Alex Miller—fear and blood
National
June 30, 2022
On June 27, 2022, CNN was aghast with breaking news that the 1*6 Commission announced that they would have an impromptu hearing but wouldn’t disclose who was testifying.
The “star” witness was Cassidy Hutchinson who was a top aide to former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows. Just hours after her public testimony the statements she made were being debunked as f**e news.
The damage was so bad that the day after she testified the new talking point was to ignore what she said and focus on Trump.
“This obsessive focus over whether Trump got physical when he wasn’t allowed to go to the Capitol misses the point of Cassidy Hutchinson’s testimony. No one’s disputing that he was irate and demanded to go. And her other testimony is much more damning,” Vice News chief political reporter said in a comment that was reposted by CNN’s Jim Acosta.
As the days go on multiple portions of Hutchinson’s testimony have been discredited.
Multiple news sources have reported that Secret Service agents are ready to testify that at no time did then-President Trump ever try to assault a Secret Service agent and take over a vehicle to drive to the Capitol.
Another ABC News report found that a letter Rep. Liz Cheney used to support Hutchinson’s testimony was also very f**e news.
From ABC News:
At Tuesday’s J*** 6 c*******e hearing, Rep. Liz Cheney displayed a handwritten note which Hutchinson testified she wrote after Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows handed her a note card and pen to take his dictation.
Sources familiar with the matter said that Herschmann had previously told the committee that he had penned the note.
“The handwritten note that Cassidy Hutchinson testified was written by her was in fact written by Eric Herschmann on J****** 6, 2021,” a spokesperson for Herschmann told ABC News Tuesday evening.
“All sources with direct knowledge and law enforcement have and will confirm that it was written by Mr. Herschmann,” the spokesperson said.
Oh, and there’s more…
Hutchinson claimed that she spoke with White House Counsel Pat Cipollone the morning of 1*6 telling requesting that she tell Chief of Staff Mark Meadows not to allow President Trump to go to the Capitol that day.
Hutchinson testified that Cipollone said, “We’re going to get charged with every crime imaginable,” if Trump went to the Capitol.
There’s just one problem…According to reports Cipollone wasn’t in the building at the time Hutchinson said the discussion took place.
So what does Rep. Adam Schiff have to say about all this?
On the evening after the hearing, Schiff appeared on CNN and was asked about the growing discrepancies in Hutchinson’s testimony.
All he said was “I can’t comment on other testimony before the Committee.”
That tells you everything you need to know.

====================
I can't stand this. I must respond. All these things since the beginning were massive concocted farce. Designed to convict president Trump since it started in 2016. Nothing had been proven, yet they relentlessly pursue evil schemes until this innocent man is convicted.

Facts of the matter, and in particular the J*** 6th event. Pelosi was overall in charge of Congress. The flow of responsibility must start from her. And when she relinquished, denied that responsibility, she was in dereliction of duty.

President Trump offered her security forces from 10,000 to 20,000 National Guards. Three times offered from Jan. 3,4,5 was suggested by the Nat. Defense Dept., proven by Kash Patel former Chief of Staff to Acting Sec. of Defense Miller. Pelosi and Mayor of DC, Bowser, refused/denied to accept. Had this 20,000 National Guards been accepted, the mayhem could not have happened. That was the moment that Pelosi was in dereliction of her duties to protect Congress.

Responsibility of president Trump ended upon the rejection and refusal of the security offered to Pelosi and Bowser. That chain of command must start from Pelosi. Fact of the matter was the Chief C*****l P****e Officer wanted badly that added security. Pelosi ignored and neglected that.

This was designed on purpose to frame up so many lies and falsified events and issues against Trump. Pelosi denied the admission of Jim Jordan and Jim Banks, of GOP to present and cross examine the testimonies of the witnesses. No representation was allowed from the party accused. The breakdown of falsified evidences and tutored witnesses to lie. Doctoring of evidences. All of them were framed up to convict Trump. Liz Cheney's lies, Cassidy Hutchinson lies, and all the testimonials presented sounded farces and tutored by the framers of these h**xes. All the characters on this mayhem were liars and had malicious motives to convict Trump. And Pelosi was the framer. She must be held responsible for dereliction of duties, at the end, she must be locked up.

At the end:
John 8: 31-32 The T***h Will Set You Free!

