Donald Trump and the House Jan. 6 Committee

Republicans no longer declare the Jan. 6 insurrection was caused by antifa. They no longer say it was a peaceful protest. They no longer say the intruders of our capitol were tourists who "stayed between the ropes."

In fact, they don't say anything about the insurrection that resulted in five deaths and over a hundred capitol defenders were injured.

Why are Republican leaders silent about Jan. 6? Their lives were at risk on that day, and all we get from them is silence?

On December 19, President Trump, for all practical purposes, circled the date. The Times reports, "For weeks, President Trump and his supporters had been proclaiming Jan. 6, 2021, as a day of reckoning. A day to gather in Washington to “save America” and “stop the steal.”

“Big protest in D.C. on January 6th,” Trump tweeted on Dec. 19, just one of several of his tweets promoting the day. “Be there, will be wild!”

“We’re going to walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women. You have to show strength, and you have to be strong.”

“When you catch somebody in a fraud, you are allowed to go by very different rules."

“We fight like hell and if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.”

"Now it is up to Congress to confront this egregious assault on our democracy. And after this, we’re going to walk down, and I’ll be there with you. We are going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country.”
********************************************************************************Donald J. Trump, Jan. 5, 2021

Trump's personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, chimed in.

“If they ran such a clean election, they’d have you come in and look at the paper ballots. Who hides evidence? Criminals hide evidence. Not honest people. Over the next 10 days, we get to see the machines that are crooked, the ballots that are fraudulent, and if we’re wrong, we will be made fools of. But if we’re right, a lot of them will go to jail. Let’s have trial by combat.”

Little wonder as to why Republican leaders wish to remain silent on the subject.

In the meantime, Trump remains beloved by the members of his cult, the grassroots Republican. That is a dilemma for the Republican Party.

 

CNN reports. "Former White House counsel Pat Cipollone testified for eight hours in front of the House Jan. 6 Committee on Friday in a closed-door interview. Here are some key moments of his testimony played at the committee's seventh hearing on Tuesday.

"He did not think there was sufficient evidence of election fraud: In his testimony, Cipollone said he agreed with former Attorney General Bill Barr, who concluded there was insufficient evidence of election fraud. He recounted former chief of staff Mark Meadows saying in November 2020 that then-President Trump should have conceded, to which he said he agreed. Jason Miller, a former senior adviser to Trump, told the committee that Cipollone called John Eastman's theory to overturn the election "nutty." Cipollone did not refute this statement.

"He was verbally attacked during the Dec. 18, 2020 meeting at the White House. Cipollone told the committee he walked into the Dec.18 meeting attended by Trump, former Trump campaign lawyer Sidney Powell, former national security adviser Michael Flynn and former Overstock CEO Patrick Byrne.

"The meeting, which lasted six hours, was described as “unhinged” by former Trump White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson. Ideas circulated about overturning the election including Flynn's suggestion to invoke martial law and inspection of voting machines.

“I don’t think any of these people were providing the President with good advice,” Cipollone told the committee.

"After asking where the evidence was for claims of voter fraud, Cipollone said that he and Meadows were verbally attacked for questioning where the evidence was for Trump’s claimed victory."

CBS reports, "Tuesday's hearing began with a tweet Trump sent at 1:42 a.m. on Dec. 19, 2020, which said, "Big protest in D.C. on January 6th. Be there, will be wild!"

"On January 6, Trump knew the crowd was angry," committee member Raskin said. "He knew the crowd was armed. He sent them to the Capitol anyway."

"When you catch somebody in a fraud, you are allowed to go by very different rules."
We fight like hell and if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.”
Now it is up to Congress to confront this egregious assault on our democracy. And after this, we’re going to walk down, and I’ll be there with you. We are going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country,” part of President Trump's instructions to the mob on Jan. 6, 2021.

Was this the President giving orders to those in the audience?

 

CNN reports, "Republican leaders are trying to send a not-so-subtle signal to Donald Trump these days: Do NOT announce for president before the November midterm elections."

“Yeah, I think we’d like to just kind of keep the accelerator down and push hard into November,” Sen. John Thune, the second-ranking Republican in the chamber, said Monday. “I think we’ve got, you know, the issues set and everything the political landscapes, environment’s favorable. And I think the fewer disruptions obviously, the better, but, you know, I don’t have any control over what he may or may not do or when he may do it.”

"Thune’s warning comes amid increasing signs that Trump is itching to announce a third candidacy – and to do so before the midterms.

"The party's message is clear: Don’t screw this up for us."

 

CNN reports, "The House January 6 hearings have evolved from documenting a stain on history to a warning of a violent and tyrannical future that awaits if Donald Trump is allowed to again unleash America’s pent-up extremism.

"In the latest episode of its limited season television event, the House select committee on Tuesday traced Trump’s links to and inspiration for far right-wing groups that came to Washington to help his mob smash its way into Congress in early 2021. These were the forces that heeded the ex-President’s call to “fight like Hell” to thwart President Joe Biden’s election, including the Oath Keepers militia and the Proud Boys he once told to “stand back, and stand by” on national TV.

This continuing effort to undermine American institutions and the rule of law is showing that Trump’s threat to democracy didn’t end in 2021. Whatever impact the committee has on the ex-President’s future political prospects, and whether or not he ends up facing criminal charges, there’s a sense that while documenting Trump’s past transgressions, the committee is also racing to keep up with his new ones.

The public hearings are an effort to expose a seam of far right-wing extremism that exists below the surface of American political life, CNN.

In the meantime, the forum's Republicans remain totally silent about all this. Congressional Republicans are the quietest bunch of lawmakers in American history, and, if they say anything at all, it is to complain about inflation. According to a recent poll, 49% of GOP voters favor Trump becoming the Presidential candidate in 2024. The Democrats are doing all they can to ensure Republicans win control of Congress in November.

There is something seriously wrong with America.

 

What five deaths? How and when did they die other than the female protester?

 

I think most Republicans are preparing to dump their "leader". For which all they have to do is deny that they ever supported him. And Republican followers will believe them because... well... that's how the Republican Party works, nowadays.

 

Looks that way. Why did it take this damn long? /smdh

 

Another yawn thread about another fake Democrat committee that has no teeth, no charges, no indictments, and 15% support.
This is what all the hoopla is about?
Maybe they wake up after midterms but 85% of the country seriously doubts it.

 

No one ever said half these things, they had eyes.

 

the orders were given prior to the "rally" by the time the rally began the oath keepers were forming "stacks" at the capital doors and the proud boys were marching in formation to the capital.

i do not expect eisenhower told each soldier to attack normandy on jube 6 "will be wild." . those orders were given by bradley, montgomery, patton etc just as the insurrectionists received orders variously from stone, flynn, and bannon at the "war room."

the code words : "will be wild" "1776" "red wedding" etc were issued months before jan 6. and were well known among trump's "tough guys."

 

Ramp, this is my "issue" with all the Hate Brigade.

The reality is everything before and after that THREE HOURS AND 17 MINUTES (of his complete disconnect and dereliction of duty) can be debated until the cows come home for our 20th generation descendants.

The ONLY thing that they can't possibly deny or spin is his failure to act in the best interests of the Capitol police officers and our lawmakers during that time period.

There is no counterargument to that. None.

 

We spent way too much time debating it. As such, what this Congress does or doesn't do is effectively swept under the rug. For example, there's a semiconductor issue that was passed by the Senate on a bipartisan basis and it seems to be crucial in the geopolitical field for maintaining our competitive edge. Guess who nixed the possibility of a deal, even while being aware of the fact that she'll likely have to revisit and agree to the Senate deal?

That's right, the Madam Speaker herself in all of her glory will once again cut her nose to spite her face, and not lead the democrats to a compromise bill. But we don't get to know this stuff unless we really look because....1/6

1/6 is the excuse of the failure of the American Government. Please my fellow citizens, vote out all incumbents, they are the problem not the solution.

 

is the us government in the semiconductor business now? is that constitutional;?

 

If there's a field with lobbyists and interests, the US government can find a way to get involved lol.

 

Really? You should run to the courthouse and tell that to the judge who will be hearing Steve Bannon's trial next week.

The committee can subpoena witnesses, take depositions under oath, and refer to the DoJ if any of them lie or refuse to comply. That's all the "teeth" they need.

BTW, I don't know what 15% you're talking about. But you appear to believe that people going to jail depends on some sort of "popular vote". Wrong again!

 

1. Committees that don't apply the rules of evidence, refuse cross examinations, refuse testimony for the defense, and allow hearsay testimony are more akin to dictatorships and have no power.

2. 15%ers are whats left over of the leftist who buy into these types of fake committees

3. Hate to hurt your feelings but Bannons trial has nothing to do with the committee. lol

 

Please inform us of any evidence presented to the committee that was false.

Trump and his allies in the scheme to overthrow our elected government are invited to defend Trump. But Trump and those associated with the failed coup attempt have stayed away. They do not want to incriminate themselves.

I am no longer allowed to post reports on my thread that I started a year and a half ago entitled:

A report card on the Biden administration

So, I began this thread to keep track of the Jan. 6 committee and its effect on Trump and the Republican Party. I also began a new thread entitled:

The Biden Era

This new thread will keep abreast of the Biden administration, and, to some extent, the Republican Party and how it is affecting the Biden administration.

Both titles are links.

 

Looks like we have another poster that doesn’t research
There were not five deaths at the January 6th PROTEST

 

One of the committee's witnesses says it was Antifa starting it all.... and he was there... wow a first hand witness... kind of unheard of in this scam committee show trial

But wait... we have this man with totally 180 degree opinion when recorded that day and his testimony under oath before the committee... Trump did it in front of the committee.... antifa did it with a fresh memory that day...

STEPHEN MICHAEL AYRES.... with the day fresh in his mind he mentioned nothing about Trump hypnotizing him into entering the capitol...

 

Did Cipollone say Trump incited a riot? Did the Committee ask any questions of Cipollone that had any relevance to Hutchinsoin's "stories" that he could corroborate or not corroborate? That is what people were screaming for before he testified..... did it every happen?

 

Sure.
Hutchinsons testimony that Trump assaulted a SS agent and tried to take control of the presidential limo.
And before you start claiming her testimony was under oath, she was testifying to what she claimed she was told. When you testify to what someone else claimed, that someone else isn't under oath and its hearsay evidence.
Once her testimony as aired, the Secret Service immediately responded that those claims were false and requested to have the actual officers in the limo testify. And the committee refused to call them.
And before you respond with (but they weren't under oath) they have everything to lose by falsifying any claim either publicly or under deposition. Hutchinson has nothing to lose by making a hearsay claim of what she heard someone else say. Which is why real committee's don't allow hearsay testimony unless evidence is provided to verify it prior to testimony.

So any committee that has opposing testimony from the accused source, would hear that testimony to verify who is lying. But this committee wanted no part of it as they wanted no part of any testimony in defense and wanted no part of any committee member that was in opposition on the committee.

Additionally, any testimony that is not cross examined to remove all bias from a claim, has no value. Even if its true.

False.
Name one request for any witness in opposition of the committee that was requested to testify. You can't so please stop making assumptions.
The committee even refused to allow the Secret Service testify when their were claims against them.

 

Trump and Steve Bannon lie so much they no longer can distinguish reality from fantasy.

ABC reports, "Steve Bannon, a former top adviser in Donald Trump's White House, recently told the House panel investigating the Capitol riot that he would be willing to testify since Trump now says he won't cite executive privilege.

"In a letter on Saturday to the committee, obtained by ABC News, Bannon said he would prefer testifying in a live, public hearing after the former president had sent him a separate letter on Saturday."

Bannon thinks the Jan. 6 committee will allow him to appear on live television to expound on his zany, baseless conspiracy fantasies? He definitely has a problem with reality. That is not going to happen.

ABC explains, "Jan 6 committee member Rep. Zoe Lofgren suggested that a public testimony may be unlikely. "This goes on for hour after hour after hour. We want to get all our questions answered, and you can't do that in a live format."

Then there is the matter of executive privilege. This is where fantasy collides with reality when Trump and Bannon are involved.

Again, ABC explains, "Both the House committee and federal prosecutors who sought to speak with Bannon have said the executive privilege claims never covered him, since the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection took place long after Bannon left his post as chief White House strategist in 2017.

"Bannon previously defied a subpoena from the committee and is awaiting trial on criminal contempt charges."

Suddenly, Bannon now wants to cooperate with the committee ... governed by his conditions, of course. As mentioned, that will not happen.

ABC continued, "In Trump's letter to Bannon, Trump reiterated his criticisms of the House committee."

"He wrote, "When you first received the Subpoena to testify and provide documents, I invoked Executive Privilege. However, I watched how unfairly you and others have been treated. Therefore, if you reach an agreement on a time and place for your testimony, I will waive Executive Privilege for you, which allows you to go in and testify truthfully and fairly..."

"The Justice Department revealed in an early Monday morning court filing that federal investigators interviewed former President Donald Trump's attorney Justin Clark two weeks ago in connection with former Trump adviser Steve Bannon's criminal contempt case.

"Prosecutors say that Clark confirmed in the interview that at no point did Trump ever invoke executive privilege over Bannon's testimony."

Who is lying? I really have no idea, but Clark was under oath to federal investigators. Trump and Bannon are free to lie. They were not under oath. The reader can decide.

 

MEANING, they don't want any of Bannons testimony they don't like available to the public.
They never had a problem with hour after hour of Muellers testimony
They never had a problem with the impeachment inquiry hour after hour testimony
They never had a problem with hour after hour Capital riot committee.

This claim couldn't be any more fake. If Bannon is a psychopath then what better arena to let the country decide for themselves in a public hearing.
All Democrat's want to do is control the narrative EXACTLY like they tried to do in the impeachment hearings and failed so miserably.
If Bannon decides he won't wave his executive privilege unless the hearings are public there is no excuse you can provide that doesn't show Democrats are making excuses to try and control what the public hears.

Fake news from fake sites who haven't a clue what executive privilege is. Executive privilege doesn't just evaporate no matter what conditions you think you want to put on it.
And it isn't governed by employment. There are thousands of individuals who are not employees of the WH or government that converse with the president that are also covered by executive privilege. Thats because executive privilege is for the president, not the person having discussions with the president.
Every president has executive privilege with his staff as well as advisors and individuals from other countries. Always have, always will. And neither you or the DOJ, or the existing president, or the House, or the Senate, have any say in that matter.

And the only times executive privilege can be waved is by a federal judge if the judge decides the information will not endanger national security or by the president himself.
Any other fantasy as to anyone else declaring what is or isn't executive privilege or when and if it can be applied is just fake information by low educated voters.

 

Sandy Shanks said:
Congressional Republicans are the quietest bunch of lawmakers in American history, and, if they say anything at all, it is to complain about inflation. According to a recent poll, 49% of GOP voters favor Trump becoming the Presidential candidate in 2024.

There is something seriously wrong with America.

The WSJ reports, "Members of the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol are discussing the next steps in their investigation, including whether to seek an interview with former Vice President Mike Pence and potentially ex-President Donald Trump, according to one of the Republican members of the panel.

"Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R., Ill.), the panel member who will be leading some of the questioning at next Thursday’s prime-time hearing, said in an interview ahead of a meeting Thursday that the panel could decide to request a written interview with Mr. Pence. The committee could also discuss whether to issue a subpoena to the former vice president to try to compel him to testify, he said.

"The committee is also weighing whether it will ask Mr. Trump to testify, Mr. Kinzinger said. Earlier this year, Chairman Bennie Thompson (D., Miss.) had signaled it was unlikely that the panel would call Mr. Trump but other members indicated it was still under consideration."

The committee is unwilling to provide a soapbox for Trump's baseless conspiracies. That said, Republicans need to ask themselves a question.

The committee has not turned away anyone who wishes to testify. Why is it Donald Trump refuses to testify in his own defense?

The WSJ continued, "The next hearing, which hasn’t been formally scheduled, is expected to focus on what was happening during a 187-minute period on Jan. 6 that culminated in a 4:17 p.m. video by Mr. Trump in which he asked rioters, whom he called “very special,” to leave the Capitol."

“The information we’re going to present is going to be so compelling in terms of what was happening during the 187 minutes,” Mr. Kinzinger said.

 

This is surreal!

CNN reports, "Indiana’s Republican attorney general said Thursday that authorities in his state are investigating – for potential failure to report child abuse – a doctor who said she recently helped a 10-year-old rape victim from Ohio obtain an abortion in Indiana, even as the attack already had been reported by the girl’s mother and Ohio police were investigating.

"Attorney General Todd Rokita first made the announcement Wednesday on Fox News.

"Dr. Caitlin Bernard, an Indianapolis-based Ob-Gyn, told CNN earlier this month that she helped the girl after Ohio banned abortion as early as six weeks of gestation following the US Supreme Court’s ruling that overturned Roe v. Wade. The young girl was raped in early May and police in Columbus were first alerted of her pregnancy on June 22, according to police documents and court testimony. A little more than a week later, the girl underwent an abortion in Indiana."