Author Topic: 1/6 Committee Hearing  (Read 36410 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: 1/6 Committee Hearing
« Reply #495 on: June 24, 2022, 12:28:20 AM »

Online ozgod

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12168
  • Tommy Points: 905
Mo Brooks has indicated that he's now willing to testify, after losing his primary runoff for Alabama Senator after Trump called him a woke politician and withdrew his endorsement. Wonder what interesting tidbits he would be willing to share. Brooks and Trump were really close until they fell out (like everyone does with Trump) after Brooks committed the cardinal sin of telling people to move on past the 2020 election, which Trump didn't like. Because in Trump's mind he's convinced himself that he DID win the election and anyone saying anything else is sacrilege.

Quote
Stinging from his resounding defeat in Alabama’s Republican runoff for the Senate on Tuesday and a snub from former President Donald J. Trump, Representative Mo Brooks now appears to be willing to testify as part of the Jan. 6 investigation.

Mr. Brooks signaled on Wednesday that he would comply with an impending subpoena from the bipartisan House committee that is leading the inquiry into the attack on the Capitol — but only under certain conditions.

He hinged his willingness to testify before the House committee on being able to do so “in public so the public can see it — so they don’t get bits and pieces dribbled out,” Mr. Brooks said, according to CNN.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/23/us/politics/mo-brooks-jan-6-testify.html
Any odd typos are because I suck at typing on an iPhone :D

Re: 1/6 Committee Hearing
« Reply #496 on: June 24, 2022, 08:53:28 AM »

Offline Neurotic Guy

  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19996
  • Tommy Points: 2152
Roy,  you had asked earlier in the thread why Trump had held back when he could have gone ahead and appointed Jeff Clark as AG despite threats of mass resignations at DOJ.   Clark, as AG, would have publicly provided DOJ's blessing for Trump's lie and therefore might have provided cover for states to overturn (or decertify) their results. 

We got closer to an answer yesterday.  The testimony of Richard Donahue and Jeffrey Rosen revealed a 2-hour meeting with Trump (and others including Clark) after Trump had "leaked" his intent to appoint Clark AG.  In that meeting Deputy AGs and and Acting AG Rosen lambasted Clark to his face and not only convinced Trump that he'd have immediate mass resignations, but -- and here's the clincher -- it would look bad for Trump.   Trump wanted Clark who was completely unqualified for the position because Clark had already been conspiring with Trump and was clearly willing to break the law (had stated as such per testimony of DOJ/WH lawyers) for the President.    Donahue and others convinced Trump that Trump would look bad which of course is the only thing that hits home for the former POTUS. Conspiring to illegally overturn a righteous election didn't matter, but looking bad is where he draws the line.   

The bottom line on your question (I think) is that Donald Trump isn't Vladimir Putin, and the USA is not Russia.  It's not that Trump might not want to be Putin (likely aspires to that level of power), but there is legitimacy to the idea that this republic doesn't allow for unfettered power.  Trump doesn't (didn't) have unfettered power over the media, over the department of justice, over the federal government, over business. And this reality provides a check on an otherwise ruthless, amoral, narcissistic, liar (all traits he shares with Putin).  The beauty of these hearings to me is that although it seems that Trump was pretty close to finding a way to create a constitutional crisis, there were clearly enough checks, even among Trump appointees and Trump loyalists, to prevent him from achieving his aim. The bottom line is that there were not nearly enough people willing to put Trump over country.  It is a pretty substantial warning though that it may not have been too far off from happening -- an additional handful of Trump cultists in positions of influence may have made all the difference, at least temporarily. 

Re: 1/6 Committee Hearing
« Reply #497 on: June 27, 2022, 01:26:46 PM »

Offline heyvik

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1835
  • Tommy Points: 67
Surprise!

https://www.yahoo.com/news/jan-6-panel-calls-surprise-171236595.html

Jan. 6 panel calls surprise hearing for Tuesday
Quote
WASHINGTON (AP) — The House Jan. 6 panel says it is calling a surprise hearing on Tuesday to present “recently obtained evidence."

The hearing comes after Congress left Washington for a two-week recess. Lawmakers on the panel investigating the 2021 insurrection said last week that there would be no more hearings until July.

The subject of the hearings is so far unclear. A spokesman for the panel declined to comment on its substance.

The panel had at least two more hearings planned for July, which lawmakers said would focus on domestic extremists who breached the Capitol that day and on what then-President Donald Trump was doing as the violence unfolded.

Re: 1/6 Committee Hearing
« Reply #498 on: June 27, 2022, 01:32:49 PM »

Offline Celtics2021

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3843
  • Tommy Points: 349
Surprise!

https://www.yahoo.com/news/jan-6-panel-calls-surprise-171236595.html

Jan. 6 panel calls surprise hearing for Tuesday
Quote
WASHINGTON (AP) — The House Jan. 6 panel says it is calling a surprise hearing on Tuesday to present “recently obtained evidence."

The hearing comes after Congress left Washington for a two-week recess. Lawmakers on the panel investigating the 2021 insurrection said last week that there would be no more hearings until July.

The subject of the hearings is so far unclear. A spokesman for the panel declined to comment on its substance.

The panel had at least two more hearings planned for July, which lawmakers said would focus on domestic extremists who breached the Capitol that day and on what then-President Donald Trump was doing as the violence unfolded.

Okay, they’ve got my attention again!

Re: 1/6 Committee Hearing
« Reply #499 on: June 27, 2022, 01:44:47 PM »

Offline heyvik

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1835
  • Tommy Points: 67
Surprise!

https://www.yahoo.com/news/jan-6-panel-calls-surprise-171236595.html

Jan. 6 panel calls surprise hearing for Tuesday
Quote
WASHINGTON (AP) — The House Jan. 6 panel says it is calling a surprise hearing on Tuesday to present “recently obtained evidence."

The hearing comes after Congress left Washington for a two-week recess. Lawmakers on the panel investigating the 2021 insurrection said last week that there would be no more hearings until July.

The subject of the hearings is so far unclear. A spokesman for the panel declined to comment on its substance.

The panel had at least two more hearings planned for July, which lawmakers said would focus on domestic extremists who breached the Capitol that day and on what then-President Donald Trump was doing as the violence unfolded.

Okay, they’ve got my attention again!

This has to be information from the documentary that has changed things. My thought is that they probably have Trump himself saying that he knows that he lost the election.

Re: 1/6 Committee Hearing
« Reply #500 on: June 27, 2022, 01:47:59 PM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 50522
  • Tommy Points: -26106
  • Once A CrotoNat, Always A CrotoNat
Surprise!

https://www.yahoo.com/news/jan-6-panel-calls-surprise-171236595.html

Jan. 6 panel calls surprise hearing for Tuesday
Quote
WASHINGTON (AP) — The House Jan. 6 panel says it is calling a surprise hearing on Tuesday to present “recently obtained evidence."

The hearing comes after Congress left Washington for a two-week recess. Lawmakers on the panel investigating the 2021 insurrection said last week that there would be no more hearings until July.

The subject of the hearings is so far unclear. A spokesman for the panel declined to comment on its substance.

The panel had at least two more hearings planned for July, which lawmakers said would focus on domestic extremists who breached the Capitol that day and on what then-President Donald Trump was doing as the violence unfolded.

Okay, they’ve got my attention again!

This is probably related to the documentary films they obtained, I would imagine.

This is the stuff I'm interested in. 

EDIT:

Quote
This has to be information from the documentary that has changed things. My thought is that they probably have Trump himself saying that he knows that he lost the election.

Beat me to it.  I don't think there's any way that Trump admitted to losing, though, even if he truly believed it.


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: 1/6 Committee Hearing
« Reply #501 on: June 27, 2022, 01:58:00 PM »

Offline heyvik

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1835
  • Tommy Points: 67
Surprise!

https://www.yahoo.com/news/jan-6-panel-calls-surprise-171236595.html

Jan. 6 panel calls surprise hearing for Tuesday
Quote
WASHINGTON (AP) — The House Jan. 6 panel says it is calling a surprise hearing on Tuesday to present “recently obtained evidence."

The hearing comes after Congress left Washington for a two-week recess. Lawmakers on the panel investigating the 2021 insurrection said last week that there would be no more hearings until July.

The subject of the hearings is so far unclear. A spokesman for the panel declined to comment on its substance.

The panel had at least two more hearings planned for July, which lawmakers said would focus on domestic extremists who breached the Capitol that day and on what then-President Donald Trump was doing as the violence unfolded.

Okay, they’ve got my attention again!

This is probably related to the documentary films they obtained, I would imagine.

This is the stuff I'm interested in. 

EDIT:

Quote
This has to be information from the documentary that has changed things. My thought is that they probably have Trump himself saying that he knows that he lost the election.

Beat me to it.  I don't think there's any way that Trump admitted to losing, though, even if he truly believed it.
What ever it is that they found...it has to be really dam^ing. I do think it is something that either Trump himself OR someone close to him saying something about the election. Possibly B roll footage about Trump saying about Pence and or the destruction of the Capitol property from Jan 6

Re: 1/6 Committee Hearing
« Reply #502 on: June 27, 2022, 02:14:45 PM »

Offline Celtics2021

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3843
  • Tommy Points: 349
Surprise!

https://www.yahoo.com/news/jan-6-panel-calls-surprise-171236595.html

Jan. 6 panel calls surprise hearing for Tuesday
Quote
WASHINGTON (AP) — The House Jan. 6 panel says it is calling a surprise hearing on Tuesday to present “recently obtained evidence."

The hearing comes after Congress left Washington for a two-week recess. Lawmakers on the panel investigating the 2021 insurrection said last week that there would be no more hearings until July.

The subject of the hearings is so far unclear. A spokesman for the panel declined to comment on its substance.

The panel had at least two more hearings planned for July, which lawmakers said would focus on domestic extremists who breached the Capitol that day and on what then-President Donald Trump was doing as the violence unfolded.

Okay, they’ve got my attention again!

This is probably related to the documentary films they obtained, I would imagine.

This is the stuff I'm interested in. 

EDIT:

Quote
This has to be information from the documentary that has changed things. My thought is that they probably have Trump himself saying that he knows that he lost the election.

Beat me to it.  I don't think there's any way that Trump admitted to losing, though, even if he truly believed it.
What ever it is that they found...it has to be really dam^ing. I do think it is something that either Trump himself OR someone close to him saying something about the election. Possibly B roll footage about Trump saying about Pence and or the destruction of the Capitol property from Jan 6

Yeah, if they’re having a “surprise” hearing on a day’s notice because of brand new evidence, it has to be better than any of the evidence they were already going to show in a week.  I suspect it is, but if it isn’t, the committee is going to take a credibility hit.

Re: 1/6 Committee Hearing
« Reply #503 on: June 27, 2022, 04:06:00 PM »

Offline Neurotic Guy

  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19996
  • Tommy Points: 2152
Surprise!

https://www.yahoo.com/news/jan-6-panel-calls-surprise-171236595.html

Jan. 6 panel calls surprise hearing for Tuesday
Quote
WASHINGTON (AP) — The House Jan. 6 panel says it is calling a surprise hearing on Tuesday to present “recently obtained evidence."

The hearing comes after Congress left Washington for a two-week recess. Lawmakers on the panel investigating the 2021 insurrection said last week that there would be no more hearings until July.

The subject of the hearings is so far unclear. A spokesman for the panel declined to comment on its substance.

The panel had at least two more hearings planned for July, which lawmakers said would focus on domestic extremists who breached the Capitol that day and on what then-President Donald Trump was doing as the violence unfolded.

Okay, they’ve got my attention again!

This is probably related to the documentary films they obtained, I would imagine.

This is the stuff I'm interested in. 

EDIT:

Quote
This has to be information from the documentary that has changed things. My thought is that they probably have Trump himself saying that he knows that he lost the election.

Beat me to it.  I don't think there's any way that Trump admitted to losing, though, even if he truly believed it.

Yes -- I doubt he's going to say "I know we lost,..."  However, I'm wondering if there's a more subtle acknowledgement.   One thought is that he acknowledges that investigations of the fraud theories have produced no evidence.   Maybe he acknowledges that credible people in his administration have told him that massive voter fraud that would account for incorrect election results didn't happen.   Maybe he just says "no" to a question about whether there is any proof for any fraud theory.  Or "yes" to the possibility that Biden legitimately won in GA, PA, or AZ...    Really ANYTHING that Trump acknowledges that belies anything he has said to drum up money or to convince (rile up) his people about a stolen election would be perpetration of fraud (that's of course my opinion... probably doesn't meet legal criteria). 

Re: 1/6 Committee Hearing
« Reply #504 on: June 27, 2022, 11:38:37 PM »

Offline heyvik

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1835
  • Tommy Points: 67
My guess would be Pat Cipilloni. He was in talks to testify on June 7th. He may have finally come around.

Re: 1/6 Committee Hearing
« Reply #505 on: June 27, 2022, 11:45:31 PM »

Online tarheelsxxiii

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8576
  • Tommy Points: 1386
Wow.  This isn't at all suspicious. Isn't the committee dropping "surprise new evidence" tomorrow?  :o

Quote
Michael Stenger, the Senate sergeant-at-arms who oversaw security in the upper chamber during the Capitol riot, died Monday morning, according to multiple reports. The cause of his death was not immediately clear...


Stenger had joined the team for the Senate sergeant-at-arms in 2011 following a multidecade career with the Secret Service. Then-Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell nominated him as Senate sergeant-at-arms, and he was confirmed unanimously. 

McConnell "requested and received" his resignation the day after a mob of violent rioters stormed the Capitol, Axios reported. Stenger received fierce criticism from members of Congress over his handling of security on the day of the riot.

Ultimately, it took over four hours for the National Guard to arrive on the scene that day, and some have questioned whether Stenger and his onetime House counterpart, Paul Irving, could have called for backup sooner, WUSA9 reported.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/senate-sergeant-arms-during-capitol-riot-dies
The Tarstradamus Group, LLC

Re: 1/6 Committee Hearing
« Reply #506 on: June 27, 2022, 11:53:52 PM »

Offline Celtics2021

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3843
  • Tommy Points: 349
My guess would be Pat Cipilloni. He was in talks to testify on June 7th. He may have finally come around.

CNN is reporting Cassidy Hutchison will testify, while the Washington Post is reporting that it will be a witness with “credible threats” against them, thus the reason for secrecy.  Hutchison has been featured already, so either she’s got something new to say, or there’s a new witness (maybe Cippilone or the filmmaker) who she can help corroborate.

Re: 1/6 Committee Hearing
« Reply #507 on: June 28, 2022, 12:11:24 AM »

Offline nickagneta

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 46854
  • Tommy Points: 8679
  • President of Jaylen Brown Fan Club
Wow.  This isn't at all suspicious. Isn't the committee dropping "surprise new evidence" tomorrow?  :o

Quote
Michael Stenger, the Senate sergeant-at-arms who oversaw security in the upper chamber during the Capitol riot, died Monday morning, according to multiple reports. The cause of his death was not immediately clear...


Stenger had joined the team for the Senate sergeant-at-arms in 2011 following a multidecade career with the Secret Service. Then-Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell nominated him as Senate sergeant-at-arms, and he was confirmed unanimously. 

McConnell "requested and received" his resignation the day after a mob of violent rioters stormed the Capitol, Axios reported. Stenger received fierce criticism from members of Congress over his handling of security on the day of the riot.

Ultimately, it took over four hours for the National Guard to arrive on the scene that day, and some have questioned whether Stenger and his onetime House counterpart, Paul Irving, could have called for backup sooner, WUSA9 reported.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/senate-sergeant-arms-during-capitol-riot-dies
So before any details are released as to cause of death, we are jumping to the conclusion he was assassinated by Democrats because Stenger is a Republican that has dirt on why there was a lack of response on 1/6, something he probably could have let every right wing media outlet know about a long, long time ago?

Yup, no whacky conspiracy theory here. 😉😂


Re: 1/6 Committee Hearing
« Reply #508 on: June 28, 2022, 12:12:47 AM »

Offline nickagneta

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 46854
  • Tommy Points: 8679
  • President of Jaylen Brown Fan Club
My guess would be Pat Cipilloni. He was in talks to testify on June 7th. He may have finally come around.
Yeah, I'm jumping aboard this train of thought.

Edit: Looks like it Hutchison
« Last Edit: June 28, 2022, 12:31:53 AM by nickagneta »

Re: 1/6 Committee Hearing
« Reply #509 on: June 28, 2022, 07:46:57 AM »

Offline mobilija

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1669
  • Tommy Points: 406
Wow.  This isn't at all suspicious. Isn't the committee dropping "surprise new evidence" tomorrow?  :o

Quote
Michael Stenger, the Senate sergeant-at-arms who oversaw security in the upper chamber during the Capitol riot, died Monday morning, according to multiple reports. The cause of his death was not immediately clear...


Stenger had joined the team for the Senate sergeant-at-arms in 2011 following a multidecade career with the Secret Service. Then-Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell nominated him as Senate sergeant-at-arms, and he was confirmed unanimously. 

McConnell "requested and received" his resignation the day after a mob of violent rioters stormed the Capitol, Axios reported. Stenger received fierce criticism from members of Congress over his handling of security on the day of the riot.

Ultimately, it took over four hours for the National Guard to arrive on the scene that day, and some have questioned whether Stenger and his onetime House counterpart, Paul Irving, could have called for backup sooner, WUSA9 reported.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/senate-sergeant-arms-during-capitol-riot-dies
So before any details are released as to cause of death, we are jumping to the conclusion he was assassinated by Democrats because Stenger is a Republican that has dirt on why there was a lack of response on 1/6, something he probably could have let every right wing media outlet know about a long, long time ago?

Yup, no whacky conspiracy theory here. 😉😂

I figured he meant silenced by Republicans before he could give dirt on why there was a lack of response.... :-\