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.
Boy, for a group of posters here who overwhelmingly vote in the poll that they are NOT watching the hearings, you sure do have a lot to say!
I have been watching even though I voted no in the poll. I changed my mind after some of the news came out especially about the folks with weapons on January 6. Plus, those who don't watch can catch u via TV, radio or this thing called the internet.
How do you refute recorded police communications? That's a new one on me.
Really? you are asking that stupid question. Recorded audio just like photos and Police communications or actions are refuted all the time in court in being admissible in court in a trial or put under perspective.
Due process does that in our legal system.
What I want to know better is the police report, officers testimony and the actual arrest of the citizens with the guns or the findings of a trial if applicable. If the citizens never got charge of a crime or were acquitted it makes the recorded police audio before arriving at the scene useless.
That's why in a due process hearing everything is brought up. Comprende?
Beg your pardon here; I have not been able to watch this week's hearings yet or read thru this thread in the past few days. I'll pick it up piece-meal, I suppose. Can anyone here tell me if the two Secret Service agents (that were in the vehicle when DJT allegedly lunged at the driver) have testified yet? Last week, all of the news outlets were all over the airwaves about it. I just duckduckgo'd it and only see the same articles from last week.
SS said the agents are ready to testify under oath. Have they? Have they been called? If they haven't, which side - in your opinion - is holding that up? I realize in the grand scheme of things, this one "minor" detail probably won't have much bearing on the outcome. But it matters nonetheless. If that didn't happen, then it raises concerns about all the other testimony that does not include video.
Apologies if it's in here (or out there) & I just haven't seen it yet.
None whatsoever. The George Floyd protests began in response to the brutal torture and murder, in plain view of the public, of yet another Black man for a non-violent offense. I'm not excusing the riots but the origins of the protest are understandable. The violent insurrection on 1/6 was an existential threat to our democracy and the peaceful transition of power by a deranged madman who weaponized the mob that he assembled and sent them to follow violent militias his cronies that lead the charge to assault the Capitol and disrupt the proceedings inside. I'm following the hearings closely and am horrified by what is being uncovered.
again, as you know, this is a hearing, not a trial. there is no cross examination.
A criminal fact finding hearing about private citizens of the opposing party. What's wrong with this Kangaroo court
Congress doing a criminal investigation about private citizens of the opposing party to assist the DOJ?
He said " let my people in," knowing that they were heavily armed, and "they're not here to hurt me."
It was like he was suggesting that they were there to hurt someone other than him.
There could be a thousand ways to interpret it. How about "knowing that he never suggested violence"? Much of this hearing is trying to interpret (or misinterpret) everything in the worst possible way with "It was like he was suggesting". Imagine how many people could be convicted of something they didn't do using the same standard. [addendum: what about the people who posted pictures of Trump's beheading?]
And, again, as Roger Stone asked, where are all the recordings and surveillance footage of all involved, including government officials?
Last edited by snowmountains; 07-13-2022 at 05:59 PM..
.but the origins of the protest are understandable.
No it wasn't. The 1 police was arrested and justice and the law was working fine. Attacking the police, properties and people across the nation is an attack of the constitution and the rule of law.
There is NO excuse and nice try in your double standards. You can't have a democracy when the law is being under attacked and the institution of the police put on trial by violence.
Can anyone here tell me if the two Secret Service agents (that were in the vehicle when DJT allegedly lunged at the driver) have testified yet?
there has been no further testimony from Engle, Ornato or the driver released from the committee.
Quote:
SS said the agents are ready to testify under oath. Have they?
unsure.
Quote:
If they haven't, which side - in your opinion - is holding that up?
i believe the schedule got bumped back when Pat Cipollone agreed to testify. altho Cipollone did not testify about Hutchinson's account of Ornado's story of what happened in the SUV he did corroborate other aspects of Hutchinson's testimony.
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.
