The January 6th Committee has certainly made history, if unintentionally. Thanks to Nancy Pelosi and Liz Cheney, this committee has set a new, historical precedent for our constitutional republic.
Unlike the Watergate hearings, the Benghazi hearings, all past impeachment hearings, or the House Un-American Activities Committee, this committee does not have a single person who might present a challenging set of questions for any of the witnesses brought before the American people.
From Supreme Court confirmation hearings to the aforementioned congressional proceedings to the OJ Simpson murder trial to the Johnny Depp/Amber Heard defamation trial to any episode of Judge Judy, the American people have come to expect that we would hear "the other side" to every issue put before us. No matter how paltry the defense of any given charge might be, we take for granted that we will hear that defense, and we, the people, will be allowed the respect to reach our own conclusions.
Perhaps if Rep. Jim Jordan had been on this committee as the GOP leadership had hoped, one or two challenges to Cassidy Hutchinson's hearsay testimony might have been presented. Perhaps some exploration into her desire to continue to work with President Trump in Mar-a-Lago in his post-presidency would have emerged. Or her damning comments about the "BS" committee (she's right about that) would have come out.
Absent any semblance of disputative content that might run afoul of the Cheney/Raskin/Schiff narrative, the American people would be forgiven for feeling somewhat discombobulated when (and if) they tune in for any of these proceedings.
Recommended
It's been obvious for over a year now that the Jan. 6th Kangaroo Committee is not interested in "getting to the truth" of what happened on January 6, 2021. If that were the case, there'd be a complete and thorough dissection of the decisions made by House leadership and Speaker Pelosi with regard to the pitiful and ineffective protection for the capitol that fateful day.
So, what's really at play here?
Obviously, this is a political enterprise. The committee has no direct criminal authority, just the ability to refer issues to the Justice Department for criminal investigation... which Chairman Bennie Thompson has already ruled out. (This has not kept Cheney, bless her heart, from claiming the opposite. Who's really running this show, Chairman Thompson?)
And clearly, the committee has no legislative agenda. So it must be purely political. But, to what end? What is the political goal?
The obvious answer: to harm Donald Trump.
If the American people are to be persuaded by the made-for-TV unreality programming, they'd be so disgusted by Trump that he'd have no chance to try to run for office again.
If that were the goal, it ain't working. Just four days ago, Trump led Biden by five points in an Emerson College poll. Given how Trump always underperforms in MSM polling, he's probably leading by double digits.
So... what else are these Kafka-Klowns trying to accomplish if it's not to do political harm to Donald Trump?
The answer is a little more subtle and more insidious.
They are sending a warning shot to any conservative who might entertain working on a Trump 2024 campaign or in a potential Trump Administration.
Having spoken to several high-ranking officials in the first Trump administration, it's clear that the "Russian Collusion" hoax was drummed up in part to scare off potential members of Trump's nascent presidency. Long-time Washington Republicans didn't want anything to do with a presidency that would eventually end up under the scrutiny of a special prosecutor. They took a pass on joining the administration for fear of endless subpoenas and committee hearings.
Because of this, many of Trump's appointments never got confirmed, and many of his administration's jobs never got filled. For those who did stand up and dedicate several years to his presidency, they've been rewarded with stigma from the corporate world and subpoenas from Congress.
Part of the Jan. 6 hearings is to provide a two-year-in-advance, preemptive strike against Trump's prospects to staff his administration in January 2025.
Ken Klukowski is a perfect example. Klukowski is a constitutional lawyer who has clerked for a federal judge. He worked with many conservative legal organizations and was a well-spoken advocate for the legal and constitutional arguments in support of conservative causes.
He took a job in Trump's Office of Management and Budget and eventually transferred over to Attorney General William Barr's Justice Department.
Having served several years in relative anonymity for the Executive Branch of the federal government, Klukowski hoped to return to the private sector and take up his legal career.
But, last week, he found himself in the middle of Cheney's prime-time soap opera.
"The January 6 Committee falsely accused me on Thursday of being a go-between in a conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election. That accusation is false both in its broad outlines and its details. Since the Committee first contacted me, I have cooperated without hesitation, provided it with hundreds of documents, and sat for many hours of recorded depositions. The information produced from those efforts fully contradicts the Committee's statements regarding my actions, yet the Committee has chosen to keep such information to itself rather than share it with the public," Klukowski wrote in a public statement.
"The January 6th investigation is all about attacking mid-level and senior staff like Ken, to ensure that we don't have a farm team in 2024, no matter who the president is. This isn't about truth, but about making it impossible for conservatives to successfully enter and leave government," Andrew Kloster, the White House staffer who coordinated Klukowski's transfer from OMB to DOJ, told Margot Cleveland at The Federalist.
"Ken's transfer had nothing to do with the election."
It has been nearly two weeks, and the Jan 6 committee has still refused to release the entirety of Klukowski's deposition. They snipped a portion of it and used it as a larger presentation to tell their one-sided story. Klukowski is now left dangling and smeared without the benefit of a congressman on the committee even willing to present his full story.
Make no mistake. This proceeding is not about the truth, and it's not about justice. It's not about criminal behavior (surely we would've heard about that by now), and it's not about preventing another incident; otherwise, you'd see Cheney interrogating her colleague Alexandria Ocasio Cortez for lending her voice to a bullhorn for a "call to action" over the "illegitimate" Supreme Court decision overturning Roe last month.
The committee is designed to stop Trump (that isn't working) and to warn any high-profile Republican from embracing or endorsing him in the future.
And it's executing methodical character destruction against any American who dared to lend their support to his administration or might entertain the thought of doing so in the future.
Thankfully, these men and women have more character than the likes of Cheney, Raskin and Schiff were anticipating. It's going to take more than their limp attempts to intimidate us from being the man in the arena.
Klukowski (a personal friend of mine) came onto my daily morning radio show in Washington, DC, to discuss this. You can hear the interview on the player below, starting at the 25:38 mark.
Larry O'Connor hosts "America's Morning Show," O'Connor and Company on WMAL in Washington DC every weekday morning. His growing Locals community is available to the public and is fast becoming a place where everyone can discuss all the things you're not supposed to talk about in polite company.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member