We do the dance a lot on this forum. One side accuses someone of lying (or far worse) and the other side says the first side is lying about the lies and do-si-do to personal attacks until the thread gets lost in the unsearchable back pages. The truth is subjective.
This time is different, folks. This Jan 6 committee has interviews under sworn testimony in which a commitment has been made to tell the truth or face legal consequences.
- The witnesses are all Republicans.
- The witnesses are within Trumps inner circle of allies.
- The witnesses are experts/advisors/lawyers.
- The testimony tells the same story. There was no evidence of systematic voter fraud, that the notion otherwise was a detachment from reality, that the president should have conceded the race on election night.
- The testimony will all be released to public in full.
And how about the other side? They aren't telling. They simply refused to testify under oath. Its not hard to see who's telling the truth.
The truth: Fraud never happened. Lies were told to the contrary. The lies fomented anger and distrust in free/fair elections and peaceful power transfer. Money from those duped was asked for and was spent based on these lies.
None of these truths are good for democracy.
- Joined
- 27 Sep 06
- Moves
- 251103
@wildgrass saidGood post.
We do the dance a lot on this forum. One side accuses someone of lying (or far worse) and the other side says the first side is lying about the lies and do-si-do to personal attacks until the thread gets lost in the unsearchable back pages. The truth is subjective.
This time is different, folks. This Jan 6 committee has interviews under sworn testimony in which a commitm ...[text shortened]... power transfer. Money was spent based on these lies.
None of these truths are good for democracy.
@jimm619
Funny how the ulrtrarightwingnuts here are saying how disastrous the viewing was on TV, but actually it was seen by over 20 MILLION people.
And now the second one showing that 'legal defense' fund started by Trump begging for money which comes in at a quarter billion, was not use for any kind of legal work and in fact Trump pocketing some of it, they will definitely be sending that to DOJ and the committee has no power to force DOJ to act, it is up to the AG now if they follow up. So far they seem to be going after the grunts on the ground but not much on the top tier but we will see, Garland said he would go after anyone involved no matter how high up so we will see.
@wildgrass saidTucker Carlson, refusing to air the hearing, said “This is the only hour on an American news channel that won’t be covering their propaganda live". Is Tucker admitting that Republicans and Trump's inner circle are dishonest?
- The witnesses are all Republicans.
- The witnesses are within Trumps inner circle of allies.
@sonhouse saidI wrote it in an earlier post, but I don't really care about the prosecutions, and it doesn't seem like the committee is either. They're laser focused on: What will it take to get both sides to agree about reality? What actually happened between election day and January 6th?
@jimm619
Funny how the ulrtrarightwingnuts here are saying how disastrous the viewing was on TV, but actually it was seen by over 20 MILLION people.
And now the second one showing that 'legal defense' fund started by Trump begging for money which comes in at a quarter billion, was not use for any kind of legal work and in fact Trump pocketing some of it, they will definit ...[text shortened]... ut we will see, Garland said he would go after anyone involved no matter how high up so we will see.
- No systematic election fraud.
- A detachment from reality among Trump's legal team.
- A lot of lying to the American public.
- Trumpers were conned by Trump and major media networks.
Hopefully we get there. It takes a lot to change someone's mind after they've committed to a falsehood.
@wildgrass saidI'm more worried about the detachment from reality amongst the Trump support base.
I wrote it in an earlier post, but I don't really care about the prosecutions, and it doesn't seem like the committee is either. They're laser focused on: What will it take to get both sides to agree about reality? What actually happened between election day and January 6th?
- No systematic election fraud.
- A detachment from reality among Trump's legal team.
- A lot o ...[text shortened]... efully we get there. It takes a lot to change someone's mind after they've committed to a falsehood.
Part of me believes that Trump knew that he lost.
He was just warming up his dog whistle for the believers and dumb asses in general.
I hope a LOT that he is referred to the AG for prosecution. If there were evidence, it would have surfaced by now. With none, Trump will be all freed up, and the populace will be so disappointed in being lied to about evidence , that it will catapult the repubs!! (For the record, I dont want Trump to run. Now, I aint sayin that I dont want him to be president!!)
@wildgrass
That said, it still would the whipped cream on top of the cake if they DID go after Trump and the rest of his zombies. Roger Stoned, Jim Jordan, and the rest of the rat pack.
@AverageJoe1
NO EVIDENCE? Are you being deliberately obtuse? The evidence is right in front of your eyes if you bothered to actually watch the hearings.
His old sycophant Barr said it was and I quote 'Bullshyte' that the election was full of fraud and therefore stolen.
That is just one dude, there are many more close to the orbit of Trump testifying for instance, Rudi was DRUNK when telling Trump he should just SAY he is winning, that is all it takes to rile up his base.
And now they uncovered major fraud with Trump's 'legal' defense fund where he begged for money and that came in by the hundreds of millions and some of that money went directly to Trump. Just the fact those several hundred million was NEVER used in any kind of legal defense is illegal right off the bat.
Not even counting the money he harvested for Donald Trump and family.
But you willfully claim no evidence in spite of the fact you only watch newsmax and Fox who will NEVER present such real evidence, they don't want to upset THEIR asleep base.
- Joined
- 27 Sep 06
- Moves
- 251103
@sonhouse saidSure seems, to me, that The Watergate Hearings
@jimm619
Funny how the ulrtrarightwingnuts here are saying how disastrous the viewing was on TV, but actually it was seen by over 20 MILLION people.
And now the second one showing that 'legal defense' fund started by Trump begging for money which comes in at a quarter billion, was not use for any kind of legal work and in fact Trump pocketing some of it, they will definit ...[text shortened]... ut we will see, Garland said he would go after anyone involved no matter how high up so we will see.
moved a lot faster.
@averagejoe1 saidWhat Republicans say on spacebooks and OAN are very different than what they are saying in sworn testimony. That means something. Pay attention. Your news networks are lying to you.
I hope a LOT that he is referred to the AG for prosecution. If there were evidence, it would have surfaced by now. With none, Trump will be all freed up, and the populace will be so disappointed in being lied to about evidence , that it will catapult the repubs!! (For the record, I dont want Trump to run. Now, I aint sayin that I dont want him to be president!!)
Staunch Republicans Bill Stepien and Bill Barr and Jason Miller all stated in sworn testimony that - other than a few people who were "detached from reality" - the entire campaign staff and legal team knew that Trump lost the election freely and fairly. They all knew it on election night, and then they sifted through numerous false claims of fraud for weeks while telling the President that none of it was credible. Laughable. The false claims were dismissed from courts because they were not based on anything other than speculation.
The two-faced message if you are facing consequences for what you are saying is meaningful. They're grifters.
@averagejoe1 saidSeriously?
I hope a LOT that he is referred to the AG for prosecution. If there were evidence, it would have surfaced by now. With none, Trump will be all freed up, and the populace will be so disappointed in being lied to about evidence , that it will catapult the repubs!! (For the record, I dont want Trump to run. Now, I aint sayin that I dont want him to be president!!)
This is your take-away from it all?
Perhaps what you need to do is imagine this was going on in a different country, so you can try to look at it objectively?
It’s completely bizarre to witness this and then see republicans acting like there’s nothing wrong or worse, it’s just democrat propaganda.
Obviously Fox news is being defensive, they’re part of the problem.
@wildgrass said"The truth: Fraud never happened."
We do the dance a lot on this forum. One side accuses someone of lying (or far worse) and the other side says the first side is lying about the lies and do-si-do to personal attacks until the thread gets lost in the unsearchable back pages. The truth is subjective.
This time is different, folks. This Jan 6 committee has interviews under sworn testimony in which a commitm ...[text shortened]... ped was asked for and was spent based on these lies.
None of these truths are good for democracy.
That is not true and you lost a bet telling that (here is the irony) lie before.
You are off to a rough start. Fraud happened, it is only a question of how much. You need to use that important word before the word fraud. Widespread.
Remember? First the democrats said fraud never happened, then when we proved fraud happened and always happens they changed their wording to no "widespread" fraud. That was their sneaky way of covering up their first lie without admitting they were spreading misinformation. Now they always use the word widespread to avoid embarrassment. You didn't do that.