Right. She said that Ornato said something like, “Did you hear what happened in the Beast?” That may be, in fact, what he said. She’s not claiming this incident happened in the Beast.
She did use the term “beast” twice (and “vehicle” several other times). As has been noted, it’s possible that she was paraphrasing the term that she reported Ornato using. From the transcript of her testimony yesterday:
This is a standard argumentation tactic used by those who don’t actually have a factual argument, hence it’s a staple of right-wing types in general and Trumpists in particular. It’s been used for decades by climate change deniers: find a paper with apparent weaknesses that can be attacked – whether the weaknesses are legitimate or not doesn’t matter, as long as the attacks sound good – and use that to undermine the entire body of science.
It’s similar to the gun people disregarding the opinions of folks who misuse terms like magazine, clip, bullet, and cartridge. If you aren’t completely familiar with the proper, esoteric use of technical language, you are not entitled to an opinion.
Here’s a excerpt from the book I Alone Can Fix It about an interaction between Pence’s national security advisor, Keith Kellogg, and Tony Ornato.
Around this time, Kellogg ran into Tony Ornato in the West Wing. Ornato, who oversaw Secret Service movements, told him that Pence’s detail was planning to move the vice president to Joint Base Andrews.
“You can’t do that, Tony,” Kellogg said. “Leave him where he’s at. He’s got a job to do. I know you guys too well. You’ll fly him to Alaska if you have a chance. Don’t do it.”
Pence had made clear to Giebels the level of his determination and Kellogg said there was no changing it.
“He’s going to stay there,” Kellogg told Ornato. “If he has to wait there all night, he’s going to do it.”
Ornato, through a spokesman, denied having this conversation.
If you have two people saying they had a conversation with one guy, and that one guy denying that either conversation took place, it’s kind of dubious to suggest that both of them changed their perspective, and the one guy is the only one saying the unvarnished truth. Or something like that. Sounds familiar at least.
reading this, i would read in that ornato wanted to talk to meadows. hutchinson got to the office first, and he told her. i would think that he wanted more clarification on what meadows was saying about a possible otr movement, and was not happy about what happened to engel.
things were very hot that day and moving fast. it may be now at a year plus away, they see it differently.
IMHO, it wouldn’t matter of Gawd, Himself wrote “She’s Telling the Truth!!” across the sky in mile-high letters of flame.
RE: the Secret Service agents denying the steering wheel incident:
The secret service will deny anything embarrassing to the Presidency.
— Beau of The Fifth Column (@BeauTFC) June 29, 2022
They're duty-bound to do so.
Nothing mysterious about it. The hearing closed with an epilogue about ongoing witness tampering. If she is as low character as you say (and she is a member of the American Right, I will grant you this), she is likely prone to being tampered with.
No idea how this guy claims to know that. I would believe that the Secret Service would refuse to comment, citing their obligation to maintain the privacy of those they’re charged to protect.
Anyway Trump got rid of the mags, knew the crowd was armed and no danger to him, he sent them to Congress to attack, told multiple people Mike Pence deserved death as the attack was occurring, and wanted to lead his army.
Whether or not he tapped his driver on the shoulder is irrelevant.
Oh, and let us not forget this:
The institution might, but individual agents might not.
'This guy" knows a lot.
These particular agents are also super loyal Trumpers. Also, we haven’t heard a single word from either of them, just an anonymous source.
I’ll take Beau’s word over an anonymous source (who is certainly a rabid Trumper as well) claiming to speak for them, while not under oath or using their own identity.
That’s just me though.
OK, why is this guy particularly worthy of being a trustworthy source?
They explicitly said that they were concerned for her safety.
The committee moved up the hearing amid “sincere concerns” about Hutchinson’s “physical security because of what she knows and has revealed to the committee,” according to the report. Because of the concerns, members “felt they couldn’t wait until the House returns from recess in mid-July.”
I strongly suggest you do a little more reading about this.
I don’t think I can convince you. Watch a few of his videos, they are only 5 minutes long usually.
All through the Russian invasion in Ukraine, from before it even started, he was absolutely accurate about everything he said regarding how it would play out, what would happen, etc. He was an operator earlier in life, and definitely saw some stuff. He’s a leftist (a real leftist) who has read a hell of a lot more history than I can realistically ever read. I can’t really give you his CV, but I’ve been watching his channel for a while, and following his Twitter and I have yet to encounter anything inaccurate.
Fake news. Heh
Now, now, let’s be fair here. Rudy is recovering from that vicious dim mak attack and is probably confused . . . and drunk.
my conclusions from all this is that trump could not use the military to stop the electoral count, pence said he could not do it, so he gathered a mob.
i believe trump would think “storming the capital” would be really cool and make him look super strong. he would look amazing at the lead of this mob of people with flags with his name on it.
due to a british carry over the president can only go to the capital with an invite. who needs an invite when you have an armed mob??!
someone did not read the bit of history regarding charles 1.