The January 6th Commission To Investigate The Insurrection

[BillStime]

 

[cle23]

13 minutes ago, DRsGhost said:

 

Attack the source. How predictable. 

 

You know what Julie Kelly serves as? The other side of the story about J6 that's verboten by a corrupt one sided partisan committee.

 

That ALONE makes her reporting based on actual videos, court documents etc. worth paying attention to. Actual primary source evidence aren't "conspiracy theories" unless you want to use it as an excuse to ignore it.

 

We all know the official version of J6 events, the question is whether you and others choose to consider evidence from the other side, or just keep swallowing committee spoonfed propaganda.

 

 

 

So you took the first point and ignored the rest.  And yes, when someone keeps using Kelly as the factual side of J6, and she is very clearly 100% full of crap, then yes, I will "attack the source."  How is that any different than you claiming everyone and everything related to J6 is corrupt on the other side?

 

Look, I am all for looking at things from multiple points of view.  Julie Kelly isn't that.  She is literally the exact same thing you claim the committee is, just on the opposite side of the political spectrum.  So constantly posting her crap and claiming it as fact doesn't help anything.

Edited July 22, 2022 by cle23

[BillsFanNC]

2 minutes ago, cle23 said:

 

So you took the first point and ignored the rest.

 

Look, I am all for looking at things from multiple points of view.  Julie Kelly isn't that.  She is literally the exact same thing you claim the committee is, just on the opposite side of the political spectrum.  So constantly posting her crap and claiming it as fact doesn't help anything.

 

No I didn't. I addressed Ashli Babbits cremation at the request of the DC medical examiner in another post.

 

And she may be exactly that, which is precisely why we have an adversarial justice system in this country, not political theater show trials.

Edited July 22, 2022 by DRsGhost

[cle23]

5 minutes ago, DRsGhost said:

 

DC medical examiner requested her body be cremated according to official documents. 

 

https://www.judicialwatch.org/just-the-news-babbitt/

 

The Washington D.C. Offices of the Chief Medical Examiner submitted a request to cremate Jan. 6 Capitol protester Ashli Babbitt two days after gaining custody of the body, according to documents obtained and released Tuesday by conservative watchdog Judicial Watch.

 

 

From your own article:

 

However, neither Judicial Watch nor the medical examiner’s officer could confirm Tuesday whether the entry meant the application or the cremation was successful.

 

So they are claiming she was cremated in 2 days, yet admit they don't know what the request actually meant. Her own mother said she was cremated according to her wishes.

[Tiberius]

7 minutes ago, Doc said:

Wait, what?

Actually she is still alive. Biden sent her off to Ukraine to infiltrate the Russian army 

[BillsFanNC]

Just now, cle23 said:

 

From your own article:

 

However, neither Judicial Watch nor the medical examiner’s officer could confirm Tuesday whether the entry meant the application or the cremation was successful.

 

So they are claiming she was cremated in 2 days, yet admit they don't know what the request actually meant. Her own mother said she was cremated according to her wishes.

 

It may have very well been her wishes, but it doesn't mean it was performed at her mother's request after she was murdered. The document shows that the DC medical examiner made the request.

[All_Pro_Bills]

1 hour ago, DRsGhost said:

 

What about the speech where he asked everyone to be peaceful and the two previous tweets where he asked for no violence and obey law enforcement?

 

Those were ineffective, and only the last one worked, right?

 

Otherwise this marauding band of unarmed tourists would have successfully finished the coup!

Note to self.  If you're planning an insurrection anytime soon make sure your plan has a chance of working.  Study past successful insurrection events around the world and in history.  More importantly study failures, like 1/6.  Identify the traits and resources necessary for success.  Learn what mistakes to avoid, how to be discreet and careful in preparation and planning.  You don't want to tip off anyone.  Make sure your assault team is not composed of a majority of people that are over 60 and out of shape with multiple health issues.  Like being over-weight.  Over-weight insurrectionists are slow and cannot carry a lot of weapons and ammunition.  They are easy targets for trained marksman and security officers.  And they get tired really fast and need to stop and rest frequently.  Take their phones away too.  That will remove the temptation to waste time by stopping to take a lot of selfies.  You need to do this fast and execution of the plan needs to be precise.  I'll say it again for emphasis and importance.  You need able bodied battle ready well-armed warriors to make this work.  This is the number one critical success factor.  No slow unarmed fat old guys stopping to rest and take pictures.  

 

Do dress rehearsals or if you prefer proof of concept attempts at an insurrection.  Start small, like attempting a takeover of your local DMV office.  Move on to bigger targets to gain some expertise, get a feel for things, and shake out your plan.  Now you're ready!   

Edited July 22, 2022 by All_Pro_Bills

[ALF]

The Capital and DC police knew the Trump rally Jan 6 could turn violent with weeks notice. They should have been ready in riot gear , gas masks and plenty of tear gas . Why they were not allowed to be ready is the question I have.

[cle23]

1 hour ago, DRsGhost said:

 

It may have very well been her wishes, but it doesn't mean it was performed at her mother's request after she was murdered. The document shows that the DC medical examiner made the request.

 

Enough with the "murder" crap too.  If you are in your home and I am coming into the broken door/window like Babbitt was, you wouldn't shoot?  Because I would.

[BillStime]

7 minutes ago, cle23 said:

 

Enough with the "murder" crap too.  If you are in your home and I am coming into the broken door/window like Babbitt was, you wouldn't shoot?  Because I would.

 

She was cremated at the family's request... don't let DR continue to push lies sourcing Judicial Watch, a known disinformation purveyor...

 

Ashli Babbitt Cremation Request - Truth or Fiction?

 

 

[ChiGoose]

13 minutes ago, BillStime said:

 

She was cremated at the family's request... don't let DR continue to push lies sourcing Judicial Watch, a known disinformation purveyor...

 

Ashli Babbitt Cremation Request - Truth or Fiction?

 

 

 

Like, what is the conspiracy here? We saw her get shot and killed, the officer said he shot her, what would they be covering up by cremating her?

 

Let me guess, she actually survived the shooting, but the gunshot wound revealed that she was one of the people that Bill Gates implanted a 5G chip in via a vaccine. If they let her out, it would reveal that (((Soros))) was using the chips to communicate with the Italian satellites to change votes in Dominion machines. So they called Hillary Clinton who came in and used spirit cooking to secretly kill Babbitt at the hospital. To cover all of this up, the medical examiner, who is on the (((Rothschild))) payroll, cremated the body and prevented Babbitt's family from discovering the truth. Then, to celebrate the completed mission, the deep state all got together at the basement of Comet Ping Pong to eat babies and fill in mail-in ballots.

Edited July 22, 2022 by ChiGoose
Something... something... Seth Rich

[SoCal Deek]

2 hours ago, ChiGoose said:

 

I normally don't feed the trolls, but I wanted to clarify this in case anyone thinks this is a good point.

 

For the purposes of this post alone, I will concede that Trump saying peacefully means he didn't incite anything and that this was all on the mob or the FBI or whatever.

 

We have video, from the rioters themselves, checking Trump's posts during the riot. At one point, he tweeted about the Capitol Police being good and that they shouldn't harm them. The reaction to this from one of the rioters was "well, he didn't say not to harm the members of Congress"

 

Then, later, when Trump finally releases the video calling for everyone to go home (after getting them to omit the word "yesterday" because it was too hard), the rioters see that and believe that they are being ordered by Trump to leave, so they do so.

 

 

Here is the video of the shooting:

https://www.nbcnews.com/video/capitol-shooting-that-led-to-ashli-babbitt-s-death-captured-on-video-99180613572

 

You can see the officer's gun on the left, and you can see Babbitt climbing through the door on the right.

 

The family would have *a* case, but I don't think it would be a slam dunk. They could definitely win it, but given the facts of the case and how cases about police shootings have gone, I would think the officer would be more likely to be acquitted than convicted.

I doubt it. This would come to a ‘standard of care’ case. The question would be what would another officer have done if/when faced with the same set of circumstances. And we know exactly what they would have done because there were dozens of other officers there who didn’t discharge their weapon even as a warning shot. I’m guessing the jury would find for the victim…and pretty darn quickly. Again none of this makes the victim right, but the officer is clearly guilty of negligence.

Edited July 22, 2022 by SoCal Deek

[yall]

24 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

 

Like, what is the conspiracy here? We saw her get shot and killed, the officer said he shot her, what would they be covering up by cremating her?

 

Let me guess, she actually survived the shooting, but the gunshot wound revealed that she was one of the people that Bill Gates implanted a 5G chip in via a vaccine. If they let her out, it would reveal that (((Soros))) was using the chips to communicate with the Italian satellites to change votes in Dominion machines. So they called Hillary Clinton who came in and used spirit cooking to secretly kill Babbitt at the hospital. To cover all of this up, the medical examiner, who is on the (((Rothschild))) payroll, cremated the body and prevented Babbitt's family from discovering the truth. Then, to celebrate the completed mission, the deep state all got together at the basement of Comet Ping Pong to eat babies and fill in mail-in ballots.

Obviously the autopsy would reveal her as a lizard person, imbedded amongst the true patriot protesters as an FBI plant.

 

It's right in front of your eyes if you cared to see.

 

#Sheeple

#PrisonPlanet

[ChiGoose]

16 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

I doubt it. This would come to a ‘standard of care’ case. The question would be what would another officer have done if/when faced with the same set of circumstances. And we know exactly what they would have done because there were dozens of other officers there who didn’t discharge their weapon even as a warning shot. I’m guessing the jury would find for the victim…and pretty darn quickly. Again none of this makes the victim right, but the officer is clearly guilty of negligence.

 

I found this discussion on the shooting by two law professors and a former deputy police chief. 

 

They seem to believe there are doubts about if the cop acted properly but ultimately conclude that a lawsuit would likely be unsuccessful. I recommend the whole article, but here is their summary:

 

Quote

The limited public information that exists raises serious questions about the propriety of Byrd’s decision to shoot, especially with regard to the assessment that Babbitt was an imminent threat. To belabor the obvious, though, we cannot definitively analyze a situation without the relevant facts, and there is a frustrating shortage of facts. But there are enough facts to conclude that even if Byrd violated Babbitt’s Fourth Amendment rights, it is highly unlikely that he could be ethically charged with, let alone convicted of, a crime.

 

[Gene Frenkle]

3 hours ago, Westside said:

Ahhhh……the lemming speaks. Go back to the cult of the Democratic Party.

 

It took you more than a week to come up with that response?

2 hours ago, DRsGhost said:

 

Attack the source. How predictable. 

 

You know what Julie Kelly serves as? The other side of the story about J6 that's verboten by a corrupt one sided partisan committee.

 

That ALONE makes her reporting based on actual videos, court documents etc. worth paying attention to. Actual primary source evidence aren't "conspiracy theories" unless you want to use it as an excuse to ignore it.

 

We all know the official version of J6 events, the question is whether you and others choose to consider evidence from the other side, or just keep swallowing committee spoonfed propaganda.

 

 

 

Julie Kelly - cOnSpIrAcY HERO!

[SoCal Deek]

14 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

 

I found this discussion on the shooting by two law professors and a former deputy police chief. 

 

They seem to believe there are doubts about if the cop acted properly but ultimately conclude that a lawsuit would likely be unsuccessful. I recommend the whole article, but here is their summary:

 

 

Well that’s what the trial would determine. Unfortunately there won’t be one. And that’s my problem with the entirety of the Select Committee. They’re akin to a Grand Jury (as Tbs correctly cited a few weeks ago) but they’re doing it in public, which is a terrible miscarriage of our legal system, regardless of party or affiliation. 

[ChiGoose]

3 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Well that’s what the trial would determine. Unfortunately there won’t be one. And that’s my problem with the entirety of the Select Committee. They’re akin to a Grand Jury (as Tbs correctly cited a few weeks ago) but they’re doing it in public, which is a terrible miscarriage of our legal system, regardless of party or affiliation. 

 

I would disagree with Tbs on that. It's not a judicial hearing or a grand jury. It's a congressional hearing. Nobody's rights have been violated and the committee doesn't have the power to punish anyone.

[SoCal Deek]

Just now, ChiGoose said:

 

I would disagree with Tbs on that. It's not a judicial hearing or a grand jury. It's a congressional hearing. Nobody's rights have been violated and the committee doesn't have the power to punish anyone.

I didn’t say it was a Grand Jury! Ugh! The problem is that there isn’t a defense, legitimate questioning, or even balanced inquiry. This is NOT a hearing of anything! It’s become a presentation. There’s a HUGE difference. This is essentially a smear campaign being played out on national television at taxpayers expense. You really don’t see how wrong this is? Really? 

[BillsFanNC]

10 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

I didn’t say it was a Grand Jury! Ugh! The problem is that there isn’t a defense, legitimate questioning, or even balanced inquiry. This is NOT a hearing of anything! It’s become a presentation. There’s a HUGE difference. This is essentially a smear campaign being played out on national television at taxpayers expense. You really don’t see how wrong this is? Really? 

 

He'll never hear you. 

 

The investigation found....

 

and testimony under oath...

 

Are the fallback time and again.

 

He's swallowed the clown show load whole and with religious zeal.

[SoCal Deek]

Just now, DRsGhost said:

 

He'll never hear you. 

 

The investigation found....

 

and testimony under oath...

 

Are the fallback time and again.

 

He's swallowed the clown show load whole and with religious zeal.

If this is only a ‘hearing’ and not a court proceeding then what the whole ‘under oath’ thing about? I gave a public presentation in a public hearing just last night, and it wasn’t ‘under oath’. (I was truthful none the less. 😉) 

[BillsFanNC]

1 hour ago, cle23 said:

 

Enough with the "murder" crap too.  If you are in your home and I am coming into the broken door/window like Babbitt was, you wouldn't shoot?  Because I would.

 

Nah, I think I'll keep it as a murder.  Until your ilk ceases with calling your fellow American citizens, many of whom were allowed in by police, to take ill advised sojourns inside the velvet ropes at the Capitol on J6 as "insurrectionists" and "domestic terrorists" you can take your language policing and shove it you know where.

 

To answer your hypothetical, if an unarmed 100 lb women was breeching my front window in broad daylight and I had a gun, then yes I'd point it at her and tell her to leave or I'll shoot.  If she proceeded to enter my home anyway then I'd subdue said 100 lb. woman with non lethal force in short order.  But that's just me.

[BillStime]

42 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

 

Like, what is the conspiracy here? We saw her get shot and killed, the officer said he shot her, what would they be covering up by cremating her?

 

Let me guess, she actually survived the shooting, but the gunshot wound revealed that she was one of the people that Bill Gates implanted a 5G chip in via a vaccine. If they let her out, it would reveal that (((Soros))) was using the chips to communicate with the Italian satellites to change votes in Dominion machines. So they called Hillary Clinton who came in and used spirit cooking to secretly kill Babbitt at the hospital. To cover all of this up, the medical examiner, who is on the (((Rothschild))) payroll, cremated the body and prevented Babbitt's family from discovering the truth. Then, to celebrate the completed mission, the deep state all got together at the basement of Comet Ping Pong to eat babies and fill in mail-in ballots.

Desperate to keep the cult engaged and enraged.

 

It amazes me after all these years of disappointment - they continue to line right up for more fake news.

