[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]

Radio Paradise Comments - Coaxial - Jul 5, 2022 - 6:06am
 
RP Metadata and Album Art - Steely_D - Jul 5, 2022 - 5:37am
 
Wordle - daily game - NoEnzLefttoSplit - Jul 5, 2022 - 12:08am
 
Today, I learned... - ScottFromWyoming - Jul 4, 2022 - 11:49pm
 
seriously? - oldviolin - Jul 4, 2022 - 9:03pm
 
Dialing 1-800-Manbird - oldviolin - Jul 4, 2022 - 9:00pm
 
Favorite Quotes - Manbird - Jul 4, 2022 - 8:50pm
 
Name My Band - Manbird - Jul 4, 2022 - 8:44pm
 
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •  - haresfur - Jul 4, 2022 - 7:13pm
 
Things You Thought Today - steeler - Jul 4, 2022 - 9:51am
 
Radio Paradise for Android Automotive - jens547 - Jul 4, 2022 - 7:42am
 
Poetry Forum - Antigone - Jul 4, 2022 - 7:38am
 
Porcupine Tree to tour in late 2022 - kurtster - Jul 3, 2022 - 9:37pm
 
What is the meaning of this? - KurtfromLaQuinta - Jul 3, 2022 - 5:54pm
 
• • •  What's For Dinner ? • • •  - Antigone - Jul 3, 2022 - 5:46pm
 
The Grateful Dead - Steely_D - Jul 3, 2022 - 6:30am
 
Gentle Giant - Steely_D - Jul 3, 2022 - 6:26am
 
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos - Alchemist - Jul 2, 2022 - 3:42pm
 
US Empire - R_P - Jul 2, 2022 - 2:56pm
 
Mind Control - Manbird - Jul 2, 2022 - 2:39pm
 
Tech & Science - GeneP59 - Jul 2, 2022 - 1:29pm
 
Trump - ScottFromWyoming - Jul 2, 2022 - 12:03pm
 
Living in America - Red_Dragon - Jul 2, 2022 - 8:14am
 
Counting with Pictures - ScottN - Jul 2, 2022 - 6:54am
 
Supreme Court Rulings - kurtster - Jul 1, 2022 - 10:42pm
 
Religion - Red_Dragon - Jul 1, 2022 - 8:15pm
 
Joe Biden - Bill_J - Jul 1, 2022 - 4:49pm
 
Derplahoma! - Red_Dragon - Jul 1, 2022 - 3:06pm
 
Climate Change - R_P - Jul 1, 2022 - 1:51pm
 
Ratings - ScottFromWyoming - Jul 1, 2022 - 1:10pm
 
Baseball, anyone? - ScottFromWyoming - Jul 1, 2022 - 9:24am
 
Things for which you would sell ManBird's soul - islander - Jul 1, 2022 - 8:57am
 
Lyrics that strike a chord today... - ColdMiser - Jul 1, 2022 - 8:52am
 
d'oh! or what I would've said if I'd had a half hour to t... - ScottFromWyoming - Jun 30, 2022 - 8:44pm
 
Cryptic Posts - Leave Them Guessing - oldviolin - Jun 30, 2022 - 8:30pm
 
Ukraine - R_P - Jun 30, 2022 - 8:12pm
 
Procrastinators Anonymous - oldviolin - Jun 30, 2022 - 3:36pm
 
New Song Submissions system - ScottFromWyoming - Jun 30, 2022 - 3:21pm
 
Hockey + Fantasy Hockey - black321 - Jun 30, 2022 - 12:48pm
 
The Obituary Page - kurtster - Jun 30, 2022 - 12:18pm
 
The Abortion Wars - R_P - Jun 30, 2022 - 11:31am
 
True Confessions - oldviolin - Jun 29, 2022 - 10:19pm
 
Pernicious Pious Proclivities Particularized Prodigiously - Red_Dragon - Jun 29, 2022 - 3:54pm
 
Beer - ScottFromWyoming - Jun 29, 2022 - 3:08pm
 
Education - Isabeau - Jun 29, 2022 - 2:47pm
 
Android 11 lock screen widget - jkforde - Jun 29, 2022 - 1:58pm
 
Marijuana: Baked News. - oldviolin - Jun 29, 2022 - 12:38pm
 
China - R_P - Jun 29, 2022 - 12:32pm
 
Mixtape Culture Club - KurtfromLaQuinta - Jun 29, 2022 - 11:35am
 
Breaking News - R_P - Jun 29, 2022 - 11:20am
 
Chemosabe, the further adventures of ... - kurtster - Jun 29, 2022 - 9:04am
 
Art Show - oldviolin - Jun 28, 2022 - 9:52pm
 
RightWingNutZ - Steely_D - Jun 28, 2022 - 8:47pm
 
Highly stylized photos that you've taken - KurtfromLaQuinta - Jun 28, 2022 - 2:54pm
 
Russia - miamizsun - Jun 28, 2022 - 1:00pm
 
Nuclear power - saviour or scourge? - miamizsun - Jun 28, 2022 - 11:58am
 
Fiverr Anyone? - ScottFromWyoming - Jun 28, 2022 - 11:27am
 
Love is... - Steely_D - Jun 28, 2022 - 9:55am
 
Today in History - Red_Dragon - Jun 28, 2022 - 9:38am
 
You might be getting old if...... - kurtster - Jun 28, 2022 - 7:31am
 
Fascism American-style - R_P - Jun 27, 2022 - 11:09pm
 
YouTube: Music-Videos - Steely_D - Jun 27, 2022 - 9:56pm
 
I am Thinking of: - maryte - Jun 27, 2022 - 2:14pm
 
Vinyl Only Spin List - kurtster - Jun 27, 2022 - 1:27pm
 
Guns - kcar - Jun 27, 2022 - 11:27am
 
Talk Behind Their Backs Forum - GeneP59 - Jun 27, 2022 - 10:39am
 
Economix - R_P - Jun 27, 2022 - 10:14am
 
M.A.G.A. - R_P - Jun 27, 2022 - 9:43am
 
Using Words to Frame a Political Issue - oldviolin - Jun 27, 2022 - 8:52am
 
Britain - Red_Dragon - Jun 27, 2022 - 8:40am
 
Words, acronyms, whatever, that changed meaning - Proclivities - Jun 27, 2022 - 7:43am
 
Would you drive this car for dating with ur girl? - KurtfromLaQuinta - Jun 26, 2022 - 3:55pm
 
What Did You Do Today? - KurtfromLaQuinta - Jun 26, 2022 - 3:43pm
 
Positive Thoughts and Prayer Requests - Antigone - Jun 25, 2022 - 4:48pm
 
Terrorist Watch! - Red_Dragon - Jun 25, 2022 - 2:58pm
 
Index » Radio Paradise/General » General Discussion » Trump Page: Previous  1, 2, 3, ... 1004, 1005, 1006  Next
Post to this Topic
Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar



Posted: Jun 30, 2022 - 2:21pm

 VV wrote:

Look if Pelosi supposedly dropped the ball... or others in the chain did... I'm all for holding them accountable (haven't some of them already left/resigned i.e. Capitol Chief of Police & Assistant Chief of Police) but lets be real here... the true crux of the issue is what were the actions, decisions and events leading us to a point where the National Guard would even need to be considered to be deployed and engaged. 

I'm looking for the source of the problem not the ancillary fallout caused by the problem that would not even exist if not for the problem in the first place. You Kurt, are looking for anything that would distract from that.



Donald Trump is Jesus Christ; that's his position. Donald Trump is the hill upon which he has chosen to die, he will never surrender the absurdity of his position.
VV

VV Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 30, 2022 - 1:58pm

 kurtster wrote:

Yes you did and I read it before my reply.  I have always heard the number was 20k until now.  In my reply I was just mentioning what I have seen personally.  A first hand accounting by someone who was present.  Obviously this requires further investigation as accounts have varied.  Will the committee go there ?  Hard to say. If true, it would be somewhat exculpatory and therefore undesirable towards the goal of this committee.

Look if Pelosi supposedly dropped the ball... or others in the chain did... I'm all for holding them accountable (haven't some of them already left/resigned i.e. Capitol Chief of Police & Assistant Chief of Police) but lets be real here... the true crux of the issue is what were the actions, decisions and events leading us to a point where the National Guard would even need to be considered to be deployed and engaged. 

I'm looking for the source of the problem not the ancillary fallout caused by the problem that would not even exist if not for the problem in the first place. You Kurt, are looking for anything that would distract from that.

kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 30, 2022 - 12:27pm

 Proclivities wrote:

I believe I had linked that article below.   Kurt may not have read it all - or the sources.  Odd how the alleged number was 10K and turned into 20K.
 
Yes you did and I read it before my reply.  I have always heard the number was 20k until now.  In my reply I was just mentioning what I have seen personally.  A first hand accounting by someone who was present.  Obviously this requires further investigation as accounts have varied.  Will the committee go there ?  Hard to say. If true, it would be somewhat exculpatory and therefore undesirable towards the goal of this committee.
rgio

rgio Avatar

Location: West Jersey
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 30, 2022 - 12:20pm

 VV wrote:

So in this scenario Trump is like an arsonist with a conscience who wanted to try and make sure there were enough responders around to put out the conflagration he planned on starting.

So let's just say Kurt's right, and that Trump did in some way authorize the NG.   Ignoring all of the reasons one might do that when the shit hit the fan, did Donnie say "what the hell happened to my 20,000 National Guard troops?"  

He did nothing.

There were no troops.  There was no provision of support.  But to people like Kurt who want to focus on all of the procedural failures instead of the most obvious (Trump doesn't lie about the election and tells them to go home at the first sight of violence), this sort of bullshit provides just enough "whataboutism" cover to ignore addressing the real issues.

The difference between Trump and the arsonist, is that a great many arsonists set the blaze so they can participate in putting out the fire.  Donnie wanted to add underbrush and accelerants.  

Proclivities

Proclivities Avatar

Location: Paris of the Piedmont
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 30, 2022 - 12:06pm

 kcar wrote:

You might want read this, Kurt:


https://www.politifact.com/fac...

...


I believe I had linked that article below.  
Kurt may not have read it all - or the sources.  Odd how the alleged number was 10K and turned into 20K.


VV

VV Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 30, 2022 - 11:39am

 kurtster wrote:

The night before last I saw Kash Patel state on live TV that he was present at a meeting with Trump for an unrelated matter with his boss Gen Miller, as noted in your link and that Trump did in fact authorize 20,000 NG for the event.  That authorization went to the DOD.  Patel has already testified to the committee behind closed doors.  As have the Secret Service agents we are presently talking about.  Hmmm, eh ?

And just because there is no evidence (so far) doesn't mean it did not happen.  Evidently the committee is ignoring the security failures as part of their investigation is my understanding and that Pelosi (and others) are refusing to supply communication records between herself and the security team for the House relating to activities on and around January 6.

So in this scenario Trump is like an arsonist with a conscience who wanted to try and make sure there were enough responders around to put out the conflagration he planned on starting.

Your statement is highly illuminating in that I guess not having evidence (so far) of the election being stolen from Trump doesn't mean that didn't happen either huh? 

kcar

kcar Avatar



Posted: Jun 30, 2022 - 11:37am

You might want read this, Kurt:


https://www.politifact.com/fac...

No evidence Pelosi ‘rejected’ Trump’s authorization for ‘20,000 National Guard’ before Jan. 6 attack

IF YOUR TIME IS SHORT

  • There is no record of former President Donald Trump officially authorizing 20,000 National Guard troops for the U.S. Capitol ahead of the Jan. 6, 2021, attack.
  • There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an authorization, and experts said she doesn’t have the authority to do so in the first place.
  • A Vanity Fair report said Trump made a passing remark to his acting defense secretary about potentially needing 10,000 National Guard troops, not 20,000. But there’s no evidence the comment was treated as a formal authorization.
See the sources for this fact-check;
https://www.politifact.com/fac...

kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 30, 2022 - 10:05am

 Proclivities wrote:
 kurtster wrote:

... Several days before the "insurrection" Trump formally authorized 20,000 National Guard troops to be deployed for security purposes for the event. Since Trump was the mastermind and organizer of this insurrection, why would he authorize 20,000 presumably armed troops to prevent his insurrection from happening ? It doesn't pass the sniff test.

There is no evidence that President Trump authorized any National Guard troops prior to January 6 - it's a myth apparently fabricated by Fox News.  Do you remember seeing any National Guard there?
 
The night before last I saw Kash Patel state on live TV that he was present at a meeting with Trump for an unrelated matter with his boss Gen Miller, as noted in your link and that Trump did in fact authorize 20,000 NG for the event.  That authorization went to the DOD.  Patel has already testified to the committee behind closed doors.  As have the Secret Service agents we are presently talking about.  Hmmm, eh ?

And just because there is no evidence (so far) doesn't mean it did not happen.  Evidently the committee is ignoring the security failures as part of their investigation is my understanding and that Pelosi (and others) are refusing to supply communication records between herself and the security team for the House relating to activities on and around January 6.
kcar

kcar Avatar



Posted: Jun 30, 2022 - 9:01am

 steeler wrote:

Not sure why you are repeating much of this in response to my post. I do not see it as  inconsistent with what I stated.




I meant no disrespect towards you. But your post, while quite informative, did not touch on the human fallibility of eyewitness testimony. People see, interpret and remember things differently from each other.

The police deal with this all the time when taking eyewitness statements. Akira Kurosawa made a classic film based on this phenomenon. IIRC the Secret Service members were all over the place when recounting what they saw during the JFK assassination. 

Again, all three staffers were stressed. That affects memory. We went through this with Christine Blasey Ford. The three staffers are not f*cking video cameras nor are they AFAIK trained in remembering discussions and events. 

Also, The meeting between the three staffers took place quite a while ago; memories can change over time.

In short, there were bound to be inconsistencies and differences in the memories of the three staffers. Any good trial lawyer would emphasize in court that these are natural occurrences.

If Trump supporters want to fixate on whether Trump lunged/grabbed, though, they've lost the discussion.


VV

VV Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 30, 2022 - 6:20am

 Red_Dragon wrote:

...damn right!


person, woman, man, camera, TV.... nailed it!

ScottN

ScottN Avatar

Location: Half inch above the K/T boundary
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 30, 2022 - 6:20am

 Red_Dragon wrote: 
The other half want to go directly to a hanging.
VV

VV Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 30, 2022 - 6:19am

What is finally happening is that all of the bat-shit crazy ideas and actions that Trump took or his closest supporters initiated on his behalf are finally being put into a context to confirm that Trump knew he lost the election but choose to rip America apart by propagating an unfounded dangerous lie.  We are reminded of the extent of Trump flaunting his blatant disregard for the Constitution and leaning in on only one mission: to remain in power at-all-costs, with no-holds-barred and f*ck everyone and everything that stands in his way. 

We finally get to see that all these attempts to keep Trump in power weren't these wild one-off ideas but were part of a doomed, illegal, coordinated, plan of attack that fell by the wayside one by one until his final hurrah to try and incite an insurrection to prevent Biden's certification.
 
Should Trump go to jail?  ...absolutely!.. Will he?... never! An therein lies the real problem because if Trump can walk away from the sh*t pile he created then even having a special panel expose all of this means nothing and doesn't serve as much of a deterrent for another kook to come along who thinks they can improve on Trump's playbook.


Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar



Posted: Jun 30, 2022 - 6:15am

About half say Trump should be charged for 1/6: AP-NORC poll
rgio

rgio Avatar

Location: West Jersey
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 30, 2022 - 5:40am

 Proclivities wrote:

There is no evidence that President Trump authorized any National Guard troops - it's a myth apparently fabricated by Fox News.  Do you remember seeing any National Guard there?


Instead of questioning why he did nothing for hours, the true believers blame Pelosi, Schumer, and those who truly hate America.   It's amazing how logic and common sense can be neutralized by 2 hours of prime time.

Proclivities

Proclivities Avatar

Location: Paris of the Piedmont
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 30, 2022 - 5:08am

 kurtster wrote:

... Several days before the "insurrection" Trump formally authorized 20,000 National Guard troops to be deployed for security purposes for the event. Since Trump was the mastermind and organizer of this insurrection, why would he authorize 20,000 presumably armed troops to prevent his insurrection from happening ? It doesn't pass the sniff test.

There is no evidence that President Trump authorized any National Guard troops prior to January 6 - it's a myth apparently fabricated by Fox News.  Do you remember seeing any National Guard there?
kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Jun 30, 2022 - 1:24am

 steeler wrote:
 kurtster wrote:

Anyway, I'm waiting for Steeler to pop in and opine.

A few points: That some of Cassidy Hutchinson’s testimony was hearsay is of little or no moment.

A) Because this is not a court proceeding, the rules of evidence do not apply. Even in court, there are exceptions to the inadmissibility of hearsay.

.
That Hutchinson’s sworn testimony regarding Trump grabbing the steering wheel and lunging at a Secret Service agent may be contradicted by Secret Service agents could be of moment. As a threshold matter, to be of moment, those contradicting her testimony would have to do so under oath. It could be damaging because this testimony of hers has been treated as a bombshell. It was high drama. Curious to me is why the committee would have solicited this specific testimony if it had any notion that it might be contradicted by Engel and Ornato. From a legal standpoint, it was only necessary to establish that Trump demanded to be taken to the Capitol and was angry when he was unable to do so because of security assessments of the Secret Service. No one is disputing that. The rest was high drama, but its significance really was in establishing that Trump was/is a lunatic. It may prove to be a step too far — and, really, unnecessary. I think of when Chris Darden, part of the prosecution team, had OJ try on the gloves. If the gloves had fit, it would have been of limited evidentiary value. That they did not fit was a disaster. Darden was trying for a theatrical moment in front of the jury. It backfired. You never want to ask a question on cross examination if you do not know the answer.

B) This is not as damaging as that, but it could hurt in the court of public opinion and it certainly opened the door for Trump supporters and others to attack her and her testimony, On the one hand, it was the specifics Hutchinson offered that were presented in what appeared to be a calm, confident manner that bolstered her credibility. A contradiction on these high-drama specifics concomitantly could detract from that credibility. My view, though, is that her overall credibility is such that it would take more than this contradiction — if it does occur —  to render her an unreliable, untrustworthy witness.

.
Based just on the testimony she gave at the televised hearing, she came across as a great witness. Whether Trump grabbed the wheel and physically touched a Secret Service agent is more of a sideshow. As stated, what is of legal importance is that Trump demanded to go to the Capitol to join the mob and was angry that he was prevented from doing so. My understanding is that neither Engel or Ornato dispute that. I also am curious as to whether Ornato will deny that he informed Hutchinson of that, in the presence of Engel. She had to have been informed by someone, so I doubt she will be contradicted on that.
.
That hearing was incredibly damning for Trump. I do not think anything will change that.
 
Thanks.

A)  While not a court proceeding, they are having people physically arrested for what the committee determines to be criminal activity.  Navarro being the latest.  He is formally and legally challenging his subpoena and otherwise cooperating will all law enforcement to the best of my knowledge.

B)  I agree.  This committee already has two strikes against it with Trump supporters. 1) It is completely composed of members who agree that Trump is guilty before they started and that they are just looking for confirmation of their well established bias. 2)  There is no rebuttal or cross examination of witnesses. Which with this committee is impossible because they all have the same POV.  "Witnesses" are just trotted out and present their story and it is taken as gospel.  Plays well to the base at least.

Moving on to the most recent development Trump's WH counsel Cipollone being subpoenaed.  This is being portrayed as an act of desperation by the committee.  As I understand things just as his attorney, the matter of the attorney / client privilege comes into play.  Is not that inviolate ?  And then there is clearly the matter of legitimate Executive Privilege involved as well.  As I understand that, it prevents Cipollone for even showing up without actual permission from Trump.  What is your take on this latest development ?
Lastly, to anyone ...

Several days before the "insurrection" Trump formally authorized 20,000 National Guard troops to be deployed for security purposes for the event.  Since Trump was the mastermind and organizer of this insurrection, why would he authorize 20,000 presumably armed troops to prevent his insurrection from happening ?  It doesn't pass the sniff test.

steeler

steeler Avatar

Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth


Posted: Jun 29, 2022 - 10:35pm

 kcar wrote:


As I stated in a previous post, . . .

Not sure why you are repeating much of this in response to my post. I do not see it as  inconsistent with what I stated.



kcar

kcar Avatar



Posted: Jun 29, 2022 - 9:19pm

 steeler wrote:

A few points:



As I stated in a previous post, Hutchinson was recounting Ornato's recounting of Engel's ordeal with Trump in the vehicle. 

Jan. 6 was a very stressful day for all three staffers. It's quite possible that Ornato made mistakes when recounting what Engels said and that Hutchinson made mistakes when recalling Ornato's statement and gestures. Engel was apparently so stressed that he couldn't talk to Hutchinson. That meeting sounds like it had a lot of potential for a "broken telephone" moment.

The question about lunging and assaulting are not terribly relevant. There are no reports that Engel and Ornato disagree with the major point of Hutchinson's relay of Ornato's recounting: that Trump wanted and demanded to join the protesters at the Capitol. 

Trump knew the protesters were armed and dangerous. He knew they would try to break into the Capitol and disrupt the vote. He very likely knew that Pence was in serious physical danger. He still wanted to go.

From The Guardian: 

https://amp.theguardian.com/us...

Carol Leonnig of the Washington Post, author of two books on the Trump administration and a history of the Secret Service, Zero Fail, said: “Sources tell me agents dispute that Donald Trump assaulted any agent or tried to grab the steering wheel on Jan 6. They agree Trump was furious about not being able to go to Capitol with his supporters. They offer to testify under oath.”

Earlier this month, Politico reported that Engel had given private testimony to the January 6 committee.



Hutchinson likely knew that Engel and Ornato would testify; she might have known before her public appearance that Engel already had. It's highly doubtful she would lie about Trump lunging when she knew that both men would dispute any lie she told.

The Guardian also reports in the above-linked piece that Hutchinson would face felony charges if she were caught lying in her testimony. Another great reason to tell the truth.

steeler

steeler Avatar

Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth


Posted: Jun 29, 2022 - 6:19pm

 kurtster wrote:

Anyway, I'm waiting for Steeler to pop in and opine.

A few points:

That some of Cassidy Hutchinson’s testimony was hearsay is of little or no moment. Because this is not a court proceeding, the rules of evidence do not apply. Even in court, there are exceptions to the inadmissibility of hearsay.

That Hutchinson’s sworn testimony regarding Trump grabbing the steering wheel and lunging at a
Secret Service agent may be contradicted by Secret Service agents could be of moment. As a threshold matter, to be of moment, those contradicting her testimony would have to do so under oath. It could be damaging because this testimony of hers has been treated as a bombshell. It was high drama.

Curious to me is why the committee would have solicited this specific testimony if it had any notion that it might be contradicted by Engel and Ornato. From a legal standpoint, it was only necessary to establish that Trump demanded to be taken to the Capitol and was angry when he was unable to do so because of security assessments of the Secret Service. No one is disputing that. The rest was high drama, but its significance really was in establishing that Trump was/is a lunatic. It may prove to be a step too far — and, really, unnecessary.

I think of when Chris Darden, part of the prosecution team, had OJ try on the gloves. If the gloves had fit, it would have been of limited evidentiary value. That they did not fit was a disaster. Darden was trying for a theatrical moment in front of the jury. It backfired. You never want to ask a question on cross examination if you do not know the answer. This is not as damaging as that, but it could hurt in the court of public opinion and it certainly opened the door for Trump supporters and others to attack her and her testimony, On the one hand, it was the specifics Hutchinson offered that were presented in what appeared to be a calm, confident manner that bolstered her credibility. A contradiction on these high-drama specifics concomitantly could detract from that credibility.

My view, though, is that her overall credibility is such that it would take more than this contradiction — if it does occur —  to render her an unreliable, untrustworthy witness. Based just on the testimony she gave at the televised hearing, she came across as a great witness. Whether Trump grabbed the wheel and physically touched a Secret Service agent is more of a sideshow. As stated, what is of legal importance is that Trump demanded to go to the Capitol to join the mob and was angry that he was prevented from doing so. My understanding is that neither Engel or Ornato dispute that. I also am curious as to whether Ornato will deny that he informed Hutchinson of that, in the presence of Engel. She had to have been informed by someone, so I doubt she will be contradicted on that.

That hearing was incredibly damning for Trump. I do not think anything will change that.


Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar



Posted: Jun 29, 2022 - 4:13pm

Page: Previous  1, 2, 3, ... 1004, 1005, 1006  Next