https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61970258
She claims to have damning evidence against Trump on Jan 6, yet she says she didn't see most of this, but heard it from others.
Hardly any concrete evidence, is it?
Maybe if she isn't working any more, she was looking for a book or talk show deal.Lots of sheep will still listen or read hearsay stuff.
shareEverything she testifed to isn't "hearsay" and she is under oath.
shareSo, we need to pick through the stuff for what is truth and what isn't? Some would say she shouldn't have any credibility to be even there.They need to get that has been actor to kiss with Chuck to get the ratings back up.
shareIt is under oath (to be fair). If anyone else wants to dispute it under oath, I’d love to see it.
Like, she’s looking at jail time if she’s caught lying under oath, so it would be genuinely interesting if secret service honestly proves her word wrong. Not “really” picking sides, but if she’s proven wrong, then the hell with her - I’ll make the logical decision that she’s simply a liar…and does deserve jail time for it.
She wasn't under a prosecution in what her testimony was for. This is just what in her mind was what happened.It is the hearing things fault in wanting to know things that she just heard from others about.And then say what she speculated in what happen.
shareFair enough. Let’s hear the contrary under oath. Does it exist? I guess we’ll see. If she’s proven a liar, then she’s a fucking liar….But, “Fox News” calling her a liar is like the National Enquirer claiming that sea monkeys have an affect on global warming.
Not for nothing, but there’s a huge reason why so many on Trump’s side pleaded the fifth (and asked for pardons). It’s like “holy fuck”! If these were my friends, I’d rather be alone.
It was pretty shocking revelations , a first hand account by a very credible witness who was in the West Wing during the coup. Meadows doom scrolling on his phone, content with the idea that Trump didn't want to do anything to stop the attack. Trump throwing his lunch plate at the wall, trying to choke his SS agent. Trump letting the mob have guns because they weren't there to hurt him. Agreeing with the chants to hang the VP.
Trump is a dangerous, deranged madman who surrounded himself with simps, except for one principled, Level-headed 23 year old woman.
Fat Donnie was out of control.
shareLmao!
shareOk Amber Heard
shareHe is detached from reality. He's not normal.
shareWhat a crock of shit! How much did the democrats pay her to testify? If you watch her testimony, she seems as if she memorized a script.
shareFat Donnie's Fun Land is crumbling.
shareI think it’s great. Another no substance Democrat claim that keeps Trump trending at the top. What’s this about 10,000 now?
Meanwhile what are Democrats running the county doing about gas prices, food shortages, inflation, that their policies created? Oh that’s right, nothing as usual.
Yes, because everyone knows Trump has 8 feet long arms that can choke out a limo driver like Jason Bourne through a bullet proof partition.
Jesus, as if liberals couldn't get anymore fucking stupid, they just keep on outdoing themselves.
No bullet proof partition, perfectly easy to reach around to guy in front seat
9 seconds in,
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/live-updates/trumpcoronavirus/?id=73413060
Who are you asking here, the true believers still babbling about The BIG Lie or people that already know Trump was guilty from the get go?
shareThat's not true. Her evidence is evidence and completely admissible in a court of law.
shareI have no dog in this fight and did not vote for Trump. However, one of the main issues she testified to, violence against the secret service, it would not be admissible in any court. It was hearsay; she was not present for the incident. She heard about it from someone else. Hearsay is not admissible in a court of law. In a court of law, a witness can only testify to events they have personally seen and/or heard.
Author of the Sodality Universe
The Road from Antioch
In the Markets of Tyre
Flight to Lystra
The Theater at Ephesus (coming soon)
The Council on Jerusalem (coming 2023)
Hearsay is not so black and white. There are cases where hearsay is admissible.
Deathbed confessions or testimony are hearsay and often accepted. The SS
agent driver could be called to testify. People who know nothing about the law
often say that circumstantial evidence is not admissible too, but it can be. It
just depends.
Do you really think she would just make a total story up our of nothing, or that
the person who told her about that would make it up? Do you think it unbelievable
that Trump is crazy .... look at this whole story together ... it is coherent and it
explains the extent to which Trump is loonie tunes. ( not to mention his supporters )
This was not a deathbed confession. Yes, the driver and other agents can be called. That doesn't change the fact that she was not there and so cannot testify. (And the driver and other agents have reportedly said they will testify under oath that those events did not happen.) Perhaps if she heard it directly from the agents present it may have probative value as supporting evidence, but as I understand it (and I could be wrong) she did not hear it from them. You go too many removes from the actual witnesses, testimony becomes gossip.
I have no idea what she was thinking or why she had made those statements. My observation does not apply to anything else she may have testified to.
I'm not a lawyer, but as far as I know from speaking to my father, who was, in a court she would not be allowed to testify on those incidents, even to corroborate or not, the testimony of actual witnesses.
It would be helpful to hear from an actual lawyer on this. (My father is deceased, so I can't ask him. )
Author of the Sodality Universe
The Road from Antioch
In the Markets of Tyre
Flight to Lystra
The Theater at Ephesus (coming soon)
The Council on Jerusalem (coming 2023)
She absolutely can testify as to what she heard.
share (And the driver and other agents have reportedly said they will testify under oath that those events did not happen.)
bullshit. If they'd said that the hearings would have them involved .
or at least it would be headline news
"Trump hearings! news at 6! witness says NSA did a thing , NSA says they didnt!"
got any sort of proof/link?
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/secret-service-jan-6-committee-trump-cassidy-hutchinson-testimony/
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2022/06/29/secret-service-donald-trump-cassidy-hutchinson-january-6-hearing-nr-vpx.cnn
Things can certainly still happen and further testimony may or may not contradict Cassidy Hutchinson's.
I do apologize that I never recall how to make things link in MovieChat.
Author of the Sodality Universe
The Road from Antioch
In the Markets of Tyre
Flight to Lystra
The Theater at Ephesus (coming soon)
The Council on Jerusalem (coming 2023)
because thats how sham hearings work. why would they bring in the source when they have someone that can be paid off to say whatever the dems want.
shareYou're n0t a lawyer, obviously.
share