Jan 6 Panel: More People Turn Up with Evidence Against Trump

6
FILE - Vice Chair Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., speaks as the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol holds a hearing at the Capitol in Washington, June 28, 2022. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, File)

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

More witnesses are coming forward with new details on the Jan. 6 U.S. Capitol riot following former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson’s devastating testimony last week against former President Donald Trump, says a member of a House committee investigating the insurrection.

The panel already has subpoenaed former White House counsel Pat Cipollone, who investigators remain hopeful will appear Wednesday for a deposition, and said it would also welcome follow-up details from Secret Service members with Trump that day.

Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., cited Hutchinson’s testimony that Trump wanted to join an angry mob of his supporters who marched on Jan. 6, 2021, to the Capitol, where they rioted, as particularly valuable in “inspiring” more people to step forward as the committee gets set for at least two public hearings this month.

“Every day we get new people that come forward and say, ‘Hey, I didn’t think maybe this piece of the story that I knew was important,’” he said Sunday. “There will be way more information and stay tuned.”

The committee has been intensifying its yearlong investigation into the Jan. 6 attack and Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election. The next hearings will aim to show how Trump illegally directed a violent mob toward the Capitol on Jan. 6 and then failed to take quick action to stop the attack once it began. Over the weekend, Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., the committee’s vice chair, made clear that criminal referrals to the Justice Department, including against the Republican former president, could follow.

The committee also has been reviewing new documentary film footage of Trump’s final months in office, including interviews with Trump and members of his family.

Kinzinger, in a television interview, declined to disclose the new information he referred to and did not say who had provided it. He said nothing had changed the committee’s confidence in her credibility.

“There’s information I can’t say yet,” he said. “We certainly would say that Cassidy Hutchinson has testified under oath, we find her credible, and anybody that wants to cast disparagements on that, who were firsthand present, should also testify under oath and not through anonymous sources.”

In a separate interview, another committee member, Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., said: “We are following additional leads. I think those leads will lead to new testimony.”

In Hutchinson’s appearance before the committee, she painted a picture of Trump as an angry, defiant president who was trying to let armed supporters avoid security screenings at a rally on the morning of Jan. 6 to protest his 2020 election defeat to Democrat Joe Biden.

According to Hutchinson, Cipollone was concerned that Trump would face criminal charges if he joined his supporters in marching to the Capitol.

Legal experts have said Cassidy’s testimony is potentially problematic for Trump as federal prosecutors investigate potential criminal wrongdoing.

Cheney said in an interview aired Sunday that the committee was still considering whether to issue recommendations to the Justice Department, indicating “there could be more than one criminal referral.”

Committee members said they are hopeful Cipollone will come forward.

“He clearly has information about concerns about criminal violations, concerns about the president going to the Capitol that day, concerns about the chief of staff having blood on his hands if they didn’t do more to stop that violent attack on the Capitol,” Schiff said. “It’s hard to imagine someone more at the center of things.”

In her testimony, Cassidy recounted a conversation with Tony Ornato, Trump’s deputy chief of staff for operations, who, she testified, said Trump later grabbed at the steering wheel of the presidential SUV when the Secret Service refused to let him go to the Capitol after the rally.

That account was disputed, however. Bobby Engel, the Secret Service agent who was driving Trump, and Ornato are willing to testify under oath that no agent was assaulted and Trump never lunged for the steering wheel, a person familiar with the matter said. The person would not discuss the matter publicly and spoke on the condition of anonymity.

“We had interviewed Mr. Ornato several times,” said Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., and member of the panel. “His memory does not appear to be as precise as hers. We certainly would welcome them to come back if they wish to do that.”

The committee has also been working on setting up an interview with Virginia “Ginni” Thomas, the conservative activist and wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. She was asked to speak to the committee after disclosures of her communications with Trump’s team in the run-up to and on the day of the insurrection at the Capitol.

Kinzinger appeared on CNN’s “State of the Union,” Schiff was on CBS’ “Face the Nation,” Cheney appeared on ABC’s “This Week” and Lofgren spoke on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

(AP)


6 COMMENTS

  1. Yeh sure they do.
    witness #83 – “I heard from this guy that heard from this girl that Trump said”
    witness #84 – “I heard from this man that heard from this lady that Trump said”
    and so & so on

  2. “Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election”…
    One would hope that readers would see this, and so much else in this ‘packaged article’ as cowardly and false. The election was almost undoubtedly bought by corrupt forces who will hopefully be revealed in coming times – soon. Watch ‘2000 Mules’ and consider so much documented evidence from many other places that points to the maneuvering, including especially via excessive ‘mail in ballots’ that were easily tampered with. These were so conveniently setup by vested and nefarious democratic left forces who are certainly also involved with the false and tyrannical ‘covid narrative’.

  3. ” Cassidy Hutchinson’s devastating testimony”

    Seriously?! Is there anyone left in the entire country who still takes Hutchinson’s “testimony” seriously?! She didn’t see anything. She repeated gossip that she claims someone told her! And even if the rumors she repeated were true, they would be no big deal. Trump wanted to join the march on the Capitol; if true, good for him. I understand why the Secret Service couldn’t allow it, though technically if he ordered them to take him there they were required to obey him. But fine, they made him go back to the White House. The fact that he wanted to join the march speaks to his credit.

  4. “devastating” “evidence”

    1. If it isn’t admissible in a court of law (as opposed to a “kangaroo” court of political enemies), it should not even be called “evidence”. The reason courts reject hearsay is that it is inherently unreliable.

    2. The “we hate Trump” club needs a smoking gun, similar to the recording in which Nixon clearly acknowledged illegal acts were going on with his knowledge. The need to find proof the Trump was planning to seize the government from the lawfully elected president. The need something like a witness to him arranging for the military to obey his orders and not President Biden’s. The idea that a bunch of rioters with fake or non-lethal weapons, acting in one city, could seize the government of the United States is ABSURD.

    3. They do have a solid case that Trump by his rhetoric was guilty of inciting disorderly conduct, but that’s true of many politicians, and is probably protected by the First amendment.

  5. I have mixed feelings about the whole Jan 6 thing. While I don’t doubt that it’s a whole lot of baloney (especially as regards Trump’s “guilt”), and I also recognize that Biden’s win was not honest, given the evidence (albeit perhaps not admissible in a court of law) coming out constantly, and the 2000 Mules documentary, etc., I nevertheless want them to succeed in at least one thing: that Trump shouldn’t run in 2024. Although his policies and governance as President are probably the best for USA as possible, he is nevertheless too toxic in his interpersonal approach to a) win, and b) govern effectively even if he would win. So, Ms Cheney, keep the heat on, and maybe you’ll save the Republican party from itself.