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

[MDlaxfan76]

still pedaling
In your mind Red - is it ok for a jury person to say it is OK to lie to the FBI? It is ok to lie to a person of authority - those are not my words.

Sussman was never going to be convicted - I get that - my kid rows with your kid SMH - but unfortunately you will never win with the average Joe - you will not because the average Joe is going to say - "lawyer up" - you all miss the point

It is not clear that Sussman was lying. He did have clients, but that did not mean he was representing them in making the visit with the FBI. He also had evidence that he did not bill anyone for the time he used in the interview. But for the a lie (if he was lying) to be a crime here it had to be material to some sort of investigation that the FBI was working on. The prosecution did not really come close to that proof in the trial.

Now you are asking another question - is it OK to actually lie even if not criminal to a person in authority. Morally it may be wrong, but that is not the legal question here. Best practice is to decline to answer, as that is your right in dealing with the FBI.

Tucker Carlson lies all the time on his show. He has even said so with regard to legal proceedings. Is that morally right? I would not think so, but it happens all the time.

HRC perfected the ideal defence when being asked questions both under oath and not. I don't remember a damn thing sure worked for her. More people should follow her lead, it is a proven strategy.

13 hours of answering questions under oath, if I'm not mistaken.

[youthathletics]

Hearing resumes today at 1 PM EST on CBS News. https://www.cbsnews.com/live-updates/ja ... 022-06-21/

Same time the soap operas come on.. how appropriate.

Yeah..."As The Coup Plot Turns"

..

Like any soap opera, this one has no ending in sight. That does depend on what happens in November.

Ain't that the truth. The theatrics of both sides has proven our elected officials are merely gambling for majority each election cycle. And the more mud you sling, the percentages go up on how much sticks. It really has become as simple as that.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Hearing resumes today at 1 PM EST on CBS News. https://www.cbsnews.com/live-updates/ja ... 022-06-21/

Same time the soap operas come on.. how appropriate.

Yeah..."As The Coup Plot Turns"

..

Like any soap opera, this one has no ending in sight. That does depend on what happens in November.

Ain't that the truth. The theatrics of both sides has proven our elected officials are merely gambling for majority each election cycle. And the more mud you sling, the percentages go up on how much sticks. It really has become as simple as that.

They are good people.

[cradleandshoot]

Hearing resumes today at 1 PM EST on CBS News. https://www.cbsnews.com/live-updates/ja ... 022-06-21/

Same time the soap operas come on.. how appropriate.

Yeah..."As The Coup Plot Turns"

..

Like any soap opera, this one has no ending in sight. That does depend on what happens in November.

Ain't that the truth. The theatrics of both sides has proven our elected officials are merely gambling for majority each election cycle. And the more mud you sling, the percentages go up on how much sticks. It really has become as simple as that.

Truer words have never been spoken.

[cradleandshoot]

still pedaling
In your mind Red - is it ok for a jury person to say it is OK to lie to the FBI? It is ok to lie to a person of authority - those are not my words.

Sussman was never going to be convicted - I get that - my kid rows with your kid SMH - but unfortunately you will never win with the average Joe - you will not because the average Joe is going to say - "lawyer up" - you all miss the point

It is not clear that Sussman was lying. He did have clients, but that did not mean he was representing them in making the visit with the FBI. He also had evidence that he did not bill anyone for the time he used in the interview. But for the a lie (if he was lying) to be a crime here it had to be material to some sort of investigation that the FBI was working on. The prosecution did not really come close to that proof in the trial.

Now you are asking another question - is it OK to actually lie even if not criminal to a person in authority. Morally it may be wrong, but that is not the legal question here. Best practice is to decline to answer, as that is your right in dealing with the FBI.

Tucker Carlson lies all the time on his show. He has even said so with regard to legal proceedings. Is that morally right? I would not think so, but it happens all the time.

HRC perfected the ideal defence when being asked questions both under oath and not. I don't remember a damn thing sure worked for her. More people should follow her lead, it is a proven strategy.

And, as a fan points out "she was voted off the island" as a result.

She was voted off the Island by the dumpster. That is a humiliation she will NEVER get over. The lamps that had to die facing the wrath of the queen of evil. It never ceases to amaze me that in 2016 the only choices the American citizen had were these 2 reprobates.

[LandM]

Tomorrow I will have reread the the homework and have a better response on the three readings;

Red - your answer is that it is ok to lie to someone of authority - that is ok I guess - the FBI knew Sussman was not telling the truth - the FBI knew BUT in typical FBI fashion they did not say anything - they let the American public think that clown car 1 was under investigation. Never listened to Tucker ??? but if he carries the weight of 70 million voters I should start. I am super naive to think people are always telling me the truth - I fell off the apple cart yesterday? That is problem number 1 in many parts of Merika. I used to do business on a hand-shake, now, you have your lawyer call my lawyer who will call your lawyers and they will have lunch. $10,000 later I may get to a business deal - sure, sure, sure. What happened to honor and ethics? He was lying, knew it and did it. I thought lawyers had a code of conduct?

Donut analogy 2 - Adam Schiff. a lawyer, has been lying to the American public for how long? Jamie Raskin - how long? These two are repulsive people - you all want to know why we have issues?

[Peter Brown]

still pedaling
In your mind Red - is it ok for a jury person to say it is OK to lie to the FBI? It is ok to lie to a person of authority - those are not my words.

Sussman was never going to be convicted - I get that - my kid rows with your kid SMH - but unfortunately you will never win with the average Joe - you will not because the average Joe is going to say - "lawyer up" - you all miss the point

It is not clear that Sussman was lying. He did have clients, but that did not mean he was representing them in making the visit with the FBI. He also had evidence that he did not bill anyone for the time he used in the interview. But for the a lie (if he was lying) to be a crime here it had to be material to some sort of investigation that the FBI was working on. The prosecution did not really come close to that proof in the trial.

Now you are asking another question - is it OK to actually lie even if not criminal to a person in authority. Morally it may be wrong, but that is not the legal question here. Best practice is to decline to answer, as that is your right in dealing with the FBI.

Tucker Carlson lies all the time on his show. He has even said so with regard to legal proceedings. Is that morally right? I would not think so, but it happens all the time.

HRC perfected the ideal defence when being asked questions both under oath and not. I don't remember a damn thing sure worked for her. More people should follow her lead, it is a proven strategy.

And, as a fan points out "she was voted off the island" as a result.

She was voted off the Island by the dumpster. That is a humiliation she will NEVER get over. The lamps that had to die facing the wrath of the queen of evil. It never ceases to amaze me that in 2016 the only choices the American citizen had were these 2 reprobates.

5EC16183-BC94-44C9-B133-791EE124C0AF.jpeg (127.34 KiB) Viewed 737 times

[MDlaxfan76]

still pedaling
In your mind Red - is it ok for a jury person to say it is OK to lie to the FBI? It is ok to lie to a person of authority - those are not my words.

Sussman was never going to be convicted - I get that - my kid rows with your kid SMH - but unfortunately you will never win with the average Joe - you will not because the average Joe is going to say - "lawyer up" - you all miss the point

It is not clear that Sussman was lying. He did have clients, but that did not mean he was representing them in making the visit with the FBI. He also had evidence that he did not bill anyone for the time he used in the interview. But for the a lie (if he was lying) to be a crime here it had to be material to some sort of investigation that the FBI was working on. The prosecution did not really come close to that proof in the trial.

Now you are asking another question - is it OK to actually lie even if not criminal to a person in authority. Morally it may be wrong, but that is not the legal question here. Best practice is to decline to answer, as that is your right in dealing with the FBI.

Tucker Carlson lies all the time on his show. He has even said so with regard to legal proceedings. Is that morally right? I would not think so, but it happens all the time.

HRC perfected the ideal defence when being asked questions both under oath and not. I don't remember a damn thing sure worked for her. More people should follow her lead, it is a proven strategy.

And, as a fan points out "she was voted off the island" as a result.

She was voted off the Island by the dumpster. That is a humiliation she will NEVER get over. The lamps that had to die facing the wrath of the queen of evil. It never ceases to amaze me that in 2016 the only choices the American citizen had were these 2 reprobates.

voters, not Trump.
I don't care what "humiliation" she faced, I'm fine with her outcome.

Trump, however, is far worse, I knew it then, and all of my worst concerns were validated.

[dislaxxic]

One of two things appear to be happening on this subject with LM...

one, he is being willfully ignorant of what is happening in this series of hearings. Just about ALL of the witnesses have been republicans/conservatives. Are THEY all lying? What have Schiff or Raskin lied about during these hearings, one would have to wonder...? Why do we keep veering off this thread to Sussman? IMO, he is being willfully obtuse, shooting off the rails, careening around the world of whataboutism such that...somehow...what we are hearing with our own ears and seeing with our own eyes about this insurrection, this attempted coup...just doesn't matter?? Really? The first three witnesses today...they were lying? Is he aware of WHY Judge Carter opined that Trump and his people "likely committed felonies"? Does any of this matter at all??

which segues nicely to...

two...he just doesn't feel that this was anything close to an actual coup attempt, and/or simply doesn't care that this very likely IS what happened between election day 2020 and January 6th. He's already stated that he just wishes that we'd all just move along and stop being so icky...so combative, so, so...angry! What does he think about the call with Raffensberger...just a "perfect call"?? We may never know, since LM seems mostly intent on reciting his resume and personal history as a way, presumably, to burnish his self-proclaimed "independent", "reasonable" bona fides..."let's be reasonable, folks and stop being so divisive!"

Anyone buying any of that??

..

[dislaxxic]

Trump Proves the Jan. 6th Committee’s Point

Did you catch the part today where Donald Trump told a lie about the Arizona official Bowers just before the hearing began and was called out by the witness, who...UNDER OATH...said that Trump's assertion was a FLAT LIE!

The guy just can't help himself...

..

[ggait]

Trump is TOTALLY different from Hillary. The both sides argument on the two of them COMPLETELY misses the essential point.

Hillary is a liar. Most politicians are. Most humans are. Definitely bad, but very common and conventional. Much easier to deal with.

The essence of Trump is that he is not a conventional liar. Instead, he is a spectacular bull shirter. Very distinct from a liar and far worse:

1) Bsers don’t consciously deceive.
2) Bsers just don’t know or care about the truth.
3) Bsers ignore or reject the distinction between truth and falsity altogether.

Bottom line per Professor Frankfurter in his definitive work on the subject: "nonsense is a greater enemy of the truth than lies are."

Highly encouraged reading if you really want to understand how Trump and Fox News and Facebook are just fundamentally different than the rest of the media.

Bill Barr's testimony captures the distinction well. He testified that Trump was detached from reality. Of course he was/is. He always has been -- he could not care less what reality is. Remember, Trump says he lives on the 66-68th floors of Trump Tower (58 stories tall fyi) in a 33k square foot apartment (actual records say 10K).


https://reasonandmeaning.com/2020/10/29 ... -nonsense/

[LandM]

ggait,
Not sure Trump is much different then Hillary - they are grifters IMHO - a liar is a liar just depends whether they look you straight in the eye or not;
I did click on the link and it gave me a 401 error;
The American people are much smarter then I think you all give them credit for. I read where DJT ripped people off in business - really - ok
Hillary has lived on the taxpayer her whole life - same with Bill
My point with Raskin and Schiff is they are also grifters - they have have great credentials and they graduated from the right schools and they did the right things and now they grift;

Hopefully this makes sense:
1. In clown car 1 we have DJT; Rudy; Powell; and some dude who teaches at Chapman College;
2. In clown car 2 we have Hillary; Perkins Coui (????) and Sussman;
3. In clown car 3 we have Schiff; Raskin and others who will impeach clown car 1

I think - just an opinion, we were never close to losing our democracy - to paraphrase C&S (sorry) - yellow man posted something that was pretty cool - an AZ election official saying you got nothing; a PA and GA official saying you got nothing - ALL supporting the Constitution. He lost and our DEMOCRACY prevailed!

You can kick that guy into his grave - he loves being kicked for the same reason in your mind he is not a Hillary - keep kicking and he will keep living!!!!

[Seacoaster(1)]

"I think - just an opinion, we were never close to losing our democracy...."

All evidence -- increasing, mountains of evidence -- to the contrary.

[Andersen]

Using the logic of one or two posters, it's okay to point a gun at someone and pull the trigger if the gun jams. You were never really in danger.

[cradleandshoot]

"I think - just an opinion, we were never close to losing our democracy...."

All evidence -- increasing, mountains of evidence -- to the contrary.

What evidence counselor?? Jan.6 was an embarrassing episode in our nations history. That is all it was. You can shout as loud as you want to the contrary but that makes you telling your own big lie. The Jan. 6 hearings are rapidly turning into a partisan circus. The big lie is that these DemocRAT folks running this chitshow are interested in truth, justice and the American way. All that rat faced weasel Schiff wants to do is hang the dumpster out to dry. You wonder why an ever increasing # of Americans don't trust either party? None of this chitshow about Jan.6 has anything to do about finding the truth. It is about nailing trumps ass to the wall to assuage the anger and contempt your party has towards the dumpster. When you can finally admit that fact I will agree with you. I will say this yet again, as a distinguished attorney you already understand. There is what you know, what you think you know and what you can prove. To what extent does your party realize that your hatred for trump is out of proportion for any ability to find any evidence? Fish or cut bait is the expression often used. You can investigate the dumpster until the cows come home. If you think your going to find a smoking gun someplace... good luck with that.

[cradleandshoot]

Using the logic of one or two posters, it's okay to point a gun at someone and pull the trigger if the gun jams. You were never really in danger.

If you stab someone in the heart and miss the aorta that person was also never in danger. Your definition of "logic" is very interesting and subject to your own personal interpretation.

[CU88]

Joe Walsh@WalshFreedom

Remember this when people say these hearings are one-sided: Every witness testifying today almost certainly voted for Trump in 2020.

[CU88]

June 21, 2022
Heather Cox Richardson
Jun 22

Today, the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol held its fourth public hearing. The agenda was to lay out the scheme to pressure swing state electors to switch their states’ votes to Trump and then, when that failed, to get state operatives to create a false slate of electors to submit to Congress and the National Archives to set up an argument that there was confusion about who had won. That, Trump’s operatives hoped, would give then–vice president Mike Pence an excuse either to refuse to count Biden votes on the grounds that there was confusion over which slate was legitimate (there was no confusion: the Biden votes were certified and the Trump votes were not), or to send the certified electoral votes back to the state legislatures, where Republican-dominated bodies could recertify for Trump.

The scheme was illegal across the board.

It failed, committee chair Bennie Thompson (D-MS) pointed out, because the system held. But that system has been under attack by Trump supporters for the past year and a half, and it is no longer clear that it will continue to hold. As proof, Thompson offered the case of the New Mexico panel that refused to certify the results of the recent election there. While two of the three panel members finally agreed to certify the results after pressure the state courts demanded they do so, one continued to refuse, citing “his gut feeling” that the results were wrong. That man was at the January 6th attack on the Capitol.

The theme of the day was our election systems, and how Trump’s attack on them continues to threaten our democracy.

The panel laid out how Trump and his people tried to get state legislators to throw out Biden votes and certify electoral votes for Trump, calling the lawmakers, inviting them to the White House, and, finally, threatening them over social media and sending protesters to their homes. When that didn’t work, they urged pro-Trump state politicians to produce alternative, false, slates of electors, promising that those slates would be used only if courts ruled the certified votes illegitimate. That promise, though, was a lie. Trump’s team planned to use the existence of two sets of electoral votes to justify throwing out both, thereby getting rid of legitimate Biden electors and giving the election to Trump.

The committee’s first panel included officials who had borne pressure from the Trump camp: Russell “Rusty” Bowers, the speaker of the Arizona House of Representatives; Brad Raffensperger, Georgia’s secretary of state; and Gabriel Sterling, the chief operating officer in the office of the Georgia secretary of state, responsible for overseeing elections.

All three are Republicans, at least two of whom supported Trump in the election but refused to do his illegal bidding after it. Once again, the committee told its story using only Republican testimony, making it hard for opponents to argue that the hearings are a political hit job. Schiff made a point of asking Bowers about his admiration for President Ronald Reagan, and Bowers talked about Reagan’s celebration of the orderly transfer of power in the United States, a tradition that Trump, of course, shattered.

The three men detailed pressure from Trump lawyers Rudy Giuliani and Jenna Ellis, from lawyer John Eastman, from Trump’s chief of staff Mark Meadows, and from Trump himself.

Bowers outlined weeks of pressure to produce a competing set of electors or to decertify the existing ones, even as Giuliani and Ellis refused to produce any evidence to back up their wild claims. Bowers refused to go along. Today, he testified passionately about the importance of his oath to the Constitution and his duty to the state of Arizona, and how Trump and his people were asking him to break an oath to a document he considers divinely inspired for the benefit of one man. Giuliani tried to convince him that, as Republicans, they should stick together to put their man back into the White House.

It wasn’t going to happen. Bowers wrote in his diary: “It is painful to have friends…turn on me with such rancor.” But “I do not want to be a winner by cheating. I will not play with laws I swore allegiance to.”

Raffensperger explained that the claims of fake “suitcases” of ballots in Georgia and other irregularities were false, that the election was “remarkably smooth,” and that two recounts produced the same results as the original counting of the votes. He talked of pressure from the Trump camp over its election lies. Representative Adam Schiff (D-CA), who was directing the proceedings today, noted that Meadows reached out 18 times to set up a phone call between Raffensperger and then-president Trump.

Once underway, the call took an extraordinary 67 minutes, as Trump repeatedly pushed Raffensperger to “find” 11,780 votes, one more than Biden had won in the state. Trump told Raffensperger that it was “very dangerous” for him to say there was no fraud, a suggestion Raffensperger interpreted as a threat. “Why wouldn’t you want to find the right answer, Brad?” Trump demanded.

