Telling the whole story about the Jan. 6 House Select Committee, a transcript of testimony by former Dept. of Homeland Security Chief Ken Cuccinelli pounded by Committee lawyers to admit former President Donald Trump said the election was “rigged.” To partisan Democrats and Republicans on the committee, it was all about the “gotcha” moment with witnesses admitting “something,” then leaping to conclusions about motive. What difference did it make whether Cuccinelli said Trump thought the Nov. 8, 2020 election was “rigged?” Committee members wanted anything incriminating about Trump, whether it means anything or not. Cuccinelli refused to admit he heard Trump say the election was “rigged,” something he tweeted many times since losing the election to 80-year-old President Joe Biden. Cuccinelli refused to knuckle under the cross examination.
When asked repeatedly whether or not he heard Trump say the election was “rigged,” Cuccinelli refused to acknowledge the obvious. “I am not prepared to say that,” Cuccinelli told the Committee under oath. “Is it fair to say,:” asked a Committee investigator? “That seeds of distrust were even with respect to the 2020 election—after the November 2020 election,” asked the investigator. “I am not prepared to validate that word,” Cuccinelli said regarding Trump post-election comments about “rigged election.” Committee investigators were trying to establish that Trump whipped up his base to attack the Capitol and stop Congress from certifying the Electoral College vote. So, members of Committee took greater liberties to stretch the facts to the breaking point, saying if Trump said the election was “rigged,” that meand that he encouragef his supporters to riot on Jan. 6, 2021.
When you consider how the Committee operated, getting Cuccinelli to admit that Trump said the election was “rigged” mean the Committee could infer that Trump encouraged his followers to vandalize the Capitol. Members of the Committee, like Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wy.) and Rep. Adam Kinsinger (R-Ill.) concluded early on that Trump planned and organized the Jan.6 insurrection. So, by the Committee’s logic, if Trump called the election “rigged,” he encouraged violence by his followers. Committee members routine referred to Jan. 6 so-called “insurrectionists” as “Trump supporters.” Committee members have no clue whether or not the Jan. 6 rabble-rousers or criminals were Trump supporters but referred to them that way. Atty. Gen. Merrick Garland, 70, and his 52-year-old Special Counsel Jack Smith attempt determine whether the Committee’s work was political hit job.
When you think of all the emphasis Democrat and press gave to Trump’s taxes, it’s another red herring for the seething hatred expressed toward Trump. Trump infuriated the press by winning the 2016 election over the universal backing for former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton. Most of the broadcast and print media predicted a decisive Hillary victory Nov. 3, 2016, only to see Trump win. Trump humiliated the press by proving them wrong, when he beat Hillary in the Electoral College, while Hillary won the popular vote. Now that the Supreme Court cleared the way to release five-years of Trump’s federal taxes, the press got its way even if the public yawned. Only Democrats and the press care about trying to humiliate Trump by exposing his private financial information. Just like Trump calling the election “rigged,” who cares other than partisan Democrats?
How many times did the Jan. 6 House Select Committee say that Trump used the “Big Lie” to whip the Jan. 6 mob into a frenzy before attacking the Capitol? Democrats and press used to “Big Lie” to refute the “rigged election,” or Trump’s statements of widespread voter fraud. Democrats and the press conflate Trump personal opinions about the Nov. 8, 2020 election with galvanizing crowd to commit violence against the government. House Committee members could not find any language that encouraged anyone Jan. 6 to break the law. Whether or not certain groups or individuals broke the law Jan. 6, it’s a leap to say Trump encouraged lawlessness. Whatever happened to the Jan. 6 lawbreakers, it was not something Trump encouraged or should be punished for. Anyone who broke the law Jan. 6, has been prosecuted to the full extent of the law, receiving long jail sentences.
Garland and Smith have some big decisions to make about the Committee’s recommended charges against Trump. Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), formerly lead impeachment manager and key player on the Jan. 6 Committee, said recently that Trump has led a “misanthropic life.” When Garland and Smith hear that, how can they take any of the Committee’s criminal charges against Trump seriously? Raskin lets the Department of Justice know the extent of Committee’s bias against Trump. If Trump felt the Nov. 8, 2020 were “rigged” by Democrats, that’s his personal opinion, not a crime, not grounds for prosecution. Yet Democrats refer to Jan. 6 lawbreakers as “Trump supporters,” continuing to denigrate the former president. Garland and Smith know that any court with extreme prejudice against a defendant would trigger a hung jury. Trump’s case shows egregious bias and partisanship.
About the Author
John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He’s editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.
