2020 Election Fallout Part 16: Public Hearings Are Underway

[Howl]

1 hour ago, Xan said:

How long will Fox let Tucker continue to be a Trump-fluffer?

For as long as the MAGAts are watching Tucker (and they are) and bringing in the bucks via whatever crap he's spruiking on his show. 

8 hours ago, fraurosena said:

It’s not about the witnesses, it’s about what they say. And their stories are damning. They show the true nature of the Trump administration and the lengths it was willing to go to in order to remain in power. They show the true nature of Trump, and his desperate attempts to turn around his election loss. They show how utterly unfit for office he is. They show who aided and abetted Trump in his attempts. And best of all, they lay bare the utter corruption of the Magats within the Republican Party.

There are all true things and what I write below does not take away from your excellent point. 

There are voices telling us to be mindful to not elevate these guys to hero status, that their testimony is self serving. Yes, we're thrilled their testimony is revealing Trump for who he is (and who we've known Trump to be all along) and that is getting out to at least some of Trump's followers.

Remember, though, these lawyers are extremely savvy,  powerful political operators.  They were in the WH/Oval Office for years of Trump skullduggery. They knew exactly what he was about, and could charitably be considered people who aided and abetted Trump's agenda.  Don't forget that the avuncular Eric Herschmann defended Trump during one of his impeachment hearings and said that Obama should be impeached, so f**k him. 

Here's Anna Gifty's take:  

Gifty's tweet thread continues: "Like as entertaining as this all may seem, these witnesses are likely wrapped up in other horrible stuff that aren't even relevant to #January6th. And that's kind of the point - in the public eye these folks want to seem reasonable even though they aren't. 

This morning @SubstackInc I wrote how the former president's allies and friends, like Eric Herschmann, want you to believe that they are reasonable, but they are still very complicit.

If the almost-coup had happened, [... those testifying would] remark that this whole plan was wild, but they’d wipe the bead of sweat off their brow and continue to undermine the rest of us.

Folks talking about "I wanna grab a beer with him." With who? The guy who observed his boss trying to find every which way possible to undermine a democratic process? The soft launch rebrand of Eric Herschmann is in full effect."

Here's Gifty's substack article:  The Great Rehabilitation of January 6th    The former president's allies and friends want you to believe that they are reasonable, but the gag is they are still complicit

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 24, 2022 by Howl

[Alisamer]

I keep hoping that some of this, any of this, will be enough to wake up the Republicans who claim to be essentially moderates. The ones who are for "law and order" and who promote small government. The ones who, if they paid any attention at all and meant what they claim, would never have supported Trump in the first place. 

The basic Magat is beyond help, I think. The far-right people are just evil. And the Q-nuts simply cannot be convinced by any evidence whatsoever. If you honestly believe that JFK and JFK Jr. are still alive and are Trump supporters, no amount of truth is going to get through the delusion. 

But there are plenty of Republicans who claim to be decent people, who ought to be looking at this and realizing the horrific crimes and terrible people they are supporting, even if it's implicit support. 

But it seems those people are few, far between, and quiet. Or else they are liars. 

[GreyhoundFan]

"5 lessons from Thursday’s devastating Jan. 6 hearing"

Quote

There were a number of revelations from the House Jan. 6 committee’s hearings on Thursday regarding former president Donald Trump’s attempt to enlist the Justice Department in his scheme to steal the election. All of them were simply devastating.

For example: Former attorney general William P. Barr made clear he had investigated claims of voter fraud before leaving in December 2020 so as to be able to rebut false claims of fraud. He testified that there may not have been a presidential transition if that had not happened.

We also finally learned the identities of the Republican members of Congress who requested pardons from Trump: Reps. Mo Brooks (Ala.), Matt Gaetz (Fla.), Andy Biggs (Ariz.), Louie Gohmert (Tex.), Steve Perry (Penn.) and Marjorie Taylor Greene (Ga.).

