Jan 6 Committee: New Bombshell Testimony and Evidence (6/28, 1pm)

When one gets a funny emoji to a post like this, you know no low is too low, that some people just have no idea what America has been and is about.

 

What are you trying to say, and do you have any facts to support whatever that is?

 

errrt. wrong answer.

 

For the Congressional basketball game Nancy Pelosi rejected the two tallest (7’ and 6’ 11”) Republicans but agreed to 5’2”, 5’5” and 5’8” members to play. Totally fair. Why are Republicans whining?

 

I believe your second statement is untrue if you mean to imply you voted for Clinton and Biden.

 

Link?

 

Jeez, sorry you're bored by a Jan 6 committee news update in a thread about the hearings.

There have been direct appeals by the Thompson and Chaney during the hearings for Cippolone to cooperate. This development seemed relevant for those following with interest.

Maybe this thread is not for you.

 

https://www.congress.gov/115/crec/2017/01/06/CREC-2017-01-06-pt1-PgH185-8.pdf

There’s 2016. There are a variety of objections interposed by Dems, but your committee member is the objection by Mr. Raskin of Maryland to the certification of ten of Florida’s electoral votes on page H186.

If you want the 2000 election (I believe it was 25 member of the Congressional Black Caucus objecting to Florida) or the 2004 election (objection to Ohio), Google the Congressional Records for January 6, 2001 and January 6, 2005.

 

Trumpers always harang us for hating Trump, but NEVER address the many legitimate reasons Trump has given us to despise him.

 

Because those people read the trash pushed by Gateway and believe the filth as if it were the word of the Lord himself.

 

Say he is indicted and put on trial for the crimes he committed on January 6th. Do you think his idiocy would be a defence? Would he be unwilling to admit he didnt understand what he was saying?

 

His son's idiocy got him out of a Mueller indictment.

 

He doesn't know he's an idiot.

His defense would be that the trial is nothing but a witch hunt, and that the only way he could be convicted is if the jury is rigged.

 

Seems you miss the irony of your own post.

You might find you are better able to ascertain the truth if you just give up your tribal affiliations. While you clearly don’t agree with the Trump nut jobs you nevertheless feel you need to defend their (and your) tribe by always attacking “libbies”

 

You eloquently capture my feelings on this matter, but restating the truth, no matter how you do it, isn’t going to change the minds who willfully live in an alternate realty.

 

Silly analogy. Are you suggesting that no one else McCarthy has in the House is capable of replacing Jim Jordan and Jim Banks, who were pro-insurrection?

You wouldn't have someone involved in the plot to assassinate Lincoln involved in the investigation of John Wilkes Booth.

Still, McCarthy chose to have NO ONE on the Committee. He has no one to blame for that other than himself (and probably Trump).

 

Jesus, the CR! You really do your research. Interesting. Thanks.

 

I know, and I kick myself daily for being pissed off about it. It drives me nuts that people with a brain don't use it, especially people who believe God gave it to them. Maybe they just don't have properly wired brains. It doesn't bother me when people disagree about issues, but about the facts..... come on.

 

No worries!

Interestingly, the only presidential elections since 2000 where there have not been objections to the electoral count were 2008 and 2012.

Also interestingly, all four times prior to 2020 when formal objections had been lodged, the objections were by Democrats. In 1969 Democrats objected to a faithless elector who switched from Nixon to Wallace in the hopes of highlighting why electoral college reform was needed. In 2001, Democrats objected to Florida’s votes on the basis that the recount was not accurate and disenfranchised black voters. In 2005, Democrats objected to Ohio’s votes alleging that black voters were disenfranchised, provisional ballots were not counted, and faulty voting machines transferred Kerry votes to Bush. In 2017, Democrats objected to results in a variety of states for a variety of reasons, primarily alleged “Russian collusion,” but also objections like Mr. Raskin’s that Trump electors were supposedly not eligible to serve or properly appointed.

The two uncontested counts in the 2008 and 2012 elections make for less interesting CR reading, because rather than getting the state by state discussion like 2001 or 2017, or the chambers adjourning the joint session to debate concurred objections separately like 2005 or 2021, you just get this:

The VICE PRESIDENT. Without objection, the tellers will dispense with reading formal portions of the certificates. After ascertaining that certificates are regular in form and authentic, the tellers will announce the votes cast by the electors for each State, beginning with Alabama.

The tellers then proceeded to read, count, and announce the electoral votes of the several States in alphabetical order.

The VICE PRESIDENT. Members of Congress, the certificates having been read, the tellers will ascertain and deliver the result to the President of the Senate.

 

And I actually just realized while reading the January 6, 2005 Congressional Record, that the chair of the January 6th Committee, Bennie Thompson, was one of the 31 representatives who voted to sustain the objection to Ohio’s (decisive) electoral votes in the 2004 election - an objection that was supported, in part, by allegations of fraud and that voting machines transferred votes and made the count inaccurate.

That’s not exactly a great look if you want to make the argument that objecting to an electoral vote count (and thus trying to overturn a state’s electoral results) is an “attempted coup.”