the rover
Footballguy
That was about Russia, not January 6. Jordan should be excluded because his actions were part of what occurred on January 6. "I don't like Schiff" isn't a substantive reason to keep him off the committee.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
***Official 1/6 Select Committee thread*** (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter dozer
- Start date
zoonation
Footballguy
No, because even if you can "argue" about it, there is conflict. The Schiff example you provided in not analogous as he was not sitting in an adjudicative or investigative role at the hearings you refer to. He was in a prosecutorial role. He was making the case for impeachment. So, again, what substantive reason do you have for his exclusion from sitting on this committee?
If Jordan sits on the committee, he is arguably investigating his own conduct, or the fallout from that conduct and there is inherent bias which attaches to that. If Jordan had not participated in the big lie and had not voted to overturn a free and fair election, I would have no problem with him being on the committee, regardless of how loathsome I think he is.
Lets be intellectually honest here - He did not vote to "overturn" the election. He did vote against the certification of several states - but none of those votes had support to actually overturn those certified results. It was largely a symbolic gesture. The only difference between this election, and 2016 - where democrats objected to the results from several states, was that in 2020, the losing party had a willing accomplice in the Senate. (A formal objection required an objector from each house of congress).
And, his "votes" had nothing to do with January 6 - since they came during, and after, the actual incursion.
Now, if you want to argue that he encouraged the big lie, on the flimsiest of "evidence" then I agree. He played a role in things getting out of hand.
The two who are probably most culpable are Cruz and Hawley - who both unnecessarily extended the proceedings by objecting, with a member of the House. (Never mind, Hawley's little fist salute)
zoonation
Footballguy
fair enough. it is still disqualifying to sit on that committee IMO. there are plenty of other GOP reps that can take his place.
quick-hands
Footballguy
Well that's obvious. And why the commission won't be taken seriously by half the country.
moleculo
Footballguy
quick-hands
Footballguy
He was running a impeachment of the sitting president of the United States
And you argue that it is ok to make up a false story. Ok. But it's very blueanon
Mile High
Footballguy
quick-hands
Footballguy
dkp993
Footballguy
The Commish
Footballguy
nevermind....just piling on with the obvious at this point.
Last edited by a moderator:
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
And we need to stop pretending otherwise. Sorry, but the rights perception of just about anyone and anything should not be the basis for anything important anytime soon.
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
Good! While the odds are still low that there will be enough cooperation to discover anything substantive, the odds improve when those with no interest of allowing that go away.
the rover
Footballguy
Really, the main three things I'd be interested in learning from this committee is who was organizing the part of this that was organized, how they did it, and who paid for it. I'm certain that those issues will be secondary to Democrats re-litigating the second impeachment and establishing Trump's culpability and Republicans making arguments that it wasn't an insurrection at all, and the few bad apples that stormed the capitol were acting on their own in the heat of the moment (with a healthy peppering of whataboutism relating to BLM protests and rioting from the previous summer).
Desert_Power
Footballguy
knowledge dropper
Footballguy
Looks like a majority of Americans wish Congress spent more time on the BLM/Antifa riots.
https://americanlookout.com/poll-majority-of-voters-want-antifa-and-blm-investigated-more-than-january-6th/
https://americanlookout.com/poll-majority-of-voters-want-antifa-and-blm-investigated-more-than-january-6th/
supermike80
Footballguy
Anyone that blames Jordan for Jan 6th is just flat out wrong. That's the silliest take. I can't believe there are actually intelligent people who believe because Jordan didn't certify the results he is responsible, even partially, for Jan 6th. That logic is just messed up.
dozer
Footballguy
The Commish
Footballguy
Agreed...this would be really backwards thinking giving the lack of certification on his part was after the events happened. So far, in this thread, people are discussing the months and months of rhetoric about how the election was illegitimate and how it was stolen in the lead up to 1/6 was a contributing factor.
supermike80
Footballguy
Nope...I'm gonna reject that too. This responsibility belongs squarely on those that took part, period.
The Commish
Footballguy
you're conflating responsibility and contributing. I agree with you on where responsibility ultimately lies.
moleculo
Footballguy
you can reject that all you want. Others don't. The disagreement is why we need hearings.
supermike80
Footballguy
Well of course I can reject that. And I totally understand others don't agree. I don't think that's why we need hearings however.
Last edited by a moderator:
supermike80
Footballguy
No I'm not. I understand what contributing is..and I don't at all see it. Anyone was fully capable and allowed under the law to say they thought the election was fraudulent. None of those demanded the capitol be attacked. Therefore no contribution. They did nothing wrong. Most of you may not agree with them saying the election was fake, and I agree with you, but they can still say it.
In any case, the commission, in my opinion, is a waste of time. But I already articulated my thoughts on that.
knowledge dropper
Footballguy
DaVinci
FairTaxguy
Last edited by a moderator:
Lol...findings? This has zero to do about objectively seeking findings. It is 100 percent about writing a report which best supports their narrative. That is why it is a joke and why any honest being honest would admit so. Politicians suck.
Witz
Footballguy
Can you point to something else other than a site that along with this article has the following polls:
- Are you still loyal to Trump?
- Do you still wish Trump was in the White House?
- Do you think Trump was the real winner of the election?
dozer
Footballguy
Reasoning: Extreme Right, Propaganda“SOURCES!!!”
Founded in 2016 by Mike LaChance, American Lookout is a conservative news and opinion site. Mike LaChance has written for Legal Insurrection, the Daily Caller, Townhall, Gateway Pundit, Breitbart and others.
As far as sources go, it doesn’t get much worse than what you posted if you are trying to represent “the American people.”
knowledge dropper
Footballguy
If you can’t review or comment on the content of the article that was referencing a Rasmussen poll, then you are doing what has been called “lazy posting” in this forum with the intent to highjack discourse.
Everybody has long moved on from January 6th except those interested in milking political points out of it.
Witz
Footballguy
The irony of this post is dripping. Numerous articles on a variety of items have been posted and the various Trump supporters usually reply with emojis and laughs because the ‘link’ or ‘source’ is from a mainstream entity such as ‘CNN’, ‘Yahoo’, etc.
I guess you all are lazy posting as well uh?
I'm not sure. At a rally in Miami's little Havana last night there were Trump Won banners. And the Proud Boys called Rubio a Rino and Republican representative Maria Salazar a communist because she voted for the Jan 6 commission.
Witz
Footballguy
Witz
Footballguy
It is cute how some believe politicians are honest brokers of the truth. Laughably cute.
moleculo
Footballguy
The rassmussen poll was horse manure.
Here were the first two questions:
Here were the first two questions:
- Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has established a committee to investigate what happened in Washington DC on January 6th 2021. Do you support this investigation?
- According to a study of 68 cities by the Major Cities Chiefs Association, in the summer of 2020, there were at least 574 protests that involved acts of violence, including assaults on police officers, looting and arson. More than 2,000 police officers sustained injuries in the line of duty. Should congress investigate the 2020 violent protests that occurred in these cities?
Witz
Footballguy
moleculo
Footballguy
its cute how you think Rassmussen polls conducted in conjunction with the National Police Association is a legitimate poll. Laughably cute.
knowledge dropper
Footballguy
Not at all. I scour multiple sources to post articles that I feel aid in discussion and are not part of the cocoon of MSM distortion that many in this forum consume. I post the ones that I feel are most pertinent. CNN is a bias source. They have been exposed many times admitted what is their end goal. Therefore, it is helpful to present another POV.
