Thread by @eliehonig

The attempts to discredit Cassidy Hutchinson are off base and unpersuasive. (THREAD)

1. Hutchinson was remarkably credible overall. Her testimony was careful and measured, she has no incentive to lie (and powerful counter-incentive), and she was backed up on key points by other witnesses, by documents, and at times by former President Trump’s own statements.

2. All fire is focused now on the steering wheel lunge incident. First, Hutchinson said straight up she didn’t witness anything, and she only knew what Tony Ornato told her. Ornato has since (through spokespersons, not under oath) denied he told Hutchinson about the incident.

3. So either Hutchinson made up the story out of whole cloth and falsely put it in Ornato’s mouth, or Ornato did tell Hutchinson this story and now falsely denies it.

4. Ornato is not your standard down-the-middle, nonpolitical Secret Service agent. As @kasie and others have reported, he is a Trump partisan. That's fine, there’s nothing inherently wrong with that, but it’s fair to factor this in when assessing motive.

5. Also -- this is key -- two *other* people – @Alyssafarah and Lt. Col. Keith Kellogg – have had similar experiences with Ornato.

6. Farah and Kellogg both spoke publicly about incidents where Ornato had said things to them, while serving in the White House, that later looked bad for the Trump administration. Ornato then denied saying those things to Farah and Kellogg. (Sound familiar?)

7. So we have only two possibilities here. Door A: Hutchinson, Farah, and Kellogg *all* decided independently to fabricate stories out of thin air, and all claimed this one same fairly anonymous staffer had told them these things, and all put themselves at risk by lying.

8. Door B: Ornato had a tendency to tell people in the White House things -- and then when those people reveal those stories, and they look bad for Trump or the administration, Ornato falsely denies telling them those things.

Now: which is more plausible?

9. Finally, the attempt to make Hutchinson’s entire testimony ride entirely on the steering wheel story are weak. The point was that Trump was eager to go to the Capitol – a fact confirmed by other staffers, by NSC records, and by Donald J. Trump himself, in public.

10. This kind of dispute happens all the time at trials, and it's fair game. You assess motives, credibility, and strength of the corroborating evidence, both ways. (You're also allowed to use common sense.) When you do all that here, this isn't a close call. (END)

And now it turns out, sure enough, there were stories circulating inside Secret Service that were substantially similar to Hutchinson’s testimony.

Anyone still riding with this Ornato character and his denials?