The insurrection committee's public hearings

[Smoove_B]

Why aren't they using the Hollywood liberal elite to help them? Or has that already been floated by the right? I can't keep track anymore.

[Alefroth]

Close enough. They're yapping about it being produced by a former ABC News exec.

[Smoove_B]

Ooh, it's like when Netflix does a recap before you start the next season and they include a teaser for what's about to happen.

A message from Vice Chair @RepLizCheney about Thursday’s hearing.

[Unagi]

I like how it ended abruptly like that, with ‘and then I hung up on him.’

However, I do have to wonder if Eastman really needs that great criminal defense lawyer or not.

I suppose that is the take away message:
Trump’s own lawyer thinks they were acting criminally, and said as much at the time.

[Smoove_B]

Oh boy



EDIT: Linked to video directly from committee

[Unagi]

Oh boy



EDIT: Linked to video directly from committee

I tried to take a picture inside the DMV a year ago, to show my wife the size of the line... And I was told I couldn't take photographs inside.

[Smoove_B]

Were you wearing a red hat or some QANon flair? Maybe that was your mistake.

[Unagi]

Oops, yeah - I failed to wear the right garb.

[Dogstar]

‘All members are in the tunnels under capital seal them in. Turn on gas’

Ummm...

[Pyperkub]

Oh boy



EDIT: Linked to video directly from committee

I tried to take a picture inside the DMV a year ago, to show my wife the size of the line... And I was told I couldn't take photographs inside.

It's also the Cover-up:

"Republicans on the Committee on House
Administration—of which you (Loudermilk) are a Member—claimed to have reviewed security footage from
the days preceding January 6th and determined that “[t]here were no tours, no large groups, no one with MAGA hats on."

Loudermilk was on the Republican Committee which claimed there were no tours...

[Holman]

It's been pointed out that the grey-shirt dude in the tour video has four phones on him: one in his hand for taking photos, another held up in his other hand (presumably taking video), one poking out of his front pocket (presumably taking video), and one poking out of his back pocket (presumably also video).

Yeah. This is reconnaissance.

[Smoove_B]

I said it before, but I'd really, really like to get to the part where we start hanging people. It needs to happen.

[malchior]

You'd have in the past scoffed at part of a fictional portrayal where they have a documented conspiracy against the US and everyone sort of shrugged. This or the 1/6 committee apparently didn't merit a mention on the front page in the NY Times. INFLATION! We live in a much different world than many people thought we do. It's frustrating to still see so many with their heads buried firmly in the sand. Enough. Do something or they will.

[Grifman]

It’s clearly a recon, and Loudermilk’s lies and changing story show he knows. First he said there was no tour, then families with children, then it was 16 people. He should be expelled from Congress:

https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... 6-attacker

[malchior]

It's definitely recon and there is a lot more we don't know. The FBI comms released indicate they also seemingly knew where member of Congress were and seemed to know the location of the undisclosed location they were moved to. Someone (potentially staffers or Congresspersons) were in direct communications with the insurrectionists.

[malchior]

Another factor to consider is that Chief of Police Manger issued a letter three days ago that was partially supported and partially contradicted by the video evidence. They were apparently as far as we known in the larger Capitol complex and not the Capitol itself. They definitely were doing something suspicious. I suspect that might be part of the reason for the video release. Additionally, other Congressperson's have said they saw other groups as well. There is something very wrong here. Notice how the letter is focused on where they went and not *what they clearly were doing*. Manger either conducted a terrible investigation or he may be compromised somehow.

[TheMix]

If they didn't find any of the activities suspicious, then I'd argue that they don't actually train their officers to be alert...

[Smoove_B]

It's pretty common for government buildings to have signs about picture taking being prohibited - especially in sensitive areas. I'm surprised to learn that doesn't apply at security checkpoints in all these Capitol adjacent areas. Clearly you're not going to prohibit photographs in the main areas of the Capitol (you know, where tours typically go), but this seems pretty egregious.

And yes, the chief is either being cute with the language ("wasn't in the Capitol") or he's criminally inept at his job. Given the low volume of people I'd expect there in January -and- the Covid-19 reduction in touring in general, I'm having a hard time understanding why this specific tour (and others) didn't set off red flags. Can't wait to see what else they're going to reveal.

Rep. Mikie Sherrill tells @MSNBC that Republican Barry Loudermilk was not the only member of Congress who gave a tour of the Capitol complex in the lead up to Jan. 6.

[LawBeefaroni]

Didn't we hear about a lot of these recon "tours" in the weeks after Jan 6? I seem to remember it was well established that this was going on.

[Smoove_B]

Yes, though now we're just seeing details (what they looked like) for the first time. I'm going to assume (hope?) that we get more information about all the elected officials that were providing recon opportunities.

