Jan. 6 sentencing...

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.
Dec 9, 2013
2,003
678
743
52
Why do you defend a hearing that's predetermined with a committee stacked against you? If this were switched you would be outraged and rightfully so.

It's disappointing the number of people who pretend to be non partisan and concerned about democracy at the same time defending dangerous partisan politics.
So what exactly would you have Congress do? They tried a 9/11 style bipartisan approach. They tried a select committee but the Rs tried to put two witnesses (who requested pardons).

I’ll wait for you to answer my previous post since you get hung up on people not answering. But please answer this one also.
 

oks10

Federal Marshal
A/V Subscriber
Sep 9, 2007
11,712
7,038
1,743
Piedmont, OK
Why do you defend a hearing that's predetermined with a committee stacked against you? If this were switched you would be outraged and rightfully so.

It's disappointing the number of people who pretend to be non partisan and concerned about democracy at the same time defending dangerous partisan politics.
I just want to know the truth of what happened so we can hopefully prevent it from happening again and potentially being more successful.

Why are YOU defending the group that refuses to even share their side of the story under oath? The group that hasn't made the slightest attempt to stop it from being "predetermined" as you say? If the testimony of those under oath are shining a particular light on the events, you'll have to forgive me if I hold more weight to those claims than to those that are just broadcast on social media. Pleading the 5th or not even showing just makes you look guilty (or at least aware that you were not in the right). If they believe they were right in their actions, or that people have been lied against them in their testimonies so far, then they need to grow a pair and come tell their side of the story.
 
Dec 9, 2013
2,003
678
743
52
I just want to know the truth of what happened so we can hopefully prevent it from happening again and potentially being more successful.

Why are YOU defending the group that refuses to even share their side of the story under oath? The group that hasn't made the slightest attempt to stop it from being "predetermined" as you say? If the testimony of those under oath are shining a particular light on the events, you'll have to forgive me if I hold more weight to those claims than to those that are just broadcast on social media. Pleading the 5th or not even showing just makes you look guilty (or at least aware that you were not in the right). If they believe they were right in their actions, or that people have been lied against them in their testimonies so far, then they need to grow a pair and come tell their side of the story.
Just like his hero, he won’t answer.
 

cowboyinexile

Have some class
A/V Subscriber
Jun 29, 2004
21,367
11,616
1,743
42
Fairmont, MN
Just like his hero, he won’t answer.
He was ok with it so don't expect much out of him now. The weird thing is he isn't a Trump guy. I'd bet folding money because the guy wasn't a traditional republican he never really bought into the cult of personality. But he had a r in front of his name and for this jacka$$ who truly believes party over country the ends justify the means and he will defend that without actually admitting he does until the day he dies.

Snowflake move on his part
 

StillwaterTownie

Federal Marshal
Jun 18, 2010
17,623
1,929
1,743
Where else but Stillwater
Just like his hero, he won’t answer.
Cimmaron surely thinks Trump was the best president since Reagan, no, I mean since Lincoln. And why not? Roger Stone told Alex Jones that he thought Trump was the best president since Lincoln.

Trump lost me early, like ever since he said during a debate that wages are too high.
 
Last edited:

CowboyJD

The Voice of Reason...occasionally......rarely
A/V Subscriber
Dec 10, 2004
20,201
21,206
1,743
He was ok with it so don't expect much out of him now. The weird thing is he isn't a Trump guy. I'd bet folding money because the guy wasn't a traditional republican he never really bought into the cult of personality. But he had a r in front of his name and for this jacka$$ who truly believes party over country the ends justify the means and he will defend that without actually admitting he does until the day he dies.

Snowflake move on his part
He is definitely a Trump guy….AND….he’s a party over country guy.
 
Dec 9, 2013
2,003
678
743
52
Why do you defend a hearing that's predetermined with a committee stacked against you? If this were switched you would be outraged and rightfully so.

It's disappointing the number of people who pretend to be non partisan and concerned about democracy at the same time defending dangerous partisan politics.
You don’t think the Benghazi hearing had a predetermined outcome and had at least one alternative motive? Hillary came and sat for 11 hours and answered questions.

We absolutely needed to find out what happened, who made poor decisions and why those decisions were made. If I remember correctly you were all over those hearings and couldn’t even correctly state the facts around what happened.

I’m still waiting for answers 1 page back. Not holding breath but will check back later.
 
Apr 14, 2009
1,245
201
1,693
The 2020 presidential election was won by Joe. Although Donnie and his crew lost by a large margin. End of story. Don’t need to recount the votes again.
Now why the White supremacists where attacking the United States capital building. Let’s do do that.
 

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
54,656
18,200
1,743
I just want to know the truth of what happened so we can hopefully prevent it from happening again and potentially being more successful.

Why are YOU defending the group that refuses to even share their side of the story under oath? The group that hasn't made the slightest attempt to stop it from being "predetermined" as you say? If the testimony of those under oath are shining a particular light on the events, you'll have to forgive me if I hold more weight to those claims than to those that are just broadcast on social media. Pleading the 5th or not even showing just makes you look guilty (or at least aware that you were not in the right). If they believe they were right in their actions, or that people have been lied against them in their testimonies so far, then they need to grow a pair and come tell their side of the story.
Many here preach how divisive and partisan politics has become. The January 6th hearing is perhaps the most divisive and partisan hearing in the history of Congress. Why do you defend it?

And yes they did attempt to stop it from being predetermined but Pelosi vetoed the GOP appointments to the committee.... Lay that blame on the DNC not the GOP!!!

I've said many times that if someone is guilty then they should be convicted. But it most be fairly balanced.

If you are so worried about testimony under oath in the investigation into Hillary Clinton emails why was everyone but Hillary interviewed under oath with notes?

By defending these committee appointments complaining about divisiveness and partisan politics falls on deaf ears.

Many of you here are not defending democracy, you're defending partisan divisive politics.
 

oks10

Federal Marshal
A/V Subscriber
Sep 9, 2007
11,712
7,038
1,743
Piedmont, OK
Many here preach how divisive and partisan politics has become. The January 6th hearing is perhaps the most divisive and partisan hearing in the history of Congress. Why do you defend it?

And yes they did attempt to stop it from being predetermined but Pelosi vetoed the GOP appointments to the committee.... Lay that blame on the DNC not the GOP!!!

I've said many times that if someone is guilty then they should be convicted. But it most be fairly balanced.

If you are so worried about testimony under oath in the investigation into Hillary Clinton emails why was everyone but Hillary interviewed under oath with notes?

By defending these committee appointments complaining about divisiveness and partisan politics falls on deaf ears.

Many of you here are not defending democracy, you're defending partisan divisive politics.
He picked 5, she vetoed 2, he went "wah" and pulled all his nominees. The others he picked that she had no problem with, them not participating is on HIM not HER. The GOP CAN participate here, they're just choosing not to That fact being pointed out to you several times by multiple posters has yet to land for you so I doubt it'll land this time either.
 
Feb 7, 2011
139
44
1,578
Cimarron, Please, look at the January 6 attack on the Capitol. Ask the question, does this happen without President Trump’s rhetoric and actions?
 
Dec 9, 2013
2,003
678
743
52
He’s too soft to answer questions. It leaves room for accountability…
Never directly answers questions, yet gets indignant when someone answers him w a more nuanced answer than his binary trap answer. Never proposes solutions but is quick to Monday morning QB. Calls out other posters for partisanship but can’t quite self reflect. Obviously reads posts and passive aggressively indirectly responds.

There’s a two word phrase for that that sounds a lot like Spicken Chit.

At least he has taken a break from ending every post w “China Joe.”
 

cowboyinexile

Have some class
A/V Subscriber
Jun 29, 2004
21,367
11,616
1,743
42
Fairmont, MN
Never directly answers questions, yet gets indignant when someone answers him w a more nuanced answer than his binary trap answer. Never proposes solutions but is quick to Monday morning QB. Calls out other posters for partisanship but can’t quite self reflect. Obviously reads posts and passive aggressively indirectly responds.

There’s a two word phrase for that that sounds a lot like Spicken Chit.

At least he has taken a break from ending every post w “China Joe.”
For a while he only answered questions with another question.

Also he was totally fine with Jan 6th. He won't respond if you ask him directly though. Just like with most everything.

Spicken chit. Maybe that should be his new nickname.
 
Apr 14, 2009
1,245
201
1,693
Wire Fraud will be the undoing of the rump gang of crooks and liars. I hope it will extremely be bad for two of rumps son's. Where did all of that stop the steal money go?
 

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
54,656
18,200
1,743
The defense of partisanship here is telling for a group where many claim to be bi-partisan.

Schumer stood on the steps of the Supreme Court and threatened Supreme Court Justices by name and way too many people or OK with that. That's a federal crime.