Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

James0nJuiceb0x t1_j1izcq3 wrote

Reply to comment by RipTide275 in The Philadelphia Inquirer: What the Jan. 6 report says about Doug Mastriano, Scott Perry, and other key Pa. Republicans by boundfortrees

> Bi partisan committee, lol Cheyney and Kinzinger aren’t R’s. Both self proclaimed anti Trumpers since before the election.

So they couldn't possibly be members of that party just because they spoke up against a singular "member" of it? Okay.

75

RipTide275 t1_j1izmre wrote

The point is it really wasn’t an unbiased committee to begin with

−75

octopusinwonderland t1_j1jg0dw wrote

Have you ever considered you might have a bias here on what results you’re willing to accept?

37

RipTide275 t1_j1jgry0 wrote

Let’s face it. 99% of the people didn’t change their mind. If the committee came up with opposit conclusions you and the rest would be saying all the same shit about Trump, the fix is in, he gets away with everything it’s corruption. So does it really matter what the committee said.

−32

octopusinwonderland t1_j1ji1mk wrote

Excuse me but I accepted trump as President for four years even though I didn’t personally like it. You aren’t correct in assuming other people are as committed to their fantasies as you are. And even if they were, that doesn’t make it right for you to do it.

30

frotz1 t1_j1jioyd wrote

Again you're making up an imaginary wrongdoing where we're doing the same thing with the roles reversed, and we're supposed to answer to charges of imaginary hypocrisy on this subject. If you have any evidence that the committee wasn't telling the complete truth then let's see it, but you don't get to cop out with empty accusations.

25

drewbaccaAWD t1_j1kqma3 wrote

>If the committee came up with opposit conclusions you and the rest would be saying all the same shit

When Trump won in 2016, there were calls for verification and transparency, for recounts, etc. And then 99.9% of us accepted the results of the election, even if we didn't like it, long before Trump's inauguration (which Hillary went to, btw, after conceding and congratulating him).

We're more than two years out from the 2020 election and you still have like 1/3 of the GOP claiming that Trump actually won. There's no "both sides" thing going on.. the left actually lives in reality.

So no, if the committee would have came up with the opposite conclusions the vast majority of us would have accepted that conclusion. And if you think the Mueller report is some evidence to prove otherwise, then you clearly never read the report which blatantly stated that obstruction took place which is why we didn't accept Barr's deranged and misleading summary of the report.

*edit to add* And I'll repeat what I said above. You are free to ignore the committee's conclusions but you aren't doing yourself or this country any favors if you block out all the shit reported by witnesses who are neck deep in Republican party politics and gave an honest account that you choose to ignore.

7

RipTide275 t1_j1ky9nu wrote

Accept the election results? Trump was impeached before his inauguration! 😂

−1

drewbaccaAWD t1_j1kzt59 wrote

>Accept the election results? Trump was impeached before his inauguration! 😂

You aren't the brightest bulb if you think impeachment (for crimes in office) and election denial are the same thing.

6

SourHoagie t1_j1j6l4o wrote

You realize Republican congressional leadership declined to join the committee right? They were offered a deal to allow them to appoint an equal number of members to the committee and they said no, they had an opportunity to make it bipartisan but refused.

"Well, I think in retrospect, I think it would have been very smart to put [Republicans on the committee] and again, I wasn't involved in it from a standpoint so I never looked at it too closely. But I think it would have been good if we had representation," Trump told Punchbowl News.

"The Republicans don’t have a voice. They don’t even have anything to say," he added.link

30

RipTide275 t1_j1j9w7v wrote

I understand how it happened. I could of told you the results before the committee met, because they were biased. Just like when next year when there at committees investigating Biden corruption and you all are saying they’re biased and not believing anything the committee concludes.

−2

Rmlady12152 t1_j1jbs9y wrote

Did you see the insurrection? It was on tv. Those crazy republicans are an embarrassment to Pennsylvania and America.

32

HeyZuesHChrist t1_j1jcy8d wrote

And by Biden corruption you’re talking about Hunter Biden. Because you think Hunter Biden = Joe Biden. And if you can prove Hunter Biden is a piece of shit them it’s the same as proving Joe Biden shouldn’t be President. We know exactly how you think and we all laugh at you because it’s stupid. Terribly stupid.

No amount of proving Hunter Biden is a piece of shit will ever change the fact that Joe Biden beat Donald Trump in an historic landslide for POTUS. And no amount of proving Hunter Biden is a piece of shit means Joe Biden can’t be President.

Nobody cares if Hunter Biden goes to prison. Nobody cares if he committed crimes. He’s isn’t an elected official.

31

RipTide275 t1_j1jed8e wrote

Not what I meant at all. What if a committee shows Joe Biden is corrupt and has profited illegally from Hunter selling his influence all over the world. What would you think then?

3

HeyZuesHChrist t1_j1jhq80 wrote

I would think Joe Biden should be prosecuted because that’s what a normal person believes.

That’s not even what is on the table here though. There is absolutely zero evidence that Joe Biden has done anything illegal regarding Hunter Biden or anything else. Republicans accuse people of things first and then expect courts to accept it first without evidence so they can then go find the evidence. That’s completely backwards of how our justice system actually works.

It’s exactly the argument that Trump’s idiot legal team made in 2020. They filed lawsuits claiming election fraud, presented no evidence to the court and then argued that they court needed to take the case and grant them warrants to find the evidence to support their claims.

This is exactly what the right is doing now. They are claiming Hunter Biden broke laws, that Joe Biden aided him and that they need to be granted warrants so they can find evidence to support this claim.

Here is what is going to happen and you can save this comment. The Republican House is going to attempt to investigate Hunter Biden. They’ll form a committee. They will find absolutely nothing other than what we already know. Hunter Biden is a drug addict and likes hookers (why should I fucking care)? They will find absolutely nothing about Joe Biden doing anything illegal. All they will find is what we already know, which is that Joe Biden loves his son and has asked him to get help. They will ridicule Joe Biden for telling his son he will support him if he wants to turn his life around because to the right a father supporting his son is grounds for something. Impeachment maybe.

In the end the Republican led committee will try to convict Joe Biden because his son is a loser and it will result in absolutely nothing. Save this comment so you can apologize to me in two years.

30

Dark_Prism t1_j1jrdpp wrote

> I would think Joe Biden should be prosecuted because that’s what a normal person believes.

This is such an easy litmus test that these nutjobs fail constantly.

I want to yell in their faces "THE PEOPLE YOU VOTE FOR HATE YOU! STOP ACTING LIKE LOYALTY TO THEM MEANS ANYTHING!" Christ, the entirety of the US government is meant to work for the people who elect them, i.e. the citizens of the United States of America. Every elected official that undermines the rule of law needs to be held accountable to the furthest extent possible. This thing where cops and politicians and rich people get away with stuff all the time drives me insane. We need to hold them all to a higher standard, not a lower one.

17

HeyZuesHChrist t1_j1khyf9 wrote

The right is simply on a team. They could never comprehend holding someone on their team accountable for anything. Even though I am a Democrat there is no team. If someone breaks the law they should be held accountable to the fullest extent of the law. That’s how it works, unless you’re a Republican in which case it’s just “Hunter Biden!”

9

danappropriate t1_j1q6doz wrote

What you are saying is barely conjecture—we’ve seen Republicans run this exact dog and pony show before with the Benghazi investigations.

1

frotz1 t1_j1ji8sk wrote

Show it. You're comparing hypothetical corruption without any evidence to a very well documented insurrection attempt with evidence piled up in front of you. You don't get to call hypocrisy because we aren't taking your imaginary crimes seriously.

21

drewbaccaAWD t1_j1ksglx wrote

>Just like when next year when there at committees investigating Biden corruption

Oddly, unlike Trump, the Biden family isn't being investigated by any states, the FBI, or any other agency. Maybe because there is no corruption to be investigated? NO, THAT can't be it, it must be a conspiracy.

Given that Jim Jordan and co. are trying to prove a pre-determined conclusion, rather than following any actual evidence? They've already made it clear that this investigation into Biden was a farce and you reacted exactly how the GOP wants you to, to think that just because the GOP runs false investigations like "BENGHAZI!!!" that the Democrats must be doing the same thing.

It's not a fallacy, but if it were, it would be called "appeal to cynicism."

You also deflected from the above comment. The GOP had an opportunity to place people on the committee and didn't. It was clearly unacceptable that they'd place anyone actively being investigated and tied to 1/6 on the committee and that's what McCarthy attempted to do. When that plan didn't work, he refused to send anyone. Being upset about this is like being upset that the defendant's brother wasn't permitted to sit on a jury.

And even before that, the Democrats didn't even want to do this at the congressional level, they wanted to form an independent committee but that was shot down by the GOP as well, at the Senate level.

6

Eyesopen52 t1_j1kw005 wrote

You really can’t see that Most of us are not as deaf, dumb and blind as you on the right. We actually use our brain cells and not just accept things because we were told to.

6

RipTide275 t1_j1kykmw wrote

Left is smart. Right is dumb. Got it. I don’t know you at all but I will bet my bottom dollar I’m smarter than you

2

HeyZuesHChrist t1_j1jcayv wrote

The Republicans were offered a 50/50 split on this committee. The Dems were told to go fuck themselves. That is the only reason it was not split 50/50. I would bet any amount of money you didn’t know that. And yet the Dems still put Republicans on the committee when they didn’t have to after the Republicans told the Dems to get fucked.

23

RipTide275 t1_j1jemxc wrote

You kinda sorta are correct. Believe me I know the politics behind how the committee was formed. Again, that’s not the point though is it ?

−1

uglyKIDmoe t1_j1jg0fg wrote

The point is that declining a role on the committee is setting themselves up to declare it unbiased because they knew what the facts would show and they’d have no other way to spin it if they were involved.

So, the context matters and is not besides the point. This is standard operating procedure for suppressing the exposure of corruption. You either take control of the investigation so you can taint it, or you decline involvement and then cry foul when they’re done.

24

RipTide275 t1_j1jgfsh wrote

Nancy took control and tainted it.

−2

Eyesopen52 t1_j1kwre7 wrote

And there you go again. No facts, no intelligence, just smart ass replies and distract distract distract

6

HeyZuesHChrist t1_j1jjppk wrote

The declined for the sole purpose of being able to scream that the committee was biased and had no Republican representation when the committee found exactly what they knew they would find, which is that Trump committed crimes. And here we are, listening to a Republican who fell for it.

This is the equivalent of screaming that Ford makes terrible vehicles and then cutting the break lines to a thousand Ford vehicles and then telling everyone how right you were about Ford making shitty cars when a thousand of them crash because they had no breaks.

21

drewbaccaAWD t1_j1ktc34 wrote

Not to nitpick, but it's a "brake line." Since you wrote it more than once that way, I assume it wasn't a typo.

Totally agree with the comment though, not trying to serve red-herring or derail your great analogy.

1

RipTide275 t1_j1kk3iv wrote

Your esteemed committee didn’t look into the lack of security at the Capital, one shot was fired the whole day. That person wasn’t interviewed. Seems like a real half ass effort to me. Or a cover up.

−1

HeyZuesHChrist t1_j1kl0ky wrote

This is the equivalent of blaming the family for a home invasion because they didn’t put a second deadbolt on the door and not the three guys who kicked the door in that head a deadbolt.

10

RipTide275 t1_j1klhwm wrote

I’ll try to use your bullshit analogy. The highly paid detectives investigating the break in should at least ask the homeowner why the door was unlocked and security cameras turned off. If they didn’t you would think they were covering something up or just did a shit job

−1

HeyZuesHChrist t1_j1km3h9 wrote

Jesus Christ dude. This is legitimately one of the dumbest things I’ve seen on Reddit.

10

drewbaccaAWD t1_j1ktrag wrote

Unless Nancy left the door open and sent everyone home for the day (which didn't happen) then you aren't really adding anything constructive here, you're trying to change the subject.

The fact that you'd rather focus on whether Nancy had enough foresight to hire extra security, rather than how Trump was aware that there were armed protestors and wanted security to "let them in" is quite telling.

But I'll bite on this red herring... is there any actual evidence that Nancy Pelosi failed to have sufficient security that was within her power to request in the first place? Mike Pence wasn't on the phone asking Pelosi to send help, he called the White House... weird, since apparently this was all up to Nancy Pelosi according to you. Fortunately, Pence actually did his job that day and called everyone while Trump apparently just watched things unfold from his private dining room and did nothing the entire day (after he riled everyone up).

6

Eyesopen52 t1_j1kx3sj wrote

Really? Keep reading because there was no extra security because trump Never Called For Any! No calls logged Before or DURING inserrection! You really have to lay off the fox talking points. Hannity just admitted he didn’t believe the rigged election line from day One. Fox LIES to you

5

Eyesopen52 t1_j1kwlr5 wrote

It is if you’re gonna cry ‘illegitimate committee’ and use thatBS as a reason to ignore their findings.

3