Jan 6 Hearings Follow-Along & Commentary Thread (Starts Jun 9, 2022)

Moderating:

Ok, I realize the discussion over the alleged Trump Lunge and Clavicle Grab™ originated with the January 6th Committee hearing of June 28, 2022, which is why I’ve let it run on for so long. But it has become a distraction from the totality of that proceeding. I think all that needs to be said has already been said on the subject.

Anyone who feels otherwise is welcome to start a new thread to discuss this narrow issue, which has occupied now nearly 500 posts since the beginning of that hearing. Link back to this one if it is helpful. But no more discussion on this issue in this thread, please.

Thanks.

Thank you. That horse had definitely gone to the Rainbow Bridge.

When is the next hearing?

I’m not sure we know yet. Mid-July is best I’m aware of. Maybe someone else has better information, though.

Don’t think this will go against any mod notes.

It does not matter how long Trump has left. The hearings need to be a wake up call for those that want to try to do this again.

This is why the hearings are so important. The hearings need to be complete, and public.

Unfortunately, it’s also a map to the minefield of how to ignore and subvert the law.

So long as it pertains to the Committee’s hearings and doesn’t further discuss the “did he, didn’t he?” aspect of the lunge 'n grab or Huchinson’s veracity as a witness, it’s fine.

Can you clarify this?

Does this effectively mean that anyone can treat the “lunge 'n grab” and anything else in Hutchinson’s testimony as factual and no one can say otherwise? (It’s hard to imagine you’re saying no one can discuss the facts alleged in her testimony at all.)

Perhaps you could address these issues instead:

  1. The Secret Service informed Trump on 1/6 at his rally that there were people in the crowd with weapons.
  2. Trump acknowledged this and said they were not there to hurt him.
  3. Trump asked that the metal detectors be removed. Knowing that they were armed.
  4. Trump then asked them to march to the Capitol and give them hell, knowing that they were armed.
  5. Trump wanted to lead the march to the Capitol, but was denied by the Secret Service.
  6. Trump returned to the White House and threw a temper tantrum while democracy was being attacked.
  7. Trump approved of the hanging of his Vice President by an armed mob.

You’re not alone https://www.salon.com/2022/06/30/democrats-heres-a-thought-stop-retreating-stand-up-for-your-own-for-once/

The portion of her testimony that was hearsay, pertaining to the lunge 'n grab, is over.

You can discuss the factual nature of the rest of her testimony that covered her direct conversations with others (such as the valet or Mark Meadows) and things she directly observed.

Since she was the sole witness on the 28th, I’m not stopping discussion about anything else.

If I may, I think the reason Trump wanted the metal detectors (the magnetometers or Mags) removed was so he would have a better photo op. More people, makes a better picture. We’ve seen that before.

Those that came armed already had a plan, and probably didn’t give a hoot about Trump’s address. Many moved towards the Capitol way before Trump’s rally ended.

Cassidy Hutchinson, while there, was in the staging tent behind the stage and probably heard little of his speech. Probably on the phone to others half the time. I’m sure all such events, be it a famous band or the President are similar.

Ms. Hutchinson did her best to recall what she was either sure of, or was told. She did a hell of a good job.

It’s very likely those armed people were at the Capitol. There were no metal detectors at the Capitol windows they climbed through. All those backpacks the insurrectionists wore weren’t just to carry their lunch. A better question is why didn’t the police arrest anyone they knew was carrying a gun? It’s illegal in DC.

They where outnumbered 100 to 1.

But we are getting away from the subject of the actual hearing.

Very possible. My question was about what was the practical import of Trump wanting to remove the magnetometers, meaning, did this result in an increase in - or really have anything to do with - the number of armed people attacking the Capitol?

Looking at the transcript of the testimony:

CASSIDY HUTCHINSON: When we were in the offstage announce area tent behind the stage he was very concerned about the shot, meaning the photograph that we would get, because the rally space wasn’t full. One of the reasons which I’ve previously stated was because he wanted it to be full and for people to not feel excluded because they had come far to watch him at the rally.

And he felt the mags were at fault for not letting everybody in. But another leading reason and likely the primary reason is because he wanted it full and he was angry that we weren’t letting people through the mags with weapons, what the Secret Service deemed as weapons and are — are weapons.

But when we were in the offstage announce tent, I was part of a conversation — I was in — I was in the vicinity of a conversation where I overheard the President say something to the effect of, you know, I - - I don’t effing care that they have weapons.

They’re not here to hurt me. Take that effing mags away. Let my people in. They can march to the Capitol from here. Let the people in. Take the effing mags away. [End Videotape]

LIZ CHENEY: Just to be clear, Ms. Hutchinson, is it your understanding that the President wanted to take the mags away and said that the armed individuals were not there to hurt him?

CASSIDY HUTCHINSON: That’s a fair assessment.

LIZ CHENEY: The issue wasn’t with the amount of space available in the official rally area only, but instead that people did not want to have to go through the mags. Let’s listen to a portion of what you told us about that. [Begin Videotape]

CASSIDY HUTCHINSON: In this particular instance, it wasn’t the capacity of our space. It was the mags and the people that didn’t want to come through. And that’s what Tony had been trying to relay to him that morning. You know, it’s not the issues that we encounter on the campaign. We have enough space, Sir. They don’t want to come in right now.

They — they have weapons that they don’t want confiscated by the Secret Service. And they’re fine on the mall. They can see you on the mall and they’re — they want to march straight to the Capitol from the mall. [End Videotape]

LIZ CHENEY: The President apparently wanted all attendees inside the official rally space and repeatedly said, quote, “They’re not here to hurt me.” [Begin Videotape] And — and just to — to be clear. So he was told again in — in that conversation — or was he told again in that conversation that people couldn’t come through the mags because they had weapons?

CASSIDY HUTCHINSON: Correct.

LIZ CHENEY: And that people — and he — his response was to say they can march to the Capitol from — is it from the ellipse?

CASSIDY HUTCHINSON: Something to the effect of take the effing mags away. They’re not here to hurt me. Let them in. Let my people in. They can march to the Capitol after the rallies are over. They can march from — they can march from the ellipse. Take the effing mags away. Then they can march to the Capitol. [End Videotape]

Transcript of the sixth Jan. 6 committee hearing on its investigation : NPR

Based on all this, it looks to me like all the armed people were there anyway. They were hanging out on the Mall and not going into the rally because of the magnetometers. They intended to march from the Mall directly to the Capitol. So whether they were or weren’t let in to the rally had nothing to do with their participation in the attack on the Capitol.

Trump’s issue, as has been his wont, was his obsession with crowd size. He needed to have a huge crowd show up in photos of the event, and he was concerned that if these people watched the rally from the Mall and went directly from the Mall to the Capitol, then they wouldn’t show up in the pictures of the rally. So he wanted them in.

The only thing this would have affected is the number of people present for his speech. This ain’t complicated. Trump wanted a full room, which he didn’t have, so he said let the armed people in to the speech, too.

I’m not sure how this can work. I may address in ATMB if I get around to it.

Trump wanting to remove the mags is proof that Trump knew the crowd was armed.

That’s pretty much my impression, as above. The thing is that this is being presented as having much more import than just the number of people at Trump’s speech. That’s why it’s a bit more complicated.

It’s also important because the so called president didn’t give a fuck that he was riling up people who were armed. This again falls into the “This Ain’t Complicated” bag.

It is important because it is proof that Trump knew the crowd was armed before he told them to, “Fight like hell,” and before he told them to go to the Capitol.

It’s very important.

Right. And the unintended side effect of that entire conversation is that we know that Trump knew there were people on the mall who were armed, and he specifically wanted those people (along with the presumably unarmed people on the ellipse) to march to the capitol.

Why would Trump want armed people to march with him to the capitol?

eta: Great, I got distracted and now I’m the 4th person to repeat the same damn thing.