Half the country thinks J6 was an attempted coup where the bad actors forgot their firearms, okay?

Do these people also believe Joe Biden really did get 81 million votes? Serious question.

Not a single MAGA hat, Oath Keeper, Proud Boy, or suburban boomer grandma on the grounds of the Capitol that day had a firearm. Liz Chaney and her Smart Glasses want you to think this was an organized insurrection to overthrow the U.S. government, and that the plan was to do it without arms. Got that?

The true intention of the J6 crowd was to have Mike Pence return the electors to the states in those with contested elections, for further investigation, instead of certifying them on the floor that day. No one was asking Pence to overturn the election, quite obviously. He lied about that. Liz Chaney lied last night when she said what was being asked of Pence that day was illegal. Not only would it have been legal, it is literally the procedure called for in the certification process.

But you also need to know this: Trump had the power himself to do something about all this, long before J6, and he didn’t do it. He was the sitting President, and he didn’t do it. All he did was have his legal team pursue state lawsuits, most of which never saw the light of day. It all smells badly of theater.

By the way, whatever happened to the Kraken?

Planning to watch the J6 Show Trial tonight? Prep yourself with video of what really happened, twenty minutes before Trump’s speech was over

In the wake of the staged faux coup executed by the Deep State on January 6th, 2021, I documented in this space video and written documents which demonstrated the coordination of District officials, Capitol and Metro PD, etc., to open the barricades, open the doors and physically hold them open for everyone to come inside, etc. Oh, and how this all started twenty minutes before Trump’s speech ended (which was taking place a 30 minute walk from the Capitol… so the MAGA crowd wasn’t even on scene until 50 minutes after the Deep State had already “breached” the perimeter). I am pasting summaries below. You will need to click the links to watch the videos, and who knows how many of the tweets have been deleted by now. Why did Mayor Bowser refuse the help of additional Federal LEO/troops that Trump had offered? Isn’t it obvious?

Dozens of Capitol rioters say law enforcement ‘let us in’ to building, and there is plenty of video

Posted on

Well yes, that’s exactly what happened. It is all on video.

As authorities continue to pursue individuals who participated in the Jan. 6 insurrection (sic) at the United States Capitol, a growing number of those charged are employing a new defense: blaming the police for letting them in.

At least 29 people arrested for their role in the Jan. 6 events have claimed they thought they were free to enter the Capitol because law enforcement authorities either didn’t stop them from coming in or never told them they were not allowed to be there, according to affidavits and court filings reviewed by ABC News.

“He was not at the front of the lines, he didn’t see barricades being knocked down…” Thomas Mayr, the lawyer for Christopher Grider, one of the people accused of participating in the riot, told ABC News. “He went through an open door.”

Grider, of Texas, is one of dozens of suspected rioters who claimed to be unaware they were not allowed inside — some of whom argued that they were actually ushered in by officers. He now faces multiple charges including violent entry and disorderly conduct on Capitol grounds.

Jacob Lewis of California told investigators he was never told that he could not enter the Capitol, and that he was “escorted” by police into the building. When reached by ABC News, Lewis said he would be releasing video footage to “back up his story.” He declined to share the video with ABC News. Lewis was indicted on four misdemeanor charges, including disorderly and disruptive conduct in a restricted building.

Even as scrutiny of Capitol police continues to build, experts say it is unlikely such a defense will work in most situations. https://news.yahoo.com/defense-dozens-capitol-rioters-law-100001636.html

As has been extensively documented in this space, the entire faux insurrection was pre-planned and executed with the assistance of elected officials, Capitol and DC Metro Police, and federal agencies. This included holding doors open and providing directions. Hundreds of Antifa/BLM troops were in place at the outer perimeter hours before the Trump speech even began. After they did the dirty work, the unarmed MAGA throng followed. Following are all the links with numerous videos:

Capitol Police Chief admits riot was pre-planned with “high level of coordination”

Originally posted on 

Yeah, no kidding. In fact the high level of coordination included the Capitol Police themselves. It was all a set-up, and it is all on video. Remember how they so kindly held the doors open? https://nonvenipacem.com/2021/01/09/motives-and-more-video-inviting-aiding-and-abetting-the-staged-faux-breach-of-the-capital/

