NEW Fed Jan 6 Probe UNLEASHED: Terry Schilling Breaks It Down

The Hill
17 Mar 202410:19

Summary

TLDR前美国总统唐纳德·特朗普面临与1月6日国会大厦袭击事件相关的指控。然而,众议院共和党人的一份新报告描绘了与众议院特别委员会调查结果不同的情景。美国原则项目主席特里·施林对此进行了讨论,指出报告中的证据显示特朗普曾请求国民警卫队,却被委员会忽略。他还提到了卡西迪·赫钦森的证词与其他证人的证词相矛盾,暗示委员会有预设的叙述并排除了与此相悖的证据。施林认为,这些行为破坏了公众对司法公正的信任,可能导致更多的不信任和分裂。

Takeaways

  • 📜 前总统唐纳德·特朗普面临与1月6日国会大厦袭击有关的指控。
  • 🔍 众议院共和党人的一份新报告与众议院1月6日特别委员会的发现描绘了不同的情景。
  • 💬 报告指出,特朗普的副幕僚长安东尼·奥拉多作证称,特朗普和马克·梅诺曾请求在1月6日部署1万名国民警卫队。
  • 🚫 这一证词被1月6日委员会排除在外,这被认为是有利于特朗普的证据。
  • 🤔 报告暗示1月6日委员会有预先设定的叙述,并排除了与之相矛盾的证据。
  • 📢 媒体曾报道特朗普未请求国民警卫队,但报告显示这不是事实。
  • 🚨 另一项重要指控是,卡西迪·赫钦森在媒体上声称特朗普试图夺取车辆方向盘,但被司机的证词所反驳。
  • 🎭 赫钦森的证词被包含在报告中,而司机的反驳证词被排除。
  • 😤 嘉宾特里·施林认为这是一个虚假的委员会,它排除了支持特朗普的任何人。
  • 🏛️ 由于缺乏少数派代表,这个委员会被认为在政治上存在偏见。
  • 🌪️ 施林预测,这些事件可能导致特朗普的再次当选,因为民主党正在重复2016年的错误策略。

Q & A

  • 唐纳德·特朗普前总统面临哪些指控?

    -唐纳德·特朗普前总统面临的指控与2021年1月6日对首都的袭击有关。

  • 众议院共和党人的报告与众议院特别委员会的发现有何不同?

    -众议院共和党人的报告提出了与众议院特别委员会不同的事件版本,指出有证据被压制或排除在特别委员会的报告之外,例如特朗普曾请求派遣国民警卫队到华盛顿特区。

  • 安东尼·奥拉多是特朗普的什么职位?

    -安东尼·奥拉多是唐纳德·特朗普的副幕僚长。

  • 特朗普和梅农请求了多少国民警卫队?

    -特朗普和梅农请求了10000名国民警卫队队员。

  • 为什么特朗普请求国民警卫队的信息没有包含在特别委员会的报告中?

    -这部分信息被认为可能是对特朗普有利的证据,而特别委员会似乎有意排除与他们预设叙述相矛盾的信息。

  • 卡西迪·赫钦森的证词中有哪些争议?

    -卡西迪·赫钦森声称特朗普试图抢夺总统专车的方向盘,但这一说法被司机的证词所反驳,而司机的证词并未被特别委员会采纳。

  • 南希·佩洛西如何影响特别委员会的组成?

    -南希·佩洛西控制了哪些共和党人可以加入特别委员会,导致只有立场已经确定的共和党人被选入委员会。

  • 特朗普的竞选活动是否受到了法律诉讼的影响?

    -尽管特朗普面临多起法律诉讼,但他仍在继续筹款和竞选活动,这表明他没有受到诉讼的显著影响。

  • 特朗普在纽约面临的案件是什么?

    -特朗普在纽约面临的案件涉及声称其团队伪造商业记录,与向成人电影女演员斯托米·丹尼尔斯支付的封口费有关。

  • 曼哈顿地区检察官建议的延迟会对特朗普的竞选活动产生什么影响?

    -尽管曼哈顿地区检察官建议延迟审理特朗普的封口费案件,但这预计不会影响特朗普作为假定的候选人的竞选义务。

  • 特朗普面临的91项重罪指控涉及哪些司法管辖区?

    -特朗普面临的91项重罪指控涉及四个不同的司法管辖区,但他的支持者认为这些指控是出于政治动机。

  • 特朗普被指控煽动叛乱的证据是否完整?

