Jump to content

January 6th Committee Hearings Thread of Dominance

Longhorn_Fan68

By Longhorn_Fan68
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 4.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Chuckie Finster
Chuckie Finster
Pig Bellmont
Pig Bellmont
Make em eat Taco Bell
Make em eat Taco Bell

this is really boring and overhyped.  Most of the country doesn't care about topic, I'd say a 3 hour special on inflation would get more eyeballs.  Or a bikini contest. 

Posted Images

C-Man

C-Man 27229

Posted
Posted

And there's this: https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/02/politics/defense-department-missing-january-6-texts/index.html

Quote

(CNN)The Defense Department wiped the phones of top departing DOD and Army officials at the end of the Trump administration, deleting any texts from key witnesses to events surrounding the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol, according to court filings.

The acknowledgment that the phones from the Pentagon officials had been wiped was first revealed in a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit American Oversight brought against the Defense Department and the Army. The watchdog group is seeking January 6 records from former acting Secretary of Defense Chris Miller, former chief of staff Kash Patel, and former Secretary of the Army Ryan McCarthy, among other prominent Pentagon officials -- having filed initial FOIA requests just a few days after the Capitol attack.

Miller, Patel and McCarthy have all been viewed as crucial witnesses for understanding government's response to the January 6 Capitol assault and former President Donald Trump's reaction to the breach. All three were involved in the Defense Department's response to sending National Guard troops to the US Capitol as the riot was unfolding. There is no suggestion that the officials themselves erased the records.

The government's assertion in the filings that the officials' text messages from that day were not preserved is the latest blow to the efforts to bring transparency to the events of January 6. It comes as the Department of Homeland Security is also under fire for the apparent loss of messages from the Secret Service that day.

Miller declined to comment. Patel and McCarthy did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The Pentagon and the Army also did not respond to requests for comment.

American Oversight is now calling for a "cross-agency investigation" by the Justice Department to investigate destruction of the materials.

"It's just astounding to believe that the agency did not understand the importance of preserving its records -- particularly [with regards] to the top officials that might have captured: what they were doing, when they were doing it, why they were doing, it on that day," Heather Sawyer, American Oversight's executive director, told CNN.

Sawyer said that her organization learned the records were not preserved from government attorneys last spring, and that acknowledgment was then memorialized in a joint status report filed with the court in March.

Top lawmakers renew call for DHS IG to step aside from investigation into missing texts, citing CNN reporting

"DOD and Army conveyed to Plaintiff that when an employee separates from DOD or Army he or she turns in the government-issued phone, and the phone is wiped," the government said in the filing. "For those custodians no longer with the agency, the text messages were not preserved and therefore could not be searched, although it is possible that particular text messages could have been saved into other records systems such as email."

The acknowledgment that the records were not preserved has taken on new significance in the wake of the ongoing scandal over the loss of Secret Service agents' texts from January 6.

"It just reveals a widespread lack of taking seriously the obligation to preserve records, to ensure accountability, to ensure accountability to their partners in the legislative branch and to the American people," Sawyer said.

This story is breaking and will be updated.

 

  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31479

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

I mean how can criminal charges not be brought? I’m not a lawyer obviously but how could it be anything other than destruction of evidence? Or at least something with government preserving records? Is that a crime?

Well, first off, we have to figure out who did what when and who ordered what and when did they find out about it.  And what their excuses for doing it might be.

All of this stuff is subject to governmental records preservation laws, which don't carry much in the way of penalties.  This site lists all the unlawful records destruction cases that were administratively dealt with that never or rarely produced criminal charges, there are dozens upon dozens, mostly seemingly accidental:

https://www.archives.gov/records-mgmt/resources/unauthorizeddispositionoffederalrecords

And these are the applicable laws and penalties.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/641

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2071

And, some of it is going to depend on what the actual records/texts said (which of course is probably impossible to determine now) .  And, once investigations are underway or imminent, it starts to fall into the category of obstruction of justice (which is where "destruction of evidence" falls criminally), something like this https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1519  And that's where the prosecution starts being worthwhile.

This all appears super-juicy and insidious, and it may well be, but we're going to need a lot more information before charges are brought.  We seem to know a lot more about the Secret Service emails than the DoD stuff.  And that does look pretty bad for Cuffari and the SS people.

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

jimmyjazz 45958

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

All of this stuff is subject to governmental records preservation laws, which don't carry much in the way of penalties.

I had to get a lower-level security clearance in my late-20s.  They scared the shit out of me with all the "what could happen" scenarios.  It seemed as if I was facing the Rosenberg treatment should I fail to appropriately stamp a document.

In hindsight, I probably didn't need to worry so much.

Rosenbergs Executed for Espionage - HISTORY

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Woland

Woland 733

Posted
Posted
I had to get a lower-level security clearance in my late-20s.  They scared the shit out of me with all the "what could happen" scenarios.  It seemed as if I was facing the Rosenberg treatment should I fail to appropriately stamp a document.
In hindsight, I probably didn't need to worry so much.
rosenbergs-113633245.jpg

Aid an attempted coup? Nothing happens. Forget to stamp the toilet-paper requisition? Straight to super-max.
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31479

Posted
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I had to get a lower-level security clearance in my late-20s.  They scared the shit out of me with all the "what could happen" scenarios.  It seemed as if I was facing the Rosenberg treatment should I fail to appropriately stamp a document.

In hindsight, I probably didn't need to worry so much.

Rosenbergs Executed for Espionage - HISTORY

Well, I left it off, but there can be some stiff penalties for fooling around with "national security" or "defense" information.  That usually involves something other than destruction, though, like taking it off premises or giving it to someone unauthorized. 

That was the biggest deal facing Hilary, as I recall, because as SoS, she had a lot of that type of information, and technically, the unauthorized server was "taking it off-premises."  But there wasn't a lot of intent there.

Petraeus faced the same type of thing, but his was definitely off-premises, and while he may not have had bad intentions, per se, he probably could have gotten nailed a lot harder than he did.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 105144

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, crash_davis said:

MAGAT mentality. Guy Reffitt's wife.

bitch, he threatened to shoot his kids. that's quite the "loving father". 

https://www.reddit.com/r/PublicFreakout/comments/wee9gj/wife_of_convicted_maga_yall_can_all_go_to_hell/

 

The perfect comment:

Quote

He threatened to kill the United States and she called him a patriot.

He should be buried under the jail, with all of the other fuckers who tried to kill my country.

It was Pearl Harbor, but fucking worse, because these fuckers were Americans.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RDCanecutter

RDCanecutter 26445

Posted
Posted
35 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

It was Pearl Harbor, but fucking worse, because these fuckers were Americans.

Woulda been cooler if they'd held their arms out like wings, and closing in on the capitol, all hummed to mimic the sound of carrier aircraft.

Trump coulda jumped up and down as the ran past him, and yelled "Tora! Tora! Tora!"

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

Biff Tannen 45688

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, RDCanecutter said:

Woulda been cooler if they'd held their arms out like wings, and closing in on the capitol, all hummed to mimic the sound of carrier aircraft.

Trump coulda jumped up and down as the ran past him, and yelled "Tora! Tora! Tora!"

I feel like you and @Hank Scorpio should have a tv show together. Or at least a podcast. 

  • Like 1
  • Drool 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
troph

troph 24805

Posted
Posted
On 8/2/2022 at 11:14 PM, CTC2 said:

This guy is such a POS.  His Opus Day ass needs to be taken to the mat over his bs reliance on executive privilege and atty client privilege in furtherance of a crime.

There is some truth to your statement however the more we find out the more we are coming to understand there were policy loyalists, pure loyalists and those who were flat out against him. Cipollone was a policy loyalist and he was actively trying to prevent a coup.  So was Pompeo and many others. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CTC2

CTC2 2797

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, troph said:

There is some truth to your statement however the more we find out the more we are coming to understand there were policy loyalists, pure loyalists and those who were flat out against him. Cipollone was a policy loyalist and he was actively trying to prevent a coup.  So was Pompeo and many others. 

Yeah, I get you.  They actively tried to prevent a coup but don't want to fully talk about it because the guy who did it is probably going to be president again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
troph

troph 24805

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, CTC2 said:

Yeah, I get you.  They actively tried to prevent a coup but don't want to fully talk about it because the guy who did it is probably going to be president again.

That’s not really what I said but carry on. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31479

Posted
Posted
35 minutes ago, troph said:

There is some truth to your statement however the more we find out the more we are coming to understand there were policy loyalists, pure loyalists and those who were flat out against him. Cipollone was a policy loyalist and he was actively trying to prevent a coup.  So was Pompeo and many others. 

Raises kind of an interesting ethical question.  Cipollone is a lawyer, he has no choice about maintaining attorney-client privilege, if he wants to stay a lawyer, anyway.

Like attorney-client privilege, executive privilege doesn't belong to Cipollone, so he doesn't have authority to waive it.  But, because executive privilege isn't as sacrosanct as attorney-client, I'm not sure his waiving it would have the same professional implications (disbarment, malpractice, etc.).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CTC2

CTC2 2797

Posted
Posted
30 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Raises kind of an interesting ethical question.  Cipollone is a lawyer, he has no choice about maintaining attorney-client privilege, if he wants to stay a lawyer, anyway.

Like attorney-client privilege, executive privilege doesn't belong to Cipollone, so he doesn't have authority to waive it.  But, because executive privilege isn't as sacrosanct as attorney-client, I'm not sure his waiving it would have the same professional implications (disbarment, malpractice, etc.).

Crime Fraud Exception

Link to comment
Share on other sites
chainsaw

chainsaw 9869

Posted
Posted

The hearings resume in September, and I bet that if the MAL warrant comes out around or a little bit before then, the J6 committee ratings will be through the roof, which is going to hurt the GOP in the midterms. If they are smart, the hearings will climax the night before the midterms. And maybe even Trump will be indicted and arrested by then.

There will be domestic terror, but we can't be afraid of that. Those clowns will be dealt with, and my guess is most of the loudest voices will puss out, and as for the remaining psychos who try to follow through on their plans, none of them will find aid or comfort from their neighbors and will be swiftly dealt with.

Assuming the DOJ's case is solid, and also assuming the J6 Committee has more evidence of representatives, senators, secret service, and Trump's inner circle being in cahoots (Jones' cellphone anyone?), Trump's support will crater from 40% to something like 20%. It will be the Ron DeSantis show from then on.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
956 Worldwide

956 Worldwide 34715

Posted
Posted
On 8/2/2022 at 11:11 PM, jimmyjazz said:

Yes, I'm sure it's standard government protocol to wipe any outgoing employee's phone w/o backing up the content.   FFS.

This isn’t that nefarious and is some of the only believable parts of the story.  Government employees are allowed to use their work phones for personal use within limits.  For records management, it’s the employee that is responsible to back up anything off the phone when leaving a job.  When you hand the phone in, you log out of everything and you do a hard factory reset. Someone else gets the phone or at the end of its lifecycle it is disposed of.

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...