Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Wrong
She offered as her testimony as a witness that this is what Trump did. She did not witness the accusatory event, she was discrediting him via what someone else said to her
Classic heresay despite your attempt to redefine the word.
Which one says insurrection?
Nonsense. Miss Piggy is conducting a witch hunt.No one has come forward to testify on Donald Trump's behalf. Even Ivanka and Jerrod testified against Daddy Dearest.
No one has been charged yet. Name one who has
www.cnn.com
Hearsay.She most certainly did not. She offered the testimony as to what she was told. The head of Trump's security team was in the room, and she was told this. One of the questions she was asked is if he contracted what she was told or said it didn't happen, and her answer was that Trump's head of security had NOT disputed what she was told had happened. Not at the time, and not since.
Nothing about insurrectionProud Boys leader and top members charged with seditious conspiracy over January 6
The Justice Department on Monday charged the head of the Proud Boys, Enrique Tarrio, and four other leaders with seditious conspiracy in the January 6 US Capitol attack, escalating the criminal case against the far-right extremist group.
Nothing that said instructionsI gave you links. Are you incapable of reading them???? Or just too fucking lazy and stupid as usual?????
ALL of the charges were for "seditious conspiracy".
What the fawk do you think "seditious conspiracy" is moron?Nothing about insurrection
That's awful. Poor Benedict Donald, I heard he simply has nobody willing to testify under oath for him..... so sad. Poor guy.Miss Piggy won’t allow testimony in favor of Trump.
Not insurrectionWhat the fawk do you think "seditious conspiracy" is moron?
No. Direct testimony on a conversation she was party to.Hearsay.
That’s another lie. SS has already said it did not happenThat's awful. Poor Benedict Donald, I heard he simply has nobody willing to testify under oath for him..... so sad. Poor guy.
Was anything she said the truth? At this rate everything she claimed will be debunked by the end of today.
She claims she wrote a note that was actually written by a WH lawyer. This should be easy to verify.
of what? what is the crime?
nypost.com
It’s not testimony nor are you a witness when you relay what you were told about an event that you did not see nor hear yourself. The sentiment that you are accurately relaying what you were told as not being hearsay is incorrect and so much so that it’s actually the classic definition of hearsayShe most certainly did not. She offered the testimony as to what she was told. The head of Trump's security team was in the room, and she was told this. One of the questions she was asked is if he contracted what she was told or said it didn't happen, and her answer was that Trump's head of security had NOT disputed what she was told had happened. Not at the time, and not since.
It'snot. Nobody close to Trumpybear who could exonerate him that day is willing to testify.That’s another lie. SS has already said it did not happen
When you testify about what you were told but did not see nor hear the recounted event yourself then it’s classic hearsay. The fact that you are faithfully and accurately retelling what you were told changes NothingNo. Direct testimony on a conversation she was party to.
Nothing will happen. Hearsay isn’t evidenceThe Jan. 6 incitement case against Trump only gets stronger
In the wake of devastating testimony from an aide to his chief of staff, will the Justice Department indict former President Donald Trump?
Andrew C Mccarthy explains it
They are hanging their hat on that she faithfully and accurately retold what she was told as voiding her statements as hearsay.Nothing will happen. Hearsay isn’t evidence
Why did the Crackhead have his lawyer try to get the laptop back, Simp?The laptop has never been "verified" at all. The ONLY thing that has been verified is that some of the emails and date it contained are genuine. That's not surprising since there was a highly publicized hack of the Burisma servers in the months when Rudy Guilliani was sniffing around the Ukraine looking for "evidence" against the Bidens.
Authorities wondered what the intent of the hacking might be and pointed to a similar hacking in France which was used to obtain real documents and letterheads, to make their faked documents and emails look real. The FBI has NEVER verified that the laptop that was handed over to them was real.
Once again we see the Russian propaganda tools on this website try to twist small facts into large pieces of evidence. Yes there were real emails on "Hunter's laptop". They were there to make the fake emails look genuine.
