House January 6 Committee: Public Hearings – Pending

/60 Comments/in , , /by

PSYCH! Got you!

Seriously though, I had this post scheduled for last Wednesday September 28, then rescheduled it to this Wednesday thinking perhaps we’d have a hearing one week later.

Nope. Nada. Nothing.

And then I forgot the automated post scheduled for today. Oops, sorry about that.

That’s not to say we don’t have January 6 related material to discuss. Use this thread to do so.

What’s your guess as to what the House J6 Committee will tackle in the next hearing, which may be next Thursday October 13?

Will it be the final hearing, or will there be more before the end of this congressional term?

Do you think the next hearing will include material Justice Clarence Thomas’ spouse Ginni Thomas shared last week with the committee?

And what the hell is up with her weird response to journalists after her testimony? She acts like she’s still programmed.

Treat this as an open thread.

image_print
60 replies
  2. Rugger9 says:

    Since a date was announced I suspect the J6SC have been able to winnow out the wheat from the chaff in the tips provided. It has to be definitive now and ring loudly enough in the ears to still be heard on November 8th. What concerns me is that there is still so much to find out, let’s hope they present more and/or for longer than a 2-hour TV movie.

    • Operandi says:

      They’ve still got their big final report to drop. Though we know from experience that very few people read those things and instead just go by whatever spin manages to hit the media first.

      It’ll be interesting to see what they do if the voters are smart and give them another 2 years to keep working.

      • JVO says:

        This cannot be shared and understood enough!!
        Nov 8 is about so much more this time – the people must respond.

  5. Manuel Gonzalez says:

    “scheduled to begin Wednesday September 28 at 1:00 p.m. ET”
    Is October 5th the wrong date, please confirm if something else is the matter with this post?

  6. punaise says:

    Blomberg:

    The House committee investigating last year’s attack on the US Capitol has tentatively rescheduled its next public hearing for Oct. 13, a person familiar with the planning said, following last week’s abrupt postponement as Hurricane Ian made its way toward Florida.

    ETA: tried to embed a link but failed.

  7. Troutwaxer says:

    My special hope for this one is that we get to hear Ginni Thomas saying, “I take the Fifth.”

    • Rayne says:

      I’ve got a lot going on at the moment but I’m looking forward to reading this thread about Ginni’s body language:

      Her demeanor was just so weird and off.

      • Molly Pitcher says:

        Oh you very much want to take the time to look at this. Then scroll down that page a bit to “Andy Lowry”. Ginni (Lamp) Thomas was a member of the Lifespring cult. There is a video of her talking about the experience.

        This is more like Jim Jones cult than Stepford Wives.

        • Sue 'em Queequeg says:

          That’s kind of thing about cults, isn’t it? At some point you feel as if you’re saying, “Oh, unh unh, that was Pepsi, not Coke”. They’re certainly not all that similar and some are obviously worse than others, but they all seem to get a full nelson on the same part of the brain (n.b.: not a brain scientist).

      • OldTulsaDude says:

        For the old timers, she has the exact same expression as the Manson girls had as they walked into court.

      • cat herder says:

        Rayne –
        As someone with, well, if not autism let’s say several autistic tendencies, I find the whole idea of ‘body language’ analysis disgusting. All it does is confirm/reinforce existing beliefs about a person. It’s no more legit than phrenology. (see also: microexpressions; handwriting analysis)

        Please don’t mistake this as either an attack on you, or a defense of the nutbar Ginni Thomas. Junk science is still junk science even if it’s widely accepted and gets lots of clicks on the interwebs.

        • Rayne says:

          You’re entitled to your opinion. We’ll agree to disagree. However humans are animals; like other mammals their bodies communicate even when they aren’t using their mouths or hands/paws.

          Here’s a sketch of a dog. Most humans have learned from exposure to or experience with dogs during their own childhood that this is not a happy, comfortable animal which feels secure based on the cues their body gives off including raised hairs lifted by small muscle contractions:
          Sketch of a fearful dog expressing aggression

          This dog is aggressive as is the previous one, but its body language expresses dominance versus fearfulness:
          Sketch of a dominant dog expressing aggression

          Both dogs are communicating without words what their feelings are as well as their perception of their social status, and doing so not only by audible barking but with major and minor muscle movements.

          Humans aren’t any different; we’re simply able to study microexpressions more easily because of shared language.

          Your discomfort, though, brings up a good point: is Ginni Thomas neuro divergent? If so, would it affect her ability to know right from wrong? Is her neuro divergence why you might call her a “nutbar”?

