Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

What does the future hold for Donald Trump? - threadbans in OP

14064074094114121189

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,041 ✭✭✭Call me Al


    Re the car incident, public opinion will all come down to who is the most credible when pushed on this in public.

    Ms Hutchinson was very credible in the way she described what she was told. She was aware that she was under oath. She has no skin in the game so to speak, when she describes what she was told, amongst the myriad of other crimes she describes taking place. What good is in it for her to lie about something crazy like this? Something she knows will be denied by the others if it isn’t true and which will raise questions marks over everything else she says? It isn’t as if all the other things she said weren't truly damning in themselves. Are they all said out of spite or something?

    On the other hand the others will be asked the same questions and they will all have to have good poker faces if they lie..

    But reasoning it out I do think it was said to her, it remains to be seen as to why it was said, and not corrected by the others present, if it wasn't actually true.

    And I think it would be foolish of the committee to lead her into making that statement, and potentially open to question her honesty under oath, if they couldn't corroborate it some other way.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13 куриный шарик


    Trump out of office 18 months, USA totally controlled by Dems, the country is a disaster getting worse, Quick lets make some **** up about Trump, push this hearsay and hope it distracts our supporters from the terrible job we are doing.

    I peer into crystal ball, Trump will win in 2024 and he will win big.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 17,291 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    I have no reason to believe that Hutchinson is lying when she says she was told the story about the incident in the car - As others have said , how and why would she invent such a crazy story?

    However , the actual story seems a bit off to me , just from a physical logistics perspective.

    As I understand it and from photos/drawings I've seen of the vehicle , it's a typical "limo" layout with two rows of seats facing each other , with one set backing on the the driver area - I also assume that the driver is insulated from the passenger area as is typical in a limo , but more so from a security point of view for the President.

    On that basis even if Trump wasn't an unfit overweight septuagenarian, I can't see how he or anyone else sitting in the back seats would be in any sort of position to be able to attempt to "grab the wheel" from the driver.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 15,115 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    So, was it hearsay when she described him throwing his lunch at the wall? FFS. The POTUS literally throwing his Big Mac at the wall because he was angry.


    While in possession of the nuclear codes. Someone a large number of people in the US want to vote for again.

    Probably the thrown food story will get him votes.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,021 ✭✭✭✭duploelabs


    The beast doesn't have a second row of seats in it. Can't link to a picture right now, but it's there to see



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,041 ✭✭✭Call me Al


    This was raised last night on CNN.

    They weren't in the standard beast. It was an SUV version of the beast.

    Post edited by Call me Al on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,235 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    Whether he grabbed the wheel or not, tbh it isn't that important.

    The real story was that Trump knew the crowd had weapons, knew they were targeting Pence, and not only failed to do anything to stop it but actually tired to make things easier for the crowd.

    All that nonsense that they were just there to talk, that Trump didn't encourage them. That has all been shown up for the rubbish it always was.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,111 ✭✭✭Christy42


    It is. Because if one large part of the story is untrue it casts doubt on the rest. It is going to be tough to actually get Trump in trouble over this as too many feel he should be above the law so they will need to be near perfect in the prosecution.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 17,291 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    I think there's a difference in the various elements of the evidence she gave and she was very explicit about things she heard/saw directly herself vs. things she was told by others.

    I'm a bit skeptical of the Car story myself , but I have no reason to not believe that she was told this story by someone else.

    Whether that other person was lying/embellishing the story is a different matter.

    Also - Him having a melt-down in the car like a toddler who didn't get ice-cream isn't the thing in yesterdays testimony that should get him in legal trouble.

    It's things like knowingly sending armed protesters to the Capitol building and refusing to lift a finger to stop them when they got there.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 15,115 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    The limo incident talks to TFG's state of mind, which would be helpful in a case around incitement. The "smoking gun" is the remove the magnetometers statement. The legal theories are the explained on nicely here https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/06/28/cassidy-hutchinson-jan-6-testimony-00042985



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,021 ✭✭✭✭duploelabs


    But two Secret Service agents who have worked in the Beast told The Washington Post that such a move from the president might have been tough, given the limo’s interior equipment — but not impossible.




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,901 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    Regardless of whether he grabbed the wheel or not, he

    1) wanted the metal detectors gone and

    2) wanted to actually go up to the Capitol with those armed people and

    3) he had no problem with them calling "hang Mike Pence"

    Elect a clown... Expect a circus



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,111 ✭✭✭Christy42


    I would also say that if there is someone who can refute it they should do so under path. I am not willing to discard this story if no one is willing to go against it outside of "unnamed sources".


    Indeed other things have been shown and they should focused on if it does turn out to be untrue. I do think it hurts though and is utterly pointless if it isn't true.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 15,115 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    Well, at this point, if Trump denies it:

    1. It's true
    2. It's worse than we think


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,683 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    They sure went from ignoring the hearings to giving it their undivided attention really quick though



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,901 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    Sure 45 said he wasn't bothered by them, and then went and posted 12 times yesterday about them!

    Elect a clown... Expect a circus



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,683 ✭✭✭✭Overheal




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,683 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    The GOP accounts definitely are pretending like it doesn't matter to them either

    And then they are getting roasted for it - by Twitter

    image.png




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,683 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Lev Parnas sentenced today for 20 months in prison for his role in the scheme to launder Russian money into the Trump campaign




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,461 ✭✭✭✭Snake Plisken


    You guys are really dumb if you believe Hutchinson's testimony. She wasn't even there she just heard the story.Hearsay is not admissable in court

    Secret service agents are willing to testify under oath it never happened.

    Peter Alexander is NBC btw so not Fox

    1000's of Glocks AR15s and knuckle dusters brought in by Trump supports which are illegal in Washington DC yet no one was caught on the day with them with all the security around the capital on that day?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,683 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Her testimony was not hearsay.


    Secret service agents are willing to testify under oath it never happened.

    According to an anonymous source who isn't in the Secret Service, hey.

    The committee has not had anyone come forward to identify themselves as willing to contradict her testimony under penalty of perjury.

    CASSIDY HUTCHINSON: When I returned to the White House, I walked upstairs towards the chief of staff's office, and I noticed Mr. Ornato lingering outside of the office. Once we had made eye contact, he quickly waved me to go into his office, which was just across the hall from mine. When I went in, he shut the door, and I noticed Bobby Engel, who was the head of Mr. Trump's security detail, sitting in a chair, just looking somewhat discombobulated and a little lost.

    I looked at Tony and he had said, did you f'ing hear what happened in the beast? I said, no, Tony, I — I just got back. What happened? Tony proceeded to tell me that when the president got in the beast, he was under the impression from Mr. Meadows that the off the record movement to the Capitol was still possible and likely to happen, but that Bobby had more information.

    So, once the president had gotten into the vehicle with Bobby, he thought that they were going up to the Capitol. And when Bobby had relayed to him we're not, we don't have the assets to do it, it's not secure, we're going back to the West Wing, the president had a very strong, a very angry response to that.

    Tony described him as being irate. The president said something to the effect of I'm the f'ing president, take me up to the Capitol now, to which Bobby responded, sir, we have to go back to the West Wing. The president reached up towards the front of the vehicle to grab at the steering wheel. Mr. Engel grabbed his arm, said, sir, you need to take your hand off the steering wheel.

    We're going back to the West Wing. We're not going to the Capitol. Mr. Trump then used his free hand to lunge towards Bobby Engel. And Mr. — when Mr. Ornato had recounted this story to me, he had motioned towards his clavicles.

    LIZ CHENEY: And was Mr. Engel in the room as Mr. Ornato told you this story?

    CASSIDY HUTCHINSON: He was.

    LIZ CHENEY: Did Mr. Engel correct or disagree with any part of this story from Mr. Ornato?

    CASSIDY HUTCHINSON: Mr. Engel did not correct or disagree with any part of the story.

    LIZ CHENEY: Did Mr. Engel or Mr. Ornato ever after that tell you that what Mr. Ornato had just said was untrue?

    CASSIDY HUTCHINSON: Neither Mr. Ornato nor Mr. Engel told me ever that it was untrue.




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,461 ✭✭✭✭Snake Plisken




  • Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 12,745 Mod ✭✭✭✭2011


    Post number #3 and your crystal ball tells you this, nothing short of amazing! I peer into my crystal ball and I predict that even more re-regs with low post counts will spout out similar bullshit and then vanish when challanged.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,449 ✭✭✭nigeldaniel


    I am wrong to think that the secret service are trained to protect the president at all costs. If so they may feel duty-bound to say nothing that might make the ex-president look bad or in any way wrong. They might even feel like fibbing and saying things to continue to protect the president. It's just my thinking that's all. I think the secret service guy is between a rock and a hard place.

    Dan.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,021 ✭✭✭✭duploelabs


    A rebuttal to your first bullshit is above, care to address that?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,683 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    LIZ CHENEY: You told us that the White House Counsel's Office was in the camp encouraging the president to tell the rioters to stop the attack and to leave the Capitol. Let's listen. [Begin videotape]

    CASSIDY HUTCHINSON: White House counsel's office wanted there to be a strong statement out to condemn the rioters. I'm confident in that. [End videotape]

    LIZ CHENEY: Now let's look at just one example of what some senior advisers to the president were urging. Ms. Hutchinson, could you look at the exhibit that we're showing on the screen now? Have you seen this note before?

    image.png

    CASSIDY HUTCHINSON: That's a note that I wrote at the direction of the chief of staff on January 6th, likely around 3:00.

    LIZ CHENEY: And it's written on a chief of staff note card, but that's your handwriting, Ms. Hutchinson?

    CASSIDY HUTCHINSON: That's my handwriting.

    LIZ CHENEY: And why did you write this note?

    CASSIDY HUTCHINSON: The chief of staff was in a meeting with Eric Hirschman and potentially Mr. Philbin, and they had rushed out of the office fairly quickly. Mark had handed me the note card with one of his pens, and sort of dictating a statement for the president to potentially put out.

    LIZ CHENEY: And — no, I'm sorry. Go ahead.

    CASSIDY HUTCHINSON: That's Ok. There are two phrases on there, one illegal and then one without proper authority. The illegal phrase was the one that Mr. Meadows had dictated to me. Mr. Herschmann had chimed in and said also put without legal authority. There should have been a slash between the two phrases. It was an — an or if the president had opted to put one of those statements out. Evidently he didn't. Later that afternoon, Mark came back from the Oval Dining Room and put the palm card on my desk with illegally crossed out, but said we didn't need to take further action on that statement.

    LIZ CHENEY: So, to your knowledge, this statement was never issued.

    CASSIDY HUTCHINSON: It was — to my knowledge, it was never issued.


    Why would she perjure herself over something so easily disproven?

    Post edited by Overheal on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,041 ✭✭✭Call me Al


    A relief then for Trump that this is the aspect of her testimony they dispute.

    Not any of the other points she flagged that they were witness to.

    He must be so relieved we hear nothing from them about how he encouraged an armed mob to attempt to take over Congress and steal an election by force, but that they disagree that he tried to strangle his secret service agent. He really is one of the good guys.

    Post edited by Call me Al on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,274 ✭✭✭BruteStock


    Cassidys testimony is by her own admission hearsay and the guy she heard it from is willing to come on to deny it but isn't allowed. This farce has hit rock bottom and everyone can see it.. It's just a TV show now, no different than Stranger Things or Quantum Leap 🤡



  • Posts: 6,559 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Except that wasn't the only thing she mentioned... In fact it's the least serious.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,683 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Cassidys testimony is by her own admission hearsay

    Can you identify when she said such thing?

    I have the entire transcript here, and 'hearsay' isn't mentioned once in yesterdays hearing. Please highlight where this alleged 'admission' is.




This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement