Is Mark Meadows Testimony Really As Pathetic As It Sounds?

Biff_Poindexter

Diamond Member
Jun 6, 2018
26,844
14,774
1,415
USA

"Mark Meadows, former White House chief of staff under Donald Trump, pointed a finger "directly" at the ex-president during his testimony in Georgia on Monday. The former Trump official spent his nearly three-hour testimony speaking about his duties serving the ex-president, and claimed that his actions related to the Georgia indictment fell under his responsibilities as chief of staff.

During the hearing, however, Meadows may have further helped Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis' case, the ex-chief of staff told Willis that he didn't want Trump's 2020 "campaign to prevail in certain areas and then not have this" succeed. When further pried about why he wouldn't want that to happen, Meadows responded, "Well, because I know I would get yelled at if we had not." He later affirmed that he would have received such backlash from "the President of the United States."

"I would imagine that their defense counsel are quite worried about that testimony," said Goodman, who appeared on CNN's "Erin Burnett OutFront" on Friday. "It's bad for President Trump, because it is directly pointing the finger at him by saying, 'he would have yelled at me if I didn't do this.'" "That means that President Trump is directly involved in the false-elector scheme," Goodman continued. "That's the kind of evidence that prosecutors need, and it also shows the intensity of President Trump's interest in it."

So Mark Meadows justification for trying to do his part to overturn the election is -- he was afraid to get yelled at by Trump? If that isn't the most weak, pathetic beta male response ever. What else would you do for someone if you have this strong fear of being yelled at? That is seriously pathetic... This is why I say, Trump is a weak man's idea of a strong man....when in reality, both of them are bitches....
 

"Mark Meadows, former White House chief of staff under Donald Trump, pointed a finger "directly" at the ex-president during his testimony in Georgia on Monday. The former Trump official spent his nearly three-hour testimony speaking about his duties serving the ex-president, and claimed that his actions related to the Georgia indictment fell under his responsibilities as chief of staff.

During the hearing, however, Meadows may have further helped Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis' case, the ex-chief of staff told Willis that he didn't want Trump's 2020 "campaign to prevail in certain areas and then not have this" succeed. When further pried about why he wouldn't want that to happen, Meadows responded, "Well, because I know I would get yelled at if we had not." He later affirmed that he would have received such backlash from "the President of the United States."

"I would imagine that their defense counsel are quite worried about that testimony," said Goodman, who appeared on CNN's "Erin Burnett OutFront" on Friday. "It's bad for President Trump, because it is directly pointing the finger at him by saying, 'he would have yelled at me if I didn't do this.'" "That means that President Trump is directly involved in the false-elector scheme," Goodman continued. "That's the kind of evidence that prosecutors need, and it also shows the intensity of President Trump's interest in it."

So Mark Meadows justification for trying to do his part to overturn the election is -- he was afraid to get yelled at by Trump? If that isn't the most weak, pathetic beta male response ever. What else would you do for someone if you have this strong fear of being yelled at? That is seriously pathetic... This is why I say, Trump is a weak man's idea of a strong man....when in reality, both of them are bitches....
Yes, just as pathetic as it sounds.
 
Yes, it certainly "sounds" pathetic so long as you only read Newsweek's reporting and characterization and assume it to be accurate.

Not sure why anyone would make such an assumption after eight years of the "Get Trump" mentality of the media, in which they have abandoned all pretense of objectivity and truth-seeking. I'll wait for the video, or at least a verified transcript before I take Newsweek's word for it.

Newsweek's claim of a pathetic performance by Meadows aside, the article shows nothing incriminating for Trump at all. Meadow's supposed fear that he "would get yelled at" if the alternative elector idea did not pan out, is about Meadows, not Trump.

Not that this is incriminating for Meadows, either. There was nothing illegal about having a group of volunteers stand by in case there would be a decision that electors from states whose voting was corrupted would not be accepted. Those alternative electors never represented themselves as anything but that. Seems a very prudent move, in fact. If not for a slate of alternates, that state might have been allowed no electors at all.

Worst you could say about Meadows in this particular instance was that he went outside his role as Chief of Staff. Coordinating the alternative electors should have been a task for volunteers. I don't think that violates a criminal statute, though.
 
Yes, it certainly "sounds" pathetic so long as you only read Newsweek's reporting and characterization and assume it to be accurate.

Not sure why anyone would make such an assumption after eight years of the "Get Trump" mentality of the media, in which they have abandoned all pretense of objectivity and truth-seeking. I'll wait for the video, or at least a verified transcript before I take Newsweek's word for it.

Newsweek's claim of a pathetic performance by Meadows aside, the article shows nothing incriminating for Trump at all. Meadow's supposed fear that he "would get yelled at" if the alternative elector idea did not pan out, is about Meadows, not Trump.

Not that this is incriminating for Meadows, either. There was nothing illegal about having a group of volunteers stand by in case there would be a decision that electors from states whose voting was corrupted would not be accepted. Those alternative electors never represented themselves as anything but that. Seems a very prudent move, in fact. If not for a slate of alternates, that state might have been allowed no electors at all.

Worst you could say about Meadows in this particular instance was that he went outside his role as Chief of Staff. Coordinating the alternative electors should have been a task for volunteers. I don't think that violates a criminal statute, though.
^ Triggerd emographs ^
 
They have nothing... it's the J6 soviet show trial, version 2.0, where the participants will get their checks from soros and then slink off in disgrace and delete the 1.5 Terabytes of laughable, shit show fuckery.

Give it to the dims... they're absolutely above any type of shame or embarrassment.... it's part of being a self-loathing sub-human, I suppose.
 

"Mark Meadows, former White House chief of staff under Donald Trump, pointed a finger "directly" at the ex-president during his testimony in Georgia on Monday. The former Trump official spent his nearly three-hour testimony speaking about his duties serving the ex-president, and claimed that his actions related to the Georgia indictment fell under his responsibilities as chief of staff.

During the hearing, however, Meadows may have further helped Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis' case, the ex-chief of staff told Willis that he didn't want Trump's 2020 "campaign to prevail in certain areas and then not have this" succeed. When further pried about why he wouldn't want that to happen, Meadows responded, "Well, because I know I would get yelled at if we had not." He later affirmed that he would have received such backlash from "the President of the United States."

"I would imagine that their defense counsel are quite worried about that testimony," said Goodman, who appeared on CNN's "Erin Burnett OutFront" on Friday. "It's bad for President Trump, because it is directly pointing the finger at him by saying, 'he would have yelled at me if I didn't do this.'" "That means that President Trump is directly involved in the false-elector scheme," Goodman continued. "That's the kind of evidence that prosecutors need, and it also shows the intensity of President Trump's interest in it."

So Mark Meadows justification for trying to do his part to overturn the election is -- he was afraid to get yelled at by Trump? If that isn't the most weak, pathetic beta male response ever. What else would you do for someone if you have this strong fear of being yelled at? That is seriously pathetic... This is why I say, Trump is a weak man's idea of a strong man....when in reality, both of them are bitches....
How did Mark Meadows try to overturn the election? What exactly are you accusing him of?
 

Forum List

Back
Top