First they complained about the makeup of the commission.........

[jc456]

Bingo.

so that whole witness thing is garbage then.

 

[jc456]

You keep telling the same lie.

(WASHINGTON) – Today, Committee on Homeland Security Chairman Bennie G. Thompson (D-MS) announced that he has reached an agreement with Ranking Member John Katko (R-NY) to introduce legislation to form a bipartisan, independent Commission to investigate the January 6 domestic terrorism attack on the United States Capitol and recommend changes to further protect the Capitol, the citadel of our democracy. The legislation, entitled the National Commission to Investigate the January 6 Attack on the United States Capitol Complex Act (H.R. 3233), will be introduced by Reps. Thompson and Katko today and is expected to be considered in the House as soon as next week.

Commission details:

• The Commission will be charged with studying the facts and circumstances surrounding the January 6th attack on the Capitol as well as the influencing factors that may have provoked the attack on our democracy.
• Like the 9/11 Commission, the measure establishes a 10-person bipartisan commission with five commissioners, including the Chair, appointed by the Speaker of the House and Majority Leader of the Senate and five commissioners, including the Vice Chair, appointed by the Minority Leaders of the House and Senate.
• Commissioners must have significant expertise in the areas of law enforcement, civil rights, civil liberties, privacy, intelligence, and cybersecurity. Current government officers or employees are prohibited from appointment.
• Like the 9/11 Commission, the Commission will be granted authority to issue subpoenas to secure information to carry out its investigation but requires agreement between the Chair and the Vice Chair or a vote by a majority of Commission members.
• The Commission will be required to issue a final report with findings regarding the facts and causes of the attack, along with recommendations to prevent future attacks on our democratic institutions, by December 31, 2021.

so why didn't mccarthy get to name his reps?

 

[rightwinger]

McCarthy proposed members who were potential witnesses and compromised

So what? It's not a trial.

Conflict of interest

Not only that, but they then refused to testify

 

[jc456]

That's the kind of thing someone says when they can't make a case against the evidence revealed by the committee.

that's what someone posts when the facts support it. It's more like, what you posted is what someone posts when the facts expose your ploy.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Nope, can't seat two possible subjects to the investigation.
You should have called McCarthy and told him to quit being a PUSSY.

Why not?

It's a hearing, not a court.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Conflict of interest

Not only that, but they then refused to testify

It they didn't seat anyone with a conflict, it'd be an empty room.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

McCarthy was given his choice, and he chose people he knew Pelosi would not seat. He did so on purpose, to give an excuse to walk away from the investigation. Performance politics at its best. And you fall for these shenanigans every single time.

She should have let him seat them. The joke would be on him.

You idiots fall for these shenanigans every single time.

 

[martybegan]

You keep telling the same lie.

(WASHINGTON) – Today, Committee on Homeland Security Chairman Bennie G. Thompson (D-MS) announced that he has reached an agreement with Ranking Member John Katko (R-NY) to introduce legislation to form a bipartisan, independent Commission to investigate the January 6 domestic terrorism attack on the United States Capitol and recommend changes to further protect the Capitol, the citadel of our democracy. The legislation, entitled the National Commission to Investigate the January 6 Attack on the United States Capitol Complex Act (H.R. 3233), will be introduced by Reps. Thompson and Katko today and is expected to be considered in the House as soon as next week.

Commission details:

• The Commission will be charged with studying the facts and circumstances surrounding the January 6th attack on the Capitol as well as the influencing factors that may have provoked the attack on our democracy.
• Like the 9/11 Commission, the measure establishes a 10-person bipartisan commission with five commissioners, including the Chair, appointed by the Speaker of the House and Majority Leader of the Senate and five commissioners, including the Vice Chair, appointed by the Minority Leaders of the House and Senate.
• Commissioners must have significant expertise in the areas of law enforcement, civil rights, civil liberties, privacy, intelligence, and cybersecurity. Current government officers or employees are prohibited from appointment.
• Like the 9/11 Commission, the Commission will be granted authority to issue subpoenas to secure information to carry out its investigation but requires agreement between the Chair and the Vice Chair or a vote by a majority of Commission members.
• The Commission will be required to issue a final report with findings regarding the facts and causes of the attack, along with recommendations to prevent future attacks on our democratic institutions, by December 31, 2021.

Nothing about being able to reject those proposed by the MINORITY LEADERS because the Majority doesn't want them.

The dems decided after this to reject two Minority members.

 

[rightwinger]

This isn't a "kangaroo court" at all. In fact, it's not a court at all. It's a body which is gathering evidence. That's all they're doing. They're finding out how January 6th happened, and why.

