January 6, 2021: Insurrection or “normal tourist” visitation?

[PizzaSnake]

What did you see with your lying eyes?

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/19/opin ... e=Homepage

[PizzaSnake]

And now McTurtle weighs in. Wonder what Sinema and Manchin will have to say? If they cave, through them out of the caucus, 'cause they aren't anything other than crypto-fascist Republicans.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... story.html

[MDlaxfan76]

And now McTurtle weighs in. Wonder what Sinema and Manchin will have to say? If they cave, through them out of the caucus, 'cause they aren't anything other than crypto-fascist Republicans.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... story.html

well...that ain't happening.
If it did then none of the Biden appointments would be even considered. Nothing ever brought to the floor.

The GOP has gone into lockdown, scorched earth mode and as much as the moderate Dems, incl. Biden, would like to negotiate compromises, they know that with McConnell calling the Senate and Trump controlling the House GOP and through McConnell the Senate, nothing would get done, including judges.

[PizzaSnake]

And now McTurtle weighs in. Wonder what Sinema and Manchin will have to say? If they cave, through them out of the caucus, 'cause they aren't anything other than crypto-fascist Republicans.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... story.html

well...that ain't happening.
If it did then none of the Biden appointments would be even considered. Nothing ever brought to the floor.

The GOP has gone into lockdown, scorched earth mode and as much as the moderate Dems, incl. Biden, would like to negotiate compromises, they know that with McConnell calling the Senate and Trump controlling the House GOP and through McConnell the Senate, nothing would get done, including judges.

Sinema isn't much of a Democrat:

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/member ... ema/412509

Manchin either:

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/member ... hin/412391

[MDlaxfan76]

And now McTurtle weighs in. Wonder what Sinema and Manchin will have to say? If they cave, through them out of the caucus, 'cause they aren't anything other than crypto-fascist Republicans.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... story.html

well...that ain't happening.
If it did then none of the Biden appointments would be even considered. Nothing ever brought to the floor.

The GOP has gone into lockdown, scorched earth mode and as much as the moderate Dems, incl. Biden, would like to negotiate compromises, they know that with McConnell calling the Senate and Trump controlling the House GOP and through McConnell the Senate, nothing would get done, including judges.

Sinema isn't much of a Democrat:

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/member ... ema/412509

Manchin either:

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/member ... hin/412391

I'd be more worried about them jumping ship than being pushed out. Suicidal for Dems to push them out.

I'd be focused on figuring out what it's gonna take to get them on board with election reforms, DC statehood, etc. modified rules on filibuster forcing actual filibuster, make it possible but painful.

Infrastucture bill, etc has lots of opportunities for making them smile about helping their constituents.

[PizzaSnake]

"and as Stuart Stevens, campaign manager to every big repub in the past 25 years, says, republicans cannot be negotiated with, only defeated. "

So it has come to this?

[jhu72]

Pizza is right. Can't negotiate with them, but Manchin will try.

I don't get the Ds. If they want a 1/6/21 commission, Biden can do one on his own say so, a Presidential commission. He can make it absolutely bipartisan by picking sane republicans from yesteryear. There are plenty to choose from. Don't understand why the Ds don't push him for this. Perhaps they will after the house effort gets shot down in the the Senate.

[MDlaxfan76]

Pizza is right. Can't negotiate with them, but Manchin will try.

I don't get the Ds. If they want a 1/6/21 commission, Biden can do one on his own say so, a Presidential commission. He can make it absolutely bipartisan by picking sane republicans from yesteryear. There are plenty to choose from. Don't understand why the Ds don't push him for this. Perhaps they will after the house effort gets shot down in the the Senate.

I think Biden and folks like Manchin want to at least appear to have provided the GOP the opportunity to be sane and willing to work together...good politics at a minimum.

The question I have is at what point does Manchin say, ok, I've given them enough of an opportunity, covered my own rear end...time to move the ball? And when that happens, how much moderation of the more progressive stuff will he demand...surely he'll demand lots of bacon for West VA, but will the interest in bringing jobs and job re-training to his constituents enable him to go along with some other stuff?

[Farfromgeneva]

And now McTurtle weighs in. Wonder what Sinema and Manchin will have to say? If they cave, through them out of the caucus, 'cause they aren't anything other than crypto-fascist Republicans.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... story.html

well...that ain't happening.
If it did then none of the Biden appointments would be even considered. Nothing ever brought to the floor.

The GOP has gone into lockdown, scorched earth mode and as much as the moderate Dems, incl. Biden, would like to negotiate compromises, they know that with McConnell calling the Senate and Trump controlling the House GOP and through McConnell the Senate, nothing would get done, including judges.

Sinema isn't much of a Democrat:

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/member ... ema/412509

Manchin either:

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/member ... hin/412391

Sinema's politics is similar to her personal life, depends on the day (which as her being "politics hot" is not a bad thing for thirsty men of Arizona).

[jhu72]

Pizza is right. Can't negotiate with them, but Manchin will try.

I don't get the Ds. If they want a 1/6/21 commission, Biden can do one on his own say so, a Presidential commission. He can make it absolutely bipartisan by picking sane republicans from yesteryear. There are plenty to choose from. Don't understand why the Ds don't push him for this. Perhaps they will after the house effort gets shot down in the the Senate.

I think Biden and folks like Manchin want to at least appear to have provided the GOP the opportunity to be sane and willing to work together...good politics at a minimum.

The question I have is at what point does Manchin say, ok, I've given them enough of an opportunity, covered my own rear end...time to move the ball? And when that happens, how much moderation of the more progressive stuff will he demand...surely he'll demand lots of bacon for West VA, but will the interest in bringing jobs and job re-training to his constituents enable him to go along with some other stuff?

... agreed. I think that is the game currently being played. I think Biden and Manchin understand each other, and they have an agreement to allow Manchin and Sinema cover. Manchin will tell people at home, "I tried with the support of the President. I did all I could. These republicans are just not willing to engage meaningfully?" The price for a nice piece of the infrastructure pie, is helping Joe get the rest of the agenda done. "The republicans were standing in the way of your infrastructure, I chose West Virginia infrastructure." Would not be surprised if Capito was in on it as well. It is a win for her in the end.

[Brooklyn]

more proof of repukeblican mindlessness:



https://2qibqm39xjt6q46gf1rwo2g1-wpengi ... 24x827.jpg


Now imagine of that had been BLM or Antifa. What would the right wingers be saying?

[CU88]

Your reminder that Republicans held 33 hearings about the 2012 attack on the US embassy in Benghazi that killed 4 Americans but won’t support an investigation into the 2021 attack on the US Capitol that killed 5 Americans and threatened the lives of members of Congress.

[kramerica.inc]

Your reminder that Republicans held 33 hearings about the 2012 attack on the US embassy in Benghazi that killed 4 Americans but won’t support an investigation into the 2021 attack on the US Capitol that killed 5 Americans and threatened the lives of members of Congress.

Wait, your tune has changed? As many like to point out, nothing came of those hearings aside from being a huge waste of time and money.

Seems you need to take some of your own advice and laugh it off or "Get over it."

And you're concerned about 4 Q-Anon supporters who died that day?

What is "Get over it" (Mick Mulvaney)? Self-Dealing for 600 Alex....

LOL

Benghazi,
HRC emails,
DNC server,
etc...

[old salt]

Your reminder that Republicans held 33 hearings about the 2012 attack on the US embassy in Benghazi that killed 4 Americans but won’t support an investigation into the 2021 attack on the US Capitol that killed 5 Americans and threatened the lives of members of Congress.

The FBI did not do a criminal investigation of Benghazi. It took that many hearings to get HRC to show up.
It was a standing select committee which ran the entire duration of that Congress then produced a report at the end. They met periodically while doing their other duties rather than working full time, as a commission would.

Let the FBI do their job, then see if a commission is warranted. The security commission has completed their work, submitted their report, hearings have been hailed & legislation introduced.

[PizzaSnake]

Your reminder that Republicans held 33 hearings about the 2012 attack on the US embassy in Benghazi that killed 4 Americans but won’t support an investigation into the 2021 attack on the US Capitol that killed 5 Americans and threatened the lives of members of Congress.

Wait, your tune has changed? As many like to point out, nothing came of those hearings aside from being a huge waste of time and money.

Seems you need to take some of your own advice and laugh it off or "Get over it."

And you're concerned about 4 Q-Anon supporters who died that day?

What is "Get over it" (Mick Mulvaney)? Self-Dealing for 600 Alex....

LOL

Benghazi,
HRC emails,
DNC server,
etc...

“And you're concerned about 4 Q-Anon supporters who died that day?”

Concerned it was only four. This is what happens when you empty out the asylums (Thanks Ronnie Rayguns).

[MDlaxfan76]

Your reminder that Republicans held 33 hearings about the 2012 attack on the US embassy in Benghazi that killed 4 Americans but won’t support an investigation into the 2021 attack on the US Capitol that killed 5 Americans and threatened the lives of members of Congress.

The FBI did not do a criminal investigation of Benghazi. It took that many hearings to get HRC to show up.
It was a standing select committee which ran the entire duration of that Congress then produced a report at the end. They met periodically while doing their other duties rather than working full time, as a commission would.

Let the FBI do their job, then see if a commission is warranted. The security commission has completed their work, submitted their report, hearings have been hailed & legislation introduced.

Nah, it's needed and it's going to happen.
The only question is whether Republicans will participate constructively or not.

As tough as it's going to be for some Republicans who were actively complicit in the encouragement of the Big Lie, the sooner they get this over with, the better the chances of retaking Congress on policy differences...but stand against it and this will define that next election.

[old salt]

Your reminder that Republicans held 33 hearings about the 2012 attack on the US embassy in Benghazi that killed 4 Americans but won’t support an investigation into the 2021 attack on the US Capitol that killed 5 Americans and threatened the lives of members of Congress.

The FBI did not do a criminal investigation of Benghazi. It took that many hearings to get HRC to show up.
It was a standing select committee which ran the entire duration of that Congress then produced a report at the end. They met periodically while doing their other duties rather than working full time, as a commission would.

Let the FBI do their job, then see if a commission is warranted. The security commission has completed their work, submitted their report, hearings have been hailed & legislation introduced.

Nah, it's needed and it's going to happen.
The only question is whether Republicans will participate constructively or not.

As tough as it's going to be for some Republicans who were actively complicit in the encouragement of the Big Lie, the sooner they get this over with, the better the chances of retaking Congress on policy differences...but stand against it and this will define that next election.

Pelosi could appoint a select committee, right now, to investigate Jan 6th, just like the Benghazi committee.
She doesn't want to hear what the Sergeants-at-Arms & Capitol Police will testify to under oath about their direction from political leaders

[MDlaxfan76]

Your reminder that Republicans held 33 hearings about the 2012 attack on the US embassy in Benghazi that killed 4 Americans but won’t support an investigation into the 2021 attack on the US Capitol that killed 5 Americans and threatened the lives of members of Congress.

The FBI did not do a criminal investigation of Benghazi. It took that many hearings to get HRC to show up.
It was a standing select committee which ran the entire duration of that Congress then produced a report at the end. They met periodically while doing their other duties rather than working full time, as a commission would.

Let the FBI do their job, then see if a commission is warranted. The security commission has completed their work, submitted their report, hearings have been hailed & legislation introduced.

Nah, it's needed and it's going to happen.
The only question is whether Republicans will participate constructively or not.

As tough as it's going to be for some Republicans who were actively complicit in the encouragement of the Big Lie, the sooner they get this over with, the better the chances of retaking Congress on policy differences...but stand against it and this will define that next election.

Pelosi could appoint a select committee, right now, to investigate Jan 6th, just like the Benghazi committee.
She doesn't want to hear what the Sergeants-at-Arms & Capitol Police will testify to under oath about their direction from political leaders

You're just embarrassing yourself on this.
The "security" commission didn't embarrass political leadership and if there'd been reason to be embarrassed, if would have been right then...they're not concerned about that at all.

Pelosi is very much willing to go there with a Dem run commission, but she's savvy enough to know that it will be far better to have been forced into that by Republican intransigence. She agreed to a set of terms demanded by the Republican negotiator, only to have that rejected by all but 35 GOP House members.

Manchin has now made clear that if McConnell resists, he's going to get it through anyway. Break the filibuster if necessary. and it ain't going to go into BLM/Antifa and other such nonsense to distract from what was an actual insurrection attempt on Jan 6.

Now, if that somehow hits a wall, they'll proceed with a more partisan controlled construct in which the GOP will have no influence on subpoenas, who gets called, etc.

Sure, the GOP will whine and whine and whine about it being "partisan" but they will have blown their opportunity to be against the insurrection and the underlying Big Lie, against white supremacist groups, QAnon and the like...and the Dems will beat them bloody with it right through the next election or two...and they'll deserve that beating.

Maybe that's been Pelosi's plan all along, but I actually think she sees the merit, for the country, in a bi-partisan commission.

[old salt]

Roll your eyes at this.

https://www.vox.com/2021/5/25/22445422/ ... filibuster

Any bipartisan January 6 commission is probably doomed

...the chances for such a commission are imperiled. A bill to establish it passed the House last Wednesday with support from every Democrat and 35 Republicans. But most others in the GOP, including party leaders, have come out strongly against the bill, with the party’s senators planning a filibuster.

Republicans have evidently calculated that such a commission’s findings would likely hurt their party’s electoral prospects.

But even if a deal does somehow come together, there are real reasons to doubt whether such a commission would achieve anything substantial.

There’s nothing magical about this proposed bipartisan commission — it would have the same formal powers as any ordinary congressional committee looking into the matter. In fact, its requirement for bipartisan support to issue subpoenas means it could well be less aggressive at unearthing new information than, say, a Democratic-only House committee investigation could be.

Its hoped-for advantage would instead be in the realm of messaging. The idea is that if such a body is deemed above politics, it could deliver an assessment of what happened that would be viewed as credible by both sides, shaping a national narrative.

This second aim is what supporters of a January 6 commission are really hoping to achieve. The hope is that, if the reasonable Republicans and Democrats could only get together, they could reach consensus and sagely explain how and why the Capitol was stormed, and how the US can stop something like it from happening again.

It’s a doomed hope.

The sunny view of bipartisan commissions is that members of both parties boldly manage to put politics aside and do the right thing for the country. The more cynical and probably more realistic way to look at them is that politics never truly leaves the process — especially when the issue has serious electoral implications for both parties.

The storming of the Capitol is an issue with very different partisan dynamics, and it’s difficult to imagine what a “balanced” report on it could look like. Any broad and serious assessment of what happened only has a realistic chance of making one party — the party of Donald Trump — look bad. And Republicans have been very clear that, for electoral reasons, they don’t want to do this.

In practice, the commission would spotlight an issue that divides the GOP
Even though Republicans would likely be able to prevent a bipartisan 1/6 commission from achieving much of substance, they’d really prefer not to have one at all.

That’s because, as Thune admitted above and as Liz Cheney’s ouster shows, party strategists view any discussion of Trump’s attempt to overturn the election result as a harmful issue for their party at this point. They want to make the 2022 elections about Biden and Democrats, not Trump.

Democrats, meanwhile, have electoral incentives to try and keep the storming of the Capitol in the news however they can. “Democrats should spend every day tying all of it to the Republican Party,” political consultant James Carville recently told my colleague Sean Illing. (McConnell has reportedly been sharing that interview to argue that Democrats are motivated by politics here.)

So if electoral and messaging advantage is the true goal, the commission would still be worthwhile for Democrats. But feel-good bipartisanship isn’t in the cards, and fact-finding would probably be difficult too if the Republican commissioners agree to vote as a bloc against any controversial subpoenas.

Do Democrats have fallback options if the bill doesn’t pass?
In any event, theories of how such a commission would play out are probably moot, unless there’s a surprising sudden shift in Senate Republicans’ thinking.

Currently, there are a few Senate Republicans, like Susan Collins (R-ME) and Mitt Romney (R-UT), who sound open to supporting a changed version of the bill (Collins wants the staff to be bipartisan, and Romney wants to ensure that they’ll finish by their end-of-year deadline). Many others, though, are dug in firmly against the idea and seem immovable. So the current betting is that the 10 GOP votes needed to overcome a filibuster will not materialize.

What, then, can Democrats do instead?

It’s useful again to remember the two main things such a commission can do — fact-finding and narrative-shaping.

As far as formal fact-finding powers go, a congressional committee can do everything a bipartisan commission can do; namely, it can hold hearings and issue subpoenas. One advantage the commission might have is unified focus on one topic — but that could also be achieved by establishing a special “select committee” to investigate January 6, as House Republicans did for Benghazi.

And when it comes to shaping the narrative, it does seem that congressional committees would, more likely, be deemed partisan by the media, as compared to a special bipartisan commission. But the hope to establish one consensus national narrative around the events of January 6 was always a pipe dream.

Most Republican voters now inhabit an information environment dominated by conservative media outlets like Fox and social media similarly designed to tell them what they want to hear. Acknowledging that reality, the most Democrats may be able to do is push on forward, trying to gather facts and make a public case to their best of their ability — on their own.

[Peter Brown]

Your reminder that Republicans held 33 hearings about the 2012 attack on the US embassy in Benghazi that killed 4 Americans but won’t support an investigation into the 2021 attack on the US Capitol that killed 5 Americans and threatened the lives of members of Congress.

The FBI did not do a criminal investigation of Benghazi. It took that many hearings to get HRC to show up.
It was a standing select committee which ran the entire duration of that Congress then produced a report at the end. They met periodically while doing their other duties rather than working full time, as a commission would.

Let the FBI do their job, then see if a commission is warranted. The security commission has completed their work, submitted their report, hearings have been hailed & legislation introduced.

Nah, it's needed and it's going to happen.
The only question is whether Republicans will participate constructively or not.

As tough as it's going to be for some Republicans who were actively complicit in the encouragement of the Big Lie, the sooner they get this over with, the better the chances of retaking Congress on policy differences...but stand against it and this will define that next election.

Pelosi could appoint a select committee, right now, to investigate Jan 6th, just like the Benghazi committee.
She doesn't want to hear what the Sergeants-at-Arms & Capitol Police will testify to under oath about their direction from political leaders

You're just embarrassing yourself on this.
The "security" commission didn't embarrass political leadership and if there'd been reason to be embarrassed, if would have been right then...they're not concerned about that at all.

Pelosi is very much willing to go there with a Dem run commission, but she's savvy enough to know that it will be far better to have been forced into that by Republican intransigence. She agreed to a set of terms demanded by the Republican negotiator, only to have that rejected by all but 35 GOP House members.

Manchin has now made clear that if McConnell resists, he's going to get it through anyway. Break the filibuster if necessary. and it ain't going to go into BLM/Antifa and other such nonsense to distract from what was an actual insurrection attempt on Jan 6.

Now, if that somehow hits a wall, they'll proceed with a more partisan controlled construct in which the GOP will have no influence on subpoenas, who gets called, etc.

Sure, the GOP will whine and whine and whine about it being "partisan" but they will have blown their opportunity to be against the insurrection and the underlying Big Lie, against white supremacist groups, QAnon and the like...and the Dems will beat them bloody with it right through the next election or two...and they'll deserve that beating.

Maybe that's been Pelosi's plan all along, but I actually think she sees the merit, for the country, in a bi-partisan commission.

Someone bookmark the above post for the day after 2022’s mid terms. The results will suggest some posters are simply partisan liberals and not honest brokers.

It’s almost like the rapid increase in violent crime throughout America today don’t even matter to some.