The 01-06-21 Select Committee Thread

[Fudge Nuggets 19164]

On 1/13/2022 at 3:32 PM, Lobo said:

I just got a mailer this morning from a realtor expressing interest in our home on behalf of a buy-side client.  Wouldn't have even given it a second glance before tossing in the recycling bin.  But it said, "Bristol Palin Real Estate."  Because of course it did.  We're not living in a simulation, NAH!  This is all the Lord's plan, right?  Now I don't fault her for anything, not her burden who her parents are.  But I've been so busy vilifying the DFW area realtors that almost topped my government in front of the world, I've been neglecting the land parcels in my own backyard.  We are on such a weird timeline, I had no idea she was slinging single-family outta Pace Bend area.

There has to be a way you can scam that moron so you get the cash but keep your house.

[Fudge Nuggets 19164]

On 1/14/2022 at 4:56 PM, TwiceHorn said:

It's like going to a bank and announcing "I am person X and I have here checks on the account of person Y" and proceeding to forge Y's signature on one of the checks.  And going to the teller and trying to cash that check, and possibly presenting your person X drivers license.

You would go to jail for that if the bank got a hair up its ass.

[TwiceHorn 31349]

2 hours ago, Gap03 said:

Ahh, the "Tucker Carlson" defense - no reasonable person would take these slapdicks seriously.  This seems like a bit of a slippery slope, especially with the prevalence of unreasonable people roaming about these days ...

Well, as Chuck pointed out, it depends on the criminal statute involved.

But it's not "reasonable people" that make use of electoral certificates.  By law, they really have "use" or importance to three people or entities:  the federal district court in the state capital, the National Archivist, and the President of the Senate.  And of those three, two of them just keep a copy for safekeeping. Only the VP takes any action on them.  And not even Pence believed those to be legitimate.

[TwiceHorn 31349]

Kind of worth contrasting the "healthcare" opinion, where the Court found that a vaccine mandate for Medicare/aid providers and facilities was well within the ambit of the Secretary of HHS.  https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21a240_d18e.pdf

[Longhorn_Fan68 33853]

 

[Biff Tannen 45550]

58 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

 

motherfucker

[DDD Dad 14272]

1 hour ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

 

[Longhorn_Fan68 33853]

 

[Longhorn_Fan68 33853]

Quote

As Mark Joseph Stern noted in Slate, North Carolina law puts the burden on the candidate to prove his eligibility — so Cawthorn will have to demonstrate, by “a preponderance of the evidence” (a legal standard that usually means “more likely than not”), either that he was not involved in those efforts as a factual matter or that those efforts don’t meet the 14th Amendment’s legal criteria of “engag[ing] in insurrection” or “giv[ing] aid or comfort” to those involved in the Jan. 6 attack.

 

[Guest Lobo]

18 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

 

You gotta be real fucking specific about where/when you tell Rudy to show up to be deposed.  You can't just say some shit like "Be at the Cannon Building on February 1st at 9:00am."  Because he and his entourage won't show up to the main office building of the House of Representatives besides the Capitol.  They will show up at the Cannon Building in Troy New York instead. 

[DDD Dad 14272]

4 minutes ago, Lobo said:

You gotta be real fucking specific about where/when you tell Rudy to show up to be deposed.  You can't just say some shit like "Be at the Cannon Building on February 1st at 9:00am."  Because he and his entourage won't show up to the main office building of the House of Representatives besides the Capitol.  They will show up at the Cannon Building in Troy New York instead. 

Or some random building with a cannon outside.

[Guest Lobo]

1 minute ago, DDD Dad said:

Or some random building with a cannon outside.

Good point.  Basically we can't rule out half the public squares in half the cities on the Eastern Seaboard.  Christ, they could show up anywhere from Maine to Cuba that morning.  

[Longhorn_Fan68 33853]

 

[HornPhD 1365]

40 minutes ago, DDD Dad said:

Or some random building with a cannon outside.

Or a Canon camera shop

[Guest Lobo]

28 minutes ago, HornPhD said:

Or a Canon camera shop

Another great and hilarious point.  Be even funnier if it didn't have a 1 in 3 chance of happening in real life.  

Select Committee Counsel, "You're five hours late!" 

