Key Witnesses Challenge Bombshell Allegations of Key Witness Before the 1/6 Committee

There is an old expression in the media that some facts are just too good to check. It is a recognition that journalists can sometimes be reluctant to endanger a good story by confirming an essential fact. The Select Committee on the Jan. 6th riot is facing a similar accusation this week after critical witnesses not contradicted some of the most explosive assertions of last week’s witness, Cassidy Hutchinson. Specifically, critical witnesses said that no one on the Committee reached out to confirm her account of former President Donald Trump lunging for the wheel in “the Beast” in a physical altercation with his security team on that day.  The controversy highlights the failure of the Committee to offer a balanced investigation.

Many of us support the effort to bring greater transparency to what occurred on Jan. 6th and these hearings have offered a great deal of important new information. Indeed, it has proven gut-wrenching in the accounts of lawyers and staff trying to combat baseless theories and to protect the constitutional process.

Yet, the heavy-handed approach to framing the evidence has been both unnecessary and at times counterproductive. The strength of some of this evidence would not have been diminished by a more balanced committee or investigation.

We have been discussing the highly scripted and entirely one-sided presentation of evidence in the Committee. Indeed, witnesses are primarily used to present what Speaker Nancy Pelosi referred to as “the narrative” where their prior videotaped testimony is shown and they are given narrow follow up questions. They at times seem more like props than witnesses — called effectively to recite prior statements between well-crafted, impactful video clips. It has the feel of a news package, which may be the result of the decision to bring in a former ABC executive to produce the hearings.

That framing has led to glaring omissions. The Committee has routinely edited videotapes and crafted presentations to eliminate alternative explanations or opposing viewpoints like repeatedly editing out Trump telling his supporters to go to the Capitol peacefully.

What is striking is that offering a more balanced account, including allowing the Republicans to appoint their own members (in accordance with long-standing tradition), would not have lessened much of this stunning testimony. Yet, allowing Republicans to pick their members (yes, including Rep. Jim Jordan) would have prevented allegations of a highly choreographed show trial. It would have added credibility to the process.  Indeed, much of this evidence would have been hard to refute like the deposition of former Attorney General Bill Barr on the election fraud allegations.

It would also have protected the Democrats from what occurred last week. A former top aide to Mark Meadows, Hutchinson shocked the world with her second-hand account of an unhinged and violent president trying to force the security team to drive him to the Capitol. (There has not been a contradiction of the underlying account that Trump was prevented from going to the Capitol — an allegation that raises some serious legal questions, as discussed in yesterday’s column).

The allegation that Trump physically tried to stop or direct the car suggested that he was not just angry but out-of-control in that critical moment. The Committee combined that account with later testimony of how some were considering removing him from office under the 25th Amendment.

If the Committee had a single member with a dissenting or even skeptical viewpoint, such testimony could have been challenged before it was thrown before the world. A Republican-appointed member would have likely sought confirmation from the obvious witnesses or the Secret Service.  After all, the Secret Service was cooperating with the Select Committee and had already offered information on that day.

Hutchinson recounted a story that she insists was given to her by Tony Ornato, the former deputy chief of staff for operations. She said that Ornato told her that Trump lunged at a Secret Service agent and tried to grab the wheel of a presidential SUV when agents would not allow that.

In fairness to Hutchinson, her testimony could still be true even if the account is false…if that is what Ornato told her.

However, Fox News is reporting that Ornato was “shocked” by the testimony. He and Bobby Engel, the top agent on Trump’s Secret Service detail, both testified previously and this is a hardly a detail that they would omit from their accounts.

What is even more notable is the alleged failure of the Committee to reach out to them or the Secret Service to confirm that account before making it the highlight of a national hearing. Indeed, the hearing was suddenly called with little prior warning to highlight the new and explosive allegations.

This is the peril of an investigation that occurs in an echo chamber. Such “gotcha” moments are powerful in the moment but can also be equally damaging if later challenged.

This is the type of problem that arises when the focus of a hearing is persuasive rather than investigative. The account fit the narrative and the underlying fact seemed simply too good to check.

320 thoughts on “Key Witnesses Challenge Bombshell Allegations of Key Witness Before the 1/6 Committee”

  1. It’s irresponsible and negligent for the Jan 6 Committee not to confirm this heresy testimony by Hutchinson. The primary source will either confirm or deny. It was worth the few minutes to run it by him.

    Transparency should be equal. Why did Pelosi turn down the offer of the National Guard? Why were there so many plainclothes FBI who appeared to participate? Why were people charged with trespassing and illegal parading held in solitary for 8 months?

    1. When the GOP controls both Houses of Congress come early January, 2023, assuming the November elections go as expected, these questions you pose, and many others, will be near the top of the list of tasks for the GOP-controlled Legislative branch — and of course, Hunter Biden will be at the top of the list of investigative tasks…..and the possible interrogation under Oath of President Joe Biden —

      1. As much as Biden’s handlers try to change the subject, Americans are rather focused on that which no American can ignore. They lay this at the feet of Joe Biden. Not Putin. Not Supreme Court. Not COVID. Not Proud Boys.

        One could say Biden’s presidency / Democrats leadership is a partial-birth abortion. Virginia Democrat ex-Governor Ralph “Blackface” Northam argued that decapitating such a creation was at times merited. Are we there yet, Ralph?

        Fasten your seat belts, its going to be a bumpy night midterm election.

        Markets Post Worst First Half of a Year in Decades

        Investors gird for more volatility; almost everything—from stocks to bonds and crypto—falls to start 2022

        Global markets closed out their most bruising first half of a year in decades, leaving investors bracing for the prospect of further losses. Accelerating inflation and rising interest rates fueled a months long rout that left few markets unscathed. The S&P 500 fell 21% through Thursday, suffering its worst first half of a year since 1970, according to Dow Jones Market Data. Investment-grade bonds, as measured by the iShares Core U.S. Aggregate Bond exchange-traded fund, lost 11%—posting their worst start to a year in history. Stocks and bonds in emerging markets tumbled, hurt by slowing growth. And cryptocurrencies came crashing down, saddling individual investors and hedge funds alike with steep losses.

        Wall Street Journal, June 30

      2. unfortunately I do not expect the GOP will really seek to get to the bottom of anything consequential in 2023.

        I want EVERYTHING out in the open.
        I want all the J6 video, I want all the information on federal involvement.
        With an honest tribunal – I want all those who refuse to testify to do so.

        I want to reach ALL the actual true – what harms democrats and what harms republicans alike.

        But far too many republicans are affraid to look for the truth to conduct meaningful hearings.

        I do not expect a consequential Republican revisit of J6. I do not expect a consequential Republican examination of the 2020 election.

        Republicans will focus on the here and now misconduct of this administration – as that has little risk to them.

        I think that is a mistake.

        I do not expect that REAL open inquiry into J6 or the 2020 election will do nearly the harm to Republicans or Trump as it does to democrats and the left.

        But whether I am right about that or not – we must go there.

        But we will not.

    2. Mark Meadows, Giuliani and others have been invited to testify. They were given subpoenas. They refused. For what i hope is the very last time, Nancy Pelosi has NO control over the Capitol Police or National Guard. There were NO FBI agents involved. All alt-right false conspiracy theories. Those people who didn’t get bail didn’t qualify for bail according to the reasoning of the judges who denied bail. Democrats have nothing to do with whether someone qualifies for bail. Some of these people have outstanding criminal arrest warrants, some have previoulsy skipped on bail, some may be out on parole or probation, in which case, if you get arrested, parole or probation is automatically revoked. Why not look at the docket sheets of each of these defendants who were denied bail and read what the judge’s ruling was instead of listening to the spin put on these siutations? Oh, I know why: you’re a disciple and immune to facts.

      1. Then Pelosi can testify to that.
        Then the FBI can testify to that – BTW the have been asked repeatedly and refuse to answer.

        Federal agents is not necesscarily FBI

        Though after Michigan – you are going to beleive the FBI was not involved ?
        BTW Enrique Tarrio, the head of the proud boys is a known FBI informant – According to the New York Times.

        Trump authorized the NG for use at the capital approximately a week ahead.
        DOD Asked Pelosi if she wanted the NG – she said no – and that is why the NG was not present.
        The DOD email is now public record.
        Further the Capital police public timeline CONFIRMS this.
        DOD asked CP if they wanted NG – they said NO,
        Then they reassessed and COP Sund sought permission from the house and senate sargent of arms who report to Pelosi and Schumer respectively
        They said NO!

        “COP Sund asks Senate Sergeant at Arms (SSAA) Michael Stenger and House Sergeant at Arms (HSAA) Paul Irving for authority to have National Guard to assist with security for the January 6, 2021 event based on briefing with law enforcement partner and revised intelligence Assessment, COP Sund’s request is denied. ”

        From the capital police Timeline.

        The president can not unilaterally send the NG to the capital – He can only respond to a request.
        Trump was pro-active in authorizing the NG.

        The ONLY reason the NG was not present on J6 was because of PELOSI.

      2. The capital police report to th Capital police board.
        The capital police board is composed of the Senate and House sargents at arms – who report to the Speaker of the House and the majority leader of the senate respectively.


    “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”

    – Real President Donald J. Trump


    “May 12 (Reuters) – President Donald Trump wanted National Guard troops in Washington to protect his supporters at a Jan. 6 rally that ended with them attacking the U.S. Capitol, leaving five dead, Trump’s former Pentagon chief testified on Wednesday.”

    “Former Acting Defense Secretary Christopher Miller told a House of Representatives panel that he spoke with Trump on Jan. 3, three days before the now-former president’s fiery speech that preceded the violence and led to his second impeachment.

    “According to Miller’s testimony, Trump asked during that meeting whether the District of Columbia’s mayor had requested National Guard troops for Jan. 6, the day Congress was to ratify Joe Biden’s presidential election victory.

    “Trump told Miller to ‘fill’ the request, the former defense secretary testified. Miller said Trump told him: ‘Do whatever is necessary to protect demonstrators that were executing their constitutionally protected rights.’”

    – Reuters

  3. That stench emanating from the Washington swamp is reminiscent of driving through Omaha or South Chicago years ago where they corralled livestock on their path to slaughter. The only difference is the smell is hypocrisy and guile with a whiff of Kangaroo flatulent(s).

  4. “ That framing has led to glaring omissions. The Committee has routinely edited videotapes and crafted presentations to eliminate alternative explanations or opposing viewpoints like repeatedly editing out Trump telling his supporters to go to the Capitol peacefully.”

    Huh, huh, Turley. That’s no longer true. As shown by Hutchinson’s testimony under oath trump didn’t want his supporters to March to the Capitol peacefully. He wanted an armed mob to follow him to the Capitol. He demanded weapons be allowed in the crowd. The “peacefully” was not Trump’s idea. It was his lawyers who obviously were aware of the ramifications of allowing Trump to do what he really wanted.

    This is why the latest testimony is so damning. That claim of Trump stating they March “peacefully” is hogwash. Trump’s intent is clear.

    Turley is being disingenuous and obtuse

  5. Just like the protest turned riotous was labeled an “insurrection”, the suggestion that The President of the United States meant to commandeer the presidential limo and ostensibly redirect and control the vehicle is outlandish.

    What was the end game in both circumstances ?
    Do people really believe that the protestors who gained entry into the US Capitol were planning to MURDER the Vice President and the Speaker of the House ??!! What then ? Do they gain access to the capitals arms cash and set up a perimeter around the building? Further, how do they then make their way back to the White House and overtake that to complete the initial stage of the “coup” ??

    Would any of them know the phone number to any of the branches of the United States military? And if they had reached said later do you really think the army the Navy the Marine corps and the Air Force would have followed orders from a guy in a horn hat ??

    Now turn the ‘endgame’ analysis to the president trying to grab the steering wheel of the beast? Was he supposed to then have control of the vehicle even though he had no access to the break or the accelerator? Would he have been able to mad Max his way to the Capitol with 6 or 7 secret service agents pulling him away from the steering wheel? How would he have controlled the vehicle as to not run over his own supporters? And lastly where would he have parked??

    All of the inferences, false language, innuendo, hearsay and physical IMPOSSIBILITIES add up to a giant cluster of incredulity.!

    1. The point is he was desperate enough to try. He wanted to lead that group and he didn’t care if they were armed. There were already people believing they were really going to take over the Capitol and force pence to do what Trump wanted him to do.

      With Trump there they would have had the idea that they could do anything they wanted because they would have had the support of the president. That’s why smarter people told Trump he couldn’t do that. He would have definitely gone to prison for it.

  6. “ Yet, the heavy-handed approach to framing the evidence has been both unnecessary and at times counterproductive. The strength of some of this evidence would not have been diminished by a more balanced committee or investigation.”

    It’s heavy handed because it’s required. Turley omits the fact that the majority the evidence and testimony is coming from republicans, not democrats. Turley knows republicans had every opportunity to join the committee and even create a commission. But republicans refused or only offered members who were clearly intent on obstruction rather than honest investigation. Turley, you’re being dishonest and disingenuous. You’re in the same boat as Eastman and Giuliani now. Pretty sad.

    1. I notice also that the only time Turley comments about the Jan 6th Committee is to criticize it. Is it really far-fetched to believe that the pig might have tried to grab the steering wheel? Didn’t he say he would be joining the Oath Keepers, Proud Boys and other cretins who not only believed his lie about a “stolen landslide victory”, but were willing to take up arms and go to the Capitol to try to prevent Congress from formalizing Biden’s victory, answering the call to “fight like hell or you’re not going to have a country any more”? And, so what if Republicans get someone to say that this didin’t happen–Cassidy never said she personally witnessed it–she made that abundantly clear. She said that she saw a visibly shaken colleague who related this incident. How is this incident proven one way or the other? There’s no video. Is this detail the most-important thing about her testimony? No, it isn’t, but it’s the one that Republicans believe they can latch onto to try to undermine the Committee and other evidence it is presenting.

      Just another Fox assignment.

      1. In whose book is the pejorative “pig,” being employed deleriously with hysterical and incoherent malice against a successful person who has created wealth in America and is a former President of the United States, nay, the real, actual President, having had an election stolen through centuries of election fraud and voter (i.e. population) manipulation, not an egregious violation of conventional and ubiquitous “civility rules,” not to mention those delineated above on this very blog in particular?

        1. You know NOTHING about Trump, or the phony image of a self-made multi-billionare he has tried to curate throughout his life. He relied on his Daddy to bail him out of one financial mess after another until the old man’s dementia required appointment of a guardian who quit paying Donald’s bills. That’s when the bankruptcies started–6 of them so far. He’s been sued thousands of times for failing to honor his valid debts. He had dozens of failed businesses which I’ve listed several times, and there was a successful $25 million settlement for fraud related to “Trump University”. He had three failed casinos. He’s on his third marriage and he has cheated on his current wife.

          I call this person a “pig” because he is: it’s not just that he’s morbidly obese (and likes to call women “fat pigs”) it’s also due to his narcissism: a hog for attention, praise, adulation, must be in the spotlight, will never admit that he’s wrong and refuses to accept the truth if the truth proves he’s wrong or has lost (like an election or the HUD racial discrimination housing case that was resolved with a consent decree that he claims he “won”). How do you define a “succesful person’? One who is respected in his field? One who has been successful in business relationships or philanthropy? How about someone who is known for integrity in business dealings, paying their valid debts, honoring their marriage vows, someone whose home state honors and respects them? How about graciously accepting the truth if it’s not to your liking? According to Hutchinson, Trump threw tantrums like a child, including smashing his lunch plate against the White House dining room wall when Barr told him the DOJ found no evidence of widespread voter fraud. Trump fails all of these tests. You believe the phony, curated image of some wildly-successful real estate tycoon, which is false. All of his properties are under water financially. Trump was predicted by every single poll to lose, and he did. Everyone told him so, except Giuliani who came up with the Big Lie, and is paying for that with the suspension of his law license.

          1. Lets see Trumps Dad who was never worth much more than a coupel of hundred Million magically bailed out Trump died, Trump went bankrupt multiple times and then magically ended up a billionaire

            1. Fred Drumpft, his father, got rich by government grants to construct housing for returning American GIs after WWII–not because he’s a genius. He constructed multiple apartment buildings in the New York boroughs, which, according to his niece, were shoddily built. She, her mother and brother, lived in one of them after her father, Fred, Jr., died. That’s where their “wealth” came from: taxpayers. Here’s a little query for you: Trump SAYS he’s fabulously wealthy. His niece, Michael Cohen, and others, including his biographer, say he’s lying. So, why does he fight to prevent disclosure of fiancing statements and tax returns that would prove his net worth? Cohen said he keeps 2 sets of books–one for Forbes, to juice up his ratings and a second, for the IRS, to avoid paying taxes. He didn’t get ranked this year by Forbes–boo hoo. You say he’s a “billionaire”, so why does he have to borrow money, and why does he default on loans all of the time?

              1. Fred Trump got rich by figuring out how to deliver value in the world he was in at the time.

                You can call that genius or anything else you want.

                You will be entitled to the same respect that earns when you have done the same.

                I do not care how his apartments were built.
                I own 5 units, and I inspect apartment buildings are part of one of my many businesses.

                Some are poor some are great – pretty much in direct proportion to the rent and the ability of those who life their to afford.

                A decade ago a jewish “slumlord” was shot in NYC. He provided rooms to drug addicts for$100/month cash. Most did not pay and it was impossible to evict them. The places were crap, the heat did not work in most, the pumbing did not work in most, ….
                The city shut the place down after he died and pushed all th addicts onto the street where they slept over grates and there was an increase in homeless drug addicts freezing to death.

                My apartments are neither the best nor the worst in my city. My tenants do not have cars or bank accounts or credit. If they do not pay the rent I can evict them, I can get a large judgement against them, but I will never get paid. Most of my tenants average paying 11 months out of the 12 a year and if they do that I do not evict them. If they can not manage that – they get evicted.
                If you get evicted from my place – the next place will be WORSE, No one like me will rent to you for several years. Better places are unlikely to rent to you ever.

                Regardless, people need a place to live. Those who can not afford a decent place – will not get a decent place.
                That is how it is, and always will be.
                Though I will note that what is the worst, the bottom, improves very slowly each year.
                My apartments get slightly better all the time. The apartments I inspect get batter all the time.
                The low income housing that I inspect gets slowly better all the time.

                Why ? Because the average standard of living of the country is rising. Because the poor are less poor.

                Look arround. When I was a child, if you drove through the worst neigborhood in my city – rusted cars were up on cinder blocks, the houses were not painted, gutters were off, there was trash in the yards.
                Today if I drive down the same street – still the poorest neighboorhood in the city, the grass is cut, there are no junked cars in the street, there is no trash, there are flower beds, the houses are painted and maintained.
                This is the change in the standard of living of the poor in the US in several decades.

                This is because of people like Fred and Donald Trump – not Government.

                Getting rich near universally means providing to others something they want.

              2. Why is it you care whether Trump is “fabulously wealthy” ?

                According to Forbes Trump was worth about 2.5B in 2020.

                Cohen says all kinds of things – you clearly know nothing about wealth or economics.

                Trump’s taxes are done by an Army of lawyers and accountants. Weather you get to look at his tax return or not – They do, and the IRS does and while you can be certain they will do everything possible to legally keep Trump’s taxes as low as possible, they are not going to commit a crime.
                Trump likely has absolutely nothing to do with his own accounting – he makes decisions, he does not personally keep records.

                My personal “wealth” is quite small. I do not keep my own “books” – I have a bookkeeper to do that. I earn less – because I have to pay her, but I do not have to do a task I hate and she likes. I make business decisions. I do not keep financial records.

                Forbes does not review Trump’s “books” – they gather information on their own from public records.

              3. Why does Trump fight ?

                The same reasons I would fight to prevent you from accessing my finances.


                I would note that while Trump has fought most efforts of courts or congress to get his financial records and he has mostly lost.
                Whether he should have is debateable.

                But two other things arrise from that.
                First – Congress has his taxes, as does the NY AG. Yet they still have not been publicly disclosed – no leaks.
                Second – despite his taxes being available to congress and law enforcement – there are no new claims of illegal financial conduct.

                There are likely no leaks BECAUSE Trump fought providing the records. If there were leaks it would now be trivial to figure out where, and leaking tax records is a federal crime.

                With respect to the 2nd – contra the left it is extremely rare for wealthy people to do anything illegal. The Maddoff’s are the very rare exception, not the rule. There is no need for them to do anything illegal. The cost is far too high compared to the potential gains.
                This was OBVIOUSLY true with regard to the whole Collusion Delusion nonsense.
                No political candidate is EVER going to seek anything blatantly illegal beyond possibly money from a foreign source.
                The risk is too high and the benefit too small. Further there is no reason to beleive the Russians or any other country have the slightest skill in persuading americans to vote differently.

                But you left wing nuts can not think critically.

                We have seen LOTS of foreign money pouring into US elections. In the 21st century that is primarily through credit card political donations from overseas that are not tracked. Democrats pioneered this – but both parties do it – fairly openly – because the worst case is they get a slap on the wrists by the FEC.

                But no one will take other assistance – there is no value to it, and great risk.

              4. Elon Musk “borrowed money” as part of his bid to take Twitter Private.

                People with money borrow money all the time.

                Very few wealthy people have much money in cash.

                To get cash, they have to borrow or sell something.

                I would further note the realestate – and several other business models are heavily leveraged.

                Real estate investors typically buy properties just like everyone else with a 20% downpayment and a mortgage from the bank.
                When the mortgages on the properties have significantly declined as a portion of the total value they refinance – increasing the mortgage and cash out the difference. That either is reinvested in other properties, invested in improving existing properties, or become income for the investors.

                Th norm for realestate is that total rents only slightly exceeds finance costs, taxes, maintanance and operating expenses.
                Profits are made by cashing out on refinancing.

                If Trump’s net worth is 2.5B and it is in real estate – it is likely he owns 15B in realestate with about 12B in mortgages.

                Regardless, the point is that businesses borrow all the time.

                1. John, it is amazing how few recognize that financing large projects is based on capital markets and borrowing. A few of the leftists keep saying the price of gas isn’t up because of Joe Biden’s policies because…, and then they list things that are true but show they do not understand how capital markets function.

                  Biden’s policies regarding oil, aside from the obvious things, affect the capital markets so the investors become afraid of putting money into oil production now and in the future. It is that fear that caused much of the increased price to date. Investors require stability and the Biden administration is not providing that.

                  Among other things, I dealt with real estate rentals in high-rise buildings. For 20+ years I made a minimal profit. Sometimes the profits didn’t even cover the yearly taxes. Instead, all was put into the buildings to make them more profitable and to buy more. The selling price was enormous and far more than ever expected. We sold the property at a high, before a downturn, because of the usual reasons. Had we sold during the downturn we wouldn’t have made so much money, but if we held it until more recently the profits would have been even higher than what we sold it for.

                  How does one count how much those properties were worth? Originally the profits came from making the buildings more profitable, by reinvesting the money. Then the property became more valuable because of a boom in the real estate market. Then the prices radically fell during a bust and then radically rose again in the next boom. the value would have looked something like this:

                  1,2 (then improvements kicked prices higher than the cost of improvements ) 4, 9, 11, 12, (Then a boom) 18, 25 ( then a bust) back to around 12 + (Then a boom) 50.

                  When at 25 if this hit Detroit’s downturn the low would be below 1.

