We are quickly reaching the point where it’s more apt to ask exactly what was true about Cassidy Hutchinson’s “bombshell” testimony before the January 6th committee on Wednesday.
RedState documented that numerous claims of former White House aides have been refuted by eye-witnesses. This includes two Secret Service agents, who offer to testify that Donald Trump never karate choked them in the throat or attempted to grab control of a presidential vehicle. A White House lawyer also disputed Hutchinson’s claim that she wrote a note regarding Donald Trump’s response to January 6th, noting that his and others’ prior testimony confirms he wrote it.
Now Hutchinson’s story is crumbling further.
Hutchinson stated that Cipollone had told her to tell Chief of Staff Mark Meadows about former President Donald Trump’s refusal to go to Capitol in January 6th.
Hutchinson testified that Cipollone said, “We’re going to get charged with every crime imaginable,” if Trump went to the Capitol…
…“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,” Posobiec tweeted on Wednesday evening.
The January 6 Committee “is aware of this discrepancy,” according to Posobiec, and “are ignoring media inquiries about it.”
To be fair, this is an anonymously sourced rebuttal, so it’s possible Hutchinson is telling the truth and the sources are lying, but why would anyone assume that given how much her prior allegations have fallen apart?
While the House of Representatives is not a court of law, the same principles still apply when judging the credibility of a supposed witness, and to be sure, Hutchinson didn’t even “witness” most of what she claimed. It is pertinent to note that two of her revelations (including the one leading the news cycle) have already been refuted. Also, I don’t think there are any grounds to believe she lied about Cipollone.
Here’s what I think happened here, and I think you have to start with the fact that Hutchinson didn’t share any of this for a year-and-a-half. Think about why you should speak out. Why not speak out immediately if she feels that crimes have been committed? If she had done this, she would be regarded as an incredible hero.
Hutchinson didn’t wait so long to make her claim and then was quickly contradicted by others shows that she is a woman trying to get back on track. There’s already a list of January 6th committee witnesses who have gone on to get cable news gigs and book deals. Hutchinson wouldn’t have been able to testify without her testimony. She had previously worked for the “bad orange man”. This was her chance to “fix” things, setting herself up as a “good” one so she could continue to advance in the swamp.
And to be sure, that’s exactly what will happen. Given her cable news success, she will likely be promoted and hired by a network or liberal lobbying organization to a lucrative contract. Hutchinson and Democrats are good at helping others. Hutchinson knows precisely what she has to gain even though it may mean a slight distortion of the truth.
About Post Author
