The 01-06-21 Select Committee Thread

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13619]

So crazy to think it's possible that Marjorie Taylor Greene is a pipe bomber. But the more you think about it, it would make total sense Marjorie Taylor Greene is a pipe bomber. 

[4th&Five 41904]

Lulz. Of course. 

 

[Bullneck 19454]

[atomheartbevo 90548]

Children.

[Satchel 6982]

Idle thought. Who flies those coon capitalists to the Trump rallies? Or does he bus them from location to location?

 

 

 

[Horn Dog 10156]

“Former president Donald Trump was known inside the White House for his unusual and potentially unlawful habit of tearing presidential records into shreds and tossing them on the floor — creating a headache for records management analysts who meticulously used Scotch tape to piece together fragments of paper that were sometimes as small as confetti,”

”Stephen Gillers, a New York University law professor and constitutional scholar, said White House documents torn up by Trump are clearly the property of the government under the Presidential Records Act. “So destroying them could be a crime under several statutes that make it a crime to destroy government property if that was the intent of the defendant,” Gillers said.”

 

[F250 29175]

11 minutes ago, Bullneck said:

I think I know who they hired to find and piece all of those papers together.

 

Edited February 1, 2022 by F250

[Mole 4338]

What kind of odds can I get on the pipe bomber getting on the presidential ticket?

[NWBuck 8619]

1 hour ago, 4th&Five said:

Lulz. Of course. 

 

To be fair, he's pretty well known for doing that all the time (not just when planning an insurrection).

[Guest Lobo]

I'll bet $50 Eric Trump was in charge of the document shredding program.  

"Eric, what are you doing here?  I told you to go shred."

(18 hours later)

"Eric?  Where the fuck are you?  Where are those papers we gave you?"  

Eric, "I'm snowboarding in Aspen, shredding it like you said Ivanka!  The papers are in my hotel room but it's fine, only the MS13 housekeeper has another key."  

[Hagbard Celine 11160]

https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/31/politics/trump-executive-orders-seize-voting-machines/index.html

Former President Donald Trump's advisers drafted two versions of an executive order to seize voting machines -- one directing the Department of Defense to do so and another the Department of Homeland Security -- as part of a broader effort to undermine the 2020 election results, multiple sources tell CNN.

The idea of using the federal government to access voting machines in states that Trump lost was the brainchild of retired Col. Phil Waldron and retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, Trump's former national security adviser, the sources said. Both Army veterans spread misinformation about the election being stolen from Trump.

While advisers publicly floated the idea at the time, revelations that two draft executive orders were actually drawn up for different agencies to carry out the job underscores the extent to which the former President's allies wanted to weaponize the powers of his lame-duck administration to overturn the election.

Any operation for the military or federal agents to seize voting equipment for political purposes would have been unprecedented in US history.

CNN has reported the existence of a draft order tasking the Pentagon with seizing voting machines. That document has been handed over by the National Archives to the House select committee, which is investigating the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol.

Multiple sources now tell CNN that a second version of the document, instructing DHS to carry out the same task, also exists.

It's unclear who drafted the executive orders, and neither was issued.

But Flynn and Trump's former attorney Sidney Powell advocated for the idea during a now-infamous Oval Office meeting in mid-December 2020. The meeting devolved into screaming matches as some of the President's advisers pushed back on various proposals, including invoking martial law and naming Powell special counsel to investigate voter fraud claims, CNN reported at the time.

The House select committee is now looking into the effort to draft an executive order and how it began, including the roles of Flynn, Waldron and Powell as well as another Trump attorney, Rudy Giuliani, and Bernie Kerik, who worked alongside Giuliani after the election to find any evidence of voter fraud.

Kerik recently testified to the committee about the effort, a source familiar with the matter tells CNN. And a log detailing documents that he believes are covered by attorney-client privilege refers to a memo about seizing voting machines.

After the Pentagon draft document, as first reported by Politico, came to light, committee member Rep. Zoe Lofgren said in an interview with CNN: "It's an extraordinary document, and we have a lot of questions about it."

"We've got no evidence at this point that there were steps taken in the Department of Defense to implement that memo but ... it's a lawless document and really breathtaking in its approach," the California Democrat added.

