AIDE DETAILS TRUMP’S RAGE ON JAN. 6He Knew Crowd Was Armed, but Tried to Loosen Security, Testimony Recounts

[tres borrachos]

Great response! Thanks!

At least I watched the testimony, which is why I'm in this thread. You didn't watch the testimony so you don't even know what is going on or why you're posting here.

 

[Binary_Digit]

You think your friend is asking you to lie under oath for her when she says she knows that "you’re going to do the right thing"

Be a team player
Protect who you need to protect

And you'll stay in the good graces of Trump.

Remember: Trump is thinking about you and he reads the transcripts. He knows you're loyal.

 

[Rawley]

Depends. Why would they think I was going to **** them over?

Depends on a whole lot of things doesn't it?

But you're completely comfortable with Lizzy dropping such vague gratuitous implications of criminality at the end of a hearing. It's a shameful way to run an investigation and hearings. But we've come to expect nothing more from low, underhanded, unethical never-Trumpers given their actions over the past five years.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Immigration has been Blocked For YEARS because its not Bi-Partisan, its my way or the highway.

Student debt..... certain legislation has passed but an all out deferral/relief/forgiveness at the expense of the American people is ridiculous

International alliance to defeat putin. $40 billion appropriated to Ukraine,. What do think $40billion could do for each state regarding mental health and firearm safety.

I can go on and on, when you actually read through many of the proposals they are broaden scoped proposals that dont address direct issue.... Just give millions to "Studies"


They DONT want to legislate. Again Agree to disagree... The SCOTUS is handing out rulings like crazy they are doing their JOB like it or not. I would rather take that, than the last 10 years of stagnant legislation due to useless committee hearings.

I voted for these people to legislate. We have 3 branches of government. An Executive, a Legislative and a Judicial. Let the Judicial do the legal stuff and the Legislation freaking legislate.....

Congress critters enjoy re-election rates of over 90% by using borrow, print and spend “budgeting” nonsense while keeping federal government created problems as ‘issues’ rather than changing failed legislation. It’s become all about team red and team blue while increasing federal power and expense and nothing about we the people.

 

[Demon]

Depends on a whole lot of things doesn't it?

But you're completely comfortable with Lizzy dropping such vague gratuitous implications of criminality at the end of a hearing. It's a shameful way to run an investigation and hearings. But we've come to expect nothing more from low, underhanded, unethical never-Trumpers given their actions over the past five years.

I'm sure its all going to be addressed by the end of the hearings, and I'm comfortable with that. I don't support any of Cheney's policies, but I haven't ever thought of her as a liar.

 

[Binary_Digit]

But you're completely comfortable with Lizzy dropping such vague gratuitous implications of criminality at the end of a hearing.

It was witness testimony under oath. What's the problem?

 

[Exactice]

Wow, just wow. When you previously made the assertion about Trump offering National Guard and Pelosi refusing, you were shown links rating that assertion as false. Now, you double down on the same false assertion.

Try again? Sorry I am not quite sure I understand. I clicked on previous Reponses that I am having communications with, there no links? I may have missed it.

DOD details National Guard response to Capitol attack

WASHINGTON – Once the reality of the assault on the U.S. Capitol became apparent, National Guard troops responded appropriately and with alacrity, Department of Defense officials said in a phone

www.nationalguard.mil

From the above I stand corrected,

Was the National Guard asked to be activated PRIOR to Jan 6th, from my reading 340 was activated for exterior crowd control. but not Direct action or seemingly prepped for potential escalations.


With that,

District of Columbia officials knew of the planned protests and had requested some assistance when the "First Amendment demonstrations" were planned for Jan. 5 and 6, McCarthy said. Based on this request, officials called up 340 National Guardsmen to help. The Guardsmen were assigned mainly to traffic control, Metro crowd control, some logistics support and a 40-member quick reaction force to be based at Joint Base Andrews in Maryland.


2pm the Mayor did request additional assets, 1100 but again this was after there fact, Based on intelligence should the 1100 been ready to go not just 340.

No proof Trump authorized 20,000 National Guard for Jan. 6

Twenty million Americans tuned in June 9 as the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S

www.politifact.com

With that, I trailed your post and you were speaking to someone. This whole thing is disingenuous.

20,000 NG Troops. The POTUS does not activate the NG. the Governor Does.

So the POTUS in tern can say we need "20,000 national guard members" But the Governor decides this. NOT even Nancy Pelosi or Chuck Schumer.


BUT Nancy Pelosi is responsible for the security of the Capitol so she should have been coordinate with LEO' and the Governor to have the NG ready to go. I cant say I place direct blame on Pelosi, but there was FAILURE is adequetly staffing a potentially known escalation of violence.

 

[Exactice]

At least I watched the testimony, which is why I'm in this thread. You didn't watch the testimony so you don't even know what is going on or why you're posting here.

I said I watched some of it.... I did NOT say I did NOT watch it at all, I tried to stomach past the mountains of BS. So do not assume I didn't watch it.

great deflection btw... you can move along....I understand how you post

 

[Exactice]

Congress critters enjoy re-election rates of over 90% by using borrow, print and spend “budgeting” nonsense while keeping federal government created problems as ‘issues’ rather than changing failed legislation. It’s become all about team red and team blue while increasing federal power and expense and nothing about we the people.

Bingo, Just like this stupid hearing, Such a distraction for the 2022 midterms.

I want to hear about the people being elected on what the heck they can do for our country. NOT how they can help put committees together to investigate each other more.... FFS.... this is goes against the 3 branches of government.. The idiots still dont see it.

THIS IS IT THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH, while the have rights to do these committee's, they are NOT legislating for the betterment of the people.....same ole BS!

 

[Binary_Digit]

Bingo, Just like this stupid hearing, Such a distraction for the 2022 midterms.

I want to hear about the people being elected on what the heck they can do for our country. NOT how they can help put committees together to investigate each other more.... FFS.... this is goes against the 3 branches of government.. The idiots still dont see it.

THIS IS IT THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH, while the have rights to do these committee's, they are NOT legislating for the betterment of the people.....same ole BS!

There are only 10 members of Congress on this committee, out of more than 500. I know they're not the most competent bunch, but I'd hazard a guess that the entire Congress is not shut down for just these investigations and hearings.

 

[tres borrachos]

I said I watched some of it.... I did NOT say I did NOT watch it at all, I tried to stomach past the mountains of BS. So do not assume I didn't watch it.

great deflection btw... you can move along....I understand how you post

So you didn't watch it. Just what I said. Why are you in this thread?

 

[Binary_Digit]

I said I watched some of it.... I did NOT say I did NOT watch it at all, I tried to stomach past the mountains of BS. So do not assume I didn't watch it.

great deflection btw... you can move along....I understand how you post

It's understandable that folks may not have enough free time to watch all of the hearings from start to finish. So it seems reasonable to me that you would listen with an open mind to those of us who have, rather than purporting to know everything about them while simultaneously acknowledging that you actually don't. And by that I don't just mean the factual content, I mean the overall sense of bias you seem to have imagined they are full of. You seem to have predetermined before hand what they are before even watching the first minute, then you spent a few minutes looking for confirmation.

 

[mrdeltoid]

AIDE DETAILS TRUMP’S RAGE ON JAN. 6​

He [Trump] Knew Crowd Was Armed, but Tried to Loosen Security, Testimony Recounts​

WASHINGTON — President Donald J. Trump knew the crowd he amassed in Washington on Jan. 6, 2021, was armed and could turn violent, but wanted security precautions lifted because he said his supporters were not there to attack him, according to a junior White House aide who testified on Tuesday to the House committee investigating the attack.

In extraordinary blow-by-blow testimony based on episodes she witnessed in the West Wing of the White House, Cassidy Hutchinson, an aide to Mark Meadows, the former chief of staff, revealed that the president had demanded to march to the Capitol with his supporters even as the riot was underway, at one point trying to grab the steering wheel of the presidential limo from a Secret Service agent when he was told he could not go.
...
The shocking description of Trump wrestling the Secret Service for control of his car on Jan. 6 so he could go to the Capitol. Portraying Meadows, her former boss, as a man who abdicated responsibility to the nation and hoped to be pardoned. And saying Trump knew that his supporters had dangerous weapons when he asked them to march on Congress.
=========

Trump Broke Dishes, Splattered Wall With Ketchup During Election Fit, Aide Says

"I would stay clear of him for right now," a valet warned White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson, according to her testimony.

www.huffpost.com

Cassidy Hutchinson: Trump knew Jan. 6 rally attendees had weapons, but didn't care​

This is a smoking gun. Trump actively attempted to overthrow the election in many ways. In the end, he wanted to join the Capitol rioters and wanted to have metal detectors dismantled so that the rioters could enter. His words: "They aren't going to hurt me."

Yeah, not him, just democracy.

Lol, a “ blow by blow testimony” somebody told her happened. What a joke. And the SS people she said saw it, will testify under oath that it didn’t happen. Again, if they had anything, they would charge him.

 

[Exactice]

There are only 10 members of Congress on this committee, out of more than 500. I know they're not the most competent bunch, but I'd hazard a guess that the entire Congress is not shut down for just these investigations and hearings.

