March in DC January 6

[JimFoxvog]

Who would have ever guessed the powerful U.S. could be overthrown by a handful of rowdies one spring afternoon?

Just one part of a coordinated 7-part plan, according to a former Republican leader, Liz Cheney.

[Falco Underhill]

Jan. 6 committee faces a thorny challenge: Persuading the public to care

“Their challenge: Making the public care deeply — and read hundreds of pages more — about an event that happened more than a year ago, and that many Americans feel they already understand ... ”

They’ll attempt to do so this spring through public hearings, along with a potential interim report and a final report that will be published ahead of the November midterms with the findings likely a key part of the Democrats midterm strategy. They hope their recommendations to prevent another insurrection will be adopted, but also that their work will repel voters from Republicans who they say helped propel the attack.

Democrats are widely expected to have a tough time in the upcoming midterm elections, with even some Democrats privately fearing a bloodbath...

-- The Washington Post

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... -hearings/

The committee plans to release its final report in September, ahead of the midterm elections. -- The New York Times

https://www.nytimes.com/article/jan-6-h ... edule.html

Multiple choice question:

What do you call a public "hearing" that brings "witnesses" who aren't cross-examined by the opposing side, and then releases its "findings" just before an election?

Choose one of the following:

A. A political show trial
B. Propaganda
C. All of the above

[Ken]

Multiple choice question:

What do you call a public "hearing" that brings "witnesses" who aren't cross-examined by the opposing side, and then releases its "findings" just before an election?

Choose one of the following:

A. A political show trial
B. Propaganda
C. All of the above

Republicans were invited to participate at both the Senate level and the House. They all refused except for Cheney and Kinsinger. So it is their own fault that it is mainly Democrats doing the job.

At the Senate level McConnell and the GOP completely blocked the Senate from going forward with any sort of investigation of its own. It was the first GOP filibuster of the Biden Administration. https://www.npr.org/2021/05/28/10005248 ... pitol-riot

That left the House where McCarthy pulled all of his selected 5 GOP members off the committee after Pelosi understandably refused to seat the two members with conflicts of interest due to being personally implicated in some of the January 6th events. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/kevin-mcca ... jim-banks/

As for the timing? GOP former members of the Trump Administration from Mark Meadows to Peter Navarro have been dragging out the subpoena process for months and refusing to testify which has delayed the work of the committee for months.

So save us the hand-wringing or tut-tutting about the lack of Republicans on the committee or the timing of the reports. Every bit of that is due to Republican obstruction. They had their chance to be equal partners and have bipartisan committees work under their shared control and a bipartisan timetable. They walked away from and obstructed all efforts to do that.

[Falco Underhill]

Republicans were invited to participate at both the Senate level and the House. They all refused except for Cheney and Kinsinger. So it is their own fault that it is mainly Democrats doing the job.

At the Senate level McConnell and the GOP completely blocked the Senate from going forward with any sort of investigation of its own. It was the first GOP filibuster of the Biden Administration. https://www.npr.org/2021/05/28/10005248 ... pitol-riot

That left the House where McCarthy pulled all of his selected 5 GOP members off the committee after Pelosi understandably refused to seat the two members with conflicts of interest due to being personally implicated in some of the January 6th events. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/kevin-mcca ... jim-banks/

That's the Democrat spin. According to Republicans, Democrats refused to accept the Republicans who were selected by the Republican committee and insisted on choosing their own. That is NOT understandable nor is it bipartisan, nor is that the way bipartisan committees are usually formed. To me it's understandable why the
Republicans refused to go along with it.

As for the timing? GOP former members of the Trump Administration from Mark Meadows to Peter Navarro have been dragging out the subpoena process for months and refusing to testify which has delayed the work of the committee for months.

How convenient that it only dragged on long enough so the hearings could be held just in time for the elections!

At any rate, no matter whose fault it is, this isn't a fair hearing where witnesses are being cross-examined by the other side. It's just a political show trial, Ken, so why are you trying to make excuses for it?

[Ken]

Republicans were invited to participate at both the Senate level and the House. They all refused except for Cheney and Kinsinger. So it is their own fault that it is mainly Democrats doing the job.

At the Senate level McConnell and the GOP completely blocked the Senate from going forward with any sort of investigation of its own. It was the first GOP filibuster of the Biden Administration. https://www.npr.org/2021/05/28/10005248 ... pitol-riot

That left the House where McCarthy pulled all of his selected 5 GOP members off the committee after Pelosi understandably refused to seat the two members with conflicts of interest due to being personally implicated in some of the January 6th events. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/kevin-mcca ... jim-banks/

That's the Democrat spin. According to Republicans, Democrats refused to accept the Republicans who were selected by the Republican committee and insisted on choosing their own. That is NOT understandable nor is it bipartisan, nor is that the way bipartisan committees are usually formed. To me it's understandable why the
Republicans refused to go along with it.

As for the timing? GOP former members of the Trump Administration from Mark Meadows to Peter Navarro have been dragging out the subpoena process for months and refusing to testify which has delayed the work of the committee for months.

How convenient that it dragged on just long enough so the hearings could be held just in time for the elections!

Besides which, no matter whose fault it is, it's not a real fair hearing. It's just a political dog and pony show, so why are you trying to make excuses for it?

Democrats rejected two GOP House members who were implicated in the events of 1/6 and who were likely to be called to testify before the committee themselves. That is it. They accepted all the rest of McCarthy's nominees. As for being a fair hearing? You are welcome to watch and find points to criticize. Or not. It doesn't really matter.

I'm not making excuses for anything. I think it is entirely appropriate that Congress investigate. The events of January 6 were an actual attack on the Capital and Congress. It is entirely within the purview of Congress to investigate an actual attack on the institution. They would be irresponsibly negligent not to do so. If Republicans decide they would rather obstruct and politicize this effort that is their choice. But spare us the criticism of it not being a "real fair hearing" From what I have seen so far it has been entirely fair and factual. And if Republicans are now whining about not participating that is completely their own fault. That is like the child who murdered his parents seeking sympathy for being an orphan.

[Falco Underhill]

As for being a fair hearing? You are welcome to watch and find points to criticize. Or not. It doesn't really matter.

What's to watch when we're only getting one side of things? Let me know when some charges are brought, where witnesses can be cross-examined by the opposing side and a real jury can weigh the evidence. I'm not interested in this circus.

[Ken]

As for being a fair hearing? You are welcome to watch and find points to criticize. Or not. It doesn't really matter.

What's to watch when we're only getting one side of things? Let me know when some charges are brought, where witnesses can be cross-examined by the opposing side and a real jury can weigh the evidence. I'm not interested in this circus.

I guess you should call or write to your GOP congressman and ask why they dropped the ball then.

[Falco Underhill]

As for being a fair hearing? You are welcome to watch and find points to criticize. Or not. It doesn't really matter.

What's to watch when we're only getting one side of things? Let me know when some charges are brought, where witnesses can be cross-examined by the opposing side and a real jury can weigh the evidence. I'm not interested in this circus.

I guess you should call or write to your GOP congressman and ask why they dropped the ball then.

Even if the opposing side were present, Congress can still do nothing but make recommendations to press charges anyway. It would still just be a political circus, imo, just not quite as shameless as the one they're putting on without them.

Let us know when real charges are pressed, and witnesses can be cross examined, and a real jury can weigh the evidence.

[Ken]

What's to watch when we're only getting one side of things? Let me know when some charges are brought, where witnesses can be cross-examined by the opposing side and a real jury can weigh the evidence. I'm not interested in this circus.

I guess you should call or write to your GOP congressman and ask why they dropped the ball then.

Even if the opposing side were present, Congress can still do nothing but make recommendations to press charges anyway. It would still just be a political circus, imo, just not quite as shameless as the one they're putting on without them.

Let us know when real charges are pressed, and witnesses can be cross examined, and a real jury can weigh the evidence.

I think you are confused. This is an investigation not a trial. Just like the 9-11 investigation. Or the Iran-Contra investigation. Or the Church committee investigation on abuses by the CIA. Or the Benghazi investigation. Investigation and oversight is one of the primary duties of Congress and go all the way back to 1791 with the St. Clair Investigation by the House of Representatives.

If criminal charges are warranted, the committee can make referrals to the Justice Department. And then you can have a real trial with cross examinations and juries and so forth. That is how things work.

[Falco Underhill]

I think you are confused. This is an investigation not a trial.

No, I'm not confused at all. I'm well aware this is only a "hearing" to determine whether or not to make criminal referrals. That's why I've been insisting this whole time to let me know when/if it actually makes any.

In the meantime, this is just a show to try the other side "in the court of public opinion" before the elections.

And I'm not interested in the show, especially a one-sided show, but I wouldn’t be interested anyway.