Cassidy Hutchinson

[GURPS]

There's a Reason Why Hearsay Is Barred from Trials​

According to sworn testimony from Cassidy Hutchinson, a former aide to former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, President Donald Trump lunged at Secret Service in a limo.

Have you ever been in a limo? They're kind of big, right? But Trump lunged across the limo. Did he somehow plow through the barrier typically between people in the limo and outside it? Did he somehow shatter that plexiglass in his lunging? Did the car swerve when he lunged? That testimony would have been a fun cross-examination, but, of course, there was none, so it took us on Twitter to take her claims apart. And finally, Secret Service said, "Nah, that didn't happen." She's out there doing hearsay. Now for a thousand years, the Anglo-American legal tradition has barred the use of hearsay because it is inherently unreliable, and it can't, by definition, be cross-examined.

 

[vraiblonde]

They likely didn't have a business ripped out from underneath them by Trump, as did I.

Let's guess!

Drug smuggler?

Kiddie sex trafficker?

CEO of a fake solar panel "business"?

White House "page"?

 

[GURPS]

Jim Banks Demands White House Surveillance Logs To Vet Contested J6 Testimony


According to multiple sources with direct knowledge of White House staffing on Jan. 6, however, Cipollone was not at the White House that morning.

“Every Trump White House senior staff member knows that Cipollone was not at the White House that morning so that conversation could not have taken place,” one source who spoke on the condition of anonymity told The Federalist. “In Cipollone’s absence, Pat Philbin was filling in for Pat [Cipollone] that morning.”

“Besides the fact that Pat [Cipollone] wasn’t there,” they added, “He simply doesn’t speak like that.”

To independently investigate Hutchinson’s claims, Banks sent a letter to DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas requesting to “review White House gate logs, surveillance video, and all other records that could indicate which of these senior staff were present at the White House during the times referenced in Ms. Hutchinson’s attached testimony.”

The Indiana congressman spearheading House Republicans’ own probe into the Capitol riot after Speaker Nancy Pelosi stripped his appointment as ranking member of the Jan. 6 Committee gave Mayorkas until July 8 to comply.

Banks also sent a letter to Cipollone over the White House counsel’s whereabouts.

 

[GURPS]

F*ck Trump. I hate him. I can't wait until he expires.

You should see help for obsession Transporter

 

[Bare-ya-cuda]

Let's guess!

Drug smuggler?

Kiddie sex trafficker?

CEO of a fake solar panel "business"?

White House "page"?

He was Obama’s fluffer. When trump beat Hillary he lost his contingent position as bill Clinton’s fluffer.

 

[GURPS]

Text Messages Reveal What Cassidy Hutchinson Really Thought Of The January 6th Committee: Report​

 

[vraiblonde]

Those with knowledge of the episode also should testify under oath.

This is really annoying. It's not like the players can just take the stand - they have to be called to testify. And this Senate committee isn't going to do that, just like they didn't verify Hutchinson's claims before trotting her out there. Normally there would be a defense team who would subpoena these folks but, well, there is no defense team.

Yet the bots persist - "Oh, they should testify then! If they don't it means Cassidy was telling the truth!"

Idiots. Sofa king stupid.

 

[Hijinx]

This is a hearing where Trump has already been found guilty and he doesn't get a chance to prove himself innocent. JUST AS NANCY PLANNED.

 

[GURPS]

“There’s a lot of what Ms. Hutchinson said that is true. Certainly [Trump] wanted to go to the Capitol, that much we know. He said that publicly, he reiterated that inside the car,” a source close to the Secret Service told The Hill on Tuesday.

But the agency has also pushed back on Hutchinson’s account that Trump had lunged for the SUV’s steering wheel, and then towards the neck of Secret Service agent Robert Engel, after being told he was going back to the Oval Office — and not to the Capitol — following his defiant speech on the Ellipse.

Those acts of aggression, Hutchinson said, were relayed to her at the White House shortly after the rally by Tony Ornato, who upset Secret Service tradition by temporarily serving as Trump’s deputy chief of staff for operations. Engel was in the room during that conversation, she added, and did not dispute the details.

Both Ornato and Engel, who remain active Secret Service agents, have said they are willing to testify under oath to dispute Hutchinson’s narrative, even as they have refused to speak publicly about it. The unnamed driver, the agency has signaled, is also denying her account.

“Ornato is a red herring,” the source said, noting that he was in his office at the time and not at the rally.

“There are three people in that vehicle: Bobby Engel, President Trump and the limo driver,” the source said, and both agents are “saying that did not happen.”

In denying Hutchinson’s second-hand account, the traditionally taciturn Secret Service has stepped into a firestorm of political controversy, lending ammunition to Trump’s allies, who are playing up the dispute in an effort to discredit all of Hutchinson’s testimony.

[clip]

Hutchinson is not the only one under scrutiny. In the days since her testimony, a number of Republicans have also emerged to question the credibility of Ornato.

One Pence official pointed to Ornato refuting a Washington Post account of a conversation in which Pence National Security Advisor Keith Kellogg warned against Ornato acting to remove the vice president from the Capitol on Jan. 6.

“Those of us who worked w/ Tony know where his loyalties lie,” Olivia Troye, a former Pence advisor and high-profile critic of Trump, wrote in sharing the article. “He should testify under oath.”

Alyssa Farah, a former White House director of strategic communications, also complained that Ornato denied a conversation in which she said she urged him to warn the press before chemical irritants were used to clear a park near the White House in 2020.

“There seems to be a major thread here… Tony Ornato likes to lie,” Rep. Adam Kinzinger (Ill.) one of two Republican members of the committee, said, pointing to Farah’s tweet.

Secret Service denial of Hutchinson story fuels attacks from both sides

The Secret Service is doubling down on its denial of an alleged altercation between former President Trump and his security detail on Jan. 6 of last year, providing a rare defense of Trump’s …

thehill.com

 

[GURPS]

"That did not happen"​

Meanwhile, the Secret Service refuses to remain silent about their own testimony. That may earn them some animosity on Capitol Hill, but it also puts a lot of pressure on the J6 committee to disclose what Ornato and Engel had already told them about the incident and whether they took basic steps to check Hutchinson’s new account. At the very least, this continued pressure from the Secret Service may end up forcing the committee to take testimony in public from Ornato and Engel that will damage their star witness — which they clearly have been trying to avoid.


Byron York picks out why the committee appears to have suckered itself into this credibility crisis:

The former top aide to White House chief of staff Mark Meadows sat for not one, not two, but three interviews with the committee before, in a fourth session, offering the story that then-President Donald Trump physically attacked his own Secret Service detail in an armored SUV on Jan. 6 in an effort to force the Secret Service to drive him to the Capitol. What did Hutchinson say in those first three committee interviews, all videotaped and transcribed? Why did she wait until the fourth interview before relating the SUV allegation?
Normally, congressional committees do not like it when witnesses withhold information, especially in multiple appearances. The committee offered no information about the circumstances of Hutchinson’s testimony. It appeared to use a few clips from her earlier interviews, but even that is not clear. In any event, it provided no transcripts, no full videos, no nothing beyond the bits chosen by the producers.
Likewise with the committee’s interviews of the two White House staffers involved in Hutchinson’s story, then-deputy chief of staff Tony Ornato and Secret Service agent Robert Engel. We learned through reporting that the committee had interviewed them, too, but the committee never mentioned that simple fact during the Hutchinson testimony. Why not? Well, it might be because at the time the committee did its interview or interviews with Ornato and Engel, Hutchinson had not yet offered the SUV story, so the committee did not know to ask them about it.
Then one might ask: Why not bring Ornato and Engel back in and ask them about Hutchinson’s new story? Apparently, the committee was in too big of a hurry to do that. Members worried the blockbuster story would leak and drain the drama from the next episode. So they called a surprise hearing and rushed the SUV story into the public conversation without checking with other witnesses. Also, there was one more person involved — the driver of the SUV — and it is still not clear whether the committee has spoken to him. If it has, it hasn’t said a word about it. If it has not, that’s one more source it did not check before going public with Hutchinson.

The Secret Service made it plain yesterday that the driver also disputes Hutchinson’s story. That’s three against one on a hearsay matter that the committee largely didn’t need in the first place.

