First, a little background, in case you missed it. Earlier this week Sen. Ted Cruz referred to the January 6, 2020 insurrection as “domestic terrorism”. It was the eighteenth time he’s used this phrase. Yet apparently eighteen was one too many. Did former president Donald Trump notice this time and take offense? We probably will never know the chain of events that lead Sen. Cruz to go on Fox “News” with Tucker Carlson and, frankly, grovel in a quite unbecoming fashion. He pretty much begged for forgiveness, said he misspoke, didn’t mean it was terrorism. Tucker pushed him on this, saying he is always precise. Ted? No, he say he didn’t mean it, it came out wrong. Eighteen times he made this mistake? Grovelling is the appropriate word.
So let’s break this all down. A report from the Congressional Research Service says “Federal statute defines domestic terrorism to include dangerous criminal acts intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population or to influence or affect government policy or conduct within the jurisdiction of the United States.” So let’s see: people, supporters of then President Donald Trump, attacked our nation’s Capitol. The violence on the building and police officers were clearly dangerous criminal acts. The attackers did this to prevent certification of election results. That’s clearly “to influence or affect government policy or conduct within the jurisdiction of the United States.” The facts of January 6 match exactly to this definition of domestic terrorism.
Ted Cruz can lie all he wants. So can Fox News. The facts are there. Watch the videos. The intent was clear. This won’t stop either of them from lying. Not Donald Trump either. I doubt anything will.
I #standwithdemocracy. I hope you do too.
#factsmatter
#democracymatters
#exposethelies
👍
On Sat, Jan 8, 2022 at 6:29 PM David Valade’s Blog Site wrote:
> David Valade posted: ” First, a little background, in case you missed it. > Earlier this week Sen. Ted Cruz referred to the January 6, 2020 > insurrection as “domestic terrorism”. It was the eighteenth time he’s used > this phrase. Yet apparently eighteen was one too many. Did f” >