Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Well if you look at their body of work around national/international "policy" thus far there is nothing that would lead me to to believe that they wouldn't double-down on stupid.....They just have a couple of political dead men walking RINOs on their side this time.Because they are beholdin to the ever persistent Obama Maxim.
ALWAYS Double down.
" the child is father to the man. " ?
The American public has the attention span and focusing abilities of a two year old at a carnival. Plus, we're more concerned about things that affect us directly.How is it that the "American people" seem to not get that investigations that include hundreds of witnesses, scores of documents, dozens of legal challenges, and open obstruction by the opposing party takes considerable time?
The report goes beyond prior analyses to provide the first in-depth treatment of the voluminous publicly available evidence and the relevant law, including possible defenses. It reviews the evidence as to whether Trump as a matter of law conspired with his outside counsel John Eastman, administration lawyer Jeffrey Clark, and others to defraud the United States in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371 by scheming to block the electoral count on January 6, 2021 and to subvert the Department of Justice’s election enforcement work. The report similarly reviews the evidence as to whether Trump and Eastman violated 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c) with their scheme to obstruct the congressional count.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.
www.brookings.edu
The bolded area is what I'm curious about going into this. The committee can't do anything legally, and I'm assuming that they're putting everything in a big pile and shipping it off to the DOJ when they're done with the public stuff.The report goes beyond prior analyses to provide the first in-depth treatment of the voluminous publicly available evidence and the relevant law, including possible defenses. It reviews the evidence as to whether Trump as a matter of law conspired with his outside counsel John Eastman, administration lawyer Jeffrey Clark, and others to defraud the United States in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371 by scheming to block the electoral count on January 6, 2021 and to subvert the Department of Justice’s election enforcement work. The report similarly reviews the evidence as to whether Trump and Eastman violated 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c) with their scheme to obstruct the congressional count.
While the report is primarily focused on possible federal offenses that the hearings are expected to illuminate, it also notes evidence potentially probative of state criminal violations that the hearings will consider. Fulton County, Georgia is one jurisdiction currently investigating such evidence, and the report addresses the factual and legal aspects of that investigation and how it will be advanced by the Congressional hearings. (The Georgia investigation is also the subject of a separate report by some of the publication’s authors.)
The report’s review of well-established law and public record evidence as it exists today leads the authors to believe that there is substantial evidence of all the essential elements of those federal and state offenses and suggests there is a substantial basis for prosecutors to go forward. Accordingly, the report considers whether the Committee will send prosecutors an evidentiary “road map” or even formal criminal referrals as among the possible legislative and other outcomes following the hearings. The decision whether to make such referrals rests with the January 6 Committee and the ultimate determination whether to prosecute must be made by the Department of Justice—and for Georgia state offenses, by the Fulton County District Attorney. But the issues bearing on those judgments are among the most important open questions as the Committee does its work and as prosecutors weigh next steps. Our report’s analysis is intended to help readers evaluate all those proceedings going forward.
Trump on Trial: A Guide to the January 6 Hearings and the Question of Criminality | Brookings
A report reviewing the substantial evidence that Donald Trump conspired to defraud the United States in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371, by scheming to block the electoral count on January 6, 2021.
This report is tremendously informative in explaining the statutes behind the crimes Trump committed and the evidence of his (and other's) guilt.
Bad optics.I want to comment on one of your points.
I think the committee has done the best they could to avoid making this a cynical ploy to grab independents. They've avoided as much as they could leaking of their findings, they've got members in there that are not Democrats. Yes they rejected 2 of the members the GOP wanted to add. Members who are themselves subject of subpoenas. Hardly surprising since you can't really be a material witness and a prosecutor at the same time. Mccarthy pulled the rest. Just like he REFUSED to allow for a bipartisan commission 9/11 style that would have consisted of non-lawmakers chosen by both parties on an equal basis.
I would venture that the whole argument that the Democrats are playing a cynical political game and not a genuine investigation is a direct result of REPUBLICANS wanting it to appear that way by blocking any attempt to take politics out of it.
Again Hugh Hewitt who I started a thread on back a few months agoWell if you look at their body of work around national/international "policy" thus far there is nothing that would lead me to to believe that they wouldn't double-down on stupid.....They just have a couple of political dead men walking RINOs on their side this time.
Political prisoners. Very AmeriKKKan.Bad optics.
They're trying to throw the political opposition in jail.
There are still people alive today who remember McCarthy. Many of them are in the entertainment industry. It's being discussed, because actors and producers know about optics
The optics are bad because REPUBLICANS refused to allow for a bipartisan non-lawmaker commission.Bad optics.
They're trying to throw the political opposition in jail.
There are still people alive today who remember McCarthy. Many of them are in the entertainment industry. It's being discussed, because actors and producers know about optics
Hey Pally why not STFU already.We now have confirmation thatThe report goes beyond prior analyses to provide the first in-depth treatment of the voluminous publicly available evidence and the relevant law, including possible defenses. It reviews the evidence as to whether Trump as a matter of law conspired with his outside counsel John Eastman, administration lawyer Jeffrey Clark, and others to defraud the United States in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371 by scheming to block the electoral count on January 6, 2021 and to subvert the Department of Justice’s election enforcement work. The report similarly reviews the evidence as to whether Trump and Eastman violated 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c) with their scheme to obstruct the congressional count.
While the report is primarily focused on possible federal offenses that the hearings are expected to illuminate, it also notes evidence potentially probative of state criminal violations that the hearings will consider. Fulton County, Georgia is one jurisdiction currently investigating such evidence, and the report addresses the factual and legal aspects of that investigation and how it will be advanced by the Congressional hearings. (The Georgia investigation is also the subject of a separate report by some of the publication’s authors.)
The report’s review of well-established law and public record evidence as it exists today leads the authors to believe that there is substantial evidence of all the essential elements of those federal and state offenses and suggests there is a substantial basis for prosecutors to go forward. Accordingly, the report considers whether the Committee will send prosecutors an evidentiary “road map” or even formal criminal referrals as among the possible legislative and other outcomes following the hearings. The decision whether to make such referrals rests with the January 6 Committee and the ultimate determination whether to prosecute must be made by the Department of Justice—and for Georgia state offenses, by the Fulton County District Attorney. But the issues bearing on those judgments are among the most important open questions as the Committee does its work and as prosecutors weigh next steps. Our report’s analysis is intended to help readers evaluate all those proceedings going forward.
Trump on Trial: A Guide to the January 6 Hearings and the Question of Criminality | Brookings
A report reviewing the substantial evidence that Donald Trump conspired to defraud the United States in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371, by scheming to block the electoral count on January 6, 2021.
This report is tremendously informative in explaining the statutes behind the crimes Trump committed and the evidence of his (and other's) guilt.
Hay Pally.It's been " PUSHED " hard since day one { January 6th }.This will get pushed hard just before November as a Democratic Party ploy to keep seats in the House and the Senate, then they will drag it until the primaries in 2024. The pay need to get a lot of mileage with this as a diversion to the economy.
One would hope it will fill any gaps in knowledge regarding info the DoJ already has. The real question being whether Garland has the nads to charge a former prez with a crime(s) since it is inevitable he will be accused of being motivated by politics if he does. Making it somewhat important for the public to pay attention to the hearings so they can grasp the scope of Trump's criminal behavior.The bolded area is what I'm curious about going into this. The committee can't do anything legally, and I'm assuming that they're putting everything in a big pile and shipping it off to the DOJ when they're done with the public stuff.
You are right. How could they inflect more injuries after an 18 month locked up in total confinement, no charges filed. Their rights as Americans violated by dirty tyrants that shit them self and anyone within 10 feet. Ask the Pope! I hope we have enough short rope to go around for all the bunch of those worthless lying democRats and a few left over for their ass hole followers.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
There's a reason that No respectable Journalist even bothersPolitical prisoners. Very AmeriKKKan.
Some Dems, especially Jamie Raskin, sure have been pumping this sucker up at the risk of creating expectations that are too high.
Everything I've read about him says he's VERY meticulous and VERY precise. That's a good sign, but in this insane environment, it may not be enough. We'll see.One would hope it will fill any gaps in knowledge regarding info the DoJ already has. The real question being whether Garland has the nads to charge a former prez with a crime(s) since it is inevitable he will be accused of being motivated by politics if he does. Making it somewhat important for the public to pay attention to the hearings so they can grasp the scope of Trump's criminal behavior.
This committee can't convict anyone. They can't sentence anyone. What they're doing is separate from legal proceedings.
Nope. The FACT is there are 600 political prisoners sitting in Nancy Pelosi's personal gulag.The optics are bad because REPUBLICANS refused to allow for a bipartisan non-lawmaker commission.
It's like a pyromaniac complaining that the fire department was unable to put out a fire HE set. In other words a bad faith argument.
It's a joke based in a lie they know is a lie. Same as Russian Collusion. Obama, Clinton and Biden should be in jail for that bit of treason but they will only see justice when they are thrown in to Hell on Judgment Day.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…
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…
