sturg33
I
There is currently zero evidence that I am wrong.
January 6th insurrection thread...
- Thread starter goldfly
- Start date
There is currently zero evidence that I am wrong.
Sheffield10
Arizona Fall Leaguer
How do these text messages prove there was a planned insurrection? I’m sort of confused.
sturg33
I
They just do bro you wouldn't understand
57Brave
Well-known member
Mueller, She Wrote
@MuellerSheWrote
THREAD: A couple of interesting things. I'm sure you've noticed by now the deliberate
legalese used by Liz Cheney repeatedly during recent hearings. "Whether trump by action
or inaction corruptly sought to obstruct or impeded Congress' official proceeding."
This is no accident
Liz Cheney's refrain is nearly word-for-word 18 U.S. Code § 1512(c)(3):
"Whoever corruptly obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding
or attempts to do so." I find it interesting that a MoC who can't bring
criminal charges is using prosecutorial language
If you listen to @dailybeanspod or watch
@glennkirschner2
, you've heard us talk frequently about the importance of the DoJ charging JanSixers with Obstructing an Official Proceeding because by pleading guilty, they admit that they were there to stop the certification.
Glenn and I have said that those guilty pleas could help build a criminal case
against donald trump. The DoJ is using 18 U.S. Code § 1512(c)(3) instead of
seditious conspiracy likely because it's easier to prosecute and carries the
same sentence (max 20 years).
you can go to Mueller She Wrote on Twitter to read the whole thread
@MuellerSheWrote
THREAD: A couple of interesting things. I'm sure you've noticed by now the deliberate
legalese used by Liz Cheney repeatedly during recent hearings. "Whether trump by action
or inaction corruptly sought to obstruct or impeded Congress' official proceeding."
This is no accident
Liz Cheney's refrain is nearly word-for-word 18 U.S. Code § 1512(c)(3):
"Whoever corruptly obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding
or attempts to do so." I find it interesting that a MoC who can't bring
criminal charges is using prosecutorial language
If you listen to @dailybeanspod or watch
@glennkirschner2
, you've heard us talk frequently about the importance of the DoJ charging JanSixers with Obstructing an Official Proceeding because by pleading guilty, they admit that they were there to stop the certification.
Glenn and I have said that those guilty pleas could help build a criminal case
against donald trump. The DoJ is using 18 U.S. Code § 1512(c)(3) instead of
seditious conspiracy likely because it's easier to prosecute and carries the
same sentence (max 20 years).
you can go to Mueller She Wrote on Twitter to read the whole thread
57Brave
Well-known member
We don't know yet because of how much or how little the Committee has.
We wont know for a long time what these texts mean.
People are still rummaging through Watergate gaining
new knowledge about " what it means".
In June 1973 ( one year) we didn't know that much about or the magnitude of the break in,
other than it was as (R) told us then as now, it was
" a 3rd rate burglary"
we will have to wait and see
chew on this
https://www.rollingstone.com/feature/fear-and-loathing-at-the-watergate-37739/amp/
Last edited:
Jaw
It's OVER 5,000!
Jaw
It's OVER 5,000!
They better hurry, they only have about 13 months to figure it out.
goldfly
<B>if my thought dreams could be seen</B>
Tapate50
Well-known member
Let me be clear: I don’t like or trust Schiff, and would happily wave goodbye to him on his way out of the Capitol building. I also don’t think he should have done this, as there’s no reason to have done so. However, this edit really didn’t change the meaning of Jordan’s forwarded text. The additional context should have been included, but it would not have changed the message being shared.