Mon Mar 28, 2022, 07:20 PM
Evolve Dammit (13,575 posts)
January 6th Committee live and only MSNBC is covering. A meaningful announcement
and no other outlets? Makes me wonder if the "public testimony" in a few months will be similarly marginalized?
|
14 replies, 950 views
![]() |
Author | Time | Post |
![]() |
Evolve Dammit | Mar 2022 | OP |
UTUSN | Mar 2022 | #1 | |
spanone | Mar 2022 | #2 | |
PA_jen | Mar 2022 | #4 | |
Ocelot II | Mar 2022 | #3 | |
Kaleva | Mar 2022 | #5 | |
onecaliberal | Mar 2022 | #6 | |
C_U_L8R | Mar 2022 | #9 | |
RussBLib | Mar 2022 | #11 | |
onecaliberal | Mar 2022 | #12 | |
RussBLib | Mar 2022 | #7 | |
C_U_L8R | Mar 2022 | #10 | |
Hoyt | Mar 2022 | #8 | |
brooklynite | Mar 2022 | #13 | |
Poiuyt | Mar 2022 | #14 |
Response to Evolve Dammit (Original post)
Mon Mar 28, 2022, 07:22 PM
UTUSN (66,909 posts)
1. Now? What was the announcement?
Response to UTUSN (Reply #1)
Mon Mar 28, 2022, 07:24 PM
spanone (132,931 posts)
2. criminal referral of Navarro & Scavino
holding them in contempt of congress....
|
Response to spanone (Reply #2)
Mon Mar 28, 2022, 07:27 PM
PA_jen (1,059 posts)
4. What Rep Lofgen read was freaking Scary and prove how involved Trump was in all this.
Where is AG Garland? I am sure he has all this evidence and more we have not heard of.
|
Response to Evolve Dammit (Original post)
Mon Mar 28, 2022, 07:25 PM
Ocelot II (105,774 posts)
3. It's a procedural announcement regarding contempt recommendations
for Navarro and Scavino; it's not a substantive or evidentiary hearing. That's probably why it's not being covered live everywhere.
|
Response to Evolve Dammit (Original post)
Mon Mar 28, 2022, 07:28 PM
Kaleva (33,441 posts)
5. Just a very small fraction of adults in the US watch cable news
And that includes Fox.
NBC News, ABC News, and CBS News each have more viewers then all the cable news networks combined . |
Response to Evolve Dammit (Original post)
Mon Mar 28, 2022, 07:31 PM
onecaliberal (28,855 posts)
6. Raskin is 🔥
Response to onecaliberal (Reply #6)
Mon Mar 28, 2022, 07:39 PM
C_U_L8R (43,327 posts)
9. Raskin had me standing. Wow what an impassioned indictment.
Response to C_U_L8R (Reply #9)
Mon Mar 28, 2022, 07:43 PM
RussBLib (6,746 posts)
11. passed 9-0
love Raskin.
At least 3 of them urged the DOJ to do its job. |
Response to C_U_L8R (Reply #9)
Mon Mar 28, 2022, 07:52 PM
onecaliberal (28,855 posts)
12. Mini closing argument.
Response to Evolve Dammit (Original post)
Mon Mar 28, 2022, 07:31 PM
RussBLib (6,746 posts)
7. twice now the cameras have switched to 2 bald guys
who, sorry, kinda look like thugs to me. Do we have Proud Boys attending this hearing? Intimidation, perhaps?
I do hope security is tight. |
Response to RussBLib (Reply #7)
Mon Mar 28, 2022, 07:40 PM
C_U_L8R (43,327 posts)
10. That was weird. Who are those guys?
Response to Evolve Dammit (Original post)
Mon Mar 28, 2022, 07:32 PM
Hoyt (54,770 posts)
8. The Committee lost momentum last summer by not quickly
following up riot videos, guards’ testimonies, etc.
|
Response to Evolve Dammit (Original post)
Mon Mar 28, 2022, 08:12 PM
brooklynite (84,590 posts)
13. The watergate hearings were covered by only one network at at time.
The others had their regular game shows and soap operas.
You can’t force people to watch it (and most people won’t). If people have an opportunity it’s that’s all that’s necessary. |
Response to brooklynite (Reply #13)
Mon Mar 28, 2022, 08:18 PM
Poiuyt (17,671 posts)
14. I think the first week they all covered it live
Then they started alternating. Remember though, there were only three networks at that time. Viewing was quite limited.
|