J6 Committee Vice Chair Liz Cheney has been criticized by critics for participating in a one-sided series of hearings devoid of alternative or dissenting views. Some have called it a “show trial” with members reading off teleprompters in tightly scripted and controlled hearings. As if to fulfill that show trial portrayal, Cheney ended the hearing this week by calling for more officials to come forward and noting that Trump family members and former officials have now come forward with their own public “confessions.”
As with past hearings, the summation included a direct call by Cheney for voters to oppose Donald Trump in the coming election: “Can a President who is willing to make the choices Donald Trump made during the violence of January 6 ever be trusted with any position of authority in our great nation again?” It is the type of pitch that is as unnecessary as it is counterproductive. Many voters tuned out the hearings weeks ago due to the absence of any balance in the presentation of evidence. To add direct political pitches only reduces the audience further. The result is that it is left telling largely Democratically aligned voters not to vote for Trump.
The alternative was to secure a larger audience by allowing more balance. It would not have altered the power of these accounts. It would have simply added greater credibility to the proceedings. It could have changed minds rather than just reaffirm preexisting views. Instead, once again, the Committee simply edited out conflicting evidence. For example, the Committee again edited out the line of Trump where he said “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”
That line does not exonerate the former president. However, it is illustrative of the Committee’s refusal to hold these hearings for investigative rather than persuasive purposes.
What was particularly bizarre was Cheney’s effort to dismiss the need for any opposing views in the hearings. In one of the most counterintuitive and forced claims, Cheney said that such balance would not have made a difference:
“And for those of you who seem to think the evidence would be different if Republican Leader McCarthy had not withdrawn his nominees from this committee, let me ask you this. Do you really think Bill Barr is such a delicate flower that he would wilt under cross-examination? Pat Cipollone, Eric Herschmann, Jeff Rosen, Richard Donoghue?”
No one is suggesting that Barr would have changed his testimony. Rather, the argument is that there were questions not being asked for the witnesses and evidence not being presented. For example, when the two former members of the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers testified, members carefully avoided a host of countervailing questions, including any direct contacts with Trump or the White House.
However, it was the true confessions moment that stood out in the closing summation. Cheney said that more people will be called to come forward. She then added:
“The case against Donald Trump in these hearings is not made by witnesses who were his political enemies. It is instead a series of confessions by Donald Trump’s own appointees, his own friends, his own campaign officials, people who worked for him for years, and his own family. They have come forward. And they have told the American people the truth.”
I seriously doubt that figures like former Attorney General Bill Barr or other Trump officials believed that they were coming forward with public confessions. They spoke about courageous and principled positions that put them at odds with the former president.
What was so striking about the Cheney’s characterization of such testimony as “confessions” is that it seemed to address a glaring disconnect for many Democratic critics. The hearing has shown that virtually all of the Trump officials in the White House took the same position against the effort to reject the certification of the election and called for immediate responses to the riot. Many of these figures, like Barr, had been unfairly attacked for years as Trump stooges or enemies of democracy.
The fact is that our system worked. The courts (including Trump appointed judges) rejected these challenges. Executive officials held firm in refusing to allow the Justice Department or other agencies from being used to further attacks on the election without evidence of widespread voting fraud. There was no flinching or hesitation for figures like Barr or Vice President Michael Pence and they have always been public about their positions. There were no confessions in these hearing beyond a couple witnesses like the members of the extremist groups.
The fact is that there was little new offered in the last two hearings. There continued to be a conspicuous absence of the long promised new evidence of criminal conduct by Trump. The two witnesses yesterday were important new voices who offered authentic and heartfelt accounts of their decisions to resign on January 6th.
The biggest news was the announcement of additional hearings. While the Democrats brought in a former ABC producer to frame the hearings, it could well have been George Lucas behind the camera. Whenever a hearing end with what sounds like a summation, the chair comes forward with a sequel line that “there is another.”
