I kinda cringed when Hutchison told the story of the Trump lunge...for two reasons. First, because it terrorized me that if true, we had a President in control of nuke codes that had lost his mind. But secondly, because it was a third hand/hearsay story that I was rightfully thinking would be automatically pushed back on.
I don't think Hutchinson is lying. I believe her that she heard a story like this.
The two SS agents coming forward have taken oaths to protect the Presidency. Could lying under oath to protect their other oath of protecting the Presidency happen? I don't know. But clearly the office of the Presidency was hurt by the story told by Hutchinson.
I am conflicted here. I don't think Hutchinson lied especially since, firstly, so much of her other testimony, like all of it, has not been disputed in any meaningful way. Second, because she is a staunch Republican and a believer in Trump up until she saw Trump's 2:17PM tweet about Pence. Third, I don't see her motivation to lie given all the other incredibly damaging testimony. And fourth, she was tampered with and pressured to be loyal, it has to be because she knew something extraordinarily damaging to Trump, like the lunging incident.
But, I want to believe that those in public law enforcement wouldn't lie about such a thing as telling that story about what happened in the Beast. But, unfortunately, being a member of a family with a bunch of LEOs, I know LEOs aren't always completely truthful, even under oath, especially if what comes up makes them or their buddies look bad.
So I look at it this way. Throw out the Beast story. Concentrate on everything else Hutchinson testified to. If concrete evidence comes forward to confirm or deny the story, deal with that implication then.