Author Topic: The Jan 6 Commission  (Read 55161 times)

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #500 on: June 17, 2022, 09:31:33 PM »
...Obviously, mail in ballots take longer than the millions they counted from in-person voting. Does he even know how ballots work? It's not like you can just run off ballots at kinko's. It is completely detached from reality.

No. Many states count the mail-in ballots before election day, and as they come in, so they can be counted quickly. Some refuse to do so.

Pennsylvania refused to do so. Election officials asked the republican controlled legislature to change the law and they refused to do so. Everyone who cared knew this and knew Pennsylvania would take a long time. But Trump uses that time lag to claim fraud that doesn’t exist. And he makes the same argument in his paper, it’s “factual” how many days Pennsylvania took. But claiming the time had anything to do with democrats or fraud is, in the words of Barr, bull*censored*.

Tom

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #501 on: June 17, 2022, 10:02:45 PM »
Quote
What is misleading?
I feel like you've been given a short list of misleading things to be getting along with.

wmLambert

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #502 on: June 18, 2022, 07:26:18 PM »
...I feel like you've been given a short list of misleading things to be getting along with.

No. When Mules have been caught because of the ballot cameras and cell phone tracking and then plead guilty, do yoy still find it necessary to claim they did not do whay they admitted doing? It seems you mislead to claim there was no wide-spread conspiracy to scam votes. Remember, most courts decided not to even evaluate the eyewitness complaints, saying the witnesses lacked standing. Then the Democrat apologists say the issue is closed and dealt with, even though no such "dealing with" ever happened. I have not seen a total listing of the officials who claimed they did everything correctly, yet didn't

wmLambert

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #503 on: June 18, 2022, 08:59:26 PM »
BTW: In Michigan, we had hundreds of eyewitness allegations of scamming by official precinct watchers reporting wrongdoing. None of these seemed to approach the courts level of "standing." Care to explain that? Remember, it wasn't that their observations were mistaken or irrelevant. They were never evaluated at all.

Tom

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #504 on: June 18, 2022, 10:07:46 PM »
What do you believe was on the short list you were given?

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #505 on: June 20, 2022, 08:45:34 PM »
Sol far all of the witnesses have been Republicans.  And it looks like that will continue tomorrow.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #506 on: June 20, 2022, 08:51:43 PM »
Oh sure a lot of RINOs who don't have the guts to be held in contempt. They won't let Jim Jordan speak, though, he could show the committee proof that the election was stolen! Seriously, I wonder what kind of exculpatory evidence we're missing out on? Calling Dinesh to the stand to play his 2000 mules into the public record so that the entire committee can have a big belly laugh? Or is some star witness going to reveal that Trump's people were not trying to overturn the election, when that was their stated goal?

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #507 on: June 20, 2022, 09:26:27 PM »
Oh sure a lot of RINOs who don't have the guts to be held in contempt. They won't let Jim Jordan speak, though, he could show the committee proof that the election was stolen! Seriously, I wonder what kind of exculpatory evidence we're missing out on? Calling Dinesh to the stand to play his 2000 mules into the public record so that the entire committee can have a big belly laugh? Or is some star witness going to reveal that Trump's people were not trying to overturn the election, when that was their stated goal?

He wouldn’t want to license it to them. How else could he get his cut of the big lie grift?

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #508 on: June 21, 2022, 01:42:56 PM »
Rusty Bowers is tearing Trump and his team to pieces.  Again he is bringing out that his oath was to the Constitution and not Trump or the Party.

Time and time again that is what we are hearing. Trump wanted personal loyalty and not loyalty to the Constitution or country.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #509 on: June 21, 2022, 02:22:47 PM »
Waiting on the comments from the Trumpist about how Bowers is a Never Trumper RINO who would not listen or even look at the evidence.

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #510 on: June 21, 2022, 02:50:22 PM »
Oh sure a lot of RINOs who don't have the guts to be held in contempt. They won't let Jim Jordan speak, though, he could show the committee proof that the election was stolen!
...

Jim Jordan could speak to the committee all he wanted if he agreed to testify under oath. He refused that offer and is ignoring that subpoena. The party of "Law and Order."

wmLambert

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #511 on: June 21, 2022, 03:44:07 PM »
...Jim Jordan could speak to the committee all he wanted if he agreed to testify under oath. He refused that offer and is ignoring that subpoena. The party of "Law and Order."

Exactly. The Committee lacks any hint of "Law and Order." The two Never-Trumpers that Pelosi installed as pretend Republicans should feel mortified by the extent they are being used. In November, after the Red Wave flushes Pelosi out of her chair, Many MAGA GOP have vowed to return the favor and finally see the Democrats indicted for obvious malfeasance, Sedition, Treason, conspiracy, and untrue personal attacks. What one rarely sees on a poll is how important it is for criminals to pay for their crimes and not get away. Everyone thinks the politicians get away with things anybody else would be pilloried for. They live by defamation, libel, and slander - and always create strawman bogey men to run against.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #512 on: June 21, 2022, 04:05:21 PM »
Projection.

Tom

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #513 on: June 21, 2022, 04:06:10 PM »
It's literally all they have left.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #514 on: June 21, 2022, 04:11:08 PM »
Jordan couldn't be on the committee, because we don't normally let defendants also serve in the prosecution team or on the jury. It was an act in bad faith to nominate him when they had 210 Republicans to choose from, the majority of which would have been accepted without question. He was actively involved in the attempts to delegitimize the election, including giving a speech ON January 6th claiming that the Arizona results were wrong, now disproved by a half dozen different audits including the rigged one.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #515 on: June 22, 2022, 07:02:12 AM »

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #516 on: June 22, 2022, 09:54:04 AM »
Conservative commentator on Fox.  Trump "unfit for office."

https://currently.att.yahoo.com/att/even-fox-news-conservative-analysts-233216501.html?.tsrc=daily_mail&uh_test=1_11

Hope he has his resume up to date. Fox commentator is probably no longer a gig for him.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #517 on: June 22, 2022, 11:08:34 AM »
To me the most damming statements is where they tell the guy from AZ that they have thousands of names and that they will send the to him and they never do.

This was a bluff that Trump can not call his way out of.  He keeps claiming to have evidence of 10's of thousands if not 100's of thousands of cases of voter fraud and has not presented them to any one.

wmLambert

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #518 on: June 22, 2022, 03:50:33 PM »
What do you believe was on the short list you were given?

Just so you will stop misleading and deflecting: I was given NO "list of any kind." I simply see the news as it occurs, then look to see how the contemporaneous events are approached by different media and people. By and large, anything that counters Democrat disinformation is ignored. Not refuted or explained - just never covered. Then the information is left in the air long enough for it to be considered old news. It is never referred to at all. the average person spends 750 minutes per day with the media. Time spent by the complicit media on important stories may be as little as one minute or less, if covered at all. If Joe Sixpack misses that minute within his 750 minutes of watching it never becomes news.

So stop bullying and start explaining the scammers who were caught and plead guilty, and admitted being a small part of the nuch bigger enterprise to scam the vote.

Hillary has been claiming her Presidency was stolen for over six years. At any time over that whining, any Hillary complaint would get far more than the minute allocated for real info. Anyone questioning proved scamming against Trump gets arrested and put in shackles. Hillary, Abrams, and the like could have been serving time for years.

Tom

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #519 on: June 22, 2022, 03:56:28 PM »
I meant the list we gave you, William.

wmLambert

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #520 on: June 22, 2022, 04:01:05 PM »
Jordan couldn't be on the committee, because we don't normally let defendants also serve in the prosecution team or on the jury. It was an act in bad faith to nominate him when they had 210 Republicans to choose from, the majority of which would have been accepted without question. He was actively involved in the attempts to delegitimize the election, including giving a speech ON January 6th claiming that the Arizona results were wrong, now disproved by a half dozen different audits including the rigged one.

What a ludicrous stretch. Pelosi needed to be questioned for her role in the Jan. 6 protest, but tell me when and for how long she testified. That's right: zero. Never before has the "loyal opposition" been denied the right to present evidence and cross-examine. This entire Commission is a disgrace. Y'know, the right of Habeas Corpus and the right to confront one's accusers is guaranteed in the body of the Constitution. The Founders thought it too important to be an add-on withing the Bill of Rights. Alongside that, we are always guaranteed a jury by our peers. The Committee defies that, as well.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #521 on: June 22, 2022, 04:06:26 PM »
It is for a criminal trial, but you seem to forget this is not a criminal trial.

And Trump and his supporters can show up and testify under oath, just like all of the others. But they will not.

Why do you keep bring up criminal trial things?  This is not a trial.  It is an investigation. What are Trump and his cronnies hidding?

wmLambert

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #522 on: June 22, 2022, 05:03:38 PM »
Any one who does not agree with Trump is a RINO and part of the deep state.
Trump is now like the flat earthers and young earth people. No amount of proof will change his mind since his whole sense of self is now based on the election being stolen from him, not him losing.  If he lost, then it was his fault. If it was stolen, it was not his fault. He has to maintain this to have any chance in any lawsuits.

On the contrary.  Flat Earthers is a strawman pejorative consigned by Andrew Dickson White.
Quote

Every history book recounts how Columbus fought the religious extremists who used the Bible to decree the Earth was Flat. Name a Liberal who knows any different! Rodney Stark in How Christianity (and Capitalism) Led to Science presents the accepted and unargued true history that is unreported in school books.

Quote
The warfare of Columbus [with religion] the world knows well: how the Bishop of Ceuta bested him in Portugal,; how sundry wise men of Spain confronted him with the usual quotations from Psalms, from St, Paul, and from St. Augustine; how, even after he was triumphant, and after his voyage had greatly strengthened the theory of the Earth's sphericity... the Church by its highest authority solemnly stumbled and persisted in going astray... the theological barriers to this geographical truth yielded but slowly. Plain as it had become to scholars, they hesitated to declare it to the world at large... But in 1519 science gains a crushing victory. Magellan makes his famous voyage. He proves the Earth is round, for his expedition circumnavigates it... Yet even this does not end the war. Many conscientious [religious] men oppose the doctrine for two hundred years longer.

White lied. He was running for President of Cornell and admitted he wrote this to "get even with his Christian critics of his plans for Cornell." Every educated person of Columbus's time knew the earth was round. This includes Roman Catholic theologians. The Venerable Bede (ca. 673-735) taught that the Earth was round, as did Bishop Virgilius of Salzburg (ca. 720-784). Hildegard of Bingen (1098-1179), and Thomas Aquinas (1224-1274), and all four became Saints. It was part of an ages-old conspiracy of atheists to portray Religion as being anti-Science. Columbus was not argued out of sailing off the edge of the world. The scientist of his day knew the world was round - but much larger than Columbus estimated. He put Japan at being only 2,080 miles from the Canary Islands, but the "sundry wise men of Spain" knew it was over 14,000 miles. Had Columbus not run across an unsuspected continent - his crew would have all died at Sea.
Quote
Every history book recounts how Columbus fought the religious extremists who used the Bible to decree the Earth was Flat. Name a Liberal who knows any different!
White lied. He was running for President of Cornell and admitted he wrote this to "get even with his Christian critics of his plans for Cornell." Every educated person of Columbus's time knew the earth was round. This includes Roman Catholic theologians. The Venerable Bede (ca. 673-735) taught that the Earth was round, as did Bishop Virgilius of Salzburg (ca. 720-784). Hildegard of Bingen (1098-1179), and Thomas Aquinas (1224-1274), and all four became Saints. It was part of an ages-old conspiracy of atheists to portray Religion as being anti-Science. Columbus was not argued out of sailing off the edge of the world. The scientist of his day knew the world was round - but much larger than Columbus estimated. He put Japan at being only 2,080 miles from the Canary Islands, but the "sundry wise men of Spain" knew it was over 14,000 miles. Had Columbus not run across an unsuspected continent - his crew would have all died at Sea.

The plan to dumb down America was launched in 1898 by socialist John Dewey in an essay entitled 'The Primary Education Fetich.' In it he showed his fellow progressives how to transform America into a collectivist utopia by taking over the public schools and destroying the literacy of millions of Americans. The plan has been so successfully implemented that it is now a fact that half the adult population of America are functionally illiterate. They can't read their nation's Constitution or its Declaration of Independence. They can't read their high school diplomas.

   [Dewey was a brilliant sociologist, but lived at a time when the promise of Marx and Engels was untested, but claimed the intelligencia (Like Dewey) could and should rule the world. Since then, the verdict has been rebutted by history, yet the Dewey plan endures. Dewey was inspired by Edward Bellamy, a Unitarian journalist, who in 1884 wrote 'Looking Backward' which described a utopian socialist society in 2000 America. It was this utopian vision of a socialist future that drove the progressives in their messianic crusade to use education as the means of changing America into a socialist society.]

Furthermore, Trump does not need to believe nonsense to maintain a sense of himself. He believes the election was deeply flawed because it was. It was also a high-tech lynching. Dominion has been declared dangerous and corruptible. It risks big bucks to call them out, because they sue anyone who wants the voting machines to be audited to explain eyewitness complaints. Instead of allowing transparency, they refuse any inspection. ...Awfully suspicious in itself.

Since Trump received far more votes than a popular Obama did - and an unpopular Biden (handicapped by a laptop that revealed the Biden Crime Family), who never came out of his basement to campaign, somehow got more, the stink is quite noticeable.

wmLambert

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #523 on: June 22, 2022, 05:28:34 PM »
It is for a criminal trial, but you seem to forget this is not a criminal trial.

And Trump and his supporters can show up and testify under oath, just like all of the others. But they will not.

Why do you keep bring up criminal trial things?  This is not a trial.  It is an investigation. What are Trump and his cronnies hidding?

No. It is not a criminal trial. It is also not an investigation. It is a kangaroo court, an imitation court to make disinformational accusations in order to create a felonious crime to charge Trump,  to keep him off of future ballots. It is also sheer stupidity. The Democrats have crossed lines never contemplated before, unafraid of future reciprocity using the same tactics they now say is "good to go." They know that Trump is not constrained by comity. If someone crosses any line to unfairly attack him, he has always responded right back at them,  but twice as hard. Thery are stupid for doing this. Are they idiots?

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #524 on: June 22, 2022, 05:43:55 PM »
It is for a criminal trial, but you seem to forget this is not a criminal trial.

And Trump and his supporters can show up and testify under oath, just like all of the others. But they will not.

Why do you keep bring up criminal trial things?  This is not a trial.  It is an investigation. What are Trump and his cronnies hidding?

No. It is not a criminal trial. It is also not an investigation. It is a kangaroo court, an imitation court to make disinformational accusations in order to create a felonious crime to charge Trump,  to keep him off of future ballots. It is also sheer stupidity. The Democrats have crossed lines never contemplated before, unafraid of future reciprocity using the same tactics they now say is "good to go." They know that Trump is not constrained by comity. If someone crosses any line to unfairly attack him, he has always responded right back at them,  but twice as hard. Thery are stupid for doing this. Are they idiots?

Glad you see part of trump for who he is. Just wish it scared you that instead of public testimony that trump will go for secret trials. Strike back, twice as hard, end democracy and freedom.

wmLambert

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #525 on: June 22, 2022, 07:45:07 PM »
Perhaps this list is the "short list" that Yossarian asked about.

I already commented on the least smarmy ones. I'll comment on each one, although I've already been told it won't be read for various smarmy reasons.

Truth claims made by William in the above post:
1) In order for what Congress distributes to be reliable, the GOP has to be involved in the selection of items to distribute.
Of course. Everything most be open to counterargument and exclusionary evidence. It's n the Constitution, and one of the reasons we had a War of Independence.

2) Implicitly, the GOP was either not permitted to be involved or was not interested in ensuring the reliability of distributed information.
Both. Pelosi, on her own, decided not to let the GOP select its own members to ensure any reliability. We know that was the right call because Cheney has already been caught in several outright lies. Since she and her GOP cohort on the unselect committee voted to impeach Trump - but once their reasons for that vote had been proved wrong, they never apologized for doing so.

3) Implicitly, editing sound over unrelated visuals means you cannot trust what is shown.
Correct. Video and audio can both be edited. That is why the original material must be vetted by the opposition, and other exculpatory clips must be examined for value.

4) Liz Cheney lied through her teeth. Specifics not provided.
BPR Business and Politics posted:
Quote
...Liz Cheney ran to CNN a few weeks ago to accuse conservative stalwart Rep. Jim Banks of falsely presenting himself as the Jan. 6 commission’s ranking member. Banks is, in fact, congressional Republicans’ choice to be their top investigator on the committee, but he has been prevented from fulfilling his duties by Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. However, it’s Cheney who appears to be misrepresenting herself as the ranking member — that is, the top Republican — on the committee…

    “John Wood works for the Democrat Party, just like Liz Cheney, who was appointed by Pelosi and is not the Ranking Member of the Select Committee. She is misleading witnesses, before they testify under penalty of law, about the motives and the position of the person questioning them,” said Banks, who has continued leading Republicans’ investigation of the federal government’s handling of the Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol…

    Cheney was given six days to explain whether she considers herself just the Democrat-appointed vice-chair of the committee or also the Republican ranking member, as is being represented to key witnesses. She has not responded to multiple requests for comment.

