Jan 6 public hearings Live

[+DieChecker]

1 hour ago, Hammerclaw said:

Yes and for some curious reason they haven't solicited testimony from the parties concerned. I wonder why that is?

This does seem to be true. If the things testified to are true, then the committee needs to have those people who were quoted confirm, or deny, that such happened/was said. Otherwise it very well can be considered hearsay.

A police officer is typically given the benefit of the doubt. While a disgruntled neighbor testifying might be considered hearsay giving the same info.

[+DieChecker]

7 hours ago, Tiggs said:

Nope. Majority of it was first hand.

Such as her conversation with Guliani on the 2nd ("We're going to the Capitol. It's going to be great. The President's going to be there."), and Meadows ("Things might get real, real bad on January 6th").
Or her being backstage with the President on the 6th at the Elipse ("I don't ****ing care that they have weapons. They're not here to hurt me. Take the ****ing mags away. Let my people in. They can march to the Capitol from here.")

 

I thought that last one was 2nd hand, but like I said, I've not been dwelling on this and memorizing things. I'll look it up.

Still much of her testimony was indeed 2nd hand. The comments of the president to Giuliani, for instance, are 2nd hand as quotes of Trump. 

[Tatetopa]

1 hour ago, Hammerclaw said:

Yes and for some curious reason they haven't solicited testimony from the parties concerned. I wonder why that is?

Because so far, they have not agreed to testify under oath.  That seems to be changing this week.

 

[+DieChecker]

What does it mean to be a Republican?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_the_Republican_Party

Quote

Currently, the party's fiscal conservatism includes support for lower taxes, free market capitalism, deregulation of corporations, and restrictions on labor unions. The party's social conservatism includes support for gun rights outlined in the Second Amendment, and other traditional values, often with a Christian foundation, including restrictions on abortion.[4] In foreign policy, Republicans usually favor increased military spending and unilateral action. Other Republican positions include restrictions on immigration, more specifically opposition to illegal immigration, opposition to drug legalization, and support for school choice.

I tend to agree on every one of those topics, which is why I consider myself a Republican.

[Tiggs]

2 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

I thought that last one was 2nd hand, but like I said, I've not been dwelling on this and memorizing things. I'll look it up.

She was there when Trump said it.
 

2 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

Still much of her testimony was indeed 2nd hand. The comments of the president to Giuliani, for instance, are 2nd hand as quotes of Trump. 

But first-hand evidence of what Giuliani was telling people, as of the 2nd.

[+DieChecker]

What does it mean to be a RINO?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_in_Name_Only#:~:text=In US politics%2C Republican In,used since the early 1900s.

Quote

"RINO" redirects here. For other uses, see Rino.
In US politics, Republican In Name Only (RINO) is a pejorative used to describe politicians of the Republican Party who are deemed to be insufficiently loyal to the party or aligned with the party's ideology. 

Quote

The term became popular in the 1990s, and has been used often by former President Donald Trump to describe his critics in the Republican Party.

So basically anyone claiming to be Republican who someone else doesn't think is fanatical enough.

[Grim Reaper 6]

10 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

As a Christian in a Democrat state, I know as a fact most church going Christians voted Trump without even considering Biden. 

Let me do some research though. 

Please do because Pence was the only reason the entire evangelical Christian community voted for Trump the first time without Pence I think he would have lost. I have done the research and the evangelical community has dropped him. To my know according to research I have done, the majority of Christians supporting him are far right or right wing.

Peace Bro. Oh and by the way fricken hammerclaw called me a fricken RINO because I never supported Trump, check out the meme I left him in post 581 that is his true charactor a typical bow and bend the knee type really sad!

Its really not important whether you agree or disagree with me you are welcome to your view but the name calling kindergarten crap is nonsense but it takes all kinds that's for certain even those with true TDS!

[+DieChecker]

3 minutes ago, Tiggs said:

She was there when Trump said it.
 

But first-hand evidence of what Giuliani was telling people, as of the 2nd.

Do we have testimony proving she was there? Again, I will look into it.

I can say I saw Johnny Depp hit Amber, but unless I can be placed at the scene, its not solid evidence and still suspect.

[Grim Reaper 6]

2 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

What does it mean to be a RINO?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_in_Name_Only#:~:text=In US politics%2C Republican In,used since the early 1900s.

So basically anyone claiming to be Republican who someone else doesn't think is fanatical enough.

Yes that's correct either you support Trump or your a RINO and that's what hammerclaw called me earlier this morning, he is silly widdle boy!

[+DieChecker]

Just now, Manwon Lender said:

Please do because Pence was the only reason the entire evangelical Christian community voted for Trump the first time without Pence I think he would have lost. I have done the research and the evangelical community has dropped him. To my know according to research I have done, the majority of Christians supporting him are far right or right wing.

