Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
WRONG. It was unprecedented by Pelosi. She even said it. It was "reasonable" for Pelosi to put Adam Schiff, a well known Trump hater and a proven liar about Trump for years in the committee but veto 2 Republians because they would have focus on a different narrative and focus on the lack of security of Congress making Pelosi look bad? What a hack.
Pelosi can't pick the members of the opposing side just because they have a different narrative than the speaker. All congressional hearings in history have 2 sides so all narratives are represented except this one.
WSJ editotial: UNPRECEDENTED by Pelosi and here you are defending her abuse of power by using Congress to criminally investigate private citizens of the opposing party and leaking to push their narrative. That is the real abuse of power here.
It’s not a different narrative it’s a lie. You want someone on the committee who will continue to expound trumps lies in a scenario where they can lie without consequences.
Trumps own attorneys denied there was election fraud when in a court of law where they could be punished for lying
Knowing that you still want Jordan to be able to put forth completely discredited conspiracy theories
Republican Judges appointed by trump found no evidence of fraud.
While losing 63 lawsuits Trumps own attorneys say there is no evidence of electoral fraud in their court pleadings and IN OPEN COURT.
Giuliani said in open court there was no fraud . Many of trumps lawyers stated in open court no fraud.
Fox News and newsmax read on air retractions saying no fraud.
Sydney Powell said no rational person would believe her fraud claims
Attorney General William Barr said in an interview that the Justice Department has uncovered no evidence of widespread voter fraud that would tip the results of the presidential election, a comment directly undercutting allegations being made by President Donald Trump and his legal team.
“To date, we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have affected a different outcome in the election,” Barr told the Associated Press
3rd circuit court of appeals
The court said it would not issue an injunction to undo the certification because “the Campaign’s claims have no merit.”
“The number of ballots it specifically challenges is far smaller than the roughly 81,000-vote margin of victory. And it never claims fraud or that any votes were cast by illegal voters,” the court found.
Republican senator Sasse statement
“And based on what I’ve read in their filings, when Trump campaign lawyers have stood before courts under oath, they have repeatedly refused to actually allege grand fraud –because there are legal consequences for lying to judges,"
Chris Christie who was in the Oval Office helping trump prepare for the debates said
"They allege fraud outside the courtroom, but inside the courtroom they don't plead fraud and they don't argue fraud.
Trump RNC lawyer in Arizona
attorney Kory Langhofer stressed the plaintiffs were "not alleging fraud" or "that anyone is stealing the election" — simply raising concerns about a "limited number of cases" involving "good faith errors."
Giuliani in Pennsylvania
And when Brann pressed Giuliani to explain why none of the specific legal claims in the suit are based on voter fraud, the president’s lawyer admitted the campaign isn’t pleading voter fraud at all. Later, Brann asked whether he should apply a higher legal standard of “strict scrutiny” to the case, which is required when fraud is alleged.
“If we had alleged fraud, then yes, but this is not a fraud case,” Giuliani said quickly.
Trump campaign lawyer Goldstein in Pennsylvania
“In your petition, which is right before me — and I read it several times — you don’t claim that any electors or the Board of the County were guilty of fraud, correct?” asked the judge. “That’s correct?”
“Your Honor, accusing people of fraud is a pretty big step,” Goldstein replied. “And it is rare that I call somebody a liar, and I am not calling the Board of the DNC or anybody else involved in this a liar. Everybody is coming to this with good faith. The DNC is coming with good faith. We’re all just trying to get an election done. We think these were a mistake, but we think they are a fatal mistake, and these ballots ought not be counted.”
“I understand,” he told Goldstein. “I am asking you a specific question, and I am looking for a specific answer. Are you claiming that there is any fraud in connection with these 592 disputed ballots?”
“To my knowledge at present, no,” Goldstein said.
“Are you claiming that there is any undue or improper influence upon the elector with respect to these 592 ballots,” queried the judge.
“To my knowledge at present, no,” was Goldstein’s reply.
So give us the positive facts about Trump and 1/6, why don’t you, since you obviously are holding back? If there is another side or a reasonable explanation, we’d all like to hear it.
It’s not a different narrative it’s a lie. You want someone on the committee who will continue to expound trumps lies in a scenario where they can lie without consequences.
