U.S Capitol Riot: The January 6 committee is about to show its work

[Jingthing]

A great place to watch this.

 

Happening live now but you can scroll back to the beginning time. There is regular news before they actually start the official hearing.

 

Going back about 1 hour, 34 minutes from the time of this post. 

 

 

[Thailand]

I hope that nice Mr Trump is not going to be in trouble!

is this anything to do with him not playing in the LIV golf tournament?

[heybruce]

"Ivanka Trump, the daughter of former President Donald Trump and a senior adviser in his administration, told the Jan. 6 select committee that she “accepted” former Attorney General William Barr’s assessment that there was no evidence of sufficient fraud in the 2020 election that could have overturned the results."  https://www.yahoo.com/news/ivanka-trump-told-jan-6-committee-that-she-accepted-her-father-lost-election-011357007.html

 

Oh....Daddy won't be happy with his little girl.

[LarrySR]

3 minutes ago, heybruce said:

"Ivanka Trump, the daughter of former President Donald Trump and a senior adviser in his administration, told the Jan. 6 select committee that she “accepted” former Attorney General William Barr’s assessment that there was no evidence of sufficient fraud in the 2020 election that could have overturned the results."  https://www.yahoo.com/news/ivanka-trump-told-jan-6-committee-that-she-accepted-her-father-lost-election-011357007.html

 

Oh....Daddy won't be happy with his little girl.   I wonder if he will stop wanting to have sex with her.

Everyone knows Trump lost...except for the morons.

[Berkshire]

10 minutes ago, heybruce said:

"Ivanka Trump, the daughter of former President Donald Trump and a senior adviser in his administration, told the Jan. 6 select committee that she “accepted” former Attorney General William Barr’s assessment that there was no evidence of sufficient fraud in the 2020 election that could have overturned the results."  https://www.yahoo.com/news/ivanka-trump-told-jan-6-committee-that-she-accepted-her-father-lost-election-011357007.html

 

Oh....Daddy won't be happy with his little girl.   I wonder if he will stop wanting to have sex with her.

There are times I wish Trump was still on Twitter.  If he was, knowing how impulsive he is, he'd probably attack his own daughter.  But after these hearings, Trump will have a long list of new enemies....all people inside his own administration.

[ThailandRyan]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

A great place to watch this.

 

Happening live now but you can scroll back to the beginning time. There is regular news before they actually start the official hearing.

 

Going back about 1 hour, 34 minutes from the time of this post. 

 

 

Monday, June 13th they will continue as they lay out the case against the now former president.  

[LarrySR]

25 minutes ago, Berkshire said:

There are times I wish Trump was still on Twitter.  If he was, knowing how impulsive he is, he'd probably attack his own daughter.  But after these hearings, Trump will have a long list of new enemies....all people inside his own administration.

If Trump does get back into office, he will stack his cabinet, FBI, CIA, with Q Anon, MAGA  whack jobs,  crackpot lawyers and he will go berserk with revenge. 

[Jingthing]

3 minutes ago, LarrySR said:

If Trump does get back into office, he will stack his cabinet, FBI, CIA, with Q Anon, MAGA  whack jobs,  crackpot lawyers and he will go berserk with revenge. 

US democracy is finished if he is.

[Berkshire]

3 minutes ago, LarrySR said:

If Trump does get back into office, he will stack his cabinet, FBI, CIA, with Q Anon, MAGA  whack jobs,  crackpot lawyers and he will go berserk with revenge. 

No doubt.  If Trump somehow becomes POTUS again, he will have zero interest in governing.  He'd be occupied 24/7 with going after everyone who's wronged him.  And he will use every means at his disposal, rightly/legal or not. 

[ThailandRyan]

10 minutes ago, Berkshire said:

No doubt.  If Trump somehow becomes POTUS again, he will have zero interest in governing.  He'd be occupied 24/7 with going after everyone who's wronged him.  And he will use every means at his disposal, rightly/legal or not. 

Wasn't he trying to do that already?, and would one not wonder if he would end up like the Kennedy's, a martyr for the cause....

[Berkshire]

11 minutes ago, ThailandRyan said:

Wasn't he trying to do that already?, and would one not wonder if he would end up like the Kennedy's, a martyr for the cause....

Absolutely not.  When Trump first became POTUS, he at least "tried" to govern.  He put competent people in key positions.  But most of them wouldn't do what he wanted because his orders were either illegal or against the national interest.  Trump won't make that mistake again.  He won't care if they're competent or qualified, only that they will follow orders.  Sort of like what a dictator would do.  Just look at Putin.  We see Russia through the illegal war in Ukraine.  But the corruption there has permeated through that entire society.  That's what I worry about for the USA.  It's not just a dem/rep thing.  When there's corruption at the top, they'll be corruption all the way down the chain-of-command.

[LarrySR]

14 minutes ago, Berkshire said:

Absolutely not.  When Trump first became POTUS, he at least "tried" to govern.  He put competent people in key positions.  But most of them wouldn't do what he wanted because his orders were either illegal or against the national interest.  Trump won't make that mistake again.  He won't care if they're competent or qualified, only that they will follow orders.  Sort of like what a dictator would do.  Just look at Putin.  We see Russia through the illegal war in Ukraine.  But the corruption there has permeated through that entire society.  That's what I worry about for the USA.  It's not just a dem/rep thing.  When there's corruption at the top, they'll be corruption all the way down the chain-of-command.

The people with integrity fled the scene pretty quickly. 
One of the early ones to go was Rex Tillerson who called Trump <deleted> Moron.
And he was right. 

[LarrySR]

Interesting, numerous Republican lawmakers that played a role in the insurrection approached Trump & sought pre emptive pardons. 
 

No doubt many Trump associates, including his kids, attorneys and lawmakers are walking around with a pardon in their back pocket. 

 

[onthedarkside]

A post with a misinformation claim has been removed, along with an ensuing reply.

 

[ballpoint]

Previously unseen video footage was shown at the hearings.  Not a pretty watch.

 

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

8 hours ago, ballpoint said:

Previously unseen video footage was shown at the hearings.  Not a pretty watch.

 

 

 

Screen caps from the end of the above video screened by the committee:

 

 

 

And then the video included audio of Trump's post riot/insurrection comments to Fox News in July 2021:

 

"the former president also offered a full-throated defense of the rioters who breached the U.S. Capitol building and incited violent clashes with police and security forces, evoking memories of his defense of the white nationalist protesters who gathered in Charlottesville, Virginia, in 2017.

 

Rather than a violent insurrection, Trump instead sought to recast the day as one of "peace" and "love" following his "mild-mannered" speech. 

 

"There was such love at that rally," he said, "They were peaceful people, these were great people, the crowd was unbelievable and I mentioned the word love, the love in the air I've never seen anything like it."

 

https://www.salon.com/2021/07/11/trump-embraces-capitol-rioters-rewrites-jan-6-history-during-fox-appearance/

 

Watch the above 12-minute video of the riot/insurrection violence screened by the House committee, and see if you see any "love" going on...

 

[LarrySR]

4 hours ago, oliverX said:

 

 

Factual reporting is much more interesting than that tripe you are being fed.

 

FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE WEBSITE January 13 2022:

Leader of Oath Keepers and 10 Other Individuals Indicted in Federal Court for Seditious Conspiracy and Other Offenses Related to U.S. Capitol Breach

Eight Others Facing Charges in Two Related Cases.

 

June 6, 2022; 

A grand jury has accused Enrique Tarrio and four associates of seditious conspiracy in connection with the riot at the U.S. Capitol on January 6.

 

-But what we don't know is how close the DOJ might be to that next level, indicting the funders and organizers of the political rallies in late December and early January 2021.

 

We do know the FBI has been investigating. We're really waiting to see what happens next.

Remember; Attorney General Merrick Garland has vowed to go after anyone accountable for January 6 at, quote, "every level."

 

[placeholder]

4 hours ago, oliverX said:

 

Well. the Socialists at Fox News disagree with you:

 

DOJ charges Oath Keepers founder, 10 others with seditious conspiracy related to Jan. 6 riot

 

The move marks the first set of charges echoing claims of an insurrection

The Department of Justice unveiled seditious conspiracy charges against 11 defendants, including the founder and leader of the right-wing Oath Keepers militia group, Elmer Stewart Rhodes III, for their role in the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/doj-charges-oath-keepers-founder-10-others-seditious-conspiracy-jan-6-riot

 

And there's this:

Far right Proud Boys leader charged with seditious conspiracy related to Jan. 6

 

A grand jury has accused Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio and four associates with seditious conpsiracy tied to the Jan. 6 attack on the Captiol.