They still haven't named anyone else that provided them or indicated which members of Congress asked for a pardon. If this doesn't end with legal action, I don't even know what to say anymore other than we deserve whatever is coming.

[Skinypupy]

While I tend to take Haberman with a huge grain of salt, this seems to be getting corroboration elsewhere as well.

SCOOP: Eastman relayed in previously undisclosed email that he had awareness of a debate among SCOTUS judges about whether to listen to an election case

I have been assured but top conservative minds that leaking details on the inner workings of SCOTUS is tantamount to treason and should be punished accordingly.

God Speed, Ginni.

[malchior]

Actually Haberman gets taken down a peg for me on this one. This story is IMO pretty weak. She is talking about an Eastman claim in an email. Maybe the claim was true or it was gossip. We have no way to ascertain that since they present no corroboration that it actually happened. In my mind this is again Deathwatch material. The NY Times ran this on the front page - not too far from reporting on gossip/boasting - instead of the revelations about the tours which was on page A16. Ridiculous.

Edit: Another take which shows how irrelevant this was but for me another indicator that the once excellent NY Times is sliding quickly towards hunting clicks instead of the truth.

[Skinypupy]

That's fair, but it does seem to be the final straw to get the Committee to call her in.

Not that I expect her to actually appear, of course.

[malchior]

That's fair, but it does seem to be the final straw to get the Committee to call her in.

FWIW I think what was the final straw were the direct emails that Thomas-Eastman exchanged which were the subject of a WaPo piece. Haberman references it even in this piece. That is what makes her piece so incredibly weak to me. It lacks a ton of context that give us any insight whether this was consequential or not. The emails exist but the reader has no way to even understand if the claim is true or not. For example, check out the quote below. They engage in some convenient arrangement in the piece that I could argue is there to spice it up with implicit speculation that IMO goes right up to the line and winks at us. Maybe these things are linked but maybe they are not but she puts a heavy thumb on the scale. And that isn't the only time in the piece. Maybe this is me holding the NY Times to too high a standard but I think this is below par.

And Mr. Eastman’s email, if taken at face value, raised the question of how he would have known about internal tension among the justices about dealing with election cases. Mr. Eastman had been a clerk for Justice Clarence Thomas.

The committee is also reviewing emails between Mr. Eastman and Virginia Thomas, the wife of Justice Thomas. Ms. Thomas was an outspoken supporter of Mr. Trump and in the period after Election Day sent a barrage of text messages to the Trump White House urging efforts to reverse the outcome and supported a variety of efforts to keep Mr. Trump in office.

[Unagi]

I just need to say that it's really hard to listen to J. Michael Luttig's testimony (the Former Fed Judge who advised Pence)... only because it is delivered so slowly, like listening to a YouTube video at 25% rate. It's crazy to my ear how slow he is generating. each. word. he. is. . . saying.

His words are powerful. Carefully measured, for certain. I'll get over it. He seems to have built up a little momentum. The first 2 minutes or so were really quite the experience.

[Dogstar]

Luttig apparently has a stutter and his speaking cadence is his way of combating that.

[Carpet_pissr]

Maybe this is me holding the NY Times to too high a standard

[Pyperkub]

Lol!

[Unagi]

Luttig apparently has a stutter and his speaking cadence is his way of combating that.

Thank you. That would totally explain it.

[Skinypupy]

So YouTube deleted one of the videos uploaded by the Jan 6 committee because it included Trump's statements about election fraud. According to YouTube's spokesperson:

“Our election integrity policy prohibits content advancing false claims that widespread fraud, errors or glitches changed the outcome of the 2020 U.S. presidential election, if it does not provide sufficient context. We enforce our policies equally for everyone, and have removed the video uploaded by the Jan. 6 committee channel.”

[Unagi]

So YouTube deleted one of the videos uploaded by the Jan 6 committee because it included Trump's statements about election fraud. According to YouTube's spokesperson:

“Our election integrity policy prohibits content advancing false claims that widespread fraud, errors or glitches changed the outcome of the 2020 U.S. presidential election, if it does not provide sufficient context. We enforce our policies equally for everyone, and have removed the video uploaded by the Jan. 6 committee channel.”

Seems moderately legit and very easy for the panel to address and get right.

Don’t put up the video without context. Make a new video that establishes context and then includes the speech? I’m assuming that is the issue.

Now, if they took down a video that included the context (‘that this is the lie he said…’) , that’s super lame.

[stimpy]

It's been pointed out that the grey-shirt dude in the tour video has four phones on him: one in his hand for taking photos, another held up in his other hand (presumably taking video), one poking out of his front pocket (presumably taking video), and one poking out of his back pocket (presumably also video).

Yeah. This is reconnaissance.

I think he also had those contact lenses like Batman gave to Catwoman to record the secret lair of the Penguin.

[Jaymann]

So YouTube deleted one of the videos uploaded by the Jan 6 committee because it included Trump's statements about election fraud. According to YouTube's spokesperson:

“Our election integrity policy prohibits content advancing false claims that widespread fraud, errors or glitches changed the outcome of the 2020 U.S. presidential election, if it does not provide sufficient context. We enforce our policies equally for everyone, and have removed the video uploaded by the Jan. 6 committee channel.”

Seems moderately legit and very easy for the panel to address and get right.

Don’t put up the video without context. Make a new video that establishes context and then includes the speech? I’m assuming that is the issue.

Now, if they took down a video that included the context (‘that this is the lie he said…’) , that’s super lame.

Governance by algorithm.

[Drazzil]

I love how people are talking about and covering the Jan 6 commission breathlessly; as if the conclusions will have any consequences AT ALL. Get it thru your head folks. The Democrats have sold us out. They're smart people, and can read the writing on the wall. They have more in common with the Republicans then us. They will drop some soundbytes, wring their hands and loudly protest, then shuffle to the midterms like a drugged up cow to the chopping block.

[dbt1949]

The reason for our national discontent is we are in the age of extremism. We've been on the edge for a long time but it took Obama to bring out. Those who are racist started rebelling. At least half the country evidently. Then came the the grand master of deceit, Trump. Stupid as a ( I have no word for it)..... and pushing his racist agenda. We are in the middle of a civil war now and it will get worse before it'll get better. Maybe it would be better to divide the country in two.

[Smoove_B]

To be clear, wanting to make sure votes are counted and not ignored is not extremist. Making sure women have bodily autonomy isn't extremist. Making sure LBGTQ+ individuals aren't targeted isn't extremist.

The "extremists" are the troglodytes that vote for and support those trying to drag us back into the Dark Ages and/or into some kind of fascist theocracy.

[Unagi]

I love how people are talking about and covering the Jan 6 commission breathlessly; as if the conclusions will have any consequences AT ALL. Get it thru your head folks. The Democrats have sold us out. They're smart people, and can read the writing on the wall. They have more in common with the Republicans then us. They will drop some soundbytes, wring their hands and loudly protest, then shuffle to the midterms like a drugged up cow to the chopping block.

If they have sold out what’s the point in the hearings? As in: why would they bother? I don’t follow your conspiracy angle. What’s Liz Cheney doing up there? Selling out?

[Drazzil]

I love how people are talking about and covering the Jan 6 commission breathlessly; as if the conclusions will have any consequences AT ALL. Get it thru your head folks. The Democrats have sold us out. They're smart people, and can read the writing on the wall. They have more in common with the Republicans then us. They will drop some soundbytes, wring their hands and loudly protest, then shuffle to the midterms like a drugged up cow to the chopping block.

If they have sold out what’s the point in the hearings? As in: why would they bother? I don’t follow your conspiracy angle. What’s Liz Cheney doing up there? Selling out?

Theater. The idea that "very serious" people are trying to get to the bottom of things and ideally preventing such things from happening again. It's all a show. The conclusions and verdicts have already been reached. The commission will talk a good game, go thru the motions and by the week after the "judgement"(s) have been handed down; everything will have been forgotten. Its all kabuki, designed to appease what little public outcry resulted from the dry run for the insurrection.

Vapid lip service to those few families of the murdered officers and those few poor fools who still think law and order mean anything to the oglarchy at the top.

[Alefroth]

Theater.

To what end? What do Cheney and Kinzinger get out of it?

[Unagi]

I love how people are talking about and covering the Jan 6 commission breathlessly; as if the conclusions will have any consequences AT ALL. Get it thru your head folks. The Democrats have sold us out. They're smart people, and can read the writing on the wall. They have more in common with the Republicans then us. They will drop some soundbytes, wring their hands and loudly protest, then shuffle to the midterms like a drugged up cow to the chopping block.

If they have sold out what’s the point in the hearings? As in: why would they bother? I don’t follow your conspiracy angle. What’s Liz Cheney doing up there? Selling out?

Theater. The idea that "very serious" people are trying to get to the bottom of things and ideally preventing such things from happening again. It's all a show. The conclusions and verdicts have already been reached. The commission will talk a good game, go thru the motions and by the week after the "judgement"(s) have been handed down; everything will have been forgotten. Its all kabuki, designed to appease what little public outcry resulted from the dry run for the insurrection.

Vapid lip service to those few families of the murdered officers and those few poor fools who still think law and order mean anything to the oglarchy at the top.

When autumn comes and the leaves all change color and then fall to the ground as we hit winter, do you think spring was all just Kabuki?