The January 6 Committee has released the transcript of St Sen (and failed GOP cand. for PA Gov) Doug Mastriano's testimony.
And Sen Mastriano, that champion of transparency, has successfully (for now) played out the clock.
Chris Potter of WESA tweeted this yesterday:
This isn't exactly a tl;dr situation, but here's the only exchange in this transcript that actually involves Mastriano. https://t.co/bX20aKrYXe pic.twitter.com/IzG1kCAlRI
— Chris Potter (@CPotterPgh) December 29, 2022
For those happy few who have yet to learn snarky internet-speak, "tl;dr" stands for "Too long. Didn't Read."
The bulk of the testimony, such as it is, is Doug's attorney Timothy Parlatore getting all feisty and nitpicky over whether a committee's subpoena was signed with an autopen or whether the committee has designated two individuals to conduct the investigation.
When Parlatore doesn't get the answers he wants, he and Doug walk.
For the record, the committee said they dealt with in correspondence with Doug and his attorney.
If I am reading Parlatore's statements correctly (and if I am not, he's completely free to email me to correct the record), he's saying that the committee itself is not following it's own rules and so therefore Sen Mastriano won't comply and testify. Doug would be happy to comply, of course, if only the committee were to follow Parlatore's understanding of its own rules.
For the record, the committee states it's following its own rules.
Also for the record, no one else among the vast list of those who've testified before the committee (among them Donald Trump Jr or William Barr) has successfully backed out of testifying using the same argument.
It's like Doug was insisting on a different set of rules or something.
Oh, well. He played out the clock. Good for Sen Transparency.
In any event, this is what some of what the committee would have asked him had he sat down and answered questions under oath. The committee:
- would have asked about Doug's involvement and understanding of a hearing that took place on November 25, 2020, in Gettysburg at a Wyndham Hotel that was related to the election.
- would have asked Doug about direct communications that he had with the President related to the election and joint session of Congress.
- would have asked Doug about his knowledge or involvement of the GOP electors who met to cast electoral college votes in December 2020 for the states that Trump lost.
- would have asked Doug about his presence in Washington DC at or near Capitol Hill on January 6th.
Even though Doug's attorney lawyered Doug's way out of answering those questions, I still want to hear the truth.