The 1/6 Committee Hearings

@mesquite,

I sincerely hope so. One of the things that has (in my mind, anyway)set these hearings apart from the congressional hearings I was accustomed to has been the way they have been about strictly business. Not just a soapbox for congresspeople trying for sound bytes, but asking questions and showing evidence.
A “witness” like Bannon could put a screeching halt to all that.

If they need his testimony, they can just get it in closed session like they did with Cippolone.

0 Replies

Quote:

Steve Bannon, the onetime strategist to Donald Trump who was involved in the former president’s efforts to invalidate his defeat in the 2020 election, has opened discussions with the House January 6 select committee about testifying to the inquiry into the Capitol attack.

The offer of cooperation could mark a breakthrough for the panel, which has sought Bannon’s testimony for months, believing he could provide unique insight into the inner-workings of Trump’s unlawful push to stop the congressional certification of his loss to Joe Biden from taking place.

The Guardian

0 Replies

That article makes it sound like the committee is thinking about taking the bait and letting Bannon testify. I sure hope they don’t give him a platform to show his ass.

0 Replies

Yeah, could you imagine Congress and the people getting all of the witness testimony instead of the just those shilling for the Democrats? How ******* horrible would that be?

1 Reply

@Region Philbis,

I wrote:

today's hearing has been moved to 1 PM and thursday's has been postponed...

0 Replies

@McGentrix,

So you think all of those republicans testifying under oath are lying?

0 Replies

Does anyone remember this?

https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/i/Cutachogie/Garland.jpg

This was part of the questioning done with Robert Mueller after he had wrapped up his investigation, and was testifying before congress.
He clearly stated that in his opinion Trump could be charged with obstruction as soon as he left office.
His findings laid out no less than ten clear instances of obstruction that could be used to draw up those charges.

Merrick Garland was handed that information on a silver platter, and then he proceeded to do nothing with it, until the statute of limitations ran out.

Was Mueller just mistaken? You'd think his opinion that Trump could be charged would be pretty solid. I mean, he was Robert Mueller, the stalwart bulldog of by-the-book rule of law.

If he wasn't mistaken in stating that Trump could be charged with all those instances of obstruction, then why the **** did Merrick Garland just let them sit until they were defunct?

Further, if Garland was that feckless about Mueller's obstruction charges, why should we believe that he is going to do anything with all the information being uncovered and tied in a bow by the 1/6 committee?

0 Replies

next hearing will be thursday, 7/21 @ 8:00 PM ET...

0 Replies

I think I would be interested in seeing what others think about Garland’s refusal to charge Trump with the obstruction charges laid out by the Mueller investigation.

I think I would, but I also am a little cautious to ask because I think the answer may be just more blind faith in Garland and the DOJ.

0 Replies

No matter. Because along with commentary and questions I have about the 1/6 hearings, I will continue to say what I think about the DOJ and Merrick Garland.

In answer to the faithful patient one’s who are full of assurance that Garland is doing what’s right, at the necessary pace, I refer you to my post above that talks about his inaction on Mueller’s findings.

To those who say Garkand’s reputation as a dogged prosecutor was proven by his handling of the OK City bombing, I say that is an urban myth that unduly inflates Garland’s role.

Now the DOJ has released a statement saying that they were
“shocked” or “stunned” (don’t remember which- maybe it was both) by Cassidy Hutchinson’s testimony.

After a year and a half of investigation, how in the **** is one of the, if not the biggest, best funded and resourced investigative bodies in the nation surprised
by her testimony? And if they really didn’t know that stuff, what does that say about the work Garland is doing?

The proof is in the pudding.

The ONLY acceptable outcome after all this is the indictment of Trump and the main co-conspirators in 1/6.

1 Reply

@snood,

Quote:

The ONLY acceptable outcome after all this is the indictment of Trump and the main co-conspirators in 1/6.

I agree. I'd be overjoyed knowing that the system works. Until a Republican president gives him a full pardon.

1 Reply

@hightor,

hightor wrote:

Quote:
The ONLY acceptable outcome after all this is the indictment of Trump and the main co-conspirators in 1/6.

I agree. I'd be overjoyed knowing that the system works. Until a Republican president gives him a full pardon.

Maybe be there’s a sane Republican (besides Cheney and Kinzinger) out there, somewhere, who could do all of the economically destructive and socially retrograde things they want, but still leave Trump in jail.
If you’re gonna dream, dream big I guess.

0 Replies

Adam Kinzinger tells CBS the January 6 investigation isn't winding down and there will be more hearing past this upcoming week.

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1548699868511850497?s=21&t=y6yv36TK5fxwLLG-vW3OWw

I’m glad to hear that they’re schedule is open ended.

1 Reply

@snood,

1. I believe the next hearing date is schedule for this upcoming Thursday.

2. I think this one is supposed to be during prime time.

3. Dates and times are always subject to change.

0 Replies

0 Replies

chair Bennie Thompson has covid, but the show must go on...

0 Replies

Jury reaches verdict in Steve Bannon Contempt of Congress trial.

Published July 22, 2022

Quote:

A federal jury on Friday reached a verdict in the trial of Steve Bannon, the former Donald Trump adviser charged with contempt for ignoring subpoenas from the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection.

Bannon faced two counts of contempt of Congress, with a minimum sentence of 30 days behind bars and fines of up to $100,000.

Bannon’s team rested their case on Thursday without calling any defense witnesses — including Bannon himself — and instead asked the judge to acquit him, according to The Associated Press.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Molly Gaston said during closing arguments that the subpoenas were straightforward and that Bannon chose to blow them off.

“Our government only works if people show up. It only works if people play by the rules, and it only works if people are held accountable when they do not,” Gaston said, according to NBC News.

After the House Jan. 6 committee issued his subpoenas, Bannon was quoted by The Daily Mail as responding: “I stand with Trump and the Constitution.”

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/jury-reaches-verdict-in-steve-bannon-contempt-of-congress-trial/ar-AAZSauJ

The 1/6 Committee Hearings

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know