                  So, how does one judge Trump’s assets? It depends on the year, the location of properties, what people are looking for, etc. If the investor invests the longest term he can earn 50X. If he bails at the wrong time he could lose the entire investment or his capital could have diminished significantly, less than the usual investment rates. One has to be paid a lot to risk losing everything, and few people can absorb such risk.

                  When one looks at the marketplace correctly and assesses Trump’s fortune it could range from <$ 1 billion to $ 5 billion.

                  The fools on this blog want to file criminal charges against Trump based on his evaluations. Looking at the way such types of real estate sell at various times, one has to recognize how stupid they are, for the price is what the market can bear at that particular second. The visionaries that make money like Musk see value not appreciated by most people so they rely on investors that recognize what the visionary has to offer. Trump was somewhat of a visionary, though not as great a visionary as Musk.

                  The last thing that I will say is what did Trump do with his money? He provided housing that people desperately need. He supplied NYC with cash when others were afraid to invest. He provided jobs that also improved the city’s finances. He provided recreation areas all over the country and elsewhere. They were a boon to the economies of those localities and a small boon for the nation. He is a part of the increased standard of living this nation has. We would be lucky to have thousands of more Trumps working to create a better nation.

                  What has John done? He doesn’t have the finances to build housing units starting at $1 Million. John deals in low-income property improving conditions while at the same time providing housing for the poor. He runs similar risks to Trump though he isn’t as rich. He is happy, Trump is happy and the people that benefit are happier than they would be without them.

                  1. Biden is currently blaming the war for gas prices.
                    While false – that is also misleading.

                    The war is a consequence of Biden’s idiotic energy policies.

                    Increased US oil production, Increased US oil and gas transport would have made it unlikely that Putin would have invaded Ukraine.

                    Energy policy is at its core National Security.

                    It is BECAUSE of Trump’s energy policy that we are/were out of the middle east.
                    It is BECAUSE of Trump’s energy policy that there is/was more peace in the mideast – and the world.

                    Trump’s energy policy disempowered Russia.

                    That is why there i no way Putin EVER favored Trump.
                    And it is why when Biden reversed it Putin had enough leverage to invade Ukraine.

                    The war in Ukraine is not just because Putin was afraid of Trump,
                    But because Trump’s energy policy made the war much harder for Russia.

                    This is obvious to people who can think critically.
                    interestingly the majority of americans – the so called flyover people, trump supporters get this.
                    But the most educated people in the country can not grasp very simple things.

                    And these idiots are the ones in power.

              5. If Trump actually defaulted on his loans all the time – just like you – he would not be able to borrow.

                Quite some time ago Trump had multiple bankruptcies. But these were not liquidation bankruptcies. They were cashflow bankruptcies – inability to pay currently due loans and other payments NOW. The US bankruptcy code provides – and in many cases requires that businesses that can not make current debt payments file for bankruptcy. the courts restructure the debt. Everyone that is actually owed gets paid, but not as quickly as they would prefer.

                Liquidation means that there are not enough assets to cover all debts. In that case assets are liquidated, secured creditors are paid off first unsecured creditors are paid off from what is left. That is the norm. The Obama administration violated those norms in post 2008 and as a result has increased the risk to secured creditors and therefore the cost of secured credit.

                Those of you on the left rant and rave about Trump’s finances – as if you have a clue about any of it.

                The very FACT that banks like Deutche Bank – one of the most conservative in the world is willing to lend Trump money is PROOF that Trump has excellent credit, that if you lend him money you are with near certainty going to get paid.

                Disputes over payments for services are not defaults. All businesses have disputes – many of them go to court – usually but not always the courts resolve them approximately correctly. No one’s credit is harmed by winning a payment dispute in court. Thought he loser may well rant that they have been cheated. Trump has a reputation for being demanding of his suppliers, and litigious when he does not get what he demanded.
                If you do not like that do not do business with Trump.

              6. Micheal Cohen had virtually nothing to do with Trump’s finances.

                Cohen had innumerable tax and other problems in his own businesses – none of which involved Trump.

                The fact that the investigation of Cohen never connected to Trump should make it clear to you that Trump had very limited use of Cohen.

                But critical thinking is not your forte.

        1. Interesting.

          Ignorning the funny parody re-enactment – the actual testimony is Hearsay – which I had not realized before.
          The witness SAYS that she HEARD this story – not that she was present and witnessed it.
          She claims to beleive it because when she heard it – no one present challenged it.

          I would also note by her own testimony – the SS refused to allow Trump to go to the Capital because i was not Safe for him to do so.

          Which actually makes sense. SS has NO authroty to decide what the president is legally entitled to do.
          That is not their domain.
          They are only free to stop him from doing something that poses a danger to HIM.

          1. John B Say,

            Since there was no Cross the kids that drive the Shiners’ Clown Cars at Inforwars decided they could use the Parody as a sort of Cross for us in the the Gen Pop..

            Infowars & others promoted the Jan 6 Trump event as a “Peaceful 1Amd Event USCON Event” from soon after Nov3 2020. I was Not There!

            I believe, & others, we didn’t conceive that Gov’t 3 letter Intel Group would/did colluded to sabotage the Trump events. Mind you the Ralliers had a “Legal Permit” for that day!!!!!!!!!!!!!

            Who & How Many Govt Agents/Actors were there that day, J6. We have haerd from insiders there were well over a 1000, but How Many More.

            All that was being demanded by Trump & the Million Plus J6’ers was a Legal US CON 10 day investigation into the Nov3, 2020 Election from both branches of Congress.

            Now “the Riggers ” have moved from rigged 2020 election to attempting to block Trump from the 2024 election.

            Yet We the People what to Know

            But a lil bird suggest news is soon coming.

            1. I am not sure I understand most of your comment.
              But I think what I do understand is mostly correct.

              I doubt there were 1000 government agents at J6.

              That said you are correct that J6 was a demand to delay for 10 days and conduct some investigation.

              What is becoming increasingly evident from the actual fraud that was found is that had Biden, or the courts, or Democrats agreed to meaningful inquiry after the 2020 election – it is highly unlikely that the investigations that would have occured would have found compelling evidence of Fraud.

              The results would have been much like the AZ audit – basically confirming the count, and demonstrating lots and lots of things that were very suspicious but no smoking gun.

              The only “smoking gun” from the audits is that Biden would not likely have won had mailin ballots been properly signature matched and those that failed been rejected as has been the norm for mailin and absentee ballots forever.

              In GA the random audit of Cobb County found 6% of mailin ballots should have been rejected for signature matching issues.
              Unsurprisingly that is the historic norm – except in 2020 where almost none were rejected.
              Further that audit revealed a signature FRAUD rate of 0.6% – that alone would have been enough to tip the election.

              But the Cobb county audit – a county where problems were unlikely, did not result in further random audits – as it should have.

              Regardless, None of the assorted court cases, audits etc, prior to the results of TTV’s ballot harvesting investigation found incontovertable proof of fraud much larger than needed to tip the election.

              Other audits hinted at problems, but did not prove them. The AZ audit strongly suggests exactly the type of large scale ballot harvesting operation that TTV exposed – but the AZ audit did not and could not prove that.

              Put simply hard Trump gotten the Audits he wanted – lots of problems that have since been identified, The narative that the 2020 election was “perfect”, secure, the least fraud ever, would have been completely debunked. But the outcome would not have changed.

              The big election fraud claims by Gulliani are true, but not big, The DVS counting claim of Powell and Wood is false. While we know that DVS and other systems are horribly insecure – and far less accurate than cvclaimed, they did not deliberately miscount ballots in 2020, and they were not hacked to tip the election.

              The actual fraud in 2020 was the Massive Ballot harvesting operation. Project Vertias exposed SOME of that BEFORE the election,.
              But no one except TTV appears to have been looking into large scale Ballot harvesting prior to J6.

              Put simply had Biden, democrats, the left, the courts allowed meaningful inquiry into the election Before J6 – or shortly after, the real fraud would not have been found.

              There is enough shenanigans going on that I do not think we shall ever see sigificant prosecutiions or investigations into the actual large scale fraudulent ballot harvesting operation. But it has been exposed, and there is more than enough evidence to persuade anyone who bothers to check the evidence.

    2. “Turley knows republicans had every opportunity to join the committee and even create a commission.”

      Indeed, a fact the trump sycophants never mention. Also, Hutchinson was under oath, the SS that had previously testified were not under oath. And perhaps the SS were never asked the question about trumps actions in the car. All of the witnesses that can corroborate or discredit Hutchinson have taken the 5th. Why? If she is lying, she can be prosecuted for perjury. Let’s get those people who plead the fifth to answer questions under oath.

  7. The walls are closing in on former President Trump. In an explosive bombshell unprecedented star witness testimony yesterday, Cassidy Hutchinson told everyone that she heard Mark Meadows say that a Secret Service agent’s friend’s cousin’s husband once heard that one of Trump’s other aides said she thinks she heard him say he wanted to “do an insurrection.”

  8. Professor, as Tony Ornato was not in the limo (there are reports that they didn’t use “The Beast” at this time), hearsay witness Cassidy Hutchinson presented her story from a third hand account. If J6 Committee is interested in facts, it should be not too difficult to interview the driver of the limo and SSA who where in the limo (like Bobby Engel) what happened 1 1/2 years ago. Everybody can judge what was the reason to establish J6 (especially if s/he look at the one sided video presentation where then President Trump’s remarks “to go to the Capitol peacuflly” repeatedly cutting out).

  9. If you think “the beast” was the bombshell headline from Cass Hutchinson testimony, JT, you suffer from media-buzz sickness.

    The 2 headlines should be:
    “Trump agreed with the mob that Mike Pence deserved to be hanged”. (putting him in league with violent insurrection against the USG)

    “Willard Hotel “war room” operation was working late the night of Jan 5th” (obliging the investigation to get to the bottom of their role)

    Nobody is denying that there was a showdown in the Beast over whether Trump was going to the Capitol vs. the WH. Let’s try to keep to the big picture folks, and not bog down fighting each other over the weeds. We have a superpower republic to keep.

    1. Peter Alexander, NBC News Chief White House Correspondent, tweeted two day ago…”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.” Let’s see if the J6 committee will allow them to testify.

      1. Ornato or Engel already did testify.

        Notice that “A source close to the Secret Service” isn’t even someone in the Secret Service, much less Ornato or Engel saying it. No one contests the main fact: Trump wanted to go the Capitol and was angry when he was told “no.”

        1. I believe they did not testify under oath. And, were they asked a question about trump lunging for steering wheel or the throat?

    2. “If you think “the beast” was the bombshell headline from Cass Hutchinson testimony, JT, you suffer from media-buzz sickness.”

      Actually, pbinka, this demonstrates that the committee is fraudulent and everything that comes out of the committee is tainted.

      It is not a matter of supporting or not supporting Trump. It is a matter of law; how decisions involving right and wrong are determined.

      Hutchinson’s testimony might have been canned if she were subject to cross-examination. Barr’s comments would have radically changed if he were subject to cross. The video snippets highlighting prior testimony with abridged questioning of the witness would have been canned if it were subject to cross. On and on, we see virtually everything produced by the Jan 6 committee to be tainted so badly that a reasonable person would not accept anything and have to relook at the facts before presenting them as evidence.

      One more point. The committee (which is illegal to begin with for the purpose it is being used) is looking for criminality. We don’t know what Trump said or didn’t say. If one finds Trump guilty, one has to find almost parent guilty of the same thing. How many times does a parent say,

      “Im going to kill that kid.”

      or before the parent gets home he says:

      “I’m going to hang that child or shoot him”

      We all get frustrated, and say things we don’t mean. We don’t know everything Trump said, but such frustration is common and not criminal.

  10. “. . . to reach out to them or the Secret Service to confirm that account . . .”

    “To confirm”?! You mean to check a claim against the facts of reality, to determine whether it’s true or false?

    They don’t need confirmation. Their wishes are reality. Their desires vanquish facts.

    And thus we’re offered a search for Nemo, instead of a search for the Truth.

  11. It all came across as phony, in that Speaker Pelosi is more interested in “crafting the narrative” than she is at finding the truth of what happened that day.

    I don’t know whether there is any crime that then-President Trump may have committed that day, or the days leading up to the riot. But when the committee that is supposed to be investigating possible criminal activity is more interested in putting out talking points and gotcha moments (that are not being given a chance to be properly cross-examined), it smacks as a joke This political theater may be impressive to some, but I can’t come to their pre-ordained conclusion just because of the abundance of statements being issued by the people involved.

    If this committee wants to be taken seriously (at least by me), they will have to drop their pre-conceived idea of what they want to tell everybody, and instead just lay out the facts in a proper forum.

    1. The Committee is not there to “investigate possible criminal activity.” They’re there to investigate anything and everything that they might write legislation about (for example, revising the Electoral Count Act) or about activities within the Capitol Complex.

      The DOJ is investigating possible criminal activity, has already charged hundreds of people (many of whom have already been convicted), and has served subpoenas and warrants on others, including Eastman and Jeffrey Clark.

  12. I think this bears repeating a former statement I made as things need to be kept clear. The revisionist leftists will change their statements on a whim before the ink is dry.

    We have listened to the leftist bloggers that have been wrong on almost every issue. They are swarming. We see them writing the same BS over and over again this morning as if some higher power has told them to swarm before the truth is permitted to come out?

    What do they have?

    1) Hearsay
    2) Nothing criminal
    3) A lot made up of thin air

    In the end it will be like the Russia Hoax and Steele Dossier where they still refuse to apologize.

    Why haven’t we heard about the 20,000 National Guard troops offered by Trump and refused by Pelosi?

    Why haven’t we seen the documents showing the murder of Ashli Babbitt was justified when all over the nation there have been riots when criminals are shot or killed despite having weapons?

    Why haven’t they investigated why the Capitol police let the Jan6 people in?

    Why haven’t they explained the West Tunnel where people were let in and then tear gas was sprayed and police beat civilians.

    Why haven’t they explained the death of Roseanne Boyland and why the police interfered with people trying to save her life?

    Why did two other people nearly die in that tunnel but at least one was rescued by a Jan 6 who later was incarcerated, prevented from seeing his lawyer, moved from jail to jail and kept much of the time in solitary confinement?

    Why were two other Jan 6 deaths listed as cardiac arrests when it was percussion weapons that killed at least one and that person wasn’t close to the Capitol building.

    Why was only one person found not guilty by a judge when videos showed him being let into the Capitol by police. Why not the others that due to lack of effective counsel pled guilty to charges that are ridiculous?

    Why haven’t the Capitol videos been released since they would show police letting Jan6 people in and also show them being peaceful.

    Why hasn’t Pelosi released all her communications? Those communications can enlighten everyone as to her culpability in the Jan 6 event.

    Why isn’t the press investigating all these things?

    Is the lack of press investigation the same reason that the press went with successive stories?

    It’s not proven to be Hunter’s laptop
    It’s not shown that the laptop wasn’t altered.
    It’s Russian disinformation
    It doesn’t have to do with the President, even though we have audible messages from the President.

    This is all a scam pushed by political despots that are liars who desire despotic power.

    They are using lies, the media and the ideas created by the media that Trump isn’t a nice person. He is like all people, both good and bad.

    It doesn’t matter if one likes Trump or thinks he is a jerk.

    He dramatically improved the economy cutting down unemployment a couple of times faster than Obama whose recovery was abysmal.

    He was sealing up the Southern Border that Biden said he was protecting. The number of illegal immigrants was quickly falling along with the amount of drugs crossing the border.

    What has Biden provided?

    1) Death of many immigrants. ~ 50 yesterday
    2) 100,000 deaths from Fentanyl and other drugs that is rising because of the drugs crossing over the border. 150,000 Fentanyl pills found in a drug arrest. The criminals were let out of jail by Democrats.
    3) Human trafficking and slavery
    4) MS-13 endangering our cities
    5) Millions of illegals overwhelming social services, hospitals, and schools
    6) Human trafficking and slavery
    7) Disease
    6) Does anyone need to know more?

    Democrats have nothing to offer except to hold one-sided hearings because they are afraid Jim Jordan might make them look like the fools they are.

    The press will keep pushing crazy leftist talking points that are lies and destructive to the nation.

    On this blog one has to wonder why the leftist bloggers this morning simultaneously started to pound the blog, almost as if they were told to hit hard with whatever they lies they have and as frequently as they could to drown out other voices.

    What have they said? Nothing except the same type of hearsay they had when the Steele Dossier was pushed onto the American public to destroy a presidency providing economic relief and safety to its citizens.

    1. facts dont matter to the Aggrieved Party (TM). Did you hear the latest cluster f*** that occurred on the high seas? Yup, they have reasons too for acting like animals. Who knew Carnival Cruise Lines accepted EBT? I’m black, and I have a rule when I go out to a place. My rule is about other black people, and here it is: “If there are two blacks or more, I will run for the door.” Obama started this “Aggrieved Party” (TM) trend. Democrats feed it. No wonder they support abortions considering blacks are the more frequent users. The Democrats are the party of death, oppression and lies.

    2. S. Meyer, the reason why your issues haven’t been addressed is because they are based on conspiracy theories, wild assumptions and deflections that have nothing to do with the current discussion about the new allegations against the trump administration and Trump himself.

      You are the one changing the topics constantly and here you are trying to do just that.

      Only one allegation is thru hearsay, but until it is publicly refuted under oath it is still a legitimate allegation. Let’s have those Trump loyalist secret service agents testify under oath.

      Even Fox News is questioning trumps claims and motives. The majority of the testimony from Cassidy Hutchinson are first hand accounts. She was there, she heard and saw the events with the exception of the claim of Trump trying to take the wheel. What is telling is that trump supporters like yourself and others are only focusing on the easiest claim to criticize because it’s still hearsay but not officially contradicted under oath.

      Trump wanted weapons allowed. He wanted to lead a crowd of armed protesters to the Capitol. That’s literally an insurrection by definition.

      Trump knew his voter fraud claims were fake and still pushed them despite being told what he wanted to do is illegal. That shows intent. The DOJ is getting plenty of evidence as the hearings continue. It’s not just trump. It’s his chief of staff, some republicans in congress, his lawyers, all asked for pardons which are admissions of guilt. They knew what they were doing was unlawful.

      There’s still more evidence to come.

      1. “the reason why your issues haven’t been addressed is because they are based on conspiracy theories, wild assumptions and deflections “

        Anyone reading my response above recognizes that there was substance and appropriate linkage. You don’t have the ability to go point by point or even pick out one or two statements that you feel weren’t true. You lie because you are stupid and have no better response.

        Hearsay especially through multiple mouths is ludicrous but you wouldn’t know that. You are like a four year old that accepts candy from strangers when the stranger said mommy told me I could give you this. It becomes even more ludicrous when there is an answer from the primary source. Ask the primary source, but you foolishly rely on third hand.

        “Trump wanted weapons allowed.”

        Provide the evidence and then provide what you think the criminal act is. Your comments make you sound like a four legged creature not a man.

        “Trump knew his voter fraud claims were fake “

        2000 Mules demonstrates Trump’s claims to be valid and that the big lie was that there was no significant cheating. Watch the documentary.

        It clearly demonstrates that more likely than not Biden lost the election if invalid ballots were removed from the count.

  13. I saw the original release of the fantasy flop, Impeach Trump. This supposed sequel, Convict Trump, is nothing more than a director’s cut version of the original. No thanks.

    BTW, Ms. Hutchinson should immediately get a physical and mental health exam for the record. She should also travel with a group.

    1. Olly,

      By my count, you are the 11th Trumpist who has- as I predicted- would reject Turley’s estimation of the importance of this committee’s investigation in spite of its obvious shortcomings:

      Feeling a little betrayed by Turley especially after he would not disparage Bill Barr’s damning testimony?

      1. By my count, you are the 11th Trumpist who has- as I predicted- would reject Turley’s estimation of the importance of this committee’s investigation in spite of its obvious shortcomings:

        A rightly constituted investigation into the January 6th events was and still is important. The “shortcomings,” as you characterize them, undermine the credibility of the proceedings.

        By my count, as a standalone commenter on this blog, you have been egregiously wrong on nearly everything. And playing the remora to JT has done nothing to rehabilitate that record.

  14. The Repos had a chance to have this a bipartisan committee. They choose to put two avowed obstructionists on the committee. Pelosi rightly rejected those two names and said give me reasonable people, McCarthy refused. You sow what you reap.

    1. Nancy, the Criminal, should not be able to dictate Republican members of the committee if she wants anyone to give credence this inquisition. She chose to undermine her own case by revealing this is nothing a political sham for those gullible enough to pay any attention. The nation is dying before our eyes and Pelosi is one of the people moist responsible for it. She is a stain on American history and everyone know this is her fourth failed attempt at making false charges against Trump.

      1. House rules have given the Speaker the authority to name all Select Committee members since the country was founded. Get over it.

        The nation is dying before our eyes and Trump is one of the people moist responsible for it. FIFY.

        1. Nobody questions the Speakers Power.
          Almost everyone, including an ever widening swath of Democrats question her commitment to truthful presentation of facts. She shoved transparency aside, in the pursuit of presenting a compelling narrative.

          1. Nope.

            She accepted the other 3 Republicans that McCarthy nominated, but HE withdrew them. Even Trump criticizes McCarthy for that.

      2. “The nation is dying before our eyes”

        You mean by all the lies trump spews? He has been yelling fraud for 2 years. Never once has he put forth any evidence. 60+ times he was in court yelling fraud, Not once when the judge asked were is the proof did they produce anything. The only thing close to fraud I have read about are several Repos voting twice for Trump, the election official in Colorado that let in a trump supporter to do something with the voting machines. Arizona did a recount, lead by Repos that found Biden won by more votes than originally thought. Wisconsin did a recount, found that Biden won, Michigan did some recounts and found, Biden won.

        It is long past time to show the fraud and stop yelling fraud.

        or perhaps the Demos ate the fraud documents along with the babies that Q said they were eating?

  15. Hutchinson was under oath. I believe the SS was not under oath. And did they ask the SS if the crybaby trump lunged at the wheel? time will tell. What is certain is crybaby trumps words in his Jan 6 speech said HE was going to the capitol with them. He alluded to that several times in his speech. What is also clear is that trump was willing to try anything to stay in power. He and his cronies committed a coup, not a bloodless coup as several people were not only bloodied, but also killed in his attempt to stay in power.

    Deflect all you want. At the end of the day crybaby trump and his cronies were insurrectionists.

  16. Hey Turleydog: You can bring forth the opposing witnesses here on your international blog.

  17. Liz gave up a lot to be a part of this long running Anti-Trump show. Its hard to understand what she is shooting for. I don’t think she is truly on a mission to save Democracy but she is on a mission. They do have a family history of firing in the wrong direction..

      1. Who knew the Left saw a Cheney as an oracle of truth?!?! Wonders of wonders. How about a cite to support your claim like something reliable, unbiased and known for accuracy like New York Times?

  18. “The real point is no one is denying that the former president wanted to go to the Capitol and lead this armed mob, and be there while they attacked the Capitol.”

      1. If you eliminate the spin and obvious factual errors, The rest MIGHT be true. But it would not be a Crime.

        Trump was free to go to the capital to lead his supporters in opposition to congress accepting fraudulent elections.

        The only firearms at the capital were with the capital police and federal agents.

        I do not know if Trump wanted to go – we only have the word of a witness that has serious credibility issues.
        But there was nothing wrong with him wanting to go. or actually going.

Comments are closed.