[UCANSEE2]

is there a testimony difference or is Cummings blowing smoke?

Cummings brought this issue up during the hearing.

Mr. Hicks said that he felt he was being ignored/persecuted/reduced to a lower job position/yelled at/etc.

Cummings brought up the fact that they had a piece of paper that Hicks had signed stating that (AT THE TIME) he was not being punished. Apparently this was signed by Hicks in the early stages of the incident, and the DEMS are trying to use it to say that he is contradicting himself.

I.E. The best they got is a bunch of B.S. that anyone can see means nothing, considering what they have done to him since he signed it.

[Mortrey]

Your tagline says it all:

The monsters are due on Maple Street.

Only, The monsters are HERE on Maple Street.

[NonValueAdded]

Thanks ... a signed piece of paper by an employee stating "he was not being punished" screams that he was being punished.

[CottShop]

[[Cummings brought up the fact that they had a piece of paper that Hicks had signed stating that (AT THE TIME) he was not being punished. Apparently this was signed by Hicks in the early stages of the incident, and the DEMS are trying to use it to say that he is contradicting himself.]]

The republicans need to recall him and ask “So Mr Hicks, Is it your opinion that AFTER you signed that statement that the left then began intimidating you, bullying you and harrasing you and htreatening to demote you in order to keep you from testifying?”

And

“Sionce you were harrassed and threatened with demotion, is it your contention that the left was tryign to force you to say soemthign agaisnt your will so that htey could hten later politicise your previous statements BEFORE they began the threats and harrassments?”

turn htis right back aroudn o nthe scum o nthe left liek cummings-

[william clark]

Actually, based on what I heard in the hearings, I think in this case what Cummings is referring to, apart from his ignorance of fundamental English, is to say that Hicks’ story changed because his testimony this week was that he had been instructed not to meet privately with Chaffetz. In prior testimony Hicks had stated that he wasn’t instructed to withhold information from anybody. Genius Cummings evidently can’t distinguish between the concepts of “withholding information” and “private meeting.”

During the hearing, he was trying to leverage this into an accusation of changed testimony, and I guess he’s now running with it.