Given my long history of watching hearings just like this, they almost certainly have subpoena powers. But I think, think, they can’t subpoena sitting Congress members.
And which they would do whether or not the Dems kept them off the committee.
Still I share Uniqueorn’s curiosity as to whether actually having prominant GOP members try to defend the indefensible in the face of witnesses describing their harrowing experiences fully expose the moral bankruptcy of the modern GOP on national television.
On the other hand its probably more likely that it would just devolve it into a mess of grandstanding and shouting over eachother, with Fox news showing carefully curated clips that “show” Jim Jordan owning the libs.
AKA, the people who gave inside information, tours and maps to the terrorists beforehand.
Again given my long history of watching hearings just like this, I’d be more than a little leary about having them testify without actual council doing the questioning.
No, I don’t buy into the idea that Jim Jordan or any of the other idiots would have succeeded in making themselves look any douchier than they already look. We already saw how their disruptive tactics basically succeeded in confusing the American public. Instead, for once, Americans are getting an opportunity to hear exactly what the officers want people to know. There’s very little that can be spliced and spun from this. It makes the conservatives who did this look horrible.
I’m not under any delusions, though, as we tend to have short memories.
But they don’t actually have to rationalize anything as they have so often demonstrated that they can tell blatant, obvious lies; all of those times it has been shown that there is a sufficient critical mass of vile and unethical people that GOP truth is irrelevant.
Even if the “normal tourist” and “hugs and kisses” statements were made in front of giant screens showing the worst insurrection scenes, it wouldn’t matter.
Slick.
Is this a settled question? There was some talk of them maybe calling MqQarthy to testify about his phone call with Trump. Is that just idle sub-space chatter?
Well, I found this,
Which includes the statement:
Rep. Cheney, among the two Republicans on the select committee, said Tuesday morning that the panel could call Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, as a material witness and could subpoena House Minority Leader McCarthy and even former President Trump.
So no, they haven’t forgotten about him.
The DOJ won’t defend Mo Brooks.
That link didn’t work for me but this one does:
https://thehill.com/regulation/565175-doj-declines-to-back-mo-brookss-defense-against-swalwells-capitol-riot-lawsuit
That’s really good news. I was reading an opinion piece in the NY Times (probably paywalled) a few days ago. The authors said:
Mr. Garland’s choice is important in its own right, but it also carries ramifications for cases targeting possible official wrongdoing in the Trump era, including by the former president himself.
The Constitution and laws of the United States are not, as Justice Robert Jackson once warned, a suicide pact. Certification that Mr. Brooks acted within the scope of his job would leave the United States government defending the right of its elected representatives to foment insurrection against itself.
Our future depends on our resolve in adhering to our basic democratic values — among them, that truth is a key to the functioning of our electoral system. And that demands that Attorney General Garland unequivocally reject any notion that a congressman is doing his job when he foments a riot based on lies in order to sabotage a legitimate national electoral process.
Thanks, I don’t know why I’m having so much trouble with linking lately.
That one looked like maybe the tweet got deleted; I don’t think it was anything you did or didn’t do.
The DOJ brief was quite pointed:
[tents fingers] Excellent.
Did anyone hear the nasty voice message that some asshole left for Office Fanone? They played it on CNN. I don’t want to amplify it, so I don’t really want to link to it, but I just can’t believe the ugliness.
I would hate to live in a brain so full of that much hatred. He needs help.
I did. It was indeed horrible. The word “fa**ot” was used a lot, as well as the inevitable N-word.
Hatred is all some people have.
The 9/11 investigation was horribly biased and one sided as well.
The 19 hijackers were all clean and well-dressed. They didn’t smell bad. They waited in an orderly manner at the boarding gate, they weren’t unruly. They boarded the plane politely, without pushing and shoving other passengers and they even fastened their seat belts and turned off their electronics when asked.
Yet no one ever mentions this, because they are so intent on making these men out to be nothing but evil and horrible. It’s UNFAIR…………
( In case I really need to say it, the above was sarcasm.)
Pelosi was right. You can’t put Banks & Jordan and the committee for the same reason you don’t put suspects on the jury. And shame on him for trying it.
If those rejected Republicans had been included on the committee, how do y’all suppose they would have attempted to undermine the testimony of the police who were beaten up, knocked down, tased, maced, and otherwise attacked? There’s video to confirm these things happened. Would they say the video was faked?
Would they have tried to discredit them by dredging up offenses they committed in elementary/high school? Tweets they’ve sent?
Or would they have just indulged in grandstanding to derail the entire proceedings?
I guess I’m still looking for how low they will go…