It’s all so unnecessary — and had the committee oriented itself in a properly adversarial format, one they likely would have avoided. On my Tuesday podcast, I discussed that aspect and the Hutchinson dilemma in general with attorney and legal analyst Paul Mirengoff of Rinsgide at the Reckoning, who agreed that this was a stunning and unforced error on the committee’s part. They needed Hutchinson to remain as credible as possible to bolster her standing on the single-source eyewitness testimony she provided. Having her deliver explosive and yet apparently unfounded hearsay demolishes the value of her other testimony, legally and likely politically as well.

 

[GURPS]

J6 Committee Members Founder Badly When Asked About 'Corroboration' for Cassidy Hutchinson Claim​

From Hot Air:

In fact, the committee has gotten rather quiet about their due diligence on vetting this story before putting it on national television:

The Jan. 6 Committee Tuesday did not respond to a request for comment from Fox News Digital asking if it has attempted to speak to Ornato or Engel since the hearing. It also did not respond to questions on if it reached out to the Secret Service to verify the allegations, if there may be further subpoenas related to Hutchinson’s claims, or if it’s taken any other actions to verify what she said.
USSS spokesperson Anthony Gugliemi said the agency does not have any information to share when asked if the committee has taken further steps to verify Hutchinson’s claims.

Gugliemi said that the Committee had not reached out to them over the 10 days before Hutchinson’s latest testimony, indicating that the Committee hadn’t reached out to them to corroborate the claim before putting her on before the world.

Committee members Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) and Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) appeared on shows on Sunday.

Lofgren told CNN’s “State of the Union” that they didn’t ask witnesses to corroborate other witnesses.

A member of the Jan. 6 committee indicated former White House counsel Pat Cipollone was not directly asked to corroborate or respond to Cassidy Hutchinson’s testimony that he had advised former President Donald Trump against going to the Capitol on Jan. 6.
Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) said on Sunday that Capitol riot investigators do not call witnesses to “corroborate other witnesses” but stressed that Cipollone provided testimony that “does not dispute” what Hutchinson told the committee.

Then Kinzinger was on ABC with George Stephanopoulos. But Stephanopoulos made the point that they didn’t ask Cipollone to corroborate the specifics of Hutchinson’s testimony.

It’s been reported that the committee didn’t ask Mr. Cipollone to corroborate the specifics of Cassidy Hutchinson’s testimony. What’s the reasoning behind that?
REP. ADAM KINZINGER (R-IL): Well, look, we — it was an eight-hour interview. We went through a lot of stuff. And as Zoe said, he did not contradict anybody.
Look, we’re not — first off, we’re not going to bring somebody in and just sit around and ask them about what other people said, too. We’re getting their information, their front, position. And I think it’s very clear, you’ll see over the next couple of hearings a little of what he said. Certainly you’ll see a lot of that in the report. But at no point was there any contradiction of — of what anybody said. But the rest I’ll have to leave to the presentation for the — for the committee.

If you don’t ask him the question then yes, you’re likely not to get a contradiction. But I’m not sure what they thought this proves any way, even if this part of what she said was true. He, of course, wouldn’t know anything about her other testimony about what happened in the car, since he wasn’t there; he’s not repeating things he didn’t see, like her.

 

[GURPS]

January 6 Committee Downgrades Secret Service Story from Seizing the Wheel to ‘Heated Discussion’​

The testimony was a significant step back from claims last month by former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson — based on hearsay — that Trump had tried to wrest control of the vehicle from the Secret Service.

Hutchinson’s claimed were immediately disputed by the Secret Service agents she named, Tony Ornato and Bobby Engel. Rep. Elaine Luria (D-VA) cited Ornato claiming in an earlier interview that Trump had been “irate.” She did not mention Hutchinson’s claims.

Rep. Luria then cited another witness, retired D.C. Metro Police Sergeant Mark Robinson, who was not in the vehicle with Trump but was in the motorcade. Sgt. Robinson — who could only offer hearsay evidence — said on video that he heard that the president was “upset” and that there had been a “heated argument or discussion about going to the Capitol.”

 

[vraiblonde]

Where's Cassidy Hutchinson's dawn raid? Where's her perp walk in front of the conveniently just happened to be there CNN cameras?

Isn't that what they do with people who lie to Congress?

 

[Kyle]

Where's Cassidy Hutchinson's dawn raid? Where's her perp walk in front of the conveniently just happened to be there CNN cameras?

Isn't that what they do with people who lie to Congress?

Seems only under "very specific" conditions.

 

[GURPS]

'I'm an Insurrectionist' - Cassidy Hutchinson Texts Shatter Her Testimony​

According to The Federalist, they now have more texts from Hutchinson that further blow up her credibility.

Hutchinson commiserated with other targets of the probe about how little information she had about any wrongdoing that day, and lamented how corrupt the politicized committee was. Far from being upset with Trump, Hutchinson repeatedly spoke in favor of him and his presidency.
“I would rather shoot myself dead into the Potomac than see marine one flying around this city without 45 again,” Hutchinson wrote in one message nearly three months after the Capitol riot.
In November 2021, Hutchinson was among the first former White House staffers to be subpoenaed by the Select Committee. In the weeks and months following, Hutchinson continued to disparage the politicized committee in private, and repeatedly joked about the same riot she now says leaves her with emotional scars today. Six days after she was issued a subpoena, Hutchinson called the Jan. 6 panel a “phony committee.” Around the same time, she told a former colleague her testimony would have nothing to offer.
“Other than a handful of irrelevant texts, I have literally no documents or anything they’re asking about,” one ex-White House staffer texted her.
“Same,” she wrote back.

About being subpoenaed in November, she joked that they were “f**ked by Bennie Thompson,” who is the Chair of the Jan. 6 Committee.

From Townhall:

Hutchinson also was using “STOP THE STEAL” in messages, and had been at the U.S. Capitol on January 5, 2021 to “see our PEOPLE.” What’s more, she joked with a friend about having “an insurrection at parc Chelsea,” a D.C. apartment building, on “jan 6, 2023.” There was also a message in which she said she’d use a picture of President Trump’s rally outside the White House on January 6 as her Zoom background when she was deposed by the committee.

Hutchinson also detailed a conversation that she said she had with someone in D.C. while she was wearing a “45” t-shirt after Jan. 6.

Person on sidewalk: your sweatshirt says 45.
Me: yes
Person: like, Trump?
Me: yes
Person: stares
Me: I’m an insurrectionist.
And then I put my headphones in. The end.

 

[GURPS]

January 6 Star Witness Cassidy Hutchinson's Credibility Takes Another Brutal Hit​

The biggest hit to Hutchinson’s credibility was the unearthed texts showing that she considered herself an insurrectionist and called Cheney and Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL), the two Republican traitors on this committee, egomaniacs.

Hutchinson’s testimony is shoddy at best, and why would she work for such an unpatriotic man for weeks? Does she still consider Cheney an egomaniac? In a sane world, Hutchinson’s play for a six-figure book deal and media contributor agreement with a liberal network should have ended when her lies were exposed. Then again, CNN hired professional liar Andrew McCabe, former deputy director of the FBI, to be a contributor so who knows.

 

[vraiblonde]

I'd be interested in knowing the real story behind all this. Not just this bimbo, but all of them.

 

[herb749]

I'd be interested in knowing the real story behind all this. Not just this bimbo, but all of them.

Just check their bank accounts .

 

[Hijinx]

Opinions are like rectums, everyone has one, but here is mine.

This whole thing was a farce meant to keep trump from running again, and it has backfired on them.
Instead of having people believe there was an insurrection it has proven that the riot was actually planned and put together by the FBI the Capitol police and Nancy Pelosi. They followed up the nastiest piece of political work ever---The Russian Hoax----with an even nastier insurrection hoax,

Pelosi should be going to jail as an accessory to the murder of Ashli babbitt.

 

[vraiblonde]

Just check their bank accounts .

That's what makes the most logical sense, but I struggle with it because I can't relate. Put yourself in that position: would you turn on someone who had been good to you and gave you opportunities, align yourself with their enemies who are trying to have them actually imprisoned for something they didn't do, would you lie and completely compromise your integrity.....for money?

What kind of person does that?