Re: 1/6 Hearings

51
Trump was desperate, only about three weeks were left in his term of office. Barr had already said that DOJ investigated and found no fraud in the election. Multiple state and federal courts found no fraud in all the election challenges by Trump's campaign. If Rosen said it was fraud, the public and the media would have demanded evidence or Rosen would have been seen as just another political hack spouting off like the Bloviator in Chief. And there would have been baying for Rosen's resignation or impeachment.

Yelling fraud by Trump or his sketchy lawyers or Republicans in Congress didn't make it true. They had no evidence.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: 1/6 Hearings

52
well of course there was fraud, and the republicans damn well knew it, because they were the ones doing it. foreign money, multiple types of voter suppression... all by the very people claiming there was fraud.
never submit! (click "submit" button now.)

Re: 1/6 Hearings

53
Beau unpacks the propaganda ploy, discussing that all the orange spirochete needed was for the DOJ to say it was corrupt. Not prove, just say:




I really can't guess beyond "corruption" why that shit head is not in jail.

CDFingers
Image
Image
.
I've always wondered if you shouldn't feel less concern about the Deep Unreal.
The very first word is "How do you do?" The last "Go home, your mama's calling you."

Re: 1/6 Hearings

55
lurker wrote: Sat Jul 31, 2021 9:24 am reps lately have never been very good about requiring evidence to back up their positions, in fact they're quite good at ignoring it. yes, dems too, but that's gist for another thread.
If Rosen had said "fraud", it would have been red meat for the Trump base and right wing media. Yes it would have also been red meat for the "never Trumpers" both Democrats and Republicans. And now Rosen would have found himself in the same situation as Ole Rudy, his law license suspended.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: 1/6 Hearings

57
Butt to the MAGA GOP voters it is just BOHICA time and time again. They don’t ever learn from it, because they keep supporting the same beliefs and screwball ideas that work against themselves.
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.-Huxley
"We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both." ~ Louis Brandeis,

Re: 1/6 Hearings

58
Add to the hearings
'Seditious conspiracy': Trump critics stunned after Mark Meadows mentions 'cabinet' meetings at Bedminster

An appearance on Friday night on Newsmax by Donald Trump's last White House chief of staff, Mark Meadows, set off a flurry of angry comments by critics of the former president after Meadows said they are holding "cabinet" meetings at the Trump National Golf Club.

Repeating "cabinet members" multiple times while speaking with Newsmax host Steve Cortes, Meadows added, "Well, we met with several of our cabinet members tonight, we actually had a follow-up member, meeting with some of our cabinet members, and as we were looking at that, we were looking at what does come next. I'm not authorized to speak on behalf of the president, but I can tell you this Steve, we wouldn't be meeting tonight if we weren't making plans to move forward in a real way, with president Trump at the head of that ticket."

Twitter commenters were quick to question what they are discussing with others wondering if they realize the Trump administration was ousted in last November's presidential election.

You can see some comments below:

@RonFilipkowski Cabinet? Aren't they just a group of guys now?
— Jim'sJunkBox (@Jim'sJunkBox) 1627698738.0
@RonFilipkowski He lost. He is not going to be reinstated. The grift continues. (seriously is Mark being blackmailed)
— Survivingnsweatpants (@Survivingnsweatpants) 1627701536.0
@RonFilipkowski @BaddCompani Does this mean there is a shadow government? @LeaderMcConnell should train on how to r… https://t.co/JZC6mZugdW
— Expand voting access to all citizens! (@Expand voting access to all citizens!) 1627693563.0
@RonFilipkowski They think they have a shadow government?
— HannahBC (@HannahBC) 1627685402.0
@RonFilipkowski What the actual fuck is he talking about?
— seanie (@seanie) 1627685013.0
@RonFilipkowski Was @GOPLeader there? "The president bears responsibility for Wednesday's attack on Congress by mo… https://t.co/HoEeaAXkfa
— One_of_The_Survivors (@One_of_The_Survivors) 1627705615.0
@RonFilipkowski Seditious conspiracy
— Sandi Bachom (@Sandi Bachom) 1627691096.0
@RonFilipkowski And the scary thing is, the Faux News, OANN and Newsmax’s of this world nod and smile while they s… https://t.co/QlGIWz1maW
— Frankie 🏴‍☠️ (@Frankie 🏴‍☠️) 1627736983.0
@MTPSU1987 @HunterJCullen @RonFilipkowski Yes. Take this as evidence of criminal intent ⚖️
🇺🇸 ʑıɬıŋɧą 🇵🇹 (@🇺🇸 ʑıɬıŋɧą 🇵🇹) 1627721212.0
@RonFilipkowski This is not right, this is scary that they're even talking like this.
— LawlessIsBack🌊✌️🇺🇲 (@LawlessIsBack🌊✌️🇺🇲) 1627702642.0
@RonFilipkowski 'Our Cabinet members' implies a government-in-exile. They should all face indictment for sedition.
— Tom Shafer (@Tom Shafer) 1627688413.0
@RonFilipkowski This is insane. Do we even have laws that prevent this situation?
— Marla Tauscher (@Marla Tauscher) 1627692657.0
@RonFilipkowski I'm telling you, he's set up a shadow government. This is sedition... Damn...Is the @FBI or the… https://t.co/3HiEXiFP85
— No Justice, No Peace! 💉💉 (@No Justice, No Peace! 💉💉) 1627699713.0
https://www.rawstory.com/mark-meadows-2654316776/

