A new article of mine just went up at Discourse making a more detailed case for school choice. I focus, as I have recently, on how school choice is a solution to the ideological war for control over our schools, including how this problem was programmed into the public schools from the beginning.
While I agree that Trump is unfit to be President, your all-in subscription to Cassidy Hutchinson's testimony as described by the Wash. Examiner is unwarranted and disappointing. Her performance was largely based on hearsay and appeals hugely to anyone who hates Trump and is therefore likely to believe anything bad said about him. The hearing itself is unlike the usual Congressional hearing and is devoid of any defense of Trump. Hutchinson's testimony would be destroyed by any competent first-year law student on cross examination.
Hutchinson's testimony depended heavily on the words "so-and-so said something to the effect of.,...". That phrase is repeated dozens of times, ie, she did not know the exact wording, she was only "in the vicinity of" the discussion she overheard, and unless she has notes she took at the time, how likely is she to get the quotes correct? Hearsay, period.
Her description of Trump's supposed behavior toward the driver of his car ( lunging for the steering wheel, grabbing at the arm of the security man in the car) is disputed by the men themselves who were THERE, which Hutchinson was not. To accept this testimony at face value, and calling it "explosive" and "stunning" , and refusing to allow anyone to respond in committee, is obscenely partisan and non-credible on its face.
There are also reports , still to be confirmed, that Miss Hutchinson nevertheless stayed on Trump's team and indicated she wanted to go to Florida when he moved there and continue to work for him, but was turned down . If true, this suggests that her testimony may be influenced by sour grapes. In any case, Trump deserves to be accorded the proper respect for his rights, no matter how much you may despise him.
While I agree that Trump is unfit to be President, your all-in subscription to Cassidy Hutchinson's testimony as described by the Wash. Examiner is unwarranted and disappointing. Her performance was largely based on hearsay and appeals hugely to anyone who hates Trump and is therefore likely to believe anything bad said about him. The hearing itself is unlike the usual Congressional hearing and is devoid of any defense of Trump. Hutchinson's testimony would be destroyed by any competent first-year law student on cross examination.
Hutchinson's testimony depended heavily on the words "so-and-so said something to the effect of.,...". That phrase is repeated dozens of times, ie, she did not know the exact wording, she was only "in the vicinity of" the discussion she overheard, and unless she has notes she took at the time, how likely is she to get the quotes correct? Hearsay, period.
Her description of Trump's supposed behavior toward the driver of his car ( lunging for the steering wheel, grabbing at the arm of the security man in the car) is disputed by the men themselves who were THERE, which Hutchinson was not. To accept this testimony at face value, and calling it "explosive" and "stunning" , and refusing to allow anyone to respond in committee, is obscenely partisan and non-credible on its face.
There are also reports , still to be confirmed, that Miss Hutchinson nevertheless stayed on Trump's team and indicated she wanted to go to Florida when he moved there and continue to work for him, but was turned down . If true, this suggests that her testimony may be influenced by sour grapes. In any case, Trump deserves to be accorded the proper respect for his rights, no matter how much you may despise him.