The Jan. 6 Investigation

Status
Not open for further replies.
BobTheCoward said:
The idea that you can use government violence against an individual for the objective of possibly improving legislation is frightening.
Click to expand...

You phrased it wrong, they're looking to stop violence on the government. That's what this thread is about, Jan. 6th. I'm not looking to try and nail your gelatinous ideas to the wall. If you don't like it, don't. It's not on me to change your mind.
 
plague311 said:
You phrased it wrong, they're looking to stop violence on the government. That's what this thread is about, Jan. 6th. I'm not looking to try and nail your gelatinous ideas to the wall. If you don't like it, don't. It's not on me to change your mind.
Click to expand...

That is not justification to use violence
 
Bad news for Donnie. The judge who is going to hear his case is Judge Tanya Chutkan.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/19/poli...Feed:+rss/cnn_latest+(RSS:+CNN+-+Most+Recent)

"Speaking earlier this month at a sentencing hearing for a nonviolent rioter who pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of illegally demonstrating in the Capitol, Chutkan made a tacit reference to Trump, saying that the rioter "did not go to the United States Capitol out of any love for our country ... He went for one man."

During the same hearing, she described the January 6 episode as "a violent mob seeking to overthrow the lawfully elected government," adding that the crowd that day posed a "very real danger ... to our democracy."

Chutkan also said that rioters "soiled and defaced the halls of the Capitol and showed their contempt for the rule of law."

Cue the pathetic bleating from the Orange Florida Fraud about biased "Obama" judges.
 
BobTheCoward said:
They can ask nicely. Perjury should also not be a tool they have.
Click to expand...

Very funny. They did ask "nicely" they subpoenaed him through the typical and usual legal process along with any pertinent documents he might have. Which is typical of such investigations. And what did Steve Bannon do? Well he pleaded "Executive Privilege". A hilariously specious bit of nonsense.

Obviously Steve Bannon is still beholden to his lord and master Donald Trump for whom he will lie, fabricate etc., for. After all Trump rewarded him by pardoning him for his sacrifices, (lying for him.), on his behalf. Perhaps that is why Steve Bannon won't testify?

They are not charging him with perjury but contempt of congress, although I have no doubt Steve Bannon would lie like a trooper for Trump to congress if and when he does testify.

And of course the refusal to testify is a nice admission by Steve Bannon of wrong doing. Just what is he trying to hide?

Steve Bannon is a bottom feeder I have zero sympathy for him

Oh and by the way did Bannon, Trump or the rioters on Jan. 6th ask "nicely"?
 
Pacal said:
Very funny. They did ask "nicely" they subpoenaed him through the typical and usual legal process along with any pertinent documents he might have. Which is typical of such investigations. And what did Steve Bannon do? Well he pleaded "Executive Privilege". A hilariously specious bit of nonsense.

Obviously Steve Bannon is still beholden to his lord and master Donald Trump for whom he will lie, fabricate etc., for. After all Trump rewarded him by pardoning him for his sacrifices, (lying for him.), on his behalf. Perhaps that is why Steve Bannon won't testify?

They are not charging him with perjury but contempt of congress, although I have no doubt Steve Bannon would lie like a trooper for Trump to congress if and when he does testify.

And of course the refusal to testify is a nice admission by Steve Bannon of wrong doing. Just what is he trying to hide?

Steve Bannon is a bottom feeder I have zero sympathy for him

Oh and by the way did Bannon, Trump or the rioters on Jan. 6th ask "nicely"?
Click to expand...

Congress should have no power to find someone in contempt.
 
Hurrah! Things are progressing nicely.

From: CBC
A House committee investigating the Jan. 6 Capitol insurrection voted unanimously Tuesday to hold former White House aide Steve Bannon in contempt of Congress...The Tuesday evening vote sends the contempt resolution to the full House, which is expected to vote on the measure Thursday. House approval would send the matter to the U.S. Justice Department, which would then decide whether to pursue criminal charges...

Not really a big shocking development. But at least we know progress is being made.
 
Segnosaur said:
Hurrah! Things are progressing nicely.

From: CBC
A House committee investigating the Jan. 6 Capitol insurrection voted unanimously Tuesday to hold former White House aide Steve Bannon in contempt of Congress...The Tuesday evening vote sends the contempt resolution to the full House, which is expected to vote on the measure Thursday. House approval would send the matter to the U.S. Justice Department, which would then decide whether to pursue criminal charges...

Not really a big shocking development. But at least we know progress is being made.
Click to expand...

I've always liked progress. :thumbsup:
 
Segnosaur said:
Hurrah! Things are progressing nicely.

From: CBC
A House committee investigating the Jan. 6 Capitol insurrection voted unanimously Tuesday to hold former White House aide Steve Bannon in contempt of Congress...The Tuesday evening vote sends the contempt resolution to the full House, which is expected to vote on the measure Thursday. House approval would send the matter to the U.S. Justice Department, which would then decide whether to pursue criminal charges...

Not really a big shocking development. But at least we know progress is being made.
Click to expand...
And how possible is it that they get the house approval?
 
Lennart Hyland said:
And how possible is it that they get the house approval?
Click to expand...
Probably pretty good. Democrats hold the house, and even though their majority is razor thin, they also have at least 2 republican members on their side, just in case a few democrats defect.

Sent from my LM-X320 using Tapatalk
 
Stacyhs said:
Once again, the pro-democracy House members will be clearly identified from those who aren't.
Click to expand...

I've been calling the GOP the Antidemocratic Party for about four years.
 
Stacyhs said:
Once again, the pro-democracy House members will be clearly identified from those who aren't.
Click to expand...

That presupposes that being anti-democracy would negatively affect representatives' ability to get elected. The proportion of Republicans who believe that the election was stolen means that being anti-democracy won't get you primaried which in turn means that you're likely to be elected.

The proportion who believe that the "steal" should be reversed by whatever means, means that even in the unlikely event that you are beaten in the polls, you may still be returned thanks to a state-level ruling. :mad:
 
I'd guess it's safe to say that the House will approve the contempt case. I can't imagine any Democrat voting against it, and as mentioned, there are a few Republicans that will vote for it as well.

As I mentioned before, this is a great way to continue getting the GOP to make excuses for that day, and to keep getting them on record voting against the truth.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom