Per an anonymous party familiar with Ornato's denial...
Link: Jan. 6 Witness Account of Trump Outburst Gets Fresh Scrutiny
she was CALLED INTO Tony Ornato's office whereupon he IMMEDIATELY started describing an UNUSUALl occurrence while Trump was being driven away from the Rally with.SS agent Rob Engel in the vehicle...Engel was also in Ornato's office..."...looking 'Discombobulated'..a little lost..."...she then went on to describe what Tony had told her about it...
Now, given that Tony Ornato had summoned her into his office and began immediately relating the details of this "Unusual" occurrence...one that had likely unnerved Rob Engel...tell me why the details are likely to be materially different from what Ms. Hutchinson testified to...under oath and penalty of perjury...what possible benefit would she derive by making up a story that the two SS agents in the room would almost surely deny?...that's right...NONE.
Both Ornato and Engel would have to lie through their teeth to bend this any other way than what Ms. Hutchinson testified to...Trump desperately wanted to go to the Capitol (after all, this is his "Operation") became irate when told there were not enough SS resources...then, lunged for the steering wheel.(they were actually in the "SUV", or "Suburban")..had his arm grabbed by Engel...upon which Trump reacted to the "breach of protocol" by putting his free hand on Engel's 'clavicles'...I truly believe that's exactly what happened on Jan. 6th...and I also believe that if the SS agents were to refute her testimony, any attorney representing her would have a field day dissecting their rationale for summoning her into the office.
I'm interested in how the Secret Service plays this.
Link: https://youtu.be/LX6Qx_CvBs4?t=4591
...why I posted this.
(no message)
(no message)
How could he use simultaneous choking and steering motions. Seems odd....
Maybe it was just a bullshit story. Like the pee pee tape. Or the Steele Dossier. Or hunters laptop being Russian disinformation.
(no message)
(no message)
call her a liar for a few weeks and do their very best to undermine her credibility but they won't expose themselves to other questions
on their familiarity and outright support of Trump. Once they're testifying, they will open to too many questions.
It's odd, the one thing the R's want to deflect to is the one thing where she wasn't there to witness the action or dialogue herself.
There are so very many other issues about Trump and his ways along with the knowledge of the planned attack by those she worked
alongside with during her time in the Trump admin. Her inside knowledge is what the R's are determined to stay far away from.
Deflect, deflect as long as you can - destroy her credibility and move on.
(no message)