A bad day for Trump
-
@Jolly said in A bad day for Trump:
DeSantis.
Probably. He's very Trump-like without being like Trump, if you get my drift. I saw a poll saying that half of GOP members who were polled want Trump to not run. I think that number will only grow in the next year.
-
@Jolly said in A bad day for Trump:
DeSantis.
Probably. He's very Trump-like without being like Trump, if you get my drift. I saw a poll saying that half of GOP members who were polled want Trump to not run. I think that number will only grow in the next year.
@George-K said in A bad day for Trump:
@Jolly said in A bad day for Trump:
DeSantis.
Probably. He's very Trump-like without being like Trump, if you get my drift. I saw a poll saying that half of GOP members who were polled want Trump to not run. I think that number will only grow in the next year.
Yeah it seems DeSantis is positioning well for that nomination. He also (should?) help lock in Florida's electoral votes. DeSantis/Haley would be a solid ticket.
-
Desantis would be fascinating. Pop culture will expect a pledge of fealty against him along the lines of Never Trump. Lots of opportunists who recognized how easy it was to publicly hate Trump are going to lose some friends, or come to terms that they’ll never be able to publicly support a GOP president again.
-
@Mik said in A bad day for Trump:
Looking like the frontrunner.
DeSantis/Haley? Not sure she'd take the VP spot.
Under the present global security situation, I think either would be a good choice. Together it would be a solid ticket, but I agree she may not want the VP spot.
-
@Mik said in A bad day for Trump:
Looking like the frontrunner.
DeSantis/Haley? Not sure she'd take the VP spot.
Under the present global security situation, I think either would be a good choice. Together it would be a solid ticket, but I agree she may not want the VP spot.
@Renauda said in A bad day for Trump:
she may not want the VP spot
She might be interested looking forward 8 years. By then, it'll be her turn.
-
@Renauda said in A bad day for Trump:
she may not want the VP spot
She might be interested looking forward 8 years. By then, it'll be her turn.
-
The driver of "The Beast" said that what Hutchinson alleged never happened.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/11/us/politics/jan-6-trump-motorcade-secret-service.html
Testimony Fleshes Out Account of Trump’s Demand to Go to Capitol on Jan. 6
But a newly released transcript of an interview of the Secret Service agent who drove Donald Trump’s vehicle that day disputes that he tried to grab the steering wheel or lunged at another agent.
“The president was insistent on going to the Capitol,” recounted the driver, whose name was not disclosed. “It was clear to me he wanted to go to the Capitol. He was not screaming at Mr. Engel. He was not screaming at me. Certainly his voice was raised, but it did not seem to me that he was irate — certainly not, certainly didn’t seem as irritated or agitated as he had on the way to the Ellipse.”
But, the driver said, Mr. Trump never lunged for the steering wheel or physically accosted the agents, contradicting one of the most sensational and hotly disputed elements of testimony given to the House Jan. 6 committee by a White House aide. The transcript of the driver is the first extensive eyewitness account of what happened in the armored vehicle to be made public.“I did not see him reach,” the Secret Service driver told investigators for the House panel. “He never grabbed the steering wheel. I didn’t see him, you know, lunge to try to get into the front seat at all. You know, what stood out was the irritation in his voice, more than his physical presence.”
The driver’s transcript adds detail to one of the most scrutinized episodes of Jan. 6, 2021. The transcript was never released publicly by the House Jan. 6 committee, which entered into an agreement with the Secret Service regarding 12 interviews to avoid disclosing “privacy information, for-official-use-only information, intelligence and law enforcement sensitive records and raw intelligence information.”
Republicans have suggested that the panel did not release the transcript because it contradicts portions of a public account of the incident from a prominent witness, Cassidy Hutchinson, who served as an aide to Mark Meadows, the White House chief of staff at the time. Ms. Hutchinson testified in June 2022 that she had heard about what happened from others second- or thirdhand. Republicans have faulted the panel’s decision to promote her account of Mr. Trump’s behavior in the vehicle.
So, as speculated Ms Htuchinson was testifying about what someone told her. That kind of testimony, in a real court, is called "hearsay."
And the driver's testimony was only released today. I wonder why.
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
-
LOL just like the other thread, the truth is likely in the middle somewhere. Did he lunge at the driver? Probably not. Was he irate and wanted to go? Yes. Did he make any movement and/or joke about driving himself? I could see it, but who knows, but which is where Cassidy heard about it. And yes, that is hearsay... which is literally what the other thread (about the 10k troops) is, too. Hearsay.
BTW to you @George-K and @Jolly the article above literally says why it was not released publicly. The Secret Service had an agreement not to release the transcript for security purposes.
More importantly, Cassidy Hutchinson? I'd hit that. Maybe Jon would too.
-
LOL just like the other thread, the truth is likely in the middle somewhere. Did he lunge at the driver? Probably not. Was he irate and wanted to go? Yes. Did he make any movement and/or joke about driving himself? I could see it, but who knows, but which is where Cassidy heard about it. And yes, that is hearsay... which is literally what the other thread (about the 10k troops) is, too. Hearsay.
BTW to you @George-K and @Jolly the article above literally says why it was not released publicly. The Secret Service had an agreement not to release the transcript for security purposes.
More importantly, Cassidy Hutchinson? I'd hit that. Maybe Jon would too.
-
LOL just like the other thread, the truth is likely in the middle somewhere. Did he lunge at the driver? Probably not. Was he irate and wanted to go? Yes. Did he make any movement and/or joke about driving himself? I could see it, but who knows, but which is where Cassidy heard about it. And yes, that is hearsay... which is literally what the other thread (about the 10k troops) is, too. Hearsay.
BTW to you @George-K and @Jolly the article above literally says why it was not released publicly. The Secret Service had an agreement not to release the transcript for security purposes.
More importantly, Cassidy Hutchinson? I'd hit that. Maybe Jon would too.
@89th said in A bad day for Trump:
Secret Service had an agreement not to release the transcript for security purposes.
And another thing. The Committee was in possession of the Secret Service testimony which contradicted Hutchinson. Even if you accept (and I don't) the "security purposes" argument, the committee knew she was a) testifying to hearsay and b) probably lying.
They promoted her, while knowing she was wrong.
Ask yourself, why is that? "Security purposes" has NOTHING to do with it. It's a red herring to distract.
They knew, and they lied.
-
The driver of "The Beast" said that what Hutchinson alleged never happened.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/11/us/politics/jan-6-trump-motorcade-secret-service.html
Testimony Fleshes Out Account of Trump’s Demand to Go to Capitol on Jan. 6
But a newly released transcript of an interview of the Secret Service agent who drove Donald Trump’s vehicle that day disputes that he tried to grab the steering wheel or lunged at another agent.
“The president was insistent on going to the Capitol,” recounted the driver, whose name was not disclosed. “It was clear to me he wanted to go to the Capitol. He was not screaming at Mr. Engel. He was not screaming at me. Certainly his voice was raised, but it did not seem to me that he was irate — certainly not, certainly didn’t seem as irritated or agitated as he had on the way to the Ellipse.”
But, the driver said, Mr. Trump never lunged for the steering wheel or physically accosted the agents, contradicting one of the most sensational and hotly disputed elements of testimony given to the House Jan. 6 committee by a White House aide. The transcript of the driver is the first extensive eyewitness account of what happened in the armored vehicle to be made public.“I did not see him reach,” the Secret Service driver told investigators for the House panel. “He never grabbed the steering wheel. I didn’t see him, you know, lunge to try to get into the front seat at all. You know, what stood out was the irritation in his voice, more than his physical presence.”
The driver’s transcript adds detail to one of the most scrutinized episodes of Jan. 6, 2021. The transcript was never released publicly by the House Jan. 6 committee, which entered into an agreement with the Secret Service regarding 12 interviews to avoid disclosing “privacy information, for-official-use-only information, intelligence and law enforcement sensitive records and raw intelligence information.”
Republicans have suggested that the panel did not release the transcript because it contradicts portions of a public account of the incident from a prominent witness, Cassidy Hutchinson, who served as an aide to Mark Meadows, the White House chief of staff at the time. Ms. Hutchinson testified in June 2022 that she had heard about what happened from others second- or thirdhand. Republicans have faulted the panel’s decision to promote her account of Mr. Trump’s behavior in the vehicle.
So, as speculated Ms Htuchinson was testifying about what someone told her. That kind of testimony, in a real court, is called "hearsay."
And the driver's testimony was only released today. I wonder why.
@George-K said in A bad day for Trump:
The driver of "The Beast" said that what Hutchinson alleged never happened.
So, as speculated Ms Htuchinson was testifying about what someone told her. That kind of testimony, in a real court, is called "hearsay."
And the driver's testimony was only released today. I wonder why.
The driver wanted to testify at the J6 Committee, but was denied. Former Rep. Liz Cheney (R-TDS) said that there was no time to allow his testimony. Yet, somehow, there was time to have Casey Hutchinson give her hearsay account.
The transcript of the driver’s testimony contains express objections by the lawyer that his client had offered to testify in July, August and September of 2022, but was “rebuffed” by the committee.
The account reaffirms a major criticism of the committee. After Democrats refused to allow the GOP to pick its members (as a long accepted practice in the House), the Democrats selected two anti-Trump Republicans who did little to push for a full and fair display of witnesses and facts. The Committee was chaired by Rep. Benny Thompson, a Democrat, with Rep. Liz Cheney, as Vice Chairwoman.
