Wasn't the Secret Service guy supposed to refute Hutchinson?

L

LV426

Verified User
What happened with that?

Oh right, the Secret Service guy never said he would refute Hutchinson, a Nazi on Twitter said that a source close to the Secret Service said that and Conservatives have been exaggerating that the same way Flash does.
 
LV426 said:
Can you find any proof that this Secret Service guy wanted to refute Hutchinson's testimony that isn't a tweet from a Nazi citing "a source close to the Secret Service"?
Click to expand...

Hutchinson's testimony, up until today, WAS the most recent release from the Nazi sources.......did they have anything new today?......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
Hutchinson's testimony, up until today, WAS the most recent release from the Nazi source
Click to expand...

You said at least a dozen times three weeks ago that a secret service agent is willing to refute Hutchinson's testimony under oath, and your source for that is a Nazi tweet on Twitter.
 
LV426 said:
You said at least a dozen times three weeks ago that a secret service agent is willing to refute Hutchinson's testimony under oath, and your source for that is a Nazi tweet on Twitter.
Click to expand...

impossible......I don't even read Nancy's tweets.....can you explain why the committee refused to call any SS agents to testify?.....
 
LV426 said:
What happened with that?

Oh right, the Secret Service guy never said he would refute Hutchinson, a Nazi on Twitter said that a source close to the Secret Service said that and Conservatives have been exaggerating that the same way Flash does.
Click to expand...
If the SS agrees with Hutchinson why doesn't the J6 committee subpoena him to testify? Oh right that is because his testimony would destroy Hutchinson's testimony. The SS will never be given the opportunity to impeach her testimony.
 
ExpressLane said:
If the SS agrees with Hutchinson why doesn't the J6 committee subpoena him to testify?
Click to expand...

First of all, you don't know if the SS agrees with Hutchinson or not because all you have is an anonymous "source close to the Secret Service"...so it's not even the Secret Service, it's "a source close to the Secret Service" that you are running with here; an unnamed source, who is NOT in the Secret Service, from three weeks ago.

You got grifted AGAIN because you're a fucking sucker and everyone knows it now.

You're such a fucking sucker that I bet you bought into a timeshare and you got the undercoat protection for your jalopi.


Oh right that is because his testimony would destroy Hutchinson's testimony.
Click to expand...

What testimony? All you have is a tweet that references "a source close to the Secret Service".

You're basing your entire argument on that tweet from three weeks ago that has never been followed up.


The SS will never be given the opportunity to impeach her testimony.
Click to expand...

Sure they have. Everyone has an open invitation to testify before the committee, and all you have is "a source close to the Secret Service", but you don't know who that source is, or if the source is even real.
 
Last edited:
LV426 said:
Fox News' source is the same as the anonymous (and fake) Twitter source; "a source close to the Secret Service".
Click to expand...

Well, they ARE the SECRET service, after all.

They don't need to be subpoenaed. They can just call the committee and arrange testimony
Click to expand...

Would you call that a reverse subpoena? And how would you know if they had already testified or not? Nobody is appearing in this circus unless those clowns know EXACTLY what they're going to say, and it fits their narrative EXACTLY. Let me guess, you've been watching this babble like people used to watch Game of Thrones, right? Have you seen any pro-Trump "witnesses" testify yet?
 
Callinectes said:
Well, they ARE the SECRET service, after all.



Would you call that a reverse subpoena? And how would you know if they had already testified or not? Nobody is appearing in this circus unless those clowns know EXACTLY what they're going to say, and it fits their narrative EXACTLY. Let me guess, you've been watching this babble like people used to watch Game of Thrones, right? Have you seen any pro-Trump "witnesses" testify yet?
Click to expand...

She worked in the Trump admin. What is a "pro Trump" witness?

Shouldn't hearings be about the truth - and not pro one way or the other? Do criminals deserve to have their own cheerleaders testify?
 
LV426 said:
What happened with that?

Oh right, the Secret Service guy never said he would refute Hutchinson, a Nazi on Twitter said that a source close to the Secret Service said that and Conservatives have been exaggerating that the same way Flash does.
Click to expand...
That, and dozens of people are now coming out and stating that he's a trumper who has always lied for the flaccid orange moron.
 
BartenderElite said:
She worked in the Trump admin. What is a "pro Trump" witness?

Shouldn't hearings be about the truth - and not pro one way or the other? Do criminals deserve to have their own cheerleaders testify?
Click to expand...

It's looking that way with the Pelosi Punch and Judy show. :dunno:

That committee is not seeking truth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top