        • JVO says:

          I agree with both of you! Rayne’s points are correct. The real issue for me is to what extent it’s allowed to be used to convict someone of a crime. It’s potentially highly prejudicial and it is a short, slippery slope to it also being psuedoscience.

        • Rayne says:

          Humans are far too diverse to use this in a court of law; we already know polygraphs aren’t 100% accurate and they only measure a very narrow range of physical responses.

          Body language is nonetheless used every day, and often without conscious effort. Neurotypical humans don’t even think about what a smile means, they respond to it, and they can also recognize fake smiles from real ones as just one example — far more subtle than a dog baring its teeth in a snarl. Humans use these cues in all sorts of ways but because they’re difficult to measure and quantify, they really shouldn’t be used in legal settings.

          However, if I were a House J6 Committee member who didn’t participate in interviewing Ginni Thomas, after seeing this video of her I’d want to comb through the interview even more closely for inconsistencies. Many of us have observed and commented on perception of body language cues from others who’ve testified and their relative credibility based on consistency with testimony — Ginni Thomas will be no different.

  8. Tom-1812 says:

    I’m expecting to see a lot of Flood-Zone Ron DeSantis trick-or-treaters this Halloween. The gleaming white booties should really recommend themselves to parents as a safety factor for their little ones in costume going door-to-door at night. Plus, the white booties have definite unisex fashion appeal, which I’m sure is what the Governor had in mind!

  9. Krisy Gosney says:

    Re Ginni Thomas. She reminds me, in the above video, of Tom Delay’s old mugshot where he has that weird ‘programmed’ smile. The mugshot was much ridiculed. Delay said later he told himself to have an expression that radiated “God’s love.” The video makes me think that’s what GT told herself to do- radiate God’s love. These Christian Fascists seem to really not get how creepy they are, in my opinion. (And she might be on one or two insurrectionist’s-little-helpers, imo.)

  10. Hahnizona says:

    Perhaps I missed it, but I sure would like to know how many phone calls Mike Pence made and who he was talking to and what they said to him.

  11. Gatorbaiter says:

    Is it possible for Judge Carter to have sorted out Eastman’s emails by then? It would be great to see what he’s still fighting so hard to conceal.

  13. surfer2099 says:

    4 Hour stint:

    First 2 hours on Ginni Thomas testimony
    Second 2 hours on Mar-A-Lago documents DOJ is pursuing.

    This delay feels like they are waiting for the courts and DOJ. Just a gut feeling.

  14. Leoghann says:

    The committee has been very media-savvy since the beginning. Up to now, the witnesses who have appeared in person at the televised hearings seem to have been there just for verification. So I don’t see any disadvantage to them presenting only videotaped testimony.

    As much as most of us would like to see them cover several topics in depth, IMO there’s no way they’re going to let one presentation go much longer than the 2 hours +/- the others have been. They want to keep their audience engaged. That might involve airing a second hearing, or it might not.

    • timbo says:

      I have to disagree. They certainly don’t appear to be as hard charging as the Congress during the Watergate era (which was, admittedly, a more innocent and innovative time in national politics than today). For instance, imagine the electricity in the room if there were witnesses who had been granted immunity and no longer could rely on invoking the 5th, etc? It is incredibly unlikely to happen but it certainly would have made public hearings more compelling by quite a bit.

      I hasten to add, for those who are against Congressional compelled testimony through grants of immunity, that we already see social immunity to a large agree in practice, what with all the tell all books that come out after the Congress has been dissed by the authors. Perhaps the Congress should look into that problem too, which seems to a symptom of the times… about how some of these recent authors are monetizing the scandals that they were associated with but refuse to give testimony under oath before the Congress.

      I suppose that one could argue that it is a tribute to Congress’ recent restraint in that they haven’t been throwing immunity grants around left and right just to get attention from the public… or maybe they could start go-fundme campaigns where if enough folks donate money to a grants of immunity fund, say with individual campaigns for each alleged conspirator, that then the Congress might use that as a guide as on who to prioritize for granting such. No doubt something would go through the roof?

  15. Tom R. says:

    I expect the upcoming hearing to include information about efforts by Roger Stone and others to organize events, including juicy snippets from the Danish documentary.

    WaPo: Jan. 6 committee hearing will use clips from Roger Stone documentary

    F— the voting, let’s get right to the violence. Shoot to kill, see an antifa, shoot to kill. F— ’em. Done with this bulls—. I am of course only kidding. We renounce violence completely. We totally renounce violence. The left is the only ones who engage in violence.

    Forgive me, I’ve been googling “Roger Stone” every few days for the last couple years, waiting for all the shoes to drop.

    • Peterr says:

      The number of shoes in Stone’s closet rivals the count in Imelda Marcos’ closet, so if you’ve only been doing this a couple of years, you may have a while longer to wait.

  16. Zinsky says:

    I always hesitate to prognosticate, especially given the fluid nature of the hearings and the much wiser people who post here, but I will state what I think the final J6 hearing should accomplish. As followers of EW know, there is a need to legally connect the “muscle” (e.g. Joe Beggs, etc.) to the mid-level leadership of Trumpworld (e.g. Roger Stone, Ali Alexander, Alex Jones, etc.) to the inner circle (Trump, Meadows, etc) at the top. The seditious conspiracy thread needs to be drawn through this whole crooked enterprise. I hope the final installment does that. Regarding Ginni Thomas, my impression is that she is a liar and a wack-a-doodle. To assert that she never discusses politics with her husband is laughable and her texts to White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows about trying Joe Biden on a barge outside Gitmo are delusional and sound like something a maladjusted adolescent would post, not the spouse of a sitting Supreme Court justice. However, if you examine her earlier years, it is clear she is drawn to cults and zealotry. In short, the woman is easily deceived. Sad.

    • Belyn says:

      I am eager to hear more of the follow-the-money trail.
      I’d also love to hear something about Grassley and the ties of staffer Barbara Ledeen (or her spouse Michael) to Gini Thomas.

  17. Blaze Trailer says:

    When I was a kid, if it was a snow day or I was home sick, Mom and I would watch Perry Mason. A well made, satisfying show. As a youngin I was mesmerized by the surprise confessions – even though they happened a lot I would later learn. So my wish for the finale is a surprise witness – as long as it’s not Barr.
    The B side wish is that Liz the Mighty Unleashed walks in with a cape and big hat and proceeds to wreck the Republican party for about a 1/2 hour.
    Update past episodes with any new information. Find a way to mention MAL a few times in passing. Tell them what you told them. Drop at least one hammer.

  18. Alan Charbonneau says:

    Since it is an open thread, here are a couple of non-Jan 6 links on stories that might be of interest
    Ken Paxton must testify
    https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/05/politics/ken-paxton-abortion-lawsuit-texas/index.html

    Biden pardons federal prisoners for simple posssession of marijuana. There are currently no federal prisoners in that category, but it’s still a step in the right direction.
    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/biden-marijuana-possession-pardons-prior-federal-offenses/

  19. mospeck says:

    NYT — KYIV, Ukraine — leaders of the Ukrainian Center for Civil Liberties, which won the Nobel Peace Prize on Friday, rejected criticism of the committee’s decision to award it the prize alongside human rights defenders from Russia and Belarus, saying that the prize recognized the universal struggle against oppression.Oleksandra Matviychuk, the chairwoman of the center, stressed during a news conference on Saturday that the Nobel Peace Prize belongs to every Ukrainian fighting for freedom and democracy, addressing a backlash from some Ukrainians over the sharing of the prize. But Ms. Matviychuk also urged solidarity with those groups who have been fearlessly documenting human rights abuses in Belarus and Russia. She said people who had criticized the lumping of the three organizations together should see that they all are working to fight as one for universal freedoms. “It is a story about resistance to common evil and that human rights defenders in different countries are building links to solve problems that do not have state borders,” Ms. Matviychuk said, mentioning the slogan “for our freedom and yours” that many post-Soviet nations had used during their struggles for independence, “once again has become relevant and will lead to the destruction of the renewed Russian empire.” President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, she added, is not afraid of NATO — he is “afraid of ideas of liberty.”
    https://www.nytimes.com/live/2022/10/08/world/russia-ukraine-war-news
    scary wonderful times with the Ukrainians blowing up a bridge and tickling the dragon’s tail. So yea, the young Russians gotta be free also. So what’s a tac nuke or two when you’re burning down the house
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GmYsHZjTPk

  20. Clare Kelly says:

    Open thread enabled. Ty Rayne.

    Maggie Haberman’s breathtaking hubris with David Folkenflik on “On The Media” today.

    FF’sS.

    • Rayne says:

      I dread listening. I’d seen another interview within the last week; I was struck by her weirdly flat responses which felt like a manifestation of privilege. That’s what really galls me. So many Americans have suffered real injury because of this tangerine twatwaffle she treats like a subject of observation, utterly removed from the toxic bullshit he throws everywhere, and he gets away with it because she is so goddamned flaccid as a journalist.

      For anybody else still looking around down here at the end of this thread, go to the October 7, 2022 edition of On the Media at NPR:
      https://www.npr.org/podcasts/452538775/on-the-media

Comments are closed.