Who shall investigate the investigators (a J6 committee update)!

[struth]

Link to the report from the ethics committee please.

I don’t have the report, Shifty referred him there, they reviewed and didn’t refer him to the DOJ

 

[Marener]

Jim Jordan was never actually referred to the DOJ because the house ethics committee found he wasn’t contemptuous

Still waiting on a link to that report.

 

[Marener]

I don’t have the report

So you made it up. Gotcha.

 

[Mac1958]

And the latest thread attempting to downplay the Insurrection.

Every few days. All these years later.

 

[struth]

So you made it up. Gotcha.

No he was referred to the house ethics committee

The fact you are grossly uninformed on this isn’t a surprise

 

[struth]

And the latest thread attempting to downplay the Insurrection.

Every few days. All these years later.

Just the opposite this is about investigating folks that attempted to engage in crimes against the United States

 

[Marener]

No he was referred to the house ethics committee

The fact you are grossly uninformed on this isn’t a surprise

Where did the ethics committee say he did nothing wrong?

 

[alang1216]

a pardon doesn't erase a crime, the crime still happned. It's just an acceptance of guilt, and forgivness from the executive for the crime.

you don't get pardoned for not committing a crime....how illogical is that???

On reflection I think you're right. The pardon was to head off any DoJ lawfare.

 

[struth]

Where did the ethics committee say he did nothing wrong?

Where did they refer him to the DOJ?

There is your answer

 

[struth]

On reflection I think you're right. The pardon was to head off any DoJ lawfare.

Prosecuting crimes against the United States is lawfare?? What in the world??

 

[Marener]

Where did they refer him to the DOJ?

There is your answer

So they didn’t “say” anything. Right?

 

[martybegan]

So Congress could have asked the executive to arrest Jim Jordan?

I doubt it.

That is a question of could or should. And there is a difference between arrest and compelling attendance.

 

[Marener]

Prosecuting crimes against the United States is lawfare?? What in the world??

MAGA world.

That is a question of could or should. And there is a difference between arrest and compelling attendance.

Subpoenas go well beyond attending, and are basically unenforceable absent the willingness to arrest or prosecute someone.

 

[struth]

So they didn’t “say” anything. Right?

Yes they said something but not referring him to the DOJ

 

[alang1216]

Those elected by voters who clearly broke laws deserve to be investigated.

If there is any evidence of a crime, for sure. Otherwise it is a fishing expedition.

 

[struth]

MAGA world.

Subpoenas go well beyond attending, and are basically unenforceable absent the willingness to arrest or prosecute someone.

Yes in MaGa world we prosecute crimes against the United States, glad you agree

This is a welcome change from xiden’s world were his DOJ and demafasict prosecuted people for crimes against the demklan

 

[Marener]

Yes they said something but not referring him to the DOJ

That’s not the meaning of the word “say”.

 

[struth]

If there is any evidence of a crime, for sure. Otherwise it is a fishing expedition.

Accepting a pardon for crimes against the United States is evidence of a crime against the United States

 

[alang1216]

Prosecuting crimes against the United States is lawfare?? What in the world??

Isn't that the word Trump used. Even after he was convicted of crimes. What crimes were committed?

 

[struth]

That’s not the meaning of the word “say”.

Sure it is, it speaks volumes