Kindly step over to ATMB, please.
Already done.
The committee is trying to put together an accurate record of what led to and what occurred on January 6. They will not be hiding things.
The world doesn’t work in the conspiracy theory, political thriller way that you seem to think it does.
I don’t recall saying any such thing. I said that some members of Congress are liable to be charged criminally by the DOJ, and that the charges will probably have some basis in the information provided by the witnesses and materials discovered by the Special Committee. I’m quite happy to provide information, substantiating that expectation?
The DOJ routinely classifies and redacts materials for both public and Congressional use, on the basis that certain matters need to be hidden from outside eyes while investigations are underway.
Usually, Congress tries to avoid stepping on the feet of the DOJ investigations by steering clear of matters of criminality. In this case, they chose not to. That creates the above issue where you’ve got a sizable amount of materials in the possession of the committee that, under normal procedure, would be confined to the eyes of those in the FBI and DOJ who were working the case and which could only make their way to the accused individuals after vetting and redaction.
I have no issue with that system, as normally executed. Information about Roger Stone was redacted from the Mueller Report because the trial of Stone had not yet been held - and that seems reasonable to me. Not doing likewise, here, would already be bad enough without getting to the part where it’s the persons accused gaining access and who can selectively use the materials to their own end, and including all the private, not-for-public-dissemination underlying information that was surfaced by the investigation.
If the Special Committee isn’t considering an option to classify and render the materials inaccessible until the DOJ clears everything for public dissemination then Merrick Garland should be looking at options to claim it for the Executive Branch, as classified materials pertinent to an active investigation.
He [Lindell] has, and will happily provide, enough evidence to put 300 million Americans in jail. Not even the J6 Committee wants that to happen!
Moderating:
There is a general mod note in the thread admonishing posters to not pursue discussion about speculative witnesses and which you are apparently ignoring. If @Peter_Morris can’t discuss it, neither can you.
This is a formal warning for disregarding moderator instructions.
Back in my snarky days I preferred Congress spend its time on minutia like National Olives Week rather than eroding even more rights (I’m looking at you, PATRIOT Act).
I mean…
What is the dumber move:
- Having the Don followed by a Documentary film crew
- Having the war-time Consigliere followed by a Documentary film crew
0 voters
Not to Godwinize myself, but the Nazis were similarly obsessed with documenting themselves so future descendants could appreciate their greatness.
Watta buncha maroons.
Well, history is written by the victors; they were obviously sure that they would win and wanted to document their greatness for posterity.
The movie’s website (thesteal.com) seems to be a bit cagy on what their message is.
On the one hand, they call it a “documentary on a grassroots protest”. On the other, they titled a movie about Roger Stone’s activities, “The Steal”.
!!
At the moment, Rhodes has plead “Not Guilty” to all charges. I’d be pretty suspicious of his offer, minus some serious behind-the-scenes convincing.
If I ran the committee, I’d let Rhodes testify live if and only if he first testifies under oath on tape in a closed room that he had contact with the White House to plan the insurrection. If he wants to disavow any connection between him and the DJT orbit, no live testimony.
Yeah, I’m sure lots of people would love to have a bit of screen time that will air on every cable network.
“It’s a trap.” I’m pretty sure the committee has people that recognize this. Especially those that regularly read our posts here for advice. He should nor more be given a stage than My Pillow Guy.
The guy is only in it for the notoriety and grift. Here’s an interview with his ex-wife and estranged adult children. Advanced abuse, fearing for their lives. This guy is Oranganus without the bronzer and gold toilet.
Update:
“we were able to get all the questions we were able to get answered.”
Well isn’t that informative. If they hadn’t even been able to get answered all the questions they were able to get answered, that would have been a poor show indeed.
I don’t see why Cipollone should need to take the 5th. I don’t think he was involved in any of the conspiracy. I did expect a fair amount of atty-client priviledge, though. But if a client is planning future crimes or in the process of executing one, I don’t think that priviledge still holds. But I’m not a lawyer, so could be wrong.
“we were able to get all the questions we were able to get answered.”
The hell does that mean?
(If he answered one out of a hundred questions, or 100 out of 100 the statement would apply. ??? )