January 6 didn't do Trump proud, but the committee's proceedings cry out for balanced presentation and analysis.
The first thing we need is a clear examination of when the capitol was breached, the extent and duration of the breach, and Trump's response. The committee focuses on the fraught confrontation between rioters and capitol police, with the implication this was occurring during the whole two plus hours that Trump allegedly twiddled his thumbs. In fact, as the full video of the incursion shows, there was a lot of non-violent mulling around inside the breached capitol, which raises the issue of how long there was violent confrontation as opposed to harmless trespass. Paul points to Trump's "peaceful" tweets, and someone representing the other side might ask whether the rioters turned barricade storming to mulling at least in part in response to Trump's tweets. With only the one-sided focus of the committee, we don't have a complete picture of what was happening during the two plus hours before the crowd disbursed.
And where was Nancy Pelosi, who was in charge of the capitol police and had apparently been authorized by Trump to use the national guard? Same with Mayor Bowser, in charge of the DC police with the same authority to use the guard. They, not Trump, were responsible for capitol security, and yet the committee explicitly declared Pelosi off limits and we haven't heard a peep of why Bowser fiddled while the capitol burned. We do know both of them expressed reluctance to use the guard on January 6, and they had both excoriated those who even thought of using the guard during the violent 2020 riots.
The 1/6 committee proceedings have been called a kangaroo court, but they're worse than that, a kangaroo court held under false pretenses. A real kangaroo court gives short shrift to an explicitly identified defendant accused of specific misconduct. The January 6 committee pretends to be conducting a broad examination of the events of January 6, but it is doing nothing of the sort. Its sole focus is to sentence Donald Trump to political death in a Stalinesque show trial that marches under the guise of congressional committee hearings.
One last point. Every member of the committee was appointed by Nancy Pelosi, and every single one voted to impeach Trump. Some were even impeachment managers. And Pelosi has the gall to suggest she blackballed Jim Jordan and Jim Banks because they might have prejudged the matter, or might be witnesses. She gives "give me a break" a good name.
He wasnt allowed defence and was convicted of a crime that isn’t a real crime for which he was indicted for an event that he wasn’t a participant in any way shape or form. It’s now illegal to be a republican in this country. But at least no mean orange tweets.
The things Democrats are doing are far worse than anything Trump did or even conceivably pondered. We are living in a Fascist Oligarchic banana republic. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ApfU152awvw
If there was anything at the Capitol on 1-6-21 that could be construed as a riot, there is plenty of video that shows those activities were instigated by provocative agents like Ray Epps when he’s on video telling people to go into the Capitol. And yet somehow people like Ray Epps haven’t been arrested. Curious, that…
We can always count on the #neverTrumpers to support the Stalinist show trials. I thought Mr Mirengoff claimed to be a lawyer. How could that be? The J6 Kangaroo court doesn't follow the law at all. They don't allow cross examinations, they don't allow the accused representation, and they promote in hearsay evidence. Mr Mirengoff hates President Trump so much, he supports this illegal travesty.
I have repeatedly criticized the committee proceedings for lack of fairness. I criticized them again in this post.
But the proceedings aren't illegal. Witnesses are allowed representation. Those who are watching these proceedings will have seen the lawyers of reluctant witnesses consult their counsel before asserting a privilege or taking the Fifth. (I don't think Stalin allowed asserting privileges or invoking the Fifth.)
If Trump agreed to testify, which I don't recommend, he could have a lawyer, too.
Witnesses' lawyers don't get to cross-examine anyone, but they never get to do this during investigative hearings by congressional committees. That's true whether the hearings are run by Democrats or Republicans.
There is nothing illegal about this. No right for counsel to cross-examine witnesses exists at a congressional hearing, any more than such a right exists in a grand jury proceeding..
I bow to your lawyerly expertise about the legality of the proceedings. But isn't more than unfair? Isn't it unethical? Have you ever seen any other Congressional committee run this way? How about spineless McCarthy allowing Pelosi to toss two Trump supporters and replace them with two Trump haters? Have you ever seen that before? And how would you compare this to the Benghazi hearings? It was revealed that Hillary committed treason and yet she was given a pass. And the FBI helped her and her staff to destroy the evidence. Have you ever seen that before? In addition, would you say it's par for the course for committees and the Mueller witch hunt to leak damaging misinformation, disinformation, and propaganda, knowing the fake news will never present President Trump's side of the story. With the Mueller witch hunt, the FBI, CIA, and the rest of the IC manufactured dirt to implicate President Trump. And they started that while he was still a candidate for the repub primary. Has that ever happened before?
And what did the republican establishment do? Paul Ryan made it clear with his leaked October surprise recording that the establishment would never support or defend Trump. The establishment supported Hillary and Biden over trump. They supported the four year coup, the stolen election, and the J6 false flag riot. Have you ever seen anything like that before? I don't think so. President Trump put America first and that's why the republican establishment collaborated with the deems to remove him from office. Now, this committee is laying the ground work so Garland can indict our President.
January 6 didn't do Trump proud, but the committee's proceedings cry out for balanced presentation and analysis.
The first thing we need is a clear examination of when the capitol was breached, the extent and duration of the breach, and Trump's response. The committee focuses on the fraught confrontation between rioters and capitol police, with the implication this was occurring during the whole two plus hours that Trump allegedly twiddled his thumbs. In fact, as the full video of the incursion shows, there was a lot of non-violent mulling around inside the breached capitol, which raises the issue of how long there was violent confrontation as opposed to harmless trespass. Paul points to Trump's "peaceful" tweets, and someone representing the other side might ask whether the rioters turned barricade storming to mulling at least in part in response to Trump's tweets. With only the one-sided focus of the committee, we don't have a complete picture of what was happening during the two plus hours before the crowd disbursed.
And where was Nancy Pelosi, who was in charge of the capitol police and had apparently been authorized by Trump to use the national guard? Same with Mayor Bowser, in charge of the DC police with the same authority to use the guard. They, not Trump, were responsible for capitol security, and yet the committee explicitly declared Pelosi off limits and we haven't heard a peep of why Bowser fiddled while the capitol burned. We do know both of them expressed reluctance to use the guard on January 6, and they had both excoriated those who even thought of using the guard during the violent 2020 riots.
The 1/6 committee proceedings have been called a kangaroo court, but they're worse than that, a kangaroo court held under false pretenses. A real kangaroo court gives short shrift to an explicitly identified defendant accused of specific misconduct. The January 6 committee pretends to be conducting a broad examination of the events of January 6, but it is doing nothing of the sort. Its sole focus is to sentence Donald Trump to political death in a Stalinesque show trial that marches under the guise of congressional committee hearings.
One last point. Every member of the committee was appointed by Nancy Pelosi, and every single one voted to impeach Trump. Some were even impeachment managers. And Pelosi has the gall to suggest she blackballed Jim Jordan and Jim Banks because they might have prejudged the matter, or might be witnesses. She gives "give me a break" a good name.
Jim Dueholm
He wasnt allowed defence and was convicted of a crime that isn’t a real crime for which he was indicted for an event that he wasn’t a participant in any way shape or form. It’s now illegal to be a republican in this country. But at least no mean orange tweets.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=EEw1cg1D3Jw
The things Democrats are doing are far worse than anything Trump did or even conceivably pondered. We are living in a Fascist Oligarchic banana republic. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ApfU152awvw
If there was anything at the Capitol on 1-6-21 that could be construed as a riot, there is plenty of video that shows those activities were instigated by provocative agents like Ray Epps when he’s on video telling people to go into the Capitol. And yet somehow people like Ray Epps haven’t been arrested. Curious, that…
We can always count on the #neverTrumpers to support the Stalinist show trials. I thought Mr Mirengoff claimed to be a lawyer. How could that be? The J6 Kangaroo court doesn't follow the law at all. They don't allow cross examinations, they don't allow the accused representation, and they promote in hearsay evidence. Mr Mirengoff hates President Trump so much, he supports this illegal travesty.
I have repeatedly criticized the committee proceedings for lack of fairness. I criticized them again in this post.
But the proceedings aren't illegal. Witnesses are allowed representation. Those who are watching these proceedings will have seen the lawyers of reluctant witnesses consult their counsel before asserting a privilege or taking the Fifth. (I don't think Stalin allowed asserting privileges or invoking the Fifth.)
If Trump agreed to testify, which I don't recommend, he could have a lawyer, too.
Witnesses' lawyers don't get to cross-examine anyone, but they never get to do this during investigative hearings by congressional committees. That's true whether the hearings are run by Democrats or Republicans.
There is nothing illegal about this. No right for counsel to cross-examine witnesses exists at a congressional hearing, any more than such a right exists in a grand jury proceeding..
I bow to your lawyerly expertise about the legality of the proceedings. But isn't more than unfair? Isn't it unethical? Have you ever seen any other Congressional committee run this way? How about spineless McCarthy allowing Pelosi to toss two Trump supporters and replace them with two Trump haters? Have you ever seen that before? And how would you compare this to the Benghazi hearings? It was revealed that Hillary committed treason and yet she was given a pass. And the FBI helped her and her staff to destroy the evidence. Have you ever seen that before? In addition, would you say it's par for the course for committees and the Mueller witch hunt to leak damaging misinformation, disinformation, and propaganda, knowing the fake news will never present President Trump's side of the story. With the Mueller witch hunt, the FBI, CIA, and the rest of the IC manufactured dirt to implicate President Trump. And they started that while he was still a candidate for the repub primary. Has that ever happened before?
And what did the republican establishment do? Paul Ryan made it clear with his leaked October surprise recording that the establishment would never support or defend Trump. The establishment supported Hillary and Biden over trump. They supported the four year coup, the stolen election, and the J6 false flag riot. Have you ever seen anything like that before? I don't think so. President Trump put America first and that's why the republican establishment collaborated with the deems to remove him from office. Now, this committee is laying the ground work so Garland can indict our President.