I welcome additional hearings. I believe that these accounts are important for the public to hear what occurred on that horrific day. However, the hearings at points had a feel of a political infomercial due to the heavy handed pitch. While both sides have blamed each other for the absence of any Republican-appointed members, that is not a license for the Committee to then dispense with any need to offer the public a full and fair account of the underlying evidence and claims. Even Democrats have admitted that the hearings do not appear to be changing many minds of conservative or Republican voters. The reason may be that many tuned out weeks ago when they saw the hearings as presenting a single narrative rather than pursue a comprehensive record on what occurred from a variety of perspectives.
Declaring that Trump family members and former officials have now “confessed” only played into the criticism of these hearings. By yielding to the temptation to exclude any opposing voices or views, the Committee seems intent on fulfilling the stereotype of the hearings as a show trial. It could be so much more but that requires politicians to do something that they are almost genetically resistant to: yielding time to opponents. It is the difference between creating a case for the next election as opposed to creating a record for history.
If the Jan. 6h committee miniseries seems to be a Seinfeldesque saga about nothing, then this might explain what the Democrats fear the most if they are unsuccessful.
Former President Trump’s top allies are preparing to radically reshape the federal government if he is re-elected, purging potentially thousands of civil servants and filling career posts with loyalists to him and his “America First” ideology, people involved in the discussions tell Axios.
The impact could go well beyond typical conservative targets such as the Environmental Protection Agency and the Internal Revenue Service. Trump allies are working on plans that would potentially strip layers at the Justice Department — including the FBI, and reaching into national security, intelligence, the State Department and the Pentagon, sources close to the former president say.
During his presidency, Trump often complained about what he called “the deep state.”
The heart of the plan is derived from an executive order known as “Schedule F,” developed and refined in secret over most of the second half of Trump’s term and launched 13 days before the 2020 election.
The reporting for this series draws on extensive interviews over a period of more than three months with more than two dozen people close to the former president, and others who have firsthand knowledge of the work underway to prepare for a potential second term. Most spoke on condition of anonymity to describe sensitive planning and avoid Trump’s ire.
https://www.axios.com/2022/07/22/trump-2025-radical-plan-second-term
😱 Grab some popcorn.
I truly wanted a J6 hearing. I want to know what happened and I fear I never will. I will be watching Epoch TV’s documentary on it tonight. The only true way to know is have everyone questioned and cross examined—with no grandstanding. Sure, like that will happen ever!
Conrad Liz!
Republicans, like Mr. Turley, complain about how this was a one-sided presentation by the committee. How could it not be one-sided when Republicans in congress refused to either appoint a bi-partisan commission or to appoint Republicans, other than radicals like Banks and Jordon, to the 1/6 committee.
We should have had our radicals on the committee to offset your radicals. Only fair.
“The truth never hurts a just cause.”
Gandhi
Technically, McCarthy appointed three other Republicans in addition to Banks and Jordan, when those two were rejected he took his ball and went home, pulling the other three appointees.
She suffers failure worse than Hillary. Hysteria and incoherence, oh, and affirmative action – the products of the 19th Amendment. I thought women made babies – made Americans. Not so much, eh? The American fertility rate is in a “death spiral.” That can’t be good unless the population is illegally imported. Dang, America! Who does that to their country?
Liz Cheney is a RepubliCon.
What is the party of that guy on yesterday? I think his name was Kinzinger. Is he a Dem or a RepubliCon?
So Turleydog:
You comments are wrong. This is not just a Dem squad.
Alan Dershowitz and Judge Janine have both said a witness is not a real witness until they can be cross examined. This whole thing is a show trial. Impeachment number 3. I agree with Prof Turley in his assessments. Btw/ no concern for an unarmed Ashli Babbit, and we’d like to learn about Ray Epps. Trump lost the election, (not my candidate btw) but there were no — nada — voter irregularities? WI just eliminated the voter boxes. I know, they’re all right wing judges, right?
