ADVERTISEMENT

*****January 6th committee public hearings thread*****UPDATE: Transcripts released

This movie quote keeps sticking in my head, as we peel open more and more onion layers here...

FU2dsRoWQAAB3zj
 
Facts? What facts? 1/6 is a charade. If it was such a big deal, it should have been dealt with in ‘21. Dems come off as political sluts putting on this stupid ass show.
1/6 would have been dealt with in ‘21 if McCarthy and the GOP would have participated. We are seeing more of the people who were close to Trump step forward as time goes on to tell what they know. You would acknowledge this if you were as impartial as you like to claim. I think both sides suck, but Trump is even worse so I want to see him out.
 
Last edited:
Using the military to collect evidence is a violation of the Posse Comitatas Act of 1868 - the amended offered is if you break the law then the proverbial “forbidden fruit” is not admitted.
After the fruit has been released to the public. Dude is covering his ass because he is about to have the spotlight on him.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: DFSNOLE
After the fruit has been released to the public. Dude is covering his ass because he is about to have the spotlight on him.
No. For some reason you do not understand the law here and this Julie account is completely off because Congress has oversight over the military and DOD. If they want to investigate Afghanistan, they can and DOD can’t turn down that request (an example Julie) posted
 
  • Like
Reactions: RileyHawk
No. For some reason you do not understand the law here and this Julie account is completely off because Congress has oversight over the military and DOD. If they want to investigate Afghanistan, they can and DOD can’t turn down that request (an example Julie) posted
You are of the belief the "fruit" he is teying to cover has not already been brought public?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: DFSNOLE
I think he is teying to cover up his tactics for how he got the information.
I would refrain from adopting tweets and responses there to as a basis for your opinion. If Schmidt ordered military to collect evidence of 1/6, that can be prosecuted. The evidence collected cannot be used in this hearing or any court case against defendants on charges relating to 1/6 insurrection.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sob5 and RileyHawk
I would refrain from adopting tweets and responses there to as a basis for your opinion. If Schmidt ordered military to collect evidence of 1/6, that can be prosecuted. The evidence collected cannot be used in this hearing or any court case against defendants on charges relating to 1/6 insurrection.
The tweet contains his request. Jesus dude, I posted an article in another thread and people cried it was an article. I posted his actual request and now you are complaining because it is in the body of a tweet. It "cannot" but schiff covering his ass tells me "it has".
 
The tweet contains his request. Jesus dude, I posted an article in another thread and people cried it was an article. I posted his actual request and now you are complaining because it is in the body of a tweet. It "cannot" but schiff covering his ass tells me "it has".
I’m not complaining it was in a tweet. I explained the law and the effect of the amendment on rule of evidence. I was suggesting that refraining from forming one’s opinions based on a tweet or the responses is a good practice.
 
No. For some reason you do not understand the law here and this Julie account is completely off because Congress has oversight over the military and DOD. If they want to investigate Afghanistan, they can and DOD can’t turn down that request (an example Julie) posted
??? For some reason? Lol. You know the reason. We all know the reason.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: DFSNOLE and sob5
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT