JAN 6 COMMITTEE FINAL PUBLIC HEARING MONDAY 12/19- They're making a list & Liz is checking it twice, criminal referrals on the way, MERRY XMAS BITCHES
- Thread starter lightbright
- Start date
Yo that testimony when Trump was trying to convince Pence.. I couldn't find just that snippet
Trump /Pence 4:10 if you want to go to just that.
DUDE.......this mofokr
I told yall exactly this back when America elected him.
28 sec mark
I give Pence a small amount of credit, but I also think some people might be reading too much into this.
The fact of the matter is that at this point, Pence doesn't trust anybody but his personal security squad. At this point, he is already on the outs with Trump, per accounts of previous conversations they have had during the week.
I'm sure some small part of him wanted to secure democracy, but when he says, "You aren't the one behind the wheel," I feel like he's not just saying he doesn't trust them to stay, he literally doesn't trust what they're going to do if they leave.
He gets in a car with what he finds out are a handful of Trump loyalists, and the next thing he knows, "The Vice President is unaccounted for". I don't blame him one bit for deciding to roll with the squad he got there with and to hunker down in the building.
It's more than that.
Even if the driver genuinely drove Pence out of the capital for his own safety the election doesn't get certified.
Pence knew that his certification was symbolic. So did pretty much everyone else at that trial. But the rioters didn't!
Pence doesn't complete the certification and all of a sudden the insurrectionists have a win. This would have emboldened them to try again. Not only that, but it would have been the basis of a court challenge to get Biden out of the White House.
On top of that, without his information it would have been a lot harder to secure the capital. Some of our legislators might have even been killed.
That whiteness I tells ya
January 6 committee trying to secure witnesses for hearing focusing on Trump's efforts to use Justice Department to further election lies
(CNN)The House select committee investigating the January 6 Capitol insurrection is still trying to nail down a witness list for an upcoming hearing about former President Donald Trump's efforts to use the Justice Department to help support his false election fraud claims, according to sources familiar with the matter.
The hearing, which had been scheduled for Wednesday but was postponed until next week, would feature former top Trump administration legal officials who stood up to the former president's pressure. Former acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen and acting Deputy Attorney General Richard Donoghue are expected to appear.
But the committee is striking out with Pat Cipollone, Trump's White House counsel, who many former Trump administration officials credit with helping prevent Trump from taking even more legally questionable actions in the months around the election. Sources say Cipollone is not expected to join the in-person testimony. He previously appeared for a closed-door interview with the committee.
Sources say the committee also may have to do without another former top Justice Department official they had planned to join the hearing next week: Steve Engel, who headed the Office of Legal Counsel. Engel was a key witness at a pivotal January 3 meeting at the White House where Trump held a reality TV-show style contest over whether to fire Rosen and install someone more amenable to run the Justice Department to support his election fraud claims.
CONTINUED:
January 6 committee trying to secure witnesses for hearing focusing on Trump's efforts to use Justice Department to further election lies - CNNPolitics
(CNN)The House select committee investigating the January 6 Capitol insurrection is still trying to nail down a witness list for an upcoming hearing about former President Donald Trump's efforts to use the Justice Department to help support his false election fraud claims, according to sources familiar with the matter.
The hearing, which had been scheduled for Wednesday but was postponed until next week, would feature former top Trump administration legal officials who stood up to the former president's pressure. Former acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen and acting Deputy Attorney General Richard Donoghue are expected to appear.
But the committee is striking out with Pat Cipollone, Trump's White House counsel, who many former Trump administration officials credit with helping prevent Trump from taking even more legally questionable actions in the months around the election. Sources say Cipollone is not expected to join the in-person testimony. He previously appeared for a closed-door interview with the committee.
Sources say the committee also may have to do without another former top Justice Department official they had planned to join the hearing next week: Steve Engel, who headed the Office of Legal Counsel. Engel was a key witness at a pivotal January 3 meeting at the White House where Trump held a reality TV-show style contest over whether to fire Rosen and install someone more amenable to run the Justice Department to support his election fraud claims.
CONTINUED:
January 6 committee trying to secure witnesses for hearing focusing on Trump's efforts to use Justice Department to further election lies - CNNPolitics
Listening to this on the news this morning.
A lot of these idiots have testified before the DOJ. With the DOJ, if they are caught lying it’s perjury and they can be charged.
The Jan 6 committee does not have any legal powers. This is just a hearing.
The DOJ most likely want written transcripts on what these idiots have stated to the committee and compare it to what they have.
Also, it’s possible Trump issued pocket pardon’s to a lot of folks. Pardon’s that didn’t go thru the normal process of the DOJ. This is a possibility being Eastman pleaded the 5th and others came in singing like canaries cuz they got a pardon to whip out if indicted.
We will wait and see.
I'm somewhat ignorant of what the specific legal requirements are for perjury, but it seems to me that if the DOJ interviewed someone and then has reason to believe they lied to the agency, that is sufficient to prosecute them. Why exactly do they need the House committee's transcript to confirm a lie. Can't their own investigative personnel determine if they were untruthful in a prior statement to the DOJ and indite based on that.
It should have happened months ago. The problem is that this case is just as much about the court of public opinion as it is a court of law. Maybe even more.
Right now there are people all across the country holding their guns just waiting for the signal to return Trump to the throne. Some got sick of waiting and starting their own side missions. Trying to kidnap and assassinate political figures or spread fear by shooting up a public place.
That's what this hearing is really about. It's also why the first day aired on primetime and the third day was delayed so that the presentation could be flawless.
The committee has to show the entire country that 1) Trump and his people are guilty as hell of the worst possible crimes and 2) Joe Biden is indeed the legitimate president of the United states.
If the committee doesn't accomplish this goal. Or worse, the DOJ writes their warrants too soon the backlash could destabilize the entire country in the worst possible way.
Yea they might have done exactly like they said they were going to do and hang Pence on live television..
as for Pelosi,AOC,Cheney etc..may have been a different story with them
Yea they might have done exactly like they said they were going to do and hang Pence on live television..
as for Pelosi,AOC,Cheney etc..may have been a different story with them
Yes they would have! Just like their granddaddies taught them to.
As far as what they would have done to which legislators my guess is that all of them would have been beaten with the same flag pole that killed the cop. This was a bloodthirsty mob who wasn't that bright.
Yeah, with the NV GOP primary the Clark County Sheriff (Las Vegas Metro) and some TV Commercial Personal Injury Lawyer up in the Reno area are dueling it out for Governor.
The Sheriff is a Trump endorsed candidate and the lawyer is a basic nutjob who is crying about voter integrity.
The dumbass obviously didn’t get the memo that Voter Fraud only applies when a GOP Candidate runs against a Democrat. You ain’t supposed to do it against somebody in your own party.
HaHa!!!
Whenever that buffoon speaks.... he tells you exactly what he is doing... in that speech that he just gave.... he said that "the Jan 6 committee was a con job".... he just literally tells on himself
.
Last edited:
YouTube removes video from Jan 6 panel including Trump’s election misinformation
YouTube confirmed on Friday that it had removed a video uploaded by the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot for violating the platform’s election integrity policy.
“Our election integrity policy prohibits content advancing false claims that widespread fraud, errors or glitches changed the outcome of the 2020 U.S. presidential election, if it does not provide sufficient context. We enforce our policies equally for everyone, and have removed the video uploaded by the January 6th Committee channel,” Ivy Choi, a YouTube
The video in question was a clip of a hearing that the committee conducted and posted to the video platform on Tuesday, The New York Times reported.
Part of the video showed the former president baselessly claiming on Fox Business that “We had glitches where they moved thousands of votes from my account to Biden’s account,” according to the newspaper. The clip also reportedly included some testimony from former Attorney General William Barr.
Though the committee has also shown testimony from Barr in which he dismissed former President Trump’s baseless claims of widespread voter fraud in the 2020 election, calling them “crazy stuff” and “bulls—,” that perspective was not featured in the video YouTube removed, the Times noted.
In the public hearings this month, the panel is making a case to the public that the Capitol riot resulted from a Trump-led effort to overturn the results of the 2020 election. The committee has held three hearings so far.
Trump, speaking at a Faith and Freedom event in Nashville, Tenn., on Friday, railed against the committee and its hearings.
The Hill has reached out to the committee for comment.
YouTube removes video from Jan 6 panel including Trump’s election misinformation | The Hill
YouTube confirmed on Friday that it had removed a video uploaded by the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot for violating the platform’s election integrity policy.
“Our election integrity policy prohibits content advancing false claims that widespread fraud, errors or glitches changed the outcome of the 2020 U.S. presidential election, if it does not provide sufficient context. We enforce our policies equally for everyone, and have removed the video uploaded by the January 6th Committee channel,” Ivy Choi, a YouTube
The video in question was a clip of a hearing that the committee conducted and posted to the video platform on Tuesday, The New York Times reported.
Part of the video showed the former president baselessly claiming on Fox Business that “We had glitches where they moved thousands of votes from my account to Biden’s account,” according to the newspaper. The clip also reportedly included some testimony from former Attorney General William Barr.
Though the committee has also shown testimony from Barr in which he dismissed former President Trump’s baseless claims of widespread voter fraud in the 2020 election, calling them “crazy stuff” and “bulls—,” that perspective was not featured in the video YouTube removed, the Times noted.
In the public hearings this month, the panel is making a case to the public that the Capitol riot resulted from a Trump-led effort to overturn the results of the 2020 election. The committee has held three hearings so far.
Trump, speaking at a Faith and Freedom event in Nashville, Tenn., on Friday, railed against the committee and its hearings.
The Hill has reached out to the committee for comment.
YouTube removes video from Jan 6 panel including Trump’s election misinformation | The Hill
January 6 committee says it 'won't be an obstacle' to Justice Department prosecution
(CNN)The House January 6 committee "won't be an obstacle" to Department of Justice prosecutions, the committee spokesman said in a statement Friday.
The comment was in response to Department of Justice concerns raised in court that the committee had not shared transcripts and was jeopardizing the department's ability to prosecute and investigate the January 6 events. The New York Times reported on Friday that the committee could now share them as soon as July. Several weeks ago, prosecutors told a court they did not anticipate the committee sharing them until September.
"The Select Committee is engaged in a cooperative process to address the needs of the Department of Justice," committee spokesman Tim Mulvey said in a statement provided to CNN. "We are not inclined to share the details of that publicly. We believe accountability is important and won't be an obstacle to the Department's prosecution."
The panel's statement is the latest in a back-and-forth between the committee and the Justice Department, where the department is claiming the panel is slowing its investigation by not sharing its transcripts, while the panel maintains it is not trying to stand in the way of the the department's investigation.
Democratic Rep. Bennie Thompson of Mississippi, who chairs the committee, told reporters on Thursday that the panel was not going to stop its work to share its materials with the Justice Department.
"We are not going to stop what we are doing to share the information that we've gotten so far with the Department of Justice," he said. "We have to do our work."
Democratic Rep. Zoe Lofgren of California, who is a member of the committee, criticized the Justice Department for its blanket request for all of the interview transcripts in the committee's possession, told CNN's Jake Tapper on "The Lead," "It's really not the way that DOJ is supposed to work," and asking, "what have they been doing over there?"
"I mean, they've known about all the witnesses we've had for over a year. They could subpoena them. They could open up grand juries," Lofgren said.
Enter your email to sign up for CNN's The Point with Chris Cillizza.
close dialog
Sign up for CNN's
CNN's Chris Cillizza cuts through the political spin and tells you what you need to know.
Sign Me Up
No Thanks
By subscribing, you agree to our
privacy policy.
Lofgren also said the Justice Department has a much easier process to compel witness testimony and enforce subpoenas than a congressional committee, but that the department's interest in the committee's work is potentially a sign that it is ramping up its own investigation.
"It just makes me wonder, though, what have they been doing over there?" Lofgren asked. "I mean, they have a much easier way to compel testimony under their subpoenas than we do under ours. So hopefully, this shows that they're gearing up. We're going to make sure we're doing what we are able to do to assist, but we're not going to let our investigation be disrupted."
Despite her criticism, Lofgren acknowledged that the committee will engage with the Justice Department and not be an obstacle for it.
"We're certainly going to be engaged with them and provide necessary transcripts and information that might be necessary, but you don't have the executive branch tromping into the legislative branch and essentially turning our investigation upside down. That's not the way things have proceeded. But we will engage with the DOJ. We will provide what's necessary in an orderly way," she said.
Lofgren said the Justice Department's argument that the committee is delaying trials and future prosecutions by not turning over materials was "legally false." She said the department has to turn over evidence it has, but "they don't have to turn over evidence they don't have."
"The testimony received by congressional committees is protected under the Speech or Debate Clause in the Constitution," Lofgren said. "So that's just a, you know, a serious misunderstanding."
But federal judges typically expect prosecutors to make a good-faith effort to get the information, said CNN legal contributor Elie Honig.
"Prosecutors have an obligation to turn over exculpatory evidence, evidence that may be helpful to a defendant. So if you're a prosecutor, you have to go out and gather any evidence that may help a defendant even in any small way," Honig said. "What they want to avoid is a situation where they say, 'Judge, there's evidence that Congress has, we don't have it, sorry, we can't turn it over,' and the judge might dismiss those cases."
The letter, said Honig, is likely part of the effort to show it is trying to get the information from Congress.
January 6 committee says they 'won't be an obstacle' to Justice Department prosecution - CNNPolitics
(CNN)The House January 6 committee "won't be an obstacle" to Department of Justice prosecutions, the committee spokesman said in a statement Friday.
The comment was in response to Department of Justice concerns raised in court that the committee had not shared transcripts and was jeopardizing the department's ability to prosecute and investigate the January 6 events. The New York Times reported on Friday that the committee could now share them as soon as July. Several weeks ago, prosecutors told a court they did not anticipate the committee sharing them until September.
"The Select Committee is engaged in a cooperative process to address the needs of the Department of Justice," committee spokesman Tim Mulvey said in a statement provided to CNN. "We are not inclined to share the details of that publicly. We believe accountability is important and won't be an obstacle to the Department's prosecution."
The panel's statement is the latest in a back-and-forth between the committee and the Justice Department, where the department is claiming the panel is slowing its investigation by not sharing its transcripts, while the panel maintains it is not trying to stand in the way of the the department's investigation.
Democratic Rep. Bennie Thompson of Mississippi, who chairs the committee, told reporters on Thursday that the panel was not going to stop its work to share its materials with the Justice Department.
"We are not going to stop what we are doing to share the information that we've gotten so far with the Department of Justice," he said. "We have to do our work."
Democratic Rep. Zoe Lofgren of California, who is a member of the committee, criticized the Justice Department for its blanket request for all of the interview transcripts in the committee's possession, told CNN's Jake Tapper on "The Lead," "It's really not the way that DOJ is supposed to work," and asking, "what have they been doing over there?"
"I mean, they've known about all the witnesses we've had for over a year. They could subpoena them. They could open up grand juries," Lofgren said.
Enter your email to sign up for CNN's The Point with Chris Cillizza.
close dialog
Sign up for CNN's
CNN's Chris Cillizza cuts through the political spin and tells you what you need to know.
Sign Me Up
No Thanks
By subscribing, you agree to our
privacy policy.
Lofgren also said the Justice Department has a much easier process to compel witness testimony and enforce subpoenas than a congressional committee, but that the department's interest in the committee's work is potentially a sign that it is ramping up its own investigation.
"It just makes me wonder, though, what have they been doing over there?" Lofgren asked. "I mean, they have a much easier way to compel testimony under their subpoenas than we do under ours. So hopefully, this shows that they're gearing up. We're going to make sure we're doing what we are able to do to assist, but we're not going to let our investigation be disrupted."
Despite her criticism, Lofgren acknowledged that the committee will engage with the Justice Department and not be an obstacle for it.
"We're certainly going to be engaged with them and provide necessary transcripts and information that might be necessary, but you don't have the executive branch tromping into the legislative branch and essentially turning our investigation upside down. That's not the way things have proceeded. But we will engage with the DOJ. We will provide what's necessary in an orderly way," she said.
Lofgren said the Justice Department's argument that the committee is delaying trials and future prosecutions by not turning over materials was "legally false." She said the department has to turn over evidence it has, but "they don't have to turn over evidence they don't have."
"The testimony received by congressional committees is protected under the Speech or Debate Clause in the Constitution," Lofgren said. "So that's just a, you know, a serious misunderstanding."
But federal judges typically expect prosecutors to make a good-faith effort to get the information, said CNN legal contributor Elie Honig.
"Prosecutors have an obligation to turn over exculpatory evidence, evidence that may be helpful to a defendant. So if you're a prosecutor, you have to go out and gather any evidence that may help a defendant even in any small way," Honig said. "What they want to avoid is a situation where they say, 'Judge, there's evidence that Congress has, we don't have it, sorry, we can't turn it over,' and the judge might dismiss those cases."
The letter, said Honig, is likely part of the effort to show it is trying to get the information from Congress.
January 6 committee says they 'won't be an obstacle' to Justice Department prosecution - CNNPolitics
You need HWITE guilt; which is nonexistent.
I think Republicans put him up to run against Clyburn and he got his ass smoked but still I hate Black people like him. I hate coons
Yo some heads has to roll for this
Means nothing , Republikkklans are untouchable
Similar threads
