Quote (thundercock @ Jun 11 2022 08:00pm)
The committee hasn't presented everything yet so we still need to wait and see. However, I think the conclusion was pretty obvious from Jan 7, 2021. Anyone paying attention would inevitably reach the same conclusion and what we really need to know are a few details i.e. how involved certain people were, what requests were/weren't made, etc. We've learned quite a lot from leaks but all it seems to do is corroborate the obvious.
I mean do you disagree with the following statement: Donald Trump wanted to stay President and worked with individuals in an attempt to make that a reality.
If you agree with that statement, do you think something should be done to prevent that from happening again or do you think we have an adequate system?
If you disagree with the statement, what evidence is necessary in order for you to believe such a statement?
There was bipartisan action within a week on Jan 6th to tamp down some of the loopholes, including clarifying the constitutional significance of the certification. There was no need for a strictly partisan committee.
The decision to form a partisan committee presents a view problems. It's ineffective, because large tracts of the population will simply write it off as a political stunt. But it also leaves unanswered the question of why this attack was possible in the first place. Was Nancy Pelosi just personally incompetent? And it would be incredibly inappropriate if the FBI were involved in any form with something this sensitive. Convincing sole attackers to participate in manufactured schemes is one thing, but if FBI informants were involved in part for encouraging violence during a sensitive transition of power, then pretty severe repercussions are in order.