I think Barr is speaking legal process strategy not his opinion. He's saying they brought in this testimony as a tactic / pretext for digging deeper,, not that he agrees it's warranted.
*****Official Jan 6th Committee Hearing Thread*****
152,903 Views |
2038 Replies |
Last: 8 mo ago by Funky Winkerbean
Trump's lawyer subpoenaed for further corroboration of events related to the submissions of fake electoral ballots, the appointment Jeffery Clark as AG due to the insubordination of the acting AG, and the efforts to stop the electoral count.
The Select Committee has subpoenaed former White House Counsel Pasquale “Pat” Cipollone for deposition testimony as a part of the committee’s investigation into the January 6th attack on the U.S. Capitol. pic.twitter.com/VjZsHlIqkD
— January 6th Committee (@January6thCmte) June 29, 2022
We believe progress is made through MORE discussion, not LESS, and we believe that to be true even if the topics are uncomfortable and we occasionally disagree with one another. - TexAgs
The name-calling technique making false associations is a child's game. The propagandist who uses this technique hopes that the audience will reject a person and their argument on this false basis.
The name-calling technique making false associations is a child's game. The propagandist who uses this technique hopes that the audience will reject a person and their argument on this false basis.
This time they really got him! This time it's for real!
Well.. that was fast.
Yea, a lot of stuff just got memory holed. So it goes.
Carolin - What did you do??
Its all about MORE discussion.
Probably was getting too real for the election deniers. Oh well.. I'm out!
Maybe you'll have a better day. Who knows!
The testimony was pretty damning because it showed Trump and Meadows knew there was a potential for violence on January 6th.
Other revelations include:
On January 2, 2021, Rudy Giuliani met with White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows.
— January 6th Committee (@January6thCmte) June 28, 2022
Hutchison was told that things on January 6 might get "real bad." pic.twitter.com/401ThSJNWv
Other revelations include:
- Trump's advisers knew that Trump could be exposed to criminal charges
- Trump wanted to be at the Capitol, like he said in his speech
- People assisting Trump with his plans asked for pardons, including members of Congress
- Trump knew the crowd was armed.
We believe progress is made through MORE discussion, not LESS, and we believe that to be true even if the topics are uncomfortable and we occasionally disagree with one another. - TexAgs
The name-calling technique making false associations is a child's game. The propagandist who uses this technique hopes that the audience will reject a person and their argument on this false basis.
The name-calling technique making false associations is a child's game. The propagandist who uses this technique hopes that the audience will reject a person and their argument on this false basis.
"Potential for violence"? In DC!?
Only on days that end in "y".
This farcical jaunt down Dumb**** Lane is tiringly stupid.
Only on days that end in "y".
This farcical jaunt down Dumb**** Lane is tiringly stupid.
"The Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution was never designed to restrain the people. It was designed to restrain the government."
Carolin_Gallego said:
The testimony was pretty damning because it showed Trump and Meadows knew there was a potential for violence on January 6th.On January 2, 2021, Rudy Giuliani met with White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows.
— January 6th Committee (@January6thCmte) June 28, 2022
Hutchison was told that things on January 6 might get "real bad." pic.twitter.com/401ThSJNWv
Other revelations include:
- Trump's advisers knew that Trump could be exposed to criminal charges
- Trump wanted to be at the Capitol, like he said in his speech
- People assisting Trump with his plans asked for pardons, including members of Congress
- Trump knew the crowd was armed.
I wonder if this committee has ever considered calling Trump or Meadows to testify so they didn't have to make a case on third hand testimony and political grudges
Maybe this is just a big misunderstanding
You start at the bottom and move up. By the time they get there, they'll have corroborating evidence of events. At which point they may plead the 5th.Burdizzo said:Carolin_Gallego said:
The testimony was pretty damning because it showed Trump and Meadows knew there was a potential for violence on January 6th.On January 2, 2021, Rudy Giuliani met with White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows.
— January 6th Committee (@January6thCmte) June 28, 2022
Hutchison was told that things on January 6 might get "real bad." pic.twitter.com/401ThSJNWv
Other revelations include:
- Trump's advisers knew that Trump could be exposed to criminal charges
- Trump wanted to be at the Capitol, like he said in his speech
- People assisting Trump with his plans asked for pardons, including members of Congress
- Trump knew the crowd was armed.
I wonder if this committee has ever considered calling Trump or Meadows to testify so they didn't have to make a case on third hand testimony and political grudges
Maybe this is just a big misunderstanding
We believe progress is made through MORE discussion, not LESS, and we believe that to be true even if the topics are uncomfortable and we occasionally disagree with one another. - TexAgs
The name-calling technique making false associations is a child's game. The propagandist who uses this technique hopes that the audience will reject a person and their argument on this false basis.
The name-calling technique making false associations is a child's game. The propagandist who uses this technique hopes that the audience will reject a person and their argument on this false basis.
Carolin_Gallego said:You start at the bottom and move up. By the time they get there, they'll have corroborating evidence of events. At which point they may plead the 5th.Burdizzo said:Carolin_Gallego said:
The testimony was pretty damning because it showed Trump and Meadows knew there was a potential for violence on January 6th.On January 2, 2021, Rudy Giuliani met with White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows.
— January 6th Committee (@January6thCmte) June 28, 2022
Hutchison was told that things on January 6 might get "real bad." pic.twitter.com/401ThSJNWv
Other revelations include:
- Trump's advisers knew that Trump could be exposed to criminal charges
- Trump wanted to be at the Capitol, like he said in his speech
- People assisting Trump with his plans asked for pardons, including members of Congress
- Trump knew the crowd was armed.
I wonder if this committee has ever considered calling Trump or Meadows to testify so they didn't have to make a case on third hand testimony and political grudges
Maybe this is just a big misunderstanding
They may also sprout wings and fly
.png)
- Trump knew the crowd was armed.
There is no link to the source material (First Amendment Demonstrations, issued Jan. 3, 2021, by Chief of Police Robert Contee of the Metropolitan Police Department) and OJP (linked in other parts of the article) has no record of the report on their website.
We believe progress is made through MORE discussion, not LESS, and we believe that to be true even if the topics are uncomfortable and we occasionally disagree with one another. - TexAgs
The name-calling technique making false associations is a child's game. The propagandist who uses this technique hopes that the audience will reject a person and their argument on this false basis.
The name-calling technique making false associations is a child's game. The propagandist who uses this technique hopes that the audience will reject a person and their argument on this false basis.
More name-calling. Is that really necessary? Can we try to act civil?
We believe progress is made through MORE discussion, not LESS, and we believe that to be true even if the topics are uncomfortable and we occasionally disagree with one another. - TexAgs
The name-calling technique making false associations is a child's game. The propagandist who uses this technique hopes that the audience will reject a person and their argument on this false basis.
The name-calling technique making false associations is a child's game. The propagandist who uses this technique hopes that the audience will reject a person and their argument on this false basis.
1. Definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result.
2. The Dems (and their fanboys/girls/its) are going after Trump again with little to no evidence, expecting to get him this time.
See #1. Then see #2. If this is too hard for you to understand, then you might not be insane, but just really unintelligent.
2. The Dems (and their fanboys/girls/its) are going after Trump again with little to no evidence, expecting to get him this time.
See #1. Then see #2. If this is too hard for you to understand, then you might not be insane, but just really unintelligent.
Trump asked the Georgia Secretary of State to find 11k votes and that bad things might happen if he doesn't. I just don't get how some of you view what he did after the election as a total nothing burger and totally above board.
See my previous post.
aggiejayrod said:Carolin_Gallego said:
More name-calling. Is that really necessary? Can we try to act civil?
We all know it's you Keith. It's not name calling to call you by the name your mom gave you. Unless you've come out as transexual and you think we're dead naming you. Then it's still not name calling to call you by the name your mom gave you.
I figured he didn't like the Steve Austin comment.
Malibu2 said:
Trump asked the Georgia Secretary of State to find 11k votes and that bad things might happen if he doesn't. I just don't get how some of you view what he did after the election as a total nothing burger and totally above board.
For me, as a non-supporter, because in the big picture of real life (gas prices, food shortages, grooming, etc) it is a nothingburger and largely a fabrication out of the minds of the insane.
"The Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution was never designed to restrain the people. It was designed to restrain the government."
Dude, they were finding 10,000 of thousands of votes after the election for Joe.Malibu2 said:
Trump asked the Georgia Secretary of State to find 11k votes and that bad things might happen if he doesn't. I just don't get how some of you view what he did after the election as a total nothing burger and totally above board.
Were you an adult paying attention to what a sitting Vice President did in Florida in 2000?Malibu2 said:
Trump asked the Georgia Secretary of State to find 11k votes and that bad things might happen if he doesn't. I just don't get how some of you view what he did after the election as a total nothing burger and totally above board.
aggiehawg said:Were you an adult paying attention to what a sitting Vice President did in Florida in 2000?Malibu2 said:
Trump asked the Georgia Secretary of State to find 11k votes and that bad things might happen if he doesn't. I just don't get how some of you view what he did after the election as a total nothing burger and totally above board.
Great question ...
"I'm sure that won't make a bit of difference for those of you who enjoy a baseless rage over the decisions of a few teenagers."
Yeah clearly it had nothing to do with the ignorance you were posting...it's always someone else.PabloSerna said:
Probably was getting too real for the election deniers. Oh well.. I'm out!
But it's (D)ifferent this time!aggiehawg said:Were you an adult paying attention to what a sitting Vice President did in Florida in 2000?Malibu2 said:
Trump asked the Georgia Secretary of State to find 11k votes and that bad things might happen if he doesn't. I just don't get how some of you view what he did after the election as a total nothing burger and totally above board.
I am still trying to figure out the end game here. Are they that scared Trump will run again? Will they throw him in jail like we did with Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell while other criminals like Hunter Biden roam freely?
For all the impeachment hearings and false claims against Trump in the past, why do they keep going after him and why do they struggle so to get some hardcore evidence that isn't second hand bull***** Vinkman, What's-her-name the staffer, Blase-Ford, they keep fabricating crap.
What can't you Democrats find some real evidence?
For all the impeachment hearings and false claims against Trump in the past, why do they keep going after him and why do they struggle so to get some hardcore evidence that isn't second hand bull***** Vinkman, What's-her-name the staffer, Blase-Ford, they keep fabricating crap.
What can't you Democrats find some real evidence?
Burdizzo said:
I am still trying to figure out the end game here. Are they that scared Trump will run again? Will they throw him in jail like we did with Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell while other criminals like Hunter Biden roam freely?
For all the impeachment hearings and false claims against Trump in the past, why do they keep going after him and why do they struggle so to get some hardcore evidence that isn't second hand bull***** Vinkman, What's-her-name the staffer, Blase-Ford, they keep fabricating crap.
What can't you Democrats find some real evidence?
Obviously, there isn't any. They wouldn't be shy at all about bringing criminal charges. But they don't have any. So they use their held bodies of congress to put forth partisan and slanted hearings meant to disparage his name in hopes he won't run in 2024
They're scared.