Yep.so maybe she is headed for the stern approach. Anyway fun to discuss
New Jan 6 surprise hearing (June 28)
- Thread starter tlwwake
- Start date
Yep.so maybe she is headed for the stern approach. Anyway fun to discuss
"I don't ****ing care that they have weapons. They're not here to hurt me. Take the ****ing mags away. Let my people in. They can march to the Capitol from here.”
I still have doubts that you are a real anarchist, even your take here isn't very anarchy oriented. Giving illegal orders is fine, acting on them that would be a bridge too far though huh?
Keep in mind too that the Justice Department doesn't need a referral from the Select Committee to investigate and/or charge Trump for his role on January 6. It would definitely be nice but it isn't needed.
I'm not convinced that formal charges are even helpful. Just getting the story out should be sufficient. Trump can live with the shame of the truth.
Seems that’s already been done. Again and again and again 🤣
Yes, acting on illegal orders is a bridge too far. Did they act on your assumed illegal order, did they "take the mags away"? Was that an "illegal" order or was it heated narcissitic bullshit from Trump, something for which he is well known? I ask that honestly, I do not know the answer.
It was at a minimum reckless and irresponsible. I know, par for the course. Yet another example of how his narcissism undermined his own best interests.
Oh I’m sure there will be. Just like every other time. 🤣
It is an important distinction, though. Insisting it was an official and illegal order, as you have been trying to do, is something far different from a whacked out Donald Trump flailing about like we see @Syskatine do so often. I would not be surprised to learn that the Sec Serv guys had seen that part of Donald Trump many times in the past, and knew it was not anything they needed to stress over. But I agree it makes for good tv for those of you whose hatred of the man knows no limits.
Let me put it in a little more accurate way. A dictator is a dictator only when people obey his commands. He isn't a dictator, he can't dictate, if no one pays him any attention, especially those whom he expects to follow him blindly and use force when necessary to see his dictates are carried out. Absent obedience he is nothing more than a crank.
Rub it in -- I MISSED THAT ONE!! The first time in months I've missed one!
How much do you think you miss by getting one side of the story?
Hilarious people in this thread who continue to think this is a hearing.
That's the second half of why I am here. Please do educate me. I just ask for credible sources which I know can be a struggle.
Hilarious people in this thread who think a Jim Jordan et al moves the needle toward truthsaying and fact-finding lol
Carry on
In your opinion who in the Democrat Party moves the needle toward truthsaying and fact finding?
The burden seems much higher for me.
You don’t bother with credible sources on your end.
The GOP would be wise to appoint Dems of their choice to committees/hearings when they retake the House next November.
Lol. Left leaning 538 gives Dems a 13% chance of retaining the House.
You should post those polls for us.
What did she witness? Her testimony regarding Trump's actions were all second-hand retelling of what she had supposedly been told. Her most damning direct testimony was 'overheard' while stood away some distance not actually part of the conversation and thus not capable of being scrutinized for context or accuracy. Some eyewitness, or is it earwitness in this case?
Not to mention the principals she's citing have either outright denied her story, or weren't where she claimed they were in the first place.
This is what happens when a hearing isn't actually a hearing.
That's ok, there's a ton of Obama/Hillary/Biden stuff to dredge up the next several years.
It's a long list. Do you have that much time? Might be easier to say what she did not eye witness. Any item that starts with "I heard [insert name] say...." would be something she witnessed. He'll even "I was told my so and so that such and such" is her relating a conversation she had. But go ahead and tell us how "anonymous sources say the log file doesn't show so and so was in the building at the time" is more credible.
you aren’t even paying attention
It’s quite clear Trump is still 💯 rent-free…in his voters’ minds. The amount of defensiveness for an old-news/has-been candidate lately.
eerie…
carry on
eerie…
carry on
You won’t suffer any permanent damage by getting non lib news.
We won’t tell on you.
Meadows is calling her a liar. The lawyer (I forget his name) says he wrote the note she testified was her handwriting. The SS agents in the car have repotedly denied what she claimed happened ever happened. Under oath? Not yet, but they say they will. Will the committee call them? I guess we’ll find out.
Exactly, they are saying none of this under oath. Meadows isn't under oath. In fact, he has refused to sit down under oath and answer questions from the Select Committee. Today, Cheney stated that the Committee welcomed any further testimony from the Secret Service under oath. She also noted that Engel has already testified to the Committee along with Tony Ornato and that she remains absolutely confident in Hutchinson's testimony. That should tell you something.
On top of all that, Pat Cipollone has been subpoenaed by the Committee to testify under oath. Do you think he will? Do you think he should?
I find it interesting Dan that your latest attempt to defend Trump in all of this is to argue that it doesn't matter what he says or does, what matters is whether or not those around him listen to his orders and obey. Does this mean, therefore, that you believe those around him should testify under oath to this Committee? Shouldn't Meadows testify? And Cipollone? According to your logic, they should and to not do so is very dangerous.
Currently, we are seeing testimony under oath to this Committee from those who didn't want to follow Trump blindly. And what is happening? They are being attacked and degraded by the Trump cult.
Also, the Committee is requesting testimony under oath from others in Trump's circle. Again, according to your logic, they should testify under oath as to their actions because what they did matters.
Did she actually say anything?
She was very careful to cite the info second hand so as not to perjure herself.
I heard from someone that you are a tranny lot lizard at the Loves in Italy, Texas. Since I heard it from someone, it must be true.
She said a lot. Surprised you haven't bothered to watch or read the transcript. You seem to have very strong opinions about this whole thing. Here is a sample of interesting things she said:
- "As Mr. Giuliani and I were walking to his vehicles that evening, he looked at me and said something to the effect of, Cass, are you excited for the 6th? It's going to be a great day. I remember looking at him saying, Rudy, could you explain what's happening on the 6th? He had responded something to the effect of, we're going to the Capitol. It's going to be great. The President's going to be there. He's going to look powerful. He's — he's going to be with the members. He's going to be with the Senators. Talk to the chief about it, talk to the chief about it. He knows about it."
- "I remember leaning against the doorway and saying, I just had an interesting conversation with Rudy, Mark. It sounds like we're going to go to the Capitol. He didn't look up from his phone and said something to the effect of, there's a lot going on, Cass, but I don't know. Things might get real, real bad on January 6th."
- "I recall hearing the word Oath Keeper and hearing the word Proud Boys closer to the planning of the January 6th rally when Mr. Giuliani would be around."
- "I remember Mr. Ornato had talked to him about intelligence reports. I just remember Mr. Ornato coming in and saying that we had intel reports saying that there could potentially be violence on the 6th."
- "I recall Tony and I having a conversation with Mark probably around 10 a.m., 10:15 a.m. where I remember Tony mentioning knives, guns in the form of pistols and rifles, bear spray, body armor, spears, and flagpoles. Spears were one item, flagpoles were one item. But then Tony had related to me something to the effect of and these effing people are fastening spears onto the ends of flagpoles."
- "I was in the vicinity of a conversation where I overheard the President say something to the effect of, you know, I - - I don't effing care that they have weapons. They're not here to hurt me. Take that effing mags away. Let my people in. They can march to the Capitol from here. Let the people in. Take the effing mags away."
- "that's what Tony had been trying to relay to him that morning. You know, it's not the issues that we encounter on the campaign. We have enough space, Sir. They don't want to come in right now. They — they have weapons that they don't want confiscated by the Secret Service. And they're fine on the mall. They can see you on the mall and they're — they want to march straight to the Capitol from the mall."
- "Mr. Cipollone said something to the effect of please make sure we don't go up to the Capitol, Cassidy. Keep in touch with me. We're going to get charged with every crime imaginable if we make that movement happen."
- "Having a private conversation with Pat late in the afternoon of the 3rd or 4th that Pat was concerned it would look like we were obstructing justice or obstructing the Electoral College count. And I apologize for probably not being so very clear with my legal terms here, but that it would look like we were obstructing what was happening on Capitol Hill. And he was also worried that it would look like we were inciting a riot or encouraging a riot to erupt on the Capitol — at the Capitol."
- "Mr. Meadows had a conversation with me where he wanted me to work with Secret Service on a movement from the White House to the Willard Hotel so he could attend the meeting or meetings with Mr. Giuliani and his associates in the war room."
- "I remember Pat saying to him something to the effect of, the rioters have gotten to the Capitol, Mark. We need to go down and see the President now. And Mark looked up at him and said, he doesn't want to do anything, Pat."
- "I remember Pat saying something to the effect of, Mark, we need to do something more. They're literally calling for the vice president to be f'ing hung. And Mark had responded something to the effect of, you heard him, Pat. He thinks Mike deserves it."
- "As a staffer that worked to always represent the administration to the best of my ability and to showcase the good things that he had done for the country, I remember feeling frustrated and disappointed, and really it felt personal. I — I was really sad. As an American, I was disgusted. It was unpatriotic."
Lots more for your reading pleasure. Have fun!