I find it absolutely impossible to believe that those like Liz Cheney will ultimately get away with such obviously partisan and slanderous acts. The reality is that even if we set aside fraudulent balloting entirely 2020 was STILL a constitutionally unlawful election. Everybody knows that; the entire world knows that. And nobody likes the corrupt, not even those corrupt. There’s no doubt either that Trump has thoroughly castigated both GW and Dick Cheney for the Iraq war, a that should never have occurred, and served only to enrich the few at the expense of all Americans. Also that Liz Cheney undoubtedly views Trump, and those like myself who agree with him, with disdain. I also think it’s really sad when Congress and the “hallowed halls” are used so callously to stage such Stalinesque show trials. .
More of Turley’s paid spin. Never forget that Turley’s Fox colleagues were directly involved in promoting Trump. Hannity appeared with Trump at rallies. And Kilmeade and Ingraham were tweeting advice to Trump during the riot, begging him to call off the fans. These people aren’t journalists. So, when Turley tries to trash the hearings as biased or lacking any countervailing opinion, this is the Fox network speaking. How ironic for anyone on Fox’s payroll to accuse anyone else of being biased when the exist to spin away Trump’s criminality, attack Biden, his administration and Democrats.
Turley says: “Many voters tuned out the hearings weeks ago due to the absence of any balance in the presentation of evidence.” Turley also claims: “The reason may be that many tuned out weeks ago when they saw the hearings as presenting a single narrative rather than pursue a comprehensive record on what occurred from a variety of perspectives.” What alternative “perspectives” are there, Turley? Can you give us some examples? Trump DID lose. He KNEW he lost. He KNEW polls predicted he would lose, and he began lying about this even before Election Day. This is just another Fox assignment: criticize the J6 hearings as unfair. Of course, Turley cannot come up with any valid reason or facts that prove that the hearings are unfair.
Fox didn’t even cover the hearings last night, and has consistently told its disciples NOT to tune in. And, being the dupes that they are, they complied. Turley claims that “allowing more balance” would “secure a larger audience”. No it wouldn’t. There’s no way to spin or deflect away from the seriousness of Trump inciting a riot because his delicate ego couldn’t handle the fact that he lost a second time. What Trump did was outrageous. There’s no way to downplay or spin away the facts: according to a recently-released audio from Bannon, put out in October before the election, he was going to claim he won anyway, and keep the lie going as far as he could. He lost over 60 lawsuits, he lost over 38 recounts, he lost audits, everone told him he lost and he still lied to his fans, encouraged them to go to the “Capitol” to “fight like hell”, he told them that Mike Pence “didn’t do the right thing”, and so they were hunting him down. So, it’s wrong for Liz Cheney to say that someone like this should never be in the White House ever again? That’s not a partisan observation–someone who would have the audacity to do this for the sake of their ego and to cling to power after losing an election shouldn’t even be allowed to live in America, much less be the President.
Tell us, Turley, what is the countervailing or dissenting view regarding just the matter of the 3 hours that Trump watched the carnage unfold on your employer’s network while he tweeted Republican members of Congress, demanding that they object to the certified vote totals? During this time, he also tweeted that Mike Pence didn’t do the right thing, which 2 of his White House staff, including a national security advisor and deputy press secretary said was like “pouring gas on a fire”? Both of them resigned that night. They’d seen enough.
What was Congress supposed to do–ignore the first domestic-based attack on our Capitol? Give Trump a voice or means by which to disrupt the proceedings with jesters like Jim Jordan or Jim Banks, so as to present a “balanced” view? The American people expressed our voice when we voted him out in November, 2020, but his massive ego wouldn’t accept it. So, according to Turley, clowns like Jim Jordan or Jim Banks should have been there to turn the hearings into a dog and pony show in the interests of “fairness”?
+100 Thank you Karen.
it is adorable when you upvote your own comments
Natasha, is that you?? Did you change your name?? If not, you send long drawn out blah, blah, blahs…that most everybody here just scrolls by because it is nonsense.
Good catch. She did this about 2 years ago. I found an attorney in Indianpolis with a Martindale rating of 2.0. Uuuufff!
https://www.martindale.com/attorney/ms-karen-b-neiswinger-985154/
Natacha has told us:
– she is Catholic
– earned a nursing degree
– earned a JD degree
im not saying she is in fact Karen, as I think Natacha is Peter Shill, Svelaz, Sammy, Seth Warner, et al. But if you are curious, it is all there, including the following sad note. May explain her bizarre tirades if she is in fact Karen, but who knows!
https://www.legacy.com/us/obituaries/indystar/name/james-neiswinger-obituary?id=9449295
Wen Bars,
I wondered the same thing myself…
For the record, this is not me. I did not post at 8:44PM last night.
Whichever Anonymous this is, he/she has a new tactic of using others handles, posting as them, or posting under other names.
They are clearly desperate in their attempts to deflect from the professors topic at hand.
Upstate, these abuses are not part of acceptable free speech. They are fraudulent acts of impersonation. Maybe they should be eliminated.
Karen: You’ve got this wrong. I believe it was CNN that heralded Trump 24/7. Fox came along later, not so much in support of Trump as in opposition to Hillary who even then was seen as corrupt and a liar. Jim Comey finished her off and that’s about the only good thing that can be said for Jim. I know you’re upset and perhaps disappointed that the J6 closed its road show pretty much in disgrace but, cheer up, January 2023 will be here before you know it and then, perhaps, we will finally have a Congress that really wants to find out what occurred on January 6th and who failed to protect the Capitol in the process. As Cheryl Holmes used to say during BC’s impeachment, “Facts are stubborn things.”
The length and tone screams Natcha.
I’m not fooled. After two or three sentences, the ubiquitous over wrought FOX lies, ad hominem attacks and total avoindence of the topic, the length gave away the ruse.
Back in the day when the public education system was well-regarded, we young people learned what the Scientific Method was.
Somewhere over the last 50 to 60 years, it has steadily disappeared from the K through 12 curriculum
If only politicians would employ the scientific method in the practice of their profession, we might not be dealing with the divisiveness we’re facing today, and the threat of a true civil war not only psychological in nature, but physical as well.
Anyone agree?
Richard Lowe,
Sadly, I have to agree with you.
Mr. Turley, Does the Oath, Trump took when he took the job matter anything to you?
Section 3 of the 14th Amendment prohibits Trump from ever running again. He’s done unless 2/3 of each house of Congress overturns it. There are ample plaintiffs to file a 14th Amendment lawsuit barring Trump from ever serving again.
This is silly. To even begin to consider this, there would have to be evidence that the POTUS engaged in insurrection. No such evidence exists and to the contrary, he called for his supporters to be peacful and orderly. As much as the hate squad in Congress trries, it cannot come up with credible evidence sufficient to trigger this claim. But, hey, the zombie-hate crowd will continue to babble about it.
Mademoiselle Chaney seems to be on a vendetta against Donald Trump, while else would she participate in this Kafka like proceeding where guilt was predetermined? Supposition(s) regardless of facts is the mantra.
From Henry Brook Adams “Education of Henry Adams” 1907:
“Politics, as a practice, whatever its professions, has always been the systematic organization of hatreds.”
Wyoming voters will soon deliver their own verdict on Liz Cheney.
Dread and Circuses
Is it true Frau Cheney asked Frau Pelosi if Roland Freisler could preside over the committee? Frau Pelosi told her not to worry Adam Schiff would fill in for him.
After SCOTUS agreed to hear the case about President Biden’s immigration guidelines (1), I hoped to read some insights about this topic. Instead, Professor Turley beated a dead horse another time: Acknowledging the “absence of any balance in the presentation of evidence” as well as supporting “additional hearings. [which] are important for the public to hear what occurred on that horrific day” (I doubt that these include the oversight responsibility of four Congressional Commitees for the USCP).
On 8/16/22 Republican Primary will (more or less) decide who will be the next U.S. representative for Wyoming’s at-large congressional district: Incumbent Rep Liz Cheney (endorsed by President George W. Bush, Senator Mitt Romney, Rep Adam Kitzinger, Paul Ryan, Karl Rove, John Boehner, Alyssah Farrah, Kay Bailey Hutchison, Cindy McCain among many others) or Harriet Hagman (endorsed by President Donald Trump and …)
(1) https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/072122zr_7k47.pdf
Has Pelosi answered questions under oath about that day yet? Has Mayor Bowzer answered questions under oath about that day yet? Has FBI director Wray answered questions under oath yet? Why was the Capitol so unprotected? Who opened the doors from inside? Who gave the order to open the doors and usher the “protestors” inside? How many “feds” were in the crowd? Why has Ray Epps not been held in the gulag like the others?
I believe that the J6 Committee, which set the ground rules for the miniseries, has declared that communications between Speaker Pelosi and the Sergeant at Arms are “off limits.” Perhaps those Communications and the sworn testimony of the Speaker would undermine the narrative that is being developed by the committee. 😂
“Miniseries” is a perfect description, Catherine. For nearly all miniseries, the story arch turns into a writer’s hairball–usually by the third season–and the plot becomes convoluted, preachy, and boring: a perfect analog to this kangaroo court in Congress. Game of Thrones bombs for a second time in D.C.
What this committee has been trying to do is to focus public attention on the events of one day, as if they define the totality of President Trump’s entire term. I reluctantly voted for him as an unknown specifically because the known alternative would have been a disaster. My hope was that the Legislative and Judicial branches would be an effective check on “another” President that decided he will go it alone. The cries of Trump being “unpresidential” are meaningless, unless by “unpresidential” one can prove he is acting outside his constitutional authority. Was Obama being “presidential” telling a joint session of Congress that if they didn’t act, he would with his pen and his phone? Was Congress being “congressional” when they gave him a standing ovation? Were the federal courts being “judicial” when they blocked constitutional policy?
For far too long the electorate has been enamored by the personalities they elect to office, while being completely disinterested in the constitutionality of the power they execute. Lastly, after 5 years of unrelenting and unwarranted attacks on him personally, his family, his presidency and his administration, we are now supposed to believe this January 6th commission has some noble cause to “prosecute” the personality of Trump from seeking elected office. That might sell to the ignorant masses, but it will do nothing to move the needle on the vast majority in this country that want to restore us to a legitimate constitutional republic.
What was particularly bizarre was Cheney’s effort to dismiss the need for any opposing views in the hearings.
As someone in the front lines of medical care for the poor, for the uninsured, for minorities and people in the lower to middle socioeconomic class, their existence appears to be an afterthought to those leading these circus hearings. They hearings are repulsive considering the reality of millions of Americans today. What are on the minds, right now, since 2020, of the majority of Americans? Aside from the inflationary economy, increase in violent crime and polarization of our country, the data below paint a very grim picture.
Given the terrible polling data for these past 1.5 years, and Congress ignoring said data, it is apparent that they have given Americans the middle finger.
###
More “Covid Suicides” than Covid Deaths in Kids
But there has been another cost that we’ve seen, particularly in high schools. We’re seeing, sadly, far greater suicides now than we are deaths from COVID. We’re seeing far greater deaths from drug overdose that are above excess that we had as background than we are seeing the deaths from COVID.
– CDC Director Dr Robert Redfield
https://www.buckinstitute.org/covid-webinar-series-transcript-robert-redfield-md/
###
Evaluation of Suicides Among US Adolescents During the COVID-19 Pandemic
Georgia, Indiana, New Jersey, Oklahoma, and Virginia had an increase in absolute count of adolescent suicides during the pandemic. These states, along with California, also had an increase in the proportion of overall suicides among adolescents. In contrast, Montana had a decrease in both absolute count and proportion of adolescent suicides during the pandemic, whereas Alaska had a decrease in proportion only. When data were aggregated across all 14 states, the proportion of overall suicides among adolescents increased during the pandemic.
