Comments by "L.W. Paradis" (@l.w.paradis2108) on "Ex-Trump Aide Drops Bombshell After Bombshell In Jan.6 Hearing" video.

@03stmlax I don't disagree. This was not a Perry Mason moment -- the Committee knew in advance exactly what her testimony would be, and what YouTubers like Rational National would say about it. It is, in short, a reality show. And they say they don't like Trump. We know what is the sincerest form of flattery . . .
2
@MrSoonerCal In the room. With the agents. Who were just with Trump. Who told her. What happened. Yes. That is correct.
2
This is hearsay. She witnessed none of this. She claims she was told every one of these "bombshells." The rebuttal to characterizing this as hearsay is nonsense. This is information about WHO has firsthand knowledge, and THUS should be subpoenaed to testify.
1
Are you this easily duped?
1
Liz Skelton Nothing she said can lead to prison for anyone. The substance of her testimony was not firsthand knowledge of what Trump did, but pointed to WHO actually was there and has firsthand knowledge of Trump's actions on 1/6, and needs to be subpoened to testify by Congress -- or a grand jury, if they are going to seriously consider indictments. I've never seen legal news reported worse than it is now. This entire video was nonsense. Pure grift. As a Canadian, this guy doesn't even take the time to get the most basic facts about the US legal system straight.
1
Her testimony is hearsay. Its sole value at present is to point to who has firsthand knowledge of these events. Her testimony supports a subpoena for each of those people, who told her they witnessed what Trump said and did for themselves. She wasn't there.
1
@t.dmytryshyn2615 The agents who she testified told her what happened need to be subpoenaed immediately. Let's see whether they are.
1