Patterico's Pontifications

6/28/2022

Jan. 6 Hearing Testimony: Trump Knew There Were Weapons in the Crowd But Still Demanded They Be Allowed To March To The Capitol

Filed under: General — Dana @ 3:06 pm



[guest post by Dana]

Damning testimony today from Cassidy Hutchinson, the onetime aide to then-chief of staff Mark Meadows:

In a videotaped testimony, Hutchinson said that when she attended the Jan. 6 rally at the White House ellipse, she overheard a conversation with the president saying he knew people had “many weapons.”

“When we were in the off-stage announce tent, I was part of a conversation … I was in the vicinity of a conversation where I overheard the president say something to the effect of, ‘You know, I don’t effing care that they have weapons. They’re not here to hurt me. Take the effing mags away. Let my people in. They can march to the Capitol from here. Let the people in. Take the effing [magnetometers] away,'” Hutchinson said during her testimony,

“He said something to the effect of, you know, eff the Secret Service. I’m the president. Take the effing mags away. They’re not here to hurt me,'” she added.

Hutchinson also said the White House counsel’s office was worried about Trump’s plans to march to the Capitol would cause legal issues, and were concerned about lines in Trump’s speech that day, including telling people to march on the Capitol and to “fight.”

Trump was informed people were armed by Tony Ornato, his deputy chief of staff for operations who oversaw all security at the White House, according to Hutchinson. She said that Meadows did not act on the information.

Police radio transmissions played by the Jan. 6th committee revealed that among the thousands of people attending the Stop the Steal rally before the attack on the Capitol, some were armed with AR-15s and glocks, including someone in a tree that Secret Service was aware of who had an AR-15.

Hutchinson testified that she had heard reports of D.C. police arresting people with firearms or ammunition on the night of Jan. 5 at a pro-Trump rally on Freedom Plaza.

Hutchinson’s testimony leads to the question of incitement. An expert weighs in:

And before huffy cries of hearsay!are made (looking at you, House Judiciary GOP), I’ll leave you with Prof. Vladeck’s response :

She’s testifying to conversations in which *she* participated. That’s not hearsay. Party admissions are an exception to hearsay. She’s testifying under oath and under penalty of perjury; you’re just whining under neither.

Hutchinson’s testimony was jarring today because Trump and the White House knew that there were weapons in the crowd and that there was going to be violence but chose not to stop it before it was too late. Because, despite knowing about the weapons and violence, Trump wasn’t concerned because a) he knew that he wasn’t going to be targeted, and b) I believe that on some level he hoped the crowd would go after those he was convinced had wronged him. Not necessarily with weapons but certainly with intimidation and force. He didn’t care about anyone’s safety but his own. If Congress was targeted, so be it. If the Capitol police were targeted, so be it. If Mike Pence was targeted, well, good, he deserved it:

Former President Donald Trump said that former Vice President Mike Pence “deserved” it as rioters chanted “Hang Mike Pence” at the Capitol on January 6, according to a former White House aide.

Cassidy Hutchinson…said Tuesday that she heard a conversation between Meadows and White House Counsel Pat Cipollone and in which Meadows said that Trump was happy with the rioters.

“I remember Pat saying something to the effect of, ‘Mark, we need to do something more. They’re literally calling for the vice president to be f-ing hung,'” Hutchinson said. “And Mark had responded something to the effect of, ‘You heard him Pat, he thinks Mike deserves it. He doesn’t think they’re doing anything wrong.”

According to Hutchinson, Cipllione warned:

“Something needs to be done, or somebody is going to die and this is going to be on your effing hands.”

At the close of today’s hearing, a troubling presentation of witness tampering was made:

Republican Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming offered the two examples of apparent witness tampering at the end of a surprise hearing held by the House Select Committee investigating the January 6 Capitol insurrection.

Cheney shared two messages that she said witnesses had received ahead of their depositions. The witnesses, who Cheney didn’t name, subsequently shared the messages with the committee.

“What they said to me is as long as I continue to be a team player, they know that I’m on the team, I’m doing the right thing, I’m protecting who I need to protect, you know, I’ll continue to stay in the good graces in Trump world,” the first text message read. “And they have reminded me a couple of times that Trump does read transcripts and just keep that in mind as I proceed through my depositions and interviews with the committee.”

A separate witness warning from Trumpworld came in the form of a phone call…

“[A person] let me know you have your deposition tomorrow. He wants me to let you know that he’s thinking about you. He knows you’re loyal, and you’re going to do the right thing when you go in for your deposition,” the caller said.

Witness tampering is a federal crime.

–Dana

257 Responses to “Jan. 6 Hearing Testimony: Trump Knew There Were Weapons in the Crowd But Still Demanded They Be Allowed To March To The Capitol”

  1. Lock him up!!

    Kevin M (eeb9e9)

  2. This is just incredible. No doubt there is a witness tampering investigation currently taking place. I don’t see how Trump defends the indefensible with regard to incitement. He did lash out at Hutchinson:

    “I hardly know who this person, Cassidy Hutchinson, is, other than I heard very negative things about her (a total phony and ‘leaker’), and when she requested to go with certain others of the team to Florida after my having served a full term in office, I personally turned her request down,” Trump said. “Why did she want to go with us if she felt we were so terrible? I understand that she was very upset and angry that I didn’t want her to go, or be a member of the team. She is bad news!”

    Dana (1225fc)

  3. Is there some reason why the Secret Service guys aren’t being deposed?

    Kevin M (eeb9e9)

  4. I didn’t even cover how he physically lunged at his limo driver, grabbed the steering wheel, and demanded he turn around and go to the Capitol when he had been told that he couldn’t go…

    Dana (1225fc)

  5. “You know, I don’t effing care that they have weapons. They’re not here to hurt me.”

    As if more proof was needed of his malignant narcissism.

    Anybody who continues to want Trump to be President again is beyond salvage.

    norcal (da5491)

  6. I hardly know who this person, Cassidy Hutchinson, is, other than I heard very negative things about her (a total phony and ‘leaker’)

    Ahaha! The political illustration that nk linked a few days ago could not have been more accurate. Check out the sixth frame:

    https://www.politico.com/gallery/2022/06/24/the-nations-cartoonists-on-the-week-in-politics-00041844?slide=6

    norcal (da5491)

  7. Anybody who continues to want Trump to be President again is beyond salvage.

    Versus whom? AOC, yes, maybe. But if the GOP nominates him instead of anyone else, they are dead as a party.

    Kevin M (eeb9e9)

  8. I overheard the president say something to the effect of,

    ROFLMAOPIP

    DCSCA (5cce96)

  9. Anybody who continues to want Trump to be President again is beyond salvage.

    Or can’t afford gas, out of toilet paper, tampons, wants war and loves inflation. 😉

    DCSCA (5cce96)

  10. I didn’t even cover how he physically lunged at his limo driver, grabbed the steering wheel, and demanded he turn around and go to the Capitol when he had been told that he couldn’t go…

    Been there; seen that:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMKFIHRpe7I

    DCSCA (5cce96)

  11. “I overheard the president say something to the effect of,”

    Popehat put together a nice hearsay primer:

    https://twitter.com/Popehat/status/1541909079509020672

    Davethulhu (763837)

  12. Davethulhu (763837) — 6/28/2022 @ 3:39 pm

    Exactly. It’s a pattern. I think people are getting tired of his sh!tshow. DCSCA will probably be his last supporter.

    norcal (da5491)

  13. I didn’t even cover how he physically lunged at his limo driver, grabbed the steering wheel, and demanded he turn around and go to the Capitol when he had been told that he couldn’t go…

    Dana (1225fc) — 6/28/2022 @ 3:13 pm

    You may want to give that one 24 hours.

    Peter Alexander
    @PeterAlexander
    · 1h
    🚨 A source close to the Secret Service tells me both Bobby Engel, the lead agent, and the presidential limousine/SUV driver are prepared to testify under oath that neither man was assaulted and that Mr. Trump never lunged for the steering wheel.

    Jonathan Turley
    @JonathanTurley
    ·
    28m
    Peter Alexander just reported that the Secret Service is categorically denying the testimony of Hutchinson that Donald Trump tried to grab the steering wheel of the Beast.

    It is curious that the Committee would air the account without confirming from the Secret Service, particularly since Bobby Engel appears willing to testify. This is the danger of using witnesses to repeat third party accounts.

    https://mobile.twitter.com/JonathanTurley/status/1541919112670085120

    BuDuh (340919)

  14. We all saw what Trump was up to. We are all witnesses.

    Using violent imagery (with one “peaceful” thrown in to cover his ass legally), he fired up a crowd to march on the Capitol to intimidate Congress and Pence into overturning the election, and then refused to lift a finger to stop it. He praised the people afterwards. “We love you.” “You’re special.”

    If you can’t see it, you are hopelessly misguided, and have fallen for a false idol.

    Orwell was right. “To see what is in front of one’s nose needs a constant struggle.”

    norcal (da5491)

  15. I overheard the president say something to the effect of…

    Nuke NorKo; do Ivanka; grab pu–y; drink bleach… and, of course, all things covfefe.
    Comedy gold: a show that writes itself.

    OTOH, we’ve definitively heard “the president” say this- it’s on tape, on twitter, on the interweb and on a magnet stuck to Bob Gates’ refrigerator:

    “Because Putin knows if I am president of the United States, his days of tyranny and trying to intimidate the United States and those in Eastern Europe are over. I’m going to stand up to him. He’s a bully, just like the president. And I know he doesn’t want me to be president, but to tell you what, when I’m president, things are going to change.” – Joe Biden

    Things are going to change, eh Joey; for the worse. Attaboy, Squinty.

    DCSCA (5cce96)

  16. It’s funny in a way. A Fifth Avenue fancy boy born with a silver spoon in his mouth, whose daddy had to hire escorts to go out with him, thought he could lead a coup to seize Congress, like he was Putin or something.

    Oh, Donald, Donald!

    nk (251c2a)

  17. it’s putin’s fault

    JF (3d8282)

  18. I’m guessing that the Secret Service has an issue with agents repeating Presidential faux pas.

    Kevin M (eeb9e9)

  19. John Santucci
    @Santucci
    New: Source close to the Secret Service tells @PierreTABC to expect the Secret Service to push back against any allegation of an assault against an agent or President Trump reaching for the steering wheel.

    https://twitter.com/Santucci/status/1541918674642259968?cxt=HHwWgMC-qa-3_-UqAAAA

    BuDuh (340919)

  20. I think people are getting tired of his sh!tshow.

    He hosted The Apprentice for 14 years, norcal. Might wanna ask the advertising and marketing department about the lucrative earnings poured into the NBC coffers and the ratings that kept him on the air. Stay tuned. 😉

    DCSCA (5cce96)

  21. Remember when SCOTUS nominees in congressional confirmation hearings said, “something to the effect of”— RvW is settled law?? LOLOLOLOL

    DCSCA (5cce96)

  22. He hosted The Apprentice for 14 years, norcal. Might wanna ask the advertising and marketing department about the lucrative earnings poured into the NBC coffers and the ratings that kept him on the air. Stay tuned. 😉

    DCSCA (5cce96) — 6/28/2022 @ 5:02 pm

    So, whoever has the highest-rated TV show should be President? Got it.

    norcal (da5491)

  23. Remember when SCOTUS nominees in congressional confirmation hearings said, “something to the effect of”— RvW is settled law?? LOLOLOLOL

    I remember them being asked if that was so. But it’s a strange question to ask if it IS “settled law.”

    Kevin M (eeb9e9)

  24. @23. Yep, norcal, you got it starting a long time ago:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vYeNuISN4Dc

    DCSCA (5cce96)

  25. OT- Biden to announce extension of increased US troop presence in Poland: report

    https://news.yahoo.com/biden-announce-extension-increased-us-234953485.html

    More $$$ wasted. Hence, my Marine neighbor was deployed there 2 weeks ago… meanwhile the ruble is soaring and Russia is still raking in billions on oil sales– you… you’re paying $7/gallon at the pump and facing empty shelves.

    Attaboy, Squinty.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  26. DCSCA (f4c5e5) — 6/28/2022 @ 5:24 pm

    Aren’t you glad Vlad rolled those tanks?

    Glorious!

    norcal (da5491)

  27. it’s putin’s fault

    It’s okay to lay blame where it really belongs.

    Dana (1225fc)

  28. “A source close to the Secret Service tells me both Bobby Engel, the lead agent, and the presidential limousine/SUV driver are prepared to testify under oath that neither man was assaulted and that Mr. Trump never lunged for the steering wheel.” – Peter Alexander, NBC News

    Oops! And Daddy Darth said, ‘we’d be greeted as liberators,’ too, eh, Liz.

    DCSCA (474afd)

  29. @27. Aren’t you??? “Because Putin knows if I am president of the United States, his days of tyranny and trying to intimidate the United States and those in Eastern Europe are over. I’m going to stand up to him. He’s a bully, just like the president. And I know he doesn’t want me to be president, but to tell you what, when I’m president, things are going to change.” – Joe Biden

    DCSCA (474afd)

  30. Dana,

    I think like someone said earlier, might want to give this 24 hours – Meadows denied she was in the office – she is a very disgruntled employee, who was not given a severance nor further employment, the only one not to be given it

    Most importantly she didnt directly witness anything she testified to. it was 90% hearsay, and the little she did have knowledge of is denied by others.

    EPWJ (650a62)

  31. Aren’t you???

    DCSCA (474afd) — 6/28/2022 @ 6:16 pm

    Not me. I was never clamoring for it, or complaining about sending arms to Ukraine.

    norcal (da5491)

  32. Proving again this is nothing more than a soviet show trial. She would’ve been destroyed on cross-examination for her implausible remarks, but there wasn’t any.

    NJRob (eb56c3)

  33. @31. Wait ’til you get the bill. 😉

    DCSCA (474afd)

  34. OT- 101-year-old former Nazi concentration camp guard sentenced to five years for Holocaust atrocities

    ‘Berlin (CNN)A 101-year-old former Nazi concentration camp guard has been sentenced to five years in prison by a German court for aiding and abetting the murder of 3,518 people during the Holocaust.

    The man had been charged in 2021 with “knowingly and willfully” aiding and abetting the killing of prisoners at the Sachsenhausen concentration camp in Oranienburg, north of Berlin, from January 1942 to February 1945, according to the prosecutor’s office in Neuruppin, in the northeastern state of Brandenburg.’ – CNN.com

    A life sentence at 101. But in hindsight, looks like this tune pretty much was for him for the century behind him: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6lpT6e8nAA

    DCSCA (474afd)

  35. “I think it goes a long way to meeting the Brandenburg test for incitement.”

    lawyers playing in their little sandbox again

    so cute

    JF (4b4575)

  36. Just a mean tweet during a normal tourist visit.

    nk (251c2a)

  37. I was part of a conversation … I was in the vicinity of a conversation

    It’s one of those two. Trust me.

    The witnesses, who Cheney didn’t name

    I guess they didn’t think Schiff could pull this off twice.

    frosty (4d7ac0)

  38. “I think it goes a long way to meeting the Brandenburg test for incitement.”

    lawyers playing in their little sandbox again

    so cute

    JF (4b4575) — 6/28/2022 @ 7:33 pm

    Your point being what? Which part of their analysis do you dispute, and why?

    lurker (cd7cd4)

  39. Which part of their analysis do you dispute, and why?
    lurker (cd7cd4) — 6/28/2022 @ 9:01 pm

    “He knows they’re armed and wants them to be armed because he knows they’ll target other people.”

    i dispute the mind reading part

    JF (4b4575)

  40. @38 You mean the whole “if they feel comfortable they can prove” and “it goes a long way”? Yea, that’s some iron clad analysis you’ve got your hands on there. Top legal minds and what not.

    frosty (4d7ac0)

  41. After seeing Ms. Hutchinson’s under-oath testimony, this anecdote from Ms. Grisham sounds all the more plausible.

    She related a number of examples in her tell-all book published after she left office, and noted that when Mr. Trump descended into rage, his staff resorted to summoning an aide, nicknamed the Music Man, to play favorite show tunes they knew would soothe him, including “Memory” from the Broadway musical “Cats.”

    If the committee does nothing more than stopping Trump from running again, mission accomplished.

    Paul Montagu (5de684)

  42. If the committee does nothing more than stopping Trump from running again, mission accomplished.
    Paul Montagu (5de684) — 6/28/2022 @ 9:30 pm

    kudos to montagu for acknowledging this has nothing to do with the Rule of Law (TM)

    JF (4b4575)

  43. “I think it goes a long way to meeting the Brandenburg test for incitement.”

    lawyers playing in their little sandbox again

    so cute

    I’m going need to know why anyone should accept your take on this versus lawyers who have actual training, knowledge, and experience in this area of law. Otherwise, I’m just going to have to write it off with most of your comments.

    Dana (1225fc)

  44. “He knows they’re armed and wants them to be armed because he knows they’ll target other people.”

    i dispute the mind reading part

    JF (4b4575) — 6/28/2022 @ 9:20 pm

    It’s not as clear as I’d like it to be — it’s Twitter — but I don’t think Popehat’s mindreading because I don’t think he’s asserting it as fact. Following logically from his previous sentence, I think he’s positing it as the interpretation of Trump’s statement the prosecution would argue satisfies Brandenburg.

    Nobody’s saying the case would be a slam dunk, or even that, absent more, Garland will decide it’s enough to overcome the political and prudential pressures against charging an ex-president. They’re just saying the bit you called “mindreading” is a fair inference from what Trump allegedly said, and that if what Trump allegedly said is verified, it may finally be enough to get over the mens rea hurdle. That’s a quantum leap from where a potential prosecution stood yesterday.

    lurker (cd7cd4)

  45. @38 You mean the whole “if they feel comfortable they can prove” and “it goes a long way”? Yea, that’s some iron clad analysis you’ve got your hands on there. Top legal minds and what not.

    frosty (4d7ac0) — 6/28/2022 @ 9:25 pm

    God forbid people on the internet who actually know what they’re talking about temper their analysis with epistemic humility.

    lurker (cd7cd4)

  46. “Proving again this is nothing more than a soviet show trial. She would’ve been destroyed on cross-examination for her implausible remarks, but there wasn’t any.”

    Wait until you find out what happens in a grand jury.

    Davethulhu (763837)

  47. Well, I said after the first hearing that they’d done a pretty good job of showing that the proud boys had known what they were doing but not necessarily that Trump knew. I think today they have been pretty convincing that yes, Trump knew.

    Nic (896fdf)

  48. Maybe. More than one witness with something more than overhearing words to the effect of would be good.

    This has a bit of the Kavanaugh hearing feel to it though. The brave woman coming in with bombshell testimony and speaking truth to power. Maybe this will get the believe all women trope and there will be a plot twist with a macguffin. Not a yearbook this time though. Maybe a diary? No, they already did that one a few episodes ago. My money’s on something with a phone.

    frosty (3f0993)

  49. Meanwhile… OT- US sending Ukraine missile defense, G7 leaders vow to back Kyiv ‘long as it takes’

    White House national security adviser Jake Sullivan told reporters that the administration was on board with Zelensky’s main request for more air defense after Russia targeted the capital, Kyiv, with missile attacks over the weekend and continues to bombard other cities across the country.’- https://nypost.com/2022/06/27/us-sending-ukraine-missile-defense-g7-vow-to-back-kyiv/

    W.T.F. More borrowed $$$$$ for weapons given away to non-taxpaying, non-US citizens by Squinty.

    “Extortion is my business.” – Ernst Stavros Blofeld [Donald Pleasence] ‘You Only Live Twice’ 1967

    DCSCA (b3c09c)

  50. This has a bit of the Kavanaugh hearing feel to it though.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRJecfRxbr8

    “I’m a keg is half-full kinda guy…’

    DCSCA (b3c09c)

  51. Interesting that Cheney made sure to get Hutchinson to say that Engel was present and heard the story Ornato told her, and that Engel didn’t correct it. Something isn’t adding up but one gets the sense Cheney knew it was a possibility the SS would dispute her account.

    JRH (fe2954)

  52. @51 I would hate to think there are Secret Service agents who are Trump-humpers, but one never knows. If a general can be (Flynn), why not an agent?

    norcal (da5491)

  53. I figured out why Trump wanted the magnetometers removed on January 6th–his tinfoil hat supporters would set off the alarms.

    norcal (da5491)

  54. @14. It is curious that the Committee would air the account without confirming from the Secret Service, particularly since Bobby Engel appears willing to testify. This is the danger of using witnesses to repeat third party accounts.

    Not for a Cheney; it’s SOP for them: lest you forget Daddy Darth’s planting stories in the press backing his POV then appearing on MTP to use the plant to confirm his own assertions. It’s the kind of deviousness a 13th century pope– or an Alito– would love. Daughter Darth just isn’t as good at it.

    Dick Cheney warned his daughter Rep. Liz Cheney on January 6 that she might not be safe after seeing Trump attack her before the Capitol riot, report says

    ‘Trump’s political brand was partly formed in opposition to figures such as Dick Cheney. Trump criticized the “forever wars” he said Cheney and his allies had visited on the US, and instead championed “America First” nationalism.’ – https://www.businessinsider.com/dick-cheney-feared-for-liz-cheney-safety-capitol-trump-nyt-2021-6

    DCSCA (b3c09c)

  55. Guestimate: Once booted, Liz is CNN bound. MSNBC already has a Psaki.

    DCSCA (b3c09c)

  56. Smollett Hutchinson is full of it. How many more lies can this clown show produce?

    mg (8cbc69)

  57. OT- NATO chief: Alliance faces biggest challenge since WWII

    “Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said the alliance was meeting in Madrid “in the midst of the most serious security crisis we have faced since the Second World War.” -AP.com

    We’ve faced? Neat trick; “The North Atlantic Treaty Organization was created in 1949 by the United States, Canada, and several Western European nations to provide collective security against the Soviet Union. NATO was the first peacetime military alliance the United States entered into outside of the Western Hemisphere.” WW2 ended in 1945. -NATOfacts.org

    DCSCA (b3c09c)

  58. The problem the J6 committee has with this approach is the bizarro-world echo-chamber they work in. There is no one in the room when these outlandish ideas are promoted that says, “wait, stop are you sure this is real?” And because there’s no common sense being applied, the feeding frenzy of Moonbat foolishness just spreads throughout the committee agenda. And I thought at one time some of you people had a brain.

    mg (8cbc69)

  59. Perhaps the fools ought to run the Russian p hooker scam again.

    mg (8cbc69)

  60. AOC was on stephen colbert show last night. Her reception was unbelievable with the audience cheering then shouting AOC! AOC! AOC! AOC! for several minutes. Conservatives on social media sites remarked how fanatical the cheering was similar to the kind of fanaticism chants that trump gets. (check it out on youtube) They are right and will strike fear in those planning to run for president in democratic primaries in 2024. Along with her powerful fund raising like when she raised 10 million dollars for texas storm relief in just a few days in 2021 While turd crud was hiding out in cancun.

    asset (741f82)

  61. Get her some Harf glasses and beg chubby Amy’s uncle to get the hint or be run over. Albany would be an albatross. Through classic rotten borough voting, IL might have supplied AOCs replacement in Congress.

    urbanleftbehind (d5b707)

  62. I’m just so heartened by the fact that our beloved JF, frosty, mg, and BuDuh are adamantly demanding that Pat Cipollone and Mark Meadows testify under oath so the country can finally get to the truth. I almost heard them collectively heaving their lunch plates at the wall as Hutchinson testified under oath….ketchup everywhere.

    AJ_Liberty (c82e21)

  63. I’m still in IL-5, but the secure lockbox where I dropped off my ballot yesterday was at an IL-3 polling place. There was a young woman campaigning for Villegas outside that made AOC look like a plucked chicken. Tyson not Amish. asset needs to get out more.

    nk (251c2a)

  64. Nk, just 2 more days and you will have survived the N and NW sides version of Hell Month.

    urbanleftbehind (ade87c)

  65. @62 They stopped giving me a lunch plate after Clapper. They stopped letting me into the lunch room at all after Kavanaugh. I get to sit out in the sun more.

    It’s cute that you think testifying under oath to congress gets to the truth.

    frosty (a2d0cc)

  66. To those who supports the J6 hearing, this is what happens when you don’t have an adversarial committee.

    And now, this one (maybe 2) outright lies from this witness, sinks this committee’s credibility even further.

    smdh

    whembly (7e0293)

  67. kudos to montagu for acknowledging this has nothing to do with the Rule of Law (TM)

    Care to explain, JF?

    Paul Montagu (5de684)

  68. “asset needs to get out more.”

    In other news: John Hinkley Jr. unconditional release effective June 15

    AJ_Liberty (c82e21)

  69. AJ_Liberty (c82e21) — 6/29/2022 @ 5:24 am

    you mean you’ve moved on from “finally getting to the truth” about trump russia collusion?

    russian bounties?

    seems too soon

    nobody talks about a flat earth cuz we finally got to the truth about that

    are you prepared to stop talking about trump? do you have your go pack?

    JF (8e1ff4)

  70. Conservatives on social media sites remarked how fanatical the cheering was similar to the kind of fanaticism chants that trump gets. (check it out on youtube)

    asset (741f82) — 6/29/2022 @ 3:28 am

    I’m told by reliable sources that this cult stuff is bad.

    I’m still baffled by the process there though. People went in search of a cult leader and they think she’s a good pick? She’s supposed to lead the revolution and we’ve forgotten about her Jan/6 story? She has a bad day when people say mean things to/about her. Why do I feel like this revolution is going to involve a lot of people sharing their feelings?

    frosty (a2d0cc)

  71. Hutchinson’s testimony was jarring today because Trump and the White House knew that there were weapons in the crowd and that there was going to be violence b

    Trump did not know there was going to be violence at the Capitol . Just the opposite. The people gathering the testimony
    don’t understand what it demonstrates.

    I said several times before what \I wanted to know was when ws Trump’s speech at the Capitol cancelled and if his intention was real. Trump (and also Alex Jones at the Capitol standing next to Ali Alexander – this was an independent claim) said he would be there. and Democrats and the media were saying or implying he was lying.

    Now there is testimont that until the last minute, he thought he was going to the Capitol – that, in fact, he was so intent on being driven there that he told his Secret Service driver that he was the president and even lunged at the steering wheel. (that last part has been brought into question – and after all, how could he expect to drive himself? I would expect he would get out of the car and maybe try to get into the driver’s seat if he intended to drive himself there.)

    How would Trump want to go to the Capitol if he expected violence? Was he going to insert himself into violence – which was actually already going on – or lead the charge a la Teddy Roosevelt and the Rough Riders? \

    Since when has Trump been known to ever be personally involved in a physical fight?

    Sammy Finkelman (b434ee)

  72. “And now, this one (maybe 2) outright lies from this witness, sinks this committee’s credibility even further.”

    How is it a lie if she is reporting what Pat Cipollone told her and Mark Meadows did not contradict? Still the detail of what exactly Trump did in the limo distracts from the bigger point….he was itching to get into the action. Maybe it says something about state of mind.

    AJ_Liberty (c82e21)

  73. Heh!

    nk (251c2a)

  74. Who knew a POTUS sits in the front passenger seat when transported!?!?

    SS guys say it never happened and are willing to be deposed. What a total schiffshow.

    Colonel Haiku (835d36)

  75. As for when thee speech was cancelled, it seems like the answer is other people in his entourage cancee;ed it, maybe even much earlier but without telling him! </b?

    Trump wanted to go there to lobby members of Congress – at least |House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy thought he was going to go to his office, (because Trump needed permission to legally go on the Capitol grounds and Kevin McCarthy was the most likely person to authorize him to visit and he could not refuse him because if he did he'd never get to be Speaker?) and he very very much didn't want that, and he called up the White House demanding that he be told he wasn't coming. Cassidy Hutchinson could not tell him that, and he demanded she find out and she contacted Mark Matthews and he told her no Trump was not coming)

    The committee is confused about what Trump wanted to do at the Capitol. They also heard he wanted to give a speech, so that is confirmed.

    Sammy Finkelman (b434ee)

  76. @72 AJ_Liberty (c82e21) — 6/29/2022 @ 6:43 am
    There’s plenty of news that the SS is pushing back hard and is willing to testify.

    So, that really put an egg on the committee’s face now, and this is what the public is going to here.

    How much credence do you give to her other statements afterward?

    Again, this is because we don’t have someone on that committee taking on the “adversarial” role to fine tune these investigation and reports.

    Frankly, and this really frustrates me infinitely because I was good with a good faith-investigation committee: For an obvious partisan committee, it makes it MUCH easier for Trump to hand waive their reports by claiming partisanship, and as such its an easy “off ramp” for his supporters to latch onto.

    If we’re honest, Democrats are savvy enough to know this and still believes a partisan committee like this is a net-plus for their electoral chances.

    whembly (7e0293)

  77. SS guys say it never happened and are willing to be deposed.

    this of course won’t matter

    ask the border patrol “whip” guys

    JF (8e1ff4)

  78. If we’re honest, Democrats are savvy enough to know this and still believes a partisan committee like this is a net-plus for their electoral chances.

    whembly (7e0293) — 6/29/2022 @ 6:54 am

    Time will tell. But this certainly looks more about elections. It’s a bold plan. Let’s see if it pays off.

    frosty (a2d0cc)

  79. Scott Adams
    @ScottAdamsSays
    ·
    16h
    So far, Trump’s second term has been a huge success. He has several major SCOTUS victories, looks better than ever compared to Biden, and the Jan6 theater just went full Jussie. You can’t win harder than that.

    Heh, quite sincinct.

    Now, whomever that Trump is listening to. Tell him to rest his laurels and NOT run in ’24. He ain’t going to top this.

    whembly (7e0293)

  80. “The smoking gun. The soiled scalpel. The voracious vacuum. And, now, the ketchup splatter pattern.“

    Colonel Haiku (835d36)

  81. If this story is true, it’s an egregious waste of a condiment. Truly reprehensible.

    Colonel Haiku (835d36)

  82. “SS guys say it never happened and are willing to be deposed”

    Are they pushing back that Trump wanted adamantly to go to the Capitol?
    Are they pushing back that Trump knew people with weapons were in the crowd?
    Will they push back on whether the President wanted to remove the magnemometers?

    Be careful what you wish for….

    AJ_Liberty (c82e21)

  83. AJ_Liberty (c82e21) — 6/29/2022 @ 6:43 am

    How is it a lie if she is reporting what Pat Cipollone told her and Mark Meadows did not contradict?

    I don;t think thaat is supposed to be the lie. The lies are supposed to be Trump\s conflict with the driver, and that certain notes for a proposed speech that they wanted Trump to deliver after thee riot started that were never used were in her handwriting.\

    The driver and his supervisor are reportedly prepared to testify that did not happen (The person who Cassidy Hutchinson said told her that may be one of those people not co-operating with the committee) and there is someone else who says those notes are in his handwriting

    Also being disputed is the ketchcup on the wall, which, days earlier, she says a porter told her Donald Trump flung at the wall when Bill Barr told him something he didn’t like

    One of Trump’s first comments was he didn’t know her. Later on – he left about a dozen “tweets” he denied getting into an altercation with the driver.

    Still the detail of what exactly Trump did in the limo distracts from the bigger point….he was itching to get into the action. Maybe it says something about state of mind.

    I don’t think Trump was itching to get into the fight and nothing in his history would align with that.

    Remember, at the time of the second impeachment it was argued that his not going to the Capitol was proof he knew there would be violence.

    They are also again using his use of the word “fight” as an argument, right after abortion proponents in many places used that word a lot. I thought that argument was quite effectively demolished by Trump\s defense in a video shown at the Trump’s second impeachment trial – as if it really needed to be demolished.

    Sammy Finkelman (b434ee)

  84. Helluva dramatic tale unsupported by the players.

    It’s the Big Half-Assed Lie.

    Colonel Haiku (835d36)

  85. @72 Bold and serious claims require credible evidence. We didn’t get that here. I think everyone knows that and it’s why everyone is qualifying their statements about it. You’re doing that here. You aren’t confident enough to say it’s not a lie.

    I’m not sure who prepped her but this testimony could have been given in a way that didn’t make it sound like a middle school mean persons argument.

    If you’re going to claim the outgoing POTUS tried to stage a coup or insurrection you should bring more than a) she’s relaying what she was told (which doesn’t make it truthful) b) she wasn’t contradicted (also doesn’t make it true) and c) “words to the effect of” (this is just unserious).

    We’re working with a lot of conjecture in her testimony. You can wish-cast it whichever way you want but this isn’t the smoking gun.

    frosty (a2d0cc)

  86. “So, that really put an egg on the committee’s face now”

    Now from a believability perspective, I can hardly imagine corpulent little-hands Trump straining over the seat trying to “win control” of anything let alone the vehicle from the Secret Service Agent. Though I can imagine a red-faced foaming Trump demanding to be driven to the Capitol because he was the F-ing President…..gangster style. Even Mick Mulvaney on Fox News says this isn’t looking good…..

    AJ_Liberty (c82e21)

  87. Giuliani also did not expect violence, at least on January 2nd, according to her testimony.

    But Mark Meadows was worried -and keeping his thoughts mostly to himself.

    It seems like he felt he could not trust Donald Trump’s judgement or intentions and was sticking around to try to prevent something awful from happening, if he could..

    He was worried but definitely not certain.

    Sammy Finkelman (b434ee)

  88. @82

    “SS guys say it never happened and are willing to be deposed”

    Are they pushing back that Trump wanted adamantly to go to the Capitol?
    Are they pushing back that Trump knew people with weapons were in the crowd?
    Will they push back on whether the President wanted to remove the magnemometers?

    Be careful what you wish for….

    AJ_Liberty (c82e21) — 6/29/2022 @ 7:19 am

    They should definitely be deposed.

    But, with regards to that witness:

    If one “anecdote” in a witness’s sworn testimony turns out to be a complete fabrication, it calls into question their credibility and the rest of their testimony, true or not.

    That’s a standard jury instruction in court, because its bloody common sense in the real outside of the courts.

    whembly (7e0293)

  89. She mentioned that security is usually for the protection of the president/ Trump’s statement that they were not out to harm him sounds reasonable. (He wanted people let in without going through a magnetometer so as to fill up the ellipse so that it would look like a bigger crowd in a picture)

    That should not be read as an indication that Trump had some actual knowledge. Let alone, that he was conspiring with people in the crowd although I think the committee, or some of its members, wants us to think that.

    They are trying to prove that being told that weapons were being confiscated at the magnetometer and people declining to go through the magnetometer (presumably because they were carrying weapons) meant that Trump expected them to harm someone else. Is that the only reason people carry weapons?

    But that is not the case, and in fact most serious weapons were never used at the Capitol. (some things like bear spray and tear gas were used at the Capitol)

    Sammy Finkelman (b434ee)

  90. AJ wearing his bias and hatred on his sleeve. Nice to meet you!

    Colonel Haiku (835d36)

  91. Hutchison didn’t testify to what happened in the limo….she testified to what she was told happened in the limo. Now she could have mistaken hyperbole or she may have conflated the story from other gossip but it’s hard to argue that she simply invented a less-than-relevant detail to garner some sort of attention. You’re focused on a sideshow to avoid the ten bombshells that were uncovered. Trump wrestling the wheel is like the plate against the wall….it is unflattering but in the big picture….irrelevant to sedition, fraud, and conspiracy

    AJ_Liberty (c82e21)

  92. @91 AJ_Liberty (c82e21) — 6/29/2022 @ 7:54 am

    Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus exists for a reason.

    This is the reason that I try to set people straight on false stories even about the politicians I can’t personally stand.

    When proven false, they just undermine all the bad stuff that happens to be true. You don’t like Trump, fine. But lying about him only papers over his real flaws.

    And putting on a witness, who could only attest to what amounts to a Telephone Game™ is not a good look, and does a massive disservice.

    whembly (7e0293)

  93. @86

    You may say I’m a dreamer, but I’m not the only one
    I hope someday you’ll join us and the world will live as one

    frosty (a2d0cc)

  94. Next up on the witness stand Ms. Fluke.
    Followed by Anita Hill.

    mg (8cbc69)

  95. but it’s hard to argue that she simply invented a less-than-relevant detail to garner some sort of attention

    AJ_Liberty (c82e21) — 6/29/2022 @ 7:54 am

    Not really. That’s how lies work. It pulls in people who can imagine Trump doing something like that.

    The story she’s telling second hand has more details than the one she can’t remember if she overheard or was a part of. Which is also how lies work. She wants the added credibility of being in the conversation but also wants to hedge it against anyone saying she wasn’t.

    You’re focused on a sideshow to avoid the ten bombshells that were uncovered

    Which 10? Maybe we should review. I don’t count 10.

    frosty (af6c86)

  96. This young lady would have been 23 when all this happened. I’m sure she would be The Person that all these SS higher ups would go to to reveal the supposed most embarrassing moments of the administration. And then, she has a lawyer to explain it all. Where did she get the money for counsel?

    mg (8cbc69)

  97. 94, you called that vibe directly…Hutchinson did remind me of a “cleans up well” Fluke.

    urbanleftbehind (ade87c)

  98. The witness lied at least once provably. So, we can assume she lied throughout her testimony.

    Richard Wetmore (ddc02c)

  99. The witness lied at least once provably.

    What provable lie?

    Paul Montagu (5de684)

  100. Keep digging in that pile! There must be a calf in all that bullsh*t.

    Colonel Haiku (835d36)

  101. To my understanding, there are a few things to note. First, although some here are zeroing in on the least important issues, which are the ketchup on the wall and the limo lunge, the two critical issues are incitement and witness tampering. However, if SS is deposed and testify under oath that the limo stuff didn’t happen, then it might cast some doubt on Hutchinson’s testimony. However, what she was a participant in and what she was actually there to witness and thus testify to would remain intact as sworn testimony. It wasn’t hearsay if she was involved. But it’s cute how desperate people are to throw out the baby with the bathwater and make the determination that it’s all a sham! because they don’t like the outcome thus far. Witchhunt and all that…

    Dana (1225fc)

  102. No accusation against Trump is true as long as Trump’s endorsement can win primaries for wackos.

    nk (d9811c)

  103. Let’s see if anything else will stick to the wall long enough to facilitate the monkees on parade.

    Colonel Haiku (835d36)

  104. You’re not going to disabuse the idea that this wasn’t a witchhunt or a Star-chamber committee when it’s so obviously partisan.

    That’s the problem. At this point, even if some (or all) of the allegations are true, you’re not going to make a case to the American public. Because that’s what this committee SHOULD be doing. A good faith investigation, and it’s been anything but that.

    He’s the thing, it doesn’t matter to Liz Cheney and crew that their big witness are pushing hearsay (or at worst, lied multiple times) and that at least some of her major claims were debunked. They got what they wanted, and that’s exactly why the committee shouldn’t exist in the first place.

    It’s a partisan, carnival affair.

    If folks who nominally vote Republicans really don’t want Trump to run again. Relying on a Democratic-ran, obvious partisan committee that only gives fap materials to the Democrats and NeverTrumpers alike isn’t not going to “solve” this issue for you. That’s a lazy route imo.

    If you truly do care and don’t want Trump to run, then do the hard work in engaging the political process to coalesce behind a strong candidate during the primary to knock Trump out. That includes, getting the other GOP candidates to recognize this, and stay out of the primary to support a strong candidate.

    whembly (7e0293)

  105. “amounts to a Telephone Game™ is not a good look, and does a massive disservice”

    You need to understand hearsay. Also, you need to understand the difference between a hearing and a trial. Then you need to understand that the GOP had a deal to have more representation on the committee and decided instead to frame the entire endeavor as a witch hunt. You seem to be taking their direction.

    https://twitter.com/Popehat/status/1541909079509020672?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1541909079509020672%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.huffpost.com%2Fentry%2Fjim-jordan-attorney-hearsay-twitter_n_62bbb0dde4b0187add1983f4

    AJ_Liberty (ec7f74)

  106. Lunging from the back seat of a large SUV to grab a steering wheel.

    Marvel Comics worthy…

    Colonel Haiku (835d36)

  107. It could all be easily confirmed or disproven if Tony Ornato (deputy chief of staff), Pat Cipollone (WH legal counsel), Robert Engel (head of Trump’s SS detail), Mark Meadows, and Donald Trump testify under oath. According to Hutchinson, Engel was in the room when Ornato related “the Beast” story to Hutchinson and he didn’t contradict Ornato. So far only anonymous sources are disputing the story.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  108. …..at at least some of her major claims were debunked……

    Nothing has been debunked on the record, only by anonymous sources not under oath.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  109. It doesn’t even seem possible for the President to seize the wheel of his limousine.
    As I have stated forever go back to the- Russian hooker p scenario.
    The Clintonian mindset keeps growing.

    mg (8cbc69)

  110. I look at the conversation and much of it concentrates on whether the plate throwing or driver stangling stories events actually happened. Frankly, both of those stories are second hand (the witness didn’t see the event — she heard about it). The critical part is this:

    * People at the Elipse were known to have weapons and weren’t being let in, making the crowd size smaller;

    * Trump was angered by this — wanted his people let in, because they wouldn’t use the weapons on him;

    * Trump urged people he knew to be armed (see above) to march on the Capitol.

    At least Sammy engages this issue in his comments. The rest of our 1-6 Committee critics are choosing to concentrate on bright shiny objects. (The 1-6 Committee may have been better served to keep the more inflammatory stories out of the narrative, as they run the risk of losing the thread)

    Appalled (3bba40)

  111. @105

    “amounts to a Telephone Game™ is not a good look, and does a massive disservice”

    You need to understand hearsay. Also, you need to understand the difference between a hearing and a trial. Then you need to understand that the GOP had a deal to have more representation on the committee and decided instead to frame the entire endeavor as a witch hunt. You seem to be taking their direction.

    https://twitter.com/Popehat/status/1541909079509020672?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1541909079509020672%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.huffpost.com%2Fentry%2Fjim-jordan-attorney-hearsay-twitter_n_62bbb0dde4b0187add1983f4

    AJ_Liberty (ec7f74) — 6/29/2022 @ 9:09 am

    1) The GOP offered their people, as afforded by committee rule that Pelosi rejected (busting up, yet again another norm).

    2) Even *IF* the GOP refuses to participate, there’s nothing stopping the Democrat/NeverTrumper ran committee from making good faith efforts to conduct a rational, well-meaning investigation. But, that’s impossible with you have people like Chairman Benny Thompson (who denied GWB’s OH electoral vote), Adam Freaking Schiff (who’s a hardcore partisan fabulous) and Liz Cheney (who so anti-Trump, PELOSI nominated her to the committee!). You simply cannot ignore that context, and most Americans I’m willing to bet sees this.

    3) I understand the difference between a hearing v. a courtroom. If you’re building a committee to investigate alleged crime, the standard should be that the conduct of such committees abide by the standard that is afforded in a court room. The more you deviate from that standard, the less credible the committee becomes.

    4) I can see for what it is: A committee designed to characterize both Trump, GOP and Trump voters in the worst possible light possible, in a distinct partisan manner.

    whembly (7e0293)

  112. @101 Have they identified which witnesses have allegedly been influenced? Or is that still just a list in Liz’s hand?

    This

    The witnesses, who Cheney didn’t name, subsequently shared the messages with the committee

    makes it sound like the the witnesses did the sharing but I’m not seeing any names. Given the poor wording, is this a case of the entire committee having this information and just not releasing it to the public?

    frosty (af6c86)

  113. Trump supporters raced to debunk Jan. 6 testimony. Then they got confused.
    ………
    Trump supporters quickly snapped back online that they’d found an obvious sign she was lying: The presidential limousine, known as “the Beast,” is so heavily fortified that they argued it would be “physically impossible” for Trump to cross from the back cabin to the driver’s seat.

    But Trump was not riding in the limousine that day; videos show he actually rode in a Secret Service SUV, where the seats are closer together.

    Even if he had ridden in the Beast, the rear and front seats have a glass window the president can lower whenever he’d like — a detail noted even in the same infographic that Trump supporters shared as proof that Hutchinson’s story couldn’t be right.
    …….
    …….[T]wo Secret Service agents who have worked in the Beast told The Washington Post that such a move from the president might have been tough, given the limo’s interior equipment — but not impossible.

    The quibbling followed an aggressive campaign before the testimony by pro-Trump commenters on social networks, blogs and message boards seeking to portray Hutchinson, an aide to Trump’s chief of staff Mark Meadows, as an irrelevant attention seeker.
    ……..
    …….Trump defenders tried a different tack, saying she was just a rumormonger — even though much of her testimony was supported by written notes and text messages, and all of it was made under oath.
    …….
    On the pro-Trump message board patriots.win, one poster said, “She sounds like a child gossiping.” Some patriots.win posters said the testimony showed how unfairly Trump had been treated. One poster said the story showed that “the Deep State coup plotters” of the Secret Service had “effectively kidnapped the President of the United States of America against his wishes” as part of a “C.I.A. Military Industrial Complex coup d’etat.”

    Some there argued she should be “locked up for lying under oath,” while another poster there suggested her wild testimony was just Washington as usual.

    “Even if she’s telling the truth,” the anonymous patriots.win poster said, “where’s the f—ing problem?”
    #########

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  114. Whembly (#104):

    From Andrew McCarthy, who is no friend of this Committee or its process:

    We should understand, in any event, that what Cheney did with Hutchinson Tuesday is what prosecutors do with witnesses in grand juries every day: drawing out the witness’s testimony with no obligation to provide the defense perspective. To be sure, no one gets convicted at the grand-jury stage, but an awful lot of people get indicted this way, and on far less evidence than the country heard today.

    Moreover, when we say the committee lacks due-process legitimacy, that means it lacks legitimacy as an ultimate finder of fact. It does not mean that we can blithely dismiss any evidence the committee discloses. It does not mean that, because we’d prefer that the evidence not be true, we can dismiss it out of hand because we don’t like the Democrats or the committee process. These witnesses are testifying under oath. There is significant risk to them if they are found to have committed perjury.

    https://www.nationalreview.com/2022/06/cassidy-hutchinsons-testimony-against-trump-is-devastating/

    Appalled (3bba40)

  115. If one “anecdote” in a witness’s sworn testimony turns out to be a complete fabrication, it calls into question their credibility and the rest of their testimony, true or not.


    Mr. Google points to a couple (that’s two, one male and one female) of Trump supporters who put that on Twitter. Got any other source?

    That’s a standard jury instruction in court, because its bloody common sense in the real outside of the courts.

    Same question. How do you know that’s a standard jury instruction in court? Do you have a citation to Pattern Jury Instructions from any jurisdiction?

    Do you know how many criminals think their convictions should be reversed because the police report said they were arrested at 9:40 pm and it was really 9:35?

    nk (d9811c)

  116. @114 Appalled (3bba40) — 6/29/2022 @ 9:35 am

    I’m not ignoring it. I’m merely pointing out the partisan nature.

    With respect to this Hutchinson witness: her credibility is now suspect. We’d need much more statements to support her assertions.

    Also of note, this committee is simply one big rorschach test. I would implore to everyone to be a bit more cynical of anything coming out of this committee and not to simply accept things at face-value.

    whembly (7e0293)

  117. Weapons… from what I’ve read, a total of 6 individuals involved on Jan 6 had firearms – all found in their cars, none on the Capitol grounds. Is there evidence on the record that contradicts this?

    Colonel Haiku (835d36)

  118. Ginni Thomas backtracks.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  119. Have they identified which witnesses have allegedly been influenced? Or is that still just a list in Liz’s hand?

    This

    The witnesses, who Cheney didn’t name, subsequently shared the messages with the committee

    makes it sound like the the witnesses did the sharing but I’m not seeing any names. Given the poor wording, is this a case of the entire committee having this information and just not releasing it to the public?

    I suspect they aren’t releasing the names because there is an investigation into possible witness tampering taking place. Best to keep names under wraps, especially if there is an issue of safety involved. That would be a reasonable take.

    Dana (3b629c)

  120. Weapons… from what I’ve read, a total of 6 individuals involved on Jan 6 had firearms – all found in their cars, none on the Capitol grounds. Is there evidence on the record that contradicts this?

    Yes. Watch the hearing. There is video of Jan. 6 crowd members identified by law enforcement where and what they are carrying.

    Dana (9ded50)

  121. Her reception was unbelievable

    What’s unbelievable is – a) the Ed Sullivan Theater wasn’t condemned decades ago; no ampount opf pancake and rhinestones cover the blemishes; did business there; it’s a rat-infested dump. b) Colbert still calls himself a comedian when it’s the writers who do all the funny work.

    DCSCA (3f868b)

  122. First, although some here are zeroing in on the least important issues, which are the ketchup on the wall and the limo lunge, the two critical issues are incitement and witness tampering.

    Translation: don’t hire a bad ABC TV producer to try to produce your TV show peddling the sizzle not the steak– and let a lousy cast deliver the lines. Daughter Darth is no Sam Ervin.

    Now you know why John Dean dressed down, had his pert, pretty wife perched diminutively behind him w/her blonde hair pulled tightly back; wore horn-rimmed glasses, looked down, didn’t smile read and spoke in a slow, del;iberate, monotone voice… and kept a summer daytime TeeVee audience riveted for four days. And that was before Butterfield revealed the tapes could corroborate Dean’s recollections.

    DCSCA (3f868b)

  123. Weapons… from what I’ve read, a total of 6 individuals involved on Jan 6 had firearms – all found in their cars, none on the Capitol grounds. Is there evidence on the record that contradicts this?

    Colonel Haiku (835d36) — 6/29/2022 @ 9:52 am

    Here are photos of individuals carrying firearms on the Capitol grounds, and here is a list of those charged (so far) with carrying firearms on the Capitol grounds.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  124. “1) The GOP offered their people, as afforded by committee rule that Pelosi rejected”

    Did Pelosi reject them all or just Jim Banks and Jim Jordan, citing statements and actions by the two as being problematic for a well-functioning committee? The fact that McCarthy pulled them all was his decision that Trump then retroactively cried about…though it would be hard to imagine Trump’s people not having had input on the pulling back maneuver. If Jordan is knee-deep in the electoral college conspiracy, does it make objective sense to you to include him on the committee? Is it common sense?

    “2) there’s nothing stopping the Democrat/NeverTrumper ran committee from making good faith efforts to conduct a rational, well-meaning investigation”

    How much have you watched live? Most of the witnesses have been Republicans…and most of those were Trump supporters hoping for his re-election. If the “other side” isn’t getting out, it’s because none of the principals are willing to testify and/or are fighting subpoenas.

    “4) characterize both Trump, GOP and Trump voters in the worst possible light”

    This is the challenge….you feel that this is an attack on you. If Trump is corrupt, then you take that as personal culpability. Bill Barr was as big of a Trump toadie as possible. When you lose Barr and Barr is critical of Trump’s actions, maybe it’s time to cut bait and consider the evidence that is piling up (rather than looking for distractions)

    AJ_Liberty (ec7f74)

  125. “amounts to a Telephone Game™

    Exactly. Thought the same thing. The stink of the Russian dossier play is all over this. They’re so terrified he’ll run again and win because they’ve wrecked the lives of so many Americans and the Magoo they championed turned out to be… actually Mr. Magoo. Desperation is in the air- the party is floating HRC now… but she’d be wise to grab for VEEP when the Kamala dump happens and walk into the Oval when Joey’s health craters or he cashes in his chips- avoiding primary hassles and campaign fund raising. The issues of the day are made for her.

    DCSCA (3f868b)

  126. this has nothing to do with the Rule of Law (TM)

    No. Hanging Trump on the Mall would be more in line with the Rule of Law™

    Kevin M (eeb9e9)

  127. 123…

    “Reffitt is one of three people charged with carrying a gun onto Capitol grounds; no one is charged so far with having a gun inside the building. Two others are charged with bringing guns and explosives to Washington.”

    Thanks, so 3 people charged with having on grounds, no one charged with bringing a gun into the building. Per buzzfeed.

    Colonel Haiku (835d36)

  128. No one brought a gun into the building. What sort of insurrectionists would do that?

    Colonel Haiku (835d36)

  129. @123, and from police radio reports as reported at the hearing: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/house-committee-describes-weapons-trump-190545024.html

    AJ_Liberty (ec7f74)

  130. The reasoning in some of the comments reminds me of the old story about the man who was accused of killing a man, a boy, and a small dog. His defense attorney produced the dog, alive, and demanded that the jury acquit.

    (Honest eye witnesses, and “ear” witnesses, may err because our memories are imperfect. A rational person will understand this, and try to look at the totality of the evidence, when deciding on the guilt or innocence of an individual. By now there is more than enough evidence to persuade any open-minded person that Donald Trump encouraged a mob to attack the Capitol, in order to overturn an election he lost. Whether he also broke laws is a question I will leave to legal experts.)

    Jim Miller (406a93)

  131. Smollett Hutchinson is full of it. How many more lies can this clown show produce?

    Oh, wait, you’re not talking bout everyone in the Trump administration. Had me going for awhile.

    Kevin M (eeb9e9)

  132. Were these some of the same police that ushered folks into the Capitol building?

    Colonel Haiku (835d36)

  133. Every time I see a comment by DCSCA, I think: “Damn. Forgot to push that button again!”

    Kevin M (eeb9e9)

  134. #116 whembly,

    Let me understand your position. I think you are saying — because Hutchison repeated stories from others (the strangulation, the ketchup on the wall) that are now challenged by anonymous sources — her entire testimony is questionable, maybe perjury.

    Is that it? Or are you simply saying (reasonably, in my view) that it’s very possible these flashy events didn’t really happen.

    Appalled (0a4216)

  135. How would Trump want to go to the Capitol if he expected violence?

    Maybe he wanted to be Yeltsin-on-the-tank.

    Kevin M (eeb9e9)

  136. He should have stayed with Marla, who told him how brave, selfless and kind, and the greatest lover in the world, he was. And not hitched up, again, with a Communist who would compare him to Lenin, Stalin, Tito, and Putin, strong leaders who had control of their countries.

    nk (d9811c)

  137. @133. LOLOLOLOL Meh. Talk about pushing buttons: said the man who advocates: “Hanging Trump on the Mall would be more in line with the Rule of Law™”

    DCSCA (5064da)

  138. @136. Why buy the cow… etc., etc.

    DCSCA (5064da)

  139. @117. Weapons… from what I’ve read, a total of 6 individuals involved on Jan 6 had firearms – all found in their cars, none on the Capitol grounds. Is there evidence on the record that contradicts this?

    The Royalist’s Brigade were much better armed; ask Ashli Babbitt.

    DCSCA (5064da)

  140. “Every time I see a comment by DCSCA….”

    I wonder what it would be like to have a beer with him….would you get the same interaction. Kinda like with happyfeet….whether there would be a break in kayfabe

    AJ_Liberty (ec7f74)

  141. No one brought a gun into the building. What sort of insurrectionists would do that?

    Colonel Haiku (835d36) — 6/29/2022 @ 10:56 am

    First, no one can’t say that for certain guns were not brought inside the Capitol, as there were dozens of persons inside the Capitol that may have carried concealed weapons that have not been identified.
    Two, firearms aren’t a requirement of an attempted insurrection. As the Buzzfeed article demonstrates, they had plenty of other weapons, and the Justice Department has charged far more than six (nearly 80) with possessing weapons in the the Capitol. Such charges include:

    Entering and Remaining in a Restricted Building with a Deadly or Dangerous Weapon;
    Engaging in Physical Violence in a Restricted Building with a Deadly or Dangerous Weapon;
    Disorderly and Disruptive Conduct in a Restricted Building or Grounds with a Deadly or Dangerous Weapon

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  142. “Mr. Trump may be a compendium of human vices but he will always be the president who withstood the most insidious, organized slur in modern memory. His enemies did that for him, not least among them a largely cretinous media that showed its true colors, which turned out to have nothing to do with fearless and searching concern for the truth….” —- Holman W. Jenkins, Jr. WSJ

    Colonel Haiku (835d36)

  143. AJ_Liberty (ec7f74) — 6/29/2022 @ 11:31 am

    Trigger warning! Star Trek nerdiness follows:

    It would be like sharing in a glass of Trania with Belloc.

    felipe (484255)

  144. @129. Was there a motorcycle cop w/a stuck open mike who recorded four shots, too?

    With gas at $7/gallon, borrowed billions shoveled to Ukraine for a war not yours to fight, 8.6% inflation- the worst in 40 years; you can’t find baby formula for your kid; your wife can’t find tampons; fatty ground round is selling for $6.25/lb., as July 4 BBQ times approach, kiddies getting blown awy in schools w/assault weapons; a constitutional right rescinded pissing off women nationwide— so nobody really cares about ‘looking back in anger’ at an administration out of power while the congresscritters let the house burn down.

    DCSCA (5064da)

  145. @140. I wonder what it would be like to have a beer with him…

    Wonder away; don’t drink, AJ. Quit 40 years ago. But we could share a Diet Coke and some German chocolate cake. 😉

    DCSCA (5064da)

  146. #145

    I see your internal contradictions extend to your menu choices.

    Appalled (0a4216)

  147. @145 Diet Coke is very unhealthy for you

    frosty (af6c86)

  148. @128. What sort of insurrectionists would do that?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-K4BvF_sb3Y

    DCSCA (5064da)

  149. 144… although the Democrats, media, NeverTrump and their two bound-for-MSNBC monkees strive mightily to change the subject and distract from current calamities, people recognize malevolence, subterfuge and manipulation when they see it.

    Colonel Haiku (835d36)

  150. You’re focused on a sideshow to avoid the ten bombshells that were uncovered.

    It’s the bright, shiny object tactic. They have no other option in light of the incitement and witness tampering problems brought up yesterday. Ignore the substantive parts of the testimony and focus on the less important (like limos and ketchup). It’s both remarkable and troubling that someone as corrupt and dishonest as Trump continues to eke out loyalty from his defenders. He is so unworthy of that.

    Dana (1225fc)

  151. @147. Diet Coke is very unhealthy for you.

    ROFLMAOPIP!!! And beer -fermented liquid bread- isn’t??? Thank you, Doctor Frosty.

    Never argue with ‘Kojak.’ Or Elton, Bogie, Cagney and Satchmo: Diet Coke- you’re gonna drink it just for the taste of it!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQRrxpCzCoQ&t=7s

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PP30ph6jcHE

    DCSCA (5064da)

  152. @134

    #116 whembly,

    Let me understand your position. I think you are saying — because Hutchison repeated stories from others (the strangulation, the ketchup on the wall) that are now challenged by anonymous sources — her entire testimony is questionable, maybe perjury.

    Is that it? Or are you simply saying (reasonably, in my view) that it’s very possible these flashy events didn’t really happen.

    Appalled (0a4216) — 6/29/2022 @ 11:02 am

    I don’t think this comes all that close to perjury.

    But, it’s fair to consider the veracity of her claims after making numerous statements that are seemingly untrue. Especially in light that this is being orchestrated by a very partisan committee.

    whembly (7e0293)

  153. focus on the less important (like limos and ketchup)

    So ‘less important’ the congresscritters brought them up to begin with. That’s what happens when a bad ABC TV producer produces a production badly.

    The bombshells are duds; $7 gas, pricey burgers, 8.6% inflation; billions shoveled to Ukraine; no baby formula, scare tampons… a rescinded right– there’s your bombshells- -and they’re blitzing America daily.

    DCSCA (5064da)

  154. 128. Colonel Haiku (835d36) — 6/29/2022 @ 10:56 am

    /No one brought a gun into the building. What sort of insurrectionists would do that?

    Ones trying to avoid prosecution or trying to give themselves a defense. (the leadership of the Proud Boys also had themselves recorded as telling their people to avoid violence)

    https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/26/us/politics/proud-boys-jan-6.html

    …Adopt a defensive posture on Jan. 6, they were told. Keep the “normies” — or the normal protesters — away from the Proud Boys’ marching ranks. And obey police lines….

    ….As for the Capitol itself, it came up only occasionally.

    At one point, as the floor was opened for questions, various Proud Boys asked Mr. Tarrio about the group’s goals for Jan. 6, including how much they would focus on Vice President Mike Pence’s certification of the election results that day. Mr. Tarrio deflected the inquiries, saying that the details of the Proud Boys’ mission would be discussed in future meetings.

    From F Troop: An attempt to change an election result:

    (Corporal Agarn’s (post election?) absentee ballot cast in New Mexico territory in an election held in Passaic, New Jersey)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HpNX2PMVGqc

    One thing about Lincoln — the most serious charge the “woke” people in San Francisco found for removing Abraham Lincoln’s name from a school was his Indian policy.

    Sammy Finkelman (1d215a)

  155. @149. Liz will hitch up w/CNN. MSNBC already has a Psaki on their back.

    DCSCA (5064da)

  156. Whembly, that’s fair. But I’d point out that none of the people who are pushing back on her claims have testified yet. We don’t know if their dispute is that the event happened at all, or that ‘lunged’ should be ‘reached’ and that the story she was told was embellished.

    Also, one of the people disputing her story (again not under oath) was a Trump political advisor.

    The substantive point, that Trump wanted to accompany violent rioters he believed to be armed to the capital, doesn’t seem to be disputed.

    Time123 (e3c533)

  157. @150

    You’re focused on a sideshow to avoid the ten bombshells that were uncovered.

    It’s the bright, shiny object tactic. They have no other option in light of the incitement and witness tampering problems brought up yesterday. Ignore the substantive parts of the testimony and focus on the less important (like limos and ketchup). It’s both remarkable and troubling that someone as corrupt and dishonest as Trump continues to eke out loyalty from his defenders. He is so unworthy of that.

    Dana (1225fc) — 6/29/2022 @ 11:56 am

    Dana, I’m on record here as one who believed Trump should’ve been impeached/removed for his conduct DURING J6 as simply dereliction of duty.

    But Democrats have had their chance to conduct a worthy impeachment hearing, but instead chose a partisan route because they’ve factored that it’s to their partisan best interest.

    It’s the same calculous on this current committee hearing. It’s nothing more than to control the narrative in the most one-sided partisan manner. Even IF there were some truly obnoxious deed uncovered by this committee, most American won’t believe it because the media, Democrats and NeverTrumpers don’t have a good track record here.

    Trump’s not the President.

    If the concern that he’s going to run again, then the “battle” need to be focused on the Primary. We need to convince primary voters, donors and OTHER potential candidates to box out Trump so that he doesn’t win the primary easily.

    The only thing that matters to this committee, is the try to damage, politically, of Trump’s prospect of running again. It is not a committee in good faith standing.

    One can simultaneously hold that Trump shouldn’t run again AND believe that this committee is a farce. I think there are way more people who falls into this bucket, than those who sincerely believe everything that comes out of this committee.

    whembly (7e0293)

  158. @154. LOLOLOL Hilarious. AJ Agarn’s got quite a film reel, don’t he.

    DCSCA (5064da)

  159. I see your internal contradictions…

    Gas.

    DCSCA (5064da)

  160. Whembly, how would you have reasonably structured this differently?

    Time123 (0ead25)

  161. @156

    Whembly, that’s fair. But I’d point out that none of the people who are pushing back on her claims have testified yet. We don’t know if their dispute is that the event happened at all, or that ‘lunged’ should be ‘reached’ and that the story she was told was embellished.

    Also, one of the people disputing her story (again not under oath) was a Trump political advisor.

    The substantive point, that Trump wanted to accompany violent rioters he believed to be armed to the capital, doesn’t seem to be disputed.

    Time123 (e3c533) — 6/29/2022 @ 12:28 pm

    I simply find the conversation that Trump “believed” the rioters were armed AND that he wanted to join them. (meaning, he may have wanted to join the march, but not in an insurrectiony way that is currently being framed).

    To me, that doesn’t pass the BS test and it’s more likely its either embellished (to fit a narrative) and/or taken out of context.

    Again, even if you ignore that Hutchinson lied and take everything she said as truth, there was no smoking gun. Wanting to go to the Capitol he had just told people to peacefully protest at is not enacting a coup. There’s no secret communication or codeword in that speech that signals “the coup is on”.

    I would also say this: If Trump was as culpable as they say he is for Jan 6th, they wouldn’t have to allow hearsay, near perjury and parlor tricks to prove their case.

    whembly (7e0293)

  162. Here’s what the Mayo Clinic says about diet sodas.

    Jim Miller (406a93)

  163. “But we could share a Diet Coke and some German chocolate cake”

    I would have taken you for a Blintz or Russian Honey Cake kind of guy. Unfortunately I gave up soda, pop, and soda-pop a while back….and don’t really miss it. It is nice that your facility does allow unsupervised public outings…you should take advantage of that more…you know break free of 1964 and all.

    AJ_Liberty (ec7f74)

  164. @160

    Whembly, how would you have reasonably structured this differently?

    Time123 (0ead25) — 6/29/2022 @ 12:35 pm

    You mean the committee hearing?

    Not be so obvious to stack the committee in one direction. That means, accepting whomever McCarthy selects to represent his party. (claims that Jim Jordan and others are rejected because they may be witness in such investigation is such a weak excuse, as every bloody other major committee of this type always, ALWAYS has that kind of connection).

    whembly (7e0293)

  165. “But Democrats have had their chance to conduct a worthy impeachment hearing”

    What was the Republican’s responsibility? This is the rub. Everyone in Congress should have been bothered by the events of Jan 6th…..but the Republican party was not only eager to move on, it gladly moved to making Trump into a kingmaker, with pilgrimages down to Mar a Lago.

    AJ_Liberty (ec7f74)

  166. It’s the bright, shiny object tactic.
    Dana (1225fc) — 6/29/2022 @ 11:56 am

    the whole hearing is a bright, shiny object tactic

    you are surrounded by substantive issues — inflation, gas prices, shortages, border chaos, crime, homeless everywhere, war, pick one, any

    let’s obsess on a nancy grace sh!tshow like it’s masterpiece theater

    JF (22a334)

  167. 120. Dana (9ded50) — 6/29/2022 @ 9:58 am

    There is video of Jan. 6 crowd members identified by law enforcement where and what they are carrying.

    At the Ellipse, not at the Capitol, although people at the Capitol had weapons. They did not use firearms, possibly intending to use them only if fired upon, thinking that would make klook better and they tried to get other people involved.

    (Meanwhile they are pretending that all the people at the Capitol came there from the Ellipse. But the insurrectionists mainly came directly to the Capitol.)

    https://www.quora.com/Why-did-hundreds-of-members-of-the-Proud-Boys-who-were-previously-told-to-stand-by-go-directly-to-the-Capitol-building-on-Jan-6-instead-of-to-the-Trump-rally-which-was-a-mile-in-the-opposite-direction

    Trump can be accused of ignoring the possibility that some of the people in the crowd might want to kill somebody, especially after some people were saying “Hang Mike Pence>”

    Sammy Finkelman (1d215a)

  168. @165

    “But Democrats have had their chance to conduct a worthy impeachment hearing”

    What was the Republican’s responsibility? This is the rub. Everyone in Congress should have been bothered by the events of Jan 6th…..but the Republican party was not only eager to move on, it gladly moved to making Trump into a kingmaker, with pilgrimages down to Mar a Lago.

    AJ_Liberty (ec7f74) — 6/29/2022 @ 12:48 pm

    GOP responsibility is to be the on providing adversarial side of the spectrum. It’s up to Democrats (the one who initiated it) to make their case.

    whembly (7e0293)

  169. “GOP responsibility is to be the on providing adversarial side of the spectrum. It’s up to Democrats (the one who initiated it) to make their case.”

    The GOP position is that no investigation take place at all.

    Davethulhu (763837)

  170. @150 The easiest thing to do is wait and see what plays out.

    frosty (af6c86)

  171. frosty (af6c86) — 6/29/2022 @ 9:28 am

    Have they identified which witnesses have allegedly been influenced? Or is that still just a list in Liz’s hand?

    They haven’t said anybody has been influenced – they have two people whose names they are keeping confidential for now, who say something happened that could be interpreted as an attempt to influence them. Chairman Bennie Thompson indicated that he is suspicious that some people who didn’t give full answers did so on purpose.

    https://www.npr.org/2022/06/28/1108396692/jan-6-committee-hearing-transcript

    But after hearing your testimony in all its candor and detail, I want to speak directly to the handful of witnesses who have been outliers in our investigation. The small number who have defied us outright, those whose memories have failed them again and again on the most important details, and to those who fear Donald Trump and his enablers.

    They are not ready to accuse anyone in particular. I don’t think anyone even knows what witness(es) claimed to have a failure of memory that they doubt is true.

    I would think anyone whose testimony was influenced would have had much more direct to the point communications than what was reported by those reported by the two anonymous witness Liz Cheney cited. The sort of thing Liz Cheney mentioned wouldn’t be effective, and they wouldn’t know from that what Trump world wanted them to keep secret. Surely not anything that merely reflects badly on Trump.

    Also, I think whoever told a witness that Trump reads all the transcripts was lying. I can’t see Trump doing that.

    Of course, Trump might be informed by some interested party that some person was against him, and that person might be interested in something particular pertaining to himself, not Trump. I have a question:Who sent those messages?

    Sammy Finkelman (1d215a)

  172. This

    The witnesses, who Cheney didn’t name, subsequently shared the messages with the committee

    makes it sound like the the witnesses did the sharing but I’m not seeing any names. Given the poor wording, is this a case of the entire committee having this information and just not releasing it to the public?

    The entire committee didn’t release the name of Cassidy Hutchison until an hour or so before her testimony.

    I don’t know if the entre committee had that information or just Thompson and Cheney and top staff, but there are not two partisan sides to the committee so it could very well be all the members of that committee..

    Sammy Finkelman (1d215a)

  173. @162 I took their advice and switched to water, skim milk, and unsweetened tea or coffee. Skim milk is a lie. It’s also how they track you with the jewish space laser.

    frosty (af6c86)

  174. @171 This is why I’m having a bit of fun with the notion that we heard evidence of actual, in fact, witness tampering and some of the other claims. We’ve heard a lot of things, most of them from professional liars politicians. All of them should be fully flushed out and explored.

    Who sent those messages?

    Yep.

    frosty (af6c86)

  175. “GOP responsibility is to be the on providing adversarial side of the spectrum.”

    Yikes, and how could you ever get to 2/3 of the Senate to convict? The Republicans are the ones that went to Nixon and got him to resign. The GOP responsibility is to be a neutral arbiter of fact and vote their conscience. It’s not to act like defense lawyers. The challenge for many of them is that they were literally knee-deep in the electoral college vote scam…and were compromised. That’s why we’re at where we are at. The GOP could not clean its tent and hold Trump accountable…..and now Trump is leading early polls. Hoping for primary season with no effort to document the events surrounding Jan 6 and the election is an effort in ignorance. How is a primary candidate like DeSantis or Haley supposed to draw out the information that is being pulled out through the power of subpoena right now? And do all of that while being slimed.

    I think it’s proper to lay out the evidence now and hope enough Republican primary voters choose to get informed and understand what happened. In my opinion, it’s unlikely that Trump gets indicted…primarily because of the political realities rather than the evidence which is mounting. We need good Republicans to start saying now that enough is enough. They’re not doing that because they’re busy playing defense lawyers….oftentimes badly

    AJ_Liberty (ec7f74)

  176. I was trying to use bottled water and tea with maybe some Stevia in it, but found it nearly impossible to give up Coca-Cola. Tnen I discovered (and this was a revelation for this Boomer) that Zero Sugar branded drinks are indistinguishable from the real thing (OK, from the HFCS thing). The terrible, not good, awful diet drinks of my youth (I’m looking at you, Tab) apparently left me scarred for life.

    Kevin M (eeb9e9)

  177. @175: Maybe a 3rd impeachment, assuming that someone checks with McConnell on the odds.

    Kevin M (eeb9e9)

  178. Time123 (e3c533) — 6/29/2022 @ 12:28 pm

    Whembly, that’s fair. But I’d point out that none of the people who are pushing back on her claims have testified yet. We don’t know if their dispute is that the event happened at all, or that ‘lunged’ should be ‘reached’ and that the story she was told was embellished.

    According to the New York Times, the dispute is only about the scene in the vehicle itself, and not that Trump wanted and expected to be driven to the Capitol. And what about that is disputed has not been published except that it was mot an assault and that Trump did not reach for the steering wheel.

    So it could still be a sort of game of Telephone™ (or it could have been embellished to sell a book to pay her new lawyer because it sounds like the sort of thing that a literary agent would like, and maybe she said that in an interview, not realizing it was under penalty of perjury, and was then stuck with the story or told to stick with that story by her lawyer.)

    It might even be that the account Anthony Ornato or Robert Engel (who may not have been looking the whole time) was told was in error or the result of a misunderstanding.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/28/us/politics/trump-jan-6-behavior.html

    A Secret Service spokesman said in a statement that the agency would respond on the record to the House committee about Ms. Hutchinson’s account of what happened in the armored car.

    Secret Service officials who requested anonymity to discuss the potential testimony said that both Robert Engel, the head of Mr. Trump’s protective detail, and the driver of Mr. Trump’s sport utility vehicle were prepared to state under oath that neither man was assaulted by the former president and that he did not reach for the wheel. The officials said the two men would not dispute the allegation that Mr. Trump wanted to go to the Capitol.

    Ms. Hutchinson did not witness the scene in the vehicle herself but said she was informed about it moments later by Anthony Ornato, the president’s deputy chief of staff and a former Secret Service agent, with Mr. Engel present in the room and not disputing it.

    I have a question as to whether Cassidy Hutchinson was informed about that just “moments” later. It didn’t sound that way to me: (boldface mine to indicate passage of time)

    https://www.npr.org/2022/06/28/1108396692/jan-6-committee-hearing-transcript

    When I returned to the White House, I walked upstairs towards the chief of staff’s office, and I noticed Mr. Ornato lingering outside of the office. Once we had made eye contact, he quickly waved me to go into his office, which was just across the hall from mine. When I went in, he shut the door, and I noticed Bobby Engel, who was the head of Mr. Trump’s security detail, sitting in a chair, just looking somewhat discombobulated and a little lost.

    I looked at Tony and he had said, did you f’ing hear what happened in the beast? I said, no, Tony, I — I just got back. What happened? Tony proceeded to tell me that when the president got in the beast, he was under the impression from Mr. Meadows that the off the record movement to the Capitol was still possible and likely to happen, but that Bobby had more information.

    So, once the president had gotten into the vehicle with Bobby, he thought that they were going up to the Capitol. And when Bobby had relayed to him we’re not, we don’t have the assets to do it, it’s not secure, we’re going back to the West Wing, the president had a very strong, a very angry response to that.

    Tony described him as being irate. The president said something to the effect of I’m the f’ing president, take me up to the Capitol now, to which Bobby responded, sir, we have to go back to the West Wing. The president reached up towards the front of the vehicle to grab at the steering wheel. Mr. Engel grabbed his arm, said, sir, you need to take your hand off the steering wheel.

    We’re going back to the West Wing. We’re not going to the Capitol. Mr. Trump then used his free hand to lunge towards Bobby Engel. And Mr. — when Mr. Ornato had recounted this story to me, he had motioned towards his clavicles.

    LIZ CHENEY: And was Mr. Engel in the room as Mr. Ornato told you this story?

    CASSIDY HUTCHINSON: He was.

    LIZ CHENEY: Did Mr. Engel correct or disagree with any part of this story from Mr. Ornato?

    CASSIDY HUTCHINSON: Mr. Engel did not correct or disagree with any part of the story.

    LIZ CHENEY: Did Mr. Engel or Mr. Ornato ever after that tell you that what Mr. Ornato had just said was untrue?

    CASSIDY HUTCHINSON: Neither Mr. Ornato nor Mr. Engel told me ever that it was untrue.

    LIZ CHENEY: And despite this altercation, this physical altercation during the ride back to the White House, President Trump still demanded to go to the Capitol….. [He wanted to walk, now, according to Liz Cheney’s interpretation of the sequence of events, relying on what Kayleigh McEnany, the White House press secretary at the time, told the committee.]

    Sammy Finkelman (1d215a)

  179. What was the Republican’s responsibility? This is the rub. Everyone in Congress should have been bothered by the events of Jan 6th…..but the Republican party was not only eager to move on, it gladly moved to making Trump into a kingmaker, with pilgrimages down to Mar a Lago.

    I think you are assigning motives that were not the same for everyone. There are plenty of GOP politicians who will be happy to see Trump go, however he goes. They’ll even help, if they can wear gloves. The problem is twofold:

    1) The Republican base still supports Trump, and will punish everyone who does him wrong. The whole party even.
    2) They are Republicans.

    Politics has been called “the art of the possible” and right now dissing Trump is not possible for them, almost as much as NOT dissing Trump is possible for a Democrat.

    Kevin M (eeb9e9)

  180. Also, one of the people disputing her story (again not under oath) was a Trump political advisor.

    No, that’s another story. It’s about who wrote some notes.

    This is what she testified to:

    LIZ CHENEY: Now let’s look at just one example of what some senior advisers to the president were urging. Ms. Hutchinson, could you look at the exhibit that we’re showing on the screen now? Have you seen this note before?

    CASSIDY HUTCHINSON: That’s a note that I wrote at the direction of the chief of staff on January 6th, likely around 3:00.

    LIZ CHENEY: And it’s written on a chief of staff note card, but that’s your handwriting, Ms. Hutchinson?

    CASSIDY HUTCHINSON: That’s my handwriting.

    LIZ CHENEY: And why did you write this note?

    CASSIDY HUTCHINSON: The chief of staff was in a meeting with Eric Hirschman and potentially Mr. Philbin, and they had rushed out of the office fairly quickly. Mark had handed me the note card with one of his pens, and sort of dictating a statement for the president to potentially put out.

    CASSIDY HUTCHINSON: That’s Ok. There are two phrases on there, one illegal and then one without proper authority. The illegal phrase was the one that Mr. Meadows had dictated to me. Mr. Herschmann had chimed in and said also put without legal authority. There should have been a slash between the two phrases. It was an — an or if the president had opted to put one of those statements out. Evidently he didn’t. Later that afternoon, Mark came back from the Oval Dining Room and put the palm card on my desk with illegally crossed out, but said we didn’t need to take further action on that statement.

    LIZ CHENEY: So, to your knowledge, this statement was never issued.

    CASSIDY HUTCHINSON: It was — to my knowledge, it was never issued.

    The dispute:

    https://abcnews.go.com/US/trump-white-house-attorney-disputes-cassidy-hutchinsons-testimony/story?id=85898838

    Former Trump White House lawyer Eric Herschmann is claiming that a handwritten note regarding a potential statement for then-President Donald Trump to release during the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol was written by him during a meeting at the White House that afternoon, and not by White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson, sources familiar with the matter tell ABC News.

    At Tuesday’s Jan. 6 committee hearing, Rep. Liz Cheney displayed a handwritten note which Hutchinson testified she wrote after Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows handed her a note card and pen to take his dictation.

    Sources familiar with the matter said that Herschmann had previously told the committee that he had penned the note.

    Why the committee wanted it to be her handwriting, I don’t know. You do that sort of thing to introduce and authenticate exhibits into evidence in court, but none of that should matter here.

    Sammy Finkelman (1d215a)

  181. According to Del Wilber’s book “Rawhide Down” (worth a read), when Nacny Reagan first heard that there had been a shooting and her husband had been taken to the hospital, her reaction was as follows:

    “I’m going to the hospital,” she said. “If you don’t get me a car, I’m going to walk.”

    “No, let’s wait and see what happens,” Opfer said, following her. “It’s a madhouse over there. He’ll probably be coming right back to the White House any minute.”

    “No, I’m going to the hospital,” she said.

    “Once we get the all clear, I’ll take you over,” he said.

    “No, I’m going now,” she replied.

    There was no point in arguing. “Okay,” Opfer said. “How about this, give me a couple of minutes to have the cars ready and we can go.”

    “Fine,” she said.

    With Opfer leading the way, they took the stairs down to the ground floor. Then they headed for the diplomatic entrance to the White House, where the first lady’s two-car motorcade would assemble. He could hear Mrs. Reagan right behind him—she was nearly clipping his heels.

    “George, when are we going?” He heard a note of panic in her voice.

    “As soon as the cars are ready,” he answered.

    By now Opfer had radioed instructions to prepare the motorcade. When the two agency sedans pulled up outside the diplomatic entrance, Opfer took his place in the front passenger seat of the first black car. Mrs. Reagan, wearing her red raincoat, sat in the back and was joined by her spokeswoman. Opfer made sure the doors were locked, as much to keep the first lady in as to keep danger out.

    The two cars pulled out of the White House and onto Pennsylvania Avenue for the short ride to the hospital. The radio in Opfer’s ear fed him a steady stream of information, but since the radio’s frequency was unsecured the reports weren’t very specific. He still didn’t know how badly the president had been hurt.

    Only a block or two from the White House, the small motorcade encountered heavy traffic and came to a stop. They were stuck for just a few minutes, but to Opfer the wait seemed interminable.

    Soon two hands gripped Opfer’s shoulders from behind. “When am I going to get there to see him?” the first lady asked.

    “We’re moving,” Opfer replied. “We’ll get there soon.”

    A minute later, she seized his shoulders again. “George, I’m going to get out and walk. I need to get out and walk.”

    “No, no, we can’t do that, it’s not safe,” Opfer said.

    “I need to walk,” she said. “I have to get there.”

    At last the traffic eased and they began making good progress. As soon as they reached the ER entrance, Opfer opened the car’s rear door. He watched a blur of red raincoat run for the emergency room doors and then hurried to catch up.

    Nancy Reagan could teach Trump quite a bit about getting her way.

    Kevin M (eeb9e9)

  182. The substantive point, that Trump wanted to accompany violent rioters he believed to be armed to the capital, doesn’t seem to be disputed.

    That’s all wrong. Trump would have had reason to believe that some of the people there could be armed (in violation of DC law even after Heller) but that’s nothing.

    This amounts to proof that he did not expect there to be a riot at the Capitol (even though it had already started) because this is not professional wrestling and that what he did in 2007 was an act.

    He wouldn’t have been wanting to be walking into such a situation, or lead the charge.

    That Trump promised to be there but didn’t go, used to be cited as proof that he intentionally incited a riot.

    Sammy Finkelman (1d215a)

  183. Kevin M (eeb9e9) — 6/29/2022 @ 2:02 pm

    Nancy Reagan could teach Trump quite a bit about getting her way.

    But not Joe /Biden. He didn’t even fight as far as is known.

    Joe Biden wanted to go into Ukraine even if not to Kyiv. But the Secret Service wouldn’t let him go. This is the same Joe Biden who claimed that as Vice President, he had told the Ukrainians he could cut off loan guarantees unless a prosecutor was fired (note: He probably made the whole story up and Democrats prevented that explanation from coming up in 2019)

    Everybody else went to Ukraine and usually Kyiv. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken and Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin and the heads of many other countries; Boris Johnson now twice.

    Even Jill Biden went a bit into Ukraine and met with Zelensky’s wife.

    This is perfect material for the Onion of Babylon Bee – you know you could have Trump claiming it was his right to seize the steering wheel.

    Sammy Finkelman (1d215a)

  184. This is what he said about it in April (originally to the Washington Post):

    https://www.politico.com/news/2022/04/07/trump-secret-service-capitol-riot-00023737

    Trump says Secret Service blocked him from joining Jan. 6 march to the Capitol

    The “Secret Service said I couldn’t go. I would have gone there in a minute,” the former president said.

    …..Former President Donald Trump said Wednesday that the U.S. Secret Service blocked him from making good on his pledge to join supporters marching on Jan. 6, 2021, from the White House to the Capitol ahead of that day’s deadly riot….

    …A spokesperson for the Secret Service did not immediately reply to an email seeking confirmation that the then-president’s protective detail kept him from joining his supporters at the Capitol that day.

    Except that it wasn’t really entirely the Secret Service.

    It was also the White House staff:

    https://www.npr.org/2022/06/28/1108396692/jan-6-committee-hearing-transcript

    … As you can see, NSC staff believed that MOGUL, the president, was “going to the Capitol,” and “they are finding the best route now.” From these chats, we also know the staff learned of the attack on the Capitol in real time. When President Trump left the Ellipse stage at 1:10, the staff knew that rioters had invaded the inaugural stage and Capitol Police were calling for all available officers to respond.

    When Republican leader Kevin McCarthy heard the president say he was going to the Capitol, he called you, Ms. Hutchinson, isn’t that right?

    CASSIDY HUTCHINSON: That’s correct.

    LIZ CHENEY: And in this text message, you told Tony Ornato, “McCarthy just called me too. And do you guys think you’re coming to my office?”

    Tell us about the call that day with Leader McCarthy during the president’s speech on the Ellipse.

    CASSIDY HUTCHINSON: I was still in the tent behind the stage. And when you’re behind the stage, you can’t really hear what’s going on in front of you. So, when Mr. McCarthy called me with this information, I answered the call. And he sounded rushed, but also frustrated and angry at me. I — I was confused because I — I didn’t know what the president had just said.

    He then explained the president just said he’s marching to the Capitol. You told me this whole week you aren’t coming up here. Why would you lie to me? I said I’m — I’m not lying. I wasn’t lying to you, sir. I — we’re not going to the Capitol. And he said, well, he just said it on stage, Cassidy. Figure it out.

    Don’t come up here. I said I’ll — I’ll — I’ll run the traps on this and I’ll shoot you a text. I can assure you we’re not coming up to the Capitol. We’ve already made that decision. He pressed a little bit more, believing me but I think frustrated that the president had said that. And we ended the phone conversation after that.

    I called Mr. Ornato to reconfirm that we weren’t going to the Capitol, and which was also in our text messages. I sent Mr. McCarthy another text telling him the affirmative, that we were not going up to the Capitol, and he didn’t respond after that.

    LIZ CHENEY: And we understand, Ms. Hutchinson, that the plans for the president to come up to the Capitol had included discussions at some point about what the president would do when he came up to the Capitol on January 6th. Let’s look at a clip of one of your interviews discussing that issue with the committee. [Begin videotape]

    UNKNOWN: When you were talking about a scheduled movement, did anyone say what the president wanted to do when he got here?

    CASSIDY HUTCHINSON: No, not that I can specifically remember. I remember — I remember hearing a few different ideas discussed with — between Mark and Scott Perry, Mark and Rudy Giuliani. I don’t know which conversations were elevated to the president. I don’t know what he personally wanted to do when he went up to the Capitol that day.

    You know, I — I know that there were discussions about him having another speech outside of the Capitol before going in. I know that there was a conversation about him going into the House chamber at one point. [End videotape]

    LIZ CHENEY: As we’ve all just heard, in the days leading up to January 6th, on the day of the speech, both before and during and after the rally speech, President Trump was pushing his staff to arrange for him to come up here to the Capitol during the electoral vote count. Let’s turn now to what happened in the president’s vehicle when the Secret Service told him he would not be going to the Capitol after his speech. First, here is the president’s motorcade leaving the Ellipse after his speech on January 6th. Ms. Hutchinson, when you returned to the White House in the motorcade after the president’s speech, where did you go?…

    And that goes back to what I quoted before about when she heard the story about Trump attempting to grab the steering wheel.

    Sammy Finkelman (1d215a)

  185. whembly (7e0293) — 6/29/2022 @ 12:38 pm

    there was no smoking gun. Wanting to go to the Capitol he had just told people to peacefully protest at is not enacting a coup. There’s no secret communication or codeword in that speech that signals “the coup is on”.

    I rhink they are presuming other unknown communications, like maybe the call Mark Meadows had with Roger Stone and Mike Flynn.

    But one thing should be clear: The speech did nothing.

    Now Mark Meadows was worried about something he couldn’t stop:

    Ms. Hutchinson, do you remember Mr. Giuliani meeting with Mr. Meadows on January 2, 2021?

    CASSIDY HUTCHINSON: I do. He met with Mr. Meadows in the evening of January 2, 2021.

    LIZ CHENEY: And we understand that you walked Mr. Giuliani out of the White House that night, and he talked to you about January 6th. What do you remember him saying?

    CASSIDY HUTCHINSON: As Mr. Giuliani and I were walking to his vehicles that evening, he looked at me and said something to the effect of, Cass, are you excited for the 6th? It’s going to be a great day. I remember looking at him saying, Rudy, could you explain what’s happening on the 6th? He had responded something to the effect of, we’re going to the Capitol.

    It’s going to be great. The President’s going to be there. He’s going to look powerful. He’s — he’s going to be with the members. He’s going to be with the Senators. Talk to the chief about it, talk to the chief about it. He knows about it.

    LIZ CHENEY: And did you go back then up to the West Wing and tell Mr. Meadows about your conversation with Mr. Giuliani?

    CASSIDY HUTCHINSON: I did. After Mr. Giuliani had left the campus that evening, I went back up to our office and I found Mr. Meadows in his office on the couch. He was scrolling through his phone. I remember leaning against the doorway and saying, I just had an interesting conversation with Rudy, Mark. It sounds like we’re going to go to the Capitol.

    He didn’t look up from his phone and said something to the effect of, there’s a lot going on, Cass, but I don’t know. Things might get real, real bad on January 6th.

    Mark Meadows is refusing the testify. I think the committee thinks he is one of the persons whose testimony has been obstrcted.

    Sammy Finkelman (1d215a)

  186. Meadows knew something that Trump was ignoring.

    Sammy Finkelman (1d215a)

  187. @163. I would have taken you for a Blintz or Russian Honey Cake kind of guy.

    I would have taken you. By sticking you w/t bill. 😉

    DCSCA (848cb9)

  188. The big winner from the January 6 hearings: Ron DeSantis?
    ………
    Trump isn’t the winner. He’s being damaged by the hearings even if the MAGA cheering squad refuses to admit it. As proof, look no further than his own unhappiness at the fact that there are no Republicans on the committee, a choice Kevin McCarthy made after Pelosi rejected two of his picks. “The Republicans don’t have a voice. They don’t even have anything to say,” Trump told Punchbowl last week. “[W]e should’ve picked other people. We have a lot of good people in the Republican Party.” If you believe the NYT, though, he’s scapegoating McCarthy for his own poor strategic instincts…….Whatever the truth about that might be, Trump grasps that the hearings aren’t great for him.
    ………
    Logically the only winners from the hearings are Republican 2024 hopefuls who need the base to move off of Trump cultism so that challengers are viable in the next primary. ……[I]f the video of goons in red caps beating cops at the Capitol wasn’t enough to shake (MAGA voters) loyalty, nothing will. Yet the ongoing testimony could become an excuse for many who are quietly tired of Trump to move on without feeling “disloyal.” …….
    ……..
    According to Politico, there are people close to DeSantis himself who share the belief that he’s the chief beneficiary of all this.
    ………
    ………You can’t side with the committee in believing that he did anything wrong. You can’t even comfortably say that Joe Biden won fair and square. But you can reframe Trump’s problems as potential electoral problems for the GOP, knowing that the supreme ambition of the Republican base — even above electing Trump — is owning the libs at the polls. If an argument can plausibly be made that a different nominee would give them a better chance of doing that, that’s a potential winner.

    And it explains why Team DeSantis is keen to run up the score in his gubernatorial race this fall. The bigger his margin of victory, the stronger the belief that he rather than Trump maximizes the party’s ability to own the libs. That’s the only way the Trump cult disbands. And I think Trump knows it: He put out a pissier-than-usual statement about Peggy Noonan yesterday after she dared to suggest in her Friday column that the hearings were hurting him, making him seem like old news. “This is one of the great stories. Mr. Trump won’t recover from it,” she said.
    ……….

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  189. “right now dissing Trump is not possible for them”

    I think there is a pernicious feedback loop that’s been aggravated by hyper-partisanship fueled by confirmation bias. If the only “news” I consumed was FNC, I might have a different perception of reality…..same with MSNBC. If politicians can’t go on FNC and criticize Trump without seeing gatekeeper blowback, it’s much harder to create momentum. DeSantis has a narrative that will play on FNC and does not require criticism of Trump. GOPers are conditioned to not trust the NYT, WAPO, or CNN. They listen to Talk Radio and surf blogs that tell them what they want to hear. People need to change…but leaders must lead. Romney has survived but can’t do it alone.

    AJ_Liberty (ec7f74)

  190. Mark Meadows is refusing the testify. I think the committee thinks he is one of the persons whose testimony has been obstrcted.

    Witness tampering?

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  191. Better link for #190.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  192. Popeye Doyle could teach Trump quite a bit about getting his way.

    FIFY

    DCSCA (848cb9)

  193. Trump Is In Deep, Deep, Deep, Deep Trouble

    …….If what (Cassidy Hutchinson) has testified to, sworn under oath, is not countered or contradicted by (Mark) Meadows or Trump’s White House counsel Pat Cippolone—either under oath themselves or eventually before a grand jury—then there is a credible criminal case that Trump violated the law in ways not dealt with by the second impeachment, and from which he would not be shielded by executive privilege. It’s possible her memory is faulty, or that she is a fantasist and that none of this happened. But she has reported directly on things that went on inside the White House and around the Oval Office on January 5 and January 6 that go beyond the merely circumstantial.
    ……..
    You’re going to hear people call this “hearsay.” It is not hearsay. It is direct testimony of contemporaneous things said in Hutchinson’s earshot about events that were taking place while she was listening.

    And here’s the rub for Trump. He has so far been protected by Meadows and Cippolone because they have refused to testify to the committee under claims of executive privilege—that Congress does not have the power to force them to speak about their direct conversations with the president or the actions they may have taken under his direct authority because the executive branch is not subordinate to the legislative branch. But they can testify if they choose. If they do not, they will, in essence, be allowing Hutchinson’s testimony to stand. If they do, and they do not say everything she said was a lie, her testimony will stand and be bolstered by them. And if they testify and say their recollections of the days were different, they will have to report in what way they were different—and will not be able to refuse to answer questions they find uncomfortable.

    But if they do remain silent and Hutchinson’s testimony is not somehow rebutted, they can be made to testify if Attorney General Merrick Garland convenes a grand jury on the basis of the revelations of the January 6 committee and subpoenas them. Failure to testify under those conditions will lead to prison time.

    I did not think this day would come. …… But as a result of the bombshells today, there’s no question now that Donald Trump is staring down the barrel of an indictment for seditious conspiracy against the government of the United States.
    ………

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  194. @193. Much more eneteratining:

    Calmes: Brett Kavanaugh’s Roe vote proved it again, He has a problem with truth

    ‘Brett Kavanaugh is a serial liar.

    It’s jarring to write that about anyone, let alone a life-tenured justice on the Supreme Court. Yet years of evidence throughout Kavanaugh’s career show it’s a fact.

    And that fact, together with recent years’ confirmation controversies and Clarence Thomas’ ethical lapses, is central to understanding why public confidence in the court has dropped precipitously. And that was before the last week’s string of unpopular, precedent-defying decisions against abortion, gun controls and the wall between church and state. Worse for Kavanaugh, the criticism of his credibility is bipartisan. In the latest blow, Maine Sen. Susan Collins, a fellow Republican whose vote was decisive when the Senate confirmed Kavanaugh four years ago, has doubled-down on her contention that he “misled” her when he reassured her that, if confirmed, he would not support overturning the court’s half-century-old abortion rights precedent, Roe vs. Wade.

    The ever-cautious Collins would never say “lie.” Yet the New York Times obtained proof of just that, clearly from the senator’s office, publishing “contemporaneous notes” kept by those who sat in on Collins’ private meeting with then-nominee Kavanaugh in 2018. According to the notes, Collins pressed him hard about Roe.

    Kavanaugh told her: “Start with my record, my respect for precedent, my belief that it is rooted in the Constitution, and my commitment and its importance to the rule of law. I understand precedent and I understand the importance of overturning it.”

    “Roe is 45 years old, it has been reaffirmed many times, lots of people care about it a great deal, and I’ve tried to demonstrate I understand real-world consequences,” he said, and then added, “I am a don’t-rock-the-boat kind of judge.”

    Now, hearing that, wouldn’t you believe that Kavanaugh would vote to uphold Roe?…” – LATimes.com

    DCSCA (848cb9)

  195. What does the public think, so far? A large majority think Trump should be prosecuted:

    A Politico-Morning Consult poll released on Wednesday asked respondents if they believed Trump’s efforts to overturn the last presidential election’s results was a crime and that he should face prosecution.

    Sixty-six percent of respondents said that they thought it was a crime and should be prosecuted, while 19 percent said it was not a crime and 18 percent said they thought it was a crime but Trump should not be prosecuted.

    Correction: If you look at the poll, you’ll find that 18 should be 8 percent. (Probably just a typo.)

    That 8 percent fascinates me. Here’s the full question:

    And do you believe that Donald Trump’s attempt to overturn the results of the 2020
    presidential election was a crime that he should be prosecuted for, a crime that he
    should not be prosecuted for, or do you think it was not a crime?

    Jim Miller (406a93)

  196. @188 How is desantes the winner? How will he be able to campaign in purple states let alone blue ones without an army of security forces? Even then their will be rioting or worse.

    asset (e75d41)

  197. @194

    Now, hearing that, wouldn’t you believe that Kavanaugh would vote to uphold Roe?…” – LATimes.com

    DCSCA (848cb9) — 6/29/2022 @ 3:28 pm

    None of that is even remote an indication which way he’d rule on Roe.

    Precedents are not etched into stone that forever renders it un-overturnable.

    whembly (7e0293)

  198. It’s the bright, shiny object tactic. They have no other option in light of the incitement and witness tampering problems brought up yesterday. Ignore the substantive parts of the testimony and focus on the less important (like limos and ketchup). It’s both remarkable and troubling that someone as corrupt and dishonest as Trump continues to eke out loyalty from his defenders.

    Dana (1225fc) — 6/29/2022 @ 11:56 am

    As Popehat said today:
    Really would be more efficient to come up with a single phrase for Trumpists that conveys “the process is unfair and they’re lying and he didn’t do it and also it’s okay if he did it and they deserve it and there’s nothing wrong with it.”

    lurker (cd7cd4)

  199. Must have dropped another html tag. The sentence after the Popehat link should be blockquoted.

    lurker (cd7cd4)

  200. Trumpspeak!

    nk (d9811c)

  201. @197. Except it does. Karma has a way of catching up with Kavanaugh types.

    DCSCA (b5715b)

  202. @188 How is desantes the winner?

    Because the hearings damage Trump-maybe not among Republican voters, but with independents and swing Democrats. The most important group that can hurt Trump are Republican money donors.

    “Trump is facing an important onslaught of negative facts with these hearings and there is no real defense. He has no friendly members on the committee and there aren’t facts to put in front of the public to make any of this sound less bad,” said Dan Eberhart, a Republican donor.

    While Eberhart suspected that the hearings were hardening Trump’s core supporters, he also noted that one of the former president’s more formidable, potential opponents was benefiting too.

    “Ron DeSantis,” he said of the Florida governor, “is lying in wait, sharpening his knives.”
    …….
    “I think the January 6 hearings are continuation of the exhausting circus that surrounds Trump,” said a close DeSantis adviser granted anonymity to speak freely. “There are of course the lunchbox Republicans who think this is a ‘mass conspiracy,’ but among the donor class many are just tired of this.”

    “It’s a sh1tshow,” the person continued. “Some donors are getting sick of the sh1tshow.”
    …….
    DeSantis has been bringing in huge sums from six and seven-figure Trump donors for his reelection, which he is heavily favored to win in November and could leave him with a huge state-level war chest that could be converted to a super PAC headed into the 2024 election cycle.
    ……….

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  203. mr. kevin mccarthy

    who knew a man bojangles and he danced for you

    in worn out shoes

    made a calculation that boycotting the committee entirely would be in his own best interest

    and he was probably right

    until mr. donald trump

    who always finds somebody to blame

    for everything

    blames him for not having any allies on the committee

    then mr. mccarthy will be wrong

    and it’s already starting

    but isn’t that the way these things go?

    nk (d9811c)

  204. “I think there is a pernicious feedback loop that’s been aggravated by hyper-partisanship fueled by confirmation bias.”

    Democrats can be counted on to project. It’s a bug for them, a feature for the clear-minded.

    Colonel Haiku (bdc497)

  205. As Popehat said today:

    i’m pretty sure popehat said that in 2017

    and every year since

    JF (7b1c3c)

  206. Haiku, Trump’s a jerk. Albeit a better jerk than the jerkoff from Scranton. Or is it Wilmington this week. But at least life was better with The Donald being ‘President of Pittsburgh, not Paris’ for a change and he kept American adversaries reacting rather than proacting against national interests. Except for Helsinki. But it’s the entrenched, Cheney-type ideologues who bailed on their party nominee brought this hell on to everybody. And the bottom of the deck isn’t low enough for them.

    DCSCA (87d22b)

  207. Remember… when NeverTrumpers say (paraphrase) look how the Republicans focus on this and disregard the rest of the allegations. The Clownshow Committee are the folks that jumped on this, showcased it, thinking it a fatal wound. It’s obvious they wanted to get it on the record and had/have no interest in anything that would destroy their handmade narrative

    ‘The Jan. 6 committee didn’t reach out to the Secret Service in the days before it aired explosive testimony about an alleged physical altercation between Donald Trump and his security detail on the day of the riot, according to an agency spokesperson.

    In a blockbuster Tuesday hearing, former Trump White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson described being told that the “irate” then-president was so furious agents wouldn’t drive him to the Capitol on Jan. 6 that he “lunge[d]” toward the head of his detail.

    Anthony Guglielmi, the service’s chief of communications, told POLITICO that select committee investigators did not ask Secret Service personnel to reappear or answer questions in writing in the 10 days before asking Hutchinson about the matter at the hearing.

    “[W]e were not asked to reappear before the Committee in response to yesterday’s new information and we plan on formally responding on the record,” he wrote in an email. “We have and will continue to make any member of the Secret Service available.” ‘

    https://www.politico.com/amp/news/2022/06/29/jan-6-00043164

    Colonel Haiku (bdc497)

  208. A Closer Look at the ‘Hearsay’ Claims Surrounding Hutchinson’s Trump Testimony

    It seems to me that the Secret Service and the commentariat are misfiring in their claimed contradictions of Cassidy Hutchinson. If there is a proper target of criticism (and that’s not clear at this point), it is the House January 6 committee, not the witness.
    ……..
    Secret Service sources, and unidentified media sources said to be informed of its version of events, are signaling that the agency will dispute the version of events given by Hutchinson. Perhaps Secret Service will deny that any physical altercations occurred. It is not clear yet whether anyone has denied it under oath. …….

    Here is the salient point: Hutchinson never claimed to have seen any of this. She was neither in the car nor in a position to have viewed it from the outside. She was very clear that she was told this version of events, and that she was simply relating what she was told. If it turns out that Secret Service witnesses, in particular Engel and the unidentified driver, testify that it did not happen the way Hutchinson described it, that would not contradict her…….
    ……..
    To begin with, the federal rules of evidence do not apply to congressional proceedings. They also never apply to investigations, which is what the committee says it is conducting. The point of an investigation is to search for reliable, admissible evidence. For that, hearsay is not only allowed but encouraged — it’s often how we find out who has a probative, firsthand account.

    Furthermore, I am not even sure Hutchinson’s testimony in this regard would be inadmissible as hearsay if the rules of evidence did apply.
    ……..
    If Engel was present, engaged, and listening to what Ornato said, and the circumstances were such that, if Ornato got details wrong, Engel would naturally be expected to correct him, then Ornato’s words were by implication Engel’s words, as if he had spoken them himself. It would not be simply a matter of someone telling Hutchinson what that person saw Trump do; it would essentially be Engel telling Hutchinson what Engel did with Trump.

    In any event, obvious questions arise out of this, none of which necessarily cast doubt on Hutchinson’s testimony — which, again, is that she was told these things happened; she’s not in a position to say that they did happen.
    ……..
    There are other salient questions, but they are better directed to the committee. For example, given that, with great fanfare but with no cross-examination, it has presented wide-ranging testimony from Hutchinson, will the committee now publicly release the deposition testimony of Engel — at the very least, any relevant portions related to what happened in the car and how it was reported to the White House staff?

    Was Engel asked about what happened in the car? If not, why not? If so, was Engel’s testimony consistent with Hutchinson’s? ……
    ……..
    …… In my experience, when various witnesses who have little or no motive to lie provide different versions of events, there are usually innocent, rational explanations for this — they had different perspectives on the relevant events, what was important to one may not have been to others, the memories of some may be better than others, and so on. ……
    ……..

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  209. Hutchinson claims to have written a note that Trump Attorney Eric Herschmann says he wrote. A committee searching for the truth would address it as an inconsistency that should be looked at.

    Not Clownshow Committee. They say hmmm… inconsistency, but we believe Hutchinson, cuz she’s credible.

    There is much fvckery afoot… but still time for the fair minded Cheney to give Hutchinson an embrace after her performance.

    Colonel Haiku (bdc497)

  210. Laughable!

    Colonel Haiku (bdc497)

  211. Won’t be anybody showing him teh lurvs, Rip.

    I’m sure they’ll search for a narrative that will blow NeverTrumpers skirts up.

    Colonel Haiku (bdc497)

  212. I think there is a pernicious feedback loop that’s been aggravated by hyper-partisanship fueled by confirmation bias

    Currently, I get my news from CNBC and Shepard Smith’s actual NEWS show. I can’t watch CNN or Fox (and certainly not MSNBC). They’ve given up on news and just scream a lot. Bah.

    Kevin M (eeb9e9)

  213. But as a result of the bombshells today, there’s no question now that Donald Trump is staring down the barrel of an indictment for seditious conspiracy against the government of the United States.

    Past time for him to take the Agnew deal.

    Kevin M (eeb9e9)

  214. How is desantes the winner? How will he be able to campaign in purple states let alone blue ones without an army of security forces? Even then their will be rioting or worse.

    If any legitimate candidate cannot campaign anywhere in the United States, that area is in insurrection and the military should put it down with all necessary force.

    Kevin M (eeb9e9)

  215. Because the hearings damage Trump-maybe not among Republican voters, but with independents and swing Democrats.

    If Trump is knocked out of the race before, oh, mid-2023, it hurts DeSantis. His best situation is for him to go one-on-one with Trump, or at least have Trump drop out as late as possible.

    The problem with Trump in the race is that other potential candidates would prefer not to get on his voters’ bad side. Some, like DeSantis, are willing to go there, but not many. But if Trump is no longer an option soon enough for others to organize, you’ll have 20 candidates overnight.

    Kevin M (eeb9e9)

  216. I understand what Popehat was trying to say, but if I am in the jury box and- lets say for some reason the defense attorney’s go mute- and the witness says: “I was part of a conversation … I was in the vicinity of a conversation where I overheard the president say something to the effect of…” I’m out. I don’t need cross examination to bring me to a conclusion. So she really wasn’t part of the conversation, overheard something to the effect of….”. I’d be pissed. You brought me back on a day off for this? I’d tune her out.

    steveg (6e43a8)

  217. steveg,

    They would probably get rid of you during vior dire.

    Kevin M (eeb9e9)

  218. @215

    asset (44def9)

  219. @215 Just because you want it wont make it so. Biden would not send troops to protect desantis in blue states from pro-choice demonstrators and neither would blue state governors Kyle rittenhouse verdict made sure of that.

    asset (44def9)

  220. Rip Murdock on 6/29/2022 @ 3:12 pm quoting something:

    But as a result of the bombshells today, there’s no question now that Donald Trump is staring down the barrel of an indictment for seditious conspiracy against the government of the United States.

    \somebody on te committee is leaking like crazy (anonymously) saying so, and citing possible reasons, and too much of the media is following along, but this depends on errors of logic, misstatements of law and omissions of fact.

    They argue that Trump had knowledge that people in the crowd at the \Ellipse had weapons. Then they cite what the Secret Service observed. But Trump was not privy to those details

    The leakers cite Trump saying they are not out to hurt me ignoring the context of that statement. As Vice Chairman Liz Cheney said:

    https://www.npr.org/2022/06/28/1108396692/jan-6-committee-hearing-transcript

    When a President speaks, the Secret Service typically requires those attending to pass through metal detectors known as magnetometers, or mags for short.

    He was told weapons were being confiscated and other people were declining to go through the metal detectors. That does not mean that Trump intended hoped or knew that such weapons would be used on anyone else. You can say that maybe Trump was in a deep conspiracy to breach the Capitol – such a conspiracy that he was confident that even if he was there he would not be harmed – but you can’t use that lack if worry to establish that as fact. There’s a far more reasonable interpretation. The leakers omit the fact that many people who breached the Capitol, especially those planned that in advance and who carried some sort of weapon never went near the Ellipse.

    The important point is not whether or not Trump had a reason to believe that some people who would go to the Capitol (and people who went to the Capitol were not mainly inspired by his speech too do so — there was a web site that called for that) had arms.

    The important point is whether he had a reason to suspect, or wanted, people to breach police lines, and there is not the slightest shred of evidence that he did and a great deal of evidence to surmise that he did not, and did not know it was happening, or could happen, when he wanted to go to the Capitol…

    What he did not do later is not a proof that he wanted or expected it to happen – it’s more like getting a lemon and trying to make lemonade from it.

    And it is a stretch to characterize his legally maneuvering as fraud or obstruction of a governmental proceeding.

    Sammy Finkelman (b434ee)

  221. “I was part of a conversation” and “I was in the vicinity of a conversation where I overheard the president” are two different ways of characterizing the same thing. Legally she was part of it, because they culd see she was there, but not so much in reality.

    Now Cassidy Hutchison has shown that she is a witness who can be led. She should never have acknowledged that she wrote that note. Maybe somebody working for that committee felt that it needed that to be authenticated. We don;t know if that note was in er possession.

    Sammy Finkelman (b434ee)

  222. 96. mg (8cbc69) — 6/29/2022 @ 8:13 am

    This young lady would have been 23 when all this happened.

    One New York Tmes article said she was 26 but Maggie Haberman says she was 25.

    That would give her a date of birth between June 28, 1995 and June 28, 1997. If she is now 26, it seems like there must have been a gap year before she attended college. She was a first generation college student. She graduated in 2019.

    Sammy Finkelman (b434ee)

  223. 221… Forget it, Sammy, it’s the lying corksoakers of DC…

    Colonel Haiku (d41f8b)

  224. This sham event is no different than when the leftists in Congress held their “trial” of George W for war crimes in the basement.

    Same propaganda. Same effect.

    NJRob (eb56c3)

  225. Liz Cheney says ‘men are running the world and it is really not going that well’ in Reagan Library speech – businessinsider.com

    “So?” – Dick Cheney

    =mike-drop=

    DCSCA (8c4c87)

  226. Seen on some RW comment sights…a willingness to trade Roe reversal for Texas beating Biden. Kavanaugh effed up.

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/supreme-court-biden-may-end-141609750.html

    urbanleftbehind (de4f63)

  227. Bradley Moss

    I can’t believe I have to do this but since so many in Trump apology land are doing their best to undermine Hutchinson’s testimony let’s revisit what she testified to that was from firsthand observations and is not disputed.

    1) The White House had intelligence that the 1/6 crowd was armed. People going through the Mags had been armed and the weapons were confiscated. Other people with more serious weaponry were staying outside the security bubble to avoid losing their weapons.

    2) Meadows is told the crowd is armed. He doesn’t care.

    3) Trump is told the crowd is armed. He doesn’t care.

    4) Trump gets so made [mad, sic] that the Mags are thinning his crowd “shot” he demands USSS back down and let everyone in. When told they can’t because of safety concerns tied to the weapons, he says he doesn’t care b/c the attendees aren’t there to hurt him.

    5) Trump was clear before the speech he wanted to go to the Hill and march with the crowd. Staff told him over and over he could not do it and promised the Hill he wouldn’t. He told the 1/6 crowd anyway he was going to march with them, and USSS started making preparations to clear a path. Again, this is despite his awareness the crowd was armed, up to and including AR-15s.

    6) After the speech, Trump is told they’re not marching with the crowd. Trump is pissed. He planned to march.

    That’s it. That’s the criminal argument. He was aware the crowd was armed, he planned to lead them to the Hill anyway with the intent to prevent certification. That’s the criminal case right there. And none of that is being disputed by USSS.

    Whether Trump grabbed the damn steering wheel or assaulted Engle is sooooo not the point. That was the one bit of hearsay Hutchinson included that is now being seized on by Fox and the likes of @ggreenwald to cast aspersions on the entirety of Hutchinson’s testimony. It was a wild anecodte, NOT the main testimony.

    Enough with the damn gaslighting. /end

    Ornato and Engel can of course be put under oath and testify to Trump’s behavior in the SUV, and they could also testify to Trump’s foreknowledge of the armed “protesters” and his wanting them to turn off the “mags”.

    Paul Montagu (5de684)

  228. Yet Another New Poll Spells Bad News for Liz Cheney

    Nearly six in 10 Democrats (58%) have a favorable view of Liz Cheney, compared with just 18% of Republicans. Americans overall are split (35% vs. 37%).https://t.co/rdr6OcZmtB pic.twitter.com/24ZTfKrgJp

    — YouGov America (@YouGovAmerica) June 17, 2022

    – source, https://townhall.com/tipsheet/rebeccadowns/2022/06/17/yet-another-new-poll-spells-bad-news-for-liz-cheney-n2608919

    DCSCA (808a3b)

  229. ‘Domestic threat:’ Liz Cheney says Republicans must abandon Donald Trump

    WASHINGTON – Liz Cheney urged the Republican Party on Wednesday to rid itself of Donald Trump, calling the former president a clear and present threat to both the GOP and to American democracy at large. “We have to choose, because Republicans cannot both be loyal to Donald Trump and loyal to the Constitution,” Cheney said during an address at the Ronald Reagan Library in Simi Valley, California.’- USAToday.com

    ROFLMAOPIP:

    Cheney Voted with Trump More Than His Closest Allies
    November 16, 2021 at 1:16 pm EST By Taegan Goddard

    The Casper Star Tribune‘s report on Wyoming Republicans refusing to recognize Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY) as a member of their party also notes that Cheney voted with Donald Trump on policy 93% of the time. “That’s a higher percentage than Rep. Jim Jordan, Rep. Elise Stefanik, Rep. Paul Gosar, Rep. Matt Gaetz and a number of other lawmakers who are seen as staunch Trump allies.”

    https://politicalwire.com/2021/11/16/cheney-voted-with-trump-more-than-his-closest-allies/

    LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL So Daughter Darth was for “Hitler”– before she was against him. “Dick Nixon before he dicks you,” eh dear? This is one neocon Americans will gladly dispatch to the ash heap of history. Or CNN.

    DCSCA (808a3b)

  230. @228 This is a very good summary. But it leaves out an element that supports:

    with the intent to prevent certification

    I’m not saying you can’t add that element, just that it’s not in that list.

    I don’t think whether the crowd was armed is an essential element in this argument and I think trying to make it so undermines the larger point.

    So:

    He was aware the crowd was armed, he planned to lead them to the Hill anyway with the intent to prevent certification. That’s the criminal case right there.

    frosty (8c9e29)

  231. “That was the one bit of hearsay Hutchinson included that is now being seized on by Fox and the likes of @ggreenwald to cast aspersions on the entirety of Hutchinson’s testimony. It was a wild anecodte, NOT the main testimony.”

    Puhleeeeeze… This may play well to the Trump haters and others who wish to distract from Biden’s sinking ship, but it was the Democrats/NeverTrump that put the focus on this and dressed it up like a bombshell.

    Colonel Haiku (af87af)

  232. Rip Murdock on 6/29/2022 @ 3:12 pm quoting something:
    …….
    Sammy Finkelman (b434ee) — 6/30/2022 @ 6:04 am

    If you had clicked the link you would have seen who I was quoting. Better than your ungrounded speculations.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  233. I see a tear in the Rip, Sammy.

    There is zero accountability and there are zero limits to what this Clownshow can say, imply, or do.

    All stagecraft… a further refinement of the Democrats/NeverTrump strategy of spreading unfounded smears and lies to a gullible and friendly press corps. Why did the J6 Clownshow not get the SS agents’ confirmation of her tale ?

    Colonel Haiku (af87af)

  234. I heard Trump on news max talking about the rigged and stolen election and more over complaining that Newsmax itself is complicit in covering it up. I was reminded of Captain Queeg and the strawberries. I think more people are realizing they need to cut this guy loose. And Trump is starting to realize they realize it.

    JRH (9a8878)

  235. The Trump defenders are pulling out all the stops.

    Paul Montagu (5de684)

  236. My preference is for Trump to fade from the scene – many of us appreciate what he was able to help get done – and make way for DeSantis. That would be a big help.

    After seeing the pushback Trump got, the 4 years of ridiculous allegations that were employed by this sh*theeled opposition… never substantiated and those making them never held to account… it is difficult to be charitable to any of these gargoyles.

    Colonel Haiku (dbba2d)

  237. Ms. Hutchinson was one of the witnesses whom TrumpWorld tried to tamper out of testifying.

    Also, the $250 million from the “Stop the Steal” slush fund is possibly/likely being used by TrumpWorld for Joint Defense Agreements and such. An excerpt…

    The problem Trump had at that time—because his liquid assets are profoundly limited—is that he didn’t have the money to pay for witnesses’ lawyers or for their silence himself. This is why Manafort was given millions by Trump allies as soon as he left the 2016 Trump campaign.

    In fact, Trump is *still* paying off Paul Manafort today. Just a few days ago major media reported that $5 million from Trump’s post-election fund was given to “Event Strategies” to set up the January 6 White House Ellipse event. Paul Manafort is an executive at that company.

    All of the money Trump raised after the 2020 presidential election was raised fraudulently from gullible schmucks who were, sadly, the victim of Wire Fraud. None of the money they sent him went to the purposes they were told it would go to, even as Trump got them to pay up…by teasing a 2024 presidential run as an unannounced candidate, which itself was a campaign finance crime. Yet what the $250 million Trump raised through this criminal scheme allowed him to do was pay for the current massive cover-up of the January 6 attack on the Capitol.

    When will the GOP move on from an old, unfit unhinged Trump and go with someone else? Not that I’m a fan, but DeSantis is fit, hinged and smarter.

    Paul Montagu (5de684)

  238. You know what I’m thinking? Praetorian Guard. That moment in the limo may really have been Trump’s moment of realization that he could, actually, be physically removed from the White House on January 20.

    nk (f805b3)

  239. The president reached up towards the front of the vehicle to grab at the steering wheel. Mr. Engel grabbed his arm, said, sir, you need to take your hand off the steering wheel.

    Where does it say that Trump was inside the car at the time?

    Cassidy Hutchinson says that:

    So, once the president had gotten into the vehicle with Bobby

    But another thing she says, in relaying this story second hand, seems to point to when he arrived at the vehicle.

    Tony proceeded to tell me that when the president got in the beast, he was under the impression from Mr. Meadows that the off the record movement to the Capitol was still possible and likely to happen, but that Bobby had more information.

    Trump would more likely have been told this BEFORE getting into the vehicle.

    I think the committee staff pushed her into saying where Trump was.

    Sammy Finkelman (1d215a)

  240. And is she right that the vehicle was “the Beast?

    Thereare two transcripts Both have errors

    https://www.npr.org/2022/06/28/1108396692/jan-6-committee-hearing-transcript

    This one at least mentions the Beast laterbut has the wrong verb:

    https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/day-6-of-jan-6-committee-hearings-6-28-22-transcript

    Male Interviewer: (56:42)
    When you wrote, “POTUS wanted to walk to the Capitol”, was that based solely on what the president said during his speech or anything that he or anybody else said afterwards?

    Kayleigh McEnany: (56:53)
    So to the best of my recollection, I believe when we got back to the White House, he said he wanted to physically walk with… He’d be fine with just writing The Beast. So that’s my recollection, he wanted to be a part of the march.

    Not “writing” the beast – but “riding
    the Beast.

    I think maybe instead of using the other vehicle he had used to just go to the Ellipse/

    NPR has worse:

    And according to my notes, he then said, you’d be fine with just writing the piece, but — so that’s my recollection. He wanted to be a part of the March in some fashion.

    UNKNOWN: Alright. And just for the record, the piece refers to the Presidential limousine?

    KAYLEIGH MCENANY: Yes. [End videotape] The Beast , not the piece!

    https://spyscape.com/article/7-top-secrets-about-the-beast-presidential-limo

    The car with all the James Bond equipment.

    Sammy Finkelman (1d215a)

  241. I think more people are realizing they need to cut this guy loose. And Trump is starting to realize they realize it..

    It’s not ‘the guy.’ The next ‘guy’ or ‘gal’ will pick up the populist banner. This caldron has been simmering to a boil for multiple cycles over several decades and it’s foolish to believe this is about ‘the guy’ – -especially now that they’ve tasted power for four years and still command sway over the swaths of the electorate. The rodents who lost control of the part want back in- neocons, never-Trumpers and the pundit elites on the outs and such- and it’s not going to happen for a long, long time.

    DCSCA (898b3a)

  242. KAYLEIGH MCENANY actually said a word that sounded like “piece” but riding was smething close to writng.

    npr at one point has [Inaudible]. where it should be “the Beast”

    Rev has:

    Mark got into his vehicle, to my understanding. Trump got into the Beast and after we had all arrived back at the White House, later in the day it had been relayed to me via Mark that the President wasn’t happy that Bobby didn’t pull it off for him and that Mark didn’t work hard enough to get the movement on the books.

    Sammy Finkelman (1d215a)

  243. DeSantis is fit, hinged and smarter.

    Except he’s not. Listen to him for 10 minutes and you’ll see a refrigerator bulb has more wattage than him. He won’t survive any serious vetting.

    DCSCA (898b3a)

  244. 239. nk (f805b3) — 6/30/2022 @ 4:23 pm

    That moment in the limo may really have been Trump’s moment of realization that he could, actually, be physically removed from the White House on January 20.

    Mark Meadows was lying to Trump, and to everyone else.

    I think the altercation, whatever it was, took place OUTSIDE the car.

    Sammy Finkelman (1d215a)

  245. There’s also that the Secret Service agents were reminded, every time that they checked in for work, that they were supposed to step in front of a bullet for this guy.

    nk (90f958)

  246. 🇺🇸 Mike Davis 🇺🇸

    Jun 29, 2022
    “On March 7, 2022, former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson testified to @January6thCmte that former senior Justice Department official Jeff Clark strategized at White House with Giuliani and Trump campaign to object to election.

    100% false.

    They’ve never met or communicated.”

    🇺🇸 Mike Davis 🇺🇸
    @mrddmia

    “I have spoken with a well-placed source, and I have a confirmatory email between @washingtonpost and another well-placed source.

    So The Washington Post knows Ms. Hutchinson’s testimony is not truthful. When will WaPo report this?“

    https://twitter.com/mrddmia/status/1542239361940455431?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1542239361940455431%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Face.mu.nu%2Farchives%2F399824.php399824

    Colonel Haiku (bd9a44)

  247. Biden would not send troops to protect desantis in blue states from pro-choice demonstrators

    You are certainly right, but that doesn’t mean it’s OK, it means that Biden is a corrupt hack. But if the tables were turned and a Democrat was attacked in a red state by Trumpbots, Biden would act like it was the worst thing ever.

    Kevin M (eeb9e9)

  248. Biden would not send troops to protect desantis in blue states from pro-choice demonstrators

    American soldiers would never fire on middle-aged women wearing tampons on their ears anyway.

    nk (90f958)

  249. DCSCA, as much as I dislike populism, populism in the hands of a conservative leader who doesn’t have Trump’s psychological and ethical failings would be an enormous improvement.

    aphrael (e6e2b1)

  250. Jun 29, 2022

    “On March 7, 2022, former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson testified to @January6thCmte that former senior Justice Department official Jeff Clark strategized at White House with Giuliani and Trump campaign to object to election.

    100% false.

    Wait a second.

    Last week, three top DOJ officials testified that Jeffrey Clark was probably secretly meeting with Trump. And they all met with him and Trump one day. And the committee showed meetings including one where he was labeled as Acting Attorney General, were in White Houe records. Of course, that all ended on January 3rd, and in the end they all went back to work and treated it as if it all had never happened.

    (Trump had asked wa=hat would happen to Jeffrey Clark now. Would his boss fire him? He said he didn’t have the power to do so – Jeffrey Ca=lark was a Senate confired official. Trump asked who had the power to fire him. You do sir he was told. He decided he wasn’t going to do that))

    Sammy Finkelman (b7dc9b)

  251. On March 7, 2022, former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson testified to @January6thCmte
    that former senior Justice Department official Jeff Clark strategized at White House with Giuliani and Trump campaign to object to election.

    100% false.

    They’ve never met or communicated.

    He was strategizing but probably not in person, and it was ot to object to the election, but to help aalong a claim that there was massive election fraud, and he probably never met with Giuliani or either with Eastman (Eastman had placed a person at DOJ and that was the person working with him) and while Jeffrey Clark went to the White House it was mostly to meet with Donald Trump and argue that he could find fraud and should be appointed Acting Attorney General.

    I don’t know what it was that Cassidy Hutchinson said about Clark, or how she qualified her knowledge. How can I find out?

    Sammy Finkelman (b434ee)

  252. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-secret-service-hutchinson-testimony-b2114153.html

    But when you rad it, you see the fact of an altercation is agreed upon but not what was described — nor did the Secret Service sources deny it.

    According to CNN, two sources with the Secret Service say they heard about the incident described by ex-Trump White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson in bombshell testimony before the House January 6 select committee on Tuesday. During the reported episode, Mr Trump berated the head of his protective detail, Robert Engel, and the driver of his armoured SUV, after he was told he could not go to the US Capitol to join the riotous mob he had summoned to Washington that day

    Those sources told the network they heard of an “angry confrontation” between Mr Trump and his bodyguards stemming from their refusal to transport the president to the Capitol. Their accounts reportedly “align” with what Ms Hutchinson told the select committee.

    It’s not the incident!

    Like it was all 100% true or not true.

    Here is the denial:

    https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/28/us/politics/trump-jan-6-behavior.html

    A Secret Service spokesman said in a statement that the agency would respond on the record to the House committee about Ms. Hutchinson’s account of what happened in the armored car.

    Secret Service officials who requested anonymity to discuss the potential testimony said that both Robert Engel, the head of Mr. Trump’s protective detail, and the driver of Mr. Trump’s sport utility vehicle were prepared to state under oath that neither man was assaulted by the former president and that he did not reach for the wheel. The officials said the two men would not dispute the allegation that Mr. Trump wanted to go to the Capitol.

    They are denying an assault and they are denying that he grabbed for the steering wheel.

    Sammy Finkelman (1d215a)

  253. Cheney shared two messages that she said witnesses had received ahead of their depositions. The witnesses, who Cheney didn’t name, subsequently shared the messages with the committee.

    “What they said to me is as long as I continue to be a team player, they know that I’m on the team, I’m doing the right thing, I’m protecting who I need to protect, you know, I’ll continue to stay in the good graces in Trump world,” the first text message read. “And they have reminded me a couple of times that Trump does read transcripts and just keep that in mind as I proceed through my depositions and interviews with the committee.”

    This witness was apparently Cassidy Hutchinson. We don;t know who actally sent this — probably a lawyer.

    Sammy Finkelman (1d215a)

  254. rld came in the form of a phone call…

    “[A person] let me know you have your deposition tomorrow. He wants me to let you know that he’s thinking about you. He knows you’re loyal, and you’re going to do the right thing when you go in for your deposition,” the caller said.

    Witness tampering is a federal crime.

    The New York Times repeats this in a story today about why Cassie Hutchinson;s public testimony was rushed but dooooooes not say, as has been reported – maybe in the NYT – that thiis came from Mark Meadows (who I think was trying to hide from Trump world that he was working at cross purposes with Trump.

    Trump has okayed Bannon’s testimony whom he had no authority to stop – and no his lawyer says that Trump did not invoke executive privilege (Bannnon made that up, or claimed it on his own initiative

    DOJ claims his offer to testify is a “stunt” (in advance of his trial for contempt of Congress) scheduled to start next week, and that (anyway?) he hasn’t complied with a subpoena for documents.

    Sammy Finkelman (b7dc9b)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2661 secs.