Well, what do you know? Something went right for a change, and it’s definitely good news. The DOJ failed in another one of their attempted lawsuits. They’ve been failing a lot lately. Every time they fail, we get to put another mark on the board for our side. Blanche is not having nearly as easy a time as he thought he would be. They’re doing things in a rush and do not prepare well. Grand juries and judges have figured them out. It has to be embarrassing for those they send out who do not have all the information needed.
So, about that grand jury? Yea, they told the DOJ to nope on out of there on trying to indict Cassidy Hutchinson. Oh, yes. (It still would have been awesome to have Jack Smith as her lawyer.) Thus far, it seems she is okay and will not have to deal with the nonsense of a trial. They were trying to accuse her of perjury. Wut? Because she testified before the House Committee regarding the riot, and her testimony implicated Trump. Except Trump never went to trial for it, no thanks to Merritt Garland dragging his damn feet, so why should it matter? Because she insulted him? Taking her to trial would prove nothing. But Trump is vindictive, as shown by all the nonsense lawsuits he’s trying to file or has filed, including the BBC.
Ms. Hutchinson made a very difficult and extremely brave decision to come and testify before the committee. She showed us that an employee can stand up and speak out. Sure, it might not all be accurate to the event, but it’s accurate to her. Anyone else can deny, deny, deny what she said, but she is presenting what *she* saw and was told. She wasn’t trying to put words in anyone else’s mouth, and that’s what people forget. When someone speaks out, they are doing so for a very good reason, but it is about them and what they have to share.
Now, on an interesting note, it’s rare for juries to decline to indict. The threshold is rather low – that there was probable cause that a crime was committed. Apparently, they did not have enough “on” Ms. Hutchinson to indict. And they have declined other requests to indict James Comey, AG Letitia James, and the six lawmakers that, almost a year ago, made a video to remind our troops they do not have to follow illegal orders. Weren’t the boat strikes illegal? Seems it would be. But digression aside, it seems that the grand juries are smarter than the prosecutors.
Her attempted prosecution was a point of contention all over the place. Some of the people inside the DOJ said there was not enough evidence for an actual criminal case. Lawmakers across the aisle said to drop it. But they still tried. Now, in the source I’m using, Jack Smith apparently stated in the closed-door questioning that much of what she knew was second-hand. That goes back to what was stated earlier. And two different people seeing the same thing are going to describe it differently. Nevertheless, she chose to come forward and describe what she knew. That’s the important thing. She could have stayed quiet. She didn’t.
Thanks to CNN for some of the information I used.
Friends, I know everybody begs you for money. I promise you that, of all the outlets bugging you for spare change, we are the smallest and the hardest-working. We’re a bunch of old, disabled people, except for one writer in his mid-50s. But the rest of us are in our sixties and seventies, and this is a labor of love. All we’re asking for is the ability to continue our quest to tell the truth about Trump and help ensure democracy survives. If you can help, please do. Thank you. Ursula
