NYT admits Jan 6 committee all about getting Trump

T. A. Gardner said:
But just to indulge you, here's the original NYT article


https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/11/us/politics/jan-6-prosecute-trump.html

And, the exact same quote I made in the OP. How retarded do you have to be not to accept a reprint as accurate?
Click to expand...

Yep. It's great. I don't see a thing wrong with it. The committee's doing exactly what it's suppose to be doing. Following and reporting the facts.

You don't like the facts Too bad. Nothing inappropriate is going on.
 
Joe Capitalist said:
It's about Trump breaking the law. If Trump broke the law, shouldn't be be held accountable?
Seems to be an open-and-shut case.
Click to expand...

Not in twump world. In twump world, the fact that Dems are investigating discredits the entire process. Of course they can spend millions on a Benghazi witch hunt which found nothing and charged no one.

We're not dealing with wisdom or even human beings here. These are evil Nazis and TA's proving it.
 
 
anatta said:
id ask you to make that case, but you will just spout partisan BS.
But answer this -where is the quid pro quo in the Zelensky phone call?
Click to expand...

Well, you know this, but I'll tell you anyway. The "quid pro quo" did not get the chance to happen because John Bolton and Vindman sounded the alarm. But he tried it, and that's still a crime. If you try to rob a bank but get caught and don't steal anything it's still a crime.
 
How did our nation fail people like Gardner? How do people like Gardner come to believe in the use of violence to overthrow the government?
 
anatta said:
lol..no comment except this is a continual display of talking before one thinks
My daddy used to say "you holler before you are hurt" -same thing
Click to expand...

I know what you mean. My daddy used to tell me, "don't trust a blind squirrel wearing an eyepatch".

Wise words that are still with me, even today.
 
anatta said:
so indict him or STFU.
Merrick Garland is as corrupt as one can get - wont even enforce the law on protecting SCOTUS from assassination attempts, and calls parents at school board meetings "terrorists"if they oppose the Woke freaks agenda

So he'd indict Trump if he had anything.. Mueller had nothing,,impeachment was a bust.
TDS never ends. fortunately the American people are gonna lay waste to the Progs come Nov.
And Trump will still be standing
Click to expand...

Well, kitten, kitten, KITTEN!!! Calm down and let me explain something to you: Congress cannot indict in this case. Congress has to make the case, then if they think the case is made, refer the case to the DOJ and then the DOJ decides whether or not to prosecute criminally.

I'm not a lawyer, but I think the 1/6'ers are doing a pretty good job of erasing reasonable doubt. One big takeaway. - everyone around twump including his daughter new there was not "stolen election".

This inquiry needs to continue and we all need to be patient.

The Benghazi inquiry went on for years with no findings and no charges, costing millions.
 
AProudLefty said:
And? Are you suggesting that prosecutors are out to get the defendants?

Why are you against investigating treason and sedition?
Click to expand...

I am suggesting that the committee is about persecuting people it targets, not gathering evidence to submit for pursuing a legal trial within the justice system. If they were trying to do the latter, they wouldn't be on primetime television presenting cherry picked evidence in a completely one-sided fashion. They aren't giving witnesses any chance to make any sort of rebuttal to their claims. They seemingly aren't worried about tainting the evidence, witnesses, or anything else for proceeding legally.

What they are doing is trying their case in the court of public opinion, not a court of law. They have no intention of giving those they make claims and accusations against a chance to respond. This is a political show trail and nothing more.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Wrong. It's about getting Trump no matter how thin the evidence is. This is the same bunch that tried to impeach him the first two times. It's one of the major reasons Pelosi rejected the Republican choices for this committee in favor of ones she picked--nearly 200 years of history of the House be damned.
Click to expand...

1. The evidence is not "thin" the timelines along with its evidence is pretty clear.
2. Charging criminals along the way, if crimes are discovered is exactly what the they're supposed to do.

You seem to have a problem with propriety. There is nothing wrong going on here.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
I never said it was a "fake investigation." I stated it was about getting Trump, not getting to the facts of what happened on Jan 6 as far as the riot went.
Click to expand...

It's about getting trump. And anyone else along the way who shit their pants. Still I don't see a problem.
 
BartenderElite said:
This kind of argument is only meant to distract from the truth.

Does the committee have an agenda? Who cares. EVERYTHING we're seeing is factual - testimony, video, audio. The committee can't "bias" that.

Why are people bending over backwards to try to protect a known liar & grifter, who actively tried to overturn an election?
Click to expand...

Yep. TA can't point to anything corrupt the 1/6ers are doing. TA just doesn't like that they're actually doing their job that Republicans won't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top