1/6 Fedsurrection?

[TimT]

https://twitter.com/ThatmattersNews/status/1542115671198294017

[zh cohen]

Since we decided that the credibility of a source should not influence whether we pay attention to their claims -

Jack Posobiec @JackPosobiec
BREAKING: Multiple sources including one who was at the WH on Jan 6 tell me Cipollone was not there in the am when Hutchinson testified she spoke with him. J6 Cmtes is aware of this discrepancy & are ignoring media inquiries about it. Seems she made up the entire conversation

[biobook]

Since we decided that the credibility of a source should not influence whether we pay attention to their claims -

1. We should consider the credibility of the source.  Hearing CH's background and her 2-hr testimony left me feeling she was credible.  From a short clip you may get a different picture.
 
2. You're citing this guy: "Far-right commentator Jack Posobiec is a current host on One America News Network (OANN), an information network widely known to distort facts and which has been embraced by President Trump. This investigation has found that Posobiec — a Trump favorite — has collaborated with white supremacists, neo-fascists and antisemites for years, while producing propaganda that Trump and his inner circle have publicly celebrated." https://www.splcenter.org/splc-investigation-far-right-oann-anchor-jack-posobiecs-rise-tied-white-supremacist-movement
Not sure he's more credible than CH.

3. JP says that Cipollone was not in the WH in the morning.  CH did not say he was.  What she specifically said was "I saw Mr. Cipollone right before I walked out onto West Exec that morning, and Mr. Cipollone said something to the effect of please make sure we don't go up to the Capitol, Cassidy. Keep in touch with me. We're going to get charged with every crime imaginable if we make that movement happen." 

"West Exec" apparently refers to both a street outside the WH and a parking lot there.  So maybe the claim that Cipollone wasn't in the WH is consistent with CH speaking to him just outside it, on her way to the rally. 

4. I'm willing to accept that CH might have forgotten when the conversation happened, or might have spoken to him on the phone, or somehow misremembered the specifics.  I'm even willing to accept that she's totally making up this particular 2 minute sentence from the 2 hour testimony.  But I don't see any reason to decide about that now, when we can wait for Cipollone to describe the event to the committee himself.

[Yehuda57]

I think OP was saying that if CH should be trusted even if her credibility is in question, then he can post from JP even though he isn't credible

[aygart]

2. You're citing this guy: "Far-right commentator Jack Posobiec is a current host on One America News Network (OANN), an information network widely known to distort facts and which has been embraced by President Trump. This investigation has found that Posobiec — a Trump favorite — has collaborated with white supremacists, neo-fascists and antisemites for years, while producing propaganda that Trump and his inner circle have publicly celebrated." https://www.splcenter.org/splc-investigation-far-right-oann-anchor-jack-posobiecs-rise-tied-white-supremacist-movement

I know nothing about Prosobiec, but SPLC has about zero credibility.

[R.A.T.]

I know nothing about Prosobiec,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Posobiec

[R.A.T.]

I understand why many want to ignore the real bombshell of her testimony.

The president was told about individuals being armed. With this knowledge he then went on stage and instructed the armed mob to march on the capital and fight like hell.

[Yehuda57]

I understand why many want to ignore the real bombshell of her testimony.

The president was told about individuals being armed. With this knowledge he then went on stage and instructed the armed mob to march on the capital and fight like hell.

I think @aygart's question is a good one. Mimah nafshach, if the concern people were armed was real, how did the SS let the president speak at the rally? And if it wasn't a real concern, that majorly tempers concerns about Trump's encouragement of violence.

[R.A.T.]

I think @aygart's question is a good one. Mimah nafshach, if the concern people were armed was real, how did the SS let the president speak at the rally? And if it wasn't a real concern, that majorly tempers concerns about Trump's encouragement of violence.

It is a good question. All we have now is the testimony and not a real clear picture.

[zh cohen]

I understand why many want to ignore the real bombshell of her testimony.

The president was told about individuals being armed. With this knowledge he then went on stage and instructed the armed mob to march on the capital and fight like hell.

Pretty much every aspect of her testimony that can be fact checked is falling apart. Why would we think that there is any truth to the parts that haven't yet been disproven yet?

[biobook]

I think @aygart's question is a good one. Mimah nafshach, if the concern people were armed was real, how did the SS let the president speak at the rally? And if it wasn't a real concern, that majorly tempers concerns about Trump's encouragement of violence.

Trump spoke in the Ellipse, across the street from the White House lawn.  That area started filling up in the morning.

CHENEY:  When a President speaks, the Secret Service typically requires those attending to pass through metal detectors known as magnetometers, or mags for short. The Select Committee has learned that people who willingly entered the enclosed area for President Trump's speech were screened so they could attend the rally at the Ellipse.  They had weapons and other items that were confiscated: pepper spray, knives, brass knuckles, tasers, body armor, gas masks, batons, blunt weapons.

So Trump was sent that info, that these are the kinds of weapons that people brought to the rally.  But not everybody gave up their weapons. The report of the Glock and AR-15 were from morning police reports of people outside the Ellipse (one on Constitution Ave, one at 14th and Independence).  We can't tell from this if the police subsequently apprehended those people before the president spoke, or if the USSS considered them far enough away, but in any event, they weren't near the president. 

The USSS were concerned about the weapons on the streets of DC, and therefore didn't allow the president to walk to the Capitol as he wanted.

Trump knew that people had brought weapons, and that not all those weapons had been confiscated.  And he encouraged these people to go to the Capitol and "fight like hell".

[biobook]

Pretty much every aspect of her testimony that can be fact checked is falling apart. Why would we think that there is any truth to the parts that haven't yet been disproven yet?

Are you forming an opinion based on twitter soundbites?  Did you listen to her testimony?

[aygart]

Trump spoke in the Ellipse, across the street from the White House lawn.  That area started filling up in the morning.

CHENEY:  When a President speaks, the Secret Service typically requires those attending to pass through metal detectors known as magnetometers, or mags for short. The Select Committee has learned that people who willingly entered the enclosed area for President Trump's speech were screened so they could attend the rally at the Ellipse.  They had weapons and other items that were confiscated: pepper spray, knives, brass knuckles, tasers, body armor, gas masks, batons, blunt weapons.

So Trump was sent that info, that these are the kinds of weapons that people brought to the rally.  But not everybody gave up their weapons. The report of the Glock and AR-15 were from morning police reports of people outside the Ellipse (one on Constitution Ave, one at 14th and Independence).  We can't tell from this if the police subsequently apprehended those people before the president spoke, or if the USSS considered them far enough away, but in any event, they weren't near the president. 

The USSS were concerned about the weapons on the streets of DC, and therefore didn't allow the president to walk to the Capitol as he wanted.

Trump knew that people had brought weapons, and that not all those weapons had been confiscated.  And he encouraged these people to go to the Capitol and "fight like hell".

I am trying to figure out how to reconcile the way they presented the guns as relevant to the riot at the capital yet irrelevant enough that the SS was fine with POTUS going there.

The re[ports of knives etc makes much more sense and is equally damning of Trump. The AR15  part just makes no sense to me.

[R.A.T.]

The bombshell that hasn't been disputed is changing the minds of some of the president’s strongest supporters.

Mick Mulvaney, Trump's former Acting Chief of Staff, explicitly stated that he can no longer support Trump in the wake of Hutchinson's testimony.

"I've been defending the president against the charges of incitement to riot. I've seen the same speech he's given dozens of times. I've seen him accused of trying to foment violence with no violence coming as a result, so I've been defending him," Mulvaney told CBS Mornings on Wednesday.

"But after yesterday when she testified that he knew that there were guns on property and that he still encouraged people to go down to the Capitol, that certainly changes my mind."

[zh cohen]

3. JP says that Cipollone was not in the WH in the morning.  CH did not say he was.  What she specifically said was "I saw Mr. Cipollone right before I walked out onto West Exec that morning, and Mr. Cipollone said something to the effect of please make sure we don't go up to the Capitol, Cassidy. Keep in touch with me. We're going to get charged with every crime imaginable if we make that movement happen." 

"West Exec" apparently refers to both a street outside the WH and a parking lot there.  So maybe the claim that Cipollone wasn't in the WH is consistent with CH speaking to him just outside it, on her way to the rally. 

4. I'm willing to accept that CH might have forgotten when the conversation happened, or might have spoken to him on the phone, or somehow misremembered the specifics.  I'm even willing to accept that she's totally making up this particular 2 minute sentence from the 2 hour testimony.  But I don't see any reason to decide about that now, when we can wait for Cipollone to describe the event to the committee himself.

I think we need @cm's pretzel .gif

[R.A.T.]

Pretty much every aspect of her testimony that can be fact checked is falling apart. Why would we think that there is any truth to the parts that haven't yet been disproven yet?

At this point there has been no evidence presented showing anything she said as being false. What has been shown is this is not the first time Tony Ornato has disputed sworn testimony. You going to give more credence to someone via twitter or sworn testimony.

[S209]

I think we need @cm's pretzel .gif

Why not just use R.A.T.s?

[PlatinumGuy]

https://twitter.com/jason_kint/status/1543706658999771137

https://twitter.com/ryanobles/status/1542957889811353601

[PlatinumGuy]

I think @aygart's question is a good one. Mimah nafshach, if the concern people were armed was real, how did the SS let the president speak at the rally? And if it wasn't a real concern, that majorly tempers concerns about Trump's encouragement of violence.

It seems very clear the discussion of weapons was of people outside the perimeter at the rally, whom the SS was denying entry by mag detectors and Trump wanted to be allowed in.

[Yehuda57]

It seems very clear the discussion of weapons was of people outside the perimeter at the rally, whom the SS was denying entry by mag detectors and Trump wanted to be allowed in.

Right, because if I'm the secret service and I know there are multiple armed people outside the perimeter, I'm totes gonna be chill that the mags are sufficient to eliminate the risk of armed people in the perimeter.

I'm not saying it's impossible, but it's not likely.