Author Topic: The Jan 6 Commission  (Read 76645 times)

Mynnion

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #650 on: July 12, 2022, 05:13:54 PM »
I prefer the term Trump Crazy.

WM-  You failed to answer my questions. 

If Trump is such a great man how come there were no significant investigations into Clinton during his presidency?  As the head of the Executive branch and the man who appointed the head of the DOJ it didn't happen despite his calls to lock her up.

While pointing your finger at Hunter who used his name to gain contracts with foreign powers so have Trumps family.  Since they promoted Trump's businesses he directly benefited.  He also benefited by staying at Trump properties forcing the Secret Service to drastically increase spending.  This also benefited Trump.  I am not a fan of Biden, Clinton, or Trump.  If any of them are charged with a crime and convicted I would happily see them in prison.  What I see you doing though is pulling long lists of alleged crimes against Clinton and Biden many of which have been investigated and totally ignoring those against Trump who has a long history of cheating others for his own gain.  You can look at the many lawsuits filed long before he expressed any political aspirations.

I actually agree that the current hearings are political showcasing.  I would prefer that the investigation be completed outside the public eye until a decision is made whether there are grounds to hold a formal trial.  I am also aware that there can never be a trial free of political influence from both sides.  However at that point the American Public could weigh the information presented by both sides and make their own decision.

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #651 on: July 12, 2022, 05:45:08 PM »
...
I've read several quotes from the DOJ that have confirmed the laptop is genuine. You can find them by searching - but be patient
...

So you make claims but have no sources. And ask me to dig through pages of google searches to support your claim. No thanks. Just show me where the DOJ confirmed the entire laptop is genuinely Hunter Biden's or make your supported lesser claim that many of the emails have been authenticated.

Stop searching for excuses. Was Nina Jankowicz forced to resign her Orwellian position of head of the Disinformation Governance Board because she said Hunter's laptop was not verified and the Steele Dossier was, or not? I guess you missed all that, neh?

I didn’t miss the freak out over her position.

Just respond clearly. The DOJ has verified it was Hunter’s laptop with your source or they haven’t done any such thing and we have media sources that have verified some of the emails.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #652 on: July 12, 2022, 10:31:15 PM »
I'll help william out on this one, since his browser apparently blocks liberal media that agrees with him.

Quote
A law enforcement source has told CNN that the assumption is that it is Hunter Biden's laptop. But the FBI is still working through the content and the integrity of what is on it, because it was not in Hunter Biden's sole possession the whole time before it was handed over to the FBI.

To date, there has been no public discussion of the contents and which portions of it have been verified. What we know for sure is that it passed from one hand to another - hands that all loathed and wanted to destroy Joe Biden. I wonder what Trumpians would say if a laptop alleged to be Donald Trump's was passed from Nancy Pelosi to Adam Schiff to Liz Cheney?

Ouija Nightmare

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #653 on: July 13, 2022, 11:03:51 AM »
I'll help william out on this one, since his browser apparently blocks liberal media that agrees with him.

Quote
A law enforcement source has told CNN that the assumption is that it is Hunter Biden's laptop. But the FBI is still working through the content and the integrity of what is on it, because it was not in Hunter Biden's sole possession the whole time before it was handed over to the FBI.

To date, there has been no public discussion of the contents and which portions of it have been verified. What we know for sure is that it passed from one hand to another - hands that all loathed and wanted to destroy Joe Biden. I wonder what Trumpians would say if a laptop alleged to be Donald Trump's was passed from Nancy Pelosi to Adam Schiff to Liz Cheney?

Just the fact that a guy running a repair shop started snooping in a customer’s data. You already have someone of poor moral character with access to it.

Somebody remind me why I should care if the President’s son is a lowlife? I didn’t vote for him. He doesn’t hold a public office, he hasn’t been appointed to the Whitehouse staff like the last president’s entire family. I’m trying hard to recall why I should care.

The world is full of lowlifes. I don’t have the time and energy to worry about them.


Mynnion

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #654 on: July 13, 2022, 11:11:05 AM »
The only reason you should care is if there is confirmed, validated information in the computer that attributes criminal activity to the president.  Hunter by all appearances is a scum bag.  That may reflect poorly on the president's parenting skills but last I heard that was not a crime.  If it was Trump would be in prison for his parenting skills also.  I'll be surprised if at least one of Trump's kids doesn't end up serving time at some point.

wmLambert

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #655 on: July 13, 2022, 11:47:37 AM »
I'll help william out on this one, since his browser apparently blocks liberal media that agrees with him.

Quote
A law enforcement source has told CNN that the assumption is that it is Hunter Biden's laptop. But the FBI is still working through the content and the integrity of what is on it, because it was not in Hunter Biden's sole possession the whole time before it was handed over to the FBI.

To date, there has been no public discussion of the contents and which portions of it have been verified. What we know for sure is that it passed from one hand to another - hands that all loathed and wanted to destroy Joe Biden. I wonder what Trumpians would say if a laptop alleged to be Donald Trump's was passed from Nancy Pelosi to Adam Schiff to Liz Cheney?

Just the fact that a guy running a repair shop started snooping in a customer’s data. You already have someone of poor moral character with access to it.

Somebody remind me why I should care if the President’s son is a lowlife? I didn’t vote for him. He doesn’t hold a public office, he hasn’t been appointed to the Whitehouse staff like the last president’s entire family. I’m trying hard to recall why I should care.

The world is full of lowlifes. I don’t have the time and energy to worry about them.

The problem here is that the FBI saying the laptop was not in Hunter's sole possession the whole time before it was handed over to the FBI, is a deliberate misdirection. The laptop was always maintained with the chain of custody intact. The repairman had sole possession under lock and key until Hunter's lack of interest and lack of payment transferred the laptop into the repairman's possession. When he realized there was bad stuff on the laptop, he made some hard drive copies for help understanding what he was seeing, and got the laptop to the FBI whereupon their chain of custody began. No lapses. It doesn't matter what he does with his possession after the FBI maintained their own chain of custody. It is legal evidence.

My browser doesn't block liberal media - but unlike many here it also peeks into everything, which is why all must be vetted. Generally, I've found the MSM as the least dependable and the major source of disinformation.

As for the FBI and the laptop, it is legal, and the repairman's attestation that it was not hacked or altered in any way is legal fact. Comparing this to a laptop passed from Nancy Pelosi to Adam Schiff to Liz Cheney does not work, because the original product is in the FBI's hands. It was never touched by others.

The repairman could sue you for slander. He did not snoop into Hunter's stuff until it was his to do with as he wanted. He was hired to repair it and make sure everything was working correctly and its memory was fully intact.

As for why you should care if the President’s son is a lowlife? - please remember that the President is also implicated, and is probably being blackmailed by sinister outside forces. Remember the quote: "For evil to flourish, it only requires good men to do nothing." Here you see evil in front of you. What do you choose to do?

Tom

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #656 on: July 13, 2022, 11:52:27 AM »
Quote
the repairman's attestation that it was not hacked or altered in any way is legal fact
Has there been a legal finding of fact on this?

wmLambert

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #657 on: July 13, 2022, 12:41:04 PM »
Quote
the repairman's attestation that it was not hacked or altered in any way is legal fact
Has there been a legal finding of fact on this?
Let me help you understand the legal nuances. The chain of custody makes admittance of the laptop a done fact. The attestation of the repairman is legally to be taken as fact, unless counter evidence is put in evidence. There has been no such evidence that a judge has addressed, so the laptop is legally admissible, FBI analysts can say what they want to, but the law stands.

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #658 on: July 13, 2022, 01:12:49 PM »
Quote
Just the fact that a guy running a repair shop started snooping in a customer’s data.

Wait a minute.  The repairman knew what was on the laptop?

How did he know that?  Wasn't the laptop password protected?  How did he get pass the password?

And if it wasn't (or he had the password), how do we know he couldn't have added files without detection?

The Washington Examiner expert said that the computer wasn't hacked, but if the repairman had the password, he wouldn't have needed to hack it.  And how could expert know who added files?  Even determining when would be tricky if the data records were manipulated.

If the repairman could review the files, he had access, which means he (or someone else) could have added files.

Quote
The chain of custody makes admittance of the laptop a done fact.

You don't understand chain of custody, do you, William?

Chain of custody starts when an object is taken into custody by the authorities: the police, the FBI, etc.  The chain is them making sure no one else has a chance to taint the evidence until it is analyzed, by documenting each person who has access to it and making sure they are authorized and trustworthy.

The repair guy was in no way, shape or form a trusted, authorized official.

Anyone who had it before the police gained custody is not part of the chain of custody.

Tom

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #659 on: July 13, 2022, 01:32:43 PM »
Quote
Let me help you understand the legal nuances. The chain of custody makes admittance of the laptop a done fact.
Remember, the assertion here is that it is a "legal fact" that the data on the laptop was not hacked or altered in any way since it was obtained. There is an actual meaning of the phrase "legal fact," and I am asking if there has in fact been a finding of fact to this effect.

To the best of my knowledge, there has not.

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #660 on: July 13, 2022, 01:34:09 PM »
Oh, and just as a point of fact, anyone who said that Donald Trump couldn't have tried to grab the steering wheel to go to the "rally" on January 6 because you couldn't reach it in The Beast:  your objection is now officially irrelevant.  Trump wasn't riding in The Beast on January 6.

Donald Trump said so.

Quote
...now they're just going with this HOAX, which is as true as me trying to strangle a Secret Service Agent from behind in, she said, 'the Beast (I wasn't even in the Beast)!

Mynnion

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #661 on: July 13, 2022, 04:37:47 PM »
Quote
Let me help you understand the legal nuances. The chain of custody makes admittance of the laptop a done fact.
Remember, the assertion here is that it is a "legal fact" that the data on the laptop was not hacked or altered in any way since it was obtained. There is an actual meaning of the phrase "legal fact," and I am asking if there has in fact been a finding of fact to this effect.

To the best of my knowledge, there has not.

Of course do we have actual proof that Hunter dropped the laptop off himself?  If not whoever had it before him could have done anything they wanted to it.

I also just read that a laptop is not considered abandoned in Delaware for a year.  Based on the timeline the Mac Issac only had it for 9 months before he "found" his damning evidence.

Crunch

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #662 on: July 13, 2022, 04:58:18 PM »
Oh, and just as a point of fact, anyone who said that Donald Trump couldn't have tried to grab the steering wheel to go to the "rally" on January 6 because you couldn't reach it in The Beast:  your objection is now officially irrelevant.  Trump wasn't riding in The Beast on January 6.

Donald Trump said so.

Quote
...now they're just going with this HOAX, which is as true as me trying to strangle a Secret Service Agent from behind in, she said, 'the Beast (I wasn't even in the Beast)!

Probably should have read more than just the headline ...

Quote
Despite Trump's denial, the January 6 committee played video appearing to show him being driven back to the White House inside the vehicle.

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #663 on: July 13, 2022, 05:10:35 PM »
Oh, and just as a point of fact, anyone who said that Donald Trump couldn't have tried to grab the steering wheel to go to the "rally" on January 6 because you couldn't reach it in The Beast:  your objection is now officially irrelevant.  Trump wasn't riding in The Beast on January 6.

Donald Trump said so.

Quote
...now they're just going with this HOAX, which is as true as me trying to strangle a Secret Service Agent from behind in, she said, 'the Beast (I wasn't even in the Beast)!

Probably should have read more than just the headline ...

Quote
Despite Trump's denial, the January 6 committee played video appearing to show him being driven back to the White House inside the vehicle.

So you’re asserting that Trump’s lying? I can believe that.

Crunch

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #664 on: July 13, 2022, 05:34:35 PM »
No, just pointing out the obvious to anyone that read the article that WS was .... ahem, less than honest about his claim. You would call this intellectual honesty though.

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #665 on: July 13, 2022, 06:09:07 PM »
Strange you should say that, Crunch.  Did you actually look at the video in the article?

Did you notice that there is a luggage rack on it?  That it isn't very long.  That there is no plate of metal between the front door and the back door of the vehicle?
 That it is, in fact, a Suburban (or something similar), and does not look anything like The Beast?