 

https://www.npr.org/2022/06/07/1103445418/far-right-proud-boys-leader-charged-with-seditious-conspiracy-related-to-jan-6

 

[LarrySR]

4 hours ago, oliverX said:

 

 

Democracy depends on people who understand the worth and ways of democracy. Trump supporters - like their hero Trump - obviously do not.

[Jingthing]

The environment has now (and more is coming) being created and softened for Merrick Garland to indict Donald Trump.  This hearing is doing that. History is in his hands. Ironic considering the Trump Republicans stole his supreme court seat from him.

 

‘What happened tonight was historic’: Bob Woodward says Jan. 6 committee ‘has it cold’

[KanchanaburiGuy]

4 hours ago, oliverX said:

 

An "insurrection" is a violent rally, protest, or action whose intent is to affect some kind of change in the law/government. It doesn't actually take very much for a "protest" to be called an "insurrection." 

 

Personally, I prefer not to call what happened on Jan 6th an "insurrection." A riot, yes. A protest that got out of control, yes. Bad, yes. But to me........... (and this is just my personal take on it!)........... saying "insurrection" implies a next step.......... an overthrow, a coup. Except nothing I've seen of the events on Jan 6th......... looks "coup-like" to me! 

 

Yes, they barged into places they didn't belong........... which is reflected in many people being charged with trespassing. But once they were inside, they didn't try to take over. They didn't try to "overthrow" anything. Mostly, they patted themselves on the back, did a little rearranging of furniture and vandalism, hooted and hollared, and took selfies! 

 

But they didn't do ANYTHING........ not one thing.......... that could even remotely be described as "trying to take over the government!" 

 

Thus, because I believe there was neither a coup nor a "coup attempt".............. describing the actions that lead up to it as an "insurrection"........... while technically correct........... really gives a very wrong impression about what was happening. 

 

Yes, it can correctly be called an "insurrection." But personally, I think it is ultimately more honest........ to call it something else!

 

Cheers!

[Jingthing]

4 minutes ago, KanchanaburiGuy said:

An "insurrection" is a violent rally, protest, or action whose intent is to affect some kind of change in the law/government. It doesn't actually take very much for a "protest" to be called an "insurrection." 

 

Many of the BLM/Antifa rallies/protests could have rightly been called "insurrections." They weren't........... but they could have been. Some of them certainly met the definition of the word, but that definition is fairly watery. 

 

Personally, I prefer not to call what happened on Jan 6th an "insurrection." A riot, yes. A protest that got out of control, yes. Bad, yes. But to me........... (and this is just my personal take on it!)........... saying "insurrection" implies a next step.......... an overthrow, a coup. Except nothing I've seen of the events on Jan 6th......... looks "coup-like" to me! 

 

Yes, they barged into places they didn't belong........... which is reflected in many people being charged with trespassing. But once they were inside, they didn't try to take over. They didn't try to "overthrow" anything. Mostly, they patted themselves on the back, did a little rearranging of furniture and vandalism, hooted and hollared, and took selfies! 

 

But they didn't do ANYTHING........ not one thing.......... that could even remotely be described as "trying to take over the government!" 

 

Thus, because I believe there was neither a coup nor a "coup attempt".............. describing the actions that lead up to it as an "insurrection"........... while technically correct........... really gives a very wrong impression about what was happening. 

 

Yes, it can correctly be called an "insurrection." But personally, I think it is ultimately more honest........ to call it something else!

 

Cheers!

Watch this.

 

[KanchanaburiGuy]

4 hours ago, LarrySR said:

 

Democracy depends on people who understand the worth and ways of democracy. Trump supporters - like their hero Trump - obviously do not.

Defending democracy depends on ACCURATELY assessing the facts and actions, and ACCURATELY charging and punishing those involved, according to those facts. 

 

Overstating the facts for feel-good rah-rah reasons............ is NOT how one defends democracy!

 

"Seditious Conspiracy" only means a group of people TALKED ABOUT IT. It is a bogus charge.

 

The bogus nature of the charge of "sedition" is why Congress repealed one law, and why the Supreme Court threw out another. There is very little room for a valid charge of "sedition" ........ in a country that has a First Amendment!

 

And there's virtually no justification for a charge of "Seditious Conspiracy".............. in a country whose very existence effectively began with the Declaration of Independence! 

 

Either the Declaration of Independence proves that a charge of "Seditious Conspiracy" is blatantly hypocritical............... or............ the charge of "Seditious Conspiracy" proves that what's declared in the Declaration of Independence........... is pure bull-poop! 

 

It can't be both! 

 

Cheers! 

[LarrySR]

22 minutes ago, KanchanaburiGuy said:

Defending democracy depends on ACCURATELY assessing the facts and actions, and ACCURATELY charging and punishing those involved, according to those facts. 

 

Overstating the facts for feel-good rah-rah reasons............ is NOT how one defends democracy!

 

"Seditious Conspiracy" only means a group of people TALKED ABOUT IT. It is a bogus charge.

 

The bogus nature of the charge of "sedition" is why Congress repealed one law, and why the Supreme Court threw out another. There is very little room for a valid charge of "sedition" ........ in a country that has a First Amendment!

 

And there's virtually no justification for a charge of "Seditious Conspiracy".............. in a country whose very existence effectively began with the Declaration of Independence! 

 

Either the Declaration of Independence proves that a charge of "Seditious Conspiracy" is blatantly hypocritical............... or............ the charge of "Seditious Conspiracy" proves that what's declared in the Declaration of Independence........... is pure bull-poop! 

 

It can't be both! 

 

Cheers! 

Quick! Call the FBI and Attorney General and explain things and tell them they are doing it all wrong…..because they indicted the Proud Boys for seditious conspiracy.

[KanchanaburiGuy]

20 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Watch this.

 

Lol........ 

 

You casually say "watch this"......... a 3hr 55min YouTube clip! 

 

Hahahahahaha! 

 

-----------------

 

Even without watching it, here's what I will and won't see......... 

 

I WILL SEE......... protesters running amok, doing things they shouldn't be doing in places they shouldn't be doing them. People caught up in a frenzy; generally acting in ways very unlike their normal selves. 

 

Of course, the potential for this happening............ a potential we've known about for a very long time............ is EXACTLY why there are such things as "inciting to riot" laws on the books! 

 

I WON'T SEE anyone actively trying to take over control of the government!

 

--------------

 

Now, if I'm wrong about that, feel free to point me to the time-stamp where that can be seen. I'd love to see it.

 

But wading through a nearly 4hr video clip to find something I'm positive isn't there? Uh........... thanks, anyway, but no thanks! 

 

????????????

 

Cheers! 

 

[KanchanaburiGuy]

58 minutes ago, LarrySR said:

Quick! Call the FBI and Attorney General and explain things and tell them they are doing it all wrong…..because they indicted the Proud Boys for seditious conspiracy.

Yes, they did. And unless there is a plea agreement that eliminates the need for a trial, the government is going to lose these cases. 

 

I believe the most likely reason these charges have been brought............. is because of all the grief they've been getting because there HAVEN'T BEEN any "serious" charges-----charges concerning insurrections and coups! 

 

So they came up with this really serious sounding, bogus charge! 

 

"No, no, no! It's not just Conspiracy............ it's Seditious Conspiracy! (This essentially means they TALKED ABOUT the  principles and rights described in the Declaration of Independence!) 

 

If I were their attorney, how would I approach it? 

 

Well, sometimes, religions gets put on trial by the government. When that happens, one of the most effective tactics is to put the judge in a position where if he wants to rule in favor of the government........ he effectively has to declare that there is no God! 

 

Since judges won't do this, the religion almost always wins! 

 

Were I the Proud Boys attorney, I'd be trying to do essentially the same thing.

 

I'd try to put the judge in a position where he has to declare the principles and rights described in the Declaration of Independence........... are invalid! 

 

And if the judge didn't want to do that and instead attempted to assert the principles and rights still apply, but don't apply to THIS CASE............. he effectively has to say, "As part of 'the governed,' you have these rights. You're just not allowed to talk to each other about them!" And no judge is going to do that! 

 

The DOJ needs to look like they're doing something......... so they're doing this. But this approach is a loser from the git-go! 

