January 6th hearings on Trump's failed insurrection.
- Thread starter hanimmal
- Start date
Bingo! That's why we must go back and end the filibuster- leadership will guide themselves accordingly and give themselves pause with the knowledge that the opposite team will get a turn again..the gridlock ended with 51.
That was bad..imposters ready to go.
I hope the J6 steps on his parade right through to 2024, when ever new facts come to light.
MickFoster
Well-Known Member
At the risk of being called a naysayer.........I doubt that will happen.
I think the Dems will lose the House in November.........so by Jan. 21, 2023 the J6 committee will cease to exist.
Fortunately the existing DOJ will still be around until Jan. 20, 2025.
printer
Well-Known Member
No, the team in power will pass every law to tilt the game in their favor. If the other team gets in they will work to eliminate what the previous government has done and tilt the game their way. The will not be thinking, "We better be nice otherwise the other guys may not be nice."
printer
Well-Known Member
Judge: Bannon can argue to throw out contempt charges after conviction
A federal judge on Wednesday said he would give Stephen Bannon’s lawyers an opportunity to argue for the dismissal of criminal contempt of Congress charges, of which the former Trump White House adviser was convicted by a jury last week.
U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols denied Bannon’s motion for an outright acquittal on the charges but said in a brief order Wednesday that he would allow the defense team to further argue their motion to dismiss the indictment after they were prevented from calling members of the House Jan. 6 select committee to testify at last week’s trial.
Nichols said he “would benefit from further briefing” on the issue and ordered Bannon’s lawyers to submit a filing by Aug. 5.
The judge had previously denied the defense team’s motion to allow testimony from all nine members of the select committee at trial. But he expressed reservations about the decision and indicated in recent weeks that he would be willing to revisit the matter.
The constitution’s Speech or Debate Clause generally shields members of Congress from being compelled to testify in court proceedings. Bannon’s lawyers argued earlier this month that immunity is in tension with Bannon’s constitutional rights as a criminal defendant in a case over whether he unlawfully defied a committee subpoena.
“Mr. Bannon respectfully argues that because [select committee members] set in motion the prosecution of Mr. Bannon, they should not have been allowed to retreat behind the Speech or Debate Clause when evidence of their actions (and their testimony concerning the same) are directly relevant to Mr. Bannon’s charges, and essential to securing his Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights,” Bannon’s lawyers wrote in a filing earlier this month.
The defense team has argued Bannon was denied a fair trial when Nichols foreclosed the possibility of subpoenaing lawmaker testimony. They declined to call any witnesses to testify before a jury last week.
The jury convicted Bannon on two contempt counts after hearing from just two witnesses during the weeklong trial. They spent less than three hours deliberating before reaching a verdict on Friday.
thehill.com
A federal judge on Wednesday said he would give Stephen Bannon’s lawyers an opportunity to argue for the dismissal of criminal contempt of Congress charges, of which the former Trump White House adviser was convicted by a jury last week.
U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols denied Bannon’s motion for an outright acquittal on the charges but said in a brief order Wednesday that he would allow the defense team to further argue their motion to dismiss the indictment after they were prevented from calling members of the House Jan. 6 select committee to testify at last week’s trial.
Nichols said he “would benefit from further briefing” on the issue and ordered Bannon’s lawyers to submit a filing by Aug. 5.
The judge had previously denied the defense team’s motion to allow testimony from all nine members of the select committee at trial. But he expressed reservations about the decision and indicated in recent weeks that he would be willing to revisit the matter.
The constitution’s Speech or Debate Clause generally shields members of Congress from being compelled to testify in court proceedings. Bannon’s lawyers argued earlier this month that immunity is in tension with Bannon’s constitutional rights as a criminal defendant in a case over whether he unlawfully defied a committee subpoena.
“Mr. Bannon respectfully argues that because [select committee members] set in motion the prosecution of Mr. Bannon, they should not have been allowed to retreat behind the Speech or Debate Clause when evidence of their actions (and their testimony concerning the same) are directly relevant to Mr. Bannon’s charges, and essential to securing his Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights,” Bannon’s lawyers wrote in a filing earlier this month.
The defense team has argued Bannon was denied a fair trial when Nichols foreclosed the possibility of subpoenaing lawmaker testimony. They declined to call any witnesses to testify before a jury last week.
The jury convicted Bannon on two contempt counts after hearing from just two witnesses during the weeklong trial. They spent less than three hours deliberating before reaching a verdict on Friday.
Judge: Bannon can argue to throw out contempt charges after conviction
A federal judge on Wednesday said he would give Stephen Bannon’s lawyers an opportunity to argue for the dismissal of criminal contempt of Congress charges, of which the former Trump White Ho…
thehill.com
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
imo that bit if passive aggression says seize’m now or earlier!
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
Legal analyst: Indicators pointing to 'severe legal peril' for Trump
70,365 views Jul 27, 2022 CNN legal analyst Norman Eisen breaks down US Attorney General Merrick Garland's remarks on the status of the Department of Justice's criminal probe into January 6 and why it points to "severe legal peril" for former President Donald Trump.
Roger A. Shrubber
Well-Known Member
ommfg can't these low life pieces of shit just lay the fuck down and die?Judge: Bannon can argue to throw out contempt charges after conviction
A federal judge on Wednesday said he would give Stephen Bannon’s lawyers an opportunity to argue for the dismissal of criminal contempt of Congress charges, of which the former Trump White House adviser was convicted by a jury last week.
U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols denied Bannon’s motion for an outright acquittal on the charges but said in a brief order Wednesday that he would allow the defense team to further argue their motion to dismiss the indictment after they were prevented from calling members of the House Jan. 6 select committee to testify at last week’s trial.
Nichols said he “would benefit from further briefing” on the issue and ordered Bannon’s lawyers to submit a filing by Aug. 5.
The judge had previously denied the defense team’s motion to allow testimony from all nine members of the select committee at trial. But he expressed reservations about the decision and indicated in recent weeks that he would be willing to revisit the matter.
The constitution’s Speech or Debate Clause generally shields members of Congress from being compelled to testify in court proceedings. Bannon’s lawyers argued earlier this month that immunity is in tension with Bannon’s constitutional rights as a criminal defendant in a case over whether he unlawfully defied a committee subpoena.
“Mr. Bannon respectfully argues that because [select committee members] set in motion the prosecution of Mr. Bannon, they should not have been allowed to retreat behind the Speech or Debate Clause when evidence of their actions (and their testimony concerning the same) are directly relevant to Mr. Bannon’s charges, and essential to securing his Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights,” Bannon’s lawyers wrote in a filing earlier this month.
The defense team has argued Bannon was denied a fair trial when Nichols foreclosed the possibility of subpoenaing lawmaker testimony. They declined to call any witnesses to testify before a jury last week.
The jury convicted Bannon on two contempt counts after hearing from just two witnesses during the weeklong trial. They spent less than three hours deliberating before reaching a verdict on Friday.
Judge: Bannon can argue to throw out contempt charges after conviction
A federal judge on Wednesday said he would give Stephen Bannon’s lawyers an opportunity to argue for the dismissal of criminal contempt of Congress charges, of which the former Trump White Ho…
they have to thrash around theatrically and cause as much collateral damage as they can on their way out, because all the damage they have caused so far just isn't fucking enough...
printer
Well-Known Member
DOJ says its obtained new search warrant for Eastman’s phone
Federal prosecutors told a judge on Wednesday they have obtained a new search warrant directed at John Eastman, a lawyer who advised former President Trump on a scheme to overturn the 2020 election results, whose phone was seized by investigators last month.
Responding to a federal lawsuit Eastman filed challenging the seizure, Justice Department officials gave new details about their probe into his records and said they have worked to avoid infringing on any attorney-client privilege issues implicated by the search.
“The United States is in possession of Plaintiff’s cell phone, as well as a manual screen capture of certain contents of the device obtained by an agent not associated with the investigation team,” the prosecutors wrote in a court filing in New Mexico federal district court.
“Plaintiff’s cell phone and the manual screen capture currently are in Northern Virginia, in the possession of federal agents with the Department of Justice, Office of Inspector General. On July 12, 2022, a federal agent obtained a second federal search warrant from the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia that authorizes review of the contents of Plaintiff’s cell phone and the manual screen capture.”
The filing was submitted by Matthew Graves, the U.S. Attorney for D.C., and Thomas Windom, a federal prosecutor who has been detailed to oversee aspects of the DOJ’s Jan. 6 investigation.
The prosecutors said the DOJ has implemented a “filter protocol” to prevent investigators from reviewing potentially privileged records and that Eastman’s lawyers have been informed about the measure.
Federal law enforcement executed search warrants on Eastman and Jeffrey Clark, the former DOJ official who Trump had nearly installed as acting attorney general, on the same day last month in one of the most overt signs that the department had escalated its investigation into Trump’s inner circle.
Eastman is asking a federal judge to order his phone be returned and that investigators be blocked from conducting a search while his case proceeds.
thehill.com
Federal prosecutors told a judge on Wednesday they have obtained a new search warrant directed at John Eastman, a lawyer who advised former President Trump on a scheme to overturn the 2020 election results, whose phone was seized by investigators last month.
Responding to a federal lawsuit Eastman filed challenging the seizure, Justice Department officials gave new details about their probe into his records and said they have worked to avoid infringing on any attorney-client privilege issues implicated by the search.
“The United States is in possession of Plaintiff’s cell phone, as well as a manual screen capture of certain contents of the device obtained by an agent not associated with the investigation team,” the prosecutors wrote in a court filing in New Mexico federal district court.
“Plaintiff’s cell phone and the manual screen capture currently are in Northern Virginia, in the possession of federal agents with the Department of Justice, Office of Inspector General. On July 12, 2022, a federal agent obtained a second federal search warrant from the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia that authorizes review of the contents of Plaintiff’s cell phone and the manual screen capture.”
The filing was submitted by Matthew Graves, the U.S. Attorney for D.C., and Thomas Windom, a federal prosecutor who has been detailed to oversee aspects of the DOJ’s Jan. 6 investigation.
The prosecutors said the DOJ has implemented a “filter protocol” to prevent investigators from reviewing potentially privileged records and that Eastman’s lawyers have been informed about the measure.
Federal law enforcement executed search warrants on Eastman and Jeffrey Clark, the former DOJ official who Trump had nearly installed as acting attorney general, on the same day last month in one of the most overt signs that the department had escalated its investigation into Trump’s inner circle.
Eastman is asking a federal judge to order his phone be returned and that investigators be blocked from conducting a search while his case proceeds.
DOJ says it’s obtained new search warrant for Eastman’s phone
Federal prosecutors told a judge on Wednesday they have obtained a new search warrant directed at John Eastman, a lawyer who advised former President Trump on a scheme to overturn the 2020 election…
thehill.com
printer
Well-Known Member
Trump, National Guard and Jan. 6: The Truth
If former President Donald Trump's word is not enough, an official Capitol Police timeline and Pentagon memo also back up his assertion that he authorized the use of the National Guard in the days before the Jan. 6 Capitol breach.
Trump and several of his aides have steadfastly maintained he offered to send at least 10,000 National Guard troops to Washington to aid in crowd control, but his overture was rejected by Congress and D.C. officials.
That version of events has been disputed by the House Jan. 6 select committee — composed entirely of Democrats and Republicans who have criticized Trump. That group has alleged Trump that ultimately instigated what it terms an "insurrection," and committee members argue there is no evidence Trump made such an authorization for National Guard troops, or that anyone stood in the way of an order if one was made.
If former President Donald Trump's word is not enough, an official Capitol Police timeline and Pentagon memo also back up his assertion that he authorized the use of the National Guard in the days before the Jan. 6 Capitol breach.
Trump and several of his aides have steadfastly maintained he offered to send at least 10,000 National Guard troops to Washington to aid in crowd control, but his overture was rejected by Congress and D.C. officials.
