Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think Cipollone can give much testimony b/c he and Meadows seem to have crimed too.

But at what point do the odds get recalculated? The boat is listing badly and at some point people will jump and try to make the bast deal possible. Cipillone is not looking for elective office so doesn’t need Trump’s endorsement. He probably has a lot else to lose though.

If he’s concerned about a grand jury subpoena he needs to hold out for an immunity deal with DOJ. Better to negotiate an agreement with the J6 Committee to limit the scope of his testimony than have a transcript littered with assertions of a Fifth Amendment or executive privilege. And it’s cleaner to deal with the executive privilege with DOJ as opposed to in a separation of powers context.

I think that 99% of American's who listened to Cassidy's testimony will take the view that Cippillone was one of the few Adults in the Room as far as consistently doing the Country a solid by forcefully pushing back against those who were plotting a coup for a Despot and betraying their country in the process such as :


1)Rudy, " time for combat" Guiliani
2) Jeffrey Clark ( of the" make me Atty Gen and I'll declare Election Fraud in the name of the DOJ "
3) Eastman - Clarence Thomas' former SCOTUS law clerk - receiving text from Ginni Thomas, who as she is married to a Judge on the SCOTUS suggests she is his pantomime
4) Ginni Thomas texting Jordan, Lee, Scott and other Congressman about what Pence should do- in short putting legal opinions in their mouths while living with a Judge on the SCOTUS to justify a coup )
5) Jordan and Lee
6) The Dept of Homeland Security leaders who blocked sharing of Intell of armed hate groups converging on the Capital
7) Each and every Hate Group member who invaded the Capital, murdered police officers trying to defend it and then smeared their feces on the walls
8)The person at the IRS who , in retaliation for them doing their duty, audited Comey and McCabe

Interesting background on why Hutchinson’s testimony was so rushed. Also, we will see Cippolone’s testimony tomorrow.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/10/us/politics/cassidy-hutchinson-jan-6-testimony.html?unlocked_article_code=AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACEIPuonUktbfqYhkT1UaAybIRp8_qRmHmfnE2_s3j2TlLSSEDDZf0-8VAo6b_EGIZ6NlIoV2wzmAWN5EN7k-Avxuy-sVd2pcdz6VmLrW0pIUP3dy7oupQmI925-KB7to_WLkP2f8ce0umPji5kjYdTG5CPTA1SJ3Jw1mpcdkfFqtymVIkvmeapN92dR-3_4iF8o6EW9GPH_WyqGuXxZuO9yGbQXe7B01WoxZWzLQlN2e69EQYVkYSAKGHD4kvzFKuJ4LM8gXPa3_MxclZMH45L4QAWRiJ46pbIYj6qt0LPs5FZFPPw5rWOh1dw&referringSource=articleShare

^ date for Bannon's trial for criminal contempt of Congress is scheduled for July 18th... so this is a last-ditch effort to avoid it.

Bannon is about to go on trial for refusing to comply with his subpoena. This is a face-saving way to crawl his way out of jail and mounting legal costs, which I'm sure Trump has refused to help him with.

Now, I think we're right to be concerned. I wouldn't put it past Bannon to try and use his moment to spout off nationalist nonsense. But if they only use edited clips of his testimony, he won't have as much punch.

Anonymous wrote:They want Bannon to ask to speak publicly so that Trump can get his "side" out. Of course, Bannon won't be televised. But they can use the fact that he wasn't to fool the idiots who still believe in Trump.
"See, they must be hiding something. They didn't let Bannon talk on television." Doesn't matter that there are people in both parties who wouldn't give Bannon, of all people, a live mic. The fact that the Jan.6th committee does it will be seen by the Trump-hive-mind as evidence of deception by the committee.
Of course, it won't change anything, but maybe it will help them raise more funds/steal from the rubes.

They should put him before the cameras, ask him a bunch of benign, boring questions so viewers lose interest, and then thank him for his testimony and dismiss him.

They want Bannon to ask to speak publicly so that Trump can get his "side" out. Of course, Bannon won't be televised. But they can use the fact that he wasn't to fool the idiots who still believe in Trump.
"See, they must be hiding something. They didn't let Bannon talk on television." Doesn't matter that there are people in both parties who wouldn't give Bannon, of all people, a live mic. The fact that the Jan.6th committee does it will be seen by the Trump-hive-mind as evidence of deception by the committee.
Of course, it won't change anything, but maybe it will help them raise more funds/steal from the rubes.

Anonymous wrote:Trump is raging that he doesn’t have his “side” represented on the committee. They want Bannon to have a microphone.
I don’t think the committee needs Steve anymore.
Could the committee just not respond to this letter?

The committee can interview him in private and it should. Just like everyone else has been. It’s not required to put him on television. Trump is so dumb though. Executive privilege is not his waive.

Trump is raging that he doesn’t have his “side” represented on the committee. They want Bannon to have a microphone.
I don’t think the committee needs Steve anymore.
Could the committee just not respond to this letter?

Anonymous wrote:Hmmmm….

Why does Trump want Bannon to testify? The Committee is tough and would, figuratively, cut him down to size if he decides to be obstreperous.

Hmmmm….

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prime time is crime time.

I’m not so sure. If they had something, they would’ve arrested him, not just made a case to the American people.

A congressional committee can’t arrest anyone.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prime time is crime time.

I’m not so sure. If they had something, they would’ve arrested him, not just made a case to the American people.

The committee hearing is separate from DOJ, which can bring charges. The conclusion of the committee hearing is to legislate changes so this can't happen again. They want the hearings open so that the American people can see how close we got to a coup. The committee can't bring charges and I'm not sure what the DOJ issue is. I do wonder if Garland thinks that it would look political or retribution to go after Republicans, and yes this problem is from Republicans only.

It is not a trial. Garland is aware of every procedure and testimony. Even if they had something, they're not going to leave anything on the table. Hutchinson’s testimony brought others forward, There will be more and the finale should be spectacular. Look at everything GOP is throwing out to distract us. Don’t fall for it. They’re lying, crazy, terrified criminals.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prime time is crime time.

I’m not so sure. If they had something, they would’ve arrested him, not just made a case to the American people.

I did not think the Committee had the power to arrest.

I meant prior.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prime time is crime time.

I’m not so sure. If they had something, they would’ve arrested him, not just made a case to the American people.

I did not think the Committee had the power to arrest.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prime time is crime time.

I’m not so sure. If they had something, they would’ve arrested him, not just made a case to the American people.

The committee hearing is separate from DOJ, which can bring charges. The conclusion of the committee hearing is to legislate changes so this can't happen again. They want the hearings open so that the American people can see how close we got to a coup. The committee can't bring charges and I'm not sure what the DOJ issue is. I do wonder if Garland thinks that it would look political or retribution to go after Republicans, and yes this problem is from Republicans only.