Liz Cheney and the J6 Committee Are Dangerous Jokes

 

The walls are closing in! This past week, they had Cassidy Hutchinson talk about her second-hand reports of Trump’s alleged actions on J6. The Secret Service agents who were there contradict her story. Any reputable committee would have asked her about that. In fact, a reputable committee would have not called since the people who were there disagree.

I’m an amateur historian and I know how important primary sources are. Presumably, there are staffers to the J6 committee who are also aware of this. The J6 committee is either incompetent, fraudulent, or both. They don’t care about the truth. They’re a propaganda arm of the Democratic Party.

.

Published in Politics
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 100 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. philo Member
    philo
    @philo

    philo (View Comment):

    [redacted for name-calling]

    Having witnessed evidence of the financial part of the transaction followed by the (evidently) desperate recipient of the funds rather passively laying back and letting the rich old man aggressively and openly have his way with the goods and services available (while figuratively giving the middle finger to all his neighbors), I am left only to ponder if there would have been a better descriptor more palatable to the overlords of the Upper Member Feed.

    I guess some mysteries are just meant for another day…

    • #61
  2. BDB Coolidge
    BDB
    @BDB

    BDB (View Comment):

    philo (View Comment):

    Blatant conspicuous trolling…it’s amazing how much unlimited, uninhibited latitude one can buy around here with a credit card. The sort-of-center-right are definitely not the most principled of whores.

    I don’t see corruption in it.  This site really “went to Damascus” a few years back.  Seems the batting away of trolls is largely up to us, and I don’t recall seeing so much as a redaction in years.

    I shall update my redaction count. 

    • #62
  3. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Richard Easton (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    You could have had a completely independent “9/11 Commission” to investigate January 6th, but Trump vetoed the idea of it and McCarthy and McConnell fell into line.

    You could have had five Republicans on the Select Committee, but McCarthy had to nominate Jim Jordan and Jim Banks, and then withdrew the other 3 Republicans.

    Since you are tired to Liz Cheney, how about some Adam Kinzinger?

    Trump was president for fifteen days after 1/6. He couldn’t veto anything with respect to a commission in that short time span. Let’s see all of Pelosi’s emails leading up to 1/6 and all of the video they’re hiding. And let’s have the FBI and DOJ come clean about what agents and provocateurs they had in the crowd. For example, the need to find out more about the curious case of Ray Epps. And why is there no progress about the pipe bombs.

    Trump gave the order from Mar-A-Lago to kill the January 6th Commission and McCarthy and McConnell obeyed him.

    A Commission could have gone into Ray Epps, etc. but we Republicans killed the January 6th Commission.  

    • #63
  4. DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Trump gave the order from Mar-A-Lago to kill the January 6th Commission and McCarthy and McConnell obeyed him.

    A Commission could have gone into Ray Epps, etc. but we Republicans killed the January 6th Commission.

    If they obeyed him, why does it still exist? If “we” Republicans killed it, why is it still going on?

     

    • #64
  5. BDB Coolidge
    BDB
    @BDB

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Richard Easton (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    You could have had a completely independent “9/11 Commission” to investigate January 6th, but Trump vetoed the idea of it and McCarthy and McConnell fell into line.

    You could have had five Republicans on the Select Committee, but McCarthy had to nominate Jim Jordan and Jim Banks, and then withdrew the other 3 Republicans.

    Since you are tired to Liz Cheney, how about some Adam Kinzinger?

    Trump was president for fifteen days after 1/6. He couldn’t veto anything with respect to a commission in that short time span. Let’s see all of Pelosi’s emails leading up to 1/6 and all of the video they’re hiding. And let’s have the FBI and DOJ come clean about what agents and provocateurs they had in the crowd. For example, the need to find out more about the curious case of Ray Epps. And why is there no progress about the pipe bombs.

    Trump gave the order from Mar-A-Lago to kill the January 6th Commission and McCarthy and McConnell obeyed him.

    A Commission could have gone into Ray Epps, etc. but we Republicans killed the January 6th Commission.

    This makes no sense.

    • #65
  6. DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    BDB (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Richard Easton (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    You could have had a completely independent “9/11 Commission” to investigate January 6th, but Trump vetoed the idea of it and McCarthy and McConnell fell into line.