Republicans have claimed it was a "spontaneous demonstration" that got out of hand. But the evidence shows that it was anything but a spontaneous demonstration at all. It was planned and orchestrated to be a violent insurrection to frighten House members into overturning the election.

So far, they have done a spectacular job presenting testimony that was previously hidden

History will thank them

 

[Independent thinker]

That's the kind of thing someone says when they can't make a case against the evidence revealed by the committee.

The committee only has one agenda. It's not to get truth, it's to get Trump. That's why the committee is made up of all anti-Trumpers.

 

[CowboyTed]

well she and her fellow reps were all victims and must recuse themselves from this. So how can they have a hearing as the questioners? You know that's illegal right?

Under that theory a committee investigating Climate Change can have no one on it too...

Your premise is a bit stupid and any Judge would tell you so...

Jordan was an active player in the attack... It is utterly unacceptable for him to be on the panel...

This Committee is just to do an investigation, they have no power of prosecution...

Trump choose to not appear at the committee which shows prioritises hiding stuff over clearing his name...

Anyway the evidence is pretty clear that a number of laws were broken and members of the Trump circle were definitely involved...

 

[CowboyTed]

Bottom line: The committee is made up of nothing but anti-Trumpers who only have an anti-Trump agenda.

Not the bottom line...

Evidence is found... There job is to find evidence...

This is like you complaining they found the murder weapon in your ca and asking why didn't they check everyone else's car...

Such a snowflake response...

 

[Winco]

Why not?

It's a hearing, not a court.

Because it’s an investigation Tod

Jordan and Banks made it clear they were there to stop the investigation.
They have no interest in finding the truth, they would be there ONLY to defend trump

Fine, they can defend trump, under oath, once a trial begins.

They scream they want their voices heard, but when put under oath they will be silent and run.

 

[jc456]

They are desperate.

who is desperate? What is it we're desperate about?

 

[BlindBoo]

The Neo-GOP didn't want their narrative and talking points about the events that day and surrounding days to be challenged. So they opposed all investigations, starting with this one.

Republicans poised to block creation of Jan. 6 commission

Senate Republicans are poised to quash an effort Thursday to establish a bipartisan, independent commission to study the Jan. 6 attacks on the U.S. Capitol.

abcnews.go.com

 

[jc456]

Not the bottom line...

Evidence is found... There job is to find evidence...

This is like you complaining they found the murder weapon in your ca and asking why didn't they check everyone else's car...

Such a snowflake response...

evidence of what? why does the chairman disagree with you?

 

[jc456]

Because it’s an investigation Tod

Jordan and Banks made it clear they were there to stop the investigation.
They have no interest in finding the truth, they would be there ONLY to defend trump

Fine, they can defend trump, under oath, once a trial begins.

They scream they want their voices heard, but when put under oath they will be silent and run.

and what? what standing does it have to keep anyone out?

 

[Independent thinker]

Not the bottom line...

Evidence is found... There job is to find evidence...

This is like you complaining they found the murder weapon in your ca and asking why didn't they check everyone else's car...

Such a snowflake response...

Evidence of what? From what I have read, the huge majority of the "evidence" is in Trump saying that the 2020 election was stolen. It is not against the law for him to say that. He has the first amendment right to say the election was stolen, just as democrats had the same first amendment rights when they spent years saying the 2016 election was stolen. Come on, hearsay evidence that Trump lunged for the steering wheel? First off, it's hearsay evidence. Second off, it is not against the law to lunge for the steering wheel. Trump ordered the taking down of metal detectors because he was fine with letting in armed protesters because he felt safe? The "evidence" shows that even though protesters entering the Capitol were armed, none of them used guns. So, Trump was right.

 

[jc456]

Because it’s an investigation Tod

Jordan and Banks made it clear they were there to stop the investigation.
They have no interest in finding the truth, they would be there ONLY to defend trump

Fine, they can defend trump, under oath, once a trial begins.

They scream they want their voices heard, but when put under oath they will be silent and run.

nice deflection away from the fact that it isn't about a witness under oath, but representatives to counter with challenging questions for the ones that were. So fking demofk I tell you. you're as fked in the head as anyone I deal with in here.

Know that you aren't smarter than me.

 

[jc456]

Evidence of what? From what I have read, the huge majority of the "evidence" is in Trump saying that the 2020 election was stolen. It is not against the law for him to say that. He has the first amendment right to say the election was stolen, just as democrats had the same first amendment rights when they spent years saying the 2016 election was stolen.

impeachment for three years of his presidency interfering in the job he was voted in to do. Talk about taking away one's vote. The demofks are fking experts at it.