Comments by "B Callahan" (@bcallahan3806) on "Pelosi taps Republican Congressman Adam Kinzinger for January 6 select committee" video.

I'll say it once again. Since when does a subject of an investigation, ( by default) Get to select a committee or have anything to do with the investigation. As her claims of a complete thorough investigation. That must include the intentional lack of security at the capitol. That if standard protocol or procedure was followed. No breach would have occured. She ,Nancy Pelosi, was and still is head of security for the capitol, and it surrounding grounds. With the exception of the Senate floor, gallery and entrance. If investigation is to be complete, and thorough. Capitol security is an issue. She is in charge of security. So by default. She is at least a witness and holds some responsibility . She needs to recuse herself from any and all forming of committee or their powers.and investigation. Other than that. It reeks of corruption and cover up. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out, when the left is forming a Jim Crow 3.0 mob trial to divert culpability. A little less editing and more actual reporting would serve the media well. Truth is better than lies and will set you free.
2
@gamedrps430 did you just get back from lunch with Nancy? Or talking with Joe ? Either way no worries. Sober up, get ur nighties on,sleep it off. Talk later. After all we all have bad days or nights.
1
@robc4191 long winded, I'll give you that.
1
@gamedrps430 haven't paid attention to fox lawyers. Really don't even know who you are referring to. I have watched initial hearings . In which head of capitol police testified about his multiple requests made to Sgt at Arms about securing additional support days before the 6th. Yet ultimately denied. His concern was so great he actually side stepped Sgt at Arms and made a personal request to the national guard to at least be on standby. Sgt at Arms was full of the usuall. "I don't recall " answers. Capitol police also testified this lack of security was abnormal. For such of an event happening nearby. Do your homework. Capitol security and surrounding grounds is the speaker's and her appointed Sgt at Arms deal. The chain of command is not that long. As the media would have you believe. That alone makes her a subject of the investigation. Or at least a witness. Which is why she removed the 2 representatives. She doesn't want this "fair and complete, thorough investigation " to go in that direction. No matter how you slice it. She bears some responsibility in the lack of security that day. And it wasn't unintentional. So why? I do not condone those who breached. And I would not want to be one of them. Because they have every federal agency dealing, with law enforcement, national security and DOJ. After them and checking there affiliations. So what is her committee going to find out, that they arent? The lack of security is the only question left that this committee can truly address. And it's one she doesn't want asked because it involves her directly. That's why she should recuse herself. Other than that, you know as well as I do. It'll be just another "Hunt for the Orange Man". Which frankly after almost 6yrs and 10s or 100s of millions of dollars. Just to watch her beat a dead horse, is getting old. Seeing as the worst corruption they found was in the FBI, that had links back to Hillary, Biden and Obama. That got swept under pretty quickly. By the way, who are these fox lawyers you keep referring to?
1
@gamedrps430 I watched the hearings live. I did the research. Capitol security and it's surrounding grounds, with the exception of the Senate floor,gallery and entrance (Senate majority leader heads that) Is headed by the Speaker of the House and her appointee(s), including Sgt at Arms, that is supposed to report directly to the Speaker. What don't you get about that? I did not say she was solely responsible. I said she bears some responsibility. Sgt at Arms is her handpicked appointee. He may make decisions, but it's her that ultimately has to sign off. Who do you think ordered the barricades and fencing afterwards? And how does the election or fox have anything to do with the security at the capitol? Even the left wing fact checkers can't get around the fact she is the head of capitol security. So they reposed the question. To ask if she was solely responsible for capitol security. Which she is not. But is, as I described above. Why do you keep referring to Fox, lawyers and elections. They have nothing to do with this. It's not where I got my information from. If you looked it up, you'd find the same information. And would realize, politics aside, Because she heads capitol security. By default, she has to be a subject of the investigation. If it is to be fair, thorough and complete as she claims. And being a subject of the investigation (even if just a witness). Should exclude her in anyway from any aspect of these proceedings. Including handpicking the committee or any aspect of its investigation. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out. I understand the extreme bias of all the media, Fox, CNN, MSNBC, CBS etc. Always better to watch live or replays of events in their entirety. It's astounding how both sides edit to try and show their narrative. A fine example would be , Senator Rand Paul and Fauci's last Senate hearing interaction. Watch, fox,CNN, msnbc, CBS, NBC etc clips. Then go back and watch the entire unedited hearing. So your assumptions of where and how I get my information are way off base. It may be your method. But certainly not mine.
1