Originally Posted by Shaps
Much of what she said was double hearsay. For example, she reported that Meadows told her that Meadows heard Trump say something. Double hearsay should be viewed very skeptically, not necessarily because you think the witness is lying but because pass-the-story testimony is inherently risky.
Her testimony might not stand up in a court case, but unless actual eyewitnesses honor subpoenas and testify under oath, her account will likely be the account that most of the country believes. I have to wonder if the public Hutchinson hearing was designed to pressure actual eyewitnesses to testify.
Perhaps a secret service agent will testify that Trump did not attempt to grab the steering wheel. An issue will then be why Tony Ornato told Hutchinson that Trump tried to grab the steering wheel. Perhaps Ornato will testify under oath about that matter. If eyewitness are willing to appear to contradict that point, why won't they appear to contradict other more important points raised by Hutchinson? The implication will be that the only point she had wrong was about grabbing the steering wheel.
Reply With Quote
