Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Will you be watching the House January 6 Committee hearing?
YES-WATCHING 70 24.56%
NO-NOT WATCHING 215 75.44%
Voters: 285. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 06-28-2022, 07:51 PM
Status: "I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out." (set 9 days ago)
 
35,635 posts, read 17,975,706 times
Reputation: 50665

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by FinsterRufus View Post
I wish the Secret Service agents would testify. They can clarify that part of the testimony and while they’re there, clarify anything else. Anything at all.

That goes for anyone else that can refute the testimony on record.

Anyone of those people who can prove something is not factual, step forward. DO.
Would you also state, "anyone who can prove something IS factual, step forward"?

 
Old 06-28-2022, 07:52 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles
7,826 posts, read 2,729,107 times
Reputation: 3387
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brave Stranger View Post
You would love them too, you wish, you hope...Peter Alexander of NBC is cutting the Trump attack story down. This is what happens when you let third-person hearsay pass off as reality.
Well they already cooperated according to the SS public statement so this is weird, somebody is being played...we will find out soon enough. Ii doubt the committee wouldn't have corroborated every shred of evidence before putting her on the stand.
 
Old 06-28-2022, 07:53 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles
7,826 posts, read 2,729,107 times
Reputation: 3387
Quote:
Originally Posted by heySkippy View Post
IMO the committee almost certainly has strong backing evidence for anything that was aired today. We'll be seeing...
Oh you know they do.
 
Old 06-28-2022, 07:53 PM
 
13,461 posts, read 4,295,282 times
Reputation: 5392
Quote:
Originally Posted by FinsterRufus View Post
I wish the Secret Service agents would testify. They can clarify that part of the testimony and while they’re there, clarify anything else. Anything at all.

That goes for anyone else that can refute the testimony on record.

Anyone of those people who can prove something is not factual, step forward. DO.
Pelosi won't let the FBI testify under oath, what makes you think she will allow the S.S. and the driver testify to kill the testimony of her hearsay witness. This is a kangaroo court not to find the truth.
 
Old 06-28-2022, 07:58 PM
 
16,579 posts, read 20,715,742 times
Reputation: 26860
Quote:
Originally Posted by AguaDulce View Post
As much as I hate to admit it, a defense attorney would just bury this woman on cross.
A defense attorney would object to some of her testimony and some of the objections would be sustained and some would be overruled.

But buried? Nah.
 
Old 06-28-2022, 08:02 PM
 
Location: sumter
12,970 posts, read 9,659,574 times
Reputation: 10432
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brave Stranger View Post
Did you miss that part where she was telling a third-hand story? A lie or not...this trash should never be allowed in a so-called Congressional Committee.
Why would you call her trash? Obviously, the Trump team didn't think she was trash, to have her working in the White House inner circle. It's like anybody who speaks against Trump gets discredited, even though they voted for and supported the president.
 
Old 06-28-2022, 08:04 PM
 
13,461 posts, read 4,295,282 times
Reputation: 5392
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marlow View Post
A defense attorney would object to some of her testimony and some of the objections would be sustained and some would be overruled.

But buried? Nah.
You are an attorney? Hearsay doesn't go far in any American court. A witness has to say that the people involved directly with the accused told her that but she didn't. No judge would allow this to a jury.

That's like accusing Judge Kavanaugh of raping the H.S. party on a hearsay from people that weren't there and no direct connection to anybody involved in the event. Democrats tried that during the confirmation but it didn't work.
 
Old 06-28-2022, 08:04 PM
 
13,425 posts, read 9,955,563 times
Reputation: 14357
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClaraC View Post
Would you also state, "anyone who can prove something IS factual, step forward"?
Sure! But I reckon there will be a lot more of those than the other.

It’s very telling that this alleged Secret Service willing to testify that’s not what happened is the ONLY time there’s been an inkling anyone is prepared to refute prior testimony under oath. And even that is not certain, until it actually happens. And Trumpers might be careful what they wish for, because they may have questions for the agents that WILL corroborate other testimony. Willing to take that chance?

So bring it on! Let’s see how much of this testimony is untruthful. Where are all the rebutters? Step up!
 
Old 06-28-2022, 08:04 PM
 
37,315 posts, read 59,888,047 times
Reputation: 25341
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miami Shores View Post
I saw a few of the clips on the news, even if true, so what if President Trump was pissed, if I GMS, you or any of us were President of the USA or leader of any nation, and we believe there was massive vote fraud against us, I would be Pissed, you would be Pissed and all of us would be Pissed, this is not a crime, there is no smoking gun, from this leftist, democrat, anti Republican, anti Trump, Political Kangaroo Court. They have nothing and you have nothing.
Whistling past the graveyard

Keep saying that if it makes you feel safe
 
Old 06-28-2022, 08:07 PM
 
16,579 posts, read 20,715,742 times
Reputation: 26860
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnBoy64 View Post
Methinks Peter Alexander is getting played...these are anonymous sources.
Yep. It would be easy enough to do. Could have been a guy named John Barron. He's been known to do that type of thing before.
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.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top