Kinzinger: Trump is ‘guilty of knowing what he did’ in lead-up to Jan. 6 attack

[mystery-ak]

Kinzinger: Trump is ‘guilty of knowing what he did’ in lead-up to Jan. 6 attack
by Olafimihan Oshin - 06/19/22 10:54 AM ET

Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.) said on Sunday that former President Trump knows he is guilty for his actions ahead of the Jan 6, 2021, attack by his supporters on the U.S. Capitol.

During an appearance on ABC’s “This Week,” moderator George Stephanopoulos asked Kinzinger, a member of the select House committee investigating Jan. 6, if Trump should be prosecuted.

“I certainly think the president is guilty of knowing what he did, seditious conspiracy, being involved in these, you know, kind of different segments of pressuring the [Department of Justice], vice president, et cetera,” Kinzinger told Stephanopoulos.

“Obviously, you know, we’re not a criminal charges committee,” Kinzinger added. “So I want to be careful and specifically using that language, but I think what we’re presenting before the American people certainly would rise to a level of criminal involvement by a president and definitely failure of the the oath has to matter here, your personal demand to stand for the Constitution has to matter.”

“And if you have people that don’t regard that at all, there is no law in the world that we can pass. It’s going to make a bit of difference.”

more
https://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/3529101-kinzinger-trump-is-guilty-of-knowing-what-he-did-in-lead-up-to-jan-6-attack/

[catfish1957]

Just think...   January 3, 2023 media darlings and RINO complict dipshits like Kinzinger and Cheney will evaporate politically.

Romney will have work 24/7 in his little corner to keep his MSM buddies happy.

[Idiot]

Does anyone really care what Trump did or didn't do?  I know I don't...

[The_Reader_David]

Wait, is awareness of one's past actions now culpable? 

I think the problem is Trump didn't have clue what he was doing:  peddling the delusional constitutional theory that the Vice President as President of the Senate could single-handedly reject the votes of electors surely did contribute to his more hot-headed supporter's actions that January 6th.  Of course, until there's an actual investigation, rather than a partisan show-trial, we can't balance how much of what happened was due to ordinary folks buying into that delusional theory and how much was due to agents provocateurs from Federal agencies.

I really wish a lot of the witnesses called had challenged the validity of the subpoenas on the basis that the committee was not constituted by a resolution of the House. The resolution called for almost equal representation of both parties with the minority allowed to select members, and Pelosi rejected the members the GOP picked and just seated two resolutely anti-Trump Republicans.  Had it been a properly constituted committee, the role of agents provocateurs would have been examined.

[Hoodat]

Guilty of knowing what he did?  Scandalous!

[Kamaji]

[Cyber Liberty]

Just look at the mind-reader!  Scott Adams calls that "Loserthink."  It's believing you know what others are thinking.

[berdie]

Wait, is awareness of one's past actions now culpable? 

I think the problem is Trump didn't have clue what he was doing:  peddling the delusional constitutional theory that the Vice President as President of the Senate could single-handedly reject the votes of electors surely did contribute to his more hot-headed supporter's actions that January 6th.  Of course, until there's an actual investigation, rather than a partisan show-trial, we can't balance how much of what happened was due to ordinary folks buying into that delusional theory and how much was due to agents provocateurs from Federal agencies.

I really wish a lot of the witnesses called had challenged the validity of the subpoenas on the basis that the committee was not constituted by a resolution of the House. The resolution called for almost equal representation of both parties with the minority allowed to select members, and Pelosi rejected the members the GOP picked and just seated two resolutely anti-Trump Republicans.  Had it been a properly constituted committee, the role of agents provocateurs would have been examined.

I agree with everything you wrote @The Reader David

[Right_in_Virginia]

Wait, is awareness of one's past actions now culpable? 

I think the problem is Trump didn't have clue what he was doing:  peddling the delusional constitutional theory that the Vice President as President of the Senate could single-handedly reject the votes of electors .......

What are you talking about @The_Reader_David ??  No one asked Pence to do this.  He was asked to follow the Constitution and return electoral votes under dispute to the statehouses from whence they came --- asking the state representatives to reject or reconfirm the votes.  The Vice President's role was not one of a judge and executioner, but that of a conduit for accuracy. 

What part of this Constitutional requirement do you disagree with?

@berdie

[berdie]

What are you talking about @The_Reader_David ??  No one asked Pence to do this.  He was asked to follow the Constitution and return electoral votes under dispute to the statehouses from whence they came --- asking the state representatives to reject or reconfirm the votes.  The Vice President's role was not one of a judge and executioner, but that of a conduit for accuracy. 

What part of this Constitutional requirement do you disagree with?

@berdie

[berdie]

Thanks for your reply @Right_in_Virginia . I won't ping the op since I don't believe he has any interest. Nor do I but i feel the need to respond.

The op made a very valid post. It looks to me like you focused on Trump/Pence.

I see very valid arguments on both sides as to whether Pence could do this. From what I have read (on this site as well as others) there were recounts done in the individual states. The counts were validadated and turned in. Now...were they accurate? I don't know, nor does anyone. Several Senators raised objections.

But there seems to be evidence that President Trump tried to pressure Pence.

It doesn't seem out of the ordinary, to me at least, that President Trump would pressure people. Does it really to you?

I don't think it would be out of line to have a bi-partisan hearing. Do you?

The thing that lingers in my mind..is if there was a Dem VP that did what was suggested for Pence...we would be screaming our lungs out. Wouldn't we?

Be back tomorrow

[Right_in_Virginia]

Thanks for your reply @Right_in_Virginia . I won't ping the op since I don't believe he has any interest. Nor do I but i feel the need to respond.

The op made a very valid post. It looks to me like you focused on Trump/Pence.

I see very valid arguments on both sides as to whether Pence could do this. From what I have read (on this site as well as others) there were recounts done in the individual states. The counts were validadated and turned in. Now...were they accurate? I don't know, nor does anyone. Several Senators raised objections.

But there seems to be evidence that President Trump tried to pressure Pence.

There is one, and only one, valid argument:  the US Constitution --- and it gives the Congress and the President of the Senate both the power and the responsibility to certify electoral votes untainted by allegations of election and voter fraud.  There was sufficient objection raised by members of Congess and statehouses to return votes from several states to the states for a two-prong review:  .  Were state election laws followed and were invalid votes included in the total sent to Congress?

No one asked Pence to answer these questions, only to allow the individual statehouses to do so, as was his Constitutional mandate.  Bear in mind the Jan 6 deadline is an arbitrary congressional construct.  The only non-negotiable, Constitutional deadline is Jan 20 at noon.------ which is why in early January Cruz proposed a two week delay in Congressional certification to allow statehouses to review and recertify their electors.  We know where that went.

As for "pressure" (and who the hell deemed Pence above "pressure"?  Is he above pressure from me, too?)  ---- President Trump was very clear he wanted Pence to follow the Constitution.  But according to the Liz Cheneys of this world this is now an impeachable offense, and if they have their way-- a felony.

I'm more interested in the pressure from the other side, leading up to and including the orchestration of the Jan 6 "insurrection".  Why the rejection of the NG, Nancy?  Why seed the crowd wih FBI agitators?  Why have the Capitol police unlock doors and hold them open for protestors?  Remember, after the Congress reconvened after surviving the "worst attack on America since Pearl Harbor", certification moved quickly to its end without further objection(s).

The theft of the election was carried out by the democrats.  But, let's give credit where credit is due:  The leadership of the GOP took turns driving the getaway car.  We know who held the keys on Jan 6.

@berdie