Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
TulliusCicero
Jul 29, 2017



Herstory Begins Now posted:

You got trump's # off, he had ~85% of conservatives in 2020



by contrast clinton picked up 7% of conservatives in 2016

I'm the 10% of identified liberals that vote Trump :shepface:

My brain actually hurts from how dumb some Americans are

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Bel Shazar
Sep 14, 2012

Murgos posted:

This tells you that 24% of the country doesn't have a loving clue if they are liberal or conservative.

These numbers check out with some independent polling.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2014/02/14/277058739/1-in-4-americans-think-the-sun-goes-around-the-earth-survey-says

Main Paineframe
Oct 27, 2010

Herstory Begins Now posted:

You got trump's # off, he had ~85% of conservatives in 2020



by contrast clinton picked up 7% of conservatives in 2016

I think it was 93% of Republicans, not 93% of conservatives. This conversation keeps switching between "Republicans" and "conservatives" and it makes it tough to follow.

Herstory Begins Now
Aug 5, 2003
SOME REALLY TEDIOUS DUMB SHIT THAT SUCKS ASS TO READ ->>

Murgos posted:

This tells you that 24% of the country doesn't have a loving clue if they are liberal or conservative.

Yeah lol that's the american electorate, but that's neither here nor there.

From pew's #s,


Main Paineframe posted:

I think it was 93% of Republicans, not 93% of conservatives. This conversation keeps switching between "Republicans" and "conservatives" and it makes it tough to follow.

yeah it's muddy specifically because we're talking about republicans and conservatives voting for democrats. In exit polls, the former can show up under republicans (but who will sometimes lean liberal in ideology questions). The latter are leaning conservative but voting left, but not showing up in exit polls as republicans. Also in as many or more cases, republicans not voting dem, but also not voting in the presidential race at all, which further complicates things.

Anyways the whole convo is kind of secondary to the multiple states that Trump lost by margins smaller than other republican senate candidates won, which is about as clearcut evidence as you can get that trump alienating conservatives almost certainly lost him votes that otherwise would've put him on top.

TulliusCicero posted:

I'm the 10% of identified liberals that vote Trump :shepface:

My brain actually hurts from how dumb some Americans are

This is confused a bit by liberal leaning republicans, but yeah the US electorate is genuinely bizarrely inconsistent, especially for how polarized american politics generally are and I genuinely do not know what to make of it fully. I suspect a lot of it is just people voting on genuinely low info and/or just a couple issues that matter to them, but it definitely seems strange that there is as much cross-over as there is.

E: if anyone wants to continue this convo in another thread I'll move on over

Herstory Begins Now fucked around with this message at 22:25 on Jun 21, 2022

OgNar
Oct 26, 2002

They tapdance not, neither do they fart
Imagine if everyone who worked at an election office and was threatened was able to use this as proof of malicious intent to sue Trump.
I mean he would probably just declare bankruptcy or some other law a politician put in place to prevent it though.
Dreams and wishes

BiggerBoat
Sep 26, 2007

Don't you tell me my business again.
I just learned from the former president that "there was a whole thing with the ballots" which, if true, is hosed up.

A whole thing?

First I've heard of this. Many people are saying it's the biggest "whole entire" "ballot thing" in all of history. Better look into it.

Oh? We did already? Well still. Seems important.

If there's an entire thing going on with ballots and poo poo.

...

God drat I loathe Joe Biden but I forgot how much more I hated listening to this stupid motherfucker that preceded him talk poo poo the way he does. It makes me sad that he rose to the highest office in the land and just might do it again because our team isn't doing poo poo to help anybody and are spineless cowards. And that slightly less than half of the country still thinks he's The Man.

EDIT

Jesus, man. Think about how annoying and distracting it is listening to your phone all loving day and tending to your email. Then imagine these poll workers and election officials just trying to get some loving sleep and dealing with this barrage of death threats from heavily armed USA USA MAGA's outside their house and bombing their in boxes wit this stupid bullshit.

I can barely manage it as is just having an ex wife and filtering spam and poo poo or fending off telemarketers

BiggerBoat fucked around with this message at 22:44 on Jun 21, 2022

BigBallChunkyTime
Nov 25, 2011

Kyle Schwarber: World Series hero, Beefy Lad, better than you.

Illegal Hen
Guys, there's evidence of USB ports in my house do I need a lawyer plz advise

Herstory Begins Now
Aug 5, 2003
SOME REALLY TEDIOUS DUMB SHIT THAT SUCKS ASS TO READ ->>

BigBallChunkyTime posted:

Guys, there's evidence of USB ports in my house do I need a lawyer plz advise

Rudy has put on his cape, downed half a bottle of whiskey, and is on his way to your house as we speak

BiggerBoat posted:

God drat I loathe Joe Biden but I forgot how much more I hated listening to this stupid motherfucker that preceded him talk poo poo the way he does. It makes me sad that he rose to the highest office in the land and just might do it again because our team isn't doing poo poo to help anybody and are spineless cowards. And that slightly less than half of the country still thinks he's The Man.

EDIT

Jesus, man. Think about how annoying and distracting it is listening to your phone all loving day and tending to your email. Then imagine these poll workers and election officials just trying to get some loving sleep and dealing with this barrage of death threats from heavily armed USA USA MAGA's outside their house and bombing their in boxes wit this stupid bullshit.

I can barely manage it as is just having an ex wife and filtering spam and poo poo or fending off telemarketers

Yeah I'm pretty cynical about, idk, most aspects of the whole american political experiment or w/e but I also have a really deep appreciation that a lot of people all over the country do put a bunch of effort into doing boring but absolutely vital stuff to keep our society and political system more or less functioning. It's incredibly thankless stuff and I don't think there's even any easy way for most americans to gain perspective on just how much poo poo we're dodging by having a minimally functional civil society. People who are first/second generation immigrants from places where that just does not exist usually have some insight into that, but Americans are generally several generations insulated from those realities.

like I don't say that as some 'hey the us is working great lets not change anything,' but just a recognition that if a lot of people didn't volunteer their weekends and evenings for no other reason than because they think society functioning is good and elections should be fair, poo poo would be so, so much worse. Most of the stuff that actually keeps things running is specifically the most thankless stuff.

Herstory Begins Now fucked around with this message at 23:03 on Jun 21, 2022

Charliegrs
Aug 10, 2009

Murgos posted:

This tells you that 24% of the country doesn't have a loving clue if they are liberal or conservative.

So for us terminally online types it's pretty insane to think there are people like that but you have to remember there are tons of people in the US that are just completely totally disconnected from the world of politics and world events. In a way I kind of envy them. It must be great going through life not knowing that American democracy is hanging on by a thread and probably has about a couple years before it's gone, or that the pandemic is not actually over by a long shot, or there's a horrible war in Ukraine that is killing thousands etc. Like lots of people just straight up don't *know* this stuff. They never watch or read the news. I know people like this. One of them is basically the happiest person I know but she's dumb as a rock. She and her kids got covid pretty early on in the pandemic and a year later she didn't even know a vaccine was available. I told her she should probably get it because she literally never wears a mask and she asked me how much it costs :wtc:

So yeah it's not hard to imagine some people don't know if they are liberal or conservative. They might not even have much of a grasp of what those labels mean.

Lager
Mar 9, 2004

Give me the secret to the anti-puppet equation!

Charliegrs posted:

So for us terminally online types it's pretty insane to think there are people like that but you have to remember there are tons of people in the US that are just completely totally disconnected from the world of politics and world events. In a way I kind of envy them. It must be great going through life not knowing that American democracy is hanging on by a thread and probably has about a couple years before it's gone, or that the pandemic is not actually over by a long shot, or there's a horrible war in Ukraine that is killing thousands etc. Like lots of people just straight up don't *know* this stuff. They never watch or read the news. I know people like this. One of them is basically the happiest person I know but she's dumb as a rock. She and her kids got covid pretty early on in the pandemic and a year later she didn't even know a vaccine was available. I told her she should probably get it because she literally never wears a mask and she asked me how much it costs :wtc:

So yeah it's not hard to imagine some people don't know if they are liberal or conservative. They might not even have much of a grasp of what those labels mean.

This is true, but also I would add that I have noticed that ~10% of people in any given poll always seem to select the stupidest possible response to any question. Like, without fail, it just seems like 1 in 10 people are just dumb as gently caress. I don't know if there's a name for this phenomenon but it's something I've been noticing for years now.

Madkal
Feb 11, 2008

Fallen Rib

Herstory Begins Now posted:

Rudy has put on his cape, downed half a bottle of whiskey, and is on his way to your house as we speak

Half a bottle? Sounds like Rudy isn't treating this seriously enough it it is only half a bottle.

Herstory Begins Now
Aug 5, 2003
SOME REALLY TEDIOUS DUMB SHIT THAT SUCKS ASS TO READ ->>

Madkal posted:

Half a bottle? Sounds like Rudy isn't treating this seriously enough it it is only half a bottle.

I should've said jug

nine-gear crow
Aug 10, 2013

Madkal posted:

Half a bottle? Sounds like Rudy isn't treating this seriously enough it it is only half a bottle.

Because he's drinking the other half in the car on the ride over. You know, like a responsible lawyer does.

MrMojok
Jan 28, 2011

BigBallChunkyTime posted:

Guys, there's evidence of USB ports in my house do I need a lawyer plz advise

Trevian Kutti will be there in twenty minutes. Pack your bags.

BiggerBoat
Sep 26, 2007

Don't you tell me my business again.

Charliegrs posted:

So for us terminally online types it's pretty insane to think there are people like that but you have to remember there are tons of people in the US that are just completely totally disconnected from the world of politics and world events. In a way I kind of envy them. It must be great going through life not knowing that American democracy is hanging on by a thread and probably has about a couple years before it's gone, or that the pandemic is not actually over by a long shot, or there's a horrible war in Ukraine that is killing thousands etc. Like lots of people just straight up don't *know* this stuff. They never watch or read the news. I know people like this. One of them is basically the happiest person I know but she's dumb as a rock. She and her kids got covid pretty early on in the pandemic and a year later she didn't even know a vaccine was available. I told her she should probably get it because she literally never wears a mask and she asked me how much it costs :wtc:

So yeah it's not hard to imagine some people don't know if they are liberal or conservative. They might not even have much of a grasp of what those labels mean.

Centrists, man. That's where most of them land

Yeah...sigh. But they know who the Masked Singer was and what the Kardashians are up to! Half the people I meet don't have a loving clue about anything and, if I'm being honest about it, I'll throw myself on that pile since I'm probably not as smart as I like to think I am. But sometimes...like you said...loving come on once in a while

BigBallChunkyTime posted:

Guys, there's evidence of USB ports in my house do I need a lawyer plz advise

You better book it out of there and go on the lam. USB connections are a threat to our nation

BiggerBoat fucked around with this message at 23:42 on Jun 21, 2022

Xiahou Dun
Jul 16, 2009

We shall dive down through black abysses... and in that lair of the Deep Ones we shall dwell amidst wonder and glory forever.



Lager posted:

This is true, but also I would add that I have noticed that ~10% of people in any given poll always seem to select the stupidest possible response to any question. Like, without fail, it just seems like 1 in 10 people are just dumb as gently caress. I don't know if there's a name for this phenomenon but it's something I've been noticing for years now.

The name depends on field and the kind of question because of different kinds of research and/or stupid, but yeah. For the lab I used to work at one of the joke names for them was “drunk moron questions” : answers so absolutely stupid that all your other questions get tabulated separately cause you’re either not actually paying attention or you’re just so stupid we don’t want your responses infecting the rest of the data.

Judge Schnoopy
Nov 2, 2005

dont even TRY it, pal
Rudy: we have evidence the election was stolen, decertify your electors

States: ok cool show me the evidence and we'll do that asap

Rudy: yeah I have the evidence I looked at it, all good, go ahead

States: um. Where is the evidence?

Rudy: of course, I have all of it, please decertify now


It's loving grade school antics trying to show off and be the cool popular kid on a total loving bluff. My god.

Moktaro
Aug 3, 2007
I value call my nuts.

Dacap posted:

Yeah it’s just a ginger flavored hard candy, my dad pops them all the time

Altoids makes a ginger mint, for one example.

PhantomOfTheCopier
Aug 13, 2008

Pikabooze!
I mean like use an Internet search engine. She should start a GoFundMe: Moss and Lady Ruby's Ginger Mints.


For some reason I felt today's was more solemn than previously. Something about the committee members and the witnesses, the video they did show, etc. It was less shocking (from a media perspective) and more serious.

I remember thinking in the days after 1/6 that this was a greater attack than 9/11, and I believe today is strengthening that opinion. This wasn't just a fly-by to strike fear with killings. This was an attack on the fundamental sovereignty of the nation. Today showed how much of that attack targeted state sovereignty, not just the US Constitution.

"Extensive actions undertaken to overthrow the government"... That's not sedition. That brings this back to being treason.

BigBallChunkyTime
Nov 25, 2011

Kyle Schwarber: World Series hero, Beefy Lad, better than you.

Illegal Hen

Judge Schnoopy posted:

Rudy: we have evidence the election was stolen, decertify your electors

States: ok cool show me the evidence and we'll do that asap

Rudy: yeah I have the evidence I looked at it, all good, go ahead

States: um. Where is the evidence?

Rudy: of course, I have all of it, please decertify now


It's loving grade school antics trying to show off and be the cool popular kid on a total loving bluff. My god.

Rudy's uncle works at Nintendo

Murgos
Oct 21, 2010
I had a thought a minute ago.

There is enough evidence out there of Trump committing crimes that a judge has ruled that it’s probable he’s guilty.

This is way beyond what the FBI would need for a wire tap. Heck, there was enough information public for a wire tap of Trump on Jan 03.

Someone please tell me that there are recordings of Trump in private for at least the last few months. If not longer. Please.

Oracle
Oct 9, 2004

PhantomOfTheCopier posted:

I mean like use an Internet search engine. She should start a GoFundMe: Moss and Lady Ruby's Ginger Mints.


For some reason I felt today's was more solemn than previously. Something about the committee members and the witnesses, the video they did show, etc. It was less shocking (from a media perspective) and more serious.

I remember thinking in the days after 1/6 that this was a greater attack than 9/11, and I believe today is strengthening that opinion. This wasn't just a fly-by to strike fear with killings. This was an attack on the fundamental sovereignty of the nation. Today showed how much of that attack targeted state sovereignty, not just the US Constitution.

"Extensive actions undertaken to overthrow the government"... That's not sedition. That brings this back to being treason.

It'll never be tried as such sadly, because our Founding Fathers (PBUT) were too drat paranoid about their political enemies using it against them and so made the bar pretty much unbelievably high.

Just a refresher:

"Criminal Defense Lawyer posted:

Treason prosecutions are rare, with around 40 federal prosecutions (and even fewer convictions) in U.S. history.

Treason is the only crime defined in the U.S. Constitution. According to Article III, Section 3:

The motherfucking Constitution posted:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

This section authorizes Congress to set the penalties for treason but not to change the definition or create degrees of treason. The federal treason statute, 18 U.S.C. § 2381, mirrors the Constitution's language and imposes minimum penalties of five years' imprisonment and a $10,000 fine. A conviction bars the defendant from holding any federal office and carries the possibility of the death penalty.

The elements of treason are the same under state and federal law:

the defendant owes allegiance to the government, and
the defendant intentionally betrays that allegiance by either
levying war against the government, or
giving aid or comfort to the government's enemies.

