A bad day for Trump
-
@89th said in A bad day for Trump:
@Larry said in A bad day for Trump:
Anyone who has even looked inside a limo can tell you it is flat out impossible to grab the steering wheel from the back seat, which is where the VIP would be sitting. That's one. The Secret Service says it didn't happen. That's two. By making such a ridiculous claim, the woman proved herself to be a liar before the sun had set. That's three. It is a proven fact that Trump tried to provide the znational Guard to beef up security. Yet this bunch of fools would have you believe that at the same time as he was trying to beef up security he was conspiring to send armed I surgents into the capital. Thats four.
Ok, I'll bite:
One: If it was the Presidential SUV, there is no barrier between the backseat and the front seat.
Two: The Secret Service hasn't testified to that under oath.
Three: Not sure how her testimony makes her a liar. I believe she told the truth about what she heard. Now, whether what she heard was accurate is a different question, as others like @George-K have pointed out.
Four: I'm not sure he was trying to send armed insurgents to the Capitol, but as said before, all of this is hearsay anyway so until there is better proof of his comments (this and others), this is all just vapor testimony, IMO.
- How do you KNOW there is no barrier? There's one in the Presidential limo.
- The SS has already submitted papers saying they will be happy to testify under oath. Hide behind a tree and see if they're called. I'd say it's 75/25 they're not called.
- That's hearsay. What person in their right mind wants hearsay, possible even third or fourth hand hearsay given in a committee of supposedly this much importance. It's not important, son. It's a political sideshow. They on't give a shit about the country...This is solely trying to wound Trump politically, trying to keep him from running again. It's very hard to steal two elections in a row.
- Troops were offered. It's Pelosi's responsibility to ensure the safety of the Capitol. She did not take the President up on his offer.
Always remember, Operation Valkyrie was an act of sedition.
Warning: I post things that interest me. Read and comment at your own discretion. -
@Jolly said in A bad day for Trump:
That's hearsay. What person in their right mind wants hearsay, possible even third or fourth hand hearsay given in a committee of supposedly this much importance. It's not important, son. It's a political sideshow.
This is not a trial. This is theater. In a trial, there are rules of evidence (which would bar this type of testimony) and in a trial you have the right to cross-examine.
Also, Rep. Cheney, at the end of one statement played the video (audio?) of Trump saying, something to the effect of "Now let's go to the Capitol..." and the audio was cut before the word "peacefully" was out.
After all the caterwauling about "deceptively edited videos," you'd think the committee would have the honesty to at least not do that.
"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.
-
@George-K said in A bad day for Trump:
@Jolly said in A bad day for Trump:
That's hearsay. What person in their right mind wants hearsay, possible even third or fourth hand hearsay given in a committee of supposedly this much importance. It's not important, son. It's a political sideshow.
This is not a trial. This is theater. In a trial, there are rules of evidence (which would bar this type of testimony) and in a trial you have the right to cross-examine.
Also, Rep. Cheney, at the end of one statement played the video (audio?) of Trump saying, something to the effect of "Now let's go to the Capitol..." and the audio was cut before the word "peacefully" was out.
After all the caterwauling about "deceptively edited videos," you'd think the committee would have the honesty to at least not do that.
Nice to get more evidence that Cheney is just another dime a dozen, principle-free, opportunist. It so happens that the Trump era has enticed lots of principle-free opportunists to jump on that bandwagon where they shout at the top of their lungs about their principles and how Trump violates them.
-
What's hilarious, is that Cheney approved of the RvW SCOTUS decision. Her Dem buddies quit singing her praises long enough to damn her to Hell.
Useful idiot, indeed...
-
@Horace said in A bad day for Trump:
@George-K said in A bad day for Trump:
Deeply unsettling. Ax, how do you feel about this allegation?
Fake news. I feel bad about you being taken in by it.
-
@Axtremus said in A bad day for Trump:
@Horace said in A bad day for Trump:
@George-K said in A bad day for Trump:
Deeply unsettling. Ax, how do you feel about this allegation?
Fake news. I feel bad about you being taken in by it.
I'm sorry to have made you feel badly. I feel badly about making you feel badly.
-
This article breaks down various parts of Hutchinson's testimony, carefully classifying for which parts she testified as a direct witness and for which other parts she provided second hand recounting ("hearsay"), and calling out the significance of each:
It turns out for the most part she was a direct witness to events recounted in her testimony; only on the "Trump tried to grab the steering wheel" part did she recounted the event second hand.
-
@Axtremus said in A bad day for Trump:
This article breaks down various parts of Hutchinson's testimony, carefully classifying for which parts she testified as a direct witness and for which other parts she provided second hand recounting ("hearsay"), and calling out the significance of each:
It turns out for the most part she was a direct witness to events recounted in her testimony; only on the "Trump tried to grab the steering wheel" part did she recounted the event second hand.
My old Uncle Henry used to say, If a person will lie about one thing, they'll lie about something else.
Now, I figure if the woman would lie about something as easily discernable as people fighting over a steering wheel, the truth ain't in her.
Always remember, Operation Valkyrie was an act of sedition.
Warning: I post things that interest me. Read and comment at your own discretion. -
"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.
-
@Axtremus said in A bad day for Trump:
This article breaks down various parts of Hutchinson's testimony, carefully classifying for which parts she testified as a direct witness and for which other parts she provided second hand recounting ("hearsay"), and calling out the significance of each:
It turns out for the most part she was a direct witness to events recounted in her testimony; only on the "Trump tried to grab the steering wheel" part did she recounted the event second hand.
Paywall...
"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.
-
Secret Service Deputy Chief of Staff Tony Ornato.
This is <checks notes> hearsay, of course, but if it's good enough for Congress, it's good enough for TNCR, right?
A source close to former Trump Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations Tony Ornato says he did not brief Jan. 6 Committee witness Cassidy Hutchinson on one of the major allegation she made to the committee Tuesday.
Hutchinson, a former top aide to White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, testified to lawmakers Tuesday that Ornato told her former President Donald Trump repeatedly demanded that the Secret Service take him to the Capitol on January 6. Ornato further told Hutchinson, according to her, that Trump lunged at a Secret Service agent and tried to grab the wheel of a presidential SUV when agents would not allow that.
However, a source close to Ornato told Fox News that Ornato watched the hearing yesterday and was shocked when Cassidy made the allegation about the steering wheel.
Both Bobby Engel, the top agent on Trump's Secret Service detail who was in the car, and Ornato, who was not in the car, testified to the January 6 Committee in private over the past year, the source close to Ornato said.
Engel and Ornato never brought up part about steering wheel, according to that source. Both want to testify on the record again and refute the part about Trump grabbing or trying to grab the wheel. The driver of the SUV, who is unnamed, will also cooperate with the committee.
A source close to the USSS says Hutchinson was truthful when she said that Trump was furious inside the SUV. Trump did want to go to the Capitol on January 6 and was yelling and shouting. However, the steering wheel part is false, per this source.
"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.
-
@George-K said in A bad day for Trump:
Secret Service Deputy Chief of Staff Tony Ornato.
This is <checks notes> hearsay, of course, but if it's good enough for Congress, it's good enough for TNCR, right?
A source close to former Trump Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations Tony Ornato says he did not brief Jan. 6 Committee witness Cassidy Hutchinson on one of the major allegation she made to the committee Tuesday.
Hutchinson, a former top aide to White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, testified to lawmakers Tuesday that Ornato told her former President Donald Trump repeatedly demanded that the Secret Service take him to the Capitol on January 6. Ornato further told Hutchinson, according to her, that Trump lunged at a Secret Service agent and tried to grab the wheel of a presidential SUV when agents would not allow that.
However, a source close to Ornato told Fox News that Ornato watched the hearing yesterday and was shocked when Cassidy made the allegation about the steering wheel.
Both Bobby Engel, the top agent on Trump's Secret Service detail who was in the car, and Ornato, who was not in the car, testified to the January 6 Committee in private over the past year, the source close to Ornato said.
Engel and Ornato never brought up part about steering wheel, according to that source. Both want to testify on the record again and refute the part about Trump grabbing or trying to grab the wheel. The driver of the SUV, who is unnamed, will also cooperate with the committee.
A source close to the USSS says Hutchinson was truthful when she said that Trump was furious inside the SUV. Trump did want to go to the Capitol on January 6 and was yelling and shouting. However, the steering wheel part is false, per this source.
What lawyer ( and most of those idiots are lawyers) would not verify hearsay with a primary source?
Always remember, Operation Valkyrie was an act of sedition.
Warning: I post things that interest me. Read and comment at your own discretion. -
@George-K said in A bad day for Trump:
@Axtremus said in A bad day for Trump:
This article breaks down various parts of Hutchinson's testimony, carefully classifying for which parts she testified as a direct witness and for which other parts she provided second hand recounting ("hearsay"), and calling out the significance of each:
It turns out for the most part she was a direct witness to events recounted in her testimony; only on the "Trump tried to grab the steering wheel" part did she recounted the event second hand.
Paywall...
I feel badly that Ax has more subscriptions than I do. That’s two times Ax has made me feel badly. I only made him feel badly once.
-
@Jolly said in A bad day for Trump:
@George-K said in A bad day for Trump:
Secret Service Deputy Chief of Staff Tony Ornato.
…This is <checks notes> hearsay, of course, but if it's good enough for Congress, it's good enough for TNCR, right?
Hearsay under oath ≠ hearsay not under oath.
-
-
@George-K said in A bad day for Trump:
As I said above, a legal principle is "Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus."
-
Has it been established that there is a falsehood in Hutchinson’s testimony?
-
Is the aforementioned legal principle applicable here? Think of it this way: every one lies about something at some points in their lives, a strict universal application of that principle would disqualify every testimony. Yet we live in the world where many testimonies have been accepted. So clearly that principle is only applied under some conditions but not others.
-
