See YT link below to podcast episode I’m referencing

I think getting the witnesses under oath was huge, but there are so many other questions or issues that are baked into this aspect of the hearing according to Corbell

1- why did getting the witnesses’ testimony under oath have to be bargained for in the first place? What individuals or groups involved in planning the 7/26/23 public hearing would be against that option? Why would they be against it? Is the fact that they were against it, in part, a confirmation of that there is a “there” there?

2- the fact that Corbell says this was a negotiated agreement means Corbell has some cache of leverage that we are not fully aware of, and that by itself is interesting. How did Jeremy Corbell of all people acquire / wield such leverage in the first place? What does he have up his sleeve that is forcing the DOD’s hand in some of these back room planning meetings and conversations ?

submitted by /u/bluff2085
[link] [comments] 

Read More