The Justice Department went after Cassidy Hutchinson, and a grand jury said no. On Tuesday, a federal grand jury in Washington, D.C., rejected an attempt to indict the former White House aide over her Jan. 6 testimony, The Washington Post reports, citing two people familiar with the matter.
That is a rare thing. Grand juries hear only the prosecution’s side, so they almost always say yes. When they refuse, prosecutors should stop and ask why.
Why DOJ Went After Cassidy Hutchinson
Hutchinson worked for Mark Meadows, Trump’s last White House chief of staff. In 2022, she became the star witness for the House committee that investigated Jan. 6. The Associated Press called her testimony “dramatic but disputed.”
Among other things, she testified that Trump and Meadows were warned some supporters had weapons that day. She also said Trump wanted the metal detectors removed, according to CBS. Notably, CBS could not determine which parts of her testimony prosecutors were targeting.
Disputed is the right word. For example, she told the committee that Trump lunged at the steering wheel of his vehicle after his Secret Service agent refused to drive him to the Capitol. However, she was repeating a story she said a deputy chief of staff told her. Later, Trump’s driver said under oath that the president never grabbed the wheel, CBS News reported.
In March, Republican Rep. Barry Loudermilk sent the Justice Department a criminal referral accusing her of lying to Congress. House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan co-signed it, CNN reported. The referral said she lied when she claimed Trump knew violence was possible and pressed ahead anyway. Then, this fall, prosecutors started presenting evidence to a grand jury. Oddly, the Civil Rights Division ran the case instead of the U.S. Attorney’s Office in D.C., according to CBS.
A Bad Story Is Not the Same as a Crime
Conservatives have every right to doubt the steering wheel tale. It was secondhand, and the people in the car denied it. Still, telling Congress something false is not enough for a charge. Prosecutors have to prove a witness knowingly lied about something that mattered.
That is a high bar, and it should be. Repeating a story you were told is not perjury if you repeated it honestly. Apparently, the Cassidy Hutchinson grand jury saw it the same way. As a result, the case is dead, at least for now.
The Cassidy Hutchinson Case Hurts Real Cases
Here is what bothers me most. This DOJ is also pursuing cases that deserve a full hearing. For instance, it charged James Comey a third time and charged former FBI officials over the Hunter Biden laptop. Those cases need public trust to win in court.
Every weak case burns some of that trust. Meanwhile, a grand jury no-bill a week before the midterms hands Democrats a ready-made story about a political Justice Department. That story will follow every serious case this department brings.
What Conservatives Should Want Now
For years, we said the Justice Department under Biden went after political opponents. We were right to say it. But the answer to a weaponized DOJ is not a weaponized DOJ pointed the other way. Instead, it is a department that charges crimes it can prove.
The record on Jan. 6 is already public. Loudermilk’s work and the sworn testimony that contradicted Hutchinson are out there for anyone to read. In other words, voters can judge her credibility without a criminal case.
So far, the Justice Department has not commented. A spokesperson told Bloomberg Law earlier that it does not confirm or deny investigations.
Bottom Line
A grand jury looked at the Cassidy Hutchinson case and walked away. The Justice Department should take the hint and spend its time on cases that hold up. For more conservative commentary, visit the World of Payne homepage and follow the show on X, Facebook, and Instagram.