Sorta a play on words. I do not disagree with you but lets face it, Pelosi and Schumer wont bring bills to the table now during this hearing because they dont want to distract from it?

Plus they dont even have their own support to pass bills. They cant do it. The created a divide is so extreme people cant even get on board.

So again 100% correct its only 10 members....but NO way are they going to do anything "legislative" to remotely steal the thunder right?

 

[MTAtech]

Lol, a “ blow by blow testimony” somebody told her happened. What a joke. And the SS people she said saw it, will testify under oath that it didn’t happen. Again, if they had anything, they would charge him.

Thank you, Nostradamus.

 

[Exactice]

It's understandable that folks may not have enough free time to watch all of the hearings from start to finish. So it seems reasonable to me that you would listen with an open mind to those of us who have, rather than purporting to know everything about them while simultaneously acknowledging that you actually don't. And by that I don't just mean the factual content, I mean the overall sense of bias you seem to have imagined they are full of. You seem to have predetermined before hand what they are before even watching the first minute, then you spent a few minutes looking for confirmation.

In fairness you have been wonderful in our conversation so I am happy to engage. Especially with you respectable discussions. I have watched enough to have my own opinion. But to be fair thats my own opinion. Its not facts or legal standing. That being said am I not free to have a debate about my opinion? Someone telling me I am not allowed to post or be in a thread because I didnt spend every moment watching the whole thing seems pretty draconian no?

With that, I stated I did watch, but not in its entirety. Hence being in here to catch some items I missed. I respect peoples opinion, but respects is both given and received no? Some people choose otherwise. Again you have been extremely respectful and I trying to return the favor more so again engage in our conversation. (Thank you btw)

Anyways, regarding all that you have posted, I dont recall discrediting your opinion? I might disagree, but I respect it?

On that note, I DO NOT know everything, thats why I am here. If did know everything I would be giving a statement to the appropriate LEO's LOL!

As for predetermined. I did mention the fact of lact of credibility after 6 years of claims against Trump and not a single legal charge against him. Is that not fact?

Anyways, I did mention if a charge was upheld and Trump has to face a court of law. Then so be it, why would I disagree let him have his day in court if there is charges that stick?

 

[Mustachio]

NG was asked but was denied from my understanding to react upon the Capitol breach.

Exactly, Pelosi and McCarthy had the responsibility to be the ones to MAKE the calls, NOT trump.

3.5 hours is dishonest, I watched the tape.

Let me be clear if there is clear cut proof and the DOJ takes it charges it then so be it. I am NOT defending it. What I do think is this is well over blown trying to FIND a connection. JUST like the Mueller Special council, just like Impeachment 1.0 & 2.0 they tried to paint a picture of damning evidence. But NOTHING could stick as it was projection and opinion. More so just pure disdain.... that motivated them to want him guilty period.

I’m sorry I had to edit your comment so that this can fit but it seems to me that you are being intentionally deceitful and are making statements in bad faith either knowing that they are false or trying to mislead while presenting yourself as neutral. Things happened just as I said, have been investigated and you are asking questions that have already been answered - and suggesting people should be blamed who have already been exonerated.

Part 1-

It adds that the previous summer, when civil unrest unfolded in the wake of the police murder of George Floyd, the D.C. Guard was deployed numerous times to protect federal buildings. Its belated mobilization on Jan. 6, Matthews continues, was a jarring break from the norm.

Part 2 -

Four minutes later, according to that Guard timeline, Flynn again “advised D.C. National Guard to standby until the request has been routed” to then-Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy and then-acting Defense Secretary Chris Miller.

And this is general Flynn brother of Michael Flynn, qanon cult member who was already convicted of a felony and then pardoned by Trump. Everybody who you suggested may have some culpability had pleaded for intervention because their lives were in danger so would you like to repeat what you are accusing them of? Failing to do their job of………. ? They reviewed and then approved of national guard presence and then repeatedly called for it and were denied access to it. They have already had this hearing it was bipartisan and Flynn (who is associated with Trump) has been accused of perjury by multiple people so I’m not sure that you ever linked to anything but if you have anything disputing these facts let me know

The above article details a memo sent to the January 6 committee accusing general Flynn of intentionally withholding orders to activate the National Guard

 

[dcsports]

The attempt to call Hutchinson a liar and discredit her only seems to hinge on one small snippet of information that is third hand (steering wheel) and may or not be corroborated by sources that were known to be strong MAGA supporters and 'yes' men to Trump. It has certainly consumed a good portion of this thread.

