aggiehawg said:

---

I know I always dress my table and chair legs in pants.

"Tableclothes" really?

---

Matt Drudge rn

I posted on this thread, posts are gone. Test to see if I'm banned.

Edit: nope, guess not. Maybe I dreamt I posted something??? My vacation is coming at the perfect time. Been on the road too long.

Just to be relevant... this thread is stupid, this chick is lying, yada yada yada.

I posted about this on the main Jan 6th hearing thread, so you can all check in there. Yesterday, the thread was deleted, I even emailed staff about it because I didnt think it was that bad, and then I moved on with my day outside of TexAgs. So,heres me showing my face around here.

Ok?

Rockdoc said:

---

Ok?

---

Theres an angry mob accusing me of tucking tail and being a beta wuss for not showing my face around here, when the reality of Excel,picking up kids from day care, and watching another episode of The Dropout on Hulu before going to bed is less interesting.

Tramp96 said:

---

Malibu2 said:

---

Rockdoc said:

---

Ok?

---

Theres an angry mob accusing me of tucking tail and being a beta wuss for not showing my face around here, when the reality of Excel,picking up kids from day care, and watching another episode of The Dropout on Hulu before going to bed is less interesting.

---

No there isn't.

It's weird that the Left don't really know what an angry mob is. I'll give you all a hint. It's those people threatening the lives of the SCOTUS justices and attacking churches and pregnancy clinics. THOSE are angry mobs.

---

The right doesnt understand glibness, apparently.

Malibu2 said:

---

Tramp96 said:

---

Malibu2 said:

---

Rockdoc said:

---

Ok?

---

Theres an angry mob accusing me of tucking tail and being a beta wuss for not showing my face around here, when the reality of Excel,picking up kids from day care, and watching another episode of The Dropout on Hulu before going to bed is less interesting.

---

No there isn't.

It's weird that the Left don't really know what an angry mob is. I'll give you all a hint. It's those people threatening the lives of the SCOTUS justices and attacking churches and pregnancy clinics. THOSE are angry mobs.

---

The right doesnt understand glibness, apparently.

---

Describing one's self as insincere is an interesting tactic.

Fenrir said:

---

Malibu2 said:

---

Tramp96 said:

---

Malibu2 said:

---

Rockdoc said:

---

Ok?

---

Theres an angry mob accusing me of tucking tail and being a beta wuss for not showing my face around here, when the reality of Excel,picking up kids from day care, and watching another episode of The Dropout on Hulu before going to bed is less interesting.

---

No there isn't.

It's weird that the Left don't really know what an angry mob is. I'll give you all a hint. It's those people threatening the lives of the SCOTUS justices and attacking churches and pregnancy clinics. THOSE are angry mobs.

---

The right doesnt understand glibness, apparently.

---

Describing one's self as insincere is an interesting tactic.

---

Don't forget "shallow."

Good grief yall are as insufferable as I am.

Bonfire1996 said:

---

Even the leftist media is destroying her

“The handwritten note that Cassidy Hutchinson testified was written by her was in fact written by Eric Herschmann on January 6, 2021," spokesperson for Eric Herschmann told ABC News Tuesday evening. W/ @Santucci @wsteaks https://t.co/0NvLFj9NwL

— Katherine Faulders (@KFaulders) June 29, 2022

I guess she'll have an OF account soon. She has nice up tops.

---

the Trump soap opera will literally never end until he dies or is beaten in 2024

Malibu2 said:

---

Good grief yall are as insufferable as I am.

---

Sorry for taking your own words at face value.

Duly noted.

Malibu2 said:

---

Good grief yall are as insufferable as I am.

---

I think it's important to note your number 1 value hierarchy from the previous thread was "Rule of Law"

Which you broke by believing hearsay "testimony" and still haven't addressed.

If you don't address it, it just makes you a team blue hack.

Because they all jumped on it as true and now, again, they look like the idiots they are.

Lest we not forget the love fest with CPL Avanatti. Now they act like it never happened.

They're putting up lies and narrative, that all.

Too funny.

Malibu2 said:

---

Good grief yall are as insufferable as I am.

---

You sound embarrassed that you were made to look like foolish, just like the farce committee and media. AGAIN!

Just man up and take the loss.

We all make mistakes.

We all know Malibu has been and always will be team blue hack.

akm91 said:

---

We all know Malibu has been and always will be team blue hack.

---

Enjoying that $7/gal Commie-fornia gas and no mean tweets.

Interesting that "glibness" always shows up in certain posters after getting their pants yanked down around their ankles. I suppose it is that or not showing back up at all - which is what the rest of them do.

BREAKING: Former White House lawyer Eric Herschmann says that it is not true that Cassidy Hutchinson wrote the handwritten note that she testified on Tuesday that she wrote. He says it's not true because he was the one who wrote the note. https://t.co/jBBtnOwzTn

— Ryan Saavedra (@RealSaavedra) June 29, 2022

12thAngryMan said:

---

Sterling82 said:

---

The problem with your entire post is the widespread use of "false" and "fraudulent". You know full well that there is a mountain of evidence that the elections are suspect. Just because you won't look at it or don't hear it on the news doesn't mean it doesn't exist. So for me it boils down to this: is it more patriotic to willfully go along with a stolen election or to condemn the fraud and demand inquiry and accountability? For democracy to survive it has to be the latter. Unfortunately you and the press believe it's best to accept and turn away from it and move on which will only invite more corruption.

