January 6th Committee Hearings

Home Forums Decaffeinated Coffee January 6th Committee Hearings

Viewing 33 posts - 101 through 133 (of 133 total)
  • Author
  • #2098313

    One thing is certain. The January 6th Committee clearly does not want any outside scrutiny. Not even by friendly groups. Their absolute refusal to hand over the transcripts of the interviews they conducted to the DOJ which is completely on their side is just another indication that they have something to hide or info they hiding because it does not help their narrative.


    jackk, thanks for doing the holy work of watching it for us and summarizing here the most mesmerizing episodes. Truly appreciate it!


    Smerel, on one hand you’ve acknowledged Trump probably did lots of bad stuff and he’s a corrupt person. On the other hand, whenever anyone investigates him your knee jerk reaction is to distrust the investigators. I don’t get it. So far they’ve produced compelling testimony. Of course there would need to be a chance to cross examine in a criminal forum. But as you have already said, there’s probably lots of bad he’s done. And this shows a chunk of this bad.

    When we decide who we vote for, we don’t wait for a criminal trial to convict “beyond a reasonable doubt”. Civil trials’ standard of liability is “by preponderance of the evidence.” And the evidence shows they’ve met that burden.
    One thing that speaks volumes is Trump’s own speeches, texts, actions and inactions: he refused to condemn the violence for hours while he watched it on TV. And this past Shabbos he said at rally that he would pardon the violent protestors. That says it all. And the fact that there is now credible testimony establishing Trump knew he lost, peddled the lie anyway, knew or should have known there would be violence, and refused to do anything about it, just fills in the blanks and makes it worse. If you agree that these thugs should be held accountable, why would you vote for someone who is rewarding them for doing his bidding?


    Shaye Moss’s life forever changed on Dec. 10, 2020, when Rudy Giuliani, then President Donald Trump’s top campaign lawyer, publicly claimed that she and her mother, a fellow poll worker in Fulton County, Ga., had rigged the outcome in her state.

    Moss’s supervisor suggested that day that she check her social media accounts to see if she had received any threats, as others in the office had. She was stunned by what she saw when she pulled up her Facebook Messenger account.

    “It was just a lot of horrible things there,” Moss said at a hearing Tuesday before the House committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol. Many of the messages were racist and “hateful,” said Moss, who is Black. “A lot of threats wishing death upon me, telling me I’ll be in jail with my mother and saying things like, ‘Be glad it’s 2020 and not 1920.’ ”

    Both she and her mother, Ruby Freeman, were forced into hiding.

    Moss said she was speechless when her supervisors showed her a recording of Giuliani’s statement to a Georgia state Senate committee investigating the 2020 result. Giuliani claimed that Moss and Freeman had plotted to kick out observers at the State Farm Arena, where the county had set up a ballot counting operation. They had brought in suitcases filled with fraudulent ballots for Biden and scanned them through the tabulating teams multiple times, he said. He described surveillance video from the arena that he claimed showed the two exchanging USB memory sticks, presumably containing fraudulent vote counts, “as if they’re vials of cocaine.”

    “I mean, it’s obvious to anyone who’s a criminal investigator or prosecutor that they are engaged in surreptitious, illegal activity,” Giuliani said. “And they’re still walking around Georgia. They should have been questioned already. Their homes should have been searched for evidence.”

    Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.), who led the questioning at Tuesday’s hearing, asked Moss: “None of that was true, was it?”

    Moss’s answer: “None of it.”

    Schiff then asked about the USB memory sticks.

    “What was your mom actually handing you on that video?”

    “A ginger mint,” Moss said.

    Trump also attacked Freeman and Moss personally in a phone call with Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger (R) just days before the Capitol attack, mentioning Freeman 18 times and describing her at one point as a “professional vote scammer and hustler.” The Washington Post obtained a recording of the call and published it last year.


    jackk, thanks for the updates! Breathtaking. I hope the gingermint was obtained and DNA analysis done. Do keep us updated if something else important happens.


    The House committee investigating the Jan. 6 Capitol riot revealed that Johnson’s chief of staff tried to deliver to Vice President Mike Pence a slate of fake electors backing Trump, raising questions about the Wisconsin Republican’s role in a deliberate and coordinated plan to block Biden’s win and give Trump the presidency.



    A judge dismissed conservative cable news channel One America News Network from a defamation lawsuit filed by Ruby Freeman and Wandrea “Shaye” Moss after the two sides reached a settlement.
    The two women had also sued former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, a lawyer for former President Donald Trump, saying he amplified the lies about them during frequent appearances on OAN.
    Moss and Freeman also filed a separate defamation lawsuit against The Gateway Pundit, its owner Jim Hoft and his brother Joe Hoft, a contributor to the conservative website. That lawsuit is pending in federal court in Missouri.


    “The president of the United States is supposed to represent every American, not to target one. But he targeted me, Lady Ruby, a small business owner, a mother, a proud American citizen who stand up to help Fulton County run an election in the middle of the pandemic.”


    Jackk, thanks, this is mind boggling stuff. Is this still prime-time TV or on C-span? How many people are watching (besides you).


    Mind boggling ? No.
    Nothing Trump does is mind boggling.
    Just illegal and sad.

    Not sure why you think nobody is watching it. So many people are watching that Fox news changed their sick minds and started showing it.

    young rechnitz

    trump asked nancy for tens of thousands more national guard and she turned it down. it is ridiculous that even some jews can be so closed minded as to who the villian and hero of america is

    young rechnitz

    i understand that you want to know whats going on but you should just know that there is a whole other side of the story than what the libs are spouting. our government was not going to be overturned. antifa was there rilng everyone up. trump did not cause it. and trump asked nancy before hand for extra national gaurd and she turned him down


    Trumps claim has been entirely debunked.

    Statements from the Pentagon and testimony from the former House sergeant-at-arms show Trump did not request 10,000 troops ahead of the rally. The speaker of the House does not even have the power to reject that type of request.

    Pelosi is not in charge of Capitol security. The Capitol Police are overseen by the Capitol Police Board and committees from the Senate and House of Representatives.

    The claim does not even make common sense.
    Why would you need 10,000 National Guardsmen for a peaceful rally, where people hear speeches and carry signs and then go home?


    1) The pardon requesters:
    Reps. Mo Brooks (R-Ala.) and Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) — In a Jan. 11 email from Brooks, he said he and Gaetz were suggesting pardons for everyone who objected to the election results in Arizona and Pennsylvania. White House lawyer Eric Herschmann also said he believed that Gaetz had requested a pardon.
    Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) — Hutchinson testified that he requested a pardon.
    Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Tex.) — Hutchinson testified that he requested a pardon.
    Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) — Hutchinson said that she had heard that Greene had asked the White House counsel’s office for a pardon from deputy counsel Pat Philbin but that Greene hadn’t asked her personally.
    Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.) — Hutchinson testified that he requested a pardon.
    Hutchinson also said that Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), whom House Republicans tried to put on the committee before Democrats objected, talked with the White House about congressional pardons but that she was unaware of him asking for one.

    2) The committee indicated for apparently the first time that there might have been coordination in the plotting between Trump’s legal team and certain members of the Justice Department.


    3) Jeffrey Clark, whose home federal agents searched Wednesday in a significant development that reflects the increasing legal jeopardy faced by Trump’s allies and perhaps Trump himself.

    Herschmann said ,“When he finished discussing what he planned on doing, I said: … ‘Congratulations, you’ve just admitted your first step you’d take as attorney general would be committing a felony and violating Rule 6(e). You’re clearly the right candidate for this job.’”

    Donoghue recalled a meeting that involved both Trump and Clark:

    And so I said, ‘Mr. President, you’re talking about putting a man in that seat who has never tried a criminal case, who’s never conducted a criminal investigation. He’s telling you that he’s going to take charge of the department — 115,000 employees, including the entire FBI, and turn the place on a dime and conduct a nationwide criminal investigations that will produce results in a matter of days? It’s impossible. It’s absurd. It’s not going to happen. It’s going to fail. He has never been in front of a trial jury, a grand jury. He’s never even been to [FBI Director Christopher] Wray’s office.’ … ‘It’s not going to happen. He’s not competent.’


    Jackk, I looked up polling about the committee:
    45% of independents approve their work and 20% of Repubs, so not much traction with Indies, but some with anti-Trump R-s.

    on hearings (literally sheni vhamishi – June 13 and 16):
    20% of Ds listened in full, 8% of Is and 5% of Rs did
    44% of Ds did not listen at all, I 68% R 75%
    they do not seem to have data on the rest of hearings

    on minute details:
    Only 40% of Dems heard nothing at all about some lady paid $60K for a short speech, 60% of R-s and I-s did not hear that.
    30% of Ds did not hear anything about a judge talking about “war on democracy”, 50% of the rest.
    30% of Ds did not hear about email asking T for a pardon, 50% of Rs and Is did not
    for comparison:
    40% of all group did not hear that some Elon M. voted R first time in his life
    only 20% ! in each group heard nothing about some doctor getting positive for Covid
    13% of Ds and Is and 10% of Rs did not hear about inflation (no car?)
    50% of all groups did not hear that border Patrol arrests on Mexican border are record high


    Today’s hearing posits that Trump thought he was running an actual coup. There is no more missing pieces.


    n0, great, they could not find retzicha and geneiva, now let’s do thought crimes…

    young rechnitz

    Jakkkkkk the reason why you would need so many people there is bc things do get rowdy and it’s best to stay on the safe side. Additionally if antifa would showed up and they did they would make it violent. ( not trumpers)

    young rechnitz

    Cross examination is important. Why are you all ready to believe some little girl who wants attention without even giving a chance for the other side to testify. Why are there no real republicans on the committee. Why are you throwing trump under the bus after 6 years I will repeat six years of the libs trying to find something anything to back up the claim that he is a fraud and currupt And each time there arguments go up in smoke. We have been here before you people don’t have any common sense

    young rechnitz

    AskQs lol this is garbage and it is meant to avert our eyes from Brandon’s 10 plus crisis


    Dear Young,

    If Liz Cheney, is not a real Republican, than who is? Maybe Karl Rove And that’s it.

    You could twist the world upside down. It doesn’t change what the Republican Party was for forty years.

    There were many great Republicans who served and yet considered ‘owning the libs’ beneath them.


    Dear Always,

    It is called overthrowing the government. Same as what happens go the Far East, Africa, and Latin America.

    Three differences from a classic coup are: 1. Some of the conspirators, including key figures, asked for pardons or planned a judicial defense in advance of the attempt. 2. Nobody thought of what to do if Pence etc. wouldn’t go along with their plans. 3. There was no safeguards to prevent things from going me the rails. A successful coup needs some discipline.

    What does it show? That even when it comes to holding on to power, people without personal virtue will not think enough of themselves to do what actually works. Always looking for it to be handed to them.


    Dear Smerel,

    The Jan 6 committee wants some cooperation from the Justice Department. Neither is hiding anything specific. It’s the correct way to build a case.


    young rechnitz, the reason why there are only 2 republicans is because republican senator Kennedy decided the republicans would not to cooperate with the committee. The initial proposal before the committee came into existence was a full-on bi-partisan congressional investigation, which was also rejected by republicans. So it’s unfair to cry foul about a committee with majority democrats. At least you have a couple cooperative republicans. And the most damning evidence (including texts and emails) are from Trumpers and republicans. If there’s a point this goes to trial there will be opportunity to cross examine. But most judgments you make every day are not proven to criminal court standards anyway. Damning evidence is exactly what it sounds like.

    🍫Syag Lchochma

    er -I stopped reading this thread when n0m hacked it up with definitions (no offense) and only clicked on your post thinking you were bringing something new.
    “the reason why there are only 2 republicans is because republican senator Kennedy decided the republicans would not to cooperate with the committee. The initial proposal before the committee came into existence was a full-on bi-partisan congressional investigation, which was also rejected by republicans. ”
    Is not accurate. Either you don’t understand what happened, or you got your info from Joy Behar but it’s distorted.
    Decades back i thought news stories were true. Then I read a write up about something that happened in my family and saw it was a mess. It took me months to realize that if that was wrong/altered, e eruthing else probably was too. It would serve you well to revisit. Unless this version works for you, in which case carry on.


    Dear Syag,

    It wasn’t definitions. It was saying how the same words have different meaning according to certain narratives.

    young rechnitz

    Anyone that thinks that trump was trying to overthrow the government without the military/ammunition just doesn’t know to much history or is just ignorant



    He wasn’t trying to overthrow the government. Nobody says he was trying to do that.
    He was the government.
    He was overturning the results of an election to stay in power.


    the EX-president wanted to join the mob at the capitol and was stopped by the secret service.
    I guess his bone spurs healed. LOL.


    Hi Syag, this is my understanding, please let me know specifically where you think I might be wrong and then I can go look up some more:
    The full investigation idea was blocked by republicans, so they went with the hearing committee option. Republican Senator McCarthy (I had said Kennedy) proposed 5 republican names to participate on the committee. 2 of them, Banks and Jordan, were rejected by Pelosi because they actually voted to block the vote on Jan 6. So not only are they partisan (which EVERYBODY is), but they were involved in the very plan/scheme under investigation. So McCarthy decided no one would participate. Do you agree with the facts at least?
    A legitimate apparent concern of course is the 2 republicans would undercut any attempt to investigate. I don’t know the ins and outs of the procedures but seems reasonable to believe they would hide or block testimony given they’ve already tried to block the votes. At least there could be more cross examination, but seems reasonable to block people involved somewhat in the allegations. There’s been speculation Trump is annoyed with McCarthy for refusing to participate.

    young rechnitz

    Okay jackkkkk sounds less and less like a coup the more questions you answer. but how would he overturn the results by being there if he is able to contact party anyway


    you can use Karl Popper’s definition of a “theory” – it has to have plausible data that would disprove it. If a theory can “explain away” any data, it is not really a theory.

    In this case, T is accused of “trying to go with the mob”. Previously, when everyone assumed it was his decision not to go – he was accused of provoking them and not even joining them.

Viewing 33 posts - 101 through 133 (of 133 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.