Jan. 6th commission

LG is such a slime ball of southern charm. It reminds me of what was said about Talleyrand being "a silk stocking full of shet"
Watching that video is a refresher of what the Republicans failed to do... ie unite behind a unity candidate to stop Trump when they had the chance. The Democrats learned from that mistake in 2020, which is why all of the viable candidates dropped out simultaneously to endorse Biden.
 
The difference being that the Democrats did it to keep out a decent man whose politics are basically firebrand-of-center New Deal Liberalism.
 
The difference being that the Democrats did it to keep out a decent man whose politics are basically firebrand-of-center New Deal Liberalism.
I'm talking pure tactics, not the merit of the candidate. As you may recall, I jumped onboard the Bernie train once it became clear that Warren was not going to win and Harris had no chance, but once Bernie got to about 35% the Democrats all agreed to unify behind Biden. In the end Biden saved us from 4 more years of Trump, which was a pretty big deal, as it turns out. If Trump had won in 2020 we would be facing a dictator situation right now. We may still end up facing one.

The Republicans who don't want Trump to get the nomination have to either do what the Democrats did in 2020 with Biden, or what the Democrats did in 2016 with Hillary. Whether the Republicans would end up winning the election is a separate issue, but if they want to stop Trump that's the way to do it. Kasich's failure to drop out, albeit principled, is what denied Cruz the win over Trump. I don't know how much better a President Cruz would have been than Trump, but I'm pretty sure he couldn't have been worse. Thinking about it, Cruz probably loses to Hillary anyway, which, again I don't know how bad or good Hillary would have been, but the response to COVID alone would have been much better, for the US and the world as a whole. That in-and-of-itself is reason enough to elect Hillary or even Cruz over Trump.

Even putting all that aside, since its the topic of this thread... we wouldn't even have this thread if not for completely predictable total disaster that was the Trump presidency. No way Jan 6 happens with anyone else who ran in 2016 in office. If Trump gets back into office he's never leaving as long as he lives. Ukraine is even more screwed, along with the rest of the former Soviet republics, which Putin will quickly annex, and who knows what else. We didn't know how bad things were going to get under Trump, but his last tenure has convinced me that there really is no limit to how bad it can go with that scumbag in charge.
 
Last edited:
The reason to pursue him is the same reason for pursuing any criminal: so that justice can be served.

It's particularly important in the present context because of the political dimension of the crime. Trump exposed vulnerabilities in our system that a more competent and equally evil person will exploit, particularly if that person sees that Trump and his followers didn't experience consequences.
I cannot say what the justice department will do, however I do find it odd that no individual (that I know of) in the capitol riots was charged and/or sentenced with literal "insurrection" and yet congress claims that that is what Donald Trump incited.
 
I'm talking pure tactics, not the merit of the candidate.

Oh I know, I'm just pointing out another aspect to the situation. Republicans couldn't unite against a megalomaniacal would-be dictator, but the Democrats very swiftly closed ranks to keep out a guy who was a total threat to...what, exactly?
Maybe it just means the Republicans are bunglers. They can't seem to elect a Speaker, even, so...
 
Oh I know, I'm just pointing out another aspect to the situation. Republicans couldn't unite against a megalomaniacal would-be dictator, but the Democrats very swiftly closed ranks to keep out a guy who was a total threat to...what, exactly?
Maybe it just means the Republicans are bunglers. They can't seem to elect a Speaker, even, so...
My hot take... thinking back on that Lindsey Graham video that I posted yesterday... what occurs to me about what you mention, is that maybe one of the underlying issues was that the Republicans are relatively more committed to gaining/keeping power in general than they are to "doing what's best", whatever that might be in their minds. There's no other good way to explain the way Graham (and Cruz) flipped from such an adamant, outspoken Never-Trumper into such a loyal Trump lapdog.

The Democrats in 2020 somehow managed to swallow their pride/egos and unify behind Biden, because ostensibly, they thought getting rid of Trump was the greater good and they thought he had a better chance of beating Trump than Bernie... which in retrospect, seems to have been the correct call. The Democrats did the same thing with Obamacare, where they torched their political fortunes to get the legislation passed because again, they thought it was the right thing to do for the country.

The Republicans seem less inclined to do that kind of thing. Cruz refused to drop out and endorse Kasich and vice-versa. That's why I think the only way the Republicans can purge Trump is by unifying behind an anti-Trump candidate, either in the middle of the race like the Democrats did with Biden, or basically from the very beginning, like what the Democrats did in 2016 with Hillary... ie nobody serious runs and they just crown DeSantis or whoever from the start, and let Trump be his tackling dummy. If they take it all the way to the convention, Trump wins by default. But I just don't think the Republicans can put their own aspirations for personal power aside to see it that way.

Its like Lindsey Graham... where all he cares about is himself getting re-elected. The greater good is just less of a concern for him. I guess maybe you could look at his holding his nose and endorsing Cruz as thinking of the greater good, but at that point, he was already out of the race, so he wasn't dropping out to support Cruz, rather, he was endorsing Cruz because he thought that Trump would drag the party down as well as lose to Clinton. But once Trump won, he flipped to being an adamant supporter in order to secure his own seat.
 
