Don’t want to watch that [deleted] so I’ll ask, 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.
He loves the plantation as it gives him a better life than he could ever have through honest work.
The Obama administration as we know changed their story 12 times at least. Now he's accusing a witness [behind the witnesses back of course] of changing his story.
Cummings is just out there to provide indefensibly stupid but easy to remember talking points to their stupid constituency so they will not educate themselves and will remain stupid.
I agree with the replies to you for your question at post #5.