January 6 Hearing Session 2: Willful Ignorance.

Again the committee is pre-empting Trump's "too stupid to prosecute" defense. It's clear that this will be his defense when this comes to trial.

"Yeah... they told me it wasn't fraud. But I didn't believe them", might be a good defense. But NOT if you simply chose not to believe them.

Particularly significant, I think, was the testimony of the Deputy Attorney General (I don't recall his name) who sat with Trump, and went point by point, one by one, ALL the allegations of voter fraud (Dominion machines, "vote dump" in Georgia or Michigan, more votes than voters in Philadelphia... ALL). He explained to Trump how they investigated and what they found out in each case. Which was no widespread voter fraud. All the allegations were pure B.S.

So his attorneys, his closest advisors, his family, the AG,.... they were ALL telling him that there had been no widespread voter fraud.

Who did Trump choose to believe? In comes, with obvious signs of being DRUNK... none other than Rudy Giuliani. And THAT's who Trump chose to believe.

We also got a hint about how the Trump campaign used The Big Lie to solicit donations for Trump's legal efforts. And how those donations were used illegally. Of the over $280 million, only $13 million were used for legal expenses. As for the rest: much of it for Trump and his minion's personal use. Just in case insurrection charges don't land him in jail for the rest of his life.

 

I have a feeling most Trump loyalists aren't following the hearings. That's up to them. But you should know that it's the HEARINGS that have all the evidence. So if you later come asking "where is the evidence?", the answer will be "did you watch the January 6 hearing? That's where!"

The evidence is much more than what anybody can write in a poste. And the hearings, so far, have been pretty thorough.

 

More like willful indoctrination

 

today's hearing was a good one. video of barr answers the "did he know he lost" question. if he did not know, after his atty general spelled it out for him, fe was too stupid to be president.

the last bit, from the group investigating $250M donations to "the official legal defense fund," a fund that does not exist, should be eye opening. but, "none so blind as he who will not see."

 

Wow... still no cross examination... communist tactics at best... let's put a real lawyer in to cross examine the Deputy Attorney General...

 

Today's current crisis's way more important than this, glad to see our tax dollars being wasted as usual

 

Just when , exactly, does Dirty Donnie and his gang of crooks and liars get to face the music ?

 

The source of information is interesting: the Trump administration and a smattering of Republicans under oath.

Also, the chair made it clear ANYONE with anything to add to the proceeding was more than welcome to come in and tell their story under oath. Most likely a response to Scott Perry after day one. Nonetheless.

Opportunity awaits!

 

We've been asking the left that now for over 6 years and they are still batting 0/20,000.

 

On the latter Bannon was charged with wire fraud for this type of con. Although the dollars that went to Meadows and Manafort from the Big Lie fund-I suppose- could be “defense” related depending on the circle you’re in

 

And ask him what?

 

They won't - ultimately this is just a politically driven waste of time

They had the golden opportunity to minimize Trump, by not effing things up, but they failed miserably

Instead he will be back in 2025 riding the wave of the Anti-Biden vote. I don't want to vote for a narcissistic con-man, but I can't vote for Biden either

 

The same things lawyers ask witnesses every day in a fair court system..... you seem to think Pelosi, once again, just like the impeachment can make her own rules, and that is not how fair hearings are conducted...
Save your blah, blah ,blah and babbling how this just fine. If you want fair, subpoena Pelosi and have her answer questions about what she knew before, during, and after about inadequate security...

 

More like "A fool and his money are soon parted."

It's possible that a few Trump supporters on this forum have donated to the non-existent Election Defense Fund and are too embarrassed to admit it.

 

Seriously? Were you watching? Didn't Senators from both parties participate?

And fyi, most Senators and other Congress critters are lawyers. They often return to law practice after leaving congress.

 

AG Garland was interviewed and stated that he and the DOJ's Jan 6 prosecutors are watching. One can hope, but I won't hold my breath.

 

On this one point alone, he looks so guilty. I think if he is convicted on this non-existent fund, the money should go to BLM. That is IF anything is left.

 

Here's what I find puzzling. You mean to tell me the AG couldn't secure meetings with his precessdor and others on the matter of the phony election fraud claims? That the DOJ didn't investigate any of this under two years? They just delegated this essentially to the House of Representatives? So the House is an extension of the judiciary branch of the government? That kind of breaks the idea of our three co-separate equal branches if the AG is essentially saying the House is their arm, but we've seen that modus operandi with regards to the contempt charges.

But in any event, both Stone and Bannon can argue that clearly the House has more than enough information at its disposal that what they're subpoenaing is no longer necessary.

 

We all know what the outcome of this will be. Absolutely nothing.

If DOJ had anything to charge Trump with they would have done it quickly. Even if they eek out legitimate grounds to charge Trump now if they do so at this late stage it will look like a 'political setup'.

 

Ah, typical con, blame the victim.

You seem to think this is a court proceeding. Hopefully, that will come when the House issues a criminal referral.

 

Isn't it normal that the DoJ wants to have as many elements as possible before proceeding with a charge. We know Congress is usually slow; Justive is even slower.

 

It is not a trial.

 

Almost nobody is watching those Democrat liars.

 

The Republican liars are.

 

Possible, yes, but I doubt many of the Trump diehards on this forum are stupid enough to put their money where their mouth is. (See how charitable I am!)

And, if they did, they will be too embarrassed to admit it and/or too frightened to claim their money back!

Hopefully, they are not watching; it's so painful to realize you're a gullible con.