The Jan 6 Commission

[TheDrake]

That was no judge, that was Antifa! See, he's wearing black!

[wmLambert]

One relative who gets his news exclusively from Fox and OANN still believes it was BLM and Democrats.

Which everyone with a working brain believes. Did you not see that those who asked Pelosi for added security were refused? The question should be what did Pelosi plan, and when did she plan it. Everyone with a brain (which eliminates many apologists here) do know that the Jan 6 protest was designed as a simple march, and that we have video of Pelosi's security inviting protestors into the Capital. Anyone ever hear of the Doctrine of Laches? You allow one group of people to do a thing, then all people have that right. That protestor with all the visibility (wearing Buffalo horns) never stole anything, broke in anywhere, or ignored any legal directions from security - yet he is still incarcerated. We also have video evidence of BLM and other activists infiltrated into the protestors who did nothing wrong. Ignore the eyewitness testimony of activists ditching their normal black outfits with "blend-in" camouflage clothes? Why not? you follow in the footsteps of 51 Intel officials and the Gray Lady in ignoring anything you don't like.

[yossarian22c]

One relative who gets his news exclusively from Fox and OANN still believes it was BLM and Democrats.

Which everyone with a working brain believes.

Strong words coming from the person most likely to post false information.

Did you not see that those who asked Pelosi for added security were refused? The question should be what did Pelosi plan, and when did she plan it. Everyone with a brain (which eliminates many apologists here) do know that the Jan 6 protest was designed as a simple march, and that we have video of Pelosi's security inviting protestors into the Capital.

Pelosi doesn't have security. The capital police work for the house and Senate.

Anyone ever hear of the Doctrine of Laches? You allow one group of people to do a thing, then all people have that right. That protestor with all the visibility (wearing Buffalo horns) never stole anything, broke in anywhere, or ignored any legal directions from security - yet he is still incarcerated. We also have video evidence of BLM and other activists infiltrated into the protestors who did nothing wrong. Ignore the eyewitness testimony of activists ditching their normal black outfits with "blend-in" camouflage clothes? Why not? you follow in the footsteps of 51 Intel officials and the Gray Lady in ignoring anything you don't like.

He is incarcerated because he pled guilty.

If you have the video evidence of these nefarious evil doers maybe you should submit it to the DOJ so they can get arrested with the rest of the rioters who rioted for Trump.

[wmLambert]

...Pelosi doesn't have security. The capital police work for the house and Senate.

Is this a purposeful demonstration of said brainlessness? The Sergeant of Arms works for Nancy. Didn't he resign in protest over Nancy refusing his requests? This is documented, yet you want to blame Nancy leaving the Capitol wide open on the police? They have Nancy at the top of their command structure for the Capitol.

Mr Buffalo horns has been incarcerated since forever. Has he had a chance to argue it? What does the law say about being forced into a plea to get out of unjust solitary confinement? Coercion? Did he admit violence or any criminal activity? Is following a Security guard allowing him into the building illegal? How about all the others who are still awaiting a chance to be heard in court? Why weren't the known BLM and Dem activists not swept up? Please be honest and fair and stop blowing smoke. What are you going to say in 2024 if Trump regains the Presidency and goes after those who have escaped  arrest so far? Some one must speak the truth even though you are uncomfortable admitting it.

[Wayward Son]

One relative who gets his news exclusively from Fox and OANN still believes it was BLM and Democrats.

Which everyone with a working brain believes.

A bigger question is how is it that no one on this board has a working brain except you? 

Consider these points for your working brain:

If it was BLM and the Democrats who stormed the Capitol, why are so many Republicans insisting that nothing illegal happened?   

Why, of the dozens and dozens of people charged for the activities on Jan. 6, a vast majority are Trump supporters?  Where are all the actual BLM supporters and Democrats?

If there were so many BLM and Democrats, why hasn't anyone identified them from their Facebook posts and other electronic media?  (That's how most of the rioters were found.)  And I don't mean government officials; I mean activists like you. Why haven't activists like you found the many BLM supporters who were there, and published the proof?  Or is it only Trump supporters who were stupid enough to film themselves committing crimes at the time? 

I consider myself to a have an adequately functioning brain.  And it tells me that when I see videos and pictures of a bunch of yahoos storming the Capitol wearing Trump hats, Trump T-shirts and waving Trump flags, yelling to stop the confirmation of the person who beat Trump, and then those yahoos that have been caught being all Trump supporters, it tells me it wasn't BLM and Democrats who were there.  It was Trump supporters. 

