Things seem to be unfolding rather quickly. Former White House aides and advisors are scrambling to cover themselves as they receive subpoenas to appear and produce documents.
It’s rare when lawyers — as opposed to their clients — take the Fifth Amendment. But Jeffrey Clark, the former Justice Department lawyer who reportedly tried to help Donald Trump overturn the 2020 presidential election, is now claiming the privilege against self-incrimination to avoid testifying before the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol. He has just been joined in that posture by one of Trump’s main outside legal advisers, John Eastman.
The lawsuit comes after the committee signaled it would pursue a criminal contempt referral against Meadows because of his refusal to sit for a deposition in the investigation into the Capitol riot. Meadows alleges that the subpoenas are "overly broad and unduly burdensome," while claiming that the committee "lacks lawful authority to seek and to obtain" the information requested.
And apparently Mark Meadows had a power point outlining how to overturn election results.
The 38-page presentation, entitled "Election Fraud, Foreign Interference & Options for 6 Jan," is dated one day before the Capitol riot. It's believed to have been submitted by Meadows after he was subpoenaed by the panel in connection with the insurrection.
I’m sorry, what does this mean “they will be asked only one side questions.” There are no sides to the truth. Who is going to rebut their testimony? If McCarthy is asked about a call to Trump asking for help, why does that need rebuttal?
Well. This type of hearing does not make it necessary for a rebuttal. It is simular to Supreme Court indictment hearings where all the evidence against a person is submitted. The Judges then rule whether or not there is enough evidence to charge someone criminally. It's also not usually broadcasted on prime time on almost every news outlet either. If the Judges rule there is enough evidence then the person is charged.
However Trump will not be charged so it's a convenient way to present information you want , blast it far and loud because nobody will challenge it. I don't think the Republicans you mention are comfortable doing that. I wouldn't be and I would not appreciate a bias group of people that make no reserves on how much they hate me making claims I cannot defend myself from.
Haven't you ever heard "this is my truth" "this is their truth" and the actual truth is somewhere in between?
Save your lectures on civility in online discussions... it implies that you believe you've been respectful toward me.
My approach in discussion is not effective in your opinion. I wonder though, do you believe that my objective is to convince you of something? I think that I've adequate challenged your opinions and claims with data, evidence, articles which provide background and context...
Yes, when people have believed things without evidence they will often double down when confronted with truth, facts or evidence. That doesn't mean that we should stop presenting facts or evidence.
If you don't want to talk about the lie that Trump used to convince conservative Americans that he didn't lose the 2020 election or how dangerous this political movement based upon that lie is then you are in the wrong thread. This thread is about that threat to our republic.
The only danger to the Republic are the incompetent people in charge now. But that’s going to change in November and Biden got his only Supreme Court nominee he’s ever going to get.
If this was an insurrection and a actual attempt to overthrow our government and Trump was part if it, then charge him.
You cannot claim that this is the worst thing since 9/11, (not saying anyone here specifically)then identify who is to blame then not charge him. Nope,sorry.
Charge him, charge the offenders and move on. Let me add, those charged with sedition have not gone to trial so they are innocent until proven otherwise. At least they'll get a defence.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
1 hour ago, Justlookingfornow said:
That's a good point! I'll have to research. What I think may be there issue is privileged information(some that I heard) but mostly because they will be asked only one side questions. There will be no rebuttal to their testimony.
There has been no executive privilege invoked to preclude their cooperation with the inquiry.
53 minutes ago, Justlookingfornow said:
Well. This type of hearing does not make it necessary for a rebuttal. It is simular to Supreme Court indictment hearings where all the evidence against a person is submitted. The Judges then rule whether or not there is enough evidence to charge someone criminally. It's also not usually broadcasted on prime time on almost every news outlet either. If the Judges rule there is enough evidence then the person is charged.
However Trump will not be charged so it's a convenient way to present information you want , blast it far and loud because nobody will challenge it. I don't think the Republicans you mention are comfortable doing that. I wouldn't be and I would not appreciate a bias group of people that make no reserves on how much they hate me making claims I cannot defend myself from.
Haven't you ever heard "this is my truth" "this is their truth" and the actual truth is somewhere in between?
They should be willing to come before the congressional committee and tell their truth, which presumably would explain everything away... right?
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
1 hour ago, Justlookingfornow said:
Bad. I'm embarrassed.
It's naive to believe that people intending on taken down the US government, which has the most powerful military in the word would not think of bringing weapons.
They were Republican and probably could have formed a nice orificenal of weapons. However , they did not.
Similar to this dog and pony show? Wagon without wheels on both sides?
Yes, it's naive to believe that all coup attempts involve the military.
Is that a new way of trying to imply that the democrats are no different than the political party that is working to undermine our elections with lies and corrupt intent... that wagon without wheels silliness? Because they aren't the same and this investigation isn't a joke.
Yes. You've made hints to your angst of the electoral college........
They did? Perhaps you can provide some info from the committee that they were actually trying to stop the transition? It was a terrible shamefully protest that turned violent. That's it and nothing thus far has proven otherwise.
What was their plan? Hold everyone in congress hosage in the rotunda until Biden said he lost? Hold their breaths until they stayed Trump run? There was no military brought in by Trump,no heavy inserectionist type weapons bybthe rioters. Who in the right mind would attempt to over throw the US government without at least some weapons of war? Fantastical conspiracy theory.
My source? The Jan.6 committee that has failed to bring any evidence that we already didn't know. No criminal charges for him? After the tried to overthrow a US election?
The only new thing I learned was Trump acted worse than I thought and Guliani was drunk LOL.
Is whether the goal was to interfere with the electoral college certification still up for debate? I had the impression neither side was really disputing that, but maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
30 minutes ago, Justlookingfornow said:
If this was an insurrection and a actual attempt to overthrow our government and Trump was part if it, then charge him.
You cannot claim that this is the worst thing since 9/11, (not saying anyone here specifically)then identify who is to blame then not charge him. Nope,sorry.
Charge him, charge the offenders and move on. Let me add, those charged with sedition have not gone to trial so they are innocent until proven otherwise. At least they'll get a defence.
Can you please let the process play out? It's not normal to just start demanding that people be charged or locked up before proper investigation is accomplished... just because people are worked up about the issue.
Do you realize that at least 2 of the Oath Keepers charged with seditious conspiracy plead guilty to the charges?
If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
Well. This type of hearing does not make it necessary for a rebuttal. It is simular to Supreme Court indictment hearings where all the evidence against a person is submitted. The Judges then rule whether or not there is enough evidence to charge someone criminally. It's also not usually broadcasted on prime time on almost every news outlet either. If the Judges rule there is enough evidence then the person is charged.
However Trump will not be charged so it's a convenient way to present information you want , blast it far and loud because nobody will challenge it. I don't think the Republicans you mention are comfortable doing that. I wouldn't be and I would not appreciate a bias group of people that make no reserves on how much they hate me making claims I cannot defend myself from.
Haven't you ever heard "this is my truth" "this is their truth" and the actual truth is somewhere in between?
This is more
of your word salad gobbledygook. The hearings are seeking information by doing interviews ( more than 1000 I think) and gathering documents. Currently the committee is presenting information to the American public. Several Trump election officials testified under oath. Are you saying they are untruthful?
I think you are talking about a Grand Jury?
I don’t know what you mean about my truth. That makes no sense at all.
Is that a new way of trying to imply that the democrats are no different than the political party that is working to undermine our elections with lies and corrupt intent... that wagon without wheels silliness? Because they aren't the same and this investigation isn't a joke.
The only one alluding to the investigation as a "joke" thus far has been you.
Yes. I can see actions by the democrats that could be seen as "undermining our elections with lies and corrupt attempt" Exploiting mail in voting, making the prejudicial claim that POC in the US are unable to get ID or use technology. Invoking the racism God into everything in attempt to prevent people from pushing back, stacking the court, trying to end the filibusters(when it's not in their favor like in November primaries) which I suspect if the Republicans win the primary they will go back on their position. Getting rid of the electoral college.......
Not to mention refusing to enforce laws, protesting outside Justice's homes. Allowing city blocks to be taken over as autonomous zones, police having to abandon their police stations.......... both fall under sedition BTW.........
of your word salad gobbledygook. The hearings are seeking information by doing interviews ( more than 1000 I think) and gathering documents. Currently the committee is presenting information to the American public. Several Trump election officials testified under oath. Are you saying they are untruthful?
I think you are talking about a Grand Jury?
I don’t know what you mean about my truth. That makes no sense at all.
Not to worry. Let's focus on if there is any substantial evidence presented that we don't already know and any direct link to the "insurrectionist" and Trump or any pre-organized plan for the riot. In which the FBI has already deemed there is no evidence of a pre-organized attempt. Which only cast more doubt on the actual purpose for all this.
"FBI investigators did find that cells of protesters, including followers of the far-right Oath Keepers and Proud Boys groups, had aimed to break into the Capitol. But they found no evidence that the groups had serious plans about what to do if they made it inside, the sources said."
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
9 minutes ago, Justlookingfornow said:
The only one alluding to the investigation as a "joke" thus far has been you.
Yes. I can see actions by the democrats that could be seen as "undermining our elections with lies and corrupt attempt" Exploiting mail in voting, making the prejudicial claim that POC in the US are unable to get ID or use technology. Invoking the racism God into everything in attempt to prevent people from pushing back, stacking the court, trying to end the filibusters(when it's not in their favor like in November primaries) which I suspect if the Republicans win the primary they will go back on their position. Getting rid of the electoral college.......
Not to mention refusing to enforce laws, protesting outside Justice's homes. Allowing city blocks to be taken over as autonomous zones, police having to abandon their police stations.......... both fall under sedition BTW.........
It doesn't seem that you take this committee or their work seriously, hence the reference to a joke.
The remainder of your quoted remark is emotional but unrelated to the topic of this thread.
Justlookingfornow
425 Posts
Well. This type of hearing does not make it necessary for a rebuttal. It is simular to Supreme Court indictment hearings where all the evidence against a person is submitted. The Judges then rule whether or not there is enough evidence to charge someone criminally. It's also not usually broadcasted on prime time on almost every news outlet either. If the Judges rule there is enough evidence then the person is charged.
However Trump will not be charged so it's a convenient way to present information you want , blast it far and loud because nobody will challenge it. I don't think the Republicans you mention are comfortable doing that. I wouldn't be and I would not appreciate a bias group of people that make no reserves on how much they hate me making claims I cannot defend myself from.
Haven't you ever heard "this is my truth" "this is their truth" and the actual truth is somewhere in between?