Salon Implies Secret Service Men "Who Disputed" Hutchinson's "Steering Wheel" Story Are Liars

[Captain Caveman]

Until they testify under oath their statements could just as easily be lies. It’s not like you haven‘t been shredding Hutchinson’s character and she at least was under oath.

People still lie under oath.

Once a liar, always a liar.

 

[lantern2814]

Go-go Gadget arms!

That or Trump has found Reed Richards and taken some cosmic ray blasts.

 

[lantern2814]

Waiting for them to testify.

Waiting for you cowards to call them.

 

[lantern2814]

That's what the secret service guys told Cassidy.

No they didn’t moron. They debunked her whole story. But you swallow the shit and ask for seconds.

 

[bodecea]

Waiting for you cowards to call them.

Why aren't they volunteering? Why are some even refusing to come testify? They are cowards and you are all about loving up on them and the orange godlet who hires nothing but cowards.

 

[bodecea]

No they didn’t moron. They debunked her whole story. But you swallow the shit and ask for seconds.

Have they debunked it under oath yet?

 

[easyt65]

I would like to thank Salon for self-identifying as FAKE NEWS / LIBERAL PROPAGANDA PUSHERS.

Accusing someone, especially someone with a massive background check / Security Clearance and willingness to take a bullet to protect someone (they probsbly didn't vote for), of being a liar when they have not even been allowed to testify under oath (or even be consulted with to verify the credibility of the heresay presented as 'evidrnce'), is pretty brazen...

....and reaks of despetately attempting to undermine an actual source to protect the last shreds of debunked 6 Jan Committee testimony credibility.

 

[scruffy]

Why aren't they volunteering?

They did.

Nancy the Stalinist pig refuses to call them.

Oink.

Why are some even refusing to come testify?

Because they won't support a dog and pony show at taxpayer expense.

They are cowards and you are all about loving up on them and the orange godlet who hires nothing but cowards.

Right.

Tell that to Nancy the Stalinist coward, who refuses to hear exculpatory evidence.

We don't need a committee for this crap, if I want to hear bullshit I can just turn on CNN.

 

[otto105]

Stop by, I got something you can kiss and it isn't a ring.

What? Stop by?


Well ain’t you the prom queen.

 

[bodecea]

They did.

Nancy the Stalinist pig refuses to call them.

Oink.




Because they won't support a dog and pony show at taxpayer expense.



Right.

Tell that to Nancy the Stalinist coward, who refuses to hear exculpatory evidence.

We don't need a committee for this crap, if I want to hear bullshit I can just turn on CNN.

Who volunteered and show us where Nancy refused to call them? (BTW, Nancy Pelosi isn't the Committee Chair)

 

[Coyote]

what she heard - so you are "ok" with heresy evidence on cases of such magnitude? if so then that means this is allowed against you, but when i see it going in a manner you don't like, you call this tactic a foul.

IT IS NOT a legal case. It is NOT A TRIAL. Why do you and others keep conflating the two? There is no standard of evidence like there is in a legal trial. There is no cross examination. There is no “objection yer Honor”. There are no convictions. There is no sentencing. About the only you can’t do is LIE UNDER OATH.

REPEAT: THIS. IS. NOT. A. TRIAL.

Can we reach an understanding on this?

Second, the bit about ”wait until it is done to you” (assuming you mean to liberals).

Does White Water ring a bell?

How about Benghazi Benghazi Benghazi?

How about the Hillary email hearings?

Was the “defendant” allowed to cross examine? Was the “defendant” allowed to produce witnesses?

pretty much the core of our divide. you allow 1 side to manufacture whatever it takes to demonize the other side but you won't allow the same tactics to come YOUR way.

No, it isn’t. You DID that to the “other side” in multi-year Congressional investigations, hearings, special committees…so what’s your problem?

Bonus question: did anyone whine about how Hillary was “on trial” and prevented from cross examining witnesses or producing her own in any of those hearings? No. Everyone KNEW they were Congressional Hearings.

body language - really? from someone who "heard" about it? you don't see a stretch here?

The specific I’m referring was how people in the room with her, all hearing the same story, reacted.

how do you reason with someone and come to a common ground when the tactics used are now allowed to be fair and equal in the decision making process?

How do you reason with someone who doesn’t even recognize that these “antics” have long been used, including from his own side. How unfair, eh? And yet that is exactly how Senate hearings are run and have been since the start.

as for painting a disturbing picture - well, as with any picture, people will often see what they want. but if you're worried about a disturbing picture and "body language", lets look at mothers who can't find formula for their babies. unlike the mythical black voter who can't get an ID for some reason, i can find these people. i see the calls out many times a week on my facebook community page.

Why bother to even reply you boil down her entire testimony (and my responses) to some thing as stupid as just body language. Sure you can redirect to all our other problems, but those are short term and fixable. What the hearing is about is something much larger, and much more dangerous to our country even if less immediate.

gas prices at $8 an hour and our white house quietly preparing for $200 a barrel oil.

See above.

we've got russia close to seeing if a limited nuclear war is possible.

we've got china eyeing Taiwan like a fat kid eyeballs a cake.

Which means…uh…what? We should ignore the worst threat to our system of governance, the integrity of our elections and checks and balances…. in…decades…a century? SERIOUSLY?

general violence is at an all time high and last night in a new york subway, a mother was shot in the head.

So we should ignore what happened on Jan 6? Can’t work on both?

Why no complaints when it soared in 2020?

we've got an administration who has an open border policy but doesn't seem to realize it and simply calls it "closed" while illegal crossings are simply through the roof.

There is no open border, and I’m not going to waste time if you are just going to spout talking points. None of it diminishes the very real attempt to pull down our government, install the election loser and destroy one of the most principles of American Democracy: peaceful transfer of power (and please don’t start up on the Floyd riots, that is not issue).

we've got a president who is simply dismissing these cases and forcing "amnesty" and not even going through the proper political process.

we've got a fbi coming after churches and political opponents left and right while ignoring those who are actually causing violence in this country.

All of those are entire other issues in an attempt to attention. Start another thread. If I respond to each, it will derail this thread.

and you're worried about "body language" and if someone exaggurated so you can see your "disturbing" trend.

No. YOU are obsessing about body language and making a transient statement about how I interpreted one minute of (how many hours?) of testimony Into a summation of it’s entirety. What a dishonest tactic and not worth any kind of thoughtful rebuttal.

and you wonder why you're hard to talk to at times.

And you always come down this…after a long list of what boils down to “grievance politics” rather than the actual issue.
Not worth further replies.

 

[bodecea]

IT IS NOT a legal case. It is NOT A TRIAL. Why do you and others keep conflating the two? There is no standard of evidence like there is in a legal trial. There is no cross examination. There is no “objection yer Honor”. There are no convictions. There is no sentencing. About the only you can’t do is LIE UNDER OATH.

REPEAT: THIS. IS. NOT. A. TRIAL.

Can we reach an understanding on this?

Second, the bit about ”wait until it is done to you” (assuming you mean to liberals).

Does White Water ring a bell?

How about Benghazi Benghazi Benghazi?

How about the Hillary email hearings?

Was the “defendant” allowed to cross examine? Was the “defendant” allowed to produce witnesses?






No, it isn’t. You DID that to the “other side” in multi-year Congressional investigations, hearings, special committees…so what’s your problem?

Bonus question: did anyone whine about how Hillary was “on trial” and prevented from cross examining witnesses or producing her own in any of those hearings? No. Everyone KNEW they were Congressional Hearings.




The specific I’m referring was how people in the room with her, all hearing the same story, reacted.



How do you reason with someone who doesn’t even recognize that these “antics” have long been used, including from his own side. How unfair, eh? And yet that is exactly how Senate hearings are run and have been since the start.





View attachment 664477

Why bother to even reply you boil down her entire testimony (and my responses) to some thing as stupid as just body language. Sure you can redirect to all our other problems, but those are short term and fixable. What the hearing is about is something much larger, and much more dangerous to our country even if less immediate.



See above.



Which means…uh…what? We should ignore the worst threat to our system of governance, the integrity of our elections and checks and balances…. in…decades…a century? SERIOUSLY?




So we should ignore what happened on Jan 6? Can’t work on both?

Why no complaints when it soared in 2020?



There is no open border, and I’m not going to waste time if you are just going to spout talking points. None of it diminishes the very real attempt to pull down our government, install the election loser and destroy one of the most principles of American Democracy: peaceful transfer of power (and please don’t start up on the Floyd riots, that is not issue).


All of those are entire other issues in an attempt to attention. Start another thread. If I respond to each, it will derail this thread.




No. YOU are obsessing about body language and making a transient statement about how I interpreted on minute of (how many hours?) of testimony Into a summation of it’s entirety. What a dishonest tactic and not worth any kind of thoughtful rebuttal.


And you always come down this…after a long list of what boils down to “grievance politics” rather than the actual issue.
Not worth further replies.

Well said. Everything covered.

 

[daveman]

All you sycophants have is your sycophancy.

That might carry some weight if you weren't kissing your Democrat overlords' asses.

 

[daveman]

Why aren't they volunteering? Why are some even refusing to come testify? They are cowards and you are all about loving up on them and the orange godlet who hires nothing but cowards.

Y'know, if you'd shut the fuck up, you wouldn't look so stupid.

Secret Service: Officials willing to testify after Jan. 6 witness said Trump lunged, grabbed wheel​

 

[Coyote]

it was your body language.

I’m done with trolls who lack the integrity to even attempt an honest discussion. You wan‘t to natter on about how unfair (sob) the other side, you’re free to do that. On the other hand, here is a novel but highly risky idea. How about listening to her actual testimony in entirety instead of obsessing on minutiae? But but but the other side (insert toque fallacy of choice )…

Cya

 

[Coyote]

Well said. Everything covered.

I’m just amazed at the level of whining…the right has brought “snowflake“ to a whole new level lately….oy!

 

[daveman]

I’m done with trolls who lack the integrity to even attempt an honest discussion. You wan‘t to natter on about how unfair (sob) the other side, you’re free to do that. On the other hand, here is a novel but highly risky idea. How about listening to her actual testimony in entirety instead of obsessing on minutiae? But but but the other side (insert toque fallacy of choice )…

Cya

The meat of her testimony is false, as proven by the people who were actually there.

 

[daveman]

I’m just amazed at the level of whining…the right has brought “snowflake“ to a whole new level lately….oy!

Really? It's not the right whining that people don't believe your bitterly-clung-to "bombshell" story that was going to put Trump away for life.

 

[Coyote]

People still lie under oath.

Once a liar, always a liar.

Yes they do, and the consequences for doing so are serious. At this point, she has not lied. She reiterated what she heard and was clear about the fact it was second hand. Now if the others are willing to go under oath and testify, that could change things. The committee is talking with them…so we’ll see.

 

[Coyote]

The meat of her testimony is false, as proven by the people who were actually there.

Link to their testimony under oath?