Salon Implies Secret Service Men "Who Disputed" Hutchinson's "Steering Wheel" Story Are Liars
- Thread starter munkle
- Start date
lantern2814
Diamond Member
- Jul 17, 2018
- 15,390
- 12,593
- 2,290
That or Trump has found Reed Richards and taken some cosmic ray blasts.
lantern2814
Diamond Member
- Jul 17, 2018
- 15,390
- 12,593
- 2,290
Waiting for you cowards to call them.
lantern2814
Diamond Member
- Jul 17, 2018
- 15,390
- 12,593
- 2,290
No they didn’t moron. They debunked her whole story. But you swallow the shit and ask for seconds.That's what the secret service guys told Cassidy.
easyt65
Diamond Member
- Aug 4, 2015
- 90,307
- 61,587
- 2,645
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 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 always come down this…after a long list of what boils down to “grievance politics” rather than the actual issue.
Not worth further replies.
Last edited:
bodecea
Diamond Member
- Banned
- #172
Well said. Everything covered.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.
daveman
Diamond Member
That might carry some weight if you weren't kissing your Democrat overlords' asses.
Last edited:
daveman
Diamond Member
Y'know, if you'd shut the **** up, you wouldn't look so stupid.
Secret Service: Officials willing to testify after Jan. 6 witness said Trump lunged, grabbed wheel
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
I’m just amazed at the level of whining…the right has brought “snowflake“ to a whole new level lately….oy!Well said. Everything covered.
daveman
Diamond Member
The meat of her testimony is false, as proven by the people who were actually there.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
daveman
Diamond Member
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.
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.
Link to their testimony under oath?
Similar threads
New Topics
-
Evidence That Russia Has Been Helping Iran Target And Kill American Troops.
- Started by Alicia J
- Replies: 0
-
More money left Canada than foreign investors brought in, but it’s not a red flag yet, says economist- Started by shockedcanadian
- Replies: 0
-
Zone1 Should FedEx killer of 7-year-old girl get death penalty?
- Started by Lisa558
- Replies: 3
-
People purchasing fake medical degrees and posing as doctors
- Started by GuyOnInternet
- Replies: 1
