Text began coming in to Meadows on January 6th, begging trump to stop the Capitol attack

[Billiejeens]

I would speculate that making Trump un-electable is more of a side benefit. A not unwelcome happenstance to the investigation.

My view, is that the primary focus ----and face it, the primary responsibility ---- of any Congressional Committee is to be informational. Informational --- so that Congress can devise new laws, or change old laws so that such a violent and dangerous attack on the People's House cannot happen again.

Ergo....get to the bottom of this attack. Autopsy the hell outta it. What happened? Who did what? Who said what? And to whom? To what effect? In short, who was responsible for this debacle?

So if they find the answers to all of that....then that improves the likelihood that better future decisions to prevent a re-occurrence can occur.

IMHO

You do or you do not understand that what is happening bears no resemblance to what you described?

 

[22lcidw]

As you no doubt know by now, the Select Committee issued a subpoena late yesterday to the chief White House lawyer, Pat Cipollone.
And, as you no doubt heard in some of the hearings to date.....Cipollone was a prominent voice in meetings. Often a prudent voice urging moderation while warning of legal jeopardy attached to some of the proposed 'Election Reversal' schemes.

He's been reluctant to sit before the Committee while under oath or being filmed.

But, with the effective testimony of Cassidy Hutchinson Cipollone's name became even more prominent than it was when Cheney called him out as she ended the 4th (or was it the 3rd?) hearing.

Cipollone is now the guy with the spotlight on him.....and it's gonna follow him. THAT much attention doesn't just fade away. Something hasta happen. He'll cooperate. Or he'll file a suit to attempt to stop it. But the press will be on him like a perfume. After all, there's no 'client confidentiality' aspect here. He is the 'People's lawyer'....... NOT Don Trump's lawyer.



This morning's Washington Post offered us this:

"But the subpoena may provide cover for Cipollone to cooperate with the committee, as Trump and his allies have sought to keep those in the former president’s orbit from providing the committee with potentially damaging information.

Hutchinson in her testimony portrayed Cipollone as one of the last firewalls blocking Trump’s efforts to overturn the elections. She testified that, on the morning of Jan. 6, Cipollone came forward with an urgent request, saying “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.’”

Tuesday’s surprise hearing was designed in part to ramp up pressure on reluctant witnesses such as Cipollone, according to those involved with the investigation....."

---------------------------------------------------------

These hearings have been a fascinating exercise in watching drama, conflict, and the 'sausage-making' ickyness of our elected leaders.

Trump ran on a free sovereign nation. Borders, language and culture. The globalists and their localized D.C. swamp will have none of that. Biden doesn't even want to come back here from Europe because of the pushback by some of the citizens at least in potential voting. The men and women involved in this travesty are the real traitors. But gaining an easy life with lots of comforts and little sweating is the tradeoff for selling out the citizens. And many of them including you are on that train. Paying attention to a farce and then even a lower farce with the other side allowed no questioning or defense. A Drumhead or a Kangaroo Court or any other name.

 

[Stormy Daniels]

But, with the effective testimony of Cassidy Hutchinson Cipollone's name became even more prominent than it was when Cheney called him out as she ended the 4th (or was it the 3rd?) hearing.

I've been scratching my head trying to figure out what purpose there was to suddenly call the Hutchinson meeting out of nowhere. I don't think for a moment that the committee learned anything new from it. And it occurred to me that the whole point might have been leverage to subpoena Cipollone. He's been reluctant to say too much, fearing legitimate implications on Executive Privilege. But Hutchinson's testimony makes it clear that the subject matter sought by the committee cannot be hid behind privilege, and that circumstances are so extraordinary that Executive Privilege just seems inadequate for anything else that might be otherwise be legitimately covered.

 

[berg80]

I've been scratching my head trying to figure out what purpose there was to suddenly call the Hutchinson meeting out of nowhere. I don't think for a moment that the committee learned anything new from it. And it occurred to me that the whole point might have been leverage to subpoena Cipollone. He's been reluctant to say too much, fearing legitimate implications on Executive Privilege. But Hutchinson's testimony makes it clear that the subject matter sought by the committee cannot be hid behind privilege, and that circumstances are so extraordinary that Executive Privilege just seems inadequate for anything else that might be otherwise be legitimately covered.

I suspect Cipolonne's attempts to withhold testimony may come up against the same problem Eastman faced as he tried to withhold documents from the committee. The crime-fraud exception to attorney-client and executive privilege. Leaving him with the 5th as his only protection. Not a good look.

It is the purpose of the crime-fraud exception to the attorney-client privilege to assure that the “seal of secrecy” between lawyer and client does not extend to communications made for the purpose of getting advice for the commission of a fraud or crime.

 

[playtime]

They're not providing proof. Proof is established in a court of law. They're providing evidence. And the evidence thus far shows Trump was involved in a scheme to get fake electors submitted to Congress with the hope that Pence would reject legit Biden electors, leading to Trump remaining as president.

And now the Department of Justice is investigating the evidence they're discovering to determine if crimes were committed.

just ask peter navarro & john eastman.

 

[playtime]

The Select Committee has put on live a large number of Republicans under oath,

so far every witness that testified have been (R)s .. except for possibly the poll worker & her mom. as for the cops that represented most of their brothers, one that i know of said he was (R) & even voted for donny was officer fanone. - who was tazed into having a heart attack.

 

[Stormy Daniels]

The challenge for the committee will be to find useful questions to ask that do not fall under the protections from answering afforded to him. Like executive privilege, attorney-client privilege, and the 5th amendment

Attorney-client privilege does not apply for a variety of reasons. The chief reason being that the "client" is the office of the Presidency, not the individual occupying the office. This was on display when John Dean testified during the Watergate hearings.

As for the other matters, Congress has the authority to grant immunity to a witness, as was provided for Dean's testimony.

 

[playtime]

He is the single most popular person in the USA.
That Infomercial that yawl are doing is keeping the fraudulent election fresh in everyone mind.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

You’re not going to sit here and act like its not being reported that the 2 SS agents who were in the vehicle are saying she’s full of shit are you?

Why do you assume that she is lying, andthe agents are not? Why would she make up a story like that when she has some much shit on him already? Try some logic!

 

[playtime]

ABC reporting SS now says he was outraged when he couldn't go.

cassidy hutchinson testified that mark meadows was literally pacifying donny by not divulging the truth & left it up to his protection to tell him & that's why he freaked inside the SUV. sounds exactly how meadows woulda played that out - he's such a weasel.

 

[berg80]

Attorney-client privilege does not apply for a variety of reasons. The chief reason being that the "client" is the office of the Presidency, not the individual occupying the office.

And yet it took a ruling that the crime-fraud exception applied to Eastman in order to force him to produce documents related to his advice to Trump on the plot to overturn the election.

In any case, I doubt Cipolonne will be as forthcoming as Dean. There's a high degree of likelihood he'll lie. But his testimony will be compelled............unless he invokes the 5th.

Crime-Fraud Exception to Attorney-Client Privilege Applies to Trump’s Attempt to Overturn Election

A recent court ruling related to Donald Trump’s attempts to overturn the 2020 presidential election serves as an evergreen reminder that the attorney-client privilege and work product doctrine d

www.natlawreview.com

 

[hadit]

She claims that is what she was told. You have no evidence she wasn't told that. I don't know if she's lying or not but neither do you. Meaning you're lying when you claim she lied.

She may not have been lying because she may have actually heard someone say something like that. We do not, however, know if the guys were just spouting off wildly embellished war stories or rigorously recounting exact details of an actual event. IOW, there's no good reason to believe it happened, especially since people who were there are willing to testify it didn't.

 

[playtime]

-------------------------------------------------------

In my view, this brouhaha over the wrestling match in the car will fade soon. It is a tempest in a teapot that the RightTighties are fervently wishing to be a nuclear reactor. Gone soon. Betcha.

indeed. & what can NOT be said to be hearsay - is that SHE heard FIRSTHAND that donny said to get rid of the 'f'n mags & let armed people into the rally because they weren't gonna hurt him. ' yep - right outa his cat anus shaped orange mouth. that is not only chilling - but sociopathic & were gonna unleash them when they went to the capital.

 

[playtime]

I wasn’t asking you but why would they?

because they are guilty AF - why would THEY (most of 'em so far anyways) ask for a pardon?

 

[SeaMajor7]

Don't forget the ketchup, you demented zombies, THE KETCHUP!!!!

 

[Stormy Daniels]

And yet it took a ruling that the crime-fraud exception applied to Eastman in order to force him to produce documents related to his advice to Trump on the plot to overturn the election.

Eastman's work was campaign related, and therefore attorney-client privilege would apply as normal. Because he represented Donald Trump the candidate, which is a personal capacity. Cipillone was White House Counsel, representing the office of the President in official capacity.

 

[playtime]

He wanted more people in the crowd. He didn’t care if they were armed.

because he's a sociopath who was in need of yet another ego soothing butt powdering.

So no I dont think it means anything other than he’s a narcissist.

that would be a malignant narcissist.

How to Tell You're Dealing with a Malignant Narcissist

The intentional destruction of others while pathologically loving the self.
Posted Feb 22, 2017
[...]
Malignant Narcissism

I want to explore with you the darker side of narcissistic personality disorder, where aggression, antisocial behaviors, and suspiciousness are as prominent as their poor sense of self, fragility, and egocentricity. (Below is a video clip that explores the symptoms of malignant narcissism.)

A person with malignant narcissism has the potential to destroy families, communities, nations, and work environments. This condition reflects a hybrid or blending of narcissistic and antisocial personality disorders. Psychologist Eric Fromm termed the disorder in 1964. Psychoanalyst Otto Kernberg later delineated the symptoms of the condition and presented it as an intermediary between narcissistic and antisocial personality disorders.

Why is the behavior of malignant narcissism often considered dangerous?

Individuals with this profile can form connections with others. However, they process information in ways that can hurt society in general, but also the people who love or depend on them. Family, co-workers, employees, and others in their lives often have to walk on eggshells to appease a fragile ego and minimize the occurrence of their unstable, impulsive, or aggressive behaviors.

They lash out or humiliate others for infractions of even the most frivolous nature (for example, you gave an opinion that differed from theirs; you demonstrated confidence, and it made them look bad; you told a joke that involved poking fun at them).
[...]
How to Tell You're Dealing with a Malignant Narcissist

But we didn’t need a committee to investigate to know that

what we needed & got is a committee who is presenting evidence that donny et al were involved in an attempted coup; & in reality is still ongoing.

 

[berg80]

Eastman's work was campaign related, and therefore attorney-client privilege would apply as normal. Because he represented Donald Trump the candidate, which is a personal capacity. Cipillone was White House Counsel, representing the office of the President in official capacity.

The subpoena of a White House counsel, a rare step for a congressional committee, sent a clear signal of the aggressive tactics the panel is willing to use to try to force cooperation of even the White House’s former top lawyer, who most likely could invoke attorney-client privilege in response to many questions. But the testimony of Mr. Cipollone — who participated in key conversations on Jan. 6 and throughout Mr. Trump’s efforts to overturn the election, and is known to have doubted the legality of many of those plans — could prove consequential.

Jan. 6 Committee Subpoenas Pat Cipollone, Trump’s White House Counsel

Mr. Cipollone, who repeatedly fought extreme plans to overturn the election, had resisted publicly testifying to the panel.

www.nytimes.com

 

[playtime]

She may not have been lying because she may have actually heard someone say something like that. We do not, however, know if the guys were just spouting off wildly embellished war stories or rigorously recounting exact details of an actual event. IOW, there's no good reason to believe it happened, especially since people who were there are willing to testify it didn't.

she was asked the way the agent's demeanor was as he was sitting in the chair & she used the word, he seemed to be 'discombobulated' & as the other dude was relaying what happened in the SUV to her - the agent donny supposedly grabbed didn't object to it at the time.

 

[playtime]

That's a cop-out mate.

How many news outlets are reporting this? How many have confirmed that these men are willing to testify under oath against the testimony?

well unless/until they do..................... SHE did testify UNDER OATH.

just like with ginni thomas said she was 'willing to testify' to the committee about all them thar texts & emails to mark meadows about stopping the count on jan 6, means nothing since her lawyer said she won't be.