Last year, useful fool Liz Cheney agreed to act as Pelosi’s J6 “vice-chair.” She hasn’t disappointed. She’s asked scripted questions like a good parrot, without a breath of critical thinking or circumspection.

The committee has spent millions of dollars gathering “proof,” then spent thousands of hours pouring over evidence. The best this Soviet-style show trial has done is refer a couple of witnesses to the DOJ for prosecution. Their crime? Failing to toe the party line.

After millions of dollars spent, and thousands upon thousands of documents and records, the committee still found it necessary to manipulate evidence.

What has the committee actually proved against their singular target, Donald Trump? I still don’t know. As a trial attorney, I’ve watched with dismay as the committee submits “evidence.” All of it is designed not to prove guilt, but rather to entertain a TV audience.

Take, for example, the committee calling Cassidy Hutchinson on Tuesday for a “special session.”

She was brought in for this “special” session, much like producers of TV dramas call in a “special guest star.” After all, this is for show, not evidence. Her testimony was almost entirely irrelevant, littered with opinion, and/or based on hearsay and double hearsay. Almost none of what she said was based on her witnessing anything, and for me, the worst is the lack of anyone to push back. There’s no cross-examination but there are pundits writing romance novels in support. The left’s second favorite lawn gnome ate it up. Why? Because he’s a fool.

There has never in my lifetime been a Congressional hearing more damning to a President. Never.

This makes Watergate’s darkest moments look like a bridge club meeting.

— Rick Wilson (@TheRickWilson) June 28, 2022

It’s easy to convince a willing TV audience and tiny bootlickers like Rick Wilson when you ask leading questions of salacious acts from a witness, who witnessed nothing. They might as well have called an actor to recite lines, because an actor would have the same knowledge of the facts. Additionally, she continually said, “something to the effect of.” If she’s claiming she heard something you don’t “quote” a witness and then say: “He said something to the effect.” He either said it, or he didn’t. He either did it, or he didn’t.

Assuming this charade went to trial in my state, I’d demand and likely get an Ev Code 402 hearing (to determine preliminary facts). Before she hit the stand, we’d determine if she could be called at all. None of her hearsay and double hearsay would be allowed. Her testimony about Trump’s outbursts are interesting but irrelevant and prejudicial (a separate Ev Code 352 motion would be offered). Before the seat Hutchinson was sitting in was cold, cold water was being dumped on her claims.

Her claim that Trump went full ninja in the Beast grabbing a steering wheel, then grabbing the neck of a secret service agent is pure TV fiction. It never happened according to the people she claims said it and did it.

Her claim that she wrote a note was quickly disputed by the lawyer who actually wrote the note (a fact that the committee was already aware of before the question was asked).

None of her inconsistencies have subsequently mattered to Vice-Chair Liz Cheney. Cheney has gone on talk shows to claim Hutchinson has credibility. No, she doesn’t, Liz. Liz claims that democracy is at stake. No it isn’t, Liz. Liz will soon be just a political memory, and good riddance.

Liz Cheney can play Chicken Little until November and scream “Democracy is Falling!, Democracy is Falling!” but it’s not. Cheney, along with the show trial, is about to crash and burn. Democracy, fortunately, will survive.