Jan 6th Committee Mid-Summer Finale

We had a sorta mid-season finale, to use the lingo, of the 1/6 Committee hearings with another prime time showing. There will be more, the chair (remotely, since he like President Biden, has COVID) upfront announcing more hearings in September. This left Liz Cheney as the chair in the room while Rep. Elaine Luria (another vet) getting some time in the sun. 

Rep. Luria (a Generation X member), for instance, got to show Sen. Hawley running out of Congress is a rather to be un-PC, he looked like a sissy.  This does not only have amusement value.  His infamous fist shake at the protesters was supposed to be his rode to MAGA cred.  As we see him "scamper off," this outrageous act of egging on protesters -- protesters the hearings showed Republicans already knew were not just peaceful types -- should have consequences on him personally.  

The basic focus of the hearing was to show Trump not doing anything to stop the invasion of the Capitol for over three hours (187 minutes).  If anything, while he watched FOX and multiple people (including the House minority leader and his own children) basically begged him to do something, he made things worse.  Early on, after he knew the invasion started, he tweeted his infamous tweet against Mike Pence.

In fact, and the raw video also makes him look embarrassing ("yesterday" was a hard word for him to say), we see that even on the day after that he did not want to say Biden won.  He was only willing to say that Congress formally announced the vote.  One of the witnesses, Sarah Matthews, the former White House deputy press secretary, focused her disgust at talk about not him wanting to use "peace" in a tweet to the protestors.

The other witness was Matthew Pottinger, the former deputy national security adviser, who reminded me in both appearance and manner as a sort of Dan Quayle type.  He still noted how proud he was to serve in the Trump Administration.  And, yes, in answer to one online, I can see him voting for Trump again if it was Trump v. Biden in November 2024.  

Some are concerned about the important role Liz Cheney is playing here. The reality of the situation is that she is doing a good job and provides a message that this is not just a partisan witch hunt.  There was some feeling toward the end -- her closing statement was rather long this time -- that she was trying to argue there are good Republicans, including good Republican former members of the Trump Administration.  This is rather unclear.

There are Republicans who are showing some spine. One who is not is former chief of staff, Mark Meadows, whose stonewalling without apparent punishment so far is aggravating.  Steve Bannon was just convicted for criminal contempt, but we are still months away from sentencing, putting aside a possible appeal.  Trump's stonewalling of Congress was even an impeachment charge, if one that seems to have gone down the memory hole.

The whole thing was bullshit. The Trump officials appeal to use of litigation and then during litigation claim total immunity. Oh, and offer impeachment as a possible alternative.  But, when Congress moves in that directly, even early stages of investigation, it is a partisan witch hunt and violation of due process. We should not take this seriously.  

People have dreams of Congress sending a marshal to arrest people here and put them in some sort of congressional jail or something.  To me, the sensible thing is for Congress to have some sort of inherent contempt, not needing to rely on the executive branch that times will be at cross purposes -- concerned themselves about executive flexibility -- and use monetary fines as a means to apply pressure. And, decide things quickly, within months at most.  

A basic concern here is that Republicans will regain control in November and then the shoe will be on the other foot.  But, at some point, you have to bite the bullet.  This also shows the value of special mechanisms, including an impeachment investigation, which can put the edge more on the congressional side.  Still, not even wanting to show up?  Hillary Clinton did so. You are going to have to do that even if the Congress is in troll control.

Cheney's final message was that we can not trust Trump with power any more given what he did.  This should be expanded to all of their enablers. She at one point noted that the hearings would have gone basically the same even with the original Republicans chosen for the committee. Sure. Having the likes of Jim Jordan wasn't going to cause problems.

People who don't like Cheney getting so much air time -- other Democrats have some too -- like to call the opposite side Nazis.  Well, we worked with the Soviet Union to defeat them.  I think Cheney can be used now.  But, yes, we should be wary.  The appeal to "good Republicans" and leaving an opening to "move on" without enough full accounting is something to be wary about.  

===

I find it depressing and almost giving oxygen to something that should not be given it, but guess I should add a bit on Rachel Maddow's bit on the Garland memo regarding investigations in an election year.

As one review noted: "Rachel Maddow reported the exciting news that Merrick Garland released the same memo that Attorneys General always do during election years."   No.  We are supposed to be APPALLED at Garland. Fire him!  Biden should have picked someone like Doug Jones ... who tweeted a video reminding people there is nothing to see here. 

Back to the Bush43's firing of U.S. attorneys, one in particular who was in part fired for not indicting someone during a campaign, the possibility of prosecutorial abuse has been cited multiple places. One discussion by Alex Kozinski, before citing him became in bad taste, about prosecution abuses cited the issue.  We were mad when Comey violated it.  

I did not watch the segment, I admit, but at this point am tired of Rachel Maddow's extended emoting entrances anyways.  The memo was dropped earlier this year, sensibly as the mid-term election cycle started to go in full swing.  Oh no!  It cited a Barr memoranda saying that the Attorney General has to sign off on an investigation of someone like Trump.  Just as you would expect.  Anyway, the investigation already started.

I STILL will not believe Trump will be prosecuted until I see it.  I STILL am wary about the speed of certain investigations. But, the Watergate investigations took years.  Five years or so; and they were smaller in scope, without an insurrection with over a thousand participants alone.  

I basically block everyone on Twitter who shows that meme with Chris Farley screaming at Garland to arrest someone ... after lots of people, including top people ... were arrested.  Multiple people were charged by Mueller, until Barr and Trump blocked it, for those who sneer at him too.  

To the degree Rachel Maddow is aiding and abetting this despair that in various cases is probably aided and abetted by trolls, I say "get behind me Satan."  And, as we moved past chattel slavery and a bunch of other things, the idea we won't be able to survive the current times? Grow up.  

Oh, Garland and the Justice Department said the investigation goes on and they will not let an election campaign stop that. And, things will be taken where justice warrants.  Not that this will satisfy those who wish not to be.