How much of the Jan 6 Hearings do you expect you'll watch?

[Mreader]

I was out of the country for most but damn. I wish I had seen all. Tonight’s is RIVETING. Omg. Even the Fox News personalities were texting Meadows to tell the president to call off the rioters. Incredible. Also incredible how much the “followers” listen to the 45. Just wow. Sadly the “followers” won’t watch.

 

[Mreader]

it was bleeped out on what I'm watching

They didn’t bleep in Nashville! Haha surprising

 

[Mreader]

Carefully selected clips and practiced answers to make it look the way they want it to look.
After saying no I was not going to watch it, I did watch most of it.

Wow. Um. Wow.

 

[Lookinagain]

They didn’t bleep in Nashville! Haha surprising

And I'm in the liberal north, and it was. Hah!

 

[kenny]

Whew!
Wow!
WTF?!?

 

[Karl_K]

Wow. Um. Wow.

Since you drug me back into this...
I do not want to see any past or current president reelected.
However in my opinion these hearings are playing out as were going to get you aimed at one person rather than any sort of legitimate investigation.
It is also being staged for tv in an attempt to harm political opponents and that is abuse of office.

 

[ItsMainelyYou]

I thought the most interesting development was that an unwitting admission was written and released as these hearings were going on tonight.
Which was of course immediately entered to J6 committee as further evidence.


Oops.

 

[Mreader]

I thought the most interesting development was that an unwitting admission was written and released as these hearings were going on tonight.
Which was of course immediately entered to J6 committee as further evidence.


Oops.

What are you referring to?

 

[seaurchin]

Since you drug me back into this...
I do not want to see any past or current president reelected.
However in my opinion these hearings are playing out as were going to get you aimed at one person rather than any sort of legitimate investigation.
It is also being staged for tv in an attempt to harm political opponents and that is abuse of office.

To be fair, you put yourself into it by making several comments before it even started airing and after only watching a small piece of it. So imo it's fair enough for people to respond.

Any investigation will focus on those who are suspected of wrongdoing. They are not and should not be immune simply because they belong to any particular party. That alone does not automatically equal it being a "witch hunt" as you called it or staged for political purposes or not a legitimate investigation.

If you had actually watched the many hours of Jan. 6 hearings that have been shown, you'd see that those questioned are ALL either high level Republicans who worked closely with the person accused of trying to overthrow our election and, therefore, our democracy--- your democracy too, not only belonging to one side. OR ALSO close family of the "victim of the witch hunt" who were also directly involved. OR police officers and others who were actually there, with most of those also having been Republicans on the side of the accused.

Some of those serving on the Jan. 6 committee are also high level Republicans. Of course, any who are suspected, with evidence, of having actually supported or participated in the attempted coup were not allowed to serve on the committee. Some have tried to turn that around as being unfair, which is obviously ridiculous.

There comes a point, Karl, where the sheer NUMBERS of people who were firmly on the side of the accused, then came forward, ALL saying the same things, combined with video footage, taped phone calls, and documentation, that your assertions become not only ignorant (since being stated without even watching the hearings) and incorrect but actually ludicrous imo.

I don't think you can tell me I'm wrong here, if you consider my post fairly. Or at least maybe it will help someone else see the truth of it.

 

[seaurchin]

I thought the most interesting development was that an unwitting admission was written and released as these hearings were going on tonight.
Which was of course immediately entered to J6 committee as further evidence.


Oops.

I want to know too!

 

[Karl_K]

To be fair, you put yourself into it by making several comments before it even started airing and after only watching a small piece of it. So imo it's fair enough for people to respond.
never said it was unfair



Some of those serving on the Jan. 6 committee are also high level Republicans.
no they are not, they are democrats in anything but name and always have been.
that your assertions become not only ignorant
tsk tsk

I don't think you can tell me I'm wrong here, if you consider my post fairly. Or at least maybe it will help someone else see the truth of it.
ok, I see, next time I want the truth I will shut off my brain and ask you

 

[kenny]

Seaurchin please don't use the term ignorant when talking to or about Karl.
Please find less inflammatory language.

He's one of the few on that side of the aisle who speaks up here.
I would not want for this good guy to be driven away.

Karl and I may not agree on poly tics, but I like him tons and I prefer hanging out with a diverse crowd.

Thanks.

 

[ItsMainelyYou]

It's not really new.
He released a flurry of 'Truths' on Truth Social, essentially committing in written word that he wanted VP to overturn election. Part of what was slippery is that he's never actually written any of that down. He stated it several times, but never written.
The whole point of these hearings is to determine 'What did he know and when did he know it'. He had plausible deniability(not really but legally) before, or the 'idiot defense'. This is part and parcel of his coordination to coup.

 

[ItsMainelyYou]

@Karl_K
I want to make an appeal.
I know we don't agree on some things- but I've always respected you and listened during our debates.
This really is different. This isn't a legal trial, though the evidence surpasses legal requirements.
The J6 committee are from both parties. Cheney and Kinzinger are most certainly Republican and they're running this hearing.

The fact is Republicans chose not to include more participants in the hearings.
They chose not to.
Why? Because they have no defense. They know he's guilty and many of them are now found to be co-conspirators or accessories themselves.
Most of the evidence comes from his own cabinet. Former White House officials. His own officials. It's all recorded.
The witnesses are Republican White House officials and Trump voters- his own people.
They all say the same thing.
All of them.
This was an attempted coup.
It's way more serious than policy disagreement. It's not a team thing.
I will always respond as an American, first.
It's an American thing. Listen as an American.

GOP lawmakers are who are calling for him to be prosecuted.

I'm not ever going to tell you what to believe, but for yourself, and for your country, keep listening.

 

[Gussie]

@Karl_K, I love different points of view and I do respect your opinion. But if Liz Cheney is a Democrat, I'm the Queen of England. Show me the tiaras!

 

[Karl_K]

@Karl_K, I love different points of view and I do respect your opinion. But if Liz Cheney is a Democrat, I'm the Queen of England. Show me the tiaras!

Thank you and I respect your opinion.
2 points...
She is being funded by democrats in her primary.
Democrats are trying to deny Republicans their choice of candidates by registering as Republicans to vote for her in the primary.
That makes her a Democrat no actually it makes her something much worse.
That said agree or disagree, here is tiara for you!

 

[Karl_K]

keep listening.

ok
Here is tiara for you also!

 

[ItsMainelyYou]

That's all I can ask. Keep listening.
Donors from other parties for candidates used to be the norm, @Karl_K .
Political parties used to work together.
People used to vote for representation on issues they believed/supported, not the letter after their name.
Only after her voluntary involvement in J6 and more to the point- that's not the crime or condemnation of her that you think it is.
She put herself and her career at great risk to tell the truth.
She did it anyway, despite the threats and loss of donors.
For America. Like a true patriot would.
I may not agree with her positions but g*ddamn, I admire her bravery.
The over 1000 witnesses so far working with the hearing did the same.
I would think you'd be proud, isn't that what you purport to stand for?
Ideals, freedoms and fair elections, or is it just power at the expense of our Democracy, our Constitutional Republic? Because that is the only question.
Most Republicans admire her for that. History certainly will.

* Thank you, the tiara is beautiful.

 

[Lookinagain]

Liz Cheney and I are worlds apart on the issues, but I admire her integrity and guts to go against her party for the sake of upholding the constitution.

 

[MissGotRocks]

Liz Cheney and I are worlds apart on the issues, but I admire her integrity and guts to go against her party for the sake of upholding the constitution.

This is the place where we all need to be - individuals first, party second when making our choices and decisions.

 

[Demon]

She is being funded by democrats in her primary.
Democrats are trying to deny Republicans their choice of candidates by registering as Republicans to vote for her in the primary.
That makes her a Democrat no actually it makes her something much worse.

How does democrats switching parties make Cheney "something worse than a democrat" (whatever that means)?

 

[Demon]

This is the place where we all need to be - individuals first, party second when making our choices and decisions.

