A bad day for Trump
-
@George-K said in A bad day for Trump:
The driver of "The Beast" said that what Hutchinson alleged never happened.
So, as speculated Ms Htuchinson was testifying about what someone told her. That kind of testimony, in a real court, is called "hearsay."
And the driver's testimony was only released today. I wonder why.
The driver wanted to testify at the J6 Committee, but was denied. Former Rep. Liz Cheney (R-TDS) said that there was no time to allow his testimony. Yet, somehow, there was time to have Casey Hutchinson give her hearsay account.
The transcript of the driver’s testimony contains express objections by the lawyer that his client had offered to testify in July, August and September of 2022, but was “rebuffed” by the committee.
The account reaffirms a major criticism of the committee. After Democrats refused to allow the GOP to pick its members (as a long accepted practice in the House), the Democrats selected two anti-Trump Republicans who did little to push for a full and fair display of witnesses and facts. The Committee was chaired by Rep. Benny Thompson, a Democrat, with Rep. Liz Cheney, as Vice Chairwoman.
Cheney and the committee members clearly knew that Hutchinson’s account was debunked by the very driver who allegedly struggled with Trump. Yet, they allowed the media to report the incident for months while rebuffing the requests of the driver. Loudermilk is quoted as saying “We’re talking about the driver of the limousine, and the head of the entire protective detail. They were brought in by the select committee to testify, but they weren’t brought in until November.
The false account was given by Hutchinson in June of that year.
The Secret Service driver testified Trump never tried to reach for or grab the wheel of the SUV.
Notably, the transcript shows Cheney trying to explain the delay as due to the need for the Secret Service to produce all documents in the January 6 investigation.
Yet, she had no problem with making the false story public through Hutchinson before such supporting material was supplied.
I wonder why.
Yeah, there were horrible people at J6. Their vileness is matched by the members of the committee who allowed this to happen. Get me a banana.
-
No, I'd say the Jan 6 Committee may be worse.
The riot which took place on January 6 was just that, a spontaneous (with maybe some FBI help) riot. It wasn't an insurrection. An insurrection is a violent overthrow of an existing government. Even the most rabid rioters that day had no planned effort to overthrow the government. The primary beef was that the election was fraudulent and that fair elections and subsequently the government, must be sustained.
The Jan 6 Committee was cold, planned theater. Its purpose was to create a false narrative, to lie to the American people and do it in a scripted and professionally produced way. What makes it worse, is that this lie was crafted by elected representatives in our government, who swear an oath of office to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. Sadly, those enemies turned out to be the Jan 6 Committee.
-
G George K referenced this topic on
-
Pelose admits fault for lack of security.
Now, a previously-unreleased video taken on Jan. 6, 2021 shows then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., admitting that she was responsible for the lack of preparedness.
The video was disclosed in a posting on X by a House Republican panel. The video shows Pelosi in an exchange with Chief of Staff Terri McCullough on the evacuation. Pelosi states:
“We have responsibility, Terri. We did not have any accountability for what was going on there. And we should have. This is ridiculous. You’re going to ask me in the middle of the thing when they’ve already breached…that, should we call the Capitol Police? I mean the National Guard? Why weren’t the National Guard there to begin with?…They clearly didn’t know, and I take responsibility for not having them just prepared for more.”
The video was never released by the J6 Committee, which was criticized for its highly choreographed and scripted hearings with little balance in the presentation of evidence. The lack of emphasis on the security issues was glaring and raised by critics throughout the hearings.
-
And from the other side:
Members of Congress were evacuated to Fort McNair when rioters violently breached the Capitol. Schumer could be seen in the video, which aired Monday on MSNBC, yelling at then-Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy over the whereabouts of the National Guard.
“D.C. has requested the National Guard, and it’s been denied by DOD. I’d like to know a good f‑‑‑ing reason why it’s been denied,” Schumer said. “We need them fast. We’ve all had to, I’ve never seen anything like this. We’re like a third-world country here. We had to run and evacuate the Capitol.”
Trump has long claimed, falsely, that he ordered the National Guard into Washington and that then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) stopped him. The claim has been undermined by Trump’s Cabinet members under oath.
Later in the video, Schumer said he would move on to then-acting Secretary of Defense Chris Miller to urge his case for deploying the Guard.