Trumps own attorneys denied there was election fraud when in a court of law where they could be punished for lying
Knowing that you still want Jordan to be able to put forth completely discredited conspiracy theories
Republican Judges appointed by trump found no evidence of fraud.
While losing 63 lawsuits Trumps own attorneys say there is no evidence of electoral fraud in their court pleadings and IN OPEN COURT.
Giuliani said in open court there was no fraud . Many of trumps lawyers stated in open court no fraud.
Fox News and newsmax read on air retractions saying no fraud.
Sydney Powell said no rational person would believe her fraud claims
Attorney General William Barr said in an interview that the Justice Department has uncovered no evidence of widespread voter fraud that would tip the results of the presidential election, a comment directly undercutting allegations being made by President Donald Trump and his legal team.
“To date, we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have affected a different outcome in the election,” Barr told the Associated Press
3rd circuit court of appeals
The court said it would not issue an injunction to undo the certification because “the Campaign’s claims have no merit.”
“The number of ballots it specifically challenges is far smaller than the roughly 81,000-vote margin of victory. And it never claims fraud or that any votes were cast by illegal voters,” the court found.
Republican senator Sasse statement
“And based on what I’ve read in their filings, when Trump campaign lawyers have stood before courts under oath, they have repeatedly refused to actually allege grand fraud –because there are legal consequences for lying to judges,"
Chris Christie who was in the Oval Office helping trump prepare for the debates said
"They allege fraud outside the courtroom, but inside the courtroom they don't plead fraud and they don't argue fraud.
Trump RNC lawyer in Arizona
attorney Kory Langhofer stressed the plaintiffs were "not alleging fraud" or "that anyone is stealing the election" — simply raising concerns about a "limited number of cases" involving "good faith errors."
Giuliani in Pennsylvania
And when Brann pressed Giuliani to explain why none of the specific legal claims in the suit are based on voter fraud, the president’s lawyer admitted the campaign isn’t pleading voter fraud at all. Later, Brann asked whether he should apply a higher legal standard of “strict scrutiny” to the case, which is required when fraud is alleged.
“If we had alleged fraud, then yes, but this is not a fraud case,” Giuliani said quickly.
Trump campaign lawyer Goldstein in Pennsylvania
“In your petition, which is right before me — and I read it several times — you don’t claim that any electors or the Board of the County were guilty of fraud, correct?” asked the judge. “That’s correct?”
“Your Honor, accusing people of fraud is a pretty big step,” Goldstein replied. “And it is rare that I call somebody a liar, and I am not calling the Board of the DNC or anybody else involved in this a liar. Everybody is coming to this with good faith. The DNC is coming with good faith. We’re all just trying to get an election done. We think these were a mistake, but we think they are a fatal mistake, and these ballots ought not be counted.”
“I understand,” he told Goldstein. “I am asking you a specific question, and I am looking for a specific answer. Are you claiming that there is any fraud in connection with these 592 disputed ballots?”
“To my knowledge at present, no,” Goldstein said.
“Are you claiming that there is any undue or improper influence upon the elector with respect to these 592 ballots,” queried the judge.
“To my knowledge at present, no,” was Goldstein’s reply.
For me, it’s a question of fairness; I was barely a teenager during Watergate and what led to that committee’s credibility was it’s composition—nearly evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans. They weren’t out to “get” Nixon and many from both parties were fans. They went into investigating with an open mind.
I don’t get the impression with this highly partisan committee. We know the goal—get Trump, and short of throwing him in prison, damage him politically. Waste of money. I have yet to hear any testimony on how this riot logistically happened—why wasn’t there a bigger force guarding The Capitol? Did FBI surveillance pick up on any chatter? Where was the large-scale planning?
It’s as if they’re working backwards—Trump did it, Trump caused it, let Garland indict Trump.
This investigation is so phony. The committee isn’t concerned about trying to prevent this from happening again. They just want to prevent Trump from running because they don’t trust the American people to make up their minds that his political shelf life has expired. This committee, composed nearly completely of Democrats, thinks we’re stupid. And I’m tired of Democrats feeling we’re so stupid that we should just depend on them for handouts, and telling us which words and pronouns to use, and whose “truth” needs to be believed, whether criminal or victim, depending on their demographics.
And so I say “Personally, I look forward to a day when I can consider voting for a Democrat again, in good conscience, as I have in the past.”
So give us the positive facts about Trump and 1/6, why don’t you, since you obviously are holding back. If there is another side or a reasonable explanation, we’d all like to hear it.
Let me type slowly for you because I have said it many times and goes in one ear and out the other. Trump was impeached and acquitted over the matter. He is now a private citizen. Anything "new" has to go to the DOJ and protect due process and the law and impartiality. You are not going to get me to trial this case in this forum with the "evidence" coming out of the Pelosi's Kangaroo court but here you are everyday with your buddies repeating the same thing over and over, day after day. It's amusing. TDS does that to people.
My CONCERN is the political process. Why Pelosi is using Congress to criminally investigate private citizens of the opposing party and make criminal charges and leak for the mid-terms advantage? That is the main abuse of power here regardless if the DOJ takes the case or not.
Why is Adam Schiff in the committee? That alone kills any credibility the committee had to start if they ever had one.
Let me type slowly for you because I have said it many times and goes in one ear and out the other. Trump was impeached and acquitted over the matter. He is now a private citizen. Anything "new" has to go to the DOJ and protect due process and the law and impartiality. You are not going to get me to trial this case in this forum with the "evidence" coming out of the Pelosi's Kangaroo court but here you are everyday with your buddies repeating the same thing over and over, day after day. It's amusing. TDS does that to people.
My CONCERN is the political process. Why Pelosi is using Congress to criminally investigate private citizens of the opposing party and make criminal charges and leak for the mid-terms advantage? That is the main abuse of power here regardless if the DOJ takes the case or not.
Why is Adam Schiff in the committee? That alone kills any credibility the committee had to start if they ever had one.
Congress can investigate what you, personally, had for lunch if they want. You keep throwing legal terms up there that have absolutely no bearing on the situation.
For me, it’s a question of fairness; I was barely a teenager during Watergate and what led to that committee’s credibility was it’s composition—nearly evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans. They weren’t out to “get” Nixon and many from both parties were fans. They went into investigating with an open mind.
I don’t get the impression with this highly partisan committee. We know the goal—get Trump, and short of throwing him in prison, damage him politically. Waste of money. I have yet to hear any testimony on how this riot logistically happened—why wasn’t there a bigger force guarding The Capitol? Did FBI surveillance pick up on any chatter? Where was the large-scale planning?
It’s as if they’re working backwards—Trump did it, Trump caused it, let Garland indict Trump.
This investigation is so phony. The committee isn’t concerned about trying to prevent this from happening again. They just want to prevent Trump from running because they don’t trust the American people to make up their minds that his political shelf life has expired. This committee, composed nearly completely of Democrats, thinks we’re stupid. And I’m tired of Democrats feeling we’re so stupid that we should just depend on them for handouts, and telling us which words and pronouns to use, and whose “truth” needs to be believed, whether criminal or victim, depending on their demographics.
And so I say “Personally, I look forward to a day when I can consider voting for a Democrat again, in good conscience, as I have in the past.”
. Due process and take it out of politics and from very dishonest people. Remember Trump was already impeached and acquitted and he is a private citizen. Anything "new", has to be done by the DOJ with protections of due process and impartiality.
Why is Pelosi allowed to use Congress to criminally investigate private citizens of the opposing party, leak and make criminal accusations of a private citizen? That is the real abuse of power here regardless if the DOJ indicts or not.
Let me type slowly for you because I have said it many times and goes in one ear and out the other. Trump was impeached and acquitted over the matter. He is now a private citizen. Anything "new" has to go to the DOJ and protect due process and the law and impartiality. You are not going to get me to trial this case in this forum with the "evidence" coming out of the Pelosi's Kangaroo court but here you are everyday with your buddies repeating the same thing over and over, day after day. It's amusing. TDS does that to people.
My CONCERN is the political process. Why Pelosi is using Congress to criminally investigate private citizens of the opposing party and make criminal charges and leak for the mid-terms advantage? That is the main abuse of power here regardless if the DOJ takes the case or not.
Why is Adam Schiff in the committee? That alone kills any credibility the committee had to start if they ever had one.
So, then, you have nothing positive you can say. Got it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. Due process and take it out of politics and from very dishonest people. Remember Trump was already impeached and acquitted and he is a private citizen. Anything "new", has to be done by the DOJ with protections of due process and impartiality.