Because treason must be intentional, someone who unintentionally aids the enemy or is forced to by duress or coercion isn't guilty of treason. (See The Defense of Duress.) There can be no accomplice liability for treason; every participant is considered a principal.
The First Amendment Defense

The First Amendment is the primary limitation on treason prosecutions. Freedom of speech allows people to express anger toward the government, even a desire to overthrow it, but it doesn't protect speech that is likely to incite others to violence. But, although words usually can't constitute treason by themselves, they can serve as proof of the speaker's treasonous intent.

Though I gotta admit Trump comes genuinely, provably closer than I think anyone in recent American history.

This is the one that they would try to get him on if they felt they had the case (they don't):

quote:

Two Types of Treason

There are two ways to commit treason: levying war against the government or providing aid or comfort to the enemy.
Levying War

Levying war isn't limited to formally declaring war. It includes any forcible opposition to the execution of a public law. Such "forcible opposition" ordinarily requires actual use of force by multiple people with the common purpose of preventing some law from being enforced. Weapons aren't always required; sheer numbers can be enough.

Merely conspiring to overthrow the government isn't levying war—there must be an actual assemblage of people who are ready and intend to use force.
(But see "Related Crimes," below.) So, no person acting alone can be guilty of levying war.
What is an 'overt act of treason?'

quote:

In order to prove treason, the prosecution needs either a confession or two witnesses testifying to the same "overt act" by the defendant. An overt act is an act that shows criminal intent and furthers the accomplishment of a crime. But, the overt act doesn't have to be a crime itself. A wide range of actions can qualify as overt treasonous acts, from making online posts to providing weapons and ammunition. The key consideration is whether the defendant took the action with the intention of carrying out or furthering treason.

Treason charges must specify the relevant overt acts, including where they took place. It isn't necessary that all the participants commit the same overt act; different participants can commit different overt acts as part of one treasonous plan. If the government alleges multiple overt acts, it need prove only one of them by two witnesses.

While testimony from two witnesses is required to prove the overt act, the intent to betray can be proved in the same way as intent for any other crime.

Dr. Faustus
Feb 18, 2001

Grimey Drawer

Oracle posted:

This is the one that they would try to get him on if they felt they had the case (they don't):
On what basis do you assert proof of this negative?

Oracle
Oct 9, 2004

Dr. Faustus posted:

On what basis do you assert proof of this negative?

They need two witnesses of the same overt act, and they don't have them.

Dr. Faustus
Feb 18, 2001

Grimey Drawer
You mean, that we know of, right?

Judge Schnoopy
Nov 2, 2005

dont even TRY it, pal
Any charge of treason would shatter the government entirely. It doesn't matter if he's guilty, Trump has set up his followers to believe any action against him is vindictive, petty, and false, brought only by people who are guilty of worse crimes and are afraid of what he stands for.

The harder you swing at him, the harder his crowd swings back. Treason would bring civil war.

It's far better just to bar him from taking office, jailing the boots on the ground (they've already dismantled the proud boys and it's pretty hard to start another insurrection without them at the charge), and moving on.

PhantomOfTheCopier
Aug 13, 2008

Pikabooze!
I knew the first bit (narrow definition); thanks for including the second half. Just because a crime has been committed doesn't mean they'll prosecute at that level. Sedition has comparably been a no brainer in many of the individual cases.

It's interesting reading articles from 2017 talking about Don Jr committing "treason" by talking to Russia. (Hint: Everyone clarified it wasn't even close).

gq 2017 posted:

At first, I giggled at the fact that federal law actually goes to the trouble of saying that choosing to wage war against the United States of America makes you ineligible to run for political office in the event that you eventually have a change of heart, but then I thought about the millions of people for whom Donald Trump literally leading an armed insurrection would not be a dealbreaker when they head to the polls in 2020. Sometimes it's good to spell things out, just in case.

Leading from the back is still directing an intentional, forcible opposition, and in this case what was opposed was the existence of the office of the president, and the existence of the legislative branch, the electoral process, state rights, etc. For the time being, I'm awaiting the direct tie-in showing Trump was communicating with Proud Boys and/or oath keepers, but you can still put me in the polls as "I'm convinced there was treason". (Whereas before today I would have only said "conspiracy... to sedition").


