RipTide275 t1_j1jemxc wrote
Reply to comment by HeyZuesHChrist in The Philadelphia Inquirer: What the Jan. 6 report says about Doug Mastriano, Scott Perry, and other key Pa. Republicans by boundfortrees
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 ?
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.
RipTide275 t1_j1jgfsh wrote
Nancy took control and tainted it.
Eyesopen52 t1_j1kwre7 wrote
And there you go again. No facts, no intelligence, just smart ass replies and distract distract distract
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
HeyZuesHChrist t1_j1km3h9 wrote
Jesus Christ dude. This is legitimately one of the dumbest things I’ve seen on Reddit.
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).
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
Luvs2spooge89 t1_j1kr16q wrote
Capitol*
RipTide275 t1_j1kxx2j wrote
Thanks dork
Eyesopen52 t1_j1kwlr5 wrote
It is if you’re gonna cry ‘illegitimate committee’ and use thatBS as a reason to ignore their findings.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments