• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Liz Cheney, January 6 Committee Suppressed Exonerating Evidence Of Trump’s Push For National Guard

US&THEM said:
A report by the REPUBLICAN committee operation undermine all facts.
Click to expand...
Oh, OK. I wasn't aware someone had proof that their facts were wrong. You must have a link with an excerpt, amirite?
 
Paradoxical said:
Oh, OK. I wasn't aware someone had proof that their facts were wrong. You must have a link with an excerpt, amirite?
Click to expand...


A Republican-led House committee on Monday released a report attempting to undermine the work of the Jan. 6 select committee.
Why it matters: The report pushes back against the select committee's focus on former President Trump, as the presumptive GOP presidential nominee reasserts his grip over the Republican Party.

  • A senior Democratic congressional aide called the report "yet another attempt to rewrite the history of January 6th and whitewash the events of that horrible, bloody, and violent day."
  • Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), the former chair of the Jan. 6 committee, said in a statement that the report is "dishonest."

 
Uncensored2008 said:
Exculpatory evidence. If we are to have a pretense that the rule of law still exists, she has no choice but to dismiss.
Click to expand...
[^ above emphasis added by bubba]

precisely what was found exculpating about ornato's deposition?
 
soap box said:
Trump believed he could make the decision and he decided he won the election. Does the president or vice president choose the winner of a presidential election?
Click to expand...

The facts indicate that Mr. Trump thought the Constitution and law allowed the VP to have a say in that decision ie-- acting in his role of actually counting the electoral votes.
soap box said:
Then, after his decision, he committed crimes.
Click to expand...

Mr. Smith doesnt actually cite the statute that Mr. Trump supposedly violated ie the actual criminal act he did.
soap box said:
Some of those crimes are in the indictment.
Click to expand...

As above-- Mr. Smith argues that a compilation of lawful actions by Mr. Trump amount to the crimes he indicted on.
soap box said:
Ornato's transcript doesn't have much to say about any of that.
Click to expand...

The reason why Ornato transcript matters here is that it undermines the progressive political narrative as to the events of Jan 6.
 
Hamish Howl said:
No, this is just more lies from the right, sort of like when they took Smirnov seriously.
Click to expand...
The paid FBI liar who went off the reservation and FBI threw under the bus when it became strategically beneficial. The once revered FBI has jumped the shark.
 
Athanasius68 said:
The facts indicate that Mr. Trump thought the Constitution and law allowed the VP to have a say in that decision ie-- acting in his role of actually counting the electoral votes.


Mr. Smith doesnt actually cite the statute that Mr. Trump supposedly violated ie the actual criminal act he did.


As above-- Mr. Smith argues that a compilation of lawful actions by Mr. Trump amount to the crimes he indicted on.


The reason why Ornato transcript matters here is that it undermines the progressive political narrative as to the events of Jan 6.
Click to expand...
Mr. Trump thought the vice president picked the winner. Silly Mr. Trump.
 
Eriech said:
The paid FBI liar who went off the reservation and FBI threw under the bus when it became strategically beneficial. The once revered FBI has jumped the shark.
Click to expand...
That's a weird take.

If it weren't for Comer, Smirnov might very well be a free man today. The FD-1023 was buried and forgotten until Comer dug it up. Now we know Smirnov was a Russian spy, and Comer is dumber than he looks.
 
US&THEM said:
A Republican-led House committee on Monday released a report attempting to undermine the work of the Jan. 6 select committee.
Why it matters: The report pushes back against the select committee's focus on former President Trump, as the presumptive GOP presidential nominee reasserts his grip over the Republican Party.

  • A senior Democratic congressional aide called the report "yet another attempt to rewrite the history of January 6th and whitewash the events of that horrible, bloody, and violent day."
  • Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), the former chair of the Jan. 6 committee, said in a statement that the report is "dishonest."

Click to expand...
OK, I see a few opinions in your post. I asked for FACTS. I thought you had some evidence. I am disappointed. I see nothing in your post that refutes the Republican-led House committee report. I trust you will research that link and ferret out the facts instead of just grumblings by angry old Senators who don't like what it says. Thanks in advance.
 
Athanasius68 said:
The facts indicate that Mr. Trump thought the Constitution and law allowed the VP to have a say in that decision ie-- acting in his role of actually counting the electoral votes.


