IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 29th June 2022, 05:44 PM   #41
I Am The Scum
Illuminator
 
I Am The Scum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,755
In a now-deleted tweet, Rudy Giuliani completely told on himself in an attempt to deny that he ever sought a pardon.

Quote:
Contrary to her false testimony she was never present when I asked for a pardon.

Actually, I told the President I did not want or need one.
I Am The Scum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th June 2022, 06:19 PM   #42
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 56,005
Originally Posted by I Am The Scum View Post
In a now-deleted tweet, Rudy Giuliani completely told on himself in an attempt to deny that he ever sought a pardon.
And this guy was once a great district attorney......
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th June 2022, 06:20 PM   #43
stanfr
Master Poster
 
stanfr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,101
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Not quite right. A person testifying to what someone told them is not always hearsay.

"Trump said Mike Pence deserved to be hung!"

This IS hearsay if an attempt was made to use this is evidence against The Fat Orange Turd, but it is NOT hearsay if it were to be used against Mark Meadows.

There are also other hearsay exceptions in Section 803 of the Federal Rules of Evidence that may apply to some of what Ms Hutchinson said
Present Sense Impression.
A statement describing or explaining an event or condition, made while or immediately after the declarant perceived it.

Excited Utterance.

A statement relating to a startling event or condition, made while the declarant was under the stress of excitement that it caused.

Recorded Recollection. A record that:
- is on a matter the witness once knew about but now cannot recall well enough to testify fully and accurately;
- was made or adopted by the witness when the matter was fresh in the witness’s memory; and
- accurately reflects the witness’s knowledge.

Records of a Regularly Conducted Activity. A record of an act, event, condition, opinion if:
- the record was made at or near the time by — or from information transmitted by — someone with knowledge;
- the record was kept in the course of a regularly conducted activity of a business, organization, occupation, or calling, whether or not for profit;
- making the record was a regular practice of that activity.

Reputation Concerning Character.

A reputation among a person’s associates or in the community concerning the person’s character.
No, it is quite right. I am aware of the exceptions and usage, as a former criminal defense attorney.
My post was in reference to a potential criminal case against TRUMP. The example I gave was HEARSAY against T. Period. (aside from the fact that that statement was probative of nothing, since the word "thinks" was used) No exceptions are applicable. It would not make it past any judge. Some of there exceptions might apply to other statements, but not that one, and from what I heard there was quite a bit of additional hearsay.
stanfr is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th June 2022, 06:47 PM   #44
Warp12
King of Kings
 
Warp12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 5,949
I don't think her testimony is earth-shattering. It sounds a bit gossipy, to me. More sizzle than steak. I think they have a lot better stuff than this, tbh.
__________________
Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more.
Warp12 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th June 2022, 07:40 PM   #45
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 21,870
Originally Posted by stanfr View Post
My post was in reference to a potential criminal case against TRUMP. The example I gave was HEARSAY against T. Period.
I accept that, but you made no mention of that in your post.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...3&postcount=23

There is potential for charges against a LOT more people than just The Fat Orange Turd - Giuliani, Eastman, Clark, Brooks, Gosar, Gaetz et al
__________________
Science supplies evidence, invites you to analyse and evaluate that evidence, and then to draw conclusions from that
Religion supplies no evidence, demands you have faith, and expects you to uncritically and automatically believe that something is true simply because "the Bible tells you so"
If you don't like my posts, opinions, or directness then put me on your ignore list!
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th June 2022, 07:41 PM   #46
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 21,870
Originally Posted by Warp12 View Post
I don't think her testimony is earth-shattering. It sounds a bit gossipy, to me. More sizzle than steak.


Originally Posted by Warp12 View Post
I think they have a lot better stuff than this, tbh.
This is the first thing you have said in this thread that I agree with.
__________________
Science supplies evidence, invites you to analyse and evaluate that evidence, and then to draw conclusions from that
Religion supplies no evidence, demands you have faith, and expects you to uncritically and automatically believe that something is true simply because "the Bible tells you so"
If you don't like my posts, opinions, or directness then put me on your ignore list!
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th June 2022, 07:43 PM   #47
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 21,870
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Baiscaly, calling the Hutchnson a liar, and the usual "We have evidence that will prove that...coming out any day now".
Ah yes.. the "Pillow Guy" defence
__________________
Science supplies evidence, invites you to analyse and evaluate that evidence, and then to draw conclusions from that
Religion supplies no evidence, demands you have faith, and expects you to uncritically and automatically believe that something is true simply because "the Bible tells you so"
If you don't like my posts, opinions, or directness then put me on your ignore list!
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th June 2022, 08:09 PM   #48
shemp
a flimsy character...perfidious and despised
 
shemp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Out back preparing the bunker for the next Civil War
Posts: 49,578
Originally Posted by eerok View Post
For example, Trump might one day be well-hanged.
Well, we have heard from some women that he was never well-hung.
__________________
Counting the days to Civil War II.
shemp is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th June 2022, 08:42 PM   #49
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
 
a_unique_person's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Waiting for the pod bay door to open.
Posts: 44,460
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
I do wish people would stop using "hung" when they mean "hanged". A picture is/was hung on a wall but a person is/was hanged. It's really not that difficult.
Is that why my picture is dead and there's a convicted murderer on my lounge room wall?
__________________
Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.
Everything is possible, but not everything is probable.
“Perception is real, but the truth is not.” - Imelda Marcos
a_unique_person is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th June 2022, 09:09 PM   #50
stanfr
Master Poster
 
stanfr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,101
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
I accept that, but you made no mention of that in your post.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...3&postcount=23

There is potential for charges against a LOT more people than just The Fat Orange Turd - Giuliani, Eastman, Clark, Brooks, Gosar, Gaetz et al
Not to beat a dead horse, but for the benefit of others, the exceptions you listed are exceptions to the rule that forbids hearsay as evidence. They are not exceptions to what qualifies as hearsay, it is still hearsay--just admissible!

I was simply stating that some in the media are unfortunately characterizing some of her testimony as being a lot stronger than it actually would be in a criminal case. It is absolutely crucial they get some more people close to trump to start talking. I am sure they already have, and hopefully the dominoes will start falling. The Justice Dept has to step up to the plate and not be concerned about repercussions, because democracy and the rule of law are most definitely at stake.
stanfr is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 12:25 AM   #51
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 21,870
Originally Posted by stanfr View Post
Not to beat a dead horse, but for the benefit of others, the exceptions you listed are exceptions to the rule that forbids hearsay as evidence. They are not exceptions to what qualifies as hearsay, it is still hearsay--just admissible!

I was simply stating that some in the media are unfortunately characterizing some of her testimony as being a lot stronger than it actually would be in a criminal case. It is absolutely crucial they get some more people close to trump to start talking. I am sure they already have, and hopefully the dominoes will start falling. The Justice Dept has to step up to the plate and not be concerned about repercussions, because democracy and the rule of law are most definitely at stake.
Not to beat a dead horse, but for the benefit of others

hhttps://www.govinfo.gov/app/details...ule803/summary

The title of the law that grants some hearsay to be used in evidence is called...

28 USC § 803 - Exceptions to the Rule Against Hearsay-Regardless of Whether the Declarant Is Available as a Witness[/hilite]

... and in the Federal Rules of Evidence, that section is called....

Rule 803. Exceptions to the Rule Against Hearsay

Its pretty strange, don't you think, that both the Law and the Rule regarding a list of exceptions, that are called exceptions, are not exceptions?
__________________
Science supplies evidence, invites you to analyse and evaluate that evidence, and then to draw conclusions from that
Religion supplies no evidence, demands you have faith, and expects you to uncritically and automatically believe that something is true simply because "the Bible tells you so"
If you don't like my posts, opinions, or directness then put me on your ignore list!
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 02:42 AM   #52
Parsman
Muse
 
Parsman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bonnie Scotland
Posts: 837
Originally Posted by Warp12 View Post
I don't think her testimony is earth-shattering. It sounds a bit gossipy, to me. More sizzle than steak. I think they have a lot better stuff than this, tbh.
"These are not the droids you are looking for." MAGA denial is a wonderful thing
__________________
I was not; I have been; I am not; I am content - Epicurus

When you're dead you don't know that you're dead, all the pain is felt by others....................the same thing happens when you're stupid.
Parsman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 02:48 AM   #53
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 43,373
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Not to beat a dead horse, but for the benefit of others

hhttps://www.govinfo.gov/app/details...ule803/summary

The title of the law that grants some hearsay to be used in evidence is called...

28 USC § 803 - Exceptions to the Rule Against Hearsay-Regardless of Whether the Declarant Is Available as a Witness[/hilite]

... and in the Federal Rules of Evidence, that section is called....

Rule 803. Exceptions to the Rule Against Hearsay

Its pretty strange, don't you think, that both the Law and the Rule regarding a list of exceptions, that are called exceptions, are not exceptions?
It's not a trial so it doesn't matter anyway.
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 02:48 AM   #54
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Stacyhs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 26,068
If they have worse than Hutchinson's testimony coming up, I need to go to Costco and stock up on popcorn.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 03:27 AM   #55
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 21,870
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
It's not a trial so it doesn't matter anyway.
True, but regardless, evidence given at these hearings still has to be assessed as to it admissibility in a trial.
__________________
Science supplies evidence, invites you to analyse and evaluate that evidence, and then to draw conclusions from that
Religion supplies no evidence, demands you have faith, and expects you to uncritically and automatically believe that something is true simply because "the Bible tells you so"
If you don't like my posts, opinions, or directness then put me on your ignore list!
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 04:49 AM   #56
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
Moderator
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 26,772
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
I do wish people would stop using "hung" when they mean "hanged". A picture is/was hung on a wall but a person is/was hanged. It's really not that difficult.
Mussolini being an exception.
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Public/Compulsory Expenditure on healthcare
https://data.oecd.org/chart/60Tt

Every year since 1990 the US Public healthcare spending has been greater than the UK as a proportion of GDP. More US Tax goes to healthcare than the UK
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 05:07 AM   #57
eerok
Quixoticist
 
eerok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: ON Canada
Posts: 5,143
Originally Posted by stanfr View Post
I was simply stating that some in the media are unfortunately characterizing some of her testimony as being a lot stronger than it actually would be in a criminal case. It is absolutely crucial they get some more people close to trump to start talking. I am sure they already have, and hopefully the dominoes will start falling. The Justice Dept has to step up to the plate and not be concerned about repercussions, because democracy and the rule of law are most definitely at stake.
Yes, I think the main value of Hutchinson's testimony is in the stage it sets. There's no question now that the testimony of Meadows and Cipollone is required, and I doubt they'll be able to continue ducking their responsibility for long. It won't look good if they fifth it like Flynn, either.
__________________
"Every saint has a past and every sinner has a future." - Oscar Wilde
eerok is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 05:50 AM   #58
Armitage72
Philosopher
 
Armitage72's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 7,203
Originally Posted by a_unique_person View Post
Is that why my picture is dead and there's a convicted murderer on my lounge room wall?

There was a novel or short story I read once, with a scene of a police detective arriving at a crime scene and being briefed by someone who arrived earlier.

"We found the victim hung in the next room."
"Hanged. People are hanged. Sides of meat are hung."
"I know. We found the victim hung in the next room."
Armitage72 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 06:10 AM   #59
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
Moderator
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 26,772
Originally Posted by Armitage72 View Post
There was a novel or short story I read once, with a scene of a police detective arriving at a crime scene and being briefed by someone who arrived earlier.

"We found the victim hung in the next room."
"Hanged. People are hanged. Sides of meat are hung."
"I know. We found the victim hung in the next room."
I see you were thinking along similar lines

Originally Posted by jimbob View Post
Mussolini being an exception.
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Public/Compulsory Expenditure on healthcare
https://data.oecd.org/chart/60Tt

Every year since 1990 the US Public healthcare spending has been greater than the UK as a proportion of GDP. More US Tax goes to healthcare than the UK
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 07:41 AM   #60
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 16,118
Originally Posted by Warp12 View Post
I don't think her testimony is earth-shattering. It sounds a bit gossipy, to me. More sizzle than steak. I think they have a lot better stuff than this, tbh.
How unsurprising.

Never mind the temper tantrums. She overheard highly significant conversations.
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
varwoche is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 10:00 AM   #61
Warp12
King of Kings
 
Warp12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 5,949
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
How unsurprising.

Never mind the temper tantrums. She overheard highly significant conversations.

You know what I heard? "Rizzo got a bun in the oven!".

Like I said, they have a lot better stuff than this. I can hear it in court now, "Yes, it's true...there was ketchup on the wall. I swear."

Sure this is the kind of stuff that excites some Dems and gets them chatting, but it is isn't the concrete, serious stuff.
__________________
Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more.

Last edited by Warp12; 30th June 2022 at 10:03 AM.
Warp12 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 10:01 AM   #62
stanfr
Master Poster
 
stanfr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,101
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Not to beat a dead horse, but for the benefit of others

hhttps://www.govinfo.gov/app/details...ule803/summary

The title of the law that grants some hearsay to be used in evidence is called...

...snip...

Its pretty strange, don't you think, that both the Law and the Rule regarding a list of exceptions, that are called exceptions, are not exceptions?
I don't know why you are confused, you just reiterated the point i made, which is that the statements are still *hearsay* but may be admissible if they fall under exceptions. None of your cited rules are contrary to my OP, where i said that Hutchinson's statement was "hearsay" And no exception is applicable, especially with such a vague statement. I hope we can both agree that T is a seditious lunatic who belongs in jail. I am simply (again, and again) pointing out that Hutchinson's testimony, while useful, is not as valuable as the media made it out to be.
stanfr is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 10:07 AM   #63
stanfr
Master Poster
 
stanfr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,101
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
True, but regardless, evidence given at these hearings still has to be assessed as to it admissibility in a trial.
Yep, and that is why i made my initial assessment of it. It is obvious that the panel is laying out the reasons to indict Trump, that has been the theme from the first day. And he is clearly the focus, as opposed to the other players. If one of them would testify against T in return for full immunity, i bet they would offer it!
The only reason they are reluctant is 1) they still think team T is a winning team 2) they are insane (1&2 might go hand in hand) or 3) they fear for their safety.
stanfr is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 10:08 AM   #64
Kestrel
Philosopher
 
Kestrel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Colorado
Posts: 6,210
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
How unsurprising.

Never mind the temper tantrums. She overheard highly significant conversations.
I find it disturbing that anyone from the White House was phoning the War Room in the Willard on the night of January 5.
Kestrel is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 10:08 AM   #65
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 9,980
Originally Posted by Warp12 View Post
You know what I heard? "Rizzo got a bun in the oven!".

Like I said, they have a lot better stuff than this. I can hear it in court now, "Yes, it's true...there was ketchup on the wall. I swear."

Sure this is the kind of stuff that excites some Dems and gets them chatting, but it is isn't the concrete, serious stuff.
Whew, thanks Warp! It's getting pretty warm outside but all your handwaving is really creating a nice breeze.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 11:52 AM   #66
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 92,453
Originally Posted by eerok View Post
Yes, I think the main value of Hutchinson's testimony is in the stage it sets. There's no question now that the testimony of Meadows and Cipollone is required, and I doubt they'll be able to continue ducking their responsibility for long. It won't look good if they fifth it like Flynn, either.
People should keep in mind the right wing is knowingly using this business about hearsay, especially the focus on supposed Suburban incident to distract from the actual issue: there is a lot of evidence of pre-planning and what Drumpf's fantasy plan* was leading a 'army' into Congress so he could stop the certification process Pence wouldn't stop.

Keep that in mind, this is a purposeful talking point, don't look behind the curtain.



*This is a repeating symptom of Drumpf's mental illness, like imagining COVID would simply go away. He imagined he could stop the election process and stay in power. Think of the fantasy: a gizillion soldiers behind him, vs reality: at best a small rag-tag group of soldier cosplayers plus a crazed crowd.

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 30th June 2022 at 11:54 AM.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 11:57 AM   #67
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 92,453
Originally Posted by Warp12 View Post
You know what I heard? "Rizzo got a bun in the oven!".

Like I said, they have a lot better stuff than this. I can hear it in court now, "Yes, it's true...there was ketchup on the wall. I swear."

Sure this is the kind of stuff that excites some Dems and gets them chatting, but it is isn't the concrete, serious stuff.
There was plenty of 'evidence' revealed in Hutchinson's testimony. You simply have to resist the distractions the right wing is flinging out.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 12:14 PM   #68
Warp12
King of Kings
 
Warp12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 5,949
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
There was plenty of 'evidence' revealed in Hutchinson's testimony. You simply have to resist the distractions the right wing is flinging out.

If you had to pick just one piece of evidence from her testimony as being the most solid and significant, what would it be?
__________________
Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more.
Warp12 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 01:29 PM   #69
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 21,870
Originally Posted by Warp12 View Post
If you had to pick just one piece of evidence from her testimony as being the most solid and significant, what would it be?
How about this?

The Fat Orange Turd knew the crowd was armed, with firearms, that he wanted the metal detectors removed to allow more armed people into the crowd, and that he wanted to go to the Capitol with that armed mob.

I believe this aspect is the most important revelation, and it has not gone unnoticed that the right wing media have been silent on this... they don't want their sheep focusing on this. They are busy trying distract and deflect from by playing up the dispute over whether or not he threw food at a wall or tried to grab a steering wheel. Those things are just fluffery, thing that help to confirm what we already knew, that he is a toddler who throws tantrums when he doesn't get his way - behaviour that shows he was always unfit for the Office
__________________
Science supplies evidence, invites you to analyse and evaluate that evidence, and then to draw conclusions from that
Religion supplies no evidence, demands you have faith, and expects you to uncritically and automatically believe that something is true simply because "the Bible tells you so"
If you don't like my posts, opinions, or directness then put me on your ignore list!

Last edited by smartcooky; 30th June 2022 at 01:31 PM.
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 01:40 PM   #70
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 16,118
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
How about this?

The Fat Orange Turd knew the crowd was armed, with firearms, that he wanted the metal detectors removed to allow more armed people into the crowd, and that he wanted to go to the Capitol with that armed mob.

I believe this aspect is the most important revelation, and it has not gone unnoticed that the right wing media have been silent on this... they don't want their sheep focusing on this. They are busy trying distract and deflect from by playing up the dispute over whether or not he threw food at a wall or tried to grab a steering wheel. Those things are just fluffery, thing that help to confirm what we already knew, that he is a toddler who throws tantrums when he doesn't get his way - behaviour that shows he was always unfit for the Office
Indeed. Also, his rational for letting in the armed brown-shirts was NOT that they were harmless. Rather, they posed no threat to Trump. Stated specifically.
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
varwoche is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 01:43 PM   #71
Warp12
King of Kings
 
Warp12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 5,949
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
How about this?

The Fat Orange Turd knew the crowd was armed, with firearms, that he wanted the metal detectors removed to allow more armed people into the crowd, and that he wanted to go to the Capitol with that armed mob.

True or not, don't you think that is the kind of testimony that would need some significant corroboration in order to hold up in court? Yes, I know this isn't a trial. I'm just asking what gives validity to her statements in that regard?

Sometimes this stuff reads like the made-for-tv dramatization. Maybe it is all true? Hard to say without more testimony.
__________________
Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more.

Last edited by Warp12; 30th June 2022 at 01:45 PM.
Warp12 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 01:45 PM   #72
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 16,118
Originally Posted by Warp12 View Post
Like I said, they have a lot better stuff than this. I can hear it in court now, "Yes, it's true...there was ketchup on the wall. I swear."
I said never mind the temper tantrums. And you cite a temper tantrum.

You seem to be determined to overlook the legally significant, direct observations.
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
varwoche is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 01:54 PM   #73
Donal
Illuminator
 
Donal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,820
"Her testimony was hearsay" - people trying to convince you 2000 Mules is legit.
__________________
SuburbanNerd A blog for making tech make sense
Donal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 02:25 PM   #74
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 21,870
Originally Posted by Warp12 View Post
True or not, don't you think that is the kind of testimony that would need some significant corroboration in order to hold up in court? Yes, I know this isn't a trial. I'm just asking what gives validity to her statements in that regard?
How about that she was there, in the tent behind the stage at the Ellipse, with The Fat Orange Turd, and heard what he said.

Oh, and this is NOT hearsay - she is testifying directly to what The Fat Orange Turd said.
LIZ CHENEY: And did you go to the rally in the Presidential motorcade?

CASSIDY HUTCHINSON: I — I was there, yes, in the motorcade.

LIZ CHENEY: And were you backstage with the President and other members of his staff and family?

CASSIDY HUTCHINSON: I was.

LIZ CHENEY: And you told us, Ms. Hutchinson, about particular comments that you heard while you were in the tent area.

CASSIDY HUTCHINSON: When we were in the offstage announce area tent behind the stage he was very concerned about the shot, meaning the photograph that we would get, because the rally space wasn't full. One of the reasons which I've previously stated was because he wanted it to be full and for people to not feel excluded because they had come far to watch him at the rally.

And he felt the mags were at fault for not letting everybody in. But another leading reason and likely the primary reason is because he wanted it full and he was angry that we weren't letting people through the mags with weapons, what the Secret Service deemed as weapons and are — are weapons.

But when we were in the offstage announce tent, I was part of a conversation — I was in — I was in the vicinity of a conversation where I overheard the President say something to the effect of, you know, I - - I don't effing care that they have weapons.
They're not here to hurt me. Take the effing mags away. Let my people in. They can march to the Capitol from here. Let the people in. Take the effing mags away.
__________________
Science supplies evidence, invites you to analyse and evaluate that evidence, and then to draw conclusions from that
Religion supplies no evidence, demands you have faith, and expects you to uncritically and automatically believe that something is true simply because "the Bible tells you so"
If you don't like my posts, opinions, or directness then put me on your ignore list!
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 02:51 PM   #75
Warp12
King of Kings
 
Warp12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 5,949
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
How about that she was there, in the tent behind the stage at the Ellipse, with The Fat Orange Turd, and heard what he said.

Oh, and this is NOT hearsay - she is testifying directly to what The Fat Orange Turd said.
LIZ CHENEY: And did you go to the rally in the Presidential motorcade?

CASSIDY HUTCHINSON: I — I was there, yes, in the motorcade.

LIZ CHENEY: And were you backstage with the President and other members of his staff and family?

CASSIDY HUTCHINSON: I was.

LIZ CHENEY: And you told us, Ms. Hutchinson, about particular comments that you heard while you were in the tent area.

CASSIDY HUTCHINSON: When we were in the offstage announce area tent behind the stage he was very concerned about the shot, meaning the photograph that we would get, because the rally space wasn't full. One of the reasons which I've previously stated was because he wanted it to be full and for people to not feel excluded because they had come far to watch him at the rally.

And he felt the mags were at fault for not letting everybody in. But another leading reason and likely the primary reason is because he wanted it full and he was angry that we weren't letting people through the mags with weapons, what the Secret Service deemed as weapons and are — are weapons.

But when we were in the offstage announce tent, I was part of a conversation — I was in — I was in the vicinity of a conversation where I overheard the President say something to the effect of, you know, I - - I don't effing care that they have weapons.
They're not here to hurt me. Take the effing mags away. Let my people in. They can march to the Capitol from here. Let the people in. Take the effing mags away.

That is not solid testimony, imo.

"But another leading reason and likely...". That sounds like her interpretation, and nothing more.

She heard "something to the effect of"...while "in the vicinity of"...again, not very solid.

Like I said, could all be true...but sounds like gossip more than hard facts without something to bolster her account. Maybe she will get a book deal, though. It's all got a "juicy" ring to it.

I can see why some may not find her testimony convincing.
__________________
Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more.

Last edited by Warp12; 30th June 2022 at 02:53 PM.
Warp12 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 03:16 PM   #76
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 21,870
Originally Posted by Warp12 View Post
That is not solid testimony, imo.

"But another leading reason and likely...". That sounds like her interpretation, and nothing more.

She heard "something to the effect of"...while "in the vicinity of"...again, not very solid.

Like I said, could all be true...but sounds like gossip more than hard facts without something to bolster her account. Maybe she will get a book deal, though. It's all got a "juicy" ring to it.

I can see why some may not find her testimony convincing.
Well, there are two facts that give me confidence she is speaking the truth here,

1. Crickets! Not one of the other people in that tent have come out and said "Trump never said that" or "that is not what was said". No-one has contradicted her testimony.

2. She testified to this under oath; under penalty of perjury. Those who might contradict anything in her testimony are unwilling to do so under oath.


Even in the non-issues of the plate throwing and steering wheel grabbing, all we have is one journalist, Peter Alexander telling the public, that someone told him that someone else said that what Ms Hutchinson said was incorrect. This isn't just hearsay, its hearsay about hearsay!
__________________
Science supplies evidence, invites you to analyse and evaluate that evidence, and then to draw conclusions from that
Religion supplies no evidence, demands you have faith, and expects you to uncritically and automatically believe that something is true simply because "the Bible tells you so"
If you don't like my posts, opinions, or directness then put me on your ignore list!
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 03:29 PM   #77
Bob001
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US of A
Posts: 15,638
Originally Posted by Warp12 View Post
.....
She heard "something to the effect of"...while "in the vicinity of"...again, not very solid.

Like I said, could all be true...but sounds like gossip more than hard facts without something to bolster her account. Maybe she will get a book deal, though. It's all got a "juicy" ring to it.

I can see why some may not find her testimony convincing.

She's not a stenographer. She testified under oath to the substance of what people said to her, and what she herself heard from others. If someone else told her something that turns out to be wrong, it doesn't devalue her testimony. She said she herself heard Trump rage about the magnetometers that were keeping weapons out of his rally and demand that they be removed. He knew that he was sending an armed mob to march on the Capitol. That is probably the single most damning thing she reported. If anyone wants to say she's lying, let them them testify in public under oath. But so far there are no takers.
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 04:10 PM   #78
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 56,005
Pat Cipollone,formeraly an attorney for Trump, has been supoened by the commitee.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 04:24 PM   #79
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Stacyhs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 26,068
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
People should keep in mind the right wing is knowingly using this business about hearsay, especially the focus on supposed Suburban incident to distract from the actual issue: there is a lot of evidence of pre-planning and what Drumpf's fantasy plan* was leading a 'army' into Congress so he could stop the certification process Pence wouldn't stop.

Keep that in mind, this is a purposeful talking point, don't look behind the curtain.



*This is a repeating symptom of Drumpf's mental illness, like imagining COVID would simply go away. He imagined he could stop the election process and stay in power. Think of the fantasy: a gizillion soldiers behind him, vs reality: at best a small rag-tag group of soldier cosplayers plus a crazed crowd.
Exactly. Warp et al can handwave away the temper tantrum incidents but those of us not choosing to wear blinders can see that it's part of a pattern of erratic, unstable behavior. It's not the steak but it's definitely part of the "Trump is mentally unfit for office" stew.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th June 2022, 04:30 PM   #80
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Stacyhs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 26,068
Originally Posted by Warp12 View Post
That is not solid testimony, imo.

"But another leading reason and likely...". That sounds like her interpretation, and nothing more.

She heard "something to the effect of"...while "in the vicinity of"...again, not very solid.

Like I said, could all be true...but sounds like gossip more than hard facts without something to bolster her account. Maybe she will get a book deal, though. It's all got a "juicy" ring to it.

I can see why some may not find her testimony convincing.
Your "I'm not a Trump supporter" schtick got old a long time ago. We know pee from rain when we see it.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:32 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.