Sterling walked us through the “suitcases” allegation again, but his testimony focused on his anger at the disinformation coming from the Trump campaign and then-president Trump himself. He asked Trump directly, on camera, to stop inciting violence. “It’s not right,” he said. Rather than backing off, Trump escalated his pressure on Georgia, alleging “massive voter fraud” there.

The witnesses told the committee that Trump had tried to pressure them by whipping up his followers to harass them at home, terrifying them and their families. Bowers said he is still harassed every week, with people staking out his home and calling him a pedophile and a pervert. Raffensperger detailed the threats coming to him and his wife, and said that people broke into his widowed daughter-in-law’s home.

The threats provided the introduction to the next witness, who sat before the committee alone. After Thompson dismissed the first panel, the committee swore in Wandrea ArShaye “Shaye” Moss. Moss and her mother, Ruby Freeman, were the two Georgia election workers Trump and Giuliani targeted as rigging the vote. If Bowers represented the heights of political lawmaking, and Raffensperger and Sterling the bureaucracy of it, Moss and her mother, who was sitting behind her, represented the rest of us.

But Moss was not at all ordinary. She gave a passionate account of why she had chosen to become an election worker and how she had loved helping older people—people who had not been able to vote when they were young—submit their ballots. On the anniversary of the 1964 murder of James Chaney, Andrew Goodman, and Michael Schwerner for their efforts to register Black voters in Mississippi, Ms. Moss articulated just what the struggle for voting rights continues to mean.

Her testimony also outlined what that struggle continues to cost. Both she and her mother explained how they and Moss’s grandmother had been doxxed and harassed until they are now virtual prisoners in their homes—when they can be in them at all. The FBI warned Ms. Freeman to leave her home for two months around the time of January 6 because agents worried for her safety.

“Do you know how it feels to have the president of the United States target you?” Freeman said on video. “The President of the United States is supposed to represent every American. Not target one. But he targeted me: Lady Ruby, a small business owner, a mother, a proud American citizen, who stood up to help Fulton County run an election in the middle of the pandemic."

Taken together, today’s testimony showed the human side of the rule of law in the United States, and how Trump’s pressure on officials and weaponization of gangs to harass them threatens to destroy the system. Both Moss and Freeman have had to quit their jobs, along with all the permanent workers in the Georgia counting venue Trump and Giuliani attacked.

The committee revealed some other interesting information today. It said that protests at state houses, organized by Trump people, had some of the same characters who later showed up in Washington on January 6, including Jacob Chansley (the “QAnon Shaman” who showed up on January 6 in an animal headdress) and various Proud Boys.

It showed testimony from Ronna McDaniel, the head of the Republican National Committee, confirming that the RNC helped the Trump campaign collect the false electoral slates.

It named two lawmakers who appeared to participate in the attempt to overthrow the election. Representative Andy Biggs (R-AZ) apparently called Bowers to pressure him, and Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) wanted to hand the fake slates of electors from Michigan and Wisconsin to Pence on January 6.

Striding quickly past reporters today, Johnson told CNN’s chief congressional correspondent Manu Raju that he had “no idea” who asked him to share the fake electors with Pence. He said he had “no involvement” in the attempt to provide fake electors to overturn the legitimate outcome of the 2020 election and claimed he didn’t know who handed his office the envelope that was supposed to go to Pence. It was, he said, “some staff intern” who handed another staff member the envelope. When asked if he would try to find out, he said, “No. No, because there’s no conspiracy here. This is a complete non-story, guys. Complete non-story.”

[dislaxxic]

trump is the same as Hillary. Check.
i've been to the Congo. Check.
Public Service bad, self-denigrating. Check.
Nothing bad, no evidence worth a prosecution here. Check.
trump never ripped anyone off as a businessman...if he did, meh, Big Wup! Check.

I got it now...LM is Fatty's grandpa!

..

[dislaxxic]

The Jan. 6 hearings are rapidly turning into a partisan circus. The big lie is that these DemocRAT folks running this chitshow are interested in truth, justice and the American way.

This poster is evidently unaware that Mitch McConnell refused the establishment of a BIPARTISAN, INDEPENDENT commission to investigate this issue.

This poster is also evidently unaware that Kevin McCarthy withdrew involvement in this investigation in a tantrum over having two coup sympathizers denied a seat on the committee (others were approved).

This poster is indifferent to the fact that all three witnesses in the devastating first half of the Tuesday hearing were republicans.

This poster is also unaware, or indifferent to, the FACT that there are two bona fide REPUBLICANS on this committee who see this incident for what it is, a COUP ATTEMPT.

It's instructive however, to read his words...to see what average rank and file trumpublicans across the nation feel about the pursuit of justice in this most heinous attack on elections our country has ever seen.

..