• 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

reflechissez said:
You people go from zero to sixty with your conspiracy theories.

1. Do you believe the FBI was in on it?
2. Do you believe Pelosi knowingly and intentionally minimized security? If so, why would she do that?
3. We know why Babbitt was shot. It's on camera.
4. What footage do you think you're missing?
Click to expand...
I'll summarize my opinion of what a "fair" investigation would find.

#1 - I do think the FBI was in on it - planning, implementation, and execution. My guess is the FBI would say that's part of their job - to get in the middle of things like that to learn more about both the situation and the players. In the process of doing that "job", I think they very likely also stirred the pot by both encouraging and increasing the intensity of it. I would think it highly likely some of the FBI involved had strong partisan leanings which influenced their involvement - in such a way as to increase the severity and intensity of the riot so the party they oppose would both look bad and hurt themselves in the public eye.

#2 - YES I do. For very similar reasons to the latter part of my answer about the FBI. I think it VERY likely she wanted chaos to both happen and to be observed. I do not think she wanted injuries to members of Congress, but I think she very much wanted a chaotic riot to play out. It could have easily been quite contained by the presence of adequate security/police personnel but I think Nancy wanted a scene and a very big narrative to go with it.

#4 - Thousands of hours of footage are not being released. I would imagine it would show interesting actions (or inactions) by both FBI and Capitol Police. Potentially, members of Congress as well.

I think a "fair" investigation would indicate there is all sorts of blame to go around. Clearly, those rioting would receive blame (and they already are). But, I think the wrong doing would spread quite far and wide, if it was fairly investigated. It was widely known a large protest was expected! But, there was NO reason for that large protest to turn into a disorderly riot because there was EVERY reason to have plentiful security detail - and there wasn't even close to adequate security! Many personnel requests were made and many were (very oddly) denied or ignored. But, even if a fair investigation were to take place, I don't think there is even a remote chance a fair application of justice would occur.
 
Anthony60 said:
Brightened your day, that young lady's death did? That's a good little leftist. Quite disgusting, actually. You have my pity.
Click to expand...

It's always a good day when a traitor takes it in the neck.

In this case, it was even literally in the neck.
 
Anthony60 said:
Brightened your day, that young lady's death did? That's a good little leftist. Quite disgusting, actually. You have my pity.
Click to expand...

So you cried when Bin Laden was killed? That’s weird. Unless you rooted against American on 911 as well as Jan 6.
 
Before I can reply—what do you mean that ‘it hasn’t been done before’?
Click to expand...
Pelosi's action of rejecting the committee members. She said that to McCarthy, as told by McCarthy. Pelosi hasn't denied it. But that's just an aside, it's the fact that she would even do that. Supposed to be a bipartisan committee, and she takes action to make sure that it isn't.
 
Anthony60 said:
Pelosi's action of rejecting the committee members. She said that to McCarthy, as told by McCarthy. Pelosi hasn't denied it. But that's just an aside, it's the fact that she would even do that. Supposed to be a bipartisan committee, and she takes action to make sure that it isn't.
Click to expand...

He chose to nominate clowns. Tough luck.
 
Aunt Antifa said:
So you cried when Bin Laden was killed? That’s weird. Unless you rooted against American on 911 as well as Jan 6.
Click to expand...
I didn't know he was at the Capitol on Jan 6th. Got a photo? Or do you mean Ashley Babbitt killed over 3,000 Americans that day? What a foolish comment.
 
joko104 said:
Definitely should. Security at the Capitol ultimately is those two's jobs. They had 1,900 Capitol police to call upon - and didn't
Click to expand...
joko104 said:
THAT IS THE #1 QUESTION. Not why did a huge protest gathers also produce a small riot, which always happens. The vandalism done near the bottom of the scale compared to dozens to hundreds over the previous 2 years.
Click to expand...

LMAO.. Can you name another time when the halls of congress were trashed? When the house had to be evacuated? Please... this bullshit of this being a small riot is ignorant...

joko104 said:
But that won't happen. The new Capitol police chief explained to Congress that security at the Capitol isn't really his or the Capitol polices' job. It is the job of the National Guard, FBI and DHS. The job of Capitol police is to run the ticket booths, watch for shoplifters in the gift shops, and not let in people without shoes or shirt. Operate the info desk. Look at security cameras. Or some other blame ass excuses like that.
Click to expand...

Who commands the DC National Guard?
 
Luce said:
It's always a good day when a traitor takes it in the neck.

In this case, it was even literally in the neck.
Click to expand...
There you go. I'm getting a good idea of the type of person you are, as are others.
 
911Sparky said:
Do you think there may be some hypocrisy in your statement, or were you the only republican to object to the 10 Benghazi investigations into Clinton?
Click to expand...
How many years ago was that? Same Republicans?
Why is this all the left can dredge up from history to defend Pelosi and her politically motivated crap over the last 4+ years?

Let's not forget that in the Benghazi case, there were gross security oversights by Democrats the same as with 1/6.
Also the same was the prevention of forces at hand that could have intervened but were prevented from doing so.

Pelosi's dismissals are due to the questions she doesn't want to have asked in committee on the record, same as with Hillary in the Benghazi case.

'Why does it seem to be a recurring theme with Democrats get caught up in similar security situations?' might be a legitimate question to ask.
 
Anthony60 said:
Pelosi's action of rejecting the committee members. She said that to McCarthy, as told by McCarthy. Pelosi hasn't denied it. But that's just an aside, it's the fact that she would even do that. Supposed to be a bipartisan committee, and she takes action to make sure that it isn't.
Click to expand...

But she can, this special committee was set up EXACTLY like the Republicans Benghazi committee. And I think it was almost word for word on the rules
 
Liz Cheney, talking about McCarthy's withdrawing from the Jan 6 Commission:

“Any person who would be 3rd in line to the presidency must demonstrate a commitment to the Constitution and a commitment to the rule of law, and Minority Leader McCarthy has not done that.”
Cheney signaled agreement with Pelosi's decision to block Banks and Jordan, citing their "disgraceful" rhetoric about the select committee.
 
poweRob said:
Man, you guys are already set with your scape-goat excuses and diversions.
Click to expand...
David Atkins: "It is just mindboggling that there was a partisan attempted coup within minutes of murdering legislators, there has been no public investigation of any but the doofus footsoldiers, its leader is just hanging out at his golf club, and we're blithely talking about debt ceilings."
 
Anthony60 said:
I didn't know he was at the Capitol on Jan 6th. Got a photo? Or do you mean Ashley Babbitt killed over 3,000 Americans that day? What a foolish comment.
Click to expand...

I mean she attacked our democracy. You’re upset that someone attacking our democracy took a bullet for it. It does not compute.
 
Anthony60 said:
Ah, so really, there was never going to be a bipartisan committee then. Why bother with the pretense?
Click to expand...

Exactly. Why bother with any pretense that the GOP isn’t an anti-american death cult?
 
Aunt Antifa said:
I mean she attacked our democracy. You’re upset that someone attacking our democracy took a bullet for it. It does not compute.
Click to expand...
The bending of logic is fascinating. Remember when federal law enforcement and Secret Service had to protect the White House? Nobody was shot, but it seems you'd be good with them killing those people. Well, not just good, quite happy. That about right?
 
Anthony60 said:
The bending of logic is fascinating. Remember when federal law enforcement and Secret Service had to protect the White House? Nobody was shot, but it seems you'd be good with them killing those people. Well, not just good, quite happy. That about right?
Click to expand...

USSS always has to protect the WH, you’re delusional.

And what does any of that have to do with your being upset at a terrorist being shot for attacking Democracy?
 
Anthony60 said:
Wow, it's been quite a while since you've actually even tried to answer. It is a debate board, you know that?
Click to expand...

What is it you want debated? You are insisting that Jim Jordan is a pol of good faith looking to get to the bottom of what happened on Jan 6, and you want that notion entertained seriously. I don’t have to. It’s not a serious argument.
 
gbg3 said:
I'll summarize my opinion of what a "fair" investigation would find.
Click to expand...

There…is literally no means for an investigation to be “fair” if you demand it pre-finds the things you want it to.

Holy shit, Republicans are so used to rigging things they now just casually discuss their wishcasting as though it’s what passes for impartial.
 
Aunt Antifa said:
USSS always has to protect the WH, you’re delusional.

And what does any of that have to do with your being upset at a terrorist being shot for attacking Democracy?
Click to expand...
Did your cat walk across your keyboard your something? Just more disjointed reasoning, eh? I see why you stick to that, it's what you are good at. Debating, not so much.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom