Calm down about the committee hearings

[j-mac]

Not surprising that you choose snark over a refutation of the facts.

2. Obstructing a Lawful Function of the Federal Government

This is why courts have largely brushed aside defendants’ claims that § 371 is unconstitutionally vague as applied for failure to give adequate notice that the charged conduct is illegal.288 The statutory standard for criminal intent—specific intent to obstruct or impede—and the requirement of deceit or dishonesty narrow the statute’s reach and protect against prosecution for innocuous conduct.289 A great deal of caselaw has given clarity to the statutory language and explained which government functions will—and which will not—be covered.290 Criminal intent would likely be the critical and most hotly contested element of a § 371 prosecution against Trump, Eastman, Clark, Meadows, and possibly other members of their circle. In his litigation resisting a subpoena from the January 6 Committee to turn over his email correspondence related to the assault on the U.S. Capitol, Eastman claimed that he and Trump did not deploy dishonest means because “t is not ‘deceit, craft or trickery’ for the President, based on counsel from trusted advisors, to have arrived at conclusions on various factual matters which the Select Committee does not share.”291 The argument was that the attempts to obstruct and impede Congress and the DOJ could not have been dishonest if Trump and his collaborators honestly believed their cause was just. But—as Judge Carter found in the Eastman v. Thompson litigation, in deciding that Trump and Eastman more than likely violated § 371—that argument cannot withstand scrutiny. There is strong circumstantial evidence showing that Trump, Eastman, Clark, and Meadows subjectively knew that Trump fairly lost a secure election. Regardless of their beliefs about the election outcome, these men also knew that the means by which they pursued their objective were deceptive and inconsistent with established law. And there is no end-justifies-the-means safe harbor under § 371 for conspirators who deceitfully obstruct a lawful government function, even if they subjectively believe that their cause is justified.

Bullshit…this sham is not acting on legal authority.

 

[j-mac]

Unanimous acquittal is not jury nullification.

Judge: Obama leftist
Judges wife: representing Lisa Page
Jurors: At least 3 doners to Clinton campaign, and jury foreman admitted as much….

But I don’t expect you to be honest here, after all my guess is that you believe ALL Trump supporters should be jailed.

 

[j-mac]

like everyone else I have a mind set about Jan 6, still I am interested to see what is produced. The more information brought forth about any major event is of interest to me.

Enjoy your highly produced propaganda

 

[dudmuck]

Other than the most partisan of the partisans the vast majority of Americans have moved on from this.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

So far they start each public hearing with Ivanka testifying that her father is a liar with all that election fraud bullshit as Bill Barr puts it.

She must be working for DeSantis
So her dad can disappear and quit embarrassing her.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

What matters in this thing is what, if anything, Garland and the DOJ decide to do.

Hmm, somewhat I would call that secondary to airing out the criminals in public for the purpose of letting the voters decide.

 

[easyt65]

.

• If they start going beyond hard facts, hard evidence and solid testimony, people will tune out.

When are they going to get to any ... besides the evidence they altered / made up?




When yiy're a Democrat & Rachel Maddow doesn't buy you bs 'Get Trump 3.0' false narrative your committee / political theatrics suck.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I've seen several comments from around the net about the importance of these hearings, and this board sure is crammed with threads trying to downplay them. So some facts, just for fun:

• This isn't a trial. There are some who appear to think it is.
• Some Dems, especially Jamie Raskin, sure have been pumping this sucker up at the risk of creating expectations that are too high.
• If these members launch into the standard politician showboating, preening and pontificating for the cameras, this thing is toast.
• If they start going beyond hard facts, hard evidence and solid testimony, people will tune out.
• If they provide hard facts, hard evidence and solid testimony, great, it will help to flesh out the historical record.
• Those who are saying this is a cynical ploy to grab the independents certainly have a fair point. Such is the condition of our politics.
• This committee can't convict anyone. They can't sentence anyone. What they're doing is separate from legal proceedings.
• I'd imagine there will be a lot of people like me who don't want to sit through it, and will just observe the fallout, where we can get views from both ends.
• What matters in this thing is what, if anything, Garland and the DOJ decide to do. I'd imagine they'll get the evidence the committee has found.

Jan. 6 committee adviser on public hearings: People will be ‘absolutely surprised’

Former GOP Rep. Denver Riggleman (Va.), a former adviser to the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol, said the panel’s upcoming public hearings wi…

thehill.com

On the other hand, in the context of:

"What matters in this thing is what, if anything, Garland and the DOJ decide to do."

It could be said the hearings are catered to an audience of one.... Garland

 

[NotfooledbyW]

When are they going to get to any ... besides the evidence they altered / made up?

Nothing is altered or made up.

Financial Fraud. Trump raised $250 million from his supporters who believed they were contributing to Trump’s effort to find the election fraud that allegedly cost them that election.

The committee has found evidence that $60,000 of that $250 million was paid to Don Trump Jr’s girlfriend for her two and a half minute speech on the morning of Jan6 to the suckers who came to DC to stop the sledged steal.


Don Jr’s girlfriend was paid $24.000 a minute to speak at Trump’s “gonna be wild” Rally in DC on Jan6. She contributed nothing to finding evidence Iof fraud in the 2020 election by stirring up anger in that mob


Nobody on he left can make corrupt shit like this up or needs to.

 

[easyt65]

Nobody on he left can make corrupt shit like this up or needs to.

That's some funny shit considering Hillary, Obama, Biden, etc... made up the whe Russia Collusion / Russian Bank Connection scandal, the largest criminal political scandal in US history...

...considering Schiff & Swalwell were caught manufacturing evidence against a sitting President IOT try to remove him from office (conspiracy, sedition, treason)...



Yeah, you're funny

 

[Mac1958]

Hmm, somewhat I would call that secondary to airing out the criminals in public for the purpose of letting the voters decide.

I would be very, very pleasantly surprised if many people whose minds can be changed are watching.

This culture is more concerned with who's winning on "Survivor", or who the last TikTok lipstick influencer is.

I hope I'm wrong, but I'm not holding my breath on that. It's not even a consideration.

 

[Mac1958]

It could be said the hearings are catered to an audience of one.... Garland

Wouldn't surprise me.

I just want this stuff on the public record for the history books. Outside of the DOJ, this country is currently in no condition to fix anything or hold anyone accountable for anything.

My standards have become extremely low over the last six years.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

My standards have become extremely low over the last six years.

Maintain your standards It’s not Trump.

it’s the Republican white evangelical Christian base who are sejf deluded into believing they are God’s gift to America . , , Trump took advantage of that unique path to power that white mostly European nationalism combined with the will of god and guns the three G’s GOOBER GOD & GUNS That stifle real progress in America and the world.

They are blended well to this day with Putin’s agenda against liberal multicultural democratic Republics such as ours.

Plus it is the undemocratic structural problem in our system

IOWA Wyoming has four Senators / California NY has four Senators & GERRYMANDERING is permitted sometimes.


I THINK we need to maintain 64 Dem Senators somehow someway in the near future and build toward a permanent 60 seat Dem Senate