[ChiGoose]

35 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

I didn’t say it was a Grand Jury! Ugh! The problem is that there isn’t a defense, legitimate questioning, or even balanced inquiry. This is NOT a hearing of anything! It’s become a presentation. There’s a HUGE difference. This is essentially a smear campaign being played out on national television at taxpayers expense. You really don’t see how wrong this is? Really? 

 

A congressional committee did a month's long investigation into the attempt to overturn the election. As the investigation wound down, they wanted to present their findings to the public so they held public hearings of some of the witnesses and testimony. Since this is not a trial or a judicial proceeding, and since the committee members seem to generally agree on the findings, what they show is what the committee believes is the most important information for the public to know.

 

That does not make it illegitimate in any sense. The "other side" people keep bringing up isn't Republicans, it's people who refuse to testify. They interviewed basically everyone in the Trump White House, Campaign, and even DoJ. Those people were free to give testimony (as most did) or plead the fifth the whole time (as people like John Eastman did).

 

Often, a committee will present a majority report and a minority report. It does not appear that this committee will do that, at least for the factual findings. I suspect there will be disagreement when it comes to legislative recommendations. I wonder if McCarthy hadn't withdrawn his nominees if we would have a minority report but we'll never know because McCarthy is a moron.

 

It does sound like they've been sent more evidence since the hearings started, so they may hold more hearings down the line, but we should be getting a final report in the coming months, as well as transcripts of the testimony. They did mention that they might amend the final report after issuing it if new evidence comes to light.

[SoCal Deek]

11 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

 

A congressional committee did a month's long investigation into the attempt to overturn the election. As the investigation wound down, they wanted to present their findings to the public so they held public hearings of some of the witnesses and testimony. Since this is not a trial or a judicial proceeding, and since the committee members seem to generally agree on the findings, what they show is what the committee believes is the most important information for the public to know.

 

That does not make it illegitimate in any sense. The "other side" people keep bringing up isn't Republicans, it's people who refuse to testify. They interviewed basically everyone in the Trump White House, Campaign, and even DoJ. Those people were free to give testimony (as most did) or plead the fifth the whole time (as people like John Eastman did).

 

Often, a committee will present a majority report and a minority report. It does not appear that this committee will do that, at least for the factual findings. I suspect there will be disagreement when it comes to legislative recommendations. I wonder if McCarthy hadn't withdrawn his nominees if we would have a minority report but we'll never know because McCarthy is a moron.

 

It does sound like they've been sent more evidence since the hearings started, so they may hold more hearings down the line, but we should be getting a final report in the coming months, as well as transcripts of the testimony. They did mention that they might amend the final report after issuing it if new evidence comes to light.

Well that answered my question. You obviously do not see how wrong this is. Thanks for having a calm and civil discussion. It’s appreciated.

[BillsFanNC]

46 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

If this is only a ‘hearing’ and not a court proceeding then what the whole ‘under oath’ thing about? I gave a public presentation in a public hearing just last night, and it wasn’t ‘under oath’. (I was truthful none the less. 😉) 

 

Well you see that the testimony already given, which the committee sees fit to share as they desire, has been under oath.  A little bit of this testimony under oath here, a little bit of that there, no not that testimony, and voila we have a presentation that gives us all that's required to reach a preconceived conclusion. 

 

I often wonder how well a research presentation of mine would go over if I said that I only included the data that supports my original hypothesis.  There was other data but I either expunged it or I can't be bothered to look at it. Therefore you can clearly see that my conclusions are supported by the data.  Now stop asking me questions about that missing data you conspiracy theorists!

[ChiGoose]

7 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Well that answered my question. You obviously do not see how wrong this is. Thanks for having a calm and civil discussion. It’s appreciated.

 

Frankly, it seems pretty normal from a congressional committee with three exceptions:

• Not doing questions as 5-minutes per member (this is a good thing. That format is stupid and counterproductive)
• The minority leader withdrawing his nominees
• Large public interest

I know a lot of liberals complained about the Benghazi hearings, but that was a similar select committee format (and Pelosi considered not sending any Dems but ended up appointing members). Every once in a while testimony from a random congressional hearing goes viral and we get to see C-SPAN clips of it.

 

Normally committee hearings like this are boring but given the topic at hand, there is large public interest, hence the coverage being on network news instead of just C-SPAN.

 

Ultimately, if your problem is that we don't have more than two Republicans on it or that it is just a House select committee and not a joint committee like the 9/11 committee, then you're problem is with GOP leadership, not the committee itself.

[Big Blitz]

2 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

 

 

Normally committee hearings like this are boring but given the topic at hand, there is large public interest, hence the coverage being on network news instead of just C-SPAN.

 

No there isn't.  

 

Unless you count the NYC-DC beltway media DNC machine's full blown TDS crowd as "large public interest."

 

[ChiGoose]

3 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:

 

No there isn't.  

 

Unless you count the NYC-DC beltway media DNC machine's full blown TDS crowd as "large public interest."

 

 

Nearly 6 in 10 Americans are following the hearings.

 

Did not realize that 60% of Americans live in the NYC-DC beltway. Guess you learn something every day.

[Big Blitz]

11 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

 

Nearly 6 in 10 Americans are following the hearings.

 

Did not realize that 60% of Americans live in the NYC-DC beltway. Guess you learn something every day.

 

 

Cool story.  I'm paying "some attention" also:

 

 

Nearly six in ten Americans (58%) are paying either a lot of attention (25%) basically Bill Stime and family, or some attention (33%) to the House January 6th hearings. Democrats (80%) are the most plugged into the testimony.

 

The hearings, though, have failed to punch through as a voting issue. Inflation (37%) is the number-one issue for registered voters as they think about November’s midterm elections. Abortion (18%), guns (10%), and health care (10%) follow. The January 6th Committee Hearings (9%), crime (6%), and immigration (6%) receive single digits. 

55% of independents and 44% of Republicans are also paying, at least, some attention to the hearings.

[BillStime]

1 hour ago, SoCal Deek said:

I didn’t say it was a Grand Jury! Ugh! The problem is that there isn’t a defense, legitimate questioning, or even balanced inquiry. This is NOT a hearing of anything! It’s become a presentation. There’s a HUGE difference. This is essentially a smear campaign being played out on national television at taxpayers expense. You really don’t see how wrong this is? Really? 

You’re still biching about this?

 

JFC - your cult voted against/blocked the creation of an independent commission.

 

YOU FREAKS HAD YOUR CHANCE.

[ChiGoose]

3 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:

 

 

Cool story.  I'm paying "some attention" also:

 

 

Nearly six in ten Americans (58%) are paying either a lot of attention (25%) basically Bill Stime and family, or some attention (33%) to the House January 6th hearings. Democrats (80%) are the most plugged into the testimony.

 

The hearings, though, have failed to punch through as a voting issue. Inflation (37%) is the number-one issue for registered voters as they think about November’s midterm elections. Abortion (18%), guns (10%), and health care (10%) follow. The January 6th Committee Hearings (9%), crime (6%), and immigration (6%) receive single digits. 

55% of independents and 44% of Republicans are also paying, at least, some attention to the hearings.

 

Man, @BillStime must have a huge family. 83 million people is a lot of mouths to feed...

[Big Blitz]

2 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

 

Man, @BillStime must have a huge family. 83 million people is a lot of mouths to feed...

 

 

Is it the only thing on Leftist TV News?

 

Then yes, by default people are following because it's being shoved down their throat - the only logical answer to this question is absolutely paying "some attention" or you look uninformed to the pollster.  

 

 

 

But no one cares.  That's the point.  See that tiny 9% number?   It's much much much less then that.  

[Doc]

3 hours ago, ALF said:

The Capital and DC police knew the Trump rally Jan 6 could turn violent with weeks notice. They should have been ready in riot gear , gas masks and plenty of tear gas . Why they were not allowed to be ready is the question I have.

 

"Defund the police!"

 

2 hours ago, cle23 said:

Enough with the "murder" crap too.  If you are in your home and I am coming into the broken door/window like Babbitt was, you wouldn't shoot?  Because I would.

