The recent felony conviction and eight month prison sentence of January 6th protester Paul Hodgkins is an affront to any notion of justice. It is a political charge and a political verdict by a political court. Every American regardless of political persuasion should be terrified of a court system so beholden to politics instead of justice.
We’ve seen this movie before and it does not end well.
Worse than this miscarriage of justice is the despicable attempt by the prosecutor in the case to label Hodgkins – who has no criminal record and was accused of no violent crime – a “terrorist.”
As journalist Michael Tracey recently wrote, Special Assistant US Attorney Mona Sedky declared Hodgkins a “terrorist” in the court proceedings not for committing any terrorist act, not for any act of violence, not even for imagining a terrorist act.
Sedky wrote in her sentencing memo, “The Government … recognizes that Hodgkins did not personally engage in or espouse violence or property destruction.” She added, “we concede that Mr. Hodgkins is not under the legal definition a domestic terrorist.”
Yet Hodgkins should be considered a terrorist because the actions he took – entering the Senate to take a photo of himself – occurred during an event that the court is “framing…in the context of terrorism.”
That goes beyond a slippery slope. He is not a terrorist because he committed a terrorist act, but because somehow the “context” of his actions was, in her words, “imperiling democracy.”
In other words, Hodgkins deserved enhanced punishment because he committed a thought crime. The judge on the case, Randolph D. Moss, admitted as much. In carrying a Trump flag into the Senate, he said, Hodgkins was, “declaring his loyalty to a single individual over the nation.”
As Tracey pointed out, while eight months in prison is a ridiculously long sentence for standing on the floor of the “People’s House” and taking a photograph, it is also a ridiculously short sentence for a terrorist. If Hodgkins is really a terrorist, shouldn’t he be sent away for longer than eight months?
The purpose of the Soviet show trials was to create an enemy that the public could collectively join in hating and blaming for all the failures of the system. The purpose was to turn one part of the population against the other part of the population and demand they be “cancelled.” And it worked very well…for awhile.
In a recent article, libertarian author Jim Bovard quoted from Solzhenitsyn’s Gulag Archipelago about how average people turned out to demand "justice" for the state's designated “political” enemies: “There were universal meetings and demonstrations (including even school-children). It was the newspaper march of millions, and the roar rose outside the windows of the courtroom: ‘Death! Death! Death!’”
While we are not quite there yet, we are moving in that direction. Americans being sent to prison not for what they did, but for what they believe? Does that sound like the kind of America we really want to live in?
While many Biden backers are enjoying seeing the hammer come down on pro-Trump, non-violent protesters, they should take note: the kind of totalitarian “justice” system they are cheering on will soon be coming for them. It always does.
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#176280 07/28/202107:50 PM07/28/202107:50 PM
PERSONALLY, I WISH THE PROTESTORS WOULD'VE BURNED THEIR DAMNED TEMPLE OF DEMOCRACY TO THE GROUND.
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#176281 07/28/202108:01 PM07/28/202108:01 PM
Four Members Of Congress Accused Of “Trespassing” While Trying To Inspect Prison Where Jan. 6th Defendants Are Held
What's happening inside the jail that they don't want Americans to see?
By Kelen McBreen | INFOWARS.COM Thursday, July 29, 2021
Four GOP lawmakers were accused of “trespassing” at a Washington DC prison when they tried to check on the conditions of January 6th defendants being held there.
Security guards at the DC Department of Corrections told the congressional members they could not enter the facility and locked them out of the building entirely.
Footage posted by Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz shows an attorney was even barred from seeing his client inside the prison.
Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (MTG) can be heard saying, “They don’t want us to know what’s happening inside.”
Take part in the ultimate win-win deals on the web by checking out our store now!
Texas Rep. Louie Gohmert explained that he and his colleagues are cleared for top secret information and they often inspect facilities, but that things are different under the Biden administration.
The elected officials explained that they’ve received reports of poor treatment in the facility and simply wanted to inspect the conditions for themselves.
One prisoner published a letter complaining about poor treatment in the facility and another claimed in an interview that detainees who refuse the COVID jab are being denied basic sanitary rights.
“These are the same types of questions we ask when we go to the detention centers at the border where they house illegals that come into our country,” MTG told an OAN reporter.
After being told that a facility supervisor was outside, the congress members and media left the facility and were locked out of the building.
“It was apparently a bait and switch. We are here just to talk to a supervisor and when the supervisor came out and we came out to have that discussion, they literally ran behind us and locked the doors, ” Rep. Gaetz said.
What is going on inside the prison that would make the employees rush to block members of Congress from entering?
Whatever they were trying to hide will likely be covered up before any investigation takes place.
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#176286 07/29/202104:49 PM07/29/202104:49 PM
I write all the time but sometimes I can’t reach the things that are really important. The ideas fly around my brain in inchoate fashion but I lack the authorial and analytic chops to put them into words that have the power to convey to others my deepest concerns about what’s happening.
Thankfully, John Hayward doesn’t have that problem — or, at least, he doesn’t have it when it comes to the horrors Democrats have inflicted on America as they’ve politicized both the Constitutional rights of speech and assembly and the entire criminal code. Here’s John Hayward’s Twitter thread, turned (verbatim) in the prose I find easier to read:
Quote
The 1/6 rioters should be treated with the same severity as Black Lives Matter rioters. Since that is not remotely possible, all else is political theater and raw exercises of power, and I am weary of pretenses to the contrary.
I’m weary of our ruling class sending the message that your home, business, and personal safety are at the mercy of violent Demcorat-approved grievance groups, but don’t you DARE do anything that makes the aristocracy in D.C. uncomfortable.
I’m tired of hearing the Abolish the Police Party demand limitless scrutiny and aggressive defunding of the police who protect the rest of us, but unquestioning support and increased funding for the police who protect THEM. Why not protect the Capitol with social workers, huh?
There are Democrat-controlled parts of the country where theft has literally been decriminalized, and not just during Democrat-approved riots. You have to stand and watch helplessly while your business is looted every day. But the rules are different for THEIR place of business.
The entire premise of the theatrical 1/6 hearings is supposedly that further “insurrections” are a serious threat that must be proactively addressed. That is FAR more true of Democrat-approved grievance riots. They were vastly larger, deadlier, and more likely to occur again.
No group that might contemplate barging into the Capitol was given billions of dollars in funding by politicized corporations, as BLM was. None of them enjoys anything like to [sic] the political and media support of the 2020 rioters, who even got a pass from coronavirus restrictions. Democrat-approved rioters were even given free passes from coronavirus restrictions.
Every rule on the books was bent and broken for them. Prosecution for their offenses has not been zero, but it hasn’t exactly been thorough. The message sure as hell isn’t “never do this again.”
The Democrat Party normalized and celebrated political violence for months before the Capitol riots. Let’s have some hearings on THAT. Let’s talk about how incredibly dangerous it is for one Party to think it has a monopoly on grievance-mongering, street theater, and violence.
Let’s also have some hearings about how one Party thinks it has a monopoly on questioning the outcome of elections. We could roll video of top Dems, including sitting officials, doing that for HOURS. You want theater? I’ll make the popcorn and bring the tapes.
I’m not really interested in hearing any Democrat, or their GOP footstools, give tearful speeches about sacred democracy while their party systematically destroys every bit of protection for our elections and wantonly undermines every outcome they don’t like. We have every reason to fear the full power of bloated, hyper-politicized government being turned against Americans who dissent from the ruling Party.
Show trials designed to establish the predicate that dissenters are potential violent terrorists are not exactly reassuring. There is no need to excuse or valorize anything that occurred on 1/6 to be disgusted by this week’s political spectacle. Our media tells us that “context” is everything. Well, in the full context of 2020, hysterics over 1/6 are absurd and hypocritical.
You can’t say THIS city is sacred ground, but THESE cities must be abandoned to mobs and criminals as lawless wastelands. Hell, most of D.C. outside the Capitol IS a lawless wasteland. You shrieking potentates can see murder factories through your barbed wire fences.
You can’t say THESE cops are sacred avatars of law and order whose actions merit no public scrutiny or investigation, but all the rest of them are trigger-happy racists who should be micromanaged, distrusted, disarmed, defunded, and replaced by community organizers.
You can’t say THIS politicized violence is totally unacceptable and should be prosecuted unto the end of time, but THESE people are allowed to use violence and vandalism whenever they feel the system is not addressing their grievances quickly enough.
You can’t tell me the 1st Amendment must be bypassed to silence “disinformation” because it might lead to “insurrection,” while embracing media outlets that spread Hands Up Don’t Shoot lies with wild abandon, resulting in real and immediate crime and violence.
When people who spent four years role-playing as “the Resistance” against a “stolen election” suddenly start telling us dissent and resistance are treason that will be punished without mercy, we know exactly what’s going on. It’s a grim story repeated throughout human history.
By all means, let’s have universal respect for universally RESPECTABLE elections. Let’s have zero tolerance for political violence. Let every American’s property be treated with the respect afforded to a congressman’s office. These hearings obviously aren’t about that.
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#176339 08/07/202111:22 AM08/07/202111:22 AM
...Which is why, as we have argued repeatedly at American Greatness, the government and U.S. Capitol Police should agree to release more than 14,000 hours of surveillance video captured by security cameras on January 6. If the four-hour melee indeed compares to the worst terrorist attacks against Americans, and ranks among the worst days in U.S. history, the public deserves to see what happened, minute-by-minute, inside and outside the building.
But it’s not just Capitol complex security video that the government is trying to conceal from the public. In a recent filing, Joe Biden’s Justice Department argued against the release of footage recorded by officer Michael Fanone’s bodycam on January 6. The D.C. Metropolitan Police narcotics officer was one of the four cops who testified last week.
Fanone, 40, said he was not supposed to be on Capitol Hill that day but that he put on an official, unworn uniform—including a body camera—for the first time in 10 years to help assist his colleagues control the chaos. Fanone also testified he was afraid he would be killed that day—either shot with his own gun or torn limb from limb by Trump fanatics. In one outburst, Fanone called insurrection deniers in Congress “disgraceful” and claimed they were “betraying their oath of office.”
Fanone is working hard to become a household name. He’s been on a part-pity, part-publicity tour for the past seven months, detailing his harrowing experience and stalking Republican members of Congress. He’s become a regular on CNN; following his testimony last Tuesday, Fanone headed to the CNN studio for an interview with Don Lemon. The two ended the segment with an embrace and expressions of love for each other.
In a front-cover profile in this week’s Time magazine, Fanone recalled how he phoned the network from his emergency room hospital bed on January 6. “Fanone looked up CNN, called the number that came up on his phone and told the woman who answered that Mike Fanone with the metropolitan police department needed to talk right away to that jerk on the air who was insulting the good name of every police officer,” Molly Ball reported. “The following week, at his urging, the department set up a round of interviews with the Washington Post and major TV networks. Fanone, one of several officers authorized to speak to the press, was the star of every segment.”
Four months later, Ball writes, Fanone was in a D.C. ritzy wine bar with other cops looking “to meet girls”—Fanone is divorced and living with his mother—when they asked the bartender to turn on CNN. Lemon was airing exclusive footage from Fanone’s body-worn camera. “The bar fell silent as the body-cam footage played,” Fanone told Ball. “And suddenly, for the first time since that day, Fanone was sobbing uncontrollably, shoulders heaving as his buddies put their arms around him.”
The Justice Department continues to release cherry-picked video clips from its massive trove of digital evidence to support the White House’s narrative that January 6 was a deadly insurrection executed by domestic terrorists. The government continues to blow through discovery deadlines in court; during a hearing last Friday, a prosecutor admitted full discovery obligations in the Capitol breach probe won’t be fulfilled until early 2022 at the earliest....
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#176341 08/07/202102:54 PM08/07/202102:54 PM
Fanone is just another tax payer funded attention whore.
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#176342 08/07/202105:37 PM08/07/202105:37 PM
Prosecutors in the cases against the January 6 demonstrators are starting to run into some judicial pushback: Questions about exculpatory evidence in their possession not turned over as the law demands, lower courts assessing the defendant as more dangerous than the evidence warranted, and most significantly, whether the prosecution is overcharging defendants with the federal crime of obstruction.
Most of the defendants are charged with knowingly entering or remaining in a restricted area -- a fancy way of saying trespassing. Defendants are entitled to see before pleading to the charges any materially exculpatory evidence in the government’s possession. Defense counsel have complained that the government has not been meeting this obligation, and the prosecution has been responding that it is unable to quickly assess all the evidence it has to meet this burden. As to those charged with trespassing, some are claiming they were invited in and, therefore, could not be guilty of the charges. The prosecution got one extension and the question is whether they should get another, a question complicated by the defendants’ right to a speedy trial. Sixteen of the defendants facing the most serious charges will not have their cases heard until next January.
This week, the Department of Justice seems to have conceded the very point of the inapplicability of some trespass charges.
In its pleading, it states: ”we possess some information that the defense may view as supportive of arguments that law enforcement authorized defendants (including Defendant) to enter the restricted grounds'. e.g., images of officers hugging or fist-bumping rioters, posing for photos with rioters, and moving bike racks, we are not in a position to state whether we have identified all such information.”
To my knowledge, two appellant courts have now held that the trial courts have erred in assessing the appellant’s dangerousness. The first such case was decided in March.
Quote
In a 2–1 decision, the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit ordered a lower court judge to reconsider his decision to keep Eric Munchel and his mother, Lisa Eisenhart, in jail while their cases go forward. US District Judge Royce Lamberth had ruled in February that Munchel -- who was photographed inside the Capitol wearing tactical gear and holding plastic zip-tie handcuffs -- and Eisenhart presented “a clear danger to our republic” and that there were no release conditions that would “reasonably ensure the safety of the community.” But DC Circuit Judge Robert Wilkins wrote Friday that Lamberth’s 17-page opinion failed to articulate how the two posed a danger when they hadn’t actually been charged with committing specific violent acts at the Capitol on Jan. 6. Lamberth wrote that the allegations against Munchel showed that he was “willing to use force to promote his political ends,” but the appeals court found that the judge didn’t explain how he reached that conclusion when there was no evidence Munchel hurt anyone or broke anything.
“In our view, those who actually assaulted police officers and broke through windows, doors, and barricades, and those who aided, conspired with, planned, or coordinated such actions, are in a different category of dangerousness than those who cheered on the violence or entered the Capitol after others cleared the way,” Wilkins, joined by Judge Judith Rogers, wrote.
Munchel and Eisenhart will remain in jail as the case goes back to Lamberth for another round of arguments. [Judge Lamberth released them pending trial]
Friday’s opinion marks the first time the appeals court has weighed in with a specific framework for how lower court judges should think about pretrial detention in the Capitol riot cases. The decision sets precedent that is now binding on all the district court judges in DC and moves the bar higher for the government to successfully argue for pretrial detention for other defendants who, like Munchel and Eisenhart, aren’t charged with assaulting police, property destruction, or conspiracy and have minimal or no previous criminal record.
This week, another appellant court came to a like decision.
Quote
A three-judge appeals court panel has ordered the release of West Virginia sandwich shop owner George Tanios pending trial in the Jan. 6 chemical-spray assault on three police officers including Brian D. Sicknick, who died the following day after suffering two strokes.
A lower court “clearly erred in its individualized assessment of appellant’s dangerousness,” the judges from the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit said in an order filed Monday night.
“The record reflects that Tanios has no past felony convictions, no ties to any extremist organizations, and no post-January 6 criminal behavior that would otherwise show him to pose a danger to the community within the meaning of the Bail Reform Act,” the order said.
The most serious hurdle to date was also raised this week when U.S. District Judge Randolph D. Moss questioned whether it was appropriate to imply obstruction charges against 235 defendants. The government’s claim is that the actions of these defendants constituted a violation of the federal “obstruction” statutes because their conduct disrupted the congressional certification of the presidential election. Judge Moss is no babe in the wood, he headed the department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel and now chairs the Federal Judiciary’s Committee on Criminal Law. (In my view the federal crimes of “conspiracy” and “obstruction” are overly broad and misused by prosecutors. It is what was used to destroy the Arthur Anderson accounting firm and it was no compensation that the Supreme Court unanimously held that the firm’s conduct did not constitute “obstruction.” It had recommended destruction of records in the ordinary course of events, and if that made the government’s case more difficult it was not done for that purpose. Arthur Andersen LLP v. United States, 543 U.S. 1042 (2005).
In any event, Judge Moss questioned whether the charges aren’t unconstitutionally vague and asked the parties to brief how the Justice Department distinguished “felony conduct under the statute, punishable by up to 20 years in prison, from misdemeanor offenses, such as shouting to interrupt a congressional hearing.”
“‘Unless we can tell the public where that line is, there’s a problem.” You bet there is. Criminal statutes should be clear and consistent to provide guidance to all, and it’s hard to see how they can be when prosecutors have charged people who aren't accused of violence or destruction. Is sitting in the vice-president’s chair really obstruction of Congress. to take one example?
This hurdle will certainly slow down the impetus to plead guilty -- it’s one thing to face a misdemeanor charge and quite another to risk a 20-year sentence. If the prosecution believes this conduct had been seditious or an insurrection, they would have charged it. Obviously, they lack the evidence to sustain such serious claims. Will they now re-charge for lesser offenses? We’ll see. I think Judge Moss might have, as I do, recalled the recent Kavanaugh hearings and their disruption when he asked the government whether it could cite any other cases in which the government charged comparable conduct. The department could not.
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#176574 09/13/202104:04 PM09/13/202104:04 PM
About that "Justice for J6" rally in Washington on Sept. 18, it might be a good idea to stay away. It looks for all the world like a false flag trap. And even the "Proud Boys" agree:
Quote
...Not everyone on Trump’s side thinks this rally is a good idea. The Proud Boys are looking at it as a “false flag” event meant to entrap even more Trumpsters.
Messages from the Proud Boys Telegram channel show that the pro-Trump antifa-boppers aren’t interested in attending the rally.
“We aren’t going and you shouldn’t either because everybody going to jail. Sounds like bait,” stated one message.
“If you rally in DC right now, you’re an idiot and you’re going to get people thrown in jail or worse,” the group added.
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#176576 09/13/202107:23 PM09/13/202107:23 PM
it might be a good idea to stay away It looks for all the world like a false flag trap.
While that may be true, one would be wise to recall the months of high-intensity PSYOP surrounding the election. The psychological impact of “trust the plan,” “stay out of the way,” “they’re trying to provoke a civil war,” “it’s a trap,” “it’s a false-flag,” “remember what happened to the January 6 protesters,” and so forth, was devastating to the cause of Liberty. The objective of that very obvious PSYOP was to intimidate, confuse, demobilize and demoralize. That PSYOP was a resounding success. Any would-be resistance was neutralized before it even began, leaving the traitor with a virtually uncontested victory over the pacified dissents.
The fact of the matter is, if we can’t mobilize substantial numbers even for just a peaceful protest, then we can’t accomplish anything meaningful.
Quote
“This morning the United States Capitol Police arrested a California man who had multiple knives in his truck near the Democratic National Committee headquarters ... Around midnight, a Special Operation Division Officer was on patrol when he noticed a Dodge Dakota pickup truck, with a swastika and other white supremacist symbols painted on it, outside of the DNC headquarters. The truck did not have a license plate. Instead, a picture of an American flag was placed where the license plate should have been. The Capitol Police officer pulled over the truck ... officers noticed a bayonet and machete, which are illegal in Washington DC, inside the truck. The driver, 44-year-old Donald Craighead of Oceanside, California was arrested for Possession of Prohibited Weapons. Craighead said he was ‘on patrol’ and began talking about white supremacist ideology and other rhetoric pertaining to white supremacy ... it is not clear if he was planning to attend any upcoming demonstrations“ https://www.uscp.gov/media-center/press-releases/uscp-officers-arrest-california-man-bayonet-machete
This incident, occurring today in DC near the DNC Headquarters, has all the hallmarks of the right-wing white-supremacist homegrown terrorist narrative being heavily propagated by the government and media. It also bears resemblance to the events of January 6th itself, where an individual placed two pipe bombs near the DNC Headquarters.
I believe this incident is a component of the aforementioned PSYOP campaign and this incident has been staged for dissident consumption. I further believe it is intended to remind would-be protesters of the events of January 6th, the undesirable outcome for myriad of the protesters that day, and to suggest another high-intensity incident may occur, false-flag or not, implying that many September 18th protesters may share the fate of the January 6th protesters, therefore intimidating would-be protesters and reducing dissident mobilization.
As a reminder, when the Boogaloo armed protests at state capitals occurred, there were myriad warnings that it would involve a “false-flag” and “trap.” The protest ultimately had a very small turnout because would-be protesters had been pacified through this intimidation. There was no false-flag, and nobody was trapped. I further remind you of the barricades and military occupation of DC which followed January 6th, indicating that the traitor realized he had a great deal more to fear of the People than the People did of the state. The traitor, more specifically, understood that January 6th could have very easily evolved into a Maidan-type revolution. The Capitol could have been captured; Washington could have been captured. A series of events could have transpired leading to not only a threat to government continuity, but in fact an existential crisis for the traitor himself. The People needn’t fear the traitor nor his government goons, because the PSYOP intended to pacify the People is in fact an indication of the traitor’s own fear and impotence.
Quote
“If they remain quiet under such misconceptions it is a lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty ... what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance?“ -Thomas Jefferson
Liberty and Prosperity, by Right or Might
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#176600 09/15/202101:13 PM09/15/202101:13 PM
This won't help the government. 49% of Americans - including 45% of Democrats - agree the Jan. 6 defendants are political prisoners. Just 42% disagree.
Quote
In a shock survey likely to draw even more attention to this weekend’s “Justice for J6” rally, nearly half of voters believe those charged in the Capitol riots are political prisoners.
According to the latest Rasmussen Reports survey, 49% said that those jailed for violence and other charges are being held as “political prisoners.” Some 30% “strongly” agree.
Just 42% disagree, said the survey.
Notably, 45% of Democrats agree that the more than 500 arrested are political prisoners.
Rasmussen also found more agree that the FBI’s Jan. 6 dragnet is targeting “patriots.”
Asked to agree or disagree with this statement: “The Department of Justice and the FBI have targeted, imprisoned, and persecuted non-violent American patriots,” 48% agreed, and 46% disagreed.
The findings are surprising considering the general negative media coverage of the pro-Trump riots that led to the U.S. Capitol Police killing of one protester, Ashli Babbitt, as she tried to enter the House floor.
The survey comes in advance of the weekend "Justice for J6" rally, when about 700 are expected to speak out in support of those arrested and targeted in the protest described as an “insurrection” and worse than 9/11 in the liberal media....
Read the whole thing at the link.
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#176608 09/16/202102:35 PM09/16/202102:35 PM
“Trump acknowledged the widespread disgust that most Americans have for the professional political class in Washington, DC. ‘There’s a discontent with everything having to do with politics,’ Trump said about the general political situation in the country. ‘People are so disgusted with the way people are being treated from the Jan. 6 situation. It’s a combination of that compared to how Antifa and BLM were treated. When you compare the treatment, it is so unjust, it is so unfair. It’s disgraceful.’ Trump also characterized the planned Sept. 18 rally at the U.S. Capitol as a ‘setup’ meant to denigrate Republican voters regardless of what transpires. ‘Saturday, that’s a setup,’ Trump said, referring to the rally. ‘If people don’t show up they’ll say, Oh, it’s a lack of spirit. And if people do show up they’ll be harassed.’” https://thefederalist.com/2021/09/1...p-senate-should-fire-disaster-mcconnell/
Quote
“What country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance?“ -Thomas Jefferson
The traitor will be watching, closely studying the American spirit, or lack thereof. When far-left extremists were rampaging through our communities challenged by only very limited resistance, the traitor was inspired and knew he could safely escalate. When the People were forced out of work and imprisoned within their own homes without meaningful resistance, the traitor was again inspired. When Democracy was blatantly usurped and the People’s voice in government stripped from them, again without significant resistance, the traitor was once more inspired, and again knew he could safely escalate.
The traitor is a calculating coward, and he’ll be watching September 18th.
Quote
Quote
“And if people do show up they’ll be harassed.”
“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” -Benjamin Franklin
Liberty and Prosperity, by Right or Might
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: Navarro]
#176609 09/16/202102:57 PM09/16/202102:57 PM
..."Trump also characterized the planned Sept. 18 rally at the U.S. Capitol as a ‘setup’ ... If people don’t show up they’ll say, 'Oh, it’s a lack of spirit,' And if people do show up they’ll be harassed.’”
Sounds about right.
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: Navarro]
#176627 09/18/202105:57 PM09/18/202105:57 PM
“Trump acknowledged the widespread disgust that most Americans have for the professional political class in Washington, DC. ‘There’s a discontent with everything having to do with politics,’ Trump said about the general political situation in the country. ‘People are so disgusted with the way people are being treated from the Jan. 6 situation. It’s a combination of that compared to how Antifa and BLM were treated. When you compare the treatment, it is so unjust, it is so unfair. It’s disgraceful.’ Trump also characterized the planned Sept. 18 rally at the U.S. Capitol as a ‘setup’ meant to denigrate Republican voters regardless of what transpires. ‘Saturday, that’s a setup,’ Trump said, referring to the rally. ‘If people don’t show up they’ll say, Oh, it’s a lack of spirit. And if people do show up they’ll be harassed.’” https://thefederalist.com/2021/09/1...p-senate-should-fire-disaster-mcconnell/
Quote
“What country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance?“ -Thomas Jefferson
The traitor will be watching, closely studying the American spirit, or lack thereof. When far-left extremists were rampaging through our communities challenged by only very limited resistance, the traitor was inspired and knew he could safely escalate. When the People were forced out of work and imprisoned within their own homes without meaningful resistance, the traitor was again inspired. When Democracy was blatantly usurped and the People’s voice in government stripped from them, again without significant resistance, the traitor was once more inspired, and again knew he could safely escalate.
The traitor is a calculating coward, and he’ll be watching September 18th.
Quote
Quote
“And if people do show up they’ll be harassed.”
“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” -Benjamin Franklin
It would appear that yet another protest has taken place with little turnout and muted spirit. Once again the PSYOP campaign was successful at proactively pacifying and silencing the People through intimidating them with the “it’s a trap” and other propaganda narratives. The controlled opposition and organizers on the main stage further confused, pacified and distracted the relatively few protesters who attended. Fortunately, there was a militia side protest with genuinely patriotic speakers being fairly direct. As with other post-J6 protests, social media censorship lead to little coverage beyond that of the impotent controlled opposition narrative, an effort to silence the voice of the dissident Patriot in order to prevent him from informing or inspiring others.
Liberty and Prosperity, by Right or Might
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#176628 09/18/202107:48 PM09/18/202107:48 PM
A former high-ranking Capitol Police official with knowledge of the department’s response to the Jan. 6 attack has sent congressional leaders a scathing letter accusing two of its senior leaders of mishandling intelligence and failing to respond properly during the riot.
The whistleblower, who requested anonymity for privacy reasons and left the force months after the attack, sent the 16-page letter late last month to the top members of both parties in the House and Senate. His missive makes scorching allegations against Sean Gallagher, the Capitol Police’s acting chief of uniformed operations, and Yogananda Pittman, its assistant chief of police for protective and intelligence operations — who also served as its former acting chief.
The whistleblower accuses Gallagher and Pittman of deliberately choosing not to help officers under attack on Jan. 6 and alleges that Pittman lied to Congress about an intelligence report Capitol Police received before that day’s riot. After a lengthy career in the department, the whistleblower was a senior official on duty on Jan. 6.
The whistleblower’s criticism went beyond Capitol Police leaders to Congress. Without naming specific lawmakers, his letter accuses congressional leaders of having “purposefully failed” to tell the truth about the department’s failures.
POLITICO obtained the letter detailing the allegations, which is circulating among Capitol Police officers, and is publishing portions of it here. To protect the whistleblower’s identity, POLITICO is not publishing the letter in full.
“The truth may be valued less than politics by many members of the congressional community to include those that have made decisions about the leadership of the USCP post January 6th, but I believe the truth still matters to real people and certainly the men and women of the U.S. Capitol Police,” the whistleblower wrote.
A spokesperson for the Capitol Police sent a statement in response to the letter that begins: “A lot has changed since January 6. Although there is more work to do, many of the problems described in the letter have been addressed.”
The spokesperson added that the department “has implemented, and continues to implement, many of the critical recommendations called for in” a Senate inquiry into Jan. 6, a separate review conducted by retired Lt. Gen. Russel Honoré, and multiple probes by its own inspector general...
Read the whole thing at the link.
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#176753 10/11/202102:00 PM10/11/202102:00 PM
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#176965 11/11/202112:51 PM11/11/202112:51 PM
Jacob Chansley - AKA QAnon Shaman, the "horns guy," - is facing 51 months in prison. That would be the longest sentence requested for the Jan. 6 protesters.
Quote
The Justice Department is asking for the so-called QAnon Shaman, who wore a headdress and posed shirtless on the Senate floor during the siege of the US Capitol, to be sentenced to a prison term of more than four years, the longest incarceration prosecutors have asked for any guilty January 6 defendant so far, according to a new court filing.
Prosecutors' request for the high-profile Capitol riot defendant Jacob Chansley is as a harsh assessment of his crime and calls him "quite literally, their flagbearer" among the mob on January 6.
In their sentencing request to the judge filed late Tuesday night, prosecutors made clear they hope to use Chansley's sentence as an example to deter future attacks on the government.
The attempted coup, prosecutors wrote, "has made us all question the safety and security of the country in which we live."
"Those enormous harms, borne out of the acts of this defendant, must be deterred so that we never see a similar assault on our democracy again," they continued.
Chansley is set to be sentenced next Wednesday by Federal Judge Royce Lamberth of the DC District Court, as one of the first felony defendants to receive his punishment. He has been in jail for nearly 10 months....
Read the whole thing at the link.
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#176966 11/11/202103:01 PM11/11/202103:01 PM
Funny thing...Thomas Jefferson would've approved of the Jan 6 demand for a redress of grievances. Matter of fact, he would've probably led it.
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#176992 11/15/202109:19 AM11/15/202109:19 AM
Jan. 6 Defendants Taken Out Of Cells On Stretchers: Court Filing
By Zachary Stieber | The Epoch Times Sunday, November 14, 2021
Multiple Jan. 6 defendants were taken out of their cells on stretchers on Thursday, according to a court filing.
The situation started when one of the defendants refused to wear a mask, family members of Kelly Meggs, who is being held in the D.C. Jail, told Meggs lawyer.
Prison guards began spraying a chemical substance described as “some kind of mace or pepper spray, according to a filing in federal court.
“They sprayed mace or some type of gas at an inmate and kept missing so it went into an intake that fed into other cells and the lady with the key left because she didn’t like the gas, so the inmates in the cells who were being fed the gas from that intake were locked in for like 15 minutes while it was going into their rooms and they couldn’t see/breathe,” the family told Jonathon Moseley, the lawyer.
More than one of the defendants was taken out on stretchers to medical bays.
Julie Kelly, a writer for the American Greatness, reported on Wednesday that prison guards filled an area of the jail with chemical spray and three detainees had to be taken out on stretchers.
Moseley and the D.C. Department of Corrections did not respond to requests for comment.
The lawyer said his client was not in one of the cells that the gas was cycled into by the ventilation system. He urged the court to explore with the Bureau of Prisons and Congress whether any federal funds are already or can be allocated to repair and upgrade the D.C. Jail facilities.
Neither prosecutors nor the judge has yet responded to the filing.
The jail has been under heightened scrutiny in recent months due to its holding of dozens of people accused of participating in the breach of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6.
One defendant, Christopher Worrell, was released from pretrial custody last week because U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth became troubled by the lack of proper medical care he received from the jail.
The U.S. Marshals Service showed up unannounced at the facilities in mid-October. Officials deemed the part holding Jan. 6 detainees suitable but found conditions in another part that “do not meet the minimum standards of confinement,” the agency said in a recent statement.
Lamont Ruffin, the acting U.S. Marshal for Washington, told Quincy Booth, director of the D.C. Department of Corrections, in a letter that he personally went to the jail and saw “evidence of systemic failures.”
Prison guards routinely shut off water to cells as punishment and multiple cells had “large amounts of standing human sewage (urine and feces) in the toilets,” inspectors found. Additionally, guards were observed antagonizing detainees and hot meals were observed being served “cold and congealed.”
Jail officials were ordered to transfer around 400 detainees, or 36 percent of the inmates in the Central Treatment Facility, one of the facilities that makes up the D.C. Jail, to a prison in another state.
Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) and Louie Gohmert (R-Texas), after months of attempts, were able to tour the facilities last week. Greene said she witnessed terrible conditions, including Jan. 6 detainees receiving “very poor food” and “virtually no medical care.”
“I want to be very clear that we will deal with those deficiencies so that we have a safe jail until such time that the District is able to build a new one,” Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser, a Democrat who helped the members secure access, told The Epoch Times in an email.
Avis Buchanan, director of the Public Defender Service for the District of Columbia, said in a statement it has called out the treatment of detainees at the D.C. Jail for years.
“The inhumane conditions have included long-term solitary confinement for people with no disciplinary issues, lack of running water, full illumination of cells for 24-hours per day resulting in sleep deprivation, cells soiled with feces and blood, lack of air conditioning during the summer, and heat during the winter, lack of proper medical care, failure to provide mental health treatment, and physical and mental abuse by correctional officers of people in their custody,” Buchanan said.
Councilman Charles Allen, the Democrat chairman of the D.C. City Council’s Committee on the Judiciary and Public Safety, described the situation as “a crisis” during a remote hearing this week.
“I do not use that term lightly. The District of Columbia has a moral and constitutional duty to provide humane and dignified conditions of confinement and to do so immediately. And that’s not happening here,” he added.
D.C. Attorney General Karl Racine, a Democrat, acknowledged during the hearing that concerns about the conditions in the jail “received little attention until they were raised, of course, by mostly white defendants accused of perpetrating the Jan. 6” breach, adding, “That’s not because people weren’t complaining.”
Chris Geldart, a deputy mayor, told councilmembers that there are “systemic issues” at the jail and the issues raised by U.S. Marshals were being addressed, but also claimed that the problems were “not so pervasive that [the jail] has become uninhabitable.”
Geldart also confirmed that Marshals were blocked from re-entering the facilities about a week after the inspection, pinning the decision on the warden.
The D.C. Department of Corrections and the U.S. Marshals Service on Nov. 10 entered into a memorandum of understanding that outlines plans to improve conditions at the jail. Each party is forbidden from issuing press releases or speaking to the media about the agreement without consent from the other party.
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#177020 11/18/202112:04 PM11/18/202112:04 PM
Jacob Chansley, the horned, shirtless figure known as the QAnon Shaman who participated in the mob storming the Capitol on January 6, was sentenced to 41 months in prison for his part in the riot.
If a 3.5-year sentence sounds harsh for what was ultimately a nonviolent charge—obstructing an official proceeding in Congress—consider that Chansley has already spent the past several months in jail in solitary confinement.
According to NPR:
Quote
Before announcing his sentence, Judge Lamberth told Chansley he believes that his remorse is genuine and heartfelt, but he also told Chansley that "what you did was terrible."
He said Chansley had made the right decision to plead guilty and take responsibility for his actions, instead of going to trial where he faced a much longer possible sentence.
"You were facing 20 years, Mr. Chansley. The one advantage you get here is you're only facing now 41 months," Lamberth said. "It may not feel it today, but let me guarantee you, you were smart and did the right thing."
The sentenced handed down was less than the 51 months the Justice Department had recommended for Chansley, whom prosecutors described as the "flag bearer" of the Capitol riot.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Kimberly Paschall told the court at the start of the hearing that such a sentence was necessary "to send a strong message" to Chansley and anyone who would wish to do harm to the country.
Chansley felt he had no choice but to accept the plea deal that came with that 41-month sentence, of course, because he couldn't risk a trial that could send him to prison for 20 years. This is the sad reality of the criminal justice system: Defendants often plead guilty in order to avoid absurdly long mandatory sentences, and are thus denied the opportunity to actually attempt to prove their innocence before a jury of their peers.
The people who entered and defaced the Capitol on January 6 are not political prisoners, and they are certainly not heroes. They committed trespassing and broke other laws, and it's legitimate for the government to prosecute them. But this sentence is too harsh; Chansley did not commit a violent crime, and is certainly unlikely to re-offend. If prosecutors disagree, they should have to prove that to a jury: Unfortunately, the threat of an even lengthier sentence prompts most defendants to fall in line.
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#177021 11/18/202105:51 PM11/18/202105:51 PM
Jacob Chansley, the "QAnon Shaman" whose face became fodder for front-page news spreads when he broke into the U.S. Capitol on January 6 while wearing patriotic face-paint and a horned headdress, was sentenced to 41 months in prison yesterday.
The punishment, handed down by Judge Royce C. Lamberth in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, was widely covered. But almost every news outlet skirted over the most insidious part of the proceedings.
"You were facing 20 years, Mr. Chansley," said the judge, telling him he was "smart" for not going to trial. "You did the right thing."
The "right" thing. At first glance, I'd posit most readers wouldn't think much of that; plea bargains are a core part of the U.S. criminal justice system. Yet in being frank with Chansley, Lamberth laid bare why those "bargains" are raw deals: Had Chansley insisted on his constitutional right to a trial by jury, he would have been staring down more than 16 additional years in prison. That's not because the government believes such a stratospheric sentence would serve public safety. It's because prosecutors routinely inflate hypothetical prison sentences and dangle them over defendants in order to bully them out of going to trial, where outcomes are both costly and uncertain.
In plainer terms, Chansley could have received almost 6 times a higher sentence solely for exercising his constitutional rights—something the judge here not only acknowledged but celebrated.
This is in no way unique to the January 6 defendants.
"The way the modern criminal justice system is structured, we punish people if they try to go to trial, which is sort of an astounding thing to say out loud," says Carissa Byrne Hessick, a professor of law at the University of North Carolina and the author of Punishment Without Trial: Why Plea Bargaining Is a Bad Deal. "And yet it's entirely commonplace….Judges are quite explicit that they impose heavier sentences on people who go to trial."
Lamberth said the quiet part out loud yesterday. But judges are not where the plea-bargaining problem begins or ends. For years, tough-on-crime legislators have passed laws that allow prosecutors to hit defendants with multiple charges for the same offense, giving the government leverage to threaten the accused with grotesquely inflated punishments. The escape hatch: Agree to waive your constitutional right to a trial by a jury of your peers, and accept whatever the authorities will give you.
"State officials, prosecutors, judges are trying to keep cases from going to trial because it's expensive," says Hessick. If it were about public safety, would a plea have been offered in the first place? Take Chansley: Of course the federal government does not believe he needs to stay behind prison walls for two decades. If they thought so, they wouldn't have agreed to the deal.
The trials for the January 6 defendants have been highly politicized, and how you feel about Chansley's sentence may have something to do with your political priors. But the injustice inherent to plea bargaining is not partisan. Indeed, it infiltrates the entire U.S. criminal justice system and disproportionately impacts defendants without means.
Some would argue the practice is unconstitutional. Prosecutors in Maricopa County, Arizona, for instance, make no attempt to conceal the fact that defendants are pressured to take plea deals before seeing the evidence against them or getting a chance to attend a pretrial hearing. The accused receive a warning on those deals: "The offer is withdrawn" if a defendant wants to attend their hearing, and "any subsequent officer will be substantially harsher." The American Civil Liberties Union is suing to stop this practice.
Consider Michael Calhoun, a 61-year-old man who the Maricopa County Attorney's Office offered an excess of nine years in prison for selling about $20 worth of drugs. He has never been arrested for a violent offense, according to police records. Yet should he have the audacity to ask a jury to consider the charges against him, he will receive something "substantially harsher" than that near-decade "deal."
This is one reason why 97 percent of trials in the U.S. are resolved via guilty pleas. If prosecutors threaten someone with a decades-long sentence, and a defendant is worried about his likelihood of acquittal, it's no wonder that so many take such deals, opting to minimize risk. That obviously includes guilty people. But it includes innocent people too.
And even defendants we think are guilty are entitled to their Sixth Amendment rights. The Founders understood that rigid safeguards were necessary to ensure that the innocent weren't deprived of their liberty. So they made it difficult to convict people—something prosecutors clearly understand and would like to circumvent.
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#177022 11/18/202108:50 PM11/18/202108:50 PM
If people knew that a jurist can judge the law besides judging guilt or innocence a lot of people would be set free. The QAnon Shaman is a dope for Q who got duped but he did not harm anyone. It was all a Q setup. The charge should have been dropped
The damn leftist communist agitators who rioted, committed arson, threw explosive devices at police, and blinded people with lasers are the ones who should be sent to prison.
www.TexasMilitia.Info Seek out and join a lawful Militia or form one in your area. If you wish to remain Free you will have to fight for it...because the traitors will give us no choice in the matter--William Cooper
If people knew that a jurist can judge the law besides judging guilt or innocence a lot of people would be set free.
I noticed in the Rittenhouse trial the first page of the jury instructions included this: “Regardless of any opinion you may have about what the law is or ought to be, you must base your verdict on the law I give you in these instructions.” https://ebookshala.com/wp-content/u...nhouse-Jury-Instructions-PDF-709x500.jpg
Those instructions don’t appear to allow for jury nullification. I understand the courts are resistant to the concept of jury nullification, despite longstanding precedence. What the details are, I don’t know. I suspect however that a juror who openly admits to employing jury nullification is at risk of being booted from the jury. One who wishes to ignore legal from illegal in favor of right from wrong, or even to ignore a law because it conflicts with the Constitution which is the supreme law of the land, such a juror would be wise to simply vote “not guilty” and keep any reasoning related to jury nullification to him or herself. Unfortunately, that would prevent that juror from informing other jurors of the concept of jury nullification, therefore preventing that juror from influencing the vote of other jurors toward nullification.
Originally Posted by Texas Resistance
The QAnon Shaman is a dope for Q who got duped but he did not harm anyone. It was all a Q setup. The charge should have been dropped
The damn leftist communist agitators who rioted, committed arson, threw explosive devices at police, and blinded people with lasers are the ones who should be sent to prison.
Agreed.
Liberty and Prosperity, by Right or Might
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#177033 11/19/202102:28 PM11/19/202102:28 PM
One time I reported for jury selection when there was a woman there charged for spanking her teenage child with an extension cord. I stood up and yelled, "it says in the Bible, the holy word of God, spare the rod spoil the child." "The law of God is superior to any man made law." As I expected, I was immediately excluded from being on the jury. I did not think I would be chosen anyway but I hoped my outburst would influence everyone that was chosen to be on the jury.
www.TexasMilitia.Info Seek out and join a lawful Militia or form one in your area. If you wish to remain Free you will have to fight for it...because the traitors will give us no choice in the matter--William Cooper
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#177034 11/19/202104:35 PM11/19/202104:35 PM
I'd imagine everyone here has heard of the Fully Informed Jury Association. If anyone hasn't here is their website. "An Essay on the Trial By Jury," by Lysander Spooner, is also available online here.
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#177063 11/22/202111:57 AM11/22/202111:57 AM
press release from The Pragmatic Constitutionalist:
Quote
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - November 22, 2021
Independent Journalist to be Prosecuted for Coverage of January 6th Events
Steve Baker, well-known on various social media platforms as The Pragmatic Constitutionalist, is facing criminal charges for his non-violent, non-participatory coverage of the events in DC January 6th. Immediately following the events that day, Mr. Baker released several videos and long-form blogs to his tens-of-thousands of followers about what he witnessed. Nine and half months later he was contacted by the FBI with a request for a voluntary “interview.” Because of Baker’s long-established reputation as a political writer and journalist, the FBI had to receive special permission from the US Attorney General’s office to conduct the interview.
The transcripts show the FBI agents conducting that interview verbally “thanked” Baker for “not” participating in violence or property destruction that day, as is consistent with the thousands of hours of video they have reviewed. Baker only videoed events as they unfolded — from the rally at The Ellipse to the US Capitol steps, and eventually inside the Capitol Building. Baker’s videos have been used by such diverse media outlets as WUSA in DC, the New York Times, and Newsmax TV. His many stories written about the events of January 6th have been read by hundreds of thousands of people.
The FBI insists upon searching Mr. Baker's premises and electronic devices. The stated purpose is to obtain all raw video footage of January 6th, however, Mr. Baker is an active journalist investigating other questionable government activities, including certain agencies’ involvement leading up to and on the day of January 6th. The FBI will also obtain this information by default — information they're not entitled to or in any way related to this case. This is an egregious violation of Mr. Baker's right to privacy and may be a tactic designed to discourage and suppress Mr. Baker's First Amendment rights as a citizen and journalist.
Unaffiliated with any political party, Baker wore no Trump paraphernalia and carried no flags on January 6th. He participated in no acts of violence, engaged in no property damage, did no taunting of law enforcement officers, did not breach any police lines or barricades, did not engage in the activity of “parading” inside the Capitol Building, and did not enter the building until after the Capitol Police and Metro DC Police were ordered to “stand down” and allow the public’s entry. He’d informed his readers, in advance, of his intention to cover the rally in DC, then as the day and riotous events unfolded, he simply followed the historic event as it developed. As any good journalist would do.
To reach Steve Baker for an interview about this developing story, he can be contacted directly at:
“Absolute And Unmitigated Liars”: Former DC National Guard Official Says Generals Fabricated January 6th Account
By ZeroHedge Monday, December 06, 2021
A former DC National Guard official has accused two senior Army officials of lying to Congress about the circumstances surrounding the January 6th Capitol riot in order to protect a top Army official who didn’t want to send the Guard to the Capitol, Politico reports.
In a 36-page memo sent to the Jan. 6 select committee this month, Col. Earl Matthews – who held high-level National Security Council and Pentagon positions under Trump – accused Army General Charles Flynn and Lt. Gen. Walter Piatt of being “absolute and unmitigated liars” for how they characterized the events of Jan. 6.
Of note, Flynn served as deputy chief of staff for operations on Jan. 6, while Matthews was serving as the top attorney to Maj. Gen. William Walker – then commanding general of the DC National Guard. Matthews was in a unique position to know what happened that day.
Matthews’ memo defends the Capitol attack response by Walker, who now serves as the House sergeant at arms, amplifying Walker’s previous congressional testimony about the hourslong delay in the military’s order for the D.C. National Guard to deploy to the riot scene. -Politico
Matthews accuses Flynn and Piatt of lying to Congress about how they responded to urgent requests for the DC guard to be quickly deployed, and claims that the Pentagon inspector general’s November report on the attack was “replete with factual inaccuracies.”
He says the Army has created its own ‘closely held’ revisionist document regarding the riot that’s “worthy of the best Stalinist or North Korea propagandist.’
“Every leader in the D.C. Guard wanted to respond and knew they could respond to the riot at the seat of government,” reads the memo.
Instead of responding, however, DC guard officials “set [sic] stunned watching in the Armory” while the attack unfolded for two hours during the certification of the 2020 election results.
The memo follows Walker’s own public call for the inspector general to retract its detailed report on the events of Jan. 6, as first reported by The Washington Post. Walker told the Post he objected to specific allegations by the Pentagon watchdog that Matthews’ memo also criticizes, calling the inspector general’s report “inaccurate” and “sloppy work.” -Politico
What actually went down, according to Matthews:
The memo says that at 2:30 p.m. on January 6, Matthews and Walker were on a conference call with senior military and law enforcement officials, in which then-Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund “pleaded” for the immediate deployment of the National Guard to the Capitol after rioters breached the perimeter.
Piatt and Flynn denied the request.
“LTG Piatt stated that it would not be his best military advice to recommend to the Secretary of the Army that the D.C. National Guard be allowed to deploy to the Capitol at that time,” Matthews wrote, adding: “LTGs Piatt and Flynn stated that the optics of having uniformed military personnel deployed to the U.S. Capitol would not be good.”
Instead, Piatt and Flynn suggested that the Guardsmen serve as de-facto DC police traffic control officers so that the cops could attend to the Capitol.
In another document obtained by Politico, Piatt and Flynn “recommended for DC Guard to standby” at 2:37 p.m. rather than immediately deploying to the Capitol during the riot.
Four minutes later, Flynn again “advised D.C. National Guard to standby until the request has been routed” to then-Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy as well as then-acting Defense Secretary Chris Miller.
Matthews says everyone on the call was “astounded.”
Piatt and Flynn then lied to Congress – denying that they had said the Guard shouldn’t deploy to the Capitol.
According to Matthews, they committed “outright perjury.”
Read the rest of the report here, and Matthews’ memo by clicking here.
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#177284 01/06/202212:12 PM01/06/202212:12 PM
One of the informants at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge standoff, Fabio Minoggio alias "John Killman" the name I knew him by also attended a militia training exercise in Oklahoma in 2009 that I saw him at. See: https://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-standoff/2016/10/defense_rests_with_witness_con.html He was also doing border ops in Arizona and was probably snitching on them too.
The Jan. 6th incident in the District of Criminals was was a QAnon, FBI, and Goerge Soros set up to vilify patriots, Trump, and steal elections.
www.TexasMilitia.Info Seek out and join a lawful Militia or form one in your area. If you wish to remain Free you will have to fight for it...because the traitors will give us no choice in the matter--William Cooper
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#177313 01/13/202202:44 PM01/13/202202:44 PM
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Thursday, January 13, 2022 Leader of Oath Keepers and 10 Other Individuals Indicted in Federal Court for Seditious Conspiracy and Other Offenses related to U.S. Capitol Breach Eight Others Facing Charges in Two Related Cases
WASHINGTON – A federal grand jury in the District of Columbia returned an indictment yesterday, which was unsealed today, charging 11 defendants with seditious conspiracy and other charges for crimes related to the breach of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, which disrupted a joint session of the U.S. Congress that was in the process of ascertaining and counting the electoral votes related to the presidential election.
According to court documents, Elmer Stewart Rhodes III, 56, of Granbury, Texas, who is the founder and leader of the Oath Keepers; and Edward Vallejo, 63, of Phoenix, Arizona, are being charged for the first time in connection with events leading up to and including Jan. 6. Rhodes was arrested this morning in Little Elm, Texas, and Vallejo was arrested this morning in Phoenix.
In addition to Rhodes and Vallejo, those named in the indictment include nine previously charged defendants: Thomas Caldwell, 67, of Berryville, Virginia; Joseph Hackett, 51, of Sarasota, Florida; Kenneth Harrelson, 41, of Titusville, Florida; Joshua James, 34, of Arab, Alabama; Kelly Meggs, 52, of Dunnellon, Florida; Roberto Minuta, 37, of Prosper, Texas ; David Moerschel, 44, of Punta Gorda, Florida; Brian Ulrich, 44, of Guyton, Georgia, and Jessica Watkins, 39, of Woodstock, Ohio. In addition to the earlier charges filed against them, they now face additional counts for seditious conspiracy and other offenses.
Eight other individuals affiliated with the Oath Keepers, all previously charged in the investigation, remain as defendants in two related cases. All defendants – except Rhodes and Vallejo – previously were charged in a superseding indictment. The superseding indictment has now effectively been split into three parts: the 11-defendant seditious conspiracy case, a seven-defendant original case, and a third case against one of the previously charged defendants.
In one of the related cases, the original superseding indictment, charges remain pending against James Beeks, 49, of Orlando, Florida; Donovan Crowl, 51, of Cable, Ohio; William Isaacs, 22, of Kissimmee, Florida; Connie Meggs, 60, of Dunnellon, Florida; Sandra Parker, 63, of Morrow, Ohio; Bernie Parker, 71, of Morrow, Ohio, and Laura Steele, 53, of Thomasville, North Carolina. The other case charges Jonathan Walden, 57, of Birmingham, Alabama.
The three indictments collectively charge all 19 defendants with corruptly obstructing an official proceeding. Eighteen of the 19 defendants – the exception is Walden – are charged with conspiring to obstruct an official proceeding and conspiring to prevent an officer of the United States from discharging a duty. Eleven of the 19 defendants are charged with seditious conspiracy. Some of the defendants are also facing other related charges.
As alleged in the indictments, the Oath Keepers are a large but loosely organized collection of individuals, some of whom are associated with militias. Though the Oath Keepers will accept anyone as members, they explicitly focus on recruiting current and former military, law enforcement, and first-responder personnel. Members and affiliates of the Oath Keepers were among the individuals and groups who forcibly entered the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.
The seditious conspiracy indictment alleges that, following the Nov. 3, 2020, presidential election, Rhodes conspired with his co-defendants and others to oppose by force the execution of the laws governing the transfer of presidential power by Jan. 20, 2021. Beginning in late December 2020, via encrypted and private communications applications, Rhodes and various co-conspirators coordinated and planned to travel to Washington, D.C., on or around Jan. 6, 2021, the date of the certification of the electoral college vote, the indictment alleges. Rhodes and several co-conspirators made plans to bring weapons to the area to support the operation. The co-conspirators then traveled across the country to the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area in early January 2021.
According to the seditious conspiracy indictment, the defendants conspired through a variety of manners and means, including: organizing into teams that were prepared and willing to use force and to transport firearms and ammunition into Washington, D.C.; recruiting members and affiliates to participate in the conspiracy; organizing trainings to teach and learn paramilitary combat tactics; bringing and contributing paramilitary gear, weapons, and supplies – including knives, batons, camouflaged combat uniforms, tactical vests with plates, helmets, eye protection, and radio equipment – to the Capitol grounds; breaching and attempting to take control of the Capitol grounds and building on Jan. 6, 2021, in an effort to prevent, hinder and delay the certification of the electoral college vote; using force against law enforcement officers while inside the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021; continuing to plot, after Jan. 6, 2021, to oppose by force the lawful transfer of presidential power, and using websites, social media, text messaging and encrypted messaging applications to communicate with co-conspirators and others.
On Jan. 6, 2021, a large crowd began to gather outside the Capitol perimeter as the Joint Session of Congress got under way at 1 p.m. Crowd members eventually forced their way through, up, and over U.S. Capitol Police barricades and advanced to the building’s exterior façade. Shortly after 2 p.m., crowd members forced entry into the Capitol by breaking windows, ramming open doors, and assaulting Capitol police and other law enforcement officers. At about this time, according to the indictment, Rhodes entered the restricted area of the Capitol grounds and directed his followers to meet him at the Capitol.
At approximately 2:30 p.m., as detailed in the indictment, Hackett, Harrelson, Meggs, Moerschel, and Watkins, and other Oath Keepers and affiliates – many wearing paramilitary clothing and patches with the Oath Keepers name, logo, and insignia – marched in a “stack” formation up the east steps of the Capitol, joined a mob, and made their way into the Capitol. Later, another group of Oath Keepers and associates, including James, Minuta, and Ulrich, formed a second “stack” and breached the Capitol grounds, marching from the west side to the east side of the Capitol building and up the east stairs and into the building.
While certain Oath Keepers members and affiliates breached the Capitol grounds and building, others remained stationed just outside of the city in quick reaction force (QRF) teams. According to the indictment, the QRF teams were prepared to rapidly transport firearms and other weapons into Washington, D.C., in support of operations aimed at using force to stop the lawful transfer of presidential power. The indictment alleges that the teams were coordinated, in part, by Caldwell and Vallejo.
The charge of seditious conspiracy carries a statutory maximum penalty of 20 years in prison. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.
This case is being prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia and the Department of Justice National Security Division’s Counterterrorism Section. Valuable assistance was provided by U.S. Attorney’s Offices in the Northern District of Texas and the District of Arizona.
The case is being investigated by the FBI’s Washington Field Office with valuable assistance provided by the FBI’s Dallas and Phoenix Field Offices. These charges are the result of significant cooperation between agents and staff across numerous FBI Field Offices, including those in Florida, North Carolina, Ohio, Texas, Arizona, Alabama and Georgia, among other locations.
In the one year since Jan. 6, more than 725 individuals have been arrested in nearly all 50 states for crimes related to the breach of the U.S. Capitol, including over 225 individuals charged with assaulting or impeding law enforcement. The investigation remains ongoing.
Anyone with tips can call 1-800-CALL-FBI (800-225-5324) or visit tips.fbi.gov.
An indictment is merely an allegation, and all defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#177317 01/13/202208:15 PM01/13/202208:15 PM
Did you hear the interview on A. Jones last night?
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#177320 01/15/202202:07 PM01/15/202202:07 PM
He had a board member of gatekeepers on. The guy resigned shortly before Jan 6. Said he'd been on the board of directors for 10+ years and smelled a setup. Rhodes introduced him to a black guy named "Wit"...claiming he was the new VP. No one had ever heard of this guy before and no one had voted for him. said this guy who is suspect #10 was advocating they go to war.
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#177322 01/15/202202:52 PM01/15/202202:52 PM
You would think someone in Stewar Rhodes' position would be a little more careful, wouldn't you?
There used to be a KKK-Nazi type living here in Tulsa, Dennis Mahon, who became locally famous after the OKC bombing in the mid 90's. He published a newspaper, "White Aryan Resistance" (WAR). He came to one of our Libertarian meetings once. We were polite to him, and let him speak his mind. (I think he was a little surprised we didn't throw him out on his ass.) Anyway, he mentioned going to a meeting with other leaders in his movement - and realized that everyone but him was an agent or an informant.
He wasn't always so careful. A couple years later he moved to Arizona, and was arrested with his twin brother for trying to blow up the office of a local civil rights attorney. He said they were set up, and I have no reason to doubt it.
This meme has been floating around the internet for a couple days now:
Onward and upward, airforce
Last edited by airforce; 01/15/202202:52 PM.
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#177323 01/15/202203:12 PM01/15/202203:12 PM
The guy on AJ said Stuart wasn't the same the past year or so after his wife divorced him and took everything. Said Stuart was all but homeless and seemed on a downhill spiral. He thinks Stuart was set up by the 'Wit" character.
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#177324 01/15/202204:04 PM01/15/202204:04 PM
I've heard his wife, or ex-wife, didn't have too many good things to say about him. Does anyone know just who this "Wit" guy is? Is there a photo of him somewhere?
Just as an aside, I think most of Dennis Mahon's problems stemmed from his alcoholism. He was in my jail a few times, and usually spent some time in the drunk tank before we could book him in. If Rhodes was hitting the bottle it could explain his lack of judgment.
Onward and upward, airforce
Last edited by airforce; 01/15/202204:08 PM.
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#177626 03/03/202201:07 PM03/03/202201:07 PM
A member of the far-right Oath Keepers extremist group has become the first to admit to engaging in seditious conspiracy on Jan. 6, 2021, to keep President Biden from taking office.
Joshua James, 34, of Arab, Ala., pleaded guilty in federal court in Washington on Wednesday to helping lead a group that prosecutors say sent two tactically equipped teams into the Capitol and organized a cache of weapons in a hotel just outside the city. He also pleaded guilty to one count of obstructing an official proceeding, and he may face the stiffest sentence of any Jan. 6 defendant so far, according to preliminary sentencing guidelines.
As part of his plea, James agreed to cooperate with federal investigators, including testifying in front of a grand jury.
James, an Army veteran who was injured fighting in Iraq, was indicted on the sedition charge in January along with 10 others, including Oath Keepers founder and leader Stewart Rhodes. James faced multiple felony counts of obstructing the formal count of the electoral college, as well as assaulting a D.C. police officer during his time inside the Capitol. He was also accused of tampering with documents to destroy his communications with other Oath Keepers. Prosecutors agreed to dismiss the charges other than the seditious conspiracy and obstruction counts. Both charges carry a maximum 20-year prison term. No defendant has yet been sentenced to a maximum term.
James appeared in court virtually from Alabama; he was released on GPS monitoring in April over government objections. U.S. District Judge Amit P. Mehta said the sentencing guidelines for both the sedition and the obstruction charge were calculated to a range of 87 to 108 months in prison. The range is advisory, and both sides can ask for the judge to go above or below the range at sentencing.
The longest sentence any Jan. 6 defendant has received so far is 63 months for Robert S. Palmer, who admitted to hurling a fire extinguisher, a plank and a long pole at officers.
Five other Oath Keepers, apart from the 11 charged with seditious conspiracy, have already pleaded guilty and agreed to cooperate with the government. But James is the first to plead to sedition, a rarely used and politically significant crime of conspiring against the U.S. government.
James did not make any statements in court other than to answer the judge’s questions. No sentencing date was set, which Assistant U.S. Attorney Troy Edwards Jr. said was done to enable James to provide his cooperation before the hearing.
The plea marks the first successful use of a sedition charge by federal prosecutors in decades. Federal law defines seditious conspiracy as two or more people who “conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States,” or act “by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States.”
James’s defense attorneys, Chris Leibig and Joni Robin, said in a statement that he pleaded not to the first part of the law but only the second part, “preventing, hindering or delaying, by force, a federal law.” ...
Read the whole thing at the link.
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#177629 03/03/202203:18 PM03/03/202203:18 PM
It looks like Joshua James punked out by pleading guilty. He is a political prisoner. What he did was protesting. He did nothing compared to the rioters who burned and looted cities and Biden's minions who committed election fraud stealing the election.
Remember our goal is not another revolution nor the violent over throw of the government. Our goal is to hold the government to the US Constitution.
www.TexasMilitia.Info Seek out and join a lawful Militia or form one in your area. If you wish to remain Free you will have to fight for it...because the traitors will give us no choice in the matter--William Cooper
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#177884 03/30/202204:04 PM03/30/202204:04 PM
A federal judge blasted U.S. prosecutors seeking excessive sentences for some nonviolent participants in the Capitol riot, pointing to the treatment of BLM rioters as an example of a clear double standard.
“I know that the government believes that the January 6th cases are sui generis [one of a kind] and therefore can’t be compared to other cases. But I don’t agree,” said U.S. District Judge Trevor N. McFadden.
“It does feel like the government has had two standards here, and I can’t abide by that,” he added, noting that before January 6, he couldn’t remember an instance where a nonviolent, first-time offender was “sentenced to serious jail time … regardless of their race, gender or political affiliation.”
McFadden expressed his views during the sentencing of a defendant who pleaded guilty to misdemeanor trespassing. The Biden administration called for her to be sentenced to 75 days in jail and one year of probation, which McFadden believed to be excessive. “The government’s sentencing recommendation here is just so disproportionate to other sentences for people who have engaged in similar conduct,” he said.
Instead, McFadden sentenced her to two months probation and a $5,000 fine. McFadden noted the same U.S. prosecutor’s office that recommended jail time for the J6 defendant sought a much lighter sentence for a Code Pink activist with a lengthy criminal record who infiltrated Brett Kavanaugh’s Senate Judiciary Committee hearings in September 2018.
McFadden also noted that last fall, government prosecutors treated pro-Trump rioters more harshly than violent BLM rioters in Washington, D.C. back in 2020, after the death of George Floyd.
The Biden administration’s excessive targeting of J6 defendants has had dire consequences. One defendant, Matthew Perna — who merely walked through the Capitol building for a few minutes yet was facing more than four years of jail time from Biden administration prosecutors — ultimately committed suicide before being sentenced.
J6 defendants have also been detained by the government without indictment, which is a violation of their constitutional rights.
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#177929 04/07/202211:41 AM04/07/202211:41 AM
New Mexico man becomes the first January 6 defendant to be acquitted. Matthew Martin—who faced four federal charges as a result of entering the U.S. Capitol building during the January 6 protests and riots—has been found not guilty on all counts.
The feds had charged Martin with knowingly entering or remaining in any restricted building or grounds without lawful authority; disorderly conduct which impedes the conduct of government business; disruptive conduct in the Capitol buildings; and pandering, demonstrating, or picketing in Capitol buildings.
Martin contended that Capitol police had let him into the building, leading him to think it was OK to enter. "According to MARTIN, Capitol guards opened the doors to the Rotunda and let them in, though MARTIN did acknowledge seeing smashed glass," stated the government's complaint against him.
This seems reasonable—and Judge Trevor McFadden of the U.S. District Court for the District of Washington agreed. McFadden called Martin's defense "plausible" and noted that "people were streaming by and the officers made no attempt to stop the people."
The judge said that while he did not believe that an officer had actually waved Martin into the Rotunda as Martin claimed, video of the scene shows how Martin may have gotten that impression. "I do think the defendant reasonably believed the officers allowed him into the Capitol," opined the judge.
After a two-day bench trial, McFadden acquitted Martin of all charges.
While it was a "close call" on the charge of knowingly entering or remaining in a restricted building without lawful authority, "under our system of justice close calls go to the defendant," said McFadden.
The decision is bad news for the feds' cases against the many other January 6 defendants charged with illegally entering the U.S. Capitol. But it's good news for due process and justice.
Certainly not all people who entered the Capitol building that day are blameless. But neither were all of them necessarily acting with criminal intent, and McFadden's decision reinforces this.
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#178304 06/07/202211:37 AM06/07/202211:37 AM
[/quote]Proud Boys indicted on sedition charges. Four members of the Proud Boys and the group's former chair, Enrique Tarrio, have been charged with seditious conspiracy for their role in the January 6 riots last year. "The men had already been charged in an earlier indictment filed in March with conspiring to obstruct the certification of the 2020 presidential election," notes The New York Times.
Quote
The new indictment marked the second time a far-right group has been charged with seditious conspiracy in connection with the Jan. 6 attack. In January, Stewart Rhodes, the leader and founder of the far-right Oath Keepers militia, was arrested and charged along with 10 others with the same crime.
The charge of seditious conspiracy — which can be difficult to prove and carries particular legal weight as well as political overtones — requires prosecutors to show that at least two people agreed to use force to overthrow government authority or delay the execution of a U.S. law. It carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison.
It was not immediately clear what evidence led to the new charges, but the indictment underscored the central role played by the Proud Boys in the effort to forestall President Donald J. Trump's defeat and "oppose the lawful transfer of presidential power by force" by storming the Capitol.
The charges come as Congress is preparing for the first public hearing on the events of January 6. "Several major networks and cable news programs are expected to carry the first hearing live in its prime-time slot," notes the Associated Press. "The committee is also expected to live-stream it on C-SPAN and on its YouTube page."[/quote]
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#178317 06/09/202211:32 AM06/09/202211:32 AM
Will tonight's congressional hearing on Jan. 6 be a bombshell, or a dud? The House Committee are promising lost of new information about the riot, but I have serious doubts. It's been a year and a half, it's hard to believe anything new is going to come out of it.
What is new, of course, is the (mostly) Democratic committee is going to milk it for every political point they can make. And if they manage to get the news organizations to focus on something other than inflation, the economy, and Biden's ineptness, even for a day, then I suppose they will have succeeded.
Will we actually learn anything new? I seriously doubt it. But we'll see.
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#178335 06/11/202212:35 PM06/11/202212:35 PM
The hearings had about 11 million viewers. By contrast, Joe Biden's "State of the Union" address got 38 million, and Trump SOTU got 45 million.
Quote
...Bottom line? This didn’t work out as the Democrats had hoped. Most people aren’t interested in seeing a political show. They blame Biden and the Democrats for the failures that are happening now. They know that Democrats are throwing this out as their last gasp before the midterms. They know by comparison the Democrats ignored and even mocked President Donald Trump when rioters were outside the White House in 2020....
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#178369 06/17/202212:20 PM06/17/202212:20 PM
How many people are watching the Jan. 6 Committee hearings?
I don't know exactly, but NBC ended its coverage of the hearing to televise golf. Since there's more credible information at the US Open, it actually makes sense.
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#178376 06/18/202212:34 PM06/18/202212:34 PM
Patriots do not watch NBC or any major news media. It's slanted deceptive liberal leftist propaganda.
www.TexasMilitia.Info Seek out and join a lawful Militia or form one in your area. If you wish to remain Free you will have to fight for it...because the traitors will give us no choice in the matter--William Cooper
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#178378 06/18/202203:10 PM06/18/202203:10 PM
I watch it sometimes just to see what kind of bullshit they're feeding the dumbasses.
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: ConSigCor]
#178379 06/18/202203:48 PM06/18/202203:48 PM
I watch it sometimes just to see what kind of bullshit they're feeding the dumbasses.
NBC isn't much more than a mouthpiece for the Democratic Party, so it's a little useful to hear what they're latest talking points are. If you're looking for real news, you'll have to look elsewhere.
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#178384 06/19/202212:29 PM06/19/202212:29 PM
...The survey of 1,541 U.S. adults, which was conducted from June 10-13, found that if another presidential election were held today, more registered voters say they would cast ballots for Donald Trump (44%) than for Biden (42%) — even though the House Jan. 6 committee has spent the last week linking Trump to what it called a “seditious conspiracy” to overturn the 2020 election and laying the groundwork for possible criminal prosecution.
Since Biden took office, no previous Yahoo News/YouGov poll has shown him trailing Trump (though Biden’s most recent leads have been within the margin of error, like this one is for Trump). One year ago, Biden led Trump by 9 percentage points. In 2020, Biden won the White House by more than 7 million votes.
Yet Biden’s job approval rating has been atrophying for much of the last year, and the new survey shows that it has never been weaker. A full 56% of Americans now disapprove of the president’s performance — the highest share to date — while just 39% approve. Three weeks ago, those numbers were 53% and 42%, respectively....
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#178385 06/19/202203:08 PM06/19/202203:08 PM
The 42% of people surveyed who said they would vote for Biden, the senile, Chi-Com Agent, child molester who is trying to cause economic collapse are total idiots.
Tucker Carlson, on new Biden allegations: "If that’s not child molestation, it is definitely close enough to justify a police visit." https://twitter.com/DailyCaller/status/1537967841458020352?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1537967841458020352%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.infowars.com%2Fposts%2Ftucker-carlson-torches-joe-biden-over-horrifying-claims-of-showers-with-sex-addict-daughter%2F
www.TexasMilitia.Info Seek out and join a lawful Militia or form one in your area. If you wish to remain Free you will have to fight for it...because the traitors will give us no choice in the matter--William Cooper
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#178408 06/23/202211:31 AM06/23/202211:31 AM
Why a January 6th commission when it started on January 5th? by Trevor Zantos
*Warning, I’m not an expert, not claiming to be one just asking questions! *
There are many unanswered questions about the events surrounding January 6th, 2020, and the riot in the Capital. A few brave reporters are asking very good questions about what the government knew and when it knew it as well as the unequal prosecutorial pressure and conditions (Julie Kelly, Lee Smith, and Daren Beattie stand out). However, while they have asked about the “bomber” and why the FBI hasn’t seemingly tried quite as hard to find them vs the 70yr old Grandma that’s charging crime is trespassing, they have not asked about the “IED”. This is evidence that the Federal government has in hand and can answer all these questions, it also occurred at approx 8:00 PM EST on Jan 5th, 2020 so it really should be the focal point as it is the first event in the sequence.
Based on the FBI’s own data, statements, and photos there are many questions that need to be answered and can be all with materials on hand. My PERSONAL theory is that the “IEDs” were not live devices and were not intended to go off, they were intended to further draw resources and attention at the precise time the group was planning on gaining entry to the Capital. According to the former US Capitol Police Chief’s testimony, they accomplished it perfectly. as I will show below. My best guess is that the person that dropped the devices was just a cutout, who built the fakes? Who paid for the operation? Were any of these individuals known to the federal government through undercover officers, and informants whether directly or indirectly? As always, the language used by the Government is very important, every press release and interview I have seen refers to the devices as “viable” not “live”. According to the FBI, the device was 1”x8” which has a volume of less than 103cc, it was filled with homemade black powder. Regular black powder is 1/3 as powerful as smokeless powder. Both are widely available across the US with no need for ID and limited tracking ability. The home-made black powder would have a much more unique signature and potentially even less explosive potential. Why would the bomber/people behind it do that? Finally, even if they were live, they were packed with one of the least powerful explosives and the 60min egg timers would have had them going off the evening of January 5th. Had it gone off it would have probably done little physical damage but would have canceled Trump’s rally and probably most of the events. I’m just some aspiring writer, hopefully, writers with an audience will see these questions and start getting answers because I believe they will reveal much more than people imagine.
Questions for FBI/DOJ/ATF/White House
Were the devices live when they were neutralized? Was there a secondary activation device besides the 60 min mechanical egg timer? If not, did the timer malfunction? Were there any differences between the two devices? Have both the FBI explosives lab and the ATF explosives lab had full access to all the data? What parts of the chemical signature of the homemade black powder distinguish it from commercial off-the-shelf powder (COTS)? What is the powder’s Relative Effectiveness Factor compared to factory back powder (scale used to compare explosive’s potential energy vs TNT)? Does the government have any previous incidents that match this black powder compound? What would the damage be had the devices gone off? Who did the US Capital Police get the call from at 12:52 pm regarding the device by the RNC headquarters? If it was a law enforcement agency that called, who tipped them? Who exactly located the second device? Were they operating on any tips? Has the FBI reviewed video from the two IED placement sites to discover how the devices weren’t discovered until 1/6?
Questions/observations as far as intentions/desired reaction by the bomber/bombers.
Why would the individual use homemade black powder? It seems logical that factory black powder would probably contain more potential energy. Even then, smokeless powder is roughly 3 times more powerful than black powder. All these powders generally are sold in a minimum of 1lb jugs and are not regulated and widely available across the US and are not super unique. There are different types but it’s not as easy to track a specific lot of powder and where it was sold etc. The device is described as a 1”x8” pipe, according to math that means the maximum volume would be 103ccs or about 100 grams. Without knowing the exact composition of the black powder it’s hard to know exactly how large the grains are vs density but working on those rough numbers it would be equivalent to .055kg TNT=.1KG black powder (assuming the homemade powder was as effective as a commercial black powder but that is highly doubtful. If the 60min timer was the only activation device, why didn’t the devices go off the night of Jan 5th? Why would the individual/individuals set it to go off the night of Jan 5th, there were some limited gatherings, but had they gone off the logical outcome is the activities of 1/6, like the president’s speech, would have been severely affected if not canceled outright. What if the devices weren’t designed to explode? The former US Capitol Police Chief Sund testified the following to Congress excerpts from Pg 5-6: “We were monitoring the actions and demeanor of the crowd, which at the time did not raise any concerns when we received word at 12:52 p.m. that a pipe bomb had been located at the Republican National Committee Headquarters, immediately adjacent to Capitol Grounds. We responded immediately to coordinate and send resources to the scene, including a number of officers, officials, and a bomb squad. We also dispatched resources to look for other explosive devices, suspects, and vehicles.”
He continues: “Meanwhile, at approximately 1:50 p.m., USCP resources dispatched to look for other possible explosives located another pipe bomb at the Democratic National Committee headquarters, as well as a vehicle with explosives and a weapon, all within close proximity of the Capitol Grounds. As a result of these explosive devices, extensive USCP resources were dispatched to the scenes, and two congressional office buildings had to be evacuated. I believe all of this was part of a coordinated plan related to the attack on the Capitol.”
Would it be reasonable to postulate that this diversion of vital resources and mind power could have been the exact desired outcome? According to Elijah Shaffer’s detailed timeline the breach of the Capital, it started at 1 pm EST, right as resources are being directed towards the suspicious devices. The first entry of the capital is at 1:15 PM. Near the height of the chaos inside the Capital, authorities are made aware of the 2nd device at 1:52 PM and must send additional resources there. Another interesting question is raised in a recent interview with Kash Patel, Chief of Staff for the Secretary of Defense, he remarked the South part of the capital was left completely undefended, why was that?
Chief Sund stated, “I believe all of this was part of a coordinated plan related to the attack on the Capitol“. So, who coordinated this attack? The Proud Boys? Antifa? The 3 Percenters? If the placing of devices was coordinated with the activities the next day, then obviously that would be further proof that President Trump didn’t incite violence during his speech. It appears irrefutable that the FBI and possibly other agencies knew beforehand through confidential informants/undercover agents that the specific individuals planned to agitate an assault, were there any communications known by Federal/State/Local law enforcement that the IEDs were part of the plan?
Addendum: Without knowing the exact composition of the black powder it’s hard to know exactly how much potential explosive energy the device contained, but the REF of 100g of factory black power =.055kg TNT black powder (assuming the homemade powder was as effective as a commercial black powder but highly doubtful).
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#178524 07/09/202203:05 PM07/09/202203:05 PM
Oath Keepers Founder Stewart Rhodes Wants to Give Jan. 6 Testimony Live Rhodes believes Jan. 6 Committee could misrepresent comments if he submits to taped deposition.
By Infowars.com Friday, July 08, 2022
Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes says he’ll testify before the Jan. 6 House Select Committee – but only if his testimony can be made in public.
On Friday, Rhodes’ lawyer said his client, who’s currently in federal custody on seditious conspiracy charges, would offer testimony if he could give it live in-person, instead of from jail.
“He’s willing to waive his Fifth Amendment rights, he wants to testify in public, and he wants to testify live,” Rhodes’ attorney James Lee Bright stated Friday.
“I don’t think they’ll go along with that,” he added.
Bright argued Rhodes does not want to submit a videotaped deposition, “saying he doesn’t trust the panel to air Rhodes’ remarks in full,” reports Politico.
Besides, Rhodes has already been deposed by the committee, and invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination several times.
Rhodes’ offer comes as the committee is set to meet again next Tuesday where they will focus on alleged Proud Boy and Oath Keeper involvement in the events of Jan. 6. Look sharp by wearing exclusive gear found only at our store.
According to Politico, Bright doesn’t anticipate the committee will take Rhodes up on his offer, since they have thus far not honored other requests to give live testimony.
If they did acquiesce to the request, it could cause a shake-up unlike anything seen in the previous kangaroo court processions. Bloomberg notes:
The nine-member panel has been able to make its presentations mostly with scripted narratives, limited questioning of mostly cooperative witnesses, and edited video of previous closed-door testimony.
Rhodes is currently awaiting a Sept. 26 trial and is being held in solitary confinement at a detention center in Oklahoma, from which he last testified to the committee in February.
“If Solzhenitsyn Can Deal with Being in Gulag in Siberia, I Can Deal With this Jail in Virginia” : US Political Prisoner Stewart Rhodes
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#178525 07/09/202203:52 PM07/09/202203:52 PM
"The Democrats are planning to arrest former President Donald J. Trump in a desperate bid to turn the tide ahead of their imminent midterm election defeat, according to reports. Investigative reporter Julie Kelly from American Greatness joined author Lee Smith on EpochTV.com on Friday to discuss the Democrats’ plan for an “October Surprise” to advance their “insurrection” narrative and pivot from Joe Biden’s spate of epic domestic and foreign policy disasters."
www.TexasMilitia.Info Seek out and join a lawful Militia or form one in your area. If you wish to remain Free you will have to fight for it...because the traitors will give us no choice in the matter--William Cooper
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#178528 07/09/202206:04 PM07/09/202206:04 PM
If they do this… it will make a martyr of him, making the November red wave into a red super nova. It would also put Ron Desantis an even better possition come ‘24. It would bring out conservatives and moderates that don’t vote like nothing seen before, and would convince the few moderates left in the party of slavery, secession, the klan, Jim Crow laws, lynching and segregation that their party has gone too far. They will either switch sides or stay home out of disgust.
"Government at its best is a necessary evil, and at it�s worst, an intolerable one." Thomas Paine (from "Common Sense" 1776)
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#178531 07/11/202204:41 PM07/11/202204:41 PM
Leaked Docs: FBI Infiltrated Proud Boys On Jan 6, Group Did Not Plan ‘Insurrection’ 'The Proud Boys were not involved in, nor did they inspire the breaking of the barriers at the Capitol building,' mole stated.
By Kelen McBreen | INFOWARS.COM Monday, July 11, 2022
The Gateway Pundit obtained documents and text messages from a whistleblower showing the FBI allegedly had a mole inside the Kansas City Proud Boys group on January 6th.
Joe Hoft of the Gateway Pundit joined Steve Bannon’s War Room on Monday to further detail the explosive leaked documents.
The information published Monday reveals the supposed informant told FBI handlers the Proud Boys did not participate in or inspire the breaking of the barriers at the US Capitol.
The undercover FBI confidential source also said the group only intended to act as security for Trump supporters and to help them “get back to their hotels safely” amid rumors of Antifa planning violence on Jan. 6.
Despite texts showing the agency’s informant confirmed nobody in the group engaged in or planned to be violent, members of the Kansas City Proud Boys as well as others he was associated with are facing decades in jail.
According to the leaked FBI report documenting the confidential source’s January 6th discussion with his handlers, the mole stated, “The Proud Boys were not involved in, nor did they inspire the breaking of the barriers at the Capitol building.” Get back in the game, jump on our major sale at the store now!
He also described the crowd as acting in an unorganized, “herd mentality.”
Regarding the group entering the capitol, the source claimed they were trying to stop violence between protesters and police.
“The KC Proud Boys (KCPB) in attendance at the rally entered the Capitol building 30 minutes after the building was breached to help deescalate Trump supporters and law enforcement,” the testimonial explained.
The Proud Boys allegedly “told people to stop acting like anarchists and leave” before beginning to pick up garbage after trash cans were thrown at law enforcement by those who stormed the building.
The FBI source added, “No one from KCPB were involved with the battery of a law enforcement officer, nor did anyone damage property in the capital building. KCPB then went back to a rental house and adhered to the curfew in place.”
The statement was provided to the FBI on the evening of January 6th and that same day, the informant was also said to be communicating with them via text message.
One leaked screenshot shows the source telling the FBI, “PB did not do it, nor inspire.”
According to The Gateway Pundit, the agency’s mole provided videos and photos captured during the Capitol debacle which were used in court and resulted in individuals being raided by the FBI and arrested.
The whistleblower documents add to the proof that American patriots are being unjustly held as political prisoners of the Biden administration.
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#178532 07/12/202209:34 AM07/12/202209:34 AM
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#178622 08/02/202209:56 PM08/02/202209:56 PM
First Capitol rioter to stand trial gets seven years - the longest sentence yet: Texas far-right militia member 'egged crowd on' and warned his kids not to turn him in to FBI because 'traitors get shot'
Guy Reffitt, 49, a member of the far-right group the Three Percenters got 7.25 years behind bars and ordered to pay $2000 in restitution He was convicted in March on five felony counts, including bringing a gun onto the Capitol grounds During the sentencing he called himself an 'idiot' and said he was done with extremist groups He was recorded on video outside the Capitol during the January 6 riot and later threatened his wife and children if they turned him in His son, Jackson Reffitt, said he was in contact with the FBI after the DC riot on January 6 The son testified in court that that his father told him 'If you turn me in, you're a traitor and traitor's get shot' Under federal sentencing guidelines, Reffitt Sr. faces up to 11 years at his sentencing on Monday Federal prosecutors are asking for 15 years behind bars for his crimes
By Reuters and Janon Fisher For Dailymail.Com
Published: 16:06 EDT, 1 August 2022 | Updated: 08:25 EDT, 2 August 2022
A member of the far-right Three Percenters militia was sentenced to more than seven years in prison for his role in the January 6 riot at the Capitol Building - the longest sentence yet for any of the insurrectionists.
Guy Reffitt, 49, of Wylie, Texas, was convicted by a jury in March of five felony charges, including bringing a gun onto the Capitol grounds and obstructing an official proceeding.
He had threatened to harm his own children if they ratted him out to the FBI.
'He said, 'If you turn me in, you're a traitor,'' his 19-year-old son, Jackson Reffitt told jurors. ''And traitors get shot.'
Federal guidelines recommend a prison sentence of 9 to 11.25 years for those crimes, prosecutors say.
Reffitt never entered the Capitol, but video evidence showed him egging on the crowd and leading other rioters up a set of stairs outside the building.
He was heard on his GoPo camera recording saying he planned to drag House Speaker Nancy Pelosi out by her feet 'with her head hitting every step on the way down,' according to a copy of the recording submitted at trial.
Reffitt lost his swagger at the hours-long sentencing where the feds sought 15 years for his crimes.
He decided to address the court, reversing his previous decision, though he said that his anxiety over public speaking was 'crushing him,' according to NBC News.
'I don't want anything to do with any groups or militias or any stupid sh*t like that,' he said. 'I do deeply regret everything.'
Reffitt was brought to tears at trial as his son told the jury about how his father threatened him if he dared to call the FBI. The elder Reffitt wiped away tears as his son Jackson testified that he felt 'gross' when he googled 'FBI tip' in order to report his father.
Later, Jackson Reffitt told The New York Times that he felt bad for turning his father in, but he doesn't regret it.
'I would say I'm sorry, because I don't feel like I put him in this situation, but I still feel guilty. I would do it again,' Jackson told the paper.
'I can't help but wonder, whether like many other Jan. 6 defendants, [if] I'm hearing what I'd like to hear from you as opposed to what you really believe,' the judge said.
'I clearly f**ked up,' he replied.
Even after his arrest, he wrote a letter on behalf of other incarcerated rioters.
'I hope that was the only day in American history we would without doubt feel the need to notify our government they have transgressed much too far,' he said.
Freidrich said that the claims in his letter 'border on the delusional.'
'He hasn't walked back his statements about being a martyr,' she said. 'He hasn't walked back his statements about being a patriot. And so, as here he sits, I have to consider: what is this man going to do when he's released from prison?'
Still, his family stuck by his side after turning him in.
The insurrectionist's wife Nicole Reffitt said that she didn't think her husband would act on his statements, but said that the family was 'disturbed' by the comments.
His family set up a crowdfunding page on GiveSendGo asking for donations for his defense.
'Guy stood on the stairs of our Capitol that day not to cause terror, but to stand up to the corruption and evil that has eroded our government. You, the American people, have supported the Reffitts through some of the darkest days this family has endured, and I am now asking for a rally,' Nicole Reffitt wrote.
After the sentencing, Nicole Reffitt defended her husband, calling him a 'patriot' and saying the trial was 'political,' according to CBS reporter Rob Legare.
His daughters Peyton and Sara, defended their dad, after the sentencing, blaming former President Donald Trump.
'Trump deserves life in prison if my father's in prison for this long,' Sara Reffitt said.
The Texas dad was the first Capitol rioter to go to trial in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
He was caught on camera with a Smith & Wesson pistol in a hip holster. He also carried zip-tie handcuffs
To date, federal prosecutors have prevailed and won convictions in all but one of 13 trials tied to the Capitol attack.
Federal prosecutors had asked U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich to sentence Reffitt to 15 years, more than the U.S. sentencing guidelines recommend, citing Reffitt's crime as being 'calculated to influence or affect the conduct of government by intimidation or coercion.'
But on Monday, as the sentencing stretched into its fifth hour, the judge rejected the federal prosecutors' arguments.
'There are a lot of cases where defendants possessed weapons or committed very violent assaults,' Politico reported the judge saying. Friedrich noted that the harshest sentences so far have been for little more than five years.
'The government is asking for a sentence that is three times as long as any other defendant and the defendant did not assault an officer,' according to Politico's coverage.
Reffitt's attorney has sought to portray him as man who felt marginalized and down on his luck after losing his job in 2019.
Depressed and suicidal, his attorney said he turned to political news on social media and became a fervent believer in former President Donald Trump.
His daughter Peyton told the court in a letter she could see how her father's ego and personality 'fell to his knees when President Trump spoke.'
'You could tell he listened to Trump's words as if he was really truly speaking to him ... Constantly feeding polarizing racial thought.'
His attorney F. Clinton Broden said that while his client broke the law, his actions were not as egregious as those of others who entered the Capitol and assaulted police.
He noted that Reffitt will get credit for the 19 months he has already spent behind bars since his arrest, and has asked the judge to impose a sentence of no more than two years.
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#178626 08/03/202201:46 PM08/03/202201:46 PM
The Feds always run video cameras at right wing protests to identify patriots to persecute them. Militiamen who are fit for combat should never go to protests.
Mr. Reffitt made a mistake carrying a handgun to a protest in the anti-gun District of Criminals. If he had to carry a handgun he should have worn a concealment holster not an outside the waist band belt holster.
Mr. Reffitt with his handgun at the protest.
I would never open carry in public because many career criminals when they are not pumping iron in prison practice disarming techniques on each other. Many career criminals when they get out are looking for someone open carrying so they can knock them out and steal their handgun.
Mr. Reffitt should not have worn a running Go Pro video and audio camera that recorded evidence against him.
Mr. Reffitt and the other D.C. protesters are political prisoners who committed no crimes and caused no damage. They should not have been arrested, locked up in the gulags, and held without bail.
The so-called protesters that should be arrested are the Antifa and BLM criminals who burnt down police cars, burnt businesses to the ground, blinded police with lasers, and threw improvised explosives at police while the corrupt Demorats in the major cites allowed the left wing arson and assaults to continue to further their goal of disrupting the presidential election and install Obama's senile puppet Biden through massive election fraud.
www.TexasMilitia.Info Seek out and join a lawful Militia or form one in your area. If you wish to remain Free you will have to fight for it...because the traitors will give us no choice in the matter--William Cooper
The so-called protesters that should be arrested are the Antifa and BLM criminals who burnt down police cars, businesses, blinded police with lasers, and threw improvised explosives at police...
But those people are DANGEROUS, and the police arresting them might get hurt! We can't have that happen, can we?
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#178628 08/03/202202:17 PM08/03/202202:17 PM
I haven't had time to watch this video yet. It is 1 hour and 42 minutes long. It looks good so far.
The Real Story of January 6,” a documentary by The Epoch Times https://www.theepochtimes.com/the-real-story-of-jan-6-documentary_4596670.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_campaign=mb-2022-07-27&utm_medium=email&est=FkkUWr6H%2BNaVD0Q9cvV6IZbEhEKTr7o%2F7ileEBnfPnnGKwgp93hTukb9250uBf31ybt4cZFb
The Real Story of January 6,” a documentary by The Epoch Times, reveals the truth that has been hidden from the American people. While a narrative has been set that what took place that day was an insurrection, key events and witnesses have been ignored until now. The documentary takes an unvarnished look at police use of force and the deaths that resulted in some measure from it. The film asks tough questions about who was responsible for the chaos that day. With compelling interviews and exclusive video footage, the documentary tells the real story of January 6. The film is narrated by Joshua Philipp, host of “Crossroads” on EpochTV and a senior investigative reporter at The Epoch Times.
Jasper Fakkert, editor-in-chief of The Epoch Times, said: “There has been a narrative perpetuated about January 6 that omits many of the facts about what happened that day.
“With in-depth interviews and exclusive video footage, we take an objective look at the issues, the people, and the impacts of the events.”
The film takes a close look at the shooting of 35-year-old Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt and the deaths of three other supporters of former President Donald J. Trump. It analyzes the police response to the massive crowds and use of force around the U.S. Capitol.
It examines the human impacts of Jan. 6, including the suicide of one defendant and the long pretrial imprisonment of dozens of others. It also investigates claims that some attacks on the Capitol and police were carried out by unindicted suspicious actors.
What Really Happened on January 6? | The Real Story of January 6
While the dust from Jan. 6, 2021, has long cleared, it has been replaced by a smoke screen. A carefully crafted narrative has been set that claims the events of that day amounted to a “violent insurrection.” This claim, however, does not match the facts. “The Real Story of January 6” takes an objective look at what happened through the eyes of those who were there. The Epoch Times provides the first comprehensive look into what really happened that day. The Truth can’t be hidden. We are Being Censored. Help Spread This Documentary
While this documentary is groundbreaking in providing a complete overview of what happened on January 6, The Epoch Times has been censored and suppressed by Big Tech. In order to spread the documentary, The Epoch Times relies on its own Epoch TV as well as other non-cancelable platforms to spread the truth. Stand up for free speech and oppose censorship by sharing the documentary with as many people as you can.
–
www.TexasMilitia.Info Seek out and join a lawful Militia or form one in your area. If you wish to remain Free you will have to fight for it...because the traitors will give us no choice in the matter--William Cooper
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#178648 08/04/202205:37 PM08/04/202205:37 PM
'He put his hand on my shoulder and said to me, 'You have a bullhorn! You have a loud voice to get the word out!'' says Sean McHugh.
A man imprisoned for entering the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, penned a letter from jail fingering Ray Epps as the person who recruited him to tell others to storm the federal building that day.
Writing from his cell in a Washington DC jail, Sean Michael McHugh says Epps told him to use his bullhorn in order to “get the word out” to other protesters about coordinating a siege on the Capitol building that day, according to a letter obtained by The Gateway Pundit.
Epps was caught on film encouraging a siege on the Capitol, and has even been suspected of being an FBI operative, informant, provocateur, or asset, by many including various US lawmakers.
On twitter Thomas Massie @RepThomasMassie wrote: I questioned Attorney General Garland about whether there were Federal Agents present on 1/6 and whether they agitated to go into the Capitol. Attorney General Garland refused to answer.
On twitter Matt Walsh @MattWalshBlog wrote: If the FBI did not participate in or encourage the rioting on January 6th, they would just say so. “No comment” is confirmation that they did exactly that.
A man imprisoned for entering the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, penned a letter from jail fingering Ray Epps as the person who recruited him to tell others to storm the federal building that day.
Despite footage showing Epps inciting crowds to enter the Capitol, he has not been arrested or charged for his involvement that day, the FBI has refused to answer whether he works for them or not, and the New York Times https://www.infowars.com/posts/new-...-ray-epps-as-victim-of-conspiracy-theory even wrote a puff piece defending him as a sweetheart.
In his letter, the father of four from California also calls out inhumane conditions inside the prison where he’s being held, and claims Capitol Police officers that day were attacking otherwise peaceful protesters without provocation.
Read McHugh’s letter singling out Epps below, with emphasis from The Gateway Pundit:
My fellow patriots,
I’m a January 6th political prisoner being held in the DC-Gulag. My name is Sean McHugh. I’m being held in very inhumane conditions in the DOJ’s effort to try and make me plead guilty under duress. I believe they are trying to do this because I had direct contact as seen on video with Ray Epps, an individual who has been reported by multiple media sources to possibly have FBI connections and involvement for incitement. At the very least he appears to be a government cutout protected by a lawyer who was formally known as an employee of the FBI. In fact, the FBI has covered for him by scrubbing his name from the most wanted list for January 6th after real journalism exposed his identity.
I encountered Ray Epps, the real de facto leader of January 6th 2021, multiple times while in D.C. I had coincidental contact with Ray Epps throughout the day and people who appeared to be working in concert with Ray Epps. Other than Capitol Police attacking peaceful protesters without provocation or warning, Ray Epps was more responsible for the for initiating the events that happened at the Capitol than anyone else. He is seen on video January 5th encouraging other patriots to go inside the Capitol which is the very inception of the whole idea to actually go inside. However, he is still not indicted or spent one day in jail. I’m actually the one labeled as the de facto leader of January 6th by the government and Chief Judge Howell of the DC Circuit.
Here is a brief account of the morning of January 6th 2021. Some details are left out as I still face trial.
On the morning of January 6th my mother, friend, and I were walking down Constitution Avenue toward Ellipse Park. I was talking into my megaphone something about Joe Biden when I was waived down by who I now know as Ray Epps. We walked over to Ray Epps and associates who were wearing military colors. He was yelling, “We are marching over to the Capitol at 1:00pm whether Trump is done speaking or not and we are going inside.”
When we were close to Ray Epps he put his hand on my shoulder and said to me, “You have a bullhorn! You have a loud voice to get the word out!” Trying to place responsibility on me Ray Epps said, “You need to tell people the plans. At 1:00pm we are going inside the Capitol whether Trump is done speaking or not.” Ray Epps said, “We are leaving from here and we will walk that way to the Capitol and through the front door.” That was near the corner of what I believe is Constitution Avenue and Ellipse Park.
We continued on with our day at the Trump rally and as Trump was speaking, sure enough, a crowd was on its way down Constitution Avenue towards our nation’s Capitol Building. This was the beginning of a peaceful protest, or so I thought. At the Capitol Ray Epps was whispering in Ryan Samsel’s ear egging him on to take down the barricade as seen on video. I can tell you Ray Epps was inciting the crowd all day. Ray Epps was yelling to the crowd “Push forward” on the West Terrace. I heard Ray Epps on multiple occasions saying “We are going inside”, even after peaceful protesters were met with police force on the West Terrace.
Not once did my mother, my friend, or I pass the police line or continue into the Capitol Building that day. However I was attacked multiple times with rubber bullets and sprayed repeatedly directly in the face with various chemicals for speaking on my megaphone. My mother was also sprayed with multiple different chemicals in her face and shot with rubber bullets and pepper balls in her head for no reason. Capitol police were aiming for faces leaving multiple people’s faces riddled with holes bleeding profusely.
My friend was hit in the head with a concussion grenade and it went off severely injuring him and cracking one of his teeth without warning or any provocation. It was clear they wanted to severely injure people without any announced reason or any apparent provocation. I watched as Capitol Police beat unarmed women with batons. I watched a very petite woman pushed over by Capitol police onto a sharp leg of a barricade that was on its side purposely and unwarranted. They wanted to hurt the vulnerable and elderly. Everyone was asking “Why are you doing this?” They were out for blood!
I remember walking back into the crowd to find my mother and hearing Ray Epps yelling “keep going, push forward” and still pushing the idea that we were “going inside”. He even said, “We knew this would happen, this is why we showed up.” He was pushing the same metal sign in the same way that the DOJ has used to charge me with felony assault. (We were trying to push it upright, not to harm anyone.) Never did I expect the events to unfold as they did that day. Yet cool, calm, and collected Ray Epps was still there directing others to “remember the plan”. The plan that he and his corrupt cronies had in place on a very specific timeline, seemingly in order to stop the truth from coming out on the house floor as representatives started to contest the election. Imagine if our representatives had time to present the evidence in a constitutional debate on the house floor in front of millions on national television. I knew something was off. It was an ominous feeling I know shared by many patriots that day.
I decided to leave early on, well before any breach in the police line actually occurred. Little did I know that the Capitol police were already waiving people inside the building on the east side.
Now I am facing decades in prison. I’m up against the full weight of the DOJ, the DC-Gulag, a very bias court circuit and the mainstream media lies with nothing but a court appointed lawyer who seems to be working against me.
I wish to put Ray Epps on the stand to answer the tough questions. Why is Ray Epps not in jail for inciting the crowd or obstruction of congress or seditious conspiracy? Where is equal application of the law? Who was he there with? What were his motives and who does he work for? Why did he keep repeating that we need to go inside not only a day before January 6th but even after being met with police force outside the Capitol?
Why am I being treated harshly and Ray Epps is free to go when he was clearly more involved in the events of January 6th? God bless America. Pray for justice pray for truth.
Thank you for supporting my family and I during these hard times.
McHugh has currently been locked up for over 427 days. He “faces two misdemeanors, eight felonies, loss of licensure and decades in prison,” the Gateway Pundit reports.
www.TexasMilitia.Info Seek out and join a lawful Militia or form one in your area. If you wish to remain Free you will have to fight for it...because the traitors will give us no choice in the matter--William Cooper
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#178727 08/17/202210:17 PM08/17/202210:17 PM
A defense attorney for members of the Oath Keepers organization who have been charged with seditious conspiracy in connection with the Jan. 6, 2021 false flag at the U.S. Capitol Building says that scores of federal “assets” were present in the building that day.
David W. Fischer, attorney for Thomas E. Caldwell of Berryville, Va., filed a motion with U.S. District Judge Amit P. Mehta in Washington, D.C., seeking to dismiss the conspiracy and obstruction charges against 10 members of the group, The Epoch Times reported.
While Caldwell is listed in the indictment, he is not a member of the Oath Keepers, the outlet reported in March.
“At least 20 FBI and ATF assets were embedded around the Capitol on J6,” says a footnote on page 6 of the 41-page motion, though no other details were provided.
The Epoch Times added:
In addition to the information about law-enforcement assets on the ground at the Capitol, the footnote says, the Oath Keepers “were being monitored and recorded prior to J6.”
An examination of evidence turned over in discovery by prosecutors in two major Oath Keepers cases has “not found one iota of proof” that defendants “had any plan, intention, design, or scheme to specifically enter the Capitol Building on J6,” the motion says.
Fischer told The Epoch Times he couldn’t comment on the motion or provide more details on the footnote.
There have been reports for months that federal agents were replete in the crowds that descended on the Capitol Building, with many suggesting that it was a straight-up false flag attack with one objective: Blaming it all on then-President Donald Trump so as to permanently tarnish him in the eyes of Americans.
During a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Jan. 11, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) pressed top FBI officials about the allegations.
“How many FBI agents or confidential informants actively participated in the events of Jan. 6?” Cruz asked Jill Sanborn, executive assistant director of the FBI’s National Security Branch.
“Sir, I’m sure you can appreciate that I can’t go into the specifics of sources and methods,” Sanborn responded.
Cruz replied, “Did any FBI agents or confidential informants actively participate in the events of Jan. 6, yes or no?”
“Sir, I can’t answer that,” Sanborn replied.
“Did any FBI agents or confidential informants commit crimes of violence on Jan. 6?” Cruz pressed.
“I can’t answer that, sir,” Sanborn said.
Jeremy M. Brown, an Oath Keepers member from Florida who is not part of either major Oath Keepers conspiracy case but has nonetheless been charged with two counts related to Jan. 6, told The Epoch Times that the FBI attempted to recruit him in December 2020 as a plant and spy. He refused; he was summarily arrested by a swarm of FBI agents in September 2021, months after the incident.
“When asked by me and my girlfriend to produce the warrants at the time of arrest, they refused to produce them,” Brown told the outlet. “One agent was even recorded stating, ‘We don’t know what we are looking for yet.’ They should look for a copy of the Constitution and read it.”
A noted expert has said he saw trained cadres suggesting federal agitators moving toward the U.S. Capitol ahead of the riot on Jan. 6.
J. Michael Waller, who was at the Capitol that day, wrote about what he saw in a piece for The Federalist a week after the breach:
Plainclothes militants. Militant, aggressive men in Donald Trump and MAGA gear at a front police line at the base of the temporary presidential inaugural platform; Agents-provocateurs. Scattered groups of men exhorting the marchers to gather closely and tightly toward the center of the outside of the Capitol building and prevent them from leaving; Fake Trump protesters. A few young men wearing Trump or MAGA hats backwards and who did not fit in with the rest of the crowd in terms of their actions and demeanor, whom I presumed to be Antifa or other leftist agitators; and Disciplined, uniformed column of attackers. A column of organized, disciplined men, wearing similar but not identical camouflage uniforms and black gear, some with helmets and GoPro cameras or wearing subdued Punisher skull patches.
The Democrat deep state is moving to criminalize its political opponents. We’ve seen this before, and we know how it ends.
www.TexasMilitia.Info Seek out and join a lawful Militia or form one in your area. If you wish to remain Free you will have to fight for it...because the traitors will give us no choice in the matter--William Cooper
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#178728 08/17/202210:31 PM08/17/202210:31 PM
The FBI has been doing stuff like this since at least the '60's. There's no way the FBI can be reformed, the corruption is too deep and embedded. It should be disbanded, and the sooner the better.
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#178798 08/30/202212:59 PM08/30/202212:59 PM
As long as the Justice Department keeps serving up these January 6 riot convictions, we’ll keep trying to knock them out of the park. The next defendant to face the music for his heinous crimes was Joshua Pruitt, a 40-year-old Maryland man who entered the Capitol Building during the course of the riot. Pruitt received very special attention from both the Department of Justice and the press because of his alleged “affiliation” with the Proud Boys. He also holds the distinction of being the only rioter to come within visual distance of a Senator, specifically Chuck Schumer. While nothing actually happened during that “encounter” (as the Associated Press puts it)
Onward and upward, airforce, he was given 55 months in prison and three years of supervised release. As usual, we will review the details of what Pruitt actually did or did not do.
Quote
A Maryland man affiliated with the far-right Proud Boys extremist group was sentenced on Monday to more than four years in prison for storming the U.S. Capitol, where authorities say he encountered Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer as his armed security detail led the New York Democrat to safety.
Joshua Pruitt, 40, was one of the few Capitol rioters to come face-to-face with a member of Congress during the Jan. 6, 2021, attack by a mob of Donald Trump supporters, according to federal prosecutors.
“One look at Pruitt, and the leader of Senator Schumer’s security detail immediately saw the threat and hustled the 70-year-old senator down a hallway, having to change their evacuation route on a dime,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Alexis Loeb wrote in a court filing ahead of Monday’s hearing.
