3.11.24 – U. S. House Committee Report
“What Really Happened on Jan. 6? – Finally, the Facts Are Known” – U. S. House Committee Report
From Donna Garner
[COMMENTS BY DONNA GARNER: On 3.11.24, U.S. House Chairman Barry Loudermilk (House Administration Subcommittee on Oversight) released his committee’s report on the many and serious discrepancies they found in the Democrat’s earlier and much-publicized Jan. 6 committee report.
Below are samplings from Chair Loudermilk’s 3.11.24 report.
Loudermilk’s committee report is written in a clear and easy-to-understand format which means that the American people are now free to read the facts for themselves.
The report (in pdf format) is only 80 pages long but fortunately is written so that laymen can understand it.
I suggest that a person should go to the Table of Contents, find a particular topic of interest, and then read that part of the report.
Below are samplings from the report.]
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1ST SESSION OF 118TH CONGRESS – PREPARED AT THE DIRECTION OF CHAIRMAN BARRY LOUDERMILK – HOUSE ADMINISTRATION SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT -- 3.11.24
4F510144C1F427873D3298D955C8E19F.initial-findings-report.pdf (house.gov)
PT 1, P. 13 -- CONCLUSION: The Select Committee was a partisan exercise from the beginning and its work product and findings must be carefully weighed against its partisan formation.
The Select Committee’s hearings and final report are tainted by the unprecedented partisan decisions made by Speaker Pelosi.
The Select Committee's Final Report contains some facts, but the conclusions and findings presented were predetermined due to the committee's partisan nature.
Speaker Pelosi’s unprecedented decision to reject the minority party’s selections for the Select Committee set the tone for how the Select Committee would function.
It meant that the Select Committee lacked a ranking minority member and instead operated with a vice chair, two distinctly different roles which House Democrats incorrectly asserted were interchangeable.
As a result, some Select Committee actions were procedurally flawed.
The Select Committee effectively operated as a federal prosecutor targeting President Trump.
However, this was a prosecution without due process.
There was no cross-examination of the witnesses, and the Select Committee was determined to obtain one narrative while failing to effectively question witnesses and uncover the truth based on facts.
House Democrats had the power to establish a Select Committee with no rules and without a requirement that the ranking minority member be consulted for certain actions.
Instead, they included a requirement that the Chair of the Select Committee consult with the ranking minority member — which was impossible after Speaker Pelosi rejected the minority party’s selected members for the Select Committee.
This allowed Democrats to hand-pick the Republican members they thought were suitable while also claiming to be bipartisan for the sake of good television.
A SAMPLING FROM THE REPORT
II: ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY: WHAT THE SELECT COMMITTEE DID NOT SHOW THE AMERICAN PUBLIC – PP. 14-15
The Select Committee collected and reviewed significantly more information about the underlying causes of January 6 than it released on its website.
At the conclusion of the 117th Congress, the Select Committee released its highly promoted Final Report and carefully selected records to accompany it, that as their website suggests, supports the Select Committee’s narrative.
However, the documents released on the U.S. Government Publishing Office (“GPO”) website do not represent all documents obtained by the Select Committee during its existence, and specifically excludes information that did not support the Select Committee’s narrative.
Chairperson Thompson admitted that the Select Committee did not preserve hundreds of video recordings made by the Select Committee during transcribed interviews and depositions.74
Chairperson Thompson also admitted that as Chair of the Select Committee, he failed to archive certain transcripts of transcribed interviews conducted by the Select Committee, in violation of House Rules. 75
This raises the obvious question: Why did Chairperson Thompson not want House Republicans to see these records?
Additionally, the Select Committee selectively interviewed certain witnesses and publicly released their testimony before interviewing other witnesses who may have provided contradictory testimony.
One example of this is the Select Committee’s decision to invite Cassidy Hutchinson for a public hearing before interviewing firsthand witnesses whose testimony may have corroborated or contradicted hers.
On June 20, 2022, Cassidy Hutchinson participated in her fourth transcribed interview with the Select Committee, in which she leveled 74 Letter from Bennie Thompson to Barry Loudermilk (July 7, 2023).
During this interview, Hutchinson testified that while in his motorcade after his speech at the Ellipse, President Trump attempted to grab the vehicle’s steering wheel from the United States Secret Service (“USSS”) driver and lunged at another USSS agent in the vehicle.
Eight days later, the Select Committee – knowing that this new testimony would garner significant media attention – scheduled a public hearing with Hutchinson as the witness.
During these eight days, the Select Committee did not interview either of the two USSS agents referenced in her testimony, nor did the Select Committee interview any other individual implicated in her testimony.
Although the Subcommittee was not provided transcripts of the interviews with these USSS agents, which is in violation of House Rules, records obtained by the Subcommittee indicate that the Select Committee waited until November 2022 to interview them – well over four months after Hutchinson’s public testimony, and when it was obvious Republicans would win control of the House.
The Select Committee failed to archive all of its records at the end of the 117th Congress.
These records include evidence that undermines some of the most headline-grabbing themes of the Select Committee hearings, as well as evidence that pertains to the Select Committee’s investigation but did not align with its narrative.
While the Subcommittee has endeavored to recover all of the missing records, the fact that the Select Committee did not archive or publicly disclose this information must be considered when evaluating the Select Committee’s hearings and Final Report.
The Select Committee should have archived all materials, not just the supporting materials; for almost two years it promoted their predetermined narrative through made-for-Hollywood trials to the American public rather than investigating the security failures of January 6, 2021.