 

And you'd be charged with murder.

 

6 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

Nearly 6 in 10 Americans are following the hearings.

 

Did not realize that 60% of Americans live in the NYC-DC beltway. Guess you learn something every day.

 

Following doesn't mean people are taking it seriously or changing their minds about what happened that day.  

[ChiGoose]

1 minute ago, Doc said:

Following doesn't mean people are taking it seriously or changing their minds about what happened that day.  

 

Agreed. I did not make that claim.

 

I was just pointing out a false claim that there is no interest and that nobody outside of DC and NYC were following it.

 

I am making no predictions as to its impact on the elections because I find that irrelevant. 

[Doc]

15 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

Agreed. I did not make that claim.

 

I was just pointing out a false claim that there is no interest and that nobody outside of DC and NYC were following it.

 

I am making no predictions as to its impact on the elections because I find that irrelevant. 

 

Fair enough but it's mostly a semantic argument.  I think that people are interested, but it's changing almost no one's mind about what happened that day.

[B-Man]

J6 witch hunt ratings dropped 21%

 

 

The January 6 hearings captivated a nation wracked by inflation, covid and baby formula shortages.

 

Just kidding. Lizzy "Bored Them" Cheney and her gang of liars tanked in prime time last night as the J6 witch hunt's ratings fell 21%.

 

Matt Webb Mitovich of TV Line reported, "All told, the cumulative Big 3 broadcast audience (8.6 million) is currently down 21% from the first public hearing, which aired in primetime on June 9." 
 

8.6 million is less than 3% of the nation's population. 
 

https://donsurber.blogspot.com/2022/07/j6-witch-hunt-ratings-dropped-21.html?m=1

 

 

https://tvline.com/2022/07/22/tv-ratings-january-6-hearing-how-many-watched/

 

 

 

[ChiGoose]

4 minutes ago, B-Man said:

J6 witch hunt ratings dropped 21%

 

 

The January 6 hearings captivated a nation wracked by inflation, covid and baby formula shortages.

 

Just kidding. Lizzy "Bored Them" Cheney and her gang of liars tanked in prime time last night as the J6 witch hunt's ratings fell 21%.

 

Matt Webb Mitovich of TV Line reported, "All told, the cumulative Big 3 broadcast audience (8.6 million) is currently down 21% from the first public hearing, which aired in primetime on June 9." 
 

8.6 million is less than 3% of the nation's population. 
 

https://donsurber.blogspot.com/2022/07/j6-witch-hunt-ratings-dropped-21.html?m=1

 

 

https://tvline.com/2022/07/22/tv-ratings-january-6-hearing-how-many-watched/

 

 

 

If you think the purpose of the committee is for ratings or to move the needles on the midterms, then you have no idea what you’re talking about.

 

Then again, I’m not sure what I would expect from such illustrious outlets as… Donsurbur.blogspot and tvline…?

[Boatdrinks]

1 hour ago, ChiGoose said:

If you think the purpose of the committee is for ratings or to move the needles on the midterms, then you have no idea what you’re talking about.

 

Then again, I’m not sure what I would expect from such illustrious outlets as… Donsurbur.blogspot and tvline…?

C’mon Goose. Everyone knows the sham committee’s purpose is to try and prevent Donald Trump from running for President again. They (and the entire Dem party plus their supporters) are obsessed with Trump because they are terrified of him. 

[BillsFanNC]

7 hours ago, ChiGoose said:

If you think the purpose of the committee is for ratings or to move the needles on the midterms, then you have no idea what you’re talking about.

 

Then again, I’m not sure what I would expect from such illustrious outlets as… Donsurbur.blogspot and tvline…?

 

How about from The Paper Of Record?

 

 

[Albwan]

1 minute ago, DRsGhost said:

 

How about from The Paper Of Record?

 

 

Yea the left is desperate, the whole we need to kill babies thing sort of fizzled.