Capitol insurrection hearings.

[MadChemist]

repeating your blather won't make it any more plausible. You MAGA minions keep trying to infer, insinuate because you no longer have the cojones to make a declarative statement unless you think you have the upper hand. Your like minded brethren thought they did, and now are on the FBI/NSA hit list.

You said what you said....now you want to wuss out to the implications there of. You can't don't play or diminish Jan. 6th and all it's consequences without looking as preposterous as Trump in his public denials . But like your god Cheeto Jeezus, you'll never concede a point or admit to anything. Calling me a moron is mere subconscious projection on your part. Now, run-a-long, repeat yorself and declare victory. The objective, rational reader sees your folly. Carry on.

And your BS isn't really smelling any better.

You keep making statements about things that are not there. IOW you make stuff up.

You are a moron. And now you are a plagerizing moron.

What victory ? I see no value in showing you up or anything else. It's like fighting a two year old.

When I hear from a rational objective reader, I'll let you know.

 

[MadChemist]

Video records by the rioters themselves make your regurgitated blather even more ridiculous. Keep it up....your a perfect example of what a piss poor propagandist you Maga minions are.

I get that you can't get past your own need to see yourself as "right".

There are others who suffer the same problem.

Especially when they, like you, are wrong almost all the time.

No insurrection is going to have video like they have.

 

[TheDefiantOne]

And your BS isn't really smelling any better.

You keep making statements about things that are not there. IOW you make stuff up.

You are a moron. And now you are a plagerizing moron.

What victory ? I see no value in showing you up or anything else. It's like fighting a two year old.

When I hear from a rational objective reader, I'll let you know.

As the reader can see, this joker is living up to his screen name. The chronology of the posts makes him a more ridiculous liar with each of his responses. That's the problem with these intellectually impotent Maga minions, once properly challenged, they just deteriorate and throw hissy fits. No point in giving this joker the attention he craves. He's done.

 

[TheDefiantOne]

I get that you can't get past your own need to see yourself as "right".

There are others who suffer the same problem.

Especially when they, like you, are wrong almost all the time.

No insurrection is going to have video like they have.

Notice, dear readers, the Maga minion mindset.......he doesn't DARE address the FACT that the yahoos on Jan. 6th video recorded their actions...and indirectly documented the actions that justified the shooting of Babbitt. so he just babbles personal attacks, revisionism, supposition and conjecture.

Once I've reduced these jokers to this level, I just dump them in the IA bin and watch them nip at my heels for a month or so.

 

[TheDefiantOne]

I get that you can't get past your own need to see yourself as "right".

There are others who suffer the same problem.

Especially when they, like you, are wrong almost all the time.

No insurrection is going to have video like they have.

Ahh, the Maga mindset......they create their own definitions and determinations despite the physical evidence to the contrary. In this case broadcasted by every major, minor and independent media format. The sheer stupidity of such an attitude by our Mad Maga Chemist plain for all to see. He's done, and I'm done wasting anymore time on him.

 

[Lakhota]

 

[MadChemist]

As the reader can see, this joker is living up to his screen name. The chronology of the posts makes him a more ridiculous liar with each of his responses. That's the problem with these intellectually impotent Maga minions, once properly challenged, they just deteriorate and throw hissy fits. No point in giving this joker the attention he craves. He's done.

How funny.

I thought you were going to try and do something serious and this is what we get.

You have no case to make yet you hang on to your little fairytale all the while acting like you really do have something to add.

The irony of the above post would be somewhat comical if it wasn't so sad.

 

[MadChemist]

Notice, dear readers, the Maga minion mindset.......he doesn't DARE address the FACT that the yahoos on Jan. 6th video recorded their actions...and indirectly documented the actions that justified the shooting of Babbitt. so he just babbles personal attacks, revisionism, supposition and conjecture.

Once I've reduced these jokers to this level, I just dump them in the IA bin and watch them nip at my heels for a month or so.

No, there is nothing in their videos that justify her shooting. We've said that from the start.

What part of that don't you understand.

Oh...wait....you really don't understand much of anything.

 

[MadChemist]

Ahh, the Maga mindset......they create their own definitions and determinations despite the physical evidence to the contrary. In this case broadcasted by every major, minor and independent media format. The sheer stupidity of such an attitude by our Mad Maga Chemist plain for all to see. He's done, and I'm done wasting anymore time on him.

Still chanting ?

Mr. Alisky would be proud.

"He's done". How totally funny.

You are not done. You never got started.

Let's see if you can keep to your word this time.

Try not to respond.

Asswipe.

 

[TheDefiantOne]

The 2nd link was about the Senate being able to call witnesses, that is just NOT how it works.
The House first acts to collect all the evidence, including calling all the witnesses.
Then the transcripts all go to the Senate for judgement.
The Senate never gets to call its own witnesses.
That just is not how it works.

Your revisionism in light of the documented facts is absurd. Essentially, your trying to rework moot points to deny what has actually happened. If what you say is true, then there would be article about McConnell.
Yet there is.
Schumer has yet to immulate what McConnell and company have done....and the MAGA message is always about Pelosi, but ignores the Turtle's antics.
But not here, not today.

 

[TheDefiantOne]

That said exactly what I said, that the police can only use deadly force against a deadly weapon attack, with addition of the allowance for use of deadly force to prevent the escape of someone has attempted or likely to attempt to use deadly force to harm others.

Police can not possibly ever have more authority than anyone, because we are who they get their authority from, not government.
Government is never a source of authority, but are just hired help.

You're making sense....you acknowledge the legal authority and then you throw in some revisionist clap trap to try and nullify the very rule you agree with.

The cops on the scened determined by her actions and the actions of her cohorts that Babbitt intended imminent use of deadly physical force when she broke through that barrier. She attempted to commit a felony involving the infliction or threat of serious physical injury to the Senators behind that barrier and was given warning by the cops outside and the security inside their intent to use deadly physical force to stop her.
Babbitt's actions got her killed, and the cops were (as you acknowledged) following legal rules to stop her in a riotous situation.
A matter of fact, a matter of history and a matter of law whether you like it or not.

 

[Coyote]

It was explained in the article.

You keep saying the evil repubs did all this, I'm asking why.

I think you are confused. Your article referenced Pelosi’s Select Committee. NOT the original plan for the 911 style Independent Committee. Two DIFFERENT things.

The original plan, agreed to by the Republicans, was an Independent Committee, like 911, using the selection process and rules I posted earlier.

THEN the Republicans changed their minds and voted against it. That then led to Pelosi having to resort to a Select Committee instead.

So again, I will ask: why did the Republicans veto that Independent Committee Which would have given them everything they are complaining about not having in the Select Committee?

 

[OKTexas]

I think you are confused. Your article referenced Pelosi’s Select Committee. NOT the original plan for the 911 style Independent Committee. Two DIFFERENT things.

The original plan, agreed to by the Republicans, was an Independent Committee, like 911, using the selection process and rules I posted earlier.

THEN the Republicans changed their minds and voted against it. That then led to Pelosi having to resort to a Select Committee instead.

So again, I will ask: why did the Republicans veto that Independent Committee Which would have given them everything they are complaining about not having in the Select Committee?

They didn't, they voted against an "Independent Commission" because they saw the writing on the wall. It wasn't going to be any more bipartisan than palouseys scripted production.

.

 

[Coyote]

They didn't, they voted against an "Independent Commission" because they saw the writing on the wall. It wasn't going to be any more bipartisan than palouseys scripted production.

.

And you know this, how? What were the rules going to be? How were people going to be selected? How many of each party?

Text - H.R.3233 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): National Commission to Investigate the January 6 Attack on the United States Capitol Complex Act

Text for H.R.3233 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): National Commission to Investigate the January 6 Attack on the United States Capitol Complex Act

www.congress.gov

SEC. 5. COMPOSITION OF COMMISSION.

(a) Members.—The Commission shall be composed of ten members, of whom—
(1) one member shall be appointed jointly by the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the majority leader of the Senate to serve as Chairperson of the Commission;
(2) one member shall be appointed jointly by the minority leader of the House of Representatives and the minority leader of the Senate to serve as Vice Chairperson of the Commission;
(3) two members shall be appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives;
(4) two members shall be appointed by the minority leader of the House of Representatives;
(5) two members shall be appointed by the majority leader of the Senate; and
(6) two members shall be appointed by the minority leader of the Senate.

 

[Lakhota]

You're making sense....you acknowledge the legal authority and then you throw in some revisionist clap trap to try and nullify the very rule you agree with.

The cops on the scened determined by her actions and the actions of her cohorts that Babbitt intended imminent use of deadly physical force when she broke through that barrier. She attempted to commit a felony involving the infliction or threat of serious physical injury to the Senators behind that barrier and was given warning by the cops outside and the security inside their intent to use deadly physical force to stop her.
Babbitt's actions got her killed, and the cops were (as you acknowledged) following legal rules to stop her in a riotous situation.
A matter of fact, a matter of history and a matter of law whether you like it or not.

Amen! Terrorism has consequences! Babbitt was a terrorist involved in an insurrection to overthrow a presidential election. Trump and her own stupidity got her killed.

 

[OKTexas]

And you know this, how? What were the rules going to be? How were people going to be selected? How many of each party?

Text - H.R.3233 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): National Commission to Investigate the January 6 Attack on the United States Capitol Complex Act

Text for H.R.3233 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): National Commission to Investigate the January 6 Attack on the United States Capitol Complex Act

www.congress.gov

SEC. 5. COMPOSITION OF COMMISSION.

(a) Members.—The Commission shall be composed of ten members, of whom—
(1) one member shall be appointed jointly by the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the majority leader of the Senate to serve as Chairperson of the Commission;
(2) one member shall be appointed jointly by the minority leader of the House of Representatives and the minority leader of the Senate to serve as Vice Chairperson of the Commission;
(3) two members shall be appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives;
(4) two members shall be appointed by the minority leader of the House of Representatives;
(5) two members shall be appointed by the majority leader of the Senate; and
(6) two members shall be appointed by the minority leader of the Senate.

Oh right, like palousey allowed the minority leaders to chose their own people. Name one commie "investigation", in the last 3 years, that didn't start with a predetermined outcome.

.

 

[OKTexas]

Amen! Terrorism has consequences! Babbitt was a terrorist involved in an insurrection to overthrow a presidential election. Trump and her own stupidity got her killed.

Funny, bill ayres was involved in bombing the capitol twice, why aren't you advocating his execution?

.

 

[Lakhota]

 

[iceberg]

I think you are confused. Your article referenced Pelosi’s Select Committee. NOT the original plan for the 911 style Independent Committee. Two DIFFERENT things.

The original plan, agreed to by the Republicans, was an Independent Committee, like 911, using the selection process and rules I posted earlier.

THEN the Republicans changed their minds and voted against it. That then led to Pelosi having to resort to a Select Committee instead.

So again, I will ask: why did the Republicans veto that Independent Committee Which would have given them everything they are complaining about not having in the Select Committee?

regardless of the "commission" in question, WHY has been my question from the start. WHY did they oppose it? (and i've looked. unfortunately most media outlets simply say they do but not WHY they do)

WHY do we have so many "independent" commissions on this?

WHY are we not holding ALL violence to this same standard?

oddly enough, zero big boy media outlets are asking this one simple question. They simply paint their stories up to make the other side look bad and insert emotions and insults where facts should be.

as a journalism minor from college days, it pains me greatly to see our "news' sources become political advocates instead. this isn't news, unbiased, or the truth anymore. EITHER SIDE.

but i keep looking and have found a few WHY's -

January 6 commission - Wikipedia - starting point and using their references to find what few articles i can that dig into it.

best article i can find:

Why A '9/11 Commission' Is Popular But May Not Happen For The Jan. 6 Capitol Attack

Republicans are resisting the formation of an independent commission to look into the Jan. 6 invasion of the U.S. Capitol. A key exchange from the 9/11 Commission investigation helps explain why.

www.npr.org

part 1:
Republicans have argued that two Senate committees are already looking at the events of Jan. 6, as House panels have done as well. The Justice Department is pursuing cases against hundreds of individuals who were involved. Former President Donald Trump and others have said any commission ought to also be tasked to look at street protests and violence that took place in the aftermath of the police killing of George Floyd.

part 2:
But support in Congress has since become a partisan affair, despite the efforts of Rep. John Katko, a Republican of New York, who was tasked with negotiating details with Democratic Rep. Bennie Thompson of Mississippi. Katko reported back success on his demands to House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif. The initial proposal for a 7-3 Democratic majority and superior subpoena powers for the Democratic chairman had been negotiated to a 10-member body split evenly between Democrats and Republicans with shared staff and subpoena powers along the 9/11 model.

so - initially it was 70% democrat. interesting. not exactly starting of bipartisan as we're lead to believe, now is it?

part 3:
Those who wonder why Republicans today are resisting the creation of a new independent commission to investigate the Jan. 6 invasion of the U.S. Capitol might review the tape of that moment in 2004 for a potential insight. That's because the new commission plan has been advertised as being modeled on the 9/11 Commission, and Republicans have long memories.

seems everything got twisted up and "rephrased" by democrats to be an attack, not a truth. so when they got named the 9/11 style commission, they went back and remembered what was done then.

doesn't appear to be pretty.

but there we go. here are the reasons for balking and saying no. it didn't start out as bipartisan, certainly can't with a 7 Dem 3 Repub board (hope we can agree on that) and these days seems everything is reworded and the media who loves to stir shit up to get clicks, paves the way.

everyone is a nazi. everyone is a racist. everyone practices micro aggressions on others. EVERYTHING these days is made an extreme and we're told to fear it and ONLY THEY can save us. only - they can't save themselves. the vast majority of us are living in a shit bucket because our leadership can't work together and tells the rest of us to FIGHT OR DIE.

again, quite extreme.

so to recap, the bipartisan 9/11 style commission brought back the activities of the past and there is zero trust from one side to the other. if i believe you are setting me up, will i trust you? would you trust a 7 Repub 3 Dem commission to review election results and say "what really happened"?

from what i know of you - no. you would not. know what? i would not either. whatever is keeping us from regaining that trust and working together *is* the problem today. til we fix that, who's doing what commission and who's todays nazi is meaningless and were we will stay.

how we go from here us on us, but it's quite clear the reasons for not participating are many; top ones including total lack of trust based off historical review and references; and we already had several going on.

 

[woodwork201]

First of, thank you for agreeing that force is not how we dispute election outcomes.

Having said that, I want to point out a few things. The legitimacy of the outcome of an election is decided by... well its outcome. Any challenges to that outcome are put forwards to the courts, after which a judge rules on those challenges, after that the election outcomes are certified. These steps have happened.

You can not both claim that you want to protect the constitution, and then claim the president appointed by the process in that constitution lacks legitimacy. It is a contradiction in terms.

I will also tell you why it matters. By claiming that Biden is illegitimate you are giving a justification for those who believe the same to try to remedy the situation by any means available. It leads to people like Bear thinking violence is perfectly valid.
Or to make it less hypothetical, it leads to lawmakers in Georgia voting laws that allows the state houses wich are by definition partisan and NOT the election boards which are bipartisan the power to certify the election. It also gives those lawmakers political cover to simply claim like you just did, an election illegitimate and refuse to certify a result. Thereby destroying the entire concept of free and fair elections.

The process is legitimate. That legitimate process was not followed. Secretaries of State changed election laws in multiple states, violating the Constitution. One could argue that a state has a right to certify an election that has fraudulent votes - even a large number of fraudulent votes, but only the legislature can alter the law, meaning that those certifications were unconstitutional. They did not follow the process.