Advertisement

Enough about COVID-19. Ever since Nancy Pelosi’s phony January 6 committee premiered its made-for-TV hearings, we’ve known that a much more serious health risk is posed by Trump Derangement Syndrome. We now have scientific proof that TDS is a brain-eating disease.

How do we know? Well, it turns out that when enough brain cells have been consumed by the fiery hatred of Donald Trump, it’s impossible to tell actual evidence from essentially worthless, uncorroborated hearsay and even outright lying. To the patient with this advanced level of brain damage, the only thing that gives such “evidence” value is its ability to put Trump in a bad light and damage his political viability as we careen towards 2024.

The testimony of a former aide to then-White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows about events she said took place on January 6 is perhaps the ultimate example of this. We’ve learned that this “emergency” meeting to quickly make public some fast-breaking testimony was nothing of the sort. It was a lie to create a sense of urgency around the testimony of Cassidy Hutchinson. Why, it was so important, this kangaroo court had to change its plan for a two-week hiatus and hop to it! But by then, they’d already completed four video interviews with her.

So they’d had plenty of time to corroborate her hearsay testimony with the Secret Service but had never reached out. They still could’ve done it during their so-called hiatus. But perhaps they sensed it might spoil a good thing. Wouldn’t want to get in the way of a great anti-Trump story! (Like that fake “pee tape” yarn --- how long were they able to keep THAT going?)

The fact that the committee failed to reach out to the Secret Service has been reported by POLITICO, not exactly a bastion of support for Trump.

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/06/29/jan-6-hutchinson-secret-service-00043164

The leadership behind the J6 committee consists mostly of people with fancy law degrees and lots of experience with hearings and rules of evidence. The hypothesis that they’ve lost billions of brain cells due to TDS explains why they didn’t realize how quickly Hutchinson’s testimony would be demolished by people with firsthand knowledge, and how much that would discredit their entire operation.

No, they were so thrilled with her testimony that afterwards, Liz Cheney gave her a hug. 
Cheney appears to be suffering from the most serious case of TDS to date –- call it “long TDS” –- with most of her higher brain function destroyed.  Another symptom:

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/liz-cheney-republicans-loyal-trump-constitution

Sadly, many in the media are also infected with some form of “long TDS” and are unable to recognize and reject hearsay, either, if it appears to work against Donald Trump. They are so brain-damaged that they report this as actual evidence. They also ignore the complete lack of cross-examination.

As POLITICO reported, attorneys for Hutchinson said Wednesday she stands by “all of the testimony.” But the Secret Service said it would have been a simple matter for committee members to access any documents or witnesses they’d thought might be relevant. They just didn’t do it.

One especially puzzling part of Hutchinson’s testimony is that she claimed to have written a particular note herself, when White House attorney Eric Herschmann says he wrote it. POLITICO and other news outlets are downplaying the significance of this apparent lie, saying it doesn’t matter who wrote the note, as the important thing is that it shows Trump was being advised to immediately instruct supporters to leave the Capitol. They’re failing to ask why the committee chose to call Hutchinson as a witness and not Herschmann. None of the committee’s choices are accidental; there must be some reason why they wanted the note in evidence but not Herschmann as a witness. They preferred Hutchinson on-camera, even if she had to misrepresent the note as hers. We’d like to know why.

Also, Mark Meadows, Hutchinson’s boss at the time, denies that he requested a pardon from Trump over the events of January 6, as Hutchinson testified he did. Here’s an excellent take:

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2022/06/29/mark-meadows-my-aide-is-lying-about-me-requesting-a-pardon-over-january-6-n2609552

Megyn Kelly, no fan of Trump, thinks Trump “embarrassed himself” with his reaction to the outcome of the election, but even so, she says a “first-year law student” could drive a truck through the holes in Hutchinson’s testimony. Actually, we think any reasoned person should be able to do it, no law school necessary.

https://twitchy.com/dougp-3137/2022/06/29/megyn-kelly-explains-why-a-first-year-law-student-could-have-driven-a-truck-through-holes-in-cassidy-hutchinsons-testimony/

That touch of TDS Kelly experienced –- presumably when he made a less-than-gentlemanly remark about her during his presidential campaign –- was perhaps just enough to inoculate her against the more serious and incapacitating form. So even though she still has doubts about Trump’s “temperament,” she’s able to think coherently and objectively about the workings of this committee.

Her video is a must-watch, and reiterates quite bluntly what we’ve been saying. “This committee has one goal and only one goal,” she says. “Stop Donald Trump from running again in 2024. They’re worried he could win. They absolutely loathe him. And they will do what it takes to stop his political resurrection.”

She debunks these hearings in short order, particularly the testimony of Cassidy Hutchinson. She notes all the paraphrases of stories Hutchinson heard secondhand and even features a montage of her using the frequent qualifier “something to the effect of.”

This deficiency obviously didn’t matter to the committee. It “cloaks itself in sanctimony,” Kelly said, “purporting to be a fair-minded, down-the-middle finder of fact, just looking to get to the truth of January 6. IT’S A LIE. And they prove every time they get together that it’s a lie.”

Note: Kelly personally has a view different from mine on Trump’s feelings about the violence at the Capitol; her take-away is that he approved of it. Perhaps some residual mild TDS infection is still lurking in some of her cells, as after chickenpox. She’s to be commended for functioning so well in spite of this.

Kelly also does not mention the denial from Tony Ornato that he had the conversation with Hutchinson described by her in testimony, about Trump attacking Secret Service agents and grabbing the steering wheel. That might have been reported after she made this video, but she doesn’t need it to debunk the hearing.

What she demonstrates in this video is how the testimony might have gone if there'd been any cross-examination. And let me tell you, Megyn would have been a great one to do it. She has got skills.

“I actually think I’m in a unique spot on this front,” she concludes. “I feel no need to defend Trump or his character, as this audience knows. But I know a sham trial when I see one. And this is not justice, it is not fair, and it is not to be trusted.”

Further reading:

https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2022/06/28/j6-committee-just-kneecapped-themselves-over-evidence-in-cassidy-hutchinsons-testimony-n585882

https://dailycaller.com/2022/06/29/january-6-committee-razors-edge-andrew-mccarthy/

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/secret-service-wasnt-contacted-by-jan-6-committee-before-hutchinson-testimony

Andrew C. McCarthy sees this as less of a problem with the witness’s hearsay testimony than it is with the committee’s failure to question and cross-examine.

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/a-closer-look-at-the-hearsay-claims-surrounding-hutchinsons-trump-testimony/

Our arrogant complacency

June 30, 2022

Amidst all the insufferable virtue-claiming of the last week - including the ongoing morality play of the January 6th hearings - I've been pre-occupied by one thought: The Hullabaloo sounds awfully arrogant for a country with 60 million infant deaths on its much-abused conscience. Particularly nauseating examples of the self-deception orgy include the circumlocution of "reproductive freedom" and "women's health-care" to obscure the definitive act of the new Democratic sacrament: the surgical dismemberment of a live baby snatched from its mother 's womb.

How can a country with such a track record be so complacent, especially when our adversaries have directly threatened us over the last fortnight with nuclear war? Although such concerns are seldom raised in polite company, my military career included studying under Professor William Kaufman of MIT. He was the genius who authored, for SECDEF Robert McNamara, the Single Integrated Operations Plan by which American nuclear forces would attack the Soviet Union. The applied mathematics had a seductive logic: numbers of delivery vehicles and warheads, effective mega-tonnage, targets lists arrayed by Overall Probability of Kill (requiring two warheads per target). We tried to ignore the implications of over a thousand attacks by both Blue and Red forces. "We destroyed everything on our target list but would the world survive?" Sorry, but that was well beyond the scope of our classroom problem. Even more worrying, the Soviets engaged in similar war-games but with a critical difference. While Americans typically asked, "How much is enough?" our Soviet counter-parts had an entirely different approach: "How much is demonstrably too much?"

So why would today's Russian and Chinese adversaries be deterred from attacking the US to achieve those interests they consider vital - from Ukraine to Taiwan? Is there something in Joe Biden's halting demeanor that might make them hesitate? Or in the fearsome war-fighting mien of General Mark Milley, best known for suggesting that our armed forces should be imbued with an in-depth knowledge of critical race theory? National security practitioners in both Russia and China routinely point out that the United States is so far the only world power to use nuclear weapons in combat, relatively modest demonstration shots (by modern standards) in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Why should old white men in their dotage be the only ones to enjoy such a useful operational monopoly?

Naturally, those are inconvenient questions to pose with the virtue-claimants still in full cry. For me, one of the most appalling was a Supreme Court demonstrator carrying a hand-lettered sign: JEWS FOR ABORTION RIGHTS. Excuse me? Perhaps those rights were granted sometime after the conflicts in which Ancient Israel was specifically warned against tolerating Canaanite worship of their baby-killing god Molech. https://www.chabad.org/parshah/article_cdo/aid/4372130/jewish/The-Tragic-History-of-Molech-Child-Sacrifice.htm. And how to reconcile abortion with King David's eloquent words in Psalm 139: "You made all the delicate parts of my body and knit me together in my mother's womb...You watched me as I was being formed in utter seclusion, as I was woven together in the dark of the womb.." (Ps 139, 15-16 NIV).

Instead of defiling the Supreme Court, those pro-abortion demonstrators might have considered our history, when Americans were forcibly confronted by the manifold evils of slavery, our long-running foundational sin. On the north wall of the Lincoln Memorial are engraved the immortal words of his Second Inaugural, delivered just 41 days prior to his assassination. "Fondly do we hope ~ fervently do we pray ~ that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue until all the wealth piled by the bondsman's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword as was said three thousand years ago so still it must be said 'the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether.' "

I keep wondering if that same calculus could be applied again - this time to atone for the 60 million infants sacrificed on the unholy altar of Roe v Wade. Would it include prompt mega-deaths from a nuclear strike or the lingering effects of radiation spread downwind from the smoking remnants of America’s great cities? Should we fall to our knees to pray for grace and forgiveness or just shrug and carry on as before, hoping that Lincoln was exaggerating when he declared that the Lord's judgments are "true and righteous altogether?"

Colonel Kenneth Allard, United States Army (Ret.) is a Vietnam-era draftee who became a West Point professor and Dean of the National War College. He is also the author of Command, Control and the Common Defense, winner of the 1991 National Security Book Award. After leaving active duty, he served for nearly a decade as an on-air military analyst for the networks of NBC News.

“This committee has engaged in widespread manipulation of evidence. They’re refusing to provide the testimony of people who dispute the narrative that they’re trying to construct. They are running roughshod over our American ideals of what should happen when you accuse people of crimes, and whether there should be the ability to make a defense or have a cross-examination.”

That was Mollie Hemingway, speaking Tuesday night with Laura Ingraham on FOX News. “I mean,” she said, “those rights are enshrined in the Constitution, and our congressional committees are supposed to honor that in the way they conduct their hearings. That has not been the case since Day 1, and today, this was just absurd.”

“ABSURD” is the word. Hemingway was referring to the testimony of Cassidy Hutchinson, former aide to White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows. Even before it was refuted --- and it quickly was --- it should’ve been seen as the wild hearsay it was, something that would never be allowed in a courtroom, for good reason.


SUMMER SALE: SUBSCRIBE TO MY SUBSTACK NEWSLETTER

This happened during Tuesday’s “emergency” hearing of the January 6 committee, which they called because they thought they had game-changing testimony that would rock the political world! It mostly showed they have rocks in their heads. Hutchinson testified she’d been told that President Trump was so upset and ready to wage insurrection at the Capitol that he assaulted two Secret Service agents in his car and tried to grab the steering wheel.

Very quickly, Peter Alexander of NBC News --- not a news outlet known for its defense of Trump --- refuted this story, tweeting, “A source close to the Secret Service tells me both Bobby Engel, the lead agent, and the presidential limousine/SUV driver are prepared to testify under oath that neither man was assaulted and that Mr. Trump never lunged for the steering wheel.”

As Bonchie at REDSTATE reports (and I can attest), President Trump was known for the respect he always gave Secret Service agents. Of course they’d speak up right away to set the record straight. “The only thing I can take from this is that the January 6 committee is full of idiots,” he writes. “They actually thought they could have an aide spin fanciful, third-hand tales and that there’d be no pushback…We are supposed to believe that Trump fought his way into the front seat of the presidential limo (or a suburban depending on who you ask) as a 74-year-old, overweight man, overtaking two Secret Service agents to ‘grab the wheel’? I mean, if he wanted to go to the Capitol, he was the president. All he had to do was say, ‘Take me to the Capitol.’”

“Honestly, I can’t stop laughing,” he says. “I find this entire episode absolutely hilarious.”

https://redstate.com/bonchie/2022/06/28/surprise-nbc-news-report-blows-apart-january-6th-committee-claim-that-trump-assaulted-secret-service-agents-n585853

Take it from someone who’s personally ridden in “The Beast” with the President –- there is NO WAY he could get to the driver. However, a picture of Trump leaving the rally shows that he was in the SUV. Either way, if this committee cared about the truth, they would’ve checked out this story out and traced it to whoever apparently made it up or grossly exaggerated it. (She testified that she'd heard it from then-White House deputy chief of operations Tony Ornato, who is denying that this happened or that he'd told her it happened.) This is why hearsay testimony is not allowed in courtrooms. It’s just embarrassing, or would be, if the committee had any sense of shame.

FOX News reports that he January 6 committee and the Secret Service are “in discussions” as to whether the two agents will testify on camera. My sense is that this won't be happening.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/secret-service-agents-testify-trump-lunge-steering-wheel-capitol-riot

Here’s another take on the story, complete with Trump’s posts on Truth Social about Hutchinson’s claim, which he called “sick and fraudulent, very much like the Unselect Committee itself.”

http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=63179

“Wouldn’t even have been possible to do such a ridiculous thing,” he continued. (See?)  He went on to deny another of her claims, that he was throwing food. “And why would SHE have to clean it up, I hardly knew who she was?”

Chris Menahan at INFORMATION LIBERATION said, “Hutchinson’s story actually made Trump sound pretty awesome and I must say I’m rather disappointed to learn that it never happened.”

THE PALMIERI REPORT offers a bit more about Hutchinson herself. Their previous report revealed that she’d wanted to work for Trump in Florida after he left the White House but was turned down for the job.

For what it's worth, this report even has a diagram that proves my point that Trump would not have been able to make those aggressive moves in “The Beast.” (Now, there's some solid construction!)

https://thepalmierireport.com/trump-responds-to-sham-jan-6th-panel-witness-fake-story-sick-and-fraudulent/

DAILY WIRE also has a good summary. There was apparently some Secret Service testimony that would “seemingly corroborate or dispute” Hutchinson’s testimony, “but it wasn’t played,” WASHINGTON POST reporter Josh Dawsey tweeted. “Unclear why.”
 It is?

https://www.dailywire.com/news/breaking-report-reveals-top-secret-service-agents-story-of-what-happened-inside-car-with-trump

Let’s move on from this absurdity to something we really should be concerned about. Andrew C. McCarthy has brought up something odd about the FBI’s heavy-handed raids on Jeffrey Clark and John Eastman:  agents were working not on behalf of a U.S. district attorney’s office but for the Justice Department’s Office of Inspector General (OIG). The warrant on Eastman didn’t even mention any specific crime for which the evidence sought by the warrant might be relevant.

As my readers will know, the OIG has jurisdiction only with current federal government employees. They do not investigate crimes. They investigate “to detect and deter waste, fraud, abuse and misconduct involving DOJ programs and personnel, and promote economy and efficiency in DOJ operations.”

McCarthy points out that John Eastman was not a government employee in 2020, much less a DOJ employee (and he certainly isn’t one now). He was Donald Trump’s private legal counsel. So how does the OIG have legitimate cause to be investigating him? Liz Cheney is trying to tie him to Jeffrey Clark, who was acting head of the DOJ Criminal Division in 2020 but has not worked at the DOJ for over a year. And if they’re alleging that Clark was part of a conspiracy to subvert the democratic process after the 2020 election, the OIG doesn’t have jurisdiction there, either. As McCarthy says, “It’s not the IG’s mission to investigate --- much less obtain search warrants to probe --- such felony federal violations as obstruction of Congress and seditious conspiracy.”

So what’s going on? McCarthy thinks Biden’s DOJ is doing it this way to hide the fact that they’re really conducting a criminal investigation of Trump. They’re PRETENDING to investigate only whether Clark engaged in waste, fraud or abuse of DOJ programs. He suspects they went “covertly” to federal judges –- and they’d be able to judge-shop for this –- to obtain warrants that enabled federal agents to “rifle through the belongings of these Trump associates, only after subjecting them to the humiliation of temporary arrest and frisk, without notifying their lawyers.” The prize: all those electronics they’re confiscating --- especially Eastman's, I would think --- with their thousands and thousands of messages to pick through, just to find something, anything, to use against Donald Trump.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2022/06/the-stealth-inspector-general-investigation-of-donald-trump/

…………………..

In related news, Michael Stenger, the former Senate sergeant-at-arms who oversaw security during the January 6 rally, died Monday at his home in Falls Church, Virginia. He was 71, a Marine Corps veteran who spent 35 years with the Secret Service before joining the Senate sergeant-at-arms team in 2011, reaching the top post in 2018. He resigned the day after the January 6 security breach, after Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell requested his resignation.

https://www.theblaze.com/news/senate-sergeant-at-arms-january-6

According to a Senate Rules Committee report, he’d had some “informal conversations” with Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund (who also resigned, along with the House sergeant-at-arms) about the level of need for National Guard troops on that day. Perhaps we’ll find out more about Mr. Stenger’s views at the time concerning that need.

Here he is, from February 2021, offering a brief prepared statement about January 6, as posted by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene.

https://twitter.com/RepMTG/status/1541598258505580545

We have no additional detail about his death at this point, and no reason to think it was related to the current investigation. Please pray for his grieving family and loved ones, who surely don't wish for the media attention they're going to get.

Democrats are irresponsibly demagoging to fire up their far-left base that’s already violently unhinged, in hopes that abortion will save them from oblivion in the midterm elections. I think they’re making the same mistake that many liberals in the media make: thinking that Twitter is America.

A new CBS poll taken after the SCOTUS decision ending Roe found that Americans opposed overturning Roe by 52-31%. Also that 50% of Democrats said this will make them more likely to vote, up from 40% last month. That's obviously giving Democrats motivation to fan the flames.

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/rick-moran/2022/06/26/no-surprises-in-cbs-post-roe-poll-n1608283

But will that bump be enough to make a big difference? And will it hold once all the hysteria dies down and people start to figure out that they’ve been misled about what the ruling really means (the SCOTUS didn’t ban abortion, it just sent the issue back to the states)? Besides, most of the voters most likely to be motivated by this are in blue states, where abortion laws will remain unchanged and possibly get even more liberal.

More to the point, for all the 24/7 focus on abortion, it’s just not that big an issue for most people. CBS also reports that the highest priority issue with voters is inflation, followed by the economy and crime. None of that is good news for Democrats. Abortion came in 6th, with 42% calling it high priority, but of those, many are doubtless pro-life. By comparison, 82% named inflation as high priority. And as the RNC’s Tyler Bowyer points out at this link, the issues that got the least votes for “high priority” were January 6th, climate change, COVID and abortion, or as he puts it, “the entire Democratic platform for 2022.”

https://redstate.com/bonchie/2022/06/26/joe-biden-and-democrats-stare-into-the-abyss-after-latest-poll-drops-n584687