ADVERTISEMENT

Ketchup on the wall!

Did I say it wasn't a hearing? Did I say hearsay wasn't allowed in hearings? No, I said it shouldn't be allowed so people wouldn't be allowed to make shit up.
Who has been proven to make shit up? You are showing your true colors. The ss report is hearsay until they testify under oath.
 
She can be told something that's factually incorrect, and repeat it but not be lying. It's only a lie for her if says something she knows isn't true.
This guy gets it. The vast majority of her claims were 3rd hand knowledge. Even the conversations where she asked people what they talked about on the phone had 3rd party info. I don't think I have ever seen thr message get all the way around the game of telephone.
 
She can be told something that's factually incorrect, and repeat it but not be lying. It's only a lie for her if says something she knows isn't true.
Stop. How many Republican members of the Trump administration have come to her side? Would you like to make a wager as to who will be vindicated, SS or Hutchinson?
 
Last edited:
How do you feel about home ownership as a vehicle for gaining wealth for the middle class?
It’s overrated depending on where you live, what kind of person you are, and how much money you make. Houses can be money pits and if you’re unprepared for that, you can end up in a lot of trouble. That said, if you can get a no down payment loan without pmi (good luck), it’s a no brainer.
 
Who has been proven to make shit up? You are showing your true colors. The ss report is hearsay until they testify under oath.
My true colors lol. I don't give two shits about Trump and what he might or might not have done. Lock his ass up so I can stop hearing most of you bitch and complain and we can get this message board back to non politics. I'm one of the few that has an open mind and can see both sides. Something many of you should try out once in a while.
 
My true colors lol. I don't give two shits about Trump and what he might or might not have done. Lock his ass up so I can stop hearing most of you bitch and complain and we can get this message board back to non politics. I'm one of the few that has an open mind and can see both sides. Something many of you should try out once in a while.
Not many are going to agree with you on this.
 
My true colors lol. I don't give two shits about Trump and what he might or might not have done. Lock his ass up so I can stop hearing most of you bitch and complain and we can get this message board back to non politics. I'm one of the few that has an open mind and can see both sides. Something many of you should try out once in a while.
👏 👏 👏
 
It’s overrated depending on where you live, what kind of person you are, and how much money you make. Houses can be money pits and if you’re unprepared for that, you can end up in a lot of trouble. That said, if you can get a no down payment loan without pmi (good luck), it’s a no brainer.
Glad you are back. Try not to catch the hammer.
 
I think it's clear it's allowed during this hearing. I'm saying it shouldn't be so things like this don't occur. Anyone can say anything with no way to back up their claim.

1. Not allowing a witness to freely tell his/her story or applying restrictions to how he/she can respond to questions turns the hearing into a quasi-juidical proceeding with constant interruptions for rulings on admissability. You don't want that when you are conducting an investigation to determine facts.

2. In this case, its not certain Hutchinson has nothing to back up her now disputed claim. The Committee already had sworn testimony from Engels and Omato prior to her public testimony. IMHO - I doubt they (the Committee and her personal attorney) would green-light that part of her testimony if there is strong counter-factual testiony on the record from the two principals. If she freelanced - fine, allow witnesses to appear and testify under oath so they can relay their account of the incident.
 
1. Not allowing a witness to freely tell his/her story or applying restrictions to how he/she can respond to questions turns the hearing into a quasi-juidical proceeding with constant interruptions for rulings on admissability. You don't want that when you are conducting an investigation to determine facts.

2. In this case, its not certain Hutchinson has nothing to back up her now disputed claim. The Committee already had sworn testimony from Engels and Omato prior to her public testimony. IMHO - I doubt they (the Committee and her personal attorney) would green-light that part of her testimony if there is strong counter-factual testiony on the record from the two principals. If she freelanced - fine, allow witnesses to appear and testify under oath so they can relay their account of the incident.
For someone that knows that law, he doesn't know the law.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tunadog
Life Fail GIF
 
  • Like
Reactions: standiego
This guy gets it. The vast majority of her claims were 3rd hand knowledge. Even the conversations where she asked people what they talked about on the phone had 3rd party info. I don't think I have ever seen thr message get all the way around the game of telephone.
Most of them were NOT 3rd hand info.

I’m aware of one for sure(vehicle to the cap) and possibly one other, but, I was in and out of the car a bit.

most of what she relayed, from what I heard, was in fact first hand knowledge.

Z
 
Most of them were NOT 3rd hand info.

I’m aware of one for sure(vehicle to the cap) and possibly one other, but, I was in and out of the car a bit.

most of what she relayed, from what I heard, was in fact first hand knowledge.

Z
Gonna have time agree to disagree. The vast majority of it were conversations that happen afterwords between her and Meadows regarding conversations Meadows had with Trump ect.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: sob5 and RileyHawk
Just providing theories. Somehow I doubt the accuracy of claims made by someone that are contradicted by people who were actually present. But what do I know? The libs on here have brainwashed you into sheep hood.

Who has officially contradicted the statements yesterday? There have been reports of someone willing to contradict some of her statements, but I have not seen anyone officially step forward and make a statement. If she lied or what she said was not true, then I hope someone does step up and correct the record. Until then, she is on record after swearing to tell the truth, which is more than anyone else can say.
 
Gonna have time agree to disagree. The vast majority of it were conversations that happen afterwords between her and Meadows regarding conversations Meadows had with Trump ect.
Hearsay evidence is not admissible in court unless a statue or rule provides otherwise. Therefore, even if a statement is really hearsay, it may still be admissible if an exception applies. The Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE) contains nearly thirty of these exceptions to providing hearsay evidence.

We are both of the opinion that her saying anything in court about the conversation Meadows may have had with Trump would be objectionable, but, due to the above, MIGHT, be overruled and allowed. I believe, I’m my limited experience, the types of conversations that might be allowed would be exactly what Ms.Hutchinson relayed through conversations with her boss and what was discussed in those conversations.
 
Hearsay evidence is not admissible in court unless a statue or rule provides otherwise. Therefore, even if a statement is really hearsay, it may still be admissible if an exception applies. The Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE) contains nearly thirty of these exceptions to providing hearsay evidence.

We are both of the opinion that her saying anything in court about the conversation Meadows may have had with Trump would be objectionable, but, due to the above, MIGHT, be overruled and allowed. I believe, I’m my limited experience, the types of conversations that might be allowed would be exactly what Ms.Hutchinson relayed through conversations with her boss and what was discussed in those conversations.
I'm certainly no Philadelphia lawyer and it very well might be allowed into court but i also think you would agree that IF Trump does ever go to court he is going to show up with a group of lawyers that are the best money can buy and that stuff will get lambasted. That's the kind of stuff I was talking about yesterday. If you arengoing to go after a slimy person you have to have every angle of escape covered.
 
No wonder ketchup prices continue to skyrocket in the grocery stores. It's a matter of supply and demand and here we have a president literally increasing the ketchup shortfall by throwing a limited supply against the wall! We can only take solace in the fact that he wasn't throwing mustard which is much more difficult to clean up!
 
I repeatedly condemned the events that we've seen play out from video that day. But do you really think an obviously one sided commission with hearsay is a healthy exercise?

This may be the most stupid post ever. One sided? Hearsay? Whose fault is it that it's one sided? All of the witnesses have been republicans. I suppose you would be happier if more democrats testified? WOW, freaking WOW!
 
Last edited:
I only read a page or two in this thread, but for all of you trump minions who continue to try and make Cassidy Hutchison out a liar, how about seeing what you can do to get all of those persons she mentioned in her under oath testimony, and she mentioned several, to just contact the bipartisan January 6th Committee, and come on in, and under oath, set the record straight.
 
I know the rules of court and it's not allowed. If they are allowing it during this hearing, that is the perfect reason they don't allow hearsay in an actual trial.
FUNFACT: They DO allow hearsay in actual trials

Should probably have a lawyer explain the Rules of Evidence to you on this.
 
I know the rules of court and it's not allowed. If they are allowing it during this hearing, that is the perfect reason they don't allow hearsay in an actual trial.
FUNFACT 2.0: It's not the "rules of court", it's referred to as the Rules of Evidence.
 
Stop. How many Republican members of the Trump administration have come to her side? Would you like to make a wager as to who will be vindicated, SS or Hutchinson?
I was commenting on whether or not she was lying. I watched part of her testimony. She seemed credible to me. That doesn't mean what she says happened actually did happen. That's the nature of 2nd hand information. It's called nuance. Everyone would love for it to be black or white. Sometimes it's not.
 
I was commenting on whether or not she was lying. I watched part of her testimony. She seemed credible to me. That doesn't mean what she says happened actually did happen. That's the nature of 2nd hand information. It's called nuance. Everyone would love for it to be black or white. Sometimes it's not.
Where are you hearing that she might have been lied to? Those in the Trump Administration (outside of the idiot himself) seem to believe her.
 
Where are you hearing that she might have been lied to? Those in the Trump Administration (outside of the idiot himself) seem to believe her.
Seriously use your brain. Do you just blindly believe everything you hear, especially relating to politics, and especially related to trump and the “1/6 coup conspiracy?” My god, this is the biggest joke/show of our lifetimes and you all line up for your daily oohs and ahhs fed to you by hacks with agendas.
 
Well I did work third shift, but as I stated NBC nightly news is where I heard that secret service would be willing to testify that it never occurred.
But “the SS” did not report that! An anonymous source reported that he learned the SS had personnel that would disagree with what the secretary reportedly heard. There is a difference here Hawkman. Now, all the SS personnel has to do is testify to such for the Committee.
 
  • Like
Reactions: globalhawk
Seriously use your brain. Do you just blindly believe everything you hear, especially relating to politics, and especially related to trump and the “1/6 coup conspiracy?” My god, this is the biggest joke/show of our lifetimes and you all line up for your daily oohs and ahhs fed to you by hacks with agendas.
I remembered why I have you on ignore. Wow.
 
ADVERTISEMENT