Charpignon ML, Ontiveros J, Sundaresan S, Puri A, Chandra J, Mandl KD, Majumder MS. Evaluation of Suicides Among US Adolescents During the COVID-19 Pandemic. JAMA Pediatr. 2022 Jul 1;176(7):724-726. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2022.0515
###
Mental Health, Suicidality, and Connectedness Among High School Students During the COVID-19 Pandemic – Adolescent Behaviors and Experiences Survey, United States, January-June 2021
Overall, 37.1% of students experienced poor mental health during the pandemic, and 31.1% experienced poor mental health during the preceding 30 days. In addition, during the 12 months before the survey, 44.2% experienced persistent feelings of sadness or hopelessness, 19.9% had seriously considered attempting suicide, and 9.0% had attempted suicide. Compared with those who did not feel close to persons at school, students who felt close to persons at school had a significantly lower prevalence of poor mental health during the pandemic (28.4% versus 45.2%) and during the past 30 days (23.5% versus 37.8%), persistent feelings of sadness or hopelessness (35.4% versus 52.9%), having seriously considered attempting suicide (14.0% versus 25.6%), and having attempted suicide (5.8% versus 11.9%).
Jones SE, Ethier KA, Hertz M, DeGue S, Le VD, Thornton J, Lim C, Dittus PJ, Geda S. Mental Health, Suicidality, and Connectedness Among High School Students During the COVID-19 Pandemic – Adolescent Behaviors and Experiences Survey, United States, January-June 2021. MMWR Suppl. 2022 Apr 1;71(3):16-21. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.su7103a3
I think it’s really one in 300 doses, not 1/5000. I’ll have to recheck.
***********
The German Government publicly acknowledged on Wednesday that the Covid vaccines cause serious side effects for one in every 5,000 doses.
A tweet from the Ministry of Health stated (via Google translate): “One in 5,000 people is affected by a serious side effect after a COVID19 #vaccination. If you suspect #sideeffects, get medical attention and report your symptoms to @PEI_Germany.” It later added a correction that the figure related to the reporting rate and to doses rather than individuals: “Correction: According to @PEI_Germany, the reporting rate for serious reactions is 0.2 reports per 1,000 vaccine doses.”
https://www.newswars.com/german-government-admits-covid-vaccines-cause-serious-injury-for-one-in-5000-doses-but-its-own-data-show-the-real-rate-is-one-in-300-doses/
I had 2 COVID vaccines, as did my household, I personally administered the injections and vials in my hands for patients, my friends and coworkers, and then I got COVID 8 months later. No adverse events, no mutations, and no myocarditis. I have had no call backs from anyone to whom I administered the vaccine nor any patients from my clinic have returned with complaints.
OTOH, I do look younger, am lifting heavier in the gym, my sleep has improved, my hair is still falling out though but my IQ score has increased by 20 points. Is this what Alex Jones has told you as well, Oky1, before or after you bought his alpha male testosterone libido enhancing supplements?
😉
The COVID vaccines are safe. Take all of your recommended vaccines especially at your age of 80+ years. Follow your physician’s guidance.
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedules/hcp/imz/adult.html
“The fact is that our system worked.” Is this statement meant to say that there were no problems with the election? Really? We have clear evidence that thousands of ballots were collected (and most likely manufactured) and delivered by paid operatives to the notorious drop boxes in violation of state election laws. We know that republican observers were physically turned away from counting centers in democrat cities. In other places observers were kept so far away from the counting that they could not see what was being done. Of course, this was “necessary” because of COVID, which itself was exaggerated in order to justify the total corruption of the voting process. Voting rules were changed at the last minute or just ignored because of COVID. Vote counting was suspended in the wee hours of the morning and then restarted with a deluge of one-sided votes. Anyone who objected was deemed anti-democratic. And those who protested at the Capitol (or even the vicinity of the Capitol) were swept up in a massive manhunt and many were held without bail. Then the J6 Committee was created to put on a phony trial intended to keep one man from running again and to intimidate anyone who might want to vote for him. The only sense in which the system worked is that the democrat’s attempted coup has exposed them.