Remember how DC Mayor Bowser ordered Federal law enforcement to stand down the day before? https://nonvenipacem.com/2021/01/07/dc-mayor-told-federal-law-enforcement-to-stand-down-day-before-breach/

Remember how, that very same day, the FBI had issued warning of an impending “war” at the Capitol, based on intel they had gathered? https://nonvenipacem.com/2021/01/13/shock-on-same-day-dc-mayor-asked-federal-troops-to-stay-home-fbi-had-warned-of-war-at-capital/

Remember how the first defenses were breached TWENTY MINUTES before the end of Trump’s speech, and how the speech took place at a distance of 1.6 miles away from the Capitol, a thirty minute walk? https://nonvenipacem.com/2021/01/12/who-exactly-breached-the-capital-twenty-minutes-before-trumps-speech-ended/

But muh impeachment for inciting a false flag insurrection that was staged and started before the speech.

In a detailed letter addressed to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, former U.S. Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund said the department “did not fail” on Jan. 6, arguing that Capitol Police did everything it could with the intelligence available beforehand, but still did not expect a group of “thousands of well-coordinated, well-equipped violent criminals” to attack law enforcement at the Capitol building.

Sund, who resigned after the insurrection, revealed that a number of those in the crowd, “were wearing radio earpieces indicating a high level of coordination,” and many also carried, “weapons, chemical munitions, protective equipment, explosives and climbing gear.”


The letter addressed to Pelosi on Feb. 1 claimed that the first 150 members of the National Guard were not sworn in on Capitol grounds on Jan. 6 until about four and half hours after Sund’s request for their support was approved by the Capitol Police Board. 

“What occurred on January 6th cannot be considered under any circumstances a protest, rally of civil disobedience. This was a well-planned, coordinated insurrection at the United States Capitol,” Sund wrote. “The USCP does not have the manpower, the training of the capabilities to handle an armed insurrection involving thousands of individuals bent on violence and destruction at all costs. Nevertheless, because of their bravery and professionalism in the face of this attack, USCP did not fail.”


Video: CDC had already formed its “Monkeypox Response Team” in July 2021, and subsequently purchased 13 million vaxx doses

Folks, it’s Event 201 all over again. Except this time, the war game wasn’t a tabletop exercise.

Watch this one minute video of Dr. McCullough. (He mistakenly says 2022, but he meant 2021)

Here is the paper he cites:

Here is the CDC link: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7114a1.htm#

How the Left Learned To Stop Worrying and Love Domestic Terrorism

Biden DOJ asks judge to go easy on Ivy League firebombers

By Washington Free Beacon Editors • June 7, 2022

On the cusp of nonstop, around-the-clock (primetime!) coverage of the Jan. 6 committee hearings, a couple of domestic terrorists are actually getting their day in court, and it is informative to see how Merrick Garland’s Justice Department is handling their prosecution.

Recall Garland’s breathless declaration, during his confirmation hearings, that “150 years after the Department’s founding, battling extremist attacks on our democratic institutions also remains central to its mission.”

Colinford Mattis and Urooj Rahman were arrested in the “mostly peaceful” protests following George Floyd’s murder. The two lawyers handed out Molotov cocktails to the crowd, and Rahman tossed one into a police car before fleeing the scene in Mattis’s van. They reached a plea deal with federal prosecutors in October 2020 that wiped out six of the seven charges against them. Those prosecutors, nonetheless, sought a maximum 10-year sentence and argued that the incident qualified for a so-called terrorism enhancement that would turbocharge sentencing—a determination with which the U.S. Probation Office concurred.

Ginning herself up to distribute explosives to the crowd, Rahman gave a video interview in which she declared, “This shit won’t ever stop until we fuckin’ take it all down,” adding that “the only way [the police] hear us is through violence.”

Then, Garland and the U.S. attorney for New York’s Eastern District, Breon Peace, who’s handling the prosecution, took office, and you won’t believe what happened next!