Peace Bro. Oh and by the way fricken hammerclaw called me a fricken RINO because I never supported Trump, check out the meme I left him in post 581 that is his true charactor a typical bow and bend the knee type really sad!

Its really not important whether you agree or disagree with me you are welcome to your view but the name calling kindergarten crap is nonsense but it takes all kinds that's for certain even those with true TDS!

Not to be too aggressive, or dismissive, but your "research" has sometimes been... suspect... and though usually true, from specific angles, often seems misrepresented. 

Again, ill look into it.

[Grim Reaper 6]

1 hour ago, Hammerclaw said:

I look things up with my computer.

Hearsay Evidence - Definition, Examples, Cases, Processes (legaldictionary.net)

Oh that's right, they don't take people with Coke bottle glasses for jury duty, do so how do you look things up in the computer, with the Coke bottles and a magnifying glass!

[Grim Reaper 6]

2 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

Not to be too aggressive, or dismissive, but your "research" has sometimes been... suspect... and though usually true, from specific angles, often seems misrepresented. 

Again, ill look into it.

That why I suggested it, yours is also subject to me in the same manner and we have both corrected each other in the past and that's to the point. Because if you don't take care of yourself and you choose to follow others blindly you will end up having another Trump for President is that what you want!!

I take no offense to your comments at all, because in reality I could careless what unknown random  people online think or say anyway hope you feel the same way!

[Grim Reaper 6]

18 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

What does it mean to be a Republican?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_the_Republican_Party

I tend to agree on every one of those topics, which is why I consider myself a Republican.

Being a Republican is easy, now you must draw the real line.

1. Moderate

2. Conservative 

3. Conservative right wing

4. Conservative extreme right wing

5. Conservative extremist 

Where do you fall in the above?

[Tiggs]

46 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

Do we have testimony proving she was there? Again, I will look into it.

Other than her own?

The Jan 6th Committee hasn't released very much into the public domain yet, testimony-wise.

I don't personally have any photos/videos of the backstage of the Ellipse from Jan 6th, but I'd imagine someone has.

Given the various attempts to undermine her credibility, I'm fairly sure people would be screaming it from the rooftops by now if she wasn't.

[psyche101]

9 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

What does it mean to be a Republican?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_the_Republican_Party

I tend to agree on every one of those topics, which is why I consider myself a Republican.

A lot of those values, guns, anti abortion, anti immigration, conservative Christian values are what we spoke about the other day. They also draw some of the worst elements of society into the mix. Because they are closer to their core values.

Isn't that a giant red flag? 

If it attracts those low brow elements of society, how can that be a positive thing? 

[Tiggs]

5 hours ago, Hammerclaw said:

That's call hearsay evidence, usually inadmissible in a court of law, here in the US.

Wikipedia

Hearsay evidence, in a legal forum, is testimony from an under-oath witness who is reciting an out-of-court statement, the content of which is being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted.

Depends what they're using it as evidence for.

If someone used the statement "We're going to the Capitol. It's going to be great. The President's going to be there." as evidence that Rudy and the President went to the Capitol -- then, sure, it would be hearsay.

If it's being used to evidence that Rudy was talking about going to the Capitol as early as the 2nd Jan — then it's not hearsay.
 

5 hours ago, Hammerclaw said:

In most courts, hearsay evidence is inadmissible (the "hearsay evidence rule") unless an exception to the hearsay rule applies.

Should also note that Opposing Party’s Statements are also not heresay, which would allow a witness statement on Trump's remarks on the Magnometers, for example, to be admissible, if he were being prosecuted.

[+DieChecker]

5 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

Why not just give him $100 billion dollars and name some bridges after him?  Will that save democracy?

If it keeps him from running for office? If think about it very seriously.

[+DieChecker]

2 hours ago, psyche101 said:

A lot of those values, guns, anti abortion, anti immigration, conservative Christian values are what we spoke about the other day. They also draw some of the worst elements of society into the mix. Because they are closer to their core values.

Isn't that a giant red flag? 

If it attracts those low brow elements of society, how can that be a positive thing? 

Can't the same be said of the Left (Democrats) and the True Communists, and Anarchists (Antifa)?

You can't blame an organization (Republicans) if extremist idiots (racists, neo'Nazis) vote that way because they absolutely hate the other option (Democrats). Who else would they be voting for? Its basically a two party system. 

[Tatetopa]

29 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

If it keeps him from running for office? If think about it very seriously.

Then America will have been sold. No laws but money and power.

[psyche101]

12 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

Can't the same be said of the Left (Democrats) and the True Communists, and Anarchists (Antifa)?