I included the third paragraph in the excerpt above to demonstrate the melodrama on display by the prosecution and the press, but the underlying substance of the charge is pretty much nonexistent. Based on the descriptions offered by the prosecution, Pruitt attended the rally at the White House on January 6 and then made his way to the Capitol complex. He arrived during a lull after the initial rioters broke through the windows and doors, but before the Capitol Hill Police established lines with riot shields to keep more people from entering. Pruitt basically just walked in unimpeded.
A big deal is being made of Pruitt’s “association” with the Proud Boys and he was apparently a fan and had exchanged social media messages with some of them. But he was not in Washington as part of some planned Proud Boys attack squadron. So what did he do when he got inside? He began walking around. Then, at one point, he reached a hallway where Chuck Schumer was being escorted through by his armed security guard. (That emphasized bit is important.) Upon seeing the group, Pruitt began walking – not running – toward them.
That’s when Schumer’s detail hit the panic button, later testifying that “one look” at Pruitt was all it took to “see the threat.” We should note at this point that Joshua Pruitt was unarmed. He didn’t even have a pole to try to hit anyone with as Mark Ponder did, getting a slightly longer sentence than Pruitt for his efforts. No words were exchanged between Schumer’s detail and Joshua Pruitt. The armed detail simply rushed Schumer away from the unarmed, middle-aged, casually strolling pedestrian, went through another door and locked it behind them. Pruitt turned around and walked down another hallway before leaving the complex.
That was it. That was the entire event. Nobody reported seeing Joshua Pruitt do anything other than walking around for a while. And he “encountered” Chuck Schumer, who he did not recognize. Did he trespass inside the Capitol Hill complex? He most certainly did. Pruitt basically did the same thing that Stephen Colbert’s production crew did last month, and they were most certainly doing their level best to “encounter” Marjorie Taylor Greene. Of course, Colbert’s crew was released without bail and no charges were filed.
We’re continuing to see the sentencing phases of these trials being used to make a mockery of the justice system. It’s being done when people who have committed far more violence while rioting never see a day in court because they come from politically favored groups that are supported by the Democrats. And most of the mainstream media is going along with it and lapping it up.
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#178807 09/01/202203:53 PM09/01/202203:53 PM
A lawyer for the far-right Oath Keepers extremist group has been charged with conspiracy in connection with the Jan. 6, 2021, attack at the U.S. Capitol, authorities said Thursday.
Kellye SoRelle — general counsel for the antigovernment group — was arrested in Texas on charges including conspiracy to obstruct the certification of President Joe Biden's electoral college victory, the Justice Department said.
SoRelle, 43, is a close associate of Stewart Rhodes, the Oath Keepers' leader who is heading to trial later this month alongside other extremists on seditious conspiracy charges.
After Rhodes' arrest in January, SoRelle told media outlets she was acting as the president of the Oath Keepers while he's behind bars.
Prosecutors have accused Rhodes and his militia group of plotting for weeks to stop the transfer of power and keep former President Donald Trump in office, purchasing weapons, organizing military-style trainings and setting up battle plans.
SoRelle told The Associated Press last year — when FBI agents seized her phone as part of the Jan 6. investigation — that she had no knowledge of or involvement in the Capitol breach. She called the seizure of her phone "unethical" and the investigation "a witch hunt."
She is expected to make an initial appearance in federal court in Austin, Texas, later Thursday and it wasn't immediately clear if she has an attorney to speak on her behalf. SoRelle was photographed with Rhodes outside the Capitol on Jan. 6 and was present at an underground garage meeting the night before the riot that's been a focus for investigators.
The meeting included Rhodes and and Enrique Tarrio, the former chairman of the Proud Boys, who is charged separately with seditious conspiracy alongside other members of the extremist group that describes themselves as a politically incorrect men’s club for "Western chauvinists." From Jan. 2022: 'Oath Keepers' charged in connection to January 6 insurrection
The founder and leader of the far-right 'Oath Keepers' militia group has been arrested with 10 others, charged with seditious conspiracy in the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.
Publicly released video of the meeting doesn’t reveal much about their discussion and prosecutors have said only that one of the meeting’s participants "referenced the Capitol."
SoRelle was also on a call with Rhodes and other Oath Keepers days after the 2020 election during which Rhodes rallied his followers to prepare for violence, according to a transcript made public in court.
SoRelle is also charged with obstruction of an official proceeding, obstruction of justice for tampering with documents and a misdemeanor charge for entering Capitol grounds. The indictment says she persuaded others to destroy and conceal records sought by investigators.
SoRelle told the AP last September that agents seized her phone and provided her a search warrant that said it was related to an investigation into seditious conspiracy, among other crimes. The indictment against SoRelle made public Thursday does not include a charge of seditious conspiracy.
Rhodes and four co-defendants scheduled to go on trial starting Sept. 26 have said there was no plot to attack the Capitol and that their communications in the run up to Jan. 6 were about providing security for right-wing figures such as Roger Stone or preparing for attacks from left-wing antifa activists.
Rhodes, a former U.S. Army paratrooper, founded the Oath Keepers in 2009. The group recruits current and former military, police and first responders and pledges to "fulfill the oath all military and police take to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic."
A slew of its members have been charged in connection with Jan. 6. Three Oath Keepers have already pleaded guilty to seditious conspiracy, a rare Civil War-era charge that's historically been hard to prove. They are also cooperating with the Justice Department.
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#179462 02/07/202302:23 PM02/07/202302:23 PM
"Geofence warrants are just part of day-to-day cop business these days," laments Tim Cushing at Techdirt. "Rather than moving forward with a list of suspects, law enforcement agencies just ask for data on everyone in a certain area at a certain time and move backwards to probable cause to investigate and arrest."
The FBI utilized geofence warrants in its investigation into January 6 protesters—one of whom challenged the use of these warrants in court, filing a motion to suppress data obtained through the warrant.
A court has now denied the motion to suppress. "The ruling [PDF] from the DC District Court does have a few problems with geofence warrants generally, but not this particular one," notes Cushing. "The court also says there's no expectation of privacy in anonymized location data. Referencing the Supreme Court's Carpenter decision, it says hoovering up massive amounts of data related to hundreds of devices isn't the same thing as harvesting data targeting a particular device over the space of days or weeks."
Cushing has more on the decision and on what it means here.
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#179464 02/07/202305:13 PM02/07/202305:13 PM
That is tyranny and it is a violation of the 4th amendment. When they can track you as an individual it is not so called "anonymized location data."
Throw your damn cell phones away now! Get a land line and get an answering machine.
If someone really has a need to talk to you they can leave you a message on your answering machine and you can hear it when you get home.
I hate cell phones. To many people are spoiled from seeing who is calling them with caller ID. You never know who might be calling you and it might be important so always answer your phone when you hear it ring. If you don't like the call yell, don't ever call me again and hang up.
www.TexasMilitia.Info Seek out and join a lawful Militia or form one in your area. If you wish to remain Free you will have to fight for it...because the traitors will give us no choice in the matter--William Cooper
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#179466 02/07/202306:15 PM02/07/202306:15 PM
With my positions in the state and county political party, I pretty much need a cell phone. And in an emergency, it's damn near impossible to find a pay phone. And the caller ID is convenient - if a call comes in from a number I or my phone doesn't recognize, I don't answer it. And if I'm somewhere sensitive, where I don't want the government tracking me, I turn off the phone and take out the battery. For me at least, a few simple precautions is all it takes.
Anyone at any kind of demonstration or protest, talking on a cell phone, is either a fool or a fed.
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#179477 02/09/202301:55 PM02/09/202301:55 PM
FBI whistleblower raises fresh concerns about bank record mining, undercover agents in J6 probe
A recently retired FBI supervisory intelligence analyst told Congress in a whistleblower disclosure that agents in Boston were improperly pressured by Washington to open criminal cases on 140 people who had simply taken a bus ride to the Jan. 6 rally in Washington. The agents refused because there was no evidence the attendees engaged in any criminality, the whistleblower said.
George Hill’s testimony to the House Judiciary Committee also raised new civil liberty concerns about the FBI’s Jan. 6 probe, including whether the Bureau mined Americans’ bank records without court authority and whether the agency possesses video footage it is refusing to release because it identifies undercover agents and human sources who were at the U.S. Capitol that fateful day.
Hill, a military veteran and longtime analyst for the National Security Agency (NSA) and FBI who retired last year from the Bureau’s Boston field office, told Just the News on Wednesday night that he disclosed concerns earlier this week to the House Judiciary Committee during a transcribed deposition, including that the Bureau analyzed banking data without evidence of a crime — simply to find Americans who traveled to Washington around the time of Jan. 6 or who owned a gun.
Hill said supervisors in the Washington field office pressured to open cases, first on seven individuals who came up in a sweep of bank records provided by Bank of America, and then on the larger group of 140 Americans who paid to take bus rides to President Donald Trump’s now infamous rally on Jan. 6, 2021, the day a mob overran police lines and flooded into the Capitol as Congress met to certify the 2020 election results. He credited his supervisors in Boston for resisting the pressure.
“There’s no evidence of a crime being committed here,” he said during a wide-ranging interview on the “Just the News, No Noise” television show. “We cannot open up preliminary investigations on someone for using a financial instrument in the District. And so they pushed back, and Boston did not take any action on those names.”
Hill also said the Washington field office, which led the Jan. 6 probe, did not react well to the refusal, escalating up the chain of command, but at each step of the process the Boston office held its ground. “Getting on a bus and participating in a political rally is not predication for a crime or a preliminary investigation,” he said, explaining why Boston resisted.
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, told Just the News on Wednesday night that Hill’s information provided an essential roadmap for his select subcommittee’s investigation into potential weaponization of law enforcement agencies like the FBI.
“I appreciate this brave whistleblower coming forward,” Jordan said in an interview. “He’s worked in the military and then as an FBI agent. And he gave us a lot of valuable information that will be the foundation for our weaponization investigation going forward.”
Hill’s account backs up other FBI whistleblowers, like Special Agent Steve Friend, who’ve alleged the FBI’s Washington field office exerted undue pressure and exhibited political bias in an effort to get field offices around the country to open up as many domestic terrorism cases on Jan. 6 attendees as possible, to pad numbers or to make Trump supporters who came to Washington feel pain and shame. “The process was the punishment,” Friend told Just the News.
Friend has been sidelined from his job because his security clearance was suspended, after he raised his whistleblower concerns. Hill retired from the Bureau last year.
Hill and Friend both are being advised by former Senate investigator Jason Foster, the head of Empower Oversight, a whistleblower support nonprofit. Foster, who worked for years under Sen. Chuck Grassley, said the whistleblowers have provided Congress with a portrait of the FBI that, “keeps feeding public suspicion that it’s too focused on political narratives and not focused enough on fighting crime.”
“After 9/11, everybody was upset that we didn’t connect the dots,” Foster said. “We didn’t find a needle in the haystack, and what’s happened since is we turned the FBI into a domestic surveillance organization, and now we collect tens of thousands of haystacks and now it’s even harder to find the needles.
“And this is a perfect example of that, where you have tons of people [who] just want to push numbers, and they want to get tons of cases open so that they can say they’re addressing domestic violent extremism and they can say that there’s a big problem with it.”
“[T]his is another example of the evidence that we’re seeing, that a lot of that just appears to be hype, and it was predicated on just the thinnest” of evidence… The fact that someone is in DC and goes to a rally, as George said, is just not reason [enough] to open up a criminal investigation.”
The FBI national press office and Bank of America’s (BOA’s) media department did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Wednesday.
There have been concerns in legal circles for more than a year about the FBI obtaining bank data from institutions that volunteered it without a subpoena.
Judicial Watch is currently pursuing litigation to force the Bureau to release documents on how it got bank records during the Jan. 6 probe, but so far, the FBI has declined to provide any data.
Hill said he was told the banks provided the FBI with the records they mined. “Nobody asked for it,” he claimed. “It was totally voluntary.”
Hill also told the committee about concerns he developed when the Washington field office refused to let its colleagues in Boston review surveillance video from the Capitol to see if any of the 140 attendees had committed crimes. The answer he got back raised concerns about whether the FBI had undercovers — or informants — at the site, he said.
“When you ask for footage,” he recalled, “what they’ll come back with is ‘Tell us the exact place and time where you think the subject of your investigation was?’ To which the standard reply is, ‘Well, we don’t know because we can’t see the footage.’ And the comeback then is ‘There may be identities within that footage that we need to protect.’
“So one can make inferences regarding that, who those identities were they were looking to protect, but that probably wasn’t their grandparents or their aunts and uncles.”
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#179536 02/23/202301:05 PM02/23/202301:05 PM
First, let me say I just don't believe Trump would testify in this trial, and allow himself to be cross examined (remember, leading questions are allowed during cross examination). If he is forced to testify, the safest thing would be for him to plead the Fifth Amendment to every question.
However, this would give Trump a great opportunity to rant about the Democrats, and this would give him an unprecedented opportunity to do so. I just can't imagine his attorneys would allow hi to do it - but Lord knows, Trump doesn't always listen to his attorneys or anyone else.
Quote
Former President Donald Trump will reportedly accept a subpoena related to the Jan. 6 trial of members of the Proud Boys group.
Four group members, including leader Enrique Tarrio, said they would subpoena Trump as part of their defense. They are accused of trying to overturn the 2020 election with the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.
"Donald Trump called on patriots to stop the steal. We're calling on Donald Trump to take the stand," Norm Pattis, an attorney for Proud Boy Joseph Biggs, said last week.
Politico correspondent Kyle Cheney reported Tuesday that the Trump team had decided to accept Biggs' subpoena.
"Norm Pattis, lawyer for Proud Boy Joe Biggs, says he expects the government to announce today that Donald TRUMP's attorney Evan Corcoran has agreed to accept service of the defense's subpoena," Cheney wrote.
It was not immediately clear how Trump would participate in the Proud Boys' defense.
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#179540 02/23/202302:05 PM02/23/202302:05 PM
Tucker Carlson now has the equivalent of nearly five years of surveillance footage captured by U.S. Capitol Police security cameras on January 6, 2021. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) turned over the tapes to the Fox News host earlier this month, according to Axios. Carlson’s producers and researchers are already distilling the footage; the first round of clips is expected to air in a few weeks.
While some grumble that McCarthy did not fulfill his promise to publicly release the footage—arguably a valid complaint—Carlson’s team undoubtedly will give the massive trove much-needed context and maximum impact. Carlson released a three-part documentary, “Patriot Purge,” in November 2021 that explained how the events of January 6 helped launch a second “war on terror” against American citizens out of step with the Biden regime.
Since early 2021, Carlson has used his nightly show to expose the cruel treatment of Trump supporters suffering pretrial detention orders; raised questions about the use of undercover assets including FBI informants and the mysterious role of Ray Epps; asked why the case of the January 5 “pipe bomber” remains unsolved; and demanded the release of the surveillance video as late as last month.
Releasing the video never should have been a political fight; after all, the footage was recorded on a taxpayer-paid closed circuit television system installed on public property to monitor public employees. Contrary to arguments by Capitol Police and the Justice Department, the video belongs to the public, not federal agencies.
But both entities, with the help of D.C. District Court judges, have successfully kept the trove largely under wraps for more than two years. Even the FBI and D.C. Metropolitan Police departments signed agreements a few days after the Capitol protest to acknowledge that the tapes technically belonged to Capitol Police.
In a sworn statement filed in March 2021, Thomas DiBiase, general counsel for the Capitol Police, insisted the footage constituted “security information” that required very limited access. “Our concern is that providing unfettered access to hours of extremely sensitive information to defendants who already have shown a desire to interfere with the democratic process will . . . [be] passed on to those who might wish to attack the Capitol again,” DiBiase warned.
The Justice Department subsequently designated the tapes as “highly sensitive” government material subject to protective orders in January 6 prosecutions. It’s been a major battle for defendants and their attorneys to properly access all of the video tied to their cases; defendants cannot watch any clips without the presence of a legal authority and none of the footage can be shared or downloaded.
Of course, there have been some exceptions. Capitol Police shared cherry-picked clips with the House Democrats on the second impeachment committee as well as the January 6 select committee. For example, the brief clip of Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) running through a hallway that afternoon presumably after the breach was produced from surveillance video. HBO also accessed surveillance footage for its slanted documentary on January 6. “Security” concerns, my foot.
Imagine the universal outrage in any other situation had crucial video of what the government considered a terror attack been kept away from the public for more than two years. Influential opinion pages would have banged the drum incessantly for its release, insisting some sort of cover up was unfolding. Progressive activist groups and elected officials would demand a full accounting of what happened before, during, and after the “attack,” including all government-produced evidence. Influential lawyers and legal defense funds would lament the deprivation of due process for those involved in the allegedly heinous act.
Instead, the usual defenders of accountability, transparency, and constitutional rights have been completely AWOL. The fight has been waged by outmatched defense attorneys in the rigged legal and judicial system in the nation’s capital. And a handful of influencers like Carlson.
To be fair, a consortium called the Press Coalition forced a few federal judges to lift protective orders on a small amount of surveillance video. Representing more than a dozen major news companies, the coalition successfully won the release of limited security footage that, in some instances, contradicted the assertion that police did not allow protesters into the building that afternoon. Unsealed video also showed how police brutalized women inside the lower west terrace tunnel.
In a laughable “reality check” in his article, Axios reporter Mike Allen suggested the public has seen enough surveillance video since the “Jan. 6 committee played numerous excerpts of the footage at last year’s captivating hearings.” But not only were most of the evidentiary video clips sourced from protesters’ cell phones, the surveillance video clips offered by the committee represented an infinitesimal sliver of the total collection.
Which, notably, is much bigger than what the government has made available to January 6 defendants. Axios reported that Carlson’s team has 41,000 hours of raw footage—nearly three times the amount that the Justice Department allowed into evidence, which only covered the time period between noon and 8:00 p.m. on January 6. The tapes now in Carlson’s possession apparently covers the entire 24-hour period from “multiple camera angles from all over Capitol grounds.”
One can only guess what the videos will reveal. It’s possible, even likely, the never-before-seen footage will show the elements of a preplanned attack engineered by the same political and government forces that attempted to destroy Donald Trump for the better part of six years. Will the tapes finally answer the questions that top law enforcement officials such as FBI Director Christopher Wray refuse to answer and the January 6 select committee buried—not the least of which was the role of the FBI?
Withholding the video is only one part of the massive cover-up about January 6. Republicans should seek similar demands for records, emails, and communications from Capitol Police to expose the full scope of the cover-up. But like all good political scandals, the path to the truth begins with the tapes.
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#179550 02/27/202302:19 PM02/27/202302:19 PM
Via John Nolte, I learn that a group of left-wing media companies now wants access to the January 6 tapes that Kevin McCarthy has given to Tucker Carlson:
Quote
A group of media organizations, including CBS News, is demanding access to a tranche of surveillance and police videos from the Jan. 6, 2021, assault on the Capitol that U.S. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy provided to Fox News host Tucker Carlson.
In a letter to congressional leadership Friday, the media companies argue the footage McCarthy allowed Carlson and Fox News to access should be made available to other media groups.
The letter was sent on behalf of CBS News, CNN, Politico, ProPublica ABC, Axios, Advance, Scripps, the Los Angeles Times, and Gannett.
Where have they been for the last two years? Why haven’t they wanted to see the footage until now? To date, apparently, they have been happy with the isolated clips and spin provided by Nancy Pelosi. This is the hilarious part:
Quote
“Without full public access to the complete historical record, there is concern that an ideologically-based narrative of an already polarizing event will take hold in the public consciousness…
But wait! Until now, we haven’t had “full public access to the complete historical record,” because Nancy Pelosi wouldn’t permit it. An “ideologically-based narrative” of the “polarizing event” has been propagated–by Pelosi and her Democrats–and has “take[n] hold in the public consciousness.” It has taken hold largely because it was eagerly adopted by the very news organizations who now, belatedly, are demanding “full public access.” You can’t make this stuff up.
Quote
…with destabilizing risks to the legitimacy of Congress, the Capitol Police, and the various federal investigations and prosecutions of January 6 crimes,” wrote attorney Charles Tobin.
This is a stunning admission. The news organizations are saying that if more January 6 footage is released, it “risks…the legitimacy of…the various federal investigations and prosecutions of January 6 crimes.” Gosh, why might that be?
The left-wing organizations imply that they want access to the footage so that they can counter any evidence that Fox News might produce that casts doubt on the Democratic Party’s narrative. I guess you could say that is a good thing. Now that Pelosi’s boycott of video information has been broken, news organizations will compete to inform the public about what really happened. The consequences of that competition, compared to where we have been for the last two years, can only be good.
Onward and upward, airforce
Last edited by airforce; 02/27/202302:20 PM.
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#179576 03/09/202311:51 AM03/09/202311:51 AM
"Mostly peaceful chaos" is how Tucker Carlson is describing the Jan. 6 riot. He's not wrong. it was hardly the "deadly insurrection" as others have portrayed it.
Too long to post here, read the whole thing at the link.
Quote
During his Fox News show on Monday night, Tucker Carlson presented surveillance video from the U.S. Capitol on the day of the January 6 riot, which he obtained from House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R–Calif.), as evidence that the conventional depiction of that event is misleading. He noted that Democratic politicians, journalists, and commentators have routinely described the breach of the Capitol as "a deadly insurrection." His assessment: "Everything about that phrase is a lie. Very little about January 6th was organized or violent. Surveillance video from inside the Capitol shows mostly peaceful chaos."
According to a New York Times article about the controversy over that show, it is Carlson who is lying. The headline calls his claims about the riot "false," while the subhead describes him as "falsely portraying the attack on the Capitol as a largely peaceful event." The lead repeats that charge, saying Carlson "falsely portrayed the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol as a largely peaceful gathering." But if we take "peaceful" to mean "nonviolent," the evidence, including the arrest numbers cited by the Times as well as the video record, supports that characterization....
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#179577 03/09/202312:30 PM03/09/202312:30 PM
Tucker Carlson is locked in shredding the nonsense surrounding the January 6 riot, which has been sold to the public as a violent insurrection. The hyperbole knows no bounds as others have said that day was worse than Pearl Harbor or the 9/11 attacks, once again showing that liberals have no sense of history. Trump supporters killed Capitol Police officers; people took that seriously. And it’s all a lie. It’s also a lie that those arrested, indicted, and convicted are domestic terrorists. I’m not referring to the ones who attacked police officers; they deserve whatever comes to them. But folks like Jacob Chansley, the ‘QAnon Shaman,’ are decidedly not domestic threats.
Chansley was given a four-year jail sentence for walking around the Capitol Building escorted by Capitol Police officers. Most rapists and other violent criminals don’t get nearly as much jail time nowadays as liberals have embraced a soft-on-crime attitude, unless it’s January 6, which the political class has used to declare all-out legal war on these political prisoners.
Carlson added that Chansley’s lawyers didn’t have access to these tapes. Moreover, the January 6 Select Committee chair, Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS), didn’t even review them before forcibly plunging the nation through this kangaroo court.
“I'm actually not aware of any member of the committee who had access [to the footage]. We had a team of employees who kind of went through the video,” he said.
This is gross incompetence, but Democrats went along with it anyway because they knew they would get all the political cover from the media, and they did. The lies were manufactured and sold, and even members of our judicial system believed it. Carlson has all 41,000-plus hours of security footage and was able to shred numerous liberal media narratives about January 6 in a week. No staffer looked through these tapes; if they did—they’d find exculpatory evidence.
The committee was going to ensnare Donald Trump and be the vehicle to drive home the Democrats’ 2022 message about GOP extremism, except that no one cared by the time this circus act was gaveled into session. The economy was tanking, Russia had invaded Ukraine, and everyone had moved on with their lives. Nothing criminal was ever discovered that warranted a DOJ indictment. It was a total waste of time that now has a new layer of malfeasance to go with it.
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#179579 03/09/202303:50 PM03/09/202303:50 PM
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#179584 03/10/202306:16 PM03/10/202306:16 PM
There is no way to avoid this moment. The formal letter of apology. From me. To Conservatives and to those who “put America first” everywhere.
It’s tempting to sweep this confrontation with my own gullibility under the rug — to “move on” without ever acknowledging that I was duped, and that as a result I made mistakes in judgement, and that these mistakes, multiplied by the tens of thousands and millions on the part of people just like me, hurt millions of other people like you all, in existential ways.
But that erasure of personal and public history would be wrong.
I owe you a full-throated apology.
I believed a farrago of lies. And, as a result of these lies, and my credulity — and the credulity of people similarly situated to me – many conservatives’ reputations are being tarnished, on false bases.
The proximate cause of this letter of apology is the airing, two nights ago, of excepts from tens of thousands of hours of security camera footage from the United States Capitol taken on Jan 6, 2021. The footage was released by House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) to Fox News commentator Tucker Carlson. . . .
There is no way for anyone thoughtful, even if he or she is a lifelong Democrat, not to notice that Sen Chuck Schumer did not say to the world that the footage that Mr Carlson aired was not real. Rather, he warned that it was “shameful” for Fox to allow us to see it. The Guardian characterized Mr Carlson’s and Fox News’ sin, weirdly, as “Over-Use” of Jan 6 footage. Isn’t the press supposed to want full transparency for all public interest events?
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#179603 03/14/202312:36 PM03/14/202312:36 PM
Americans will hold accountable those responsible for the accelerating degradation of the U.S. justice system as the government's J6 narrative collapses and their wrongdoing becomes apparent. By Julie Kelly March 13, 2023
The FBI agent squirmed on the hot seat.
Confronted with messages the Justice Department attempted to conceal, Nicole Miller, one of the lead FBI investigators assigned to the Proud Boys case, was on the verge of admitting that the FBI monitored privileged communications between one defendant and his attorney in 2021.
“It appears so,” Miller responded when asked by defense attorney Nicholas Smith on March 8 to confirm she and another agent discussed the content of emails exchanged between Zachary Rehl, one of five Proud Boys currently on trial for seditious conspiracy, and his former lawyer.
Smith read aloud one of Miller’s texts: “I need to find other emails, but this one email definitely indicates that they want to go to trial, But don’t freak out, Jason and Luke.”
Smith turned to Miller. “Now, ‘Jason,’ you understand to be referring to the prosecutor in this case, Jason McCullough. Correct?”
But jurors never heard an answer. After prosecutors loudly objected, Judge Timothy Kelly abruptly dismissed the jury. He informed jurors that he wanted “to press pause, as we sometimes do when an objection hits,” and reconvene the morning of March 9.
But that didn’t happen either.
Instead, Kelly, outside the eyes and ears of the jury, held a hearing with both sides on March 9 to determine how to proceed after the defense team uncovered messages indicating FBI agents doctored internal reports, destroyed evidence, and tipped off prosecutors about defense strategy on the government’s highest-profile January 6 case.
Prior to her testimony, Miller had compiled a spreadsheet of so-called “Jencks” material that cataloged internal messages related to her work on the case. The spreadsheet contained 25 rows of messages—but roughly 12,000 rows were hidden behind a tab and found by the defense.
One message referenced editing a report on a confidential human source, commonly known as an informant: “You need to go into that report you just put and edit out that I was present,” one agent texted Miller. She complied.
Another agent told Miller an FBI supervisor instructed the unidentified agent to destroy “338 items of evidence.” To which Miller reacted, “OMG INSANE.”
In perhaps the most shocking revelations, Miller and another agent discussed emails between Rehl, who has been imprisoned under pretrial detention orders since March 2021, and his then-attorney, Jonathan Moseley. “Found an email thread with Rehl and his attorney, Moseley. The attorney raised some interesting points.”
“Hopefully all related to him pleading out,” Miller replied.
Another defense attorney later noted that “there appear to be missing FBI messages” in the same exchange.
Rather than express outrage at the fact that the FBI was spying on what is commonly considered privileged communications protected by the Constitution, Kelly instead gave prosecutors time to concoct a face-saving strategy—and that they did.
“It appears that the Jencks production to defense counsel may involve a spill of classified information,” assistant U.S. Attorney Joyelyn Ballatine told Judge Kelly. She added that the government needed to “claw back” the entire spreadsheet to review all the messages for allegedly “classified” material.
“[We] would ask them to return to us and confirm that they have deleted all copies of that spreadsheet from any electronic device or any hard drive that they have and then we would reproduce it to them,” Ballatine said. She further claimed that one agent in communications with Miller “works on a squad that does covert activity that is classified.”
Ballantine claimed the 338 items of destroyed evidence might “impact a classified equity,” Whatever that means.
Naturally, defense attorneys immediately objected to the government’s demand that incriminating materials be returned to the original source and, without any oversight or accountability, unilaterally decide which messages were classified and which were not.
“Everything has been a secret order where we can’t share any information,” Sabino Jauregui, the lawyer representing Enrique Tarrio, complained to Kelly. “Everything has been done under cover. And now, they come in here; they use this word ‘classified’ to try and delay the case. I think we should continue. I think Mr. Smith’s ‘gotcha’ moment yesterday was ruined, and he had every right to get that agent and destroy her on cross and, all of a sudden, the trial was stopped.”
Kelly, a longtime Justice Department employee who worked for years at the U.S. attorney’s D.C. office—the same office prosecuting every January 6 case—was unpersuaded by the defense argument and the totality of the evidence before him. “I think it makes sense for me to order the defense to do what the government’s asked,” Kelly concluded. The spreadsheet, which Ballantine later in the hearing described as a “classified document,” could not be reviewed, copied, or shared until further notice.
A flurry of motions followed. Defense attorneys filed motions to dismiss the case based on Sixth Amendment violations. The Justice Department informed the court on March 12 that 80 rows in the original spreadsheet had been removed after prosecutors determined the messages were “either classified or sensitive.” And the reference to a doctored FBI report? The government claimed the agent requesting the edit simply wanted to be removed from an email chain because he had been promoted and was no longer handling the informant. “The exchange concerns a routine clerical matter and does not suggest any wrongdoing on the part of the FBI generally or of Agent Miller personally,” prosecutors wrote.
Sure.
Oh, and the 338 items of destroyed evidence? Prosecutors insisted, without providing a scintilla of proof, that message referred to the routine “disposal” of evidence in a 20-year old case that had been closed. Always indignant, the Justice Department condemned the “potential for confusion and unfair prejudice here is obvious, given the inflammatory use defense counsel have already made of the ‘destroy evidence’ remark.”
But the government’s explanation as to why FBI agents were spying on email correspondence between a defendant and his attorney then apparently sharing that intelligence with prosecutors handling the case should alarm all Americans.
According to the Justice Department, individuals incarcerated at federal prisons—including defendants not convicted of any crime, as is the case with the Proud Boys, including Rehl, now on trial—are not entitled to protected communications with their lawyers. All emails and phone calls, the government explained, are conducted on a computer system operated by the Justice Department. Those in custody must agree to terms of use, including an acknowledgement that attorney-client discussions would be monitored. “Rehl waived any privilege by knowingly using [the Federal Detention Center]-Philadelphia’s monitored email system to communicate with his attorney.”
Prosecutors demanded that cross-examination of Agent Miller, which Kelly interrupted right before the line of questioning got juicy, be limited to “video, photographic, and message evidence from January 6, 2021, from midnight to shortly before 5:00 p.m.” Translation: Anything Miller discussed after January 6 should be off the table.
As expected, Kelly folded to nearly every government demand. He accepted at face value the explanation that the destroyed evidence pertained to an old criminal case and was not relevant to the Proud Boys’ trial. He also refused to take up arguments about violations of the defendants’ Sixth Amendment rights, declaring those discussions were not within the jury’s purview. And Kelly strictly limited cross examination about the edited report on the informant. If the government’s version of what happened related to the report is true, Kelly sniffed, the defense objections are “much ado about nothing.”
What Kelly must not realize is that the public does not view the dirty secrets accidentally “spilled” by an untrustworthy FBI and Justice Department as “nothing.” Kelly, and the Justice Department, can wave off due process rights, transparency, and the basic tenets of a fair trial. But as the American people come to terms with the phony narrative of January 6, they ultimately will hold shameless judges like Kelly and rogue federal officials, like Ballantine and Miller, responsible for the accelerating degradation of the U.S. justice system.
Julie Kelly is a political commentator and senior contributor to American Greatness. She is the author of January 6: How Democrats Used the Capitol Protest to Launch a War on Terror Against the Political Right and Disloyal Opposition: How the NeverTrump Right Tried―And Failed―To Take Down the President. Her past work can be found at The Federalist and National Review. She also has been featured in the Wall Street Journal, The Hill, Chicago Tribune, Forbes, and Genetic Literacy Project. She is the co-host of the “Happy Hour Podcast with Julie and Liz.” She is a graduate of Eastern Illinois University and lives in suburban Chicago with her husband and two daughters.
Content created by the Center for American Greatness, Inc. is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a significant audience. For licensing opportunities for our original content, please contact licensing@centerforamericangreatness.com. Support Free & Independent Journalism Your support helps protect our independence so that American Greatness can keep delivering top-quality, independent journalism that's free to everyone. Every contribution, however big or small, helps secure our future. If you can, please consider a recurring monthly donation.
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#179657 03/26/202308:54 PM03/26/202308:54 PM
What REALLY Happened ON J6: Conspiracy Truths Corrupt Congress members and their paid shills in the media blew up J6 to be an “attack on democracy” to run cover for themselves, and demonize anyone who dare question the establishment.
By AmericanAFMindy | MadMaxWorld.TV Saturday, March 25, 2023
As someone who was at J6, what was portrayed on TV couldn’t have been more vastly different then what happened in real life.
The rally was peaceful until Capitol Police started shooting flash bang grenades indiscriminately into the crowd, causing mayhem, injury and death.
The biased two-tier justice system between patriots upset about a questionable election, and BLM rioters who set fire to the city just months earlier, has not gone unnoticed.
Corrupt Congress members and their paid shills in the media blew up J6 to be an “attack on democracy” to run cover for themselves, and demonize anyone who dare question these criminals in DC, the unconstitutional Covid tyranny they rolled out, government censorship of citizens and journalists, and the highly questionable 2020 election for which we still haven’t gotten answers.
Now that Elon has freed Twitter, and given political discourse a new life…we have a chance to expose what really happened that day, and why the powers that be lied about it.
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#179658 03/26/202309:02 PM03/26/202309:02 PM
‘Go, Go, Go! Help Them Up! Push Them Up’: New Leaked J6 Footage ‘Shows DC Metro Cop Encouraging People to Go Towards The Capitol’
By Chris Menahan | Information Liberation Sunday, March 26, 2023
Newly leaked footage from January 6th shows undercover DC Metropolitan Police officers pushing protesters to move towards the US Capitol and helping them climb the scaffolding outside the Capitol building.
The full video was leaked Saturday on Rumble by an anonymous account named OverwatchJ6:
Newly leaked footage from January 6th shows undercover DC Metropolitan Police officers pushing protesters to move towards the US Capitol and helping them climb the scaffolding outside the Capitol building.
The full video was leaked Saturday on Rumble by an anonymous account named OverwatchJ6:
From The Epoch Times, “Prosecutor Admits DC Police Officers Acted as Provocateurs at US Capitol on Jan. 6”:
A federal prosecutor admitted in court papers that three D.C. Metropolitan Police Department undercover officers acted as provocateurs at the northwest steps of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.
The admission came in a March 24 filing before U.S. District Judge Rudolph Contreras that seeks to keep video footage shot by the officers under court seal.
Prosecutors accused the case defendant—William Pope of Topeka, Kansas—of an “illegitimate” attempt to unmask the video as part of his alleged strategy to try the case in the news media. Pope filed a motion to remove the court seal on Feb. 21.
“The defendant is not entitled to ‘undesignate’ these videos to share them with unlimited third parties,” said Assistant U.S. Attorney Kelly Moran. “His desire to try his case in the media rather than in a court of law is illegitimate, and the government has met its burden to show the necessity of the protective order.”
The feds worked together with the media to smear everyone involved in this protest for two years straight and bias the already biased DC juries against them but their victims are not allowed to share this footage to defend themselves?
The fact these cases are even being tried in DC is an absolute disgrace. J6 protesters are blatantly being denied their right to a fair trial on top of being held indefinitely in pre-trial detention and tortured in prison.
Videos long hidden under court seal have become a major topic, especially with prosecutors disclosing in a number of high-profile Jan. 6 cases the involvement of multiple FBI informants.
Pope is seeking to lift the court seal on the undercover video as part of his drive to obtain full access to video evidence held by the government. Pope is representing himself in the criminal case being prosecuted against him. At a hearing on March 3, Judge Contreras seemed sympathetic to Pope’s motion to unmask the videos.
“The officer clearly incited that area, and we still don’t have video from all other undercover MPD,” Pope told The Epoch Times. “And as the numerous informants in the Proud Boys trial demonstrates, we are only just beginning to scratch the surface on FBI involvement.”
[…] “This video clearly evidences undercover law enforcement officers urging the crowds to advance up the stairs and scaffolding towards the Capitol on January 6,” Pope wrote in an earlier case filing. “The government may claim that incidents like this did not happen, but the facts show they did.”
Prosecutor Moran acknowledges such in a motion filed on March 24.
“The specific footage, GoPro video recorded by an MPD police officer who was stationed at the Capitol in an evidence-gathering capacity, captures the officer shouting words to the effect of, “Go! Go! Go!” Moran wrote.
“At other times in these videos, the officer and the two other plainclothes officers with him appear to join the crowd around them in various chants, including “drain the swamp,” “U.S.A.! U.S.A.! U.S.A.!”, and “Whose house? Our house!”
Moran also argued against unsealing large amounts of closed-circuit television (CCTV) security video, which she said could put officers at risk.
“There are very specific and highly worrisome risks associated with the specific videos the defendant seeks to share en masse,” she wrote.
“Given the highly volatile nature of the discourse surrounding these cases, releasing the identities of the officers depicted in these videos—officers the defendant now claims to have instigated the entire attack on the U.S. Capitol—would surely put the lives of those officers at risk.”
Pope told The Epoch Times that he never made such a claim. He has not yet filed a response to the government’s memorandum.
Another video Pope discovered in his research shows Officer 2 and Officer 3 walking behind the late Ashli Babbitt on the northwest steps. About an hour later, Babbitt was shot at the entry of the Speaker’s Lobby by Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd. She died a half-hour later.
The only “risk” involved in releasing this footage and more from J6 is the police and feds being caught helping provocateur the event.
House Speaker Kevin McCarthy and Tucker Carlson need to get on with it already and release the 40,000 hours of footage they have to the public.
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#179664 03/27/202312:38 PM03/27/202312:38 PM
Federal prosecutors disclosed Wednesday that a witness expected to testify for the defense at the seditious conspiracy trial of former Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio and four associates was secretly acting as a government informant for nearly two years after the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol, a defense lawyer said in a court filing.
Carmen Hernandez, a lawyer for former Proud Boys chapter leader Zachary Rehl, asked a judge to schedule an immediate emergency hearing and suspend the trial “until these issues have been considered and resolved.” Lawyers for the other four defendants joined in Hernandez’s request.
Hernandez said in court papers that the defense team was told by prosecutors on Wednesday afternoon that the witness they were planning to call to the stand on Thursday had been a government informant.
The judge ordered prosecutors to file a response to the defense filing by Thursday afternoon and scheduled a hearing for the same day, putting testimony in the case on hold until Friday. The U.S. attorney’s office did not immediately comment on the filing.
In her court filing, Hernandez said the unnamed informant participated in “prayer meetings” with relatives of at least one of the Proud Boys on trial and had discussions with family members about replacing one of the defense lawyers on the case. The informant also has been in contact with at least one of the defense lawyers and at least one of the five defendants, Hernandez wrote.
It’s the latest twist in a trial that has been bogged down by bickering between lawyers and the judge and already lasted much longer than expected. Defense lawyers have repeatedly asked the judge in vain to declare a mistrial over a variety of issues they say have been unfair to their clients.
The trial in Washington’s federal court is one of the most serious cases to emerge from the Jan. 6 attack. Tarrio, Rehl and three other Proud Boys — Joseph Biggs, Ethan Nordean and Dominic Pezzola — are charged with conspiring to block the transfer of presidential power from Donald Trump to Joe Biden after the 2020 election.
Tarrio, a Miami resident, served as national chairman for the far-right extremist group, whose members describe it as a politically incorrect men’s club for “Western chauvinists.” He and the other Proud Boys could face up to 20 years in prison if convicted of seditious conspiracy.
Defense attorneys have argued there is no evidence the Proud Boys plotted to attack the Capitol and stop Congress from certifying Biden’s electoral victory.
Hernandez didn’t name the informant in her court filing, but she said it is somebody who has serving as a “confidential human source” for the federal government since April 2021 through at least January 2023. Prosecutors knew in December that the person was a potential trial witness but didn’t inform defense lawyers until Wednesday that the witness has been a federal informant, she said.
It’s not the first time the government’s use of informants has become an issue in the case. Defense attorneys have repeatedly pushed to get more information about informants in the far-right extremist group as they try to undermine the notion that the group had a plan to attack the Capital on Jan. 6.
FBI Agent Nicole Miller testified last week that she was aware of two informants in the Proud Boys, including one who marched on the Capital on Jan. 6.
Hernandez said there are “reasons to doubt the veracity of the government’s explanation and justification for withholding information about the (confidential human sources) who have been involved in the case.” She could not immediately be reached for additional comment.
Law enforcement routinely uses informants in criminal investigations, but their methods and identities can be closely guarded secrets. Federal authorities haven’t publicly released much information about their use of informants in investigating the Proud Boys’ role in a mob’s attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6.
Nordean, of Auburn, Washington, was a Proud Boys chapter leader. Biggs, of Ormond Beach, Florida, was a self-described Proud Boys organizer. Rehl was president of the Proud Boys chapter in Philadelphia. Pezzola was a Proud Boys member from Rochester, New York.
At this point, I'm pretty sure the FBI had more people in the Proud Boys than the Proud Boys did.
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#179677 03/30/202301:45 PM03/30/202301:45 PM
Jacob Chansley, the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol rioter better known as the “QAnon Shaman,” was released from federal prison early and transferred to a halfway house on Wednesday.
The Bureau of Prisons said Chansley was moved to “community confinement” — a term that can either refer to home confinement or a halfway house; but Chansley’s attorney Albert Watkins confirmed it was the latter.
“After serving eleven months in solitary prior to his sentence being imposed, and only 16 months of his sentence thereafter, it is appropriate this gentle and intelligent young man be permitted to move forward with the next stage of what undoubtedly will be a law abiding and enriching life,” Watkins said in a statement.
The Bureau of Prisons said in a statement that “for safety, and security reasons, we do not discuss the conditions of confinement for any inmate, including transfers or release plans, nor do we specify an individual’s specific location while in community confinement.”
Chansley, who gained national attention for wearing face paint and a horned headdress during the riot, pleaded guilty to obstruction and was sentenced in November 2021 to 41 months in prison.
The bureau now lists Chansley’s release date as May 25 of this year. The bureau declined to discuss the specifics of Chansley’s case, but inmates are able to shave off part of their sentences for good conduct while behind bars....
Well, good. He should never have been in prison in the first place.
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#179836 05/24/202309:33 AM05/24/202309:33 AM
Over the past month, speculation has swirled around why Fox News honchos ousted the nation’s most popular cable news host just hours before he was set to begin his nightly monologue. Tucker Carlson reportedly was stunned by the news, which was announced in a terse statement released by the network on April 24: “FOX News Media and Tucker Carlson have agreed to part ways. We thank him for his service to the network as a host and prior to that as a contributor.”
Subsequent reports suggested any number of reasons why Carlson was yanked off the air, including the company’s settlement with Dominion Voting Systems, a separate lawsuit filed by a one-time producer for “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” political differences with the sons of Fox News founder Rupert Murdoch, and his questioning of the war in Ukraine.
But the timing of his removal—less than 24 hours after “60 Minutes” aired a puff piece on Ray Epps, the infamous January 6 instigator frequently covered by Carlson’s show—fueled rumors that Fox News wanted to silence Carlson before he could respond to several accusations made in the interview.
Carlson is “obsessed with me,” Epps told reporter Bill Whitaker, who repeatedly used the term “conspiracy theory” to describe claims Epps’ acted as a federal agent during the Capitol protest. “He’s going to any means possible to destroy me.”
Now it appears Carlson was, in fact, prepared to address Epps’ interview in his April 24 monologue. Chadwick Moore, author of an upcoming biography on Carlson, revealed in a video message posted on Twitter on Monday that Carlson’s scheduled monologue that night “dealt with, among other things, investigations around January 6 and particularly Ray Epps, the only person captured on video inciting people to violence at the Capitol that day and allegedly an FBI informant who still has not been arrested or charged.”
Carlson quote-tweeted Moore’s video with a wide-eye emoji to confirm Moore’s report.
If true, Fox News executives join a long list of Ray Epps’ sympathizers both in the news media and in Congress. For example, former Representative Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.), who was vice chairman of the January 6 select committee, publicly condemned “conspiracy theories about the role that [Epps] was playing that day.” Former Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.), also formerly a member of the committee, routinely covered for Epps, even insisting Epps “broke no laws,” when he clearly did.
In the same “60 Minutes” interview that gave Epps the warm and fuzzy treatment, Tom Joscelyn, an investigator on the January 6 select committee, also came to Epps’ defense. Calling Epps a “pebble” in a “mountain range of evidence” about the breach of the Capitol, Joscelyn mocked the notion Epps acted on behalf of a government agency. The conspiracists, Joscelyn said, have to “come up with some connective tissue between Ray Epps and the FBI and they’ve got none.”
But Joscelyn didn’t explain why Epps has so far evaded criminal charges when others involved in similar or even lesser behavior have not. Not only does Epps remain uncharged, he also has not been called as a government witness even though he was a key figure at the first exterior breach point on the west side of the Capitol grounds and whispered in the ear of Ryan Samsel, the first Capitol protester to knock down metal racks near Peace Circle right before 1 p.m.
Several defendants who participated in that first breach face various conspiracy counts. But not Ray Epps.
Ironically, on the same day Carlson planned to once again raise questions about Epps’ suspicious involvement in the events of January 6, a prosecutor had to confront the Epps issue during closing arguments in the Proud Boys seditious conspiracy trial. (Proud Boys were at the breach point with Epps and Samsel that afternoon.)
Assistant U.S. Attorney Conor Mulroe told the jury on April 24 that any intimation Epps acted on behalf of the government was a “fantasy.” Epps made several cameo appearances throughout the nearly four-month trial in the Justice Department’s most important January 6 case to date, appearing in a video disclosed by the government in a last-minute dirty trick to smear Zachary Rehl, one of four men convicted of seditious conspiracy.
One defense attorney attempted to subpoena Epps to testify during the trial. “It is significant that the government appears to be protecting Epps,” attorney Roger Roots, representing Dominic Pezzola, wrote in a motion in March. “Epps has never been indicted or arrested for his activities on January 5 and 6. This is despite the fact that Epps is the only Jan. 6 demonstrator who publicly (multiple times, actually) urged protestors on video to enter the Capitol on Jan. 6. Epps played a direct role in instigating the first breach on the west side. Ray Epps is seen on video recordings all over the West plaza and grounds of the U.S. Capitol and often within a short distance from Dominic Pezzola on Jan. 6.”
But Judge Tim Kelly refused to compel Epps’ testimony in the trial. And now more than a year into January 6 jury trials, Epps, one of the most prolific Capitol protesters, has not taken the stand to answer questions from prosecutors and defense attorneys about his role in the events of January 6.
And now it appears that Fox News, which has a brick on nearly all January 6 reporting, also is running cover for Epps and, potentially, the government.
One can only hope Tucker gets to finally read that monologue soon.
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#179840 05/25/202304:03 PM05/25/202304:03 PM
Ray Eps is an damn FBI informant and agent provocateur. The DC Kangaroo court sentenced Steward Rhodes to 18 years in prison but if we can have an honest election then Trump will win and he will pardon Stewart Rhodes.
www.TexasMilitia.Info Seek out and join a lawful Militia or form one in your area. If you wish to remain Free you will have to fight for it...because the traitors will give us no choice in the matter--William Cooper
Ray Eps is an damn FBI informant and agent provocateur....
Yep, but I'm not so sure about him pardoning Rhodes. It's my impression that Trump doesn't really care about anyone but himself. (And yes, I hope I'm wrong about this.)
Now, if we could elect a Libertarian...
Onward and upward, airforce
Last edited by airforce; 05/25/202304:34 PM.
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#179849 05/29/202305:38 PM05/29/202305:38 PM
Stewart Rhodes was found not guilty of "conspiring to obstruct an official proceeding." He got 18 years anyway. How is this possible?
Quote
A federal judge in Washington, D.C., last week sentenced Oath Keepers leader Stewart Rhodes to 18 years in prison for seditious conspiracy, obstruction of an official proceeding, and tampering with records. The New York Times says Rhodes was sentenced for "the role he played in helping to mobilize the pro-Trump attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021." It adds that the sentence is "the most severe penalty so far in the more than 1,000 criminal cases stemming from the Capitol attack."
Contrary to that gloss, Rhodes' role in the breach of the Capitol, which forced a delay in the congressional ratification of President Joe Biden's election, remains unclear. Rhodes was at the Capitol grounds that day, and during his trial a federal prosecutor described him as "a general surveying his troops on the battlefield." But unlike other members of his group, he did not enter the Capitol or participate in the violence or vandalism. Notably, the jury found him not guilty of conspiring to obstruct an official proceeding, a puzzling verdict if he did in fact direct his followers to assault the Capitol.
The Justice Department's sentencing memo, which recommended a 25-year sentence for Rhodes, said he and other Oath Keepers "led a conspiracy that culminated in a mob's attack on the United States Capitol while our elected representatives met in a Joint Session of Congress." It also said Rhodes "led a conspiracy to oppose by force the lawful transfer of power following the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election," a vaguer description that better fits the facts that the jury accepted.
Prosecutors urged U.S. District Judge Amit P. Mehta to take into account acquitted conduct in punishing Rhodes, as federal sentencing rules allow, and hold him responsible for the actions of his co-conspirators. They also recommended a sentencing enhancement based on "terrorism," defined as conduct "calculated to influence or affect the conduct of government by intimidation or coercion, or to retaliate against government conduct." Although Rhodes "did not engage in violence," the Justice Department said, his rhetoric inspired others to do so.
Based on evidence cited in the sentencing memo, it is clear that Rhodes saw violence as a legitimate response to what he perceived as a stolen election. "We're very much in exactly the same spot that the founding fathers were in like March 1775," he said during a conference call after the election. "Patrick Henry was right. Nothing left but to fight. And that's true for us, too. We're not getting out of this without a fight."
Rhodes was more explicit a December 14 open letter to Donald Trump that was posted on the Oath Keepers website. "If you fail to act while you are still in office," he wrote, "we the people will have to fight a bloody civil war and revolution."
Rhodes reiterated that sentiment in chat group messages that day. "Trump has one last chance to act," he said. "He must use the insurrection act. Unless we fight a bloody civil war/revolution."
In Rhodes' fantasy, the Oath Keepers would rise up after Trump invoked the Insurrection Act, which authorizes the president to call upon "the militia" to suppress "any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy" that "opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws." If Trump "doesn't use the Insurrection Act to keep a ChiCom [Chinese Communist] puppet out of the White House," Rhodes warned, "we will have to fight a bloody revolution/civil war to defeat the traitors."
In a December 19 exchange with a member of the Proud Boys, Oath Keeper Roberto Minuta described Rhodes as "pretty disheartened." Based on a conversation with Rhodes the previous night, Minuta added that "he feels like it's go time" and that "the time for peaceful protest is over in his eyes."
In a series of messages to an Oath Keepers chat group on December 25, Rhodes complained that Trump's advisers were "acting as if his only option is to hope Congress does the right thing." He said that was "extremely unlikely," adding, "I think Congress will screw him over. The only chance we/he has is if we scare the shit out of them and convince them it will be torches and pitchforks time is they don't do the right thing."
Such rhetoric was not enough to persuade jurors that Rhodes specifically planned the attack on the Capitol. In arguing that Mehta nevertheless should assume that Rhodes did have such a plan, the Justice Department noted that he had described January 6 as a "hard constitutional deadline," which it said confirmed "the group's knowledge of Congress's process for certifying the election results" and "improper purpose in later breaching the Capitol building."
The sentencing memo also cited a 90-second phone call between Rhodes and Meggs before the latter led a group of Oath Keepers who pushed their way into the Capitol. Although the content of that conversation is unknown, the Justice Department said, witnesses "testified that Meggs appeared to be receiving direction from whomever he was talking to on the phone." Again, the jury did not view that inference, even when combined with Rhodes' violent rhetoric, as sufficient to find him guilty of conspiring to attack the Capitol.
What about the "quick reaction force" (QRF) that stockpiled weapons at a Comfort Inn in Arlington, Virginia, prior to the riot? The sentencing memo noted that Rhodes "claimed he was unaware that there was a QRF for January 6," saying he knew that Oath Keeper Edward Vallejo had stashed guns at the hotel but "did not know that there was anybody sitting on them to do anything with them." In a message introduced at trial, however, Rhodes agreed with Meggs that a QRF was appropriate. "Okay," he said. "We will have a QRF. The situation calls for it."
The QRF ultimately did not do anything. But what did Rhodes think its purpose was? Oath Keeper Michael Greene, who in March was found guilty of a misdemeanor in connection with the Capitol riot, testified that Rhodes "wanted an armed QRF in Virginia because he heard people talking about they were going to forcefully storm the White House and remove Trump because Trump was refusing to leave the White House." According to the sentencing memo, Rhodes "instructed his co-conspirators to be prepared, if necessary, to secure the White House and use force against any government actors attempting to remove President Trump as a result of the presidential election."
Rhodes manifestly was ready to violently oppose the peaceful transfer of power, and he took steps in that direction, including the QRF and weapon purchases after the Capitol riot. That conduct, the jury evidently concluded, fit comfortably within the legal definition of seditious conspiracy, which includes plots to forcefully oppose the authority of the U.S. government or hinder the execution of its laws. But that conspiracy did not necessarily entail a plan to violently disrupt the electoral vote count on January 6. On that charge, the jury deemed the evidence insufficient to convict Rhodes.
The jury "made the confusing decision to acquit Mr. Rhodes of planning in advance to disrupt the certification of the election yet convict him of actually disrupting the certification process," the Times reported after the verdicts. "That suggested that the jurors may have believed that the violence at the Capitol on Jan. 6 erupted more or less spontaneously, as Mr. Rhodes has claimed."
Whatever you make of Rhodes' intent, it seems clear that the violence, by and large, did erupt "more or less spontaneously." According to the Justice Department, the Oath Keepers conspiracy involved 20 or so people. A handful of Proud Boys also were convicted of seditious conspiracy.
These relatively organized rioters represented a tiny fraction of the angry Trump supporters who trespassed on the Capitol grounds or entered the building itself. The 1,000 or so who have been arrested so far typically have been charged with misdemeanors such as "entering or remaining in a restricted building or grounds," "disorderly and disruptive conduct in a restricted building or grounds," "disorderly conduct in a Capitol building," and "parading, demonstrating, or picketing in a Capitol building." Roughly a third have been charged with violent crimes, and only a few have been accused of acting based on plans hatched prior to January 6.
When the Justice Department says Rhodes "led a conspiracy that culminated in a mob's attack on the United States Capitol," it is not only making an allegation that jurors rejected. It is implying that, but for that conspiracy, there would have been no Capitol riot. Given the emotional energy unleashed by Trump's pre-riot speech, that counterfactual supposition seems highly implausible. But it fits the narrative favored by Democrats who reflexively portray the riot as an "insurrection," a term that does not reflect the chaotic reality of what happened that day.
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#179989 07/13/202312:16 PM07/13/202312:16 PM
Ray Epps To Be Criminally Charged For Role In January 6th, Blames Tucker
Via ZeroHedge
Ray Epps, a man who was seen goading Trump supporters to storm the Capitol on January 6, 2021, will be criminally charged, according to Epps’ attorney.
The impending charges were revealed in a Wednesday lawsuit filed by Epps against Fox News, which accuses former host Tucker Carlson of defaming him.
“…in May 2023, the Department of Justice notified Epps that it would seek to charge him criminally for events on January 6, 2021—two-and-a-half years later,” reads the filing. “The relentless attacks by Fox and Mr. Carlson and the resulting political pressure likely resulted in the criminal charges.”
In March, Epps hired attorney Michael Teter – formerly of Perkins Coie, the firm notorious for helping the Clinton campaign hatch the Steele dossier and collaborating with the FBI to push the Trump-Russia hoax. Teter immediately sent a letter to Carlson demanding that the former Fox News host retract “false and defamatory statements” that Epps was a J6 government plant.
Epps, 62, was identified as a key instigator of the riot who has long been suspected of being a fed (or a fed asset), told his nephew in a text message: “I was in the front with a few others. I also orchestrated it.”
Last year he told Congressional investigators: “At that point, I didn’t know that they were breaking into the Capitol,” adding “I didn’t know anybody was in the Capitol. … I was on my way back to the hotel room.”
In two interviews with the FBI in 2021, Epps explained his actions on Jan. 5 and Jan. 6. He admitted he was guilty of trespassing on restricted Capitol grounds and confessed to urging protesters to go to—and into—the Capitol on Jan. 6.
Epps also told members of the Committee that he found himself playing peacekeeper between Trump supporter “Baked Alaska” and the police – who called Epps a Fed.
“I was trying to find some common ground,” said Epps. “This guy was trying to turn people against me…he was calling me ‘boomer,’ and it’s his generation’s fault that we’re in the position we’re in.”
Despite the admissions, the FBI never arrested Epps and he was not charged by the U.S. Department of Justice with any Jan. 6 crimes. The non-action has fueled a crop of theories that he might have been working for the FBI or another agency.
Epps has repeatedly denied those suggestions through his attorney.
Speculation that Epps was a ‘fed’ intensified after a Revolver News reported with the headline: “Meet Ray Epps: The Fed-Protected Provocateur Who Appears To Have Led The Very First 1/6 Attack On The U.S. Capitol”
Revolver also determined, and will prove below, that the the FBI stealthily removed Ray Epps from its Capitol Violence Most Wanted List on July 1, just one day after Revolver exposed the inexplicable and puzzlesome FBI protection of known Epps associate and Oath Keepers leader Stewart Rhodes. July 1 was also just one day after separate New York Times report amplified a glaring, falsifiable lie about Epps’s role in the events of January 6.
Lastly, Ray Epps appears to have worked alongside several individuals — many of them suspiciously unindicted — to carry out a breach of the police barricades that induced a subsequent flood of unsuspecting MAGA protesters to unwittingly trespass on Capitol restricted grounds and place themselves in legal jeopardy. -Revolver News
And so, according to Epps’ legal team, Tucker Carlson is the reason the Biden DOJ is about to charge him.
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#179991 07/13/202301:15 PM07/13/202301:15 PM
Good. Maybe now we'll find out if he was a fed asset. (I suspect the charges will be minor, and will be quietly dropped or expunged in the unlikely event he's convicted.)
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#179994 07/14/202308:13 PM07/14/202308:13 PM
The militia/patriot movement is full of paid informants, snitches trying to get criminal charges reduced or dismissed, and Soros/leftists backed agent provocateurs. It's like the old joke who are the only ones at KKK meetings who are not FBI - answer DEA, Homeland Insecurity, and BATFaggots. They have tried to set up our militia several times with offers of drop in autosears, Sten gun parts kits, and they tried to get us to agree with crazy specific plans so we kicked them out immediately. If you as much as laugh at their idiotic specific plans like you take them seriously instead of voicing disagreement with their plans and kicking them out then you can be arrested and charged with conspiracy.
Don't forget the un-dead dead guy snitch besides the FBI agent who infiltrated and brought down the Hutaree Militia in Michigan in an attempt to get to also get Mark Koernke.
www.TexasMilitia.Info Seek out and join a lawful Militia or form one in your area. If you wish to remain Free you will have to fight for it...because the traitors will give us no choice in the matter--William Cooper
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#180001 07/17/202309:11 AM07/17/202309:11 AM
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#180082 08/18/202304:54 PM08/18/202304:54 PM
January 6 political prisoner Ryan Samsel has been held in prison without trial now since January 2021.
During his two-and-a-half years without trial Ryan has been moved around to 17 different facilities. Ryan has been beaten, abused, tortured, and neglected since his arrest in January 2021.
Earlier this week The Gateway Pundit received exclusive photos from Ryan Samsel’s prison cell at the FDC in Philadelphia. The cell was a size of a closet with a light on all of the time. The cell had a thin blue mattress, no sheets or blankets, no clothing, and he was kept here for five months straight.
The photos are just shocking. This is taking place in America today. This is who we are.
Ryan told The Gateway Pundit in a conversation this week, “I was kept in … a hard cell. And in that particular cell about five, six months. I even told you what was happening is the judge was actually calling, trying to get in contact with me because I wasn’t in a named cell. They were missing me and they were saying I wasn’t showing up to court. They were saying I wasn’t showing up to medical. But they were pretty much keeping me in there… Like I said, it was cold, the light was on, there’s zero window. And that followed me from Virginia. When I was in Virginia, it was the same exact conditions.”
** Please donate to help raise money for Ryan to pay his attorney here.
Ryan described the same situation in Virginia, “It was Central Regional Virginia Jail (CVRJ). I was kept in and they called it booking hard cell, which is you get zero phone, zero commissary, zero clothing because they think that you’re going to hang yourself and you’re on constant surveillance. You’re under surveillance constantly. The light has to be on 24/7. You’re locked in a cell. There is no getting out. The windows in Virginia were covered by a black mat, so you weren’t able to see. And it’s constant nothing. It’s deprivation of everything.”
Ryan told The Gateway Pundit that there are no books allowed, no letters, no photos. Nothing. The yellow bucket was his toilet.
yan believes the government tortured him for months so he would rat out the Proud Boys. They even beat Ryan numerous times and kept him locked down so he couldn’t communicate with anyone.
This torture is taking place in America today.
Where is the Republican Party?
Where is the ACLU, Amnesty International, and Human Rights Watch?
Please contact these organizations here:
** Contact ACLU
** Contact Amnesty International
** Contact Human Rights Watch
Ryan is not alone. Numerous January 6 prisoners have been held for months in torturous conditions, dozens have been sentenced to extreme sentences for non-violent crimes. This is a horrible chapter in American history. It must be confronted.
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#180093 08/22/202307:40 AM08/22/202307:40 AM
A federal appeals court Friday ruled that prison, followed by probation, is not appropriate for January 6 defendants charged with minor offenses.
James Little of North Carolina committed a petty offense, the appeals court opined. U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth sentenced him to 60 days in prison, followed by three years of probation.
Little admitted, he “took over the Capital [sic]” because “[s]tealing elections is treason.” He later pleaded guilty to: Parading, Demonstrating, or Picketing in a Capitol Building, which is a petty offense.
The defendant appealed the lengthy probation following his brief prison sentence, asking the appeals court to decide if imposing both prison and probation for a minor offense is legal.
“It is not,” ruled a three-member panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Washington District. “Probation and imprisonment are alternative sentences that cannot generally be combined. So the district court could not impose both for Little’s petty offense.”
This decision might have implications for several other cases, according to a report from TrendingPolitics.
This recent ruling could potentially nullify the sentences of numerous Jan. 6 defendants, raising questions about U.S. Attorney Matthew Graves’ aggressive prosecution approach.
Graves has been actively pursuing individuals involved in the Jan. 6 events, even as time has passed since the incident, which briefly escalated into a minor riot.
Many Jan. 6 defendants have either been found guilty or have admitted guilt to minor trespassing offenses, such as picketing or parading. The sentences they’ve received can be considered stringent for their alleged offenses.
The recent court decision might influence the outcomes for approximately 80 defendants who were given “split sentences,” meaning they were sentenced to both jail time and probation for minor offenses.
Even though many of these individuals have already served their prison sentences, future sentencing might be adjusted based on this ruling.
“The Court must not only punish Little for his conduct but also ensure that he will not engage in similar conduct again during the next election,” Lamberth explained in his ruling.
“Some term of imprisonment may serve sentencing’s retributive goals,” he continued. “But only a longer-term period of probation is adequate to ensure that Little will not become an active participant in another riot.”
The Department of Justice has the option to appeal this decision.
A representative from the U.S. attorney’s office commented, “We are reviewing the Court’s ruling and will determine our next steps in accordance with the law.”
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: ConSigCor]
#180095 08/22/202312:12 PM08/22/202312:12 PM
...A federal appeals court Friday ruled that prison, followed by probation, is not appropriate for January 6 defendants charged with minor offenses....
A pretty small step, but at least it's in the right direction.
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#180123 08/31/202304:39 PM08/31/202304:39 PM
For the Proud Boys, the hammer has fallen. Joe Biggs, a leader of the far-right male organization, received a 17-year sentence for his activities during the January 6 Capitol riot in 2021. Enrique Tarrio, the group's chairman, is still awaiting sentencing but was similarly convicted of sedition, conspiracy to obstruct the 2020 election's certification, and other serious crimes earlier this year.
While 17 years constitutes a lengthy prison sentence, it is considerably shorter than what the government requested: Prosecutors wanted 33 years for Biggs. That's in keeping with the government's view that Biggs committed an act of terrorism; the prosecution asked U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly to apply a terrorism enhancement to the sentence.
"Biggs committed a crime of terrorism on January 6, and the Court should not hesitate to impose a sentence that reflects the seriousness of the crime and its threat to our nation—as reflected in the Sentencing Guidelines," wrote the prosecutors in their sentencing recommendation document.
In court, prosecutors argued that Biggs' actions certainly constituted terrorism because, though January 6 did not involve widespread destruction—exploding buildings, massive casualties—its impact on the nation's collective scarring is like that of a terrorist attack, they said. Assistant U.S. Attorney Jason McCullough argued that the psychological fallout from January 6 is "no different than the act of a spectacular bombing of a building."
The judge quibbled slightly with this argument—accusing prosecutors of "overstat[ing]" their case—but ultimately agreed in principle that "while blowing up a building in some city somewhere is a very bad act… the constitutional moment we were in that day is something that is so sensitive that it deserves a significant sentence."
This does not seem overly scientific. Prosecutors said Biggs committed an act of terrorism akin to blowing up a building and that he should get 33 years in prison. The judge said, Well that's sort of an exaggeration, so… how about half that many years? ...
Read the whole thing at the link.
Onward and upward, airforce
Last edited by airforce; 08/31/202304:39 PM.
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#180126 09/01/202302:41 AM09/01/202302:41 AM
Joe Biggs is a political prisoner who caused no damage but was sentenced to the gulag while the leftists got away with burning down buildings, blinding police with lasers, attacking people with improvised explosives, fire bombing police cars, and stealing the presidential election. I hope Joe Biggs does not bow down to the leftists and tells the court he is an innocent political prisoner. He needs to tell the judge and prosecutor that they are tyrants who are making a mockery of the constitution. If patriots don't wake up they will steal the next election too. Damn their crooked election.
www.TexasMilitia.Info Seek out and join a lawful Militia or form one in your area. If you wish to remain Free you will have to fight for it...because the traitors will give us no choice in the matter--William Cooper
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#180129 09/01/202303:09 PM09/01/202303:09 PM
Tex, I hear the antifa crowd plans to start active operations again this coming Oct. Their stated goal is to harass MAGA/Trump supporters and disrupt the election. But, I guess that's ok when they do it.
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#180132 09/01/202304:41 PM09/01/202304:41 PM
Here's an interesting question from my friend D. Frank Robinson, one of the founders of the LIbertarian Party (and one of an increasingly few number of people older than me).
Quote
Were the people who entered the Capitol building on J6 impersonating cops by breaking and entering without a search warrant? What sentences do cops get? Why not the same for "civilians?"
It's an interesting theory, but I haven't heard of any of the protesters claiming to be on duty law enforcement officers, so I really, really doubt it would fly.
Onward and upward, airforce
Last edited by airforce; 09/02/202304:07 PM.
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#180139 09/02/202305:25 PM09/02/202305:25 PM
Joe Biggs wimped out in court and cried for them like a little bitch. This is what he said, "I apologize for my rhetoric," said a tearful Biggs. "I'm so sorry." "I was seduced by the crowd, and I just moved forward. I was curious. I wanted to see what would happen. My curiosity got the best of me, and I'm going to have to live with that for the rest of my life," he added. "[But] I'm not a terrorist. I don't have hate in my heart." Source: https://www.naturalnews.com/2023-09-01-proud-boys-joe-biggs-sentenced-17-years-prison.html
I blame law enforcement taking orders from the big city leftists for the theft of the 2020 Presidential Election from Trump. They allowed seditious felony arson and assault to continue in several large cities. They would not even have the fire departments hose the rioters down.
www.TexasMilitia.Info Seek out and join a lawful Militia or form one in your area. If you wish to remain Free you will have to fight for it...because the traitors will give us no choice in the matter--William Cooper
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#180143 09/05/202307:40 AM09/05/202307:40 AM
Injustice, American Style: BLM Rioters Walk — J6 Defendants Get Almost 20 Years
by Selwyn Duke September 3, 2023
Article audio sponsored by The John Birch Society
It’s certainly not unprecedented. Leftist Maximilien Robespierre, the French Revolution’s main author, was a passionate capital punishment opponent who called the death penalty a “cowardly assassination” — he then went on to execute thousands during his Reign of Terror. Likewise did the liberals of decades ago frown upon punishment, sometimes saying it “doesn’t work” and is “morally wrong.” Boy, has that ever changed.
Now, Frenchie Max style, punishment’s effectiveness is not only a self-evident truth to leftists, but it can’t be harsh enough.
That is, when it’s the “right people” being punished.
A good example is the recent sentencing of “Proud Boy” January 6 defendants, one of the latest of whom got 17 years for an incident in which no “one was killed, no property was significantly damaged, nothing was set on fire, nobody whipped out a gun, nobody got taken hostage, [and] no mass casualties were strewn through the streets,” as commentator Monica Showalter put it Friday.
In contrast, Black Lives Matter and Antifa rioters routinely get off with minor or no charges.
The Hill reports on the aforementioned J6er who had the book — and a few addenda — thrown at him, writing that Florida Army veteran and “Proud Boy Joe Biggs on Thursday was sentenced to 17 years in prison, the second-highest sentence handed down to anyone convicted in connection with the Capitol attack.”
“Biggs was convicted of sedition and other serious felonies earlier this year after being accused of leading members of the right-wing extremist group to the Capitol and talking with the first rioter to breach police barricades just minutes before he acted,” the site continues.
Also sentenced Thursday was Proud Boy Zachary Rehl, an ex-U.S. Marine; he got 15 years after a conviction for leading a mob toward the Capitol on J6.
This was followed Friday by the draconian sentencing of two other Proud Boys figures: One-time leader Ethan Nordean received 18 years’ incarceration for “seditious conspiracy.” And Dominic Pezzola was convicted for breaking a Capitol window, ushering rioters into the structure (much as some cops had done), and grabbing a shield from a policeman. He did “get off” relatively easy, however.
He’ll serve 10 years.
Also receiving 18 years, this past May, was Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes. He was joined that month by Oath Keepers Florida chapter leader Kelly Meggs, who got 12 years for “conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction of an official proceeding, conspiracy to prevent an officer from discharging duties and tampering with documents or proceedings,” as The Hill puts it.
Well, okay, they didn’t get 19 years for stealing a loaf of bread like Jean Valjean did. But suffice it to say that Nancy Pelosi’s line, “People will do what they do” — uttered to dismiss the actions of violent mobs tearing down statues — is not universally applicable. When leftists do what they do, they get a hand.
When conservatives do what they don’t usually do (aka, what liberals oft do), they get done.
Speaking of which, Showalter analyzes the Biggs’ case’s particulars. She first quotes The Hill again:
U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly ultimately applied a terrorism enhancement to Biggs’s sentencing guidelines, wherein a defendant must have committed an offense that “was calculated to influence or affect the conduct of government by intimidation or coercion, or to retaliate against government conduct.”
Kelly cited Biggs’s efforts to tear down a fence separating rioters from the Capitol and bringing them “one step closer” to their objective of halting the 2020 election certification as reason for applying the enhancement.
“I really don’t think this is a close call,” he said of the decision.
Of course not — not when the accused opposes the regime.
Bit it’s really quite “laughable,” opines Showalter. “All the rioters, aided by a nest of still opaquely known FBI informants, did was manage to disrupt and delay the electoral certification of 2020. Was there any congressional Democrat at the Capitol that day who was so intimidated by the January 6 rioters that he planned to change his vote to Republican?”
What’s more, The New York Times “indicated that Kelly actually seemed to know that he was off base, but it didn’t matter to him,” Showalter adds. As the paper wrote, “While Judge Kelly said the provision was technically applicable, he was less certain — given what Mr. Biggs had actually done — that it fit in a more colloquial sense.”
“He noted that he had reviewed several cases involving terrorism, most concerning situations where defendants ‘were training to fight American troops or planning an act like blowing up a large building,’” the Times continued. “And he expressed skepticism that the Proud Boys had engaged in that kind of behavior on Jan. 6.”
In fact, “Whatever the disruption was,” Showalter emphasizes, “it was not an insurrection or coup attempt — we are watching real insurrections and coups these days in places like Niger and Gabon — with guns, blood, dead bodies, flights out, and flung suitcases of stolen cash. Those are the real thing.”
It also was just a glimmer of what the Left does continually. There were 2020’s 600-plus left-wing riots, which tore the country apart in an effort to oust President Trump from power; the May/June 2020 leftist attack on the White House, which injured 50 Secret Service agents and forced Trump to retreat to a “terror bunker”; and the June 2020 Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone (CHAZ) insurrection, in which rebels established their own jurisdiction and their “warlord,” Raz Simone, was seen giving a supporter an AR-15. To this day, Simone has never been charged.
Then there was the longest continuous occupation of a government building in American history: The multi-week, 2011 left-wing occupation of the Wisconsin Capitol (tweet below). (This occupation was allowed by the authorities, do note. But would they have been so accommodating had the protesters been conservatives?)
Oh, and Nancy Pelosi called the above an “impressive show of democracy in action.”
Note, too, that this normalizing of political violence has an effect: People (including conservatives) become conditioned to accept it as the status quo — or at least as a heating up of a political cold war — and then will respond in kind, perhaps considering their action a reaction and a necessary sort of proportionate force.
Except that they then get government force.
Might that not be the idea, too? To wit:
Give your mobs free rein so you can destabilize the existing order and increase your power. When your opponents, not surprisingly, react likewise, portray them as being Threats to Democracy™, aided and abetted by a complicit media that will do your bidding. Then use your opponents’ reaction as a pretext to quash their opposition — and that of their peaceful co-ideologists.
Hey, tyrants will do what they do.
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#180147 09/06/202312:36 PM09/06/202312:36 PM
Enrique Tarrio refused to cop to a plea agreement, and insisted on going to trial. He got 22 years for his trouble. (And did I mention he wasn't even there?)
Quote
Yet another Proud Boy is paying a hefty "trial penalty" for January 6. On Tuesday, a federal judge in Washington, D.C., sentenced former Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio to 22 years in prison for his part in organizing the 2021 protest-turned-riot that obstructed Congress' ratification of Joe Biden's victory in the 2020 presidential election.
Tarrio was not at the riot on January 6. He was in Baltimore, after having been arrested two days prior in a separate criminal case. He did however post messages encouraging the riot on social media and claimed credit for helping carry it out after the fact.
That was enough to convince a jury three months ago to find him guilty of "seditious conspiracy" for his involvement.
Prosecutors had sought a 33-year sentence for Tarrio. U.S. District Judge Timothy J. Kelly declined to go that far. But he did slap Tarrio with a sentencing enhancement for committing an act of terrorism.
His 22-year sentence is the longest any January 6 defendant has received to date. Fellow Proud Boy Ethan Nordean and Oath Keepers leader Stewart Rhodes have each previously been sentenced to 18 years in prison on seditious conspiracy charges as well.
Most other defendants, including many who directly participated in the riot, have received much more modest sentences of a few months to a few years.
"[Prosecutors] got a really long sentence by asking for something really absurd," said C.J. Ciaramella on yesterday's Reason Roundtable. "In cases where January 6 defendants did plead guilty, expressed remorse, the judges were much more likely to go easy on them."
Those like Tarrio who chose to take it to trial instead of pleading guilty are receiving sentences one might get for murder.
This is an example of what's called the "trial penalty" whereby prosecutors, who would otherwise accept a much lighter sentence as part of a plea bargain, seek much harsher sentences for defendants who insist on a jury trial.
This practice has been harshly criticized by liberal and libertarian groups for effectively punishing people just for exercising their constitutional right to a trial by jury.
The American Bar Association found that average sentences for federal felony convictions are seven years longer for defendants who went to trial. Prosecutors' preference for plea bargains also sees them layer on as many charges or stretch the applicability of vague statutes to coerce defendants into forfeiting their right to a trial.
The end result is that those convicted at trial go to prison for longer than even prosecutors think is necessary.
"Today's sentencing demonstrates that those who attempted to undermine the workings of American democracy will be held criminally accountable," said FBI Director Christopher Wray yesterday. And U.S. Attorney Matthew M. Graves said that those who used "force against their own government to prevent the peaceful transfer of power have now been held accountable."
In other words, both Wray and Graves are satisfied that Tarrio had been held adequately accountable despite the fact that he ended up with a sentence that was a decade less than what the DOJ had advocated for. Their goal was securing a maximum sentence for Tarrio and others, not a sentence just long enough to hold them accountable for his crimes.
Tarrio and others receiving sentences of over a decade for their role in January 6 are hardly sympathetic figures. Yet the amount of time they'll spend in prison is nevertheless a product of a trial penalty that is widely considered to be unjust. If one opposes these enhanced penalties in the routine administration of criminal justice, we should oppose them in the case of the January 6 defendants as well.
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#180149 09/07/202308:41 AM09/07/202308:41 AM
Breaking! DOJ Looking To Jail Infowars’ Owen Shroyer For 120 Days In Jan. 6th Trial
By Kelen McBreen | INFOWARS.COM Wednesday, September 06, 2023
The host of Infowars’ War Room program, Owen Shroyer, is facing up to 120 days in prison after a recommendation was issued by DOJ prosecutors Tuesday.
Shroyer was first charged in relation to Jan 6th on August 2021, eventually pleading guilty to one count of “knowingly entering or remaining in or on any restricted building or grounds.”
Now, the weaponized American judicial system is being sent after Shroyer to set an example for other outspoken citizens.
“Shroyer did not step foot inside the Capitol, he did not need to; many of those who listened to him did instead,” the court document claims.
Of course, there is no evidence Shroyer ever encouraged people to “step foot inside the Capitol.”
Instead, there is actually footage of Shroyer standing by Infowars founder Alex Jones, who grabbed a megaphone and tried to warn the crowd they were being set up and to turn around.
Bodycam footage from Jones’ security detail shows the moment they tried to get Capitol Police officers to allow Jones on a speaker so he could make an attempt at de-escalating the situation.
The court document even admits an Infowars security member said on camera, “Let’s take a break right here. Let me talk to this cop and see if I can get [Person One] up there and deescalate the situation,” with “person one” being Jones.
The DOJ prosecutors are also upset Shroyer “has blamed ‘Antifa’” for its role in Jan. 6th despite evidence showing Antifa members were in the crowd.
At one point, the feds told the judge presiding over Shroyer’s case “the absence of violent or destructive acts is not a mitigating factor.”
Basically, the government is asking that the judge not go easy on the political commentator just because he never committed any violence or destroyed any property.
Towards the end of the prosecution’s document, the Biden administration claimed Shroyer “has yet to sincerely demonstrate genuine remorse for his conduct” on Jan. 6th because he still believes the 2020 election was stolen.
The DOJ even alleged Shroyer has “a lack of respect for law enforcement” but in reality, he’s vocally pro-police, especially compared to the “defund the police” leftists who burned down American cities during the 2020 BLM riots.
Revealing the true reason they’re throwing the book at peaceful demonstrators, the feds said it’s important for the judge to jail defendants in order to “deter” American citizens from marching on the Capitol in the future, writing, “general deterrence may be the most compelling reason to impose a sentence of incarceration.”
This development comes just one day after Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio was sentenced to 22 years in prison despite the fact he was in jail as the events of Jan. 6th took place.
Last week, former Infowars employee and Proud Boys member Joe Biggs was sentenced to 17 years for his non-violent role in January 6th.
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#180343 11/17/202306:30 PM11/17/202306:30 PM
..."When I ran for Speaker, I promised to make accessible to the American people the 44,000 hours of video from Capitol Hill security taken on January 6, 2021,” Johnson said in a statement on X/Twitter. "Truth and transparency are critical. Today, we will begin immediately posting video on a public website and move as quickly as possible to add to the website nearly all of the footage, more than 40,000 hours. In the meantime, a public viewing room will ensure that every citizen can view every minute of the videos uncensored."
Democrats have long sought to hide this footage from the public, only giving us access to cherrypicked or altered footage, and you can bet that there’s plenty of footage here that will destroy the narrative that Democrats and the media have pushed for two and a half years.
"This decision will provide millions of Americans, criminal defendants, public interest organizations, and the media an ability to see for themselves what happened that day, rather than having to rely upon the interpretation of a small group of government officials,” Johnson continued. "I commend Chairman Loudermilk and his team for their diligent work to ensure the thousands of hours of videos are promptly processed to be uploaded to the committee’s public website. Processing will involve blurring the faces of private citizens on the yet unreleased tapes to avoid any persons from being targeted for retaliation of any kind and segregating an estimated 5% of the videos that may involve sensitive security information related to the building architecture." ...
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#180346 11/22/202303:25 PM11/22/202303:25 PM
Cheney, Kinzinger, And “Sham” J6 Committee Under Fire After Friday Footage Dump; GOP Senator Calls For Investigation
Original article here.
Ever since Friday’s release of more than 40,000 hours of Jan. 6 Capitol Police security video, dozens of clips debunking the Jan. 6 committee’s ‘violent insurrection’ narrative have been floating around X.
Mike Lee raises questions
In response to the exculpatory footage that the Jan. 6 committee never showed the American public, Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) has raised significant questions about the handling of security footage.
Lee’s statements directly challenge the integrity of the now-disbanded committee, particularly addressing the roles of its former Republican members, Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger. He also accuses the committee – particularly those two, of selectively sharing information.
After Cheney attempted to hit back with her ‘best hits’ Jan. 6 footage, Lee replied: “Liz, we’ve seen footage like that a million times. You made sure we saw that—and nothing else.”
Lee also called for an investigation into the committee itself, labeling it a “sham” and questioning the use of taxpayer dollars in its operations. He insinuates that crucial information about the committee’s work could have been “deliberately lost or destroyed,” casting doubts on the committee’s transparency and objectivity.
The argument continued throughout the day, with Lee linking to a NY Post article with the headline “FBI lost count of how many paid informants were at Capitol on Jan. 6, and later performed audit to figure out exact number.”
Kinzinger swings and misses all day
In response to the backlash, Kinzinger made a stupid joke comparing Jan. 6 protesters to US army helicopters providing fire for South Vietnamese ground troops attacking the Vietcong in 1965.
Twice.
He also retweeted about a dozen similarly stupid jokes (check out his timeline).
The House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack was disbanded in January 2023, after releasing its final report in December 2022. The committee, comprising seven Democrats and two Republicans, faced criticism for its composition and the perceived partisanship in its approach.
Kinzinger did not seek reelection, and Cheney lost her primary, marking a significant shift in the Republican landscape. The release of the security tapes by Johnson is seen as a step towards transparency, allowing the public to form their own opinions about the events of January 6, away from the committee’s narrative.
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: ConSigCor]
#180347 11/22/202306:00 PM11/22/202306:00 PM
...Lee also called for an investigation into the committee itself, labeling it a “sham” and questioning the use of taxpayer dollars in its operations. He insinuates that crucial information about the committee’s work could have been “deliberately lost or destroyed,” casting doubts on the committee’s transparency and objectivity....
Not a moment too soon.
Originally Posted by ConSigCor
...Kinzinger did not seek reelection, and Cheney lost her primary, marking a significant shift in the Republican landscape. The release of the security tapes by Johnson is seen as a step towards transparency, allowing the public to form their own opinions about the events of January 6, away from the committee’s narrative.
Good, on both counts. Maybe we'll finally get some justice out of this.
Onward and upward, airforce
Last edited by airforce; 11/22/202306:04 PM.
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#180511 01/25/202403:57 PM01/25/202403:57 PM
The Big Lie of the January 6 “insurrection” is falling apart before our eyes…
With over three years having passed since January 6, 2021, it may come as a shock to some that this vexed date is more relevant than ever. The regime has broadly employed the absurd notion of January 6 as a violent assault on the scale of 9/11 as a pretext to weaponize the national security state against its political opponents. The still more absurd notion that Trump personally instigated this insurrection has emerged as the sham legal rationale behind the regime’s recent efforts to remove the presumptive GOP nominee from the ballot entirely. A bungling, senescent Biden clearly signaled in his speech marking the third anniversary of the “day we almost lost America” that January 6 would feature prominently in the Democrat’s 2024 strategy.
The stakes involved help us to understand why the regime so jealously guards its official January 6 narrative, and so aggressively attacks anyone who dares to question it. These troublesome questions involve asking why, of all days, the Capitol seemed to enjoy uniquely poor security, despite numerous warnings and threats. One might also ask how, given the well-established level of penetration federal authorities had into the key militia groups accused of conspiracies to attack the Capitol, the same authorities could possibly claim to have been caught off guard. Most troubling and damning of all, one might ask whether any government agents or affiliates took more active steps in helping to facilitate the events of January 6. This last line of questioning has been the principal focus of my reporting at Revolver.news, and has led me to maintain that the two smoking guns of the “Fedsurrection” is the curious case of Ray Epps, on the one hand, and the case of the so-called January 6 pipe bombs on the other.
The January 6 pipe bombs refer to the two alleged explosive devices planted on the evening of January 5 and discovered on January 6 near the DNC and RNC buildings, respectively, just as the assault on the west perimeter of the Capitol began to unfold in the early afternoon. These pipe bombs, technically considered weapons of mass destruction by the government, were arguably the most serious, terrorist-like element associated with the day the media and regime has been desperate to paint as a domestic terror attack on par with 9/11. The FBI put out urgent videos pleading with the public to provide help in helping to identify and apprehend this presumptive MAGA terrorist.
From the very outset it was clear that something was off with the FBI’s treatment of this case. A more careful look at the pipe bomb story reveals that the official version of events relies on an almost impossible set of coincidences compounded on one another. The best entry point into the pipe bomb story is a 7-minute clip reluctantly and quietly released by the Capitol Police of the DNC bomb being discovered. When considered as a stand-alone piece of footage, it is sufficient to warrant a national scandal; when considered in light of the broader aforementioned coincidences surrounding the pipe bomb story, it threatens to completely demolish the regime’s January 6 narrative and expose one of the darkest and most damning government operations in recent American history.
Without further ado, we ask that the reader skim the linked video and then revisit it as you read our description below.
This surveillance footage released by the Capitol Police depicts the discovery of a pipe bomb by a bench right outside of the Democrat National Committee headquarters at approximately 1:05 PM on January 6. In the first part of the video, from approximately 1:05:30-1:06:30, we can see an individual with a backpack approach two SUVs parked outside the DNC garage entrance. The SUVs were both part of then Vice President-elect Kamala Harris’ secret service detail (more on that later) and the individual with the backpack was informing the Secret Service of the presence of the pipe bomb just feet away.
After being informed of an explosive device within feet of themselves and possibly their protectee, it takes the Secret Service officers over a minute to even bother getting out of their cars, after which point they proceed to stand and lounge about in the most lackadaisical manner imaginable for another two minutes. Go ahead and look at the footage around the 1:07 timestamp and ask yourself whether the Secret Service officers are behaving the way you’d expect upon being informed of an explosive device in the vicinity.
The real whopper occurs at around the 1:09:41 timestamp. Here we can see a group of children cross the street in the direction of the pipe bomb, and walk within feet of where the pipe bomb is placed. Astonishingly, the Secret Service agents who themselves are standing about don’t even bother to warn these children of the bomb. Shortly thereafter, a Capitol Police officer walks right up to the bomb, snaps a photo of it, gives a thumbs up sign to the other agents, who then for the first time in the entire clip move with hustle and purpose and quickly leave the scene.
Here we see the Secret Service detail acting with utter lack of concern for their own lives, for the lives of their protectee Kamala Harris, and perhaps most scandalously of all, for the lives of the group of children they cavalierly allowed to walk right next to the pipe bomb. The Secret Service somehow knew the pipe bomb was a dud, but how would they have known that? A reliable source who has seen the extended non-public footage reports to us that, minutes after the footage above ends, authorities had that very DNC pipe bomb defused by a bomb-safe robot. If the Secret Service were so confident the bomb wasn’t a threat that they would exhibit zero concern for themselves, their protectee, and children walking by, then why bother with the gratuitous spectacle of defusing the bomb with a robot?
Now let’s turn to the question of Kamala Harris. It may surprise the reader to learn of then-VP-elect Harris’ presence in the DNC building on January 6, a fact that Harris studiously kept hidden from the public for almost a year before the information leaked—and still Harris has never acknowledged it publicly. Let’s stop for a moment to process this information. Kamala Harris is without question one of the most politically opportunistic creatures on this planet. Why on earth would she forgo the opportunity to milk politically the fact that she came within a hair’s breadth of losing her life to this January 6 pipe bomb at the DNC? Joe Biden is so desperate to paint Donald Trump and his supporters as insurrectionists that he took the occasion of the third anniversary of January 6 to give an ominous speech on the matter. And yet, nowhere in this speech attempting to reinforce the narrative of January 6 as a dark day of domestic terrorism does he bother to mention that his own Vice President came dangerously close to the only known explosive devices associated with this day of supposed infamy. How is this possible? How dirty and embarrassing does the truth have to be for the likes of Kamala and Biden to forgo such an obvious and politically advantageous talking point?
These questions alone are simply damning, but when considered in light of the full context of our knowledge of the January 6 pipe bombs, the situation becomes far worse. Almost as bizarre as the Secret Service’s inexplicable lack of concern in response to being informed of the pipe bomb is the fact that up until that point the Secret Service was informed of the bombs at 1:05 P.M., the pipe bomb had been sitting out there, fairly conspicuously, by the bench for over 17 hours without being discovered. For reference, here is a photo of the pipe bomb next to the DNC bench —presumably the photo taken by the Capitol Police officer as described above.
According to the FBI and surveillance footage presented by the FBI, the pipe bomber planted this bomb at approximately 8 P.M. on the evening of January 5. From 8 P.M. on January 5 to 1:05 P.M on January 6 (over 17 hours) the pipe bomb was supposedly sitting there by the bench—undiscovered by motorists, pedestrians (January 6 was a very high foot traffic day), a regularly stationed security guard within feet of the pipe bomb, and the Secret Service of the United States, which is on record as having swept the DNC premises prior to Kamala Harris’ entrance into the building. Are we to believe that the Secret Service dogs had Covid that day and weren’t able to smell the live explosive material found on the pipe bomb, according to a national forensics task force report that still has not been made fully available to the public?
The notion that the DNC pipe bomb could have sat out there for 17 hours undiscovered, including by the Secret Service, seemed so bizarre to our investigative team at Revolver News that we thought to revisit the question as to whether the bombs were actually planted when the surveillance footage released by the FBI suggests they were. From this we were able to demonstrate conclusively that the FBI is in possession of footage that would prove definitively whether or not the pipe bomber planted the bomb at the time they claim he or she did, but they for whatever reason have decided not to release this. Furthermore, we showed that the surveillance footage itself is clearly tampered with, as it has a frame rate of 1.6 frames per second which is well below the lowest commercial standard of 8 frames per second. Are we to believe that any gas station in the country has higher quality surveillance cameras than the national headquarters of the Democrat Party? And why is it the case that the only footage of the pipe bomber at the benches that the FBI will make public is the clearly corrupted DNC surveillance footage? And why is the Democrat Party so uninterested in questions that could help us to identify the pipe bomber who planted an explosive device outside of their national headquarters?
To get to the essential structural flaw in the official pipe bomb story, however, we need to say a few things about the discovery of the first pipe bomb, at the office of the Republican National Committee, and the timing surrounding it. The first device discovered on January 6 was found by a random pedestrian named Karlin Younger behind a trash can in a back alley near the Capitol Hill Club. Younger reports that she discovered the bomb at 12:40 P.M. and notified a security official in the Capitol Hill Club. We know from sources that the security official in question also happened to be a veteran of the Capitol Police, and reported the bomb’s discovery through the Capitol Police system, whereupon the Capitol Police began responding to the bomb at 12:50 P.M.
The timing is relevant as 12:50 is just three minutes before the initial and decisive attack on the west perimeter of the Capitol. Karlin Younger reported that the mechanical kitchen timer affixed to the pipe bomb, which was an hourlong timer, was stuck on the 20-minute mark. Younger found the bomb at 12:40 and it had 20 minutes on the dial, conveying the impression that it was set to go off exactly when the certification of the vote proceeding was to begin at 1:00 P.M.
Take a second to digest just how infinitesimally improbable this set of circumstances is. Like the DNC pipe bomb, surveillance footage provided by the FBI suggests the RNC pipe bomb was planted on the evening of January 5 at around 8:30 P.M. This means that the RNC bomb was sitting behind a trash can in a back alley, undiscovered for over 16 hours, only to be randomly stumbled upon by a random pedestrian who discovers it nearly to the exact minute such as to be perfectly synchronized with both the certification proceeding and the initial and decisive attack on the west perimeter of the Capitol. The synchronicity here is so striking that many, including former head of Capitol Police Steve Sund, believed the pipe bombs were never intended to detonate but rather to serve a diversionary purpose, specifically to divert resources away from the Capitol as the attack unfolded. Given the remarkable timing of the pipe bombs’ discovery this seems likely, especially because the hour-long mechanical kitchen timers on the bombs meant that the latest they could have detonated would have been at 9:30 PM or so on the evening of January 5, which would have been pointless.
There’s only one problem with this otherwise eminently sound diversion theory. How could the pipe bomber have counted on these pipe bombs being discovered at such a time as to perfectly synchronize with the unfolding attack on the Capitol? How could he or she have known the pipe bombs wouldn’t have been discovered early in the morning, which likely would have had the counterproductive effect of beefing up security at the Capitol? The DNC bomb was lying undiscovered for over 17 hours until it was found at 1:05 P.M, scarcely 15 minutes after the first pipe bomb was discovered. Did the pipe bomber just count on getting so lucky that the pipe bombs wouldn’t be discovered prematurely, but rather would sit in their respective locations for 16 or 17 hours, only to be discovered in a narrow 15-minute window that corresponded precisely to the unfolding attack on the Capitol?
As if things weren’t strange enough, the head of the pipe bomb investigation at the FBI was a man called Steven D’Antuono, who had just recently been the head of the Detroit FBI Field Office where he oversaw the disgraced entrapment operation known as the Whitmer Kidnapping Plot. Perhaps as a result of our continuous and damning reporting on the pipe bomb story, along with a guilty conscience, D’Antuono resigned from his position as head of the Washington D.C. Field Office—a rare move as the WFO position is usually a stepping stone to the rarified floors of the FBI’s Hoover building.
Unusually, D’Antuono in his retirement volunteered himself for questioning before the Judiciary Committee in Congress. Congressman Thomas Massie compiled a number of pointed questions based on Revolver’s long history of reporting on the pipe bomb issue. D’Antuono had no answer for any of the questions, and seemed to acknowledge that the whole pipe bomb story made no sense. When asked whether the FBI used geo-fencing technology to identify the pipe bomber, D’Antuono sheepishly replied in the affirmative, but noted that the telecom company in question reported that for the specific time and location of the pipe bomber, the data was corrupted. While D’Antuono acknowledged that it is “investigation 101” that the people who discovered the pipe bombs would be considered suspects, at least initially, he claimed that he didn’t even know the identity of the man who discovered the DNC bomb, and professed not to know whether this individual had even been interviewed.
The timing of the discovery of the bombs in relation to the attack on the Capitol alone means that, at the very least, the people who discovered the RNC and DNC bombs respectively should be subject to serious questioning. The bizarre footage of the discovery of the DNC bomb is so damning that we must use it to generate sufficient pressure to force the gatekeepers in the Capitol Police to identify the individual who discovered the DNC bombs and allow Congress to question him. Given the massive amount of public attention on this story as of late we expect the plain clothes officer who discovered the DNC pipe bomb to be identified and interviewed quickly. And given the concatenation of shockingly implausible coincidences that precariously undergird the official pipe bomb narrative, we expect the lies behind the pipe bomb story to unravel rapidly, and with it the entire Fedsurrection lie.
The regime has desperately tried to suppress our Fedsurrection coverage, but with the story now having reached escape velocity the goal of suppression has grudgingly given way to the goal of damage control. At this very moment, mainstream newsrooms and government offices alike are brainstorming the best damage control strategy in nervous anticipation of the pipe bomb story cracking wide open. I suspect this damage control will involve a narrative containment strategy to cordon off the pipe bomb scandal and prevent it from metastasizing to other highly questionable elements of January 6. Unfortunately for the regime such containment is impossible. The perfect synchronicity between the discovery of the pipe bombs and the unfolding of the west perimeter attack on the Capitol make such a containment strategy possible.
There is already overwhelming evidence for massive federal involvement in this west perimeter breach as presented in the Revolver News piece “Meet Ray Epps Part II.” If the pipe bomb story is exposed as some kind of government operation to frame Trump supporters, the federal involvement in the West Perimeter breach is likely to follow. If both the January 6 pipe bombs and the West Perimeter breach were instigated by the government, then January 6 at large can fairly be described as an inside job. If January 6 is finally and definitively exposed as a Fedsurrection, so goes the key pretext the regime has been counting on to weaponize the security apparatus politically against its opposition, and there goes the key pillar the democrats are leaning on to deprive Trump a fair shot at the White House.
These are the stakes. We are very close. And this is why we all need to give this ill-fated pipe bomb story the final push that it needs to bring the entire rotten January 6 edifice crumbling down on its corrupt and criminal architects.
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#180514 01/25/202406:03 PM01/25/202406:03 PM
"When misguided public opinion honors what is despicable and despises what is honorable, punishes virtue and rewards vice, encourages what is harmful and discourages what is useful, applauds falsehood and smothers truth under indifference or insult, a nation turns its back on progress and can be restored only by the terrible lessons of catastrophe." - Frederic Bastiat
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#180519 01/28/202401:21 PM01/28/202401:21 PM
Michael Shellenberger @shellenberger BOMBGATE: This Video Proves FBI Is Covering Up The Truth About The January 6 “Bomb”
We must be blunt: the FBI is a dangerous, politicized, and rogue agency that must be brought to heel
by @shellenberger
Video by @lwoodhouse
The US Department of Justice has charged over 1,200 people with federal crimes related to the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot. In order to convict those individuals, the DOJ has relied heavily on 14,000 hours of surveillance video as well as cell phone data, some of which somebody leaked to the New York Times.
“The data we were given showed what some in the tech industry might call a God-view vantage of that dark day,” wrote Charlie Warzel and Stuart A. Thompson in 2021 in the New York Times. “It included about 100,000 location pings for thousands of smartphones…While there were no names or phone numbers in the data, we were once again able to connect dozens of devices to their owners, tying anonymous locations back to names, home addresses, social networks and phone numbers of people in attendance.”
The New York Times authors had less cell phone data than what the FBI had available to it. And yet, amazingly, the cell phone and video surveillance data of the suspect who committed the worst crime on January 6 are, according to the FBI, corrupted and/or missing.
And what was the worst crime? The attempted assassination of Vice President-elect Kamala Harris while she was at the Democratic National Committee.
In other words, while the FBI had cell phone data for the January 6 protesters, none of whom tried to kill anyone, it doesn’t have the cell phone data for the one person who did.
And while the FBI had 14,000 hours of high-quality surveillance video for the January 6 protesters, it somehow does not have any video of the suspect actually leaving the bomb. Nor does it have high-quality video, including from the best angles, of the suspect.
That's an unbelievable coincidence.
And it gets worse.
Last year, the person who was in charge of the FBI investigation, the head of the Washington Field Office, admitted to Rep. Thomas Massie that the Vice President’s life was never at risk.
Massie: Do you think it was technically possible for a kitchen timer –
Steven D'Antuono: No, no.
Massie: — that has 1-hour duration —
D'Antuono: No.
Massie: — to detonate a bomb 17 hours later?
D'Antuono: No, I don't. And I saw the same kitchen timer as you. I agree. I don't know when they were supposed to go off. Maybe they weren't supposed to go off. We can't — we don't know. We honestly don't know…
Neither the FBI nor the DOJ ever announced that they had changed their mind about the bomb. Nor had they, or Harris, or anyone else, ever said publicly that Harris was at the DNC until late 2021, which is shocking since had January 6 protesters truly tried to kill the Vice President, an ambitious politician in her right mind would have milked that fact to maximum effect for years to come. In the case of the Vice President, it’s the kind of thing that might have earned her the presidency.
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#180545 02/04/202403:12 PM02/04/202403:12 PM
A watchdog group is escalating its battle with the Justice Department over the FBI’s refusal to turn over files on Ashli Babbitt, the United States Air Force veteran shot and killed during the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot over the certification of President Joe Biden’s victory over former President Donald Trump.
Judicial Watch, claiming a “cover-up,” on Friday filed a suit in federal court claiming that the FBI has twice refused to comply with Freedom of Information Act demands for any files it has on Babbitt and her husband Aaron.
The FOIA lawsuit was filed with the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California.
Judicial Watch is working with Aaron Babbitt, who is the executor of his wife’s estate, to get all the information the government has on the duo and its reports of her shooting death by then-U.S. Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd as she attempted to enter the House Speaker’s Lobby unarmed.
They recently joined in filing a $30 million wrongful death suit against the government in the death of the 35-year-old, the only one associated with the riots who died on Jan. 6.
“Judicial Watch and our supporters are honored to represent Ashli’s steadfast widower Aaron Babbitt and her estate in this legal action. Ashli was shot in cold blood, and the rule of law requires justice for her,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in filing the suit on Jan. 4.
In its new FOIA suit, Judicial Watch said that not only has the FBI refused its two demands for files but that the law enforcement agency has also stiff-armed the Justice Department office that advocates FOIA compliance, the Office of Information Policy.
In its four-page filing, the attorney for Aaron Babbitt and Judicial Watch said, “the FBI has failed to produce the requested records or demonstrate that the requested records are lawfully exempt from production; or notify plaintiffs of the scope of any responsive records they intend to produce or withhold and the reasons for any withholdings.”
Fitton said, “Ashli Babbit was the only homicide victim on Jan. 6, yet the FBI has been illicitly hiding its files on Ashli Babbitt from her family for a year. Why the cover-up?”
In the wrongful death suit, a new camera angle of the shooting was provided. The time-stamped video showed an unarmed Babbitt being pushed into the House Speaker’s Lobby as Byrd raises his gun. After he shot, she fell back, bleeding from the shoulder and neck.
According to the suit, “Ashli remained conscious for minutes or longer after being shot by Lt. Byrd. Ashli experienced extreme pain, suffering, mental anguish, and intense fear before slipping into pre-terminal unconsciousness. The autopsy report identified the cause of death as a ‘gunshot wound to left anterior shoulder’ with an onset interval of ‘minutes.’ The fact that Ashli was alive and conscious in extreme pain and suffering is documented in videos of the shooting.”
The suit continues, “Furthermore, nothing about the wound track described in the autopsy report would be expected to result in immediate death or instantaneous loss of consciousness, and Ashli’s lungs contained blood, further confirming that she was alive and breathing after being shot. Ashli was pronounced dead at Washington Hospital Center at 3:15 p.m. The medical examiner determined that the manner of death was homicide.”
Byrd later said he shot Babbitt as a “last resort.” He was subsequently promoted to captain.
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#180662 03/05/202404:02 PM03/05/202404:02 PM
House Speaker Johnson announces the release of 5,000 more hours of Jan. 6 footage
"Today, 5,000 more hours of Capitol security footage from January 6th, 2021 is now available for the public to view," Johnson wrote. By Charlotte Hazard
Published: March 1, 2024 12:18pm
House Speaker Mike Johnson announced Friday the release of 5,000 additional hours of video from the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot.
The additional video, equal to roughly 208 straight days of viewing, is being released by the House Administration Oversight Subcommittee.
"House Republicans again commend subcommittee Chairman Barry Loudermilk and the entire Committee on House Administration for their ongoing commitment to ensuring that there is full transparency surrounding the events of January 6," Johnson said.
The release follows Johnson saying in November 2023 that he would make the January 6, 2021, tapes available to the American people and the release of an initial tranche of 90 hours of footage.
There seems to more video in addition to what is being released Friday, with the Administration committee vowing to "continue to release the remaining footage online as expeditiously as possible so that it is accessible to every American."
Some of new video is previously released video that was blurry and re-uploaded in an attempt to make the images clearer, Johnson also said.
The link to the footage can be found here.
“I appreciate Speaker Johnson’s continued support of our efforts and his resolute commitment to full transparency for the American people," Loudermilk said. "Today's decision will significantly expedite CCTV footage releases, all of which will be made available to the American public within the next few months, without blurring or editing. The first batch is already available on our Rumble page.”
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#180663 03/05/202404:06 PM03/05/202404:06 PM
The Pipe Bombs Before Jan. 6: Capital Mystery That Doesn’t Add Up
Authored by Julie Kelly via RealClear Wire,
The newly disclosed video shows a dark SUV pulling up to the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee in Washington, D.C., at 9:44 a.m. on Jan. 6, 2021. It sits for several minutes until a uniformed man with a bomb-sniffing dog enters from the right and steps up to the vehicle. The driver complies with his command, the dog sniffs inside and outside the car which is soon allowed to enter the parking garage. The man and his dog exit back to the right.
This scene is unremarkable except for one detail: The uniformed man and his trained canine came within a few feet of where a plainclothes Capitol Police officer would soon discover a pipe bomb that had been planted there the night before. The bomb, which the FBI has described as viable and capable of inflicting serious injury, along with a similar one found at the headquarters of the Republican National Committee, would appear to be the most overt act of violence perpetrated on Jan. 6.
Responding to the video discovered by this reporter, Rep. Barry Loudermilk, the Georgia Republican who chairs the House Oversight Committee subcommittee now conducting a separate inquiry into Jan. 6, asked, “How could a bomb-sniffing dog miss a pipe bomb at the DNC? We’ll add this to our long list of unanswered questions and continue getting to the truth.”
The number of anomalies surrounding this still unsolved case continues to grow. These include:
The failure of the Secret Service detail assigned to Vice President-Elect Kamala Harris, who was inside DNC headquarters when the bomb was discovered, to find the device before her visit. The fact that the bomb at RNC headquarters was discovered by a government contractor with ties to the FBI. That law enforcement officials repeatedly described the bombs as “highly dangerous” but also said they couldn’t have detonated on their own because of their cheap kitchen timers. That cell phone data that might help locate the perpetrator has been deemed corrupted. That the FBI’s geofence warrant to obtain cell phone data from Google gives no indication the warrant included the Capitol Hill neighborhood on the night of Jan. 5 – the time and location the pipe bombs were apparently planted. That the FBI assistant director leading the stalled investigation had previously been in charge of the investigation into a kidnap plot against Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer in which the bureau tried to get alleged conspirators to build bombs. That an FBI whistleblower has testified he was told the bombs were inoperable – a claim that seems supported by video showing authorities allowing children to cross the street toward the DNC bomb after it was discovered.
Discovery of the new video featuring the ineffective bomb-sniffing dog has also generated skepticism about the timing of the day’s events: The RNC pipe bomb was discovered at 12:40 pm, just thirteen minutes before the first breach of police lines on the west side of the Capitol and 20 minutes before House and Senate members convened to consider the electoral college results of the 2020 election – creating a narrative of grave threat as the protests turned violent. How might the day have unfolded if the bombs had been discovered many hours before and large swaths of the city had been shut down? And why, given the devices’ proximity to the U.S. Capitol and the joint session of Congress that would involve every U.S. Senator and House member, did law enforcement not send investigators with bomb-sniffing canines to the Capitol immediately?
Vanished Without a Trace
The greatest mystery may be why official Washington has lost interest in this alleged act of domestic terrorism. In the three years since Jan. 6, the DOJ has conducted what Attorney General Merrick Garland describes as a criminal investigation proceeding at an “unprecedented speed and scale” into the protests. Casting a wide dragnet for Capitol protesters across the country, federal and local authorities in Washington have tracked down and prosecuted more than 1,300 defendants, almost all of whom were unarmed, including 62 individuals so far this year.
Yet the perpetrator of what could have been the only deadly attack by a civilian that day appears to have vanished without a trace. He or she also seems to have slipped down the official memory hole. Although the Washington FBI field office recently issued a statement saying the “suspect may still pose a danger to the public or themselves” and upped the reward to $500,000, Washington appears to have lost interest in the pipe bomb whodunnit.
The now defunct Select Committee to Investigate the Attack on the U.S. Capitol barely mentioned the pipe bomb threat in its final report; the committee did not include video of the incident or the suspect during any televised hearings. This strikes some observers as odd for two reasons: The pipe bombs seemed to offer the strongest evidence for the Committee’s case that Jan. 6 was an act of domestic terrorism, and the direct threat to the life of the vice president, who was at the DNC for nearly two hours as the device sat undetected outside the building.
The major news organizations that initially devoted significant space to promote the idea that a supporter of Donald Trump tried to blow up buildings near the Capitol on Jan. 6 have also lost interest in the case.
But a handful of outlets led by Revolver News stayed on the story. And the same media once fixated on the pipe bomber now considers poking holes in the government’s official story little more than right-wing conspiracy-mongering.
The government’s seeming ineffectiveness, however, and lack of forthrightness regarding an allegedly deadly plot filled with unanswered questions has also created a wellspring of distrust.
The presence of bombs in the nation’s capital as the joint session of Congress convened to debate the outcome of the Electoral College vote animated the notion that Jan. 6 represented an act of domestic terrorism perpetrated by Trump supporters. Reports that two explosives were found just blocks from the U.S. Capitol initiated the first wave of panic that accelerated throughout the afternoon.
It began when a 37-year-old woman from Madison, Wisc., named Karlin Younger, who said she was walking to do her laundry near the RNC, discovered a device in an alley around 12:40 p.m. Although it is not clear whether the Jan. 6 committee interviewed Younger – her name does not appear in its final report – she gave numerous media interviews in the weeks and months following Jan. 6.
In November 2021, Younger told Business Insider, “When I cast my eyes down, I just saw something kind of metallic, and it was just a very passing glimpse, and all I thought is someone must have missed the recycling bin. And I was going to recycle it, because I’m about that life. I just looked, and it was so completely unbelievable. You’re not on high alert. You don’t think you’re under attack. I’m not in Iraq. This is Capitol Hill.”
She beckoned an RNC security guard whose name has not been made public to confirm her suspicions. “Holy shit, it’s a bomb!” Younger said he exclaimed.
The FBI interviewed Younger a few days later after she contacted the bureau’s Jan. 6 tip line. But it doesn’t appear she was interviewed again by the FBI.
The FBI story.
The FBI official leading the investigation, Washington FBI Field Office assistant director in charge Steven D’Antuono, told House Republicans he did not “recall” who discovered the device. Had the FBI come knocking again, Younger certainly would have consented to another interview. At the time, Younger worked for a public-private partnership called FirstNet, which provides interoperable broadband for first responders across the country. The month before Jan. 6, the FBI awarded a $92 million grant to FirstNet.
Authorities quickly dispatched officers to the DNC located a few blocks away. A similar device reportedly was found on the ground between two benches outside one of the building’s entrances at 1:07 pm.
In response, police immediately evacuated a few congressional buildings including the nearby Cannon House Office building. “I just had to evacuate my office because of a pipe bomb reported outside,” Virginia Democratic Rep. Elaine Luria tweeted at 1:46 p.m. “Supporters of the President are trying to force their way into the Capitol and I can hear what sounds like multiple gunshots. I don’t recognize our country today and the members of Congress who have supported this anarchy do not deserve to represent their fellow Americans.”
The Capitol Police stated on Jan. 7 that both devices, which it said were “hazardous and could cause great harm to public safety,” were “disabled and turned over to the FBI for further investigation and analysis.” The FBI did not respond to a request for a report on the devices.
The topic of the pipe bombs was raised repeatedly during the Department of Justice’s first press conference a few days later. In their joint appearance on Jan. 12, D’Antuono and acting U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia Michael Sherwin were asked by CBS News reporter Catherine Herridge whether the pipe bombs were a diversionary tactic to redirect police away from the site of the protest, or if the devices intended to kill or maim individuals working in both buildings. Sherwin responded that both scenarios would be explored during the investigation but he emphasized that the devices were “real” and contained “explosive igniters.”
D’Antuono, who spearheaded the FBI’s Jan. 6 investigation including the pipe bombs, announced a $50,000 reward leading to the arrest of the perpetrator. “I just want to make that perfectly clear and that we’re looking at all angles in that. Every rock is being unturned, because we have to bring that person to justice or people to justice,” D’Antuono said.
By the end of January 2021, the FBI released grainy footage of a person the government believed to be the bomber and upped the reward to a total of $75,000 – and which now stands at $500,000.
An individual, wearing a hoodie, a face mask, gloves, and Nike gym shoes, is seen carrying a backpack around the vicinity of both buildings. FBI authorities said the suspect planted the devices sometime between 7:30 p.m. and 8:30 p.m. on Jan. 5. Ashlan Benedict, head of D’Antuono’s ATF division, told CNN at the time that the bureau considered the investigation an urgent matter because the suspect “could potentially be building more bombs right now.”
Intense media coverage followed. On Jan. 29, 2021, the Washington Post published an extensive story on the pipe bombs, assigning five of the paper’s top reporters to investigate the timeline and obtain private security camera footage from surrounding property owners.
Months passed before D’Antuono’s office provided an update into the investigation. In September 2021, the FBI released more inconclusive security video obtained from a camera at the DNC showing the alleged suspect walking by the building and sitting on a bench next to where the bomb was discovered the next day. But the brief clip did not show the perpetrator removing anything from his backpack or placing a bomb on the ground.
By the third anniversary of the Capitol protest, the FBI was still empty-handed. D’Antuono himself had become a target of media and congressional scrutiny over his handling of the Jan. 6 investigation and his involvement in the FBI-orchestrated plot to kidnap Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer in 2020.
FBI Director Christopher Wray had promoted D’Antuono from head of the Detroit FBI field office – the office responsible for the key FBI agents, informants, and undercover employees responsible for executing the entrapment operation – to head of the Washington FBI office in October 2020.
That case also involved the use of explosives. The FBI ran an undercover agent disguised as an explosives expert into the group of alleged kidnappers to lure them into attempting to buy components to build a bomb. Several of the men targeted by the FBI were arrested when the FBI’s lead informant drove them to meet the undercover agent acting as a bomb builder.
Under questioning by House Republicans in 2023, D’Antuono, who retired from the FBI after Republicans won control of the House in November 2022 to take a job in the private sector, appeared less confident about the threat posed by the pipe bombs than he had in public statements. Asked by Rep. Tom Massie whether a one-hour kitchen timer, a component of both devices, could detonate a bomb 17 hours after it was set, D’Antuono said it could not.
D’Antuono admitted he did not follow the “granularity” of his office’s inquiry into the pipe bomber case and also did not know if the FBI interviewed the person who discovered the device outside the DNC.
D’Antuono also testified that a search warrant failed to scoop up data of the alleged suspect, who is seen handling a cell phone on his walk in the vicinity. Stating the FBI did a “complete” geofence warrant for Jan. 6, D’Antuono disclosed that data from one company strangely was missing. “Some data that was corrupted by one of the providers, not purposely by them, right. It just – unusual circumstance that we have corrupt data from one of the providers. I’m not sure – I can’t remember right now which one. But for that day, which is awful because we don’t have that information to search. So could it have been that provider? Yeah, with our luck, you know, with this investigation it probably was.”
Congressional Republicans say they were troubled by another aspect of D’Antuono’s testimony related to the allegedly corrupted file. While the FBI did issue a geofence warrant to obtain cell phone data from Google, there is no indication the warrant included Jan. 5 – the day the pipe bombs were allegedly planted.
Public reporting and court filings in Jan. 6 cases indicate the warrant identified three specific time periods on Jan. 6, resulting in the collection of data from more than 5,000 devices, but did not request records for Jan. 5.
“Mr. D’Antuono’s testimony raises concerns about the FBI’s handling of the pipe bomb investigation, more than 890 days following the placement of the pipe bombs. To date, the FBI has failed to respond to the Committee’s requests for a briefing regarding the investigation,” Jim Jordan, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, wrote in June 2023.
Other aspects of the pipe bomb story started to raise eyebrows. After nearly a year of misleading judges and defendants, federal prosecutors revealed in late 2021 that Kamala Harris was at the DNC and not at the Capitol on Jan. 6; the government was forced to disclose her whereabouts to correct court filings that stated Harris was in the Capitol on the afternoon of Jan. 6. Harris left the Capitol following a Senate Intelligence Committee briefing and arrived at the DNC around 11:25 a.m. She remained inside the building until she was evacuated at 1:15 p.m.
The timeline generated even more head-scratchers. How did her security detail, which included Secret Service agents and D.C. Metropolitan police officers, miss the device sitting in relatively plain view?
Did the Secret Service fail to perform a sweep of the premises before she arrived? Even so, how did numerous law enforcement agents not see a pipe bomb laying on the ground just feet from her parked motorcade?
Further, security video posted this month by Revolver News showed law enforcement’s puzzling reaction to the discovery of the bomb at 1:07 p.m.
“The most striking feature of the footage depicting the discovery of the DNC bomb is the utter nonchalance of the Secret Service officials, Metro PD officials, and Capitol Police officers upon learning of the proximity of the bomb,” Darren J. Beattie of Revolver wrote on Jan. 18. “The Metro PD officers didn’t even bother getting out of their vehicles for about a minute after being informed of the bomb and proceeded to stand around in the most lackadaisical fashion imaginable once getting out of the vehicles.”
And according to Sean Gallagher, chief of the Protective Services Bureau of the Capitol Police, one of his plainclothes officers found the bomb after responding to the threat at neighboring RNC. “[One] of my counterintelligence teams that was doing enhanced sweeps around the DNC found a pipe bomb at the DNC as well,” Gallagher told the Jan. 6 committee in 2022. He also did not discuss with the committee Harris’ presence or any aid his division provided in ensuring her safe escape from the building.
Even more puzzling is the fact Harris never mentions the episode in her public statements, even though she has compared Jan. 6 to Pearl Harbor and 9/11. Reporters also appear uninterested in the subject; Harris, more than three years later, hasn’t been asked about it.
The Secret Service also is mum on the issue – and under suspicious circumstances. Text messages belonging to at least two dozen officials and agents from Jan. 5 and 6 were deleted at the end of January 2021 and never recovered. Jan. 6 committee investigators, when first informed the messages were purged during “a pre-planned, three-month system migration,” according to an agency spokesman, issued a subpoena for the missing records in July 2022, but the request came up empty. Committee investigators did not continue their inquiry further.
This represents another aspect of the congressional investigation that did not reach an edifying conclusion. A suspected Trump supporter planted a bomb that could have killed the first female and person of color to hold the office of the vice presidency – and it only merited one sentence in an 840-page report.
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#180666 03/05/202405:04 PM03/05/202405:04 PM
We already know the truth. It is a set up to disqualify Trump, vilify patriots, and to destroy the US with an illegal alien alien invasion. Damn the corrupt government. Joe Biden is a senile puppet who should be placed in a nursing home. Biden is controlled by Barry Soetoro aka Barrack Obama a communist Muslim born in Kenya.
www.TexasMilitia.Info Seek out and join a lawful Militia or form one in your area. If you wish to remain Free you will have to fight for it...because the traitors will give us no choice in the matter--William Cooper
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#180713 03/18/202402:50 PM03/18/202402:50 PM
January 6 political prisoners claim they are being tortured in DC jail with 'ear-piercing noise'
by: Pat Droney 2024-03-06 Source: Law Enforcement Today Opinion
WASHINGTON, DC- The United States Constitution bans explicitly “cruel and unusual punishment.” That provision is outlined in the Bill of Rights under the Eighth Amendment:
“Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishment inflicted.”
Someone may want to inform those running the Washington, D.C. gulag, otherwise known as the Washington DC Correctional Treatment Facility. The Gateway Pundit was contacted by January 6 prisoners detained at that facility who told the outlet that “an ear-shattering, harrowing sharp noise” has been blasted throughout the prison for weeks in the cell block where January 6 political prisoners are being held.
It has previously been reported by several outlets, including Law Enforcement Today, The Gateway Pundit, and others, about the harsh treatment January 6 detainees have experienced in the DC facility. Detainees have reported episodes of brutality and torture after complaints about the Bureau of Prisons System and the Department of Justice were made to the media.
Remember…this isn’t a Turkish prison we are talking about. This is a prison in the United States, where our Constitution is supposed to protect those who are locked up. We hear often enough, primarily from so-called “progressives,” about the harsh conditions inside our jails and prisons.
Yet you hear nothing but crickets from them concerning those locked up for January 6, some only being held or convicted for offenses such as parading or trespassing. These are not hardened criminals, by and large.
In February, The Gateway Pundit reports, “two political prisoners were ripped from their cells, abducted, and transferred to the country’s most hostile anti-Trump correctional facilities” while also being barred from any type of communication. It is unknown where the two inmates, Ryan Samsel and Jake Lang, were transferred.
Samsel believes the government is “trying to kill” him. He is suffering from a severe medical condition involving blood clots and was only recently given blood thinners to help prevent throwing a clot, which could be fatal.
‘As soon as I was recommended outside [medical] treatment, I get [transferred]. This is what always happens,” Samsel said. “Every single time I am referred to outside treatment, I get [transferred]. Stopping my meds will make me extremely sick.”
Another political prisoner, Matthew Krol, currently wears a pacemaker and said he died of a heart attack while he was incarcerated and was revived while he awaits heart surgery. Krol is also in a legal battle with the DC jail over medical deprivation. Krol reached out to The Gateway Pundit about the overbearing noise.
“We have another situation here in C3A. For weeks now, throughout the day and many nights, there [are] sounds of construction going on,” Krol said, telling TGP it has been going on for a couple of weeks. “The supervisors say there is no construction at night, yet the noise continues.
“And there have been C/O’s [correctional officers] that have said there [is] no construction going on in the pod above us. It is 10:23 PM, and our current ℅ has been in my cell listening twice tonight to the noise. Inmates in the USA are supposed to get 8-½ hours of [un]interrupted sleep a day, that does not happen here.”
The outlet visited the jail last week with an undercover camera and found a scaffold erected on the exterior of the building, alongside shattered glass on the grounds and possible dried puddles of blood on the ground.
When TGP’s reporter walked into the jail lobby, the “deafening noise Krol claimed the inmates have endured living with for weeks was persistently blaring off the cinderblock walls of the jail,” the outlet reported.
“Can we get our supporters to contact the jail, the Marshals, and their Congressmen? Other inmates here will verify what I’m saying. Thank you,” Krol wrote in a text message to TGP.
When the outlet returned to the jail last Friday, “the same ear-piercing noise was blaring throughout the building,” they reported.
The use of sound is a form of torture that the military has used at Gitmo, where Muslim prisoners tied to terrorism have been held. Some members of Congress and the United Nations have widely condemned that practice. Yet when it comes to January 6 detainees, nothing.
Policy at the prison requires all visitors to be escorted to a private room by guards, “where they are subject to invasive patdowns.” Among those invasive patdowns, female visitors must remove their shoes, bend over, lift their bras and undergarments, open their mouths, and lift their tongues to ensure no illegal substances are present, and then be allowed to conduct their visit.
By and large and with few exceptions, members of Congress, including Republicans, have stayed away from the jail, apparently uninterested in the horrifying conditions described by the political prisoners. By way of location, the facility is located just a few short miles from the US Capitol. Yet nobody, Republicans included, can take the time to see what American citizens are being subjected to.
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#180714 03/18/202402:54 PM03/18/202402:54 PM
Secret Service Agent Blocked Trump From Going To Capitol On Jan. 6: Driver
Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),
When then-President Donald Trump finished his speech on Jan. 6, 2021, he wanted to go to the U.S. Capitol. Surrounded by campaign staff and members of the U.S. Secret Service, former U.S. President Donald Trump (C) waves to supporters as he visits the Iowa Pork Producers Tent at the Iowa State Fair in Des Moines, Iowa, on Aug. 12, 2023. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
But a Secret Service agent blocked him from going, according to a newly disclosed account.
“The president wanted to go to the Capitol,” the Secret Service agent who was driving the vehicle, told a U.S. House of Representatives panel.
President Trump and Robert Engel, his lead Secret Service agent, entered the SUV around 1:10 p.m. after President Trump concluded his speech, which was delivered on the Ellipse.
“He asked Bob Engel if we could go to the Capitol and why couldn’t we go to the Capitol and was insistent on going to the Capitol,” the driver testified, adding later that the president “was pushing pretty hard to go.”
“Mr. Engel’s response was essentially to tell him that we didn’t have any people at the Capitol, we didn’t have a plan in place, and that we needed to essentially go back to the White House and assess what our options were and wait till we can get a plan in place before we went down there,” the driver added.
President Trump responded by saying he felt it would be fine because he was not concerned about the people at the Capitol, describing them as being his supporters, according to the driver, although the driver could not recall specifically what words the president used.
“Mr. Engel consistently had the same response, that we didn’t have a plan in place, we didn’t have people at the Capitol, and that we needed to go back to the White House and reassess,” the driver said, adding later that whether the crowd at the Capitol was comprised of supporters of President Trump “was immaterial.”
President Trump did not say anything like, “I’m the president, I’ll decide where I get to go or where I’m going,” the driver said, responding to a question from the panel.
The driver took President Trump and Mr. Engel to the White House, which is 1.2 miles from the Ellipse. By 1:25 p.m., President Trump was told about violence at the Capitol, according to a White House employee.
After arriving at the White House, the driver communicated what transpired to other agents and said they should stand by as a decision was made as to whether the president would at some point be taken to the Capitol.
The agents remained with the presidential vehicles until they were told they would not be going to the Capitol, according to the driver. The communication came within 15 minutes after Mr. Engel met with White House chief of staff Mark Meadows or Meadows’s deputy, the driver said. “My understanding was that … a decision came out of that meeting,” he said.
The driver was speaking on Nov. 7, 2022, to a House select committee investigating the events of Jan. 6, 2021. The transcript was obtained and reviewed by The Epoch Times. The transcript was not released by the committee when it published online a final report and accompanying materials, including many transcripts, as it disbanded in late 2022.
The select committee also interviewed Mr. Engel, who could not be reached, but did not release a transcript of that interview. Portions of the interview, which have still not been disclosed, were quoted in the panel’s report.
The report says that President Trump entered the SUV after the Ellipse speech ended and “forcefully expressed his intention that Bobby Engel, the head of his Secret Service detail, direct the motorcade to the Capitol.” It does not mention who made the decision not to adhere to the request.
“I said … ‘let’s go down to the Capitol and the Secret Service very nicely said, ’Sir, really better for you to go back to the White House, it really is, you know, we’re not prepared to go down there,’” President Trump said on a Just the News podcast this week. “And I understood that and it was no big argument.”
Former White House official Cassidy Hutchinson, who testified in public to the select committee, has claimed that President Trump grew irate after not being taken to the Capitol and lunged at the wheel of the vehicle. Both Mr. Engel, according to the select committee, and the driver, according to the transcript, refuted that claim.
Ms. Hutchinson, whose lawyer has not returned an inquiry, changed her testimony dramatically after testifying to the panel three times, according to a new House Republican report. She did not mention the alleged grabbing incident until her fourth interview. Mr. Engel and Mr. Meadows could not be reached. The Secret Service did not respond to a request for comment. Word of Possible Trip
President Trump was not scheduled to go to the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, but some officials received word that he might go there, according to testimony.
Anthony Ornato, a Secret Service agent not on the scene, said in a recently released transcript that he was asked by officials if President Trump could walk to the Capitol after the speech on the Ellipse. He thought the idea was “ridiculous” and referred the officials to Mr. Engel.
An email from an agent to the driver and others on Jan. 5 said that President Trump planned to go to the Ellipse the following day. “There are also unconfirmed rumors of a move to the Capitol following the event on the Ellipse, but that will be an OTR if it happens,” the email stated, according to the select committee.
OTR stands for off-the-record movement, meaning the move would not be placed on the presidential schedule, according to the driver.
He said his superior did not inform him on Jan. 6 of any plans to take President Trump to the Capitol.
According to summaries released by House Republicans of testimony given by four White House employees to the select committee, several White House employees became aware of President Trump possibly going to the Capitol, although one said that both the Secret Service and Mr. Meadows told him such a trip was not happening. The White House employee transcripts were not released by the select committee and have not otherwise been disclosed.
“The committee’s principal concern was that the President actually intended to participate personally in the January 6th efforts at the Capitol, leading the attempt to overturn the election either from inside the House Chamber, from a stage outside the Capitol, or otherwise. The committee regarded those facts as important because they are relevant to President Trump’s intent on January 6th. There is no question from all the evidence assembled that President Trump did have that intent,” according to the summary.
After President Trump arrived back at the White House, the president said “he wanted to physically walk and be a part of the march” to the Capitol, former White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany told the select committee. Mr. Meadows, according to Ms. Hutchinson, said President Trump was upset Mr. Engel did not arrange a Capitol trip, and that Mr. Meadows did not make plans for a trip official.
President Trump remained at the White House, where he watched events at the Capitol unfold on television. He later released a video showing him standing outside the White House and telling people to “go home.”
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#180793 04/09/202406:09 PM04/09/202406:09 PM
“Oh Man, This Is Huge”: Video Revealed By Jan. 6 Defendant Raises Questions About Undercover Agents
Authored by Joseph M. Hanneman via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),
Recently released Jan. 6 U.S. Capitol Police security video shows a suspected FBI special agent clapping and cheering as crowds surged up steps to the Columbus Doors and another meeting with an FBI tactical team just before it entered the Capitol after the fatal shooting of Ashli Babbitt.
The videos were first identified by defendant William Pope of Topeka, Kansas, in court filings in his own Jan. 6 criminal case. Exhibits Mr. Pope originally filed under seal have become public since the release of thousands of hours of Jan. 6 security video by the Committee on House Administration Subcommittee on Oversight. Former FBI special agent John Guandolo (center) with two possible active FBI special agents at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. (Illustration by The Epoch Times, U.S. Capitol Police/Graphic by The Epoch Times)
Two possible FBI special agents and a third unknown colleague were with John D. Guandolo, the FBI’s former liaison with U.S. Capitol Police, at the Women for a Great America event on the East Front of the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, according to Mr. Pope.
In sworn testimony in a December 2022 Alaska civil court trial and in numerous media appearances, Mr. Guandolo said he was with two FBI special agents and a colleague with whom he traveled to Washington on Jan. 6. Mr. Guandolo has indicated that he was also introduced to other FBI personnel at the Capitol that day.
Mr. Pope is seeking to compel federal prosecutors to identify them all. He said even if the men were at the Capitol on personal time, their free movement around the grounds shows they did not believe the Capitol was off limits to the public.
Mr. Guandolo, who handled counterterrorism and criminal investigations for nearly 13 years—from 1996 to 2008—as an FBI special agent, has said he was at the Capitol in a personal capacity and went primarily to pray.
He was interviewed by the FBI about his Jan. 6 visit on July 6, 2022. A heavily redacted copy of the FBI 302 interview summary has been made public. ‘This Is Huge’
Security video shows that as the crowd broke through the police line on the East Plaza and surged up the steps to the Columbus Doors, one of Mr. Guandolo’s colleagues clapped enthusiastically.
“Oh, oh, oh man, this is huge,” the man said, heard on Mr. Guandolo’s cell phone video that showed the crowd ascending the east steps.
On Capitol Police security Camera 7231, which looks out at the House Egg on the East Front, Mr. Guandolo was seen filming while standing on a chair just before 2:05 p.m. The clapping man, wearing a grey knit cap and dark coat, is identified in Mr. Pope’s court filing as “the Clapper” and “Colleague 2.”
While Colleague 2 cheered the protesters’ advance on the Capitol, a man on Mr. Guandolo’s left, “Colleague 1,” had his phone raised, presumably capturing his own video of the advancing crowd. He wore a brown knit cap and blue jacket, and carried a backpack, video showed.
Mr. Pope asked U.S. District Judge Rudolph Contreras to compel the Department of Justice to identify all FBI agents “who were material witnesses at the Capitol.” Mr. Pope wants the FBI “to produce all photographs, videos, and records related to their presence.”
The DOJ has filed opposition to Mr. Pope’s motion, saying it has “no obligation to investigate” who the men in the videos are.
Some of the exhibits in Mr. Pope’s Feb. 12 motion were redacted, but the recent release of thousands of hours of Jan. 6 security video by the Subcommittee on Oversight allows them to be released publicly, Mr. Pope said.
Capitol Police security video shows Mr. Guandolo, Colleague 1, and Colleague 2—often trailed by a third unidentified man, “Colleague 3”—moving about the Capitol grounds.
“For the record, my friend and colleague with me for most of the day on January 6th was not working,“ Mr. Guandolo told The Epoch Times in an April 2 email. ”He was there with his family to experience the event like most of us.”
Subsequently asked to clarify which of the men shown on CCTV he was referring to, Mr. Guandolo did not reply before press time.
“The other FBI guys I saw there I cannot speak about their capacity that day,” Mr. Guandolo added.
Mr. Guandolo said he testified for the defense in the criminal trial of Jan. 6 defendant Rebecca Lavrenz on March 29 and has been “asked to testify in several upcoming cases.”
Mr. Guandolo said his statements about Jan. 6 have been “very public and very clear.”
“There was an insurrection and revolution, and it was not done by the participants of January 6th but by senior government officials of the U.S. government,” he said. ‘Right to Be There’
The video from Mr. Guandolo and security cameras “also indicates that active-duty FBI agents perceived events at the Capitol to not be criminal,” Mr. Pope wrote in his motion. “From the clapping and celebratory expression we can conclude that these FBI agents were in favor of people accessing the building and that they believed the people had a First Amendment right to be there.”
At 2:28 p.m., Camera 7202 captured footage of Colleague 2 walking across the East Plaza and climbing the House steps. He stopped to shoot video or photos just a few feet from a group of Capitol Police officers, the video showed.
He appeared to be filming or photographing a group of five—two young men and three young women or teens—standing about a dozen steps above him. The five then descended the stairs and walked off camera with Colleague 2.
The group of five young adults was also seen walking immediately in front of Mr. Guandolo and his three colleagues on the House Plaza Egress—Camera 0811—at 2:55 p.m. and on Camera 0681 on the Southwest Walk at 2:57 p.m., video shows. One of the young adults carried on a conversation with Colleague 2 during part of the walk.
“Since this FBI Agent has professional law enforcement training, and since he found it permissible to walk up on the steps while three Capitol Police officers looked on nearby … it is reasonable for me to conclude that this FBI agent will provide favorable testimony about the permissive actions of police that is likely to sway a jury away from a determination of guilt,” Mr. Pope wrote.
At 2:32 p.m., an FBI tactical team drove onto the East Plaza in an MRAP (Mine Resistant Ambush Protected) vehicle. After the dark green vehicle was parked, Colleague 1 came from the area of the Women for a Great America event, walked around the front of the vehicle and spoke to someone inside the front passenger door for approximately five minutes, video showed. Former FBI special agent John Guandolo with suspected FBI agents Colleague 1 and Colleague 2, along with an unidentified man labeled in court filings as Colleague 3, on the Southwest Walk of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. (U.S. Capitol Police/Graphic by The Epoch Times)
“This could indicate that FBI Colleague 1 was indeed on the clock at the Capitol on January 6, or that the uniformed FBI SWAT team did not consider the events at the Capitol to be a pressing matter and that they had time to shoot the breeze with an off-duty FBI colleague,” Mr. Pope wrote.
Members of the FBI SWAT team were seen on security video entering the South Door of the Capitol just before 2:50 p.m. They immediately turned right down a side hallway and helped Capitol Police carry a mortally wounded Ms. Babbitt, who’d been shot outside the Speaker’s Lobby minutes earlier.
Ms. Babbitt was set on the floor near the south entrance and emergency care was provided by FBI medics and Capitol Police until paramedics from the District of Columbia Fire and EMS Department took over.
At about 2:55 p.m. Camera 0948 on the southeast roof of the Capitol showed Mr. Guandolo and his three colleagues walking away from the east steps. Camera 0811 on the House Plaza Egress sidewalk showed the men walking past just before 2:56 pm. Mr. Guandolo looked to his right and appeared to be speaking to someone just before he disappeared from view, Mr. Pope wrote. An FBI SWAT team enters the South Door of the U.S. Capitol just after the shooting of Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt on Jan. 6, 2021. (U.S. Capitol Police/Screenshots via The Epoch Times)
A few seconds later, a man known only by the hashtag #FenceCutterBulwark walked into view from the opposite direction. The identity of #FenceCutterBulwark has been a longstanding mystery after he was shown on public video cutting down the green plastic security fencing erected by Capitol Police to keep crowds away from the Capitol.
Mr. Guandolo told The Epoch Times, “I do not know #FenceCutterBulwark.”
While he was carrying out his fence destruction, #FenceCutterBulwark was filmed by Metropolitan Police Department undercover officer Ryan Roe, who said to him, “Appreciate it, brother.”
A man claiming to be #FenceCutterBulwark appeared on the Patriot Punk Network podcast in September 2023, saying he was not a provocateur or a federal informant, and did not know Officer Roe.
“If he said, ‘Thanks, brother,’ then our, I’m assuming our exchange would have been, you know, me just basically saying, ‘Hey, I’m just trying to get this out of the way. It’s a hazard. It’s dangerous, or whatever. I don’t want people getting hurt,’” the man told Patriot Punk host Chase Matheson.
Mr. Pope has petitioned Judge Contreras to order the release of video shot by all members of the Metropolitan Police Department Electronic Surveillance Unit (MPD ESU) who captured video on Jan. 6 using cell phones, camcorders and GoPro cameras. The mysterious Jan. 6 figure known only by the hashtag #FenceCutterBulwark appears on the Patriot Punk Network on Sept. 27, 2023. (Courtesy of Chase Matheson/Patriot Punk Network)
Nearly 30 ESU officers were assigned for duty on Jan. 6, organized into eight teams. Some of the men used their phones to live stream to the MPD command center, according to court records.
One of the undercover officers allegedly acted as a provocateur in the crowd on the Northwest Steps, according to previous court filings by Mr. Pope.
