'Merlot and cabernet': Jeanine Pirro's attempt to smear Cassidy Hutchinson blows up in her face
Republicans and right-wing media pundits have been falling over themselves trying to rationalize and discredit ex-White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson's blockbuster Tuesday testimony before the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol.
Scores of conservatives from Rudy Giuliani to Roger Stone and even former President Donald Trump himself have desperately tried to paint Hutchinson as a nobody and a liar, despite the fact that she was the assistant to then-White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows and worked just steps from the Oval Office. Hutchinson's detractors have also steadfastly refused to provide sworn statements, preventing their accusations from being properly vetted.
The latest attempt to smear Hutchinson occurred on Wednesday afternoon when Fox News host Jeanine Pirro claimed that multiple unnamed individuals supposedly from the White House told her that Hutchinson was never anywhere near Trump.
"Number two, she talked about hearsay," Pirro said of Hutchinson. "Now I talked to two sources today from the White House at that time. They both say that she was so low-level. She wanted people to believe that she was in the center of the room when major things were being discussed. She was not that person. That's factually untrue."
Watch below via Acyn:
\u201cJeanine says she has two sources that say Hutchinson was low level and was not in the center of the room when major things were being discussed\u201d— Acyn (@Acyn) 1656537785
Observers, however, were unconvinced by Pirro's unsubstantiated and unoriginal anecdote.
\u201c@Acyn Why do they feel the need to disprove her, exactly? \n\nI'm curious why EVERY SINGLE FUCKING THING THAT IS SAID ABOUT DONALD TRUMP THAT IS BAD has to be disproven by fox news.\n\nWhat's up with that?\n\nCurious. Curious AF.\u201d— Acyn (@Acyn) 1656537785
\u201c@Acyn So low level that her office was only steps away from the Oval?\u201d— Acyn (@Acyn) 1656537785
\u201c@Acyn Her accounts were FIRST HAND.\u201d— Acyn (@Acyn) 1656537785
\u201c@Acyn\u201d— Acyn (@Acyn) 1656537785
\u201c@Acyn I am going to trust the lady who swore a oath yesterday, over some judge with a serious box wine problem.\u201d— Acyn (@Acyn) 1656537785
\u201c@Acyn I trust under oath testimony by witnesses who refer to the criminals in question by their first names. She knows these men very well.\u201d— Acyn (@Acyn) 1656537785
Speculation abounded over who – or what – Pirro's sources could have been.
\u201c@Acyn But never name sources. They don\u2019t exist\u201d— Acyn (@Acyn) 1656537785
\u201c@Acyn Her sources are Merlot and Cabernet\u2026\u201d— Acyn (@Acyn) 1656537785
\u201c@Acyn Vodka and Vermouth?\u201d— Acyn (@Acyn) 1656537785
\u201c@Acyn I'm guessing the two sources are Mad Dog 20/20 and Ripple.\u201d— Acyn (@Acyn) 1656537785
\u201c@Acyn Her sources are Bartles & Jaymes.\u201d— Acyn (@Acyn) 1656537785
\u201c@Acyn Anonymous sources, I thought republicans didn\u2019t like anonymous sources\u201d— Acyn (@Acyn) 1656537785
\u201c@Acyn But her two sources were Ernest and Julio Gallo\u201d— Acyn (@Acyn) 1656537785
\u201c@Acyn Her sources are Gallo and Sutter\u201d— Acyn (@Acyn) 1656537785
\u201c@Acyn If her two sources are not under oath, what Jeanine says doesn't mean shit.\u201d— Acyn (@Acyn) 1656537785
