January 6 - How much do you care?

[AZGrizFan]

Yes, and those fucking grifters use that leverage to provide free or subsidized healthcare and then rub our noses in it.

Again, stop being the world’s policeman and we’d have bucketfuls of money to spend on socialist-type shit. Just can’t do both without bankrupting the country (which we’re well on our way to, by the way).

It’s a choice we’ve made freely.

We?

[kalm]

It’s a choice we’ve made freely.

We?

Yes?

[SDHornet]

[kalm]

When you rely on Gaetz, MTG, Tucker, and a drunk werewolf trapped in mid transformation for your intelligence…

[SeattleGriz]

Lock em up! Taking photos and video of Republican offices, no doubt to plan attacks.

[houndawg]

The biggest key in anything DC is try to understand where the narrative is coming from and who is pushing it. Both sides give money to the opposing sides in order to try and influence certain elections. The uni-party is an apt description of the "swamp", followed by the bureaucratic minions that actually do the work and influence the laws. They are the ones that craft the overall language that is put forth in the actual bills that are "signed".

DC is all theater and the sooner people realize this the better. Nothing is serious in DC and "committee's" are the worst due to nothing gets done in any committee that is publicized as it is all for show.

Stop the presses.

[houndawg]

Which of personal testimony given so far do you not find credible?

Studies have shown that around 50% of eyewitness testimony is inaccurate as it is biased towards their own well-being.

So you'd say that about 50% of the first-hand testimony under oath by those Republican advisors/operatives/cabinet members at the White House at that time is perjury?

Same for the first-hand testimony under oath of Mike Pence's staff?

And you know this because you haven't been watching the hearings?

[houndawg]

It’s a choice we’ve made freely.

We?

[UNI88]

We?

You both have turds in your pockets?

[JohnStOnge]

That's just more ridiculous "look over there" deflection. The FBI did not cause what happened. Trump caused what happened. Yes, there were other factors. But the primary factor was the way Trump conducted himself during the months leading up to the election then continuing through the period from election day through January 6.

If Trump had not first spent lots of time prior to the election making the ridiculous claim that the only way he could lose was fraud then spent lots of time after election making the ridiculous claim that he really won but the election was stolen from him the January 6 incident would not have occurred.

[JohnStOnge]

Which of personal testimony given so far do you not find credible?

Studies have shown that around 50% of eyewitness testimony is inaccurate as it is biased towards their own well-being.

I don't know this to be the case but I suspect the reliability varies with circumstances. For example: I think a situation in which someone is waiting in line in a convenience store when someone comes in and rob the store is different than when a family is sitting in their house together and one family member pulls out a gun then shoots the other. When someone who was waiting in line picks someone out of a lineup as the perpetrator there is some question about reliability. When someone in the family says "Billy shot Bob" there isn't unless they are just intentionally lying.

When William Barr, for instance, talks about the nature of his conversations with Trump over the issue of election irregularities I think it very likely that's accurate with respect to the basic picture.

[JohnStOnge]

https://www.politifact.com/article/2022 ... -undercut/

Yes, I know some of you will go along with the myth that Politifact is not generally reliable. But the piece, as always, is well referenced. The FBI did not instigate the incident and there is no evidence the Epps is connected to the FBI.

i picked the Politifact piece because of its detail and referencing. You can find plenty of other pieces. Just Google "Fact check did FBI instigate January 6?"

Why do Republicans like Cruz do this crap? I'm telling you, People, you are making a mistake if you are supporting that Party right now. It represents the pinnacle of dishonesty and corruption.

[AZGrizFan]

Studies have shown that around 50% of eyewitness testimony is inaccurate as it is biased towards their own well-being.

So you'd say that about 50% of the first-hand testimony under oath by those Republican advisors/operatives/cabinet members at the White House at that time is perjury?

Same for the first-hand testimony under oath of Mike Pence's staff?

And you know this because you haven't been watching the hearings?

He said it was inaccurate. That doesn’t make it perjury unless it’s intentionally inaccurate.

[UNI88]

So you'd say that about 50% of the first-hand testimony under oath by those Republican advisors/operatives/cabinet members at the White House at that time is perjury?

