|
Replies: 74
| visibility 1
|
All-TigerNet [10134]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8862
Joined: 7/20/12
|
|
|
|
 |
All-TigerNet [10134]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8862
Joined: 7/20/12
|
Re: Okay? So the chick was lying unde oath? Isn’t
Jul 3, 2022, 11:52 PM
|
|
I’d call this a big ole zero evidence that any of this occurred. Just like zero evidence had been provided in any other Trump trial over the last 4 years and several million taxpayers dollars wasted!
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13024]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14038
Joined: 11/2/15
|
Re: Okay? So the chick was lying unde oath? Isn’t
Jul 4, 2022, 7:42 AM
|
|
The committee’s real objective is to prove how Liz Chaney is a “real conservative”.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [55664]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 35262
Joined: 11/30/98
|
I miss the old days when there’d be a Playboy pictorial in
Jul 4, 2022, 7:52 AM
|
|
her near future.
Rita Jenrette yo.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24695]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42365
Joined: 7/31/10
|
Dixie mafioso princess...***
Jul 4, 2022, 1:20 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10867]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15038
Joined: 8/6/10
|
There are texts from her to conservative groups asking for legal help
Jul 4, 2022, 8:03 AM
|
|
Before this show trial started where she calls the whole thing BS.
So she was probably trying to entrap other people or she knows the whole thing is BS, including her testimony.
And anyone with a functioning brain knows it is BS. Most of the commies know, but they think they can invent reality by lying big enough, just like their idol.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12233]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5388
Joined: 9/12/04
|
The only people who get prosecuted for lying under oath
Jul 4, 2022, 8:13 AM
|
|
are us peasant class citizens and the political targets of the DC establishment. If you are a useful "tool" of the DC establishment you can say and just about do anything you want without fear of prosecution...
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [58376]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46314
Joined: 4/23/00
|
Here's how ridiculous this is ...
Jul 4, 2022, 9:03 AM
|
|
She may not be lying, but it's still pathetic. Hutchinson, of course wasn't there. She's repeateing what she was allegedly told by Ornato. But, Ornato wasn't there either; he's allegedly telleing Hutchinson what Bobby Engel, the SS agent who was actually there with Trump, said. So, at best, Engel told Ornato, Ornato told Hutchinson, and Hutchinson repeated the 3rd-hand hearsay as DAMNING, BOMBSHELL testimony. Sort of. I mean, she repeatedly qualified her testimony with "something to the effect of", rather than exact words. So in the end, at best, we have "something to the effect of" 3rd-hand hearsay.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [40875]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42930
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Hutchinson does not look like a democrat
Jul 4, 2022, 9:09 AM
|
|
she looks like she belongs on Fox's Outnumbered more than she does the View. Well I guess she could be a rich snobby Hollywood actress, some of them are hot.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10867]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15038
Joined: 8/6/10
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4008]
TigerPulse: 68%
Posts: 8033
Joined: 12/9/01
|
Re: Here's how ridiculous this is ...
Jul 4, 2022, 12:03 PM
[ in reply to Here's how ridiculous this is ... ] |
|
Is everyone that has testified so far under oath lying, and is everyone who is hiding behind executive privilege and asking for pardons telling the truth?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24695]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42365
Joined: 7/31/10
|
Clapper lied under oath about the NSA. He now works f/CNN.
Jul 4, 2022, 1:26 PM
|
|
Ollie North lied about Iran-Contra... He was later elected to Congress.
There are laws for the politically connected and then there are laws for the plebes...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4008]
TigerPulse: 68%
Posts: 8033
Joined: 12/9/01
|
Re: Clapper lied under oath about the NSA. He now works f/CNN.
Jul 4, 2022, 1:42 PM
|
|
Nice deflection. Do you believe that everyone who has testified under oath so far(many of whom are from Trump's own administration) are lying, and that those who are asking for pardons and hiding behind executive privilege are telling the truth?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24695]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42365
Joined: 7/31/10
|
Maybe.***
Jul 5, 2022, 4:56 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [58376]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46314
Joined: 4/23/00
|
Once again, you're totally missing the point.
