# Text began coming in to Meadows on January 6th, begging trump to stop the Capitol attack



## JimH52

CNN Exclusive: Republicans who texted Meadows with urgent pleas on January 6 say Trump could have stopped the violence
					

Within minutes of the US Capitol breach on January 6, 2021, messages began pouring into the cell phone of White House chief of staff Mark Meadows. Among those texting were Republican members of Congress, former members of the Trump administration, GOP activists, Fox personalities -- even the...




					www.cnn.com
				




But hours went by before trump did anything.


----------



## Mashmont

JimH52 said:


> CNN Exclusive: Republicans who texted Meadows with urgent pleas on January 6 say Trump could have stopped the violence
> 
> 
> Within minutes of the US Capitol breach on January 6, 2021, messages began pouring into the cell phone of White House chief of staff Mark Meadows. Among those texting were Republican members of Congress, former members of the Trump administration, GOP activists, Fox personalities -- even the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But hours went by before trump did anything.


For the 1000th time, how can you have an attack on the Capitol without one single weapon?


----------



## JimH52

Mashmont said:


> For the 1000th time, how can you have an attack on the capital without one single weapon?


We all watched it on TV.  The weapons were flag poles, bear spray, fire extinguishers, and there were firearms found later.  It was an attack.  It was a coup attempt incited by a fat man that could not admit it lost his re-election.









						Capitol Protesters Were Armed With Variety of Weapons - FactCheck.org
					

Conservative social media posts misleadingly claim the attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 was not an "armed" insurrection, citing FBI testimony that no guns were seized from suspects that day. But 23 people have been charged with having deadly or dangerous weapons during the assault --...




					www.factcheck.org


----------



## johngaltshrugged

I bet the OP watched the whole thing on TV without changing his wet drawers. 
The unarmed insurrection lie is so stupid you have to be a progbot to believe it


----------



## Mashmont

JimH52 said:


> We all watched it on TV.  The weapons were flag poles, bear spray, fire extinguishers, and there were firearms found later.  It was an attack.  It was a coup attempt incited by a fat man that could not admit it lost his re-election.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Capitol Protesters Were Armed With Variety of Weapons - FactCheck.org
> 
> 
> Conservative social media posts misleadingly claim the attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 was not an "armed" insurrection, citing FBI testimony that no guns were seized from suspects that day. But 23 people have been charged with having deadly or dangerous weapons during the assault --...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.factcheck.org


Oh a flag pole (that was already there).  Of course.  lol.  You leftwingers are starting to believe your own ridiculous story.


----------



## JimH52

johngaltshrugged said:


> I bet the OP watched the whole thing on TV without changing his wet drawers.
> The unarmed insurrection lie is so stupid you have to be a progbot to believe it


MAGA is not so smart, are you?  That is fine.  Go get someone to read my threads to you.


----------



## bodecea

Mashmont said:


> For the 1000th time, how can you have an attack on the Capitol without one single weapon?


There were multiple weapons at the Jan 6th Capitol.   You sound groomed.


----------



## johngaltshrugged

It was a peaceful demonstration until the feds instigated violence with the cops & then egged the angry masses on after the cops started retaliating with tear gas & clubs.
Nice try proggy.
Nobody is buying your BS outside the low info bed wetters


----------



## bodecea

JimH52 said:


> We all watched it on TV.  The weapons were flag poles, bear spray, fire extinguishers, and there were firearms found later.  It was an attack.  It was a coup attempt incited by a fat man that could not admit it lost his re-election.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Capitol Protesters Were Armed With Variety of Weapons - FactCheck.org
> 
> 
> Conservative social media posts misleadingly claim the attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 was not an "armed" insurrection, citing FBI testimony that no guns were seized from suspects that day. But 23 people have been charged with having deadly or dangerous weapons during the assault --...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.factcheck.org


Funny how the same people who keep going on about other weapons besides guns kill people now act like guns are the only weapons that exist.


----------



## bodecea

johngaltshrugged said:


> It was a peaceful demonstration until the feds instigated violence with the cops & then egged the angry masses on after the cops started retaliating with tear gas & clubs.
> Nice try proggy.
> Nobody is buying your BS outside the low info bed wetters


"it was a peaceful demonstration"....................


----------



## johngaltshrugged

bodecea said:


> There were multiple weapons at the Jan 6th Capitol.   You sound groomed.


Said the side that actually defends child groomers.
Projection anyone?


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones

Mashmont said:


> For the 1000th time, how can you have an attack on the Capitol without one single weapon?


Trump and his supporters had no desire to stop the rightwing terrorist attack on America's democracy.


----------



## Mac1958

Trump's enablers knew he had gone too far.

And afterwards?  They kept enabling him.

Craven.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones

Mashmont said:


> Oh a flag pole (that was already there).  Of course.  lol.  You leftwingers are starting to believe your own ridiculous story.


Having been voted out of office, Trump was content to do nothing and watch America burn to the ground..


----------



## Lastamender

JimH52 said:


> CNN Exclusive: Republicans who texted Meadows with urgent pleas on January 6 say Trump could have stopped the violence
> 
> 
> Within minutes of the US Capitol breach on January 6, 2021, messages began pouring into the cell phone of White House chief of staff Mark Meadows. Among those texting were Republican members of Congress, former members of the Trump administration, GOP activists, Fox personalities -- even the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But hours went by before trump did anything.


Were the rioters watching TV? How would they have known and why would they care? You people are just plain dumb.


----------



## OhPleaseJustQuit

JimH52 said:


> CNN Exclusive: Republicans who texted Meadows with urgent pleas on January 6 say Trump could have stopped the violence
> 
> 
> Within minutes of the US Capitol breach on January 6, 2021, messages began pouring into the cell phone of White House chief of staff Mark Meadows. Among those texting were Republican members of Congress, former members of the Trump administration, GOP activists, Fox personalities -- even the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But hours went by before trump did anything.


Oh, you mean the Selfie Stick Riot?  I heard that a thousand congress critters were murdered in cold blood with the deadly weapons.  THE HORROR!


----------



## surada

JimH52 said:


> CNN Exclusive: Republicans who texted Meadows with urgent pleas on January 6 say Trump could have stopped the violence
> 
> 
> Within minutes of the US Capitol breach on January 6, 2021, messages began pouring into the cell phone of White House chief of staff Mark Meadows. Among those texting were Republican members of Congress, former members of the Trump administration, GOP activists, Fox personalities -- even the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But hours went by before trump did anything.



Even his kids were freaking out and trying to get Trump to call it off, but Trump was enjoying the violence.


----------



## OhPleaseJustQuit

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Having been voted out of office, Trump was content to do nothing and watch America burn to the ground..


Oh, okay.  I got it.  The Selfie Stick Riot became the* FLAMING SELFIE STICK RIOT* and all of America burned to ashes.  Thanks for clearing that up.  I guess the ashes hid all the congress critters' blood on the ground.

Oh, the drama.


----------



## toobfreak

JimH52 said:


> begging trump to stop the Capitol attack​



Oh Pleeeaze, Pres. Trump!  After telling these people to go down and peacefully support Pence, being baited into the Capitol, incited to riot by FBI plants, and arresting hundreds of people on phony, bogus charges aimed to make J6 look serious, then calling it an insurrection rocking the foundations of democracy, we asked the president to fly over the crowd in a red cape throwing flowers of peace and tell his flock to come on home!  It was all Trump's fault!   

Look, shitferbrains, J6 was a set up, another democrat con-- no one is falling for it so you can stop stroking yourself now.  We all know the whole thing was a fake, staged event designed to try to hang around Trump so afraid you are of his being reelected you are!  My guess:  the Dems will wrap up their J6 "investigations" just in time for the midterms hoping to bludgeon the voters with a lot of bogus lies hoping to once again steal an election.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

JimH52 said:


> CNN Exclusive: Republicans who texted Meadows with urgent pleas on January 6 say Trump could have stopped the violence
> 
> 
> Within minutes of the US Capitol breach on January 6, 2021, messages began pouring into the cell phone of White House chief of staff Mark Meadows. Among those texting were Republican members of Congress, former members of the Trump administration, GOP activists, Fox personalities -- even the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But hours went by before trump did anything.


J6 Reichstag Fire


----------



## toobfreak

Mac1958 said:


> Craven.






 Yep. Craven liar. Most apt description of the prog-commie I've heard to date. Mac never met a leftwing lie he didn't like.


----------



## Mac1958

toobfreak said:


> commie


----------



## JimH52

bodecea said:


> There were multiple weapons at the Jan 6th Capitol.   You sound groomed.


Most MAGA cult members have been groomed.  They worship at the feet of the fat man, trump....TFG.


----------



## toobfreak

Mashmont said:


> For the 1000th time, how can you have an attack on the Capitol without one single weapon?



Must have been all those "mean tweets" they were carrying.


----------



## toobfreak

Mac1958 said:


>



No one wants to be like you, creep.


----------



## JimH52

johngaltshrugged said:


> It was a peaceful demonstration until the feds instigated violence with the cops & then egged the angry masses on after the cops started retaliating with tear gas & clubs.
> Nice try proggy.
> Nobody is buying your BS outside the low info bed wetters


We all saw the police attacks and the windows broken.  You can gaslight all you want.  The facts say otherwise.  The upcoming public hearings will show what a total slug trump and his criminals associates are.


----------



## toobfreak

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Having been voted out of office



Is that what you call having an election stolen, fool?  What will you call it when your love interest Biddum the incompetent installed false hand-puppet gets his ass impeached and removed from office next winter?  Cause it is COMIN'.


----------



## JimH52

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Having been voted out of office, Trump was content to do nothing and watch America burn to the ground..


Cause trump is all about trump.  Screw the country and even screw his party.


----------



## toobfreak

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Trump and his supporters had no desire to stop the rightwing terrorist attack on America's democracy.



Is that what you call the communist coup in the WH now, dirtball sleezy prog?  Just wait until November!


----------



## AMart

JimH52 said:


> CNN Exclusive: Republicans who texted Meadows with urgent pleas on January 6 say Trump could have stopped the violence
> 
> 
> Within minutes of the US Capitol breach on January 6, 2021, messages began pouring into the cell phone of White House chief of staff Mark Meadows. Among those texting were Republican members of Congress, former members of the Trump administration, GOP activists, Fox personalities -- even the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But hours went by before trump did anything.


Nancy is in charge of that place. Not Trump or Meadows. Shame on her.


----------



## toobfreak

JimH52 said:


> Cause trump is all about trump.  Screw the country and even screw his party.



Whoops!  If that were really true, wouldn't you be CELEBRATING that?!

America is gonna stomp you a new mudhole in November, fool.


----------



## JimH52

AMart said:


> Nancy is in charge of that place. Not Trump or Meadows. Shame on her.


It was trump's words that incited the riot.


----------



## toobfreak

JimH52 said:


> We all watched it on TV.  The weapons were flag poles, bear spray, fire extinguishers


Find me one flag pole or fire extinguisher filmed being carried to the capitol that day by Trump Supporters, because everything was filmed that day, sphincterbreath!  But thanks for confirming that the Biddum regime can be overthrown by a can of bear spray!  



JimH52 said:


> It was an attack.


Were your feelings hurt, poor boy?!   Better go dry those tears. No, wait. WE will dry them for you starting this November!


----------



## Sunsettommy

JimH52 said:


> It was trump's words that incited the riot.



Now you are just LYING.

"And after this, we’re going to walk down, and I’ll be there with you. We’re going to walk down. We’re going to walk down any one you want, but I think right here. We’re going to walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators, and congressmen and women. We’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them, because you’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength, and you have to be strong.”

“We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated, lawfully slated. *I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard. *Today we will see whether Republicans stand strong for integrity of our elections, but whether or not they stand strong for our country, our country. Our country has been under siege for a long time, far longer than this four-year period.”

LINK

_bolding mine_


“*Please support our Capitol Police and Law Enforcement. They are truly on the side of our Country. Stay peaceful!*” he tweeted at 2:38 p.m. By that point, the mob had already shattered windows as they pushed inside the building.

His video statement repeated false claims about the fraudulent election and said, *“We have to have peace.* *So go home*. We love you. You’re very special.”

_bolding mine_

=====

No mention of storming the Capital building, no mention of attacking Congressional members, no mention of taking over the Certification process, no mention of an armed attack on anyone, no mention over overthrowing the government.


----------



## AMart

JimH52 said:


> It was trump's words that incited the riot.


Not it wasn't. And the words of Demorats have inspired billions of dollars in property and untold murders. Antifa is the Demorats brown shirt street army.


----------



## Darkwind

bodecea said:


> There were multiple weapons at the Jan 6th Capitol.   You sound groomed.


There sure were.  One unjustified shooting of a protester we know of for certain.


----------



## toobfreak

JimH52 said:


> Text began coming in to Meadows on January 6th, begging trump to stop the Capitol attack​



HEY JIM:
Did you hear the millions of people all begging Biddum to:

Fix the border?
Save Americans trapped in Afghanistan left there by you?
Stop causing hyperinflation?
Get out of Ukraine and address problems here?
Fix gasoline prices?
Fix the supply chain problem?
End the crime?
No?  You WILL, starting on November 8, this Fall.


----------



## mudwhistle

JimH52 said:


> CNN Exclusive: Republicans who texted Meadows with urgent pleas on January 6 say Trump could have stopped the violence
> 
> 
> Within minutes of the US Capitol breach on January 6, 2021, messages began pouring into the cell phone of White House chief of staff Mark Meadows. Among those texting were Republican members of Congress, former members of the Trump administration, GOP activists, Fox personalities -- even the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But hours went by before trump did anything.


Fuck that shit. It's all hogwash. 
Trump had jack squat to do with the Democrat's false-flag operation!


----------



## Clipper

Mashmont said:


> For the 1000th time, how can you have an attack on the Capitol without one single weapon?


Because they weren't packing AR's?


----------



## Clipper

JimH52 said:


> We all watched it on TV.  The weapons were flag poles, bear spray, fire extinguishers, and there were firearms found later.  It was an attack.  It was a coup attempt incited by a fat man that could not admit it lost his re-election.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Capitol Protesters Were Armed With Variety of Weapons - FactCheck.org
> 
> 
> Conservative social media posts misleadingly claim the attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 was not an "armed" insurrection, citing FBI testimony that no guns were seized from suspects that day. But 23 people have been charged with having deadly or dangerous weapons during the assault --...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.factcheck.org


You're talking to cement heads who are so in love with Trump that the rioters could have tossed hand grenades into the Capital & they'd still deny it. 

Cult worship 101.


----------



## JimH52

Clipper said:


> Because they weren't packing AR's?


If DC didn't have the gun law, they would have been.


----------



## JimH52

Clipper said:


> You're talking to cement heads who are so in love with Trump that the rioters could have tossed hand grenades into the Capital & they'd still deny it.
> 
> Cult worship 101.


The MAGA cult even deficated on Capitol walls...and these idiots still claim it was just another Capitol tour.  Do they know how stupid they sound?


----------



## Clipper

JimH52 said:


> If DC didn't have the gun law, they would have been.


No doubt.


----------



## JimH52

Query:  If trump wasn't responsible for the January 6th attack...why were his associates and kids trying to get him to stop it?


----------



## surada

JimH52 said:


> CNN Exclusive: Republicans who texted Meadows with urgent pleas on January 6 say Trump could have stopped the violence
> 
> 
> Within minutes of the US Capitol breach on January 6, 2021, messages began pouring into the cell phone of White House chief of staff Mark Meadows. Among those texting were Republican members of Congress, former members of the Trump administration, GOP activists, Fox personalities -- even the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But hours went by before trump did anything.



Trump was enjoying the attack on the Capitol.


----------



## JimH52

surada said:


> Trump was enjoying the attack on the Capitol.


Of course he was.  He doesn't care about the country.  It is all about trump.


----------



## surada

JimH52 said:


> Of course he was.  He doesn't care about the country.  It is all about trump.


Exactly.


----------



## JimH52

surada said:


> Trump was enjoying the attack on the Capitol.


Of course he was.  He is a Narcissist.  Everything revolves around him.   He and Poootin are so.mych alike they could be related.


----------



## surada

JimH52 said:


> Of course he was.  He is a Narcissist.  Everything revolves around him.   He and Poootin are so.mych alike they could be related.


Gaddafi was like Trump.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

JimH52 said:


> Most MAGA cult members have been groomed.  They worship at the feet of the fat man, trump....TFG.



^ Expert on grooming


----------



## JimH52

surada said:


> Gaddafi was like Trump.


trump and desantis are vengeful and punish anyone who disagrees with them.....you know...sort of like Poootin.


----------



## surada

JimH52 said:


> trump and desantis are vengeful and punish anyone who disagrees with them.....you know...sort of like Poootin.



I know. How did things get so bad? I've never seen so many rotten politicians.


----------



## JimH52

surada said:


> I know. How did things get so bad? I've never seen so many rotten politicians.


FOX news is the catalyst of much of the far right nuts we see out there today.  The Australian and his likes are out to ruin America.  There would never had been a trump if it had not been for FOX.


----------



## PoliticalChic

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Having been voted out of office, Trump was content to do nothing and watch America burn to the ground..




There was little left to burn to the ground after the 12 thousand riots, arsons, acts of domestic terrorism authorized and produced by the Democrat Party....



Nobody does it better than the Wehrmacht.....er, Democrats.





1.It is of the utmost necessity for the Left to mitigate, disguise, *the year-long series of riots, arsons, assaults, mayhem that they released on America *in preparation for stealing the election. Toward that end, they designed a *Biden-voter riot a the Capitol, *had their media allies pretend the damage was done by Trump supporters, the effort to shield the fact that their BLM, ANTIFA, and assorted other anarko-communist thugs were actually behind it. They learned that from earlier Nazis, as in the Reichstag Fire, a model for false-flag propaganda.









2. Completely ignored behind the pretense that this was an insurrection, a rebellion, an attack on democracy itself, was *the real such attack on America: The three day siege of the White House in May of 2020, occupation of Lafayette Park, and the burning of the historic St. John's Church.



"**Debunking The Photo Op Myth: Inspector General Investigation Refutes Media Account On The Clearing Of Lafayette Park*

For over a year, there has been one fact that has been repeated in literally thousands of news stories: former Attorney General Bill Barr ordered the clearing of Lafayette Park on June 1, 2020 to allow former President Donald Trump to hold his controversial photo op in front of St. John’s Church. From the outset, there was ample reason to question the claim echoed across media outlets. As I noted in my testimony to Congress on the protest that month, the operation was clearly a response to days of violent and destructive protests. Now the Inspector General has completed its investigation and the report debunks the conspiracy theory that the Lafayette Square area was cleared to make way for the Trump photo op.



While many today still claim that the protests were “entirely peaceful” and there was no “attack on the White House,” that claim is demonstrably false. It is only plausible if one looks at the level of violence at the start of the clearing operation as opposed to the prior 48 hours. There was in fact an exceptionally high number of officers were injured during the protests. In addition to a reported 150 officers were injured (including at least 49 Park Police officers around the White House), protesters caused extensive property damage including the torching of a historic structure and the attempted arson of St. John’s. The threat was so great that Trump had to be moved into the bunker because the Secret Service feared a breach of security around the White House."









						Debunking The Photo Op Myth: Inspector General Investigation Refutes Media Account On The Clearing Of Lafayette Park
					

For over a year, there has been one fact that has been repeated in literally thousands of news stories: former Attorney General Bill Barr ordered the clearing of Lafayette Park on June 1, 2020 to a…




					jonathanturley.org
				








“More than 60 Secret Service officers and special agents sustained multiple injuries in three days worth of violent clashes stemming from protests demanding justice for George Floyd in Washington, D.C.



The uprisings overflowed from Lafayette Park and continued near the White House on Saturday night and early into Sunday morning. Protesters in the area had taken to the streets since Friday to condemn police brutality.”



At least 60 Secret Service members injured during George Floyd protests in DC







*“St. John's Church Near White House Set on Fire ….*fire crews were able to get to the scene to save the historic structure where every president since James Madison has attendended services,…” https://www.newsmax.com/us/protests-washington-fire/2020/05/31/id/969879/






















First time a President had to be evacuated from the White House since the War of 1812.







Here is MSNBC reporting on that ‘mostly peaceful protest” attacking the WhiteHouse






“….folks trying to make a point of being peaceful….”







Peaceful protesters jumping the barriers at the White House.










The Democrat party would love to have an excuse to cover, to mitigate, what they have done for a full year of riots....and that is the reason for amplifying the farrago at the Capitol.

I've seen worse at Walmart on Black Friday.

















In a heartbreaking Instagram live video,* the congresswoman described how she came to terms with the fact that she would be killed* during the Capitol riot.



Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s (D-NY) incredibly raw and emotional Instagram live video is possibly the most vivid and terrifying account yet of last month’s Trumpist insurrection at the U.S. Capitol building.”



Get the hankies ready!



4. “Most reports on the video have focused on the congresswoman speaking out for the first time about her experience of sexual assault, and how she feels that *GOP lawmakers are deploying “tactics of abusers” *….” Ibid.









5. She forgot these 'GOP' examples.......Ted Kennedy, Senator Chris Dodd, Harvey Weinstein, Anthony Weiner, John Edwards, Jeffrey Epstein, Bill Clinton, …..don’t forget Joe Biden and Tara Reade.





6. More from the AOC hagiography in the Daily Beast:



“….understand the sheer panic of lawmakers inside the building who *thought they were going to be killed at the hands of pro-Trump rioters who burst into the building*….Ocasio-Cortez talked about hiding in a bathroom and accepting the fact that she was about to die as an unidentified person hammered on her office door, and said she felt the need to change her clothes to disguise herself in case she needed to flee.”









7. Remember the similar heart-wrenching stories of the First Family being rushed to a bunker when the White House was under assault by Biden voters?



*“Trump, Melania, and Barron were rushed to a secure bunker after protesters breached barricades near the White House*

…rushed to a secure bunker on Friday after protesters breached temporary fences outside the White House, The Washington Post reported Wednesday…. breach elevated the alert level at the White House from "yellow" to "red." Trump, Melania, and Barron were rushed to a secure bunker after protesters breached barricades near the White House, contradicting the president's claim that he was there for 'inspection'







No, we weren’t treated to any fear-filled tales of how Melania fretted about herself and her son.





Propaganda......no one does it better than the Wehrmacht....er, Democrats.






Oscar Best Supporting Actor Gallery: Every Winner in Academy Award History


----------



## August West

JimH52 said:


> The MAGA cult even deficated on Capitol walls...and these idiots still claim it was just another Capitol tour.  Do they know how stupid they sound?


They`re too stupid to know how stupid they really are but the scoreboard reads
USA-1
MAGA-0
It`s only going to get worse for them.


----------



## Welldone

surada said:


> Even his kids were freaking out and trying to get Trump to call it off, but Trump was enjoying the violence.


The nerve of Daddy keeping his kids in the dark about his intentions to incite an overthrow of our democracy! What's the world coming to when you can't trust your own kids with your plans?


----------



## Welldone

JimH52 said:


> It was trump's words that incited the riot.


What exactly did he say that his supporters figured he was no longer a "law and order" POTUS? Part of the reason cited in his campaign was based on it, so you'll have to find and cite the words that indicated he no longer believed in law and order.


----------



## JimH52

PoliticalChic said:


> There was little left to burn to the ground after the 12 thousand riots, arsons, acts of domestic terrorism authorized and produced by the Democrat Party....
> 
> 
> 
> Nobody does it better than the Wehrmacht.....er, Democrats.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1.It is of the utmost necessity for the Left to mitigate, disguise, *the year-long series of riots, arsons, assaults, mayhem that they released on America *in preparation for stealing the election. Toward that end, they designed a *Biden-voter riot a the Capitol, *had their media allies pretend the damage was done by Trump supporters, the effort to shield the fact that their BLM, ANTIFA, and assorted other anarko-communist thugs were actually behind it. They learned that from earlier Nazis, as in the Reichstag Fire, a model for false-flag propaganda.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2. Completely ignored behind the pretense that this was an insurrection, a rebellion, an attack on democracy itself, was *the real such attack on America: The three day siege of the White House in May of 2020, occupation of Lafayette Park, and the burning of the historic St. John's Church.
> 
> 
> 
> "**Debunking The Photo Op Myth: Inspector General Investigation Refutes Media Account On The Clearing Of Lafayette Park*
> 
> For over a year, there has been one fact that has been repeated in literally thousands of news stories: former Attorney General Bill Barr ordered the clearing of Lafayette Park on June 1, 2020 to allow former President Donald Trump to hold his controversial photo op in front of St. John’s Church. From the outset, there was ample reason to question the claim echoed across media outlets. As I noted in my testimony to Congress on the protest that month, the operation was clearly a response to days of violent and destructive protests. Now the Inspector General has completed its investigation and the report debunks the conspiracy theory that the Lafayette Square area was cleared to make way for the Trump photo op.
> 
> 
> 
> While many today still claim that the protests were “entirely peaceful” and there was no “attack on the White House,” that claim is demonstrably false. It is only plausible if one looks at the level of violence at the start of the clearing operation as opposed to the prior 48 hours. There was in fact an exceptionally high number of officers were injured during the protests. In addition to a reported 150 officers were injured (including at least 49 Park Police officers around the White House), protesters caused extensive property damage including the torching of a historic structure and the attempted arson of St. John’s. The threat was so great that Trump had to be moved into the bunker because the Secret Service feared a breach of security around the White House."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Debunking The Photo Op Myth: Inspector General Investigation Refutes Media Account On The Clearing Of Lafayette Park
> 
> 
> For over a year, there has been one fact that has been repeated in literally thousands of news stories: former Attorney General Bill Barr ordered the clearing of Lafayette Park on June 1, 2020 to a…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jonathanturley.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “More than 60 Secret Service officers and special agents sustained multiple injuries in three days worth of violent clashes stemming from protests demanding justice for George Floyd in Washington, D.C.
> 
> 
> 
> The uprisings overflowed from Lafayette Park and continued near the White House on Saturday night and early into Sunday morning. Protesters in the area had taken to the streets since Friday to condemn police brutality.”
> 
> 
> 
> At least 60 Secret Service members injured during George Floyd protests in DC
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *“St. John's Church Near White House Set on Fire ….*fire crews were able to get to the scene to save the historic structure where every president since James Madison has attendended services,…” https://www.newsmax.com/us/protests-washington-fire/2020/05/31/id/969879/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> First time a President had to be evacuated from the White House since the War of 1812.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is MSNBC reporting on that ‘mostly peaceful protest” attacking the WhiteHouse
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “….folks trying to make a point of being peaceful….”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Peaceful protesters jumping the barriers at the White House.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Democrat party would love to have an excuse to cover, to mitigate, what they have done for a full year of riots....and that is the reason for amplifying the farrago at the Capitol.
> 
> I've seen worse at Walmart on Black Friday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 656152
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In a heartbreaking Instagram live video,* the congresswoman described how she came to terms with the fact that she would be killed* during the Capitol riot.
> 
> 
> 
> Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s (D-NY) incredibly raw and emotional Instagram live video is possibly the most vivid and terrifying account yet of last month’s Trumpist insurrection at the U.S. Capitol building.”
> 
> 
> 
> Get the hankies ready!
> 
> 
> 
> 4. “Most reports on the video have focused on the congresswoman speaking out for the first time about her experience of sexual assault, and how she feels that *GOP lawmakers are deploying “tactics of abusers” *….” Ibid.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 5. She forgot these 'GOP' examples.......Ted Kennedy, Senator Chris Dodd, Harvey Weinstein, Anthony Weiner, John Edwards, Jeffrey Epstein, Bill Clinton, …..don’t forget Joe Biden and Tara Reade.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 6. More from the AOC hagiography in the Daily Beast:
> 
> 
> 
> “….understand the sheer panic of lawmakers inside the building who *thought they were going to be killed at the hands of pro-Trump rioters who burst into the building*….Ocasio-Cortez talked about hiding in a bathroom and accepting the fact that she was about to die as an unidentified person hammered on her office door, and said she felt the need to change her clothes to disguise herself in case she needed to flee.”
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 7. Remember the similar heart-wrenching stories of the First Family being rushed to a bunker when the White House was under assault by Biden voters?
> 
> 
> 
> *“Trump, Melania, and Barron were rushed to a secure bunker after protesters breached barricades near the White House*
> 
> …rushed to a secure bunker on Friday after protesters breached temporary fences outside the White House, The Washington Post reported Wednesday…. breach elevated the alert level at the White House from "yellow" to "red." Trump, Melania, and Barron were rushed to a secure bunker after protesters breached barricades near the White House, contradicting the president's claim that he was there for 'inspection'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, we weren’t treated to any fear-filled tales of how Melania fretted about herself and her son.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Propaganda......no one does it better than the Wehrmacht....er, Democrats.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oscar Best Supporting Actor Gallery: Every Winner in Academy Award History


You are the queen of cut and past.  There will always be protests that turn violent.  Put January 6th was not a "protest that turned violent."  It was a well organized, planned and funded, conspiracy to take down a duly elected government.  If trump had gotten his way, our democracy would have been destroyed on January 6th, 2021.  He would have installed himself as president forever, ala Poootin.  He actually called for the hanging of Mike Pence.


Welldone said:


> What exactly did he say that his supporters figured he was no longer a "law and order" POTUS? Part of the reason cited in his campaign was based on it, so you'll have to find and cite the words that indicated he no longer believed in law and order.


*"We fight like hell. And if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore," he said.*









						Read Trump's Jan. 6 Speech, A Key Part Of Impeachment Trial
					

The former president's remarks are being used by Democrats hoping to convict him for incitement of insurrection — and are being defended by his lawyers in the Senate proceedings.




					www.npr.org
				




For months he had been stoking the anger of his cult.  The only law and order trump know is HIS law and order.  The giant turd  knew what was going to happen and when it did....he sat and watched it and loved  it.


----------



## Indeependent

bodecea said:


> There were multiple weapons at the Jan 6th Capitol.   You sound groomed.


Concealed and never taken out unlike in the slums.


----------



## PoliticalChic

JimH52 said:


> You are the queen of cut and past.  There will always be protests that turn violent.  Put January 6th was not a "protest that turned violent."  It was a well organized, planned and funded, conspiracy to take down a duly elected government.  If trump had gotten his way, our democracy would have been destroyed on January 6th, 2021.  He would have installed himself as president forever, ala Poootin.  He actually called for the hanging of Mike Pence.
> 
> *"We fight like hell. And if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore," he said.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Read Trump's Jan. 6 Speech, A Key Part Of Impeachment Trial
> 
> 
> The former president's remarks are being used by Democrats hoping to convict him for incitement of insurrection — and are being defended by his lawyers in the Senate proceedings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.npr.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For months he had been stoking the anger of his cult.  The only law and order trump know is HIS law and order.  The giant turd  knew what was going to happen and when it did....he sat and watched it and loved  it.





12 Thousand Democrat authorized riots, arsons, anarcho-terrorist acts.


And the only insurrection:
Watch the Terrifying Democrat Insurrection and Attack On the White House​During the Trump administration there was a terrifying riot in Washington as angry, violent, lawless, left wing, anit-Trump protestors tried to enter the White House. Luckily, the White House had a massive amount of force to stop the rioters who were trying to come over the fence. But 67 Secret Service officers were wounded and sent to the hospital and the President had to be removed to a secure bunker for safety.

There were times overnight when America's capital city descended into chaos, with running battles between rioters and police through the streets.

This was more violent than January 6th and if anything would qualify as an "insurrection" seizing the White House would be it. Yet, no investigation, no panel, no commission, no one thrown in jail without bail.


----------



## Gabe Lackmann

You Dems and this Jan 06 thing.

You remind me of the fans of shit teams who constantly talk about a championship from decades prior. 

"Remember that homer in '76...flew right over my head"

Your one 'happy place', as you block out all reality.






Your party is run by slap assed, commie lunatics.

They push dystopian policies, who  promote the absolute destruction of the nation, in every facete.

The executive branch, if pitched by an agent wouldn't get a sniff for production, for the sheer ridiculousness of it. 

"Ok...so the president is a dementia ridden, pedo who meanders around mumbling to himself...his vice, a diversity hire, brainless, narcissist, who goes through staff like M&Ms!...The Speaker of the House is an octogenarian vodka swilling crook who inside trades with her equally alcoholic husband...whaddya think!?"

You people are a disgusting joke.


----------



## Welldone

JimH52 said:


> You are the queen of cut and past.  There will always be protests that turn violent.  Put January 6th was not a "protest that turned violent."  It was a well organized, planned and funded, conspiracy to take down a duly elected government.  If trump had gotten his way, our democracy would have been destroyed on January 6th, 2021.  He would have installed himself as president forever, ala Poootin.  He actually called for the hanging of Mike Pence.
> 
> *"We fight like hell. And if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore," he said.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Read Trump's Jan. 6 Speech, A Key Part Of Impeachment Trial
> 
> 
> The former president's remarks are being used by Democrats hoping to convict him for incitement of insurrection — and are being defended by his lawyers in the Senate proceedings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.npr.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For months he had been stoking the anger of his cult.  The only law and order trump know is HIS law and order.  The giant turd  knew what was going to happen and when it did....he sat and watched it and loved  it.


If that's all you've got it's a pathetic way of claiming Trump incited a riot. The phrase is a well known (and used) metaphor. One that has been used even by the idiot in chief -- Biden.









						Unearthed tweets show Jamie Raskin, Joe Biden saying ‘fight like hell’
					

Republicans on Wednesday dug up past instances of Democratic House impeachment managers and President Biden using the words “fight” or “fight like hell” — one of the k…




					nypost.com
				






> “That’s why I’ve spent my whole career fighting — and I will continue to fight — like hell so that no one ever has to make that walk again,” Biden tweeted in May.


Do better than this, if you expect me to take you seriously.


----------



## citygator

Seems scheduled pretty sudden… apparently the Jan 6 Committee is excited to present something to your open minds. I bet it’s a pretty big bombshell… any takers?  

January 6 committee adds new hearing for Tuesday - CNNPolitics



> (CNN)The committee investigating the Capitol Hill insurrection on January 6, 2021, has added a previously unexpected public hearing for Tuesday afternoon, the committee announced Monday.
> 
> The panel has not revealed the hearing's topic.
> The announcement came as a surprise to many as the committee had said it was not going to resume its hearings until mid-July. Democratic Rep. Bennie Thompson of Mississippi, the committee's chairman, told reporters last week that the panel needed more time to go through the new documentary footage it received from documentarian Alex Holder, who possesses never-before-seen footage of Trump and his family, new information from the National Archives, and new tips coming in through the panel's tip line since the hearings started in order to move forward with its hearings


----------



## marvin martian

citygator said:


> Seems scheduled pretty sudden… apparently the Jan 6 Committee is excited to present something to your open minds. I bet it’s a pretty big bombshell… any takers?
> 
> January 6 committee adds new hearing for Tuesday - CNNPolitics



The pee tape you keep hoping for?

LOL


----------



## rightwinger

How long before Republicans call it fake news?


----------



## Ralph Norton

citygator said:


> Seems scheduled pretty sudden… apparently the Jan 6 Committee is excited to present something to your open minds. I bet it’s a pretty big bombshell… any takers?
> 
> January 6 committee adds new hearing for Tuesday - CNNPolitics


Between inflation/ gas prices/ crime/ open border  and now the SC overturning Roe vs. Wade, Dems are even more desperate to make the public believe that their contrived "hearings" matter.


----------



## citygator

Your browser is not able to display this video.


----------



## citygator

marvin martian said:


> The pee tape you keep hoping for?
> 
> LOL


Ha. Good one. Probably bigger than peeing hookers.


----------



## 1srelluc

Sure, any day now.   

* Two weeks.

* Follow the science.

* Russian collusion.

* Schiff's bogus "evidence" X 2. 

* 0-2 on "peach-mints". 

Yes sir, that's one mighty fine record of fail you got going there.


----------



## johngaltshrugged

Does Lucy work for CNN?
I'm sure she'll hold the ball THIS time


----------



## JackOfNoTrades

marvin martian said:


> The pee tape you keep hoping for?
> 
> LOL


Putin has that. He may never give it up.

But it would be hysterical to see.


----------



## marvin martian

citygator said:


> Ha. Good one. Probably bigger than peeing hookers.



I doubt it.


----------



## Meister

It really would be  nice if all this "evidence" could be cross examined.
But, we know that will never happen.


----------



## rightwinger

Ralph Norton said:


> Between inflation/ gas prices/ crime/ open border  and now the SC overturning Roe vs. Wade, Dems are even more desperate to make the public believe that their contrived "hearings" matter.


History will say they matter

Republicans scream…Look over there!


----------



## marvin martian

rightwinger said:


> History will say they matter
> 
> Republicans scream…Look over there!



What Republicans? The "hearing" is all DemoKKKrats and Dem-affected losers. It's not a legal proceeding if there's only one side present. You're a dupe, and this is a show to entertain stupid people like you.


----------



## Oddball

Another day, another.....









*yawn*


----------



## Sunsettommy

citygator said:


> Seems scheduled pretty sudden… apparently the Jan 6 Committee is excited to present something to your open minds. I bet it’s a pretty big bombshell… any takers?
> 
> January 6 committee adds new hearing for Tuesday - CNNPolitics



If there really is some smoking hot evidence, they should ask the DOJ to indict then prosecute, the J6 committee can't do that.


----------



## struth

so what was the bombshell?


----------



## Hutch Starskey

citygator said:


> Seems scheduled pretty sudden… apparently the Jan 6 Committee is excited to present something to your open minds. I bet it’s a pretty big bombshell… any takers?
> 
> January 6 committee adds new hearing for Tuesday - CNNPolitics


Certainly intriguing.


----------



## Meister

struth said:


> so what was the bombshell?


Wait for it, wait for it............


----------



## marvin martian

Meister said:


> Wait for it, wait for it............



This reality show for dumb people keeps getting more and more hilarious.


----------



## Rogue AI

struth said:


> so what was the bombshell?


That's just it, they found a shell and will spend the next ten years looking for a bomb to fit it.


----------



## BackAgain

citygator said:


> Seems scheduled pretty sudden… apparently the Jan 6 Committee is excited to present something to your open minds. I bet it’s a pretty big bombshell… any takers?
> 
> January 6 committee adds new hearing for Tuesday - CNNPolitics


They haven’t had any bombshells at all. I doubt they’re gonna start now.


----------



## BlindBoo

Meh?  Recordings of Trumps conversation with Satan when he sold his soul wouldn't be enough for the MAGANUTS.

Sorry to say....


----------



## The Original Tree

citygator said:


> Seems scheduled pretty sudden… apparently the Jan 6 Committee is excited to present something to your open minds. I bet it’s a pretty big bombshell… any takers?
> 
> January 6 committee adds new hearing for Tuesday - CNNPolitics


*This is what Insurrection Looks like courtesy of The Militant Brown Shirt Wings of The DemNazi Party.*


----------



## WEATHER53

Bombshell coming to a town near you .  Advanced advertising just like the staged event that it is.


----------



## citygator

I think they found the boat captain that brought the bamboo ballots to the US so they’ll declare Trump president for eternity as a remedy.


----------



## citygator

struth said:


> so what was the bombshell?


Do you know how you keep a moron in suspense? : )


----------



## TroglocratsRdumb

oh weeeegotttemmnooowww


----------



## Mac1958

citygator said:


> I think they found the boat captain that brought the bamboo ballots to the US so they’ll declare Trump president for eternity as a remedy.


I KNEW IT


----------



## citygator

TroglocratsRdumb said:


> oh weeeegotttemmnooowww


We will see.  From a marketing perspective it puts a lot on the expectations.  Democrats are terrible at marketing so I would not be surprised if it’s not an A bomb.


----------



## 22lcidw

rightwinger said:


> How long before Republicans call it fake news?


Just to see some insurrectionists break into this sham and eliminate the people involved would be a ratings winner.


----------



## Dragonlady

1srelluc said:


> Sure, any day now.
> 
> * Two weeks.
> 
> * Follow the science.
> 
> * Russian collusion.
> 
> * Schiff's bogus "evidence" X 2.
> 
> * 0-2 on "peach-mints".
> 
> Yes sir, that's one mighty fine record of fail you got going there.



Have you noticed that Trump is no longer President?  I ask because you apparently failed to notice ANY of his criminal behaviour while in office.  The two impeachments, multiple investigations of wrong doing, criminal charges and guilty pleas from his associates, or the insurrection on January 6th - after he LOST the election.


----------



## The Original Tree

BackAgain said:


> They haven’t had any bombshells at all. I doubt they’re gonna start now.


*BREAKING NEWS BOMBSHELL:

Shocking revelations and documented evidence of Donald Trump's Collusion with Vladimir Putin, Yahoo Reports
The Clinton Campaign has no comment at this time.*


----------



## Dragonlady

22lcidw said:


> Just to see some insurrectionists break into this sham and eliminate the people involved would be a ratings winner.



Why does every Republican solution to a problem involve killing Democrats?


----------



## The Original Tree

22lcidw said:


> Just to see some insurrectionists break into this sham and eliminate the people involved would be a ratings winner.


*You want some insurrection and shit burnt down, just hire Biden's Brownshirts!*


----------



## The Original Tree

Dragonlady said:


> Why does every Republican solution to a problem involve killing Democrats?


*It's like Planned Parenthood only for freeeeeeee.*


----------



## WEATHER53

“New” evidence for something already ruled to be not so.
The endless cycles of liberal causes.


----------



## marvin martian

BlindBoo said:


> Meh?  Recordings of Trumps conversation with Satan when he sold his soul wouldn't be enough for the MAGANUTS.
> 
> Sorry to say....



If Adam Schiff said he had those, you'd believe it.

This is a reality show for dumb people like you.


----------



## Mac1958

citygator said:


> Seems scheduled pretty sudden… apparently the Jan 6 Committee is excited to present something to your open minds. I bet it’s a pretty big bombshell… any takers?
> 
> January 6 committee adds new hearing for Tuesday - CNNPolitics


Strange.  What could be so important that they *just had* to move up the hearing?  It's not as if there's some kind of deadline here.

While I like what they're doing, that smells a little of showbiz to me.  We'll see.


----------



## WEATHER53

Stay tuned for tomorrow’s Bombshell
Slick production


----------



## The Original Tree

Mac1958 said:


> Strange.  What could be so important that they *just had* to move up the hearing?  It's not as if there's some kind of deadline here.
> 
> While I like what they're doing, that smells a little of showbiz to me.  We'll see.


Nothing.  It is just theatrics.  Same lying Evil Shit that was pulled over Russian Collusion during the entire Trump Administration.  I will enjoy watching these people involved and all that helped promote such Evil on Judgment Day.


----------



## buckeye45_73

rightwinger said:


> How long before Republicans call it fake news?


WE already did, this is clearly designed to get off the abortion debate....the left can't debate...they just change the subject.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

citygator said:


> We will see.  From a marketing perspective it puts a lot on the expectations.  Democrats are terrible at marketing so I would not be surprised if it’s not an A bomb.


The most I’ve heard so far is that the committee spoke with a witness that they previously had not. 

Pence?


----------



## Hutch Starskey

Dragonlady said:


> Why does every Republican solution to a problem involve killing Democrats?


It’s their degenerate minds.


----------



## buckeye45_73

rightwinger said:


> History will say they matter
> 
> Republicans scream…Look over there!


The Soviet show trial is the democrats....Sorry you're not gonna stop Trump if he decides to run.......sucks to be you.


----------



## marvin martian

Mac1958 said:


> While I like what they're doing, that smells a little of showbiz to me. We'll see.



Ya think, dummy?

A "hearing" with only one side allowed to participate is a reality show for dumb people like you.

And you VOTED for this, Mac. It's your fault.


----------



## bendog

Hutch Starskey said:


> The most I’ve heard so far is that the committee spoke with a witness that they previously had not.
> 
> Pence?


I doubt Pence is venturing forth from his secure undisclosed closet of prayer where he's dancing Jigs with Mommy over abortion.  

Interesting though.  Possibly the new tapes of WH interviews of Trump and company.  But I doubt Pence would truly revolt even if Trump personally ok'ed his murder.  LOL


----------



## g5000

Meister said:


> It really would be  nice if all this "evidence" could be cross examined.
> But, we know that will never happen.


The Republican idea of cross-examination is, "Yeahbut inflation!  Yeahbut gas prices!  LOOK! A SQUIRREL!"


----------



## WEATHER53

They know about the upcoming Bombshell because they created it


----------



## kaz

citygator said:


> Seems scheduled pretty sudden… apparently the Jan 6 Committee is excited to present something to your open minds. I bet it’s a pretty big bombshell… any takers?
> 
> January 6 committee adds new hearing for Tuesday - CNNPolitics



Anyone who would bet you based on a one sided show trial is dumber than you are for asking them to


----------



## BlindBoo

marvin martian said:


> If Adam Schiff said he had those, you'd believe it.
> 
> This is a reality show for dumb people like you.


The conversation is available on the most recent remastered version of Black Sabbaths "Master of Reality" when played backward at 78 speed of course.

Honestly, that is a dishonest lie.


----------



## Meathead

citygator said:


> Seems scheduled pretty sudden… apparently the Jan 6 Committee is excited to present something to your open minds. I bet it’s a pretty big bombshell… any takers?
> 
> January 6 committee adds new hearing for Tuesday - CNNPolitics


No one cares. Really.


----------



## kaz

g5000 said:


> The Republican idea of cross-examination is, "Yeahbut inflation!  Yeahbut gas prices!  LOOK! A SQUIRREL!"



This is the moronic hard left g5000 who doesn't attack Democrats for NOT ALLOWING QUESTIONS FROM THE DEFENSE, but for his paranoid made up attack by Republicans.     Incredible.    So you still stick with the flimsy, shallow lie you aren't a Democrat, huh?  That's just hilarious at this point.   You're like a four year old boy thinking no one can find you behind the sofa, LOL


----------



## evenflow1969

Ralph Norton said:


> Between inflation/ gas prices/ crime/ open border  and now the SC overturning Roe vs. Wade, Dems are even more desperate to make the public believe that their contrived "hearings" matter.


You  mean the contrived hearing in which ever person that has testified so far were trumps own people.  So Truump surrounds himself with nothing but traders?


----------



## marvin martian

g5000 said:


> The Republican idea of cross-examination is, "Yeahbut inflation!  Yeahbut gas prices!  LOOK! A SQUIRREL!"



We'll never know, because your reality show for idiots isn't allowing anyone from the opposing side to participate.


----------



## rightwinger

marvin martian said:


> What Republicans? The "hearing" is all DemoKKKrats and Dem-affected losers. It's not a legal proceeding if there's only one side present. You're a dupe, and this is a show to entertain stupid people like you.


Every witness I have seen was a Republican

Every Republican who was willing to serve is on the committee
Republicans boycott the committee and then complain it is not bipartisan enough


----------



## g5000

kaz said:


> This is the moronic hard left g5000 who doesn't attack Democrats for NOT ALLOWING QUESTIONS FROM THE DEFENSE, but for his paranoid made up attack by Republicans.     Incredible.    So you still stick with the flimsy, shallow lie you aren't a Democrat, huh?  That's just hilarious at this point.   You're like a four year old boy thinking no one can find you behind the sofa, LOL


The Republicans had their chance, dumbass.

Pelosi tried to form an independent commission like the one after 9/11.  It would have been comprised of non-officeholders and would have been 5 Democrats and 5 Republicans.

But Trump killed that idea.  

Just think.  If there had been an independent commission, they would have released a report no one would read and that would be the end of it, and Trump would declare the report exonerated him.

But nooooooo!  Trump killed it instead.

So then Pelosi created a committee, and of the five Republicans McCarthy picked to be on the committee, two of them were potential witnesses.  What a dumbass.

So when Pelosi put the kibosh on the two potential witnesses, McCarthy decided to cancel all five Republican seats instead of just replacing the two hacks.

And that, retard, is why there is no cross-examination.  Trump shot himself in the mouth.

If McCarthy had appointed five loyalists, you'd be seeing an ocean of red herrings being tossed around by the Trumptards.

Too bad.  So sad.


----------



## WEATHER53

Something triggered paid 4 digits bots in last 5 minutes as three showed up at the same time


----------



## evenflow1969

citygator said:


> Seems scheduled pretty sudden… apparently the Jan 6 Committee is excited to present something to your open minds. I bet it’s a pretty big bombshell… any takers?
> 
> January 6 committee adds new hearing for Tuesday - CNNPolitics


Won't matter any way you slice it. There is already been overwhelming evidence to show Trump is a trader and insurrectionist. The right trumpeter just does not care. So if Trump and cohorts stay out of jail  the Dems should just use Trumps plan to stay in power.  Kamala Harris should just do what Pence did not. Fight fire with fire. If Trump and company does not go to jail no reason we should not do exactly what they were planning.


----------



## kaz

g5000 said:


> The Republicans had their chance, dumbass.
> 
> Pelosi tried to form an independent commission like the one after 9/11.  It would have been comprised of non-officeholders and would have been 5 Democrats and 5 Republicans.
> 
> But Trump killed that idea.
> 
> Just think.  If there had been an independent commission, they would have released a report no one would read and that would be the end of it, and Trump would declare the report exonerated him.
> 
> But nooooooo!  Trump killed it instead.
> 
> So then Pelosi created a committee, and of the five Republicans McCarthy picked to be on the committee, two of them were potential witnesses.  What a dumbass.
> 
> So when Pelosi put the kibosh on the two potential witnesses, McCarthy decided to cancel all five Republican seats instead of just replacing the two hacks.
> 
> And that, retard, is why there is no cross-examination.  Trump shot himself in the mouth.
> 
> If McCarthy had appointed five loyalists, you'd be seeing an ocean of red herrings being tossed around by the Trumptards.
> 
> Too bad.  So sad.





So (according to you) it actually makes sense that you are attacking Republicans for answers Nancy Pelosi wouldn't like and therefore (according to you) it makes sense Pelosi rejected allowing Republicans to answer at all.

You're a total stooge and a complete fucking imbecile.

Democrats like you just don't understand why anyone would want a system with more than one party since you care so much about us (sic)


----------



## WEATHER53

g5000 said:


> The Republicans had their chance, dumbass.
> 
> Pelosi tried to form an independent commission like the one after 9/11.  It would have been comprised of non-officeholders and would have been 5 Democrats and 5 Republicans.
> 
> But Trump killed that idea.
> 
> Just think.  If there had been an independent commission, they would have released a report no one would read and that would be the end of it, and Trump would declare the report exonerated him.
> 
> But nooooooo!  Trump killed it instead.
> 
> So then Pelosi created a committee, and of the five Republicans McCarthy picked to be on the committee, two of them were potential witnesses.  What a dumbass.
> 
> So when Pelosi put the kibosh on the two potential witnesses, McCarthy decided to cancel all five Republican seats instead of just replacing the two hacks.
> 
> And that, retard, is why there is no cross-examination.  Trump shot himself in the mouth.
> 
> If McCarthy had appointed five loyalists, you'd be seeing an ocean of red herrings being tossed around by the Trumptards.
> 
> Too bad.  So sad.


Yes he did not participate  in the pre witch hunt to try and avoid the actual one


----------



## Mac1958

rightwinger said:


> Every witness I have seen was a Republican
> 
> Every Republican who was willing to serve is on the committee
> Republicans boycott the committee and then complain it is not bipartisan enough


Look at all these solid, serious, Trump-supporting Republicans (some of them appointed by the buffoon himself) testifying *under oath* who the rubes are having to dismiss, because they have to stick to their denial story.

"They're RINOs now!  They're RINOs now!"

One of my favorite parts of this.


----------



## citygator

Juicy.  









						Jan. 6 committee raises eyebrows with abruptly scheduled hearing
					

A source told NBC News that these developments are “unplanned,” adding, “You can deduce from that that there will be a lot of significance to the hearing.”




					www.msnbc.com
				




A source familiar with the plans told NBC News conceded that these developments are “unplanned,” adding, “You can deduce from that that there will be a lot of significance to the hearing.”


----------



## citygator

kaz said:


> Anyone who would bet you based on a one sided show trial is dumber than you are for asking them to


So, wanna bet then? ; )


----------



## evenflow1969

Ralph Norton said:


> Between inflation/ gas prices/ crime/ open border  and now the SC overturning Roe vs. Wade, Dems are even more desperate to make the public believe that their contrived "hearings" matter.


So if Trump and Co are not punished for trying to over throw the government why should Kamala Harris and Co just use Trump s plan to stay in power


----------



## Mac1958

citygator said:


> So, wanna bet then? ; )


It's safe to assume that they'll dismiss and deride the whole thing, regardless.


----------



## g5000

kaz said:


> So (according to you) it actually makes sense that you are attacking Republicans for answers Nancy Pelosi wouldn't like and therefore (according to you) it makes sense Pelosi rejected allowing Republicans to answer at all.
> 
> You're a total stooge and a complete fucking imbecile.
> 
> Democrats like you just don't understand why anyone would want a system with more than one party since you care so much about us (sic)


The vast majority of the officials testifying against Trump are all Republicans, moron.  Every one of them wanted Trump to win, but they put our democracy above a tyrant.

Trump lost, and he tried to steal the election.  He failed.  Thank God.

Too bad.  So sad.


----------



## WEATHER53

How can they advertise Bombshell in advance?
The answer-they created it


----------



## JimH52

House Jan. 6 committee announces last-minute hearing Tuesday
					

The hearing will be held at 1 p.m. ET. The committee said it will "present recently obtained evidence and receive witness testimony."




					www.cbsnews.com
				




Interesting...I wonder what the evidence is that calls for a last minute meeting?


----------



## g5000

Even the most obsequious of lickspittles working for Trump and the Republican Party didn't buckle under pressure by Trump to help steal the election.

Thank God they found their consciences when it counted most.


----------



## iamwhatiseem

citygator said:


> Seems scheduled pretty sudden… apparently the Jan 6 Committee is excited to present something to your open minds. I bet it’s a pretty big bombshell… any takers?
> 
> January 6 committee adds new hearing for Tuesday - CNNPolitics


  I predict they will still hate Trump and stop at nothing to constantly attempt to smear him.

There, no matter what I will be right


----------



## citygator

WEATHER53 said:


> How can they advertise Bombshell in advance?
> The answer-they created it


Really?  That’s the ONLY way?  How about they simply had someone come to them with new information?  It’s possible… Right?


----------



## g5000

“Just say the election was corrupt, and leave the rest to me and the Republican congressmen.”

That right there is enough to charge Trump with criminal intent.


----------



## citygator

A couple of weeks ago, there was some public dissatisfaction by the DOJ about access to committee transcripts. Perhaps there is some DOJ and NatSec urgency that we just don't know about?   Hmmmmm. Maybe Trumps a flight risk. 









						The Justice Department wants to see the Jan. 6 committee's transcripts
					

It says the lack of sharing is complicating its criminal probe.




					www.npr.org


----------



## g5000

iamwhatiseem said:


> I predict they will still hate Trump and stop at nothing to constantly attempt to smear him.
> 
> There, no matter what I will be right


Trump will be "smeared" the same way John Dillinger is "smeared" as a bank robber.


----------



## WEATHER53

citygator said:


> Really?  That’s the ONLY way?  How about they simply had someone come to them with new information?  It’s possible… Right?


Where has the new person with the new information been all this time?
Did they just be Woke?


----------



## g5000

citygator said:


> A couple of weeks ago, there was some public dissatisfaction by the DOJ about access to committee transcripts. Perhaps there is some DOJ and NatSec urgency that we just don't know about?   Hmmmmm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Justice Department wants to see the Jan. 6 committee's transcripts
> 
> 
> It says the lack of sharing is complicating its criminal probe.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.npr.org


The DOJ has raided Jeffrey Clark's house.  That's bad news for Trump.


----------



## citygator

WEATHER53 said:


> Where has the new person with the new information been all this time?
> Did they just be Woke?


How would I know?  I’ll watch it like you. But it’s possible something new came up. Just how big is the real question. 

What would you have to see to change your mind the Trump had a plan to retain the presidency?


----------



## g5000

Mo Brooks of Alabama, Matt Gaetz of Florida, Andy Biggs of Arizona, Louie Gohmert of Texas, Scott Perry of Pennsylvania, and Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia all asked Trump for pardons.

Gee, why would you need a pardon unless you broke the law?

Hmmm...


----------



## Tommy Tainant

I wonder what they have got.? Must be significant.

Lord knows America needs a lift.

January 6 committee announces surprise hearing over ‘recently obtained evidence’


----------



## Rambunctious

Damn the people aren't outraged... Trump's approval keeps going up.... we need a "SURPRISE" session....


----------



## WEATHER53

citygator said:


> How would I know?  I’ll watch it like you. But it’s possible something new came up. Just how big is the real question.
> 
> What would you have to see to change your mind the Trump had a plan to retain the presidency?


Your precious insurrection would have to have ability to accomplish and overthrow and enact their wishes
This couple dozen Buffalo Bills had no plans and no ability to seize control of anything nor run anything
You are presenting a cartoon, emotional falsity and impossibility.


----------



## Sunni Man

JimH52 said:


> *Interesting...I wonder what the evidence is that calls for a last minute meeting?*


Just more fake Democrat last minute grandstanding to try and smear Trump and the Republicans before the up coming midterm elections.   ...


----------



## struth

citygator said:


> Do you know how you keep a moron in suspense? : )


haha yeah....dang poor dembots have been waiting for 5 years for that bombshell on trump to drop


----------



## Hugo Furst

Tommy Tainant said:


> I wonder what they have got.? Must be significant.
> 
> Lord knows America needs a lift.
> 
> January 6 committee announces surprise hearing over ‘recently obtained evidence’



Who manufactured it?

Schiff, or Pelosi?


----------



## playtime

JimH52 said:


> House Jan. 6 committee announces last-minute hearing Tuesday
> 
> 
> The hearing will be held at 1 p.m. ET. The committee said it will "present recently obtained evidence and receive witness testimony."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cbsnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting...I wonder what the evidence is that calls for a last minute meeting?



i'm thinking mo brooks met with them.  after donny pulled his endorsement & he lost alabama's primary - he told the comittee that he wanted to testify in front of them & he wanted to do it live.

tee hee.


----------



## citygator

Can we give some odds? 

Melania 1:1,000
Ivanka 1:50
Pence 1:500
Rudy 1:1,000,000
Pat Cipollone 1:3
Jeffrey Clark 1:4
Ginni Thomas 1: a gazillion
Satan 1:2


----------



## bodecea

citygator said:


> Seems scheduled pretty sudden… apparently the Jan 6 Committee is excited to present something to your open minds. I bet it’s a pretty big bombshell… any takers?
> 
> January 6 committee adds new hearing for Tuesday - CNNPolitics


Mo Brooks?  After being snubbed by the fat former guy, I'm sure he's got a lot to share.


----------



## 1srelluc

Dragonlady said:


> Why does every Republican solution to a problem involve killing Democrats?


Maybe problem solved, problem staying solved? 

Now what me being the merciful type I think they should just be rounded-up, stripped of citizenship, and exiled to S. Georgia island or Liberia....Their choice....Hot or cold.


----------



## bodecea

rightwinger said:


> How long before Republicans call it fake news?


Even before it happens, they are well-groomed.


----------



## Rambunctious




----------



## Hutch Starskey

bendog said:


> I doubt Pence is venturing forth from his secure undisclosed closet of prayer where he's dancing Jigs with Mommy over abortion.
> 
> Interesting though.  Possibly the new tapes of WH interviews of Trump and company.  But I doubt Pence would truly revolt even if Trump personally ok'ed his murder.  LOL


I agree. But it must be someone senior to warrant a last minute hearing during their 4th recess.


----------



## JimH52

playtime said:


> i'm thinking mo brooks met with them.  after donny pulled his endorsement & he lost alabama's primary - he told the comittee that he wanted to testify in front of them & he wanted to do it live.
> 
> tee hee.


It may be him?


----------



## WEATHER53

Committee gets more half assed every day.  Variable days on and off and then when some more titillation may be revealed react as if this one is the game changer and go into a mad scramble


----------



## jbrownson0831

Tommy Tainant said:


> I wonder what they have got.? Must be significant.
> 
> Lord knows America needs a lift.
> 
> January 6 committee announces surprise hearing over ‘recently obtained evidence’


As usual, your blind ignorance doesn't tell you the more stink you make about this flag waving the more popular Trump becomes.  Duuuuhhhhh


----------



## Hutch Starskey

marvin martian said:


> We'll never know, because your reality show for idiots isn't allowing anyone from the opposing side to participate.


Patently stupid lie. 
Even children know better.


----------



## playtime

JimH52 said:


> It may be him?



there's only gonna be one witness.  who else could it be?


----------



## jbrownson0831

JimH52 said:


> House Jan. 6 committee announces last-minute hearing Tuesday
> 
> 
> The hearing will be held at 1 p.m. ET. The committee said it will "present recently obtained evidence and receive witness testimony."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cbsnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting...I wonder what the evidence is that calls for a last minute meeting?


And your boyfriends ratings just go up and up......


----------



## playtime

JimH52 said:


> It may be him?



Rep. Mo Brooks says he’s willing to testify in public as Jan. 6 committee prepares to reissue him a subpoena​By Manu Raju and Morgan Rimmer, CNN
Published 8:47 PM EDT, Wed June 22, 2022

CNN — 
Rep. Mo Brooks – one of the Republican lawmakers facing calls from the January 6 committee to testify about his interactions with former President Donald Trump – said Wednesday that he is willing to testify but only in public.

“My basic requirement is it be in public so the public can see it – so they don’t get bits and pieces dribbled out,” the Alabama Republican said. He also said he’d testify only about matters related to January 6, 2021, and wants to see copies of any documents beforehand that the panel may ask him about.
Rep. Mo Brooks says he's willing to testify in public as Jan. 6 committee prepares to reissue him a subpoena


----------



## JGalt

Tommy Tainant said:


> I wonder what they have got.? Must be significant.
> 
> Lord knows America needs a lift.
> 
> January 6 committee announces surprise hearing over ‘recently obtained evidence’



Ooooo!!! You got that mean ol' Trump now. This time fer sure.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

WEATHER53 said:


> How can they advertise Bombshell in advance?
> The answer-they created it


No one has. The “bombshell” narrative came from one of you dopes.


----------



## scruffy

Do we have a bombshell yet?


----------



## WEATHER53

Hutch Starskey said:


> No one has. The “bombshell” narrative came from one of you dopes.


Lie
Came from citygator


----------



## Hutch Starskey

WEATHER53 said:


> Lie
> Came from citygator


The OP said it in passing. Not “the Dems”.


----------



## B. Kidd

citygator said:


> Seems scheduled pretty sudden… apparently the Jan 6 Committee is excited to present something to your open minds. I bet it’s a pretty big bombshell… any takers?
> 
> January 6 committee adds new hearing for Tuesday - CNNPolitics



Not another bombshell!!
Ukraine must be safer (despite the 48 cruise missiles Putin tossed into there during the G-7).


----------



## BlindBoo

marvin martian said:


> We'll never know, because your reality show for idiots isn't allowing anyone from the opposing side to participate.


I'm sure they will let most anyone from Trumpyberra's inner circle a seat at the table for a little chat.


scruffy said:


> Do we have a bombshell yet?


----------



## JimH52

Who will blame him if he skewers trump.  Perhaps someone gets revenge on the Orange POS....after he stabs them in the back?


----------



## marvin martian

BlindBoo said:


> I'm sure they will let most anyone from Trumpyberra's inner circle a seat at the table for a little chat.
> 
> 
> View attachment 663001



Meanwhile inflation is still rising, the stock market is still falling, and gas is more expensive than it's ever been.

Keep up the reality show!


----------



## Godboy

Tommy Tainant said:


> I wonder what they have got.? Must be significant.
> 
> Lord knows America needs a lift.
> 
> January 6 committee announces surprise hearing over ‘recently obtained evidence’


PFFF, you just KNOW they got nothin!


----------



## jbrownson0831

JimH52 said:


> Who will blame him if he skewers trump.  Perhaps someone gets revenge on the Orange POS....after he stabs them in the back?


There will be a skewering in a matter of a few months....it won't be Trump on the pointy part.


----------



## daveman

Tommy Tainant said:


> I wonder what they have got.? Must be significant.
> 
> Lord knows America needs a lift.
> 
> January 6 committee announces surprise hearing over ‘recently obtained evidence’


Be careful with it.  The ink's still wet.


----------



## OhPleaseJustQuit

JimH52 said:


> House Jan. 6 committee announces last-minute hearing Tuesday
> 
> 
> The hearing will be held at 1 p.m. ET. The committee said it will "present recently obtained evidence and receive witness testimony."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cbsnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting...I wonder what the evidence is that calls for a last minute meeting?


Anything to do with J6 is now and will in the future be a colossal joke -- even more of a joke than it has been up to now -- until every one of the baby murderers who held the Arizona legislators hostage is in jail.


----------



## WEATHER53

Hutch Starskey said:


> The OP said it in passing. Not “the Dems”.


Have no idea what this nebulosity is refuting or confirming.
Conservatives did not initiate the Bombshell reference.  The thread starter City gator did.
I think you just tried to dance around that fact so please dance some more


----------



## marvin martian

JimH52 said:


> House Jan. 6 committee announces last-minute hearing Tuesday
> 
> 
> The hearing will be held at 1 p.m. ET. The committee said it will "present recently obtained evidence and receive witness testimony."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cbsnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting...I wonder what the evidence is that calls for a last minute meeting?



^^^_The Reality Show for Idiots_ pulls in another dupe!

LOL


----------



## Godboy

Tommy Tainant said:


> I wonder what they have got.? Must be significant.
> 
> Lord knows America needs a lift.
> 
> January 6 committee announces surprise hearing over ‘recently obtained evidence’


At the end of your pitiful hearings, there wont be a single criminal referral. Wanna bet? You would have to be a god damn fool to bet against me.


----------



## JimH52

rightwinger said:


> How long before Republicans call it fake news?


Many feel it is Mo Brooks.   He may skewer trump for stabbing him in the back...?


----------



## struth

it’s sad that the dems are running Congress like a prime time soap opera 

Stay tuned…we have a top secret special surprise meeting….same channel, same time…

what’s even more sad is they know their dembot base will eat this up..propagandist and parody for their cult


----------



## Hutch Starskey

WEATHER53 said:


> Have no idea what this nebulosity is refuting or confirming.
> Conservatives did not initiate the Bombshell reference.  The thread starter City gator did.
> I think you just tried to dance around that fact so please dance some more


Yes and you dopes are trying to create narratives about the committee over if. You specifically.


----------



## BlindBoo

marvin martian said:


> Meanwhile inflation is still rising, the stock market is still falling, and gas is more expensive than it's ever been.
> 
> Keep up the reality show!


Like a raving lunatic, these Neo-GOP buffoons keep pointing this way and that trying desperately to deflect from Benedict Donald and his faithful followers disgraceful performance on Jan 6th and the days that followed.


----------



## Bootney Lee Farnsworth

Tommy Tainant said:


> I wonder what they have got.? Must be significant.
> 
> Lord knows America needs a lift.
> 
> January 6 committee announces surprise hearing over ‘recently obtained evidence’


----------



## B. Kidd

Godboy said:


> At the end of your pitiful hearings, there wont be a single criminal referral. Wanna bet? You would have to be a god damn fool to bet against me.



Don't be so sure.
The Dimm's have no viable policies, so most of their eggs are in the 1/6 kangaroo Court!

BTW, how old and politically experienced are you??


----------



## Batcat

citygator said:


> Seems scheduled pretty sudden… apparently the Jan 6 Committee is excited to present something to your open minds. I bet it’s a pretty big bombshell… any takers?
> 
> January 6 committee adds new hearing for Tuesday - CNNPolitics


If the Jan 6th Committee was a real committee instead of a kangaroo committee I would have some interest in watching the proceedings.


----------



## Godboy

B. Kidd said:


> Don't be so sure.
> The Dimm's have no viable policies, so most of their eggs are in the 1/6 kangaroo Court!
> 
> BTW, how old and politically experienced are you??


Im 49 and ive met 2 US presidents... George Bush senior and Ronald Reagan during the campaign against Carter. I got to meet them and shake their hands when i was like 8 or 9. Ive been a republican my whole life.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

citygator said:


> Seems scheduled pretty sudden… apparently the Jan 6 Committee is excited to present something to your open minds. I bet it’s a pretty big bombshell… any takers?
> 
> January 6 committee adds new hearing for Tuesday - CNNPolitics


Trump has survived more bombshells than anyone else in human history!!


----------



## Tommy Tainant

I agree with my fellow posters. It must be a significant development.
Its great that you can keep your spirits up. Well done chaps.


----------



## okfine

Rambunctious said:


> Damn the people aren't outraged... Trump's approval keeps going up.... we need a "SURPRISE" session....


Approval? I think it's something else. 🤔


----------



## Godboy

Tommy Tainant said:


> I agree with my fellow posters. It must be a significant development.
> Its great that you can keep your spirits up. Well done chaps.


Yeah, im sure its going to be devastating.


----------



## g5000

WEATHER53 said:


> Yes he did not participate  in the pre witch hunt to try and avoid the actual one


Yes, I'm sure John Dillinger told his followers the FBI were on a witch hunt to get him, too.


----------



## Meister

g5000 said:


> The Republican idea of cross-examination is, "Yeahbut inflation!  Yeahbut gas prices!  LOOK! A SQUIRREL!"


Do you realize just how weak that sounds?   

Sounds more like one party wants to silence the other party, after all,
it's an election year and one party hasn't any policies to run on.


----------



## Dekster

Tommy Tainant said:


> I wonder what they have got.? Must be significant.
> 
> Lord knows America needs a lift.
> 
> January 6 committee announces surprise hearing over ‘recently obtained evidence’



Some of us here in America haven't watched a second of the hearings.  Dem porn should be confined to OnlyFans.


----------



## B. Kidd

Godboy said:


> Im 49 and ive met 2 US presidents... George Bush senior and Ronald Reagan during the campaign against Carter. I got to meet them and shake their hands when i was like 8 or 9. Ive been a republican my whole life.



Looks like no political acumen rubbed off.
And,
It wasn't their fault.


----------



## marvin martian

Tommy Tainant said:


> I wonder what they have got.? Must be significant.
> 
> Lord knows America needs a lift.
> 
> January 6 committee announces surprise hearing over ‘recently obtained evidence’



It's the pee tape, Tommy! Finally, what you've been praying for!


----------



## struth

Tommy Tainant said:


> I agree with my fellow posters. It must be a significant development.
> Its great that you can keep your spirits up. Well done chaps.


it true…and sad…that thanks to the xiden economy this is what your chaps have to do to keep your spirits up


----------



## Godboy

B. Kidd said:


> Looks like no political acumen rubbed off.
> And,
> It wasn't their fault.


You really need to work on being more clever. What you do is just plain lazy. SMH.


----------



## g5000

As everyone knows, Trump HATES being a loser.  What the evidence is showing is that Trump hates being a loser so much that he was willing to drag down our entire democracy in order to seize power away from the American people.

Fortunately, even his most devoted lickspittles would not go that extra distance.

Trump was impeached, twice, but was saved by the spineless Republicans in the Senate.

So the American people impeached him and removed him from office.  This came as too great a shock for the lying piece of shit to bear, and he chose to blow up the Constitution.


----------



## Bootney Lee Farnsworth

Tommy Tainant said:


> I agree with my fellow posters. It must be a *significant development.*
> Its great that you can keep your spirits up. Well done chaps.


----------



## g5000

Meister said:


> Do you realize just how weak that sounds?


It sounds VERY weak, doesn't it.  But that is precisely the bullshit you hear from people supporting Trump who don't want to hear the evidence of Trump's crimes.


----------



## B. Kidd

Tommy Tainant said:


> I agree with my fellow posters. It must be a significant development.
> Its great that you can keep your spirits up. Well done chaps.



Keep worshipping your poster of a shirtless Boris Johnson on horseback.

Except, it doesn't exist!!


----------



## g5000

Meister said:


> Sounds more like one party wants to silence the other party, after all,
> it's an election year and one party hasn't any policies to run on.


The Republicans silenced themselves.  They shot themselves in the mouth.

They CHOSE to deny an independent investigation.

They CHOSE not to sit on the January 6 committee.

And now they have the audacity to whine they don't have a voice in the proceedings?!?!?!  

Oh, man.  That's priceless.  Only the dumbest of rubes would drink that piss.


----------



## B. Kidd

Godboy said:


> You really need to work on being more clever. What you do is just plain lazy. SMH.



I can accept this as you are easily politically pawned.
How long have you been on this board?

Nevermind. You've learned very little.


----------



## daveman

Tommy Tainant said:


> I agree with my fellow posters. It must be a significant development.
> Its great that you can keep your spirits up. Well done chaps.


No perp walk.  No Trump being dragged out of Mar-a-Lago in chains.  No nothing.

You need to face the fact that the fantasies you've been fed have no relation to reality.


----------



## WEATHER53

Hutch Starskey said:


> Yes and you dopes are trying to create narratives about the committee over if. You specifically.


You got caught lying and rather than leave your fallacy alone you have spun it off to “yeah but…but…but” and engaged in carpet bombing name calling. 
Go lie to another poster now


----------



## Meister

g5000 said:


> It sounds VERY weak, doesn't it.  But that is precisely the bullshit you hear from people supporting Trump who don't want to hear the evidence of Trump's crimes.


Shouldn't have   let your gal Nancy pull the shit that she did.  Should have let the republicans put
up the members that they wanted, and not let Nancy put up a couple of RINO's.  Might have had the appearance
of some integrity with the committee.
But, leave it to Pelosi, and she creates a shit sammich.

just an observation


----------



## Sunni Man

The bogus J6 hearings just highlight the amount of fear and impending doom the Democrats have concerning Trump running for president in the 2024 election.


----------



## Meister

g5000 said:


> The Republicans silenced themselves.  They shot themselves in the mouth.
> 
> They CHOSE to deny an independent investigation.
> 
> They CHOSE not to sit on the January 6 committee.
> 
> And now they have the audacity to whine they don't have a voice in the proceedings?!?!?!
> 
> Oh, man.  That's priceless.  Only the dumbest of rubes would drink that piss.


Dude, it's your circus, the republicans didn't want to be a part of a circus.
Good for them.


----------



## g5000

Meister said:


> Shouldn't have   let your gal Nancy pull the shit that she did.  Should have let the republicans put
> up the members that they wanted, and not let Nancy put up a couple of RINO's.  Might have had the appearance
> of some integrity with the committee.
> But, leave it to Pelosi, and she creates a shit sammich.
> 
> just an observation


Two of the five that McCarthy chose for the committee were potential witness, so Pelosi rightfully rejected them.

All McCarthy had to do was replace them with two other Republicans not subject to subpoena.

Instead, he pulled all five in a snit.

Performative theater for the rubes.

And now the Republicans have the audacity to whine they don't have a voice on the committee?  BWA-HA-HA-HA-HA!

Priceless.









						A Year Later, Some Republicans Second-Guess Boycotting the Jan. 6 Panel
					

The decision by Representative Kevin McCarthy not to appoint Republicans to the committee has given Democrats the chance to set out an uninterrupted narrative.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## Lesh

Meister said:


> Shouldn't have   let your gal Nancy pull the shit that she did.  Should have let the republicans put
> up the members that they wanted, and not let Nancy put up a couple of RINO's.  Might have had the appearance
> of some integrity with the committee.
> But, leave it to Pelosi, and she creates a shit sammich.
> 
> just an observation


Pelosi was not going to put people on the Committee that may have been participants in the insurrection.

Meadows could have put others on but CHOSE not to


----------



## struth

buckeye45_73 said:


> WE already did, this is clearly designed to get off the abortion debate....the left can't debate...they just change the subject.


yep…it’s pretty clear that leaking the memo backfired as when the opinion was finally released most americans were like…oh wait this isn’t that big a deal…and we’ll inflation….

so now they got to go back to their soap opera


----------



## g5000

Meister said:


> Dude, it's your circus, the republicans didn't want to be a part of a circus.
> Good for them.


If McCarthy had not pulled all five Republicans in a snit, then we would have a real circus right now.

Instead, the proceedings are very formal with no performative jackasses tossing out red herrings, straw men, tu quoques, false dichotomies, etc., etc., etc.


----------



## blackhawk




----------



## marvin martian

Lesh said:


> Pelosi was not going to put people on the Committee that may have been participants in the insurrection.
> 
> Meadows could have put others on but CHOSE not to



When your little Soviet show trial is over, inflation is still going to be through the roof, people still won't be able to feed their kids, the border will still be open to fentanyl traffickers, and the stock market will still be in the shitter. And everyone will still know it's Joe Biden's fault.

Is it time for another "pandemic"?

LOL


----------



## g5000

Lesh said:


> Pelosi was not going to put people on the Committee that may have been participants in the insurrection.
> 
> Meadows could have put others on but CHOSE not to


This does not penetrate their pointy heads.

It was McCarthy, not Meadows, who chose not to put five Republicans on the committee.


----------



## g5000

The biggest fuckup of all was Trump.  He came out against the independent commission, and his loyalists in the Senate voted it down.

What a dumbass.


----------



## Meister

g5000 said:


> Two of the five that McCarthy chose for the committee were potential witness, so Pelosi rightfully rejected them.
> 
> All McCarthy had to do was replace them with two other Republicans not subject to subpoena.
> 
> Instead, he pulled all five in a snit.
> 
> Performative theater for the rubes.
> 
> And now the Republicans have the audacity to whine they don't have a voice on the committee?  BWA-HA-HA-HA-HA!
> 
> Priceless.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Year Later, Some Republicans Second-Guess Boycotting the Jan. 6 Panel
> 
> 
> The decision by Representative Kevin McCarthy not to appoint Republicans to the committee has given Democrats the chance to set out an uninterrupted narrative.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com


PELOSI should have been a witness, also.  
How does this circus work again?????? 

You minions are spoon fed from your masters.


----------



## Bootney Lee Farnsworth

citygator said:


> Seems scheduled pretty sudden… apparently the Jan 6 Committee is excited to present something to your open minds. I bet it’s a pretty big bombshell… any takers?
> 
> January 6 committee adds new hearing for Tuesday - CNNPolitics


With the economy deliberately falling over a damn cliff, does anyone give a single rat fuck about this bullshit show trial.

The house is on fire and instead of putting it out or getting everyone to safety, you assholes are trying prove little Timmy stole a cookie from the jar.

The internal polling must be *devastating* for the Dems to double down so fucking hard.


----------



## Clipper

The Original Tree said:


> Nothing.  It is just theatrics.  Same lying Evil Shit that was pulled over Russian Collusion during the entire Trump Administration.  I will enjoy watching these people involved and all that helped promote such Evil on Judgment Day.


If there's nothing to it then why are you Trump's asseater's heads exploding over these hearings?

Or is that just your normal state of mind?


----------



## B. Kidd

Dragonlady said:


> Why does every Republican solution to a problem involve killing Democrats?



It might be a possibility that Commies may not go away any other way.
Just check history, the Khmer Rouge and Pol Pot's killing fields.


----------



## Clipper

marvin martian said:


> We'll never know, because your reality show for idiots isn't allowing anyone from the opposing side to participate.


You mean Trump's asseaters like Jordan? Jordan will have to find another hearing to rant & rave, put on a show & prove again that he's an idiot.


----------



## BackAgain

The Original Tree said:


> *BREAKING NEWS BOMBSHELL:
> 
> Shocking revelations and documented evidence of Donald Trump's Collusion with Vladimir Putin, Yahoo Reports
> The Clinton Campaign has no comment at this time.*


🙄


----------



## Clipper

Mac1958 said:


> Look at all these solid, serious, Trump-supporting Republicans (some of them appointed by the buffoon himself) testifying *under oath* who the rubes are having to dismiss, because they have to stick to their denial story.
> 
> "They're RINOs now!  They're RINOs now!"
> 
> One of my favorite parts of this.


If Jesus himself came down from Heaven & testified to what he saw from up there they'd say Hillary got to him & crucify him again.

"Jesus is a RINO, I knew it"!


----------



## citygator

marvin martian said:


> Meanwhile inflation is still rising, the stock market is still falling, and gas is more expensive than it's ever been.
> 
> Keep up the reality show!


The bots usually kick out inflation and gas prices posts much earlier in a thread. I wonder what happened to your programming?


----------



## citygator

CrusaderFrank said:


> Trump has survived more bombshells than anyone else in human history!!


I won’t argue with that.  The dude just plowed through “grab them by the ****y” on video as if it were a normal thing.


----------



## Mac1958

citygator said:


> The bots usually kick out inflation and gas prices posts much earlier in a thread. I wonder what happened to your programming?


They're programmed to change the subject when it gets sticky.


----------



## citygator

Bootney Lee Farnsworth said:


> With the economy deliberately falling over a damn cliff, does anyone give a single rat fuck about this bullshit show trial.
> 
> The house is on fire and instead of putting it out or getting everyone to safety, you assholes are trying prove little Timmy stole a cookie from the jar.
> 
> The internal polling must be *devastating* for the Dems to double down so fucking hard.


Economy is fine. It was a disaster when everyone was unemployed under Bush and again under Trump. We have a supply issue. Not a big deal dipity do but it’s a bitch to fix.


----------



## buckeye45_73

g5000 said:


> If McCarthy had not pulled all five Republicans in a snit, then we would have a real circus right now.
> 
> Instead, the proceedings are very formal with no performative jackasses tossing out red herrings, straw men, tu quoques, false dichotomies, etc., etc., etc.


Just like in the old Soviet Union, show trials were run so professionally.


----------



## blackhawk




----------



## B. Kidd

Commiecrats pretending to know Jesus.

Priceless!!


----------



## ThunderKiss1965

rightwinger said:


> History will say they matter
> 
> Republicans scream…Look over there!


This whole "trial" is nothing but one big look over there. Inflation, fuel prices, cost of living increases. How are you loons going to sell your brand come midterms, We ignored everything else but we maybe got Trump this time ?


----------



## theHawk

citygator said:


> Seems scheduled pretty sudden… apparently the Jan 6 Committee is excited to present something to your open minds. I bet it’s a pretty big bombshell… any takers?
> 
> January 6 committee adds new hearing for Tuesday - CNNPolitics


Does this mean the Democrats’ insurrection against the “illegitimate Supreme Court” is already over?


----------



## marvin martian

citygator said:


> The bots usually kick out inflation and gas prices posts much earlier in a thread. I wonder what happened to your programming?



^^^Look everyone, this guy is too stupid to realize inflation is the number ONE issue in the country right now.

LOL. You'll do just fine in November, tard. Hahahaha


----------



## WEATHER53

marvin martian said:


> ^^^Look everyone, this guy is too stupid to realize inflation is the number ONE issue in the country right now.
> 
> LOL. You'll do just fine in November, tard. Hahahaha


Just leave them alone and let them persue the years old Get Trump Agenda as their main benefit to the American people for November


----------



## B. Kidd

marvin martian said:


> ^^^Look everyone, this guy is too stupid to realize inflation is the number ONE issue in the country right now.
> 
> LOL. You'll do just fine in November, tard. Hahahaha



Unfortunately our Media, even Fox, is ignoring the increased ranks of homeless along with those just hanging onto the little that they have by a fingernail.

Shameful!!!


----------



## Billiejeens

Godboy said:


> At the end of your pitiful hearings, there wont be a single criminal referral. Wanna bet? You would have to be a god damn fool to bet against me.



That is not a fair bet
They already announced that there would not be.


----------



## theHawk




----------



## Billiejeens

Tommy Tainant said:


> I agree with my fellow posters. It must be a significant development.
> Its great that you can keep your spirits up. Well done chaps.



Looks as if you are alone on this to me.


----------



## Mac1958

bodecea said:


> Mo Brooks?  After being snubbed by the fat former guy, I'm sure he's got a lot to share.


Twitter has been great fun today on this.

Guesses are everyone from Sister Teresa to JFK Jr.


----------



## Billy_Bob

Meister said:


> It really would be  nice if all this "evidence" could be cross examined.
> But, we know that will never happen.


In order for it to be called evidence it must be given to the defense to refute.   I wonder if Schiff has been working overtime to create something new to distract from his own act of insurrection with Colberts staff?


----------



## Billy_Bob

IF this is anything like the last 12,000 bombshells, it won't go off and it will be a dud.


----------



## theHawk

Tommy Tainant said:


> I wonder what they have got.? Must be significant.
> 
> Lord knows America needs a lift.
> 
> January 6 committee announces surprise hearing over ‘recently obtained evidence’


----------



## Nostra

citygator said:


> Seems scheduled pretty sudden… apparently the Jan 6 Committee is excited to present something to your open minds. I bet it’s a pretty big bombshell… any takers?
> 
> January 6 committee adds new hearing for Tuesday - CNNPolitics


They are trying to distract from their insurrections and riots by their Baby Killer Cult base.


----------



## Tommy Tainant

Billiejeens said:


> Looks as if you are alone on this to me.


It isnt a consideration. Its more important that I am right. I wouldnt expect much support on an extreme right wing site wiith a majority of low education imbeciles.


----------



## daveman

Billiejeens said:


> That is not a fair bet
> They already announced that there would not be.


Then what's the point?


----------



## daveman

Tommy Tainant said:


> It isnt a consideration. Its more important that I am right. I wouldnt expect much support on an extreme right wing site wiith a majority of low education imbeciles.


...says the guy who STILL believes the Russian Collusion fairytale.


----------



## flan327

Rambunctious said:


> Damn the people aren't outraged... Trump's approval keeps going up.... we need a "SURPRISE" session....


Prove it

Because you are LYING


----------



## flan327

Dekster said:


> Some of us here in America haven't watched a second of the hearings.  Dem porn should be confined to OnlyFans.


Safe in YORE bunker

Willfully ignorant people disgust me


----------



## Rogue AI

Are they bringing in the dunking chair? Too hard to take this witch hunt seriously without it.


----------



## Dekster

flan327 said:


> Safe in YORE bunker
> 
> Willfully ignorant people disgust me



I am sure everybody disgusts you.  I, however, have no interest in congressional hearings.  I was forced to sit through too many boring ass ones when I worked on the Hill so they would have people appearing to care for the CSPAN cameras.  The woman who unofficially ran our office was big into goofy women's issues and wouldn't let me come and go as I pleased every other day unless I did as she decreed on funding for native american women's cancer screening day in the hearing room and crap like that.


----------



## fncceo

Is the surprise that _they're going to whine about President Trump for a few hours, no one will listen, and they'll all go home?_

Because I saw that surprise coming.


----------



## fncceo




----------



## Rambunctious

flan327 said:


> Prove it
> 
> Because you are LYING


Nancy's little show isn't working just like both of her impeachment tries....


----------



## Hossfly

*Breaking news!






*


----------



## Rambunctious

okfine said:


> Approval? I think it's something else. 🤔


Its not going to work... If Trump runs he wins... if he endorses Ron he wins... if he endorsed the boogie man the boogie man wins....


----------



## fncceo

flan327 said:


> Prove it
> 
> Because you are LYING



Oh, I believe *YOU'RE* outraged.  But, you are a _person_, you're not the _people_.


----------



## Rambunctious

flan327 said:


> Prove it
> 
> Because you are LYING


The show is working so well they need a surprise session?...Buuuuaaaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha


----------



## fncceo

Rambunctious said:


> The show is working so well they need a surprise session?...Buuuuaaaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha



It's Shark Week and they need the rating.


----------



## BackAgain

Tommy Tainant said:


> It isnt a consideration. Its more important that I am right. I wouldnt expect much support on an extreme right wing site wiith a majority of low education imbeciles.


You prefer the low intellectual capacities of your fellow libtards to people who can rebut your  nonsense.

 Face it,  taint.  You breathlessly trumpet any crumb of libtard anti-Trump propaganda and never show any insight into the fact that you’ve been shown to be a shallow drooling useless tool each and every time. 

Folks like pencilneck Schiff make promises, but never keep them. And morons like you keep hoping “we’ll get it next time.” 🤣😂


----------



## Missourian

Tommy Tainant said:


> I wonder what they have got.? Must be significant.
> 
> Lord knows America needs a lift.
> 
> January 6 committee announces surprise hearing over ‘recently obtained evidence’


Dan Rather 'found' more documents?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

citygator said:


> Seems scheduled pretty sudden… apparently the Jan 6 Committee is excited to present something to your open minds. I bet it’s a pretty big bombshell… any takers?
> 
> January 6 committee adds new hearing for Tuesday - CNNPolitics


How about some video of the orange pile of shit gleefully and approvingly watching the violence on his television?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Billy_Bob said:


> In order for it to be called evidence it must be given to the defense to refute.


Hahahahah

So dumb.


----------



## iceberg

rightwinger said:


> How long before Republicans call it fake news?


Cause you hold all your best evidence to show after you've failed at everything else.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

iceberg said:


> Cause you hold all your best evidence to show after you've failed at everything else.


But you know less than nothing about the hearings. So your opinion of them therefore means less than nothing.

You guys never seem to get this simple principle.


----------



## lantern2814

g5000 said:


> The Republican idea of cross-examination is, "Yeahbut inflation!  Yeahbut gas prices!  LOOK! A SQUIRREL!"


Hey  dumbfuck, inflation, gas prices, empty shelves. These things actually matter to REAL Americans (leaving traitorous scum like you out). YOU are the asshole screaming “LOOK! JAN. 6!” in a desperate deflection attempt.


----------



## lantern2814

g5000 said:


> The Republicans had their chance, dumbass.
> 
> Pelosi tried to form an independent commission like the one after 9/11.  It would have been comprised of non-officeholders and would have been 5 Democrats and 5 Republicans.
> 
> But Trump killed that idea.
> 
> Just think.  If there had been an independent commission, they would have released a report no one would read and that would be the end of it, and Trump would declare the report exonerated him.
> 
> But nooooooo!  Trump killed it instead.
> 
> So then Pelosi created a committee, and of the five Republicans McCarthy picked to be on the committee, two of them were potential witnesses.  What a dumbass.
> 
> So when Pelosi put the kibosh on the two potential witnesses, McCarthy decided to cancel all five Republican seats instead of just replacing the two hacks.
> 
> And that, retard, is why there is no cross-examination.  Trump shot himself in the mouth.
> 
> If McCarthy had appointed five loyalists, you'd be seeing an ocean of red herrings being tossed around by the Trumptards.
> 
> Too bad.  So sad.


Time to educate this dumb Dim again. That “independent committee” wasn’t going to be so independent. Pisslosi was still going to running every aspect. Pisslosi is  a material witness, but your ignorant ass ignores that. She should be being questioned, not exempting herself from turning over any evidence or being called to testify. What’s sad is your terminal TDS.


----------



## Billy_Bob

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Hahahahah
> 
> So dumb.


Until the point where it has been cooberated and the defense allowed to check the veracity of any information it remains hearsay.   He said-she said...   But then you don't want Trump to have the ability to defend himself...


----------



## Faun

citygator said:


> Seems scheduled pretty sudden… apparently the Jan 6 Committee is excited to present something to your open minds. I bet it’s a pretty big bombshell… any takers?
> 
> January 6 committee adds new hearing for Tuesday - CNNPolitics



Whatever it is, Trump could walk into that hear and shoot Liz Cheney and his cult would applaud him.

They suffer from a mental deformity


----------



## Billy000

rightwinger said:


> How long before Republicans call it fake news?


They already decided it is.


----------



## Faun

BackAgain said:


> They haven’t had any bombshells at all. I doubt they’re gonna start now.


----------



## lantern2814

g5000 said:


> The Republicans silenced themselves.  They shot themselves in the mouth.
> 
> They CHOSE to deny an independent investigation.
> 
> They CHOSE not to sit on the January 6 committee.
> 
> And now they have the audacity to whine they don't have a voice in the proceedings?!?!?!
> 
> Oh, man.  That's priceless.  Only the dumbest of rubes would drink that piss.


And you’re drinking it straight from the private parts of Xiden, Schumer, Pisslosi, AOC, Waters......


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Billy_Bob said:


> Until the point where it has been cooberated and the defense allowed to check the veracity of any information it remains hearsay.   He said-she said...   But then you don't want Trump to have the ability to defend himself...


That isn't what hearsay means.

Trump is the dumbass who didn't want to defend himself. He refused the independent commission. He refuses to testify or cooperate. Go whine to him.


----------



## Faun

The Original Tree said:


> *This is what Insurrection Looks like courtesy of The Militant Brown Shirt Wings of The DemNazi Party.*
> 
> View attachment 662969


----------



## Faun

buckeye45_73 said:


> WE already did, this is clearly designed to get off the abortion debate....the left can't debate...they just change the subject.



Well that the retarded perspective. The Left does not want the abortion debate to fall silent. That SCOTUS ruling is going to inspire many on the left to vote in November, who prolly wouldn't have voted.


----------



## Sandy Shanks

_Politico _reports, "John Eastman, the attorney who developed Donald Trump’s last-ditch strategy to seize a second term, said in court Monday that he had his phone seized by federal agents last week."

“The federal agents identified themselves as FBI agents, but they appeared to be executing a warrant issued at the behest of the Department of Justice’s Office of the Inspector General,” Eastman’s lawyer, Charles Burnham, wrote.

_Politico _continued, "A legal adviser to Trump’s campaign, Eastman has been a central figure in the Capitol riot committee’s case that the former president attempted to block the peaceful transfer of power on Jan. 6, 2021. A federal judge in California has previously ruled that Eastman and Trump “likely” entered a criminal conspiracy to obstruct the counting of electoral votes on Jan. 6.

"Last week, subpoenas were served on a slew of those false electors, including at least three state Republican Party chairs. Investigators also searched the Lorton, Va., home of former Justice Department official Jeffrey Clark, another critical player in Trump’s efforts."

*The House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol on Monday abruptly scheduled a hearing for Tuesday afternoon to hear what the panel called “recently obtained evidence” and take witness testimony, a surprise move that touched off a wave of speculation about a potentially explosive revelation," *every major news outlet in the country.

It is beginning to look like the DOJ is closing in on Trump, the leader of the Republican Party, and the leader of the attempt to overthrow our elected government.

No response is expected from Trump Republicans. They seemed to have crawled under a rock.


----------



## BS Filter

There is no Thursday June 28th this year.


----------



## Faun

kaz said:


> This is the moronic hard left g5000 who doesn't attack Democrats for NOT ALLOWING QUESTIONS FROM THE DEFENSE, but for his paranoid made up attack by Republicans.     Incredible.    So you still stick with the flimsy, shallow lie you aren't a Democrat, huh?  That's just hilarious at this point.   You're like a four year old boy thinking no one can find you behind the sofa, LOL



LOL

What defense, kazzer? This isn't a trial, it's a hearing. This is more akin to a grand jury, which has no defense.

But no worries, the Department of Justice is currently investigating all of this; so if they show the courage to follow through with charges, those charged will have their day in court where they will get their opportunity to present a defense.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Faun said:


> LOL
> 
> What defense, kazzer? This isn't a trial, it's a hearing. This is more akin to a grand jury, which has no defense.
> 
> But no worries, the Department of Justice is currently investigating all of this; so if they show the courage to follow through with charges, those charged will have their day in court where they will get their opportunity to present a defense.


Yep.

And they won't be able to refuse to appear, and then pretend they weren't given a chance to tell their stories.


----------



## rightwinger

Mac1958 said:


> Look at all these solid, serious, Trump-supporting Republicans (some of them appointed by the buffoon himself) testifying *under oath* who the rubes are having to dismiss, because they have to stick to their denial story.
> 
> "They're RINOs now!  They're RINOs now!"
> 
> One of my favorite parts of this.


Be interesting to see what the surprise testimony is tomorrow


----------



## rightwinger

Billy000 said:


> They already decided it is.



Any news Republicans don’t like is fake


----------



## Nostra

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> That isn't what hearsay means.
> 
> Trump is the dumbass who didn't want to defend himself. He refused the independent commission. He refuses to testify or cooperate. Go whine to him.


What “independent commission”?


----------



## Nostra

rightwinger said:


> Be interesting to see what the surprise testimony is tomorrow


The only surprise would be if they actually brought something someone was interested in…..besides you mindless drone Dimtard drones.


----------



## BackAgain

Jan 6 Committee: New Bombshell Testimony and Evidence (6/28, 1pm)​
*“Bombshell*.”  Lol.   

What do you call a bomb’s shell when it’s hollow and contains no explosives at all?

You could say a bombshell. But, realistically, it’s just a dud.


----------



## iceberg

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> But you know less than nothing about the hearings. So your opinion of them therefore means less than nothing.
> 
> You guys never seem to get this simple principle.


I get you are a trolling fucktard. 

Past that it didn't really matter.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

BackAgain said:


> Jan 6 Committee: New Bombshell Testimony and Evidence (6/28, 1pm)​
> *“Bombshell*.” Lol.
> 
> What do you call a bomb’s shell when it’s hollow and contains no explosives at all?
> 
> You could say a bombshell. But, realistically, it’s just a dud.


To an ignorant crybaby who knows nothing about the hearings, we call it anything anything we like. Its not as if you would be able to tell the difference.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

iceberg said:


> I get you are a trolling fucktard.
> 
> Past that it didn't really matter.


That has no bearing on the fact that you know less than nothing about the hearings, though.

In fact, you are too big a pussy to watch them.


----------



## BackAgain

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> To an ignorant crybaby who knows nothing about the hearings, we call it anything anything we like. Its not as if you would be able to tell the difference.


Aww. The precious widdle Farty has a new favorite “word.”  Today’s word is “crybaby,” regardless of the fact that it has no applicability. 

But let’s humor Farty, the pathetic-ass troll. 

Today is 6/27. So, this alleged “bombshell” hasn’t been “exploded” yet. Nevertheless, Farty imagines that we won’t learn about the nature of the “bombshell” when it gets exposed tomorrow. 

😂🤣


----------



## Chillicothe

citygator said:


> _I bet it’s a pretty big bombshell… any takers?_


I'm thinkin' Pat Cipollone.
Cheney laid a hard shot on him in the 4th hearing (I think it was the 4th).
Testimony seems to indicate he has a sense of civic duty and morality, so maybe Cheney's 'hint' was heard?
========================================



Meister said:


> It really would be nice if all this "evidence" could be cross examined.   But, we know that will never happen


Well, patience Grasshopper.  If there is or are indictments lurking....we ALL will be able to see that 'cross examination'-thingy.
Betcha.
=========================================


marvin martian said:


> The "hearing" is all DemoKKKrats and Dem-affected losers. It's not a legal proceeding if there's only one side present


Ah, that's a sad mis-read poor poster Martian.  

Do this: Actually watch the hearings. There's been five so far. You can get each one on YouTube.   Maybe there's an epiphany in your future.
Be optimistic that you can be a better you.
===============================


Sunsettommy said:


> If there really is some smoking hot evidence, they should ask the DOJ to indict then prosecute, the J6 committee can't do that.


Patience, Grasshopper.
It seems there are some stirrings in the pot. Clark's home 'visited' by the FBI, stuff confiscated. Eastman's phone confiscated. The fake electors subpoenaed.  Stuff seems to me moving. No?
========================================


----------



## BackAgain

Chillicothe said:


> I'm thinkin' Pat Cipollone.
> Cheney laid a hard shot on him in the 4th hearing (I think it was the 4th).
> Testimony seems to indicate he has a sense of civic duty and morality, so maybe Cheney's 'hint' was heard?
> ========================================
> 
> 
> Well, patience Grasshopper.  If there is or are indictments lurking....we ALL will be able to see that 'cross examination'-thingy.
> Betcha.
> =========================================
> 
> Ah, that's a sad mis-read poor poster Martian.
> 
> Do this: Actually watch the hearings. There's been five so far. You can get each one on YouTube.   Maybe there's an epiphany in your future.
> Be optimistic that you can be a better you.
> ===============================
> 
> Patience, Grasshopper.
> It seems there are some stirrings in the pot. Clark's home 'visited' by the FBI, stuff confiscated. Eastman's phone confiscated. The fake electors subpoenaed.  Stuff seems to me moving. No?
> ========================================


Zzzzzzzzz


----------



## Sunsettommy

Chillicothe said:


> I'm thinkin' Pat Cipollone.
> Cheney laid a hard shot on him in the 4th hearing (I think it was the 4th).
> Testimony seems to indicate he has a sense of civic duty and morality, so maybe Cheney's 'hint' was heard?
> ========================================
> 
> 
> Well, patience Grasshopper.  If there is or are indictments lurking....we ALL will be able to see that 'cross examination'-thingy.
> Betcha.
> =========================================
> 
> Ah, that's a sad mis-read poor poster Martian.
> 
> Do this: Actually watch the hearings. There's been five so far. You can get each one on YouTube.   Maybe there's an epiphany in your future.
> Be optimistic that you can be a better you.
> ===============================
> 
> Patience, Grasshopper.
> It seems there are some stirrings in the pot. Clark's home 'visited' by the FBI, stuff confiscated. Eastman's phone confiscated. The fake electors subpoenaed.  Stuff seems to me moving. No?
> ========================================


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

As it turns out, making a list of fake electors, putting it on a fake State letterhead, and adorning the document with a fake Official State seal, then sending them to the National Archives...

... is a serious felony.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Sunsettommy said:


>


Of course, it's the first time you ever heard his name.


----------



## Faun

Billy_Bob said:


> Until the point where it has been cooberated and the defense allowed to check the veracity of any information it remains hearsay.   He said-she said...   But then you don't want Trump to have the ability to defend himself...



Huh?? Who said Trump can't testify?


----------



## Meister

Chillicothe said:


> I'm thinkin' Pat Cipollone.
> Cheney laid a hard shot on him in the 4th hearing (I think it was the 4th).
> Testimony seems to indicate he has a sense of civic duty and morality, so maybe Cheney's 'hint' was heard?
> ========================================
> 
> 
> Well, patience Grasshopper.  If there is or are indictments lurking....we ALL will be able to see that 'cross examination'-thingy.
> Betcha.
> =========================================
> 
> Ah, that's a sad mis-read poor poster Martian.
> 
> Do this: Actually watch the hearings. There's been five so far. You can get each one on YouTube.   Maybe there's an epiphany in your future.
> Be optimistic that you can be a better you.
> ===============================
> 
> Patience, Grasshopper.
> It seems there are some stirrings in the pot. Clark's home 'visited' by the FBI, stuff confiscated. Eastman's phone confiscated. The fake electors subpoenaed.  Stuff seems to me moving. No?
> ========================================


Yeah, yeah, yeah....we got him now.
And the Sergeant of Arms had a timely death.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Chillicothe said:


> I'm thinkin' Pat Cipollone.


I am thinking video of Trump watching the riots.


----------



## Chillicothe

Mac1958 said:


> _While I like what they're doing, that smells a little of showbiz to me. We'll see._


I like their confidence. And their caution thus far.
I've noted their prudence in public communications.  Also noted the minimalist grandstanding in the hearings themselves.  In short, they are guarding their credibility, their gravitas.  Which makes me kinda sort suspect they're holding an ace.  May not be a silver-bullet....I doubt they'd try that...but I think it may leave a mark.  IMHO

===================================================



marvin martian said:


> _A "hearing" with only one side allowed to participate is a reality show for dumb people like you._


Martian, c'mon man. You've worn that puppy out.
Or.......you just ain't listening to what knowledgeable posters are trying to help you with.
This is a friggin' hearing. Not a trial where you have plaintiff/defendant.
If....IF.....indictments come, you and me, and everybody.....will have the opportunity to hear the "side" that Meadows, Jordan, Eastman, Clark, et al, have refused, so far, to offer the American people. So be patient. Let's see if an indictment drops on the table.
=======================================



marvin martian said:


> _We'll never know, because your reality show for idiots isn't allowing anyone from the opposing side to participate._


Martian, read my comments just above.  They are still true.

=======================================


WEATHER53 said:


> _How can they advertise Bombshell in advance?
> The answer-they created it_


I'm not at all sure that the Committee has advertised a _'bombshell'._ Leastwise, I have seen no such comment in the media. And given their circumspection to date.....it sounds out of character for them to hype it. Rather, what I have read is that they simply have announced a new hearing to demonstrate new evidence.   Fair enough.
=====================================



marvin martian said:


> _Meanwhile inflation is still rising, the stock market is still falling, and gas is more expensive than it's ever bee_n.


Martian, do this:  Go start a thread on that stuff.  Doing what you are doing above is a cheap '_Look, Squirrel_-ism'.   You are better than that.
===========================================


----------



## Chillicothe

Meister said:


> _Yeah, yeah, yeah....we got him now.
> And the Sergeant of Arms had a timely death._



I have no idea what that means.
==================================



g5000 said:


> _tu quoques,_



I do know what that means.
And I like it. It is apropos. 
A hat-tip.


----------



## dudmuck

rightwinger said:


> Any news Republicans don’t like is fake


----------



## buckeye45_73

Faun said:


> Well that the retarded perspective. The Left does not want the abortion debate to fall silent. That SCOTUS ruling is going to inspire many on the left to vote in November, who prolly wouldn't have voted.


Oh they do, that's why Roe was so important. They don't want to debate, they are hoping people are just horny......


----------



## bripat9643

rightwinger said:


> How long before Republicans call it fake news?


0.00000000000! micro seconds.


----------



## bripat9643

JackOfNoTrades said:


> Putin has that. He may never give it up.
> 
> But it would be hysterical to see.


Your delusions are hysterical.


----------



## bripat9643

Ralph Norton said:


> Between inflation/ gas prices/ crime/ open border  and now the SC overturning Roe vs. Wade, Dems are even more desperate to make the public believe that their contrived "hearings" matter.


Forevermore, Dims will be the party of inflation and sky high gas prices.  

You would think they had learned their lesson after Carter.


----------



## Faun

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> I am thinking video of Trump watching the riots.



Maybe. But it's gotta be more than just watching. Maybe on camera rooting for the insurgents. Maybe cheering for them to catch Pence.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

citygator said:


> I won’t argue with that.  The dude just plowed through “grab them by the ****y” on video as if it were a normal thing.


Joe Biden actually grabbed a Senate Staffer by her pussy

Are you familiar with Ashley's diary?


----------



## Mac1958

Chillicothe said:


> I like their confidence. And their caution thus far.
> I've noted their prudence in public communications.  Also noted the minimalist grandstanding in the hearings themselves.  In short, they are guarding their credibility, their gravitas.  Which makes me kinda sort suspect they're holding an ace.  May not be a silver-bullet....I doubt they'd try that...but I think it may leave a mark.  IMHO


Yeah.  My biggest concern was that it would be a typical politician hearing, replete with pontificating and grandstanding. Y'know, come to think of it, the fact that they have clearly _*avoided *_the standard pontificating and grandstanding tells me they _*know*_ they usually pontificate and grandstand.  So that's been a positive, otherwise I'd be tuning out quickly.

Also, their near-exclusive use of Republicans and _*Trump-appointed*_ Republicans has been excellent.  The rubes have to impulsively call them RINOs because that's all they know, but it has been very effective.


----------



## scruffy

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> But you know less than nothing about the hearings. So your opinion of them therefore means less than nothing.
> 
> You guys never seem to get this simple principle.


No, the righties have been telling you that exact thing from the very start.

The hearings are of, by, and for morons 

No one else cares


----------



## scruffy

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> To an ignorant crybaby who knows nothing about the hearings, we call it anything anything we like. Its not as if you would be able to tell the difference.


Have fun playing with yourself


----------



## citygator

Not sure how this fits in. 









						Former Meadows aide to testify in surprise Jan. 6 committee hearing
					

Capitol riot investigators, citing "recently obtained evidence," changed course after deciding to pause their public events until July.




					www.politico.com
				




The Jan. 6 select committee is set to hear from a onetime top aide to former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows on Tuesday, an abruptly scheduled hearing whose announcement riveted Washington.

Cassidy Hutchinson will testify publicly, according to two people familiar with the committee’s plans, after providing crucial testimony to the panel about significant exchanges among top Donald Trump’s inner circle in the weeks before the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol. Hutchinson replaced her attorney earlier this month as the select committee’s hearings began; her former attorney was the Trump White House’s chief ethics lawyer, and her new attorney is a longtime ally of former Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

Earlier Monday the select panel announced a surprise hearing, with about 24 hours’ notice, “to present recently obtained evidence and receive witness testimony.” That statement included no details on the testimony or witnesses — and the sudden schedule change intensified intrigue in Washington, where the panel has mounted a carefully choreographed set of hearings about the former president’s election subversion. 

It’s unclear why the panel expedited Hutchinson’s hearing, or whether she will appear alongside other significant witnesses. Hutchinson was present during meetings between Meadows and multiple House Republicans who aided Trump’s effort to overturn the 2020 election. Snippets of her video deposition supported the committee’s contention that several of those Republicans later sought presidential pardons


----------



## Godboy

B. Kidd said:


> I can accept this as you are easily politically pawned.
> How long have you been on this board?
> 
> Nevermind. You've learned very little.


Are you ever going to actually debate the topic, or is this ^ weak trash the best we can expect from you?


----------



## Mac1958

citygator said:


> Not sure how this fits in.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Former Meadows aide to testify in surprise Jan. 6 committee hearing
> 
> 
> Capitol riot investigators, citing "recently obtained evidence," changed course after deciding to pause their public events until July.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.politico.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Jan. 6 select committee is set to hear from a onetime top aide to former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows on Tuesday, an abruptly scheduled hearing whose announcement riveted Washington.
> 
> Cassidy Hutchinson will testify publicly, according to two people familiar with the committee’s plans, after providing crucial testimony to the panel about significant exchanges among top Donald Trump’s inner circle in the weeks before the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol. Hutchinson replaced her attorney earlier this month as the select committee’s hearings began; her former attorney was the Trump White House’s chief ethics lawyer, and her new attorney is a longtime ally of former Attorney General Jeff Sessions.
> 
> Earlier Monday the select panel announced a surprise hearing, with about 24 hours’ notice, “to present recently obtained evidence and receive witness testimony.” That statement included no details on the testimony or witnesses — and the sudden schedule change intensified intrigue in Washington, where the panel has mounted a carefully choreographed set of hearings about the former president’s election subversion.
> 
> It’s unclear why the panel expedited Hutchinson’s hearing, or whether she will appear alongside other significant witnesses. Hutchinson was present during meetings between Meadows and multiple House Republicans who aided Trump’s effort to overturn the 2020 election. Snippets of her video deposition supported the committee’s contention that several of those Republicans later sought presidential pardons


And my hopes for JFK Jr. are dashed.


----------



## Superbadbrutha

Rambunctious said:


> Damn the people aren't outraged... Trump's approval keeps going up.... we need a "SURPRISE" session....


Only among Trump Humpers.


----------



## Superbadbrutha

No matter what they present nothing will be done, this is a prime example of the Law in this country.


----------



## SeaMajor7

The Nancy Pelosi's selected committee is a freaking JOKE!!!


----------



## sparky

1srelluc said:


> * Schiff's bogus "evidence" X 2.





another episode of '_Schiff's got wood_'......

~S~


----------



## rightwinger

SeaMajor7 said:


> The Nancy Pelosi's selected committee is a freaking JOKE!!!


The Bipartisan committee is doing a wonderful job

I would describe them as….Perfect


----------



## rightwinger

bripat9643 said:


> 0.00000000000! micro seconds.


----------



## Dragonlady

WEATHER53 said:


> “New” evidence for something already ruled to be not so.
> The endless cycles of liberal causes.



Do you have a link to this ruling that said the insurrection never happened or is this just something you’ve pulled out of your ass?  

Every time Donald Trump does something that’s illegal, you pretend it never happened. How’s that working for you so far?


----------



## The Original Tree

citygator said:


> We will see.  From a marketing perspective it puts a lot on the expectations.  Democrats are terrible at marketing so I would not be surprised if it’s not an A bomb.


*So Russian Collusion wasn't a marketing success, you pin head propagandist?*


----------



## The Original Tree

Dragonlady said:


> Do you have a link to this ruling that said the insurrection never happened or is this just something you’ve pulled out of your ass?
> 
> Every time Donald Trump does something that’s illegal, you pretend it never happened. How’s that working for you so far?


*What did he do that is illegal?  You got some US code to cite?  How about some evidence?  Did you go out and buy you some shiny new Russian Collusion Narrative from your pal and Biden's investor Vlad Putin again?*


----------



## Chillicothe

Today's New York Times offers us this:

"...in recent days, the committee has indicated that it has gathered crucial new information that bears further exploration.

But pressed on the matter on Monday, aides declined to divulge what additional evidence they planned to present on Tuesday.
Some of the most damning testimony the panel has received so far has come from people who worked directly for Mr. Trump, including officials from his presidential campaign, his legal team and the Justice Department.

Ms. Hutchinson was asked by the committee about Mr. Trump’s positive reaction to the chants from rioters to execute Mr. Pence and confirmed it, according to people familiar with the panel’s work......... the committee received testimony that when Mr. Trump learned of the mob’s threats to hang Mr. Pence, he said, “Maybe our supporters have the right idea,” and added that Mr. Pence “deserves it.”

Ms. Hutchinson’s closed-door testimony also suggested that at least a handful of Republican lawmakers were concerned about criminal liability after participating in the effort to invalidate the election results. In a videotaped interview played by the panel at its last public hearing, Ms. Hutchinson testified that Representatives Mo Brooks of Alabama, Matt Gaetz of Florida, Louie Gohmert of Texas, Scott Perry of Pennsylvania, Andy Biggs of Arizona and Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia all sought pardons after the Jan. 6 assault."


----------



## 22lcidw

Dragonlady said:


> Do you have a link to this ruling that said the insurrection never happened or is this just something you’ve pulled out of your ass?
> 
> Every time Donald Trump does something that’s illegal, you pretend it never happened. How’s that working for you so far?


Joe Biden has his day coming up next year.


----------



## berg80

citygator said:


> Seems scheduled pretty sudden… apparently the Jan 6 Committee is excited to present something to your open minds. I bet it’s a pretty big bombshell… any takers?


At this point, no one can seriously think the minds of Trump's cult will be opened by anything short of him making a public announcement admitting the Big Lie was a big hoax. That he lied because his enormous ego did not allow for him to graciously acknowledge defeat, and because he saw convincing The Following of the Big Lie as a fund raising opportunity so he could fleece the flock.


----------



## Billiejeens

daveman said:


> Then what's the point?



It's an infomercial.

They want you to buy the idea that President Trump shouldn't be allowed to move back into the White House when he beats Biden again.


----------



## Billiejeens

Tommy Tainant said:


> It isnt a consideration. Its more important that I am right. I wouldnt expect much support on an extreme right wing site wiith a majority of low education imbeciles.




It isn't?

Then why did you say this -

*I agree with my fellow posters*


----------



## Oddball

I hear that Gislaine Maxwell is being sentenced at about the same time.

Look over here, not over there!


----------



## Billiejeens

Chillicothe said:


> Today's New York Times offers us this:
> 
> "...in recent days, the committee has indicated that it has gathered crucial new information that bears further exploration.
> 
> But pressed on the matter on Monday, aides declined to divulge what additional evidence they planned to present on Tuesday.
> Some of the most damning testimony the panel has received so far has come from people who worked directly for Mr. Trump, including officials from his presidential campaign, his legal team and the Justice Department.
> 
> Ms. Hutchinson was asked by the committee about Mr. Trump’s positive reaction to the chants from rioters to execute Mr. Pence and confirmed it, according to people familiar with the panel’s work......... the committee received testimony that when Mr. Trump learned of the mob’s threats to hang Mr. Pence, he said, “Maybe our supporters have the right idea,” and added that Mr. Pence “deserves it.”
> 
> Ms. Hutchinson’s closed-door testimony also suggested that at least a handful of Republican lawmakers were concerned about criminal liability after participating in the effort to invalidate the election results. In a videotaped interview played by the panel at its last public hearing, Ms. Hutchinson testified that Representatives Mo Brooks of Alabama, Matt Gaetz of Florida, Louie Gohmert of Texas, Scott Perry of Pennsylvania, Andy Biggs of Arizona and Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia all sought pardons after the Jan. 6 assault."




I laugh -

There has literally been zero (0) damning testimony.


----------



## Billiejeens

Rambunctious said:


> Its not going to work... If Trump runs he wins... if he endorses Ron he wins... if he endorsed the boogie man the boogie man wins....



To the left they are all boogie men.


----------



## The Original Tree

Clipper said:


> If there's nothing to it then why are you Trump's asseater's heads exploding over these hearings?
> 
> Or is that just your normal state of mind?


*Your Evil and your lies will drag you straight to Hell where you belong hairy man ass lover.
Congress especially the DemNazi congress is more hated than ever.
They refuse to do what we pay them for which is to fix things.
Instead they engage in fictitious hearings based on false allegations and drag our entire country through the mud, playing the fiddle while watching Rome burn to the ground.

Change your diaper Mr. Poopy Pantz.  Joe probably already changed his.  Get with the program shit head.*


----------



## The Original Tree

berg80 said:


> At this point, no one can seriously think the minds of Trump's cult will be opened by anything short of him making a public announcement admitting the Big Lie was a big hoax. That he lied because his enormous ego did not allow for him to graciously acknowledge defeat, and because he saw convincing The Following of the Big Lie as a fund raising opportunity so he could fleece the flock.


*Shouldn't you be investigating your own hair sniffing cult, and Joe Biden raping his teenage daughter in the shower?
Maybe you should have your DemNazi party do something about Fentanyl, Open Borders and diseased illegals coming in here or about the price of gas, food shortages or supply chain issues.  I'd even settle for you clowns taking some initiative to change Joe's soiled diaper.

Nope, it's fap fap fap for you over a do nothing committee investigating imaginary accusations in a prime time political clown show soap opera.

Fap fap fap

Trump Trump Trump

Hump Hump Hump

Fap fap fap*


----------



## The Original Tree

sparky said:


> View attachment 663195
> another episode of '_Schiff's got wood_'......
> 
> ~S~


*Every time I see pictures of Schiff I imagine him and Right Winger wearing a ball gag in an S & M marathon session.





No wonder Congress can't get shit done.*


----------



## Clipper

The Original Tree said:


> *Your Evil and your lies will drag you straight to Hell where you belong hairy man ass lover.
> Congress especially the DemNazi congress is more hated than ever.
> They refuse to do what we pay them for which is to fix things.
> Instead they engage in fictitious hearings based on false allegations and drag our entire country through the mud, playing the fiddle while watching Rome burn to the ground.
> 
> Change your diaper Mr. Poopy Pantz.  Joe probably already changed his.  Get with the program shit head.*


Head exploding over the hearing at 1300 today, Tramp asseater? Why sure! What else is new, mouthbreather?


----------



## CowboyTed

citygator said:


> Seems scheduled pretty sudden… apparently the Jan 6 Committee is excited to present something to your open minds. I bet it’s a pretty big bombshell… any takers?
> 
> January 6 committee adds new hearing for Tuesday - CNNPolitics


We'll see but it is coming more obvious where there is convictions...

Trump personally telling the RNC Chair (Ronna McDanie)to put in fake electors is look pretty ominous. It is highly unlike likely she has a pocket pardon, she seems smart enough to get proof of being ordered... She doesn't come across like the batshit crazy and would know that proof on Trump ordering her is cover under a plea.

I thought it would be others but this looks the closest right now... But you never know... 

If they have hard evidence of Trump ordering Ronna McDanie (or even knowing about it) then that is a criminal. That is a charge and struggle to see how Trump can delay that for years.. 









						RNC coordinated fake electors at Trump's 'direct request': Ronna McDaniel
					

Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel confirmed Tuesday that former President Donald Trump was involved in lawyer John Eastman's fake elector scheme.




					gazette.com
				




There is always self pardoning but that could would involve admission of guilt and Trump would be supenoaed immediately to give testimony with no plead the 5th protection..


----------



## The Original Tree

Clipper said:


> Head exploding over the hearing at 1300 today, Tramp asseater? Why sure! What else is new, mouthbreather?


*The hearing is nothing.  Only you commie cock sucking baby batter swallowing useful idiots want to turn it into something.  It is a joke and distraction, political theater, and a monumental waste of tax dollars.  Just think Democracy was almost overthrown with a single fire extinguisher and the only people that were murdered was an unarmed little old lady, murdered by Pelosi's personal SS Goon Squad.

Proud of that?  Proud of you turning The Symbol of Freedom in The World DC into a war zone and looking like a WWII Prisoner Camp?

Why aren't you working to stop Fentanyl, Heroin, Meth, Child Trafficking, Inflation, runaway food, housing and fuel costs?  Why haven't you done anything about supply chain shortages?*


----------



## Faun

SeaMajor7 said:


> The Nancy Pelosi's selected committee is a freaking JOKE!!!


----------



## Faun

The Original Tree said:


> *What did he do that is illegal?  You got some US code to cite?  How about some evidence?  Did you go out and buy you some shiny new Russian Collusion Narrative from your pal and Biden's investor Vlad Putin again?*



The way it's shaping up -- 18 U.S. Code § 2384


----------



## struth

Mac1958 said:


> Look at all these solid, serious, Trump-supporting Republicans (some of them appointed by the buffoon himself) testifying *under oath* who the rubes are having to dismiss, because they have to stick to their denial story.
> 
> "They're RINOs now!  They're RINOs now!"
> 
> One of my favorite parts of this.


there is nothing presented worthy of dismissal


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> there is nothing presented worthy of dismissal



How much of it have you watched?


----------



## bripat9643

Mac1958 said:


> Yeah.  My biggest concern was that it would be a typical politician hearing, replete with pontificating and grandstanding. Y'know, come to think of it, the fact that they have clearly _*avoided *_the standard pontificating and grandstanding tells me they _*know*_ they usually pontificate and grandstand.  So that's been a positive, otherwise I'd be tuning out quickly.


No they haven't avoided  pontificating and grandstanding.



Mac1958 said:


> Also, their near-exclusive use of Republicans and _*Trump-appointed*_ Republicans has been excellent.  The rubes have to impulsively call them RINOs because that's all they know, but it has been very effective.



That just proves it's a show trial.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> How much of it have you watched?


all that was covered


----------



## berg80

Cassidy Hutchinson Is The Surprise Jan. 6 Witness
					

The Jan. 6 committee hurriedly announced yesterday a new hearing today, without revealing who the witness would be.



					talkingpointsmemo.com


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> No they haven't avoided  pontificating and grandstanding.
> 
> 
> 
> That just proves it's a show trial.



Then you must be watching with SAP turned on. Many righties who are not watching at all, are blindly dismissing testimony of Republicans.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

My goodness -- A bombshell by the same people who brought us the Russia collusion bombshell. 

How quaint.


----------



## scruffy

rightwinger said:


> The Bipartisan committee is doing a wonderful job
> 
> I would describe them as….Perfect



So you support Stalinist dog and pony shows to torpedo the political opposition.

Noted.


----------



## Faun

Dogmaphobe said:


> My goodness -- A bombshell by the same people who brought us the Russia collusion bombshell.
> 
> How quaint.



Huh?? Which party do you _think_ was in charge of the Senate in 2020?









						Senate committee concludes Russia used Manafort, WikiLeaks to boost Trump in 2016
					

Russia used Republican political operative Paul Manafort and the WikiLeaks website to try to help now-U.S. President Donald Trump win the 2016 election, a Republican-led Senate committee said in its final review of the matter on Tuesday.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## Tommy Tainant

Billiejeens said:


> I laugh -
> 
> There has literally been zero (0) damning testimony.


It has been very damning. You are deluded to think otherwise.


----------



## Rambunctious

Tommy Tainant said:


> It has been very damning. You are deluded to think otherwise.


You know what's damming?... Biden killed another 50 migrants today....


----------



## Rambunctious

Superbadbrutha said:


> Only among Trump Humpers.


Biden killed another 50 migrants today... are you proud?....


----------



## hadit

Tommy Tainant said:


> I agree with my fellow posters. It must be a significant development.
> Its great that you can keep your spirits up. Well done chaps.


It is amazing that they can stay positive after the failure of the hearings to do damage to TRUMP!.


----------



## 2aguy

Tommy Tainant said:


> I wonder what they have got.? Must be significant.
> 
> Lord knows America needs a lift.
> 
> January 6 committee announces surprise hearing over ‘recently obtained evidence’




Yeah....they really have him this time Charlie Brown.....the democrats are holding that football for you for sure.......


----------



## 2aguy

Godboy said:


> At the end of your pitiful hearings, there wont be a single criminal referral. Wanna bet? You would have to be a god damn fool to bet against me.




There may be criminal charges, they just won't be based on anything factual or true...i don't think there is a law that says.....we have to charge him because we don't want to lose against him in 2024, so they will just make something up...


----------



## 2aguy

Tommy Tainant said:


> I agree with my fellow posters. It must be a significant development.
> Its great that you can keep your spirits up. Well done chaps.




So......a poiltical court controlled by the democrats without any republicans, the prosecutors are democrats, the defense are democrats, the witnesses are handpicked by democrats....

Yeah, that is fair and impartial......

No wonder you lost your empire...


----------



## tyroneweaver

good thing law abiding citizens control the supreme court or the dem would get convictions  on made up evidence and narratives.

"well we know this is what you would do"  doesn't hold up










						EXCLUSIVE: Proud Boys Proven INNOCENT in Newly Released VIDEO Hidden from Public! -- DOJ Tried to Hide This Evidence! BLOWS UP DOJ and Liz Cheney's Bogus SEDITIOUS CONSPIRACY Charges - THEY HID THIS FROM PUBLIC! See Entire Video HERE!
					

An incredible new video has emerged that exonerates the members of the Proud Boy fraternity from the ridiculous seditious conspiracy charges that the Biden Regime launched against them in their War On Trump and his supporters. *SEE THE FULL NEVER BEFORE SEEN VIDEO BELOW!! This Proud Boy...




					www.thegatewaypundit.com


----------



## Rambunctious

They ain't got shit... so they will try and convince their stupid base once again in a "surprise" session today Buuuaaauauauahahahahaha


----------



## WEATHER53

Bombshell turned Shitbomb


----------



## bendog

BlindBoo said:


> The conversation is available on the most recent remastered version of Black Sabbaths "Master of Reality" when played backward at 78 speed of course.
> 
> Honestly, that is a dishonest lie.


I throw up in my mouth a little when people rate Tony Iommi as the greatest rock guitarist.


----------



## bendog

scruffy said:


> So you support Stalinist dog and pony shows to torpedo the political opposition.
> 
> Noted.


McCarthy chose to remain on the sideline.


----------



## bendog

I wonder if any of the new testimony of communications inside Trump's circle will touch on .... Gini?


----------



## Nostra

Dragonlady said:


> Do you have a link to this ruling that said the insurrection never happened or is this just something you’ve pulled out of your ass?
> 
> Every time Donald Trump does something that’s illegal, you pretend it never happened. How’s that working for you so far?


No charges, so I would say it’s working out just fine, Simp.


----------



## BackAgain

BlindBoo said:


> The conversation is available on the most recent remastered version of Black Sabbaths "Master of Reality" when played backward at 78 speed of course.
> 
> Honestly, that is a dishonest lie.


A dishonest lie?  Not one of the usual honest lies?  Or dishonest truths?  

Is that a double negative FOR the truth?


----------



## Faun

tyroneweaver said:


> good thing law abiding citizens control the supreme court or the dem would get convictions  on made up evidence and narratives.
> 
> "well we know this is what you would do"  doesn't hold up
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EXCLUSIVE: Proud Boys Proven INNOCENT in Newly Released VIDEO Hidden from Public! -- DOJ Tried to Hide This Evidence! BLOWS UP DOJ and Liz Cheney's Bogus SEDITIOUS CONSPIRACY Charges - THEY HID THIS FROM PUBLIC! See Entire Video HERE!
> 
> 
> An incredible new video has emerged that exonerates the members of the Proud Boy fraternity from the ridiculous seditious conspiracy charges that the Biden Regime launched against them in their War On Trump and his supporters. *SEE THE FULL NEVER BEFORE SEEN VIDEO BELOW!! This Proud Boy...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thegatewaypundit.com



There's video evidence that the Proud Boys were the first ones to break into the Capitol...


----------



## Rambunctious

Faun said:


> There's video evidence that the Proud Boys were the first ones to break into the Capitol...


Too late butthead... Now I'm late for golf....


----------



## bripat9643

bendog said:


> I wonder if any of the new testimony of communications inside Trump's circle will touch on .... Gini?


I wonder if your brain transplant was successful.


----------



## Faun

Rambunctious said:


> Too late butthead... Now I'm late for golf....



LOL

Too late for what, rambtard? The country is supposed to ignore video evidence?


----------



## JimH52

BlindBoo said:


> Meh?  Recordings of Trumps conversation with Satan when he sold his soul wouldn't be enough for the MAGANUTS.
> 
> Sorry to say....


Unless trump committed or was complicit in a homicide, the MAGA faithful will ignore all other crimes he may have committed.  The man is nothing more than a Mafia Boss who was aided into the WH by lies and misinformation from Poootin.


----------



## Tommy Tainant

Cassidy Hutchinson. She knows everything and has just got a new lawyer.

She worked for Meadows and was inside on all the insurrection shit.


----------



## JimH52

bendog said:


> I wonder if any of the new testimony of communications inside Trump's circle will touch on .... Gini?


I would like to hear her defend her emails to Meadows encouraging the coup attempt.  Boy, if Clarence thought the pubic hair on the Coke was embarrassing.Gini's testimony may top that.


----------



## Tommy Tainant

2aguy said:


> So......a poiltical court controlled by the democrats without any republicans, the prosecutors are democrats, the defense are democrats, the witnesses are handpicked by democrats....
> 
> Yeah, that is fair and impartial......
> 
> No wonder you lost your empire...


There are two republicans. The rest are likely to be suspects.


----------



## JimH52

Ralph Norton said:


> Between inflation/ gas prices/ crime/ open border  and now the SC overturning Roe vs. Wade, Dems are even more desperate to make the public believe that their contrived "hearings" matter.


So, you want to ignore the coup attempt and the continuing attempt to steal elections.  The POS Former Guy is going to be outed as just another Mafia Boss...intent on ruling the repub party with fear and intimidation.


----------



## bripat9643

JimH52 said:


> Unless trump committed or was complicit in a homicide, the MAGA faithful will ignore all other crimes he may have committed.  The man is nothing more than a Mafia Boss who was aided into the WH by lies and misinformation from Poootin.


We tend to ignore lying morons.  Anyone who still believes Trump colluded with Putin is suffering brain-damage.

Right now Dims are ignoring all the crimes you may have committed.


----------



## JimH52

Can felons run for President?  I don't think so...


----------



## bripat9643

JimH52 said:


> I would like to hear her defend her emails to Meadows encouraging the coup attempt.  Boy, if Clarence thought the pubic hair on the Coke was embarrassing.Gini's testimony may top that.


There are no such emails, dumbass.


----------



## bendog

JimH52 said:


> Unless trump committed or was complicit in a homicide, the MAGA faithful will ignore all other crimes he may have committed.  The man is nothing more than a Mafia Boss who was aided into the WH by lies and misinformation from Poootin.


Trump was truthful and correct when he said he could shoot somebody in the head on 5th Ave and not see any loss of support.  Various Wags have pointed to this truth as cognitive dissonance.  But personally I just think that Trumpism began and ended with ... Trump.  Not even DeSantis, let alone anyone else contemplating a run in 24 consistently supports his issues of grievance that can never be popular, such as repealing Obamacare or ending legal immigration from latin America.  Once a voter or individual buys into those policies, there's only one candidate who can "save you."


----------



## berg80

_As a top aide to Mark Meadows, the White House chief of staff, Cassidy Hutchinson was present for a number of key meetings and conversations in the weeks after the 2020 election as President Donald J. Trump tried to stay in power, and was inside the West Wing as the Capitol attack unfolded on Jan. 6, 2021.

She is the headline witness on Tuesday for a hearing abruptly called by the House select committee investigating the riot, at which the panel promised to show “recently obtained evidence” that would reveal more about the assault._








						Live Updates: Day 6 of the Jan. 6 Panel Hearings
					

The addition of today’s hearing to the schedule came as a surprise. The afternoon hearing will feature testimony from Cassidy Hutchinson, a former aide to President Donald J. Trump’s final chief of staff.




					www.nytimes.com
				




I recall last week she testified as to direct knowledge of some of the Repubs asking for pardons.


----------



## JimH52

g5000 said:


> Two of the five that McCarthy chose for the committee were potential witness, so Pelosi rightfully rejected them.
> 
> All McCarthy had to do was replace them with two other Republicans not subject to subpoena.
> 
> Instead, he pulled all five in a snit.
> 
> Performative theater for the rubes.
> 
> And now the Republicans have the audacity to whine they don't have a voice on the committee?  BWA-HA-HA-HA-HA!
> 
> Priceless.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Year Later, Some Republicans Second-Guess Boycotting the Jan. 6 Panel
> 
> 
> The decision by Representative Kevin McCarthy not to appoint Republicans to the committee has given Democrats the chance to set out an uninterrupted narrative.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com


It is like a defense attorney, throwing a tantrum, and refusing to put on a defense.  What happens then?  The prosecution wins because of the ignorance of the defense attorney.  Whose fault is that?  In this case, it is McCarthy's fault and trump's fault.  Because McCarthy bowed to trump's insistence that the repubs not be part of the Select Committee.

So...when McCarthy and trump and the rest of the repubs whine about not being able to defend themselves....TO BAD...SO SAD....YOU BLEW YOUR CHANCE.  Now, shut up and sit down.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

rightwinger said:


> The Bipartisan committee is doing a wonderful job
> 
> I would describe them as….Perfect


I agree. Pelosi always wanted this to be a solemn and serious process. This has been that and the next best thing to a non partisan commission.


----------



## JimH52

g5000 said:


> The Republicans silenced themselves.  They shot themselves in the mouth.
> 
> They CHOSE to deny an independent investigation.
> 
> They CHOSE not to sit on the January 6 committee.
> 
> And now they have the audacity to whine they don't have a voice in the proceedings?!?!?!
> 
> Oh, man.  That's priceless.  Only the dumbest of rubes would drink that piss.


The repubs took their ball and went home.  Now they can sit in the stands and watch the other team make them look like.....INSURRECTIONISTS.


----------



## Superbadbrutha

Rambunctious said:


> Biden killed another 50 migrants today... are you proud?....


Smfh.


----------



## bendog

berg80 said:


> _As a top aide to Mark Meadows, the White House chief of staff, Cassidy Hutchinson was present for a number of key meetings and conversations in the weeks after the 2020 election as President Donald J. Trump tried to stay in power, and was inside the West Wing as the Capitol attack unfolded on Jan. 6, 2021.
> 
> She is the headline witness on Tuesday for a hearing abruptly called by the House select committee investigating the riot, at which the panel promised to show “recently obtained evidence” that would reveal more about the assault._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Live Updates: Day 6 of the Jan. 6 Panel Hearings
> 
> 
> The addition of today’s hearing to the schedule came as a surprise. The afternoon hearing will feature testimony from Cassidy Hutchinson, a former aide to President Donald J. Trump’s final chief of staff.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nytimes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I recall last week she testified as to direct knowledge of some of the Repubs asking for pardons.


Yeah, but I just don't see that as being something to cause the Committee to reverse itself in pausing to review new evidence before proceeding.  I'm not a huge fan of congressional committees in general, and I'd say I've underestimated Bennie Thompson, but they have organized their material for an organized and step by step takedown of Trump's lies concerning his justification for an insurrection, which of course is never justified once they are adjudicated.


----------



## JimH52

The viewership rating on this hearing will rival the first prime time hearing.  The Dems have captured the imagination of voters....something that trump had been doing for the last few years.  I bet Meadows and McCarthy are soiling their pants.....💩


----------



## Clipper

The Original Tree said:


> *The hearing is nothing.  Only you commie cock sucking baby batter swallowing useful idiots want to turn it into something.  It is a joke and distraction, political theater, and a monumental waste of tax dollars.  Just think Democracy was almost overthrown with a single fire extinguisher and the only people that were murdered was an unarmed little old lady, murdered by Pelosi's personal SS Goon Squad.
> 
> Proud of that?  Proud of you turning The Symbol of Freedom in The World DC into a war zone and looking like a WWII Prisoner Camp?
> 
> Why aren't you working to stop Fentanyl, Heroin, Meth, Child Trafficking, Inflation, runaway food, housing and fuel costs?  Why haven't you done anything about supply chain shortages?*


Still suffering from that ass bleed, simpleton? And the attack on Democracy hearing hasen't even started yet. Gonna be a long day for you, CLOWN.


----------



## bripat9643

bendog said:


> Trump was truthful and correct when he said he could shoot somebody in the head on 5th Ave and not see any loss of support.  Various Wags have pointed to this truth as cognitive dissonance.  But personally I just think that Trumpism began and ended with ... Trump.  Not even DeSantis, let alone anyone else contemplating a run in 24 consistently supports his issues of grievance that can never be popular, such as repealing Obamacare or ending legal immigration from latin America.  Once a voter or individual buys into those policies, there's only one candidate who can "save you."


You're deluded if you believe that Obamacare and illegal immigration are popular.  Trump ran on those issues and won.


----------



## JimH52

Clipper said:


> Still suffering from that ass bleed, simpleton? And the attack on Democracy hearing hasen't even started yet. Gonna be a long day for you, CLOWN.


He better change his diaper now, it is going to fill up in the next couple hours.


----------



## bripat9643

JimH52 said:


> The viewership rating on this hearing will rival the first prime time hearing.  The Dems have captured the imagination of voters....something that trump had been doing for the last few years.  I bet Meadows and McCarthy are soiling their pants.....💩


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

JimH52 said:


> The repubs took their ball and went home.  Now they can sit in the stands and watch the other team make them look like.....INSURRECTIONISTS.


It's only obvious to everyone on the planet (outside the cult anyway) what happened.

Mitch and Trump did not want the independent commission, because they knew the facts would be damaging to Trump and other Republicans.

But they know those facts ARE coming out. 

So, they sent it to the House and sabotage it by trying to appoint two people to the committee that were clearly disciple of Trump and possibly subjects of the investigation itself, knowing these picks would be rejected.

So now they can tell their sheep that there are no facts. And the sheep believe them.


----------



## Lesh

Billy_Bob said:


> In order for it to be called evidence it must be given to the defense to refute.   I wonder if Schiff has been working overtime to create something new to distract from his own act of insurrection with Colberts staff?


It ain’t a trial dumbshit

It’s a hearing


----------



## Winco

Meister said:


> It really would be nice if all this "evidence" could be cross examined.
> But, we know that will never happen.





marvin martian said:


> What Republicans? The "hearing" is all DemoKKKrats and Dem-affected losers. It's not a legal proceeding if there's only one side present.


Be careful what you wish for.
If you want both sides presented, then that will happen after the indictments.
If NO indictments, it won't matter, and the public can make their opinions.

If there are indictments, then a trial ( if no one pleas out ) then your side can present your evidence.

1). If indicted, I predict that the person indicted will make NO attempt to defend themselves (as you want) but they can't, so they will take the fifth.

2) If Cross was allowed, I predict that guys like Jordan and Banks will NOT defend the one indicted, but would just attack the left.


----------



## Billy_Bob

Lesh said:


> It ain’t a trial dumbshit
> 
> It’s a hearing


Your right... Its a blatant smear show... nothing more..


----------



## Meister

Winco said:


> Be careful what you wish for.
> If you want both sides presented, then that will happen after the indictments.
> If NO indictments, it won't matter, and the public can make their opinions.
> 
> If there are indictments, then a trial ( if no one pleas out ) then your side can present your evidence.
> 
> 1). If indicted, I predict that the person indicted will make NO attempt to defend themselves (as you want) but they can't, so they will take the fifth.
> 
> 2) If Cross was allowed, I predict that guys like Jordan and Banks will NOT defend the one indicted, but would just attack the left.


Get out all the facts, period.  That's not what's happening with this circus.


----------



## BackAgain

bripat9643 said:


> I wonder if your brain transplant was successful.


Sadly, yes. Now the poor monkey they put his brain into is retarded.


----------



## Winco

bripat9643 said:


> You're deluded if you believe that Obamacare and illegal immigration are popular.  Trump ran on those issues and won.


and then trump FAILED to replace Obamacare (on day 1 ) as promised.
Promise broken.  "Who knew that healthcare could be so difficult."

Believe it or not, there was in FACT illegal immigration under trump.
trump did NOT stop illegal immigration.

The FACTS ^^^^^^ are hard for you to swallow.


----------



## kaz

citygator said:


> So, wanna bet then? ; )



Sure.     The Democrat only committee will condemn Trump in the end.     How much do you want to bet I'm wrong?


----------



## Meister

Winco said:


> Believe it or not, there was in FACT illegal immigration under trump.
> trump did NOT stop illegal immigration.
> 
> The FACTS ^^^^^^ are hard for you to swallow.


Yeah, went from a drip, drip to a full on Tsunami.


----------



## BlindBoo

bendog said:


> I throw up in my mouth a little when people rate Tony Iommi as the greatest rock guitarist.



I got to see them in 77.  Technical Ecstasy tour.  Touring with them was a little known band named Boston.  Boston blew them away.


----------



## Winco

Meister said:


> Get out all the facts, period.  That's not what's happening with this circus.


I thought nobody was watching and that nobody cares.
What changed?


----------



## JimH52

Lesh said:


> It ain’t a trial dumbshit
> 
> It’s a hearing


The defense WAS given the chance to cross-examine and they refused to play ball.  Now they can whine all they want.


----------



## ColonelAngus

When is Ray Epps testifying?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

kaz said:


> Sure.     The Democrat only committee will condemn Trump in the end.     How much do you want to bet I'm wrong?


Um...they condemned him from the beginning of the hearings.

But you didn't know that, because you know less than nothing about the hearings.

They said on day one that they would establish, using facts and testimony, Trump's high crimes.


----------



## Meister

Winco said:


> Believe it or not, there was in FACT illegal immigration under trump.
> trump did NOT stop illegal immigration.
> 
> The FACTS ^^^^^^ are hard for you to swallow.


Also, ask yourself if Trump was sending them back across the border and wait, or
was he putting them on buses and planes shipping them across the US?


----------



## kaz

g5000 said:


> The vast majority of the officials testifying against Trump are all Republicans, moron.  Every one of them wanted Trump to win, but they put our democracy above a tyrant.
> 
> Trump lost, and he tried to steal the election.  He failed.  Thank God.
> 
> Too bad.  So sad.



Yet another standard as a Democrat you apply only one direction.   Democrat = hypocrite, and you're a racist too


----------



## kaz

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Um...they condemned him from the beginning of the hearings.
> 
> But you didn't know that, because you know less than nothing about the hearings.
> 
> They said on day one that they would establish, using facts and testimony, Trump's high crimes.



Read the chain, racist jackass


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

ColonelAngus said:


> When is Ray Epps testifying?


He already met with the committee and was interviewed under oath.

OANN must not have told you that.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

Meister said:


> Get out all the facts, period.  That's not what's happening with this circus.


Certainly not the facts you want to hear anyway.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

kaz said:


> Read the chain, racist jackass


Sorry, your hissy fit does not cover up your embarrassing ignorance about the hearings.


----------



## bendog

BlindBoo said:


> I got to see them in 77.  Technical Ecstasy tour.  Touring with them was a little known band named Boston.  Boston blew them away.


Never a fan.  I'd like to have seen Boston.

Little Feat was on PBS a week or so ago.  They're touring up in missouri.  IF my daughter was not breaking me, I'd like to go.  Tix are pretty reasonable.


----------



## Winco

Meister said:


> Also, ask yourself if Trump was sending them back across the border and wait,


Are you implying that trump did this with ALL illegals that crossed?
Are you implying that Biden hasn't done this at ALL?


----------



## Meister

Hutch Starskey said:


> Certainly not the facts you want to hear anyway.


We'll never know, will we, Jake?


----------



## kaz

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Sorry, your hissy fit does not cover up your embarrassing ignorance about the hearings.



You came in and didn't understand a discussion and now you're melting down like the racist fag you are, bitch


----------



## Billy_Bob

JimH52 said:


> The defense WAS given the chance to cross-examine and they refused to play ball.  Now they can whine all they want.


Bull Shit...   The prosecution got to assign the people who were supposed to be the defenders, but they are just two more prosecutors who hate Trump..  You're a lying sack of shit.


----------



## kaz

Winco said:


> and then trump FAILED to replace Obamacare (on day 1 ) as promised.
> Promise broken.  "Who knew that healthcare could be so difficult."
> 
> Believe it or not, there was in FACT illegal immigration under trump.
> trump did NOT stop illegal immigration.
> 
> The FACTS ^^^^^^ are hard for you to swallow.



The quest for free shit never ends, racist government dependency whore


----------



## Lastamender

EXCLUSIVE: Proud Boys Proven INNOCENT in Newly Released VIDEO Hidden from Public! -- DOJ Tried to Hide This Evidence! BLOWS UP DOJ and Liz Cheney's Bogus SEDITIOUS CONSPIRACY Charges - THEY HID THIS FROM PUBLIC! See Entire Video HERE!
					

An incredible new video has emerged that exonerates the members of the Proud Boy fraternity from the ridiculous seditious conspiracy charges that the Biden Regime launched against them in their War On Trump and his supporters. *SEE THE FULL NEVER BEFORE SEEN VIDEO BELOW!! This Proud Boy...




					www.thegatewaypundit.com
				




The committee wants no one to see this. Too bad.


----------



## Meister

Winco said:


> Are you implying that trump did this with ALL illegals that crossed?
> Are you implying that Biden hasn't done this at ALL?


It's all or nothing with you? 
Nobody can close the border completely, get serious.
Biden has a sieve going on at the border.
Are you in denial?


----------



## bripat9643

JimH52 said:


> It is like a defense attorney, throwing a tantrum, and refusing to put on a defense.  What happens then?  The prosecution wins because of the ignorance of the defense attorney.  Whose fault is that?  In this case, it is McCarthy's fault and trump's fault.  Because McCarthy bowed to trump's insistence that the repubs not be part of the Select Committee.
> 
> So...when McCarthy and trump and the rest of the repubs whine about not being able to defend themselves....TO BAD...SO SAD....YOU BLEW YOUR CHANCE.  Now, shut up and sit down.


The Dims didn't allow the accused to put on a defense, you fucking moron.  What it's really like is allowing the prosecution to also serve as the judge and the jury.  That's what a show trial is.

Pelosi chose the Republicans on the committee.  You dumb fucking progs can't get around the fact that the Dims are staging a Stalinist show trial.  It has ne credibility.  None.


----------



## Winco

ColonelAngus said:


> When is Ray Epps testifying?


Sure, Ray Epps is your beacon of hope.
You really believe a man standing outside the Capitol giving 'directions' has MORE INFLUENCE than trump.

These people already had their minds made up about their future actions.
Epps shouting stuff didn't have ANY affect on these insurrectionists.

The *trump KKKult* is Strong.  

But Epps had zero influence on the *trump KKKult*


----------



## Hutch Starskey

Meister said:


> We'll never know, will we, Jake?


LOL
You just said as much.


----------



## kaz

bripat9643 said:


> The Dims didn't allow the accused to put on a defense, you fucking moron.  What it's really like is allowing the prosecution to also serve as the judge and the jury.  That's what a show trial is.
> 
> Pelosi chose the Republicans on the committee.  You dumb fucking progs can't get around the fact that the Dims are staging a Stalinist show trial.  It has ne credibility.  None.



Racists like JimH52 know that if Trump was allowed to put on a defense then they would keep playing Trump saying to demonstrate peacefully and blow the kangaroo court out of the water.

Democrats did cheat, they did steal the election.   Trump was right and he said to protest peacefully.    Democrats never let facts stand in their way ...


----------



## Mac1958

Wow, Glocks, AR-15, pistols...


----------



## Lastamender

Winco said:


> Sure, Ray Epps is your beacon of hope.
> You really believe a man standing outside the Capitol giving 'directions' has MORE INFLUENCE than trump.
> 
> These people already had their minds made up about their future actions.
> Epps shouting stuff didn't have ANY affect on these insurrectionists.
> 
> The *trump KKKult* is Strong.
> 
> But Epps had zero influence on the *trump KKKult*


Of course he had more influence. *He was there *provoking and encouraging people to go into the Capitol. Until he testifies or is arrested this is a joke,.


----------



## Lesh

Lastamender said:


> Of course he had more influence. *He was there *provoking and encouraging people to go into the Capitol. Until he testifies or is arrested this is a joke,.


He HAS testified retard

I don't quite get the obsession with this clown but I guess if you're desperate...


----------



## Lastamender

Mac1958 said:


> Wow, Glocks, AR-15, pistols...


And none inside the Capitol unless the Capitol police had them. Remember they murdered an unarmed woman.


----------



## BackAgain

JimH52 said:


> The defense WAS given the chance to cross-examine and they refused to play ball.  Now they can whine all they want.


There is no “defense.” This isn’t a trial.

And although the Dumbocraps like to act like a prosecution, they aren’t doing that either. They aren’t investigating. They are putting on a show.  That’s all. Nothing of any actual value. You know; like your posts.


----------



## kaz

Mac1958 said:


> Wow, Glocks, AR-15, pistols...



Yes, a starting list of weapons that you're melting down in racist faggery that you didn't give a shit about when leftist groups were burning cities across the country


----------



## Winco

Meister said:


> It's all or nothing with you?
> Nobody can close the border completely, get serious.
> Biden has a sieve going on at the border.
> Are you in denial?


I agree.
Your rhetoric just suggests that trump stopped illegal immigration, when in fact you just admitted that he didn't.
Title 42, what happened to that?


----------



## Lastamender

Lesh said:


> He HAS testified retard
> 
> I don't quite get the obsession with this clown but I guess if you're desperate...


He should be in jail with the rest. The obsession is the dual justice system and the fascists who run it. It is completely foreign to American justice.


----------



## Winco

BackAgain said:


> Thee is no “defense.” This isn’t a trial.
> 
> And although the Dumbocraps like to act like a prosecution, they aren’t doing that either. They aren’t investigating. They are putting on a show.  That’s all. Nothing of any actual value. You know; like your posts.


How do you feel about the testimony of Hutchinson?


----------



## Lastamender

Does everyone realize if the election was not stolen this would not be going on?


----------



## BackAgain

Winco said:


> How do you feel about the testimony of Hutchinson?


Indifferent.


----------



## Mac1958

holy crap


----------



## Winco

kaz said:


> that you didn't give a shit about when leftist groups were burning cities across the country


YUGE deflection........squirrell.


----------



## Winco

BackAgain said:


> Indifferent.


Is she lying under Oath?
Is she NOW a traitor?

Is she presenting FACTS?


----------



## Mac1958

I guess this isn't surprising.  "I don't care if they're armed.  They're not here to hurt me."

Classic.  Typical.  Incredible.


----------



## Clipper

bripat9643 said:


> No they haven't avoided  pontificating and grandstanding.
> 
> 
> 
> That just proves it's a show trial.


It's not a trial, simpleton.

Don't know the difference between a hearing & a trial?


----------



## Billiejeens

Tommy Tainant said:


> There are two republicans. The rest are likely to be suspects.



You are the fucking retard that regular retards point at and laugh.


----------



## kaz

Winco said:


> YUGE deflection........squirrell.



LOL.     Pointing out you do what you are attacking is no deflection.    Since you're stupid, I'll explain it to you.   It means that it isn't a real standard to you, just a lame political attack.   We know it's not a standard to you because, you know, you DID IT


----------



## Billiejeens

Superbadbrutha said:


> Smfh.



are you?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

kaz said:


> You came in and didn't understand a discussion and now you're melting down like the racist fag you are, bitch


You shouldn't even be discussing the hearings. You haven't watched any and know nothing about them.


----------



## Silent Warrior

I keep watching the hearings.  I realize they are a kangaroo court, but when will they actually get to questioning the kangaroos on camera?


----------



## Clipper

Nostra said:


> No charges, so I would say it’s working out just fine, Simp.


You think it's fine because you can't see or hear anything when your head is buried up your own ass.

Which is 90% of the time.

Stick a fork in Trump. He's done.


----------



## Lastamender

J6 Committee Ignores Witness's Ties To Zuckerberg-Funded Group That Manipulated 2020 Election
					

The Jan. 6 committee conveniently left out the fact that their witness is connected to a Zuckerberg-funded group that may have given Democrats an advantage in key states.




					thefederalist.com
				




The Jan. 6 committee conveniently left out the fact that their witness is connected to  a Zuckerberg-funded group that may have given Democrats an advantage in key states.


----------



## Mac1958

Yeah, I didn't think it went this far.


----------



## JimH52

Mac1958 said:


> I guess this isn't surprising.  "I don't care if they're armed.  They're not here to hurt me."
> 
> Classic.  Typical.  Incredible.


The POS knew they were armed but he did not want them to go through the magnetometer?  What a frigin idiot


----------



## JimH52

Clipper said:


> You think it's fine because you can't see or hear anything when your head is buried up your own ass.
> 
> Which is 90% of the time.
> 
> Stick a fork in Trump. He's done.


desantis is watching this in Glee.  He knows trump is toast and desantis is next in line.


----------



## Mac1958

JimH52 said:


> The POS knew they were armed but he did not want them to go through the magnetometer?  What a frigin idiot


Meadows was fine with this too.  He knew.  WTF


----------



## Hutch Starskey

BackAgain said:


> Indifferent.


 More like Dissonance.


----------



## Tommy Tainant

Billiejeens said:


> You are the fucking retard that regular retards point at and laugh.


The fact that you use such a term tells me all I need to know about you.


----------



## Clipper

Lastamender said:


> J6 Committee Ignores Witness's Ties To Zuckerberg-Funded Group That Manipulated 2020 Election
> 
> 
> The Jan. 6 committee conveniently left out the fact that their witness is connected to a Zuckerberg-funded group that may have given Democrats an advantage in key states.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thefederalist.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Jan. 6 committee conveniently left out the fact that their witness is connected to  a Zuckerberg-funded group that may have given Democrats an advantage in key states.


Here's a hint, mouthbreather. This witness is blowing Trump & Meadows right out of the water.

You can cry now.


----------



## BackAgain

Winco said:


> Is she lying under Oath?
> Is she NOW a traitor?
> 
> Is she presenting FACTS?


Ask serious questions. I wasn’t there at those meetings. Go figure, huh. 

Anyway, since I wasn’t there, I don’t know what was actually said or by whom. I therefore wouldn’t know if she’s lying or being truthful or confused or whatever. 

She seems appropriately serious. If her testimony is premised on a faulty memory (or worse), then obviously she isn’t testifying about “facts.”  But if she is trying her best to be honest, then of course she isn’t a traitor. And even if she had lied her ass off, it wouldn’t be an act of treason.  She wouldn’t be a “traitor.”  She could be a perjurer. 

Also, I don’t care if anybody suggested parsons or asked for parsons. Immunity is good if you can get it even if you’re entirely innocent. 

The reason I remain indifferent to her testimony is because I deem it irrelevant. Irrelevant to the actual purpose of the existence of this bogus committee and irrelevant to much of anything.


----------



## JimH52

The one effect of these hearings is they will assure that trump will never sit in the White House again.


----------



## Mac1958

Cippollone is off the hook.  He didn't want this.


----------



## bripat9643

bendog said:


> Yeah, but I just don't see that as being something to cause the Committee to reverse itself in pausing to review new evidence before proceeding.  I'm not a huge fan of congressional committees in general, and I'd say I've underestimated Bennie Thompson, but they have organized their material for an organized and step by step takedown of Trump's lies concerning his justification for an insurrection, which of course is never justified once they are adjudicated.


You just admitted that the committee isn't interested in finding the truth.  It's only goal is "taking down Trump."


----------



## BackAgain

Hutch Starskey said:


> More like Dissonance.


No. Exactly like indifference. You may not understand it because you’re a bit of a stupid troll hack. But that doesn’t alter what’s happening. This is just a clown show. Nothing of actual significance is happening here.


----------



## bripat9643

JimH52 said:


> The one effect of these hearings is they will assure that trump will never sit in the White House again.


Wrong.  They will ensure that the Dims will never hold power in DC again.


----------



## Lastamender

Clipper said:


> You think it's fine because you can't see or hear anything when your head is buried up your own ass.
> 
> Which is 90% of the time.
> 
> Stick a fork in Trump. He's done.


Six years later and the fork is in the people after Trump.


----------



## bripat9643

Winco said:


> and then trump FAILED to replace Obamacare (on day 1 ) as promised.
> Promise broken.  "Who knew that healthcare could be so difficult."
> 
> Believe it or not, there was in FACT illegal immigration under trump.
> trump did NOT stop illegal immigration.
> 
> The FACTS ^^^^^^ are hard for you to swallow.


Yes, he failed at it.  That doesn't mean it wasn't a popular goal, dumbass.

And, yes, Trump didn't not stomp it out entirely, but it was 1/10th what it is now.


----------



## Batcat

BlindBoo said:


> Meh?  Recordings of Trumps conversation with Satan when he sold his soul wouldn't be enough for the MAGANUTS.
> 
> Sorry to say....


I would be listening and paying close attention if this “committee” was a real committee.

I want to hear both sides of the story, not a orchestrated, one sided prosecution with no defense rebuttal allowed.



H


----------



## Faun

JimH52 said:


> The POS knew they were armed but he did not want them to go through the magnetometer?  What a frigin idiot



And knowing they were armed, he summoned them to the Capitol.  Fucking traitor.


----------



## JimH52

*Hey MAGA....TRUMP IS TOAST!


*​


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> And knowing they were armed, he summoned them to the Capitol.  Fucking traitor.


He didn't know any such thing, dumbass.


----------



## Nostra

What was today’s BOMBSHELL……er, popcorn fart?


----------



## BackAgain

JimH52 said:


> *Hey MAGA....TRUMP IS TOAST!
> View attachment 663375*​


We’ve heard this before. And it always ends up the same. 

Wait until next time. Then you’ll get him.


----------



## kaz

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> You shouldn't even be discussing the hearings. You haven't watched any and know nothing about them.



I know everything about them.     It's a Democrat show trial full of rampant double standards and Democrat racism.     See, and you thought I didn't know what it was, LOL.

Talk about not knowing what you are talking about, remember how just this afternoon you attacked me for a discussion that you obviously knew nothing about, LOL.   You're such a racist ....


----------



## alang1216

tyroneweaver said:


> good thing law abiding citizens control the supreme court or the dem would get convictions  on made up evidence and narratives.


'Made up' by Republicans you realize.


----------



## Meister

Winco said:


> I agree.
> Your rhetoric just suggests that trump stopped illegal immigration, when in fact you just admitted that he didn't.
> Title 42, what happened to that?


----------



## bripat9643

Clipper said:


> It's not a trial, simpleton.
> 
> Don't know the difference between a hearing & a trial?


Right.  It's a show trial.


----------



## Winco

Nostra said:


> No charges


Patience* trump KKKult* member.


----------



## Billiejeens

Tommy Tainant said:


> The fact that you use such a term tells me all I need to know about you.



I don't like to use it.
But you are  the exception.


----------



## kaz

Nostra said:


> What was today’s BOMBSHELL……er, popcorn fart?



Swalwell's providing the farts!









						Rep. Eric Swalwell appears to fart on live TV
					

Here’s one act he had no problem passing. A congressman from California became the butt of everyone’s joke for appearing to fart on live television Monday night. Rep. Eric Swalwell was …




					nypost.com


----------



## Clipper

Mac1958 said:


> Meadows was fine with this too.  He knew.  WTF


meadows is a POS, always was, always will be.


----------



## Lastamender

Clipper said:


> Here's a hint, mouthbreather. This witness is blowing Trump & Meadows right out of the water.
> 
> You can cry now.


There is no defense. She is lying to brainwashed fools like yourself. They cannot stop Trump from running again. Period.


----------



## Clipper

TOAST!


----------



## Mac1958

Clipper said:


> meadows is a POS, always was, always will be.


Man, this is fucking INSANE


----------



## basquebromance

“I’m the f’n president. Take me to the Capitol now,” Cassidy Hutchinson testifies being told. 

She says the president tried to grab the steering wheel to steer the motorcade to the Capitol.


----------



## citygator

Holy shit. This is treason.


----------



## Winco

What's the problem Meister ?


----------



## Lastamender

Faun said:


> And knowing they were armed, he summoned them to the Capitol.  Fucking traitor.


You think people who know there was fraud are listening?


----------



## Mac1958

citygator said:


> Holy shit. This is treason.


It's like a freakin' movie.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

BackAgain said:


> No. Exactly like indifference. You may not understand it because you’re a bit of a stupid troll hack. But that doesn’t alter what’s happening. This is just a clown show. Nothing of actual significance is happening here.


That’s called dissonance. You only see what you want to see. Fortunately, the rest of the world is watching clear eyed.


----------



## Mac1958

I hope this woman has serious security.

Her life is changed forever.


----------



## Meister

Winco said:


> What's the problem Meister ?


Without trolling, I'm trying to figure out if you're a teenager, or just naïve?


----------



## Winco

bripat9643 said:


> but it was 1/10th what it is now.


LINK?

Proof of Claim?

I'll wait.
You will deflect.


----------



## g5000

kaz said:


> Yet another standard as a Democrat you apply only one direction.   Democrat = hypocrite, and you're a racist too


I don't know of any Democrats who fueled an insurrection or tried to steal an election.

Too bad.  So sad.


----------



## Lastamender

citygator said:


> Holy shit. This is treason.



 

The treason is the stolen election. This circus is to cover the fraud. It always has been about that. Censorship did not work and political persecution has also failed. Only idiots think this is anywhere near treason.


----------



## Winco

Meister said:


> Without trolling, I'm trying to figure out if you're a teenager, or just naïve?


Serious.
Mr High and Mighty.

Explain what you believe I'm "naive' about.
Be specific mr moderator.


----------



## kaz

Hutch Starskey said:


> That’s called dissonance. You only see what you want to see. Fortunately, the rest of the world is watching clear eyed.



No one is watching clear eyed because those of us who are clear eyed aren't interested in a trial where the defendant's due process rights are ignored by the authoritarian leftists running Congress


----------



## g5000

That was some extraordinary testimony just now.


----------



## Lastamender

g5000 said:


> I don't know of any Democrats who fueled an insurrection or tried to steal an election.
> 
> Too bad.  So sad.


The election was already stolen. They were protesting obvious fraud.


----------



## JimH52

citygator said:


> Holy shit. This is treason.


trump wanted to strangle anyone who refused to take him to the Capitol.


----------



## g5000

kaz said:


> No one is watching clear eyed because those of us who are clear eyed aren't interested in a trial where the defendant's due process rights are ignored by the authoritarian leftists running Congress


You aren't watching because you are cowards and don't want to see the truth about your messiah.


----------



## Mac1958

How did they not subdue and arrest Trump?


----------



## Lastamender

g5000 said:


> That was some extraordinary testimony just now.


It was also one sided bullshit.


----------



## Mac1958

g5000 said:


> You aren't watching because you are cowards and don't want to see the truth about your messiah.


Man, we just watched history.  John Dean is minor league.


----------



## Winco

Lastamender said:


> The treason is the stolen election.


Still ZERO evidence of your claim.


----------



## berg80

Yikes, sounds like Baby Donald had quite a number of tantrums including trying to assault an assistant, grabbing the wheel of the presidential car, and throwing food on the wall. 

Hillary was right. He never had the temperament to be prez.


----------



## Clipper

basquebromance said:


> “I’m the f’n president. Take me to the Capitol now,” Cassidy Hutchinson testifies being told.
> 
> She says the president tried to grab the steering wheel to steer the motorcade to the Capitol.


Trump tried to grab the throat of his head of security in the presidential limo. Unfit for office is putting it mildly.


----------



## kaz

Lastamender said:


> It was also one sided bullshit.



g5000 likes it this way since facts just confuse him and he can't handle hearing two sides


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> He didn't know any such thing, dumbass.



LOL

Good thing you're a known liar. No one cares about your lies and denials.



bripat9643 said:


> yes, I did lie about that.  I said it simply to trigger morons like you, and it worked.


----------



## Meister

Sounds like you got him now, But it has sounded like that for the last year and a half.


----------



## JimH52

g5000 said:


> That was some extraordinary testimony just now.


trump attacked his own secret service agent?


----------



## kaz

Clipper said:


> Trump tried to grab the throat of his head of security in the presidential limo. Unfit for office is putting it mildly.



Wow, is that your standard?    Then you must REALLY hate Bungling Biden ...


----------



## Mac1958




----------



## Winco

Mac1958 said:


> Man, we just watched history.  John Dean is minor league.


Total denial from the right.
Cries of......

Fake News
Liar
Whataboutism
Traitor
Rino

I guess the claim "No-one had a weapon" is totally blown up.


*"They aren't there to harm me."  WOW.*
So who were they there to harm.
This is BIG, but the RW will deny and deflect.


----------



## JimH52

Winco said:


> Still ZERO evidence of your claim.


"lots of theories...but no evidence."


----------



## GHook20

rightwinger said:


> How long before Republicans call it fake news?


When the shoe fits… yes there was a riot at the capital on 1/6, yes Trump’s comments might have inspired people, but he ordered the national guard and Pelosi refused it. There is no grand right wing conspiracy. It was a protest that spiraled to a riot and got out of hand… similar to every BLM riot… only difference is BLM intents for it to be a riot. 1/6 did not.

This is more smoke and mirrors just like the Russia hoax… they will milk it as far as they can to distract from having to answer on the out of control inflation and gas prices, a bow souring economy, an inevitable recession and tanking stock market.


----------



## g5000

JimH52 said:


> trump attacked his own secret service agent?


He also knew members of the crowd were armed when he told them to go to the Capitol.


----------



## Faun

Lastamender said:


> You think people who know there was fraud are listening?



LOLOL

You actually think it matters if you retards are not listening??


----------



## Clipper

Lastamender said:


> It was also one sided bullshit.


Trump is a fucking psychopath.


----------



## BackAgain

Winco said:


> Patience* trump KKKult* member.


You libtard cultists are the ones who will need patience. Never takes a looooong time.


----------



## skews13

citygator said:


> Seems scheduled pretty sudden… apparently the Jan 6 Committee is excited to present something to your open minds. I bet it’s a pretty big bombshell… any takers?
> 
> January 6 committee adds new hearing for Tuesday - CNNPolitics



Damn. Dotard tried to attack his own Secret Service agent in the car. He knew members in the crowd were armed, and wanted to take down the metal detectors for n the Capitol.









						'They're not here to hurt me': Aide testified Trump knew the J6 crowd was armed -- and didn't care
					

Former Trump White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson provided bombshell testimony as to what was being discussed backstage at the Jan. 6 "Stop the Steal" rally.Hutchinson, who was a top aide to White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, testified before the House Select Committee Investigating the...




					www.rawstory.com
				












						'It starts and ends with crowd size': Twitter reacts to bombshell testimony about Trump sending armed mob to Capitol
					

A former White House aide revealed that Donald Trump knew his supporters were armed on Jan. 6, 2021, but he wanted them let into his rally anyway and then sent on to the U.S. Capitol.Cassidy Hutchinson, a former aide to White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, told the House Select Committee...




					www.rawstory.com
				




Not good donny


----------



## Meister

Winco said:


> Be specific mr moderator.


Have I moderated you?  Why would you even have to bring that up????


----------



## JimH52

Mac1958 said:


> *
> 
> 
> 
> *​


*trump is TOAST!


*​


----------



## Peach45

Watching the J6 hearing out of curiosity. Witness said Trump literally tried to forcefully take over The Beast to drive into the Capitol, triee to choke a secret service agent when they physically restrained him from doing it; THEN threw food and dishes like a toddler on multiple occasions; Demanded metal detectors be removed so armed rioters could gain more access; Theres more…..but…..

I despise Trump. However I hate seeing my government waste time. So I ask….how in the fuck did the above stuff, which if true is quite incredible, NOT LEAK in 18 months despite all the witnesses around when it happened? EVERYTHING leaks especially crazy shit.

So Trump wanted to go to the Capitol, they surprised him inside the vehicle and said no; So he physically tries to takeover the car, had to be physically stopped, then he tried to choke an agent…..and that stayed secret for 18 months.

Hmmmm. Liz Cheney…..this shits suspect to me.


----------



## Mac1958

Winco said:


> Total denial from the right.
> Cries of......
> 
> Fake News
> Liar
> Whataboutism
> Traitor
> Rino
> 
> I guess the claim "No-one had a weapon" is totally blown up.
> 
> 
> *"They aren't there to harm me."  WOW.*
> So who were they there to harm.
> This is BIG, but the RW will deny and deflect.


Yeah, they'll never admit this.  It's too personal for them.

Man, that was fucking stunning.


----------



## marvin martian

Peach45 said:


> Watching the J6 hearing out of curiosity. Witness said Trump literally tried to forcefully take over The Beast to drive into the Capitol, triee to choke a secret service agent when they physically restrained him from doing it; THEN threw food and dishes like a toddler on multiple occasions; Demanded metal detectors be removed so armed rioters could gain more access; Theres more…..but…..
> 
> I despise Trump. However I hate seeing my government waste time. So I ask….how in the fuck did the above stuff, which if true is quite incredible, NOT LEAK in 18 months despite all the witnesses around when it happened? EVERYTHING leaks especially crazy shit.
> 
> So Trump wanted to go to the Capitol, they surprised him inside the vehicle and said no; So he physically tries to takeover the car, had to be physically stopped, then he tried to choke an agent…..and that stayed secret for 18 months.
> 
> Hmmmm. Liz Cheney…..this shits suspect to me.



This "hearing" is a reality show for dumb people like you.


----------



## Winco

kaz said:


> Then you must REALLY hate Bungling Biden ...


Deflection is all you got.
Could you possibly stay on Topic.


----------



## JimH52

g5000 said:


> He also knew members of the crowd were armed when he told them to go to the Capitol.


*PREMEDITATION!*​


----------



## Meister




----------



## Stormy Daniels

I'm not gonna lie, Donald made me toss my lunch, too.


----------



## SeaMajor7

Hearsay bOmBsHell


----------



## Peach45

What a colossal waste of time by Democrats. This is why we’re gonna lose to Desantis


----------



## BackAgain

Hutch Starskey said:


> That’s called dissonance. You only see what you want to see. Fortunately, the rest of the world is watching clear eyed.


No. The vision problem is all yours, butchie.  You see and hear only that which you wish to believe. 

Confirmation bias. You live it; you might be as well understand it.


----------



## berg80

_White House Counsel Was Concerned About Obstruction Charges From March To Capitol_​_White House counsel Pat Cipollone was concerned with being charged with obstruction of justice, “defrauding the electoral count” “obstructing the Electoral College count,” if President Donald Trump pursued a march to the Capitol on Jan. 6, Hutchinson just testified._








						Meadows' Closest Aide Testifies Publicly During Surprise Jan. 6 Hearing
					

The Jan. 6 Select Committee announced a surprise public hearing Monday, and,...



					talkingpointsmemo.com
				




Any questions about why Cipollone and Meadows don't want to testify?


----------



## Faun

kaz said:


> No one is watching clear eyed because those of us who are clear eyed aren't interested in a trial where the defendant's due process rights are ignored by the authoritarian leftists running Congress



You're kazzing again. You know this isn't a trial.


----------



## Votto

Peach45 said:


> Watching the J6 hearing out of curiosity. Witness said Trump literally tried to forcefully take over The Beast to drive into the Capitol, triee to choke a secret service agent when they physically restrained him from doing it; THEN threw food and dishes like a toddler on multiple occasions; Demanded metal detectors be removed so armed rioters could gain more access; Theres more…..but…..
> 
> I despise Trump. However I hate seeing my government waste time. So I ask….how in the fuck did the above stuff, which if true is quite incredible, NOT LEAK in 18 months despite all the witnesses around when it happened? EVERYTHING leaks especially crazy shit.
> 
> So Trump wanted to go to the Capitol, they surprised him inside the vehicle and said no; So he physically tries to takeover the car, had to be physically stopped, then he tried to choke an agent…..and that stayed secret for 18 months.
> 
> Hmmmm. Liz Cheney…..this shits suspect to me.


I hear that Trump drinks the blood of pregnant women who can't obtain a legal abortion at night.

How that was never introduced into evidence is beyond me. 

My guess is Putin had something to do with it.


----------



## JimH52

SeaMajor7 said:


> Hearsay bOmBsHell


Let Rudy and Meadows testify and deny some of these claims. * YOU KNOW THEY WILL NOT DO THAT!*


----------



## August West

marvin martian said:


> This "hearing" is a reality show for dumb people like you.


This has been quite painful for the Deplorables and it`s only going to get worse. You guys aren`t watching because they keep using all of those big college type words.


----------



## miketx

Just.Cant.Shut.Up.


----------



## whitehall

Threw food like a child? What does it have to do with Jan 6? Nancy must be desperate.


----------



## JimH52

Faun said:


> You're kazzing again. You know this isn't a trial.


Yup, the repubs could be there....but they refused.


----------



## g5000

Trump ordering the magnetometers to be disabled, lunging at his Secret Service team, throwing his dinner plate at the wall.

This is all too good to pass up for a movie not to be made about all this.


----------



## BlindBoo

bripat9643 said:


> He didn't know any such thing, dumbass.



Hey did you hear what that Bombshell had to say?

Neo-GOP response A.


----------



## JimH52

whitehall said:


> Threw food like a child? What does it have to do with Jan 6? Nancy must be desperate.


He is a child and should never, never be close to the WH again.


----------



## irosie91

rightwinger said:


> How long before Republicans call it fake news?


   I am a registered democrat but voted for Trump.  I am highly suspicious 
   of the JAN 6 testimony-----BOTH SIDES SEEM LIKE LIARS TO ME


----------



## Clipper

BackAgain said:


> You libtard cultists are the ones who will need patience. Never takes a looooong time.


You can bet the farm that Trump is watching MSNBC & not Fox to see how deep his sorry ass is in hot water. 

He's already as usual released a statement filled with more lies.H

I wonder who's cleaning up after his temper tantrums today?


----------



## basquebromance




----------



## jc456

Rambunctious said:


> They ain't got shit... so they will try and convince their stupid base once again in a "surprise" session today Buuuaaauauauahahahahaha


I’m laughing my ass off! Trump threw a plate! Hly crap, that’s evidence


----------



## Winco

Meister said:


> Have I moderated you?


Yup
May 24th, 2022

Why bring that up?


----------



## shockedcanadian

Charge him with a crime and let him call witnesses and defend himself.  Let's see if MSM covers it 24/7 on their networks.

Some in America, including your own agencies and politicians just don't seem to get it. * The only way to avoid Trump and his influence is through policies that Americans believe in* and that which work for them. 

We have CNN throwing out a trial balloon to suggest Hillary could be the 2024 Dem nominee.  I thought America fought to leave the monarchy?

Of all the issues Americans are concerned with, the J6 Hearings wouldn't even crack top 20.  Just having MSM, yet again, try and convince Americans through a one-sided "Hearing" that their day to day reality, border issues, inflation, war and trade deficits don't matter, "because Jan 6th!", doesn't mean Americans believe it.


----------



## Pellinore

whitehall said:


> Threw food like a child? What does it have to do with Jan 6? Nancy must be desperate.


It establishes that when he said "We will march to the Capitol," that it was definitely his intention to do so, and he forcefully resisted those who tried to keep him from it.


----------



## JimH52

g5000 said:


> Trump ordering the magnetometers to be disabled, lunging at his Secret Service team, throwing his dinner plate at the wall.
> 
> This is all too good to pass up for a movie not to be made about all this.


trump, Meadows, and McCarthy.......played in the upcoming movie, Larry, Moe, and Curly.


----------



## BackAgain

Clipper said:


> You can bet the farm that Trump is watching MSNBC & not Fox to see how deep his sorry ass is in hot water.
> 
> He's already as usual released a statement filled with more lies.H
> 
> I wonder who's cleaning up after his temper tantrums today?


Zzzz. Are you still vomiting your crap?


----------



## Lastamender

g5000 said:


> You aren't watching because you are cowards and don't want to see the truth about your messiah.


You are watching them dig their own graves. 75 million voted for Trump in 2020. 10 million more votes for Trump than in 2016. You pissed them off and the backfiring of this fascist trial will be more than apparent in the Midterms.


----------



## Peach45

Yet none of these BOMBSHELL incidents leaked for 18 months despite dozens of witnesses. 

I despise Trump and even I dont buy it. What a fucking waste of time. Democrats have actual power right now and THIS is what we use it for? Fucking no way we win 2024


----------



## JimH52

irosie91 said:


> I am a registered democrat but voted for Trump.  I am highly suspicious
> of the JAN 6 testimony-----BOTH SIDES SEEM LIKE LIARS TO ME


repubs are lying?  No news there....


----------



## Tommy Tainant

So Trump knew his fans were armed. Because they couldnt get in to his rally.


----------



## berg80

berg80 said:


> Yikes, sounds like Baby Donald had quite a number of tantrums including trying to assault an assistant, grabbing the wheel of the presidential car, and throwing food on the wall.
> 
> Hillary was right. He never had the temperament to be prez.











						Trump lunged at Secret Service agent in rage when told he couldn't go to Capitol on Jan. 6, aide testifies
					






					www.cnbc.com


----------



## Billy_Bob

Too funny... the bombshell was a hyped-up nothing burger...  Why am I not surprised...

Just a lot of leftists frothing at the mouth...


----------



## Meister

Winco said:


> Yup
> May 24th, 2022
> 
> Why bring that up?


 I meant in this thread?
Good grief....


----------



## Astrostar

Jan. 6 hearings day 6
					

The House committee investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection at the US Capitol is holding its sixth public hearing of the month. Watch live and follow the latest news updates here.




					www.cnn.com
				




Talk about rocking off the porch!  Wow!   Bigly!!!


----------



## Peach45

irosie91 said:


> I am a registered democrat but voted for Trump.  I am highly suspicious
> of the JAN 6 testimony-----BOTH SIDES SEEM LIKE LIARS TO ME



I agree. They’re saying he tried to hijack The Beast, had to be restrained and then he tried to choke an agent. And THAT never leaked???? BS


----------



## BackAgain

berg80 said:


> _White House Counsel Was Concerned About Obstruction Charges From March To Capitol_​_White House counsel Pat Cipollone was concerned with being charged with obstruction of justice, “defrauding the electoral count” “obstructing the Electoral College count,” if President Donald Trump pursued a march to the Capitol on Jan. 6, Hutchinson just testified._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meadows' Closest Aide Testifies Publicly During Surprise Jan. 6 Hearing
> 
> 
> The Jan. 6 Select Committee announced a surprise public hearing Monday, and,...
> 
> 
> 
> talkingpointsmemo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any questions about why Cipollone and Meadows don't want to testify?


Who cares?


----------



## Faun

_“You see the mob takes the Fifth. If you’re innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?” ~ Donald Trump_


----------



## Pellinore

The thrown-dinner and strangling-the-agent stories are glitzy and attention-grabbing, but to me the most damning testimony she has given so far is that Trump knew that the armed attendees of his rally were not there to hurt him.  That implies strongly that he knew they were there to hurt someone else.


----------



## Billy_Bob

Peach45 said:


> Yet none of these BOMBSHELL incidents leaked for 18 months despite dozens of witnesses.
> 
> I despise Trump and even I dont buy it. What a fucking waste of time. Democrats have actual power right now and THIS is what we use it for? Fucking no way we win 2024


The hype is drummed up BS and even democrats can see through it... Now that's bad.. these people are soooo screwed..


----------



## BackAgain

JimH52 said:


> trump, Meadows, and McCarthy.......played in the upcoming movie, Larry, Moe, and Curly.


Past tense (played) in the future (upcoming).

???


----------



## Winco

shockedcanadian said:


> Charge him with a crime and let him call witnesses and defend himself.


Are you referring to trump?

If so, trump will defy
Claim the 5th.

Trump will never testify under oath,
but if he does........He will then have that Colonel Jessop moment.

I can hardly wait.  Please defend yourself under oath mr trump.


----------



## skews13

Peach45 said:


> I agree. They’re saying he tried to hijack The Beast, had to be restrained and then he tried to choke an agent. And THAT never leaked???? BS



They’re not saying anything. 

A witness that was there with first hand information, is testifying under oath is saying it.

So you’re saying she is lying under oath?


----------



## marvin martian

Astrostar said:


> Jan. 6 hearings day 6
> 
> 
> The House committee investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection at the US Capitol is holding its sixth public hearing of the month. Watch live and follow the latest news updates here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Talk about rocking off the porch!  Wow!   Bigly!!!



^^^The reality show for dumb people.


----------



## Pellinore

Peach45 said:


> I agree. They’re saying he tried to hijack The Beast, had to be restrained and then he tried to choke an agent. And THAT never leaked???? BS


The evidence of Watergate took longer than that.  It's not unusual.


----------



## Billy_Bob

Pellinore said:


> The thrown-dinner and strangling-the-agent stories are glitzy and attention-grabbing, but to me the most damning testimony she has given so far is that Trump knew that the armed attendees of his rally were not there to hurt him.  That implies strongly that he knew they were there to hurt someone else.


You're taking the sugar-coated turd as fact...now that's funny...


----------



## Mac1958

Meadows:  "He doesn't want to do anything, Pat"


----------



## Meister

skews13 said:


> So you’re saying she is lying under oath?


We'll never know, will we?


----------



## BackAgain

Pellinore said:


> The thrown-dinner and strangling-the-agent stories are glitzy and attention-grabbing, but to me the most damning testimony she has given so far is that Trump knew that the armed attendees of his rally were not there to hurt him.  That implies strongly that he knew they were there to hurt someone else.


No it doesn’t,  in fact, it assumes her testimony is honest or accurate. It might be neither. Let’s wait for the cross examination. Oh wait. There is of course no cross examination. Hm. 

Maybe (*if* he *had* actually heard about anyone in the rally being armed at all), maybe he didn’t give it any thought. Maybe he thought it was a 2d Amendment “statement.”  But, either way,  there’s *no* reasonable inference that he imaginesd that anyone armed was planning to hurt anyone.


----------



## Pellinore

Billy_Bob said:


> You're taking the sugar-coated turd as fact...now that's funny...


Well, you don't have to believe her, but a lot of other people will, especially if no one comes forward with a contradictory account that is as specific and detailed as hers.


----------



## Mac1958

I'll bet Meadows is wondering if it's too late to turn.


----------



## berg80

After Baby Donald was told the mob was chanting "hang Mike Pence" he said "Mike deserves it, the rioters aren't doing anything wrong." Then he sent out the incendiary tweet about Pence's lack of courage.


----------



## Nostra

Winco said:


> Patience* trump KKKult* member.


6 years and counting, Simp.


----------



## Clipper

Lastamender said:


> Six years later and the fork is in the people after Trump.


Trump was ok with Pence hung by that out of control mob. Which proves that for one, he's crazy & two, if he ever sits in the W.H. again his perceived enemies better watch their back for the rest of their life because Trump will do anything to enact his revenge. Again. Trump was ok with his own V.P. hung by a marauding mob.

That's the guy you defend.


----------



## Billy_Bob

Pellinore said:


> Well, you don't have to believe her, but a lot of other people will, especially if no one comes forward with a contradictory account that is as specific and detailed as hers.


You guys can't see this is a train wreck...  No one believes this crap and the hesitations of this witness tell me she is making a lot of this up.  She does not appear credible.  to many tell tale signs of deceit.


----------



## BackAgain

Pellinore said:


> Well, you don't have to believe her, but a lot of other people will, especially if no one comes forward with a contradictory account that is as specific and detailed as hers.


Someone with such possible testimony wouldn’t be called by the Kangaroo Committee.


----------



## Mac1958

Holy shit, I hadn't seen that Gallagher post before.  "Only you can call this off"

Not Antifa?


----------



## Lastamender

Clipper said:


> Trump was ok with Pence hung by that out of control mob. Which proves that for one, he's crazy & two, if he ever sits in the W.H. again his perceived enemies better watch their back for the rest of their life because Trump will do anything to enact his revenge. Again. Trump was ok with his own V.P. hung by a marauding mob.
> 
> That's the guy you defend.


Stop the ridiculous drama. No one believes that crap unless they have a two digit IQ and they have their doubts. Again a cover up for fraud and an insult to the American system of justice.


----------



## Clipper

BackAgain said:


> Zzzz. Are you still vomiting your crap?


Still defending that crazy fuck, Trump's asseater?


----------



## Lastamender

Mac1958 said:


> Holy shit, I hadn't seen that Gallagher post before.  "Only you can call this off"
> 
> Not Antifa?


Was that a message to Epps?


----------



## Nostra

No bombshells?

Looks like today's episode is just another Schifferbrains popcorn fart.


----------



## Winco

Billy_Bob said:


> No one believes this crap and the hesitations of this witness tell me she is making a lot of this up.


LOOOLLOOLLL

Why would she risk so much to LIE?

Everything she states has been backed up with PROOF.  Video, text or Email.


----------



## Billy_Bob

Nostra said:


> No bombshells?
> 
> Looks like today's episode is just another Schifferbrains popcorn fart.


Everything they presented is hearsay evidence.  Nothing is confirmed or cooberated.   Just more of the same schitt...


----------



## Winco

Nostra said:


> No bombshells?
> 
> Looks like today's episode is just another Schifferbrains popcorn fart.


To a simpleton and denier like you, I agree.


----------



## Billy_Bob

Winco said:


> LOOOLLOOLLL
> 
> Why would she risk so much to LIE?
> 
> Everything she states has been backed up with PROOF.  Video, text or Email.


No ccoberation... No other witnesses...  Unbelievable accusations that no one else saw....   Hesitation of the story multiple times... fidgeting and uncomfortable....   nothing says the truth like someone displaying the physical actions of someone lying..

I've interviewed hundreds of people and I know a liar when I see one.   It is unmistakable behavior.


----------



## BackAgain

Clipper said:


> Still defending that crazy fuck, Trump's asseater?


I haven’t defended Trump, Mr asseater. I do refute and rebut the numerous false claims or unsupported claims made about him by all manner of libtards and others suffering from TDS. 

I know that bothers you. 

Just one of the perks.


----------



## berg80

Members of the cabinet discussed using the 25th A to remove Trump from power. Gee, what a bunch of snowflake libtards..........right Trumpers?


----------



## Clipper

BackAgain said:


> No it doesn’t,  in fact, it assumes her testimony is honest or accurate. It might be neither. Let’s wait for the cross examination. Oh wait. There is of course no cross examination. Hm.
> 
> Maybe (*if* he *had* actually heard about anyone in the rally being armed at all), maybe he didn’t give it any thought. Maybe he thought it was a 2d Amendment “statement.”  But, either way,  there’s *no* reasonable inference that he imaginesd that anyone armed was planning to hurt anyone.


And she has what to gain by coming forward? Hounded by Trump cult asslicker's for years to come? 

She's already been attacked by the lowlife that you Trumptards bow before.


----------



## bendog

So Trump wanted armed protestors to march on the capitol and even tried to take control of his secret service car to force his security to let him join with attacking the capitol?

The Trumpanzies will be thrilled.


----------



## basquebromance




----------



## Clipper

BackAgain said:


> I haven’t defended Trump, Mr asseater. I do refute and rebut the numerous false claims or unsupported claims made about him by all manner of libtards and others suffering from TDS.
> 
> I know that bothers you.
> 
> Just one of the perks.


She's under oath. Not everyone is a pathalogical liar. And not everyone takes the fucking 5th either.


----------



## Winco

Billy_Bob said:


> Everything they presented is hearsay evidence.


I don't think you understand what 'Hearsay' is.
Let me help.






These are Hutchinson's OWN accounts.
What she states is not Hearsay.


----------



## Billy_Bob

basquebromance said:


>


She said he said.. and no witnesses to this "behavior"   she is lying...


----------



## Billy_Bob

Winco said:


> I don't think you understand what 'Hearsay' is.
> Let me help.
> 
> View attachment 663398
> 
> These are Hutchinson's OWN accounts.
> What she states is not Hearsay.


Until the statement is cooberated by other things, hard physical evidence or other witnesses, the statement is Hearsay.  You have no clue how investigations are done..


----------



## BackAgain

Clipper said:


> And she has what to gain by coming forward? Hounded by Trump cult asslicker's for years to come?
> 
> She's already been attacked by the lowlife that you Trumptards bow before.


I wouldn’t know what she has to gain if anything. But she got subpoenaed and that is maybe good enough reason to come forward. It doesn’t address the issue of whether her testimony is accurate or honest. 

You useless clump of cells known as libtards will obviously cherish her for sharing her story — regardless of how unsubstantiated it is. And even if every word were as accurate and honest as possible, it still doesn’t amount to a hill of snot in terms of value.


----------



## Nostra

Winco said:


> To a simpleton and denier like you, I agree.


Feel free to post the evidence presented of actual crimes.

GO!


----------



## berg80

Sounds like, among other crimes, they have Trump on witness tampering charges.


----------



## Billy_Bob

BackAgain said:


> I wouldn’t know what she has to gain if anything. But she got subpoenaed and that is maybe good enough reason to come forward. It doesn’t address the issue of whether her testimony is accurate or honest.
> 
> You useless clump of cells known as libtards will obviously cherish her for sharing her story — regardless of how unsubstantiated it is. And even if every word were as accurate and honest as possible, it still doesn’t amount to a hill of snot in terms of value.


There would have been a hard copy report on this type of behavior by the Secret Service.  Where is that report? IF this were true, they would have the reports and they would have other fact witnesses, the agents themselves. they have none of those things.    This is bull shit.


----------



## BlindBoo

bendog said:


> So Trump wanted armed protestors to march on the capitol and even tried to take control of his secret service car to force his security to let him join with attacking the capitol?
> 
> The Trumpanzies will be thrilled.



Nah they'll be...


----------



## Stormy Daniels

Cassidy Hutchinson has more balls than all the cultists on the board put together.


----------



## Winco

Clipper said:


> And she has what to gain by coming forward? Hounded by Trump cult asslicker's for years to come?


Exactly, why would she LIE?


Billy_Bob said:


> She said he said.. and no witnesses to this "behavior"   she is lying...


Yes, not Hearsay.
Did you read the definition of Hearsay.
Sure, she may be lying (you hope and pretend) but her direct testimony is NOT hearsay.


----------



## BackAgain

Clipper said:


> She's under oath. Not everyone is a pathalogical liar. And not everyone takes the fucking 5th either.


People under oath can still be inaccurate or have poor memories. Sometimes they can even lie!  Just ask Bubba Clinton. 

I know that not everyone one is like you.  You pathological liars (take note of the correct spelling) don’t mind it when someone else lies, unless it impacts you. 

She did testify so obviously she didn’t take the 5th, you dolt.


----------



## BackAgain

Stormy Daniels said:


> Cassidy Hutchinson has more balls than all the cultists on the board put together.


She has no balls.  Look up the definition of “woman.”  

Oh. Shit. Touchy subject for libtards.


----------



## g5000

Lastamender said:


> You are watching them dig their own graves. 75 million voted for Trump in 2020.


81 million voted for Biden.


----------



## g5000

Pellinore said:


> The thrown-dinner and strangling-the-agent stories are glitzy and attention-grabbing, but to me the most damning testimony she has given so far is that Trump knew that the armed attendees of his rally were not there to hurt him.  That implies strongly that he knew they were there to hurt someone else.


Yep.  Exactly.


----------



## Pellinore

berg80 said:


> Sounds like, among other crimes, they have Trump on witness tampering charges.


I think it goes without saying that the DOJ has a brown expanding folder somewhere labelled "Seditious Conspiracy."


----------



## Winco

Billy_Bob said:


> IF this were true, they would have the reports and they would have other fact witnesses. This is bull shit.


And when they subpoena the 'other witnesses' in the trump vehicle, will you call them liars too?


----------



## BackAgain

Billy_Bob said:


> There would have been a hard copy report on this type of behavior by the secret service.  Where is that report? IF this were true, they would have the reports and they would have other fact witnesses.  This is bull shit.


I can see Trump getting angry if the Secret Service (even for perfectly valid safety reasons) refused to take him to the Capitol. I think anybody would be angry about that — especially under the circumstances. 

But I also have my doubts about the story. And I do imagine that there would be some report about it.


----------



## Clipper

BackAgain said:


> How do you feel when tossing Brandon’s salad, you imbecile?


Touched a nerve, did I? Who's taking it harder you or Trump after having your ass handed back to you, cementhead?


----------



## g5000

Trump and the Republicans had their chance and shot themselves in the mouth.  They refused to participate in the committee and they refused to accept an independent commission.

Several pro-Trump witnesses have refused to give their testimony.

And now the Republicans have the audacity to whine they are not allowed to participate!  BWA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA!

Only the dumbest of rubes are drinking that piss.


----------



## Oddball

Clipper said:


> She's under oath. Not everyone is a pathalogical liar. And not everyone takes the fucking 5th either.



Pathological liars, huh?.....


----------



## BackAgain

Stormy Daniels said:


> And yet she has 10x the balls you have.


Your grasp on human physiology is as non-existent as your grasp in Constitutional law.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Batcat said:


> I would be listening and paying close attention if this “committee” was a real committee.


That, of course, is the cultist excuse for shielding themselves from the hearings.


----------



## Clipper

BackAgain said:


> I can see Trump getting angry if the Secret Service (even for perfectly valid safety reasons) refused to take him to the Capitol. I think anybody would be angry about that — especially under the circumstances.
> 
> But I also have my doubts about the story. And I do imagine that there would be some report about it.


She was a W.H. staffer working at the seat of power & she's a liar, you moron?

Who hired her, shithead?


----------



## Lastamender

g5000 said:


> 81 million voted for Biden.


My dick they did. The election was stolen and no one is giving up until it is proven. You sit tight because it will happen.


----------



## berg80

Like all patriotic Americans, Hutchinson was disgusted at what Trump did.


----------



## BlindBoo

BackAgain said:


> She has no balls.  Look up the definition of “woman.”
> 
> Oh. Shit. Touchy subject for libtards.


Hahaha.  Her balls are about half the size of Liz Cheney's......I'd say.

Untouchable subject for the Neo-GOP flock.

Cause "Women"


----------



## Lastamender

berg80 said:


> Like all patriotic Americans, Hutchinson was disgusted at what Trump did.


Patriotic Americans wanted Congress to investigate fraud. That is why they were there on Jan. 6th. Why isn't that ever mentioned?


----------



## Faun

Lastamender said:


> My dick they did. The election was stolen and no one is giving up until it is proven. You sit tight because it will happen.



LOL

just another 3-4 weeks, right?


----------



## berg80

Pellinore said:


> I think it goes without saying that the DOJ has a brown expanding folder somewhere labelled "Seditious Conspiracy."


They may have to create more folders given the number of potential charges they could indict him on.


----------



## Lastamender

BlindBoo said:


> Hahaha.  Her balls are about half the size of Liz Cheney's......I'd say.
> 
> Untouchable subject for the Neo-GOP flock.
> 
> Cause "Women"


Oh no!!! Republicans might force her to have a baby!!!


----------



## bodecea

Godboy said:


> At the end of your pitiful hearings, there wont be a single criminal referral. Wanna bet? You would have to be a god damn fool to bet against me.


Sure...I'll bet.


----------



## Billy_Bob

BackAgain said:


> Your grasp on human physiology is as non-existent as your grasp in Constitutional law.


They are going to be sorely disappointed.  They have nothing at this point. To many inconsistencies and her behavior do not give her credibility.  No other hard evidence and no other fact witnesses. IF this were truly the bombshell they said, those secret service agents would have been called in to testify.  The fact they were not present and that the daily log was not introduced lead me to believe this is a fabrication.


----------



## Clipper

Lastamender said:


> Of course she is a liar and most likely a rich one now.


What's your reasoning for calling her a liar, shitface?

Other then your cult status.


----------



## Lastamender

Faun said:


> LOL
> 
> just another 3-4 weeks, right?


It is coming troll, and you cannot stop it.


----------



## Winco

Oddball said:


> Pathological liars, huh?.....


What crimes were these people ^^^^^ charged with?
Any day now.


----------



## berg80

Lastamender said:


> Patriotic Americans wanted Congress to investigate fraud. That is why they were there on Jan. 6th. Why isn't that ever mentioned?


The fact that the mob was there based on a lie was mentioned today.


----------



## g5000

Don't listen to today's witness.  She's obviously a groomer.  A tranny.  Antifa.  And she has overdue books from the library. Her favorite hobby is throwing live puppies into rush hour traffic.  She's also kissed a negro.


----------



## bodecea

Lastamender said:


> Oh no!!! Republicans might force her to have a baby!!!


How'd JUN30 turn out last year.


----------



## Lastamender

Clipper said:


> What's your reasoning for calling her a liar, shitface?
> 
> Other then your cult status.


Because the committee is a lie and supports liars. Simple.


----------



## Lastamender

g5000 said:


> Don't listen to today's witness.  She's obviously a groomer.  A tranny.  Antifa.  And she has overdue books from the library. Her favorite hobby is throwing live puppies into rush hour traffic.


That your party is scum is a known quantity but thanks for confirming it.


----------



## 22lcidw

g5000 said:


> 81 million voted for Biden.


Destroying yourselves is your business. Destroying everyone else is not.


----------



## berg80

Lastamender said:


> Because the committee is a lie and supports liars. Simple.


There are zero pieces of evidence the committee has presented that have been refuted in a material way.


----------



## Lastamender

bodecea said:


> How'd JUN30 turn out last year.


It does not matter. There is digital and video evidence of fraud.


----------



## Faun

Lastamender said:


> It is coming troll, and you cannot stop it.



You've been saying that since the election and after 20 months, *nothing* has come except excuses. It's a shame you have no idea how insane you appear.


----------



## Lastamender

berg80 said:


> There are zero pieces of evidence the committee has presented that have been refuted in a material way.


They are not evidence because this is not a trial, dumbass.


----------



## Dragonlady

buckeye45_73 said:


> WE already did, this is clearly designed to get off the abortion debate....the left can't debate...they just change the subject.



The left is capable of walking, talking and chewing gum at the same time.  They can investigate Donald Trump AND deal with the fallout of Roe being overturned.  Unlike Donald Trump who can barely focus on one topic at a time.


----------



## g5000

Lastamender said:


> That your party is scum is a known quantity but thanks for confirming it.


I'm a registered Independent.  Formerly a Republican.  If Insurrection Donald lives to be 100, I will still have been a Republican longer than him.

It's because of Trump and his cock gobblers like you that I am no longer a Republican.


----------



## Faun

Lastamender said:


> It does not matter. There is digital and video evidence of fraud.



You're lying again, FruitLoops. There is no video evidence. That's why you can't post any. Just more excuses.


----------



## Lastamender

Faun said:


> You've been saying that since the election and after 20 months, *nothing* has come except excuses. It's a shame you have no idea how insane you appear.


2,000 Mules. It has not and cannot be debunked.


----------



## Stormy Daniels

BackAgain said:


> But I also have my doubts about the story. And I do imagine that there would be some report about it.



There _is_ a report about it. They had a whole freaking hearing about it today.


----------



## kaz

Winco said:


> Deflection is all you got.
> Could you possibly stay on Topic.



LOL, that's funny.  Since you're stupid I'll explain it to you.

When you engage in hypocrisy, it means it isn't really a standard for you.   An actual standard would be something you apply to yourself first.

What you keep doing is attacking people for fake standards that you don't apply to yourself.  Which means they aren't actual standards, just lame political attacks.

Of course you want to not be attacked for your hypocrisy.     Too bad, you will be, it proves you're a racist and a nasty all around person


----------



## Dragonlady

Lastamender said:


> My dick they did. The election was stolen and no one is giving up until it is proven. You sit tight because it will happen.



The election wasn't stolen and everyone who has testified has said that Trump knew it, but still continued to lie to you.

Your insisting otherwise just shows how gullible and stupid YOU are.


----------



## Nostra

Nazi Piglosi's Clown Show shoulda stayed on hiatus until they found a better Hollywood producer.

What a flop today was.


----------



## Lastamender

g5000 said:


> I'm a registered Independent.  Formerly a Republican.  If Insurrection Donald lives to be 100, I will still have been a Republican longer than him.
> 
> It's because of Trump and his cock gobblers like you that I am no longer a Republican.


I do not care one fucking bit about what you say you are. You have shown me you are a traitor to almost everything this country stands for.


----------



## Dragonlady

kaz said:


> LOL, that's funny.  Since you're stupid I'll explain it to you.
> 
> When you engage in hypocrisy, it means it isn't really a standard for you.   An actual standard would be something you apply to yourself first.
> 
> What you keep doing is attacking people for fake standards that you don't apply to yourself.  Which means they aren't actual standards, just lame political attacks.
> 
> Of course you want to not be attacked for your hypocrisy.     Too bad, you will be, it proves you're a racist and a nasty all around person



So you have nothing and you're attacking yet another poster with your garbage because that's all you have.


----------



## Faun

Lastamender said:


> 2,000 Mules. It has not and cannot be debunked.



No video evidence.


----------



## Clipper

Lastamender said:


> Oh no!!! Republicans might force her to have a baby!!!


Didn't take long for the attacks to begin on this witness did it, CLOWN?


----------



## Lastamender

Dragonlady said:


> The election wasn't stolen and everyone who has testified has said that Trump knew it, but still continued to lie to you.
> 
> Your insisting otherwise just shows how gullible and stupid YOU are.


The election was stolen and it has been proven with digital admissible evidence. It needs to get to a court but this corrupt administration and RINOs in the swing states will not allow it.


----------



## g5000




----------



## BlindBoo

Lastamender said:


> Oh no!!! Republicans might force her to have a baby!!!



She is 55 years old.


----------



## Faun

Clipper said:


> Didn't take long for the attacks to begin on this witness did it, CLOWN?



This is my shocked face -->


----------



## Lastamender

Faun said:


> No video evidence.


It is coming. The movie had a montage of people with stacks of ballots and you know it.


----------



## g5000

Lastamender said:


> The election was stolen and it has been proven with digital admissible evidence. It needs to get to a court but this corrupt administration and RINOs in the swing states will not allow it.


----------



## Lastamender

BlindBoo said:


> She is 55 years old.


The one who testified today? She looks good for 55. Now prove what you said.


----------



## g5000

BlindBoo said:


> She is 55 years old.


Cassidy Hutchinson is 25.


----------



## Lastamender

g5000 said:


>


*GOP plaintiff prevailed on 14 of the 21 cases decided on the merits*









						Here is the Evidence
					

Crowdsourcing evidence for journalists.



					hereistheevidence.com


----------



## Dragonlady

Lastamender said:


> I do not care one fucking bit about what you say you are. You have shown me you are a traitor to almost everything this country stands for.



You don't care about truth or facts.  You believe Trump despite all reasonable information showing you that he lied.


----------



## kaz

Dragonlady said:


> So you have nothing and you're attacking yet another poster with your garbage because that's all you have.



One day when I care what you're babbling about, I'll ask you to explain, Canadian racist


----------



## bripat9643

Mac1958 said:


> Man, this is fucking INSANE


Yes you are.


----------



## Faun

Lastamender said:


> It is coming. The movie had a montage of people with stacks of ballots and you know it.



The movie did show a single person at a drop box more than once. That was what the movie was about. So they used the only videos they did have which were about 15 people with more than one ballot but only at one drop box. And since it's legal to drop off ballots for family members in every one of the states they investigated, they even failed with those videos to prove a crime had been committed.

The rest of your miserable life will always be ... just another 3-4 more weeks.


----------



## g5000

Lastamender said:


> I do not care one fucking bit about what you say you are. You have shown me you are a traitor to almost everything this country stands for.


]


----------



## Lastamender

Dragonlady said:


> You don't care about truth or facts.  You believe Trump despite all reasonable information showing you that he lied.


It is you who does not care. And of course I believe Trump. He has more credibility than the media and the illegitimate administration.


----------



## Dragonlady

Lastamender said:


> 2,000 Mules. It has not and cannot be debunked.



It has been completely debunked.  It's weak and laughably false.  Only an idiot believes these lies.


----------



## Rambunctious

So now on 1-6 Trump dove into the front seat right through the seat divider and grabbed the wheel from the secret service agent and tried to drive to the capitol.....
OMG you libs are fucking stupid people....


----------



## kaz

g5000 said:


>


----------



## skews13

Lastamender said:


> Because the committee is a lie and supports liars. Simple.


My guess is that before this is over, we will be hearing testimony from Ornato, Engle, and Meadows," Mulvaney tweeted, after Hutchinson described Trump physically attacking his Secret Service detail on Jan. 6. "This is explosive stuff."

If Cassidy is making this up, they will need to say that," Mulvaney said. "If she isn’t they will have to corroborate.I know her. I don’t think she is lying."









						‘I don’t think she’s lying’: Ex-Trump official Mick Mulvaney vouches for Cassidy Hutchinson’s ‘explosive’ testimony
					

Donald Trump's one-time chief of staff Mick Mulvaney vouched for the "explosive" testimony provided by former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson.Mulvaney, who served as Trump's chief of staff before Mark Meadows and as White House director of management and budget, said he believed Hutchinson's...




					www.rawstory.com


----------



## Dragonlady

Lastamender said:


> It is you who does not care. And of course I believe Trump. He has more credibility than the media and the illegitimate administration.



Trump has NO credibility with anyone in the world.  Banks won't lend to him because he lies - about everything.


----------



## Mac1958

g5000 said:


> Cassidy Hutchinson is 25.


I thought the committee was in danger of creating expectations that were too high with this surprise hearing.

Nope.

Holy shit.  This goes beyond what I was already assuming, and THAT was a LOT.


----------



## Billy_Bob

Rambunctious said:


> So now on 1-6 Trump dove into the front seat right through the seat divider and grabbed the wheel from the secret service agent and tried to drive to the capitol.....
> OMG you libs are fucking stupid people....


They are going to be sorely disappointed. They have nothing at this point. To many inconsistencies and her behavior do not give her credibility. No other hard evidence and no other fact witnesses. IF this were truly the bombshell they said, those secret service agents would have been called in to testify. The fact they were not present and that the daily log was not introduced lead me to believe this is a fabrication.


----------



## Lastamender

Faun said:


> The movie did show a single person at a drop box more than once. That was what the movie was about. So they used the only videos they did have which were about 15 people with more than one ballot but only at one drop box. And since it's legal to drop off ballots for family members in every one of the states they investigated, they even failed with those videos to prove a crime had been committed.
> 
> The rest of your miserable life will always be ... just another 3-4 more weeks.


I have told your stupid ass they are not finished with proving fraud and they will not stop until they do. You have no choice in the matter.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> LOL
> 
> Good thing you're a known liar. No one cares about your lies and denials.
> 
> ​


Do you actually believe anyone believes you tell the truth, fuckstick?


----------



## BlindBoo

Lastamender said:


> The one who testified today? She looks good for 55. Now prove what you said.


Liz Cheney and her balls.


----------



## g5000




----------



## Rambunctious

Billy_Bob said:


> They are going to be sorely disappointed. They have nothing at this point. To many inconsistencies and her behavior do not give her credibility. No other hard evidence and no other fact witnesses. IF this were truly the bombshell they said, those secret service agents would have been called in to testify. The fact they were not present and that the daily log was not introduced lead me to believe this is a fabrication.


A super surprise session...LMFAO.....


----------



## kaz

Lastamender said:


> It is you who does not care. And of course I believe Trump. He has more credibility than the media and the illegitimate administration.



Dragonlady does love her some fake news


----------



## Lastamender

g5000 said:


> ]


2,000 Mules. The candidate for AZ. governor Kari Lake mentioned it on Fox News. Brett Bair almost shit his pants. They will not be interviewing her again.


----------



## g5000




----------



## bripat9643

Dragonlady said:


> It has been completely debunked.  It's weak and laughably false.


Wrong


----------



## Rambunctious

g5000 said:


>


I saw them in a news clip... if I saw them Trump may have too... don't be such a sucker... of course many people here and around the world celebrated that day.... probably even you tard....


----------



## kaz

g5000 said:


>



From the guy still supporting leftists attacking cities across the country for the entire summer in 2020, as if you have standards, LOL, racist


----------



## BlindBoo

g5000 said:


> Cassidy Hutchinson is 25.


Liz Cheney is over twice that age and has balls about twice as big.  Not that I'm discounting the size of Cassidy's balls, they are obviously bigger that most of the Neo-GOP guys.  But I bet they have big cars and big speakers at home.......


----------



## kaz

bripat9643 said:


> Wrong



Democrats like Dragonlady are so stupid they think things are not true if Democrats don't want them to be.     She is a Democrat above all else


----------



## g5000

The ‘big rip-off’: how Trump exploited his fans with ‘election defense’ fund​


----------



## Faun

Lastamender said:


> I have told your stupid ass they are not finished with proving fraud and they will not stop until they do. You have no choice in the matter.



LOLOL

*Translation: *_3-4 more weeks._


----------



## Billy_Bob

BlindBoo said:


> Liz Cheney is over twice that age and has balls about twice as big.  Not that I'm discounting the size of Cassidy's balls, they are obviously bigger that most of the Neo-GOP guys.  But I bet they have big cars and big speakers at home.......


Liz Cheney is a woman without a party... She back stabs everyone for her own power...


----------



## Rambunctious

Lastamender said:


> 2,000 Mules. The candidate for AZ. governor Kari Lake mentioned it on Fox News. Brett Bair almost shit his pants. They will not be interviewing her again.


Bair is scared to death he will lose his job....


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> Do you actually believe anyone believes you tell the truth, fuckstick?





bripat9643 said:


> yes, I did lie about that.  I said it simply to trigger morons like you, and it worked.


----------



## marvin martian

Mac1958 said:


> I thought the committee was in danger of creating expectations that were too high with this surprise hearing.
> 
> Nope.
> 
> Holy shit.  This goes beyond what I was already assuming, and THAT was a LOT.



Truly a reality show for idiots. With the Mac1958 Biden Cult's stamp of approval.

LOL


----------



## Rambunctious

Faun said:


> LOLOL
> 
> *Translation: *_3-4 more weeks._


Loser response...


----------



## kaz

g5000 said:


> The ‘big rip-off’: how Trump exploited his fans with ‘election defense’ fund​



Trump was right, you stole the election.   You know that too, which is why you're working so hard to deflect


----------



## Astrostar

citygator said:


> Seems scheduled pretty sudden… apparently the Jan 6 Committee is excited to present something to your open minds. I bet it’s a pretty big bombshell… any takers?
> 
> January 6 committee adds new hearing for Tuesday - CNNPolitics


Num nuts didn't care that the Jan 6 demonstrators were armed, that "they aren't going to hurt me."  Then he and his Fox News allies blamed the insurrection on Antifa and non-Trump people.  If that is true, and they were armed, surely they would have taken care of num nuts sorry ass.  Guess he blaimed them falsely.  Hard to believe.  Bigly!!!


----------



## Faun

Rambunctious said:


> I saw them in a news clip... if I saw them Trump may have too... don't be such a sucker... of course many people here and around the world celebrated that day.... probably even you tard....



More ramblies. There were none in or around NYC shown on TV that day.


----------



## AMart

She isn't a witness to anything. She was probably at Kavanaughs's beer party back in the 80's also, hot tub time machine!


----------



## WEATHER53

Pretty much another carrot dangle about more will be revealed later.


----------



## TemplarKormac




----------



## g5000

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/05/07/cheney-was-more-loyal-trumps-agenda-than-stefanik-trump-only-cares-about-loyalty-him/


----------



## Rambunctious

Faun said:


> More ramblies. There were none in or around NYC shown on TV that day.


You are losing another debate I see... That's three days in a row....


----------



## Billy_Bob

AMart said:


> She isn't a witness to anything. She was probably at Kavanaughs's beer party back in the 80's also, hot tub time machine!


She had that Basley Ford aurora about her..


----------



## g5000




----------



## WelfareQueen

Dragonlady said:


> Have you noticed that Trump is no longer President?  I ask because you apparently failed to notice ANY of his criminal behaviour while in office.  The two impeachments, multiple investigations of wrong doing, criminal charges and guilty pleas from his associates, or the insurrection on January 6th - after he LOST the election.



Thank God Trump was convicted and put in jail....


----------



## Faun

Rambunctious said:


> You are losing another debate I see... That's three days in a row....



LOL

Lying to yourself only makes you look delusional. Again, there was no video that day of what you're claiming you watched. Your idiocy exposes your lies.

Did you watch the hearing today? Now we know, a) members of that mob were armed; and b) Trump knew members of that mob were armed; and c) Trump summoned them to the Capitol.


----------



## Rambunctious

Faun said:


> More ramblies. There were none in or around NYC shown on TV that day.


----------



## Faun

Rambunctious said:


> View attachment 663412



More rambtrolling.  

Did you watch the hearing today? Now we know, a) members of that mob were armed; and b) Trump knew members of that mob were armed; and c) Trump summoned them to the Capitol.


----------



## TemplarKormac




----------



## jknowgood

BlindBoo said:


> Meh?  Recordings of Trumps conversation with Satan when he sold his soul wouldn't be enough for the MAGANUTS.
> 
> Sorry to say....


It's all hearsay, I heard some woman talking about she heard Trump wanted to go to the Capitol and the guy said no. She heard that Trump lunged in the front trying to grab the steering wheel. Lol, I'm pretty sure there would be a partition in between them. This is nothing but a circus. Hopefully when we take over the democrat party will have to give the American people back the hundreds of millions they have spent on Trump.


----------



## Rambunctious

Faun said:


> More rambtrolling.
> 
> Did you watch the hearing today? Now we know, a) members of that mob were armed; and b) Trump knew members of that mob were armed; and c) Trump summoned them to the Capitol.


I hear Peroxide removes blood.....


----------



## Faun

Rambunctious said:


> I hear Peroxide removes blood.....



More rambtrolling. 

Did you watch the hearing today? Now we know, a) members of that mob were armed; and b) Trump knew members of that mob were armed; and c) Trump summoned them to the Capitol.


----------



## g5000

Lastamender said:


> *GOP plaintiff prevailed on 14 of the 21 cases decided on the merits*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is the Evidence
> 
> 
> Crowdsourcing evidence for journalists.
> 
> 
> 
> hereistheevidence.com


There is nothing to support that statement on the web site.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

Lastamender said:


> 2,000 Mules. The candidate for AZ. governor Kari Lake mentioned it on Fox News. Brett Bair almost shit his pants. They will not be interviewing her again.


Yes. You’ve even lost Fox. Your circle is shrinking.


----------



## jknowgood

Faun said:


> More rambtrolling.
> 
> Did you watch the hearing today? Now we know, a) members of that mob were armed; and b) Trump knew members of that mob were armed; and c) Trump summoned them to the Capitol.


All hearsay, anyway why hasn't Biden condemned the guy that tried to kill Kavanaugh? Should we investigate and impeach him? That's what you loons are trying to do to trump.


----------



## WEATHER53

So she was  in a car ride and heard Trump express what he would like to do. Speculation about what you would like to see is not criminal
The Bombshell is Bumsmell


----------



## Billy_Bob

WEATHER53 said:


> Pretty much another carrot dangle about more will be revealed later.


We got him Now.....   Episode 3,456,798,324


----------



## g5000

Lastamender said:


> *GOP plaintiff prevailed on 14 of the 21 cases decided on the merits*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is the Evidence
> 
> 
> Crowdsourcing evidence for journalists.
> 
> 
> 
> hereistheevidence.com











						PolitiFact - Trump did not win two-thirds of election lawsuits ‘where merits considered’
					

Donald Trump and his allies filed dozens of lawsuits in state and federal courts seeking to challenge the results of the




					www.politifact.com
				




The Feb. 7 headline of an article from the Epoch Times, a media outlet backed by the Falun Gong religious movement, said: "Trump Won Two-Thirds of Election Lawsuits Where Merits Considered."

_"Of the 22 cases that have been heard by the courts and decided on their merits, Trump and Republicans have prevailed in 15," the site wrote. "This means Trump has won two-thirds of the cases fully adjudicated by the courts."

[snip]

*None** of the lawsuits filed by Trump and his supporters have proved there was fraud*, and judges across the political spectrum have rejected their cases. But we wanted to take a closer look at the claim that the challenges were more successful than they appear.

[snip]_

*In a statement*_* on his website, Droz conceded that the majority of the cases he logged have nothing to do with allegations of voter fraud. *The Epoch Times also included that disclaimer in its article._




Awwwwwww.  Too bad.  So sad.


----------



## TemplarKormac




----------



## Faun

jknowgood said:


> All hearsay, anyway why hasn't Biden condemned the guy that tried to kill Kavanaugh? Should we investigate and impeach him? That's what you loons are trying to do to trump.



LOLOL

You rightards crack me up. Now you demonstrate you're too ignorant to know what hearsay is.

Retard, hearsay is claiming someone told you something about someone else.

She didn't do that in regards to demonstrating Trump knew there were armed members in that crowd. 

*Did you not watch the hearing??*

She didn't say someone told her Trump knew people were armed. She said she herself heard Trump say that.

So NOW what's your next pathetic excuse for why Trump summoned an armed mob to the Capitol?


----------



## g5000

jknowgood said:


> All hearsay, anyway why hasn't Biden condemned the guy that tried to kill Kavanaugh? Should we investigate and impeach him? That's what you loons are trying to do to trump.


Biden did not incite the assassin, dumb fuck.










						Biden signs bill to protect Supreme Court justices into law
					

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden signed a bill Thursday that will give around-the-clock security protection to the families of Supreme Court justices. The new law, which passed the House this week and the Senate last month, comes eight days after a man carrying a gun, knife and zip ties was...




					apnews.com


----------



## Billy_Bob

TemplarKormac said:


>


The story is a fabrication.  Full Stop...


----------



## Seymour Flops

That guy Bennie Thompson is the worst teleprompter reader I ever saw.  He's obviously staring at it, like he knows he will lose his place if he glances around the room or looks at the camera to make eye contact with the viewers.  If you look close,  you can see his eyes move to his right and then quick back to the next line on the left.  

They should have let Sheila Jackson-Lee have that role.  At least she has some drama skills.


----------



## struth

TemplarKormac said:


>


this is frankly comical...


----------



## jknowgood

Faun said:


> LOLOL
> 
> You rightards crack me up. Now you demonstrate you're too ignorant to know what hearsay is.
> 
> Retard, hearsay is claiming someone told you something about someone else.
> 
> She didn't do that in regards to demonstrating Trump knew there were armed members in that crowd.
> 
> *Did you not watch the hearing??*
> 
> She didn't say someone told her Trump knew people were armed. She said she herself heard Trump say that.
> 
> So NOW what's your next pathetic excuse for why Trump summoned an armed mob to the Capitol?


Lol, okay if Trump was told that some people were armed. Why didn't they stop them? Did they let them go to frame Trump for later? We won't know because there is no questioning what is stated. A kangaroo hearing if I ever seen one. Hopefully you will get treated the same. A bunch of Nazis.


----------



## Billy_Bob

Faun said:


> LOLOL
> 
> You rightards crack me up. Now you demonstrate you're too ignorant to know what hearsay is.
> 
> Retard, hearsay is claiming someone told you something about someone else.
> 
> She didn't do that in regards to demonstrating Trump knew there were armed members in that crowd.
> 
> *Did you not watch the hearing??*
> 
> She didn't say someone told her Trump knew people were armed. She said she herself heard Trump say that.
> 
> So NOW what's your next pathetic excuse for why Trump summoned an armed mob to the Capitol?


Follow the logic...  Trump is in the back seat of a limo; his wife is with them, and he is going to jump up (ridicules assertion given his height and body size) and try and push the limo driver out of the seat and grab the wheel through the limo window sectioning off the president from his drivers.  All while risking his wife's life due to reckless behavior of grabbing the wheel...  

Sorry but the shear unbelievability of this and the mechanics of this say it is a pure fabrication.


----------



## g5000

jknowgood said:


> Lol, okay if Trump was told that some people were armed. Why didn't they stop them? Did they let them go to frame Trump for later? We won't know because there is no questioning what is stated. A kangaroo hearing if I ever seen one. Hopefully you will get treated the same. A bunch of Nazis.


You obviously did not watch the hearing.


----------



## BlindBoo

jknowgood said:


> Hopefully you will get treated the same.



When their militia storms the Capitol, and their party conspires to fraudulently steal a Presidential election, okay you can.


----------



## jknowgood

g5000 said:


> Biden did not incite the assassin, dumb fuck.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Biden signs bill to protect Supreme Court justices into law
> 
> 
> WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden signed a bill Thursday that will give around-the-clock security protection to the families of Supreme Court justices. The new law, which passed the House this week and the Senate last month, comes eight days after a man carrying a gun, knife and zip ties was...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apnews.com


That's right it was Schumer and he has yet to apologize. But Biden isn't trying to stop the crazies in your party, because he wants it to happen. Impeach the damn pedophile.


Faun said:


> LOLOL
> 
> You rightards crack me up. Now you demonstrate you're too ignorant to know what hearsay is.
> 
> Retard, hearsay is claiming someone told you something about someone else.
> 
> She didn't do that in regards to demonstrating Trump knew there were armed members in that crowd.
> 
> *Did you not watch the hearing??*
> 
> She didn't say someone told her Trump knew people were armed. She said she herself heard Trump say that.
> 
> So NOW what's your next pathetic excuse for why Trump summoned an armed mob to the Capitol?


It's all hearsay because if in the future. If the transcripts are released, they can prove they were all lying. Hopefully Trump does that when he is president again. Shit load of perjury going on.


----------



## Billy_Bob

g5000 said:


> You obviously did not watch the hearing.


I did and it was all a lie.  pure fabrication...


----------



## 2aguy

Meister said:


> It really would be  nice if all this "evidence" could be cross examined.
> But, we know that will never happen.



Cross examined?  This is about making up something, anything, that will allow a democrat party prosecutor to make up a phony baloney criminal charge to go through the 2024 election cycle…..

Cross examined?   Please…….


----------



## Stormy Daniels

Billy_Bob said:


> Follow the logic... Trump is in the back seat of a limo; his wife is with them, and he is going to jump up (ridicules assertion given his height and body size) and try and push the limo driver out of the seat and grab the wheel through the limo window sectioning off the president from his drivers. All while risking his wife's life due to reckless behavior of grabbing the wheel...



We all know Donald loves his wife very much and would never do anything to hurt her. Certainly would never cheat on her while she's pregnant.


----------



## jknowgood

g5000 said:


> You obviously did not watch the hearing.


I heard all I need to hear. There is only one side telling the story. No one defending Trump's side.


----------



## SeaMajor7

You have to be a total partisan moron to believe this crap!

It's no surprise though coming from the demented avenger subverted demoralized zombie crowd.


----------



## Billy_Bob

Stormy Daniels said:


> We all know Donald loves his wife very much and would never do anything to hurt her. Certainly would never cheat on her while she's pregnant.


Right to baseless claims from the far left...  no surprise..


----------



## Mac1958

Billy_Bob said:


> I did and it was all a lie.  pure fabrication...


Wow.  It's all fake news.

Amazing, but not a surprise.


----------



## 2aguy

WEATHER53 said:


> So she was  in a car ride and heard Trump express what he would like to do. Speculation about what you would like to see is not criminal
> The Bombshell is Bumsmell



She had to hurry her testimony… she had to step out of the hearing room to check her bank account to make sure the money from the democrats was in her account.


----------



## jknowgood

2aguy said:


> Cross examined?  This is about making up something, anything, that will allow a democrat party prosecutor to make up a phony baloney criminal charge to go through the 2024 election cycle…..
> 
> Cross examined?   Please…….


Hopefully when we get the house back. We can stop it and review everyone that are committing perjury and lock them up. The democrats are proving what crooks they are.


----------



## Lastamender

g5000 said:


> There is nothing to support that statement on the web site.


There is nothing to support your bullshit either.


----------



## Batcat

bripat9643 said:


> Yes, he failed at it.  That doesn't mean it wasn't a popular goal, dumbass.
> 
> And, yes, Trump didn't not stomp it out entirely, but it was 1/10th what it is now.


There are terrorists being caught crossing the Mexican border so that means some are successfully entering our nation.

Therefore at sometime in the future there will be terrorist attacks in our nation and people will die.

If this is a large number of people and there is proof the terrorists crossed our Mexican border, I would not want to be running  for office as a Democrat









						About those 42 Terrorists Who Crossed the American Southern Border
					

By Todd Bensman as originally published April 26, 2022 by Townhall Media




					medium.com
				





Fort Fun Indiana said:


> That, of course, is the cultist excuse for shielding themselves from the hearings.


Would you watch a football game where only one team was on the field? 

Would you be interested in watching a court case where the was a judge, a jury but only the prosecution and no defense?

I can waste my time in many other ways. If Pelosi would have wanted people like me to watch she would have allowed real Republicans on the committee. That would have been interesting.


----------



## marvin martian

Mac1958 said:


> Wow.  It's all fake news.
> 
> Amazing, but not a surprise.



Was today's episode of your Reality Show for Idiots the "bombshell"??? An anecdote from a person who may or may not have ridden in a car with Trump?

LOL, they bamboozled you again, mac. _Again_! When will you ever learn...?


----------



## Lastamender

g5000 said:


> PolitiFact - Trump did not win two-thirds of election lawsuits ‘where merits considered’
> 
> 
> Donald Trump and his allies filed dozens of lawsuits in state and federal courts seeking to challenge the results of the
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.politifact.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Feb. 7 headline of an article from the Epoch Times, a media outlet backed by the Falun Gong religious movement, said: "Trump Won Two-Thirds of Election Lawsuits Where Merits Considered."
> 
> _"Of the 22 cases that have been heard by the courts and decided on their merits, Trump and Republicans have prevailed in 15," the site wrote. "This means Trump has won two-thirds of the cases fully adjudicated by the courts."
> 
> [snip]
> 
> *None** of the lawsuits filed by Trump and his supporters have proved there was fraud*, and judges across the political spectrum have rejected their cases. But we wanted to take a closer look at the claim that the challenges were more successful than they appear.
> 
> [snip]_
> 
> *In a statement*_* on his website, Droz conceded that the majority of the cases he logged have nothing to do with allegations of voter fraud. *The Epoch Times also included that disclaimer in its article._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Awwwwwww.  Too bad.  So sad.


That link is garbage. Fact checkers have been exposed as opinion checkers and nothing more that that. Try something with actual substance.


----------



## Lastamender

Hutch Starskey said:


> Yes. You’ve even lost Fox. Your circle is shrinking.


Wrong again. The support for a real government is growing. Ask the Hispanics.


----------



## WEATHER53

Faun said:


> LOLOL
> 
> You rightards crack me up. Now you demonstrate you're too ignorant to know what hearsay is.
> 
> Retard, hearsay is claiming someone told you something about someone else.
> 
> She didn't do that in regards to demonstrating Trump knew there were armed members in that crowd.
> 
> *Did you not watch the hearing??*
> 
> She didn't say someone told her Trump knew people were armed. She said she herself heard Trump say that.
> 
> So NOW what's your next pathetic excuse for why Trump summoned an armed mob to the Capitol?


So she says she heard Trump say he knew people  were armed during a car ride 
The people who did not hear that are prohibited from testifying
Kangaroo hoax farce


----------



## BlindBoo

jknowgood said:


> That's right it was Schumer


Claiming that a whirlwind had been released?


jknowgood said:


> I heard all I need to hear. There is only one side telling the story. No one defending Trump's side.


These are all the things the Trumpy-led Neo-GOP doesn't want the country to hear.  They surely don't want the flock to hear it.


----------



## jknowgood

BlindBoo said:


> Claiming that a whirlwind had been released?
> 
> These are all the things the Trumpy-led Neo-GOP doesn't want the country to hear.  They surely don't want the flock to hear it.


No, that he will pay. But you're a liberal and you don't hear that coming from one of your own.


----------



## Stormy Daniels

Before anyone gets carried away with the revelations in the latest hearing, just remember that all evidence needs to be supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by, so on and so forth.


----------



## Blaine Sweeter

Meister said:


> It really would be  nice if all this "evidence" could be cross examined.
> But, we know that will never happen.


You don't know the difference between and hearing and a trial????  LOLOL  Idiot.


----------



## marvin martian

Blaine Sweeter said:


> You don't know the difference between and hearing and a trial????  LOLOL  Idiot.



You're enjoying the Reality Show for Idiots, aren't you?

LOL


----------



## iamwhatiseem

Just what I thought... the BOMBSHELL was Trump yelled and got angry and said some stuff.

  Geraldo Rivera again


----------



## Blaine Sweeter

2aguy said:


> Cross examined?  This is about making up something, anything, that will allow a democrat party prosecutor to make up a phony baloney criminal charge to go through the 2024 election cycle…..
> 
> Cross examined?   Please…….



I think Cassidy put the nail in the coffin today.  All of these people testifying are......REPUBLICANS.  So because you still want to believe the Big Lie, they are all RINOs now.  You Trump assholes are just that.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

jknowgood said:


> Hopefully when we get the house back. We can stop it and review everyone that are committing perjury and lock them up. The democrats are proving what crooks they are.





jknowgood said:


> The democrats are proving what crooks they are.


By having Republicans testify?
Many of whom worked within the Trump Admin?


----------



## Lastamender

Hutch Starskey said:


> By having Republicans testify?
> Many of whom worked within the Trump Admin?


RINOs testifying means 0. How terrified of this man and the American people are they?


----------



## Billy_Bob

iamwhatiseem said:


> Just what I thought... the BOMBSHELL was Trump yelled and got angry and said some stuff.
> 
> Geraldo Rivera again





DUD:  A piece of ordinance that fails to explode (operate correctly)


----------



## Crick

jknowgood said:


> Hopefully when we get the house back. We can stop it and review everyone that are committing perjury and lock them up. The democrats are proving what crooks they are.


Assuming the courts are still working, that is going to require proving beyond a reasonable doubt that these people WERE knowingly committing perjury.  If you really think that can be done, more power to you.


----------



## jknowgood

Hutch Starskey said:


> By having Republicans testify?
> Many of whom worked within the Trump Admin?


Lol, most that are testifying are Trump haters.


----------



## Crick

Billy_Bob said:


> View attachment 663424
> DUD:  A piece of ordinance that fails to explode (operate correctly)


If you think the young lady's testimony today was a dud, you weren't listening very well.  I realize that may be the best you can do, but it's not really good enough to produce an informed opinion.


----------



## Crick

jknowgood said:


> Lol, most that are testifying are Trump haters.


Bullshit.  Most that are testifying were loyal to Trump, broke rules for Trump and worked for him up to the very end.  Asshole.


----------



## jknowgood

Crick said:


> Assuming the courts are still working, that is going to require proving beyond a reasonable doubt that these people WERE knowingly committing perjury.  If you really think that can be done, more power to you.


Everything the president said is on record. When a witness states Trump said this and the time he said it. Can be looked at. So I hope they keep lying their asses off.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

Lastamender said:


> RINOs testifying means 0. How terrified of this man and the American people are they?


You’re pathological. 
There is no RINO party. They’re Republicans who worked for Trump.


----------



## jknowgood

Crick said:


> Bullshit.  Most that are testifying were loyal to Trump, broke rules for Trump and worked for him up to the very end.  Asshole.


I'm sure the ones that were loyal are being black mailed by our corrupt fbi and doj.


----------



## rightwinger

irosie91 said:


> I am a registered democrat but voted for Trump.  I am highly suspicious
> of the JAN 6 testimony-----BOTH SIDES SEEM LIKE LIARS TO ME



Do you wear a tin foil hat when you vote?

It will keep your vote safe


----------



## g5000

Billy_Bob said:


> Follow the logic...  Trump is in the back seat of a limo; his wife is with them, and he is going to jump up (ridicules assertion given his height and body size) and try and push the limo driver out of the seat and grab the wheel through the limo window sectioning off the president from his drivers.  All while risking his wife's life due to reckless behavior of grabbing the wheel...
> 
> Sorry but the shear unbelievability of this and the mechanics of this say it is a pure fabrication.


Robert Engel has already testified to the committee.  He is a first person witness.  He is the one Trump allegedly attacked.

The committee can also interview Tony Ornato to corroborate Hutchinson's testimony.

She'd be pretty stupid to make up such a story.


----------



## jknowgood

Hutch Starskey said:


> You’re pathological.
> There is no RINO party. They’re Republicans who worked for Trump.


Yes Chaney also supported Trump at one time.


----------



## Meister

Blaine Sweeter said:


> You don't know the difference between and hearing and a trial????  LOLOL  Idiot.


So all of this is just   a poorly spun yarn by the desperate democrats?
Sounds like it.  Thanks for setting me straight, Tiger


----------



## Hutch Starskey

jknowgood said:


> Everything the president said is on record. When a witness states Trump said this and the time he said it. Can be looked at. So I hope they keep lying their asses off.


LOL
WTF?


----------



## rightwinger

basquebromance said:


>



Does Trump ever come up with a new response to those who side against him?

I really don’t know that person
He/she is a loser
RINO
Low ratings


----------



## Hutch Starskey

jknowgood said:


> Yes Chaney also supported Trump at one time.


Uh huh. I wonder what changed.


----------



## Billy_Bob

Crick said:


> If you think the young lady's testimony today was a dud, you weren't listening very well.  I realize that may be the best you can do, but it's not really good enough to produce an informed opinion.


1. Story Believability.   Score was 0
2. Cooberating evidence.  Score was 0
3. Other fact witnesses.  Score was 0

This was a major DUD.

Trump being a large person could not have fit through window on the separation wall nor could he "jumped up" as she asserted.  This story is pure fabrication.

Where is the Secret Service log for the day which would have logged this behavior.?

Where are the Secret Service agents assigned that day and why were they not testifying?

There was no cooberating evidence that should be easily obtained.

This was pure fantasy and a lie.  The witnesses was fidgety, did not track her story well, needed breaks in the story.

You people have never had to do investigations, so I do not blame you for missing the signs of a liar.


----------



## Faun

jknowgood said:


> Lol, okay if Trump was told that some people were armed. Why didn't they stop them? Did they let them go to frame Trump for later? We won't know because there is no questioning what is stated. A kangaroo hearing if I ever seen one. Hopefully you will get treated the same. A bunch of Nazis.



You would know it was proven in the hearing that some were armed had you watched it.


----------



## Lastamender

Hutch Starskey said:


> You’re pathological.
> There is no RINO party. They’re Republicans who worked for Trump.


Bullshit. RINOs worked for Trump at all times. Trump could not weed them out in just 4 years. He will do better the third time he is elected.


----------



## Nostra

BlindBoo said:


> She is 55 years old.


25.  Have you ever not lied?


----------



## Lastamender

Faun said:


> You would know it was proven in the hearing that some were armed had you watched it.


They proved nothing. And who did they murder?


----------



## Hutch Starskey

jknowgood said:


> Lol, most that are testifying are Trump haters.


Trump haters work for Trump? 
Huh. Who knew?


----------



## jknowgood

Hutch Starskey said:


> LOL
> WTF?


There are transcripts.


----------



## Faun

Billy_Bob said:


> Follow the logic...  Trump is in the back seat of a limo; his wife is with them, and he is going to jump up (ridicules assertion given his height and body size) and try and push the limo driver out of the seat and grab the wheel through the limo window sectioning off the president from his drivers.  All while risking his wife's life due to reckless behavior of grabbing the wheel...
> 
> Sorry but the shear unbelievability of this and the mechanics of this say it is a pure fabrication.



It's a pity you're too stupid to keep up. I said nothing about the limo incident, which is hearsay. I was talking about Trump knowingly sending an armed mob to the Capitol.


----------



## g5000

Robert Engel, the head of Trump's Secret Service detail who Hutchinson ways was attacked by Trump, was interviewed by the committee earlier this month









						Jan. 6 committee interviews head of Trump's Secret Service detail on day of Capitol attack
					

Given the importance of trust in their relationships with protectees, agents generally feel deep discomfort when fielding investigators’ questions.




					www.politico.com
				




_Engel isn’t the only Secret Service employee to speak with committee investigators. Two people who spoke with POLITICO about Engel’s interview said the panel has interviewed multiple agency personnel, in sessions that have taken hours. Some of those interviewed have been called back in for repeat questioning.

_


----------



## TemplarKormac




----------



## Lastamender

g5000 said:


> Robert Engel, the head of Trump's Secret Service detail who Hutchinson ways was attacked by Trump, was interviewed by the committee earlier this month
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jan. 6 committee interviews head of Trump's Secret Service detail on day of Capitol attack
> 
> 
> Given the importance of trust in their relationships with protectees, agents generally feel deep discomfort when fielding investigators’ questions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.politico.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Engel isn’t the only Secret Service employee to speak with committee investigators. Two people who spoke with POLITICO about Engel’s interview said the panel has interviewed multiple agency personnel, in sessions that have taken hours. Some of those interviewed have been called back in for repeat questioning.
> 
> _


----------



## g5000

jknowgood said:


> I heard all I need to hear. There is only one side telling the story. No one defending Trump's side.


Textbook willful ignorance.


----------



## Faun

jknowgood said:


> That's right it was Schumer and he has yet to apologize. But Biden isn't trying to stop the crazies in your party, because he wants it to happen. Impeach the damn pedophile.
> 
> It's all hearsay because if in the future. If the transcripts are released, they can prove they were all lying. Hopefully Trump does that when he is president again. Shit load of perjury going on.



A pity you didn't watch the hearing and therefore, have zero knowledge of what was proven today.


----------



## TemplarKormac




----------



## jknowgood

g5000 said:


> Textbook willful ignorance.


So that's how we do hearings in the USA now? Hope if you go to court the same happens to you.


----------



## g5000

2aguy said:


> She had to hurry her testimony… she had to step out of the hearing room to check her bank account to make sure the money from the democrats was in her account.


Soooo...you just made up a lie to accuse her of lying?

Why doesn't your head explode from cognitive dissonance?

Oh, that's right.  That would require cognition.


----------



## Faun

jknowgood said:


> I heard all I need to hear. There is only one side telling the story. No one defending Trump's side.



Why won't Trump and his defenders testify then to give their side?


----------



## Rye Catcher

rightwinger said:


> How long before Republicans call it fake news?


Immediately above you.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

jknowgood said:


> There are transcripts.


So a president has a transcriber at his side 24/7?


----------



## bodecea

Bootney Lee Farnsworth said:


> With the economy deliberately falling over a damn cliff, does anyone give a single rat fuck about this bullshit show trial.
> 
> The house is on fire and instead of putting it out or getting everyone to safety, you assholes are trying prove little Timmy stole a cookie from the jar.
> 
> The internal polling must be *devastating* for the Dems to double down so fucking hard.


Nervous?


----------



## Billy_Bob

Faun said:


> It's a pity you're too stupid to keep up. I said nothing about the limo incident, which is hearsay. I was talking about Trump knowingly sending an armed mob to the Capitol.


There was no evidence of that presented. A lot of hearsay was presented *without* cooberating evidence.


----------



## jknowgood

Faun said:


> A pity you didn't watch the hearing and therefore, have zero knowledge of what was proven today.


I don't need to watch it. I've seen you loons act like idiots for six years over your hatred for one man. All I need to know about this trial.


----------



## g5000

Lastamender said:


> That link is garbage. Fact checkers have been exposed as opinion checkers and nothing more that that. Try something with actual substance.


BWA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA!

You provide a claim which has NOTHING to back it up, and now you claim the guy who made that claim is lying when he says none of the cases had anything to do with voter fraud?

Really?

Why does your head not explode from cognitive dissonance?

Oh, that's right.  That would require cognition.


----------



## jknowgood

Faun said:


> Why won't Trump and his defenders testify then to give their side?


Pelosi will not allow it.


----------



## Faun

Billy_Bob said:


> Right to baseless claims from the far left...  no surprise..



LOL

Baseless claims?? He paid her a lot of money during the run up to an election just to not talk about it publicly. Nobody does that over a false claim.


----------



## Nostra

Why did her testimony change from the first time around?

Was she lying then, or is she lying now?  Either way, she should be facing perjury charges.


----------



## Lastamender

g5000 said:


> BWA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA!
> 
> You provide a claim which has NOTHING to back it up, and now you claim the guy who made that claim is lying when he says none of the cases had anything to do with voter fraud?
> 
> Really?
> 
> Why does your head not explode from cognitive dissonance?
> 
> Oh, that's right.  That would require cognition.


Fact checkers are garbage posted by garbage,


----------



## Faun

2aguy said:


> She had to hurry her testimony… she had to step out of the hearing room to check her bank account to make sure the money from the democrats was in her account.


----------



## Nostra

marvin martian said:


> Was today's episode of your Reality Show for Idiots the "bombshell"??? An anecdote from a person who may or may not have ridden in a car with Trump?
> 
> LOL, they bamboozled you again, mac. _Again_! When will you ever learn...?


She wasn't in the Beast.  She claims she heard something from a Secret Service agent.  I'm sure SS agents always tell some low level staffer all kinds of stuff that happens in the Beast, right?


----------



## rightwinger

jknowgood said:


> Pelosi will not allow it.



Trump and all his too Staff were invited to testify under oath. 
They either claimed executive privilege or took the fifth


----------



## jknowgood

Hutch Starskey said:


> So a president has a transcriber at his side 24/7?


Not in the resident, but I'm sure when he is out and about.


----------



## Billy_Bob

I am going to leave you left tard clowns to believe what you want...  You got nothin,,, Again,,,


----------



## Hutch Starskey

jknowgood said:


> So that's how we do hearings in the USA now? Hope if you go to court the same happens to you.


It isn’t a court hearing, dope. 
It’s a public hearing.


----------



## g5000

WEATHER53 said:


> So she says she heard Trump say he knew people  were armed during a car ride
> The people who did not hear that are prohibited from testifying
> Kangaroo hoax farce


Trump was told before he began his speech that there were armed people arriving for his speech.  The committee then played the Capitol Police transmissions stating they were finding all manner of arms on the attendees.

Trump then asked for the magnetometers which scanned for weapons and which kept the armed attendees from getting too close be disabled.  He stated they were not there to hurt him.

Meaning he knew those people were armed for the march on the Capitol.

And no one has been prohibited from testifying, dipshit.  Though some Trump lickspittles have REFUSED to tesify.

All caught up now, idiot?


----------



## jknowgood

rightwinger said:


> Trump and all his too Staff were invited to testify under oath.
> They either claimed executive privilege or took the fifth


I doubt that.


----------



## Chillicothe

Whew!  This has become a big unwieldy thread......600+ posts... ....but who can deny that the topic ain't important.

I've got some quotes I'll respond to below, but first, I have to say today's witness, Hutchinson, was credible and compelling. She was an 'insider'....hell, her office was on the hallway leading to the Oval Office and closer to the Oval than Mark Meadow's own office.  She was right there, on the premises, and in the company of these men and others who were close to them.  She is an on-site eyewitness who was there.  And she built on that with credible and detailed accounts of events.
I wish her well. Her 'career' as a Republican administrator and operative is likely now destroyed. And, given what we've been hearing about threats to the lives and families of other witnesses, well, she was courageous to put herself at such risk.    Americans can admire her.

-----------------------------------------



Meister said:


> _Get out all the facts, period. That's not what's happening with this circus._


 I would suggest "all of the facts"......for anything, be it a large rambling event of this nature, with the size of the cast of players, the time frame and geographical reach.......well, not all will ever be known.  But importantly, the important facts can be. And enough of them for interested, responsible people to make valid determinations.....be they us common citizens, or legal authorities.
And it is to that end that intense investigations such as this one help all of us loyal Americans.

=======================================================


Clipper said:


> _This witness is blowing Trump & Meadows right out of the water._


Yes, this young woman was in a position to know about what she is relaying; and she offered us all enough detailed factoids to burnish her credibility and lend credence to her accounts.   And yes, Trump and Meadows did not come out the other end of her testimony as appearing to be admirable men.
======================================================


Mac1958 said:


> _I hope this woman has serious security.   Her life is changed forever._


I agree on both accounts. May she and her family be safe from the more nutsocrazo Trump supporters.

=======================================================


Peach45 said:


> _I despise Trump. However I hate seeing my government waste time. So I ask….how in the fuck did the above stuff, which if true is quite incredible, NOT LEAK in 18 months despite all the witnesses around when it happened? EVERYTHING leaks especially crazy shit._





Peach45 said:


> _So Trump wanted to go to the Capitol, they surprised him inside the vehicle and said no; So he physically tries to takeover the car, had to be physically stopped, then he tried to choke an agent…..and that stayed secret for 18 months._


I don't 'know', of course, but I can speculate.  First, why didn't it leak? Well, notably nearly every single witness has been a Republican.....with careers, jobs, livelihoods, families.  And by going to the press, going to law enforcement over, say, your disgust over your boss's actions is not without risk.

And then, vis-a-vis the Secret Service & Trump.  As I understand it the relationship between any SS detail and the official they regularly assigned to protect with their life is a unique and intense one.  An SS officer who 'leaked' that wrestling match...either as a participant or an observer would very very likely be re-assigned, at minimum.  Or find himself on the street looking for another line of work.

==================================================


irosie91 said:


> _-BOTH SIDES SEEM LIKE LIARS TO ME_


Honest, Rosie......you really truly believe this young Hutchinson woman was lying today?  That he female Capitol officer who was savaged by the mob was lying about her experience?

If you do, fine. You be you. However, I do not. Both of them....and other witnesses ....have come across in my viewing as truthful. As responsible, caring, and credible.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

jknowgood said:


> Not in the resident, but I'm sure when he is out and about.


WOW!


----------



## Stormy Daniels

Let's be honest, Hutchinson has a million reasons in the world to publicly lie. That's what these political staffers do to build careers in their party. They go and through it all away in their mid 20s.


----------



## WEATHER53

Libs have conjured up a charge of-
Insurrection upon limo driver.  
Bombshell


----------



## Faun

WEATHER53 said:


> So she says she heard Trump say he knew people  were armed during a car ride
> The people who did not hear that are prohibited from testifying
> Kangaroo hoax farce



Retard, I'm talking about when she was standing near Trump as he was informed there were armed people in that crowd. That's not hearsay. That is her testifying to what she heard directly.


----------



## Nostra

The BOMBSHELL is a bigger dud than that IRS tax return B0MBSHELL that Madcow Dude had.


----------



## g5000

jknowgood said:


> I'm sure the ones that were loyal are being black mailed by our corrupt fbi and doj.


Of course you are.


----------



## Rye Catcher

Meister said:


> It really would be  nice if all this "evidence" could be cross examined.
> But, we know that will never happen.


It will happen but not by the Select Committee nor Grand Juries; both are investigative.  

When indictments are issued, and a jury becomes the trier of facts, during the trial you will get what you want.  In fact, more:

Direct Examination
Cross Examination
Redirect
Recross.


----------



## Meister

Chillicothe said:


> Whew!  This has become a big unwieldy thread......600+ posts... ....but who can deny that the topic ain't important.
> 
> I've got some quotes I'll respond to below, but first, I have to say today's witness, Hutchinson, was credible and compelling. She was an 'insider'....hell, her office was on the hallway leading to the Oval Office and closer to the Oval than Mark Meadow's own office.  She was right there, on the premises, and in the company of these men and others who were close to them.  She is an on-site eyewitness who was there.  And she built on that with credible and detailed accounts of events.
> I wish her well. Her 'career' as a Republican administrator and operative is likely now destroyed. And, given what we've been hearing about threats to the lives and families of other witnesses, well, she was courageous to put herself at such risk.    Americans can admire her.
> 
> -----------------------------------------
> 
> 
> I would suggest "all of the facts"......for anything, be it a large rambling event of this nature, with the size of the cast of players, the time frame and geographical reach.......well, not all will ever be known.  But importantly, the important facts can be. And enough of them for interested, responsible people to make valid determinations.....be they us common citizens, or legal authorities.
> And it is to that end that intense investigations such as this one help all of us loyal Americans.
> 
> =======================================================
> 
> Yes, this young woman was in a position to know about what she is relaying; and she offered us all enough detailed factoids to burnish her credibility and lend credence to her accounts.   And yes, Trump and Meadows did not come out the other end of her testimony as appearing to be admirable men.
> ======================================================
> 
> I agree on both accounts. May she and her family be safe from the more nutsocrazo Trump supporters.
> 
> =======================================================
> 
> 
> I don't 'know', of course, but I can speculate.  First, why didn't it leak? Well, notably nearly every single witness has been a Republican.....with careers, jobs, livelihoods, families.  And by going to the press, going to law enforcement over, say, your disgust over your boss's actions is not without risk.
> 
> And then, vis-a-vis the Secret Service & Trump.  As I understand it the relationship between any SS detail and the official they regularly assigned to protect with their life is a unique and intense one.  An SS officer who 'leaked' that wrestling match...either as a participant or an observer would very very likely be re-assigned, at minimum.  Or find himself on the street looking for another line of work.
> 
> ==================================================
> 
> Honest, Rosie......you really truly believe this young Hutchinson woman was lying today?  That he female Capitol officer who was savaged by the mob was lying about her experience?
> 
> If you do, fine. You be you. However, I do not. Both of them....and other witnesses ....have come across in my viewing as truthful. As responsible, caring, and credible.


If you want the facts, they should have called Pelosi as a witness, and the sergeant at arms....oh wait, he died mysteriously.


----------



## jknowgood

Hutch Starskey said:


> WOW!


My bad they stopped recording them in the 70's.


----------



## g5000

Billy_Bob said:


> Where are the Secret Service agents assigned that day and why were they not testifying?


They have testified earlier this month.  The head of the Secret Service detail that Trump physically attacked has already testified.

Think about that.


----------



## marvin martian

TemplarKormac said:


>



Oh, the "bombshell" gets defused after mere hours!

LOL


----------



## Stormy Daniels

Meister said:


> If you want the facts, they should have called Pelosi as a witness, and the sergeant of arms....oh wait, he died mysteriously.


----------



## Faun

iamwhatiseem said:


> Just what I thought... the BOMBSHELL was Trump yelled and got angry and said some stuff.
> 
> Geraldo Rivera again



LOL

No, the bombshell was learning there were armed people in that crowd ... that Trump knew there were armed people in that crowd ... that Trump wanted them let into the Ellipse without having their weapons confiscated because he knew they weren't coming after him ... and that he then summoned them to the Capitol.


----------



## WEATHER53

g5000 said:


> Trump was told before he began his speech that there were armed people arriving for his speech.  The committee then played the Capitol Police transmissions stating they were finding all manner of arms on the attendees.
> 
> Trump then asked for the magnetometers which scanned for weapons and which kept the armed attendees from getting too close be disabled.  He stated they were not there to hurt him.
> 
> Meaning he knew those people were armed for the march on the Capitol.
> 
> And no one has been prohibited from testifying, dipshit.  Though some Trump lickspittles have REFUSED to tesify.
> 
> All caught up now, idiot?


This goes on the tangent of what people had on them who attended his speech
Otherwise it’s got nothing to do with bombshells nor insurrection (neither of which has happened)


----------



## g5000

TemplarKormac said:


>











						All About Donald Trump’s ‘The Beast’ - US Presidents Official Car
					

Donald Trump, President of the United States of America, is visiting India for an official tour. Take a look at the vehicle that will be his conveyance here.




					indianauto.com
				




_However, what’s of our real interest here is that Trump is being driven around in his bespoke *SUV*, nicknamed ‘The Beast’._

Dumbshit.

There are several presidential vehicles.

And the SUV would make it that much easier for Trump to try to grab the wheel.


----------



## Meister

Stormy Daniels said:


>


Go back to the poster to whom I was responding to.  My post was on topic with responding to him.


----------



## rightwinger

jknowgood said:


> I doubt that.


It is the truth 
Team Trump refused to testify


----------



## Billy_Bob

Faun said:


> LOL
> 
> Baseless claims?? He paid her a lot of money during the run up to an election just to not talk about it publicly. Nobody does that over a false claim.


Baseless....   Let me know when this reaches a court of law..  Until then, this is bull shit claims that are unsupported by cooberating evidence.


----------



## g5000

jknowgood said:


> So that's how we do hearings in the USA now? Hope if you go to court the same happens to you.


The Republicans and Trump had their chance to put loyal Trump lickspittles on the committee.  They chose not to.

And now they have the audacity to whine about no loyalists being on the committee!

Only the dumbest of tards like yourself is drinking their piss.


----------



## Nostra

TemplarKormac said:


>


It seems this woman perjured herself today.


----------



## rightwinger

Great day for Gov Ron DeSantis

Watching Trump’s chances for 2024 disintegrate


----------



## Faun

Billy_Bob said:


> There was no evidence of that presented. A lot of hearsay was presented *without* cooberating evidence.



This only means you were either not watching the hearing or you lacked the ability to comprehend it. They literally replayed audio of police communication from Capitol Grounds proving weapons were spotted.


----------



## g5000

Faun said:


> Why won't Trump and his defenders testify then to give their side?


They are worried they will be charged for their crimes.

Several Republicans in Congress asked for pardons from Trump.  Now why would they do that unless they had broken the law?

Hmmmmm...


----------



## Chillicothe

Faun said:


> _Now we know, a) members of that mob were armed; and b) Trump knew members of that mob were armed; and c) Trump summoned them to the Capitol._



Hutchinson also demolished the oft-used assertion that it was just a 'spontaneous' march to the Capitol, that it was an unplanned attack, a 'protest that got outta hand', yadda, yadda, yadda.

Hutchinson told us it was none of those things.
Meadows, Trump, Giuliani, et al, were well aware at least days in advance that there was an intention, and there were firearms, that Oathkeepers and Proud Boys were in the mix to some end.

As such, we can only hope and pray that credible testimony emerges that makes the link between Trump's inner circle.....and some one within those violent organizations who played such a leading role in effecting the actual breach of the building.


----------



## Mac1958

g5000 said:


> The Republicans and Trump had their chance to put loyal Trump lickspittles on the committee.  They chose not to.
> 
> And now they have the audacity to whine about no loyalists being on the committee!
> 
> Only the dumbest of tards like yourself is drinking their piss.


The dismissals would make a wee bit more sense if there weren't a parade of Republicans and Trump appointees talking up there.

And still, it's all fake news.  All the witnesses are lying.  These folks don't believe a word.  And I believe them.  They're serious.  That's the nature of a cult.


----------



## Chillicothe

Also.....Hutchinson revealed that Meadows and Giuliani requested pre-emptive pardons.

A tell?


----------



## Billy_Bob

Rye Catcher said:


> It will happen but not by the Select Committee nor Grand Juries; both are investigative.
> 
> When indictments are issued, and a jury becomes the trier of facts, during the trial you will get what you want.  In fact, more:
> 
> Direct Examination
> Cross Examination
> Redirect
> Recross.


A "fact-finding" committee is supposed to operate under legal rules of evidence...  This is nothing more than a giant cluster fuck witch trial.


----------



## g5000

Billy_Bob said:


> There was no evidence of that presented. A lot of hearsay was presented *without* cooberating evidence.


How...ironic.

Trump broadcasts a Big Lie to this day, and you whine about a lack of corroborating evidence at the hearing?  Trump has ZERO evidence for his lies.

BWA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA!

There has been a MOUNTAIN of evidence at the hearings.  Maybe you should stop guzzling the piss your propagandists are feeding you and see for yourself.


----------



## Nostra

Faun said:


> LOL
> 
> No, the bombshell was learning there were armed people in that crowd ... that Trump knew there were armed people in that crowd ... that Trump wanted them let into the Ellipse without having their weapons confiscated because he knew they weren't coming after him ... and that he then summoned them to the Capitol.


That was hearsay.  She wasn't in the care with him at the time.


----------



## Faun

g5000 said:


> Trump was told before he began his speech that there were armed people arriving for his speech.  The committee then played the Capitol Police transmissions stating they were finding all manner of arms on the attendees.
> 
> Trump then asked for the magnetometers which scanned for weapons and which kept the armed attendees from getting too close be disabled.  He stated they were not there to hurt him.
> 
> Meaning he knew those people were armed for the march on the Capitol.
> 
> And no one has been prohibited from testifying, dipshit.  Though some Trump lickspittles have REFUSED to tesify.
> 
> All caught up now, idiot?



LOL

Cracks me up that these idiots didn't watch the hearing but now talk about what they didn't see.


----------



## rightwinger

Chillicothe said:


> Hutchinson also demolished the oft-used assertion that it was just a 'spontaneous' march to the Capitol, that it was an unplanned attack, a 'protest that got outta hand', yadda, yadda, yadda.
> 
> Hutchinson told us it was none of those things.
> Meadows, Trump, Giuliani, et al, were well aware at least days in advance that there was an intention, and there were firearms, that Oathkeepers and Proud Boys were in the mix to some end.
> 
> As such, we can only hope and pray that credible testimony emerges that makes the link between Trump's inner circle.....and some one within those violent organizations who played such a leading role in effecting the actual breach of the building.


She also destroyed the notion that the posters were peaceful and unarmed


----------



## berg80

berg80 said:


> Sounds like, among other crimes, they have Trump on witness tampering charges.


_Trumpworld Tried To Intimidate Jan. 6 Witnesses_​_At the end of today’s hearing, Rep. Cheney shared some messages that witnesses in the investigation have received.
The messages suggest that unnamed people in Trumpworld are trying to block or alter people from testifying. One person remarked that Trump “reads transcripts.”
“[A person] let me know you have your deposition tomorrow,” one message reads. “He wants me to let you know he’s thinking about you. He knows you’re loyal, and you’re going to do the right thing when you go in for your deposition.”_








						Meadows’ Closest Aide Testifies Publicly During Surprise Jan. 6 Hearing
					

The Jan. 6 Select Committee announced a surprise public hearing Monday, and, last night, news broke that today's hearing will feature Cassidy Hutchinson, former aide to White House chief of staff Mark…



					talkingpointsmemo.com


----------



## marvin martian

Hutch Starskey said:


> It isn’t a court hearing, dope.
> It’s a public hearing.



It's a reality show for idiots, and you're in the front row.


----------



## Faun

Nostra said:


> That was hearsay.  She wasn't in the care with him at the time.



She says she was standing near him and heard him.

That's not hearsay, ya moron.


----------



## rightwinger

Nostra said:


> That was hearsay.  She wasn't in the care with him at the time.



She didn’t see Trump throw his lunch against the wall either

But she helped clean up the mess


----------



## Mac1958

rightwinger said:


> She also destroyed the notion that the posters were peaceful and unarmed


So did the recordings of the cops and security.


----------



## Faun

Lastamender said:


> They proved nothing. And who did they murder?


----------



## jknowgood

g5000 said:


> Of course you are.


The fbi and doj are a joke. They are the Democrats bullies.


rightwinger said:


> It is the truth
> Team Trump refused to testify


Bullshit, Pelosi would not allow the Republicans to pick people to testify. Pelosi personally chose Trump haters to represent republicans.


----------



## TemplarKormac




----------



## berg80

Chillicothe said:


> Also.....Hutchinson revealed that Meadows and Giuliani requested pre-emptive pardons.
> 
> A tell?


As Kinzinger said last week, why ask for a pardon if not to escape prosecution for crimes?


----------



## rightwinger

Mac1958 said:


> So did the recordings of the cops and security.



Trump acknowledged the mob was armed but said……They are not a danger to me

Then he sent them to the Capitol


----------



## Faun

TemplarKormac said:


>



You don't knoknow


----------



## Mac1958

rightwinger said:


> Trump acknowledged the mob was armed but said……They are not a danger to me
> 
> Then he sent them to the Capitol


IN THAT ORDER

He knew.


----------



## Faun

Billy_Bob said:


> Baseless....   Let me know when this reaches a court of law..  Until then, this is bull shit claims that are unsupported by cooberating evidence.



LOL

His attorney took the fall for him and went to jail over it.


----------



## Nostra

rightwinger said:


> She didn’t see Trump throw his lunch against the wall either
> 
> But she helped clean up the mess


So she has no idea who made the mess.

Classic hearsay.

Why did her testimony change?  Was she lying then, or is she lying now?  Either way, she perjured herself.


----------



## g5000

jknowgood said:


> I don't need to watch it.


And there it is.  How many times over the years have to told you rubes that you are willfully blind?

See, willful blindness is not a crime when you do it, but it is a prosecutable crime when someone in a position of authority like Trump does it.  And the evidence has shown he willfully ignored every piece of evidence presented to him which debunked his Big Lies.

For example, when trying to strongarm the Republican Georgia election officials in his phone call to them, Trump willfully ignored their evidence which totally debunked his "ballots in suitcases" lies that he and Giuliani were spreading.









						Read the full transcript and listen to Trump's audio call with Georgia secretary of state
					

CNN has obtained the full January 2 audio call between President Donald Trump and Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger. Trump is joined on the call by White House chief of staff Mark Meadows and several lawyers.




					www.cnn.com
				




*Raffensperger:* Mr. President, we'll send you the link from WSB.

*Trump: *I don't care about the link. I don't need it. 

Boom.  Willful blindness.  On record.







						Willful blindness - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



*Willful blindness*_ is a term used in law to describe a situation in which a person seeks to avoid civil or criminal liability for a wrongful act by intentionally keeping themselves unaware of facts that would render them liable or implicated. In United States v. Jewell, the court held that proof of willful ignorance satisfied the requirement of knowledge as to criminal possession and importation of drugs_


----------



## BlindBoo

Nostra said:


> 25.  Have you ever not lied?


Liz Cheney is. Both women have bigger balls than "little" Donnie


----------



## tyroneweaver

Tommy Tainant said:


> Cassidy Hutchinson. She knows everything and has just got a new lawyer.
> 
> She worked for Meadows and was inside on all the insurrection shit.


everything she sez is hearsay


----------



## Zincwarrior

Faun said:


> No, the bombshell was learning there were armed people in that crowd ... that Trump knew there were armed people in that crowd ... that Trump wanted them let into the Ellipse without having their weapons confiscated because he knew they weren't coming after him ... and that he then summoned them to the Capitol.


Also that he wanted to go to the Capital Building and lead them.

I imagine his actual intent was to pressure Pence to try to stop the electoral count or even substitute in his fake ones.


----------



## g5000

Lastamender said:


> That link is garbage. Fact checkers have been exposed as opinion checkers and nothing more that that. Try something with actual substance.


Oh, the irony!

You posted a bald assertion with NO evidence to back it up.


----------



## g5000

Lastamender said:


> *GOP plaintiff prevailed on 14 of the 21 cases decided on the merits*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is the Evidence
> 
> 
> Crowdsourcing evidence for journalists.
> 
> 
> 
> hereistheevidence.com


Prove it.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

marvin martian said:


> It's a reality show for idiots, and you're in the front row.


You want to talk about idiots? How about a president who thows his lunch against the wall because he did not like what the AG said about fraud, says that he does not care that the Jan 6 riotors are armed because "they do not want to hurt me" and who tries to grab controll of the presidential limo because they were not taking him to the capital to join in the mayhem?

Exactly the kind of behavior that you would want and expect from the leader of (what used to be) the free world, who is responsible for national security, and has access to the nuclear codes. Right?

Now that is  aa reality show for idiots!!


----------



## g5000

Rye Catcher said:


> It will happen but not by the Select Committee nor Grand Juries; both are investigative.
> 
> When indictments are issued, and a jury becomes the trier of facts, during the trial you will get what you want.  In fact, more:
> 
> Direct Examination
> Cross Examination
> Redirect
> Recross.


Trump's attorney will throw up a blizzard of bogus motions to stop the truth from getting out.


----------



## TemplarKormac

g5000 said:


> All About Donald Trump’s ‘The Beast’ - US Presidents Official Car
> 
> 
> Donald Trump, President of the United States of America, is visiting India for an official tour. Take a look at the vehicle that will be his conveyance here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> indianauto.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _However, what’s of our real interest here is that Trump is being driven around in his bespoke *SUV*, nicknamed ‘The Beast’._
> 
> Dumbshit.
> 
> There are several presidential vehicles.
> 
> And the SUV would make it that much easier for Trump to try to grab the wheel.



Lol. I can't help it your star witness has credibility issues.


----------



## g5000

Chillicothe said:


> Also.....Hutchinson revealed that Meadows and Giuliani requested pre-emptive pardons.
> 
> A tell?


As did Mo Brooks of Alabama, Matt Gaetz of Florida, Andy Biggs of Arizona, Louie Gohmert of Texas, Scott Perry of Pennsylvania, and Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia.


----------



## g5000

TemplarKormac said:


> Lol. I can't help it your star witness has credibility issues.


It's your propagandist who has issues, dumb fuck.  You fell for a hoax yet again.


----------



## WEATHER53

berg80 said:


> As Kinzinger said last week, why ask for a pardon if not to escape prosecution for crimes?


When the track record is continuous witch hunts you preemptively prohibit yourself from being put in the cauldron.


----------



## g5000

Billy_Bob said:


> A "fact-finding" committee is supposed to operate under legal rules of evidence...  This is nothing more than a giant cluster fuck witch trial.


The committee is following the rules to the letter.

Instead of listening to your lying propagandists, why don't you watch for yourself?

Willfull blindness.

You BEG to be lied to!


----------



## Faun

TemplarKormac said:


> Lol. I can't help it your star witness has credibility issues.



LOL

Thanks. Your opinion is noted and laughed at.


----------



## g5000

Faun said:


> LOL
> 
> Cracks me up that these idiots didn't watch the hearing but now talk about what they didn't see.


Willfully blind monkeys take great pains to avoid anything which will shake them of their delusions.


----------



## rightwinger

Ron DeSantis


----------



## g5000

jknowgood said:


> The fbi and doj are a joke. They are the Democrats bullies.
> 
> Bullshit, Pelosi would not allow the Republicans to pick people to testify. Pelosi personally chose Trump haters to represent republicans.


Pelosi did not choose the witnesses, idiot.

And the witnesses are firsthand witnesses.

My God, your head is so full of bullshit it is amazing you are capable of breathing.


----------



## g5000

rightwinger said:


> Trump acknowledged the mob was armed but said……They are not a danger to me
> 
> Then he sent them to the Capitol


Yep.


----------



## 22lcidw

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> You want to talk about idiots? How about a president who thows his lunch against the wall because he did not like what the AG said about fraud, says that he does not care that the Jan 6 riotors are armed because "they do not want to hurt me" and who tries to grab controll of the presidential limo because they were not taking him to the capital to join in the mayhem?
> 
> Exactly the kind of behavior that you would want and expect from the leader of (what used to be) the free world, who is responsible for national security, and has access to the nuclear codes. Right?
> 
> Now that is  aa reality show for idiots!!


4 years of peace. Of attempting to make peace. To get the foreign friends to pay their fair share. to make the U.S. a stronger and freer sovereign nation. Trump has some Founding Father's backbone in him.


----------



## Faun

g5000 said:


> As did Mo Brooks of Alabama, Matt Gaetz of Florida, Andy Biggs of Arizona, Louie Gohmert of Texas, Scott Perry of Pennsylvania, and Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia.



I'm look forward to Brooks testifying.  Can't wait to learn what prompted him to wear body armor that day.


----------



## BlindBoo

tyroneweaver said:


> everything she sez is hearsay



Except for all the first hand conversations she testified too.

Trump the Traitor's violent eruption in the beast sounded like hearsay.


----------



## TemplarKormac

g5000 said:


> It's your propagandist who has issues, dumb fuck.  You fell for a hoax yet again.


You seem visibly upset for one so extremely confident in his case. 

(no, I'm not talking about the lawsuits)


----------



## g5000

22lcidw said:


> 4 years of peace. Of attempting to make peace. To get the foreign friends to pay their fair share. to make the U.S. a stronger and freer sovereign nation. Trump has some Founding Father's backbone in him.


The Founding Fathers did a very good job of providing barriers to a tyrant like Trump from illegally seizing control.

Thank God for them.


----------



## BlindBoo

22lcidw said:


> 4 years of peace.


^^Groomed^^









						Trump Inherited the Drone War but Ditched Accountability
					

Only a single formal check remains on U.S. killings worldwide.




					foreignpolicy.com
				




On March 10, a U.S. drone fired a missile, turning a passenger vehicle outside Janaale, Somalia, into a heap of burnt and broken metal with fresh corpses inside. Whether the people killed that day were “terrorists” or ordinary Somalis is actively disputed. It is also a reminder that the United States’ targeted killing program persists to this day, another legacy of the forever war that has now lasted for three presidential administrations and shows no signs of stopping in the next one. Under U.S. President Donald Trump, however, an already opaque and murderous set of rules has become even more widely applied, and ever less accountable.


----------



## g5000

TemplarKormac said:


> You seem visibly upset for one so extremely confident in his case.
> 
> (no, I'm not talking about the lawsuits)


You posted a hoax about Trump and an SUV as if it meant Hutchinson lied.

You were busted for being a total rube.

Too bad.  So sad.

Why do you keep going back to gobble more bullshit?  Seriously.


----------



## TemplarKormac

g5000 said:


> Willfully blind monkeys





g5000 said:


> The committee is following the rules to the letter.


Hmm, if I were to guess, you are the blind monkey. People are blind to reality in their own unique ways, and then there's you.


----------



## g5000

For all the willfully blind and cowardly bullshit-gobbling monkeys, it's not too late to watch today's hearing.


----------



## berg80

jknowgood said:


> The fbi and doj are a joke. They are the Democrats bullies.
> 
> Bullshit, Pelosi would not allow the Republicans to pick people to testify. Pelosi personally chose Trump haters to represent republicans.


Hutchinson described Trump insisting that security allow armed protesters to move freely. She added that Meadows did little to try to manage Trump on Jan. 6 and sought a pardon for himself. Her testimony fits seamlessly in to what we already knew. But she added a lot of detail.


----------



## BlindBoo

jknowgood said:


> No, that he will pay. But you're a liberal and you don't hear that coming from one of your own.


Uh-huh. that whirlwind will make him pay.  They released it, so of course it's coming for them.  That's some kind of rule for whirlwinds I heard.

Why don't you don't post the full quote?


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

tyroneweaver said:


> everything she sez is hearsay


Holy shit!! She was there !!


----------



## rightwinger

Jan 6 witness testimony



Trump witness testimony


----------



## TemplarKormac

g5000 said:


> You posted a hoax about Trump and an SUV as if it meant Hutchinson lied.
> 
> You were busted for being a total rube.
> 
> Too bad.  So sad.
> 
> Why do you keep going back to gobble more bullshit?  Seriously.


It's all too easy to string you along with your indignance.  Nobody _in their right minds_ cares about this hearing, regardless of what is true and what's not, namely because the economy is taking front and center for everyone else except those in that building. 

When gas returns to the price it was on Jan 6, 2021, then we'll start giving a damn. Okay?


----------



## Rye Catcher

Meister said:


> If you want the facts, they should have called Pelosi as a witness, and the sergeant of arms....oh wait, he died mysteriously.


What questions would you put to The Speaker?  It would be a first to have her to be speaking to the Select Committee, better to put her under oath at a Grand Jury, and if that to be so, what would be the prosecutors need to call her in this investigation?


----------



## g5000

22lcidw said:


> Trump has some Founding Father's backbone in him.


Trump doesn't even know who the Founding Fathers are.  He thought they seized the airports and had victory at Fort McHenry under the rockets red glare during the Revolution.

I doubt you know a thing about the Founding Fathers, either, or you would not be so profoundly stupid as to make a comparison between them and Trump.


----------



## forkup

tyroneweaver said:


> everything she sez is hearsay


You are right. That would matter in a court. Not so much during a congressional investigation. I also want to point out that if this was an actual trial. People like Meadows wouldn't be able to dodge being called up as a witness. Both alleviating the need for hearsay evidence and putting Meadows under oath himself. 

I've yet to see anyone willing to take the stand under oath and actually deny ANY of the serious charges laid at Trump's feet. I have seen several of the people implicated in the events plead the fifth when put under oath. And I've also heard, (admittedly hearsay, for the reasons outlined) that quite a few people have asked for pardons. 

Who do you think is trying to get away with something in this scenario?


----------



## TemplarKormac

g5000 said:


> The Founding Fathers did a very good job of providing barriers to a tyrant like Trump from illegally seizing control.
> 
> Thank God for them.


You're not prepared for when real tyrants take control, g5, I can tell you that confidently. You don't know what real tyrants are in the first place.


----------



## g5000

_Attorney General Merrick Garland said Monday he is watching the televised hearings of the congressional committee investigating the Jan. 6 riot, as members of the House panel focused on former President Donald Trump's election fraud claims on the second day of testimony.

“I am watching, and I will be watching all the hearings, although I may not be able to watch all of it live,” he said. “*And I can assure you that the Jan. 6 prosecutors are watching all the hearings.”*









						Attorney General Garland says he’s watching all Jan. 6 committee hearings
					

Garland's comments came as the House panel zeroed in on Trump and his lies about a stolen election.




					www.nbcnews.com
				



_


----------



## jknowgood

I 


berg80 said:


> Hutchinson described Trump insisting that security allow armed protesters to move freely. She added that Meadows did little to try to manage Trump on Jan. 6 and sought a pardon for himself. Her testimony fits seamlessly in to what we already knew. But she added a lot of detail.


Heard that, it was hearsay. She wasn't there.


----------



## irosie91

rightwinger said:


> Do you wear a tin foil hat when you vote?
> 
> It will keep your vote safe


   no    I wear riot gear


----------



## TemplarKormac

g5000 said:


> You posted a hoax about Trump and an SUV as if it meant Hutchinson lied.


Does it ever occur to you that I might just be posting things here because I'm more entertained with how posters react than the veracity of the claim? I find it funny you approach this issue with such zeal, but won't even acknowledge that anyone with the ability to cross-examine these witnesses were stricken from the committee almost immediately, Jim Jordan, for example.


----------



## g5000

jknowgood said:


> I
> 
> Heard that, it was hearsay. She wasn't there.


Trump's Secret Service detail has already testified to the committee.

You don't think Liz Cheney would be hauling out his warmup act unless she had some firepower to back it up, now do you?


----------



## berg80

TemplarKormac said:


> When gas returns to the price it was on Jan 6, 2021, then we'll start giving a damn. Okay?


That depends on Putin.


----------



## g5000

TemplarKormac said:


> Does it ever occur to you that I might just be posting things here because I'm more entertained with how posters react than the veracity of the claim? I find it funny you approach this issue with such zeal, but won't even acknowledge that anyone with the ability to cross-examine these witnesses were stricken from the committee almost immediately, Jim Jordan, for example.


No, you have a long history of falling for hoaxes.  Which is de rigueur for Trumptards.


You were busted.

Too bad.  So sad.

Nice try.


----------



## TemplarKormac

Now, if I want to be serious, I'll post something like this. From someone with actual experience as a Secret Service agent. g5000


----------



## berg80

TemplarKormac said:


> Does it ever occur to you that I might just be posting things here because I'm more entertained with how posters react than the veracity of the claim? I find it funny you approach this issue with such zeal, but won't even acknowledge that anyone with the ability to cross-examine these witnesses were stricken from the committee almost immediately, Jim Jordan, for example.


How do you imagine the presence of a Trump sycophant like Jordan could possibly be allowed on the committee since he is a material witness to potential crimes........and may have abetted them himself?


----------



## Faun

TemplarKormac said:


> It's all too easy to string you along with your indignance.  Nobody _in their right minds_ cares about this hearing, regardless of what is true and what's not, namely because the economy is taking front and center for everyone else except those in that building.
> 
> When gas returns to the price it was on Jan 6, 2021, then we'll start giving a damn. Okay?



Well you certainly care or you wouldn't be posting in this thread.


----------



## g5000

TemplarKormac said:


> It's all too easy to string you along with your indignance.  Nobody _in their right minds_ cares about this hearing, regardless of what is true and what's not, namely because the economy is taking front and center for everyone else except those in that building.
> 
> When gas returns to the price it was on Jan 6, 2021, then we'll start giving a damn. Okay?


So your concern about an illegal seizure of power is somehow connected to what you pay for gas?

Are you really this fucking stupid?


----------



## TemplarKormac

g5000 said:


> No, you have a long history of falling for hoaxes. Which is de rigeur for Trumptards.


You have a history of falling for the "all Trump voters think alike" trope the liberals feed you. 

Spare me your lectures on gullibility.


----------



## g5000

"So yeah, he's a dictator, but he got the trains running on time!"


----------



## Faun

g5000 said:


> _Attorney General Merrick Garland said Monday he is watching the televised hearings of the congressional committee investigating the Jan. 6 riot, as members of the House panel focused on former President Donald Trump's election fraud claims on the second day of testimony.
> 
> “I am watching, and I will be watching all the hearings, although I may not be able to watch all of it live,” he said. “*And I can assure you that the Jan. 6 prosecutors are watching all the hearings.”*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Attorney General Garland says he’s watching all Jan. 6 committee hearings
> 
> 
> Garland's comments came as the House panel zeroed in on Trump and his lies about a stolen election.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nbcnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _



They're paying very close attention. Just last week, they confiscated Eastman's phone.


----------



## berg80

Faun said:


> Well you certainly care or you wouldn't be posting in this thread.


I was going to point out the extraordinary number of posts by Trump cultists on this thread for folks who don't care (wink) about the hearings.


----------



## TemplarKormac

berg80 said:


> How do you imagine the presence of a Trump sycophant like Jordan could possibly be allowed since he is a material witness to potential crimes........and may have abetted them himself?



The idea that a committee won't allow anyone to cross-examine the witnesses shows it for the one-sided farce it actually is.  Tell me, how interested are you in hearing both sides of a story? Not very, it seems.


----------



## jknowgood

g5000 said:


> Trump's Secret Service detail has already testified to the committee.
> 
> You don't think Liz Cheney would be hauling out his warmup act unless she had some firepower to back it up, now do you?


There is no one to tell the other side, so she can say what she wants. She voted to impeach Trump, and she represents the Republican side. Lol


----------



## g5000

TemplarKormac said:


> You have a history of falling for the "all Trump voters think alike" trope the liberals feed you.
> 
> Spare me your lectures on gullibility.


You got caught falling for a hoax.

No matter how much you wriggle and lie, you were busted.  Period.

Too bad.  So sad.


----------



## Faun

jknowgood said:


> I
> 
> Heard that, it was hearsay. She wasn't there.



She was standing near Trump, Spunky. She heard him say it. That makes her a first hand witness to that event. Not hearsay.

The desperation has reached a feverish pitch today from the _nobody cares about this_ crowd.


----------



## forkup

TemplarKormac said:


> Does it ever occur to you that I might just be posting things here because I'm more entertained with how posters react than the veracity of the claim? I find it funny you approach this issue with such zeal, but won't even acknowledge that anyone with the ability to cross-examine these witnesses were stricken from the committee almost immediately, Jim Jordan, for example.


There were exactly 2 people stricken. Not all of them. Also, let me point out again that the original proposal shot down by Mccharty was a commission of non-lawmakers nominated by both parties on an equal basis.

So not only was the ability to cross-examine something that MCCHARTY choose to forego, he had the ability to take politics out of it entirely. He refused to do so.


----------



## g5000

jknowgood said:


> There is no one to tell the other side, so she can say what she wants. She voted to impeach Trump, and she represents the Republican side. Lol


The Republicans had their chance to place five Trump loyalists on the committee.  They blew it off in a snit.

So you have to be a very special retard to parrot this bullshit you are parroting.

A very special retard indeed.

They missed their chance to throw an ocean of red herrings, lies, hoaxes, tu quoques, and misdirection.  And now they have the audacity to whine about no "real" Republicans on the committee.  BWA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA!

They get away with this hoax with tards like you because they know you are an idiot.


----------



## TemplarKormac

berg80 said:


> I was going to point out the extraordinary number of posts by Trump cultists on this thread for folks who don't care (wink) about the hearings.


Notice we're here and not watching the hearings. Meaning that posting on this trivial thread outweighs any interest we have in watching the hearings themselves. 

Quite the indictment of the hearings if I do say so myself.


----------



## WEATHER53

Seriel wheel grabber 
Pearl clutch


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

tyroneweaver said:


> everything she sez is hearsay


She was there ! She is testifying to what she saw and heard firsty hand! How stupid are you??!!


----------



## berg80

TemplarKormac said:


> The idea that a committee won't allow anyone to cross-examine the witnesses shows it for the one-sided farce it actually is.  Tell me, how interested are you in hearing both sides of a story? Not very, it seems.


Trump (and other defendants) will have every opportunity to present their defense in court. Until then, if you have material facts that disputes the testimony we've heard thus far please present it.


----------



## iceberg

g5000 said:


> As everyone knows, Trump HATES being a loser.  What the evidence is showing is that Trump hates being a loser so much that he was willing to drag down our entire democracy in order to seize power away from the American people.
> 
> Fortunately, even his most devoted lickspittles would not go that extra distance.
> 
> Trump was impeached, twice, but was saved by the spineless Republicans in the Senate.
> 
> So the American people impeached him and removed him from office.  This came as too great a shock for the lying piece of shit to bear, and he chose to blow up the Constitution.


How any times did the scotus have to overrule Trump? 

Now biden? 

Who's tearing up the constitution again?


----------



## TemplarKormac

forkup said:


> There were exactly 2 people stricken. Not all of them.



At any rate, for anyone actually deigning to watch these hearings in their entirety, how many times have you seen anyone meaningfully cross-examining the statements made by the witnesses?


----------



## Faun

TemplarKormac said:


> The idea that a committee won't allow anyone to cross-examine the witnesses shows it for the one-sided farce it actually is.  Tell me, how interested are you in hearing both sides of a story? Not very, it seems.



You're just another idiot who doesn't know the difference between a trial and a hearing.


----------



## JimH52

shockedcanadian said:


> Charge him with a crime and let him call witnesses and defend himself.  Let's see if MSM covers it 24/7 on their networks.
> 
> Some in America, including your own agencies and politicians just don't seem to get it. * The only way to avoid Trump and his influence is through policies that Americans believe in* and that which work for them.
> 
> We have CNN throwing out a trial balloon to suggest Hillary could be the 2024 Dem nominee.  I thought America fought to leave the monarchy?
> 
> Of all the issues Americans are concerned with, the J6 Hearings wouldn't even crack top 20.  Just having MSM, yet again, try and convince Americans through a one-sided "Hearing" that their day to day reality, border issues, inflation, war and trade deficits don't matter, "because Jan 6th!", doesn't mean Americans believe it.


I would love to see trump under oath.  Wouldn't you?


----------



## g5000

Faun said:


> They're paying very close attention. Just last week, they confiscated Eastman's phone.


The DOJ also raided Jeffrey Clark's house.


----------



## berg80

jknowgood said:


> There is no one to tell the other side, so she can say what she wants. She voted to impeach Trump, and she represents the Republican side. Lol


Any Trumpleton who feels what they did or said was misrepresented by the committee can spend hours on Faux defending themselves if they so choose. Their lawyers likely don't want their clients to go on TV and make matters worse by lying.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

TemplarKormac said:


> Notice we're here and not watching the hearings. Meaning that posting on this trivial thread outweighs any interest we have in watching the hearings themselves.
> 
> Quite the indictment of the hearings if I do say so myself.


Thank you for admitting that you are committed to wilful ignorane and have your head in the sand, ot that other smelly place where the sun don't shine


----------



## g5000

iceberg said:


> How any times did the scotus have to overrule Trump?











						Supreme Court rejects Trump request to block release of records to January 6 committee
					

President Joe Biden had refused to invoke executive privilege, as Donald Trump wanted to prevent White House records from going to the January 6 riot panel.




					www.cnbc.com


----------



## Faun

TemplarKormac said:


> Notice we're here and not watching the hearings. Meaning that posting on this trivial thread outweighs any interest we have in watching the hearings themselves.
> 
> Quite the indictment of the hearings if I do say so myself.



_*Notice we're here and not watching the hearings.*_

LOL

Which means you have no idea what you're talking about.


----------



## Rye Catcher

BlindBoo said:


> Except for all the first hand conversations she testified too.
> 
> Trump the Traitor's violent eruption in the beast sounded like hearsay.


Maybe so, and maybe those who were first hand in the vehicle will testify under oath coming later.  Investigations keep rolling along, and investigations have never been interrupted by a defense attorney.  Of course an attorney might have advised (Flynn) a witness to take the 5th. 

In the matter of a crime, which the Select Committee is investigating, and one so critical (insurrection, treason, possibly conspiracy to murder (hang pence) is more important then the average felony.


----------



## TemplarKormac

berg80 said:


> Trump (and other defendants) will have every opportunity to present their defense in court. Until then, if you have material facts that disputes the testimony we've heard thus far please present it.


When there are two sides to every case, it is important that the halls of our congress reflect that of our courts. Does this look like a fair hearing to you? 

And what makes you think any real charges are coming from this?


----------



## scruffy

Yawn. 

40 pages of the same stupid shit.

Big yawn.

Zzzzzz......


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Meister said:


> If you want the facts, they should have called Pelosi as a witness, and the sergeant of arms....oh wait, he died mysteriously.


But nobody is paying any attention to debunked cult insanity. Sorry.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

TemplarKormac said:


> Does this look like a fair hearing to you?


A parade of Republicans, testifying under oath?

Video and documents as evidence?

Yep. Very fair.


----------



## TemplarKormac

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Thank you for admitting that you are committed to wilful ignorane and have your head in the sand, ot that other smelly place where the sun don't shine


If this is all you have to contend with, your argument is fairly weak.


----------



## JimH52

Pellinore said:


> It establishes that when he said "We will march to the Capitol," that it was definitely his intention to do so, and he forcefully resisted those who tried to keep him from it.


He endangered every congress person's life when he demanded that the magnetometer be removed.  If he says none of this is true, Let him come before the committee under oath.  THAT AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN.  *STICK A FORK IN HIM.  HE IS DONE.*


----------



## Mac1958

JimH52 said:


> I would love to see trump under oath.  Wouldn't you?


MUST-SEE TEEVEE BROTHER


----------



## Nostra

g5000 said:


> Pelosi did not choose the witnesses, idiot.
> 
> And the witnesses are firsthand witnesses.
> 
> My God, your head is so full of bullshit it is amazing you are capable of breathing.


Nope.  She wasn't in the Beast when he supposedly grabbed the wheel, and she wasn't around when he supposedly threw his lunch against the wall.

Not a firsthand witness, Dumbass.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

TemplarKormac said:


> The idea that a committee won't allow anyone to cross-examine the witnesses shows it for the one-sided farce it actually is.  Tell me, how interested are you in hearing both sides of a story? Not very, it seems.


It is not a trial. It is an investigation. The next step is a Federal Grand Jury. And no there  is no cross examination there either. But there will be a trial where there is cross examination and due process is served. Try to learn how things work


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

iceberg said:


> How any times did the scotus have to overrule Trump?
> 
> Now biden?
> 
> Who's tearing up the constitution again?


Hahahaha

Just kind of flinging your poo, now



			https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/07/20/trump-has-worst-record-supreme-court-any-modern-president/


----------



## hadit

Hutch Starskey said:


> I agree. Pelosi always wanted this to be a solemn and serious process. This has been that and the next best thing to a non partisan commission.


Oh, good grief.


----------



## Nostra

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Holy shit!! She was there !!


Nope.  Wasn't in the Beast, nor was she around to see him throw his lunch.

Hearsay, Dumbass.


----------



## TemplarKormac

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> A parade of Republicans, testifying under oath?
> 
> Video and documents as evidence?
> 
> Yep. Very fair.


If they are anything like Liz Cheney, or Republicans like you support, then I would call it a peanut gallery

Videos and documents can be picked over and presented without any context. As was the case when the committee presented Trump's speech encouraging peaceful protest, except without that particular part.

Your deference to authority makes you weak and easily led. You will never admit that authority can be wrong or is acting with ill intent.


----------



## shockedcanadian

JimH52 said:


> I would love to see trump under oath.  Wouldn't you?



Not particularly no, it's irrelevant to todays issues.  As with the other four episodes, this is purely political.

This story has all the hallmarks of the "Russian pee tape" and other B.S we've heard for 5 years.  

The Bush Neo-Cons are angry and they want to instill one of theirs in 2024.  The same people who have been wrong about everything for 30 years and oversaw Americas decline want to squeeze whatever juice is left in the lemon (as if the Paris Accord and their carbon credits weren't enough for them).


----------



## Nostra

g5000 said:


> _Attorney General Merrick Garland said Monday he is watching the televised hearings of the congressional committee investigating the Jan. 6 riot, as members of the House panel focused on former President Donald Trump's election fraud claims on the second day of testimony.
> 
> “I am watching, and I will be watching all the hearings, although I may not be able to watch all of it live,” he said. “*And I can assure you that the Jan. 6 prosecutors are watching all the hearings.”*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Attorney General Garland says he’s watching all Jan. 6 committee hearings
> 
> 
> Garland's comments came as the House panel zeroed in on Trump and his lies about a stolen election.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nbcnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _


Glad to see he is busy watching TV as Dimwinger hoards riot, burn, and make terroristic threats over Roe v Wade.


----------



## WEATHER53

Well in fact Secret Service can order the President and since he disobeyed them then they can fire him. Forever.

That track will get you much further than this insurrection hootenanny.


----------



## Crick

jknowgood said:


> Everything the president said is on record. When a witness states Trump said this and the time he said it. Can be looked at. So I hope they keep lying their asses off.


Everything this president said is most definitely NOT on the record.  He has made certain of that.  Do you have anything in the hearings so far that you believe can be proven false?


----------



## Nostra

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> She was there ! She is testifying to what she saw and heard firsty hand! How stupid are you??!!


Lies.


----------



## Crick

jknowgood said:


> I'm sure the ones that were loyal are being black mailed by our corrupt fbi and doj.


What makes you think they are being blackmailed and what makes you think the FBI and the DOJ are corrupt?


----------



## TemplarKormac

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> It is not a trial. It is an investigation. The next step is a Federal Grand Jury.


Common sense tells you that in a law-based society like ours, especially in places where those laws are made, that both sides should be allowed to ask questions, not one.


----------



## forkup

TemplarKormac said:


> At any rate, for anyone actually deigning to watch these hearings in their entirety, how many times have you seen anyone meaningfully cross-examining the statements made by the witnesses?


At any rate? Meaning let's ignore the fact that it's the Republican House leader who made it impossible to cross-examine? I think that's kind of important.

Second, the committee is approaching the questioning very much like a trial. Meaning lots of open-ended questions. They provide documentation, footage, and most importantly those being questioned are one or two exceptions not withstanding, Republicans answering questions under oath.

There is absolutely nothing stopping Trump or his cronies from testifying before the committee and telling their side of the story. The fact that they very much don't want to, says something all by itself.


----------



## WEATHER53

Also lying dumbasses. The Trump  people who you say “refused to participate” in Fact refused to be limited to answering questions only and not be allowed to present their side.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

TemplarKormac said:


> If they are anything like Liz Cheney, or Republicans like you support, then I would call it a peanut gallery


Well they are actually Trump administration appointees and officials.

Did you not know that?

Why are you even commenting, if you don't even have any basic knowledge about any of this?


----------



## Faun

Nostra said:


> Nope.  She wasn't in the Beast when he supposedly grabbed the wheel, and she wasn't around when he supposedly threw his lunch against the wall.
> 
> Not a firsthand witness, Dumbass.



True, but she was near him when she heard him being informed there were armed people in that crowd. And she was near him when she heard him say they should be let into the Ellipse anyway because they were not there to harm him. And we all heard him summon the crowd to the Capitol.


----------



## TemplarKormac

TemplarKormac said:


> Now, if I want to be serious, I'll post something like this. From someone with actual experience as a Secret Service agent. g5000


Only Faun thinks that someone with actual experience in the Secret Service isn't qualified to give opinions on the subject.


----------



## struth

Crick said:


> Everything this president said is most definitely NOT on the record.  He has made certain of that.  Do you have anything in the hearings so far that you believe can be proven false?


how about this…how about you all prove something that we heard in the hearings

i’m really interested in you all proving the bomb shell we learned at this special session today…about how trump jumped into the front seat of the limo and was grabbing at the wheel to go to the capitol


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

WEATHER53 said:


> Also lying dumbasses. The Trump  people who you say “refused to participate” in Fact refused to be limited to answering questions only and not be allowed to present their side.


So you are saying Trump hand picked a bunch of lying dumbasses.


----------



## Meister

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> But nobody is paying any attention to debunked cult insanity. Sorry.


Debunked by the circus?


----------



## Nostra

Faun said:


> True, but she was near him when she heard him being informed there were armed people in that crowd. And she was near him when she heard him say they should be let into the Ellipse anyway because they were not there to harm him. And we all heard him summon the crowd to the Capitol.


So you lied.

Got it.


----------



## forkup

TemplarKormac said:


> Common sense tells you that in a law-based society like ours, especially in places where those laws are made, that both sides should be allowed to ask questions, not one.


A law-based society has different rules in different settings. In a court, both sides aren't just allowed to ask questions, those being accused have all kinds of protections.

In a political setting, however. If one side REFUSES to cooperate, the other side dictates the rules.


----------



## TemplarKormac

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Well they are actually Trump administration appointees and officials.
> 
> Did you not know that?
> 
> Why are you even commenting, if you don't even have any basic knowledge about any of this?


Because, if you had been paying any attention during his term, there were members throughout who were seeking to "resist" him at every turn. 

People leaking from within his own administration come to mind. 

I'm fairly certain these are people within his administration that were picked for their favorability, not their credibility or veracity.


----------



## Stormy Daniels

TemplarKormac said:


> Common sense tells you that in a law-based society like ours, especially in places where those laws are made, that both sides should be allowed to ask questions, not one.



Of course. Because all evidence needs to be supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence that is supported by evidence, so on and so forth.


----------



## TemplarKormac

forkup said:


> In a court, both sides aren't just allowed to ask questions, those being accused have all kinds of protections.



Funny, I recall there being a phase in court proceedings where the lawyers of each party are allowed to question the witnesses. And since there are two parties, it's only fair that both parties get to have people with the ability to cross and re-cross the witness.


----------



## Crick

Billy_Bob said:


> 1. Story Believability.   Score was 0
> 2. Cooberating evidence.  Score was 0
> 3. Other fact witnesses.  Score was 0
> 
> This was a major DUD.
> 
> Trump being a large person could not have fit through window on the separation wall nor could he "jumped up" as she asserted.  This story is pure fabrication.
> 
> Where is the Secret Service log for the day which would have logged this behavior.?
> 
> Where are the Secret Service agents assigned that day and why were they not testifying?
> 
> There was no cooberating evidence that should be easily obtained.
> 
> This was pure fantasy and a lie.  The witnesses was fidgety, did not track her story well, needed breaks in the story.
> 
> You people have never had to do investigations, so I do not blame you for missing the signs of a liar.


I missed the first 20 minutes or so but I would be surprised if she said Trump got his hands on the wheel.  I bet she said something along the lines of "he tried to get his hands on the wheel".

Very few of these witnesses have been volunteering information.  They answer questions.  Since no one on the committee knew about this incident in the limo, no one would have asked about it.

You have no idea whether or not there's corroborating evidence.  And this isn't a trial.

What was your rank when you retired from the PD bob?  I have a hard time believing you ever made detective.  And I have exactly as much proof of that as you have refuting Ms Hutchison's testimony.


----------



## Faun

TemplarKormac said:


> Only Faun thinks that someone with actual experience in the Secret Service isn't qualified to give opinions on the subject.



LOL

Funny since I never said that.


----------



## Crick

TemplarKormac said:


> Funny, I recall there being a phase in court proceedings where the lawyers of each party are allowed to question the witnesses.


This isn't a trial and it's not taking place in court.


----------



## Faun

Nostra said:


> So you lied.
> 
> Got it.



Oh? What lie did I tell?


----------



## Rye Catcher

TemplarKormac said:


> Does it ever occur to you that I might just be posting things here because I'm more entertained with how posters react than the veracity of the claim? I find it funny you approach this issue with such zeal, but won't even acknowledge that anyone with the ability to cross-examine these witnesses were stricken from the committee almost immediately, Jim Jordan, for example.


Jim Jordan would have interrupted every witness and whined and whined and whined.


----------



## JimH52

shockedcanadian said:


> Not particularly no, it's irrelevant to todays issues.  As with the other four episodes, this is purely political.
> 
> This story has all the hallmarks of the "Russian pee tape" and other B.S we've heard for 5 years.
> 
> The Bush Neo-Cons are angry and they want to instill one of theirs in 2024.  The same people who have been wrong about everything for 30 years and oversaw Americas decline want to squeeze whatever juice is left in the lemon (as if the Paris Accord and their carbon credits weren't enough for them).


It tells the story of an out of control so called president who tried to get his mob to overturn a fair and legitimate election.  The Former Guy cannot even get near a position of authority again.  Many in his "team" will be indicted?  Will he be one?  Perhaps he will.  Georgia will take the first crack at him, betting money says.


----------



## Faun

Crick said:


> This isn't a trial and it's not taking place in court.



They've been spoon fed otherwise. That's why they don't know that.


----------



## Meister

Rye Catcher said:


> What questions would you put to The Speaker?  It would be a first to have her to be speaking to the Select Committee, better to put her under oath at a Grand Jury, and if that to be so, what would be the prosecutors need to call her in this investigation?


The Sargent at Arms refused the National Guard, Pelosi is/was his boss.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Meister said:


> Debunked by the circus?





Meister said:


> Debunked by the circus?


As if it would matter to the cult if it were debunked by Jesus himself...


----------



## TemplarKormac

forkup said:


> In a political setting, however. If one side REFUSES to cooperate, the other side dictates the rules.


The other side was dictating the rules before any cooperation was requested.


----------



## SeaMajor7

Meister said:


> Debunked by the circus?


Self awareness is lost on the demented avenger subverted zombies.


----------



## Meister

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> As if it would matter to the cult if it were debunked by Jesus himself...


I'll take that as a deflection away from the truth.


----------



## forkup

TemplarKormac said:


> Because, if you had been paying any attention during his term, there were members throughout who were seeking to "resist" him at every turn.
> 
> People leaking from within his own administration come to mind.
> 
> I'm fairly certain these are people within his administration that were picked for their favorability, not their credibility or veracity.


His daughter? Bill Barr? Luttig? Rusty Bowers? Templar, these are not never Trumpers; not by any stretch of the imagination.


----------



## TemplarKormac

Crick said:


> This isn't a trial and it's not taking place in court.


You're missing the point. If there are two parties in congress, both parties deserve equal representation on that committee no? Then why were there people taken off that committee that had legitimate questions to ask the witnesses? Fear.


----------



## rightwinger

Billy_Bob said:


> 1. Story Believability.   Score was 0
> 2. Cooberating evidence.  Score was 0
> 3. Other fact witnesses.  Score was 0
> 
> This was a major DUD.
> 
> Trump being a large person could not have fit through window on the separation wall nor could he "jumped up" as she asserted.  This story is pure fabrication.
> 
> Where is the Secret Service log for the day which would have logged this behavior.?
> 
> Where are the Secret Service agents assigned that day and why were they not testifying?
> 
> There was no cooberating evidence that should be easily obtained.
> 
> This was pure fantasy and a lie.  The witnesses was fidgety, did not track her story well, needed breaks in the story.
> 
> You people have never had to do investigations, so I do not blame you for missing the signs of a liar.


She testified under oath

Let’s see Trump do the same


----------



## shockedcanadian

JimH52 said:


> It tells the story of an out of control so called president who tried to get his mob to overturn a fair and legitimate election.  The Former Guy cannot even get near a position of authority again.  Many in his "team" will be indicted?  Will he be one?  Perhaps he will.  Georgia will take the first crack at him, betting money says.



If this is the worst of his "offenses" against the American people than he is an amateur.  I don't even want to relive 30 years of scandals and conspiracies from multiple politicians from both sides of the aisle.

Trump is a saint compared to them.  A loud and obnoxious one at times, but relatively speaking, a saint.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

TemplarKormac said:


> Because, if you had been paying any attention during his term, there were members throughout who were seeking to "resist" him at every turn.
> 
> People leaking from within his own administration come to mind.
> 
> I'm fairly certain these are people within his administration that were picked for their favorability, not their credibility or veracity.


So you jump from that weak sauce to accusing a bunch of people whose names you dont even know of perjuring themselves with testimony you have never heard.

Because they must all be liars, because Trump doesn't lie.

Wow.

Look at what Trump has done to your mind.


----------



## TemplarKormac

forkup said:


> His daughter? Bill Barr? Luttig? Rusty Bowers? Templar, these are not never Trumpers; not by any stretch of the imagination.



Yeah, and if you go by that, then Trump's niece, Mary would have credibility too, if she were called.  

It is fairly easy to lead someone with a series of questions to a desirable answer. Backgrounds are only part of the story.


----------



## shockedcanadian

TemplarKormac said:


> You're missing the point. If there are two parties in congress, both parties deserve equal representation on that committee no? Then why were there people taken off that committee that had legitimate questions to ask the witnesses? Fear.



It doesn't just destroy their narrative, it exposes their motive.  Only a blind idiot wouldn't at least ask the question "why were these people kicked off of the committee"?


----------



## forkup

TemplarKormac said:


> The other side was dictating the rules before any cooperation was requested.


Nope, the original proposition again, was a commission consisting of half people appointed by Democrats, half by Republicans, and NONE of them actual lawmakers. The moment you can give me a good reason to reject that, I'll consider your wining as made in good faith.


----------



## Meister

TemplarKormac said:


> You're missing the point. If there are two parties in congress, both parties deserve equal representation on that committee no? Then why were there people taken off that committee that had legitimate questions to ask the witnesses? Fear.


Pelosi knows that her bell would have been rung with questions, she's too old to keep
a straight face when lying.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

TemplarKormac said:


> Yeah, and if you go by that, then Trump's niece, Mary would have credibility too, if she were called


Good God this is factinating and sad to watch.

Your litmus test for trustworthiness is fealty to the pathological liar Trump

So bizarre...

Ivanka slurped the big lie, when she wasn't under oath.

Under oath, she didn't.

Think on it.


----------



## forkup

TemplarKormac said:


> Yeah, and if you go by that, then Trump's niece, Mary would have credibility too, if she were called.
> 
> It is fairly easy to lead someone with a series of questions to a desirable answer. Backgrounds are only part of the story.


True, if they pose leading questions but they aren't and NONE of them claim they have been misrepresented. Something you would expect if they were being duped to say stuff that isn't true.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Meister said:


> Pelosi knows that her bell would have been rung with questions, she's too old to keep
> a straight face when lying.



It is so desperate to blame her for your fellow insurrectionist cultists.

Now blame the US military for 9/11, since they didn't shoot the planes down.


----------



## Faun

TemplarKormac said:


> You're missing the point. If there are two parties in congress, both parties deserve equal representation on that committee no? Then why were there people taken off that committee that had legitimate questions to ask the witnesses? Fear.



Then Kevin McCarthy shouldn't have boycotted the committee.


----------



## TemplarKormac

Crick said:


> I missed the first 20 minutes or so but I would be surprised if she said Trump got his hands on the wheel. I bet she said something along the lines of "he tried to get his hands on the wheel".


There is conflicting accounts as to what vehicle he was in when this happened. If it was in an armored SUV, then it's quite possible given the switch the president has to lower the barrier. If it was The Beast, then it would have been physically impossible for him to do.


----------



## TemplarKormac

forkup said:


> True, if they pose leading questions but they aren't and NONE of them claim they have been misrepresented. Something you would expect if they were being duped to say stuff that isn't true.



This whole thing is being tried under a political lens. And you seriously believe that these people aren't leading the witnesses with their questions?


----------



## jknowgood

Faun said:


> She was standing near Trump, Spunky. She heard him say it. That makes her a first hand witness to that event. Not hearsay.
> 
> The desperation has reached a feverish pitch today from the _nobody cares about this_ crowd.


Not what she said about the limo event. I heard her state that another person told her.


----------



## forkup

Meister said:


> The Sargent of Arms refused the National Guard, Pelosi is/was his boss.


You are aware that Pelosi isn't the one making assessments on security arrangements in the Capitol right?


----------



## SeaMajor7

This whole cOmMiTtiE is nothing but a soap opera TV show.

It is also an example of the Soviet tactics the DemocRATS have embraced and utilized.

Show Trial Telenovela


----------



## Zincwarrior

berg80 said:


> Hutchinson described Trump insisting that security allow armed protesters to move freely. She added that Meadows did little to try to manage Trump on Jan. 6 and sought a pardon for himself. Her testimony fits seamlessly in to what we already knew. But she added a lot of detail.


It appears she testified early due to threats and potential witness testimony. Interesting to get corroborating testimony.


----------



## TemplarKormac

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> So you jump from that weak sauce to accusing a bunch of people whose names you dont even know of perjuring themselves with testimony you have never heard.


Egads this is all too easy. Watching all this righteous indignance from those who keep insisting Trump fomented an insurrection when there is absolutely no evidence proving he did any such thing.

Statements can be altered, text message chains can be selectively quoted, videos can be doctored or edited to add or remove context. Anything can be selectively interpreted when you have a goal or agenda in mind. 

Not 'weaksauce' when these things can and do happen in media and politics all the time.


----------



## Faun

jknowgood said:


> Not what she said about the limo event. I heard her state that another person told her.



So? I'm not talking about the limo.

Capiche?


----------



## TemplarKormac

Zincwarrior said:


> It appears she testified early due to threats and potential witness testimony. Interesting to get corroborating testimony.


Are there more witnesses being called by the committee?


----------



## forkup

TemplarKormac said:


> This whole thing is being tried under a political lens. And you seriously believe that these people aren't leading the witnesses with their questions?


Do you seriously believe that Ivanka wouldn't run to Tucker Carlson the moment she was done with her deposition if the Jan 6 committee was misrepresenting what happened? To your question. Of course, they are leading the witnesses somewhere. It's called facts. What happened, who knew what, when. Etc. etc.

Many people have asked you and so will I. Do you have ANY information that would question anything that's being said?


----------



## Zincwarrior

TemplarKormac said:


> Notice we're here and not watching the hearings. Meaning that posting on this trivial thread outweighs any interest we have in watching the hearings themselves.
> 
> Quite the indictment of the hearings if I do say so myself.


That's not a logical statement. It's more a statement of you.


----------



## Zincwarrior

TemplarKormac said:


> Are there more witnesses being called by the committee?


Yes


----------



## WEATHER53

Bumshill


----------



## Care4all

jknowgood said:


> Not what she said about the limo event. I heard her state that another person told her.


Yep...in that case, The TWO people in the car told her, the guy who got choked by Trump told her..what trump did to him, and the driver told her.


----------



## Zincwarrior

JimH52 said:


> He endangered every congress person's life when he demanded that the magnetometer be removed.  If he says none of this is true, Let him come before the committee under oath.  THAT AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN.  *STICK A FORK IN HIM.  HE IS DONE.*


He knew they were armed and sent them to the Capital. He wanted to go too.


----------



## TemplarKormac

Zincwarrior said:


> He knew they were armed and sent them to the Capital. He wanted to go too.


I find it funny they were armed and none of them fired a shot. That's what gets me. So, was it an attempt to overthrow the government or to protect themselves from violent counter-protests?


----------



## skews13

TemplarKormac said:


> Yeah, and if you go by that, then Trump's niece, Mary would have credibility too, if she were called.
> 
> It is fairly easy to lead someone with a series of questions to a desirable answer. Backgrounds are only part of the story.





WEATHER53 said:


> Bumshill



Criminal intent proven beyond a reasonable doubt

Frame of mind

Intent

Corrobborating witness testimony

Actions


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

SeaMajor7 said:


> This whole cOmMiTtiE is nothing but a soap opera TV show


That you haven't watched one second of.


----------



## TemplarKormac

skews13 said:


> Criminal intent proven beyond a reasonable doubt
> 
> Frame of mind
> 
> Intent
> 
> Corrobborating witness testimony
> 
> Actions


Yeah sure. If that were true, then that would have been brought out in the prior hearings. 

Nobody's falling for it, except maybe for the zealots on this thread.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

TemplarKormac said:


> Yeah sure. If that were true, then that would have been brought out in the prior hearings.


It was. It was literally the entire focus of 3 of the prior hearings.

Good God man. You are embarrassing yourself.


----------



## TemplarKormac

rightwinger said:


> She testified under oath
> 
> Let’s see Trump do the same


Trump would never. Given he wouldn't be given a fair hearing with Democrats in control of congress.


----------



## Nostra

Care4all said:


> Yep...in that case, The TWO people in the car told her, the guy who got choked by Trump told her..what trump did to him, and the driver told her.


Hearsay.


----------



## TemplarKormac

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> It was. It was literally the entire focus of 3 of the prior hearings.
> 
> Good God man. You are embarrassing yourself.



Not really. The fact I'm still here means I am far from embarrassed. I am here to watch heads melt, explode, or spontaneously combust over the idea that Trump somehow fomented a full-scale insurrection.


----------



## forkup

TemplarKormac said:


> I find it funny they were armed and none of them fired a shot. That's what gets me. So, was it an attempt to overthrow the government or to protect themselves from violent counter-protests?


Does that really matter? The President of the United States was aware that there were armed supporters listening to his rally. He subsequently told them to go to the Capitol. At best an extremely reckless act. At worst an honest to god attempt to start a shootout outside the capitol. Not only that but even though he was aware that the Capitol police couldn't control the situation he didn't try to lower the temperature he raised it. It took him hours to give a half-hearthed stand down order to his supporters.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

TemplarKormac said:


> Not really.


Yes really. It was even explicitly stated in the opening and closing comments.

But you wouldn't know that, because you know less than nothing about the hearings. You should not even be commenting on them.


----------



## WEATHER53

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> So you are saying Trump hand picked a bunch of lying dumbasses.


No that’s what you deflected to
Trumps people refused to come in and be limited to answering questions Only and be prohibited from asking questions and presenting testimony
That’s not how it works in America and why this is in fact a show “trial”


----------



## TemplarKormac

Zincwarrior said:


> That's not a logical statement. It's more a statement of you.


I disagree, vehemently.


----------



## Zincwarrior

Nostra said:


> Hearsay.


Only in a trial and only until the other witnesses testify.


----------



## TemplarKormac

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> You should not even be commenting on them.


I'll comment on whatever I wish, whenever I wish, you wannabe fascist.


----------



## Faun

Faun said:


> Oh? What lie did I tell?


_<crickets>_

Thanks for tacitly admitting you lied, Nostra.


----------



## Nostra

Zincwarrior said:


> Only in a trial and only until the other witnesses testify.


No stupid, it is hearsay.


----------



## Zincwarrior

forkup said:


> Does that really matter? The President of the United States was aware that there were armed supporters listening to his rally. He subsequently told them to go to the Capitol. At best an extremely reckless act. At worst an honest to god attempt to start a shootout outside the capitol. Not only that but even though he was aware that the Capitol police couldn't control the situation he didn't try to lower the temperature he raised it. It took him hours to give a half-hearthed stand down order to his supporters.


He only gave a stand down order to his people After they failed.


----------



## Nostra

Faun said:


> _<crickets>_
> 
> Thanks for tacitly admitting you lied, Nostra.


No, I didn't lie.  Looking back you jumped into a conversation I was having with the other Dimtard who was lying.  I simply got you two Dimtard liars confused.

But glad to have you admit her testimony is hearsay.


----------



## forkup

TemplarKormac said:


> Not really. The fact I'm still here means I am far from embarrassed. I am here to watch heads melt, explode, or spontaneously combust over the idea that Trump somehow fomented a full-scale insurrection.


You're here to show that you don't have a shred of intellectual honesty, and you find it funny that people still try to convince you. 

I find it funny to watch someone who has no intellectual honesty twisting himself in a pretzel to come up with bizarre justifications.

Guess we both get something out of it.


----------



## Zincwarrior

TemplarKormac said:


> I disagree, vehemently.


Ok 👌


----------



## Zincwarrior

Nostra said:


> No stupid, it is hearsay.


You seem to lack knowledge.


----------



## Faun

Nostra said:


> No, I didn't lie.  Looking back you jumped into a conversation I was having with the other Dimtard who was lying.  I simply got you two Dimtard liars confused.
> 
> But glad to have you admit her testimony is hearsay.



LOL

So your excuse is that you're an idiot, not a liar?


----------



## WEATHER53

skews13 said:


> Criminal intent proven beyond a reasonable doubt
> 
> Frame of mind
> 
> Intent
> 
> Corrobborating witness testimony
> 
> Actions


Let us know when any of the above are offered and proven 
Also, on any given day of 2,000 people there will be those who are armed


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

WEATHER53 said:


> No that’s what you deflected to


Excuse you. You just called his hand-picked staffers and appointees liars. Perjurers, actually. That was you.


----------



## TemplarKormac

forkup said:


> You're here to show that you don't have a shred of intellectual honesty, and you find it funny that people still try to convince you.


Given that the people conducting this hearing have no intellectual honesty of their own, I am not obliged to employ any of my own. Congress as a body politic have no credibility with me whatsoever.

Thanks.


----------



## Nostra

Zincwarrior said:


> You seem to lack knowledge.


Nope.  That would be you.  When someone testifies under oath that someone else told them something, that is the very definition of hearsay.

Sorry you are too stupid to figure that out.


----------



## Nostra

Faun said:


> LOL
> 
> So your excuse is that you're an idiot, not a liar?


Nope.  I said no such thing.  You are lying.


----------



## tyroneweaver

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> She was there ! She is testifying to what she saw and heard firsty hand! How stupid are you??!!


ya the dems when  ever they wanna crucify someone they come up with these balsy ford witnesses


----------



## Faun

Nostra said:


> Nope.  I said no such thing.  You are lying.



Nope, that's what I read you say. You couldn't tell two posters apart. That reveals to me you're an idiot.


----------



## Nostra

Faun said:


> Nope, that's what I read you say. You couldn't tell two posters apart. That reveals to me you're an idiot.


*Nope, that's what I read you say.*

Then you have a reading comprehension problem.


----------



## Zincwarrior

Nostra said:


> Nope.  That would be you.  When someone testifies under oath that someone else told them something, that is the very definition of hearsay.
> 
> Sorry you are too stupid to figure that out.


Hey if that's what you think then you be you!


----------



## Couchpotato

So Im no expert on this but doesnt the President ride in the back of the limo?    Was he diving over the seat to grab the steering wheel?   I would guess there's some sort of divider in there as well isnt there?     I dont ride around in limo's ever but I remember from years ago that it wouldnt be super easy to get into the front of the limo from the back, I cant imagine it's easier in the Presidential Limo.   But lets say he did.   So.


----------



## Faun

Nostra said:


> *Nope, that's what I read you say.*
> 
> Then you have a reading comprehension problem.



LOL

Nope. Two different posters, with two different avatars, with two different names, talking about two different things; and you confessed you couldn't tell us apart. It takes an idiot to make a mistake like that.


----------



## Stormy Daniels

Couchpotato said:


> So Im no expert on this but doesnt the President ride in the back of the limo?    Was he diving over the seat to grab the steering wheel?   I would guess there's some sort of divider in there as well isnt there?     I dont ride around in limo's ever but I remember from years ago that it wouldnt be super easy to get into the front of the limo from the back, I cant imagine it's easier in the Presidential Limo.   But lets say he did.   So.



Where the glass divider would normally be in a typical limo, The Beast has a shotgun case instead.


----------



## Nostra

Zincwarrior said:


> Hey if that's what you think then you be you!


It's not a matter of what I think, it's a matter of fact.

Typical hearsay.


----------



## Faun

Stormy Daniels said:


> Where the glass divider would normally be in a typical limo, The Beast has a shotgun case instead.



I think it's been established Trump wasn't in the Beast.


----------



## Nostra

Faun said:


> LOL
> 
> Nope. Two different posters, with two different avatars, with two different names, talking about two different things; and you confessed you couldn't tell us apart. It takes an idiot to make a mistake like that.


Like I said, you jumped into the middle of our exchange.  Most of you single digit IQ Dimtards are hard to distinguish since you all share half a brain.


----------



## Nostra

Faun said:


> I think it's been established Trump wasn't in the Beast.


So the witness lied when she said "Beast".

More perjury.


----------



## Zincwarrior

SUV


Nostra said:


> It's not a matter of what I think, it's a matter of fact.
> 
> Typical hearsay.


You be you. Did you watch the testimony?


----------



## TemplarKormac

Oh how I will revel in the silence


----------



## Stormy Daniels

Faun said:


> I think it's been established Trump wasn't in the Beast.



WTF are you talking about?


----------



## miketx

citygator said:


> Seems scheduled pretty sudden… apparently the Jan 6 Committee is excited to present something to your open minds. I bet it’s a pretty big bombshell… any takers?
> 
> January 6 committee adds new hearing for Tuesday - CNNPolitics


Lol, it'll be more he said she said bullshit like always. And like always  you gullible fools suck it up and then it just blows away cause it was BS to begin with.


----------



## miketx

TemplarKormac said:


> Oh how I will revel in the silence


Ohhh, a close source....


----------



## TemplarKormac

This is the sound of a thousand self-righteous narratives dropping dead, all at once.


----------



## TemplarKormac

How easily people are led. How easily people will take up any narrative without checking its veracity. 

Your star witness lied to congress. And her testimony is therefore, and forevermore invalid. 

In layman's terms: get bent.


----------



## rightwinger

TemplarKormac said:


> Trump would never. Given he wouldn't be given a fair hearing with Democrats in control of congress.


Trump knows he cannot tell the truth

That is why he won’t testify under oath


----------



## TemplarKormac

miketx said:


> Ohhh, a close source....


Problem? This is coming from an NBC news correspondent. Far be it from them to contradict the narrative, yet here they are, doing just that.


----------



## TemplarKormac

rightwinger said:


> Trump knows he cannot tell the truth
> 
> That is why he won’t testify under oath


People like you with no concept of fairness could ever possibly hope to understand.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

TemplarKormac said:


> How easily people are led.


Yeah, I just saw some goober gobble up an anonymous source on Twitter.


----------



## rightwinger

TemplarKormac said:


> People like you with no concept of fairness could ever possibly hope to understand.


Actually, I have never understood Trump’s reluctance to tell the truth, even on the most trivial matters


----------



## TemplarKormac

Stormy Daniels said:


> Where the glass divider would normally be in a typical limo, The Beast has a shotgun case instead.


Let's try this again, shall we?


----------



## miketx

TemplarKormac said:


> an NBC news correspondent


Same as a liar in my book.


----------



## Faun

Nostra said:


> Like I said, you jumped into the middle of our exchange.  Most of you single digit IQ Dimtards are hard to distinguish since you all share half a brain.



LOL

Aww, it's adorable how you blame others for you being an idiot.


----------



## TemplarKormac

rightwinger said:


> Actually, I have never understood Trump’s reluctance to tell the truth, even on the most trivial matters


You, among all the board members here, are _the least_ authoritative source on "the truth."

So spare me.


----------



## miketx

Faun said:


> LOL
> 
> Aww, it's adorable how you blame others for you being an idiot.


Sez the never ending cryer of fake news.


----------



## TemplarKormac

miketx said:


> Same as a liar in my book.


Suit yourself. But if NBC is contradicting the testimony instead of blindly shilling for it, what does that tell you?


----------



## Couchpotato

Stormy Daniels said:


> Where the glass divider would normally be in a typical limo, The Beast has a shotgun case instead.


So how would he get to the front


Faun said:


> I think it's been established Trump wasn't in the Beast.


What was he riding in?    Wouldn’t he be in the back regardless?


----------



## TemplarKormac

For those of you asking me why I'm not watching this hearing, or never watched the others, this is why. This is EXACTLY why. 

I've seen enough of these dog and pony shows from both sides to know these hearings, and those conducting them, lack any substantive credibility whatsoever.


----------



## Faun

Nostra said:


> So the witness lied when she said "Beast".
> 
> More perjury.



No, just more evidence you're an idiot. As though the forum even needs more evidence. 

A lie is telling something the liar knows to be false.

She testified, _“I looked at Tony, and he said, ‘Did you f—ing hear what happened in the Beast? He proceeded to tell me that when the president got in the Beast, he was under the impression from Mr. Meadows that the off the record movement to the Capitol was still possible or likely to happen and that Bobby had more information.”_

So let's see your proof that Tony *didn't* tell her what happened in the Beast when Trump got in....


----------



## citygator

I just finished the full testimony. OMG. Worse than anyone thought. Trump planned and wanted to storm the castle. 

The right wingers are crying about whether or not Trump can reach a steering wheel instead of addressing the mountain of evidence and whether Trump is trying to intimidate witnesses.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

TemplarKormac said:


> For those of you asking me why I'm not watching this hearing, or never watched the others, this is why. This is EXACTLY why


No it isn't, and you aren't fooling anyone.


----------



## skews13

Nostra said:


> So the witness lied when she said "Beast".
> 
> More perjury.



"Take the fucking mags away"


----------



## TemplarKormac

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> No it isn't, and you aren't fooling anyone.


Ha. You have nothing now.


----------



## Zincwarrior

TemplarKormac said:


> Oh how I will revel in the silence


Cool. My sources tell me Elvis is alive and living in Borneo. 


TemplarKormac said:


> This is the sound of a thousand self-righteous narratives dropping dead, all at once.


Cool. Let's see the testimony or public statement by the people involved.


----------



## Faun

Couchpotato said:


> So how would he get to the front
> 
> What was he riding in?    Wouldn’t he be in the back regardless?



If the story is even true, he was just in an SUV. All he would have to do is reach for the steering wheel. Even if it was a limo, with the divider down, he could still reach for it. Personally, that story sounded sensationalized to me. I hope we get to hear from the two guys who were up front for clarification.


----------



## Weatherman2020

citygator said:


> Seems scheduled pretty sudden… apparently the Jan 6 Committee is excited to present something to your open minds. I bet it’s a pretty big bombshell… any takers?
> 
> January 6 committee adds new hearing for Tuesday - CNNPolitics






Trump, The Eye of Sauron knows all! Even what everyone has inside their cars!!!!


----------



## TemplarKormac

citygator said:


> I just finished the full testimony. OMG. Worse than anyone thought. Trump planned and wanted to storm the castle.
> 
> The right wingers are crying about whether or not Trump can reach a steering wheel instead of addressing the mountain of evidence and whether Trump is trying to intimidate witnesses.


Given that she lied about Trump attacking the occupants of the vehicle he was in, nothing else she said should hold weight anymore, unless your goal isn't to get to the truth, but to get at someone.


----------



## Weatherman2020

TemplarKormac said:


> Given that she lied about Trump attacking the occupants of the vehicle he was in, nothing else she said should hold weight anymore, unless your goal isn't to get to the truth, but to get at someone.


Trump is very athletic. He smashed the RPG proof glass with his fist and tried to grab the wheel. Really.


----------



## Weatherman2020

citygator said:


> I just finished the full testimony. OMG. Worse than anyone thought. Trump planned and wanted to storm the castle.
> 
> The right wingers are crying about whether or not Trump can reach a steering wheel instead of addressing the mountain of evidence and whether Trump is trying to intimidate witnesses.


“My best friend’s sister’s boyfriend’s brother’s girlfriend heard from this guy who knows this kid who’s going with a girl who saw Trump grab the steering wheel. I guess it’s pretty serious.”


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

TemplarKormac said:


> Ha. You have nothing now.


You're just lying through your teeth. To yourself, really


----------



## TemplarKormac

Weatherman2020 said:


> Trump is very athletic. He smashed the RPG proof glass with his fist and tried to grab the wheel. Really.


Speaking of RPG's, that kind of strength would make him a great character on one of mine. 



(I'm a gamer, so 'RPG' has two connotations: "Rocket Propelled Grenade" and "Role-playing game")


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Weatherman2020 said:


> “My best friend’s sister’s boyfriend’s brother’s girlfriend heard from this guy who knows this kid who’s going with a girl who saw Trump grab the steering wheel. I guess it’s pretty serious.”


Nah, the serious part was inciting an insurrection.

And sending forged electors to the National Archives is a serious crime.

Lots of more serious stuff to talk about.


----------



## WEATHER53

TemplarKormac said:


> Oh how I will revel in the silence


Per Mr Alexander’s comments let’s see if the two  people he referenced can avoid random, coincidental bullets


----------



## TemplarKormac

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> You're just lying through your teeth. To yourself, really


Now comes the ad hominem and psychoanalysis. I've watched hearings like these before. I know the behavior of those directing them are essentially the same. Thus I could easily assume this one was hardly any different than the ones before.


----------



## Meister

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> It is so desperate to blame her for your fellow insurrectionist cultists.
> 
> Now blame the US military for 9/11, since they didn't shoot the planes down.


I was firmly against the unlawful riot when it went down.  They were idiots.
9-11?  WTF does that have to do with this?


----------



## Nostra

Faun said:


> No, just more evidence you're an idiot. As though the forum even needs more evidence.
> 
> A lie is telling something the liar knows to be false.
> 
> She testified, _“I looked at Tony, and he said, ‘Did you f—ing hear what happened in the Beast? He proceeded to tell me that when the president got in the Beast, he was under the impression from Mr. Meadows that the off the record movement to the Capitol was still possible or likely to happen and that Bobby had more information.”_
> 
> So let's see your proof that Tony *didn't* tell her what happened in the Beast when Trump got in....


Show us YOUR proof she didn't know what she said was a lie.

See how that works when you are dealing with hearsay?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

TemplarKormac said:


> Now comes the ad hominem and psychoanalysis. I've watched hearings like these before. I know the behavior of those directing them are essentially the same. Thus I could easily assume this one was hardly any different than the ones before.


You have watched nome of these hearings and have no idea what has transpired.

You are shielding yourself from them.

Sad.


----------



## Nostra

Zincwarrior said:


> Cool. My sources tell me Elvis is alive and living in Borneo.
> 
> Cool. Let's see the testimony or public statement by the people involved.


Do you have the same sources this clown today had?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Meister said:


> I was firmly against the unlawful riot when it went down.  They were idiots.
> 9-11?  WTF does that have to do with this?


Gotcha. 

And you blame a public official for not stopping them.

Have you thought that maybe that public official should be Trump?


----------



## Hutch Starskey

TemplarKormac said:


> The other side was dictating the rules before any cooperation was requested.


Per the House Rules. 
Select committees and their members are appointed at the discretion of the Speaker.


----------



## TemplarKormac

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> You are shielding yourself from them.


I am shielding myself from stupidity, nothing more.


----------



## Billy_Bob

I just wasted 30 min looking at the redundant nothing burger that this thread is..   just wow...  hearsay is not evidence.  there was no bombshell.  It was a dud...


----------



## TemplarKormac

Hutch Starskey said:


> Per the House Rules.
> Select committees and their members are appointed at the discretion of the Speaker.


You don't know how damning that statement is, given that Nancy Pelosi is the Speaker.


----------



## Stormy Daniels

Couchpotato said:


> So how would he get to the front
> 
> What was he riding in?    Wouldn’t he be in the back regardless?



Because there's no divider. Is you stupid or something?


----------



## TemplarKormac

Okay, so now there are two reporters from two different outlets are reporting the same thing. There are a lot of you who should be ashamed of yourselves right now for actually taking this testimony seriously.


----------



## TemplarKormac

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Nah, the serious part was inciting an insurrection.


Did he? What part of the hearings should I focus on that will convince me he tried to incite an insurrection?


----------



## TemplarKormac




----------



## Meister

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Gotcha.
> 
> And you blame a public official for not stopping them.
> 
> Have you thought that maybe that public official should be Trump?


Trump offered and the offer was rejected.  Being that Pelosi was the Sergeant at Arm's boss,
I'm sure she was aware of it.  Even after she was warned of the possibility of a riot.
Trump didn't have the authority to order the troops.
The proper questions will never be asked, and Trump won't be brought up on any
charges.  If he did, then the tough questions will be asked, and nobody from your tent
wants them answered.


----------



## Chillicothe

g5000 said:


> AG Garland:
> _“I am watching, and I will be watching all the hearings, although I may not be able to watch all of it live,” he said. “*And I can assure you that the Jan. 6 prosecutors are watching all the hearings.”*_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Attorney General Garland says he’s watching all Jan. 6 committee hearings
> 
> 
> Garland's comments came as the House panel zeroed in on Trump and his lies about a stolen election.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nbcnews.com




The above, by poster *g5000*, bears repeating.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


TemplarKormac said:


> _"....ability to cross-examine these witnesses were stricken from the committee almost immediately,* Jim Jordan,* for example."_


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Now that suggestion of poster *Kormac *is one of the more intriguing ideas presented here. 

 I'm thinking a movie scene.
To wit:  So, we have Jim Jordan on the Committee, and he is a subpoenaed witness to what Trump, Giuiliani, Meadows communicated about the "Vote Fraud", about 'January 6th'.   

Accordingly, he sits on the dias and 'cross-examines' Ms Hutchinson.  Then, he promptly leaves that perch and goes to sit at the witness table and answer questions from the Committee, including 'cross examination' questions.

That scene is ripe for Saturday Night Live.  
I mean Kormac suggest we have our suspects sit on the court bench to judge whether they should even  be suspects.   
What could wrong?

I love bar.


----------



## TemplarKormac

Chillicothe said:


> The above, by poster *g5000*, bears repeating.
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> Now that suggestion of poster *Kormac *is one of the more intriguing ideas presented here.
> 
> I'm thinking a movie scene.
> To wit:  So, we have Jim Jordan on the Committee, and he is a subpoenaed witness to what Trump, Giuiliani, Meadows communicated about the "Vote Fraud", about 'January 6th'.
> 
> Accordingly, he sits on the dias and 'cross-examines' Ms Hutchinson.  Then, he promptly leaves that perch and goes to sit at the witness table and answer questions from the Committee, including 'cross examination' questions.
> 
> That scene is ripe for Saturday Night Live.
> I mean Kormac suggest we have our suspects sit on the court bench to judge whether they should even  be suspects.
> What could wrong?
> 
> I love bar.


You have such a childish view on how fairness works in civilized society. So childish.


----------



## TemplarKormac




----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

TemplarKormac said:


> Did he?


Yep!


----------



## Nostra

TemplarKormac said:


> Okay, so now there are two reporters from two different outlets are reporting the same thing. There are a lot of you who should be ashamed of yourselves right now for actually taking this testimony seriously.


Was this "witness" hand picked by Adumb Schifferbrains?


----------



## Sunsettommy

rightwinger said:


> Trump knows he cannot tell the truth
> 
> That is why he won’t testify under oath



We all know you can't accept the truth of her probable lies since there are news about some people who were actually in the car saying she is LYING her ass off!

Your partisanship makes you GULLIBLE to bullshit.


----------



## citygator

Trump wasn’t in the Beast, he was in an SUV, and this pic shows you can reach the driver from the back seat.


----------



## TemplarKormac

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Yep!


Oh, that's a solid rebuttal if I ever heard one. 

Can it.


----------



## Nostra

TemplarKormac said:


>


BOOM!

THREAD OVER!

Raskin confirms they have nothing but hearsay.  NOTHING.

Today's BOMBSHELL turns out to be just another Dimtard Popcorn Fart.


----------



## Synthaholic

Ketchup is streaming down the walls of Mar-a-Largo tonight! 🤣🤣🤣


----------



## TemplarKormac

citygator said:


> Trump wasn’t in the Beast, he was in an SUV, and this pic shows you can reach the driver from the back seat.
> 
> View attachment 663527


None of that matters when there are people within the USSS willing to testify under oath that she lied about the whole incident.


----------



## Nostra

citygator said:


> Trump wasn’t in the Beast, he was in an SUV, and this pic shows you can reach the driver from the back seat.
> 
> View attachment 663527


That is a pic of the Beast, Moron.


----------



## citygator

Weatherman2020 said:


> View attachment 663503
> 
> Trump, The Eye of Sauron knows all! Even what everyone has inside their cars!!!!
> 
> View attachment 663505


The secret service and police recordings and pictures were shown in testimony today of guns in the crowd. It was confirmed Trump was told.


----------



## citygator

Nostra said:


> That is a pic of the Beast, Moron.


Can you reach the driver from the back seat?


----------



## TemplarKormac

citygator said:


> Can you reach the driver from the back seat?


You're not even paying attention to anything I'm posting are you? ABC and NBC are both reporting that the those mentioned in her testimony regarding that incident are all willing to testify under oath to congress saying that no such incident ever took place.


----------



## TemplarKormac

citygator said:


> Can you reach the driver from the back seat?


Yeah, but that doesn't explain the reaching I'm seeing from you right now.


----------



## Dragonlady

Nostra said:


> Nazi Piglosi's Clown Show shoulda stayed on hiatus until they found a better Hollywood producer.
> 
> What a flop today was.





TemplarKormac said:


> For those of you asking me why I'm not watching this hearing, or never watched the others, this is why. This is EXACTLY why.
> 
> I've seen enough of these dog and pony shows from both sides to know these hearings, and those conducting them, lack any substantive credibility whatsoever.



These Hearings aren't like any other Hearings we've ever seen before.  They intersperse tapes of the original depositions, with the attendance of live witnesses.  All of the witnesses are Republicans who worked for and with Donald Trump and were part of the White House staff.  

Not one of them has said ANYTHING that would let Trump off the hook, and today's testimony was shocking, but having watched it I understand why they held the meeting today.  This young woman has been under tremendous pressure and threats from Trump's associates prior to her testimony.  

This isn't the dog and pony show of everybody getting their 5 minutes to make a little speech and get on the news tonight.  This is actually telling the story of how January 6th happened, who organized it, who planned it, and what happened at the White House during the weeks leading up to January 6th.  

Today we also had General Flynn taking the 5th.  The questions he refused to answer were telling indeed:  Do you believe in the orderly transfer of power?  The Fifth.


----------



## Chillicothe

Stormy Daniels said:


> _"Let's be honest, Hutchinson has a million reasons in the world to publicly lie. That's what these political staffers do to build careers in their party. They go and through it all away in their mid 20s."_



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ummm, I dunno. I  see nuances here.

For example, the first thing that comes to mind would be:  Which of those "million reasons" would be an adequate defense to the perjury charge her under-oath lie could create?

Second, in Hutchinson's case.....it appears none of those 'reasons' would salvage her Republican career.  She's been a dyed-in-the-wool Republican administrator (worked for Scalise, worked for Cruz, worked for Meadows in Trump's White House. None of those positions is open to a Democrat partisan. Betcha).  So, now her Republican career is toast.  NOT a good reason to 'lie'. In my humble opinion.

And lastly, her 'lying' to damage her boss as the poster suggests......ain't exactly a gold-star on her application to any Democrat Congressional staffer position.

So, tho the poster suggest Hutchinson had a million reasons to lie......I, personally, couldn't detect any tells in her testimony that would  benefit her by lying.

But that's just me.


----------



## Nostra

citygator said:


> Can you reach the driver from the back seat?


Why do you want to know?  There have been pics posted of Trump in the SUV that day, not the beast.

You suck at this.


----------



## TemplarKormac

Dragonlady said:


> These Hearings aren't like any other Hearings we've ever seen before.  They intersperse tapes of the original depositions, with the attendance of live witnesses.  All of the witnesses are Republicans who worked for and with Donald Trump and were part of the White House staff.
> 
> Not one of them has said ANYTHING that would let Trump off the hook, and today's testimony was shocking, but having watched it I understand why they held the meeting today.  This young woman has been under tremendous pressure and threats from Trump's associates prior to her testimony.
> 
> This isn't the dog and pony show of everybody getting their 5 minutes to make a little speech and get on the news tonight.  This is actually telling the story of how January 6th happened, who organized it, who planned it, and what happened at the White House during the weeks leading up to January 6th.
> 
> Today we also had General Flynn taking the 5th.  The questions he refused to answer were telling indeed:  Do you believe in the orderly transfer of power?  The Fifth.


Sigh... 

You're like a 5-year-old who repeats what she hears on TV. Oh, I wish I still had that kind of blissful ignorance.


----------



## Sunsettommy

citygator said:


> Trump wasn’t in the Beast, he was in an SUV, and this pic shows you can reach the driver from the back seat.
> 
> View attachment 663527



She wasn't there at all!

Her HEARSAY claims are worthless and inadmissible in court.


----------



## struth

TemplarKormac said:


> This is the sound of a thousand self-righteous narratives dropping dead, all at once.


well this bombshell hearing didn’t age well


----------



## Nostra

Dragonlady said:


> These Hearings aren't like any other Hearings we've ever seen before.  They intersperse tapes of the original depositions, with the attendance of live witnesses.  All of the witnesses are Republicans who worked for and with Donald Trump and were part of the White House staff.
> 
> Not one of them has said ANYTHING that would let Trump off the hook, and today's testimony was shocking, but having watched it I understand why they held the meeting today.  This young woman has been under tremendous pressure and threats from Trump's associates prior to her testimony.
> 
> This isn't the dog and pony show of everybody getting their 5 minutes to make a little speech and get on the news tonight.  This is actually telling the story of how January 6th happened, who organized it, who planned it, and what happened at the White House during the weeks leading up to January 6th.
> 
> Today we also had General Flynn taking the 5th.  The questions he refused to answer were telling indeed:  Do you believe in the orderly transfer of power?  The Fifth.


She has been exposed as a liar.  And why would you be so fucking stupid to think this Nazi Piglosy Clown Show would call anyone who doesn't trash Trump?

Seriously, you are fucking stupid beyond belief.  

Clean up your own shithole country that locks people up and seizes their property for simply disagreeing with your Gestapo Government, Assflap.


----------



## struth

Zincwarrior said:


> Cool. My sources tell me Elvis is alive and living in Borneo.
> 
> Cool. Let's see the testimony or public statement by the people involved.


haha liz won’t call them to testify


----------



## Deplorable Yankee

citygator said:


> Seems scheduled pretty sudden… apparently the Jan 6 Committee is excited to present something to your open minds. I bet it’s a pretty big bombshell… any takers?
> 
> January 6 committee adds new hearing for Tuesday - CNNPolitics








Bombshell!





You people are 3complete fucking spoon fed morons 
Especially indiana


----------



## Sunsettommy

Turley asked the obvious question, why didn't the J6 Committee clear this with the lead SS involved with transportation of Trump.

From Twitter






Jonathan Turley
@JonathanTurley

...It is curious that the Committee would air the account without confirming from the Secret Service, particularly since Bobby Engel appears willing to testify. This is the danger of using witnesses to repeat third party accounts.

LINK


----------



## Dragonlady

TemplarKormac said:


> Sigh...
> 
> You're like a 5-year-old who repeats what she hears on TV. Oh, I wish I still had that kind of blissful ignorance.



At least I'm not repeating the lies of the Republican Party.  I can't believe you believe Republicans after everything they've done to your country, and especially believing in a creep like Trump.

The witnesses who are saying these things are all Republicans who worked hard for the President's re-election.  And NO, ABC don't have people preparing to deny her testimony.  Quite the opposite:









						As Trump rails at Cassidy Hutchinson's Jan. 6 testimony, other aides vouch for her
					

Trump and others in his orbit reacted to former Meadows aide Cassidy Hutchinson' s testimony in front of the House Jan. 6 committee




					abcnews.go.com


----------



## Nostra

Sunsettommy said:


> Turley asked the obvious question, why didn't the J6 Committee clear this with the lead SS involved with transportation of Trump.
> 
> From Twitter
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jonathan Turley
> @JonathanTurley
> 
> ...It is curious that the Committee would air the account without confirming from the Secret Service, particularly since Bobby Engel appears willing to testify. This is the danger of using witnesses to repeat third party accounts.
> 
> LINK


This BOMBSHELL just blew up in Nazi Piglosi's face.


----------



## TemplarKormac

Dragonlady said:


> At least I'm not repeating the lies of the Republican Party. I can't believe you believe Republicans after everything they've done to your country, and especially believing in a creep like Trump.



I don't put much stock in opinions from people who don't actually live here and haven't been a part of the US body politic.


----------



## Sunsettommy

Dragonlady said:


> At least I'm not repeating the lies of the Republican Party.  I can't believe you believe Republicans after everything they've done to your country, and especially believing in a creep like Trump.
> 
> The witnesses who are saying these things are all Republicans who worked hard for the President's re-election.  And NO, ABC don't have people preparing to deny her testimony.  Quite the opposite:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As Trump rails at Cassidy Hutchinson's Jan. 6 testimony, other aides vouch for her
> 
> 
> Trump and others in his orbit reacted to former Meadows aide Cassidy Hutchinson' s testimony in front of the House Jan. 6 committee
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abcnews.go.com



Her "testimony" is HEARSAY you idiot!

It was NOT even a testimony at all,

Merriam-Webster:

"a solemn declaration usually made orally by a *witness* under oath in response to interrogation by a lawyer or authorized public official"

_bolding mine_

===

She wasn't a witness.


----------



## Sandy Shanks

The _Post _reports, "Cassidy Hutchinson, who was an aide to former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, delivered explosive testimony Tuesday to the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection, offering startling details on the activities of President Donald Trump and those around him before the attack on the U.S. Capitol and on the deadly day itself."

Here are some of the biggest revelations:


Meadows and Rudy Giuliani, Trump’s attorney, sought pardons related to their roles in the Jan. 6 assault on the Capitol, Hutchinson testified. She said Trump also expressed interest in pardoning the Capitol rioters.
Hutchinson testified that *Trump was informed that attendees at a Jan. 6 rally near the White House were armed but that he still wanted security removed from the area and the crowd to march to the Capitol.* Trump waved off concerns that the rallygoers had been reported to be armed. “You know, I don’t even care that they have weapons. They’re not here to hurt me,” Hutchinson testified Trump said.
Hutchinson said that as violence increased at the Capitol, she witnessed White House counsel Pat Cipollone telling Meadows: “Mark, something needs to be done or people are going to die. The blood is going to be on your f---ing hands.”
Hutchinson recalled that Meadows told her days before insurrection that “things might get real, real bad” at the Capitol on that day.
If Trump knew his supporters had weapons, if this can be proven, and he encouraged them to march on the Capitol, he is guilty of sedition. We know he tried to join the extremist mob, too. He said so.

*“We’re going to walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women. You have to show strength, and you have to be strong.”

"Now it is up to Congress to confront this egregious assault on our democracy. And after this, we’re going to walk down, and I’ll be there with you. We are going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country.” *

Did the former President lead a coup attempt to overthrow the elected government? Did he commit crimes?

Stay tuned.


----------



## Billy_Bob

Sandy Shanks said:


> The _Post _reports, "Cassidy Hutchinson, who was an aide to former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, delivered explosive testimony Tuesday to the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection, offering startling details on the activities of President Donald Trump and those around him before the attack on the U.S. Capitol and on the deadly day itself."
> 
> Here are some of the biggest revelations:
> 
> 
> Meadows and Rudy Giuliani, Trump’s attorney, sought pardons related to their roles in the Jan. 6 assault on the Capitol, Hutchinson testified. She said Trump also expressed interest in pardoning the Capitol rioters.
> Hutchinson testified that *Trump was informed that attendees at a Jan. 6 rally near the White House were armed but that he still wanted security removed from the area and the crowd to march to the Capitol.* Trump waved off concerns that the rallygoers had been reported to be armed. “You know, I don’t even care that they have weapons. They’re not here to hurt me,” Hutchinson testified Trump said.
> Hutchinson said that as violence increased at the Capitol, she witnessed White House counsel Pat Cipollone telling Meadows: “Mark, something needs to be done or people are going to die. The blood is going to be on your f---ing hands.”
> Hutchinson recalled that Meadows told her days before insurrection that “things might get real, real bad” at the Capitol on that day.
> If Trump knew his supporters had weapons, if this can be proven, and he encouraged them to march on the Capitol, he is guilty of sedition. We know he tried to join the extremist mob, too. He said so.
> 
> *“We’re going to walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women. You have to show strength, and you have to be strong.”
> 
> "Now it is up to Congress to confront this egregious assault on our democracy. And after this, we’re going to walk down, and I’ll be there with you. We are going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country.” *
> 
> Did the former President lead a coup attempt to overthrow the elected government? Did he commit crimes?
> 
> Stay tuned.


Matter of FACT witnesses, people who were present, say she LIED..


----------



## Synthaholic

Nostra said:


> That is a pic of the Beast, Moron.


Trump supporters quickly snapped back online that they’d found an obvious sign she was lying: The presidential limousine, known as “the Beast,” is so heavily fortified that they argued it would be “physically impossible” for Trump to cross from the back cabin to the driver’s seat.

But Trump was not riding in the limousine that day; videos show he actually rode in a Secret Service SUV, where the seats are closer together.

Even if he had ridden in the Beast, the rear and front seats have a glass window the president can lower whenever he’d like — a detail noted even in the same infographic that Trump supporters shared as proof that Hutchinson’s story couldn’t be right.






			https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/06/28/trump-cassidy-hutchinson-jan6-hearing/


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

TemplarKormac said:


> Common sense tells you that in a law-based society like ours, especially in places where those laws are made, that both sides should be allowed to ask questions, not one.


Clearly ypu do not understand how things work


----------



## struth

Synthaholic said:


> Trump supporters quickly snapped back online that they’d found an obvious sign she was lying: The presidential limousine, known as “the Beast,” is so heavily fortified that they argued it would be “physically impossible” for Trump to cross from the back cabin to the driver’s seat.
> 
> But Trump was not riding in the limousine that day; videos show he actually rode in a Secret Service SUV, where the seats are closer together.
> 
> Even if he had ridden in the Beast, the rear and front seats have a glass window the president can lower whenever he’d like — a detail noted even in the same infographic that Trump supporters shared as proof that Hutchinson’s story couldn’t be right.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/06/28/trump-cassidy-hutchinson-jan6-hearing/


the agent deriving the care has publicly come forward and said it’s a lie…liz and the committee refuse to call him


----------



## Clipper

Stormy Daniels said:


> Let's be honest, Hutchinson has a million reasons in the world to publicly lie. That's what these political staffers do to build careers in their party. They go and through it all away in their mid 20s.


How bout sharing a couple of those "million reasons" to lie that you know about?

That way we can take you apart for your stupidity.

Her life is probably in danger after that dirtbag Trump attacked her before the hearing was even over. 

You actually believe she still has a career in the Republican Party after today?

See how that works?


----------



## Weatherman2020

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Nah, the serious part was inciting an insurrection.
> 
> And sending forged electors to the National Archives is a serious crime.
> 
> Lots of more serious stuff to talk about.


You run with that Dufus.


----------



## citygator

Here is a 3 minute recap for you traitors who couldn’t bother.


----------



## Billy_Bob

citygator said:


> Here is a 3 minute recap for you traitors who couldn’t bother.


Matter of fact witnesses, who were present with Trump, say she is a lair....  I don't believe anything this person has to say.


----------



## citygator

Billy_Bob said:


> Matter of fact witnesses, who were present with Trump, say she is a lair....  I don't believe anything this person has to say.


Under oath?


----------



## Nostra

Synthaholic said:


> Trump supporters quickly snapped back online that they’d found an obvious sign she was lying: The presidential limousine, known as “the Beast,” is so heavily fortified that they argued it would be “physically impossible” for Trump to cross from the back cabin to the driver’s seat.
> 
> But Trump was not riding in the limousine that day; videos show he actually rode in a Secret Service SUV, where the seats are closer together.
> 
> Even if he had ridden in the Beast, the rear and front seats have a glass window the president can lower whenever he’d like — a detail noted even in the same infographic that Trump supporters shared as proof that Hutchinson’s story couldn’t be right.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/06/28/trump-cassidy-hutchinson-jan6-hearing/


Too bad for you the SS agents she claimed to have been quoting are willing to testify it didn't happen.

I wonder if Nazi Piglosi's Clown Show will call them?


----------



## TemplarKormac

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Clearly ypu do not understand how things work



Clearly, I do.


----------



## Synthaholic

struth said:


> the agent deriving the care has publicly come forward and said it’s a lie…liz and the committee refuse to call him


----------



## Nostra

citygator said:


> Here is a 3 minute recap for you traitors who couldn’t bother.


Recap of hearsay the SS agents have already debunked.

 Nice job, Dipshit.


----------



## TemplarKormac

citygator said:


> Under oath?


Yes, under oath.


----------



## citygator

Nostra said:


> Recap of hearsay the SS agents have already debunked.
> 
> Nice job, Dipshit.


Link?


----------



## Synthaholic

Billy_Bob said:


> Matter of fact witnesses, who were present with Trump, say she is a lair.... * I don't believe anything this person has to say.*


"It's easier to con someone than to convince them they've been conned"

It's true.


----------



## Nostra

citygator said:


> Link?


It has been posted many times in this thread, Simp.


----------



## Synthaholic

citygator said:


> Link?


There is no URL to his ass.


----------



## TemplarKormac

citygator said:


> Link?


Post #1,037


----------



## citygator

TemplarKormac said:


> Yes, under oath.


She didn’t claim an assault. She said the head security said Trump tried to get to the wheel.


----------



## citygator

TemplarKormac said:


> Post #1,037


Hearsay.


----------



## citygator

Nostra said:


> It has been posted many times in this thread, Simp.


No SS quotes linked at all.


----------



## Nostra

citygator said:


> She didn’t claim an assault. She said the head security said Trump tried to get to the wheel.


. *She said the head security said ....*


Hearsay.

The SS agents in question say she is lying.


----------



## Lastamender

Mac1958 said:


> IN THAT ORDER
> 
> He knew.


How many bridges have you bought? What is the final charge going to be? Almost reckless driving?


----------



## Nostra

citygator said:


> No SS quotes linked at all.


I guess Nazi Piglosi will allow them to testify live like they want to, right?

Surely she won't try to sweep this under the rug, right?


----------



## struth

citygator said:


> She didn’t claim an assault. She said the head security said Trump tried to get to the wheel.


hahahaha now you all are denying what she said p


----------



## Weatherman2020

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Nah, the serious part was inciting an insurrection.
> 
> And sending forged electors to the National Archives is a serious crime.
> 
> Lots of more serious stuff to talk about.


I wouldn’t mess with Trump. He can punch his fist thru RPG proof glass and try to grab the steering wheel 8 feet away. 

Trumps a Superhero per the testimony you say is true.


----------



## TemplarKormac

citygator said:


> Hearsay.


LOL!

Now YOU'RE the one claiming hearsay?!

This is hilarious!!


----------



## CowboyTed

Billy_Bob said:


> Matter of FACT witnesses, people who were present, say she LIED..


She was under oath....

Show us where the people saying she is lying are under oath... This is the difference between TV  squawking and testimony...

Why are all these people looking for pardons if she is meant to be lying... We now have dozens of people who say Trump was unfit to be President... The Secret Service Agent will be asked to testify now, by the way no executive privilege ...


----------



## TemplarKormac

CowboyTed said:


> She was under oath....
> 
> Show us where the people saying she is lying are under oath... This is the difference between TV  squawking and testimony...
> 
> Why are all these people looking for pardons if she is meant to be lying... We now have dozens of people who say Trump was unfit to be President... The Secret Service Agent will be asked to testify now, by the way no executive privilege ...


Some people in the high political class testify under oath, then they lie, and then they almost always get away with it.

So tell, me, how afraid of the consequences are they when they lie to congress?


----------



## TemplarKormac

CowboyTed said:


> We now have dozens of people who say Trump was unfit to be President


That wasn't the pertinent issue. It was whether he incited an insurrection, and he didn't. Pure and simple.


----------



## Billy_Bob

citygator said:


> Under oath?


She wasn't present. her statements are hearsay.. no court will accept them.  Epic fail..


----------



## Billy_Bob

CowboyTed said:


> She was under oath....
> 
> Show us where the people saying she is lying are under oath... This is the difference between TV  squawking and testimony...
> 
> Why are all these people looking for pardons if she is meant to be lying... We now have dozens of people who say Trump was unfit to be President... The Secret Service Agent will be asked to testify now, by the way no executive privilege ...


She wasn't present. her statements are hearsay.. no court will accept them. Epic fail..


----------



## TemplarKormac

Add this to the list...


----------



## Lesh

Billy_Bob said:


> She wasn't present. her statements are hearsay.. no court will accept them.  Epic fail..


She was absolutry present for most of her testimony.

Most damning were the parts where Trump was informed that members in the crowd were armed (including with AR-a5s and Glocks) and Trump's response was "They aren't here to hurt me" and repeatedly demanding that the magnetometers that check for weapons be removed


----------



## BlindBoo

Rye Catcher said:


> Maybe so, and maybe those who were first hand in the vehicle will testify under oath coming later.  Investigations keep rolling along, and investigations have never been interrupted by a defense attorney.  Of course an attorney might have advised (Flynn) a witness to take the 5th.
> 
> In the matter of a crime, which the Select Committee is investigating, and one so critical (insurrection, treason, possibly conspiracy to murder (hang pence) is more important then the average felony.


She did name names I believe and we know who was in the Beast I think.  Lets hear what they have to say.


----------



## Billy_Bob

Lesh said:


> She was absolutry present for most of her testimony.
> 
> Most damning were the parts where Trump was informed that members in the crowd were armed (including with AR-a5s and Glocks) and Trump's response was "They aren't here to hurt me" and repeatedly demanding that the magnetometers that check for weapons be removed


The item she was testifying about is at issue.  She wasn't there for the event so her testimony is nothing more than hearsay.  No court will give it any credibility.   It doesn't matter that she was under oath, she lied. She lied before congress, and it will be proven...

Thanks for playing..


----------



## CowboyTed

Synthaholic said:


> View attachment 663558


Well he can say that under oath....


----------



## CowboyTed

Weatherman2020 said:


> I wouldn’t mess with Trump. He can punch his fist thru RPG proof glass and try to grab the steering wheel 8 feet away.
> 
> Trumps a Superhero per the testimony you say is true.


It should be noted that on January 6th, the President’s official limo, nicknamed the “Beast” wasn’t being used. Instead, Trump was being transported in an armored Chevy Suburban that didn’t have a partition between the front and rear seats.

Oops, your information is wrong again...


----------



## Sunsettommy

CowboyTed said:


> It should be noted that on January 6th, the President’s official limo, nicknamed the “Beast” wasn’t being used. Instead, Trump was being transported in an armored Chevy Suburban that didn’t have a partition between the front and rear seats.
> 
> Oops, your information is wrong again...



It doesn't matter since the HEARSAY woman claims are being contested by the people who were in the freaking vehicle.


----------



## Sunsettommy

citygator said:


> Here is a 3 minute recap for you traitors who couldn’t bother.



It is hearsay you IDIOT and now being contradicted by people who were THERE in the vehicle.

You are being made a fool of which is a shame that you are that gullible.


----------



## TemplarKormac




----------



## Nostra

TemplarKormac said:


> Add this to the list (Engel, not Ornato)...


Dayum!

CNN calling her a liar.

GAME OVER!


----------



## conserveguy877

Already hours after that Unselect committee trial today... still underwhelming and hearsay. President Trump said to go peacefully. Case closed. Let's try to survive the Biden Depression now.


----------



## Nostra

Lesh said:


> She was absolutry present for most of her testimony.
> 
> Most damning were the parts where Trump was informed that members in the crowd were armed (including with AR-a5s and Glocks) and Trump's response was "They aren't here to hurt me" and repeatedly demanding that the magnetometers that check for weapons be removed


She has been exposed as a lying sack of shit.

Deal with it.

Another Adumb Schifferbrians Story Time FAIL!


----------



## Sunsettommy

citygator said:


> She didn’t claim an assault. She said the head security said Trump tried to get to the wheel.



The Head security is saying that didn't happen including the DRIVER of the vehicle who was there.

From Twitter


Peter Alexander

@PeterAlexander
 · 2h





 A source close to the Secret Service tells me both Bobby Engel, the lead agent, and the presidential limousine/SUV driver are prepared to testify under oath that neither man was assaulted and that Mr. Trump never lunged for the steering wheel.

and,

Jonathan Turley

@JonathanTurley

...It is curious that the Committee would air the account without confirming from the Secret Service, particularly since Bobby Engel appears willing to testify. This is the danger of using witnesses to repeat third party accounts.


----------



## Lesh

Nostra said:


> She has been exposed as a lying sack of shit.
> 
> Deal with it.
> 
> Another Adumb Schifferbrians Story Time FAIL!


She's a staffer for Mark Meadows. No "Evil liberal" there.

She has NOT been exposed as anything other than a witness to this fucking mess

Hutchinson told the panel she remembered White House counsel Pat Cipollone telling Meadows, with a high degree of alarm, that the mob was “literally calling for [Vice President Mike Pence] to be f-ing hung.”
ADVERTISEMENT

*Meadows replied, “You heard [Trump], Pat. He thinks Mike deserves it. He doesn’t think they’re doing anything wrong.”*

And remember..Trump knew that the crowd was armed


----------



## Zincwarrior

struth said:


> the agent deriving the care has publicly come forward and said it’s a lie…liz and the committee refuse to call him


Cool where is the agent's statement or testimony?


----------



## Zincwarrior

Nostra said:


> . *She said the head security said ....*
> 
> 
> Hearsay.
> 
> The SS agents in question say she is lying.


Please link there statement.


----------



## hjmick

As I said in another thread...

I have made no secret of my distaste of Trump, but I have a question...

Is it going to matter to anyone, besides Trump's acolytes, if the Secret Service agents testify, under oath, and deny all that was "revealed" today?









						Secret Service Could Testify Trump Didn’t Try to Take Wheel
					

Secret Service agents are reportedly prepared to testify that then-President Donald Trump didn’t go for the steering wheel in his limousine on Jan. 6.




					www.mediaite.com


----------



## conserveguy877

President Trump was in a SUV, not the beast... She lied to congress!


----------



## Weatherman2020

CowboyTed said:


> It should be noted that on January 6th, the President’s official limo, nicknamed the “Beast” wasn’t being used. Instead, Trump was being transported in an armored Chevy Suburban that didn’t have a partition between the front and rear seats.
> 
> Oops, your information is wrong again...


Except the SS said the story is bullshit.


----------



## Sunsettommy

Zincwarrior said:


> Cool where is the agent's statement or testimony?



The question really should be asked is WHY the Joke 6 committee didn't ask Lead Agent Bobby Engels to testify about it instead of the Hearsay woman who was never there.


----------



## Sunsettommy

Zincwarrior said:


> Please link there statement.



It has been posted many times, but you manage to miss them all, but here it is for you:

Twitter:

Jonathan Turley
@JonathanTurley
·
2h

Peter Alexander just reported that the Secret Service is categorically denying the testimony of Hutchinson that Donald Trump tried to grab the steering wheel of the Beast.
Quote Tweet







Peter Alexander

@PeterAlexander
 · 2h





 A source close to the Secret Service tells me both Bobby Engel, the lead agent, and the presidential limousine/SUV driver are prepared to testify under oath that neither man was assaulted and that Mr. Trump never lunged for the steering wheel.


----------



## Zincwarrior

Sunsettommy said:


> It has been posted many times, but you manage to miss them all, but here it is for you:
> 
> Twitter:
> 
> Jonathan Turley
> @JonathanTurley
> ·
> 2h
> 
> Peter Alexander just reported that the Secret Service is categorically denying the testimony of Hutchinson that Donald Trump tried to grab the steering wheel of the Beast.
> Quote Tweet
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Peter Alexander
> 
> @PeterAlexander
> · 2h
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A source close to the Secret Service tells me both Bobby Engel, the lead agent, and the presidential limousine/SUV driver are prepared to testify under oath that neither man was assaulted and that Mr. Trump never lunged for the steering wheel.


No the agent's statement. Not what someone else tweeted.


----------



## Lesh

The idiots seem totally focused on the assault on the Secret Service Agent.

That's the LEAST damning thing that was said today

Trump KNEW the rally goers were armed. HE DIDN"T CARE "They're not going to hurt ME" he said

In fact he wanted the magnetometers removed!

He KNEW the rioters were armed and that they were after Pence and he APPROVED


----------



## TemplarKormac

CowboyTed said:


> Trump was being transported in an armored Chevy Suburban that didn’t have a partition between the front and rear seats.


But if Robert Engel and Tony Ornato are both willing to testify under oath that none of that happened, the anatomy of the vehicle is irrelevant.


----------



## j-mac

Lesh said:


> She's a staffer for Mark Meadows. No "Evil liberal" there.
> 
> She has NOT been exposed as anything other than a witness to this fucking mess
> 
> Hutchinson told the panel she remembered White House counsel Pat Cipollone telling Meadows, with a high degree of alarm, that the mob was “literally calling for [Vice President Mike Pence] to be f-ing hung.”
> ADVERTISEMENT
> 
> *Meadows replied, “You heard [Trump], Pat. He thinks Mike deserves it. He doesn’t think they’re doing anything wrong.”*
> 
> And remember..Trump knew that the crowd was armed


No, she’s a child that wanted to work for Trump at Mara lago and when Trump didnt hire her, here she is all disgruntled and lying.


----------



## TemplarKormac

Zincwarrior said:


> No the agent's statement. Not what someone else tweeted.


Four news outlets are saying the same thing, mate. ABC, NBC, CNN, FOX.  Those agents are willing to testify under oath to debunk the claim.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

TemplarKormac said:


> Oh, that's a solid rebuttal if I ever heard one.
> 
> Can it.


It wasn't a rebuttal. You literally asked a yes/no question, ya rabid little dummy.


----------



## j-mac

Lesh said:


> The idiots seem totally focused on the assault on the Secret Service Agent.
> 
> That's the LEAST damning thing that was said today
> 
> Trump KNEW the rally goers were armed. HE DIDN"T CARE "They're not going to hurt ME" he said
> 
> In fact he wanted the magnetometers removed!
> 
> He KNEW the rioters were armed and that they were after Pence and he APPROVED


Wrong, you only believe her because you really want that to be true…How many weapons were fired by Trump supporters that day?


----------



## Lesh

Sunsettommy said:


> The question really should be asked is WHY the Joke 6 committee didn't ask Lead Agent Bobby Engels to testify about it instead of the Hearsay woman who was never there.


Because that is the least damning thing brought up

Let me know when Engel testifies by the way


----------



## Lesh

j-mac said:


> Wrong, you only believe her because you really want that to be true…How many weapons were fired by Trump supporters that day?


Oh now the claim is that it can't be a coup unless they fired weapons


----------



## j-mac

Lesh said:


> Because that is the least damning thing brought up
> 
> Let me know when Engel testifies by the way


They’ll never call him because it doesn’t fit their narrative.


----------



## lantern2814

Nostra said:


> Too bad for you the SS agents she claimed to have been quoting are willing to testify it didn't happen.
> 
> I wonder if Nazi Piglosi's Clown Show will call them?


I wouldn’t bet on it. This is Blasé Fraud part 2.


----------



## j-mac

Lesh said:


> Oh now the claim is that it can't be a coup unless they fired weapons


Well, did they?


----------



## Sunsettommy

Zincwarrior said:


> No the agent's statement. Not what someone else tweeted.



No it is the Committee who failed to have the lead agent to testify is what YOU are ignoring.

The Hearsay woman isn't credible yet YOU don't seem to have realized that.

Meanwhile MEDIAite

“A source close to the Secret Service tells me both Bobby Engel, the lead agent, and the presidential limousine/SUV driver are prepared to testify under oath that neither man was assaulted and that Mr. Trump never lunged for the steering wheel,” tweeted NBC News Chief White House Correspondent *Peter Alexander* on Tuesday."

===

It is being considered real.


----------



## TemplarKormac

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> It wasn't a rebuttal. You literally asked a yes/no question, ya rabid little dummy.


Oh, saying "Yep!" to a question of whether Trump incited an insurrection is an assertion, a claim, an attempted rebuttal, for which proof needs to be provided and only conjecture was provided. 

Not falling for that.


----------



## TemplarKormac

Sunsettommy said:


> No it is the Committee who failed to have the lead agent to testify is what YOU are ignoring.
> 
> The Hearsay woman isn't credible yet YOU don't seem to have realized that.
> 
> Meanwhile MEDIAite
> 
> “A source close to the Secret Service tells me both Bobby Engel, the lead agent, and the presidential limousine/SUV driver are prepared to testify under oath that neither man was assaulted and that Mr. Trump never lunged for the steering wheel,” tweeted NBC News Chief White House Correspondent *Peter Alexander* on Tuesday."
> 
> ===
> 
> It is being considered real.


ABC, NBC, CNN, FOX, MEDIAite...


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

TemplarKormac said:


> Oh, saying "Yep!" to a question of whether Trump incited an insurrection is an assertion, a claim, an attempted rebuttal, for which proof needs to be provided and only conjecture was provided.
> 
> Not falling for that.


You said, "Really?"

I said "yep!"

Look at your behavior. So childish. Trump has really done a number on you.


----------



## Missouri_Mike

Can you left wingers get any more ridiculous. Is it actually possible for you to get dumber than you are today? I don’t think so but I do know you’re going to fucking try. These stupid bombshells keep going off in your face but you keep building them.

From the OP down to every one of you that bought into this crap. How fucking stupid do you feel right now.


----------



## Sunsettommy

TemplarKormac said:


> ABC, NBC, CNN, FOX, MEDIAite...



MEDIAite has all of them in the article, all of their tweets too.


----------



## j-mac

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> You said, "Really?"
> 
> I said "yep!"
> 
> Look at your behavior. So childish. Trump has really done a number on you.


You’re really telling someone else their childish? Really?


----------



## Weatherman2020

Zincwarrior said:


> No the agent's statement. Not what someone else tweeted.





Sunsettommy said:


> The question really should be asked is WHY the Joke 6 committee didn't ask Lead Agent Bobby Engels to testify about it instead of the Hearsay woman who was never there.


Because liars need to lie.


----------



## lantern2814

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Look at your behavior. So childish.


Yet another ironic post from a child.^^^


----------



## TemplarKormac

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> You said, "Really?"
> 
> I said "yep!"
> 
> Look at your behavior. So childish. Trump has really done a number on you.


The question was "Did he?" incite an insurrection. You answered "Yep!" with no supporting evidence. 

Don't insult my intelligence. Anyone can look through the quote chain and see that, except you, perhaps.


----------



## Weatherman2020

WE GOT HIM NOW!
Part 4,638 in a continuing series.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

TemplarKormac said:


> The question was "Did he?" incite an insurrection. You answered "Yep!" with no supporting evidence.


Yes, I am going to run right out and compile the evidence for a squealing little dumbass who won't even watch the hearings.

Sure. I'll get right on that.


----------



## TemplarKormac

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Look at your behavior. So childish. Trump has really done a number on you.


Heh. No. He's done a number on you, actually. You're the one frothing at the mouth at any negative uncorroborated claim made against him. 

But then, I can only look at posts like these and smile at the irony.


----------



## Faun

Nostra said:


> Show us YOUR proof she didn't know what she said was a lie.
> 
> See how that works when you are dealing with hearsay?



She claims that is what she was told. You have no evidence she wasn't told that. I don't know if she's lying or not but neither do you. Meaning you're lying when you claim she lied.


----------



## TemplarKormac

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Yes, I am going to run right out and compile the evidence for a squealing little dumbass who won't even watch the hearings.
> 
> Sure. I'll get right on that.


When I'm mentioning people who were directly mentioned by this witness as having been quoted as willing to debunk her claims about them, it is imperative that you provide evidence for your claims.

Please quit while you're behind.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

TemplarKormac said:


> Heh. No. He's done a number on you, actually. You're the one frothing at the mouth at any negative uncorroborated claim made against him.


I am? Huh. Funny. Your posts have the tone of an excitable 3 year old. I post "Yep!", and you pee your panties.

I will let the readers decide.


----------



## citygator

Nostra said:


> . *She said the head security said ....*
> 
> 
> Hearsay.
> 
> The SS agents in question say she is lying.


Nope. Not true.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

TemplarKormac said:


> When I'm mentioning people who were directly mentioned by this witness as having been quoted as willing to debunk her claims about them, it is imperative that you provide evidence for your claims.
> 
> Please quit while you're behind.


I didn't claim it was true. You got confused and forgot whose ankles you were biting.


----------



## Nostra

Faun said:


> She claims that is what she was told. You have no evidence she wasn't told that. I don't know if she's lying or not but neither do you. Meaning you're lying when you claim she lied.


Why doesn't Nazi Piglosi call the Agents who have already debunked her lies, Dumbass?


----------



## Nostra

citygator said:


> Nope. Not true.


Get back to me when Nazi Piglosy calls the agents who debunked your BOMBSHELL witness, Simp.


----------



## TemplarKormac

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> I am? Huh. Funny. Your posts have the tone of an excitable 3 year old. I post "Yep!", and you pee your panties.
> 
> I will let the readers decide.


No,  what you will do is run away, all the while screaming "I'm right!!!1!!11!"


----------



## TemplarKormac

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> I didn't claim it was true. You got confused and forgot whose ankles you were biting.


You just asserted that Trump incited an insurrection.  Please, enough with your lies.


----------



## citygator

Nostra said:


> Get back to me when Nazi Piglosy calls the agents who debunked your BOMBSHELL witness, Simp.


The president tried to incite a riot to overturn an election he lost. You’re a cuckold notch to take it like that. Have some balls.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

TemplarKormac said:


> No,  what you will do is run away, all the while screaming "I'm right!!!1!!11!"


Still here.

I see you are still pretty excited.


----------



## Missouri_Mike

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Yes, I am going to run right out and compile the evidence for a squealing little dumbass who won't even watch the hearings.
> 
> Sure. I'll get right on that.


The hearings don’t provide evidence. What the fuck are you talking about? If you could compile any evidence you’d be the first fucking democrat in the nation that could do so.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

TemplarKormac said:


> You just asserted that Trump incited an insurrection.  Please, enough with your lies.


He sure did. Just ask them. They freely admit it. They say it under oath, to judges. The oathkeeper guy said it is why they were there.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Missouri_Mike said:


> The hearings don’t provide evidence.


Hmm, yes, they do show us some. Video, documents, these are evidence.


----------



## Lesh

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Hmm, yes, they do show us some. Video, documents, these are evidence.


Testimony is evidence as well


----------



## Nostra

citygator said:


> The president tried to incite a riot to overturn an election he lost. You’re a cuckold notch to take it like that. Have some balls.


Ok, I'm really not interested in your Terminal TDS,

When will Nazi Piglosi call these agents to her Prime Time Show?


----------



## Dragonlady

Sunsettommy said:


> It doesn't matter since the HEARSAY woman claims are being contested by the people who were in the freaking vehicle.



No one has disputed her story and no one in the vehicle has denied it at all.


----------



## Missouri_Mike

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Hmm, yes, they do show us some. Video, documents, these are evidence.


Nope. Just films. Without context and a narrative they’re just democrat porn.


----------



## TemplarKormac

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Still here.
> 
> I see you are still pretty excited.


"I'll let the readers decide" sounds like an admission of defeat and one step out the door.


----------



## Nostra

Dragonlady said:


> No one has disputed her story and no one in the vehicle has denied it at all.


You mean, other than the SS agents who were actually there?


----------



## Hutch Starskey

TemplarKormac said:


> You don't know how damning that statement is, given that Nancy Pelosi is the Speaker.


Huh?
How is that damning at all?


----------



## Stormy Daniels

Clipper said:


> How bout sharing a couple of those "million reasons" to lie that you know about?
> 
> That way we can take you apart for your stupidity.



Someone who failed to grasp glaring and obvious sarcasm might want to think twice before throwing those stones.


----------



## Missouri_Mike

Dragonlady said:


> No one has disputed her story and no one in the vehicle has denied it at all.


The driver did. So once again you’re an idiot who only reads the headlines from people you like.


----------



## TemplarKormac

Hutch Starskey said:


> Huh?
> How is that damning at all?


Wow. Her political partisanship is legendary in modern American politics. And it only leads one to assume she let her politics dictate who she put on that committee. 

Do I have to spell this out for you?


----------



## TemplarKormac

TemplarKormac said:


> You have such a childish view on how fairness works in civilized society. So childish.


So, Hutch Starskey I'd like to hear what you thought was funny about this post.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Missouri_Mike said:


> Nope. Just films. Without context and a narrative they’re just democrat porn.


Riiight... just democrats. 

You know that pretty much everyone outside the Trump tribe sees this for what it is, don't you? You do. You know it.


----------



## Nostra

Nostra said:


> Ok, I'm really not interested in your Terminal TDS,
> 
> When will Nazi Piglosi call these agents to her Prime Time Show?


citygator 

When will your Queen call these guys to her Prime Time TV Show?


----------



## Roudy

citygator said:


> Seems scheduled pretty sudden… apparently the Jan 6 Committee is excited to present something to your open minds. I bet it’s a pretty big bombshell… any takers?
> 
> January 6 committee adds new hearing for Tuesday - CNNPolitics


She made some fake accusations and claims, and the secret service just came out and said none of what she described happened and they are willing to testify to that effect. In other words her testimony was false, coached and concocted by the prosecution.  But let's not forget, there is no such thing as a defense in this stupid January 6 stalinist committee.  

Now that the secret service has disputed her claims, will she be prosecuted for lying under oath?


----------



## Missouri_Mike

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Riiight... just democrats.
> 
> You know that pretty much everyone outside the Trump tribe sees this for what it is, don't you? You do. You know it.


Nothing? A democrat scam? A democrat clown show? Yeah. We see you.


----------



## TemplarKormac




----------



## Nostra

This shit is funny.

This Clown Show had to call this "Special Session" because they had a "BOMBSHELL"..................and it blew up in their face in real time.


Too fucking funny.


----------



## Chillicothe

Sunsettommy said:


> We all know you can't accept the truth of her probable lies since there are news about some people who were actually in the car saying she is LYING her ass off!





TemplarKormac said:


> None of that matters when there are people within the USSS willing to testify under oath that she lied about the whole incident.


------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, to be clear, this woman never said she was in the vehicle and saw the interaction. Rather, she said she was in a room in the White House and an agent who was allegedly the driver was in the room and another individual related a narrative of what happened.  That is what Hutchinson said she was testifying to.
========================================




Lesh said:


> _The idiots seem totally focused on the assault on the Secret Service Agent.    That's the LEAST damning thing that was said today._



I quite agree. If it happened, and I truly believe that Hutchinson was told a narrative that it happened, by Engel or Arnatto.....it is still small potatoes.

Small potatoes compared to the information relayed that the White House knew at least days before the January 6th, that there was going to be a march to the Capitol (which they had previously denied, and for which they refused to seek a permit which would have alerted the DC Police)....and that her immediate boss, Meadows, informed her that it would be "really, really bad" at the Capitol days before the 6th.

How would he know that?

Is there a nexus, a link, between Mark Meadows and Roger Stone and some top bloke in the Oathkeepers or Proud Boys?

I'm betting there are hard serious discussion between a DOJ attorney and some honcho(s) from the Boys or Oathkeepers. Hard discussion along the lines of .....'we are going for a 40yr sentence in a Federal pen.  Unless, you can give us truthful testimony that Mark Meadows or Roger Stone gave you instructions.' 

Or words to that effect.


----------



## Lesh

Roudy said:


> She made some fake accusations and claims, and the secret service just came out and said none of what she described happened and they are willing to testify to that effect. In other words her testimony was false, coached and concocted by the prosecution.  But let's not forget, there is no such thing as a defense in this stupid January 6 stalinist committee.
> 
> Now that the secret service has disputed her claims, will she be prosecuted for lying under oath?


She recounted a conversation she heard. She did this under oath

Let me know when they testify under oath


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Missouri_Mike said:


> Nothing? A democrat scam? A democrat clown show? Yeah. We see you.


No. Step outside the bubble.


----------



## Clipper

Stormy Daniels said:


> Someone who failed to grasp glaring and obvious sarcasm might want to think twice before throwing those stones.


Ok, you got me.


----------



## TemplarKormac

Chillicothe said:


> Well, to be clear, this woman never said she was in the vehicle and saw the interaction. Rather, she said she was in a room in the White House and an agent who was allegedly the driver was in the room and another individual related a narrative of what happened. That is what Hutchinson said she was testifying to.


Which automatically qualifies this as hearsay. 

If you aren't there, and are testifying as to what other people told you as opposed to your direct observation of the event, it is hearsay.


----------



## TemplarKormac

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> No. Step outside the bubble.


You first.


----------



## Lesh

And let's remember that Bobby Engle and Tony Ornato were Trump loyalists. The "Palace guard" if you will

This occurred in the in the SUV not "The Beast" so it IS possible for this to have occurred.

But again...this particular incident is the LEAST damning bit of testimony and impugns the rest in no way


----------



## TemplarKormac

Lesh said:


> And let's remember that Bobby Engle and Tony Ornato were Trump loyalists. The "Palace guard" if you will
> 
> This occurred in the in the SUV not "The Beast" so it IS possible for this to have occurred.
> 
> But again...this particular incident is the LEAST damning bit of testimony and impugns the rest in no way


Lol. They are saying it didn't happen. And look at you trying to impeach their character and sow doubt. 

That's fear, mate. And you're absolutely afraid.


----------



## Chillicothe

Roudy said:


> _She made some fake accusations and claims, and the secret service just came out and said none of what she described happened and they are willing to testify to that effect._


I don't believe the post above. If the poster can offer us proof, vetting, a credible authoritative source.....I will read it with interest.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Clipper said:


> Ok, you got me.


Yeah, Stormy zoomed me too.


----------



## TemplarKormac

Chillicothe said:


> I don't believe the post above. If the poster can offer us proof, vetting, a credible authoritative source.....I will read it with interest.


Yeah, you're setting barriers between you and actual facts, because you don't want to see the facts. It's that simple.


----------



## Roudy

Chillicothe said:


> I don't believe the post above. If the poster can offer us proof, vetting, a credible authoritative source.....I will read it with interest.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Yeah, Stormy zoomed me too.


This is what happens when you have a gestapo style stalinist banana republic trial.









						Secret Service agents willing to testify Trump did not lunge at steering wheel during Capitol riot: source
					

Secret Service agents are prepared to refute testimony that Trump lunged at a steering wheel during the Jan. 6 riot to try to go to the Capitol, a source tells Fox News.




					www.foxnews.com


----------



## Nostra

Lesh said:


> She recounted a conversation she heard. She did this under oath
> 
> Let me know when they testify under oath


Surely Nazi Piglosi will have them on a Special Edition Episode tomorrow for damage control, right?

Why have they not scheduled them?


----------



## Nostra

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> No. Step outside the bubble.


The innerweb irony meter just exploded.


----------



## Lesh

She recounted a conversation about an event that was probably the least damning thing that occurred.

It in no way affects the rest of her testimony and the rest of her testimony was DAMNING

Trump KNEW that the rally goers were armed and did not CARE. He knew (or at the very least THOUGHT) that the rioters trying to find Mike Pence were armed

In fact he tried to ENSURE that by removing the magnetometers that they WOULD be armed


----------



## Chillicothe

TemplarKormac said:


> _Which automatically qualifies this as hearsay.   If you aren't there, and are testifying as to what other people told you as opposed to your direct observation of the event, it is hearsay._



So?
You point is .....  what?

So what if it is 'hearsay'?
This ain't a court of law. Not a trial.  There are no plaintiffs here. No defendants.  
What it is ..is informative.  

Hutchinson informed the committee ---under oath --- what she was told, heard, or saw. That was her role. And she did it with earnestness, credibility, and in a measured, controlled demeanor.
Hutchinson took an oath to tell the truth as she heard it or eyeballed it.  I believe she did that.

_".... it is important to be as clear as possible about what Cassidy Hutchinson has done. She told us, in no uncertain terms, that the sitting president at the very least condoned a violent attack that he knew ahead of time was likely — behavior that is, itself, an assault on the foundations of American government. What we do with that, as a democracy, is up to us."   Z.Beachamp_


----------



## Lesh

Nostra said:


> Surely Nazi Piglosi will have them on a Special Edition Episode tomorrow for damage control, right?
> 
> Why have they not scheduled them?


Engles has already testified


----------



## citygator

Nostra said:


> Ok, I'm really not interested in your Terminal TDS,
> 
> When will Nazi Piglosi call these agents to her Prime Time Show?


When she does you’ll call them a liar too. Just like every republican that has testified.


----------



## TemplarKormac

Chillicothe said:


> So?
> You point is ..... what?
> 
> So what if it is 'hearsay'?
> This ain't a court of law. Not a trial. There are no plaintiffs here. No defendants.
> What it is ..is informative.


Because if you're actually interested in finding the truth, you have to treat it as a court of law. Allegations of criminal behavior were being made by Ms. Hutchinson against a former president. In any setting, if you make a claim like that, you need actual evidence to prove it, not "he said this to me" or "he told me he did this or that."

It is conjecture, and it won't pass any scrutiny in any fact-finding setting.


----------



## jknowgood

Faun said:


> So? I'm not talking about the limo.
> 
> Capiche?


Well that part proved she is lying. Cupcake.


----------



## Chillicothe

TemplarKormac said:


> _"you're setting barriers between you and actual facts,"_


Ah, that is a sad misread of my post.

Rather, I am expecting those who come onto this adult discussion venue to be able to credibly vet the assertions they ask us to consider as reliable.

Yes, that is an adult expectation. 
Regardless, it is still quite simple.


----------



## Stormy Daniels

Chillicothe said:


> Rather, I am expecting those who come onto this adult discussion venue



This seems to have been posted on the wrong website.


----------



## TemplarKormac

Lesh said:


> Engles has already testified


Not publicly. 









						Head of Trump Secret Service detail spoke with House investigators about Jan. 6: report
					

According to a report from Politico's Betsy Woodruff Swan, the head of former President Donald Trump's Secret Service detail on January 6, 2021, has already sat down with House committee members investigating the insurrection.With the Washington Post reporting that Trump's protective detail was...




					www.rawstory.com


----------



## Chillicothe

TemplarKormac said:


> _It is conjecture, and it won't pass any scrutiny in any fact-finding setting._


------------------------------------------------------------------------
I demur.
It was clearly NOT conjecture.  It was under-oath testimony by an insider who relayed to us what she said she heard. She was not speculating ..or conjecturing....on what she heard. She was testifying under oath on what she heard.

I'm mildly confident you recognize the difference.


----------



## TemplarKormac

Chillicothe said:


> Rather, I am expecting those who come onto this adult discussion venue to be able to credibly vet the assertions they ask us to consider as reliable.


Placing arbitrary prerequisites on what constitutes proof to you shows your disinterest in the proof. How many ways could I possibly say this? All of these news outlets have obviously done the vetting for us and let us know these agents are willing to deny the claims Hutchinson made.


----------



## Synthaholic

man, car, steering wheel, throat, ketchup


----------



## Lesh

TemplarKormac said:


> Not publicly.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Head of Trump Secret Service detail spoke with House investigators about Jan. 6: report
> 
> 
> According to a report from Politico's Betsy Woodruff Swan, the head of former President Donald Trump's Secret Service detail on January 6, 2021, has already sat down with House committee members investigating the insurrection.With the Washington Post reporting that Trump's protective detail was...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.rawstory.com


So Engles has already spoken to the Committee and they chose to include that tidbit about about Trump assaulting Engles.

What does that tell you?


----------



## Chillicothe

Stormy Daniels said:


> This seems to have been posted on the wrong website.


An old man can still dream, can't he?
Hope springs eternal.
And rainbows are real.


----------



## jknowgood

Care4all said:


> Yep...in that case, The TWO people in the car told her, the guy who got choked by Trump told her..what trump did to him, and the driver told her.


She said he grabbed the wheel. Have you seen how far a six foot man would have to leap to cover the 10ft or so to grap the steering wheel in a limo? Not to mention, does the driver have full access to the president? Without a partition?


----------



## TemplarKormac

Chillicothe said:


> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> I demur.
> It was clearly NOT conjecture.  It was under-oath testimony by an insider who relayed to us what she said she heard. She was not speculating ..or conjecturing....on what she heard. She was testifying under oath on what she heard.
> 
> I'm mildly confident you recognize the difference.



What she heard and what happened are clearly two different things. Engel and Ornato say they are willing to testify against what she said to the Committee. She lied about what they said, or if they said anything of that nature to her in the first place.


----------



## TemplarKormac

Lesh said:


> So Engles has already spoken to the Committee and they chose to include that tidbit about about Trump assaulting Engles.
> 
> What does that tell you?



Engles has told sources across the mainstream media landscape that he is willing to testify that no assault or any behavior of that kind ever occurred. 

What does that tell you?


----------



## TemplarKormac

Synthaholic said:


> man, car, steering wheel, throat, ketchup


Your fetishes? If so, keep them to yourself.


----------



## TemplarKormac




----------



## TemplarKormac

rightwinger said:


> How long before Republicans call it fake news?


Question should have been: how long before it IS fake news?


----------



## TemplarKormac

Dragonlady said:


> Why does every Republican solution to a problem involve killing Democrats?


Why does every Democrat solution to a problem involve killing babies?


----------



## TemplarKormac

I've had enough of this thread. Night.


----------



## Lesh

jknowgood said:


> She said he grabbed the wheel. Have you seen how far a six foot man would have to leap to cover the 10ft or so to grap the steering wheel in a limo? Not to mention, does the driver have full access to the president? Without a partition?


A. She was repeating a conversation

B. They weren't in the limo. They were in the SUV

C. This is the LEAST important accusation made today


----------



## tahuyaman

Any testimony which doesn't face scrutiny through cross examination is not credible


----------



## Lesh

tahuyaman said:


> Any testimony which doesn't face scrutiny through cross examination is not credible


Nonsense.

Grand Jury testimony doesn't face cross...you failed fake law school huh


----------



## WEATHER53

Weatherman2020 said:


> “My best friend’s sister’s boyfriend’s brother’s girlfriend heard from this guy who knows this kid who’s going with a girl who saw Trump grab the steering wheel. I guess it’s pretty serious.”


When the secret service, driver and/other occupants of the car come forward; what then will Democrats offer?


----------



## Lesh

WEATHER53 said:


> When the secret service, driver and/other occupants of the car come forward; what then will Democrats offer?


We will shrug. It just ain't that important


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

"She also said she witnessed her former boss burn documents in his office following a meeting with Pennsylvania Republican *Scott Perry*, a far-right congressman who pushed Trump to replace *Jeffrey Rosen*, the acting attorney general at the time, with *Jeffrey Clark*, a DOJ official prepared to use the department to aid the fraudulent electors plot. (Perry was among the GOP lawmakers who sought pardons after the January 6 riot.) Hutchinson expanded on that earlier testimony Tuesday, revealing that Meadows was among those who sought a pardon from Trump after the attack."









						“I Don't F--king Care That They Have Weapons”: White House Aide Gives Bombshell Testimony Of the Day Trump Incited the Capitol Attack
					

Cassidy Hutchinson testified in the January 6 committee hearing that Trump attacked his security detail, threw his lunch against the wall and raged at staff on Jan. 6 for not letting him go to the Capitol alongside rioters.




					www.vanityfair.com


----------



## tahuyaman

Lesh said:


> Nonsense.
> 
> Grand Jury testimony doesn't face cross...you failed fake law school huh


Why should unchallenged testimony be considered reliable or credible?  This isn't a grand jury.  It's a congessional hearing.   It's political theater.


----------



## Nostra

Lesh said:


> Engles has already testified




Cool.  So Nazi will have him on Prime Time to confirm the testimony of your BOMBSHELL today, right?

What episode will that be on?


----------



## lennypartiv

citygator said:


> Seems scheduled pretty sudden… apparently the Jan 6 Committee is excited to present something to your open minds. I bet it’s a pretty big bombshell… any takers?
> 
> January 6 committee adds new hearing for Tuesday - CNNPolitics


You're crazy if you think Trump will ever be convicted.


----------



## lennypartiv

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> You know that pretty much everyone outside the Trump tribe sees this for what it is, don't you? You do. You know it.


There is a word for it...persecution.


----------



## citygator

tahuyaman said:


> Why should unchallenged testimony be considered reliable or credible?  This isn't a grand jury.  It's a congessional hearing.   It's political theater.


Your president wanted to reverse an election with a mob and an illegal move of the Vice President that would send the country into chaos… and that doesn’t bother you?


----------



## citygator

lennypartiv said:


> You're crazy if you think Trump will ever be convicted.


And you’re a traitor.  I guess I win.


----------



## tahuyaman

lennypartiv said:


> You're crazy if you think Trump will ever be convicted.


The goal here is to find away to remove Trump before 2024.  That's kind of dumb.  They should be encouraging another Trump run.  He will cause a divide on the Republican / conservative side


----------



## Lesh

tahuyaman said:


> Why should unchallenged testimony be considered reliable or credible?  This isn't a grand jury.  It's a congessional hearing.   It's political theater.


But wait...you said unchallenged testimony is never credible.

Clearly that's horse shit. Grand Jury testimony is unchallenged


----------



## tahuyaman

citygator said:


> Your president wanted to reverse an election with a mob and an illegal move of the Vice President that would send the country into chaos… and that doesn’t bother you?


You mean that he was our president.    

The country is in chaos now.  That doesn't seem to bother you.


----------



## buckeye45_73

Dragonlady said:


> The left is capable of walking, talking and chewing gum at the same time.  They can investigate Donald Trump AND deal with the fallout of Roe being overturned.  Unlike Donald Trump who can barely focus on one topic at a time.


NAh sweetie.....it doesn't work like that. They can't protest while having hearings on another protest..


----------



## TemplarKormac

This is what I get for scrolling Twitter in bed. MOAR!


----------



## tahuyaman

Lesh said:


> But wait...you said unchallenged testimony is never credible.
> 
> Clearly that's horse shit. Grand Jury testimony is unchallenged


This is a congressional hearing.  The objective is to find the truth.  The congress can not indict.  They have no such authority.  

They can not find the truth if they don't seek the truth.  In order to find the truth everything must be examined. Not just one side.


----------



## tahuyaman

Dragonlady said:


> The left is capable of walking, talking and chewing gum at the same time.  They can investigate Donald Trump AND deal with the fallout of Roe being overturned.  Unlike Donald Trump who can barely focus on one topic at a time.


There is no fallout from Roe vs Wade being overturned.  The issue simply falls to each state.


----------



## Sunsettommy

TemplarKormac said:


> This is what I get for scrolling Twitter in bed. MOAR!



Ms. Hearsays opposition to her hearsay claims are growing which is sinking the credibility of the Joke Goons committee.


----------



## Chillicothe

jknowgood said:


> _She said he grabbed the wheel._


She said she was told he grabbed the wheel.
It's a noteworthy difference.
Please note it.
--------------------------------------------


tahuyaman said:


> _Any testimony which doesn't face scrutiny through cross examination is not credible_


That is silly on the face of it. There are all kinds of testimony ---under oath ---where a cross is not applied. Hell, I've given testimony under oath before government or judicial bodies many many times and not been cross examined. I have also given under oath testimony and was cross examined.   In either and all cases I told the truth as I knew it. 
"Under oath" is a pretty determinant factor the poster should consider. Testimony under oath carries the burden of perjury if one is found to be lying.  That is not insignificant.



tahuyaman said:


> _The country is in chaos now._


That is a sad confession.
We hope you can build a better life than you have to date in the country of your choosing.
In my own country, the United States, life is good. It is prosperous. It is healthier than ever. The air and water cleaner. Jobs are plentiful. Wages rising. Housing starts have been strong. Residential real estate values increasing significantly --- indicating people have access to money to buy their first, or upgrade to a nicer home.

So, for whatever country you live in, and if it is in chaos, well, we hope it improves for you.  And that you can have a better life for you and your family. Regardless which new country you move to.

Good luck.


----------



## Care4all

jknowgood said:


> She said he grabbed the wheel. Have you seen how far a six foot man would have to leap to cover the 10ft or so to grap the steering wheel in a limo? Not to mention, does the driver have full access to the president? Without a partition?




It's certainly hard to imagine trump being able to do that!!!


----------



## tahuyaman

Chillicothe said:


> She said she was told he grabbed the wheel.
> It's a noteworthy difference.
> Please note it.
> --------------------------------------------
> 
> That is silly on the face of it. There are all kinds of testimony ---under oath ---where a cross is not applied. Hell, I've given testimony under oath before government or judicial bodies many many times and not been cross examined. I have also given under oath testimony and was cross examined.   In either and all cases I told the truth as I knew it.
> "Under oath" is a pretty determinant factor the poster should consider. Testimony under oath carries the burden of perjury if one is found to be lying.  That is not insignificant.
> 
> 
> That is a sad confession.
> We hope you can build a better life than you have to date in the country of your choosing.
> In my own country, the United States, life is good. It is prosperous. It is healthier than ever. The air and water cleaner. Jobs are plentiful. Wages rising. Housing starts have been strong. Residential real estate values increasing significantly --- indicating people have access to money to buy their first, or upgrade to a nicer home.
> 
> So, for whatever country you live in, and if it is in chaos, well, we hope it improves for you.  And that you can have a better life for you and your family. Regardless which new country you move to.
> 
> Good luck.


One of the problems now is we have too many partisan hacks who can't view current events from an objective point of view .  They view everything subjectively.    The other big problem is they don't know it, or they deny it.


----------



## Care4all

Chillicothe said:


> She said she was told he grabbed the wheel.
> It's a noteworthy difference.
> Please note it


Yep.  But didn't she also say Engel (or SS guy) was sitting on the couch disheveled, while she was told the story by that other person and SS guy didn't speak up to deny it?


----------



## Lesh

tahuyaman said:


> *One of the problems now is we have too many partisan hacks who can't view current events from an objective point of view* .  They view everything subjectively.    The other big problem is they don't know it, or they deny it.


You mean like YOU?


----------



## Synthaholic




----------



## Lesh

Synthaholic said:


>


Yup.From Huffington Post

*TRUMP TANTRUM LAID BARE: THREW PLATES, GRABBED AT WHEEL*


----------



## Missouri_Mike

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> No. Step outside the bubble.


You stupid mother fucker. You started this bomb shell thread and look what the hell happened. You and the rest of your party all look like fucking retards. Your bombshell didn’t last a full afternoon. What did last is how gullible and ignorant you people are. And you keep doing this shit. You never learn.


----------



## Thinker101

Care4all said:


> Yep.  But didn't she also say Engel (or SS guy) was sitting on the couch disheveled, while she was told the story by that other person and SS guy didn't speak up to deny it?


----------



## Care4all

Thinker101 said:


>


Well, didn't she say that the SS guy was on the couch when she was given the secondhand account?  And he never spoke up, to confirm or deny the story she was told, at the time by the other guy there....though she said the SS guy seemed disheveled in her observation of him....??


----------



## tahuyaman

Lesh said:


> You mean like YOU?


Why are you trolling?  Aren’t you interested in holding a discussion?


----------



## tahuyaman

Double hearsay is not reliable.


----------



## tahuyaman

jknowgood said:


> She said he grabbed the wheel. Have you seen how far a six foot man would have to leap to cover the 10ft or so to grap the steering wheel in a limo? Not to mention, does the driver have full access to the president? Without a partition?


That sounds like a tall tale.


----------



## TemplarKormac




----------



## tahuyaman

citygator said:


> Seems scheduled pretty sudden… apparently the Jan 6 Committee is excited to present something to your open minds. I bet it’s a pretty big bombshell… any takers?
> 
> January 6 committee adds new hearing for Tuesday - CNNPolitics


This doesn’t seem to be much of a bombshell.    How long do you suppose they are going keep this going?


----------



## cnm

rightwinger said:


> How long before Republicans call it fake news?


Or resort to the Fifth (Avenue) defence...


----------



## WEATHER53

She speaks far too deliberatively and haltingly.  This appears to be thoughtful but I think it’s something else.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

WEATHER53 said:


> She speaks far too deliberatively and haltingly.  This appears to be thoughtful but I think it’s something else.


Let all the crazy out.


----------



## cnm

Colbert and crowd sing _'The Star Spangled Fifth'_: vid starts around second verse, I think.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones

citygator said:


> it’s a pretty big bombshell


It is.

Trump not only knew about the coming violence but facilitated and supported it; demanding that terrorists be allowed to take weapons to Ellipse:

‘She said Trump was told that morning that weapons were being confiscated from some of his supporters who came for his rally. Later, when Trump and his team were at the Ellipse – the large oval lawn on the south side of the White House – and before his speech, Trump barked out orders to his staffers to “take the mags away” – referring to the metal detectors – because the people in the crowd, “they’re not here to hurt me.”

Trump also said, “I don’t f**king care that they have weapons,” according to Hutchinson. This is particularly shocking, because Trump then encouraged the same crowd to march to the Capitol while lawmakers were affirming Biden’s win. (Hundreds of Trump’s diehard supporters soon stormed the Capitol, many carrying knives, bear spray, metal poles, tasers and a few guns.)’



			https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/28/politics/january-6-hearing-day-6-takeaways-hutchinson/index.html


----------



## struth

Zincwarrior said:


> Cool where is the agent's statement or testimony?


he’s statement has repeatedly been posted…his testimony won’t happene cause liz won’t call him..


----------



## tyroneweaver

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> She was there ! She is testifying to what she saw and heard firsty hand! How stupid are you??!!


roflmbo
I never believe a lib









						DEBUNKED! Jan. 6 Committee "Surprise" Witness GETS CAUGHT - US Secret Service Sources DENY Trump Tried to Grab Steering Wheel -- ARE WILLING TO TESTIFY!
					

Clown Cassidy Hutchinson with Clown Liz Cheney On Tuesday, Liz Cheney and the sham Jan. 6 committee brought in Mark Meadows staffer Cassidy Hutchinson as a “surprise witness.” Young Cassidy testified that “she was told” that when then-President Donald Trump was being driven back to the White...




					www.thegatewaypundit.com


----------



## Weatherman2020

WEATHER53 said:


> When the secret service, driver and/other occupants of the car come forward; what then will Democrats offer?


Like we’ve seen the last 6 years, once their lie is exposed they just quietly move on to the next lie screaming WE GOT HIM THIS TIME!


----------



## SeaMajor7

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> It is.
> 
> Trump not only knew about the coming violence but facilitated and supported it; demanding that terrorists be allowed to take weapons to Ellipse:
> 
> ‘She said Trump was told that morning that weapons were being confiscated from some of his supporters who came for his rally. Later, when Trump and his team were at the Ellipse – the large oval lawn on the south side of the White House – and before his speech, Trump barked out orders to his staffers to “take the mags away” – referring to the metal detectors – because the people in the crowd, “they’re not here to hurt me.”
> 
> Trump also said, “I don’t f**king care that they have weapons,” according to Hutchinson. This is particularly shocking, because Trump then encouraged the same crowd to march to the Capitol while lawmakers were affirming Biden’s win. (Hundreds of Trump’s diehard supporters soon stormed the Capitol, many carrying knives, bear spray, metal poles, tasers and a few guns.)’
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/28/politics/january-6-hearing-day-6-takeaways-hutchinson/index.html


You should be EMBARRASSED to believe this BULLSHIT!


----------



## Mac1958

This stuff is good to know.  Few, if any, will be held accountable, but it's good to know.

It took someone very close to bring down Gotti.  I don't see that happening.


----------



## SeaMajor7

Mac1958 said:


> This stuff is good to know.  Few, if any, will be held accountable, but it's good to know.
> 
> It took someone very close to bring down Gotti.  I don't see that happening.


"Ketchup on the wall"......


----------



## Mac1958

SeaMajor7 said:


> "Ketchup on the wall"......


I guess that's all you heard.  Okay.


----------



## j-mac

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Yes, I am going to run right out and compile the evidence for a squealing little dumbass who won't even watch the hearings.
> 
> Sure. I'll get right on that.


Why should anyone watch a joke like the 1/6 hearings that have no challenging testimony?


----------



## j-mac

Dragonlady said:


> No one has disputed her story and no one in the vehicle has denied it at all.


You’re a complete idiot.


----------



## SweetSue92

Mac1958 said:


> This stuff is good to know.  Few, if any, will be held accountable, but it's good to know.
> 
> It took someone very close to bring down Gotti.  I don't see that happening.



Mac probably still believes the pee tape


----------



## SweetSue92

Dragonlady said:


> No one has disputed her story and no one in the vehicle has denied it at all.



Ooooo....that aged poorly


----------



## SeaMajor7

Mac1958 said:


> I guess that's all you heard.  Okay.


That you believe that shit show is enough to know that you're a good example of the demented avenger subverted demoralized zombie Marxist brigade., and a pathetic political wind sock.


----------



## Mac1958

SeaMajor7 said:


> That you believe that shit show is enough to know that you're a good example of the demented avenger subverted demoralized zombie Marxist brigade., and a pathetic political wind sock.


Okay Trumpster, got it.


----------



## jknowgood

Lesh said:


> A. She was repeating a conversation
> 
> B. They weren't in the limo. They were in the SUV
> 
> C. This is the LEAST important accusation made today


Hearsay.


----------



## jknowgood

Chillicothe said:


> She said she was told he grabbed the wheel.
> It's a noteworthy difference.
> Please note it.
> --------------------------------------------
> 
> That is silly on the face of it. There are all kinds of testimony ---under oath ---where a cross is not applied. Hell, I've given testimony under oath before government or judicial bodies many many times and not been cross examined. I have also given under oath testimony and was cross examined.   In either and all cases I told the truth as I knew it.
> "Under oath" is a pretty determinant factor the poster should consider. Testimony under oath carries the burden of perjury if one is found to be lying.  That is not insignificant.
> 
> 
> That is a sad confession.
> We hope you can build a better life than you have to date in the country of your choosing.
> In my own country, the United States, life is good. It is prosperous. It is healthier than ever. The air and water cleaner. Jobs are plentiful. Wages rising. Housing starts have been strong. Residential real estate values increasing significantly --- indicating people have access to money to buy their first, or upgrade to a nicer home.
> 
> So, for whatever country you live in, and if it is in chaos, well, we hope it improves for you.  And that you can have a better life for you and your family. Regardless which new country you move to.
> 
> Good luck.


Like I said hearsay.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

tyroneweaver said:


> roflmbo
> I never believe a lib
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DEBUNKED! Jan. 6 Committee "Surprise" Witness GETS CAUGHT - US Secret Service Sources DENY Trump Tried to Grab Steering Wheel -- ARE WILLING TO TESTIFY!
> 
> 
> Clown Cassidy Hutchinson with Clown Liz Cheney On Tuesday, Liz Cheney and the sham Jan. 6 committee brought in Mark Meadows staffer Cassidy Hutchinson as a “surprise witness.” Young Cassidy testified that “she was told” that when then-President Donald Trump was being driven back to the White...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thegatewaypundit.com


Pull you head out and watch the testimony


----------



## rightwinger

tahuyaman said:


> This doesn’t seem to be much of a bombshell.    How long do you suppose they are going keep this going?


Going well so far

Lets keep the witnesses coming


----------



## rightwinger

jknowgood said:


> Like I said hearsay.


It can be verified
Call the agents


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

SeaMajor7 said:


> That you believe that shit show is enough to know that you're a good example of the demented avenger subverted demoralized zombie Marxist brigade., and a pathetic political wind sock.


Did you just spit up on yourself?


----------



## rightwinger

SeaMajor7 said:


> You should be EMBARRASSED to believe this BULLSHIT!



Trump can allow his key staff to testify and testify himself

Why won’t he?


----------



## rightwinger

Sunsettommy said:


> We all know you can't accept the truth of her probable lies since there are news about some people who were actually in the car saying she is LYING her ass off!
> 
> Your partisanship makes you GULLIBLE to bullshit.


Lets have them testify under oath

Works for me


----------



## Billiejeens

Lastamender said:


> You are watching them dig their own graves. 75 million voted for Trump in 2020. 10 million more votes for Trump than in 2016. You pissed them off and the backfiring of this fascist trial will be more than apparent in the Midterms.



Their bombshell witness recounted events that other people told her.
Then immediately, firsthand witnesses denied that any of it happened.

Shock -
Yet the Bubble cultists still believe.


----------



## Billiejeens

Pellinore said:


> The thrown-dinner and strangling-the-agent stories are glitzy and attention-grabbing, but to me the most damning testimony she has given so far is that Trump knew that the armed attendees of his rally were not there to hurt him.  That implies strongly that he knew they were there to hurt someone else.



Probably could have used those 20,000 National Guard Troops that President Trump authorized.
Yes?


----------



## Billiejeens

Peach45 said:


> I agree. They’re saying he tried to hijack The Beast, had to be restrained and then he tried to choke an agent. And THAT never leaked???? BS



The secret service already denied it.
Sorry but the people that you align with are really stupid.


----------



## Billiejeens

skews13 said:


> They’re not saying anything.
> 
> A witness that was there with first hand information, is testifying under oath is saying it.
> 
> So you’re saying she is lying under oath?



Who are you talking about?


----------



## rightwinger

Billiejeens said:


> Their bombshell witness recounted events that other people told her.
> Then immediately, firsthand witnesses denied that any of it happened.
> 
> Shock -
> Yet the Bubble cultists still believe.


Most of what she testified to were events she was witness to

If Republicans have evidence to the contrary, why won’t they testify under oath like Hutchinson did?


----------



## Nostra

rightwinger said:


> It can be verified
> Call the agents


The agents have already debunked her lies, Troll.


----------



## Billiejeens

rightwinger said:


> Most of what she testified to were events she was witness to
> 
> If Republicans have evidence to the contrary, why won’t they testify under oath like Hutchinson did?



I dismiss you troll.


----------



## Billiejeens

Nostra said:


> The agents have already debunked her lies, Troll.



Of course.

Anyone with a brain would know that it is not even possible to do what she claimed.


----------



## berg80

Billiejeens said:


> Their bombshell witness recounted events that other people told her.
> Then immediately, firsthand witnesses denied that any of it happened.
> 
> Shock -
> Yet the Bubble cultists still believe.


When Tony Ornato, the deputy chief of staff, told Hutchinson what happened the Secret Service agent Trump lunged at, Robert Engle, was standing right there. 
Hutchinson was asked if either of those people subsequently changed the account of what happened. She said they did not.


----------



## Billiejeens

berg80 said:


> When Tony Ornato, the deputy chief of staff, told Hutchinson what happened the Secret Service agent Trump lunged at, Robert Engle, was standing right there.
> Hutchinson was asked if either of those people subsequently changed the account of what happened. She said they did not.



You are simply lying.
It is what you do.
I dismiss you.


----------



## berg80

Billiejeens said:


> You are simply lying.
> It is what you do.
> I dismiss you.


Do you really think it surprises me that you dismiss the facts? Or that I care what a pissant like you thinks?


----------



## rightwinger

Billiejeens said:


> I dismiss you troll.


Accusing someone of being a troll…
Doesn’t answer the question

If Republicans have other versions of events, why don’t they testify under oath like Hutchinson did ?


----------



## Nostra

rightwinger said:


> Accusing someone of being a troll…
> Doesn’t answer the question
> 
> If Republicans have other versions of events, why don’t they testify under oath like Hutchinson did ?


Why would anyone want to touch this shitshow?

It's imploding every time they get together.  Just sit back and laugh at the made for TV Comedy Clown Show.


----------



## Chillicothe

SeaMajor7 said:


> _That you believe that shit show is enough to know that you're a good example of the demented avenger subverted demoralized zombie Marxist brigade., and a pathetic political wind sock._


------------------------------------------------------------------------

Whew!! Anger issues?

But, let's put that aside and focus on the young Republican woman's testimony. She said a lot of things...both on the live TV hearing, and in the depositions that we saw videos of.

So, poster Sea, you call the hearing a "shit show".  OK,  what about it was wrong?  Did the woman lie on substantive issues? Did the members of the panel act inappropriately? The two that spoke.....Cheney and the Thompson, well, did they lie?  And if they did, on what aspect of the testimony?

I ask these things as too often posters here use this venue as merely their form of a keyboard-enema. An opportunity to release their sense of grievance. And parade a little of their partisanship.

So, are you telling the chatroom that Cassidy Hutchinson lied on all things that she testified to?


Lastly, if I may, what is your take on her testimony that Rudy and Meadows asked for pre-emptive pardons?


----------



## jknowgood

rightwinger said:


> It can be verified
> Call the agents


You expect me to believe anything a liberal says? After years of the russian collusion lie you loons still try to push.


----------



## Billy_Bob

citygator said:


> Under oath?


LOL Fallacy Argument...  The Driver publicly acknowledged she was a liar.  That what she described, didn't happen.  She has now been refuted by Trump, the Driver, and by the lead Agent in charge who was in the passenger seat.

This bomb just blew up in your hands...


----------



## The Original Tree

Clipper said:


> Still suffering from that ass bleed, simpleton? And the attack on Democracy hearing hasen't even started yet. Gonna be a long day for you, CLOWN.


*The attack on Democracy is Joe Biden illegitimately sitting in The Oval Office.  How come you never protested The Dominion Voting Machines that Maduro used to overthrow Democracy in Venezuela like The DemNazi SS Leadership used to overthrow Democracy in America?  How come you never protested The Brown Shirts of The DemNazi Party burning America down to the ground?  Why weren't you protesting illegal changes to our voting laws which enabled fraud?  How come you never said anything about observers being kicked out from legally observing the count of the vote?  Why didn't you say anything about the 6 battle ground states simulataneously shutting down the vote count when Trump was running away with it, and then only to start up again after they ran the algorithms to change the vote counts?  Why didn't you protest 100s of liberal judges refusing to look at 1,000s of sworn affidavits from citizens who witnessed election fraud? *


----------



## Nostra




----------



## Weatherman2020

Soon after Alexander revealed that his sources challenged the story, Hutchinson’s lawyer, Jody Hunt, quickly attempted to walk back her testimony.

“Ms. Hutchinson testified, under oath, and recounted what she was told,” Hunt tweeted. “Those with knowledge of the episode also should testify under oath.”


----------



## Clipper

The Original Tree said:


> *The attack on Democracy is Joe Biden illegitimately sitting in The Oval Office.  How come you never protested The Dominion Voting Machines that Maduro used to overthrow Democracy in Venezuela like The DemNazi SS Leadership used to overthrow Democracy in America?  How come you never protested The Brown Shirts of The DemNazi Party burning America down to the ground?  Why weren't you protesting illegal changes to our voting laws which enabled fraud?  How come you never said anything about observers being kicked out from legally observing the count of the vote?  Why didn't you say anything about the 6 battle ground states simulataneously shutting down the vote count when Trump was running away with it, and then only to start up again after they ran the algorithms to change the vote counts?  Why didn't you protest 100s of liberal judges refusing to look at 1,000s of sworn affidavits from citizens who witnessed election fraud? *


You're not too bright are you? Your entire screed is a crock of shit based on conspiracy theories, lies spread by Dotard Trump & his goons over at Fox News. There isn't one shred of proof in anything you've alleged.

Seek help soon.


----------



## rightwinger

jknowgood said:


> You expect me to believe anything a liberal says? After years of the russian collusion lie you loons still try to push.



Hmmm…..You mean all those Trump Republicans were liberal?

Here, let me help you
DEEP STATE
RINO
Losers


----------



## rightwinger

Weatherman2020 said:


> Soon after Alexander revealed that his sources challenged the story, Hutchinson’s lawyer, Jody Hunt, quickly attempted to walk back her testimony.
> 
> “Ms. Hutchinson testified, under oath, and recounted what she was told,” Hunt tweeted. “Those with knowledge of the episode also should testify under oath.”
> 
> View attachment 663793



Good idea

Hutchinson testified under oath
Why did the others refuse?


----------



## Weatherman2020

rightwinger said:


> Good idea
> 
> Hutchinson testified under oath
> Why did the others refuse?


Why not ask those directly involved and not use hearsay in your Salem witch trial?


----------



## Weatherman2020

Clipper said:


> You're not too bright are you? Your entire screed is a crock of shit based on conspiracy theories, lies spread by Dotard Trump & his goons over at Fox News. There isn't one shred of proof in anything you've alleged.
> 
> Seek help soon.





Clipper said:


> Your entire screed is a crock of shit based on conspiracy theories


Hilarious. Tell us more about Russia, rapes, incest, and Trump knowing what each protester in DC had inside their cars.


----------



## Billy_Bob

rightwinger said:


> Good idea
> 
> Hutchinson testified under oath
> Why did the others refuse?


They have already stated they would do so publicly...  Guess who isn't allowing them to refute the lies?  The Committee... Now why would that be? Hmmmmmmmmmm


----------



## Clipper

Nostra said:


>


Your delusions won't change the fact that Dotard Trump is a criminal mob boss, CLOWN.


----------



## Weatherman2020

Clipper said:


> Your delusions won't change the fact that Dotard Trump is a criminal mob boss, CLOWN.


And your President again 1/25.


----------



## Billy_Bob

Clipper said:


> Your delusions won't change the fact that Dotard Trump is a criminal mob boss, CLOWN.


Coming from a dupe that has no evidence to support their accusations...  This is rich..


----------



## rightwinger

Billy_Bob said:


> They have already stated they would do so publicly...  Guess who isn't allowing them to refute the lies?  The Committee... Now why would that be? Hmmmmmmmmmm


OK….Bring them on and we will talk

You do realize they will have to testify on more than what Hutchinson testified to?

Run away!
Run away!


----------



## Billiejeens

berg80 said:


> Do you really think it surprises me that you dismiss the facts? Or that I care what a pissant like you thinks?



Poor bergy.


----------



## Billiejeens

Chillicothe said:


> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Whew!! Anger issues?
> 
> But, let's put that aside and focus on the young Republican woman's testimony. She said a lot of things...both on the live TV hearing, and in the depositions that we saw videos of.
> 
> So, poster Sea, you call the hearing a "shit show".  OK,  what about it was wrong?  Did the woman lie on substantive issues? Did the members of the panel act inappropriately? The two that spoke.....Cheney and the Thompson, well, did they lie?  And if they did, on what aspect of the testimony?
> 
> I ask these things as too often posters here use this venue as merely their form of a keyboard-enema. An opportunity to release their sense of grievance. And parade a little of their partisanship.
> 
> So, are you telling the chatroom that Cassidy Hutchinson lied on all things that she testified to?
> 
> 
> Lastly, if I may, what is your take on her testimony that Rudy and Meadows asked for pre-emptive pardons?



Do you know what they were actually asking for pardons for?

What specific actions?


----------



## Weatherman2020

rightwinger said:


> OK….Bring them on and we will talk
> 
> You do realize they will have to testify on more than what Hutchinson testified to?
> 
> Run away!
> Run away!


Why bring hearsay into your clown show and not talk to those directly involved?


----------



## Billy_Bob

rightwinger said:


> OK….Bring them on and we will talk
> 
> You do realize they will have to testify on more than what Hutchinson testified to?
> 
> Run away!
> Run away!


They have already told their stories publicly. They refuted everything she said as a lie.  Even the person that "told her" Stated he never made those statements to her and that they were a made-up lie.  SO, her source even calls her a liar.   

Once again, just like Ford was discredited by those she stated told her, this woman has been discredited.  I guess you all didn't learn your lesson when you tried to nuke Kavanaugh, and you tried it again.


----------



## rightwinger

Weatherman2020 said:


> Why bring hearsay into your clown show and not talk to those directly involved?


She brought up what she was told

Why won’t your guys testify to the contrary under oath?


----------



## rightwinger

Billy_Bob said:


> They have already told their stories publicly. They refuted everything she said as a lie.  Even the person that "told her" Stated he never made those statements to her and that they were a made-up lie.  SO, her source even calls her a liar.
> 
> Once again, just like Ford was discredited by those she stated told her, this woman has been discredited.  I guess you all didn't learn your lesson when you tried to nuke Kavanaugh, and you tried it again.



OK
Let them testify under oath like Hutchinson did

What are they afraid of?
Because testifying under oath is harder than speaking to Fox News


----------



## Billy_Bob

rightwinger said:


> She brought up what she was told


And there you have it...   THE FABRICATION EXPOSED... what she was told to bring up...  Thank You For exposing it.   Now who told her to say it?  Schiff?  Bernie?  Pelosi?  who exactly.


----------



## Billy_Bob

rightwinger said:


> OK
> Let them testify under oath like Hutchinson did
> 
> What are they afraid of?
> Because testifying under oath is harder than speaking to Fox News


Testify under oath about HEARSAY?  why should they?  It is not admissible in any court of law?  Your fallacy argument fails...  and you people can't see it..


----------



## tahuyaman

rightwinger said:


> Going well so far
> 
> Lets keep the witnesses coming


Why should this waste of time continue?


----------



## Nostra

Why hasn't Nazi Piglosi called the SS Agents in question to testify?  What is she afraid of?


----------



## rightwinger

tahuyaman said:


> Why should this waste of time continue?


Because we are sealing Trumps historical legacy


----------



## Billy_Bob

rightwinger said:


> Because we are sealing Trumps historical legacy


Nope, you're trying to write a lie..  and it isn't working...


----------



## jknowgood

rightwinger said:


> Hmmm…..You mean all those Trump Republicans were liberal?
> 
> Here, let me help you
> DEEP STATE
> RINO
> Losers


Lol, your girl Hillary started that lie to over throw a legitimate election.


----------



## Nostra

And yet another lie is exposed.....










						Top Former White House Lawyer Delivers Devastating Blow To Cassidy Hutchinson Testimony | The Daily Wire
					






					www.dailywire.com


----------



## ColonelAngus

When are they going to depose Ray Epps?

Why doesnt the cult want him questioned?


----------



## Weatherman2020

rightwinger said:


> She brought up what she was told
> 
> Why won’t your guys testify to the contrary under oath?


Hearsay is only admissible in kangaroo courts.


----------



## Weatherman2020

rightwinger said:


> Because we are sealing Trumps historical legacy


As the best President in modern history.


----------



## Faun

Nostra said:


> Why doesn't Nazi Piglosi call the Agents who have already debunked her lies, Dumbass?



They should. At the very least, if those agents make a public statement disputing her account, the 1/6 committee should address that so that it's on the public record.

That aside, you lied. You falsely claimed she lied but you have no proof Tony Ornato didn't tell her what she claimed he told her.


----------



## Faun

Weatherman2020 said:


> Hearsay is only admissible in kangaroo courts.



She didn't appear in court.


----------



## Billy_Bob

Faun said:


> They should. At the very least, if those agents make a public statement disputing her account, the 1/6 committee should address that so that it's on the public record.
> 
> That aside, you lied. You falsely claimed she lied but you have no proof Tony Ornato didn't tell her what she claimed he told her.


We have his publicly given statement on tape...  You do know what an unsolicited statement is and what weight it carries in a court of law, Don't you?


----------



## Faun

jknowgood said:


> Well that part proved she is lying. Cupcake.



Great, prove she lied...


----------



## Faun

Billy_Bob said:


> We have his publicly given statement on tape...



Link...


----------



## Weatherman2020

Faun said:


> She didn't appear in court.


Clown show.


----------



## Chillicothe

Billiejeens said:


> _Do you know what they were actually asking for pardons for?   What specific actions?_



No, I do not.  Your questions are good questions.  I hope that future testimony or revelations will show us the answers.
There was testimony that Gaetz's 'ask' was very very broad and going back many years.*

What is noteworthy for me though, is these requests were for 'pre-emptive' pardons. Not pardons after a conviction, or even an indictment. To me, that is a 'tell'.  A signal that they strongly suspected that what they had done was a violation and could possibly catch up with them eventually.  Ergo.....let's obtain a 'get-outta-jail' card now to keep in the safety-deposit box.... if that eventuality comes to pass.

I personally look at it as not foresight or wisdom.....but rather a tacit admission that they knew they had committed some bad juju and they were scrambling for self-preservation.



*CBS News on April 7, 2021 reported:   "
Congressman Matt Gaetz, a close ally of former President Trump, asked the White House for a blanket preemptive pardon before Mr. Trump left office, two sources familiar with the situation confirm to CBS News. 

One of the sources said Gaetz asked for the blanket preemptive pardon for both himself and other congressional allies. The source noted that Gaetz and a few others couched the request broadly, implying that anyone close to Mr. Trump should receive a preemptive pardon...."


----------



## Weatherman2020

We've got forty year high inflation, cities are setting all time highs for murders all over the country, gas prices just set an all time high, the border is wide open, hell, moms can't even find baby formula, and
Democrats see all this going on and focus on a private citizen.


----------



## tahuyaman

rightwinger said:


> Because we are sealing Trumps historical legacy


Actually you are not.  You aren't doing anything. You are a spectator.  You are only witnessing a drill in hyper-partisanship by people who never got over the 2016 election.


----------



## Billy_Bob

All of the news that Cassidy Hutchison was discredited has been scrubbed from search engines...   Just wow...  All of the videos of the agents and those who made public statements ARE GONE>!   

BIG TECH is censoring what is getting out...


----------



## tahuyaman

Weatherman2020 said:


> We've got forty year high inflation, cities are setting all time highs for murders all over the country, gas prices just set an all time high, the border is wide open, hell, moms can't even find baby formula, and
> Democrats see all this going on and focus on a private citizen.


They are trying to divert the public's attention away from their failures.  It's not working  because virtually everyone in the country is having to work through these failures


----------



## Faun

Billy_Bob said:


> All of the news that Cassidy Hutchison was discredited has been scrubbed from search engines...   Just wow...  All of the videos of the agents and those who made public statements ARE GONE>!
> 
> BIG TECH is censoring what is getting out...



LOL

So you have no link to corroborate your claim.

Figures.


----------



## Billy_Bob

Faun said:


> So you have no link to corroborate your claim.
> 
> Figures.


Moron...  It is public knowledge... But your all giddy that the information is no longer available in the public domain because of your buddies in Big TECH.     Don't worry, I know where to find it. and it's coming out...


----------



## Faun

Billy_Bob said:


> Moron...  It is public knowledge... But your all giddy that the information is no longer available in the public domain because of your buddies in Big TECH.     Don't worry, I know where to find it. and it's coming out...



LOL

It's "public knowledge" that can't be found on the Internet.

Riiiiight.


----------



## Billy_Bob

Faun said:


> LOL
> 
> It's "public knowledge" that can't be found on the Internet.
> 
> Riiiiight.


The videos remain.  You just cant search for them at the moment.  It won't take Youtube long to remove or limit the videos..


----------



## rightwinger

Weatherman2020 said:


> Hearsay is only admissible in kangaroo courts.


No it isn’t. 
Not if it is identified as hearsay.

In this case, she directly heard the report as part of her duties


----------



## Zincwarrior

rightwinger said:


> No it isn’t.
> Not if it is identified as hearsay.
> 
> In this case, she directly heard the report as part of her duties


Additionally she was a direct witness to:
1) Trump knowing there were multiple armed persons in the crowd.
2) Telling them to fight and march on the Capital.
3) Planning on leading them AT the Capital.


----------



## Chillicothe

The Original Tree said:


> _How come you never protested The* Dominion Voting Machine*s that Maduro used to overthrow Democracy in Venezuela like The DemNazi SS Leadership used to *overthrow Democracy in America?* _





The Original Tree said:


> _How come you never protested The Brown Shirts of The DemNazi Party* burning America down to the groun*d? _





The Original Tree said:


> _ Why didn't you say anything about the 6 battle ground states *simulataneously shutting down the vote count* when Trump was running away with it, _





The Original Tree said:


> _and then only to start up again after they _*ran the algorithms to change the vote counts? *


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I love this bar.  The DewDropInn at the corner of Cloud Cuckoo Land.
There be nutters there.  But entertaining nutters.    🖖

IMHO




Weatherman2020 said:


> _Soon after Alexander revealed that his sources challenged the story, Hutchinson’s lawyer, Jody Hunt,* quickly attempted to walk back her testimony.       *“Ms. Hutchinson testified, under oath, and recounted what she was told,” Hunt tweeted. “Those with knowledge of the episode also should testify under oath.”_


_"attempted to walk back"_?????
Ummm, nope. That is a sad mis-read of the statement. The lawyer is simply re-enforcing the fact that Ms Hutchinson made her statement under oath. The others contradicting her are refusing.....or at any rate, haven't raised their right hand to testify they are truthful.
So there is that.
---------------------------------------------------------------------



Billy_Bob said:


> _We have *his* publicly given statement on tape._




And we have _*her*_ publicly given statement on tape.
AND...not unimportantly.......her's is under oath.


----------



## Weatherman2020

rightwinger said:


> No it isn’t.
> Not if it is identified as hearsay.
> 
> In this case, she directly heard the report as part of her duties


Democrats relying on hearsay instead of those directly involved says everything.


----------



## Weatherman2020

Zincwarrior said:


> Additionally she was a direct witness to:
> 1) Trump knowing there were multiple armed persons in the crowd.
> 2) Telling them to fight and march on the Capital.
> 3) Planning on leading them AT the Capital.


WE GOT HIM NOW!


----------



## Billy_Bob

Zincwarrior said:


> Additionally she was a direct witness to:
> 1) Trump knowing there were multiple armed persons in the crowd.
> 2) Telling them to fight and march on the Capital.
> 3) Planning on leading them AT the Capital.


There were no arms in the general crowd... 

The statement was to go peacefully....

He wasn't going to the Capitol as his driver and lead agent have explained.

Strike out...


----------



## Weatherman2020

Zincwarrior said:


> Additionally she was a direct witness to:
> 1) Trump knowing there were multiple armed persons in the crowd.
> 2) Telling them to fight and march on the Capital.
> 3) Planning on leading them AT the Capital.


Wow. Trump is so good he knows what’s inside the cars of every 1/6 protester. 
THE EYE KNOWS


----------



## rightwinger

Weatherman2020 said:


> Democrats relying on hearsay instead of those directly involved says everything.


Those directly involved are welcome to testify under oath

Hutchinson did, why won’t they?


----------



## Billy_Bob

Chillicothe said:


> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> I love this bar.  The DewDropInn at the corner of Cloud Cuckoo Land.
> There be nutters there.  But entertaining nutters.    🖖
> 
> IMHO
> 
> 
> 
> _"attempted to walk back"_?????
> Ummm, nope. That is a sad mis-read of the statement. The lawyer is simply re-enforcing the fact that Ms Hutchinson made her statement under oath. The others contradicting her are refusing.....or at any rate, haven't raised their right hand to testify they are truthful.
> So there is that.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And we have _*her*_ publicly given statement on tape.
> AND...not unimportantly.......her's is under oath.


So, all you got is he said - she said...  and we have cooberating witnesses.  Nice try but this is going to end badly for you folks...


----------



## Faun

Billy_Bob said:


> Moron...  It is public knowledge... But your all giddy that the information is no longer available in the public domain because of your buddies in Big TECH.     Don't worry, I know where to find it. and it's coming out...



That doesn't confirm what you claimed. You said  Tony Ornato gave a taped unsolicited statement. That video you posted says no such thing.

How many time are you going to repeat you were full of shit?


----------



## rightwinger

Billy_Bob said:


> There were no arms in the general crowd...
> 
> The statement was to go peacefully....
> 
> He wasn't going to the Capitol as his driver and lead agent have explained.
> 
> Stike out...


As was reported yesterday, there were arms confiscated including AR15s and Glocks

Trump was informed many of his people were armed and couldn’t witness his speech. He said let them to the Capitol anyway and sent them to get Mike Pence and Congress


----------



## Faun

Billy_Bob said:


> There were no arms in the general crowd...



The police say differently. Why should anybody believe you over them?


----------



## rightwinger

Faun said:


> The police say differently. Why should anybody believe you over them?


Key testimony is that Trump was informed they were armed and refused to tone down his rhetoric and still sent them to the Capitol to stop Congress from certifying 

As Trump stated, they were not after him, so why would he care?


----------



## iamwhatiseem

Now all three Secret Service members in the SUV have all said they are willing to testify and cooperate with the "investigation" that Hutchinson's testimony is a fabrication, as well as the SS member that was supposed to have told her - also said he never told her anything of the sort and wasn't even in the car - and also says he will testify saying so under oath.

*SHE LIED*


----------



## rightwinger

iamwhatiseem said:


> Now all three Secret Service members in the SUV have all said they are willing to testify and cooperate with the "investigation" that Hutchinson's testimony is a fabrication, as well as the SS member that was supposed to have told her - also said he never told her anything of the sort and wasn't even in the car - and also says he will testify saying so under oath.
> 
> *SHE LIED*


Good to hear

Now they can be asked to testify exactly what Trump said and did.


----------



## Weatherman2020

rightwinger said:


> Those directly involved are welcome to testify under oath
> 
> Hutchinson did, why won’t they?


Clown show has the SS scheduled to testify before I heard from a friends uncle about something he heard from a neighbor?


----------



## Weatherman2020

rightwinger said:


> As was reported yesterday, there were arms confiscated including AR15s and Glocks
> 
> Trump was informed many of his people were armed and couldn’t witness his speech. He said let them to the Capitol anyway and sent them to get Mike Pence and Congress


Guns legally inside of locked cars make you piddle your pants?


----------



## iamwhatiseem

rightwinger said:


> Good to hear
> 
> Now they can be asked to testify exactly what Trump said and did.


Yeah uh huh.
The circus committee spent hours willing to listen to a "witness" with third-hand information - that they like. But are unwilling to hear, and never called to testify - the ACTUAL PEOPLE THERE.

 And this is yet another example of why this is a banana republic clown show


----------



## rightwinger

Weatherman2020 said:


> Guns legally inside of locked cars make you piddle your pants?


You are just making shit up 

According to testimony there was a guy up in a tree with an AR15

Also guns confiscated at the magnetic scanners


----------



## rightwinger

iamwhatiseem said:


> Yeah uh huh.
> The circus committee spent hours willing to listen to a "witness" with third-hand information - that they like. But are unwilling to hear, and never called to testify - the ACTUAL PEOPLE THERE.
> 
> And this is yet another example of why this is a banana republic clown show


Actually most of her testimony was from direct conversations with key staff and Trump himself


----------



## Billy_Bob

rightwinger said:


> Actually most of her testimony was from direct conversations with key staff and Trump himself


There is a word for that... HEARSAY and not one lick of it is admissible in any court of law.  The Jan 6 Committee was supposed to be a fact-finding committee and use rules of evidence.  Pelosi ensured that did not happen.  You idiot are spewing bull shit.. That is all you have.  And its crumbling now...


----------



## Zincwarrior

rightwinger said:


> Actually most of her testimony was from direct conversations with key staff and Trump himself


Yes direct testimony that there were armed members of the crowd, that he sent the crowd to the Capital, and that he wanted to meet the crowd there. Whether he "grabbed for the wheel" is irrelevant.


----------



## tahuyaman

Weatherman2020 said:


> Democrats relying on hearsay instead of those directly involved says everything.


Actually it's double hearsay.   I heard it from someone who heard it from someone else who was told by another person ......


----------



## tahuyaman

Zincwarrior said:


> Yes direct testimony that there were armed members of the crowd, that he sent the crowd to the Capital, and that he wanted to meet the crowd there. Whether he "grabbed for the wheel" is irrelevant.


Does anyone really believe Trump lunged from the rear of a limo to the front and grabbed the steering wheel?    If people are going to invent stories, they should at least make them somewhat believable


----------



## Billiejeens

Chillicothe said:


> No, I do not.  Your questions are good questions.  I hope that future testimony or revelations will show us the answers.
> There was testimony that Gaetz's 'ask' was very very broad and going back many years.*
> 
> What is noteworthy for me though, is these requests were for 'pre-emptive' pardons. Not pardons after a conviction, or even an indictment. To me, that is a 'tell'.  A signal that they strongly suspected that what they had done was a violation and could possibly catch up with them eventually.  Ergo.....let's obtain a 'get-outta-jail' card now to keep in the safety-deposit box.... if that eventuality comes to pass.
> 
> I personally look at it as not foresight or wisdom.....but rather a tacit admission that they knew they had committed some bad juju and they were scrambling for self-preservation.
> 
> 
> 
> *CBS News on April 7, 2021 reported:   "
> Congressman Matt Gaetz, a close ally of former President Trump, asked the White House for a blanket preemptive pardon before Mr. Trump left office, two sources familiar with the situation confirm to CBS News.
> 
> One of the sources said Gaetz asked for the blanket preemptive pardon for both himself and other congressional allies. The source noted that Gaetz and a few others couched the request broadly, implying that anyone close to Mr. Trump should receive a preemptive pardon...."



I don't just ask pertinent questions.
I know the answer and it had nothing to do with January 6th.


----------



## ColonelAngus

Faun said:


> They should. At the very least, if those agents make a public statement disputing her account, the 1/6 committee should address that so that it's on the public record.
> 
> That aside, you lied. You falsely claimed she lied but you have no proof Tony Ornato didn't tell her what she claimed he told her.



Why dont you want Ray Epps to testify? He is on video inciting the insurrection.


----------



## Billiejeens

tahuyaman said:


> Does anyone really believe Trump lunged from the rear of a limo to the front and grabbed the steering wheel?    If people are going to invent stories, they should at least make them somewhat believable



This -

And --- it was not just a regular limo.


----------



## Zincwarrior

tahuyaman said:


> Does anyone really believe Trump lunged from the rear of a limo to the front and grabbed the steering wheel?    If people are going to invent stories, they should at least make them somewhat believable


Its irrelevant. A story she relayed that makes the papers.  Again this is the real bombshell:
Direct testimony that both Trump and Meadows were deeply involved and planned the march to the Capital; that there were armed members of the crowd; that he sent the crowd to the Capital; and that he wanted to meet the crowd there. Whether he "grabbed for the wheel" is irrelevant.


----------



## Faun

Billy_Bob said:


> There is a word for that... HEARSAY and not one lick of it is admissible in any court of law.  The Jan 6 Committee was supposed to be a fact-finding committee and use rules of evidence.  Pelosi ensured that did not happen.  You idiot are spewing bull shit.. That is all you have.  And its crumbling now...



Hearsay is sometimes admissible in a court of law; which these hearings aren't anyway.


----------



## Faun

ColonelAngus said:


> Why dont you want Ray Epps to testify? He is on video inciting the insurrection.



He already did. What a pity you don't pay attention to real news.


----------



## ColonelAngus

Faun said:


> He already did. What a pity you don't pay attention to real news.



I didnt see it.  Why wasnt it televised?  Link the video.


----------



## TemplarKormac




----------



## rightwinger

Zincwarrior said:


> Whether he "grabbed for the wheel" is irrelevant.


Conservatives deny that he attempted to grab the wheel 

What they don’t deny is that he was in the middle of a Temper Tantrum at the time and that he was trying to participate in the attack on the Capitol


----------



## skews13

Nostra said:


> Show us YOUR proof she didn't know what she said was a lie.
> 
> See how that works when you are dealing with hearsay?



Nothing she said was a lie. And any grand jury will believe her testimony. And nobody is going to perjure themselves under oath n a courtroom, to protect Trump. That’s why they don’t want to testify.

See how that works?


----------



## rightwinger

TemplarKormac said:


>


What Beast ride?

Trump was not in the Beast


----------



## TemplarKormac

Zincwarrior said:


> Its irrelevant. A story she relayed that makes the papers.  Again this is the real bombshell:
> Direct testimony that both Trump and Meadows were deeply involved and planned the march to the Capital; that there were armed members of the crowd; that he sent the crowd to the Capital; and that he wanted to meet the crowd there. Whether he "grabbed for the wheel" is irrelevant.


If she lied about Trump lunging for the wheel and lied about what those agents told her,  that easily calls the rest of her testimony into question.

She is no longer a believable witness.


----------



## Synthaholic

struth said:


> the agent deriving the care has publicly come forward and said it’s a lie…liz and the committee refuse to call him


False.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

tyroneweaver said:


> roflmbo
> I never believe a lib
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DEBUNKED! Jan. 6 Committee "Surprise" Witness GETS CAUGHT - US Secret Service Sources DENY Trump Tried to Grab Steering Wheel -- ARE WILLING TO TESTIFY!
> 
> 
> Clown Cassidy Hutchinson with Clown Liz Cheney On Tuesday, Liz Cheney and the sham Jan. 6 committee brought in Mark Meadows staffer Cassidy Hutchinson as a “surprise witness.” Young Cassidy testified that “she was told” that when then-President Donald Trump was being driven back to the White...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thegatewaypundit.com


But you are stupid enough to believe the Gateway Pundit.


----------



## TemplarKormac

rightwinger said:


> What Beast ride?
> 
> Trump was not in the Beast


Trolls will be trolls. Ignored.


----------



## struth

Synthaholic said:


> False.


no he’s said it wasn’t true and said he’d like to testify…that’s what nbc reported


----------



## iceberg

Lesh said:


> She was absolutry present for most of her testimony.
> 
> Most damning were the parts where Trump was informed that members in the crowd were armed (including with AR-a5s and Glocks) and Trump's response was "They aren't here to hurt me" and repeatedly demanding that the magnetometers that check for weapons be removed


i can only assume you're intentionally being "obtuse".

ANY LIE the left lobs out, you sucker-fish onto and swear it's true regardless of the fact it's "heresay" and refuted by the very people who WERE THERE.

so i'll ask - why? why do you reject ANYTHING that doesn't advance your hatred of trump as a lie? why do you believe 2nd hand info vs people who were there?


----------



## Zincwarrior

TemplarKormac said:


> If she lied about Trump lunging for the wheel and lied about what those agents told her,  that easily calls the rest of her testimony into question.
> 
> She is no longer a believable witness.


If she relayed gossip its not lying if the gossiper told her something false.


----------



## ColonelAngus

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> But you are stupid enough to believe the Gateway Pundit.



Attack the source rather than discuss the content.

Dont you get tired of being a cliche cultist.


----------



## TemplarKormac

Zincwarrior said:


> If she relayed gossip its not lying if the gossiper told her something false.


In fact, they are saying they never told her what she said they told her. 

Outright fabrication.


----------



## Synthaholic




----------



## iceberg

Zincwarrior said:


> If she relayed gossip its not lying if the gossiper told her something false.


you verify things like this before you make these accusations.

or can we accuse you of massive crimes and call you guilty based on what someone heard someone else say? even this has been refuted as not what she was told.

is that how you want THE SYSTEM to work? how it works for ONE is how it needs to work for ALL. so if you're cool doing this to someone else, you're cool it being done to you.

are you?


----------



## struth

skews13 said:


> Nothing she said was a lie. And any grand jury will believe her testimony. And nobody is going to perjure themselves under oath n a courtroom, to protect Trump. That’s why they don’t want to testify.
> 
> See how that works?


Sorry....career federal agents, that she claims were at the heart of this...say she lied


----------



## Billiejeens

Faun said:


> He already did. What a pity you don't pay attention to real news.



Link?


----------



## Weatherman2020

tahuyaman said:


> Does anyone really believe Trump lunged from the rear of a limo to the front and grabbed the steering wheel?    If people are going to invent stories, they should at least make them somewhat believable


Even if he did, what’s the crime?


----------



## Desperado

I thought a witness actually had to see the acts in person otherwise it is just hearsay and not allowed into the court


----------



## Billy_Bob

rightwinger said:


> Conservatives deny that he attempted to grab the wheel
> 
> What they don’t deny is that he was in the middle of a Temper Tantrum at the time and that he was trying to participate in the attack on the Capitol



You pieces of shit are stretching really bad...  and you just got cut off by the driver and the assistant chief of staff.  all you idiots have is a bloody stump now.... 









						Secret Service agent and former White House official willing to testify that false claims were made at Jan. 6 hearing about Trump
					

A former White House official and a Secret Service agent said they were willing to testify in the Jan. 6 hearings in order to contradict claims that former President Donald Trump got into an altercation while trying to make his way to the Capitol rioting.  	The claims were made by Cassidy...




					www.theblaze.com


----------



## ColonelAngus

Faun said:


> He already did. What a pity you don't pay attention to real news.



You got a link to that transcript?


----------



## citygator

tahuyaman said:


> This doesn’t seem to be much of a bombshell.    How long do you suppose they are going keep this going?


Facts established:
1. Trump knew the election wasn’t stolen as told by his staff

2. Trump knew the crowd he assembled to go over to the capitol was armed

3. Trump intended to personally lead the assault on the Capitol but had to have his orders disobeyed to be kept in check

4. Trump knew there was a violent attack on the Capitol ongoing with an armed crowd and held out for hours to see what would happen before calming the crowd

5. Trump expressed his lack of concern for the VPs safety to key personnel.  



Hang Trump for treason.


----------



## iamwhatiseem

rightwinger said:


> Actually most of her testimony was from direct conversations with key staff and Trump himself


Actually RW, her testimony is not worth the air it took to make her vocal chords vibrate.
Four people who were all there stated, and are willing to testify that what she says simply isn't true. And the person she cited as who told her, says he WANTS to testify because he not only never said that to her - but couldn't have because he wasn't even there.
  When a "witness" is shown to have provably lied under oath - the rest of their testimony is invalid for obvious reasons.
If you choose to still believe her - then it is because you CHOOSE to.


----------



## Billy_Bob

ColonelAngus said:


> You got a link to that transcript?


The Committee refuses to release it, even to members of congress...


----------



## Billy_Bob

citygator said:


> Facts established:
> 1. Trump knew the election wasn’t stolen as told by his staff
> 
> 2. Trump knew the crowd he assembled to go over to the capitol was armed
> 
> 3. Trump intended to personally lead the assault on the Capitol but had to have his orders disobeyed to be kept in check
> 
> 4. Trump knew there was a violent attack on the Capitol ongoing with an armed crowd and held out for hours to see what would happen before calming the crowd
> 
> 5. Trump expressed his lack of concern for the VPs safety to key personnel.
> 
> 
> 
> Hang Trump for treason.


All of what you posted is a fabricated lie by DEMOCRATS.  Propagated by Pelosi's Salem Witch Trial of falsified testimony.


----------



## Faun

ColonelAngus said:


> I didnt see it.  Why wasnt it televised?  Link the video.



Fuck off and do your own homework.


----------



## bripat9643

Blaine Sweeter said:


> You don't know the difference between and hearing and a trial????  LOLOL  Idiot.


Evidence is also cross examined in a hearing, moron.  Both the DA and the accused's attorney are present.


----------



## tahuyaman

citygator said:


> Facts established:
> 1. Trump knew the election wasn’t stolen as told by his staff
> 
> 2. Trump knew the crowd he assembled to go over to the capitol was armed
> 
> 3. Trump intended to personally lead the assault on the Capitol but had to have his orders disobeyed to be kept in check
> 
> 4. Trump knew there was a violent attack on the Capitol ongoing with an armed crowd and held out for hours to see what would happen before calming the crowd
> 
> 5. Trump expressed his lack of concern for the VPs safety to key personnel.
> 
> 
> 
> Hang Trump for treason.


Fact.  You are 


citygator said:


> Facts established:
> 1. Trump knew the election wasn’t stolen as told by his staff
> 
> 2. Trump knew the crowd he assembled to go over to the capitol was armed
> 
> 3. Trump intended to personally lead the assault on the Capitol but had to have his orders disobeyed to be kept in check
> 
> 4. Trump knew there was a violent attack on the Capitol ongoing with an armed crowd and held out for hours to see what would happen before calming the crowd
> 
> 5. Trump expressed his lack of concern for the VPs safety to key personnel.
> 
> 
> 
> Hang Trump for treason.


Fact. Your bombshell testimony fell flat as it was exposed as double hearsay.


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> no he’s said it wasn’t true and said he’d like to testify…that’s what nbc reported



He hasn't said that and NBC didn't report he said that. What the did report was someone else claiming  he would testify to that.


----------



## Billy_Bob

Faun said:


> Fuck off and do your own homework.


You keep getting your butt handed to you...

I love it.. the black Knight crying "it's only a flesh wound"...


----------



## citygator

iceberg said:


> i can only assume you're intentionally being "obtuse".
> 
> ANY LIE the left lobs out, you sucker-fish onto and swear it's true regardless of the fact it's "heresay" and refuted by the very people who WERE THERE.
> 
> so i'll ask - why? why do you reject ANYTHING that doesn't advance your hatred of trump as a lie? why do you believe 2nd hand info vs people who were there?


She’s not the left you dim wit. She one of yours.


----------



## citygator

Billy_Bob said:


> All of what you posted is a fabricated lie by DEMOCRATS.  Propagated by Pelosi's Salem Witch Trial of falsified testimony.


That’s republican testimony.  We’ve had no democrats give relevant testimony.  They are all Trump staff. Give it up dude. Your guy is a traitor. Why battle insanity by believing nonsense?


----------



## Zincwarrior

Billy_Bob said:


> You keep getting your butt handed to you...
> 
> I love it.. the black Knight crying "it's only a flesh wound"...


A truly classic scene.


----------



## citygator

Seems like we need a reminder.  She was a hardcore republican Trump staff insider. She has zero allegiance with liberals.  

You either can believe she is lying under oath for the other side or men are lying while not under oath to keep from going to jail for wrong doing.  Which is more likely dipshits?


----------



## Faun

Billy_Bob said:


> You keep getting your butt handed to you...
> 
> I love it.. the black Knight crying "it's only a flesh wound"...



LOL

By getting my ass handed to me, you mean by me embarrassing you by showing you were full of shit when you falsely claimed Tony Ornato had given a taped unsolicited statement? Or do you mean me educating a rightard who didn't know that Epps already gave testimony to the 1/6 committee?


----------



## Billy_Bob

Faun said:


> LOL
> 
> By getting my ass handed to me, you mean by me embarrassing you by showing you were full of shit when you falsely claimed Tony Ornato had given a taped unsolicited statement? Or do you mean me educating a rightard who didn't know that Epps already gave testimony to the 1/6 committee?


AND just like the black knight you can't see that your story has no arms and no legs while you bleed out... 
I guess we will call it a draw...  What are you going to do?  Bleed on me..?    LOL


----------



## citygator

Billy_Bob said:


> AND just like the black knight you can't see that your story has no arms and no legs while you bleed out...
> I guess we will call it a draw...  What are you going to do?  Bleed on me..?    LOL


She’s a right wing hard core Trump staff insider under oath.  She’s not a liberal. She was there and telling you what she saw as a fellow conservative. She’s telling you because she is under oath.  What the fuck is wrong with you?


----------



## Synthaholic

Republican David French


----------



## Faun

Billy_Bob said:


> AND just like the black knight you can't see that your story has no arms and no legs while you bleed out...
> I guess we will call it a draw...  What are you going to do?  Bleed on me..?    LOL



Except it's not my story.


----------



## Lastamender

citygator said:


> She’s a right wing hard core Trump staff insider under oath.  She’s not a liberal. She was there and telling you what she saw as a fellow conservative. She’s telling you because she is under oath.  What the fuck is wrong with you?


And the two people in the car with Trump are prepared to testify under oath what she said never happened. Case closed, more lies.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

tyroneweaver said:


> roflmbo
> I never believe a lib
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DEBUNKED! Jan. 6 Committee "Surprise" Witness GETS CAUGHT - US Secret Service Sources DENY Trump Tried to Grab Steering Wheel -- ARE WILLING TO TESTIFY!
> 
> 
> Clown Cassidy Hutchinson with Clown Liz Cheney On Tuesday, Liz Cheney and the sham Jan. 6 committee brought in Mark Meadows staffer Cassidy Hutchinson as a “surprise witness.” Young Cassidy testified that “she was told” that when then-President Donald Trump was being driven back to the White...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thegatewaypundit.com


She's not a liberal.

But the reporter you just sourced in your article is.

So apparently you do believe libs over Trump's people, when it suits you to do so.


----------



## Billy_Bob

Faun said:


> Except it's not my story.


ITs the one you all are clinging to for dear life... Man up and own it...


----------



## Rye Catcher

Billy_Bob said:


> The item she was testifying about is at issue.  She wasn't there for the event so her testimony is nothing more than hearsay.  No court will give it any credibility.   It doesn't matter that she was under oath, she lied. She lied before congress, and it will be proven...
> 
> Thanks for playing..


Once again, an investigation is different than a court trial.  Hearsay is evidence that leads to further investigation.  Your claim that mens rea was within the character of this witness cannot be proved.  Of course you've already taken a "lock her up" attitude and that I find is deplorable.

For a moment consider _Mens Rea _which refers to *criminal intent*. The literal translation from Latin is "guilty mind."  The statements by Barrett, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh clearly intended to overturn R v. W and did not answer the question on R v W truthfully.


----------



## Faun

Synthaholic said:


> Republican David French



They're desperate to avoid having to defend Trump sending armed domestic terrorists to the Capitol.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Billy_Bob said:


> ITs the one you all are clinging to for dear life... Man up and own it...


You are really setting yourself up for disappointment.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> He hasn't said that and NBC didn't report he said that. What the did report was someone else claiming  he would testify to that.


i literally link to the nbc reporter


----------



## Lastamender

MORE LIES: Cassidy Hutchinson ALSO Lied about Handwritten Note in Testimony -- And Liz Cheney KNEW IT WAS A FALSE because the Actual Author of the Note Testified It Was His!
					

Cassidy Hutchinson — Amber Heard, Jussie Smollett, Christine Blasey Ford (creator unknown) Was anything she said true? On Tuesday, Liz Cheney and the sham Jan. 6 committee brought in Mark Meadows’ former staffer Cassidy Hutchinson as a “surprise witness.” Young Cassidy testified that “she was...




					www.thegatewaypundit.com
				




The committee cannot look any worse if they tried, but it seems they are trying.


----------



## Faun

Billy_Bob said:


> ITs the one you all are clinging to for dear life... Man up and own it...



If you're talking about what she claimed she was told happened in the Beast, you're out of your fucking mind.


----------



## Billy_Bob

Rye Catcher said:


> Once again, an investigation is different than a court trial.  Hearsay is evidence that leads to further investigation.  Your claim that mens rea was within the character of this witness cannot be proved.  Of course you've already taken a "lock her up" attitude and that I find is deplorable.
> 
> For a moment consider _Mens Rea _which refers to *criminal intent*. The literal translation from Latin is "guilty mind."  The statements by Barrett, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh clearly intended to overturn R v. W and did not answer the question on R v W truthfully.


Regurgitating known lies to further your agenda is not helping you...


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> i literally link to the nbc reporter



... who quoted someone other than the agents in the car that day with Trump. The agents themselves have not yet made a public comment about it.


----------



## Chillicothe

Billiejeens said:


> _I don't just ask pertinent questions.
> I know the answer......._


---------------------------------------------------------


Which begs the question:  What is the answer?

Saddle up, Skinnyjeans. Show us your dance-steps.


----------



## Lastamender

Never Trumpers, Ex-Staffers Fall for Cassidy Hutchinson's Testimony
					

Never Trumpers and disgruntled former White House staffers fell hard for Cassidy Hutchinson's testimony on Capitol Hill Tuesday.




					www.breitbart.com
				




The bomb blew up in their faces.


----------



## Lastamender

Faun said:


> ... who quoted someone other than the agents in the car that day with Trump. The agents themselves have not yet made a public comment about it.


The agents that provoked the riot on Jan. 6th have made no public comment either.


----------



## Faun

Lastamender said:


> The agents that provoked the riot on Jan. 6th have made no public comment either.


----------



## ColonelAngus

Faun said:


> Fuck off and do your own homework.


It doesnt exist. You brainwashed fuck.


----------



## Lastamender

Faun said:


>


It will come out like every other lie they have been feeding you. Keep sweating.


----------



## Nostra

Faun said:


> They should. At the very least, if those agents make a public statement disputing her account, the 1/6 committee should address that so that it's on the public record.
> 
> That aside, you lied. You falsely claimed she lied but you have no proof Tony Ornato didn't tell her what she claimed he told her.


She is a proven liar.  Deal with it, Simp.


----------



## Faun

ColonelAngus said:


> It doesnt exist. You brainwashed fuck.



LOL

Of course it does. Just because you can't see it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.


----------



## Faun

Nostra said:


> She is a proven liar.  Deal with it, Simp.



She might be but nothing's been proven yet.


----------



## Zincwarrior

If they do testify, all that is needed for corroboration is that Trump wanted to go to the Capital building.  Thats the issue, not if he threw a fit or whatever.


----------



## citygator

Lastamender said:


> And the two people in the car with Trump are prepared to testify under oath what she said never happened. Case closed, more lies.


Can I ask you why you believe the men who aren’t under oath that have a reason to lie are telling the truth and the person who is under oath with no reason to lie… is lying?


----------



## Flash

Rye Catcher said:


> Once again, an investigation is different than a court trial.  Hearsay is evidence that leads to further investigation.  Your claim that mens rea was within the character of this witness cannot be proved.  Of course you've already taken a "lock her up" attitude and that I find is deplorable.
> 
> For a moment consider _Mens Rea _which refers to *criminal intent*. The literal translation from Latin is "guilty mind."  The statements by Barrett, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh clearly intended to overturn R v. W and did not answer the question on R v W truthfully.


Is that like the two dingbats that The Worthless Negro appointed and that dumbass affrimative action Negro bitch Potatohead appointed lying when they said they would uphold the Constitution but yet voted against basic Constitutional rights?  Well the dumbass Negor hasn't done it yet but we know she will.


----------



## Flash

citygator said:


> Can I ask you why you believe the men who aren’t under oath that have a reason to lie are telling the truth and the person who is under oath with no reason to lie… is lying?


You Libtard filth always want to believe the lies put out by the Democrat Dirty Tricks Department, don't you?  But you always get schlonged with the truth.


----------



## Chillicothe

skews13 said:


> _And nobody is going to perjure themselves under oath in a courtroom, to protect Trump. That’s why they don’t want to testify._


I agree that is likely a major part of their motivation.  
THAT.....and they don't want to be on video depicting their taking the 5th 100 times in a row.
Both look bad.
But the perjury sends 'em to jail.

Also, one would think that one's loyalty to Don Trump may, possibly, probably,  likely .....NOT be returned in kind by Don Trump.
Meaning, will Don be your six?
Does he have your back if you get down to the nut-cutting?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



citygator said:


> Facts established:
> 1.* Trump knew* the election wasn’t stolen as told by his staff
> 2.*Trump knew* the crowd he assembled to go over to the capitol was armed
> 3. *Trump intended *to personally lead the assault on the Capitol........
> 4. *Trump knew* there was a violent attack on the Capitol ongoing with an armed crowd and held out for hours.......
> 5. *Trump expressed his lack of concern* for the VPs safety to key personnel.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

CG's list bears repeating.  
CG's list is the real deal.
Some wrestling match between grown men in a luxury automobile....doesn't threaten America's democracy.
The items on CG's list......do.

Also, I found Cheney's closing comments about witness intimidation notable.
Notable in that:  They think it has occurred. 
Notable in that they were issuing a warning.
Notable in that I suspect we will hear more about that little gig. 

Witness intimidation against a federal witness ain't bean-bag. The Feds, the DOJ, can throw some real hardball heaters-to-the-head on a charge like that.
And....if I was one of the blokes who made one of those calls....well, I'd hire a lawyer insto-presto. 
And I wouldn't look to Don Trump to have my six ---for the call --- I made ---for him --- to a witness.

Anyway, that's just how I think.


----------



## marvin martian

citygator said:


> Can I ask you why you believe the men who aren’t under oath that have a reason to lie are telling the truth and the person who is under oath with no reason to lie… is lying?



^^^Look everyone, the guy who believed Jussie Smollett is telling you that this chick is _totally _telling the truth!

LOL


----------



## Lastamender

citygator said:


> Can I ask you why you believe the men who aren’t under oath that have a reason to lie are telling the truth and the person who is under oath with no reason to lie… is lying?


Can I ask you why you believe a discredited lie? And she had a reason to lie. 15 minutes of fame and her anger Trump did not hire her to work for him after he was defrauded out of office.

Again, you look like fascist fools. You wear it well.


----------



## Rye Catcher

TemplarKormac said:


> That wasn't the pertinent issue. It was whether he incited an insurrection, and he didn't. Pure and simple.



Pure, not so much; simple, of course:  simple people really believe trump didn't incite the riot.  

The truth is trump in his own words incited a coup, and the coup failed. Anyone who denies trump was not guilty is a damn liar or an idiot.

Given that you are not an idiot, the only other choice is you are a damn liar, and someone who is opposed to democracy.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> ... who quoted someone other than the agents in the car that day with Trump. The agents themselves have not yet made a public comment about it.


haha NBC reported what the agents in the car said…it didn’t happen and they want to testify


----------



## Chillicothe

Lastamender said:


> The committee cannot look any worse if they tried,





Lastamender said:


> The agents that provoked the riot on Jan. 6th.....





Flash said:


> the Worthless Negro appointed and that dumbass affrimative action Negro bitch Potatohead appointed.......





Flash said:


> Well the dumbass Negor hasn't.....





Flash said:


> You Libtard filth.......


----------------------------------------------------
A pair of clichéd Trump Supporters?
Are poster '*Lastamender'* and poster '*Flash'* really just the same person with two different avatars?
They sound so similar.  Use the same language. The  same thought process and word choice.
They sound so Trump Supporter cliché' -like.


IMHO

And, are all Trump Supporters like Lastamender and Flash?


----------



## TemplarKormac

Rye Catcher said:


> Pure, not so much; simple, of course:  simple people really believe trump didn't incite the riot.
> 
> The truth is trump in his own words incited a coup, and the coup failed. Anyone who denies trump was not guilty is a damn liar or an idiot.
> 
> Given that you are not an idiot, the only other choice is you are a damn liar, and someone who is opposed to democracy.


----------



## Billy_Bob

This thread has turned into a shear desperation to make anything stick shit show...  NO matter how many times the lies are debunked...


----------



## Lastamender

Chillicothe said:


> ----------------------------------------------------
> A pair of clichéd Trump Supporters?
> Are poster '*Lastamender'* and poster '*Flash'* really just the same person with two different avatars?
> They sound so similar.  Use the same language. The  same thought process and word choice.
> They sound so Trump Supporter cliché' -like.
> 
> 
> IMHO
> 
> And, are all Trump Supporters like Lastamender and Flash?


----------



## g5000

Crick said:


> What makes you think they are being blackmailed and what makes you think the FBI and the DOJ are corrupt?


"I want to bleev it, so it must be true!"


----------



## iamwhatiseem




----------



## Lastamender

g5000 said:


> "I want to bleev it, so it must be true!"


That is all you got. You are projecting again.


----------



## g5000

TemplarKormac said:


> Common sense tells you that in a law-based society like ours, especially in places where those laws are made, that both sides should be allowed to ask questions, not one.


Once again, tard, the Republicans had their chance to place Trump lickspittles on the committee, and they refused in a snit.

Only a seriously stupid person like yourself would now drink their piss and cries of moral outrage.


----------



## g5000

WEATHER53 said:


> Also lying dumbasses. The Trump  people who you say “refused to participate” in Fact refused to be limited to answering questions only and not be allowed to present their side.


Every witness is allowed to make an opening statement.

"Yeahbut Hunter!  Yeahbut gas prices!  Yeahbut inflation!  LOOK!  A SQUIRREL!"


----------



## g5000

TemplarKormac said:


> I'll comment on whatever I wish, whenever I wish, you wannabe fascist.


All you are capable of doing is manufacturing bullshit to deflect from the facts which you have steadfastly refused to observe.

You are just showing yourself to be a full-fledge piss guzzling useful idiot for Trump who does not care one whit about the truth.


----------



## g5000

WEATHER53 said:


> Let us know when any of the above are offered and proven


Already done.  In the hearings.  Which you have obviously not seen.



WEATHER53 said:


> Also, on any given day of 2,000 people there will be those who are armed


You really, really should have watched Hutchinson's testimony.  That way you would have avoided sounding like a complete retard.


----------



## marvin martian

g5000 said:


> "I want to bleev it, so it must be true!"



^^^Says the guy who _swore _Jussie Smollett was telling the truth.

LOL


----------



## g5000

TemplarKormac said:


> Given that the people conducting this hearing have no intellectual honesty of their own, I am not obliged to employ any of my own. Congress as a body politic have no credibility with me whatsoever.
> 
> Thanks.


If "intellectual honesty" were one of your actual guideposts, you would be a Never Trumper.


----------



## kaz

g5000 said:


> Already done.  In the hearings.  Which you have obviously not seen.
> 
> 
> You really, really should have watched Hutchinson's testimony.  That way you would have avoided sounding like a complete retard.



No one should believe anything about a scripted performance with no defense.  It's just for racists like you to masturbate over


----------



## g5000

Couchpotato said:


> So Im no expert on this but doesnt the President ride in the back of the limo?    Was he diving over the seat to grab the steering wheel?   I would guess there's some sort of divider in there as well isnt there?     I dont ride around in limo's ever but I remember from years ago that it wouldnt be super easy to get into the front of the limo from the back, I cant imagine it's easier in the Presidential Limo.   But lets say he did.   So.


Back Seat Driver Donald Trump was in an SUV, not a limo.  According to Hutchinson's testimony, he attempted to lunge for the wheel, but was blocked by the Secret Service.


----------



## kaz

g5000 said:


> If "intellectual honesty" were one of your actual guideposts, you would be a Never Trumper.



"Honesty" ???      You think the Democrats are "honest?"   You've lost your ever loving racist mind


----------



## kaz

g5000 said:


> Back Seat Driver Donald Trump was in an SUV, not a limo.  According to Hutchinson's testimony, he attempted to lunge for the wheel, but was blocked by the Secret Service.



According to the secret service agents who were actually there, she lied and you're a racist


----------



## g5000

Faun said:


> No, just more evidence you're an idiot. As though the forum even needs more evidence.
> 
> A lie is telling something the liar knows to be false.
> 
> She testified, _“I looked at Tony, and he said, ‘Did you f—ing hear what happened in the Beast? He proceeded to tell me that when the president got in the Beast, he was under the impression from Mr. Meadows that the off the record movement to the Capitol was still possible or likely to happen and that Bobby had more information.”_
> 
> So let's see your proof that Tony *didn't* tell her what happened in the Beast when Trump got in....


Engel and Ornato will need to testify.


----------



## Flash

Chillicothe said:


> ----------------------------------------------------
> A pair of clichéd Trump Supporters?
> Are poster '*Lastamender'* and poster '*Flash'* really just the same person with two different avatars?
> They sound so similar.  Use the same language. The  same thought process and word choice.
> They sound so Trump Supporter cliché' -like.
> 
> 
> IMHO
> 
> And, are all Trump Supporters like Lastamender and Flash?


Just telling the truth to these stupid TDS afflicted Moon Bat turds that thought it would be a great idea to steal an election and install an idiot like Potatohead as President.


----------



## Lastamender

g5000 said:


> All you are capable of doing is manufacturing bullshit to deflect from the facts which you have steadfastly refused to observe.
> 
> You are just showing yourself to be a full-fledge piss guzzling useful idiot for Trump who does not care one whit about the truth.


You have no facts. The committee is a failure and a national joke.


----------



## TemplarKormac

g5000 said:


> If "intellectual honesty" were one of your actual guideposts, you would be a Never Trumper.





g5000 said:


> Once again, tard, the Republicans had their chance to place Trump lickspittles on the committee, and they refused in a snit.
> 
> Only a seriously stupid person like yourself would now drink their piss and cries of moral outrage.





g5000 said:


> All you are capable of doing is manufacturing bullshit to deflect from the facts which you have steadfastly refused to observe.
> 
> You are just showing yourself to be a full-fledge piss guzzling useful idiot for Trump who does not care one whit about the truth.


----------



## Billy_Bob

And now major news sources are pulling their Jan 6 "Bombshell" stories....

I hope they like the egg that is all over them...  The Jan 6 narrative is collapsing, Schiff and Cheney are now the laughingstock as they were the ones who fabricated this schitt show that has been proven false in less than 24 hours.


----------



## Zincwarrior

*Wiener Dog Mod Mode: Allrighty everyone, lets try to avoid insulting other posters here. *


----------



## g5000

Faun said:


> I think it's been established Trump wasn't in the Beast.


See post 730.

Trump was in the Beast.

There are several presidential vehicles.


----------



## g5000

Weatherman2020 said:


> Trump is very athletic. He smashed the RPG proof glass with his fist and tried to grab the wheel. Really.


There is no partition in the SUV.

As for the limo, the president has the ability to lower the partition.  In fact, he is the ONLY person able to lower the partition.

Are you done making shit up yet?


----------



## The Original Tree

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Um...they condemned him from the beginning of the hearings.
> 
> But you didn't know that, because you know less than nothing about the hearings.
> 
> They said on day one that they would establish, using facts and testimony, Trump's high crimes.


*I am sure you have a list of actual crimes committed, right Butt Plug?

I see you still use that Obama bobblehead dildo you lovingly call, Russian Collusion.
I bet you watch that fake pee tape over and over again and fantasize that you are Donald Trump making love to Vladimir Putin.

Delusional as always.

If we actually started lining people up for Treason like we should have with The Russian Collusion Scam, this annoying bullshit would stop.

In my opinion Obama, Comey, Strozk, Mueller, Baker, Ohr, Paige, Brennan, Clapper, McCabe, Clinton and Biden should all be on trial for treason and should be sentenced appropriately.*


----------



## g5000

TemplarKormac said:


> None of that matters when there are people within the USSS willing to testify under oath that she lied about the whole incident.


The only testimony which can confirm or deny Hutchinson's statements about what took place in the Beast is from Engel and/or Ornato.

They are the only witnesses as to what they told Hutchinson about the incident.


----------



## g5000

Sunsettommy said:


> She wasn't there at all!
> 
> Her HEARSAY claims are worthless and inadmissible in court.


Only a small portion of her testimony was hearsay.

The bulk was a firsthand account.  Not hearsay.


----------



## g5000

Sunsettommy said:


> Turley asked the obvious question, why didn't the J6 Committee clear this with the lead SS involved with transportation of Trump.
> 
> From Twitter
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jonathan Turley
> @JonathanTurley
> 
> ...It is curious that the Committee would air the account without confirming from the Secret Service, particularly since Bobby Engel appears willing to testify. This is the danger of using witnesses to repeat third party accounts.
> 
> LINK


Engel has already been interviewed by the J6 committee.  Earlier this month.

I would be surprised if the J6 committee allowed Hutchinson as a warmup act if they didn't already have Engel on record about the incident in the beast.


----------



## g5000

Sunsettommy said:


> Her "testimony" is HEARSAY you idiot!
> 
> It was NOT even a testimony at all,
> 
> Merriam-Webster:
> 
> "a solemn declaration usually made orally by a *witness* under oath in response to interrogation by a lawyer or authorized public official"
> 
> _bolding mine_
> 
> ===
> 
> She wasn't a witness.


Only a small fraction of her testimony was hearsay.

The bulk was firsthand account.

Nice try.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

TemplarKormac said:


> Wow. Her political partisanship is legendary in modern American politics. And it only leads one to assume she let her politics dictate who she put on that committee.
> 
> Do I have to spell this out for you?


You do have to spell it out because your logic is retarded given the facts. 
Of course that’s complete nonsense. 
The Repubs were offered just as many members as the Dems. Two were refused as they were potential witnesses. Replacements were allowed but the Minority leader instead pulled them all and refused to participate. 

Per the House Rules, the Speaker then made her choice without the republicans.


----------



## g5000

Billy_Bob said:


> Matter of FACT witnesses, people who were present, say she LIED..


How ironic.  All you have is hearsay that other people present say she lied.

Only Engel and Ornato can confirm or deny her testimony.  No one else.


----------



## marvin martian

g5000 said:


> Only a small portion of her testimony was hearsay.
> 
> The bulk was a firsthand account.  Not hearsay.



^^^Says the guy who swore Jussie Smollett and Christine Blasey Ford were telling the truth.

LOL! You fucking idiots will _literally _believe anything.


----------



## iamwhatiseem

g5000 said:


> You really, really should have watched Hutchinson's testimony.  That way you would have avoided sounding like a complete retard.


  So yeah.... you are just going to ignore the fact that everyone who was actually there, all of the Secret Servicemen have said to both Fox News and CNN they want to testify that what Hutchinson said happened - never happened. And who she says told her - has also come forward and said he is willing to testify he not only did not tell her that, but he was not even there.
   So just... gloss that right over eh?


----------



## Hutch Starskey

TemplarKormac said:


> So, Hutch Starskey I'd like to hear what you thought was funny about this post.


Your projection and lack of self awareness is hilarious.


----------



## The Original Tree

Clipper said:


> You're not too bright are you? Your entire screed is a crock of shit based on conspiracy theories, lies spread by Dotard Trump & his goons over at Fox News. There isn't one shred of proof in anything you've alleged.
> 
> Seek help soon.


*Biden's, Clinton's, & Obama's Russian Collusion was the only attack on our Democracy of late.  That is all I need to know about you and your treasonous friends.  COVID19 was also used to attack The Republic and make our election of Joe Biden completely illegitimate.

You all should face a firing squad.  If you did then people like you would quit weaponizing the government against The American People and their political rivals like a Banana Republic or like the Nazis did in Nazi Germany.*


----------



## citygator

Flash said:


> You Libtard filth always want to believe the lies put out by the Democrat Dirty Tricks Department, don't you?  But you always get schlonged with the truth.
> 
> View attachment 663891


You didn’t answer my question.  Why would a life long Republican insider lie under oath to make other republicans simply look bad and risk prison for perjury?  Now, why would someone not under oath lie with no downside when the truth would make them look bad?


----------



## kaz

g5000 said:


> Only a small portion of her testimony was hearsay.
> 
> The bulk was a firsthand account.  Not hearsay.



LOL, such an open mind!  LOL, I crack myself up ...


----------



## The Original Tree

Chillicothe said:


> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> I love this bar.  The DewDropInn at the corner of Cloud Cuckoo Land.
> There be nutters there.  But entertaining nutters.    🖖
> 
> IMHO
> 
> 
> 
> _"attempted to walk back"_?????
> Ummm, nope. That is a sad mis-read of the statement. The lawyer is simply re-enforcing the fact that Ms Hutchinson made her statement under oath. The others contradicting her are refusing.....or at any rate, haven't raised their right hand to testify they are truthful.
> So there is that.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And we have _*her*_ publicly given statement on tape.
> AND...not unimportantly.......her's is under oath.


*Straight from The Nazi Playbook and The Satanic DemNazi book Rules for Radicals on how to tell lies and undermine everyone who tells the truth.*


----------



## The Original Tree

citygator said:


> You didn’t answer my question.  Why would a life long Republican insider lie under oath to make other republicans simply look bad and risk prison for perjury?  Now, why would someone not under oath lie with no downside when the truth would make them look bad?


*Globalists have no party but The Satanic Party.  People lie.  Liars go to Hell.  Party affiliation has nothing to do with whether a person will lie or not.*


----------



## Billy_Bob

g5000 said:


> How ironic.  All you have is hearsay that other people present say she lied.
> 
> Only Engel and Ornato can confirm or deny her testimony.  No one else.


Thier statements have been recorded.  They are UNSCOLISTITED statement's unlike Hutchenson's and are admissible in court as direct evidence... Hers, not so much..


----------



## kaz

citygator said:


> You didn’t answer my question.  Why would a life long Republican insider lie under oath to make other republicans simply look bad and risk prison for perjury?



They want to be loved by the left wing media, like Liz Chaney.   Or they're afraid of leftist violence, like Kavanaugh 



citygator said:


> Now, why would someone not under oath lie with no downside when the truth would make them look bad?



Because Democrats are the only ones who matter and they will all back up the lie


----------



## Hutch Starskey

Lesh said:


> So Engles has already spoken to the Committee and they chose to include that tidbit about about Trump assaulting Engles.
> 
> What does that tell you?


It tells me that Engles probably testified to this privately but refused to do so publicly so Hutchinson did instead.
I can’t imagine something so explosive would be made public without prior corroboration.


----------



## Billo_Really

rightwinger said:


> How long before Republicans call it fake news?


Like I always said, Trump makes for good TV.


----------



## citygator

marvin martian said:


> ^^^Says the guy who swore Jussie Smollett and Christine Blasey Ford were telling the truth.
> 
> LOL! You fucking idiots will _literally _believe anything.


Link.  Or are you lying about that too?  You’ll try to simply insulting me rather than think logically.


----------



## Nostra

rightwinger said:


> Those directly involved are welcome to testify under oath
> 
> Hutchinson did, why won’t they?


Nazi Piglosi hasn’t asked the Agents who debunked her lies.  I wonder why…..


----------



## Nostra

rightwinger said:


> Key testimony is that Trump was informed they were armed and refused to tone down his rhetoric and still sent them to the Capitol to stop Congress from certifying
> 
> As Trump stated, they were not after him, so why would he care?


“Peacefully and Patriotically let your voices be heard”

Why won’t  Nazi play that part?


----------



## Nostra

skews13 said:


> Nothing she said was a lie. And any grand jury will believe her testimony. And nobody is going to perjure themselves under oath n a courtroom, to protect Trump. That’s why they don’t want to testify.
> 
> See how that works?


She has been caught in multiple lies, Dumbass.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> "She also said she witnessed her former boss burn documents in his office following a meeting with Pennsylvania Republican *Scott Perry*, a far-right congressman who pushed Trump to replace *Jeffrey Rosen*, the acting attorney general at the time, with *Jeffrey Clark*, a DOJ official prepared to use the department to aid the fraudulent electors plot. (Perry was among the GOP lawmakers who sought pardons after the January 6 riot.) Hutchinson expanded on that earlier testimony Tuesday, revealing that Meadows was among those who sought a pardon from Trump after the attack."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “I Don't F--king Care That They Have Weapons”: White House Aide Gives Bombshell Testimony Of the Day Trump Incited the Capitol Attack
> 
> 
> Cassidy Hutchinson testified in the January 6 committee hearing that Trump attacked his security detail, threw his lunch against the wall and raged at staff on Jan. 6 for not letting him go to the Capitol alongside rioters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.vanityfair.com


Perry and Jordan were also the two excluded from the committee. Now we see why.


----------



## citygator

Meadows claimed in his book that Trump was speaking “metaphorically” about going to the capital. Proving that was BS (and that Trump knew some of his people were armed when he tried to lead them to the capital) is hugely important to sedition charges for Trump (and probably Meadows). 

Whether Trump grabbed the steering wheel, or attempted to grab it, or grabbed at the agent, or didnt grab him is interesting but not relevant.


----------



## Nostra

rightwinger said:


> What Beast ride?
> 
> Trump was not in the Beast


The serial perjurer yesterday claimed he was.


----------



## Nostra

Zincwarrior said:


> If she relayed gossip its not lying if the gossiper told her something false.


So this is “The Gossip Committee”


----------



## tyroneweaver

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> She's not a liberal.
> 
> But the reporter you just sourced in your article is.
> 
> So apparently you do believe libs over Trump's people, when it suits you to do so.


my my thx for proving my point 
It wasn't the woman in question I was referring to


----------



## tyroneweaver

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> But you are stupid enough to believe the Gateway Pundit.



naw, just abc and nbc news








						Secret Service to ‘push back’ against Cassidy Hutchinson’s testimony: report
					

The Secret Service will push back against bombshell testimony by former Trump White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson, according to reports by NBC News and ABC News.Hutchinson testified about a conversation with Trump Deputy Chief of Staff Tony Ornato and Robert Engel, who ran Trump's Secret Service...




					www.rawstory.com


----------



## Nostra

Has anyone corroborated anything Gossip Girl had to say at the Show yesterday?


----------



## marvin martian

Nostra said:


> So this is “The Gossip Committee”



Pretty much. Though it's really just a reality show for idiots, as evidenced by every idiot on this forum tuning in.


----------



## Lesh

Nostra said:


> Has anyone corroborated anything Gossip Girl had to say at the Show yesterday?


She was repeating something Ornato told her. What's to stop him from lying about what he told her?

He said she said


----------



## Couchpotato

g5000 said:


> Back Seat Driver Donald Trump was in an SUV, not a limo.  According to Hutchinson's testimony, he attempted to lunge for the wheel, but was blocked by the Secret Service.


Which is being disputed by the people actually in the vehicle at the time.     So there’s that.  

Also i find it hard to believe DT’s fat ass did any of that.


----------



## Couchpotato

Lesh said:


> She was repeating something Ornato told her. What's to stop him from lying about what he told her?
> 
> He said she said


What would be the SS agents motivation for lying?   Typically we never hear from those guys on any subject.


----------



## Billy_Bob

Nostra said:


> Has anyone corroborated anything Gossip Girl had to say at the Show yesterday?


Nope... I got nothin...  everything she has said has been disproved..


----------



## Billy_Bob

Couchpotato said:


> What would be the SS agents motivation for lying?   Typically we never hear from those guys on any subject.


Not only that, but if they are found to have lied, they lose their security clearance and their job.


----------



## Lesh

Billy_Bob said:


> Nope... I got nothin...  everything she has said has been disproved..


Nope...not even


----------



## Lesh

Couchpotato said:


> What would be the SS agents motivation for lying?


They love Trump


----------



## tahuyaman

citygator said:


> She’s a right wing hard core Trump staff insider under oath.  She’s not a liberal. She was there and telling you what she saw as a fellow conservative. She’s telling you because she is under oath.  What the fuck is wrong with you?


Some of what she said is not what she saw.  It’s what she says someone else told her who heard it from someone else.   That’s double hearsay.  Then the one she said told her says that he never told her anything and another who was involved said it never happened


----------



## Weatherman2020

g5000 said:


> There is no partition in the SUV.
> 
> As for the limo, the president has the ability to lower the partition.  In fact, he is the ONLY person able to lower the partition.
> 
> Are you done making shit up yet?


I’m going to have so much fun with this thread next week.


----------



## tahuyaman

Lesh said:


> They love Trump


So they’re lying?


----------



## Weatherman2020

Lesh said:


> They love Trump


As does all who love America


----------



## Clipper

The Original Tree said:


> *Biden's, Clinton's, & Obama's Russian Collusion was the only attack on our Democracy of late.  That is all I need to know about you and your treasonous friends.  COVID19 was also used to attack The Republic and make our election of Joe Biden completely illegitimate.
> 
> You all should face a firing squad.  If you did then people like you would quit weaponizing the government against The American People and their political rivals like a Banana Republic or like the Nazis did in Nazi Germany.*


The only thing worse then Trump throwing his McD's Big Mac, Large fries & Diet Coke lunch against a wall is him thinking he's human. That & him reaching for the throat of that SS Agent. 

Try to stop imagining your head up Trump's ass for a brief moment & snap out of it, retard.


----------



## Lesh

tahuyaman said:


> So they’re lying?


It appears so


----------



## Weatherman2020

Clipper said:


> The only thing worse then Trump throwing his McD's Big Mac, Large fries & Diet Coke lunch against a wall is him thinking he's human. That & him reaching for the throat of that SS Agent.
> 
> Try to stop imagining your head up Trump's ass for a brief moment & snap out of it, retard.


You can tell the Leftards are seeing lie #45,387 about Trump is ready for the garbage bin. They get really snippy.


----------



## tahuyaman

Lesh said:


> It appears so


What evidence do you cite to support that?  Just your opinion?


----------



## citygator

You guys are fucking nuts. Absolutely insane.  Absolutely fucking insane.  

Woman has first hand account of Mark Meadows learning the crowd is armed.  First hand account that Mark knew that Trump wanted to go to Hill and knew the crowd was armed.  First hand account that Trump was mad he couldn’t go to the capitol.  First hand account the Mark Meadows said Trump didn’t care Pence was at risk.  

The one thing you fucking traitor pieces of shit want to debate was the details of a story related about exactly how mad Trump was they didn’t go to the capital ok?  You are all fucking nuts. You deserve a king.


----------



## Zincwarrior

Lesh said:


> It appears so


Or just that the story was exaggerated. Again the story is irrelevant. Whether or not they corroborate Trump wanted to go to the Capital is the only thing that they matter for.


----------



## Weatherman2020

citygator said:


> You guys are fucking nuts. Absolutely insane.  Absolutely fucking insane.
> 
> Woman has first hand account of Mark Meadows learning the crowd is armed.  First hand account that Mark knew that Trump wanted to go to Hill and knew the crowd was armed.  First hand account that Trump was mad he couldn’t go to the capitol.  First hand account the Mark Meadows said Trump didn’t care Pence was at risk.
> 
> The one thing you fucking traitor pieces of shot want to debate was the details of a story related about exactly how mad Trump was they didn’t go to the capital ok?  You are all fucking nuts. You deserve a king.


I’m going to have sooooo much fun with this thread next week!


----------



## citygator

From that "lib" rag (sarcasm), the Washington Examiner . . . .









						Trump proven unfit for power again
					

Former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson’s Tuesday testimony ought to ring the death knell for former President Donald Trump’s political career. Trump is unfit to be anywhere near power ever again.




					www.washingtonexaminer.com
				




Former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson’s Tuesday testimony ought to ring the death knell for former President Donald Trump’s political career. Trump is unfit to be anywhere near power ever again.

Hutchinson’s resume alone should establish her credibility. The 25-year-old had already worked at the highest levels of conservative Republican politics, including in the offices of Sen. Ted Cruz (TX) and House Minority Whip Steve Scalise (LA), before becoming a top aide for former Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows.

In short, Hutchinson was a conservative Trumpist true believer and a tremendously credible one at that. She did not overstate things, did not seem to be seeking attention, and was very precise about how and why she knew what she related and about which testimony was firsthand and which was secondhand but able to be corroborated.


----------



## Rye Catcher

TemplarKormac said:


>


Given your 'response', I was a bit wrong, you are both a damn liar and a childish grownup, incapable of posting an honest rebuttal.


----------



## Rye Catcher

Lastamender said:


> You have no facts. The committee is a failure and a national joke.


The Committee is not a failure, it has proved by the witness that trump is guilty of both state and federal crimes.  The witness to most of these crimes is trump himself.  The man-child can't ever shut his mouth.


----------



## WEATHER53

rightwinger said:


> Going well so far
> 
> Lets keep the witnesses coming


What did she witness?


----------



## Lastamender

Rye Catcher said:


> The Committee is not a failure, it has proved by the witness that trump is guilty of both state and federal crimes.  The witness to most of these crimes is trump himself.  The man-child can't ever shut his mouth.


Bullshit.


----------



## Clipper

Nostra said:


> Has anyone corroborated anything Gossip Girl had to say at the Show yesterday?


The hearings aren't over yet, CLOWN. 

Still plenty of time to stock up on Kleenex.


----------



## Lastamender

Clipper said:


> The hearings aren't over yet, CLOWN.
> 
> Still plenty of time to stock up on Kleenex.


They were over before they started.


----------



## tahuyaman

Rye Catcher said:


> The Committee is not a failure, it has proved by the witness that trump is guilty of both state and federal crimes.  The witness to most of these crimes is trump himself.  The man-child can't ever shut his mouth.


Actually it hasn’t proved that Trump is guilty of anything.

  I get that many people don’t like his personality, but being an ass is not a crime.


----------



## Clipper

Lastamender said:


> They were over before they started.


 Hardly.


----------



## kaz

tahuyaman said:


> Actually it hasn’t proved that Trump is guilty of anything.
> 
> I get that many people don’t like his personality, but being an ass is not a crime.



Rye Catcher doesn't believe in allowing a defense for his political enemies, and he's also a racist


----------



## Zincwarrior

tahuyaman said:


> Does anyone really believe Trump lunged from the rear of a limo to the front and grabbed the steering wheel?    If people are going to invent stories, they should at least make them somewhat believable


Its literally irrelevant.


----------



## g5000

CowboyTed said:


> It should be noted that on January 6th, the President’s official limo, nicknamed the “Beast” wasn’t being used. Instead, Trump was being transported in an armored Chevy Suburban that didn’t have a partition between the front and rear seats.
> 
> Oops, your information is wrong again...


See post 730.

Oops, your information is wrong again...


----------



## kaz

Clipper said:


> Hardly.



Well, they are over unless you're a Democrat masturbating watching the hearings.    BTW, most guys masturbate to porn.    But that's not your way, LOL.  Racist


----------



## Lastamender

Zincwarrior said:


> Its literally irrelevant.


Like you?


----------



## Clipper

kaz said:


> Well, they are over unless you're a Democrat masturbating watching the hearings.    BTW, most guys masturbate to porn.    But that's not your way, LOL.  Racist


Hows the view from Trump's ass, mouthbreather?


----------



## tahuyaman

Zincwarrior said:


> Its literally irrelevant.


Why is false testimony irrelevant?  Because it doesn't support a particular agenda?


----------



## kaz

Clipper said:


> Hows the view from Trump's ass, mouthbreather?



How's life in the racist party, Democrat?


----------



## tahuyaman

Clipper said:


> Hows the view from Trump's ass, mouthbreather?


I can see you're a serious debater


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

g5000 said:


> Engel and Ornato will need to testify.


*under oath

And these Trumpanzees are in for a disappointment.

They may testify that they were not assaulted, and that Trump didn't grab the wheel. 

That would just mean he didn't get his hands on them or the steering wheel.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

WEATHER53 said:


> What did she witness?


Watch the the hearings. Your mommy doesn't work here.


----------



## Zincwarrior

tahuyaman said:


> Why is false testimony irrelevant?  Because it doesn't support a particular agenda?


Because its not false. Whether or noth he went full apsehit or whether he was just verbally pissed off, he still wanted to meet the *armed marchers* at the Capital *where he was pressuring Pence to fuck up the elector count. *

He knew they were armed. He jizzed them up to go fight.
He sent them to the Capital where the count was being done. He didn't try to call them off until after Pence has been spirited out.


----------



## bripat9643

Hutch Starskey said:


> By having Republicans testify?
> Many of whom worked within the Trump Admin?


Are they all Republicans?  Where was that written?  Not everyone in the Trump administration was a Trump supporter.  Everyone who worked for the federal government was "in the Trump administration," and 95% of them are hostile to Trump.

You post is just another Dim talking point that is little more than a lie.


----------



## bripat9643

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Watch the the hearings. Your mommy doesn't work here.


She witnessed nothing, you fucking douchebag.  It's all hearsay.


----------



## bripat9643

Zincwarrior said:


> Because its not false. Whether or noth he went full apsehit or whether he was just verbally pissed off, he still wanted to meet the *armed marchers* at the Capital *where he was pressuring Pence to fuck up the elector count. *
> 
> He knew they were armed. He jizzed them up to go fight.
> He sent them to the Capital where the count was being done. He didn't try to call them off until after Pence has been spirited out.


Since her testimony is a big fat lie, none of that is true.


----------



## tahuyaman

Zincwarrior said:


> Because its not false. Whether or noth he went full apsehit or whether he was just verbally pissed off, he still wanted to meet the *armed marchers* at the Capital *where he was pressuring Pence to fuck up the elector count. *
> 
> He knew they were armed. He jizzed them up to go fight.
> He sent them to the Capital where the count was being done. He didn't try to call them off until after Pence has been spirited out.


Actual witnesses say it's false.  Third hand accounts say it's true.


----------



## WEATHER53

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Watch the the hearings. Your mommy doesn't work here.


My mother is dead
Yours still tells your summer school short  bus ass what to say.  
What the woman “witnessed” was someone else’s mouth moving while they recounted  their  version  of events.  She heard them say.  I think there is a word for that. 
Back to name calling and dodging again for you.


----------



## Billy_Bob

Zincwarrior said:


> Because its not false. Whether or noth he went full apsehit or whether he was just verbally pissed off, he still wanted to meet the *armed marchers* at the Capital *where he was pressuring Pence to fuck up the elector count. *
> 
> He knew they were armed. He jizzed them up to go fight.
> He sent them to the Capital where the count was being done. He didn't try to call them off until after Pence has been spirited out.


BWHAAAAaaaaaaaa

This has been debunked over and over again... why do you persist in telling it? Firsthand witnesses say this never happened... yet you want to believe a third hand HEARSAY-gossiper....  LOL


----------



## tahuyaman

It's obvious that there are several,people here who refuse to discuss this in a rational manner.    When you try you get responses of "fuck you you fucking traitor."   That's unfortunate


----------



## WEATHER53

Zincwarrior said:


> Because its not false. Whether or noth he went full apsehit or whether he was just verbally pissed off, he still wanted to meet the *armed marchers* at the Capital *where he was pressuring Pence to fuck up the elector count. *
> 
> He knew they were armed. He jizzed them up to go fight.
> He sent them to the Capital where the count was being done. He didn't try to call them off until after Pence has been spirited out.


See the  ABCs of what he wanted to do but didn’t do Dont  Mean Shit because the motivation was Never Enacted
Though police in full swing


----------



## Zincwarrior

Billy_Bob said:


> BWHAAAAaaaaaaaa
> 
> This has been debunked over and over again... why do you persist in telling it? Firsthand witnesses say this never happened... yet you want to believe a third hand HEARSAY-gossiper....  LOL


She was a direct witness.  Unlike you I actually watched it.


----------



## Billy_Bob

Zincwarrior said:


> She was a direct witness.  Unlike you I actually watched it.


LOL... a direct witness to the event?   nope... she heard it from friend who heard it from a friend...  Sounds like a song...  She has no credibility. Her story has been debunked by direct witnesses to the actual event.


----------



## tahuyaman

Zincwarrior said:


> She was a direct witness.  Unlike you I actually watched it.


She provided mostly third hand testimony.  She's not credible. No one could be convicted of anything based on her testimony  .


----------



## Billiejeens

Chillicothe said:


> ---------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> Which begs the question:  What is the answer?
> 
> Saddle up, Skinnyjeans. Show us your dance-steps.



You could have asked more nicely.

It was in the Letter that Mo Brooks sent -


----------



## Billiejeens

tahuyaman said:


> She provided mostly third hand testimony.  She's not credible. No one could be convicted of anything based on her testimony  .



They are not looking for "convictions"

It is simply an infomercial -

It is the Sham Wow! of political discourse.


----------



## tahuyaman

Billiejeens said:


> They are not looking for "convictions"
> 
> It is simply an infomercial -
> 
> It is the Sham Wow! of political discourse.


They can't indict or seek a conviction   

They aren't  interested in seeking information either because they are looking only in one direction.  This is a partisan side show.  The true motive is to focus the public's away from the massive failures of  the current administration and  the Democrat majority.   They are failing at that too.  It's a shameful sham.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

ColonelAngus said:


> Attack the source rather than discuss the content.
> 
> Dont you get tired of being a cliche cultist.


Gateway is well known for its lies, distortions and right wing hyperbole . They immediatly painted her as being caught in a lie. There is no reason to belive that she knowingly lied. It is much more plausible that 1) she was told something that was not true and believed it because it was a trusted source, or 2) Her account of the incident is true, but the Secret Service- for whatever reason, decided that they did not want to put that information out there. Every other publication that reported on this matter simply stated that the Secret Service may be walking back that account of what happened and did not call Hutchison a liar. So in conclusion - it is very appropriate to attack the source. Don't you ever get tired of being a cliche cultist?


----------



## Billiejeens

tahuyaman said:


> They can't indict or seek a conviction
> 
> They aren't  interested in seeking information either because they are looking only in one direction.  This is a partisan side show.  The true motive is to focus the public's away from the massive failures of  the current administration and  the Democrat majority.   They are failing at that too.  It's a shameful sham.



You are not wrong 

The main purpose is to try and make President Trump not electable.

Each of The Party establishments fear a new President Trump more than they fear anything else in the world.


----------



## tahuyaman

Billiejeens said:


> You are not wrong
> 
> The main purpose is to try and make President Trump not electable.
> 
> Each of The Party establishments fear a new President Trump more than they fear anything else in the world.


It looks like they aren't accomplishing that goal either.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

Billiejeens said:


> You are not wrong
> 
> The main purpose is to try and make President Trump not electable.
> 
> Each of The Party establishments fear a new President Trump more than they fear anything else in the world.


He is already unelectable. Republicans are not that stupid


----------



## tahuyaman

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Gateway is well known for its lies, distortions and right wing hyperbole . They immediatly painted her as being caught in a lie. There is no reason to belive that she knowingly lied. It is much more plausible that 1) she was told something that was not true and believed it because it was a trusted source, or 2) Her account of the incident is true, but the Secret Service- for whatever reason, decided that they did not want to put that information out there. Every other publication that reported on this matter simply stated that the Secret Service may be walking back that account of what happened and did not call Hutchison a liar. So in conclusion - it is very appropriate to attack the source. Don't you ever get tired of being a cliche cultist?


What your version of a credible news / opinion publication?


----------



## tahuyaman

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> He is already unelectable. Republicans are not that stupid


Maybe,  mabe not.    Clearly the current administration is making him look much better.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

tahuyaman said:


> What your version of a credible news / opinion publication?


CNN, the NY Times, CNBC,The Huffington Post for starters


----------



## tahuyaman

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> CNN, the NY Times, CNBC,The Huffington Post for starters


All of which are very liberal .   CNN and the NY Times is anything but credible.  Huffpo is hard left wing.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

tahuyaman said:


> Maybe,  mabe not.    Clearly the current administration is making him look much better.


No the current administration is not making him look better. Nothing can make him look better. Biden has his problems, most of which are not of his own making. Although it will hurt him, he is not a raving lunatic who cheepens the presidency


----------



## playtime

holy crap, batman ... & come july -  we'll get to see the documentarian testify with the  video he's been shooting since september thru the insurrection & after -  all at the bequest of panty waist,  jared.

& i do believe mo brooks wants to testify live as well -  now that he lost his alabammy primary & donny's reneged endorsement.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

tahuyaman said:


> All of which are very liberal .   CNN and the NY Times is anything but credible.  Huffpo is hard left wing.


They tell the truth. That they are hard left is your opinion. They are liberal and may spin news that way, but they do not knowingly lie. Gateway lies and uses hyped up language as they did with Hutchinson


----------



## Chillicothe

First, I have no special knowledge on this matter. I am not an insider, nor do I know one.

But, what strikes in me a cautionary note about these alleged 'denials' from alleged Secret Service sources is.........

........is how thoroughly Cheney plowed the ground around Hutchinson's version of events.

Meaning, (and if I recall properly) but Cheney took pains to ask if the agents had denied or changed the story to Hutchinson. If memory serves, she asked it more than once, or asked it in at least two different ways.  If I was an opposing lawyer in court I would suspect a trap.  Or at minimum, ponder "_Why did she nail that particular story down so tight? What's up with that?"_

Time will tell.
The RightyTighties are in overdrive trying to discount this dyed-in-the-wool Republican woman's testimony.
That's understandable. The game is played this way.

Still, for my own personal opinion......the woman came across as credible. Believable. She seemed organized and cautious in how she answered. No rhetorical flourishes with her.  And the various commentary last evening by folks who worked with her in the White House added context to how well she was regarded as the 'go-to' administrator for Meadows, and others in the West Wing.


----------



## WEATHER53

Chillicothe said:


> First, I have no special knowledge on this matter. I am not an insider, nor do I know one.
> 
> But, what strikes in me a cautionary note about these alleged 'denials' from alleged Secret Service sources is.........
> 
> ........is how thoroughly Cheney plowed the ground around Hutchinson's version of events.
> 
> Meaning, (and if I recall properly) but Cheney took pains to ask if the agents had denied or changed the story to Hutchinson. If memory serves, she asked it more than once, or asked it in at least two different ways.  If I was an opposing lawyer in court I would suspect a trap.  Or at minimum, ponder "_Why did she nail that particular story down so tight? What's up with that?"_
> 
> Time will tell.
> The RightyTighties are in overdrive trying to discount this dyed-in-the-wool Republican woman's testimony.
> That's understandable. The game is played this way.
> 
> Still, for my own personal opinion......the woman came across as credible. Believable. She seemed organized and cautious in how she answered. No rhetorical flourishes with her.  And the various commentary last evening by folks who worked with her in the White House added context to how well she was regarded as the 'go-to' administrator for Meadows, and others in the West Wing.


I too find her very credible that she heard things from other people
That’s not the issue.


----------



## Chillicothe

Billiejeens said:


> _The main purpose is to try and make President Trump not electable._



I would speculate that making Trump un-electable is more of a side benefit. A not unwelcome happenstance to the investigation.

My view, is that the primary focus ----and face it, the primary responsibility ---- of any Congressional Committee is to be informational. Informational --- so that Congress can devise new laws,  or change old laws so that such a violent and dangerous attack on the People's House cannot happen again.

Ergo....get to the bottom of this attack. Autopsy the hell outta it. What happened? Who did what?  Who said what? And to whom? To what effect? In short, who was responsible for this debacle?

So if they find the answers to all of that....then that improves the likelihood that better future decisions to prevent a re-occurrence can occur. 

IMHO


----------



## tahuyaman

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> They tell the truth. That they are hard left is your opinion. They are liberal and may spin news that way, but they do not knowingly lie. Gateway lies and uses hyped up language as they did with Hutchinson


I know.  In your mind as long as they parrot the liberal line they are telling the truth.  You are not interested in truth.   You want your bias confirmed.    CNN and the NY Times have knowingly reported false strories on many occasions.


----------



## tahuyaman

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> No the current administration is not making him look better. Nothing can make him look better. Biden has his problems, most of which are not of his own making. Although it will hurt him, he is not a raving lunatic who cheepens the presidency


Nearly all of our current problems are a result of current administration policy.    What isn't?  It's certainly not Putin's fault as our rudderless president claims.


----------



## Faun

Couchpotato said:


> Which is being disputed by the people actually in the vehicle at the time.     So there’s that.
> 
> Also i find it hard to believe DT’s fat ass did any of that.



False. No one inside the vehicle has actually confirmed or denied what she said.


----------



## Faun

Billy_Bob said:


> Nope... I got nothin...  everything she has said has been disproved..



WTF??

She said Trump was informed there were armed people there. What proof debunked that?


----------



## Faun

WEATHER53 said:


> What did she witness?



She witnessed Trump being informed sone people were armed.

She witnessed Trump saying let them remain armed, just let them in to fill up the Ellipse. 

She witnessed Trump summoning an armed crowd to the Capitol.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

WEATHER53 said:


> I too find her very credible that she heard things from other people
> That’s not the issue.


Mostly it was what she heard directly, and saw for herself


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

tahuyaman said:


> I know.  In your mind as long as they parrot the liberal line they are telling the truth.  You are not interested in truth.   You want your bias confirmed.    CNN and the NY Times have knowingly reported false strories on many occasions.


They may have made mistakes. They did not knowingly lie. There is a difference


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

tahuyaman said:


> Nearly all of our current problems are a result of current administration policy.    What isn't?  It's certainly not Putin's fault as our rudderless president claims.


Really? The invasion of Ukraine? Covid? Inflation? What?


----------



## Faun

tahuyaman said:


> Actually it hasn’t proved that Trump is guilty of anything.
> 
> I get that many people don’t like his personality, but being an ass is not a crime.



They're not providing proof. Proof is established in a court of law. They're providing evidence.  And the evidence thus far shows Trump was involved in a scheme to get fake electors submitted to Congress with the hope that Pence would reject legit Biden electors, leading to Trump remaining as president. 

And now the Department of Justice is investigating the evidence they're discovering to determine if crimes were committed.


----------



## WEATHER53

Faun said:


> She witnessed Trump being informed sone people were armed.
> 
> She witnessed Trump saying let them remain armed, just let them in to fill up the Ellipse.
> 
> She witnessed Trump summoning an armed crowd to the Capitol.


Being armed happens a lot and no way, nor reason, to disarm them.  It’s a false flag because the bombshell turned out to be a Shitbomb.


----------



## Rye Catcher

tahuyaman said:


> Actually it hasn’t proved that Trump is guilty of anything.
> 
> I get that many people don’t like his personality, but being an ass is not a crime.


Being an asshole is not a crime.  Sad that HRC is not an asshole and trump supporters chant "lock her up".  trump has not yet been indicted or charged for a series of crimes he appears to have planned and committed.

Most mob bosses have been able to get away with serious crimes too, but not too long.


----------



## WEATHER53

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Mostly it was what she heard directly, and saw for herself


You still offering that “hearing directly” is not hearsay?   I’m unfamiliar with hearing indirectly?


----------



## Faun

Zincwarrior said:


> Its literally irrelevant.



Not exactly. What is relevant is whether or not she was told Trump went for the steering wheel. Her credibility is on the line.


----------



## WEATHER53

Faun said:


> They're not providing proof. Proof is established in a court of law. They're providing evidence.  And the evidence thus far shows Trump was involved in a scheme to get fake electors submitted to Congress with the hope that Pence would reject legit Biden electors, leading to Trump remaining as president.
> 
> And now the Department of Justice is investigating the evidence they're discovering to determine if crimes were committed.


And that’s why it’s a witch hunt show trial. Thank you for the elaborate clarifying.


----------



## JustAGuy1

You Progs are no better than Q people. Meanwhile Biden's daughter has admitted Joe's pedophilia.


----------



## Faun

Zincwarrior said:


> Because its not false. Whether or noth he went full apsehit or whether he was just verbally pissed off, he still wanted to meet the *armed marchers* at the Capital *where he was pressuring Pence to fuck up the elector count. *
> 
> He knew they were armed. He jizzed them up to go fight.
> He sent them to the Capital where the count was being done. He didn't try to call them off until after Pence has been spirited out.



There's also the possibility he was hoping they would get to Pence. That would have opened the door for him to declare Martial Law, which some folks close to him were pushing for.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> She witnessed nothing, you fucking douchebag.  It's all hearsay.


----------



## Faun

Billy_Bob said:


> LOL... a direct witness to the event?   nope... she heard it from friend who heard it from a friend...  Sounds like a song...  She has no credibility. Her story has been debunked by direct witnesses to the actual event.



Liar. She said she personally heard Trump informed there were armed people in that crowd. She said she personally heard Trump insist they be let into the Ellipse armed. She said she personally heard Trump summon that armed crowd to the Capitol.


----------



## Faun

tahuyaman said:


> They can't indict or seek a conviction
> 
> They aren't  interested in seeking information either because they are looking only in one direction.  This is a partisan side show.  The true motive is to focus the public's away from the massive failures of  the current administration and  the Democrat majority.   They are failing at that too.  It's a shameful sham.



Given Pelosi announced this investigation before inflation and gas went way up, you look like an idiot staking the position this investigation is really to distract the public's opinion from other issues.


----------



## Zincwarrior

Faun said:


> Not exactly. What is relevant is whether or not she was told Trump went for the steering wheel. Her credibility is on the line.


Fair enough


----------



## Faun

WEATHER53 said:


> Being armed happens a lot and no way, nor reason, to disarm them.  It’s a false flag because the bombshell turned out to be a Shitbomb.



It's not about disarming them. Despite Trump telling the crowd he knows they'll march peacefully, now we know he sent an angry, armed mob to the Capitol.


----------



## Rye Catcher

tahuyaman said:


> They can't indict or seek a conviction
> 
> They aren't  interested in seeking information either because they are looking only in one direction.  This is a partisan side show.  The true motive is to focus the public's away from the massive failures of  the current administration and  the Democrat majority.   They are failing at that too.  It's a shameful sham.


Oh bullshit.  Millions of Americans and citizens around the world watched trump in action on January 6, 2021.  The Select Committee has put on live a large number of Republicans under oath, and a not to few members of the trump circle were subpoenaed and did not appear; a few of them asked for a pardon.  These are facts, and people like you choose to ignore them.


----------



## HandleTheTruth

Even Republican legal experts know trump is toast.


----------



## Faun

WEATHER53 said:


> You still offering that “hearing directly” is not hearsay?   I’m unfamiliar with hearing indirectly?



Hearing discussion of an event directly is first hand evidence. Being told something happened by somebody else is hearsay.


----------



## Faun

WEATHER53 said:


> And that’s why it’s a witch hunt show trial. Thank you for the elaborate clarifying.



Who knows what I said which led you to that conclusion?


----------



## Rye Catcher

tahuyaman said:


> All of which are very liberal .   CNN and the NY Times is anything but credible.  Huffpo is hard left wing.


Ah ah, another ditto head.  No wonder you remain out of touch with reality.  Try to ignore the BIG LIE promulgated by Limbaugh decades ago that the major networks and Newspapers were all fake and you may open your eyes to probative evidence.


----------



## Chillicothe

Billo_Really said:


> _Like I always said, Trump makes for good TV._


I quite agree with *Billo.*

Trump as a game-show host celebrity is doing what celebrities do.....be an eyeball magnet.
But my take on his hold on the imaginations of his supporters is sorta like the Ted Baxter character on the old Mary Tyler Moore show. He looks impressive with the dyed hair, bleached teeth, and fake tan......and folks want to believe he is the real deal.  They desperately  want him to be real.

In contrast, the appeal to the imaginations of the Trump-Skeptics is the appeal that causes 'Gaper's Blocks' on the freeway.  Everybody on the Skeptic side is watching to see the train wreck. The body in the ditch.  To see the clown on the dunk-seat splash into the tank. 

IMHO
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------



WEATHER53 said:


> _See the ABCs of what he wanted to do but didn’t do Dont Mean Shit because the motivation was Never Enacted_



"Never Enacted"?
And, therein is the conundrum.

Therein lies "Conspiracy".
As in......' '_Seditious Conspiracy'_.
With that you don't need to do the deed. You don't even need to try to do the deed. You just have to conspire with someone to do the deed.
And with that....smart prosecutors have built successful careers.
Trust me.

---------------------------------------------------------------




Faun said:


> They're not providing proof. Proof is established in a court of law. They're providing evidence. And the evidence thus far shows Trump was involved in a scheme to get fake electors submitted to Congress with the hope that Pence would reject legit Biden electors, leading to Trump remaining as president.



Well said. On point. A bingo.
And a hat-tip!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




WEATHER53 said:


> _Being armed happens a lot and no way, nor reason, to disarm them_


Ummm, not quite.
It was illegal in Washington, DC.


----------



## excalibur

Nostra said:


> So this is “The Gossip Committee”




A committee that has suborned perjury.


----------



## Zincwarrior

WEATHER53 said:


> Being armed happens a lot and no way, nor reason, to disarm them.  It’s a false flag because the bombshell turned out to be a Shitbomb.


It's illegal in Washington DC.


----------



## Zincwarrior

Faun said:


> There's also the possibility he was hoping they would get to Pence. That would have opened the door for him to declare Martial Law, which some folks close to him were pushing for.


I hadn't thought of that.


----------



## excalibur




----------



## C_Clayton_Jones

Billy_Bob said:


> AND just like the black knight you can't see that your story has no arms and no legs while you bleed out...
> I guess we will call it a draw...  What are you going to do?  Bleed on me..?    LOL


Unsurprisingly, the dishonest, reprehensible right rejects the truth and facts in their effort to defend the indefensible.


----------



## Zincwarrior

ABC reporting SS now says he was outraged when he couldn't go.


----------



## Faun

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Unsurprisingly, the dishonest, reprehensible right rejects the truth and facts in their effort to defend the indefensible.



Funniest part is that they were rejecting testimony even before they knew who was going to testify or what they were going to testify about.

Essentially, at this point, they're quintessentially the wagon circlers.


----------



## Rye Catcher

WEATHER53 said:


> And that’s why it’s a witch hunt show trial. Thank you for the elaborate clarifying.


Go away.  The Select Committee isn't a witch hunt, that's the same bullshit that trump echoes ad nausea.  trump incited the insurrection, that was clear even before the first vote was cast by mail or in person.  Even in 2016 when he was sure he was not going to win he complained the election was rigged; now, it was stolen and rigged.  

There is no evidence to support trump's allegations.


----------



## Zincwarrior

Rye Catcher said:


> Go away.  The Select Committee isn't a witch hunt, that's the same bullshit that trump echoes ad nausea.  trump incited the insurrection, that was clear even before the first vote was cast by mail or in person.  Even in 2016 when he was sure he was not going to win he complained the election was rigged; now, it was stolen and rigged.
> 
> There is no evidence to support trump's allegations.


He was saying the primaries we're rigged on 2016.


----------



## easyt65

In case you missed watching the latest episode of the 6 Jan Committee's 'Inquisition', here is a clip from today's hearing during which they dragged into court Trump's nanny when he was 5, accusing her of witnessing young Trump's plotting to overthrow the US govt...

In this clip the committee tries to break her into confessing...


----------



## Hutch Starskey

bripat9643 said:


> Are they all Republicans?  Where was that written?  Not everyone in the Trump administration was a Trump supporter.  Everyone who worked for the federal government was "in the Trump administration," and 95% of them are hostile to Trump.
> 
> You post is just another Dim talking point that is little more than a lie.


Look at the witness list, dope.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

bripat9643 said:


> She witnessed nothing, you fucking douchebag.  It's all hearsay.


Wrong cry baby. And you might know that you're wrong, if you actually watch some of the hearings.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

WEATHER53 said:


> You still offering that “hearing directly” is not hearsay?   I’m unfamiliar with hearing indirectly?


What? If she was told something, or in the room when something was said, and testifies to it under oath, THAT IS NO HEARSAY


----------



## Couchpotato

Faun said:


> False. No one inside the vehicle has actually confirmed or denied what she said.


You’re not going to sit here and act like its not being reported that the 2 SS agents who were in the vehicle are saying she’s full of shit are you?


----------



## Couchpotato

Lesh said:


> They love Trump


Ok.


----------



## Chillicothe

Jack Schafer in Politico offered this opinion:

_" Without any apparent animus or any theatrics, Hutchinson artfully sketched the portrait many of us hold in our mind’s eye of the former president: A belligerent oaf who cares for nothing but himself; ......a blowhard who will do anything to maintain power; and a mess-making child who breaks things when he doesn’t get his way and leaves us to clean up after him."_

Well, even I gotta admit that sounds critical of Don Trump.
 But, even I gotta admit there is some ring of truth there.

IMHO


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Couchpotato said:


> You’re not going to sit here and act like its not being reported that the 2 SS agents who were in the vehicle are saying she’s full of shit are you?


You overstate it. Slow down son.


----------



## rightwinger

WEATHER53 said:


> What did she witness?


She witnessed discussions with Trump and key Trump staff

She testified under oath
Why won’t they?


----------



## Chillicothe

rightwinger said:


> _She testified under oath
> Why won’t they?_


-------------------------------------------------------

In my view, this brouhaha over the wrestling match in the car will fade soon.  It is a tempest in a  teapot that the RightTighties are fervently wishing to be  a nuclear reactor.  Gone soon. Betcha. 

However.......

What may linger longer is ---- the testimony of Pat Cipollone.
He's been subpoenaed now  (wouldn't surprise me that it was after he subtly hinted to 'em to do so. CYA, you know.)

The testimony so far has surely indicated Cipolllone is a key guy in a number of meetings.   I hope he comes to the witness table cooperatively.....and brings his files, memory sticks, contemporaneous notes.....and his knowledge of who said what to whom.

These hearings are getting curioser and curioser. No?


----------



## Couchpotato

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> You overstate it. Slow down son.


What’s the overstatement?   It is 100% being reported that the 2 SS Agents who were in the car are willing to testify before Congress that what she said was complete bullshit.

That happened within hours of her testimony.   Whats ridiculous is that this committee didn’t bother to even ask the 2 agents before bringing in a witness to offer hearsay testimony.


----------



## Crick

Billy_Bob said:


> Follow the logic...  Trump is in the back seat of a limo; his wife is with them, and he is going to jump up (ridicules assertion given his height and body size) and try and push the limo driver out of the seat and grab the wheel through the limo window sectioning off the president from his drivers.  All while risking his wife's life due to reckless behavior of grabbing the wheel...
> 
> Sorry but the shear unbelievability of this and the mechanics of this say it is a pure fabrication.


I just wanted to point out that Trump was NOT in a limo.  He was in a Secret Service SUV.  There was no window or barrier between Trump and the front seat.  Given his height, it would have been entirely possible for him to reach over the front seat and grab the wheel.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Couchpotato said:


> What’s the overstatement?   It is 100% being reported that the 2 SS Agents who were in the car are willing to testify before Congress that what she said was complete bullshit.
> 
> That happened within hours of her testimony.   Whats ridiculous is that this committee didn’t bother to even ask the 2 agents before bringing in a witness to offer hearsay testimony.


The overstatement is that they have ruled out that Trump did lunge for the wheel and toward a SS agent.

But that's not the important part anyway.


----------



## Couchpotato

rightwinger said:


> She witnessed discussions with Trump and key Trump staff
> 
> She testified under oath
> Why won’t they?


Whose they?


----------



## Synthaholic

Couchpotato said:


> You’re not going to sit here and act like its not being reported that the 2 SS agents who were in the vehicle are saying she’s full of shit are you?


There are MANY quotes from various Trumpers, from Cory Lewandowski to Rudy Rubles saying that they lie to reporters because there's no law against it.

*Saying things for Trump, not always being truthful about it—do you ever worry that this will be your legacy? Does that ever worry you in any way?*

Absolutely. I am afraid it will be on my gravestone. “Rudy Giuliani: He lied for Trump.” Somehow, I don’t think that will be it. But, if it is, so what do I care? I’ll be dead. I figure I can explain it to St. Peter.








						“Even If He Did Do It, It Wouldn’t Be a Crime”: Rudy Giuliani on President Trump
					

“I’m a criminal lawyer. I am not an ethicist. And I defend people against unfair criminal charges.”




					www.newyorker.com


----------



## Synthaholic

CLONK!!!!


----------



## Lesh

Couchpotato said:


> Whose they?


Who were you talking about?


----------



## Synthaholic

Couchpotato said:


> Whose they?


It's Who's 

Guiliani
Meadows
Jordan
Cippione
Biggs
Ginni Thomas


Need more?


----------



## Couchpotato

Synthaholic said:


> It's Who's
> 
> Guiliani
> Meadows
> Jordan
> Cippione
> Biggs
> Ginni Thomas
> 
> 
> Need more?


I wasn’t asking you but why would they?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Couchpotato said:


> I wasn’t asking you but why would they?


Because their Congress asked them to do so of course.


----------



## Couchpotato

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Because their Congress asked them to do so of course.


That’s not a compelling reason, frankly.


----------



## Lesh

Couchpotato said:


> That’s not a compelling reason, frankly.


If they don't testify...then what is said about them stands


----------



## BasicHumanUnit

Ever wonder why someone in the Left media can say outrageous, untrue things about Trump.......
And he never sues them?

Think about it.  You might come to an enlightened conclusion.


----------



## Sunsettommy

rightwinger said:


> She witnessed discussions with Trump and key Trump staff
> 
> She testified under oath
> Why won’t they?



It is hearsay since she wasn't at the SUV you understand now?


----------



## Couchpotato

Lesh said:


> If they don't testify...then what is said about them stands


Let me know when something worth hearing about is said in these hearings.     If yesterday was any indication I won’t hold my breath


----------



## Lesh

Couchpotato said:


> Let me know when something worth hearing about is said in these hearings.     If yesterday was any indication I won’t hold my breath


So the fact that Trump not only knew the protesters were armed but approved of it means nothing?


----------



## Lesh

Sunsettommy said:


> It is hearsay since she wasn't at the SUV you understand now?


Ok...and? You think Ornato lied to her?


----------



## Couchpotato

Lesh said:


> So the fact that Trump not only knew the protesters were armed but approved of it means nothing?


He wanted more people in the crowd.   He didn’t care if they were armed.     So no I dont think it means anything other than he’s a narcissist.   But we didn’t need a committee to investigate to know that


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Couchpotato said:


> He wanted more people in the crowd. He didn’t care if they were armed. So no I dont think it means anything other than he’s a narcissist.


Actually, it means he is derelict. Those guns are illegal in DC.


----------



## Couchpotato

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Actually, it means he is derelict. Those guns are illegal in DC.


Ok and?   The POTUS isn’t in charge of enforcing the gun laws in DC.      You guys are grasping at straws.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Couchpotato said:


> Ok and?   The POTUS isn’t in charge of enforcing the gun laws in DC.      You guys are grasping at straws.


Right, he is just disregarding them. Disregard for the law. Gun laws. gins carried by angry people in the DC.

How low will you go? Keep going?


----------



## TemplarKormac

g5000 said:


> The only testimony which can confirm or deny Hutchinson's statements about what took place in the Beast is from Engel and/or Ornato.


That's right, and they're both willing to testify under oath. Or were you not paying any attention?


----------



## Couchpotato

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Right, he is just disregarding them. Disregard for the law. Gun laws. gins carried by angry people in the DC.
> 
> How low will you go? Keep going?


POTUS has no authority to enforce those laws or not enforce them.    Whether Trump cared or not is irrelevant.    Did the DC police hear that Trump didn’t care about those people being armed and not arrest then as a result?


----------



## TemplarKormac

Rye Catcher said:


> Given your 'response', I was a bit wrong, you are both a damn liar and a childish grownup, incapable of posting an honest rebuttal.


Your word salads are not worth a cogent response. So get bent.


----------



## g5000

TemplarKormac said:


> That's right, and they're both willing to testify under oath. Or were you not paying any attention?


I have not seen them quoted in any reportage.

Do you have a link?


----------



## TemplarKormac

g5000 said:


> I have not seen them quoted in any reportage.
> 
> Do you have a link?











						Secret Service says January 6 Committee didn't reach out before Hutchinson testimony on Trump lunging at agent
					

The U.S. Secret Service said the January 6 Committee did not check an allegation against former President Trump with witnessing agents before a hearing.




					www.foxnews.com
				




Also posts 948 and 989


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Couchpotato said:


> POTUS has no authority to enforce those laws or not enforce them.


Therefore, okay to facilitate people breaking them.

How low will you go?


----------



## Lesh

Couchpotato said:


> He wanted more people in the crowd.   He didn’t care if they were armed.     So no I dont think it means anything other than he’s a narcissist.   But we didn’t need a committee to investigate to know that


Not only is that illegal in DC...but he SENT those armed people to the Capitol


----------



## Lesh

TemplarKormac said:


> Secret Service says January 6 Committee didn't reach out before Hutchinson testimony on Trump lunging at agent
> 
> 
> The U.S. Secret Service said the January 6 Committee did not check an allegation against former President Trump with witnessing agents before a hearing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.foxnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also posts 948 and 989


That is NOT a link to either of them being quoted


----------



## TemplarKormac

Lesh said:


> That is NOT a link to either of them being quoted


Every reporter from ABC to FOX are reporting the same thing. It's like having multiple witnesses to a murder. More witnesses, more credibility. 

So please, don't bother.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones

Sunsettommy said:


> Her "testimony" is HEARSAY you idiot!
> 
> It was NOT even a testimony at all,
> 
> Merriam-Webster:
> 
> "a solemn declaration usually made orally by a *witness* under oath in response to interrogation by a lawyer or authorized public official"
> 
> _bolding mine_
> 
> ===
> 
> She wasn't a witness.


Wrong.

Hutchinson was present during the exchange between Meadows and Cipollone, where Trump refused to do anything to stop his bloodthirsty supporters, that Trump knew his terrorists were armed, and that Trump didn’t care that Pence was in danger.


----------



## Rye Catcher

TemplarKormac said:


> Your word salads are not worth a cogent response. So get bent.


LOL  temper temper little boy.  You have no clue as to what word salad is, and likely never heard of it before I used it weeks ago.


----------



## Sunsettommy

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Wrong.
> 
> Hutchinson was present during the exchange between Meadows and Cipollone, where Trump refused to do anything to stop his bloodthirsty supporters, that Trump knew his terrorists were armed, and that Trump didn’t care that Pence was in danger.



You really don't know what HEARSAY is because she wasn't a WITNESS of the claimed events.

Meadows and Cipollone were not in the car thus also hearsay which makes it a DOUBLE hearsay.

Thus, it is at best second hand which very often make it admissible in court thus worthless.

*Why not have the two REAL witnesses testify under oath instead?*


----------



## tahuyaman

Rye Catcher said:


> Ah ah, another ditto head.  No wonder you remain out of touch with reality.  Try to ignore the BIG LIE promulgated by Limbaugh decades ago that the major networks and Newspapers were all fake and you may open your eyes to probative evidence.


Ah. Another troll who can’t engage in a discussion


----------



## Rye Catcher

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Wrong.
> 
> Hutchinson was present during the exchange between Meadows and Cipollone, where Trump refused to do anything to stop his bloodthirsty supporters, that Trump knew his terrorists were armed, and that Trump didn’t care that Pence was in danger.


Yep, and all the clowns who continue to make shit out of one or two phrases is all over the MB.  How many lies and misinformation has dumb donald uttered in the past six years?  

Tens of thousands, and the young woman didn't even lie.


----------



## g5000

TemplarKormac said:


> Secret Service says January 6 Committee didn't reach out before Hutchinson testimony on Trump lunging at agent
> 
> 
> The U.S. Secret Service said the January 6 Committee did not check an allegation against former President Trump with witnessing agents before a hearing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.foxnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also posts 948 and 989


There is no quote from either man.

All you have is an anonymous source.


----------



## TemplarKormac

g5000 said:


> There is no quote from either man.
> 
> All you have is an anonymous source.


That's a cop-out mate.

How many news outlets are reporting this? How many have confirmed that these men are willing to testify under oath against the testimony? ALL OF THEM. This also shows me you are scared that all of that sophistry and colorful language you threw at me yesterday is going to boomerang on you.


----------



## Esdraelon

g5000 said:


> There is no quote from either man.
> 
> All you have is an anonymous source.


Seems if they are impugning the validity of the committee over the testimony, the committee would subpoena them ASAP and make them testify under oath.  The committee is refusing to do this.  They've not hesitated to subpoena any other member of the Trump admin or team.  That doesn't seem a bit odd to you?


----------



## TemplarKormac

Rye Catcher said:


> LOL  temper temper little boy.  You have no clue as to what word salad is, and likely never heard of it before I used it weeks ago.


I actually do. Unintelligible, nonsensical strings of words and phrases, or namely, _your posts_. _You_ are not smart, it's time you came to terms with that.


----------



## rightwinger

Sunsettommy said:


> It is hearsay since she wasn't at the SUV you understand now?



The SUV wasn’t in the White House while Trump was throwing his tantrums


----------



## rightwinger

Chillicothe said:


> -------------------------------------------------------
> 
> In my view, this brouhaha over the wrestling match in the car will fade soon.  It is a tempest in a  teapot that the RightTighties are fervently wishing to be  a nuclear reactor.  Gone soon. Betcha.
> 
> However.......
> 
> What may linger longer is ---- the testimony of Pat Cipollone.
> He's been subpoenaed now  (wouldn't surprise me that it was after he subtly hinted to 'em to do so. CYA, you know.)
> 
> The testimony so far has surely indicated Cipolllone is a key guy in a number of meetings.   I hope he comes to the witness table cooperatively.....and brings his files, memory sticks, contemporaneous notes.....and his knowledge of who said what to whom.
> 
> These hearings are getting curioser and curioser. No?


We are starting to learn what was going on behind closed doors. 
It shows a President detached from reality, throwing tantrums and scheming to overturn the election


----------



## Chillicothe

As you no doubt know by now, the Select Committee issued a subpoena late yesterday to the chief White House lawyer, Pat Cipollone.
And, as you no doubt heard in some of the hearings to date.....Cipollone was a prominent voice in meetings. Often a prudent voice urging moderation while warning of legal jeopardy attached to some of the proposed 'Election Reversal'  schemes.

He's been reluctant to sit before the Committee while under oath or being filmed.

But, with the effective testimony of Cassidy Hutchinson Cipollone's name became even more prominent than it was when Cheney called him out as she ended the 4th (or was it the 3rd?) hearing.

Cipollone is now the guy with the spotlight on him.....and it's gonna follow him.  THAT much attention doesn't just fade away. Something hasta happen.  He'll cooperate. Or he'll file a suit to attempt to stop it. But the press will be on him like a perfume.  After all, there's no 'client confidentiality' aspect here. He is the 'People's lawyer'....... NOT Don Trump's lawyer.



*This morning's Washington Post offered us this:*

_"But the subpoena may provide cover for Cipollone to cooperate with the committee, as Trump and his allies have sought to keep those in the former president’s orbit from providing the committee with potentially damaging information.

Hutchinson in her testimony portrayed Cipollone as one of the last firewalls blocking Trump’s efforts to overturn the elections. She testified that, on the morning of Jan. 6, Cipollone came forward with an urgent request, saying “something to the effect of: ‘Please make sure we don’t go up to the Capitol, Cassidy. Keep in touch with me. We’re going to get charged with every crime imaginable if we make that movement happen.’”

Tuesday’s surprise hearing was designed in part to ramp up pressure on reluctant witnesses such as Cipollone, according to those involved with the investigation....."

---------------------------------------------------------_

These hearings have been a fascinating exercise in watching drama, conflict, and the 'sausage-making' ickyness of our elected leaders.


----------



## Hang on Sloopy

Chillicothe said:


> As you no doubt know by now, the Select Committee issued a subpoena late yesterday to the chief White House lawyer, Pat Cipollone.
> And, as you no doubt heard in some of the hearings to date.....Cipollone was a prominent voice in meetings. Often a prudent voice urging moderation while warning of legal jeopardy attached to some of the proposed 'Election Reversal'  schemes.
> 
> He's been reluctant to sit before the Committee while under oath or being filmed.
> 
> But, with the effective testimony of Cassidy Hutchinson Cipollone's name became even more prominent than it was when Cheney called him out as she ended the 4th (or was it the 3rd?) hearing.
> 
> Cipollone is now the guy with the spotlight on him.....and it's gonna follow him.  THAT much attention doesn't just fade away. Something hasta happen.  He'll cooperate. Or he'll file a suit to attempt to stop it. But the press will be on him like a perfume.  After all, there's no 'client confidentiality' aspect here. He is the 'People's lawyer'....... NOT Don Trump's lawyer.
> 
> 
> 
> *This morning's Washington Post offered us this:*
> 
> _"But the subpoena may provide cover for Cipollone to cooperate with the committee, as Trump and his allies have sought to keep those in the former president’s orbit from providing the committee with potentially damaging information.
> 
> Hutchinson in her testimony portrayed Cipollone as one of the last firewalls blocking Trump’s efforts to overturn the elections. She testified that, on the morning of Jan. 6, Cipollone came forward with an urgent request, saying “something to the effect of: ‘Please make sure we don’t go up to the Capitol, Cassidy. Keep in touch with me. We’re going to get charged with every crime imaginable if we make that movement happen.’”
> 
> Tuesday’s surprise hearing was designed in part to ramp up pressure on reluctant witnesses such as Cipollone, according to those involved with the investigation....."
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------_
> 
> These hearings have been a fascinating exercise in watching drama, conflict, and the 'sausage-making' ickyness of our elected leaders.


You ass holes look like GD fools now you imbecile

Give it up. You investigated one man and his family for 6 years and got your teeth knocked in every time. And look at that crooked inside trader, Pelosi


----------



## struth

Chillicothe said:


> As you no doubt know by now, the Select Committee issued a subpoena late yesterday to the chief White House lawyer, Pat Cipollone.
> And, as you no doubt heard in some of the hearings to date.....Cipollone was a prominent voice in meetings. Often a prudent voice urging moderation while warning of legal jeopardy attached to some of the proposed 'Election Reversal'  schemes.
> 
> He's been reluctant to sit before the Committee while under oath or being filmed.
> 
> But, with the effective testimony of Cassidy Hutchinson Cipollone's name became even more prominent than it was when Cheney called him out as she ended the 4th (or was it the 3rd?) hearing.
> 
> Cipollone is now the guy with the spotlight on him.....and it's gonna follow him.  THAT much attention doesn't just fade away. Something hasta happen.  He'll cooperate. Or he'll file a suit to attempt to stop it. But the press will be on him like a perfume.  After all, there's no 'client confidentiality' aspect here. He is the 'People's lawyer'....... NOT Don Trump's lawyer.
> 
> 
> 
> *This morning's Washington Post offered us this:*
> 
> _"But the subpoena may provide cover for Cipollone to cooperate with the committee, as Trump and his allies have sought to keep those in the former president’s orbit from providing the committee with potentially damaging information.
> 
> Hutchinson in her testimony portrayed Cipollone as one of the last firewalls blocking Trump’s efforts to overturn the elections. She testified that, on the morning of Jan. 6, Cipollone came forward with an urgent request, saying “something to the effect of: ‘Please make sure we don’t go up to the Capitol, Cassidy. Keep in touch with me. We’re going to get charged with every crime imaginable if we make that movement happen.’”
> 
> Tuesday’s surprise hearing was designed in part to ramp up pressure on reluctant witnesses such as Cipollone, according to those involved with the investigation....."
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------_
> 
> These hearings have been a fascinating exercise in watching drama, conflict, and the 'sausage-making' ickyness of our elected leaders.


why wouldn’t the committee call the secret service agents that were at the heart of the “bombshell” witness testimony?


----------



## Couchpotato

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Therefore, okay to facilitate people breaking them.
> 
> How low will you go?


How is that facilitation?   Did he give them the guns?     Straws, keep grasping.


----------



## berg80

The challenge for the committee will be to find useful questions to ask that do not fall under the protections from answering afforded to him. Like executive privilege, attorney-client privilege, and the 5th amendment. However, it has been noted some information he has withheld does not fall under any of those three categories. The extent of his willingness to answer questions fully and honestly will help or hinder the committee and the DoJ in the former's attempt to tell the public what happened and the latter's decision to indict a former prez or not.


----------



## Billiejeens

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> He is already unelectable. Republicans are not that stupid



He is the single most popular person in the USA.
That Infomercial that yawl are doing is keeping the fraudulent election fresh in everyone mind.


----------



## Billiejeens

Chillicothe said:


> I would speculate that making Trump un-electable is more of a side benefit. A not unwelcome happenstance to the investigation.
> 
> My view, is that the primary focus ----and face it, the primary responsibility ---- of any Congressional Committee is to be informational. Informational --- so that Congress can devise new laws,  or change old laws so that such a violent and dangerous attack on the People's House cannot happen again.
> 
> Ergo....get to the bottom of this attack. Autopsy the hell outta it. What happened? Who did what?  Who said what? And to whom? To what effect? In short, who was responsible for this debacle?
> 
> So if they find the answers to all of that....then that improves the likelihood that better future decisions to prevent a re-occurrence can occur.
> 
> IMHO



You do or you do not understand that what is happening bears no resemblance to what you described?


----------



## 22lcidw

Chillicothe said:


> As you no doubt know by now, the Select Committee issued a subpoena late yesterday to the chief White House lawyer, Pat Cipollone.
> And, as you no doubt heard in some of the hearings to date.....Cipollone was a prominent voice in meetings. Often a prudent voice urging moderation while warning of legal jeopardy attached to some of the proposed 'Election Reversal'  schemes.
> 
> He's been reluctant to sit before the Committee while under oath or being filmed.
> 
> But, with the effective testimony of Cassidy Hutchinson Cipollone's name became even more prominent than it was when Cheney called him out as she ended the 4th (or was it the 3rd?) hearing.
> 
> Cipollone is now the guy with the spotlight on him.....and it's gonna follow him.  THAT much attention doesn't just fade away. Something hasta happen.  He'll cooperate. Or he'll file a suit to attempt to stop it. But the press will be on him like a perfume.  After all, there's no 'client confidentiality' aspect here. He is the 'People's lawyer'....... NOT Don Trump's lawyer.
> 
> 
> 
> *This morning's Washington Post offered us this:*
> 
> _"But the subpoena may provide cover for Cipollone to cooperate with the committee, as Trump and his allies have sought to keep those in the former president’s orbit from providing the committee with potentially damaging information.
> 
> Hutchinson in her testimony portrayed Cipollone as one of the last firewalls blocking Trump’s efforts to overturn the elections. She testified that, on the morning of Jan. 6, Cipollone came forward with an urgent request, saying “something to the effect of: ‘Please make sure we don’t go up to the Capitol, Cassidy. Keep in touch with me. We’re going to get charged with every crime imaginable if we make that movement happen.’”
> 
> Tuesday’s surprise hearing was designed in part to ramp up pressure on reluctant witnesses such as Cipollone, according to those involved with the investigation....."
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------_
> 
> These hearings have been a fascinating exercise in watching drama, conflict, and the 'sausage-making' ickyness of our elected leaders.


Trump ran on a free sovereign nation. Borders, language and culture. The globalists and their localized D.C. swamp will have none of that. Biden doesn't even want to come back here from Europe because of the pushback by some of the citizens at least in potential voting.  The men and women involved in this travesty are the real traitors. But gaining an easy life with lots of comforts and little sweating is the tradeoff for selling out the citizens. And many of them including you are on that train.  Paying attention to a farce and then even a lower farce with the other side allowed no questioning or defense. A Drumhead or a Kangaroo Court or any other name.


----------



## Stormy Daniels

Chillicothe said:


> But, with the effective testimony of Cassidy Hutchinson Cipollone's name became even more prominent than it was when Cheney called him out as she ended the 4th (or was it the 3rd?) hearing.



I've been scratching my head trying to figure out what purpose there was to suddenly call the Hutchinson meeting out of nowhere. I don't think for a moment that the committee learned anything new from it. And it occurred to me that the whole point might have been leverage to subpoena Cipollone. He's been reluctant to say too much, fearing legitimate implications on Executive Privilege. But Hutchinson's testimony makes it clear that the subject matter sought by the committee cannot be hid behind privilege, and that circumstances are so extraordinary that Executive Privilege just seems inadequate for anything else that might be otherwise be legitimately covered.


----------



## berg80

Stormy Daniels said:


> I've been scratching my head trying to figure out what purpose there was to suddenly call the Hutchinson meeting out of nowhere. I don't think for a moment that the committee learned anything new from it. And it occurred to me that the whole point might have been leverage to subpoena Cipollone. He's been reluctant to say too much, fearing legitimate implications on Executive Privilege. But Hutchinson's testimony makes it clear that the subject matter sought by the committee cannot be hid behind privilege, and that circumstances are so extraordinary that Executive Privilege just seems inadequate for anything else that might be otherwise be legitimately covered.


I suspect Cipolonne's attempts to withhold testimony may come up against the same problem Eastman faced as he tried to withhold documents from the committee. The crime-fraud exception to attorney-client and executive privilege. Leaving him with the 5th as his only protection. Not a good look.

_It is the purpose of the crime-fraud exception to the attorney-client privilege to *assure that the “seal of secrecy” between lawyer and client does not extend to communications made for the purpose of getting advice for the commission of a fraud or crime*._


----------



## playtime

Faun said:


> They're not providing proof. Proof is established in a court of law. They're providing evidence.  And the evidence thus far shows Trump was involved in a scheme to get fake electors submitted to Congress with the hope that Pence would reject legit Biden electors, leading to Trump remaining as president.
> 
> *And now the Department of Justice is investigating the evidence they're discovering to determine if crimes were committed.*



just ask peter navarro & john eastman.


----------



## playtime

Rye Catcher said:


> The Select Committee has put on live a large number of Republicans under oath,



so far every witness that testified have been (R)s .. except for possibly the poll worker & her mom.  as for the cops that represented most of their brothers, one that i know of said he was (R) & even voted for donny was officer fanone.   -  who was tazed into having a heart attack.


----------



## Stormy Daniels

berg80 said:


> The challenge for the committee will be to find useful questions to ask that do not fall under the protections from answering afforded to him. Like executive privilege, attorney-client privilege, and the 5th amendment



Attorney-client privilege does not apply for a variety of reasons. The chief reason being that the "client" is the office of the Presidency, not the individual occupying the office. This was on display when John Dean testified during the Watergate hearings.

As for the other matters, Congress has the authority to grant immunity to a witness, as was provided for Dean's testimony.


----------



## playtime

Billiejeens said:


> He is the single most popular person in the USA.
> That Infomercial that yawl are doing is keeping the fraudulent election fresh in everyone mind.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

Couchpotato said:


> You’re not going to sit here and act like its not being reported that the 2 SS agents who were in the vehicle are saying she’s full of shit are you?


Why do you assume that she is lying, andthe agents are not? Why would she make up a story like that when she has some much shit on him already? Try some logic!


----------



## playtime

Zincwarrior said:


> ABC reporting SS now says he was outraged when he couldn't go.



cassidy hutchinson testified that mark meadows was literally pacifying donny by  not divulging the truth & left it up to his protection to tell him & that's why he freaked inside the SUV.  sounds exactly how meadows woulda played that out -  he's such a weasel.


----------



## berg80

Stormy Daniels said:


> Attorney-client privilege does not apply for a variety of reasons. The chief reason being that the "client" is the office of the Presidency, not the individual occupying the office.


And yet it took a ruling that the crime-fraud exception applied to Eastman in order to force him to produce documents related to his advice to Trump on the plot to overturn the election.

In any case, I doubt Cipolonne will be as forthcoming as Dean. There's a high degree of likelihood he'll lie. But his testimony will be compelled............unless he invokes the 5th.









						Crime-Fraud Exception to Attorney-Client Privilege Applies to Trump’s Attempt to Overturn Election
					

A recent court ruling related to Donald Trump’s attempts to overturn the 2020 presidential election serves as an evergreen reminder that the attorney-client privilege and work product doctrine d




					www.natlawreview.com


----------



## hadit

Faun said:


> She claims that is what she was told. You have no evidence she wasn't told that. I don't know if she's lying or not but neither do you. Meaning you're lying when you claim she lied.


She may not have been lying because she may have actually heard someone say something like that. We do not, however, know if the guys were just spouting off wildly embellished war stories or rigorously recounting exact details of an actual event. IOW, there's no good reason to believe it happened, especially since people who were there are willing to testify it didn't.


----------



## playtime

Chillicothe said:


> -------------------------------------------------------
> 
> In my view, this brouhaha over the wrestling match in the car will fade soon.  It is a tempest in a  teapot that the RightTighties are fervently wishing to be  a nuclear reactor.  Gone soon. Betcha.



indeed.  & what can NOT be said to be hearsay -  is that SHE heard FIRSTHAND that donny said to get rid of the 'f'n mags & let armed people into the rally because they weren't gonna hurt him. ' yep -  right outa his cat anus shaped orange mouth.  that is not only chilling -  but sociopathic & were gonna unleash them when they went to the capital.


----------



## playtime

Couchpotato said:


> I wasn’t asking you but why would they?



because they are guilty AF -  why would THEY (most of 'em so far anyways)  ask for a pardon?


----------



## SeaMajor7

Don't forget the ketchup, you demented zombies, THE KETCHUP!!!!


----------



## Stormy Daniels

berg80 said:


> And yet it took a ruling that the crime-fraud exception applied to Eastman in order to force him to produce documents related to his advice to Trump on the plot to overturn the election.



Eastman's work was campaign related, and therefore attorney-client privilege would apply as normal. Because he represented _Donald Trump the candidate_, which is a personal capacity. Cipillone was White House Counsel, representing the office of the President in official capacity.


----------



## playtime

Couchpotato said:


> He wanted more people in the crowd.   He didn’t care if they were armed.



because he's a sociopath who  was in need of yet another ego soothing butt powdering. 




Couchpotato said:


> So no I dont think it means anything other than he’s a narcissist.



that would be a malignant narcissist.

*How to Tell You're Dealing with a Malignant Narcissist

The intentional destruction of others while pathologically loving the self.*
Posted Feb 22, 2017
[...]
*Malignant Narcissism*

I want to explore with you the darker side of narcissistic personality disorder, where aggression, antisocial behaviors, and suspiciousness are as prominent as their poor sense of self, fragility, and egocentricity. (_Below is a video clip that explores the symptoms of malignant narcissism._)

A person with malignant narcissism has the potential to destroy families, communities, nations, and work environments. This condition reflects a hybrid or blending of narcissistic and antisocial personality disorders. Psychologist Eric Fromm termed the disorder in 1964. Psychoanalyst Otto Kernberg later delineated the symptoms of the condition and presented it as an intermediary between narcissistic and antisocial personality disorders.

*Why is the behavior of malignant narcissism often considered dangerous?*

Individuals with this profile can form connections with others. However, they process information in ways that can hurt society in general, but also the people who love or depend on them. Family, co-workers, employees, and others in their lives often have to walk on eggshells to appease a fragile ego and minimize the occurrence of their unstable, impulsive, or aggressive behaviors.

They lash out or humiliate others for infractions of even the most frivolous nature (for example, you gave an opinion that differed from theirs; you demonstrated confidence, and it made them look bad; you told a joke that involved poking fun at them).
[...]
How to Tell You're Dealing with a Malignant Narcissist





Couchpotato said:


> But we didn’t need a committee to investigate to know that



what we needed & got is a committee who is presenting evidence that donny   et al  were involved in an attempted coup; & in reality is still ongoing.


----------



## berg80

Stormy Daniels said:


> Eastman's work was campaign related, and therefore attorney-client privilege would apply as normal. Because he represented _Donald Trump the candidate_, which is a personal capacity. Cipillone was White House Counsel, representing the office of the President in official capacity.


_The subpoena of a White House counsel, a rare step for a congressional committee, sent a clear signal of the aggressive tactics the panel is willing to use to try to force cooperation of even the White House’s former top lawyer, *who most likely could invoke attorney-client privilege in response to many questions. *But the testimony of Mr. Cipollone — who participated in key conversations on Jan. 6 and throughout Mr. Trump’s efforts to overturn the election, and is known to have doubted the legality of many of those plans — could prove consequential._








						Jan. 6 Committee Subpoenas Pat Cipollone, Trump’s White House Counsel
					

Mr. Cipollone, who repeatedly fought extreme plans to overturn the election, had resisted publicly testifying to the panel.




					www.nytimes.com


----------



## playtime

hadit said:


> She may not have been lying because she may have actually heard someone say something like that. *We do not, however, know if the guys were just spouting off wildly embellished war stories or rigorously recounting exact details of an actual event.* IOW, there's no good reason to believe it happened, especially since people who were there are willing to testify it didn't.



she was asked the way the agent's demeanor was as he was sitting in the chair & she used the word,  he seemed to be 'discombobulated' & as the other dude was relaying what happened in the SUV to her -  the agent donny supposedly grabbed didn't object to it at the time.


----------



## playtime

TemplarKormac said:


> That's a cop-out mate.
> 
> How many news outlets are reporting this? How many have confirmed that these men are willing to testify under oath against the testimony?



well unless/until they do.....................  SHE did testify UNDER OATH.

just like with ginni thomas said she was 'willing to testify' to the committee about all them thar texts & emails to mark meadows about stopping the count on jan 6, means nothing since her lawyer said she won't be.


----------



## playtime

Esdraelon said:


> Seems if they are impugning the validity of the committee over the testimony, the committee would subpoena them ASAP and make them testify under oath.  The committee is refusing to do this.  They've not hesitated to subpoena any other member of the Trump admin or team.  That doesn't seem a bit odd to you?



LOL!!!  subpoena?   they don't need no stinking subpoena. after every hearing -  the chair states anyone having additional info or wants to clarify anything that was testified to  - is free & welcome to get in touch with them.

*you're 'excuse' is a big fat fail.*


----------



## ColonelAngus

Faun said:


> Fuck off and do your own homework.



What specific part of his testimony did you find most compelling?


----------



## hadit

Lesh said:


> And let's remember that Bobby Engle and Tony Ornato were Trump loyalists. The "Palace guard" if you will
> 
> This occurred in the in the SUV not "The Beast" so it IS possible for this to have occurred.
> 
> But again...this particular incident is the LEAST damning bit of testimony and impugns the rest in no way


Didn't she swear under oath that she heard it happened in the Beast? If she did and TRUMP! wasn't in the Beast, then what she recounted is false and cannot be taken seriously.


----------



## bripat9643

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Wrong cry baby. And you might know that you're wrong, if you actually watch some of the hearings.


What did she witness?


----------



## hadit

playtime said:


> she was asked the way the agent's demeanor was as he was sitting in the chair & she used the word,  he seemed to be 'discombobulated' & as the other dude was relaying what happened in the SUV to her -  the agent donny supposedly grabbed didn't object to it at the time.


Was it an SUV or the Beast? I thought she said several times that it was the Beast. If that was false, the whole thing was probably just a story, embellished for effect. This is the problem with hearsay.


----------



## berg80

playtime said:


> cassidy hutchinson testified that mark meadows was literally pacifying donny by  not divulging the truth & left it up to his protection to tell him & that's why he freaked inside the SUV.  sounds exactly how meadows woulda played that out -  he's such a weasel.


I thought her testimony about Meadows being afraid to go to speak with Don about the "hang Mike Pence" chants was revealing. The point at which Cipolonne said he was going to talk to Trump because it was so incredibly damning for Don not to do anything. 

The Chief-of-Staff is the guy who is supposed to tell the prez the truth, no matter how hard it is. But Meadows was just a sycophant with the title of Chief. His predecessors, ones who actually did confront Trump, they had all been fired.


----------



## berg80

hadit said:


> Didn't she swear under oath that she heard it happened in the Beast? If she did and TRUMP! wasn't in the Beast, then what she recounted is false and cannot be taken seriously.


I'm trying to think of something that could matter less. Nope, nothing comes to mind.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

Billiejeens said:


> He is the single most popular person in the USA.
> That Infomercial that yawl are doing is keeping the fraudulent election fresh in everyone mind.


Good fucking grief!


----------



## bripat9643

hadit said:


> Didn't she swear under oath that she heard it happened in the Beast? If she did and TRUMP! wasn't in the Beast, then what she recounted is false and cannot be taken seriously.


Her story has all manner of holes in it.   That's the problem when you make stuff up,  it's almost impossible to get all the details right.


----------



## bripat9643

berg80 said:


> I'm trying to think of something that could matter less. Nope, nothing comes to m



It doesn't matter only to sleazy lying douchebags like you who don't care about whether her story is true.


----------



## bripat9643

Lesh said:


> If they don't testify...then what is said about them stands


Wrong.


----------



## bripat9643

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Right, he is just disregarding them. Disregard for the law. Gun laws. gins carried by angry people in the DC.
> 
> How low will you go? Keep going?


Another straw.


----------



## bripat9643

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Actually, it means he is derelict. Those guns are illegal in DC.


What guns?


----------



## hadit

berg80 said:


> I'm trying to think of something that could matter less. Nope, nothing comes to mind.


Something tells me that if this story was actually true you would be all over it.


----------



## bripat9643

Lesh said:


> So the fact that Trump not only knew the protesters were armed but approved of it means nothing?


Nobody knew if the protesters were armed.  Furthermore, they weren't armed.


----------



## bripat9643

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Wrong cry baby. And you might know that you're wrong, if you actually watch some of the hearings.


It's right, dumbass.  I've watched the parts that are wrong.  That's all I need to know.


----------



## bripat9643

Chillicothe said:


> -------------------------------------------------------
> 
> In my view, this brouhaha over the wrestling match in the car will fade soon.  It is a tempest in a  teapot that the RightTighties are fervently wishing to be  a nuclear reactor.  Gone soon. Betcha.
> 
> However.......
> 
> What may linger longer is ---- the testimony of Pat Cipollone.
> He's been subpoenaed now  (wouldn't surprise me that it was after he subtly hinted to 'em to do so. CYA, you know.)
> 
> The testimony so far has surely indicated Cipolllone is a key guy in a number of meetings.   I hope he comes to the witness table cooperatively.....and brings his files, memory sticks, contemporaneous notes.....and his knowledge of who said what to whom.
> 
> These hearings are getting curioser and curioser. No?


"Linger longer?"  You mean we will be laughing at it longer?


----------



## bripat9643

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Wrong cry baby. And you might know that you're wrong, if you actually watch some of the hearings.


Please post an example of something that isn't hearsay.


----------



## Faun

Couchpotato said:


> You’re not going to sit here and act like its not being reported that the 2 SS agents who were in the vehicle are saying she’s full of shit are you?



That's not been reported. What was actually reported was someone else, who was not in the vehicle that day, is claiming those 2 agents dispute Hutchinson's claim. But those 2 agents have not yet made a public statement yet either way. Rightards, who regrettably suffer from a lack of comprehension, read that wrong and ran with it out of desperation. And while it's entirely possible those 2 agents can publicly state they never told her that, that hasn't actually happened yet. Read for clarity next time.


----------



## tahuyaman

bripat9643 said:


> What guns?


The guns which no one had during the riot


----------



## Faun

Couchpotato said:


> I wasn’t asking you but why would they?



To get their account of what happened on the record.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> To get their account of what happened on the record.


They can simply tell the press if they want their account on the record.  They don't need to filter it through a gang of sleazy lying clowns who will do everything in their power to mischaracterize it.


----------



## Nostra

Lesh said:


> She was repeating something Ornato told her. What's to stop him from lying about what he told her?
> 
> He said she said


Gossip Girl has been caught in multiple lies by multiple people.  She claimed to write a letter that her boss actually wrote on top of all her other bullshit lies.


----------



## Couchpotato

Faun said:


> That's not been reported. What was actually reported was someone else, who was not in the vehicle that day, is claiming those 2 agents dispute Hutchinson's claim. But those 2 agents have not yet made a public statement yet either way. Rightards, who regrettably suffer from a lack of comprehension, read that wrong and ran with it out of desperation. And while it's entirely possible those 2 agents can publicly state they never told her that, that hasn't actually happened yet. Read for clarity next time.


So hearsay vs hearsay.   And one set of hearsay evidence is more believable because why?


----------



## Faun

Sunsettommy said:


> You really don't know what HEARSAY is because she wasn't a WITNESS of the claimed events.
> 
> Meadows and Cipollone were not in the car thus also hearsay which makes it a DOUBLE hearsay.
> 
> Thus, it is at best second hand which very often make it admissible in court thus worthless.
> 
> *Why not have the two REAL witnesses testify under oath instead?*



So you don't know not all of her testimony was about what happened in that vehicle, huh? You didn't watch the hearing, did you?


----------



## Faun

Couchpotato said:


> So hearsay vs hearsay.   And one set of hearsay evidence is more believable because why?



Quote me saying her hearsay should be believed without confirmation from Ornato or Engel...


----------



## Nostra

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> CNN, the NY Times, CNBC,The Huffington Post for starters


----------



## tahuyaman

Faun said:


> To get their account of what happened on the record.


Why not get everyone’s account?   Why just one side?


----------



## bripat9643

tahuyaman said:


> Why not get everyone’s account?   Why just one side?


Yes, let's get Pelosi's account.  Put her on the witness stand.


----------



## Nostra

rightwinger said:


> She witnessed discussions with Trump and key Trump staff
> 
> She testified under oath
> Why won’t they?



The SS has said they will make them available anytime to tell their story.  Why hasn't Nazi Piglosy scheduled them to testify is the question.

Troll better, Troll.


----------



## Faun

ColonelAngus said:


> What specific part of his testimony did you find most compelling?



The part where he denied being involved with the FBI.


----------



## Faun

hadit said:


> Didn't she swear under oath that she heard it happened in the Beast? If she did and TRUMP! wasn't in the Beast, then what she recounted is false and cannot be taken seriously.



It can be taken seriously if Ornato or Engel confirm what she said.


----------



## ColonelAngus

Faun said:


> The part where he denied being involved with the FBI.



But he is on video inciting an insurrection. Why dont you want him in jail?

You wont call him out. Why is that?


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> Nobody knew if the protesters were armed.  Furthermore, they weren't armed.



Fucking moron, the police were reporting seeing guns.


----------



## Faun

ColonelAngus said:


> But he is on video inciting an insurrection. Why dont you want him in jail?
> 
> You wont call him out. Why is that?



Quote him saying they should go inside the Capitol forcefully and to overturn the election...


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> Fucking moron, the police were reporting seeing guns.


So where are the guns?


----------



## Faun

tahuyaman said:


> Why not get everyone’s account?   Why just one side?



You'll have to ask Trump's allies who've either not complied with being called in to testify ... or did show up but pled the 5th to virtually every question.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

Sunsettommy said:


> It is hearsay since she wasn't at the SUV you understand now?


Her testimony is regarding her direct conversations with the two who were there. They related the story to her.  Not hearsay but straight from the horses mouth.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> So where are the guns?



Likely in the possession of the government to be used as evidence against the people they arrested for being armed.


----------



## Nostra

Faun said:


> Quote him saying they should go inside the Capitol forcefully and to overturn the election...


Quote Trump saying that.


----------



## Nostra

Hutch Starskey said:


> Her testimony is regarding her direct conversations with the two who were there. They related the story to her.  Not hearsay but straight from the horses mouth.


No Stupid, that is the very definition of hearsay.  The agents dispute her version of events.


----------



## hadit

Faun said:


> It can be taken seriously if Ornato or Engel confirm what she said.


She said they were in the Beast. If they confirm they were in the Beast, it makes TRUMP! trying to grab the wheel that much less likely.


----------



## hadit

Hutch Starskey said:


> Her testimony is regarding her direct conversations with the two who were there. They related the story to her.  Not hearsay but straight from the horses mouth.


And, of course, not embellished in any way to make it sound more dramatic in a casual conversation. For sure they knew they were going to be quoted in a hearing under oath, so they recounted to her the exact details of everything that happened. Of course, you can hear the sarcasm. Until they get the people who were actually in the car to testify, there's no good reason to believe it happened.


----------



## Faun

Nostra said:


> Quote Trump saying that.



I never said he did.


----------



## Lastamender

Hutch Starskey said:


> Her testimony is regarding her direct conversations with the two who were there. They related the story to her.  Not hearsay but straight from the horses mouth.











						Mark Meadows: My Aide Is Lying About Me Wanting a Pardon After the January 6 Riot
					

Well, there it is, folks. We were all waiting for another narrative to be blown up concerning the select committee on January 6, and here it is. Former White House




					townhall.com


----------



## Sunsettommy

Hutch Starskey said:


> Her testimony is regarding her direct conversations with the two who were there. They related the story to her.  Not hearsay but straight from the horses mouth.



You gloss over the part that it was in error.

Better to have actual physical witnesses of people who were at the SUV with Trump to testify but there is a reason why the Joke 6 committee isn't going to allow it.

Can you figure it out buttercup?


----------



## Sunsettommy

Hutch Starskey said:


> Her testimony is regarding her direct conversations with the two who were there. They related the story to her.  Not hearsay but straight from the horses mouth.



You embarrass yourself here because what YOU described is HEARSAY in this case probably DOUBLE hearsay since NONE of them are physical witnesses of the alleged events in a SUV not in the Beast as they erroneously claimed.



*Hearsay* evidence, in a legal forum, *is testimony from an under-oath witness who is reciting an out-of-court statement*, the content of which is being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. In most courts, hearsay evidence is inadmissible (the "hearsay evidence rule") unless an exception to the hearsay rule applies.

LINK

_bolding mine_

===

Using your very lose interpretation, I can say you beat your wife every day in a drunken rage, I heard it during my prayers.

You have very low standards for determining what is real and valid.


----------



## Sunsettommy

Lastamender said:


> Mark Meadows: My Aide Is Lying About Me Wanting a Pardon After the January 6 Riot
> 
> 
> Well, there it is, folks. We were all waiting for another narrative to be blown up concerning the select committee on January 6, and here it is. Former White House
> 
> 
> 
> 
> townhall.com



There was only a 13 day pardon window available for something they didn't do anyway since it was a riot not an insurrection which is why Meadows saying no that is false is very credible.


----------



## Billy_Bob

Sunsettommy said:


> There was only a 13 day pardon window available for something they didn't do anyway since it was a riot not an insurrection which is why Meadows saying no that is false is very credible.


Most people have no clue about the time limit restrictions of a president being in office.  LOL  they totally miss that...


----------



## Billiejeens

playtime said:


> because they are guilty AF -  why would THEY (most of 'em so far anyways)  ask for a pardon?



No one asked for a pardon on this -

You fucking idiots can't get any fucking thing right -
You are a small minority that keep repeating the same talking point over and over.

Midterms are going to slam your ass so hard that you will never walk right again.


----------



## Billiejeens

Sunsettommy said:


> There was only a 13 day pardon window available for something they didn't do anyway since it was a riot not an insurrection which is why Meadows saying no that is false is very credible.



The request was never about that -
Don't fall for that shit.


----------



## Sunsettommy

Billiejeens said:


> The request was never about that -
> Don't fall for that shit.



Did you read the article?

Mark Meadows: My Aide Is Lying About Me Wanting a Pardon After the January 6 Riot​


----------



## Hutch Starskey

Nostra said:


> No Stupid, that is the very definition of hearsay.  The agents dispute her version of events.


So anything said directly to her or she heard in conversation is just hearsay then?  What isn’t hearsay then?

Hearsay is gossip. Word around the office or on the street. This is a story related directly to her by the two who were there.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

hadit said:


> She said they were in the Beast. If they confirm they were in the Beast, it makes TRUMP! trying to grab the wheel that much less likely.


She said she was told they were in the Beast. She is relating information from others. Not making claims of her own.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

Nostra said:


> No Stupid, that is the very definition of hearsay.  The agents dispute her version of events.


Quote “ the agents”.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> You'll have to ask Trump's allies who've either not complied with being called in to testify ... or did show up but pled the 5th to virtually every question.


Wrong.  Pelosi and Schif for brains are the ones who need to answer that questions.


----------



## bripat9643

Hutch Starskey said:


> She said she was told they were in the Beast. She is relating information from others. Not making claims of her own.


That's true.  It's all hearsay, or made up, which is pretty much the same thing.


----------



## Nostra

Faun said:


> I never said he did.


So you agree Trump never incited any insurrection.

Got it.


----------



## hadit

Hutch Starskey said:


> She said she was told they were in the Beast. She is relating information from others. Not making claims of her own.


Then why is everyone making such a big deal about him being in an SUV? If he wasn't in the Beast, then the story she was told is that much more unlikely. This is the problem with hearsay, the details and the truth get lost very quickly.


----------



## bripat9643

Hutch Starskey said:


> Quote “ the agents”.


If the Dims don't need to quote the agents, then why should anyone else?


----------



## Hutch Starskey

hadit said:


> And, of course, not embellished in any way to make it sound more dramatic in a casual conversation. For sure they knew they were going to be quoted in a hearing under oath, so they recounted to her the exact details of everything that happened. Of course, you can hear the sarcasm. Until they get the people who were actually in the car to testify, there's no good reason to believe it happened.


You have no way to determine what if any embellishments were made. There is no reason to have fabricated such a story.


----------



## bripat9643

Hutch Starskey said:


> You have no way to determine what if any embellishments were made. There is no reason to have fabricated such a story.


There are all kinds of reasons, turd.  For one thing, she's selling a book.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

Sunsettommy said:


> You gloss over the part that it was in error.
> 
> Better to have actual physical witnesses of people who were at the SUV with Trump to testify but there is a reason why the Joke 6 committee isn't going to allow it.
> 
> Can you figure it out buttercup?


No doubt they should testify. All those resisting should testify.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

hadit said:


> Then why is everyone making such a big deal about him being in an SUV? If he wasn't in the Beast, then the story she was told is that much more unlikely. This is the problem with hearsay, the details and the truth get lost very quickly.


The SUV was shown to be the vehicle used. The RW world immediately started trying to “debunk” this by claiming it is impossible in the limo. 

I have no idea why it was characterized as “the beast”. It may just be used as a generic term among staff.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

bripat9643 said:


> There are all kinds of reasons, turd.  For one thing, she's selling a book.


Uh huh.  Felony Perjury is so with it.


----------



## hadit

Hutch Starskey said:


> You have no way to determine what if any embellishments were made. There is no reason to have fabricated such a story.


I'm not saying she fabricated anything. Even if she quoted what she heard word for word, I think she heard a story that was just that, a story, subject to embellishment for dramatic effect. She had no way of knowing that what she heard was true or not, and that's why such hearsay doesn't carry much weight in court. Until we hear from the people who were actually there, I don't think the event itself happened the way she told it.

"I heard my neighbor say he murdered his wife" won't get your neighbor convicted of murder. What it would likely prompt is, "We'll go ask your neighbor if he murdered his wife". Let's see if the kangaroo court will follow the logical path and have the SS agents at the scene testify about it. If they don't, I remain skeptical.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Couchpotato said:


> How is that facilitation?


By removing the obstacle. Maybe you have a hard time with simple English words...?

By the way, you're embarrassing yourself.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

Sunsettommy said:


> You embarrass yourself here because what YOU described is HEARSAY in this case probably DOUBLE hearsay since NONE of them are physical witnesses of the alleged events in a SUV not in the Beast as they erroneously claimed.
> 
> 
> 
> *Hearsay* evidence, in a legal forum, *is testimony from an under-oath witness who is reciting an out-of-court statement*, the content of which is being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. In most courts, hearsay evidence is inadmissible (the "hearsay evidence rule") unless an exception to the hearsay rule applies.
> 
> LINK
> 
> _bolding mine_
> 
> ===
> 
> Using your very lose interpretation, I can say you beat your wife every day in a drunken rage, I heard it during my prayers.
> 
> You have very low standards for determining what is real and valid.


This isn’t a court proceeding, dope. It’s a hearing. There is no such standard. 
Nothing loose about my interpretation. It’s yours that’s shaky.


----------



## hadit

Hutch Starskey said:


> The SUV was shown to be the vehicle used. The RW world immediately started trying to “debunk” this by claiming it is impossible in the limo.
> 
> I have no idea why it was characterized as “the beast”. It may just be used as a generic term among staff.


No, the presidential limo is referred to as "the beast" because it is specifically hardened to withstand pretty much anything short of a massive bomb blast. Staff would not call generic vehicles "the beast". If she heard he was in "the beast" when he wasn't, it reduces the story's credibility.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Sunsettommy said:


> since NONE of them are physical witnesses of the alleged events in a SUV


Wrong as always.

Engle was in the SUV.

But you know nothing about any of this except for some blog headlines.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

hadit said:


> I'm not saying she fabricated anything. Even if she quoted what she heard word for word, I think she heard a story that was just that, a story, subject to embellishment for dramatic effect. She had no way of knowing that what she heard was true or not, and that's why such hearsay doesn't carry much weight in court. Until we hear from the people who were actually there, I don't think the event itself happened the way she told it.
> 
> "I heard my neighbor say he murdered his wife" won't get your neighbor convicted of murder. What it would likely prompt is, "We'll go ask your neighbor if he murdered his wife". Let's see if the kangaroo court will follow the logical path and have the SS agents at the scene testify about it. If they don't, I remain skeptical.



This isn’t court, fool.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

hadit said:


> No, the presidential limo is referred to as "the beast" because it is specifically hardened to withstand pretty much anything short of a massive bomb blast. Staff would not call generic vehicles "the beast". If she heard he was in "the beast" when he wasn't, it reduces the story's credibility.


Much like this post reduces your credibility.


----------



## Lesh

TemplarKormac said:


> Every reporter from ABC to FOX are reporting the same thing. It's like having multiple witnesses to a murder. More witnesses, more credibility.
> 
> So please, don't bother.


They’re all reporting the same thing from the same anonymous “source”


----------



## Lesh

hadit said:


> Didn't she swear under oath that she heard it happened in the Beast? If she did and TRUMP! wasn't in the Beast, then what she recounted is false and cannot be taken seriously.


Don’t know but she was recounting what she was told by Ornato. If Ornato mentioned the Beast then meh… or if she just assumed he was talking about the Beast and he never specified… again… meh


----------



## Nostra

Hutch Starskey said:


> The SUV was shown to be the vehicle used. The RW world immediately started trying to “debunk” this by claiming it is impossible in the limo.
> 
> I have no idea why it was characterized as “the beast”. It may just be used as a generic term among staff.


I heard a former SS Agent on the radio yesterday saying they never use the term "Beast", so she is lying when she claim's the agent said "Beast".


----------



## bripat9643

Hutch Starskey said:


> Uh huh.  Felony Perjury is so with it.


That has never stopped any of those Washington cretins before.


----------



## bripat9643

Hutch Starskey said:


> This isn’t a court proceeding, dope. It’s a hearing. There is no such standard.
> Nothing loose about my interpretation. It’s yours that’s shaky.


it's not even a hearing, turd.  At a hearing, the accused is entitled to have his attorney representing him.  Rules of evidence still apply.   This is a farce.


----------



## Lesh

bripat9643 said:


> it's not even a hearing, turd.  At a hearing, the accused is entitled to have his attorney representing him.  Rules of evidence still apply.   This is a farce.


A Gran Jury is a hearing numbnuts


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> Wrong.  Pelosi and Schif for brains are the ones who need to answer that questions.



Nope, they can't speak for Trump's allies. They can only speak for themselves but they don't want to.


----------



## Faun

Nostra said:


> So you agree Trump never incited any insurrection.
> 
> Got it.



Never said that either. A pity you lack the ability to understand that.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> There are all kinds of reasons, turd.  For one thing, she's selling a book.



What book?


----------



## Faun

Hutch Starskey said:


> The SUV was shown to be the vehicle used. The RW world immediately started trying to “debunk” this by claiming it is impossible in the limo.
> 
> I have no idea why it was characterized as “the beast”. It may just be used as a generic term among staff.



It could also have been in the Beast. Everyone is assuming it's not because of the video which showed an SUV, but there were several vehicles in that motorcade. It's possible the video they showed just didn't capture the Beast.


----------



## Care4all

Lesh said:


> A Gran Jury is a hearing numbnuts


And there is no representation for the accused present in a grand jury!


----------



## Care4all

Faun said:


> It could also have been in the Beast. Everyone is assuming it's not because of the video which showed an SUV, but there were several vehicles in that motorcade. It's possible the video they showed just didn't capture the Beast.


It was the beast.  Bobby engel, top dog SS security testified to such.  Testified he had an all out disagreement on going to the Capitol with Trump, Engel won....they went to the whitehouse.

Notice the only denial from Trump acolytes is grabbing the wheel, not the fight with Engel on going to the Capitol.


----------



## Care4all

Meadows was told ahead of time, secret service said it wasn't safe, wouldn't hapoen....  Meadows was suppose to relay that to Trump....instead secret service was shocked they were the ones that had to relay this to trump, instead of meadows doing it, as expected.


----------



## Nostra

Faun said:


> Never said that either. A pity you lack the ability to understand that.


Using your criteria of Epps, Trump didn't incite a riot.

You lose again.


----------



## hadit

Lesh said:


> Don’t know but she was recounting what she was told by Ornato. If Ornato mentioned the Beast then meh… or if she just assumed he was talking about the Beast and he never specified… again… meh


Exactly my point. She could be recounting word for word what she heard but has no way of knowing if it is the truth, so there's no reason to believe it actually happened the way she told it. IOW, it's a story, and just like Ford's testimony against Kavanaugh, has holes in it.


----------



## WEATHER53

Big time emotional attempts to redefine hearsay


----------



## Faun

Nostra said:


> Using your criteria of Epps, Trump didn't incite a riot.
> 
> You lose again.



LOLOL 

Still false. You really have no fucking clue. But keep trying. It's fun reading.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

Lesh said:


> They’re all reporting the same thing from the same anonymous “source”


And no one is disputing that Trump was irate and demanding to go to the Capitol which is far more serious than any outburst.


----------



## Lesh

Nostra said:


> Using your criteria of Epps, Trump didn't incite a riot.
> 
> You lose again.


If you base that on only his remarks at the Elipse and ignore everything else


----------



## Hutch Starskey

Nostra said:


> I heard a former SS Agent on the radio yesterday saying they never use the term "Beast", so she is lying when she claim's the agent said "Beast".


Ornato said Beast. He was Meadows deputy.
Like I said earlier. It may have been a generic term used by staffers.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

bripat9643 said:


> it's not even a hearing, turd.  At a hearing, the accused is entitled to have his attorney representing him.  Rules of evidence still apply.   This is a farce.


This is Congress. Not a courtroom.


----------



## struth

Zincwarrior said:


> If they do testify, all that is needed for corroboration is that Trump wanted to go to the Capital building.  Thats the issue, not if he threw a fit or whatever.


he said in the speech he was going … so not sure what the issue is


----------



## WEATHER53

Trump can  state what he wants as much as he wants and that’s not a crime.  If he  takes the action or someone does at his order then it becomes a crime possibly
Liberal are playing “though and intent” police when it’s the action and outcome that governs


----------



## struth

Hutch Starskey said:


> This is Congress. Not a courtroom.


this isn’t Congress…it’s an embarrassment


----------



## Weatherman2020

citygator said:


> You guys are fucking nuts. Absolutely insane.  Absolutely fucking insane.
> 
> Woman has first hand account of Mark Meadows learning the crowd is armed.  First hand account that Mark knew that Trump wanted to go to Hill and knew the crowd was armed.  First hand account that Trump was mad he couldn’t go to the capitol.  First hand account the Mark Meadows said Trump didn’t care Pence was at risk.
> 
> The one thing you fucking traitor pieces of shit want to debate was the details of a story related about exactly how mad Trump was they didn’t go to the capital ok?  You are all fucking nuts. You deserve a king.


I’m going to have so much fun with this thread until my dying day.


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> this isn’t Congress…it’s an embarrassment


----------



## Care4all

hadit said:


> Exactly my point. She could be recounting word for word what she heard but has no way of knowing if it is the truth, so there's no reason to believe it actually happened the way she told it. IOW, it's a story, and just like Ford's testimony against Kavanaugh, has holes in it.


Bobby Engel, the Secret Service top dog in the car, testified before the committee earlier about the *all out disagreement with Trump, *and him having to hold his ground against Trump's will for them to take him there_.


Engel told Jan. 6 select committee investigators that the two men discussed Trump’s desire to go to the Capitol *and took 'different views' on the topic.* Engel noted that they went back to the White House instead of heading to Capitol Hill. The contents of Engel’s testimony have not been previously reported. Secret Service spokesperson Anthony Guglielmi declined to comment.


The testimony shows just how much Trump wanted to be at the Capitol with his backers as Congress voted to certify his Electoral College loss to Joe Biden. And he expressed his desire to join the protesters even as violence was unfolding.




			https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/07/trump-pressed-secret-service-for-plan-to-join-march-to-capitol/
		

_


----------



## struth

Lesh said:


> If you base that on only his remarks at the Elipse and ignore everything else


yeah i guess if you take bits and pieces of all the words he said in his 70 plus years of life, you could fit them together to make your point


----------



## Weatherman2020

Hutch Starskey said:


> And no one is disputing that Trump was irate and demanding to go to the Capitol which is far more serious than any outburst.


Who’s saying he was?
Oh ya. A proven liar.


----------



## Nostra

Lesh said:


> If you base that on only his remarks at the Elipse and ignore everything else


Quote Trump saying to storm the Capital and stop the count.

GO!

That is Fawnboi’s requirement.


----------



## Nostra

Hutch Starskey said:


> Ornato said Beast. He was Meadows deputy.
> Like I said earlier. It may have been a generic term used by staffers.


SS Agents never use the term, Dumbass.


----------



## Nostra

Care4all said:


> Bobby Engel, the Secret Service top dog in the car, testified before the committee earlier about the *all out disagreement with Trump, *and him having to hold his ground against Trump's will for them to take him there_.
> 
> 
> Engel told Jan. 6 select committee investigators that the two men discussed Trump’s desire to go to the Capitol *and took 'different views' on the topic.* Engel noted that they went back to the White House instead of heading to Capitol Hill. The contents of Engel’s testimony have not been previously reported. Secret Service spokesperson Anthony Guglielmi declined to comment.
> 
> 
> The testimony shows just how much Trump wanted to be at the Capitol with his backers as Congress voted to certify his Electoral College loss to Joe Biden. And he expressed his desire to join the protesters even as violence was unfolding.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/07/trump-pressed-secret-service-for-plan-to-join-march-to-capitol/
> 
> 
> _


Thanks for confirming Gossip Girl lied.


----------



## Faun

Nostra said:


> Quote Trump saying to storm the Capital and stop the count.
> 
> GO!
> 
> That is Fawnboi’s requirement.



Great, then you should be able to quote me saying that....


----------



## citygator

Weatherman2020 said:


> I’m going to have so much fun with this thread until my dying day.


Based on the typical profile of a right winger on here your age is 60+ and you’re not thin so definitely get some enjoyment while you have time still.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> Great, then you should be able to quote me saying that....


so he never did…gotcha


----------



## Lesh

Nostra said:


> SS Agents never use the term, Dumbass.


What term do they use?


----------



## bripat9643

Lesh said:


> A Gran Jury is a hearing numbnuts


There are lots of other kinds of hearings, you brain damaged fucknut.


----------



## struth

Lesh said:


> What term do they use?


they just call dembots idiots


----------



## Lesh

struth said:


> they just call dembots idiots


Fucking troll


----------



## Lesh

bripat9643 said:


> There are lots of other kinds of hearings, you brain damaged fucknut.


Yup. Including Congressional. Some don’t require rebuttal witnesses as we have shown. Not sure if any do but that’s irrelevant


----------



## bripat9643

Hutch Starskey said:


> And no one is disputing that Trump was irate and demanding to go to the Capitol which is far more serious than any outburst.


how is that "serious?"


----------



## struth

Lesh said:


> A Gran Jury is a hearing numbnuts


haha no it’s not…a Grand jury is a jury…not a hearing.  Both sides don’t present evidence at a grand jury.  It’s not before a judge.

god you dembots are idiots


----------



## bripat9643

Lesh said:


> Yup. Including Congressional. Some don’t require rebuttal witnesses as we have shown. Not sure if any do but that’s irrelevant


They do require rules of evidence and counsel for the accused to be present, you fucking moron


----------



## struth

Lesh said:


> Fucking troll


well you can. call dembots trolls…but don’t need the F word


----------



## Lesh

bripat9643 said:


> how is that "serious?"


Wanting to lead his armed minions into the Capitol while the votes that put him out of office are being counted?

That’s akin to Caesar crossing the Rubicon… which is why his staff was telling him he’d be in legal jeopardy if he did


----------



## bripat9643

Lesh said:


> Wanting to lead his armed minions into the Capitol while the votes that put him out of office are being counted?
> 
> That’s akin to Caesar crossing the Rubicon… which is why his staff was telling him he’d be in legal jeopardy if he did


You have no proof of that.   You can't convict Trump of crimes that are totally imaginary, idiot.

Debating progs is like debating mentally challenged children.


----------



## Lesh

bripat9643 said:


> They do require rules of evidence and counsel for the accused to be present, you fucking moron


Counsel present for GJ hearings? Nope

Back to fake law school for you


----------



## struth

Lesh said:


> Wanting to lead his armed minions into the Capitol while the votes that put him out of office are being counted?
> 
> That’s akin to Caesar crossing the Rubicon… which is why his staff was telling him he’d be in legal jeopardy if he did


oh wow…and just like that you showed the internet you are an idiot


----------



## Lesh

bripat9643 said:


> You have no proof of that.   You can't convict Trump of crimes that are totally imaginary, idiot.
> 
> Debating progs is like debating mentally challenged children.


His staff are on record telling him that we would be on serious legal jeopardy if he went to the Capitol

Moron


----------



## struth

Lesh said:


> His staff are on record telling him that we would be on serious legal jeopardy if he went to the Capitol
> 
> Moron


provide the record


----------



## Lesh

struth said:


> provide the record


Why ? You’d ignore it.


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> so he never did…gotcha



I never said he told them to storm the Capitol.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> They do require rules of evidence and counsel for the accused to be present, you fucking moron



For a Congressional hearing?? Who's been accused of a crime and what crime(s) did they allege?


----------



## Synthaholic




----------



## MagicMike

buckeye45_73 said:


> The Soviet show trial is the democrats....Sorry you're not gonna stop Trump if he decides to run.......sucks to be you.


Well....it kinda looks like Trump has stopped himself doesn't it?
The rats are jumping off the sinking ship.
Before long there will only be a loose gaggle of bitter-clinger, deplorable MAGATS left supporting Captain Chaos.
You know, the same type of loosers that would attack the U.S. Capitol in Buffalo skin robe with spear.
Liz Cheney is becoming the new hero.
Maybe SHE should run for POTUS!









						Liz Cheney Receives Huge Applause From Republicans or Speech Against Trump
					

Liz Cheney deemed Donald Trump a "domestic threat" and called for the GOP to support the Constitution instead of the former president.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## MagicMike

marvin martian said:


> We'll never know, because your reality show for idiots isn't allowing anyone from the opposing side to participate.


The Committee has extended the invitation to testify anyone who who has any FACTS that are meaningful and useful to getting to the truth in this investigation.
Unfortunately for the "opposing side" though the FACTS of the matter don't look too good for them.
That is why several of the key players are defying lawful subpoenas or, if they do appear to testify, pleading the fifth.


----------



## Faun

Nostra said:


> Quote Trump saying to storm the Capital and stop the count.
> 
> GO!
> 
> That is Fawnboi’s requirement.
> 
> 
> Faun said:
> 
> 
> 
> Great, then you should be able to quote me saying that....
Click to expand...


So no quote showing that "requirement," huh?


----------



## tahuyaman

Faun said:


> You'll have to ask Trump's allies who've either not complied with being called in to testify ... or did show up but pled the 5th to virtually every question.


The committee was established to hear only one side.   It was established to seek information from only one point of view.  

That's what the third world mentality is all about


----------



## Nostra

Faun said:


> Great, then you should be able to quote me saying that....


This was your esponse to a poster saying Epps was inciting an insurrection.

You so stupied you can’t remember your own posts?



Faun said:


> Quote him saying they should go inside the Capitol forcefully and to overturn the election...


----------



## Winco

IF Cipollone actually testifies and doesn't plead the 5th, and says anything negative about trump or supports anything Hutchinson said, how long before we hear the following.

1). Cipollone is a lying turncoat.
2). I never liked Cipollone, he's always been a RINO
3). My favorite...."I hardly knew him"


----------



## Faun

tahuyaman said:


> The committee was established to hear only one side.   It was established to seek information from only one point of view.
> 
> That's what the third world mentality is all about



That's simply not true. Anyone from Trump to the people around him can testify. Many have been called in but refuse to show up. Some others did show up but refused to say anything but, _I plead the Fifth._

So no, the committee did not establish it to be one-sided; and in fact, most of the people called in have been Republicans. The reason we've only heard one side is not because of the committee but because one side won't speak up. What are they so afraid of? Their silence speaks for them.


----------



## Faun

Nostra said:


> This was your esponse to a poster saying Epps was inciting an insurrection.
> 
> You so stupied you can’t remember your own posts?



LOLOL

You dumbfuck, that's not a "requirement."

Holyfuckingshit.


----------



## jc456

berg80 said:


> The challenge for the committee will be to find useful questions to ask that do not fall under the protections from answering afforded to him. Like executive privilege, attorney-client privilege, and the 5th amendment. However, it has been noted some information he has withheld does not fall under any of those three categories. The extent of his willingness to answer questions fully and honestly will help or hinder the committee and the DoJ in the former's attempt to tell the public what happened and the latter's decision to indict a former prez or not.


pat asks,   I want to know why peloser ignored the call for the national guard?


----------



## jc456

Winco said:


> IF Cipollone actually testifies and doesn't plead the 5th, and says anything negative about trump or supports anything Hutchinson said, how long before we hear the following.
> 
> 1). Cipollone is a lying turncoat.
> 2). I never liked Cipollone, he's always been a RINO
> 3). My favorite...."I hardly knew him"


it all means nothing.


----------



## Nostra

Faun said:


> LOLOL
> 
> You dumbfuck, that's not a "requirement."
> 
> Holyfuckingshit.


It was for you since you used it to claim Epps didn’t incite an insurrection.

Keep spinning, Simp.


----------



## marvin martian

Chillicothe said:


> As you no doubt know by now, the Select Committee issued a subpoena late yesterday to the chief White House lawyer, Pat Cipollone.
> And, as you no doubt heard in some of the hearings to date.....Cipollone was a prominent voice in meetings. Often a prudent voice urging moderation while warning of legal jeopardy attached to some of the proposed 'Election Reversal'  schemes.
> 
> He's been reluctant to sit before the Committee while under oath or being filmed.
> 
> But, with the effective testimony of Cassidy Hutchinson Cipollone's name became even more prominent than it was when Cheney called him out as she ended the 4th (or was it the 3rd?) hearing.
> 
> Cipollone is now the guy with the spotlight on him.....and it's gonna follow him.  THAT much attention doesn't just fade away. Something hasta happen.  He'll cooperate. Or he'll file a suit to attempt to stop it. But the press will be on him like a perfume.  After all, there's no 'client confidentiality' aspect here. He is the 'People's lawyer'....... NOT Don Trump's lawyer.
> 
> 
> 
> *This morning's Washington Post offered us this:*
> 
> _"But the subpoena may provide cover for Cipollone to cooperate with the committee, as Trump and his allies have sought to keep those in the former president’s orbit from providing the committee with potentially damaging information.
> 
> Hutchinson in her testimony portrayed Cipollone as one of the last firewalls blocking Trump’s efforts to overturn the elections. She testified that, on the morning of Jan. 6, Cipollone came forward with an urgent request, saying “something to the effect of: ‘Please make sure we don’t go up to the Capitol, Cassidy. Keep in touch with me. We’re going to get charged with every crime imaginable if we make that movement happen.’”
> 
> Tuesday’s surprise hearing was designed in part to ramp up pressure on reluctant witnesses such as Cipollone, according to those involved with the investigation....."
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------_
> 
> These hearings have been a fascinating exercise in watching drama, conflict, and the 'sausage-making' ickyness of our elected leaders.



It's already been debunked, try to keep up, assclown.

Do keep us posted on what Jussie Smollett and Christine Blasey-Ford are up to, though...LOL


----------



## Winco

jc456 said:


> pat asks,   I want to know why peloser ignored the call for the national guard?


Maybe because "It was a peaceful protest" and "Nobody had any weapons."

We've heard this ^^^^ ad nauseam from the right, so why the need for the National Guard.
If trump actually asked for the NG, then trump was expecting violence.


----------



## jc456

Winco said:


> Maybe because "It was a peaceful protest" and "Nobody had any weapons."
> 
> We've heard this ^^^^ ad nauseam from the right, so why the need for the National Guard.
> If trump actually asked for the NG, then trump was expecting violence.


oh, so it was a peaceful protest, then what am I doing here?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Care4all said:


> It was the beast.  Bobby engel, top dog SS security testified to such.  Testified he had an all out disagreement on going to the Capitol with Trump, Engel won....they went to the whitehouse.
> 
> Notice the only denial from Trump acolytes is grabbing the wheel, not the fight with Engel on going to the Capitol.


Well of course.

The cultists are drowning and reaching for a life preserver.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

tahuyaman said:


> The committee was established to hear only one side.   It was established to seek information from only one point of view.
> 
> That's what the third world mentality is all about


Wrong of course. The Trump circle has refused to testify.


----------



## Winco

jc456 said:


> oh, so it was a peaceful protest, then what am I doing here?


That's what you keep trying to push, 
regardless of ALL that video evidence of KKKult Violence.

I know it turned out 'non peaceful' but now you are concerned about the lack of NG when it was, in your words, a peaceful protest.


----------



## jc456

Winco said:


> That's what you keep trying to push,
> regardless of ALL that video evidence of KKKult Violence.
> 
> I know it turned out 'non peaceful' but now you are concerned about the lack of NG when it was, in your words, a peaceful protest.


demofks were there in their robes?  holy shit, don't you tell peloser or Schitts.


----------



## marvin martian

jc456 said:


> demofks were there in their robes?  holy shit, don't you tell peloser or Schitts.



These guys were definitely there...holding up their Biden for President signs.


----------



## tahuyaman

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Wrong of course. The Trump circle has refused to testify.


The committee was formed fraudulently.   It is not seeking the truth.  It is seeking cherry-picked elements which support a partisan agenda.  The only people buying it are a small minority of hacks.   The vast majority isn’t paying any attention as this is not on their radar.   Current living conditions are on their radar though.


----------



## Chillicothe

marvin martian said:


> _It's already been debunked, try to keep up, assclown.
> Do keep us posted on what Jussie Smollett and Christine Blasey-Ford are up to, though...LOL_


=========================================================================
"Assclown"?

Poster *Martian*, is this the right chatroom for you?
A merely informative post on a current news story from this morning's press and that triggers your 'a_ssclown_' epithet?
What's up with that?

It could be interpreted.....and I mean no disrespect....but it could be interpreted that you have some unresolved anger issues. Anchored, perhaps, by some grievance, unhappiness, or failure in your life.

For that we all can be sympathetic, but mein freund, you need to settle down a bit, breathe, maybe sign up for a tai chi class or some other meditation technique.  And maybe not drink alcohol?

And then, Smollett and Blasey-Ford?
What in this god's green world does either one of them have to do with Don Trump sending armed supporters at our legislators and our Capitol?
What is the connection there, my friend?


----------



## WEATHER53

Chillicothe said:


> As you no doubt know by now, the Select Committee issued a subpoena late yesterday to the chief White House lawyer, Pat Cipollone.
> And, as you no doubt heard in some of the hearings to date.....Cipollone was a prominent voice in meetings. Often a prudent voice urging moderation while warning of legal jeopardy attached to some of the proposed 'Election Reversal'  schemes.
> 
> He's been reluctant to sit before the Committee while under oath or being filmed.
> 
> But, with the effective testimony of Cassidy Hutchinson Cipollone's name became even more prominent than it was when Cheney called him out as she ended the 4th (or was it the 3rd?) hearing.
> 
> Cipollone is now the guy with the spotlight on him.....and it's gonna follow him.  THAT much attention doesn't just fade away. Something hasta happen.  He'll cooperate. Or he'll file a suit to attempt to stop it. But the press will be on him like a perfume.  After all, there's no 'client confidentiality' aspect here. He is the 'People's lawyer'....... NOT Don Trump's lawyer.
> 
> 
> 
> *This morning's Washington Post offered us this:*
> 
> _"But the subpoena may provide cover for Cipollone to cooperate with the committee, as Trump and his allies have sought to keep those in the former president’s orbit from providing the committee with potentially damaging information.
> 
> Hutchinson in her testimony portrayed Cipollone as one of the last firewalls blocking Trump’s efforts to overturn the elections. She testified that, on the morning of Jan. 6, Cipollone came forward with an urgent request, saying “something to the effect of: ‘Please make sure we don’t go up to the Capitol, Cassidy. Keep in touch with me. We’re going to get charged with every crime imaginable if we make that movement happen.’”
> 
> Tuesday’s surprise hearing was designed in part to ramp up pressure on reluctant witnesses such as Cipollone, according to those involved with the investigation....."
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------_
> 
> These hearings have been a fascinating exercise in watching drama, conflict, and the 'sausage-making' ickyness of our elected leaders.


He’s not the one who is the crux of her recounting what she was told
Let’s get the “horses mouths” who actually witnessed the events and stop avoiding or declining them


----------



## lantern2814

Chillicothe said:


> =========================================================================
> "Assclown"?
> 
> Poster *Martian*, is this the right chatroom for you?
> A merely informative post on a current news story from this morning's press and that triggers your 'a_ssclown_' epithet?
> What's up with that?
> 
> It could be interpreted.....and I mean no disrespect....but it could be interpreted that you have some unresolved anger issues. Anchored, perhaps, by some grievance, unhappiness, or failure in your life.
> 
> For that we all can be sympathetic, but mein freund, you need to settle down a bit, breathe, maybe sign up for a tai chi class or some other meditation technique.  And maybe not drink alcohol?
> 
> And then, Smollett and Blasey-Ford?
> What in this god's green world does either one of them have to do with Don Trump sending armed supporters at our legislators and our Capitol?
> What is the connection there, my friend?


So you’re so stupid you need facts spoon fed to you. That happens when you’re a Kool-Aid dinking, unthinking Dim cultist like you. Hutchinson, Smollett, and Blasé Fraud are all proven liars. It can be asserted with no doubt that you are an uneducated, arrogant asshole who has no regard for the truth.


----------



## Chillicothe

lantern2814 said:


> _ It can be asserted with no doubt that you are an uneducated, arrogant asshole who has no regard for the truth._


===================================================


The lady doth protest too much, methinks.


----------



## Couchpotato

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> By removing the obstacle. Maybe you have a hard time with simple English words...?
> 
> By the way, you're embarrassing yourself.


What obstacle?    The metal detectors were for the speech not the city.  These people if they had guns were in the city already goofy.    And since no one seemed to have a gun during the BS at the capitol, apparently POTUS not worrying about a law he has no authority to enforce was of no consequence.    

Keep grasping I’m sure you will eventually grab something.


----------



## lantern2814

Chillicothe said:


> ===================================================
> 
> 
> The lady doth protest too much, methinks.


 ^^^ This little girl completely avoids the points of the post. Thus proving it all true.


----------



## Couchpotato

Faun said:


> Quote me saying her hearsay should be believed without confirmation from Ornato or Engel...


Quote me saying you said that.


----------



## Couchpotato

Care4all said:


> It was the beast.  Bobby engel, top dog SS security testified to such.  Testified he had an all out disagreement on going to the Capitol with Trump, Engel won....they went to the whitehouse.
> 
> Notice the only denial from Trump acolytes is grabbing the wheel, not the fight with Engel on going to the Capitol.


So the smoking gun is Trump wanted to go to the capital and had an argument with a SS agent about it?      

Im convinced.  Throw him in jail and throw away the key.     I’m sure Trump is the only President to ever have a disagreement with a SS agent.


----------



## marvin martian

Chillicothe said:


> What is the connection there, my friend?



The connection appears to be the ease with which you can be duped by easily disprovable lies.


----------



## Faun

Nostra said:


> It was for you since you used it to claim Epps didn’t incite an insurrection.
> 
> Keep spinning, Simp.



LOL

You moron, that's not the only way to incite a riot.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

tahuyaman said:


> The committee was formed fraudulently.


Pathetic lie. Completely within the rules. 




Couchpotato said:


> What obstacle?


The metal detectors and security.

There is no way you are this fucking stupid. You are acting.


----------



## Couchpotato

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Pathetic lie. Completely within the rules.
> 
> 
> 
> The metal detectors and security.
> 
> There is no way you are this fucking stupid. You are acting.


Right, Trump was responsible metal detectors for all of DC. Security as well.    Who’s stupid again?     The MD and security were for the speech which was held INSIDE DC so if those people had guns they were already in DC and were able to go to the capital with them whether there were metal detectors at the Trump speech or not.    So tell me again how Trump caring if people carrying arms were in his speech or not affected anything outside the speech area?


----------



## WEATHER53

Couchpotato said:


> Right, Trump was responsible metal detectors for all of DC. Security as well.    Who’s stupid again?     The MD and security were for the speech which was held INSIDE DC so if those people had guns they were already in DC and were able to go to the capital with them whether there were metal detectors at the Trump speech or not.    So tell me again how Trump caring if people carrying arms were in his speech or not affected anything outside the speech area?


False flag that Trump was legally and morally responsible to “disarm” them. 
Following lib loon logic, every time a person is armed they intend to do harm


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Couchpotato said:


> , Trump was responsible metal detectors for all of DC. Security as well.


Idiot non sequiturs


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

WEATHER53 said:


> False flag that Trump was legally and morally responsible to “disarm” them.


Same idiot non sequitur

Not that you know what a Jnon sequitur is.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> I never said he told them to storm the Capitol.


gotcha.  so…what’s the point of this hearing?


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> gotcha.  so…what’s the point of this hearing?



To learn how and why Sedition Day happened.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> To learn how Sedition Day happened.


 didn’t we learn about this? we had an impeachment trial, we have xiden doj…

now we have shifty and liz


----------



## JustAGuy1

You guys have no reason not to have not learned that you can't get him. For the same reason Pubs can't get Hillary.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

JustAGuy1 said:


> You guys have no reason not to have not learned that you can't get him. For the same reason Pubs can't get Hillary.


Not the same reason. The problem with the Hillary witch hunts is that they turned up nothing at all.

We have mountains of evidence the orange slob committed crimes. The only thing that protected him was his office.


----------



## WEATHER53

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Same idiot non sequitur
> 
> Not that you know what a Jnon sequitur is.


Binging on the phrase non sequitur we see.  Learning it’s definition First is better.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

WEATHER53 said:


> Binging on the phrase non sequitur we see.  Learning it’s definition First is better.


You don't know what it means.

You embarrass yourself.


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> didn’t we learn about this? we had an impeachment trial, we have xiden doj…
> 
> now we have shifty and liz



The impeachment did not learn how or why it happened.


----------



## JustAGuy1

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Not the same reason. The problem with the Hillary witch hunts is that they turned up nothing at all.
> 
> We have mountains of evidence the orange slob committed crimes. The only thing that protected him was his office.



Only stupid people believe there is no evidence on Hillary. She is one of the worst people on this planet.


----------



## WEATHER53

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> You don't know what it means.
> 
> You embarrass yourself.


These lib admonition about dont embarrass yourself and lol and all the shame based motivational attempts don’t work on thinkers. They worked on you which is why you are a summer school flunkie.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Faun 

Remember how these quivering little babies cheered the fact that the Democrats were not allowed to present any new evidence or witnesses at the Senate trial (an ACTUAL trial, mind you)...

...but now they whine like little bitches that there aren't people at the hearings (not a trial) to tell their story, when that is because they refused to testify?

These idiots half the self awareness of roadkill. They have no idea how stupid they look. None.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

JustAGuy1 said:


> Hillary


J


JustAGuy1 said:


> Only stupid people believe there is no evidence on Hillary.


Then go whine to the republicans who wrote the hearings conclusions on their own witch hunts, in which they said there was nothing  there.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

WEATHER53 said:


> These lib admonition about dont embarrass yourself and lol and all the shame based motivational attempts don’t work on thinkers. They worked on you which is why you are a summer school flunkie.


You are not a thinker, ya dummy. Non sequitur is something anyone with a higher education learns is a fallacy and a favored tactic of conmen of low intellectual capacity.


----------



## scruffy

Faun said:


> To learn how and why Sedition Day happened.


Bullshit 

We know that already 

These hearings are a total abuse of power. The Demtards are using the floor of Congress to engage in partisan grandstanding at taxpayer expense.

They're NOT doing the Peoples' business, they haven't passed a budget in 15 years and they haven't passed an immigration bill in damn near 40 years now.

But they love to spend YOUR money on dog and pony shows. 

These fucktard Democrats have totally lost their marbles. They have a bunch of psychopaths in the leadership, which is why we get the Stalinist behavior. These assholes are FUCKED UP, they need to go.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> The impeachment did not learn how or why it happened.


why not? geez you’re impeaching a president…didn’t you have evidence l??


----------



## struth

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> You are not a thinker, ya dummy. Non sequitur is something anyone with a higher education learns is a fallacy and a favored tactic of conmen of low intellectual capacity.


i have a doctors of law, and your post makes zero sense


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> why not? geez you’re impeaching a president…didn’t you have evidence l??



They impeached him for inciting it and for purposefully delaying calling it off. And they had evidence of that.


----------



## Faun

scruffy said:


> Bullshit
> 
> We know that already
> 
> These hearings are a total abuse of power. The Demtards are using the floor of Congress to engage in partisan grandstanding at taxpayer expense.
> 
> They're NOT doing the Peoples' business, they haven't passed a budget in 15 years and they haven't passed an immigration bill in damn near 40 years now.
> 
> But they love to spend YOUR money on dog and pony shows.
> 
> These fucktard Democrats have totally lost their marbles. They have a bunch of psychopaths in the leadership, which is why we get the Stalinist behavior. These assholes are FUCKED UP, they need to go.



Hey, I already paid for 8 investigations into Benghazi. I'll pay for 6 more investigations into Sedition Day.


----------



## MagicMike

WEATHER53 said:


> False flag that Trump was legally and morally responsible to “disarm” them.
> Following lib loon logic, every time a person is armed they intend to do harm


While it is not true that every armed person intends to do harm, in this specific incidence (that white supremacist/Trump rally on January 6th) those people that Trump insisted be allowed to enter with their weapons DID in fact mean to and did do harm.
This is evidenced by the harm that they DID do at The Capitol which is well documented in the records.


----------



## MagicMike

tahuyaman said:


> The committee was established to hear only one side.   It was established to seek information from only one point of view.
> 
> That's what the third world mentality is all about


You are completely missing the point here.
There. Is. ONLY. ONE. credible. "side!"

I cannot think of a simpler way to spell that out for you.


----------



## Chillicothe

marvin martian said:


> _"The connection appears to be the ease with which you can be duped...."_



Now that's a puzzler.
My poor avatar doesn't recall being "duped" by either Smollete or Blasey-Ford.

But, am always curious how others view my realities.
So, good poster *Martian*.....whatcha got on that '_dupery'_ thingy?

Show us and I'll take you as a serious poster.
And seriously respond.

Saddle up, mi amigo.


----------



## Couchpotato

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Idiot non sequiturs


Idiot who can’t refute the point.


----------



## Couchpotato

MagicMike said:


> While it is not true that every armed person intends to do harm, in this specific incidence (that white supremacist/Trump rally on January 6th) those people that Trump insisted be allowed to enter with their weapons DID in fact mean to and did do harm.
> This is evidenced by the harm that they DID do at The Capitol which is well documented in the records.


Did they throw their guns in the Potomac on their way to the capitol?


----------



## Nostra

Faun said:


> LOL
> 
> You moron, that's not the only way to incite a riot.


----------



## Faun

Couchpotato said:


> Did they throw their guns in the Potomac on their way to the capitol?



Probably not. A few were arrested. Most others who were armed prolly went undetected.


----------



## Faun

Nostra said:


>



LOL

Your inability to understand is not really my problem.


----------



## Nostra

Faun said:


> LOL
> 
> Your inability to understand is not really my problem.


I understand all you have is pathetic spinning.


----------



## Couchpotato

Faun said:


> Probably not. A few were arrested. Most others who were armed prolly went undetected.


Thats what you believe not what you know though right? 

Is there any real evidence of any fire arms in the Capital building on January 6th

Otjer than the ones being legalply carried by the Police


----------



## Hutch Starskey

Care4all said:


> Bobby Engel, the Secret Service top dog in the car, testified before the committee earlier about the *all out disagreement with Trump, *and him having to hold his ground against Trump's will for them to take him there_.
> 
> 
> Engel told Jan. 6 select committee investigators that the two men discussed Trump’s desire to go to the Capitol *and took 'different views' on the topic.* Engel noted that they went back to the White House instead of heading to Capitol Hill. The contents of Engel’s testimony have not been previously reported. Secret Service spokesperson Anthony Guglielmi declined to comment.
> 
> 
> The testimony shows just how much Trump wanted to be at the Capitol with his backers as Congress voted to certify his Electoral College loss to Joe Biden. And he expressed his desire to join the protesters even as violence was unfolding.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/07/trump-pressed-secret-service-for-plan-to-join-march-to-capitol/
> 
> 
> _


That is more important than any reported outburst. 
The president literally had to be forced to not go to the Capitol.


----------



## Couchpotato

Hutch Starskey said:


> That is more important than any reported outburst.
> The president literally had to be forced to not go to the Capitol.


So.


----------



## Nostra

Hutch Starskey said:


> That is more important than any reported outburst.
> The president literally had to be forced to not go to the Capitol.


According to the Gossip Girl who wasn't there.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

Nostra said:


> SS Agents never use the term, Dumbass.


The story was related by a staffer and not the SS, dope. 
I literally said that in the post you responded to.


----------



## Nostra

Hutch Starskey said:


> The story was related by a staffer and not the SS, dope.
> I literally said that in the post you responded to.


The guy was both, Dumbass.

Get educated.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

bripat9643 said:


> There are lots of other kinds of hearings, you brain damaged fucknut.


Like a House Select Committee, dope. Governed by the rules of the House.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

bripat9643 said:


> They do require rules of evidence and counsel for the accused to be present, you fucking moron


They don’t , dope. Not at all.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

struth said:


> provide the record


Watch the hearings, tard.


----------



## Lesh

Couchpotato said:


> Did they throw their guns in the Potomac on their way to the capitol?


Were any of them searched?

Did they go though metal detectors at the Capitol?


----------



## Chillicothe

Couchpotato said:


> _"Is there any real evidence of any fire arms in the Capital building on January 6th."_



Newsweek, June 13, 2022:

_"In April, 72-year-old Lonnie Coffman of Falkville, Alabama, was sentenced to four years in prison for bringing loaded guns, ammunition and Molotov cocktail ingredients to Washington on Jan. 6.

 A statement by the Department of Justice said Coffman "also carried a loaded handgun and a loaded revolver as he walked around the area that day."

In March 2022, 49-year-old Texan Guy Reffitt, was convicted (among other charges) for being unlawfully present on Capitol grounds while possessing a firearm and transporting firearms during civil disorder.

A Department of Justice indictment from January 2021 also states that Christopher Alberts, Maryland, was found carrying a Taurus G2C semi-automatic handgun on Capitol grounds on January 6.

Off-duty Drug Enforcement Administration agent Mark Sami Ibrahim, 32, was also indicted by a grand jury for bringing a firearm within the United States Capitol and its grounds.

In an article for Newsweek, Nick Suplina and Justin Wagner of Everytown for Gun Safety said they had identified __"12 individuals allegedly tied to the events of Jan. 6 who were arrested in Washington, D.C., and charged with firearms offenses."_


----------



## Care4all

Nostra said:


> Thanks for confirming Gossip Girl lied.


No she didnt...she made it clear it was what Trump's operations guy, Tony Ornato, told her it happened, and he was likely embellishing the story....he too was not there....just repeating and embellishing a second hand story.....

But Engel, who was there in the Beast with the President, had already testified to the committee earlier that it was a showdown in the car, between him saying they would NOT bring Trump to the Capitol, and Trump insisting they do.

I'd love to see Engel and Ornato  back on the hill under oath, to get to the bottom of this.....

Tony Ornato is a known liar in the Whitehouse by staffers....several WH staffers say he's a liar and they all said Hutchinson has never ever, been known to lie....always straight forward.


----------



## Care4all

Chillicothe said:


> Newsweek, June 13, 2022:
> 
> _"In April, 72-year-old Lonnie Coffman of Falkville, Alabama, was sentenced to four years in prison for bringing loaded guns, ammunition and Molotov cocktail ingredients to Washington on Jan. 6._
> 
> _A statement by the Department of Justice said Coffman "also carried a loaded handgun and a loaded revolver as he walked around the area that day."
> 
> In March 2022, 49-year-old Texan Guy Reffitt, was convicted (among other charges) for being unlawfully present on Capitol grounds while possessing a firearm and transporting firearms during civil disorder.
> 
> A Department of Justice indictment from January 2021 also states that Christopher Alberts, Maryland, was found carrying a Taurus G2C semi-automatic handgun on Capitol grounds on January 6.
> 
> Off-duty Drug Enforcement Administration agent Mark Sami Ibrahim, 32, was also indicted by a grand jury for bringing a firearm within the United States Capitol and its grounds.
> 
> In an article for Newsweek, Nick Suplina and Justin Wagner of Everytown for Gun Safety said they had identified __"12 individuals allegedly tied to the events of Jan. 6 who were arrested in Washington, D.C., and charged with firearms offenses."_


The thing about listening to those tapes of officers shouting back and forth reporting all the Trump fans with guns was scary, especially the cop recording saying they had people up in trees brandishing AR15S....  

It makes sense that capitol police didn't use their guns to stop the riot break in to the capitol now, they likely were aware of all the guns from radio traffick, and didn't want to have a shootout massacre on their hands, at the Capitol of the United States.


----------



## jc456

Chillicothe said:


> =========================================================================
> "Assclown"?
> 
> Poster *Martian*, is this the right chatroom for you?
> A merely informative post on a current news story from this morning's press and that triggers your 'a_ssclown_' epithet?
> What's up with that?
> 
> It could be interpreted.....and I mean no disrespect....but it could be interpreted that you have some unresolved anger issues. Anchored, perhaps, by some grievance, unhappiness, or failure in your life.
> 
> For that we all can be sympathetic, but mein freund, you need to settle down a bit, breathe, maybe sign up for a tai chi class or some other meditation technique.  And maybe not drink alcohol?
> 
> And then, Smollett and Blasey-Ford?
> What in this god's green world does either one of them have to do with Don Trump sending armed supporters at our legislators and our Capitol?
> What is the connection there, my friend?


Your didn’t post that straight


----------



## Care4all

Nostra said:


> According to the Gossip Girl who wasn't there.


And the secret service top dog in the car, bobby engel, testified to the committee, it was a contentious fight with Trump on whether they would bring him to the Capitol, or whitehouse...after the ellipse rally.

Secret service won out....the whitehouse.... Is where he brought Trump....not the Capitol.


----------



## Faun

Couchpotato said:


> Thats what you believe not what you know though right?
> 
> Is there any real evidence of any fire arms in the Capital building on January 6th
> 
> Otjer than the ones being legalply carried by the Police



No, no one who was armed went inside. Possibly for the same reason many armed attendees wouldn't go to the Ellipse, because they didn't want to go through magnetometers. But there were some outside the Capitol who were armed. Again, a few of them were arrested. I see no reason to believe those 9 were the only ones carrying. They were the only ones who police spotted carrying a firearm.


----------



## WEATHER53

MagicMike said:


> While it is not true that every armed person intends to do harm, in this specific incidence (that white supremacist/Trump rally on January 6th) those people that Trump insisted be allowed to enter with their weapons DID in fact mean to and did do harm.
> This is evidenced by the harm that they DID do at The Capitol which is well documented in the records.


Well since you maintain they did intend harm  then why didn’t the armed use their arms?


----------



## Chillicothe

WEATHER53 said:


> _He’s not the one who is the crux of her recounting what she was told_



My bad.
I had -- obviously in error --- thought that the headline *"..the testimony of Pat Cipollone.*.." was sufficient to clue the cluefull about what the thread would be about.

Communicating can be a challenge, despite the best of intentions.  No?


----------



## Faun

Care4all said:


> The thing about listening to those tapes of officers shouting back and forth reporting all the Trump fans with guns was scary, especially the cop recording saying they had people up in trees brandishing AR15S....
> 
> It makes sense that capitol police didn't use their guns to stop the riot break in to the capitol now, they likely were aware of all the guns from radio traffick, and didn't want to have a shootout massacre on their hands, at the Capitol of the United States.



Michael Fanone testified to something along those lines. When they were beating him to within an inch of his life, he said he considered using his firearm; but decided to plead for his life instead because he feared that violent mob would have felt justified in murdering him.


----------



## Couchpotato

Faun said:


> No, no one who was armed went inside. Possibly for the same reason many armed attendees wouldn't go to the Ellipse, because they didn't want to go through magnetometers. But there were some outside the Capitol who were armed. Again, a few of them were arrested. I see no reason to believe those 9 were the only ones carrying. They were the only ones who police spotted carrying a firearm.


Not sure why someone breaking into the Capital building would be worried about magnetometers.      That said it’s a lot of I think and I believe.    We are really short on I know.


----------



## Lesh

Care4all said:


> And the secret service top dog in the car, bobby engel, testified to the committee, it was a contentious fight with Trump on whether they would bring him to the Capitol, or whitehouse...after the ellipse rally.
> 
> Secret service won out....the whitehouse.... Is where he brought Trump....not the Capitol.


Wait...so you mean Engle testified that there WAS some kind of altercation in the Presidential vehicle?

Ohhh


----------



## Couchpotato

Care4all said:


> The thing about listening to those tapes of officers shouting back and forth reporting all the Trump fans with guns was scary, especially the cop recording saying they had people up in trees brandishing AR15S....
> 
> It makes sense that capitol police didn't use their guns to stop the riot break in to the capitol now, they likely were aware of all the guns from radio traffick, and didn't want to have a shootout massacre on their hands, at the Capitol of the United States.


They could have closed and locked the doors and called for back up.  I don’t think they needed to hold the doors and wave people in.


----------



## Care4all

Lesh said:


> Wait...so you mean Engle testified that there WAS some kind of altercation in the Presidential vehicle?
> 
> Ohhh


What we know that was reported, is that they had a very serious disagreement on it....


----------



## MagicMike

WEATHER53 said:


> Well since you maintain they did intend harm  then why didn’t the armed use their arms?


I don't know
lack of cojones maybe?
You know how these wanna-be, weekend warrior types are.
"Proud Boy/Oathkeeper" faux patriots.
They turn to jello when the other side has guns too.


----------



## WEATHER53

MagicMike said:


> I don't know
> lack of cojones maybe?
> You know how these wanna-be, weekend warrior types are.
> "Proud Boy/Oathkeeper" faux patriots.
> They turn to jello when the other side has guns too.


So you claim to have it both ways.


----------



## Chillicothe

Couchpotato said:


> _"I don’t think they needed to hold the doors and wave people in."_


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A clue to the cluefull.  Watch this about those _"hold-the-door_' tropes:   * *


Warning: Strong language. Violent behavior. Threats and injuries.

A strong constitution may be required. 

(yes, it's a pun. Duh.)


----------



## Faun

Couchpotato said:


> Not sure why someone breaking into the Capital building would be worried about magnetometers.      That said it’s a lot of I think and I believe.    We are really short on I know.



That's the reason we have a Congressional committee looking into it; and why they're televising some of their findings for the American people.


----------



## Faun

Lesh said:


> Wait...so you mean Engle testified that there WAS some kind of altercation in the Presidential vehicle?
> 
> Ohhh



I haven't seen where he testified to anything other than Trump wanted to be taken to the Capitol but Engel wouldn't allow it.


----------



## Lesh

WEATHER53 said:


> Well since you maintain they did intend harm  then why didn’t the armed use their arms?


You'd have to ask them. But they DID have them


----------



## Lesh

Faun said:


> I haven't seen where he testified to anything other than Trump wanted to be taken to the Capitol but Engel wouldn't allow it.


And we KNOW trump has a temper


----------



## Faun

Couchpotato said:


> They could have closed and locked the doors and called for back up.  I don’t think they needed to hold the doors and wave people in.



Most of the people broke in. At one entrance, they were pulling cops out of the doorway so that they could break in. At another, they were crushing a cop as they tried to break in. At another, they fought with cops defending a tunnel where one cop was dragged out and beaten to within an inch of his life. I suspect the few cops who let them in, did so because there was no keeping that violent mob, which outnumbered police by an estimated 100 to 1 from fighting past them. No doubt they heard other battles raging with police on their radios. There's one video I saw where police abandoned their position behind some doors as the mob was breaking in. The mob literally "escorted" them out of the way and the police allowed it for their own safety. This was a storming of the Capitol. It wasn't by invitation.


----------



## Billy000

bripat9643 said:


> 0.00000000000! micro seconds.


Right any information about politics you don’t like is fake. We already know.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Couchpotato said:


> Idiot who can’t refute the point.


Your point refutes itself. It is a fallacy. But you don't know own what that means. Because you are of low intellectual capability.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

WEATHER53 said:


> So you claim to have it both ways.


You are the jackass trying to have both armed insurrectionists and say they were no threat to anyone.


----------



## TemplarKormac

Lesh said:


> They’re all reporting the same thing from the same anonymous “source”


Coming from a liberal who relies on consensus to lend anything credence, I find that very ironic.


----------



## bripat9643

Billy000 said:


> Right any information about politics you don’t like is fake. We already know.


No, but almost any idiocy spouted by morons like you is almost certainly fake


----------



## bripat9643

Hutch Starskey said:


> They don’t , dope. Not at all.


Yes the do, you fucking dumb turd.


----------



## bripat9643

Care4all said:


> The thing about listening to those tapes of officers shouting back and forth reporting all the Trump fans with guns was scary, especially the cop recording saying they had people up in trees brandishing AR15S....
> 
> It makes sense that capitol police didn't use their guns to stop the riot break in to the capitol now, they likely were aware of all the guns from radio traffick, and didn't want to have a shootout massacre on their hands, at the Capitol of the United States.


Nobody but the police had any guns, you fucking moron.


----------



## Lesh

bripat9643 said:


> Nobody but the police had any guns, you fucking moron.


We've already documented numerous guns you idiot...not to mention molotov cocktails, pipe bombs, bear spray, brass knuckles, spears, pipes, sharpened flag poles...


----------



## bripat9643

Lesh said:


> We've already documented numerous guns you idiot...not to mention molotov cocktails, pipe bombs, bear spray, brass knuckles, spears, pipes, sharpened flag poles...


Please list them.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

Faun said:


> No, no one who was armed went inside. Possibly for the same reason many armed attendees wouldn't go to the Ellipse, because they didn't want to go through magnetometers. But there were some outside the Capitol who were armed. Again, a few of them were arrested. I see no reason to believe those 9 were the only ones carrying. They were the only ones who police spotted carrying a firearm.


It’s not unreasonable to conclude that those who stayed outside while armed did so as a back up if things took a more violent turn with law enforcement inside. Meaning shots exchanged.


----------



## Lesh

bripat9643 said:


> Please list them.


I just did you fucking idiot


----------



## Lesh

Hutch Starskey said:


> It’s not unreasonable to conclude that those who stayed outside while armed did so as a back up if things took a more violent turn with law enforcement inside. Meaning shots exchanged.


Since very very few of those thousands who entered the Capitol were searched or went through metal detectors...we have no idea how many of the ARMED people from the Elipse rally were armed inside the Capitol


----------



## Hutch Starskey

WEATHER53 said:


> Well since you maintain they did intend harm  then why didn’t the armed use their arms?


It was not advantageous to do so. Meaning the police did not use theirs.
Don’t ask as if you haven’t a clue.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

Faun said:


> Michael Fanone testified to something along those lines. When they were beating him to within an inch of his life, he said he considered using his firearm; but decided to plead for his life instead because he feared that violent mob would have felt justified in murdering him.


Just as the police would kill them had they tried. It wasn’t that kind of fight. No doubt to the attackers chagrin.


----------



## 366h34d

can someone be kind enough to explain the issue with Trump reaching the steering wheel from the backseat? I have no idea what is the problem here???


----------



## Hutch Starskey

bripat9643 said:


> Yes the do, you fucking dumb turd.


Post the House rules.


----------



## Billy000

bripat9643 said:


> No, but almost any idiocy spouted by morons like you is almost certainly fake


Okay cite me some info that made democrats look good and republicans look bad. Give me an example.


----------



## Leviticus

struth said:


> why wouldn’t the committee call the secret service agents that were at the heart of the “bombshell” witness testimony?


Same reason they didn't testify against Nixon.  The SSA doesn' permit its agents to take part in certain, more politicized investigations, especially when a former President is involved, since they still are charged with protecting them.  The agency wants to be as impartial as possible in their duties.  So, unless an agent has critical information that HAS to come out , like Trump literally confessing to plaaning the attack, the comittee will like respect the agency as a neutral party.


----------



## tahuyaman

MagicMike said:


> You are completely missing the point here.
> There. Is. ONLY. ONE. credible. "side!"
> 
> I cannot think of a simpler way to spell that out for you.


Whatever,  so long


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> Nobody but the police had any guns, you fucking moron.



LOL

fucking moron, some were arrested for carrying guns.

Are you ever not a fucking moron?

Ever???


----------



## Faun

Hutch Starskey said:


> It’s not unreasonable to conclude that those who stayed outside while armed did so as a back up if things took a more violent turn with law enforcement inside. Meaning shots exchanged.



That was even their stated plan. We know that's exactly what they did.


----------



## Faun

Lesh said:


> I just did you fucking idiot



There's no bigger fucking moron.


----------



## Synthaholic

For those who claim that no one cares and no one's watching. This doesn't include streaming.


----------



## scruffy

Still waiting for the bombshell...


----------



## Esdraelon

Hutch Starskey said:


> They don’t , dope. Not at all.


Is that why polling shows so many clamoring for more of the story?  JK, there is nearly zero interest in your star chamber.  Proof of that is inbound.  TICK... TOCK...


----------



## struth

Hutch Starskey said:


> Watch the hearings, tard.


i have


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> They impeached him for inciting it and for purposefully delaying calling it off. And they had evidence of that.


haha but they couldn’t prove it


----------



## Synthaholic




----------



## surada

kaz said:


> Anyone who would bet you based on a one sided show trial is dumber than you are for asking them to











						Jan. 6 committee rallies around Hutchinson amid Trump World onslaught
					

Several members of the panel say the former White House aide turned star witness isn't the one with credibility problems — it's her doubters.




					www.politico.com


----------



## TemplarKormac




----------



## Vrenn

rightwinger said:


> History will say they matter
> 
> Republicans scream…Look over there!



You stole my line.


----------



## Chillicothe

Esdraelon said:


> _*"...there is nearly zero interest in your star chamber."*_


????

20 million for the first hearing.

13 million for the short-notice 5th hearing at 1 in the afternoon?

No interest?

(doesn't include the 'streaming' audience)

Sounds to me the momentum is there, the interest is growing.  The stakes getting higher.

And, so it seems-----Cassidy Hutchinson has left a mark on Trumpistan.

IMHO


----------



## Nostra

Care4all said:


> No she didnt...she made it clear it was what Trump's operations guy, Tony Ornato, told her it happened, and he was likely embellishing the story....he too was not there....just repeating and embellishing a second hand story.....
> 
> But Engel, who was there in the Beast with the President, had already testified to the committee earlier that it was a showdown in the car, between him saying they would NOT bring Trump to the Capitol, and Trump insisting they do.
> 
> I'd love to see Engel and Ornato  back on the hill under oath, to get to the bottom of this.....
> 
> Tony Ornato is a known liar in the Whitehouse by staffers....several WH staffers say he's a liar and they all said Hutchinson has never ever, been known to lie....always straight forward.


You have any links for your bullshit?


----------



## jc456

Leviticus said:


> Same reason they didn't testify against Nixon.  The SSA doesn' permit its agents to take part in certain, more politicized investigations, especially when a former President is involved, since they still are charged with protecting them.  The agency wants to be as impartial as possible in their duties.  So, unless an agent has critical information that HAS to come out , like Trump literally confessing to plaaning the attack, the comittee will like respect the agency as a neutral party.


horse hockey, it didn't happen and that's why they weren't called.


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> haha but they couldn’t prove it



They couldn't prove it to Senate Republicans who circled the wagon. Saying they couldn't prove it would be like saying Republicans couldn't prove Bill Clinton lied under oath about getting a blow job.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> They couldn't prove it to Senate Republicans who circled the wagon. Saying they couldn't prove it would be like saying Republicans couldn't prove Bill Clinton lied under oath about getting a blow job.


they couldn’t…but the doj could hence why he took a plea deal


----------



## berg80

Winco said:


> IF Cipollone actually testifies and doesn't plead the 5th, and says anything negative about trump or supports anything Hutchinson said, how long before we hear the following.
> 
> 1). Cipollone is a lying turncoat.
> 2). I never liked Cipollone, he's always been a RINO
> 3). My favorite...."I hardly knew him"


Exactly. He'll immediately be summarily dismissed as are all Repubs who have the audacity to tell the truth about Dear Leader.


----------



## eagle1462010

She testified they were in the beast and now it's the SUV.  lmao


----------



## struth

eagle1462010 said:


> She testified they were in the beast and now it's the SUV.  lmao


yes, they have to change their story to fit whatever narrative they are trying to sell


----------



## Nostra

Synthaholic said:


> For those who claim that no one cares and no one's watching. This doesn't include streaming.


America loves gossip.


----------



## Couchpotato

Hutch Starskey said:


> That is more important than any reported outburst.
> The president literally had to be forced to not go to the Capitol.


Do you think that's the first time the SS had to tell a President that he couldn't go somewhere he wanted to go and said President got pissed about it?   Really?      Get you head out of the sand man.


----------



## jc456

berg80 said:


> Exactly. He'll immediately be summarily dismissed as are all Repubs who have the audacity to tell the truth about Dear Leader.


just more evidence that you all aren't for the laws of the US and attorney client privilege that is in our system of justice.  so typical.

Cause you all would want the DA to call your attorney to testify against you.  yeah, double standard whack-a-moles.


----------



## berg80

jc456 said:


> just more evidence that you all aren't for the laws of the US and attorney client privilege that is in our system of justice.  so typical.
> 
> Cause you all would want the DA to call your attorney to testify against you.  yeah, double standard whack-a-moles.


As John Eastman found out, attorney/client privilege is waived when normally protected discussions involve the commission of a crime. It's called the crime-fraud exception.


----------



## jc456

berg80 said:


> As John Eastman found out, attorney/client privilege is waived when normally protected discussions involve the commission of a crime. It's called the crime-fraud exception.


nope.  see you are truly brainwashed.


----------



## bripat9643

Hutch Starskey said:


> It’s not unreasonable to conclude that those who stayed outside while armed did so as a back up if things took a more violent turn with law enforcement inside. Meaning shots exchanged.


No one was armed, you godzilla sized dumbfuck.


----------



## citygator

"I am absolutely confident in her credibility, I'm confident in her testimony, and the committee is not going to stand by and watch her character be assassinated by anonymous sources and by men who are claiming executive privilege," Cheney told ABC.









						Cheney to Secret Service: 'We welcome additional testimony under oath'
					

Republican Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming said she is "absolutely confident" in blockbuster testimony from former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson, and that the January 6 committee welcomes information from the Secret Service related to the incidents Hutchinson described.




					amp.cnn.com


----------



## bripat9643

Lesh said:


> I just did you fucking idiot


Bear spray, brass knuckles, spears, pipes, sharpened flag poles are not arms, moron.  Guns were found only in the trunk of some guy's car nowhere near the events.  Never heard of about anyone possessing any Molotov cocktails or pipe bombs.


----------



## eagle1462010

citygator said:


> "I am absolutely confident in her credibility, I'm confident in her testimony, and the committee is not going to stand by and watch her character be assassinated by anonymous sources and by men who are claiming executive privilege," Cheney told ABC.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cheney to Secret Service: 'We welcome additional testimony under oath'
> 
> 
> Republican Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming said she is "absolutely confident" in blockbuster testimony from former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson, and that the January 6 committee welcomes information from the Secret Service related to the incidents Hutchinson described.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> amp.cnn.com


LOL

Well she is playing the part of Drama Queen After all.  Will she get a TROPHY?  

Whats next?  The garbage man saw Trump litter in the SUV...........lmao


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> LOL
> 
> fucking moron, some were arrested for carrying guns.
> 
> Are you ever not a fucking moron?
> 
> Ever???


Really?  Post an example.


----------



## citygator

Two former officials in the Trump White Houseare casting doubt on the trustworthiness of Tony Ornato, the Secret Service official who this week denied that then-President Donald Trump physically lunged at an agent or attempted to grab the steering wheel of the presidential vehicle during a confrontation that occurred on January 6.

Mr Ornato, currently the assistant director of the Secret Service’s Office of Training, vaulted into political relevance this week after a former aide to ex-White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows testified to the Jan 6 committee that she had been told by the agent on the day of the attack on Congress about the confrontation. It apparently erupted in an SUV transporting Mr Trump after the president grew enraged at his agents’ refusal to take him to the US Capitol,where thousands of his supporters would soon riot and storm the building









						Two former Trump aides accuse Tony Ornato of having lied previously
					

Secret Service says it will make agents available to testify




					www.independent.co.uk


----------



## bripat9643

citygator said:


> "I am absolutely confident in her credibility, I'm confident in her testimony, and the committee is not going to stand by and watch her character be assassinated by anonymous sources and by men who are claiming executive privilege," Cheney told ABC.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cheney to Secret Service: 'We welcome additional testimony under oath'
> 
> 
> Republican Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming said she is "absolutely confident" in blockbuster testimony from former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson, and that the January 6 committee welcomes information from the Secret Service related to the incidents Hutchinson described.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> amp.cnn.com


That impresses only prog idiots like you.


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> they couldn’t…but the doj could hence why he took a plea deal



Which only serves to highlight how the Senate failing to convict is not evidence the president is innocent.


----------



## Faun

eagle1462010 said:


> She testified they were in the beast and now it's the SUV.  lmao



No, she testified she was told he was in the beast.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> No one was armed, you godzilla sized dumbfuck.



Fucking moron, 9 people were arrested for being armed.


----------



## citygator

bripat9643 said:


> That impresses only prog idiots like you.


Then you support the SS testifying that Trump never wanted to go the the capitol to the riot?


----------



## eagle1462010

citygator said:


> lunged





citygator said:


> vaulted





citygator said:


> erupted


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> Which only serves to highlight how the Senate failing to convict is not evidence the president is innocent.


agreed....that's why the DOJ charged the President, and why the DOJ hasnt changed anyone else since


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> No, she testified she was told he was in the beast.


Which has a big sheet of bulletproof glass separating the driver from the passenger compartment.  So her hearsay testimony turns out to to be impossible.


----------



## bripat9643

citygator said:


> Then you support the SS testifying that Trump never wanted to go the the capitol to the riot?


Pointing out that one claim is idiotic claim implies nothing about my attitude towards another claim.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> Fucking moron, 9 people were arrested for being armed.


With what, hollow aluminum flag poles?  They certainly weren't armed with guns.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> Really?  Post an example.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> With what, hollow aluminum flag poles?  They certainly weren't armed with guns.



Guns, you fucking moron.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


>


More hearsay.  That's all you got.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> Guns, you fucking moron.


Where are the guns?


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> agreed....that's why the DOJ charged the President, and why the DOJ hasnt changed anyone else since



This is still under investigation.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> Which has a big sheet of bulletproof glass separating the driver from the passenger compartment.  So her hearsay testimony turns out to to be impossible.



Fucking moron, Trump wasn't in the Beast.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> More hearsay.  That's all you got.



Are you ever not a fucking moron?

Ever??

How is that hearsay?


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> Fucking moron, Trump wasn't in the Beast.


Then her hearsay evidence is false.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> Are you ever not a fucking moron?
> 
> Ever??
> 
> How is that hearsay?


She's testifying about what someone supposedly told her.  You can't get anymore hearsay than that.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> This is still under investigation.


You mean Schiff for Brains and Pisslosi are still conspiring about how to generate more fake evidence.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> Then her hearsay evidence is false.



Nope, that doesn't prove it was false. To prove it was false requires both Ornato and Engel to testify under oath that she wasn't told what she claimed she was told.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> You mean Schiff for Brains and Pisslosi are still conspiring about how to generate more fake evidence.



No, I'm talking about the Department of Justice.


----------



## EvilCat Breath

Hutch Starskey said:


> Her testimony is regarding her direct conversations with the two who were there. They related the story to her.  Not hearsay but straight from the horses mouth.


No.  Straight from the horse's mouth would be if the agents themselves were being questioned.   Hutchinson was testifying to hearsay.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> This is still under investigation.


hahahhaa yeah....the DOJ isn't investigating Trump.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> Nope, that doesn't prove it was false. To prove it was false requires both Ornato and Engel to testify under oath that she wasn't told what she claimed she was told.


Nothing is required to prove that hearsay evidence is false,  By definition, it's false.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> No, I'm talking about the Department of Justice.


Which does the bidding or Schiff for Brains and Pisslosi.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> She's testifying about what someone supposedly told her.  You can't get anymore hearsay than that.



LOLOL 

All you just did was prove you didn't bother to play the video I posted. It's not hearsay. Nor does it become hearsay simply because you're too scared to watch any of the hearing and choose to remain ignorant.

Still that video proves 2 things...

1 ... there were people there armed with firearms.

2 ... you're a fucking moron.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> Which does the bidding or Schiff for Brains and Pisslosi.



Are you ever not a fucking moron?

Ever??


----------



## EvilCat Breath

Faun said:


> Nope, that doesn't prove it was false. To prove it was false requires both Ornato and Engel to testify under oath that she wasn't told what she claimed she was told.


That's why they are demanding to take the stand.  Cheney and Pelosi won't allow it.


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> hahahhaa yeah....the DOJ isn't investigating Trump.



Then why did they confiscate John Eastman's cell phone last week?


----------



## Faun

EvilCat Breath said:


> That's why they are demanding to take the stand.  Cheney and Pelosi won't allow it.



Prove Cheney and Pelosi denied them the opportunity to come back to testify...


----------



## TemplarKormac

Former secret service agents says Trump too big reach steering wheel
					

A Secret Service agent has cast doubt on White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson's testimony where she claimed Trump lunged for the wheel during the January 6 protest in Washington DC.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## EvilCat Breath

Faun said:


> Prove Cheney and Pelosi denied them the opportunity to come back to testify...


The men have not testified and are not scheduled to testify even though they demanded to be heard.  Whoever is running this schiff shitshow won't let them.  Who is it?


----------



## Lesh

bripat9643 said:


> Bear spray, brass knuckles, spears, pipes, sharpened flag poles are not arms, moron.


They most certainly are arms. Confront a cop with them and dee what happens


bripat9643 said:


> Guns were found only in the trunk of some guy's car nowhere near the events.


That is a lie


bripat9643 said:


> Never heard of about anyone possessing any Molotov cocktails or pipe bombs.


Then you are either lying or not paying attention


----------



## Chillicothe

I posted my thoughts on the effect of Hutchinson's testimony on the RighyTightie world of Trumpistan.  Can't remember if it was in this thread or another thread on these hearings.

I'll repeat its' essence.  And do so after reading several posts from one of our more, ah....measured and mature....posters, i.e., Little Bripat.  But he ain't alone in HissyFitWorld. Any number of our Rightfielders have been fluttering their pearls over Ms. Hutchinson.

Anyway, my point in that other post was this: * Ms. Hutchinson has drawn blood. She has left a mark. * Otherwise we wouldn't be witnessing the histrionic hysteria from Rightfield.
It's akin to Galileo's Law of Inertia:  For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

So, judging by the over-the-top reaction from our Rightfielders (1,900 posts in just this single thread)... it signals that Ms. Hutchinson was credible and was believed by most folks. 
 And the Rightfield ain't happy about that.  About her.  
Hence, their reaction to her action.

Or so it seems to my avatar.


----------



## Lesh

bripat9643 said:


> Which has a big sheet of bulletproof glass separating the driver from the passenger compartment.  So her hearsay testimony turns out to to be impossible.


NOT in the SUV (which what they were in) stupid


----------



## eagle1462010

Chillicothe said:


> Anyway, my point in that other post was this: * Ms. Hutchinson has drawn blood. She has left a mark. * Otherwise we wouldn't be witnessing the histrionic hysteria from Rightfield.


No she hasn't.  No one is watching this BS.  And she saw NOTHING.


----------



## Lesh

EvilCat Breath said:


> The men have not testified


Engle HAS testified...and he testified to the effect that there WAS a "difference of opinion" regarding Trump going to the Capitol


----------



## Chillicothe

eagle1462010 said:


> _No she hasn't. No one is watching this BS. And she saw NOTHING._



As has been said:  For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

And in this case, Trumpistan....as evidenced by the post above.....is perplexed and aggrieved by Ms Hutchinson.

She drew blood.  No doubt about that.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> LOLOL
> 
> All you just did was prove you didn't bother to play the video I posted. It's not hearsay. Nor does it become hearsay simply because you're too scared to watch any of the hearing and choose to remain ignorant.
> 
> Still that video proves 2 things...
> 
> 1 ... there were people there armed with firearms.
> 
> 2 ... you're a fucking moron.


I don't watch reality TV shows either, but it's not because I'm scared.  It's because the content is designed for imbeciles like you.

How does the video prove there were people with firearms in the crowd?  Please tell us the exact minute where "proof" occurs so we don't have to endure the entire tedious pile of shit.


----------



## EvilCat Breath

Lesh said:


> Engle HAS testified...and he testified to the effect that there WAS a "difference of opinion" regarding Trump going to the Capitol


He has categorically denied every statement made by Cassidy Hutchinson.   Every person that Hutchinson has said acted or spoken has denied that the words and acts of her testimony never happened.  Let the men testify.


----------



## eagle1462010

Chillicothe said:


> As has been said:  For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
> 
> And in this case, Trumpistan....as evidenced by the post above.....is perplexed and aggrieved by Ms Hutchinson.
> 
> She drew blood.  No doubt about that.


She did nothing of the sort.  She wasn't there and saw NOTHING.  Not to mention in her testimony she said the beast..........and now everyone is saying the SUV.

She didn't even know which vehicle they were in now did she?  

This is exactly why hearsay evidence is not allowed in court.  It is worthless.


----------



## bripat9643

Lesh said:


> Engle HAS testified...and he testified to the effect that there WAS a "difference of opinion" regarding Trump going to the Capitol


A differnce of opinion about what, whether they should take him, whether he grabbed the steering wheel, what?


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> Then why did they confiscate John Eastman's cell phone last week?


that was a couple weeks ago…just harassing him, he’s already sued for it


----------



## EvilCat Breath

Chillicothe said:


> As has been said:  For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
> 
> And in this case, Trumpistan....as evidenced by the post above.....is perplexed and aggrieved by Ms Hutchinson.
> 
> She drew blood.  No doubt about that.


No doubt about it.  It is democrat blood that she drew.  The necessity of the entire committee is called into question.


----------



## Winco

Under Oath

Hutchinson
Ford (kavanaugh)
Clinton (Benghazi)
All the trump appointed  (R) to date
All Testified under Oath

Until these SS agents, Cipollone, trump himself, Etc testify Under Oath, they can’t discredit anyone.


----------



## EvilCat Breath

bripat9643 said:


> A differnce of opinion about what, whether they should take him, whether he grabbed the steering wheel, what?


Whether they were in the limo or an SUV.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> I don't watch reality TV shows either, but it's not because I'm scared.  It's because the content is designed for imbeciles like you.
> 
> How does the video prove there were people with firearms in the crowd?  Please tell us the exact minute where "proof" occurs so we don't have to endure the entire tedious pile of shit.



The video I posted proves it. A pity you're too scared to watch it. Remain ignorant, fucking moron.


----------



## Chillicothe

struth said:


> _he’s already sued for it_



And already dropped the suit.


----------



## bripat9643

Lesh said:


> They most certainly are arms. Confront a cop with them and dee what happens
> 
> That is a lie
> 
> Then you are either lying or not paying attention


Millions of American women carry bear spray in their purse.  That's what you are calling an "arm."

If you confront a cop with one, you won't be charged with assault with a deadly weapon.

Misuse of English like this is a classic tactic of the sleazy lying left.


----------



## Lesh

bripat9643 said:


> Millions of American women carry bear spray in their purse.  That's what you are calling an "arm."
> 
> If you confront a cop with one, you won't be charged with assault with a deadly weapon.
> 
> Misuse of English like this is a classic tactic of the sleazy lying left.


Do they carry molotov cocktails, AR-15s, sharpen flagpoles, pipe bombs? Do they wear body armor

Minimizing FAIL junior


----------



## Lesh

EvilCat Breath said:


> He has categorically denied every statement made by Cassidy Hutchinson.   Every person that Hutchinson has said acted or spoken has denied that the words and acts of her testimony never happened.  Let the men testify.


Lie


----------



## struth

Chillicothe said:


> And already dropped the suit.


no he didn’t


Lesh said:


> Do they carry molotov cocktails, AR-15s, sharpen flagpoles, pipe bombs? Do they wear body armor
> 
> Minimizing FAIL junior


no that’s what we call BLM.


----------



## Lesh

Told of armed rallygoers on Jan. 6, Trump called for relaxed security
					

“I don’t effing care that they have weapons,” Trump had said on Jan. 6, according to new bombshell testimony.




					www.courthousenews.com
				




Armed...with guns


----------



## bripat9643

Lesh said:


> Do they carry molotov cocktails, AR-15s, sharpen flagpoles, pipe bombs? Do they wear body armor
> 
> Minimizing FAIL junior


Prove anyone in the crowd was carrying any of those things.


----------



## bripat9643

Lesh said:


> Told of armed rallygoers on Jan. 6, Trump called for relaxed security
> 
> 
> “I don’t effing care that they have weapons,” Trump had said on Jan. 6, according to new bombshell testimony.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.courthousenews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Armed...with guns


Hutchinson testimonial evidence?  You're serious?


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> The video I posted proves it. A pity you're too scared to watch it. Remain ignorant, fucking moron.


Hutchinson's hearsay evidence proves nothing.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> Prove anyone in the crowd was carrying any of those things.



You were given evidence some had firearms but instead of looking at the evidence, you ignored it and kept lying.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> You were given evidence some had firearms but instead of looking at the evidence, you ignored it and kept lying.


No I wasn't.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> Hutchinson's hearsay evidence proves nothing.



LOL

I didn't post hearsay. You don't know that because you refuse to watch the video I posted.

Are you ever not a fucking moron?

Ever??


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> No I wasn't.



LOL

Now everyone here sees you're lying. You asked for proof people were carrying guns and I posted the proof. You choose to continue lying because the truth scares you too much to look at what I posted.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> You were given evidence some had firearms but instead of looking at the evidence, you ignored it and kept lying.


show me where anyone said they saw a firearm


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> that was a couple weeks ago…just harassing him, he’s already sued for it



It was last week and Eastman dropped that suit.









						Eastman drops bid to block phone records from Jan. 6 committee
					

The former Trump lawyer is increasingly the subject of legal scrutiny.




					www.politico.com


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> show me where anyone said they saw a firearm



It's in the video I posted a couple of pages back.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> It was last week and Eastman dropped that suit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Eastman drops bid to block phone records from Jan. 6 committee
> 
> 
> The former Trump lawyer is increasingly the subject of legal scrutiny.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.politico.com


i’m talking about the lawsuit again the doj not the one with the committee


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> It's in the video I posted a couple of pages back.


sorry there was nobody saying they actually saw a gun, there was somebody that testified they heard someone say somebody told them there were guns


----------



## meaner gene

struth said:


> show me where anyone said they saw a firearm


How about the police officers that arrested a protesters with a handgun?

The defendant, Guy Reffitt, is accused of carrying a semi-automatic handgun while on U.S. Capitol grounds on January 6.

 Mark Andrew Mazza, 56, of Shelbyville, is charged with illegal possession of a firearm on Capitol grounds


----------



## struth

meaner gene said:


> How about the police officers that arrested a protesters with a handgun?
> 
> The defendant, Guy Reffitt, is accused of carrying a semi-automatic handgun while on U.S. Capitol grounds on January 6.
> 
> Mark Andrew Mazza, 56, of Shelbyville, is charged with illegal possession of a firearm on Capitol grounds


that was one guy at the capitol…not at the rally


----------



## meaner gene

struth said:


> sorry there was nobody saying they actually saw a gun, there was somebody that testified they heard someone say somebody told them there were guns


The defendant, Guy Reffitt, is accused of carrying a semi-automatic handgun while on U.S. Capitol grounds on January 6.

 Mark Andrew Mazza, 56, of Shelbyville, is charged with illegal possession of a firearm on Capitol grounds

I guess nobody saw their guns, including the police that arrested them.


----------



## EvilCat Breath

Lesh said:


> Lie


Not on this planet.


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> sorry there was nobody saying they actually saw a gun, there was somebody that testified they heard someone say somebody told them there were guns



Thanks for letting me know you didn't watch the video I posted. I know that since your description doesn't match at all what I posted.


----------



## tahuyaman

Faun said:


> That's simply not true. Anyone from Trump to the people around him can testify. Many have been called in but refuse to show up. Some others did show up but refused to say anything but, _I plead the Fifth._
> 
> So no, the committee did not establish it to be one-sided; and in fact, most of the people called in have been Republicans. The reason we've only heard one side is not because of the committee but because one side won't speak up. What are they so afraid of? Their silence speaks for them.


The reason they are refusing to show up is because this committee is nothing but partisan political theater.    Liberal media is actually involved in the production of this clown show.


----------



## meaner gene

meaner gene said:


> The defendant, Guy Reffitt, is accused of carrying a semi-automatic handgun while on U.S. Capitol grounds on January 6.
> 
> Mark Andrew Mazza, 56, of Shelbyville, is charged with illegal possession of a firearm on Capitol grounds





struth said:


> that was one guy at the capitol…not at the rally


That was at least two guys.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> Thanks for letting me know you didn't watch the video I posted. I know that since your description doesn't match at all what I posted.


nah i nailed the video


----------



## Faun

tahuyaman said:


> The reason they are refusing to show up is because this committee is nothing but partisan political theater.    Liberal media is actually involved in the production of this clown show.



LOLOL 

Then complaints only one side is being represented are meaningless whining. They can show up but they either don't or they plead the Fifth to every question.

What are they afraid of?


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> nah i nailed the video



LOL

Not possible since your description doesn't match what I posted.


----------



## meaner gene

struth said:


> nah i nailed the video


You claimed at least two arrested with guns, was a single guy.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> LOL
> 
> Not possible since your description doesn't match what I posted.


maybe you didn’t watch the video


----------



## struth

meaner gene said:


> You claimed at least two arrested with guns, was a single guy.


at the capitol not at the rally


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> maybe you didn’t watch the video



LOLOL 

You're crazy, lady. 

You didn't watch what I posted and you lied about what's in the video I posted without knowing what's in that video since you didn't watch it.


----------



## meaner gene

struth said:


> at the capitol not at the rally


Actually at least three people were arrested for carrying guns at the capitol.
At least one of them also attended the rally.


----------



## meaner gene

Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., asked Jill Sanborn, assistant director of the FBI’s counterterrorism division, how many guns the FBI had confiscated in the Capitol or on its grounds on Jan. 6.

“To my knowledge, none,” Sanborn 









						Fact check: Claim about FBI official who said bureau recovered no guns at Capitol riot is missing context
					

An FBI official told a Senate committee that the Bureau did not recover any guns at the U.S. Capitol riot. That is missing context.



					www.usatoday.com


----------



## Faun

meaner gene said:


> Actually at least three people were arrested for carrying guns at the capitol.
> At least one of them also attended the rally.



At least 9 did...









						Enough Ammunition to Shoot Every Member of the House and Senate
					

This was not just a protest or a riot, but an armed insurrection—and this is no coincidence. Many of the participants were motivated by an extreme gun rights worldview that sees armed rebellion as the very reason to own guns.




					www.newsweek.com
				




_First, make no mistake about it—this was an armed insurrection. While arrests and indictments are still rolling into our court system, at least nine individuals were arrested on firearms charges relating to events in or around the Capitol.

These arrests include a man who traveled to D.C. from Colorado, texting that he would be "putting a bullet" in Speaker Nancy Pelosi's head. It was no idle threat: authorities found him with a handgun, a pistol, an assault rifle, and hundreds of rounds of ammunition, including armor piercing bullets. As he drove to D.C., the man allegedly sent texts that he was "ready to remove several craniums from shoulders."_​


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> At least 9 did...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Enough Ammunition to Shoot Every Member of the House and Senate
> 
> 
> This was not just a protest or a riot, but an armed insurrection—and this is no coincidence. Many of the participants were motivated by an extreme gun rights worldview that sees armed rebellion as the very reason to own guns.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com
> 
> 
> 
> ​_First, make no mistake about it—this was an armed insurrection. While arrests and indictments are still rolling into our court system, at least nine individuals were arrested on firearms charges relating to events in or around the Capitol._​​_These arrests include a man who traveled to D.C. from Colorado, texting that he would be "putting a bullet" in Speaker Nancy Pelosi's head. It was no idle threat: authorities found him with a handgun, a pistol, an assault rifle, and hundreds of rounds of ammunition, including armor piercing bullets. As he drove to D.C., the man allegedly sent texts that he was "ready to remove several craniums from shoulders."_​


Is that the guy who had weapons in the trunk of his car which was parked 1/2 mile away from the capitol building?

_








						Fact check: Claim about FBI official who said bureau recovered no guns at Capitol riot is missing context
					

An FBI official told a Senate committee that the Bureau did not recover any guns at the U.S. Capitol riot. That is missing context.



					eu.usatoday.com
				



_​​_Asked how many firearms were confiscated in the Capitol or on its grounds on Jan. 6, Sanborn said, “To my knowledge we have not recovered any on that day from any of the arrests at the scene at this point. But I don’t want to speak on behalf of Metro and Capitol police, but to my knowledge none.”_​​_Sanborn later noted that investigators found a firearm in a search of a vehicle that also had Molotov cocktails. The only shots fired that day, she said, were from __an officer who shot and killed a woman inside the Capitol._​


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> Is that the guy who had weapons in the trunk of his car which was parked 1/2 mile away from the capitol building?
> 
> _
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fact check: Claim about FBI official who said bureau recovered no guns at Capitol riot is missing context
> 
> 
> An FBI official told a Senate committee that the Bureau did not recover any guns at the U.S. Capitol riot. That is missing context.
> 
> 
> 
> eu.usatoday.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _​​_Asked how many firearms were confiscated in the Capitol or on its grounds on Jan. 6, Sanborn said, “To my knowledge we have not recovered any on that day from any of the arrests at the scene at this point. But I don’t want to speak on behalf of Metro and Capitol police, but to my knowledge none.”_​​_Sanborn later noted that investigators found a firearm in a search of a vehicle that also had Molotov cocktails. The only shots fired that day, she said, were from __an officer who shot and killed a woman inside the Capitol._​




_To my knowledge, we have not recovered any on that day from any of the arrests to this point. *But I don't want to speak on behalf of Metro and Capitol police*, but to my knowledge, none."_


----------



## meaner gene

bripat9643 said:


> _Asked how many firearms were confiscated in the Capitol or on its grounds on Jan. 6, Sanborn said, “To my knowledge we have not recovered any on that day from any of the arrests at the scene at this point. But I don’t want to speak on behalf of Metro and Capitol police, but to my knowledge none.”_​​


Sanborn was speaking only for the actions of the FBI.  

*But I don’t want to speak on behalf of Metro and Capitol police, * - Sanborn


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> _To my knowledge, we have not recovered any on that day from any of the arrests to this point. *But I don't want to speak on behalf of Metro and Capitol police*, but to my knowledge, none."_


So where are the weapons the Metro and Capitol police recovered?

Oh yeah .  .  .  . there are none.


----------



## bripat9643

meaner gene said:


> Sanborn was speaking only for the actions of the FBI.
> 
> *But I don’t want to speak on behalf of Metro and Capitol police, * - Sanborn


So you're saying that the FBI doesn't know if there were any firearms at the capitol on Jan 6?


----------



## tahuyaman

Faun said:


> LOLOL
> 
> Then complaints only one side is being represented are meaningless whining. They can show up but they either don't or they plead the Fifth to every question.
> 
> What are they afraid of?


The committee is not legit and everyone knows it


----------



## struth

meaner gene said:


> Actually at least three people were arrested for carrying guns at the capitol.
> At least one of them also attended the rally.


did he have a gun at the rally?  provide me me with that evidence


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> So where are the weapons the Metro and Capitol police recovered?
> 
> Oh yeah .  .  .  . there are none.



Asked and answered.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> So you're saying that the FBI doesn't know if there were any firearms at the capitol on Jan 6?



We know there were. The video I posted proves it.


----------



## meaner gene

bripat9643 said:


> So where are the weapons the Metro and Capitol police recovered?
> 
> Oh yeah .  .  .  . there are none.


The guns are in the Metro and Capitol police evidence lockers.


----------



## meaner gene

bripat9643 said:


> So you're saying that the FBI doesn't know if there were any firearms at the capitol on Jan 6?


Sanborn was speaking for the FBI.  Saying that the FBI didn't confiscate any guns on January 6th at the Capitol.

Meanwhile stashes of guns were seized inside and outside of Washington DC.  As well as weapons seized by the Capitol and DC Metro police on January 6th at the Capitol.

It's like the reverse application of "As I was going to St. Ives...."


----------



## meaner gene

struth said:


> did he have a gun at the rally?  provide me me with that evidence


That's like the police stopping a bank robbery in progress, and then being asked to prove the gunman possessed the gun "BEFORE" he entered the bank.


----------



## struth

meaner gene said:


> That's like the police stopping a bank robbery in progress, and then being asked to prove the gunman possessed the gun "BEFORE" he entered the bank.


so i evidence of guns at the rally?


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> so i evidence of guns at the rally?



In the video I posted.


----------



## tahuyaman

meaner gene said:


> Actually at least three people were arrested for carrying guns at the capitol.
> At least one of them also attended the rally.


Not one person was seen carrying or displaying  a firearm during the Capitiol  riot.  No one who participated in the riot has been charge for possessing a firearm.


----------



## Faun

tahuyaman said:


> Not one person was seen carrying or displaying  a firearm during the Capitiol  riot.  No one who participated in the riot has been charge for possessing a firearm.



No one inside the Capitol building but some on or around Capitol grounds were.


----------



## tahuyaman

meaner gene said:


> Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., asked Jill Sanborn, assistant director of the FBI’s counterterrorism division, how many guns the FBI had confiscated in the Capitol or on its grounds on Jan. 6.
> 
> “To my knowledge, none,” Sanborn
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fact check: Claim about FBI official who said bureau recovered no guns at Capitol riot is missing context
> 
> 
> An FBI official told a Senate committee that the Bureau did not recover any guns at the U.S. Capitol riot. That is missing context.
> 
> 
> 
> www.usatoday.com


Facts are meaningless in this case.


----------



## meaner gene

struth said:


> so i evidence of guns at the rally?


They confiscated guns of people "BEFORE" they got to the rally.
They confiscated guns of people "AFTER" they left the rally.

Because none were seized at the rally, where no arrests were made, it's not logical to conclude there were no guns at the rally.


----------



## citygator

tahuyaman said:


> Not one person was seen carrying or displaying  a firearm during the Capitiol  riot.  No one who participated in the riot has been charge for possessing a firearm.


Everyone was charged from video weeks later. The number of guns onsight is unknowable. However…





__





						Man charged with carrying loaded firearm to the Capitol on Jan. 6  - POLITICO
					





					www.politico.com


----------



## struth

meaner gene said:


> They confiscated guns of people "BEFORE" they got to the rally.
> They confiscated guns of people "AFTER" they left the rally.
> 
> Because none were seized at the rally, where no arrests were made, it's not logical to conclude there were no guns at the rally.


i’m just looking for evidence


----------



## Chillicothe

struth said:


> _no he didn’t_




Seems he did:

*Fox News, June 30, 2022:*     "_Trump election lawyer John Eastman dropped his lawsuit seeking to block his phone records from the January 6 Committee after the FBI ... seized his phone."_


----------



## struth

Chillicothe said:


> Seems he did:
> 
> *Fox News, June 30, 2022:*     "_Trump election lawyer John Eastman dropped his lawsuit seeking to block his phone records from the January 6 Committee after the FBI ... seized his phone."_


that’s not the lawsuit i’m discussing


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> Asked and answered.


Yep, the answer is none.


----------



## Lesh

meaner gene said:


> Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., asked Jill Sanborn, assistant director of the FBI’s counterterrorism division, how many guns the FBI had confiscated in the Capitol or on its grounds on Jan. 6.
> 
> “To my knowledge, none,” Sanborn
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fact check: Claim about FBI official who said bureau recovered no guns at Capitol riot is missing context
> 
> 
> An FBI official told a Senate committee that the Bureau did not recover any guns at the U.S. Capitol riot. That is missing context.
> 
> 
> 
> www.usatoday.com


But of course that's only the FBI


----------



## Lesh

just stop


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> i’m just looking for evidence



I posted it. You didn't want to look at it.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> Yep, the answer is none.



Nope, that wasn't the answer.


----------



## Faun

Lesh said:


> just stop



I already posted that but these idiots don't want to see it.


----------



## tahuyaman

citygator said:


> Everyone was charged from video weeks later. The number of guns onsight is unknowable. However…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Man charged with carrying loaded firearm to the Capitol on Jan. 6  - POLITICO
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.politico.com


There were no firearms displayed by any of the rioters nor were there any firearms recovered.  Not one single rioter  has been charged with posession of a firearm.     All you have is unsupported speculation.  


There is zero evidence to claim any rioter was in posession of a firearm during the riot.  None what so ever


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> I posted it. You didn't want to look at it.


haha no you don’t


----------



## meaner gene

struth said:


> i’m just looking for evidence


You're looking for excuses.  Since you know it's virtually impossible to buy a handgun in DC on short notice, they had to bring any weapon they had from out of state.  And for them to not have it on their person as they attended the rally would require they kept it in their car, and specifically armed themselves for the assault on the capitol.  

Which actually means it was a deliberate armed insurrection, and not one where they just happened to have their firearms with them.


----------



## struth

meaner gene said:


> You're looking for excuses.  Since you know it's virtually impossible to buy a handgun in DC on short notice, they had to bring any weapon they had from out of state.  And for them to not have it on their person as they attended the rally would require they kept it in their car, and specifically armed themselves for the assault on the capitol.
> 
> Which actually means it was a deliberate armed insurrection, and not one where they just happened to have their firearms with them.


they could have had them in their cars…


----------



## meaner gene

tahuyaman said:


> There were no firearms displayed by any of the rioters nor were there any firearms recovered.  Not one single rioter  has been charged with posession of a firearm.     All you have is unsupported speculation.
> 
> 
> There is zero evidence to claim any rioter was in posession of a firearm during the riot.  None what so ever


I can only throw out the words, stupid and moron at you. For those are the only descriptive adjectives in your case.  The DOJ indictments, which are available on the internet, clearly list at least three people indicted for the January 6th riots, with possessing firearms


----------



## meaner gene

struth said:


> they could have had them in their cars…


And as I said, they would have to have gotten them from their cars specifically to assault the capitol.

Which is worse than having the gun at the rally.


----------



## struth

meaner gene said:


> And as I said, they would have to have gotten them from their cars specifically to assault the capitol.
> 
> Which is worse than having the gun at the rally.


but the fact nobody has come forward saying they saw guns at the rally undermines your “bombshell” witness


----------



## berg80

_The Jan. 6 select committee publicly pointed to two communications this week as potential evidence of Trump World’s efforts to influence witness testimony — without revealing their origin. Both were detailed to the panel by Cassidy Hutchinson, according to a person familiar with the last of her four depositions.

Both of the two slides that the panel revealed at the end of its live hearing with Hutchinson reflected conversations she described to the committee in her final closed-door deposition, this person said. Hutchinson told the committee at the time that, on the eve of her earlier March 7 deposition, an intermediary for former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows contacted her to say that her former boss valued her loyalty._








						New details of Jan. 6 panel's mystery messages emerge
					

Former Trump White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson told the committee she was contacted by an intermediary for Mark Meadows, according to a person familiar with her final deposition.




					www.politico.com
				




So Meadows asked an intermediary to become involved in possible charges of witness tampering. I hope the intermediary has testified to the committee as to who told him/her to call Cassidy.


----------



## Winco

tahuyaman said:


> There is zero evidence to claim any rioter was in posession of a firearm during the riot. None what so ever


You don't follow the real news, do ya.
Of Course your biased RW sites are going to lie to you.









						January 6 rioter charged with bringing gun to Capitol grounds, undercutting GOP claims that the pro-Trump mob was unarmed | CNN Politics
					

The Justice Department on Thursday charged a US Capitol rioter with bringing a handgun onto Capitol grounds -- two days after a hearing where Republican lawmakers downplayed the deadly attack and claimed the pro-Trump rioters were unarmed.




					www.cnn.com


----------



## berg80

struth said:


> but the fact nobody has come forward saying they saw guns at the rally undermines your “bombshell” witness


During the hearing an audio tape of law enforcement officers identifying members of the mob who were armed was played.

_As early as 10 a.m. on Jan. 6, top White House officials were aware that many of those who had gathered in Washington were armed. Hutchinson testified that she was present when Tony Ornato, the deputy White House chief of staff for operations, shared reports with Meadows that marchers had been spotted with guns, knives, bear spray, body armor and even spears. Meadows, she said, “looked up and said, ‘Have you talked to the president?’ And Tony said: ‘Yes, sir, he’s aware, too.’ He said: ‘All right, good.’”_


			https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/06/28/trump-sought-lead-armed-mob-capitol-jan-6-aide-says/


----------



## meaner gene

struth said:


> but the fact nobody has come forward saying they saw guns at the rally undermines your “bombshell” witness



As I said, that would mean they deliberate armed themselves just for the insurrection against the capitol.

Making it an armed insurrection, and not just an insurrection with arms.


----------



## struth

berg80 said:


> During the hearing an audio tape of law enforcement officers identifying members of the mob who were armed was played.


yes at the riot…i was asking about the rally


----------



## WEATHER53

Since the Bimboshell did not work due to hearsay the libs are now switching  to a feelings declaration  that her tepid efforts were due to “tampering and intimidation”


----------



## Winco

struth said:


> but the fact nobody has come forward saying they saw guns at the rally undermines your “bombshell” witness


True, they had to go through weapon detector machines, which wisely they didn't, so sure, no detected weapons were at the RALLY.  But they were outside the RALLY and at the Capitol.

But trump allegedly wanted those machines turned off, allegedly saying "they aren't here to hurt me, those those machines off."   What a clueless arrogant POS trump is.


----------



## WEATHER53

berg80 said:


> During the hearing an audio tape of law enforcement officers identifying members of the mob who were armed was played.


That one has a stick!
Oh my.  Shoot him.


----------



## struth

Winco said:


> True, they had to go through weapon detector machines, which wisely they didn't, so sure, no detected weapons were at the RALLY.  But they were outside the RALLY and at the Capitol.
> 
> But trump allegedly wanted those machines turned off, allegedly saying "they aren't here to hurt me, those those machines off."   What a clueless arrogant POS trump is.


really puts another hole in this women’s testimony


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

WEATHER53 said:


> Thar one has a stick!
> Oh my.  Shoot him.


That's exactly what a cop would do, if you beat him with a club. Especially a crazy eyed maniac foaming at the mouth, like you. 

But they didn't want to kill Americans on the Capitol steps.

Frankly, I was relieved they didn't start hosing down the crowd with bullets.

They paid the price with 140 injured cops.


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> they could have had them in their cars…



They were seen carrying them.


----------



## WEATHER53

Faun said:


> They were seen carrying them.


Hearsay


----------



## meaner gene

struth said:


> yes at the riot…i was asking about the rally


Actually the point you made, means they didn't have to have their guns at the rally.



struth said:


> they could have had them in their cars…



They got their guns for the specific purpose of attacking the capitol.


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> but the fact nobody has come forward saying they saw guns at the rally undermines your “bombshell” witness



You're lying again. You've been shown video of cops reporting seeing guns.


----------



## Faun

WEATHER53 said:


> Hearsay



A cop saying he sees an individual with a gun is hearsay??

You're fucking nuts.


----------



## Winco

struth said:


> really puts another hole in this women’s testimony


I'm hear to listen.
Explain HOW it 'puts a hole in her testimony.'

Did she say, 'there are guns inside the Rally,'  Did she say <<<<< that?


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> They were seen carrying them.


by who?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

WEATHER53 said:


> Hearsay


Wrong as always. The police testified to that fact and arrested people for it. You have zero shame. Else you would be embarrassed of yourself for being such a sissy.


----------



## struth

meaner gene said:


> Actually the point you made, means they didn't have to have their guns at the rally.
> 
> 
> 
> They got their guns for the specific purpose of attacking the capitol.


1) yes, it undermines the testimony 
2) ok


----------



## Faun

berg80 said:


> During the hearing an audio tape of law enforcement officers identifying members of the mob who were armed was played.
> 
> _As early as 10 a.m. on Jan. 6, top White House officials were aware that many of those who had gathered in Washington were armed. Hutchinson testified that she was present when Tony Ornato, the deputy White House chief of staff for operations, shared reports with Meadows that marchers had been spotted with guns, knives, bear spray, body armor and even spears. Meadows, she said, “looked up and said, ‘Have you talked to the president?’ And Tony said: ‘Yes, sir, he’s aware, too.’ He said: ‘All right, good.’”_
> 
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/06/28/trump-sought-lead-armed-mob-capitol-jan-6-aide-says/



These rightards have been shown that video but they're intent on ignoring it.


----------



## struth

Winco said:


> I'm hear to listen.
> Explain HOW it 'puts a hole in her testimony.'
> 
> Did she say, 'there are guns inside the Rally,'  Did she say <<<<< that?


yes…she said she was told that


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> yes at the riot…i was asking about the rally



That was not at the riot.


----------



## meaner gene

Faun said:


> They were seen carrying them.


So one scenario is they didn't bring them to the rally because of the magnetometers.  And fetched them from their cars for the march to the capitol.

It doesn't disprove Trump leading an armed mob, and actually makes it worse for the insurrectionists to arm themselves just for the assault on democracy.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> That was not at the riot.


? what wasn’t?


----------



## Winco

struth said:


> yes…she said she was told that


Show us the video.
Show us where she said that.

I might have missed it, I don't watch all day.
But you claim "she said she was told that."

So show the video


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> really puts another hole in this women’s testimony



Oh? What hole is that?


----------



## meaner gene

struth said:


> 1) yes, it undermines the testimony
> 2) ok


it doesn't undermine her testimony, because it still means Trump wanted to lead an armed crowd to the capitol, just that they didn't "lock and load" until they left the rally.


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> ? what wasn’t?



Where people were seen with guns.


----------



## struth

Winco said:


> Show us the video.
> Show us where she said that.
> 
> I might have missed it, I don't watch all day.
> But you claim "she said she was told that."
> 
> So show the video


did you not watch her testimony?


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> by who?



By police.


----------



## meaner gene

struth said:


> yes…she said she was told that


NO she said that of Trumps intentions, not of what actually happened.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> Oh? What hole is that?


that nobody can back up her claim about guns at the rally


----------



## struth

meaner gene said:


> NO she said that of Trumps intentions, not of what actually happened.


say what?  if it didn’t actually happen then what i’m the world can you get to trump intentions


----------



## struth

meaner gene said:


> it doesn't undermine her testimony, because it still means Trump wanted to lead an armed crowd to the capitol, just that they didn't "lock and load" until they left the rally.


but nobody was armed!!


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> By police.


who what police have treaties to that?


----------



## meaner gene

struth said:


> that nobody can back up her claim about guns at the rally


His desire to march on the Capitol. His request to remove the magnetometers and allow armed supporters to attend the "Stop the Steal" rally.

Backstage at the rally, Trump was irate that people with weapons were not being let through the magnetometers by Secret Service officers 

 Minutes before Donald Trump took the stage at an Ellipse rally on Jan. 6, 2021, he urged the Secret Service to remove security magnetometers ...

 Trump wanted to take magnetometers away from the entrance to his rally space near the White House in order to let armed supporters in on Jan. 6, .


----------



## Winco

struth said:


> did you not watch her testimony?


Keep up.
I said I must have missed that part (if you say it exists)

Just repost her testimony saying that.
You say you say it.

Your deflecting is NOT good enough.
Post the video portion of her saying that.

You can't, you won't....... you will just deflect.


----------



## meaner gene

struth said:


> say what?  if it didn’t actually happen then what i’m the world can you get to trump intentions


Remember, many crimes are one of intent, as well as success.  Attempted murder is as serious a crime, and has the same punishment as an actual murder.


----------



## struth

meaner gene said:


> His desire to march on the Capitol. His request to remove the magnetometers and allow armed supporters to attend the "Stop the Steal" rally.
> 
> Backstage at the rally, Trump was irate that people with weapons were not being let through the magnetometers by Secret Service officers
> 
> Minutes before Donald Trump took the stage at an Ellipse rally on Jan. 6, 2021, he urged the Secret Service to remove security magnetometers ...
> 
> Trump wanted to take magnetometers away from the entrance to his rally space near the White House in order to let armed supporters in on Jan. 6, .


yes that’s what this discredited woman said…but there is nothing to support it


----------



## meaner gene

struth said:


> but nobody was armed!!


When they got to the capitol they were armed.

We have the indictments to prove it.


----------



## struth

meaner gene said:


> Remember, many crimes are one of intent, as well as success.  Attempted murder is as serious a crime, and has the same punishment as an actual murder.


well actually it doesn’t…but yes it requires the actual internet commit murder


----------



## WEATHER53

Faun said:


> A cop saying he sees an individual with a gun is hearsay??
> 
> You're fucking nuts.


You repeating what you heard a cop say but did not see yourself is classic hearsay


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> that nobody can back up her claim about guns at the rally



To be fair, the Q & A could give that appearance but her answers did clarify it was outside of the mags at the Ellipse...

She was asked about the Ellipse...

_*Q: *Sticks or flag poles, bear spray. Is there anything else that you recall hearing about that the people who would gather on the Ellipse 

*A: *I recall Tony and I having a conversation with Mark probably around 10:00 AM, 10:15 AM. Where I remember Tony mentioning knives, guns in the form of pistols and rifles, bear spray, body armor, spears, and flag poles. Spears were one item, flag poles were one item. And then, Tony had relayed to me something to the effect of, and these, I think people are fastening spears onto the ends of flag poles.

*Q: *What was Mark’s reaction, Mr Meadows’ reaction to this list of weapons that people had in the crowd?

*A: *When Tony and I went in to talk to Mark that morning, Mark was sitting on his couch and on his phone, which was something typical. And I remember Tony just got right into it, he was like, “Sir, I just want to let you know”, and informed him, *“This is how many people we have outside the mags right now.* These are the weapons that were known to have.”_​


----------



## WEATHER53

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Wrong as always. The police testified to that fact and arrested people for it. You have zero shame. Else you would be embarrassed of yourself for being such a sissy.


The classic “ you should be ashamed of yourself” as brought by abused libs


----------



## Faun

WEATHER53 said:


> You repeating what you heard a cop say but did not see yourself is classic hearsay



LOLOL 

You retard, I'm not a witness. That's not hearsay. And the video containing police reporting seeing guns was posted here a couple of times.


----------



## meaner gene

struth said:


> but nobody was armed!!


To that I say you are wrong.  The proof is in the federal record.









						Indiana Man Pleads Guilty to Carrying a Gun and Assaulting Law Enforcement Officers in Jan. 6 Capitol Breach
					

WASHINGTON – An Indiana man pleaded guilty today to carrying a loaded gun on Capitol grounds and assaulting law enforcement officers during the breach of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. His and others’ actions disrupted a joint session of the U.S. Congress convened to ascertain and count the...




					www.justice.gov
				




Friday, June 17, 2022

 An Indiana man pleaded guilty today to carrying a loaded gun on Capitol grounds and assaulting law enforcement officers during the breach of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

 Mark Andrew Mazza, 57, of Shelbyville,  Indiana, pleaded guilty in the District of Columbia to assaulting, resisting, or impeding officers with a dangerous weapon and carrying a pistol without a license.

According to court documents, Mazza brought a Taurus revolver, loaded with three shotgun shells and two hollow point bullets, into Washington, D.C., to the Ellipse, and then to the Capitol.


----------



## WEATHER53

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Wrong as always. The police testified to that fact and arrested people for it. You have zero shame. Else you would be embarrassed of yourself for being such a sissy.


And when you “testify” as to testimony provided by others then it’s hearsay.  That testimony is not proven fact and when you pass on what you heard, and in your case try to present as fact, then you are wrong in two ways including hearsay


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> but nobody was armed!!



Police say they were.


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> who what police have treaties to that?



Try asking again but in English this time...


----------



## WEATHER53

Faun said:


> LOLOL
> 
> You retard, I'm not a witness. That's not hearsay. And the video containing police reporting seeing guns was posted here a couple of times.


You do not have to be a witness in court to have committed hearsay.  In everyday parlance it’s called gossip.


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> yes that’s what this discredited woman said…but there is nothing to support it



Well except for Trump's own words...

_"And after this, we're going to walk down, and I'll be there with you, we're going to walk down, we're going to walk down."_​


----------



## WEATHER53

meaner gene said:


> Remember, many crimes are one of intent, as well as success.  Attempted murder is as serious a crime, and has the same punishment as an actual murder.


No it never does


----------



## meaner gene

struth said:


> yes that’s what this discredited woman said…but there is nothing to support it


How about one of his supporters who was at the ellipse, and later at the capitol pleading guilty to possessing a loaded taurus revolver at the capitol.

Not just charged, not just indicted, but admitting gun possession to the judge.

What more proof do you need the crowd was armed?


----------



## Faun

WEATHER53 said:


> You do not have to be a witness in court to have committed hearsay.  In everyday parlance it’s called gossip.



Moron, it's not hearsay even there's first hand evidence corroborating the claim. You have no fucking clue what you're talking about, which is more apparent with every post you make.


----------



## struth

meaner gene said:


> How about one of his supporters who was at the ellipse, and later at the capitol pleading guilty to possessing a loaded taurus revolver at the capitol.
> 
> Not just charged, not just indicted, but admitting gun possession to the judge.
> 
> What more proof do you need the crowd was armed?


yeah for having it at the capitol not the rally


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> Well except for Trump's own words...
> 
> _"And after this, we're going to walk down, and I'll be there with you, we're going to walk down, we're going to walk down."_​


huh? nobody denied he wanted a peaceful and patriotic protest


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> Try asking again but in English this time...


sorry what police officers have testified to that?


----------



## struth

meaner gene said:


> To that I say you are wrong.  The proof is in the federal record.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indiana Man Pleads Guilty to Carrying a Gun and Assaulting Law Enforcement Officers in Jan. 6 Capitol Breach
> 
> 
> WASHINGTON – An Indiana man pleaded guilty today to carrying a loaded gun on Capitol grounds and assaulting law enforcement officers during the breach of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. His and others’ actions disrupted a joint session of the U.S. Congress convened to ascertain and count the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.justice.gov
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Friday, June 17, 2022
> 
> An Indiana man pleaded guilty today to carrying a loaded gun on Capitol grounds and assaulting law enforcement officers during the breach of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.
> 
> Mark Andrew Mazza, 57, of Shelbyville,  Indiana, pleaded guilty in the District of Columbia to assaulting, resisting, or impeding officers with a dangerous weapon and carrying a pistol without a license.
> 
> According to court documents, Mazza brought a Taurus revolver, loaded with three shotgun shells and two hollow point bullets, into Washington, D.C., to the Ellipse, and then to the Capitol.


at the capitol…we are talking about the rally.  two totally different locations


----------



## Faun

WEATHER53 said:


> And when you “testify” as to testimony provided by others then it’s hearsay.  That testimony is not proven fact and when you pass on what you heard, and in your case try to present as fact, then you are wrong in two ways including hearsay



Imbecile, police reported what they themselves saw. They weren't told someone had a gun... they reported seeing someone with a gun.

That's first hand direct evidence.


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> sorry what police officers have testified to that?



Don't know. They played audio taken from police radio transmissions from that day.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> Don't know. They played audio taken from police radio transmissions from that day.


of the riot not the rally.  I am just trying to find someone to support her claim about the rally…so far most of her testimony has been. discredited


----------



## meaner gene

Faun said:


> To be fair, the Q & A could give that appearance but her answers did clarify it was outside of the mags at the Ellipse...
> 
> _“Sir, I just want to let you know”, and informed him, *“This is how many people we have outside the mags right now.* These are the weapons that were known to have.”_​



_According to court documents, Mazza brought a Taurus revolver, loaded with three shotgun shells and two hollow point bullets, into Washington, D.C., to the Ellipse, and then to the Capitol. _

We have people who plead guilty to having arms at the rally (but outside of the magnetometers).

The witness is backed up by the federal court records.


----------



## kaz

surada said:


> Jan. 6 committee rallies around Hutchinson amid Trump World onslaught
> 
> 
> Several members of the panel say the former White House aide turned star witness isn't the one with credibility problems — it's her doubters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.politico.com



We know she lied once, which destroys all her credibility.     Sorry, honey.    Maybe you can go back to the kids table until you think of something else.   Try to make it less stupid


----------



## surada

kaz said:


> We know she lied once, which destroys all her credibility.     Sorry, honey.    Maybe you can go back to the kids table until you think of something else.   Try to make it less stupid



It's not over. Trump thrives amid his chaos and lies.


----------



## meaner gene

struth said:


> yeah for having it at the capitol not the rally


He was at the ellipse, but outside of the magnetometers.


----------



## berg80

struth said:


> yes at the riot…i was asking about the rally


Ones at the rally were identified as well. They are the ones who stayed at distance so they didn't have to go past the metal detectors.


----------



## meaner gene

struth said:


> at the capitol…we are talking about the rally.  two totally different locations


According to court documents, Mazza brought a Taurus revolver, loaded with three shotgun shells and two hollow point bullets, into Washington, D.C., to the Ellipse, and then to the Capitol.

The rally was at the ellipse, and he plead guilty to being there with his firearm.


----------



## berg80

WEATHER53 said:


> Since the Bimboshell did not work


Perhaps it didn't inside the warm embrace of the right wing echo chamber of lies. Outside of it even Faux news talking heads were shocked.


----------



## kaz

surada said:


> It's not over. Trump thrives amid his chaos and lies.



Democrats are completely irrational and not very bright, so whatever you say, dearie


----------



## meaner gene

struth said:


> of the riot not the rally.  I am just trying to find someone to support her claim about the rally…so far most of her testimony has been. discredited


A man already pled guilty to being at the rally, but outside of the magnetometers.


----------



## berg80

meaner gene said:


> it doesn't undermine her testimony, because it still means Trump wanted to lead an armed crowd to the capitol, just that they didn't "lock and load" until they left the rally.


The right wing panic over her damning testimony is palpable.


----------



## struth

berg80 said:


> Ones at the rally were identified as well. They are the ones who stayed at distance so they didn't have to go past the metal detectors.


oh so they didn’t actually go into the rally


----------



## struth

meaner gene said:


> He was at the ellipse, but outside of the magnetometers.


gotcha so he didn’t actually go in


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

meaner gene said:


> So one scenario is they didn't bring them to the rally because of the magnetometers.


Another is that they brought rnem anyway and got them confiscated by police. As stated in testimony.


----------



## struth

meaner gene said:


> A man already plead guilty to being at the rally, but outside of the magnetometers.


so not in the rally just near it


----------



## berg80

WEATHER53 said:


> And when you “testify” as to testimony provided by others then it’s hearsay.  That testimony is not proven fact and when you pass on what you heard, and in your case try to present as fact, then you are wrong in two ways including hearsay


Everyone understands there is a different evidentiary standard applying to hearings as opposed to a legal proceeding. Because something she testified to under oath may not be admissible in court doesn't make it untrue.


----------



## berg80

kaz said:


> We know she lied once


No we don't. Try as you might to smear her, the testimony she gave was truthful as far as she knew. Don't forget she was an eyewitness to a lot of what she related.


----------



## berg80

struth said:


> gotcha so he didn’t actually go in


That's an immaterial point. Trump knew members of the mob were armed. Full stop.


----------



## berg80

It seems these folks rightly found Cassidy to be credible.









						GOP megadonors turn on Trump after Jan. 6 hearings, set sights on DeSantis, Pence and other 2024 hopefuls
					

Republican megadonors are moving further away from Donald Trump and considering other potential 2024 contenders after the latest Jan. 6 hearings.




					www.cnbc.com


----------



## meaner gene

struth said:


> oh so they didn’t actually go into the rally


They were at the rally, just not as close as those who went through the metal detectors.

Think of Trumps inauguration, how many people attended his inauguration, who weren't close enough to have to go through metal detectors?

Are you saying they didn't attend Trumps inauguration now?


----------



## meaner gene

struth said:


> gotcha so he didn’t actually go in


In is a relative term.  It's like being at a concert, but in the bleachers, instead of on the floor close to the stage.


----------



## WEATHER53

Faun said:


> Moron, it's not hearsay even there's first hand evidence corroborating the claim. You have no fucking clue what you're talking about, which is more apparent with every post you make.


If somebody tells you they saw something and then you pass those details on without having confirmed it yourself by seeing same yourself then you are gossiping or commiting hearsay.  See I don’t have to curse, berate and name call because Im not upset about the flimsy reed I’m standing on.


----------



## Chillicothe

berg80 said:


> _I hope the intermediary has testified to the committee as to who told him/her to call Cassidy._


I am keenly watching newsfeeds about this 'intimidation' story.
If it proves true, and if the DOJ brings an indictment against somebody....well, all of a sudden Trumpistan will be in DefCon4 whether they want to be or not. 
Attempting to intimidate a federal witness will put the 'attempter' square in the bullseye.
And THAT can lead to fingering others.
This 'intimidation' story may have some real legs.
IMHO

--------------------------------------------------------


berg80 said:


> _The right wing panic over her damning testimony is palpable._



I've read similar observations on this very forum.
It seems that that controlled and careful witness has drawn blood over there in QLoonistan.  And the QLoons are awfully unhappy about it.

  Look just at this thread....2,000 posts.  That tells you there is panic amongst the RightyTighties.

IMHO


ps.....Don't we all want Pat Cipollone to come to the witness table with a sense of civic duty and a desire to be cooperative?


----------



## struth

meaner gene said:


> In is a relative term.  It's like being at a concert, but in the bleachers, instead of on the floor close to the stage.


or being at a basketball game, but not having a ticket and standing outside the stadium


----------



## WEATHER53

berg80 said:


> Perhaps it didn't inside the warm embrace of the right wing echo chamber of lies. Outside of it even Faux news talking heads were shocked.


Your impression of non reality


----------



## struth

meaner gene said:


> They were at the rally, just not as close as those who went through the metal detectors.
> 
> Think of Trumps inauguration, how many people attended his inauguration, who weren't close enough to have to go through metal detectors?
> 
> Are you saying they didn't attend Trumps inauguration now?


sounds like they were near it, but not actually there


----------



## WEATHER53

berg80 said:


> Everyone understands there is a different evidentiary standard applying to hearings as opposed to a legal proceeding. Because something she testified to under oath may not be admissible in court doesn't make it untrue.


You are correct. It is not proven untrue; it is proven hearsay


----------



## struth

berg80 said:


> That's an immaterial point. Trump knew members of the mob were armed. Full stop.


there is no evidence of that


----------



## WEATHER53

Will pass the torch and let others do the battle with lib loons who are trying to redefine and mis apply the word hearsay


----------



## meaner gene

WEATHER53 said:


> If somebody tells you they saw something and then you pass those details on without having confirmed it yourself by seeing same yourself then you are gossiping or commiting hearsay.  See I don’t have to curse, berate and name call because Im not upset about the flimsy reed I’m standing on.


You do confuse part of it.  The person isn't testifying as to what happened as a witness, but testifying what they were told by a witness.  Hence what was witnessed becomes hearsay, but the conversation with the witness is direct evidence of their statement, but not to the truth of that statement.

Example, when police testified that Jussie Smolette told them he was attacked, was direct evidence of Jussie making the claim, not that his claim was truthful.


----------



## meaner gene

struth said:


> or being at a basketball game, but not having a ticket and standing outside the stadium


If the stadium didn't have walls, but instead just a fence, that might be the case.  But walls did not separate those inside from outside the magnetometers.  In fact someone "inside" the rally, could have been just a foot away from somebody "outside" the rally.


----------



## struth

meaner gene said:


> You do confuse part of it.  The person isn't testifying as to what happened as a witness, but testifying what they were told by a witness.  Hence what was witnessed becomes hearsay, but the conversation with the witness is direct evidence of their statement, but not to the truth of that statement.
> 
> Example, when police testified that Jussie Smolette told them he was attacked, was direct evidence of Jussie making the claim, not that his claim was truthful.


so your saying Liz and Shifty weren’t offering anything she said in for the truth of it..

seems rather pointless


----------



## struth

meaner gene said:


> If the stadium didn't have walls, but instead just a fence, that might be the case.  But walls did not separate those inside from outside the magnetometers.  In fact someone "inside" the rally, could have been just a foot away from somebody "outside" the rally.


glad you are admitting they weren’t at the rally


----------



## meaner gene

struth said:


> sounds like they were near it, but not actually there


So Trump lied about how many people attended his inauguration.  Since only those on the white house grounds were at his inauguration?

Sweet, that means that Bidens inauguration could have been bigger than Trumps.

Thanks for how you define attendance at an event.


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> of the riot not the rally.  I am just trying to find someone to support her claim about the rally…so far most of her testimony has been. discredited



No, not from the riot. There were no guns reported at the riot.

And none of her testimony has been discredited.  _Nuh-uh_ doesn't actually discredit anything.


----------



## struth

meaner gene said:


> So Trump lied about how many people attended his inauguration.  Since only those on the white house grounds were at his inauguration?
> 
> Sweet, that means that Bidens inauguration could have been bigger than Trumps.
> 
> Thanks for how you define attendance at an event.


have t y’all been saying he lied?


----------



## Faun

kaz said:


> We know she lied once, which destroys all her credibility.     Sorry, honey.    Maybe you can go back to the kids table until you think of something else.   Try to make it less stupid



No, you don't know that.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> No, not from the riot. There were no guns reported at the riot.
> 
> And none of her testimony has been discredited.  _Nuh-uh_ doesn't actually discredit anything.


haha of course it has…federal agents have said it’s not true


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> oh so they didn’t actually go into the rally



The rally wasn't just inside the Ellipse where Trump was standing. It extended beyond that. Trump even cried because the media wouldn't show the people who remained at a distance.


----------



## Faun

berg80 said:


> No we don't. Try as you might to smear her, the testimony she gave was truthful as far as she knew. Don't forget she was an eyewitness to a lot of what she related.



They can't forget what they ignore.


----------



## Faun

meaner gene said:


> They were at the rally, just not as close as those who went through the metal detectors.
> 
> Think of Trumps inauguration, how many people attended his inauguration, who weren't close enough to have to go through metal detectors?
> 
> Are you saying they didn't attend Trumps inauguration now?



But he had the biggest inauguration crowd evah!


----------



## meaner gene

WEATHER53 said:


> Will pass the torch and let others do the battle with lib loons who are trying to redefine and mis apply the word hearsay


Hearsay deals with specific utterances, not to a persons entire testimony.   Which is why only specific fact testimony is excluded as hearsay in federal court.  Such as to strike a portion of the testimony.

But remember, congress is not a criminal court. and the hearsay rules are far more lax in civil proceedings, which are not bound by the 6th amendment


----------



## Faun

WEATHER53 said:


> If somebody tells you they saw something and then you pass those details on without having confirmed it yourself by seeing same yourself then you are gossiping or commiting hearsay.  See I don’t have to curse, berate and name call because Im not upset about the flimsy reed I’m standing on.



_*without having confirmed it yourself*_

Which is exactly what I did, ya flamin' idiot.


----------



## meaner gene

struth said:


> so your saying Liz and Shifty weren’t offering anything she said in for the truth of it..
> 
> seems rather pointless


Actually they were setting up the requirement that Mark Meadows, and other Trump staffers testify.


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> there is no evidence of that



She claims she heard Trump being told that. That would be evidence.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> The rally wasn't just inside the Ellipse where Trump was standing. It extended beyond that. Trump even cried because the media wouldn't show the people who remained at a distance.


there might of been people around the rally but they weren’t in it


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> She claims she heard Trump being told that.


yet nobody else including whomever allegedly told him has come forward


----------



## struth

meaner gene said:


> Actually they were setting up the requirement that Mark Meadows, and other Trump staffers testify.


haha why would they be “required?”

They aren’t interested


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> glad you are admitting they weren’t at the rally



Who said they weren't at the rally? Who knows why that's even important? They were at the rally, just not close enough to pass through the magnetometers.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> Who said they weren't at the rally? Who knows why that's even important? They were at the rally, just not close enough to pass through the magnetometers.


you did…you said they were outside if it


----------



## meaner gene

struth said:


> glad you are admitting they weren’t at the rally


Just like the people on the Mall weren't at Trumps inauguration.


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> have t y’all been saying he lied?



Well that's because he did...

*Obama







Trump




*


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> haha of course it has…federal agents have said it’s not true



They've said what's not true?


----------



## meaner gene

Faun said:


> She claims she heard Trump being told that. That would be evidence.


Just like when people testified that Trumps pollster told him on election day that the numbers indicated he lost.

It proves what Trump was told he lost, not proof that Trump lost.


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> there might of been people around the rally but they weren’t in it



Says who? If they were there, watching and listening and cheering, they were at the rally even if they stayed further back.


----------



## meaner gene

struth said:


> haha why would they be “required?”
> 
> They aren’t interested


If there are facts in question, and they were the actual eyewitness, they can be compelled by subpoena to testify.  Which seems to be the setup.


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> yet nobody else including whomever allegedly told him has come forward



LOL

That's because they're Trump loyalists and don't want to make him look bad.


----------



## struth

meaner gene said:


> Just like the people on the Mall weren't at Trumps inauguration.


ok


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> LOL
> 
> That's because they're Trump loyalists and don't want to make him look bad.


or they iust fine exist.


----------



## struth

meaner gene said:


> If there are facts in question, and they were the actual eyewitness, they can be compelled by subpoena to testify.  Which seems to be the setup.


like the secret service agents…they want to testify…when are they?


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> you did…you said they were outside if it



LOLOL 

The magnetometers were not the dividing line of who was in and who was out. It's a big open field. Some stood back.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> Well that's because he did...
> 
> *Obama
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trump
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


not sure what i am looking at here


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> or they iust fine exist.



English, please.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> LOLOL
> 
> The magnetometers were not the dividing line of who was in and who was out. It's a big open field. Some stood back.


of course they were…

i agree though it’s an open area anyone can walk around outside of the rally


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> not sure what i am looking at here



Obamaxs first inauguration crowd compared to Trump's. Trump claimed his crowd was bigger.  Clearly he's either delusional or lying.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> English, please.


just don’t exist.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> Obamaxs first inauguration crowd compared to Trump's. Trump claimed his crowd was bigger.  Clearly he's either delusional or lying.


yeah clearly.


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> of course they were…
> 
> i agree though it’s an open area anyone can walk around outside of the rally



Your made up definitions belong only to you. No one else is bound by them. People at the Ellipse and past the mags were at the rally. People at the Ellipse but not past the mags were also at the rally.


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> just don’t exist.



LOL

You think Trump doesn't exist??


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> Your made up definitions belong only to you. No one else is bound by them. People at the Ellipse and past the mags were at the rally. People at the Ellipse but not past the mags were also at the rally.


i’m sorry what did i make up?


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> LOL
> 
> You think Trump doesn't exist??


no i don’t think any of the people she claims to have heard exist …she already got discredited by the Secret Service


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> i’m sorry what did i make up?



That people at the Ellipse but not passing through magnetometers were not at the rally.


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> no i don’t think any of the people she claims to have heard exist …she already got discredited by the Secret Service



She claims she heard Trump. You say he doesn't exist because he hasn't testified.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> That people at the Ellipse but not passing through magnetometers were not at the rally.


right.


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> right.



Yes, that's your own definition.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> She claims she heard Trump. You say he doesn't exist because he hasn't testified.


she claimed she heard him respond to someone telling him something.  Of course i’m sure people exist, just want sue says happened and what wes discussed didn’t exist

like the secret service against exist, just ones that would support her story don’t exist


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> Yes, that's your own definition.


well yea…you are either in or out


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> she claimed she heard him respond to someone telling him something.  Of course i’m sure people exist, just want sue says happened and what wes discussed didn’t exist
> 
> like the secret service against exist, just ones that would support her story don’t exist



She claim she heard something to the effect of, "I don’t f’ing care that they have weapons. They’re not here to hurt me, take the f’ing mags away, let my people in."


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> well yea…you are either in or out



Either way, they were still there. They just weren't as close. Why does this even matter? There were armed people there and Trump knew it.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> She claim she heard something to the effect of, "I don’t f’ing care that they have weapons. They’re not here to hurt me, take the f’ing mags away, let my people in."


yep and yet nobody else did l…those people don’t exist…moreover nobody at the rally had guns…nobody has said they. saw guns


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> Either way, they were still there.


i mean shit…there were tons of people in DC that day


----------



## meaner gene

Faun said:


> Says who? If they were there, watching and listening and cheering, they were at the rally even if they stayed further back.


January 6 arrived, after another amendment had been submitted by the Ellipse organizers, the permit was issued for an estimated 30,000 participants. *Approximately 25,000 participants were screened by Secret Service Uniformed Division officers to get into the restricted area where Donald Trump was speaking on January 6.* An additional 15,000 positioned themselves between the Ellipse and the Washington Monument, outside the restricted area, according to still-classified Secret Service data.









						Exclusive: Classified documents reveal the number of January 6 protestors
					

In this daily series, Newsweek explores the steps that led to the January 6 Capitol Riot.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> i mean shit…there were tons of people in DC that day



Not all at the Ellipse. Why does this even matter? There were armed people there and Trump knew it.


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> yep and yet nobody else did l…those people don’t exist…moreover nobody at the rally had guns…nobody has said they. saw guns



But Shirley you really know Trump exists and she says she heard Trump acknowledge there were people with guns there.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> Not all at the Ellipse. Why does this even matter? There were armed people there and Trump knew it.


geez yeah there were armed people in DC


----------



## meaner gene

struth said:


> like the secret service agents…they want to testify…when are they?


I don't see the head of the secret service letting them testify to protectee details.  Once you breech that confidence for good or bad, you open a can of worms.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> But Shirley you really know Trump exists and she says she heard Trump acknowledge there were people with guns there.


but there has been zero evidence to support this claim…zero


----------



## struth

meaner gene said:


> I don't see the head of the secret service letting them testify to protectee details.  Once you breech that confidence for good or bad, you open a can of worms.


They are ok with it.  The Committee won’t invite them.  There was a reason the Committtee decided to go with a woman with 3 or 4th account instead of the actually agents (who have testified already) —-they want narrative, not the truth


----------



## tahuyaman

Winco said:


> You don't follow the real news, do ya.
> Of Course your biased RW sites are going to lie to you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> January 6 rioter charged with bringing gun to Capitol grounds, undercutting GOP claims that the pro-Trump mob was unarmed | CNN Politics
> 
> 
> The Justice Department on Thursday charged a US Capitol rioter with bringing a handgun onto Capitol grounds -- two days after a hearing where Republican lawmakers downplayed the deadly attack and claimed the pro-Trump rioters were unarmed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com


No one who participated in the riot was accused of possessing a firearm.  That is a fact.   No firearms were seen or recovered. Those are facts.  

Not one rioter has been accused of or VHA TV her with carrying a firearm n the capitol building.  

The closest they can come is that someone had something outside the capitol building blocks away.


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> geez yeah there were armed people in DC



And then Trump summoned them to the Capitol.


----------



## meaner gene

Faun said:


> Not all at the Ellipse. Why does this even matter? There were armed people there and Trump knew it.


Now they'll claim that Trump was only leading those INSIDE the restricted zone to the capitol.   When it's obvious, those on the other side of the fence were also being lead to the capitol.  The one's carrying guns.  The one's Trump wanted to be let in past the magnetometers.


----------



## Winco

tahuyaman said:


> No one who participated in the riot was accused of possessing a firearm.  That is a fact.   No firearms were seen or recovered. Those are facts.
> 
> Not one rioter has been accused of or VHA TV her with carrying a firearm n the capitol building.
> 
> The closest they can come is that someone had something outside the capitol building blocks away.


You don't say.
Court charged and documents suggest otherwise.
Why the Lies?

An Indiana man charged with carrying a loaded firearm to the Capitol on Jan. 6 told investigators that if he had found Speaker Nancy Pelosi, “you’d be here for another reason,” according to court documents posted over the weekend.

Mark Mazza, 56, is the latest of about half a dozen Jan. 6 defendants charged with bringing a gun to the Capitol. In this case, Mazza allegedly carried a Taurus revolver known as “The Judge,” which is capable of firing shotgun shells — two of which were in the chamber, along with three hollow-point bullets. A Capitol Police sergeant obtained the weapon after allegedly fending off an assault from Mazza.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> And then Trump summoned them to the Capitol.


yes during his speech he said  people should go peacefully and patriotically excessive their first amendment rights and protest.  

sadly folks had already began rioting up there before his speech was even done…and it got out of hand, largely due to nancy amd the dc mayor unwillingness to acccept additionally security trunp had made available 4 days prior


----------



## Winco

tahuyaman said:


> No one who participated in the riot was accused of possessing a firearm.  That is a fact.   No firearms were seen or recovered. Those are facts.
> 
> Not one rioter has been accused of or VHA TV her with carrying a firearm n the capitol building.
> 
> The closest they can come is that someone had something outside the capitol building blocks away.


Wow, some more.
Where are you getting your talking points.









						Prosecutors have charged a fourth Capitol riot defendant with a firearms violation
					

The defendant, Guy Reffitt, is accused of carrying a semi-automatic handgun while on U.S. Capitol grounds on January 6.




					www.cbsnews.com


----------



## Winco

tahuyaman said:


> No one who participated in the riot was accused of possessing a firearm.  That is a fact.   No firearms were seen or recovered. Those are facts.
> 
> Not one rioter has been accused of or VHA TV her with carrying a firearm n the capitol building.
> 
> The closest they can come is that someone had something outside the capitol building blocks away.


What say you now?









						A Running List of Gun Arrests Tied to the U.S. Capitol Attack
					

Civilians didn't open fire on January 6, but that doesn’t mean the Trump supporters who congregated at the Capitol weren’t armed.




					www.thetrace.org


----------



## Winco

struth said:


> yes during his speech he said people should go peacefully and patriotically excessive their first amendment rights and protest.


What time was this speech?

You realize trump had to be forced to read this speech.


----------



## struth

Winco said:


> What time was this speech?
> 
> You realize trump had to be forced to read this speech.


oh he didn’t even want to read the speech? who forced him?


----------



## tahuyaman

Winco said:


> What say you now?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Running List of Gun Arrests Tied to the U.S. Capitol Attack
> 
> 
> Civilians didn't open fire on January 6, but that doesn’t mean the Trump supporters who congregated at the Capitol weren’t armed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetrace.org


No one has been charged with being armed with a firearm inside the Capitol building.     Several blocks away is not inside the capitol building.    Your link supports my comments.  Did you even read your link? 

  Lol.


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> but there has been zero evidence to support this claim…zero



LOLOLOL 

Trump confirmed it...

_"And I'd love to have if those tens of thousands of people would be allowed. The military, the secret service. And we want to thank you and the police law enforcement. Great. You're doing a great job. But I'd love it if they could be allowed to come up here with us. Is that possible? Can you just let him come up, please?"_​


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> LOLOLOL
> 
> Trump confirmed it...
> 
> _"And I'd love to have if those tens of thousands of people would be allowed. The military, the secret service. And we want to thank you and the police law enforcement. Great. You're doing a great job. But I'd love it if they could be allowed to come up here with us. Is that possible? Can you just let him come up, please?"_​


who was he asking for?  who was “him?”


----------



## tahuyaman

Winco said:


> What say you now?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Running List of Gun Arrests Tied to the U.S. Capitol Attack
> 
> 
> Civilians didn't open fire on January 6, but that doesn’t mean the Trump supporters who congregated at the Capitol weren’t armed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetrace.org


Nothing is funnier than someone posting a link which supports the comments they are refuting.   That is hilarious


----------



## Winco

struth said:


> oh he didn’t even want to read the speech? who forced him?











						CNN Exclusive: Republicans who texted Meadows with urgent pleas on January 6 say Trump could have stopped the violence
					

Within minutes of the US Capitol breach on January 6, 2021, messages began pouring into the cell phone of White House chief of staff Mark Meadows. Among those texting were Republican members of Congress, former members of the Trump administration, GOP activists, Fox personalities -- even the...




					www.cnn.com
				




Perhaps any or all of these ^^^^^^


----------



## struth

Winco said:


> CNN Exclusive: Republicans who texted Meadows with urgent pleas on January 6 say Trump could have stopped the violence
> 
> 
> Within minutes of the US Capitol breach on January 6, 2021, messages began pouring into the cell phone of White House chief of staff Mark Meadows. Among those texting were Republican members of Congress, former members of the Trump administration, GOP activists, Fox personalities -- even the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps any or all of these ^^^^^^


huh? that was after the riot started


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> yes during his speech he said  people should go peacefully and patriotically excessive their first amendment rights and protest.
> 
> sadly folks had already began rioting up there before his speech was even done…and it got out of hand, largely due to nancy amd the dc mayor unwillingness to acccept additionally security trunp had made available 4 days prior



At least you admit he summoned an armed crowd to the Capitol.  That's a start.


----------



## Winco

tahuyaman said:


> Nothing is funnier than someone posting a link which supports the comments they are refuting.   That is hilarious


Nope, in those are many who had guns INSIDE the Capitol.
I didn't separate the list out for you, I assumed you could comprehend what you were reading, but apparently not.
Were some of the listed charged with possession outside the Capitol.  Yes.
Were some of the listed charged with possession INSIDE the Capitol.  Yes.


----------



## Faun

tahuyaman said:


> No one has been charged with being armed with a firearm inside the Capitol building.     Several blocks away is not inside the capitol building.    Your link supports my comments.  Did you even read your link?
> 
> Lol.



And no one here is saying people went inside the Capitol building with a gun. A pity you can't follow this thread.


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> who was he asking for?  who was “him?”



Don't know who "him" is but "they" were the people who needed to get past the mags.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> Don't know who "him" is but "they" were the people who needed to get past the mags.


your quote he specially says “him” - an imdividial


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> At least you admit he summoned an armed crowd to the Capitol.  That's a start.


there is no evidence he knew they were armed…it’s DC they have tight gun laws, why wouldn’t he assume they were all following g the law?  he had just asked them to be peaceful a d patriotic


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> your quote he specially says “him” - an imdividial



Turns out that transcript got that word wrong. I watched the video and what he actually said was...

_"But I'd love it if they could be allowed to come up here with us. Is that possible? Can you just let *'em* come up, please?"_​


----------



## tahuyaman

Faun said:


> And no one here is saying people went inside the Capitol building with a gun. A pity you can't follow this thread.


Yes they are.  Winco is one of them. 

 They are saying that several rioters were armed with firearms.    You guys are making comments you can’t support. Then you claim you’re not making those comments ts when they are effectively refuted.  

Liberals are wholly dishonest.


----------



## tahuyaman

struth said:


> there is no evidence he knew they were armed…it’s DC they have tight gun laws, why wouldn’t he assume they were all following g the law?  he had just asked them to be peaceful a d patriotic


Me sure there were several people all over DC who were illegally in possession of a weapon.  I’m guessing some think everyone was related the capitol riot.


----------



## tahuyaman

Winco said:


> Nope, in those are many who had guns INSIDE the Capitol.
> I didn't separate the list out for you, I assumed you could comprehend what you were reading, but apparently not.
> Were some of the listed charged with possession outside the Capitol.  Yes.
> Were some of the listed charged with possession INSIDE the Capitol.  Yes.


That is not true.  No one inside the Capitol building has been charged with being armed inside the capitol building.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> Turns out that transcript got that word wrong. I watched the video and what he actually said was...
> 
> _"But I'd love it if they could be allowed to come up here with us. Is that possible? Can you just let *'em* come up, please?"_​


sorry i heard  him


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> there is no evidence he knew they were armed…it’s DC they have tight gun laws, why wouldn’t he assume they were all following g the law?  he had just asked them to be peaceful a d patriotic



You're lying again. There is evidence. Hutchinson says she heard him say something to the effect of,

_ “I don’t f’ing care that they have weapons. They’re not here to hurt me, take the f’ing mags away, let my people in."_​
That is evidence. 

And then on stage, Trump I heard asking SS and military to just let his people in...

_"And I'd love to have if those tens of thousands of people would be allowed. The military, the secret service. And we want to thank you and the police law enforcement. Great. You're doing a great job. But I'd love it if they could be allowed to come up here with us. Is that possible? Can you just let 'em come up, please?"_​
That too is evidence and corroborates Hutchinson's claim.


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> sorry i heard  him



Then you're hearing things. As you wondered, why would he single out an individual. Especially given he just asked them to let tens of thousands come in.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> You're lying again. There is evidence. Hutchinson says she heard him say something to the effect of,
> 
> _ “I don’t f’ing care that they have weapons. They’re not here to hurt me, take the f’ing mags away, let my people in."_​
> That is evidence.
> 
> And then on stage, Trump I heard asking SS and military to just let his people in...
> 
> _"And I'd love to have if those tens of thousands of people would be allowed. The military, the secret service. And we want to thank you and the police law enforcement. Great. You're doing a great job. But I'd love it if they could be allowed to come up here with us. Is that possible? Can you just let 'em come up, please?"_​
> That too is evidence and corroborates Hutchinson's claim.


yep but nobody else heard it, and her credibility is at issue given the lies about the secret service


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> Then you're hearing things. As you wondered, why would he single out an individual. Especially given he just asked them to let tens of thousands come in.


nah sounds like you are pulling the old demafasict truck of changing the terms of reality cause it doesn’t match your false narrative f


----------



## BluesLegend

Two things are clear, most Americans don't give a shit about this sham hearing and Dems can't do jack shit to Trump.


----------



## citygator

And now the truth comes out… as if this small detail was important anyway. 









						Cassidy Hutchinson’s testimony of Trump’s altercation with Secret Service confirmed
					

Mr Trump and his allies claim the altercation never happened but multiple sources now confirm ex-White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson’s testimony




					www.independent.co.uk
				




The story of an altercation between former president Donald Trump and members of his Secret Service detail on the day of the January 6 attack on the US Capitol was widely repeated and discussed by Secret Service agents and other law enforcement officials when it happened, according to multiple reports. 

….two sources with the Secret Service say they heard about the incident described by ex-Trump White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson in bombshell testimony before the House January 6 select committee on Tuesday. During the reported episode, Mr Trump berated the head of his protective detail, Robert Engel, and the driver of his armoured SUV, after he was told he could not go to the US Capitol to join the riots.


----------



## playtime

Billiejeens said:


> No one asked for a pardon on this -



At least 6 GOP members of Congress asked the Trump White House for a January 6 pardon, including Matt Gaetz and Marjorie Taylor Greene​Warren Rojas
Jun 23, 2022, 6:13 PM

*GOP Reps. Andy Biggs of Arizona, Mo Brooks of Alabama, Matt Gaetz of Florida, Louie Gohmert of Texas, Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, and Scott Perry of Pennsylvania asked Trump to pardon them for helping him try to overturn the 2020 election, *the former White House aides said in a series of taped statements presented Thursday on Capitol Hill.
At least 6 GOP members of Congress asked the Trump White House for a January 6 pardon, including Matt Gaetz and Marjorie Taylor Greene

Trump allies Rudy Giuliani and Mark Meadows sought pardons related to Jan. 6 attack, testimony reveals​​Kenneth Tran
USA TODAY
June 29, 2022
Trump allies Rudy Giuliani and Mark Meadows sought pardons related to Jan. 6 attack, testimony reveals

& i'm willing to bet there are more ... including some senators:  raphael cruz (R) TX  & ron johnson (R), WI for starters.  perhaps that will be revealed as well.

panty waist  _jared _ testified under oath that he was busy handing out pardons like chicklets...
​​​​


----------



## BluesLegend

If these lying Dems and RINO's even attempt to keep Trump from running in 2024 all hell is going to break loose. That will bring Trump's army to the polls in historic numbers. So keep it up fools, the ass beating will be epic.


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> yep but nobody else heard it, and her credibility is at issue given the lies about the secret service



Doesn't matter. Trump confirmed it.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> Doesn't matter. Trump confirmed it.


when did he confirm he said that?


----------



## tahuyaman

BluesLegend said:


> Two things are clear, most Americans don't give a shit about this sham hearing and Dems can't do jack shit to Trump.


What you need to understand that over time, liberal have adopted  a third world dictator mentality.  If you demand transparency and accountability, you should be silenced.  you are an enemy of democracy.


----------



## BluesLegend

tahuyaman said:


> What you need to understand that over time, liberal have adopted  a third world dictator mentality.  If you demand transparency and accountability, you should be silenced


Over time liberals will be bitch slapped into next week and cease to hold any power.


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> nah sounds like you are pulling the old demafasict truck of changing the terms of reality cause it doesn’t match your false narrative f



LOL

You're deranged. He says there are tens of thousands he wants let in. Then he asks if *"they"* could be let in. Then he repeats that question. According to you, he's now talking about just letting in one person. In 30 seconds, did he just forget about the other tens of thousands he just asked to be allowed in?


----------



## playtime

BluesLegend said:


> If these lying Dems and RINO's even attempt to keep Trump from running in 2024 all hell is going to break loose. That will bring Trump's army to the polls in historic numbers. So keep it up fools, the ass beating will be epic.



ooooooOOOOOoooooo... as liz cheney said:

bring it.

between  roe  v  wade getting gutted  , the hearings, AND other rights on the chopping block - you are in for an overwhelming ass whopping.


----------



## tahuyaman

BluesLegend said:


> Over time liberals will be bitch slapped into next week and cease to hold any power.


We need to ensure we still have some around in positions of authority.  If we didn't, we'd forget about how dumb and crazy they are.


----------



## Faun

citygator said:


> And now the truth comes out… as if this small detail was important anyway.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cassidy Hutchinson’s testimony of Trump’s altercation with Secret Service confirmed
> 
> 
> Mr Trump and his allies claim the altercation never happened but multiple sources now confirm ex-White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson’s testimony
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.independent.co.uk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The story of an altercation between former president Donald Trump and members of his Secret Service detail on the day of the January 6 attack on the US Capitol was widely repeated and discussed by Secret Service agents and other law enforcement officials when it happened, according to multiple reports.
> 
> ….two sources with the Secret Service say they heard about the incident described by ex-Trump White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson in bombshell testimony before the House January 6 select committee on Tuesday. During the reported episode, Mr Trump berated the head of his protective detail, Robert Engel, and the driver of his armoured SUV, after he was told he could not go to the US Capitol to join the riots.



Still unconfirmed. Ornato and Engel need to testify.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> LOL
> 
> You're deranged. He says there are tens of thousands he wants let in. Then he asks if *"they"* could be let in. Then he repeats that question. According to you, he's now talking about just letting in one person. In 30 seconds, did he just forget about the other tens of thousands he just asked to be allowed in?


you’re quote “him” 

second that quote is not what your bombshell witness said he said


----------



## Faun

BluesLegend said:


> If these lying Dems and RINO's even attempt to keep Trump from running in 2024 all hell is going to break loose. That will bring Trump's army to the polls in historic numbers. So keep it up fools, the ass beating will be epic.



Not a problem. According to Trump, VP Harris can just toss enough Trump electors to make the Democrat the winner.


----------



## Winco

tahuyaman said:


> That is not true.  No one inside the Capitol building has been charged with being armed inside the capitol building.


Mark Sami Ibrahim of California was arrested on July 20, 2021, and charged with entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds with a deadly or dangerous weapon. Prosecutors say Ibrahim, a special agent with the Drug Enforcement Administration, entered the Capitol grounds after rioters breached the barricades and showed off his badge and gun to rioters, posing for photos. He was off-duty at the time.


----------



## BluesLegend

Faun said:


> Not a problem. According to Trump, VP Harris can just toss enough Trump electors to make the Democrat the winner.


Nobody likes you people.


----------



## struth

Winco said:


> Mark Sami Ibrahim of California was arrested on July 20, 2021, and charged with entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds with a deadly or dangerous weapon. Prosecutors say Ibrahim, a special agent with the Drug Enforcement Administration, entered the Capitol grounds after rioters breached the barricades and showed off his badge and gun to rioters, posing for photos. He was off-duty at the time.


so. federal agent got charged with having a gun?


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> you’re quote “him”
> 
> second that quote is not what your bombshell witness said he said



Again, he says 'em. Again, him makes no sense when speaking of tens of thousands. Again, yes it is...

*Hutchinson: *_take the f’ing mags away, let my people in._

*Trump: *_You're doing a great job. But I'd love it if they could be allowed to come up here with us. Is that possible? Can you just let 'em come up, please?_​


----------



## playtime

BluesLegend said:


> Nobody likes you people.


----------



## Faun

BluesLegend said:


> Nobody likes you people.



So? Thanks to Trump, on January 6th, 2025, Harris has the power to declare Trump the loser of the election even if he wins.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> Again, he says 'em. Again, him makes no sense when speaking of tens of thousands. Again, yes it is...
> 
> *Hutchinson: *_take the f’ing mags away, let my people in._​​*Trump: *_You're doing a great job. But I'd love it if they could be allowed to come up here with us. Is that possible? Can you just let 'em come up, please?_​


who was he asking to be let on stage with him?


----------



## citygator

Faun said:


> Still unconfirmed. Ornato and Engel need to testify.


The anonymous denial was unconfirmed too. lol


----------



## playtime

Billiejeens said:


> No one asked for a pardon on this -



Kellyanne Conway says Trump offered her a blanket pardon after the 2020 election, saying 'they go after everyone, honey'​Sophia Ankel 
May 24, 2022, 9:18 AM

Trump offered Kellyanne Conway a blanket pardon, she wrote in a new book.
The former president made the suggestion after he lost the 2020 election, she said in the book. 
Conway, who was one of Trump's longest-serving senior aides, said she declined the offer.
Kellyanne Conway says Trump offered her a blanket pardon after the 2020 election, saying 'they go after everyone, honey'


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> who was he asking to be let on stage with him?



You think he was asking for tens of thousands of people to be on stage with him??


----------



## Faun

citygator said:


> The anonymous denial was unconfirmed too. lol



It is.


----------



## tahuyaman

Winco said:


> Mark Sami Ibrahim of California was arrested on July 20, 2021, and charged with entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds with a deadly or dangerous weapon. Prosecutors say Ibrahim, a special agent with the Drug Enforcement Administration, entered the Capitol grounds after rioters breached the barricades and showed off his badge and gun to rioters, posing for photos. He was off-duty at the time.


So a DEA  special agent was armed outside the Capitol building?  Wow.    That's really a real effective supporting argument you got there.  

Lol..


----------



## eagle1462010

playtime said:


> ooooooOOOOOoooooo... as liz cheney said:
> 
> bring it.
> 
> between  roe  v  wade getting gutted  , the hearings, AND other rights on the chopping block - you are in for an overwhelming ass whopping.


Liz is screwed in Wyoming.  Maybe CNN will hire her.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> You think he was asking for tens of thousands of people to be on stage with him??


no i assume that’s what’s you thought he was asking


----------



## playtime

eagle1462010 said:


> Liz is screwed in Wyoming.  Maybe CNN will hire her.



silly SILLY you ... i'll let you in on a little secret...

liz cheney has zero fucks to give.  so she really has nothing left to lose.  she knows she's not gonna keep her seat; so she's full tilt gunning for donny.

tickticktick....


----------



## struth

playtime said:


> Kellyanne Conway says Trump offered her a blanket pardon after the 2020 election, saying 'they go after everyone, honey'​Sophia Ankel
> May 24, 2022, 9:18 AM
> 
> Trump offered Kellyanne Conway a blanket pardon, she wrote in a new book.
> The former president made the suggestion after he lost the 2020 election, she said in the book.
> Conway, who was one of Trump's longest-serving senior aides, said she declined the offer.
> Kellyanne Conway says Trump offered her a blanket pardon after the 2020 election, saying 'they go after everyone, honey'


he’s right…they do.  I


----------



## tahuyaman

playtime said:


> silly SILLY you ... i'll let you in on a little secret...
> 
> liz cheney has zero fucks to give.  so she really has nothing left to lose.  she knows she's not gonna keep her seat; so she's full tilt gunning for donny.
> 
> tickticktick....


Well, she’s going to be disappointed.


----------



## eagle1462010

playtime said:


> silly SILLY you ... i'll let you in on a little secret...
> 
> liz cheney has zero fucks to give.  so she really has nothing left to lose.  she knows she's not gonna keep her seat; so she's full tilt gunning for donny.
> 
> tickticktick....


We already knew that.  She has TDS just like you do.  She will have the same ratings if on tv just like CNN does.


----------



## tahuyaman

struth said:


> so. federal agent got charged with having a gun?


Yep.  Lol.


----------



## playtime

struth said:


> he’s right…they do.  I



but SHE didn't ask for one AND when donny offered, she turned it down.... why?

If You Accept a Pardon Does it Admit Guilt?​Home » If You Accept a Pardon Does it Admit Guilt?

In the 1833 case of _United States v. _Wilson, the Supreme Court ruled that a pardon could be rejected by the convict. Due to the findings in the 1925 case, _Burdick v. United States_, it seems as though accepting a pardon is, in fact, admitting guilt. In _Burdick_ the appellant was offered a pardon but declined it, also refusing to testify in criminal court. The opinion of the case given by the justices seemed to uncover that 1) a pardon can be given before a conviction and sentence; 2) a pardon can be refused, and* 3) acceptance of a pardon implies acceptance of guilt.*

If You Accept a Pardon Does it Admit Guilt?


----------



## playtime

eagle1462010 said:


> We already knew that.  She has TDS just like you do.  She will have the same ratings if on tv just like CNN does.



who cares about CNN?  hmmmmm.... why did fox decide to air them after the 1st hearing?

lol ... yaaaaaaaaaaaa............... we know why.


----------



## eagle1462010

playtime said:


> who cares about CNN?  hmmmmm.... why did fox decide to air them after the 1st hearing?
> 
> lol ... yaaaaaaaaaaaa............... we know why.


Ratings are in the dumps.............No one believes Congress or the left anymore.  

The Boy that cries wolf all the time gets ZERO RESPECT.


----------



## struth

playtime said:


> but SHE didn't ask for one AND when donny offered, she turned it down.... why?
> 
> If You Accept a Pardon Does it Admit Guilt?​Home » If You Accept a Pardon Does it Admit Guilt?
> 
> In the 1833 case of _United States v. _Wilson, the Supreme Court ruled that a pardon could be rejected by the convict. Due to the findings in the 1925 case, _Burdick v. United States_, it seems as though accepting a pardon is, in fact, admitting guilt. In _Burdick_ the appellant was offered a pardon but declined it, also refusing to testify in criminal court. The opinion of the case given by the justices seemed to uncover that 1) a pardon can be given before a conviction and sentence; 2) a pardon can be refused, and* 3) acceptance of a pardon implies acceptance of guilt.*
> 
> If You Accept a Pardon Does it Admit Guilt?


i think she thought she was protected due to her husband’s anti trump rhetoric 

moreover nobody got one so likely changed his mind


----------



## playtime

eagle1462010 said:


> Ratings are in the dumps.............



who cares?    




eagle1462010 said:


> No one believes Congress or the left anymore.



okey dokey



eagle1462010 said:


> The Boy that cries wolf all the time gets ZERO RESPECT.


----------



## Faun

tahuyaman said:


> So a DEA  special agent was armed outside the Capitol building?  Wow.    That's really a real effective supporting argument you got there.
> 
> Lol..



His occupation is meaningless. He was there to protest and he was armed.


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> no i assume that’s what’s you thought he was asking



Why would I think that? I'm not deranged like you are.


----------



## eagle1462010

playtime said:


> who cares?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> okey dokey
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 664923


You cheated.  And you are pushing perverted BS on the country.  Not to mention the worst inflation in 5 decades.  You are fucked.


----------



## lantern2814

playtime said:


> silly SILLY you ... i'll let you in on a little secret...
> 
> liz cheney has zero fucks to give.  so she really has nothing left to lose.  she knows she's not gonna keep her seat; so she's full tilt gunning for donny.
> 
> tickticktick....


Pathetic deflection because the pig is done. Begging morons like you to switch parties to vote for her. She’s a laughingstock and will be treated as such. Remember, tick tock, once Republicans take the House, you’re done here. Enjoy the Republican landslide.


----------



## Faun

eagle1462010 said:


> You cheated.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> Why would I think that? I'm not deranged like you are.


well you went from trump asking “him” on the stage, to changing the quote to suggest he wanted thousands up there


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> well you went from trump asking “him” on the stage, to changing the quote to suggest he wanted thousands up there



LOL

_"up here with *us*."_

_*"us"*_

So you thought he thought there were already others on the stage with him; versus asking if they could join the crowd with him??


----------



## tahuyaman

Faun said:


> His occupation is meaningless. He was there to protest and he was armed.


A federal agent was armed.  Lol.  

Jeebus.  These people are getting whackier. 


I wonder if he was there on orders to roil up the crowd?


----------



## Faun

tahuyaman said:


> A federal agent was armed.  Lol.
> 
> Jeebus.  These people are getting whackier.
> 
> 
> I wonder if he was there on orders to roil up the crowd?



Where it was illegal for that protester to be armed.


----------



## tahuyaman

Faun said:


> Where it was illegal for that protester to be armed.


So now we have gone down the rabbit hole  of a federal agent being armed on the Capitol grounds.  What’s next? The armed capitol police officers?  

Lol.


----------



## tahuyaman

Faun said:


> Where it was illegal for that protester to be armed.


No.



 DEA agents are authorized to carry a weapon 24/7 on or off duty even on federal property.   Also
In places where it illegal for you to carry even if you have a permit.  When DEA agents are off duty, they are essentially on call.   That’s the life of a federal agent. 

You are clueless


----------



## lg325

Here is what some committees should be addressing is this poll information  60% of republican men and 40% of democratic men think the government is corrupt.  When I was a kid my father and other adult men  were proud and wanted the boys to be in government and serve their country.  To me its a disturbing poll information. But I must admit I am part of that 40%             Polls find high amount of White men think US government is rigged


----------



## tahuyaman

lg325 said:


> Here is what some committees should be addressing is this poll information  60% of republican men and 40% of democratic men think the government is corrupt.  When I was a kid my father and other adult men  were proud and wanted the boys to be in government and serve their country.  To me its a disturbing poll information. But I must admit I am part of that 40%             Polls find high amount of White men think US government is rigged


Unfortunately the federal Government is  consumed with corruption and it’s getting worse.    Leftists want it that way.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> LOL
> 
> _"up here with *us*."
> 
> *"us"*_
> 
> So you thought he thought there were already others on the stage with him; versus asking if they could join the crowd with him??


yeah up here…you know the stage


----------



## dudmuck

tahuyaman said:


> A federal agent was armed.  Lol.
> 
> Jeebus.  These people are getting whackier.
> 
> 
> I wonder if he was there on orders to roil up the crowd?


 A friend of Ibrahim’s told investigators that the probationary agent “had been thinking about his next move” because he was planning to leave the DEA and “wanted the protests to be his stage for launching a ‘Liberty Tavern’ political podcast and cigar brand,” it explains.


----------



## tahuyaman

dudmuck said:


> A friend of Ibrahim’s told investigators that the probationary agent “had been thinking about his next move” because he was planning to leave the DEA and “wanted the protests to be his stage for launching a ‘Liberty Tavern’ political podcast and cigar brand,” it explains.


So, supposedly he had a motive other than protesting the certification of the election?


----------



## Faun

tahuyaman said:


> So now we have gone down the rabbit hole  of a federal agent being armed on the Capitol grounds.  What’s next? The armed capitol police officers?
> 
> Lol.



Who knows why you compare Capitol Police officers who were there legally and legally armed; with a protester who was there illegally and illegally armed.

That's the same to you lunatics, is it?


----------



## tahuyaman

Faun said:


> Who knows why you compare Capitol Police officers who were there legally and legally armed; with a protester who was there illegally and illegally armed.
> 
> That's the same to you lunatics, is it?


The DEA agent was not a protester    He was an observer.  He was not illegally arned.  He was within his legal rights / authority. You are clueless


----------



## Faun

tahuyaman said:


> No.
> 
> 
> 
> DEA agents are authorized to carry a weapon 24/7 on or off duty even on federal property.   Also
> In places where it illegal for you to carry even if you have a permit.  When DEA agents are off duty, they are essentially on call.   That’s the life of a federal agent.
> 
> You are clueless



LOL

You're nuts. It's not ok for a DEA agent to be armed in the commission of a crime. Which is why he was indicted with a gun charge. According to your idiocy, it would have been legal for him to brandish his gun while robbing a bank. 

But seriously, you obviously know the law better than prosecutors who have charged him. You should call them and insist they drop the charges because he was a federal agent.

Then you should call the DEA since you clearly know more than them and kindly explain to them he was wrongfully terminated since a federal agent can go commit a crime anywhere because they're always on call.


----------



## tahuyaman

Faun said:


> LOL
> 
> You're nuts. It's not ok for a DEA agent to be armed in the commission of a crime. Which is why he was indicted with a gun charge. According to your idiocy, it would have been legal for him to brandish his gun while robbing a bank.
> 
> But seriously, you obviously know the law better than prosecutors who have charged him. You should call them and insist they drop the charges because he was a federal agent.
> 
> Then you should call the DEA since you clearly know more than them and kindly explain to them he was wrongfully terminated since a federal agent can go commit a crime anywhere because they're always on call.


He wasn't in commission of a crime.  He'll be exonerated of anything criminal in nature. Again.   Still, he was not an armed participant in the Capitol riot.  

You're clueless.


----------



## Faun

tahuyaman said:


> The DEA agent was not a protester    He was an observer.  He was not illegally arned.  He was within his legal rights / authority. You are clueless



LOLOLOLOL 

Are you ever not a retard?

Ever???

Not a protester???


----------



## Faun

tahuyaman said:


> He wasn't in commission of a crime.  Again.   You're clueless.



Then why did he lie for why he was there?


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> yeah up here…you know the stage



With *us*??

Who else was up on the stage with him?


----------



## tahuyaman

Faun said:


> LOLOLOLOL
> 
> Are you ever not a retard?
> 
> Ever???
> 
> Not a protester???


Go fuck yourself flit-boy.


----------



## tahuyaman

These TDS infected nit-wits just can’t help themselves. They actually think that they are accomplishing something with this idiotic partisan circus.


----------



## Faun

tahuyaman said:


> Go fuck yourself flit-boy.



LOLOLOLOL 

Run, Forrest! Run!!!  

And now for the coup de grâce...

He had no authority to be there, armed or not. He was a probationary employee with the DEA and on Sedition Day, *was on personal leave.*

He lied to the FBI for why he was there, which is another charge against him. And despite him giving prior notice to the DEA that he was resigning, they terminated his employment upon learning of his involvement at the Capitol.


----------



## Faun

tahuyaman said:


> These TDS infected nit-wits just can’t help themselves. They actually think that they are accomplishing something with this idiotic partisan circus.



Well I'm accomplishing being thoroughly entertained by your ignorance and sycophancy.


----------



## tahuyaman

Faun said:


> LOLOLOLOL
> 
> Run, Forrest! Run!!!
> 
> And now for the coup de grâce...
> 
> He had no authority to be there, armed or not. He was a probationary employee with the DEA and on Sedition Day, *was on personal leave.*
> 
> He lied to the FBI for why he was there, which is another charge against him. And despite him giving prior notice to the DEA that he was resigning, they terminated his employment upon learning of his involvement at the Capitol.


I’d continue with this, but it’s of no use.  You’re a complete clueless dolt.  It’s embarrassing that there could be American citizens as stupid as you.


----------



## Faun

tahuyaman said:


> I’d continue with this, but it’s of no use.  You’re a complete clueless dolt.



LOLOL 

Everything you posted was utter bunk as you weren't familiar with his case. You just went full mental tribal and sucked up to him. Projecting I'm the clueless dolt in this arrangement only serves to make me laugh at you even harder.


----------



## tahuyaman

Faun said:


> LOLOL
> 
> Everything you posted was utter bunk as you weren't familiar with his case. You just went full mental tribal and sucked up to him. Projecting I'm the clueless dolt in this arrangement only serves to make me laugh at you even harder.


Your  brand of stupid is funny.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

tahuyaman said:


> Your  brand of stupid is funny.


See if you think that this is funny









						New Insights Emerge About Trump's Attempt To Join The Capitol Riot
					

Several sources familiar with Trump's behavior at the time are expanding on the bombshell testimony from White House staffer Cassidy Hutchinson.




					www.huffpost.com
				






> *Fifteen sources ―* including former government officials, aides and law enforcement officers ― offered their insight in a Washington Post report published Friday. Several said Trump had brought up the idea of marching to the Capitol alongside his supporters several times after he lost the election, but they assumed he’d made the remarks in a “joking manner.”


----------



## Hutch Starskey

Couchpotato said:


> Do you think that's the first time the SS had to tell a President that he couldn't go somewhere he wanted to go and said President got pissed about it?   Really?      Get you head out of the sand man.


Uh… yeah. 
Certainly the first time a president was redirected from physically joining a coup in process.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

eagle1462010 said:


> She testified they were in the beast and now it's the SUV.  lmao


She testified to what was related to her.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

bripat9643 said:


> No one was armed, you godzilla sized dumbfuck.


Had you watched the hearing, you might have spared yourself such embarrassingly stupid posts.


----------



## Care4all

struth said:


> yeah up here…you know the stage


Nope, he requested that the magnetometer be taken down, to let the armed followers in to the half empty, fenced off, Ellipse rally area.....Trump views life in video, and the video of a half empty rally was unacceptable to him....  Thus his demand, to let the armed protesters in, to fill the Ellipse rally area....  They were his protesters and he said he had no worries of them hurting him....  (the heck with concern for others....).


----------



## Hutch Starskey

bripat9643 said:


> More hearsay.  That's all you got.


Hearsay from the SS and police radio communications.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

EvilCat Breath said:


> No.  Straight from the horse's mouth would be if the agents themselves were being questioned.   Hutchinson was testifying to hearsay.


And?


----------



## eagle1462010

Hutch Starskey said:


> She testified to what was related to her.


Which would be thrown out in any court worth a damn.  We already now have proof of why she is useless.  She said the Beast limo under oath.  Now reports are the so called event happened in the SUV


----------



## Hutch Starskey

EvilCat Breath said:


> That's why they are demanding to take the stand.  Cheney and Pelosi won't allow it.


Post it. Post any statement made by either of the two men in question.


----------



## struth

Care4all said:


> Nope, he requested that the magnetometer be taken down, to let the armed followers in to the half empty, fenced off, Ellipse rally area.....Trump views life in video, and the video of a half empty rally was unacceptable to him....  Thus his demand, to let the armed protesters in, to fill the Ellipse rally area....  They were his protesters and he said he had no worries of them hurting him....  (the heck with concern for others....).


there is literally no evidence of that.  The best you have is a already debunked aid making the claim she overheard someone say something.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

eagle1462010 said:


> Which would be thrown out in any court worth a damn.  We already now have proof of why she is useless.  She said the Beast limo under oath.  Now reports are the so called event happened in the SUV


This isn’t a court proceeding. It’s a Congressional hearing. 
Hutchinson testified to the alleged incident as related to her by Ornato. 
It’s not her assertion that any of this happened. Only that she had heard it happened. Any discrepancies are not hers or otherwise evidence of her dishonesty.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

Faun said:


> LOLOL
> 
> Then complaints only one side is being represented are meaningless whining. They can show up but they either don't or they plead the Fifth to every question.
> 
> What are they afraid of?


Yes. When they do testify, they literally refuse to answer as doing so may actually reveal the crimes they believe they may have committed.


----------



## Care4all

eagle1462010 said:


> Which would be thrown out in any court worth a damn.  We already now have proof of why she is useless.  She said the Beast limo under oath.  Now reports are the so called event happened in the SUV


The SS got these new SUVs for POTUS and the VP just a couple of years ago, and they use those as the Beast term now too,  is what I read, and they refer to the super duper limo,  The  original Beast Limo now, *Cadillac One.*


----------



## scruffy

Hutch Starskey said:


> This isn’t a court proceeding. It’s a Congressional hearing.




It's a dog and pony show.


----------



## eagle1462010

Care4all said:


> The SS got these new SUVs for POTUS and the VP just a couple of years ago, and they use those as the Beast term now too,  is what I read, and they named the super duper limo,  The  original Beast Limo now, *Cadillac One.*


Is that the new spin for the HEARSAY EVIDENCE.  She wasn't in any of them.  And I'm repeating the media from both sides her.

SHE WASN'T THERE.........Want someone to care..........the ones who were there need to talk.  And even so...............SO WHAT.  Doesn't prove a dang thing but a president pissed off at security on protocol................They are allowed to overrule for his safety and many presidents have been pissed over this.


----------



## Lesh

And more importantly than this nonsense about the steering wheel is the revelation that Trump knew his followers were armed (illegally),  the fact that he took action to ALLOW those folks to remain armed, and that he sent them to the Capitol knowing that they were armed


----------



## Care4all

struth said:


> there is literally no evidence of that.  The best you have is a already debunked aid making the claim she overheard someone say something.


Oh silly one, they have the testimony of others on it....


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

eagle1462010 said:


> Is that the new spin for the HEARSAY EVIDENCE.  She wasn't in any of them.  And I'm repeating the media from both sides her.
> 
> SHE WASN'T THERE.........Want someone to care..........the ones who were there need to talk.  And even so...............SO WHAT.  Doesn't prove a dang thing but a president pissed off at security on protocol................They are allowed to overrule for his safety and many presidents have been pissed over this.


See post 2223


----------



## Hutch Starskey

Faun said:


> They were seen carrying them.


By law enforcement.


----------



## eagle1462010

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> See post 2223


Huff po BS.  If the RAGE actually happened ..........He wanted to be with his supporters for the RALLY..............

Facts...........They knew the capital was going to have a very large protest.

Fact...........they didn't bring in added security or the National Guard.

Fact...........they opened doors up and let people in.

Fact........FBI were caught in the crowd INCITING VIOLENCE.

Fact.......damage was MINOR and most calmly walked into the capital and took selfies.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

eagle1462010 said:


> Huff po BS.  If the RAGE actually happened ..........He wanted to be with his supporters for the RALLY..............
> 
> Facts...........They knew the capital was going to have a very large protest.
> 
> Fact...........they didn't bring in added security or the National Guard.
> 
> Fact...........they opened doors up and let people in.
> 
> Fact........FBI were caught in the crowd INCITING VIOLENCE.
> 
> Fact.......damage was MINOR and most calmly walked into the capital and took selfies.


Fact: Trump incided a riot of white supremacists who interfeared with a lawful government fuction


----------



## Care4all

eagle1462010 said:


> Is that the new spin for the HEARSAY EVIDENCE.  She wasn't in any of them.  And I'm repeating the media from both sides her.
> 
> SHE WASN'T THERE.........Want someone to care..........the ones who were there need to talk.  And even so...............SO WHAT.  Doesn't prove a dang thing but a president pissed off at security on protocol................They are allowed to overrule for his safety and many presidents have been pissed over this.


The guy who told her this embellished story was a Trumper loyalist, and was not there either....  But Bobby Engel, the top dog secret service agent in the car, testified under oath a few weeks ago, that confirms the "diagreement" and fight with Trump over going to the Capitol, and testified he won out, and brought the president to the whitehouse after the Ellipse rally.....  The beast term was used in his testimony too, according to what was reported on it a few weeks ago, before Hutchinson testified.

We need to see his full under oath testimony to know if anything else like The Lunge, look place of which Tony Ornato told Cassidy!

Two other secret service agents said this morning that the rumor about the fight in the car, has been swirling around the Secret Service division, since 1/6.

AND Trump said in an interview that he desperately wanted to go to the Capitol with his fans, BUT THE SECRET SERVICE WOULD NOT LET HIM......

IM PRETTY CERTAIN, the fight or major disagreement in the SUV beast, was NOT pretty!


----------



## EvilCat Breath

Hutch Starskey said:


> Post it. Post any statement made by either of the two men in question.


Both Bobby Engel, the lead agent, and the presidential limousine/SUV driver are prepared to testify under oath that neither man was assaulted and that Mr. Trump never lunged for the steering wheel,” Secret Service reportedly denies Cassidy Hutchinson’s Jan. 6 tale

Obviously the matter can be settled if all witnesses were allowed to testify.   That is not going to happen.

This emergency bombshell was hastily concocted to divert the news cycle from Fuckwad Biden's mass murder of 53 invaders.


----------



## Care4all

eagle1462010 said:


> Huff po BS.  If the RAGE actually happened ..........He wanted to be with his supporters for the RALLY..............
> 
> Facts...........They knew the capital was going to have a very large protest.
> 
> Fact...........they didn't bring in added security or the National Guard.
> 
> Fact...........they opened doors up and let people in.
> 
> Fact........FBI were caught in the crowd INCITING VIOLENCE.
> 
> Fact.......damage was MINOR and most calmly walked into the capital and took selfies.


There was no permit requested by Trump team, to march down to the Capitol, and no request for a permit by trump team to protest at the Capitol......  they were sent there ILLEGALLY, by Trump.

The Whitehouse KNEW they were going to send their crowd down there....days ahead of the rally.

Trump team should have requested permits....the capitol could have been better prepared.


Funny as shit, that YOU are trying to blame Democrats for not having enough security, to protect them from *YOU*....  now if that isn't bat shit crazy and demented.... I don't know what is....?


----------



## Lesh

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Fact: Trump incided a riot of white supremacists who interfeared with a lawful government fuction


ARMED white supremacists. And Trump not only knew that but approved and facilitated it


----------



## Care4all

EvilCat Breath said:


> Both Bobby Engel, the lead agent, and the presidential limousine/SUV driver are prepared to testify under oath that neither man was assaulted and that Mr. Trump never lunged for the steering wheel,” Secret Service reportedly denies Cassidy Hutchinson’s Jan. 6 tale
> 
> Obviously the matter can be settled if all witnesses were allowed to testify.   That is not going to happen.
> 
> This emergency bombshell was hastily concocted to divert the news cycle from Fuckwad Biden's mass murder of 53 invaders.


Lets see them testify UNDER OATH again, they've both done so previously...

No reporting on these two denying it to the press, only an unnamed source saying they are...but not from their mouths directly to journalists....that's a second hand source, hearsay.


----------



## eagle1462010

Care4all said:


> There was no permit requested by Trump team, to march down to the Capitol, and no request for a permit by trump team to protest at the Capitol......  they were sent there ILLEGALLY, by Trump.
> 
> The Whitehouse KNEW they were going to send their crowd down there....days ahead of the rally.
> 
> Trump team should have requested permits....the capitol could have been better prepared.
> 
> 
> Funny as shit, that YOU are trying to blame Democrats for not having enough security, to protect them from *YOU*....  now if that isn't bat shit crazy and demented.... I don't know is....


More excuses.  They knew the rally was there.......and should have added security. It has been proven the even the FBI incited riots.  A complete setup

I've watched videos of them opening the doors.  letting them in.

This is just like Russia and Ukraine.........MORE BS.


----------



## struth

Care4all said:


> Oh silly one, they have the testimony of others on it....


no they don’t


----------



## EvilCat Breath

Care4all said:


> Lets see them testify UNDER OATH again, they've both done so previously...
> 
> No reporting on these two denying it to the press, only an unnamed source saying they are...but not from their mouths directly to journalists....that's a second hand source, hearsay.


I gave you a link.  Directly from their mouths to Peter Alexander,  not an unnamed source.  The way to settle what they said or didn't say, put them under oath and ask them if Hutchinson is a lying sack of tampons.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

WEATHER53 said:


> And when you “testify” as to testimony provided by others then it’s hearsay.  That testimony is not proven fact and when you pass on what you heard, and in your case try to present as fact, then you are wrong in two ways including hearsay


^ Full retard.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

struth said:


> of the riot not the rally.  I am just trying to find someone to support her claim about the rally…so far most of her testimony has been. discredited


At the rally, dope.


----------



## Care4all

eagle1462010 said:


> More excuses.  They knew the rally was there.......and should have added security. It has been proven the even the FBI incited riots.  A complete setup
> 
> I've watched videos of them opening the doors.  letting them in.
> 
> This is just like Russia and Ukraine.........MORE BS.


The rally was 2 miles from the Capitol, at the Ellipse.


----------



## eagle1462010

Care4all said:


> The rally was 2 miles from the Capitol, at the Ellipse.


so.  Was a big freaking rally.  They knew it was large and DID NOTHING............They knew WTF they were doing.


----------



## Care4all

It took Trump OVER 3 HOURS to send the rioters home.

And Trump team never sent help for hours...the Pentagon stalled....why?


----------



## Faun

Care4all said:


> Nope, he requested that the magnetometer be taken down, to let the armed followers in to the half empty, fenced off, Ellipse rally area.....Trump views life in video, and the video of a half empty rally was unacceptable to him....  Thus his demand, to let the armed protesters in, to fill the Ellipse rally area....  They were his protesters and he said he had no worries of them hurting him....  (the heck with concern for others....).



... which confirmed what Cassidy Hutchinson said she heard him say earlier.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

WEATHER53 said:


> You are correct. It is not proven untrue; it is proven hearsay


A distinction with no relevance.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

WEATHER53 said:


> Will pass the torch and let others do the battle with lib loons who are trying to redefine and mis apply the word hearsay


As you attempt repeatedly to apply the evidentiary standards of a court proceeding.


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> there is literally no evidence of that.  The best you have is a already debunked aid making the claim she overheard someone say something.



Sadly, you're lying again. You yourself know that Trump confirmed it...



_"And I'd love to have if those tens of thousands of people would be allowed. The military, the secret service. And we want to thank you and the police law enforcement. Great. You're doing a great job. But I'd love it if they could be allowed to come up here with us. Is that possible? Can you just let 'em come up, please?"_​


----------



## Care4all

Where was "Nixon's Side" in the Watergate hearings?  Not present!!!!


----------



## Hutch Starskey

struth said:


> there might of been people around the rally but they weren’t in it


Pretty telling that so many did not want to interact with magnetometers. No?


----------



## iceberg

Hutch Starskey said:


> This isn’t court, fool.


You sure are treating it like one


----------



## watchingfromafar

*Trump and families future------*




-


----------



## Hutch Starskey

eagle1462010 said:


> Liz is screwed in Wyoming.  Maybe CNN will hire her.


Maybe her sights are set on something else.


----------



## eagle1462010

Hutch Starskey said:


> Maybe her sights are set on something else.


MSDNC?


----------



## tahuyaman

tahuyaman said:


> That is not true.  No one inside the Capitol building has been charged with being armed inside the capitol building.


One can disagree with that, but it's a fact.  No one who was arrested for being inside the Capitol building has been charged with being in possession of a firearm.


----------



## tahuyaman

Faun said:


> Doesn't matter. Trump confirmed it.


He did?  When?


----------



## tahuyaman

Liberals have gone insane


----------



## eagle1462010

tahuyaman said:


> Liberals have gone insane


Trump broke them.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

scruffy said:


> It's a dog and pony show.


And you have neither in the show.
Great leadership the Republicans have.


----------



## tahuyaman

eagle1462010 said:


> Trump broke them.


That's it.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

EvilCat Breath said:


> Both Bobby Engel, the lead agent, and the presidential limousine/SUV driver are prepared to testify under oath that neither man was assaulted and that Mr. Trump never lunged for the steering wheel,” Secret Service reportedly denies Cassidy Hutchinson’s Jan. 6 tale
> 
> Obviously the matter can be settled if all witnesses were allowed to testify.   That is not going to happen.
> 
> This emergency bombshell was hastily concocted to divert the news cycle from Fuckwad Biden's mass murder of 53 invaders.


So nothing from either man directly?  
I thought so.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

iceberg said:


> You sure are treating it like one


Not in any way.


----------



## kaz

berg80 said:


> No we don't. Try as you might to smear her, the testimony she gave was truthful as far as she knew. Don't forget she was an eyewitness to a lot of what she related.



When you make up something not knowing if it's true or not, it's a lie.     Go fuck yourself, racist, you're a total liar and a total bitch of the Democrat party.    She didn't care if it was true, which is why she didn't verify it


----------



## Faun

EvilCat Breath said:


> I gave you a link.  Directly from their mouths to Peter Alexander,  not an unnamed source.  The way to settle what they said or didn't say, put them under oath and ask them if Hutchinson is a lying sack of tampons.





It's from an unnamed source...

_"A source close to the Secret Service tells me both Bobby Engel, the lead agent, and the presidential limousine/SUV driver are prepared to testify under oath that neither man was assaulted and that Mr. Trump never lunged for the steering wheel." ~ Peter Alexander_​


----------



## EvilCat Breath

Sit them down and ask them, under oath.


----------



## Faun

eagle1462010 said:


> so.  Was a big freaking rally.  They knew it was large and DID NOTHING............They knew WTF they were doing.



That was on the Capitol Police Board. They're the ones responsible for Capitol security.


----------



## struth

Hutch Starskey said:


> Pretty telling that so many did not want to interact with magnetometers. No?


likely not…with that said only three people i am aware of where charged with having a firearm at the capitol…one was a DEA agent


----------



## basquebromance

You don’t need to compare the extremism happening in America to some far away country. America has a long history of extremism and cruelty...from Jim Crow to Jan 6, from Slavery to sedition...from Trump's tyranny to Ted Cruz's treason


----------



## Faun

tahuyaman said:


> He did?  When?





_"And I'd love to have if those tens of thousands of people would be allowed. The military, the secret service. And we want to thank you and the police law enforcement. Great. You're doing a great job. But I'd love it if they could be allowed to come up here with us. Is that possible? Can you just let 'em come up, please?"_


----------



## Lesh

Lesh said:


> And more importantly than this nonsense about the steering wheel is the revelation that Trump knew his followers were armed (illegally),  the fact that he took action to ALLOW those folks to remain armed, and that he sent them to the Capitol knowing that they were armed


And ALL of the attention to the "steering wheel" is DESIGNED to distract from the above


----------



## Faun

eagle1462010 said:


> Trump broke them.



LOL

Cartoons are nice but reality is better...









						MAGA Meltdown Full Uncut Video. Trumper Crying For Trump! Hilarious!
					

MAGA Supporter having a full blown meltdown! Snowflake alert!




					m.youtube.com


----------



## bripat9643

Hutch Starskey said:


> Hearsay from the SS and police radio communications.


Yes, that's right.


----------



## bripat9643

Lesh said:


> And ALL of the attention to the "steering wheel" is DESIGNED to distract from the above


"The above" is pure horseshit.


----------



## Care4all

struth said:


> no they don’t


Geez, you really are ignorant on these things and really don't know a lot, about what is going on around you!   I don't mean that in a harsh way, like you are ignorant because you are just plain dumb!  Cuz you're not dumb...I can see that clearly.

What you are, is more naive than ignorant....  You believe your right wing lying press and Donald Trump, and lack any interest in truth and facts because of that loyalty to Trump.

This article is from June 7th, weeks before Cassidy s public testimony...about the incident....


Www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/07/trump-pressed-secret-service-for-plan-to-join-march-to-capitol/

“We’re going to walk down to the Capitol,” he told the crowd.
Witnesses have told the House Jan. 6 committee that, immediately after Trump made that remark, Secret Service agents contacted D.C. police about blocking intersections, according to the people briefed on the testimony. Police officials declined, as they were stretched thin because they were monitoring numerous protests and later assisting with a growing mob at the Capitol, the people said. A senior law enforcement official told The Washington Post that the president’s detail leader scuttled the idea as untenable and unsafe.
A D.C. official on Tuesday confirmed that the Secret Service sought D.C. police for help with a presidential motorcade on Jan. 6.

“We were asked, and the response was no,” said Dora Taylor-Lowe, a spokeswoman for the D.C. deputy mayor that oversees the police department.

The testimony, which could be featured during high-profile hearings set to begin this week by the House Jan. 6 committee, indicates that several days before his speech, Trump had been eager to join supporters on a march to the Capitol. No permit had been issued for such a march, although some Trump allies were touting a march on far-right social media platforms as a way to pressure Congress not to certify Biden’s election victory.

Trump previously told The Post that his wishes to go to the Capitol on Jan. 6 were blocked by the Secret Service. But Trump’s early insistence on joining a march has not been previously reported, nor was it known publicly that Secret Service officials considered taking steps to transport him there just as the chaotic events were about to unfold.

The new details also reflect a growing focus by the House committee on whether Trump’s White House may have tried to drag this civil service agency into the president’s quest to block the peaceful transfer of power. Five people died in the attack or in its immediate aftermath, and more than 100 police officers were injured as rioters streamed into the Capitol.

=========================
*
and this POLITICO article on Bobby Engel's testimony....weeks before Cassidy testifying....JUNE 8th*

Www.politico.com/news/2022/06/08/trump-raised-jan-6-capitol-appearance-secret-service-agent-select-panel-00038217

Trump privately raised Jan. 6 Capitol appearance with Secret Service agent, select panel hears​Robert Engel, the head of Donald Trump's Secret Service detail at the time, said they had *different* *views* on whether the former president should join his supporters.

-----------------''-''

“We’re going to the Capitol,” he said. “We’re going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country.”

When Secret Service agents heard the remarks, they reached out to law enforcement partners about the feasibility of transporting the president to the Capitol, as the Post first reported. Engel opposed the move, saying it would have been unfeasible.

---------------'--------


*Engel’s* *testimony* stands in stark contrast to a claim from former Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), Trump’s then-chief of staff. In his book “The Chief’s Chief,” Meadows wrote that Trump told him right after the speech that he was “speaking metaphorically” when he said he wanted to go to the Capitol.


----------------

Meadows has refused to answer questions from committee investigators. 


----------'-----------

The Secret Service, meanwhile, has fully cooperated with the congressional Jan. 6 probe, according to Guglielmi. He added that Secret Service personnel appeared before the select panel without having to be subpoenaed.

The Jan. 6 select committee is gearing up to start rolling out its findings this week. Its first hearing, airing Thursday at 8 p.m.,


----------



## Hutch Starskey

struth said:


> likely not…with that said only three people i am aware of where charged with having a firearm at the capitol…one was a DEA agent


Which of course is irrelevant to the discussion.


----------



## WEATHER53

meaner gene said:


> You do confuse part of it.  The person isn't testifying as to what happened as a witness, but testifying what they were told by a witness.  Hence what was witnessed becomes hearsay, but the conversation with the witness is direct evidence of their statement, but not to the truth of that statement.
> 
> Example, when police testified that Jussie Smolette told them he was attacked, was direct evidence of Jussie making the claim, not that his claim was truthful.


The conversation that is relayed is not direct evidence


----------



## WEATHER53

Faun said:


> _*without having confirmed it yourself*_
> 
> Which is exactly what I did, ya flamin' idiot.


Nope sorry.  No matter how much you feel you “have confirmed” the 3rd party story, unless you witnessed or heard the event yourself then Any Recounting of it by you is hearsay


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

WEATHER53 said:


> The conversation that is relayed is not direct evidence


But in the court of public opinion, it can still be compelling.

That's why major donors are flocking away from the orange pile of shit, as predicted by yours truly. 

Trump cares more about that than he does his legal exposure. So you aren't doing a good job of soothing him.


----------



## Faun

WEATHER53 said:


> Nope sorry.  No matter how much you feel you “have confirmed” the 3rd party story, unless you witnessed or heard the event yourself then Any Recounting of it by you is hearsay



I personally heard the audio of police saying they see guns. That's not hearsay.


----------



## struth

Care4all said:


> Geez, you really are ignorant on these things and really don't know a lot, about what is going on around you!   I don't mean that in a harsh way, like you are ignorant because you are just plain dumb!  Cuz you're not dumb...I can see that clearly.
> 
> What you are, is more naive than ignorant....  You believe your right wing lying press and Donald Trump, and lack any interest in truth and facts because of that loyalty to Trump.
> 
> This article is from June 7th, weeks before Cassidy s public testimony...about the incident....
> 
> 
> Www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/07/trump-pressed-secret-service-for-plan-to-join-march-to-capitol/
> 
> “We’re going to walk down to the Capitol,” he told the crowd.
> Witnesses have told the House Jan. 6 committee that, immediately after Trump made that remark, Secret Service agents contacted D.C. police about blocking intersections, according to the people briefed on the testimony. Police officials declined, as they were stretched thin because they were monitoring numerous protests and later assisting with a growing mob at the Capitol, the people said. A senior law enforcement official told The Washington Post that the president’s detail leader scuttled the idea as untenable and unsafe.
> A D.C. official on Tuesday confirmed that the Secret Service sought D.C. police for help with a presidential motorcade on Jan. 6.
> 
> “We were asked, and the response was no,” said Dora Taylor-Lowe, a spokeswoman for the D.C. deputy mayor that oversees the police department.
> 
> The testimony, which could be featured during high-profile hearings set to begin this week by the House Jan. 6 committee, indicates that several days before his speech, Trump had been eager to join supporters on a march to the Capitol. No permit had been issued for such a march, although some Trump allies were touting a march on far-right social media platforms as a way to pressure Congress not to certify Biden’s election victory.
> 
> Trump previously told The Post that his wishes to go to the Capitol on Jan. 6 were blocked by the Secret Service. But Trump’s early insistence on joining a march has not been previously reported, nor was it known publicly that Secret Service officials considered taking steps to transport him there just as the chaotic events were about to unfold.
> 
> The new details also reflect a growing focus by the House committee on whether Trump’s White House may have tried to drag this civil service agency into the president’s quest to block the peaceful transfer of power. Five people died in the attack or in its immediate aftermath, and more than 100 police officers were injured as rioters streamed into the Capitol.
> 
> =========================
> 
> *and this POLITICO article on Bobby Engel's testimony....weeks before Cassidy testifying....JUNE 8th*
> 
> Www.politico.com/news/2022/06/08/trump-raised-jan-6-capitol-appearance-secret-service-agent-select-panel-00038217
> 
> Trump privately raised Jan. 6 Capitol appearance with Secret Service agent, select panel hears​Robert Engel, the head of Donald Trump's Secret Service detail at the time, said they had *different* *views* on whether the former president should join his supporters.
> 
> -----------------''-''
> 
> “We’re going to the Capitol,” he said. “We’re going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country.”
> 
> When Secret Service agents heard the remarks, they reached out to law enforcement partners about the feasibility of transporting the president to the Capitol, as the Post first reported. Engel opposed the move, saying it would have been unfeasible.
> 
> ---------------'--------
> 
> 
> *Engel’s* *testimony* stands in stark contrast to a claim from former Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), Trump’s then-chief of staff. In his book “The Chief’s Chief,” Meadows wrote that Trump told him right after the speech that he was “speaking metaphorically” when he said he wanted to go to the Capitol.
> 
> 
> ----------------
> 
> Meadows has refused to answer questions from committee investigators.
> 
> 
> ----------'-----------
> 
> The Secret Service, meanwhile, has fully cooperated with the congressional Jan. 6 probe, according to Guglielmi. He added that Secret Service personnel appeared before the select panel without having to be subpoenaed.
> 
> The Jan. 6 select committee is gearing up to start rolling out its findings this week. Its first hearing, airing Thursday at 8 p.m.,


nobody denied he wanted to go tot rhe capitol and be at the peaceful and patriotic protest…he said that in the speech!  so is that all you got out of this?? 

the lies were the assault and grabbing the wheel


----------



## Lesh

struth said:


> nobody denied he wanted to go tot rhe capitol and be at the peaceful and patriotic protest…he said that in the speech!  so is that all you got out of this??
> 
> the lies were the assault and grabbing the wheel


He was clearly and admittedly "in conflict" with the SS about going to the Capitol.

Whether he got into a physical altercation matters not at all. That's what Huchinson was told.

More importantly ( and what you are trying desperately to ignore) he knew that there were guns and other arms in that crowd and not only didn't care, not only tried to have metal detectors removed, but sent that armed crowd to the Capitol. 

And despite reports of police lines being overwhelmed...he wanted to go and be with "his people"

Despite knowing that his Vice President was at risk from that armed crowd...he actually said "Maybe he deserves it"


----------



## tahuyaman

Faun said:


> LOL
> 
> Cartoons are nice but reality is better...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MAGA Meltdown Full Uncut Video. Trumper Crying For Trump! Hilarious!
> 
> 
> MAGA Supporter having a full blown meltdown! Snowflake alert!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> m.youtube.com


It's  fact that many, mostly on the left,  nave a "broken brain" because of Trump.


----------



## bripat9643

Care4all said:


> Geez, you really are ignorant on these things and really don't know a lot, about what is going on around you!   I don't mean that in a harsh way, like you are ignorant because you are just plain dumb!  Cuz you're not dumb...I can see that clearly.
> 
> What you are, is more naive than ignorant....  You believe your right wing lying press and Donald Trump, and lack any interest in truth and facts because of that loyalty to Trump.
> 
> This article is from June 7th, weeks before Cassidy s public testimony...about the incident....
> 
> 
> Www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/07/trump-pressed-secret-service-for-plan-to-join-march-to-capitol/
> 
> “We’re going to walk down to the Capitol,” he told the crowd.
> Witnesses have told the House Jan. 6 committee that, immediately after Trump made that remark, Secret Service agents contacted D.C. police about blocking intersections, according to the people briefed on the testimony. Police officials declined, as they were stretched thin because they were monitoring numerous protests and later assisting with a growing mob at the Capitol, the people said. A senior law enforcement official told The Washington Post that the president’s detail leader scuttled the idea as untenable and unsafe.
> A D.C. official on Tuesday confirmed that the Secret Service sought D.C. police for help with a presidential motorcade on Jan. 6.
> 
> “We were asked, and the response was no,” said Dora Taylor-Lowe, a spokeswoman for the D.C. deputy mayor that oversees the police department.
> 
> The testimony, which could be featured during high-profile hearings set to begin this week by the House Jan. 6 committee, indicates that several days before his speech, Trump had been eager to join supporters on a march to the Capitol. No permit had been issued for such a march, although some Trump allies were touting a march on far-right social media platforms as a way to pressure Congress not to certify Biden’s election victory.
> 
> Trump previously told The Post that his wishes to go to the Capitol on Jan. 6 were blocked by the Secret Service. But Trump’s early insistence on joining a march has not been previously reported, nor was it known publicly that Secret Service officials considered taking steps to transport him there just as the chaotic events were about to unfold.
> 
> The new details also reflect a growing focus by the House committee on whether Trump’s White House may have tried to drag this civil service agency into the president’s quest to block the peaceful transfer of power. Five people died in the attack or in its immediate aftermath, and more than 100 police officers were injured as rioters streamed into the Capitol.
> 
> =========================
> 
> *and this POLITICO article on Bobby Engel's testimony....weeks before Cassidy testifying....JUNE 8th*
> 
> Www.politico.com/news/2022/06/08/trump-raised-jan-6-capitol-appearance-secret-service-agent-select-panel-00038217
> 
> Trump privately raised Jan. 6 Capitol appearance with Secret Service agent, select panel hears​Robert Engel, the head of Donald Trump's Secret Service detail at the time, said they had *different* *views* on whether the former president should join his supporters.
> 
> -----------------''-''
> 
> “We’re going to the Capitol,” he said. “We’re going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country.”
> 
> When Secret Service agents heard the remarks, they reached out to law enforcement partners about the feasibility of transporting the president to the Capitol, as the Post first reported. Engel opposed the move, saying it would have been unfeasible.
> 
> ---------------'--------
> 
> 
> *Engel’s* *testimony* stands in stark contrast to a claim from former Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), Trump’s then-chief of staff. In his book “The Chief’s Chief,” Meadows wrote that Trump told him right after the speech that he was “speaking metaphorically” when he said he wanted to go to the Capitol.
> 
> 
> ----------------
> 
> Meadows has refused to answer questions from committee investigators.
> 
> 
> ----------'-----------
> 
> The Secret Service, meanwhile, has fully cooperated with the congressional Jan. 6 probe, according to Guglielmi. He added that Secret Service personnel appeared before the select panel without having to be subpoenaed.
> 
> The Jan. 6 select committee is gearing up to start rolling out its findings this week. Its first hearing, airing Thursday at 8 p.m.,


<YAWN!>


----------



## bigrebnc1775

marvin martian said:


> The pee tape you keep hoping for?
> 
> LOL


When this is over the committee members need to be taken out an executed.


----------



## bripat9643

Lesh said:


> He was clearly and admittedly "in conflict" with the SS about going to the Capitol.
> 
> Whether he got into a physical altercation matters not at all. That's what Huchinson was told.
> 
> More importantly ( and what you are trying desperately to ignore) he knew that there were guns and other arms in that crowd and not only didn't care, not only tried to have metal detectors removed, but sent that armed crowd to the Capitol.
> 
> And despite reports of police lines being overwhelmed...he wanted to go and be with "his people"
> 
> Despite knowing that his Vice President was at risk from that armed crowd...he actually said "Maybe he deserves it"


You prog imbeciles keep claiming that were "guns and other arms in that crowd."  He knew no such thing.

You keep repeating this load of horse manure as if it proves something.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

bripat9643 said:


> You prog imbeciles keep claiming that were "guns and other arms in that crowd." He knew no such thing


Liar. He was told that by his own security team. 

Damn son.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> I personally heard the audio of police saying they see guns. That's not hearsay.


No guns have been produced, so those claims are meaningless.


----------



## bripat9643

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Liar. He was told that by his own security team.
> 
> Damn son.


They didn't know either, moron.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

bripat9643 said:


> No guns have been produced, so those claims are meaningless


Oops, another lie, as they confiscated many guns that day. 

Damn son. You are so embarrassing.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> You prog imbeciles keep claiming that were "guns and other arms in that crowd."  He knew no such thing.
> 
> You keep repeating this load of horse manure as if it proves something.



Cassidy Hutchinson says she was told he was informed. She says she personally heard him demand magnetometers be removed so that armed fans could get closer to him speaking.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> They didn't know either, moron.



Police spotted guns and you think they didn't pass that information along to the secret service?


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> No guns have been produced, so those claims are meaningless.



Fucking moron...


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

bigrebnc1775 said:


> When this is over the committee members need to be taken out an executed.


You are a fine patriot indeed!


----------



## Mac1958

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> You are a fine patriot indeed!


They're at war.  Jihadis think they're patriots, too.


----------



## bripat9643

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Oops, another lie, as they confiscated many guns that day.
> 
> Damn son. You are so embarrassing.


I suppose you have photos of these guns?  .  .  .  .

I thought not.


----------



## eddiew37

Real Americans  won't be intimidated  by republican swine


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> Cassidy Hutchinson says she was told he was informed. She says she personally heard him demand magnetometers be removed so that armed fans could get closer to him speaking.


Hersay of hearsay.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> Police spotted guns and you think they didn't pass that information along to the secret service?


In other words, you have no idea.


----------



## bripat9643

eddiew37 said:


> Real Americans  won't be intimidated  by republican swine


Progs are the only ones trying to intimidate anyone.  In fact, they are arresting people simply for expressing the wrong opinion,


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> Fucking moron...
> 
> View attachment 665263


Off-duty DEA agent brought his government-issued gun to the Capitol riot, prosecutors say

<YAWN!>


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

Mac1958 said:


> They're at war.  Jihadis think they're patriots, too.


That is the kind of mentality that will certainly destroy us all


----------



## Hutch Starskey

bripat9643 said:


> You prog imbeciles keep claiming that were "guns and other arms in that crowd."  He knew no such thing.
> 
> You keep repeating this load of horse manure as if it proves something.


It’s your continued denials that are truly meaningless. You are impacting no one’s understanding of the information presented at the hearings. It’s going very badly for Trump.


----------



## scruffy

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Fact: Trump incided a riot of white supremacists who interfeared with a lawful government fuction



Cut the crap, clownie.

You haven't proven any facts.

As usual with you fucking asswipes, your star witness is a liar and your committee chairman is a Stalinist pig.

Shit or get off the pot. I'm tired of your bullshit tig and pony shows. Charge the guy and prosecute him, or shut the fuck up and stop polluting the airwaves with your drivel


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

bripat9643 said:


> Progs are the only ones trying to intimidate anyone.  In fact, they are arresting people simply for expressing the wrong opinion,


Complete and utter bizarre bovine excrement!


----------



## scruffy

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> That is the kind of mentality that will certainly destroy us all


Read my lips:

There will be no Stalinism in this country.

Not now, not ever.

If it takes a war to stop it, you'll get one.


----------



## scruffy

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Complete and utter bizarre bovine excrement!



Deny it all you want, retarded DNC lemming.

We all know what's up with you assholes.

Your days of intimidation are over. You're done. Finished.

Now we laugh at you fucktards every time you deflect, every time you accuse, basically every time you open your mouth.

None of you dumb fuckers can think for yourselves anyway, all you do is repeat DNC talking points.

You're working for a bunch of STALINIST ASSHOLES, dimwit.


----------



## scruffy

eddiew37 said:


> Real Americans  won't be intimidated  by republican swine



Real Americans are kicking the lefties out on their asses even as we speak.

San Francisco, the most liberal place in the whole country, just booted it's leftist DA.

No one has to intimidate you, asshole. We just have to ride you out of town on a rail


----------



## Hutch Starskey

scruffy said:


> Cut the crap, clownie.
> 
> You haven't proven any facts.
> 
> As usual with you fucking asswipes, your star witness is a liar and your committee chairman is a Stalinist pig.
> 
> Shit or get off the pot. I'm tired of your bullshit tig and pony shows. Charge the guy and prosecute him, or shut the fuck up and stop polluting the airwaves with your drivel


I know, buddy. 
It ain’t easy right now for the MAGA faithful.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

scruffy said:


> Read my lips:
> 
> There will be no Stalinism in this country.
> 
> Not now, not ever.
> 
> If it takes a war to stop it, you'll get one.


Stalinism?


----------



## Lesh

bigrebnc1775 said:


> When this is over the committee members need to be taken out an executed.


That’s not a joke. These fuckers mean it


----------



## bripat9643

eddiew37 said:


> Real Americans  won't be intimidated  by republican swine


Real Americans have nothing to fear from Republicans.  It's Democrats they fear.


----------



## bripat9643

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Complete and utter bizarre bovine excrement!


It's truth.


----------



## bripat9643

Hutch Starskey said:


> It’s your continued denials that are truly meaningless. You are impacting no one’s understanding of the information presented at the hearings. It’s going very badly for Trump.


True.  You are immune to facts and logic.


----------



## bripat9643

Hutch Starskey said:


> I know, buddy.
> It ain’t easy right now for the MAGA faithful.


It's not easy for any American to watch his country being destroyed, asshole.


----------



## Faun

bigrebnc1775 said:


> When this is over the committee members need to be taken out an executed.



You don't know there are bots which crawl this website, looking for relevant information, do ya? Prolly including one from time to time by the FBI or other law enforcement agencies.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> No guns have been produced, so those claims are meaningless.



Lying doesn't help you, fucking moron.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> They didn't know either, moron.



Lying fucking moron, there's audio of them saying they see guns.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> Hersay of hearsay.



LOLOL 

Fucking moron, she first hand witnessed Ornato tell Meadows he informed Trump. That is not hearsay.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> Off-duty DEA agent brought his government-issued gun to the Capitol riot, prosecutors say
> 
> <YAWN!>



So you lied when you said there were no guns there.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

bripat9643 said:


> I suppose you have photos of these guns? . .


Why would I have photos of the guns the police and secret service confiscated?

Drunk already?


----------



## berg80

On the credibility scale I'd put this on the same level as Engel's denials.









						Two Secret Service Sources Corroborate Hutchinson Testimony About Trump Demanding to Go to Capitol, CNN Reports
					

CNN is reporting that Secret Service sources are confirm Cassidy Hutchinson's testimony that Donald Trump demanded to be taken to the Capitol on January 6.




					www.mediaite.com


----------



## berg80

Faun said:


> Lying fucking moron, there's audio of them saying they see guns.


_*The hearing added evidence that some people in the crowd on Jan. 6 were armed, including with assault rifles. The committee played police radio transmissions describing people carrying weapons*, as well as testimony from White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson describing President Donald Trump’s urging the Secret Service to remove metal detectors rather than turn away people with weapons.

The new evidence comes on top of multiple people charged in the riot who were found with loaded guns. The Justice Department has also accused the Oath Keepers of stashing weapons just outside D.C. At a hearing last July, former Capitol Police officer Harry Dunn testified to seeing the outline of a gun on one rioter’s hip._
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati.../jan-6-committee-hearings-live-updates-day-6/


----------



## Mac1958

Mac1958 said:


> They're at war.  Jihadis think they're patriots, too.





TheProgressivePatriot said:


> That is the kind of mentality that will certainly destroy us all


It's the kind of thing that destroys everything it touches.


----------



## bripat9643

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Why would I have photos of the guns the police and secret service confiscated?
> 
> Drunk already?


The cops always take pictures of the evidence they have seized.  Obviously, there isn't any such evidence.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> LOLOL
> 
> Fucking moron, she first hand witnessed Ornato tell Meadows he informed Trump. That is not hearsay.


She's a firsthand witness to hearsay testimony?


----------



## Faun

berg80 said:


> _*The hearing added evidence that some people in the crowd on Jan. 6 were armed, including with assault rifles. The committee played police radio transmissions describing people carrying weapons*, as well as testimony from White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson describing President Donald Trump’s urging the Secret Service to remove metal detectors rather than turn away people with weapons.
> 
> The new evidence comes on top of multiple people charged in the riot who were found with loaded guns. The Justice Department has also accused the Oath Keepers of stashing weapons just outside D.C. At a hearing last July, former Capitol Police officer Harry Dunn testified to seeing the outline of a gun on one rioter’s hip._
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati.../jan-6-committee-hearings-live-updates-day-6/



Unfortunately for rightards, blanket denials are all that remains in their arsenal following her testimony.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> The cops always take pictures of the evidence they have seized.  Obviously, there isn't any such evidence.



They rarely put them on the Internet. It's evidence they hold onto until trial.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> They rarely put them on the Internet. It's evidence they hold onto until trial.


Every time there's a big drug bust they put the pictures on the internet.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> She's a firsthand witness to hearsay testimony?



Fucking moron, she personally heard Trump acknowledge the crowd was armed...

_"I don’t f’ing care that they have weapons. They’re not here to hurt me, take the f’ing mags away, let my people in." ~ Trump_


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

bripat9643 said:


> The cops always take pictures of the evidence they have seized


And give them to... me?  Dude, let me help you up. You have fallen on your face.


----------



## Mac1958

Faun said:


> Fucking moron, she personally heard Trump acknowledge the crowd was armed...
> 
> _"I don’t f’ing care that they have weapons. They’re not here to hurt me, take the f’ing mags away, let my people in." ~ Trump_





Fort Fun Indiana said:


> And give them to... me?  Dude, let me help you up. You have fallen on your face.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> Fucking moron, she personally heard Trump acknowledge the crowd was armed...
> 
> _"I don’t f’ing care that they have weapons. They’re not here to hurt me, take the f’ing mags away, let my people in." ~ Trump_


That isn't what he did, dumbass.


----------



## bripat9643

Mac1958 said:


>


What's so "brave" about her?  She's going to make millions selling her book.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

bripat9643 said:


> What's so "brave" about her?  She's going to make millions selling her book.


You always assume everyone is as low in ethical and moral character as you are.


----------



## Chillicothe

2300+ posts on this single thread.  And some folks say 'nobody cares' about the hearings.

I can't read through all of this, so I scanned some recent posts.
Good ones.
Bad ones.

And I'll comment on just two. One of each.

First, the Good. From poster Care4all:



Care4all said:


> "There was *no permit requested by Trump team, to march down to the Capitol*, and no request for a permit by trump team to protest at the Capitol...... they were sent there ILLEGALLY, by Trump.    *The Whitehouse KNEW* they were going to send their crowd down there...*.days ahead of the rally.  ....*should have requested permits....*the capitol could have been better prepared."*



Thank you, C4A. That is a point that has been surfaced in other earlier threads about J6.  Clearly, the White House bears the blame for any unpreparedness at the Capitol Building.  They knew days ahead they were gonna direct the people assembled at the Elipse to go at the legislators on the Hill. 
If....IF.....a permit would have been applied for that would have alerted the DC police to set up crowd control barricades, traffic control, and enhanced security at the Capitol itself.

The Trump people did not give the city police any warning about the march.  They had a duty to do so. And, as C4A states, the march was illegal. The directive by Don Trump from the stage was irresponsible, reckless, and dangerous. He, and his staff bear the primary responsible for the attack on the Capitol.  Accountability is required.

And the question lurks:   Was this intentional? 
Did they WANT the Capitol to be lightly defended for a reason?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------




EvilCat Breath said:


> _"...put them under oath and ask them if Hutchinson is a lying sack of tampons."_


*"lying sack of tampons."*
????
Misogyny seems to be a go-to tool for too many of these Trump sycophants who post here.   How many times do we read some fool make gratuitous demeaning remarks about adult women on this chatroom?

But, putting aside the petty misogyny by the above poster, she also states that the witness was lying?

About what?
'Lying'....that she was told of an exchange in a car and she truthfully testified as to what she was told by others?

Clue to the cluefull:  That ain't lying.

Duh!


----------



## bripat9643

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> You always assume everyone is as low in ethical and moral character as you are.


No, only progs and the people who support their agenda.  Only scumbags support the prog agenda.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

bripat9643 said:


> No, only progs and the people who support their agenda.  Only scumbags support the prog agenda.


So you assume progs are all as low in ethical and moral character as you are. Gotcha. So I guess the only leg up they hold on you is education.


----------



## bripat9643

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> So you assume progs are all as low in ethical and moral character as you are. Gotcha. So I guess the only leg up they hold on you is education.


No.  I note their low ethical standards by the way they lie all the time.  A prog would sell his mother for gold.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

bripat9643 said:


> No.  I note their low ethical standards by the way they lie all the time.  A prog would sell his mother for gold.


Yes, I understand you tell yourself all kinds of things to justify your own, embarrassing behavior.


----------



## scruffy

Mac1958 said:


> It's the kind of thing that destroys everything it touches.


Now it's touching the Democrats 

And it's going to crawl right up their asses


----------



## scruffy

bripat9643 said:


> No.  I note their low ethical standards by the way they lie all the time.  A prog would sell his mother for gold.


Gold? Hell, half a blow job...


----------



## bripat9643

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Yes, I understand you tell yourself all kinds of things to justify your own, embarrassing behavior.


What "embarrassing behavior,"  pointing out that you're a douchebag?


----------



## scruffy

Faun said:


> Fucking moron, she personally heard Trump acknowledge the crowd was armed...
> 
> _"I don’t f’ing care that they have weapons. They’re not here to hurt me, take the f’ing mags away, let my people in." ~ Trump_


Who cares?

Who the fuck cares?

Trump is the least of your problems


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> That isn't what he did, dumbass.



That's what he wanted, fucking moron. He didn't get his way but he asked security to let those people past the mags so the could fill up the area in front of the stage.


----------



## Faun

scruffy said:


> Who cares?
> 
> Who the fuck cares?
> 
> Trump is the least of your problems



You care, that's who.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> That's what he wanted, fucking moron. He didn't get his way but he asked security to let those people past the mags so the could fill up the area in front of the stage.


I see you believe you can read minds.  It only matters what he did, not what you believe he wanted.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> I see you believe you can read minds.  It only matters what he did, not what you believe he wanted.



I don't read minds, fucking moron; I listen to words...



_"And I'd love to have if those tens of thousands of people would be allowed. The military, the secret service. And we want to thank you and the police law enforcement. Great. You're doing a great job. But I'd love it if they could be allowed to come up here with us. Is that possible? Can you just let 'em come up, please?"_​


----------



## berg80

bripat9643 said:


> Every time there's a big drug bust they put the pictures on the internet.


_*The committee played police radio transmissions describing people carrying weapons

Now what? Claim the Deep State created the tapes?*_


----------



## whoisit

I don't trust anyone in government, but I do feel very sorry for those poor men that have been in jail illegally for last two years now. 
This is totally unconstitutional and wrong. No bond plus torture use to be illegal in a civilized nation.


----------



## Faun

berg80 said:


> _*The committee played police radio transmissions describing people carrying weapons
> 
> Now what? Claim the Deep State created the tapes?*_



Here are weapons confiscated...





__





						Here’s Every Weapon The Capitol Rioters Are Accused Of Having On Jan. 6
					





					www.buzzfeednews.com


----------



## Faun

whoisit said:


> I don't trust anyone in government, but I do feel very sorry for those poor men that have been in jail illegally for last two years now.
> This is totally unconstitutional and wrong. No bond plus torture use to be illegal in a civilized nation.



Too bad they stormed the Capitol to kill the VP and "stop the steal."


----------



## Care4all

berg80 said:


> _*The committee played police radio transmissions describing people carrying weapons
> 
> Now what? Claim the Deep State created the tapes?*_


Yep.


----------



## whoisit

Faun said:


> Too bad they stormed the Capitol to kill the VP and "stop the steal."



I think it was just a protest and very peaceful if you compare it to Antifa BLM that the libs sicked on American cities and towns to murder ,burn and loot for months.


----------



## Faun

whoisit said:


> I think it was just a protest and very peaceful if you compare it to Antifa BLM that the libs sicked on American cities and towns to murder ,burn and loot for months.



Many disagree with you. Too bad for them, that includes our justice system.


----------



## whoisit

Faun said:


> Here are weapons confiscated...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here’s Every Weapon The Capitol Rioters Are Accused Of Having On Jan. 6
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.buzzfeednews.com



No proof Jan6 patriots brought guns to the capital.

Clip of our fake news, 

"In his bedroom, agents found a holster with a Smith & Wesson semiautomatic handgun that they suspected he’d brought to Washington."


----------



## Care4all

struth said:


> nobody denied he wanted to go tot rhe capitol and be at the peaceful and patriotic protest…he said that in the speech!  so is that all you got out of this??
> 
> the lies were the assault and grabbing the wheel


And she only repeated what she was told by Tony Ornato, made it clear it was what was TOLD to her....

Why would she make that part up, while under oath, giving the investigators the name of the person that told her this, and the name of the other person present to hear it?  When she would know if she were lying about what Tony Ornato told her, by giving his name, and giving the other person present's name, when she knew the other two men had already testified, or could be called back in, to testify again?

She didn't lie.

Now, did Tony Ornato embellish the story to make it more dramatic when he told the 24 year old Miss Hutchinson..... that could be....


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

whoisit said:


> I don't trust anyone in government, but I do feel very sorry for those poor men that have been in jail illegally for last two years now.
> This is totally unconstitutional and wrong. No bond plus torture use to be illegal in a civilized nation.


No such people exist. Sorry. Snap out it. For one, the insurrection was only 18 months ago. Second, not one person is being held illegally.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

whoisit said:


> No proof Jan6 patriots brought guns to the capital


Lie.

I see what you are doing with this sock account.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

bripat9643 said:


> True.  You are immune to facts and logic.


Which of course is irrelevant to the truth about Trump that is being exposed.


----------



## Faun

whoisit said:


> No proof Jan6 patriots brought guns to the capital.
> 
> Clip of our fake news,
> 
> "In his bedroom, agents found a holster with a Smith & Wesson semiautomatic handgun that they suspected he’d brought to Washington."



Holyfuckingshit.  

I post a link with images of a couple of them with their guns exposed -- and you still deny it??

You freaks are out of your fucking minds.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

Faun said:


> Unfortunately for rightards, blanket denials are all that remains in their arsenal following her testimony.


Unfortunately for them repeating endless denials on USMB does nothing to mitigate the information pouring out of the committee.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

bripat9643 said:


> No.  I note their low ethical standards by the way they lie all the time.  A prog would sell his mother for gold.


You dopes have sold your souls for empty power.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

scruffy said:


> Who cares?
> 
> Who the fuck cares?
> 
> Trump is the least of your problems


Giddy up, commander.
 Mount your shitbox and get busy then.


----------



## bripat9643

Hutch Starskey said:


> You dopes have sold your souls for empty power.


How have I sold my soul?  Dims are the ones craving power.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

bripat9643 said:


> How have I sold my soul?  Dims are the ones craving power.


The best part is they made you do it without you even realizing it.


----------



## bripat9643

Hutch Starskey said:


> Which of course is irrelevant to the truth about Trump that is being exposed.


Nothing is being exposed except Dim idiocy and their utter lack of integrity or honor.


----------



## bripat9643

Hutch Starskey said:


> The best part is they made you do it without you even realizing it.


Who is "they," and what did they make me do?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Hutch Starskey said:


> The best part is they made you do it without you even realizing it.


It was very easy. Just listen for what these assholes whine about, then repeat their own crybabying back to them.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

bripat9643 said:


> Nothing is being exposed except Dims idiocy and Dim and their utter lack of integrity or honor.


As evidenced by the thousands of desperate deflections and denials in this thread. 
As well as the absolute silence from Republicans.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

bripat9643 said:


> Who is "they," and what did they make me do?


Exactly.


----------



## bripat9643

Hutch Starskey said:


> As evidenced by the thousands of desperate deflections and denials in this thread.
> As well as the absolute silence from Republicans.


Your idiocy and lack of integrity are "evidenced by the thousands of desperate deflections and denials in this thread?"

I agree.


----------



## Sandy Shanks

*The Republican Senate Intelligence Committee reaffirmed its support for the U.S. intelligence community’s conclusion that the Russian government interfered in the 2016 presidential election with the goal of putting Donald Trump in the Oval Office.*
Senate Intel report confirms Russia aimed to help Trump in 2016

The Russian dictator, Vladimir Putin, wanted Donald Trump to become our President in 2016 and wanted the Republican Party to be in power. Trump appointed three judges to the Supreme Court to continue his legacy.

Putin is being rewarded handsomely. America is in turmoil. The very basis of our democracy, free elections, is under attack. Trump and the Republican Party are, of course, responsible, aided by a very conservative Supreme Court that has become so unpopular it has walled itself off from the American people.  

Republicans remain silent.

*We* *have never experienced the silence from a major party that we are experiencing now.*

The _Times_ writes, "Pressed by Supreme Court decisions diminishing rights that Americans hold dear and expanding those cherished by the right, the United States appears to be drifting apart into separate nations, with diametrically opposed social, environmental and health policies.

*"Call these the Disunited States."*

Thank you, Clarence Thomas, Samuel A. Alito, Jr., Neil M. Gorsuch, and Brett M. Kavanaugh. Vladimir Putin is extremely proud of you. Thanks to the President I wanted, you have accomplished in a few months what communist Russia could not accomplish in over a hundred years. 

*America has become a divided nation!*

The responsibility lies with the Republican Party, which accounts for their total silence.

For reasons that confuse many, it is expected that the Republican Party will be rewarded for what they have done. As their leader, Trump, is being investigated for possible sedition, the Republican Party may win control of Congress in November.

How could this happen? The rural voters that dominate the Republican Party are clueless. As this thread shows, they avoid reality. They don't know, and they don't want to know.


----------



## Sandy Shanks

Sandy Shanks said:


> *Putin is being rewarded handsomely. America is in turmoil. The very basis of our democracy, free elections, is under attack. Trump and the Republican Party are, of course, responsible, aided by a very conservative Supreme Court that has become so unpopular it has walled itself off from the American people.*


CNN reports, "The marshal of the Supreme Court has asked Maryland and Virginia officials to direct law enforcement to enforce state and county laws prohibiting picketing outside the homes of Supreme Court justices, according to letters obtained by CNN.

"Col. Gail A Curley sent letters to Republican Gov. Larry Hogan, Republican Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin, Democrat Marc Elrich, the county executive of Montgomery County, and Democrat Jeffrey McKay, Fairfax County board of supervisors’ chairman.

"The letters, released by a court spokesperson on Saturday to reporters and sent as the court ended a blockbuster term which saw historic decisions on guns, abortion and climate, refer to protests that have taken place “for weeks on end."


----------



## Hutch Starskey

bripat9643 said:


> Your idiocy and lack of integrity are "evidenced by the thousands of desperate deflections and denials in this thread?"
> 
> I agree.


Why even respond if that’s all you’ve got? Seriously.
You know you can just not respond. Right?


----------



## bripat9643

Hutch Starskey said:


> Why even respond if that’s all you’ve got? Seriously.
> You know you can just not respond. Right?


That's sufficient for a moron like you.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

scruffy said:


> Cut the crap, clownie.
> 
> You haven't proven any facts.
> 
> As usual with you fucking asswipes, your star witness is a liar and your committee chairman is a Stalinist pig.
> 
> Shit or get off the pot. I'm tired of your bullshit tig and pony shows. Charge the guy and prosecute him, or shut the fuck up and stop polluting the airwaves with your drivel


Holy fucking shit! Did you just spit up on yourself.? Pay attention and work on your reading comprehension. The big Orangre is goingh down along with many of his moronic minions. He will be charhes, by the DOJ, by Georgia , and in New York. I will be right here to shove it in your face when it happens


----------



## struth

Care4all said:


> And she only repeated what she was told by Tony Ornato, made it clear it was what was TOLD to her....
> 
> Why would she make that part up, while under oath, giving the investigators the name of the person that told her this, and the name of the other person present to hear it?  When she would know if she were lying about what Tony Ornato told her, by giving his name, and giving the other person present's name, when she knew the other two men had already testified, or could be called back in, to testify again?
> 
> She didn't lie.
> 
> Now, did Tony Ornato embellish the story to make it more dramatic when he told the 24 year old Miss Hutchinson..... that could be....


look dude you admitted you’ve not watched he hearing


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Faun said:


> You don't know there are bots which crawl this website, looking for relevant information, do ya? Prolly including one from time to time by the FBI or other law enforcement agencies.
> 
> 
> View attachment 665291


Well stop being a bot. There is going to come a day that every democrat will be marked as an enemy if America hunted down like Hitler's Nazis tried and executed.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Lesh said:


> That’s not a joke. These fuckers mean it


One day democrats will be marked and hunted down like Hitler's Nazis, tried and executed.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Care4all said:


> And she only repeated what she was told by Tony Ornato, made it clear it was what was TOLD to her....
> 
> Why would she make that part up, while under oath, giving the investigators the name of the person that told her this, and the name of the other person present to hear it?  When she would know if she were lying about what Tony Ornato told her, by giving his name, and giving the other person present's name, when she knew the other two men had already testified, or could be called back in, to testify again?
> 
> She didn't lie.
> 
> Now, did Tony Ornato embellish the story to make it more dramatic when he told the 24 year old Miss Hutchinson..... that could be....


She lied because Trump was not in the beast. He was in the presidential SUV not the limo.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> You are a fine patriot indeed!


And democrats are enemies.


----------



## scruffy

Faun said:


> Holyfuckingshit.
> 
> I post a link with images of a couple of them with their guns exposed -- and you still deny it??
> 
> You freaks are out of your fucking minds.


Perhaps you didn't hear me the first time 

NO ONE CARES.

All summer long you fucktards were running around with Molotovs, and bricks, and bottles full of frozen piss.

Now you expect me to give a shit about a measly old gun?

I don't 

Couldn't care less


----------



## scruffy

Sandy Shanks said:


> *The Republican Senate Intelligence Committee reaffirmed its support for the U.S. intelligence community’s conclusion that the Russian government interfered in the 2016 presidential election with the goal of putting Donald Trump in the Oval Office.*
> Senate Intel report confirms Russia aimed to help Trump in 2016
> 
> The Russian dictator, Vladimir Putin, wanted Donald Trump to become our President in 2016 and wanted the Republican Party to be in power. Trump appointed three judges to the Supreme Court to continue his legacy.
> 
> Putin is being rewarded handsomely. America is in turmoil. The very basis of our democracy, free elections, is under attack. Trump and the Republican Party are, of course, responsible, aided by a very conservative Supreme Court that has become so unpopular it has walled itself off from the American people.
> 
> Republicans remain silent.
> 
> *We* *have never experienced the silence from a major party that we are experiencing now.*
> 
> The _Times_ writes, "Pressed by Supreme Court decisions diminishing rights that Americans hold dear and expanding those cherished by the right, the United States appears to be drifting apart into separate nations, with diametrically opposed social, environmental and health policies.
> 
> *"Call these the Disunited States."*
> 
> Thank you, Clarence Thomas, Samuel A. Alito, Jr., Neil M. Gorsuch, and Brett M. Kavanaugh. Vladimir Putin is extremely proud of you. Thanks to the President I wanted, you have accomplished in a few months what communist Russia could not accomplish in over a hundred years.
> 
> *America has become a divided nation!*
> 
> The responsibility lies with the Republican Party, which accounts for their total silence.
> 
> For reasons that confuse many, it is expected that the Republican Party will be rewarded for what they have done. As their leader, Trump, is being investigated for possible sedition, the Republican Party may win control of Congress in November.
> 
> How could this happen? The rural voters that dominate the Republican Party are clueless. As this thread shows, they avoid reality. They don't know, and they don't want to know.


Fuck you.

The Stalinist pigs are sitting on your goddamn committee AND YOU KNOW IT.

You're a total fucking hypocrite, bleating about Russia.

Fuck you, dimtard. Go to hell. And take your goddamn committee with you.


----------



## Deplorable Yankee




----------



## scruffy

Deplorable Yankee said:


> View attachment 665463
> 
> View attachment 665464


Guess what she's an expert on? ^^^

Confabulation.

Look it up.


----------



## Chillicothe

bigrebnc1775 said:


> _One day democrats will be marked and hunted down like Hitler's Nazis, tried and executed._


As soon as you have a firm ETA on that, good poster *bigb*, well, give me a heads up as I know some really wonderful people who vote the Democrat ticket often enough (tho not always).

I wanna give them warning to be at their daughter's place when you come huntin' 'em down with your big Elmer Fudd huntin'-gun.

Thanx in advance.
---------------------------------------------------------




scruffy said:


> _Fuck you.   The Stalinist pigs are sitting on your goddamn committee AND YOU KNOW IT.   You're a total fucking hypocrite, bleating about Russia.    Fuck you, dimtard. Go to hell. And take your goddamn committee with you._



Let's just lump this post from good poster '*scruffy' *with that post by *Deplorable Yankee *with his picture of Cheney with the name plate showing "C*nt".

Both posts are indicative of unhappy men who are afraid of the new world. One is crassly vulgar, the other afraid of smart, well educated, articulate women.

It is sad. 
But, you know, America is a big tent and we have, so far, been able to accommodate and tolerate the angry and the misogynistic.  It is an uncomfortable fit, I'll acknowledge that.  But diversity has it's strengths and these folks are the  fringiest. The vast vast majority of patriotic Americans are good people trying to do right with a sense of civility and decorum.    IMHO


----------



## Mac1958

Chillicothe said:


> As soon as you have a firm ETA on that, good poster *bigb*, well, give me a heads up as I know some really wonderful people who vote the Democrat ticket often enough (tho not always).
> 
> I wanna give them warning to be at their daughter's place when you come huntin' 'em down with your big Elmer Fudd huntin'-gun.
> 
> Thanx in advance.
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let's just lump this post from good poster '*scruffy' *with that post by *Deplorable Yankee *with his picture of Cheney with the name plate showing "C*nt".
> 
> Both posts are indicative of unhappy men who are afraid of the new world. One is crassly vulgar, the other afraid of smart, well educated, articulate women.
> 
> It is sad.
> But, you know, America is a big tent and we have, so far, been able to accommodate and tolerate the angry and the misogynistic.  It is an uncomfortable fit, I'll acknowledge that.  But diversity has it's strengths and these folks are the  fringiest. The vast vast majority of patriotic Americans are good people trying to do right with a sense of civility and decorum.    IMHO


These people are what they are.  This is far beyond politics for them.  It's literally about Good vs. Evil.

Oh, and by the way, THEY are the "good".  Just so you know.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Mac1958 said:


> These people are what they are.  This is far beyond politics for them.  It's literally about Good vs. Evil.
> 
> Oh, and by the way, THEY are the "good".  Just so you know.


You are correct democrats are evil


----------



## Mac1958

Mac1958 said:


> These people are what they are.  This is far beyond politics for them.  It's literally about Good vs. Evil.





bigrebnc1775 said:


> You are correct democrats are evil


And there ya go.  I know these people.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Chillicothe said:


> As soon as you have a firm ETA on that, good poster *bigb*, well, give me a heads up as I know some really wonderful people who vote the Democrat ticket often enough (tho not always).
> 
> I wanna give them warning to be at their daughter's place when you come huntin' 'em down with your big Elmer Fudd huntin'-gun.
> 
> Thanx in advance.
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let's just lump this post from good poster '*scruffy' *with that post by *Deplorable Yankee *with his picture of Cheney with the name plate showing "C*nt".
> 
> Both posts are indicative of unhappy men who are afraid of the new world. One is crassly vulgar, the other afraid of smart, well educated, articulate women.
> 
> It is sad.
> But, you know, America is a big tent and we have, so far, been able to accommodate and tolerate the angry and the misogynistic.  It is an uncomfortable fit, I'll acknowledge that.  But diversity has it's strengths and these folks are the  fringiest. The vast vast majority of patriotic Americans are good people trying to do right with a sense of civility and decorum.    IMHO


Congratulations for your lack of comprehension.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Mac1958 said:


> And there ya go.  I know these people.


You are the enemy


----------



## Mac1958

bigrebnc1775 said:


> You are the enemy


I know. 

Conversely, you're not my enemy.  I'm not at war with you.  I don't hate you.  I don't think you're evil.

I said the same things to jihadis after 9/11.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Mac1958 said:


> I know.
> 
> Conversely, you're not my enemy.  I'm not at war with you.  I don't hate you.  I don't think you're evil.
> 
> I said the same things to jihadis after 9/11.


Shrugs


----------



## Care4all

struth said:


> look dude you admitted you’ve not watched he hearing


Dudette!!!

I've watched every hearing, most in their entirety, not a minute missed, except to go to the girls room!!


----------



## Care4all

Deplorable Yankee said:


> View attachment 665463
> 
> View attachment 665464


He wasn't in CADILAC ONE.  He was in one of the new souped up, SUVs which the Secret service calls Camp David SUVs....

The media created the word Beast to cover the limo, and they also some times, use it for whatever car the president is in....


----------



## bripat9643

Mac1958 said:


> These people are what they are.  This is far beyond politics for them.  It's literally about Good vs. Evil.
> 
> Oh, and by the way, THEY are the "good".  Just so you know.


Politics is often about good and evil, and progs are evil.


----------



## Mac1958

bripat9643 said:


> Politics is often about good and evil, and progs are evil.


And another confirmation.  I know these people.


----------



## bripat9643

Mac1958 said:


> And another confirmation.  I know these people.


We aren't exactly hiding what we're about like progs do.


----------



## eagle1462010

Mac1958 said:


> And another confirmation.  I know these people.


Wow.  You just know SO MUCH.


----------



## eagle1462010

Care4all said:


> He wasn't in CADILAC ONE.  He was in one of the new souped up, SUVs which the Secret service calls Camp David SUVs....
> 
> The media created the word Beast to cover the limo, and they also some times, use it for whatever car the president is in....


And next week you clowns will say he was seen in a ford Bronco

Let me repeat.  She DIDN'T SEE SHIT...............

Hearsay isn't allowed because ANYONE CAN MAKE SHIT UP.  Either bring on those who saw it OR STFU.

We don't care Trump lives in your head 24/7.  Hell I enjoy it.  You've had 2 fraud investigations looking for a crime and the evidence always points back at you.

This INSURECTION wasn't Jack shit...........Compared to the Summer of Love it's RIOTS BY AMATEURS.......LMAO

Why were the FBI there egging it on............And why aren't they being CHARGED WITH ENTRAPMENT. Same for the clowns in the Capital Police who unlocked and opened the doors.

This is another CLOWN SHOW.


----------



## eagle1462010




----------



## bigrebnc1775

Care4all said:


> Dudette!!!
> 
> I've watched every hearing, most in their entirety, not a minute missed, except to go to the girls room!!


A lie is still a lie no matter how many times you listen to it.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Care4all said:


> He wasn't in CADILAC ONE.  He was in one of the new souped up, SUVs which the Secret service calls Camp David SUVs....
> 
> The media created the word Beast to cover the limo, and they also some times, use it for whatever car the president is in....


Cassidy testified that the Secret Service agent said, "did you effing hear what happened in The Beast."  Then she said that Tony told her "when the president got in The Beast, he was under the impression . . . "

1:25:


I googled "Presidential Beast" and clicked on images and not one picture of an SUV came up.  Where are these examples of the media using "The Beast" referring to an SUV?  I'd especially love to see an example of that prior to Cassidy's testimony.

Just out of curiosity, when the president gets into The Beast, an SUV, Air Force One, Marine One, or any other presidential transportation, who is in charge?


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Seymour Flops said:


> Cassidy testified that the Secret Service agent said, "did you effing hear what happened in The Beast."  Then she said that Tony told her "when the president got in The Beast, he was under the impression . . . "
> 
> 1:25:
> 
> 
> I googled "Presidential Beast" and clicked on images and not one picture of an SUV came up.  Where are these examples of the media using "The Beast" referring to an SUV?  I'd especially love to see an example of that prior to Cassidy's testimony.
> 
> Just out of curiosity, when the president gets into The Beast, an SUV, Air Force One, Marine One, or any other presidential transportation, who is in charge?


The secret service.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Care4all said:


> He wasn't in CADILAC ONE.  He was in one of the new souped up, SUVs which the Secret service calls Camp David SUVs....
> 
> The media created the word Beast to cover the limo, and they also some times, use it for whatever car the president is in....


The secret service doesn't use the term the beast.nor would they use it for the SUV


----------



## Seymour Flops

bigrebnc1775 said:


> The secret service.


Is in charge when the president steps into presidential transport?

He becomes subordinate to the lowest ranking Secret Service agent?

Is that a part of the Constitution that I missed?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Deplorable Yankee said:


> View attachment 665463
> 
> View attachment 665464





eagle1462010 said:


> Wow.  You just know SO MUCH.


It doesn't take a mind reader. Or a psychologist. Just the ability to read. You happily confirm all of it, every day.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Seymour Flops said:


> Is in charge when the president steps into presidential transport?
> 
> He becomes subordinate to the lowest ranking Secret Service agent?
> 
> Is that a part of the Constitution that I missed?


Then why doesn't or didn't  Trump push for them to be found in subordinate and face internal charges?

Oh that's right, the orange pile of shit is denying it ever happened. 

Can't have it both ways.


----------



## BackAgain

Clipper said:


> She was a W.H. staffer working at the seat of power & she's a liar, you moron?
> 
> Who hired her, shithead?


Because nobody who has ever worked in a seat of power in our land can possibly lie?
That’s odd. You libtards seem to always accuse your opponents of lying.

Thanks for signing your post.


----------



## BackAgain

BlindBoo said:


> Hahaha.  Her balls are about half the size of Liz Cheney's......I'd say.
> 
> Untouchable subject for the Neo-GOP flock.
> 
> Cause "Women"


🙄
Your fellow libtards can’t even define “woman.”


----------



## BackAgain

Billy_Bob said:


> They are going to be sorely disappointed.  They have nothing at this point. To many inconsistencies and her behavior do not give her credibility.  No other hard evidence and no other fact witnesses. IF this were truly the bombshell they said, those secret service agents would have been called in to testify.  The fact they were not present and that the daily log was not introduced lead me to believe this is a fabrication.


They hadn’t even spoken with the agents. And they clearly didn’t understand where in the Beast the President sat in relation to the driver. This committee is a huge unfunny  joke.


----------



## WEATHER53

Bombshell and Hearsay been worked over good by lib  loons to fit into their New Definitions


----------



## bripat9643

bigrebnc1775 said:


> The secret service doesn't use the term the beast.nor would they use it for the SUV


Hutchinson did, and that's all that matters.


----------



## WEATHER53

The woman is dead eyes expressionless and likely  mad that Trump never followed thru on his 20 year old comment to grab a tad.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

bripat9643 said:


> Hutchinson did, and that's all that matters.


Hutchinson lied right off the bat. No one in the secret service would use a term that doesn't exist.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

WEATHER53 said:


> The woman is dead eyes expressionless and likely  mad that Trump never followed thru on his 20 year old comment to grab a tad.


Because that's what you tell yourself when you see a woman who is better than you in virtually every way. Your entire cult is an inferiority complex.


----------



## scruffy

Mac1958 said:


> And there ya go.  I know these people.



I don't moralize about good and evil.

But I know Stalinism when I see it.

The stuff that killed 40 million people in the 20th century.

There is zero emotion in this statement:

Stalinism will not be allowed here. PERIOD.


----------



## hadit

Couchpotato said:


> So the smoking gun is Trump wanted to go to the capital and had an argument with a SS agent about it?
> 
> Im convinced.  Throw him in jail and throw away the key.     I’m sure Trump is the only President to ever have a disagreement with a SS agent.


Let us not forget that we have been told for over a year now that TRUMP! was a no-show at the Capital, and that was double-plus ungood, and stuff. Now we're told that he wanted to go to the Capital and that is also double-plus ungood, and stuff. Can they not make up their minds?


----------



## hadit

Faun said:


> To learn how and why Sedition Day happened.


By blatantly making it just another attempt to pin something, anything on TRUMP!, they're not going to get that.


----------



## playtime

eagle1462010 said:


> You cheated.



evidence & reality prove otherwise.  but do go on, 'cause you funny.




eagle1462010 said:


> And you are pushing perverted BS on the country.



says the dude who voted 2x for the thrice married, pussy grabbing, tribble headed deviant.




eagle1462010 said:


> Not to mention the worst inflation in 5 decades.  You are fucked.



inflation is world wide, jr.  it pretty much is pandemic related with many reasons why.


----------



## playtime

lantern2814 said:


> Pathetic deflection because the pig is done. Begging morons like you to switch parties to vote for her. She’s a laughingstock and will be treated as such. Remember, tick tock, once Republicans take the House, you’re done here. Enjoy the Republican landslide.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

hadit said:


> Let us not forget that we have been told for over a year now that TRUMP! was a no-show at the Capital, and that was double-plus ungood, and stuff. Now we're told that he wanted to go to the Capital and that is also double-plus ungood, and stuff. Can they not make up their minds?


It's almost as if they changed their minds, in light of newly revealed facts.


That's probably why it looks so foreign to you.


----------



## hadit

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> It's almost as if they changed their minds, in light of newly revealed facts.
> 
> 
> That's probably why it looks so foreign to you.


It's either a good thing or not. We've been told he's a terrible, awful person (and stuff) who didn't want to go be with his people at the Capital and now we find out that the SS kidnapped him and prevented him from going and he's a terrible, awful person (and stuff) because he actually did want to go be with his people at the Capital? Integrity would demand that everyone who wailed and whined about him not being at the Capital acknowledge their mistake, but this is politics where such things don't happen. Instead, we simply jump on the bicycle headed the other direction and continue wailing and whining. It is to be amused. Oh, well, we still have no idea what happened in the SUV, so it's a moot point.


----------



## WEATHER53

hadit said:


> It's either a good thing or not. We've been told he's a terrible, awful person (and stuff) who didn't want to go be with his people at the Capital and now we find out that the SS kidnapped him and prevented him from going and he's a terrible, awful person (and stuff) because he actually did want to go be with his people at the Capital? Integrity would demand that everyone who wailed and whined about him not being at the Capital acknowledge their mistake, but this is politics where such things don't happen. Instead, we simply jump on the bicycle headed the other direction and continue wailing and whining. It is to be amused. Oh, well, we still have no idea what happened in the SUV, so it's a moot point.


Yes that’s the lib mantra
He started it and  did nothing to stop it-insurrection and coward
He started it and tried to go see about it-interfered with  and attacked secret service; insurrection


----------



## hadit

WEATHER53 said:


> Yes that’s the lib mantra
> He started and  did nothing to stop it-insurrection and coward
> He started it and tried to go see about it-interfered with  and attacked secret service; insurrection


It's almost as if they intend to complain about everything he does, even if he does the exact opposite of what they were complaining about the first time.


----------



## bripat9643

scruffy said:


> I don't moralize about good and evil.
> 
> But I know Stalinism when I see it.
> 
> The stuff that killed 40 million people in the 20th century.
> 
> There is zero emotion in this statement:
> 
> Stalinism will not be allowed here. PERIOD.


I'm afraid it already is.  this hearing is pure Stalinism.


----------



## WEATHER53

hadit said:


> It's almost as if they intend to complain about everything he does, even if he does the exact opposite of what they were complaining about the first time.


It’s not almost if they intend, they can’t think so they emote even  when contradictory


----------



## playtime

hadit said:


> It's either a good thing or not.



facts & truth is always better than lies.




hadit said:


> We've been told he's a terrible, awful person (and stuff)



he is.




hadit said:


> who didn't want to go be with his people at the Capital and now we find out that the SS kidnapped him



nobody is saying they 'kidnapped' him.




hadit said:


> and prevented him from going



because their #1 j-o-b, is to protect his life by using their bodies as shields.



hadit said:


> and he's a terrible, awful person (and stuff)




he  is.



hadit said:


> because he actually did want to go be with his people  at the Capital?



correction :  flying monkeys.





hadit said:


> Integrity would demand that everyone who wailed and whined about him not being at the Capital



you are prone to hypobole, aren'tcha?




hadit said:


> acknowledge their mistake,



well, silly me.  here, along with countless other critical thinkers figured he was lying -  'cause you know ...



... wellllll....'cause he lied about oh so many things over the oh so many decades, long b4 he was BLOTUS.  but, hey let's just count since the election, m'k?  how it was rigged, stolen, etc etc etc. 




hadit said:


> but this is politics where such things don't happen.



see above.




hadit said:


> Instead, we simply jump on the bicycle headed the other direction and continue wailing and whining.



lol ...



hadit said:


> It is to be amused.



watching you CONtinue to deny that it's happening -   donny ( & his minions ) will shirley be held accountable.  not only for jan 6, but georgia, & all the attempted swing state vote elector fraud. 



hadit said:


> Oh, well, we still have no idea what happened in the SUV, so it's a moot point.



no worries -  that is just one small piece to the bigger insurrection puzzle that is getting completed with each hearing.  there will be at least 2 more hearings in july, with at least one including the documentarian who was embedded with the trumps from sept. 2020, thru the election, & after jan 6  before donny was evicted from the whitehouse -   & THAT can be attributed to panty waisted  jared kirshner for getting it all hooked up.


----------



## hadit

playtime said:


> facts & truth is always better than lies.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> he is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nobody is saying they 'kidnapped' him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> because their #1 j-o-b, is to protect his life by using their bodies as shields.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> he  is.
> 
> 
> 
> correction :  flying monkeys.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you are prone to hypobole, aren'tcha
> 
> 
> 
> 
> well, silly me.  here, along with countless other critical thinkers figured he was lying -  'cause you know ...
> 
> 
> 
> ... welll....'cause he lied about oh so many things over the oh so many decades, long b4 he was BLOTUS.  but, het let's just count since the election, m'k?  how it was rigged, stolen, etc etc etc.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> see above.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lol ...
> 
> 
> 
> watching you CONtinue to deny that it's happening.  donny ( & his minions ) will shirley be held accountable.  not only for jan 6, but georgia, & all the attempted swing state vote elector fraud.
> 
> 
> 
> no worries -  that is just one small piece to the bigger insurrection puzzle that is getting completed with each hearing.  there will be at least 2 more hearings in july, with at least one including the documentarian who was embedded with the trumps from sept. 2020, thru the election, & after jan 6  before donny was evicted from the whitehouse -   & THAT can be attributed to panty waisted  jared kirshner for getting it all hooked up.


Let's see if we can translate:

Orange Man Bad, besides, Jan 6. 

I saved a lot of words.


----------



## playtime

hadit said:


> Let's see if we can translate:
> 
> Orange Man Bad,   besides, Jan 6.
> 
> I saved a lot of words.



words complicate yer life.  

i get it.  maybe i should use

 pictures?


----------



## Mac1958

scruffy said:


> Stalinism will not be allowed here. PERIOD.


So you don't want an authoritarian, hyper-nationalist strongman in power, who rules by intimidation and force, using government to pick and choose the winners.  Who creates a cult of personality by demanding the unswerving loyalty of anyone who comes in contact with him.  Who creates distrust in the system and who will attack and try to discredit and destroy anyone who criticizes him.

Good.


----------



## BackAgain

Trump didn’t go to the protest. Therefore he sucks.

Trump did want to go to the protest. Therefore he sucks. 

Trump tried to reach for the steering wheel from his seat in the back of the Beast. 

I not only believe Cassidy, I also believe everything the liberal propagandist media tells me. 

Yet libs fail to see how unserious they are.


----------



## struth

Care4all said:


> Dudette!!!
> 
> I've watched every hearing, most in their entirety, not a minute missed, except to go to the girls room!!


then…why can you lie so easily?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

hadit said:


> It's either a good thing or not.


Maybe in the Fantasyland devoid of morality or ethics, where the trump cult resides.. In this reality, they are both poor options, and both reflect very poorly upon Donald trump.


----------



## lantern2814

playtime said:


> View attachment 665692


Pathetic. As expected. No response just whining. Enjoy the Republican landslide.


----------



## Care4all

eagle1462010 said:


> And next week you clowns will say he was seen in a ford Bronco
> 
> Let me repeat.  She DIDN'T SEE SHIT...............
> 
> Hearsay isn't allowed because ANYONE CAN MAKE SHIT UP.  Either bring on those who saw it OR STFU.
> 
> We don't care Trump lives in your head 24/7.  Hell I enjoy it.  You've had 2 fraud investigations looking for a crime and the evidence always points back at you.
> 
> This INSURECTION wasn't Jack shit...........Compared to the Summer of Love it's RIOTS BY AMATEURS.......LMAO
> 
> Why were the FBI there egging it on............And why aren't they being CHARGED WITH ENTRAPMENT. Same for the clowns in the Capital Police who unlocked and opened the doors.
> 
> This is another CLOWN SHOW.


She never said she saw shit.  Why do you lie?

She said Tony Ornato,  Trump's Deputy of Operations, told her that this is what happened on the way back from the Ellipse with President Trump and his top dog Secret service guy, Bobby Engel.

She said when Tony Ornato told her this story, Bobby Engel was sitting on the couch, right there, when Ornato told her this story of what happened in the car, and Engel, never spoke up and interrupted Ornato's tale, to say if it was true, or not true.

She said all of this under oath, and so far, 5 days later, journalists have only heard second hand, from an alleged close source, that Ornato disputes the claim.

Neither men, though they promised they would, have  gone in to testify under oath to it.

If you actually think she made this up and lied about what she was told, why would she give this account under oath and threat of perjury, knowing that they could call in Ornato and Engle to testify to its veracity?  And also knowing, both of these men, have been interviewed under oath by the committee, before her?

Think!


----------



## Care4all

Seymour Flops said:


> Cassidy testified that the Secret Service agent said, "did you effing hear what happened in The Beast."  Then she said that Tony told her "when the president got in The Beast, he was under the impression . . . "
> 
> 1:25:
> 
> 
> I googled "Presidential Beast" and clicked on images and not one picture of an SUV came up.  Where are these examples of the media using "The Beast" referring to an SUV?  I'd especially love to see an example of that prior to Cassidy's testimony.
> 
> Just out of curiosity, when the president gets into The Beast, an SUV, Air Force One, Marine One, or any other presidential transportation, who is in charge?


In the article about Engel's testimony which took place 3 weeks earlier than Cassidy, the press reporting on it, used the term Beast as well, and that Engel testified that he and Trump in the car, differed on taking him to the capitol or the whitehouse....or they had a disagreement on it....  But in the end, he brought trump to the whitehouse.

The secret service among eachother, do not use the term, The Beast, when talking about the Limo, involved with their work, they call it, Cadillac One....  It is the public's and journalist term for the President's vehicle that he travels in.


----------



## Care4all

bigrebnc1775 said:


> The secret service doesn't use the term the beast.nor would they use it for the SUV


I know they don't, when they are on duty..... The limo, is Cardiac One.


----------



## Care4all

hadit said:


> Let us not forget that we have been told for over a year now that TRUMP! was a no-show at the Capital, and that was double-plus ungood, and stuff. Now we're told that he wanted to go to the Capital and that is also double-plus ungood, and stuff. Can they not make up their minds?


You're not paying attention!

The new news about him insisting on going to the capitol, and on him sending his followers there, is, at the time he sent them down to the Capitol, he had found out all the thousands of followers outside of the ellipse gate, would not enter because the magnetometer would stop them because they were carrying guns and other weapons with metal content.

He sent his crowd down to the Capitol anyway, knowing they had weapons.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Care4all said:


> In the article about Engel's testimony which took place 3 weeks earlier than Cassidy, the press reporting on it, used the term Beast as well, and that Engel testified that he and Trump in the car, differed on taking him to the capitol or the whitehouse....or they had a disagreement on it....  But in the end, he brought trump to the whitehouse.


So, the whole grabbing the wheel and attacking the Secret Service never happened?  We knew that, already.


Care4all said:


> The secret service among eachother, do not use the term, The Beast, when talking about the Limo, involved with their work, they call it, Cadillac One....  It is the public's and journalist term for the President's vehicle that he travels in.


But it was Cassidy who used the term "Beast" while supposedly quoting a Secret Service supervisor.   She said it twice. 

Here, I'll post it again, as often as you need me to:

(1:25)


Was she lying about what the Secret Service man said?


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Care4all said:


> I know they don't, when they are on duty..... The limo, is Cardiac One.


They wouldn't use the term at all it doesn't exist within their communications.


----------



## Care4all

bigrebnc1775 said:


> She lied because Trump was not in the beast. He was in the presidential SUV not the limo.


She wasn't there, she was repeating what she was told by Tony Ornato, who also wasn't there, but allegedly was updated on it.

Why do you care what she calls any presidential vehicle that Trump is in.....?  Or how Ornato relayed his story to her?

Who cares?

The point is, Trump had it out with Secret Service because he really wanted to go down to the Capitol, even with his protesters that were armed....and that Trump said he was not afraid of his followers with guns, they weren't there, to hurt him....

So I guess he didn't give two shits, about them possibly hurting others, like Pence, or the capitol police or other peop!e in the crowd.....?  It shows he didn't care....


----------



## Care4all

Seymour Flops said:


> So, the whole grabbing the wheel and attacking the Secret Service never happened?  We knew that, already.
> 
> But it was Cassidy who used the term "Beast" while supposedly quoting a Secret Service supervisor.   She said it twice.
> 
> Here, I'll post it again, as often as you need me to:
> 
> (1:25)
> 
> 
> Was she lying about what the Secret Service man said?


You don't know, that he didn't use that term with her...because that's the term laymen in the admin use for any of the vehicles the president is in.... and Ornato was not working for the Secret Service at that time, he worked for Trump personally in some special arrangement that's never been done before...  He went back to the Secret Service after Trump left.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Care4all said:


> She wasn't there, she was repeating what she was told by Tony Ornato, who also wasn't there, but allegedly was updated on it.
> 
> Why do you care what she calls any presidential vehicle that Trump is in.....?  Or how Ornato relayed his story to her?
> 
> Who cares?


It goes to her credibility as a hearsay witness.  Maybe Ornato did not say "The Beast," at all.  Maybe he said, "The SUV," or whatever.  


Care4all said:


> The point is, Trump had it out with Secret Service because he really wanted to go down to the Capitol, even with his protesters that were armed....and that Trump said he was not afraid of his followers with guns, they weren't there, to hurt him....


But that all assumes that while Cassidy clearly did not get the part about "The Beast" right, she got every other thing right. 


Care4all said:


> So I guess he didn't give two shits, about them possibly hurting others, like Pence, or the capitol police or other peop!e in the crowd.....?  It shows he didn't care....


Did you think that he cared before Cassidy testified?

I'm trying to figure out why you think she was such a "bombshell" witness when all she did was repeat level two hearsay that was designed to reinforce what Trump haters already thought.  

Key question:  What did Cassidy actually hear Trump say?


----------



## eagle1462010

Care4all said:


> She never said she saw shit.  Why do you lie?
> 
> She said Tony Ornato,  Trump's Deputy of Operations, told her that this is what happened on the way back from the Ellipse with President Trump and his top dog Secret service guy, Bobby Engel.
> 
> She said when Tony Ornato told her this story, Bobby Engel was sitting on the couch, right there, when Ornato told her this story of what happened in the car, and Engel, never spoke up and interrupted Ornato's tale, to say if it was true, or not true.
> 
> She said all of this under oath, and so far, 5 days later, journalists have only heard second hand, from an alleged close source, that Ornato disputes the claim.
> 
> Neither men, though they promised they would, have  gone in to testify under oath to it.
> 
> If you actually think she made this up and lied about what she was told, why would she give this account under oath and threat of perjury, knowing that they could call in Ornato and Engle to testify to its veracity?  And also knowing, both of these men, have been interviewed under oath by the committee, before her?
> 
> Think!


Which is Hearsay and shouldnt even see the time if day.  Every legal proceeding worth a damn throws bs out.

This is joke same as the leaders doing it


----------



## Seymour Flops

Care4all said:


> You don't know, that he didn't use that term with her...because that's the term laymen in the admin use for any of the vehicles the president is in.... and Ornato was not working for the Secret Service at that time, he worked for Trump personally in some special arrangement that's never been done before...  He went back to the Secret Service after Trump left.


Maybe he used the term "grabbed for the steering wheel" because that is what laymen say when they really mean, "ordered the Secret Service to go to the capital."  Like it was a verbal grab, right?  Maybe he used the term "take your hand off the steering wheel," when he meant "stop looking at the steering wheel like that!"  Maybe when he used the term lunged for Mr. Engel," he meant, "waved his hand at Bobby!"

If your goal is to make the statement fit the facts, no matter how counter-factual, so you allow yourself to assume that a false statement really meant something else, I suppose you could interpret any words any way that you need to. 

You do know that the phrase was "take your hand off the steering wheel," right?  Can you describe how a man as large as Trump managed to lean over the back of the front seat past the Secret Service driver to put his hand on the steering wheel?


----------



## Care4all

Seymour Flops said:


> So, the whole grabbing the wheel and attacking the Secret Service never happened?  We knew that, already.
> 
> But it was Cassidy who used the term "Beast" while supposedly quoting a Secret Service supervisor.   She said it twice.
> 
> Here, I'll post it again, as often as you need me to:
> 
> (1:25)
> 
> 
> Was she lying about what the Secret Service man said?


Here some reporting on Engel's testImony when it happened, about 3 weeks prior to the Cassidy testimony.... and this article used the term, the Beast.....  So I'm thinking it must be just a term for either of the armoured vehicles that trump uses??!  

It is strange....that Cassidy, and the news used the term???

Www.talkingpointsmemo.com/news/trump-secret-service-engel-january-6-committee-testimony

June 8, 2022

Robert Engel, head of former President Trump’s Secret Service detail on Jan. 6, discussed Trump’s unsuccessful request to march with his supporters to the Capitol during his testimony to Jan. 6 Select Committee investigators, according to Politico.

Engel reportedly testified to the panel that Trump raised the prospect privately with him, a person familiar with the agent’s congressional testimony told Politico. Engel rode with the then-President in the presidential armored car known as “*the Beast”* back to the White House, following the infamous “Stop the Steal” rally on the Ellipse that preceded the deadly Capitol insurrection.

In his testimony, Engel reportedly recalled his discussion with Trump about the then-President’s desire to go to the Capitol, according to Politico. *Engel testified that he and the President were at odds on the matter. Engel opposed Trump’s request, and testified that they returned to the White House. *Trump ultimately did not make an appearance on Capitol Hill.
Politico’s report on Engel’s testimony comes a day after the Washington Post reported on Trump’s weeks-long attempt to pressure the Secret Service to devise a plan for him to join his supporters on a march to the Capitol on Jan. 6.

According to the Post, the Secret Service rejected the then-President’s initial requests. But Trump blindsided the agency on Jan. 6 when he urged his supporters at the “Stop the Steal” rally on the Ellipse to march to the Capitol — and suggested he would join them. Trump’s remarks swiftly prompted the agency to rush to accommodate him in response to his call to action.

*Engel’s reported testimony contradicts claimed by former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, who claimed in his book that the then-President told him right after his speech at the rally that he was “speaking metaphorically” when he suggested that he would march on the Capitol himself.*


Trump “knew as well as anyone that we couldn’t organize a trip like that on such short notice,” Meadows wrote in his book, according to The Guardian.


Secret Service spokesperson Anthony Guglielmi told the Post that the agency is cooperating fully with congressional investigators’ request for information and documents about Secret Service planning for Trump’s movements on Jan. 6.


The committee is reportedly investigating Trump’s efforts to convince the Secret Service to allow him join the march on Jan. 6, according to the Post. Additionally, the panel is investigating whether Trump and his aides played any role in encouraging the Secret Service to remove then-Vice President Mike Pence from the Capitol as a mob of Trump supporters stormed the Capitol, targeting Pence and other lawmakers.


----------



## Care4all

Seymour Flops said:


> Maybe he used the term "grabbed for the steering wheel" because that is what laymen say when they really mean, "ordered the Secret Service to go to the capital."  Like it was a verbal grab, right?  Maybe he used the term "take your hand off the steering wheel," when he meant "stop looking at the steering wheel like that!"  Maybe when he used the term lunged for Mr. Engel," he meant, "waved his hand at Bobby!"
> 
> If your goal is to make the statement fit the facts, no matter how counter-factual, so you allow yourself to assume that a false statement really meant something else, I suppose you could interpret any words any way that you need to.
> 
> You do know that the phrase was "take your hand off the steering wheel," right?  Can you describe how a man as large as Trump managed to lean over the back of the front seat past the Secret Service driver to put his hand on the steering wheel?


Let the guys testify again, before the committee, under oath.

You are right, it's all speculation at this point....when we don't even know what the guys will say, under oath!


----------



## Seymour Flops

Care4all said:


> Here some reporting on Engel's testImony when it happened, about 3 weeks prior to the Cassidy testimony.... and this article used the term, the Beast.....  So I'm thinking it must be just a term for either of the armoured vehicles that trump uses??!
> 
> It is strange....that Cassidy, and the news used the term???
> 
> Www.talkingpointsmemo.com/news/trump-secret-service-engel-january-6-committee-testimony
> 
> June 8, 2022
> 
> Robert Engel, head of former President Trump’s Secret Service detail on Jan. 6, discussed Trump’s unsuccessful request to march with his supporters to the Capitol during his testimony to Jan. 6 Select Committee investigators, according to Politico.
> 
> Engel reportedly testified to the panel that Trump raised the prospect privately with him, a person familiar with the agent’s congressional testimony told Politico. Engel rode with the then-President in the presidential armored car known as “*the Beast”* back to the White House, following the infamous “Stop the Steal” rally on the Ellipse that preceded the deadly Capitol insurrection.
> 
> In his testimony, Engel reportedly recalled his discussion with Trump about the then-President’s desire to go to the Capitol, according to Politico. *Engel testified that he and the President were at odds on the matter. Engel opposed Trump’s request, and testified that they returned to the White House. *Trump ultimately did not make an appearance on Capitol Hill.
> Politico’s report on Engel’s testimony comes a day after the Washington Post reported on Trump’s weeks-long attempt to pressure the Secret Service to devise a plan for him to join his supporters on a march to the Capitol on Jan. 6.
> 
> According to the Post, the Secret Service rejected the then-President’s initial requests. But Trump blindsided the agency on Jan. 6 when he urged his supporters at the “Stop the Steal” rally on the Ellipse to march to the Capitol — and suggested he would join them. Trump’s remarks swiftly prompted the agency to rush to accommodate him in response to his call to action.
> 
> *Engel’s reported testimony contradicts claimed by former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, who claimed in his book that the then-President told him right after his speech at the rally that he was “speaking metaphorically” when he suggested that he would march on the Capitol himself.*
> 
> 
> Trump “knew as well as anyone that we couldn’t organize a trip like that on such short notice,” Meadows wrote in his book, according to The Guardian.
> 
> 
> Secret Service spokesperson Anthony Guglielmi told the Post that the agency is cooperating fully with congressional investigators’ request for information and documents about Secret Service planning for Trump’s movements on Jan. 6.
> 
> 
> The committee is reportedly investigating Trump’s efforts to convince the Secret Service to allow him join the march on Jan. 6, according to the Post. Additionally, the panel is investigating whether Trump and his aides played any role in encouraging the Secret Service to remove then-Vice President Mike Pence from the Capitol as a mob of Trump supporters stormed the Capitol, targeting Pence and other lawmakers.


Your own article says that "the Beast" is _the_ presidential armored car.  Not _an_ SUV.  Good Gawd, y'all!  If you can't admit that you're wrong about that detail, how credible is the rest of it?

Where is the part in that article where Engel said that about Trump grabbing the wheel?  That would actually make Trump look bad, if it were even possible.  I can't imagine Engel leaving it out of his testimony, if he told it to Cassidy.

I await your description of that wheel grabbing incident.

EDIT:  I agree with what you said about waiting until the guys testify.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Care4all said:


> She wasn't there, she was repeating what she was told by Tony Ornato, who also wasn't there, but allegedly was updated on it.
> 
> Why do you care what she calls any presidential vehicle that Trump is in.....?  Or how Ornato relayed his story to her?
> 
> Who cares?
> 
> The point is, Trump had it out with Secret Service because he really wanted to go down to the Capitol, even with his protesters that were armed....and that Trump said he was not afraid of his followers with guns, they weren't there, to hurt him....
> 
> So I guess he didn't give two shits, about them possibly hurting others, like Pence, or the capitol police or other peop!e in the crowd.....?  It shows he didn't care....


It doesn't matter she said it happened she lied.


----------



## scruffy

Mac1958 said:


> So you don't want an authoritarian, hyper-nationalist strongman in power, who rules by intimidation and force, using government to pick and choose the winners.



Correct.




Mac1958 said:


> Who creates a cult of personality by demanding the unswerving loyalty of anyone who comes in contact with him.



Meh... all politicians do that. Entertainers are actually the worst, you know, gotta be a stahhhhr....

But politicians like to draw attention to themselves too.




Mac1958 said:


> Who creates distrust in the system and who will attack and try to discredit and destroy anyone who criticizes him.
> 
> Good.



You're talking about Hillary? Nancy Pelosi? Adam Schifftard?

Look man - we all know in advance that ALL politicians are a bunch of crooked self serving bastards. To say that one is worse than the other is downright idiotic.

Out of the field of 16 other Republicans who ran in the '16 primary, who would NOT have had the qualities you mention? Jeb? Ted Cruz? Rubio?

How about the Democrats? Hillary? Harris? I mean, they're all the same. None of them inspire confidence. All of them are authoritarian - to a degree.

USUALLY, we can convince ourselves to look the other way, over a little graft, or a personality quirk. But this stuff that's going on now, is so far over the top it's tubular. I don't want my taxpayer money spent this way. I don't consent to be governed this way.


----------



## Nostra

Faun said:


> No, she testified she was told he was in the beast.


Hearsay


----------



## Care4all

Seymour Flops said:


> Your own article says that "the Beast" is _the_ presidential armored car.  Not _an_ SUV.  Good Gawd, y'all!  If you can't admit that you're wrong about that detail, how credible is the rest of it?
> 
> Where is the part in that article where Engel said that about Trump grabbing the wheel?  That would actually make Trump look bad, if it were even possible.  I can't imagine Engel leaving it out of his testimony, if he told it to Cassidy.
> 
> I await your description of that wheel grabbing incident.
> 
> EDIT:  I agree with what you said about waiting until the guys testify.


Yep.  But even the beast isn't an armored car, it's an armored LIMO..... 


So, I'm not certain what's going on....?


What kind of car do you have?  ANSWER:  I have an SUV. 
They are interchangeable....

But honestly, it is weird..... Though immaterial to the information gained....he planned it for a while before the rally, to march down there...and he never let capitol hill know, and never got legal permits for the crowd to march down to the capitol, or to protest at the capitol.... Capitol and metro police, could have been better prepared if the permits had been filed ahead of time.

I've read that the Secret Servicemen themselves, supposedly call the SUV, The Camp David suv


----------



## Seymour Flops

Care4all said:


> Yep.  But even the beast isn't an armored car, it's an armored LIMO.....
> 
> 
> So, I'm not certain what's going on....?


Yes, let's wait and see if Ornato and Engel testify.  At least they were there.


Care4all said:


> What kind of car do you have?  ANSWER:  I have an SUV.
> They are interchangeable....


Like in Texas we say, "Can you get me a coke?"  "Sure!  Coke coke?"  "Nooo . . . you know I like Dr. Pepper."


Care4all said:


> But honestly, it is weird..... Though immaterial to the information gained....he planned it for a while before the rally, to march down there...and he never let capitol hill know, and never got legal permits for the crowd to march down to the capitol, or to protest at the capitol.... Capitol and metro police, could have been better prepared if the permits had been filed ahead of time.


Not saying that it didn't happen, but where do you get the information that he planned it for a while before the rally, to march down there?  

I won't bother to ask whether you also objected to the numerous BLM/ANTIFA riots on the grounds that they did not get permits or coordinate with police.


Care4all said:


> I've read that the Secret Servicemen themselves, supposedly call the SUV, The Camp David suv


Right, so not "the Beast" as Cassidy described them calling it.  She just got that part wrong, no big deal.  Our minds fill in gaps, especially when relaying a third hand story.  She assumed that Trump was in the beast so she relayed that Ornato _said_ "the Beast."  She may actually remember it that way.  That's how the mind works.    

It isn't a problem unless you must insist that her hearsay testimony is by definition perfectly accurate.

She may have remembered Ornato being pissed off at Trump for not obeying the Secret Service (as if . . .), and her mind filled in the part about Trump attacking the agent, which is unlikely, and the part about Trump lunging over the seat to grab the wheel, which is impossible.


----------



## Care4all

eagle1462010 said:


> Which is Hearsay and shouldnt even see the time if day.  Every legal proceeding worth a damn throws bs out.
> 
> This is joke same as the leaders doing it


Jebus Crisco!

This is NOT a legal proceeding.  This is simply a hearing to inform the public of the who, what, where, when, why and how January 6th riot and that obstruction of the official counting of electors, came about, and what did the president know, and when did he know it, type stuff.

If the DOJ investigates for legal purposes, they won't use hearsay.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

WEATHER53 said:


> Bombshell and Hearsay been worked over good by lib  loons to fit into their New Definitions


Nothing’s changed. You’re just a chump. 
Let’s be honest here. You never understood any of this to begin with.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

scruffy said:


> I don't moralize about good and evil.
> 
> But I know Stalinism when I see it.
> 
> The stuff that killed 40 million people in the 20th century.
> 
> There is zero emotion in this statement:
> 
> Stalinism will not be allowed here. PERIOD.


Oof….
That smooth brain of yours certainly has you in a snit.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

hadit said:


> It's almost as if they intend to complain about everything he does, even if he does the exact opposite of what they were complaining about the first time.


The work you dopes have to put in to trying to stay ahead of this must be exhausting. At what point does he cease to be worth it? When do you just say enough and move on ?


----------



## Hutch Starskey

Mac1958 said:


> So you don't want an authoritarian, hyper-nationalist strongman in power, who rules by intimidation and force, using government to pick and choose the winners.  Who creates a cult of personality by demanding the unswerving loyalty of anyone who comes in contact with him.  Who creates distrust in the system and who will attack and try to discredit and destroy anyone who criticizes him.
> 
> Good.


Oh my. That sounds like Stalin. 
Of course we don’t want that.


----------



## scruffy

Care4all said:


> Jebus Crisco!
> 
> This is NOT a legal proceeding.  This is simply a hearing to inform the public of the who, what, where, when, why and how January 6th riot and that obstruction of the official counting of electors, came about, and what did the president know, and when did he know it, type stuff.
> 
> If the DOJ investigates for legal purposes, they won't use hearsay.



What a load of crap. ^^^

Putting liars on the stand is NOT informing the public 

Withholding evidence is NOT informing the public.

This is NOT an investigation. It's a smear parade. A monkey trial for sound bites. The fucktards even hired a Hollywood producer.

Grow a brain cell, will you?


----------



## Hutch Starskey

@Fort Fun Indianav


scruffy said:


> What a load of crap. ^^^
> 
> Putting liars on the stand is NOT informing the public
> 
> Withholding evidence is NOT informing the public.
> 
> This is NOT an investigation. It's a smear parade. A monkey trial for sound bites. The fucktards even hired a Hollywood producer.
> 
> Grow a brain cell, will you?


IKR?
Republicans even pulled all their people out so morons like yourself could bitch about how unfair it is.


----------



## eagle1462010

Care4all said:


> Jebus Crisco!
> 
> This is NOT a legal proceeding.  This is simply a hearing to inform the public of the who, what, where, when, why and how January 6th riot and that obstruction of the official counting of electors, came about, and what did the president know, and when did he know it, type stuff.
> 
> If the DOJ investigates for legal purposes, they won't use hearsay.


Its a clown show trying to find a crime including jay walking on Trump


----------



## Care4all

eagle1462010 said:


> Its a clown show trying to find a crime including jay walking on Trump


Pay attention!  The crimes committed by the Trump team have always been evident to anyone with the ability to see with clear eyes, what is going on, around them.

This is just filling in some gaps and putting faces, on those involved!


And maybe it's a wake up jolt, to some on your aisle that have been stuck in their right wing media prism.


----------



## berg80

*It’s possible the Jan. 6 committee refers a criminal case against Trump, Liz Cheney says*

_It’s still possible that the Jan. 6 committee investigating the attack on the U.S. Capitol makes a criminal referral to the Justice Department against former President Donald Trump, Rep. Liz Cheney said.

“It’s a decision that we’ll make together as a committee,” the Wyoming Republican said in an interview with ABC News’ “This Week” that aired Sunday.

Committee members have appeared to be divided over whether it would potentially refer a case against Trump, who some believe is to blame for the 2021 attack. Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-MS, who chairs the committee, said last month that while if the DOJ examines the hearings and decides to review it further they would, but making a criminal referral is “not our job.”

Others on the committee, including Cheney, quickly shot back, saying that the committee has yet to vote on whether it would recommend criminal referrals to the department._
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/07/03/che...ould-refer-a-criminal-case-against-trump.html

Whether they do or not the committee will be passing along to the DoJ more than enough information to sustain multiple indictments of Trump.


----------



## hadit

playtime said:


> words complicate yer life.
> 
> i get it.  maybe i should useView attachment 665707 pictures?


Well, that covers Orange Man Bad. If a picture's worth 1,000 words, I'm still saving a lot of words.


----------



## hadit

Hutch Starskey said:


> The work you dopes have to put in to trying to stay ahead of this must be exhausting. At what point does he cease to be worth it? When do you just say enough and move on ?


About the time he ceases to be your cover excuse for Quid Pro Joe. It's still exceedingly rare for a thread about Quid Pro to go more than a handful of posts before the inevitable stumble by posting about TRUMP!. You do know, don't you, that the worst thing you can do to TRUMP! is to ignore him, right?


----------



## bripat9643

Care4all said:


> Jebus Crisco!
> 
> This is NOT a legal proceeding.  This is simply a hearing to inform the public of the who, what, where, when, why and how January 6th riot and that obstruction of the official counting of electors, came about, and what did the president know, and when did he know it, type stuff.
> 
> If the DOJ investigates for legal purposes, they won't use hearsay.


If it's not a legal proceeding, whatever that nebulous term is supposed to mean, then why can witnesses go to jail if they lie?


----------



## eagle1462010

Care4all said:


> Pay attention!  The crimes committed by the Trump team have always been evident to anyone with the ability to see with clear eyes, what is going on, around them.
> 
> This is just filling in some gaps and putting faces, on those involved!
> 
> 
> And maybe it's a wake up jolt, to some on your aisle that have been stuck in their right wing media prism.


Tds isnt proof.  Proof is the uncovering and FISA abuse by the veggie in chief during Obama.  Which has proof backed up by the FISA courts themselves.

Proof is the over 500 riots in the summer of love that Your side Hyped up causing violence.

Proof is the IRS and many agencies attacking non profits to try to make sure they neber exist.

Proof is veggie 1 using his influence to get money in Ukraine through his son.  Where is that impeachment?

This is just another show by those inflicted with TDS and a Swamp that has been exposed for being pond scum.


----------



## eagle1462010

bripat9643 said:


> If it's not a legal proceeding, whatever that nebulous term is supposed to mean, then why can witnesses go to jail if they lie?


It is a fishing trip looking for a crime. And it throws back fish caught from their own side.  

The FBI has been shown in the protest Inciting Riot.  So has the BLM.  No extra security and opened up doors to let them in.

The left and swamp are corrupt beyond Nero's Rome


----------



## berg80

berg80 said:


> *It’s possible the Jan. 6 committee refers a criminal case against Trump, Liz Cheney says*
> 
> _It’s still possible that the Jan. 6 committee investigating the attack on the U.S. Capitol makes a criminal referral to the Justice Department against former President Donald Trump, Rep. Liz Cheney said.
> 
> “It’s a decision that we’ll make together as a committee,” the Wyoming Republican said in an interview with ABC News’ “This Week” that aired Sunday.
> 
> Committee members have appeared to be divided over whether it would potentially refer a case against Trump, who some believe is to blame for the 2021 attack. Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-MS, who chairs the committee, said last month that while if the DOJ examines the hearings and decides to review it further they would, but making a criminal referral is “not our job.”
> 
> Others on the committee, including Cheney, quickly shot back, saying that the committee has yet to vote on whether it would recommend criminal referrals to the department._
> https://www.cnbc.com/2022/07/03/che...ould-refer-a-criminal-case-against-trump.html
> 
> Whether they do or not the committee will be passing along to the DoJ more than enough information to sustain multiple indictments of Trump.


The New Yorker has reported Garland is getting a weekly briefing on the DoJ's progress with their investigation in to the criminality of 1/6 and surrounding events.

*A Potential Criminal Prosecution of Donald Trump Is Growing Closer*
https://www.newyorker.com/news/dail...prosecution-of-donald-trump-is-growing-closer


----------



## Calypso Jones

Bombshells.......are empty.   Like de bombashells made in Schindler's factory.


----------



## playtime

Care4all said:


> She wasn't there, she was repeating what she was told by Tony Ornato, who also wasn't there, but allegedly was updated on it.



& has yet to testify UNDER OATH like the very brave cassidy hutchinson.


----------



## playtime

bigrebnc1775 said:


> It doesn't matter she said it happened she lied.



has it been contradicted under oath by anyone disputing it?

no?  well then  ... unless or until that happens; your ilk has nothing to hang yer MAGA cap on.


----------



## playtime

hadit said:


> Well, that covers Orange Man Bad. If a picture's worth 1,000 words, I'm still saving a lot of words.



no you're not ... it just means you can't debate worth a damn to defend the chosen one. 

you played hooky the day they taught critical thinging, huh?


----------



## playtime

bripat9643 said:


> If it's not a legal proceeding, whatever that nebulous term is supposed to mean, then why can witnesses go to jail if they lie?



ummmm ...  congress has to refer a criminal charge to the DOJ, who then decides whether to indict -  which THEN goes in front of a judge/goes to trial; THEN it's a criminal matter.   howverrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr..........if  you lie under oath in a court of LAW -  it AUTOMATICALLY becomes a bigley issue for jail time.

.


----------



## Nostra

berg80 said:


> The New Yorker has reported Garland is getting a weekly briefing on the DoJ's progress with their investigation in to the criminality of 1/6 and surrounding events.
> 
> *A Potential Criminal Prosecution of Donald Trump Is Growing Closer*
> https://www.newyorker.com/news/dail...prosecution-of-donald-trump-is-growing-closer


Any. Day. Now.


----------



## Seymour Flops

playtime said:


> & has yet to testify UNDER OATH like the very brave cassidy hutchinson.


Actually, he has already appeared before the committee and testified under oath.  The committee has not chosen to show you his testimony.

Now, they are smearing him as a liar before he can speak publicly.  

No shame at all.


----------



## bripat9643

playtime said:


> ummmm ...  congress has to refer a criminal charge to the DOJ, who then decides whether to indict -  which THEN goes in front of a judge/goes to trial; THEN it's a criminal matter.   howverrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr..........if  you lie under oath in a court of LAW -  it AUTOMATICALLY becomes a bigley issue for jail time.
> 
> .


If you lie under oath the judge has to refer that accusation to the DA, who then decides whether to indict, which then goes to trial in front of a jury.  Then it becomes a criminal matter.

Pretty much the same process.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

bripat9643 said:


> If it's not a legal proceeding, whatever that nebulous term is supposed to mean, then why can witnesses go to jail if they lie?


D’oh…
Because it’s a crime maybe?



			https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/98-808.pdf
		


“Federal crime

It is a federal crime to make a material false statement in a matter within the jurisdiction of a federal agency or department. 1 Perjury is also a federal crime. Perjury is *a false statement made under oath before a federal tribunal or official*.”


----------



## Care4all

berg80 said:


> *It’s possible the Jan. 6 committee refers a criminal case against Trump, Liz Cheney says*
> 
> _It’s still possible that the Jan. 6 committee investigating the attack on the U.S. Capitol makes a criminal referral to the Justice Department against former President Donald Trump, Rep. Liz Cheney said.
> 
> “It’s a decision that we’ll make together as a committee,” the Wyoming Republican said in an interview with ABC News’ “This Week” that aired Sunday.
> 
> Committee members have appeared to be divided over whether it would potentially refer a case against Trump, who some believe is to blame for the 2021 attack. Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-MS, who chairs the committee, said last month that while if the DOJ examines the hearings and decides to review it further they would, but making a criminal referral is “not our job.”
> 
> Others on the committee, including Cheney, quickly shot back, saying that the committee has yet to vote on whether it would recommend criminal referrals to the department._
> https://www.cnbc.com/2022/07/03/che...ould-refer-a-criminal-case-against-trump.html
> 
> Whether they do or not the committee will be passing along to the DoJ more than enough information to sustain multiple indictments of Trump.


I'm uncertain.  I think they will bring charges against his co conspirators for certain, like all the president's men, of Nixon.  But a former president???  The jury pool, only needs one Trumper on it out of the 12, for a hung jury....and no way is the DOJ gonna take that chance and be labeled a partisan Doj, that continued to divide the country, unless....unless it was a slam dunk indictment, where even a Trumper would have to convict.


----------



## Calypso Jones

y'all keep hopin' don't you.  

meanwhile:........









						Nolte: On This July 4th, Trump Is America's Most Popular Politician
					

Donald Trump is currently the most popular politician in America.




					www.breitbart.com


----------



## Care4all

Calypso Jones said:


> y'all keep hopin' don't you.
> 
> meanwhile:........
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nolte: On This July 4th, Trump Is America's Most Popular Politician
> 
> 
> Donald Trump is currently the most popular politician in America.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.breitbart.com


It took two years of Watergate hearings and investigation to bring the American people, around to the truth.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Care4all said:


> It took two years of Watergate hearings and investigation to bring the American people, around to the truth.


They've been going after Trump, using the federal government and congress, for about six years.

Nothing yet . . .


----------



## Faun

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Well stop being a bot. There is going to come a day that every democrat will be marked as an enemy if America hunted down like Hitler's Nazis tried and executed.



LOL

Imbecile, I showed you a screen shot of robots crawling this site. You're a total moron thinking I was talking of myself.





__





						Current visitors
					





					www.usmessageboard.com


----------



## Faun

bigrebnc1775 said:


> One day democrats will be marked and hunted down like Hitler's Nazis, tried and executed.



Only in your dreams.


----------



## Faun

scruffy said:


> Perhaps you didn't hear me the first time
> 
> NO ONE CARES.
> 
> All summer long you fucktards were running around with Molotovs, and bricks, and bottles full of frozen piss.
> 
> Now you expect me to give a shit about a measly old gun?
> 
> I don't
> 
> Couldn't care less


----------



## Faun

hadit said:


> By blatantly making it just another attempt to pin something, anything on TRUMP!, they're not going to get that.



So the committee should just ignore Trump's involvement?


----------



## Faun

Nostra said:


> Hearsay



Correct.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Faun said:


> LOL
> 
> Imbecile, I showed you a screen shot of robots crawling this site. You're a total moron thinking I was talking of myself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Current visitors
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmessageboard.com


Stop be a bot you moron


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Faun said:


> Only in your dreams.


Nothing you can do to stop it.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

playtime said:


> has it been contradicted under oath by anyone disputing it?
> 
> no?  well then  ... unless or until that happens; your ilk has nothing to hang yer MAGA cap on.


Yes it has.


----------



## Faun

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Stop be a bot you moron



Oh well, I tried to help you.


----------



## Faun

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Nothing you can do to stop it.



Oh? What are you going to do about it?


----------



## Calypso Jones

> It took two years of Watergate hearings and investigation to bring the American people, around to the truth.[/qupte]
> 
> democrat truth.   He shoulda stayed and fought it.  Clinton did and he deserved impeachment.











						Podcast: Everything You Know About Watergate Is Wrong, Part 1
					

Writing about the Watergate scandal in the 1980s, political scientist John Marini said “The passage of time has not resulted in greater clarity concerning what it is we should have learned from the event, perhaps because we still lack an authoritative account of it.” Having reached the 50th...




					www.powerlineblog.com
				




it's taken 50 years to see what it REALLY was.


----------



## Faun

Calypso Jones said:


> democrat truth. He shoulda stayed and fought it. Clinton did and he deserved impeachment.



It wouldn't have been much of a fight. Had he not resigned, he would have been impeached by the House and thrown out of office by the Senate.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Faun said:


> Oh well, I tried to help you.


Stop being a bot


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Faun said:


> Oh? What are you going to do about it?


Nothing you can do


----------



## Faun

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Nothing you can do



So you're gonna do nothing.


----------



## berg80

*Jan. 6 Panel Members Say New Witnesses Have Come Forward After Hutchinson’s Testimony*

_The two Republican members of the Jan. 6 Select Committee, Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) and committee vice chair Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY), on Sunday said that new witnesses have come forward wanting to testify before the panel after explosive testimony by Cassidy Hutchinson, former aide to Trump White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, last week.

In her testimony, Hutchinson offered a firsthand account of then-President Trump and his allies’ behavior in the days leading up to and on Jan. 6. Among the stunning revelations during Hutchinson’s testimony, the ex-Meadows aide testified about how Meadows and others in Trump’s circle anticipated violence prior to Jan. 6 and the ways in which Trump encouraged it privately. Additionally, Hutchinson recalled Trump demanding the Secret Service get rid of metal detectors at the pre-insurrection rally on the Ellipse so that his armed supporters could move closer to the stage, making the crowd appear larger.

On CNN, Kinzinger said that new witnesses have expressed their desire to testify before the panel since Hutchinson’s testimony aired.

After declining to go into details about the new witnesses, Kinzinger praised Hutchinson for “inspiring” more people to come forward._
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/...ger-cheney-hutchinson-testimony-new-witnesses

As Chairman Thompson suggested, perhaps Cassidy's testimony has jogged the memory of reluctant witnesses.


----------



## bripat9643

Hutch Starskey said:


> D’oh…
> Because it’s a crime maybe?
> 
> 
> 
> https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/98-808.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> “Federal crime
> 
> It is a federal crime to make a material false statement in a matter within the jurisdiction of a federal agency or department. 1 Perjury is also a federal crime. Perjury is *a false statement made under oath before a federal tribunal or official*.”


It's a crime only if committed before official legal bodies.  That rules out the Jan 6 show trial


----------



## Hutch Starskey

bripat9643 said:


> It's a crime only if committed before official legal bodies.  That rules out the Jan 6 show trial


Congress members are federal officials, dope.


----------



## bripat9643

berg80 said:


> *Jan. 6 Panel Members Say New Witnesses Have Come Forward After Hutchinson’s Testimony*
> 
> _The two Republican members of the Jan. 6 Select Committee, Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) and committee vice chair Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY), on Sunday said that new witnesses have come forward wanting to testify before the panel after explosive testimony by Cassidy Hutchinson, former aide to Trump White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, last week.
> 
> In her testimony, Hutchinson offered a firsthand account of then-President Trump and his allies’ behavior in the days leading up to and on Jan. 6. Among the stunning revelations during Hutchinson’s testimony, the ex-Meadows aide testified about how Meadows and others in Trump’s circle anticipated violence prior to Jan. 6 and the ways in which Trump encouraged it privately. Additionally, Hutchinson recalled Trump demanding the Secret Service get rid of metal detectors at the pre-insurrection rally on the Ellipse so that his armed supporters could move closer to the stage, making the crowd appear larger.
> 
> On CNN, Kinzinger said that new witnesses have expressed their desire to testify before the panel since Hutchinson’s testimony aired.
> 
> After declining to go into details about the new witnesses, Kinzinger praised Hutchinson for “inspiring” more people to come forward._
> https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/...ger-cheney-hutchinson-testimony-new-witnesses
> 
> As Chairman Thompson suggested, perhaps Cassidy's testimony has jogged the memory of reluctant witnesses.


Of course, Hutchinson is a proven liar.

You prog tards are so desperate to get Trump that it's sad to watch.


----------



## bripat9643

Hutch Starskey said:


> Congress members are federal officials, dope.



Federal officials have no authority to charge you with a crime except as a result of being part of an official legitimate congressional proceeding.  The Jan 6 committee is not legitimate.  There are no members on it that were selected by the opposition party.  No one has any legal obligation to tell the truth to a kangaroo court.


----------



## Calypso Jones

> It wouldn't have been much of a fight. Had he not resigned, he would have been impeached by the House and thrown out of office by the Senate.



no one knows that for a fact.  I DO know that hilliary was fired from her position. junior member house judiciary committee because the head of the committee was astounded at her lack of ethics.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> It's a crime only if committed before official legal bodies.  That rules out the Jan 6 show trial


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> Of course, Hutchinson is a proven liar.
> 
> You prog tards are so desperate to get Trump that it's sad to watch.



A pity you can't prove she lied about anything she said.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> Federal officials have no authority to charge you with a crime except as a result of being part of an official legitimate congressional proceeding.  The Jan 6 committee is not legitimate.  There are no members on it that were selected by the opposition party.  No one has any legal obligation to tell the truth to a kangaroo court.


----------



## Faun

Calypso Jones said:


> no one knows that for a fact.  I DO know that hilliary was fired from her position. junior member house judiciary committee because the head of the committee was astounded at her lack of ethics.



Then you don't know shit because Hillary wasn't fired. The impeachment inquiry team she was on was disbanded as they were no longer needed since Nixon resigned.

And Nixon wouldn't have resigned if he wasn't going to lose. His sources knew what the count would be and it wasn't that he would prevail. In committee, with enough Republicans voting to impeach, 71% of the members of that committee voted to impeach. He would have been impeached easily and there's no reason to think the Senate would have been much different. Not to mention, his resignation was a tacit admission of guilt as he couldn't have been pardoned had he been impeached.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> A pity you can't prove she lied about anything she said.


Where did Trump lung at the driver, in the Beast or somewhere else?


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> A pity you can't prove she lied about anything she said.


It doesn't matter if she did or she didn't.  Her testimony was all hearsay, bullshit in other words.  You're harping on the issue of her honesty is one of your typical diversions.


----------



## flan327

rightwinger said:


> How long before Republicans call it fake news?


Yesterday


----------



## flan327

bripat9643 said:


> Where did Trump lung at the driver, in the Beast or somewhere else?


The limo I think


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> Where did Trump lung at the driver, in the Beast or somewhere else?



Doesn't matter as she didn't testify that he actually did that. She testified she was told he did that.

What a shame you don't understand English, fucking moron.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> It doesn't matter if the did or she didn't.  Her testimony was all hearsay, bullshit in other words.  You're harping on the issue of her honesty is one of your typical diversions.



Which is why I don't care that she claims she was told Trump lunged at the steering wheel. The bombshell she dropped was that Trump knew that crowd was armed and summoned them to the Capitol because they weren't there to harm him. And that was based on first hand evidence, not hearsay.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Faun said:


> So you're gonna do nothing.


Nothing you can do to stop it.


----------



## Faun

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Nothing you can do to stop it.



There's nothing needing to be stopped as you can't even say what you're gonna do.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> Which is why I don't care that she claims she was told Trump lunged at the steering wheel. The bombshell she dropped was that Trump knew that crowd was armed and summoned them to the Capitol because they weren't there to harm him. And that was based on first hand evidence, not hearsay.


There is no way Trump could have known that, asshole.  Someone told him that is not synonymous with him knowing it.  No one knew it.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> Doesn't matter as she didn't testify that he actually did that. She testified she was told he did that.
> 
> What a shame you don't understand English, fucking moron.


She said it was the beast.  No you seem to be admitting that she lied.


----------



## bripat9643

flan327 said:


> The limo I think


No one cares what you think.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Faun said:


> There's nothing needing to be stopped as you can't even say what you're gonna do.


The democrat hunt is coming. They are the enemy as with any enemy will be hunted down like Hitler's Nazis tried and executed.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> There is no way Trump could have known that, asshole.  Someone told him that is not synonymous with him knowing it.  No one knew it.



He acknowledged it, ya fucking moron.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> She said it was the beast.  No you seem to be admitting that she lied.



Fucking moron, she said *she was told* it happened in the Beast.


----------



## Faun

bigrebnc1775 said:


> The democrat hunt is coming. They are the enemy as with any enemy will be hunted down like Hitler's Nazis tried and executed.



So that's what you're gonna do??


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Faun said:


> So that's what you're gonna do??


Nothing you can do to stop it.


----------



## Faun

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Nothing you can do to stop it.



LOLOL

There's nothing needing to be stopped. You still can't say what you're gonna do.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Faun said:


> LOLOL
> 
> There's nothing needing to be stopped. You still can't say what you're gonna do.


Keep thinking that.


----------



## Faun

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Keep thinking that.



What else can I think when you can't say what you're gonna do? 

Or are you just afraid of those bots?


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> He acknowledged it, ya fucking moron.


No he didn't, asshole.  He said he didn't care.  

If there are 10 different ways to interpret a statement, leave it to a prog douchebag to interpret it to suppose the Dim narrative.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> Fucking moron, she said *she was told* it happened in the Beast.


Yeah?  And that turns out to have been impossible.  Yet you claim we should believe everything she says.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> No he didn't, asshole.  He said he didn't care.
> 
> If there are 10 different ways to interpret a statement, leave it to a prog douchebag to interpret it to suppose the Dim narrative.



LOL

You fucking moron ... he purportedly said, _"I don't care that they have weapons. They're not here to hurt me. Take the f'ing mags away. Let my people in."_


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> Yeah?  And that turns out to have been impossible.  Yet you claim we should believe everything she says.



I've already said I neither believe, nor disbelieve, what she said about that as it's been neither confirmed not refuted at this point. Regardless, even if it's not possible, that falls upon Ornato, if that's what he actually told her. All she conveyed about that event is what she claims Ornato, who also wasn't in the vehicle, told her.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Seymour Flops said:


> So, the whole grabbing the wheel and attacking the Secret Service never happened?  We knew that, already.
> 
> But it was Cassidy who used the term "Beast" while supposedly quoting a Secret Service supervisor.   She said it twice.
> 
> Here, I'll post it again, as often as you need me to:
> 
> (1:25)
> 
> 
> Was she lying about what the Secret Service man said?


Probably not. Ornato probably misspoke.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Probably not. Ornato probably misspoke.


I wouldn't be surprised.

But where was the committee staff to check out whether what Cassidy was rehearsed to say was even possible?

Are they that sure that the mainstream media will never contradict them and that no one listens to  non-mainstream media?


----------



## Seymour Flops

Faun said:


> I've already said I neither believe, nor disbelieve, what she said about that as it's been neither confirmed not refuted at this point. Regardless, even if it's not possible, that falls upon Ornato, if that's what he actually told her. All she conveyed about that event is what she claims Ornato, who also wasn't in the vehicle, told her.


Except that we don't know that Ornato told her that.  We only have her statement that he told her that.  Whatever Ornato and said under oath to the committee, the committee does not want you to see.  Nor do they want you to see what Engel testified to under oath.

Ever wonder why that is?


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> LOL
> 
> You fucking moron ... he purportedly said, _"I don't care that they have weapons. They're not here to hurt me. Take the f'ing mags away. Let my people in."_


You don't know that he said "that they have weapons" because it's hearsay evidence, which is always the product of the presenter's creative interpretation.  All you proved is another reason why hearsay evidence is bullshit.


----------



## bripat9643

Seymour Flops said:


> Except that we don't know that Ornato told her that.  We only have her statement that he told her that.  Whatever Ornato and said under oath to the committee, the committee does not want you to see.  Nor do they want you to see what Engel testified to under oath.
> 
> Ever wonder why that is?


You can't get more suspicious than when the prosecution doesn't want you to see all the evidence. Schiff-for-Brains is a former DA, and he should know all this.  The guy just can't get any sleazier.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> I've already said I neither believe, nor disbelieve, what she said about that as it's been neither confirmed not refuted at this point. Regardless, even if it's not possible, that falls upon Ornato, if that's what he actually told her. All she conveyed about that event is what she claims Ornato, who also wasn't in the vehicle, told her.



Wrong.  It's on Schiff-for-Brains to prove it's true, and so far he hasn't done that.  Yet you behave as if Trump is guilty of something.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

bripat9643 said:


> Federal officials have no authority to charge you with a crime except as a result of being part of an official legitimate congressional proceeding.  The Jan 6 committee is not legitimate.  There are no members on it that were selected by the opposition party.  No one has any legal obligation to tell the truth to a kangaroo court.



You are truly stupid.


----------



## Chillicothe

bigrebnc1775 said:


> _They are the enemy as with any enemy will be hunted down like Hitler's Nazis tried and executed._



I read silly internet threats like above and immediately think of Elmer Fudd and his shootin' iron that knocks him on his keister every time he shoots it.  

I kinda think that kind of huffery & puffery is amusing.  Gunslingers who can't find the safety on their gopher gun.
Cartoonish, I suppose.


----------



## buckeye45_73

MagicMike said:


> Well....it kinda looks like Trump has stopped himself doesn't it?
> The rats are jumping off the sinking ship.
> Before long there will only be a loose gaggle of bitter-clinger, deplorable MAGATS left supporting Captain Chaos.
> You know, the same type of loosers that would attack the U.S. Capitol in Buffalo skin robe with spear.
> Liz Cheney is becoming the new hero.
> Maybe SHE should run for POTUS!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Liz Cheney Receives Huge Applause From Republicans or Speech Against Trump
> 
> 
> Liz Cheney deemed Donald Trump a "domestic threat" and called for the GOP to support the Constitution instead of the former president.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


Yeah, sure she is, now they bring up witnesses who make up rediculous stories, so rediculous, it makes Trump out to be an Action Hero and is used against the Left. The left really doesn't have a clue on how humans work, it's hilarious.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Chillicothe said:


> I read silly internet threats like above and immediately think of Elmer Fudd and his shootin' iron that knocks him on his keister every time he shoots it.
> 
> I kinda think that kind of huffery & puffery is amusing.  Gunslingers who can't find the safety on their gopher gun.
> Cartoonish, I suppose.


🖕


----------



## buckeye45_73

Faun said:


> Fucking moron, she said *she was told* it happened in the Beast.


Who gives a fuck what she was told. She was not a witness so why was she asked about it? And we know the agents will testify, so why are they not asked to? You know this whole thing is more bullshit, I can't wait to vote for Trump again......


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> You don't know that he said "that they have weapons" because it's hearsay evidence, which is always the product of the presenter's creative interpretation.  All you proved is another reason why hearsay evidence is bullshit.



Fucking moron...



_"And I'd love to have if those tens of thousands of people would be allowed. The military, the secret service. And we want to thank you and the police law enforcement. Great. You're doing a great job. But I'd love it if they could be allowed to come up here with us. Is that possible? Can you just let 'em come up, please?"_​
... are you ever not a fucking moron?

Ever??


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> You can't get more suspicious than when the prosecution doesn't want you to see all the evidence. Schiff-for-Brains is a former DA, and he should know all this.  The guy just can't get any sleazier.



What prosecution, fucking moron?


----------



## JustAGuy1




----------



## Faun

buckeye45_73 said:


> Who gives a fuck what she was told. She was not a witness so why was she asked about it? And we know the agents will testify, so why are they not asked to? You know this whole thing is more bullshit, I can't wait to vote for Trump again......



She claims he told her that. That's why.

And of course you would vote for Trump after he tried to steal an election and collected $250 million from his suckers for his "election defense fund" that didn't actually exist...

_#becauseitsacult_


----------



## CowboyTed

Sunsettommy said:


> It doesn't matter since the HEARSAY woman claims are being contested by the people who were in the freaking vehicle.


That's OK...

By the way it was common knowledge that whats happened in the vehicle... It is not illegal (well no one is pressing charges).... 

The main thing is Trump wanted to goto the Capitol and that is not being disputed...

Cassidy integrity is totally unaffected even if they say it didn't happen... The two are considered Trump loyalists and there are plenty Secret Service that will say they were told the same information or close to it...

The Committee could talk the actual driver... He has no history of being a Trump supporter so he would clear things up... Again it is not illegal so, committee don't care..


----------



## CowboyTed

Lesh said:


> The idiots seem totally focused on the assault on the Secret Service Agent.
> 
> That's the LEAST damning thing that was said today
> 
> Trump KNEW the rally goers were armed. HE DIDN"T CARE "They're not going to hurt ME" he said
> 
> In fact he wanted the magnetometers removed!
> 
> He KNEW the rioters were armed and that they were after Pence and he APPROVED


The Trumpers want to focus on non crimes, they don't want anyone looking at actual crimes where people died...

We aren't loosing focus... Cassidy's testimony stands up and is another nail...

We haven't even got to the DOJ yet..


----------



## CowboyTed

TemplarKormac said:


> But if Robert Engel and Tony Ornato are both willing to testify under oath that none of that happened, the anatomy of the vehicle is irrelevant.


Let them testify first...

Trumpers are all bullish in the media and lambs when the bible comes out..


----------



## CowboyTed

bripat9643 said:


> You don't know that he said "that they have weapons" because it's hearsay evidence, which is always the product of the presenter's creative interpretation.  All you proved is another reason why hearsay evidence is bullshit.


Not a fucking court...

Which part of that don't you get... There is no judge and no one is going to found guilty...

This is an official investigation with congressional power...


----------



## Billiejeens

playtime said:


> At least 6 GOP members of Congress asked the Trump White House for a January 6 pardon, including Matt Gaetz and Marjorie Taylor Greene​Warren Rojas
> Jun 23, 2022, 6:13 PM
> 
> *GOP Reps. Andy Biggs of Arizona, Mo Brooks of Alabama, Matt Gaetz of Florida, Louie Gohmert of Texas, Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, and Scott Perry of Pennsylvania asked Trump to pardon them for helping him try to overturn the 2020 election, *the former White House aides said in a series of taped statements presented Thursday on Capitol Hill.
> At least 6 GOP members of Congress asked the Trump White House for a January 6 pardon, including Matt Gaetz and Marjorie Taylor Greene
> 
> Trump allies Rudy Giuliani and Mark Meadows sought pardons related to Jan. 6 attack, testimony reveals​​Kenneth Tran
> USA TODAY
> June 29, 2022
> Trump allies Rudy Giuliani and Mark Meadows sought pardons related to Jan. 6 attack, testimony reveals
> 
> & i'm willing to bet there are more ... including some senators:  raphael cruz (R) TX  & ron johnson (R), WI for starters.  perhaps that will be revealed as well.
> 
> panty waist  _jared _ testified under oath that he was busy handing out pardons like chicklets...
> ​​​​



You literally are sofa king stupid.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> Fucking moron...
> 
> ​​​_"And I'd love to have if those tens of thousands of people would be allowed. The military, the secret service. And we want to thank you and the police law enforcement. Great. You're doing a great job. But I'd love it if they could be allowed to come up here with us. Is that possible? Can you just let 'em come up, please?"_​
> ... are you ever not a fucking moron?
> 
> Ever??


Your video didn't prove your claim, moron.


----------



## bripat9643

CowboyTed said:


> Not a fucking court...
> 
> Which part of that don't you get... There is no judge and no one is going to found guilty...
> 
> This is an official investigation with congressional power...



Yet, all you fucking prog morons keep treating this like it's a trial.  

It's also not an official investigation since they haven't followed the rules for Congressional committees where the opposition gets to choose slightly less than half f\the members of the committee.  It's a Stalinist show trial.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> You video didn't prove your claim, moron.



LOLOL 

Are you ever not a fucking moron?

Ever??


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> LOLOL
> 
> Are you ever not a fucking moron?
> 
> Ever??


Thanks for confirming.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> Thanks for confirming.



Fucking moron, I already posted the evidence.  Not my problem you're too big of a fucking moron to grasp it.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> Fucking moron, I already posted the evidence.  Not my problem you're too big of a fucking moron to grasp it.


"Evidence" of what?   Not what you claimed.


----------



## hadit

playtime said:


> no you're not ... it just means you can't debate worth a damn to defend the chosen one.
> 
> you played hooky the day they taught critical thinging, huh?


Again I apparently need to translate;

"Oh, shoot, I gave it my best and he's not intimidated at all. I know, I'll post pictures and random things I just make up about him. It works with my 5th grade classmates all the time."


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> "Evidence" of what?   Not what you claimed.



Poor, fucking moron.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> Poor, fucking moron.


You are a pathetic douchebag..


----------



## jc456

CowboyTed said:


> Let them testify first...
> 
> Trumpers are all bullish in the media and lambs when the bible comes out..


they did, there is testimony from what your peers told me.  So post the testimony.


----------



## jc456

CowboyTed said:


> Not a fucking court...
> 
> Which part of that don't you get... There is no judge and no one is going to found guilty...
> 
> This is an official investigation with congressional power...


to do what?


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> You are a pathetic douchebag..



Huh? Why is it my fault you're a fucking moron??

Why was Trump asking the secret service to allow his people into the Ellipse? Why didn't Trump just ask those people directly to come up to the stage he was on?


----------



## jc456

playtime said:


> At least 6 GOP members of Congress asked the Trump White House for a January 6 pardon, including Matt Gaetz and Marjorie Taylor Greene​Warren Rojas
> Jun 23, 2022, 6:13 PM
> 
> *GOP Reps. Andy Biggs of Arizona, Mo Brooks of Alabama, Matt Gaetz of Florida, Louie Gohmert of Texas, Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, and Scott Perry of Pennsylvania asked Trump to pardon them for helping him try to overturn the 2020 election, *the former White House aides said in a series of taped statements presented Thursday on Capitol Hill.
> At least 6 GOP members of Congress asked the Trump White House for a January 6 pardon, including Matt Gaetz and Marjorie Taylor Greene
> 
> Trump allies Rudy Giuliani and Mark Meadows sought pardons related to Jan. 6 attack, testimony reveals​​Kenneth Tran
> USA TODAY
> June 29, 2022
> Trump allies Rudy Giuliani and Mark Meadows sought pardons related to Jan. 6 attack, testimony reveals
> 
> & i'm willing to bet there are more ... including some senators:  raphael cruz (R) TX  & ron johnson (R), WI for starters.  perhaps that will be revealed as well.
> 
> panty waist  _jared _ testified under oath that he was busy handing out pardons like chicklets...
> ​​​​


not sure what this post has attempted to prove.  Post one piece of evidence.  Cassidy Hutchinson's viewpoint isn't evidence of anything.


----------



## jc456

playtime said:


> ooooooOOOOOoooooo... as liz cheney said:
> 
> bring it.
> 
> between  roe  v  wade getting gutted  , the hearings, AND other rights on the chopping block - you are in for an overwhelming ass whopping.


they are, Cheney is not doing well if you were to believe the polls.  I don't, but I know the likes like you do, so they brought it on.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> Huh? Why is it my fault you're a fucking moron??
> 
> Why was Trump asking the secret service to allow his people into the Ellipse? Why didn't Trump just ask those people directly to come up to the stage he was on?


That doesn't address the claim you made, moron.


----------



## jc456

bripat9643 said:


> That doesn't address the claim you made, moron.


he won't ever address it.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> That doesn't address the claim you made, moron.



Of course it does, fucking moron. That's why you refuse to answer my questions. Because the answer proves my claim.

Why was Trump asking the secret service to allow his people into the Ellipse? Why didn't Trump just ask those people directly to come up to the stage he was on?


----------



## Faun

jc456 said:


> he won't ever address it.



LOL

I already did.


----------



## 366h34d

CowboyTed said:


> Not a fucking court...
> 
> Which part of that don't you get... There is no judge and no one is going to found guilty...
> 
> This is an official investigation with congressional power...


IT is a freak show to say "the orange man is bad, vote for anyone but Trump even if that anyone is Simple Jack." For any official investigation, we will have all people in the SUV testified already.


----------



## playtime

Seymour Flops said:


> Actually, he has already appeared before the committee and testified under oath.  The committee has not chosen to show you his testimony.
> 
> Now, they are smearing him as a liar before he can speak publicly.
> 
> No shame at all.



ummmmm.....

was it under oath or informal?  apparently when he did meet with them -  his memory was fuzzy & he really didn't give many actual details.  hmmmm, 'magine that.  so ms. hutchinson filled in the gaps.

soooooooooooo................ when he is under oath, perhaps he'll deny it ...

perhaps not.  

will it take a subpoena to actually get him to do it?


----------



## playtime

Calypso Jones said:


> y'all keep hopin' don't you.
> 
> meanwhile:........
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nolte: On This July 4th, Trump Is America's Most Popular Politician
> 
> 
> Donald Trump is currently the most popular politician in America.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.breitbart.com



meanwhile..............

BREITBART
Breitbart​





QUESTIONABLE SOURCE​A questionable source exhibits _one or more_ of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency, and/or is fake news. Fake News is the _deliberate attempt_ to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for profit or influence (Learn More). Sources listed in the Questionable Category _may_ be very untrustworthy and should be fact-checked on a per-article basis. Sources on this list _are not_ considered _fake news_ unless specifically written in the reasoning section for that source. See all Questionable sources.

*Overall, we rate Breitbart Questionable based on extreme right-wing bias, the publication of conspiracy theories and propaganda, as well as numerous false claims.*
Detailed Report​Reasoning:* Extreme Right, Propaganda, Conspiracy, Failed Fact Checks*
Bias Rating:* RIGHT*
Factual Reporting: *MIXED*
Country: *USA*
Press Freedom Rating: *MOSTLY FREE*
Media Type: *Website*
Traffic/Popularity: *High Traffic*
MBFC Credibility Rating: *LOW CREDIBILITY*
Breitbart


----------



## playtime

Billiejeens said:


> You literally are sofa king stupid.


^^^


----------



## playtime

hadit said:


> Again I apparently need to translate;
> 
> "Oh, shoot, I gave it my best and he's not intimidated at all. I know, I'll post pictures and random things I just make up about him. It works with my 5th grade classmates all the time."



lol ...  i make nothing up about donny.  i've seen him in action for well over 40 years.

you love doony & donny loves you long time.


----------



## playtime

jc456 said:


> they are, Cheney is not doing well if you were to believe the polls.  I don't, but I know the likes like you do, so they brought it on.



haven't you figured out by now ( & as i said earlier )  that liz cheney has zero fucks to give. 

she's going after donny & i'm tickled that velociraptor is doing the right thing.


----------



## playtime

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Yes it has.



nope.   fuzzy memories.... perhaps they remember clearly now & will do it again -  under oath - with clarity.

as yer chosen loves to say: *we'll see what happens.*


----------



## jc456

playtime said:


> haven't you figured out by now ( & as i said earlier )  that liz cheney has zero fucks to give.
> 
> she's going after donny & i'm tickled that velociraptor is doing the right thing.


ahhh who the fk cares?  Liz Cheney is a washout now. The fallen ranks.


----------



## jc456

playtime said:


> nope.   fuzzy memories.... perhaps they remember clearly now & will do it again -  under oath - with clarity.
> 
> as yer chosen loves to say: *we'll see what happens.*


and so what if it's true?  What's the issue exactly? Why can't you explain the issue with it?  there's other things to say, but I'll wait to hear your response.


----------



## Calypso Jones

playtime said:
			
		

> meanwhile....




Sez the guy whose media masters have been telling him what to think for decades.  Gotten used to it haven't you. LOLOL


----------



## playtime

jc456 said:


> ahhh who the fk cares?



_donny does....................._




jc456 said:


> Liz Cheney is a washout now. The fallen ranks.









Zero fucks given​The inability to give even one fuck about someone or something, i.e. the situation in which one is unable to care. This term is also used to express dismay, disbelief, or sarcasm pertaining to someone or something, and can be a successful comeback comment in the event of a downward-spiraling conversation.


----------



## playtime

jc456 said:


> and so what if it's true?  What's the issue exactly? Why can't you explain the issue with it?  there's other things to say, but I'll wait to hear your response.



the case is building.

tick tock, spinach eater.


----------



## jc456

playtime said:


> _donny does....................._


link


----------



## iceberg

Hutch Starskey said:


> D’oh…
> Because it’s a crime maybe?
> 
> 
> 
> https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/98-808.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> “Federal crime
> 
> It is a federal crime to make a material false statement in a matter within the jurisdiction of a federal agency or department. 1 Perjury is also a federal crime. Perjury is *a false statement made under oath before a federal tribunal or official*.”


it's also a crime to protest outside a judges house. when you prosecute your own site, you have some cred. til then, really don't care. you flaunt the laws for your own purposes, others will too.


----------



## jc456

playtime said:


> ^^^
> 
> View attachment 666417


still nothing huh?


----------



## playtime

Calypso Jones said:


> Sez the guy



i'm a born & raised hetero female.




Calypso Jones said:


> whose media masters have been telling him what to think for decades.










Calypso Jones said:


> Gotten used to it haven't you. LOLOL


----------



## Hutch Starskey

bripat9643 said:


> Yet, all you fucking prog morons keep treating this like it's a trial.
> 
> It's also not an official investigation since they haven't followed the rules for Congressional committees where the opposition gets to choose slightly less than half f\the members of the committee.  It's a Stalinist show trial.


Post the “rules” you’re referring to, dope.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

playtime said:


> nope.   fuzzy memories.... perhaps they remember clearly now & will do it again -  under oath - with clarity.
> 
> as yer chosen loves to say: *we'll see what happens.*


The secret service agents have already debunked her lie.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

playtime said:


> i'm a born & raised hetero female.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 666435
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 666436


DNC cultist mentality.


----------



## Calypso Jones

Democrats stole the 2020 election...all evidence points to that...especially the fact that the media and the left want to shut down all conversation about it.   Look...democrats know what they did.   Maybe they haven't let you in on it....or perhaps you know it but you cannot admit it...it would ruin your worldview.
President Trump did good things for this country and the American people....this dolt in the white house changed all that in 18 months..  now that IS a feat in itself it it weren't so disgusting to all americans.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

bripat9643 said:


> That doesn't address the claim you made, moron.


What would keep law enforcement from allowing people in to the ellipse  that is secured with magnetometers?


----------



## Hutch Starskey

iceberg said:


> it's also a crime to protest outside a judges house. when you prosecute your own site, you have some cred. til then, really don't care. you flaunt the laws for your own purposes, others will too.


Huh?
I’m neither a LEO or in that jurisdiction.


----------



## Faun

Calypso Jones said:


> Democrats stole the 2020 election...all evidence points to that...especially the fact that the media and the left want to shut down all conversation about it.   Look...democrats know what they did.   Maybe they haven't let you in on it....or perhaps you know it but you cannot admit it...it would ruin your worldview.
> President Trump did good things for this country and the American people....this dolt in the white house changed all that in 18 months..  now that IS a feat in itself it it weren't so disgusting to all americans.


----------



## Faun

Hutch Starskey said:


> What would keep law enforcement from allowing people in to the ellipse  that is secured with magnetometers?



He doesn't want to answer that. Fact is, there was no reason for Trump to ask the secret service to allow them in unless he already knew that mob couldn't get past the secret service with the weapons they had.

Had Trump truly not known that crowd was armed, he would have just asked that crowd to come closer and fill up the Ellipse.


----------



## eagle1462010

playtime said:


> _donny does....................._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 666426
> 
> Zero fucks given​The inability to give even one fuck about someone or something, i.e. the situation in which one is unable to care. This term is also used to express dismay, disbelief, or sarcasm pertaining to someone or something, and can be a successful comeback comment in the event of a downward-spiraling conversation.


Her voters feel the same way.


----------



## hadit

playtime said:


> lol ...  i make nothing up about donny.  i've seen him in action for well over 40 years.
> 
> you love doony & donny loves you long time.


Sounds like you're more than a little obsessed with him. I didn't pay any attention to him until he got the nomination in '16. Let him go already.


----------



## bripat9643

Hutch Starskey said:


> What would keep law enforcement from allowing people in to the ellipse  that is secured with magnetometers?


That's not the claim we're discussing.  I'm talking about the claim that he knew they were armed.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> He doesn't want to answer that. Fact is, there was no reason for Trump to ask the secret service to allow them in unless he already knew that mob couldn't get past the secret service with the weapons they had.
> 
> Had Trump truly not known that crowd was armed, he would have just asked that crowd to come closer and fill up the Ellipse.


We aren't required to accept your claim that he knew they were armed or that you can read Trump's mind.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> That's not the claim we're discussing.  I'm talking about the claim that he knew they were armed.



That's the same claim, ya fucking moron. 

Hutchinson testified Trump's response to learning the mob was staying back from his stage was because they were armed and didn't want to walk through the magnetometers was to insist the secret service take down the mags and allow his people to fill in the Ellipse.

Then during his speech, he asked the secret service to allow his people in, which confirms what Hutchinson said.


----------



## jc456

playtime said:


> the case is building.
> 
> tick tock, spinach eater.


case of what?


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> We aren't required to accept your claim that he knew they were armed or that you can read Trump's mind.



I'm not reading his mind, ya fucking moron. I'm listening to his words.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> That's the same claim, ya fucking moron.
> 
> Hutchinson testified Trump's response to learning the mob was staying back from his stage was because they were armed and didn't want to walk through the magnetometers was to insist the secret service take down the mags and allow his people to fill in the Ellipse.
> 
> Then during his speech, he asked the secret service to allow his people in, which confirms what Hutchinson said.


You claimed he knew they were armed.  I said that's obvious horseshit.  Then you posted a video that was totally irrelevant to that discussion.

Apparently you can't keep the discussion straight in your head.

Whatever Hutchinson testified is hearsay and therefore total bullshit.  Her testimony is not relevant to the discussion


----------



## eagle1462010




----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> I'm not reading his mind, ya fucking moron. I'm listening to his words.


No, you are listening to Hutchinson's words, which are hearsay and therefor are pure bullshit.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Seymour Flops said:


> But where was the committee staff to check out whether what Cassidy was rehearsed to say was even possible?


Maybe they did. Even a 5 year old with goggle can find a pic of the SUV.


----------



## jc456

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Maybe they did. Even a 5 year old with goggle can find a pic of the SUV.


then why did she say beast in her testimony?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

jc456 said:


> then why did she say beast in her testimony?


Because that is what she recalled. Probably sounds weird to you, since she didn't just say "fifth", like yer Boyz.


----------



## jc456

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Because that is what she recalled. Probably sounds weird to you, since she didn't just say "fifth", like yer Boyz.


recall?  hearsay?  dude, listen to yourself.  too fking funny.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> You claimed he knew they were armed.  I said that's obvious horseshit.  Then you posted a video that was totally irrelevant to that discussion.
> 
> Apparently you can't keep the discussion straight in your head.
> 
> Whatever Hutchinson testified is hearsay and therefore total bullshit.  Her testimony is not relevant to the discussion



LOL

It's not irrelevant. It confirms exactly to what Hutchinson testified.

Are you ever not a fucking moron? 

Ever???


----------



## bripat9643

Hutch Starskey said:


> What would keep law enforcement from allowing people in to the ellipse  that is secured with magnetometers?





Faun said:


> That's the same claim, ya fucking moron.


No it isn't, moron.



Faun said:


> Hutchinson testified Trump's response to learning the mob was staying back from his stage was because they were armed and didn't want to walk through the magnetometers was to insist the secret service take down the mags and allow his people to fill in the Ellipse.
> 
> Then during his speech, he asked the secret service to allow his people in, which confirms what Hutchinson said.



He didn't know whether they were armed, fuckstick.  It's a collection of assumptions.  She isn't qualified to testify as to why Trump did whatever he did.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> LOL
> 
> It's not irrelevant. It confirms exactly to what Hutchinson testified.
> 
> Are you ever not a fucking moron?
> 
> Ever???


Wrong.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> No, you are listening to Hutchinson's words, which are hearsay and therefor are pure bullshit.



Holyshit, you're beyond deranged, fucking moron. 

She says she heard Trump sat that. That's direct evidence, ya fucking moron, not hearsay. Hearsay is testifying you heard something you didn't actually witness. She directly witnessed Trump saying something to the effect of, _"I don’t f’ing care that they have weapons. They’re not here to hurt me, take the f’ing mags away, let my people in. They can March the capital from here. Let the people in, take the f’ing mags away."_


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> No it isn't, moron.
> 
> 
> 
> He didn't know whether they were armed, fuckstick.  It's a collection of assumptions.  She isn't qualified to testify as to why Trump did whatever he did.



If he didn't know they were armed, he wouldn't have said, _"I don’t f’ing care that they have weapons."_


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> Wrong.


----------



## TemplarKormac

CowboyTed said:


> Let them testify first...
> 
> Trumpers are all bullish in the media and lambs when the bible comes out..



Hmm. I don't know what the Bible has to do with the J6 thing at all, to be honest. 

But as far as "thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor" is concerned,  people like you are just as guilty of it as they are.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> Holyshit, you're beyond deranged, fucking moron.
> 
> She says she heard Trump sat that. That's direct evidence, ya fucking moron, not hearsay. Hearsay is testifying you heard something you didn't actually witness. She directly witnessed Trump saying something to the effect of, _"I don’t f’ing care that they have weapons. They’re not here to hurt me, take the f’ing mags away, let my people in. They can March the capital from here. Let the people in, take the f’ing mags away."_


"To the effect of?"  There's a big difference between.  _"I don’t f’ing care* that *they have weapons." and "I don’t f’ing care* IF* they have weapons."   _Her testimony is  worthless as evidence that anyone had any weapons.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> If he didn't know they were armed, he wouldn't have said, _"I don’t f’ing care that they have weapons."_


Not true at all.  However, we still have no proof that he said that other than her dubious testimony.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> "To the effect of?"  There's a big difference between.  _"I don’t f’ing care* that *they have weapons." and "I don’t f’ing care* IF* they have weapons."   _Her testimony is  worthless as evidence that anyone had any weapons.



Nope, Trump's actions indicated he knew they had weapons. Why else would he want the mags removed? Why else would he ask the secret service to "allow" people to enter the Ellipse?

Are you ever not a fucking moron? 

Ever???


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> Not true at all.  However, we still have no proof that he said that other than her dubious testimony.



Fucking moron, we know her testimony is truthful and accurate. Again, Trump himself confirmed it...



_"And I'd love to have if those tens of thousands of people would be allowed. The military, the secret service. And we want to thank you and the police law enforcement. Great. You're doing a great job. But I'd love it if they could be allowed to come up here with us. Is that possible? Can you just let 'em come up, please?"_​


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> Nope, Trump's actions indicated he knew they had weapons. Why else would he want the mags removed? Why else would he ask the secret service to "allow" people to enter the Ellipse?
> 
> Are you ever not a fucking moron?
> 
> Ever???


No they don't, moron.  You haven't demonstrated the capacity to read minds, so you don't know what he knew.

I can think of a lot of reasons, if he even actually did what you claim.  Courts of law generally don't allow mind reading into evidence


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> Fucking moron, we know her testimony is truthful and accurate. Again, Trump himself confirmed it...
> 
> ​​​_"And I'd love to have if those tens of thousands of people would be allowed. The military, the secret service. And we want to thank you and the police law enforcement. Great. You're doing a great job. But I'd love it if they could be allowed to come up here with us. Is that possible? Can you just let 'em come up, please?"_​


Where did he say he knew they had firearms?


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> No they don't, moron.  You haven't demonstrated the capacity to read minds, so you don't know what he knew.
> 
> I can think of a lot of reasons, if he even actually did what you claim.  Courts of law generally don't allow mind reading into evidence



LOLOL 

You're such a fucking moron, fucking moron. 

She says she heard him wanting the secret service to allow people with weapons allowed up to his stage. He is on record for asking the secret service to allow people up to his stage. And you're dumb enough to think that doesn't corroborate her testimony. 

Again... why didn't he just ask the crowd at the edge of the Ellipse to enter?


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> Where did he say he knew they had firearms?



When he asked the secret service to "allow" them to enter the Ellipse. Why would the secret service not allow them to enter if they weren't armed?


----------



## Hutch Starskey

bripat9643 said:


> That's not the claim we're discussing.  I'm talking about the claim that he knew they were armed.


It’s exactly what we’re discussing. 
The quote Faun has posted repeatedly where Trump complimented law enforcement for their good work but asked them to “just let his people come up”.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

jc456 said:


> then why did she say beast in her testimony?



She testified as to what she heard from Ornato. 
That was how he characterized the vehicle. 

Why does this need to be explained to you?


----------



## Hutch Starskey

bripat9643 said:


> No it isn't, moron.
> 
> 
> 
> He didn't know whether they were armed, fuckstick.  It's a collection of assumptions.  She isn't qualified to testify as to why Trump did whatever he did.


Wow!


----------



## jc456

Hutch Starskey said:


> She testified as to what she heard from Ornato.
> That was how he characterized the vehicle.
> 
> Why does this need to be explained to you?


okay was he there? How is it you know over him?


----------



## Hutch Starskey

jc456 said:


> okay was he there? How is it you know over him?


Huh?
She’s simply relating what he told her. She isn’t making any of her own claims.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> LOLOL
> 
> You're such a fucking moron, fucking moron.
> 
> She says she heard him wanting the secret service to allow people with weapons allowed up to his stage. He is on record for asking the secret service to allow people up to his stage. And you're dumb enough to think that doesn't corroborate her testimony.
> 
> Again... why didn't he just ask the crowd at the edge of the Ellipse to enter?


He's not on record for any hearsay, moron.

What she says is all hearsay, so it's not relevant to anything.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> When he asked the secret service to "allow" them to enter the Ellipse. Why would the secret service not allow them to enter if they weren't armed?


I can think of all kinds of reasons.  Again, mind reading is not admissible evidence in court.


----------



## bripat9643

Hutch Starskey said:


> It’s exactly what we’re discussing.
> The quote Faun has posted repeatedly where Trump complimented law enforcement for their good work but asked them to “just let his people come up”.


Where does that prove they were armed?  First of all, it's hearsay, so it's proof of nothing.


----------



## bripat9643

Hutch Starskey said:


> Wow!


"Wow" what?  That's the law, moron.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> He's not on record for any hearsay, moron.
> 
> What she says is all hearsay, so it's not relevant to anything.



Why didn't he just ask the crowd at the edge of the Ellipse to enter?


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> "Wow" what?  That's the law, moron.



Fucking moron, there's no law preventing someone from testifying to what they personally witnessed.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> I can think of all kinds of reasons.  Again, mind reading is not admissible evidence in court.



So name them...


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> Where does that prove they were armed?  First of all, it's hearsay, so it's proof of nothing.



Fucking moron, the police were recorded seeing people carrying guns.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> Why didn't he just ask the crowd at the edge of the Ellipse to enter?


Irrelevant.  They don't allow mind reading in a trial.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> Fucking moron, there's no law preventing someone from testifying to what they personally witnessed.


There is when what they witnessed is someone else talking, and truth of those statements would be material to the trial.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> Irrelevant.  They don't allow mind reading in a trial.



LOLOL 

You wish it was irrelevant because the answer destroys your idiocy. There was no reason to need the secret service to "allow" them in unless they were armed.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> There is when what they witnessed is someone else talking, and truth of those statements would be material to the trial.



You're a fucking moron, fucking moron. Whether someone personlly sees something or hears something, that makes them a first hand witness to which they can testify. There's no law against that.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

bripat9643 said:


> There is when what they witnessed is someone else talking, and truth of those statements would be material to the trial.


What trial?


----------



## buckeye45_73

Faun said:


> She claims he told her that. That's why.
> 
> And of course you would vote for Trump after he tried to steal an election and collected $250 million from his suckers for his "election defense fund" that didn't actually exist...
> 
> _#becauseitsacult_


Well stupid people give money all the time...the dems do it even better.....They are using abortion right now to rack up the dollars...and Gore, Kerry, and Clinton have had fight the election money.......so lets not get crazy.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> LOLOL
> 
> You wish it was irrelevant because the answer destroys your idiocy. There was no reason to need the secret service to "allow" them in unless they were armed.


ROFL!   It's hearsay, which means "irrelevant" - not valid testimony.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> You're a fucking moron, fucking moron. Whether someone personlly sees something or hears something, that makes them a first hand witness to which they can testify. There's no law against that.


They can only testify about what they heard, and it's doubtful they got it accurately.  Whatever the person said cannot be regarded as true without further evidence.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> ROFL!   It's hearsay, which means "irrelevant" - not valid testimony.



It's not hearsay to testify a first hand account, which is what that was.

Are you ever not a fucking moron? 

Ever?


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> They can only testify about what they heard, and it's doubtful they got it accurately.  Whatever the person said cannot be regarded as true without further evidence.



That's what she did, fucking moron.


----------



## 366h34d

Faun said:


> LOL
> 
> It's not irrelevant. It confirms exactly to what Hutchinson testified.
> 
> Are you ever not a fucking moron?
> 
> Ever???


Hutchinson testified to what she heard, not the fact. she can be telling you the fact, but it can be a FAKE story BECAUSE NO ONE KNOWS THE FACT UNTIL WE HAVE THE PEOPLE IN THE SUV COME FORWARD.


----------



## Faun

366h34d said:


> Hutchinson testified to what she heard, not the fact. she can be telling you the fact, but it can be a FAKE story BECAUSE NO ONE KNOWS THE FACT UNTIL WE HAVE THE PEOPLE IN THE SUV COME FORWARD.



Next time, at least try to pay attention. Ok? 

We're not talking about what happened in the SUV.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> Next time, at least try to pay attention. Ok?
> 
> We're not talking about what happened in the SUV.


You're the one who needs to pay attention, moron.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> You're the one who needs to pay attention, moron.



Aww, poor fucking moron... getting himself soaked by pissing in the wind again.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

bripat9643 said:


> ROFL!   It's hearsay, which means "irrelevant" - not valid testimony.


LOL
Not valid where?


----------



## struth

Care4all said:


> In the article about Engel's testimony which took place 3 weeks earlier than Cassidy, the press reporting on it, used the term Beast as well, and that Engel testified that he and Trump in the car, differed on taking him to the capitol or the whitehouse....or they had a disagreement on it....  But in the end, he brought trump to the whitehouse.
> 
> The secret service among eachother, do not use the term, The Beast, when talking about the Limo, involved with their work, they call it, Cadillac One....  It is the public's and journalist term for the President's vehicle that he travels in.


there you have it!   The Committee knew from Engels that the rumors their witness at the special session testified to weren’t true. 

yet used her anyway.  Tells use how incredible and how little in the truth they are concerned with


----------



## struth

Care4all said:


> Let the guys testify again, before the committee, under oath.
> 
> You are right, it's all speculation at this point....when we don't even know what the guys will say, under oath!


when they testified the first few times the my weren’t under oath?


----------



## playtime

jc456 said:


> link



Donald Trump is raging on Truth Social and demanding 'equal time' on national TV amid the January 6 committee's primetime hearings​Cheryl Teh 
Jun 17, 2022, 12:12 AM





Donald Trump is raging on Truth Social and demanding 'equal time' on national TV amid the January 6 committee's primetime hearings

*yer welcome.*


----------



## playtime

bigrebnc1775 said:


> The secret service agents have already debunked her lie.



nope.  they did not.  nice hallucination you got goin' on there, though....


----------



## playtime

bigrebnc1775 said:


> DNC cultist mentality.



^^^


----------



## Calypso Jones

Attorneys Claim Government Manufacturing Evidence to Charge, Incarcerate Jan. 6 Prisoners
					

As Jan. 6 prisoners continue to languish in jail without trials, without bond and in subhuman conditions, two ...




					www.theepochtimes.com
				




Feds/dems (but then i am repeating myself)  have broken every right of these folks guaranteed by the constitution in falsely imprisoning them, torturing them, denying them medical treatment, humane living conditions and time with their attorneys.


----------



## playtime

Calypso Jones said:


> Democrats stole the 2020 election...



nope.




Calypso Jones said:


> all evidence points to that...



nope.  every case sans one was thrown out due to.....




NO EVIDENCE.  




Calypso Jones said:


> especially the fact that the media and the left want to shut down all conversation about it.



nope.




Calypso Jones said:


> Look...democrats know what they did.



yes, they voted in biden. 

ha ha & neener neener.




Calypso Jones said:


> Maybe they haven't let you in on it....or perhaps you know it but you cannot admit it...it would ruin your worldview.








Calypso Jones said:


> President Trump did good things for this country



correction: _for himself._




Calypso Jones said:


> and the American people....



correction : _ his minions._




Calypso Jones said:


> this dolt in the white house changed all that in 18 months..



lol ...  you're such a whiner!



Calypso Jones said:


> now that IS a feat in itself it it weren't so disgusting to all americans.


----------



## playtime

eagle1462010 said:


> Her voters feel the same way.



having voting for donny's policies, some 90% of the time -  there is no doubt that liz cheney is an awful person...

but she's right about the insurrection being spurred on by the walking mango ... & that much planning went into the attempted coup.

<psssst>

another hearing is set for next tuesday.


----------



## playtime

hadit said:


> Sounds like you're more than a little obsessed with him.



lol ...




hadit said:


> I didn't pay any attention to him until he got the nomination in '16.



being from CT, & close enough to NYC  whilst growing up  etc....  there aren't many people my age & from my little corner of the good ol' USofA - not aware of donny's filthy life on display since the 70s.




hadit said:


> Let him go already.



nobody is above the law -  & he will be held accountable.


----------



## bripat9643

Hutch Starskey said:


> What trial?


The Jan 6 show trial.


----------



## playtime

jc456 said:


> case of what?



case of indictment.  it's just a matter of who does it first ...the DOJ, or georgia.


Fulton grand jury subpoenas Giuliani, Graham, Trump campaign lawyers​By Tamar Hallerman, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
6 hours ago

The Fulton County special grand jury investigating potential criminal interference in Georgia’s 2020 elections has subpoenaed key members of former President Donald Trump’s legal team, including his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani, according to copies obtained by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

In addition to Giuliani, those being summoned include John Eastman, Cleta Mitchell, Kenneth Chesebro and Jenna Ellis, all of whom advised the Trump campaign on strategies for overturning Democrat Joe Biden’s wins in Georgia and other swing states.

The grand jury also subpoenaed U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), one of Trump’s top allies, along with attorney and podcast host Jacki Pick Deason.

The subpoenas were filed July 5 and signed by Fulton Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney, who is overseeing the special grand jury. They noted that all seven people were “a necessary and material witness” to the investigation.
Unlike subpoenas issued to Georgians, the summons required McBurney’s blessing since they are for people who reside outside the state.
Fulton grand jury subpoenas Giuliani, Graham, Trump campaign lawyers

_*ticky tocky..........*_


----------



## bripat9643

playtime said:


> lol ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> being from CT, & close enough to NYC  whilst growing up  etc....  there aren't many people my age & from my little corner of the good ol' USofA - not many people weren't aware of donny's filthy life on display since the 70s.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nobody is above the law -  & he will be held accountable.


Did you have anything aside from cheap shots to offer?

If no one is above the law, then why are Hillary, Comey, McCabe and Strzok  still walking around free?


----------



## playtime

Calypso Jones said:


> Attorneys Claim Government Manufacturing Evidence to Charge, Incarcerate Jan. 6 Prisoners
> 
> 
> As Jan. 6 prisoners continue to languish in jail without trials, without bond and in subhuman conditions, two ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.theepochtimes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Feds/dems (but then i am repeating myself)  have broken every right of these folks guaranteed by the constitution in falsely imprisoning them, torturing them, denying them medical treatment, humane living conditions and time with their attorneys.



The Epoch Times​





QUESTIONABLE SOURCE​A questionable source exhibits _one or more_ of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency, and/or is fake news. Fake News is the _deliberate attempt_ to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for profit or influence (Learn More). Sources listed in the Questionable Category _may_ be very untrustworthy and should be fact-checked on a per-article basis. Please note sources on this list _are not_ considered _fake news_ unless specifically written in the reasoning section for that source. See all Questionable sources.

*Overall, we rate The Epoch Times Right Biased and Questionable based on the publication of pseudoscience and the promotion of propaganda and conspiracy theories, as well as numerous failed fact checks.*
Detailed Report​Questionable Reasoning: *Conspiracy Theories, Pseudoscience, Propaganda, Fake News, Failed Fact Checks*
Bias Rating:* RIGHT*
Factual Reporting: *MIXED*
Country: *USA*
Press Freedom Rank: *MOSTLY FREE*
Media Type: *Newspaper*
Traffic/Popularity: *High Traffic*
MBFC Credibility Rating: *LOW CREDIBILITY*
The Epoch Times
​


----------



## BS Filter

The Jan 6th committee......Perpetual masturbating without a climax....


----------



## playtime

bripat9643 said:


> Did you have anything aside from cheap shots to offer?



so facts are cheap shots to you, 'eh?

#toofunny.


----------



## Lastamender

Who is going to be the first this has been debunked?


----------



## bripat9643

playtime said:


> case of indictment.  it's just a matter of who does it first ...the DOJ, or georgia.
> 
> 
> Fulton grand jury subpoenas Giuliani, Graham, Trump campaign lawyers​By Tamar Hallerman, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
> 6 hours ago
> 
> The Fulton County special grand jury investigating potential criminal interference in Georgia’s 2020 elections has subpoenaed key members of former President Donald Trump’s legal team, including his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani, according to copies obtained by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
> 
> In addition to Giuliani, those being summoned include John Eastman, Cleta Mitchell, Kenneth Chesebro and Jenna Ellis, all of whom advised the Trump campaign on strategies for overturning Democrat Joe Biden’s wins in Georgia and other swing states.
> 
> The grand jury also subpoenaed U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), one of Trump’s top allies, along with attorney and podcast host Jacki Pick Deason.
> 
> The subpoenas were filed July 5 and signed by Fulton Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney, who is overseeing the special grand jury. They noted that all seven people were “a necessary and material witness” to the investigation.
> Unlike subpoenas issued to Georgians, the summons required McBurney’s blessing since they are for people who reside outside the state.
> Fulton grand jury subpoenas Giuliani, Graham, Trump campaign lawyers
> 
> _*ticky tocky..........*_


<YAWN!>


----------



## bripat9643

playtime said:


> so facts are cheap shots to you, 'eh?
> 
> #toofunny.


Your post was totally fact free.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> Aww, poor fucking moron... getting himself soaked by pissing in the wind again.


Youre confused about who is pssing in the wind.   What do the words "hearsay evidence?"  mean to you?


----------



## struth

playtime said:


> so facts are cheap shots to you, 'eh?
> 
> #toofunny.


well thanks for highlighting you don’t know the difference betweens someone’s opinion and a fact


----------



## playtime

bripat9643 said:


> <YAWN!>


_
stellar response.  _


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> It's not hearsay to testify a first hand account, which is what that was.
> 
> Are you ever not a fucking moron?
> 
> Ever?


It's not a firsthand account.  It's a second or third hand account  Firsthand would be if she testified about what Trump said in front of her.


----------



## playtime

struth said:


> well thanks for highlighting you don’t know the difference betweens someone’s opinion and a fact



being from CT, & close enough to NYC whilst growing up etc.... there aren't many people my age & from my little corner of the good ol' USofA - not aware of donny's filthy life on display since the 70s.

how he ripped people off - thru his fraudulent university....

stole from his own 'charity' to use as his personal piggy bank...

tried to steal on old woman's home & property, so he could bulldoze it to build a limo parking lot for his now bankrupted casino patrons...

how he splashed his affair allover the tabloids whilst still married - humiliating his wife & 3 young spawn at the time...

how he would go into the dressing rooms of young contestants of his beauty pagaent to 'inspect' them ....

how he took one winner of his contest - & forced her to 'work out' at a gym in front of the media because she had gained a few pounds....

is that enough?


----------



## struth

playtime said:


> being from CT, & close enough to NYC whilst growing up etc.... there aren't many people my age & from my little corner of the good ol' USofA - not aware of donny's filthy life on display since the 70s.
> 
> how he ripped people off - thru his fraudulent university....
> 
> stole from his own 'charity' to use as his personal piggy bank...
> 
> tried to steal on old woman's home & property, so he could bulldoze it to build a limo parking lot for his now bankrupted casino patrons...
> 
> how he splashed his affair allover the tabloids whilst still married - humiliating his wife & 3 young spawn at the time...
> 
> how he would go into the dressing rooms of young contestants of his beauty pagaent to 'inspect' them ....
> 
> how he took one winner of his contest - & forced her to 'work out' at a gym in front of the media because she had gained a few pounds....
> 
> is that enough?


yeah those are opinions from a guy from CT

It’s no real surprised he spent a lot of time donating to dems back then though


----------



## 366h34d

Faun said:


> Next time, at least try to pay attention. Ok?
> 
> We're not talking about what happened in the SUV.


Those are her stories (1) SUV (2) Jan 6 Capitol. The one in the Capitol was her and others' opinions.


----------



## Chillicothe

Calypso Jones said:


> *"Feds/dems (but then i am repeating myself)  have broken every right of these folks guaranteed by the constitution in 1. falsely imprisoning them,  2. torturing them, 3. denying them medical treatment, 4. humane living conditions and 5.time with their attorneys."                 *(the enumeration formatting is by my avatar)



I didn't know any of that.
How does the poster?
Can he give us some vetting, some credible sourcing on each of those five assertions?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



playtime said:


> *Donald Trump is raging on Truth Social and demanding 'equal time' on national TV*



I quite agree on the 'equal time' thingy.
He should get it.
Absolutely.

But, notably....he will have to follow the same protocols and requirements that Wm. Barr, Cassidy Hutchinson, and all the others.
Meaning:  

He sits for sworn filmed depositions with Committee investigators beforehand. 
Then he comes before the Committee in person and under oath and answers their questions on live TV.
And he does not take the 5th.  
(scratch that. I'm OK if he pleads the 5th before the Committee on live TV.)

So let's go, Donald. 
Saddle up.


----------



## Sandy Shanks

*“So look. All I want to do is this. I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have. Because we won the state,”* President Trump to the Georgian secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger, on Jan. 3, 2021.

CNN reports, "An Atlanta-area special grand jury investigating former President Donald Trump’s attempts to overturn the 2020 election in Georgia has subpoenaed a handful of key Trump allies, including his former attorney Rudy Giuliani and South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, according to court filings.

"The subpoenas also cover a handful of the Trump campaign’s other former legal advisers, including John Eastman, Jenna Ellis, Cleta Mitchell and Kenneth Chesebro.

"Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis has been leading the investigation digging into Trump’s actions in Georgia. Several state officials have already been subpoenaed and have appeared before the special grand jury.

"Willis has been investigating potential crimes including solicitation of election fraud, making false statements, conspiracy, racketeering, and threats related to election administration.

"The latest raft of subpoenas marks a new phase, as the grand jury seeks testimony from *witnesses who were members of Trump’s inner circle*. 

"The special grand jury wants to hear from Graham because the Republican senator allegedly made two calls to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger and his staff in the wake of the 2020 election. According to court filings, Graham “questioned Secretary Raffensperger and his staff about reexamining certain absentee ballots cast in Georgia in order to explore the possibility of a more favorable outcome for former President Donald Trump.” 

No doubt Republicans will continue their silence through all of this, and the Republican Party is turning a blind eye to Trump's alleged crimes, not even coming to his defense.

Trump is the leading Republican candidate for the Presidency in 2024.


----------



## Sandy Shanks

CNN reports, "The House select committee investigating the January 6, 2021, insurrection has scheduled its seventh hearing for July 12, the panel announced Tuesday.

"The hearing is set to start at 10 a.m. ET. The committee has not yet announced any witnesses.

"Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff of California, a member of the committee, had previously told CBS’ “Face the Nation” that the next hearing will focus on “efforts to assemble that mob on the mall” and connections between the Trump White House and various extremist groups at the rally that preceded the attack on the US Capitol, including the Proud Boys, Three Percenters, and others.

"Sarah Matthews, who served as deputy press secretary in the Trump White House until resigning shortly after the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol, has been subpoenaed by the House select committee investigating the insurrection and has agreed to testify at an upcoming hearing.

"Matthews has been subpoenaed to testify at a public hearing as early as next week, sources tell CNN.

"Matthews resigned the night of January 6, 2021, saying in a statement that she was honored to serve in then-President Donald Trump’s administration but “was deeply disturbed by what I saw.” She added: “Our nation needs a peaceful transfer of power.”

Little wonder as to why Congressional Republicans are staying away. Still, they are looking the other way at a failed attempt by their party to overthrow the elected government.

For Trump supporters, this is rapidly becoming a train wreck.


----------



## Sandy Shanks

bripat9643 said:


> *What do the words "hearsay evidence?" mean to you?*


Hearsay evidence is not necessarily untrue, but it is not permitted in a trial.

However, it is permitted in Congressional hearings.

Why are Republicans confusing a hearing with a trial? Lack of knowledge?


----------



## Faun

playtime said:


> Donald Trump is raging on Truth Social and demanding 'equal time' on national TV amid the January 6 committee's primetime hearings​Cheryl Teh
> Jun 17, 2022, 12:12 AM
> 
> View attachment 666670
> 
> Donald Trump is raging on Truth Social and demanding 'equal time' on national TV amid the January 6 committee's primetime hearings
> 
> *yer welcome.*



What a shame the Fairness Doctrine was revoked.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> The Jan 6 show trial.



It's not a trial, fucking moron.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> Youre confused about who is pssing in the wind.   What do the words "hearsay evidence?"  mean to you?



To me it means you don't know what the fuck hearsay means. Again, being part of a conversation is NOT hearsay.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> It's not a firsthand account.  It's a second or third hand account  Firsthand would be if she testified about what Trump said in front of her.



LOLOLOL 

You're such a fucking moron. 

In her testimony, she said, _I was in the vicinity of a conversation where I overheard the president say something to the effect of, “I don’t f’ing care that they have weapons. They’re not here to hurt me, take the f’ing mags away, let my people in. They can March the capital from here. Let the people in, take the f’ing mags away.”_

So while you say, _*"Firsthand would be if she testified about what Trump said in front of her."*_ She said that's exactly what she did.

You're literally saying what she did is first hand; but you keep calling it, _"hearsay."_

Are you ever not a fucking moron? 

Ever??


----------



## Faun

366h34d said:


> Those are her stories (1) SUV (2) Jan 6 Capitol. The one in the Capitol was her and others' opinions.



Again, what's being discussed here is her testimony of what she saw and heard backstage at the Ellipse. Better luck next time.


----------



## 366h34d

Faun said:


> Again, what's being discussed here is her testimony of what she saw (???) and *heard backstage* at the Ellipse. Better luck next time.


That is the problem. She can be telling the truth, but it can be FAKE. Just ask amber heard about kate moss's story.


----------



## JimH52

Former deputy press secretary for Trump to testify at an upcoming January 6 committee hearing | CNN Politics
					

Sarah Matthews, who served as deputy press secretary in the Trump White House until resigning shortly after the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol, has been subpoenaed by the House select committee investigating the insurrection and has agreed to testify at an upcoming hearing, according...




					www.cnn.com
				




I expect another shocking testimony.


----------



## Nostra

Faun said:


> Next time, at least try to pay attention. Ok?
> 
> We're not talking about what happened in the SUV.


Got any quotes by anyone who was actually in the SUV, Fuckwit?

Anything Faun


----------



## Nostra

Faun said:


> Again, what's being discussed here is her testimony of what she saw and heard backstage at the Ellipse. Better luck next time.



Hearsay from Gossip Girl.


----------



## Nostra

Faun said:


> It's not a trial, fucking moron.


 You finally got something right.

Its a shit show.


----------



## JGalt

Wowsers! Will there be potential reams of behind-the-scenes footage and unparalleled intimate access?

My nipples are getting hard again and I'm getting a tingle up my leg.


----------



## Nostra

Faun said:


> To me it means you don't know what the fuck hearsay means. Again, being part of a conversation is NOT hearsay.


Got any non hearsay quotes about what happened in the Beast……er, SUV?


----------



## Chillicothe

BS Filter said:


> _The Jan 6th committee......Perpetual masturbating without a climax...._



What an odd choice of imagery, or allegory, for this event.
Why does the poster choose such?
What's up with that?


----------



## BS Filter

Chillicothe said:


> What an odd choice of imagery, or allegory, for this event.
> Why does the poster choose such?
> What's up with that?


Obviously, too deep for you to figure out.


----------



## Harry Dresden

JimH52 said:


> Former deputy press secretary for Trump to testify at an upcoming January 6 committee hearing | CNN Politics
> 
> 
> Sarah Matthews, who served as deputy press secretary in the Trump White House until resigning shortly after the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol, has been subpoenaed by the House select committee investigating the insurrection and has agreed to testify at an upcoming hearing, according...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I expect another shocking testimony.


shocking!.......


----------



## Faun

366h34d said:


> That is the problem. She can be telling the truth, but it can be FAKE. Just ask amber heard about kate moss's story.



Trump confirmed her testimony...



_"And I'd love to have if those tens of thousands of people would be allowed. The military, the secret service. And we want to thank you and the police law enforcement. Great. You're doing a great job. But I'd love it if they could be allowed to come up here with us. Is that possible? Can you just let 'em come up, please?"_​


----------



## Faun

Nostra said:


> Got any quotes by anyone who was actually in the SUV, Fuckwit?
> 
> Anything Faun



Another rightard who can't follow a conversation. I'm not talking about the SUV here.


----------



## Faun

Nostra said:


> Hearsay from Gossip Girl.



LOL

Thanks for letting thd forum know you don't know what hearsay is.


----------



## Faun

Nostra said:


> You finally got something right.
> 
> Its a shit show.


----------



## Nostra

Faun said:


> Another rightard who can't follow a conversation. I'm not talking about the SUV here.


----------



## Nostra

Faun said:


> LOL
> 
> Thanks for letting thd forum know you don't know what hearsay is.


Claiming she was told something by the two agents is the very definition of hearsay, Simp.


----------



## scruffy

Faun said:


> What prosecution, fucking moron?


If there's no prosecution then Donald Trump has an airtight case for slander.


----------



## scruffy

Calypso Jones said:


> Democrats stole the 2020 election...all evidence points to that...especially the fact that the media and the left want to shut down all conversation about it.   Look...democrats know what they did.   Maybe they haven't let you in on it....or perhaps you know it but you cannot admit it...it would ruin your worldview.
> President Trump did good things for this country and the American people....this dolt in the white house changed all that in 18 months..  now that IS a feat in itself it it weren't so disgusting to all americans.



Fuck the Democrats, and fuck the Deep State too. Neither one of them could manage their way out of a paper bag.

The people who are supposedly running this country are fucking up BADLY. They're going to get blowback, and it won't be long.


----------



## scruffy

BS Filter said:


> The Jan 6th committee......Perpetual masturbating without a climax....


Are you kidding? They can't even get a hard on


----------



## scruffy

Faun said:


> It's not a trial, fucking moron.



Oh shut up.

We all know what we're looking at, we don't need you to tell us.


----------



## 366h34d

Faun said:


> Trump confirmed her testimony...
> 
> ​​​_"And I'd love to have if those tens of thousands of people would be allowed. The military, the secret service. And we want to thank you and the police law enforcement. Great. You're doing a great job. But I'd love it if they could be allowed to come up here with us. Is that possible? Can you just let 'em come up, please?"_​


I think you better read what she said in Committee


----------



## Esdraelon

Every one of these crusades has the effect of boosting his popularity.  Add that to the chaotic cluster fudge of the current admin and he's a shoo-in for '24.  But go ahead   I'm SURE you've "got him" THIS time


----------



## Faun

scruffy said:


> Oh shut up.
> 
> We all know what we're looking at, we don't need you to tell us.



Apparently you do since you can't tell the difference between a trial and a hearing.


----------



## Faun

366h34d said:


> I think you better read what she said in Committee



She said...

_I overheard the president say something to the effect of, “I don’t f’ing care that they have weapons. They’re not here to hurt me, take the f’ing mags away, let my people in. They can March the capital from here. Let the people in, take the f’ing mags away.”_​
He said...

_And I'd love to have if those tens of thousands of people would be allowed. The military, the secret service. And we want to thank you and the police law enforcement. Great. You're doing a great job. But I'd love it if they could be allowed to come up here with us. Is that possible? Can you just let 'em come up, please?_​


----------



## scruffy

Faun said:


> Apparently you do since you can't tell the difference between a trial and a hearing.



Dumbass fucking leftard. ^^^

What are you in third grade?

Fuck you. Go away.


----------



## Faun

scruffy said:


> Dumbass fucking leftard. ^^^
> 
> What are you in third grade?
> 
> Fuck you. Go away.



LOL

Nah, I think I'll stay. It's too much fun poking you to watch you get triggered.


----------



## scruffy

Faun said:


> LOL
> 
> Nah, I think I'll stay. It's too much fun poking you to watch you get triggered.


You're playing a dangerous game, fuckface.


----------



## Faun

scruffy said:


> You're playing a dangerous game, fuckface.


----------



## Nostra

Faun said:


> She said...
> 
> _I overheard the president say something to the effect of, “I don’t f’ing care that they have weapons. They’re not here to hurt me, take the f’ing mags away, let my people in. They can March the capital from here. Let the people in, take the f’ing mags away.”_​
> He said...
> 
> _And I'd love to have if those tens of thousands of people would be allowed. The military, the secret service. And we want to thank you and the police law enforcement. Great. You're doing a great job. But I'd love it if they could be allowed to come up here with us. Is that possible? Can you just let 'em come up, please?_​


Holy cow you are one delusional twit.

Stay stupid, Stupid.


----------



## Faun

Nostra said:


> Holy cow you are one delusional twit.
> 
> Stay stupid, Stupid.



Poor baby.


----------



## scruffy

Faun said:


> Poor baby.



This one must be a faggot. ^^^

It behaves like a faggot.


----------



## Nostra

Faun said:


> Poor baby.


I accept your admission of defeat.


----------



## Faun

scruffy said:


> This one must be a faggot. ^^^
> 
> It behaves like a faggot.



Nope. Straight, married and not interested in you. Sorry, you'll have to search for dates elsewhere.


----------



## Faun

Nostra said:


> I accept your admission of defeat.



Whatever makes ya feel better, Dumbfuck. A pity you can prove your lies about Hutchinson though. A real shame.


----------



## 366h34d

Faun said:


> She said...
> 
> _I overheard the president say something to the effect of, “I don’t f’ing care that they have weapons. They’re not here to hurt me, take the f’ing mags away, let my people in. They can March the capital from here. Let the people in, take the f’ing mags away.”_​
> He said...
> 
> _And I'd love to have if those tens of thousands of people would be allowed. The military, the secret service. And we want to thank you and the police law enforcement. Great. You're doing a great job. But I'd love it if they could be allowed to come up here with us. Is that possible? Can you just let 'em come up, please?_​


hmm, are you saying they are the same thing? OK. you win


----------



## excalibur

JimH52 said:


> Former deputy press secretary for Trump to testify at an upcoming January 6 committee hearing | CNN Politics
> 
> 
> Sarah Matthews, who served as deputy press secretary in the Trump White House until resigning shortly after the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol, has been subpoenaed by the House select committee investigating the insurrection and has agreed to testify at an upcoming hearing, according...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I expect another shocking testimony.




You mean more lies, hearsay, and whatever they put into the person's mind to say. Or the legal bills will keep rising at $750 an hour. So, tell us what we want and you can cut the hours down.


----------



## Faun

366h34d said:


> hmm, are you saying they are the same thing? OK. you win



I'm saying they're close enough to show she was telling the truth. In her statement, she says he wanted mags taken down so more people can get up close. In his statement, he's asking the secret service, who was in charge of the mags, to allow more people to get up close.

You see much of a distinction there?


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> What a shame the Fairness Doctrine was revoked.


Then you admit the whole point of the rule was to censor opposing views.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> Then you admit the whole point of the rule was to censor opposing views.



No, fucking moron, the point of it was to give opposing views equal time. You know, the polar opposite of what you just posted.


----------



## Lastamender

Faun said:


> No, fucking moron, the point of it was to give opposing views equal time. You know, the polar opposite of what you just posted.


No wonder you want it.








						The Sordid History of the Fairness Doctrine
					

After Twitter permanently suspended Donald Trump's account, conservative interest in mandating online platform neutrality spiked. Meanwhile, progressives alarmed by the...




					reason.com


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> It's not a trial, fucking moron.


Yeah, se know.  It's a witch hunt.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> No, fucking moron, the point of it was to give opposing views equal time. You know, the polar opposite of what you just posted.


Wrong.  What the government claims it's trying to do often has no connection with what it's really trying to do.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> LOLOLOL
> 
> You're such a fucking moron.
> 
> In her testimony, she said, _I was in the vicinity of a conversation where I overheard the president say something to the effect of, “I don’t f’ing care that they have weapons. They’re not here to hurt me, take the f’ing mags away, let my people in. They can March the capital from here. Let the people in, take the f’ing mags away.”_
> 
> So while you say, _*"Firsthand would be if she testified about what Trump said in front of her."*_ She said that's exactly what she did.
> 
> You're literally saying what she did is first hand; but you keep calling it, _"hearsay."_
> 
> Are you ever not a fucking moron?
> 
> Ever??


The subject of her testimony is about the events discussed in the conversation, not the conversation itself, turd.


----------



## scruffy

Faun said:


> No, fucking moron, the point of it was to give opposing views equal time. You know, the polar opposite of what you just posted.



What a total fucking hypocrite. ^^^

The committee is SUPPRESSING exculpatory evidence.

You people are so fucking stupid it boggles the mind. Just wait till this entire apparatus is turned against you and you're on the butt end of it.

Which will be... oh... about five months.

You DNC lemmings are terminally fucking retarded.


----------



## Faun

Lastamender said:


> No wonder you want it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Sordid History of the Fairness Doctrine
> 
> 
> After Twitter permanently suspended Donald Trump's account, conservative interest in mandating online platform neutrality spiked. Meanwhile, progressives alarmed by the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> reason.com



English is not your strong suit, FruitLoops.

I offered no opinion as to whether I want it or not. I was merely making fun of Trump, who's demanding equal time which he's not entitled to without the Fairness Doctrine.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> Yeah, se know.  It's a witch hunt.



Nope, it's not a witch hunt either.


----------



## BS Filter

scruffy said:


> What a total fucking hypocrite. ^^^
> 
> The committee is SUPPRESSING exculpatory evidence.
> 
> You people are so fucking stupid it boggles the mind. Just wait till this entire apparatus is turned against you and you're on the butt end of it.
> 
> Which will be... oh... about five months.
> 
> You DNC lemmings are terminally fucking retarded.


They're all in love with Liz Cheney and they can't even see why she's doing this.  It's payback for attacking the Bush family.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> English is not your strong suit, FruitLoops.
> 
> I offered no opinion as to whether I want it or not. I was merely making fun of Trump, who's demanding equal time which he's not entitled to without the Fairness Doctrine.


The reason he won't get it is because the media is biased.  Glad you can admit that.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> Nope, it's not a witch hunt either.


It sure as hell is.


----------



## Faun

scruffy said:


> What a total fucking hypocrite. ^^^
> 
> The committee is SUPPRESSING exculpatory evidence.
> 
> You people are so fucking stupid it boggles the mind. Just wait till this entire apparatus is turned against you and you're on the butt end of it.
> 
> Which will be... oh... about five months.
> 
> You DNC lemmings are terminally fucking retarded.



Oh? Specifically, what exculpatory evidence have they suppressed?


----------



## Lastamender

Faun said:


> English is not your strong suit, FruitLoops.
> 
> I offered no opinion as to whether I want it or not. I was merely making fun of Trump, who's demanding equal time which he's not entitled to without the Fairness Doctrine.


What could Trump say that would distress you? Why not give him equal time? At least people will watch that.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> Oh? Specifically, what exculpatory evidence have they suppressed?


For one, the testimony of the two SS agents who say that miss Hutchinson is a liar.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> It sure as hell is.



Suuure, fucking moron. uh-uh. 

You call every investigation you don't like, a "witch hunt." Like the Mueller investigation.


----------



## excalibur




----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> For one, the testimony of the two SS agents who say that miss Hutchinson is a liar.



Fail. As always.

a) Those two agents are not actually on record as saying she lied.

b) The committee welcomed them to come back again to testify.

c) The secret service has said they're willing to have those agents testify.

d) The committee was working with the secret service to have them come back again.

e) You're a fucking moron.

f) Better luck next time.


----------



## Faun

Lastamender said:


> What could Trump say that would distress you? Why not give him equal time? At least people will watch that.



He can have equal time. All he has to do his show up for the committee and testify under oath.


----------



## scruffy

Faun said:


> He can have equal time. All he has to do his show up for the committee and testify under oath.


What an idiot. ^^^

You'll be lucky if that entire committee doesn't get tarred and feathered long before November.

Which would be a federal crime because of the kidnapping aspect, so you fuckers will be howling and starting investigations and all that, but y'know what?

No one cares!


----------



## Faun

scruffy said:


> What an idiot. ^^^



LOL

Look, you did it again. You don't learn, do ya?


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> Suuure, fucking moron. uh-uh.
> 
> You call every investigation you don't like, a "witch hunt." Like the Mueller investigation.


Witch hunts are what Democrats do.    They can't win on the issues, so they try to lawyer their way into office.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> He can have equal time. All he has to do his show up for the committee and testify under oath.


Nope, that wouldn't be equal because all the people asking the questions were selected by Democrats.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> LOL
> 
> Look, you did it again. You don't learn, do ya?


What did he do again, identify an idiot?


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> Fail. As always.
> 
> a) Those two agents are not actually on record as saying she lied.
> 
> b) The committee welcomed them to come back again to testify.
> 
> c) The secret service has said they're willing to have those agents testify.
> 
> d) The committee was working with the secret service to have them come back again.
> 
> e) You're a fucking moron.
> 
> f) Better luck next time.


Those are all lies.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> Witch hunts are what Democrats do.    They can't win on the issues, so they try to lawyer their way into office.



The Mueller investigation was thanks to Republicans, not Democrats, Fucking moron. And the purpose of a witch hunt to find the target culpable, which the Mueller investigation didn't do in terms of Trump colluding with Russia.


----------



## Lastamender

Faun said:


> He can have equal time. All he has to do his show up for the committee and testify under oath.


Then the committee will be turning over their phones and testifying too?


----------



## scruffy

Faun said:


> LOL
> 
> Look, you did it again. You don't learn, do ya?



Look, FOOL, no one's going to let you get away with any Stalinist bullshit. If you have a case to make THEN DO IT, but don't try to get in my face and tell me that up is down. You try that shit and I'll bite you so fucking hard insurrection will be the least of your problems. I have 925 years of doing and succeeding to back me up. I will make YOUR life extremely fucking miserable if I want to, which means if YOU make it necessary.

We can talk about abortion, we can talk about guns, but one think we can NOT talk about is blatant violations of due process and constitutional process FOR PARTISAN POLITICAL REASONS.

Me and 75 million other people are going to shove that Stalinist crap right back down your throats. HARD. If we have to teach you a lesson it's going to be a nasty one 

Don't say you weren't warned


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> Those are all lies.



LOLOL 

You're always the fucking moron...

_a) Those two agents are not actually on record as saying she lied._

This falls into the, _you can't prove a negative_, category since there is no record of either Ornato or Engel stating Ornato didn't tell Hutchinson Trump lunged at the steering wheel. But as there's no record of any such revelations from them, (a) is not a lie.​
_b) The committee welcomed them to come back again to testify._

From Fox News...

_Schiff said he would not discuss details of past testimony, said the committee would welcome those men to testify again_

So (b) is not a lie.​
_c) The secret service has said they're willing to have those agents testify._

From CBS News

_"The United States Secret Service has been cooperating with the Select Committee since its inception in spring 2021, and will continue to do so, including by responding on the record to the Committee regarding the new allegations surfaced in today's testimony," Secret Service spokesperson Anthony Guglielmi said in a statement to CBS News._

So (c) is not a lie.​
_d) The committee was working with the secret service to have them come back again._

From Fox News

_The Jan. 6 committee and the Secret Service are in discussions about whether one or both men will appear on camera._

So (d) is not a lie.​
_e) You're a fucking moron._

This is evident in virtually every one of your posts. Even you once referred to yourself as a "fucking moron" and I've agreed with you ever since.

So (e) is not a lie.​
_f) Better luck next time._

Although I'm doubtful you can do better, here I'm just hoping you do.

So (f) is not a lie.​
As always, you get everything wrong. That's an 'F' for you, fucking moron.


----------



## Faun

Lastamender said:


> Then the committee will be turning over their phones and testifying too?



No, why would they? They weren't involved with Sedition Day.

If Trump wants equal time, he can have it just as those who testified under oath. I have no doubt that committee would give him as much ropetime as he wants.


----------



## Faun

scruffy said:


> Look, FOOL, no one's going to let you get away with any Stalinist bullshit. If you have a case to make THEN DO IT, but don't try to get in my face and tell me that up is down. You try that shit and I'll bite you so fucking hard insurrection will be the least of your problems. I have 925 years of doing and succeeding to back me up. I will make YOUR life extremely fucking miserable if I want to, which means if YOU make it necessary.
> 
> We can talk about abortion, we can talk about guns, but one think we can NOT talk about is blatant violations of due process and constitutional process FOR PARTISAN POLITICAL REASONS.
> 
> Me and 75 million other people are going to shove that Stalinist crap right back down your throats. HARD. If we have to teach you a lesson it's going to be a nasty one
> 
> Don't say you weren't warned



_*"Stalinist bullshit."*_

LOLOL

You idiots always crack me up. And you're 925 years old, are ya? 

And lastly, I'll talk about whatever the fuck I want to talk about and there ain't shit you can do about it but make me laugh at you.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> The Mueller investigation was thanks to Republicans, not Democrats, Fucking moron. And the purpose of a witch hunt to find the target culpable, which the Mueller investigation didn't do in terms of Trump colluding with Russia.


Spare me.  The Dims managed to turn a couple of RINOs. Sessions turned out to be a spineless idiot and Rosenstein was always a viper out for personal gain.  Just another example of the party that couldn't shoot straight.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> LOLOL
> 
> You're always the fucking moron...
> 
> _a) Those two agents are not actually on record as saying she lied._​​This falls into the, _you can't prove a negative_, category since there is no record of either Ornato or Engel stating Ornato didn't tell Hutchinson Trump lunged at the steering wheel. But as there's no record of any such revelations from them, (a) is not a lie.​
> ​_b) The committee welcomed them to come back again to testify._​​From Fox News...​​_Schiff said he would not discuss details of past testimony, said the committee would welcome those men to testify again_​​So (b) is not a lie.​
> ​_c) The secret service has said they're willing to have those agents testify._​​From CBS News​​_"The United States Secret Service has been cooperating with the Select Committee since its inception in spring 2021, and will continue to do so, including by responding on the record to the Committee regarding the new allegations surfaced in today's testimony," Secret Service spokesperson Anthony Guglielmi said in a statement to CBS News._​​So (c) is not a lie.​
> ​_d) The committee was working with the secret service to have them come back again._​​From Fox News​​_The Jan. 6 committee and the Secret Service are in discussions about whether one or both men will appear on camera._​​So (d) is not a lie.​
> ​_e) You're a fucking moron._​​This is evident in virtually every one of your posts. Even you once referred to yourself as a "fucking moron" and I've agreed with you ever since.​​So (e) is not a lie.​
> ​_f) Better luck next time._​​Although I'm doubtful you can do better, here I'm just hoping you do.​​So (f) is not a lie.​
> 
> As always, you get everything wrong. That's an 'F' for you, fucking moron.


Don't waste your time to convince me they aren't lies.


----------



## scruffy

Faun said:


> And lastly, I'll talk about whatever the fuck I want to talk about and there ain't shit you can do about it but make me laugh at you.


You're looking down at others from the gutter, asswipe.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> Don't waste your time to convince me they aren't lies.



I can't convince you of anything, fucking moron. Only you can educate yourself and that's an uphill battle for you. VERY uphill. Still, I can post evidence that what I said was not lies. It matters not to me if you accept reality or not.


----------



## scruffy

bripat9643 said:


> What did he do again, identify an idiot?



My, how far the left has fallen.

My friends from the 60's would be rolling over in their graves if they saw these fucktards who call themselves leftists today.

Hey - it's time to put and end to the Stalinist bullshit. It's been going on for too long. These people need to learn it's NOT a winning formula.


----------



## Faun

scruffy said:


> You're looking down at others from the gutter, asswipe.



LOL

Moron, you just placed yourself in the sewer.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> What did he do again, identify an idiot?



LOLOL

Yes, exactly. You finally got something right, ya fucking moron. 

Notice where his carets are pointing...



scruffy said:


> What an idiot. ^^^



​


----------



## scruffy

Faun said:


> LOL
> 
> Moron, you just placed yourself in the sewer.



Tripping. ^^^

OCD

TDS

This is where the left is today. ^^^. Here. ^^^ Right here. ^^^

These are the fuckers trying to run the country. ^^^

These are the asswipes trying to tell us what the truth is. ^^^

This the left. ^^^


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> Spare me.  The Dims managed to turn a couple of RINOs. Sessions turned out to be a spineless idiot and Rosenstein was always a viper out for personal gain.  Just another example of the party that couldn't shoot straight.



LOLOL

You're such a fucking moron that anyone on the right who doesn't toe the Trump line is called a RINO. Moron, they are still Republicans no matter how much that irks you.

Still, the investigation was started by a *Republican* who appointed a *Republican* because another *Republican* who was also appointed by a *Republican* recused himself.


----------



## Faun

scruffy said:


> Tripping. ^^^
> 
> OCD
> 
> TDS
> 
> This is where the left is today. ^^^. Here. ^^^ Right here. ^^^
> 
> These are the fuckers trying to run the country. ^^^
> 
> These are the asswipes trying to tell us what the truth is. ^^^
> 
> This the left. ^^^


----------



## scruffy

Faun said:


>



That's what they got now. ^^^

Fiddling while Rome burns.

And occasionally heaping gasoline on the flames.

This is the left. ^^^


----------



## Lastamender

Faun said:


> No, why would they? They weren't involved with Sedition Day.
> 
> If Trump wants equal time, he can have it just as those who testified under oath. I have no doubt that committee would give him as much ropetime as he wants.


Then what would they have to hide?


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones

JimH52 said:


> Former deputy press secretary for Trump to testify at an upcoming January 6 committee hearing | CNN Politics
> 
> 
> Sarah Matthews, who served as deputy press secretary in the Trump White House until resigning shortly after the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol, has been subpoenaed by the House select committee investigating the insurrection and has agreed to testify at an upcoming hearing, according...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I expect another shocking testimony.


And expect more lies and failed attempts to deflect from the right.


----------



## Care4all

struth said:


> there you have it!   The Committee knew from Engels that the rumors their witness at the special session testified to weren’t true.
> 
> yet used her anyway.  Tells use how incredible and how little in the truth they are concerned with


Engel's testimony was consistent with Cassidy's testimony on what Ornato told her....minus the embellishment Ornato told her on the Lurch.










						Bobby Engel's Testimony Consistent With Cassidy Hutchinson—Legal Expert
					

Former White House aide Hutchinson told a panel that on January 6,  2021 Donald Trump was irate in the presidential limousine and demanded to be taken to the Capitol to join his supporters.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## Faun

Lastamender said:


> Then what would they have to hide?



Again, FruitLoops, they're not under investigation. I know, that's too difficult for you to comprehend.


----------



## citygator

scruffy said:


> My, how far the left has fallen.
> 
> My friends from the 60's would be rolling over in their graves if they saw these fucktards who call themselves leftists today.
> 
> Hey - it's time to put and end to the Stalinist bullshit. It's been going on for too long. These people need to learn it's NOT a winning formula.


Your racist friends from the 60’s would be Pubs now.


----------



## scruffy

citygator said:


> Your racist friends from the 60’s would be Pubs now.


My racist friends?

What the fuck is wrong with you shit for brains assholes?

You have NO fucking IDEA what you're talking about 

None.

Not a clue.

This country is fucked. We're fucked.


----------



## Faun

scruffy said:


> My racist friends?
> 
> What the fuck is wrong with you shit for brains assholes?
> 
> You have NO fucking IDEA what you're talking about
> 
> None.
> 
> Not a clue.
> 
> This country is fucked. We're fucked.



Well, you might be fucked.


----------



## citygator

scruffy said:


> My racist friends?
> 
> What the fuck is wrong with you shit for brains assholes?
> 
> You have NO fucking IDEA what you're talking about
> 
> None.
> 
> Not a clue.
> 
> This country is fucked. We're fucked.


I do. You are the one whining about the old Democratic Party. The only policy they’ve dropped is racism picked up like a champ by pubs. Democrats are the party of the working class  and the people who need to be spoken for: marginalized, minimum wage, vulnerable, those with less access to the American dream. Their goal is simply to provide a platform for basic necessities and a reasonable access to success.

The pubs have only two policies: 1. as little taxes for the top with their pet spending on defense and corporations, 2. Dog whistle racism.

Elements of both are turned into populist messages to rally the uneducated to vote against their welfare. Brilliant.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

playtime said:


> ^^^
> 
> View attachment 666673


I'm never a victim as long as I have a loaded magazine with my view on leftists.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

citygator said:


> I do. You are the one whining about the old Democratic Party. The only policy they’ve dropped is racism picked up like a champ by pubs. Democrats are the party of the working class  and the people who need to be spoken for: marginalized, minimum wage, vulnerable, those with less access to the American dream. Their goal is simply to provide a platform for basic necessities and a reasonable access to success.
> 
> The pubs have only two policies: 1. as little taxes for the top with their pet spending on defense and corporations, 2. Dog whistle racism.
> 
> Elements of both are turned into populist messages to rally the uneducated to vote against their welfare. Brilliant.


The old democrat party is still here. Why do you keep voting for people like Biden who worked with good segregationist to keep his children from going to racial jungle schools?


----------



## bigrebnc1775

playtime said:


> nope.  they did not.  nice hallucination you got goin' on there, though....





			https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/30/anthony-ornato-dispute-conversations/


----------



## eagle1462010

Care4all said:


> Engel's testimony was consistent with Cassidy's testimony on what Ornato told her....minus the embellishment Ornato told her on the Lurch.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bobby Engel's Testimony Consistent With Cassidy Hutchinson—Legal Expert
> 
> 
> Former White House aide Hutchinson told a panel that on January 6,  2021 Donald Trump was irate in the presidential limousine and demanded to be taken to the Capitol to join his supporters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


So what if he did?  What law was violated?

He wouldnt be the 1st President pissed off over security protocals.


----------



## struth

Care4all said:


> Engel's testimony was consistent with Cassidy's testimony on what Ornato told her....minus the embellishment Ornato told her on the Lurch.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bobby Engel's Testimony Consistent With Cassidy Hutchinson—Legal Expert
> 
> 
> Former White House aide Hutchinson told a panel that on January 6,  2021 Donald Trump was irate in the presidential limousine and demanded to be taken to the Capitol to join his supporters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


she said the president assaulted two agents, grabbing one my the neck…sorry that spin is not going to fly


----------



## scruffy

Faun said:


> Well, you might be fucked.


I'll be fine either way. I'll get rich if we have a war.


----------



## hadit

playtime said:


> lol ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> being from CT, & close enough to NYC  whilst growing up  etc....  there aren't many people my age & from my little corner of the good ol' USofA - not aware of donny's filthy life on display since the 70s.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nobody is above the law -  & he will be held accountable.


If you think that means your fantasy of seeing him in prison will come true, it's not happening. But hey, you could try to impeach him again, that might work.


----------



## hadit

struth said:


> she said the president assaulted two agents, grabbing one my the neck…sorry that spin is not going to fly


Correction, she swore under oath that she heard OTHER people say they saw him grab someone. She also swore she was told it was in the Beast, while we are told it was not. That makes the whole story suspect.


----------



## struth

hadit said:


> Correction, she swore under oath that she heard OTHER people say they saw him grab someone. She also swore she was told it was in the Beast, while we are told it was not. That makes the whole story suspect.


yes the committte decided to use hearsay and rumors at their special public session, knowing that rumor wasn’t true, instead of calling the folks in the car

this says all we need to know about the committee


----------



## Hutch Starskey

bripat9643 said:


> The Jan 6 show trial.


Not a trial, dope.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

bripat9643 said:


> Did you have anything aside from cheap shots to offer?
> 
> If no one is above the law, then why are Hillary, Comey, McCabe and Strzok  still walking around free?


Because you were lied to about them. Don’t you ever wonder why your “realities” never seem to materialize?


----------



## Hutch Starskey

BS Filter said:


> The Jan 6th committee......Perpetual masturbating without a climax....


Y’all are here taking loads every day. Why you keep getting back in line is the real question.


----------



## JimH52

excalibur said:


> You mean more lies, hearsay, and whatever they put into the person's mind to say. Or the legal bills will keep rising at $750 an hour. So, tell us what we want and you can cut the hours down.


$750 is cheap.  I bet even the incompetent Rudy could ask for that.....of course trump never pays his bills....so....


----------



## Hutch Starskey

hadit said:


> Correction, she swore under oath that she heard OTHER people say they saw him grab someone. She also swore she was told it was in the Beast, while we are told it was not. That makes the whole story suspect.


Or it simply makes the story incomplete.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

Chillicothe said:


> What an odd choice of imagery, or allegory, for this event.
> Why does the poster choose such?
> What's up with that?


Arrested development?
Many of these posters seem to be forever 14 in their logical and emotional reasoning.


----------



## Oddball

Yer another deputy-assistant covfefe gofer to give 3rd-hand hearsay "testimony".

I'm waiting with bated breath!


----------



## Nostra

Faun said:


> Whatever makes ya feel better, Dumbfuck. A pity you can prove your lies about Hutchinson though. A real shame.


Please show my lies Faun 

Watch this spin......


----------



## Nostra

Faun said:


> He can have equal time. All he has to do his show up for the committee and testify under oath.


How would it be "equal time" to have 9 Trump hating blowhards question him without any means to present a counter position, Moron.

Man, you really are one stupid SOB.


----------



## Nostra

Care4all said:


> Engel's testimony was consistent with Cassidy's testimony on what Ornato told her....minus the embellishment Ornato told her on the Lurch.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bobby Engel's Testimony Consistent With Cassidy Hutchinson—Legal Expert
> 
> 
> Former White House aide Hutchinson told a panel that on January 6,  2021 Donald Trump was irate in the presidential limousine and demanded to be taken to the Capitol to join his supporters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newsweek.com


Link us up to the transcripts Care4all 

I'm not interested in the spin of some leftist "journalist" puking out what Adumb Schifferbrains told them happened.


----------



## struth

Nostra said:


> How would it be "equal time" to have 9 Trump hating blowhards question him without any means to present a counter position, Moron.
> 
> Man, you really are one stupid SOB.


equal time would be for another Star Chamber be created and get to question this “committee” for why they have to decided ignore the truth and knowingly use rumors and misinformation


----------



## Nostra

Can any of the board Lefttards explain why this Clown Show called Gossip Girl if the Secret Service agents are on record  under oath with them saying Trump lunged at them and tried to hijack the "Beast"?

Seems to me they would call an EMERGENCY session to have them testify on their TV show.   Instead, they called Gossip Girl to give us hearsay.

I wonder why.


----------



## struth

Nostra said:


> Can any of the board Lefttards explain why this Clown Show called Gossip Girl if the Secret Service agents are on record  under oath with them saying Trump lunged at them and tried to hijack the "Beast"?
> 
> Seems to me they would call an EMERGENCY session to have them testify on their TV show.   Instead, they called Gossip Girl to give us hearsay.
> 
> I wonder why.


the Shifty Committee operates in gossip and oarody…we learned this during the “impeachment” hoax, and russian hoax…it’s just on full display once again


----------



## JGalt

Oddball said:


> Yer another deputy-assistant covfefe gofer to give 3rd-hand hearsay "testimony".
> 
> I'm waiting with bated breath!



By the time the Dem's Tijuana donkey show is all over, the only thing that'll remain will be something resembling the taste of fish bait in their mouths.


----------



## Smokin' OP

So, the Trump cult are whining about no Trumpsters being allowed to testify.
Now, when they do, they are already called liars even before they testify.
WTF?


----------



## Nostra

Nostra said:


> Can any of the board Lefttards explain why this Clown Show called Gossip Girl if the Secret Service agents are on record  under oath with them saying Trump lunged at them and tried to hijack the "Beast"?
> 
> Seems to me they would call an EMERGENCY session to have them testify on their TV show.   Instead, they called Gossip Girl to give us hearsay.
> 
> I wonder why.


: crickets: from

Faun 
Care4all 
Smokin' OP


----------



## JimH52

Smokin' OP said:


> So, the Trump cult are whining about no Trumpsters being allowed to testify.
> Now, when they do, they are already called liars even before they testify.
> WTF?


Georgia...Georgia will be the first to indict.  But I see Rudy and Eastman asking for immunity.  And the only way they get immunity is to rat on the person who put the whole rotten scheme to overturn the election together.  And they better have some juicy information...or immunity is off the table.

I am beginning to see where this is going.  It will make a great movie.  "The first former president to be indicted."

*Garland, get off your ars and do something!  These people are trying to destroy our democracy and even the tiny Fulton County DA office is ahead of you!*


----------



## CrusaderFrank

JimH52 said:


> Former deputy press secretary for Trump to testify at an upcoming January 6 committee hearing | CNN Politics
> 
> 
> Sarah Matthews, who served as deputy press secretary in the Trump White House until resigning shortly after the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol, has been subpoenaed by the House select committee investigating the insurrection and has agreed to testify at an upcoming hearing, according...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I expect another shocking testimony.



Uninformed sources told me that....


----------



## CrusaderFrank

Harry Dresden said:


> shocking!.......



We got him this time!! Part 35,098,902


----------



## Smokin' OP

Nostra said:


> : crickets: from
> 
> Faun
> Care4all
> Smokin' OP


WTF?
Another "gradiate" from the Trump U. correspondence course?

June 30 2022
Republican Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming said she is "absolutely confident" in blockbuster testimony from former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson, and that the January 6 committee welcomes information from the Secret Service related to the incidents Hutchinson described.

"The committee has spoken to both Mr. Ornato and Mr. Engel, and we welcome additional testimony under oath from both of them, and from anybody else in the Secret Service who has information about any of these issues."

That would be the 12th, dumbass.


----------



## Nostra

Smokin' OP said:


> WTF?
> Another "gradiate" from the Trump U. correspondence course?
> 
> June 30 2022
> Republican Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming said she is "absolutely confident" in blockbuster testimony from former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson, and that the January 6 committee welcomes information from the Secret Service related to the incidents Hutchinson described.
> 
> "The committee has spoken to both Mr. Ornato and Mr. Engel, and we welcome additional testimony under oath from both of them, and from anybody else in the Secret Service who has information about any of these issues."
> 
> That would be the 12th, dumbass.


So you confirm the Clown Show ran with Gossip Girl's hearsay in a rush to make headlines before even trying to confirm her story with those who were actually there.

Yep, a Clown Shit Show is what Adumb Schifferbrians is putting on TV.


----------



## Faun

struth said:


> she said the president assaulted two agents, grabbing one my the neck…sorry that spin is not going to fly



No, what she said was she was told that is what happened. For all we know, Ornato did tell her that but was embellishing. Or maybe whoever told Ornato was embellishing.


----------



## Faun

scruffy said:


> I'll be fine either way. I'll get rich if we have a war.



LOLOL 

You just said you're fucked, moron. Make up your tiny, under-sized mind.


----------



## JimH52

Former White House Counsel Cipollone Agrees to Testify to Jan. 6 Committee
					

Former White House Counsel Pat Cipollone has agreed to testify behind closed doors on Friday to the House committee investigating last year’s assault on the US Capitol, people familiar with the matter said.




					www.bloomberg.com
				




Could this be your 21st Century John Dean?


----------



## JimH52

Chillicothe said:


> As you no doubt know by now, the Select Committee issued a subpoena late yesterday to the chief White House lawyer, Pat Cipollone.
> And, as you no doubt heard in some of the hearings to date.....Cipollone was a prominent voice in meetings. Often a prudent voice urging moderation while warning of legal jeopardy attached to some of the proposed 'Election Reversal'  schemes.
> 
> He's been reluctant to sit before the Committee while under oath or being filmed.
> 
> But, with the effective testimony of Cassidy Hutchinson Cipollone's name became even more prominent than it was when Cheney called him out as she ended the 4th (or was it the 3rd?) hearing.
> 
> Cipollone is now the guy with the spotlight on him.....and it's gonna follow him.  THAT much attention doesn't just fade away. Something hasta happen.  He'll cooperate. Or he'll file a suit to attempt to stop it. But the press will be on him like a perfume.  After all, there's no 'client confidentiality' aspect here. He is the 'People's lawyer'....... NOT Don Trump's lawyer.
> 
> 
> 
> *This morning's Washington Post offered us this:*
> 
> _"But the subpoena may provide cover for Cipollone to cooperate with the committee, as Trump and his allies have sought to keep those in the former president’s orbit from providing the committee with potentially damaging information.
> 
> Hutchinson in her testimony portrayed Cipollone as one of the last firewalls blocking Trump’s efforts to overturn the elections. She testified that, on the morning of Jan. 6, Cipollone came forward with an urgent request, saying “something to the effect of: ‘Please make sure we don’t go up to the Capitol, Cassidy. Keep in touch with me. We’re going to get charged with every crime imaginable if we make that movement happen.’”
> 
> Tuesday’s surprise hearing was designed in part to ramp up pressure on reluctant witnesses such as Cipollone, according to those involved with the investigation....."
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------_
> 
> These hearings have been a fascinating exercise in watching drama, conflict, and the 'sausage-making' ickyness of our elected leaders.


Meet the 21st Century John Dean....


----------



## Smokin' OP

Nostra said:


> So you confirm the Clown Show ran with Gossip Girl's hearsay in a rush to make headlines before even trying to confirm her story with those who were actually there.


HOLY FUCK!!!!!
What a retard and proud to take the Trumptard short bus to his rallies.
There was no hearsay, you moron.
CONFIRMATION will be on the 12th.


Nostra said:


> Yep, a Clown Shit Show is what Adumb Schifferbrians is putting on TV.


Sure, and Tucker is for intellectuals



.


----------



## JimH52

The trump Mafia will now go after Cipollone.  He will be threatened, accosted, and bullied.  That is what the Mafia does.


----------



## struth

Faun said:


> No, what she said was she was told that is what happened. For all we know, Ornato did tell her that but was embellishing. Or maybe whoever told Ornato was embellishing.


Yes, all she did was repeat rumors and hearsay.  I don't take issue with that...the issue is the "Committee" using it, instead of the actual fact witnesses.  They knew the truth, they knew the rumors weren't supported...and used it anyway


----------



## Faun

Nostra said:


> Please show my lies Faun
> 
> Watch this spin......



You said Hutchinson lied. You can't prove that as neither Ornato nor Engel have yet to deny telling her that account which she claims Ornato conveyed to her. That's you lying.

See how easy that was?


----------



## JimH52

Now....Cipollone has agreed to testify.  The walls are closing in on the Fat Former Guy.

Ironically, Cipollone has the same position that John Dean had in Watergate.


----------



## Faun

Nostra said:


> How would it be "equal time" to have 9 Trump hating blowhards question him without any means to present a counter position, Moron.
> 
> Man, you really are one stupid SOB.



Trump has a mouth, right? He can speak, right? He can say whatever the fuck he wants.


----------



## Faun

Nostra said:


> : crickets: from
> 
> Faun
> Care4all
> Smokin' OP



That's already been answered, you idiot. They didn't go into detail about that. 

You should write this down so you don't have to ask again.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

struth said:


> Yes, all she did was repeat rumors and hearsay.  I don't take issue with that...the issue is the "Committee" using it, instead of the actual fact witnesses.  They knew the truth, they knew the rumors weren't supported...and used it anyway


You have no way of knowing what the “truth” is or that the committee is ignoring it. 
The agent allegedly involved, (the fact witness), had already testified to the committee. For all you know, he’s already told the committee this.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> LOLOL
> 
> You're always the fucking moron...
> 
> _a) Those two agents are not actually on record as saying she lied._​​This falls into the, _you can't prove a negative_, category since there is no record of either Ornato or Engel stating Ornato didn't tell Hutchinson Trump lunged at the steering wheel. But as there's no record of any such revelations from them, (a) is not a lie.​
> ​_b) The committee welcomed them to come back again to testify._​​From Fox News...​​_Schiff said he would not discuss details of past testimony, said the committee would welcome those men to testify again_​​So (b) is not a lie.​
> ​_c) The secret service has said they're willing to have those agents testify._​​From CBS News​​_"The United States Secret Service has been cooperating with the Select Committee since its inception in spring 2021, and will continue to do so, including by responding on the record to the Committee regarding the new allegations surfaced in today's testimony," Secret Service spokesperson Anthony Guglielmi said in a statement to CBS News._​​So (c) is not a lie.​
> ​_d) The committee was working with the secret service to have them come back again._​​From Fox News​​_The Jan. 6 committee and the Secret Service are in discussions about whether one or both men will appear on camera._​​So (d) is not a lie.​
> ​_e) You're a fucking moron._​​This is evident in virtually every one of your posts. Even you once referred to yourself as a "fucking moron" and I've agreed with you ever since.​​So (e) is not a lie.​
> ​_f) Better luck next time._​​Although I'm doubtful you can do better, here I'm just hoping you do.​​So (f) is not a lie.​
> 
> As always, you get everything wrong. That's an 'F' for you, fucking moron.


More lies.


----------



## bripat9643

Hutch Starskey said:


> You have no way of knowing what the “truth” is or that the committee is ignoring it.
> The agent allegedly involved, (the fact witness), had already testified to the committee. For all you know, he’s already told the committee this.


Yes, we do know the committee is ignoring it.


----------



## Lastamender

Faun said:


> Again, FruitLoops, they're not under investigation. I know, that's too difficult for you to comprehend.


And that is why all of this is bullshit.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> I can't convince you of anything, fucking moron. Only you can educate yourself and that's an uphill battle for you. VERY uphill. Still, I can post evidence that what I said was not lies. It matters not to me if you accept reality or not.


That's true, you can't, because you've already demonstrated that you're a lying idiot.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> I can't convince you of anything, fucking moron. Only you can educate yourself and that's an uphill battle for you. VERY uphill. Still, I can post evidence that what I said was not lies. It matters not to me if you accept reality or not.


I don't need to edecuate myself about all the lies Dims have told.  They have been exposed countless times.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> No, why would they? They weren't involved with Sedition Day.
> 
> If Trump wants equal time, he can have it just as those who testified under oath. I have no doubt that committee would give him as much ropetime as he wants.


Nancy Pelosi was.


----------



## struth

Hutch Starskey said:


> You have no way of knowing what the “truth” is or that the committee is ignoring it.
> The agent allegedly involved, (the fact witness), had already testified to the committee. For all you know, he’s already told the committee this.


Yes we do....we heard from the agents.   No we know they didn't because they came out after her testimony and said it's not correct and have requested to come back...but the committee hasn't allowed it.  

Moreover, we know, that if they had said this...the Committee would have used them in the public hearing


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> LOLOL
> 
> You're always the fucking moron...
> 
> _a) Those two agents are not actually on record as saying she lied._​​This falls into the, _you can't prove a negative_, category since there is no record of either Ornato or Engel stating Ornato didn't tell Hutchinson Trump lunged at the steering wheel. But as there's no record of any such revelations from them, (a) is not a lie.​
> ​_b) The committee welcomed them to come back again to testify._​​From Fox News...​​_Schiff said he would not discuss details of past testimony, said the committee would welcome those men to testify again_​​So (b) is not a lie.​
> ​_c) The secret service has said they're willing to have those agents testify._​​From CBS News​​_"The United States Secret Service has been cooperating with the Select Committee since its inception in spring 2021, and will continue to do so, including by responding on the record to the Committee regarding the new allegations surfaced in today's testimony," Secret Service spokesperson Anthony Guglielmi said in a statement to CBS News._​​So (c) is not a lie.​
> ​_d) The committee was working with the secret service to have them come back again._​​From Fox News​​_The Jan. 6 committee and the Secret Service are in discussions about whether one or both men will appear on camera._​​So (d) is not a lie.​
> ​_e) You're a fucking moron._​​This is evident in virtually every one of your posts. Even you once referred to yourself as a "fucking moron" and I've agreed with you ever since.​​So (e) is not a lie.​
> ​_f) Better luck next time._​​Although I'm doubtful you can do better, here I'm just hoping you do.​​So (f) is not a lie.​
> 
> As always, you get everything wrong. That's an 'F' for you, fucking moron.


Do you actually believe I'm going to go through everyone of these details and do a tit for tat with a moron like you? 

The thing about debates in this forum is that you can post a lie in 5 seconds that might take me 15 minutes to chase down the information to dispute it.  Of course, that's your intent - to waste all my time and wear me down.

I'm not playing that game, asshole.

The bottom line is that Hutchinson's testimony was hearsay.  It's legally meaningless.


----------



## Nostra

Faun said:


> No, what she said was she was told that is what happened. For all we know, Ornato did tell her that but was embellishing. Or maybe whoever told Ornato was embellishing.


Or maybe she made it up.


----------



## Nostra

JimH52 said:


> Former White House Counsel Cipollone Agrees to Testify to Jan. 6 Committee
> 
> 
> Former White House Counsel Pat Cipollone has agreed to testify behind closed doors on Friday to the House committee investigating last year’s assault on the US Capitol, people familiar with the matter said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bloomberg.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Could this be your 21st Century John Dean?


How many John Dean's have you clowns had in the past 6 years?  About a dozen?


----------



## Nostra

Smokin' OP said:


> HOLY FUCK!!!!!
> What a retard and proud to take the Trumptard short bus to his rallies.
> There was no hearsay, you moron.
> CONFIRMATION will be on the 12th.
> 
> Sure, and Tucker is for intellectuals
> 
> View attachment 666954.


*There was no hearsay, you moron.*



Um, Gossip Girl claims she was told what happened by others.  That is the very definition of hearsay, Simp.


----------



## Nostra

Faun said:


> You said Hutchinson lied. You can't prove that as neither Ornato nor Engel have yet to deny telling her that account which she claims Ornato conveyed to her. That's you lying.
> 
> See how easy that was?


She did lie. The SS says her account will be debunked by the agents if Nazi Piglosi ever let's them testify again.

Also, she claimed to write a letter that her boss says he wrote.

Gossip Girl is a liar, just like you.


----------



## Nostra

Faun said:


> Trump has a mouth, right? He can speak, right? He can say whatever the fuck he wants.


Yeah, right.  Just when I thought you couldn't get any dumber, you do.


----------



## Nostra

Faun said:


> That's already been answered, you idiot. They didn't go into detail about that.
> 
> You should write this down so you don't have to ask again.


Nope.  No answer yet.  Just the kind of claptrap spin you just posted, Simp.


----------



## Nostra

Hutch Starskey said:


> You have no way of knowing what the “truth” is or that the committee is ignoring it.
> The agent allegedly involved, (the fact witness), had already testified to the committee. For all you know, he’s already told the committee this.


If the agent already told the committee this why didn't they call him in open session instead of calling Gossip Girl for her hearsay?


----------



## bripat9643

Hutch Starskey said:


> Because you were lied to about them. Don’t you ever wonder why your “realities” never seem to materialize?


Where did I lie?  Durham says she arranged the whole "Russia! Russia! Russia!" conspiracy.  Multiple crimes were committed when she did that.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> No, what she said was she was told that is what happened. For all we know, Ornato did tell her that but was embellishing. Or maybe whoever told Ornato was embellishing.


Right - hearsay.


----------



## bripat9643

Hutch Starskey said:


> Arrested development?
> Many of these posters seem to be forever 14 in their logical and emotional reasoning.


I can't believe you talk about yourself that way.


Crick said:


> No, they do not.  When the EPA required scrubbers or filters or improved technology that was implemented at the plant level - as they have done repeatedly for decades, it was NOT at the grid level.  The grid level approach began when the EPA mandated CO2 levels that simply could not be met by a coal fired plant under any circumstances in an effort, via a "generational shift", to move power generation from coal to natural gas and from natural gas to wind and solar.  The problem here is that instead of reading the actual opinions, you fools are basing your opinions on the headlines (and only the headlines) you see on Fox, OAN and NewsMax.
> 
> * - As was clearly shown in the text I quoted from the dissenting opinion, above.


The only time the SC decision is when referring to the arguments offered by the EPA, so referring to that term is meaningless.

BTW, asshole, the SC decision, so every time you ask me to quote some argument from it you're just playing games.  You know damn well no one is going to read that thing.  Only an lying asshole would even suggest that someone do that.  I leave that to the legal experts employed by the news outlets that I trust.


----------



## bripat9643

Hutch Starskey said:


> Not a trial, dope.


Right.  Show trials are not trials.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> No, what she said was she was told that is what happened. For all we know, Ornato did tell her that but was embellishing. Or maybe whoever told Ornato was embellishing.


She spewed hearsay.  End of story.


----------



## bripat9643

JimH52 said:


> The trump Mafia will now go after Cipollone.  He will be threatened, accosted, and bullied.  That is what the Mafia does.


Dims are the thugs in these matters.  They have bared their fangs over and over.


----------



## bripat9643

struth said:


> Yes, all she did was repeat rumors and hearsay.  I don't take issue with that...the issue is the "Committee" using it, instead of the actual fact witnesses.  They knew the truth, they knew the rumors weren't supported...and used it anyway


Telling that they preferred the hearsay to testimony from people who were there.


----------



## EvilCat Breath

The armed mob is just another lie








						Another January 6 Lie: No ‘Armed Mob’ › American Greatness
					

To hear Andrew McCarthy tell it, Donald Trump’s racuous speech at the Ellipse on January 6 ended with a “Braveheart” moment when the president beseeched his throng of weapon-wielding supporters to…




					amgreatness.com


----------



## Hutch Starskey

bripat9643 said:


> Yes, we do know the committee is ignoring it.


Ignoring what?


----------



## Hutch Starskey

struth said:


> Yes we do....we heard from the agents.   No we know they didn't because they came out after her testimony and said it's not correct and have requested to come back...but the committee hasn't allowed it.
> 
> Moreover, we know, that if they had said this...the Committee would have used them in the public hearing


Which agents have you heard from?
Not the two in the vehicle. Neither have made any statement. 
Again. You have no way of knowing why or if any testimony from the agents is not being made public or if it even can be.


----------



## MagicMike

Esdraelon said:


> Every one of these crusades has the effect of boosting his popularity.  Add that to the chaotic cluster fudge of the current admin and he's a shoo-in for '24.  But go ahead   I'm SURE you've "got him" THIS time











						Dunning-Kruger effect | Definition, Examples, & Facts
					

Dunning-Kruger effect,  in psychology, a cognitive bias whereby people with limited knowledge or competence in a given intellectual or social domain greatly overestimate their own knowledge or competence in that domain relative to objective criteria or to the performance of their peers or of...



					www.britannica.com


----------



## bripat9643

Hutch Starskey said:


> Ignoring what?


Ignoring the two agents who actually witnessed the events Hutchinson pretends to describe.


----------



## citygator

bigrebnc1775 said:


> The old democrat party is still here. Why do you keep voting for people like Biden who worked with good segregationist to keep his children from going to racial jungle schools?


Because the GQP has taken that flag to carry. Democratic policy is a much better option than the GOP nonsense. Nothings perfect but the Texas platform is nothing short of bonkers.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

Nostra said:


> If the agent already told the committee this why didn't they call him in open session instead of calling Gossip Girl for her hearsay?


I said you have no way of knowing if he did. The committee says they have full confidence in her testimony. To me that means she’s probably not their only source. Maybe the Secret Service only testifies privately so as to not publicly embarrass those they secure. Trust is a big part of their obligation to those they spend enormous amounts of time with.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

bripat9643 said:


> Ignoring the two agents who actually witnessed the events Hutchinson pretends to describe.


How do you know they have done so?
You only know they have not publicly disclosed their testimony.

You’re creating narrative about something you can’t possibly know.


----------



## JimH52

Hutch Starskey said:


> Which agents have you heard from?
> Not the two in the vehicle. Neither have made any statement.
> Again. You have no way of knowing why or if any testimony from the agents is not being made public or if it even can be.


The lengths these MAGA nuts go to defend their Fat Former Guy is amazing.  Garland is going to have a hard decision to make soon.  Does he ignore the obvious crimes that the FFG and his cohorts committed or does he make the FFG the first Former president the first to be Indicted?  And even if he is Indicted, there could very well be a MAGA cult member who lies his way onto the jury.  That person could hang the jury.  Then the FFG will boast that he was innocent all along.
But if he is not held accountable, he or one of his fellow criminals will try another coup attempt.  Count on it!

Garland has a hard decision to make. It looks like Fulton County has already made it?


----------



## JimH52

Hutch Starskey said:


> How do you know they have done so?
> You only know they have not publicly disclosed their testimony.
> 
> You’re creating narrative about something you can’t possibly know.











						Did the Secret Service 'Officially Debunk' Hutchinson's Testimony?
					

This rumor surfaced in a tweet after Cassidy Hutchinson testified in front of the U.S. House Jan. 6 panel.




					www.snopes.com


----------



## Oddball

Good fucking grief....


----------



## JimH52

bripat9643 said:


> Dims are the thugs in these matters.  They have bared their fangs over and over.


trump is the one on the hot seat.  Now that Cipollone has agreed to testify, trump must be very nervous.  You know that he will direct some of his cult to threaten Cipollone.  It is not the crime that takes most people down....it is the attempted cover up.


----------



## surada

JimH52 said:


> The lengths these MAGA nuts go to defend their Fat Former Guy is amazing.  Garland is going to have a hard decision to make soon.  Does he ignore the obvious crimes that the FFG and his cohorts committed or does he make the FFG the first Former president the first to be Indicted?  And even if he is Indicted, there could very well be a MAGA cult member who lies his way onto the jury.  That person could hang the jury.  Then the FFG will boast that he was innocent all along.
> But if he is not held accountable, he or one of his fellow criminals will try another coup attempt.  Count on it!
> 
> Garland has a hard decision to make. It looks like Fulton County has already made it?



Not former fat guy. He's still morbidly obese.


----------



## Lastamender

Pelosi Refuses to Explain Her Role in Jan. 6 Riots -- Instead Her Spokesman Releases Smart-Aleck Remarks -- What Is She Hiding?
					

In February 2021 Republican Representatives Jim Jordan (R-OH), Devin Nunes (R-CA), Rodney Davis (R-IL) and James Comer (R-KY) sent a letter to Speaker Pelosi on her failure to protect the US Capitol on January 6, 2021. The four ranking members asked Speaker Pelosi to explain her decision to: **...




					www.thegatewaypundit.com
				



*The four ranking members asked Speaker Pelosi to explain her decision to:*
** Deny national guard support on January 4th
** What conversations did she or her staff give Sergeant at Arms Paul Irving specifit to January 6th?
** What response did you give security officials on January 6th when National Guard support was initially requested?
** Why are House Officers refusing to turn over documents relevant to that day?


----------



## Lastamender

surada said:


> Not former fat guy. He's still morbidly obese.


Nadler?


----------



## BackAgain

JimH52 said:


> trump is the one on the hot seat.  Now that Cipollone has agreed to testify, trump must be very nervous.  You know that he will direct some of him cult to threaten Cipollone.  It is not the crime that takes most people down....it is the attempted cover up.


*Yeah* yeah. This time. This is the time. The other times were all false alarms. But THIS TIME you guys got him. Trump is all doomed and shit, *this* time. 

i am here to help.  I tell you this in actual truth: it’s not the lack of seriousness of the allegations that lead to all your libtarded fails. It’s the lack of concern you guys have for the truth, logic and evidence. 

You might as well start scheduling your next massive “bombshell,” now. Because like all the other pre-announced “bombshells,” this one will be a dud, too.


----------



## Harry Dresden

JimH52 said:


> Georgia...Georgia will be the first to indict.  But I see Rudy and Eastman asking for immunity.  And the only way they get immunity is to rat on the person who put the whole rotten scheme to overturn the election together.  And they better have some juicy information...or immunity is off the table.
> 
> I am beginning to see where this is going.  It will make a great movie.  "The first former president to be indicted."
> 
> *Garland, get off your ars and do something!  These people are trying to destroy our democracy and even the tiny Fulton County DA office is ahead of you!*


garland is a wuss jimmie....yea i know,i was shocked too....


----------



## Harry Dresden

CrusaderFrank said:


> We got him this time!! Part 35,098,902


he is persistent.....


----------



## hadit

Hutch Starskey said:


> Or it simply makes the story incomplete.


No, suspect, because if she heard correctly, then the so-called firsthand witnesses were not telling the truth. That doesn't mean she deliberately lied, it just means that if we want to know what really happened, we don't ask her, and quite frankly, there's no good reason for her to recount the story in the first place.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

citygator said:


> Because the GQP has taken that flag to carry. Democratic policy is a much better option than the GOP nonsense. Nothings perfect but the Texas platform is nothing short of bonkers.


Nope wrong docrats still use blacks like they did during slave days.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

JimH52 said:


> Did the Secret Service 'Officially Debunk' Hutchinson's Testimony?
> 
> 
> This rumor surfaced in a tweet after Cassidy Hutchinson testified in front of the U.S. House Jan. 6 panel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.snopes.com


And snoop's is just full of shit balls that you love to eat.


----------



## JimH52

Mashmont said:


> Oh a flag pole (that was already there).  Of course.  lol.  You leftwingers are starting to believe your own ridiculous story.


NO they weren't.  They brought their own TRUMP flags and confederate flags that they used to beat the police.  No matter how you try to spin it, everyone with a brain so what the trump mob did on January 6th.  If he decides to run again in 2024 and the cowardly repubs give him the nomination, the January 6th videos will be part of the Dems campaign ads.  If there was no attack, as you claim, then you should welcome the videos.


----------



## Lastamender

JimH52 said:


> NO they weren't.  They brought their own TRUMP flags and confederate flags that they used to beat the police.  No matter how you try to spin it, everyone with a brain so what the trump mob did on January 6th.  If he decides to run again in 2024 and the cowardly repubs give him the nomination, the January 6th videos will be part of the Dems campaign ads.  If there was no attack, as you claim, then you should welcome the videos.


The Capitol police beat a woman to death. It is on video.


----------



## theHawk

JimH52 said:


> We all watched it on TV.  The weapons were flag poles, bear spray, fire extinguishers, and there were firearms found later.  It was an attack.  It was a coup attempt incited by a fat man that could not admit it lost his re-election.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Capitol Protesters Were Armed With Variety of Weapons - FactCheck.org
> 
> 
> Conservative social media posts misleadingly claim the attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 was not an "armed" insurrection, citing FBI testimony that no guns were seized from suspects that day. But 23 people have been charged with having deadly or dangerous weapons during the assault --...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.factcheck.org


Okay so when we see those “weapons” at BLM riots, we can open fire.


----------



## theHawk

JimH52 said:


> CNN Exclusive: Republicans who texted Meadows with urgent pleas on January 6 say Trump could have stopped the violence
> 
> 
> Within minutes of the US Capitol breach on January 6, 2021, messages began pouring into the cell phone of White House chief of staff Mark Meadows. Among those texting were Republican members of Congress, former members of the Trump administration, GOP activists, Fox personalities -- even the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But hours went by before trump did anything.


Complete and total lie.  He tweeted out to stay “peaceful” at 2:38pm and 3:13pm.

Your lie is debunked that “hours went by” before Trump did anything.


----------



## theHawk

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Having been voted out of office, Trump was content to do nothing and watch America burn to the ground..


Burn to the ground?

Our side isn’t BLM.


----------



## Chillicothe

JimH52 said:


> t I see Rudy and Eastman asking for immunity


Yeah, that 'immunity'-thingy is something that probably the DOJ will have a say in.  After all, they are the ones who who file the charges.


Nostra said:


> ".....ran with Gossip Girl's hearsay in a rush to make headlines before even trying to confirm her story with those who were actually there.


Well, recent analysis in last weekend's NYT was that they move Hutchinson up in the calendar because of the persistent attempts by Meadows, and Trump allies to intimidate and get the woman to change her testimony.


----------



## playtime

struth said:


> yeah those are opinions from a guy from CT



 i'm a born & raised female.   & you are wrong about it all.

* they are 100% factual, jr*.  don't like it?  too bad.

how he ripped people off - thru his fraudulent university....

*fact.  *

A.G. Schneiderman Statement On Final Trump University Settlement​A.G. Schneiderman Statement On Final Trump University Settlement | New York State Attorney General

stole from his own 'charity' to use as his personal piggy bank...

*fact.*

Donald J. Trump Pays Court-Ordered $2 Million For Illegally Using Trump Foundation Funds​_Trump Ordered to Pay Eight Separate Charities $250,000 Each
Remaining $1.8 Million in Trump Foundation Bank Account Disbursed Among Charities_
Donald J. Trump Pays Court-Ordered $2 Million For Illegally Using Trump Foundation Funds  | New York State Attorney General

tried to steal on old woman's home & property, so he could bulldoze it to build a limo parking lot for his now bankrupted casino patrons...

*fact.*

Atlantic City Condemnation – Vera Coking​Public Power, Private Gain: The Abuse of Eminent Domain
“Individual freedom finds tangible expression in property rights.” This statement, penned by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, recognizes how central property rights are to a free society.
Atlantic City Condemnation - Vera Coking - Institute for Justice

how he splashed his affair allover the tabloids whilst still married - humiliating his wife & 3 young spawn at the time...

*fact.  now ..  your OPINION might be that it wasn't filthy or sleazy to do so, which doesn't surprize me ... but it is YOU who is too poorly educated to know the diff.  **

The Real Story Behind Donald Trump’s Infamous “Best Sex I’ve Ever Had” Headline (Guest Column)

how he would go into the dressing rooms of young contestants of his beauty pageant to 'inspect' them ....

*fact.*

i use to listen to howard stern back in the day & he had trump on alot.
i heard the show live & donny bragged about doing that.

*again -  YOUR OPINION = not filthy/sleazy?*

how he took one winner of his contest - & forced her to 'work out' at a gym in front of the media because she had gained a few pounds....

*fact.*


*YOUR OPINION = not filthy/sleazy?*

is that enough?

hmmmmm, silly me -  *MY OPINION *is you don't think this is either, because you're in a cult. ....


*fact.*



struth said:


> It’s no real surprised he spent a lot of time donating to dems back then though



of course he did.  donny was in it for himself ...

*fact.*


----------



## Esdraelon

surada said:


> Not former fat guy. He's still morbidly obese.


So?  Get back to us when he's shitting himself in an audience with a world leader, um kay?


----------



## surada

Esdraelon said:


> So?  Get back to us when he's shitting himself in an audience with a world leader, um kay?



Trump has been in diapers since he was a game show host on celebrity apprentice.


----------



## playtime

bigrebnc1775 said:


> I'm never a victim as long as I have a loaded magazine with my view on leftists.



^^^


----------



## Esdraelon

JimH52 said:


> the January 6th videos will be part of the Dems campaign ads.


No prob... I'll see your riot vids and raise you 4 years worth of economic misery.  TICK... TOCK...


----------



## playtime

Esdraelon said:


> So?  Get back to us when he's shitting himself in an audience with a world leader, um kay?


----------



## playtime

hadit said:


> If you think that means your fantasy of seeing him in prison will come true, it's not happening. But hey, you could try to impeach him again, that might work.


----------



## citygator

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Nope wrong docrats still use blacks like they did during slave days.


 Brilliant. That’s why 90% of them vote democrat. It’s not that democrats are great _it’s that Pubs are horrific for black Americans. _


----------



## Esdraelon

surada said:


> Trump has been in diapers since he was a game show host on celebrity apprentice.


Source?  Let me guess... "EVERYBODY KNOWS"... am I right?


----------



## surada

Esdraelon said:


> Source?  Let me guess... "EVERYBODY KNOWS"... am I right?



The crew on the celebrity apprentice said Trump always wore diapers.


----------



## playtime

Esdraelon said:


> Source?  Let me guess... "EVERYBODY KNOWS"... am I right?



not just staff  from his crappy reality show ( pun intended ... get it???? )

but also from the WWE.

take yer pick of sources who reported the same thing ...

https://www.google.com/search?q=cel...dge..69i57.13119j0j1&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8





__





						trump diaper WWE - Google Search
					





					www.google.com


----------



## hadit

playtime said:


> View attachment 667011


Your fantasy has pictures.


----------



## citygator

theHawk said:


> Burn to the ground?
> 
> Our side isn’t BLM.


“Our” side?  What the fuck?  Are you not American?


----------



## theHawk

citygator said:


> “Our” side?  What the fuck?  Are you not American?


I know these things are confusing for commies.  Patriots are Americans who live this country and the constitution.  BLM, Antifa, radical left commies, hate this country and the constitution.  BLM and the left call for “burning it all to the ground”, and they on many occasions have burnt buildings and cities to the ground.


----------



## JimH52

Chillicothe said:


> Yeah, that 'immunity'-thingy is something that probably the DOJ will have a say in.  After all, they are the ones who who file the charges.
> 
> Well, recent analysis in last weekend's NYT was that they move Hutchinson up in the calendar because of the persistent attempts by Meadows, and Trump allies to intimidate and get the woman to change her testimony.


Typical Mafia ploy...


----------



## bigrebnc1775

playtime said:


> ^^^
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 667008


🖕🖕🖕🖕


----------



## bigrebnc1775

citygator said:


> Brilliant. That’s why 90% of them vote democrat. It’s not that democrats are great _it’s that Pubs are horrific for black Americans. _


Doesn't speak much about their intelligence.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

hadit said:


> No, suspect, because if she heard correctly, then the so-called firsthand witnesses were not telling the truth. That doesn't mean she deliberately lied, it just means that if we want to know what really happened, we don't ask her, and quite frankly, there's no good reason for her to recount the story in the first place.


So the story is incomplete then.  Got it. 
Why are all these Trump folks lying anyway?


----------



## JimH52

Hutch Starskey said:


> So the story is incomplete then.  Got it.
> Why are all these Trump folks lying anyway?


Covering for the Jolly Orange POS.


----------



## hadit

Hutch Starskey said:


> So the story is incomplete then.  Got it.
> Why are all these Trump folks lying anyway?


If it is that incomplete, it should not have been brought up in the hearing. The holes in the story should have been enough for it to have been a media leak instead of sworn testimony.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

hadit said:


> If it is that incomplete, it should not have been brought up in the hearing. The holes in the story should have been enough for it to have been a media leak instead of sworn testimony.


There are no holes. It is what it is. It will be addressed one way or the other in future testimony.


----------



## hadit

Hutch Starskey said:


> There are no holes. It is what it is. It will be addressed one way or the other in future testimony.


The biggest hole is that she swore she was told he was in the Beast, when we're told by other sources he was in an SUV. That alone makes it questionable, because it's not an easy mistake to make.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

hadit said:


> The biggest hole is that she swore she was told he was in the Beast, when we're told by other sources he was in an SUV. That alone makes it questionable, because it's not an easy mistake to make.


It’s not a hole. She’s simply relating what she was told by Ornato. He’s the only one who can speak to that.  
Why are Trump folks lying to you?


----------



## hadit

Hutch Starskey said:


> It’s not a hole. She’s simply relating what she was told by Ornato. He’s the only one who can speak to that.
> Why are Trump folks lying to you?


Uhhh, yeah, if she is repeating accurately what she was told, and she's under oath, remember, that's a hole in the story. It doesn't directly impact her credibility but underscores the weakness of hearsay when the credibility of statements needs to be ascertained. It casts doubt on the story that the person claiming it happened has that wrong.


----------



## Leo123

JimH52 said:


> CNN Exclusive: Republicans who texted Meadows with urgent pleas on January 6 say Trump could have stopped the violence
> 
> 
> Within minutes of the US Capitol breach on January 6, 2021, messages began pouring into the cell phone of White House chief of staff Mark Meadows. Among those texting were Republican members of Congress, former members of the Trump administration, GOP activists, Fox personalities -- even the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But hours went by before trump did anything.


It wasn't an attack.  They weren't even armed and the only person shot was an unarmed woman.  The BLM riots were attacks...

_*we are supposed to believe that the Jan. 6 Capitol riots were the worst attack on American democracy since the Civil War, worse than 9/11, the president told us, and the rioters must be treated as terrorists on par with ISIS.*_

*Yet, as RealClearInvestigations has found, the 2020 BLM riots resulted in “15 times more injured police officers, 30 times as many arrests, and estimated damages in dollar terms up to 1,300 times more costly than those of the Capitol riot.”*








						BLM privilege and Jan. 6 Capitol riot shame
					

Quintez Brown was arrested last week for assassinating a Jewish mayoral candidate but was bailed out of jail by his Black Lives Matter comrades. However, participants in the Jan.6 riot are held to …




					nypost.com


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Hutch Starskey said:


> So the story is incomplete then.  Got it.
> Why are all these Trump folks lying anyway?


Liar


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Hutch Starskey said:


> It’s not a hole. She’s simply relating what she was told by Ornato. He’s the only one who can speak to that.
> Why are Trump folks lying to you?


She lied but with your avoidance of the truth lies is what you do.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Hutch Starskey said:


> It’s not a hole. She’s simply relating what she was told by Ornato. He’s the only one who can speak to that.
> Why are Trump folks lying to you?


Why are you a lying sack of shit. That is the real question.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Why are you a lying sack of shit. That is the real question.







__





						Two secret service agents say Ornato lied on them
					

That's pretty F up crazy....demented....thinking there, Tommy. My predition.. They won't testify under oath claiming she made up the story she was told....because they do not want to commit perjury....  The SS will put out some statement from them, without being under oath before the...



					www.usmessageboard.com


----------



## bigrebnc1775

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Two secret service agents say Ornato lied on them
> 
> 
> That's pretty F up crazy....demented....thinking there, Tommy. My predition.. They won't testify under oath claiming she made up the story she was told....because they do not want to commit perjury....  The SS will put out some statement from them, without being under oath before the...
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmessageboard.com


No one in the secret service would use a term such as the beast because it doesn't exist.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

hadit said:


> Uhhh, yeah, if she is repeating accurately what she was told, and she's under oath, remember, that's a hole in the story. It doesn't directly impact her credibility but underscores the weakness of hearsay when the credibility of statements needs to be ascertained. It casts doubt on the story that the person claiming it happened has that wrong.


You’re aware that these are all Trump people you’re impugning, right? These aren’t never Trumpers or Dems.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

bigrebnc1775 said:


> No one in the secret service would use a term such as the beast because it doesn't exist.


Bullshit. It is known as the Beast,


----------



## bigrebnc1775

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Bullshit. It is known as the Beast,


Not by the secret service. That's a media dreamed up name


----------



## JimH52

Hutch Starskey said:


> You’re aware that these are all Trump people you’re impugning, right? These aren’t never Trumpers or Dems.


trump is done.  But his sh*t stain will be on our country for generations.


----------



## Indeependent

JimH52 said:


> trump is done.  But his sh*t stain will be on our country for generations.


If you believed that you wouldn't spend 99% of your awake time posting that.


----------



## Who_Me?

surada said:


> Even his kids were freaking out and trying to get Trump to call it off, but Trump was enjoying the violence.


Trump's mantra is, "If I can't have it nobody can".  We all ran into those dolts in grade school or high school.  The orange narcissist never grew up!  He lives in fantasy land.


----------



## surada

Who_Me? said:


> Trump's mantra is, "If I can't have it nobody can".  We all ran into those dolts in grade school or high school.  The orange narcissist never grew up!  He lives in fantasy land.



Trump is a voyeur and he likes violence.


----------



## Who_Me?

surada said:


> Trump is a voyeur and he likes violence.


I wish the Secret Service would have taken him to the Capitol and dropped his fat ass off.  It would have been interesting to see what Captain Bone Spurs would have done.  He fights like a girl you know.


----------



## surada

Who_Me? said:


> I wish the Secret Service would have taken him to the Capitol and dropped his fat ass off.  It would have been interesting to see what Captain Bone Spurs would have done.  He fights like a girl you know.



🤣🤣🤣😂🤣 I may die laughing. What a great idea.


----------



## JimH52

Who_Me? said:


> Trump's mantra is, "If I can't have it nobody can".  We all ran into those dolts in grade school or high school.  The orange narcissist never grew up!  He lives in fantasy land.


Can you imagine having that bully in you class at school?  I bet there were kids that wanted to take him behind the ball field grand stands and beat the crap out of the spoiled, rich, bully.

I expect the only friends he ever had were other spoiled, rich, bullies.


----------



## surada

JimH52 said:


> Can you imagine having that bully in you class at school?  I bet there were kids that wanted to take him behind the ball field grand stands and beat the crap out of the spoiled, rich, bully.
> 
> I expect the only friends he ever had were other spoiled, rich, bullies.



Trump was sent away at age 12 to a second rate military school.


----------



## citygator

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Doesn't speak much about their intelligence.


And you wonder why they don’t vote Republican with your contempt and insults. F off.


----------



## MagicMike

Mashmont said:


> For the 1000th time, how can you have an attack on the Capitol without one single weapon?


Define weapon.


----------



## MagicMike

Mashmont said:


> Oh a flag pole (that was already there).  Of course.  lol.  You leftwingers are starting to believe your own ridiculous story.


Mashmont you sound like a guy who is loosing his struggle to bail the boat out quickly enough.


----------



## MagicMike

johngaltshrugged said:


> It was a peaceful demonstration until the feds instigated violence with the cops & then egged the angry masses on after the cops started retaliating with tear gas & clubs.
> Nice try proggy.
> Nobody is buying your BS outside the low info bed wetters


Conspiracy think much?


----------



## bigrebnc1775

citygator said:


> And you wonder why they don’t vote Republican with your contempt and insults. F off.


The slave mentality of the democrat plantation


----------



## playtime

hadit said:


> Your fantasy has pictures.



so does yours.


----------



## playtime

theHawk said:


> Burn to the ground?
> 
> Our side isn’t BLM.


----------



## playtime

bigrebnc1775 said:


> 🖕🖕🖕🖕View attachment 667037




^^^


----------



## playtime

Leo123 said:


> It wasn't an attack.  They weren't even armed and the only person shot was an unarmed woman.  The BLM riots were attacks...



& now for the truth:


----------



## bigrebnc1775

playtime said:


> ^^^


Bless your heart but snowflake is a term trademark for leftists


----------



## playtime

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Bless your heart but snowflake is a term trademark for leftists



if you say so *buttercup.*


----------



## bigrebnc1775

playtime said:


> & now for the truth:


The bitch lied and the other bitches day are limited


----------



## bigrebnc1775

playtime said:


> if you say so *buttercup.*


Bless your heart snowflake you've been called that since nov 2016


----------



## playtime

bigrebnc1775 said:


> The bitch lied and the other bitches day are limited



you are too much of a coward to watch, arent'cha *buttercup*?

22 seconds in & there is RADIO TRANSMISSION & VIDEO TAKEN BY SECRET SERVICE, dimbulb.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

playtime said:


> you are too much of a coward to watch, arent'cha *buttercup*?
> 
> 22 seconds in & there is RADIO TRANSMISSION & VIDEO TAKEN BY SECRET SERVICE, dimbulb.


Sure thing snowflake


----------



## playtime

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Bless your heart snowflake you've been called that since nov 2016












i'm not the one having a hissy fit about a word.....


----------



## bigrebnc1775

playtime said:


> i'm not the one having a hissy fit about a word.....


Sure thing snowflake


----------



## playtime

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Sure thing snowflake



lol ...

*so you can't even last 22 seconds...........*


----------



## bigrebnc1775

playtime said:


> lol ...
> 
> *so you can't even last 22 seconds...........*
> 
> 
> View attachment 667150


Sure thing snowflake ❄️


----------



## playtime

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Sure thing snowflake ❄️



you proved it.  

lol ...

all you got are blanks.

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

incels always do.


----------



## JimH52

MagicMike said:


> Mashmont you sound like a guy who is loosing his struggle to bail the boat out quickly enough.


Their defense of the Former Fat Guy is failing.  With each J6 hearing...more of his despicable actions are revealed.  trump is gone.  desantis rejoices.


----------



## Seymour Flops

JimH52 said:


> We all watched it on TV.  The weapons were flag poles, bear spray, fire extinguishers, and there were firearms found later.  It was an attack.



Sounds mostly peaceful with no evidence of widespread violence.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Seymour Flops said:


> Sounds mostly peaceful with no evidence of widespread violence.




95%+ of BLM protests in 2020 were peaceful.

100% of the orange turd cult insurrections in 2021 were not.


----------



## theHawk

playtime said:


>


Jesus Christ, the left can’t meme.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> 95%+ of BLM protests in 2020 were peaceful.


Before or after they put out the fires?


Fort Fun Indiana said:


> 100% of the orange turd cult insurrections in 2021 were not.


The mostly peaceful protests at the Capital had no evidence of widespread violence.

Stop mindlessly repeating talking points.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Seymour Flops said:


> Before or after they put out the fires?


A pretty stupid question, as peaceful would mean, "no arson". I will chalk that one up to a mini stroke, or a bad day.




Seymour Flops said:


> The mostly peaceful protests at the Capital had no evidence of widespread violence.


Followed up by a shameless, embarrassing cult lie.

Nope. No stroke. You are just of low character, apparently.


----------



## Chillicothe

bigrebnc1775 said:


> _".....snowflake is a term trademark for leftists."_



Well, I can't speak to this "leftists" thingy.  I don't know any.

However, some RightyTighties have been described as* Elmer Fudds'.*
Hell, I know that to be true, as I read it on this very forum.
Even applied to specific posters.

So there is that.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> A pretty stupid question, as peaceful would mean, "no arson". I will chalk that one up to a mini stroke, or a bad day.


But there was some arson in the BLM/ANTIFA riots that were still mostly peaceful. Only a liar would deny that.

The big difference is that Trump asked his supporters to peacefully protest, and of course they mostly did.

A tiny percent of his supporters had weapons and of that tiny percent, an even smaller percent hurt anyone.

Wish we could say that for BLM.


----------



## Winco

Mashmont said:


> For the 1000th time, how can you have an attack on the Capitol without one single weapon?


Video evidence suggests otherwise. 

And Babbitt was a traitor 


Lastamender said:


> Were the rioters watching TV? How would they have known and why would they care? You people are just plain dumb.


They had radios dumbass. 


CrusaderFrank said:


> J6 Reichstag Fire


Nice try Frank, for the 100th time you’ve posted this.


----------



## Lastamender

Winco said:


> Video evidence suggests otherwise.
> 
> And Babbitt was a traitor
> 
> They had radios dumbass.
> 
> Nice try Frank, for the 100th time you’ve posted this.


Radios? You mean cell phones? I always turn mine off when I am rioting. What a dumb excuse.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

Winco said:


> Video evidence suggests otherwise.
> 
> And Babbitt was a traitor
> 
> They had radios dumbass.
> 
> Nice try Frank, for the 100th time you’ve posted this.


Probably more than 100

J6 Reichstag Fire


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Seymour Flops said:


> But there was some arson in the BLM/ANTIFA riots that were still mostly peaceful.


So, the other 5%. Thank you, captain obvious. 

So you agree even the ones that had violence were mostly peaceful. You're really helping me move the needle, here. 




Seymour Flops said:


> A tiny percent of his supporters had weapons and of that tiny percent, an even smaller percent hurt anyone.


Just 140 police officers.

*had YET to hurt anyone

Who were they going to hurt, after blasting through the police? Each other?

Oh that's right... congress.


----------



## Faun

Seymour Flops said:


> Sounds mostly peaceful with no evidence of widespread violence.



You must be conservative because only a conservative is stupid enough to say something like that.


----------



## Smokin' OP

Nostra said:


> *There was no hearsay, you moron.*
> 
> 
> 
> Um, Gossip Girl claims she was told what happened by others.  That is the very definition of hearsay, Simp.


NO, it isn't you fucking retard.
Let me dumb it down for the Trump U. grade school "gradiate'.

IF Hutchinson was asked what happened after Trump got in the SUV and she replied "Trump tried to grab the steering wheel of the SUV"...........THAT would be hearsay.

Cassidy was asked what was said by Tony Ornato, in her presence, back at the white house.

I looked at Tony. And he had said, did you effing hear what happened in the Beast? I said, no, Tony. I just got back. What happened?

Tony proceeded to tell me that when the president got in the Beast, he was under the impression from Mr. Meadows that the off-the-record movement to the Capitol was still possible and likely to happen, but that Bobby had more information. 

So once the president had gotten into the vehicle with Bobby, he thought that they were going up to the Capitol. And when Bobby had relayed to him, we're not, we don't have the assets to do it, it's not secure, we're going back to the West Wing, the President had very strong-- a very angry response to that. Tony described him as being irate.

*NOT *Fucking hearsay, she didn't claim, either way the validity of the statement, only that it was made.


----------



## Weatherman2020

JimH52 said:


> CNN Exclusive: Republicans who texted Meadows with urgent pleas on January 6 say Trump could have stopped the violence
> 
> 
> Within minutes of the US Capitol breach on January 6, 2021, messages began pouring into the cell phone of White House chief of staff Mark Meadows. Among those texting were Republican members of Congress, former members of the Trump administration, GOP activists, Fox personalities -- even the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But hours went by before trump did anything.


How’s that working out for ya?


----------



## Care4all

Nostra said:


> : crickets: from
> 
> Faun
> Care4all
> Smokin' OP


... it doesn't really matter to their case, what Tony Ornato told her about the Lurch....

The only thing Trump is denying that she said, is the Lurch towards SS agents, he never denies any of the other things she testified to....which were the important things!!!!

But, so ya know....the SS guys can come in to testify again, its up to them, when they can or if they want to.

Congress is on break this week, they are in home states.

The committee staffer lawyers are interviewing the white house counsel Patrick Cipollone this week.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones

Weatherman2020 said:


> How’s that working out for ya?


_“Text began coming in to Meadows on January 6th, begging trump to stop the Capitol attack”_

And Trump did nothing.

Indeed, Trump actually supported and encourage an armed attack on the Capitol; he was going to march with his terrorists and install himself as despot and dictator.

And conservative want Trump to be ‘president’ again.


----------



## Weatherman2020

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> _“Text began coming in to Meadows on January 6th, begging trump to stop the Capitol attack”_
> 
> And Trump did nothing.
> 
> Indeed, Trump actually supported and encourage an armed attack on the Capitol; he was going to march with his terrorists and install himself as despot and dictator.
> 
> And conservative want Trump to be ‘president’ again.


Sure he did. And Trump knew what was in the cars of every protester too.

The Eye is always watching….




And enjoy President Trump in two years.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

playtime said:


> you proved it.
> 
> lol ...
> 
> all you got are blanks.
> 
> LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> incels always do.


Sure thing snowflake


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Chillicothe said:


> Well, I can't speak to this "leftists" thingy.  I don't know any.
> 
> However, some RightyTighties have been described as* Elmer Fudds'.*
> Hell, I know that to be true, as I read it on this very forum.
> Even applied to specific posters.
> 
> So there is that.
> 
> View attachment 667175 View attachment 667179


Another snowflake that wishes to be recognized. The left has been known as snowflakes since nov.9 2016 meltdown


----------



## Clipper

bripat9643 said:


> She witnessed nothing, you fucking douchebag.  It's all hearsay.


She was Meadows' assistant, CLOWN. She saw it all. Think she was just there to serve coffee?


----------



## Seymour Flops

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> So, the other 5%. Thank you, captain obvious.
> 
> So you agree even the ones that had violence were mostly peaceful. You're really helping me move the needle, here.


I guess you think I'm dumb to be honest about the BLM protests being mostly peaceful when you keep refusing to admit the Jan 6th protests were also mostly peaceful.


Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Just 140 police officers.
> 
> *had YET to hurt anyone
> 
> Who were they going to hurt, after blasting through the police? Each other?
> 
> Oh that's right... congress.


I could take the time to list the thousands of acts of violence by the BLM/ANTIFA coalition. Many against police.  But what would be the point if you would still refuse to own up to them?

So honesty test:  when BLM/ANTIFA tried to break onto a federal courthouse who did they plan to hurt?


----------



## Faun

Seymour Flops said:


> So honesty test:  when BLM/ANTIFA tried to break onto a federal courthouse who did they plan to hurt?



The one in the middle of the night? Who was in there other than police?


----------



## bripat9643

Clipper said:


> She was Meadows' assistant, CLOWN. She saw it all. Think she was just there to serve coffee?


If she saw it, then why did she testify that she heard about it from someone else?


----------



## hadit

Hutch Starskey said:


> You’re aware that these are all Trump people you’re impugning, right? These aren’t never Trumpers or Dems.


Why does that matter? Isn't it better to be accurate than to worry about who is at fault?


----------



## playtime

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Sure thing snowflake


^^^


----------



## Seymour Flops

Faun said:


> The one in the middle of the night? Who was in there other than police?


Oooh . . . so it was only police, court security and the maintenance and cleaning crews they were targeting for violence so it's kewl?


----------



## playtime

theHawk said:


> Jesus Christ, the left can’t meme.



& yet you commented.

_mission accomplished._


----------



## playtime

Seymour Flops said:


> Sounds mostly peaceful with no evidence of widespread violence.



lol ... you stupid.


----------



## bripat9643

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> 95%+ of BLM protests in 2020 were peaceful.
> 
> 100% of the orange turd cult insurrections in 2021 were not.


Big lie.


----------



## playtime

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Another snowflake that wishes to be recognized. The left has been known as snowflakes since nov.9 2016 meltdown



you know what's the best thing about calling ' US ' snowflakes?

them there snowflakes became an avalanche & got yer tribble headed traitor outa the white house.


----------



## JimH52

Weatherman2020 said:


> How’s that working out for ya?


Great!  The J6 committee is putting a nail in trump's golden vault each time they have a hearing.


----------



## Faun

Seymour Flops said:


> Oooh . . . so it was only police, court security and the maintenance and cleaning crews they were targeting for violence so it's kewl?



Of course not cool. I've condemned BLM violence countless times. But still, means it wasn't an attack on the seat of our government, unlike sedition day.


----------



## Weatherman2020

JimH52 said:


> Great!  The J6 committee is putting a nail in trump's golden vault each time they have a hearing.


Oh? You said it wasn’t a trial.


----------



## playtime

Weatherman2020 said:


> Oh? You said it wasn’t a trial.



the court of public opinion carries much weight.  at the polls, BUT also the DOJ is not only admittedly watching, they are letting the select committee get it done all out in the open.


----------



## Weatherman2020

playtime said:


> the court of public opinion carries much weight.  at the polls, BUT also the DOJ is not only admittedly watching, they are letting the select committee get it done all out in the open.


So Justice is based upon public opinion?

Hang all Democrats then. Most hated group in America now.


----------



## Faun

Weatherman2020 said:


> So Justice is based upon public opinion?
> 
> Hang all Democrats then. Most hated group in America now.



According to who?


----------



## Weatherman2020

Faun said:


> According to who?


Americans


----------



## playtime

Weatherman2020 said:


> So Justice is based upon public opinion?
> 
> Hang all Democrats then. Most hated group in America now.



oh dear -  you played hookey on the day they taught reading comp, huh?

*the court of public opinion carries much weight. at the polls,* BUT also the DOJ is not only admittedly watching, *< because they may learn new intel they hadn't previously, but also to see if the same witness' who testified to them, give a different story to the committee. >*

 they are letting the select committee get it done all out in the open.

a wise move, because a lot of *the select committee were former prosecutors ... they are getting truth & facts & evidence *out to americans in layman's terms; & it sure is working.


----------



## Faun

Weatherman2020 said:


> Americans



How many have told you that?


----------



## Seymour Flops

playtime said:


> lol ... you stupid.


Your media seem no less stupid saying "the protests were mostly peacefull" with burning buildings as a backdrop.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

Weatherman2020 said:


> So Justice is based upon public opinion?
> 
> Hang all Democrats then. Most hated group in America now.


Murder is typically the go to response of incompetent losers.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

hadit said:


> Why does that matter? Isn't it better to be accurate than to worry about who is at fault?


You’re trying desperately to discredit Trump’s own people. Why would you believe they are anything but truthful? 

Because you now see them as disloyal. They now are to be ripped to shreds. Not very logical.


----------



## hadit

Hutch Starskey said:


> You’re trying desperately to discredit Trump’s own people. Why would you believe they are anything but truthful?
> 
> Because you now see them as disloyal. They now are to be ripped to shreds. Not very logical.


I'm all for the truth. Sad that all this is such a game to you.


----------



## Weatherman2020

Hutch Starskey said:


> Murder is typically the go to response of incompetent losers.


Justice is not murder.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

playtime said:


> you know what's the best thing about calling ' US ' snowflakes?
> 
> them there snowflakes became an avalanche & got yer tribble headed traitor outa the white house.


Poor snowflake


----------



## Hutch Starskey

hadit said:


> I'm all for the truth. Sad that all this is such a game to you.


Not a game in any way. Just straight foreword for me. No feels clouding it.


----------



## JimH52

Weatherman2020 said:


> So Justice is based upon public opinion?
> 
> Hang all Democrats then. Most hated group in America now.


trump has the distinction of being the first president Impeached Twice.  Now he could become the first former president indicted.  He is setting records!


----------



## Hutch Starskey

Weatherman2020 said:


> Justice is not murder.


It is. 
Emotion is not reason.


----------



## bripat9643

Faun said:


> According to who?


The polls.


----------



## Faun

bripat9643 said:


> The polls.



Like this one?









						More Americans Struggling; Inflation, Gas Prices Top Family Concerns | Monmouth University Polling Institute
					

Majority say federal government actions are hurting them




					www.monmouth.edu


----------



## hadit

Hutch Starskey said:


> Not a game in any way. Just straight foreword for me. No feels clouding it.


Then why does it matter whose credibility is challenged? If what someone says is not credible, it's not credible.


----------



## Weatherman2020

JimH52 said:


> trump has the distinction of being the first president Impeached Twice.  Now he could become the first former president indicted.  He is setting records!


And history will forever mock Democrats for their fabricated coup attempt on two term President Trump.


----------



## JimH52

Weatherman2020 said:


> And history will forever mock Democrats for their fabricated coup attempt on two term President Trump.


The repubs are running from him now.  He has too much baggage.  And he very well may be indicted by Georgia and the DOJ.  A coup attempt cannot go unpunished.


----------



## Weatherman2020

JimH52 said:


> The repubs are running from him now.  He has too much baggage.  And he very well may be indicted by Georgia and the DOJ.  A coup attempt cannot go unpunished.


Almost everyone he endorsed in June won….


----------



## bripat9643

JimH52 said:


> The repubs are running from him now.  He has too much baggage.  And he very well may be indicted by Georgia and the DOJ.  A coup attempt cannot go unpunished.


Any day now.  Any day now.  Any day now.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Seymour Flops said:


> guess you think I'm dumb to be honest about the BLM protests being mostly peaceful when you keep refusing to admit the Jan 6th protests were also mostly peaceful


Aww, poor little guy. It must suck not to be in control of yourself.


----------



## JimH52

Weatherman2020 said:


> Almost everyone he endorsed in June won….


The Dems love it when one of trump's nut cases wins!


----------



## Weatherman2020

JimH52 said:


> The Dems love it when one of trump's nut cases wins!


Sure you do!
How come nobody wants Brandon’s endorsement?


----------



## Faun

Weatherman2020 said:


> And history will forever mock Democrats for their fabricated coup attempt on two term President Trump.



LOL

You _think_ Trump was president for two terms??


----------



## Weatherman2020

Faun said:


> LOL
> 
> You _think_ Trump was president for two terms??


Of course not. It’s not 2025 yet.


----------



## Faun

Weatherman2020 said:


> Of course not. It’s not 2025 yet.



Then he's not a two term president.


----------



## Weatherman2020

Faun said:


> Then he's not a two term president.


In context of my statement he is.


----------



## meaner gene

Faun said:


> LOL
> 
> You _think_ Trump was president for two terms??


One term in the White House, and one term in Prison.


----------



## Weatherman2020

meaner gene said:


> One term in the White House, and one term in Prison.


WE GOT EM THIS TIME!
Part 484 in a continuous series.


----------



## meaner gene

Weatherman2020 said:


> WE GOT EM THIS TIME!
> Part 484 in a continuous series.


The devil went down to Georgia  Charlie Daniels.


----------



## Faun

Weatherman2020 said:


> In context of my statement he is.



LOL

But your statement was imaginary and based upon your own delusions.


----------



## Weatherman2020

Faun said:


> LOL
> 
> But your statement was imaginary and based upon your own delusions.


Delusional? Like rape, Russia, hookers, taxes, blah blah blah.


----------



## westwall

JimH52 said:


> CNN Exclusive: Republicans who texted Meadows with urgent pleas on January 6 say Trump could have stopped the violence
> 
> 
> Within minutes of the US Capitol breach on January 6, 2021, messages began pouring into the cell phone of White House chief of staff Mark Meadows. Among those texting were Republican members of Congress, former members of the Trump administration, GOP activists, Fox personalities -- even the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But hours went by before trump did anything.





Sent by democrap operatives.

DURRRRRRRR


----------



## Faun

Weatherman2020 said:


> Delusional? Like rape, Russia, hookers, taxes, blah blah blah.



Yeah, delusions.

What rape, Russia, Hoover or taxes?


----------



## Seymour Flops

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Aww, poor little guy. It must suck not to be in control of yourself.


Personal attacks in a message board debate are white flags.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Seymour Flops said:


> Personal attacks in a message board debate are white flags.


Ah yes, the declaration of victory. As always.


----------



## JimH52

Weatherman2020 said:


> Of course not. It’s not 2025 yet.


trump is done...you idiot.  Georgia and the DOJ have him in their crosshairs.  You cannot plan and stage a coup attempt and get away with it.  Ask the proud boys.


----------



## Weatherman2020

Faun said:


> Yeah, delusions.
> 
> What rape, Russia, Hoover or taxes?


Yeah, Trumps never been accused of rape, Russian collusion, hookers, not paying taxes. 

All Leftard lies swept under the rug.


----------



## Faun

Weatherman2020 said:


> Yeah, Trumps never been accused of rape, Russian collusion, hookers, not paying taxes.
> 
> All Leftard lies swept under the rug.



Not by me, other than rape. But then, I'm not delusional like you.


----------



## meaner gene

Faun said:


> Not by me, other than rape. But then, I'm not delusional like you.


They have such short memories.  It was only 2016 that Trump effectively plead guilty to fraud and theft through Trump University and the Trump charity.


----------



## JimH52

Weatherman2020 said:


> Yeah, Trumps never been accused of rape, Russian collusion, hookers, not paying taxes.
> 
> All Leftard lies swept under the rug.





meaner gene said:


> They have such short memories.  It was only 2016 that Trump effectively plead guilty to fraud and theft through Trump University and the Trump charity.


Ask the 20+ women that have accused him of various sexual acts.  Of course...the liar in Chief denies them all....uneven after the "grab them by the p*ssy" audio.


----------



## playtime

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Poor snowflake



*tell that to donny the losing loooooooooooser...........*


----------



## playtime

meaner gene said:


> They have such short memories.  It was only 2016 that Trump effectively plead guilty to fraud and theft through Trump University and the Trump charity.



& pardoned the human sausage casing, steve bannon with his 'build the wall fund' for intentionally ripping off the very flying monkeys who voted donny in.

what stupid cultish fucks.


----------



## playtime

meaner gene said:


> One term in the White House, and one term in Prison.


----------



## Hutch Starskey

hadit said:


> Then why does it matter whose credibility is challenged? If what someone says is not credible, it's not credible.


Lol
You see it as not credible because it happens to be unfavorable for Trump. 

The rest of the world sees Trump folks spilling the beans.


----------



## hadit

Hutch Starskey said:


> Lol
> You see it as not credible because it happens to be unfavorable for Trump.
> 
> The rest of the world sees Trump folks spilling the beans.


I see a story as not being credible when someone swears a person was in a certain vehicle when he was in a different vehicle. And what crime are we talking about, anyway, being a meanie, a poopyhead, what? 

Now, back to the salient point. Apparently, you thought that me not thinking a story told by "TRUMP! people" is not credible was somehow significant. Why is that? You thought you had a gotcha, but failed. You do understand that, right?


----------



## Faun

hadit said:


> I see a story as not being credible when someone swears a person was in a certain vehicle when he was in a different vehicle. And what crime are we talking about, anyway, being a meanie, a poopyhead, what?
> 
> Now, back to the salient point. Apparently, you thought that me not thinking a story told by "TRUMP! people" is not credible was somehow significant. Why is that? You thought you had a gotcha, but failed. You do understand that, right?



She never swore he was in any vehicle.


----------



## Weatherman2020

JimH52 said:


> Ask the 20+ women that have accused him of various sexual acts.  Of course...the liar in Chief denies them all....uneven after the "grab them by the p*ssy" audio.


Yeah, everyone fell for your lies he won in a landslide.


----------



## meaner gene

hadit said:


> I see a story as not being credible when someone swears a person was in a certain vehicle when he was in a different vehicle. And what crime are we talking about, anyway, being a meanie, a poopyhead, what?



Your point is wrong because the story was one of hearsay, not of first hand knowledge.  So inaccuracies are traced to the originator of the narrative, not the one echoing the story.  It's no different than an ear witness to Daunte Wrights murder, saying that Officer Kim Potter used her taser on him.


----------



## hadit

Faun said:


> She never swore he was in any vehicle.


Correct, she swore she was told he was, and that's the problem with hearsay. This whole story should never have come from her. It just makes her look bad.


----------



## hadit

meaner gene said:


> Your point is wrong because the story was one of hearsay, not of first hand knowledge.  So inaccuracies are traced to the originator of the narrative, not the one echoing the story.  It's no different than an ear witness to Daunte Wrights murder, saying that Officer Kim Potter used her taser on him.


The point is correct because I specifically said the STORY wasn't credible, and it's not.


----------



## meaner gene

hadit said:


> Correct, she swore she was told he was, and that's the problem with hearsay. This whole story should never have come from her. It just makes her look bad.


In part that's the problem.  The committee has asked everybody in the Trump administration to come talk to them.  But many of them have refused, forcing the committee to put on witnesses to the eye witnesses.


----------



## hadit

meaner gene said:


> In part that's the problem.  The committee has asked everybody in the Trump administration to come talk to them.  But many of them have refused, forcing the committee to put on witnesses to the eye witnesses.


Then, if they think they have enough evidence, they should proceed to trials, wherein they can compel testimony and the defendants have opportunity to cross-examine witnesses. I do not blame these for not wanting to take part in a kangaroo court where their presence is required for only one reason, to get at TRUMP!. They would be collateral damage, thrown to the liberal wolves who would delight in destroying their entire lives, and for nothing.


----------



## Faun

hadit said:


> Then, if they think they have enough evidence, they should proceed to trials, wherein they can compel testimony and the defendants have opportunity to cross-examine witnesses. I do not blame these for not wanting to take part in a kangaroo court where their presence is required for only one reason, to get at TRUMP!. They would be collateral damage, thrown to the liberal wolves who would delight in destroying their entire lives, and for nothing.



Trials would come from the DoJ, not the Congress. The DoJ has begun investigating so we'll find out after these hearings if they're indicating anyone.


----------



## meaner gene

hadit said:


> Then, if they think they have enough evidence, they should proceed to trials, ...



Congress doesn't hold trials, except in cases of impeachment.


----------



## Chillicothe

bigrebnc1775 said:


> _The left has been known as snowflakes since nov.9 2016 meltdown_





bigrebnc1775 said:


> _Poor snowflake_


------------------------------------------------------------------

Avalanche vs. Elmer Fuddism.
Tough choice.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Chillicothe said:


> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Avalanche vs. Elmer Fuddism.
> Tough choice.
> 
> View attachment 667526 View attachment 667528


Poor snowflake since Nov 9 2016


----------



## Chillicothe

Elmer Fudds who self-identify as a gun ..too often misfire. 
Some have said on this very venue that the 2nd Amendment is for 2nd raters who can't articulate and are scaredy cats.

I wouldn't say that. But some have.

So there is that.


----------



## Chillicothe

Winco said:


> _Nice try Frank, for the 100th time you’ve posted this._





CrusaderFrank said:


> _Probably more than 100.....*J6 Reichstag Fire*_


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You know, poster Winco, I too have noticed that poor *Frank *long ago stopped at the fence to his field of wit.

I put myself through university a gabillion years ago as a part-time bartender (a pretty good job for a college kid, I'm here to testify)....anyway, in the joint I worked there was this guy who would come in about once a week. Grab a stool at the corner of the bar. And then tell the same joke. Week after week.

The regulars, polite guys that they were, would look up at the ceiling, look down at their shoes, ponder their beers.....but never, ever, look at each other.
Because.......well, because they were afraid if they caught the eye of another regular they'd fall off their seats snickering at the poor would-be comedian who could never find any new material.  I admired their sense of forbearance of... and lack of rudeness to.....  the poor sad bloke. 

But he quickly drank his 'shorty' (back then they had 10oz drafts)....and then left.  No harm, no foul. Till he came back again the next week.

Sad but kinda heart-warming.  I tell that story with great nostalgia.


----------



## Clipper

bripat9643 said:


> If she saw it, then why did she testify that she heard about it from someone else?


That's not the only incident that she testified to. Pardons for Trump's mob associates were also mentioned.


----------



## eagle1462010

meaner gene said:


> In part that's the problem.  The committee has asked everybody in the Trump administration to come talk to them.  But many of them have refused, forcing the committee to put on witnesses to the eye witnesses.


witness #1......were you in the car with Trump?  Yup.

                       Did you see him attack the steering wheel?  Nope.

Witness #2......Were you in the car with Trump?  Nope

                      Did you HEAR ANYONE SAY HE ATTACKED the steering Whell?  YES......I remember this guy said he said horrible things.  Lunged at the Driver going through 2 secret service agents..........Grabbed the Wheel and we swerved all over the fucking road.........'And and and...ummm  We almost hit a doggy and the dog was being chased by a cat.......It was the MOST HORRIFIC MOMENT IN MY LIFE....oops the guy I HEARD SAY what happened.  This was so bad from what I HEARD I'll need counciling.

Witness # 1..Witness #2 SAYS SHE HEARD YOU SAYS that Trump attacked  2 secret service men and attacked the Steering Wheel and nearly ran over a dog.

 What do you say to this TESTIMONY?  Laughing.............Was she doing drugs and/or having a dream............lol

YOU ARE ORDERED TO EXPLAIN HER COMMENTS.

Okay...............Committee................SHE IS FULL OF SHIT.

CONTEMPT.


tune in to the next episode........when Shifty says...........Trump got peed on by a whore at a golf course and Putin has naked photos of Trump.....


----------



## eagle1462010

Clipper said:


> That's not the only incident that she testified to. Pardons for Trump's mob associates were also mentioned.


Al Capone is already dead............My god the BS here is so damned deep.  Need a Backhoe to shovel the shit around here and in Washington.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

eagle1462010 said:


> witness #1......were you in the car with Trump?  Yup.
> 
> Did you see him attack the steering wheel?  Nope.
> 
> Witness #2......Were you in the car with Trump?  Nope
> 
> Did you HEAR ANYONE SAY HE ATTACKED the steering Whell?  YES......I remember this guy said he said horrible things.  Lunged at the Driver going through 2 secret service agents..........Grabbed the Wheel and we swerved all over the fucking road.........'And and and...ummm  We almost hit a doggy and the dog was being chased by a cat.......It was the MOST HORRIFIC MOMENT IN MY LIFE....oops the guy I HEARD SAY what happened.  This was so bad from what I HEARD I'll need counciling.
> 
> Witness # 1..Witness #2 SAYS SHE HEARD YOU SAYS that Trump attacked  2 secret service men and attacked the Steering Wheel and nearly ran over a dog.
> 
> What do you say to this TESTIMONY?  Laughing.............Was she doing drugs and/or having a dream............lol
> 
> YOU ARE ORDERED TO EXPLAIN HER COMMENTS.
> 
> Okay...............Committee................SHE IS FULL OF SHIT.
> 
> CONTEMPT.
> 
> 
> tune in to the next episode........when Shifty says...........Trump got peed on by a whore at a golf course and Putin has naked photos of Trump.....


You and your fantasies. I sometimes think you have a problem distinguishing them from reality.


----------



## Chillicothe

eagle1462010 said:


> _tune in to the next episode........when Shifty says...........Trump got peed on by a whore at a golf course and Putin has naked photos of Trump....._



Damn! I didn't see any of that in the hearings I watched (and I watched all of 'em).

I don't mean to be dismissive of poor poster '*eagle',* but......but he seems to be offering his insight on another presentation that the ones I watched.
So, I will give him the benefit of the doubt that he knows well what he watched. After all he is observant and intelligent. However, he didn't watch the J6 Select Committee hearings everybody else watched.

Which begs the question -- why is he even offering an opinion that is not connected to this thread or this topic?
Why just shoot one's mouth off about a topic that no one is talking about?
What's up with that?
No disrespect intended.


----------



## bripat9643

Clipper said:


> That's not the only incident that she testified to. Pardons for Trump's mob associates were also mentioned.


So she testified to other fake events?


----------



## Clipper

bripat9643 said:


> So she testified to other fake events?


Uh no, she testified that some of Trump's organized crime mobsters were looking for a pardon from The Don. Trump's consigliere Rudy was one of them.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Clipper said:


> Uh no, she testified that some of Trump's organized crime mobsters were looking for a pardon from The Don. Trump's consigliere Rudy was one of them.


And Gaetz, for some reason *cough* was begging for one right away.


----------



## Clipper

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> And Gaetz, for some reason *cough* was begging for one right away.


They're all running scared because apparently Trump didn't use pocket pardons to let his mob associates off the hook. As far as we know.

That's one of the reasons that McCarthy & Trump's asseaters all want to shut down that committee & whitewash everything.


----------



## eagle1462010

Chillicothe said:


> Damn! I didn't see any of that in the hearings I watched (and I watched all of 'em).
> 
> I don't mean to be dismissive of poor poster '*eagle',* but......but he seems to be offering his insight on another presentation that the ones I watched.
> So, I will give him the benefit of the doubt that he knows well what he watched. After all he is observant and intelligent. However, he didn't watch the J6 Select Committee hearings everybody else watched.
> 
> Which begs the question -- why is he even offering an opinion that is not connected to this thread or this topic?
> Why just shoot one's mouth off about a topic that no one is talking about?
> What's up with that?
> No disrespect intended.


Goes to the creditability.  They have NONE.  Once a pack of Liars always a pack of Liars.

We give them the respect they have earned.  NONE.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Clipper said:


> They're all running scared because apparently Trump didn't use pocket pardons to let his mob associates off the hook. As far as we know.
> 
> That's one of the reasons that McCarthy & Trump's asseaters all want to shut down that committee & whitewash everything.


Biden should offer them pardons to testify under oath. Or immunity. Slap them with power. It's all they understand.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Chillicothe said:


> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> You know, poster Winco, I too have noticed that poor *Frank *long ago stopped at the fence to his field of wit.
> 
> I put myself through university a gabillion years ago as a part-time bartender (a pretty good job for a college kid, I'm here to testify)....anyway, in the joint I worked there was this guy who would come in about once a week. Grab a stool at the corner of the bar. And then tell the same joke. Week after week.
> 
> The regulars, polite guys that they were, would look up at the ceiling, look down at their shoes, ponder their beers.....but never, ever, look at each other.
> Because.......well, because they were afraid if they caught the eye of another regular they'd fall off their seats snickering at the poor would-be comedian who could never find any new material.  I admired their sense of forbearance of... and lack of rudeness to.....  the poor sad bloke.
> 
> But he quickly drank his 'shorty' (back then they had 10oz drafts)....and then left.  No harm, no foul. Till he came back again the next week.
> 
> Sad but kinda heart-warming.  I tell that story with great nostalgia.


Poor snowflake you shouldn't be eating those little balls you pull from your asshole


----------



## Chillicothe

bigrebnc1775 said:


> _"....those little balls you pull from your asshole"_





Ah, little ElmerFudd.....for being the butt of a kid's cartoon joke, you are rather crassly gross.

But, if you were raised that way by your parents, well then, you be you.  Not your fault.


----------



## Chillicothe

eagle1462010 said:


> _We give them the respect they have earned. NONE._



Have you watched all....or any.... of the hearings?

Are you gonna watch the one scheduled for next week?

If you do, please offer the forum your considered and articulate opinion.

Thanx.


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Chillicothe said:


> Ah, little ElmerFudd.....for being the butt of a kid's cartoon joke, you are rather crassly gross.
> 
> But, if you were raised that way by your parents, well then, you be you.  Not your fault.


Snowflake don't melt


----------



## bigrebnc1775

Chillicothe said:


> Have you watched all....or any.... of the hearings?
> 
> Are you gonna watch the one scheduled for next week?
> 
> If you do, please offer the forum your considered and articulate opinion.
> 
> Thanx.


That's your problem snowflake you listen too much democrat propaganda.


----------



## eagle1462010

Chillicothe said:


> Have you watched all....or any.... of the hearings?
> 
> Are you gonna watch the one scheduled for next week?
> 
> If you do, please offer the forum your considered and articulate opinion.
> 
> Thanx.


I work for a living Moonbat.  I do not watch SITCOMS.  

These hearings are a joke.  They have no real audience, and are full of BS Hearsay evidence.  We've seen this before.  

It's a freaking joke.


----------



## Chillicothe

eagle1462010 said:


> I work for a living Moonbat. I do not watch.....


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OK,  we get it.
You share your thoughtful insights about the hearings to the entire forum frequently and prolifically.

Yet, you never watch them.

I love this bar.
We've got winners.
We've got __________.


----------



## Chillicothe

bigrebnc1775 said:


> That's your problem snowflake......


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OK.
And I could be persuaded that your problem is your never-ending fantagasm that you are gonna catch Bugs Bunny.

ps.....a clue to the clueful:  Look, Elmer, go watch Wiley Coyote vs the Road Runner.
You are caught it the same sad trap Wiley is.....'ineffectiveness'. 

You should be better than that.


----------



## eagle1462010

Chillicothe said:


> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> OK,  we get it.
> You share your thoughtful insights about the hearings to the entire forum frequently and prolifically.
> 
> Yet, you never watch them.
> 
> I love this bar.
> We've got winners.
> We've got __________.


I look at data and the the bullet points and think seek reality.  You don't live in Reality.  The Reality is that the DOD repeatedly asked the Capital Police do you want the National Guard...........they refused .........Then you blame Trump because the Capital police under Pelosi's watch REFUSED TROOPS.

Then you call a BS witness to say Trump attacked the Secret Service and LUNGED at steering wheel that the Secret Service denies...........and even if true......It BREAKS NO LAW.

Enjoy the show.


----------



## eagle1462010




----------



## bigrebnc1775

Chillicothe said:


> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> OK.
> And I could be persuaded that your problem is your never-ending fantagasm that you are gonna catch Bugs Bunny.
> 
> ps.....a clue to the clueful:  Look, Elmer, go watch Wiley Coyote vs the Road Runner.
> You are caught it the same sad trap Wiley is.....'ineffectiveness'.
> 
> You should be better than that.


I really don't give a fuck about you snowflake


----------



## bripat9643

Clipper said:


> Uh no, she testified that some of Trump's organized crime mobsters were looking for a pardon from The Don. Trump's consigliere Rudy was one of them.


Like I said, she testified to more lies and hearsay.


----------



## playtime

Faun said:


> Trials would come from the DoJ, not the Congress. The DoJ has begun investigating so we'll find out after these hearings if they're indicating anyone.



LOL!!!


----------



## playtime

eagle1462010 said:


> I work for a living Moonbat.  I do not watch SITCOMS.
> 
> These hearings are a joke.  They have no real audience, and are full of BS Hearsay evidence.  We've seen this before.
> 
> It's a freaking joke.



ummmm.... there's a thing called the interwebs, where you can watch them in their entirety at your CONvenience.

you:


----------



## eagle1462010

playtime said:


> ummmm.... there's a thing called the interwebs, where you can watch them in their entirety at your CONvenience.
> 
> you:View attachment 667812


Why da fuck would I do that?  2 Impeachments and your party LYING IT'S ASS OFF............You have ZERO CREDITABILITY AT ALL.  

Hell they can't get any ratings for this nonsense...............And approval rating for Congress is in the single digits.

But I guess you don't see it as the TDS has broken you................poor thing.


----------



## Weatherman2020

JimH52 said:


> CNN Exclusive: Republicans who texted Meadows with urgent pleas on January 6 say Trump could have stopped the violence
> 
> 
> Within minutes of the US Capitol breach on January 6, 2021, messages began pouring into the cell phone of White House chief of staff Mark Meadows. Among those texting were Republican members of Congress, former members of the Trump administration, GOP activists, Fox personalities -- even the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But hours went by before trump did anything.


How’d your CNN exclusive story turn out?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

eagle1462010 said:


> Why da fuck would I do that?


To inform yourself, so you don't appear to be an ignorant, cackling moron, as you have in this thread.


----------



## playtime

eagle1462010 said:


> Why da fuck would I do that?



why does donny love the poorly educated long time?




eagle1462010 said:


> 2 Impeachments and your party LYING IT'S ASS OFF



not ' my' party.  i don't have a party.  just 'cause you are a partison stooge -  you ASSume everybody must be?  lol ... silly you.

lie?  uh-huh ...  soooooooo when pat cipollone was the WH lawyer who defended donny when he was impeached -  he did a fine bang up job, _riiiiight?_    but when he sat down for 8 HOURS with the committee -  then he was lying, _riiiiiight_? 

lol ...




eagle1462010 said:


> ............You have ZERO CREDITABILITY AT ALL.



oh dear -  seems as of RIGHT NOW - some 60% of americans think yer chosen one oughta be sent up.  & we have at least 2 more hearings  with yet MORE video to see.

oh dear.



eagle1462010 said:


> Hell they can't get any ratings for this nonsense...............



what world are you living in? even FOX relented, after the 1st hearing & started airing them, 'cause they knew their audience was going to other networks.  it will be interesting to see if they air it on thursday night during their pundits' shows -  or go commercial free AGAIN, 'cause they don't wanna lose 'em yet again.




eagle1462010 said:


> And approval rating for Congress is in the single digits.



as a general CONsensus?  absolutely, & with good reason.

but not with the hearings.   tutt tutt, they are getting thru to critical thinking bipeds.




eagle1462010 said:


> But I guess you don't see it as the TDS has broken you................poor thing.


----------



## playtime

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> To inform yourself, so you don't appear to be an ignorant, cackling moron, as you have in this thread.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

Weatherman2020 said:


> How’d your CNN exclusive story turn out?
> 
> View attachment 668148


This Just In!









						Cipollone's 8-hour testimony will light a fire under Trump's inner circle to talk to investigators: legal analyst
					

Appearing on MSNBC with host Ali Velshi early Saturday morning, the Democrat's chief counsel during Donald Trump's first impeachment trial claimed the 8-hour testimony given by former White House counsel Pat Cipollone will likely provoke a rush of members of Donald Trump's inner circle to talk...




					www.rawstory.com


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

eagle1462010 said:


> Why da fuck would I do that?  2 Impeachments and your party LYING IT'S ASS OFF............You have ZERO CREDITABILITY AT ALL.
> 
> Hell they can't get any ratings for this nonsense...............And approval rating for Congress is in the single digits.
> 
> But I guess you don't see it as the TDS has broken you................poor thing.


Update!









						'Donald is terrified' is an 'understatement' after Cipollone testimony: Mary Trump
					

Appearing on MSNBC's "Katie Phang Show," Donald Trump's niece Mary said her uncle is likely shaking in his boots after hearing former White House counsel Pat Cipollone spent over 8 hours talking with investigators working for the House select committee investigating the Jan 6th Capitol...




					www.rawstory.com


----------



## JimH52

I still say Georgia is Donald's biggest threat.


----------



## playtime

JimH52 said:


> I still say Georgia is Donald's biggest threat.


----------



## playtime

JimH52 said:


> I still say Georgia is Donald's biggest threat.



_*& donny cannot get pardoned for state crimes either.*_


----------



## JimH52

playtime said:


> _*& donny cannot get pardoned for state crimes either.*_


The con man is gonna go down


----------



## playtime

JimH52 said:


> The con man is gonna go down



than damn has broken.  apparently more than one report that (R)s are coming fwd.  that damn has broken bigley & donny must have a stack of diapers with him at all times.


----------



## eagle1462010

playtime said:


> why does donny love the poorly educated long time?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> not ' my' party.  i don't have a party.  just 'cause you are a partison stooge -  you ASSume everybody must be?  lol ... silly you.
> 
> lie?  uh-huh ...  soooooooo when pat cipollone was the WH lawyer who defended donny when he was impeached -  he did a fine bang up job, _riiiiight?_    but when he sat down for 8 HOURS with the committee -  then he was lying, _riiiiiight_?
> 
> lol ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> oh dear -  seems as of RIGHT NOW - some 60% of americans think yer chosen one oughta be sent up.  & we have at least 2 more hearings  with yet MORE video to see.
> 
> oh dear.
> 
> 
> 
> what world are you living in? even FOX relented, after the 1st hearing & started airing them, 'cause they knew their audience was going to other networks.  it will be interesting to see if they air it on thursday night during their pundits' shows -  or go commercial free AGAIN, 'cause they don't wanna lose 'em yet again.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> as a general CONsensus?  absolutely, & with good reason.
> 
> but not with the hearings.   tutt tutt, they are getting thru to critical thinking bipeds.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 668151


Come November if you haven't found another way to cheat you are gonna get your asses handed to you.  Enjoy.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

eagle1462010 said:


> Come November if you haven't found another way to cheat you are gonna get your asses handed to you.  Enjoy.


And there is the Fondation of the cult, on display.

Any nauseating, unethical behavior is acceptable, to reach the goal.

The Jihad Rule.


----------



## playtime

eagle1462010 said:


> Come November if you haven't found another way to cheat you are gonna get your asses handed to you.  Enjoy.


----------



## playtime

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> And there is the Fondation of the cult, on display.
> 
> Any nauseating, unethical behavior is acceptable, to reach the goal.
> 
> The Jihad Rule.


----------



## Chillicothe

JimH52 said:


> _The con man is gonna go down_



Orange will be the new orange?


----------



## August West

eagle1462010 said:


> Come November if you haven't found another way to cheat you are gonna get your asses handed to you.  Enjoy.


You`ve found evidence of cheating and you`re keeping it to yourself for what reason? Spill it already! Show us what you got!


----------



## JimH52

August West said:


> You`ve found evidence of cheating and you`re keeping it to yourself for what reason? Spill it already! Show us what you got!


Yeah....the got all these theories....just no evidence.  But I bet those theories are pretty well developed.


----------



## JimH52

Chillicothe said:


> Orange will be the new orange?


Lot so people broke the law.  How many actually are prosecuted and go to jail i yet to be seen.  They will defy, delay, and lie as they try to run out the clock.


----------



## August West

The J6 hearings are playing live on a tv near you. Enjoy! I know I am.


----------



## August West

August West said:


> The J6 hearings are playing live on a tv near you. Enjoy! I know I am.


The score today?
America 100
MAGA  0


----------



## eagle1462010

August West said:


> You`ve found evidence of cheating and you`re keeping it to yourself for what reason? Spill it already! Show us what you got!


Plenty has been shown bitch.  Only ones not saying it are you troll clowns


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

eagle1462010 said:


> Plenty has been shown bitch.  Only ones not saying it are you troll clowns


Not to the courts or to the authorities. Because you are frauds that have no evidence.


----------



## eagle1462010

He was BEGGING TRUMP to stop it.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

eagle1462010 said:


> I look at data and the the bullet points and think seek reality. You don't live in Reality. The Reality is that the DOD repeatedly asked the Capital Police do you want the National Guard...........they refused .........Then you blame Trump because the Capital police under Pelosi's watch REFUSED TROOPS.


Don't  you people ever get tired of repeating you inane equine excrement?

Fact check: Nancy Pelosi wasn't ‘in charge’ of Capitol …​
The claim that *Pelosi* was in charge of the U.S. *Capitol* *Police* during the insurrection has circulated both online and offline for months. On July 21 , U.S. Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, floated the......


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

Update!While Republicans are complaining about being excluded from the Jan. 6 hearings, most of them hve their heads where the sun don't shine









						Exclusive: All 50 Senate Republicans weigh in on Jan. 6 hearings – only 8 are watching
					

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Pundits and political reporters continue to compare the Jan. 6 select committee hearings to the Watergate hearings. There’s a fatal flaw with the analogy though. Back in the Nixon years, Senate Republicans showed up, pored over evidence, asked hard questions, listened to...




					www.rawstory.com


----------



## Delldude

playtime said:


> Rep. Mo Brooks says he’s willing to testify in public as Jan. 6 committee prepares to reissue him a subpoena​By Manu Raju and Morgan Rimmer, CNN
> Published 8:47 PM EDT, Wed June 22, 2022
> 
> CNN —
> Rep. Mo Brooks – one of the Republican lawmakers facing calls from the January 6 committee to testify about his interactions with former President Donald Trump – said Wednesday that he is willing to testify but only in public.
> 
> “My basic requirement is it be in public so the public can see it – so they don’t get bits and pieces dribbled out,” the Alabama Republican said. He also said he’d testify only about matters related to January 6, 2021, and wants to see copies of any documents beforehand that the panel may ask him about.
> Rep. Mo Brooks says he's willing to testify in public as Jan. 6 committee prepares to reissue him a subpoena





> Last-chance hearing: Jan. 6 committee has yet to establish a criminal case against Trump​The eighth and final scheduled hearing of the House Jan. 6 select committee is scheduled for Thursday, and its members reportedly will present a time line of events on that day, particularly the 187 minutes between the end of then-President Trump’s speech on the Ellipse and his call for supporters to leave the Capitol.
> 
> 
> It will again replay moments from the horrific to the heroic. *What it has not shown thus far, however, is what was promised at the outset: a clear criminal case against Trump.*





> *Yet, on the eve of the primetime hearing this week, committee members sound strikingly less prosecutorial.* Rep. Elaine Luria (D-Va.) told CNN that “I look at it as a dereliction of duty. He didn’t act. He did not take action to stop the violence.”
> 
> *It is difficult to make a criminal case over what an official failed to do.* Yet the last hearing seemed to focus on a number of things that did not occur, from a draft tweet that was not sent to an executive order that was never signed. There were discussions of appointing Trump attorney Sidney Powell as a special counsel, seizing voting machines or replacing the Justice Department’s leadership. As unnerving as these proposals were, they also were not carried out.





Last-chance hearing: Jan. 6 committee has yet to establish a criminal case against Trump


----------



## playtime

Delldude said:


> View attachment 672325
> Last-chance hearing: Jan. 6 committee has yet to establish a criminal case against Trump



getting a little obsessed with me 'eh troll boy?

i recall you said nobody would be watching the hearings ... how'd that turn out?



Justice Department probe into Trump won’t stop if he announces 2024 run: Deputy AG​BY REBECCA BEITSCH - 07/19/22 1:55 PM ET
Justice Department probe into Trump won’t stop if he announces 2024 run: Deputy AG


----------



## Delldude

playtime said:


> getting a little obsessed with me 'eh troll boy?
> 
> i recall you said nobody would be watching the hearings ... how'd that turn out?
> 
> 
> 
> Justice Department probe into Trump won’t stop if he announces 2024 run: Deputy AG​BY REBECCA BEITSCH - 07/19/22 1:55 PM ET
> Justice Department probe into Trump won’t stop if he announces 2024 run: Deputy AG


Actually, I was right. Viewer rating have been poor. NBC left the hearing for PGA golf.......shows you what's more important.


----------



## Chillicothe

Delldude said:


> Viewer rating have been poor.



Well then, good poster Dude...you should add one more viewer to the mix tomorrow night at 8pm.
Do your part to be an engaged and interested American citizen.  Tune in.

Please report back to the forum on what you heard from this latest Select Committee hearing.


----------



## Frankeneinstein

Delldude said:


> NBC left the hearing for PGA golf.


----------



## Frankeneinstein

Chillicothe said:


> Well then, good poster Dude...you should add one more viewer to the mix tomorrow night at 8pm.
> Do your part to be an engaged and interested American citizen. Tune in.
> 
> Please report back to the forum on what you heard from this latest Select Committee hearing.


The "hearings" need something more believable to make them watchable, like commercials, lots and lots of commercials


----------



## playtime

Delldude said:


> Actually, I was right. Viewer rating have been poor. NBC left the hearing for PGA golf.......shows you what's more important.



negatory dan-o.  they 'left' because they had a contract already in the drawer. 

you gave it a nice try, though.


----------



## playtime

Frankeneinstein said:


> The "hearings" need something more believable to make them watchable, like commercials, lots and lots of commercials



is that why fox didn't air any commercials the one & only night they didn't air the hearings for fear of their sheep leaving & switching over during one?   is that why they aired the rest of the hearings for fear of losing their sheep altogether when the hearings were on?

let the class know if there are any commercials during hannity or laura braun's shows tonight as they pretend that all is well.


----------



## eagle1462010

Anyone win Oscars for their acting in this yet.  I mean so far the day time ceral has some attempts of victimhood and drama.  Might need a trophy


----------



## Delldude

Chillicothe said:


> Well then, good poster Dude...you should add one more viewer to the mix tomorrow night at 8pm.
> Do your part to be an engaged and interested American citizen.  Tune in.
> 
> Please report back to the forum on what you heard from this latest Select Committee hearing.


I'm more engaged than you think.

Sorry, Tucker is on at 8.


----------



## Delldude

playtime said:


> is that why fox didn't air any commercials the one & only night they didn't air the hearings for fear of their sheep leaving & switching over during one?   is that why they aired the rest of the hearings for fear of losing their sheep altogether when the hearings were on?
> 
> let the class know if there are any commercials during hannity or laura braun's shows tonight as they pretend that all is well.


So you watch Fox?


----------



## Delldude

playtime said:


> negatory dan-o.  they 'left' because they had a contract already in the drawer.
> 
> you gave it a nice try, though.


Ad revenue tops politics.


----------



## Frankeneinstein

playtime said:


> is that why fox didn't air any commercials the one & only night they didn't air the hearings for fear of their sheep leaving & switching over during one? is that why they aired the rest of the hearings for fear of losing their sheep altogether when the hearings were on?


I see you've semi-recovered from your big "OOPS I was caught" moment...the only thing your rant proves is that fox needs to run more commercials during the hearings, or maybe some golf if the testimony isn't getting the ol adrenalin pumping.



playtime said:


> let the class know if there are any commercials during hannity or laura braun's shows tonight as they pretend that all is well.


"The class"? a freudian moment or mea culpa? at the very least a left handed way of admitting to being schooled...as for fox news, outside of Gutfeld I seldom watch any "news" channel [fox included]...but like most everyone else who wants to add something of substance and/or give the appearance of veracity to their argument you hold up fox as your proof...true story


----------



## playtime




----------



## ThunderKiss1965

bodecea said:


> There were multiple weapons at the Jan 6th Capitol.   You sound groomed.


What weapons ?


----------



## playtime

ThunderKiss1965 said:


> What weapons ?


Of the cases involving weapons, there are four main charges: "Assaulting, Resisting, or Impeding Certain Officers Using a Dangerous Weapon"; "Entering and Remaining in a Restricted Building with a Deadly or Dangerous Weapon"; "Disorderly and Disruptive Conduct in a Restricted Building with a Deadly or Dangerous Weapon"; and "Engaging in Physical Violence in a Restricted Building with a Deadly or Dangerous Weapon."

Going through the Justice Department site, as well as some media databases, I counted 82 defendants who have been charged with at least one of those offenses. It's possible I missed a few, but I think they represent the vast majority of those who face weapons-related charges in the Capitol riot investigation. In each charge, prosecutors have specified the weapon the defendant is accused of using. Below is a list of all the defendants, and all the weapons:

DEFENDANTWEAPONALAM, Zachary JordanHelmetALBERTS, Christopher MichaelHandgun (Alberts was arrested after the riot was over, at 7:25 p.m., on a street near the Capitol and was accused of having a firearm.)BALLARD, Thomas JohnPolice batonBARNETT, RichardStun gun, walking stickBARNHART, Logan JamesBaton, flagpole, crutchBLACK, Joshua MatthewKnifeBLAIR, David AlanFlagpole, knifeBROCKHOFF, Nicholas JamesFire extinguisherBYERLY, Alan WilliamTaserCALDWELL, Daniel RayPepper or mace sprayCAPUCCIO, StevenBatonCHRESTMAN, WilliamAx handleCOFFEE, Luke RussellCrutchCOFFMAN, Lonnie LeroyMultiple firearms (Coffman is not charged with being on Capitol grounds; allegedly had two guns on his person, plus firearms in his truck parked on 1st Street SE in Washington D.C.)COPELAND, Landon KennethMetal fenceCUA, Bruno JosephBatonDEMPSEY, David NicholasCrutch, metal pole, "lacrimal spray," and "club-like object"EISENHART, Lisa MarieTaserFAIRLAMB, Scott KevinBatonFOY, Michael JosephHockey stickGIESWEIN, RobertBaseball bat, "aerosol irritant spray"GOSSJANKOWSKI, VitaliTaserHARKRIDER, Alex KirkTomahawk axIBRAHIM, Mark SamiFirearmJACKSON, EmanuelMetal baseball batJAMES, AaronShieldJENKINS, Shane LeedonTomahawk ax, flagpole, desk drawer, and "stick-like objects"JENSEN, Douglas AustinKnifeJOHNSON, Paul RussellMetal crowd control barrierJONES, Chad BarrettFlagpoleJUDD, David LeeFirecrackerKHATER, Julian ElieChemical spray (Accused of attacking Officer Brian Sicknick)KLEIN, Federico GuillermoShieldKRAMER, Philip EdwardSnowboarding helmet, walking cane, Master Lock, climbing ropeLANG, Edward JacobBat, shieldLANGUERAND, NicholasTraffic barrier, "stick-like objects"LAZAR, SamuelChemical irritantMCABEE, Ronald ColtonBaton, flagpole, crutch, and "reinforced gloves"MCCAUGHEY, Patrick E. IIIShieldMCGREW, James BurtonPoleMCHUGH, Sean MichaelBear spray, "metal sign"MCKELLOP, JeffreyFlagpoleMEREDITH, Cleveland Grover Jr.Firearms (Meredith arrived in Washington after the riot was over but was charged with having three guns in his possession.)MELLIS, Jonathan GennaroStickMILLER, Matthew RyanFire extinguisherMINK, Jorden RobertBaseball batMUNAFO, Jonathan JoshuaFlagpoleMUNCHEL, EricTaserNEEFE, MarshallWooden club, "metal sign frame"NICHOLS, Ryan TaylorCrowbar, pepper sprayOWENS, Grady DouglasSkateboardPADILLA, Joseph LinoFlagpole, "large metal sign"PALMER, Robert ScottFire extinguisher, "stick-like object"PERKINS, Michael StevenFlagpolePOLLOCK, Jonathan DanielFlagpole, riot shieldPONDER, Mark K.PolePOWELL, Rachel MarieIce ax, "large wooden pole"QUAGLIN, Christopher JosephShield, pepper sprayRANDOLPH, Stephen ChaseMetal crowd control barrierREFFITT, Guy WesleyHandgunRODRIGUEZ, DanielFlagpole, "electroshock weapon"RODRIGUEZ, Edward FranciscoChemical irritantSABOL, JeffreyBaton, flagpole, crutchSAMSEL, Ryan StephenMetal crowd control barrierSANFORD, RobertFire extinguisherSCHAFFER, JonBear spraySCHWARTZ, Peter J.Pepper spraySILLS, Geoffrey WilliamBatonSMITH, Charles BradfordKnifeSTAGER, Peter FrancisBaton, flagpole, crutchSTEVENS, Tristan ChandlerShieldSULLIVAN, John EarleKnifeTAAKE, Andrew QuentinPepper spray, metal whipTANIOS, George PierreChemical spray (Accused of attacking Officer Brian Sicknick)TAYLOR, RussellKnifeTHOMPSON, DevlynBatonWATSON, WilliamPepper sprayWEBSTER, ThomasFlagpoleWESTBURY, IsaacShieldWHITTON, Jack WadeBaton, flagpole, crutchWILSON, Duke EdwardPipeWORRELL, Christopher JohnPepper spray

'Armed insurrection': What weapons did the Capitol rioters carry?

*starting at 1:40, there's radio communications coming from security/secret service spotting & describing individual flying monkeys that were armed.*


----------



## SweetSue92

You know how there's someday gonna be the last Holocaust survivor, the last known living Shaker, etc?

Someday like 100 years from now, they'll be some mad unhappy liberal in some care home somewhere still randomly screeching out "Trump! Russia! Mueller!"

And then maybe it will be over.


----------



## Mac1958

His staff was pleading with him.  His family was pleading with him.  His allies in the Capitol were pleading with him.  His allies in the media were pleading with him.

That's a fact.

And what did he do? He* CHOSE NOT TO ACT.*

Why?  Because his misguided rubes were doing what he wanted them to do.  He was mad he couldn't be there to play the conquering hero, in his fucked up mind.


----------



## SweetSue92

Mac1958 said:


> His staff was pleading with him.  His family was pleading with him.  His allies in the Capitol were pleading with him.  His allies in the media were pleading with him.
> 
> That's a fact.
> 
> And what did he do? He* CHOSE NOT TO ACT.*
> 
> Why?  Because his misguided rubes were doing what he wanted them to do.  He was mad he couldn't be there to play the conquering hero, in his fucked up mind.



Wait I thought you all were mad that he took the steering wheel and tried to GO THERE and the SS said no. Now he was supposed to take over and "act" or something?

Or what?

Medicate your TDS


----------



## SweetSue92

Mac1958 said:


> His staff was pleading with him.  His family was pleading with him.  His allies in the Capitol were pleading with him.  His allies in the media were pleading with him.
> 
> That's a fact.
> 
> And what did he do? He* CHOSE NOT TO ACT.*
> 
> Why?  Because his misguided rubes were doing what he wanted them to do.  He was mad he couldn't be there to play the conquering hero, in his fucked up mind.


----------



## Chillicothe

SweetSue92 said:


> _Someday like 100 years from now, they'll be some mad unhappy liberal in some care home somewhere still randomly screeching out "Trump! Russia! Mueller!"_



My avatar would demur on the above sentiment.
Rather, we would suggest that 10 years from now folks who voted for Don Trump, who believed him when he said he was the most honest human ever, who believed him when he said a massive fraud stole the election.....well, those folks will be like the 'birthers' for Obama.  They'll claim they never believed it.  Or the jackasses who said Michelle Obama is a man. Or the folks who believe in QAnon.

They'll all deny it.  Duck and cover. 

IMHO
-----------------------------------------------------------------------




SweetSue92 said:


> _Medicate your TDS_


*TDS.*.....Trump's Duped & Snookered.
The same jackasses who beat the snot out of uniformed police on the steps and in the entryways to the Capitol on J6?

Yupper, exactly.   The HoneyBooBoo demographic, the celebrity-groupie cohort.  

All the same.

It's sad.  Really.


----------



## SweetSue92

Chillicothe said:


> My avatar would demur on the above sentiment.
> Rather, we would suggest that 10 years from now folks who voted for Don Trump, who believed him when he said he was the most honest human ever, who believed him when he said a massive fraud stole the election.....well, those folks will be like the 'birthers' for Obama.  They'll claim they never believed it.  Or the jackasses who said Michelle Obama is a man. Or the folks who believe in QAnon.
> 
> They'll all deny it.  Duck and cover.
> 
> IMHO
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> *TDS.*.....Trump's Duped & Snookered.
> The same jackasses who beat the snot out of uniformed police on the steps and in the entryways to the Capitol on J6?
> 
> Yupper, exactly.   The HoneyBooBoo demographic, the celebrity-groupie cohort.
> 
> All the same.
> 
> It's sad.  Really.



I wouldn't protest too much. Yours is the contingent to believed every single one of the Covid lies, and unlike Obama's very opaque past, the dubious election numbers and etc--the Covid lies are unraveling before our very eyes. 

Your liars are blatant and copious. Everyone can see it and knows it.


----------



## Chillicothe

SweetSue92 said:


> _Your liars are blatant and copious._



Settle down, poster Sue. It's Saturday morning.
Peace can come to your little life if you allow it to enter.
This grievance-think that has absorbed you is making you unhappy.

Peace ✌️


----------



## SweetSue92

Chillicothe said:


> Settle down, poster Sue. It's Saturday morning.
> Peace can come to your little life if you allow it to enter.
> This grievance-think that has absorbed you is making you unhappy.
> 
> Peace ✌️



Thanks for your concern, but I am exceedingly blessed and I do not forget it. It may be a little life, but full of love and good things.


----------



## Vrenn

SweetSue92 said:


> You know how there's someday gonna be the last Holocaust survivor, the last known living Shaker, etc?
> 
> Someday like 100 years from now, they'll be some mad unhappy liberal in some care home somewhere still randomly screeching out "Trump! Russia! Mueller!"
> 
> And then maybe it will be over.



And in the next room, you are going to find the last Rumpster screeching "TDS, MAGA, Stolen"


----------



## Flash

I wonder why none of the Democrats ever begged the Negroes and ANTIFA assholes to stop the six months of rioting, looting, murdering and destruction?


----------



## August West

eagle1462010 said:


> Anyone win Oscars for their acting in this yet.  I mean so far the day time ceral has some attempts of victimhood and drama.  Might need a trophy


This was no act. It`s called poultry in motion.


----------



## Delldude

playtime said:


> Of the cases involving weapons, there are four main charges: "Assaulting, Resisting, or Impeding Certain Officers Using a Dangerous Weapon"; "Entering and Remaining in a Restricted Building with a Deadly or Dangerous Weapon"; "Disorderly and Disruptive Conduct in a Restricted Building with a Deadly or Dangerous Weapon"; and "Engaging in Physical Violence in a Restricted Building with a Deadly or Dangerous Weapon."
> 
> Going through the Justice Department site, as well as some media databases, I counted 82 defendants who have been charged with at least one of those offenses. It's possible I missed a few, but I think they represent the vast majority of those who face weapons-related charges in the Capitol riot investigation. In each charge, prosecutors have specified the weapon the defendant is accused of using. Below is a list of all the defendants, and all the weapons:
> 
> DEFENDANTWEAPONALAM, Zachary JordanHelmetALBERTS, Christopher MichaelHandgun (Alberts was arrested after the riot was over, at 7:25 p.m., on a street near the Capitol and was accused of having a firearm.)BALLARD, Thomas JohnPolice batonBARNETT, RichardStun gun, walking stickBARNHART, Logan JamesBaton, flagpole, crutchBLACK, Joshua MatthewKnifeBLAIR, David AlanFlagpole, knifeBROCKHOFF, Nicholas JamesFire extinguisherBYERLY, Alan WilliamTaserCALDWELL, Daniel RayPepper or mace sprayCAPUCCIO, StevenBatonCHRESTMAN, WilliamAx handleCOFFEE, Luke RussellCrutchCOFFMAN, Lonnie LeroyMultiple firearms (Coffman is not charged with being on Capitol grounds; allegedly had two guns on his person, plus firearms in his truck parked on 1st Street SE in Washington D.C.)COPELAND, Landon KennethMetal fenceCUA, Bruno JosephBatonDEMPSEY, David NicholasCrutch, metal pole, "lacrimal spray," and "club-like object"EISENHART, Lisa MarieTaserFAIRLAMB, Scott KevinBatonFOY, Michael JosephHockey stickGIESWEIN, RobertBaseball bat, "aerosol irritant spray"GOSSJANKOWSKI, VitaliTaserHARKRIDER, Alex KirkTomahawk axIBRAHIM, Mark SamiFirearmJACKSON, EmanuelMetal baseball batJAMES, AaronShieldJENKINS, Shane LeedonTomahawk ax, flagpole, desk drawer, and "stick-like objects"JENSEN, Douglas AustinKnifeJOHNSON, Paul RussellMetal crowd control barrierJONES, Chad BarrettFlagpoleJUDD, David LeeFirecrackerKHATER, Julian ElieChemical spray (Accused of attacking Officer Brian Sicknick)KLEIN, Federico GuillermoShieldKRAMER, Philip EdwardSnowboarding helmet, walking cane, Master Lock, climbing ropeLANG, Edward JacobBat, shieldLANGUERAND, NicholasTraffic barrier, "stick-like objects"LAZAR, SamuelChemical irritantMCABEE, Ronald ColtonBaton, flagpole, crutch, and "reinforced gloves"MCCAUGHEY, Patrick E. IIIShieldMCGREW, James BurtonPoleMCHUGH, Sean MichaelBear spray, "metal sign"MCKELLOP, JeffreyFlagpoleMEREDITH, Cleveland Grover Jr.Firearms (Meredith arrived in Washington after the riot was over but was charged with having three guns in his possession.)MELLIS, Jonathan GennaroStickMILLER, Matthew RyanFire extinguisherMINK, Jorden RobertBaseball batMUNAFO, Jonathan JoshuaFlagpoleMUNCHEL, EricTaserNEEFE, MarshallWooden club, "metal sign frame"NICHOLS, Ryan TaylorCrowbar, pepper sprayOWENS, Grady DouglasSkateboardPADILLA, Joseph LinoFlagpole, "large metal sign"PALMER, Robert ScottFire extinguisher, "stick-like object"PERKINS, Michael StevenFlagpolePOLLOCK, Jonathan DanielFlagpole, riot shieldPONDER, Mark K.PolePOWELL, Rachel MarieIce ax, "large wooden pole"QUAGLIN, Christopher JosephShield, pepper sprayRANDOLPH, Stephen ChaseMetal crowd control barrierREFFITT, Guy WesleyHandgunRODRIGUEZ, DanielFlagpole, "electroshock weapon"RODRIGUEZ, Edward FranciscoChemical irritantSABOL, JeffreyBaton, flagpole, crutchSAMSEL, Ryan StephenMetal crowd control barrierSANFORD, RobertFire extinguisherSCHAFFER, JonBear spraySCHWARTZ, Peter J.Pepper spraySILLS, Geoffrey WilliamBatonSMITH, Charles BradfordKnifeSTAGER, Peter FrancisBaton, flagpole, crutchSTEVENS, Tristan ChandlerShieldSULLIVAN, John EarleKnifeTAAKE, Andrew QuentinPepper spray, metal whipTANIOS, George PierreChemical spray (Accused of attacking Officer Brian Sicknick)TAYLOR, RussellKnifeTHOMPSON, DevlynBatonWATSON, WilliamPepper sprayWEBSTER, ThomasFlagpoleWESTBURY, IsaacShieldWHITTON, Jack WadeBaton, flagpole, crutchWILSON, Duke EdwardPipeWORRELL, Christopher JohnPepper spray
> 
> 'Armed insurrection': What weapons did the Capitol rioters carry?
> 
> *starting at 1:40, there's radio communications coming from security/secret service spotting & describing individual flying monkeys that were armed.*


82 people out of some 330 million.

Wow.


----------



## playtime

SweetSue92 said:


> Wait I thought you all were mad that he took the steering wheel and tried to GO THERE and the SS said no. Now he was supposed to take over and "act" or something?
> 
> Or what?
> 
> Medicate your TDS



ummmm suze?  ya, i gotta question for ya.

why have the SS suddenly all lawyered up?  i mean like, personal lawyers? lol ... & one more thing, Q-Q ...  why were there no call or daily doings re: thePOTUS that is the standard protocol? 

well, that's a bit of a quandary, now ain't?


----------



## Delldude

playtime said:


> ummmm suze?  ya, i gotta question for ya.
> 
> why have the SS suddenly all lawyered up?  i mean like, personal lawyers? lol ... & one more thing, Q-Q ...  why were there no call or daily doings re: thePOTUS that is the standard protocol?
> 
> well, that's a bit of a quandary, now ain't?


No link?


----------



## playtime

SweetSue92 said:


> Thanks for your concern, but I am exceedingly blessed and I do not forget it. It may be a little life, but full of love and good things.



every word that you've uttered makes that crystal clear, suze.

FACT!


----------



## playtime

Delldude said:


> No link?



Trump aides at heart of explosive Jan. 6 claims have hired private lawyers, committee member says​PUBLISHED FRI, JUL 22 202212:57 PM EDTUPDATED FRI, JUL 22 20223:53 PM EDT
Kevin Breuninger@KEVINWILLIAMB
Trump aides at heart of explosive Jan. 6 claims have hired private lawyers, committee member says

'Unusual': Secret Service officials lawyering up, Jan. 6 committee member says​by Cami Mondeaux, Breaking News Reporter & Ryan King, Breaking News Reporter |
 | July 21, 2022 06:00 PM
 | _Updated Jul 21, 2022, 11:32 PM_
Officials with the Secret Service have retained legal counsel as investigators hone in on deleted text messages sought by the House Jan. 6 committee to provide more insight into the days leading up to the Capitol riot, according to a member of the panel.
'Unusual': Secret Service officials lawyering up, Jan. 6 committee member says

Tony Ornato, Robert Engel Lawyer Up as Secret Service Scrutiny Intensifies​BY DARRAGH ROCHE ON 7/22/22 AT 8:17 AM EDT
Tony Ornato, Robert Engel lawyer up as Secret Service scrutiny intensifies

Jan. 6 hearings highlights: Committee examines Trump's actions during riot​Thursday’s prime-time hearing focused on the 187 minutes between Trump’s speech and his tweet telling rioters to leave the Capitol.

i can always back up what i say, trolldude.


----------



## Delldude

playtime said:


> Trump aides at heart of explosive Jan. 6 claims have hired private lawyers, committee member says​PUBLISHED FRI, JUL 22 202212:57 PM EDTUPDATED FRI, JUL 22 20223:53 PM EDT
> Kevin Breuninger@KEVINWILLIAMB
> Trump aides at heart of explosive Jan. 6 claims have hired private lawyers, committee member says
> 
> 'Unusual': Secret Service officials lawyering up, Jan. 6 committee member says​by Cami Mondeaux, Breaking News Reporter & Ryan King, Breaking News Reporter |
> | July 21, 2022 06:00 PM
> | _Updated Jul 21, 2022, 11:32 PM_
> Officials with the Secret Service have retained legal counsel as investigators hone in on deleted text messages sought by the House Jan. 6 committee to provide more insight into the days leading up to the Capitol riot, according to a member of the panel.
> 'Unusual': Secret Service officials lawyering up, Jan. 6 committee member says
> 
> Tony Ornato, Robert Engel Lawyer Up as Secret Service Scrutiny Intensifies​BY DARRAGH ROCHE ON 7/22/22 AT 8:17 AM EDT
> Tony Ornato, Robert Engel lawyer up as Secret Service scrutiny intensifies
> 
> Jan. 6 hearings highlights: Committee examines Trump's actions during riot​Thursday’s prime-time hearing focused on the 187 minutes between Trump’s speech and his tweet telling rioters to leave the Capitol.
> 
> i can always back up what i say, trolldude.


Then do it when you make the claim.........


----------



## SweetSue92

playtime said:


> ummmm suze?  ya, i gotta question for ya.
> 
> why have the SS suddenly all lawyered up?  i mean like, personal lawyers? lol ... & one more thing, Q-Q ...  why were there no call or daily doings re: thePOTUS that is the standard protocol?
> 
> well, that's a bit of a quandary, now ain't?



No, because I don't care, and neither do the vast majority of the American people.

See: the latest "prime time" ratings on this absolute joke.


----------



## August West

SweetSue92 said:


> No, because I don't care, and neither do the vast majority of the American people.
> 
> See: the latest "prime time" ratings on this absolute joke.


People aren`t watching things like the Oscars and Olympics these days either. We didn`t have 200 channels and Netflix in the Watergate era. 
Do you think there should be no indictment because of the Nielson ratings?   
People who haven`t watched a minute of the hearings or read a newspaper story about the proceedings are the losers calling it a sham, show trial, kangaroo court, etc. Their heads are up trump`s orange ass for life.


----------



## SweetSue92

August West said:


> People aren`t watching things like the Oscars and Olympics these days either. We didn`t have 200 channels and Netflix in the Watergate era.
> Do you think there should be no indictment because of the Nielson ratings?
> People who haven`t watched a minute of the hearings or read a newspaper story about the proceedings are the losers calling it a sham, show trial, kangaroo court, etc. Their heads are up trump`s orange ass for life.



Having attempting and abandoned all other avenues, hapless Leftists are now hoping to pursue avenues like "heh didn't DO ANYTHING TO STOP IT!!"

Normal Americans: are. you. serious.

Meanwhile, we are still out here paying too much for gas and groceries, now losing our jobs, can't find formula for our babies.

Keep going.


----------



## August West

SweetSue92 said:


> Having attempting and abandoned all other avenues, hapless Leftists are now hoping to pursue avenues like "heh didn't DO ANYTHING TO STOP IT!!"
> 
> Normal Americans: are. you. serious.
> 
> Meanwhile, we are still out here paying too much for gas and groceries, now losing our jobs, can't find formula for our babies.
> 
> Keep going.


A.   Biden doesn`t set the global price for a barrel of oil.
B.    He`s not in the baby formula business. 
We should forget about trump`s coup attempt because groceries are expensive?


----------



## playtime

Delldude said:


> Then do it when you make the claim.........



sometimes i do ... sometimes i don't.  know why?






^^^ that ^^^


----------



## playtime

SweetSue92 said:


> No, because I don't care, and neither do the vast majority of the American people.
> 
> See: the latest "prime time" ratings on this absolute joke.



lol ... sure sure.  does that soothe you?

Nearly 17.7 million watched the second prime-time Jan. 6 hearing​By Sonia Rao
July 22, 2022 at 6:03 p.m. EDT

Nearly 17.7 million television viewers tuned in Thursday to the second prime-time hearing in the House select committee’s investigation into the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, the Nielsen rating service announced Friday. The number, which encompasses 10 broadcast and cable networks, represents a *slight* drop from the more than 20 million people who watched the first prime-time hearing in June.

According to ratings data provided by some of the individual networks Friday, *MSNBC led the pack with an average of 4.7 million viewers* for the high-profile programming block from 8 p.m. to 11 p.m. Similar to their plans for the June 9 hearing, major broadcast networks ABC, CBS and NBC booted other programming to make space for the congressional proceedings. *ABC led the three with roughly 3.9 million viewers, while NBC and CBS each attracted 2.7 million. July tends to be the lowest-rated month in television.

Fox News did not show the hearing and instead aired its usual programming featuring Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity. The network reported 2.66 million viewers during the prime-time block on Thursday. Fox News Media opted to instead air the hearing on the lesser-watched channel Fox Business.*
https://www.washingtonpost.com/tv/2022/07/22/prime-time-jan-6-hearings-ratings/

not to mention, that the hearings are available 24/7 to be watched outside of being live.

& depending on the polls, at least 50% of those asked, think donny is guilty AF & oughta go to prison.


----------



## playtime

SweetSue92 said:


> Meanwhile, we are still out here paying too much for gas and groceries,



that's worldwide, suze ... some due to supply chain issues -  world wide because of covidiots such as yer self.




SweetSue92 said:


> now losing our jobs,


*The US unemployment rate was unchanged at 3.6 percent in June of 2022, the same as in the previous three months, remaining the lowest since February 2020 and in line with market expectations. The number of unemployed people decreased by 38 thousand to 5.912 million, while employment levels fell by 315 thousand to 158.111 million. Meanwhile, the labor force participation rate edged down to 62.2 percent in June fom 62.3 percent in May. source: **U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics*​





United States Unemployment Rate - June 2022 Data - 1948-2021 Historical


SweetSue92 said:


> can't find formula for our babies.



blame the company who allowed bacteria to flourish in one of their major factories AND being only one outa 2 companies allowed to go thru the WIC program to start with.  then there's the supply chain issue yet again ... due to people just not getting vaxxed &/or aren't masking up when they really still should world wide. 




SweetSue92 said:


> Keep going.


----------



## Chillicothe

SweetSue92 said:


> Meanwhile, we are still out here paying too much for gas and groceries, now losing our jobs, can't find formula for our babies.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"paying too much for gas".....ummm, what is the right price for gas?  
Whining about 'high gas prices' now....is just that, whining.

Baby formula?  You do know the major cause of the shortage....the closure of Abbots's Sturgis plant , the country's largest facility, due to safety or sanitation citations .....has been resolved? The plant has re-opened.

"Losing jobs".....ah, Sue, that is a shame you live in such a depressed area.  In my area, "Now Hiring" signs are all over. In fact, in a 40 mile trip I took on Friday morning....I drove on a state highway through (or on the outskirts of) 6 communities.  I counted 14 "Hiring" signs in windows, on roadside display signs, yard signs, on two billboards.  And that's not counting the semi-trucks I passed that had solicitations for new drivers painted on their rear-ends.

Sounds to me that if you want a job Sue you could move to that area and apply.

Good luck. I hope things improve for you.


----------



## Faun

SweetSue92 said:


> No, because I don't care, and neither do the vast majority of the American people.
> 
> See: the latest "prime time" ratings on this absolute joke.



Some 18 million people watched the last hearing. Pretty good ratings even for prime time. And that was just those watching it on networks. Millions more streamed it from other services.


----------



## Chillicothe

Faun said:


> _Some 18 million people watched the last hearing. Pretty good ratings even for prime time. _



And that's in the middle of summer!
Sounds like a bingo!.......to me.
America has been fortunate to have this serious-minded purposeful Committee executing this endeavor.***

BTW, I've watched all of them. Trust me......this has been great TV.




***And the flip-side of that is: Some folks  haven't been as fortunate as America. 
For example --- DonT., Mark Meadows, Mike Flynn, Clark & Eastman, Rudy, Krakenpot Powell, Roger Stone, the Secret Service, Josh Hawley.   _NOT_....great TV for those blokes.


IMHO


----------



## Frankeneinstein

Chillicothe said:


> My avatar would demur on the above sentiment.


No one wields an avatar like chillicothe


----------



## SweetSue92

Chillicothe said:


> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> "paying too much for gas".....ummm, what is the right price for gas?
> Whining about 'high gas prices' now....is just that, whining.
> 
> Baby formula?  You do know the major cause of the shortage....the closure of Abbots's Sturgis plant , the country's largest facility, due to safety or sanitation citations .....has been resolved? The plant has re-opened.
> 
> "Losing jobs".....ah, Sue, that is a shame you live in such a depressed area.  In my area, "Now Hiring" signs are all over. In fact, in a 40 mile trip I took on Friday morning....I drove on a state highway through (or on the outskirts of) 6 communities.  I counted 14 "Hiring" signs in windows, on roadside display signs, yard signs, on two billboards.  And that's not counting the semi-trucks I passed that had solicitations for new drivers painted on their rear-ends.
> 
> Sounds to me that if you want a job Sue you could move to that area and apply.
> 
> Good luck. I hope things improve for you.



You all are trying to convince me. Don't bother with me. Try with the 70% of Americans who agree with me--and growing. This for August West and playtime too. Good luck!


----------



## August West

SweetSue92 said:


> You all are trying to convince me. Don't bother with me. Try with the 70% of Americans who agree with me--and growing. This for August West and playtime too. Good luck!


No one is trying to convince you. We`re just pointing out your idiocy.


----------



## SweetSue92

August West said:


> No one is trying to convince you. We`re just pointing out your idiocy.



I guess you think 70% of the American public are idiots then, not loving the high gas prices, lack of formula and inflation like you do--because it's not the demented basement dummy's fault, after all.

Okay


----------



## Vrenn

SweetSue92 said:


> I guess you think 70% of the American public are idiots then, not loving the high gas prices, lack of formula and inflation like you do--because it's not the demented basement dummy's fault, after all.
> 
> Okay



You would rather continue your MAGA Rumpster Domestic Terrorist and Traitor routine rather than help figure out ways to fix things.  We have new linen in Gitmo just for  you.


----------



## SweetSue92

Vrenn said:


> You would rather continue your MAGA Rumpster Domestic Terrorist and Traitor routine rather than help figure out ways to fix things.  We have new linen in Gitmo just for  you.



Come get it child


----------



## August West

SweetSue92 said:


> I guess you think 70% of the American public are idiots then, not loving the high gas prices, lack of formula and inflation like you do--because it's not the demented basement dummy's fault, after all.
> 
> Okay


Idiots would be those who believe that the POTUS sets the global price for a barrel of oil. The demented one isn`t the one who thinks we have a national park called Yo Semite.


----------



## Chillicothe

SweetSue92 said:


> You all are trying to convince me.



Ummm, noper.  No offfense but.....but that is a tad too me-centric, Sue.  
Look, *Sue92,* I know a bridge-too-far when I see one.  Mathew 13 talks about seed on rocky ground. Get the drift?

Anyway, I post, sometimes in response to you, sometimes to other TDS'rs 'cause it's more fun than doing NYT crossword puzzles in the morning. And I respond as some sort of corrective, a prophylactic, so to speak ....against the misinformation, deflections, and fantagasms  from those same posters.

I hope you are not offended by being corrected.  Think of it as going to the gym for your cardio.  It makes you a better person.

Trust me.


----------



## playtime

SweetSue92 said:


> You all are trying to convince me. Don't bother with me. *Try with the 70% of Americans who agree with me*--and growing. This for August West and playtime too. Good luck!



you mean70% of trump humping anti vaxxers who'll keep voting for the chosen one because they are well.... as poorly educated as they can come & donny loves long LONG time!


----------



## playtime

SweetSue92 said:


> I guess you think 70% of the American public are idiots then, not loving the high gas prices, lack of formula and inflation like you do--because it's not the demented basement dummy's fault, after all.
> 
> Okay



^^^


----------



## Delldude

Chillicothe said:


> And that's in the middle of summer!
> Sounds like a bingo!.......to me.
> America has been fortunate to have this serious-minded purposeful Committee executing this endeavor.***
> 
> BTW, I've watched all of them. Trust me......this has been great TV.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ***And the flip-side of that is: Some folks  haven't been as fortunate as America.
> For example --- DonT., Mark Meadows, Mike Flynn, Clark & Eastman, Rudy, Krakenpot Powell, Roger Stone, the Secret Service, Josh Hawley.   _NOT_....great TV for those blokes.
> 
> 
> IMHO


About twice as much watch the nightly news on any given night, on the big three.......so what's your point?


----------



## Delldude

playtime said:


> you mean70% of trump humping anti vaxxers who'll keep voting for the chosen one because they are well.... as poorly educated as they can come & donny loves long LONG time!


You miss Debbie Birx's reports that they didn't think the vax would be that effective, but pushed it anyways?


----------



## August West

Delldude said:


> About twice as much watch the nightly news on any given night, on the big three.......so what's your point?


The first prime time hearing drew 19 million viewers and the second one had 17 million. Monday Night Football attracts 12-13 million viewers.


----------



## Delldude

playtime said:


> Trump aides at heart of explosive Jan. 6 claims have hired private lawyers, committee member says​PUBLISHED FRI, JUL 22 202212:57 PM EDTUPDATED FRI, JUL 22 20223:53 PM EDT
> Kevin Breuninger@KEVINWILLIAMB
> Trump aides at heart of explosive Jan. 6 claims have hired private lawyers, committee member says
> 
> 'Unusual': Secret Service officials lawyering up, Jan. 6 committee member says​by Cami Mondeaux, Breaking News Reporter & Ryan King, Breaking News Reporter |
> | July 21, 2022 06:00 PM
> | _Updated Jul 21, 2022, 11:32 PM_
> Officials with the Secret Service have retained legal counsel as investigators hone in on deleted text messages sought by the House Jan. 6 committee to provide more insight into the days leading up to the Capitol riot, according to a member of the panel.
> 'Unusual': Secret Service officials lawyering up, Jan. 6 committee member says
> 
> Tony Ornato, Robert Engel Lawyer Up as Secret Service Scrutiny Intensifies​BY DARRAGH ROCHE ON 7/22/22 AT 8:17 AM EDT
> Tony Ornato, Robert Engel lawyer up as Secret Service scrutiny intensifies
> 
> Jan. 6 hearings highlights: Committee examines Trump's actions during riot​Thursday’s prime-time hearing focused on the 187 minutes between Trump’s speech and his tweet telling rioters to leave the Capitol.
> 
> i can always back up what i say, trolldude.



Your posts on the same issue are incredibly misleading. 

Lawyering up happens when a person is being questioned  and stops the interview and exercises their right to counsel*.*

Here is what happened without the sensational headline:



> *Some of the officers said that they would be coming and talking under oath,*” select committee member Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., told reporters Thursday night after the panel’s latest public hearing.
> 
> “They have not come in, and they recently retained private counsel, *which is unusual *but they have a right to do that,” Lofgren said.



Which is unusual?

Leftist heroine Cassidy Hutchinson did exactly the same thing when she testified under oath.

Looks like you sat on your own hook, line and sinker......

Keep your facts coming.


----------



## Delldude

August West said:


> The first prime time hearing drew 19 million viewers and the second one had 17 million. Monday Night Football attracts 12-13 million viewers.


Like I said, about double that watch nightly news on the big three.


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

Delldude said:


> Lawyering up happens when a person is being questioned and stops the interview and exercises their right to counsel*.*


Lawyering up happens when a person has something to hide


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

Delldude said:


> Your posts on the same issue are incredibly misleading.
> 
> Lawyering up happens when a person is being questioned  and stops the interview and exercises their right to counsel*.*
> 
> Here is what happened without the sensational headline:
> 
> 
> 
> Which is unusual?
> 
> Leftist heroine Cassidy Hutchinson did exactly the same thing when she testified under oath.
> 
> Looks like you sat on your own hook, line and sinker......
> 
> Keep your facts coming.


Breaking News!









						Latest moves suggest DOJ investigation of 2020 election is looking at conduct directly related to Trump and his closest allies
					

The move by the Justice Department to bring two top aides to former Vice President Mike Pence in front of a federal grand jury is the most aggressive public step taken yet by prosecutors investigating the plots to subvert the 2020 election.




					edition.cnn.com


----------



## Delldude

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Lawyering up happens when a person has something to hide


Wrong.....it happens when someone is in an interview with law enforcement and doesn't want to answer questions anymore.
These people have been asked to testify under oath.....big difference.......bringing their own counsel......just like Cassidy Hutchinson did....but that was ok.


----------



## Delldude

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Breaking News!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Latest moves suggest DOJ investigation of 2020 election is looking at conduct directly related to Trump and his closest allies
> 
> 
> The move by the Justice Department to bring two top aides to former Vice President Mike Pence in front of a federal grand jury is the most aggressive public step taken yet by prosecutors investigating the plots to subvert the 2020 election.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> edition.cnn.com


From your article:  suggest


----------



## playtime

Delldude said:


> You miss Debbie Birx's reports that they didn't think the vax would be that effective, but pushed it anyways?



ol' deb has had zero credibility since this moment when she kept her mouth shut about yer chosen one.


lol , did it hurt much when you took that hook out yer mouth?


----------



## playtime

TheProgressivePatriot said:


> Lawyering up happens when a person has something to hide



*bigley.*


----------



## Delldude

playtime said:


> in this case -  PERSONAL lawyers ... not white house council, which under normal circumstances would provide their services.   they declined because they know that all that 'innocent text deleting'   wasn't innocent at all.  there are strict by the book guidelines that were not followed; & especially the fact that they were deleted after being told that they were to be preserved for the OIG.


USSS isn't under WH council. And neither was Hutchinson's representation.
Try again.


----------



## Delldude

playtime said:


> ol' deb has had zero credibility since this moment when she kept her mouth shut about yer chosen one.


Still providing more misinformation?

BTW---no matter what you think of her, Birx is ratting out the task force.


----------



## playtime

Delldude said:


> Your posts on the same issue are incredibly misleading.
> 
> Lawyering up happens when a person is being questioned  and stops the interview and exercises their right to counsel*.*



lawyer up​ intransitive verb
Save Word
To save this word, you'll need to log in.
Log In 

Definition of _lawyer up_​
chiefly US, informal
*: to obtain the services of a lawyer especially while being investigated for possible wrongdoing*
Definition of LAWYER UP




Delldude said:


> Leftist



LOL!




Delldude said:


> heroine



LOL!




Delldude said:


> Cassidy Hutchinson did exactly the same thing when she testified under oath.



uh-huh.  'cept for one thing -  she willingly testified.  BUT her 1st lawyer was pd for by trump & was giving some advise that she knew wasn't kosher.  she realized that the shark was not putting HER best interest in focus but the person paying the bill.  that's when she changed lawyers & told the truth.




Delldude said:


> Looks like you sat on your own hook, line and sinker......



try harder, cause you really haven't made a case for yerself.




Delldude said:


> Keep your facts coming.



Justice Dept. investigating Trump’s actions in Jan. 6 criminal probe​People familiar with the probe said investigators are examining the former president’s conversations and have seized phone records of top aides​By Carol D. Leonnig, Devlin Barrett,
Josh Dawsey
 and 
Spencer S. Hsu
Updated July 26, 2022 at 7:47 p.m. EDT|Published July 26, 2022 at 6:58 p.m. EDT
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/07/26/trump-justice-investigation-january-6/

Trump Efforts to Create Fake Electors Probed by US Prosecutors​
Pence former chief of staff questioned before grand jury
Prosecutors shift from Capitol attackers to Trump inner circle
Bloomberg - Are you a robot?


----------



## playtime

Delldude said:


> USSS isn't under WH council. And neither was Hutchinson's representation.
> Try again.



i realized that after  i wrote it that the timeline was wrong.    but interesting that every wh council that was there during donny's term  hasn't picked up their case now.


----------



## playtime

Delldude said:


> Still providing more misinformation?
> 
> BTW---no matter what you think of her, Birx is ratting out the task force.



you mean pences' covid task force?   you are just 2 funny.


----------



## Delldude

playtime said:


> i realized that after  i wrote it that the timeline was wrong.    but interesting that every wh council that was there during donny's term  hasn't picked up their case now.


Time for you to lawyer up.


----------



## Delldude

playtime said:


> you mean pences' covid task force?   you are just 2 funny.



No, your boy Donnies covid advisors......now looking like they fed Him, you and me BS.

So comforting to find this out.


----------



## playtime

Delldude said:


> Time for you to lawyer up.



time for you to get a script for the little blue pill, cause your replies are just that impotent.


----------



## playtime

Delldude said:


> No, your boy Donnies covid advisors......now looking like they fed Him, you and me BS.
> 
> So comforting to find this out.


----------



## Delldude

playtime said:


> time for you to get a script for the little blue pill, cause your replies are just that impotent.


Following your lead.....


----------



## playtime

Delldude said:


> Following your lead.....



the only leader you follow is in deep deep orange doo doo.


----------



## Delldude

playtime said:


> the only leader you follow is in deep deep orange doo doo.
> 
> View attachment 675639


Nope


----------



## playtime

SweetSue92 said:


> now losing our jobs,


July Jobs Report: U.S. Added 528,000 New Jobs as Unemployment Rate Fell to 3.5%​Labor market hits two major recovery markers almost 2 1/2 years from the start of pandemic​
July Jobs Report: U.S. Added 528,000 New Jobs as Unemployment Rate Fell to 3.5%






SweetSue92 said:


> can't find formula for our babies.



Kansas voters block effort to strip abortion protections from state constitution​The conservative state voted overwhelmingly Tuesday to reject an amendment that would have allowed the state legislature to ban the procedure.
Kansas voters block effort to strip abortion protections from state constitution




SweetSue92 said:


> Keep going.


----------



## Delldude

> playtime:​July Jobs Report: U.S. Added 528,000 New Jobs as Unemployment Rate Fell to 3.5%​Labor market hits two major recovery markers almost 2 1/2 years from the start of pandemic​
> July Jobs Report: U.S. Added 528,000 New Jobs as Unemployment Rate Fell to 3.5%


So the mass exodus resulting from the Great Resignation has made many have second thoughts and returning to the job market.



> playtime:​Kansas voters block effort to strip abortion protections from state constitution​The conservative state voted overwhelmingly Tuesday to reject an amendment that would have allowed the state legislature to ban the procedure.
> Kansas voters block effort to strip abortion protections from state constitution


That's great news. This was the reason why SCOTUS overturned RvW in the first place.

Let the states decide.


----------



## playtime

Delldude said:


> Let the states decide.



the person who's pregant decides.


----------



## Delldude

playtime said:


> the person who's pregant decides.


If all the women in a particular state are 'pregant'.....then get their legislators to write the law.
That's the way we roll in a constitutional republic and not in your version of fascism.


----------



## playtime

Delldude said:


> If all the women in a particular state are 'pregant'....



going after a mispelling is low hanging fruit & lazy.




Delldude said:


> .then get their legislators to write the law.



autonomy shouldn't be illegal.

so yer point is a non starter.




Delldude said:


> That's the way we roll in a constitutional republic and not in your version of fascism.



^^^

idiot.


----------



## Delldude

playtime said:


> going after a mispelling is low hanging fruit & lazy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> autonomy shouldn't be illegal.
> 
> so yer point is a non starter.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ^^^
> 
> idiot.


Be sure your brain is engaged when posting.

Autonomy....where is it included in the constitution?


----------



## playtime

Delldude said:


> Be sure your brain is engaged when posting.
> 
> Autonomy....where is it included in the constitution?



freedom is.


----------



## Delldude

playtime said:


> freedom is.


Freedom, as defined in a constitutional republic........no mention of autonomy.


----------



## Delldude

playtime said:


> freedom is.


Autonomy is self governance.....of the people, by the people.


----------



## playtime

Delldude said:


> Freedom, as defined in a constitutional republic........no mention of autonomy.



freedom starts with autonomy.


----------



## playtime

Delldude said:


> Autonomy is self governance.....of the people, by the people.



Fourth Amendment​The Fourth Amendment originally enforced the notion that “each man’s home is his castle”, secure from unreasonable searches and seizures of property by the government.  It protects against arbitrary arrests, and is the basis of the law regarding search warrants, stop-and-frisk, safety inspections, wiretaps, and other forms of surveillance, as well as being central to many other criminal law topics and to privacy law.


Amendment IV​*The right of the people to be secure in their persons*, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Fourth Amendment


----------



## Delldude

playtime said:


> freedom starts with autonomy.


And autonomy is how and why our government came into being.
Note the Preamble to the Constitution starts with 'We the People' , not 'Me the Person'.


----------



## Delldude

playtime said:


> Fourth Amendment​The Fourth Amendment originally enforced the notion that “each man’s home is his castle”, secure from unreasonable searches and seizures of property by the government.  It protects against arbitrary arrests, and is the basis of the law regarding search warrants, stop-and-frisk, safety inspections, wiretaps, and other forms of surveillance, as well as being central to many other criminal law topics and to privacy law.
> 
> 
> Amendment IV​*The right of the people to be secure in their persons*, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
> Fourth Amendment


No mention of vaginas.


----------



## playtime

Delldude said:


> And autonomy is how and why our government came into being.
> Note the Preamble to the Constitution starts with 'We the People' , not 'Me the Person'.



uh-huh.  our founding fathers also owned people.


----------



## playtime

Delldude said:


> No mention of vaginas.



that was pathetically weak.


----------



## Delldude

playtime said:


> uh-huh.  our founding fathers also owned people.



Boy you sure change the subject to get away from your flawed statements.

Red Herring much?


----------



## Delldude

playtime said:


> that was pathetically weak.


Was what you were inferring.


----------

