Investment Strategies / Mechanical Investing
No. of Recommendations: 4
Because of course he did:
https://redstate.com/smoosieq/2025/10/06/whoa-jack...Thank you, Senator Johnson, and Chairman Grassley, thank you for your leadership in making this happen. This is an extraordinary revelation that just took place this afternoon. My colleagues and I found out — all of us Republicans, by the way — that we were placed under investigation by this FBI, under the Joe Biden FBI, that was led, I presume, by Jack Smith and his predecessors. This isn’t the first time that it’s happened, though. Senator Johnson just mentioned this: I served on the Trump transition team in Trump Tower in 2016. Senator Blackburn was vice-chair of the transition committee then, as were probably a dozen or more members of Congress. To think that we were surveilled by the Obama FBI — this corruption runs deep, and it’s gone on for too long.
And the fact that it’s happened here again, the fact that they are looking at our records in 2023 — sitting members of the United States Senate. Again, the only thing that we have in common, the only thing in common in this entire list, is that we’re all Republicans. They've decided to come after us — this is as partisan as it gets — the FBI and the corruption that's running there has to be cleared out. Thank God we have Kash Patel and Dan Bongino there. This has to be addressed. It has to be resolved. It needs to happen today.And
The truth comes out. Biden’s Stasi who claimed to be saving “our sacred democracy” in fact worked overtime to destroy it - all for power. They spied on Catholic churches, prosecuted pro-lifers, deployed the FBI against parents at school board meetings - and tried to tap the phones of their political enemies. Including mine. This is an abuse of power beyond Watergate, beyond J. Edgar Hoover, one that directly strikes at the Constitution, the separation of powers, and the First Amendment. We need a full investigation of all involved: who knew about it, who ordered it, and who approved it. Anyone and everyone who violated the law must be prosecuted. The way to save the country is to restore the rule of law.
No. of Recommendations: 8
Looks OK to me.
SNIP Some of the lawmakers were part of a group of Republicans who planned to challenge the results of the 2020 presidential election. After the voting was disrupted by the rioters on Jan. 6, 2021, most of the lawmakers named in the FBI document voted to certify the results, while Sen. Lummis and Rep. Kelly objected to at least one state.
The special counsel's investigation delved into phone calls between lawmakers and the president on the evening of Jan. 6, 2021, which Smith alleged were part of a last-ditch attempt to talk congressional Republicans into blocking the certification of Biden's victory. The 2023 indictment against Mr. Trump lists several attempts by Mr. Trump and his alleged co-conspirators to reach senators and representatives by phone. It argued the president "attempted to exploit the violence and chaos at the Capitol by calling lawmakers to convince them, based on knowingly false claims of election fraud, to delay the certification."
Last year, a final report penned by Smith — which argued the president would have been convicted if not for his 2024 election win — also pointed to phone calls placed by Mr. Trump and members of his circle. It cited toll records from two unindicted co-conspirators who are unnamed but are widely believed to be Rudy Giuliani and one other person. SNIP
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/fbi-gop-lawmaker-phon...
No. of Recommendations: 13
If there were Democrats involved in the conspiracy it is likely that Smith would have investigated them as well. It is not his fault that all the criminals were Republicans.
No. of Recommendations: 10
Because of course he did: ~Dope
https://redstate.com/smoosieq/2025/10/06/whoa-jack...Sadly, RedState is not a legitimate source of information:
"Overall, we rate RedState borderline Questionable and strongly Right Biased, based on story selection that always favors the right and use of emotionally loaded (sensationalized) headlines.
We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to poor sourcing of information and several failed fact checks."
Posting sensationalized headlines and links to questionable sources makes you look foolish. Please do better, if you can. Thanks.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/red-state/
No. of Recommendations: 3
Looks OK to me.
Of course. That's perfectly on brand. You and the others believe that civil rights don't extend to Republicans and you have no problems at all abusing the rights of your political enemies.
No. of Recommendations: 4
course. That's perfectly on brand. You and the others believe that civil rights don't extend to Republicans and you have no problems at all abusing the rights of your political enemies.
Horseshit.
No. of Recommendations: 4
Horseshit.
Whatever you say. As I said, reality marches on whether or not you're aligned with it or not.
No. of Recommendations: 2
Of course. That's perfectly on brand. You and the others believe that civil rights don't extend to Republicans and you have no problems at all abusing the rights of your political enemies.
Oh, you don't think there should be an investigation into the perpetrators of Jan 6? It was a pic-a-nic, eh, Booboo? No Jan 6, no need to look at the phone records.
No. of Recommendations: 7
Oh, you don't think there should be an investigation into the perpetrators of Jan 6?
Which is exactly the reason that what Dope said is “horseshit”.
No. of Recommendations: 4
Which is exactly the reason that what Dope said is “horseshit”.
Were those Senators present in the riot?
No?
Then Smith was just spying on his political opponents.
You're running around yelling HORSESHIT but you're the guy OD'ing on milk of magnesia and waddling about with his pants down.
No. of Recommendations: 10
Were those Senators present in the riot?
They voted not to certify the election.
You may say it was their right.
I say it was evidence of their complicity in the “riot” that was certainly worth investigating.
No. of Recommendations: 1
Were those Senators present in the riot?
No?
The boats blown up in the Caribean weren't present on US soil where Americans OD and die either. So..
... Trump is murdering civilians without any...
No. of Recommendations: 4
They voted not to certify the election.
So what?
You had no problems with democrats doing the same thing. Gimmie an h! Gimmie a y!...
You may say it was their right.
Because...it was.
You people can pretzel yourself into whatever shapes your joints and ligaments will allow. The bottom line is that none of you really believe in all that icky stuff the Constitution spells out. For you, it's a convenient shield to duck behind when it suits your fancy. Nothing more.
No. of Recommendations: 12
You had no problems with democrats doing the same thing. Gimmie an h! Gimmie a y!...
Since exactly 0 Democratic Senators voted not to certify Trump’s election, again, your argument is horseshit.
No. of Recommendations: 3
Since exactly 0 Democratic Senators voted not to certify Trump’s election, again, your argument is horseshit.Nice try, amigo.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/despite-...Democrats objected 11 times, citing a variety of issues, including “Russian interference,” “massive voter suppression” and the “violation of the Voting Rights Act.”Oh, look. RussiaRussiaRussia.
Objecting to elections is something the little d's do pretty much every time.
So...you lose. Again.
No. of Recommendations: 8
I say it was evidence of their complicity in the “riot” that was certainly worth investigating.
You skipped this one. The plan was formed ahead of time and it does look like they were part of the Jan 6 effort to keep Trump in power.
Skipping it means ya got nothing.
No. of Recommendations: 4
You skipped this one. The plan was formed ahead of time and it does look like they were part of the Jan 6 effort to keep Trump in power.
It was?
Weren't you banging on about conspiracy theories? Going through life shouting IKNOWYOURAREBUTWHATAMI is how you lose arguments.
Try again.
No. of Recommendations: 6
Weren't you banging on about conspiracy theories? Going through life shouting IKNOWYOURAREBUTWHATAMI is how you lose arguments.
Well, no one on this Board can argue against Dope’s overwhelming expertise on how to lose an argument.
No. of Recommendations: 2
Well, no one on this Board can argue against Dope’s overwhelming expertise on how to lose an argument.
Ahh, the voice of The Irrelevant weighs in. Nothing to add but snark.
Not unlike the guy who farts in the crowded elevator.
No. of Recommendations: 1
Ahh, the voice of The Irrelevant weighs in. Nothing to add but snark.
Not unlike the guy who farts in the crowded elevator.
***
Poor guy.
I think I had gas once back in '93.
Hopefully the elevator guy gets ok soon.
No. of Recommendations: 6
DOPE:It was?
Weren't you banging on about conspiracy theories?
Here you are Dopester the Great L.
AI Overview
The statement that "six senators planned to object" refers to the final outcome of the vote on the objection to Arizona's electors, which six Republican senators supported
. More than a dozen senators initially planned to object to the certification of multiple states' results, but several changed their minds after the January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol.
The six Republican senators who voted to sustain the objection to Arizona's electoral votes were:
Ted Cruz (Texas)
Josh Hawley (Missouri)
Cindy Hyde-Smith (Mississippi)
John Kennedy (Louisiana)
Roger Marshall (Kansas)
Tommy Tuberville (Alabama)
Initial plans to object
Before January 6, a group of 11 senators, led by Ted Cruz, announced their intention to object to the certification unless an emergency 10-day audit of the results was completed.
The first senator to publicly announce his objection was Josh Hawley, in December 2020.
Other senators who were part of the initial effort included Marsha Blackburn, Mike Braun, Steve Daines, and Ron Johnson.
Changes after the Capitol attack
The violent attack on the U.S. Capitol on January 6 caused some senators to reverse their decision to object to the certification.
For example, Senator Kelly Loeffler, who had earlier said she would object, announced on the Senate floor that she could not, in good conscience, do so following the day's events.
Other senators, like James Lankford and Mike Braun, also withdrew their planned objections.
The final vote
The vote to reject Arizona's electoral votes was the first objection considered during the joint session of Congress.
The Senate voted 6–93 against the objection, meaning the vast majority of senators did not support it.
Later, seven senators voted to sustain the objection to Pennsylvania's electors, with Senators Cynthia Lummis and Rick Scott joining the six who had voted against Arizona's electors.
I have vague memories of some other things too. :) Enjoy!
No. of Recommendations: 5
your argument is horseshit.
If you keep comparing Dope’s arguments to horseshit, you’re going to give horseshit a bad name!
No. of Recommendations: 9
Dope1: And the fact that it’s happened here again, the fact that they are looking at our records in 2023 — sitting members of the United States Senate.
Umm, cough. Smith accessed the phone records of potential insurrection suspects as a result of lawful grand jury subpoenas. It's hardly his problem that some of those suspected of participating in or planning the January 6th insurrection were republican members of Congress.
PRO TIP: If you don't want to have your phone records subpoenaed, don't participate in an effort to overthrow the government after losing an election.