Jul 5, 2022, 8:58 AM
[ in reply to Re: Here's how ridiculous this is ... ] |
|
Totally clueless in your fantastical bubble. I'll try again: I'm not defending Trump - I don't care if they nail him on something. I'll slow it down for you: I ' M N O T D E F E N D I N G T R U M P
- I D O N ' T C A R E. If Trump can be proven guilty of crimes in a legitimate trial, I'm 100% good with that. So far, that has not happened.
Is everyone that has testified so far under oath lying, and is everyone who is hiding behind executive privilege and asking for pardons telling the truth?
I'll answer this if it makes you feel better: Probably not.
There. Now, back to MY point.
These entire proceedings are a sham, and so much of it is a blatant, in-our-face joke. This latest go-around with Hutchinson, where the committee used 3rd-hand hearsay testimony dependent on the credibility of a source they are now themselves claiming is not credible, and claimed it was BOMBSHELL, DAMNING testimony, is just another example. These proceedings have been filled with this kind of meaningless, pointless, tabloid type of attacks, not to present any kind of useful legal evidence, but as an attempt to smear, humiliate, and discredit Trump as much as possible in the public eye, and to satisfy the petty, personally vengful nature of those on the committee. My point has little to do with the guilt or innocence of Trump, but rather the nature and legitimacy of the process.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4008]
TigerPulse: 68%
Posts: 8033
Joined: 12/9/01
|
Re: Once again, you're totally missing the point.
Jul 5, 2022, 9:25 AM
|
|
LOL. You believe that an investigation into an illegal and unconstitutional attempt of a sitting POTUS to overturn a democratic election, along with assassination attempts on elected officials is a Sham. Too funny. So in your mind, what warrants an investigation?
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [58376]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46314
Joined: 4/23/00
|
Stop making stuff up.***
Jul 5, 2022, 9:31 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4008]
TigerPulse: 68%
Posts: 8033
Joined: 12/9/01
|
Re: Stop making stuff up.***
Jul 5, 2022, 9:32 AM
|
|
What am I "making up"?
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [58376]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46314
Joined: 4/23/00
|
Re: Stop making stuff up.***
Jul 5, 2022, 9:38 AM
|
|
You believe that an investigation into an illegal and unconstitutional attempt of a sitting POTUS to overturn a democratic election, along with assassination attempts on elected officials is a Sham.
A legitimate one would not be. This one certainly is not legitimate. If you can't see that, you're willfully ignorant.
Message was edited by: Smiling Tiger®
Message was edited by: Smiling Tiger®
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4008]
TigerPulse: 68%
Posts: 8033
Joined: 12/9/01
|
Re: Stop making stuff up.***
Jul 5, 2022, 9:57 AM
|
|
It's very much legitimate. Just because you're not interested in what might be uncovered does not invalidate that. Law and Order.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [58376]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46314
Joined: 4/23/00
|
Re: Stop making stuff up.***
Jul 5, 2022, 10:39 AM
|
|
Proceedings that start with the intent of doing as much damage as possible to a suspect, whose guts the investigators hate and whose guilt has already been concluded, is not legitimate in any way. That's not law and order.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4008]
TigerPulse: 68%
Posts: 8033
Joined: 12/9/01
|
Re: Stop making stuff up.***
Jul 5, 2022, 11:27 AM
|
|
We shouldn't investigate people who are not liked? Really? How does that fit in with "Law and Order"? Waiting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [58376]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46314
Joined: 4/23/00
|
Not at all what I said, but so easy to refute.
Jul 5, 2022, 11:53 AM
|
|
Let's say it's 1960, and a black man is accused of ###### a white girl in Mississippi. Everybody knows good an well he did it. Would you be okay with the Klan in charge of the investigation? Because that's about what we have here.
Remember, The person in white is in charge of the whole thing, and selected the investigators:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4008]
TigerPulse: 68%
Posts: 8033
Joined: 12/9/01
|
Re: Not at all what I said, but so easy to refute.
Jul 5, 2022, 12:03 PM
|
|
There are 2 Republicans on the committee, including the vice chair. McCarthy withdrew from participation because 2 of his 5 choices were rejected because they were potential witnesses and were subject to subpoena.
The other 3 were accepted. Many of the witnesses who have testified so far are from within the Trump administration. There's nothing stopping team MAGA from marching in these hearings and setting the record straight (ala HClinton/Benghazi). Instead, team MAGA is hiding behind executive privilege (laughable) and asking for pardons. Why is that? You can't make this up. LOL.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [58376]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46314
Joined: 4/23/00
|
Re: Not at all what I said, but so easy to refute.
Jul 5, 2022, 12:46 PM
|
|
The two "Republicans" on the committee were selected because they are very public enemies of Trump, who have publicly spoken out against Trump, and have been publicly, personally insulted by Trump. They are essentially in the Klan, regardless of the "R" after their name. For the purposes of this committee, they'd might as well be Democrats.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4008]
TigerPulse: 68%
Posts: 8033
Joined: 12/9/01
|
Re: Not at all what I said, but so easy to refute.
Jul 5, 2022, 12:50 PM
|
|
So the committee should have been disbanded when McCarthy decided to withdraw? How convenient. Lol
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [58376]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46314
Joined: 4/23/00
|
Re: Not at all what I said, but so easy to refute.
Jul 5, 2022, 2:29 PM
|
|
It doesn't matter what McCarthy did, Pelosi is in charge and should have appointed Trump supporting Republicans to make the committee truly more fair and balanced. That was never in the cards, however, and instead, due to her usual spitefulness and intent on skewering Trump, we've wound up with the Klan investigating a black man accused of the rape of a white girl in 1960 Mississippi.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4008]
TigerPulse: 68%
Posts: 8033
Joined: 12/9/01
|
Re: Not at all what I said, but so easy to refute.
Jul 5, 2022, 2:43 PM
|
|
Since when do party leaders select committee members from both parties? Do you have any examples?
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [58376]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46314
Joined: 4/23/00
|
Re: Not at all what I said, but so easy to refute.
Jul 5, 2022, 3:19 PM
|
|
Are you serious? After McCarthy bailed, Pelosi appointed Cheney and Kinzinger. She could have just as easily attempted to assemble a balanced committee, but she abandoned her responsibility and reacted out of spite and personal vindictiveness, as well as for political reasons.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [46801]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 30710
Joined: 8/11/15
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [58376]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46314
Joined: 4/23/00
|
Re: They gave republicans a chance to put their choices
Jul 5, 2022, 3:34 PM
|
|
Clearly, Pelosi only wanted Republicans that had an axe to grind with Trump. She selected Cheney and Kinzinger. She rejected Republicans who would oppose her agenda to smear Trump.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24695]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42365
Joined: 7/31/10
|
You can't fix obtuse stupidity... No need to try.***
Jul 5, 2022, 5:00 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4008]
TigerPulse: 68%
Posts: 8033
Joined: 12/9/01
|
Re: They gave republicans a chance to put their choices
Jul 5, 2022, 5:19 PM
[ in reply to Re: They gave republicans a chance to put their choices ] |
|
Pelosi accepted McCarthy's nominations of Rodney Davis of Illinois, Kelly Armstrong of North Dakota and Troy Nehls of Texas. You're gonna have to show us where those 3 have an axe to grind with Trump for your narrative to not completely crumble.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10134]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8862
Joined: 7/20/12
|
Re: They gave republicans a chance to put their choices
Jul 5, 2022, 5:59 PM
|
|
Pelosi accepted McCarthy's nominations of Rodney Davis of Illinois, Kelly Armstrong of North Dakota and Troy Nehls of Texas. You're gonna have to show us where those 3 have an axe to grind with Trump for your narrative to not completely crumble.
Lost me after Pelosi!
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [31860]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 37166
Joined: 11/22/03
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [40344]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 23463
Joined: 7/13/12
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4008]
TigerPulse: 68%
Posts: 8033
Joined: 12/9/01
|
Re: wouldn't marching into the hearings
Jul 5, 2022, 5:25 PM
|
|
Sorry, but I MEAN TWEET. I don't understand why the MAGA on here gets triggered when I do that, cause they praised DADDY for that. It's like they hold me to a higher standard than the POTUS.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10134]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8862
Joined: 7/20/12
|
Re: Once again, you're totally missing the point.
Jul 5, 2022, 5:55 PM
[ in reply to Re: Once again, you're totally missing the point. ] |
|
LOL. You believe that an investigation into an illegal and unconstitutional attempt of a sitting POTUS to overturn a democratic election, along with assassination attempts on elected officials is a Sham. Too funny. So in your mind, what warrants an investigation?
About like the Hellary Russian collusion fiasco right? Man, if you don’t see the hypocrisy in your own statement then you are definitely blinded by the left nut over both eyes!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4008]
TigerPulse: 68%
Posts: 8033
Joined: 12/9/01
|
Re: Once again, you're totally missing the point.
Jul 5, 2022, 6:49 PM
|
|
Where's this hypocrisy you are referring to?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10134]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8862
Joined: 7/20/12
|
Re: Once again, you're totally missing the point.
Jul 5, 2022, 6:00 PM
[ in reply to Re: Once again, you're totally missing the point. ] |
|
LOL. You believe that an investigation into an illegal and unconstitutional attempt of a sitting POTUS to overturn a democratic election, along with assassination attempts on elected officials is a Sham. Too funny. So in your mind, what warrants an investigation?
Okay “Big GUy”
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [31860]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 37166
Joined: 11/22/03
|
What about the other things that she was....
Jul 5, 2022, 9:07 AM
[ in reply to Here's how ridiculous this is ... ] |
|
giving first-hand accounts of?
To me, the limo stuff is the least important part of her testimony.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [58376]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46314
Joined: 4/23/00
|
Great! Good! But, if the limo stuff wasn't important, then
Jul 5, 2022, 9:29 AM
|
|
why was it even included? And why did every major news outlet lead with that very part of it and declare that specifically as DAMNING and BOMBSHELL testimony, over and over? To pretend now, after the fact like it's no big deal is ########; it's a lie. It mattered a lot at the time, it was THE main focus, the lead story. Again, as I explained to Birm above, I'm not defending Trump, or claiming he's totally clean in all of this; Trump is not my dog, and that's not my fight. I'm just pointing out the blatant illegitamacy of this committee and media involvement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [31860]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 37166
Joined: 11/22/03
|
I didn't say it wasn't important...
Jul 5, 2022, 12:35 PM
|
|
I said I thought it was the least important...I think the IMO was implied.
Did you watch the hearing and think that the limo incident was the main focus of her testimony?
I watched a good bit of coverage of her testimony (in addition to watching the hearing) and I didn't have the sense that all of the coverage was about the the limo scene. I guess that is subjective, unless there is some kind of total coverage time calculation already.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [58376]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46314
Joined: 4/23/00
|
Okay, what did you think was most important?***
Jul 5, 2022, 12:48 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [31860]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 37166
Joined: 11/22/03
|
If I had to rank them off the top of my head....
Jul 5, 2022, 1:10 PM
|
|
I would say the following:
- Trump knew there were people that were armed at the rally and he pushed Secret Service to take down the magnetometer screening and let everyone in.
Him saying that they weren't there to harm him could be spun in different ways. However, this could be important info for a possible criminal charge.
- The general actions of the WH staff and urging Trump to do something during the riot at the Capital. And confirmation that Trump didn't want to do anything.
Pat Cipollene urging Mark Meadows to do more. Then the comments back from Meadows about Trump thinking "Mike deserves it".
Pat Cipollene's comment to Hutchinson about making sure Trump doesn't go to the Capital
- Meadows statement indicating that he knew/thought violence was coming
“There’s a lot going on, Cass, but I don’t know. Things might get real, real bad on Jan. 6,”
- Potential witness intimidation
- Pardon seekers (which we already had some info on) including Rudy and Meadows
- McCarthy calling Hutchinson complaining that Trump said he was coming to the Capital during his rally speech, saying that she had promised him that Trump wasn't coming to the Capital.
- Limo incident that was 3rd hand info
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [58376]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46314
Joined: 4/23/00
|
Fair enough - but a couple of things...
Jul 5, 2022, 2:18 PM
|
|
First, she said she was "in the vicinity of a conversation" in which Trump said "something to the effect of..." dropping the magnetometers and letting his people in. So, how close was she? 2 feet? 6 feet? 20 feet? Were there other people around? was it crowded or noisy? Is it possible she misheard or misunderstood? Was he really serious, or just joking? What does she mean, "something to the effect of"? What exactly did he say? What were his exact words? I'm sure she is being coached up by her legal team for all of that, but as it stands, that's extremely shaky testimony. If true, if accurate, and if it can be corroberated, great. If not, it's not worth much. We'll see if and when it gets to court.
Second thing - back to my main point, No news outlet led with the part about the magnetometers; whether or not the limo incident was the most important part of her testimony, almost every news outlet led with that that day and the next. I did not watch the tesimony as it unfolded, and my impression is based on news reports after the fact, and while the part about marchers possibly having guns was definitely discussed, the assault on the driver and grabbing the wheel got the headlines, across the board. So, it was very important at the time, yet once it was challenged, and it bacame apparent that the source was not reliable, it became not so important (so what?). Hypocricy. Throwing stuff at the wall to see what sticks. That's my point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [34100]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 33601
Joined: 9/13/99
|
Re: Fair enough - but a couple of things...
Jul 5, 2022, 2:50 PM
|
|
Regarding the limo story: Let's wait and see what anyone testifies to, and we can compare credibility. So far it's her story vs. an unnamed source who insists someone's going to testify otherwise.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [58376]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46314
Joined: 4/23/00
|
Re: Fair enough - but a couple of things...
Jul 5, 2022, 3:42 PM
|
|
I'm all for waiting. I'm not the one who presented this questionable testimony in the first place, or the one who made it into a DAMNING BOMBSHELL headline story. And her source is not unnamed, she's said Ornato told her this story. It was only once the story was supposedly denied by the people who were actually there that Ornato, the source of her testimony, was deemed a known liar with no credibility.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [34100]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 33601
Joined: 9/13/99
|
Re: Fair enough - but a couple of things...
Jul 5, 2022, 3:46 PM
|
|
Sorry, I was unclear. The unnamed source is the one who has told news outlets that Ornato and the driver will testify otherwise. Neither Ornato nor the driver has spoken to reporters.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [58376]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46314
Joined: 4/23/00
|
Re: Fair enough - but a couple of things...
Jul 5, 2022, 3:56 PM
|
|
My bad - got it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [58376]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46314
Joined: 4/23/00
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [20518]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11669
Joined: 10/15/02
|
Re: One more thing ...
Jul 5, 2022, 4:24 PM
|
|
That pic is awesome.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [31860]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 37166
Joined: 11/22/03
|
In this discussion, you seem to be the one throwing...
Jul 6, 2022, 7:56 AM
[ in reply to Fair enough - but a couple of things... ] |
|
things at the wall, so to speak. Of course she prefaces everything with "something to the effect of" because she's recounting conversations and it's pretty hard to remember conversations word-for-word. I can only assume her lawyer is telling her to phrase it like that so if she changes one little word from her previous testimony, it won't be an issue. I'm no lawyer, but I'm assuming that is only common sense from a legal perspective. Thinking someone is going to be able to repeat someone's exact words from 1.5 yrs ago in an extremely busy situation is naive IMO.
As for the coverage...your whole line of complaint seems to be centered around so much attention being paid to what happened in the limo. I watched and read a lot of coverage and I certainly didn't come away thinking that others thought that was the sole "bombshell".
I looked up a few examples:
This is real-time coverage from CNN's Jake Tapper. Yeah, they're discussing the limo story, but it's hardly the main focus of their discussions/analysis.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w50dCQpKf-M&ab_channel=CNN
Here's Chris Hayes on MSNBC. I would think this would be the most main stream/anti-Trump take. Limo issue not the primary focus.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HRwC2Dr1UHA&ab_channel=MSNBC
In fact, doing a relatively quick search, I can't find any news shows or news papers that led with the limo incident...maybe there were some, but one would think if it was like you say it was, that it would be easy to find.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7086]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 9659
Joined: 10/6/21
|
Re: What about the other things that she was....
Jul 5, 2022, 8:31 PM
[ in reply to What about the other things that she was.... ] |
|
Are you curious about whether Hutchinson had any coaching / testimony rehearsal before she went before the committee?
Of course, you know she was coached and rehearsed with tremendous intensity.
Was she so stupid that she forgot her coaching and was quickly discredited with her limo 'testimony'?
Or were her coaches simply trying to make a splashy TV moment, with the (correct) understanding the majority of Americans who watched this elaborate prime time version of "The View" would never pay attention to the follow up / discrediting of Hutchinson?
Please, don't assert that the Democrats simply put her up there as the grand finale despite having no idea about what her testimony would be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4008]
TigerPulse: 68%
Posts: 8033
Joined: 12/9/01
|
Re: What about the other things that she was....
Jul 6, 2022, 8:42 AM
|
|
LCheney is a Democrat? Lol
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13024]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14038
Joined: 11/2/15
|
It was a lie
Jul 4, 2022, 10:04 AM
|
|
This big.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [22381]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 31279
Joined: 11/30/98
|
"You dropped a bomb on me, Baby, Baby!" DJT.
Jul 4, 2022, 11:11 AM
|
|
The round the clock efforts to discredit the bombshell testimony of Ms. Hutchinson enters day 7.
One of the indicators of just how impactful her testimony is the panic that has ensued amongst the MAGAverse. Hair on fire!
There will only be about 3 more hearings over the next two months and then the final report once all of the people who are coming forward have testified under oath. The Hutchinson Bombshell testimony has apparently caused a number of new witnesses to come forward.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10134]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8862
Joined: 7/20/12
|
Re: "You dropped a bomb on me, Baby, Baby!" DJT.
Jul 4, 2022, 11:58 AM
|
|
The round the clock efforts to discredit the bombshell testimony of Ms. Hutchinson enters day 7.
One of the indicators of just how impactful her testimony is the panic that has ensued amongst the MAGAverse. Hair on fire!
There will only be about 3 more hearings over the next two months and then the final report once all of the people who are coming forward have testified under oath. The Hutchinson Bombshell testimony has apparently caused a number of new witnesses to come forward.
Buy then you have the “bombshell” that Trumps own SS guy saying he would be willing to testify that none of this crap happened. So is there even a need for this crap show to continue?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [22381]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 31279
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Hutchinson's bombshell testimony has inspired new Republican
Jul 4, 2022, 12:21 PM
|
|
witnesses to come forward, so it's hard to say exactly when your nightmare will be over.
My guess is The Committee's final hearing and report will be some time in late September/early October.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [20518]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11669
Joined: 10/15/02
|
Re: Hutchinson's bombshell testimony has inspired new Republican
Jul 4, 2022, 1:17 PM
|
|
It isn't going to be over anytime soon.
The Committee will stop prior to the mid-terms because they have to...and after the mid-terms, the GOP will almost certainly control Congress, so the next Committee is going to be All Hunter Biden + Big Guy performative show-hearing Benghazi-type stuff for the next 18 months after that. (Which may actually wind up with Hunter Biden in jail, and could get Poppa Joe in some soup himself if it turns out he was standing too close to Hunter.)
But that's just garden-variety corruption, there. What people have IMHO not wrapped their heads around quite well enough yet is, 1/6 was indeed a coup attempt...criminal in every sense of the word, and on multiple levels, involving a fairly significant cabal of actual conspirators. No amount of Fox News spin is going to change the fact that the DOJ - which is part and parcel of the very government Trump tried to corrupt and unseat - is going to start systematically prosecuting these people over the next year, and that in the vast majority of cases these charges seem extremely likely to stick. Which means they will one and all have massive motivation to give up all they have on Donald himself.
I still think it's a coin flip as to whether or not Trump himself is going to wind up in an orange jumpsuit, just because it'll only take one hard-core Trumpista on the jury to hang it, and that's a mistrial. But he's going to be tried in DC, and that's a problem for him too...and Meadows, Rudy, Bannon, Roger Stone, Michael Flynn, Sidney Powell, John Eastman...those folks are almost certainly going to jail. By the time it's time for The People vs. Donald Trump the DOJ might have so much evidence in their hands a conviction is almost a foregone conclusion, too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [17248]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14204
Joined: 12/14/98
|
Perhaps Hutchinson's admittedly here say story has …
Jul 4, 2022, 1:29 PM
[ in reply to Hutchinson's bombshell testimony has inspired new Republican ] |
|
Already been corroborated by other witnesses under oath. So denial testimony under oath becomes a little tricky not to mention executive privilege implications. Texts, phone call records and 3rd party presence really could complicate things.
Could be wrong but guess there will be little contradictory testimony under oath.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [22381]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 31279
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Most likely. The non-denial from "a source" was just a bone
Jul 4, 2022, 2:57 PM
|
|
thrown to the Usual Trump Defenders and their ilk. As we have seen, it doesn't take even a kernel of truth for them to seize upon something as proof of what they want to believe.
Ornato hasn't and isn't going to refute her testimony under oath.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [22381]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 31279
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Trump's posting frantically about the Hutchinson Bombshell
Jul 4, 2022, 3:18 PM
|
|
multiple times per day on Truth Social since her testimony last Tuesday. The Usual Trump Defenders have been following his lead, creating multiple threads on it every day since.
You're responding to another one of those threads.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10134]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8862
Joined: 7/20/12
|
Re: Hutchinson's bombshell testimony has inspired new Republican
Jul 5, 2022, 5:58 PM
[ in reply to Re: Hutchinson's bombshell testimony has inspired new Republican ] |
|
Lol nightmare. You realize you all are the only ones caring about this right? The rest of us aren’t even watching and are only seeing random news clips and articles for anything important, which so far has been extremely little.
Correct! As if we all aren’t going to sleep at night! Haha! I rest easy with zero guilt every single night!
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7086]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 9659
Joined: 10/6/21
|
Re: "You dropped a bomb on me, Baby, Baby!" DJT.
Jul 5, 2022, 8:35 PM
[ in reply to "You dropped a bomb on me, Baby, Baby!" DJT. ] |
|
Do you really believe that Hutchinson's testimony (i.e., as a third party non-witness) was powerful for the Democrats?
Other than the absurdity of it which has gotten a reaction from the non-lefties, do you really think that Hutchinson ... as a thoroughly discredited 'witness' ... is causing the slightest bit of angst among the non-lefties?
I mean, this whole matter is a tap-in putt for the non-lefties. Michelob Light and nice cigar time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3512]
TigerPulse: 94%
Posts: 4243
Joined: 12/5/06
|
MAGA really grasping for straws…
Jul 4, 2022, 1:14 PM
|
|
RWM takes the one portion of her testimony that would rightly be considered hearsay and turn the volume up to 10 trying to drown out everything else she had to say. What she said would probably be ruled hearsay, but it doesn’t mean she was lying about what she was told. Regardless, none of that noise matters. How about let’s focus on the rest of her testimony, which was plenty damaging to Trump. Ultimately, I don’t know if Trump will be indicted, but he deserves to be. His chances are greater now than before this recent testimony…I’m hopeful, but will believe it when I see it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10867]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15038
Joined: 8/6/10
|
LOL you cucks have been grasping for straws for 6 years***
Jul 4, 2022, 1:34 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [59982]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 22472
Joined: 5/24/17
|
Re: LOL you cucks have been grasping for straws for 6 years***
Jul 4, 2022, 3:10 PM
|
|
TigerBTM is the most delusional of all Liberals on this board. He and Balm need to get a room.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3512]
TigerPulse: 94%
Posts: 4243
Joined: 12/5/06
|
Re: LOL you cucks have been grasping for straws for 6 years***
Jul 4, 2022, 3:48 PM
|
|
Liberal…anyone not MAGA.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [22381]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 31279
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Look for Trump to announce he's running for president soon
Jul 4, 2022, 2:45 PM
[ in reply to MAGA really grasping for straws… ] |
|
so that he can label the Jan 6th investigation a political witch hunt and cause more GOP voter energy and resources to be diverted to his grift and defense. He also wants to get out ahead of DeSantis et al.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7190]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9406
Joined: 12/18/13
|
Hard to argue there was no criminal intent now.
Jul 4, 2022, 2:51 PM
[ in reply to MAGA really grasping for straws… ] |
|
He knew the mob was armed, wasn't there to hurt him, and he wanted to lead them to the Capitol.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26954]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15608
Joined: 1/26/22
|
Can't cage something that beautiful.***
Jul 5, 2022, 12:48 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7086]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 9659
Joined: 10/6/21
|
Re: Can't cage something that beautiful.***
Jul 5, 2022, 8:38 PM
|
|
You be right about that ... she's got some real natural talent.
I wonder if she can wiggle and shake?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Okay? So the chick was lying unde oath? Isn’t
Jul 6, 2022, 9:36 AM
|
|
It’s not over. Nobody is moving on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 74
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