    “If this was a real investigation, that’d land you in jail for prosecutorial misconduct,” Banks said of the false representation. “Fortunately for Liz, this is a sham investigation,” he added.

She also lied about facts.

5) Presentations cannot be trusted when they are made without room for cross-examination or objections.
Since they were threatened to answer in the way the questioner instructed, without counsel, any thing said is not to be admitted.

6) The January 6th insurrectionists came without weapons.
I guess you didn't see the hearing. The Committee's witnesses said that.

7) Only one person was killed on January 6th.
Unarmed Ashli Babbitt was shot and killed by a Pelosi security guard who was off to the side and not endangered. He was hidden away and unnamed for months and given an award.

8 ) The only person who was killed was not threatening.
This was one position that could have been sealed off because of the doorway and number of guards defending the area against those without any weapons.

9) There has never been a committee like this House Investigative Committee.
there is no question here. This is a new precedent. No such unselected one-party committee in 138 years.

10) No matter what the committee releases, it will not be accepted (by persons unidentified; presumably includes William).
What about unselected one-party kangaroo court don't you understand?

11) William found the ironic audio editing at the end of the video to be rhetorically effective, but felt it distorted Trump's meaning.
I don't know about which edit at the end you are so interested in - but you must know it isn't right. As a professional producer/director for many years, I can tell you the editing was heavy-handed and unable to resist any legal challenge had there been anyone there to do so.

12) It is unnecessary to psycho-analyze something (target unknown) to know why this presentation was released.
Everyone knows there are two targets to this travesty. One is the American public to sway public opinion against Trump and the oncoming Red Wave. The other is aimed at the Democrat complicit swamp monsters in the the Justice Department to indict Trump and charge him with a non-existent felony to block him from Federal ballots.

wmLambert

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #526 on: June 22, 2022, 08:04:10 PM »
...Glad you see part of trump for who he is. Just wish it scared you that instead of public testimony that trump will go for secret trials. Strike back, twice as hard, end democracy and freedom.

No, Trump holds no fear to anyone for his doing anything illegal - that is only in the Democrat playbook. Disinformation number one, is that Trump will go for secret trials. Why should he? He sees the Dems are already doing that. The danger is in the complicit heads of departments in the House, Senate, and Justice. Trump can't smash back in kind, but he can keep track of the legal violations and let them know there will be a time for justice in the end, but to do it for real and not in pretense like this committee. He will definitely fight back twice as hard, but transparently and to do so to expose the criminality of those trying to form a future coup against his running in 2024. Don't let this splash on you. The reason he fights back twice as hard is because bullies never expect their bullying to be blocked and for anyone to force them to account for their nefarious actions. Politicians always expect comity to rule the response to anything they do. Trumo knows how to it successfully.

wmLambert

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #527 on: June 22, 2022, 08:10:20 PM »
Looking at my last post, I imagine appointing Giuliani as head of Justice. He is so unlike any Soros people.

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #528 on: June 22, 2022, 08:40:47 PM »
Perhaps this list is the "short list" that Yossarian asked about.

No you asked what was misleading about trump’s screed. Tom said we had given you a few items. Primary:

1) Trump’s repeated statement about more votes than voters that has shown to be false.
2) The fact this is an investigation, not a criminal trial. So all this hoopla about cross examination and confronting your accusers is a misdirection. You’ve clearly bought into this narrative pretty hard.

These are two examples where maybe Trump’s statements were not outright lies but are deceptive and misleading.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #529 on: June 22, 2022, 08:57:05 PM »
Other examples.

Trump tweeting Jan 5 that Pence agreed with him that Pence was allowed to stop the counting of the EC votes. Straight up lie.
Trump and Rudy saying they have thousands of examples of voter fraud in AZ and never supplying any names to AZ.

Trump calling the poll worker in GA a known vote scammer. That was a lie. And a dangerous one.

wmLambert

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #530 on: June 22, 2022, 11:30:38 PM »
...1) Trump’s repeated statement about more votes than voters that has shown to be false.
At the time he mentioned yhem they were more than conjecture. The only reason he didn't push for fuller investigations was because the fix was in and he knew it. Here are wha=t was going on, up until the enf of December:
Quote
(Reuters) - Numerous voting machines in heavily Democratic Detroit showed a greater number of ballots than poll workers records said were cast in the Nov. 8 [2020] presidential election, the Detroit News reported on Tuesday.
About 37 percent of precincts in Wayne County, Michigan, where Detroit is located, showed such discrepancies, the newspaper reported, citing records prepared at its request by the county.
Voting irregularities in Detroit have prompted the state to audit the election results in the city, the newspaper said.
Michigan was one of three rust belt states in which the campaign of Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein requested a recount of the presidential election.
Those efforts came to an end in Michigan on Friday when the Michigan Supreme Court refused to review an appeal of a lower court order barring a recount.
On Monday, all three efforts were suspended after weeks of legal wrangling yielded a recount in Wisconsin only, and it favored Republican winner Donald Trump.
————————————
The numbers certified by the counties, not the uploading of voter histories…, determines the ultimate certification of an election by the secretary.

————————————

Courts have rejected challenges to the 2020 presidential vote, generally citing the lack of evidence that any alleged fraud would have altered the outcome in a particular state. The Republican plaintiffs argued that since their observers couldn’t watch the vote counts or were prevented from seeing other evidence, they couldn’t provide such proof without investigations backed by subpoena power. Still, while some judges have agreed that irregularities occurred in 2020, they weren’t willing to grant discovery in the absence of evidence that fraud could reverse the election results. Republicans thus faced a Catch-22 situation.
Recounts haven’t been useful in resolving fraud concerns, as they merely involve recounting the same potentially fraudulent ballots.
—————————————
Republican-leaning swing state counties had higher turnouts relative to the 2016 election. Democratic-leaning counties had lower turnouts, except for the Democratic counties with alleged vote fraud, which had very high turnouts.

The main counter to this was David Mikkelson of Snopes who is a rabid Democrat apologist. He found everything to be a conspiracy ...but this is the guy who said that Gore never claimed to have invented the Internet, which he did. Problem is that he did. He was assigned to be the bureaucrat behind the Internet Two, which was an unsuccessful attempt to give the educational system its own intranet. Taking a tip from Biden, he lied about it to senior citizens and other less discriminating audiences, and didn't explain the II wasn't the whole internet. Since then, Snopes has been less than fair.

2) The fact this is an investigation, not a criminal trial. So all this hoopla about cross examination and confronting your accusers is a misdirection. You’ve clearly bought into this narrative pretty hard.
No need to buy into anything. The Dems have all but promised that they will get to the bottom of Trump's Felonious coup attempt. They have only recently been made to admit they don't have any authority to do anything but give the DOJ the excuse to indict him.
 
3) Trump tweeting Jan 5 that Pence agreed with him that Pence was allowed to stop the counting of the EC votes. Straight up lie.[/quote
I've always respected Pense, until he decided he was safer bowing out of any responsibility to ensure the election wasn't scammed.

4) Trump and Rudy saying they have thousands of examples of voter fraud in AZ and never supplying any names to AZ.
When courts refused to look at the evidence, the eyewitness affidavits became just wide-eyed speculation.

5)Trump calling the poll worker in GA a known vote scammer. That was a lie. And a dangerous one.
You mean Wandrea "Shaye" Moss, who was a member of the team that said there was a non-existent water main break that made all the ballot observers leave the premises, whereupon this team locked the doors, and instead of also leaving, turned the lights back on and started counting ballots without the watchers? She had been with this bunch for 10 years. Of course the eyewitness affidavits could not be evaluated, because they were said to lack standing. Sure smelled dirty. You know, when you lie about removing the observers, you don't have much credibility left.

These are ... examples where maybe Trump’s statements were not outright lies but are deceptive and misleading.

Or maybe not deceptive and misleading at all, but dead on, but without an honest investigation.

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #531 on: June 23, 2022, 07:25:15 AM »
...1) Trump’s repeated statement about more votes than voters that has shown to be false.
At the time he mentioned yhem they were more than conjecture. The only reason he didn't push for fuller investigations was because the fix was in and he knew it. Here are wha=t was going on, up until the enf of December:
 …

Or maybe not deceptive and misleading at all, but dead on, but without an honest investigation.

Trump brought it up again in his pdf diatribe about the January 6th committee. You do realize most of that 36% of being off was by a single vote and none off by more than 10. Small clerical or counting errors. Not evidence of massive fraud. Trump didn’t give up investigating because “the fix was in” it’s because there was nothing to investigate. So bringing this up again last week out of context, without specifying where and how many votes they were off by is misleading. Trump had 250+ million of his donors money to investigate and show the evidence of fraud to the American people. Instead he paid his daughter in law $60,000 to give a 2 minute speech. Why not pay an investigator, mathematician, or statistician that money to write a report detailing such obvious fraud? Unless he knows there is no there there.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #532 on: June 23, 2022, 04:05:10 PM »
DOJ is saying they investigated claims of fraud and said they did not find any. Trump did not like those answers so he claims they were not doing enough.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #533 on: June 23, 2022, 04:07:50 PM »
Trump to DOJ "Just say it was corrupt and let me and the Rep in Congress take it from there."

wmLambert

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #534 on: June 23, 2022, 09:34:53 PM »
DOJ is saying they investigated claims of fraud and said they did not find any. Trump did not like those answers so he claims they were not doing enough.

Who said that? What investigations did they run that used subpoena power and actually looked at the eyewitness affidavits? What Dominion audits did they run? All the ones I know about said Dominion is not safe because they have been found to have been wrong and hackable. Somebody arrested Mules from D'Souza's documentary and got confessions of their guilt. Somebody found operatives supplying bogus ballots to those Mules, who also confessed. Did someone explain why they lied about a water main break and locked out the poll watchers? Did the courts who said the plaintiffs lacked standing because there were not enough numbers to overturn the election notice the 2,000 Mules documentary that asserted there were more than enough proved scammed votes to alter the results?

The numbers are:  207K ballots illegally put in drop-boxes by mules in AZ which Trump only lost by 10,457 votes. 83K in WI to offset 20,682, 200K in PA to offset 80,555 votes, and 226K in MI to offset 154,188.
« Last Edit: June 23, 2022, 09:42:04 PM by wmLambert »

wmLambert

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #535 on: June 23, 2022, 09:51:49 PM »
Evidently, Cheney has asked Democrats to vote for her instead of their own candidate in order to screw up the GOP voting. Certainly fits in with the Democrat propensity to cheat. She is currently at least 30% behind her opponents.

Tom

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #536 on: June 23, 2022, 10:57:31 PM »
Good Lord, William. Gish galloping is one thing, but a simple refusal to acknowledge when specific talking points have been thoroughly refuted is quite another. Do you realize how tiresome you're being, or would it come as a surprise to you?

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #537 on: June 24, 2022, 07:36:32 AM »
How could the courts in 2019 know about a "documentary" that was released in 2022?

And when the head of the DOJ says they investigated the claims I believe him. They just do some research and find out the claims are false.  Or are not what the people who reported them think they are.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #538 on: June 24, 2022, 08:23:48 AM »
Now that he has lost his primary Mo Brooks is willing to testify.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-loyalist-mo-brooks-spurned-035442795.html

NobleHunter

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #539 on: June 24, 2022, 11:11:25 AM »
If the GOP tries to turn around and launch a committee at democrats, it would be hilarious except for the enormous waste of time and money involved. They'll bring charge after charge with great sound and fury only to quietly slink away when they can't actually prove anything or when they've actually provided proof of innocence.

I mean, they tried how many times to hang Benghazi on Clinton using Benghazi? It was a farce. If she hadn't run her own private server they'd have had nothing to show for it.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #540 on: June 24, 2022, 12:07:05 PM »
I love that wm is still peddling the water main story. There isn't one actual fact that they got correct, and Trump and his minions continue to cackle about it. I mean, they have video tape of the actual water leak, the cleanup, and the ballot handling as well as the statements of observers that they weren't told to leave, they just went home when the work was done. The situation was originally reported by AJC as a "burst pipe" - which I don't know how you get from that to "water main" which isn't typically inside a building. I wonder if maintaining that level of cognitive dissonance takes a lot of energy.

Tom

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #541 on: June 24, 2022, 12:11:30 PM »
Quote
I love that wm is still peddling the water main story.
For what it's worth, I do not love it. It means that he's deliberately made himself unreceptive to anything that challenges even his weakest points, which makes it highly unlikely that he'll be able to extricate himself from his delusions without first lapsing into psychosis. I've seen that happen to people, and it's tragic every time.

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #542 on: June 24, 2022, 12:12:28 PM »
My observation has been the the majority of Trumper's refuse (or psychologically can't) to look at evidence that might challenge what they already know. ( the idea that a lack of proof is proof so dangerous and they don't/wont 'see' it)

The Daily Show did the bit where they asked Trumper's about the Jan 6 Commission. I know not a valid format that proves anything but one of the Guys face when He was shown Barr's comments was... he just couldn't believe it. And then the two young women total refusal to acknowledge that anything even occurred on Jan 6.

Troubling.
I'm going to bet nothing comes from the Jan 6 Commission and Trump is elected if he runs again. When he wins the GOP will not lose again for a long long time.
« Last Edit: June 24, 2022, 12:14:51 PM by rightleft22 »

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #543 on: June 24, 2022, 12:14:18 PM »
I love that wm is still peddling the water main story. There isn't one actual fact that they got correct, and Trump and his minions continue to cackle about it. I mean, they have video tape of the actual water leak, the cleanup, and the ballot handling as well as the statements of observers that they weren't told to leave, they just went home when the work was done. The situation was originally reported by AJC as a "burst pipe" - which I don't know how you get from that to "water main" which isn't typically inside a building. I wonder if maintaining that level of cognitive dissonance takes a lot of energy.

Or very little. Close yourself off to any information that doesn't fit the Trump narrative.

Watching Klepper show clips of the Jan 6 committee testimony to Trump supporters is simultaneously hilarious and terrifying.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNIJH5gufaQ

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #544 on: June 24, 2022, 12:15:30 PM »
I guess I keep hoping that the further out there that the GOP nutbags go, at some point the non-crazy conservatives will hit the limit of their patience and get things under control. Through primaries of course, they'd rather have a lunatic Trumper than a sane Socialist, apparently.

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #545 on: June 24, 2022, 12:30:23 PM »
I guess I keep hoping that the further out there that the GOP nutbags go, at some point the non-crazy conservatives will hit the limit of their patience and get things under control. Through primaries of course, they'd rather have a lunatic Trumper than a sane Socialist, apparently.

I was hoping that as well. But the house keeps getting more gerrymandered. I think the most recent analysis I saw said around 30 swing districts out of 435. The majority of the non-crazies don't vote on primary day so ... they end up voting for Greene, Gatze, or Bobart anyway. The Senate favors the small rural red states, so hard for Democrats to keep pace there.  There just aren't enough middle of the road districts to make the GOP pay a price for nominating Trump sycophants. Maybe we can get some more Joe Machin's elected. But its hard for people like that to join the Democratic party, make it through a primary, and have enough name recognition to attract cross over voters.

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #546 on: June 24, 2022, 12:34:16 PM »
I guess I keep hoping that the further out there that the GOP nutbags go, at some point the non-crazy conservatives will hit the limit of their patience and get things under control. Through primaries of course, they'd rather have a lunatic Trumper than a sane Socialist, apparently.

I had hoped that that would happen but I don't think its going to.
The GOP stance on 'small government' when it comes to economics comes into tension with 'big government' to enforce "law and order", Values...
verses
DNC 'big government' when it comes to economics and small government on social issues. 

Only everything is getting mixed up and it seems that no one really knows what they want let alone how to get where the want to go.
No compromise no commission... I can't 'see' how we arn't in the process of crating the very things we fear.

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #547 on: June 24, 2022, 12:35:32 PM »
DOJ is saying they investigated claims of fraud and said they did not find any. Trump did not like those answers so he claims they were not doing enough.

Who said that?
...

The senior officials at the DoJ under Trump testified that they investigated all the claims and found no evidence to support any of them. Jeffery Clark (environmental law) also investigated found no evidence but was willing to call the election corrupt anyway. In front of the January 6th committee he didn't tell his side of the story he pled the 5th the entire time. Why would he do that if he had all this great evidence of fraud? Why would he do that if everything he did was honest and lawful?

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #548 on: June 24, 2022, 12:40:15 PM »
Seeing more and more interviews with liberal progresses who are angry with Biden and won't be voting for him and that means down the ticket.
A year from now they will be wondering why they keep losing at the State and local level of government let along at the Supreme Court and blaming anyone but themselves.

Tom

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #549 on: June 24, 2022, 12:51:55 PM »
To be fair, it probably does suck to be a progressive and thus forced to choose, in every election of your lifetime, between a party who wants to destroy you and another party that just wants to marginalize you while lying to your face.