• 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!

Pelosi rejects Jordan, Banks for Jan. 6 committee

Good move on Jordan. He is nothing but a disrupter and show boat but now McCarthy will pull them all in a preplanned move to discredit the committee. What a flipping mess. The real question should be why McCarthy refused the special committee that met every one of his demands. Just more and more polarization and dig in. Meanwhile, Biden keeps pushing ahead with an agenda aimed to pull up the middfkje class. I think voters will see who is working for the people vs working to please Trump.
 
Carl Young said:
By a Grand Jury.
Click to expand...

Optics are for pansies. Who gives a ****. Now is not the time to prove anything to anyone. Now is the time to investigate and bring everything to light. Let history decide who was right and who was wrong.

Idiots worried about "how will this look" are pathetic pieces of shit.
 
ecofarm said:
Optics are for pansies. Who gives a ****. Now is not the time to prove anything to anyone. Now is the time to investigate and bring everything to light. Let history decide who was right and who was wrong.

Idiots worried about "how will this look" are pathetic pieces of shit.
Click to expand...
You feel comfortable with Congress investigating itself? Then you'll likely get the outcome you want.
 
Callen said:
No, she wants bipartisan but impartial...that would not be Jordan but to be honest it wouldn't be Scihff either
Click to expand...
Excellent point on Schiff not being impartial.

To an extent, each party leader should be able to appoint their representatives to the committee. People they want to appoint. In many cases, having a few skeptics are a good way to help achieve a balanced result.
 
dcsports said:
And she is still pushing the pretense that she wants an impartial, bipartisan, committee?
Click to expand...
It was never going to be impartial, bipartisan. That's not what Pelosi and the Democrats want.

She dismissed Jordan because he was going to ask questions that she doesn't want answered.
 
dcsports said:
Excellent point on Schiff not being impartial.

To an extent, each party leader should be able to appoint their representatives to the committee. People they want to appoint. In many cases, having a few skeptics are a good way to help achieve a balanced result.
Click to expand...
A 'balanced result' isn't what Pelosi wants.
 
The reason for appointing Jordan was to make the hearings so nauseating that everybody tuned out. Pelosi was under no obligation to help McCarthy do that.
 
I don't think people who oppose investigations understand what an investigation means. They think someone is given mind control power over them and they don't want that. But that's not what investigations are, are they. Investigations produce evidence and then we decide. I decide. Having looked at the evidence.

But some people think investigations are mind control and must be stopped. That's insane.
 
mrjurrs said:
Sweet.

thehill.com

Pelosi rejects Jordan, Banks for Jan. 6 committee

Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Wednesday rejected two of the Republican picks — Reps. Jim Jordan (Ohio) and Jim Banks (Ind.) — for the Jan. 6 select committee. Both GOP lawmakers are staunch al…
thehill.com thehill.com
Click to expand...
Good!! But since McCarthy now wants to put on a show for his King of Fla by withdrawing all 5 picks, Pelosi simply needs to pick the other 5 and move on with the investigation, asap!
 
Democrats better use the slim majority while they have it. History doesn’t think they will…..
 
eohrnberger said:
It was never going to be impartial, bipartisan. That's not what Pelosi and the Democrats want.
Click to expand...
Not true. She pushed hard for a truly bipartisan special committee which McCarthy rejected because he knew the results would be credible and difficult to challenge so he rejected it in favour of something he, from the start, knew he could label as partisan. Everything he had done from rejecting the special committee to appointing Jordan has been orchestrated to do just that.
 
There's nothing our geopolitical opponents would like more than for us to stop investigating anything. Let the country slide into corruption. The policing of our representatives is a most important policing. Democracy depends on it.
 
dcsports said:
And she is still pushing the pretense that she wants an impartial, bipartisan, committee?
Click to expand...
Republicans weren’t interested when such a thing was proposed. Now it becomes Nancy’s thing by default. Republicans are free to name their own “It was just tourists” commission.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom