‘What kind of monsters’ are you: MSNBC panel says MAGA riot-denying GOP is still hurtling toward rock bottom
NBC News commentator John Heilemann attacked Republicans who came out against Reps. Liz Cheney (R-WY) and Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) for participating in the Jan. 6 select Committee that will research the failures on that day and the days that led up to it.
Speaking to MSNBC's Nicolle Wallace, Heilemann said that he has never seen a hearing that has had such an emotional impact.
"I was struck on the other side of that with this incredibly powerful sense of just what kind of moral depravity you must be in the grips of to engage in the kind of whitewashing and memory holing and attempted gaslighting that we've seen on the part of so many Republicans," said Heilemann. "I just can't imagine what kind of a monster you would have to be to watch those men, listen to that testimony, know the truth, hear them talk about it, and then stand up and say that the things they said were not true."
He noted that some Republicans believe it was just "a day at the beach," others think it was nothing more than a "picnic," and then there were some calling it a "tourist" visit for folks on vacation.
"In Donald Trump's recent tellings, it was a moment of glory, it was a moment of people trying to do the right thing, these mob members, these insurrectionists, these terrorists," Heilemann continued. "Rarely, just the starkness of the kind of moral monstrosity that's required to take that position in the face of that kind of testimony, it does truly boggle my mind."
Wallace said that she keeps waiting for the bottom of Donald Trump's presidency. Instead, people like Minority Leaders Sen. Mitch McConnell and Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) have attempted to erase the "bottom."
"I wonder, watching it today, what you thought the chances are of eroding some of the calcified lies that have been bought by the ex-president's supporters with this truth bomb," she asked.
Former FBI counterintelligence deputy Frank Figliuzzi said that he doesn't think that Republicans have quit hit "rock bottom yet," but he's hopeful.
"I have to tell you that while I pray that we're nearing the bottom I don't think we're there yet," he confessed. "You only need look at the social media reaction, reactions to some people in congress who are now deciding to blame everything on Nancy Pelosi, this whole thing that happened on January 6th, in their words, seems to be Nancy Pelosi's fault. There's a right wing cable TV host is attacking those police officers today, saying they're not fit for duty. Are we at the bottom yet? Apparently not."
See the discussion below:
Trump-loving OAN did a total 'whitewash' of first day of Capitol riot committee: CNN media analystWhile ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC and Fox News all carried the first day of the Jan. 6 hearing for the special select committee, other right-wing networks had their own agenda.
Writing for CNN.com, media analyst Brian Stelter noted that "One America News viewers witnessed the whitewashing first-hand."
He noted that as the hearings were beginning, OAN ran a segment on crime in Chicago. It was as if Tuesday's hearing "barely happened at all."
In typical OAN style, Stelter said "the channel's poorly-produced programs avoided the substance of the hearing; slipped in several factual mistakes; and promoted the GOP's counter-programming instead."
While Newsmax attempted to promote conspiracy theories about the Capitol riots, they did show the hearing. So did Fox, despite police officers making it clear that it was a pro-Trump mob that was beating them.
"But the mere act of carrying the police testimony at all is noteworthy because right-wing media has so thoroughly downplayed the crimes of that day," wrote Stelter. He noted that even Fox host Bret Baier called the hearing "an eye-opener" for "anybody watching who ... thought it was not violent."
OAN, by contrast, perpetuated the conspiracy that Jan. 6 was nothing more than a tourist visit at the Capitol. They criticized Reps. Liz Cheney (R-WY) and Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) for being willing to participate in the committee to ensure it was bipartisan. They continued to spout the conspiracy that Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) had a death wish and wanted Trump's supporters to come into the Capitol and kill Democratic members. The logic doesn't hold up, but that's the only argument the GOP has left and OAN is running with it.
By the time lunch came, OAN was reading another old statement released the previous day from Trump about Pelosi, claiming she's spending too much money on the hearing.
They then attempted to cover news that talked about Tesla stocks but broke into the Department of Justice press conference with Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) and Matt Gaetz (R-FL). The presser was ultimately shouted down by protesters that the officials failed to plan for.
Read Stelter's full column at CNN.com.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/27/media/fox-news-oan-newsmax-january-6-hearing/index.htmlJim Jordan 'may well be a material witness' for the Jan 6. House committeeHouse Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy was clearly pandering to the Republican Party's lowest common denominator when he picked Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio as one of the five Republicans he wanted to serve on Speaker Nancy Pelosi's select committee on the January insurrection — a pick that Pelosi flatly rejected, inspiring McCarthy to angrily respond that if Pelosi wouldn't accept all of his picks, she couldn't have any of them. But Pelosi made a wise decision, given how aggressively Jordan promoted the Big Lie and former President Donald Trump's bogus elect fraud claims. And author Sidney Blumenthal, in an op-ed published by The Guardian on July 27, lists some things that Jordan might be asked if he testifies before Pelosi's committee.
Blumenthal is a former senior adviser to President Bill Clinton and 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton.
One right-wing Republican who Pelosi herself picked for the committee is Rep. Liz Cheney, who wholeheartedly agrees with Pelosi's decision to keep Jordan off her January 6 committee. Cheney has said that Jordan should be kept off the committee because he "may well be a material witness to events that led to that day, that led to January 6."
On October 20, Jordan tweeted, "Democrats are trying to steal the election, before the election." In light of that tweet, Blumenthal writes, the committee could ask: "What does Jordan know about the creation of the 'stop the steal' myth? Were his statements about a fraudulent election and attacking the Pennsylvania Supreme Court for its role in 'stealing the election' made in coordination with anyone at the White House or known to them in advance? If he got marching orders, where did he get them from?"
A few days after the 2020 presidential election, Jordan promoted the Big Lie at a "Stop the Steal" rally in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania that was organized by Scott Presler, a former field director for the Virginia Republican Party. And Pelosi's committee, according to Blumenthal, could ask: "Who funded the Harrisburg rally? What is Jordan's relationship to Scott Presler? What are the communications between Jordan, his staff and Presler?"
On January 11, the day the U.S. House of Representatives impeached Trump for incitement to insurrection, Trump gave Jordan the Presidential Medal of Freedom. And Pelosi's committee, Blumenthal writes, should ask: "What conversations did Jordan have at the ceremony with Trump or others about overturning the election and how to defend Trump?"
On December 4, Jordan tweeted, "Over 50 million Americans think this election was stolen." And in light of how much Jordan promoted the Big Lie that month, Blumenthal writes, Pelosi's committee should ask: "Did Jordan coordinate his statements with Trump, the White House staff, other Republican House members, or Trump's legal team led by Rudy Giuliani?"
On December 21, according to Politico, Jordan privately met with Trump and other Republicans in the hope of finding ways "to overturn the election results." And according to Blumenthal, Pelosi's committee should ask: "What was said at that meeting? What were those plans? Was the rally discussed? Was the idea discussed of sending Trump supporters to intimidate and interrupt members of Congress in the certification process? Was Jordan's role on the House floor on 6 January against certification raised at that meeting? What did Jordan say?"
The committee, Blumenthal writes, should also ask: "Did Jordan broadcast falsehoods in order to encourage Trump supporters to come to Washington on 6 January?"
In a January 12 hearing, Jordan claimed, "I never once said that this thing was stolen." And the committee, according to Blumenthal, should ask: "Why, then, did he tweet that the election was being stolen before it had occurred, appear at a 'Stop the Steal' rally and claim that 'crazy things' had changed the vote in swing states in addition to many other statements?"
https://www.rawstory.com/jim-jordan-may-well-be-a-material-witness-for-the-jan-6-house-committee/WATCH: Jim Jordan squirms when asked if he talked to Trump about riots — and pivots to blaming PelosiRep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) had a tough time when Fox News host Bret Baier asked him about what happened when he spoke to President Donald Trump on Jan. 6 during the attack.
At first, Jordan confessed that he spoke to Trump that day, but rambled around trying to find some other way that he could pivot to attack Democrats.
Baier asked Jordan what he and Trump discussed when they spoke during the insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, but Jordan refused to say. Instead, he pivoted to attack Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the Capitol Police officers.
"The Speaker's office is the one that knows the [Capitol] security posture, and why it was the way it was," Jordan said.
The GOP has been trying to blame Pelosi for not doing enough to prepare the Capitol for what was an unprecedented violent mob attack by the former Republican president's supporters.
Jordan has yet to be subpoenaed by the select committee, and if he is, it's unclear if he would willingly testify.
See the video of Jordan below:
https://www.rawstory.com/jim-jordan-spoke-trump-insurrection/Here are the excuses Trump will most likely use to weasel out of testifying at Capitol riot commissionThe House Select Committee on the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol kicked off Tuesday with four police officers delivering emotional testimony about their experiences that day.
But one major question hanging over the committee is whether former President Donald Trump will testify, and the general assumption is that there is no way he would willingly show up to answer questions for Congress.
Longtime followers of Trump will notice he has certain go-to excuses for avoiding accountability that he is most likely to employ if asked to testify.
With that in mind, here are the top 3 excuses Trump will probably give for why he won't testify on the committee.
1. He'll claim it isn't a legitimate committeeRepublicans are already saying that the special select committee isn't a legitimate committee because House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) refused to allow members to be on it after Pelosi wouldn't allow Reps. Jim Jordan (R-OH) and Jim Banks (R-IN) to serve. It is a bipartisan committee, much to the chagrin of McCarthy, as GOP. Reps. Liz Cheney (R-WY) and Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) are participating in the committee and have pledged to ensure its bipartisan nature.
The only option that Republicans now have is to demonize Cheney and Kinzinger as not "true" Republicans or as "traitors." Rep. Matt Rosendale (R-MT) came very close to using that word, but instead claimed the two GOP members were "blinded by ambition." Cheney has already lost her post as the top third Republican in the House and Kinzinger is risking his House seat.
During Trump's second impeachment trial, his lawyers argued that it wasn't a legitimate trial because it was "unconstitutional" because Trump had already left office by the time the trial began.
2. He will claim that subpoenaing Trump is just a public relations stuntOne thing Trump's lawyers said during the second impeachment trial and investigations was that Trump would never testify because subpoenaing him would be nothing more than a publicity stunt. The comments came after Trump complained that he wasn't allowed to defend himself.
"Presidents Gerald Ford and Bill Clinton both provided testimony while in office — and the Supreme Court held just last year that you were not immune from legal process while serving as president — so there is no doubt that you can testify in these proceedings," wrote Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD). "Indeed, whereas a sitting president might raise concerns about distraction from their official duties, that concern is obviously inapplicable here. We, therefore, anticipate your availability to testify."
The impeachment lawyers for Trump argued that he has a First Amendment right to say whatever he wants in a rally. Trump could also claim the Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate himself, though that would have to be done in person on the record.
3. Trump will claim executive privilege prevents him from testifyingWhile Trump's lawyers claimed that impeachment was unconstitutional because he was no longer president, they'll use the protection of the executive branch to hide him from being subpoenaed this time.
Because Trump was president, he'll claim that his calls with other Republican that occurred during the Capitol riots were protected by executive privilege. In fact, he'll claim that all of the things that happened that day were protected by executive privilege.
He tried to use this excuse on May 8, 2019, when he was asked to give a deposition to special counsel Robert Mueller for the Russia investigation. It became Trump's "first use of the secrecy powers as president," reported the New York Times.
It's unclear how far that argument will go given Trump appears to have already waved that privilege by speaking to several reporters for several books about him and his administration. It could also be argued that Trump's rally that day was a political one, not an official one from the president.
There are likely other things his lawyers could come up with as a reason for him to avoid testifying.
https://www.rawstory.com/donald-trump-too-weak-testify/
