January 6 Committee Wraps Summer Hearings With Footage of Hawley Fleeing, Detailed Account of Trump's Day
Plus: Electoral count reform, freeing baby formula from useless regulation, and more...

Don't say the January 6 committee never gave you anything. Last night's hearing—the eighth of its kind, the second aired in prime time, and the last one until September—was focused on former President Donald Trump's actions as the January 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol was taking place. But its most memorable moment revolved around Missouri Republican Sen. Josh Hawley, who infamously raised a fist in solidarity as he walked by the MAGA mob early in the day.
It was a different story for Hawley a few hours later. In newly disclosed footage, Hawley can be seen running to flee rioters in the building.
The footage elicited laughter from people in the hearing room yesterday and has quickly become a meme online. See, for instance, this thread of "Josh Hawley running away to a variety of soundtracks":
Josh Hawley running away to a variety of soundtracks.
Pt. 1: Chariots of Fire #January6thCommitteeHearing pic.twitter.com/tVCf2R5tUD
— Mallory Nees (@The_Mal_Gallery) July 22, 2022
Sowing Reaping pic.twitter.com/2TT804jQYe
— Carolyn B. Maloney (@RepMaloney) July 22, 2022
The meat of last night's hearing concerned White House officials' attempts to persuade Trump to act during the riot and the former president's reticence to do so. Instead, Trump hung out in the presidential dining room watching footage of the riot on TV, former White House officials said. Trump "told Mark Meadows that the rioters were doing what they should be doing and the rioters understood they were doing what President Trump wanted them to do," Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R–Ill.) summed things up.
Trump never reached out to the Department of Defense or any law enforcement bodies—to the chagrin of Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley. "You're the commander in chief—you've got an assault going on the Capitol of the United States of America and there's nothing? No call? Nothing? Zero?" said Milley in audio from his deposition.
???????? #PrinciplesFirst alert:
Sarah Matthews (R): "January 6…was one of the darkest days in our nation's history and Pres. Trump was treating it as a celebratory occasion."
Thank you for speaking truth, Sarah. The American people deserve to hear it. pic.twitter.com/9pERCp7XjS
— Principles First (@Principles_1st) July 22, 2022
The committee played video footage of Trump taping a statement the day after the riot. "But this election is now over. Congress has certified the results," Trump said in one outtake before stopping and saying, "I don't want to say the election is over. I just want to say Congress has certified the results without saying the election is over, OK?"
Rep. Liz Cheney (R–Wyo.) closed yesterday's hearing by pointing out that so much detail and criticism about Trump's handling of the events of January 6 came not from "witnesses who were his political enemies," but from "Donald Trump's own appointees, his own friends, his own campaign officials, people who worked for him for years, and his own family. They have come forward and they have told the American people the truth."
The committee also revealed that former Vice President Mike Pence had been stuck in his office for 13 minutes while folks tried to figure how to get him safely out of the building. In audio footage from Pence's Secret Service agents, you can hear them discussing how rioters are getting dangerously near. "If we lose any more time, we may lose the ability to leave," said one agent. "There are six officers between us and the people that are 5 to 10 feet away from me," said another.
NBC News has a detailed rundown of last night's hearing here.
FREE MINDS
The Senate's latest election reform attempt is pretty good, suggests Reason's Eric Boehm. And it could be the key to preventing another presidential attempt to overturn election results:
While a special House committee has been probing the scope of Trump's plots and the role the former president played in the ugly events of January 6, a bipartisan group of senators led by Susan Collins (R–Maine) and Joe Manchin (D–W.Va.) has been working on a fix for the procedural issues Trump's team nearly exploited to overturn the election. This is less dramatic than what the January 6th Committee has been turning up, but it is probably the more important project for the future of American democracy.
The Senate's bill—dubbed the Electoral Count Reform and Presidential Transition Improvement Act of 2022—would take aim at three procedural weaknesses in our system that Trump sought to exploit following the 2020 election.
"Whether it can pass remains unknown," notes Boehm. "The bill has nine Republican cosponsors; one shy of the 10 GOP votes that would be required (assuming all 50 Democrats in the Senate vote for the bill) to avoid the possibility of a filibuster."
FREE MARKETS
The Fixing Our Regulatory Mayhem Upsetting Little Americans (FORMULA) Act passed in the Senate yesterday, after passing the House of Representatives earlier this month. The bill will temporarily lift tariffs on baby formula, halt stringent Food and Drug Administration (FDA) labeling regulations that keep perfectly safe foreign formulas from passing regulatory muster here, and expand the types of products covered by the federal Women, Infants, and Children program, which only subsidizes certain brands of formula at present. The FORMULA Act now goes to President Joe Biden to sign.
Senate unanimously passed legislation to temporarily suspend tariffs on imported baby formula until the end of the year to address the ongoing baby formula shortage, by voice vote. The Formula Act now heads to the President for his signature. https://t.co/aRP9jImBDS pic.twitter.com/epW0mOGPEn
— Craig Caplan (@CraigCaplan) July 21, 2022
More on the tariffs, baby formula, and the FORMULA Act here. More on the formula shortage and FDA labeling laws here.
FOLLOW-UP
Clinics that try to steer women away from abortion are at the center of a Google results controversy. The partisan battle to control the internet is perfectly exemplified in a fight over Google search results for crisis pregnancy centers. Democrats have been pressuring Google to limit ads and other search results for these businesses. Now, Republicans are threatening to punish Google if they do. A group of 17 state Republican attorneys general told Google's CEO that they want to know how it handles search results for crisis pregnancy centers and may investigate the company for antitrust or religious freedom violations if they don't like what they're told.
See also: "Both Democrats and Republicans Want To Break Up Big Tech. Consumers Would Pay the Price."
QUICK HITS
As a lawyer, before throwing out non-specified "fraud," Gohmert might ask questions like "Whom did they pay?" "What were they promised?" "Are these people I trust when they tell me this?" But as a huckster hack politician spewing nonsense to create a bogeyman, perhaps he did not. https://t.co/jTmohHiKXv
— Jeff Roush (@JeffRoushPoetry) July 21, 2022
• Biden has COVID-19.
• Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer's (D–N.Y.) doomed marijuana decriminalization bill is not a serious attempt to repeal pot prohibition, writes Reason's Jacob Sullum. The 296-page bill "would compound the barriers to successful legalization."
• Kat Rosenfield on feminism and beauty.
• End the two-party system, writes New America Foundation Senior Fellow Lee Drutman.
• "The Supreme Court on Thursday refused to reinstate the Biden administration's policy limiting immigration arrests, after a Texas district judge said the guidance to deportation officers violated federal laws," reports The Washington Post. "The court instead said it will hear the merits of the case in December. The practical result is that the administration will not be able to implement its strategy for the rest of the year."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Fuck Joe Biden
Fuck Joe Biden
Is it ok to make fun of him for catching the ‘rona?
-- Yes.
Maybe, but definitely OK to tease him about his "cancer".
Is it OK to tease him about his Alzheimers/dementia as long as we space it out to once every 5-10 min.?
I without a doubt have made $18k inside a calendar month thru operating clean jobs from a laptop. As I had misplaced my ultimate business, I changed into so disenchanted and thank God I searched this easy task (veg-05) accomplishing this I'm equipped to reap thousand of bucks simply from my home. All of you could really be part of this pleasant task and will gather extra cash on-line
travelling this site.
>>>>>>>>>> http://netcash94.tk
Now there's a chance for old Joe to prove that the virus is just as deadly as he's been telling everyone.
He shut it down over a year ago.
He was twice vaccinated, twice boosted, acquired immunity from previous COVID infection, and is a member of the worst demographic that suffers the highest prevalence of death due to COVID. Yet here we are looking at the man who fell off of a stationary bicycle who shakes imaginary hands and can not follow cue cards.
Hey, you're talking about the Dear Leader, defender of Democracy!, and champion of right-thinking people around the globe.
All that's great but can he tie his own shoelaces?
What?
C'mon, man!
Call it "Corn-Pop's Revenge"
Corn pop just didn’t like the way joe was looking at kids.
I made $30,030 in just 5 weeks working part-time right from my apartment. (res-16) When I lost my last business I got tired right away and luckily I found this job online and with that I am able to start reaping lots right through my house. Anyone can achieve this top level career and make more money online by:-
.
Reading this article:>>>> https://brilliantfuture01.blogspot.com/
It should be pointed out that the recent court rulings invalidating the 2020 election in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania drop the electoral count received by Joe Biden below the 270 required to win.
Literally illegitimate president.
Further, it should be noted that the 2020 census was improperly tabulated for House apportionment. The result is a net benefit of 10+ seats/votes to blue states robbed from red states.
Fake newz. If something that important happened CNN and MSNBC would have covered it. And there is no way ENB would of left it out of the roundup.
Can you still get abortions in those new blue districts?
would've would have Just sayin'.
So wait, the insurrection is funny? It's not a very serious thing? I don't remember people laughing at footage of people running away from the towers collapsing on 9/11, so why is it funny that Hawley was running away from the violent mob intent on murdering Congress? This is STILL worse than 9/11, right?
This roundup is an embarrassment.
I'm just trying to get on the same page, here. Was the insurrection a clownshow we can laugh at because it wasn't very serious? Or is it something horrifying that requires an extensive congressional hearing in order to answer serious questions? Or, put more frankly, how does making Senator Joe Hawley look silly serve the public interest?
It's got everything: laughter, sadness, suspense, romance. It's just plain good theater.
It’s a story with no ending.
To be continued in season 2 in September.
A story that ends only when Trumpanzees replace democracy with mobocracy! THEN the charades will STOP, and enemies will be SILENCED!
Soap operas are almost dead,so this is a first attempt at turning progtard fan fiction into an Anglo reality show version of a tele novella.
And Hollywood producers, partisan writers, and a foregone conclusion.
What interests me most about it is the precedent they set of excluding the opposition party; what will payback be come Jan 2023? If the GOP doesn't investigate Hunter and his Joe connection, I will wonder how much they got bought for. I can understand not impeaching Joe; who'd want Kamala for President? On the other hand, it would put an asterisk on her "first woman President" for all time, and then they could impeach her for cackling.
They should re-launch the J6 committee & this time focus on the FBI infiltration & instigation the break in and ID'ing the 80 ‘Suspicious Actors’ and ‘Material Witnesses’ Under Scrutiny by Jan. 6 Defense Attorneys. They can end the committee hearings with a scene of AOC claiming to fear being raped while she wasn't even in the area.
The GOP wasn't excluded
In fact they were offered a non-partisan committe with equal subpoena power to the democrats. That is not normal. They dejected that and when a standard committee was chosen instead, try to put 2 members who are subject to the investigation on it. Pelosi said no, replace them, as is her power and the GOP stupidly withdrew all cooperation.
Read a paper before you comment so you won't be so uninformed.
Joe Friday, go drink draino.
I had really hoped a support beam had fallen on him.
Hey, that’s MY line. But well played. Keep it up and maybe they will really drink it.
By reading the paper you are conformed, not informed.
OK, great, he is “conformed”. Did his comment say anything that wasn’t 100% factual.
Yes.
Mike, llike Joe, will ignore the facts because he's already come to his desired conclusion.
I hope Trump gets re-elected just to watch these smarmy motherfuckers have their brains melt.
Yes.
And then he said this.
Read a paper before you comment so you won't be so uninformed.
Nothing you said was accurate. Speaker had a veto for any gop subpeona. No prior committee ever had a veto on minority party members. They wanted a show trial.
The 2 sitting gop members were not selected by the minority party making the committees subpoenas and depositions actually invalid.
No prior committee ever had a veto on minority party members.
That is not true. Here is for example the resolution creating the "Select Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the Preparation for and Response to Hurricane Katrina".
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BILLS-109hres437eh/pdf/BILLS-109hres437eh.pdf
(a) The select committee shall be composed of 20 members appointed by the Speaker, of whom 9 shall be appointed
after consultation with the Minority Leader. The Speaker
shall designate one Member as chairman.
Even here, the Speaker chose the members, and the Minority Leader only had an advisory role. That was the same rule for the Jan. 6 select committee.
What minority party members were excluded?
CuntJeff answer the question you fat, boring, retarded contrarian.
(Banks) said he would use the committee to turn the spotlight back on Democrats, scrutinizing why the Capitol WAS NOT BETTER PREPARED for the attack, as well as unrelated “political riots” last summer during the national wave of protest against systemic racism. Pelosi, Mcconnel and Capital Security would have to be deposed and called to testify (did not happen) and all records and phone calls and memorandums re pre protest/riot produced, (never happened). To try and argue Pelosi's unprecedented in our History, decision is anything but unfair or reasonable is stupid. Banks and Jordon are not under investigation for anything regarding the planned protest of January 6th that turned into a riot.
Yes, yes he did.
It's a Hollywood Blockbuster!
https://www.flickr.com/photos/66890686@N02/52230792947/in/dateposted-public/
Let me clear it up for you: ENB is a lefty propagandist who will follow the narrative (she once admitted in the roundup there was a narrative she was following) no matter which direction it goes.
I just want to know what the narrative is. I'm not understanding. I have my own ideas about what the events of Jan. 6 were, but I want to see if there's something cohesive happening in the narrative being shared by the committee itself. Are we having a good time here laughing because Hawley looked silly? Can we also laugh at AOC's hyperventilation about how she barely survived even though she wasn't even in the building?
Let me know how serious this issue actually is, and whether it's of critical public interest. Or maybe it's just a good old fun show we can sit the family down and watch and enjoy with some popcorn.
It's all of the above. Try to imagine yourself as a typical American infotainment consumer, with intellectual and emotional capacity that oscillates between 6 and 16 years old.
You don’t even have to imagine!
"I just want to know what the narrative is"
Orangemanbad. The rest is ad-libbed.
Yes. And obvious contradictions are acceptable.
He pussy-grab His creditors in 6 bankruptcies, His illegal sub-human workers ripped off of pay on His building projects, and His “students” in His fake Get-Rich-like-Me realty schools, and so on. So, He has a GREAT record of ripping others off! So SURELY He can rip off other nations, other ethnic groups, etc., in trade wars and border wars, for the benefit of ALL of us!!!
All Hail to THE Pussy Grabber in Chief!!!
Most of all, HAIL the Chief, for having revoked karma! What comes around, will no longer go around!!! The Donald has figured out that all of the un-Americans are SOOO stupid, that we can pussy-grab them all day, every day, and they will NEVER think of pussy-grabbing us right back!
Orange Man Bad-Ass Pussy-Grabber all right!
We CAN grab all the pussy, all the time, and NONE will be smart enough to EVER grab our pussies right back!
These voters simply cannot or will not recognize the central illusion of politics… You can pussy-grab all of the people some of the time, and you can pussy-grab some of the people all of the time, but you cannot pussy-grab all of the people all of the time! Sooner or later, karma catches up, and the others will pussy-grab you right back!
Heeble-beeble-babble--boop.
Yes, it is OK to laugh at AOC if you want to. It is OK to find humorous moments in serious situations. Always has been. In fact, it is one of the most important times to find little moments of humor.
Reading your posts makes everyone laugh.
Not in a good way, though.
Dahyum! Talk about sending a canine to knock out his eyeball! well played!
Compare this post with all Dee’s comments immediately after 1/6. Fucking hypocrite.
The White Knight
January.6.2021 at 5:07 pm
It is now crystal clear Trump is monster. If you still support him, you are a bad person. There is no ambiguity, no wiggle room anymore.
Remember this?
Mike Laursen
July.31.2021 at 12:03 pm
Flag Comment Mute User
White Knight pointed out, correctly, that you are very logical, but quite unaware that you often engage in not seeking out information that goes against your narratives, garbage-in/garbage-out logic, and not checking your conclusions for basic sanity. You should have listened to White Knight.
I remember its 50 posts in every thread on every article every day calling everyone else traitors
Mike Laursen thinks White Knight was the cleverest poster to ever visit reason, and vice versa.
How pathetic must one be to cite your own well known sock?
ML, pretty sure that was diWhite Knightoxide
You’re an ongoing joke. So I guess I should thank your for providing comic relief, albeit unintended.
“I just want to know what the narrative is.”
Well, it’s July, and we haven’t had a grand three-ring circus narrative of, say, a Scopes Monkey trial in quite a while. May as well revisit, as Time never disappoints.
The shift is from hillbilly Tennessee to bureaucrat DC, of course, and this contrived narrative leapfrogs ( pun intended) from evolution to revolution. But oh how the melodrama and the bilge stays the same.
All the town boomers (still eagerly) leap to the assault of one man, to recall Mencken’s words; heresy remains a core theme, though of slightly altered flavor, whilst the current infidel in Trump dared challenge the swamp rather than the heavens.
There’s the speechifying and finger-pointing and crusading, all more rehearsed today than yesterday since TV beats radio; finally, the fundamentalists all gathered about, always in their crucifying gang-bang style, except this bunch of frazzled accusers came from the left and relied on testimonies and gospel of less weight than those prompted by that rustic Tennessean Bible.
It’s a 100 years since…and the simian imbecility amongst men still haunts.
A+
Because voters shouldn’t be electing people of Hawley’s low character ilk. Humiliating him publicly helps convince the public to look twice at the dipshit losers they’ve been voting for.
Because voters shouldn’t be electing people of Hawley’s low character ilk.
That's a matter for the campaign trail and not a government interest. Hawley's candidacy is an issue for the people of Missouri and not the United States as a whole.
Curious that you subtly shifted form the words “public interest” to “government interest”.
That’s because you’re a lefty hack.
Curious that you keep eluding to some moral standard yet you obviously have none. No one is buying your bullshit.
Of course all the lefties he supports are of the utmost character.
Here’s Dee admitting she’s OK with congressional hearings for the purpose of campaigning against Republicans.
But she’s not a Democrat!
Don't dare say White Mike is a Democrat.
Spoken like a good Superior-grade person.
What about Harley’s character is low? His profiteering off foreign governments? Selling access and influence? His insider trading? His serial groping of females? Does he shower with his daughter, or bang his widowed sister in law, or his niece?
He’s a Republican. But don’t call Dee a Democrat!
Jeez, when you put it all in a list it sounds kinda bad.
If we got rid of every Senator with unacceptably low character, there would be few of them left. How about starting with Schumer?
Your Vice President got where she is by being the side piece to Willie Brown. Your president is known to have rape done of his staffers back in the 90’s and possible also molested his ten year old daughter in the shower around that time.
So yeah, let’s talk about character.
Or, put more frankly, how does making Senator Joe Hawley look silly serve the public interest?
we don't need a public-interest rationale to make Senator Josh Hawley look silly
And here’s Lefty Jeffy agreeing with Dee that congressional hearings for the purpose of campaigning against Republicans is ok.
And he’s not a Democrat either!
Jeffy has to defend his betters with enthusiasm. How else is he going to make a living from his parent's basement?
What's really funny is Hawley will be serving next year and Gloria Stivik-Chaney and the other RINO won't be
Blackwhite.
I knew it would happen.
Note she didn't promote the outright lies last night like then saying the officer succumbed yo his injuries jan 7th. Cause of death natural.
Watched about half an hour because of mother in law. The show is an embarrassment. The full 30 min I saw was them trying to indict someone for inaction. Yet do the same for the blm riots and you'd have hours of film watching democrats cheer on violence, actual actions.
Ugh. My desert dwelling parents are here in the cool NW for a visit this week. My mom wanted to watch that poison on my tv last night and I shut it off.
It’s so hard to keep parents away from poison these days!
Only one way
Because Hawley is a hypocrital, cowardly dipshit, and the video showed it clearly.
Then this committee is using Taxpayer's funds in order to help a political campaign against Hawley. It's a misapplication of government resources. It's not a valid legislative purpose because Congress isn't going to pass a law saying that Hawley runs like a bitch.
Congressional hearings are supposed to have at least a hypothetical legislative function, you see?
She doesn’t care.
The laughter was spontaneous.
One could equally make the argument that it would have been campaigning for Hawley to not show the video.
Look, they showed something that factually really did happen. And people laughed.
Right, the committee didn't think it would be fun to embarrass Hawley at all. They just wanted to show footage of him, specifically, and nobody else running away from the violence.
Come the fuck on.
The Republicans were given the chance to participate in a bipartisan committee, and turned it down. So, it’s the Democrat’s show now.
I’m not getting how a libertarian would be getting so worked up about this.
You're not getting how a libertarian, a small party, finds it problematic that the majority party is using taxpayer funds and resources to embarrass a minority candidate they don't like?
Man, it's a real fucking headscratcher that you can't figure out why libertarians might be against the force of government being misapplied to attack people they don't like.
Mike does not get much of "libertarian".
First of all, libertarian and the Libertarian Party are not the same.
Second, are we going to start holding Congress members and the President to high expectations of old-fashioned decorum?
That would be fine with me. So, I assume you had problems with Trump’s continual barrage of “mean tweets” while he was President. I’ve been told over and over by commenters here that it is wrong to consider his mean tweets.
But trump!!!!
Poor sarc.
First of all, libertarian and the Libertarian Party are not the same.
Careful now. You don't want to break anyone's brain now do you?
Nobody is confused by the difference broke ass.
Here we see that Mike is just here to troll, ATM.
"First of all, libertarian and the Libertarian Party are not the same."
Notice the nitpicking. It has nothing to do with your point- you didn't even mention the Party by namy, but he is trying to get you to digress. Because that is his only goal.
"Second, are we going to start holding Congress members and the President to high expectations of old-fashioned decorum?"
Again, notice that he has shifted tactics. He isn't even answering your question about the proper role of government. He is now making an argument about what "decorum". That is, of course a non answer. Because while he likes to pretend to be discussing things in good faith, he actually is just here to shit on icky deplorables he doesn't like. So he won't answer your question, because he knows the answer makes him look petty.
" So, I assume you had problems with Trump’s continual barrage of “mean tweets” while he was President."
And there is his last ditch effort to derail the thread. Like a standard troll, he isn't here to discuss things with you. Mike wants a flame war. So he now puts you in the position of defending Trump, or trying to get a war about trump coming in.
Resist the urge to respond to Mike. He pretends to be interested in reasoned discussion, but as you can see, his ultimate goal is to create chaos. Another example here:
https://reason.com/2022/01/07/mandatory-gmo-disclosure-doesnt-sway-shopping-habits-but-will-drive-up-costs/?comments=true#comment-9293589
That's Mike trying to turn a discussion about GMOs into yet another vaccine flame war.
“…, wrong to consider his mean tweets.”
Not at all. But the people who whine like little bitches about it deserve to be mocked.
Bitch.
Your posting wouldn't be so bad if you would just come out and admit to your obvious Democrat bias. At least then people might think you had a capacity for honesty.
How about Biden’s rape, child molesting, corruption, and treason? Are those things a problem for you?
That's correct, including equal subpoena powers for both parties. The selective ignorance of the MAGA dummies here is amusing
It wasn't equal. Democrats had a veto if the vote was tied.
Everyone can see your lies dumbass.
This was not a legal proceeding and any pretense of that is a lie. Straight up.
They showed what they wanted, did what they wanted, edited footage, cut context and allowed multiple hearsay testimonies.
To call it a trial is the biggest joke.
Laursen is an enthusiastic stalinist
It’s not a trial. It’s a hearing.
Why do people make such a big deal about the McCarthy hearings?
I mean, it’s not like it was a trial or something!
It's a show trial
…… and now he moves the goalpost. Dee, you bitch. Democrats have no character and rig everything.
Why do leftists continue to lie about this? They were not given the opportunity. Pelosi rejected their members from sitting.
Because lying is not just what leftists do, it's who they are.
You and the troll brigade are leftists?
Even stranger is them sweeping in nearly every week to say the same exact thing. Do they think we forgot? Or are they hoping no one says anything *this time* so that the casual reader will listen to them instead of what actually happened?
It is interesting that the SAME people will bring up this point over and over, and then "Poof" disappear like a scared ninja when you bring this point up. I have not once seen any of the usual suspects actually respond to this inconvenient fact.
Jesse is being his usual dishonest self.
There were TWO proposals put forth to investigate Jan. 6. The FIRST proposal, a bipartisan commission, would have done as Joe Friday claimed - equal representation on both sides, each side separately chooses their own members, equal subpoena powers from both sides.
Here is the text of this proposal. Read it for yourself.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3233/text
Republicans turned this down.
The SECOND proposal was the one that gave the Speaker veto power over all committee members. That is what we have now. We only got the second proposal, because Republicans turned down the first proposal.
DC Republicans never wanted to seriously investigate Jan. 6, they just wanted to be able to complain about it.
So you are saying I was right. For fucks sake jeff you are ridiculous.
The committee was set up from day 1 to be one sided. When they explicitly discussed which topics could be discussed. Followed by the veto.
You continue to be a raging idiot.
The committee was set up like most House Select committees. Speaker chooses the members, Minority Leader is consulted. See above where I gave an example from the committee formed as a response to Hurricane Katrina.
And so Jesse's dishonesty is to deliberately conflate these two proposals.
No. It is to point out the set up of the current committee you fucking retard. Known as reality.
The irony here being you trying to use a non effective proposal to hide behind actual reality. Lol.
Jeff so fails to note that it was essentially a party line vote.
In a largely party-line vote, the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives approved legislation on Wednesday to create a select committee to launch a new inquiry into the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.
So basically jeff is saying that the gop turned down biased rules that the democrats thought was fair. So it is their fault. Lol.
You are a ridiculous idiot jeff.
And here is the committee lying to witnesses they are deposits regarding committee rules.
https://thefederalist.com/2021/11/10/j6-committee-misleading-witnesses-about-republican-staff-presence/
Jeff supports this. Because he is a raging leftist.
Even the partisan The Hill called this out at creation
the language of the resolution that created the select committee explicitly gives Pelosi the power to appoint all 13 members, “5 of whom shall be appointed after consultation with the minority leader.” In other words, Pelosi has veto power over McCarthy’s selections, should he choose to make them, and that’s raised questions about how the Speaker might screen Republican lawmakers, if at all.
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/561435-five-big-questions-about-the-jan-6-select-committee/
And the original agreement had this:
Under the resolution, Pelosi will pick eight members and Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., will choose five, giving the select committee more of a partisan lean than the previous Jan. 6 commission bill which passed the House with support from several Republicans. That bill would have given each party an equal number of members on the commission.
As jeff and Joe know, subpoenas are voted on by the committee, giving democrats a 3 vote lead to block any gop requested subpoenas.
So once again, Joe and Jeff are lying their asses off.
The FIRST proposal would have created a bipartisan commission with equal membership from both sides, each side chooses its own members independently, and equal veto power from both sides. True or False Jesse?
The answer is True.
This proposal was REJECTED by Republicans. Therefore we got the SECOND proposal which is what we see now.
And what jeff doesn't mention of the original bill.
But Senate Republicans had other objections to the Jan. 6 commission bill, including that the staff of the commission would only be chosen by Democrats and that the scope of the investigation would have been limited just to the events on Jan. 6 and the factors that contributed to that specific day.
Jeff knows this. But is such a piece of shit he thought he could hide it.
Jeff. I answered your retarded and ignorant question. See the prior post you raging leftist shit.
By the way jeff. Nice try deflecting away from reality by talking only one part of the prior bill and not the totality of it or the objections to it.
Usual leftist shit weasel trick. Part of your dishonest bullshit.
Again you are mixing the two proposals together.
The bipartisan commission would have had equal representation. The select committee had unequal representation.
The vote in the House to establish the bipartisan commission was bipartisan. The vote in the House to establish the select committee was more party-line. You're deliberately mixing the two together.
As jeff and Joe know, subpoenas are voted on by the committee, giving democrats a 3 vote lead to block any gop requested subpoenas.
NOT IN THE ORIGINAL PROPOSAL, WHICH WOULD HAVE GIVEN BOTH PARTIES EQUAL SUBPOENA POWER.
Republicans TURNED THAT ONE DOWN.
Jeff. This is you ate the epitome of your lies.
Did they turn down equal representation of the committee? No. They turned down heavily weighted to help the democrats. The second offer switched these concerns to heavily weight the members.
In both cases the committee bill was slanted to give democrats power over the narrative.
If you weren't such a dishonest person you would admit this instead of trying to defend Joe and other leftists.
So when I point out the agreed make up of the committee you called me dishonest despite the truth.
When I point out they weren't offered a neutral agreement that included equal representation (it contained unfavorable pieces the gop objected to) you called me dishonest.
I'm your entire conversation you focused on one part of one bill not agreed to as a defense of current membership actions resulting in a show trial, but you all yourself honest.
Lol.
You really are a leftist shit weasel aren't you.
Did they turn down equal representation of the committee? No. They turned down heavily weighted to help the democrats. The second offer switched these concerns to heavily weight the members.
You are still deliberately conflating the bipartisan commission proposal and the select committee proposal.
For the umpteenth time: The FIRST PROPOSAL was for a bipartisan commission with membership to be equally weighted, and with each team having equal subpoena power. By the way, that wasn't Pelosi's opening offer. She compromised with Republicans when they demanded those two items.
https://www.npr.org/2021/02/24/970918563/mcconnell-blasts-pelosis-proposed-jan-6-commission-as-partisan
His [McConnell's] remarks appear to confirm news reports that Democratic leaders had proposed a panel that would have favored Democrats. A senior House Democratic aide said Pelosi's proposal was a "discussion draft, which was shared with the House Republican leadership one week ago and we requested edits."
...
McConnell said Wednesday added that in addition to equal party representation on the commission, there should be equal subpoena authority as well, a sentiment House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy had also expressed earlier on Wednesday.
That article was from Feb. 24, 2021. By May 14, they had reached a deal that included these two Republican demands. And then Republicans voted against it anyway, by moving the goalposts even further by demanding that the commission also consider the George Floyd protests/riots as well. That is when Pelosi said "fuck it, we're gonna do plan B" and proposed the select committee.
So just to review:
Democrats put out an initial proposal for a bipartisan commission that favored Democrats.
Republicans demanded changes including equal representation and equal subpoena power.
Democrats compromised and agreed to those changes.
Republicans rejected it anyway.
The Republicans never negotiated in good faith from the start.
"And then Republicans voted against it anyway, by moving the goalposts even further by demanding that the commission also consider the George Floyd protests/riots as well. That is when Pelosi said "fuck it, we're gonna do plan B" and proposed the select committee."
That doesn't sound like they voted against it. It sounds like Pelosi and the Democrats didn't want to include any context that might make it seem like J6 wasn't as unique or horrible as they had been painting it. Making additional demands isn't the same as saying no.
And by your own admission, the original proposal was not, in fact "bipartisan". If it was, it wouldn't have taken three months of whatever back and forth happened to finally get the Democrats to agree to the two demands of equal membership and equal subpoena powers (both of which should be the default for ANY select committee).
That doesn't sound like they voted against it.
Yes, they did.
https://www.npr.org/2021/05/28/1000524897/senate-republicans-block-plan-for-independent-commission-on-jan-6-capitol-riot
It sounds like Pelosi and the Democrats didn't want to include any context that might make it seem like J6 wasn't as unique or horrible as they had been painting it. Making additional demands isn't the same as saying no.
Republicans kept moving the goalposts. They kept making more and more demands which are never sufficient.
(both of which should be the default for ANY select committee).
The select committee is not the same as the bipartisan commission!
Look through some of the select committees that have been proposed in the recent past. They are all tilted in favor of the majority party. What Pelosi did was the same thing that both parties had done for a while now in creating select committees. It was not some unique attempt to punish Republicans. Go ahead and complain that the committees should be more equal as a matter of default, I am sympathetic to that idea. But that is not the convention currently in use REGARDLESS of whether it's about Jan. 6 or not.
Jeffy, knowing he will be lying his fat fucking ass off, first calls Jesse a liar. Jeffy then proceeds to lie his fat fucking ass off.
See? She’s so dishonest she’ll maintain the position that it wasn’t the intent of this illegal commission of The Party to campaign against the minority party.
Not speaking out is violence yells Mike.
I laughed my ass off when that fat fuck Jerry Nad-ler shat himself on stage, doesn't rate a prime time kangaroo court.
Maybe they should show the selfie video of the guy lecherously admiring his "favorite big booty latina" for the same reason? Personally, I thought that was funny enough to spontaneously laugh.
Ya gotta admit, that is a big booty.
Wasn’t Hawley supposed to be One of the GOP members of Congress who allegedly took the rioters on a reconnaissance tour the day before? By the way, what happened to that allegation? Why isn’t the January 6 committee presenting us with proof to support that claim?
I'm not really fond of that either.
Saying "they gave us something" is such cheap point-scoring too. I don't know. Hawley is not my guy, but this is such an ugly sentiment. I really don't like the AOC mocking about this either. I'm not going to give my opinions on January 6th, but it seems like all these people were genuinely afraid at the moment and I'm not really keen on mocking folks for that.
why is it funny that Hawley was running away from the violent mob intent on murdering Congress?
To be fair, when I watched the Twitter clips, the only thing that came to my mind was "The Left can't meme". Seriously, 10 shots at a meme of a senator running away and all 10 were terrible to the point that I think that either the "people running away to a soundtrack" idea isn't memeable or the creator doesn't understand memes.
The worst mistake of all was watching Twitter Clips. Twitter is basically useless other than allowing you to see what IowaHawk is up to.
Shouldnt he flee the crazed killer Ashli Babbit?
What I don't get is that Trump was so passionate about going to the scene of the riot that he punched his guards and grabbed the steering wheel, but he was also so uncaring that he sat around and watched television doing absolutely nothing. Can they not even get the story straight?
On Topic because it's The Topic of Topics:
Well I'll be damned, M'Lady! They got Him! As in Capital HIM!
Deputies arrest man calling himself God after nearly four-hour standoff
Published 4:55 pm Thursday,
https://www.salisburypost.com/2022/07/21/deputies-arrest-man-calling-himself-god-after-nearly-four-hour-standoff/
I got a serious rethink to do and He's got some serious 'splaining to do! 😉
Those bigoted cops, they should be forced to practice affirmation theory and genuflect to him and tithe their earnings to him
Hey, if he identifies as God, then that's how he should be treated.
Would fhat include everyone making the same claim? Like the two Jesuses (Jesae? Jesi?) in fhe song "Industrial Disease?"
https://youtu.be/g3X3rKtruSg
Reverend Arthur/Jerry Sandusky has gone
10 YEARS, 1 MONTH, 12 DAYS
without buggering any young men,
*as far as we know, https://www.cor.pa.gov/Facilities/StatePrisons/Pages/Greene.aspx
Frank
Then again, maybe not. The Zealots at Masadah held out against the Romans from 73 C.E. to 74 C.E., but this "God" only lasted 4 hours against modern donut-sponge po-po? Yeah, fuck this guy!
Trump never reached out to the Department of Defense
And as libertarians, we're quite thrilled that he didn't try to activate the fucking army to mobilize against civilians in the country, right? RIGHT?
"You're the commander in chief—you've got an assault going on the Capitol of the United States of America and there's nothing? No call? Nothing? Zero?" said Milley in audio from his deposition.
Nice to know that Mark Milley is quite gung-ho about utilizing the armed forces against rioters.
It's not like they were CCP members.
And milley has already stated that he was ready to, and promised the chinks he would commit treason, so there's a good person to listen to
That is quite an accusation.
Is there probable cause at least?
https://archive.ph/TwKdb
In the calls, Milley sought to assure Li the United States was stable and not going to attack and, if there were to be an attack, he would alert his counterpart ahead of time, the report said.
And don’t forget:
“Milley’s spokesman also appeared to confirm that Milley talked with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in the days following the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, to assure her that safeguards were in place to prevent Trump from launching nuclear weapons or ordering the military to somehow try to keep him in power after he lost the election.”
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/09/15/milley-held-secret-calls-with-china-others-as-trump-pushed-election-lies.html
Now that was a seditious act.
"some Defense Department officials have privately expressed anger that political leaders seemed to be trying to get the Pentagon to do the work of Congress and Cabinet secretaries, who have legal options to remove a president.
Mr. Trump, they noted, is still the commander in chief, and unless he is removed, the military is bound to follow his lawful orders. While military officials can refuse to carry out orders they view as illegal, they cannot proactively remove the president from the chain of command. That would be a military coup, these officials said."
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/08/us/politics/trump-impeachment-pelosi.html
Trying to incite a military coup is actual insurrection.
It is quite an accusation and a true one, but somehow there's no treason trial for Milley and we get this kangaroo court instead.
A true libertarian moment!
Reverend Arthur/Jerry Sandusky has gone
10 YEARS, 1 MONTH, 12 DAYS
without buggering any young men,
*as far as we know, https://www.cor.pa.gov/Facilities/StatePrisons/Pages/Greene.aspx
Frank
"activate the fucking army to mobilize against civilians in the country"
Well, they did bring in the National Guard to hang out for a week or so, just in case things got "insurrectiony" again.
But that was pelosi, so totes cool.
Sounds nazi-stormtrooperish. Jeff is certain to be upset at the lack of names on soldiers uniforms
he may not have reached out to the department of defense but prior to the protest he did ask to have the national guard present but Pelosi refused that request so why should he then also how was he going to stop it anyway since he was locked out of social media and as we know the SS would not allow him to go there to tell them to stop so this is all typical BS trump did nothing, yes because he could do nothing.
Gosh, how did Presidents communicate before Twitter?
You think the people at the capitol were watching tv or listening to the radio?
Woo-hoo libritarians for banana republic style show trials!
Government propaganda TV shows are the hallmark of liberty.
TeenReason libertarianism recognizes the importance of agitprop theatre in political hegemony.
Trump never reached out to the Department of Defense
In contrast to Congressional Democrats...wait, who was conducting the coup again?
And didn't Trump offer to mobilize National Guard reinforcements to the DC police, which were rejected by the mayor? Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
Dude, if you are at all trying to explain or excuse Trump then you are definitely "wrong".
Trump Pentagon first offered National Guard to Capitol four days before Jan. 6 riots, memo shows
Oh, did this come out during the January 6 hearings as well? That's kind of interesting to know. I'm sure the committee shared some interesting thoughts on that. Is there any footage of them discussing this?
They haven't got to it yet, but I'm sure as their so interested in fairness and integrity, that they'll have a whole episode devoted to it next season.
If not, maybe it will get mentioned in the post-credits scene when Samuel L Jackson tries to recruit Lynne Cheney to join the Avengers Initiative.
Unlike Pelosi who had a phone conversation with General Willey about arresting Trump before he could speak that day. There would have been real violence if they had arrested him that day, and not just one day of violence either.
Pelosi didn't care. She actually pushed for a military coup that day according to the NYT.
As there would've been had Trump actually called for violence/insurrection.
Probably should have.
Orange-dick-suckers will NEVER stop sucking orange dick!
Der TrumpfenFuhrer ***IS*** responsible for agitating for democracy to be replaced by mobocracy!
https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/24/politics/trump-election-warnings-leaving-office/index.html
A list of the times Trump has said he won’t accept the election results or leave office if he loses.
Essential heart and core of the LIE by Trump: “ANY election results not confirming MEEE as Your Emperor, MUST be fraudulent!”
September 13 rally: “The Democrats are trying to rig this election because that’s the only way they’re going to win,” he said.
Trump’s constant re-telling and supporting the Big Lie (any election not electing Trump is “stolen”) set up the environment for this (insurrection riot) to happen. He shares the blame. Boys will be boys? Insurrectionists will be insurrectionists, trumpanzees gone apeshit will be trumpanzees gone apeshit, so let’s forgive and forget? Poor Trump was misunderstood? Does that sound good and right and true?
It really should immediately make us think of Krystallnacht. Hitler and the NAZIs set up for this by constantly blaming Jews for all things bad. Jew-haters will be Jew-haters, so let’s forgive and forget? Poor Hitler was misunderstood? Does that sound good and right and true?
And mentally ill shit-munchers will never stop munching shit.
It’s funny because sqrlsy admitted he eats poop.
The Fixing Our Regulatory Mayhem Upsetting Little Americans (FORMULA) Act passed in the Senate yesterday
I'm voting against it because the name is so explicitly forced in order to generate an acronym. I don't care if it's the best bill ever, you're getting entirely too cute with the names.
What the fuck are Little Americans?
I think they come out of Birthing Persons.
Only on breeding farms where abortion liberty has been crushed by the patriarchy.
Girls dressed as handmaidens, chained up in stalls and pumping out evil xtians babies.
Children that then get put in cages!
Danny Woodburn and Peter Dinklage?
Wee Man?
Honestly just logged in to see what Fist was going to do with "Little Americans"
Guess he has actual work to do this morning, damnit
It happens sometimes.
It's a dumb term they used because they really, really wanted to be able to call it the FORMULA act. People talk about corruption in the federal government, but their truest love is incredibly tortured acronyms and initialisms.
My favorite still, from Bell labs though the military is almost certainly involved, is SNOBOL:
StriNg Oriented and symBOLic language
The creator of the language went on to found the CS department I studied at, and I choose to recognize it as the finest tortured acronym the military industrial complex ever blessed us with.
I have actually programmed in SNOBOL, albeit 35 years ago or so, and still have a language reference guide on my shelves. Next to Prolog and some other esoteric languages.
What the fuck are Little Americans?
The answer varies from State to State.
Does this mean we can go back to midget tossing?
As long as you toss midget-identified persons of all sizes.
if you're tired of salad tossing
It is perhaps the dumbest acronym ever.
Hey now! Let’s not dismiss the importance of acronyms. I’m sure there are highly paid focus groups working on this stuff all the time.
This shits important, dammit!
expand the types of products covered by the federal Women, Infants, and Children program, which only subsidizes certain brands of formula at present
I've talked about this at length. The subsidies are a huge part of the problem and why we're so dependent on a single point of failure, the plant in Michigan, in the first place. You can't cheer on the destruction of the free market and call yourself a libertarian.
The funny thing is the fda is even saying the contamination didn't come from the Michigan plant. And they delayed (or are still delaying) its reopening
Reverend Arthur/Jerry Sandusky has gone
10 YEARS, 1 MONTH, 12 DAYS
without buggering any young men,
*as far as we know, https://www.cor.pa.gov/Facilities/StatePrisons/Pages/Greene.aspx
Frank
"You can't cheer on the destruction of the free market and call yourself a libertarian."
60% of the articles here since Obama's election.
They just had a you'll pay the price for competition if you break up silicon very yesterday.
MammaryBahnFuhrer can’t refute the FACTS, as usual… What a surprise!
Lusts-after-your-web-sites Marxist “Christian Theological Expert” MammaryBahnFuhrer thinks that one of the Ten Commandments reads as follows:
Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s. Unless thy neighbor art a corporatist in Thine Righteous Eyes, in which case, Thou shalt steal ALL of their stuff & shit, howsoever Thy Power-Hungry Right-Wing Wrong-Nut Marxist Heart may desire.
Gibbledy-goop-braop-dash-wop.
MammaryBahnFuhrer's VERY best counter-argument! I bet your mamma is SOOOO very PROUD of You, Oh Perfectly Marxist One!
Is your mamma proud of you for munching shit, shit-muncher?
My mom's proud of me. Sqrlsy's mom just laid her eggs on the carcass and flew away. Sqrlsy hasn't seen her since.
This just in:
Looks like the next season of Jan. 6 will have a new cast and direction after Republicans win the House in November.
Maybe they will investigate the attack on the Mark O. Hatfield Courthouse in Portland?
Or yesterday's attack on Lee Zeldin.
Attempted political assassination, released on bail.
Bail? You mean, without actually having to pay any bail at all, right? Released on his own recognizance, ie, good faith.
Compare this to Jose Alba, who initially was held on $250,000 bond for defending himself.
Didn’t realize that. So it’s even worse. We’re fucked.
Yup.
And anyone who thinks that the midterms are going to save them are kidding themselves. Electoral fortification in every purple state has kicked into overdrive the last month and a half.
Didn't you hear? Covid is back in a big way! We'll need to go back to the voting standards of 2020... you know, just to be safe.
At this point, I'm surprised Zeldin hasn't been arrested for not dying.
HA!
If we didn’t get intense January 6th style riots after the Dobbs decision, we won’t get them after a Republican midterm victory.
"we didn’t get intense January 6th style riots after the Dobbs decision"
What planet do you live on? They're trying to assassinate judges and congressmen.
I know Dee’s got us muted, but does she have Spiritus Mundi? I look forward to the attempted political assassination yesterday being brought up in a month or so and watching her and jeffsarc play dumb and deny it.
Right Mic and Mac will spend their time initiating legislation for the agenda their supporters want, the bills will all lose by one vote and then back to business as usual, tax cuts, military spending and purging Trumpists.
"Next season, on Big Brother..."
"Biden has COVID-19."
I blame Drumpf. And #DeathSantis.
#LibertariansForBiden
#safeANDeffective
#MasksWork
"End the two-party system"
Absolutely. The Koch / Reason open borders agenda will eventually import enough obedient Democratic voters to turn the entire country into a single-party state like California is now.
#LibertariansForOnePartyRule
The Senate's bill—dubbed the Electoral Count Reform and Presidential Transition Improvement Act of 2022—would take aim at three procedural weaknesses in our system that Trump sought to exploit following the 2020 election.
But you're not going to waste the pixels actually telling us what those three weaknesses are? Thanks.
From Boehm's article:
To prevent state lawmakers from meddling with the results of an election after it has been held, the law clarifies that states must certify their results in accordance with whatever election laws are on the books when the vote is held.
This seems reasonable, except when you take into consideration that the laws in many states violated both the state and federal Constitutions.
In 2020, the election violated state laws on the books
But NATIONAL EMERGENCY! Defeating Trump, er, CORONA justified breaking some rules, right?
Not so much the laws, as it was the non-legislative "guidance" promulgated by various election officials that was often diametrically contrary to duly established state laws.
Second, the bill would set a hard deadline (six days before the Electoral College meets) for states to certify their results and would prohibit state lawmakers from submitting multiple sets of electors. If state officials don't comply, the bill sets up an expedited review process to be conducted by a panel of three federal judges, who would then certify results to the Electoral College and to Congress. The bill also mandates that Congress use the results certified by those judges in the event of a dispute later on.
Pretty much every aspect of this one strikes me as unconstitutional.
It worked out real well the last time a judge picked a president for us.
someone still upset that Justices stopped Gores attempt to illegal changes to how votes are counted in an attempt to be presedent
As bad as W was, Al Gore has shown himself to be even worse. And that is quite the task.
Yep.
Consti-what?
"To prevent state lawmakers from meddling with the results of an election after it has been held, the law clarifies that states must certify their results in accordance with whatever election laws are on the books when the vote is held."
But, what if they didn't obey those laws that were on the books for the election itself? What if election officials just arbitrarily decided to allow drop boxes or mail-in ballots against the laws on the books? Is it meddling to say those ballots were invalid?
And, is there a law that says only Democrats can contest an election and call for alternate electors, or does that only apply to Republican candidates?
So many questions, so many double-standards.
Nearly 2 years after the 2020 election courts have finally adjudicated that elections in at least 3 swing states were not conducted per state law in effect at the time with the potential for more to come. This bill would force the states to certify fraudulent elections.
Finally, the bill clarifies that the vice president's role in the final congressional certification of the Electoral College vote is purely ceremonial.
This portion is utterly meaningless. If the Constitution grants the VP certain powers, they cannot be curtailed by statute. If it doesn't grant him said powers (and my personal opinion is that it does not), then again, the statute serves no purpose.
And the standing bill is pretty explicit, anyway. The reception of the electoral votes is verified by tellers pulled from the House and Senate before the envelopes are handed to the VP. He opens the envelopes and reads off the count. The veracity is challenged before it gets to him, or by lodging a formal complaint when the votes are read off. The VP has no authority to challenge, it didn't need a correction.
The other two fail to answer questions brought up by the 2020 election, such as the usage of ballot drop-boxes that were ruled illegal by courts in three states after the fact. The legal challenges weren't settled, so therefore, according to this law, that state can't certify its electors, so it goes to a panel of three federal judges. That's just BEGGING for another constitutional crisis.
Honestly, one of my big take-aways from the 2020 election was that the timeframe between Election Day and the day that the votes are tallied in Congress is too short.
If there are legitimate challenges to be raised, running it through the legal system is not equipped to handle everything so quickly. We're looking at about 2 months to collect evidence, take depositions, conduct legal research, write briefs, hold oral arguments, issue a decision, file appeal, more briefing, more arguments, another decision, file for cert., more briefing, more arguments, SCROTUS decision. It's a recipe for chaos.
Somehow in 2000, though, the issue managed to get in front of SCOTUS by December 12, after having gone through Florida courts. In the past 20 years we've somehow lost all urgency about addressing election issues?
There was no standing or it was moot or something.
Maybe there should be less court involvement in elections, not more.
Go ahead and let aggrieved parties file whatever lawsuit that they wish, but at the end of the day, the state legislature makes the final call, on or before the deadline for having EC votes counted.
Or maybe we should consider other models for how elections ought to be run. Other nations manage to pull off elections without months of lawsuits.
Other nations manage to pull off elections without months of lawsuits.
Other nations require voters to show a valid ID before voting.
No need to get all racist on us.
including 3rd World countries
I like the fingers dipped in ink to prevent multiple voting (at least superficially).
Not THAT part of the models.
I'm totally fine with photo ID for voting.
Other nations also have nationwide standards for voting.
What do you think about this idea?
Since when. Youve constantly attacked laws requiring ID and called it a voting tax?
An example of you responding to voter ID.
https://reason.com/2022/02/09/georgia-election-investigation-fails-once-again-to-find-massive-voter-fraud/?comments=true#comment-9347108
Lying as usual. I was responding to the demand to impose a huge new set of requirements to vote, not merely an ID to vote. If a state demands an ID to vote, AND in-person-only voting, AND no ballot drop boxes, AND eliminating early voting, AND AND AND... then the aggregation of all of those requirements starts to add up to an undue burden on voting, and - here is the key point related to the previous discussion - without setting any acceptable standard on what constitutes "good enough". It becomes just an exercise in imposing requirements for the sake of requirements. That is what I was objecting to. But because you hate me and are dishonest, you cherry-pick one sentence out of a much larger discussion, even misrepresent that sentence, and use the twisted version to attack me.
So, Jesse, I'll say again that I am in favor of photo ID to vote. I am not in favor of imposing restrictions on voting just for the sake of imposing restrictions on voting, just to make Team Red "feel better" about voting. Restrictions on voting have to be tied to some clear standard of an acceptable voting process.
More lying, as usual.
Die, pedo.
Stop lying. I don’t know why you’re even worried about this after you’ve come out as pro pedophile on so m any issues. Like this is the one thing that will ruin your rep here. Like everyone but Sarc and Shrike doesn’t already actively disrespect and hate you. Like you haven’t already obliterated your own credibility.
Just embrace your leftist bullshit. It’s not like you’re fooling anyone here to begin with.
And now, Jesse, what do you think of having nationwide standards for voting?
We went through this yesterday dummy. The legislatures made the call state executives violated the laws.
How can you repeat such idiocy over and over?
https://reason.com/2022/07/21/the-senates-election-reform-bill-is-surprisingly-logical-and-bipartisan/?comments=true#comment-9611789
Apparently, it does need clarification, because a POTUS’ lawyer and several commenters here say it wasn’t clear enough.
Eastman himself admitted it would be laughed out of the Supreme Court, but he was just trying to advance any bullshit theory to buy time. I don't think it's illegal to try to advance a shitty legal theory to help your client, however.
If the bill only clarified the VP's role, redundant as it is, I'd be largely fine with it. But it introduces a couple of other things that I find problematic.
It is completely unethical for a lawyer to advise a client to break the law, and it may well be illegal depending on the law that is contemplated being broken.
It is a constitutional assertion, not statutory dummy.
Advising a client to break the law -vs- advancing a novel or untested legal or Constitutional theory to defend a particular course of action
Huge difference. Dumbass.
Did you actually read Eastman's memo?
https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/21/politics/read-eastman-memo/index.html
2. When he gets to Arizona, he announces that he has multiple slates of electors, and so is going to defer decision on that until finishing the other States. This would be the first break with the procedure set out in the Act.
In other words, advising Pence to break the law.
Maybe not illegal on his part, but worthy of criticism from anyone who cares about this country.
.....from anyone who cares about this country.
LOL
Salvador Allende, is that you?
Trump never reached out to the Department of Defense or any law enforcement bodies—to the chagrin of Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley.
Are we supposed to forget that Milley couldn't have taken the call anyway because he was swapping calls with Pelosi and Chinese military leaders to conspire against the POTUS?
When is the committee going to ask Milley about that?
“When is the committee going to ask Milley about that?”
Ha! Thanks, I needed a good chuckle this am.
Under any other administration, CPOS Milley and Pelosi would have been investigated for conspiracy to commit treason. What else can you conclude when it is discovered that a phone call was made to the military leaders of a hostile nuclear power from our nation's highest ranking military officer that implied the President was unfit for office and the military would refuse to follow his commands.
"When is the committee going to ask Milley about that?"
I'm sure that they'll get around to it in the early episodes of season two.
One could hope, but do any of us believe the GOP has the balls for that? Would be nice, but their track record says otherwise.
Biden has COVID-19.
I would think this merited higher billing, especially given the hysteria when Trump got it.
I think we all know Biden isn't running the show. We're just not allowed to say it.
Trump got the real one, Biden got wuflu light
Who knew Biden was some anti-vax chud? He even told us that the vaccine would prevent you from catching the 'vid. It's a shame that he couldn't take his own advice.
We were wondering how they were going to get rid of Biden before 2024.
Gonna have to fortify the midterms because Biden died.
I can definitely see them trying to at least postpone the midterms if Biden succumbs to covid.
Everyone going to be locked up again in the fall, will last through the midterms.
Dems gain house seats and 68 seats in the Senate.
"Kat Rosenfield on feminism and beauty."
Intersectional feminism is all about rejecting traditional patriarchal concepts of how women are "supposed" to look. Like the idea that they shouldn't be obese. That's why as a nonbinary pansexual feminist I find Stacey Abrams far more beautiful than Kristi Noem.
#BlackGirlMagic
#DiabetesIsFatShaming
#Thebiggerthebetter
#MoreCushionForThePushin
And personally, I can't wait for the government to institute personal attraction justice, and assign sexual partners and script sexual encounters. Based on intersectional feminism, CRT, and body/hygiene diversity.
For some people, this will mean less breeding. For me, much much more.
Dibs on Tulsi!
intersectional feminism
When they're dead, they're just hookers.
Take a look at fashion and hairdos for women from the forties (when a lot fewer men were around). Their clothing looks like overdone upholstery. And their hair looks like a deranged cake icer went wild.
Remember when tom Cotton wrote that column in 2020 arguing for the use of military force against rioters?
FALSE EQUIVALENCE
And the editor got canceled for publishing it.
For a brief moment in time, Tom Cotton was Hitler. Shortly after, Trump returned to being Hitler.
And now being criticized for not being Hitler enough.
#BidenBoom update!
In 2022 Democrats have raised the minimum wage by: $0.00 / hour
In 2022 Reason.com benefactor Charles Koch's net worth has increased by: $7.61 billion
#VoteDemocratToHelpCharlesKoch
Well, both parties can now agree that there's something positive about Joe Biden.
What's the over/under on them doing another one of these Jan 6th committees? I would almost bet money they will try and get another going before 2024, unless midterms go their way and then we will probably get another early next year.
I'd put my money on 1 October.
Will it be a surprise?
Of course. Nobody expects the
SpanishJanuary 6th Inquisition!They already announced next season in September.
I hope The Duffer Brothers are in charge of writing it.
It'll probably be whoever wrote the godawful Resident Evil series.
The lead character blows, as do both acresses that play her.
I'm two episodes in and entirely unimpressed. I nearly gave up last episode but will give it one more because I love the dude who plays the father.
Will probably be the Wachowski "sisters".
Ah, yeah, I'm thinking the goal is to get more viewers rather than flopping to a sequel of the CGI remake to High School Musical or Pitch Perfect or whatever.
I'm figuring on another impeachment trial based on the compelling evidence presented. I haven't actually been paying attention but ENB is pretty jazzed up about it and that's good enough for me.
"The Senate's bill—dubbed the Electoral Count Reform and Presidential Transition Improvement Act of 2022"
The ECRPTI Act? Booooorrrrrrinnnng! Come back to us when you can make it spell something clever.
This person gets it.
They just could not figure out a name for the bill that gave them NEVER AGAIN TRUMP.
INability
Securing
Unapproved
Real
Reform of
Electoral
Counting,
Transitioning
Into
Other
Narratives
Act of 2022?
The Electoral Numeric Count Reform and Your Presidential Transition Act of 2022. Completely anonymous, completely trustworthy.
Fixing Our Regulatory Mayhem Upsetting Little Americans (FORMULA) Act
*facepalm*
Don’t criticize the professionals, Jeffy.
hey man, these are bill/acronym experts. You going to question the experts? Experts cant possibly be totally moronic in anything they do.
Die, pedo
You never want an official document to have the word "mayhem" in the title. It's too colorful and imprecise. It shows where the priorities of the legislators are-being cute at the expense of precision.
Or it shows that Allstate is expanding their advertising reach.
Regulatory Mayhem is truth in advertising though and a great band name.
Hawley is such a fucking tool.
Brandyshit is such a TDS-addled asshole.
But is it fair to laugh at him. It bothers A Thinking Mind:
https://reason.com/2022/07/22/january-6-committee-wraps-summer-hearings-with-footage-of-hawley-fleeing-detailed-account-of-trumps-day/?comments=true#comment-9612192
Whoosh! (Again)
It's fair because it's a sitting senator imposing laws upon us while being a hypocrite.
Paul Pelosi loves seeing Nancy Pelosi's cultists lap up her lies about her providing him stock tips, because being a multimillionaire is so 1990s
#BillionaireOrBust
who cares? It's like reading People magazine articles and caring that the actress or british royal is a bitch. it has nothing to do with anything.
No mention of Lee Zeldin?
I'm listening to Led Zeppelin right now, man.
Did someone try to stab them on stage?
The only deadly weapons on stage were Bonham's drumsticks, Page's guitar, Jones' bass, and Plant's trouser snake.
Too local? No harm no foul? Attempted assassinations are common these days so it's not really news?
I guess we won’t be getting any “dangers of violent rhetoric”-style lectures from the DNC and their media partners on this stabbing attempt.
The Governor of New York, Kathy Hochul, called him a "dangerous, far-right extremist" and just hours before the attempted stabbing her office sent out a mass email with locations he would be at and called for her supporters to harrass him there.
https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1550318862457077760
https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1550315473778130945
Can’t she just have the FBI arrest him like Whitmer did?
Released on his own recognizance after assaulting a sitting Congressman campaigning as the national party nominee for Governor of NY. And there was nothing 'attempted' about it. He put a device designed to cause excruciating pain when punching someone on his hand and then went up to get the microphone from Zeldin. His plan to physically prevent Zeldin from speaking was 100% successful.
I personally know 2 people who have spent multiple days in jail for arguing with a police officer during a traffic stop.
I personally know 2 people who have spent multiple days in jail for arguing with a police officer during a traffic stop.
They should have just assaulted them while yelling Leftist slogans.
"...was focused on former President Donald Trump's actions as the January 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol was taking place..."
TDS-addled piles of shit like ENB, any protest which supports Trump is a riot.
Eat shit and die, ENB.
I cant wait until the R congress spends all their time impeaching Biden and having endless Hollywood produced hearings about the hunter biden laptop, hooker, crack, and (most importantly) foreign money laundering / influence selling under Joe's name.
Its not productive, and will be a massive waste of time. But hey, if the democrats want to turn congress into even more of a joke that just wastes time on show trials rather than passing invasive legislation, it appears we have to give them what they asked for.
Im OK with a few years of Biden and Clinton investigations to waste some more taxpayer resources.
Wait, I thought the purpose of Congress is to conduct endless political campaigns while the executive branch runs the country. Did my public schooling teach me wrong?
There will be no impeachment by Mc and Mac when they take over. They may even have Jan 6th hearings in the house and Senate. They will be busy trying to find the next Bush to run in 2024.
BTW AOC will be 35 in 2024 look for her to be running for the dem nomination. I also expect Illhan Omar to throw her head bandage into the ring. the Constitution is no roadblock for the dems.
(((Hollywood))) will not permit their slave GOP figureheads to do any such thing
Hell, impeach every member of the DNC that received ACTBLUE money from the violent far left terrorist group antifa and their fundraising arm BLM. They burned cities, assaulted Congress and DC but were cheered on by the media and Demoncrats.
"Amid threats, security rises at meetings of public officials"
[...]
"Even one of the main social events — trivia night — would be at an undisclosed location. This was no meeting of spies or undercover law enforcement agents. Instead, these were the security protocols for a gathering this week in Madison, Wisconsin, of state election bureaucrats from around the U.S.
While the hush-hush measures might seem a bit extreme, they were put in place because of the very real threats against election workers that have been escalating since the 2020 presidential election as former President Donald Trump continues to promote the lie that widespread fraud cost him re-election.
[...]
Four people have been charged by federal prosecutors, with one of them pleading guilty last month. In that case, Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold was the subject of multiple threatening posts on social media..."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/amid-threats-security-rises-at-meetings-of-public-officials/ar-AAZPuNK
Wanna bet if those four people were 'threatening' several SCOTUS justices, they'd be seen as 'mostly peaceful'?
So, for those who think Trump reacted poorly to the election results: what was he supposed to do?
Just accept corruption to screw over the American people without making a fuss?
The entire system was in on the fix. What the hell then?
-Soap box: denied/rigged
-judicial box: denied/rigged
-ballot box: denied/rigged
"Oh well, guess The Powers That Be can't be argued against. Too bad legitimate government and our way of life is destroyed."
Is that the proper response?
The establishment, deep state, media, NGO complex, corporate America, and big tech get to call the shots, regardless of the American people's will?
All they have to do is "fortify elections to ensure the proper outcomes" and nobody else gets a fucking say?
The republic is now dead.
The publishing of that Times article is what cinched it for me. They knew they could proudly proclaim what they did to the elections and brag about it to our faces.
And if they published THAT, you know they did a whole lot more.
Yeah I think Trump went too far with the Pence thing. But he had some pretty good reasons to at least suspect election fraud. I know I did and still do. And it is becoming increasingly evident that my instincts were correct. As it stands, the Big Lie is that Joe Biden is a legitimate president.
Perhaps a dumb question, but when does defense counsel, for Donald Trump, get to cross-exam all these J6 hearing witnesses?
Under oath of course, and on prime time national tv.
According to the prosecution, the defense counsel was invited to participate refused, so never.
The same day we get to hear from the Secret service men who denied that Trump ever threatened them or tired to take over the car. SILENCE for those who deny the stories
Is this the first national political show trial in American history? I'm trying to think of something similar but I'm drawing a blank.
I wasn't old enough for the Watergate hearings, but off the top of my head that is the immediate parallel I could think of. And maybe Monica Lewinsky? But again, I was young and couldn't give two fucks.
I also am not watching this one because I'm middle-aged and couldn't give two fucks.
To be fair, the trial wasn't about Monica Lewinsky. It was about the women he assaulted prior to being elected, she just became the most famous person from the trial.
I guess you could count the Trump impeachment hearings.
Was going to also add in the Clinton impeachment, but that was left off the comment.
The Benghazi hearings come to mind. Didn't watch those either, but I recall them as being a political show trial to sink Hillary. Not saying what she did was ok, but they definitely blew it out of proportion to score political points
Of course every public official has no government email trail, it's standard practice. It was blown out of proportion only because of the blatant illegality of what they uncovered. If it had been a documented pick-up it probably would have been embarrassing, but her line about taking responsibility would have some credibility because we'd have some semblance of understanding what was going on at State in the days leading up to that mess.
You mean after our embassy was attacked by Muslim extremists and they knew about it before hand and didn’t do anything, then afterwards they sent out their hacks to all the Sunday shows blaming it on a YouTube video, then arrested the guy that made the video for good measure? Then found out that Hillary was using a private server so she could ignore FOIA laws and cover up all the illegal shit she was doing?
there have been a LOT of Mafia hearings before the Senate wholly intended for spectacle.
"...You're the commander in chief—you've got an assault going on the Capitol of the United States of America and there's nothing? No call? Nothing? Zero?" said Milley in audio from his deposition..."
As I recall, Milley was, by then, running his own foreign policy efforts, warning foreign powers regarding Trump, so his opinion of what was going on is subject to some skepticism.
For instance, what "assault"?
Term Limits for SCOTUS?
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/07/21/supreme-court-reform-term-limits-00046883
As soon as the court is majority communist the left will want to go back to lifetime appointments. this has nothing to do with principles and everything to do with how to get an advantage now.
Principles and SC membership is dead, killed by the GOP over the last several years. Of course democrats are not concerned with principles now, and as the party with majority support of Americans, you can expect no mercy as they gain the upper hand. That's how it works simpleton.
Lol.
You say that, but I think you'd find a majority of conservatives are open to or in agreement with term limits on the court. This is in spite of them having a supposed 6-3 advantage in the current SC. Some people do have principles. Republican politicians might not, but their voters tend to.
Of course democrats are not concerned with principles now
It's not like they ever were to begin with.
Well of course partisans will be partisans.
But there are solid non-partisan reasons for having judges serve a limited tenure, and not a lifetime appointment.
The proposal given in the article would have SCOTUS justices serve 18-year terms, with terms staggered to expire 2 years apart, in the 1st and 3rd years of every president's term.
I think it is at least worth exploring the idea.
Nobody cares groomer.
Same for all the noise about reforming the Electoral College.
As soon as the Electoral College is bad for republicans the left will sing its praises, guaranteed. You will not find a single leftist pondering the 'fairness' of the EC if they are getting low-pop states to go left.
The EC is great for fortifying elections. You only need to fortify a couple of key cities in a couple key states.
Imagine if they had to fortify the ENTIRE country? That's so much work.
Oh, they were up to it.
How do you think Joe Biden got 80m+ votes?
a bunch of dead people
Well, lately the EC has favored Republicans over Democrats.
An argument in favor of the EC is of course that if presidential elections were decided by a true national popular vote, then there would be no need to 'fortify' the entire country at all - just drive up turnout in densely populated areas and that will overwhelm the votes from rural areas. So, not as you claim.
And you'll be screaming like a stuck pig about the unfairness of it all. Your party has won 1 popular vote for president since 1988, and the winner had incumbent advantages he didn't earn. ONE VOTE SINCE 1988!
So change the voting to all states get the same number of electoral votes. That would be fair, right? Majority of electoral votes wins!
And as a reminder, Joe, the popular vote means nothing. Just that the populous states think they are more important, know better and should have more say than the other states.
Having a larger group of idiots doesn't make you smarter overall.
My party has never won a single popular vote. Or any election at the federal or gubernatorial level.
There is no popular vote.
Talking about popular vote is like saying the team with the most total yards of offense instead of the one with the most points on the scoreboard wins the game by changing the rules to say that *after* the game is over.
There is no popular vote because the campaigns and elections were based on the rules of the Electoral College. Everyone planned their strategy for campaigning based on garnering EC votes. Voters in locked-in states made their Election Day decisions to perhaps stay home knowing their candidate had basically already won (or lost) their state.
Based on the final score of a football game played under the current rules you can't say who'd have won if 2 points were also awarded based on each first down gained, because team strategies would change based on the different rules in effect at the time of the game. If fouls in a basketball game resulted in 2 points being deducted from your team score rather than allowing the other team the chance to shoot free throws, think the game would be played differently?
If we elected the President based on elections allocated by Congressional district one vote per district plus 2 statewide votes, think the campaigns and votes would be different? So the same is true of saying "popular vote". We don't have a "popular vote", so saying Clinton (or Gore) won the "popular vote" is not true.
It is true that when aggregating the votes across all states, that they had pluralities. But that's like saying Clinton had 658 yards of total offense (she had 68.5M votes) and Trump had 629 yards of total offense (62.9M votes), and saying she should have won.
But the fact is, that despite moving the ball up and down the field somewhat better than Trump, she turned the ball over 5 times (lost 5 states that Obama carried twice) and failed to score points when it counted. Someone crying about total yards off offense is readily countered with "Scoreboard!".
10 paragraphs on the jan 6 show trial. good grief.
is doing a job for spite a healthy thing?
Don't worry, they will probably publish another article about it before the end of the day. You know, to make a place for the commenters to yell at each other over the weekend.
>>They have come forward and they have told the American people the truth.
Liz Cheney is a nut and you're culpable for not calling out the nonsense.
As an elected official who swore an oath, Trump was obligated by law to defend the constitution and the federal government. He chose not to do that.
Case closed.
LOCK HIM UP!
You want to explain to us how Trump chose not to defend the constitution and the federal government?
He failed to call out the troops on American citizens. That makes him a fascist.
Are you deaf, dumb, and blind?
Thousands of people carrying his flags attacked the Capital and its police in an effort to stop the government perform its constitutional duty and he did nothing to stop them for 3 hours.
If you need a road map or program to figure this out you're beyond help.
PS If a jury needs help, the evidence is overwhelming.
And your side bombed the building. What's your point?
Are you deaf, dumb, and blind?
No, and unlike you I'm not gullible and retarded either.
Thousands of people carrying his flags attacked the Capital and its police in an effort to stop the government perform its constitutional duty and he did nothing to stop them for 3 hours.
1. Tell me what Trump should've done (please say call out the National Guard), and;
2. Not even a year earlier people the senate in an effort to stop the government perform its constitutional duties regarding the supreme court, and people attacked the Whitehouse and the capitol police in another effort to do the same.
And during Trump's inauguration in Jan 2017 you guys burned down whole cities in protest.
Why is this somehow different or worse?
As urged by his staff, daughter and sons, and numerous advisors, he could have tweeted or made a public statement asking the rioters to cease and desist.
No, nothing like this has happened before and your an idiot if you truly think so in fact Biden oversaw and enforced a lawful and peaceable approval of the EC and a peacefull transition of power.
LOCK HIM UP!
"he could have tweeted or made a public statement asking the rioters to cease and desist."
You mean like this tweet?
“I am asking for everyone at the U.S. Capitol to remain peaceful. No violence! Remember, WE are the Party of Law & Order – respect the Law and our great men and women in Blue. Thank you!
Please support our Capitol Police and Law Enforcement. They are truly on the side of our Country. Stay peaceful!”
Or the video he then posted saying “I know your pain, I know you’re hurt, but you have to go home now, we have to have peace. We have to have law and order, we have to respect our great people in law and order.”?
https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/trump-video-telling-protesters-at-capitol-building-to-go-home-transcript
Either you have the memory of a goldfish or you're retarded.
Trump did not ask his followers to stop and leave until more than 3 hours after the assault on the Capital began and his 1st tweet, an hour plus after it began urged them on and claimed Pence was yellow. Even his kid were desperately trying to get him to call them off.
Wait, are you now actually trying to claim that issuing a statement on an evolving event in just three hours is too long?
You went from lying that he didn't make a public statement at all, to opining that just three hours from the very start is too long, in only three short posts.
As for "calling them off" were the protesters browsing Twitter at the time? kicking back and watching some CNN?
You shills can't even get your lies straight.
According to Dee they were all watching themselves on TV.
You know what I saw in all that released footage from j6. People staring at their phones waiting for direct orders on Twitter.
You really are a fucking retard.
Trumps tweet about Pence was read over loud speakers to rioters and many of them said they were there because he asked them to be. Of course a tweet or announcement by Trump to cease and desist would have registered and caused many to do just that.
"Trumps tweet about Pence was read over loud speakers to rioters"
I don't like to sealion, but I'd like to see evidence of them setting up loudspeakers and reading out Trumps tweets in the capitol.
If true, there has to be cell phone footage of that.
Huh, 6 hours later and Joe Asshole has no evidence of his claim.
No, nothing like this has happened before
No you're flat out lying. How many examples would you like because I can post over fifty, in addition to the three recent ones that I gave you.
You haven't given one jack ass.
I gave you three and you pretended to ignore them, you lying fuck.
Believe there have been 2 state level examples from democrats just this year.
Speaking of the "invasion of the the insurrectionists", the several similar--albeit much smaller--"invasions" at different parts of Capitol Hill have been memory-holed...
And while the Jan 6 protest was only "mostly" peaceful, the media keeps repeating "5 killed". Bear in mind that Capitol police killed one woman, that one Capitol Hill police officer died later from injuries he apparently sustained from the crowd, and that 3 others died from "medical emergencies". My best efforts lead me to understand that 2 of those were heart attacks that seem to have just coincided with the events rather than caused by them; the last one seems (?) to have been injuries due to a fall.
Capitol Police Arrest Protesters Inside Senate Office Building
Capitol Police Arrest Protesters Inside Senate Office Building
Capitol Police moved swiftly to stop protesters unfurling banners at a U.S. Senate office building in Washington...
[October, 2011]
Protesters gained entrance to the Hart Senate office building's atrium and dropped two banners, one reading "End War Now" and the other "People for the People."
NBC News reports as soon as demonstrators unfurled their signs, Capitol Police placed them under arrest. At least six have been arrested for unlawful conduct - demonstrating. Dozens of other demonstrators ran through the building's upper levels chanting and waving smaller signs.
The offices of Democratic senators Dianne Feinstein and Harry Reid are located inside the Hart building, as well as Republican Marco Rubio.
The political protests rumble into a second week in the nation's capital. The demonstrations, smaller in size than the Occupy Wall Street protest in New York City, have for the most part been restrained and peaceful. On Saturday, one demonstrator was arrested after a group attempted to enter the Smithsonian Air and Space museum. Guards repelled the demonstrators with pepper spray, and the museum shut down early.
Scores of Kavanaugh protesters arrested after descending on Senate building
Scores of Kavanaugh protesters arrested after descending on Senate building
Morgan Chalfant and Melanie Zanona
More than 300 people were taken into custody by police on Thursday afternoon on Capitol Hill after descending on...
[October, 2018]
More than 300 people were taken into custody by police on Capitol Hill after descending on a pair of Senate office buildings Thursday afternoon to protest the confirmation process of Brett Kavanaugh, President Trump's Supreme Court nominee.
The vast majority of the arrests, 293, were a result of protests in the Hart Senate Office Building, where protesters crowded in the atrium. Loud chants could be heard throughout the building, which is structured so the hallways of each floor open up and look out onto the first floor.
Those arrested in Hart were charged with crowding, obstructing or incommoding, according to Capitol Police. Another nine people were arrested on the fourth floor of Dirksen Senate Office Building and charged with unlawful demonstrations.
Photos of the Day: 575 Protesters Charged at Senate’s Hart Building at Immigration Rally - Roll Call
Photos of the Day: 575 Protesters Charged at Senate’s Hart Building at I...
An afternoon of protests ended in many arrests in the Hart Senate Office Building on Thursday as a group of most...
[June, 2018 ]
An afternoon of protests ended in many arrests in the Hart Senate Office Building on Thursday as a group of mostly female protesters flooded the atrium of the work space to protest President Donald Trump’s immigration policies.
United States Capitol Police charged nearly 575 individuals with “unlawfully demonstrating,” according to a Capitol Police statement Thursday.
Inline image
[Isn't that "inciting", Senator Warren??]
Protesters and police in disarray amid anti-Trump demonstrations - Roll Call
Protesters and police in disarray amid anti-Trump demonstrations - Roll ...
Demonstrators protesting President Donald Trump and the prospect of war in Iran occupied the Hart Senate Office ...
[January, 2020]
Demonstrators protesting President Donald Trump and the prospect of war in Iran occupied the Hart Senate Office building Monday. Active protests are prohibited in the Senate office buildings, but demonstrators maintained that they would work within those limitations by not chanting or waving signs, occasionally invoking the ire of Capitol Police but not the handcuffs.
I would say that is exactly what he did by exhausting all avenues to counter the obvious coup that was taking place.
The result of the Jan. 6th show trial illustrates this exactly as the one change they are moving for is the obscure loophole Trump legally tried to use as a last resort. Close a 100 year old loophole is what we just got for the 4 or 5 showtrial episodes.
Enjoy, Joe.
There aren't enough prisons in the world to lock up the politicians, law enforcement, and others in government who have violated that oath.
Doofus, we are talking about an actual physical attack on the government and its representatives and employees in order to half its legal function.
Like when Dem activists raided the senate in an actual physical attack, to stop it from performing its constitutional duties regarding SCOTUS confirmation?
Or is that different because reasons?
Or the left celebrated a riot forcing the president to a bunker.
They were arrested and no democratic leaders urged them on and participated. Any of them who were elected government officials should have been prosecuted
"no democratic leaders urged them on and participated."
You just can't stop lying, can you.
"New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand addressed protesters, telling them, "This is a moment about all of you — all of you are speaking truth to power because you care about the future, you care about our children, you care about who is leading this country and who sits on the highest court in the land...
Massachusetts Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren also addressed the crowd...
Diane Russell, a Democratic official from Maine... traveled to the nation's capital to protest Kavanaugh's nomination.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cancel-kavanaugh-protest-hart-senate-building-amy-schumer-emily-ratajkowski-today-2018-10-04/
Huh, 6 hours later and no response from Asshole Joe.
He'll sneak in and post a couple of days from now when nobody remembers this thread so he can lie unchallenged.
When people actually attack the government they tend to like, have guns and stuff. They, you know, attack.
This wasn't an attack. It was a bunch of MAGA yahoos storming the Capital to "Stop the Steal" without arms or a coherent plan.
It it really was an attack then it was the most incompetent insurrection attempt in the history of history.
It was a bunch of MAGA yahoos storming the Capital to "Stop the Steal" without arms or a coherent plan.
Pretty much this.
Criminal acts do not require competency.
Even if those crimes are directed by the FBI?
Our election was hijacked. There is no question. Congress has a duty to #ProtectOurDemocracy & #FollowTheFacts.
Nancy Pelosi
And then there’s the Democrat insurrection…
1:09 P.M. ET: Rep. Jim McGovern of Massachusetts rose to object to the certificate from Alabama.
“The electors were not lawfully certified, especially given the confirmed and illegal activities engaged by the government of Russia,” McGovern said.
Biden denied McGovern on the grounds that he didn’t have a senator’s signature on his written objection.
1:14 P.M.: Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland rose to object to 10 of Florida’s 29 electoral votes.
“They violated Florida’s prohibition against dual office holders,” Raskin said.
Again, despite the fact that Raskin pointed out that he had his objection in writing, he failed to get a senator’s signature.
1:15 P.M.: No sooner had the Florida question been settled than its neighbor to the north was the subject of another objection, when Washington’s Rep. Pramila Jayapal objected to Georgia’s vote certificate.
“It is over,” Biden told the congresswoman.
1:21 P.M.: Rep. Barbara Lee of California brought up voting machines and Russian hacking when she objected following the counting of Michigan’s votes.
“People are horrified by the overwhelming evidence of Russian interference in our election,” Lee said.
Once again, her objection was denied for the lack of a senator’s signature. They also turned off her microphone.
1:23 P.M.: After New York’s tally was read, Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas stood up to object.
“I object on the massive voter suppression that included –” Jackson Lee began.
“The debate is not in order,” Biden interrupted. Again, the congresswoman lacked a senator’s signature.
1:28 P.M.: Arizona’s Rep. Raul Grijalva rose to object after North Carolina’s tally. He tried to object on violations of the Voting Rights Act, but Biden shut him down.
As you may have guessed, he didn’t have the signature of a senator.
Once he gave up, Jackson Lee tagged him out and tried to object to the votes herself. They cut off her microphone, too.
“There is no debate. There is no debate. There is no debate,” a visibly agitated Biden said as he gaveled.
1:31 PM: Jackson Lee made another appearance minutes later after South Carolina’s certification.
“There is no debate in the joint session,” Biden said, shutting her down once more.
1:36 PM: Biden must have thought, after five minutes of peace and getting through the state of West Virginia, that the House members might observe the rules. Lee wasn’t even able to make it through her objection before Biden said, “There is no debate.”
They cut off her microphone again.
1:37 PM: Wisconsin’s votes had been read. With just Wyoming to go, the finish line was in reach.
Jackson Lee once again tried to make an objection on the grounds of Russian interference in the election.
“The objection cannot be received,” Biden said.
1:38 PM: The final state’s votes had been read. Then entered California Rep. Maxine Waters.
Taking a play from her own book – she objected to the certification of George W. Bush’s 2000 election – Waters admitted that she didn’t have a senator’s signature on her objection.
“I wish to ask: Is there one United States senator who will join me in this letter of objection?” Waters asked. Through House Speaker Paul Ryan’s chuckle and boos from the rest of the chamber, it was clear that there was not.
1:40 PM: The states were counted, but three protestors started yelling from the visitors’ gallery of the chamber. At least one of them was reciting the Constitution as he was taken away by security.
somebody's never seen an insurrection.
Sri Lanka still doesn't exist.
Reason hasn't reported on it? Well that's your cue. Tell everyone what Reason really thinks. Then when they do post something on the subject you can call them liars for disagreeing with the voices in you head. It's the only way you can win an argument.
Neither does holland.
Get ready
https://www.axios.com/2022/07/22/trump-2025-radical-plan-second-term
This almost makes me want to vote for Trump this time.
Long overdue. I'll vote for almost anyone who promises this.
I'm in.
I wonder how Reason would cover such a thing?
Fantastic.
It's a good thing when Axios is panicking.
So, Reason is all in for these dumb-ass "hearings." Will they breathlessly report every detail of the Fauci hearings, when the GOP gets the House this fall?
For a libertarian publication, they're really not very concerned about the waste of public resources and time going into this bullshit, and the reduction of Congress to a reality TV show and sorority full of mean girls, while the country is governed by executive orders by POTUS and bureaucratic rule-making by faceless career "public servants."
As a taxpayer, I'd like to see the bill for the production of all this nonsense. How much did this bullshit cost me?
>>libertarian publication
two things wrong here.
"Will they breathlessly report every detail of the Fauci hearings, when the GOP gets the House this fall?"
That suggests they will actually try and do that. I have my doubts.
IF, big fucking IF, the GOP has hearings when they reclaim the House, you can 100% expect the following from Teen Reason:
1. Claims that they are wasting tax payer money on political attacks of their opponents
2. Claims that the hearings are illegal
3. Pouncing by Republicans
Oh, the pouncing that will go on....
The "dumb ass hearings" have resulted in 59% of Americans deciding Trump performed a criminal act. The hearings of course have consisted of almost 100% of the testimony coming from GOP and Trump advisors, staff members, and politicians.
No they haven't, you gullible fuck.
Even IF 59% of people believe he committed a criminal act, pretty much every poll has him leading Biden by a substantial margin. In pretty much every poll, Biden is third, behind Trump the Criminal and Ron "Don't Say Gay" DeSantis.
That's how fucking bad your guy is. People would rather vote for someone they think is a criminal than Joe Biden.
Your numbers are bullshit, and regardless, it’s a lot easier to convince people of things when you lie with impunity and have the far left media covering.
Report: The Senate Armed Services Committee Calls For Pentagon To Cease Rooting Out “Extremism” In The Military
https://rollcall.com/2022/07/20/senate-ndaa-to-pentagon-immediately-halt-fight-against-extremism/
Good fucking luck. You can't "fortify" a military without constant rolling purges.
Blackstone prepares a record $50 billion to snap up real estate during the coming crash.
$30.3 billion for the US, and together with funds dedicated to real estate in Asia and Europe, Blackstone will have a war chest of more than $50 billion.
The firm raised the fund, expected to be the largest traditional private-equity vehicle in history, in just three months.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/blackstone-puts-finishing-touches-on-record-real-estate-vehicle-11658349652
Wouldn't be surprised if it is taxpayer funded war chest.
I was just about to wonder where they got all that money.
ZIRP loans from the Fed.
This is worth 1:49 of your time.
https://twitter.com/obianuju/status/1550185756974452736?s=20&t=18WlvPOogNYAWDFLY1OcEg
Goddam it. Not supposed to be a reply.
My sentiments exactly. It all comes down to, who do you prioritize? who has the most to lose?
We're almost to the point where they swoop in and buy the rubble of the homes and businesses we can no longer afford -- at pennies on the dollar.
Meanwhile, in the world of libertarian issues:
Democrats Argue Stabilizing Braces Turn Rifles Into Machine Guns In Congressional Hearing On Gun Control
And:
Democrats trying to figure out the difference between a bump stock and an arm brace. They want to ban both but they don’t even know the difference.
https://twitter.com/RepThomasMassie/status/1549907267218178050
I wonder what's the issue on the left side that I'm just completely ignorant of. I see this all the time with guns. I don't know much about guns, but I somehow am able to identify error after error in the public debate.
What's the thing on the left side of the spectrum where I'm just completely unaware of how wrong I am.
They made some of our kids scan a QR code every time they sat down in the school cafeteria for contact tracing and now....
Reporter: "Where exactly was the president infected?"
Jha: "Where was he infected? I don't think we know. I certainly don't know. If you have any thoughts on that..."
Karine Jean-Pierre: "Look, I don't think that matters, right? I think what matters is we prepared for this[.]"
https://twitter.com/sarah_wxtx/status/1550195695063375872
Liked Uncle Remus Chairing better than Gloria Stivik-Chaney
Today's Journalistic facts brought to you by Twitter Randos.
“January 6...was one of the darkest days in our nation's history and Pres. Trump was treating it as a celebratory occasion.”
lol
In audio footage from Pence's Secret Service agents, you can hear them discussing how rioters are getting dangerously near. "If we lose any more time, we may lose the ability to leave," said one agent. "There are six officers between us and the people that are 5 to 10 feet away from me," said another.
Dangerously near. DANGEROUSLY NEAR
Trust me folks, this is no mostly peaceful BLM riot, this is a January 6 riot, lined with bodies and the blood of the innocent!
'And as the rioters approached NEAR, the insurrection turned deadly.' - farcical narrator of J6 extravaganza
Democrats have been pressuring Google to limit ads and other search results for these businesses. Now, Republicans are threatening to punish Google if they do.
There's so much bowf sidez in this fight I can't even... as the kids say.
I don't know why some right-wing billionaire doesn't fund an alternative search engine. That would appear to be the appropriate response.
Duck Duck Go, I think? It's pretty terrible. They also tried it with social media (Parlor) and Amazon shut them down.
Duck Duck Go isn't that bad. It's better than Bing.
It's also great for demonstrating how the censorship and gaming results on Google is overwhelming.
There are, and twenty of them have been swallowed up by Google, the others pine away under a hostile regulatory atmosphere.
Don't forget, Facebook and Google got as big as they did PRECISELY due to government investment, patronage and sponsorship, either directly via In-Q-Tel, or through their proxies.
They're not natural free market entities.
Well, if a billionaire launches his own search engine, he can ignore a Google or Meta attempt at a takeover, no?
Though I have visions of a search engine where if you enter, say, "evolution", the first results are from answersingenesis, conservapedia, and the Family Research Council.
Look at you pretend that the fact that they are where they are due to government investment, patronage, sponsorship and regulation, somehow doesn't matter. And that magically they can be bested by a plucky billionaire.
Never change, Shrike.
I pretend nothing. What are the technical obstacles?
And one can expect that major companies benefit from government spending and support - common enough in very many other market sectors.
Stop whining.
Eat shit and die, lefty shitpile.
Not a leftist.
Sure you are . Just admit it. I might have the slightest bit of respect for you if you did.
Let me add, only a modern American "right-winger" would think that an advocate for free markets is a leftist.
I think Republicans are overplaying their hands. This is a cultural issue first and foremost and government power is not necessarily the best means of combating it.
It's further hurt by the simple fact that Google search is shifting a bit. A recent discussion with one of the VPs of Google even mentioned how younger kids are shifting towards using things like TikTok and Instagram as search engines now. So, finding restaurants or local businesses, things like that. These are actually where most of the money for Google comes from and so there's some question of whether this is chasing the wrong horse.
That said, I'm really not convinced this is the correct way to do it. Both Republicans and Democrats seem to be setting up for a regulatory capture scenario. You can see Facebook actively courting this now, taking out ads and such basically calling for new regulations.
Google is an arm of the DNC, but sure- Republicans are overplaying it...
It’s a creation of the CIA.
Most people wave that off as conspiracy theory, but Google and Facebook really were both started under the CIA's In-Q-Tel program.
I can't recall House hearings that were so time consuming, that appear to be a total waste of time, that allowed no opposition party defense, that ignored very important information regarding the subject of the hearing, that had to be "produced" by a Hollywood producer, and that showed itself to be lying. And with nothing to show in legislation, or anything new, but showing political prosecutions that only apply to Trump supporters, but not others violating the same laws.
For the Democrats, it's been the most important thing ever since the election, which was over 1.5 years ago. People are still in jail awaiting trial for walking around in the Capitol (unless you worked for Colbert).
Democrats just showed us their vision and priorities for the citizens of the US, and how they intend to use the government, rather than the ballot box, to achieve them. That is a very scary vision.
I can't recall House hearings that were so time consuming, that appear to be a total waste of time, that allowed no opposition party defense, that ignored very important information regarding the subject of the hearing, that had to be "produced" by a Hollywood producer, and that showed itself to be lying.
Other than the "Hollywood producer" bit, I'd say the Kavanaugh hearings.
This has to be said over and over again, apparently: Congressional Republicans we’re offered the chance to form a bipartisan committee, and turned it down.
Pelosi rejected the Republicans chosen by the R leadership team and went with Cheney and Kitzenger over McCarthy's objection. Dumbass.
"Cheney and Kitzenger"
They got the token R's they wanted to make things "bipartisan"
That was of course AFTER the Republicans turned down a bipartisan commission offer in which each side would have chosen its membership independently.
Democrats gave in to Republican demands to have a completely equal bipartisan commission, then Republicans turned it down anyway.
It's not an "equal bipartisan committee" if one side gets to pick the other side's committee members, dumbass.
THE FIRST PROPOSAL was for an equal bipartisan committee. The one that Republicans REJECTED.
Liar.
Just because you're ignorant of the facts doesn't make the person who asserts the facts a liar.
No, it doesn’t. His lying makes him a liar.
ENB - you're so broken by TDS. Please stop pretending to be a Libertarian.
The whole Hawley thing came across as more of a pot shot than a legitimate criticism. But the kangaroo court doesn't seem to struggle for legitimacy among its target audience.
It's effective propaganda as long as you're already onboard with the pre-loaded verdict.
I mean if the mob was as violent as they say, then he's completely justified in running for his life. The problem is that they KNOW the mob wasn't really there to murder Congress, didn't have any firearms, nothing more dangerous than a hockey stick, so it's funny to watch someone run away like a bitch.
They can't keep straight what narrative they're trying to push. And taking potshots like this is exposing what the committee is really about-pwning Republicans instead of investigating.
That’s not the reason it is funny. It is funny because he was cheering them on earlier in the day.
It is not true that “they KNOW the mob wasn't really there to murder Congress, didn't have any firearms, nothing more dangerous than a hockey stick”.
That’s not the reason it is funny. It is funny because he was cheering them on earlier in the day.
That's bullshit. If this crowd had actually murdered Mike Pence and Nancy Pelosi, nobody would find it funny that he's running away because it's completely justified in fleeting them, and Congress wouldn't find it funny, either.
In this alternate history, maybe everyone in the room wouldn’t have laughed, maybe they wouldn’t have shown this video, maybe they wouldn’t be having these hearings.
Anyway, we live on a timeline where they didn’t murder Pence or Pelosi, so the video got a laugh.
You really deserve your fate.
he was cheering them on earlier in the day.
"go home with love and in peace.”
It'll be real fucking funny when Mike Laursen has to face the consequences of his constant lies
Listen, AOC was almost MURDERED and RAPED while in a totally different building. That's how violent it was.
he did nothing to stop them for 3 hours.
The so-called 'attackers' walked directly in front of the HQ of the FBI, and the ensuing riots took place within sight of it. Representatives of the FBI testified before the committee that they had no assets within the crowd.
Why did thousands of FBI agents and supervisors, who also take an oath to uphold the Constitution, completely fail to respond to the unfolding events? They are the persons authorized to exercise police powers on behalf of the Executive. They have jurisdiction within Washington D.C. Were they derelict in their duties, or just too stupid to realize what was happening?
"Representatives of the FBI testified before the committee that they had no assets within the crowd."
Maybe they did, and maybe they didn't. I don't know either way, all I know is I'm not simply going to take them at their word.
Can you imagine trusting the FBI at their word?
products covered by the federal Women, [...]
The what?
With the hearings blaring in another room, I heard one of the Congresscritters say that it would have made no difference if the Committee's Republican leaders had actually been appointed by the minority leader, as is customary, because the witnesses were so awesome they could not have been overcome by cross-examination.
We’ll never know, because the minority leaders turned it down.
You keep repeating that lie.
Mike Laursen lives under the delusion that there aren't millions of people willing to turn his skull into soup the moment it becomes opportune, and that he'll never face justice for his behavior.
Hahahahahahahahahahaha... Oh wow!
Some of them invalidated their own testimony sentences later, others were contradicted by the actual witnesses and the Secret Service. And can I say how amusing it was to see the Committee's own video contradict it's own witness.
Also, if the committee wants to appear impartial to the American people, it probably is not a good idea to get caught on camera hugging the witness.
https://twitter.com/greta/status/1542124333912424449
And by the way, the power and meaning of that image cannot be understated. The optics of that alone are so terrible that it's hard to muster the words to describe them.
AOC was arrested! ARRESTED!
That's the LARPing thing from an earlier article, right?
Was she?
According to the calendar, Congress is in session all week. So, she couldn't be arrested?
https://www.congress.gov/days-in-session
She was metaphorically and spiritually arrested. Arrested in her heart. Those handcuffs and arrest papers may not be physical, but they were real to her. How dare you deny her experiences, you white male.
There's a "Breach of the Peace" exception allowing Congresscritters to be arrested. Was she breaching the peace?
https://twitter.com/CNNOpinion/status/1550496281604268032?t=ewIUhNi0dY5Xx7OIabb60Q&s=19
“It is self-indulgent to insist on chilly temperatures in the middle of summer,” writes Paul Hockenos on how America can break its dangerous infatuation with air conditioning.
[Link]
It is becoming more obvious by the day that climate zealotry is a religion for those that think "I dont need religion".
It seems humans can try and be "secular", but that need to find something that parallels religion seems to be almost universal.
Original sin, self-flagellation, calls to live an austere life, calls to cast away modern conveniences to prove your faith, paying penance, paying for indulgences.
Climate zealotry has so many of the features religious people have found themselves landing on for centuries. These smug, secular, "educated" (lol) schmucks have convinced themselves they are superior to the backwater god worshipers but behave in an almost unmistakably similar fashion. Just replace "God" with "Gaia" and you get the same shit
Dave Smith just covered this really well in his last podcast.
https://twitter.com/CollierForTexas/status/1550125437723914242?t=8JtIB1byUc_BcI4DoZ-uCQ&s=19
As Lt. Governor, I will lead the legislature to amend our constitution to ban forever private school vouchers.
Because vouchers are for vultures.
[Video]
Imagine calling struggling parents with kids trapped in failing public schools "vultures"
I guess it's a good thing they didn't learn from the McAullife disaster.
https://twitter.com/JesseKellyDC/status/1550501579874246657?t=b5H-9kIF9QUBsXlgf4Wo8w&s=19
REMINDER: You cannot buy into the lie of needing to “reduce carbon” and still stop the climate change death cult.
You’ve already given them the game. You buy into that lie, you’re a useful idiot. At best.
I buy into it only so much that I use it for argument. That argument being, the elites that clamor for an austere carbon free future are fully intent on continuing to burn unlimited fossil fuels THEMSELVES, with no limits, to live a very happy and comfortable life.
So I ask them to practice what they preach before I even consider doing it myself. So long as Obama is installing massive gas tanks at his sea level mansion, and John Kerry is flying in private jets everywhere, I refuse to even consider burning less carbon in my own life.
Leftists wear hypocrisy like a badge of honor.
Cede no ground. Call bullshit, bullshit.
Using their own behavior as evidence that they know they're pushing bullshit is fine, but that doesn't require accepting with their bullshit lies.
https://twitter.com/apmassaro3/status/1550452423084449792?t=3ar24bM6l_8kK_GsRQL3WA&s=19
The survival of the liberal international order depends on Ukrainian victory
Davos will survive just fine whether the Ukrainian's win or lose.
Can someone break down what the powers/duties of the president are when it comes to riot control in the Capitol?
I know that in the states, he has almost no power by default. Which is why Trump was limited to deploying federal LEOs solely to protect federal courthouses.
Yes, the Capitol is a federal building, but it is also a coequal branch of government that in every other case takes direct responsibility for its own security. Is the Capitol really a place that a president can unilaterally send law enforcement to?
Similar question on national guard. National Guardsmen are not allowed to take police action (such as helping to put down a riot) when federalized. They can only do that when under the control of the governor. But D.C. doesn't have a governor. So, can federalized NG be used for police purposes in D.C.? Or would they have to be under the authority of the mayor?
Can a question be more disingenuous? It was his followers rioting at a rally he organized. He had an ethical duty to try to stop the rioting ASAP.
There weren’t any riots you goddamn liar!
Can you be more disingenuous? How do tweets and a fucking video address within 4 hours not count?
Iridium is exactly right. What more could Trump legally do?
If you want to say he had an ethical duty to put out his "go home" video more quickly, I can understand that. But is that really all that the J6 hearing was thrusting at? That if he had put out the video an hour or so earlier that his response was fine?
"Can someone break down what the powers/duties of the president are when it comes to riot control in the Capitol?..."
If the POTUS is Trump, he owns it regardless.
Any D? Not responsible.
https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1550555284199903233?t=FWAxK1_05i4fk-rP6RUuag&s=19
Steve Bannon did nothing wrong
I seriously don't understand why he doesn't just agree to show up to the hearings and then plead the 5th to every question. The committee's and AG's own statements basically make the case for him why any question about J6 is potentially self incriminating.
Yeah, there is a procedure for Congress to get an immunity waiver from the DOJ, but my impression is that it is a pain, takes a while, and isn't something the committee is willing to bother with.
https://twitter.com/NewDiscourses/status/1550269074348834821?t=rTbnuf-9yjNKW2jrK2bbcA&s=19
Hi all, @ConceptualJames has been locked out of his Twitter account. Stay tuned...
[Link]
Remember, it doesn't violate the constitution if the government censorship is performed through corporate partnerships.
I don't want to say the election is over. I just want to say Congress has certified the results without saying the election is over, OK?
The blooper reels are always fun.
Journalists do the illusion of their objectivity a disservice on the Twitter.
Not that I even remotely consider Chris Hayes a journalist, but unfortunately he is what passes for one to the left.
He was on Colbert recently screeing about how Josh Hawley is a poo poo head.
Perfect picture to encapsulate how far both late night comedy and journalism has fallen. Both have simultaneously just replaced their previous gigs with paid state propaganda.
Twitter has been fun in that these people absolutely cannot help themselves from showing us how compromised their judgement and principles are. Any veneer that was even left has been shit-posted away by the "journalists"
TrUSt tHe MeDIa!!!11!!1!!!
...take aim at three procedural weaknesses in our system that Trump sought to exploit following the 2020 election.
Close them loopholes.
... halt stringent Food and Drug Administration (FDA) labeling regulations that keep perfectly safe foreign formulas from passing regulatory muster here...
The hoi polloi are in danger of thinking the FDA might be worse than useless.
Top men are top for a reason. Who are these little fools to want control over their own lives.
Clinics that try to steer women away from abortion are at the center of a Google results controversy.
Abortion is the sum total of women's health. Everyone knows that.
Damn, I love the smell of hot censorship in the morning.
Biden has COVID-19.
I blame his stutter.
Also, be prepared for any possible gaffes, blatantly incorrect teleprompter readings, and clear signs of dementia to be blamed on "long COVID"
How long exactly HAS he had covid? Like, the whole time?
I blame long vax damage.
The 296-page bill "would compound the barriers to successful legalization."
Schumer is the mendacious cunt who pushed the Ulbricht prosecution. Who on earth would think this was on the level.
Oh my.
Saying that word or making a billion bucks is as close as you or Rush ever got to strange.
Guess that means you pretend you'd kick AOC out of bed for eating crackers, or all the Hollywood feminist babes, or even Nancy Pelosi when she was young and movie star beautiful. Must prefer horse faced trash like MTG.
Oh my.
Just gotta love how politicians can put on such a clown show while ignorantly pushing the bigger symptom away... The People AREN'T HAPPY with ur Nazi-B.S.!!!
Stii wondering how, with thousands of violent, armed insurrectionists raging through the Capitol Building in an orgy of death and destruction, President Trump was supposed to stop them all, especially when the Secret Service wouldn't take him there.
Say the words "please cease and desist" on Twitter and most to many would hand hung it up. The fact he didn't try however is the fact that will count on his trial.
LOCK HIM UP!
Section 3 of the 14th Amendment might ban Trump (and his co-conspirators) from ever holding any government office in the future (ie: Disqualification Clause).
How might that happen in real practice? Mike Pence (or anyone harmed on January 6) has “legal standing” as a plaintiff under Article 3 of the U.S. Constitution and could hire a free constitutional attorney (ie: ACLU attorney or Institute for Justice attorney).
Since it’s a non-financial constitutional lawsuit it would be easier to win than a criminal case. A plaintiff could maybe file a Writ of Mandamus under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to remove anyone involved in the insurrection from ever holding any future government authority. This might be the best plan for July 2022 and doesn’t prevent future lawsuits or future indictments.
You’re a vile totalitarian.
An original script for Donald Trump’s speech the day after the Capitol insurrection included tough talk ordering the Justice Department to “ensure all lawbreakers are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law” and stating the rioters “do not represent me.”
But those words were crossed out with thick black lines, apparently by Trump, according to exhibits released by House investigators.
Virginia Rep. Elaine Luria, a Democratic member of the House panel investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack, tweeted out a short video on Monday that included testimony from White House aides discussing Trump’s speech on Jan. 7 and a screenshot of the speech, with notes and with lines to be deleted.
https://worldabcnews.com/new-jan-6-committee-video-shows-how-trump-avoided-tough-talk-on-capitol-hill-riot-response/