It would be so nice if it worked that way. But with the partisanship (and yes, I am very partisan) you don't get the candidate - you get the party. When it comes time to vote, it isn't very often that the candidate goes against the party.

 

[MissGotRocks]

It would be so nice if it worked that way. But with the partisanship (and yes, I am very partisan) you don't get the candidate - you get the party. When it comes time to vote, it isn't very often that the candidate goes against the party.

Isn’t it so sad though that it must work this way? Choosing a party means overlooking so much about a candidate and having little choice. The issues are important and we all vote on that basis - but character of the candidate matters too. This is what makes the primary races so important as there is more choice but so many overlook them as not important. Important not just for presidential races but for congressional and local races as well.

 

[Demon]

Isn’t it so sad though that it must work this way? Choosing a party means overlooking so much about a candidate and having little choice. The issues are important and we all vote on that basis - but character of the candidate matters too. This is what makes the primary races so important as there is more choice but so many overlook them as not important.

Oh definitely its sad. I'm not at all pleased with the current situation, but its what we've got. What would be nice is if the president was independent from either party, but I don't see that happening either.

 

[Lookinagain]

It would be so nice if it worked that way. But with the partisanship (and yes, I am very partisan) you don't get the candidate - you get the party. When it comes time to vote, it isn't very often that the candidate goes against the party.

I think that is generally true. It's funny though. I live in a very blue state and we have a Republican governor. And have had a few others in the past. But if they were in a different state, they probably couldn't be Republicans because they are moderate. I think our current governor is probably being called a RINO by others in his party. But I like him and I don't tend to vote republican. But I'd vote for him if he could run again, but he can't.

 

[ItsMainelyYou]

Relevant development of note:
There are consequences to ignoring subpoenas.
Bannon found guilty of contempt on two counts. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/22/us/politics/bannon-trial-contempt-charges.html

 

[Demon]

I think that is generally true. It's funny though. I live in a very blue state and we have a Republican governor. And have had a few others in the past. But if they were in a different state, they probably couldn't be Republicans because they are moderate. I think our current governor is probably being called a RINO by others in his party. But I like him and I don't tend to vote republican. But I'd vote for him if he could run again, but he can't.

We've had one republican governor in 46 years, and he wasn't too bad because the legislature pretty much kept him in check. There have been republicans I could vote for in the past, but with the current state of things - not till anyone even remotely connected to Jan 6, and the policies that led to it are gone.

Edit: maybe 'the policies that led to it' are the wrong words. Maybe 'the mindsets and lies that led to it' works better.

 

[Lookinagain]

Oh I totally agree @Demon. These days I’m voting party even if Gumby and Pokey are the candidates.

 

[Karl_K]

I think that is generally true. It's funny though. I live in a very blue state and we have a Republican governor. And have had a few others in the past. But if they were in a different state, they probably couldn't be Republicans because they are moderate. I think our current governor is probably being called a RINO by others in his party. But I like him and I don't tend to vote republican. But I'd vote for him if he could run again, but he can't.

What is kinda funny is im voting for a democrat for governor in Nov. in IL I dont agree with him on guns or taxes but he did a very good job seeing the state through the worst of covid so he is getting my vote.
If covid gets bad again he will also have the guts to make the hard decisions.
Unlike many Governors he stood up and was a leader.
I do not trust the Republican candidate to do the same.

ssssssshhhhh dont tell anyone.

 

[Matata]

he is being funded by democrats in her primary.
Democrats are trying to deny Republicans their choice of candidates by registering as Republicans to vote for her in the primary.
That makes her a Democrat no actually it makes her something much worse.

This is ridiculous. She voted for nearly 100% of *rump's policies and has been a diehard conservative her entire political career. What you are demonizing her for is HAVING A CONSCIENCE, ETHICS, AND COMMITMENT TO UPHOLDING THE *UCKING CONSTITUTION OF THE US. No one is denying R's the right to vote against her. Dems voting for her are sending a message that CONSCIENCE, ETHICS, AND COMMITMENT TO THE *UCKING CONSTITUTION are more important than party.