January 6 Hearing Session 2: Willful Ignorance.

Who would that be? The news people who are paid to do so? Or maybe Kinzinger and Cheney?

 

No.... they called out the committee for what a joke it is and was not going to play along with another childish Pelosi game who makes up her own rules... but let's let Kevin McCarthy speak for himself... you can try twisting his words the best you can my liberal friend...

https://www.republicanleader.gov/mccarthy-statement-on-select-committee-on-january-6/

Washington, D.C. – House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy (CA-23) released the following statement on the Select Committee on January 6th:

“Speaker Pelosi’s rejection of the Republican nominees to serve on the committee and self-appointment of members who share her pre-conceived narrative will not yield a serious investigation.

“The Speaker has structured this select committee to satisfy her political objectives. She had months to work with Republicans on a reasonable and fair approach to get answers on the events and security failures surrounding January 6.

“Instead, she has played politics. Lost in much of the news coverage is the fact that the Senate has already conducted bipartisan investigations that should serve as a roadmap for the House.

“Speaker Pelosi’s departure from this serious-minded approach has destroyed the select committee’s credibility. The U.S. Capitol and the men and women who protect it suffered a massive leadership failure. We must make sure that never happens again and that is what Republicans will be focused on.”

 

Trump is number one then start with Rudy and works yer way through the mob.

 

On the one hand, you now have what shall be the official record for posterity: documented facts and sworn testimony featuring cogent accounts by Trump intimates and family, among others, irrefutable video self-incriminations, and the certified election results of 50 states - after having exhausted all the legitimate recourses of recounts, audits, and court appeals.

On the other hand, you have a self-indulgent fantasy that still festers only in hyper-partisan, ideological entertainment media that has spewed a paranoidal scenario so baseless that it cannot survive even the most indulgent, minimal, smell-test requirement needed to litigate.

Why is there no zealous disciple of trumpery, no hyper-partisan blowhard, no trumpified politician, no ambitious prosecutor, anywhere in America, who can glean even a single article of credible evidence from all the vapid, trumpy bluster in all the trumpy propaganda outlets, that would allow him to actually litigate the fantasy of an inexplicable stolen "Landslide!" in a legitimate venue?

Transparently fake reporting and petty-vendetta-fraught loser grievance jamborees are the only sh¡tholes left to the terminally-deluded.

 

Naw the mob's holding the hearings.

 

You might need to reposition your rose-colored glasses.

 

The question being, are the multiple times Trump was told he lost the election by members of his team enough to convince a jury the Stop the Steal canard was a fraud knowingly perpetrated on the public?
The answer to that question also has implications for the Big Con as well. The fleecing of his flock who were lied to regarding what their contributions were going to be spent on.

 

Sorry the objective reality is that all the worst crap comes out of DC so...

Note Trump isn't the greatest thing since sliced bread but I'll take him over Democrats and Neocons any day. Granted this is a lot like preferring the common cold over lung cancer.

 

Neither party has a clue about democracy

 

Bad assumption on your part - I despise Trump too

 

@Golem, Trump knows there was no widespread election fraud. He isn't being willfully ignorant. He's being a liar and grifter.

Think about it. Why appoint DeJoy, try to get fake electors, consider issuing an Executive Order preventing Biden from winning the election or the countless other underhanded things he did to make it difficult for non-R voters if he is so well-loved and popular? He knew he was going to be fired because of his abysmal non-leadership during the early days of the pandemic. All the rest of us it is his delusions of grandeur. Nobody likes him except the handful of loud people that worship boorish, idiotic, stupid ne'er-do-wells. Nobody else can stand him.

 

Yes, Carl Sagan was almost proven right again on Jan 6 when Your Charlatan refused the normal transition of power to the newly-elected President.

 

I think it would be poetic justice, not that anyone on the Left would actually advocate for it, but it would crack me up.

 

These hearings are more if a threat to our democracy than January 6 ever was

 

Except he didn't. Transition happens the 20th not the sixth

 

Evidence of nothing illegal.

 

Yet another fake poster claiming they know who anyone supports
Go figure

 

The investigation is not a criminal procedure

 

You do realize the DOJ has some 800 person to prosecute? I mean, try walking in another man's shoes before you draw such a conclusion.
And they are conducting an investigation. A grand jury was empaneled, a few months ago.

The investigation isn't about crime, primarily, though there is so much of it there will be crimes exposed. But no doubt the facts garnered will be of help to the DOJ, who is overloaded with prosecutions from 1/6, and in these extraordinary times, the DOJ and congress are working together to get the job done, which is a pretty big job. No judge is going to deny the arrangement, given this fact.

 

I would like to have an examination of the HSAA and ask him under whose orders he refused to respond to REPEATED calls of assistance and an emergency declaration by Sund on Jan 6.

 

You’re dreaming. The DOJ, unlike this sham, knows they have to contend with ALL the evidence in a court of law and not just the evidence the democrats want to produce.

It will never see a court of law.

 

Facts

 

I’ll ask you the same thing I asked every other lib who claims this isn’t a sham.

If the committee found irrefutable exculpatory evidence on behalf of trump, do you believe that this committee would present it in this hearing?

If the answer is no, then on WHAT GROUNDS do you assert this isn’t a partisan sham?

 

That’s easy to answer. Because in order to find the fraud we have to do a signature verification audit which the democrats stonewall at every turn.

 

Don’t worry. The democrats will ACTUALLY refuse a peaceful transition of power when Trump wins in 2024. Watch what I say.