If your brain tells you anything different, look carefully at what you've been feeding it.  Brains don't work well if you've been feeding it a bunch of B.S. 

[TheDrake]

Without evidence, Jordan asserted that House Speaker Pelosi had denied a request for National Guard troops two days before the insurrection. Instead, public testimony shows she did not even hear about the request until two days later. Jordan also tried to pin the blame on the House sergeant-at-arms, but testimony shows the Senate sergeant-at-arms also was not keen about the idea.

Jim Jordan lied about Pelosi being involved. A person with a functioning brain would be able to understand that.

[msquared]

So should Clarence Thomas recuse himself from further SC decisions on Jan 6 items?  Sure seems like it.  His lone dissent on some of these cases makes much more sense now, don't they.

Should he be impeached?  He would never be convicted in the Senate, I don't think.

[TheDrake]

Thomas shouldn't recuse himself. There's no precedent for it.

Ginsburg, like Thomas, was among the justices most reluctant to recuse herself. She maintained that posture despite blurring the lines between political activism and the judiciary on multiple occasions.

Many of the Ginsburg recusal questions stemmed from the work of her husband, Martin Ginsburg. He was a well-known tax lawyer who often found himself tied, however directly or indirectly, to cases before the Supreme Court.

In 1997, he sold stocks in eight companies after it was revealed that Justice Ginsburg took part in cases involving the companies. (Justices often — though not always — recuse from cases involving stock holdings.) He also worked at a law firm involved in cases before the court. In 2004, she defended her decision to continue working with the NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund, even after she took its side in a case. She heard cases involving the ACLU despite having been heavily involved with the group before becoming a justice. And most recently, in 2017, Republicans called on her to recuse herself from a case involving President Donald Trump’s travel ban because she had offered unusually blunt criticisms of his candidacy during the 2016 campaign.

Justices and their friends and family can hardly avoid being linked in some way to cases with broad impact involving politics and the law. It would be a different story if he was copied on the email, and clear grounds for impeachment if he were the author. But just because his wife expressed something? Might be different if he knows about more damning communications that are soon to be revealed, but we'll see.

[msquared]

7-1/2 hours of WH phone logs are missing from Jan 6. Starting at 11:17 and ending around 7PM.

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/possible-coverup-white-house-logs-113519295.html


Worse then the 13 minutes of tape missing?

For a guy who did nothing wrong he sure seems to be working very hard to make sure no one knows what happened.

[yossarian22c]

https://www.npr.org/2022/03/28/1089146544/scavino-navarro-trump-contempt-congress-jan-6

More Trump advisors getting a contempt citation. Executive privilege doesn't apply because Biden waved it. What are they hiding?

[TheDeamon]

Breaking down the law on each point, Carter, who sits on the Central District of California and was nominated by President Bill Clinton, writes it is “more likely than not” that Trump and Eastman conspired to disrupt the counting of the electoral votes on Jan. 6 — which would be a crime under federal statutes.

“Dr. Eastman and President Trump launched a campaign to overturn a democratic election, an action unprecedented in American history,” the judge concludes. “Their campaign was not confined to the ivory tower — it was a coup in search of a legal theory. The plan spurred violent attacks on the seat of our nation’s government, led to the deaths of several law enforcement officers, and deepened public distrust in our political process.”

Six in one hand, half-dozen in the other.

What Trump was attempting to do may have been "a coup attempt."

But I think an honest review of the relevant law being violated during the attempt is itself a bad law, and one that does need to be revised all the same. It is too rigid as it stands and does have me concerned about future ramifications, as it seems more concerned with a timetable than with election integrity.

It's like arguing with a bunch of Lawful ________ characters about why something is a bad idea and their falling back on "but it is the law"

[msquared]

The one thing that works against Trump is the fact that no large fraud has been found.  He keeps saying it, but, for example, AZ has recounted and audited their election 4 times and the results are always the same. Biden won.  Even when the count was done by a group hostile to Biden, Biden won.

If the people wanting the recounts and audit were honest, they would admit they were wrong. But they are so sure there was fraud, they will not accept any result that does not show fraud, no matter who tells them there was not fraud. They always have an excuse.  They just KNOW it because their guy lost and the only way their guy could lose is by fraud.

