Capitol insurrection hearings.

[iceberg]

Pelosi is not following that format because, as you well know, the Republicans refused to support an independent 911 style commission. Given that, a special commission is what she is left with AND given the Republican nixing of it, why would she?

again -

Pelosi rejects Trump allies from Jan. 6 panel, casting doubt on its impartiality

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi rejected two Republicans tapped by Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy to serve on the Jan. 6 Capitol riot select committee, likely casting doubt on the impartiality of the pa…

nypost.com

pelosi flat rejected them and bypassed the very process say she SHOULD follow and accused the R's of backing out.

so - 2 links that show pelosi abused power and made an unprecedented move to block the R's from putting someone on the committee. again, tell me how this is even close to "impartial".

 

[Coyote]

always an excuse with you. you take every allowance for "your side" but refuse to give the same considerations to the other side.

I have never seen you say "your side" was wrong.

she handpicked everyone. you are cool with that.

she refuses to allow all evidence to be seen. you run to a mythical security risk of the dreaded camera placement.

This is why it's so difficult to talk to you. you are never wrong and your side does everything right and in good faith but no one else ever does.

when someone on YOUR SIDE breaks laws and doesn't follow rules you ALWAYS blame someone else.

WHAT do you not get, in your apples and oranges conflation and Pelosi-Derangement-Syndrome, that she gave EXACTLY the same consideration to the other side when she pushed for a 911 style commission, but you keep ignoring that. The Republicans made their bed when they blocked that.

As to two other statements:

Claiming she handpicked everyone is a lie. 3 of the McCarthy picks (all of whom voted against accepting the election results, ALL of whom were Trump allies) were were accepted, two rejected. All of that, by the way was in the rules, the same rules they did the Benghazi hearing with (only you had no problem with that because your side was in control then).

Second, you are saying she broke rules and laws in regards to this commission. What specific rule or law did she break?

 

[Coyote]

nancy rejected the republicans who who picked by the GOP, as illustrated by your example they have every right to do.

your post, official rules of engagement:

(4) 2 members shall be appointed by the senior member of the
leadership of the House of Representatives of the Republican
Party;
(5) 2 members shall be appointed by the senior member of the
Senate leadership of the Republican Party; and
-----
so - to be an independent investigation these are the rules we follow.

the R's named their 2, she nixed them because she didn't like what they may say, or have said in the past. SHE NIXED THEM AND WENT AROUND PROECSS. the R's didn't decide to tell her to FO, they did what process said to do.

again - SHE NIXED THEM AND WENT AROUND PROCESS. please explain why it's ok for her to do it and keep in mind that once it's allowed, the requirement is now dead and can safely be ignored by anyone. the dems seem to hate it when their precedence setting moves come back to them.

she put herself above the law of the land.

why? i have my guesses, as i'm sure you have your excuses. but PELOSI is the one who broke the rules.

period.

Hold on.

FIRST: this isn’t an independent commission, like 911, the Republicans voted against that, remember?

My choice would have been an independent commission under the rules I posted, but they can’t do that because your team killed it. So why on earth are attempting to apply rules for an independent commission to what is now a select commission? Different rules.

So what rules exactly did she go around?

Second, the two members that were rejected, were rejected, in part at least, because they are very likely going to have to testify. So how would that work if they were also on the commitee? And don’t think McCarthy did not know this.

 

[Mac1958]

Hold on.

FIRST: this isn’t an independent commission, like 911, the Republicans voted against that, remember?

My choice would have been an independent commission under the rules I posted, but they can’t do that because your team killed it. So why on earth are attempting to apply rules for an independent commission to what is now a select commission? Different rules.

So what rules exactly did she go around?

Second, the two members that were rejected, were rejected, in part at least, because they are very likely going to have to testify. So how would that work if they were also on the commitee? And don’t think McCarthy did not know this.

I've run into quite a few of them who didn't know that the Republicans backed out before, after getting what they wanted.

That's how tightly controlled the information in the alternate universe is.

 

[iceberg]

WHAT do you not get, in your apples and oranges conflation and Pelosi-Derangement-Syndrome, that she gave EXACTLY the same consideration to the other side when she pushed for a 911 style commission, but you keep ignoring that. The Republicans made their bed when they blocked that.

As to two other statements:

Claiming she handpicked everyone is a lie. 3 of the McCarthy picks (all of whom voted against accepting the election results, ALL of whom were Trump allies) were were accepted, two rejected. All of that, by the way was in the rules, the same rules they did the Benghazi hearing with (only you had no problem with that because your side was in control then).

Second, you are saying she broke rules and laws in regards to this commission. What specific rule or law did she break?

I asked you if she followed the format. you said no.

Capitol insurrection hearings.

Man, are you triggered or what? You might want to take a moment to wipe the froth from your chin and clean off your keyboard. I will wait for you to do that, and then maybe you can explain how a riot that injured over 140 police and caused millions in damage was a peaceful protest. Here is a...

www.usmessageboard.com

I show you where what she did is unprecedented by her own admission.

you bypass all of that to call me a liar (something I do NOT do to you when we disagree) and then excuse her actions.

I have never once in my life seen you say someone on "your side" is wrong without you putting a disclaimer on why they HAD to be wrong cause someone made them.

now yes she did reject these 2. but her reasons why are vague and not defined. disqualifying statements made by these 2 has yet to be clarified.

what did they say and why does SHE get to determine who is honest and who isn't?

 

[Coyote]

again -

Pelosi rejects Trump allies from Jan. 6 panel, casting doubt on its impartiality

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi rejected two Republicans tapped by Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy to serve on the Jan. 6 Capitol riot select committee, likely casting doubt on the impartiality of the pa…

nypost.com

pelosi flat rejected them and bypassed the very process say she SHOULD follow and accused the R's of backing out.

so - 2 links that show pelosi abused power and made an unprecedented move to block the R's from putting someone on the committee. again, tell me how this is even close to "impartial".

I think some of this, I answered when I responded to your earlier posts. The fact that it is a select committee now means it likely won’t be impartial (just as Benghazi wasn’t), so why did you nix the independent commission, which WOULD have been?

I don’t see her as abusing power. She accepted three of McCarthy’s picks, and added two Republicans. She’s trying to prevent it from becoming a mockery. It IS playing politics, they both are, but then (rolling eyes) we COULD have had an indendent commission.

 

[iceberg]

I think some of this, I answered when I responded to your earlier posts. The fact that it is a select committee now means it likely won’t be impartial (just as Benghazi wasn’t), so why did you mix the independent commission, which WOULD have been?

I don’t see her as abusing power. She accepted three of McCarthy’s picks, and added two Republicans. She’s trying to prevent it from becoming a mockery. It IS playing politics, they both are, but then (rolling eyes) we COULD have had an indendent commission.

given many feel it is a mockery and Support is dropping for it by the day, she failed.

in. my mind, in order to be independent she isn't involved either.

then again she won't allow people to see all the available video. no I dont agree with security risk with no specific reason to verify thst.

 

[Coyote]

I asked you if she followed the format. you said no.

Capitol insurrection hearings.

Man, are you triggered or what? You might want to take a moment to wipe the froth from your chin and clean off your keyboard. I will wait for you to do that, and then maybe you can explain how a riot that injured over 140 police and caused millions in damage was a peaceful protest. Here is a...

www.usmessageboard.com

I show you where what she did is unprecedented by her own admission.

Unprecedented, but also within the rules.

you bypass all of that to call me a liar (something I do NOT do to you when we disagree) and then excuse her actions.

You call me other things. I am not excusing anything, I am pointing out three things you keep glossing over:

1. This is not an independent commission.
2. It IS going to be a political process in part at least, but will hopefully get to the bottom of this.
3. If you wanted a truly impartial investigation you should not have rejected an independent commission. Now you are stuck with Pelosi and her commission. I have no sympathy for the Republican whining because they created this situation.

You go on and on about me never blaming my side, well, why aren’t YOU blaming any of this on the Republicans? They rejected an independent commission. McCarthy provocativeLy pickEd two that he had to know would be rejected. He’s playing politics, she’s playing politics. The Republicans played politics when they reject the independent commission. They lost the political gamble. Now they are whining.

I have never once in my life seen you say someone on "your side" is wrong without you putting a disclaimer on why they HAD to be wrong cause someone made them.

now yes she did reject these 2. but her reasons why are vague and not defined. disqualifying statements made by these 2 has yet to be clarified.

what did they say and why does SHE get to determine who is honest and who isn't?

 

[iceberg]

Unprecedented, but also within the rules.




You call me other things. I am not excusing anything, I am pointing out three things you keep glossing over:

1. This is not an independent commission.
2. It IS going to be a political process in part at least, but will hopefully get to the bottom of this.
3. If you wanted a truly impartial investigation you should not have rejected an independent commission. Now you are stuck with Pelosi and her commission. I have no sympathy for the Republican whining because they created this situation.

You go on and on about me never blaming my side, well, why aren’t YOU blaming any of this on the Republicans? They rejected an independent commission. McCarthy provocativeLy pickEd two that he had to know would be rejected. He’s playing politics, she’s playing politics. The Republicans played politics when they reject the independent commission. They lost the political gamble. Now they are whining.

from what I understand, it wasn't as independent as we are led to believe.

Home | Sara A. Carter

Taking Back The Story

saraacarter.com

8 dems, 5 repubs. is this your idea of fair and independent?

you cant blame the Rs until you at least list WHY they blocked it.

so, why? honest articles on this are hard to find in mainstream because they don't say WHY just that they are evil.

for the record, I am not a fan of the hype/emotion Sara has put into her article but at least she does give 1 reason why the Rs didn't play.

so, why didn't they go along with the "ondependt" one? did they start off at 8 to 5 and at a disadvantage or not?

 

[colfax_m]

8 dems, 5 repubs. is this your idea of fair and independent?

They should have voted for the resolution to set up a 9/11 style commission.

The Benghazi select committee was 7 Republicans and 5 Democrats. The 5 Democrats had basically no power since the chair could do about anything they wanted and could vote down any motion by the Democrats.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

pelosi flat rejected them and bypassed the very process say she SHOULD follow and accused the R's of backing out.

Good.

 

[lantern2814]

translation: Lantern made an accusation that he cannot factually back up, so he tries to bluff.
Lantern needs to realize that in a debate when you make an statement, the burden of proof is on YOU, not the person you accuse. Since Lantern can't back up what he says, repeating his statement makes him a liar. And the band plays on.

Hey asshole, it’s been backed up multiple times. Your laziness is not my problem. Since you’re a sheep who can’t perform critical thought, like Coyote and oh every leftard here, you ignore facts and cry about the source because you can’t refute the story. Now, calling the BLM riots “minor” and claiming they were treated so harshly by being released with no charges, then blaming the feds for YOUR side’s violence pretty well proves my point. Not that a leftard like you ever accepts proof anyway. So YOU are now proven as the liar. Run along now little boy.

 

[lantern2814]

View attachment 519071

special kind of stupid

Well, since you people claimed that right wingers disguised themselves as BLM protestors and you blamed them for all YOUR violence, it seems you, Coyote, and IQof2 are a special kind of stupid.

 

[lantern2814]

Uh, you are the ones who kept supporting Trump after he killed half a million people.



Sure.
His immigration policy, which was inhumane
His tax policies, that put us 8 Trillion deeper in debt.
His Covid Policy, that killed half a million people
His trade policy, that not only bankrupted farmers but actually INCREASED our deficit with China. We are still trying to fix all the supply chains he fucked up.


Yes, Cleetus, we know you wrap yourself in your Confederate flag and cuddle up to your statue of Robert E. Lee and say, "What Racism"?



None of them failed as badly as Trump did. It's how we had 4% of the world's population and 20% of the Covid Deaths.


Actually, you guys completely lost your shit when Obama became president. It's how we got Trump. You picked him over 16 other more reasonable candidates because he was willing to say his racism openly.



No, I'm a realist, who went to work every day and talked to counterparts in dozens of other countries. Last job I had before i started my own business, I was dealing with vendors and customers in Canada, Vietnam, Korea, Taiwan, the Czech Republic, Mexico, Malaysia, etc. The idea we can shut ourselves off from the rest of the world is just... silly.




If there was really something to investigate, Trump could have ordered Barr to do it without trying to shake down Zelensky.

The idea was never to find any "wrongdoing", it was to tarnish Biden by having a supposedly neutral third party investigate Hunter.

And I guess you can see why Trump was so afraid of Biden.. Biden mopped the floor with him.

What. A. Huge. Pile. Of. Shit. Repeating the lies like a good parrot. Polly want a cracker now?

 

[lantern2814]

Care to make an argument, traitor boy? I know that I'm far more intelligent than any Trumpoid Qtip fascist.

Care to discuss any policy? No, like an angry 8th-grade boy on his way to the office, you just sputter insults.

Move to Russia, traitor. We decent folks don't want you here. Or... just go lick some doorknobs in a "red" area... catch yourself a real good case of Delta, and do your country a favor.

What are you 5? Does mommy know you’re using her computer?

 

[lantern2814]

nancy rejected the republicans who who picked by the GOP, as illustrated by your example they have every right to do.

your post, official rules of engagement:

(4) 2 members shall be appointed by the senior member of the
leadership of the House of Representatives of the Republican
Party;
(5) 2 members shall be appointed by the senior member of the
Senate leadership of the Republican Party; and
-----
so - to be an independent investigation these are the rules we follow.

the R's named their 2, she nixed them because she didn't like what they may say, or have said in the past. SHE NIXED THEM AND WENT AROUND PROECSS. the R's didn't decide to tell her to FO, they did what process said to do.

again - SHE NIXED THEM AND WENT AROUND PROCESS. please explain why it's ok for her to do it and keep in mind that once it's allowed, the requirement is now dead and can safely be ignored by anyone. the dems seem to hate it when their precedence setting moves come back to them.

she put herself above the law of the land.

why? i have my guesses, as i'm sure you have your excuses. but PELOSI is the one who broke the rules.

period.

That’s why there have been thoughts of using a legal Congressional maneuver to remove Pelosi as speaker. It likely wouldn’t get through, but the people look like they’re going to remove her in 2022 by giving Republicans the House. Also explains why police departments around the country are calling the fact that these 4 cops participated in this clown show a sad day for law enforcement.

 

[lantern2814]

WHAT do you not get, in your apples and oranges conflation and Pelosi-Derangement-Syndrome, that she gave EXACTLY the same consideration to the other side when she pushed for a 911 style commission, but you keep ignoring that. The Republicans made their bed when they blocked that.

As to two other statements:

Claiming she handpicked everyone is a lie. 3 of the McCarthy picks (all of whom voted against accepting the election results, ALL of whom were Trump allies) were were accepted, two rejected. All of that, by the way was in the rules, the same rules they did the Benghazi hearing with (only you had no problem with that because your side was in control then).

Second, you are saying she broke rules and laws in regards to this commission. What specific rule or law did she break?

Read his post. It spells it out for you. But in your partisan mind, Pelosi does no wrong. Pelosi DID reject McCarthy’s LEGALLY appointed people. Violating the laws and rules surrounding this clown show. And you applaud.

 

[lantern2814]

Hold on.

FIRST: this isn’t an independent commission, like 911, the Republicans voted against that, remember?

My choice would have been an independent commission under the rules I posted, but they can’t do that because your team killed it. So why on earth are attempting to apply rules for an independent commission to what is now a select commission? Different rules.

So what rules exactly did she go around?

Second, the two members that were rejected, were rejected, in part at least, because they are very likely going to have to testify. So how would that work if they were also on the commitee? And don’t think McCarthy did not know this.

TIme to inject reality. That thing you don’t like. Pelosi is a fact witness yet you are fine with her being in charge of this clown show. Oh wait, her hand picked people will NEVER allow her to be questioned. Convenient.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

What. A. Huge. Pile. Of. Shit. Repeating the lies like a good parrot. Polly want a cracker now?

Pelosi is a fact witness yet you are fine with her being in charge of this clown show.

No she isn't. Sorry. Once again reality just does not align with your cult fantasies. Aren't you getting used to that, yet?

 

[lantern2814]

No she isn't. Sorry. Once again reality just does not align with your cult fantasies. Aren't you getting used to that, yet?

Yes she would be. Reality hurts you doesn’t it? The former Capitol police chief (who Pelosi had fired) has revealed that she refused security 6 times, including at 1:30pm the afternoon of Jan.6. Making her a fact witness. Yes’m, I am getting used to making you look like a fool. Not that it’s very difficult.