January 6th Committee Hearings Thread of Dominance

[henrygandorf 29191]

Just now, TwiceHorn said:

Yeah, the Senate sure seems like a mistake in a whole bunch of ways, along with the electoral college.

But the founders didn't wholly trust this newfangled democracy thing, and for pretty good reasons, so they put some anti-democratic firewalls in place.

The horrible irony of it is that the firewalls were supposed to prevent Trumps. 

as long as dems flock to big cities, there will be more red states than blue states. this is a problem for numerous reasons and will be the fuse for civil war part 2.

before 2032 there will be a presidential election where neither candidate gets to 270. 

[Captainant 27680]

6 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Yeah, the Senate sure seems like a mistake in a whole bunch of ways, along with the electoral college.

But the founders didn't wholly trust this newfangled democracy thing, and for pretty good reasons, so they put some anti-democratic firewalls in place.

The horrible irony of it is that the firewalls were supposed to prevent Trumps. 

The founders also expected us to change the government and update it over time, which is in direct contradiction towards MAGA. And MAGA weaponizes those anti democratic mechanisms to further entrench their grip on power, and prevents their patching to protect against abuse. 

It's not a horrible irony, it's a well executed plan of attack

[C-Man 27230]

44 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

See my post immediately preceding yours.  There is a rationality to keeping a POTUS from having to answer to Congress (or basically anyone else) for every petty grievance, particularly those with a purely political purpose.  The office would grind to a halt.  Same with the Congress and the speech and debate clause and other immunities that governments and government officials have (which is all of them, down even to cops and dogcatchers). 

The grievances against Trump are not petty, but it's hard to make exceptions to these doctrines without swallowing the whole thing.  And, there are means to hold a former president to account, but not to Congress.  There are even means to hold a president accountable to congress (impeachment), but Congress had best be acting with one mind for that one, if it's not, don't even bother.

You mean like when the House votes to impeach Biden on some stupid, BS "charge" as soon as they take control in November?

[tx 3 putt 76988]

 

[tx 3 putt 76988]

the secret service needs to be shut down 

[Satchel 6938]

When one considers that the FBI brass expressed concern about the number of agents within the agency who sympathized with aims of the insurrectionists, along the degree to which the SS seemed to act as an extension of the Trump regime, it’s hard to argue against wholesale change within both the FBI and SS.

[Biff Tannen 45691]

9 hours ago, tx 3 putt said:

 

1. MTG - no doubt in my mind

2. SS at the direction of dotard

3. SS at the direction of dotard

4. One of the Reps giving "tours"

[Mdhorn 5968]

1 hour ago, Biff Tannen said:

1. MTG - no doubt in my mind

2. SS at the direction of dotard

3. SS at the direction of dotard

4. One of the Reps giving "tours"

he can't do much on her own--she'd need a lot of assistance internally with security and structural information.    She'd have to straight up get that info--don't even know if she would be able to ask the questions required.  

[Goredho 17408]

10 hours ago, Satchel said:

When one considers that the FBI brass expressed concern about the number of agents within the agency who sympathized with aims of the insurrectionists, along the degree to which the SS seemed to act as an extension of the Trump regime, it’s hard to argue against wholesale change within both the FBI and SS.

Poor FBI, both the right and left thinks they are the gestapo for the other side. 

[Satchel 6938]

1 hour ago, Goredho said:

Poor FBI, both the right and left thinks they are the gestapo for the other side. 

Not sure why the right has an issue with the FBI, given its long problematic history with liberals and people of color, which is undeniably rooted in the culture created by J Edgar.

[Gil Bang 25964]

[Goredho 17408]

2 hours ago, Satchel said:

Not sure why the right has an issue with the FBI, given its long problematic history with liberals and people of color, which is undeniably rooted in the culture created by J Edgar.

https://www.businessinsider.com/auschwitz-holocaust-museum-republicans-comparing-fbi-to-gestapo-are-offensive-2022-8

I have heard the FBI described as Biden's gestapo by at least a half dozen people in personal conversation.

[Pato del Muerto 52510]

Wasn’t Hoover a little non-binary?

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19103]

19 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Just for the record, for half a century and through eight administrations that have considered the issue:

"Since the 1970s, this Office has consistently advised that “the President and his immediate advisers are absolutely immune from testimonial compulsion by a Congressional committee” on matters related to their official duties. Memorandum for All Heads of Offices, Divisions, Bureaus and Boards of the Department of Justice, from John M. Harmon, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legal Counsel, Re: Executive Privilege at 5 (May 23, 1977) (“Harmon Memorandum”); see also Rehnquist Memorandum at 7 (“The President and his immediate advisers—that is, those who customarily meet with the President on a regular or frequent basis—should be deemed absolutely immune from testimonial compulsion by a congressional committee.”). Indeed, this Office has endorsed that legal principle on more than a dozen occasions, over the course of the last eight presidential administrations."

That's an excerpt from the most recent OLC opinion on the matter, but as it states, and it's accurate, that has been the position of every presidential administration since Nixon on the matter, note the Carter Administration memo from 1977, also similar memos during the Clinton and Obama Adminstrations.

And I would completely agree if this were something that were part of the Trump Administration's duties as part of the office of the President.  But activities related to being re-elected are NOT part of the office of the President.  There is a reason a lot of us are angry to find out how much of Trump's campaign was run with White House officials, etc...

The bullshit on Jan 6 was related to his Preseidential re-election, which had lost.  It has nothing to do with the office of the President.  Thus, I would think he better show the fuck up.

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19103]

So, posting this here since this is Dotard's response to the January 6th Committee.

https://cdn.nucleusfiles.com/27/27b7896f-01c5-4609-93c7-742e5cb22e96/830-am-final-january-6th-committee-letter14446.pdf?utm_medium=email_hf&utm_source=ncl__&utm_campaign=20221014___sa&utm_content=__6167&_nlid=fGCD7XzbpG&_nhids=8p9MFWNdEm

Quote

The same group of Radical Left Democrats who utilized their Majority position in Congress to create the fiction of Russia, Russia, Russia, Impeachment Hoax #1, Impeachment Hoax #2, the $48 Million Mueller Report (which ended in No Collusion!), Ukraine, Ukraine, Ukraine, the atrocious and illegal Spying on my Campaign, and so much more, are the people who created this Committee of highly partisan political Hacks and Thugs whose sole function is to destroy the lives of many hard-working American Patriots, whose records in life have been unblemished until this point of attempted ruination. The double standard of the Unselects between what has taken place on the “RIGHT,” and what has taken place with Radical Left, lawless groups such as Antifa, Black Lives Matter, and others, is startling and will never be acceptable, even to those who will be writing the history of what you have done to America.

This memo is being written to express our anger, disappointment, and complaint that with all of the hundreds of millions of dollars spent on what many consider to be a Charade and Witch Hunt, and despite strong and powerful requests, you have not spent even a short moment on examining the massive Election Fraud that took place during the 2020 Presidential Election, and have targeted only those who were, as concerned American Citizens, protesting the Fraud itself. Those who committed the Fraud, thereby having created the Crime of the Century, go unblemished and untouched, but those who fought the Crime have suffered a fate that was unthinkable just a short time ago. We have a two-tier system of Justice in the United States that cannot be allowed to continue. A Majority of people in our Country say that the Presidential Election of 2020 was determinatively dishonest, including the fact that many Legislatures were overridden by local and State politicians and judges on vital regulations and requirements, which is totally illegal and UNCONSTITUTIONAL. In February 2021, Time Magazine broke the story of the shadow campaign that was launched to rig the 2020 Presidential Election. The authors write:

“‘To the President, something felt amiss. ‘It was all very, very strange,’ Trump said on Dec. 2. ‘Within days after the election, we witnessed an orchestrated effort to anoint the winner, even while many key states were still being counted.’

In a way, Trump was right. There was a conspiracy unfolding behind the scenes…” You did not ask one question about any of this. Since 1888, no incumbent President has gained votes and lost reelection. I received many millions more votes in 2020 than I did in 2016, unheard of in our political History. When you win Ohio, Florida, and Iowa, which I did in a landslide, no President has lost the General Election since 1960. We swept all four bellwether States (Iowa, Florida, Ohio, and North Carolina) that have correctly predicted Election winners since 1896. I won 18 of the 19 bellwether counties, my coattails secured the Victories of 27 out of 27 “toss up” House races, and the Democrats did not flip a single State Legislature. Yet somehow Biden beat Obama with the Black population in select Swing State cities, but nowhere else. It is all not possible, or very likely, but should have been a major subject of your Committee’s work because it was the Election result that brought this record-breaking crowd to Washington, D.C. on January 6th.

A large percentage of American Citizens, including almost the entire Republican Party, feel that the Election was Rigged and Stolen (because they have seen the determinative evidence, some of which is attached to this letter).

No work was done by the Committee on Election Fraud. We, and a huge portion of the American people, simply asked that it be a part of your Committee’s work. It wasn’t.

In addition, the Unselect Committee has willfully ignored the fact that days before January 6, 2021, I recommended and authorized thousands of troops to be deployed to ensure that there was peace, safety, and security at the Capitol and throughout Washington, D.C. on January 6th because I knew, just based on instinct and what I was hearing, that the crowd coming to listen to my speech, and various others, would be a very big one, far bigger than anyone thought possible. As it turns out, it was indeed one of the largest crowds I have ever spoken before, a very wide swath stretching all the way back to the Washington Monument. The massive size of this crowd, and its meaning, has never been a subject of your Committee, nor has it been discussed by the Fake News Media that absolutely refuses to acknowledge, in any way, shape or form, the magnitude of what was taking place. In fact, for such a historic event, there are very few pictures that accurately show the event, or how many people were really there. Incredibly, it seems that pictures showing the size of the event were perhaps cancelled, scrubbed, deleted or, in any event, not available, but we still have some—as attached. The Department of Defense timeline shows that National Guard troops could have easily been present at the Capitol before January 6th and that I fully authorized this recommendation and request. Following my authorization, the Department of Defense was surprised to receive a wholesale refusal, in writing, from D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser and the Capitol Police, who do not report to me, but report to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. The law requires their authorization before any troop deployment could be utilized in Washington, D.C.

Why the failure to act or use this ready force? Had even a small percentage of National Guard or fencing been there, there would have been no problem, January 6th would have been just another date. I did my job long ahead of schedule. Some people call it good instinct, but the troops were ready to go. Nancy Pelosi and Muriel Bowser didn’t do their job, they didn’t like the look of soldiers, and sadly your Committee refuses to say anything about it, because if they did, it would be clear that I did everything correctly, and that is not what the Committee wants to see. You stated openly that Nancy Pelosi is off limits, there will be no discussions on this subject, yet she and the Mayor were responsible for this very bad decision not to bring in the troops. The troops were ready to go, and you refuse to even discuss this subject. Why?

Despite very poor television ratings, the Unselect Committee has perpetuated a Show Trial the likes of which this Country has never seen before. There is no Due Process, no Cross-Examination, no “real” Republican members, and no legitimacy since you do not talk about Election Fraud or not calling up the troops. It is a Witch Hunt of the highest level, a continuation of what has been going on for years. You have not gone after the people that created the Fraud, but rather great American Patriots who questioned it, as is their Constitutional right. These people have had their lives ruined as your Committee sits back and basks in the glow.

The people of this Country will not stand for unequal justice under the law, or Liberty and Justice for some. Election Day is coming. We demand answers on the Crime of the Century.

What an absolute fucking lunatic this guy is.  

[TwiceHorn 31495]

1 hour ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

And I would completely agree if this were something that were part of the Trump Administration's duties as part of the office of the President.  But activities related to being re-elected are NOT part of the office of the President.  There is a reason a lot of us are angry to find out how much of Trump's campaign was run with White House officials, etc...

The bullshit on Jan 6 was related to his Preseidential re-election, which had lost.  It has nothing to do with the office of the President.  Thus, I would think he better show the fuck up.

To be clear, I'm not stating an opinion of my own.  I am quoting from opinions of the Office of Legal Counsel.  Although that is an executive department and has a definite bias toward the executive, they tend not to make shit up out of the whole cloth and their legal analysis is usually pretty spot-on.  I'm just explaining that it is the "status quo" on these issues.  It's not my opinion, and legally, it's not the Word of God, either.  It's just kind of the "99% solution."

As far as the rest of it, I agree completely. 

If there is a "sidestep" or exception to executive privilege, this should be it.  But, in the "separation of powers" aspect of EP (as opposed to the confidentiality aspect, which applies whether it's Congress asking or someone else), they don't usually parse that finely.  The other thing is that there are plausible arguments that things like "the executive response to a riot" could be legitimate executive deliberations guarded by EP.  It certainly would be the case for the "BLM riots" or the response to a riotous strike, etc.

Other stuff, like conspiring to interrupt the electoral count, present false alternate electors, and propagate lies about election integrity, is more clearly outside the scope of executive duties.

In the criminal context, I think a lot of this is being hashed out behind closed doors, i.e. all those meetings between Trumpco officials, lawyers and DOJ occurring in DC relating to their testimony to the grand jury.

And, for better or worse, in this context (congressional subpoena), I don't think the courts are going to take it up to parse the issues due to the political question doctrine.

Edited October 14, 2022 by TwiceHorn

[Irwin F Fletcher 3550]

There's no way Fat Donny typed all of that out. It's a poor attempt to splice in his childish phrases.

[WhatTheBuck 28786]

1 hour ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Wasn’t Hoover a little non-binary?

I’m pretty sure the answer to that is no and that his reputation as a cross-dresser was unfounded. 

[DigglerontheHoof 21202]

1 hour ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

So, posting this here since this is Dotard's response to the January 6th Committee.

https://cdn.nucleusfiles.com/27/27b7896f-01c5-4609-93c7-742e5cb22e96/830-am-final-january-6th-committee-letter14446.pdf?utm_medium=email_hf&utm_source=ncl__&utm_campaign=20221014___sa&utm_content=__6167&_nlid=fGCD7XzbpG&_nhids=8p9MFWNdEm

What an absolute fucking lunatic this guy is.  

[Biff Tannen 45691]

2 hours ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

Seriously.  This sums it up.

[Sawbonz 27566]

He’ll refuse to show and they won’t ask DOJ to pursue 

[TwiceHorn 31495]

11 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

He’ll refuse to show and they won’t ask DOJ to pursue 

DOJ probably wouldn't even if they did, as the OLC "policy" outlined above pretty much binds them. It's basically an opportunity for him to voluntarily comply and go under oath like everyone else.  

He's never going under oath on any of this shit.  But if he gets indicted for the documents or for January 6 or both, his testimony, if disciplined, could be his best defense.  Quite a dilemma for his attorneys.

And, all of this has me imagining him sitting through his own criminal trial.  Even if he doesn't take the stand, that would be a delicious sight.  I don't think that fucker has even sat through a civil hearing, much less a trial.  And he'd have to sit there in silence while people talk shit on him.  Glorious.  Borderline erotic.

[brown water 3777]

30 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Borderline erotic.

Too soon 

[CTC2 2797]

3 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

To be clear, I'm not stating an opinion of my own.  I am quoting from opinions of the Office of Legal Counsel.  Although that is an executive department and has a definite bias toward the executive, they tend not to make shit up out of the whole cloth and their legal analysis is usually pretty spot-on.  I'm just explaining that it is the "status quo" on these issues.  It's not my opinion, and legally, it's not the Word of God, either.  It's just kind of the "99% solution."

As far as the rest of it, I agree completely. 

If there is a "sidestep" or exception to executive privilege, this should be it.  But, in the "separation of powers" aspect of EP (as opposed to the confidentiality aspect, which applies whether it's Congress asking or someone else), they don't usually parse that finely.  The other thing is that there are plausible arguments that things like "the executive response to a riot" could be legitimate executive deliberations guarded by EP.  It certainly would be the case for the "BLM riots" or the response to a riotous strike, etc.

Other stuff, like

Do your clients often fall asleep when you start to explain something to them?

[wildcat09 29355]

17 minutes ago, CTC2 said:

Do your clients often fall asleep when you start to explain something to them?

All clients do that.

[Doc Sam Beckett 5793]

Furk

Edited October 15, 2022 by Doc Sam Beckett
Cholas 4 life

[Satchel 6938]

3 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

I’m pretty sure the answer to that is no and that his reputation as a cross-dresser was unfounded. 

And Clyde Tolson really wasn’t  his life long roommate

[tx 3 putt 76988]

[Willfully Horn 8024]

I, too, think the J6 committee will make a unanimous criminal referral to DOJ.

Cheney indirectly weighs in on whether Trump should be prosecuted

Quote

While Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY) opted not to answer directly whether she believes Donald Trump should be prosecuted, the Wyoming Republican pointed to Judge David Carter’s opinion while speaking at the University of Notre Dame on Friday that the ex-president and his former attorney John Eastman likely committed crimes. 

The Wyoming Republican, a political scion who was removed from her leadership position in the House due to her criticisms of Trump, and was ousted in her primary by Trump-endorsed candidate Harriet Hageman, added that she believes the Jan. 6 select committee will be in unanimous agreement when the time comes to decide whether to make a criminal referral.

“Well, the committee has the responsibility to make decisions about criminal referrals, and I, of course, have my own views about that. I don't want to get ahead of the committee's discussions on it,” Cheney, the vice chair of the select committee, told the crowd. 

“I would point people to Judge Carter's opinion in which he said that it's more likely than not that Donald Trump and John Eastman violated at least two federal criminal statutes," she added. "And so, I, again, I don't want to get ahead of the committee, but I think you will see the committee's work in this regard done in a unanimous way. And I think there's no question about the answer.” 

In a 44-page ruling earlier this year, Carter stated that Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election “more likely than not constitute attempts to obstruct an official proceeding.” 
 

The Jan. 6 select committee voted during its hearing on Thursday to subpoena the former president. It remains unclear whether Trump will cooperate with the panel. 

When asked why the committee waited until its final hearing, Cheney cast doubt that it was the panel’s final hearing. 

“Well, it's not necessarily the last day of the hearings. But I think we have felt it's very important that the investigation be conducted in a way that is rigorous and disciplined and responsible, and that has meant collecting evidence from many, if not all, because, of course, some people took the Fifth or some people refuse to appear — but collecting evidence from all of those around the central figure in Jan. 6, before we issued a subpoena for him,” she said. “And so, that's what we've done.”

 

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/house/cheney-weighs-in-trump-prosecuted
 

 

Whether Garland will pull that trigger is too damn uncertain. The motherfucker took an oath to defend the Constitution, however. I hope he hasn’t put his finger in the air, and is weighing public sentiment. That thinking led us here, with Nixon, and also with Clinton.
 

The more powerful the lawbreaker, the more critical it is to indict and go to trial.

[TwiceHorn 31495]

A criminal referral is just pissing in the wind.  It won't make a shit to Garland or anyone else that matters.

DOJ is investigating the shit out of this and has the highest White House officials before grand juries even as we speak.

[tx 3 putt 76988]

 

[Willfully Horn 8024]

28 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

A criminal referral is just pissing in the wind.  It won't make a shit to Garland or anyone else that matters.

DOJ is investigating the shit out of this and has the highest White House officials before grand juries even as we speak.

The J6 committee’s criminal referral will carry more weight than wind borne piss. At the least, the piss stream will be direct to Garland’s face.

[Captainant 27680]

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

DOJ is investigating the shit out of this and has the highest White House officials before grand juries even as we speak.

What the actual fuck is there to investigate? Did trump steal government documents and imperil national security for his own personal gain?

Idk, better check the tape! Hope we don't get a big 12 officiating crew!