Rudy, "Shit.  Look, I'm a lawyer...I know the consequences for failing to adhere to a subpoena okay.  You said, 'Canon Building'...we showed up to the 'Canon Building' outside D.C., okay?  You can't hold me in contempt!  We showed up to this address! (points to print-out)"

Select Committee Counsel, "Sir, this is the address of a Canon Authorized Dealer." 

Rudy, "Yeah, and I assumed you were authorized to make a deal for my testimony!  Look there were a bunch of cameras when we got there, we assumed it was WaPo or CNN or some shit!" 

Edited January 19, 2022 by Lobo

[Sawbonz 27460]

I hope this is not true

 

 

[Biff Tannen 45550]

3 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

I hope this is not true

 

 

I mean, of course it’s true. Same reason they won’t get rid of the filibuster. Too afraid of the big bad Rs. 

[RDCanecutter 26346]

1 hour ago, DDD Dad said:

Or some random building with a cannon outside.

Hey. You said "Cannon Building." There's a cannon, right here is a building. I did my part.

[DigglerontheHoof 21095]

6 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

I hope this is not true

 

 

The Dems are weak, weak, weak.  And that's why we will end up as a fascist state. 

[Captainant 27510]

8 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

I hope this is not true

 

 

Hint: they're going to do it anyway. It's what bullies do. They'll always find an excuse.

You have to deal with strong men, not wish them away.

We are fucked. But at least the rich will get richer until society collapses.

[Guest Lobo]

2 minutes ago, RDCanecutter said:

Hey. You said "Cannon Building." There's a cannon, right here is a building. I did my part.

But sir, this is an Arby's.....And your holding a child's toy soldier artillery piece.  

[Fudge Nuggets 19164]

14 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

I hope this is not true

 

 

Don't commit treason and there's nothing for them to retaliate against.  Seems pretty fucking easy.

[RDCanecutter 26346]

9 minutes ago, Lobo said:

But sir, this is an Arby's.....And your holding a child's toy soldier artillery piece.  

If the kid had understood soldiering, he would have fought to keep his toy.

[atomheartbevo 89499]

1 hour ago, Sawbonz said:

I hope this is not true

58 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

I mean, of course it’s true. Same reason they won’t get rid of the filibuster. Too afraid of the big bad Rs. 

55 minutes ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

The Dems are weak, weak, weak.  And that's why we will end up as a fascist state. 

54 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Hint: they're going to do it anyway. It's what bullies do. They'll always find an excuse.

You have to deal with strong men, not wish them away.

We are fucked. But at least the rich will get richer until society collapses.

Democrats: We don't want to do this thing, because then Republicans will do this other thing if they take back the House.

Republicans: Oh, regardless of what you do, we're going to do that other thing the moment we take back the House.

Democrats: See, that's why we don't want to do this thing.

Republicans: We just said we are going to do that other thing regardless of what you do.

Democrats: Which is why we can't do that thing.

[Bullneck 19029]

NM

Edited January 19, 2022 by Bullneck

[Longhorn_Fan68 33853]

is a 2-week baby watch normal? still think he was full of shit and could have been there to stand up for his country.

 

[Biff Tannen 45550]

4 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

is a 2-week baby watch normal? still think he was full of shit and could have been there to stand up for his country.

 

Meh, not gonna die on that hill.  He's way better than 99% of them.

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19096]

50 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

is a 2-week baby watch normal? still think he was full of shit and could have been there to stand up for his country.

 

For the first child?  Yes.

[kevwun 15680]

Babies don't arrive on a schedule.  They get delivered early all of the time.  Sometimes the mother has health complications that pop up and they induce early also.

Edited January 19, 2022 by kevwun

[WhatTheBuck 28728]

1 hour ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

is a 2-week baby watch normal? still think he was full of shit and could have been there to stand up for his country.

 

I imagine it takes however long it takes. So you at least accept the fact that his wife really was expecting, right?

[Longhorn_Fan68 33853]

Just now, WhatTheBuck said:

I imagine it takes however long it takes. So you at least accept the fact that his wife really was expecting, right?

I never questioned that, just the timing of the "baby watch"

[WhatTheBuck 28728]

2 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

I never questioned that, just the timing of the "baby watch"

Sounds like they really were expecting a baby soon. Babies don’t stick to a schedule. They come when they come.

[Pato del Muerto 52384]

Plus whatever hospital rules about quarantining to be allowed in. That could lead to an early preparation stage. 

[elfenix 34204]

On 1/14/2022 at 4:56 PM, TwiceHorn said:

It's an interesting criminal law problem.  While those are literally "false election documents," I believe everyone that knew anything about them, state secretaries of state, the archivist, people of that nature, knew that they were basically a LARP, like those assclown electors that presented themselves in DC, I think, to the National Archives, attempting to transmit similar documents and were denied entry.

So they were false documents, presented to relevant people with the intention that the relevant people "rely" on them, but all of the relevant people knew that they were bullshit and none relied on them.

It's like going to a bank and announcing "I am person X and I have here checks on the account of person Y" and proceeding to forge Y's signature on one of the checks.  And going to the teller and trying to cash that check, and possibly presenting your person X drivers license.

now do provisional ballots from people not eligible to vote in texas

[Longhorn_Fan68 33853]

17 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Sounds like they really were expecting a baby soon. Babies don’t stick to a schedule. They come when they come.

I get it. I'm a dick. I also just don't trust R's. 

[WhatTheBuck 28728]

13 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

I get it. I'm a dick. I also just don't trust R's. 

He’s not running again. He’s already universally hated by his party for opposing Trump. What possible reason could he have to lie about staying home with a pregnant wife who, as it turns out, really was pregnant? It just doesn’t make any sense. 

[Gourmand 7774]

 

[Gourmand 7774]

Well what could possibly be the reason that Clarence Thomas was the lone dissenting Justice on a far-right dominated court?

[Biff Tannen 45550]

9 minutes ago, Gourmand said:

Well what could possibly be the reason that Clarence Thomas was the lone dissenting Justice on a far-right dominated court?

He needs to be gone. 

[Irwin F Fletcher 3550]

Well what could possibly be the reason that Clarence Thomas was the lone dissenting Justice on a far-right dominated court?

This. Sounds like the scope of the investigation needs to expand further.

[Longhorn_Fan68 33853]

28 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

He’s not running again. He’s already universally hated by his party for opposing Trump. What possible reason could he have to lie about staying home with a pregnant wife who, as it turns out, really was pregnant? It just doesn’t make any sense. 

And that's fair. I never said my take was rational. I'm just programmed to take anything R's say as a lie. 

[Longhorn_Fan68 33853]

13 minutes ago, Irwin F Fletcher said:

23 minutes ago, Gourmand said:

Well what could possibly be the reason that Clarence Thomas was the lone dissenting Justice on a far-right dominated court?

This. Sounds like the scope of the investigation needs to expand further.

Dumb question: is there any mechanism by which a scotus judge can be removed?

[Irwin F Fletcher 3550]

The House needs only a simple majority to impeach a Supreme Court justice or any federal judge. To convict and then remove the justice or judge, the Senate requires a two-thirds majority.

[JimmyJames 12271]

29 minutes ago, Gourmand said:

Well what could possibly be the reason that Clarence Thomas was the lone dissenting Justice on a far-right dominated court?

He is really making the other hacks look bad.

Its like once scalia died old Clarence just decided fuck it, I give not a single shit about the court or anything else. He’s become completely unhinged. In a judicial sense of course.

[Longhorn_Fan68 33853]

5 minutes ago, Irwin F Fletcher said:

The House needs only a simple majority to impeach a Supreme Court justice or any federal judge. To convict and then remove the justice or judge, the Senate requires a two-thirds majority.

Badass, thank you

[lemonlime 5503]

12 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

He is really making the other hacks look bad.

Its like once scalia died old Clarence just decided fuck it, I give not a single shit about the court or anything else. He’s become completely unhinged. In a judicial sense of course.

Or he's protecting his wife.

 

[TexasEd 8066]

1 minute ago, lemonlime said:

Or he's protecting his wife.

 

I think there may be a money trail that leads to her grifting off the big lie.  

 

[jimmyjazz 45621]

How is being on the wrong side of an 8-1 ruling "protecting his wife"?

[lemonlime 5503]

Ok.  Bad choice of words.  He's conflicted as fuck.  I have no reason to think he's unhinged or he's completely sane.  I do think he very clearly should have recused himself.  There's also plenty of reason to believe that his wife was involved in 1/6 and the evidence trump wants to hide could implicate her.  But clarence's role in this?  Who the fuck knows.

[Neonmoon 38127]

9 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

How is being on the wrong side of an 8-1 ruling "protecting his wife"?

He’s protecting the narrative.  He can’t argue it’s political if he voted against Trump.