The committee’s star witnesses — Richard Donoghue, former acting U.S. deputy attorney general; Jeff Rosen, former acting attorney general; and Steven A. Engel, former assistant attorney general for the Office of Legal Counsel — all testified that former Justice Department official Jeffrey Clark, whom Trump attempted to name as his acting attorney general, had repeatedly been told that there was no evidence of widespread voter fraud. Clark nevertheless pressured Justice Department leaders to send a letter to states falsely claiming the election was fraudulent to justify pulling back their electors. Coincidentally, it was reported that the FBI searched Clark’s home on Wednesday.

Here are five of the most important lessons from the hearing:

1. Justice Department lawyers repeatedly told Trump he had the facts and the law wrong

Barr had told Trump at least three times that there was no evidence of fraud. After Barr resigned, Trump persisted in calling or meeting with Rosen and his colleagues to insist they investigate fraud. Rosen repeatedly told Trump his allegations had been refuted and resisted efforts to involve the Justice Department because they “were not appropriate" under the law.

Testimony made clear that on multiple occasions, Trump or Clark attempted to push the department to find fraud where none existed. At one point on Dec. 27, Trump, after being told there was no fraud, insisted that the department tell people that there was widespread fraud. Donoghue testified that Trump instructed him to “just say the election was corrupt and leave the rest to me and the Republican congressmen.” Witnesses described Trump as “agitated.”

Throughout these events, Trump seemed to be bent on whipping up his supporters. He told the public that his Justice Department had been “missing in action,” and he enlisted GOP lawmakers to recite his allegations of voter fraud to his rabid fans.

2. Trump tried all sorts of nutty gambits

The Clark letter was only one of several gambits he tried in enlisting the Justice Department to overthrow the election. Engel testified that Trump wanted the department to file a lawsuit with the Supreme Court. Trump also wanted Rosen to appoint a special counsel — crackpot Trump lawyer Sidney Powell, of all people — to investigate fraud claims. Engel and Rosen explained in their testimony why each was unmeritorious.

On New Year’s Eve, the attorneys were asked to “seize” voting machines. They told him there was no basis in law or fact to do so. So instead, Trump called his Homeland Security official Ken Cuccinelli and falsely said the Justice Department said he had authority to seize the machines. Meadows the next day even urged they look into a daft YouTube conspiracy theory that Italian satellites had changed votes. This was “total insanity,” Donoghue said.

Trump was determined to come up with any way to remain in power. The evidence of his corrupt intent should no longer be doubt.

3. The threat of mass resignation stopped Trump from appointing Clark

The committee interviewed all those involved in the infamous Jan. 3 meeting in the Oval Office when Justice Department officials confronted Trump’s attempt to appoint Clark as acting attorney general. Rosen detailed the meeting, saying he wouldn’t overturn the election because that was what the facts and Constitution required. Everyone present supported his position (apparently including then-White House counsel Pat Cipollone).

Donoghue testified that he ripped into Clark’s total lack of experience and competence in the meeting. Clark tried to defend himself, but no one supported him. Donoghue said he and the entire Justice Department leadership would all quit if Trump put Clark in the job. Only then did Trump back down. For the time being.

4. Jeffrey Clark is in deep trouble

Trump started “lawyer shopping” when he ran into resistance from Rosen and Donoghue, prompting Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.) to introduce Trump to Clark. Rudy Giuliani, in video testimony, said there needed to be someone in charge of the Justice Department who was not going to be concerned about their “reputation.”

Rosen testified that Trump brought up Clark’s name to Rosen for the first time on Christmas Eve. Rosen said he called Clark on Dec. 26 to find out what he was up to. Clark revealed to him that he had met with Trump — in violation of a Justice Department rule that only the attorney general and his deputy should communicate with the president. Clark sounded “contrite" and promised not to do it again, Rosen said.

Meanwhile, Perry was telling Trump via White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows to promote Clark as attorney general. Perry also called Donoghue on Dec. 27 at Trump’s behest to discuss allegations of fraud in Pennsylvania. “There was zero” credibility, Donoghue said.

On Dec. 28, Clark sent the draft letter to Rosen and Donoghue, who said he had to read it twice because it was so "extreme.” Rosen was “exasperated” and met with Clark that night. Donoghue told Clark he was asking the Justice Department to interfere in an election, yet Clark did not relent and tried his hand at his own investigations. Despite finding no evidence of fraud, Clark still wanted to send the letter.

Clark at the infamous Jan. 3 meeting told Trump he would do what the president wanted if appointed as acting attorney general. Cipollone said that the letter was a “murder-suicide pact" and that the White House should have nothing to do with it. The witnesses threatened to quit if Rosen was replaced by Clark, insisting Clark was unqualified. After all that, Clark was still coming up with screwball conspiracies later that night. (Clark took the Fifth when questioned by the committee.)

5. We need to hear from Cipollone

Cipollone — like Meadows and Trump aide Daniel Scavino Jr. — has stiff-armed the committee with claims of executive privilege. (The Justice Department officials who testified disagree on that privilege.)

Such blatant disregard for one’s legal obligations — especially for a lawyer like Cipollone — is unacceptable. That Georgia election workers Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss would put their lives and reputations at risk by testifying about the abuse they faced after the election while Cipollone and others refuse to come forward speaks volumes.

 

[GreyhoundFan]

[fraurosena]

1 hour ago, Howl said:

There are voices telling us to be mindful to not elevate these guys to hero status, that their testimony is self serving. Yes, we're thrilled their testimony is revealing Trump for who he is (and who we've known Trump to be all along) and that is getting out to at least some of Trump's followers.

Remember, though, these lawyers are extremely savvy,  powerful political operators.  They were in the WH/Oval Office for years of Trump skullduggery. They knew exactly what he was about, and could charitably be considered people who aided and abetted Trump's agenda.  Don't forget that the avuncular Eric Herschmann defended Trump during one of his impeachment hearings and said that Obama should be impeached, so f**k him. 

Agree completely!

This all is complicated and can -- and should -- be viewed through many lenses.

A single heroic act (such as Pence refusing to go along with Trump's illegal plan, and Bowman's refusal to break his oath) does not a hero make, nor does it negate all the obsequiousness, sycophancy and blind loyalty to Trump and the party line they exhibited before (and since!). Nevertheless, the single heroic act deserves some regard; there are many who could have acted and didn't, and to this day refuse to act. And without some of those single 'heroic' acts, democracy (already hanging on by a thread) would have been destroyed completely.

[Ozlsn]

Spoiler

 

The timing of this is I think also a distraction from the hearings - which makes me wonder what's up next.

[Ozlsn]

The full thread is available here.

The bit that really stood out to me was:

Spoiler

 

This is terrifying.

Also, from the same author, Why ending Roe vs Wade won't placate the Right. Article is from May.

[WiseGirl]

They best get out and vote then.

 

[Ozlsn]

I guess my question is whether the 56% will firstly get out and vote and secondly whether the system is so broken that it won't make a difference.  

Edited June 27, 2022 by Ozlsn
Seriously autocorrect? Seco day??

[GreyhoundFan]

There's going to be an unexpected hearing tomorrow.

Quote

Today, the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection, unexpectedly announced a hearing for Tuesday afternoon, its sixth this month. In a statement, the bipartisan panel said it would “present recently obtained evidence and receive witness testimony.” More details are expected later.

 

[Howl]

Just saw this on twitter.  What the actual gosh darned heck.  So much speculation, we need some Jan. 6 hearings fantasy football league or something.   

I hope it's a damn neutron bomb that gets rid of all the Republicans but leaves Congress and democrats standing. 

ETA: Just checked back on twitter.  Ali Alexander just posted on another social media platform that he's flying to DC tomorrow...lots of speculation that he's the man.  Whatever it is, it's a huge deal.  I think the hearing will begin at 11 am our time.  

I wonder if Ali A testifies, he gets wit sec., because he'll have a big target on his back. 

Edited June 27, 2022 by Howl

[Xan]

The latest that I've read is that Cassidy Hutchinson, the aide to Mark Meadows, will be the surprise witness tomorrow.  

[fraurosena]

11 am is wayyy to early for me to be able to watch live. 

I guess I'll be checking my phone between meetings all afternoon...

Pat Cippilone (sp?) would be a great surprise witness, although the Meadow's aide sounds quite interesting too. Ali Alexander would be quite the bombshell.

J6C is playing this smart. Whetting everyone's curiosity like this with a surprise witness at a surprise hearing puts public attention right back at them, despite the horrors emanating from the SC the last couple of days.

[Dandruff]

52 minutes ago, fraurosena said:

11 am is wayyy to early for me to be able to watch live. 

I guess I'll be checking my phone between meetings all afternoon...

I think the hearing is scheduled for 1 PM (ET), but aren't you in Europe where it'll be 6 hours later?

[fraurosena]

1 hour ago, Dandruff said:

I think the hearing is scheduled for 1 PM (ET), but aren't you in Europe where it'll be 6 hours later?

Yes, if it's 1 pm instead of 11 am, it will be 7 pm over here and I will be able to watch live. 

[Howl]

6 hours ago, fraurosena said:

11 am is wayyy to early for me to be able to watch live. 

This is Central Time in the US,  Washington DC is Eastern time zone, so one hour later.  I hope the time works out for you to listen live, @fraurosena.

I need to recheck the official start time and set up the DVR to record.  

9 hours ago, Xan said:

The latest that I've read is that Cassidy Hutchinson, the aide to Mark Meadows, will be the surprise witness tomorrow.  

There are some delicious possibilities here.  *off the check Twitter!*

[WiseGirl]

A friend's current summary of it all. 

2020 the rehearsal

2022 the dress rehearsal

2024 the final production (coup)

Good grief nail these mfs to the door.

[47of74]

Fuck Face is nervous

Quote

Donald Trump is bracing for an explosive day of testimony from Cassidy Hutchinson, a former White House aide and assistant to chief of staff Mark Meadows who previously told the House select that the former President approved of rioters chanting violent threats against Vice President Mike Pence on January 6, 2021. 

Trump has previously denied reporting on Hutchinson's leaked testimony, claiming on his Truth Social platform earlier this month that he "never said, or even thought of saying, 'Hang Mike Pence.'" 

"This is either a made up story by somebody looking to become a star, or fake news!" he wrote at the time. 

But a person close to Trump said he is nervous about Tuesday's hearing, which will feature live testimony from Hutchinson and "present recently obtained evidence," the committee announced Monday. Prior to the committee's announcement on Monday, this person said Trump was feeling triumphant amid back-to-back Supreme Court decisions protecting a right to conceal carry a gun and ending the constitutional right to abortion.

 

[fraurosena]

"Take the fucking mags away!"

This will be Trump's downfall.

[fraurosena]

Holy moly! The conversations she had with Pat Cippiloni are nuclear level explosive -- and that's an understatement.

 

 

Asked what crimes Cipollone was referring to, Hutchinson said, "Potentially obstructing justice or defrauding the electoral count."

She's now describing Trump grabbing the steering wheel of the Beast and hitting his security when he was told he wouldn't be going to the Capitol. He threw a fit, crying " I'm the fucking president, take me to the Capitol!"

 

[GreyhoundFan]

[fraurosena]

 

[47of74]

52 minutes ago, fraurosena said:

"Take the fucking mags away!"

This will be Trump's downfall.

My biggest wish is wherever he goes to prison they film the entire intake process. 

Oh Lord 

 

[Dandruff]

10 minutes ago, fraurosena said:

 

My, but he uses foul language.

The big(ly) question is whether Trump and justice ultimately meet, and in time and a manner to benefit the country.  That, IMO, is the bottom line.  Meanwhile, I'm enjoying these hearings.

[Howl]

31 minutes ago, fraurosena said:

 

Hopefully, this sill shut down the still common belief that the rioters were antifa.