January 6, 2021 Storming of the US Capitol

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

A Congressional hearing isn't a court of law. That said, nearly all of the damning testimony thus far was from Republicans, Trump appointees and staff. The committee's agenda, in part, is to demonstrate to those who don't know it already (i.e., MAGAMorons like you) how much of a dangerous and lawless clown your Dear Leader is. I'm sorry you're having such a tough time coming to terms with the obvious.

Oh my, such condescension. If you can't convenience them, just insult them.

Much of the "testimony" coming out of the Jan 6 Committee - such as yesterday's testimony - would never be admissible in a court of law, or would be subject to a likely supportable objection for hearsay or supposition. So, yeah, I take the Jan 6 committee for what it is: a political exercise and not much more. Sorry if you're having a tough time coming to terms with the obvious.

[Noogies]

Originally Posted by whell

Much of the "testimony" coming out of the Jan 6 Committee - such as yesterday's testimony - would never be admissible in a court of law, or would be subject to a likely supportable objection for hearsay or supposition. So, yeah, I take the Jan 6 committee for what it is: a political exercise and not much more. Sorry if you're having a tough time coming to terms with the obvious.

He conceded that in the first line of his post.

[Noogies]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

Pretty much my feelings. But this testimony points at numerous crimes, while giving yet more illustration of Trump's knowledge and intent. Explicit knowledge of what communication went back and forth to the Proud Boys through Roger Stone would be enough to hang the lot, seems to me.

Yeah, I guess the surprising part is the documentation.

With regard to the Stone/PB connection, you'd need a three-part transcript including Stone's communications with Trump. I wonder if that exists anywhere -- I'm sure Trump understands the concept and need for a "Chinese Wall," but does he have the self-control to maintain one?

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

Oh my, such condescension. If you can't convenience them, just insult them.

Much of the "testimony" coming out of the Jan 6 Committee - such as yesterday's testimony - would never be admissible in a court of law, or would be subject to a likely supportable objection for hearsay or supposition. So, yeah, I take the Jan 6 committee for what it is: a political exercise and not much more. Sorry if you're having a tough time coming to terms with the obvious.

Rules about the use of hearsay evidence don't apply to Congressional hearings. They apply only to court proceedings (which this isn't). Moreover, just about the only alleged hearsay evidence was the issue of Trump trying to take the wheel in "the Beast" and anyone wishing to challenge it is welcome to testify under oath to the contrary.

Trump, his media cheerleaders and his gullible MAGAMorons are hanging their hats on this one piece of alleged hearsay to discredit everything else she said, nearly all of which is supported by other testimony and/or video and documentary evidence. Why else would Hannity assert that nothing new was learned in this hearing? How can something be already known yet false?

It's amazing how you MAGAMorons, credulous believers of all sorts of ridiculous conspiracy theories, are disputing a hearing with mountains of physical and testimonial evidence demonstrating that your Dear Leader is corrupt and unfit for office? The Beast vignette was the one bit of hearsay Hutchinson included that is now being seized on by Fox News and their credulous MAGAMoron audience to cast aspersions on the entirety of Hutchinson's testimony. It was a wild anecdote, NOT the main testimony. Cognitive dissonance is a real bitch, eh?

[whell]

Originally Posted by Chicks

Mick Mulvaney @MickMulvaney

My guess is that before this is over, we will be hearing testimony from Ornato, Engle, and Meadows.

This is explosive stuff. If Cassidy is making this up, they will need to say that. If she isn't they will have to corroborate.

I know her. I don't think she is lying.

11:01 AM · Jun 28, 2022·Twitter Web App

I thought Mulvaney was a saboteur and a grifter...just another MagaMoron. Are you saying you want to believe him now?

And no, Mick. If she is lying, it doesn't matter. Her comments will survive a two or three media cycles, and that's all that matters to the Star Chamber.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

I thought Mulvaney was a saboteur and a grifter...just another MagaMoron. Are you saying you want to believe him now?

Virtually anyone close to Trump is a liar and a grifter. If one of the deigns to tell the truth about him, he throws them under the bus and sics his thugs or wingnut media upon them (as is happening now with Cassidy Hutchinson). That's why so many refuse to testify or choose plead the Fifth. Hell, Flynn even plead the Fifth to a question as to whether he believes in the peaceful transfer of power.

[Oerets]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Virtually anyone close to Trump is a liar and a grifter. If one of the deigns to tell the truth about him, he throws them under the bus and sics his thugs or wingnut media upon them (as is happening now with Cassidy Hutchinson). That's why so many refuse to testify or choose plead the Fifth. Hell, Flynn even plead the Fifth to a question as to whether he believes in the peaceful transfer of power.

""A witness can waive (give up) the right to invoke the Fifth by later making statements about the topic in question. For example, if a witness invokes the Fifth but goes on to selectively answer questions about the same subject matter, a judge might decide that the later answers invalidate the initial waiver.""

From a search off the net.

I've heard in the past once you answer the 5th every answer after needs to be the same. To protect the person being questioned.

I stand by my statement that the committee has backup proof for any statements being made. They have locked down more information then is being released. Perjury is also a crime and prostituting this gang of traitors for crimes is the end game.

[Chicks]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Virtually anyone close to Trump is a liar and a grifter.

I'd include the MAGAMorons, as well. They are an incredibly gullible bunch.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by Oerets

""A witness can waive (give up) the right to invoke the Fifth by later making statements about the topic in question. For example, if a witness invokes the Fifth but goes on to selectively answer questions about the same subject matter, a judge might decide that the later answers invalidate the initial waiver.""

From a search off the net.

I've heard in the past once you answer the 5th every answer after needs to be the same. To protect the person being questioned.

I stand by my statement that the committee has backup proof for any statements being made. They have locked down more information then is being released. Perjury is also a crime and prostituting this gang of traitors for crimes is the end game.

And the interesting thing is that virtually all of the Trump minions and thugs pleading the Fifth or asserting privilege (Bannon, Meadows, Clark, Eastman, Rudy, Flynn ... have written books and/or spoken extensively on Fox News or other wingnut media sources about Jan. 6.

[Oerets]

Originally Posted by finnbow

And the interesting thing is that virtually all of the Trump minions and thugs pleading the Fifth or asserting privilege (Bannon, Meadows, Clark, Eastman, Rudy, Flynn ... have written books and/or spoken extensively on Fox News or other wingnut media sources about Jan. 6.

Yes, just when it counts.
Under oath to tell the truth, they clam up.