Cassidy Hutchinson’s brave testimony to the Jr Committee included her reporting what she had been told about Trump’s behavior when the Secret Service wouldn’t let him go with his armed mob to the Capitol. Trump defenders have manufactured one discrepancy already: he couldn’t have done that because “The Beast”’s structure made that impossible. Well, actually, that’s not quite true — but it’s also irrelevant, because the Secret Service didn’t use The Beast — the limo — to take him back to the West Wing. They used one of their SUV’s, where it’s much easier for Trump to do what it seems he did.
But then there’s this: Secret Service officials: Agents willing to dispute Trump SUV incident under oath. Seems Ornato and Engel, whom Hutchinson says told her about the incident, are prepared to say they told her no such thing — though they do admit Trump was absolutely furious that they wouldn’t take him up the Hill.
But here’s the thing, according to CBS News: Secret Service plans to respond to Jan. 6 committee regarding Trump's actions, after Cassidy Hutchinson's testimony
According to the source close to the agency, both Ornato and Engel have appeared before the committee on the record and behind closed doors, at the committee's request. Those sessions were recorded, but not used in Tuesday's hearing.
In other words, the committee already has testimony taken under oath from the Secret Service agent (Engel) and the guy in charge of WH operations (Ornato). Given how careful they’ve been so far, I am completely confident the committee would never have had Hutchinson testify about the wheel grabbing unless they already had, on tape, corroborating testimony from these two. The wheel grab story is highly sensational — but it’s not a critical story; it would have been enough to say Trump was insistent on joining the march and furious when wouldn’t let him.
So why are Ornato and Engel offering to testify again? Well, maybe they aren’t, really. Here’s what Greg Sargent (WaPo) has to say: Trump’s silly new ‘defense’ against Hutchinson is full of holes
First off, Ornato and Engel are Trump loyalists. “[A]s Post reporter and Secret Service expert Carol Leonnig told Rachel Maddow, Ornato and Engel are known as “yes men” to Trump. So we don’t have any idea how cooperative they were.”
More to the point, if the committee gets them under oath again, they would have to answer some very uncomfortable questions:
For instance, Ornato was the person who informed Meadows that Trump supporters attempting to enter the rally were armed at a meeting on the morning of Jan. 6, according to Hutchinson’s testimony.
Ornato also told Meadows he informed Trump of this, per Hutchinson. She went on to recount that Trump angrily demanded that armed supporters be let in, after which he directed the mob to the Capitol to intimidate his vice president into completing his coup attempt.
If Ornato wants to testify under oath, he could address all of those claims as well. Is that something Trump supporters want?
Similarly, Ornato and Engel can address the core assertion that Hutchinson made about the president’s alleged rage-fit in his vehicle. They can testify about whether Trump actually did want to go to the Capitol and what happened then.
On that last point, the Secret Service has already admitted that Trump did have a rage-fit; it’s just the details of that fit that may be hazy. From the CBSNews story:
The Secret Service officials do not dispute that Trump was irate or that he demanded to be taken to the Capitol, in the language that Hutchinson related to the committee. [emphasis added]
Again, I can’t see the committee pursuing the wheel detail if they thought it might be challenged. So this offer to testify may be no more genuine than Ginni Thomas’s was.