[ad_1]
Republicans take control of the House of Representatives for a week. When that happens, the Jan. 6 commission, with all of its members selected by outgoing Speaker Nancy Pelosi, will cease to exist. Now that the clock is ticking, it looks like the commission’s collapse will leave some important questions unanswered.
The biggest such question is: What happens to the material collected by the commission? According to its own data, the commission interviewed more than 1,000 people. According to some reports, the number was as high as 1,200. Many of these interviews were videotaped and transcribed, and even those that were not were recorded in memos by investigative committees.
The committee’s ten hearings, all made for television, included brief excerpts from video interviews. Several witnesses came forward in person to repeat on camera what they had previously told investigators. At least in the public show, all members selected by Pelosi agreed on all issues, so there was no public debate or disagreement between members, nor was there any meaningful, unscripted conversation with witnesses. It was all a tightly controlled affair. The public saw only what the committee heads wanted to see. Overall, this was a small part of all the information gathered by the committee.
Now the question is: Will the videos, transcripts and notes of more than 1,000 interviews be released? Here’s the most important thing to remember: the committee can do whatever it wants. The chairman, in this case Democratic Rep. Benny Thompson of Mississippi, decides what records the committee will archive and what records it will destroy. The House resolution creating the committee said that upon the committee’s dissolution, “the papers of the select committee shall become the records of such committee or committees designated by the Speaker.” But the chairman decides what is a “record” and what is not. There are insiders on Capitol Hill who believe the Jan. 6 Committee will destroy much of its work. It will never see the light of day.
Thompson was vague about what he would do. Sometimes he says the commission will release “hundreds” of transcripts. Most recently, just before the commission’s final report was released, Thompson said the commission “intends to make the majority of its non-sensitive records public before the end of the year.” He added: “These transcripts and documents will allow the American people to see for themselves the evidence we have gathered and continue to examine the information that led us to our conclusions.”
What exactly does that mean? It all depends on the meaning of “intends”, “bulk” and “insensible”. There is a lot of wiggle room in Thompson’s words. The committee can keep all kinds of things secret.
One thing is clear, and that is that the commission’s public disclosure has gotten off to a slow start. On December 21, at the same time it released its final report, the commission released transcripts of 34 interviews. On December 22, he released five more. On December 23rd, I released 46 more. That’s 85 transcripts, which means there are at least 900 and maybe 1100 more that will be posted in the next week. This period includes the New Year holidays, so time is particularly limited.
So far, releases have been extremely selective. For example, the committee’s star witness is Cassidy Hutchinson, the former aide to former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, who gave bombshell testimony on June 28 that she heard a White House staffer say that then-President Donald Trump became violent when after his Ellipse Rally on January 6, he asked to be driven to the Capitol.
It was sensational testimony and got Democrats and many in the press very, very excited. The public then learned that Hutchinson had conducted multiple transcribed interviews with the commission before her June 28 appearance. She apparently did not discuss the limo incident in those interviews. Then, at the end of June, she found a new lawyer and memorized him in great detail. She revealed it in a new interview with committee officials and Vice Chairwoman Liz Cheney, the Republican who has turned the committee into a personal crusade against Trump. Cheney and Thompson got Hutchinson to the microphone in a hastily arranged public hearing. Hutchinson then conducted two more transcribed interviews with the committee in September.
So far, the commission has released only Hutchinson’s two transcripts since September. She did not release any of Hutchinson’s initial testimony, nor did she release any tape of her interview with Cheney that led to the June 28 special hearing. Moreover, her account clearly raises questions about the testimony of Ornato and Engel. What did they say? This is quite important. Each has conducted multiple interviews with the committee, which have not yet been published.
And, of course, there were no committee members who were even slightly skeptical about the Hutchinson matter and asking questions to find out more about the events in question. Yes, there were two Republicans on the committee – Cheney and Congressman Adam Kinzinger – but they were in complete agreement with everything the Democrats did. To do otherwise, to be even slightly skeptical, would be “obstructionist”. A new report in the New York Times, which relied on significant access to the committee, put it this way: “The lack of obstructionist voices on the committee meant that the panel could proceed with a clean, unbroken account of the events of January 6. “
Real life is never as pure as the narrative the January 6th Committee showrunners wanted to create. Which brings things back to the question: Will the public be able to see the full picture of what the commission gathered? Chairman Thompson should show the American people nothing else. He doesn’t need to reveal anything that would complicate the “clean, continuous narrative” he and his colleagues have created. Maybe he will, maybe he won’t.
But what about the public’s right to know? Of course, the public has a right to know. But that doesn’t mean he will know.
[ad_2]
Source link