General Senate Judiciary Committee Report on Jan 6th

Welcome to our Community
Wanting to join the rest of our members? Feel free to Sign Up today.
Sign up

Filthy

Iowa Wrestling Champion
Jun 28, 2016
27,500
29,657
The Christian Science Monitor agrees..



In CCC data collected from May 2020 to June 2021, 94% of protests involved no participant arrests, 97.9% involved no participant injuries, 98.6% involved no injuries to police, and 96.7% involved no property damage.
so there were a shitload of incidents of participant injuries/arrests, property damage, and attacks on police.
 

John Lee Pettimore

Further south than you
May 18, 2021
6,302
6,719
so there were a shitload of incidents of participant injuries/arrests, property damage, and attacks on police.
Yes, there were.

Millions of people across the nation took to the streets and participated in BLM protests against police violence.

The vast majority of these protests in fact were completely peaceful. In some places, after dark these protests were hijacked by opportunistic criminals who engaged in looting, property damage, and violence.

These people are criminals, and nobody who was arrested for looting is having CNN call them a patriot or a political prisoner.

Also, the BLM protests were reality-based. In fact, your police ARE brutal and oppressive and trigger-happy, and George Floyd WAS murdered by police over bullshit.

As opposed to the insurrection, which is based on total lies built on nothing more than a total refusal to accept what living in a democracy is.

But other than that...... good one!

??
 

Filthy

Iowa Wrestling Champion
Jun 28, 2016
27,500
29,657
Maybe a couple.
they're counting the "anti-Asian violence" protest in Pacific Heights.

Let's compare the BLM/George Floyd riots in DC to the Jan6 riot, but let's hold Police Response as a constant...

imagine the Jan6 riots with the BLM/George Floyd police response of cordoning crowd flow, establishing defensive perimters, arresting instigators, deploying tear gas, etc.

then imagine the BLM/George Floyd protests if police had removed barricades, stood aside, and expressed comradery with the rioters.

How's that look to you?
 

John Lee Pettimore

Further south than you
May 18, 2021
6,302
6,719
I've noticed some folks trying to make the defense of the Biden administration encouraging protesting at the Justice's homes by saying "This was one crazy guy" they seek to forget that when one crazy guy shot up a grocery store a month back that was fully and completely the fault of right wings politics.

It's really neat how that all works.
Which folks are they? Can you come up with some names? Or not so much?

Not really "completely the fault of right wing policies" either, is it. Radicalisation by right wing garbage blogs is not caused by right wing political policy, and that's what caused the supermarket shooter to decide to commit his massacre.

The access to guns sort of is right-wing policy, in the sense that the right wing politicians are all for a gun free for all and the Dem politicians pretty much go along with it. But once again, you are making blanket binary statements that sound good, but that you actually can't back up at all, whatsoever.

??
 

Freeloading Rusty

Here comes Rover, sniffin’ at your ass
Jan 11, 2016
26,916
26,589
they're counting the "anti-Asian violence" protest in Pacific Heights.

Let's compare the BLM/George Floyd riots in DC to the Jan6 riot, but let's hold Police Response as a constant...

imagine the Jan6 riots with the BLM/George Floyd police response of cordoning crowd flow, establishing defensive perimters, arresting instigators, deploying tear gas, etc.

then imagine the BLM/George Floyd protests if police had removed barricades, stood aside, and expressed comradery with the rioters.

How's that look to you?
Looks like deflection of the topic at hand.
 

John Lee Pettimore

Further south than you
May 18, 2021
6,302
6,719
they're counting the "anti-Asian violence" protest in Pacific Heights.

Let's compare the BLM/George Floyd riots in DC to the Jan6 riot, but let's hold Police Response as a constant...

imagine the Jan6 riots with the BLM/George Floyd police response of cordoning crowd flow, establishing defensive perimters, arresting instigators, deploying tear gas, etc.

then imagine the BLM/George Floyd protests if police had removed barricades, stood aside, and expressed comradery with the rioters.

How's that look to you?
Who knows how it looks? Don't you think that the police being the focus and cause of one set of protests, versus being viewed as allies and sympathisers to the cause (which a lot of police are) means anything?

But why the deflection in the first place?

??
 

John Lee Pettimore

Further south than you
May 18, 2021
6,302
6,719
...not to put too fine a point on it, but...

Here's the way I deal with people: ad homs are best when they're objectively funny, but usually better left out altogether.

He and I have had plenty of amicable disagreements, it just takes crushing the Shasta. I could bust out a cold, friendly can if you like ?
That's fine.

The only three posters I am routinely a prick to are that clown with his shilling and his fake-neutral gimmick, sparkuri and Enoch. Both the others are because they are brain-rotted conspiracy wankers. Other than that, the other right wingers on the board I am much more polite to.

??
 

Filthy

Iowa Wrestling Champion
Jun 28, 2016
27,500
29,657
Looks like deflection of the topic at hand.
no, what you just did is deflect. You're comparing the damage/violence, but you're not considering the role of the police response - which is obviously the most determinant factor beyond the crowd itself.

remember all the "antifa" and "black block" protestors at the BLM/Floyd riots?
how much property damage would there have been if the cops stood aside and said "I don't agree with what you're doing, but it's your 1st Amendment right."
 

Filthy

Iowa Wrestling Champion
Jun 28, 2016
27,500
29,657
Who knows how it looks? Don't you think that the police being the focus and cause of one set of protests, versus being viewed as allies and sympathisers to the cause (which a lot of police are) means anything?

But why the deflection in the first place?

??
it's pretty easy to see the relevance of the police response to a discussion of the relative damage done to people and property.
 

Freeloading Rusty

Here comes Rover, sniffin’ at your ass
Jan 11, 2016
26,916
26,589
no, what you just did is deflect. You're comparing the damage/violence, but you're not considering the role of the police response - which is obviously the most determinant factor beyond the crowd itself.

remember all the "antifa" and "black block" protestors at the BLM/Floyd riots?
how much property damage would there have been if the cops stood aside and said "I don't agree with what you're doing, but it's your 1st Amendment right."
Everyone else is talking J6 and your over there screaming Antifa! BLM!
 

Filthy

Iowa Wrestling Champion
Jun 28, 2016
27,500
29,657
Everyone else is talking J6 and your over there screaming Antifa! BLM!
the Jan6 protest was mostly peaceful and was not a threat to the functioning of democracy.

the coverage of the property damage and violence has been overstated for political purposes, and the "trial" is a circus with the explicit purpose of distracting the citizens from the upwards transfer of wealth and (entirely predictable) economic malaise.

Comparisons to the Kavanaugh sit-in as an example of an actual disruption to the functioning of a democracy, and comparisons to the BLM/Floyd protests as an example of how police response affects the perception of violence and property damage are entirely on point in this discussion.

so now you can consider how far this "coup" would get with 40 arrests and a couple dozens cans of tear gas.
 

La Paix

Fuck this place
First 100
Jan 14, 2015
38,253
64,404
Evidence Trump’s team knew their plot was illegal
In Trump lawyer John Eastman’s own words:
  • In his memos outlining the plot to overturn the election on Jan. 6, Eastman said Vice President Mike Pence should simply disregard the Electoral Count Act because Eastman viewed it as unconstitutional.
  • In a Dec. 19, 2020 email, he conceded that having alternate electors who weren’t certified by state legislatures would mean they were “dead on arrival in Congress.” “… The textual claim that the ‘executive’ certification would prevail in such an instance over the legislature-certified slate is contrary to Article II” of the Constitution, Eastman wrote in the Dec. 19 email. He nonetheless pressed forward.
  • After the Capitol riot, he again pressed Pence’s general counsel, Greg Jacob, to have Pence violate the Electoral Count Act. In an email on the evening of Jan. 6, he argued that it had already been violated by how Congress handled the aftermath of the riot and asked them “to consider one more relatively minor violation and adjourn for 10 days to allow the legislatures to finish their investigations.”
  • He asked to be put on a “pardon list” in the days after the insurrection, saying in an email: “I’ve decided that I should be on the pardon list, if that is still in the works.” This doesn’t necessarily show he knew it was illegal in advance — and a federal appeals court has ruled that accepting a pardon isn’t an admission of guilt. He also argued in the email he was merely insulating himself from “the outright lies and false witness being spewed.” But it reinforces that he viewed himself as having legal liability.
From the testimony of Greg Jacob, then chief counsel to the vice president, on June 16:
  • Eastman admitted the plan would violate the Electoral Count Act: “Mr. Eastman acknowledged that that was the case.”
  • Eastman admitted to him that the plot would lose on the merits in the Supreme Court: “When I pressed him on the point, I said ‘John, if the vice president did what you were asking him to do, we would lose 9-0 in the Supreme Court, wouldn’t we?’ And he initially started at, ‘Well, I think maybe you would lose only 7-2,' and after some further discussion, acknowledged, ‘Well, yeah, you’re right, we would lose 9-0.’ ... [He] ultimately acknowledged that, no, we would lose 9-0 — no judge would support his argument.”
  • Testified that Eastman thought that, while his plan would fail on the merits, the Supreme Court might decline to interfere in a political dispute: “When I raised concerns that that position would likely lose in court, his view was that the court simply wouldn’t get involved, they would invoke the political-question doctrine and therefore we could have some comfort proceeding with that path.”
From the testimony of White House lawyer Eric Herschmann:
  • Giuliani conceded the plan was unlikely to pass legal muster over the “long term”: “We had an intellectual discussion about … the VP’s role. And he was asking me my view and analysis about the practical implications of it. And when we finished, he said, ‘Look, I believe that you’re probably right.'
Evidence they were told their election claims were bogus
Below we’ll highlight both instances in which Trump was told that his voter-fraud theories were wrong more broadly, and also specific claims (in bold).
From testimony by former attorney general William P. Barr:
  • “I made it clear I did not agree with the idea of saying the election was stolen and putting out this stuff, which I told the president was bullshit.”
  • On Nov. 23, 2020, he said he told Trump of his voter-fraud claims: “They’re not meritorious, they’re not panning out.”
  • “I reiterated that they’ve wasted a whole month on these claims on the Dominion voting machines, and they were idiotic claims. … I told them that it was crazy stuff, and they were wasting their time on that. And it was doing a great grave disservice for the country.”
  • On Trump’s allegation of “vote dumps” in Detroit: “I said, ‘Mr. President, there are 630 precincts in Detroit. And unlike elsewhere in the state, they centralize the counting process. … So, there’s nothing. … Did all the people complaining about it point out to you, you actually did better in Detroit than you did last time? I mean, there’s no indication of fraud in Detroit.' And I told him that the stuff that his people were shoveling out to the public were bull -- it was bullshit, I mean, that the claims of fraud were bullshit.”
  • On allegations of “vote dumps” in Philadelphia: “But once you actually go and look and compare apples to apples, there’s no discrepancy at all. And, you know, that’s one of the — I think at some point, I covered that with the President.”
From testimony from former deputy attorney general Richard Donoghue:
  • “I said something to the effect of, ‘Sir, we’ve done dozens of investigations, hundreds of interviews. The major allegations are not supported by the evidence developed. We’ve looked at Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Nevada. We’re doing our job. Much of the info you’re getting is false.’ ”
  • “And then I went into, for instance, this thing from Michigan — this report about 68 percent error rate. The reality is it was only 0.0063 percent error rate, less than one in 15,000.”
  • “So, then I talked about a little bit about the Pennsylvania truck driver. … This claim was by a truck driver who believed, perhaps honestly, that he had transported an entire tractor-trailer truck full of ballots from New York to Pennsylvania. … And I essentially said, 'Look, we looked at that allegation. We looked at both ends, both the people who loaded the truck and the people that unloaded the truck. And that allegation was not supported by the evidence.”
  • “I said, 'Okay, well, with regard to Georgia, we looked at the tape, we interviewed the witnesses.There is no suitcase; the president kept fixating on the suitcase that supposedly had fraudulent ballots and that the suitcase was rolled out from under the table. And I said, no, sir, there is no suitcase, you can watch that video over and over, there is no suitcase, there was a wheeled bin where they carry the ballots. And that’s just how they move ballots around that facility. There’s nothing suspicious about that at all.”
  • “I told him that there was no multiple scanning of the ballots. One part of the allegations that they were taking one ballot and scanning it through three or four or five times to rack up votes, presumably for Vice President Biden. I told him that the video did not support that. ”
  • “Then he went off on double-voting. … He said dead people are voting. Indians are getting paid to vote. He met people on Native American reservations. He said there’s lots of fraud going on here. I told him flat-out that much of the information he’s getting is false and/or just not supported by the evidence. We look at the allegations, but they don’t pan out.”
  • On Trump’s allegations about Antrim County, Mich., and Fulton County, Ga.: “I do know that they came up in subsequent conversations with the president … and I essentially told them we looked into that, and it’s just not true. … I told the president myself that several times in several conversations that these allegations about ballots being smuggled in, in a suitcase and run through the machines several times it was not true — that we looked at, we looked at the video; we interviewed the witnesses, it was not true.”
 

BeardOfKnowledge

The Most Consistent Motherfucker You Know
Jul 22, 2015
61,378
56,688

kaladin stormblessed

Nala fanboy
Apr 24, 2017
17,656
20,039
Evidence Trump’s team knew their plot was illegal
In Trump lawyer John Eastman’s own words:
  • In his memos outlining the plot to overturn the election on Jan. 6, Eastman said Vice President Mike Pence should simply disregard the Electoral Count Act because Eastman viewed it as unconstitutional.
  • In a Dec. 19, 2020 email, he conceded that having alternate electors who weren’t certified by state legislatures would mean they were “dead on arrival in Congress.” “… The textual claim that the ‘executive’ certification would prevail in such an instance over the legislature-certified slate is contrary to Article II” of the Constitution, Eastman wrote in the Dec. 19 email. He nonetheless pressed forward.
  • After the Capitol riot, he again pressed Pence’s general counsel, Greg Jacob, to have Pence violate the Electoral Count Act. In an email on the evening of Jan. 6, he argued that it had already been violated by how Congress handled the aftermath of the riot and asked them “to consider one more relatively minor violation and adjourn for 10 days to allow the legislatures to finish their investigations.”
  • He asked to be put on a “pardon list” in the days after the insurrection, saying in an email: “I’ve decided that I should be on the pardon list, if that is still in the works.” This doesn’t necessarily show he knew it was illegal in advance — and a federal appeals court has ruled that accepting a pardon isn’t an admission of guilt. He also argued in the email he was merely insulating himself from “the outright lies and false witness being spewed.” But it reinforces that he viewed himself as having legal liability.
From the testimony of Greg Jacob, then chief counsel to the vice president, on June 16:
  • Eastman admitted the plan would violate the Electoral Count Act: “Mr. Eastman acknowledged that that was the case.”
  • Eastman admitted to him that the plot would lose on the merits in the Supreme Court: “When I pressed him on the point, I said ‘John, if the vice president did what you were asking him to do, we would lose 9-0 in the Supreme Court, wouldn’t we?’ And he initially started at, ‘Well, I think maybe you would lose only 7-2,' and after some further discussion, acknowledged, ‘Well, yeah, you’re right, we would lose 9-0.’ ... [He] ultimately acknowledged that, no, we would lose 9-0 — no judge would support his argument.”
  • Testified that Eastman thought that, while his plan would fail on the merits, the Supreme Court might decline to interfere in a political dispute: “When I raised concerns that that position would likely lose in court, his view was that the court simply wouldn’t get involved, they would invoke the political-question doctrine and therefore we could have some comfort proceeding with that path.”
From the testimony of White House lawyer Eric Herschmann:
  • Giuliani conceded the plan was unlikely to pass legal muster over the “long term”: “We had an intellectual discussion about … the VP’s role. And he was asking me my view and analysis about the practical implications of it. And when we finished, he said, ‘Look, I believe that you’re probably right.'
Evidence they were told their election claims were bogus
Below we’ll highlight both instances in which Trump was told that his voter-fraud theories were wrong more broadly, and also specific claims (in bold).
From testimony by former attorney general William P. Barr:
  • “I made it clear I did not agree with the idea of saying the election was stolen and putting out this stuff, which I told the president was bullshit.”
  • On Nov. 23, 2020, he said he told Trump of his voter-fraud claims: “They’re not meritorious, they’re not panning out.”
  • “I reiterated that they’ve wasted a whole month on these claims on the Dominion voting machines, and they were idiotic claims. … I told them that it was crazy stuff, and they were wasting their time on that. And it was doing a great grave disservice for the country.”
  • On Trump’s allegation of “vote dumps” in Detroit: “I said, ‘Mr. President, there are 630 precincts in Detroit. And unlike elsewhere in the state, they centralize the counting process. … So, there’s nothing. … Did all the people complaining about it point out to you, you actually did better in Detroit than you did last time? I mean, there’s no indication of fraud in Detroit.' And I told him that the stuff that his people were shoveling out to the public were bull -- it was bullshit, I mean, that the claims of fraud were bullshit.”
  • On allegations of “vote dumps” in Philadelphia: “But once you actually go and look and compare apples to apples, there’s no discrepancy at all. And, you know, that’s one of the — I think at some point, I covered that with the President.”
From testimony from former deputy attorney general Richard Donoghue:
  • “I said something to the effect of, ‘Sir, we’ve done dozens of investigations, hundreds of interviews. The major allegations are not supported by the evidence developed. We’ve looked at Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Nevada. We’re doing our job. Much of the info you’re getting is false.’ ”
  • “And then I went into, for instance, this thing from Michigan — this report about 68 percent error rate. The reality is it was only 0.0063 percent error rate, less than one in 15,000.”
  • “So, then I talked about a little bit about the Pennsylvania truck driver. … This claim was by a truck driver who believed, perhaps honestly, that he had transported an entire tractor-trailer truck full of ballots from New York to Pennsylvania. … And I essentially said, 'Look, we looked at that allegation. We looked at both ends, both the people who loaded the truck and the people that unloaded the truck. And that allegation was not supported by the evidence.”
  • “I said, 'Okay, well, with regard to Georgia, we looked at the tape, we interviewed the witnesses.There is no suitcase; the president kept fixating on the suitcase that supposedly had fraudulent ballots and that the suitcase was rolled out from under the table. And I said, no, sir, there is no suitcase, you can watch that video over and over, there is no suitcase, there was a wheeled bin where they carry the ballots. And that’s just how they move ballots around that facility. There’s nothing suspicious about that at all.”
  • “I told him that there was no multiple scanning of the ballots. One part of the allegations that they were taking one ballot and scanning it through three or four or five times to rack up votes, presumably for Vice President Biden. I told him that the video did not support that. ”
  • “Then he went off on double-voting. … He said dead people are voting. Indians are getting paid to vote. He met people on Native American reservations. He said there’s lots of fraud going on here. I told him flat-out that much of the information he’s getting is false and/or just not supported by the evidence. We look at the allegations, but they don’t pan out.”
  • On Trump’s allegations about Antrim County, Mich., and Fulton County, Ga.: “I do know that they came up in subsequent conversations with the president … and I essentially told them we looked into that, and it’s just not true. … I told the president myself that several times in several conversations that these allegations about ballots being smuggled in, in a suitcase and run through the machines several times it was not true — that we looked at, we looked at the video; we interviewed the witnesses, it was not true.”
One of the scariest bits was a subtle comment made during that testimony

Before admitting that all 9 justices would disagree, Eastman suggested it might be 7-2

So a piece of him thought 2 Supreme court justices would be okay with Pence rejecting electors

Presumably, Clarence since he is corrupted for Trump. I wonder who is the other person he was thinking of...
 

Qat

QoQ
Nov 3, 2015
16,379
22,495
yes.

maybe Trump arrested immediately.
It would have been the biggest thing since 9/11. There wouldn't be no business as usual the next day, and you know it. And who knows if it wouldn't have sparked a lot more violence.

The protests ended within a couple hours
Your fucking capitol was stormed by a mob while a lot high ranking politicians were inside, not some empty Wal-Mart. It's naturally a big story and not just about Trump.

Throwing in some guy that didn't even make it to ring the door on a justice's house as a bigger story is a bit baffling bruv.
 

Freeloading Rusty

Here comes Rover, sniffin’ at your ass
Jan 11, 2016
26,916
26,589
It would have been the biggest thing since 9/11. There wouldn't be no business as usual the next day, and you know it. And who knows if it wouldn't have sparked a lot more violence.


Your fucking capitol was stormed by a mob while a lot high ranking politicians were inside, not some empty Wal-Mart. It's naturally a big story and not just about Trump.

Throwing in some guy that didn't even make it to ring the door on a justice's house as a bigger story is a bit baffling bruv.
And other high ranking politicians are appearing to be involved… tweeting code words and locations.. opening side doors to let rioters in.. touring security areas without explanation… communicating with proud boys n militia dorks. All proven with evidence.