[cherrypoptart]

There were so many irregularities during that election that just because no fraud was found doesn't mean it was wrong to suspect it and look for it just to make sure. And now that that's been done maybe it's time to move on.

The whole idea that suspecting voter fraud and wanting to make sure massive amounts didn't happen is the same thing as a coup, an insurrection, and terrorism is and always has been ridiculous. It's nothing more than Democrat Party posturing and politicking. Insurrection and coup attempt pshaw... it was a protest against potential voter fraud, nothing more and nothing less. If it didn't happen then fine. But nobody who had suspicions was wrong for doubting, especially after Democrats insisted for four years, and to this very day even, that the last Presidential election was stolen.

[msquared]

The rally on Jan 6 was a protest that Trump and his supporters tried to turn into a coup. They wanted to obstruct the transfer of power. They wanted the crowd to break into the Capital and stop Congress. They turned a rally into a riot into a coup attempt.  Most of the crowd was innocent. Those who never entered the building were exercising their free speech rights. Those who entered violated laws of varying degree. Most were just sheeple who where drug along as useful idiots to those who really wanted to stop the proceedings. They were cover. The real people trying to stage a coup where the ones in contact with the Trump team, the Proud Boys, the Oathkeepers and the like. The ones charged with insurrection.

[TheDrake]

There were so many irregularities during that election that just because no fraud was found doesn't mean it was wrong to suspect it and look for it just to make sure. And now that that's been done maybe it's time to move on.

The whole idea that suspecting voter fraud and wanting to make sure massive amounts didn't happen is the same thing as a coup, an insurrection, and terrorism is and always has been ridiculous. It's nothing more than Democrat Party posturing and politicking. Insurrection and coup attempt pshaw... it was a protest against potential voter fraud, nothing more and nothing less. If it didn't happen then fine. But nobody who had suspicions was wrong for doubting, especially after Democrats insisted for four years, and to this very day even, that the last Presidential election was stolen.

Very few people had a problem with investigating. Those investigations went on for two months prior to Jan 6 and found nothing. There was either no massive fraud, or it was going to remain undetectable through inauguration. There was no point in trying to subvert the acknowledgement of electoral votes except to subvert the system itself - a coup. Nobody had a problem with recounting votes in Florida in 2000, despite unresolved issues nobody stormed the capitol after the supreme court halted the recount. Nixon strongly believed that he had an election stolen from him through fraud, and had a lot more to back it up than Trump. He accepted the results, his supporters didn't erect a gallows.

[msquared]

And in AZ, after all the recounts and audits (4 so far) all they have found is that Biden won by more then they originally said.  Again, if it is not the result they want, they ignore it or say the fraud was so deep it can only be discovered if they visit every person who voted and make sure they voted correctly. And they will be armed when they do that, just to protect themselves.

[rightleft22]

And in AZ, after all the recounts and audits (4 so far) all they have found is that Biden won by more then they originally said.  Again, if it is not the result they want, they ignore it or say the fraud was so deep it can only be discovered if they visit every person who voted and make sure they voted correctly. And they will be armed when they do that, just to protect themselves.

Silly rabbet tricks are for kids. The proof of fraud is the fact that it can't be proved.
The left is so wickedly smart their only pretending to be stupid as they can't stop stepping on thier own dicks. 

[TheDrake]

IT'S A CONSPIRACY SO VAST THAT IT CAN'T BE UNCOVERED! - Q

Every single observed "discrepancy" was easily explained. In some cases, right wing nutbags thought standard procedure was a discrepancy because they didn't even know what standard procedure was. Including not being allowed to force poll workers to feel their hot breath on the backs of their necks. Or boxes of ballots being delivered at nighttime.

[msquared]

The thing is some Republicans (like Mark Meadows)  know that fraud happened because they did it.  I mean look how long it took NC to find out he voted fraudulently. There is proof fraud happens.

[TheDrake]

Another secret antifa got sentenced. 72 year old Lonnie Coffman from Alabama got 46 months.

Lonnie Coffman, 72, parked his truck -- filled with 11 Mason jars filled with gasoline and Styrofoam, several unregistered firearms, hundreds of rounds of ammo, a stun gun, machetes and a crossbow with bolts -- a few blocks from the Capitol on January 6.

"He had almost a small armory in his truck, ready to do battle," Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly said before sentencing Coffman to several months above what prosecutors had recommended.

[Wayward Son]

According to court records, along with the guns and ammunition, the guy brought Molotov cocktails to the Capitol that day, but said he had "no intentions to hurt anyone or destroy any property."

So what exactly were those "cocktails" for?  Drinks for an after-riot party?  As road flares to help direct traffic?  Mini-bonfires for a weenie roast?  Exactly how can you use a Molotov cocktail without hurting anyone or destroying something?

[msquared]

George Soros planted those cocktails.

[TheDrake]

According to court records, along with the guns and ammunition, the guy brought Molotov cocktails to the Capitol that day, but said he had "no intentions to hurt anyone or destroy any property."

So what exactly were those "cocktails" for?  Drinks for an after-riot party?  As road flares to help direct traffic?  Mini-bonfires for a weenie roast?  Exactly how can you use a Molotov cocktail without hurting anyone or destroying something?

They were for self defense against BLM and illegal immigrants.

[NobleHunter]

And we all know from Ukraine how useful molotov cocktails are for self defence.

[Wayward Son]

I'd still like to see how you can use one without intending to hurt someone or to cause destruction of property. 

Now that would be a trick! 

[TheDrake]

I'd still like to see how you can use one without intending to hurt someone or to cause destruction of property. 

Now that would be a trick! 

Maybe it's just for sport like target shooting at a range. It was just a coincidence that the amateur Molotov championships were the same time as the electoral vote.

[Wayward Son]

I look forward to when it becomes an Olympic sport.

Maybe the day Urkaine hosts the games. 

[msquared]

So where are the Trump supporters explaining away the 7-1/2 hours of missing call logs from Jan 6? Right when the riot was happening?  How do the law and order people explain such an egregious violation of Federal Law?  And don't say some underling did it. Just like Nixon, there is no way this did not start at the top?  Is this evidence changing your mind about what Trump wanted to happen?

[Lloyd Perna]

Fake news.  I don't blame you for falling for it though.  The MSM dove into it hard.  Surprisingly, it was CNN that debunked it.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/31/politics/mystery-call-gap-trump-jan-6-white-house-phone-logs/index.html

[msquared]

From the article you link to

Multiple sources have described the record-keeping during the Trump administration as generally chaotic. Those sources, as well as witnesses who have testified as part of previous congressional investigations related to the former President's conduct described Trump as deeply suspicious of the White House switchboard and detailed various ways he sought to avoid having records of certain phone calls from being kept.
A Senate Intelligence report from 2020 includes witness testimony from former aides saying that Trump regularly used the cellphone of his body man, Keith Schiller, to place calls to Republican operative Roger Stone because he did not want his to advisers to know they were talking.
"Trump hated people knowing who he spoke to, including from the residence at night when they went through the switchboard," one former Trump official told CNN.

He willfully tried to go around the system set up to keep track of these things.  I wonder why he was trying to keep these records from being kept?

[TheDrake]

From the article you link to

Multiple sources have described the record-keeping during the Trump administration as generally chaotic. Those sources, as well as witnesses who have testified as part of previous congressional investigations related to the former President's conduct described Trump as deeply suspicious of the White House switchboard and detailed various ways he sought to avoid having records of certain phone calls from being kept.
A Senate Intelligence report from 2020 includes witness testimony from former aides saying that Trump regularly used the cellphone of his body man, Keith Schiller, to place calls to Republican operative Roger Stone because he did not want his to advisers to know they were talking.
"Trump hated people knowing who he spoke to, including from the residence at night when they went through the switchboard," one former Trump official told CNN.

He willfully tried to go around the system set up to keep track of these things.  I wonder why he was trying to keep these records from being kept?

Exactly this. Trump didn't want people knowing about all of his perfect phone calls. I wonder if Obama had a similar gap during the Benghazi assault? No, he just used regular phones? Interesting.

[Lloyd Perna]

Moving the goalposts now.

From the article you link to

Multiple sources have described the record-keeping during the Trump administration as generally chaotic. Those sources, as well as witnesses who have testified as part of previous congressional investigations related to the former President's conduct described Trump as deeply suspicious of the White House switchboard and detailed various ways he sought to avoid having records of certain phone calls from being kept.
A Senate Intelligence report from 2020 includes witness testimony from former aides saying that Trump regularly used the cellphone of his body man, Keith Schiller, to place calls to Republican operative Roger Stone because he did not want his to advisers to know they were talking.
"Trump hated people knowing who he spoke to, including from the residence at night when they went through the switchboard," one former Trump official told CNN.

He willfully tried to go around the system set up to keep track of these things.  I wonder why he was trying to keep these records from being kept?

[rightleft22]

Moving the goalposts now.

What would you consider should be the goal line for the investigation? 
I don't understand the comment - move the goal line?

[yossarian22c]

Moving the goalposts now.

So your defense to him destroying Presidential records is that he took willful action to avoid creating the proper presidential records?

[Lloyd Perna]

Moving the goalposts now.

What would you consider should be the goal line for the investigation? 
I don't understand the comment - move the goal line?

msquared's original claim was that there were "7-1/2 hours of missing call logs from Jan 6" which was "an egregious violation of Federal Law"

Except thats not true.  So msquared then shifted his claims to "He willfully tried to go around the system set up to keep track of these things"  thereby "moving the goal posts".

So your defense to him destroying Presidential records is that he took willful action to avoid creating the proper presidential records?

There is testimony from 2020 of some things that you have characterized that way.  How is that relevant to January 6?

[TheDrake]

Point being, we should know who he talked to and when. That should be a matter of public record. Shouldn't it? I remember when conservatives were up in arms because they didn't know what Bill Clinton said to Loretta Lynch at the airport. Guess he should have used his aide's phone to talk to her.

[TheDrake]

FYI, the reason we're resorting to investigating call logs is the fact that most of the people he talked to are in contempt of Congress for not testifying as to what he said to them, among other things.

[yossarian22c]

So your defense to him destroying Presidential records is that he took willful action to avoid creating the proper presidential records?

There is testimony from 2020 of some things that you have characterized that way.  How is that relevant to January 6?

So during the riot on the capital the President was unavailable by phone for 7 and 1/2 hours? He was taking a nap and playing a round of golf and the white house didn't give a crap about what was going on a block away?

[Lloyd Perna]

So your defense to him destroying Presidential records is that he took willful action to avoid creating the proper presidential records?

There is testimony from 2020 of some things that you have characterized that way.  How is that relevant to January 6?

So during the riot on the capital the President was unavailable by phone for 7 and 1/2 hours? He was taking a nap and playing a round of golf and the white house didn't give a crap about what was going on a block away?

Did you even read the article?

[yossarian22c]

So your defense to him destroying Presidential records is that he took willful action to avoid creating the proper presidential records?

There is testimony from 2020 of some things that you have characterized that way.  How is that relevant to January 6?

So during the riot on the capital the President was unavailable by phone for 7 and 1/2 hours? He was taking a nap and playing a round of golf and the white house didn't give a crap about what was going on a block away?

Did you even read the article?

Yeah, the president purposefully used phones that wouldn't create the proper call log and presidential records. Just trying to understand how you interpret that since you didn't think it was important that he was purposefully avoiding following the presidential records act.

[kidv]

Donald Trump used an official White House phone to place at least one call during the Capitol attack on January 6 last year that should have been reflected in the internal presidential call log from that day but was not, according to two sources familiar with the matter.

The former president called the phone of a Republican senator, Mike Lee, with a number recorded as 202-395-0000, a placeholder number that shows up when a call is incoming from a number of White House department phones, the sources said.

The number corresponds to an official White House phone and the call was placed by Donald Trump himself, which means the call should have been recorded in the internal presidential call log that was turned over to the House select committee investigating the Capitol attack.

Trump’s call to Lee was reported at the time, as well as its omission from the call log, by the Washington Post and CBS. But the origin of the call as coming from an official White House phone, which has not been previously reported, raises the prospect of tampering or deletion by Trump White House officials.

It also appears to mark perhaps the most serious violation of the Presidential Records Act – the statute that mandates preservation of White House records pertaining to a president’s official duties – by the Trump White House concerning January 6 records to date.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/mar/30/trump-used-white-house-phone-call-capitol-attack-jan-6-not-official-log?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Well, there's at least one, per the Guardian

[Lloyd Perna]

So your defense to him destroying Presidential records is that he took willful action to avoid creating the proper presidential records?

There is testimony from 2020 of some things that you have characterized that way.  How is that relevant to January 6?

