Published
on
Newly unearthed congressional letters have confirmed the worst fears of Trump supporters — that the January 6th Committee was never about “defending democracy” but about weaponizing government power to destroy President Donald J. Trump.
The shocking letters, released by congressional investigators, show direct coordination between disgraced former Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) and Special Counsel Jack Smith, the Biden Justice Department’s top political hitman.
Authored by Cheney and then–Committee Chair Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), the two documents reveal that the anti-Trump duo quietly handed over materials from their so-called investigation before Republicans took back the House in 2023.
The letters, dated December 2022, confirm that the Jan. 6 panel transferred at least 16 interviews and deposition transcripts to Smith’s office. These included attached exhibits, text messages, and even spreadsheets detailing Trump administration communications.
One of the letters explicitly stated the committee’s intention to make all gathered evidence “available to the Department of Justice.” That statement alone shatters any illusion of separation between the congressional probe and Smith’s ongoing witch hunt.
Within just four days, Cheney and Thompson wrote again to Smith, this time proudly announcing they had sent text messages from Trump’s then–Chief of Staff Mark Meadows and confidential documents from attorney John Eastman.
“Along with the latter, we are producing a staff-created spreadsheet of the Meadows texts that contain additional information from privilege logs,” they bragged, showing a complete disregard for privacy and executive privilege.
The pair even promised to send “additional evidence on a rolling basis,” effectively making the Jan. 6 Committee an unofficial branch of the Biden Department of Justice.
According to the House Judiciary Committee, these newly revealed communications prove that the partisan panel worked “hand-in-hand” with Smith to politically target Trump and his associates.
Smith, who was personally appointed by Attorney General Merrick Garland, would go on to indict Trump twice — once over a records dispute with the National Archives, and again over Trump’s challenge to the 2020 election results.
The collusion between Cheney’s committee and Smith’s prosecutors shows that the Jan. 6 operation was part of a coordinated effort to criminalize political opposition.
It also raises serious questions about the ethics of lawmakers sharing privileged materials with a prosecutor before their own investigation had even formally concluded.
Many Republicans are now calling it one of the most blatant abuses of congressional power in modern American history.
Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.), who is leading the current probe into the Jan. 6 Committee’s activities, says the revelations confirm that the previous panel may have engaged in “criminal or unethical behavior.”
Loudermilk’s new investigation is focused on allegations that the committee deleted files, manipulated evidence, and conducted itself as an arm of the Democratic Party rather than a neutral fact-finding body.
Adding to the outrage, both Cheney and Thompson reportedly received preemptive pardons from President Joe Biden for any actions tied to the Jan. 6 investigation.
That revelation has sparked fury among conservatives, who view the pardons as a blatant attempt to shield political allies from accountability.
The original Jan. 6 Committee was hand-selected by then–Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who barred pro-Trump lawmakers from serving on it — ensuring the panel’s conclusions were politically one-sided from the start.
Cheney, who lost her seat in a landslide after turning on Trump, used her position to promote the Democrat narrative that the former president was responsible for the Capitol riot.
Meanwhile, Thompson oversaw the committee’s public hearings, which featured selectively edited footage, staged testimony, and heavily scripted “evidence” designed to manipulate public opinion.
Now, the release of these letters confirms that behind the scenes, the same individuals who claimed to be seeking “truth” were secretly feeding information to federal prosecutors.
Even worse, that information would later form the backbone of Smith’s politically motivated indictments against President Trump.
The entire saga paints a disturbing picture of government collusion — where congressional Democrats, anti-Trump Republicans, and DOJ officials conspired to weaponize the legal system against a sitting and future president.
For millions of Americans, these revelations only reaffirm what they have long believed: that the Jan. 6 investigation was a partisan hit job masquerading as justice.
By
Newly unearthed congressional letters have confirmed the worst fears of Trump supporters — that the January 6th Committee was never about “defending democracy” but about weaponizing government power to destroy President Donald J. Trump.
The shocking letters, released by congressional investigators, show direct coordination between disgraced former Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) and Special Counsel Jack Smith, the Biden Justice Department’s top political hitman.
Authored by Cheney and then–Committee Chair Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), the two documents reveal that the anti-Trump duo quietly handed over materials from their so-called investigation before Republicans took back the House in 2023.
The letters, dated December 2022, confirm that the Jan. 6 panel transferred at least 16 interviews and deposition transcripts to Smith’s office. These included attached exhibits, text messages, and even spreadsheets detailing Trump administration communications.
One of the letters explicitly stated the committee’s intention to make all gathered evidence “available to the Department of Justice.” That statement alone shatters any illusion of separation between the congressional probe and Smith’s ongoing witch hunt.
Within just four days, Cheney and Thompson wrote again to Smith, this time proudly announcing they had sent text messages from Trump’s then–Chief of Staff Mark Meadows and confidential documents from attorney John Eastman.
“Along with the latter, we are producing a staff-created spreadsheet of the Meadows texts that contain additional information from privilege logs,” they bragged, showing a complete disregard for privacy and executive privilege.
The pair even promised to send “additional evidence on a rolling basis,” effectively making the Jan. 6 Committee an unofficial branch of the Biden Department of Justice.
According to the House Judiciary Committee, these newly revealed communications prove that the partisan panel worked “hand-in-hand” with Smith to politically target Trump and his associates.
Smith, who was personally appointed by Attorney General Merrick Garland, would go on to indict Trump twice — once over a records dispute with the National Archives, and again over Trump’s challenge to the 2020 election results.
The collusion between Cheney’s committee and Smith’s prosecutors shows that the Jan. 6 operation was part of a coordinated effort to criminalize political opposition.
It also raises serious questions about the ethics of lawmakers sharing privileged materials with a prosecutor before their own investigation had even formally concluded.
Many Republicans are now calling it one of the most blatant abuses of congressional power in modern American history.
Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.), who is leading the current probe into the Jan. 6 Committee’s activities, says the revelations confirm that the previous panel may have engaged in “criminal or unethical behavior.”
Loudermilk’s new investigation is focused on allegations that the committee deleted files, manipulated evidence, and conducted itself as an arm of the Democratic Party rather than a neutral fact-finding body.
Adding to the outrage, both Cheney and Thompson reportedly received preemptive pardons from President Joe Biden for any actions tied to the Jan. 6 investigation.
That revelation has sparked fury among conservatives, who view the pardons as a blatant attempt to shield political allies from accountability.
The original Jan. 6 Committee was hand-selected by then–Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who barred pro-Trump lawmakers from serving on it — ensuring the panel’s conclusions were politically one-sided from the start.
Cheney, who lost her seat in a landslide after turning on Trump, used her position to promote the Democrat narrative that the former president was responsible for the Capitol riot.
Meanwhile, Thompson oversaw the committee’s public hearings, which featured selectively edited footage, staged testimony, and heavily scripted “evidence” designed to manipulate public opinion.
Now, the release of these letters confirms that behind the scenes, the same individuals who claimed to be seeking “truth” were secretly feeding information to federal prosecutors.
Even worse, that information would later form the backbone of Smith’s politically motivated indictments against President Trump.
The entire saga paints a disturbing picture of government collusion — where congressional Democrats, anti-Trump Republicans, and DOJ officials conspired to weaponize the legal system against a sitting and future president.
For millions of Americans, these revelations only reaffirm what they have long believed: that the Jan. 6 investigation was a partisan hit job masquerading as justice.
On a night that was supposed to mark a confident appearance for Karoline Leavitt, the Republican political strategist and former congressional candidate, the spotlight turned into something she never expected — a stage that would reveal more about her than she may have intended.
Appearing on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert in New York City, Leavitt entered the Ed Sullivan Theater with sharp talking points, a rehearsed smile, and the determination of someone ready to seize national attention.
The audience, a mix of Colbert’s loyal fans and curious onlookers intrigued by the pairing, was ready for sparks to fly.
And sparks did fly, but not in the way Leavitt may have hoped.
From the opening exchange, Leavitt launched into pointed attacks, accusing Colbert of “weaponizing comedy to shield hypocrisy,” and insisting that late-night television had become little more than “propaganda dressed up as entertainment.
” Her words, laced with bravado, drew nervous laughter from the crowd, which seemed uncertain whether to laugh, boo, or wait for Colbert’s trademark satirical counterpunch.
But Colbert didn’t flinch.
Instead of meeting fire with fire, he remained unnervingly calm.
He let her speak, nodding occasionally, pausing long enough that her accusations began to echo uncomfortably in the studio.
Viewers watching at home later described the moment on social media as “watching someone play chess while their opponent kept throwing checkers across the board.”
As Leavitt’s voice rose, her confidence swelling with each sharp remark, she seemed convinced that Colbert’s silence was proof she had cornered him.
“You don’t even want to debate me, do you?” she pressed, her smile widening as she leaned forward.
Then came the turning point.
Colbert leaned into the desk, his voice even, steady, and devastatingly precise.
“I don’t debate performances,” he said.
“I hold up a mirror.
If you don’t like what you see, that’s not my problem.”
The room shifted instantly.
Gasps echoed through the theater.
What had been nervous giggles moments earlier gave way to thunderous applause, the kind that seemed to rattle the rafters of the Ed Sullivan Theater.
Leavitt froze, her carefully rehearsed rhythm collapsing in real time.
Her expression, once confident, flickered with the unmistakable recognition that the narrative had slipped from her control.
Colbert didn’t need to shout.
He didn’t need to overwhelm her with statistics, jokes, or policy jabs.
With one surgical line, he dismantled her performance, exposing it as hollow and leaving her standing vulnerable under the same lights she had entered so boldly.
By the time the cameras cut to commercial, the story had flipped entirely.
What began as Leavitt’s attempt to challenge a late-night host on his own stage ended as a moment of live television that left her struggling to recover her composure.
Colbert, meanwhile, stood taller than ever — a reminder of why his mix of patience, wit, and razor-sharp timing has cemented his place as one of the most formidable figures in late-night broadcasting.
In the hours that followed, clips of the exchange flooded social media.
The moment trended within minutes, with hashtags like #ColbertMirror and #LeavittMeltdown taking over platforms.
Supporters of Colbert praised his restraint and precision, calling it “a masterclass in dismantling arrogance without raising your voice.
” Critics of Leavitt seized on the exchange as evidence of her lack of preparedness, while her allies attempted to spin the moment as an ambush by a hostile host.
Yet the raw footage told its own story.
There was no shouting match, no over-the-top humiliation.
What unfolded was far more unsettling: a mirror held up on live television that forced Leavitt’s performance to collapse under its own weight.
For Colbert, it was more than just another memorable moment in a career filled with viral exchanges.
It was a reminder of his ability to turn silence into power, to transform an interview into an unexpected reckoning.
For Leavitt, the night will likely linger as a cautionary tale about the dangers of mistaking a platform for control.
And for viewers, it was one of those rare instances where live television shed its polish and revealed something raw, real, and unforgettable.
A performance meant to showcase dominance ended as an unforgettable implosion — and a defining reminder of why Stephen Colbert remains a force no guest can underestimate.