Last edited:
I cannot say what the justice department will do, however I do find it odd that no individual (that I know of) in the capitol riots was charged and/or sentenced with literal "insurrection" and yet congress claims that that is what Donald Trump incited.
The seditious conspiracy pleas and convictions are a step toward establishing that an insurrection occurred (if one needed more evidence than just what one observed on 1/6). Both are defined as attacks on the United States or its system of laws. It's clear that there was an attempt, a violent attempt, to prevent an established legal proceeding involved in the transfer of power: the tallying of the electoral votes. If Trump is found to have incited that or given aid and comfort to those engaged in it, we may see the first conviction for insurrection since such laws were put in place after the Civil War--because we experienced the first case of it since then.
 
...I do find it odd that no individual (that I know of) in the capitol riots was charged and/or sentenced with literal "insurrection" and yet congress claims that that is what Donald Trump incited.
This one's really easy if you think about it: a single person cannot "do" an insurrection. Like, you or I cannot "do an insurrection", right? On our own?

And yet, someone else can "incite an insurrection" - leading to a whole bunch of people doing... well, an insurrection. Like how neither of us can really be a pep rally, right? Just by ourselves. But someone else can organize a pep rally.
 
The seditious conspiracy pleas and convictions are a step toward establishing that an insurrection occurred (if one needed more evidence than just what one observed on 1/6). Both are defined as attacks on the United States or its system of laws. It's clear that there was an attempt, a violent attempt, to prevent an established legal proceeding involved in the transfer of power: the tallying of the electoral votes. If Trump is found to have incited that or given aid and comfort to those engaged in it, we may see the first conviction for insurrection since such laws were put in place after the Civil War--because we experienced the first case of it since then.

Actually, the first instance since the last "redemption" coup in the South, but that only proves your point. We let armed mobs sweep away elected state governments at the South, did nothing about it, and the result was eight decades of Jim Crow.
 

Exclusive: Trump’s former White House ethics lawyer told Cassidy Hutchinson to give misleading testimony to January 6 committee, sources say​

WashingtonCNN —
The January 6 committee made a startling allegation on Monday, claiming it had evidence that a Trump-backed attorney urged a key witness to mislead the committee about details they recalled.

Though the committee declined to identify the people, CNN has learned that Stefan Passantino, the top ethics attorney in the Trump White House, is the lawyer who allegedly advised his then-client, former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson, to tell the committee that she did not recall details that she did, sources familiar with the committee’s work tell CNN.

Trump’s Save America political action committee funded Passantino and his law firm Elections LLC, including paying for his representation of Hutchinson, other sources tell CNN. The committee report notes the lawyer did not tell his client who was paying for the legal services.


 
I mean . . . a Trump "ethics lawyer" is like a contradiction right out of the gate.
Lols, on CNN last night, Paul Begala (former Clinton advisor and CNN contributor) literally said quote "“Being an ethics lawyer in the Trump white house must have been like being a sensitivity trainer for Kanye West” :lol:
 
Right, but to get the analogy complete, a Nazi sensitivity trainer.
 
Yeah, to quote Nancy Pelosi, Passantino is in "the poo-poo".
And he might well make a deal to implicate The Donald and avoid being prosecuted.
 
At the very end the Committee makes eleven recommendations.
Spoiler :

RECOMMENDATIONS page 689 of report, not pdf
1. Electoral Count Act. As our Report describes, Donald J. Trump, John Eastman, and others corruptly attempted to violate the Electoral Count Act of 1887 in an effort to overturn the 2020 Presidential Election. To deter other future attempts to overturn Presidential Elections, the House of Representatives has passed H.R. 8873, “The Presidential Election Reform Act,” and the Senate should act promptly to send a bill with these principles to the President. H.R. 8873 reaffirms that a Vice President has no authority or discretion to reject an official electoral slate submitted by the Governor of a state. It also reforms Congress’s counting rules to help ensure that objections in the joint session conform to Congress’s narrow constitutional role under Article II and the Twelfth Amendment. It provides that presidential candidates may sue in federal court to ensure that Congress receives the state’s lawful certification, and leaves no doubt that the manner for selecting presidential electors cannot be changed retroactively after the election is over.

2. Accountability. The Select Committee has made criminal referrals to the Department of Justice, and both the Department of Justice and other prosecutorial authorities will now make their determinations on whether to prosecute individuals involved in the events resulting in an attack on the United States Congress on January 6, 2021. Additional steps may also be appropriate to ensure criminal or civil accountability for anyone engaging in misconduct described in this Report. Those courts and bar disciplinary bodies responsible for overseeing the legal profession in the states and the District of Columbia should continue to evaluate the conduct of attorneys described in this Report. Attorneys should not have the discretion to use their law licenses to undermine the constitutional and statutory process for peacefully transferring power in our government. The Department of Justice should also take appropriate action to prevent its attorneys from participating in campaign-related activities, or (as described in this report) activities aimed at subverting the rule of law and overturning a lawful election. This report also identifies specific attorney conflicts of interest for the Department to evaluate.

3. Violent Extremism. Federal Agencies with intelligence and security missions, including the Secret Service, should (a) move forward on whole-of-government strategies to combat the threat of violent activity posed by all extremist groups, including white nationalist groups and violent anti-government groups while respecting the civil rights and First Amendment civil liberties of all citizens; and (b) review their intelligence sharing protocols to ensure that threat intelligence is properly prioritized and shared with other responsible 690 RECOMMENDATIONS intelligence and security agencies on a timely basis in order to combat the threat of violent activity targeting legislative institutions, government operations, and minority groups.

4. Fourteenth Amendment, Section 3. Under Section 3 of the Constitution’s Fourteenth Amendment, an individual who previously took an oath to support the Constitution of the United States, but who has “engaged in an insurrection” against the same, or given “aid or comfort to the enemies of the Constitution” can be disqualified from holding future federal or state office. The Select Committee has referred Donald Trump and others for possible prosecution under 18 U.S.C. 2383, including for assisting and providing aid and comfort to an insurrection. The Committee also notes that Donald J. Trump was impeached by a majority of the House of Representatives for Incitement of an Insurrection, and there were 57 votes in the Senate for his conviction. Congressional committees of jurisdiction should consider creating a formal mechanism for evaluating whether to bar those individuals identified in this Report under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment from holding future federal or state office. The Committee believes that those who took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution and then, on January 6th, engaged in insurrection can appropriately be disqualified and barred from holding government office—whether federal or state, civilian or military—absent at least two-thirds of Congress acting to remove the disability pursuant to Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Committee notes that Ms. Wasserman Schultz and Mr. Raskin have introduced H. Con. Res. 93 to declare the January 6 assault an insurrection and H.R. 7906 to establish specific procedures and standards for disqualification under section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment in the United States district court for the District of Columbia.

5. National Special Security Event. Until January 6th, 2021, the joint session of Congress for counting electoral votes was not understood to pose the same types of security risks as other major events on Capitol Hill. Both the inaugural and the State of the Union have long been designated as National Special Security Events, requiring specific security measures and significant advance planning and preparation. Given what occurred in 2021, Congress and the Executive Branch should work together to designate the joint session of Congress occurring on January 6th as a National Special Security Event. RECOMMENDATIONS 691

6. To the extent needed, consider reforming certain criminal statutes, including to add more severe penalties. As indicated in the Report, the Committee believes that 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)2 and other existing provisions of law can be applied to efforts to obstruct, influence, or impede the joint session on January 6th, including to related planning efforts to overturn the lawful election results on that date. To the extent that any court or any other prosecutorial authorities ultimately reach any differing conclusion, Congress should amend those statutes to cover such conduct. Congress should also consider whether the severity of penalties under those statutes is sufficient to deter unlawful conduct threatening the peaceful transfer of power.

7. House of Representatives Civil Subpoena Enforcement Authority. The current authority of the House of Representatives to enforce its subpoenas through civil litigation is unclear. Congressional committees of jurisdiction should develop legislation to create a cause of action for the House of Representatives to enforce its subpoenas in federal court, either following the statutory authority that exists for the Senate in 2 U.S.C. § 288d and 28 U.S.C. § 1365 or adopting a broad approach to facilitate timely oversight of the executive branch.

8. Threats to Election Workers. Congressional committees of jurisdiction should consider enhancing federal penalties for certain types of threats against persons involved in the election process and expanding protections for personally identifiable information of election workers.

9. Capitol Police Oversight. Congressional committees of jurisdiction should continue regular and rigorous oversight of the United States Capitol Police as it improves its planning, training, equipping, and intelligence processes and practices its critical incident response protocols, both internally and with law enforcement partners. Joint hearings with testimony from the Capitol Police Board should take place. Full funding for critical security measures should be assured.'

10. Role of the Media: [:p] The Committee’s investigation has identified many individuals involved in January 6th who were provoked to act by false information about the 2020 election repeatedly reinforced by legacy and social media. The Committee agrees that individuals remain responsible for their own actions, including their own criminal actions. But congressional committees of jurisdiction should continue to evaluate policies of media companies 692 RECOMMENDATIONS that have had the effect of radicalizing their consumers, including by provoking people to attack their own country.

11. Discussion of the Insurrection Act. The Committee has been troubled by evidence that President Trump’s possible use of the Insurrection Act was discussed by individuals identified in this Report. Congressional Committees of jurisdiction should further evaluate all such evidence, and consider risks posed for future elections.
 
Last edited:
At the very end the Committee makes eleven recommendations.

RECOMMENDATIONS page
689
For reference, sports fans, its Page 689 of the report, not page 689 of the PDF. The page number of the document is in the top right corner of the page, while the page number of the PDF is notated in the sidebar under each page. The two numbers do not match because the PDF counts cover sheets and such as "pages".

EDIT: Also @Birdjaguar you misspelled "media" (item 10):p. Not sure how that happened if you copy-pasted, since its spelled correctly in the document.
 
Top Bottom