Jump to content

The 01-06-21 Select Committee Thread

Satchel

By Satchel
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 3.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Genco
Genco
brakeman
brakeman
Brisketexan
Brisketexan

Just to be clear, an official of the United States government AND a licensed attorney.....just asserted to Congress that his actions in assisting the Trump administration with respect to the admin's a

Posted Images

washparkhorn

washparkhorn 9939

Posted
Posted
41 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

And always calls himself "Dr."  Most MD congress critters don't do that.

No name shaming, but when did parents start naming their boys, Madison?

The Delta seems to have the orange people agitated.

Could be stomach upset from the de-wormification ongoing. Where do the dead worms go? Poo? The smell must be horrific.

Good luck to those in harm's way. Stay safe. Be smart. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NameAlreadyInUse

NameAlreadyInUse 5112

Posted
Posted

yeah I'm still not a fan of naming people after towns and cities.  They call you Madison, I'm gonna call you kitten lips.  Madison is already being used elsewhere, so you are going to get a synonym for the official animal of Madison, the badger as your new nickname. 

In fact, I move that we change the name of his thread to Kitten Lips.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
Biff Tannen

Biff Tannen 45678

Posted
Posted

Can't find the insurrection thread, but this seems relevant to this thread also.

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/09/28/dhs-pentagon-jan-6-capitol-riot-514527

 

Quote

On Jan. 6, more than 30 minutes after the first attackers breached barricades erected to protect the Capitol, the Department of Homeland Security sent an incongruous update to the Pentagon.

“There are no major incidents of illegal activity at this time," read an internal Army email sent to senior leaders at 1:40 p.m. that day, referring to an update the service had just received from DHS’s National Operations Center (NOC).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89656

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Inside help to…

if the answer is breach the Capitol, that’s the whole thing. The sedition. The insurrection.  
and of course trump will disavow any knowledge and this will end with those 3. 

I assume it will never taint Trump, and in the eyes of his followers, nothing will taint him, so that's a pointless road to go down.

But if we find out the names of those three, and the media hounds them on it, Pelosi and Co. take their committee assignments, and their competitors, both primary and general, use it against them, that would be nice.

And that will be juicy as hell - the media will be chasing those three down.

Also, it'll make Kevin McCarthy a little uncomfortable when he is questioned about them.  Just a touch.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NWBuck

NWBuck 8552

Posted
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

I assume it will never taint Trump, and in the eyes of his followers, nothing will taint him, so that's a pointless road to go down.

But if we find out the names of those three, and the media hounds them on it, Pelosi and Co. take their committee assignments, and their competitors, both primary and general, use it against them, that would be nice.

And that will be juicy as hell - the media will be chasing those three down.

Also, it'll make Kevin McCarthy a little uncomfortable when he is questioned about them.  Just a touch.

Goddammit... I really don't ever need to read "uncomfortable touch", "juicy", "go down", or "Trump’s taint"... And especially not in proximity with each other. 

I would have mentioned this before, but I really never imagined it would be an issue. 

Edited by NWBuck
Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89656

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Bama Chick said:

No Brooks is 100% one of those three.

My guesses on the other two?

I’ve narrowed it down to Gosar, Bobert, Greene, Gaetz, and Nunes.

Gosar, Boebert, and Greene.  

I think Brookes, Gaetz, and Nunes have enough self-awareness to not actively support it.  Sure, they have some lousy impulse control on some things, but they also seem to give a shit about retaining what power they have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Longhorn_Fan68

Longhorn_Fan68 33869

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, DDD Dad said:

Is this even news? The guy said that Biggs, Gosar, and Gohmert helped him with the protest at the time all of this was happening and posted it on Twitter.

What about this is new?

Guess your memory is better than most. Doesn't hurt to remind people and keep these traitors' name at the end of everyone's lips

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Biff Tannen

Biff Tannen 45678

Posted
Posted
36 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

Is it bad that I'm disappointed it's only 3? I was hoping to have a holiday week of traitor executions to watch. I'll settle for a long weekend

No one is getting executed. Shit, we’ll be lucky if anyone is even tried.  This is why this will happen again. 

  • Rage+1 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mrs Whiggins

Mrs Whiggins 13050

Posted
Posted
35 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

No one is getting executed. Shit, we’ll be lucky if anyone is even tried.  This is why this will happen again. 

It's worse than the impeachment (the first) in a way. With that one, as bad as it was to sit and stew and know that the outcome was essentially predictable--there was an upcoming election. Now, it is sit and stew and know that the upcoming election is likely to make it worse not better and that any subsequent attempts will have even better odds. Why they aren't completely scared shitless that they almost were executed and acting in a get shit done manner is beyond me. When I get a hurricane or tornado warning, I act accordingly and make preparations to secure safety and well-being for others around me as well as myself.

  • Rage+1 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bama Chick

Bama Chick 28596

Posted
Posted
Is this even news? The guy said that Biggs, Gosar, and Gohmert helped him with the protest at the time all of this was happening and posted it on Twitter.

What about this is new?

He said in the weeks after those three helped him plan the dumb “Stop The Steal” rally.

That’s bad but not as bad as giving him and his ilk inside information on how to get into The Capitol.

Which is what he seems to be saying now.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Satchel

Satchel 6938

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

What reality have you been watching that makes you think this?

It’s reasonable to expect that Trump could be found guilty of something in Georgia:

“Potential violations of state law include “the solicitation of election fraud, the making of false statements to state and local governmental bodies, conspiracy, racketeering, violation of oath of office and any involvement in violence or threats related to the election’s administration.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/10/us/politics/trump-georgia-investigation.html

Edited by Satchel
Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89656

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Satchel said:

It’s reasonable to expect that Trump could be found guilty of something in Georgia:

He has managed to piss off most, if not all of the Georgia state Republican leadership, up to and including even pushing Stacey Abrams (by proxy).

So they aren't going to be doing him any favors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Francisco 2.0

Francisco 2.0 32389

Posted
Posted

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/oct/06/trump-aides-capitol-attack-house-select-committee

 

Quote

Former Trump White House chief of staff Mark Meadows and other top aides subpoenaed by the House select committee investigating the Capitol attack are expected to defy orders for documents and testimony related to 6 January, according to a source familiar with the matter.

The move to defy the subpoenas would mark the first major investigative hurdle faced by the select committee and threatens to touch off an extended legal battle as the former president pushes some of his most senior aides to undercut the inquiry.

 

Quote

All four Trump aides targeted by the select committee – Meadows, deputy chief of staff Dan Scavino, strategist Steve Bannon and defense department aide Kash Patel – are expected to resist the orders because Trump is preparing to direct them to do so, the source said.

The select committee had issued the subpoenas under the threat of criminal prosecution in the event of non-compliance, warning that the penalty for defying a congressional subpoena would be far graver under the Biden administration than during the Trump presidency.

But increasingly concerned with the far-reaching nature of the 6 January investigation, Trump and his legal team, led by former deputy White House counsel Patrick Philbin, are moving to instruct the attorneys for the subpoenaed aides to defy the orders.

 

Spoiler

The basis for Trump’s pressing aides to not cooperate is being mounted on grounds of executive privilege, the source said, over claims that sensitive conversations about what he knew in advance of plansto stop the certification of Joe Biden’s election victory should remain secret.

Philbin appears less convinced than Trump about the strength of the legal argument, the sources said, in part because the justice department previously declined to assert the protection for 6 January testimony, suggesting it did not exist to protect Trump’s personal interests.

The former president’s lawyer, sources said, instead seems to view the strategy more as an effective way to slow-walk the select committee, which is aiming to produce a final report before the 2022 midterm elections, to keep the inquiry non-partisan.

It was not clear on Tuesday whether Trump would push aides to defy all elements of the subpoenas, the source cautioned – access to some emails or call records demanded by the select committee might be waived.

But Trump’s strategy mirrors the playbook he used to prevent House Democrats from deposing his top advisors during his presidency. Former White House counsel Don McGahn, for instance, only testified to congress about the Mueller inquiry once Trump left office.

House select committee investigators had demanded that the four Trump aides turn over emails, call records and other documents related to the Capitol attack by Thursday and then appear before the panel for closed-door depositions next week.

But with the former president expected to insist to Philbin that Meadows, Scavino, Bannon and Patel mount blanket refusals against the subpoenas, the sources said, the select committee at present appears likely to see none of the requests fulfilled.

The move means that House select committee investigators now face the key decision over how to enforce the orders – and whether they make a criminal referral to the justice department after the Thursday deadline for documents or next week’s crunch date for testimony.

House select committee chairman Bennie Thompson told reporters recently that he was prepared to pursue criminal referrals to witnesses who defied subpoenas and subpoena deadlines, as the panel escalates the pace of its evidence-gathering part of its investigation.

“We’ll do whatever the law allows us to do,” Thompson said last Friday on the subject of prosecuting recalcitrant witnesses. “For those who don’t agree to come in voluntarily, we’ll do criminal referrals.”

A spokesperson for the select committee declined to comment about how the panel intended to secure compliance. 

The legal battle to force some of Trump’s most senior White House aides to comply with the subpoenas – however it is manifested – is likely to lead to constitutional clashes in court that would test the power of Congress’s oversight authority over the executive branch.

But members of the select committee in recent days have expressed quiet optimism at least about the potential prosecution of witnesses who might defy subpoenas, in part because of the Biden administration’s public support for the investigation.

The select committee said in the subpoena letters to Meadows, Bannon, Scavino and Patel that they were key persons of interest over what they knew about the extent of Trump’s involvement in the Capitol attack, which left five dead and more than 140 injured.

Meadows, the former White House chief of staff, remains of special interest to House select committee investigators since he was involved in efforts to subvert the results of the 2020 election and remained by Trump’s side as rioters stormed the Capitol in his name.

He was also in contact with Patel over at the defense department, the select committee asserted, and communicated with members of the Women for America First group that planned the ‘Stop the Steal’ rally that deteriorated into the 6 January insurrection.

Scavino, the former White House deputy chief of staff, became a person of interest after it emerged that he met with Trump the day before the Capitol attack to discuss how to persuade members of Congress not to certify the election, according to his subpoena letter.

The select committee said in the subpoena letter to Bannon that they wanted to hear from Trump’s former chief strategist, who was present at the Willard Hotel on 5 January to strategize with Trump campaign officials how to stop the election certification.

Patel, meanwhile, is under scrutiny since he was involved in Pentagon discussions about security at the Capitol before and after the riot. The select committee added they were also examining reports Trump tried to install him as deputy CIA director.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31453

Posted
Posted (edited)

It is, unfortunately, going to take some time to resolve, but I think the courts make short shrift of the executive privilege assertion for the following reasons:

a) former executive branch officials, many former at the time of the events in question

b) a former president making the assertion

c) over what was essentially a campaign rally that had almost zero connection to the function of the office of the President and in any event may constitute a "crime or fraud"

d) no support by the office of the President.

Serendipitously, Trump's criminality and selfishness is going a good ways to weakening the executive in terms of creating precedent that limits the assertion of executive privilege.  Not creating this kind of precedent for flimsy privilege assertions I think is a main reason past executives have compromised on prior subpoenas/investigative demands.

And, again, it is important to note that those witnesses not connected to or employed by the executive branch do not have the executive privilege to rely on.

What's also interesting is that I don't know what mechanisms exactly the Committee may have to secure evidence from sitting Reps and Senators.

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
PenelopeWitherspoon

PenelopeWitherspoon 19101

Posted
Posted
Dems are pussies.  No one will ever testify or be held accountable

We shall see. Seems like there will be more teeth for these folks defying the subpoena. My question to the Trumpers out there is if Trump and his lackies were on the clear, why fight the investigation? Isn’t it the GQP argument that if you have nothing to hide, you shouldn’t be worried?

Trump has fought all of the investigations and trials tooth and nail because that daughterfucker is guilty.
  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...