Mr. Smith doesnt actually cite the statute that Mr. Trump supposedly violated ie the actual criminal act he did.


As above-- Mr. Smith argues that a compilation of lawful actions by Mr. Trump amount to the crimes he indicted on.


The reason why Ornato transcript matters here is that it undermines the progressive political narrative as to the events of Jan 6.
Click to expand...
Excellent rebuttal to the nonsensical Lawfare indictment by Jackboot Smith. He fails to prove that attempting an alternate slate of electors is fraud and/or that conversations about potential actions to take are unlawful even if they are discussing things that are or could be illegal when those actions were not taken. His case is just like the Leticia James and Fani Willis case. No crime, no victims.
 
Paradoxical said:
OK, I see a few opinions in your post. I asked for FACTS. I thought you had some evidence. I am disappointed. I see nothing in your post that refutes the Republican-led House committee report. I trust you will research that link and ferret out the facts instead of just grumblings by angry old Senators who don't like what it says. Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...
Man you love being purposely obtuse
 
US&THEM said:
Man you love being purposely obtuse
Click to expand...
Really. Perhaps you can show me one rebuttal containing proof the Republicans lied in their report then? If not, then who is being obtuse?
 
Paradoxical said:
Really. Perhaps you can show me one rebuttal containing proof the Republicans lied in their report then? If not, then who is being obtuse?
Click to expand...
You want and need this Jan 6 committee to be undermines and minimized, MAGA hate reality based situations.
Playing the misunderstood victim is the typical reaction.
 
Michael Cole said:
Mr. Trump thought the vice president picked the winner. Silly Mr. Trump.
Click to expand...

It was indeed silly.

It was also silly for Biden to think he can appropriate funds.

Neither are crimes.
 
Athanasius68 said:
The reason why Ornato transcript matters here is that it undermines the progressive political narrative as to the events of Jan 6
Click to expand...
No, he talks of the events prior to Jan 6th as relates to the OP
 
Athanasius68 said:
The facts indicate that Mr. Trump thought the Constitution and law allowed the VP to have a say in that decision ie-- acting in his role of actually counting the electoral votes.


Mr. Smith doesnt actually cite the statute that Mr. Trump supposedly violated ie the actual criminal act he did.


As above-- Mr. Smith argues that a compilation of lawful actions by Mr. Trump amount to the crimes he indicted on.
Click to expand...
That's your legal theory but I don't think it relates to the indictment.


Athanasius68 said:
The reason why Ornato transcript matters here is that it undermines the progressive political narrative as to the events of Jan 6.
Click to expand...
If we remove Ornato the riot would still have happened. If we removed trump the riot would never have happened.

It doesn't matter what Ornato said because Trump is still responsible for the riot. Why did he want the NG on January 4Th but he refused to call the NG when the riot was underway?
 
Paradoxical said:
He fails to prove that attempting an alternate slate of electors is fraud and/or that conversations about potential actions to take are unlawful even if they are discussing things that are or could be illegal when those actions were not taken.
Click to expand...

Oh, has the trial happened already? I must have missed it.

You don't "prove" a case until the court renders a verdict.
 
Paradoxical said:
Excellent rebuttal to the nonsensical Lawfare indictment by Jackboot Smith. He fails to prove that attempting an alternate slate of electors is fraud and/or that conversations about potential actions to take are unlawful even if they are discussing things that are or could be illegal when those actions were not taken. His case is just like the Leticia James and Fani Willis case. No crime, no victims.
Click to expand...
Lawfare does not produce indictments. Lawfare produces noise.
 
Paradoxical said:
The point is that this information was NOT readily given by the 1-6 committee because they wanted people to believe that Trump was some deranged lunatic. I see with you....it worked. It proves the committee was there to get votes for 2022 and disbanded right after it. They were not interested in exonerating Trump at all, but in convicting him in the eyes of We, The People.
Click to expand...
Stop. Everything Loudermilk is yammering about was in the public domain. Now you boys in your silos may not have seen it. NOT MY PROBLEM
 
Eriech said:
The paid FBI liar who went off the reservation and FBI threw under the bus when it became strategically beneficial. The once revered FBI has jumped the shark.
Click to expand...
Who would that be?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom