Well, that does narrow down the possibilities to about half the U. S. population. 
IIRC that was in the very first hearing (the Capitol Police officer and the documentary filmmaker). There was footage of the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys heading to the Capitol to find the weak points in the security before Trump’s rally ever even started.
If it was meaningful at all – and I’m the first to admit it may not be! I’m having a hard time coming up with names of other people who fit @JohnT’s criteria.
I think this will fit here.
While we know that Qannon is just beyond ridiculous, wasn’t there speculation that it was meant to be a joke to start with? A way to make fun of the CT people?
And then it took off. I sort of think it was started by a couple of stoned college kids as a way to get ROTFL.
Realistically, the only big reason to keep the witness secret would be to hide them from Trump. But given that we’re talking about Trump trying to contact the witness and that we can reasonably assume that he got a call from the DOJ and/or his lawyer telling him to refrain from calling that person ever again, I don’t think that’s really a concern. The secret isn’t a big secret from a criminal justice standpoint.
So I think that would say that the goal of secrecy is to help build suspense for the next hearing.
Given that I’m expecting the mystery witness to be “White House Aide Z” and not “Ivanka Trump”, I’m not feeling like the suspense is going to have the sort of payoff worth getting invested in. Their testimony might be amazing but their identity is probably not going to be helpful to any of us, beforehand.
or his followers. As the witnesses today described, Trump’s followers be psycho.
True, I was discounting that thinking that you’re going to have to deal with threats and craziness eventually - if you’re testifying - so there’s not much difference if that starts now or later.
But I guess for a witness who’s just on the edge of testifying, it’s to the prosecutor’s advantage to minimize the chance that they flake out before going on the witness stand.
Maybe it’s Mike Pence. Trump calling Pence, trying to influence him, and Pence refusing is Jan 6th in microcosm.
And I think Pence is certainly an important witness that the Select Committee should call.
That isn’t the sense I got from the HBO documentary series “Q: Into The Storm.” As best I could follow, nobody knows anything about the original QAnon. Speculation is that maybe it was Steve Bannon, or Michael Flynn. In any case, that original guy is long gone. He started off popping up in a couple different online forums. One of them was 4Chan, and then pretty soon “his” posts on 4Chan started sounding like a different writer and declaring that that would be his permanent home online. Other admins on other (wacko) sites were certain someone else took over the account.
That someone else ends up being Ron Watkins, the 4Chan admin from the group “Q” was posting to. He proceeds to troll the world with a Napolean Dynamite kind of energy posting as Q for the next few years. I’m unclear on much of these details, but then just like Robert Durst, at the end of the documentary he accidentally admits it.
So it may have been the exact opposite of your memory: It may have started with a true believer, but was quickly commandeered by an edgelord for the lols.
EDIT: You also might be conflating QAnon with the “birds aren’t real” guy.
Has the Committee subpoenaed Pence, though? Has he been interviewed? I think Pence has “spoken” through his close advisors, but not Pence himself.
The most recent information I can find says the Committee might subpoena him, but nothing that says they have. Pretty sure he won’t come forward without a subpoena, and even Pence wouldn’t appear publicly without being interviewed in private first.
Thanks. I have to follow rabbit holes on the net for work. But I stay far, far away from this stuff.
Wouldn’t he need permission from Mother?
So, they are “setting their sights” on Pence and “Waiting to hear” from Ginni Thomas.
Hey, maybe the witness is Ginni Thomas.
Only if a straight woman questions him.
Ba-da-bing 
"Ambassador Bolton? I have the Hague on Line One." https://t.co/Glcr2DhgX4
— Charles P. Pierce (@CharlesPPierce) July 12, 2022
Did Bolton just admit on the air to war crimes?
I can actually agree with Bolton’s analysis of Trump’s character - The Former Guy tries to half-ass everything he does - but his conclusion is simply wrong.
A half-assed coup attempt is still a coup attempt.
Somebody needs to do a Downfall of Trump’s meeting…
Now that’d be awesome!
“You did what you felt right at the time and therefore it was right.” Katrine Pierson, White House ethicist.
Slight nitpick; it was 8kun (previously named 8chan), a similar but different web site and community. His dad Jim owns the site. Jim’s testimony was part of today’s hearing.