Dumb things conservatives say:

[Tgo01]

Everything I've seen is that she doesn't have control over the capitol police.

Sure. Here ya go:

https://www.npr.org/2021/01/11/95554...lled-during-ri

She doesn't have control over capitol police. What she could have done was request assistance from the National Guard.

The former chief of U.S. Capitol Police says security officials at the House and Senate rebuffed his early requests to call in the National Guard ahead of a demonstration in support of President Trump that turned into a deadly attack on Congress.

Sund told the Post that House Sergeant-at-Arms Paul Irving was concerned with the "optics" of declaring an emergency ahead of the protests and rejected a National Guard presence.

Sund says he requested assistance six times ahead of and during the attack on the Capitol. Each of those requests was denied or delayed, he says.

Washington, D.C., Mayor Muriel Bowser also wanted a light police presence at the Capitol.

The House Sergeant-at-Arms sure as shit works with the speaker of the House to ensure the safety of House members. So either the House Sergeant-at-Arms unilaterally decided more security wasn't necessary (highly doubtful), or he consulted with Pelosi who told him to piss off his more security, much like the mayor of DC wanted a light police presence as well.

[Tgo01]

The claim that Pelosi was in charge of Capitol Police on Jan. 6 is FALSE, based on our research. While the House speaker has some ties to Capitol Police oversight, saying Pelosi is “in charge” of the agency isn't accurate. The agency is overseen by a three-member board, none of whom are appointed by Pelosi. Additionally, the Jan. 6 select committee will investigate more than the Capitol Police, and there's no evidence Pelosi herself will be investigated.

Lol.

Are you just quoting a news article now?

[drauz]

Sure. Here ya go:

https://www.npr.org/2021/01/11/95554...lled-during-ri

She doesn't have control over capitol police. What she could have done was request assistance from the National Guard.







The House Sergeant-at-Arms sure as shit works with the speaker of the House to ensure the safety of House members. So either the House Sergeant-at-Arms unilaterally decided more security wasn't necessary (highly doubtful), or he consulted with Pelosi who told him to piss off his more security, much like the mayor of DC wanted a light police presence as well.

Nothing there even comes close to proving your point. I doubt they ask the house about how they want security handled, I would guess they are given itineraries and told to get it done.

[Tgo01]

Nothing there even comes close to proving your point. I doubt they ask the house about how they want security handled, I would guess they are given itineraries and told to get it done.

Me: They asked Pelosi for help and she refused.
You: Link it
Me: Here is link showing the former Capitol Police Chief requesting help from the House Sergeant-at-Arms, who works directly with the Speaker of the House to ensure the safety of House members, and said help was refused multiple times.
You: That doesn't prove what you are saying.

[Kyulen]

Instead of wasting time on the January 6 hooligans, I'd rather the Democrats use their majority to focus on real issues effecting most of the American people. The federal minimum wage hasn't been raised in over 12 years, and millions of people still can't afford healthcare. And climate change which is getting worse every year while they don't do shit to address it. Wildfires in the west are worse than last year, we've got more extreme storms causing damage, and the heat waves are getting worse too. But I don't expect much from any politicians these days. They all do what their rich donors want, not what the people want.

[Tgo01]

Instead of wasting time on the January 6 hooligans, I'd rather the Democrats use their majority to focus on real issues effecting most of the American people. The federal minimum wage hasn't been raised in over 12 years, and millions of people still can't afford healthcare. And climate change which is getting worse every year while they don't do shit to address it. Wildfires in the west are worse than last year, we've got more extreme storms causing damage, and the heat waves are getting worse too. But I don't expect much from any politicians these days. They all do what their rich donors want, not what the people want.

Democrats gonna ride this January 6th dumb shit for as long as they can.

It's funny because I was reading an article from some leftist rag (because 99% of them are leftists rags these days so I don't much have choice) and it said something like "As January 6th fades from the memory of most Americans, the House January 6th commission is getting started."

Like...YUP! Thank you for inadvertently telling the truth for once, "news." It's no coincidence this commission is just now getting underway, 6 months after the fact and will somehow stretch until right around, oh I dunno, a few days after the midterms. And if Democrats retain control of the House they will suddenly need a new January 6th commission right around...oh I don't know...let's say January 2024.

[Neveragain]

Instead of wasting time on the January 6 hooligans, I'd rather the Democrats use their majority to focus on real issues effecting most of the American people. The federal minimum wage hasn't been raised in over 12 years, and millions of people still can't afford healthcare. And climate change which is getting worse every year while they don't do shit to address it. Wildfires in the west are worse than last year, we've got more extreme storms causing damage, and the heat waves are getting worse too. But I don't expect much from any politicians these days. They all do what their rich donors want, not what the people want.

You're expecting the same institution that spent decades detonating nuclear devices in the earths atmosphere to fix things.

[drauz]

Me: They asked Pelosi for help and she refused.
You: Link it
Me: Here is link showing the former Capitol Police Chief requesting help from the House Sergeant-at-Arms, who works directly with the Speaker of the House to ensure the safety of House members, and said help was refused multiple times.
You: That doesn't prove what you are saying.

It said the sergeant-at-arms denied it. I just don't think she would have much of a say in how they prepare for events like that.

[Tgo01]

It said the sergeant-at-arms denied it. I just don't think she would have much of a say in how they prepare for events like that.

Except the sergeant-at-arms literally works with the Speaker of the House to ensure the safety of House members. I'm just finding it totally impossible to believe that the sergeant-at-arms took it upon himself to say no additional security forces were necessary without even discussing it with the Speaker of the House. I'm sure that's the version Pelosi says though, which is why she demanded the resignation of the sergeant-at-arms AND the DC police chief.

[drauz]

Except the sergeant-at-arms literally works with the Speaker of the House to ensure the safety of House members. I'm just finding it totally impossible to believe that the sergeant-at-arms took it upon himself to say no additional security forces were necessary without even discussing it with the Speaker of the House. I'm sure that's the version Pelosi says though, which is why she demanded the resignation of the sergeant-at-arms AND the DC police chief.

Have either of them refuted her version?

From the gov't website with his job description:

The Sergeant at Arms reviews and implements all issues relating to the safety and security of Members of Congress and the Capitol complex. The Sergeant at Arms also coordinates extensively with the U.S. Capitol Police and various intelligence agencies to assess threats against Members of Congress and the Capitol complex.

Seems pretty believable that they are solely in charge of security.