Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
in a real trial, each side would have a chance to cross-examine witnesses and challenge evidence, whereas this mockery of a trial permits neither.
the campaign staffer ornato, not hutchison, would have been put on the stand to introduce this testimony, and he would have been subject to cross-examination. as a hearsay witness, hutchinson could only testify as to what she heard, not what she actually observed, that’s why her “evidence” would have been barred.
this trial is shameful...
It might be, if it was a trial. This is not a trial.
why would anyone participate in this political show trial, other than partisans, with no rules of evidence?
i doubt anyone other than partisans are watching it. i haven't watched it, but do read the news and the media has once again shown their naked bias by reporting as fact the hearsay testimony of ms. hutchinson. reason number 3485859404 why the mainstream media is overwhelmingly distrusted by the public.
The only rule of evidence that matters in this process is the oath the witnesses swear to tell the truth. Not surprising that no defenders of Trump are willing to follow that one simple rule. How many more times does it have to be said that everyone is welcome to testify?
In a nutshell, this clown show is just another waste of taxpayers' dollars.
Why do you not care about the health of our system of government? I can't understand how anyone who says they love this country doesn't finally see the disaster we just barely escaped. This process is painful but necessary, no matter which party committed the crimes.
It's notable that they are not disputing the rest of her testimony, in which she stated (from your link):
"Trump demanded that Secret Service allow his armed supporters into the cordoned-off area where he was delivering his remarks. Hutchinson said that many of Trump’s supporters refused to walk through the metal detectors — or magnetometers — that had been set up to secure the area, and Capitol police spotted several men in the crowd carrying handguns and AR-15 rifles."
“I don’t f***ing care that they have weapons. They’re not here to hurt me. Take the f***ing mags away. Let my people in. They can march to the Capitol from here. Let the people in. Take the f***ing mags away,” Trump said at the time, according to Hutchinson.
Mentioned by name in the first tweet, saying the agents would be available to testify. Why would he be a "source close to the Secret Service" denying her testimony in the second part of a continuing post three minutes later? He could have done one tweet and simply said that "Gugliemi says the agents will testify she's full of cranberries."
Is Cassidy Hutchinson under oath??......why is she flat out lying....and lies they have to know someone is going to immediately call them on?
Hutchinson lied about Trump in the ”beast”....
First off, the Secret Service guys said they would testify...under oath...that not one word of that is true
...second....Trump wasn't in the ”beast”
then Hutchinson presented a ”note” she claimed she wrote.....another flat out lie
....Eric Herschmann immediately came forward....said it's a flat out lie....he wrote that note
Liz Cheney presented the note....claimed Hurchinson wrote it....when Cheney knew all along that was a lie
what the sam hell is up with these people.....it's one thing to flat out lie....it's another to be this bad at it
Mentioned by name in the first tweet, saying the agents would be available to testify. Why would he be a "source close to the Secret Service" denying her testimony in the second part of a continuing post three minutes later? He could have done one tweet and simply said that "Gugliemi says the agents will testify she's full of cranberries."
My question is why would they be focused on that part of her testimony and not the part about Trump demanding that they let the armed people past the mags?
The only rule of evidence that matters in this process is the oath the witnesses swear to tell the truth. Not surprising that no defenders of Trump are willing to follow that one simple rule. How many more times does it have to be said that everyone is welcome to testify?
Bennie Thompson has issued an open invitation to anyone with information to come and testify more than once at the close of a hearing.
If I was the one being maligned by spurious testimony, I would be over there banging on the doors and demanding to set the record straight.
Is Cassidy Hutchinson under oath??......why is she flat out lying....and lies they have to know someone is going to immediately call them on?
Hutchinson lied about Trump in the ”beast”....
First off, the Secret Service guys said they would testify...under oath...that not one word of that is true
...second....Trump wasn't in the ”beast”
then Hutchinson presented a ”note” she claimed she wrote.....another flat out lie
....Eric Herschmann immediately came forward....said it's a flat out lie....he wrote that note
Liz Cheney presented the note....claimed Hurchinson wrote it....when Cheney knew all along that was a lie
what the sam hell is up with these people.....it's one thing to flat out lie....it's another to be this bad at it
Sorry I have to post this meme. I go crazy when people use the Gateway Pundit as a source.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
