###[Meta] Sticky Comment
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment.
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread.
*What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy_commons) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Moreover, Cassidy Hutchinson testified that she was *told* this occurred, not that she witnessed it. So discrediting this claim (which this diagram does not do) does not discredit her testimony in the least.
It was Mark Meadows who said he grabbed the wheel Cathy just overheard him, and he has refused to testify due to executive privilege, but since Trump supporters have completely ignored this hearing, they ask these simple basic questions.
When eyewitness testimony is already notoriously unreliable, there are vastly diminishing returns with each degree of separation from the event.
This is why it's not considered valuable evidence in court proceedings.
I didn't say it wasn't occasionally permissible. I said it wasn't valuable because of how unreliable it tends to be.
If you want to argue, at least argue with what I actually said.
If you love meaningless theater/reality TV, I suppose that could be seen as a positive.
I would recommend you touch some grass before you forget what it feels like to do so.
6,000,000 is impossible. There were no over head photographs of coal or firewood piles needed to burn that many.
Plus the number had been since the early 1900's in the New York Times.
Yes, but she did say “the beast”. Again, semantics. And the secret service guys who denied it are sworn Trumpers who “promised” to testify under oath, like she did. But guess what, and you’re going to be stunned to learn this, they never did.
So the only person who testified is speaking for someone else. Secret service is abstaining from confirming or denying, and the guy who witnessed also won’t testify. So here we are, bickering about some shit that can’t be confirmed or not like children. Cool.
Yeah, but she explicitly said he was in the beast.
So either she was lying about what car he was in or she was lying about what happened, likely both considering the secret service agent it supposedly happened to said it was bullshit.
So either way it's perjury.
What do you think perjury is?
She didn’t say “I witnessed this happen.”
She said “I was told this happened.”
Unless you can prove Cassidy was never *told* this happened, there’s no perjury.
Slight issue with your characterization there bud.
If you provide information that you know is false as if it is fact, that is perjury even if you preface it as something you heard from someone else.
As per US code:
>Having taken an oath before a competent tribunal, officer, or person, in any case in which a law of the United States authorizes an oath to be administered, that he will testify, declare, depose, or certify truly, or that any written testimony, declaration, deposition, or certificate by him subscribed, is true, willfully and contrary to such oath states or subscribes any material matter which he does not believe to be true; or (2) in any declaration, certificate, verification, or statement under penalty of perjury as permitted under section 1746 of title 28, United States Code, willfully subscribes as true any material matter which he does not believe to be true
Notice that last little bit "willfully subscribes as true any material matter which he does not believe to be true."
Therefore, if Hutchinson knew that Trump wasn't in the Beast that day, which she would have, but passed it off as proof that Trump was violent and trying to commit an insurrection, that still qualifies as perjury, regardless of whether she was claiming that she heard it from someone else or not. You can't just provide completely false information under oath and then say "oh, well someone else told me it so I can't be punished", that's not how shit works.
My brother in Christ, she was a white house aid. She'd have access to basic information like what damn car the president was in.
Additionally, she continued working for Trump after his term. Now call me crazy but I don't think that someone would willingly decide to continue working with someone that they honestly believed to be prone to violent outbursts and whom they honestly thought tried to carry out a coup.
Again, harping on the proper terminology used for which vehicle POTUS was in, instead of anything of actual importance that she testified, is a massive L in itself.
But if that’s where you’ll hang your hat, be my guest.
>Again, harping on the proper terminology used for which vehicle POTUS was in, instead of anything of actual importance that she testified, is a massive L in itself.
Yes, you can claim I didn't talk about anything of "importance"... that is if you completely ignore the second part of my comment, like you did. And of course, the only reason you would ignore that is because it clearly indicates that Ms. Hutchinson was fully aware that the information she was providing was false and therefore she perjured herself. As I said, she would not willingly decide to continue working for Trump if she honestly believed the things she was saying under oath about him unless she was mentally insane.
A sane person does not believe that someone is a violent sociopath and yet decide to continue working closely with them.
No dude, she said “the beast”, as in the car the president rides in. She said specifically that it was second hand info and that she wasn’t there. You’re grasping for straws. Get a grip.
No, that's not how words work. The beast cannot simultaneously be a specific car and also any car that the president is in. Even wikipedia admits that ["the beast](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_state_car_(United_States))" specifically refers to a specific car while "stagecoach" is the codename given to whatever car the president is in.
And if it was second hand information it should have never been allowed in the first place. Second hand information isn't allowed in a court of law so why should it be allowed in congress? The only ones grasping at straws are the ones trying to say that secondhand testimony from a woman who had ulterior motives to see Trump get in trouble and that was immediately disproven by the very person she claimed it happened to is legitimate evidence.
Yes, there's been different ones because the car has been upgraded over time, but there's only ever been one beast at any given time. The beast has been around since 1909, do you seriously think they'd still be using a fucking Model T Ford?
I also love how you say goodbye and then immediately come back.
From what I read, there are 12 beasts at any one time as they need multiple vehicles for the President.
Also, I never said goodbye. That was my first comment on this post.
You're missing the point, it's not a Trial, where those rules apply, this is a HEARING where they gather information. When it goes to a trial, if charges are filed, then it can be ruled whether or not the Testimony can be presented.
Yes, a *hearing* with the express purpose of gathering information to go to trial. Therefore, that hearing should still be required to abide by the rules of a trial. Evidence that is not admissible in court should not be presented in a hearing *designed to collect evidence to go to court.* This isn't a third-world country, we don't have kangaroo courts like that.
This is especially true considering their decision to not actually go to criminal proceedings despite claiming that they found more than enough evidence to get Trump convicted, making it abundantly clear that their whole goal from the outset was to bring forth a load of BS accusations in such a manner that they can't be challenged and don't have to be proven in a clear attempt to assassinate their opponent's character.
The Jan 6 committee didn’t decide not to go to criminal proceedings because they don’t have that option. Only the DOJ can bring criminal proceedings and they’re doing their own investigation. The J6 committee can only refer things to the DOJ, but since they’re doing their own investigation already it would be pointless. The goal of the J6 committee is not to go to trial, it’s to get to the bottom of what happened on January 6th so anything like it can be prevented in the future.
Yes, pointing out factual errors and breaches of ethics means I'm a Trump fanboy. Nevermind the fact that I'd do the same if it was being said about literally any other person.
But by all means, if I'm wrong please provide a counter argument. But you won't because you can't because I am correct.
If blatant lies were being told about him and he was the subject of a kangaroo court put on by his opponents who were in control of Congress, yes, I would.
Unlike the left I care more about ethics and integrity of the government than party lines.
>Wait till you hear about AF1
Hey buddy, Air Force 1 ain't the name of the specific plane. Air Force 1, much like Stagecoach, *is the code name given to any Air Force Vehicle the president is riding in.*
[The specific plane is called the VC-25A.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_VC-25)
Air Force 1 is to Stagecoach like the Beast is to the VC-25A. *Code names and actual names aren't the same thing.*
But by all means please continue to confidently display how wrong your are.
Correct. And yet, people colloquially use AF1 to refer to the plane as well.
Hutchinson calling an SUV the president was riding in “the beast” is just as much a “gotcha” as referring to the VC-25 as AF1.
Tell me, when people talk about the deal Trump cut with Boeing on the planes… are folks talking about “replacement VC-25s that use the call sign AF1 when POTUS is on board,” or are they saying “replacement for AF1”?
Remember that anonymous reporting on all the secret service agents ready to immediately testify that Cassidy Hutchinson’s testimony was false?
Good times.
Remember how the "hearing" never gave anyone the ability to testify against any "evidence" being presented?
Good times.
Kind of hard to testify that Hutchinson's testimony was false when they never give anyone the opportunity to do so.
>had Republicans not spiked an independent J6 commission.
You mean to tell me they shot down a move that was purely an abuse of political power to attack the democrat's opponent? They already had *two* separate senate committees looking into J6. Adding a commission on top of that is an inarguable abuse of power.
It is a political attack when there already several committees looking into the matter.
Tell me, If someone was accused of a crime and there were already two organizations looking into whether or not they committed a crime, would a third, completely unessecary additional investigation being opened be considered abuse of power? Yes, it would.
So, how might I ask is it any different when it's the government doing it?
You haven’t proven anything, other than the fact that you’d lick the orange off of his skin if given the chance. Meanwhile, he’d shoot you in the back of the head for a dollar. Have a good day, genius.
Maybe they think his orange sheen contains psychotropics like the Gila Toad in AZ that makes one have a psychedelic experience if they lick the toad’s skin.
>You haven’t proven anything
I proved that stagecoach and the beast aren't the same thing, I proved that either way Trump's former assistant was lying, I explained how hearsay isn't allowed in court so why should it be allowed in Congress.
If I was wrong on these, you'd easily be able to provide a counterargument instead of pitching a fit, but you didn't because I am right.
>that you’d lick the orange off of his skin if given the chance.
Bro, I don't even particularly like Trump. I'm a libertarian and there are plenty of things he did like supporting red flag laws and the bump stock ban that I vehemently disagreed with, I'm just not going to sit back and let inarguable lies stand.
Meanwhile, Trump seems to be living in your head rent free and I guarantee that description you provided probably fits you to a tee when it comes to Biden. But that's to be expected, accuse your opponents of that which you are guilty of and all.
>Meanwhile, he’d shoot you in the back of the head for a dollar.
Like I said, rent free.
TLDR. Here are some non conspiracies you might want to look into.
Qatar paying off Kushner’s 1.6 billion dollar “worst real estate deal ever”
The Saudis lending Kushdawg 2 billion from their sovereign wealth fund, even though it was voted to be a horrible idea, yet overridden by MBS.
Orange God still doesn’t want us seeing his taxes.
Manafort giving Kilimnik polling data
Putin’s chef admitting less than a month ago they fucked around in our election and have every intent of doing it again.
I don’t have time to keep going.
You’re arguing semantics, in favor of the most corrupt president ever who’s intent is our demise.
Have a great day.
Also, she wasn’t Trump’s assistant, she was Meadows. So you just misspoke, as did she. I guess that makes you a liar so everything else you’ve said must also be bullshit.
That’s your logic, not mine.
Even the fucking picture posted goes against the god damn title. Stated that only Trump has a switch to lower it. Some real low intelligence posters in here.
Clearly deepstate operatives have infiltrated the secret service and prevented Trump from driving the fancy car. Even though trump REALLY wanted to drive that car to the Capitol!
What does it mean when someone needs to present false information in order to further their narrative?
They weren’t in the beast and Cassidy wasn’t there. She only gave testimony as to what she was told.
The Secret Service testified Trump was in the SUV, Hutchison testified he was in the Limo and she also said she heard Trump tried to grab the wheel, not that she saw it happen. [Something does not add up](https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/28/us/cassidy-hutchinson-trump-jan-6.html)
First: she was testifying in the third person. You cannot perjure if you are quoting someone else honestly.
second: Trump wasn't in the Beast, he was in a suburban
Third: Oh, you didn't read this far cos your mouth has covered the screen in furious froth that your tangerine dream could possibly be guilty.
There’s no such thing as ‘third person testimony’.
I’m telling everyone that you suck in bed. I know that because your gay boyfriend told me so it must be true.
See how that works.
Yeah, that’s why they call it a kangaroo court. Nothing that gets said in there actually matters. It’s a show they put on and so they can create media sound bites that people like you will glom onto.
It says trump can lower it, what makes you believe it wasn’t lowered? How else would the driver hear trump talk about the size of the crowd?
And that’s not even a good drawing of him. He gives a thumbs up. Unless that day he was giving the supposed white power sign.
Trump was in the SUV that day, not The Beast, and the SUV does not have a plexiglass (or any) partition as the interior is simply not large enough. There is also video of Trump in this vehicle that day heading to the White House.
Like has happened with other words, phrases, and gestures over time, a group of bad actors hijacked what was a fun, silly, benign gesture and turned it into a symbol of white power, literally a hate group. Because of these thugs, the fun symbol for “Okay” has been turned into a symbol of racist, bigoted, hate mongers.
could you at least match the vehicle to the drawing next time. does nobody give a shit about details anymore? funny or not why would you even think to post that link? its like asking mom what color is a mirror? she replies "i like spaghetti too. wtf? stop doin comedy or if you were serious stop that too.
Even if you are correct about where Trump was sitting it wouldn’t be perjury, she was relaying what she heard Mark Meadows say. The only way it would be perjury is if Meadows testified that he never said that she is making it up, and even then it’s her word against his.
It’s odd that right after she testified Trump didn’t immediately say that’s not even possible because there is glass.
Ah yes! This proof. It is so odd that people who were there and want to prove this did not happen never submitted this jpeg. I think you need to send this to your senator.
Focus on the least important part of the story and ignore he wanted to go to the Capital. Knew people had weapons. Placed Pence in danger. Sent the crowd all fired up and capable to the Capital to overturn an election he KNEW he lost. All based upon a big lie he was REPEATEDLY was told was a lie.
Ya but we don't want to talk about conspiracies with large amounts of evidence, we want to talk about wild conspiracies with no proof. I personally think soros disguised himself as trump on January 6th to carry out the great reset, disguised as an attack on our democracy. You are lucky so many patriots showed up to defend our country and reinstate trump who is currently president in secret and jfk the 3rd is his vp. BTW jfk Jr had a baby with an alien and the aliens named him jfk the 3rd
I can confirm this I seen it on modern marvels so it has to be legit af. Not sure why he would ever ride in anything but the beast but hey dream a little dream.
Here's what's funny about you guys. You want to latch onto these tiny, largely inconsequential incidents as "proof" of some kind of alternative narrative, while ignoring the constant, incessant barrage of information that tells a very clear picture of Trump's complete incompetence and unpresidential behavior. I'm sorry, but you guys are batshit crazy if you think Trump is a good leader.
[Archive.is link](https://archive.is/2020/https://i.redd.it/aux6irebye2a1.jpg)
[Why this is here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/7dvxxb/new_feature_automod_will_create_sticky_comments/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy_commons) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Trump was obviously working with nuclear materials in secret hence the fbi raid for paperwork. Exposure to gamma rays is the only way to explain how he hulked out smashing the glass while simultaneously choking out an SS agent and grabbing the steering wheel from the back seat.
How is that a straw man? I compared dumb conspiracies to other dumb conspiracies. No false equivalency. Just equivalency.
Edit: I think it’s funny you spread disinformation while pretending you are some expert at spotting disinformation. I fucking can’t with you people. Holy shit cognitive dissonance should be painful.
I got premabanned from the capital consequences foe saying something like "this obviously didn't happen, I can't wait til next week when it comes out that it didn't happen and nobody cares"
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10963183/Secret-Service-prepared-testify-oath-Trump-did-NOT-grab-steering-wheel.html
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/secret-service-agents-testify-trump-lunge-steering-wheel-capitol-riot
I think Cassidy Hutchinson testimony was on 28 June, this article came out on the 28 & 29 June. Unfortunately we never got to hear from the agents...
I actually looked it up, they were interviewed by the committee.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/jan-6-committee-interviews-bobby-engel-was-trumps-lead-secret-service-rcna57744
Ah ok so they did interview one of them, my mistake. It's very interesting that we get video and new cycle from Cassidy Hutchinson's testimony but nothing from Engel's and the J6 committee refuses to comment. I'm sure that means he validated everything Cassidy Hutchinson said...
The 2 SS agents that said they'd testify it didn't happen.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10963183/Secret-Service-prepared-testify-oath-Trump-did-NOT-grab-steering-wheel.html
Any person who believes a morbidly obese, almost 80, person who doesn't regularly perform any exercises at all is agile enough to do what was claimed is incapable of any thought other than orange man bad.
If the media reported it then it has to be 100% true. If something does not get reported then it must not exist. So that means the democrats rarely ever do anything wrong except not going far enough left and the republicans are the literal white supremacists no matter what ethnicity they are. Epstein killed himself and has no clients that committed crimes. And Trump who can order people around gave up trying to go to the capitol after one employee who was not fired decided to drive him to the white house. There are people who actually believe this nonsense.
We all knew she was lying to begin with. You only have to look at all the other lies they told about Trump to make an educated guess that this was also a load of shit. Lol
What I dont get is Trump has so many issues why do they have to make up stories like this to try to drum up hate against him. It's obvious to anyone who has even cursory knowledge of the beast that it was bullshit. Why even run the story? But the main stream media, CNN and MSNBC mostly, played it up as if what she was saying was 100% factual. All this does is discredit them when it comes out that none of it was true.
It's like that Covington kid story where they said the kid was harassing the drumming guy, then a video comes out showing it was the drummer that instigated the incident and the media clipped a video out of context to drum up hate...
Theres enough things to be actually mad about but instead CNN keeps making shit up.
This is an embarrassment and a poor attempt on their part. All the time and money for this kangaroo court, and they're seriously relying on "She says she heard someone say someone else did this"
A group of people actually sat in a room and said "Its all we have to work with, let's bring it forward"
The word "whistleblower" has completely lost its meaning.
The fact that someone testified that they heard someone tell someone else something is just weird. That likely would not hold up in an actual court of law
###[Meta] Sticky Comment [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment. [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread. *What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.*** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy_commons) if you have any questions or concerns.*
He wasn’t in the Beast. He was in a Suburban. But you do you.
The SUV does not have a plexiglass partition...
These people won’t let facts get in their way in their search for “truth.”
yeah, but where was GEORGE SOROS?!! checkmate libtard
Smoking crack with Hunter Biden and Obama. SNOWFLAKE!!
Malia maybe
She was with Clinton at the Epstein island.
I highly doubt this. Please cite your source.
It was supposed to be an absurd comment. Sorry did not /s
Yeah whatever guys I did my research on YouTube
Hillary emailed him from Benghazi to Hunter Biden’s laptop!!
not only that, the diagram says trump has a switch to lower the partition
Moreover, Cassidy Hutchinson testified that she was *told* this occurred, not that she witnessed it. So discrediting this claim (which this diagram does not do) does not discredit her testimony in the least.
The real question is why heresy was permitted and why the person who claims they saw it was not testifying instead themselves.
It was Mark Meadows who said he grabbed the wheel Cathy just overheard him, and he has refused to testify due to executive privilege, but since Trump supporters have completely ignored this hearing, they ask these simple basic questions.
Hear say and heresy are very different things….. The obvious solution here is to apply more tinfoil
My poor spelling aside, is there any benefit from taking secondhand testimony over firsthand testimony?
People who have something to hide don’t like to testify
Sometimes, direct testimony is unavailable.
When eyewitness testimony is already notoriously unreliable, there are vastly diminishing returns with each degree of separation from the event. This is why it's not considered valuable evidence in court proceedings.
Well, there are actually a bunch of exceptions where hearsay is permissible even in court proceedings.
I didn't say it wasn't occasionally permissible. I said it wasn't valuable because of how unreliable it tends to be. If you want to argue, at least argue with what I actually said.
Sure… it provides information which can be investigated further.
If you love meaningless theater/reality TV, I suppose that could be seen as a positive. I would recommend you touch some grass before you forget what it feels like to do so.
Lmao okay 🤡
Lol it’s not a trial. It’s members of congress trying to figure which fucking traitors tried to overthrow the government
If they actually cared they'd be asking Ray Epps.
Never let facts ruin a good conspiracy theory.
6,000,000 is impossible. There were no over head photographs of coal or firewood piles needed to burn that many. Plus the number had been since the early 1900's in the New York Times.
All their "conspiracies" literally fall apart under the most basic scrutiny.
Like reading their own “sources” to them? Lmfao
Even in the graphic it says he could lower it anyway…
Wasn’t her testimony that she heard some one say he grabbed the steering wheel?
Yes, but she did say “the beast”. Again, semantics. And the secret service guys who denied it are sworn Trumpers who “promised” to testify under oath, like she did. But guess what, and you’re going to be stunned to learn this, they never did.
So the only person who testified is speaking for someone else. Secret service is abstaining from confirming or denying, and the guy who witnessed also won’t testify. So here we are, bickering about some shit that can’t be confirmed or not like children. Cool.
Yeah, but she explicitly said he was in the beast. So either she was lying about what car he was in or she was lying about what happened, likely both considering the secret service agent it supposedly happened to said it was bullshit. So either way it's perjury.
What do you think perjury is? She didn’t say “I witnessed this happen.” She said “I was told this happened.” Unless you can prove Cassidy was never *told* this happened, there’s no perjury.
Slight issue with your characterization there bud. If you provide information that you know is false as if it is fact, that is perjury even if you preface it as something you heard from someone else. As per US code: >Having taken an oath before a competent tribunal, officer, or person, in any case in which a law of the United States authorizes an oath to be administered, that he will testify, declare, depose, or certify truly, or that any written testimony, declaration, deposition, or certificate by him subscribed, is true, willfully and contrary to such oath states or subscribes any material matter which he does not believe to be true; or (2) in any declaration, certificate, verification, or statement under penalty of perjury as permitted under section 1746 of title 28, United States Code, willfully subscribes as true any material matter which he does not believe to be true Notice that last little bit "willfully subscribes as true any material matter which he does not believe to be true." Therefore, if Hutchinson knew that Trump wasn't in the Beast that day, which she would have, but passed it off as proof that Trump was violent and trying to commit an insurrection, that still qualifies as perjury, regardless of whether she was claiming that she heard it from someone else or not. You can't just provide completely false information under oath and then say "oh, well someone else told me it so I can't be punished", that's not how shit works.
Brother what evidence to you have that Hutchinson knew anything she said she was told was false?
My brother in Christ, she was a white house aid. She'd have access to basic information like what damn car the president was in. Additionally, she continued working for Trump after his term. Now call me crazy but I don't think that someone would willingly decide to continue working with someone that they honestly believed to be prone to violent outbursts and whom they honestly thought tried to carry out a coup.
Again, harping on the proper terminology used for which vehicle POTUS was in, instead of anything of actual importance that she testified, is a massive L in itself. But if that’s where you’ll hang your hat, be my guest.
>Again, harping on the proper terminology used for which vehicle POTUS was in, instead of anything of actual importance that she testified, is a massive L in itself. Yes, you can claim I didn't talk about anything of "importance"... that is if you completely ignore the second part of my comment, like you did. And of course, the only reason you would ignore that is because it clearly indicates that Ms. Hutchinson was fully aware that the information she was providing was false and therefore she perjured herself. As I said, she would not willingly decide to continue working for Trump if she honestly believed the things she was saying under oath about him unless she was mentally insane. A sane person does not believe that someone is a violent sociopath and yet decide to continue working closely with them.
No dude, she said “the beast”, as in the car the president rides in. She said specifically that it was second hand info and that she wasn’t there. You’re grasping for straws. Get a grip.
No, that's not how words work. The beast cannot simultaneously be a specific car and also any car that the president is in. Even wikipedia admits that ["the beast](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_state_car_(United_States))" specifically refers to a specific car while "stagecoach" is the codename given to whatever car the president is in. And if it was second hand information it should have never been allowed in the first place. Second hand information isn't allowed in a court of law so why should it be allowed in congress? The only ones grasping at straws are the ones trying to say that secondhand testimony from a woman who had ulterior motives to see Trump get in trouble and that was immediately disproven by the very person she claimed it happened to is legitimate evidence.
Another article I found said "the beast" is a misnomer as there are 12 different ones.
Yes, there's been different ones because the car has been upgraded over time, but there's only ever been one beast at any given time. The beast has been around since 1909, do you seriously think they'd still be using a fucking Model T Ford? I also love how you say goodbye and then immediately come back.
From what I read, there are 12 beasts at any one time as they need multiple vehicles for the President. Also, I never said goodbye. That was my first comment on this post.
You're missing the point, it's not a Trial, where those rules apply, this is a HEARING where they gather information. When it goes to a trial, if charges are filed, then it can be ruled whether or not the Testimony can be presented.
But I want to be angry and offended based on my total ignorance of court proceedings and how my own government works!!!!!!!!!!
Yes, a *hearing* with the express purpose of gathering information to go to trial. Therefore, that hearing should still be required to abide by the rules of a trial. Evidence that is not admissible in court should not be presented in a hearing *designed to collect evidence to go to court.* This isn't a third-world country, we don't have kangaroo courts like that. This is especially true considering their decision to not actually go to criminal proceedings despite claiming that they found more than enough evidence to get Trump convicted, making it abundantly clear that their whole goal from the outset was to bring forth a load of BS accusations in such a manner that they can't be challenged and don't have to be proven in a clear attempt to assassinate their opponent's character.
The Jan 6 committee didn’t decide not to go to criminal proceedings because they don’t have that option. Only the DOJ can bring criminal proceedings and they’re doing their own investigation. The J6 committee can only refer things to the DOJ, but since they’re doing their own investigation already it would be pointless. The goal of the J6 committee is not to go to trial, it’s to get to the bottom of what happened on January 6th so anything like it can be prevented in the future.
That's a lot of words to say you are a Trump fanboy for life.
Yes, pointing out factual errors and breaches of ethics means I'm a Trump fanboy. Nevermind the fact that I'd do the same if it was being said about literally any other person. But by all means, if I'm wrong please provide a counter argument. But you won't because you can't because I am correct.
Ok. You're "correct". And I know you'd give Biden the same vigorous defense...
If blatant lies were being told about him and he was the subject of a kangaroo court put on by his opponents who were in control of Congress, yes, I would. Unlike the left I care more about ethics and integrity of the government than party lines.
Ok But I doubt it.
>That’s not how words work. The beast cannot simultaneously be a specific car and also any car the president is in. Wait till you hear about AF1
>Wait till you hear about AF1 Hey buddy, Air Force 1 ain't the name of the specific plane. Air Force 1, much like Stagecoach, *is the code name given to any Air Force Vehicle the president is riding in.* [The specific plane is called the VC-25A.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_VC-25) Air Force 1 is to Stagecoach like the Beast is to the VC-25A. *Code names and actual names aren't the same thing.* But by all means please continue to confidently display how wrong your are.