    -根据众议院共和党人的报告,特朗普被指控煽动叛乱的证据并不完整,因为一些可能对他有利的证据被排除在外。

Outlines

00:00

📜 关于1月6日事件的新报告

该段落讨论了关于前总统唐纳德·特朗普在华盛顿特区面临的与1月6日国会大厦袭击有关的指控。众议院共和党人的新报告提出了与众议院特别委员会发现的情况不同的观点。美国原则项目主席特里·席林加入了讨论,他解释了这份报告的内容以及其重要性。报告中指出,特朗普的副幕僚长安东尼·奥拉多和马克·门诺曾请求在1月6日部署1万名国民警卫队,但这一证据被特别委员会忽略。此外,还讨论了有关特朗普试图在1月6日控制车辆前往国会大厦的指控,以及这些指控与证人证词之间的矛盾。席林认为,这个特别委员会有预设的叙述,排除了与他们的结论相矛盾的证据,这不利于建立共识,而是一种宣传行为。

05:02

🚨 拒绝作证与政治偏见

这段落涉及了一些人拒绝遵守传票的情况,包括彼得·纳瓦罗和史蒂夫·班农。纳瓦罗因认为委员会的政治偏见而拒绝作证,现已被送往监狱。讨论了历史上罕见的委员会构成,没有包括少数派代表的情况,以及这种委员会对长期影响的可能后果。席林预测,这些事件可能导致特朗普的再次当选,因为民主党人试图以2016年的方式抹黑特朗普,但美国人民能够看穿这些行为。

10:02

🎙️ 采访结束与感谢

节目最后,主持人对特里·席林表示感谢,并结束了采访。背景音乐响起,标志着这一部分的结束。

Mindmap

Keywords

💡唐纳德·特朗普

唐纳德·特朗普是美国的商人和政治家,曾担任第45任美国总统。在视频中,他被提及与华盛顿特区1月6日袭击国会大厦有关的指控。视频讨论了与此相关的不同观点和证据。

💡1月6日委员会

1月6日委员会是美国众议院设立的特别委员会,旨在调查2021年1月6日美国国会大厦袭击事件。视频中提到该委员会的报告和发现,以及与之相关的争议和批评。

💡安东尼·奥拉多

安东尼·奥拉多是唐纳德·特朗普的副幕僚长,视频中提到他提供了证词,表明特朗普曾请求派遣国民警卫队到1月6日的华盛顿特区,这一信息未被包含在1月6日委员会的报告中。

💡国民警卫队

国民警卫队是美国的军事组织,负责协助州和地方应对紧急情况和灾害。视频中提到特朗普曾请求派遣国民警卫队到华盛顿特区,以应对1月6日可能发生的冲突。

💡证据排除

证据排除是指在法律程序中,某些证据被认为不合法或不相关,因此不被允许在法庭上使用。视频中提到1月6日委员会的报告中排除了一些可能对特朗普有利的证据。

💡卡西迪·赫钦森

卡西迪·赫钦森是1月6日委员会的关键证人之一,她曾公开作证称特朗普试图抢夺总统专车“野兽”的方向盘。然而,视频中提到有证据与她的证词相矛盾。

💡特别检察官

特别检察官是被任命来调查和可能起诉涉及政府官员的复杂或敏感案件的独立检察官。视频中提到特别检察官杰克·史密斯的案件,涉及对前总统特朗普的指控。

💡政治偏见

政治偏见是指在政治议题上持有的不公正或偏颇的看法,通常基于个人或团体的立场。视频中提到1月6日委员会被认为存在政治偏见,因为它的组成成员被认为对特朗普持有预设立场。

💡南希·佩洛西

南希·佩洛西是美国的政治家,曾担任美国众议院议长。视频中提到她对1月6日委员会成员的选择有决定权,这被批评为政治偏见的表现。

💡选举

选举是指公民通过投票选择代表或决定政策的过程。视频中提到,特朗普可能会因为针对他的指控而重新当选,这表明选举是美国政治生活中的重要事件。

💡重罪指控

重罪指控是指对个人或实体提出的严重犯罪行为的指控。视频中提到特朗普面临多个司法管辖区的91项重罪指控,这表明他面临的法律挑战的严重性。

Highlights

前总统唐纳德·特朗普正面临与1月6日国会大厦袭击有关的指控。

众议院共和党人的一份新报告与众议院1月6日特别委员会的调查结果描绘了不同的情景。

美国原则项目主席特里·施林加入了讨论,提供了报告的分析。

报告显示,特朗普的副幕僚长安东尼·奥拉多·瓦加和马克·门诺曾请求1月6日部署1万名国民警卫队。

有关国民警卫队的请求被1月6日委员会排除在外,这是对特朗普有利的证据。

报告指出,1月6日委员会有预设的叙述,排除了与他们的调查结果相矛盾的证据。

巴里·劳德的办公室报告指出,有多份证据被压制、销毁或排除在1月6日委员会的报告之外。

媒体曾报道特朗普从未请求国民警卫队,但事实上这是错误的。

关于特朗普试图在1月6日抢夺方向盘的证词,被众议院共和党的报告证明与事实不符。

司机的证词与卡西迪·赫钦森的指控相矛盾,但赫钦森的证词被包含在报告中。

这个委员会被批评为有预设的叙述,排除了支持特朗普的证据。

南希·佩洛西控制了哪些共和党人可以加入委员会,导致缺乏真正的两党合作。

委员会的组成在美国历史上是非常罕见的,没有包括少数派代表。

由于委员会的政治偏见,一些人拒绝遵守传票,包括彼得·纳瓦罗和史蒂夫·班农。

特朗普面临的91项重罪指控分布在四个不同的司法管辖区。

纽约地方检察官建议将封口费案件推迟30天,该案件指控特朗普团队伪造商业记录。

特朗普的法律团队抱怨证据在最后一刻被扣留。

特朗普在应对法律挑战的同时,还在进行筹款和竞选活动。

特朗普被指控试图通过声称他煽动叛乱来从选票上除名。

最高法院阻止了民主党试图将特朗普从选票上除名的行为。

特朗普的法律挑战和竞选活动将继续进行,不受封口费案件延迟的影响。

Transcripts

00:01

[Music]

00:05

former president Donald Trump is facing

00:07

charges here in Washington DC related to

00:10

the January 6th attack on the capital

00:13

but a new report from House Republicans

00:15

paints a different picture of that day

00:17

compared to the findings of the house

00:19

January 6 select committee joining us

00:22

now is Terry Schilling president of the

00:23

American principles project welcome

00:26

Terry thanks so much for having me Terry

00:29

can you help us break down that report a

00:30

little bit what's in it and why is this

00:33

important well the big thing that's

00:35

coming out here is uh it it is

00:38

apparently clear that Donald Trump's

00:40

Deputy Chief of Staff uh Anthony orado

00:44

uh W gave witness and testimony that

00:46

Donald Trump and Mark mennow had

00:48

requested uh 10,000 National Guard

00:51

troops uh for January 6 they were

00:53

concerned about a clash between the prot

00:57

Trump uh protesters and the anti-trump

01:00

protesters and they were they were

01:01

wanting more security all of that was

01:03

withheld from the January 6 committee

01:06

UHC and it was basically exculpatory

01:09

evidence uh which it really paints a

01:11

picture that this whole thing this whole

01:13

January 6 committee had a predetermined

01:15

narrative that they wanted to uphold and

01:17

they got rid of anything uh that uh

01:20

contrast or contradicted what they were

01:22

trying to find here yeah there were

01:24

report from uh Barry lauder's office

01:26

points out that there are multiple

01:28

pieces of evidence that were either

01:29

suppressed or destroyed or excluded from

01:32

the January 6 select committee's report

01:35

and I think that 10,000 National Guard

01:37

story is important because about a month

01:39

ago when we had all of these media

01:41

stories going around they were claiming

01:43

that Trump never requested the National

01:45

Guard and that that was a fake narrative

01:47

and it turns out that that wasn't true

01:49

now another important allegation here is

01:50

that one of the January 6 committee star

01:52

Witnesses Cassidy Hutchinson testified

01:55

in front of this big media circus about

01:58

how Trump had tried to grab the wheel of

02:00

the Beast to redirect his Secret Service

02:02

agents to the capital on that day what

02:05

did the louder milk report from House

02:07

Republicans find out about her

02:10

claims well Amber had found that the

02:13

driver uh that she implicated in that

02:16

story had actually given witness

02:18

testimony that uh to the contrary that

02:21

Donald Trump never did any of that he

02:23

directly contradicted her claims and

02:26

that was withheld but Cassie

02:27

Hutchinson's testimony was included in

02:29

the report Amber I think that the real

02:32

thing that bothers me about this is that

02:34

this was a sham committee right it was

02:37

it had a predetermined uh narrative from

02:38

the beginning they got rid of anyone

02:40

that was actually supportive of Donald

02:42

Trump that's not how how you operate if

02:43

you want to build a consensus if you

02:45

want to build a consensus which is

02:47

something you need in order to try and

02:49

convict and prove to the American people

02:51

that the former president is guilty of

02:54

insurrection uh then you need consensus

02:56

this is a bare minimum and instead what

02:59

we got was a propaganda committee uh

03:01

that was pushing lies and withholding

03:03

evidence that contradicted their

03:04

predetermined narrative so this is this

03:06

is a a blight on on America it's a BL on

03:08

Congress and and everything that's going

03:10

on here I mean the driver also commented

03:13

you know to keep it 100 here the driver

03:14

also commented that the former president

03:16

clearly wanted to go to the capital um

03:20

reports like this and the findings do

03:21

you think they will have any effect on

03:23

special Council Jack Smith's case

03:24

against the former president since there

03:26

are as you you noted a few discrepancies

03:28

here I think one of the most strong ones

03:30

um is probably the Cassidy Hutchinson

03:33

extra story tale that literally went

03:35

around through you know a game of

03:36

telephone one two three she was a third

03:37

person who heard it who really knows

03:39

where the facts lie there um do you

03:41

think that any of this is going to

03:43

affect the special council's

03:45

case uh it's hard to say but it

03:47

definitely doesn't help the special

03:49

council's case this only hurts it and it

03:51

show it's going to make uh the jury and

03:54

and the people making the decision about

03:56

uh where to come down with Trump on this

03:58

it's going to make them a lot more

03:59

skeptical the claims against him you if

04:01

you want to do this right if you really

04:02

want to get president Trump um on this

04:05

stuff you have to go above and beyond to

04:07

be accurate this is a former president

04:09

United States who's being accused of

04:11

very serious crimes and essentially

04:13

treason um and it turns out that the mor

04:16

treeson sacks are the people that are

04:18

putting together the Sham committee and

04:19

trying to falsely convict a a former

04:22

sitting president I think it's

04:23

interesting too that the committee

04:25

apparently waited until months after

04:27

Cassidy Hutchinson gave that public

04:28

testimony to even interview any of the

04:31

potentially corroborating Witnesses

04:32

including the driver there were two

04:34

other apparently firsthand Witnesses who

04:36

they didn't even bother to talk to in

04:38

regards to that claim um you talked

04:41

about this as a sham committee and I

04:43

think it's important for viewers to

04:44

understand that the reason why you

04:45

saying that is because Nancy Pelosi of

04:47

course had control over which

04:49

Republicans were allowed to sit on the

04:51

committee Republicans were not allowed

04:53

to pick their own people to be on there

04:54

so the only Republicans who were on it

04:56

were Liz Cheney and Adam kininger who

04:58

had already made their minds up that

05:00

Trump had committed Insurrection or

05:01

engaged in an Insurrection now we see

05:04

that there are multiple people who

05:05

refuse to comply with subpoenas

05:07

including Peter Navaro and Steve Bannon

05:09

Peter Navaro is now reporting to prison

05:12

because he said he was not going to

05:14

testify in front of the committee

05:16

because of the fact that the makeup was

05:17

so politically

05:19

biased no that that's exactly right and

05:22

you know there's a few interesting

05:24

things here which is first and foremost

05:25

this is incredibly rare I don't think

05:27

this has actually been done in American

05:29

history where uh there are no uh

05:31

minority Representatives or from the

05:34

opposition included on the committee

05:35

there's typically when they have these

05:37

types of committees to really dig deep

05:39

they produce a Minority Report so they

05:41

have a majority report that the majority

05:42

of the committee agrees to and it's

05:44

usually partisan and then they release a

05:45

Minority Report well this this this

05:48

isn't able to happen now and Republicans

05:50

have to go outside of the system outside

05:52

of the community to produce their own

05:53

findings um but the the the real

05:55

important reason why this is important

05:57

is because people are going to prison

05:59

people are going to prison over a sham

06:02

committee that was never open and and

06:04

it's also interesting that Nancy Pelosi

06:06

is all of a sudden allied with the

06:08

chenies who would have predicted

06:11

that what do you think will this that

06:14

the effect will be long term um

06:16

obviously this is a highly U politicized

06:19

event all of us saw what happened on

06:20

January 6 we've we've heard from the

06:22

officers themselves we've heard from

06:24

those who were barricaded within their

06:26

within their Senate offices and other

06:27

Chambers um what do you think is going

06:30

to be the aftermath you know we're still

06:32

having this conversation now we're years

06:33

out of January 6 obviously in the midst

06:35

of an election cycle uh what is your

06:37

take well unfortunately for Democrats

06:40

and unfortunately for America I think

06:42

it's going to end up leading to the

06:44

reelection of Donald Trump right I think

06:46

that the real problem here is that

06:48

Democrats are following the same

06:50

hysterical Playbook that they tried to

06:52

follow in 2016 where they're trying to

06:54

cast Donald Trump as this Nazi ass

06:56

figure this hitlerian uh American figure

06:59

and the American people see through it

07:01

the American people are not stupid they

07:03

understand BS and they can sort through

07:05

it now you can fool some of the people

07:06

some of the time but you can't fool all

07:08

the people all the time and so I think

07:10

that you know this next election really

07:11

is going to determine the future and

07:13

what this you know what happens from

07:15

here I think Donald Trump will get

07:17

reelected because of all of the

07:19

fraudulent claims that are being made

07:20

against him but if he isn't if he isn't

07:23

reelected then I'm even more worried

07:24

because you're going to see a lot more

07:25

of these sham committees and a lot more

07:27

innocent people uh being thrown into

07:29

jail

07:30

uh for purely partisan uh reasons

07:32

through their weaponized federal

07:33

government Trump has 91 felony charges

07:36

across four different jurisdictions um

07:39

he is in court case after court case

07:41

meanwhile trying to fund raise and

07:42

campaign at the same time turning to

07:44

another one of those legal battles let's

07:46

talk about New York for a bit um The

07:48

Manhattan DA has now suggested a 30-day

07:51

delay to the hush money payments case

07:52

against the former president remember

07:54

that was the case that alleged Trump's

07:56

team falsify business records connected

07:58

to hush money payment made to adult film

08:01

actress stormmy Daniels that trial is

08:03

scheduled to get underway later this

08:04

month on March 25th but the da suggested

08:07

he delay after the former president

08:10

legal team complained that evidence had

08:12

been withheld until the last minute

08:14

Terry will this change affect the former

08:16

president's campaign obligations as the

08:18

presumptive

08:20

nominee no I don't think so I think he's

08:22

going to carry on and I think that's

08:24

exactly the right thing I think listen

08:26

if Donald Trump was not a threat to the

08:28

swamp if he wasn't disruptive to the

08:30

system they wouldn't be making up all

08:32

these allegations I I think you know

08:34

it's important to note that allegations

08:36

are one thing and and and these are all

08:38

Democrats right when you when you start

08:40

to get Republicans pressing charges

08:42

against him and and trying to take him

08:44

to court and convict him well then we'll

08:45

have something else but right now this

08:47

is just and I think the American people

08:50

are seeing through this this is what

08:51

happens when you try to disrupt the

08:53

swamp there's a very powerful system in

08:55

place all the billionaires all the major

08:57

corporations Hollywood Academia

09:00

everyone's lined up on the Progressive

09:01

side of this um and you have to ask

09:03

yourself like what is going on here that

09:05

the billionaires in the rich class are

09:07

are now teaming up with Democrats

09:09

there's something arai here and and it

09:10

stinks well one quick final question for

09:13

you Terry we're almost out of time but

09:15

going back to this January 6 question um

09:18

I think it's also important to point out

09:19

that this exculpatory evidence is really

09:22

key to the fact that Donald Trump was

09:24

just Democrats just tried to remove him

09:27

from ballots in places like col in Maine

09:30

thankfully the Supreme Court said they

09:31

couldn't do that but they tried to

09:33

remove him from these ballots by

09:35

claiming that he had incited this

09:36

Insurrection it turns out now they

09:38

didn't even have all the evidence

09:40

available to make a proper determination

09:42

there thank goodness that the Supreme

09:45

Court came down on the right side of

09:46

this right I mean we haven't seen

09:47

Democrats try to kick a republican off

09:50

of the ballot for president since the

09:51

1860s right I think this really speaks

09:53

to how divided and fractured and

09:55

polarized America is right now um but

09:58

thank goodness that the Supreme Court

10:00

was a voice of calm and reason in this

10:02

situation otherwise we'd have quite the

10:04

civil unrest on our hands right now

10:06

Terry Schilling from American principal

10:07

project thanks again for joining

10:09

Rising thanks so much for having me

10:12

[Music]

10:18

guys