The Amateur Message Boards of the World Famous VoyeurWeb

Hutchinson then said, “Do you happen to know a First Amendment fund POC I could reach out to? I was subpoenaed in early Nov., but the committee waited to serve me until last week (after Ben’s deposition). I had to accept service because the U.S. Marshalls came to my apartment last Wednesday, but I haven’t made contact with the Committee. I’m just on a tight timeline and just trying to figure out what my options are to deal with this BS”

So what you are saying is that Hutchinson is a conservative "free speech" Republican Trump supporter with no motivation whatsoever to lie to the Committee. Got it, dimwit.

Once again johnforbes steps in it because he can't recognize the implications of anything he dutifully regurgitates for his handlers.

Incidentally, "BS" does not refer to the committee but to the subpoena/testifying date issue, dummy. Should she be considered a hostile witness, johnny?

Mr Forbes, of course, is simply seeking to ascertain what sort of a witness this 29-year-old is.

She sought legal help from a conservative group and referred to the Committee and her then-potential testimony as "BS."

To be fair, had she seen any of Clown's posts, surely reason and logic dictate that she would also have called them "BS."

Yes, johnny, we get it. She's a hardcore Republican who still likes Trump.

So she has no motivation whatsoever to lie about anything she said, does she. But she had to tell the truth because she was under oath.

You stepped in it, making the case for the Democrats, and you look like a fool.

You aren't called "dimwit" for nothing.

So she heard something while she was in the middle of a daisy chain and now the committee takes it as gospel...
Had she said something favorable about Trump we would never know about it...

This can be cleared right up by having the Secret Service agents testify UNDER OATH.

Also Trump can clear this up....UNDER OATH.

And this will happen in 4...3...2...1............................................