Oh, Rudy. “Fradulent” is not a noun.
Way to bang that drum brother! Keep it going!
Interesting.
So every time I heard somebody use the term “POS” in reference to Giuliani, it meant “Part Of Speech*.”
I did not know that.
*or “Pennzoil Oozing from Sideburns”
Or ‘Pennzoil-Oozing Sideburns’. 
This is how I see it. The Committee can’t give Trumpists anything that could even come close to being called fake. Not once, not a teeny bit. They’re not like baseball players who can hit the ball 3 out of 10 times and be an all star. They’re more like tightrope walkers who can’t miss a single step. Up until that hearsay moment, they’d been doing a spectacular job. I really hope that they corroborated that story, small as it was on the grand scale. Raskin sounds like such a smart lawyer, It’s kind of stunning that, if this was a mistake, it could even have been made.
I think we should stop catering to them so much. Trumpers do not act in good faith. They always, always go for this kind of thing, the magic bullet, the one thing they can attack that somehow cancels out everything else. The world does not work that way. We keep letting them control us with this fear that they are going to attack what we’re doing. They have always and will always do that. The general public is not Trumpers. We need to be speaking to everyone and just ignore the wailing and carrying on from Trumpland. We need to stop letting them control everything all the time. No matter what we do, they will do exactly what they are doing now. So just do the right thing, and don’t let them call the shots. Maybe I’m naive, I’m just sick to death of catering to the craziest among us all the time.
I see no reason at all to be skeptical of Hutchinson’s testimony. So far, nothing more significant than rumor has been offered to challenge it. Trump’s statements are worthless. Vague second-hand denials through media reports are meaningless. Unless and until someone denies what she said, under oath, there’s nothing that conflicts with it.
trump demanded the mags be removed, but were they actually removed? Was it the SS he was demanding remove them, because they really wouldn’t want all those guns up close?
I’m sure they didn’t remove the mags. There’s no way in the world the USSS would allow people known to have rifles get closer to the President. Even if the Pres says those guys are cool.
And while we’re at it, this kind of puts paid to the “they were secretly antifa the whole time” lie.
Not that MAGAts will stop using that lie, of course.
No. The way I understood the testimony, Trump wanted to fill the area of the speech with spectators. You know, for the photos of the crowd size. He knew there were armed people who couldn’t make it past security, but who might fill out the venue if they could get in.
That fool and his eternal disappointment with his teenie weenie peni… crowd size.
I just want to re-iterate @Dahnlor’s original comment and my response to it, because in a brief moment of fortitude I went to the Fox News website to see what they were reporting about the latest Jan 6 developments, and it was the thing I linked below. To be clear, this was the only report they had at the time about anything related to the Jan 6 hearing or Hutchinson’s testimony. IOW, it’s exactly the game I described: focus on an irrelevant detail to try to discredit the entire testimony! They’ve even put an extra twist on it, attempting to blame the Jan 6 committee for not pre-clearing this tidbit with the Secret Service, as if the orange shit-stain’s tantrum in the SUV were the sum total of the whole testimony!
This is how these lying bastards operate.
Yes. And it’s why the committee has to walk a tightrope.
The thing is, from what I can tell, Hutchinson didn’t even say anything false. Conservative respondents are just saying she did by willfully lying. You can’t prevent that.
The Committee isn’t going to satisfy alt-right’s mind any more than a person can avoid being abused by someone who claims they wouldn’t be abusive if only the other weren’t to blame.
Oh. Here’s a surprise:
I’ll be watching this race.
Sorry to keep beating this, but holy hell, you can corroborate a story before you air it.
B-b-but that’s not fair! 
Rusty was loyal. He said he’d vote for Don the Con again. Doesn’t that count for anything?
True all that. All told I’m definitely in less distress about this particular mini-controversy now that I’ve had a few more hours to process it. I would imagine that in the case of someone like my mother, it’s really up to her to want to understand what I’m trying to tell her, rather than any magic words I can utter to make it so.
That said, I’m not as worried about the big picture since if the Secret Service agents are willing to tell their version under oath, then by all means let’s hear their versions of that story, and all of the other things they were witness to on that day, under oath. This WaPo article puts it nicely: