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.
No, not the last day. Liz Cheney "teased" a few things that we'll hear from next week's hearings, including a witness who is yet to be identified.
You forgot to add this interesting little bit:
“After our last hearing, President Trump tried to call a witness in our investigation, a witness you have not yet seen in these hearings,” Cheney said at the end of the House select committee hearing on Tuesday. “That person declined to answer or respond to President Trump's call, and instead alerted their lawyer to the call. Their lawyer alerted us. And this committee has supplied that information to the Department of Justice.”
Trump wasn't planning a rally. He was planning a violent takeover of the government. It was never planned to be a "good" thing.
I still think a lot of people like Antifa types used the rally as an opportunity to do their evil, just like in 2020 with so called "peaceful protestors" then BLM entered in and thats when mayhem happened.
without cross examining in a proper trial, i cannot accept your statement. You are not a mind reader. me neither. a cross examining lawyer would have to prove his intent.
Trump is the one who PLANNED the rally SPECIFUCALLY FOR THAT DAY. He wanted his supporters to disrupt the official counting of electoral votes. No doubt about it. Trump planned this.
It is time for you to stop trying to give him the benefit of the doubt.
I can agree to what you just said, I as a Trump voter. I do believe Trump wanted to stop the electoral college from doing its job. it appears that he was trying to do anything desperately making that happen. There is enough evidence to support that.
I still think a lot of people like Antifa types used the rally as an opportunity to do their evil, just like in 2020 with so called "peaceful protestors" then BLM entered in and thats when mayhem happened.
without cross examining in a proper trial, i cannot accept your statement. You are not a mind reader. me neither. a cross examining lawyer would have to prove his intent.
You really should watch today's hearing before you make any more comments here.
The online media is starting to catch up with the hearings now. Good for the witness for notifying their lawyer.
Quote:
The House select committee investigating the attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6 revealed that it told the Department of Justice that former President Donald Trump contacted one of its witnesses who hasn’t publicly testified yet.
“After our last hearing. President Trump tried to call a witness in our investigation. A witness you have not yet seen in these hearings,” Rep. Liz Cheney, the vice chair of the committee, said on Tuesday.
“That person declined to answer or respond to President Trump’s call and instead alerted their lawyer to the call. Their lawyer alerted us. And this committee has supplied that information to the Department of Justice,” she added.
“After our last hearing, President Trump tried to call a witness in our investigation, a witness you have not yet seen in these hearings,” Cheney said at the end of the House select committee hearing on Tuesday. “That person declined to answer or respond to President Trump's call, and instead alerted their lawyer to the call. Their lawyer alerted us. And this committee has supplied that information to the Department of Justice.”
Yes, Witness intimidation is a big deal. Trump may have fried his own butt with this one.
I think it’s an exaggeration and even inflammatory. The committee should stick to the facts and not embellish. We do not know that a phone call that was never answered is witness tampering.
This smacks of sensationalism and I expect more from Liz Cheney.
And this is from someone who generally has high praise for the work the committee is doing.
I still think a lot of people like Antifa types used the rally as an opportunity to do their evil, just like in 2020 with so called "peaceful protestors" then BLM entered in and that's when mayhem happened.
without cross examining in a proper trial, i cannot accept your statement. You are not a mind reader. me neither. a cross examining lawyer would have to prove his intent.
Why do you think that a lot of people like Antifa types used the rally as an opportunity to do their evil?
No one claiming that Antifa activists stormed the Capitol has provided legitimate proof.
The evidence that Trump supporters participated, however, is indisputable.
There's one more hearing remaining. They'll take you through a minute by minute of the events of January 6th.
Personally, I don't think it looks good for Trump, all things considered, but I do have concerns about the whole process here.
Mr Raskin, Mrs Murphy, and her highness Liz Cheney did a good job, as usual, assuming you believe everything as told. I personally very much like the Chair, Mr. Thompson. I consider myself an independent conservative, if there is such a thing. They were tying things together today, for a tighter timeline. And of course, their comments are carefully crafted, notwithstanding the overall impression that Trump could not be reasoned with.
some thoughts:
Although people are under oath, many are simply expressing their own opinions of what was happening, what Trump meant when he said certain things, or posted on Twitter. People are being allowed to relay hearsay information, which is not admissible in a court of law but (?) is going to be permitted in with a body of evidence to supposedly prosecute Trump? that doesn't sit right with me ...
The two 'witnesses' today were a former hired spokesperson for the Oath Keepers and some 'regular Joe' who showed up on Jan 6th due to encouragement on social media. Tatenhove said he was once swayed by the Oath Keeper philosophy but left them after years of service after he overheard a conversation among members denying the Holocaust. He feels/admits that the group is violent, para-military, and that their leader, Rhodes, is off the rails. Then he throws in the 'what if it happens again?' Chances are likely this was a one time event - but what do I know?
Ayers, the regular Joe guy, got caught up in the frenzy. He indicated when Trump told people to go to the Capitol, he followed along with everyone else. He believed in Trump and believed the election had been stolen (but of course, he doesn't now). Claims he left the building when Trump finally told people to leave. He's only been charged with trespassing (other charges were dropped) but claims he lost his job, had to sell his house, etc. His wife was sitting behind him.
I felt most sorry for Pat Cipollone - seemed like he was threading the needle when answering. Some questions he couldn't answer due to privilege but even he said at some point, everyone finally came to the conclusion that there wasn't enough to prove fraud in the election, at least not enough to change the result - everyone except Trump, who went off the rails. And the people around Trump, even trusted personal advisors, were not able to sway him in his conviction.
That's my take. Anyone see somethng I missed or misinterpreted, please let me know. I did wash my windows and blinds during the first half but sat for the 2nd. I'm weary of it all, but also very troubled.
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.
