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

Mdhorn

Mdhorn 5949

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

Maybe I was just hoping for more, but I don't think they did a very good job of demonstrating a strong link between Trump and the militias, but as they say about chicken salad...

Think this is also about people hearing from regular former  true believers that perhaps trump followers may give more credence to rather than hearing from government officials and libs.

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

TexasEd 8066

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, NAVY said:

“President Trump is a 76 year old man, he is not an impressionable child…” - Liz Cheney

She also said that no "rational or sane" person (woman, man, camera, tv) could come to a different conclusion.

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

Mdhorn 5949

Posted
Posted
Just now, Chad Fuck said:

Because the President gave her one.  That simple. 

It can’t be that easy though. GOP was telling us Obama was going to be giving rappers access to the White House. Now we find out he could have given rappers high government security clearances. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TXSG8R

TXSG8R 3362

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Mdhorn said:

How the fuck did the kraken have a security clearance? 

The president of the United States is the top classification authority. They can classify/declassify anything they want, and approve clearance for any person they choose. 

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

Mdhorn 5949

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, immamac said:

If the DOJ doesn't indict after all this stuff then America is fucked and the people who can do something about it are choosing not to do anything about it.

DOJ should prosecute under the fullest extent of the law and let the Supreme Court get exposed, don't just refuse because you know that the SC will toss it. 

Saying the same thing on msnbc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28779

Posted
Posted
23 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

Maybe I was just hoping for more, but I don't think they did a very good job of demonstrating a strong link between Trump and the militias, but as they say about chicken salad...

It did come out in an earlier hearing that Trump got mad that a bunch of armed people were being kept out of his Jan. 6 rally. He said, “They’re not going to hurt me!” He wanted a bigger crowd. So when he ordered everyone to fight and to march to the Capitol, he knew there were a large number of his armed followers going down there. 

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

TexasEd 8066

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, Mdhorn said:

It can’t be that easy though. GOP was telling us Obama was going to be giving rappers access to the White House. Now we find out he could have given rappers high government security clearances. 

Kanye West goes on a wild, rambling Oval Office tirade

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

Beau Vine 54218

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

It did come out in an earlier hearing that Trump got mad that a bunch of armed people were being kept out of his Jan. 6 rally. He said, “They’re not going to hurt me!” He wanted a bigger crowd. So when he ordered everyone to fight and to march to the Capitol, he knew there were a large number of his armed followers going down there. 

That to me is the biggest bombshell that the committee has dropped.  

Nothing on that level today, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28779

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, Mdhorn said:

How the fuck did the kraken have a security clearance? 

She actually didn’t. As Cipollone said, the President can tell her she has one but no one is going to do anything about it. There’s paperwork and other steps involved. 

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

Mdhorn 5949

Posted
Posted (edited)

Trump also left the march to the capitol portion out of his written draft and added it during the speech, even though pillow guy and others knew it was coming.  The fear was that it would mobilize others to shut it down.  

If Trump has any evidence of fraud, now might be the time to come out with it.  At this point, he can't continue beating that drum without proof.  He built a whole case without any evidence, creating a riot where lives were lost.  He's destabilizing elections going forward and raising campaign money on the lie, but surely his followers would require something?  Are they that damn brain dead that they blindly follow a fat fuck that doesn't even lead--just points to a cliff. 

Edited by Mdhorn
  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
UpperWestside

UpperWestside 6163

Posted
Posted
27 minutes ago, immamac said:

If the DOJ doesn't indict after all this stuff then America is fucked and the people who can do something about it are choosing not to do anything about it.

DOJ should prosecute under the fullest extent of the law and let the Supreme Court get exposed, don't just refuse because you know that the SC will toss it. 

The excuse that is routinely given is we all need to come together as a country. In this case that doesn’t fly, at all. Every single person involved needs the book thrown at them. 
 

As far as the Supreme Court, we’ll, they are a lost cause. Justices lie under oath with no consequences. The Democrats need to find a firebrand that’ll go after those justices.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Red Five

Red Five 40857

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Mdhorn said:

He's destabilizing elections going forward and raising campaign money on the lie, but surely his followers would require something?  Are they that damn brain dead that they blindly follow a fat fuck that doesn't even lead--just points to a cliff.

hahahaha

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mdhorn

Mdhorn 5949

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, UpperWestside said:

The excuse that is routinely given is we all need to come together as a country. In this case that doesn’t fly, at all. Every single person involved needs the book thrown at them. 
 

As far as the Supreme Court, we’ll, they are a lost cause. Justices lie under oath with no consequences. The Democrats need to find a firebrand that’ll go after those justices.

and Mitch, who appointed them.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
UpperWestside

UpperWestside 6163

Posted
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Mdhorn said:

Trump also left the march to the capitol portion out of his written draft and added it during the speech, even though pillow guy and others knew it was coming.  The fear was that it would mobilize others to shut it down.  

If Trump has any evidence of fraud, now might be the time to come out with it.  At this point, he can't continue beating that drum without proof.  He built a whole case without any evidence, creating a riot where lives were lost.  He's destabilizing elections going forward and raising campaign money on the lie, but surely his followers would require something?  Are they that damn brain dead that they blindly follow a fat fuck that doesn't even lead--just points to a cliff. 

It’s a cult. Had two guests at work yesterday that said it pretty distinctly. Everyone here knows it is a cult, but the people in it don’t know until it is too late.

Edited by UpperWestside
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Francisco 2.0

Francisco 2.0 32389

Posted
Posted
54 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

I normally go down to the nearby convenience store every morning and get a big Diet Dr Pepper.  Today, though, when I pushed the DDP fountain lever, nothing but clear liquid came out, and I had to settle for Diet Coke.  So this hits close to home. 

 

It's piss.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
UpperWestside

UpperWestside 6163

Posted
Posted
Just now, Mdhorn said:

and Mitch, who appointed them.

Go after him too. He shares responsibility for the destabilization of our government. He put it right there in the storefront window by lying to a camera. I would have those justices removed and replaced and who cares what a single cult member thinks. It is going to take some drastic action that President Biden is not interested in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bozo_Casanova

Bozo_Casanova 26451

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Mdhorn said:

If Trump has any evidence of fraud, now might be the time to come out with it.  At this point, he can't continue beating that drum without proof.  He built a whole case without any evidence, creating a riot where lives were lost.  He's destabilizing elections going forward and raising campaign money on the lie, but surely his followers would require something?  Are they that damn brain dead that they blindly follow a fat fuck that doesn't even lead--just points to a cliff. 

It’s not blind. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TXSG8R

TXSG8R 3362

Posted
Posted

For the law dogs: do criminal statues like witness tampering apply to congressional hearing?  I know Cheney said they referred it to the DoJ, but I thought these hearings had different (non criminal) rules?  Is there a tampering with a congressional witness statue or rule as well?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
troph

troph 24788

Posted
Posted
46 minutes ago, immamac said:

If the DOJ doesn't indict after all this stuff then America is fucked and the people who can do something about it are choosing not to do anything about it.

DOJ should prosecute under the fullest extent of the law and let the Supreme Court get exposed, don't just refuse because you know that the SC will toss it. 

that would be something else. the eye of that needle for a reversal and acquittal of a jury verdict in a criminal case is pretty small.  not saying they won't do it, and not saying the trump strategy won't be to create opportunities for that reversible error but holy wow if that happened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Francisco 2.0

Francisco 2.0 32389

Posted
Posted

https://www.axios.com/2022/07/12/house-republicans-jan6-white-house?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=editorial&utm_content=politics-j6visitorlogs

 

Quote

Ten Republican members of Congress attended a Dec. 21 White House meeting focused on efforts to pressure former Vice President Mike Pence to help overturn the 2020 election, according to the Jan. 6 committee.

Why it matters: The revelation underscores how deep the involvement of some lawmakers were in former President Trump's schemes to overturn the election even after the electoral college met to affirm President Biden's victory.

 

Quote

Driving the news: Rep. Stephanie Murphy (D-Fla.) said at a hearing on Tuesday that White House visitor logs reveal 10 members were physically in attendance:

Rep. Brian Babin (R-Texas)

Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.)

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.)

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas)

Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.)

Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.)

Rep. Jody Hice (R-Ga.)

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio)

Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.)

Now-Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.)

 

Quote

Former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson told the panel in closed-door testimony that members "felt that [Pence] had the authority to ... [send] the electors back to the States," according to a court filing from April.

Hutchinson noted that "they dialed in a few Members over the course of that meeting."

She mentioned two members – Reps. Mo Brooks (R-Ga.) and Debbie Lesko (R-Ariz.) – who were not in the visitor logs cited by Murphy.

 

Quote

The committee unveiled multiple pieces of new evidence about the planning of the meeting:

A note on Trump's private schedule for the day about a 2:00 pm "private meeting with Republican members of Congress" in the Oval Office.

Pence, Chief of Staff Mark Meadows and Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani were all in attendance, according to Murphy.

Brooks said in an email setting up the meeting, with the subject line "White House meeting Dec. 21 regarding Jan. 6," in which he said he hadn't recruited other lawmakers into the "Jan. 6 effort" because "only citizens can exert the necessary influence on Senators and Congressmen."

What they're saying: Murphy tied the meeting to the testimony of former acting Deputy Attorney General Richard Donohue at a previous hearing.

Donohue said that Trump told him to have the Justice Department "just say the election was corrupt and leave the rest to me and the Republican congressmen."

She also noted that the committee has played testimony indicating that several of the members in the meeting later requested pardons after Jan. 6.

 

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

TexArcher 37774

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
54 minutes ago, immamac said:

DOJ should prosecute under the fullest extent of the law and let the Supreme Court get exposed, don't just refuse because you know that the SC will toss it. 

Agreed.  

I'm on record as saying I doubt anyone significant sees the inside of a jail cell over this.  They'll stall it in the courts until President DeSantis or Trump pardons everyone.

Do it anyway.  History needs to show that someone tried to stop these people.

  • Hook 'Em 8
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Hot Dog Buffet

The Hot Dog Buffet 1291

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, troph said:

that would be something else. the eye of that needle for a reversal and acquittal of a jury verdict in a criminal case is pretty small.  not saying they won't do it, and not saying the trump strategy won't be to create opportunities for that reversible error but holy wow if that happened.

I think a Trump conviction would be way too much to ask for, but he should face trial, anyway. It's going to be all but impossible to get a jury of 12 people who didn't vote for Trump, and nobody who voted for him is going to be a fair juror.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
yoladu

yoladu 4094

Posted
Posted (edited)
Quote

Driving the news: Rep. Stephanie Murphy (D-Fla.) said at a hearing on Tuesday that White House visitor logs reveal 10 members were physically in attendance:

Rep. Brian Babin (R-Texas)

Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.)

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.)

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas)

Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.)

Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.)

Rep. Jody Hice (R-Ga.)

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio)

Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.)

Now-Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.)

of these 10 attendees, who requested pardons in the days following Jan 6th?

they know what they did.

 

 

Edited by yoladu
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mdhorn

Mdhorn 5949

Posted
Posted

It's awesome that Liz stated along the lines: They wanted to believe in him, they put their faith and their trust in Donald Trump.  They wanted to fight for him, wanted to fight for their country and he deceived them."  Dayum.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mdhorn

Mdhorn 5949

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, The Hot Dog Buffet said:

I think a Trump conviction would be way too much to ask for, but he should face trial, anyway. It's going to be all but impossible to get a jury of 12 people who didn't vote for Trump, and nobody who voted for him is going to be a fair juror.

Not if they try him in DC, where the crime occurred.

Edited by Mdhorn
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31457

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Mdhorn said:

Trump also left the march to the capitol portion out of his written draft and added it during the speech, even though pillow guy and others knew it was coming.  The fear was that it would mobilize others to shut it down.  

If Trump has any evidence of fraud, now might be the time to come out with it.  At this point, he can't continue beating that drum without proof.  He built a whole case without any evidence, creating a riot where lives were lost.  He's destabilizing elections going forward and raising campaign money on the lie, but surely his followers would require something?  Are they that damn brain dead that they blindly follow a fat fuck that doesn't even lead--just points to a cliff. 

Do you even 2000 Mules bro?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31457

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, TXSG8R said:

For the law dogs: do criminal statues like witness tampering apply to congressional hearing?  I know Cheney said they referred it to the DoJ, but I thought these hearings had different (non criminal) rules?  Is there a tampering with a congressional witness statue or rule as well?

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1505

Quote

Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication influences, obstructs, or impedes or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede the due and proper administration of the law under which any pending proceeding is being had before any department or agency of the United States, or the due and proper exercise of the power of inquiry under which any inquiry or investigation is being had by either House, or any committee of either House or any joint committee of the Congress—

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
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...