Takeaway #2

A number of you have written in to say about the hearings, "No, that wasn't the big deal. This other thing was the big deal!" In almost every case I find myself agreeing with you. What it comes down to is there was just a huge amount of critical new detail in Hutchinson's testimony. And it was a challenge to evaluate the significance of it all in real time or organize it on a rank of significance. So TPM Reader KB notes that all the stuff about a war room at the Willard with Rudy and the top crazies starts appearing in a very, very different light if the plan was that Trump was going to go to the Capitol to in some sense lead the confrontation. It definitely seems like that wasn't just a possibility or something that was discussed but rather definitely Trump's plan and, one would imagine, what Rudy and his crew thought was going to happen.

See Also:  Former aide Cassidy Hutchinson testifies on Jan. 6 warnings, pardon requests, and Trump trying to grab the wheel

TPM Reader EG says that the real news was Giuliani's role in the prep for January 6th. "The story centered around Giuliani and the preparation on the 2nd, as well as the set-up at The Willard. Trump had a very well-developed reason for wanting to grab the wheel. Sitting in the White House for 3 hours now is seen as the best he could do, having been thwarted by his Secret Service chief."

See Also:  CNN's Don Lemon defends questioning Karine Jean-Pierre about Biden's mental fitness: 'It's our job'

We have this sense that Trump was there in the Oval Office watching the TVs, having a predatory thrill seeing the mob terrorize the folks who'd abandoned him. But Hutchinson's testimony makes it seem like he was probably pissed because his Secret Service detail had ruined the whole plan. He was supposed to be up at the Capitol not stuck back at the White House.

See Also:  MSNBC panel wonders if Ginni Thomas should be 'perp-walked' by Jan. 6 Committee

Many of the things we've learned are things we basically already knew or strongly suspected. The difference is new testimony which adds more confirmation, something more like proof. The idea that Trump was dead set on going to the Capitol wasn't my understanding of this at all. So that at least is pretty new to me.

See Also:  Joy Behar says 'The View' changed when Trump got elected: 'We used to have more laughs'

Having sat with this a bit now I think the biggest impact of this testimony may be something different and more general. Many of us have assumed that the committee's work will play out like this. They did their investigating. Now they are walking us through it in a series of hearings. The public will decide whatever they will decide. A report will be issued. And that's it.

See Also:  Boris Johnson rebukes CNN talking point that American democracy is dying: 'Grossly exaggerated'

But the committee leaders have clearly been trying to use the public hearings to create a catalytic effect which furthers the investigatory process. Create a dynamic in which the impact of the hearings breaks loose more information, more testimony, more evidence. So the hearings become not just an account of what was found but a tool for advancing the investigation. They are already very focused on getting Pat Cipollone to testify.

See Also:  U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken says Putin has 'already failed' in strategic objective to end Ukraine's independence

We have all gotten used to how much the GOP and official Washington can absorb and normalize about Trump's conduct and criminal behavior. But in this testimony today I think the committee may have gotten there. I'm not sure Meadows, Cipollone and others are going to be able to continue refusing to testify. The committee has also increased pressure on the DOJ, though we don't know just what DOJ already had in the works. The pace had seemed to be quickening on that front before today. The law enforcement side of this remains largely a black box. But on the committee investigation I think they've put the holdouts back on their heels.

See Also:  Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez dodges on whether she'll support Biden in 2024, focuses on midterms: 'That's not a yes'

Talk (On Background) Is Cheap

Earlier this month, Ginni Thomas, wife of Justice Clarence Thomas, made a big show of her willingness and desire to march right up to Capitol Hill and clear her good name before the Jan. 6th investigation committee. Yesterday, her lawyer said the committee just turns out to be too biased. So she won't be testifying after all.

See Also:  Former aide Cassidy Hutchinson testifies on Jan. 6 warnings, pardon requests, and Trump trying to grab the wheel

Two White House security officials who allegedly scuffled with the President in the presidential limousine are now denying through intermediaries what Cassidy Hutchinson said under oath in yesterday's hearing. But Ginni Thomas's switcheroo is a good reminder that talk — or rather claims through intermediaries — is cheap. People who claim they are just champing at the bit to testify usually end up refusing to testify.

See Also:  CNN's Don Lemon defends questioning Karine Jean-Pierre about Biden's mental fitness: 'It's our job'

Indeed, it's fair to question the journalistic decisions behind some of these reports. Most of us had never heard of Cassidy Hutchinson until a few days ago. Her claims definitely deserve scrutiny. But testimony under oath is the price of entry to this conversation. Indeed, the two men in question, Tony Ornato and Bobby Engel, have been able to get denials into print without even agreeing to speak on the record. In other words, they've refused to call up reporters and say, "I never said what she claims and the incident did not happen." They have been able to get reporters to report that people 'familiar with their thinking' say they will deny it. I assure you: They could get their on-the-record quotes into print at the drop of a hat. All it takes is a phone call.

See Also:  MSNBC panel wonders if Ginni Thomas should be 'perp-walked' by Jan. 6 Committee

It is worth noting that one of the men has already been accused of lying on Trump's behalf and both had a reputation of working as Trump's enablers during his presidency. Indeed, day two reports suggest that the purported denials are perhaps more semantic than substantive, denying that the President "assaulted" the lead Secret Service agent as opposed to denying that there was an irate confrontation in the limousine in which the President demanded to be taking to the Capitol.

See Also:  Joy Behar says 'The View' changed when Trump got elected: 'We used to have more laughs'

Maybe these two will testify. Maybe the story is different than what Hutchinson claimed. But until the two are willing at least to speak on the record, it's really all meaningless. And her claims are more credible until these two agree to testify about this incident under oath.

See Also:  Boris Johnson rebukes CNN talking point that American democracy is dying: 'Grossly exaggerated'

How Hutchinson Converted Skeptics To Thinking Trump Might Be Prosecuted After All

Former President Trump's speech at the Ellipse was many things — low-class, loaded with conspiracy theories, reckless.

See Also:  Former aide Cassidy Hutchinson testifies on Jan. 6 warnings, pardon requests, and Trump trying to grab the wheel

But to many legal elites, it fell short of incitement.

See Also:  CNN's Don Lemon defends questioning Karine Jean-Pierre about Biden's mental fitness: 'It's our job'

But after the Jan. 6 Committee hearings — and, specifically, after Cassidy Hutchinson's testimony on Tuesday — that view may be starting to change.

See Also:  MSNBC panel wonders if Ginni Thomas should be 'perp-walked' by Jan. 6 Committee

Multiple legal commentators and former DOJ officials who had publicly stated, before Tuesday, that Trump's activities did not meet the exacting legal standard for incitement have now changed their views.

See Also:  Joy Behar says 'The View' changed when Trump got elected: 'We used to have more laughs'

"There's no question about intent. There are enough pieces of evidence about what Trump did that made this more likely than not," said Alan Rozenshtein, an associate professor at University of Minnesota Law and former attorney-adviser in the DOJ's National Security Division. "He tried to get the magnetometers removed, tried to get them to march on the Capitol."

See Also:  Boris Johnson rebukes CNN talking point that American democracy is dying: 'Grossly exaggerated'

The testimony paints the picture, he said, of knowing wrongdoing by the former president.

See Also:  U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken says Putin has 'already failed' in strategic objective to end Ukraine's independence

It marks a shift for Rozenshtein, mirrored by other legal observers across the political spectrum.

See Also:  Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez dodges on whether she'll support Biden in 2024, focuses on midterms: 'That's not a yes'

Before Hutchinson's testimony, Trump's remarks were viewed by many as reckless, but fundamentally within the realm of political speech, evading the standard for incitement. It was, commentators argued, definitely within the boundaries granted to politicians, who frequently urge supporters to "fight" for political action.

See Also:  NBC Washington Correspondent Yamiche Alcindor and former U.S. Attorney Barbara McQuade join Andrea Mitchell to discuss key challenges facing the January 6 Committee ahead of their primetime hearings this week: getting a "distracted nation" to pay attention and understand what's at stake. "I think the biggest challenge for lawmakers here, as they talk about these sort of huge ideas of American democracy and sort of the experiment that we're all living in, benefiting from, possibly being brought to his knees, is whether or not they can make people care," says Alcindor. "The American public has been groomed to expect high value quick entertainment," says McQuade. "I think putting together a polished show can be very important." 

In January, Rozenshtein argued to TPM that Trump's action's on Jan. 6 didn't meet the bar in part for that reason — they qualified as political speech — even as he took to "alleging a massive conspiracy and fraud on the American public."

ee Also:  Joy Behar said on "The View" on Monday that inflation and high gas prices were a "worldwide problem" and largely blamed the baby formula shortage on Republicans.

"It's a lie, but to me it's campaign rhetoric; that's him going to the American people, and it's what we'd want him to do if the Constitution really were under attack," Rozenshtein said.

