Insurrection Hearings 6/28 and beyond

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:July 12

gd help us all

I'm going to be in Europe. Is there any way to eatch this from my airbnb?

If you have an internet connection and a subscription to the NYT -- they broadcast it live from their website. Maybe the Post does too.

Arrgh. Not NYT subscription, but I do have the Post. I think I might be able to watch it on Hulu after the fact.

Easy, then. I watch it on the Post's website, and find the commentary before and after to be the least grating. It's also easy to skip.

[Anonymous]

Mick Mulveny's Op-Ed: https://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/article263174168.html

Despite all of the flaws in the structure of the heavily Democrat committee, almost all of the evidence presented so far is coming from eminently credible sources: Republicans

Yes, it is possible that all of those life-long Republicans succumbed to Trump Derangement Syndrome. It is possible they decided to ignore a life-long political affiliation. It is also possible they chose to perjure themselves about what they saw, heard and know. But if they didn’t, and half of the country isn’t paying attention, then that half of the country is clinging firmly to an opinion of Jan. 6, 2021 that is based on either false or incomplete information. And clinging firmly to a belief based on false or incomplete information can lead to disastrous results. January 6 itself is a stark reminder of that. When Republicans start testifying under oath that other Republicans lost the 2020 election and then broke the law to try to change that, Republicans should pay attention. Everyone should.

Will other republicans listen to one of their own?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Mick Mulveny's Op-Ed: https://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/article263174168.html

Despite all of the flaws in the structure of the heavily Democrat committee, almost all of the evidence presented so far is coming from eminently credible sources: Republicans

Yes, it is possible that all of those life-long Republicans succumbed to Trump Derangement Syndrome. It is possible they decided to ignore a life-long political affiliation. It is also possible they chose to perjure themselves about what they saw, heard and know. But if they didn’t, and half of the country isn’t paying attention, then that half of the country is clinging firmly to an opinion of Jan. 6, 2021 that is based on either false or incomplete information. And clinging firmly to a belief based on false or incomplete information can lead to disastrous results. January 6 itself is a stark reminder of that. When Republicans start testifying under oath that other Republicans lost the 2020 election and then broke the law to try to change that, Republicans should pay attention. Everyone should.

Will other republicans listen to one of their own?

No they won't. They will get a RINO T-shirt and death threats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Mick Mulveny's Op-Ed: https://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/article263174168.html

Despite all of the flaws in the structure of the heavily Democrat committee, almost all of the evidence presented so far is coming from eminently credible sources: Republicans

Yes, it is possible that all of those life-long Republicans succumbed to Trump Derangement Syndrome. It is possible they decided to ignore a life-long political affiliation. It is also possible they chose to perjure themselves about what they saw, heard and know. But if they didn’t, and half of the country isn’t paying attention, then that half of the country is clinging firmly to an opinion of Jan. 6, 2021 that is based on either false or incomplete information. And clinging firmly to a belief based on false or incomplete information can lead to disastrous results. January 6 itself is a stark reminder of that. When Republicans start testifying under oath that other Republicans lost the 2020 election and then broke the law to try to change that, Republicans should pay attention. Everyone should.

Will other republicans listen to one of their own?

Nope. "True" Republicans regard Trump as their Warren Jeffs. Despite his grifting and criming, he's still "the Prophet" and anyone who disagrees with him is an apostate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Mick Mulveny's Op-Ed: https://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/article263174168.html

Despite all of the flaws in the structure of the heavily Democrat committee, almost all of the evidence presented so far is coming from eminently credible sources: Republicans

Yes, it is possible that all of those life-long Republicans succumbed to Trump Derangement Syndrome. It is possible they decided to ignore a life-long political affiliation. It is also possible they chose to perjure themselves about what they saw, heard and know. But if they didn’t, and half of the country isn’t paying attention, then that half of the country is clinging firmly to an opinion of Jan. 6, 2021 that is based on either false or incomplete information. And clinging firmly to a belief based on false or incomplete information can lead to disastrous results. January 6 itself is a stark reminder of that. When Republicans start testifying under oath that other Republicans lost the 2020 election and then broke the law to try to change that, Republicans should pay attention. Everyone should.

Will other republicans listen to one of their own?

Very poor writing skills.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mick Mulveny's Op-Ed: https://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/article263174168.html

Despite all of the flaws in the structure of the heavily Democrat committee, almost all of the evidence presented so far is coming from eminently credible sources: Republicans

Yes, it is possible that all of those life-long Republicans succumbed to Trump Derangement Syndrome. It is possible they decided to ignore a life-long political affiliation. It is also possible they chose to perjure themselves about what they saw, heard and know. But if they didn’t, and half of the country isn’t paying attention, then that half of the country is clinging firmly to an opinion of Jan. 6, 2021 that is based on either false or incomplete information. And clinging firmly to a belief based on false or incomplete information can lead to disastrous results. January 6 itself is a stark reminder of that. When Republicans start testifying under oath that other Republicans lost the 2020 election and then broke the law to try to change that, Republicans should pay attention. Everyone should.

Will other republicans listen to one of their own?

Very poor writing skills.

Show me your op-ed in the paper and we can compare.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mick Mulveny's Op-Ed: https://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/article263174168.html

Despite all of the flaws in the structure of the heavily Democrat committee, almost all of the evidence presented so far is coming from eminently credible sources: Republicans

Yes, it is possible that all of those life-long Republicans succumbed to Trump Derangement Syndrome. It is possible they decided to ignore a life-long political affiliation. It is also possible they chose to perjure themselves about what they saw, heard and know. But if they didn’t, and half of the country isn’t paying attention, then that half of the country is clinging firmly to an opinion of Jan. 6, 2021 that is based on either false or incomplete information. And clinging firmly to a belief based on false or incomplete information can lead to disastrous results. January 6 itself is a stark reminder of that. When Republicans start testifying under oath that other Republicans lost the 2020 election and then broke the law to try to change that, Republicans should pay attention. Everyone should.

Will other republicans listen to one of their own?

Nope. "True" Republicans regard Trump as their Warren Jeffs. Despite his grifting and criming, he's still "the Prophet" and anyone who disagrees with him is an apostate.

Omg, I JUST finished Keep Sweet. Perfect analogy!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Post reporting that Cipollone will testify Friday.

Good. Let's hope he's forthcoming and further implicates Meadows, Giuliani and Trump.

Unfortunately he’s too much on a wimp to have his testimony recorded, it’s a “transcribed testimony.” What a jerk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mick Mulveny's Op-Ed: https://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/article263174168.html

Despite all of the flaws in the structure of the heavily Democrat committee, almost all of the evidence presented so far is coming from eminently credible sources: Republicans

Yes, it is possible that all of those life-long Republicans succumbed to Trump Derangement Syndrome. It is possible they decided to ignore a life-long political affiliation. It is also possible they chose to perjure themselves about what they saw, heard and know. But if they didn’t, and half of the country isn’t paying attention, then that half of the country is clinging firmly to an opinion of Jan. 6, 2021 that is based on either false or incomplete information. And clinging firmly to a belief based on false or incomplete information can lead to disastrous results. January 6 itself is a stark reminder of that. When Republicans start testifying under oath that other Republicans lost the 2020 election and then broke the law to try to change that, Republicans should pay attention. Everyone should.

Will other republicans listen to one of their own?

Very poor writing skills.

Show me your op-ed in the paper and we can compare.

You mean my scientific research articles written in two languages? You couldn't begin to understand it, my friend

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Post reporting that Cipollone will testify Friday.

Good. Let's hope he's forthcoming and further implicates Meadows, Giuliani and Trump.

Unfortunately he’s too much on a wimp to have his testimony recorded, it’s a “transcribed testimony.” What a jerk.

BUT...

... that's how Cassidy Hutchinson started, with recorded testimony. And then she switched her Trump-paid lawyer to a normal one, and agreed to the live hearing.

Who is Cipollone's lawyer????

Who knows, we may yet induce him to speak at a live hearing!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Post reporting that Cipollone will testify Friday.

Good. Let's hope he's forthcoming and further implicates Meadows, Giuliani and Trump.

Unfortunately he’s too much on a wimp to have his testimony recorded, it’s a “transcribed testimony.” What a jerk.

BUT...

... that's how Cassidy Hutchinson started, with recorded testimony. And then she switched her Trump-paid lawyer to a normal one, and agreed to the live hearing.

Who is Cipollone's lawyer????

Who knows, we may yet induce him to speak at a live hearing!!!

Repped by Mike Purpura, former Deputy WH Counsel under Trump, who I presume is advising Cipillone to take an extremely expansive interpretation of executive privilege. He was part of the first impeachment defense team.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Post reporting that Cipollone will testify Friday.

Good. Let's hope he's forthcoming and further implicates Meadows, Giuliani and Trump.

Unfortunately he’s too much on a wimp to have his testimony recorded, it’s a “transcribed testimony.” What a jerk.

BUT...

... that's how Cassidy Hutchinson started, with recorded testimony. And then she switched her Trump-paid lawyer to a normal one, and agreed to the live hearing.

Who is Cipollone's lawyer????

Who knows, we may yet induce him to speak at a live hearing!!!

Repped by Mike Purpura, former Deputy WH Counsel under Trump, who I presume is advising Cipillone to take an extremely expansive interpretation of executive privilege. He was part of the first impeachment defense team.

Right, but is he paid by Trump-associated people, is the question. All the witnesses are Republicans and the last worked in the White House, so such baggage does not automatically mean they wish to weasel their way out of facts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mick Mulveny's Op-Ed: https://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/article263174168.html

Despite all of the flaws in the structure of the heavily Democrat committee, almost all of the evidence presented so far is coming from eminently credible sources: Republicans

Yes, it is possible that all of those life-long Republicans succumbed to Trump Derangement Syndrome. It is possible they decided to ignore a life-long political affiliation. It is also possible they chose to perjure themselves about what they saw, heard and know. But if they didn’t, and half of the country isn’t paying attention, then that half of the country is clinging firmly to an opinion of Jan. 6, 2021 that is based on either false or incomplete information. And clinging firmly to a belief based on false or incomplete information can lead to disastrous results. January 6 itself is a stark reminder of that. When Republicans start testifying under oath that other Republicans lost the 2020 election and then broke the law to try to change that, Republicans should pay attention. Everyone should.

Will other republicans listen to one of their own?

Very poor writing skills.

Show me your op-ed in the paper and we can compare.

You mean my scientific research articles written in two languages? You couldn't begin to understand it, my friend

I'm calling BS! Give us the link.
NP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Post reporting that Cipollone will testify Friday.

Good. Let's hope he's forthcoming and further implicates Meadows, Giuliani and Trump.

Unfortunately he’s too much on a wimp to have his testimony recorded, it’s a “transcribed testimony.” What a jerk.

BUT...

... that's how Cassidy Hutchinson started, with recorded testimony. And then she switched her Trump-paid lawyer to a normal one, and agreed to the live hearing.

Who is Cipollone's lawyer????

Who knows, we may yet induce him to speak at a live hearing!!!

Repped by Mike Purpura, former Deputy WH Counsel under Trump, who I presume is advising Cipillone to take an extremely expansive interpretation of executive privilege. He was part of the first impeachment defense team.

Panda painting zoom room guy - Eric whatshisname - was on the first Trump impeachment team, too, and he has been very helpful.

[Anonymous]

This is in addition to the 12th.