Liz Cheney

[GoAU 1,599]

7 hours ago, homersapien said:

No, that's a list of vague, unsubstantiated and unproven allegations. (Aka political propaganda.)

All compared to the Jan. 6 insurrection and the blatant lie about a stolen election, which is what Trump and his myrmidons continue to run on.

(You sound exactly like EMT btw.)

January 6th was a protest that had a huge group of people make very poor choices (mob mentality) and violated the law.  They deserve to be punished for this as well.   However, “insurrection” is a ridiculously overplayed Democrat marketing ploy.  To think that that group of people was going to overthrow the US government (without a single firearm) is lunacy.  
 

if you want to say that they were trying to undue a lawful election (which I have heard a lot of people claim, but I am not trying to put words in your mouth), then I would contend that the creation of the Steele dossier to try and have a sitting President impeached and removed from office is an even bigger example of insurrection and we need to begin prosecution as well.  

Edited August 19, 2022 by GoAU

[SumterAubie 3,031]

14 hours ago, GoAU said:

Maybe they just liked the other candidate better?

Certainly there prerogative to vote as they wish. I guess they valued Trump's endorsement of Hageman more than they do Cheney's conservatism.

[Leftfield 2,585]

1 hour ago, GoAU said:

January 6th was a protest that had a huge group of people make very poor choices (mob mentality) and violated the law.  They deserve to be punished for this as well.   However, “insurrection” is a ridiculously overplayed Democrat marketing ploy.  To think that that group of people was going to overthrow the US government (without a single firearm) is lunacy.  
 

if you want to say that they were trying to undue a lawful election (which I have heard a lot of people claim, but I am not trying to put words in your mouth), then I would contend that the creation of the Steele dossier to try and have a sitting President impeached and removed from office is an even bigger example of insurrection and we need to begin prosecution as well.  

Holy buckets. Are you for real with this?

What the hell difference does it make if they succeeded or not? How do you define "insurrection?" Why do you say there wasn't a single firearm there when that's been proven false?

And just who were the people that were stoking that "mob mentality?" Those people didn't march to the Capitol in a vacuum. That idea had been planted well in advance and was pushed again at the "protest" by the very man you defend, among others. If you think Trump had no clue whatsoever as to some of the dangerous people that were going to be in that crowd then you are truly lost. He knew what was going on...he just didn't care.

You're parroting Tucker Carlson talking points.

[homersapien 11,354]

2 hours ago, GoAU said:

January 6th was a protest that had a huge group of people make very poor choices (mob mentality) and violated the law.  They deserve to be punished for this as well.   However, “insurrection” is a ridiculously overplayed Democrat marketing ploy.  To think that that group of people was going to overthrow the US government (without a single firearm) is lunacy.  
 

if you want to say that they were trying to undue a lawful election (which I have heard a lot of people claim, but I am not trying to put words in your mouth), then I would contend that the creation of the Steele dossier to try and have a sitting President impeached and removed from office is an even bigger example of insurrection and we need to begin prosecution as well.  

The Jan. 6 hearing says otherwise.

Trump instigated that insurrection and clearly was hoping they would succeed.  He did nothing to try to stop it and four people died as a result.

The Steele dossier was a sideshow and had no effect on anything.  And the effort to indict Trump over his collaboration with Russian election assistance played itself out in the legal process of impeachment, even if the Republicans refused to admit the truth.

The two have nothing in common.

And you are a total fool if you think Jan. 6 happened spontaneously without Trump's instigation.  I'd say pull your head out of your ass, but you obviously prefer to keep it there. 

Edited August 20, 2022 by homersapien

[GoAU 1,599]

1 hour ago, homersapien said:

The Jan. 6 hearing says otherwise.

Trump instigated that insurrection and clearly was hoping they would succeed.  He did nothing to try to stop it and four people died as a result.

The Steele dossier was a sideshow and had no effect on anything.  And the effort to indict Trump over his collaboration with Russian election assistance played itself out in the legal process of impeachment, even if the Republicans refused to admit the truth.

The two have nothing in common.

And you are a total fool if you think Jan. 6 happened spontaneously without Trump's instigation.  I'd say pull your head out of your ass, but you obviously prefer to keep it there. 

Ahh the completely objective, non partisan Jan 6 hearing - got it.   You just keep gobbling up that Dem party propaganda.  It was so overwhelming that it produced how many indictments?  Are you really so naive as to think the 3 years of "investigations", impeachments and trials had "no effect on anything?  Are you saying that intentionally creating false information to remove elected officials is all good?  As long as the ends justifies your intended means, right?  But be careful, as that can have unintended consequences

 

 

[SumterAubie 3,031]

2 hours ago, SumterAubie said:

Certainly is their prerogative to vote as they wish. I guess they valued Trump's endorsement of Hageman more than they do Cheney's conservatism.

 

[SumterAubie 3,031]

41 minutes ago, GoAU said:

Ahh the completely objective, non partisan Jan 6 hearing - got it.  

In addition to all the Republicans who have already appeared, I imagine the January 6th committee would also welcome the points of view of Jim Jordan, McCarthy, Taylor Greene, Ron Johnson, the Secret Service agents, Ginni Thomas, John Eastman, Mark Meadows, Jeffrey Clark, Scott Perry, and so on. Seems they would be falling all over themselves to step up and defend the great man from this biased Democrat led witch hunt.

The J6 committee doesn't have  the authority to indict anyone. The DOJ does. 

This biased, Democrat led witch hunt line of thinking is so odd. Its not like the committee has paraded a steady stream of left thinkers to testify. These people appearing before the committee are people hired by the great man himself, worked in the WH, sat on the great man's cabinet, dyed into the wool Republicans speaking before the committee.

Edited August 20, 2022 by SumterAubie

[icanthearyou 4,462]

4 hours ago, GoAU said:

January 6th was a protest that had a huge group of people make very poor choices (mob mentality) and violated the law.  They deserve to be punished for this as well.   However, “insurrection” is a ridiculously overplayed Democrat marketing ploy.  To think that that group of people was going to overthrow the US government (without a single firearm) is lunacy.  
 

if you want to say that they were trying to undue a lawful election (which I have heard a lot of people claim, but I am not trying to put words in your mouth), then I would contend that the creation of the Steele dossier to try and have a sitting President impeached and removed from office is an even bigger example of insurrection and we need to begin prosecution as well.  

There is only one plausible explanation for this sort of divergence from reality.

[homersapien 11,354]

23 hours ago, GoAU said:

Ahh the completely objective, non partisan Jan 6 hearing - got it.   You just keep gobbling up that Dem party propaganda.  It was so overwhelming that it produced how many indictments?  Are you really so naive as to think the 3 years of "investigations", impeachments and trials had "no effect on anything?  Are you saying that intentionally creating false information to remove elected officials is all good?  As long as the ends justifies your intended means, right?  But be careful, as that can have unintended consequences

Well, the committee was bipartisan and virtually all of the people providing the incriminating - and corroborated -  testimony regarding Trump's behavior were Republican members of Trump's own administration, who were there as it happened.

And just perhaps it's not some imaginary evil liberal cabal that is doing everything possible to thwart Trump.  Perhaps Trump gets in investigatory or impeachment trouble because he's reckless, has contempt for our laws and thinks he can get away with anything he wants to do. 

But like I said, you keep your head up your ass.  You're obviously more comfortable there instead of confronting reality staring you in the face.

Edited August 21, 2022 by homersapien

[AU9377 4,914]

On 8/19/2022 at 5:06 AM, GoAU said:

Maybe they just liked the other candidate better?

Yes.......playing pretend can accomplish even that.  The other candidate ran on one theme and that was that the 2020 election was stolen.  That is running a campaign on a blatant lie.

[AU9377 4,914]

14 hours ago, GoAU said:

Ahh the completely objective, non partisan Jan 6 hearing - got it.   You just keep gobbling up that Dem party propaganda.  It was so overwhelming that it produced how many indictments?  Are you really so naive as to think the 3 years of "investigations", impeachments and trials had "no effect on anything?  Are you saying that intentionally creating false information to remove elected officials is all good?  As long as the ends justifies your intended means, right?  But be careful, as that can have unintended consequences

 

 

How do you explain every individual from the Trump administration that under oath gave so much damning testimony?  Do they all of a sudden have it out for Trump?  Why would they?  What is their motivation to risk their political futures?

Any other President in the history of this country would have been removed from office for much less.  The same party that wanted to impeach and remove Bill Clinton from office over an affair with an intern is willing to keep in power a man that abuses the power of the office for his own political gain, while enlisting the aid of foreign governments to slander his political rivals.  When each of his hand selected AGs refused to personally do his bidding, his only option was to use the resources on hand (military aid and financial assistance) to bribe others to do his bidding. Bill Barr finally agreed to appoint an independent counsel.  Now, millions of wasted dollars later, we see that there really is no there there.

[GoAU 1,599]

5 hours ago, homersapien said:

Well, the committee was bipartisan and virtually all of the people providing the incriminating - and corroborated -  testimony regarding Trump's behavior were Republican members of Trump's own administration, who were there.

And just perhaps it's not some imaginary evil liberal cabal that is doing everything possible to thwart Trump.  Perhaps Trump gets in investigatory or impeachment trouble because he's reckless, has contempt for our laws and thinks he can get away with anything he wants to do. 

But like I said, you keep your head up your ass.  You're obviously more comfortable there instead of confronting reality staring you in the face.

You make me laugh.  You’re such a pompous ass.  

[homersapien 11,354]

7 minutes ago, GoAU said:

You make me laugh.  You’re such a pompous ass.  

Thank you!  

(You've still got your head up your ass regarding Jan. 6)

[AU9377 4,914]

On 8/19/2022 at 5:42 PM, GoAU said:

January 6th was a protest that had a huge group of people make very poor choices (mob mentality) and violated the law.  They deserve to be punished for this as well.   However, “insurrection” is a ridiculously overplayed Democrat marketing ploy.  To think that that group of people was going to overthrow the US government (without a single firearm) is lunacy.  
 

if you want to say that they were trying to undue a lawful election (which I have heard a lot of people claim, but I am not trying to put words in your mouth), then I would contend that the creation of the Steele dossier to try and have a sitting President impeached and removed from office is an even bigger example of insurrection and we need to begin prosecution as well.  

Impeachment is a legislative function.  By its very definition, it is not insurrection. Impeachment follows a process set out in the Constitution of the United States.  The Jan. 6th crowd was attempting to disregard that same constitution and gain power by other means.

[GoAU 1,599]

11 hours ago, AU9377 said:

Impeachment is a legislative function.  By its very definition, it is not insurrection. Impeachment follows a process set out in the Constitution of the United States.  The Jan. 6th crowd was attempting to disregard that same constitution and gain power by other means.

I didn’t say the impeachment process was the issue.  I said the fabrication of the dossier and other false narratives to put that process into play was the issue.   

[homersapien 11,354]

10 hours ago, GoAU said:

I didn’t say the impeachment process was the issue.  I said the fabrication of the dossier and other false narratives to put that process into play was the issue.   

This is BS.

The Steele dossier did not "put that process into play".  

It's affect and significance in the Russia investigation process has been overblown by Republicans in their attempt to obfuscate and distort the actual findings of Mueller's investigation as well as the Senate bi-partisan investigation:

The ‘dossier’ and the Russia probes

To a large extent, the dossier has been a side show to the main event — clear evidence of the Russian government’s efforts to intervene in the 2016 election on the side of Donald Trump. A bipartisan report by the Senate Intelligence Committee in 2020 confirmed the initial intelligence community finding. (See "Russian Collusion with Trump Campaign" thread in this forum.)

Moreover, the FBI opened its investigation into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government not because of the dossier, but because of a tip from an Australian diplomat that a Trump campaign adviser, George Papadopoulos, had disclosed that Russia had obtained damaging information on Hillary Clinton. “This information provided the FBI with an articulable factual basis that, if true, reasonably indicated activity constituting either a federal crime or a threat to national security, or both, may have occurred or may be occurring,” concluded a 2019 Justice Department inspector general report.

The report by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III also largely ignored the dossier. He could not find evidence of a conspiracy between Trump and the Kremlin, but he concluded the campaign was opportunistic about apparent assistance from Russia.

For instance, when given a chance to obtain “dirt” on Clinton from a person they were told represented the Russian government, top campaign aides, including Donald Trump Jr., eagerly gathered to collect it — though it turned out to be nothing of importance.

Mueller’s investigation, moreover, determined that the hacking of the Democratic National Committee was directed by the Kremlin in an effort to help Trump’s campaign — further evidence of Russia’s covert backing of Trump.

But the Steele dossier has loomed large in the public imagination, in part because of media coverage of salacious elements, such as an alleged incident involving Trump and sex workers in a Moscow hotel room. Then-FBI Director James B. Comey on Jan. 7, 2017, privately briefed Trump on the Moscow hotel reference in the dossier, a discussion that quickly leaked.

BuzzFeed’s subsequent publication of the entire document brought what was presented as raw intelligence into the open. The dossier was eagerly described on cable news shows and referenced by Democrats in congressional hearings. The fact that the dossier’s funding was traced to the Clinton campaign — and that Steele had actively pitched the findings to news reporters — gave Trump and his defenders an opening to try to discredit the Russia-related investigations as partisan-inspired witch hunts."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/11/17/steele-dossier-guide-latest-allegations/

Sure, you can argue that Democrats and the media hyped it (which certainly backfired on the Democrats politically.)  But you cannot honestly or accurately claim "it put the whole process into play". 

Nor can you honestly argue that it being discredited proves the Trump campaign were not eagerly collaborating with Russian efforts to hurt Clinton and help Trump.  They were.

Edited August 22, 2022 by homersapien

[GoAU 1,599]

Pure deflection.  The fabrication of the dossier and all of the other BS tales that the Democrats spun for 3 years that turned out to be garbage had a very clear intent, and absolutely no accountability. 
 

Quit with the “bait and switch” and address the issue at hand.   Its ironic that the same party that tried to install a Ministry of Truth commits the most affronts against it.  

[homersapien 11,354]

20 hours ago, GoAU said:

Pure deflection.  The fabrication of the dossier and all of the other BS tales that the Democrats spun for 3 years that turned out to be garbage had a very clear intent, and absolutely no accountability. 
 

Quit with the “bait and switch” and address the issue at hand.   Its ironic that the same party that tried to install a Ministry of Truth commits the most affronts against it.  

That was no deflection.  It was a fact-based rebuttal - with referenced statements - that directly debunked your BS statement that the Steele dossier "put into play" the Mueller investigation.  It was an extraneous sideshow that had no impact on Mueller's investigation. 

You are a hopeless cultist swallowing the party line as given to you.

Edited August 23, 2022 by homersapien

[GoAU 1,599]

Being called hopeless by a liberal is a compliment - thanks!

[homersapien 11,354]

4 hours ago, GoAU said:

Being called hopeless by a liberal is a compliment - thanks!

Don't mention it. 

It costs me nothing to satisfy your need for compliments. 

[Didba 5,256]

On 8/22/2022 at 7:15 PM, GoAU said:

Pure deflection.  The fabrication of the dossier and all of the other BS tales that the Democrats spun for 3 years that turned out to be garbage had a very clear intent, and absolutely no accountability. 
 

Quit with the “bait and switch” and address the issue at hand.   Its ironic that the same party that tried to install a Ministry of Truth commits the most affronts against it.  

Please provide a credible source where the democrats tried to install a “ministry of truth”. 

[CoffeeTiger 5,084]

1 minute ago, Didba said:

Please provide a credible source where the democrats tried to install a “ministry of truth”. 

He's just talking about the 'Disinformation Governance Board' Biden considered creating awhile back to combat online disinformation used to propagate human trafficking at the southern border and election security. 

Republicans made a big stink because everything they personally believe relies on false information and made up facts so they were naturally worried the board would eventually come after them. Biden smartly dissolved it after all the firestorm from the Right. 

[Didba 5,256]

1 minute ago, CoffeeTiger said:

He's just talking about the 'Disinformation Governance Board' Biden considered creating awhile back to combat online disinformation used to propagate human trafficking at the southern border and election security. 

Republicans made a big stink because everything they personally believe relies on false information and made up facts so they were naturally worried the board would eventually come after them. Biden smartly dissolved it after all the firestorm from the Right. 

Biden also probably smartly dissolved it after his legal counsel told him “yeah, this could result in some free speech violations so how about we just nip this in the bud and leave the censorship to private actors who are not restricted by the first amendment? Good talk Joe.”

[GoAU 1,599]

8 hours ago, Didba said:

Please provide a credible source where the democrats tried to install a “ministry of truth”. 

You serious??? Just wanted to be sure you weren’t out of the country or something…

[Didba 5,256]

2 hours ago, GoAU said:

You serious??? Just wanted to be sure you weren’t out of the country or something…

Could you just answer the question for once?
 

You know I don’t do main stream media on either side so if it was a talking point for the entertainment news networks I’m not gonna see it.