Trump hearings

[HedonistForever]

Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

there is. we need to steal your Governor for President.

We'll keep him for 2 years ( he's up for re-election ) and then for the good of the country, we'll release him from his commitment.

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by HedonistForever

We'll keep him for 2 years ( he's up for re-election ) and then for the good of the country, we'll release him from his commitment.

perfect. you can keep him for 2 years then America needs him.

[VerySkeptical]

Quite a few things.

First off, any case for a criminal case against Trump won't fit in a tweet. And you claiming there isn't anything new is bullshit. Information from the testimony of numerous people hadn't been released before the 2 televised hearings.

Jan. 6 panel says Trump fleeced his base and 5 other takeaways from the 2nd hearing

"This hearing pulled back the curtain on what life was like on the Trump campaign and in the White House in the days following election night 2020.
With taped testimony from Trump's campaign advisers and lawyers, the committee painted a picture of a president who refused to listen to the truth, insulated himself in a bubble of election lie conspiracies, fleeced his own supporters out of money based on the lie and wielded the power to incite violence.

1. It was "Team Normal" vs. Trump.

This is the kind of stuff you usually only get from deeply reported, post-campaign books. Instead, it was live on television with taped, on-camera testimony from the people at the highest levels of the Trump campaign.

The committee used lots of footage from its taped interviews with professionals from Trump's 2020 campaign – Trump's campaign manager, Bill Stepien, senior adviser Jason Miller and multiple lawyers. (Stepien was originally scheduled to testify in person but was unable to do so because his wife went into labor.) Stepien said he was happy to be referred to as "Team Normal," though not everyone buys that rebranding of the person who led the effort to re-elect Trump.
Still, this group of campaign professionals say they all had the same message: they tried to tell Trump the truth – that the outlook was bleak, he should not declare victory on election night, he was going to lose and that his election fraud claims were, as former Attorney General Bill Barr called them: "bogus and silly," "idiotic," "stupid," "complete nonsense," "crazy stuff." And that's not including the three times the Monday viewing audience heard Barr say the claims were "b*******" and "doing a great great disservice to the country."

2. Trump didn't listen to the professionals and instead became "detached from reality."

Trump broke with the team that had run his campaign and was trying to get him re-elected and instead went down a deep rabbit hole of false conspiracies that were debunked repeatedly by lawyers and Justice Department officials.

Barr described the fast-and-furious nature of those conspiracies as "whack-a-mole." Former Acting Attorney General Richard Donoghue said the Justice Department looked into specifics, they debunked them and told the president that. How'd Trump react?

"He wouldn't fight us on it, he would just move on to another," Donoghue said in taped testimony.
According to the testimonies, Trump looked like a president throwing anything he could at the wall to try and stay in power.

"If he really believes this stuff," Barr said during his interview with the committee. "He's become detached from reality."

Trump dismissed the people who knew the numbers and who checked on his false claims. It became clear in the hearing, based on the broad array of testimony, that Trump began listening to three controversial figures – Rudy Giuliani (who Stepien and campaign adviser Jason Miller described as "intoxicated" on election night), lawyer Sidney Powell and former trade adviser Peter Navarro.

3. Coming from so many Republicans testifying, it's much harder for them to simply be dismissed.

It's notable that the people the viewing audience heard from Monday in their testimony were all Republicans.

That carries weight. Even when it comes to Stepien – he's working for Republican Harriet Hageman, the Trump-endorsed candidate in Wyoming, who is challenging Vice Chair Liz Cheney.

These were many of the people in Trump's inner circle – on his campaign, trying to elect him, and even his family, Jared and Ivanka Trump, who had formally worked in his White House.

Barr calls Trump's fraud claims 'detached from reality' in Jan. 6 panel testimony
Conservatives are getting a different message where they get their news and information, but if they do peek at the primary source material and who it's coming from – many people who are on their side – it's possible some might break through.

It at least makes it harder for Trump to dismiss them.

4. The committee began to lay out a fleecing of MAGA

In the second part of the hearing, an investigator for the committee said in a taped interview that $250 million was raised off the election lies from Trump supporters following Election Day, including $150 million in the first week.

But, the investigator said, most of the money went to groups supporting Trump, not to fund court battles. The committee said most of the money went to Save America PAC, which is the major Trump-supporting political action committee. Trump's press releases go out through it, for example.
It said money also went to other outside groups supporting Trump and where ex-Trump officials pull a salary; a charitable foundation with connections to former Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows; and even the Trump hotel chain.

"The Big Lie was also a big rip off," said committee member Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif. She added that Trump "supporters deserve better than what Trump and his allies did."

A lot of this was presented in summary, but it would be good for the committee to present some of the details of their findings as well. And there's also a legal question about the fundraising practice – was it illegal or merely corrupt?

5. A lot of people have faced consequences from Jan. 6, but they're mostly not the people at the top – yet.

In her opening statement, Cheney noted the consequences that many have faced already due to Jan. 6.

"Hundreds of our countrymen have faced criminal charges," Cheney said. "Many are serving criminal sentences because they believed what Donald Trump said about the election and they acted on it. They came to Washington D.C., at his request, they marched on the Capitol at his request and hundreds of them besieged and invaded the building at the heart of our constitutional Republic."

More than 840 people have been charged from the Jan. 6 riot and insurrection, but many have said – and the committee has shown – that Trump is who inspired them to be there, and there have been relatively few consequences for him and those in his inner circle who spurred them on.

"As one conservative editorial board put it recently, 'Mr. Trump betrayed his supporters by conning them on January 6th, and he is still doing it," Cheney continued.

6. Over two days of hearings, the committee is methodically establishing the building blocks of their public prosecution that Trump is responsible for Jan. 6.

The committee's case against Trump essentially boils down to this:

-He had the motive (and of course opportunity as president) – to cling to power and to make money.

-He had the capacity to incite violence. That was evidenced by the testimony of former Philadelphia City Commissioner Al Schmidt. Once Trump went after him on Twitter, Schmidt said he faced death threats.

-And people acted on what he said. That was clear from testimony from white nationalists Thursday, who said they went to D.C. because they believed they were acting at Trump's behest. And then after a day of hearing all of the false conspiracies and election lies Trump was throwing out, there was video of people on Jan. 6 echoing those lies.

There are five more hearings to come, including Wednesday and Thursday.

Some 20 million people watched Thursday night. The question is how many will be following and taking in the material themselves rather than through their preferred ideological source of information."

https://www.npr.org/2022/06/13/11046...mittee-hearing

The tweet in which Trump said, "go home with love and peace" came at 6 PM
He told people to go home in a video at 4:17
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-56004916

The "detached from reality" come from Barr saying ""If he really believes this stuff," Barr said during his interview with the committee. "He's become detached from reality."
Since Trump was lying, he only gave the illusion (his normal state) he had lost touch.

Your claim nothing new was revealed is bullshit. Testimony from numerous people was heard for the first time. The first hearing showed a bunch of footage not previously shown.

Since your analysis says there was no new info and telling people to go home in peace at 6 PM, after the riot was mostly over, doesn't change anything, it shows you have made up your mind before all the evidence has been shown. You don't recognize new information and are just pretending to give the impression you are closely following the subject. It's also obvious you shouldn't be on a jury of any kind.

Originally Posted by HedonistForever

We'll have to wait and see how today's hearings do in the ratings but the fact this is happening on a Monday morning at 10 am, will kill those numbers and add those that saw the first day and realized this was all stuff they had heard before and will not tune in again like after a first debate when numbers usually fall..


But since I did watch, I'll give you my review. If the purpose of the hearing is to make a criminal case against Trump, proving he is a narcissistic asshole detached from reality "on this particular issue", score one for the Dem's but proof of being a narcissistic asshole, detached from reality will get you nothing in a fair trial in a court of law which is what they are shooting for. And the whole "detached from reality" well, that would favor Trump's defense. "He didn't understand what might result from his words and actions since others have used similar words without this result, ladies and gentlemen of the jury". Never tried a case in a courtroom but one wouldn't really have to, to know that the prosecution should never paint a defendant as "detached from reality", that's a defense move.They were saying if he believed what he was saying. That was showing he knew he was lying.



Today's hearing was more of the same as the "primetime" hearing, trying to convince anybody listening, that Trump was told by his closest advisers and even family members, that the election was not stolen as Bill Barr, the new hero of the left who a few short years ago wanted him prosecuted and hanged for treason,New hero? Not quite, asshole. He told the truth this time. He had misrepresented things for Trump in the past and him telling the truth doesn't make up for those times. Not finding any evidence of fraud isn't an opinion. It's a fact. The terms he used to describe Trump's claims of fraud were opinions. Again, finding no evidence to back Trump's claims is fact, not opinion. told us but here's the thing and it's just an opinion/ observation, anybody tuning in, interested in all this political stuff, would have already heard all this, I certainly had. I didn't hear a single thing I didn't already know. "But what about those that didn't know all this before"? Then they probably aren't watching this if they weren't interested before and following this story.You aren't interested in the story. You don't care about new information since you've made your mind up.


I think the general consensus of any fair minded person who follows politics closely enough to be interested in watching this, is that no minds are being changed by what has been presented so far. None of this "testimony" is relevant to whether Trump committed a provable crime beyond any reasonable doubt.And you're fair minded? No fucking way.


I wish I had the future schedule of when they are going to present a case of an actual criminal case against Trump, like "today we will present a witness that Trump or his appointed representative, who met with and conspired with the leader of the Proud Boys and hear is the video and audio evidence of that meeting.


Now that would get my interest but of course such evidence doesn't exist or we would have heard about it long before now. No, all they have, that I'm aware of at this point, is that they keep repeating that Trump "motivated" the crowd to riot. But then that pesky one short sentence in the tweet Liz Cheney decided to open this one sided presentation with, was left out of the reading, "now go home with love and peace" the last line said. Would any good prosecutor present as evidence in the case you are trying to make, a tweet in it's entirety for the jury to read and leave out the last line of that tweet, which completely contradicts the narrative that you are trying to prove, that Trump encouraged them to go into the Capitol when he actually told them to "go home with love and peace"? Not until 6 that night, after the riot was over.


Everybody with even half a brain realized what Cheney had done and it became a source of discussion, surely not what she was going for I would think. Anyone with half a brain can see what you're trying to do.


Then there was the repeated "if there are no objections" from Thompson the Chairman of the committee who wanted all Americans to know with his opening statement, that he was born in Mississippi, a part of our country steeped in slavery.......that there is nobody to object since Pelosi would not allow anybody from the Republican side, that would/ might object, because they weren't allowed on the committee.
STFU. The republicans they wanted to put on the committee were just like you. They had made their minds up and let everybody know that. There were a bunch of republicans who condemned Trump but then walked their condemnations back when Trump threatened them with primary challenges.
It's unbelievable how many republicans put their own asses and Trump before America

Sure, they found 2 Republicans that voted to impeach Trump, that literally hate Trump, so much for an un-biased, fair committee, who already made up their minds about Trump's alleged involvement in the riot's. Each of these two Republicans had already made speeches to that effect and they were suppose to represent "the other side of the argument"? Please, this is a show trial with no chance of cross examining a witness that they might have "different" questions for. So Chairman Thompson, you can stop asking if anybody will object, they won't.What have you heard to object to? You just described the republicans they kept off the committee.
Plus you conveniently forget republicans shot down a 911 type investigation.



So, how'd those hearings go today? A complete waste of time going over one thought and one thought only, was Trump told by his closest advisers and family, that the election was not stolen, he didn't have the evidence to prove what he was saying as Barr repeatedly told him, and Trump did not win the election but continued to lie about it.
See why I say your opinion/analysis means little to nothing. You think you know everything about this when your mind is made up.


OK, is that relevant as to whether he conspired with the rioters? What is the legal standard that describes "motivating" people to do something illegal? Rather big 1st Amendment hurdle to jump there. I don't think you can prosecute a President for saying what he thought to be true, even though some of the closest people around him told him was not true. As I said in another thread, you have Chuck Shumer on TV, calling out the name of Justice Kavanaugh, telling him he will "reap the worldwind" if he votes against what Shumer wants and he will "pay the price". Months later a man tries to kill Kabvanaugh, perhaps motivated by Shumer's words.Not even close to the same thing.


So if we are going to prosecute Trump for "motivating" people to commit a criminal act, we would have to prosecute Shumer for the same thing. But I guess the Democrats can't qite wrap their brains around "equal justice under the law".

These aren't anywhere near the same thing. Just more false equivalencies from you.

[texassapper]

Originally Posted by VerySkeptical

blah blah blah....These aren't anywhere near the same thing. Just more false equivalencies from you.

I see you never learned how to be concise...

[txpilot3]

I'm amazed at the number of idiots on this site that continue to support Trump despite overwhelming evidence of multiple felonies and violations of his oath of office. Any politician that puts an "R" behind his name and has not PUBLICLY denounced Trump for all the lying, the attempted take down of the government has absolutely no ethics, no morals and certainly no integrity. Unfortunately, there are too many ignorant idiots in this country that share his values. So....this country is going to be just "another shit hole county" using Trump's vocabulary.

