January 6 committee hearing to feature pro-Trump lawmakers fleeing crowds

The Jan. 6 committee plans to use its Thursday night hearing to call out pro-insurgency lawmakers who cowered during the Capitol attack but have since downplayed the severity of the insurgency, according to two sources close to committee planning.

“They intend to paint a truly startling picture of how some of Trump’s biggest enablers in his coup plot were – no matter what they say today – shaking in their boots. and doing everything shy to mourn their mothers,” a source tells Rolling Stone. “If one of [these lawmakers] were capable of shame, they would be humiliated.

Throughout its hearings, the committee made extensive use of photo and video evidence, including, at times, footage of lawmakers reacting to a crowd of Donald Trump supporters who fought through a line of police to break into the Capitol.

The committee has sometimes changed plans at the last minute, and it remains unclear which specific lawmakers the committee might call. But at least some Republicans have already had their attempts to downplay or justify the coup attempt quashed by footage from the day of the attack. When Rep. Andrew Clyde (R-Ga.) claimed the insurgency was “a normal tourist visit,” social media users quickly located photos of the Georgia Republican gasping in terror and hiding behind an armed police officer from the Capitol pointing a handgun at a barricaded entrance. the Senate floor.

In the 18 months since the insurgency, Republican lawmakers have tried to whitewash it through a series of conflicting talking points. Republicans have alternately downplayed the attack, calling it a “peaceful protest,” claiming it was violent but that the violence was perpetrated only by nonexistent “antifa” or federal informants on Capitol Hill, or that the Democrats were to blame for failing to adequately defend the Capitol against protesters who they said were neither violent nor threatening.

Republicans like Reps. Matt Gaetz, Marjorie Taylor Greene and Paul Gosar have gone so far as to view suspected rioters being held in pretrial detention as wrongfully accused political prisoners.

The bulk of Thursday night’s hearing is expected to focus on Trump’s actions during the insurgency, including whether he took steps to defuse the riot at a time when lawmakers were under attack. But the use of photos and images to refute MAGA lawmakers’ claims of a “sightseeing visit” by “peaceful patriots” is part of a larger effort to cast reality on a fictionalized, pro- Trump January 6th.

This mythology, widely circulated in conservative media, claims that Trump and his allies planned a peaceful rally to bring to light credible reports of systemic voter fraud, exercising their First Amendment rights in an effort to protect democracy. In this distorted narrative, peaceful protests have been hijacked by a small number of violent extremists with no ties to Trump or his team. And, as the lie goes, Democrats have since vastly exaggerated the violence as a political ploy.

Through interviews with over 1,000 people and reviews of over 125,000 recordings, the January 6 committee has debunked every part of this narrative. Instead, the committee demonstrated that Trump tried to steal an election he was repeatedly told he had lost. And that his efforts to rob him included leading a wildly unconstitutional dummy voter scheme — and setting up his supporters for an attack on the Capitol.

As Trump spoke at his planned rally near the White House, he called for a march on the US Capitol, bolstering a crowd of people who clashed violently with law enforcement. Testimony given to the committee indicated that Trump and members of the administration were aware of the potential for violence, and witnesses alleged that Trump went so far as to request that security at his Ellipse rally be released so that individuals armed can enter the crowd. Trump’s team tried to distance themselves from all events on Capitol Hill, but the committee found the former president’s call for his supporters to march was premeditated.

The committee obtained a draft of an unsent tweet in which Trump teased a march to the Capitol after his speech at the Ellipse. “I will give a big speech at 10 a.m. on January 6 at the Ellipse (south of the White House),” reads the draft tweet, on file with the National Archives. “Please arrive early, massive crowds are expected. March to the Capitol after. Stop the robbery!”

The committee also posted a Jan. 4 text exchange between White House Ellipse rally organizer Kylie Kremer and MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell, in which the pair discussed a secret plan for Trump to call on protesters to march. to a second location, either the Supreme Court or Capitol, on January 6. In the exchange, Kremer urged Lindell to keep the plans secret because they didn’t have a permit for the march.

On January 6, the committee displays a January 4 text exchange between rally organizer Kylie Kremer and Mike Lindell discussing secret plans for Trump to call on protesters to march to the second location, either the Supreme Court or the Capitol on 6. pic.twitter.com/KFfi2mDMQ2

— nikki mccann ramrez (@NikkiMcR) July 12, 2022

A second text message, from Ali Alexander, written on January 5, described this plan for the next day. “Tomorrow: Ellipse then US Capitol. Trump is supposed to order us to the Capitol at the end of his speech, but we’ll see.”

Rolling Stone this spring reported that senior Trump officials had a phone call with Kremer in which they actively planned the march.

Trump’s team also sought to portray Trump in opposition to Capitol violence, but the committee revealed that he actively resisted efforts to quell the violence, including refusing to call the actions “unlawful.” when invited.

In her explosive testimony before the committee, former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson revealed that she drafted a statement for President Trump asking protesters who entered the Capitol “illegally” to leave. According to Hutchinson, former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows took the draft statement to Trump, who crossed out the word “illegally” and refused to release it. Hutchinson was told there would be “no further action on this statement.”

Note from Hutchinson on statement dictated by Meadows for Trump to release.

Meadows returned after meeting with Trump and said we didn’t need to take any further action on that statement, and it was never released, Hutchinson testified. pic.twitter.com/dAIMnnwZC2

— Andrew Solender (@AndrewSolender) June 28, 2022

Stephanie Grisham, former chief of staff and press secretary to first lady Melania Trump, then tweeted a screenshot of a text exchange between her and the first lady on January 6, in which Melania declined to post a statement condemning “anarchy and violence”. by protesters. Grisham resigned from his position later that day.

pic.twitter.com/PQXLSsv6IJ

— Stephanie Grisham (@OMGrisham) June 28, 2022

Indeed, Trump has since continually considered ways to mitigate the legal consequences for the Capitol rioters. Hutchinson also revealed that Trump wanted to include language in his Jan. 7 speech about pardoning his supporters who stormed the Capitol, and that Meadows was okay with including such language. According to previous testimony given by Hutchinson, the clemency offer was eventually removed from the speech on the advice of the White House counsel’s office.

Trump wanted to include a mention of pardons for Jan. 6 rioters in the Jan. 7 speech. Meadows was cheering him on pic.twitter.com/Zf2EMURGom

— Acyn (@Acyn) June 28, 2022

The possibility of pardons has been on the president’s mind since leaving office. At a January rally in Houston, he told his supporters, “If I run and if I win, we’ll treat these people fairly starting January 6.” And if it requires pardons, we will grant them pardons, because they are treated so unfairly.

The Jan. 6 uprising was the most high-profile part of a larger effort to steal the 2020 election, but it was far from the only way Trump and his team tried to overturn the results. The committee found that Trump had played a “direct and personal role” in efforts to pressure states to alter their results or appoint fake voters who would offend voters by supporting Trump.

During the committee’s fourth hearing, lawmakers described Trump pressuring lawmakers in every state to resume sessions and declare him the true winner of the 2020 election. Brad Raffensperger, the Georgian secretary of state, said was instructed by the former president to “find” the necessary votes to give him the state.

A separate plan has been concocted by Trump attorney John Eastman to send two lists of alternate voters, declaring Trump the winner, Congressional certification of the Electoral College vote, and asking Vice President Pence to use false voters during the vote. Eastman knew the scheme was illegal and admitted it to Trump days before Electoral College certification. The committee revealed June 21 that this scheme culminated in an attempt by Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) to deliver the bogus voters to Pence on Jan. 6.

None of this was in response to credible reports of systemic voter fraud, and Trump knew it — or at least he would have had he listened to several high-level members of his administration.

In its first hearing, the committee played taped testimony from former Trump attorney general Bill Barr. In his testimony, Barr told the committee he was clear with the former president that his claims that the 2020 election was stolen from him were “bullshit.” Barr would go on to testify that attempts by him and other advisers to convince Trump that the 2020 election was legitimate were futile, and described Trump as “detached from reality”.

Former acting deputy attorney general Richard Donoghue also testified before the committee that he had unsuccessfully tried to reach President Trump: “I tried, again, to put this into perspective and to try to say it in very clear terms to the president. I said something like, ‘Sir, we’ve done dozens of surveys, hundreds of interviews. The main claims are not supported by the evidence developed. “

What Are The Main Benefits Of Comparing Car Insurance Quotes Online

LOS ANGELES, CA / ACCESSWIRE / June 24, 2020, / Compare-autoinsurance.Org has launched a new blog post that presents the main benefits of comparing multiple car insurance quotes. For more info and free online quotes, please visit https://compare-autoinsurance.Org/the-advantages-of-comparing-prices-with-car-insurance-quotes-online/ The modern society has numerous technological advantages. One important advantage is the speed at which information is sent and received. With the help of the internet, the shopping habits of many persons have drastically changed. The car insurance industry hasn't remained untouched by these changes. On the internet, drivers can compare insurance prices and find out which sellers have the best offers. View photos The advantages of comparing online car insurance quotes are the following: Online quotes can be obtained from anywhere and at any time. Unlike physical insurance agencies, websites don't have a specific schedule and they are available at any time. Drivers that have busy working schedules, can compare quotes from anywhere and at any time, even at midnight. Multiple choices. Almost all insurance providers, no matter if they are well-known brands or just local insurers, have an online presence. Online quotes will allow policyholders the chance to discover multiple insurance companies and check their prices. Drivers are no longer required to get quotes from just a few known insurance companies. Also, local and regional insurers can provide lower insurance rates for the same services. Accurate insurance estimates. Online quotes can only be accurate if the customers provide accurate and real info about their car models and driving history. Lying about past driving incidents can make the price estimates to be lower, but when dealing with an insurance company lying to them is useless. Usually, insurance companies will do research about a potential customer before granting him coverage. Online quotes can be sorted easily. Although drivers are recommended to not choose a policy just based on its price, drivers can easily sort quotes by insurance price. Using brokerage websites will allow drivers to get quotes from multiple insurers, thus making the comparison faster and easier. For additional info, money-saving tips, and free car insurance quotes, visit https://compare-autoinsurance.Org/ Compare-autoinsurance.Org is an online provider of life, home, health, and auto insurance quotes. This website is unique because it does not simply stick to one kind of insurance provider, but brings the clients the best deals from many different online insurance carriers. In this way, clients have access to offers from multiple carriers all in one place: this website. On this site, customers have access to quotes for insurance plans from various agencies, such as local or nationwide agencies, brand names insurance companies, etc. "Online quotes can easily help drivers obtain better car insurance deals. All they have to do is to complete an online form with accurate and real info, then compare prices", said Russell Rabichev, Marketing Director of Internet Marketing Company. CONTACT: Company Name: Internet Marketing CompanyPerson for contact Name: Gurgu CPhone Number: (818) 359-3898Email: [email protected]: https://compare-autoinsurance.Org/ SOURCE: Compare-autoinsurance.Org View source version on accesswire.Com:https://www.Accesswire.Com/595055/What-Are-The-Main-Benefits-Of-Comparing-Car-Insurance-Quotes-Online View photos