If the Jan 6 Committee had a real case ...

the point is; they didn't have any real representation on the committees. why does the left think that they can just ignore ethics, rules, and laws, if they don't suit their interests?

The GOP made the decision to not be involved.
What ethics is s the committee ignoring? What rules? What laws? Can you list them?

McConnell torpedoed a bi-partisan committee in the Senate.

80% of the testimony has been from Republicans.

Republicans have deliberately chosen to not be involved. What rules, ethics, or laws are being violated?

This is about this sham committee as constituted,
regardless of how it was constituted

"What rules, ethics, or laws are being violated?"

This hearing? you can't be serious

Just coming back up here to allow spaces for replies- what specific rules, ethics, and laws are being violated?

And the "it's so obvious!' answer isn't an answer. What specific laws, rules, and ethics are being violated?

McCarthy chose to pull all representation when an objection was raised to 2 members.

Why is their participation on the committee more important than being on the committee?

Because respecting the rules is more important than the committee.
It's a matter of principle, both parties get to assign whatever member they want,

This is the first time in the history of the Congress where the majority member told the minority that they could not pick their own representatives; it is entirely without precedent. That was the exact moment when the committee lost their credibility irretrievably.

Again, what rules and laws are being broken?

If it's so history, this should be easy.

Let me make it easier for you: here's the specific rule for forming the Jan 6th committee: https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-resolution/503

That's the rule. It was voted on by the House. It passed.

Note this specific phrase: The select committee consists of 13 Members of the House appointed by the Speaker; 5 must be appointed after consultation with the minority leader.

The rule gives the speaker the specific power to appoint 13 members. 5 AFTER consultation with the minority leader.

She consulted with him. He gave her 5 names. She said no to two. He pulled all 5. She appointed 5 more.

The rule was followed. It doesn't say "with the approval of the House Minority leader". It says AFTER.

So...what other rules were violated?

I ask because the House resolution that appointed the Bengazi select committee uses the exact same language:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-resolution/567/text

(a) The Speaker shall appoint 12 Members to the Select Committee, five of whom shall be appointed after consultation with the minority leader.

See that? AFTER. Not with THE APPROVAL OF.

So. Again. What rule? What law?

Why have you removed ethics? Does the left not recognize ethics?

What is specifically unethical?

This is the third time I've asked?

You still don't have an answer.

Just because you don't like that the Jan 6th insurrection is being investigated doesn't make it unethical, illegal, or breaks any rules.

It is unethical to disallow the minority to pick its own membership. Obviously you either disagree or cannot understand

As much fun as this has been, I have better things to do than trying to help you grasp what is going on.

Have a good life

Yes. If is so egregious, then it should be easy to articulate.

So what ethics, rules, and laws are being ignored?

It is unethical on its face, to not allow the minority to appoint their own representatives

They were. On July 19th, 2021 McCarthy named 5 members of the House to the Jan 6th Committee.
Here's the names:

Illinois Rep. Rodney Davis;
Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan;
Rep. Kelly Armstrong of North Dakota;
Texas Rep. Troy Nehls.
Indiana Rep. Jim Banks

On July 21st, 2021, McCarthy said they were no longer be on the committee and pulled the 5 members from serving on it.

So. What ethics were violated? They were given a chance to serve on the committee. 5 members were named. And then the Republicans decided to not participate.

No ethical violations. No rules violations. No laws being broken.

You've got the story wrong, I believe,
You totally left out the part where Pelosi did not want Jordan and Banks on the committee (because they thought the investigation should include Pelosi). For the first time in the history of the congress, a select committee would not let the minority appoint their own representatives. When told that Pelosi intended to interfere with his picks, he said screw you, we're not playing. good call

I want you to think about your job.

Your boss comes to you. He says, "hey, there's this really important project coming along. It's big. It's gonna be a team of 10 people. 5 from our sister company. 5 from our company. It's very important that we send our best over to that team. So, go pick 5. The best 5 for this job."

Then you go and pick those 5. The 5 you think can do the job really well.

You bring back the names. Your boss says, "Okay, these 3? They're perfect. Solid choices. They'll do it right. But these 2? no. They're difficult to work with. They grand stand. They don't do their part of the job, then blame everyone else when it falls apart. Give me 2 other names."

Then I want you to think about this.

Is it reasonable and rational for you to then say "F**K YOU! IT'S THOSE 2 OR WE ALL WALK!!!" Is that reasonable?

Of the 200 plus employees at the company you couldn't come up with 2 other names?

Is it reasonable for McCarthy to have pulled all participation over 2 names? He couldn't say "hey, I see your concerns. I understand that. And in the spirit of compromise (the thing governance in a democracy is all about), I'll recommend these other 2 guys." That wasn't something he could do?

Having those 2 on the committee was more important than being involved in finding the truth?

That sounds reasonable and rational to you?

biased investigations don't find the truth, and yes getting to pick your own representation is that important. How come the left has so little respect for rules and laws that block their agenda?