Quote (NetflixAdaptationWidow @ 29 Jul 2021 02:37)
So let's stop here before we dive into the details
What you just admitted is you don't know how the committe was set up, but still drew conclusions and criticized Democrats for not approaching the committee in good faith.
You are willing to dive into the weeds at the smallest criticism of Republicans, but NEVER do it for Democrats, and this is a prime example. If this were a Republican committee you would be bending over backwards to dig up how it's structured to prove they were acting in good faith.
and to prove it, took me two seconds to find this.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/January_6_commission#Priorities"Under the provisions of the bill, the commission would have been composed of ten members, outside of the federal government, appointed by congressional leaders. The four party leaders in Congress (Nancy Pelosi, Kevin McCarthy, Chuck Schumer, Mitch McConnell) would have each appointed two members, with Democratic leaders jointly appointing the chair and the Republican leaders jointly appointing the vice-chair. This would have allowed Democrats and Republicans to appoint equal number of members.[9]"
So kindly eat shit.
Do you seriously think this is some big "gotcha" moment? My cynical prior is that in a country with a partisan battle as fierce as in the US, both parties will seize any opportunity to gain ground in the ongoing struggle for power. And no, this is not a double standard, I expect Republicans to act just as ruthlessly; and by default I expect them to act with partisan motives rather than in good faith until proven otherwise.
Regarding the committee: nothing in the quote or article you linked me disproves that Pelosi would have ultimately controlled the committee.
Quote (thundercock @ 29 Jul 2021 02:41)
Dude that didn't even fucking happen until AFTER the Senate rejected the bipartisan deal. And no, I don't think Pelosi would have appointed Cheney to one of the 5 spots because then the GOP would have 6 fucking spots on a 10 person committee. How fucking dumb do you think she is? Instead, she chose Cheney KNOWING that she would still have a clear majority regardless on the
13 person committee. And now you think Schumer would appoint Romney so the GOP would have 7 spots? Are you out of your fucking mind? Now I know why you do so many mental gymnastics for the GOP. You think Democrats are that fucking stupid.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3233/textYou seem to be profoundly misinformed if you think Pelosi would have been able to "veto" Jim Jordan.
1. I will admit that I was somewhat underinformed. I did not realize that the committee proposed in point 3 of your summary had a fundamentally different composition (10 persons, 5 Republicans picked by Republican leadership) than the one she created after the GOP filibustered the bill (point 5 in your summary, having 13 seats, with Pelosi herself picking some of the Republican members). You could have mentioned that to be fair.
2. Pelosi nominating Cheney for one of the Democratic slots on the 10-person commitee is not what I meant, see the point above. But now that you mentioned it, I dont think the idea is actually as outlandish as you think. Cheney suffers from even more TDS than most congressional Democrats. She has proven willing to burn her entire party (and her own political career) down for her personal vendetta against Trump. On the issue this committee was dealing with, Cheney would have been a safe vote for Pelosi. Also, imagine the headlines: "Jan 6 committee, on which Republicans hold majority, releases scathing condemnation of Trump". The msm would have eaten that shit up.
3 Now that I've found the time to read through the entire text of that originally proposed bill, I still couldn't find the answer to the key question: if that committee with its 5:5 balance had gridlocked along partisan lines, what would have happened? No action, or would Pelosi as the committee chair have had a tie-breaking vote, similar to how Democrats currently have a 50+1 majority in a 50:50 Senate? If the proposal had really given the GOP the opportunity to stonewall everything they want, then I really dont understand why they rejected this proposal. But then again: I can't imagine Democrats being that fucking stupid, so I implicitly assumed that that's not what the original proposal with the 5:5 committee would have been; that Pelosi would ultimately have been the one to call the shots.
So, I was and still am assuming both parties to be shrewd rather than retarded. I absolutely cannot imagine Dems offering Repubs a committee on which they could have blocked everything, nor can I imagine the GOP rejecting such a proposal.