Same for the first-hand testimony under oath of Mike Pence's staff?

And you know this because you haven't been watching the hearings?

He said it was inaccurate. That doesn’t make it perjury unless it’s intentionally inaccurate.

And it's in reference to all testimony. It's also a stat that is used when arguing against harsh criminal sentencing. Funny how libs trot it out for one purpose and then turn around and try to deflect away from it when the tables are turned and it's used against one of their causes.

[kalm]

He said it was inaccurate. That doesn’t make it perjury unless it’s intentionally inaccurate.

And it's in reference to all testimony. It's also a stat that is used when arguing against harsh criminal sentencing. Funny how libs trot it out for one purpose and then turn around and try to deflect away from it when the tables are turned and it's used against one of their causes.

Which specific testimony do you guys think is the most likely in a inaccurate?

[kalm]

This should be significantly higher but still good news. 60% of Americans think Trump should be prosecuted. Garland needs to do his job. Also…see the Georgia case. It will be highlighted in the hearings this week.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/10-amer ... &fs=e&s=cl

[AZGrizFan]

And it's in reference to all testimony. It's also a stat that is used when arguing against harsh criminal sentencing. Funny how libs trot it out for one purpose and then turn around and try to deflect away from it when the tables are turned and it's used against one of their causes.

Which specific testimony do you guys think is the most likely in a inaccurate?

Nobody has said ANY of the testimony is inaccurate. FFS, can’t anybody actually READ anymore?

[AZGrizFan]

This should be significantly higher but still good news. 60% of Americans think Trump should be prosecuted. Garland needs to do his job. Also…see the Georgia case. It will be highlighted in the hearings this week.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/10-amer ... &fs=e&s=cl

And 60% of Americans think Hildabeast and Obummer should be prosecuted, and yet here we are.

[HI54UNI]

This should be significantly higher but still good news. 60% of Americans think Trump should be prosecuted. Garland needs to do his job. Also…see the Georgia case. It will be highlighted in the hearings this week.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/10-amer ... &fs=e&s=cl

Do you want Trump to run again?

[BDKJMU]

This should be significantly higher but still good news. 60% of Americans think Trump should be prosecuted. Garland needs to do his job. Also…see the Georgia case. It will be highlighted in the hearings this week.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/10-amer ... &fs=e&s=cl

Do you want Trump to run again?

Trump running again is the donks ONLY chance at keeping the WH in 24’, and they’re trying to kneecap it..

[kalm]

This should be significantly higher but still good news. 60% of Americans think Trump should be prosecuted. Garland needs to do his job. Also…see the Georgia case. It will be highlighted in the hearings this week.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/10-amer ... &fs=e&s=cl

Do you want Trump to run again?

No. Why?

[AZGrizFan]

Serious question for those “insurrection” believers: Do you truly believe what Trump allegedly did and what happened on 1/6 was worse than what Hildabeast and Obama did in the run up to the 2016 election?

[HI54UNI]

Do you want Trump to run again?

No. Why?

IMO all this talk of charging him just makes it more likely he will run and announce soon. That way if he is charged with anything he can say, "they're trying to stop me, all of this is BS", etc.

[AZGrizFan]

No. Why?

IMO all this talk of charging him just makes it more likely he will run and announce soon. That way if he is charged with anything he can say, "they're trying to stop me, all of this is BS", etc.

It’s yet another example of the Donks being horrible at reading the room. There’s a large segment of the Conservative party that’s moved beyond Trump, if the donks would just let him just effing go away, but the can’t or won’t. They KEEP him in the spotlight with all these ridiculous “hearings”, keep him relevant, even though many conservative are already moving on to more level headed alternatives.

[kalm]

No. Why?

IMO all this talk of charging him just makes it more likely he will run and announce soon. That way if he is charged with anything he can say, "they're trying to stop me, all of this is BS", etc.

I’m bothered less by his chances of winning than I am with the increased threat of rioting and political violence if he’s the nominee. He’s also not exactly short on self promotion and cult followers or R’s that fear him and/or need his voters. He will either be the nominee or choose the nominee until a rival from his own party rises up and breaks the zombie trance.