New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

should republicans testify?

Dawg

President
Supporting Member
she was killed while committing a violent Crime...
Crawling through a broke window unarmed is NOT a violent Crime and good thing it was reversed and a Black woman was shot by a White cop or leftist would have burnt the capital/city down.
 

JuliefromOhio

President
Supporting Member
Pelosi should and explain why she refused National Guard requests and now a woman is dead.

Her family should sue Pelosi.
The House Select committee can call Pelosi to testify just like they have the right to call McCarthy et al.

When Congress calls for witnesses to an investigation, all Americans are obligated to show up. Many Pence and Trump staffers have already given testimony to the committee.
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
Crawling through a broke window unarmed is NOT a violent Crime and good thing it was reversed and a Black woman was shot by a White cop or leftist would have burnt the capital/city down.
So if someone breaks the window and crawls through into your home you would not shoot them?

Leading a mob with the intent of capturing members of congress is certainly a precursor to the violence that would happen once you have hostages...

Were you thinking Babbit just wanted some autographs? Once she got through what would she have done? My bet is she'd have opened the doors and the mob would have had an open path to the people being evacuated...
 

Bugsy McGurk

President
So if someone breaks the window and crawls through into your home you would not shoot them?

Leading a mob with the intent of capturing members of congress is certainly a precursor to the violence that would happen once you have hostages...

Were you thinking Babbit just wanted some autographs? Once she got through what would she have done? My bet is she'd have opened the doors and the mob would have had an open path to the people being evacuated...
The Trump terrorists who smashed their way through police into the Capitol are VERY lucky they weren’t shot down on the steps of the Capitol building. That surely would have been their fate if the were black BLM protesters.
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
The Trump terrorists who smashed their way through police into the Capitol are VERY lucky they weren’t shot down on the steps of the Capitol building. That surely would have been their fate if the were black BLM protesters.
It would have been their fate if I had been responsible for rules of engagement.
 

Bugsy McGurk

President
It would have been their fate if I had been responsible for rules of engagement.
The police restraint was truly bizarre. Not only did they not shoot the invading terrorists on the steps, as far as I know they didn’t even use less-than-lethal things like rubber bullets or tasers. Nothing. I have yet to see an explanation for that. Who made that decision?
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
The police restraint was truly bizarre. Not only did they not shoot the invading terrorists on the steps, as far as I know they didn’t even use less-than-lethal things like rubber bullets or tasers. Nothing. I have yet to see an explanation for that. Who made that decision?
I wonder if they were worried that if they open fire that there might have been a number of rioters with guns....
 

Bronwyn

Unapoligetically Republican
The ones who were withdrawn by the GOP leadership are not on the committee. True.

When the GOP re-takes the House in 2022...it will have no standing to investigate anything Biden is doing....

And thus we end up with an unchecked executive. With Biden--an institutionalist--there is no real danger. When you have Trump...what will happen with no check? Everything will be referred to the courts and (again) thanks largely to Trump, the Supreme Court is now staffed by justices who believe in the concept of "super precedents"; a term that comes from hallowed antiquity right? No--it's been around since 1975. If you're scoring at home, that is the same year Saturday Night Live started--only this concept is funnier.

Justice Amy Comey Barrett subscribes to the theory of super precedents. For an explanation, the ABA writes;

A precedent should not be overruled just because it doesn’t fall on the super precedent list, Barrett said. It just means that the decision isn’t among the cases that no one questions anymore.

Barrett’s 2013 article listed these cases as super precedent:
Marbury v. Madison, upholding judicial review.
• Martin v. Hunter’s Lessee, upholding Supreme Court review of state court judgments involving federal law.
Helvering v. Davis, upholding the Social Security Act.
• The legal tender cases, upholding the constitutionality of paper money.
Mapp v. Ohio, holding that the Fourth Amendment applied to the states through the 14th Amendment.
Brown v. Board of Education, holding the 14th Amendment bans the states from maintaining racially segregated public schools.
• The civil rights cases, holding that the 14th Amendment applies to state action rather than individual acts of discrimination.


I do love the "no one questions anymore" stipulation. Gee, what could change that? Oh yeah, a judicial nominee who does question it!

Anyway, these are the sages who will now be charged with oversight of the executive branch now that nobody is minding the store in Congress--by congressional decree! Its going to be a very dark future regarding executive power going forward. The only hope we have is for the American people to choose wisely...and about 1/2 of the population has ceased to believe in reality. Dark days are coming.
Democrats threw that baby out with the bathwater when Holder was held in contempt for not testifying. Dems can't whine when they set the precedent.
 

Bugsy McGurk

President
I wonder if they were worried that if they open fire that there might have been a number of rioters with guns....
That’s probably true on an individual police officer basis, but there seemed to be a force-wide policy not to shoot the invaders with anything - lethal or not. I would like to see an explanation as to who made that decision and why. Those poor cops had to endure some wicked beatings from Trump’s terrorists.
 
Last edited:

condorkristy

Mostly Liberal
Their “defense” for not testifying is that Trump told them to stonewall.

Complete lawlessness is the hallmark of the Trump cabal.

And the democrats will be obliged to do the same thing when they are called before a committee next year when the Republicans are in control of the House and possibly the Senate.

Congressional oversight is a thing of the past unless they start jailing people who don't show up. I'm a liberal guy....but I'm sort of hoping the Republicans will jail their fellow house members who refuse a subpoena (along with Executive branch members who refuse one)....

Congress is supposed to represent us. They can't do that if they have no oversight capacity.
 

Bronwyn

Unapoligetically Republican
Oh...it's not a "full" committee? What is a "full" committee?
There is not enough members on the committee according to their own rules. 7 democrats and 2 republicans. Yeah that's a real fair panel. The question of whether the committee has the legal authority to force sitting lawmakers to comply with its requests is expected to be the subject of court battles in the coming months. Not to mention executive power that comes into play about any conversations held with the president.
 

condorkristy

Mostly Liberal
There is not enough members on the committee according to their own rules. 7 democrats and 2 republicans. Yeah that's a real fair panel. The question of whether the committee has the legal authority to force sitting lawmakers to comply with its requests is expected to be the subject of court battles in the coming months. Not to mention executive power that comes into play about any conversations held with the president.

Doesn't fly.
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
Doesn't matter. It's not a full committee.
Send a complaint to McCarthy. He should not have withdrawn three republicans from the committee. His appointment of Jordan was predictably rejected. Jordan had already announced his intention to disrupt and distract the investigation by trying to focus it on the riots of 2020.
 
Top