I believe Ornato pantomimed some of the actions that Engel portrayed to him so technically she is telling what she saw in some instances.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
"I'm the f'n president. Take me up to the Capitol now" - Hutchinson testifies that Trump tried to grab the steering wheel of a car to head to Capitol
- Thread starter GK86
- Start date
Also keep in mind, maybe its obvious to most of folks but not to all.
Secret Service is not there to be a service to the man its there to protect the president even from himself if necessary.
They would never allow him in any real danger even if he ordered them to take him to danger.
Secret Service is not there to be a service to the man its there to protect the president even from himself if necessary.
They would never allow him in any real danger even if he ordered them to take him to danger.
How Ornato went about relating that anecdote has no bearing on whether or not Hutchinson's testimony about it is hearsay.
Looks like Trump world may be moving on from this as the greater threat is Cippolone possibly agreeing to transcribed testimony. Trump doesn't want this happening at all citing it would set a terrible precedent. But if the SC can disregard precedents then…..
we might get something since that documentarian is giving them all their footage
Covering Trump in molten bronze would set a terrible president.
In defense of the media (I know, I know, I am the hero we deserve), they're responding to what people are most hungry for. What people in this thread are most hungry for. This is identical to the Steele Dossier. What was everybody most obsessed with? Allegations of pee tapes in some bed that Obama slept in. Yet that was the most pointless detail in the whole report in terms of actual national security, the actual interest that Russia had backing Trump, the actual interest Trump had in seeking Russia's help disrupting the Clinton campaign. But there were hundreds of posts in every thread about pee tapes. And reporters would focus in on those details that people were obsessed with.
Likewise, during Hutchinson's testimony, this thread and others blew up when she mentioned Trump trying to take the wheel or scuffling with his secret service. These are juicy details that you can imaging in your brain. How many memes were created about Trump throwing ketchup at the wall? That's an irrelevant detail, but it's the image of it that draws people's curiosity and attention, and ends up demanding media attention.
The media is comprised of people, and the same reason threads like this blew up, memes, and all else, with those nuggets of testimony, is because they're hard to resist. The demand is there.
Most accounts of the testimony are on the salient details of what could hold up in court. The Daily had a 35min episode about the testimony, most of which was about what could be used by the Justice Dept, but also had a few minutes on ... the ketchup, the trying to take the wheel, etc. They can't cut that out, it's part of the testimony. THey also mentioned, "We should note, representatives of Trump have denied these details."
This is the risk of heresay testimony. One detail that's wrong or unprovable will paint a portrait that all of the testimony is wrong. This is one reason the Steele Dossier was ultimately a fart in the wind, there can be verifiable, important details, that get supereceded by unverifiable, unimportant, salacious details. The media reporters (like say John Marshall, an excellent writer, for TPM), don't "want Trump to win" anymore than the hundreds of posters here "Want Trump to win" then they write about or talk about the salacious details of something. Also, the details about Ornato, Hutchinson, the Beast, whatever else happened according to who, are just one of the dozens of articles on the TPM feed about Hutchinson's testimony, the majority of which is on information that is more criminally relevant, but ... they can still cover the salacious details. There's ~20 posts joking about ketchup in this thread. Those 20 people don't want Trump to be re-elected, but it's hard not to have some interest in these scenarios that poke at your imagination... Trump throwing ketchup at a wall out of anger, Trump assaulting a USSS officer, Trump trying to take the wheel of a car, etc, these are all scenarios that are evocative, if a movie is ever made about this, it'll prominently feature these scenes because they're so evocative. Hard to avoid that stuff as human beings.
WHat's probably pretty likely is that we have a perception that all the media is covering is ketchup or taking the wheel, because that's what our algorithmicly-driven feeds and the non-algorithmic sites that have their content driven off of those algorithms (like this one) are programmed to show us. The NYT has a block of stories about Hutchinsons testimony on the NYT homepage. A quick scan of those three articles, none of them focus on these details. But there's a pretty strong likelihood that your algorithm-driven feeds are surfacing these stories either to you or to the people who you follow, more so than the legalistic details.
Likewise, during Hutchinson's testimony, this thread and others blew up when she mentioned Trump trying to take the wheel or scuffling with his secret service. These are juicy details that you can imaging in your brain. How many memes were created about Trump throwing ketchup at the wall? That's an irrelevant detail, but it's the image of it that draws people's curiosity and attention, and ends up demanding media attention.
The media is comprised of people, and the same reason threads like this blew up, memes, and all else, with those nuggets of testimony, is because they're hard to resist. The demand is there.
Most accounts of the testimony are on the salient details of what could hold up in court. The Daily had a 35min episode about the testimony, most of which was about what could be used by the Justice Dept, but also had a few minutes on ... the ketchup, the trying to take the wheel, etc. They can't cut that out, it's part of the testimony. THey also mentioned, "We should note, representatives of Trump have denied these details."
This is the risk of heresay testimony. One detail that's wrong or unprovable will paint a portrait that all of the testimony is wrong. This is one reason the Steele Dossier was ultimately a fart in the wind, there can be verifiable, important details, that get supereceded by unverifiable, unimportant, salacious details. The media reporters (like say John Marshall, an excellent writer, for TPM), don't "want Trump to win" anymore than the hundreds of posters here "Want Trump to win" then they write about or talk about the salacious details of something. Also, the details about Ornato, Hutchinson, the Beast, whatever else happened according to who, are just one of the dozens of articles on the TPM feed about Hutchinson's testimony, the majority of which is on information that is more criminally relevant, but ... they can still cover the salacious details. There's ~20 posts joking about ketchup in this thread. Those 20 people don't want Trump to be re-elected, but it's hard not to have some interest in these scenarios that poke at your imagination... Trump throwing ketchup at a wall out of anger, Trump assaulting a USSS officer, Trump trying to take the wheel of a car, etc, these are all scenarios that are evocative, if a movie is ever made about this, it'll prominently feature these scenes because they're so evocative. Hard to avoid that stuff as human beings.
WHat's probably pretty likely is that we have a perception that all the media is covering is ketchup or taking the wheel, because that's what our algorithmicly-driven feeds and the non-algorithmic sites that have their content driven off of those algorithms (like this one) are programmed to show us. The NYT has a block of stories about Hutchinsons testimony on the NYT homepage. A quick scan of those three articles, none of them focus on these details. But there's a pretty strong likelihood that your algorithm-driven feeds are surfacing these stories either to you or to the people who you follow, more so than the legalistic details.
Last edited:
Those are some bizzaro world music choices both as background music for the strangle and for an insurrection rally in general. One of those 'no one would ever believe this' when it gets made into a movie moments.
But I was told it was physically impossible!!!!!!
Not shocked at all
Gotta say the liberal response to this "debate" is embarrassing. These are practically bigfoot photos.
If someone wants to testify under oath, let them. Otherwise ignore it. All stuff like this does is give the whole dumb debate more oxygen.
I will disagree because this at least shows that he was upset and physically touching the driver.
I honestly make out anything in that clip. Certainly not whose hand is whose. Maybe I'm missing it.
What's funny is if they can get this off general footage, I'd imagine the committee has access to even more definite stuff
Somebody gonna need to edit the shit out of some color and contrast on this video for me to be able to see shit
Trump's gonna say he was literally doing the YMCA on his goddamned social media
Trump's gonna say he was literally doing the YMCA on his goddamned social media
Guess its easy for me to see it, while its not evidence in the sense its "Hey its the President" because of the tinted windows. Even without color correction you can clearly see someone constantly try to push up through the center console and hang on the back of the driver seat and not just do it once but several times in quick succession over almost half the video (ignore the screen captures, they aren't helping anything, its the violent motion that makes it clear to me which can't be shown in the screen grabs). It would mean little without context but with the accusations it reads clarity and once again requires someone else to take the oath prove the accusation otherwise.
It speaks to his intent. His best possible excuse is that he didn't know what was about to happen; the picture we're getting now is he knew the mob was armed, he incited them to "march" on the Capitol to disrupt the democratic process, and he had every intention of joining them even against the safety recommendations of his own Secret Service.
Aaaah, got it. Ok so him requesting them to get rid of the metal detectors adds context, too... Don't know how I wasn't picking up on what you just explained.
Ah that's helpful, too.
I'd say this is tense (it is) but I'm at a point where I believe that you could have 4k footage of him shooting someone on 5th ave and he'd be fine.
Its not damning for the president unless there is really, really clear evidence of his behavior, however its also being used to criticize the testimony of Hutchinson which had far, far FAR more damning crap then that. Having any kind of visual evidence to correlate her accusation puts more pressure on others to come up with evidence she is wrong or take the oath or shut up about it.
That looks like the guy's hand getting in the SUV pulling on the seat in front.
And that was the Village People's "YMCA" -- shooting up the charts at #2 with Huey Lewis and the News staying at the top with their #1 hit - "It's Hip To Be Square"
Draft dodging orange piece of shit loved playing 'Fortunate Son' at his rallies. Nothing will top that.
I cannot believe they would allow her to say that unless they had corroborating witness accounts. Although the alleged incident is not more significant than his actions on the 6th of Jan, the symbolism of a POTUS desperately trying to reach the steering wheel from his Secret Service detail is explosive.
I cannot believe for a second the Committee did not look into this.
I cannot believe for a second the Committee did not look into this.
hed be pissed...dead, but pissed if it wasn't molten gold.
it's probably because if it had turned out that this attempted coup of an suv was false, there would be ample room for gop shittiness with regards to how true the rest of hutchinson's testimony was.
turns out it did happen, with video evidence, so that's one talking point debunked (obviously not for the dude's rabies infected base).
Well, glad that main stream media is covering it, right?