Sedition and Treason, get a lot of rope.
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.-Huxley
"We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both." ~ Louis Brandeis,

Re: 1/6 Hearings

60
How is he not cuffed and stuffed? Does he have kompromat on that many congresscritters?

CDFingers
Image
Image
.
I've always wondered if you shouldn't feel less concern about the Deep Unreal.
The very first word is "How do you do?" The last "Go home, your mama's calling you."

Re: 1/6 Hearings

61
CDFingers wrote: Sat Jul 31, 2021 8:32 pm How is he not cuffed and stuffed? Does he have kompromat on that many congresscritters?

CDFingers
he told us at the beginning that he could murder someone in plain sight and get away with it. i wonder if he's actually literally done it? was that a smug confession, or just a brag?
never submit! (click "submit" button now.)

Re: 1/6 Hearings

62
lurker wrote: Sat Jul 31, 2021 8:38 pm
CDFingers wrote: Sat Jul 31, 2021 8:32 pm How is he not cuffed and stuffed? Does he have kompromat on that many congresscritters?

CDFingers
he told us at the beginning that he could murder someone in plain sight and get away with it. i wonder if he's actually literally done it? was that a smug confession, or just a brag?
Bluff.
The coward faints at the sight of blood. When he thought there was the TINIEST threat during the 2016 campaign he instantly dove for the deck. Even before he ran, 1
when he went to CPAC, he'd have 6 security guards when governors of states would have just one, usually a state trooper.
For all his bullying he's scared of his own shadow, I'll bet when he was in Walter Reed he was BEGGING the doctors to please, please, PLEASE save his worthless, useless life.
I don't think even the ReThuglican cowards willing to tongue his butthole are as terrified of everything in life as The Coward Traitor.
"The upper class: keeps all of the money, pays none of the taxes. The middle class: pays all of the taxes, does all of the work. The poor are there...just to scare the shit out of the middle class."--George Carlin

Re: 1/6 Hearings

63
i think the other rep players in this game think that they can bask in his shadow while positioning themselves to succeed him when he dies or is committed for senility. such a battle would ensue, it would make great fiction. watch your backs, everyone.
never submit! (click "submit" button now.)

Re: 1/6 Hearings

64
Rep. Adam Kinzinger on Sunday indicated the select House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol would use its subpoena power to compel “a lot of people” to testify.

“I would expect to see a significant amount of subpoenas,” the Illinois Republican said on ABC’s “This Week.”

“It’s going to be a thorough investigation for sure,” he added.

Kinzinger, who along with Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) is serving on the committee to the frustration of many in their own party, wouldn't go into further details on who the panel could subpoena, but said, “We want to do this expeditiously. … What led up to it, what really happened and what happened in the aftermath.”

On the potential for subpoenaing prominent Republicans including former President Donald Trump and those who spoke to him on Jan. 6, such as House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy and Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), Kinzinger said: “I would support subpoenas to anyone that can shed light on that. If that’s the leader, that’s the leader.”

“I want to know what the president was doing every moment that day. … I want to know if the National Guard took five or six hours to get to Capitol Hill. Did the president make calls? If he didn’t, why?” Kinzinger said.

The congressman largely deferred on what would happen in the event a subpoena is rejected, saying it would likely be a matter for the committee lawyers.

“If anybody is scared of this investigation, I ask you, what are you afraid of? If you think it wasn’t a big deal, you should allow this to go forward,” Kinzinger said. “We may not have to talk to Donald Trump. … If he has unique information that’s one thing. There’s a lot of people around him that know something.”
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/08/0 ... n-6-501967
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: 1/6 Hearings

65
It’s more interesting to consider why so many non-Trumpy Republican partisans and conservative intellectuals are willing to expend so much effort minimizing and contextualizing January 6. You might expect them to welcome the opportunity to draw a clean break, a sharp dividing line. Here, at last, is the toad too ugly to swallow; here is the long-awaited chance to shove Trump into the past and redirect their party to the post-Trump future.

I think I can see four reasons why this is not happening.

The first is the familiar human instinct to save face. You invest five years dismissing Trump as a vulgar but ultimately harmless buffoon. Then comes the definitive proof that you were wrong. Are you going to admit it? Of course not. You will use the mighty brain God gave you to explain why you were actually right all along, only in a slightly more complicated way than you were right before.

A second reason is that non-Trumpy conservatives share with Trump conservatives an intense preoccupation with the hypocrisies and double standards of their political opponents. If anything, non-Trumpy conservatives feel even more anger against those opponents than Trump conservatives do. Affirmatively pro-Trump conservatives feel right at home in the Trump coalition. For non-Trump conservatives, their situation is much less comfortable. Disregarding Trump himself as unimportant and irrelevant—while focusing all their attention on irksome things done by anybody other than Trump—becomes an indispensable psychological coping mechanism that leads them to reinterpret January 6 not as a story about Trump but as a story about why liberals did not say more in 2020 about urban disorders or some other irritant of the moment.

Reason three: Non-Trump conservatives have begun to absorb that Trump is not in fact receding into the past. Trump’s grip on the Republican Party remains tight. Unless he’s dead or otherwise unable by then, he’s the likeliest 2024 nominee. And even if he somehow is debarred from running, noisy loyalty to Trump will be a precondition for anyone who wants to succeed him. Non-Trump conservatives can privately allow that January 6 was a blemish on Trump’s record, but a defense of the record itself is the one and only meaningful test of loyalty in today’s GOP, more meaningful than being anti–abortion rights or pro-guns, to say nothing of the economic or fiscal principles that the party junked long ago.

Finally, while non-Trump conservatives may disapprove of the crude and excessive violence deployed on January 6, they do not disapprove of the post-democratic path being explored by the modern right. The yearning for a Caesar to repress the woke mob is expressed more and more explicitly, hence the appeal to even the highest-toned of today’s conservative intellectuals of Hungary’s Viktor Orbán, Poland’s Law and Justice party, and Russia’s Vladimir Putin. Some even have favorable words for some of the fascists of the 1930s, such as Portugal’s António Salazar.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi ... rs/619634/

I'm guessing he'll be in jail or legally bushwacked so he won't be the 2024 nom. Personally I'm going to tie R's loyal to him, tie them to him. Starting with my guy, Doug LaMalfa R (CA-1).

CDFingers
Image
Image
.
I've always wondered if you shouldn't feel less concern about the Deep Unreal.
The very first word is "How do you do?" The last "Go home, your mama's calling you."

Re: 1/6 Hearings

66
David Frum is a good writer, he's a former speechwriter for W.
It’s no mystery why pro-Trump partisans would excuse January 6. Trump incited the putsch; he continues to justify it. Of course those loyal to Trump would condone this latest outrage as they have previously condoned so many others. You sign with the Mafia, you don’t get squeamish about the crimes.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: 1/6 Hearings

67
While criminal charges remain unlikely because of the protections afforded to any speaker under the First Amendment and recent court cases that limit the scope of the Anti-Riot Act, the new evidence could help prosecutors to thread the needle. Specifically, the officers’ testimony could support the notion that Trump’s calls on supporters to reject Congress’ certification of the election were not merely the musings of a sore loser but were instead deliberately calculated to instigate violence and further his multifaceted strategy to overturn the election.
https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/p ... cna1275695

"Charges remain unlikely?"

I just sneezed. It sounded like "Ceaușescu".

CDFingers
Image
Image
.
I've always wondered if you shouldn't feel less concern about the Deep Unreal.
The very first word is "How do you do?" The last "Go home, your mama's calling you."

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests

cron