 |
| Is Cassidy just another pretty face that was paid off to give a testimony ? Lets explore some twisted facts of her blockbuster testimony . |
(1)>>The January 6th Hearings aka 3rd impeachment , soap opera attempt to ruin the political career of Donald Trump , NOW has taken a most bizarre turn with the sworn testimony of (2)>>Cassidy Hutchinson. So far, the hearings are less about the specific acts committed on that day, and more about the disinformation campaign (2.1)>>Trump waged before and after the 2020 election. This campaign told millions of Americans a lie, convinced them it was true and inspired hundreds to attempt to violently disrupt the country’s democratic process.On Tuesday, (3)>>Liz Cheney and the sham Jan. 6 committee brought in Mark Meadows staffer Cassidy Hutchinson as a “surprise witness.”It’s always bizarre when you know you’re watching history unfold. I’m old enough to remember Watergate and these proceedings give me solid Watergate vibes. But the "vibes of un-truth prevail here .... (4)>>The truth about Hutchinson is that she is not exactly a "eyewitness" she is going on hearsay on what other "eyewitnesses" claimed happened .As soon as her testimony was "I heard it from a friend who, heard it from a friend who, heard it from another Trump tried to turn the limo around" I decided she was the least credible witness in the history of questions.Cassidy Hutchinson testified to events related to by Anthony Ontario, involving Chief of Staff Mark Meadows and Secret Service agent Bobby Engel and then-President Trump.My question: why aren't Meadows and Engel testifying themselves, providing first-hand accounts? I get Trump claimed executive privilege, but why weren't Meadows and Engel subpoenaed? NOW she was testifying to what she was told by another individual. The hidden-behind-unnamed-source denials (5)>>so far have focused on assaulting an agent and grabbing the wheel. They have not denied an argument or even an altercation in the car. In fact, the CSPAN video shows that there may have been an altercation. BUT Grabbing the wheel while using his other hand to strangle the driver, no less. I think the guy relating the story to Cassidy was giving it some Trump-style... embellishment. I don't think it's physically possible to do both of those things from behind the driver at the same time. (6)>>What I thought was interesting is that she wasn’t in the car. She was saying what someone told her. If it were a court trial it would not be allowed because it is hearsay, but for the committee it is acceptable.I believe she accurately relayed what she was told, but I would rather hear from the person who witnessed it. She signed up to work in the Trump administration when she was 22 or something — this is not a hero but a ruthless, amoral, far-right ladder climber who has decided to testify for reasons we don’t know, with preserving her own skin in the face of perjury charges likely at the top of the list. So we’ve gone from Cassidy Hutchinson pushing bullshit hearsay allegations that turned out to be false to outright lying under oath. Imagine being 25, having your whole career ahead of you, and voluntarily committing perjury for Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger. The hearings are really a sham propaganda movie that no one cares about.A balanced investigation would have yielded interesting findings but that's the (7)>>last thing the Democrats wanted The scheme will backfire hard on them when the DOJ returns no indictments because, despite the hysterics, no one has shown anything remotely close to a crime So pathetic.
NOTES AND COMMENTS : (1)>>The January 6th Hearings aka 3rd impeachment. Looking at the Jan 6th hearings are another attempt to impeach Trump. Here "they" want to put Trump on trial for treason . If the suprising focus of a J6 committee on the 2020 election is any indication, the Democrats appear increasingly concerned people are onto their ballot harvesting operation. The committee strategy is classic misdirection - focus on obviously unfounded election fraud claims to claim all questions about the election count are lies.What is conspicuously absent from the J6 committee focus is the Democrat cabal funnelling in at least a half billion dark dollars to hire an army of lawyers to use COVID as a pretext to waive waive or ignore election integrity laws, then hire another army of ballot harvestors to "assist" in requesting, completing and delivering mail-in ballots. As Dinesh D'Souza taunts the committee over various media to show 2000 Mules and call him as a witness to cross examine, committee members and witnesses are either studiously ignoring the documentary or giving some version of "nothing to see here, move along." According to The New York Times, that narrative is meant to “recast the midterm message” and “give [Democrats] a platform for making a broader case about why they deserve to stay in power.” It was packaged with the help of a high-powered media figure brought in to help stage the event. Much of the media touted how the hearings would be “must-see TV” and would force voters “not to look away” from Trump’s “coup.” Countervailing evidence was edited out. Thus, Trump was shown calling for the protesters to “march” on the Capitol — but not his additional words to do so “peacefully.” (2)>>Cassidy Hutchinson. Cassidy Hutchinson, who served as an aide to former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows , somehow appeared out of the blue with damaging testimony that she was told to present , but was not a actual witness .Why is information all over the place about her? How old is she? Some sites say 26-27 others say 30-40.This is going to get ugly for the 25 year old Hutchinson that looks 43. Where did she grow up? New Jersey or Washington? A first generation college student that attended private grade school and college. Hmmm not unheard of just weird, especially when all her dad did was run a small tree care company around 6 people. Lots of questions, and yes seems to be mostly hearsay in this big bullshit production we are supposed to care about. Let me make sure I understand things correctly: She actually was NOT in the car to witness any of this, and her "eyewitness testimony" is the result of her having after the fact hallway conversations with people? Even if she's lying, I don't care, she WAS NOT in the car, is that correct?What many don't realize is she testified 4 other times in secret to that panel. This was her 5th, and she still couldn't keep her stories straight even after she changed lawyers and they prepped her. They got to her. Those agents and the driver have already said they want to testify and debunk her claims....lets see if they let them.The Secret Service contradicts her on several points. So does her boss. Her testimony is hearsay on top of hearsay. Politicians use donated money to pay their legal fees. She was a GS12. Lawyers ain't cheap. (2.1)>>Trump waged before and after the 2020 election. Funny thing: Just before the hearings, Bidens approval numbers, while terrible, were still slightly higher than Trump's at the same point; and when asked if the election was held now, slightly more people said they'd vote for Biden than Trump.Now, after a week of hearings, the same polls have flipped;slightly more people would today vote for Trump than Biden.Of course, those differences are all within the statistical margin of error; and there are plenty of other reasons for Biden numbers to accelerate their tanking; but, still, if Democrats were hoping that the hearings will once and for all slay Trump, that ain't happening right now. (3)>>Liz Cheney and the sham Jan. 6 committee. Cheney, of course, is a Republican, too, and a very conservative one. But she has broken with her party over January 6th and Trump. Liz Cheney is the top Republican on the House panel investigating the violent attack on the Capitol, and her role in the historic hearings that begin will impact her own political future, one that may no longer be in Congress.Cheney's voting record in the House is solidly conservative. She backed Trump's agenda 93% of the time.But Republicans have taken the position that Cheney and her colleagues constitute, as McCarthy put it in a press conference on Thursday, “the most political and least legitimate committee in American history.” Thus far, none of the five has complied, though the legal maneuvering is still at an early stage.(4)>>The truth about Hutchinson is that she is not exactly a "eyewitness". I wonder if she was "paid" to give this credulous testimony ? I just don't get what her end goal was. Payoff from dems in shadows or just disgruntled with Trump? They need to look into her records and punish accordingly for false testimony under oath. Was secretly interviewed by Nancy Pelosi , was she a mole in the Trump camp . The "leakier" ? Her testimony is probably a media prop , Main stream media is owned by those "people" that speak in "money". That is media is owned by corporations and media will do and will tell what corporations want. Again , she did not eyewitness the events she was describing , but was told to testify on behalf of others , which again looks like she is being paid to do this . Even if her testimony is TRUE . Secret Service sources, and unidentified media sources said to be informed of its version of events, are signaling that the agency will dispute the version of events given by Hutchinson. Perhaps Secret Service will deny that any physical altercations occurred. It is not clear yet whether anyone has denied it under oath. Hutchinson said she was informed about what (allegedly) happened in the car only minutes later by Tony Ornato, who ran security at the White House. Ornato was not speaking idly. He was reporting what happened to a top aide (Hutchinson) of the White House chief of staff (Mark Meadows), Ornato’s superior.(5)>>so far have focused on assaulting an agent and grabbing the wheel. Sorry, but HAVE YOU EVER SEEN THE INSIDE OF THE PRESIDENTIAL VEHICLE (The Beast)???? The President sits in the back….there is no way he could even get into position to go for the driver! It’s impossible…The two secret service agents already made statements it didn't happen. And they was never asked by the J6 committee about the allegation. If presidents ride around in the backseat of limos, then how is Trump (who is massive) going to lunge for the steering wheel and wrestle with the driver? I can't believe you find that part believable. That's the main hole in her story. Also, why was she smirking the entire time? It seems reasonable that hearsay and other such non-provable testimony is desired during an investigation. The problem is, this is not an investigation. It is a Show, presented as a Trial, being called an Investigation. The intent is not to uncover the truth, but to do everything to destroy Trump's political future. How much $$ are we spending towards that goal?(6)>>What I thought was interesting is that she wasn’t in the car. If the Democrats and the left are sure they have a winning criminal case against Trump they should begin with the DOJ charging Trump with whatever crimes, they think he committed and then present them to a grand jury and then begin a fair trial where we can see and hear all of the evidence from both the prosecutions perspective and the defenses prospective. We have seen J6 protesters denied habeas corpus, effectively serving their prison terms (were they to be convicted) BEFORE THEY WERE TRIED!Bail, or release on self-recognizance for looters, building-burners and person-assaulters; no-pre-trial release on bail for people who had no prior arrests in their lives, many of whom merely wandered around in the Capitol. Hutchinson testified that she handwrote an exhibit. It was demonstrated and claimed by Eric Hirschman to be his note. This was definite perjury by Hutchinson. The House is not going to refer her to the DOJ, nor is the DOJ going to prosecute on its own initiative.If Trump is indicted, he faces a kangaroo court, a Stalinesque Show Trial, a Star Chamber.These hearings should end ASAP. They are totally political. (7)>>last thing the Democrats wanted . Any so called Republican who supported the Pelosi handpicked January 6 Committee. Democrat November midterms campaign committee deserves to be kicked out of office. And one would suspect that those so called Republicans would be welcomed into the Democrat Party where they belong…Speculation as fact, that would be the liberal way. If this was a legitimate hearing they wouldn't need to advertise it like a prime time show with teasers and inuendo. Remember when Schiff had all that evidence of Russian Collusion? One would think that would have come out, but all we learned is that Clinton made it up. Hutchinson , "she was simply relating what she was told" - which is the issue. Not with Hutchinson, not with the committee's right to hear such testimony, but with the conclusions people are led to make about this, which is what it's all about. "what (allegedly) happened in the car only minutes later" - in the heat of the moment she heard something. She was not there, she did not see it. Did she convey it correctly?I don't know, but I do know that what was riveting was also questionable second hand, which makes me very skeptical. If this gets largely clarified, so as being not quite so riveting, it will be on page 25 and no one will remember it. The damage will have been done.