Officer Nicholas Tomasula confirmed in an interview with defense attorneys in the Proud Boys case that he was heard on Jan. 6 video chanting, “Whose House? Our House!” and “Stop the Steal!”
Mr. Tomasula was identified as “Officer 1” in Mr. Pope’s February 2023 motion seeking to make Officer 1’s undercover video public.
At the foot of the Northwest Steps, as a protester climbed up a makeshift ladder onto the balustrade, Mr. Tomasula shouted: “C’mon, man, let’s go! Leave that [expletive],” his video showed. Mr. Tomasula got help from a protester climbing onto the balustrade, then shouted to protesters moving up the steps, “C’mon, go, go, go!”
Mr. Pope said that Mr. Tomasula was not alone in encouraging protesters on Jan. 6.
“MPD’s internal investigation on Tomasula and my own research has identified that other undercover MPD officers were, in real time, praising protesters who broke windows at the Capitol and thanking persons who removed fencing,” he wrote in a motion on Aug. 21, 2023.
Mr. Guandolo and his three colleagues were seen on two security cameras on the southwest drive, passing by at 2:57 p.m.
“It is significant that there were several agents present. The testimony of these FBI agents who believed it was acceptable to be in this alleged restricted area will weigh favorably on the minds of the jury against any contrary testimony brought by the government,” Mr. Pope wrote.
“For this reason, the court should compel the government to identify all FBI agents who directly witnessed events at the Capitol since the exculpatory testimony of many, many agents will lend strength in numbers to my defense.”
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#180834 04/20/202403:07 PM04/20/202403:07 PM
Top Military Official Lied About Jan. 6: Whistleblowers
Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),
The secretary of the Army on Jan. 6, 2021, lied about multiple details regarding what unfolded as the U.S. Capitol was breached, National Guard whistleblowers said during a congressional hearing on April 17. Secretary of the Army Ryan McCarthy testifies to the Senate Armed Services Committee on Capitol Hill on Dec. 3, 2019. (Joshua Roberts/Reuters)
Then-Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy made multiple false claims, including that he spoke to the commanding general of the District of Columbia National Guard on two separate occasions after officials requested that the Guard be deployed to the Capitol, the whistleblowers said.
After Maj. Gen. William Walker conveyed a request from the U.S. Capitol Police for Guard personnel, Mr. McCarthy called Maj. Gen. Walker at 2:14 p.m. and instructed the Guard to stand by, according to a Guard timeline of Jan. 6, 2021. But that call and others that Mr. McCarthy or one of his top advisers were said to have made later authorizing the Guard for mobilization and deployment did not happen, according to the Guard officials.
“At no time did Gen. Walker take any calls, nor did we ever hear from the secretary on any of the ongoing conference calls or the secure video teleconferencing throughout the day,” Capt. Timothy Nick, who served as Maj. Gen. Walker’s personal assistant on Jan. 6, 2021, said during the hearing. “This I know because I was with the command general the entire time recording the events.”
National Guard Captain Blows Up J6 Narrative, Accuses U.S. Govt of Lying to the American People
“I’m here today to aid the subcommittee in resolving factual errors in the official record of what happened on January 6th, 2021, specifically regarding the alleged District of… pic.twitter.com/1hJAarFgdx
— Kyle Becker (@kylenabecker) April 18, 2024
Capt. Nick has not previously discussed publicly what transpired on Jan. 6, 2021, and neither has Brig. Gen. Aaron Dean, who was the National Guard’s adjutant general on the day that the Capitol was breached.
The Department of Defense (DOD) inspector general report on Jan. 6, 2021, which relied heavily on Mr. McCarthy and other military officials, was rife with “inaccuracies,” Brig. Gen. Dean said. “I believe it is my duty and moral obligation to stand before you today and illuminate the truth,” he told the hearing, which was held by the House Administration Committee’s Subcommittee on Oversight.
Despite Mr. Walker conveying the request for assistance at about 1:50 p.m., the Guard was not deployed to the Capitol until about 5:10 p.m.
“This was a dereliction of duty by the secretary of the Army,” Rep. Greg Murphy (R-N.C.), one of the members of the committee, said.
Mr. McCarthy refused to appear before the panel, Dr. Murphy said.
Christopher Miller, the acting secretary of defense at the time, authorized Guard deployment at 3:11 p.m., but Mr. McCarthy took the order and decided to draw up a plan before ordering the deployment, according to military timelines and testimony from Mr. McCarthy and others.
“You never would employ our personnel, whether it’s on an American street or a foreign street, without putting together a [plan],” Mr. McCarthy told the now-disbanded House Jan. 6 committee.
Mr. McCarthy could not be reached for comment. The Army declined to comment.
“We stand by our January 6th Report and have no further comment at this time,” a DOD inspector general spokesperson told The Epoch Times via email.
The whistleblowers also testified that Army officials Lt. Gen. Walter Piatt and Gen. Charles Flynn, during a 2:30 p.m. conference call on Jan. 6, 2021, expressed concern about the optics of having the Guard at the Capitol.
“I did hear the word optics. And they did use it. Specifically, Gen. Piatt said ‘optics.’ And his concern was that he did not want soldiers or airmen on Capitol grounds, with the Capitol in the background,” Brig. Gen. Dean said. “They were giving every other reason why we should be around the Capitol, away from the Capitol, and not responding to the Capitol.”
The officials lacked familiarity with the Guard and the Guard’s capabilities, Brig. Gen. Dean said.
Lt. Gen. Piatt has been quoted by Maj. Gen. Walker and others as saying during the call: “I don’t like the visual of the National Guard standing a line with the Capitol in the background. I would much rather relieve USCP [U.S. Capitol Police] officers from other posts so they can handle the protestors.”
Lt. Gen. Piatt has told lawmakers that he did not recall using the words optics, visuals, or image during the call or in any other conversations on Jan. 6, 2021. But he later said, “I may have said that,” citing people who took notes during the call.
Gen. Flynn told the House Oversight Committee in 2021 that he “never expressed a concern about the visuals, image, or public perception of sending the D.C. National Guard to the U.S. Capitol.”
Col. Earl Matthews, a lawyer who was with Maj. Gen. Walker on Jan. 6, 2021, and who has challenged the Pentagon Jan. 6 narrative, and District of Columbia National Guard Command Sgt. Michael Brooks, a senior officer with the Guard until he retired in 2022, also testified during the hearing in Washington.
None of the Guard officials who testified were formally interviewed by the House Jan. 6 committee, which was primarily run by Democrats and disbanded at the end of the previous Congress.
The officials said the Guard was ready to act and could have made a difference if not for the delay.
“I know if we were able to deploy immediately when Gen. Walker made the request, the National Guard could have helped end civil disturbance and restore order quickly,” Capt. Nick said.
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#180970 06/06/202401:23 PM06/06/202401:23 PM
Report: J6 Committee Delayed Secret Service Driver From Refuting False Limo Story
Authored by Jonathan Turley,
Just the News is reporting that the January 6th Committee rebuffed repeated efforts from a Secret Service agent to refute the false story related by Cassidy Hutchinson alleging a violent episode with Trump in the presidential limousine during the Capitol riots. The J6 Committee staff repeatedly delayed the testimony of the agent to disprove the widely reported allegation.
Rep. Barry Loudermilk, the chairman of the House subcommittee that is investigating the Jan. 6 riot, has obtained a transcript of the driver’s interview that was conducted months after he first offered to testify. However, it turns out that committee staff were asked repeatedly by counsel for the agent to let him present evidence debunking the claim. Despite being reported by virtually every news outlet, the Committee slow walked his appearance as the story went viral.
The transcript of the driver’s testimony contains express objections by the lawyer that his client had offered to testify in July, August and September of 2022, but was “rebuffed” by the committee.
The account reaffirms a major criticism of the committee. After Democrats refused to allow the GOP to pick its members (as a long-accepted practice in the House), the Democrats selected two anti-Trump Republicans who did little to push for a full and fair display of witnesses and facts. The Committee was chaired by Rep. Benny Thompson, a Democrat, with Rep. Liz Cheney, as Vice Chairwoman.
Cheney and the committee members clearly knew that Hutchinson’s account was debunked by the very driver who allegedly struggled with Trump. Yet, they allowed the media to report the incident for months while rebuffing the requests of the driver. Loudermilk is quoted as saying “We’re talking about the driver of the limousine, and the head of the entire protective detail. They were brought in by the select committee to testify, but they weren’t brought in until November.”
The false account was given by Hutchinson in June of that year.
The Secret Service driver testified Trump never tried to reach for or grab the wheel of the SUV.
Notably, the transcript shows Cheney trying to explain the delay as due to the need for the Secret Service to produce all documents in the January 6 investigation.
Yet, she had no problem with making the false story public through Hutchinson before such supporting material was supplied. She also did not suggest any countervailing testimony or witnesses on the issue as the media ran with the account. Instead, Cheney publicly teased the claim that they had much more evidence of crimes against Trump, which never materialized. Cheney ended one hearing by calling for more officials to come forward and noting that Trump family members and former officials have now come forward with their own public “confessions.”
Many of us support the effort to bring greater transparency to what occurred on Jan. 6th and these hearings have offered a great deal of important new information. Indeed, it has proven gut-wrenching in the accounts of lawyers and staff trying to combat baseless theories and to protect the constitutional process.
Yet, the heavy-handed approach to framing the evidence by the Committee was both unnecessary and at times counterproductive. The strength of some of this evidence would not have been diminished by a more balanced committee or investigation.
We previously discussed the highly scripted and entirely one-sided presentation of evidence in the Committee. Indeed, witnesses were primarily used to present what Speaker Nancy Pelosi referred to as “the narrative” where their prior videotaped testimony was shown and they were given narrow follow-up questions. They at times seemed more like props than witnesses — called effectively to recite prior statements between well-crafted, impactful video clips. It had the feel of a news package, which may be the result of the decision to bring in a former ABC executive to produce the hearings.
That framing led to glaring omissions. The Committee routinely edited videotapes and crafted presentations to eliminate alternative explanations or opposing viewpoints like repeatedly editing out Trump telling his supporters to go to the Capitol peacefully.
What is striking was that offering a more balanced account, including allowing the Republicans to appoint their own members (in accordance with long-standing tradition), would not have lessened much of this stunning testimony. Yet, allowing Republicans to pick their members (yes, including Rep. Jim Jordan) would have prevented allegations of a highly choreographed show trial. It would have added credibility to the process.
If the Committee had a single member with a dissenting or even skeptical viewpoint, testimony on issues like the fight in the presidential limo could have been challenged before it was thrown before the world.
That was clearly not in the interests of the J6 Committee or the media, which eagerly spread this false account.
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#181014 06/17/202412:12 PM06/17/202412:12 PM
Cotton: There’s a ‘Strong Case’ for Many of the January 6 Defendants to Be Pardoned
Jeff Poor16 Jun 2024
During this week’s broadcast of CNN’s “State of the Union,” Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) discussed the double standard of justice applied to the January 6, 2021 protesters, noting that some of those who were convicted of misdemeanors had pre-trial incarceration last longer than their sentences.
According to Cotton, the January 6 standard was not applied to Black Lives Matter protesters who engaged in acts of violence against federal property.
He also told CNN’s Jake Tapper there was a case for a presidential pardon for some of the January 6 protesters.
Partial transcript as follows:
COTTON: Well, look, what happened on January 6, 2021, is that there was a protest in Washington that got out of hand, and it became a riot.
And as I have said from the very beginning, anyone who injured a law enforcement officer or committed acts of violence on January 6 at the Capitol should be prosecuted and face severe consequences.
Again, that’s unlike Democrats, who won’t prosecute violent protesters, for instance, from Democratic street militias outside the homes of Supreme Court justices or defacing statues of veterans right across from the White House.
Anyone who commits acts of violence, in my opinion, should be prosecuted and face severe consequences.
TAPPER: So you disagree when Donald Trump says, as president, he will considering — he will consider pardoning every one of the January 6 rioters convicted in court? He said every one, not — and I understand that others who maybe didn’t participate in violent protests are different than the ones who used violence or assaulted police officers.
But he says every one. He’s considering it.
COTTON: But he didn’t say — he didn’t say he would.
TAPPER: No, he said consider it.
COTTON: He said he would consider it. I think what that means is what he did in his first term. He’d take each case for a pardon request on a case-by-case basis.
And I do think there’s a strong case for many of the defendants to be pardoned, because they didn’t engage in acts of violence. They didn’t damage federal property. In some cases, they were subject to pretrial detention for a longer period than the sentences for the misdemeanor crimes that they faced.
Some of them are probably about to have their convictions or their indictments overturned by a Supreme Court decision, because the Biden administration stretched the law beyond reasonable bounds to go after some of the people who were present, not even in the Capitol, but near the Capitol that day, which is, again, in contrast to the violent pro-Hamas protesters you see outside the White House or Democratic street militias who are marching in violation of federal law outside Supreme Court justices’ homes trying to intimidate them on the way they rule in a particular case.
TAPPER: I will just observe that some critics might say you — it sounds like you have a different standard. You have a tough law and order stance on everything, other than these issues here that have to do with President Trump and his supporters.
You seem to have it — because you have a very hard-line stance on law and order.
COTTON: No.
TAPPER: But, here, you’re talking about, oh, maybe pardoning them if they didn’t engage in violence.
That’s not the language you use when you’re talking about the Black Lives Matter protesters or others.
COTTON: Well, many of the BLM and Antifa riots in 2020 were not so-called peaceful protests, as some on your network said. They were looting and rioting and committing arson and murder.
Again, these same — America techniques that were used for every grandma in a MAGA hat who was within a country mile of the Capitol on January 6 are not being used for the street militias who protested outside Supreme Court justices’ homes or the pro-Hamas lunatics who were defacing statues of veterans or who occupied college campuses last month.
I’m simply calling for the same standards to be used regardless of one’s politics. That’s the essence of the rule of law.
Follow Jeff Poor on Twitter @jeff_poor
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#181016 06/17/202405:20 PM06/17/202405:20 PM
House Chairman Barry Loudermilk, R-Ga., sent requests to 15 federal agencies Wednesday asking for all documents that were previously turned over to the Jan. 6 Select Committee after that Democrat-led committee failed to hand over a majority of those files to the new Republican majority after the 2022 election.
Loudermilk's House Administration Committee Subcommittee on Oversight has been investigating the response to Jan. 6 by various federal agencies and the Capitol Police as well as the investigation of the Democrat-run Jan. 6 committee and its final report.
"The Select Committee on January 6, under Chair Bennie Thompson and Vice Chair Liz Cheney, obtained numerous productions of records from federal agencies and the DC government during its investigation. However, only a fraction of these records were properly archived and handed over to House Republicans in January 2023. Therefore Congressman Loudermilk has no choice but to re-do the work of the Select Committee," reads a statement released by the subcommittee announcing the letters to the federal agencies.
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#181055 06/28/202405:00 PM06/28/202405:00 PM
The Supreme Court today rejected the statutory interpretation underlying a criminal charge against some of the Donald Trump supporters who participated in the riot at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021. The same charge—obstructing an official proceeding—also figures in the federal indictment accusing the former president himself of illegally attempting to reverse the outcome of the 2020 presidential election.
Prosecutors alleged that rioters obstructed an official proceeding by interrupting the congressional ratification of the election results. In Trump's case, they argued that he interfered with that process by promoting the stolen-election fantasy that motivated the rioters, a subset of the protesters who attended the pre-riot rally at which he ginned up his supporter's outrage at President Joe Biden's supposedly illegitimate victory and urged them to march on the Capitol "peacefully and patriotically." But according to the Supreme Court, neither the rioters' actions nor Trump's meet the elements of this offense.
The case involves Joseph Fischer, a former police officer who was charged with obstructing an official proceeding under 18 USC 1512(c) after participating in the riot. That provision was created by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, a 2002 law that Congress approved in response to a financial scandal involving the destruction of potentially incriminating documents by the accounting firm Arthur Andersen. In light of that context and the provision's structure, Fischer argued, his conduct at the Capitol, which allegedly included entering the building and confronting police officers, did not fit the requirements for prosecuting someone under that statute.
Six justices agreed. Writing for the majority in Fischer v. United States, Chief Justice John Roberts says proving a violation of Section 1512(c) requires "establish[ing] that the defendant impaired the availability or integrity for use in an official proceeding of records, documents, objects," or "other things used in the proceeding, or attempted to do so."
Section 1512(c)(1) applies to anyone who "corruptly…alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other object, or attempts to do so, with the intent to impair the object's integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding." Section 1512(c)(2), the provision used in the Capitol riot cases, applies to anyone who "otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so." Both are felonies punishable by up to 20 years in prison.
The crucial question, Roberts says, is whether "this 'otherwise' clause should be read in light of the limited reach of the specific provision that precedes it," as a federal judge concluded, or as a catchall broad enough to encompass Fischer's behavior, as a divided D.C. Circuit panel held. Roberts concludes that the latter interpretation is implausible.
"Subsection (c)(1) describes particular types of criminal conduct in specific terms," Roberts writes. "To ensure the statute would not be read as excluding substantially similar activity not mentioned, (c)(2) says it is also illegal to engage in some broader range of unenumerated conduct."
To determine how broad that "range of unenumerated conduct" is, Roberts relies on two interpretive principles. "The canon of noscitur a sociis teaches that a word is 'given more precise content by the neighboring words with which it is associated,'" he notes. That principle "avoid[s] ascribing to one word a meaning so broad that it is inconsistent" with "the company it keeps." And under "the related canon of ejusdem generis," a "general or collective term" at the end of "a list of specific items" is typically "controlled and defined by reference to" the "specific classes…that precede it."
Roberts illustrates those principles with the example of a sign at a zoo that says, "Do not pet, feed, yell or throw objects at the animals, or otherwise disturb them." Does that last phrase encompass "a visitor [who] eats lunch in front of a hungry gorilla, or talks to a friend near its enclosure"? Common sense suggests not.
...
The practical implications of this decision are important for defendants like Fischer, given the stiff punishment authorized by this provision. But there is no shortage of other charges that the Justice Department can file (and has filed) against the Capitol rioters, ranging from misdemeanors such as "entering and remaining in a restricted building" to felonies such as aggravated assault. And while the Court's decision negates two of the charges against Trump, it does not affect the other two counts in the election interference indictment: conspiracy to defraud the United States and conspiracy to deprive Americans of their voting rights.
The more serious threat to that prosecution is the litigation over whether—and, if so, to what extent—Trump is immune from criminal charges based on his "official acts" as president. The Supreme Court is expected to rule on that question this Monday. But with just four months to go before the presidential election, it seems likely that, even if the Court clears the way, any trial would begin after that contest is decided. If Trump wins the election, as he seems poised to do right now, he surely will find a way to make the case disappear.
Read the whole thing at the link.
Onward and upward, airforce
Re: The Jan. 6 Show Trials
[Re: airforce]
#181280 09/22/202410:58 AM09/22/202410:58 AM
The Silent Insurrection: General Milley’s Hand On January 6
Authored by Haley McLean via Deaclassified with Julie Kelly,
In the days and weeks leading up to January 6, the nation’s highest-ranking military officer, then-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley, was moving in lockstep with the political anxieties of top Democratic leaders.
These Democrats grew anxious as over 140 House Republicans planned to contest the election results during the electoral college certification that day. Milley was then deeply engaged with a circle of confidants including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer, former Obama National Security Advisor Susan Rice, and former Defense Secretary Robert Gates, among others—all of whom shared a unified disdain for President Donald Trump.
At a House Oversight Committee hearing in April addressing the 3-hour and 19-minute delay in mobilizing the D.C. National Guard on January 6, Colonel Earl Matthews, one of four Department of Defense witnesses, testified about an “irrational” fear among a “clique” of senior military officers concerning the potential misuse of the National Guard by the president. He indicated that these concerns were influenced behind the scenes by Milley, who often made disparaging remarks about the president and regularly referred to his fear of a so-called potential “Reichstag moment.”
In April 2024, Col. Earl Matthews, general counsel for DC National Guard, gave a detailed account as to how Army Sec Ryan McCarthy was unreachable the afternoon of Jan 6 for final authorization to deploy guard.
Matthews also discussed Gen. Milley’s suspicious conduct before J6 pic.twitter.com/tMAW6BjMI9
— Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 (@julie_kelly2) September 20, 2024
Meanwhile, Milley has insisted he maintained a posture of strict neutrality, vocally distancing his leadership of the military from the political turmoil surrounding the 2020 presidential election. “My job is to stay clean by ensuring that the uniformed military remains out of domestic politics,” Milley stated during his testimony before the January 6 Select Committee. “The United States military has no role in domestic politics, period, full stop.”
Nevertheless, accounts of Milley’s approach to the unfolding situation during the late days of the Trump administration, as detailed in Carol Leonnig and Philip Rucker’s I Alone Can Fix It and Susan Glasser and Peter Baker’s August 2022 report in The New Yorker, present a picture of Milley that is much different from the disinterested persona he has disingenuously cultivated.
Some excerpts follow:
Considering resigning in the summer of 2020 during the height of the George Floyd riots, Milley ultimately decided against it. “Fuck that shit,” he told his staff, “I’ll just fight him.” Despite assurances to confidants that he would never openly defy the president—a move he considered illegal—he was “determined to plant flags.” Milley envisioned a scenario involving either a declaration of martial law or a presidential invocation of the Insurrection Act with “Trumpian Brown Shirts fomenting violence.” Embodying a self-styled narrative of heroic defiance, Milley was prepared to face severe consequences to counter what he perceived as a grave threat. “If they want to court-martial me or put me in prison, have at it,” Milley told his staff, “but I will fight from the inside.” Milley saw himself as “tasked” with safeguarding “against Trump and his people” from potentially misusing the military, something he confided in a “trusted confidant” to ensure he remained true to this plan. “I have four tasks from now until the twentieth of January,” he affirmed, “and I’m going to accomplish my mission.”
Milley’s Cohort of Confidants
I Alone Can Fix It highlights how Milley, as the joint session approached and more than 140 House Republicans were pledged to contest the election results, shared his anxiety with “senior leaders” in Congress who sought his “comfort” amid fears of “attempted coups.” The New Yorker’s August 2022 report further reveals Milley’s communications with key Democrats, specifically Pelosi and Schumer.
Additionally, the New Yorker report describes Milley’s continued outreach to “Democrats close to Biden,” which included “regular” interactions with Susan Rice, former Obama national security advisor. Known for her role in helping to orchestrate the Trump-Russia collusion hoax, Rice’s expertise in activities aimed at undermining the former president raises this question: What was it about her that made Milley want to seek her guidance in the days leading up to January 6?
The report also references Robert Gates, former Secretary of Defense during both the Obama and Bush administrations, as another key figure in Milley’s circle of confidants. Gates reportedly advised Milley to remain in the Pentagon as long as possible, citing President Trump’s “increasingly erratic and dangerous behavior.” I Alone Can Fix It also depicts Gates as a mentor to Milley, urging him not to resign during the final months of the Trump administration. He’s quoted advising Milley, “Don’t quit. Steel your back. It’s not going to be easy, but you’re the right guy in the right place and at the right time.” Liz Cheney and Milley’s “Nightmare Scenarios”
During Trump’s final months in office, the New Yorker report notes that Milley had two “nightmare scenarios” running through his mind: One was that Trump might spark an external crisis, such as a war with Iran, to divert attention or to create a pretext for a power grab at home, and the other was that Trump would manufacture a domestic crisis to justify ordering the military into the streets to prevent the transfer of power.
On December 26, 2020, the two “nightmare scenarios” then preoccupying Milley transitioned from his personal concerns to the public domain in a column by Washington Post reporter David Ignatius—a journalist with close ties to both (you guessed it) the Obama and Bush administrations.
Ignatius’s extensive connections within these administrations are detailed in a March 2012 Politico report, which highlights his significant access to senior White House and Pentagon officials, including being tapped by the Obama White House for exclusive access to the Bin Laden documents in 2012. Additionally, former Vice President Dick Cheney mentioned Ignatius in his 2011 memoir, In My Time, co-authored with his daughter, former House Republican Liz Cheney. In the memoir, Cheney recounts concerns about leaks to the press during the Bush administration and reveals that a source had spoken to Ignatius at the president’s instruction.
Coincidentally, in her 2023 memoir, Oath and Honor, Liz Cheney also references Ignatius’s December 26, 2020, Washington Post column that unveiled the “nightmare scenarios” Milley had envisioned. That evening, she notes, the column “caught my attention” as Ignatius, “a longtime journalist well-sourced at the Pentagon, reported that senior government officials feared Trump was ‘threatening to overstep the constitutional limits of his power.’” Cheney cites her discovery of Milley’s concerns in this article as the catalyst to her mobilization of all 10 living former Secretaries of Defense to sign a letter warning the current Defense Department leadership and President Trump to stay within bounds. Additionally, she reveals that when Robert Gates, a mentor to Milley, was approached to join this effort, he responded, “If Cheney’s on, I’m on.”
I Alone Can Fix It reports that on the evening of January 2, 2021, Milley was “tipped off” by a “former defense secretary” about an impending Washington Post opinion piece authored by those same 10 living former defense secretaries Liz Cheney mobilized for the purpose on the basis of Milley’s “nightmare scenario” fears. The book also notes that on January 7, 2021—the day after the chaotic events of January 6—Cheney called Milley to check in. “How are you doing?” he asked her. “That fucking guy Jim Jordan. That son of a bitch,” Cheney responded. What more might we learn about Milley’s interactions with Cheney in the days leading up to January 6? Surely, this was not their first conversation about the events that would ultimately unfold that day. The January 6 Committee’s “Investigation”
In the months following January 6, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who previously had received assurances from Milley that he would not use the military for domestic purposes politically favorable to Trump, established the Select Committee on January 6 to “investigate” the day’s events. Remarkably, Liz Cheney was appointed vice chair of the panel, a position typically reserved for a member of the majority party.
According to a November 2022 Washington Post report, Cheney exerted a “remarkable level” of control over much of the committee’s work. Staffers, frustrated with Cheney’s insistence on centering the final report on President Trump, expressed concerns that important findings unrelated to Trump would be withheld from the public.
Consistent with Cheney’s objectives for the committee’s investigation, General Milley offered his own criticisms of President Trump. “You know, you’re the Commander-in-Chief,” he told the committee, “you’ve got an assault going on at the Capitol of the United States of America, and there’s nothing? No call? Nothing? Zero?” Milley and McCarthy’s January 5 Memo
During his interview with the January 6 Committee, Milley explained that in preparation for January 6, the role of the D.C. National Guard was defined in a memorandum he described as “very strict on the use of the military.” Milley detailed how the memorandum prohibited the use of any riot control agents, stating, “We’re not doing it … and not only not doing it, you’re not going to have it. You’re not going to have the opportunity to use it.” Additionally, he mentioned that while such measures might be authorized under different circumstances on another day, they were explicitly forbidden “at that time, on this day.”
This directive was ultimately issued by Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy to Major General William Walker, commanding general of the D.C. National Guard, on January 5, 2021. Milley disclosed to the committee that he was actively involved in advising McCarthy on the memorandum, “line by line going through this, lining it out, editing, and stuff like that, resulting in this memo.”
The January 5 memo, carefully crafted by Milley and McCarthy, authorized 340 D.C. National Guard personnel to assist law enforcement with traffic control points and metro station support, and stationed 40 personnel at Joint Base Andrews to serve as the Guard’s Quick Reaction Force (QRF) in case of an emergency. However, this memo restricted General Walker from employing the QRF without explicit personal approval from Army Secretary McCarthy—a condition previously not imposed.
In March 2021, General Walker testified before the Senate Rules and Homeland Security Committee, stating that he had the authority to employ the Guard’s QRF before January 6 and described the new restrictions as “unusual.”
He also testified to the January 6 Committee about his inability to reach Secretary McCarthy on January 6, revealing that it was the first time he found the phone number he had for McCarthy to be out of service. Additionally, General Walker noted that Colonel Earl Matthews, who had McCarthy’s private number due to their social acquaintance, was also unable to reach him.
This breakdown in communication occurred just one day after McCarthy had issued the memorandum requiring General Walker to obtain explicit approval from him for employing the Guard’s QRF. What could possibly account for McCarthy’s unavailability during those critical hours? Did McCarthy somehow overlook the crucial role he had defined for himself with the new restrictions imposed just a day earlier? Where’s McCarthy?
On January 6, Acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller approved the deployment of the D.C. National Guard by 3:04 p.m. The protocol then required Army Secretary McCarthy to convey this authorization to General Walker to enable the deployment of the D.C. National Guard. However, McCarthy never conveyed this authorization, resulting in the more than 3 hour delay.
The January 6 Committee’s final report states that after Defense Secretary Miller authorized the deployment at 3:04 p.m., Secretary McCarthy called General Walker, instructing him to “mobilize the entire Guard.” However, General Walker “categorically denies” receiving such a call. “Here’s the bottom line,” he said, “The Secretary was unavailable to me, and he never called me.”
It appears, however, that McCarthy changed his story after initially telling the committee that he had called General Walker. The committee’s final report addresses this inconsistency by detailing McCarthy’s actions and whereabouts on January 6 to explain the delay. It explains that starting around 3:00 p.m. on January 6—shortly after Defense Secretary Miller approved the Guard’s deployment at 3:04 p.m.—“25 minutes of Army Secretary McCarthy’s time was spent reassuring members of Congress that the Guard was indeed coming,” even though he had not yet conveyed the order to General Walker. The report continues, stating that by 3:45 p.m., McCarthy had completed his calls—none of which were to General Walker—and after picking up some items from his office, he headed to the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) headquarters to draft a concept of operations, a process that took an additional 20 minutes.
However, when Brigadier General Aaron Dean, another Defense Department witness who testified before the House Oversight Committee, was asked whether he ever saw the plan McCarthy claims to have prepared, he responded, “Not only did I not see the plan, but he was also at the wrong agency.” He elaborated that the lead federal agency for this particular event was the United States Capitol Police, and questioned why McCarthy was at MPD headquarters instead of coordinating with Capitol Police, who were responsible for the security of the Capitol.
The January 6 Committee report also touches on this oversight, noting that no plan from Army leaders ever made it to the troops. “If they came up with a plan, they never shared it with us,” General Walker said, “I never saw a plan from the Department of Defense or the Department of the Army.”
The committee’s report further states that by 4:35 p.m., McCarthy was ready to authorize the deployment of the Guard, but “miscommunication” led to yet another half-hour delay. McCarthy told the committee that he tried to issue the “go” order through his subordinate, General LaNeve—a claim General Walker disputes, insisting the call never occurred. McCarthy rationalized not communicating directly by stating he was at the time drafting his talking points for a planned press conference with D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser, explaining, “I wanted to get my thoughts collected.”
Authorization finally came at 5:09 p.m. during an ongoing video teleconference that had started at 2:30 p.m.. Defense Department witnesses present with General Walker on January 6 testified to the House Oversight Committee that General James McConville, Chief of Staff of the Army, mentioned during the conference that they had received authorization. Colonel Earl Matthews, who was present in the conference room next to General Walker, clarified that, “General McConville is not in the chain of command, so it wasn’t his order to give.” He added that General McConville was merely conveying that they were authorized to deploy. Matthews further specified that the actual authorization did not come from Secretary McCarthy but instead from Secretary Miller. Who’s To Blame?
While the January 6 Committee admits that the delay in mobilizing the D.C. National Guard “seems unnecessary and unacceptable,” it attempts to rationalize and excuse McCarthy’s actions. The report suggests his preoccupation with making phone calls to members of Congress, gathering items from his office, crafting a supposed concept of operations that never reached the troops, and preparing remarks for a televised press conference as mitigating factors, justifying his absence from the day’s critical chain of command communications.
This communication breakdown, stemming from McCarthy, unfolded just one day after he, with General Milley’s input, issued the memorandum requiring General Walker to receive personal authorization from McCarthy to deploy the Guard. Despite these circumstances, the January 6 Committee concluded that the military’s processes that day were merely “imperfect” and found “no evidence that the delay was intentional.”
The January 6 Committee attributes the delay to “military processes, institutional caution, and a revised deployment approval process”—specifically, a process meticulously designed by Milley and McCarthy. Yet, the committee pins the blame on “Trump’s eagerness” to engage the U.S. military, alleging it compelled senior military leaders to take extreme “precautions” for the joint session. “Trump’s eagerness” must also have led McCarthy to remain completely unavailable to General Walker just one day after imposing restrictions that effectively stripped Walker of the authority to deploy the Guard without McCarthy’s explicit approval, thereby cementing the hours-long delay.
Never mind Milley’s explicitly stated mission to “fight” against the president “from the inside” and his intent to “plant flags”—intentions that appear to have materialized in the January 5 memo he meticulously outlined with McCarthy, directly undermining the D.C. National Guard’s ability to restore order that day. Milley’s Insurrection
Milley’s perception of President Trump as a classic authoritarian leader, his willingness to entertain the possibility of Trump engaging in a “Reichstag moment,” and his fears of supposed “Trumpian Brown Shirts fomenting violence,” seems to have influenced his command decisions in the days and weeks leading up to the joint session. While Milley is entitled to his personal political prejudices, it raises the question of whether he lost sight of the fact these were, after all, just his own politically inspired opinions about the president. Did he believe his convictions were so righteous that they justified overstepping legal boundaries and authorizing actions that could be seen as undermining the president’s authority?
The chaotic events of January 6, exacerbated and prolonged by the National Guard’s delayed response, evidently served no benefit to Trump or his allies and instead significantly bolstered the objectives of his adversaries. It’s no wonder the January 6 Committee, which appears solely focused on preventing Trump from ever taking office again, shows little interest in highlighting that Milley, who swore an oath to obey the orders of the President of the United States, embarked on a mission to defy the former Commander-in-Chief, and ultimately seems to have sabotaged President Trump on that day.
"The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon, and when it does come, my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard." Gen. T.J. Jackson, March 1861
![[Linked Image]](https://i.imgur.com/3TfvRBV.png)
![[Linked Image]](https://i.imgur.com/eOIDZzY.png)
![[Linked Image]](https://i.imgur.com/orsKWNB.png)
![[Linked Image]](https://i.imgur.com/exiLIu4.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](https://i.imgur.com/nktwkON.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](https://i.imgur.com/uM4CKoK.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](https://api-assets.infowars.com/2022/07/Screen-Shot-2022-07-11-at-12.18.24-PM-1024x723.png)
![[Linked Image]](https://api-assets.infowars.com/2022/07/Screen-Shot-2022-07-11-at-12.29.41-PM.png)
![[Linked Image]](https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2022/08/01/21/60953819-11070335-image-a-19_1659385835443.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2022/08/01/21/60954703-11070335-image-a-11_1659385525260.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](https://www.informationliberation.com/files/go-go-go-j6-undercover-cops-encouraged-enter-capitol-2.png)
![[Linked Image]](https://www.informationliberation.com/files/FpQ34xSXwAA0c0j.jpg)