If they put me on a jury, I'll let the judge interpret the law.

Dr. Faustus
Feb 18, 2001

Grimey Drawer
The DC Capitol Police officer who described the riot said something to the effect of it being a scene of war. There has been speculation that, in the same way the J6 Committee uses legal language that matches the statues broken. Perhaps to support an argument for treason.

People are pretty confident in the language but I do have my doubts. They haven't charged any conspirators with Treason but if it's not legally possible to conspire to commit treason then it follows that doesn't matter.

Regardless, the likelihood of being able to prove conspiracy is totally solid and I'd posit the odds get better when you have loving documentary film crews just hanging around.

Was it Robert Wolf, writing Fire And Fury, who got all sorts of amazing info just because no one bothered to ask why he was hanging out in the loving White House for weeks or months or wtf?

Schiff was asked about Linsday Graham and he basically said, "We didn't have enough time to even cram him in, so don't assume anything about him."

BigBallChunkyTime
Nov 25, 2011

Kyle Schwarber: World Series hero, Beefy Lad, better than you.

Illegal Hen

Murgos posted:

I had a thought a minute ago.

There is enough evidence out there of Trump committing crimes that a judge has ruled that it’s probable he’s guilty.

This is way beyond what the FBI would need for a wire tap. Heck, there was enough information public for a wire tap of Trump on Jan 03.

Someone please tell me that there are recordings of Trump in private for at least the last few months. If not longer. Please.

I'm sure his toaster and microwave have been bugged already.

selec
Sep 6, 2003

I don’t think the Democrats have the constitutional ability (meaning the spine) to try a former president for treason. It’s just not in them, the fight has been trained out of anyone with any power in the party.

I can easily see the GOP doing it, but the Dems are far too cowed by capital.

PhantomOfTheCopier
Aug 13, 2008

Pikabooze!
Indeed I don't claim they'll charge treason, only that I'm now personally in the bucket that thinks there was (after having been 'corrected ' out of that position in the week after 1/6).

There are some very fun things in the supreme court documents (and there's no way for me to ensure it's all in context). Mostly the question is, What is levying war?

quote:

192
no specific number, no sufficiency of force to accomplish the object, was necessary to constitute treason.

193
If soldiers are levied and officered, with a treasonable intent, and equipments prepared, so that they can readily lay hold of their arms; although no men are actually armed, although only five men in a detachment should march to assemble at a place of rendezvous, and although there should be no warlike array, yet it would be treason. Any thing which amounts to setting on foot a military expedition, with intent to levy war against the United States, is treason.

194
The distinction between those who are present at the overt act of levying war, and those who are confederated, adhering, acting and assisting, giving aid and comfort, is contrary to all analogy. In treason, all are principals.

232
all those who perform any part, however minute, or however remote from the scene of action, and who are actually leagued in the general conspiracy, are to be considered as traitors. But there must be an actual assembling of men for the treasonable purpose, to constitute a levying of war.

Judge Chase, in the trial of Fries, was more explicit.

238
if a body of people conspire... to resist or oppose the execution of any statute of the United States by force, they are only guilty of a high misdemeanor; but if they proceed to carry such intention into execution by force, that they are guilty of the treason of levying war;


I look forward to the remaining sessions.

Oracle
Oct 9, 2004

Dr. Faustus posted:

You mean, that we know of, right?

Oh no, we could name half a dozen potential easy. None of them will ever consent to testify to the fact, though.

TulliusCicero
Jul 29, 2017



Judge Schnoopy posted:

Any charge of treason would shatter the government entirely. It doesn't matter if he's guilty, Trump has set up his followers to believe any action against him is vindictive, petty, and false, brought only by people who are guilty of worse crimes and are afraid of what he stands for.

The harder you swing at him, the harder his crowd swings back. Treason would bring civil war.

It's far better just to bar him from taking office, jailing the boots on the ground (they've already dismantled the proud boys and it's pretty hard to start another insurrection without them at the charge), and moving on.

