Jan. 6 committee's Kinzinger: Secret Service agent who may dispute Hutchinson claim 'likes to lie'

[onthedarkside]

 

Secret Service agent Tony Ornato prepared to testify against claim that former President Donald Trump lunged at steering wheel, sources say

Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., claimed Thursday that a Secret Service agent who may testify before the Jan. 6 committee about the timeline of events that unfolded around former President Donald Trump during the riot "likes to lie."

 

Two Secret Service agents, Tony Ornato and Robert Engel, are prepared to testify before Congress that then-President Donald Trump did not lunge at a steering wheel or assault them in an attempt to go to the Capitol during the Jan. 6 riot, a source close to the Secret Service told Fox News' David Spunt this week.

 

The explosive new allegations were made on Tuesday by Cassidy Hutchinson, a former top aide to Trump White House chief of staff Mark Meadows.

 

A series of social media posts accumulated this week in which colleagues and opponents of Ornato have accused him of failing to tell the truth in the past and being a habitual liar.

 

(more)

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/january-6-committee-kinzinger-secret-service-agent-who-may-dispute-hutchinson-claim-likes-lie

 

 

[ozimoron]

Neither of these secret service agents has disputed her claim under oath.

[Slip]

15 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Neither of these secret service agents has disputed her claim under oath.

I presume part of their job entails understanding the consequences of perjury.

[SunnyinBangrak]

On 7/1/2022 at 11:31 PM, ozimoron said:

Neither of these secret service agents has disputed her claim under oath.

Were Hutchinson's (fiecely disputed by those actually present in the car)hearsay comments unsupported by evidence actually made under oath? I was under the impression the partisan and divisive Jan 6th commission was not strictly classed as a court of law thus the legal concepts of oaths and perjury are not relevant. 

Edited July 4, 2022 by SunnyinBangrak

[candide]

3 hours ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

Were Hutchinson's (fiecely disputed by those actually present in the car)hearsay comments unsupported by evidence actually made under oath? I was under the impression the partisan and divisive Jan 6th commission was not strictly classed as a court of law thus the legal concepts of oaths and perjury are not relevant. 

"The witness will please stand and raise her right hand. Do you swear or affirm under penalty of perjury that the testimony you're about to give is truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?"

https://www.npr.org/2022/06/28/1108396692/jan-6-committee-hearing-transcript

[bendejo]

Well, the job of the Secret Service agent is to protect the boss against all threats.  If it looks like the boss could be sent to jail for something, lying to prevent that from happening would be within the duties of the job, no?  The legal equivalent of "taking a bullet"?

When this whole sad circus comes to a proper trial, if the DOJ ever gets around to it AND is not compromised from within, you will see a lot of this sort of reasoning.  I'm watching the hearings and I can see some of the hiding places that will come into play: Giuliani was drunk the whole time, can't be held responsible; DT was convinced by Bannon, Flynn and whoever else that he can remain president and believed it to be true, therefore can't be held responsible, and so on.  You say this can't happen?   Sounds like a variation on the Twinkie defense.  If it goes up to the Supreme Court, well, by the time it reaches there it could the 2030s and all this election silliness is passe and presidents are elected by state governors.  If there is one legal maneuver DT has learned it is playing for time.

 

Back when George W. was president and the White House was being run by Ms Cheney's father, when Congress tried to redress his actions they were told the VP was not part of the Executive Branch.  When they approached it as him being a member of Congress (the VP is "president of the Senate") he told them VP is not part of the Legislative Branch.  And he got away with it.  I'm hoping his daughter, who I assume has inherited some knowledge of how this slipperiness works, puts it to good use.  Personally I never thought I would be putting hope in anyone named Cheney.  (Have you noticed she has the ability to sneer as she's speaking, just like daddy?)

 

 

Edited July 4, 2022 by bendejo

[jimmybcool]

Until these SS agents are deposed it's an open issue.  If both testify under oath that it didn't happen one has to accept that as truth.  Hutchinson did testify under oath.  But she testified she was TOLD that this happened.  Not that she witnessed it.  So even if it's not true she didn't perjure herself.  Just passed along hearsay.

 

 

 

 

[Jingthing]

19 hours ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

Were Hutchinson's (fiecely disputed by those actually present in the car)hearsay comments unsupported by evidence actually made under oath? I was under the impression the partisan and divisive Jan 6th commission was not strictly classed as a court of law thus the legal concepts of oaths and perjury are not relevant. 

Yes, under oath.

Doesn't need to be a court trial to be under oath.

Lying to congress under oath is the crime of perjury.

Similar to lying a FBI agent. Very serious!

[SunnyinBangrak]

7 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Yes, under oath.

Doesn't need to be a court trial to be under oath.

Lying to congress under oath is the crime of perjury.

Similar to lying a FBI agent. Very serious!

That's good to know.

 

 I find it alarming that on her personal texts released by Daily Caller, she refers to the Jan 6th committee as "bs". 

 

"“I had to accept service because the U.S. Marshalls came to my apartment last Wednesday, but I haven’t made contact with the Committee. I’m just on a tight timeline and just trying to figure out what my options are to deal with this bs,” Hutchinson added.

https://dailycaller.com/2022/07/03/obtained-text-message-cassidy-hutchinson-called-january-6-committee-bs-before-testifying/

 

Now why would this expert on repeating hearsay and gossip be calling this committee "bs"? In my opinion she called it that, because that is exactly what it is. I suspect this will end very badly for Ms Hutchinson although I can't remember any prominent leftists making up garbage about Trump, like Adam Schiff ever being charged with perjury?

[Chomper Higgot]

4 hours ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

That's good to know.

 

 I find it alarming that on her personal texts released by Daily Caller, she refers to the Jan 6th committee as "bs". 

 

"“I had to accept service because the U.S. Marshalls came to my apartment last Wednesday, but I haven’t made contact with the Committee. I’m just on a tight timeline and just trying to figure out what my options are to deal with this bs,” Hutchinson added.

https://dailycaller.com/2022/07/03/obtained-text-message-cassidy-hutchinson-called-january-6-committee-bs-before-testifying/

 

Now why would this expert on repeating hearsay and gossip be calling this committee "bs"? In my opinion she called it that, because that is exactly what it is. I suspect this will end very badly for Ms Hutchinson although I can't remember any prominent leftists making up garbage about Trump, like Adam Schiff ever being charged with perjury?

You are making a false equivalence .

 

What’s said in a text message and what’s said under oath are not even close to being the same thing.

 

If making such a  false equivalence gives you some sense of comfort, then do enjoy it while you can.

 

 

[SunnyinBangrak]

8 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You are making a false equivalence .

 

What’s said in a text message and what’s said under oath are not even close to being the same thing.

 

If making such a  false equivalence gives you some sense of comfort, then do enjoy it while you can.

 

 

Mostly agree with you here. Clearly what she said in private on her texts were her honest feelings on the matter - which as she said, it's "bs". But when she is dragged out in front of a camera at the partisan farce that is the Jan 6th committee she must perform to make her masters happy - as in she can't get out there in front of Adam and Liz and say their show is bs, can she?.

 No idea what you mean by false equivalence. She has no reason to lie in private.

Edited July 5, 2022 by SunnyinBangrak

[Chomper Higgot]

17 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

Mostly agree with you here. Clearly what she said in private on her texts were her honest feelings on the matter - which as she said, it's "bs". But when she is dragged out in front of a camera at the partisan farce that is the Jan 6th committee she must perform to make her masters happy - as in she can't get out there in front of Adam and Liz and say their show is bs, can she?.

 No idea what you mean by false equivalence. She has no reason to lie in private.

How do you know what she said on private were her honest feelings?

 

Who was the text to? In what context was the text framed? 
 

Her statements to Congress were under oath and therefore framed in the context of criminal liability if she lied.

 

She’s stated what others have reported to her, she has named who these others are.

 

The veracity of her statements is easily confirmed by getting the sworn testimony of those she has referred to.

 

That it is, subject to those individuals answering subpoenas and not taking the 5th.

[bendejo]

6 hours ago, jimmybcool said:

 Hutchinson did testify under oath.  But she testified she was TOLD that this happened.  Not that she witnessed it.  So even if it's not true she didn't perjure herself.  Just passed along hearsay.

You're talking about the incident in the car, right?  That's the important thing?  Hijacking the narrative. Do you work at Fox?

She gives 2 hours of testimony about the players and their plotting, and all the focus is on the steering wheel sideshow, literally clown-car stuff. 

Yeah, sure, we're going to be distracted from the criminal activity by this. 

 

 

[Berkshire]

3 hours ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

That's good to know.

 

 I find it alarming that on her personal texts released by Daily Caller, she refers to the Jan 6th committee as "bs". 

 

"“I had to accept service because the U.S. Marshalls came to my apartment last Wednesday, but I haven’t made contact with the Committee. I’m just on a tight timeline and just trying to figure out what my options are to deal with this bs,” Hutchinson added.

https://dailycaller.com/2022/07/03/obtained-text-message-cassidy-hutchinson-called-january-6-committee-bs-before-testifying/

 

Daily Caller?  Geez man, do you ever read anything else besides right wing nutter websites?

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

58 minutes ago, Berkshire said:

Daily Caller?  Geez man, do you ever read anything else besides right wing nutter websites?

 

Founded by Tucker Carlson....

 

"Overall, we rate the Daily Caller strongly right biased based on story selection that almost always favors the right and Mixed for factual reporting due to numerous failed fact checks. The Daily Caller is a source that needs to be fact-checked on a per-article basis."

 

"Founded in 2010, the Daily Caller is an American news and opinion website based in Washington, D.C. It was founded by Tucker Carlson, a paleoconservative political pundit, and Neil Patel, a former adviser to former Vice President Dick Cheney. The current editor-in-chief is Geoff Ingersol."

 

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/daily-caller/

 

I don't know if their report of the SMS message, from back in early February, is true or not...

 

But assuming it is true, I think what is shows is what was already widely known about Hutchinson -- that she was a true Republican party loyalist and believer... right up until Trump went off the deep end, and she ended up getting served with a legal subpoena that she obviously was concerned about at the outset. Hardly anything surprising there.

 

Kind of hard for the Trump loyalists to try to discredit her by claiming she's a RINO...which of course, she's not.

 

Edited July 5, 2022 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[SunnyinBangrak]

59 minutes ago, Berkshire said:

Daily Caller?  Geez man, do you ever read anything else besides right wing nutter websites?

It is an exact record of her private text messages.  Not surprised you try and shoot the messenger. Your star (hearsay) witness being proven to have called this latest witch-hunt "bs" is totally damning. It shows the ridiculousness of the claims when the stars don't even believe in it privately.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

1 hour ago, bendejo said:

You're talking about the incident in the car, right?  That's the important thing?  Hijacking the narrative. Do you work at Fox?

She gives 2 hours of testimony about the players and their plotting, and all the focus is on the steering wheel sideshow, literally clown-car stuff. 

Yeah, sure, we're going to be distracted from the criminal activity by this

 

Correct, the grabbing the wheel item is interesting but it's hearsay and was clearly testified by Hutchinson as such.

 

A lot of the rest of her testimony to the committee was based on her first person accounts, such as:

 

"Backstage at the rally, Trump was irate that people with weapons were not being let through the magnetometers by Secret Service officers and agents who screen all attendees at any event featuring a sitting president....

 

“I don’t f---ing care that they have weapons. They’re not here to hurt me,” Trump said, according to Hutchinson’s recollection. “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.”

 

https://rollcall.com/2022/06/28/trump-wanted-armed-supporters-allowed-into-jan-6-rally-and-to-lead-capitol-charge/

 

 

[candide]

6 hours ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

That's good to know.

 

 I find it alarming that on her personal texts released by Daily Caller, she refers to the Jan 6th committee as "bs". 

 

"“I had to accept service because the U.S. Marshalls came to my apartment last Wednesday, but I haven’t made contact with the Committee. I’m just on a tight timeline and just trying to figure out what my options are to deal with this bs,” Hutchinson added.

https://dailycaller.com/2022/07/03/obtained-text-message-cassidy-hutchinson-called-january-6-committee-bs-before-testifying/

 

Now why would this expert on repeating hearsay and gossip be calling this committee "bs"? In my opinion she called it that, because that is exactly what it is. I suspect this will end very badly for Ms Hutchinson although I can't remember any prominent leftists making up garbage about Trump, like Adam Schiff ever being charged with perjury?

Haven't you noticed how young people were talking nowadays?

 

Anyway, the Trumpworld shows again it doesn't care about being incoherent! ????

 

First, Trump accused her of being motivated by angryness (because he allegedly did not hire her again).

Then, she was suspected to be motivated by greed, in order to get a very well paid job after that.

And now they complain she was not motivated at all! ????

Completely incoherent!

 

She was not keen to testify, she was feeling uneasy about it, what's wrong with it? She was not eager to testify against Trump, how can it mean that she was lying? She had no motivation for lying! That's again completely incoherent!

Edited July 5, 2022 by candide

[Berkshire]

2 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

"Backstage at the rally, Trump was irate that people with weapons were not being let through the magnetometers by Secret Service officers and agents who screen all attendees at any event featuring a sitting president....

 

“I don’t f---ing care that they have weapons. They’re not here to hurt me,” Trump said, according to Hutchinson’s recollection. “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.”

 

 

Yeah, Trump knew it was "his people" protesting on 6 Jan.  Yet, I recall Trump claiming that the 6 Jan riot was the work of ANTIFA and left wing agitators.  No proof of course, but it was just Trump being Trump.  The guy lies like he breathes.