John Adams Posted July 22, 2021 Posted July 22, 2021 1 hour ago, Governor said: Should Gym Jordan, the guy who attended the meeting which planned the terror attack on the people’s house, sit on a committee investigating that terror attack? Pelosi screwed the pooch on this. Yes he should. You don't win arguments by silencing the microphones of morans. You win them by winning them. Jordan is a disaster. I'd invite him and MTG to sit on the committee.
SectionC3 Posted July 22, 2021 Posted July 22, 2021 17 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said: Your responses only reinforce my argument and confirm my conclusions. You just can't help yourself from making continuous comments about the event to deflect from the argument that regardless of the event the process here is a farce. And listening to and reading the comments from the committee members you are in alignment with their statements to date too. So what's the point of this charade? What's the point? So they can say we checked of the official line item on the scoresheet? Do you really believe after assembling and reviewing all the "evidence" they're going to determine it wasn't "the biggest threat to democracy since the civil war" after all? And that their initial conclusions were wrong? Do you really think they're going to allow any counter-arguments or questioning outside the pre-determined outcome and narrative of the event? Or consider anything thinking or logic "outside the box" they've already built? You really think that? If you really think that I would either question your judgment or conclude you cannot be objective and honest about what this is all about. Its all BS. Like the late-great George Carlin used to say. And absent BS the entire political process would disintegrate. He was spot on.. I’d be less worried about a “farce” and more worried about the insurrection. That is, unless you supported the insurrection. So, did you support the insurrection? 1
All_Pro_Bills Posted July 22, 2021 Posted July 22, 2021 1 minute ago, SectionC3 said: I’d be less worried about a “farce” and more worried about the insurrection. That is, unless you supported the insurrection. So, did you support the insurrection? Now you're changing the subject again. But okay. But we need to establish some facts first. How many of the suspects have been charged with insurrection? Give me a number. And then we can discuss the validity of calling the events of 1/6 that term. So if you please, post the names of those defendents here.
Doc Posted July 22, 2021 Posted July 22, 2021 8 hours ago, Governor said: What a mess! The GOP is flailing around with no midterm plan whatsoever. They want an “alternate” investigation to run along side the real investigation for their rubes to gobble up nightly on their “alternate reality” news networks. By including Gym Jordan, voters see they had no intention of participating in an honest investigation into what happened that day. Really bad strategy moving forward. They couldn’t misread the electorate any worse than this. Looks like Liz is going to have the last laugh here. I guess we knew that already. McCarthy was never going to make it. He’s about to crash and burn.
SoCal Deek Posted July 22, 2021 Posted July 22, 2021 16 minutes ago, John Adams said: Pelosi screwed the pooch on this. Yes he should. You don't win arguments by silencing the microphones of morans. You win them by winning them. Jordan is a disaster. I'd invite him and MTG to sit on the committee. Thank You! I couldn’t agree more. If you really want to get to the bottom of this or even if you just want to embarrass your political opponents then you should force them to sit in the room and go along with the circus. An unforced error by Nancy here. 1
All_Pro_Bills Posted July 22, 2021 Posted July 22, 2021 7 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: Thank You! I couldn’t agree more. If you really want to get to the bottom of this or even if you just want to embarrass your political opponents then you should force them to sit in the room and go along with the circus. An unforced error by Nancy here. Consider Nancy's goal has nothing to do with getting down to the truth. Consider the goal is simply to confirm their already pronounced views. This was biggest threat to democracy since the civil war. And as a result the committee's findings will require the submission of some draconian legislation to prevent it from occurring again. To identify extremism and criminalize certain activities now protected under law. In some way characterizing political descent as extremism. Criminalizing political descent. That's the goal. For the love of God isn't that obvious to everyone already? How much clear can it be made? Entertaining any counter-arguments or contention to that narrative and the eventual conclusion might just be a headache to be avoided. Why bother as they're not going to listen to or consider any of it so what's the point other than for theater? 1
Governor Posted July 22, 2021 Posted July 22, 2021 55 minutes ago, John Adams said: Pelosi screwed the pooch on this. Yes he should. You don't win arguments by silencing the microphones of morans. You win them by winning them. Jordan is a disaster. I'd invite him and MTG to sit on the committee. We don’t appease white nationalist/Christian extremist terrorists in this country. 1
SoCal Deek Posted July 22, 2021 Posted July 22, 2021 26 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said: Consider Nancy's goal has nothing to do with getting down to the truth. Consider the goal is simply to confirm their already pronounced views. This was biggest threat to democracy since the civil war. And as a result the committee's findings will require the submission of some draconian legislation to prevent it from occurring again. To identify extremism and criminalize certain activities now protected under law. In some way characterizing political descent as extremism. Criminalizing political descent. That's the goal. For the love of God isn't that obvious to everyone already? How much clear can it be made? Entertaining any counter-arguments or contention to that narrative and the eventual conclusion might just be a headache to be avoided. Why bother as they're not going to listen to or consider any of it so what's the point other than for theater? All true, but she’s also interested in totally embarrassing any dissenters within Congress. The best way to do that is to make a mockery of them while they’re sitting right there. It’s a mistake to have them on the outside at the microphones telling the country how they were shut out of the process. Just saying.
SectionC3 Posted July 22, 2021 Posted July 22, 2021 1 hour ago, All_Pro_Bills said: Now you're changing the subject again. But okay. But we need to establish some facts first. How many of the suspects have been charged with insurrection? Give me a number. And then we can discuss the validity of calling the events of 1/6 that term. So if you please, post the names of those defendents here. Hard to say because many of the records are still sealed. But your analogy to federal criminal law is inapt. The absence of a charge of rebellion or insurrection doesn't mean that such an event didn't occur. And, if you want to play the hyperbole game, I suppose you'll agree that abortion is a procedure to remove a parasite from a woman's body, not the "murder" or the "killing" of a "baby." 1
Motorin' Posted July 22, 2021 Posted July 22, 2021 1 hour ago, John Adams said: Pelosi screwed the pooch on this. Yes he should. You don't win arguments by silencing the microphones of morans. You win them by winning them. Jordan is a disaster. I'd invite him and MTG to sit on the committee. You can't have people being investigated sit on the committee doing the investigation. And make no mistake, there are a handful of R Congressman being investigated for their possible role. 2
John Adams Posted July 22, 2021 Posted July 22, 2021 9 minutes ago, Motorin' said: You can't have people being investigated sit on the committee doing the investigation. And make no mistake, there are a handful of R Congressman being investigated for their possible role. Sure you can. Shine the light on the issues. He can defend himself if he wants to. 1
SoCal Deek Posted July 22, 2021 Posted July 22, 2021 10 minutes ago, Motorin' said: You can't have people being investigated sit on the committee doing the investigation. And make no mistake, there are a handful of R Congressman being investigated for their possible role. Why not? Adam Shitt was on the impeachment team and we now know that he repeatedly lied to the public. 1
Motorin' Posted July 22, 2021 Posted July 22, 2021 (edited) 5 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: Why not? Adam Shitt was on the impeachment team and we now know that he repeatedly lied to the public. Apples and oranges. Trump wasn't on the Impeachment team investigating himself. No R member of Congress who potentially planned the shut down of the vote count should be anywhere near the Committee investigating it. Edited July 22, 2021 by Motorin' 1
SoCal Deek Posted July 22, 2021 Posted July 22, 2021 Just now, Motorin' said: Apples and oranges. Trump wasn't on the Impeachment team. No R member of Congress who potentially planned the shut down of the vote count should be anywhere near the Committee investigating it. The impeachment was a sham! Everyone but you apparently knows it…and yet there was the main perpetrator at the prosecution table. 1
Motorin' Posted July 22, 2021 Posted July 22, 2021 1 minute ago, SoCal Deek said: The impeachment was a sham! Everyone but you apparently knows it…and yet there was the main perpetrator at the prosecution table. So because the Impeachment was a sham, everything should be a sham. Sham sham sham.
SoCal Deek Posted July 22, 2021 Posted July 22, 2021 1 minute ago, Motorin' said: So because the Impeachment was a sham, everything should be a sham. Sham sham sham. And now we’ve jumped the shark. If you believe that sitting members of Congress are going to be called as witnesses here, so be it. All the more reason why Nancy should have them on the committee. It’s better to have them as part of the process than outside making a mockery of it. We can agree to disagree. 1
Doc Posted July 22, 2021 Posted July 22, 2021 34 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: All true, but she’s also interested in totally embarrassing any dissenters within Congress. The best way to do that is to make a mockery of them while they’re sitting right there. It’s a mistake to have them on the outside at the microphones telling the country how they were shut out of the process. Just saying. She knew Jordan wouldn't let her use this as a partisan witch hunt That's why she booted him. 1
All_Pro_Bills Posted July 22, 2021 Posted July 22, 2021 (edited) 51 minutes ago, SectionC3 said: Hard to say because many of the records are still sealed. But your analogy to federal criminal law is inapt. The absence of a charge of rebellion or insurrection doesn't mean that such an event didn't occur. And, if you want to play the hyperbole game, I suppose you'll agree that abortion is a procedure to remove a parasite from a woman's body, not the "murder" or the "killing" of a "baby." You're just speculating on what might or might not be sealed. So it might be prudent to not call it something that the available facts don't support and take a wait and see approach. That said, if somebody was actually charged with insurrection or treason that would be broadcast 24/7? Or leaked? Sealed or no sealed when it benefits to reveal something or if it might be damaging to the defense's case there's no hesitation. What baffles me is how anyone can perceive the government at this point as some bastion of ethics and virtue. You guys must be on some heavy hallucinogenics to buy into that view. Or have a vested interest in big government like being on the payroll. Or getting lots of free government support or grants or funding for something or another. And per the insurrection narrative. My conclusion to this point based on the available evidence is there was violence committed on that day but the characterization of it as insurrection is an exaggeration of the risks posed by the threat and circumstances of the event. And I'm willing to adjust that conclusion when and if more and better information becomes available. I think that's a reasonable approach. But in any event you still cannot name any insurrectionist charges regardless of what excuse you might want to use. So your assessment that its insurrection is just not supported by the facts you have available so why do you continue to insist that is what it was here? Presumption of innocence here rather than guilt by accusation. So let's come back to this when we get a read out all the charges, trial, and convictions or acquittals. Edited July 22, 2021 by All_Pro_Bills
BillStime Posted July 22, 2021 Posted July 22, 2021 GQP idiots The GQP is going to make a mockery out of the select committee whether or not Gym Jordan is on the committee just like the freaks did w impeachments.
Doc Posted July 22, 2021 Posted July 22, 2021 21 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said: You're just speculating on what might or might not be sealed. So it might be prudent to not call it something that the available facts don't support and take a wait and see approach. That said, if somebody was actually charged with insurrection or treason that would be broadcast 24/7? Or leaked? Sealed or no sealed when it benefits to reveal something or if it might be damaging to the defense's case there's no hesitation. What baffles me is how anyone can perceive the government at this point as some bastion of ethics and virtue. You guys must be on some heavy hallucinogenics to buy into that view. Or have a vested interest in big government like being on the payroll. Or getting lots of free government support or grants or funding for something or another. And per the insurrection narrative. My conclusion to this point based on the available evidence is there was violence committed on that day but the characterization of it as insurrection is an exaggeration of the risks posed by the threat and circumstances of the event. And I'm willing to adjust that conclusion when and if more and better information becomes available. I think that's a reasonable approach. But in any event you still cannot name any insurrectionist charges regardless of what excuse you might want to use. So your assessment that its insurrection is just not supported by the facts you have available so why do you continue to insist that is what it was here? Presumption of innocence here rather than guilt by accusation. So let's come back to this when we get a read out all the charges, trial, and convictions or acquittals. No, calling it an "insurrection" is a lie, for political purposes only. There was never any threat to the government as a whole, or even lawmakers. And as such, there will not be any sedition and/or treason charges. And we definitely would have heard if there were by now. 1 1
Recommended Posts