In mid-May, the same career DOJ prosecutors who argued for that 10-year sentence were back in court withdrawing their plea deal and entering a new one that allowed the defendants to cop to the lesser charge of conspiracy. It tosses out the terrorism enhancement entirely.

The new charge carries a five-year maximum sentence, but the prosecutors are urging the judge to go below that, asking for just 18 to 24 months on account of the “history and personal characteristics of the defendants” and the “aberrational nature of the defendants’ conduct.” Because, you know, Mattis graduated from Princeton and New York University Law School and was an attorney at the white-shoe law firm Pryor Cashman, and Rahman was a public-interest lawyer whose “best friend,” Obama administration intelligence official Salmah Rizvi, guaranteed the $250,000 required to release her on bail.

Law360, which reported on the events, calls the new deal an “unusual step.” James Trusty, a former prosecutor in the Department of Justice’s criminal division, broke it down for us this way: “Swapping in a softer plea agreement after having gone through the plea hearing is an exceedingly rare event in federal court.” It can happen, he said, if there is “truly some new development or understanding about the defendants that merits a fresh look.” … …


DEMONIC EXPRESSIONS: Some of the worst cuss words are not what you think

By Father Jojo Zerrudo

Be careful with words because they are not as innocent as they seem to be. A friend sent me a book entitled A Message of Hope: Confessions of an Ex-Satanist: How to Protect Yourself from Evil written by Deborah Lipsky who, for many years, lived as a prisoner of a satanic cult. Browsing through the pages, I came across this part which spoke of expressions that are not meaningless but actually attract demons from hell. I would like to share this part for our guidance: 



1. “G** DAMN IT”

In this phrase you are directly asking that the Creator of the universe to curse someone or something into hell for eve. It is said in an atmosphere of anger where no love is present, only hate. If you derive some sort of satisfaction from using this expression, that satisfaction means you are under the influence of demonic thought tampering. If saying it gives you a sense of power, you are trapped into the mindset of demons. To a demon, this selfish unholy request means that you have the audacity to ask God to commit an evil act on your command. In essence you are ordering God to do your dirty work!


By saying this you are actually pronouncing a form of a curse on someone else because you are wishing for them to die. When I was in school, I was constantly bullied. There was always a group of girls who would publicly humiliate me and then tell me to drop dead. As I tried to walk away, I would either trip in my nervousness or drop my books. That made them cackle in delight and hurl even more insult my way such as “loser” or “moron”. To actually feel delight in someone else’s pain is a “character trait” of demons. To laugh at someone else’s misfortune after telling them to drop dead is an obvious tell-tale sign that they are under the influence of a cluster of demons.  Having “friends” or people support or encourage such behavior means there is a cluster of demons at work within that group.

3. “I SWEAR TO G**”

This expression means that you are making an unbreakable vow in front of God regarding your innocence. Jesus himself warned against swearing to God in Matthew 5:33-37, “Again you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, do not break your oath, but keep oaths you have made to the Lord. But I tell you, do not swear at all: either by heaven, for it is God’s throne; or by the earth, for it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem for it is the city of the Great King. And do not swear by your head, for you cannot make even one hair white or black. Simply let your ‘yes’ be ‘yes’ and your ‘no’ be ‘no’; anything beyond this comes from the evil one.”

To use this expression to hide behind a false innocence is disgusting. Not only are you lying but you are manipulating the other person’s trust by getting them to believe that God is vouching for your innocence. This expression is a favorite of demons everywhere.


Mainly this phrase is used in magic tricks but every now and then I hear it when someone says something to the effect, “There is a lot of ‘hocus pocus’ going on there.” No Catholic should ever use this phrase as it is a derogatory corruption referring to the Eucharist: “Hoc est Corpus” or “This is my Body”. Protestants back in the Middle Ages used this corrupted term to mock the Holy Eucharist…They would hurl this insult not only at clergy but also Catholic lay people on their way to Mass.

(Also the Hokey Pokey, turn yourself around, yes, mocking the Consecration, and the priest turning around at the Orate Fratres – NVP)

5. “KISS MY A**”

I saved this expression last because it is especially vulgar. Sadly it is such a common expression in our society today spoken to show defiance. It is better known to Satanists elsewhere as the “oscularum infame” or “Kiss of Shame”. During the traditional black mass this was considered a symbolic requisite towards earthly success. Participants would literally kiss the bare behind of the devil (usually the high priest conducting the mass). Nothing gets a cluster of demons charging headlong towards somebody faster than using excerpts from the satanic mass.

(Deborah Lipsky, A Message of Hope: Confessions of an Ex-Satanist: How to Protect Yourself from Evil, Phoenix: Tau Publishing, 2012, 175-176.)


Question Five for the BiP advocates of “Plan B” (he did it on purpose and knows he is still pope): Why did Benedict lie in his final public appearance of 28 Feb 2013?

Last week, I posted Four Questions to those who think “Benedict is Pope” for the reason that the whole non-renunciation was null, but with an added twist. Benedict’s resignation was invalid, or they might say not even attempted, and hence, Bergoglio was never pope, but furthermore that the invalidating act was executed by Pope Benedict on purpose, in order to protect the Church and the papacy from the ascendant anti-church. In a masterstroke of Teutonic brilliance, he pulled off the switcheroo right under everyone’s noses, using code words, subtle phrasing, etc. This all stands opposed to the theory of Substantial Error, by which the resignation was invalid because Benedict thought he could remain in some way papal, retaining some portion of papalocity, enlarged ministry, what have you, for which there are mountains of evidence. Much of the evidence indeed supports both theories, but the two theories are, by definition, in opposition to one another.

You will recall my first Four Questions to the “Plan B” clan, which were either ignored, or else answered with logical fallacies, HERE.

So now we move to Question Five:

When Pope Benedict executed his temporary exfil from the Vatican at 5pm local time on 28 February 2013, he famously got in the helicopter and flew off to Castel Gandolfo. Then at 7:45pm, with the effective time of his (non) resignation imminent, he appeared on the loggia to deliver his final, short address to the faithful gathered there. We have video:

Here are the words:


Central Loggia of the Apostolic Palace of Castel Gandolfo
Thursday, 28 February 2013

Thank you. Thank you all.
Dear Friends,

I am happy to be with you, surrounded by the beauty of Creation and your kindness, which does me so much good. Thank you for your friendship and your affection. You know that this day is different for me from the preceding ones. I am no longer the Supreme Pontiff of the Catholic Church, or I will be until 8:00 this evening and then no longer. I am simply a pilgrim beginning the last leg of his pilgrimage on this earth. But I would still, thank you, I would still—with my heart, with my love, with my prayers, with my reflection, and with all my inner strength—like to work for the common good and the good of the Church and of humanity. I feel greatly supported by your kindness. Let us go forward with the Lord for the good of the Church and the world. Thank you. I now wholeheartedly impart my blessing.

May Almighty God bless us, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Good night! Thank you all!

Which brings us to Question Five for Team Plan B:

Why would Pope Benedict, knowing that he never abdicated, lie to the lay faithful that night? Why did he lie, telling them that he would no longer be Supreme Pontiff, in fifteen minutes time? Furthermore, how is his deceit not also scandal? How is he not in mortal sin? “Non sono più Sommo Pontefice della Chiesa cattolica: fino alle otto di sera lo sarò ancora, poi non più.” WHY DID HE LIE?

As an aside, allow me to comment to those who would assert that this address also undermines the Substantial Error theory, since we have Pope Benedict spelling out that he will no longer will be Supreme Pontiff. It is as simple as this: A pope who thinks he can retire as Supreme Pontiff, yet somehow remain part of the papal household, living at the Vatican, doing the contemplative bits as part of an expanded Petrine ministry, wearing white, demanding to be addressed as “His Holiness,” … such a pope would be in SUBSTANTIAL ERROR, and his resignation would be null by the law itself. Canon 188.

Combox is open, but I suspect this will play itself out on twitter.

Blessed suppressed octave of Pentecost, everyone!