January 6th Primetime Hearings

jack · Jun 13, 2022

Order2Chaos said: ↑

jack said: ↑

It must have been a bittersweet moment for Trump when Ivanka testified at the hearings last night.

After all this time, she FINALLY screwed him.
Click to expand...

Order2Chaos said: ↑

Demiurge said: ↑

I didn't watch live but did catch the highlights this morning.

My takeaways:

1) Barr admited that the stop the steal stuff was bullshit and told Trump he lost the election at least 3 times
2) Ivanka believed Barr, not Daddy
3) The panel claims multiple GOP politicians asked for pardons, if they have proof on that that's pretty damning
4) The Proud Boys reconnoitered before the attack, and had meetings with Oath Keepers for strategy

I'm sure there's a lot of other pertinent factors. They also brought up a white blonde capitol police woman who was hurt in the attack. Too many of the Capitol Police heroes were the wrong color for the average GOP voter to care.
Click to expand...

Re: 2, as Colbert's writers put it, Donald finally got what he always wanted: Ivanka screwed him.
Click to expand...

A bit late, sorry.
Click to expand...

LOL Actually so was he, since it was Colbert I was riffing on post show

Demiurge · Jun 13, 2022

Not primetime, but still strong stuff.

The panel started by saying Trump knew that he had lost and the Jan 6th riot was due to his lies.

1) Barr over and over again saying how he told Trump that there was no evidence of fraud, it was all nonsense, and bullshit (his words). He explicitly stated that Trump wasn't interested in facts.
2) Bush's election strategist Ben Ginsberg who won Bush v Gore stating that there were over 60 court cases which Trump lost, he got his day in court, there is no valid evidence, and that Giuliani was disbarred for his misrepresentation in the election
3) Richard Donoghue, deputy AG stating how Trump was told over and over that there was no election fraud, and how everything was investigated and no evidence found
4) Al Schmidt, Republican commissioner for Philadelphia, how all investigation into fraud in Philly was found to be without merit
5) Byung Pak, US Attorney for Northern District of Georgia, stated he told Trump that there was no evidence of fraud in the Georgia election. He was pressured to quit not long after. He had been appointed by Trump in 2017.
6) Eric Herschman, former White House Attorney, said there was no indication of rigged voting machines

They then detailed how that Trump knew that the election fraud cases were a lie, but used it to fund raise, and that money did not go to challenging the election.

And they ended with a montage of footage from Jan 6th were the rioters said they were there because of the stolen election.

Trump campaign manager Bill Stepien was scheduled to testify but did not as his wife went into labor. There was footage of interviews with him showing that he had an understanding that the fraud claims were inaccurate and that he notified the White House of that.

It is unknown if he will testify later in person.

matthunter · Jun 13, 2022

Demiurge said: ↑

Not primetime, but still strong stuff.

The panel started by saying Trump knew that he had lost and the Jan 6th riot was due to his lies.

1) Barr over and over again saying how he told Trump that there was no evidence of fraud, it was all nonsense, and bullshit (his words). He explicitly stated that Trump wasn't interested in facts.
2) Bush's election strategist Ben Ginsberg who won Bush v Gore stating that there were over 60 court cases which Trump lost, he got his day in court, there is no valid evidence, and that Giuliani was disbarred for his misrepresentation in the election
3) Richard Donoghue, deputy AG stating how Trump was told over and over that there was no election fraud, and how everything was investigated and no evidence found
4) Al Schmidt, Republican commissioner for Philadelphia, how all investigation into fraud in Philly was found to be without merit
5) Byung Pak, US Attorney for Northern District of Georgia, stated he told Trump that there was no evidence of fraud in the Georgia election. He was pressured to quit not long after. He had been appointed by Trump in 2017.
6) Eric Herschman, former White House Attorney, said there was no indication of rigged voting machines

They then detailed how that Trump knew that the election fraud cases were a lie, but used it to fund raise, and that money did not go to challenging the election.

And they ended with a montage of footage from Jan 6th were the rioters said they were there because of the stolen election.

Trump campaign manager Bill Stepien was scheduled to testify but did not as his wife went into labor. There was footage of interviews with him showing that he had an understanding that the fraud claims were inaccurate and that he notified the White House of that.

It is unknown if he will testify later in person.
Click to expand...

You missed Jason Miller confirming that Guiliani was drunk when he tried to convince Trump he'd won:

The Select Committee then played video to prove the assertions.

Q, "You heard that Rudy Giuliani wanted to talk to the president and he was directed your way. Did you end up talking to him?"

"I did."

"What was that conversation?"

"A few of us, myself, Jason Miller, Justin Clark, and Mark Meadows gathered in a room off the map room to listen to whatever Rudy presumably wanted to say to the president."

The video cut to Jason Miller.

"Was there anyone in that conversation, who in your observation had too much to drink?"

"Mayor Giuliani."

"What was your observation about his potential intoxication during that discussion about what the president should say when he addressed the nation on election night?"

Miller: "The mayor was definitely intoxicated but I do not know his level of intoxication when he spoke with the president, for example."
Click to expand...

https://crooksandliars.com/2022/06/jason-miller-rudy-giuliani-intoxicated

And Bill Barr not just saying it was bullshit (that there was fraud), but singling out D'Souza's 2000 Mules "documentary":

"And I haven't seen anything since the election that changes my mind on that -- including the 2000 Mules movie," Barr said.

The former AG then burst out into laughter.

Barr was then asked to elaborate on the film's supposed conclusions since "people were talking about it."

I just think the GBI was unimpressed with it, and I was similarly unimpressed with it, because --I was holding my fire on that to see what the photographic evidence was, because I thought well, hell, if they have a lot of photographs of the same person dumping a lot of ballots in different boxes, that's hard to explain.

So I wanted to see what the photographic evidence was, but the cell phone data is singularly unimpressive. If you take 2 million cell phones and figure out where they are physically in a big city like Atlanta or wherever, just by definition you're going to find many hundreds of them have passed by and spent time in the vicinity of these boxes, and the premise that if you go by five boxes or whatever it was, you know, that that's a mule -- It's just indefensible.

By definition, you're going to have a lot -- hundreds of this. I saw one contractor said we figured out that our truck alone would account for six cell phone signals. This was some kind of contractor.and our route would take us by these things on a regular basis. but then when the movie came out, I think the photographic evidence in it was completely lack -- I mean, there was a little bit of it, but it was lacking, you know?
Click to expand...

https://crooksandliars.com/2022/06/bill-barr-laughs-dineshs-2000-mules-movie

Demiurge · Jun 13, 2022

matthunter said: ↑

Demiurge said: ↑

Not primetime, but still strong stuff.

The panel started by saying Trump knew that he had lost and the Jan 6th riot was due to his lies.

1) Barr over and over again saying how he told Trump that there was no evidence of fraud, it was all nonsense, and bullshit (his words). He explicitly stated that Trump wasn't interested in facts.
2) Bush's election strategist Ben Ginsberg who won Bush v Gore stating that there were over 60 court cases which Trump lost, he got his day in court, there is no valid evidence, and that Giuliani was disbarred for his misrepresentation in the election
3) Richard Donoghue, deputy AG stating how Trump was told over and over that there was no election fraud, and how everything was investigated and no evidence found
4) Al Schmidt, Republican commissioner for Philadelphia, how all investigation into fraud in Philly was found to be without merit
5) Byung Pak, US Attorney for Northern District of Georgia, stated he told Trump that there was no evidence of fraud in the Georgia election. He was pressured to quit not long after. He had been appointed by Trump in 2017.
6) Eric Herschman, former White House Attorney, said there was no indication of rigged voting machines

They then detailed how that Trump knew that the election fraud cases were a lie, but used it to fund raise, and that money did not go to challenging the election.

And they ended with a montage of footage from Jan 6th were the rioters said they were there because of the stolen election.

Trump campaign manager Bill Stepien was scheduled to testify but did not as his wife went into labor. There was footage of interviews with him showing that he had an understanding that the fraud claims were inaccurate and that he notified the White House of that.

It is unknown if he will testify later in person.
Click to expand...

You missed Jason Miller confirming that Guiliani was drunk when he tried to convince Trump he'd won:

The Select Committee then played video to prove the assertions.

Q, "You heard that Rudy Giuliani wanted to talk to the president and he was directed your way. Did you end up talking to him?"

"I did."

"What was that conversation?"

"A few of us, myself, Jason Miller, Justin Clark, and Mark Meadows gathered in a room off the map room to listen to whatever Rudy presumably wanted to say to the president."

The video cut to Jason Miller.

"Was there anyone in that conversation, who in your observation had too much to drink?"

"Mayor Giuliani."

"What was your observation about his potential intoxication during that discussion about what the president should say when he addressed the nation on election night?"