I don't think it's an attempt to discredit her at all. She seemed very sincere. It's more that people are laughing at the committee, who called an emergency meeting to bring up a relatively low level staffer to give stories about things she 'heard'. Especially amusing that the committee chose to spend time on the 'wheel grabbing' and 'ketchup-gate' incidents

The way I look at it, is if they somehow did come out and refute her, under oath, which is unlikely at this point, it would end up being her word vs theirs, considering only they were present at the time the information was exchanged. [rhetoric removed]

No, it wouldn't be, because she wasn't there. The person who witnessed the incident would be the credible source.

[rhetoric removed]

See above.

 

[Plasmaball]

Except that her testimony depends on what occurred in the limo, which the agents deny...

Also her testimony depends on what actually happened at the capitol, where none of these weapons were recovered...

All of her testimony would be backed by evidence that doesn't exist, or corroborated by actual witnesses who say it isn't true.

Actually her testimony doesn't depends on the limo. That's just one aspect of the overall story.

What you and the others are doing are cherrypicking one part of the story and trying to make it the crux of the whole saga.. therefore if you can bring down this one part then you'll claim the whole thing is bogus.

You guys do it all the time.

I personally don't give a shit about the limo story. It doesn't change the overall facts that Trump knew there was weapons and didn't care that it would put people in danger.
That he is now trying to tamper with he witness via a 3rd party.
That he bilked 250 million out of people over a lie he created and that he is a sore loser just like the people who defend him

 

[Mika-El]

No, it's much more complicated than that.

Without getting into all of the exceptions, hearsay is an out-of-court statement offered as proof of the matter asserted.

The evidentiary rule of not admitting second hand evidence rule applies in most courts but not all administrative tribunals. As for oongressional committees are not court they are fact finders determining if evidence exists to indicate possible criminal behaviour to then refer to court. So in that regard they can consider heresay evidence to decide if that heresay evidence makes it necessary to supeona someone to corroborate directly second that second hand evidence. The Jan.6 Committee does not assume heresay evidence is by itself reliable without further more direct evidence.

Clearly Trumpets on this board have no clue of the Jan 6 Committee mandate and its powers. They are in a cult trance.

 

[Plasmaball]

I don't know what to tell you, It's locking me out with a paywall.

Who were the pro-Trump people who testified about a coup? Why were no weapons recovered at the Capitol if Trump had armed insurrections sent there? What text messages backup this plot?

Plenty of weapons were recovered. Brass knuckles are illegal and a weapon..

If you are gonna lie, don't be so lazy,add some magic to it

 

[jmotivator]

Plenty of weapons were recovered. Brass knuckles are illegal and a weapon..

If you are gonna lie, don't be so lazy,add some magic to it

HAHAHA! Brass knuckles you say? No telling where that insurrection could have gone!!

 

[Josie]

Okay, I haven't really been paying attention to this. Let me see if I have the gist of it.

This aide heard from someone else that Trump tried to grab the steering wheel from the secret service and demanded to be taken to the Capitol? Why did they ask this aide who wasn't there to testify? Has someone who was there testified?

 

[Binary_Digit]

I don't think it's an attempt to discredit her at all. She seemed very sincere. It's more that people are laughing at the committee, who called an emergency meeting to bring up a relatively low level staffer to give stories about things she 'heard'. Especially amusing that the committee chose to spend time on the 'wheel grabbing' and 'ketchup-gate' incidents

Thing is though, that SUV story was maybe about 2% of the overall hearing and maybe about 5% of her overall testimony, but it has consumed about 98% of the right's attention because it's the only example of "hearsay" in witness testimony that has otherwise been insurmountable for Trump's defense. So it's not that the committee wasted a bunch of time on it, instead the rest of us have lol!

 

[Binary_Digit]

Okay, I haven't really been paying attention to this. Let me see if I have the gist of it.

This aide heard from someone else that Trump tried to grab the steering wheel from the secret service and demanded to be taken to the Capitol? Why did they ask this aide who wasn't there to testify? Has someone who was there testified?

It was a litany of eyewitness testimony, with this one example of hearsay sprinkled in.

Engel was there, Ornato was not. Ornato told the story to Hutchinson in front of Engel while Engel remained silent. At no time did Engel correct, amend to, or otherwise discuss the incident with Hutchinson.

It's a distraction. The only weak point in an otherwise damning eyewitness testimony.

She personally witnessed Trump being informed that the crowd was armed.
She personally witnessed Mark Meadows and the Secret Service discussing the likelihood of violence.
She was personally told by Mark Meadows that "Things might get real, real bad on January 6th."
She personally witnessed Mark Meadows having a distinct "lack of reaction" upon first hearing the Capitol was under attack.