The January 6 Hearings are ONLY for Legislative Purposes!

Your words, not mine.

 

I didn't know BLM and Antifa were involved in it. I learn something every day.

 

If you are "dinged" that means you took them out of context. I never do that! It would be a violation of forum rules. Not to mention dishonest.

 

I ask nicely once... please stop editing my posts.

 

The January 6 Hearings are ONLY for Political Purposes!

Yes, that is why they are having them at this time, with only anti-Trumpers on the committee, airing them in prime time, and releasing their final findings - just before the midterms.

 

Yet you continue to support the Democrat crime family.

 

I'm going to assume you are kidding because the alternative is very unflattering for you.

 

You have to find a crime first and they've been scouring the country diligently for about 6 years now with nothing to show for it

 

That is a false accusation. I can't edit your posts. Only a mod could do that. All I can do is quote them. So please retract your accusation!

 

No, it was I, but it turns out I misread the post. I mistakenly thought the AG was getting briefings from the congressional investigation.

 

The U.S. House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol continues to solicit revelatory testimony from Republicans with first-hand knowledge.

Cipollone has much to share.

Former White House counsel Pat Cipollone, a critical figure in the final days of the Trump White House, will testify before the House select committee behind closed doors on Friday, according to sources familiar with the committee's work.

The committee issued a subpoena to Cipollone last month after publicly pleading with him to appear. It has spoken to Cipollone in an informal interview already.

https://www.npr.org/2022/07/06/1110036950/cipollone-testify-jan-6-committee​

 

Only if all 14,000 documents are sent to the DoJ in support of a referral AND if the DoJ actually files charges will they get to Trump. Whatever congress does stays exclusively in congress Turning over exculpatory evidence is only a judiciary function and predominately criminal cases, and you know that congress cannot (wink - wink) conduct criminal investigations. Of course we are being played. That's how purges work.

 

Do you think that wouldn't be proper? Honest question. I'm not sure.

 

Afraid to answer the question ⁉️

 

Right now the Georgia AG has trump in her sights. And that may be his greatest liability in that it could be the easiest conviction to obtain. But so much has come out and with so much yet to come that it's hard to tell. IMO I've seen him commit crimes on TV. For example, asking the Russians to help spy on Hillary was a crime. I'd put him in jail for that alone. He has surely led at least 100,000 of his followers and people they came into contact with - friends of family that died because they came into contract with someone who went to one of those insane trump rallies in the middle of a pandemic, for example - to their deaths by lying and talking nonsense about Covid. He is certainly the greatest mass murderer in US history, So I would put him in jail for life for that. And I would imagine we can nail him on at least a dozen more things. But getting a conviction in court is too risky unless they are sure they will win. A failed prosecution is worse than no prosecution. So I understand why Garland is moving slowly.

 

I thought I'd add it for humor but those that attacked the Capitol still upsets me and I mean it.

 

Yeah, I just used my imagination for this. Nothing personal.

 

No. The AG will (must) brief congress when asked, but congress doesn't brief anybody as a courtesy. In this case theoretically the AG should not even listen. His position should be send me a referral if you want but nothing else.

 

Where have I heard that before?????

 

You mean except for Trump's obstruction of Mueller's investigation.

Hundreds of former prosecutors say Trump would have been indicted if he were not president

President Donald Trump would have been indicted for obstruction of justice in special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation if he did not hold the nation's highest office, nearly 700 former federal prosecutors argued in an open letter published on Medium on Monday.

The ex-prosecutors — who have served under both Republican and Democratic administrations dating back to President Dwight D. Eisenhower — said Attorney General William Barr's decision not to charge Trump with obstruction "runs counter to logic and our experience."
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/po...ay-trump-would-have-been-indicted-if-n1002436

 

No, just embarrassed for you that you asked it.

 

Yal still harping on that?...lol

 

Your personal attacks prove you have argument. It's SOP for Leftists.

 

That Trump has committed dozens and dozens of crimes is undeniable. The obstacle to overcome is that his defense "too stupid to prosecute" (i.e. "intent") could hold in many courts. And crimes like obstruction would take a long time to build, even though much of the legwork is in the Mueller Report. So the Georgia case, plus the crimes being presented by the January 6 committee are the ones that will have a result sooner. Of course, once he's in jail, I think there will be a domino effect that is likely to be continuing for many years.

 

Dozens and dozens of crimes and not one shred of evidence. That must suck for you guys