1/6 Committee informs the DOJ that they have evidence of Criminality against Donald J Trump

[Juan de Fuca]

The House rules say there should be more Republicans chosen by the Republican leadership.

Pelosi tossed the names given to her and handpicked two never Trumpers.

Non-partisan?

There were 5 Republican members of the committee. When Nancy Pelosi rejected two members, McCarthy pulled all 5. This was McCarthy's hissy fit not anyone else’s. In case you weren't aware, Pelosi rejected Jim Jordan, who the committee is investigating. It made little sense to have someone under investigation on the committee. Jim Banks was preoccupied in establishing the cause of the insurrection and blaming it on BLM. Pelosi rejected him for his inability to be objective.

 

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

1. Never allow a story you created to go unused, Nancy was behind 1/6/2020, in every stage.
2. Early planning, calling down the security to allow the protesters inside.
3. Not to mention she refused the offer for the national guard to be brought in when Trump himself a few days before offered to call them in.
4. Its Nancy.
5. Oh shit I just blew up the internet again.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

 

[PinktheFloyd88]

They are stage props and are know anti-Trumpers. It is an exclusively partisan committee.

Uh, okay. I'm talking about real life. They are Republicans.

 

[Turtlesoup]

Jan. 6 committee concludes Trump violated multiple laws in effort to overturn election​

The findings were filed in federal court.



https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.841840/gov.uscourts.cacd.841840.160.0.pdf

"The Select Committee also has a good-faith basis for concluding that the President and members of his Campaign engaged in a criminal conspiracy to defraud the United States in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371."

Jan. 6 committee says Trump violated multiple laws in effort to overturn election

The select panel suggested its evidence supported findings that the former president violated multiple laws by attempting to prevent Congress from certifying his defeat.

www.politico.com

Funny, I clearly see CRIME FRAUD happening here---from the committee Itself.

 

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

1. Yes she sent in the gun man to shoot a girl.
2. Even.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

 

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,

1. You wanted to know the truth.
2. I just gave it too you.
3. Nancy, take it to the bank, Nancy.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Jan. 6 committee concludes Trump violated multiple laws in effort to overturn election​

The findings were filed in federal court.



https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.841840/gov.uscourts.cacd.841840.160.0.pdf

"The Select Committee also has a good-faith basis for concluding that the President and members of his Campaign engaged in a criminal conspiracy to defraud the United States in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371."

Jan. 6 committee says Trump violated multiple laws in effort to overturn election

The select panel suggested its evidence supported findings that the former president violated multiple laws by attempting to prevent Congress from certifying his defeat.

www.politico.com

J6 Reichstag Fire

 

[Viktor]

If you folks think this is a good thread, just wait until the trial and the conviction. I may even publish a book about the tears shed that day.

Show us the evidence. The Jan 6 committee has not mentioned any. The lawsuit was filed against the committee by a law professor.

 

[Viktor]

There were 5 Republican members of the committee. When Nancy Pelosi rejected two members, McCarthy pulled all 5. This was McCarthy's hissy fit not anyone else’s. In case you weren't aware, Pelosi rejected Jim Jordan, who the committee is investigating. It made little sense to have someone under investigation on the committee. Jim Banks was preoccupied in establishing the cause of the insurrection and blaming it on BLM. Pelosi rejected him for his inability to be objective.

There are 7 Democrats and 2 Republicans on the Committee. It's a stacked deck with a foregone conclusion. How stupid can anybody be?

 

[forkup]

Show us the evidence. The Jan 6 committee has not mentioned any. The lawsuit was filed against the committee by a law professor.

The committee has used both testimony under oath and contemporary written documentation as evidence. It's not anybodies fault but your own that you don't know or reject that fact.

 

[surada]

Perusal of the hack committee’s retarded analysis shows that someone maybe “connected” to Trump may have suggested a “minor” violation of the law. So? Go after that guy if there’s a proper basis. But that doesn’t establish anything about what Trump did or asked for.

Trump spent 5 weeks inciting the mob to overturn the election.

 

[j-mac]

Jan. 6 committee concludes Trump violated multiple laws in effort to overturn election​

The findings were filed in federal court.



https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.841840/gov.uscourts.cacd.841840.160.0.pdf

"The Select Committee also has a good-faith basis for concluding that the President and members of his Campaign engaged in a criminal conspiracy to defraud the United States in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371."

Jan. 6 committee says Trump violated multiple laws in effort to overturn election

The select panel suggested its evidence supported findings that the former president violated multiple laws by attempting to prevent Congress from certifying his defeat.

www.politico.com

May, might be, could have….lol keep reaching for those straws….lol

 

[22lcidw]

Trump spent 5 weeks inciting the mob to overturn the election.

That what is currently in office is an abomination to our nation.

 

[forkup]

There are 7 Democrats and 2 Republicans on the Committee. It's a stacked deck with a foregone conclusion. How stupid can anybody be?

The Democrats offered a commitee of non-lawmakers evenly split between people appointed by Democrats and Republicans. The GOP rejected that proposal. Even the current Committee that ended up being the only option left has members of both parties in it.

Complaining about the partisan nature of the Committee now is akin to complaining about your house catching fire after you doused it with gasoline and tossed a match in it.

 

[surada]

That what is currently in office is an abomination to our nation.

Character counts.

 

[Independent thinker]

Jan. 6 committee concludes Trump violated multiple laws in effort to overturn election​

The findings were filed in federal court.



https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.841840/gov.uscourts.cacd.841840.160.0.pdf

"The Select Committee also has a good-faith basis for concluding that the President and members of his Campaign engaged in a criminal conspiracy to defraud the United States in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371."

Jan. 6 committee says Trump violated multiple laws in effort to overturn election

The select panel suggested its evidence supported findings that the former president violated multiple laws by attempting to prevent Congress from certifying his defeat.

www.politico.com

Imagine that, a kangaroo investigation of nothing but anti-Trumpers turns up evidence on the kangaroo.

 

[BrokeLoser]

If you folks think this is a good thread, just wait until the trial and the conviction. I may even publish a book about the tears shed that day.

 

[CowboyTed]

The partisan 1/6 committee, more properly known as “TheTrump Impeachment Canard, Part III.” That “committee?” Oh. Ok. Persuasive.

Oh Fuck, No pardons this time...

 

[bripat9643]

There were 5 Republican members of the committee. When Nancy Pelosi rejected two members, McCarthy pulled all 5. This was McCarthy's hissy fit not anyone else’s. In case you weren't aware, Pelosi rejected Jim Jordan, who the committee is investigating. It made little sense to have someone under investigation on the committee. Jim Banks was preoccupied in establishing the cause of the insurrection and blaming it on BLM. Pelosi rejected him for his inability to be objective.

Pisslosi had no right to pull any Republicans.

 

[CowboyTed]

Imagine that, a kangaroo investigation of nothing but anti-Trumpers turns up evidence on the kangaroo.

It doesn't matter political views of the investigators... They found evidence or the didn't...

Seems ye don't get it... You can't go to court and say the prosecution isn't being impartial, they are asking you tough questions and making you look guilty... Get fucking serious... You break the law, you convicted....

None of ye are trying to saying Trump is innocent... Attempting to organise a coup is a crime, yes it was pathetic ad was manned by the most incompetent set of grifters and lowlifes but Trump was ordering them. He was attending rallies and ringing up election officials...

But lets see the evidence and have a court case to determine innocence or guilt...