The Nationally Televised January 6th Committee Hearings Begin June 9th

[TA111]

I’m glad swampy keeps posting because it continues to show how silly this committee truly is.
He’s now down to arguing that even though the witness has lied on several occasions that you should believe she’s telling the truth on other matters. Good luck with that.

[Swampy Meadows]

Originally Posted by TA111 This what happens when you try to make something where nothing exists. The committee didn’t even seek out the agents who were present. https://townhall.com/tipsheet/julior...worse-n2609515

Total BS. They had talked to Tiny’s Secret Service agent Robert Engel earlier in the course of their investigation
https://www.politico.com/amp/news/20...jan-6-00043164

Just not immediately before Hutchinson testified because if you recall it was a last minute deal for her to testify.
Posted via Mobile Device

[TA111]

Originally Posted by Swampy Meadows Total BS. They had talked to Tiny’s Secret Service agent Robert Engel earlier in the course of their investigation https://www.politico.com/amp/news/20...jan-6-00043164 Just not immediately before Hutchinson testified because if you recall it was a last minute deal for her to testify. Posted via Mobile Device

Again, thanks for posting and proving what a joke the committee is. You NEVER put a witness under oath without asking the eyewitnesses who were present what actually happened and what was said. We all know why they didn’t call the SS agents to testify- they knew the testimony would destroy their “star” witness. Now they look like the hacks they are. Also, I enjoyed this Megan Kelly clip on why a 1st year law student could have driven a truck through this “testimony”.
https://twitchy.com/dougp-3137/2022/...in-the-future/

[Swampy Meadows]

If you RTFA I posted they did talk to Engel previously. And as I posted earlier, Hutchinson told Cheney under questioning that she discussed what happened immediately afterwards with Engel and Tony Ornato and neither one disputed the account.

It should be noted that Engel and Ornato are both ultra-MAGA. There is a reason why Biden switched out his Secret Service detail when he took office.
Posted via Mobile Device

[Viperstick]

[Swampy Meadows]

Kyle Cheney
@kyledcheney

NEWS: Jan. 6 committee subpoenas Pat Cipollone.

https://january6th.house.gov/sites/d...e%20Letter.pdf

[Swampy Meadows]

Kyle Cheney
@kyledcheney

This underscores why Ornato and Engel’s sworn testimony about their conversation with Hutchinson after the Jan. 6 rally is all that really matters here.

Alyssa Farah Griffin
@Alyssafarah

Tony Ornato lied about me too. During the protests at Lafayette sq in 2020, I told Mark Meadows & Ornato they needed to warn press staged there before clearing the square. Meadows replied: “we aren’t doing that.” Tony later lied &said the exchange never happened. He knows it did.

Note: Alyssa Farah Griffin was Director of Strategic Communications and Assistant to the President in the Tiny WH

[Swampy Meadows]

Seems Tony Ornato is really good at denying conversations ever happened. Here is yet another one from the book I Alone Can Fix It:



Not to mention the fact that Ornato (and Tiny) wanted Pence moved out of the Capitol. Thankfully, Pence wasn't having any of their bullsh*t.

[ud2]

Originally Posted by Swampy Meadows Total BS. They had talked to Tiny’s Secret Service agent Robert Engel earlier in the course of their investigation https://www.politico.com/amp/news/20...jan-6-00043164 Just not immediately before Hutchinson testified because if you recall it was a last minute deal for her to testify. Posted via Mobile Device

What was the rush to have CH testify? Put her in protective custody or assign her a security detail if she is getting threatened, get your ducks in a row by talking to the SS people about what happened first, and then have her testify.

I am not sure if we will ever know who is telling the truth here.

[Swampy Meadows]

Originally Posted by ud2 I am not sure if we will ever know who is telling the truth here.

When the Secret Service agents pull a Ginni Thomas and don't testify, you'll have your answer.

[ud2]

Originally Posted by Swampy Meadows When the Secret Service agents pull a Ginni Thomas and don't testify, you'll have your answer.

We will see, the SS people said that they are ready to testify, so the SS people are just bluffing or are going to perjure themselves?

[Swampy Meadows]

Originally Posted by ud2 We will see, the SS people said that they are ready to testify, so the SS people are just bluffing or are going to perjure themselves?

Ginni Thomas said she "can't wait to testify":

https://deadline.com/2022/06/ginni-t...ew-1235048088/

Until she wasn't:

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/28/u...6-hearing.html

[Viperstick]

[TA111]

Secret Service confirms the the committee didn’t reach out to them to confirm her testimony. This is malpractice of the first degree. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/sec...-lunging-agent

[TA111]

Her testimony implodes even further. https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattve...ary-6-n2609552

[Fudd]

Originally Posted by Fudd What is missing is a cross examination of officials called to testify. Where are the officials who have exculpatory testimony? Where is the testimony from witnesses to Pelosi's involvement in the security preparations that day? Isn't it odd that is completely off limits to these hearings? Why is it off limits? They are not called upon because there is no search for the truth. The accusers have blocked that possibility through their construction of the rules of the hearing. If the same rules had applied to the Russia Hoax, we would all believe that Trump really was a Russian plant. But House Reps, Senators and investigative reporters went outside the system and leaked and revealed evidence that the Democratic machine did not want revealed to the public. In the end, we saw it for what it was, a political hoax. Think for a while what we would believe if we just accepted the information that Democratic controlled legislature was feeding us without challenge. It was enough to mislead a huge portion of the country for years. This is what happens when one side is controlling the information and the production that is presented to the public. So don't make the same mistake, fooled by the very same group of politicians who tried to mislead you with the Russia Hoax. How is it that you have renewed faith in that very same group that has repeatedly tried to misrepresent political matters to you? Is it because you want to believe so badly that you have erased those episodes from your mind? The very construction of these hearings and the history of the people who constructed them should be a warning signal to you. While I am interested in a bit of the raw testimony from these hearings, I am not willing to sit through the thick political fog that is being produced with it. I can get the same content and level of credibility from watching a DNC produced political ad. I'll wait for the summary. As an avid consumer of this political production, you can tell us all where the "crimes" were committed by the end of this.

Don't say I did not warn you.

With the latest testimony in the "emergency session" of hearings, (testimony that is 2nd or 3rd person hearsay and apparently being refuted by the people who were there), this is beginning to look like a "Blasey-Ford" testimony situation at the Kavanaugh hearings.

How many times are you going to let this same group of politicians take advantage of you? Russian Collusion Hoax, Impeachment #1 Hoax, Impeachment # 2 Hoax, Kavanaugh Hearings Hoax, etc, etc. They were all "made for CNN political smears" that were hard to refute immediately, leading the public to enter into a state of suspended belief until the countering evidence could surface. But that period of plausible belief is what they are preying upon for propaganda purposes. The images stick in the general publics head for a long time, manipulating voters perception, long-term. If you are still putting your faith in these politicians who have been exposed in repeated political smear campaigns, then you just want to buy what they are fabricating. You are addicted to anti-Trump porn, and Swampy is your Larry Flynt.

Just look at who has constructed this hearing and the unprecedented way in which they excluded anyone who would oppose the CNN/DNC narrative. A hearing constructed in this way is equivalent to a 3 week political ad at best and a Russian show-trial at worst. Time to wise-up. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me 5 times, and quadruple shame on me.

I advise just letting this run it's course without emotionally investing in it. Wait for the opposition to have a chance to expose the lies outside of the "hearings". This way, you won't feel used and defensive when the house of cards collapses under the truth.

Why am I burdened with being so right so often?

[ud2]

New? documents reveal that the Capital Hill police were receiving warnings about potential violence on 1/6 at least a full week before 1/6 happened...Trump offered up 10,000 National Guard troops...the warnings were ignored, Trump's offer was rejected.

https://justthenews.com/government/c...s-congress-got

[ud2]

The warnings went all the way back to Dec 19, 2020...the FBI, DHS, the US Marshals, and the DC Metro pd all warned the Capital Hill police that they thought something was afoot regarding 1/6.

The warnings were very pointed and specific regarding what they thought was going to happen.

Congressional leadership was also given these warnings.

From the previous link:

Other Capitol Police officials said they believed the department briefed some of the intelligence it was receiving to the political leadership of Congress through the House and Senate sergeant at arms offices, making the decision to reject the National Guard troops all the more puzzling. Just the News reported earlier this month that the night before the Capitol riot, Deputy Police Chief Sean Gallagher sent an email to an aide close to Senate Democrat Leader Chuck Schumer warning that expected demonstrators had maps of the Capitol complex tunnel systems and were talking of targeting lawmakers. A former Capitol Police official on Tuesday noted there was a warning much earlier, referenced in a little-noticed footnote of the Senate’s official investigative report on the Jan. 6 riot. That footnote states police sent an email as early as Dec. 19, 2020, to a sergeant at arms official about concerns about the Trump rally. The report wasn’t more specific.

[TA111]

Notice how the “committee” hasn’t discussed the lack of security issues.
Posted via Mobile Device

[Swampy Meadows]

Cassidy Hutchinson was originally represented by a lawyer bought and paid for by Tinyworld. She decided she wanted to share more so she changed attorneys and testified publicly:

https://mobile.twitter.com/noraneus/...5Es1_&ref_url=
Posted via Mobile Device

[Mich Flyer]

Originally Posted by Swampy Meadows Cassidy Hutchinson was originally represented by a lawyer bought and paid for by Tinyworld. She decided she wanted to share more so she changed attorneys and testified publicly: https://mobile.twitter.com/noraneus/...5Es1_&ref_url= Posted via Mobile Device

And she bombed out. A total dud.

[ClaytonFlyerFan]

Originally Posted by TA111 Notice how the “committee” hasn’t discussed the lack of security issues. Posted via Mobile Device

I am waiting on the congressional hearings into why the security was so poor, with no plans for back up. Surely we have contingency plans for if ever a security breach at the capital. Why were they not implemented?

[TA111]

Yet another lie by the “star” witness. She is going to get destroyed. This is what happens when you have a kangaroo court that doesn’t look for all the evidence and talk to witnesses, this is what eventually happens. https://townhall.com/tipsheet/julior...-hits-n2609566

[TA111]

Cheney refuses to say if the “committee” sought SS corroboration of the “star” witnesses claims. Gee, I wonder why she wouldn’t just say “of course we got corroboration from the witnesses who were present”? Because of course they didn’t do it because the lie they’ve been presenting would have been destroyed.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/che...tchinson-claim

[Viperstick]

[Swampy Meadows]

Originally Posted by Mich Flyer And she bombed out. A total dud.

Show your work, Mich. Where exactly did she “bomb?” You obviously didn’t watch so how would you know?
Posted via Mobile Device

[Swampy Meadows]

Hutchinson was 1 of the witnesses Trump world sought to influence

https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/30/polit...rld/index.html

Cassidy Hutchinson, a former Trump White House aide, told the House January 6 committee that she was contacted by someone attempting to influence her testimony, three sources familiar with the hearing presentation told CNN.

The committee's vice chairwoman, GOP Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming, said at Tuesday's hearing that two witnesses -- whom she did not name -- told the committee they had heard from people connected to former President Donald Trump's world who may have been trying to intimidate them. Sources tell CNN Hutchinson is one of those witnesses.
The committee closed their presentation Tuesday at their blockbuster hearing by showing examples of testimony that described the witnesses being asked by people close to the former President to be loyal to him and his administration.

[Swampy Meadows]

THE MEN DISPUTING CASSIDY HUTCHINSON’S RETELLING OF TRUMP’S SUV LUNGE GOT WARNINGS ABOUT PLANS TO FLOOD THE CAPITOL

https://www.emptywheel.net/2022/06/3...d-the-capitol/

Since Cassidy Hutchinson’s startling testimony on Tuesday, credulous journalists have reported anonymous sources pushing back against one of her most dramatic stories: that when told he was not going to the Capitol on January 6, Donald Trump lunged towards the steering wheel of the SUV taking him back to the White House and then went after the clavicle of the head of his detail, Bobby Engel.

On top of being anonymous, the pushback never disputed Hutchinson’s claim: that she was told this story by Tony Ornato, the Secret Service Officer that Trump elevated into an important political position at the White House, Deputy Chief of Staff, in front of Engel, who did not dispute the story. Plus, Alyssa Farrah has described that Ornato, in the past, has disputed things she said under oath (about Trump’s stunt in Lafayette Square), without himself going under oath.

Nevertheless, that anonymous pushback has distracted from a far more alarming detail in Tuesday’s testimony that Ornato and Engel have not disputed, neither on or off the record: that they got warnings about plans to occupy buildings in DC and, implicitly, warnings about Proud Boy involvement.

[Swampy Meadows]

Oliver Darcy
@oliverdarcy

The trend continues: In the 12pm hour, heading into the Tuesday 1/6 hearing, Fox News was averaging 1.7 million total viewers. By the 2pm hour, that number had fallen to 900K — meaning nearly half of Fox's audience fled the channel during Cassidy Hutchinson's explosive testimony.

Of course, the trend is the opposite on the other cable channels that carried the hearing. CNN's viewership spiked to 2.6 million and MSNBC's jumped to 3.5 million.

https://twitter.com/oliverdarcy/stat...7947050819585?

[Viperstick]

[Swampy Meadows]

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.

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/0...sages-00043638

“What they said to me is as long as I continue to be a team player, they know I’m on the right team,” the slide said. “I’m doing the right thing. I’m protecting who I need to protect, you know, I’ll continue to stay in good graces in Trump World. And they have reminded me a couple of times that Trump does read transcripts.”

Classic witness tampering by Mark Meadows and Tiny.

[ud2]

Originally Posted by Swampy Meadows Nevertheless, that anonymous pushback has distracted from a far more alarming detail in Tuesday’s testimony that Ornato and Engel have not disputed, neither on or off the record: [B]that they got warnings about plans to occupy buildings in DC and, implicitly, warnings about Proud Boy involvement.

Sheesh, at this point, who didn't get a warning? Seems like this was sort of an open secret, yet nobody did anything to stop it.

[Viperstick]

[Swampy Meadows]

How Tinyworld pressures witnesses to deny his wrongdoings by flattering them in public and blasting them in private:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...source=twitter
Posted via Mobile Device

[Mich Flyer]

Greg Gutfeld: Cassidy Hutchinson's testimony has been ruined and so has the January 6 Committee, Apparently, the committee didn't bother to reach out to the Secret Service before it aired the crud about Trump lunging at security. So I guess they're doing that now, which means new witnesses become responsible for repairing other witnesses's hearsay. But maybe they'll find out that Trump didn't just lunge at the Secret Service, he did a double backflip off the trunk of the car and landed squarely in the lap of Abe Lincoln. Who knew Trump can drive an SUV from the backseat? You won't see that in a Bond movie.

Of course, the media will say, "come on, look, it's not a court of law." Which is true, but how's that helped you?

Hutchinson's testimony has now been ruined and by connection, so is the hearing. You'd think they'd be experts at framing Trump by now. They've had so much practice.

But ****, if I wanted to watch a show trial, I'd go to North Korea. At least none of the actors there are fat. It's not by choice, though. Yet it still goes on, and why? Because the incentives are in place.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/greg-g...ry-6-committee

[Swampy Meadows]

What has been ruined is Tony Ornato’s credibility . He’s a MAGAhead and has misremembered conversations on numerous occasions as outlined above and in the article below.

The fact is the Committee spoke to Ornato TWICE in January and March and let’s just say that he was not a credible individual.

https://www.politico.com/amp/news/20...aught-00043658

Posted via Mobile Device

[ud2]

Emerson poll...June 28-29...Trump 44, Biden 39...Trump +5

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...iden-7383.html

Emerson...June 28-29...Trump +35 over DeSantis

Politico...June 24-26...Trump +23 over DeSantis

[Swampy Meadows]

Hey Mich, guess what: it appears your boy Tony Ornato has a VERY serious credibility problem.

Secret Service sources say Tiny “lunged towards the steering wheel in an effort to get the detail to take him to Capitol Hill.”

In other words, EXACTLY what Ms. Hutchinson said under oath AND penalty of perjury.

https://mobile.twitter.com/Acyn/stat...5Es1_&ref_url=

Nice try Mich—try to do better next time. You too Viperstick, TA111 and the rest of Cult 45.
Posted via Mobile Device

[Showme Flyer]

Over / Under
How many more months will Swimpy be posting about Jan 6th ?

The number is 12 , Go

[Swampy Meadows]

Originally Posted by Showme Flyer Over / Under How many more months will Swimpy be posting about Jan 6th ? The number is 12 , Go

It’s not gonna take nearly that long for the indictments from DOJ to start rolling in.

Take the under.
Posted via Mobile Device

[JimBo]

Originally Posted by Swampy Meadows It’s not gonna take nearly that long for the indictments from DOJ to start rolling in. Take the under. Posted via Mobile Device

How many times being wrong with these types of predictions will it take for you it give up?

[Swampy Meadows]

Where’s your prediction big boy. It’s real easy to criticize someone willing to take a stand. What’s yours?
Posted via Mobile Device

[Swampy Meadows]

Oath Keepers will tell a jury that they believed Tiny would turn them into his own personal militia on January 6th:

https://news.yahoo.com/oath-keepers-...&ICID=ref_fark
Posted via Mobile Device

[Viperstick]

[T-Bone 84]

Originally Posted by TA111 I’m glad swampy keeps posting because it continues to show how silly this committee truly is. He’s now down to arguing that even though the witness has lied on several occasions that you should believe she’s telling the truth on other matters. Good luck with that.

Not taking sides, but I laughed when I read your comment because it reminded me of the old Gary Burbank character “Big Fat”, whose tag line was, “And ‘DIS TIME I’m being honest wit’ you!” 😂
Posted via Mobile Device

[Swampy Meadows]

Originally Posted by TA111 He’s now down to arguing that even though the witness has lied on several occasions that you should believe she’s telling the truth on other matters.

And now that it has been documented by multiple credible sources that she was telling the truth and that Tony Ornato is the one who has been less than truthful what’s your BS excuse?

Let me know when Ornato testifies (again, for the third time) before the Committee. He won’t because he will open himself up to perjury.
Posted via Mobile Device

[Fudd]

This is the reason that 2nd and 3rd person hearsay would not be permissible in a court of law. When you have a hearing that has rules constructed by politicians for political purposes, you get a dog and pony show that allows exceptions to normal trial rules that tilt things in favor of the rule-making politicians. Don't treat this like a trial, because, due to it's very construction, it is unfair and misleading.

Time for us to contemplate why our justice system will not allow these shenanigans. Meditate on that one for a while.

[Swampy Meadows]

Hutchinson was recounting a conversation she had with Ornato and Engel shortly after the incident happened. Neither one disputed any of the details at the time. Ornato testified—twice—before the Committee and was less than forthcoming. To think that the Committee doesn’t have people who can independently corroborate her testimony is being extremely naive.

“Secret Service sources” can feed whatever BS they want to the press but testifying under oath before the Committee is a whole different animal. Which is why the chances of Ornato testifying—again for the third time—under penalty of perjury is slim and none and slim just left town.
Posted via Mobile Device

[ud2]

https://thefederalist.com/2022/07/01...-j6-testimony/

More potential holes in CH's testimony...Pat Cipollone was not even at the WH on the day in question, 1/6, so the convo CH says that she had with PC could not even have taken place in the first place.

Boy, seems like she is just making a lot of stuff up, or she has a bad memory.

[Viperstick]

[Swampy Meadows]

The January 6th Committee is going to have the last word, providing clarity in a political moment fogged with lies::

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/ar...-blame/661466/
Posted via Mobile Device

[N2663R]

Originally Posted by Swampy Meadows The January 6th Committee is going to have the last word, providing clarity in a political moment fogged with lies:: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/ar...-blame/661466/ Posted via Mobile Device

A message from the Pontifical Communications Office of the left . . .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wi1SS_Jp9kU

Step away from your computer. Climb out of your basement. Get some sun on your pasty white skin, celebrate the 4th of July, and thank God that you live in a country that does not put you in prison for posting half of the insidious crap you do. (This does not include your Mens bball posts, most of which I find entertaining.)

[Swampy Meadows]

Originally Posted by N2663R A message from the Pontifical Communications Office of the left . . .

How many times are you going to post the exact same stupid freakin’ video? At least Viperstick shows a modicum of originality and posts different dog and pony show gifs.

You are living proof of the Dunning-Kruger Effect.
Posted via Mobile Device

[Viperstick]

[TA111]

More false testimony from the “star” witness. https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politic...pster-n1609864

[TA111]

Originally Posted by ud2 https://thefederalist.com/2022/07/01...-j6-testimony/ More potential holes in CH's testimony...Pat Cipollone was not even at the WH on the day in question, 1/6, so the convo CH says that she had with PC could not even have taken place in the first place. Boy, seems like she is just making a lot of stuff up, or she has a bad memory.

This is why cross examination is so important. She has never been challenged on her claims and now that people are actually investigating they are finding all sorts of problems with her testimony.

[T-Bone 84]

Originally Posted by TA111 This is why cross examination is so important. She has never been challenged on her claims and now that people are actually investigating they are finding all sorts of problems with her testimony.

Yes, but cross examination doesn’t matter when the body with jurisdiction approaches the situation with the mindset of “We’re gonna give ya a fair trial..:and then we’re gonna hang ya.”
Posted via Mobile Device

[Viperstick]

[JimBo]

Originally Posted by T-Bone 84 Yes, but cross examination doesn’t matter when the body with jurisdiction approaches the situation with the mindset of “We’re gonna give ya a fair trial..:and then we’re gonna hang ya.” Posted via Mobile Device

Very similar to what Brittney Griner is facing in Russia. They're putting out this dog and pony trial making it seem like she's getting a fair shake, but the reality is there is zero chance of her not being convicted.

[Swampy Meadows]

Republican Adam Kinzinger says more witnesses have come forward to the January 6th Committee since Cassidy Hutchinson testified:

https://mobile.twitter.com/atrupar/s...5Es1_&ref_url=
Posted via Mobile Device

[ud2]

Originally Posted by TA111 This is why cross examination is so important. She has never been challenged on her claims and now that people are actually investigating they are finding all sorts of problems with her testimony.

Can they prosecute her for perjury? This is now 3? or 4? erroneous statements in her testimony. Hard to believe these misstatements are all innocent misrememberings, more like deliberate lies.

I mean these are glaring misstatements, not just getting some minor details wrong, these are big misstatements.

[Viperstick]

EDIT: now that’s a cute pony

[ud2]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.new...720981%3famp=1:


Bannon, who served as the chief executive of Trump's 2016 campaign and then as a chief strategist to the former president, touted the possibility of a "criminal referral" against Hutchinson during a Thursday segment of his War Room podcast with former Trump White House official Boris Epshteyn.

"And I think Jody Hunt, the lawyer [for Hutchinson], should be disbarred," Bannon said. "What they did with this young woman is outrageous—and they're using her. And they're going to cast her aside quickly because of what happened."

He asked Epshteyn, "Are we going to see some criminal referrals here, sir?"

"We absolutely should. A criminal referral is absolutely appropriate," the fellow Trump ally responded. Epshteyn went on to say that Hutchinson had "lied under oath" and suggested that she had committed "perjury."

[Swampy Meadows]

Hey Steve Bannon, why don’t you try testifying to the Committee, you seditious slug?

Instead you fight your subpoena for contempt of Congress tooth and nail. Testify Sluggo—I dare you.
Posted via Mobile Device

[DGO67]

Originally Posted by Swampy Meadows Hey Steve Bannon, why don’t you try testifying to the Committee, you seditious slug? Instead you fight your subpoena for contempt of Congress tooth and nail. Testify Sluggo—I dare you. Posted via Mobile Device

Democrats aren't so much as seeking truth as having an opportunity to interrogate someone with the same question 25 different ways then saying
"Aha, lying to congress...contempt!", when one answer appears to contradict another.

[Fudd]

I wonder if UAC is still watching those hearings. Every time the Democrats and anti-Trumpers start a new government-sanctioned attack on Trump, UAC is willing to suspend doubt about their motivations and go forward with an open mind. The Hutchinson testimony, billed as an "emergency session" by the anti-Trumpers is just another example of the emptiness of these allegations. You can put anyone up in front of this group and say, "I heard this. I heard that". Any fabrication is fair game under the rules of this hearing. There is nobody there to challenge them.

How many times are they going to pull these tactics?

This is the same group of politicians who have burned the public multiple times with unsubstantiated allegations posing as "evidence". They all fall apart under delayed scrutiny. Isn't there a lesson here?

[Viperstick]

[Monster Man]

Originally Posted by Fudd I wonder if UAC is still watching those hearings. Every time the Democrats and anti-Trumpers start a new government-sanctioned attack on Trump, UAC is willing to suspend doubt about their motivations and go forward with an open mind. The Hutchinson testimony, billed as an "emergency session" by the anti-Trumpers is just another example of the emptiness of these allegations. You can put anyone up in front of this group and say, "I heard this. I heard that". Any fabrication is fair game under the rules of this hearing. There is nobody there to challenge them. How many times are they going to pull these tactics? This is the same group of politicians who have burned the public multiple times with unsubstantiated allegations posing as "evidence". They all fall apart under delayed scrutiny. Isn't there a lesson here?

Some people (UAC) never learn, especially if Trump is targeted with these tactics.
Posted via Mobile Device

[UACFlyer]

Originally Posted by Fudd I wonder if UAC is still watching those hearings. Every time the Democrats and anti-Trumpers start a new government-sanctioned attack on Trump, UAC is willing to suspend doubt about their motivations and go forward with an open mind. The Hutchinson testimony, billed as an "emergency session" by the anti-Trumpers is just another example of the emptiness of these allegations. You can put anyone up in front of this group and say, "I heard this. I heard that". Any fabrication is fair game under the rules of this hearing. There is nobody there to challenge them. How many times are they going to pull these tactics? This is the same group of politicians who have burned the public multiple times with unsubstantiated allegations posing as "evidence". They all fall apart under delayed scrutiny. Isn't there a lesson here?

Originally Posted by Monster Man Some people (UAC) never learn, especially if Trump is targeted with these tactics. Posted via Mobile Device

Testifying under oath and perjuring oneself is a crime. Mistakes and/or not remembering something correctly happen. As regards Hutchinson's testimony, which I did not see/hear, those critical have not presented their views under oath, yet.

Someone surely in a position to have witnessed essential happenings first hand is former WH Counsel Pat Cipollone. I think he has an obligation to testify. So far he has resisted. Because he's in legal jeopardy? Privilege doesn't apply.

Do we really want to know the facts? Will any evidence that casts DJT in a bad light always be interpreted by his supporters as just part of a dog and pony show? Will all evidence unfavorable to DJT always be taken as gospel by his detractors? Surely at some point not too far in the future enough credible information will exist for those who really want to understand to be able to judge. We're not there yet.

[Fudd]

Originally Posted by UACFlyer Testifying under oath and perjuring oneself is a crime. Mistakes and/or not remembering something correctly happen. As regards Hutchinson's testimony, which I did not see/hear, those critical have not presented their views under oath, yet. Someone surely in a position to have witnessed essential happenings first hand is former WH Counsel Pat Cipollone. I think he has an obligation to testify. So far he has resisted. Because he's in legal jeopardy? Privilege doesn't apply. Do we really want to know the facts? Will any evidence that casts DJT in a bad light always be interpreted by his supporters as just part of a dog and pony show? Will all evidence unfavorable to DJT always be taken as gospel by his detractors? Surely at some point not too far in the future enough credible information will exist for those who really want to understand to be able to judge. We're not there yet.

What is the standard for "evidence" that you refer to in this hearing? It sounds like anything goes when it comes to accusations. Why would any R or Trump administration person submit themselves to this free-for-all where they are completely at the mercy of anti-Trumper made rules? Who in that hearing is not already a member of the "hang all Trump supporters" club?

This is what I cautioned you on from the start.

[Swampy Meadows]

The standard of evidence is abundantly clear —if you watch the hearings which you have most likely not done. Tiny and his seditious minions all took oaths to uphold the Constitution. The numerous crimes that have been committed in attempting to overthrow the results of a free and fair election and keep Tiny in office are clear and indisputable violations of that oath.

If you chose to watch the hearings you would know these things instead of relying on Faux News to tell you what to think.

Posted via Mobile Device

[ud2]

Originally Posted by UACFlyer Testifying under oath and perjuring oneself is a crime. Mistakes and/or not remembering something correctly happen. As regards Hutchinson's testimony, which I did not see/hear, those critical have not presented their views under oath, yet. Surely at some point not too far in the future enough credible information will exist for those who really want to understand to be able to judge. We're not there yet.

Oh geez, CH just has a bad memory, that explains the gaping holes in her testimony.

And we still have not heard everything. But wait, there's more! We need more to really understand what happened.

This isn't a witch hunt, things will get clearer after another couple weeks of testimony if you just pay attention and listen to what the committee wants you to hear.

[UACFlyer]

Originally Posted by Fudd What is the standard for "evidence" that you refer to in this hearing? It sounds like anything goes when it comes to accusations. Why would any R or Trump administration person submit themselves to this free-for-all where they are completely at the mercy of anti-Trumper made rules? Who in that hearing is not already a member of the "hang all Trump supporters" club? This is what I cautioned you on from the start.

Fudd, you're making it appear as if a person appearing in front of the committee just sits down...and is then peppered with biased questions by a "hang Trump" team of questioners....with no cross. That's not the way it's been happening.

More than a few of those questioned were high ranking state officials, lawyers themselves, Republicans, strong Trump supporters. Some like Hutchison (a Repubican) were WH observers.

In each case, in addition to being questioned, every person was free to deliver a prepared statement explaining, under oath, what their experience was, in connection with the election, Jan 6, or whatever.

The suggestion that the Jan 6 committee is nothing but a kangaroo court out to hang Trump on the basis of false, biased testimony by a group of perjurers is way off the mark.

[Monster Man]

Originally Posted by UACFlyer Testifying under oath and perjuring oneself is a crime. Mistakes and/or not remembering something correctly happen. As regards Hutchinson's testimony, which I did not see/hear, those critical have not presented their views under oath, yet. Someone surely in a position to have witnessed essential happenings first hand is former WH Counsel Pat Cipollone. I think he has an obligation to testify. So far he has resisted. Because he's in legal jeopardy? Privilege doesn't apply. Do we really want to know the facts? Will any evidence that casts DJT in a bad light always be interpreted by his supporters as just part of a dog and pony show? Will all evidence unfavorable to DJT always be taken as gospel by his detractors? Surely at some point not too far in the future enough credible information will exist for those who really want to understand to be able to judge. We're not there yet.

Once again, you will never learn and admit when you are dead wrong. With respect to you and your liberal friends, anything concerning Trump is guilty until proven innocent with no regard for legal standards and fairness.
Posted via Mobile Device

[Swampy Meadows]

And Mr. Man how much of the hearings have you watched?

So much of what has incriminated Tiny is compromised of his own actions that have been captured for posterity. Take the recorded phone call with the GA SOS asking for 11,700 votes. Even a genius like you can figure out the criminal intent in his ask. There is no room for interpretation. And the GA AG has a Grand Jury getting to the bottom of it.

Posted via Mobile Device

[JimBo]

Originally Posted by UACFlyer The suggestion that the Jan 6 committee is nothing but a kangaroo court out to hang Trump on the basis of false, biased testimony by a group of perjurers is way off the mark.

The simple fact that this committee is compromised of all Dems and anti-Trump Rino's makes it a kangaroo court. They allow no cross examination and and all questions are directed towards a narrative. It's exactly why people like you and swimpy eat it up. The entire clown show is an embarrassment to this country.

[Swampy Meadows]

As Tiny so eloquently said Kevin McCarthy “screwed up” by pulling the GQPers. And NFW should Gym Jordan have been on this Committee. He asked Tiny for a pardon for a reason.
Posted via Mobile Device

[Swampy Meadows]

Liz Cheney says the J6 Committee could make multiple criminal referrals including for Tiny to Merrick Garland and the DOJ:

https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/03/polit...&ICID=ref_fark
Posted via Mobile Device

[UACFlyer]

Originally Posted by Monster Man Once again, you will never learn and admit when you are dead wrong. With respect to you and your liberal friends, anything concerning Trump is guilty until proven innocent with no regard for legal standards and fairness. Posted via Mobile Device

Originally Posted by JimBo The simple fact that this committee is compromised of all Dems and anti-Trump Rino's makes it a kangaroo court. They allow no cross examination and and all questions are directed towards a narrative. It's exactly why people like you and swimpy eat it up. The entire clown show is an embarrassment to this country.

Did either of you watch/hear the testimony of the Arizona speaker of the house or the Georgia sec of state....both Republicans, both Trump supporters? If you did not your criticism of the hearing and its procedures are entirely without merit. You are blistering something you know nothing about. Unless you actually took the time to listen to the entirely credible Republican state officials speak under oath you have no credible basis for your criticism.

[Monster Man]

Gee, I wish we were as informed as you are on this topic, UAC. Just the fact that you’re dismissing the incredibly unfair nature of the of this kangaroo-style hearing says it all. Maybe one day you’ll get past your extreme TDS.
Posted via Mobile Device

[JimBo]

Originally Posted by UACFlyer Did either of you watch/hear the testimony of the Arizona speaker of the house or the Georgia sec of state....both Republicans, both Trump supporters? If you did not your criticism of the hearing and its procedures are entirely without merit. You are blistering something you know nothing about. Unless you actually took the time to listen to the entirely credible Republican state officials speak under oath you have no credible basis for your criticism.

And who from President Trump's defense was allowed to cross examine them?? I'll answer that without even watching........ NOBODY. This isn't difficult, why's it so hard to comprehend for you?

What are Dems and anti-Trumpsters so afraid of they won't allow someone to bring up the fact that Pelosi ignored requests from Trump that national guard may be needed to that day? Or the fact that "insurrection" began before Trump's speech was over? Or what really happened to Ashli Bobbitt? It's a completely one sided **** show, take off the Trump hate blinders for a change.

[Swampy Meadows]

Originally Posted by Monster Man Gee, I wish we were as informed as you are on this topic, UAC. Posted via Mobile Device

It’s simple: Watch the freakin’ hearings and you too can be as equally well informed.
Posted via Mobile Device

[ud2]

Originally Posted by JimBo And who from President Trump's defense was allowed to cross examine them?? I'll answer that without even watching........ NOBODY. This isn't difficult, why's it so hard to comprehend for you? What are Dems and anti-Trumpsters so afraid of they won't allow someone to bring up the fact that Pelosi ignored requests from Trump that national guard may be needed to that day? Or the fact that "insurrection" began before Trump's speech was over? Or what really happened to Ashli Bobbitt? It's a completely one sided **** show, take off the Trump hate blinders for a change.

I am beginning to realize that Trump is so polarizing that normally level-headed, fair-minded people just can't get over their TDS and see things objectively.

They have pre-judged Trump as guilty no matter what, and nothing is going to change their mind. You can't talk any sense into them.

[Swampy Meadows]

What part of “Hang Mike Pence” do you GQPers not understand?

Tiny’s response according to Mark Meadows was “Maybe he deserves it.”
Posted via Mobile Device

[UACFlyer]

Originally Posted by Monster Man Gee, I wish we were as informed as you are on this topic, UAC. Posted via Mobile Device

I wish you were too.

[Viperstick]

Note: Biden in the right background

[Fudd]

Originally Posted by Swampy Meadows It’s simple: Watch the freakin’ hearings and you too can be as equally well informed. Posted via Mobile Device

If you are watching the Hutchinson testimony, it sounds like you are well informed only in fiction.

She was not a witness to her own testimonial story. She has people and places wrong. And now we have politicians chiming in on this, calling the actual witnesses liars. If the actual witnesses are liars, where did Hutchinson's 2nd-hand story originate? With the liars?

If any opposition members of the Senate had been allowed to participate, Hutchinson would have had to answer tough questions exposing her lack of credibility. But, due to the lack of a true pursuit of the truth, she was allowed to weave her story without any true examination. She is allowed to do this because it is politically useful to the people in charge of the hearings.

Ugh, it gives one a headache.

But there is no mystery to me why certain people are eating this up with a fork and spoon. This show was coordinated just for them. They are the target demographic of this production.

This "investigation" started with a conclusion and is working backwards.

[Mich Flyer]

Originally Posted by Viperstick Note: Biden in the right background

Is Biden the skunk or the clown? Fudd is right about the predetermined outcome. Hutchinson is a proven liar. So are the rest of them.

[UD62]

Originally Posted by ud2 I am beginning to realize that Trump is so polarizing that normally level-headed, fair-minded people just can't get over their TDS and see things objectively. They have pre-judged Trump as guilty no matter what, and nothing is going to change their mind. You can't talk any sense into them.

I take it that by the term "objectively" you mean see things your way.

[TA111]

Originally Posted by UD62 I take it that by the term "objectively" you mean see things your way.

Why would Pelosi, the majority leader, for the first time in history refuse the minority leader’s selections for the committee? It was fairly obvious from the beginning that this was all about “getting” Trump. Problem is they’ve gone overboard and put up witnesses who are testifying to matters of which they couldn’t possibly have firsthand knowledge.

[UD62]

This site is almost uniformly in Trump's corner. Swampy twists your shorts some and UAC will post now and then , but other than that it is a Trump lovefest. Nothing wrong with that but it does not reflect the total population. We all agree that the Dems are a failure and that change is coming, however we do not all agree on who would embody that change.

[Swampy Meadows]

Maybe it will help to put the current situation with the Cult 45ers here and the January 6th hearings into basketball terms that we can all understand it.

Take Obi Toppin and the NY Knicks. Let’s say you never watch them play, but tune into ESPN religiously. Stephen A Smith says Obi in particular and the Knicks in general suck, so you believe both he and they stink, just because Screamin’ Stephen says so.

That’s what you guys are doing with the hearings—stating they are BS and Tiny is innocent without having seen a single second of the mountain of evidence that has been presented.
Posted via Mobile Device

[Viperstick]

[Swampy Meadows]

Originally Posted by TA111 Why would Pelosi, the majority leader, for the first time in history refuse the minority leader’s selections for the committee?

Because they were co-conspirators in Tiny's plan to ovethrow the electoral count, that's why.

On January 6th, Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs were among 147 GQP reps who voted to overturn the election results:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...objectors.html

Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs also asked for presidential pardons…something all innocent people do, right TA111?

[Viperstick]

[Swampy Meadows]

Yet another top Tiny aide agrees to testify to the January 6th Committee:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...&ICID=ref_fark

Where would this country be without these brave young women?
Posted via Mobile Device

[Showme Flyer]

Originally Posted by Swampy Meadows Yet another top Tiny aide agrees to testify to the January 6th Committee: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...&ICID=ref_fark Where would this country be without these brave young women? Posted via Mobile Device

Same place it is now A MESS

[Fudd]

Originally Posted by Swampy Meadows Yet another top Tiny aide agrees to testify to the January 6th Committee: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...&ICID=ref_fark Where would this country be without these brave young women? Posted via Mobile Device

The country is in the Joe Biden toilet if you had not already noticed.

[Swampy Meadows]

Next January 6th Committee hearing: Tuesday, July 12th at 10:00 am EDT

So all of you GQPers set your alarm clocks and get ready to biatch about something you did not watch next Tuesday afternoon.
Posted via Mobile Device

[Mich Flyer]

Originally Posted by Swampy Meadows Next January 6th Committee hearing: Tuesday, July 12th at 10:00 am EDT So all of you GQPers set your alarm clocks and get ready to biatch about something you did not watch next Tuesday afternoon. Posted via Mobile Device

Fudd: The country is in the Joe Biden toilet if you had not already noticed.

Please flush the toilet.