The next Jan 6th House Select Committee Hearing is Thursday, July 21 at 6:00 p.m. local time

The next hearing of the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th attack on the U.S. Capitol is this Thursday, July 21 in prime time starting at 6:00 p.m. local time. The hearing will be broadcast on all the major TV networks ABC, CBS and NBC, and PBS. It will also be live on CSPAN (cable) and CNN will stream it live at CNN.com without requiring a cable login. It can also be viewed live on the Select Committee’s YouTube Channel. Many media outlets will also stream the hearing on their Facebook pages. The first hearing, also held in prime time, had 20 million viewers.

This hearing will focus on what former President Trump was doing, and not doing, minute by minute during the 187 minutes after Trump-supporting rioters began attacking the Capitol and before he issued he a public response. Two former Trump White House officials, Trump deputy White House Press Secretary Sarah Matthews and former Trump Deputy National Security Advisor Matthew Pottinger, both of whom were in the White House on the day of the attack and both of whom resigned that day, will testify.

January 6 Committee Chair Bennie Thompson has tested positive for Covid and will miss the next hearing. Committee members Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) and Rep. Elaine Luria (D-VA) are expected to take central roles chairing the proceedings.

 

Tina Peters fails to meet deadline to pay for recount

Tina Peters waves around a letter to the Colorado Secretary of State at the July 12 Las Vegas conference she attended, demanding a recount of her race in the primary. She failed to meet the deadline last Friday to pay over $236,000 for a state-wide recount. She lost by over 88,000 votes or a margin of over 14% between her and the winner.

For all the bluster Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters made over demanding a recount in her June 28 primary loss, she failed to get the necessary funds in to the Secretary of State by the deadline last Friday to commence the recount, so it won’t happen.

For the state pay for a recount, the difference between the leading candidate’s total votes and the next highest candidate’s total votes must be less than or equal to one-half of one percent (0.5%). Peters lost to her opponent, Pam Anderson, by 88,000 votes, a margin of more than 14% between her and the front runner.

At a speech she gave at a conference of election-denier sheriffs in Las Vegas on July 12 (video), Peters waved around a notarized letter (pdf) to the Colorado Secretary of State that she told the crowd she was sending to demand a recount, claiming without any evidence that she lost because of “extensive malfeasance” in the June 28 primary. She failed to mention ore recognize how her being indicted on 7 felonies related to election tampering might have affected the vote.

There was no fraud or malfeasance in the June 28 primary, and Peters’ loss has been accepted as legitimate.

Sherronna Bishop increasingly implicated in Tina Peters’ election-tampering conspiracy

Sherronna Bishop in January, 2022

Every arrest in connection with the Tina Peters case reveals deeper involvement in the election tampering scandal by “America’s Mom,” Sherronna Bishop.

On July 13, The Colorado Sun published a 15-page arrest affidavit (pdf) for former Mesa County Election Manager Sandra Brown.

Brown was fired from the Elections Department in November, 2021 and was arrested on July 13, 2022 in connection with Peters’ voting equipment tampering scandal. The arrest affidavit for Brown concluded that there was probable cause to charge her with conspiracy to commit criminal impersonation and attempt to influence a public servant.

But the affidavit also reveals that Sherronna Bishop, who was never an employee of the Clerk’s office, attended a key meeting of selected Elections Department staff where the plot was being formed, and that she was even the one who spurred the initial discussion of the plot.

Peters gets off again, but here is some interesting info that emerged at her Friday, 7/15/22 arrest warrant hearing

D.A. Dan Rubinstein and Investigator Michael Struwe give their presentation to the County Commissioners about their findings of no election tampering found in the local 2020 and 2021 elections

The latest effort by District Attorney Dan Rubinstein and the people of Mesa County to hold Republican Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters accountable for her actions fell flat on Friday, 7/15, as the judge gave Tina the benefit of the doubt yet again and quashed a warrant issued for her arrest after she left the state without permission to attend a conference of election-denier sheriffs in Las Vegas July 12.

Judge Matthew D. Barrett was incredulous at claims made by Tina’s highly-paid Denver attorney, Harvey Steinberg, that he didn’t know about or inform Tina of a no-travel order the Court had issued on July 11. Barrett said the idea that neither Steinberg nor her other two defense attorneys knew about the order, and that all three of them had failed to tell Tina about it, was “incredible,” “unfathomable” and “remarkable.” Despite this, the judge still gave Tina the benefit of the doubt and quashed her arrest warrant.

Should we doubt attorney Harvey Steinberg’s motion to quash Tina’s arrest warrant?

Harvey Steinberg (Photo: BestLawyers.com)

Tina Peters’ attorney, Harvey Steinberg, submitted a Motion-to-Quash her arrest warrant on 7/14 for her travel out of state to Las Vegas without court permission on 7/12, violating the terms of her bond. In the motion, Steinberg blames himself for Tina making the trip to Las Vegas, saying she emailed him her plans for the trip and relied on him to get permission from the Court before leaving the state, but he didn’t see the email that contained her plans. In the body of the motion, Steinberg writes that it was “part of an email thread that he didn’t notice.” But Steinberg did not include for the Court a print out of the entire email thread for the Court to see, for context, or to see what other talk surrounded it.