Miller: "The mayor was definitely intoxicated but I do not know his level of intoxication when he spoke with the president, for example."
Click to expand...

https://crooksandliars.com/2022/06/jason-miller-rudy-giuliani-intoxicated

And Bill Barr not just saying it was bullshit (that there was fraud), but singling out D'Souza's 2000 Mules "documentary":

"And I haven't seen anything since the election that changes my mind on that -- including the 2000 Mules movie," Barr said.

The former AG then burst out into laughter.

Barr was then asked to elaborate on the film's supposed conclusions since "people were talking about it."

I just think the GBI was unimpressed with it, and I was similarly unimpressed with it, because --I was holding my fire on that to see what the photographic evidence was, because I thought well, hell, if they have a lot of photographs of the same person dumping a lot of ballots in different boxes, that's hard to explain.

So I wanted to see what the photographic evidence was, but the cell phone data is singularly unimpressive. If you take 2 million cell phones and figure out where they are physically in a big city like Atlanta or wherever, just by definition you're going to find many hundreds of them have passed by and spent time in the vicinity of these boxes, and the premise that if you go by five boxes or whatever it was, you know, that that's a mule -- It's just indefensible.

By definition, you're going to have a lot -- hundreds of this. I saw one contractor said we figured out that our truck alone would account for six cell phone signals. This was some kind of contractor.and our route would take us by these things on a regular basis. but then when the movie came out, I think the photographic evidence in it was completely lack -- I mean, there was a little bit of it, but it was lacking, you know?
Click to expand...

https://crooksandliars.com/2022/06/bill-barr-laughs-dineshs-2000-mules-movie
Click to expand...

Fair enough, I wasn't trying to sensationalize, looking at it more in terms of what is applicable to an actual indictment.

But other highlights: WH Lawyer Lawyer Eric Herschman telling John Eastman 'Are you out of your fucking mind?' when he continued on with the conspiracy bullshit.

Barr saying Trump 'Lost Touch With Reality' after the election loss. Both pretty sensational.

But also more focused and relevant, Bill Stepien saying on tape that he quit because he didn't consider what was going on 'honest or professional.'

Oh, and also Stirewalt making the call and saying that Fox News calling Arizona was unanimous and explaining the 'Red Mirage' that Republicans tend to do better on election day with mail in votes favoring Democrats.

Tuckerfan · Jun 13, 2022

Tuckerfan · Jun 13, 2022

Nyx · Jun 13, 2022

Jan. 6 committee will not make any criminal referrals, chairman says

NBC said:

The chair of the House committee investigating the Capitol riot said Monday night that the panel will not make any criminal referrals, even though its leaders have previously hinted at the possibility of doing so.

"Our job is to look at the facts and circumstances around January 6 — what caused it — and make recommendations after that," Chair Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., told reporters as he left the House chamber after the second day of public hearings by the panel.

When pressed on the matter and whether the committee had ruled out the possibility of referring criminal charges, particularly for former President Donald Trump, Thompson replied: "We don’t have authority."

But the committee's vice chair Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., suggested later on Monday that a decision was not yet final.

"The committee has not issued a conclusion regarding potential criminal referrals. We will announce a decision on that at an appropriate time," she said in a statement on Twitter.

Rep. Elaine Luria, D-Va., tweeted in a separate statement, that the committee "has yet to vote," on recommending criminal referrals.

"If criminal activity occurred, it is our responsibility to report that activity to the DOJ," she said.

Rep. Adam Schiff, one of three California Democrats on the committee, also weighed in during a CNN interview Monday when asked about Thompson's remarks, saying, “We haven't had a discussion about that, so I don’t know that the committee has reached a position on whether we make a referral or what the referrals might be, I thought we were deferring that decision until we concluded our investigation.”

While Democrats have hoped the congressional hearings would lead to criminal prosecutions, making a criminal referral — instead of simply inspiring the Justice Department to act — comes with the risk of making the committee's entire investigation appear political.
Click to expand...

Source: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/co...s-chairman-says-rcna22325?cid=sm_npd_nn_tw_ma

Don't want to make it political. That might make it look like there's a side to be taken.

Tererune · Jun 14, 2022

Amaris said: ↑

Jan. 6 committee will not make any criminal referrals, chairman says

NBC said:

The chair of the House committee investigating the Capitol riot said Monday night that the panel will not make any criminal referrals, even though its leaders have previously hinted at the possibility of doing so.

"Our job is to look at the facts and circumstances around January 6 — what caused it — and make recommendations after that," Chair Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., told reporters as he left the House chamber after the second day of public hearings by the panel.

When pressed on the matter and whether the committee had ruled out the possibility of referring criminal charges, particularly for former President Donald Trump, Thompson replied: "We don’t have authority."

But the committee's vice chair Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., suggested later on Monday that a decision was not yet final.

"The committee has not issued a conclusion regarding potential criminal referrals. We will announce a decision on that at an appropriate time," she said in a statement on Twitter.

Rep. Elaine Luria, D-Va., tweeted in a separate statement, that the committee "has yet to vote," on recommending criminal referrals.

"If criminal activity occurred, it is our responsibility to report that activity to the DOJ," she said.

Rep. Adam Schiff, one of three California Democrats on the committee, also weighed in during a CNN interview Monday when asked about Thompson's remarks, saying, “We haven't had a discussion about that, so I don’t know that the committee has reached a position on whether we make a referral or what the referrals might be, I thought we were deferring that decision until we concluded our investigation.”

While Democrats have hoped the congressional hearings would lead to criminal prosecutions, making a criminal referral — instead of simply inspiring the Justice Department to act — comes with the risk of making the committee's entire investigation appear political.
Click to expand...

Source: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/co...s-chairman-says-rcna22325?cid=sm_npd_nn_tw_ma

Don't want to make it political. That might make it look like there's a side to be taken.
Click to expand...

Biden and the AG have both been quite obvious in saying they do not want to do anything about the criminality that has been exposed. Merrick Garland is a scumbag trump protector, and so is Joe Biden. They are also both guilty of corruption and similar crimes. Even worse is that when the legislature gets taken back by the reps they will not give them the same defense. The republicans will impeach Biden and when they get back the presidency they will try to convict him and his son of everything they can.

But we did not want someone whow as going to stir things up which is why the Biden Bros cried a river and demanded bipartisanship, right @Quincunx .

Quincunx · Jun 14, 2022

Tererun said: ↑

Amaris said: ↑

Jan. 6 committee will not make any criminal referrals, chairman says

NBC said:

The chair of the House committee investigating the Capitol riot said Monday night that the panel will not make any criminal referrals, even though its leaders have previously hinted at the possibility of doing so.

"Our job is to look at the facts and circumstances around January 6 — what caused it — and make recommendations after that," Chair Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., told reporters as he left the House chamber after the second day of public hearings by the panel.

When pressed on the matter and whether the committee had ruled out the possibility of referring criminal charges, particularly for former President Donald Trump, Thompson replied: "We don’t have authority."

But the committee's vice chair Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., suggested later on Monday that a decision was not yet final.

"The committee has not issued a conclusion regarding potential criminal referrals. We will announce a decision on that at an appropriate time," she said in a statement on Twitter.

Rep. Elaine Luria, D-Va., tweeted in a separate statement, that the committee "has yet to vote," on recommending criminal referrals.

"If criminal activity occurred, it is our responsibility to report that activity to the DOJ," she said.

Rep. Adam Schiff, one of three California Democrats on the committee, also weighed in during a CNN interview Monday when asked about Thompson's remarks, saying, “We haven't had a discussion about that, so I don’t know that the committee has reached a position on whether we make a referral or what the referrals might be, I thought we were deferring that decision until we concluded our investigation.”

While Democrats have hoped the congressional hearings would lead to criminal prosecutions, making a criminal referral — instead of simply inspiring the Justice Department to act — comes with the risk of making the committee's entire investigation appear political.
Click to expand...

Source: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/co...s-chairman-says-rcna22325?cid=sm_npd_nn_tw_ma

Don't want to make it political. That might make it look like there's a side to be taken.
Click to expand...

Biden and the AG have both been quite obvious in saying they do not want to do anything about the criminality that has been exposed. Merrick Garland is a scumbag trump protector, and so is Joe Biden. They are also both guilty of corruption and similar crimes. Even worse is that when the legislature gets taken back by the reps they will not give them the same defense. The republicans will impeach Biden and when they get back the presidency they will try to convict him and his son of everything they can.

But we did not want someone whow as going to stir things up which is why the Biden Bros cried a river and demanded bipartisanship, right @Quincunx .
Click to expand...

