I could see where the DS would be really pissed off about this.
If their own CHS gives exonorating testimony that the Oath Keepers didn't do what the J6 panel is claiming, then how can they discredit or attack their own CI?
If the CHS gives testimony that hurts the defense then the defense can claim the CHS works for the prosecution.
This is shining a light on the J6 panel ignoring testimony from their own informants that don't follow the narrative. This is one of the few we know about. Imagine all the CHS reports that had to get thrown out to hide the fact that this whole thing is a sham.....
I could see where the DS would be really pissed off about this.
If their own CHS gives exonorating testimony that the Oath Keepers didn't do what the J6 panel is claiming, then how can they discredit or attack their own CI?
If the CHS gives testimony that hurts the defense then the defense can claim the CHS works for the prosecution.
This is shining a light on the J6 panel ignoring testimony from their own informants that don't follow the narrative. This is one of the few we know about. Imagine all the CHS reports that had to get thrown out to hide the fact that this whole thing is a sham.....