AIDE DETAILS TRUMP’S RAGE ON JAN. 6He Knew Crowd Was Armed, but Tried to Loosen Security, Testimony Recounts

[Logician Man]

Virtually all of it has been

Link(s)?

 

[Rawley]

They should absolutely show us the testimony of the agents.

My personal opinion of the President did not include this - I assumed that any level of planning was beyond this administration. What is coming out has surprised me, but, until better evidence surfaces that overrides it, it seems that Trump did indeed want to lead the mob into the Capital, thinking he could get himself reinstated as President. Insane.

The fact that you accept triple hearsay as "evidence" does show some personal bias.

 

[JasperL]

Stop it with the nonsense. The secret service issued a statement yesterday that both agents are prepared to testify that it never happened. You know this is true so why even pretend that you don't?

The "secret service" issued no such thing. Or, if you want, point us to this statement on SS letterhead, with a name attached. That is a statement. That did not happen.

What also did not happen, that you claim did happen, is Tony Ornato making any statement about the story recounted by Hutchinson. Someone unnamed said he denied it. Who that someone is you have no idea. It would be nice if Ornato did make a claim on the record, better if he does so under oath like Hutchinson. He's said nothing - preferring to issue a denial through someone too cowardly to use their name.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Schiff is a partisan hack and a tool. Huchinson has not been shown to be a liar, nor has her sworn testimony been shown to be fraudulent.

Yes she has.

She claimed to author a letter she didn’t write, the letters author is willing to testify. This is perjury.

Why do you think it is that, when put under oath, the people with the most access to what actually went on in the Oval Office say the worst things about Trump?

Hutchinson is not established to have any meaningful access to the president.

 

[JasperL]

Virtually all of it has been

Debunked by anonymous people claiming to speak for others. Impressive stuff!!

 

[EMNofSeattle]

The fact that you accept triple hearsay as "evidence" does show some personal bias.

It is “evidence” in a technical sense but not credible evidence. This whole thing is clearly a hoax. Like all the others the left has created and closeted leftists and outright leftists believe this out of convenience.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Debunked by anonymous people claiming to speak for others. Impressive stuff!!

Through official channels. With names.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Debunked by anonymous people claiming to speak for others. Impressive stuff!!

It won’t matter though, because when Christine Blasey Ford was shown to commit perjury in regards to her second front door you didn’t condemn the hoax. There is no evidence that will convince you of anything other than your hoax

 

[NolanVoyd]

Through official channels. With names.

You should actually watch her testimony.

It convinced the formerly pro Trump Washington examiner of the following:

"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."

 

[beefheart]

Debunked by anonymous people claiming to speak for others. Impressive stuff!!

Remember when the Republicans were all against anonymous sources.

Oh my.

 

[Atomic Kid]

1,000 witnesses. All of them Republican huh? Do you have the list of the 1,000 that have testified?

Engel and Ornato are Republicans?

Have Oranato or Engels given sworn testimony?

 

[EMNofSeattle]

You should actually watch her testimony.

It convinced the formerly pro Trump Washington examiner of the following:

"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."

So? They’re going to get burned joining in on the hoax. We all know this isn’t true.

 

[NolanVoyd]

So? They’re going to get burned joining in on the hoax. We all know this isn’t true.

Ah, but it is true.

Everyone who has actually looked at the evidence knows that.

The only people clinging to the lie are the people who refuse to look at the evidence.

That ought to tell you something.

Think about it.

 

[cpwill]

The fact that you accept triple hearsay as "evidence" does show some personal bias.

The triple heresay in this case is coming from the unnamed sources with unvalidated access speaking off the record.

We have second-hand information in a sworn testimony from a named source with validated direct and indirect access to what she reported.

The second is worth more than the first.

 

[cpwill]

Yes she has.

It has not.

She claimed to author a letter she didn’t write, the letters author is willing to testify. This is perjury.

No it is not. It is a he-said-she-said at most.

Hutchinson is not established to have any meaningful access to the president.

Hutchinson had daily direct and indirect access to the President in the regular course of his duties and hers. However, she is far from alone when it comes to describing the President.

Why do you think former Trump Chief of Staff Mulvaney says he believes her?

This is the kind of thing that people with direct access to Trump come to expect from him:

 

[JasperL]

Through official channels. With names.

LInk?

 

[year2late]

It has not.




No it is not. It is a he-said-she-said at most.



Hutchinson had daily direct and indirect access to the President in the regular course of his duties and hers. However, she is far from alone when it comes to describing the President.

Why do you think former Trump Chief of Staff Mulvaney says he believes her?

This is the kind of thing that people with direct access to Trump come to expect from him:

Clar this all up. Get Trump under oath on the stand.

 

[JasperL]

It won’t matter though, because when Christine Blasey Ford was shown to commit perjury in regards to her second front door you didn’t condemn the hoax. There is no evidence that will convince you of anything other than your hoax

Why in the hell are you bringing up that bullcrap red herring? Insulting me in a way that would embarrass you in front of a schoolyard full of small children isn't working for you.

If you want to prove your point, show the evidence.

 

[Sue Sponte]

To recap, “hearsay” is bad

But we also “know” it was “perjury” based on a “source close to” the secret service. We literally have no idea who that “source” is or what they claim is the truth, but the “hearsay” is the problem.

So the “hearsay” is perjury because of an out of court statement (I.e. hearsay) from an unidentified person whose “statement” is also unidentified

You can’t make this shit up

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Why in the hell are you bringing up that bullcrap red herring?

It’s not a red herring, it’s absolute proof the left will suborn perjury to carry out political attacks and truth is of no consequence to them.

Insulting me in a way that would embarrass you in front of a schoolyard full of small children isn't working for you.

If you want to prove your point, show the evidence.

I don’t have to show anything, you’re making the claim, and your evidence is wanting. And in any event there is no evidence you can see that will ever cause you to say anything other than Trump is an evil fascist

 

[Mustachio]

So? They’re going to get burned joining in on the hoax. We all know this isn’t true.

"We all know this thing about trump isn't true because donald trump said it wasn't true and i didn't even watch it;."

You have so much credibility. So much. The most. You don't even know what she testified, do you

 

[EMNofSeattle]

It has not.




No it is not. It is a he-said-she-said at most.

You know she didn’t write that letter. There is no reason she would write it as opposed to the president’s counsel. Are you going to put money a handwriting analysis will show she wrote it? I’d wager you wouldn’t put money it.

Hutchinson had daily direct and indirect access to the President in the regular course of his duties and hers. However, she is far from alone when it comes to describing the President.

Why do you think former Trump Chief of Staff Mulvaney says he believes her?

I think a number of people are fair weather soldiers, given that the current AG is an out and out partisan and the “Justice Department” has become an arm of the Democratic Party, this is self denunciation to prevent being punished. Given all the bulls hit prosecutions we’ve seen of people like Roger Stone and Michael Flynn and fake news against people like Carter Page, even Ben Shapiro said today he joked he’s glad he pays his taxes because he thinks he would be singled out if the Biden government had something on him.

This is the kind of thing that people with direct access to Trump come to expect from him:

Too bad, too many disloyal people. Because he is wrong, there is in fact nothing of any substance that came out except Liz Cheney, probably upset at Trump for not creating more foreign wars, was willing to put on the most ridiculous display possible. And no one actually cares. This whole charade is a show to most politically active members of the left.

 

[Mustachio]

It’s not hard at all, it’s just that leftists never prosecute it. Christine Blasey Ford claimed she installed a second front door on her home to escape Brett Kavanaugh in 2012 when she heard his name on a lists of possible court nominees.

Wrong, she was issued building permits in 2008 as part of a home renovation as a seperate front entrance for a tenant.

Clearly a lie. Never prosecuted

You read something in the gateway pundit and I bet people have corrected you on this hundreds on times. You have 0 integrity. You don't care about truth. Only what serves your hatred, hyper-partisanship and "libs are filth" narrative. Utter rubbish.

“The reason (the assault) came up in counseling is that my husband and I had completed a very extensive, very long remodel of our home and I insisted on a second front door, an idea that he and others disagreed with and could not understand,”

 

[OscarLevant]

https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/28/politics/january-6-hearing-day-6-takeaways-hutchinson/index.html

Let me know when Engel and Ornato testifies Until then, her testimony on that point stands.

But, it's not the important point, anyway. She was a direct witness on far more damning points.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

You read something in the gateway pundit and I bet people have corrected you on this hundreds on times. You have 0 integrity. You don't care about truth. Only what serves your hatred, hyper-partisanship and "libs are filth" narrative. Utter rubbish.

“The reason (the assault) came up in counseling is that my husband and I had completed a very extensive, very long remodel of our home and I insisted on a second front door, an idea that he and others disagreed with and could not understand,”

This article proves exactly what I said. The door was attached to a master bedroom as a second entrance for tenants since they rent it to Google interns.

It was clearly remodeled for such, this is a common remodel done in California where housing prices are high and homeowners make extra money by renting out parts of their home. This is a textbook type of remodel, the attached garage is converted into a large studio, the door from the house to the garage is boarded up, and the garage door is walled with a man door added. You can walk down any suburban street in LA or the Bay Area for a couple of mile and see hundreds of these.

It was never about Kavanaugh.