Cheney and the committee members clearly knew that Hutchinson’s account was debunked by the very driver who allegedly struggled with Trump. Yet, they allowed the media to report the incident for months while rebuffing the requests of the driver. Loudermilk is quoted as saying “We’re talking about the driver of the limousine, and the head of the entire protective detail. They were brought in by the select committee to testify, but they weren’t brought in until November.
The false account was given by Hutchinson in June of that year.
The Secret Service driver testified Trump never tried to reach for or grab the wheel of the SUV.
Notably, the transcript shows Cheney trying to explain the delay as due to the need for the Secret Service to produce all documents in the January 6 investigation.
Yet, she had no problem with making the false story public through Hutchinson before such supporting material was supplied.
I wonder why.
Yeah, there were horrible people at J6. Their vileness is matched by the members of the committee who allowed this to happen. Get me a banana.
-
No, I'd say the Jan 6 Committee may be worse.
The riot which took place on January 6 was just that, a spontaneous (with maybe some FBI help) riot. It wasn't an insurrection. An insurrection is a violent overthrow of an existing government. Even the most rabid rioters that day had no planned effort to overthrow the government. The primary beef was that the election was fraudulent and that fair elections and subsequently the government, must be sustained.
The Jan 6 Committee was cold, planned theater. Its purpose was to create a false narrative, to lie to the American people and do it in a scripted and professionally produced way. What makes it worse, is that this lie was crafted by elected representatives in our government, who swear an oath of office to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. Sadly, those enemies turned out to be the Jan 6 Committee.
-
G George K referenced this topic on
-
Pelose admits fault for lack of security.
Now, a previously-unreleased video taken on Jan. 6, 2021 shows then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., admitting that she was responsible for the lack of preparedness.
The video was disclosed in a posting on X by a House Republican panel. The video shows Pelosi in an exchange with Chief of Staff Terri McCullough on the evacuation. Pelosi states:
“We have responsibility, Terri. We did not have any accountability for what was going on there. And we should have. This is ridiculous. You’re going to ask me in the middle of the thing when they’ve already breached…that, should we call the Capitol Police? I mean the National Guard? Why weren’t the National Guard there to begin with?…They clearly didn’t know, and I take responsibility for not having them just prepared for more.”
The video was never released by the J6 Committee, which was criticized for its highly choreographed and scripted hearings with little balance in the presentation of evidence. The lack of emphasis on the security issues was glaring and raised by critics throughout the hearings.
-
And from the other side:
Members of Congress were evacuated to Fort McNair when rioters violently breached the Capitol. Schumer could be seen in the video, which aired Monday on MSNBC, yelling at then-Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy over the whereabouts of the National Guard.
“D.C. has requested the National Guard, and it’s been denied by DOD. I’d like to know a good f‑‑‑ing reason why it’s been denied,” Schumer said. “We need them fast. We’ve all had to, I’ve never seen anything like this. We’re like a third-world country here. We had to run and evacuate the Capitol.”
Trump has long claimed, falsely, that he ordered the National Guard into Washington and that then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) stopped him. The claim has been undermined by Trump’s Cabinet members under oath.
Later in the video, Schumer said he would move on to then-acting Secretary of Defense Chris Miller to urge his case for deploying the Guard.
“All right. I spoke to the secretary of the Army, and he’s given the full OK to give the National Guard. He said it was not done,” Schumer said. “I’m going to call up the secretary of Defense.”
In a separate clip, the majority leader also pressed acting Attorney General Jeff Rosen on his actions that afternoon and urged him to get Trump to make the rioters go home.
“Why don’t you get the president to tell them to leave the Capitol? Mr. Attorney General, in your law enforcement responsibility. A public statement, they should all leave,” Schumer said. “He is saying his tweet said we are for peace, law and order and order. Yeah. Why don’t you get him to make that statement? Would you do that?”
https://news.yahoo.com/news/video-shows-schumer-fury-over-112535376.html
-
Trump did offer the NG. AFAIK, that's factual.
OTOH, Pelosi did not request them at any time, even several days before the rally, knowing how big the crowd was going to be.
-
Trump did offer the NG. AFAIK, that's factual.
OTOH, Pelosi did not request them at any time, even several days before the rally, knowing how big the crowd was going to be.
@Jolly said in A bad day for Trump:
Trump did offer the NG. AFAIK, that's factual.
From what I recall, Trump didn't offer the National Guard, but someone (Ornato?) overheard his chief of staff (Meadows?) told the DC Mayor on a phone call that "Trump is willing to ask for up to 10,000 guardsmen for the pro vs anti Trump crowds", and at that time it was specific to the pro/anti Trump crowds at his temper tantrum protest speech, not for Capitol Building security? Either way... when the Capitol was breached, I believe Trump was calling Congressmen to slow the vote instead of calling in troops. I could be wrong, I haven't followed the details too closely (not sarcasm).
