daz28

What we are discussing here is the 14th Amendment, Section 3, not a codified US law. They are two completely different things. If you don't believe me, then ask the guy who got arrested for having a handgun even after he showed the officer, the prosecutor, and the judge the 2nd Amendment. I know there's a lot of people who still want to claim that an insurrection never happened, but those with their eyes and dictionaries open disagree. If you absolutely require a legal statute, I already gave you seditious conspiracy, which clearly overlaps with insurrection. Here's the actual charge: The particular charge against these defendants is that two or more of them knowingly conspired to use violence to prevent or hinder the execution of federal law-Again, only a blind person watched the videos, and didn't see any "violence to prevent or hinder the execution of federal law". I'm not claiming Mike Johnson committed any crimes, I'm claiming he violated the Constitution, which would bar him from holding office. I'd also note that the penal code you listed is actually undefined. If you'd like another chance to show the actual defined statute, I'd love to see it.

I'm not going to run in circles with you, but I'll try one more time. I haven't seen anything anywhere stating that the DOJ/FBI has identified everyone that was involved, and neither has Mike Johnson, which is why he's blurring the faces. What you're saying about the FBI having access is irrelevant to what MJ did or is doing. He LITERALLY said he's doing it to protect people who haven't YET BEEN IDENTIFIED, and charged. Hmmm, do you think maybe they could if the tapes were public, and someone watching recognized someone who's face wasn't blurred out??? I'm pretty sure Mike Johnson and the rest of the sane people that don't make silly arguments do, too.

I call it the Jamal Khashoggi fund, but in case you missed it he got a $2B investment from the murdering Saudi family. Just so you can't be coy about the appearance this has, I'll leave you a quote: "The Committee is concerned by your decision to solicit billions of dollars from the Saudi government immediately following your significant involvement in shaping U.S.-Saudi relations," Maloney said, adding that Kushner's close relationship with the crown prince as well as his pro-Saudi positions during the Trump administration and the Saudi government's funding "create the appearance of a quid pro quo for your foreign policy work during the Trump Administration." He already answered in a post to me that it would not. Also, the Republicans did promise to provide a transcript of the closed-door hearings, which does provide some transparency(as long as it doesn't look like the Mueller report). I think they realize reading isn't big with the cult, so they could pick and choose their talking points, and the zombies would run with it, whereas if it were live, they'd watch the whole thing and order pizza. ...and yes, the hypocrisy is pure gold.

No, I'm not suggesting anything. I'm clearly saying and repeating exactly what Mike Johnson himself said, that he's waiting to release the tapes until after he can conceal the faces, so that the public watching the videos can't identify and report to the DOJ the people that the FBI has been unable to identify/locate.

He is concealing the identity of people who were alongside the people who have already been convicted of seditious conspiracy for the sole purpose of evading justice. I would imagine any attempt to keep them free/hidden would include comfort, not just simply hiding them in your basement/attic.

If your basing that on the emails from Schwerin, I'd hold off on that, because Fox is portraying him as Hunter's business partner/financier, but from what I've read Joe has known him for over 20 years, and also has had his own dealing with him. The timing of the emails is suspicious, but the information surrounding that is still also unknown. I'll definitely have the popcorn out, although it is bittersweet, because I have little hope that even if proven it won't curb the corruption in DC. Maybe Joe should have put Hunter's wife in charge of the Middle East, instead. I'm sure billions of dollars in influence weren't sold there, and if they were it was done in the open so as not to arouse any suspicions. Besides, why would an energy company have any interest in hiring lawyers?? 😉

It's not shaming, it's pointing out he's out of his league. Just like they'd have no chance with him in a matter concerning irrigation. Heck, I'll admit I'd make a lousy prosecutor/investigator, because I know nothing about it, and that's hard to do as an American, because 30 minutes of YouTube usually counts as an expert. Also, I'm pretty much only discussing the money laundering/bribery part, not the income tax/gun matters, which I think Hunter pretty much already admitted to, and can/will plead the 5th to. I think if you polled the people, you'd get a very high percentage wanting a public hearing, because it gives the appearance of transparency, which we rarely get. If he's not forthcoming, ie he lies, then he faces perjury. Something that he, unlike 5 House GOP Reps, doesn't appear to be afraid of.

Which means nothing if you don't understand the reasons why. Even the DOJ and the Republican committee aren't as sure as you what happened, and I'm certain they have 100k times the info/data you have. You're simply playing the role of the TBD Elise Stefanik wannabe, and I have zero interest in being the counter to that. If you want me to say there's smoke, then ok, there's smoke. I'm interested where the allegations go, and rather than it be a gotcha moment for me, I'd look at it sadly as another sad moment for my country. I'd be willing to bet a property deed that there's smoke ALL OVER Washington, and I wouldn't want any of 'my side' protected. To me, the absolute saddest part of it all is that the only smoke you're ever going to hear about is smoke from the side who's currently not in power. Well, what may be sadder is that this partisanship is escalating, and is dividing us as a nation.

I want the truth as much as any democrat hating person does. I'm no shill for anyone, and that's what makes me stay away from, for the most part, a very clearly polarized forum. I'm not convinced the Trump/Mueller investigation was handled properly, and I'm even less optimistic this will be. Also, defying subpoenas to conceal "the truth" seems to be the norm, with no repercussions depending on who now holds the gavel. A VERY CLEAR indications of politics and not "truth".

Yeah, the committee that grandstands EVERY SINGLE DAY, now doesn't want grandstanding. Explain how the hearing being public would conceal "the truth", because I can explain very quickly why a behind closed doors hearing could conceal it. Could it be a guy with a BS in agriculture doesn't want to be made to look the fool talking to actual lawyers???

I'm curious to know, and unlike your like-minded board members, I'm also curious to know if it's indeed a fact, and why I haven't been provided any substantial facts to support those ALLEGATIONS(that I don't simply wish were true). Just so you're aware, dividing people into groups is PRECISELY what 'they' want you to be doing so diligently. I'm also curious if you have any comments based around my actual post, and not just this ad hoc attempt to try to label me. You know, like maybe if you think this is political??

Can you imagine those unqualified clowns, who've been smearing Hunter(the crackhead) for years, being completely owned by him(a lawyer), and his legal team? I can, and I think they can imagine it, too. Anyone who objectively watched it would conclude that the crackhead should probably have their jobs. There's a reason why people rarely testify on their own behalf, and that's because they know the lawyers are smarter and better at the game. This is literally the same thing, but in reverse. If Comer had real evidence, there would be a comprehensive list of it all over his social media pages, but for some strange reason(hmmm), they like to instead make allegations across select media sources. It's almost like this is, gasp, purely political.

So the answer to the million dollar question of why this shouldn't be done in public for all Americans to see is because Democrats did it the wrong way before??? ....or GOP Reps. Jim Jordan of Ohio, Scott Perry of Pennsylvania, Andy Biggs of Arizona, Mo Brooks of Alabama, and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy him???

This has already been covered. There are security concerns, much akin to why we don't give guided tours of Fort Knox. So let's again ask why their faces are being concealed, and the answer was already plainly and clearly cited, "to protect them(the insurrectionist) from the DOJ". This poses a new question for those who actually read and follow the Constitution, does this disqualify Mike Johnson(et al involved). Section 3 Disqualification from Holding Office: No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or GIVEN AID OR COMFORT to the enemies thereof. If you have no argument against this, a simple laughing emoji will suffice.

He questioned the election 2 years BEFORE the election. It was the plan ALL ALONG, and anyone would have to be a fool to not see that. They also KNEW that the Pence/Fake elector plot was BS, but they tried it anyways: “Respectfully, it was gravely, gravely irresponsible for you to entice the President with an academic theory that had no legal viability, and that you well know we would lose before any judge who heard and decided the case. And if the courts declined to hear it, I suppose it could only be decided in the streets. The knowing amplification of that theory through numerous surrogates, whipping large numbers of people into a frenzy over something with no chance of ever attaining legal force through actual process of law, has led us to where we are.”

Do you or Mr. Benson Johnson know what the definition of colluding is?? Ironically, he uses the correct word, "coordination" afterward. If anyone needs a brush up on what collusion means, they can simply google, 'Manafort' or 'Flynn'.

He LITERALLY says, "to not be charged by the DOJ", so even if your 'theory' is correct, that's not what his public statement said. This is as clear a case of obstruction of justice as could possibly be presented, and claiming that the DOJ has other copies doesn't matter, because his intent is CLEAR. Also, why does his doctrine of "Let the American people see, and make up their own minds" not apply to Hunter Biden testifying publicly???

I thought you could only spike the ball in the endzone?

The one thing we don't want is the Ravens to be resting everyone vs the Dolphins. We need that to be an important game for them.

That's why the chicken little is overblown. if the D was bad, I'd be throwing in the hat, too. The McD stuff is a little overblown, because tonight was mostly execution, and other than practice plays, he can't do anything about that on gameday, especially on offense.

ESPN was supposed to go to it, and they never did. WTH

It was Trevon, and he added some dumb emoji's. If he wants to eat the cap hit, and give us a couple first rounders, then ok. otherwise he can sthu

Sean, Von's toast, why keep putting him out there when you have AJ, Groot, and his buddy from LA: "we'll trust the process, he's working his way back instead of resting the injury.'

McD on the podium after this commercial. This should be interesting. I'm sure we won't hear anything about the process, which is likely now over.

Ed Oliver. The only real positive.