Jump to content

January 6th Committee Hearings Thread of Dominance


Longhorn_Fan68

Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

. . . and I care why?

Are we after a criminal conviction or not?

Or do we just want to be able to spew sound and fury, signifying nothing, into the ether?

This isn't going to convince anyone who isn't already convinced, so what's the point of getting worked up over a salacious but ultimately inconclusive factoid.

Just about everything revealed these days I'm looking at as useful in a criminal case or not useful in a criminal case.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

If there was a call from Cheney to a hijacker’s phone on 9/11, they don’t get to wave it away by claiming wrong number. 

What delay industries?  Art Qaeda industries?  Nah, nah you’re way off.  Wrong number!  /cosmocheney

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Must be a zero chance that the WH phone systems wouldn’t know which extension called that phone number. Imagine if a staffer was calling the a reporter  about inside info, but the WH couldn’t track which extension. Impossible.

If they are being operated "according to Hoyle."  I think we already know the answer to that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's insane to me the number of missing phone records/activity logs there are from that afternoon.  And his apologists just casually dismiss it like a missed "scam likely" on their smart phone.  The most sophisticated communications system on Earth is the White House switchboard.  I've seen mid-level staffers pickup their hard line and just say, " "I need the Ambassador from Romania please."  And 5 seconds, later a secure connection pings back with their Ambassador on the line.  But nobody knows who the fuck called who on the afternoon of January 6th.

I'd bet dollars to donuts that the 7-11 on NW 17th where all the interns go to buy beer after work.  There's security cam footage of 2 WH guys walking in, not smart enough to take off their security lanyards which says where they work, and buying a dozen burner phones each and paying with large bills taken directly from a banker envelope  (which had been handed to them just minutes before).    

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

"Hello?"
"Secret Service will be moving Veep (or whatever their code word was for Pence) to the shelter via motorcade route A. Be ready to engage."

That's less than 5 seconds. And had Pence not known he was likely a dead man had he gotten into the SS transport our entire Government would have fallen. As it is, we're hanging on by a fingernail.

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

12 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Are we after a criminal conviction or not?

Or do we just want to be able to spew sound and fury, signifying nothing, into the ether?

This isn't going to convince anyone who isn't already convinced, so what's the point of getting worked up over a salacious but ultimately inconclusive factoid.

Just about everything revealed these days I'm looking at as useful in a criminal case or not useful in a criminal case.

I think everyone needs to be a lot less certain about what sorts of information might change people's minds.

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

9 minutes ago, Macanudo said:

Really?   Remember, Trump really COULD shoot someone on 5th Avenue and his followers wouldn't give a shit.

I didn't say "what sorts of information would convince Trump's followers." I just said "people." Most Americans aren't die hard Trump supporters. Most Americans don't really follow politics or the news that much at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, wildcat09 said:

I didn't say "what sorts of information would convince Trump's followers." I just said "people." Most Americans aren't die hard Trump supporters. Most Americans don't really follow politics or the news that much at all.

This still blows my fucking mind.  Granted, it's not as true as it used to be, what with social media and the highest turnout of all time in 2020.  But overall, probably still correct.

I didn't pay much attention until around Obama and even then it was more in passing, but then 2016 happened.  Granted I was in my 20s in the 2000s, so my brain was mostly filled with malted hops and bong resin.

People in their 30s and 40s+ that pay no attention in this day and age, I just can't.

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

26 minutes ago, Willfully Horn said:

If this has been posted, I missed it. Clips from the documentary film makers Roger Stone had following him around (I presume

 

 

Stone: "Our next election is going to be decided in the courts because they cheat and we don't cheat. We've never cheated."

right-dr-evil.gif

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

3 hours ago, wildcat09 said:

I think everyone needs to be a lot less certain about what sorts of information might change people's minds.

That's fair.  I typically vacillate between incredibly cynical and quite Pollyannish, so I go both ways on this.  Most of the time I'm on the receiving end of "that ain't changing anyone's mind that isn't already changed," so I was in cynical model.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

That's fair.  I typically vacillate between incredibly cynical and quite Pollyannish, so I go both ways on this.  Most of the time I'm on the receiving end of "that ain't changing anyone's mind that isn't already changed," so I was in cynical model.

People are weird and form and change opinions about things and other people for good, bad, stupid, weird and silly reasons. Trump's die hard fans won't ever change their minds.  But there's a whole lot of people that aren't Trump supporters, but still seriously think he was a real, legitimate businessman who maybe struggled with learning the protocols of the job but wasn't actively corrupt and malevolent. And they're not all blithering idiots (though some are), they just don't have a very sophisticated understanding of epistemics and haven't been lucky enough to learn the best sources of information.

In understanding the world, we all rely to an enormous extent on trusting others. And much of the mainstream media (the most trustworthy sources for people who aren't diehard Republicans) normalized Trump in many ways. But an overwhelming majority of those people probably would've trusted Bob fucking Woodward if he'd released a tape of Trump admitting he was lying about the severity of a pandemic, because Bob fucking Woodward is someone whom nearly anyone who knows the name (who isn't a die hard Watergate apologist) thinks they can trust. 

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

On 9/27/2022 at 4:15 PM, Willfully Horn said:

If this has been posted, I missed it. Clips from the documentary film makers Roger Stone had following him around (I presume

 

 

“That’s basically what Bush did to Gore.”

It’s almost like he admitted Bush stole the 2000 election. Maybe VP Gore should’ve refused to certify.

Also, fuck that guy for having photos of Nixon on his wall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

“That’s basically what Bush did to Gore.”

It’s almost like he admitted Bush stole the 2000 election. Maybe VP Gore should’ve refused to certify.

Also, fuck that guy for having photos of Nixon on his wall.

But as far as a conspiracy to steal an election by cooking up a false set of electors and a scheme to influence and then disrupt the electoral count, it is not even close. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

But as far as a conspiracy to steal an election by cooking up a false set of electors and a scheme to influence and then disrupt the electoral count, it is not even close. 

Just another of the thousand ways Bush foreshadowed Trump. Trump just turns everything up to 11. Bush wasn’t president but he had help in Florida where the Governor just happened to be his brother and the Sec. of State stopped the recount (and got a position in the White House as a reward). The plan with Trump was to just say “I’m President, I’m not leaving, fuck you.”

That failed. But now they’re pressing the Sec. of State angle in swing states and trying to get election deniers installed to help them steal the election next time around. And it’s all happening right out in the open.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Just another of the thousand ways Bush foreshadowed Trump. Trump just turns everything up to 11. Bush wasn’t president but he had help in Florida where the Governor just happened to be his brother and the Sec. of State stopped the recount (and got a position in the White House as a reward). The plan with Trump was to just say “I’m President, I’m not leaving, fuck you.”

That failed. But now they’re pressing the Sec. of State angle in swing states and trying to get election deniers installed to help them steal the election next time around. And it’s all happening right out in the open.

I agree with your post. Still, I want to believe that the Electoral Count Reform and Presidential Transition Improvement Act is as advertised. Yes, I am often naive.
 

Further, if the Texas Tribune is correct, and the bill has broad bipartisan support in the Senate,, I will enjoy the big pot of crow gumbo that I will be cooking.

https://www.texastribune.org/2022/09/27/ted-cruz-insurrection/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Willfully Horn said:

I agree with your post. Still, I want to believe that the Electoral Count Reform and Presidential Transition Improvement Act is as advertised. Yes, I am often naive.
 

Further, if the Texas Tribune is correct, and the bill has broad bipartisan support in the Senate,, I will enjoy the big pot of crow gumbo that I will be cooking.

https://www.texastribune.org/2022/09/27/ted-cruz-insurrection/

Yeah, I’m hoping for the best but prepared for the worst. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Who’s going to tell him?

The tattoo was a choice he has to live with. The photos on the wall are a choice he makes every day. And it’s not a coincidence that he’s posing in front of them for that interview. Corruption is his brand and he’s not afraid to advertise it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 9/29/2022 at 11:00 AM, WhatTheBuck said:

“That’s basically what Bush did to Gore.”

It’s almost like he admitted Bush stole the 2000 election. Maybe VP Gore should’ve refused to certify.

Also, fuck that guy for having photos of Nixon on his wall.

his WALL? he has one tattooed on his back!

Nixon Foundation objects to calling Roger Stone an 'aide' to disgraced  ex-president

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, yoladu said:

his WALL? he has one tattooed on his back!

Nixon Foundation objects to calling Roger Stone an 'aide' to disgraced  ex-president

 

Yes, I’m fully aware of the Nixon tattoo on Stone’s back and have been for years.

Today we got a shot of him sitting there surrounded by six different Nixon posters, with his hands outstretched in Nixon’s double peace sign or “V” for victory (I assume it’s the latter) and none of those Nixon posters were ones that we saw on his wall in that interview.

He doesn’t have to look at his stupid tattoo all of the time. (Although he probably does. I’ll bet he has a hand held mirror so he can admire it reflected in his bathroom mirror.) But how many photos and posters of Nixon does he own? It’s this ‘Hooray for corruption and lawlessness!’ attitude that he embraces, promotes, and gets away with, that just boggles my mind. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...