[texassapper]

Originally Posted by txpilot3

overwhelming evidence of multiple felonies and violations of his oath of office.

Source?

[Chung Tran]

Originally Posted by txpilot3

I'm amazed at the number of idiots on this site that continue to support Trump despite overwhelming evidence of multiple felonies and violations of his oath of office.

And if you don't support Trump, they will call you every name, except a child of God. Trump is their God and they are his Apostles. They never coherently defend Trump, all they got is ''you have TDS'', or ''nobody cares/watched the Hearings''.

The Orange Turd should be jailed for theft of millions of dollars.

https://www.syracuse.com/us-news/202...-hearings.html

The ink was barely dry on the election results, when I started getting 8 fucking emails a day. ''My Father needs you'' (Eric Trump), or ''donate and let me tell my Father he can count on you'' (Don jr.), or ''let's take back our Country from the election thieves'' (Guiliani).. One fucking email every 2 hours. God Damn. These Fuckers live and breathe for money and power.

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by txpilot3

I'm amazed at the number of idiots on this site that continue to support Trump despite overwhelming evidence of multiple felonies and violations of his oath of office. Any politician that puts an "R" behind his name and has not PUBLICLY denounced Trump for all the lying, the attempted take down of the government has absolutely no ethics, no morals and certainly no integrity. Unfortunately, there are too many ignorant idiots in this country that share his values. So....this country is going to be just "another shit hole county" using Trump's vocabulary.

how 'bout those "81 million" Biden voters? elect a shithead president you get a shithole nation. butt u knew that when you voted for him, right??

[Jacuzzme]

“81 million votes” LMAO!

Possible that there were that many ballots, but if you think 81 million different, eligible people actually voted for this clusterfuck of an administration you might want to look into Risperidone.

[VerySkeptical]

Sure I did. But there is a limit to how concise you can be to a bullshit comment. False equivalency is pretty concise when comparing "pay the price" to Trump's speech before the riot. Plus you added your blah, blah, blah bullshit to a complete statement. What an asshole.
I noticed you said I wasn't concise without you saying what would've been more concise.
No surprise there.

Originally Posted by texassapper

I see you never learned how to be concise...

[VerySkeptical]

And you still couldn't find any significant fraud. It's hilarious you believe Trump got 74 million. And actually I do believe it because that's how those rural stump breakers act when they go to town to cash those subsidy checks Trump gave the farmers after he fucked up the deal with China. They never bought what they said they would and Trump bought votes from soy bean farmers.
The truth is you don't have a clue how disgusting Trump is. All the senior repubs pointed that out in 2016.
They only changed their tune after he won.
Just because you lost you claim fraud. A true Trumpy.

Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

“81 million votes” LMAO!

Possible that there were that many ballots, but if you think 81 million different, eligible people actually voted for this clusterfuck of an administration you might want to look into Risperidone.

[Austin Ellen]

****eyeroll**** I'm so sick of hearing about the "hearings." All you posters who think this is the holy grail of information against Trump - get back to me when it's in an "actual"courtroom with an "actual" prosecutor. The people you are listing to have NO arrest powers. Until then - this is just a shit show for political reasons. The dems are so fucking stupid.

[Levianon17]

Originally Posted by txpilot3

I'm amazed at the number of idiots on this site that continue to support Trump despite overwhelming evidence of multiple felonies and violations of his oath of office. Any politician that puts an "R" behind his name and has not PUBLICLY denounced Trump for all the lying, the attempted take down of the government has absolutely no ethics, no morals and certainly no integrity. Unfortunately, there are too many ignorant idiots in this country that share his values. So....this country is going to be just "another shit hole county" using Trump's vocabulary.

You don't know what a Felony is.

[1blackman1]

Originally Posted by Austin Ellen

****eyeroll**** I'm so sick of hearing about the "hearings." All you posters who think this is the holy grail of information against Trump - get back to me when it's in an "actual"courtroom with an "actual" prosecutor. The people you are listing to have NO arrest powers. Until then - this is just a shit show for political reasons. The dems are so fucking stupid.

Says the dumb whore.

[texassapper]

Originally Posted by VerySkeptical

What an asshole.
I noticed you said I wasn't concise without you saying what would've been more concise.
No surprise there.

Meh, I've been called worse by better than you. Why do you expect me to do your work for you... oh yeah, libtard.. that makes sense.