See Also:  Here's the Story with Kyrsten Sinema

But Hutchinson added a few sentences which, for Rozenshtein, changed that calculus.

See Also:  Sara Haines asked Sen. Chris Murphy if the Republican Party is going further right during Tuesday's episode of "The View."

"Take the f-ing mags away. They're not here to hurt me. Let them in. Let my people in. They can march to the Capitol after the rally is over," Hutchinson recalled Trump saying.

See Also:  Joy Reid accuses Republicans of thriving on 'demographic panic,' says GOP wants no one to feel 'safe'

It's not that Hutchinson's testimony was itself a smoking gun. But it emerged after weeks of hearing which describe a coordinated, premeditated campaign to overturn the election result which culminated in an explosion of violence on Jan. 6.

See Also:  "The View" co-host Joy Behar said Wednesday that gun laws would change "once Black people get guns in this country."

Her testimony in conjunction with the other hearings have changed the views of other legal commentators across the political spectrum. David French, the notable conservative attorney and never-Trumper, wrote a column arguing that Hutchinson's testimony provided persuasive evidence that Trump met the legal standard for incitement provided by the Supreme Court in the Brandenburg case: that of stoking "imminent lawless action."

See Also: Ana Navarro loses it during CNN gun control panel: 'Get your a--es in gear and call your Senators!'

"He is trying to bring in not just the guns, but the people with the guns, into the mob," left-leaning Fordham Law Professor Shugerman told TPM. "It's not a slam-dunk case yet, but up until yesterday, most of what we had was political speech."

See Also:  Phim Tống Từ - Nhân Chứng 

The difference for Shugerman, too, came with Trump's alleged "take the f-ing mags away" remark.

See Also:  Phim Tống Từ - Bức Màn Bí Mật

"Those three sentences give you mens rea," he added — the legal term for when a person has knowledge that they're doing something that violates the law.

See Also:  Phim Bao Thanh Thiên

Even Andrew McCarthy of the National Review, typically more interested in condemning those investigating Trump, conceded that Hutchinson's testimony pointed to the former President being "culpable" for the riot.

See Also: CNN correspondent Whitney Wild downplayed the violent threat against Justice Brett Kavanaugh's life and warned about political violence from both sides, after an armed man was arrested outside the justice's home, Wednesday.  

"It's a vibe shift," Rozenshtein laughed.

See Also: CNN media analyst on Kimmel interview: Biden could use 'exposure' that isn't 'too challenging' for him

At the time, per Hutchinson's testimony, Trump had been informed that men armed with AR-15s and "spears" were gathering near the Ellipse. Hutchinson testified that Trump then ordered the armed men to be allowed into the crowd with their weapons. He then directed the crowd to the Capitol.

See Also: Texas Rep Jasmine Crockett blamed Republicans for shooting: 'The blood of these children' is on their hands

There's still much that's unknown about the episode including, as Shugerman pointed out, whether the Secret Service followed the order and let the armed men through.

See Also:  Whoopi Goldberg says 'both sides' guilty of rhetoric like Schumer's against Kavanaugh, must 'be more careful'

Shugerman also believed before Hutchinson's testimony that Trump hadn't met the bar for a crime. But he said that after hearing Hutchinson's testimony, he saw two elements of a criminal charge for incitement potentially met: intent, and a bad act.

See Also: Pelosi defends not passing a bill, claims Supreme Court Justices aren't in any danger despite assassination attempt this week…

"Some speech is performative, but if a president give an order to do something, that's an order," Shugerman said. "This is not just political speech anymore — an order to take away metal detectors is a concrete act."

See Also:  Former aide Cassidy Hutchinson testifies on Jan. 6 warnings, pardon requests, and Trump trying to grab the wheel

And Rozenshtein argued that for any charging decision, prosecutors would still have to weigh the same balance between protecting political speech and punishing wrongdoing.

See Also:  CNN's Don Lemon defends questioning Karine Jean-Pierre about Biden's mental fitness: 'It's our job'

"Does [Merrick Garland] think that these facts are sufficiently egregious that Trump can be prosecuted without really anyone in the future being worried that if I make a speech criticizing some congressional budget resolution, I'm gonna be liable for incitement?" he asked rhetorically.

See Also:  MSNBC panel wonders if Ginni Thomas should be 'perp-walked' by Jan. 6 Committee

It's not clear how senior DOJ leaders like Attorney General Merrick Garland and Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco will view the testimony or if it's even new information for them.

See Also:  Joy Behar says 'The View' changed when Trump got elected: 'We used to have more laughs'

Whether Garland has the appetite to launch such a prosecution also isn't clear. Shugerman, among others, thought that incitement to riot may not even be the applicable charge in a situation where statutes already exist that prohibit the intimidation of members of Congress.

See Also:  Boris Johnson rebukes CNN talking point that American democracy is dying: 'Grossly exaggerated'

But the description of Trump's conduct is now public, as are the concerns of those around him that they would need pardons before he completed his term.

See Also:  U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken says Putin has 'already failed' in strategic objective to end Ukraine's independence

That, Rozenshtein and other argued, puts pressure on the DOJ to decide how it will act.

See Also:  Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez dodges on whether she'll support Biden in 2024, focuses on midterms: 'That's not a yes'

"Indictments are not just about whether the case is legally provable, but about whether its in the public interest to charge," he said.

Điều Hòa Funiki 12000 BTU 1 chiều HSC 12TMU

Thiết kế hiện đại

Điều Hòa Funiki 12000 BTU 1 chiều HSC 12TMU sở hữu kiểu dáng hiện đại, làm sang trọng không gian nhà bạn hoặc văn phòng làm việc. Với ưu điểm dàn lạnh màu trắng dễ hài hòa lắp đặt với mọi không gian nội thất.

Độ bền cao, tin cậy và vận hành êm ái

Điều Hòa Funiki HSC 12TMU hoạt động êm ái dễ chịu mang lại cảm giác thư giãn, không gian yên tĩnh cho bạn đặc biệt với gia đình có người già, trẻ nhỏ.

Thiết kế thân thiện: Nhờ thiết kế cho phép lắp đặt hai phía, bạn có thể lắp đặt ống dẫn và ống thoát nước ngưng ở cả 2 cạnh trái hoặc phải của dàn lạnh

Vỏ cục lạnh trong nhà bằng bằng nhưa ABS liền khối hạn chế tiếng ồn, đạt chứng chỉ RoHS của Liên minh Châu Âu về việc hạn chế chất độc hại trong thiết bị điện, điện tử.

Dàn trao đổi nhiệt của điều Hòa Funiki HSC12TMU.M6 được mạ lớp chống rỉ sét đặc biệt.

Thiết bị vượt qua các thử nghiệm EMC (Tương thích điện từ trường) và thử nghiệm về Hiệu suất sử dụng năng lượng

Điều Hòa Funiki 12000 BTU 1 chiều HSC 12TMU - Tấm lọc không khí Catechin

Trang bị tấm lọc Catechin giúp điều hòa Funiki HSC 12TMU.M6 ngăn lại những hạt bụi li ti, mùi hôi khó chịu của mồ hôi, khói thuốc lá, các chất gây ô nhiễm cho không khí thật sạch và ngăn chặn các vi khuẩn có tính chất lây lan và gây độc hại cho không khí trong phòng.

Điều Hòa Funiki HSC 12TMU 12000 BTU 1 chiều

Hướng gió với góc rộng

Cánh đảo gió của điều hòa Funiki HSC 12TMU.M6 được thiết kế với góc mở lớn. Giúp tăng lưu lượng khí lạnh thổi ra nhiều hơn, làm gia tăng khả năng làm lạnh đáng kể. Chế độ quạt gió, hướng gió với góc rộng sẽ làm mát nhanh hơn, tăng tiếp xúc của luồng gió mắt tới mợi ngóc ngacsg trong căn phòng. Giúp tiết kiệm điện năng hơn và đem lại cảm giá tiện nghi thoải mái cho người sử dụng.

Công suất 12.000 BTU

Điều Hòa Funiki HSC 12TMU.M6 12000 BTU sẽ giúp bạn xóa tan cái nóng mùa hè với công suất lên tới 12.000BTU, làm mát không khí nhanh chóng cùng với chế độ tự động đảo gió. Phù hợp với căn phòng diện tích khoảng 20m2.

Điều Hòa Funiki 12000 BTU HSC 12TMU - Tinh chất Nano bạc

Với lưới lọc Nano bạc giúp Điều hòa Funiki HSC12TMU ngăn ngừa bụi bẩn ảnh hưởng đến sức khỏe gia đình bạn.

Điều hòa Funiki với lưới lọc Nano bạc

Chức năng Sleep

Cho bạn một giấc ngủ sâu nhờ chế độ tự điều chỉnh nhiệt độ. Khoảng 2 tiếng sau khi nhấn nút Sleep trên điều khiển, Điều hòa Funiki HSC12TMU sẽ tự điều chỉnh về nhiệt độ của phòng tăng lên 1 độ C cho phù hợp với điều kiện khí hậu thường xuống thấp khi về đêm. Bạn sẽ không lo nhiệt độ phòng quá lạnh hay quá nóng khi đang ngủ say, đảm bảo sức khỏe và thoải mái.

Chức năng SLEEP tiện lợi của điều hòa Funiki

Tính năng Powerful

Tính năng Powerful cho phép điều hòa Funiki HSC 12TMU đạt đến nhiệt độ cài đặt ở khoảng thời gian ngắn nhất bằng cách tăng tốc độ hoạt động của máy nén. Một không gian mát mẻ, thoải mái sẽ được tạo ra chỉ với một thao tác nhẹ bấm nút Powerful trên điều khiển từ xa.

Thông số điều hòa Funiki HSC 12TMU.M6 12000 BTU 1 chiều

• Model: HSC 12TMU.M6
• Thương hiệu: Funiki
• Xuất xứ: Thái lan/ Malaysia
• Kiểu máy: Điều hòa 1 chiều
• Công suất: 12.000 BTU
• Phạm vi hiệu quả: ~ 20m2
• Kháng khuẩn khử mùi: Có
• Chế độ hẹn giờ: Có
• Chế độ làm lạnh nhanh: Có
• Loại Gas lạnh: R32

Tính năng và tiện ích:

• Thiết kế nhỏ gọn, tinh tế, sang trọng
• Lưới lọc tinh chất Nano Bạc
• Dàn trao đổi nhiệt mạ lớp chống rỉ sét đặc biệt
• Điều khiển từ xa trang nhã, dễ sử dụng
• Tính năng Powerful giúp làm lạnh nhanh chóng
• Chức năng Sleep đảm bảo sức khẻo cho người dùng
• Vỏ máy thiết kế khối liền giúp giảm tiếng ồn
• Tiết kiệm năng lượng , thân thiện môi trường

Kích thước và trọng lượng:

• Kích thước cục lạnh: 285*194*805mm
• Kích thước cục nóng: 300*550*770mm
• Trọng lượng cục lạnh: 8.4kg
• Trọng lượng cục nóng: 28.2kg
• Đường ống gas lạnh:
  + Ống đẩy: Ø 6.35 mm
  + Ống hồi: Ø 12.7 mm

Chế độ bảo hành:

• 30 tháng

Lưu ý khi sử dụng điều hòa Funiki HSC 12TMU.M6 12000 BTU 1 chiều

• Lắp đặt cục nóng tại vị trí thông thoáng, cố gắng tránh ánh nắng trực tiếp
• Không nên để điều hòa ở mức nhiệt độ quá thấp nhất là khi ngủ. Khi ngủ nên để điều hòa ở chế độ Sleep, giúp máy sẽ tự động làm tăng nhiệt độ phòng lên 1oC – 3oC khi về sáng, giúp cơ thể dễ chịu hơn trong khi ngủ và cũng tiết kiệm điện.
• Thường xuyên vệ sinh các tấm lọc và lau chùi bụi bẩn chặn mặt hút gió cục lạnh.
• Định kỳ vệ sinh bảo dưỡng cục nóng, dàn tản nhiệt, dàn lạnh (khoảng 1 năm/ lần) giúp duy trì hiệu xuất và tuổi thọ thiết bị.

#dieuhoa #dieuhoafuniki #maylanh #maylanhfuniki #dieuhoa1chieu #dieuhoafuniki1chieu #maylanh1chieu #maylanhfuniki1chieu #dieuhoa12000btu #dieuhoafuniki12000btu #maylanh12000btu #maylanhfuniki12000btu

Nguồn tin: Điều Hòa Funiki 12000 BTU 1 chiều HSC 12TMU

MBS Broke Us

Sometimes the biggest things happening in the world are happening out of view. Sometimes they're hidden but just as often they simply don't get the attention they should because they don't have traction as news stories. Or perhaps all the players have their own interests in not drawing attention to them. You may have noticed that Joe Biden is traveling to Saudi Arabia next month and that he plans to hold a summit with the de facto ruler of the country, Mohammed bin Salman — usually called MBS. He's going to Riyadh. MBS is not coming to Washington. This is presented as a full reset of relations between the two countries and — though this is stated less directly — a full reset with MBS. So all that human-rights, Yemen-war, Jamal-Khashoggi-being-dismembered-at-a-consulate-in-Istanbul stuff is done with. That was then. This is now.

See Also:  Whoopi Goldberg says 'both sides' guilty of rhetoric like Schumer's against Kavanaugh, must 'be more careful'

So why would the U.S. do this? Well, that's pretty straightforward. We have no choice. The Saudis, and really MBS, has played the most brass knuckle kind of hardball with the U.S. And he's won. I don't think there's any other way to put it. There's a complex set of causes behind the inflation that currently plagues the U.S. and global economy. The exact interplay between supply chain disruption, pent-up demand from the pandemic, demand driven by stimulus spending, changed work and leisure patterns driven by the pandemic isn't clear. The relative importance of each is a matter of on-going controversy. But a critical part of the equation is energy prices — both in their political impact and as a driver in the economy overall.

See Also: Texas Rep Jasmine Crockett blamed Republicans for shooting: 'The blood of these children' is on their hands

For many decades, Saudi Arabia has been the key player in the global oil market. That is not only as one of the largest producers but as the producer with the greatest production elasticity. Put simply, the Saudis can dial up supply quickly if they want to. And that means they have an outsized impact on global prices. For the last year and a half the U.S. has needed the Saudis to step in and hike production very, very badly. That's both for the health of the U.S. economy and for Joe Biden's political fortunes. And MBS has consistently said, no. Why should I? What have you done for me lately? All I hear is that I'm a pariah and now you want my help? Being tight with the Trump family and particularly Jared Kushner hasn't hurt certainly. There are numerous reasons why MBS is more aligned with U.S. Republicans and more autocratic rulers around the world. But the biggest thing here is likely simply to be respected and power.

See Also: CNN media analyst on Kimmel interview: Biden could use 'exposure' that isn't 'too challenging' for him

The Saudis didn't cause the economic trajectory of the last 18 months. But they could have altered it very substantially. They didn't. And they refused against a gusher of U.S. demands and pleas.

See Also: CNN correspondent Whitney Wild downplayed the violent threat against Justice Brett Kavanaugh's life and warned about political violence from both sides, after an armed man was arrested outside the justice's home, Wednesday.  

This hasn't all been to stick it to the U.S. and the Biden administration. After all, the Saudis and other producer states have been making a fortune. There is also Russia's new partnership with OPEC through OPEC+. That's weighed in the balance too. But that's another part of the same equation. The Saudis have been more solicitous of Russia than the U.S. This has all come even more to the fore after the Russian invasion of Ukraine which put even greater pressure on global energy supplies — oil and natural gas. It may be Ukraine that finally forced the White House to cry uncle.

See Also: Ana Navarro loses it during CNN gun control panel: 'Get your a--es in gear and call your Senators!'

The Saudis have us over a barrel. Now we're suing for peace. Not a pretty picture. But we have no choice.

See Also:  "The View" co-host Joy Behar said Wednesday that gun laws would change "once Black people get guns in this country."

Remind Me Why We Have Sheriffs?

I hope you get a chance to read Matt Shuham's feature piece today about "constitutional sheriff" Dar Leaf. It really brings together the current rage for Trump era "voter fraud" conspiracy theories and our much longer-term interest in far-right anti-government radicalism. When I got to thinking about this a few weeks ago it suddenly occurred to me that almost always when there was one of these figures it was a sheriff. In this case I'm not talking about the so-called "constitutional sheriffs," though that's a big part of it. I'm talking about Joe Arpaio in Maricopa County, Arizona or Alex Villanueva in LA County, David Clarke in Milwaukee. Like I said, these guys are always the sheriffs.

See Also:  NBC Washington Correspondent Yamiche Alcindor and former U.S. Attorney Barbara McQuade join Andrea Mitchell to discuss key challenges facing the January 6 Committee ahead of their primetime hearings this week: getting a "distracted nation" to pay attention and understand what's at stake. "I think the biggest challenge for lawmakers here, as they talk about these sort of huge ideas of American democracy and sort of the experiment that we're all living in, benefiting from, possibly being brought to his knees, is whether or not they can make people care," says Alcindor. "The American public has been groomed to expect high value quick entertainment," says McQuade. "I think putting together a polished show can be very important."

One of the big reasons I think is that sheriffs often aren't tied into a formal system of political accountability or responsibility. They're usually elected of course and that's a fundamental accountability. But a city police force and its leadership, for all their problems, are responsible for public safety and usually report to politically accountable people — the mayor, the city council and so forth. They may have some degree of independence. But they're seldom totally independent. Needless to say this police force accountability does not always work perfectly. But at least the structure is there. Sheriffs departments are often an extra layer of police power in a region that already has a policing authority.

 See Also: CNN correspondent Whitney Wild downplayed the violent threat against Justice Brett Kavanaugh's life and warned about political violence from both sides, after an armed man was arrested outside the justice's home, Wednesday.  

Of course, a big part of the problem is precisely the accountability: They're elected. We don't usually elect the police chief. They usually report to a civilian. Yet another reason mimics our national political dynamics. Since sheriffs are county officials they often get political power from more suburban and rural areas but have varying degrees of authority in urban areas, often sharing that authority with police departments which have responsibility for ordinary crime. All of these factors spurs a great temptation for freelancing, a big temptation for highly politicized mischief.

See Also:  Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez dodges on whether she'll support Biden in 2024, focuses on midterms: 'That's not a yes'

I'm only scratching the surface here of course. The precise nature of the office varies greatly in different states. But we've been following right-wing radicalism for many years, somehow this only really hit me quite recently. I knew it like everyone else at some level. But I'd just never focused on it, maybe because it is in fact right there in the open: it's always the sheriffs.

See Also: Pelosi defends not passing a bill, claims Supreme Court Justices aren't in any danger despite assassination attempt this week…

Turns Out John Eastman Was Invited To Give Ginni Thomas’ Group A ‘Status Update’ In Dec. 2020

Remember John Eastman, Donald Trump's chief election theft legal advisor?

See Also: Pelosi defends not passing a bill, claims Supreme Court Justices aren't in any danger despite assassination attempt this week…

And remember when, after he was subpoenaed by the Jan. 6 Committee, Eastman unsuccessfully attempted to keep private a group of emails that he said concerned "civic minded citizens of a conservative viewpoint who meet semi-regularly to socialize and discuss issues of public concern"? The group, apparently, had a "high-profile leader." 

See Also:  Whoopi Goldberg says 'both sides' guilty of rhetoric like Schumer's against Kavanaugh, must 'be more careful'

That prompted a good deal of speculation — including at TPM — about just who that high-profile leader might be. We had some ideas.

See Also: Texas Rep Jasmine Crockett blamed Republicans for shooting: 'The blood of these children' is on their hands 

Well, now we have confirmation: The group was apparently one that included Ginni Thomas, wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and a right-wing activist heavily involved in her own right in the effort to steal a second Trump term. 

See Also: CNN media analyst on Kimmel interview: Biden could use 'exposure' that isn't 'too challenging' for him

After an explosive pair of articles this week describing fresh committee records detailing the correspondence between the two, Eastman on Thursday acknowledged reality himself, posting a copy of a Dec. 4 invitation from Ginni Thomas for him to speak to her group "Frontliners" four days later, and to present "a status update to a group of grassroots state leaders."

See Also: CNN correspondent Whitney Wild downplayed the violent threat against Justice Brett Kavanaugh's life and warned about political violence from both sides, after an armed man was arrested outside the justice's home, Wednesday.  

Eastman didn't confirm outright that the invitation he described was the same correspondence he tried to keep hidden from the committee, but the details of both records appear to match up.

See Also: Ana Navarro loses it during CNN gun control panel: 'Get your a--es in gear and call your Senators!'

Don't worry, Eastman said, that thing where he wrote on Dec. 24 that "I understand that there is a heated fight underway" within the Supreme Court — that definitely wasn't based on insider knowledge from the Thomas family.

See Also:  "The View" co-host Joy Behar said Wednesday that gun laws would change "once Black people get guns in this country."

"I can categorically confirm that at no time did I discuss with Mrs. Thomas or Justice Thomas any matters pending or likely to come before the Court," he said in a blog post Thursday. "We have never engaged in such discussions, would not engage in such discussions, and did not do so in December 2020 or anytime else." 

See Also:  Joy Reid accuses Republicans of thriving on 'demographic panic,' says GOP wants no one to feel 'safe'

Eastman claims, instead, he was relying on internet rumors published on conservative websites. He pointed to one example from the Vision Times. As the Washington Post's Philip Bump pointed out yesterday, unfounded stories about a supposed fight among the justices were spread across the internet, and even made their way into Trump's election-theft litigation.

See Also:  Sara Haines asked Sen. Chris Murphy if the Republican Party is going further right during Tuesday's episode of "The View."

But that's not to say he wasn't in touch with Ginni Thomas at all! "As you can see for yourselves, she invited me to give an update about election litigation to a group she met with periodically," Eastman said. 

See Also:  Joy Behar said on "The View" on Monday that inflation and high gas prices were a "worldwide problem" and largely blamed the baby formula shortage on Republicans.

See! Nothing to worry about. 

See Also:  Here's the Story with Kyrsten Sinema

Thomas, for her part, sent dozens of emails to state lawmakers pressuring them to overturn the election results. The committee has requested an interview with Thomas, who told the Daily Caller Thursday that she "can't wait to clear up misconceptions."

See Also:  NBC Washington Correspondent Yamiche Alcindor and former U.S. Attorney Barbara McQuade join Andrea Mitchell to discuss key challenges facing the January 6 Committee ahead of their primetime hearings this week: getting a "distracted nation" to pay attention and understand what's at stake. "I think the biggest challenge for lawmakers here, as they talk about these sort of huge ideas of American democracy and sort of the experiment that we're all living in, benefiting from, possibly being brought to his knees, is whether or not they can make people care," says Alcindor. "The American public has been groomed to expect high value quick entertainment," says McQuade. "I think putting together a polished show can be very important."

Important Stuff, Truly Must-See

I mentioned a few days ago that the most compelling part of the Jan 6 committee hearings so far for me has been the description of the particulars of how the breach of the Capitol complex happened. The story is usually presented as something like this. There was a big group of angry and potentially violent Trumpers. There was a much smaller group, maybe as few as a few dozens of Proud Boys and Oath Keepers with a more focused ideology, a clearer plan of the insurrection and so forth. They were both more eager to get violent and had a lot more experience getting violent. But they were in the extreme minority of the people up there. So even though they're now the ones facing serious charges including seditious conspiracy they are only a small part of what happened.

See Also: Pelosi defends not passing a bill, claims Supreme Court Justices aren't in any danger despite assassination attempt this week…

The committee did a good job of explaining that that's not at all what happened. In fact, these two groups were acting as the command and control directing the mob, actually using paramilitary drill and planning to direct the crowd, punch through vulnerable entrance points and so forth and then have the larger mob follow them. I've followed this pretty closely and even I still had the sense that the progression of events that day, in terms of the escalation of violence was more organic. That's wrong. The Proud Boys especially were basically directing the events.

See Also:  Whoopi Goldberg says 'both sides' guilty of rhetoric like Schumer's against Kavanaugh, must 'be more careful'

The committee largely just asserted this. They had some details and I think a few maps. But mostly within the confines of a hearing they were just asserting it: this is what we learned from our investigation. Perhaps in a latter hearing they'll go into more detail. Yesterday I noticed this video assembled by The New York Times. It's really must see work. They pull together a trove of different videos, break them down to show the role of different Proud Boy leaders and soldiers and then weave these together with court documents from the on-going cases against the various insurrectionists. It tells the story above in powerful and convincing detail.

See Also: Texas Rep Jasmine Crockett blamed Republicans for shooting: 'The blood of these children' is on their hands

In fact, it shows an additional point I hadn't understood. The mechanics of the breakthrough into the Capitol have been explained either as poor preparation by the Capitol Police or the individual heroism of Capitol Police officers. So it's either a negligent failure or an heroic one. But this reconstruction of events shows something a bit different. At several points the attempted breakthroughs failed. The defenders were able to reinforce their positions, bring in more personnel in riot gear, etc. At those points, the Proud Boys leaders directing the assaults drew back from the attack points to where they could see the whole complex more clearly. They reevaluated and chose another entry point to attack. They then issued orders to had picked members of their team to refocus on other more vulnerable entry points. It's very much a military operation.

See Also: CNN media analyst on Kimmel interview: Biden could use 'exposure' that isn't 'too challenging' for him

As I said, this wasn't just an angry mob overwhelming outnumbered defenders. There was a lot more command and control than that. And that command and control was coming from the Proud Boys. The Proud Boys and Oath Keepers collaborated in their planning and both groups bought caches of weapons and so forth. But at least from the Times reconstruction what I'm describing here was mostly the Proud Boys.

 See Also: CNN correspondent Whitney Wild downplayed the violent threat against Justice Brett Kavanaugh's life and warned about political violence from both sides, after an armed man was arrested outside the justice's home, Wednesday.  

Here's the link to the Times video. As I said, it's really something you must watch.