Alex Miller—fear and blood
National
June 30, 2022
On June 27, 2022, CNN was aghast with breaking news that the 1*6 Commission announced that they would have an impromptu hearing but wouldn’t disclose who was testifying.
The “star” witness was Cassidy Hutchinson who was a top aide to former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows. Just hours after her public testimony the statements she made were being debunked as f**e news.
The damage was so bad that the day after she testified the new talking point was to ignore what she said and focus on Trump.
“This obsessive focus over whether Trump got physical when he wasn’t allowed to go to the Capitol misses the point of Cassidy Hutchinson’s testimony. No one’s disputing that he was irate and demanded to go. And her other testimony is much more damning,” Vice News chief political reporter said in a comment that was reposted by CNN’s Jim Acosta.
As the days go on multiple portions of Hutchinson’s testimony have been discredited.
Multiple news sources have reported that Secret Service agents are ready to testify that at no time did then-President Trump ever try to assault a Secret Service agent and take over a vehicle to drive to the Capitol.
Another ABC News report found that a letter Rep. Liz Cheney used to support Hutchinson’s testimony was also very f**e news.
From ABC News:
At Tuesday’s J*** 6 c*******e hearing, Rep. Liz Cheney displayed a handwritten note which Hutchinson testified she wrote after Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows handed her a note card and pen to take his dictation.
Sources familiar with the matter said that Herschmann had previously told the committee that he had penned the note.
“The handwritten note that Cassidy Hutchinson testified was written by her was in fact written by Eric Herschmann on J****** 6, 2021,” a spokesperson for Herschmann told ABC News Tuesday evening.
“All sources with direct knowledge and law enforcement have and will confirm that it was written by Mr. Herschmann,” the spokesperson said.
Oh, and there’s more…
Hutchinson claimed that she spoke with White House Counsel Pat Cipollone the morning of 1*6 telling requesting that she tell Chief of Staff Mark Meadows not to allow President Trump to go to the Capitol that day.
Hutchinson testified that Cipollone said, “We’re going to get charged with every crime imaginable,” if Trump went to the Capitol.
There’s just one problem…According to reports Cipollone wasn’t in the building at the time Hutchinson said the discussion took place.
So what does Rep. Adam Schiff have to say about all this?
On the evening after the hearing, Schiff appeared on CNN and was asked about the growing discrepancies in Hutchinson’s testimony.
All he said was “I can’t comment on other testimony before the Committee.”
That tells you everything you need to know.

Any real experts here?
So.... while Pelosi is making up her own rules as she goes along.....if the legislative branch has 14,000 documents and 1000 witness depositions and testimony....
if it was to move to the executive branch and a real court with cross-examination of witnesses.... would the Trump team have access to all that material ...... which is in possession of the legislative branch and not the executive branch..... does "DISCOVERY" mean Pelosi has to turn over only some of the stuff or ALL, including exculpatory, stuff... or maybe none of it, if Pelosi deems it?
Not that I don't trust the fine upstanding lady, gag, but she would shrivel up if she got wet.

What's wrong is this committee is that it is not a court of law, so anything goes with regard to who they decide call to testify and, more importantly, who they DON'T call. Cross-examination is also expected in a court, but not with this committee. They can ask wh**ever loaded questions they want without any rebuttal from Republicans.

It is a one-sided, biased kangaroo court - a court that ignores recognized standards of law or justice, carries little or no official standing in the territory within which it resides, and is typically convened ad hoc. A kangaroo court may ignore due process and come to a predetermined conclusion.

Due process" is NOT what this committee is about!

Emily,,, what in the world makes you and the others even think for one moment that this is a court of law: It is not! only an investigation, one which was rejected by the perpetrator's and so the American people were left to conduct a special investigation of their own without any input from the side of the perps. Republicans that would be if you have lost track.. the guilt lies heavily on the heads of the the trump troops.. and with blessings will bring orange suits and closed cells to the head schemers..

Emily,,, what in the world makes you and the others even think for one moment that this is a court of law: It is not! only an investigation, one which was rejected by the perpetrator's and so the American people were left to conduct a special investigation of their own without any input from the side of the perps. Republicans that would be if you have lost track.. the guilt lies heavily on the heads of the the trump troops.. and with blessings will bring orange suits and closed cells to the head schemers..

Permafrost....what in the world makes you think that I called it a court of law! I said it was the OPPOSITE of a lawful court. I said it is a kangaroo court. There cannot be due process with a one-sided, biased, bitter group of Trump h**ers.... I put the definition of a kangaroo court in my post you responded to. Read it again, and don't lie about what I said. (You lie a lot. Did you go through your life lying - you must have, it comes so easily to you.)

Regarding rejection: Jim Jordan and Jim Baker were chosen to be on that "committee" and Nancy Pelosi clearly said she would not allow it. That is what rejection is. According to her, she didn't like "statements" Jordan and Baker have made....yet she was okay with appointing 7 Democrats (three of whom v**ed to impeach Trump and one who was the chairman of one of the impeachment committees) and 2 RINO's from the Republican party who have both made it abundantly clear they h**e Trump! Of course you won't accept that because it really points to Pelosi's bias and serious TDS, so you will have to lie about that, too.

Does lying and c***ting bother you Dems? Or is it that you think you have the right to lie and c***t simply because you don't like what the opposition is saying?