2020 Election: Predictions, Results and Reactions

[Voronwë the Faithful]

To be a bit pedantic (sorry) what Eastman actually did was file a new lawsuit in New Mexico in order to make a motion to have his property returned to him. The sole reason that he says that it is part of an Office of the Inspector General investigation is that the warrant says that law enforcement intends to deliver any devices seized to Washington, D.C. or to the DOJ-OIG laboratory in Norther Virginia. Of course, that does not really follow that it is an OIG investigation (which would not make sense since, as Eastman's lawyers point out in the motion, he has never worked for the Justice Department). It could just be the most convenient laboratory to examine the devises.

I'm no expert, but the other bases which they argue the warrant was invalid (that it violates the Fourth and Fifth Amendments) don't seem any more valid than the argument that it was invalid because it was part of an OIG investigation. But I'll be interested to see how the feds respond.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Cassidy Hutchinson, an aide to former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows and a witness to many critical events and conversations, is expected to testify publicly on Tuesday before the select committee investigating the January 6, 2021, US Capitol attack, according to two sources familiar with the matter.

Former Meadows aide will testify before January 6 committee on Tuesday, sources say

[N.E. Brigand]

Seeing reports that tomorrow's witness will be Cassidy Hutchinson, who reported to Mark Meadows (prior to her White House tenure, she had interned for Rep. Steve Scalise and Sen. Ted Cruz, so again: this is a solid Republican). It's not clear why the Committee is rushing to have her testify publicly. I believe she testified behind closed doors to them some time ago; she was apparently a source for the reports of Mark Meadows burning documents. That said, all the witnesses in the public hearings had already testified privately to the Committee. Maybe she was supposed to testify publicly in July but something came up that will prevent her from appearing then.

Edit: Cross-posted with Voronwë. But also, here's a little update: the CNN report to which he links says the secrecy surrounding tomorrow's hearing was meant to protect Hutchinon's safety and that new security protocols will be in place. The Washington Post adds that there was a "credible security threat" regarding her appearance.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Several clips of Hutchinson's private testimony have already been played in the hearings, including revealing which members of Congress requested pardens.

But did they really think that the identity of the witness would not be revealed before the hearing? This is Washington, after all. Of course, we don't know for sure that she is the only witness, or anything at all about what she is going to testify about it. It seems unlikely that it is simply stuff that they were going to cover in the remaining two scheduled hearings, but we'll see. Most likely, it will be "no big deal".

[Voronwë the Faithful]

She looks terrified.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Holy fucking shit.

And it still won't matter.

[N.E. Brigand]

The Proud Boys apparently made a video they could use later to claim the January 6th attack wasn't pre-planned. At least, that's how I read this Times artice:

Proud Boys Ignored Orders Given at Pre-Jan. 6 Meeting

"'We’re never going to be the ones to cross the police barrier or cross something in order to get to somebody,' Mr. Tarrio said."

Attorneys for some of the Proud Boys claim this Dec. 30, 2020 video is exculpatory; I think it actually shows consciousness of guilt.

Some amateur sleuths have done such exhaustive work combing through videos of the January 6th insurrection that even the FBI has occasionally (but also, I would say, grudgingly) cited their publicly available work. With the second clip below, one such group shows how my characterization above of the Proud Boys' pre-planning meeting was incorrect or at least incomplete. These terrorists often did follow their original plan: they riled up the "normies" and got them to often be the first ones to cross the line into restricted spaces:

[Voronwë the Faithful]

"I don't F-ing care that they have weapons. They're not here to hurt me. Take the F-ing mags away. Let my people in, they can march to the Capitol from here. Let the people in, take the F-ing mags away."

[N.E. Brigand]

Holy fucking shit.

And it still won't matter.

Or maybe Donald Trump will be charged with attempted murder.

It's weird that it could go either way!

[Voronwë the Faithful]

You mean because his attempt to strangle his secret service agent in "the Beast".

[Voronwë the Faithful]

What really surprised me is that they didn't play the "fight like hell" comment from Trump, made after he said that he knew that they had weapons.

[River]

I wonder how much of that is in the video footage. Is Trump attacking his security detail on tape? Narcissist tantrums can be pretty spectacular but at least the one I worked with in grad school didn't get physical. Just loud.

I also wonder who made the threat that caused them to enhance security for this hearing.

[N.E. Brigand]

You mean because his attempt to strangle his secret service agent in "the Beast".

I hadn't even gotten that far yet when I posted! (I just thought the bombshell testimony about weapons meant that Trump really did want to kill Mike Pence.)

So he grabbed the steering wheel to try to get his staff to drive him to the Capitol rather than back to the White House? And then he lunged at one of his own agents? Well, given how patting Rudy Giuliani on the back to get his attention is apparently misdemeanor assault, I can't say whether or not what Trump did in the car broke any laws, but along with the other testimony, it does show, as many have previously argued, that he's a sociopath.

[N.E. Brigand]

A law professor who testified on Donald Trump's behalf in the first House impeachment hearings thinks he's identified the real problem:

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Mark Meadows (about Trump and the rioters, and the "hang Mike Pence" chant): "He doesn't think they are doing anything wrong."

ETA: Jonathan Turley continues to bring shame to my alma mater.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I think the happiest person in the country right now is Ron DeSantis.

[Frelga]

Screenshot_20220628-124536.png (279.36 KiB) Viewed 1548 times

[N.E. Brigand]

You mean because his attempt to strangle his secret service agent in "the Beast".

I hadn't even gotten that far yet when I posted! (I just thought the bombshell testimony about weapons meant that Trump really did want to kill Mike Pence.)

Not that it means much, but an MSNBC anchor seems to agree with me:

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I pretty much consider things said at MSNBC to be roughly as reliable as things said at NewsMax.

[N.E. Brigand]

I pretty much consider things said at MSNBC to be roughly as reliable as things said at NewsMax.

Interesting. From the few snippets I've seen of Newmax, I don't think the two networks are much alike, but tastes differ. MSNBC is heavy on opinion, but not more so than Fox News and not much more than CNN in recent years -- and MSNBC has been much more welcoming of conservatives generally than Fox has been of liberals. Their morning show host was even a Republican congressman in the 1990s. As for Hayes, he's only offering his opinion here -- I was just amused that I got there first -- but he's a sober commentator and very intellectually curious. I certainly can't see MSNBC hiring someone who had been let go at another network after it became publicly known that the network had settled multiple sexual harassment lawsuits stemming from the person's conduct, as Newsmax did when they hired former Fox start Bill O'Reilly.