Plus, we have reason to doubt the veracity of what Steinberg has written in his motion.

After all, he has a lot less to lose than Tina in this matter. Tina is the Goose that Laid the Golden egg for attorneys. Based on what Mike Lindell alone says he donated to Tina’s legal defense fund, she likely has at least $1 million to spend on attorneys, making her an extremely attractive deep pocket.

Tina Peters’ unhinged talk in Las Vegas

By now everyone has probably heard that Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters had her bond revoked today for leaving the state without first getting permission from the court, which violated the terms of her release in her criminal case. Peters traveled to Las Vegas for a July 12 conference of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, a group of anti-government sheriffs who are also election deniers.

While there, Peters gave an unhinged 9 minute talk that appeared to even confuse her audience.  In her talk, she made a slew of bizarre statements, like:

  • “Our crooked DA arrested [my election manager] knowing today is her birthday.”
  • “They arrested three grandmothers for defending your elections.”
  • “They’re stealing our elections.”
  •  DA Dan Rubinstein “is the guy who let 26 pounds of fentanyl go.”
  • “Our candidates were offered to step aside and they would be propelled over the finish line if they did not talk about election security.”
  • “They took away my husband, too. 36 years we would’ve been married. The DA went in there and had him sign divorce papers in a nursing home. He has advanced dementia. These people are criminals.”
  • “They’re coming after you.”

Lauren Boebert, Sherronna Bishop, Tina Peters and “a county commissioner candidate” dined with Conan Hayes, the man who illegally took the images of Mesa County Voting machine hard drives


The Colorado Times Recorder is reporting that Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters, speaking at a conference of anti-government sheriffs in Las Vegas July 12, called Gerald Wood, the Mesa County man whose identity she is accused of stealing, “a liar and a cheat,” and confessed to the audience that she had dined with former pro surfer turned professional-election-denier Conan Hayes, the person who made the illegal images of Mesa County’s election equipment.  Peters says other guests at the dinner included “one of candidates for county commissioner,” (presumed to be Republican Bobbie Daniel), Sherronna Bishop and Republican House Rep. Lauren Boebert. When people in the room applauded at the mention of Boebert’s name, Peters said tersely “No, do NOT clap for her. Do NOT clap for her,” indicating a rift now exists between the two women.

Hutchinson’s testimony was a blockbuster, but here’s the real “wow” moment from the last hearing of the January 6 Select Committee

On June 28, 2022, former White House Aide Cassidy Hutchinson gave explosive testimony to the January 6 Select Committee: She described how an unhinged President Trump urged a crowd of his supporters — that possessed bear spray, guns, knives and spears — to march to the Capitol. She told how Trump lashed out at his Secret Service agents in the car, how he demanded they take him to the Capitol to be with his supporters, and how he petulantly hurled his lunch plate against a wall. She revealed that her boss, Trump’s Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, had sought a pardon from the President before leaving the White House.

Everyone’s been talking about her testimony since.

Yet the testimony that drew the most audible gasp from the audience at the June 28 hearing Select Committee wasn’t even from Cassidy Hutchinson.

It was from former three-star General Michael Flynn, who had been Defense Intelligence Agency head, and had served as National Security Advisor under the Trump.

That testimony is in the above video clip, which is under 2 minutes and can also be seen here on YouTube.

The next hearing of the January 6 Committee is Tuesday, July 12 at 8:00 a.m. 1:00 p.m. Eastern Time/ 11:00 a.m. Mountain Time and will feature testimony from Trump’s White House attorney Pat Cipollone, who was present with Hutchinson in the White House in the run-up to January 6.

Rep. Boebert: “I’m tired of this separation of church and state junk”


Speaking to an audience at the Cornerstone Christian Center in Basalt on June 26, 2022 — two days before the primary election — House Rep. Lauren Boebert called for America to become a theocracy, a system of government in which the church directs the government.

Strutting back and forth across the stage like a televangelist, Boebert told the audience,

“The church is supposed to direct the government. The government is not supposed to direct the church. That is not how our founding fathers intended it. And I’m tired of this separation of church and state junk. That’s not the Constitution. It was in a stinking letter and it means nothing like what they say.”

New Supreme Court Justices lied under oath to get on the Supreme Court, then changed U.S. law to force people, including child rape victims, to carry pregnancies to term. Justice Thomas indicates Court may go after the right to buy & use contraception next.


Three of the new, Republican-appointed Supreme Court justices intentionally misled the Senate and the public during their confirmation hearings about their intent to overturn Roe V. Wade, the 1973 ruling that established a woman’s constitutional right to an abortion. Among the three judges who were dishonest was Coloradan Neil Gorsuch.

The Court’s ruling ended the 50 year-old established constitutional right of American women to determine their own futures with regard to child rearing, and gives states the ability to enact laws that force women to remain pregnant against their will. The ruling effectively imposes extremist right wing Christian religious beliefs upon half the country, and instantly creates two classes of people: one class fortunate enough to live in states that protect people’s right to make decisions about their own pregnancies and child-rearing, and a second class in the other states with no such protections, with laws in place that force females to carry all pregnancies to term, no matter a woman’s age, health, emotional or economic circumstances, how many children she already has, or whether she wants to be pregnant or not.