Let's bring a little more light to this dark corner:
Our “liberal” broadcast media, responding to today’s bombshell sworn testimony with roadblock coverage reprinting the anonymous denials of notorious liars. https://t.co/rlMdqUWHaJ— Brian Beutler (@brianbeutler) June 29, 2022
Yeah, there's always the problem of reporting based on "she said/Anonymous said." But what about denying the substance, rather than the details?
Anyhow, the fact that multiple, high-profile broadcast reporters (who presumably used Ornato as a Trump White House source) are now passing along his denials anonymously (perhaps through an intermediary), knowing how commonly Trump and his loyalists lie, is a sick farce.— Brian Beutler (@brianbeutler) June 29, 2022
Always consider the source (who is not necessarily Ornato, but reportedly is Ornato-adjacent).
He’s back at Secret Service after sticking with Trump through the failed coup. https://t.co/iGUQY1ZRQE— Brian Beutler (@brianbeutler) June 29, 2022
Because an anonymous source threatening to "challenge" Hutchinson's testimony is not the same thing as proving she lied under oath:
On a related note, what do we imagine Ornato is teaching agents in his more recent capacity as USSS Assistant Director of the Office of Training?— Brian Beutler (@brianbeutler) June 29, 2022
June 29, 2022Whether or not Trump was that petulant and violent, he certainly wanted to go to the Capitol, to have his Mussolini moment. Trump hasn't denied it, "Anonymous" doesn't deny it. That simple, unchallenged fact, connects with Hutchinson's testimony that Cippolone, in her presence, told Meadows such an act would violate all manner of criminal laws, and was "insane."
Yup. If they're gonna testify, it's without boundaries as to what they saw. There is no criminal exception privilege, even for SS agents.
Also, no. Let’s hear everything they know about the coup attempt, under oath. Let’s not give them one-off opportunity to make an unfalsifiable claim on Trump’s behalf about a red-herring, while leaving everything else they witnessed off limits. https://t.co/ipPrA2OqZs— Brian Beutler (@brianbeutler) June 29, 2022
And no, it is not "second hand evidence." It is what she was told by two different persons with knowledge of the incident. We should expect better than this kind of "analysis."
She was transparent that it was second hand evidence. This is on the committee.— Jonathan Swan (@jonathanvswan) June 29, 2022
Gauntlet thrown. This is exactly where the discussion should be, and no further.
Hutchinson's lawyer last night > https://t.co/xb4dNRbyS7— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) June 29, 2022
Post a Comment