[TwiceHorn 31495]

6 hours ago, Captainant said:

What the actual fuck is there to investigate? Did trump steal government documents and imperil national security for his own personal gain?

Idk, better check the tape! Hope we don't get a big 12 officiating crew!

We're talking about January 6 here, not the documents.  Try to keep up.

Also, don't be fatuous. If there's nothing to investigate, why did you get your panties in a twist about the special master delay.

Edit to add.  A criminal referral would be pretty much purely symbolic.  Is it a good symbolism, I don't know.  But I think it would be an elevation of form over substance and I tend to dislike those.

Edited October 15, 2022 by TwiceHorn

[Satchel 6938]

When it comes to doing nothing about Trump’s in your face criminality, Garland’s options are very limited.

[tx 3 putt 76988]

 

[jimmyjazz 45971]

(I don't think that's Eric, I think it's Junior, unless they're turning into the same guy.)

You know, if he had any sense of political tactics, he wouldn't say that the Republicans are gonna steamroll the Democrats in November.  That is, unless he actually wants the Democrats to win.  The correct angle would be to say that it's too close for comfort and the evil libs will prevail unless all the right-thinking Americans turn out and vote.

But, he's a dimwit.  He's spiking the football at the 10 yard line.

[mchookem 16336]

[Gil Bang 25964]

35 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

(I don't think that's Eric, I think it's Junior, unless they're turning into the same guy.)

You know, if he had any sense of political tactics, he wouldn't say that the Republicans are gonna steamroll the Democrats in November.  That is, unless he actually wants the Democrats to win.  The correct angle would be to say that it's too close for comfort and the evil libs will prevail unless all the right-thinking Americans turn out and vote.

But, he's a dimwit.  He's spiking the football at the 10 yard line.

It's Eric.

[Biff Tannen 45691]

That whole family needs to vanish. 

[TheStoicPaisano 9922]

37 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

That whole family needs to vanish. 

Way too early and I read that as ‘wash’.

¿porque no los dos?

[HenryJames 66082]

 

[Eskimohorn 5635]

 

Huh? Why would the SS be in contact with Oath Keepers?

[Pato del Muerto 52510]

1 minute ago, Eskimohorn said:

Huh? Why would the SS be in contact with Oath Keepers?

Because when you have a conspiracy, conspirators will conspire with one another. 

[TwiceHorn 31495]

On the subject of a criminal referral from the Committee, I suppose it does serve one purpose.  The Committee can clearly state the position that no one is above the law and this situation demands accountability at the highest levels or emboldens others to challenge the foundations of our democracy again.

And thus can be something of a test bed for the "civil unrest" reaction.

I think the MAL search warrant and related proceedings have been a nice similar test bed.

I don't think that the potential for civil unrest should foreclose a Trump indictment for 1/6, at all, but I think it is a valid concern, and the corollary concern of how does it galvanize the idiot base.

The MAL saga is shaping up really nicely in that the facts keep being revealed and demonstrate that this is most certainly not a dispute over an "overdue library book."  Unfortunately, criminal proceedings post-indictment generally don't permit such revelations until the trial.  Trump's inevitable strategy of making dilatory pre-trial motions probably would, though.

[Biff Tannen 45691]

Someone explain to me how the Secret Service is not a full on threat to national security?

[Neonmoon 38129]

1 hour ago, Eskimohorn said:

Huh? Why would the SS be in contact with Oath Keepers?

Some of those that work forces 

are the same that burn crosses 

[Gap03 3308]

1 hour ago, Neonmoon said:

Some of those that work forces 

are the same that burn crosses 

I guess we're finding out that SS agents, at the end of the day, are just cops, and as we know, ACAB. 

[Longhorn_Fan68 33874]

1 hour ago, Biff Tannen said:

Someone explain to me how the Secret Service is not a full on threat to national security?

you're not gonna get any takers because that's like trying to argue that Ted Cruz isn't a piece of shit. 

[tx 3 putt 76988]

1 hour ago, Biff Tannen said:

Someone explain to me how the Secret Service is not a full on threat to national security?

It needs to be disbanded