Decoy73 Posted June 14, 2022 Share Posted June 14, 2022 All you prosecutors or legal experts out there. If J6C comes upon clear cut evidence of sedition conspiracy with Trump and/ or other “big fish “, wouldn’t they halt the public hearings and immediately refer all evidence to the DOJ? Or is there value in getting everything “out there “ prior to any possible indictment? Or does the DOJ reach out to the committee and ask them to put a hold on releasing more findings, if they (DOJ) feel like they already have enough for indictments and a strong case? I guess, what I’m getting at is at what point do you worry about poisoning a potential jury pool? 2 Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted June 14, 2022 Share Posted June 14, 2022 2 minutes ago, Decoy73 said: All you prosecutors or legal experts out there. If J6C comes upon clear cut evidence of sedition conspiracy with Trump and/ or other “big fish “, wouldn’t they halt the public hearings and immediately refer all evidence to the DOJ? Or is there value in getting everything “out there “ prior to any possible indictment? Or does the DOJ reach out to the committee and ask them to put a hold on releasing more findings, if they (DOJ) feel like they already have enough for indictments and a strong case? I guess, what I’m getting at is at what point do you worry about poisoning a potential jury pool? Good question. however, I’m sure the hearings will continue then the DOJ will make a decision after that. Link to comment
Decoy73 Posted June 14, 2022 Share Posted June 14, 2022 1 minute ago, BigRedBuster said: Good question. however, I’m sure the hearings will continue then the DOJ will make a decision after that. It seems that’s where it’s heading, but all the different “courts of public opinion “ will have already made up their minds before any real trials even take place. I would think this would increase the likelihood of unrest during and after any trials take place. I hope I’m wrong, but I feel the way people are already divided on Trump’s guilt, this is heading up to an ugly situation. Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted June 14, 2022 Share Posted June 14, 2022 39 minutes ago, Decoy73 said: It seems that’s where it’s heading, but all the different “courts of public opinion “ will have already made up their minds before any real trials even take place. I would think this would increase the likelihood of unrest during and after any trials take place. I hope I’m wrong, but I feel the way people are already divided on Trump’s guilt, this is heading up to an ugly situation. I'm of the opinion that the more information the public has, the better. 1 Link to comment
knapplc Posted June 14, 2022 Share Posted June 14, 2022 "Get a great f-ing legal defense lawyer. You're going to need it." (unless the Dems screw this up. Again) 1 Link to comment
TGHusker Posted June 15, 2022 Author Share Posted June 15, 2022 So was there any reason given for the cancellation of Wednesday J6C meeting? Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted June 15, 2022 Share Posted June 15, 2022 35 minutes ago, TGHusker said: So was there any reason given for the cancellation of Wednesday J6C meeting? Where have you seen this? Link to comment
TGHusker Posted June 15, 2022 Author Share Posted June 15, 2022 12 hours ago, BigRedBuster said: Where have you seen this? https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/jan-6-committee-abruptly-postpones-wednesday-hearing-rcna33433 WASHINGTON — The House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol announced Tuesday it was postponing a public hearing scheduled for 10 a.m. ET Wednesday. Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., a member of the panel, told reporters that the postponement was due to "technical issues" stemming from "overwhelming" demand on staff to produce videos. "We're trying to give them a little room," Lofgren said. The next hearing is now scheduled to take place on Thursday at 1 p.m. ET. The committee also announced the dates and times for two more hearings: June 21 and June 23, both at 1 p.m. Wednesday's hearing had been expected to focus on then-President Donald Trump's unsuccessful plan to replace Acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen with Justice Department lawyer Jeffrey Clark, who was more supportive of Trump’s fraud claims. Clark caught Trump’s eye after he circulated a draft letter to states that said the department “identified significant concerns that may have impacted the outcome of the election.” Rosen was expected to testify at Wednesday's hearing, along with former acting Deputy Attorney General Richard Donoghue and Steve Engel, former assistant attorney general for the Office of Legal Counsel. “In our hearings, you will hear first-hand how the senior leadership of the department threatened to resign, how the White House Counsel threatened to resign, and how they confronted Donald Trump and Jeff Clark in the Oval Office,” Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., said last week at the committee's first public hearing. 2 1 Link to comment
suh_fan93 Posted June 30, 2022 Share Posted June 30, 2022 Something tells me he's got the same dealer as Don Jr. Or something. Wow. Link to comment
funhusker Posted June 30, 2022 Share Posted June 30, 2022 8 minutes ago, suh_fan93 said: Something tells me he's got the same dealer as Don Jr. Or something. Wow. Holy tweaker, Batman! 1 1 Link to comment
TGHusker Posted July 5, 2022 Author Share Posted July 5, 2022 24 minutes ago, suh_fan93 said: Maybe they will soon find out the price of their loyalty to trump 1 Link to comment
Recommended Posts