At least it's clear now why Mark Meadows stopped cooperating with the committee.

Also clear that there were grounds to invoke the 25th amendment. A shame they didn't.

Sadly all we got today regarding the 'shocking' allegations was hearsay. Something that won't ever be admitted in a real court.

Had it not been hearsay, probably this would have been shocking. I am still trying to imagine Trump in the back of a Limo trying to move a steering wheel. That seems like at best, an exaggeration or a joke.

AirWorthy99 wrote:

Sadly all we got today regarding the 'shocking' allegations was hearsay. Something that won't ever be admitted in a real court.

Had it not been hearsay, probably this would have been shocking. I am still trying to imagine Trump in the back of a Limo trying to move a steering wheel. That seems like at best, an exaggeration or a joke.

The Secret Service has said they can't and won't testify against a protectee, which is part of their oath. But they haven't denied that it happened either.

Also to clarify, a person testifying what they themselves heard, is not hearsay. Hearsay is where the knowledge is removed by one or more persons. Cassidy was standing right there as a first person witness, for most of her testimony. In the case of the Beast incident, she was told by direct participants in their presence, and again the participants did not deny or object. Thus Cassidy's testimony is perfectly admissible in a court of law.

Your point about cross-examination is fair, and that will happen in a court of law. But it's hard to imagine what could be used on cross, given the extent of supporting documentation the committee has provided. It's a pretty thorough and solid case.

Also in video evidence that is provided, Trump is visible in the second seat, passenger side of the Beast (SUV). Easily within reach of both his security chief sitting in front of him, and the steering wheel.

Another element of the hearing today, were statements about the pressure brought to bear against some witnesses. Reminding them that Trump was watching and the need to be loyal. That is chilling. Trump behaves like a mob boss.

WOW! A President of the United States ordering magnetometers removed so 'his people' with assault rifles could pass undetected.

Now the debate Sep 2022 Debate with Joe, the comment to the audience, the public, the Proud Boys to 'Stand back and stand by'

..makes perfect sense now.
Who were the armed insurrectionists were going to draw down on? ..my guess Capitol Police, first.

Ego will compel some of the 50+ Admin peeps to not be shown up by a 25 year old staffer, plus what she said, the life preservers are all gone...now comes the stampede.


BN747

BN747 wrote:

now comes the stampede.

You sure?

Could the GOP be stalling for time? Get the hearings past the midterms, then, assuming republicans win, scuttle the hearings?

petertenthije wrote:

BN747 wrote:

now comes the stampede.

You sure?

Could the GOP be stalling for time? Get the hearings past the midterms, then, assuming republicans win, scuttle the hearings?

...watch. They've been dialing their lawyers upon hearing her words. Each lawyer is giving different advice and each potential conspirator has a very different panic threshold...and none are built for serious jail time.

BN747

Well, that lasted long, the outrageous claim that Trump went for the steering wheel is falling.

A source close to the Secret Service tells me both Bobby Engel, the lead agent, and the presidential limousine/SUV driver are prepared to testify under oath that neither man was assaulted and that Mr. Trump never lunged for the steering wheel.

https://twitter.com/PeterAlexander/stat ... 9289635841

This "star" witness entire testimony is now on shaky ground, if this wasn't true, imagine what else isn't.

AirWorthy99 wrote:

Well, that lasted long, the outrageous claim that Trump went for the steering wheel is falling.

A source close to the Secret Service tells me both Bobby Engel, the lead agent, and the presidential limousine/SUV driver are prepared to testify under oath that neither man was assaulted and that Mr. Trump never lunged for the steering wheel.

https://twitter.com/PeterAlexander/stat ... 9289635841

This "star" witness entire testimony is now on shaky ground, if this wasn't true, imagine what else isn't.

Unless they testify, what you’re writing isn’t hearsay...it’s actually double hearsay. Oh the irony.

AirWorthy99 wrote:

Well, that lasted long, the outrageous claim that Trump went for the steering wheel is falling.

A source close to the Secret Service tells me both Bobby Engel, the lead agent, and the presidential limousine/SUV driver are prepared to testify under oath that neither man was assaulted and that Mr. Trump never lunged for the steering wheel.

https://twitter.com/PeterAlexander/stat ... 9289635841

This "star" witness entire testimony is now on shaky ground, if this wasn't true, imagine what else isn't.

The Jan 6 committee has already interviewed both Ornato and Engel. They had not wanted to discuss personal information about Trump. They may be called back now to testify on this issue.

People who know Hutchinson and worked with her say they believe her. But time will tell. Most of her testimony was corroborated by other evidence, so it will stand in any case.

AirWorthy99 wrote:

Sadly all we got today regarding the 'shocking' allegations was hearsay. Something that won't ever be admitted in a real court.

Had it not been hearsay, probably this would have been shocking. I am still trying to imagine Trump in the back of a Limo trying to move a steering wheel. That seems like at best, an exaggeration or a joke.

You might want to read Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2).

And Ken White, aka PopeHat (a famous criminal defence and civil litigation lawyer) had this to say:

https://twitter.com/Popehat/status/1541909079509020672

Naw, man, only some of it is hearsay. Need help understanding the difference? I'm here to help you. I'm hoping to help you.
/1

/2 So if a player comes up to you and says "hey coach I went to the team doctor for a bloody nose and he grabbed my genitals instead," that's not hearsay because he's not repeating an out of court statement, it's something that person perceived.

/3 But if people came to you and said "hey coach a bunch of people are complaining that the team doctor is perving on them in the showers and doing gratuitous genital exams," that would be hearsay, because they're talking about other people's statements.

/4 Now, say you were being sued for something -- say, some sort of grotesque dereliction of duty for failing to report or stop the serial sexual abuse of people under your care -- and a witness said "I told coach about it and he said 'I have nothing to do with this.'"

/5 That's not hearsay either, because in that case you're a party opponent and a statement of a party opponent is not hearsay. Just like first-hand witness testimony about what Trump said would be a statement of a party opponent in, say, a prosecution of Trump.

luckyone wrote:

AirWorthy99 wrote:

Well, that lasted long, the outrageous claim that Trump went for the steering wheel is falling.

A source close to the Secret Service tells me both Bobby Engel, the lead agent, and the presidential limousine/SUV driver are prepared to testify under oath that neither man was assaulted and that Mr. Trump never lunged for the steering wheel.

https://twitter.com/PeterAlexander/stat ... 9289635841

This "star" witness entire testimony is now on shaky ground, if this wasn't true, imagine what else isn't.

Unless they testify, what you’re writing isn’t hearsay...it’s actually double hearsay. Oh the irony.

Ok, let me ask you a question, I don't like Trump's personality either, and I could easily believe a claim of something crazy he might do, but do you really believe Trump went for a wheel from the back of a limo? and was assaulting a Secret service officer?

I mean really, are you pretending to believe because you hate Trump or do you really believe it?

Its basically impossible to go for the wheel of a limo, unless he put his entire body across the car, I mean, what are the chances of that happening and no one else noticing?

To sum things up today:

1)Trump knew the January 6th protesters had guns;
2)He assaulted his own security team;
3)There may be a line from Proud Boys and Oath Keepers to the White House;
4)Top aides have asked for pardons;
5)The commission thinks they have evidence of witness tampering by Trump and his associates.

AirWorthy99 wrote:

luckyone wrote:

AirWorthy99 wrote:

Well, that lasted long, the outrageous claim that Trump went for the steering wheel is falling.


https://twitter.com/PeterAlexander/stat ... 9289635841

This "star" witness entire testimony is now on shaky ground, if this wasn't true, imagine what else isn't.

Unless they testify, what you’re writing isn’t hearsay...it’s actually double hearsay. Oh the irony.

Ok, let me ask you a question, I don't like Trump's personality either, and I could easily believe a claim of something crazy he might do, but do you really believe Trump went for a wheel from the back of a limo? and was assaulting a Secret service officer?

I mean really, are you pretending to believe because you hate Trump or do you really believe it?

Its basically impossible to go for the wheel of a limo, unless he put his entire body across the car, I mean, what are the chances of that happening and no one else noticing?

I’m a psychiatrist—an acute care one at that. The things I’ve seen people do that I can’t write about... Few things would surprise me about somebody with Trump’s ego and personality.

AirWorthy99 wrote:

Its basically impossible to go for the wheel of a limo, unless he put his entire body across the car, I mean, what are the chances of that happening and no one else noticing?

As posted above, Trump was not in the limousine, he was in a Suburban SUV, and the video shows him in the passenger side second row seat. So very plausible to reach across the driver toward the steering wheel, or across the front seat passenger (Engel) who intervened.

Looks like we will find out soon. The Secret Service will release a public statement addressing the allegations, and will fully cooperate with the Jan 6 committee.

"The United States Secret Service has been cooperating with the Select Committee since its inception in spring 2021, and will continue to do so, including by responding on the record to the Committee regarding the new allegations surfaced in today’s testimony.”

Avatar2go wrote:

Looks like we will find out soon. The Secret Service will release a public statement addressing the allegations, and will fully cooperate with the Jan 6 committee.

"The United States Secret Service has been cooperating with the Select Committee since its inception in spring 2021, and will continue to do so, including by responding on the record to the Committee regarding the new allegations surfaced in today’s testimony.”

It looks as if the committee will regret having that testimony based on hearsay and creating all of this expectation when we found out it was false directly from the Secret service.

When that happens, its over.

Its starting to look as if its already over.

AirWorthy99 wrote:

Avatar2go wrote:

Looks like we will find out soon. The Secret Service will release a public statement addressing the allegations, and will fully cooperate with the Jan 6 committee.

"The United States Secret Service has been cooperating with the Select Committee since its inception in spring 2021, and will continue to do so, including by responding on the record to the Committee regarding the new allegations surfaced in today’s testimony.”

It looks as if the committee will regret having that testimony based on hearsay and creating all of this expectation when we found out it was false directly from the Secret service.

When that happens, its over.

Its starting to look as if its already over.

Wow, just wow. Stunning patriotism, really.

Aaron747 wrote:

AirWorthy99 wrote:

Avatar2go wrote:

Looks like we will find out soon. The Secret Service will release a public statement addressing the allegations, and will fully cooperate with the Jan 6 committee.

It looks as if the committee will regret having that testimony based on hearsay and creating all of this expectation when we found out it was false directly from the Secret service.

When that happens, its over.

Its starting to look as if its already over.

Wow, just wow. Stunning patriotism, really.

This is a show trial, no one from the GOP is represented here. And the result is pretty obvious, they put a 'star' witness on the stand that basically within hours her testimony collapsed. If this is just her 'star witness' imagine the rest

Tony Ornato is denying that he told Cassidy Hutchinson Trump grabbed the steering wheel in presidential vehicle on 1/6 or lunged at a fellow agent, a USSS official tells @joshscampbell
. CNN confirms that Ornato & Enger are prepared to testify that neither incident occurred.

https://twitter.com/GabbyOrr_/status/15 ... 0716599298

This show trial is something from the Soviet era.

A week of witnesses laying out all the different ways Trump tried to overturn the election and get an armed mob into the Capitol, and you're here fussing about whether he could have grabbed a steering wheel?

And the GOP has in fact been very well represented. The fact that they're testifying against Trump doesn't make them not Republicans.

Newark727 wrote:

A week of witnesses laying out all the different ways Trump tried to overturn the election and get an armed mob into the Capitol, and you're here fussing about whether he could have grabbed a steering wheel?

And the GOP has in fact been very well represented. The fact that they're testifying against Trump doesn't make them not Republicans.

Naturally. Any good biased sycophant would latch onto something that they could use as a distraction. Nevermind that is the committee’s job to issue a final report on the testimony they heard — and they haven’t issued their final report yet. The bulk of Trump’s sins occurred before January 6 anyway. Whatever acts of petulant desperation he may have committed in the day are just gravy.

Newark727 wrote:

And the GOP has in fact been very well represented. The fact that they're testifying against Trump doesn't make them not Republicans.

Also a hilarious take given that they were given the option. You can’t say No and then be mad that you’re not included.

I’ll wait for these individuals to make their claims against todays witness while speaking under oath. Always fun that you have people making claims while under oath being renounced by people who refuse to say anything if there’s a risk of consequences

AirWorthy99 wrote:

It looks as if the committee will regret having that testimony based on hearsay and creating all of this expectation when we found out it was false directly from the Secret service.

When that happens, its over.

Its starting to look as if its already over.

If the Secret Service says that it didn't happen, I will believe them. But it only contradicts one part of her testimony, most of which was confirmed by other evidence. Nor would it undo the devastating evidence presented in the other hearings.

When you say it's over, that is a fairly comical statement. Wishful thinking, perhaps. I've been amazed by these recurring statements from the right. They are literally proving the plot of "Don't Look Up".

AirWorthy99 wrote:

luckyone wrote:

AirWorthy99 wrote:

Well, that lasted long, the outrageous claim that Trump went for the steering wheel is falling.


https://twitter.com/PeterAlexander/stat ... 9289635841

This "star" witness entire testimony is now on shaky ground, if this wasn't true, imagine what else isn't.

Unless they testify, what you’re writing isn’t hearsay...it’s actually double hearsay. Oh the irony.

Ok, let me ask you a question, I don't like Trump's personality either, and I could easily believe a claim of something crazy he might do, but do you really believe Trump went for a wheel from the back of a limo? and was assaulting a Secret service officer?

I mean really, are you pretending to believe because you hate Trump or do you really believe it?

Its basically impossible to go for the wheel of a limo, unless he put his entire body across the car, I mean, what are the chances of that happening and no one else noticing?

Instead of asking a question and debating the physical ability to take control of a vehicle you have never been in, how about you answer for your assertion of hearsay from previous posts which have been clearly refuted, using the quote function of your post, from other members.

Don’t just ‘question’ a position, defend one. Beyond ‘show trial’

There have been many GOP and Trump aligned people that have had representation in the investigation. Any assertion to the contrary is clearly untrue and proven untrue by the list of people that have given statements etc. which were GOP and Trump aligned

Here is what CBS News is reporting:

However, a source close to the Secret Service confirmed to CBS News that Engel and the driver are prepared to testify under oath that neither man was physically attacked or assaulted by Trump and that the former president never lunged for the steering wheel of the vehicle.

The Secret Service officials do not dispute that Trump was irate or that he demanded to be taken to the Capitol, in the language that Hutchinson related to the committee.

U.S. Secret Service has provided dozens of hours of testimony to the Jan. 6 committee so far, dating back to spring 2021.

According to the source close to U.S. Secret Service, both Tony Ornato and Bobby Engel have appeared before the committee on the record and behind closed doors, at the committee's request. Those sessions were recorded, but not used in Tuesday's hearing.

AirWorthy99 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

AirWorthy99 wrote:

It looks as if the committee will regret having that testimony based on hearsay and creating all of this expectation when we found out it was false directly from the Secret service.

When that happens, its over.

Its starting to look as if its already over.

Wow, just wow. Stunning patriotism, really.

This is a show trial, no one from the GOP is represented here. And the result is pretty obvious, they put a 'star' witness on the stand that basically within hours her testimony collapsed. If this is just her 'star witness' imagine the rest

Tony Ornato is denying that he told Cassidy Hutchinson Trump grabbed the steering wheel in presidential vehicle on 1/6 or lunged at a fellow agent, a USSS official tells @joshscampbell
. CNN confirms that Ornato & Enger are prepared to testify that neither incident occurred.

https://twitter.com/GabbyOrr_/status/15 ... 0716599298

This show trial is something from the Soviet era.

As I understand it,most of the GOP opted out of this, not that They were not invited.

bennett123 wrote:

As I understand it,most of the GOP opted out of this, not that They were not invited.

It's a difference that's too subtle for many on the right to grasp. That and not understanding what "hearsay" means.

AirWorthy99 wrote:

It looks as if the committee will regret having that testimony based on hearsay and creating all of this expectation when we found out it was false directly from the Secret service.

When that happens, its over.

Its starting to look as if its already over.

Politics and integrity are uneasy bedfellows.

AirWorthy99 wrote:

It looks as if the committee will regret having that testimony based on hearsay and creating all of this expectation when we found out it was false directly from the Secret service.

When that happens, its over.

Its starting to look as if its already over.

Really? Really?

You've ignored all of the other evidence presented during the other hearings, and everything else Hutchinson had to say yesterday (along with the video and audio evidence of the Police on the day and others) and think that if the Secret service come out and say, no never happened that means this all goes away? What sane, rational person thinks that? The conclusions that can be drawn are either a) She was told something that didn't happen (in which case no fault of hers, she testified to what she was told) or b) She lied. We have no evidence of b at this time, The rest of her testimony was not hearsay, it was directly witnessed in person evidence.

"I don't care that they have weapons. They're not here to hurt me"

AirWorthy99 wrote:

This is a show trial, no one from the GOP is represented here. And the result is pretty obvious, they put a 'star' witness on the stand that basically within hours her testimony collapsed. If this is just her 'star witness' imagine the rest

Nonsense, that's a straight up GOP view point. There are GOP members on the committee. Others were invited and refused. From the outset the GOP has positioned itself to push this as as sham to try and discredit it. Their continuing support of Trump is rediculous.

Her testimony didn't collapse and see above regarding the rest of the hearing's evidence and hers.

AirWorthy99 wrote:

This show trial is something from the Soviet era.

Well Russia are continuing show trial's at the UN to this day, but this isn't a trial. Lets hope it does turn into a trial though.

Show trials usually involve Jim gym where's my jacket Jordan or cohorts. You know the ones where they refuse to let anyone actually testify and use their entire time to push their opinion and don't actually listen or accept a word of evidence from any person testifying.

AirWorthy99 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

AirWorthy99 wrote:

It looks as if the committee will regret having that testimony based on hearsay and creating all of this expectation when we found out it was false directly from the Secret service.

When that happens, its over.

Its starting to look as if its already over.

Wow, just wow. Stunning patriotism, really.

This is a show trial, no one from the GOP is represented here. And the result is pretty obvious, they put a 'star' witness on the stand that basically within hours her testimony collapsed. If this is just her 'star witness' imagine the rest

Tony Ornato is denying that he told Cassidy Hutchinson Trump grabbed the steering wheel in presidential vehicle on 1/6 or lunged at a fellow agent, a USSS official tells @joshscampbell
. CNN confirms that Ornato & Enger are prepared to testify that neither incident occurred.

https://twitter.com/GabbyOrr_/status/15 ... 0716599298

This show trial is something from the Soviet era.

The only thing here from the Soviet era is the GOP's Bolshevik-like insistence on absolute loyalty to the party and militant discipline in adhering to its line. Hence you say ridiculous things like "no one from the GOP is represented." Kinzinger, Cheney, and the parade of Republicans from Trump's own administration who are testifying don't count to the true believers because they've deviated from the party's self-serving lies.

emperortk wrote:

AirWorthy99 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

Wow, just wow. Stunning patriotism, really.

This is a show trial, no one from the GOP is represented here. And the result is pretty obvious, they put a 'star' witness on the stand that basically within hours her testimony collapsed. If this is just her 'star witness' imagine the rest

Tony Ornato is denying that he told Cassidy Hutchinson Trump grabbed the steering wheel in presidential vehicle on 1/6 or lunged at a fellow agent, a USSS official tells @joshscampbell
. CNN confirms that Ornato & Enger are prepared to testify that neither incident occurred.

https://twitter.com/GabbyOrr_/status/15 ... 0716599298

This show trial is something from the Soviet era.

The only thing here from the Soviet era is the GOP's Bolshevik-like insistence on absolute loyalty to the party and militant discipline in adhering to its line. Hence you say ridiculous things like "no one from the GOP is represented." Kinzinger, Cheney, and the parade of Republicans from Trump's own administration who are testifying don't count to the true believers because they've deviated from the party's self-serving lies.

The Soviet era show trial is a common conservative talking point. But they fail to acknowledge that a incumbent leader trying to overturn the vote and the election, in order to retain personal.power and stay in office, is about as Soviet-era as one can get. Also it's completely in line with Trump's admiration for Putin and Kim.

I have to chuckle each time I hear the Soviet line. "Don't Look Up!". That movie becomes more eerily prescient with each conservative response to the Jan 6 hearings.

Avatar2go wrote:

emperortk wrote:

AirWorthy99 wrote:

This is a show trial, no one from the GOP is represented here. And the result is pretty obvious, they put a 'star' witness on the stand that basically within hours her testimony collapsed. If this is just her 'star witness' imagine the rest


https://twitter.com/GabbyOrr_/status/15 ... 0716599298

This show trial is something from the Soviet era.

The only thing here from the Soviet era is the GOP's Bolshevik-like insistence on absolute loyalty to the party and militant discipline in adhering to its line. Hence you say ridiculous things like "no one from the GOP is represented." Kinzinger, Cheney, and the parade of Republicans from Trump's own administration who are testifying don't count to the true believers because they've deviated from the party's self-serving lies.

The Soviet era show trial is a common conservative talking point. But they fail to acknowledge that a incumbent leader trying to overturn the vote and the election, in order to retain personal.power and stay in office, is about as Soviet-era as one can get. Also it's completely in line with Trump's admiration for Putin and Kim.

I have to chuckle each time I hear the Soviet line. "Don't Look Up!". That movie becomes more eerily prescient with each conservative response to the Jan 6 hearings.

The Soviet rhetoric is also indicative of the target audience—namely older voters. The Soviet Union hasn’t existed in over 30 years, but is still the global boogeyman in the minds of an older generation—we won’t get too far into the contradictory rhetoric about how Trump and his acolytes seem to want to at the very minimum pacify the Soviet’s wannabe successor, Vladimir Putin, that hypocrisy is for another thread. Not discounting the flaws and shortcomings of the Soviets but there are other more prominent boogeymen and imminent threats.

There are people on team MAGA saying they wanted blanket pardons. If these people are innocent, why were they demanding blanket pardons?

Avatar2go wrote:

Cassidy Hutchinson testified in the hearing today, that Trump tried to commandeer the Beast to go to the Capitol with the protestors, grabbing the steering wheel. He was furious at being driven back to the White House against his will. Then she said he threw his lunch plate against the wall in the White House dining room.

Also, she testified Trump requested that armed individuals be allowed though the security checkpoints for his Jan 6 rally, to increase the crowd size, saying "they're not here to hurt me".

Ah yes, the "stable genius" in all his glory. What a pathetic excuse for an adult. I'd say he acts more like a petulant nine year old, but I don't want to be insulting......to the nine year old.

Avatar2go wrote:

emperortk wrote:

AirWorthy99 wrote:

This is a show trial, no one from the GOP is represented here. And the result is pretty obvious, they put a 'star' witness on the stand that basically within hours her testimony collapsed. If this is just her 'star witness' imagine the rest


https://twitter.com/GabbyOrr_/status/15 ... 0716599298

This show trial is something from the Soviet era.

The only thing here from the Soviet era is the GOP's Bolshevik-like insistence on absolute loyalty to the party and militant discipline in adhering to its line. Hence you say ridiculous things like "no one from the GOP is represented." Kinzinger, Cheney, and the parade of Republicans from Trump's own administration who are testifying don't count to the true believers because they've deviated from the party's self-serving lies.

The Soviet era show trial is a common conservative talking point. But they fail to acknowledge that a incumbent leader trying to overturn the vote and the election, in order to retain personal.power and stay in office, is about as Soviet-era as one can get. Also it's completely in line with Trump's admiration for Putin and Kim.

I have to chuckle each time I hear the Soviet line. "Don't Look Up!". That movie becomes more eerily prescient with each conservative response to the Jan 6 hearings.

Perhaps I was too hasty in my initial assessment by saying "the only thing."

Another grim parallel between the Great Purge of the 1930s and what's happening in today's GOP:

The most prominent old guard Bolsheviks confessed to crimes they could not have committed. No doubt this was partly due to torture and desire to protect family members from suffering a similar fate, but there has also been much written about how their roles in the show trials allowed them to demonstrate their loyalty to the Party one final time. Despite the monstrosity of Stalinism they still believed in the communist cause, and their absurd confessions proved they were willing to play along so as not to harm that cause.

Today's GOP has a similar form of self-debasement where people can demonstrate their loyalty, belief, and party membership by making demonstrably false statements about the Jan 6 committee or election fraud (or any number of things really). At this point, acknowledging any of the number of terrible things that have been done would be too damaging to the party, so there are no good alternatives.

casinterest wrote:

Interesting feedback on how Fox news does when they air real news.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/fox-news ... 6a9b15f39f

Last Thursday, Fox had 1.33 million viewers for the 2 p.m. Eastern hour before the hearing started — slightly below its second quarter average but on par for early summer, when fewer people are watching TV.

After the hearing started, Fox’s audience’s sank to 747,000 for the 3 p.m. Eastern hour and even lower, to 718,000, at 4 p.m. Fox cut away from the hearing at 5 p.m. to show its popular panel program, “The Five,” and fans immediately rewarded them: viewership shot up to 2.76 million people, Nielsen said.

The apparent lack of interest explains why the frequently Trump-friendly network stuck with its regular lineup during the committee’s only prime-time hearing, while ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN and MSNBC all showed the Washington proceedings. “The Five” has also been cable television’s most-watched show, on average, for nine months.

ADVERTISEMENT

I always cringe at people who use ratings to "prove" how popular Fox infotainment is. They don't understand that Fox is on at American military bases around the world, on in common areas of hotels, airports, hospitals, nursing homes, and truck stops. Just because it is on does not mean anyone is actually watching!

seb146 wrote:

There are people on team MAGA saying they wanted blanket pardons. If these people are innocent, why were they demanding blanket pardons?

https://www.npr.org/2022/06/23/11071928 ... dons-jan-6
https://www.alreporter.com/2022/06/24/m ... committee/
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/02/0 ... e-00004738

I am posting this for the "but that never happened" crowd. If they are asking for pardons, they knew they did something against the law.

casinterest wrote:

Unfortunately that is how Fox news junkies get hooked. They are on station or in a hospital, or a truck driver on the open road, and they get hooked on the lies. Much like people get hooked on Soaps. They start off knowing it is BS, but then they get wrapped up in the abuse and BS, and a lot of those numbers are real unfortunately.

Sadly this is what happened to my brother. He was out of work for two years and filled the time driving trucks as a day hire, since he has a CDL. Listening to conservative talk radio all day, every day, changed his outlook, to the point that we can no longer have political discussions at all. He becomes very upset, frustrated and irate.

I've often said that conservative media is a form of intellectual corrosion, in that it alters the way people think. After enough exposure, it's difficult to recover those processes, because even raising the subject elicits anger. He was always conservative but this is a new level.

There have been studies of people who believe in conspiracy theories, that show they have a predisposition that is similar to an addictive personality, such that they almost always believe in more than one. They derive a form of intellectual comfort and satisfaction from the belief, that thay won't willingly give up. I think that same tendency is what's been exploited by conservative talk shows. It basically feeds a vulnerability to addiction that the person already has.

Avatar2go wrote:

Here is what CBS News is reporting:

However, a source close to the Secret Service confirmed to CBS News that Engel and the driver are prepared to testify under oath that neither man was physically attacked or assaulted by Trump and that the former president never lunged for the steering wheel of the vehicle.

The Secret Service officials do not dispute that Trump was irate or that he demanded to be taken to the Capitol, in the language that Hutchinson related to the committee.

U.S. Secret Service has provided dozens of hours of testimony to the Jan. 6 committee so far, dating back to spring 2021.

According to the source close to U.S. Secret Service, both Tony Ornato and Bobby Engel have appeared before the committee on the record and behind closed doors, at the committee's request. Those sessions were recorded, but not used in Tuesday's hearing.

The people running these hearings are supposedly seasoned professionals. Why on earth would they run tape of Hutchison saying that she was told that Trump tried to grab the steering wheel or attacked the Secret Service people when they also have tape of Tony Ornato and Bobby Engel who supposedly will testify under oath that this did not happen? If this is the case, they have just given the Trump people the ammo they need to declare this a farce. They should have gotten to the bottom of this story before her testimony was made public. Either Ornato and Elgel will not testify to this or the comittee just made an error worthy of bush league rookie lawyers. I guess we will soon find out.

victrola wrote:

Avatar2go wrote:

Here is what CBS News is reporting:

However, a source close to the Secret Service confirmed to CBS News that Engel and the driver are prepared to testify under oath that neither man was physically attacked or assaulted by Trump and that the former president never lunged for the steering wheel of the vehicle.

The Secret Service officials do not dispute that Trump was irate or that he demanded to be taken to the Capitol, in the language that Hutchinson related to the committee.

U.S. Secret Service has provided dozens of hours of testimony to the Jan. 6 committee so far, dating back to spring 2021.

According to the source close to U.S. Secret Service, both Tony Ornato and Bobby Engel have appeared before the committee on the record and behind closed doors, at the committee's request. Those sessions were recorded, but not used in Tuesday's hearing.

The people running these hearings are supposedly seasoned professionals. Why on earth would they run tape of Hutchison saying that she was told that Trump tried to grab the steering wheel or attacked the Secret Service people when they also have tape of Tony Ornato and Bobby Engel who supposedly will testify under oath that this did not happen? If this is the case, they have just given the Trump people the ammo they need to declare this a farce. They should have gotten to the bottom of this story before her testimony was made public. Either Ornato and Elgel will not testify to this or the comittee just made an error worthy of bush league rookie lawyers. I guess we will soon find out.

It does seem to be a mistake and a misstep. We can only assume that the committee found the broad outlines of the Hutchinson testimony to be supported by the previous closed-door testimony. In that Trump did want to go to the Capital, he was irate at not being taken there, and did cuss out his security detail in the SUV. But apparently did not have the described physical altercation there.

Hutchinson testified that Ornato told her the story in the presence of Engel, and Engel did not object. So now we need to get those two on the record, as well as the driver, so as to set the record straight. If there was no altercation, but only a verbal quarrel, that needs to be put forward as part of the factual record.

An issue Ms. Hutchinson's testimony and that of others presented the other day to the 1/6 Committee is the handling of security of then Pres.Trump and others that fateful day by the Secret Service. !00's of Trump supporters of his overthrowing the election were armed with handguns, semi-automatic versions of military weapons (like those used in the TX mass shooting attack), pointed tip flag poles, and other weapons that put the President at grave risk. A President is the ultimate boss over the Secret Service but they had their overriding orders to protect him, he overruled in part their attempts to protect, even to the point of saying to Agents to shut down the metal detectors could be close to Trump at his 'rally' on the Elipsise with deadly weapons. Then there was the alleged attempts to override Secret Service agents with angry demands and behavior in the Presidential special SUV to be taken to the Capitol that day to lead the insurrection/mob terrorist attack there to override the final step to confirm the election to him. Fortunately Secret Service Agents did their job and prioritized the President's safety, got him away from after his speaking and back to the White House.

Avatar2go wrote:

It does seem to be a mistake and a misstep. We can only assume that the committee found the broad outlines of the Hutchinson testimony to be supported by the previous closed-door testimony. In that Trump did want to go to the Capital, he was irate at not being taken there, and did cuss out his security detail in the SUV. But apparently did not have the described physical altercation there.

Hutchinson testified that Ornato told her the story in the presence of Engel, and Engel did not object. So now we need to get those two on the record, as well as the driver, so as to set the record straight. If there was no altercation, but only a verbal quarrel, that needs to be put forward as part of the factual record.

Could it be those who actually witnessed the rage refused to testify openly but did testify under oath behind closed doors? There are still people who will privately sell out their former boss while publicly supporting him. Or, perhaps she did not sign a NDA, the way all the other underlings did so she can talk while they can't?

Either way, it is still worth noting that the armed insurrectionists were not there to harm their dear leader (or so he believed). We really need to keep talking about this. That there were ARMED protesters who built gallows to hang Pence and Pelosi because they upheld their Constitutional duties. We also need to hold people accountable for abandoning the oath they were sworn to uphold. To defend THE CONSTITUTION and not one man.

casinterest wrote:

Looks like their is corroboration of Hutchinson's account from within the SS itself.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/01/politics ... index.html?

"He had sort of lunged forward -- it was unclear from the conversations I had that he actually made physical contact, but he might have. I don't know," the source said. "Nobody said Trump assaulted him; they said he tried to lunge over the seat -- for what reason, nobody had any idea."
The employee said he'd heard about the incident multiple times as far back as February 2021 from other agents, including some who were part of the presidential protective detail during that time period but none of whom were involved in the incident.

Anyone else wonder why Trump is so pissed off at Hutchinson's testimony? It seems there may be more truth than most are willing to accept in the Trump Support Channels.

This version seems plausible. If Trump was upset and irate, and cussing out his security detail, he may have jumped forward in his seat to more fully assert himself, but without the intention of grabbing the wheel or assaulting anyone.

Ultimately we need to get everyone on the record, under oath. The "sources" thing tends to be destabilizing, and it distracts from the overall message of what Trump did.