(THREAD) A TRUE HISTORY OF THE HOUSE SELECT COMMITTEE ON JANUARY 6
1⃣ PELOSI names the members of the Committee, which include Rep. Liz CHENEY (R-WY).
Q: Is the Committee bipartisan?
A: ✅.
Q: How many Republicans are on the Committee?
A: 1⃣.
2⃣ PELOSI contacts House Minority Leader Kevin MCCARTHY (R-CA) to inform him that she has accepted the majority of his GOP submissions to the Committee.
Q: Is the Committee bipartisan?
A: ✅.
Q: How many Republicans are on the Committee?
A: 4⃣.
3⃣ Because Nancy PELOSI had rejected two of the Committee proposals made by MCCARTHY—in both instances because MCCARTHY wanted men on the Committee *who are witnesses in the case the Committee is investigating*—MCCARTHY ordered 3⃣ of the 4⃣ Republicans on the Committee to resign.
4⃣ The resignation of 3⃣ of the 4⃣ Republicans on the Committee—all three of whom had been *agreed upon* by PELOSI and MCCARTHY—reduced the number of Republicans on the Committee.
Q: Is the Committee still bipartisan?
A: ✅.
Q: How many Republicans are on the Committee?
A: 1⃣.
5⃣ As part of her *continued effort* to make the Committee bipartisan—an effort that included naming CHENEY (R-WY), DAVIS (R-IL), NEHLS (R-TX) and ARMSTRONG (R-ND) to the Committee—Pelosi has now embarked on a *third attempt* to increase the ranks of Republicans on the Committee.
6⃣ According to news breaking today, PELOSI s now looking at naming Republican Adam KINZINGER (IL) to the Committee.
Q: Is the Committee currently bipartisan?
A: ✅.
Q: If KINZINGER joins the Committee at Pelosi's request, how many Republicans will be on the Committee?
A: 2⃣.
7⃣ Somehow—throughout the *whole duration* of these developments—media reported that there were *no Republicans* on the Committee, despite the number of Republicans on the Committee always being between 1⃣ and 4⃣ and PELOSI now preparing to name GOP member 5⃣ to the Committee.
8⃣ I have no idea why this history was misreported. This Committee was bipartisan at birth, and has never been less than bipartisan. Pelosi will soon agree to a *fifth* Republican—while McCarthy only wants *any* Republicans on the Committee if *some* can be conflicts of interest.
9⃣ This history *isn't* confusing. If I can figure it out, and if my readers can figure it out, why do I keep reading major-media articles saying that there are no Republicans on the Committee and McCarthy wanted it to be bipartisan but Pelosi's actions made that impossible? WTF?
🔟 Media failures have become foreseeable and patterned. For instance, media now says we're just learning about Trump's UAE ties. This is as inaccurate as the House Select Committee reporting. My 2019 NYT bestseller on the topic is now #13 in its category. amazon.com/Proof-Conspira…
(PS) The upshot is that media gets things wrong, and misses things, and misstates things, and then—because it doesn't want to lose viewers or readers—it simply *changes the narrative* to obscure its errors. The result is that we get misinformed. And it's unnerving and exhausting.
(NEWS) Minutes ago, CNN reported that Kinzinger could be added to the already bipartisan House Select Committee on January 6 as soon as "today or tomorrow." I hope it happens. If Pelosi can get former Congressman Denver Riggleman (R-VA) on there too—great! cnn.com/2021/07/22/pol…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I don't think CNN or other cable networks should run insurrectionist press conferences anymore. Right now my TV shows at least 2 Trump co-conspirators being given a stage to say that the only people that need to be investigated over the GOP-incited January 6 attack are Democrats.
In a serious country, it's not "news" when thousands of major-media reports establish that an armed insurrection was coordinated by Republicans and then two Republicans implicated in those reports call a presser to demand a probe of their political opponents.
That's just lunacy.
McCarthy, Jordan, and the rest of the insurrectionists have made clear time and time again that the phrase "we need to find out why we were so ill-prepared for January 6" is code for their conspiracy theory that Pelosi and Bowser conspired with the USCP to "let" January 6 happen.
(🔐) NEW at PROOF: An Updated List of Trumpworld Figures Who Have Been Criminally Investigated or Referred, Impeached, Arrested, or Convicted, As Well As Those Who Are Presently Fugitives From Justice
(NOTE) The list isn't just alphabetized and divided into more than a dozen categories, it also indicates which individuals received pardons from Trump and which sought his intervention in their cases. The list will continue to be updated as more Trumpworld figures are arrested.
(NOTE2) PROOF readers are the absolute best. They already caught two names I missed. The list is now well over 70. Most articles you find on major media—I don't know why—poop out at 5 to 8. That's a tragedy. This new PROOF list is likely to surpass 100 as I continue work on it.
The only reason Rand Paul is going after Dr. Fauci with what he knows is a lie—one that endangers Fauci and increases vaccine hesitancy nationwide—is because *he* knows, and *we* know, and the whole *world* knows that Paul's boss, Trump, killed hundreds of thousands with his lies
If Trump's lies about the election and the insurrection of January 6 weren't already the "Big Lie," his thousands of COVID-19 lies—which caused *exponentially* more death than his ongoing insurgency—would now be referred to as the "Big Lie," and Paul would be one of the Big Liars
I don't know when—it might be 5, 15, or 50 years from now—academics will study how many deaths can rightly be attributed to Trump's acts and omissions since 2015, and I've no doubt the figure will be in the 6 figures, with the only question being whether it'll be higher than that
Barrack is so close to Trump that—as I wrote about in the Proof trilogy—not only is he responsible for Kremlin agent Manafort being on Trump's campaign, but he linked Trump's campaign to the Emirati agent who helped the UAE interfere in 2016.
In fact, he's *so* close to Trump...
...that during the 2016-17 presidential transition, when Trump's inner circle was committing crimes with foreign actors and sealing its long course of collusion with several of them, much of the most sensitive work was actually done from Barrack's office, rather than Trump Tower.
(PS) Per prior NBC reporting, "Federal District Court Judge Randolph Moss said the range under federal guidelines [after the feds dropped 4 of 5 felony charges to enable this plea] would be between one and two years in prison."
So the defendant got 66.6% of the minimum sentence.
(PS2) I've no doubt that bases were presented to justify a score adjustment and downward departure, but it certainly doesn't look great when a judge announces an anticipated range and then severely undercuts it after the feds dropped 4 of 5 felonies to get the case to this point.
Jim Jordan is a witness in the January 6 probe due to his presence at a planning meeting for January 6 on December 21 at the White House—and his possible presence in one of the Trump war rooms pre-January 6. He should be blocked from the Committee due to his conflict of interest.
This isn't a matter of Jordan being a Trumpist or an insurrectionist. Obviously, *everyone* McCarthy picked is an insurrectionist to some degree or another, as they're loyal to an insurrectionist party.
No—this is about Jordan being a *witness*. He can't also be an investigator.
If the Democrats permit Jordan on this Committee not only will it make it impossible to call him as a witness but he will *immediately* leak any private conversations to all of the witnesses in the case linked to Trump—as well as Trump himself. He threatens the entire enterprise.