I must admit I missed that sentence.  But while that may be "a" Presidential limo, anyone can see that it is definitely not the Cadilliac limousine they call "The Beast."

Alas, Trump is correct (gag!) in calling Miss Hutchinson, and his supporters who said it was The Beast, liars.  ;D

Of course, Miss Hutchinson can be excused since she heard it second-hand, and may have misunderstood certain details.   Like you did. ;)

wmLambert

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #666 on: July 13, 2022, 10:44:11 PM »
...You don't understand chain of custody, do you, William?

Chain of custody starts when an object is taken into custody by the authorities: the police, the FBI, etc.  The chain is them making sure no one else has a chance to taint the evidence until it is analyzed, by documenting each person who has access to it and making sure they are authorized and trustworthy.

The repair guy was in no way, shape or form a trusted, authorized official.

Anyone who had it before the police gained custody is not part of the chain of custody.

Sorry. I got it right, you are incorrect. When I taught arson investigators how to preserve evidence so it could be admissible in court, We put togeter educational videos to teach the law required. Let me exemplify... There is an arson. People are killed in the fire. An arson investigator is called in. There are lumps of plastic in the burned out place that used to be old milk bottles filled with gasoline that was used as an accelerant. The firemen came in and smelled the gasoline, and recognized the melted bottles still containing gas, because as the fire melts the plastic, it seals in all the remaining gasoline, which can be removed with a hypodermic needle and tested. The firemen and investigators are taught to preserve the chain of evidence now, because if the bottles are overhauled to lessen danger of leaving accelerants in the building and thrown out the window, the fireman breaks the chain, and when he testifies in court that he smelled accelerant in the air, that he saw a rainbow, and the gas in the bottle was matched to the gas in the suspect's lawn mower, the judge will toss it out.

The defense asks the fireman if he is an expert witness on the scents used in hydrocarbons to identify them. Can you tell the difference between gasoline, kerosene, benzine, or other liquids? The fireman says no, but I know what I smelled. The defense has that evidence thrown out. I realized a simple scratch and sniff card could make all firemen experts. Once the plastic disk is frisbeed out the window, the chain is broken. Custody is not only for police or agents. Signatures are required when an agent takes possession. If it is not offered, the agent has broken the chain.

wmLambert

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #667 on: July 13, 2022, 11:18:21 PM »
...I also just read that a laptop is not considered abandoned in Delaware for a year.  Based on the timeline the Mac Issac only had it for 9 months before he "found" his damning evidence.

Contract Law may trump a waiting period. The signed contract specified what happens. The repairman went far beyond normal expectations in trying to contact the owner and got no response. It was only after the laptop became his property that he took it to the authorities. He also made legal copies of the hard drive to get help in understanding the many instances of illegality he now knew about.

Tom

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #668 on: July 13, 2022, 11:22:19 PM »
Can you describe to me -- after we clarify whether there has actually been a finding of fact regarding the pristine nature of any data on that laptop -- what you believe constitutes a "legal copy" of a hard drive?

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #669 on: July 13, 2022, 11:49:37 PM »
So let me get this straight.  You are saying that the computer repair man has signed the chain of custody form--a civilian who has no training or knowledge of chain of custody rules, and who is not part of law enforcement?  He's the first one who signed it?

OK, maybe.  But not being a sworn official, how do you know he isn't lying when he says that nothing had been added to the files?

Oh, yeah, we have to assume he isn't lying.  We have to assume he never put anything on the computer after he broke into it (even though a computer expert said that no one broke into the computer).  We have to assume neither he nor anyone else copied information from the computer or possibly downloaded info into the computer before it was handed over to the authorities.  But the authorities don't know that for a fact.

Here's some breaking news from April 12, 2022:

Quote
When the New York Post first reported in October 2020 that it had obtained the contents of a laptop computer allegedly owned by Joe Biden’s son Hunter, there was an immediate roadblock faced by any other news outlet that hoped to corroborate the reporting, as many did: The newspaper wasn’t sharing what it obtained. ...

Now, a new voice has joined those raising questions about the validity of the material that’s alleged to have been on Hunter Biden’s laptop: the guy who recovered that data in the first place.

Last month, The Washington Post was able to publish a report based on a copy of material that we obtained from a Republican activist named Jack Maxey who’d gotten it from Giuliani. We had multiple experts examine the contents of a hard drive that purported to contain the laptop’s contents, validating tens of thousands of emails as likely to be legitimate. But an enormous amount of the material on the drive couldn’t be validated as legitimate, in part because of the game of telephone that the material had undergone by the time it reached us. ...

One expert likened it to a crime scene that was littered with fast-food wrappers thanks to the first police who’d arrived on the scene. That’s meant as an indictment, but it’s also generous. The first people on the scene weren’t police, in this case; they were (to extend the analogy) people aiming to obtain an indictment against a particular person.

There is still an unlittered crime scene out there. The owner of the store where Hunter Biden allegedly dropped the laptop off for repairs three years ago turned the computer over to the FBI when issued a subpoena to do so. In an interview with the right-wing media outlet “Real America’s Voice,” the owner, John Paul Mac Isaac, explained how relieved he was when the FBI came to get the laptop.

“I thought everything was great when they took it," he said, “because that was what I wanted the whole time was just to get this stuff out of my shop, have the FBI — have a paper trail that afforded me some protection, both physically and legally.”

This was a theme of the interview, as it has been with past interviews with Mac Isaac: his insistences that he thought he was somehow in danger for having the laptop in his possession. If you’re wondering how he then was able to pass the material to Giuliani, the answer is that he nonetheless kept a copy of the material from the laptop “in case he was ever thrown under the bus as a result of what he knew,” his attorney told The Washington Post. In this particular tale, this is low on the scale of things that don’t entirely make sense.

It’s important to explain how Mac Isaac created the backup in the first place. The laptop he obtained repeatedly shut down as he tried to recover its data. So, instead of simply copying the entire hard drive to another device, he did so piecemeal, copying individual files and folders one at a time. In doing so, he claims that he saw material that he found alarming.

“I saw some content that was disturbing and then also raised some red flags,” Mac Isaac explained to “Real America’s Voice.” Later asked to explain what had alarmed him, he said that he saw “criminality … related to foreign business dealings, to potential money laundering and, more importantly, national security issues and concerns.” That, he explained, was “what caused me to do a deep dive into the laptop once it became my property.”

Here, again, the timeline is iffy. Delaware law indicates that he could assume ownership of the laptop after a year. But he obtained the laptop in April 2019 (at the same time that conservative media was beginning to focus on Hunter Biden’s relationship with a Ukrainian energy company, Burisma) and gave it to the FBI that December. He said that he was alarmed by the failure of the laptop to come up during Trump’s first impeachment investigation. That effort ended in February 2020, before a year had passed.

What Mac Isaac said next, though, is what was most noteworthy. When he did his “deep dive,” he said, he “saw a lot of photos” — but “did not see a lot of photos that are being reported to [have been] seen.”

“I do know that there have been multiple attempts over the past year-and-a-half to insert questionable material into the laptop as in, not physically, but passing off this misinformation or disinformation as coming from the laptop,” he said. “And that is a major concern of mine because I have fought tooth and nail to protect the integrity of this drive and to jeopardize that is going to mean that everything that I sacrificed will be for nothing.”

In other words, Mac Isaac says that he has seen claims about what the laptop contains that don’t actually reflect what he saw on the laptop at the outset. Or, presumably, sees now, as one of the few people that might still have an unlittered copy of its contents.
(Bold emphasis mine.)

So the contents of the laptop are from a copy that he made from the laptop.  So if he wanted to, he could have added content to it, and even the original hard drive (although it would have been difficult).

But more than that, much of what the media is reporting (especially the conservative media that you believe) is stuff that has been added to copies of his original copy.  ;D

But it still comes down to how trustworthy is Mr. Mac Issac.  A man who felt compelled to give Rudy Guilliani, Donald Trump's personal lawyer and opponent of Joseph Biden for the presidency, a copy of Hunter Biden's files.  Obviously a man who won't let his political leanings influence his judgement on who has a right to see Hunter's material.  (Not!)

Tell me, William:  if the first person in the chain of custody provided a copy (or a sample, in your case) to one side of a litigation over the arson, who would that person be perceived?  Would revealing it make anyone question whether he was biased, and perhaps question his testimony in court?

I am not saying the Mr. Mac Issac did or did not add anything to the files he provided to the FBI.  He may very well be perfectly honest.  But I am saying it is not beyond a reasonable doubt that Mac Issac could have tampered with the files that he had.  And certainly, with even Mac Issac saying there is a lot of misinformation out there about what is on the laptop, that what you say is on there is may be doubtful, too.

Crunch

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #670 on: July 14, 2022, 08:39:40 AM »
Strange you should say that, Crunch.  Did you actually look at the video in the article?

Did you notice that there is a luggage rack on it?  That it isn't very long.  That there is no plate of metal between the front door and the back door of the vehicle?
 That it is, in fact, a Suburban (or something similar), and does not look anything like The Beast?

I must admit I missed that sentence.  But while that may be "a" Presidential limo, anyone can see that it is definitely not the Cadilliac limousine they call "The Beast."

Alas, Trump is correct (gag!) in calling Miss Hutchinson, and his supporters who said it was The Beast, liars.  ;D

Of course, Miss Hutchinson can be excused since she heard it second-hand, and may have misunderstood certain details.   Like you did. ;)

So your position is that trump was right, again, and the jan 6 committee is fulll of *censored*, again. Don’t worry, you’ll forget soon.

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #671 on: July 14, 2022, 10:41:13 AM »
So let me get this straight.  You are saying that the computer repair man has signed the chain of custody form--a civilian who has no training or knowledge of chain of custody rules, and who is not part of law enforcement?  He's the first one who signed it?
...

Another problem is he's legally blind so he can't confirm he actually received the computer from Hunter Biden. So there is no chain of custody that definitely goes back to Hunter Biden, even if you trust everything Mac says.

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #672 on: July 14, 2022, 12:05:21 PM »

So your position is that trump was right, again, and the jan 6 committee is fulll of *censored*, again. Don’t worry, you’ll forget soon.

Actually, if you paid close attention to the committee hearings (like you should have to the video), you would have noticed that the committee is doing an excellent job of laying out  compelling evidence that Trump really did try to nullify the election, and with it, your vote.  Not to mention an insurgency to stop our government from working.

Seriously, it is now obvious that Trump planned for the people at the Jan. 6 rally to march to the Capitol.  So why didn't he get a permit for it?  Perhaps because such a permit would have altered the Capitol police that a large crowd would come, and they would have then planned for crowd control--putting up more secure barriers, increasing the number of police present, etc.  They would have been far more prepared.  Wasn't Trump worried about the possible outcome of a large, roused-up crowd, some of whom were armed, approaching the Capitol without adequate planning?  Or was that part of his plan?

There has been quite a bit of testimony that shows that it was part of his plan.

Pay attention to what people are testifying, under oath, about what was happening in the White House, instead of looking at second-hand reports from biased sources. :)

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #673 on: July 15, 2022, 10:38:44 AM »
The secret service just happened to lose text messages from January 5th and 6th?!?

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #674 on: July 15, 2022, 11:50:30 AM »
It seems like most of the Repulican's in Congress only support the cops when if is convenient.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/capitol-police-officer-injured-january-212940934.html


Ouija Nightmare

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #675 on: July 19, 2022, 05:12:05 PM »
The secret service just happened to lose text messages from January 5th and 6th?!?

Worse they planned to purge all the records months in advance and got away with it.

Trump succeeded in turning the Secret Service into his own royal guard.

wmLambert

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #676 on: July 19, 2022, 08:15:14 PM »
...There has been quite a bit of testimony that shows that it was part of his plan.

On the contrary, no credible testimony that was cross-examined has met that test. The damning testimony that was hearsay and proved lies resulted in the call for the witness' indictment for lying to Congress.

The video tapes all showed Trump telling his rally to be legal and peaceful.  Moreover, we have credible testimony that may get Pelosi prosecuted in the final reckoning for turning down Trump's offer to provide additional troops to assist the security and DC police who were at half-staff.

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #677 on: July 20, 2022, 12:57:54 AM »
And why were they at half-staff, William, when Trump had planned for all these people to march to the Capitol after his rally?  How many people did the permit for the march say would show up?  ;)

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #678 on: July 20, 2022, 09:49:08 AM »
The secret service just happened to lose text messages from January 5th and 6th?!?

Worse they planned to purge all the records months in advance and got away with it.

Trump succeeded in turning the Secret Service into his own royal guard.

The records are on Clinton's email servers they need to open another investigation on Hillary

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #679 on: July 20, 2022, 01:05:28 PM »
...There has been quite a bit of testimony that shows that it was part of his plan.

On the contrary, no credible testimony that was cross-examined has met that test.
...

Why are you fixated with people under oath being cross examined? Do you think all these Republicans and people who worked for Trump are testifying under oath and being misleading just to make him look bad? There is lots of credible testimony his plan was for people to march to the capital. He told them to. Just because a lawyer for Trump doesn't get to drag the witnesses through the mud in public hearings its not credible to you?

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #680 on: July 20, 2022, 01:08:14 PM »
"Is it true that you voted for Biden?"

"Yes"

"There we have it. There is no way you can believe anything this person says. They are obviously biased against my client and nothing they say can be taken as truthful. Case closed."

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #681 on: July 20, 2022, 01:42:20 PM »
Here is a riddle for you
When does A lack of evidence equal proof of guilt or Facts in evidence equal proof of innocence?   

When one of ten points in evidence proves false the other nine automatically discounted... Unless nine of ten points in evidence proves false then the one rules All and determines fate

When the bad apple represents the whole and when it represents itself?

That is the 'Rule of Law'

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #682 on: August 17, 2022, 11:27:02 AM »

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #683 on: August 17, 2022, 11:33:53 AM »
Pence says he might testify.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/former-vp-mike-pence-says-141955235.html

His language is ambiguous if he would do it. I wonder what kind of guarantees/conditions he is hoping for in floating this out there. Its political suicide to testify against Trump, unless he knows he can completely sink Trump. Even then it may be a pyrrhic victory politically. Because Trump is too corrupt and Pence would have alienated to many of the Trumpers. But I think he's seeing he has no place in the party of Trump (formerly the Republican party) so maybe he's willing to go for it because he has nothing to lose.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #684 on: August 17, 2022, 11:44:12 AM »
Team up with a Pence/Cheney bid in 2024 against the Trumpist?  I might vote for that group in the Primary.

Tom

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #685 on: August 30, 2022, 04:07:14 PM »
It's worth noting that Ornato has resigned and taken a job in the private sector (with an as-yet-unknown employer) to dodge a subpoena. Again, everyone who's willing to defend Trump's version of events to a credulous media appears to go out of their way to actually avoid testifying to that effect.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #686 on: August 30, 2022, 04:21:18 PM »
I thought all of those SS guys were eager to testify under oath that what Cassidy said under oath did not happen.

wmLambert

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #687 on: August 31, 2022, 11:55:20 AM »
It's worth noting that Ornato has resigned and taken a job in the private sector (with an as-yet-unknown employer) to dodge a subpoena. Again, everyone who's willing to defend Trump's version of events to a credulous media appears to go out of their way to actually avoid testifying to that effect.

Yeah, who wants to go through what general Flynn did. Go into bankruptcy, lose your home and all your money for legal fees over lies that were corrupt in themselves.

When the Red Wave flushes out the Swamp, how fitting would it be for Flynn to be picked to run the very departments that came after him?

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #688 on: August 31, 2022, 01:14:26 PM »
...

When the Red Wave flushes out the Swamp, how fitting would it be for Flynn to be picked to run the very departments that came after him?

It would be very unfitting. He lied to the FBI about talking with Russian diplomates and he was taking lots of money from Turkey to advocate for a cleric that Erdogan doesn't like to be deported and never registered as a foreign lobbyist. Can you choose worse people to put up on a pedestal? He and his son literally did everything you accuse Biden and Hunter of doing. And Hunter absolutely traded on his family name to get consulting gigs. Beyond that there is scant evidence that the rest of the allegations against Hunter are true.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #689 on: August 31, 2022, 01:20:51 PM »
Isn't he a convicted felon?  I mean Trump pardoned him, but that does not remove the conviction, right?

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #690 on: September 01, 2022, 06:09:24 PM »
Speaking of convicted felons, an ex-NY cop was sentenced to 10 years for his part in the Capitol riot.  Apparently he caught on camera swinging a flag-pole at a Capitol police officer before tackling him and ripping off the guy's gas mask.

But I guess it's OK, since he must have been Antifa. :)

But ultimately it will be all be OK, because Trump promised at a rally that he would pardon those rioters who were treated unfairly.  So I guess this ex-officer doesn't have to worry, because it was fair for him to attack a fellow officer with a flag pole and knocking him to the ground.  ;D

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #691 on: September 14, 2022, 07:02:40 PM »
and...

Quote
Juli Haller, who represents Oath Keeper Kelly Meggs, told US District Judge Amit Mehta that she was exploring whether to argue that the Oath Keepers general counsel, Kellye SoRelle, instructed Meggs to delete text messages from his phone after the riot.

Meggs has since been charged with tampering with documents for the alleged act and has pleaded not guilty.

“How is it today, 10 days before trial, I’m first being told you might advance an advice-of-counsel-defense,” Mehta shouted at Haller.

The argument is indicative of the many legal issues that have yet to be resolved before the five leaders of the far-right Oath Keepers militia group head to trial later this month – the first seditious conspiracy trial stemming from January 6.

As usual, we have a lawyer who doesn't know how lawyering works.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #692 on: September 21, 2022, 08:41:48 PM »

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #693 on: October 06, 2022, 04:24:30 PM »
And the first of the Proud Boys, the group Trump told to stand by in one of the debates in 2019, just plead guilty to seditious conspiracy.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/proud-boys-member-pleads-guilty-194230050.html

Remember he told them to 'Stand back and stand by" when he was asked if he would ask them to stand down. He would not tell or ask them to stand down.

Here is the clip from the debate.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZk6VzSLe4Y

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #694 on: October 06, 2022, 06:25:34 PM »
Quote
In addition to pleading guilty to seditious conspiracy, Bertino also pleaded guilty to a gun charge, after an FBI search of his home in March found he had six loaded firearms and more than 3,000 rounds of ammunition. He was barred from possessing guns due to a prior conviction of reckless endangerment in New York state in 2004, according to court filings.

Good thing the second amendment makes it possible for this guy to be the check and balance on the rise of an emperor. Well, at least an emperor he doesn't worship as the sun-god.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #695 on: October 13, 2022, 03:34:17 PM »
Well the Committee has unanimously decided to subpoena  Trump.

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #696 on: October 14, 2022, 11:32:04 AM »
Well, given what some new reporting is indicating. I now await the subpoena of Nancy "I've been waiting for this" Pelosi. Although I guess that'll have to wait until January.  ;)
« Last Edit: October 14, 2022, 11:42:05 AM by TheDeamon »

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #697 on: October 14, 2022, 12:21:28 PM »
Well, given what some new reporting is indicating. I now await the subpoena of Nancy "I've been waiting for this" Pelosi. Although I guess that'll have to wait until January.  ;)

As long as she shows up the same day that Trump does, so she can actually punch him in the nose.

Quote
"They told him they don't have the resources to protect him here," McCullough says. "So at the moment, he is not coming, but that could change."

"I hope he comes," Pelosi responds. "I want to punch him out. This is my moment. I’ve been waiting for this. For trespassing on the Capitol grounds. I want to punch him out, and I’m going to go to jail, and I’m going to be happy."

I'd pay good money to see that!  ;D (And, as Trump would say, contribute to her bail.  ;))

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #698 on: October 14, 2022, 12:24:32 PM »
Such violent speech.  She should be held accountable for threatening the President.  Why doesn't the FBI do something about this terrorist?

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: The Jan 6 Commission
« Reply #699 on: October 14, 2022, 12:30:24 PM »
Wanting to punch the President makes one a terrorist?

I think the majority of Americans were terrorists back then!  :o  ;D