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

[Nostra]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

So? I'm not talking about the limo.

Capiche?

Well that part proved she is lying. Cupcake.

 

[Chillicothe]

"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]

Rather, I am expecting those who come onto this adult discussion venue

This seems to have been posted on the wrong website.

 

[TemplarKormac]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

------------------------------------------------------------------------
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]

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]

man, car, steering wheel, throat, ketchup

Your fetishes? If so, keep them to yourself.

 

[TemplarKormac]