The never-ending POTUS Election thread....

[Creeper]

Apparently Mr Potato Head went on national TV via 60 minutes last night and embarrassed the shit out of himself again.

I heard some of his responses. Next to the word "jackass" in the dictionary, is a picture of Joe Biden.

His answers to the question about inflation explain everything about this turd. First, inflation is up 8.2% over last year. But in actuality some staples are up much more. I paid $6.29 for a pound of butter yesterday. 18 months ago I was paying about $4.40. Eggs are up almost 100% over 18 months ago. Rents are up well over 25%. The things we need to live our lives as we did before this dolt was elected have increased in price well more than the 8.2% reflected in the governments BS inflation numbers. Gas alone is still up more than 50% over what it was 18 months ago, and while down from 120% the fact is Biden is dumping oil from the strategic oil reserve on the global markets draining the reserve to lower prices. At some point the reserve will be depleted and that dumping will stop. Prices will go up again. But it gets worse, Biden will have to divert oil from US supplies back into the SOR to refill it. That will cause further shortages and higher prices. We are going to be clobbered by oil prices in about 6-10 months. What Biden is doing is irresponsible. He is putting the nation's energy supply at risk to avoid an embarrassing defeat at the polls in November.

He is a simple fact. Prices will never go down to what they once were until Biden's policies on reversed. We will pay $6 for butter, and $4.50 for eggs until our government stops screwing with the economy for their political agenda.

 

[Doomsday]

this dolt was elected

 

[dbair1967]

. The things we need to live our lives as we did before this dolt was elected

Define "elected"

 

[yimyammer]

can anyone answer this question:

were witnesses sworn in and under penalty of perjury or any other legal repercussions for not being truthful?

I've tried to google but no luck, I didnt watch because the whole thing struck me as political theater

 

[Doomsday]

can anyone answer this question:

were witnesses sworn in and under penalty of perjury or any other legal repercussions for not being truthful?

I've tried to google but no luck, I didnt watch because the whole thing struck me as political theater

If you lie to Congress it's a major felony period. No need to be sworn in. Same with lying to an FBI agent.

On paper this hearing was simply oversight, with possibility of the committee referring people to the justice department for prosecution. In practice it's just political theater, with likelihood of the committee referring people to the justice department for prosecution.

 

[Doomsday]

Pretty sure it falls under 18 USC, 1001 of federal law.

 

[yimyammer]

thanks

did you watch the whole thing?

Is this basically a democratic version of the Ken Starr hearings?

I watch some of it but found it annoying and too time consuming

My girlfriend is all fired up about it being an "insurrection" and I vehemently oppose that assertion not because I give 2 shits about the yahoos running around like idiots on that day but because I saw so much damage across the country during the riots and protests, police stations fire bombed, businesses burned, an entire section of Seattle occupied by the CHAZ/CHAD idiots and everyone just whistled past the grave yard on all the above but the moment someone does something in DC in one of the government buildings (& its politically expedient to be outraged) then its an insurrection, etc....it just doesnt strike me as an honest assessment of what we've seen happen over the last couple of years

Plus, it seems to me that if the evidence was so strong that Trump plotted the so called insurrection, then they would indict and prosecute. The fact that they havent underscores my believe the so called Jan 6th hearings are mere political theater

 

[dbair1967]

with likelihood of the committee referring people to the justice department for prosecution.

said dept of justice is just extension of Commy regime "committee"

 

[Doomsday]

Is this basically a democratic version of the Ken Starr hearings?

Ken Starr was a special prosecutor appointed BY Billy Clinton. Unlike what you're seeing here, there was no political witch hunt going on. Starr was diligent and went where the facts and the evidence took him.

 

[yimyammer]

Ken Starr was a special prosecutor appointed BY Billy Clinton. Unlike what you're seeing here, there was no political witch hunt going on. Starr was diligent and went where the facts and the evidence took him.

but is it the same forum being used in that its not a trial but whatever we call these things?

 

[Doomsday]

but is it the same forum being used in that its not a trial but whatever we call these things?

It wasn't the same forum. Starr was leading the grand jury, not Congress knuckleheads.

 

[yimyammer]

would it be accurate to say " there was no cross examination & one side got to select all the “witnesses” and questions which isnt due process and undermines the case trying to be made"

 

[yimyammer]

It wasn't the same forum. Starr was leading the grand jury, not Congress knuckleheads.

ahh, so they actually took the case to the grand jury and thats what was televised? Did they not indict?

If so, thats a big difference.

Obviously I dont pay close attention to this stuff because policies and our government drive me nuts and I feel completely helpless to effect any change

 

[Doomsday]

would it be accurate to say " there was no cross examination & one side got to select all the “witnesses” and questions which isnt due process and undermines the case trying to be made"

For congressional oversight hearings AND grand jury investigations, yep!

But, neither can find guilt or otherwise adjudicate in any way. That's for the courtroom only.

 

[Doomsday]

ahh, so they actually took the case to the grand jury and thats what was televised? Did they not indict?

Hell yeah there were indictments!

 

[Dodger12]

thanks

did you watch the whole thing?

Is this basically a democratic version of the Ken Starr hearings?

I watch some of it but found it annoying and too time consuming

My girlfriend is all fired up about it being an "insurrection" and I vehemently oppose that assertion not because I give 2 shits about the yahoos running around like idiots on that day but because I saw so much damage across the country during the riots and protests, police stations fire bombed, businesses burned, an entire section of Seattle occupied by the CHAZ/CHAD idiots and everyone just whistled past the grave yard on all the above but the moment someone does something in DC in one of the government buildings (& its politically expedient to be outraged) then its an insurrection, etc....it just doesnt strike me as an honest assessment of what we've seen happen over the last couple of years

Plus, it seems to me that if the evidence was so strong that Trump plotted the so called insurrection, then they would indict and prosecute. The fact that they havent underscores my believe the so called Jan 6th hearings are mere political theater

How does anyone plot and then try to commit an insurrection without any guns? I mean, there might be more guns per capita than anywhere in the world and most of those guns are (probably) owned by 2A conservatives like the ones in Washington on January 6th. Yet they didn't bring them to the insurrection?

 

[yimyammer]

How does anyone plot and then try to commit an insurrection without any guns? I mean, there might be more guns per capita than anywhere in the world and most of those guns are (probably) owned by 2A conservatives like the ones in Washington on January 6th. Yet they didn't bring them to the insurrection?

I agree but the people that believe it was an insurrection whip out this definition:

"a violent uprising against an authority or government."

and refer to the violence that occurred on that day which seemed to be rather minor skirmishes with capital police plus they claim they did have guns but as far as I can tell no one was protected for having a gun. I heard something about someone planting bomb materials but have had no time to kill researching the veracity of this claim

Plus, if a group wanted to overthrow the US Government, would it ever be successful attacking the Capital Building? You'd think an insurrection would set its eyes on military assets and locations but what do I know?

 

[Dodger12]

"a violent uprising against an authority or government."

Were there some folks who got violent? No doubt. But there were way many more peaceful protestors exercising their right to protest and freedom of assembly. Did they burn the Capitol down like the left did to American cities? Did they kill anyone? The protestors outnumbered the police hundreds to one. Congress went back to business later that day.

And I'm not saying that people that were violent shouldn't have been arrested. But they arrested people for just being near the Capitol. It's a complete set up the left used to fit their narrative, all at the expense of honest Americans who have been mischaracterized and labeled as terrorists so the left can cover up the election fraud and scare and deter Americans from ever talking about it or protesting it.

That's why Republican politicians suck. The left (VP Harris) bails them out after burning cities to the ground and told people the riots would continue. The right just fall in line. Fucking cowards.

 

[yimyammer]

Were there some folks who got violent? No doubt. But there were way many more peaceful protestors exercising their right to protest and freedom of assembly. Did they burn the Capitol down like the left did to American cities? Did they kill anyone? The protestors outnumbered the police hundreds to one. Congress went back to business later that day.

And I'm not saying that people that were violent shouldn't have been arrested. But they arrested people for just being near the Capitol. It's a complete set up the left used to fit their narrative, all at the expense of honest Americans who have been mischaracterized and labeled as terrorists so the left can cover up the election fraud and scare and deter Americans from ever talking about it or protesting it.

That's why Republican politicians suck. The left (VP Harris) bails them out after burning cities to the ground and told people the riots would continue. The right just fall in line. Fucking cowards.

How do you feel about Trumps request to get Pence to reject electoral votes so Trump could win the election?

(I'm not sure if I phrased that correctly but whatever he wanted Pence to do so Trump would win the election)

 

[Dodger12]

How do you feel about Trumps request to get Pence to reject electoral votes so Trump could win the election?

(I'm not sure if I phrased that correctly but whatever he wanted Pence to do so Trump would win the election)

I guess the argument was do you accept electors if they're fraudulent. And PA and AZ legislatures sent a second set of electors which muddied the waters even further. Had Pence rejected the electoral votes, it very well could have thrown the country into further chaos. Having said that, questioning the election and electors isn't something new. It happens every election and Pence did what the other VP's did before him. But I'm not sure I've ever heard of states sending a second slate of electors.

To specifically answer your question....Pence was in a difficult predicament. The states needed to fix that shit before they certified the electors. I know they may not have had enough time to conduct an investigation but it still falls to the states. Pence had to certify what he was given.

But questioning the election is not against the law. There was massive fraud. The Dems have questioned every election they lost and no one threatened to put them in prison. Hillary claimed the election was stolen and called herself the "resistance." But everyone conveniently forgets.

In any event, if Trump runs again and IF he wins, I can see shit going bad.....real bad.