January 6th Primetime Hearings

Liar.

Is there any particular reason you're working so hard and lying so obviously to defend a president and a party that you claim you don't support?

I'm not defending anyone, I just think the committee should be more fair to legitimize it in the eyes of the public. I'm not disputing their findings, I'm disputing the credibility of the committee. If it were the other way around, Democrats would be losing their shit and you know it. Keep pretending that Republicans won't pull the same shit in the future though.

What is it that you think I’m lying about, dipshit?

Because only two Republicans will participate the Democrats should limit themselves to three members?

You would have five, three Democrats, two Republicans, but there really should be more Republicans picked by McCarthy.

In most courts, you'll get disqualified from being on the jury if you're a co-conspirator.

So find the ones who weren’t asking for pardons, I’m sure you can find Republicans that weren’t involved.

There should have, but McCarthy withdrew their nominations.

"Disinformation".

Because Pelosi couldn't hand pick her own puppets to install.

So you have problems with their credibility but not their findings? That seems... inconsistent. But hang on...

Disinformation is a polite way of saying they repeated easily disprovable lies in public settings.

Do you think Jordan and Banks have been nothing but honest in relation to Jan 6th?

I think disinformation is a catch all phrase that Democrats use to dismiss inconvenient facts.

So you're not disputing the findings of the committee, but you're saying that two individuals that the Democrats didn't allow on the committee were kept off it for spreading "inconvenient facts" about Jan 6th?

I don’t know if they were or weren’t, I just think that the committee should have been more fair. If the Republicans had an investigation that only included two Democrats, I’d be saying the same thing. I can disagree with how it was done without disagreeing with their conclusions.

Would it kill you to spend 30 seconds googling it? I spent 30 seconds googling it and I'm convinced that Jordan and Banks were repeatedly and shamelessly lying about Jan 6th. Do you think people that repeat easily disprovable lies about a particular topic should be part of a committee investigating that topic?

Were the two Republicans on the committee incompetent or something? Do you feel they missed some "inconvenient facts" that additional Republicans would have found?

Anyone have a good source for the January 6 Committee findings in their totality? I'm behind, and all I can find is piecemeal day-by-day reports.

Wow, FF is tripping over himself to defend the Trump administration? Must be a day ending in Y.

At least one of the Republicans that Pelosi didn't object to had voted against recognizing Bidens win. Not much of a Pelosi puppet.

If you were at all an independent thinker/voter who was paying attention, you would realize:
1. Kevin McCarthy didn't particularly want the truth about January 6 to come out, given that he was blaming Donald Trump for it privately and claimed that he wanted him to resign, something he denied until it was shown that there was tapes of him blaming Donald Trump for it and saying that he was going to ask him to resign.
2. Jim Jordan, one of his choices to join the committee, according to testimony from Hutchison, was talking about presidential pardons for congressmembers and has so far refused to cooperate with the committee.
3. When Nancy Pelosi rejected McCarthy's choices she asked for alternatives and he didn't give them any.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/kelly...tee-big-mistake-not-cross-examining-witnesses

Oh look, the boy got his cliff notes.

Looks like FF is taking his talking points from Trumpers who, like him, also don’t understand how the committee was formed. FF also thinks the two Republicans on the committee are somehow fake Republicans because they aren’t stuck in conspiracy theory rabbit holes - like real Republicans?

He also talks about "cross-examination" and has no idea what it is and no idea how it works.

He appears to think it's only a fair panel if half of it is made up of truth seekers and the other side made up of blathering conspiracy theorists. Is this the new "both sides"? Has he sucked in the equal time rule talking point that doesn't apply to congressional hearings?

I think Liz Cheney is a life long Republican and should be commended for the work she has done on the committee. I don't know much about the other guy.

I'm so glad you are here to tell us all what I think.

You're lucky it amounted to a post.