 

They are undoubtedly hoping, hoping, hoping-beyond-hope they can finagle a plea deal out of them! 

 

Cheers! 

[LarrySR]

2 hours ago, KanchanaburiGuy said:

Yes, they did. And unless there is a plea agreement that eliminates the need for a trial, the government is going to lose these cases. 

 

I believe the most likely reason these charges have been brought............. is because of all the grief they've been getting because there HAVEN'T BEEN any "serious" charges-----charges concerning insurrections and coups! 

 

So they came up with this really serious sounding, bogus charge! 

 

"No, no, no! It's not just Conspiracy............ it's Seditious Conspiracy! (This essentially means they TALKED ABOUT the  principles and rights described in the Declaration of Independence!) 

 

If I were their attorney, how would I approach it? 

 

Well, sometimes, religions gets put on trial by the government. When that happens, one of the most effective tactics is to put the judge in a position where if he wants to rule in favor of the government........ he effectively has to declare that there is no God! 

 

Since judges won't do this, the religion almost always wins! 

 

Were I the Proud Boys attorney, I'd be trying to do essentially the same thing.

 

I'd try to put the judge in a position where he has to declare the principles and rights described in the Declaration of Independence........... are invalid! 

 

And if the judge didn't want to do that and instead attempted to assert the principles and rights still apply, but don't apply to THIS CASE............. he effectively has to say, "As part of 'the governed,' you have these rights. You're just not allowed to talk to each other about them!" And no judge is going to do that! 

 

The DOJ needs to look like they're doing something......... so they're doing this. But this approach is a loser from the git-go! 

 

They are undoubtedly hoping, hoping, hoping-beyond-hope they can finagle a plea deal out of them! 

 

Cheers! 

Mitch McConnell called January 6 "a failed insurrection." 

 

You should get a job teaching constitutional law somewhere. All these lawmakers, prosecutors and FBI agents could sign up for your class. 

[placeholder]

51 minutes ago, KanchanaburiGuy said:

Lol........ 

 

You casually say "watch this"......... a 3hr 55min YouTube clip! 

 

Hahahahahaha! 

 

-----------------

 

Even without watching it, here's what I will and won't see......... 

 

I WILL SEE......... protesters running amok, doing things they shouldn't be doing in places they shouldn't be doing them. People caught up in a frenzy; generally acting in ways very unlike their normal selves. 

 

Of course, the potential for this happening............ a potential we've known about for a very long time............ is EXACTLY why there are such things as "inciting to riot" laws on the books! 

 

I WON'T SEE anyone actively trying to take over control of the government!

 

--------------

 

Now, if I'm wrong about that, feel free to point me to the time-stamp where that can be seen. I'd love to see it.

 

But wading through a nearly 4hr video clip to find something I'm positive isn't there? Uh........... thanks, anyway, but no thanks! 

 

????????????

 

Cheers! 

 

Actually, in a half-fast way you've kind of got a point by calling attention to what isn't seen. What isn't seen is what was supposed to be taking place: a certified count of electoral votes supervised by the vice-President. A crucial step in the peaceful transfer of power in a democratic republic. It wasn't taking place because some insurrectionists tried to put a stop to that crucial step in the peaceful transfer of power. Not long before the rioters invaded the capitol building they were chanting about hanging the person in charge of the count. Namely, the vice-President.

[KanchanaburiGuy]

4 minutes ago, LarrySR said:

Mitch McConnell called January 6 "a failed insurrection." 

 

You should get a job teaching constitutional law somewhere. All these lawmakers, prosecutors and FBI agents could sign up for your class. 

I made a post upthread where I explained about the word "insurrection." You ought to read it. 

 

(HINT: I said very clearly that what happened on Jan 6th can rightly be called an "insurrection." But I also explained why I think that description is not apropos. But at no point........ on this board, or any other board I've posted on since Jan 7th.......... have I ever said it WASN'T an "insurrection.") 

 

Cheers! 

[metisdead]

A post with a video from an unapproved YouTube source and a reply has been removed:

 

18) Social Media content is acceptable in most social forums. However, in factual areas such as news, current affairs and health topics, it cannot be used unless it is from a credible news media source or government agency, and must include a weblink to the original source.