RE: Jan. 6 panel refers Trump on criminal charges (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


JVoV -> RE: Jan. 6 panel refers Trump on criminal charges (12/31/2022 2:19:30 PM)

Anyone not on the Trump train automatically becomes a communist. Even a Cheney. Duh.

MJ, you won't get a real answer, because there isn't anything truthful that supports this narrative. I'm pretty sure things like truth or fact have becime communist too.




MasterJaguar01 -> RE: Jan. 6 panel refers Trump on criminal charges (12/31/2022 2:41:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01


There were members of the J6 committee from two parties


I can no longer justify wasting my time on you, as you are willfully blind.



Have I said something that is incorrect? Were there members of only 1 party? No.

Liz Cheney has been a lifelong Republican and guzzler of the neocon kool-aid., saying the most moronic Republican things she could say, her entire career. I don't know anyone who could be more Republican.

Does she not count, because she called BS on trump?

Please explain...

1. How this committee is not bipartisan (I already provided the link to the definition)
2. Your legal theory supporting your assertion that the subpoena is unlawful.



Ohhhhhh... I just found it in the Congressional rules...

Here it is!
quote:


Republicans in bi-partisan committees MUST be approved by Boscox BEFORE subpoenas can be issued.


I don't know HOW I missed that!!!!




MasterJaguar01 -> RE: Jan. 6 panel refers Trump on criminal charges (1/1/2023 3:31:06 PM)

Deleted




BoscoX -> RE: Jan. 6 panel refers Trump on criminal charges (1/2/2023 7:31:43 AM)


Fast Reply -

So, what next, after a Soviet-style show trial?

A Soviet crackdown on free speech!

Naturally.

https://twitter.com/RNCResearch/status/1609614943862788103?s=20&t=io_6WC0KVoK60iU6XLlSMA




MasterJaguar01 -> RE: Jan. 6 panel refers Trump on criminal charges (1/2/2023 7:41:08 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX
So, what next, after a Soviet-style show trial?


A Soviet style show trial, with 98% of the testimony coming from lifelong Republicans and Trump aides, including trump's own family. (and their text messages and emails)

With Trump himself invited and subpoenaed to testify. But of course he refused and bragged that the subpoena was withdrawn and then whined some more on Truth Social.

I bet Russian citizens in the former Soviet Union would beg for a trial that fair!




JVoV -> RE: Jan. 6 panel refers Trump on criminal charges (1/2/2023 1:26:25 PM)

Even American criminals would love a trial like that. The part of a trial criminals hate the most has to be the sentencing phase, which didn't exist here.




BoscoX -> RE: Jan. 6 panel refers Trump on criminal charges (1/5/2023 8:38:21 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01


quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX
So, what next, after a Soviet-style show trial?


A Soviet style show trial, with 98% of the testimony coming from lifelong Republicans and Trump aides, including trump's own family. (and their text messages and emails)

With Trump himself invited and subpoenaed to testify. But of course he refused and bragged that the subpoena was withdrawn and then whined some more on Truth Social.

I bet Russian citizens in the former Soviet Union would beg for a trial that fair!


Yours is the opinion of blind, mindwashed child

Here is the opinion of an intelligent thinking adult whose eyes are wide open:

quote:

The Jan. 6 Committee established by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi last July is no mere investigation into the disgraceful events of that day. It is a far more ambitious undertaking.


The committee has embarked on a fishing expedition that has little to do with ascertaining any unknown facts about an event that took place live on television—leaving few, if any, unsolved mysteries for Congress to explore.

It's clear the committee exists to justify the hyperbolic claim that the riot was an "insurrection" or an attempted coup. What happened that day was clearly a chaotic and appalling mess, but not an orchestrated plot. But the committee is determined to find a conspiracy, even if it has to manufacture one. It has spent its time cobbling together a narrative from events and opinions that reveal nothing more than a common desire on the part of former president Donald Trump and some supporters to find a legal stratagem to deny the presidency to Joe Biden.


Open-ended investigations are always problematic. But this one has been made worse by the fact that it was formed to do the will of the majority with none of the customary limits imposed by the presence of members of the minority.

The selection of the committee's membership was unprecedented. Pelosi rejected the House Republican conference's choices for membership in the body. Instead she chose two anti-Trump Republicans—Reps. Liz Cheney (Wyo.) and Adam Kinzinger (Ill.), who were eager to assist the speaker in attacking not just the former president but also the party with which they are now only loosely associated.

There is, however, a precedent for how the committee has been proceeding: the hearings conducted by the House and the Senate in the late 1940s and early 1950s that are broadly lumped together under the term "McCarthyism."

The House Un-American Activities Committee and the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations chaired by Sen. Joseph McCarthy (R-Wisc.) were the primary engines of McCarthyism. Their probes into alleged communist subversion were not illegitimate in principle. Though their liberal critics often spoke as if there were no American communists, the Soviet Union's archives have since confirmed that party members were spying for Moscow and or had attempted to influence policy and culture at its behest.


But the McCarthyite probes were a parody of anti-communism. McCarthy's efforts often targeted people who were not actual communists, and allowed accusers to publicly shame and ostracize victims, ruining many lives.

More: https://www.newsweek.com/jan-6-committee-isnt-defending-democracy-its-mccarthyite-witch-hunt-opinion-1667488




BoscoX -> RE: Jan. 6 panel refers Trump on criminal charges (1/5/2023 8:50:51 AM)


Fast reply -

Funny how leftists are totally unaware that they are the joke

quote:

Adam Kinzinger joins CNN days after leaving Congress, sparking viral mockery: 'Nobody saw this coming'

Critics long predicted Adam Kinzinger was aiming for a plum cable news gig following his term in office

https://www.foxnews.com/media/adam-kinzinger-joins-cnn-days-after-leaving-congress-sparking-viral-mockery




BoscoX -> RE: Jan. 6 panel refers Trump on criminal charges (1/5/2023 8:54:38 AM)

"Derrrr.... duh russia hoax wasn't about president trump... derr..."




MasterJaguar01 -> RE: Jan. 6 panel refers Trump on criminal charges (1/5/2023 9:50:38 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX
The selection of the committee's membership was unprecedented. Pelosi rejected the House Republican conference's choices for membership in the body. Instead she chose two anti-Trump Republicans—Reps. Liz Cheney (Wyo.) and Adam Kinzinger (Ill.), who were eager to assist the speaker in attacking not just the former president but also the party with which they are now only loosely associated.

More: https://www.newsweek.com/jan-6-committee-isnt-defending-democracy-its-mccarthyite-witch-hunt-opinion-1667488



An intelligent thinking adult? Jonathon Tobin???? Not even close. He is a right-wing ideologue who engages in factually bankrupt nonsense.

The above quote from the article is so completely factually inaccurate and misleading, it destroys the entire premise of his opinion piece!

1. He fails to point out that Republicans BLOCKED the 9/11-style bi-partisan commission that was originally proposed. - Completely omits that fact
2. After Pelosi decided to put together a committee in the House, McCarthy put forth nominees. Pelosi accepted all but two. - Tobin omits that fact as well.
3. The two were rejected because:
A. One of the, Jim Jordan, was a witness to the committee and could therefore not testify. Further his text messages to Mark Meadows reveal his seditious activities
B. The other was Jim Banks who stated publicly that he was going to use his position on the committee to pursue his own political agenda

Tobin omits that fact as well.
4. Kevin McCarthy had a whining tantrum and then pulled ALL his nominees from the committee.

Tobin omits that fact as well.


Intelligent thinking adult? Not by a long shot.
A political hack???? 100% dead on.




BoscoX -> RE: Jan. 6 panel refers Trump on criminal charges (1/5/2023 10:40:36 AM)

Putting the rest of your lies and mindless spew aside for one moment - you're good with your queen naming every member of your witch hunt show trial

That's what you call "bipartisan"

Got it .




MasterJaguar01 -> RE: Jan. 6 panel refers Trump on criminal charges (1/5/2023 12:11:05 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX

Putting the rest of your lies and mindless spew aside for one moment - you're good with your queen naming every member of your witch hunt show trial
That's what you call "bipartisan"

Got it .


lol... "Lies and mindless spew"????? Please identify a single thing I said, which is factually inaccurate. I identified a plethora of inaccuracies in the article.
McCarthy refused to let his other nominees join the committee. His OWN nominees!!!!! Adam Kinzinger, and Liz Cheney refused to play ball with McCarthy and volunteered on their own.

I am absolutely fine with the way your queen, Pelosi, proceeded. The evidence came from text messages, emails and swprn testimony from employees of the Trump administration. and campaign. Including Trump's own lead impeachment attorney, Pat Cippilone (not to mention Hope Hicks, Jared Kushner, Ivanka Trump, Cassidy Hutchinson (Mark Meadows assistant), Mark Milley and MANY others!

Were they all in on the "witch hunt"???

Are Hope Hicks, Jared Kushner, and Ivanka Trump, biased anti-Trump political hacks??? Is Pat Cippilone? Are they ALL (And I mean ALL) diehard Republicans???
BTW: Not a one in the bunch were hostile witnesses. Read the transcripts!

Yes the committee itself was bi-partisan, but the evidence provided to them, was almost completely Republican

A great fact-finding committee that got to the truth, regardless of party.


I obliterated the article, and your argument in 2 posts.

The bottom line. You don't like what they uncovered, so you are trying to discredit the committee as biased. Typical Republican/Fox news playbook.
Sorry the facts destroy that ridiculous narrative.




JVoV -> RE: Jan. 6 panel refers Trump on criminal charges (1/5/2023 12:28:54 PM)

Bosco, you're still howling about things that have already been decided, and are already over. History won't care. Wikipedia won't care, unless you edit the right pages. Idk how that works. It doesn't change anything. It happened. It's over.




MasterJaguar01 -> RE: Jan. 6 panel refers Trump on criminal charges (1/5/2023 4:52:36 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01
lol... "Lies and mindless spew"????? Please identify a single thing I said, which is factually inaccurate.


Still waiting




BoscoX -> RE: Jan. 6 panel refers Trump on criminal charges (1/9/2023 8:00:56 PM)

FR -

https://fb.watch/hYD5kbtsF4/




JVoV -> RE: Jan. 6 panel refers Trump on criminal charges (1/9/2023 11:43:04 PM)

Still not watching a video.

Use your words.




BoscoX -> RE: Jan. 6 panel refers Trump on criminal charges (1/10/2023 8:33:37 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV

Still not watching a video.

Use your words.


Not a put down, just posting the facts - whether you're too poor to afford fast Internet, or you can't figure out how to enable video, or you are just determined to be as ignorant as possible....

No one cares. The world does not revolve around you, and I will continue to post fun, interesting and informative video clips as I damn well please





JVoV -> RE: Jan. 6 panel refers Trump on criminal charges (1/10/2023 1:36:48 PM)

I choose not to watch videos that I have no information about. I choose not to waste my time. You could add a sentence or two talking about the videos you post. Or their significance to you.

Remember, even if I am the only one posting, others see this forum too.




BoscoX -> RE: Jan. 6 panel refers Trump on criminal charges (1/11/2023 6:43:43 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV

I choose not to watch videos that I have no information about. I choose not to waste my time. You could add a sentence or two talking about the videos you post. Or their significance to you.

Remember, even if I am the only one posting, others see this forum too.


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MkdPfhQGFys




JVoV -> RE: Jan. 6 panel refers Trump on criminal charges (1/11/2023 9:29:07 AM)

So you have no words of your own. Good to know.




Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2024
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.8164063