Chuds are natural cowards and hid themselves like lobsters under every under rock and crevice right after January 6th when it looked like Trump was persona non grata

They will absolutely do it again when/ if Trump was charged with treason

A few crazies might do something, but the rest will just mumble under their breath at dinner parties and post on chan sites with FBI plants

The idea the chuds would fight a civil war successfully or even start one is fascist fantasy inspired by that dreck the Turner Diaries

Most of them are cowardly idiots: the only reason January 6th happened was because they thought they would be in charge afterwards

It's the same thing with the Texas GOP's ludicrous proposal to secede: call their bluff and loving let them

TulliusCicero fucked around with this message at 15:06 on Jun 22, 2022

Flying-PCP
Oct 2, 2005
I thought it was determined that this whole thing counts as sedition, not treason? Unless the hearings take a sudden turn back into Russiagate territory...

BiggerBoat
Sep 26, 2007

Don't you tell me my business again.
Wonder what this is about

https://www.axios.com/2022/06/21/jan-6-committee-schedule-hearings

Jan. 6 committee weighs changes to hearing schedule, citing new evidence

Members of the House Jan. 6 select committee are discussing whether to upend their hearing schedule amid a deluge of new information.

What they’re saying: Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), a member of the panel, told reporters after the committee’s fourth hearing on Tuesday, "The original hearings would have wrapped up in June, but we are picking up new evidence on a daily basis with enormous velocity."

TulliusCicero
Jul 29, 2017



BiggerBoat posted:

Wonder what this is about

https://www.axios.com/2022/06/21/jan-6-committee-schedule-hearings

Jan. 6 committee weighs changes to hearing schedule, citing new evidence

Members of the House Jan. 6 select committee are discussing whether to upend their hearing schedule amid a deluge of new information.

What they’re saying: Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), a member of the panel, told reporters after the committee’s fourth hearing on Tuesday, "The original hearings would have wrapped up in June, but we are picking up new evidence on a daily basis with enormous velocity."

:getin:

Sounds like more people breaking/ coming forward the plethora of new documentary footage

More hearings I would assume?

Heck Yes! Loam!
Nov 15, 2004

a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

BiggerBoat posted:

Wonder what this is about

https://www.axios.com/2022/06/21/jan-6-committee-schedule-hearings

Jan. 6 committee weighs changes to hearing schedule, citing new evidence

Members of the House Jan. 6 select committee are discussing whether to upend their hearing schedule amid a deluge of new information.

What they’re saying: Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), a member of the panel, told reporters after the committee’s fourth hearing on Tuesday, "The original hearings would have wrapped up in June, but we are picking up new evidence on a daily basis with enormous velocity."

My bet would be they got some or all of the video from Roger Stone's documentary film crew that was present for quite a bit.

BiggerBoat
Sep 26, 2007

Don't you tell me my business again.

Heck Yes! Loam! posted:

My bet would be they got some or all of the video from Roger Stone's documentary film crew that was present for quite a bit.

I was hoping it was the Trump wiretaps someone suggested up thread.

Judge Schnoopy
Nov 2, 2005

dont even TRY it, pal

BiggerBoat posted:

Wonder what this is about

https://www.axios.com/2022/06/21/jan-6-committee-schedule-hearings

Jan. 6 committee weighs changes to hearing schedule, citing new evidence

Members of the House Jan. 6 select committee are discussing whether to upend their hearing schedule amid a deluge of new information.

What they’re saying: Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), a member of the panel, told reporters after the committee’s fourth hearing on Tuesday, "The original hearings would have wrapped up in June, but we are picking up new evidence on a daily basis with enormous velocity."

This feels like an absolute victory for the televised hearings. They ran out of steam on evidence collection, they showed their hand of "this is a slam dunk case get on board or get run over", and now people are coming out of the woodwork to help.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Oracle
Oct 9, 2004

Judge Schnoopy posted:

This feels like an absolute victory for the televised hearings. They ran out of steam on evidence collection, they showed their hand of "this is a slam dunk case get on board or get run over", and now people are coming out of the woodwork to help save their own asses now that they see the writing on the wall.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply