....5 take-aways from this hearing...

[Orangecat]

Nah, you’re just an angry little bitch and you’re still struggling to think of something to say that‘s either intelligent or meaningful.

You're the angry little bitch here, kid.
Is "Projector" your middle name, or what? Lulz.

 

[scruffy]

I’m attempting to talk to you

That might be a mistake.

 

[OKTexas]

Washington Post has this journalistic tactic of listing 'take-aways' from whatever hearing had just completed.
WaPo ain't alone in doing that...right-leaning 'The Hill' does it. So does left-lean 'Politico' do it. As does the New York Times.

I like it.

It is a journalistic 'shorthand' device to convey information. They know people are busy, have many sources of information. So they offer a 'formatting' to mentally organize it to make it more accessible to a greater number of people. It is a way to 'deliver-the-news'.

Anyway, this is how tonight's Washington Post parsed today's hearing.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/07/12/january-6-hearing-extremism-trump/

"5 takeaways from the Jan. 6 hearing on extremism and Trump"

1. ‘Donald Trump cannot escape responsibility by arguing he is willfully blind’
2. A throw-down fight between Trump advisers over election fraud — leading to a crucial step forward for Jan. 6.
3. What happened after Trump’s ‘Be there, will be wild’ tweet.
4. How did so many people become radicalized off a lie?
5. Another big hearing next week
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Notably, WaPo did not mention Cheney's warning that witness tampering is bad juju. And will land bad juju on whoever does it.

Seriously, is that all there is. You'd think a highly produced and scripted TV show would have more substance.

.

 

[OKTexas]

It bears repeating: (from post #9) ----
"But the primary 'Highlight' they featured was Don Trump's agency in the machinations for the Election Denier scheming and in the riot itself.
In short, Don Trump was not being tricked by Mike Flynn, Rudy G., Krakenpot Powell, Roger Stone, PillowBoy, or the 'Overstock' guy. They (the Committee) persuasively presented Don Trump as the CEO of the events.....before, during and after January 6th.

================================================

I repeat the above because January 6th was a tragic day for America. Most surely so for the 5 (?) people who died in that event, or the several who died subsequent to it. And tragic for their families, it goes without saying.

The events and the portent of January 6th is now, and will continue to be a rolling tragedy for all those duped & snookered who have been charged with crimes of one degree or another. It has cost them jobs, money, time, respect, reputation..... as we heard yesterday from the cabinet-shop super from Ohio....it cost him his job and his family their house.

The testimony is clear...and repetitive.....Don Trump was emphatically informed on multiple occasions that his 'Election Denial' scheme was fraudulent. He was told often enough by people who were in a position to know. They informed him repeatedly. Yet, he put in motion this event that turned into an American tragedy that will stain his legacy and besmirched America's reputation. "Come to DC. It will be wild."

Don Trump was the willing director of all those ugly events.....before J6, during, and after.
He knew the militia thugs would be present. He was told multiple times they were armed. He did not alert the Capitol police or the DC police that we was going to direct that angered armed mob at our legislators. He didn't even tell the vast vast majority of legislators themselves.

These 7 or 8 hearings so far have been a great service to America. We need to know who did what and to what effect. And hold them accountable for trashing America's reputation.

IMHO

So when do they plan to explore the egregious lack of security on 1/6 despite at least two weeks of warnings and intel?

.

 

[OKTexas]

Scruffy, you can't possibly be this stupid, can you????? You continue to under estimate the Speaker of the House, and what she is doing.

Nothing has ever been "shoved up NP's backside". In fact, Pelosi has brilliantly outmaneuvered not only Trump, but the entire Republican Party with the January 6th Hearings. They're breaking Trump's hold on both the Party, and the American people. I would be very surprised if Trump isn't indicted at the end of all of this.

She won't have that title is 6 months. And you can bet she'll cry like hell when she gets her subpoena.

.

 

[Chillicothe]

"Seriously, is that all there is. You'd think a highly produced and scripted TV show would have more substance."

Well, no....of course not. There is more. And, good poster OKTexas, if you had watched the hearings in full you would know that. What the OP was offering, and explained in the first post, is that these 'takeaways' are journalistic devices intended to condense and simplify the testimonies of a thousand witnesses....and those testimonies themselves distilled down to just a few for each individual hearing. And, to condense the thousands and thousands of pages of documents so that the Committee could show to the American electorate the most telling, the most indicative for the point they are making in that particular segment of a particular hearing.

Really, poster OKTexas, I would highly recommend you go to any one of several archival collections of the hearings. YouTube, for example. C-Span is another. Listen and watch the hearings. In that manner, you will understand that there is far more than these 'take-aways' offered by news sources in a tactic to address the too often too short attention span of today's busy Americans.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

So when do they plan to explore the egregious lack of security on 1/6 despite at least two weeks of warnings and intel?

I do not know when or if the 'lack of security' will be explored. If I recall, that has been explored in Congressional testimony prior to the Select Committee's televised hearings. Didn't we see any number of Capitol police describe their horrible day under attack by Trump supporters on J6?

But, as a nuance to your concerns over an 'egregious lack of security' you need be aware that Don Trump and his enablers took pains to keep secret from the DC police and the Capitol police their long prepared plan for a 'march' at our legislators assembled in the Capitol. If....if.....they would have properly applied for a 'march' permit...as is required by law....that act would have alerted authorities that the assembled rallygoers were NOT going to be confined to the Ellipse as the duly issued original permit stipulated.

In hindsight, with notice of intent to march, the authorities we can presume would have manned up....both the DC police and the Capitol police. Traffic and pedestrian barriers could have been installed along the route and at the Capitol. Instead, the surreptitious plans to march at the Capitol flung thousand of intentionally angered rallygoers at a thin blue line of officers.....with near 150 of them injured, some crippled for life.

So, sure, we can ask why more DC police and Capitol police were not manned up for the day shift on J6. But we need also pointedly inquire why Don Trump, Roger Stone, Mike Flynn, and the various enablers intentionally hid their long incubating plans to attack the Capitol. Hell, ask Steve Bannon too. He clearly signaled he knew mayhem was planned....he said so in an interview or on his podcast that we've now seen repeated on broadcast news.

 

[XponentialChaos]

Correct, imbecile, the fact that it is a projection makes it so.

That would be your opinion, not a fact.

Retard.

 

[XponentialChaos]

You're the angry little bitch here, kid.
Is "Projector" your middle name, or what? Lulz.

The angry little bitch is so angry. Lulz.

 

[Dragonlady]

She won't have that title is 6 months. And you can bet she'll cry like hell when she gets her subpoena.

.

You foolishly assume Democrats are going to lose the House. I wouldn't bet any money on that at all. You can thank the Supreme Court for that one.

And what subpoena do you think she's going to be served with??? You don't actually think that the court will let Bannon subpoena Pelosi, do you??? That's not going to happen.

Apparently you missed the part where the judge has refused to acquiesce to ANY of Bannon's ridiculous motions to delay or defend the trial. The defense lawyer asked in frustration what the point of the trial was if the court has refused all of his defense argurment, and the judge agreed there was no point to the trial.

The question is only "Did Bannon refuse to testify? Yes or no?" If yes, he goes to jail. If no, there where is this testimony. While a defendant may call witnesses, he can't call anyone he feels like calling, just to cause them trouble.

I hope Bannon gets the maximum sentence since he skipped jail on his fraud charge. Grifters gotta grift but the courts don't have to help them do it.

 

[jc456]

Well, no....of course not. There is more. And, good poster OKTexas, if you had watched the hearings in full you would know that. What the OP was offering, and explained in the first post, is that these 'takeaways' are journalistic devices intended to condense and simplify the testimonies of a thousand witnesses....and those testimonies themselves distilled down to just a few for each individual hearing. And, to condense the thousands and thousands of pages of documents so that the Committee could show to the American electorate the most telling, the most indicative for the point they are making in that particular segment of a particular hearing.

Really, poster OKTexas, I would highly recommend you go to any one of several archival collections of the hearings. YouTube, for example. C-Span is another. Listen and watch the hearings. In that manner, you will understand that there is far more than these 'take-aways' offered by news sources in a tactic to address the too often too short attention span of today's busy Americans.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------


I do not know when or if the 'lack of security' will be explored. If I recall, that has been explored in Congressional testimony prior to the Select Committee's televised hearings. Didn't we see any number of Capitol police describe their horrible day under attack by Trump supporters on J6?

But, as a nuance to your concerns over an 'egregious lack of security' you need be aware that Don Trump and his enablers took pains to keep secret from the DC police and the Capitol police their long prepared plan for a 'march' at our legislators assembled in the Capitol. If....if.....they would have properly applied for a 'march' permit...as is required by law....that act would have alerted authorities that the assembled rallygoers were NOT going to be confined to the Ellipse as the duly issued original permit stipulated.

In hindsight, with notice of intent to march, the authorities we can presume would have manned up....both the DC police and the Capitol police. Traffic and pedestrian barriers could have been installed along the route and at the Capitol. Instead, the surreptitious plans to march at the Capitol flung thousand of intentionally angered rallygoers at a thin blue line of officers.....with near 150 of them injured, some crippled for life.

So, sure, we can ask why more DC police and Capitol police were not manned up for the day shift on J6. But we need also pointedly inquire why Don Trump, Roger Stone, Mike Flynn, and the various enablers intentionally hid their long incubating plans to attack the Capitol. Hell, ask Steve Bannon too. He clearly signaled he knew mayhem was planned....he said so in an interview or on his podcast that we've now seen repeated on broadcast news.

we know there's nothing. we know because the people who should have been called to testify weren't called. it's quite simple. you and your demofks friends have all allowed your brains to be drained.

 

[Orangecat]

That would be your opinion, not a fact.

Retard.

 

[Orangecat]

The angry little bitch is so angry. Lulz.

Take a break if you’re that upset, kiddo. I don’t really enjoy humiliating immature imbeciles, so you’re on your own from here on out.

 

[JWBooth]

....5 take-aways from this hearing...​

Useless waste of time and resources and fails in it’s purpose to distract from innumerable Bidet failures at home and abroad.
now repeat four times

 

[XponentialChaos]

 

[XponentialChaos]

Take a break if you’re that upset, kiddo. I don’t really enjoy humiliating immature imbeciles, so you’re on your own from here on out.

The only person you’re humiliating is yourself, little guy. You’ve clearly demonstrated that you don’t know the difference between a fact and an opinion.

Scamper off now you little bitch. Try thinking of something intelligent to say next time instead of just acting like the angry little bitch that you are.

 

[OKTexas]

Well, no....of course not. There is more. And, good poster OKTexas, if you had watched the hearings in full you would know that. What the OP was offering, and explained in the first post, is that these 'takeaways' are journalistic devices intended to condense and simplify the testimonies of a thousand witnesses....and those testimonies themselves distilled down to just a few for each individual hearing. And, to condense the thousands and thousands of pages of documents so that the Committee could show to the American electorate the most telling, the most indicative for the point they are making in that particular segment of a particular hearing.

Really, poster OKTexas, I would highly recommend you go to any one of several archival collections of the hearings. YouTube, for example. C-Span is another. Listen and watch the hearings. In that manner, you will understand that there is far more than these 'take-aways' offered by news sources in a tactic to address the too often too short attention span of today's busy Americans.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------


I do not know when or if the 'lack of security' will be explored. If I recall, that has been explored in Congressional testimony prior to the Select Committee's televised hearings. Didn't we see any number of Capitol police describe their horrible day under attack by Trump supporters on J6?

But, as a nuance to your concerns over an 'egregious lack of security' you need be aware that Don Trump and his enablers took pains to keep secret from the DC police and the Capitol police their long prepared plan for a 'march' at our legislators assembled in the Capitol. If....if.....they would have properly applied for a 'march' permit...as is required by law....that act would have alerted authorities that the assembled rallygoers were NOT going to be confined to the Ellipse as the duly issued original permit stipulated.

In hindsight, with notice of intent to march, the authorities we can presume would have manned up....both the DC police and the Capitol police. Traffic and pedestrian barriers could have been installed along the route and at the Capitol. Instead, the surreptitious plans to march at the Capitol flung thousand of intentionally angered rallygoers at a thin blue line of officers.....with near 150 of them injured, some crippled for life.

So, sure, we can ask why more DC police and Capitol police were not manned up for the day shift on J6. But we need also pointedly inquire why Don Trump, Roger Stone, Mike Flynn, and the various enablers intentionally hid their long incubating plans to attack the Capitol. Hell, ask Steve Bannon too. He clearly signaled he knew mayhem was planned....he said so in an interview or on his podcast that we've now seen repeated on broadcast news.

Wow, it's nice to see at least one person is so thoroughly impressed by so much out of context, unchallenged BS. Give me 18 months, an unlimited budget and subpoena power and I'll come up with a made for TV shit show that says the exact opposite.

.

 

[OKTexas]

You foolishly assume Democrats are going to lose the House. I wouldn't bet any money on that at all. You can thank the Supreme Court for that one.

And what subpoena do you think she's going to be served with??? You don't actually think that the court will let Bannon subpoena Pelosi, do you??? That's not going to happen.

Apparently you missed the part where the judge has refused to acquiesce to ANY of Bannon's ridiculous motions to delay or defend the trial. The defense lawyer asked in frustration what the point of the trial was if the court has refused all of his defense argurment, and the judge agreed there was no point to the trial.

The question is only "Did Bannon refuse to testify? Yes or no?" If yes, he goes to jail. If no, there where is this testimony. While a defendant may call witnesses, he can't call anyone he feels like calling, just to cause them trouble.

I hope Bannon gets the maximum sentence since he skipped jail on his fraud charge. Grifters gotta grift but the courts don't have to help them do it.

Yeah, I would bet money on it and the subpoena will be coming from a republican led committee next year. All your commie BS notwithstanding.

.