Hearsay and the Cipollone testimony.

forkup

Gold Member
Mar 3, 2016
9,206
3,309
290
For over a week now we have been privileged to hear all the people on the right talk about hearsay. So let me be the first to congratulate all of you that another piece of hearsay we got from Cassidy. Namely where she said that Cippolone and Meadows had a conversation with Trump on Jan 6th, in which Trump said something to the effect that he figured Pence deserved what was happening to him at the Capitol.

If this is confirmed, would any of you then feel Trump should not get to be in office again? Or is it acceptable for a president to endanger the Vice-President purposefully and then refuse to do anything to help him?

 
The people responsible for pushing this phony investigation should have to reimburse the American taxpayer for its cost. You would have thought that after the Russia hoax, the Ukraine hoax and two fabricated impeachments, these same liberal buffoons would have learned something about avoiding frivolous witch-hunts. Maybe if liberals had to pay for their mistakes, they wouldn't be so quick to repeat them.
 
The people responsible for pushing this phony investigation should have to reimburse the American taxpayer for its cost. You would have thought that after the Russia hoax, the Ukraine hoax and two fabricated impeachments, these same liberal buffoons would have learned something about avoiding frivolous witch-hunts. Maybe if liberals had to pay for their mistakes, they wouldn't be so quick to repeat them.
None, of it is even attempting to address the premise of my post.

Care to try again?
 
None, of it is even attempting to address the premise of my post.

Care to try again?
Actually, what I'm saying is that your post has no premise because the fabricated investigation has no premise. It's nothing more than a 2-year, taxpayer funded campaign ad against Trump and everything on the Rt. The DNC should be footing the bill, not the taxpayer.
 
For over a week now we have been privileged to hear all the people on the right talk about hearsay. So let me be the first to congratulate all of you that another piece of hearsay we got from Cassidy. Namely where she said that Cippolone and Meadows had a conversation with Trump on Jan 6th, in which Trump said something to the effect that he figured Pence deserved what was happening to him at the Capitol.

If this is confirmed, would any of you then feel Trump should not get to be in office again? Or is it acceptable for a president to endanger the Vice-President purposefully and then refuse to do anything to help him?


Bombshell!

We got him this time!

Impeachment!!
 
For over a week now we have been privileged to hear all the people on the right talk about hearsay. So let me be the first to congratulate all of you that another piece of hearsay we got from Cassidy. Namely where she said that Cippolone and Meadows had a conversation with Trump on Jan 6th, in which Trump said something to the effect that he figured Pence deserved what was happening to him at the Capitol.

If this is confirmed, would any of you then feel Trump should not get to be in office again? Or is it acceptable for a president to endanger the Vice-President purposefully and then refuse to do anything to help him?


Did the Manson girls stop loving Charlie?

There is nothing the committee or the DOJ can do or show or demonstrate or prove that will matter to these people. At worst, they'll create an excuse in their minds to vote for De Santis.

But the orange demigod will always be the orange demigod.
 
Last edited:
Actually, what I'm saying is that your post has no premise because the fabricated investigation has no premise. It's nothing more than a 2-year, taxpayer funded campaign ad against Trump and everything on the Rt. The DNC should be footing the bill, not the taxpayer.
Ah, so when called out for not engaging the premise of an OP, you deny there is even a premise?

To me it says, and that applies to all the right-wing people who are replying. All of you know that most things Hutchinson said are probably true and also know that Cipollone will probably confirm that, so all of you are in the position that in order to defend Trump you can't even answer whether or not it is OK for the President of the United States wishing his Vice-President and family harm.
 
You’re asking butt hurt Trump Humpers if their loser daddy should be held accountable?

They patiently wait for the return of the orange messiah. It’s very spiritual for them.
I know but it's always insane to watch how far they are willing to go for it.

In the abstract, the question of a President wishing his own Vice-President harm shouldn't be a hard question, yet even that, they are willing to forgive if it applies to Trump.

It just blows my mind.
 
Did the Manson girls stop loving Charlie?

There is nothing the committee or the DOJ can do or show or demonstrate or prove that will matter to these people. At worst, they'll create an excuse in their minds to vote for De Santis.

But the orange demigod will always be the orange demigod.
The CDC recommends IV drip of Hydroxychloroquin and Ivermectin to treat your TDS
 
I know but it's always insane to watch how far they are willing to go for it.

In the abstract, the question of a President wishing his own Vice-President harm shouldn't be a hard question, yet even that, they are willing to forgive if it applies to Trump.

It just blows my mind.
Remember when Trump knocked the 2 Secret Service Agents unconscious and commandeered the Presidental limo and tried to run over Mike Pence for not declaring Trump President for Life?
 
But they have nothing for yours.
I can't support Trump. He exposed the depths to which America has been sunk and his SCOTUS picks only delayed the demise of the US, but, he's done.

We need a Republican President who is as vicious as a democrat
 
Ah, so when called out for not engaging the premise of an OP, you deny there is even a premise?

To me it says, and that applies to all the right-wing people who are replying. All of you know that most things Hutchinson said are probably true and also know that Cipollone will probably confirm that, so all of you are in the position that in order to defend Trump you can't even answer whether or not it is OK for the President of the United States wishing his Vice-President and family harm.

I agree. I don't think these people will lie and commit perjury to protect Trump.
 
For over a week now we have been privileged to hear all the people on the right talk about hearsay. So let me be the first to congratulate all of you that another piece of hearsay we got from Cassidy. Namely where she said that Cippolone and Meadows had a conversation with Trump on Jan 6th, in which Trump said something to the effect that he figured Pence deserved what was happening to him at the Capitol.

If this is confirmed, would any of you then feel Trump should not get to be in office again? Or is it acceptable for a president to endanger the Vice-President purposefully and then refuse to do anything to help him?


Of the many smart things the 1/6 committee has done, one was to show the layout of the West Wing of the WH. They wanted to emphasize the tight quarters in order to explain how Cassidy could overhear so many of the conversations she testified about. Like the one involving Cipolonne and Meadows as Pat incredulously reacted to Mark's indifference over Trump gleefully watching the riot on TV yet not doing anything about it. Especially after learning Pence's life was being threatened by Trump's mob. It was at that point Pat announced he was going to talk to the Orange Insurrectionist out of a sense of urgency that Trump DO SOMETHING.
 
Remember when Trump knocked the 2 Secret Service Agents unconscious and commandeered the Presidental limo and tried to run over Mike Pence for not declaring Trump President for Life?
Nope, I don't remember that. I do remember Hutchinson testifying that she heard Meadows say to Cipollone. " You heard him, Pat, he thinks Mike deserves it"

I will ask again. Do you find that disqualifying if confirmed?
 
Nope, I don't remember that. I do remember Hutchinson testifying that she heard Meadows say to Cipollone. " You heard him, Pat, he thinks Mike deserves it"

I will ask again. Do you find that disqualifying if confirmed?
Uninformed sources told me on condition of anonymity that...
 
For over a week now we have been privileged to hear all the people on the right talk about hearsay. So let me be the first to congratulate all of you that another piece of hearsay we got from Cassidy. Namely where she said that Cippolone and Meadows had a conversation with Trump on Jan 6th, in which Trump said something to the effect that he figured Pence deserved what was happening to him at the Capitol.

If this is confirmed, would any of you then feel Trump should not get to be in office again? Or is it acceptable for a president to endanger the Vice-President purposefully and then refuse to do anything to help him?


 

Forum List

Back
Top