Not really. The left often denounces any violent action, and again, that's a wing of Antifa. That's a definite violent element but the goal of anarchist groups under the Antifa banner but the goal is to fight racism and white supremacy in general, which is a far better goal than conservative values forced on people. 

Trump called on the proud boys. There's no hiding that many Republicans are openly racist and domineering and side with these thug groups.

As I've noted, some of the worst personalities in the world lean right wing. Famous people who make headlines for bad behaviour.

Communists are in a similar boat. They are trying to give people more power than government. Removal of classes. The goal isn't as bad as the right wing views of gun support, control over abortion or immigration deterrence. Those are dividing controlling values. Not the freedom America claims it has. 

12 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

You can't blame an organization (Republicans) if extremist idiots (racists, neo'Nazis) vote that way because they absolutely hate the other option (Democrats). Who else would they be voting for? Its basically a two party system. 

I'm more concerned about the values that attract the worst people on the planet. And that they attract such people. As I say, to me that's a pretty big red flag. If such low life violent people see value in the party's views, those views are a genuine concern I would think.

[+DieChecker]

3 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

That why I suggested it, yours is also subject to me in the same manner and we have both corrected each other in the past and that's to the point. Because if you don't take care of yourself and you choose to follow others blindly you will end up having another Trump for President is that what you want!!

I take no offense to your comments at all, because in reality I could careless what unknown random  people online think or say anyway hope you feel the same way!

I have gotten mad in the past, but I usually laugh these days.

I generally do this for fun, and to keep my brain sharp. Especially arguing a hopeless subject can be very good mental exercise. 

[+DieChecker]

34 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

Then America will have been sold. No laws but money and power.

You're saying thats NOT already true?

Isn't that basically the underpinning of the BLM movement? That elites get away with things, while the minorities and poor get trampled on.

Why not use the corruption for a positive output?

Edited July 8, 2022 by DieChecker

[+DieChecker]

23 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Not really. The left often denounces any violent action, and again, that's a wing of Antifa. That's a definite violent element but the goal of anarchist groups under the Antifa banner but the goal is to fight racism and white supremacy in general, which is a far better goal than conservative values forced on people. 

I'm sorry, but that just smells like excuses to me. You lump all Republicans together, but then sub-sub-sub-group violent Democrat groups and make excuses. That's hypocrisy. 

Quote

Trump called on the proud boys. There's no hiding that many Republicans are openly racist and domineering and side with these thug groups.

"...many Republicans are openly racist...". See that's one of the problems. Lumping everyone together and inviting hate and fear. Have no doubts that's what YOU are doing here. 

Quote

As I've noted, some of the worst personalities in the world lean right wing. Famous people who make headlines for bad behaviour.

Communists are in a similar boat. They are trying to give people more power than government. Removal of classes. The goal isn't as bad as the right wing views of gun support, control over abortion or immigration deterrence. Those are dividing controlling values. Not the freedom America claims it has. 

More excuses, IMHO. I'd have more respect if you just said, "I agree there's violent groups on both sides, and we all should be working to get rid of all of them.". Making excuses means you AGREE that your guys violence and vitriol, is excusable, because it is for a "good reason". Where I'd ask, when is there ever a good reason for violence, other then in protecting your body from harm.

Quote

I'm more concerned about the values that attract the worst people on the planet. And that they attract such people. As I say, to me that's a pretty big red flag. If such low life violent people see value in the party's views, those views are a genuine concern I would think.

And I'd still say the Democrats attract just as bad of people, just on the other end of the spectrum.

I'd agree we should work to out those people, so they have no influence. But why should I work to purge the "idiots" from the Republicans, if the Democrats get to keep their "idiots"?

[+DieChecker]

3 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

Being a Republican is easy, now you must draw the real line.

1. Moderate

2. Conservative 

3. Conservative right wing

4. Conservative extreme right wing

5. Conservative extremist 

Where do you fall in the above?

The various tests I've taken online have usually said I'm a moderate, because I'm not for absolutism. I'm very open to bipartisanship. Want abortion? Let's find the middle ground. Want Defense spending down? What do you want give up? Want to bad AR-15's? Let's see what support can be raised and how the hometowns feel about it.

[+DieChecker]

3 hours ago, Tiggs said:

Other than her own?

The Jan 6th Committee hasn't released very much into the public domain yet, testimony-wise.

I don't personally have any photos/videos of the backstage of the Ellipse from Jan 6th, but I'd imagine someone has.

Given the various attempts to undermine her credibility, I'm fairly sure people would be screaming it from the rooftops by now if she wasn't.

Fair enough. Lack of evidence against is often accepted as evidence in favor. Unless someone says she was across town, she probably was there. Also if she was not likely to have been there Trump would have been more vocal about that fact.