g man

"The handwritten note that Cassidy Hutchinson testified was written by her was in fact written by Eric Herschmann on January 6, 2021," a spokesperson for Herschmann told ABC News Tuesday evening. Somebody's lying, looks like it is Hutchison. https://abcnews.go.com/US/trump-white-house-attorney-disputes-cassidy-hutchinsons-testimony/story?id=85898838

https://abcnews.go.com/US/trump-white-house-attorney-disputes-cassidy-hutchinsons-testimony/story?id=85898838

You seem somewhat confused and stymied, I can't help you, sorry.

Be that as it may, as long as you believe it you are likely alone but it does not change that fact that Cassidy Hutchison is lying and its proven. This is a disaster for the dems J6 production. I am not surprised at all, this is typical.

Yes, for sure she can say anything under oath as long as she believes it to be true. The problem starts in a court of law, if it happens at, where all her hearsay testimony would require corroboration or it will get tossed at discovery. How can this J6 committee be taken seriously when they use this dubious hearsay testimony. They have nothing and it's pretty obvious.

I have strong hunch that this women is in legal jeopardy now, in way over her head and very soon she will be outed and find herself under felony indictment and trying to post bond. She's lying, obviously. Trump White House attorney disputes Cassidy Hutchinson's testimony about handwritten note "The handwritten note that Cassidy Hutchinson testified was written by her was in fact written by Eric Herschmann on January 6, 2021," a spokesperson for Herschmann told ABC News Tuesday evening. "All sources with direct knowledge and law enforcement have and will confirm that it was written by Mr. Herschmann," the spokesperson said”. https://abcnews.go.com/US/trump-white-house-attorney-disputes-cassidy-hutchinsons-testimony/story?id=85898838 https://legalinsurrection.com/2022/06/trump-wh-attorney-shoots-down-hutchinsons-testimony-over-handwritten-note/

Oh stop please.

I believe she is, giving unsubstantiated hearsay evidence in a supposed hearing into the events surrounding the assault on the democracy of the US. The J6 gang need to brush up some in their presentation of evidence and to understand the implications of hearsay testimony. Amateurs!

So what if Trump is angry, it means nothing. The agents will testify and will show Hutchison's hearsay testimony is bogus. But this is not a court of law with normal rules of evidentiary, but it shows poor judgement by J6 to try tainting the issues with hearsay.

Why would ANYONE permit hearsay evidence from a questionable witness if the secret service involved in this "assault on the agents" could have been subpoenaed to give proper 1st hand evidence and account of the alleged incident in the Beast or Suburban and take all the unknowns out of the equation. This is telling and impactful on the committee's waning credibility IMO. J6 is obviously in trouble with their evidence on this issue and seem to be grasping now.

I watched some of Hutchison's sworn testimony, and the hearsay portions. Reminded me of Amber Heard. Irregardless, the hearsay testimony is or will be officially debunked. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/secret-service-is-reportedly-prepared-to-testify-trump-didnt-try-to-commandeer-limo-on-jan-6-despite-hutchinson-account/ar-AAYYpio

The J6 Her testimony is an act of desperation. Cassidy Hutchinson testified that “she was told” that as then-President Donald Trump was being driven back to the White House after the Jan. 6 rally that he demanded to be taken to the Capitol and tried to grab the steering wheel from a Secret Service agent. Now, there were several problems with this story, as we noted, including that she didn’t see any of this herself; this is what she supposedly heard from an agent. So basically, she was repeating gossip, even if you assume she was telling the truth. But it was hearsay, and it was odd that they were having her testify to it and not the SS agents. I know why, because “Sources close to the Secret Service and one of the individuals named by Cassidy Hutchinson told NBC News that the head of Trump's security detail and the vehicle's driver were prepared to dispute that account under oath”. Interestingly, notice how what the Committee says differs from what Hutchinson said in her hearsay testimony. She said the agent said this happened in The Beast. Now they’re claiming Trump was in a Surburban. So, which is it? Whoops. Looks like their stories are not straight, they don't jive, and that tends to blow apart the rest of the story. You don't let Cassidy Hutchinson testify if you're winning. Democrats are screwed -- and they know it.

I wouldn't either, it will be debunked soon, or has already.

Probably having a good laugh as being the legal scholar he is MG knows he can't run with Hutchison's hearsay evidence in a real criminal trial as it would need to be corroborated by the source(s) and likely it would be trashed on cross.

. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/jan-6-panel-enough-evidence-refer-trump-criminal-charges-cheney-says-rcna23778 Jan. 6 panel has enough evidence to refer Trump for criminal charges, Cheney says “It’s absolutely clear that what President Trump was doing — what a number of people around him were doing — that they knew it was unlawful. They did it anyway,” said the vice chair of the committee. The New York Times reported that the committee has concluded that it has enough evidence to make a criminal referral but that its leaders were divided over whether to do so. ( this is nonsense and so telling) "I think what we have seen is a massive and well-organized and well-planned effort that used multiple tools to try to overturn an election," Cheney said. The committee has "got a tremendous amount of testimony and documents that I think very, very clearly demonstrate the extent of the planning and the organization and the objective. Anybody reading this forum and in the know of the evidence of Trumps involvement, could they please indicate what evidence, showing what crimes Trump committed and has been presented during the scripted broadcast. I see none and if there was why state that "but that its leaders were divided over whether to do so". I know instinctively if there is the slightest chance of lambasting Trump with anything including criminal charges they would have done so already, And this committee is broadcasting a made for TV infomercial for the dem party and have zero authority to charge anyone with any crime anywhere. This is a farce and anyone with something between the ears can see this. Otherwise please educate me and show me the evidence of any crime by anyone that this sham has produced.

No need to attack me personally or my views or judge me, please refrain from doing so or risk being reported.

They'll be lucky to make it to the war zone.

China and India are buying Russin oil at a substantial discount, Europe and US are paying full rip and now mired in a pre-recessionary economy. NATO has become a social-welfare organization with nothing larger than a battalion to oppose Russia. The French Army has about a week’s worth of ammunition. The Germans barely have 100 operational tanks. And we have nothing to deploy. All of our influencers and opinion-makers and politicians, and all our high-tech weapons can’t dislodge a second-rate power like Russia. It's a total waste. US contributes more UA aid than all of Europe combined, and so many people in US know not where UA is on a map. Yesterday, another $.450B aid pkg announced by Biden. Remember the carry-on movie series: Carry on Biden.

And now look at UA, how about Mariupol, where is it now, on the moon perhaps? Open up your eyes, this war is causing world wide chaos, inflationary pressures, food shortages. Check back when US congress voted to suspend weapon aid to azov back, when 2014 perhaps. U got nothing, it's in everyone's interest to end this war now.

No further deliveries should be made to Ukraine of military equipment which could threaten Russian naval forces in the Black Sea. Nor should any deliveries be made to Ukraine of weapons that could seriously threaten targets within Russia itself. A continuing war with Russia or a possible expansion of the current war is not in the interests of the United States, nor of the people of Ukraine or the people of Russia.

Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, who has recently urged Ukraine to accept an agreement to cede territory in exchange for peace. His reason is apparently a desire to avoid an alliance between Russia and China, a reason similar to that for his earlier advice to President Nixon to open relationships with China, so as to discourage China from having a close relationship with the Soviet Union. If you recall that Trump used his alliance with Russia as a tactic to form a strong alliance to deal with the bigger threat posed by China. Putin and Trump running rough-shod on Xi could yield a benefit to the west. The United States did not tolerate any Soviet missiles in Cuba in 1962, yet the United States now expects Russia to accept Ukraine as a possible additional NATO country on Russia’s border, only a short distance from Moscow.

The world was a safer place until January 2021. But now, on Biden's watch; UA is on fire now and getting wrecked, Taiwan is next, America is a dumpster fire, all thanks to--who,,,Biden, thats who. Refresh your mind back to Biden's comments in 2019 https://www.foxnews.com/politics/russian-invasion-biden-2019-imagine-ukraine-trump Biden in 2019: Imagine What Could Happen to Ukraine If Trump Wins Re-Election copy.mp4

Why must the west do anything, just because NATO says so? Let UA fight their own battles.

Not long if Trump was involved. Biden and his admin have shown nothing but a propensity to screw everything up. Trump's the only one with stones to manage Xi and others.

Yeah sure, whatever you like.