Search Posts

- Welcome back, America. First of all, I want to correct myself. I got to thinking about it. The US Attorney and the former DA in Manhattan took a pass on the Bragg case. I just want to make that abundantly clear. We're here with Congressman Barry Loudermilk, the Congressman from Georgia, House Financial Services Committee member and a subcommittee chairman. Congressman Loudermilk, you put out an 81-page report and you've made it abundantly clear, both on my radio show and elsewhere, that as you look into the conduct this January 6th committee, you're finding things that are extraordinarily troubling to you and your other members. That is, among other things, the mass destruction of evidence, whether it's video, whether it's deposition, whether it's text, whether it's emails, the movement of certain information behind firewalls encrypted so you folks have been unable so far, even with forensic experts, to break through and get the information. Most of this occurred a week before the Republicans took over the House, so it was done in a very aggressive way and done in a purposeful way. But you've also found a number of substantive things involving whether or not President Trump did in fact offer the National Guard. Liz Cheney has been running around and said that's false. Liz Cheney keeps referring people to the report. Liz Cheney keeps doubling down. Also, you have information from a witness who did in fact testify, but was not included in the public pronouncements about January 6th, a deputy chief of staff to the president and on and on and on. Information about Cassidy Hutcheson, so let's begin. Number one, in terms of this committee destroying and hiding information, have you made any progress? - Well, we've made progress in actually getting access to some of the documents that they moved to the executive branch, in my opinion, which was to keep it from public view and keep it from us. Four documents went to the White House. Eight documents went to the Department of Homeland Security. We were able to get the redacted copies of the testimonies of White House employees, which we included in our report. And through pressuring the White House, we're finally, they never gave us unredacted copies, but they allowed us to come to the White House and review the unredacted copies. And after looking at it, we realized there's enough that was remained unredacted in the copies. They sent us that showed a different story than what this select committee was presenting. DHS, for months, they just went silent on us. Now they're telling us, oh, we still haven't finished our review of these documents. It's been well over a year. They're slow walking it. But we have at least now have Homeland Security is as of last week said, well, look, you can come look at these documents as well. But for some reason, they sent us the key document that we were looking for, which was the transcribed interview of the driver of the SUV that Trump was supposedly take the steering wheel from. So we did make some progress there. We're still trying to break passwords. But the biggest, I think, violation of public trust and house rules was the destruction or the hiding of the videotapes of all the depositions. Those, I think, are clearly-- they admitted to getting rid of those. And so of everything that they've done, I think that is the biggest violation. Let's dig in a little bit further, Congressman. This National Guard issue, I had the acting defense secretary, Christopher Miller, on my radio show about a year ago. He said, everything you're reading in the media is not true. And hearing from the Democrats is being spun that, in fact, Donald Trump did offer the National Guard. He offered it in front of him. He offered it to him. That is, he told him to be ready in case they're called up. Cash Patel, Chief of Staff, has said the same thing. So they're trashing both of these men. They're twisting what they have said. And in fact, Mark Meadows testified that they had a National Guard unit, specifically positioned at Andrews Air Force Base, should it be necessary. And the former secretary of defense also told me on the radio that he believed it was January 5, the day before, that he got a call from President Trump. He wanted reassurance, did President Trump, that, in fact, we were in a position to help and that everybody had everything they need. And you also came in touch with a witness and witness information of, believe it was Deputy Chief of Staff, which he heard most of this, and actually heard the mayor of DC turn down any help. Is that right? That's correct. And that was one of the supposedly missing documents. That was Tony Ornato, who was the Deputy Chief of Staff. Two Mark Meadows, over operations. Now, he had been the head of secret service detail until President Trump promoted him to the Deputy Chief of Staff of Operations. And we knew that he had done multiple transcribed interviews with the committee, but there was one that was just commonly referred to as the missing Ornato interview. And our team, through a lot of diligence and digging, we were able to find that. And exactly what you just said was in there, that he had testified to the committee, that he heard the conversation with Mark Meadows offering up to 10,000 troops. And even in early January, not long after the attack on the Capitol, Vanity Fair of all publications had ran an article that Trump had offered National Guard and told Secretary Miller, you have full authorization to get the Guard ready. That was in January by a liberal publication. So there is much more evidence. We even have evidence from the White House transcribed interviews that we received from the White House employees, where one of them said, that responded to a question by the select committee, which was, when President Trump first heard of the attack on the Capitol, what was his response? And this White House employee, who was physically with the president that day, said his immediate response was, get Pelosi and Milley on the phone and see what help they need. There are several instances on the record where he had offered and even was trying to get people to take the National Guard. But it was Pelosi. It was Bowser that turned down the offer. But it was crucial that they destroy the truth. It was crucial that they cover it up. It was crucial that witnesses that corroborate the president's position, that people who had evidence that would demonstrate that the president did what he said he did, it was crucial that those people be silenced, that they not be heard, that their information be killed, that they not have public testimony when the click lights were there. And so this whole argument about Donald Trump leading an insurrection, impeached on an insurrection, charged with the Klan Act and the rest, but still the environment is created about an insurrection. Donald Trump was never, ever, ever involved in or promoted an insurrection and is a rational matter, Congressman. If you're supporting an insurrection, wouldn't there be an email, a text, a sentence, a witness anywhere who said, I heard Trump say we're gonna take the building, I heard him call it so and so and say, we're gonna do these things, not one word. When we come back, Cassidy Hutcheson who was a key witness in a darling of the meeting wrote her own book and was taken under the wing of Liz Cheney, you found out information about that too. We'll be right back. Welcome back America, Congressman Barry Loudermilk. What about Cassidy Hutcheson who Liz Cheney took under her wing, who got an enormous amount of publicity, who wrote a book, what about her? - Well, she's very interesting because she was interviewed probably more than anyone else. Her first three interviews by the committee lined up with everyone else that they had met, that they had invited in to testify. But what's interesting is some of this we've derived from Cassidy Hutcheson's book and Liz Cheney's book is after her third transcribed interview, she had a meeting with Liz Cheney. After that meeting, she fired her existing attorney. Liz Cheney arranged for her to get a different attorney. And then they held another, a fourth transcribed interview. But unlike the others, this was just her and Liz Cheney and Liz's hideaway office in the Capitol. And the only others present was a court reporter and a videographer. No other member of the committee knew that this interview was going on afterwards. Liz Cheney showed the videotape of her testimony and the committee moved to have an emergency hearing at that moment to parade her in front of America that she could tell these sensational stories. They never tried to corroborate her story at all. In fact, going forward, I told our team as we start looking at all these transcribed interviews, don't just look at the way people answer questions, look at the questions that were asked and more importantly, the questions that weren't asked. And many times they would not ask firsthand, people had a firsthand account of these instances, they wouldn't even ask these questions because they didn't want anyone to give a testimony counter to what Cassidy Hutchinson had testified. - And that includes the so-called beast, the presidential limousine, where she conveys this story where Donald Trump is struggling with the Secret Service agents who's driving the car, grabs them by the neck, which is so preposterous. She wasn't there, so she, it's all hearsay, if worse. They put her in front of the clig lights, it's headlines everywhere, but they didn't bring in the people who were actually involved that day, including the driver, the Secret Service driver and the others, who I understand from you and your report, said none of that ever happened, correct? - That is correct, but he had to interject that. So she made these accusations in June. They didn't call the driver in until September. Of course, this is already national news and they're pushing this narrative that Trump is this irate guy, he's crazy, he's tried to choke a Secret Service officer, tried to grab the steering wheel from this guy. You would think when they bring this guy in, that is one thing they would ask him. They didn't even ask him if that incident was true, he had to interject it on his own. That right there tells me they did not want to get to the truth, they had their predetermined narrative, they were gonna suppress anything that countered these sensational stories that Ms. Hutchinson came up with. And again, hers was third party. She said she heard Tony Ornato, Tony Ornato called her over after the speech on the lips and said, did you hear what happened in The Beast? Tony Ornato testified in the same transcribed interview that we released, that never happened. He never told her anything like that and had never heard of that story at all until she testified to it in June. And so again, they suppressed anything that was contrary to what Ms. Hutchinson said because her story played right into the narrative that they wanted to sell to the American people. You have to assume all this material that was destroyed, interviews and all the rest, actually cut against their narrative. Otherwise, why would they destroy it? That is a perfectly legitimate inference. And you have to assume it was intentional, somebody ordered it. And you have to assume there are witnesses to this. Liz Cheney has made herself the face and the voice of this committee. She's doubled down, she's been all over the internet, trashing anybody who disagrees with her, keeps referencing them to page whatever it is of the report, which of course is not the final say. And so my question to you is this. Are we gonna be able to get to the bottom of this, the destruction of the information and the use of this committee and our tax dollars to advance another horrendous hit job on the former president and his staff on behalf of the Democrat Party? Are we gonna be able to get to the bottom of this? In other words, at some point before the next election, because God only hopes you guys hold on, but you may not. Are we gonna have testimony under oath, under penalty of perjury by Liz Cheney and others so we can get to the bottom of this, have them straighten it out, turn to the pages of the report they want you to show and then show them the other information and ask them how that information didn't get into this report and so forth and so on. - Well, Mark, that is our plan. We still have a lot more investigation to go. We're gonna build upon what we laid out in this report. We're already working overtime now on the next phase of information and once we compile all that together, at some point, we're gonna need people who were on that committee and we're gonna call them in and we're going to ask some difficult questions for them because we got to make sure the American people not only know the truth of what happened, but something like this never happens again in this country. - Amen. I mean, they want us to know the information, so why did they destroy half of it? Congressman Loudermilk, I wanna thank you for what you're doing. Keep it up and we'll definitely wanna have you back. God bless you, my friend. - Well, God bless you, Mark. Thank you very much. - We'll be right back.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.