That version of events has been disputed by the House Jan. 6 select committee — composed entirely of Democrats and Republicans who have criticized Trump. That group has alleged Trump that ultimately instigated what it terms an "insurrection," and committee members argue there is no evidence Trump made such an authorization for National Guard troops, or that anyone stood in the way of an order if one was made.
Offmymeds
Well-Known Member
That should be the normal course of business IMO. No option. They are paid very well. If they can't take the scrutiny then buh bye, we can get better civil servants with better screening methods.
Offmymeds
Well-Known Member
Newsmax is missing some important details, such as Gen. Miller's testimony under oath.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
"Trump and several of his aides have steadfastly maintained he offered to send at least 10,000 National Guard troops to Washington to aid in crowd control, but his overture was rejected by Congress and D.C. officials.:
There is no record or other evidence that Trump made that offer or that Pelosi rejected it.
No proof Trump authorized 20,000 National Guard for Jan. 6
Twenty million Americans tuned in June 9 as the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
Breaking Down DOJ's Investigation into Trump’s Actions As Part Of Jan. 6 Probe
28,846 views Jul 27, 2022 Washington Post national investigative reporter Carol Leonnig and former Acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal discuss Leonnig’s reporting that DOJ is honing in on Trump’s involvement in the fake electors scheme and has also obtained phone records from Trump insiders
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
Well Glenn can have sex with his wife again! He was getting his shorts in a real knot there for a spell, but most experts were expressing concern too, which is probably why Garland spoke. I still think it will be awhile before Donald is actually indicted, but he and those around him must be getting pretty paranoid. Knock on their doors real hard at 6 AM, if ya wanna make em shit in bed! 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Important new data points indicate DOJ does, in fact, have Donald Trump in its criminal sights
17,849 views Jul 27, 2022 Blockbuster reporting in the Washington Post reveals several data points that lead to the inescapable conclusion that Donald Trump is under criminal federal investigation. Investigative reporter Carol Leonnig and other WAPO reporters revealed that witnesses are being questioned in the federal grand jury about Donald Trump's statements, his conduct, his conversations with his lawyers, etc. Additionally, reporting shows that grand jury subpoenas have been issue to Arizona state legislators compelling the disclosure of all documents and communications "to, from, with" or about "any member, employee, or agent of Donald J. Trump." Finally, WAPO reported that back in April, federal prosecutors subpoenaed phone records of Trump's former Chief of Staff Mark Meadows and other administration officials. This is an ominous sign not only for Trump but for Ginni Thomas, wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, given her text communications with Meadows urging him to overturn the results of the presidential election.
Here's some of what these data points tell us about the state of DOJ's criminal investigation of the crimes of Donald Trump.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Important new data points indicate DOJ does, in fact, have Donald Trump in its criminal sights
17,849 views Jul 27, 2022 Blockbuster reporting in the Washington Post reveals several data points that lead to the inescapable conclusion that Donald Trump is under criminal federal investigation. Investigative reporter Carol Leonnig and other WAPO reporters revealed that witnesses are being questioned in the federal grand jury about Donald Trump's statements, his conduct, his conversations with his lawyers, etc. Additionally, reporting shows that grand jury subpoenas have been issue to Arizona state legislators compelling the disclosure of all documents and communications "to, from, with" or about "any member, employee, or agent of Donald J. Trump." Finally, WAPO reported that back in April, federal prosecutors subpoenaed phone records of Trump's former Chief of Staff Mark Meadows and other administration officials. This is an ominous sign not only for Trump but for Ginni Thomas, wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, given her text communications with Meadows urging him to overturn the results of the presidential election.
Here's some of what these data points tell us about the state of DOJ's criminal investigation of the crimes of Donald Trump.
printer
Well-Known Member
Yes, they have been known to take articles from other news sources and leave out bits that change the nature of the article. Just posted it as it shows what they are feeding the Magmas.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
when a headline contains the T-word …
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
Trump is asking an appeals court to give him immunity from civil lawsuits linked to the January 6 Capitol riot
In February, a federal judge ruled that Trump could be sued over the Capitol riot, a decision the former president is appealing.
www.businessinsider.com
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
Let's talk about the emails about the Trump's electors....