“All right. I spoke to the secretary of the Army, and he’s given the full OK to give the National Guard. He said it was not done,” Schumer said. “I’m going to call up the secretary of Defense.”
In a separate clip, the majority leader also pressed acting Attorney General Jeff Rosen on his actions that afternoon and urged him to get Trump to make the rioters go home.
“Why don’t you get the president to tell them to leave the Capitol? Mr. Attorney General, in your law enforcement responsibility. A public statement, they should all leave,” Schumer said. “He is saying his tweet said we are for peace, law and order and order. Yeah. Why don’t you get him to make that statement? Would you do that?”
https://news.yahoo.com/news/video-shows-schumer-fury-over-112535376.html
-
Always remember, Operation Valkyrie was an act of sedition.
Warning: I post things that interest me. Read and comment at your own discretion. -
@Jolly said in A bad day for Trump:
Trump did offer the NG. AFAIK, that's factual.
From what I recall, Trump didn't offer the National Guard, but someone (Ornato?) overheard his chief of staff (Meadows?) told the DC Mayor on a phone call that "Trump is willing to ask for up to 10,000 guardsmen for the pro vs anti Trump crowds", and at that time it was specific to the pro/anti Trump crowds at his temper tantrum protest speech, not for Capitol Building security? Either way... when the Capitol was breached, I believe Trump was calling Congressmen to slow the vote instead of calling in troops. I could be wrong, I haven't followed the details too closely (not sarcasm).
-
To me, the glee with which the left watched the "existential threat" of january 6, and the political capital it has mined and will continue to mine from it, will always be the elephant in the room when we consider whether due diligence was exercised to ensure it wouldn't happen.
-
Cheney has been appearing alongside Kamala on the campaign trail. Let's see if she selflessly sacrificed her all-but-anonymous Wyoming senate seat for more face time in front of the American people than she could have ever dreamed of, and then a cabinet position in a Harris administration.
-
-
@89th said in A bad day for Trump:
If America First Legal thinks Cheney is worth an ethic violation letter, boy do I have someone who "Trumps" her! Reminds me of some folks focusing on whether Walz misspoke and finding a few twigs of truth, missing the 30,573-tree Trump forest around them!
Walz misspoke? Maybe you haven't seen the internet lately, but everybody is calling him Tim "big fat liar" Walz these days. Pretty much can't even find anybody who isn't calling him that. Do you really think Tim "big fat liar" Walz isn't a big fat liar? Why would everybody be calling him that? Do you think someone just invented it? Or is he actually a big fat liar? Tim "big fat liar" Walz is probably the biggest fattest liar ever. It's really sad that he's the vice president of Kamala "I have a big fat liar for a vice president" Harris.
-
@89th said in A bad day for Trump:
If America First Legal thinks Cheney is worth an ethic violation letter, boy do I have someone who "Trumps" her!
Well, take that person to court! Wait..
But for a more detailed description:
Under Rule 4.2 of the Rules of Professional Conduct, “a lawyer shall not communicate or cause another to communicate about the subject of the representation with a person known to be represented by another lawyer in the matter, unless the lawyer has the prior consent of the lawyer representing such other person or is authorized by law or a court order to do so.”
Cheney is a D.C. licensed lawyer.
At the outset, in my view, Cheney was acting as a member of Congress in this matter. That has always been a rather grey area for lawyers who are also members of Congress. The bar has taken a broad view of the need for lawyers to adhere to these ethical standards. However, it is not clear politically or ethically if the Bar officials would be inclined to pursue Cheney, who has been lionized in Washington for her role in the investigation.
Yet, the record does indicate that Cheney was not just aware of the represented status but the policy of the House to respect the rules governing represented parties. In one message Griffin tells Hutchinson, “Her one concern was so long ad [sic] you have counsel, she can’t really ethically talk to you without him.”
-
What a huge shock that Tim "I'm a big fat liar" Walz is lying. It's literally right there in his name, that he is a liar. So I am not shocked that he is lying. I would be more shocked if he wasn't lying. That is how much of a liar he is. Mouth moving? Lies. That is Tim "I'm a big fat liar" for you. It's all over the internet now. Nowhere to hide, nowhere to pretend to ever tell the truth.
It breaks my heart.