So during the riot on the capital the President was unavailable by phone for 7 and 1/2 hours? He was taking a nap and playing a round of golf and the white house didn't give a crap about what was going on a block away?

Did you even read the article?

Yeah, the president purposefully used phones that wouldn't create the proper call log and presidential records. Just trying to understand how you interpret that since you didn't think it was important that he was purposefully avoiding following the presidential records act.

You mean the same way Obama and many presidents before him did?

[msquared]

for 7-1/2 hours? In the middle of a riot?

[Wayward Son]

I think I understand what Lloyd is getting at.

Democrats are saying that Trump was not logging his phone calls and flipping off American laws, Congress and the Constitution in order to cover up what he was doing on Jan. 6 during the insurrection.

Lloyd is saying that is completely untrue.

The article clearly shows that Trump has always not logged his phone calls and flipped off American laws, Congress and the Constitution in order to cover up what he was doing for his entire Presidency.  He's been casually ignoring and breaking the law since day one, and not just because of his attempt to subvert the Constitution on that particular day.  So we should not pay any particular attention to his illegal activity on that day.  Because he wasn't behaving any more illegally that day than any other day during his time in the White House.  To imply that he did anything especially wrong that day is a lie.

Besides, mommy, everybody else was doing it (all previous Presidents), so how could it be wrong if he did it?  Laws are just words written by Losers on paper for other Losers.  They don't apply to him.  After all, he's King--er, I mean, President--so how could anything he do be illegal?  "L'état c'est à moi."

That's basically what you're saying, isn't it, Lloyd?

[Lloyd Perna]

Please cite the laws that Trump was breaking  during these 7 1/2 hours by not routing his phone calls through the white house switchboard.  Also please describe why Obama was not violating these same laws by doing the same thing many many times during his presidency.

[yossarian22c]

Please cite the laws that Trump was breaking  during these 7 1/2 hours by not routing his phone calls through the white house switchboard.  Also please describe why Obama was not violating these same laws by doing the same thing many many times during his presidency.

https://www.archives.gov/presidential-libraries/laws/1978-act.html

Establishes preservation requirements for official business conducted using non-official electronic messaging accounts:  any individual creating Presidential records must not use non-official electronic messaging accounts unless that individual copies an official account as the message is created or forwards a complete copy of the record to an official messaging account.  (A similar provision in the Federal Records Act applies to federal agencies.)

So again is it your contention that Trump was not conducting any official business for the 7 and 1/2 hours of the riot on the capital. Or was he using non-official phone and messaging accounts?

[msquared]

Lloyds contention is that since Obama did it, it's OK for Trump to do it.  I wonder if there is a study as to what percentage of Obama's communication would have violated these statues as compared to Trumps?  Or did the fact that he actively (and not just on Jan 6) tried to avoid people knowing who he was talking to means anything.

You see I think Trump never viewed himself as a public servant so the rules that applied to public servants never applied to him and it gauled him that he would have to report./tell others what he was doing.  I mean how can you cover up failure if everyone knows about it.

[rightleft22]

Please cite the laws that Trump was breaking  during these 7 1/2 hours by not routing his phone calls through the white house switchboard.  Also please describe why Obama was not violating these same laws by doing the same thing many many times during his presidency.

I've ben looking for the examples of Obama violating these laws and only came up with 'BlackBerry' Gate but even with that the calls and emails were subject to the Presidential Records Act.

[Lloyd Perna]

Please cite the laws that Trump was breaking  during these 7 1/2 hours by not routing his phone calls through the white house switchboard.  Also please describe why Obama was not violating these same laws by doing the same thing many many times during his presidency.

https://www.archives.gov/presidential-libraries/laws/1978-act.html

Establishes preservation requirements for official business conducted using non-official electronic messaging accounts:  any individual creating Presidential records must not use non-official electronic messaging accounts unless that individual copies an official account as the message is created or forwards a complete copy of the record to an official messaging account.  (A similar provision in the Federal Records Act applies to federal agencies.)

So again is it your contention that Trump was not conducting any official business for the 7 and 1/2 hours of the riot on the capital. Or was he using non-official phone and messaging accounts?

Your contention is that a President is required to document all "official business" in a permanent record?

[jc44]

Your contention is that a President is required to document all "official business" in a permanent record?

That would appear to be what this says (a slightly better link I think than the previous one):

https://www.archives.gov/about/laws/presidential-records.html