    You could have had five Republicans on the Select Committee, but McCarthy had to nominate Jim Jordan and Jim Banks, and then withdrew the other 3 Republicans.

    Since you are tired to Liz Cheney, how about some Adam Kinzinger?

    Trump was president for fifteen days after 1/6. He couldn’t veto anything with respect to a commission in that short time span. Let’s see all of Pelosi’s emails leading up to 1/6 and all of the video they’re hiding. And let’s have the FBI and DOJ come clean about what agents and provocateurs they had in the crowd. For example, the need to find out more about the curious case of Ray Epps. And why is there no progress about the pipe bombs.

    Trump gave the order from Mar-A-Lago to kill the January 6th Commission and McCarthy and McConnell obeyed him.

    A Commission could have gone into Ray Epps, etc. but we Republicans killed the January 6th Commission.

    This makes no sense.

    No, it doesn’t. It’s also a non-sequitur. But the point is not to have a conversation, it’s to bleat out slogans and talking points in an effort to drown out the message from the right.

    • #66
  7. Richard Easton Coolidge
    Richard Easton
    @RichardEaston

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Richard Easton (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    You could have had a completely independent “9/11 Commission” to investigate January 6th, but Trump vetoed the idea of it and McCarthy and McConnell fell into line.

    You could have had five Republicans on the Select Committee, but McCarthy had to nominate Jim Jordan and Jim Banks, and then withdrew the other 3 Republicans.

    Since you are tired to Liz Cheney, how about some Adam Kinzinger?

    Trump was president for fifteen days after 1/6. He couldn’t veto anything with respect to a commission in that short time span. Let’s see all of Pelosi’s emails leading up to 1/6 and all of the video they’re hiding. And let’s have the FBI and DOJ come clean about what agents and provocateurs they had in the crowd. For example, the need to find out more about the curious case of Ray Epps. And why is there no progress about the pipe bombs.

    Trump gave the order from Mar-A-Lago to kill the January 6th Commission and McCarthy and McConnell obeyed him.

    A Commission could have gone into Ray Epps, etc. but we Republicans killed the January 6th Commission.

    Pelosi killed it by breaking with tradition and vetoing McCarthy’s choices. The commission is controlled by the Ds. They could have investigated Ray Epps but he appears to be a Fed and didn’t fit their narrative.

    • #67
  8. DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Richard Easton (View Comment):

    Pelosi killed it by breaking with tradition and vetoing McCarthy’s choices. The commission is controlled by the Ds. They could have investigated Ray Epps but he appears to be a Fed and didn’t fit their narrative.

    There is a lot about Jan. 6th that needs investigating. But most of it is outside the allowed Narrative — that being “Orange Man Bad” and nothing else.

    • #68
  9. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Richard Easton (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Richard Easton (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    You could have had a completely independent “9/11 Commission” to investigate January 6th, but Trump vetoed the idea of it and McCarthy and McConnell fell into line.

    You could have had five Republicans on the Select Committee, but McCarthy had to nominate Jim Jordan and Jim Banks, and then withdrew the other 3 Republicans.

    Since you are tired to Liz Cheney, how about some Adam Kinzinger?

    Trump was president for fifteen days after 1/6. He couldn’t veto anything with respect to a commission in that short time span. Let’s see all of Pelosi’s emails leading up to 1/6 and all of the video they’re hiding. And let’s have the FBI and DOJ come clean about what agents and provocateurs they had in the crowd. For example, the need to find out more about the curious case of Ray Epps. And why is there no progress about the pipe bombs.

    Trump gave the order from Mar-A-Lago to kill the January 6th Commission and McCarthy and McConnell obeyed him.

    A Commission could have gone into Ray Epps, etc. but we Republicans killed the January 6th Commission.

    Pelosi killed it by breaking with tradition and vetoing McCarthy’s choices. The commission is controlled by the Ds. They could have investigated Ray Epps but he appears to be a Fed and didn’t fit their narrative.

    The destruction of norms is acceptable to Never Trump as long as it lets them get Trump.

    • #69
  10. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/cherry-picking-and-spoon-feeding-jan-6

    So the committee is cherry-picking information and spoon-feeding it to the public and the press. Meanwhile, the full extent of the information it has gathered is a secret. Even when a witness is introduced and testifies in public, the committee’s practice is to guide the witness over a few topics by playing snippets of the witness’s earlier videotaped testimony. The witness then comments on his or her own testimony. The subject matter is carefully controlled. And even after the witness appears, the committee does not release video or transcripts of the witness’s full testimony. It’s all a secret.

     

    During the first Trump impeachment, in late 2019, House Democrats threw the rules and practices out the window. They conducted secret depositions and threatened Republicans with discipline if they leaked as much as a word about it. Of course, some Republicans were allowed to take part in the depositions. After much criticism, when public hearings arrived, impeachment chief Adam Schiff (D-CA), who is also a member of today’s Jan. 6 committee, relented and allowed the release of most transcripts of witness interviews.

    • #70
  11. Cassandro Coolidge
    Cassandro
    @Flicker

    philo (View Comment):

    philo (View Comment):

    [redacted for name-calling]

    Having witnessed evidence of the financial part of the transaction followed by the (evidently) desperate recipient of the funds rather passively laying back and letting the rich old man aggressively and openly have his way with the goods and services available (while figuratively giving the middle finger to all his neighbors), I am left only to ponder if there would have been a better descriptor more palatable to the overlords of the Upper Member Feed.

    I guess some mysteries are just meant for another day…

    Are you referring to Fred Garvin?

    • #71
  12. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):
    So the committee is cherry-picking information and spoon-feeding it to the public and the press. Meanwhile, the full extent of the information it has gathered is a secret. Even when a witness is introduced and testifies in public, the committee’s practice is to guide the witness over a few topics by playing snippets of the witness’s earlier videotaped testimony. The witness then comments on his or her own testimony. The subject matter is carefully controlled.

    I think it’s the first time you’ve had committee members read off of a Teleprompter. It’s a show trial.

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):
    During the first Trump impeachment, in late 2019, House Democrats threw the rules and practices out the window. They conducted secret depositions

    They used the intelligence committee so they could hide it. I forget the details but this is specifically talked about in the federalist papers that it shouldn’t be done this way. 

     

    • #72
  13. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    The article that Brian posted is devastating. Of course Byron will talk about it on his podcast.

    Now, of course, the Jan. 6 committee has two Republicans on it, Cheney and Kinzinger. But they appear to be in lockstep with committee Democrats. No member of the committee, of either party, has had the courage or independence of mind to question publicly how the committee is conducting its business. And perhaps just as importantly, few members of the press have spoken up to question the committee’s procedures. That seems unlikely to change.

    • #73
  14. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    I finally remembered and straightened this impeachment stuff out in my head. I heard a guy that read all of the federalist paper you know what. This is the way it was supposed to work. You do an ordinary investigation and finish it and then you show it to the senate. If it looks like you are going to get 2/3 of the Senate that basically means the whole population is behind it. That is the idea. It’s not supposed to be used as a political cudgel when you don’t think the Senate is going to overwhelmingly agree or there isn’t broad, bipartisan national agreement. 

    Some local never Trump here need to understand this or make a better argument.

    • #74
  15. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Then somebody is going to say something about Clinton and “move on”. 

    He is the head of the justice system and he has a bar card. It is not ideal when this person lies under oath, but the country didn’t care for some reason. He seriously should have been impeached. 

    • #75
  16. Columbo Member
    Columbo
    @Columbo

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Then somebody is going to say something about Clinton and “move on”.

    He is the head of the justice system and he has a bar card. It is not ideal when this person lies under oath, but the country didn’t care for some reason. He seriously should have been impeached.

    He was impeached, but he was not convicted, because Senator Fred Thompson (R-TN) could not get to “high crime and misdemeanor” over BJ Clinton’s blatant lies (including to a Grand Jury) and obstruction of justice. A complete lack of courage by Freddy at the time. Even Thompson’s closed door impeachment statement (link) detailed a vast number of facts which surely rose to a “high crime and misdemeanor” but good old boy Fred didn’t want to derail his own personal career, national presence and Hollywood acclaim by bringing down Clinton over “just sex”.

    • #76
  17. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    I see that another woman from the Trump Administration will be testifying next week.  You probably won’t watch her either.

    • #77
  18. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    I see that another woman from the Trump Administration will be testifying next week. You probably won’t watch her either.

    I thought this was good comprehensive analysis of what’s her name and the actual nature of the J6 and what is going to happen when the Republicans take over the house.

     

     

    David Bossie says they are going to push to have a 100% Republican committee going after Hunter Biden. 

    • #78
  19. DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    I thought this was good comprehensive analysis of what’s her name and the actual nature of the J6 and what is going to happen when the Republicans take over the house.

    David Bossie says they are going to push to have a 100% Republican committee going after Hunter Biden.

    Why bother with Hunter? There’s enough on Joe to impeach him now. (Well, actually, there was enough to impeach him before he even took office.)

    • #79
  20. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    All of this stuff about throwing plates and trying to grab the steering wheel never came out until after the third interview with the committee. 

    • #80
  21. Columbo Member
    Columbo
    @Columbo

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    I see that another woman from the Trump Administration will be testifying next week. You probably won’t watch her either.

     

    • #81
  22. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    I would like Gary or anybody knowledgeable to criticize Byron York’s analysis of the J6 committee.

    • #82
  23. Richard Easton Coolidge
    Richard Easton
    @RichardEaston

    • #83
  24. Jim George Member
    Jim George
    @JimGeorge

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    I would like [Gary] or [anybody knowledgeable] to criticize Byron York’s analysis of the J6 committee.

    The two bracketed words/phrases do not comfortably reside together. ;-) 

     

    • #84
  25. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    I see that another woman from the Trump Administration will be testifying next week. You probably won’t watch her either.

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/cherry-picking-and-spoon-feeding-jan-6

    So the committee is cherry-picking information and spoon-feeding it to the public and the press. Meanwhile, the full extent of the information it has gathered is a secret. Even when a witness is introduced and testifies in public, the committee’s practice is to guide the witness over a few topics by playing snippets of the witness’s earlier videotaped testimony. The witness then comments on his or her own testimony. The subject matter is carefully controlled. And even after the witness appears, the committee does not release video or transcripts of the witness’s full testimony. It’s all a secret.

     

    During the first Trump impeachment, in late 2019, House Democrats threw the rules and practices out the window. They conducted secret depositions and threatened Republicans with discipline if they leaked as much as a word about it. Of course, some Republicans were allowed to take part in the depositions. After much criticism, when public hearings arrived, impeachment chief Adam Schiff (D-CA), who is also a member of today’s Jan. 6 committee, relented and allowed the release of most transcripts of witness interviews.

     

    • #85
  26. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    I would like Gary or anybody knowledgeable to criticize Byron York’s analysis of the J6 committee.

    Good luck waiting for that!

    • #86
  27. BDB Coolidge
    BDB
    @BDB

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    I see that another woman from the Trump Administration will be testifying next week. You probably won’t watch her either.

    Depends.  Is it KellyAnne Conway, or Kayleigh McEnany?

    • #87
  28. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    The next hearing is on Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 10:00 EDT.  

    • #88
  29. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    The next hearing is on Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 10:00 EDT.

     

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/cherry-picking-and-spoon-feeding-jan-6

    So the committee is cherry-picking information and spoon-feeding it to the public and the press. Meanwhile, the full extent of the information it has gathered is a secret. Even when a witness is introduced and testifies in public, the committee’s practice is to guide the witness over a few topics by playing snippets of the witness’s earlier videotaped testimony. The witness then comments on his or her own testimony. The subject matter is carefully controlled. And even after the witness appears, the committee does not release video or transcripts of the witness’s full testimony. It’s all a secret.

     

    During the first Trump impeachment, in late 2019, House Democrats threw the rules and practices out the window. They conducted secret depositions and threatened Republicans with discipline if they leaked as much as a word about it. Of course, some Republicans were allowed to take part in the depositions. After much criticism, when public hearings arrived, impeachment chief Adam Schiff (D-CA), who is also a member of today’s Jan. 6 committee, relented and allowed the release of most transcripts of witness interviews.

     

    • #89
  30. Cassandro Coolidge
    Cassandro
    @Flicker

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    The next hearing is on Tuesday, July 12, 2022 at 10:00 EDT.

    Why do you keep calling it a hearing?  It’s not a hearing.  It’s a TV show.  It’s a paid, professionally-produced serialized TV show.

    You know if you’re acting in a TV show and the script calls for you to say you’ll tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, you’re not swearing any oath, you are just saying your lines, which are scripted.

    It’s Perry Mason.  It’s Les Misérables.   It’s Cats!

    • #90
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.