---

If there really is a mountain of evidence, it shouldn't be that hard to prove. Bill Barr has gone on record saying the DOJ did not have sufficient evidence to try a case (or enough cases that would matter anyway). So what now? Trump isn't a swamp creature, so we just have to trust that he knows better than everyone else in his administration? I am 100% for hardening our election procedures and doing what we can to eliminate easy avenues for voter fraud, but if you can't prove that it actually occurred in meaningful numbers (not just that some GPS pings on some cell phones look fishy), we have to move on from 2020.

Regarding the select committee proceedings, I agree they seem to be politically motivated, but characterizing it as a "show trial" is a bit much. Per myriad posters on this thread, there wasn't a crime to begin with, so it's not like Trump is getting sent to the Gulag. At any rate, I'm pretty sure there doesn't have to be a crime for the legislature to investigate something.

---

And millions of taxpayer money being spent on a "bipartisan" Kangaroo Court, just like Russia, Russia, Russia and the countless other "investigations" done by the Democrats with nothing but showboating to show for it.

GeorgiAg said:

---

The biggest thing about yesterday was it was a window into his mindset that day, and it was not at all what you'd want it to be. However, I'm giving this a 48 hour rule and probably even longer after the Russia hoax. And I want to hear more from the USSS.

I don't know if any crimes were committed (other than the one on ketchup.) but I think we have firmly established that Orange Man was, in fact, BAD.

Hopefully it results in DeSantis 2024. I'm not voting for Biden again.

---

still trying to justify your vote for the **** show in the White House? Got to be hard admitting how wrong you were when you pranced out of the voting booth with a big ole grin on your face

Bonfire1996 said:

---

Malibu2 said:

---

Good grief yall are as insufferable as I am.

---

I think it's important to note your number 1 value hierarchy from the previous thread was "Rule of Law"

Which you broke by believing hearsay "testimony" and still haven't addressed.

If you don't address it, it just makes you a team blue hack.

---

Ive been on record elsewhere that perjury is a crime and that if she purjured herself, she should face jail time. Heresay is also inadmissable, so this Beast story is a nothing burger.

And anyways, Trump isnt being dragged through the mud for heresay alleged assault on his driver. Hes being accussed of trying to interrupt the peaceful transfer of power, which theres no Universe where the President doing that isnt a big deal. So the relevant parts of her testimony, which are admissable, is that she heard POTUS directly acknowledge armed supporters were in the crowd and not only was he nonplussed, he still asked them to go to the Capitol. And he is alleged to have said, from a first hand account, "theyre not here to hurt me."

Thats a serious ****ing thing to have happened and for the President to be accused of. If true, theres no reason Trump shouldnt be in jail.

Fortunately, there have to have been other witnesses from Secret Service or others to corroborate. Either Trump did this, and he faces the consequences, or she purjured herself and she faces them. Either way, due process and rule of law.

So let's say this whole narrative you are going with is true. What law did Trump break that would warrant putting him in jail? Maybe they can impeach him a 3rd time and this time they will dig up something worth a crap.

If she's already been proven as a liar on one part of her testimony, why would you or anyone else believe any other part of it?

rgag12 said:

---

Bonfire1996 said:

---

SB 43rd STREET OG said:

---

AgResearch said:

---

So she lied under oath....

---

Wonder how much she gettin paid. Or what she's being promised.

---

It’s easy to take the logic train here. She’s 18 months removed from working for Meadows/Trump. Meadows has moved on. Trump has a political future, maybe not good, but future nonetheless. It’s campaign season and Hutchinson has zero interviews, zero prospects. Time to flip sides.

— Right Forever - Forever Right (@RForeverright) June 28, 2022

---

Wow if Cernovich is off the Trump wagon maybe other diehards are starting to see the light. Perhaps there's hope we can move forward with DeSantis.

---

In the upcoming football season, which Aggie opponent are you more afraid of. In the 2024 presidential election which Republican candidate are the Dems more afraid of. Your answer might well be a good indicator of who you should vote for in the Republican primary.

annie88 said:

---

Malibu2 said:

---

Good grief yall are as insufferable as I am.

---

You sound embarrassed that you were made to look like foolish, just like the farce committee and media. AGAIN!

Just man up and take the loss.

We all make mistakes.

---

.

Assuming gender, deduct 15 points from your ESG account. You are dangerously close to going into the red.

Malibu2 said:

---

Bonfire1996 said:

---

Malibu2 said:

---

Good grief yall are as insufferable as I am.

---

I think it's important to note your number 1 value hierarchy from the previous thread was "Rule of Law"

Which you broke by believing hearsay "testimony" and still haven't addressed.

If you don't address it, it just makes you a team blue hack.

---

Ive been on record elsewhere that perjury is a crime and that if she purjured herself, she should face jail time. Heresay is also inadmissable, so this Beast story is a nothing burger.

And anyways, Trump isnt being dragged through the mud for heresay alleged assault on his driver. Hes being accussed of trying to interrupt the peaceful transfer of power, which theres no Universe where the President doing that isnt a big deal. So the relevant parts of her testimony, which are admissable, is that she heard POTUS directly acknowledge armed supporters were in the crowd and not only was he nonplussed, he still asked them to go to the Capitol. And he is alleged to have said, from a first hand account, "theyre not here to hurt me."

Thats a serious ****ing thing to have happened and for the President to be accused of. If true, theres no reason Trump shouldnt be in jail.

Fortunately, there have to have been other witnesses from Secret Service or others to corroborate. Either Trump did this, and he faces the consequences, or she purjured herself and she faces them. Either way, due process and rule of law.

---

No. He didn't want to take the time to have the crowd scanned with detectors, presumably for his own protection, by security, which is apparently a substantial delay in gathering an audience because it limits the inflow rate of a crowd to where it is gathering.

Apparently this is a common complaint by politicians that don't want their supporters (who presumably aren't a threat, as supporters) to be unduly hassled or delayed in arriving for a speech or event because bigger crowds look better and also feed the narcissism of politicians.

It is very arguable that Cassidy was making a pure conjecture or repeating the conjecture of someone else that an individual overhead complaint by Trump that the crowd wasn't assembling fast enough for his speech and the security measures were the delay was that he knew some were armed AND had plans for later that day after the speech event. There is a much more common and benign reason to complain about security hassles that I have described above, so unless she had specific and detailed knowledge that the president both knew people in is crowd were armed and what their reason to be armed was as part of a plan, she is jumping to conclusions or making presumptions instead of sticking to facts.

Or, those looking at what she is saying about the president complaining about the security delays are doing the same, which is confirmation bias.

Malibu2 said:

---

Bonfire1996 said:

---

Malibu2 said:

---

Good grief yall are as insufferable as I am.

---

I think it's important to note your number 1 value hierarchy from the previous thread was "Rule of Law"

Which you broke by believing hearsay "testimony" and still haven't addressed.

If you don't address it, it just makes you a team blue hack.

---

Ive been on record elsewhere that perjury is a crime and that if she purjured herself, she should face jail time. Heresay is also inadmissable, so this Beast story is a nothing burger.

And anyways, Trump isnt being dragged through the mud for heresay alleged assault on his driver. Hes being accussed of trying to interrupt the peaceful transfer of power, which theres no Universe where the President doing that isnt a big deal. So the relevant parts of her testimony, which are admissable, is that she heard POTUS directly acknowledge armed supporters were in the crowd and not only was he nonplussed, he still asked them to go to the Capitol. And he is alleged to have said, from a first hand account, "theyre not here to hurt me."

Thats a serious ****ing thing to have happened and for the President to be accused of. If true, theres no reason Trump shouldnt be in jail.

Fortunately, there have to have been other witnesses from Secret Service or others to corroborate. Either Trump did this, and he faces the consequences, or she purjured herself and she faces them. Either way, due process and rule of law.

---

The woman sat there and testified "that's my handwriting" on a note she apparently didn't write. Her testimony is an embarrassment as is this whole charade which has no pretense of following the rule of law. As for the peaceful transfer of power, it shouldn't be peaceful if there is reason to believe illegal votes have been counted. Such an election is the antithesis of democracy. And we can all see what was at stake as this administration continues to wreck the country.

AgDad121619 said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

The biggest thing about yesterday was it was a window into his mindset that day, and it was not at all what you'd want it to be. However, I'm giving this a 48 hour rule and probably even longer after the Russia hoax. And I want to hear more from the USSS.

I don't know if any crimes were committed (other than the one on ketchup.) but I think we have firmly established that Orange Man was, in fact, BAD.

Hopefully it results in DeSantis 2024. I'm not voting for Biden again.

---

still trying to justify your vote for the **** show in the White House? Got to be hard admitting how wrong you were when you pranced out of the voting booth with a big ole grin on your face

---

Just because Biden sucks doesn't mean Trump doesn't also suck in other ways.

That said, I will be voting R whoever the hell it is in Nov. and in 2024.

Has there ever been a more scrutinized president than Trump? Are you CMs comfortable with the degree to which the country has been dragged through 5 1/2 years of Trump-obsessed scrutiny? Are you good with the disruption that created to his governing for 4 years? Are you good with the way it has created or exacerbated the division of our people?

Who do you know, if subjected to this level of scrutiny during their time of leadership, would emerge as unscathed as this man?

He has many flaws. But if, after 5 1/2 years of scrutiny, all we have is he "may have" tried to grab the steering wheel of his driver, that he didn't want his fans to be denied attendance to his rally, that he denied the voracity of the election results.........well, that ain't much.

Don't forget the pee tape.

Or Russia.