CNN Says Cop Corroborates “Details” of Trump’s Confrontation of Secret Service
That’s nice. Which details?
A Washington, DC, police officer has corroborated to the House select committee investigating January 6, 2021, details regarding a heated exchange former President Donald Trump had with his Secret Service detail when he was told he could not go to the US Capitol after his rally, a source familiar with the matter tells CNN.
The officer with the Metropolitan Police Department was in the motorcade with the Secret Service for Trump on January 6 and recounted what was seen to committee investigators, according to the source.
Cassidy Hutchinson’s testimony was fantastic, particularly where she related things she herself heard and observed. The bit about the thing in the SUV (which she mistakenly believed was the Beast, a different vehicle) was different — hearsay testimony about an account related to her by unreliable actors with a motive to come in and contradict her (“why, we are the Secret Service! We never tell stories on our bosses!”).
The “details” now being corroborated could be as trivial as “Trump wanted to go to the Capitol and we wouldn’t let him. Everything else she said was wrong.” And that’s possible. The people who related the story to her could have exaggerated details. Her memory of what they said could be faulty in minor respects.
The truly important testimony she gave was that Trump knew folks in the crowd were armed but he encouraged people to be let into the crowd without going through metal detectors, to increase the crowd’s size. When he delivered a speech that he had been warned was overly incendiary, this is the crowd he knew he was delivering it to. And remember he had called in goons like Flynn and Stone, whom he had recently pardoned, so he could cash in the favors they owed him.
The struggle/not struggle in the SUV is a sideshow, designed to hit her credibility because her credibility is important. I hope the committee isn’t overselling the extent of the corroboration.
Mr. Ornato, the ex-Secret Service guy who became Trump’s Deputy Chief of Staff, is now back with the Secret Service, currently assistant director of their Office of Training.
Funny how the Secret Service deleted all text messages on 1/5/2021 and 1/6/2021 after a subpoena was issued for those records.
As I recall, Ms. Hutchinson directly heard Trump say “take the effing mags away!” It will be interesting if or how many heard the same thing.Paul Montagu (5de684) — 7/15/2022 @ 9:05 am
The walls are closing in now!Colonel Haiku (efef16) — 7/15/2022 @ 9:13 am
It is real funny considering they didn’t do that.
Here is the statement that you need to debunk:BuDuh (340919) — 7/15/2022 @ 9:14 am
The explanation given the by SS makes sense to me and seems plausible. Fabricating it would require multiple people to conspire in the cover up.Time123 (28d801) — 7/15/2022 @ 9:42 am
The truly important testimony she gave was that Trump knew folks in the crowd were armed but he encouraged people to be let into the crowd without going through metal detectors, to increase the crowd’s size.
And the Secret Service agents are supposed to step in front of the bullets.nk (82e1d0) — 7/15/2022 @ 10:06 am
Pat, I disagree a bit. I think the temper tantrums are important, in that a president should not be someone who throws temper tantrums. The exact opposite of “the right stuff.”Kevin M (eeb9e9) — 7/15/2022 @ 10:09 am
That’s some first-rate a$$-covering, BuDuh. The initial reporting came directly from their Inspector General, and it has a similar smell as Comey and McCabe both getting NRP deep-dig audits.Paul Montagu (5de684) — 7/15/2022 @ 10:10 am
I do stand corrected on one thing. It wasn’t a subpoena, it was an IG request.
Oh.. azzz covering. That explains everything.
The OIG letter has some ambiguity in it:
That probably doesn’t bother you.
Back to the azzz covering. Do you think they are trying to obfuscate details regarding Kamala’s location that day as well as the DNC pipe bomb screwup?
Th OIG sent a letter to the committee that was leaked to the media. The SS promptly responded. Now it is up to the OIG to make their case. Speculation of azzz covering is silly IMO.BuDuh (340919) — 7/15/2022 @ 10:22 am
And the Secret Service agents are supposed to step in front of the bullets.
Some time in the future, at a gathering of retired Protective Detail agents:
Bill: “I sure am glad I never had to stop a bullet. I keep seeing what Tim did when Hinckley went after Reagan. Effing amazing!
Bob: “Yeah but what about poor Joe, who died saving Donald effing Trump from that deranged university professor in 2024. Can you imagine?!”
Bill: “Dying for Donald effing Trump?!? My wife would kill me.”
Bob: “And then he said that ‘he prefers agents who don’t die’ … and the next time no one stepped in front.”
Bill: “A terrible shame that.”Kevin M (eeb9e9) — 7/15/2022 @ 10:25 am
The interesting thing to speculate on is what was the committee’s thinking in having Hutchinson recount someone else’s story when, as most concede, those details kind of distract from the key point that Trump was adamant about going to the Capitol against legal and security-detail advice. Then, they chose to not immediately present secret service testimony as to what was accurate and what was not. I figure some of this is button pushing and creating the narrative of a possibly unhinged President, and some is setting up Trump defenders with later confirmation testimony that will be difficult to spin and refute…kind of like what happened with the 10yr old rape victim and the abortion.
The secret service phone issue seems not as big of a story as some are suggesting….though it is still a bit odd. Certainly some data was turned over. It’s just odd that in this day and age, any data would get “lost”. And it’s equally weird that the IT upgrade would take precedence over an IG request. You would think the SS would err on the side of not appearing to lose any data. Still, I doubt the security detail phone logs will provide magical evidence of Presidential intent…or anything else that couldn’t be provided by interview. It just looks bad based on past hooker misjudgments.AJ_Liberty (ec7f74) — 7/15/2022 @ 10:27 am
Glad you are ok, nk. It sounded like your departure was permanent when you got so worked up over DCCSA’s pixels. Stay calm brother, and scroll on by.BuDuh (340919) — 7/15/2022 @ 10:30 am
I count three things:BuDuh (340919) — 7/15/2022 @ 10:38 am
Tip of the cap to Tom Stafford, Vance Brand the late Deke Slayton, the late Alexi Leonov and the late Valery Kubasov. 47 years ago today, July 15, 1975, began the first international manned space mission between the United States and Russia: the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project. It began w/t televised launch of a Russian Soyuz and the liftoff of the last Apollo spacecraft and the final Saturn rocket- a Saturn 1B.
The American and Soviet spacecraft commanders, Stafford and Leonov, became lasting friends. Leonov was the godfather of Stafford’s younger children. Stafford gave a eulogy at Leonov’s funeral in October, 2019. Among my personal treasures is a framed up pix w/flight patch from ’75 signed by both crews- and a sealed pack of Apollo/Soyuz cigarettes marketed in both the U.S. and Russia at the time.
“Meet the future.” – Butch Cassidy [Paul Newman] ‘Butch Cassidy & The Sundance Kid’ 1969DCSCA (909eca) — 7/15/2022 @ 10:49 am
When the likes of you can embarrass me, BuDuh, I’ll stay off the internet altogether.nk (3a6240) — 7/15/2022 @ 10:52 am
That’s a funny thing to say.
Glad you are ok, anyways.BuDuh (340919) — 7/15/2022 @ 10:58 am
They said would be no math, which is probably good for you. There’s no functional difference between “deleted” and “erased”.Paul Montagu (5de684) — 7/15/2022 @ 11:09 am
Instead of trolling me, why don’t you address the post? To wit, Marla’s meal ticket asking the people who are supposed to step in front of a bullet for him to let armed loonies come into range.nk (3a6240) — 7/15/2022 @ 11:15 am
At 10:38 I bolded where you got ahead of the available information. I didn’t note “deleted.”
#1 you already stipulated. There was no subpoena.
#2 is your use of the word “all.” The OIG letter does not make that claim.
#3 is the use of the word “after.” The SS letter says the deletions were happening prior to the request.BuDuh (340919) — 7/15/2022 @ 11:21 am
I think Patterico did a fine job with the post and his final line sums up my position perfectly, nk.BuDuh (340919) — 7/15/2022 @ 11:23 am
PERSONAL ATTACK!!!! 😭😭😭BuDuh (340919) — 7/15/2022 @ 11:30 am
Personally, I think all of this, Trump and “the Steal” included, is a sideshow. Everywhere I look, one thing is constant — an attempt to call all our institutions into question: The Supreme Court, Congress, elections, the Electoral College and the President. With big plans for “reform.”
Instead of trying contain and improve dysfunction, all the players seem to want to do is get over on each other, and their ideas for “reform” are nothing more than that. National Popular Vote, Supreme Court “reform”, eliminating the filibuster, term limits, voting “rights” and voting “integrity” — all are partisan attempts to gain advantage and the institutions be damned.Kevin M (eeb9e9) — 7/15/2022 @ 11:34 am
You two need to get a room.Kevin M (eeb9e9) — 7/15/2022 @ 11:35 am
That is disgusting.BuDuh (340919) — 7/15/2022 @ 11:39 am
AJ, It could also be a desire for a good story to anchor the public attention. These are politicians making a case to the public, not lawyers. It could also just be a mistake.Time123 (54a8a1) — 7/15/2022 @ 12:04 pm
stop trolling nk. he’s one of the few good ones left.Dustin (f01c00) — 7/15/2022 @ 12:06 pm
It certainly could be a detail that the electorate could grasp. As in, he lost his cool and was acting irrationally (though the entire stop-the-steal meme was pretty irrational already). Still, it’s second-hand and everyone can see that too. I think there has to be more if for nothing else to not allow Hutchinson to be smeared….for passing on erroneous gossip. I’m suspicious that some of this is designed to make Trump respond by either contacting witnesses or saying something dumb or just to tweak him.AJ_Liberty (ec7f74) — 7/15/2022 @ 12:12 pm
I apologize. I poorly wrote advice to him to just scroll past DCSCA. nk quit posting on the 4th and said he was done here in relation to some of DCSCA’s posts and noted how others had been driven away as well.
I was and am sincere. It is a shame that it is regarded as trolling. I won’t bother posting that thread. I don’t see why I would have to mount a defense. nk could clear this up if he wanted to, but maybe the opportunity to trash me is more appealing.BuDuh (340919) — 7/15/2022 @ 12:18 pm
‘designed to hit her credibility’……did they design for her to say that in her testimony?Richard Wetmore (ddc02c) — 7/15/2022 @ 12:18 pm
AJ, You could be right. But I think a lot of this ‘3d chess’ stuff is over stated.
