Talk:United States House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions about United States House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 |
Federal Employee Involvement
Whether sanctioned or unsanctioned, the events leading up to Jan 6 are a travesty, the real injustice that's being ignored is that federal employees, state employees and tech companies chose to allow and boost pre and post election hysteria. Evidence of foreign influence has existed for decades, monetary payments, partnerships, cooperation and collusion. The US modern elections are targeted psychologically, physically and intentionally by numerous interests from abroad and at home. Influence operations, manipulations are so common place that all it takes is a simple Google search of terms to see countless associations with foreign adversaries and allies that intentionally repeatedly interfere with US politics. This only became a problem when it became widely publicly disclosed. This committee ignores the real tampering of elections by the US Postal Service employees, not debateable video evidence is clear, Joe Biden won the election, but evidence shows Donald Trump may have actually been elected by the same foreign influence operations the panel pretends does not happen and never happens. We will go down I'm History knowing that Hilary Clinton would have become president had this been taken seriously in 1990 when first disclosed. 98.97.23.73 (talk) 19:32, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
Please post any evidence you have of such widespread tampering by Postal employees... I assume you mean proven willful tampering and not accidental. Also by "widespread" I mean not just one or two incidents, and also if it could have altered an election and by how much. I know I'm not the only one who would love to hear about it.
More lies
You continue your obvious bias against Donald Trump by continuing the left wing narrative about the 2020 election, which had the Democrats not stolen the election, as proved by the movie 2000 Mules, which you also lied about. I don't know how you live with yourself. Cris47 (talk) 05:27, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- When you say "You" do you mean Bill Barr, Trump's attorney general during the 2020 election, who announced on December 1, 2020, that the Justice Department and FBI had investigated allegations of election fraud but found nothing significant. Also, in June 2022 testimony to the House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack, Barr laughed at the mention of 2000 Mules. When asked to assess it, he dismissed the movies assertions there had been widespread election fraud, calling the movie "indefensible". ―Buster7 ☎ 13:20, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
MAGA tears :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.188.108.28 (talk) 22:35, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
Tucker Carlson
The sentence:
His lawyers responded to Tucker Carlson calling him an "angry, left-wing political activist".
is a little confusing. Is Carlson calling the witness a political activist, or is the lawyer calling Carlson a political activist, which wouldn't make sense. But the sentence still feels ambiguous.
184.185.174.245 (talk) 14:34, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
- 184.185.174.245. The former. Dunn's lawyers responded to Carlson calling Dunn that. If you feel that the sentence is too ambiguous you can change it. Phillip Samuel (talk) 22:52, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
Feedback from New Page Review process
I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Thanks for adding..
Whoisjohngalt (talk) 19:08, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
Liz Cheney (R-WY)
IMO, Cheney should be listed in the minority part of the table. She's not a Democrat, despite being selected by Pelosi.
--113.196.51.134 (talk) 03:13, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
- We won't know where she should be listed until the website of the committee comes out, but I've followed where previous editors have put her. Egroeg5 (talk) 20:31, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
- She should be listed as Ranking Member, imo, especially since she seems to be fulfilling the duties of that role, such as giving the opening statement usually reserved for the ranking member of a committee. 24.151.83.95 (talk) 17:27, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Cheney and Kinzinger are considered minority committee members based on new official website. [1] Someone in SoCal Area (talk) 00:28, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
Subpoenas Section
Suggestion: The Subpoenas section should be converted into a table with grid lines. As of now, it is unclear where the divisions are in the "Role" column and they aren't clearly aligned with the named individuals. Specifically, the division between Kylie Kremer and Cynthia Chafian is particularly confusing and really, most of the column has very little indication of divisions. 66.91.36.8 (talk) 18:45, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
Done. Thanks. — Alalch Emis (talk) 18:55, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
- Hi, I have no rights to edit, so I here are Informations that Patel testified, [CNN 12/09/2021], kind regards --Flo Beck (talk) 15:07, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
- Done Thanks, Flo Beck. I updated the table. — Tuckerlieberman (talk) 21:33, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
- Hi, I have no rights to edit, so I here are Informations that Patel testified, [CNN 12/09/2021], kind regards --Flo Beck (talk) 15:07, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
- Some more Informations to the Subpoenas Section
- kind regards --Flo Beck (talk) 14:34, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
There are now (Feb. 17, 2022) something like 88 people/organizations subpoenaed by the January 6th House Committee. Perhaps adding numbers along with the names might help people realize the scope/extent of this criminal conspiracy. StevenTorrey (talk) 16:19, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
New article needed: 1st Amendment Praetorian / Robert Patrick Lewis
New article needed: 1st Amendment Praetorian / Robert Patrick Lewis. 173.88.246.138 (talk) 02:12, 28 November 2021 (UTC)