1/6 Fedsurrection?

[zh cohen]

All this tells me is that you are willing to believe anything bad said about Trump, because he is nuts.

Do you actually believe that when interviewing first hand witnesses to the events, they didn't ask them to describe the events they saw?

[biobook]

All this tells me is that you are willing to believe anything bad said about Trump, because he is nuts.

Do you actually believe that when interviewing first hand witnesses to the events, they didn't ask them to describe the events they saw?

If I ask you what you saw yesterday, will you be able to describe every minute of those 24 hours?  There was a lot going on, and these witnesses - usually with their lawyers sitting next to them - just answer the specific questions they are asked.  This is especially true for those who are still in Trump's camp.  So, yes, I actually believe that it's possible that Ornato didn't mention this 5 minute conversation with CH or the 5 min ride in the limo.

But the discussion wasn't about not-normal people like me or my stupidity, but rather about CH's credibility.

Is everyone on the J6 committee so stupid that they believed Cassidy Hutchinson's testimony? Or do they just think that their target audience is that stupid?

No normal person believes this

[biobook]

The reason the scheduled the surprise hearing was because of her "bombshell" new revelations.

When those turn out to be obviously false, and the person she claims told her about it denies ever saying such a thing, that says something about her credibility and, more importantly, the credibility of those who believed and promoted her claims

Her description is certainly not "obviously false."  Ornato says (though not under oath) that Trump didn't grab the wheel.  But that's not what she said.  She said that Ornato told her that Trump "reached up towards the front of the vehicle to grab at the steering wheel." Not that he necessarily actually grabbed it.  But I'm sure Ornato will return to the committee to clarify this.

More important: Why do you focus on the description of Trump's behavior when angry?  This was a minor part of the 2 hour testimony.  More relevant:

Trump has been claiming that the rally was peaceful but CH’s testimony shows that he was repeatedly made aware of the potential for violence.  He knew about the arms carried by those who arrived at the rally.  When he saw that the Ellipse was emptier than he liked, he told the secret service to remove the metal detectors so that more of those armed people could enter the Ellipse and march together to the Capitol.  There were multiple signs that there was the potential for this to end in violence.

More details were given of Trump’s refusal to take any steps to stop the riot for several hours.

Mark Meadows and Rudy Giuliani had requested a presidential pardon for activities related to the Jan 6 attack on the Capitol.  So they, at least, believe they did something wrong.

Anonymized letters were shown that suggest some Trump-supporter is tampering with witnesses.

[aygart]

Her description is certainly not "obviously false."  Ornato says (though not under oath) that Trump didn't grab the wheel.  But that's not what she said.  She said that Ornato told her that Trump "reached up towards the front of the vehicle to grab at the steering wheel." Not that he necessarily actually grabbed it.  But I'm sure Ornato will return to the committee to clarify this.

sir, you need to take your hand off the steering wheel.

[biobook]

Ornato is now saying the president didn't grab the steering wheel.   CH thinks Ornato said the president reached towards the steering wheel.  I'm sure everyone will appreciate Ornato returning to Congress to clarify this apparent discrepancy.

[yelped]

Whatever, it's a nice story, whether true or not, but I think everyone could agree that Trump acted liked a petulant child and is not fit to be President, no matter how we liked some of his policies.

[aygart]

Ornato is now saying the president didn't grab the steering wheel.   CH thinks Ornato said the president reached towards the steering wheel.  I'm sure everyone will appreciate Ornato returning to Congress to clarify this apparent discrepancy.

You can't take something off something it isn't on

[R.A.T.]

If you watched the hearings this episode was brought up to counter the narrative going around that the president was not serious about going to the capital. This episode disproves that 100%. That the president acted like a child in the beast is a sideshow.

Since we want to get the facts straight did this happen in the limo (beast) or the SUV?

The hearings so far are showing there was a coordinated effort by the white house and the president to overthrow the election.

[Yehuda57]

We all knew this. It was reported at the time, and I don't think anyone denied it. IIRC Trump said from the podium that he was going to march along with everyone to the Capitol.

The reason the scheduled the surprise hearing was because of her "bombshell" new revelations.

When those turn out to be obviously false, and the person she claims told her about it denies ever saying such a thing, that says something about her credibility and, more importantly, the credibility of those who believed and promoted her claims

I don't think we knew the extent. I know a couple of people who either went to DC to protest on 1/6 or were about to go, and none of them were going for any kind of insurrection or to storm the Capitol. I also know full well how things can get twisted and exaggerated to fit a narrative. I could have believed a similar story about Trump - he was pro the protest, wanted to march to the Capitol, was a "petulant child", etc. But he didn't realize just how bad things would or could get.

But these hearings are making the case that Trump knew a lot more not just about how violent it was going to get, but how much he wanted that violence. Who considers what a "bombshell" is beside the point. The overall picture getting painted, even if you discard certain parts, is far uglier than most of Trump's supporters would have guessed. But instead of reflecting on the fact that the former president was in all likelihood quite happy to have the vice president attacked (among other things), we're going to analyze one aspect of one witness's testimony to death.

[neveryou]

There was no beast, she lied, in the video you see him leaving the rally in the SUV

[zh cohen]

The overall picture getting painted, even if you discard certain parts

When the committee is repeatedly caught falsifying evidence and promoting obvious lies, I think you have to do more than just discard "certain parts."

[Yehuda57]

When the committee is repeatedly caught falsifying evidence and promoting obvious lies, I think you have to do more than just discard "certain parts."

Like I said, I haven't followed closely. Care to offer the cliff notes on what "obvious lies" have been promoted and what evidence has been falsified?

[R.A.T.]

There was no beast, she lied, in the video you see him leaving the rally in the SUV

She testified to what she was told and not what actually happened as she was not present for the episode. Do you understand the difference or even care?

Does anyone even care that she testified the president wanted to let people with guns into the rally? Wouldn’t this testimony be more damaging?

[R.A.T.]

But these hearings are making the case that Trump knew a lot more not just about how violent it was going to get, but how much he wanted that violence. Who considers what a "bombshell" is beside the point. The overall picture getting painted, even if you discard certain parts, is far uglier than most of Trump's supporters would have guessed. But instead of reflecting on the fact that the former president was in all likelihood quite happy to have the vice president attacked (among other things), we're going to analyze one aspect of one witness's testimony to death.

This is why it was a mistake for most of the republicans to boycott the committee. They all realize now what a blunder that was.

The republican that will benefit from this is DeSantis. Maybe this time around we will have two real candidates?

[zh cohen]

Does anyone even care that she testified the president wanted to let people with guns into the rally? Wouldn’t this testimony be more damaging?

Is there any video of these people she is alleging to have been openly carrying rifles?

Were any of these people arrested or charged with carrying a gun publicly? Carrying a rifle or shotgun in public is illegal in DC.

[zh cohen]

This is why it was a mistake for most of the republicans to boycott the committee. They all realize now what a blunder that was.

They didn't boycott the committee, they were removed from the committee.

Do you actually believe that if they had put the Pelosi approved members on the committee, they would have been allowed to do anything to counter the narrative?

[zh cohen]

Like I said, I haven't followed closely.

Nor have I.

Care to offer the cliff notes on what "obvious lies" have been promoted and what evidence has been falsified?

Do you mean aside for yesterday's testimony (especially the aspect which led the news yesterday and which you want us to stop "analyzing to death")?

Here is the first example that comes to mind - https://thefederalist.com/2021/12/15/during-january-6-hearing-schiff-doctored-text-messages-between-mark-meadows-and-rep-jim-jordan/

[zh cohen]

She testified to what she was told and not what actually happened as she was not present for the episode. Do you understand the difference or even care?

So when someone says they heard a story which is obviously not true, do you:
A - Have her go on national Tv and tell it again
Or
B - Try to verify if any of the details are true by asking others who would know.

The committee chose A, and it is clear that they did so because they knew that most people won't be paying attention, and will just see the headlines.

[imayid2]

Mark Meadows and Rudy Giuliani had requested a presidential pardon for activities related to the Jan 6 attack on the Capitol.  So they, at least, believe they did something wrong.

A very legitimate concern for the potential of trumped up charges is a valid reason to preemptively request a pardon. Far cry from an admission of guilt.

[R.A.T.]

They didn't boycott the committee, they were removed from the committee.

This isn’t correct. IIRC Pelosi rejected two members and McCarthy’s response was to pull all members. She also conceded to some of McCarthy’s demands.

Is there any video of these people she is alleging to have been openly carrying rifles?

Were any of these people arrested or charged with carrying a gun publicly? Carrying a rifle or shotgun in public is illegal in DC.

Again you are missing the point.

She testified the president wanted the metal detectors removed after he was told some individuals were armed. His response was they are not here to harm me. This is extremely damaging testimony if true. Has anyone that was present (besides the president) disputed this testimony?