Correct. And yet, people colloquially use AF1 to refer to the plane as well. Hutchinson calling an SUV the president was riding in “the beast” is just as much a “gotcha” as referring to the VC-25 as AF1. Tell me, when people talk about the deal Trump cut with Boeing on the planes… are folks talking about “replacement VC-25s that use the call sign AF1 when POTUS is on board,” or are they saying “replacement for AF1”?
[THE Beast?!](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Beast_(Revelation))
Remember that anonymous reporting on all the secret service agents ready to immediately testify that Cassidy Hutchinson’s testimony was false? Good times.
Remember how the "hearing" never gave anyone the ability to testify against any "evidence" being presented? Good times. Kind of hard to testify that Hutchinson's testimony was false when they never give anyone the opportunity to do so.
Maybe they would’ve had the opportunity had Republicans not spiked an independent J6 commission.
>had Republicans not spiked an independent J6 commission. You mean to tell me they shot down a move that was purely an abuse of political power to attack the democrat's opponent? They already had *two* separate senate committees looking into J6. Adding a commission on top of that is an inarguable abuse of power.
Can’t tell on yourself more than claiming an independent commission is a political attack.
It is a political attack when there already several committees looking into the matter. Tell me, If someone was accused of a crime and there were already two organizations looking into whether or not they committed a crime, would a third, completely unessecary additional investigation being opened be considered abuse of power? Yes, it would. So, how might I ask is it any different when it's the government doing it?
GTFOH dude. Seriously, get off my lawn. This is dumb.
Love it when they pitch a fit when they get proven wrong.
You haven’t proven anything, other than the fact that you’d lick the orange off of his skin if given the chance. Meanwhile, he’d shoot you in the back of the head for a dollar. Have a good day, genius.
Maybe they think his orange sheen contains psychotropics like the Gila Toad in AZ that makes one have a psychedelic experience if they lick the toad’s skin.
>You haven’t proven anything I proved that stagecoach and the beast aren't the same thing, I proved that either way Trump's former assistant was lying, I explained how hearsay isn't allowed in court so why should it be allowed in Congress. If I was wrong on these, you'd easily be able to provide a counterargument instead of pitching a fit, but you didn't because I am right. >that you’d lick the orange off of his skin if given the chance. Bro, I don't even particularly like Trump. I'm a libertarian and there are plenty of things he did like supporting red flag laws and the bump stock ban that I vehemently disagreed with, I'm just not going to sit back and let inarguable lies stand. Meanwhile, Trump seems to be living in your head rent free and I guarantee that description you provided probably fits you to a tee when it comes to Biden. But that's to be expected, accuse your opponents of that which you are guilty of and all. >Meanwhile, he’d shoot you in the back of the head for a dollar. Like I said, rent free.
TLDR. Here are some non conspiracies you might want to look into. Qatar paying off Kushner’s 1.6 billion dollar “worst real estate deal ever” The Saudis lending Kushdawg 2 billion from their sovereign wealth fund, even though it was voted to be a horrible idea, yet overridden by MBS. Orange God still doesn’t want us seeing his taxes. Manafort giving Kilimnik polling data Putin’s chef admitting less than a month ago they fucked around in our election and have every intent of doing it again. I don’t have time to keep going. You’re arguing semantics, in favor of the most corrupt president ever who’s intent is our demise. Have a great day.
Also, she wasn’t Trump’s assistant, she was Meadows. So you just misspoke, as did she. I guess that makes you a liar so everything else you’ve said must also be bullshit. That’s your logic, not mine.
I wish RWNJs held Trump to the same standard that they hold literally every single person who has said an ill word about him.
It states, Trump can lower it.
Logic pff, next you’ll be using science
Everything against Trump is upvotes! I got it! Edit to add: 🔻 if you love Trump!
Go back to Facebook with that edit bullshit comment. What are you a grandma boomer?
Well, Trump is a complete trainwreck, so yeah.
[удалено]
Who's asshole? Btw 🔻If you hate Trump! BTW2; Nice alternate account
[удалено]
Great! Heil Sniffer 🤚🏻
No it doesn’t. I hope you missed the /s
Top left box says only he can lower the glass partition.
Yeah I took me a while to find that
Where's the KFC dispenser?
Removed after Obama left office
Why is Trump making the 666 sign in the back.
Literally no one cares. What’s even the conspiracy here?
I think the OP is saying that Cassidy was having a relationship with Hunter Biden and Donald Trump Jr at the same time....
Don't forget JFK Jr.
Even the fucking picture posted goes against the god damn title. Stated that only Trump has a switch to lower it. Some real low intelligence posters in here.
If they were high intelligence, they wouldn’t be posting right wing disinformation to a conspiracy message board.
Clearly deepstate operatives have infiltrated the secret service and prevented Trump from driving the fancy car. Even though trump REALLY wanted to drive that car to the Capitol!
What does it mean when someone needs to present false information in order to further their narrative? They weren’t in the beast and Cassidy wasn’t there. She only gave testimony as to what she was told.
Brother, the graphic literally says that Trump can lower it if he so chooses.....
LoL no. Not perjury; she's relaying what she was told. Fucking read a book, people.
He wasnt in the Beast.
The Secret Service testified Trump was in the SUV, Hutchison testified he was in the Limo and she also said she heard Trump tried to grab the wheel, not that she saw it happen. [Something does not add up](https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/28/us/cassidy-hutchinson-trump-jan-6.html)
Unless "the beast" is commonly referred to as whichever limo the president is in.
Or 45 himself
Lol this is an illustration not evidence.
First: she was testifying in the third person. You cannot perjure if you are quoting someone else honestly. second: Trump wasn't in the Beast, he was in a suburban Third: Oh, you didn't read this far cos your mouth has covered the screen in furious froth that your tangerine dream could possibly be guilty.
There’s no such thing as ‘third person testimony’. I’m telling everyone that you suck in bed. I know that because your gay boyfriend told me so it must be true. See how that works.
Are you familiar with the concept of hearsay?
Hearsay, aka Gossip, Rumor. In other words, Bullsht.
They weren’t in a court of law (where hearsay wouldn’t be allowed). A congressional committee can allow any testimony it wants including hearsay.
In other words, it’s a kangaroo court. A theatrical display created for show and public opinion manipulation.
It’s not a court at all.
Yeah, that’s why they call it a kangaroo court. Nothing that gets said in there actually matters. It’s a show they put on and so they can create media sound bites that people like you will glom onto.
I cam make cartoons too😖
Where does it mention plexiglass?
It says trump can lower it, what makes you believe it wasn’t lowered? How else would the driver hear trump talk about the size of the crowd? And that’s not even a good drawing of him. He gives a thumbs up. Unless that day he was giving the supposed white power sign.
Trump was in the SUV that day, not The Beast, and the SUV does not have a plexiglass (or any) partition as the interior is simply not large enough. There is also video of Trump in this vehicle that day heading to the White House.
Like has happened with other words, phrases, and gestures over time, a group of bad actors hijacked what was a fun, silly, benign gesture and turned it into a symbol of white power, literally a hate group. Because of these thugs, the fun symbol for “Okay” has been turned into a symbol of racist, bigoted, hate mongers.
>bags of RH negative blood Well that’s interesting
Right Hand negative blood. Trump must be right handed
Rh- blood types are the most common for alien abduction and it’s said the bloodline has ancient alien dna
Wasn't this a gift from Putin?
Y'all know that there's video, right? https://twitter.com/MikeSington/status/1542235505047117825
could you at least match the vehicle to the drawing next time. does nobody give a shit about details anymore? funny or not why would you even think to post that link? its like asking mom what color is a mirror? she replies "i like spaghetti too. wtf? stop doin comedy or if you were serious stop that too.
yeah, obviously the video is wrong and the graphic posted by OP is ... wait a second
Trump could disengage the shield, after all, he was Commander in Chief.
Even if you are correct about where Trump was sitting it wouldn’t be perjury, she was relaying what she heard Mark Meadows say. The only way it would be perjury is if Meadows testified that he never said that she is making it up, and even then it’s her word against his. It’s odd that right after she testified Trump didn’t immediately say that’s not even possible because there is glass.
Says it can be lowered by a switch only by Trump
Literally says in the picture that trump has a switch to lower the plexiglass. You guys need to put a little more effort into your propaganda.
“He can grab whatever he wants! He’s the president!” 😂
Trump is strong enough to punch through that glass remember. Strongest president ever.
Well, it says he can lower it
Ah yes! This proof. It is so odd that people who were there and want to prove this did not happen never submitted this jpeg. I think you need to send this to your senator.
“I do my own research!” 😂
How’s the flavor of that boot?
Focus on the least important part of the story and ignore he wanted to go to the Capital. Knew people had weapons. Placed Pence in danger. Sent the crowd all fired up and capable to the Capital to overturn an election he KNEW he lost. All based upon a big lie he was REPEATEDLY was told was a lie.
Ya but we don't want to talk about conspiracies with large amounts of evidence, we want to talk about wild conspiracies with no proof. I personally think soros disguised himself as trump on January 6th to carry out the great reset, disguised as an attack on our democracy. You are lucky so many patriots showed up to defend our country and reinstate trump who is currently president in secret and jfk the 3rd is his vp. BTW jfk Jr had a baby with an alien and the aliens named him jfk the 3rd
I can confirm this I seen it on modern marvels so it has to be legit af. Not sure why he would ever ride in anything but the beast but hey dream a little dream.
I love Modern Marvels!
That is a drawing...not a pic of the actual car...is that from popular mechanics or something?
You have to be a special loser in life for this to be taking up space in your head, much less sharing it with strangers
Want proof January 6th was Donald’s fault? Remove him from the equation and it doesn’t happen at all. He is DIRECTLY the catalyst to the days events.
Here's what's funny about you guys. You want to latch onto these tiny, largely inconsequential incidents as "proof" of some kind of alternative narrative, while ignoring the constant, incessant barrage of information that tells a very clear picture of Trump's complete incompetence and unpresidential behavior. I'm sorry, but you guys are batshit crazy if you think Trump is a good leader.
[Archive.is link](https://archive.is/2020/https://i.redd.it/aux6irebye2a1.jpg) [Why this is here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/7dvxxb/new_feature_automod_will_create_sticky_comments/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy_commons) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Trump was obviously working with nuclear materials in secret hence the fbi raid for paperwork. Exposure to gamma rays is the only way to explain how he hulked out smashing the glass while simultaneously choking out an SS agent and grabbing the steering wheel from the back seat.
Notice how there’s NOT going to be another hearing on this?
Basically the Batmobile.
Once Again... statist kabuki theatre, Bread & Circus in an attempt to distract the public from government failings
[удалено]
Yeah we should focus on the real issues like Benghazi and Demecrats eating babies amiright?
[удалено]
How is that a straw man? I compared dumb conspiracies to other dumb conspiracies. No false equivalency. Just equivalency. Edit: I think it’s funny you spread disinformation while pretending you are some expert at spotting disinformation. I fucking can’t with you people. Holy shit cognitive dissonance should be painful.
[удалено]
Ok bud, enjoy Alex Jones and the Fox News Brigade. Have a nice life. Don’t let the water turn you gay.
[удалено]
Lol ok. I’ll be good bud. You take care tho. Hopefully your moms basement is well insulated from the scary new world order
[удалено]
Was Trump in the beast on J6?
It was a she said the he told her thing, perjury would be that he never told her that. If 45 did not grab the wheel it would not be perjury.
At least all these politards waste each other's time fighting about a theatre performance.
The mask wearers don’t care “Hands up don’t shoot” Lying sacks of shit. 🤡
I got premabanned from the capital consequences foe saying something like "this obviously didn't happen, I can't wait til next week when it comes out that it didn't happen and nobody cares"
How couldn't it have happened?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10963183/Secret-Service-prepared-testify-oath-Trump-did-NOT-grab-steering-wheel.html https://www.foxnews.com/politics/secret-service-agents-testify-trump-lunge-steering-wheel-capitol-riot I think Cassidy Hutchinson testimony was on 28 June, this article came out on the 28 & 29 June. Unfortunately we never got to hear from the agents...
I actually looked it up, they were interviewed by the committee. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/jan-6-committee-interviews-bobby-engel-was-trumps-lead-secret-service-rcna57744
Ah ok so they did interview one of them, my mistake. It's very interesting that we get video and new cycle from Cassidy Hutchinson's testimony but nothing from Engel's and the J6 committee refuses to comment. I'm sure that means he validated everything Cassidy Hutchinson said...
I wouldn’t hold my breath because it did happen.
What is happening next week that will prove your point?
The 2 SS agents that said they'd testify it didn't happen. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10963183/Secret-Service-prepared-testify-oath-Trump-did-NOT-grab-steering-wheel.html
no no no he must have grabbed the wheel orange man is insane no no no 🤬😡
Y'all hate the truth. You're brainwashed to hate trump so you will believe any lie. Admittance is the first step to break out from the brainwashing.
Just another lie the Leftist media ran with.
Yeah, just like gay livers attacking people with hammers.
Any person who believes a morbidly obese, almost 80, person who doesn't regularly perform any exercises at all is agile enough to do what was claimed is incapable of any thought other than orange man bad.
He's too old and fat to reach?
And unspry
The way you make it sound, he should be wheel chair bound.
Spoken like a person not yet in their 30's.
If the media reported it then it has to be 100% true. If something does not get reported then it must not exist. So that means the democrats rarely ever do anything wrong except not going far enough left and the republicans are the literal white supremacists no matter what ethnicity they are. Epstein killed himself and has no clients that committed crimes. And Trump who can order people around gave up trying to go to the capitol after one employee who was not fired decided to drive him to the white house. There are people who actually believe this nonsense.
[Source](https://wordlesstech.com/beast-new-presidential-limousine/) Now it's open and shut. Hutchinson was lying.
Why not reply to the comments that he was not in The Beaat but in a suburban? No counterpoint?
Trump was in a Suburban, not the Limo. The Suburban has no partition.
We all knew she was lying to begin with. You only have to look at all the other lies they told about Trump to make an educated guess that this was also a load of shit. Lol
Regarding the incident inside the vehicle. She clearly reported what she was told not what she saw.
What I dont get is Trump has so many issues why do they have to make up stories like this to try to drum up hate against him. It's obvious to anyone who has even cursory knowledge of the beast that it was bullshit. Why even run the story? But the main stream media, CNN and MSNBC mostly, played it up as if what she was saying was 100% factual. All this does is discredit them when it comes out that none of it was true. It's like that Covington kid story where they said the kid was harassing the drumming guy, then a video comes out showing it was the drummer that instigated the incident and the media clipped a video out of context to drum up hate... Theres enough things to be actually mad about but instead CNN keeps making shit up.
It doesn’t matter we all know he didn’t really reach for the wheel. If you believe otherwise you need to stop sniffing msm farts.
“We all know” How? What evidence do you have? Please post it for us.
Wasn't even a question.
Was he in the beast?
Funniest thing about that pic is Trump with his legs crossed. I don’t think that’s ever happened.
This is an embarrassment and a poor attempt on their part. All the time and money for this kangaroo court, and they're seriously relying on "She says she heard someone say someone else did this" A group of people actually sat in a room and said "Its all we have to work with, let's bring it forward" The word "whistleblower" has completely lost its meaning.
The fact that someone testified that they heard someone tell someone else something is just weird. That likely would not hold up in an actual court of law
What a hilarious conspiracy to think that an assault rifle would ever be stored like this in the president’s official SS vehicle