 2023, that the committee hadn’t adequately preserved some documents, data and video depositions.

The same day, Trump took that argument further, posting on his social media platform: “The January 6th Unselect Committee got rid of EVERYTHING! Discarded, Deleted, Thrown Out. A Flagrant Violation of the law.”

The following month, in an appearance on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Trump made a similar claim.

But, as we noted at the time, Loudermilk’s original claim didn’t allege that the committee’s records were destroyed, as Trump claimed. Rather, Loudermilk raised concerns over what materials needed to be archived.

n a letter to Loudermilk on July 7, 2023, Rep. Bennie Thompson, who chaired the committee, reported that more than a million records had been prepared for publication and archiving in coordination with several governmental offices, including the National Archives and Records Administration and the Committee on House Administration.

In a footnote to that letter, Thompson explained, “the Select Committee did not archive temporary committee records that were not elevated by the Committee’s actions, such as use in hearings or official publications, or those that did not further its investigative activities.”

So, the meme shared by Trump’s eldest child and Posobiec appears to be a rehashed version of this old claim. In reality, the evidence collected by the committee is still publicly available on a government website.

=======================================

USA Today published a similar article fact checking, but I couldn't access it since they blocked pending subscription. Same for LA Times.

=======================================

But I did a search on Washington Post, which I have a paid subscription to, and found this article:

https://wapo.st/425T23p

Trump says Liz Cheney deleted evidence of Jan. 6 troops. There isn’t any.
January 3, 2024

Excerpt:

“Why did American Disaster Liz Cheney … ILLEGALLY DELETE & DESTROY most of the evidence, and related items, from the January 6th Committee of Political Thugs and Misfits. THIS ACT OF EXTREME SABOTAGE MAKES IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR MY LAWYERS TO PROPERLY PREPARE FOR, AND PRESENT, A PROPER DEFENSE OF THEIR CLIENT, ME. All of the information on Crazy Nancy Pelosi turning down 10,000 soldiers that I offered to to [sic] guard the Capitol Building, and beyond, is gone.”
—Former president Donald Trump, in a social media post, Jan. 1

=============================================

There’s a recurring pattern to Trump’s spreading of false information. First, he repeats a false claim endlessly, no matter how often it is debunked. Then, he elevates it every so often with a dusting of new information, usually a falsehood derived from a modicum of fact.

This New Year’s post on Trump’s Truth Social platform is a good example of the tactic.

Regular readers know we’ve shown, time and again, that Trump and his allies have simply invented the claim that he requested 10,000 troops before the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, twisting an offhand comment into a supposed order to the Pentagon. A Colorado judge recently considered testimony on this point and dismissed a Trump aide’s account as “incredible.”

Now, Trump has seized on House GOP claims that some records are missing from the archives of the House select committee that investigated Jan. 6, including Trump’s actions. The Democratic chair who headed the committee denies anything was lost; instead, he says some sensitive materials were withheld from the House archive to protect witnesses.

But here’s the kicker: The special counsel who is prosecuting Trump for his efforts to overturn the 2020 election — although not for the Capitol insurrection itself — says the withheld materials have already been provided to Trump as part of discovery in the case.

Let’s take a tour through Trump’s morass of misinformation, in which he falsely accuses former congresswoman Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.), vice chair of the committee, of destroying documents.

(continued)

If you are blocked from accessing the whole article, let me know so I can cut & paste the whole thing.