What Biden and Garland are protecting is not Trump, but the credibility of the DOJ and the U.S. government as a whole. All of these lengthy procedures and bureaucratic inefficiencies exist precisely to keep corrupt officials from launching illegitimate politically motivated investigations. All the same, if the evidence keeps pointing to criminal wrongdoing there is no stopping the pursuit. This is why Trump so frequently raged against his Attorneys General. He expected them prosecute his opponents for made up crimes, while shielding him from the consequences of his own. You don’t see Biden engaged in that kind of corruption. Institutional inertia can be frustrating, but it is far preferable to condemnation by unitary decree.

Demiurge · Jun 14, 2022

It doesn't matter anyway - referrals still have to be prosecuted by DOJ. Garland will have to make the ultimate decision. There is precedent, Nixon resigned, but not only was there impeachment on the table, there was a grand jury convened to indict him on multiple counts, including bribery, conspiracy, obstruction of justice and obstruction of a criminal investigation.

Tererune · Jun 14, 2022

Quincunx said: ↑

Tererun said: ↑

Amaris said: ↑

Jan. 6 committee will not make any criminal referrals, chairman says

NBC said:

The chair of the House committee investigating the Capitol riot said Monday night that the panel will not make any criminal referrals, even though its leaders have previously hinted at the possibility of doing so.

"Our job is to look at the facts and circumstances around January 6 — what caused it — and make recommendations after that," Chair Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., told reporters as he left the House chamber after the second day of public hearings by the panel.

When pressed on the matter and whether the committee had ruled out the possibility of referring criminal charges, particularly for former President Donald Trump, Thompson replied: "We don’t have authority."

But the committee's vice chair Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., suggested later on Monday that a decision was not yet final.

"The committee has not issued a conclusion regarding potential criminal referrals. We will announce a decision on that at an appropriate time," she said in a statement on Twitter.

Rep. Elaine Luria, D-Va., tweeted in a separate statement, that the committee "has yet to vote," on recommending criminal referrals.

"If criminal activity occurred, it is our responsibility to report that activity to the DOJ," she said.

Rep. Adam Schiff, one of three California Democrats on the committee, also weighed in during a CNN interview Monday when asked about Thompson's remarks, saying, “We haven't had a discussion about that, so I don’t know that the committee has reached a position on whether we make a referral or what the referrals might be, I thought we were deferring that decision until we concluded our investigation.”

While Democrats have hoped the congressional hearings would lead to criminal prosecutions, making a criminal referral — instead of simply inspiring the Justice Department to act — comes with the risk of making the committee's entire investigation appear political.
Click to expand...

Source: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/co...s-chairman-says-rcna22325?cid=sm_npd_nn_tw_ma

Don't want to make it political. That might make it look like there's a side to be taken.
Click to expand...

Biden and the AG have both been quite obvious in saying they do not want to do anything about the criminality that has been exposed. Merrick Garland is a scumbag trump protector, and so is Joe Biden. They are also both guilty of corruption and similar crimes. Even worse is that when the legislature gets taken back by the reps they will not give them the same defense. The republicans will impeach Biden and when they get back the presidency they will try to convict him and his son of everything they can.

But we did not want someone whow as going to stir things up which is why the Biden Bros cried a river and demanded bipartisanship, right @Quincunx .
Click to expand...

What Biden and Garland are protecting is not Trump, but the credibility of the DOJ and the U.S. government as a whole. All of these lengthy procedures and bureaucratic inefficiencies exist precisely to keep corrupt officials from launching illegitimate politically motivated investigations. All the same, if the evidence keeps pointing to criminal wrongdoing there is no stopping the pursuit. This is why Trump so frequently raged against his Attorneys General. He expected them prosecute his opponents for made up crimes, while shielding him from the consequences of his own. You don’t see Biden engaged in that kind of corruption. Institutional inertia can be frustrating, but it is far preferable to condemnation by unitary decree.
Click to expand...

Demiurge · Jun 14, 2022

Tomorrow's hearing is being moved to next week. Kinzinger saying it is to 'space the hearings out.'

There's some speculation that there might be new testimony coming in that they have to incorporate. Or that there may be a major announcement that they are aware of tomorrow. Roe comes to mind.

matthunter · Jun 14, 2022

Guiliani denies being drunk in tweet, later deletes it. *strokes beard*

Demiurge · Jun 14, 2022

matthunter said: ↑

Guiliani denies being drunk in tweet, later deletes it. *strokes beard*
Click to expand...

He was drunk when he tweeted that.

Diacanu · Jun 14, 2022

I hear some people saying they feel sorry for the insurrectionists being duped by Trump.
I don't. Fuck 'em.
If in 2016, Obama had flipped his gourd, and got on TV, and said "buuuuurn thiiiis motherfucker dooooowwwnn!!! " I'd be like "wow, he's really gone off his meds, huh? ".
Say that shit to Republicans? "Yeeesss siiiiir! ".
Keep fucking telling me "both sides though!" though.

Order2Chaos · Jun 14, 2022

Demiurge said: ↑

Tomorrow's hearing is being moved to next week. Kinzinger saying it is to 'space the hearings out.'

There's some speculation that there might be new testimony coming in that they have to incorporate. Or that there may be a major announcement that they are aware of tomorrow. Roe comes to mind.
Click to expand...

SCOTUS calendar is empty today, but orders are expected next Tuesday (among other days), so I don't think that's it.

EDIT: wait, no, tomorrow's hearings, not today's. Yeah that's a possibility then.

Quincunx · Jun 14, 2022

Tererun said: ↑

Quincunx said: ↑

Tererun said: ↑

Amaris said: ↑

Jan. 6 committee will not make any criminal referrals, chairman says

Source: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/co...s-chairman-says-rcna22325?cid=sm_npd_nn_tw_ma

Don't want to make it political. That might make it look like there's a side to be taken.
Click to expand...

Biden and the AG have both been quite obvious in saying they do not want to do anything about the criminality that has been exposed. Merrick Garland is a scumbag trump protector, and so is Joe Biden. They are also both guilty of corruption and similar crimes. Even worse is that when the legislature gets taken back by the reps they will not give them the same defense. The republicans will impeach Biden and when they get back the presidency they will try to convict him and his son of everything they can.

But we did not want someone whow as going to stir things up which is why the Biden Bros cried a river and demanded bipartisanship, right @Quincunx .
Click to expand...

What Biden and Garland are protecting is not Trump, but the credibility of the DOJ and the U.S. government as a whole. All of these lengthy procedures and bureaucratic inefficiencies exist precisely to keep corrupt officials from launching illegitimate politically motivated investigations. All the same, if the evidence keeps pointing to criminal wrongdoing there is no stopping the pursuit. This is why Trump so frequently raged against his Attorneys General. He expected them prosecute his opponents for made up crimes, while shielding him from the consequences of his own. You don’t see Biden engaged in that kind of corruption. Institutional inertia can be frustrating, but it is far preferable to condemnation by unitary decree.
Click to expand...

Click to expand...

William Roper: “So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!”

Sir Thomas More: “Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?”

Roper: “Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!”

More: “Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!

Tuckerfan · Jun 14, 2022

Nyx · Jun 14, 2022

When she says this, just remember that Liz Cheney voted with Trump more than 93% of the time.

Don't see her as an ally, or as a "good" Republican. She's not. It's all theater.

matthunter · Jun 15, 2022

"Trump committee lawyer Eric Herschmann, he's MAGA, you may have seen his name pop up in the hearings, but this is new tonight, talking about his discussions with the lawyer at the center of the plotting, John Eastman. One day after, January 7th, Eastman was still talking about trying to get some way to overthrow then president-elect Biden's incoming administration, preserving information out of Georgia. This is the new testimony," Melber said.

Eastman -- I don't remember why he called me, or he texted me or called me, wanted to talk with me, and he said he couldn't reach others. and he started to ask me about something dealing with Georgia, preserving something potentially for appeal. And I said to him, are you out of your eff'ing mind? I said, 'I only want to hear two words coming out of your mouth from now on -- orderly transition.' I said, 'I don't want to hear any other eff'ing words come out of your mouth other than orderly transition. Repeat your words to me.'

What did he say?

Eventually he said orderly transition. I said, good, John. Now I'm going to give you the best free legal advice you're ever getting in your life. Get a great f***ing criminal defense lawyer. You're going to need it. And then I hung up on him.
Click to expand...

https://crooksandliars.com/2022/06/lawyer-john-eastman-are-you-out-your-effin

Tuckerfan · Jun 15, 2022

matthunter · Jun 15, 2022

Further to this: https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/barry-loudermilk-capitol-tour_n_62a9f7fee4b06169ca938f98

shootER · Jun 15, 2022

shootER · Jun 16, 2022

Report: Jared Kushner Was “Directly Involved” in Trump’s Early Attempt to Overturn the Election
Kind of blows a hole in the narrative Kushner (and Ivanka Trump) would have people believe re: them allegedly having nothing to do with Trump’s schemes.

shootER · Jun 16, 2022

Ginni Thomas corresponded with John Eastman, sources in Jan. 6 House investigation say

Bailey · Jun 16, 2022

shootER said: ↑

Report: Jared Kushner Was “Directly Involved” in Trump’s Early Attempt to Overturn the Election
Kind of blows a hole in the narrative Kushner (and Ivanka Trump) would have people believe re: them allegedly having nothing to do with Trump’s schemes.
Click to expand...

It truly is stunning how many of them are going to get away with it.

Fisherman's Worf · Jun 16, 2022

Bailey said: ↑

shootER said: ↑

Report: Jared Kushner Was “Directly Involved” in Trump’s Early Attempt to Overturn the Election
Kind of blows a hole in the narrative Kushner (and Ivanka Trump) would have people believe re: them allegedly having nothing to do with Trump’s schemes.
Click to expand...

It truly is stunning how many of them are going to get away with it.
Click to expand...

Have already*

Jenee · Jun 16, 2022

Bailey said: ↑

shootER said: ↑

Report: Jared Kushner Was “Directly Involved” in Trump’s Early Attempt to Overturn the Election
Kind of blows a hole in the narrative Kushner (and Ivanka Trump) would have people believe re: them allegedly having nothing to do with Trump’s schemes.
Click to expand...

It truly is stunning how many of them are going to get away with it.
Click to expand...

Stunning, but expected. The US is in a downward spin with no hope of recovering. It’s just a matter of time. I’m going to go on record saying the US will be completely fascist by 2050.

Demiurge · Jun 16, 2022

Looks like Roger Stone is back in the crosshairs, as richly deserved.

Demiurge · Jun 16, 2022

Log in or Sign up

January 6th Primetime Hearings

jack Slave To The Rhythm

Demiurge Goodbye and Hello, as always.

matthunter Ice Bear

Demiurge Goodbye and Hello, as always.

Tuckerfan BMF

Tuckerfan BMF

Nyx Guest

Tererune Troll princess and Magical Girl

Quincunx anti-anti Staff Member Administrator

Demiurge Goodbye and Hello, as always.

Tererune Troll princess and Magical Girl

Demiurge Goodbye and Hello, as always.

matthunter Ice Bear

Demiurge Goodbye and Hello, as always.

Diacanu Comicmike. Writer

Order2Chaos Ultimate... Immortal Administrator

Quincunx anti-anti Staff Member Administrator

Tuckerfan BMF

Nyx Guest

matthunter Ice Bear

Tuckerfan BMF

matthunter Ice Bear

shootER Insubordinate...and churlish Administrator

shootER Insubordinate...and churlish Administrator

shootER Insubordinate...and churlish Administrator

Bailey It's always Christmas Eve Super Moderator

Fisherman's Worf I am the Seaman, I am the Walrus, Qu-Qu-Qapla'!

Jenee Driver 8

Demiurge Goodbye and Hello, as always.

Demiurge Goodbye and Hello, as always.

Log in or Sign up

January 6th Primetime Hearings

jack Slave To The Rhythm

Demiurge Goodbye and Hello, as always.

matthunter Ice Bear

Demiurge Goodbye and Hello, as always.

Tuckerfan BMF

Tuckerfan BMF

Nyx Guest

Tererune Troll princess and Magical Girl

Quincunx anti-anti Staff Member Administrator

Demiurge Goodbye and Hello, as always.

Tererune Troll princess and Magical Girl

Demiurge Goodbye and Hello, as always.

matthunter Ice Bear

Demiurge Goodbye and Hello, as always.

Diacanu Comicmike. Writer

Order2Chaos Ultimate... Immortal Administrator

Quincunx anti-anti Staff Member Administrator

Tuckerfan BMF

Nyx Guest

matthunter Ice Bear

Tuckerfan BMF

matthunter Ice Bear

shootER Insubordinate...and churlish Administrator

shootER Insubordinate...and churlish Administrator

shootER Insubordinate...and churlish Administrator

Bailey It's always Christmas Eve Super Moderator

Fisherman's Worf I am the Seaman, I am the Walrus, Qu-Qu-Qapla'!

Jenee Driver 8

Demiurge Goodbye and Hello, as always.

Demiurge Goodbye and Hello, as always.

Useful Searches