CNN previously reported that Giuliani had approached Ken Cuccinelli, who was second in command at Homeland Security at the time, about seizing voting machines after the election, and Cuccinelli told him the department didn't have that authority.

Reached earlier this month, Cuccinelli said his discussion with Giuliani "never developed to the point of talking about an executive order including such action that I recall."

When asked about the executive order involving the military, Giuliani's attorney, Robert Costello, said his client also shut that idea down when he became aware of it.

"As soon as he heard about this idea, he was vehemently against it, as was White House Counsel Pat Cipollone and then-President Trump," Costello said.

But Giuliani and his team did continue to pursue other avenues for overturning the election based on the same conspiracies about election fraud cited in the draft executive order to justify the seizure of voting machines.

Trump also continued to entertain some of the same core elements of those executive orders, including the idea of installing a special counsel to investigate election fraud.

Nearly two weeks after White House aides pushed back on the suggestion of naming Powell to such a role, Trump raised the idea again during another Oval Office meeting, but this time floated Cuccinelli as a possible candidate, according to testimony provided to the Senate Judiciary Committee by former senior Justice Department officials who were present.

Meanwhile, Flynn remained adamant that election equipment was going to be seized and personally reached out to at least one senior defense official in mid-December attempting to enlist their help with his cause, according to a source familiar with the outreach.

He also promoted the idea during a Newsmax interview on December 17.

''He could immediately on his order seize every single one of these machines around the country on his order. He could also order, within the swing states, if he wanted to, he could take military capabilities and he could place them in those states and basically rerun an election in each of those states. It's not unprecedented,'' Flynn said at the time.

Flynn, Powell and Waldron could not be reached for comment Monday.

[Hagbard Celine 11160]

there are too many image/gif options for "walls closing in"

[JimmyJames 12271]

Can someone articulate why this guy has not been arrested yet?

[Brisketexan 106627]

Can someone articulate why this guy has not been arrested yet?

Because we live in actual hell.

[TwiceHorn 31987]

Seriously, though, you guys are lawyers.  This stuff needs a lot more fleshing out before charges and arrests are made.

There's enough foolishness about "why not done" without law dogs of the surl fomenting it.

[Guest Lobo]

Give Trump credit for making good on one of his New Year's resolutions---to be more transparent.  His PAC ("Save America" or whatever the fuck it's officially called) remembered to actually file this month and now has $122mm on hand.  They have distributed/spent to legitimate PAC causes/candidates, $1.35mm.  Or 1.1%. Assume they "spend" 20% in processing, marketing, mail, etc.  That's beyond the most inefficient PAC in human history.  For such a savvy business family, to have that much cash and being so little with it except spending it on G&A.  That's insane.  

I get that somebody would pay money to get a photo with Trump, or get fired up from a speech, or network with other prominent Republicans and business leaders.  But for 90% of the people at these events, they think their hard-earned money is going to this magnificent cause that's gonna make America great again, win the mid-terms, promote traditional values and culture, and improve their own personal financial standing.  When in reality, according to their own filings which they could have just as easily lied about, they're barely spending anything on the cause.  It's just a processing center where they take $1.00, spend a quarter on bullshit moving paper around, give a penny to the cause, and keep the rest on hand to be raided at a TBD date by the Trump family.  

Fuck the RNC admitted, they picked up $10mm of Trump's legal bills in the last fundraising cycle.  They're openly telling people "Keep sending money.  Feed the machine.  We're not doing anything remotely close to what you think we're doing with it.  But send it anyway."  And the people can't sign over their last assets fast enough.  He's doing in a few years what took the Catholic Church a few millennia. 

[aggie08 21734]

2 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Seriously, though, you guys are lawyers.  This stuff needs a lot more fleshing out before charges and arrests are made.

There's enough foolishness about "why not done" without law dogs of the surl fomenting it.

How are we looking on getting that done between now and sometime before oh, I don't know, early November 2024?

[TwiceHorn 31987]

14 minutes ago, aggie08 said:

How are we looking on getting that done between now and sometime before oh, I don't know, early November 2024?

That's almost three years off.  And we're one year removed from the criminal episode. Prosecutions against powerful people aren't brought without careful investigation and deliberation.  The Department of Justice will shoot to kill.

As posted on the other thread, this apparent desire to hear from Merrick Garland how the investigation and prosecution of Trump and his minions is going is just flat out dumb.  That's not the way this works.  The Committee adds a public aspect to it that feeds the fire, but prosecutors do not work that way, especially the feds.

Letitia James is pursuing a civil case, and by their nature they are more public than criminal cases, particularly before any suit is filed/charges are brought.  And, she's an elected official that does like to run her mouth.  Same apparently with the Fulton County DA.  The feds don't work like that in criminal cases.

[Born to Run 6598]

Because we live in actual hell.

No sir, we live in a remarkable place. Unfortunately, many of us from any demographic are just straight assholes without meaning to be. People that walk thier dogs leave shit bags all over, they intend to get them on the way back and forget. And who doesn't love dogs, and those people are largely chill people, maybe dumb, but acting shitty. *
Acting. Not shitty at heart just stupid or distracted.
Brokeness, original sin, all that.

Some of us repent weekly and reflect on failures and try to do better, some of us double down. Some of our pastors urge us to double down and be evil, they are the real evil fuck. I don't think we should give quarter to that evil because its willful and intentional grift. New testament Jesus would fuck em up.

[pyrohornIII 4844]

1 hour ago, Lobo said:

Give Trump credit for making good on one of his New Year's resolutions---to be more transparent.  His PAC ("Save America" or whatever the fuck it's officially called) remembered to actually file this month and now has $122mm on hand.  They have distributed/spent to legitimate PAC causes/candidates, $1.35mm.  Or 1.1%. Assume they "spend" 20% in processing, marketing, mail, etc.  That's beyond the most inefficient PAC in human history.  For such a savvy business family, to have that much cash and being so little with it except spending it on G&A.  That's insane.  

I get that somebody would pay money to get a photo with Trump, or get fired up from a speech, or network with other prominent Republicans and business leaders.  But for 90% of the people at these events, they think their hard-earned money is going to this magnificent cause that's gonna make America great again, win the mid-terms, promote traditional values and culture, and improve their own personal financial standing.  When in reality, according to their own filings which they could have just as easily lied about, they're barely spending anything on the cause.  It's just a processing center where they take $1.00, spend a quarter on bullshit moving paper around, give a penny to the cause, and keep the rest on hand to be raided at a TBD date by the Trump family.  

Fuck the RNC admitted, they picked up $10mm of Trump's legal bills in the last fundraising cycle.  They're openly telling people "Keep sending money.  Feed the machine.  We're not doing anything remotely close to what you think we're doing with it.  But send it anyway."  And the people can't sign over their last assets fast enough.  He's doing in a few years what took the Catholic Church a few millennia. 

Speaking of crooked PACs, have all the cases against the NRA and the russian ties been cleared up yet?  Or were they just put on hold until Trump's DOJ got replaced by Biden's?   

Funny how Paxton, Patrick and Abbott think Trump is going to write big checks for them.  Idiots.  Trump won't give them funds, it'll be the opposite.  He'll hold onto that shit as long as he can, claiming he's running in 24, then at the end will bail.  

[wildcat09 29558]

6 hours ago, JimmyJames said:

Can someone articulate why this guy has not been arrested yet?

Because the DOJ absolutely does not want to prosecute him.

[JimmyJames 12271]

7 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Seriously, though, you guys are lawyers.  This stuff needs a lot more fleshing out before charges and arrests are made.

There's enough foolishness about "why not done" without law dogs of the surl fomenting it.

I get it and don’t disagree. But the guy is now out there talking about how there should be some sort of a revolution if he even gets charged with anything. He’s doing the exact same thing he did prior to January 6, he just can’t use Twitter to do it. 

[TwiceHorn 31987]

1 hour ago, wildcat09 said:

Because the DOJ absolutely does not want to prosecute him.

Based on what?  I don't believe that.  I do believe that they are going to be cautious with any case because it will be so politically fraught.  I do believe that they will only bring a very solid case:  if the evidence is not there to convict, then no case.  They are not going to go out on a factual or legal limb for this.

And, I hate to break it to the peanut gallery, but while Trump entertained doing a bunch of quasi-legal things that may have ultimately been unlawful, I am not sure that those things themselves are criminally illegal, and, he didn't ultimately do them.  Politicians don't usually face criminal charges when they do unconstitutional things, which they all do with some frequency.

Granted, these things are more repugnantly unconstitutional than passing a discriminatory law, or violating the APA with an immigration rule or policy.  Or unconstitutionally interning Japanese citizens.

In a halfway rational world, the political penalty for this shit would be political death, like Nixon's complicity with Watergate.  But, we don't live in a politically rational world.  

Still, and I have said it many times now, the fairly clear criminal violation by Trump is obstruction of an official proceeding.  All of this backround legalish stuff is important to establish his motive and intention on January 6 so that it is no longer credible for him to say "I just gave a speech, I'm not responsible for what happened after."  Other stuff may develop, too, but there's one pretty clear case.  And, maybe this rises to the level of a seditious conspiracy, in criminal legal terms.

And I concede that those of us who hate Trump find that already not credible, we know what he meant to do, but we are not jurors in a court of law considering proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

[JimmyJames 12271]

8 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Based on what?  I don't believe that.  I do believe that they are going to be cautious with any case because it will be so politically fraught.  I do believe that they will only bring a very solid case:  if the evidence is not there to convict, then no case.  They are not going to go out on a factual or legal limb for this.

And, I hate to break it to the peanut gallery, but while Trump entertained doing a bunch of quasi-legal things that may have ultimately been unlawful, I am not sure that those things themselves are criminally illegal, and, he didn't ultimately do them.  Politicians don't usually face criminal charges when they do unconstitutional things, which they all do with some frequency.

Granted, these things are more repugnantly unconstitutional than passing a discriminatory law, or violating the APA with an immigration rule or policy.  Or unconstitutionally interning Japanese citizens.

In a halfway rational world, the political penalty for this shit would be political death, like Nixon's complicity with Watergate.  But, we don't live in a politically rational world.  

Still, and I have said it many times now, the fairly clear criminal violation by Trump is obstruction of an official proceeding.  All of this backround legalish stuff is important to establish his motive and intention on January 6 so that it is no longer credible for him to say "I just gave a speech, I'm not responsible for what happened after."  Other stuff may develop, too, but there's one pretty clear case.  And, maybe this rises to the level of a seditious conspiracy, in criminal legal terms.

And I concede that those of us who hate Trump find that already not credible, we know what he meant to do, but we are not jurors in a court of law considering proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

As usual you are right. I do think he eventually gets charged by the DOJ but they’re not going in half cocked and looks like they’re learning new shit everyday.

The case in Georgia though seems like a slam dunk to me. Don’t even know that the hell more they would be investigating on that one. They have to be waiting to see what the DOJ does. 

[wildcat09 29558]

2 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Based on what?  I don't believe that.  I do believe that they are going to be cautious with any case because it will be so politically fraught.  I do believe that they will only bring a very solid case:  if the evidence is not there to convict, then no case.  They are not going to go out on a factual or legal limb for this.

You answered the question yourself. It would be extremely politically fraught and I don't think they're going to want to bring anything other than a complete slam dunk and not just on some lame sounding charge like obstruction of an official proceeding. If they're going to charge Trump, it's going to be with something that sounds serious to a layperson, and as you've noted that'll be harder to prove. Hell, even if they do have a slam dunk, a prosecution would still be a complete fucking mess. I don't think they'll have what they consider a slam dunk on something like seditious conspiracy, so I don't think they're going to charge him with anything.

[Biff Tannen 46061]

15 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

You answered the question yourself. It would be extremely politically fraught and I don't think they're going to want to bring anything other than a complete slam dunk and not just on some lame sounding charge like obstruction of an official proceeding. If they're going to charge Trump, it's going to be with something that sounds serious to a layperson, and as you've noted that'll be harder to prove. Hell, even if they do have a slam dunk, a prosecution would still be a complete fucking mess. I don't think they'll have what they consider a slam dunk on something like seditious conspiracy, so I don't think they're going to charge him with anything.

Then why are they even bothering?

[Goofyboy 3428]

Then why are they even bothering?

Political theater up front - fucking the citizens in the back.

[wildcat09 29558]

8 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Then why are they even bothering?

There's some value in locking up his co-conspirators. Not much, but some. 

[retread 2951]

10 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

There's some value in locking up his co-conspirators. Not much, but some. 

Feels like it will just serve to weed out the 3 stars so that Trump and co. can recruit 4 and 5 star fascists for the next administration.

[Red Five 41596]

We should probably have some laws on the books for presidents who attempt to overturn elections and install themselves as dictators. 

[JimmyJames 12271]

6 minutes ago, Red Five said:

We should probably have some laws on the books for presidents who attempt to overturn elections and install themselves as dictators. 

Exactly. You mean to tell me that smoking a joint is a federal offense but attempting to overthrow the government hasn’t been made illegal yet? I’m not a criminal lawyer but something has to apply to this shit.

[jimmyjazz 46976]

10 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

That's almost three years off.  And we're one year removed from the criminal episode. Prosecutions against powerful people aren't brought without careful investigation and deliberation.  The Department of Justice will shoot to kill.

Is Robert Mueller involved?  Asking for a friend.

[pyrohornIII 4844]

22 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Then why are they even bothering?

 

13 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

There's some value in locking up his co-conspirators. Not much, but some. 

I would think that if they can tear down his empire and get jail time for his kids it would drive him further into the unfiltered frenzy, fully unraveled.

It's quite obvious that no one in the GOP is going to rein this moron in, and they have all bit off on democracy is dead already, and are setting themselves up in this new authoritarian system they are all in on now.  

And that is where we will continue to slip towards unless we at least try to hold these people accountable.  Otherwise, we might as well roll over now.  Trump controls his family easy enough, but there are those who control Trump and he listens to, like Hannity, Flynn, Manafort, Stone, etc.  

Trump is a psychopath narcissist who only worries about his image, and that image is based on his intelligence, which is supported by his financial empire.  Your pull the underpinnings out from under that empire, you tear him down into a whiny bully with little hands.  

Doing that gives those who oppose him hope for the future.  Otherwise, why continue?

Unfortunately we have had the disappointment of the Mueller probe to set the table for us, expectation wise.  I still think there will be more come out on that concerning how it was throttled by the Trump administration.  Regardless, it left a bad taste in our collective mouths.  Still we must remember that Mueller would have gone a lot different if McConnell and his band of goons wasn't leading the impeachment and denying all the credible witnesses, same as in the SC hearings.

[Biff Tannen 46061]

16 minutes ago, Red Five said:

We should probably have some laws on the books for presidents who attempt to overturn elections and install themselves as dictators. 

But that might make some people uncomfortable.

[Red Five 41596]

1 minute ago, JimmyJames said:

Exactly. You mean to tell me that smoking a joint is a federal offense but attempting to overthrow the government hasn’t been made illegal yet? I’m not a criminal lawyer but something has to apply to this shit.

We have people in jail for voting when they shouldn't have. But orchestrate a failed coup? "Well lets see you try that again in four years buddy!... no seriously, you're the overwhelming favorite to win the nomination in 2024. Lets see what you try this time!".

[Fudge Nuggets 19407]

12 hours ago, aggie08 said:

How are we looking on getting that done between now and sometime before oh, I don't know, early November 2024?

It’s cute that you think the committee will still exist after the mid terms.

[JimmyJames 12271]

20 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

It’s cute that you think the committee will still exist after the mid terms.

The committee will be done long before that. It’s what is the DOJ gonna do that is up on the air and ultimately matters. 

[Gil Bang 26177]

 

[Willfully Horn 8204]

As a layman I get a pass on impatience and frustration? Cool, cool.

Heres what ol’ Beto Gonzales has to say about DOJ action on Trump. It’s the future tense that makes me see red. I know. Secret stuff. Laymen like me think the good of our nation depends on certain action. I’ll take the certain now, and the action at the perfect moment.
 

"And so I think it is good that we're finding out what actually happened and we'll see whether or not there are any consequences. I think there may be some decisions ahead for the attorney general in terms of whether or not to impanel a grand jury and whether or not to -- I think he's going to look into this and see whether or not there should be something that the Department of Justice should do in response."

"Do you think something legally incriminating about this information?" Berman asked.

"Could be, yes, obviously could be," Gonzales replied.

 

"So the Department of Justice will look to see whether or not any federal laws have been violated and can be prosecuted," he explained. "And so we still have a long way to go, but obviously whether or not a crime was committed here, I think the behavior that's being described is extremely troubling. And I think it -- again, it reflects a personality that of an individual that, like a child, unwilling to accept reality, and I think it is a reflection of a person who actually -- who is a loser."

 

https://www.rawstory.com/trump-voting-machines/

 

[Pato del Muerto 53332]

*layperson you knuckle dragging caveman

[Nice Guy Eddie 13707]

I doubt that we see the DOJ prosecute anyone.  I understand they're working their way upwards but eventually the committee needs star witnesses to testify in public, even in primetime sessions.

[Willfully Horn 8204]

24 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

*layperson you knuckle dragging caveman

[Biff Tannen 46061]

54 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

I think the behavior that's being described is extremely troubling.

One might even say "brow-furrowing".

[lemonlime 5503]

Eh.  Just playing footsie with treason.

[TwiceHorn 31987]

10 hours ago, JimmyJames said:

As usual you are right. I do think he eventually gets charged by the DOJ but they’re not going in half cocked and looks like they’re learning new shit everyday.

The case in Georgia though seems like a slam dunk to me. Don’t even know that the hell more they would be investigating on that one. They have to be waiting to see what the DOJ does. 

I didn't mean to imply that the Georgia case was flawed.

I did mean to contrast some of the legal proceedings where were are getting glimpses of what's going on, in the NY AG case and the Georgia case.  State prosecutors, being elected officials, sometimes are noisier than their federal counterparts.

As we should have learned from the Mueller report redactions, the DOJ has pretty strong policies against publicity of investigations and their targets.  And are very quiet about grand jury proceedings.  With rare exceptions like Comey and Clinton, and what a real departure that was.

I would be fascinated to know whether federal prosecutors had been looking at presidential records at the same time as the Committe, or earlier, or how that would be playing out with grand jury subpoenas.  But, we'll probably never know.

But mainly, I want to reinforce the idea that just because we aren't hearing a lot from the DOJ doesn't mean they're doing nothing and plan to do nothing.

[atomheartbevo 90548]

3 hours ago, Gil Bang said:

 

Damn, that's the most blunt/honest that Turtle has been.

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/592323-mcconnell-breaks-with-trump-on-jan-6-pardons

Going to get a lot of nasty comments from Trump on that one.

[atomheartbevo 90548]

8 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

Then why are they even bothering?

8 hours ago, wildcat09 said:

There's some value in locking up his co-conspirators. Not much, but some. 

It also scares the shit out of Trump, wondering who will roll on him and whether he can try and get ahead of them.

 

[TwiceHorn 31987]

5 hours ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

It’s cute that you think the committee will still exist after the mid terms.

 

5 hours ago, JimmyJames said:

The committee will be done long before that. It’s what is the DOJ gonna do that is up on the air and ultimately matters. 

I actually think the Committee will not be fully done by January 2023.  But I think they will have made their major public points by then.

I think they will make a spectacle out of being dissolved by a GOP congress, as they should.

But people seem to think that the Committee can do anything besides hold public hearings.  They can't charge anyone with anything.  It's bread and circus.

And, as gratifying as it would be to see Trump and Trumpkins skewered for being what they are on national TV, we've seen how that works out.  It's not going to change anyone's mind.  Hell, neither is a criminal conviction.   But having the first convicted felon as the presidential nominee might be a step too far even for the GQP.

[Beau Vine 55824]

1 hour ago, atomheartbevo said:

It also scares the shit out of Trump, wondering who will roll on him and whether he can try and get ahead of them.

 

Narrator:  They all will.

[TwiceHorn 31987]

24 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

Narrator:  They all will.

True dat.  The only thing more reliable than Trump shitting on his former "friends," is those friends flinging shit right back at him.