I would find it more persuasive if they left it out. It’s a too colorful. But I’m a data nerd so….Time123 (54a8a1) — 7/15/2022 @ 12:19 pm
That’s some first-rate a$$-covering, BuDuh. The initial reporting came directly from their Inspector General, and it has a similar smell as Comey and McCabe both getting NRP deep-dig audits.
I do stand corrected on one thing. It wasn’t a subpoena, it was an IG request.
Paul Montagu (5de684) — 7/15/2022 @ 10:10 am
wiping cellphones was never a big thing in nevertrump world until todayJF (83f201) — 7/15/2022 @ 12:24 pm
Show trials are fun.
In the meantime the left is pushing to abolish the Supreme Court, do away with the electoral college and replace the “racist” Constitution.
Carry onNJRob (f9d6a1) — 7/15/2022 @ 12:25 pm
a source familiar with the matter tells CNN.
did they find the leaker?
that someone on the committee is leaking this stuff with minimal details should tell anyone that it’s a nothingburger with cheeseJF (83f201) — 7/15/2022 @ 12:30 pm
Story’s too good, it has to be true.Colonel Haiku (624405) — 7/15/2022 @ 12:39 pm
I think we also have to add the
Trump, in denying some of this, said that he was said to have jumped out of the car — which was not what Cassidy Hutchinson and Liz Cheney had said.
This seems to be an error. I think Cassidy Hutchinson was browbeaten and tired and had her memory pushed beyond where it would go. She probably ever saw the car Trump was using. Later, the Beast came up. Trump said he would be willing to use the Beast if that was what it took to get him to the Capitol
Note: He had already been told they wouldn’t drive him. In the original car anyway.
This npr transcript has errors and even the Rev.com one does.
“be fine with just writing the piece”
“be fine with just RIDING the BEAST”
In other words, he still wanted to go to the Capitol after he got back to the White House and it would be OK with him to use the souped up vehicle.
What did he want to do? The committee, or some of its members, would like us to believe he wanted to cheer on his blackshirts – that’s the point of saying he “knew they were armed” – or maybe just enjoy the spectacle of the Capitol being stormed; but really he wanted to give another speech and then walk in to personally lobby Senators and Congressmen (and maybe Mike Pence again) to reject enough Electoral votes to make him the winner, 232-227.
Also:Sammy Finkelman (1d215a) — 7/15/2022 @ 12:49 pm
Now one important thing conclusively revealed by the testimony is that Mark Meadows was playing a double game. Maybe with good reason but he was playing a double game: (the committee doesn’t seem to be very curious about this, and maybe also in getting an explanation from Mark Meadows as to why because they don’t seem to notice there’s a questions to be asked – which could also lead to an answer to the question as to who dreamed up the assault on the Capitol. I don’t think it was Trump, bad as he is as a person. Nor was it spontaneous, a result of Trump working up the crowd he spoke to. And, by the way, the crowd at the Capitol did not all come from the Ellipse.
It was pre-planned. By somebody or somebodies.Sammy Finkelman (1d215a) — 7/15/2022 @ 1:06 pm
@31. There was a reason the apes clung to the Sacred Scrolls, NJ. The C replaced the AoC- remember? Third time the charm, eh, NJ? Try more mustard on that pretzel.DCSCA (ed173f) — 7/15/2022 @ 1:19 pm
What Mark Meadows did:
Telling everybody outside the White House that Trump would not be going to the Capitol on January 6 (and telling history that as well in his book) and telling Trump that he would be going there:
The key piece of evidence in Cassidy Hutchinson’s testimony of lying by Mark Meadows.
This “off the record
comment requires some explanation. Here it is:
Maybe makin it easier to Mark Meadows to cancel.
https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/day-6-of-jan-6-committee-hearings-6-28-22-transcriptSammy Finkelman (1d215a) — 7/15/2022 @ 1:19 pm
@27. Wow, BuDuh! They say he’s more powerful than a locomotive and able to leap tall buildings at a single bound, too! 😉DCSCA (ed173f) — 7/15/2022 @ 1:25 pm
Mark Meadows didn’t tell the Secret Service that Trump was planning to the Capitol!!
So they wouldn’t drive him to the Capitol.
Note, the Rev.com transcript has:
Known TO the Secret Service.
While an Off the Record movement is NOT.
They only tell any Secret Service people at the last minute.Sammy Finkelman (1d215a) — 7/15/2022 @ 1:26 pm
In your #34, you assert:
You misunderstand and misrepresent what the Committee was intending when it went through its analysis of the “he knew they were armed” material. They are after their core contention — that Trump knowingly encouraged armed people to march on the Capitol. That’s the most damning kernal they have because it is the one that gets you to an offense that would support and indictment. It’s a kernal you dismiss because you don’t think Trump had the guts to lead a coup. But Trump’s state of mind matters less when his rabble rousing speech has an obvious result and Trump had knowledge that his crowd had the capacity to do substantial harm.
As our prosecutor host notes — the whole second-hand incident about Trump having a temper tantrum about not being able to toast his marshmellows at the ensuing weenie roast is a side issue to the main event.Appalled (782fe8) — 7/15/2022 @ 1:27 pm
Good news anti-Trumpers: Joe had his Helsinki moment today… in Jeddah.DCSCA (ed173f) — 7/15/2022 @ 1:28 pm
@37. She comes across as a ‘Hope Hicks’ wannabe, denied the ‘all-access, backstage pass,’ Sammy.DCSCA (ed173f) — 7/15/2022 @ 1:39 pm
Mark Meadows didn’t tell the Secret Service, even Trump’s driver, that Trump was planning to go the Capitol!!
Mark Meadows was lying to lots of people
It could be that was because he didn’t trust Trump’s character and judgment, and like “Anonymous” said, he wanted to thwart Trump’s worst inclinations while keeping his position so he could continue to do that, but he was lying to lots of people:
(excerpt of the interview on Sunday, June 26, 2022 on Face the Nation of Marc Short, former Vice President Pence’s chief of staff. Boldface mine:Sammy Finkelman (1d215a) — 7/15/2022 @ 1:42 pm
And let’s go back to your assumption — that Trump never intended to have the Capitol breached. That may be true and I am not inclined to roam in the weeds for that nugget. However, can you think of a better background for Trump’s “lobbying” campaign than a gaggle of lunatics brandishing weapons and lynching equipment and screaming bloody murder while he tries to persuade wavering GOP cowards to fall in with his plan?
So the plan went awry. That does not absolve Trump for culpability for easily predicted events.Appalled (782fe8) — 7/15/2022 @ 1:44 pm
What tangled webs some weave…Colonel Haiku (fe67d2) — 7/15/2022 @ 1:46 pm
DCSCA (ed173f) — 7/15/2022 @ 1:39 pm
That’s what somebody at Mar-a-Lago associated with Trump said, as an explanation as to why her job offer with Trump after the inauguration was withdrawn.
She may have been unemployed every since.
It may even be true (but irrelevant) that she wanted to be another Hope Hicks. She was perceived as ambitious. Some other people with more seniority with Trump resented her:
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/10/us/politics/cassidy-hutchinson-jan-6-testimony.htmlSammy Finkelman (1d215a) — 7/15/2022 @ 1:51 pm
@45. Leave it to Walrus Gumbo to gum up the narrative…
John Bolton admits he’s helped plan coups in other countries while speaking to CNN’s Jake Tapper on live TV: ‘It takes a lot of work’
Former National Security Advisor John Bolton admitted to planning coups on CNN’s The Lead with Jake Tapper Tuesday. However, Bolton, 73, explained that it is a “mistake” to think the Jan. 6, 2021, riots at the U.S. Capitol were a “carefully planned coup d’etat” spearheaded by former President Donald Trump, 76.
“That’s not the way Donald Trump does things,” Bolton told host Jake Tapper. “It’s rambling from one half, vast idea to another; one plan that falls through and another comes up — that’s what he was doing.” He added that the former president’s actions were “not an attack on our democracy.” “It’s Donald Trump looking out for Donald Trump,” Bolton said. “It’s a once-in-a-lifetime occurrence.”
“As somebody who has helped plan coups d’etat — not here, but, you know, other places — it takes a lot of work, and that’s not what [Trump] did,” Bolton added. “It was just stumbling around from one idea to another. Ultimately, he did unleash the rioters at the Capitol; as to that, there’s no doubt, but not to overthrow the Constitution — to buy more time to throw the matter back to the states to try and redo the issue.” – https://people.com/politics/ex-national-security-advisor-john-bolton-admits-hes-planned-coups-says-it-takes-a-lot-of-work/
… and Darth & Daughter Darth frowned. 😉DCSCA (ed173f) — 7/15/2022 @ 1:57 pm
27- lawyers trash people to buy fancy shoes and smokesmg (8cbc69) — 7/15/2022 @ 1:59 pm
@46. Hardly irrelevant- it’s how folks get chosen to be around him, Sammy. No Phyllis Diller’s in his posse. 😉DCSCA (ed173f) — 7/15/2022 @ 1:59 pm
Big deal people grab at steering wheels every day. Tempest in a tea pot. AOC says committee is afraid to investigate wither capital police let rioter into capital. Thats important news.asset (1ed153) — 7/15/2022 @ 2:13 pm
Appalled (782fe8) — 7/15/2022 @ 1:44 pm
Trump didn’t necessarily know or expect any lynching equipment to show up or weapons to be brandished, nor did he know violence had started before he was setting out to go to the Capitol.
I think the very fact he intended to give a speech there means he expected no violence at that time.
What he did want was for the size of the crowd to be greatly exaggerated.
Arizona Republican Congresswoman Debbie Lesko (maybe believing Trump about the numbers) said:
Now how did the leadership of Congress intend to counter that?
Maybe, by having the proceedings end after 3 am in the morning!Sammy Finkelman (1d215a) — 7/15/2022 @ 2:16 pm
I always liked someone’s description of Bolton as the angriest mustache since Yosemite Sam.Appalled (782fe8) — 7/15/2022 @ 2:18 pm
We don’t know how Trump expected their presence at the Capitol to help it all to work. All he said is:
So all Trump said was that if it didn’t work they would never forget. That was his threat.Sammy Finkelman (1d215a) — 7/15/2022 @ 2:23 pm
Somebody in the Capitol police changed the intelligence assessment after January 3 so as top say that maybe not even the rally at the Ellipse would take place!Sammy Finkelman (1d215a) — 7/15/2022 @ 2:24 pm
They were not easily predicted.
They were not predicted at all – at least before the proceedings were over. Debbie Lasko, at least, was worried about what wold happen after they failed to stop the certificaton.Sammy Finkelman (1d215a) — 7/15/2022 @ 2:25 pm
The Secret Service had time the change for the period betwee the election and the inauguration.Sammy Finkelman (1d215a) — 7/15/2022 @ 2:27 pm
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/12/us/politics/pat-cipollone-jan-6-trump.htmlSammy Finkelman (1d215a) — 7/15/2022 @ 2:29 pm
OT: How appropriate for today, the 47th anniversary of the joint, U.S./Russian Apollo-Soyuz space mission as noted in #13:
U.S. renews space flight cooperation with Russia for ISS
‘Despite geopolitical tensions between the U.S. and Russia, NASA and Roskosmos will keep using each other’s bases to send astronauts and cosmonauts to the International Space Station. Russia and the United States reached a deal on Friday to resume shared flights to the International Space Station (ISS) as Washington and Moscow faceoff over the war in Ukraine.
“To ensure continued safe operations of the International Space Station, protect the lives of astronauts and ensure continuous US presence in space, NASA will resume integrated crews on US crew spacecraft and the Russian Soyuz,” US space agency NASA said in a statement. Under the deal, US astronauts will travel on Russia’s Soyuz spacecraft and Russian cosmonauts will get to ride on SpaceX rockets launched from Florida. “The agreement is in line with the interests of Russia and the U.S.,” Russian space agency Roscosmos also said.
NASA confirmed that the first astronauts to be hosted on so-called “cross flights” would be Francisco Rubion from the US, set to launch from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan in September, and Russian cosmonaut Anna Kikina, who will take off from Cape Canaveral in the same month.
The U.S. space agency stressed that the ISS was designed to be operated jointly with participation from the space agencies of the United States, Russia, Europe, Japan and Canada. “No one agency has the capability to function independent of the others,” it added.
Despite geopolitical tensions between the US and Russia, NASA and Roskosmos will keep using each other’s bases to send astronauts and cosmonauts to the International Space Station.Russia and the United States reached a deal on Friday to resume shared flights to the International Space Station (ISS) as Washington and Moscow faceoff over the war in Ukraine.
“To ensure continued safe operations of the International Space Station, protect the lives of astronauts and ensure continuous US presence in space, NASA will resume integrated crews on US crew spacecraft and the Russian Soyuz,” US space agency NASA said in a statement.
Under the deal, US astronauts will travel on Russia’s Soyuz spacecraft and Russian cosmonauts will get to ride on SpaceX rockets launched from Florida.
“The agreement is in line with the interests of Russia and the US,” Russian space agency Roscosmos also said.
NASA confirmed that the first astronauts to be hosted on so-called “cross flights” would be Francisco Rubion from the US, set to launch from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan in September, and Russian cosmonaut Anna Kikina, who will take off from Cape Canaveral in the same month.
The US space agency stressed that the ISS was designed to be operated jointly with participation from the space agencies of the United States, Russia, Europe, Japan and Canada.
“No one agency has the capability to function independent of the others,” it added.
Putin removes space program chief
The bilateral agreement comes despite the announcement by the European Space Agency (ESA) earlier this week that it was ending its relationship with Russia on a mission to put a rover on Mars.
Russian space program chief Dmitry Rogozin, an ardent backer of the war in Ukraine, was angered by the ESA statement. He responded to it by banning cosmonauts on the ISS from using a Europe-made robotic arm. But hours before the NASA partnership was announced, Rogozin was dismissed from his post with no explanation.
[Guess who blinked: removing Rogozin is a ‘stellar’ win for the United States, kids.]
Rogozin, known for his controversial statements and strong ties to Putin, had held the job since 2018. It was not clear if his sacking was related to the rare display in cooperation between the US and Russia. Critics had described him as an outsider who lacked the necessary education and expertise to head Roscosmos when he got the job.
He has been on a list of U.S. sanctions since in 2014, when Moscow annexed Crimea from Ukraine.” – source, NASA, AP, DW.COM, Deutsche Welle. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.DCSCA (ed173f) — 7/15/2022 @ 2:30 pm
Trying to avoid putting on the record a conflict of testimony.
And Cipolone’s purported statement there would not make sense.
The question is, how did so many errors make their way into Cassidy Hutchinson’s testimony?
She also claimed to have personally written some notes that some other person said he wrote.Sammy Finkelman (1d215a) — 7/15/2022 @ 2:32 pm
NASA, Russian space agency sign deal to share space station flights
Apologies for double-post. This is good news all the same- for all concerned.DCSCA (ed173f) — 7/15/2022 @ 2:34 pm
Breaking off co-operation in space would not affect the war. Meanwhile Iran is getting involved – selling drones to Russia (something though of little or no effect) and the humanitarian corridor in Syria is now set to end in six months. (It had previously been extended in yearly increments)
There is still a kind of danger of the war expanding in territory – maybe to include Syria.
Putin is aware that Biden is almost terrified of escalation.Sammy Finkelman (1d215a) — 7/15/2022 @ 2:36 pm
#7 – as stated by USDC Judge Lynn N. Hughes in U.S. v. Edwin P. Wilson, 289 F.Supp 3d 801 (SD, TX 2003) @ 809: “Honesty comes hard to government. …” regarding, inter alia, the introduction of the fabricated false affidavit of Charles A. Briggs, the executive director of the CIA, in the government’s rebuttal case,over objections of violation of the 6th Amendment, hearsay and no ability to test the affidavit on cross exam. (#7 – make sure you go to then end and read the conclusion re Inspectors General.)
Hughes vacated Wilson’s conviction and sentence of fifty (51) years, after Wilson had served seventeen years, 10 in solitaire, stating:
 Twenty years ago, the government tried a former Central Intelligence officer for exporting explosives to Libya. His defense was simple. He said he was still working for the Company. The government refused to disclose records of his continued association with the agency. When he presented witnesses to his contacts after the end of his formal employment, the government convinced the judge to admit an affidavit from a principal CIA official to the effect that there were, with one minor exception, none zero. There were, in fact, over 80 contacts, including actions parallel to those in the charges.
The government discussed among dozens of its officials and lawyers whether to correct the testimony. No correction was made not after trial, not before sentencing, not on appeal, and not in this review. Confronted with its own internal memoranda, the government now says that, well, it might have misstated the truth, but that it was Wilson’s fault, it did not really matter, and it did not know what it was doing. Because the government knowingly used false evidence against him and suppressed favorable evidence, his conviction will be vacated.
* * *
 The government says that its use of the false affidavit was an innocent error. It says the law does not require a retrial when a man is convicted on manufactured evidence as long as the use was not intentional. Under the Constitution, an argument may be reasonably made that the government should be responsible for the integrity of the evidence that it presents. The costs of using unchecked or otherwise unreliable witnesses ought to be borne by the user. Unless other data contradict the testimony, the government can probably never know whether a co-defendant is shading his recollection to help himself. Retractions later by fellow crooks are inherently suspect. In this case, however, the falsity comes from high public officials with sole access to voluminous records not some high-school dropout street-level drug dealer with a memory of one sale.
Among the people who knew the government through the CIA and Department of Justice was both failing to disclose records of Wilson’s work and offering a false affidavit was the CIA’s general counsel. Yet the Department of Justice refused his request to correct or not to use the false affidavit. This person was no obscure paper-shuffler; he had been director of enforcement at the Securities and Exchange Commission and, after his CIA tenure, became a federal judge. Similar careers were had by people at the Department of Justice.
The government must be responsible for its internal fabrication of evidence. The test is not the ingenuousness of the prosecutor but the integrity of the government itself. The government would like to restrict the scope of responsible knowledge to the individual prosecutor in the courtroom, but the prosecution is brought in the name of the United States of America. The evidence, now, shows that the hierarchies of both the Justice Department and CIA were as knowledgeable as was the individual talking to the judge and jury. The government’s attempt to split the government into the personal belief of the least informed attorney will not work. The court has identified about two dozen government lawyers who actively participated in the original non-disclosure to the defense, the false rebuttal testimony, and the refusal to correct it. Governmental regularity due process requires personal and institutional integrity.
CIA attorneys told Assistant U.S. Attorney Ted Greenberg that the Briggs affidavit should not be used as evidence, as then written, and asked him not introduce it. He did.
* * *
 In the course of American justice, one would have to work hard to conceive of a more fundamentally unfair process with a consequentially unreliable result than the fabrication of false data by the government, under oath by a government official, presented knowingly by the prosecutor in the courtroom with the express approval of his superiors in Washington.
The government may not excuse its presentation of false testimony by claiming that (a) it did not know, (b) it did not understand what other agencies knew, or (c) it believed the testimony. It cannot use these excuses because they are not the law and the facts do not support them. See Mesarosh, et al. v. United States, 352 U.S. 1, 77 S. Ct. 1, 1 L. Ed. 2d 1 (1956); Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150, 92 S. Ct. 763, 31 L. Ed. 2d 104 (1972); and United States v. Mason, et al., 293 F.3d 826 (5th Cir.2002).
The Supreme Court has dismissed the argument that the federal government is too unwieldy to require accuracy in its presentation of evidence, saying, “To the extent this places a burden on the large prosecution offices, procedures and regulations can be established to carry that burden and to insure communication of all relevant information on each case to every lawyer who deals with it.” Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150, 154, 92 S. Ct. 763, 31 L. Ed. 2d 104 (1972) (Berger, C.J.).
Here, it was not that the right hand did not know what the left hand knew. The right hand knew and still misrepresented the facts. At justice’s blindfolded eyes, the right hand made a fist, concealing the truth.
* * *
 Briggs swore that, with only one exception, Wilson stopped working for the CIA in 1971. If Wilson had had the government’s extensive documentation that showed that he had contact with the CIA at least 80 more times, the jurors very likely would have believed Wilson’s theory and acquitted him. (Wilson Mot. to Vacate, Ex. 101.) With only his word, Wilson could not effectively counter the public official’s document saying that he had not continued to work for the CIA. Only an hour after it requested a re-reading of the affidavit, the jury returned its guilty verdict. Then, a juror reported to the press that the affidavit had played a critical role in the jury’s guilty verdict.
Although it was a different trial on different facts, Wilson had been acquitted of similar charges, revealing that the government was not necessarily bringing irrefutable cases.
This sort of behavior is among the reasons that the Constitution allows an accused to confront the witnesses against him. Instead of a witness whom Wilson could examine before the jury, in his Texas trial Wilson was contradicted by a dishonest agency memorandum issued from a bunker in Virginia.
* * *
 12. Conclusion.
At the time of trial, some of the information may have still had significance, but while the government may choose to prosecute, it may not prosecute without telling the whole truth. If secrets or errors are too important to use in a “speedy and public trial,” the government simply makes the policy decision not to prosecute. If it chooses the criminal process, it will have to yield its information about both the offense and defense.
Wilson’s defense obliged the CIA to gather all of the direct and secondary evidence of his association with the agency and to show it to Wilson’s lawyer. If some of it might have hurt the interests of the country and if a means could not have been devised for its presentation in an abstract manner, then the charges might have to have been dropped.
America did not defeat the Axis because it locked up Japanese Americans. America did not defeat the Soviet Union because it tried to lock up its philosophic fellow-travelers here. America will not defeat Libyan terrorism by double-crossing a part-time, informal government agent.
The government’s preparation, presentation, and preservation of false evidence are not the process that is due from the government. As Justice Sutherland observed, while a prosecutor “may strike hard blows, he is not at liberty to strike foul ones. It is as much his duty to refrain from improper methods calculated to produce a wrongful conviction as it is to use every legitimate means to bring about a just one.” Berger v. United States, 295 U.S. 78, 88, 55 S. Ct. 629, 79 L. Ed. 1314 (1935) (George Sutherland). The government has no legitimate interest in buying or presenting false evidence from outsiders it has less than none in lying to the court itself.
The government may be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt by legal evidence that Wilson is guilty of violating the law. It will have that opportunity because Edwin Paul Wilson’s conviction will be vacated.
What was Charles A. Briggs’ position before he was the Executive Director of the CIA? He was the Inspector General of the CIA.
So much for Inspectors General.
Arguably, because not only were none of the over 2-dozen high level attorneys from both the DOJ and CIA, and their superiors held to account here, and because in fact all of their careers were greatly enhanced (3 were elevated to federal judgeships and serving in 2003 when Judge Hughes’ decision came down) – it can be argued, this case was the template for the plot & coup against candidate, then president, Donald Trump and the targeting, framing and entrapment of General Michael Flynn.
So much for the Rule of Law and the Constitution of the United States of America.
There is no one left to blame – but he judges/judiciary.
Liberty & Truth require constant vigilance. GLZ.Gary L. Zerman (49eea4) — 7/15/2022 @ 3:02 pm
Gary, as it an IG who caused Wilson to be convicted?
My point is that there is good reason to be skeptical of Secret Service conduct, to not give them the benefit of the doubt, especially over the past decade.
The links are there in the article, and history didn’t start yesterday.Paul Montagu (5de684) — 7/15/2022 @ 4:27 pm
Sammy, who was the Commander-in-Chief, Meadows or Trump?Paul Montagu (5de684) — 7/15/2022 @ 4:33 pm
Nice story, JF, too bad it’s not true.
Hopefully, those erased Secret Service texts turn up, as the IG requested.Paul Montagu (5de684) — 7/15/2022 @ 4:46 pm
NEW POLL: Liz Cheney losing to Trump-backed primary challenger by more than 20 points
‘Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., trails Republican challenger Harriet Hageman by 22% in a poll released Friday, spelling trouble for the anti-Trump Republican’s primary next month.
More than half, 52%, of likely primary voters in Wyoming said they would support Hageman if the election, while just 30% expressed support for Cheney, according to the survey conducted by Mason-Dixon Polling & Strategy on behalf of the Casper, Wyoming, Star Tribune. The poll, conducted July 7 – 11 among 1,100 likely voters, showed single-digit support for other Republican primary candidates for Wyoming’s sole House seat, and indicated that 11% of voters were undecided.
Former President Donald Trump selected Hageman out of several Republicans vying to unseat Cheney, who voted to impeach the former president and is one of two Republicans on the House committee investigating Trump’s alleged role in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol.
The Wyoming poll found that the majority of voters disagreed with Cheney’s decision to serve on the Jan. 6 Committee (63%), and thought her opposition to Trump hurt her ability to represent Wyoming (61%). And 54% said Cheney’s service on the select committee investigating the Jan. 6 attacks made them less likely to vote for her.
Cheney has tried to convince Democrats in Wyoming to vote for her in the Republican primary to gain support, a move that Hageman’s campaign characterized as a “desperate” move to “hold on to power.” The committee is making the case in hearings this summer that Trump not only inspired but also encouraged attack on the Capitol in Washington, D.C., where Trump’s supporters broke into the building as Congress was certifying the 2020 election results.
Cheney and the Jan. 6 Committee say that Trump’s denial of the 2020 election results and his unsupported belief that only massive fraud could have delivered President Joe Biden the victory are a grave threat to Democracy itself. Cheney pitches herself as a constitutional conservative who has fought for “everyday Wyomingites” against crippling regulation and government overreach. The Wyoming primary election will be held Aug. 16.’ – https://www.foxnews.com/politics/new-poll-liz-cheney-losing-trump-backed-primary-challenger-20-points
20 points?! Neocon be gone: ‘The Force’ is strong with this one, eh Daughter Darth?!
“How sweet it is!” – Jackie GleasonDCSCA (814602) — 7/15/2022 @ 4:59 pm
Nice story, JF, too bad it’s not true.
Paul Montagu (5de684) — 7/15/2022 @ 4:46 pm
well if Weissmann says it’s not true, you’d certainly take that as evidenceJF (96b5f8) — 7/15/2022 @ 5:31 pm
The story didn’t die for no reason, JF, or because elite deep state globohomo groomer media shut it down.Paul Montagu (5de684) — 7/15/2022 @ 7:31 pm
The story didn’t die for no reason, JF, or because elite deep state globohomo groomer media shut it down.
Paul Montagu (5de684) — 7/15/2022 @ 7:31 pm
sez the guy who mocked the hunter laptop storyJF (78818f) — 7/15/2022 @ 7:33 pm
Nope, on #3. The IG letter, per your link, was clear that the deletions were post-request. Like I said about math.
You’re making sh-t up, JF.Paul Montagu (5de684) — 7/15/2022 @ 8:30 pm
At least we are now up to two out of the three that you are stipulating. (Your math dig seems just as misplaced as it was before)
About number 3, the IG letter was clear that there were deletions after the request. They were silent on deletions prior to the request. The SS letter clears that up.
If you read the IG letter with scrutiny you will see that it is a little sneaky. Ask yourself this, were there SS texts on Jan 5th and 6th made by agents that were no where near DC and had nothing to do with any of the activities?
The SS very well could have continued with their planned maintenance, after the IG request, on phones that were in service those days that had zero to do with anything.BuDuh (340919) — 7/15/2022 @ 8:45 pm
Same FBI that gave all Hillary’s team immunity and then destroyed their phones and computers, right?NJRob (eb56c3) — 7/15/2022 @ 8:47 pm
It seems like:
1. People are leaking misleading leaks to try to make it appear that what Cassidy Hutchinson said was the absolute truth.
2. The point about Trump expecting to go to the Capitol, and his having an argument with Secret Service people about it, is true.
3. The spin about what this his wanting to go to the Capitol means is both false and illogical – and that, possibly combined with continuing complaints that he did not call them off, seems to be based on an assumption that he was in control of the demonstrators — an assertion that some members of Congress seem to have believed back on January 6, 2021.
But just because many of the demonstrators said they were acting on behalf of Donald Trump doesn’t mean that he was the man behind the curtain. Anybody trying to get people in the crowd to do anything would have claimed that instructions were coming from Donald Trump.
4. There was nothing special at deleting text messages relating to Jan 5 and 6. They were deleting everything related to what happened during most of the Trump Administration.
5. The committee was informed by the Inspector General that texts were not supplied.
6. It turns out there was a way to recover many of them.
7. The most relevant things would be Trump’s argument with the Secret Service and Mike Pence’s argument with the Secret Service on January 6 (the Secret Service wanted Mike Pence to leave the Capitol grounds. He refused.
8. The Trump argument was caused by White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows telling Donald Trump he was going to go to the Capitol but not telling that to the Secret Service. No text messages needed to be received by the Secret Service right after the speech Trump gave at the Ellipse for his Secret Serviice driver not to want to go there.Sammy Finkelman (b7dc9b) — 7/17/2022 @ 12:00 pm
In a perfect world no one would have permanently shunned Andrew Weismann on to assert anything as truth, and Trump would be making those balloon hats at the county fair.steveg (975a36) — 7/17/2022 @ 2:45 pm
The Secret Service handed over only ne text from the time period January 5 tp 6 – from someone at the Capitol.
The first request from Congress took place on January 16, 2021. Agents were last reminded they could back up their phones on January 25. The system reset took place on January 27.
Any text message would have been an informal or unplanned record, and no record is made of voce calls, except maybe that they took placeSammy Finkelman (1d215a) — 7/21/2022 @ 3:36 pm
Not into the crowd, but into the secure area nearer to him.
But they didn’t do it.
Nobody says they actually took the magnetometers away.
Later in the June 28 hearing:
Like what? He wanted to be there himself.
He thought they would pressure Republicans- but the thing was even if he got every singe Republican he was not going to be declared president-elect.
If somehow the election got thrown into the House, would he have had Wyoming’s vote? Was Trump counting on Liz Cheney?
It’s not what Trump wanted to do – it’s what the Oath Keepers et al wanted to do.
Mark Meadows expected something bad: (bit not everybody did)Sammy Finkelman (1d215a) — 7/21/2022 @ 4:27 pm