Texts Show Liz Cheney Spoke to J6 Witness About Testimony Without Lawyer Present
Shame on everyone involved.
You know, because we needed more evidence that the J6 Committee and Liz Cheney are nothing but…well, you know what I mean. If you follow me on X you know exactly what I would say if I lacked respect for my boss.
The Committee on House Administration’s Subcommittee on Oversight released a bunch of texts between Cheney and J6 “star witness” Cassidy Hutchinson, a former aide to former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, about her testimony without the latter’s lawyer present.
You don’t have to be a lawyer to know you cannot speak to a witness without their lawyer. It’s unethical.
At first, Cheney communicated with Hutchinson through Alyssa Farah Griffin, a former White House communications director:
When Hutchinson reached out to Farah Griffin, she invited Hutchinson over to her Georgetown townhome to talk on April 26, 2022. That evening, Hutchinson told Farah Griffin she had more information she could provide to the Select Committee, according to statements by both Hutchinson and Farah Griffin. During their conversation, Farah Griffin agreed to “[contact] Liz Cheney on [Hutchinson’s] behalf about scheduling another interview.” Hutchinson’s new testimony would include her never-before-heard story that alleged that President Trump agreed with rioters chanting “Hang Mike Pence.”
According to text messages, that appear to be from the encrypted messaging app “Signal,” between Hutchinson and Farah Griffin obtained by the Subcommittee, Cheney agreed to communicate with Hutchinson through Farah Griffin. However, it appears that Cheney knew communicating with Hutchinson while Hutchinson was represented by an attorney and a subject of the Select Committee’s investigation, without going through Hutchinson’s attorney, would be unethical. This is evident by Farah Griffin’s text to Hutchinson that Cheney’s “one concern was so long as [sic] you have counsel, she can’t really ethically talk to you without him.”?
For nearly a month, Farah Griffin acted?as an intermediary betweenCheney and the Select Committee. As an intermediary for Cheney, Farah Griffin helped coordinate Hutchinson’s third transcribed interview—without Hutchinson’s lawyer, Stefan Passantino’s knowledge. During the same time, Farah Griffin and Hutchinson discussed the optics of Hutchinson leaking her “new information” to the press instead of providing it directly to the Select Committee. Hutchinson and Farah Griffin also colluded to create a false story about why Hutchinson needed to do a third transcribed interview for the Select Committee to feed to Passantino. Presumably this was done at Cheney’s direction because it was Cheney herself who led the third transcribed interview with Hutchinson. Cheney knew that Passantino represented Hutchinson leading up to and during this third transcribed interview with the Select Committee on May 17, 2021.
BREAKING: The House Oversight Committee obtained Cassidy Hutchinson’s Signal messages.
Hutchinson was directly communicating with Liz Cheney, and indirectly through Alyssa Farrah, as Cheney was leading the January 6 Committee.
Cheney also helped Hutchinson get new lawyers pic.twitter.com/wiqyIMQQsy
— Greg Price (@greg_price11) October 15, 2024
Cheney made direct contact with Hutchinson after her third transcribed interview.
Cheney knew Passantino represented Hutchinson.
But she soon dropped the lawyer. Cheney managed to supply new lawyers…pro bono.
I kid you not.
Yup. Hutchinson fired Passantino and took on the lawyers Cheney suggested.
With new lawyers, Hutchinson gave a fourth and secretive interview with Cheney and another J6 Committee counsel.
What happened in that fourth interview?
Hutchinson provided “some of her most outlandish new claims.”
People, even those involved, contradicted Hutchinson’s claims, as Jonathan Turley pointed out:
Hutchinson would later dump Passantino and testify to allegations that have been challenged as untrue. That includes the limo allegation that was repeatedly raised by Cheney and others. Hutchinson recounted the story that Trump allegedly grabbed the wheel of the vehicle after the Secret Service allegedly refused to take him to the Capitol.
Cheney and the Committee were aware that the account was directly and clearly refuted by the driver of the vehicle. However, they buried his account and highlighted that claim in its final report as being credible.
In Cheney’s book, she never said she recommended new attorneys for Hutchinson.
In her book, Hutchinson claimed that Cheney advised her “to change attorneys and even provided a list of recommendations.”
It gets better.
Other texts show Cheney and Hutchinson tried to get Passantino disbarred:
After Hutchinson switched attorneys at Cheney’s direction, the Select Committee needed to ensure Hutchinson’s credibility as a witness and explain away her changed testimony. To do this, the Select Committee needed to create a new narrative that would make Passantino the scapegoat. They manufactured the story that Passantino gave Hutchinson faulty advice — such as instructing Hutchinson to withhold information, to misrepresent her testimony, and even that Passantino implied he would help Hutchinson with employment in return for favorable testimony. Contrary to the Select Committee’s and Hutchinson’s narrative, however, the Subcommittee obtained messages between Farah Griffin and Hutchinson where Hutchinson admits that Passantino was acting in her best interest and that she agreed with his counsel.
The Subcommittee has reviewed relevant documents revealing that both bar complaints filed against Passantino in Washington D.C. and Georgia were “dismissed” without imposing any penalties against Passantio. Instead of Cheney facing scrutiny for unethically communicating with Hutchinson behind the back of her legal representation, Cheney used the weight of the Select Committee to pressure the D.C. Bar to investigate her star witness’s scapegoat. This was all to make Hutchinson seem credible while destroying the credibility of any dissenting voice, and that meant attacking the career of anyone who stood in the way of the Select Committee’s narrative.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Yeah, I am that naive guy who wants people like Cheney behind bars for this.
Yeah, good luck with that. Nothing will happen to Cheney. Nothing at all. This will just be tossed into the Memory Hole and quickly forgotten just like all the other illegal acts and actions of our elected officials. Tampering with a federal witness? Meh, whatever. Suborning perjury? Meh, whatever. Attempting to destroy the career of a lawyer who has done nothing wrong? Meh, whatever. It’s all part and parcel with our two-tiered justice system where the privileged elite don’t have to worry about violating the law but the common person will be held accountable and responsible for even the smallest infraction of the law.
“For my friends, everything; for my enemies, the law.” — Getulio Vargas
You misunderstand what ethics rules are for. They are actually meant to enable Democrats to threaten lawyers not to take on Republican clients.
1. Even if she had no immunity, I don’t think what’s revealed here is actually a crime.
2. Even if it were a crime, she has absolute immunity. Another lawyer would risk being disbarred for this, but she may not “be questioned in any other place”, which I think includes a bar tribunal, since it exercises legal authority. It could censure her, but not impose any legal penalty.
yeah I guess while trump was smashing the faces of secret service and grabbing the steering wheel
lon cheney was actually breaking laws
The “Trump grabbed the steering wheel” story was manifestly contrived bunk and rubbish, on its face.
These hucksters are so brazen and predictably dishonest in their prevarications.
The Pravda Times just published an utterly wicked and despicable propaganda piece slander against Israel and the IDF, showing x-ray photographs of Gazan children’s skulls and necks with alleged 5.56 NATO bullets embedded in them. The bullets are neatly placed in the middle of the flesh, with no deformation on them, whatsoever. Such crude and transparent fakery and a vicious hoax and defamation, Yet the Times publishes this rubbish.
This is where we’re at today, folks.
Didn’t Obama supply the Palestinians with a bunch of our rifles for their “police”. The x-rays are likely composites, or just from setting the round on the kid and taking the x-ray, but it’s possible the Palestinians are shooting their own.
News outlets don’t even care anymore how obvious the gaslight is:
“An elderly Iraqi woman shows two bullets which she says hit her house.”
The only thing that would stop this sort of behavior would be the return of the tradition of tarring and feathering lying scumbag pols who step out of bounds.
Now I would subscribe to a live stream of that.
There is a difference between cold solvent based tar and old fashioned tar that was nearly solid until it was heated to the point it became liquid. That is still used in flat roofing.
Now now now….we all know that Trump and his incendiary words about the so-called “Deep State” are the real threat to democracy.
*threat to democrats.
About the lawyer.
Conspiracy to violate civil rights is a crime that occurs when two or more people agree to injure, threaten, or intimidate someone in the United States for exercising their rights. This crime is covered by 18 U.S.C. § 241, also known as the Conspiracy Against Rights statute.
But such will never be charged against people like David Brock, who has an entire organization dedicated to exactly this.
She has absolute immunity, guaranteed by the constitution.
As with the lies the msm publishes daily and the lies from the left by the minute, there is only one way to stop it. Hold all of them legally accountable. Voter fraud is so hard to prove that anyone can do it without being punished. Most of the things in our lives that we know are wrong could be stopped if the people doing them were held accountable and fined/jailed. It should start in Congress where many of these lies and attacks start by making laws against these transgressions. My first attack would be on the MSM who can say or do anything while knowing they are lying and propagating lies. The next would be false campaign ads that lie and distort the truth. I know free speech allows lies but TV networks are under federal laws and licenses and could be held accountable. Every institution I grew up with is no longer trustworthy, and it is a sad world to bring children into.
“false campaign ads”, of which all Dem ads are bald faced lies.
The first amendment does indeed protect lies. Even the FCC can’t interfere with political speech, even for broadcast media (and it has no authority over non-broadcast media).
Interfering with a witness is incredibly bad and should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.
I mean it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to work out that speak to a witness is incredibly bad and especially when you are supposed to be sitting in judgement of the person that witness is testifying against!
The fact Chaney didnt see it that way pretty much tells you all you really need to know about the intended outcome of the witch hunt. It was never to find whether Witches actually existed but to tell you all the people you hate really are Witches.