UNI88 wrote: ↑Fri Jul 22, 2022 11:59 am
GannonFan wrote: ↑Fri Jul 22, 2022 11:48 am
Eh, while I put more of the blame on the GOP for making it one-sided, the Dems did deny the GOP multiple people they wanted on the committee. I don't think committees are normally that restrictive from the majority party. It was after the GOP wasn't able to name who they wanted on the committee that the left the process. Both sides got what they wanted, a truly political process they could spin to their constituents.
I don't like Pelosi but I don't have a problem with her rejecting the appointment of people who reasonably might have been called to testify before the committee. That would have created a conflict of interest.
January 6 was a serious event that should have been seriously investigated. McCarthy tried to appoint some people who were likely to turn it into a circus. That was a failure in leadership on his part.
In theory, anybody could have been called before the committee. Pelosi said no to Banks, Jordan, and Nehls, and specifically called out that they had voted objections to the electoral count. If that was a disqualification, why is Raskin on the committee as he did the same thing in the 2016 election? And Schiff is on the committee, and after his grandstanding in the Russia probe, one could argue his conduct was far more detrimental than a symbolic objection vote during the count. And I think to date only Jordan has even been a target of investigation.
Like I said, I place more of the blame on the GOP, but the Dems were more than happy to make this a political event in the hopes of impacting future elections (as in the current midterm) rather than a somber and neutral investigation. One thinks if they hadn't pursued impeachment for all 4 of Trump's years that when they impeached him following the Jan 6th riots more people would have gone along with it then and they could've gotten a conviction in the Senate. Probably would've changed the whole tenor of where we are now.