Let's give credit to the Trump supporters.

[Slade3200]

Zzz.

I can handle typos. Hell, girl. I can even handle your massive level of dull.

Don’t act like you’re not impressed… I know you are

 

[BackAgain]

Don’t act like you’re not impressed… I know you are

I can’t imagine anyone ever being impressed by you and your dull.

 

[Seymour Flops]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
First, do this poster Flops: Go to YouTube and watch Ginsberg's testimony.
(and while doing so also watch the guy from Philadelphia testimony.)

OK, moving on from that.
I respectfully demur that "snippets" of testimony were solely played.. Some, yes, but much if not most of the testimony was live. Under oath. With questions asked and answered in real time. Trust me. Go watch it from YouTube. Not just Ginsberg but also the whole parade of Republicans (and it was mostly Republicans) who were testifying..

Next, "one-sided". Well, OK. It was mostly Republicans who testified......live and in the videos. That's 'one-sided'.
To be sure, the witnesses were queried by some Democrats on the Committee.....but also by the Republicans on the same committee.

And too, there was ample opportunity for this so-called "Republican opposition" to testify. But many of them refused or defied the subpoenas issued to them.
To wit: (this is merely a representative sample, there were others within the Trump Administration)

• Trump
• Meadows
• Kevin McCarthy
• Jim Jordan
• Eastman
• Clark
• Bannon
• Navarro
• Andy Biggs
• Scott Perry

In short, poster Flops, to those who whine that the "other side" didn't get a chance to present their case.....I say 'balderdash'.

It was mostly Republicans who testified. And many key players on the 'other side' chickened out from giving their side.

So do this (x2): Go to YouTube and watch all of the testimony from all of the hearings. Be informed. You will be a better poster here by doing more or better due diligence.

Trust me.

I watched it when it first aired. Silliest damned reality game show ever aired on prime time. You know they hired a professional television producer for it, right? Look, it's even a credit for him on IMDB:

Haw!

Who were the executive producers for the Watergate Hearings, Iran-Contra Hearings, the Clinton impeachment hearings and the Trump impeachment hearings?

There were none, you say? What, those hearings did not have "executive producers?" Yes, that's right, they did not. Because, agree or disagree with the premises, those were real hearings, not scripted evening dramas.

Yes, they were one sided. The Never Trump side, which has Republicans and Democrats. Who else testified?

Name one pro-Trump witness who testified. Name one pro-Trump congressman who asked questions.

 

[Slade3200]

I can’t imagine anyone ever being impressed by you and your dull.

Yes I believe you… and in you

 

[Chillicothe]

You know they hired a professional television producer for it, right?

And for that we all can be grateful for his professional eye for relaying a coherent narrative and keeping the public's attention focused on a topic that could have been deadly dull (over 1,000 witnesses interviewed ,multiple transcripts, millions of documents, over 14,000 hours of video of the J6 attack on the Capitol, and a 860-page final report) Sounds like gripping TV, eh?

In short, that committee's work required a professional eye to collate, manage, and present a ginormous amount of information in a short period. America was fortunate to have a skilled professional help the Committee. Remember the primary duty of a communicator is to deliver communications that the audience --the communicated to ----can understand. The Committee as the communicator did that.

The Committee's foresight in contracting with an accomplished communications-vendor helped America better understand what happened before, during, and after the vicious attack on the seat of our democracy.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Name one pro-Trump witness who testified. Name one pro-Trump congressman who asked questions.

Let's go back to an earlier post where it was mentioned that many "Pro-Trump" officials were invited, requested, subpoenaed, to give their side of the story of what happened on J6 and the events leading up to it. In short, the chair and the TV camera was available to those folks. They, themselves.....chose NOT to go before the American public and tell their side.
Tellingly, many of the witnesses knew Don Trump well, had worked for him, had worked with him .....in the White House, on the campaign trail, and with his circle of enablers.

• Trump
• Meadows
• Kevin McCarthy
• Jim Jordan
• Eastman
• Clark
• Bannon
• Navarro
• Andy Biggs
• Scott Perry

For not being responsible to the American public and stepping up to the plate to willingly tell "their side"..... does not earn one iota of sympathy. They had bountiful chances and invitations to do so. They chickened-out.

That's on them. And no one else.

I hope I am clear on that.

 

[Seymour Flops]

And for that we all can be grateful for his professional eye for relaying a coherent narrative and keeping the public's attention focused on a topic that could have been deadly dull (over 1,000 witnesses interviewed ,multiple transcripts, millions of documents, over 14,000 hours of video of the J6 attack on the Capitol, and a 860-page final report) Sounds like gripping TV, eh?

In short, that committee's work required a professional eye to collate, manage, and present a ginormous amount of information in a short period. America was fortunate to have a skilled professional help the Committee. Remember the primary duty of a communicator is to deliver communications that the audience --the communicated to ----can understand. The Committee as the communicator did that.

The Committee's foresight in contracting with an accomplished communications-vendor helped America better understand what happened before, during, and after the vicious attack on the seat of our democracy.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Let's go back to an earlier post where it was mentioned that many "Pro-Trump" officials were invited, requested, subpoenaed, to give their side of the story of what happened on J6 and the events leading up to it. In short, the chair and the TV camera was available to those folks. They, themselves.....chose NOT to go before the American public and tell their side.
Tellingly, many of the witnesses knew Don Trump well, had worked for him, had worked with him .....in the White House, on the campaign trail, and with his circle of enablers.

• Trump
• Meadows
• Kevin McCarthy
• Jim Jordan
• Eastman
• Clark
• Bannon
• Navarro
• Andy Biggs
• Scott Perry

For not being responsible to the American public and stepping up to the plate to willingly tell "their side"..... does not earn one iota of sympathy. They had bountiful chances and invitations to do so. They chickened-out.

That's on them. And no one else.

I hope I am clear on that.

I have already agreed that the pro-Trump folks gave up their opportunity to participate. I wish they would not have, but with threats of a criminal case for political speech, no doubt their lawyers told them not to offer sworn testimony.

But, that does not change the fact that it was an entirely one-sided proceeding, and therefore I do not give it any credibility as a body that gathered and tested evidence. No matter slickly produced, such a farce is not reliable as a fact-finder.

 

[Chillicothe]

But, that does not change the fact that it was an entirely one-sided proceeding, and therefore I do not give it any credibility as a body that gathered and tested evidence.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I respectfully ----demur.

To be sure, the majority of members on that Committee were Democrats. But Liz Cheney, a died-in-the-wool Conservative with a track record and voting record to prove it was on it. She was the Co-Chair. And she had gravitas, and offered succinct and insightful commentary. She was the #3 in Republican leadership of the House. You don't get to that position by being a closet liberal. Republican Representative Adam Kissinger was on it, a military veteran, hailing from a Republican district was on it. And he asked perceptive questions.

No other Congressional Republicans were on the Committee because their leader, Kevin McCarthy, refused to participate in empaneling the Committee. He, and Mitch McConnell, rejected a bi-partisan committee of experts like the 9/11 Committee was organized. And McCarthy himself refused to testify about his contentious call with Trump during the attack itself. He could have added useful insight to the American citizenry.

And then the witnesses. Mostly Republican. Many of them staffers, employees, advisors of Don Trump or the White House, or the campaign organizations. Many of them Republican lawyers.

So if whining about political affiliation of the witnesses is now trendy.....I would say there weren't enough knowledgeable Democrats as witnesses who could have offered their insights. What they saw and heard on January 6th. Including some who felt their life was at risk due to the MAGA mobsters who attacked the Capitol.

 

[Chillicothe]

And lastly, concerning the poster Flops insight of:
"I have already agreed that the pro-Trump folks gave up their opportunity to participate."

Look, responsible Americans did not want "pro-Trump"...or 'anti-Trump' witnesses.
America wanted knowledgeable witnesses who would testify honestly about what they saw and heard.

We ALL....want such witnesses. With no axe to grind. No apple to polish.

Too many of the Republicans Congressmen and staffers to Don Trump who were in a position to be informed about the decisions and actions occurring before, during and after January 6th....well, they chickened out.

Shame on them. America was the poorer for their irresponsibility to inform us.
This list is only partial of those who refused to inform the American public:

• Trump
• Meadows
• Kevin McCarthy
• Jim Jordan
• Eastman
• Clark
• Bannon
• Navarro
• Andy Biggs
• Scott Perry

 

[martybegan]

Do you need assistance, getting back on the rails, Marty?

Non response noted.

 

[martybegan]

sure, jabba.

One response type twat responds with single response type.

 

[martybegan]

So you feel YOU are being treated by the government like the Jews were in the Warsaw Ghetto, being treated by the government as if they are at war with you, you feel the government is trying to kill you.
If you or anyone from the right or left use that as a an excuse to justify violence against our government, you are insulting the Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto and our heroic US soldiers who fought in WWII.

You made a blanket statement, I called you out on it. Take it like a man, you whiny little bitch.

 

[martybegan]

Marty, I don't really understand what you are saying.
Life is not fair. It does not matter what government you live under or no government at all.

If you are looking for a government that allows or makes your life perfect, it will never happen.

It figures you don't get it, and have to respond with broad statements that dont actually reply to my position at all.

 

[martybegan]

"Blowback"?
Sounds ominous.
So, whatcha mean there, poster Marty?
You stated it. You explain it. That's the way adult discourse works.

So tell the forum exactly what you mean so that no one is left wondering.
Will you do that?
Can you do that?

------------------------------------------------------

MAGA!
Making America great again ..... one naughty word at a time.
Anyone else here, suspect prolific poster 'scruffy' is some 14yr old on his laptop?
I say that .... 'cause in my experience folks who communicate like Scruffy does are either poorly and sadly educated adults or......not yet educated teens.

Just sayin'.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


That is interesting good poster, Blues Legend.
It sounds incredibly interesting. And important.
If........
.....if you are able to prove it.
Can you?
If you can.....well, right now is a good time to do so.

Respond to my posts individually or don't bother responding, you lazy fuck.

 

[Chillicothe]

"Respond to my posts individually or don't bother responding...."

Gladly, poster Began, I was querying you on this assertion you made:

" the thing is when normal people decide the system is done for, the blowback will be swift and terrifying."

So let me ask again: What do you mean by 'blowback'?
Why would it be terrifying? Or swift?
Why do you believe your assertion is correct?
Explain yourself, Marty.

 

[Chillicothe]

And then, poster Marty, your responses to a variety of posters need be noted.
Why the anger? Why the agitation? Why the screechiness?

Response like those below do not inspire confidence in your maturity.

Or your stability.

Just sayin'.
------------------------------------------------------------------

One response type twat

you whiny little bitch.

you lazy fuck.

 

[martybegan]

Gladly, poster Began, I was querying you on this assertion you made:




So let me ask again: What do you mean by 'blowback'?
Why would it be terrifying? Or swift?
Why do you believe your assertion is correct?
Explain yourself, Marty.

It can take multiple forms, but rest assured people who are willing to risk their comfortable lives are far more dangerous than professional agitators that see revolution as their calling.

 

[martybegan]

And then, poster Marty, your responses to a variety of posters need be noted.
Why the anger? Why the agitation? Why the screechiness?

Response like those below do not inspire confidence in your maturity.

Or your stability.

Just sayin'.
------------------------------------------------------------------

Just treating those deserving no respect with the level they earned.

 

[ElmerMudd]

I have already agreed that the pro-Trump folks gave up their opportunity to participate. I wish they would not have, but with threats of a criminal case for political speech, no doubt their lawyers told them not to offer sworn testimony.

But, that does not change the fact that it was an entirely one-sided proceeding, and therefore I do not give it any credibility as a body that gathered and tested evidence. No matter slickly produced, such a farce is not reliable as a fact-finder.

This is not political speech. Was the Confederacy in 1860 expressing political speech?

 

[ElmerMudd]

You made a blanket statement, I called you out on it. Take it like a man, you whiny little bitch.

Your definition of a man and my definition of a man are very different.

 

[ElmerMudd]

It figures you don't get it, and have to respond with broad statements that dont actually reply to my position at all.

I replied to your position. Just because you do not like my response, does not mean I did not respond.