Tag: riots

House subcommittee releases thousands of hours of new J6 footage

House Administration Subcommittee on Oversight Chairman Barry Loudermilk on Monday released an additional 4,000+ hours of United States Capitol Police (USCP) footage of the January 6 riot.

Loudermilk’s committee is working on a new investigation into the Capitol riot, after he claimed that the work of the Democrat-led Select Committee on the January 6 Capitol Attack was so tainted that the final report should be invalidated. 

The congressman previously accused the select committee of cherry-picking its evidence in their investigation, and said some of the pieces of evidence were “flat out lies.”

“My subcommittee’s investigation has one goal: Ensure the American people get the complete unvarnished truth about January 6th,” Loudermilk said in a social media post on Monday. “Today’s video footage release brings us one critical step closer to accountability and accomplishing that important mission.”

The new footage can be found on the video streaming platform Rumble.

Keep reading

Supreme Court Ruling Alters January 6 Charges: From Insurrection to Trespassing

The Supreme Court’s decision in Fischer v. U.S. has struck down one of the most common charges against January 6 defendants: “obstruction of an official proceeding.” This ruling has profound implications for the numerous cases that relied on this charge, rendering many of these convictions invalid.

For years, the narrative around January 6 has centered on the idea of an “insurrection.” Politicians and pundits alike have used this term to describe the events of that day, often framing it as an organized attempt to overthrow the government. However, the Supreme Court’s ruling signals a significant shift in how these actions are legally interpreted. The events of January 6 are now increasingly seen as a case of mass trespass and unlawful entry rather than an insurrection.

The Justice Department’s decision to use the obstruction charge, which stems from a law enacted post-Enron to criminalize the destruction of evidence, has now been called into question. The broad interpretation of this law allowed it to be applied to hundreds of January 6 cases. At least a quarter of the prosecutions included this charge. The ruling will result in resentencing for many, and pending cases will proceed without the obstruction claim.Former President Donald Trump is also affected by this decision. Special Counsel Jack Smith’s indictment against Trump in Washington, D.C., includes obstruction charges. With the Supreme Court’s ruling, half of this indictment could be dropped, necessitating a potential superseding indictment. This development could derail Smith’s efforts to bring Trump to trial before the election, a goal that has been prioritized by both Smith and Judge Tanya Chutkan.

The ruling challenges the long-held belief that January 6 was an insurrection. Polls show that a majority of citizens view the events as a protest that escalated into a riot, not an attempt to overthrow the government. This perspective is reinforced by the Supreme Court’s decision, which suggests that the legal framework used to prosecute many of the January 6 defendants was flawed.

Keep reading

Sex, Lies, & Racial Hysteria: The Quiet J6 Killing Of Rosanne Boyland

One wonders what thoughts passed through the fevered mind of Officer Lila Morris as she struck the seemingly lifeless Rosanne Boyland over the head with a branch, then struck her again, and then struck her a third time so hard that the branch snapped in half.

If Morris thought Boyland a hateful white supremacist who deserved her fate, one could, if not forgive her, at least understand how she came to think that way. For the last two years, Morris had heard little else about these MAGA minions and the monster who led them.

President-elect Joe Biden had set the tone when he launched his presidential campaign in April 2019, implying President Donald Trump had called the neo-Nazis involved in the Charlottesville dust-up “very fine people.” No major candidate has ever begun a presidential campaign with a more divisive and slanderous opening gambit (one that Snopes conceded was false just this past week).

Biden continued the slander throughout the campaign. Just four weeks before the 2020 election, he weighed in on the well-timed bust of an FBI-massaged plot to kidnap Michigan governor Gretchen Whitmer. “There is a through line from President Trump’s dog whistles and tolerance of hate, vengeance, and lawlessness to plots such as this one,” fumed Biden. “He is giving oxygen to the bigotry and hate we see on the march in our country.”

If Morris feared the depredations of these Hun-like hordes, she was in good company.

“Just remember, we’re on the right side of history,” Rep. Val Demings told a colleague as they huddled fearfully in the House gallery on January 6.

“If we all die today, another group will come in and certify those ballots.”

“White supremacy and patriarchy are very linked in a lot of ways,” congressional drama queen Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez told CNN’s Dana Bash.

“There’s a lot of sexualizing of that violence. And I didn’t think that I was just going to be killed. I thought other things were going to happen to me as well.”

When Bash asked AOC if she thought she was going to be raped, AOC answered, “Yeah, yeah. I thought I was.”

The left has been feeding its base a steady diet of racial fear and loathing for generations.

Ocasio-Cortez is Puerto Rican. Demings and Morris black. Also black is Michael Byrd, the Capitol Police lieutenant (now captain) who shot and killed January 6 protestor and Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt.

Babbitt and Boyland were both white.

The phrase “had the races been reversed” is such a manifest truism that pundits on the right no longer bother to complete the thought

Keep reading

Supreme Court strikes obstruction charge used for hundreds of Jan. 6 rioters

Federal prosecutors improperly charged a Jan. 6 defendant with obstruction, a divided Supreme Court ruled on Friday, likely upending many cases against rioters who disrupted the certification of the 2020 presidential election.

After the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol, federal prosecutors charged more than 350 participants in the pro-Trump mob with obstructing or impeding an official proceeding. The charge carries a 20-year maximum penalty and is part of a law enacted after the exposure of massive fraud andshredding of documents during the collapse of the energy giant Enron.

Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. said the government’s broad reading of the statute would give prosecutors too much discretion to seek a 20-year maximum sentence “for acts Congress saw fit to punish only with far shorter terms of imprisonment.”

To use the statute, he wrote, the government must establish that a defendant “impaired the availability or integrity” of records, documents or other objects used in an official proceeding.

In dissent, Justice Amy Coney Barrett — joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan — said the court’s reading of the obstruction statute is too limited and requires the majority to do “textual backflips to find some way — any way — to narrow the reach” of the law.

Friday’s ruling has the potential to affect the convictions and sentences of a small set of rioters — around 27— who are serving time in prison for only this felony. It also could impact about 110 more who are awaiting trial or sentencing, according to prosecutors.In addition, the ruling may affect former president Donald Trump’s stalled trialfor allegedly trying to remain in power after his 2020 defeat; two of the four charges he faces are based on the obstruction statute, and he could move to have those charges dismissed.

Keep reading

Police officers who attended Trump’s Jan. 6 ‘Stop the Steal’ rally may be allowed to keep their identities private

A striking legal question came before justices of the Washington State Supreme Court this week: Does a group of police officers who attended the “Stop the Steal” rally for Donald Trump at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, have a Constitutionally-protected right to keep the results of a probe into their specific conduct that day secret, or must their names — and those results — be revealed to the public?

The question unfolded during oral arguments in Jane & John Does 1-6 v. Seattle Police Department et al. on Tuesday.

At the center of the case are six police officers, two of whom were fired in August 2021 and have been identified publicly by the Seattle Police Department as married former officers Caitlin Everett and Alexander Everett. Four others have not been named publicly by the department though state prosecutors noted to the Washington State Supreme Court on Tuesday that their names have previously emerged on social media. This factor is central to the state’s case; as prosecutors pointed out this week, these four individuals have not only retained their roles at the Seattle Police Department but also have not suffered any harassment as an investigation got underway, The Associated Press reported. 

Keep reading

VICTORY: FBI Whistleblower Who Exposed Agency’s Lies About January 6th Has Security Clearence Reinstated, Will Receive Over Two Years of Back Pay

A patriotic former FBI agent who helped expose the agency’s lies about the January 6th protests has scored a major victory against his former employer.

FBI agent Marcus Allen had his security clearance suspended in 2022 after he raised questions about Director Christopher Wray’s statements regarding law enforcement involvement during the January 6th protests.

Empower Oversight, a legal advocacy group, filed a lawsuit against the bureau and asserted that the FBI’s actions were retaliatory and falsely labeled Allen as disloyal to the United States.

It has now been confirmed that the FBI reinstated Allen’s security clearance on May 31st and agreed to pay him over two months of back pay as part of a settlement between the two parties. He has now resigned from the bureau.

“This letter is to inform you that I am reinstating your Top Secret (TS) security clearance effective upon receipt of this letter,” the FBI said in a letter to Allen. “My decision to reinstate your security clearance is based upon a determination that the original security concerns have been investigated and have been sufficiently mitigated.”

Allen’s lawyer, Tristan Leavitt, described the settlement as a “total vindication” for his client.

“The F.B.I. has completely backed down and provided everything that we had asked for on behalf of Marcus,” Leavitt said. “It’s clear from the evidence and the FBI’s capitulation there was absolutely no truth to their accusations.”

Allen upset his superiors at the bureau when he testified before the House Judiciary Committee last year and revealed how he was the victim of political retaliation for his views about January 6th.

“I was not in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 6, played no part in the events of Jan. 6, and I condemn all criminal activity that occurred,” he testified. “Instead, it appears that I was retaliated against because I forwarded information to my superiors and others that questioned the official narrative of the events of Jan. 6.”

Keep reading

Newly Published Records Show FBI Officials Were Instructed To ‘Stand Down’ The Day Before Jan. 6 After Targeted Individuals From a Group They Had Infiltrated Decided Not to Come to DC

The Federal Bureau of Investigation continues to cover-up how the government entrapped Americans who demonstrated at the January 6 Save America rally.

In response to a Freedom of Information Act request, the FBI released a trove of internal documents on May 7 on “The Vault” section of its website titled “United States Capitol Violence and related Events of January 6, 2021 Part 35.”

Email correspondence among FBI officials in the days leading up to Jan. 6, real-time reactions to violence at the fedsurrection, and guidance of the bureau’s response to the Capitol riot are among the 107 pages of newly released documents.

But the most interesting aspect of the FOIA drop is the information the bureau concealed. The increasingly lawless agency, that continues to surveil and terrorize Americans who protested that day, heavily redacted nearly every page of the records, hiding all evidence potentially indicating malfeasance.

Despite a frustrating number of the pages being redacted,  some interesting tidbits remain among the scraps.

An email thread with the subject line, “Stand down. See Below” was sent at 5:46 pm the day before the massive crowd of demonstrators was bombed, gassed and shot by police at the Capitol.

“We are standing down in [REDACTED]. The predicated subjects have been [REDACTED]. [REDACTED] is being informed. The only people from the group who are continuing to DC are non-subjects, who are not carrying weapons, and appear to be solely involved in legal First Amendment protesting,” states one of the emails from the thread.

Keep reading

START THE COURT MARTIAL PROCEEDINGS: DC National Guard Whistleblower Alleges Trump’s Commander-in-Chief Powers Were Revoked by Military Brass During January 6 Capitol Riot

In April the House Subcommittee on Oversight held a hearing with National Guard whistleblowers who stepped forward to correct the media lies and dishonest narrative by Democrats on the January 6 protests and riots.

Four members of the National Guard testified that they were ready to be deployed on January 6 but THE PENTAGON held them back!

This directly brings General Milley’s actions into question!

Kash Patel tipped us off last month that there were more reports like this coming.

National Guard whistleblowers: Command Sgt. Major Michael E. Brooks, Colonel Earl G. Matthews, Aaron Dean Retired, and Captain Timothy Nick stepped forward and testified before Congress to correct the record on January 6.

As The Gateway Pundit previously reported, former Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Washington DC Mayor Muriel Bowser were both warned about the security situation prior to January 6th, and both turned down National Guard troops at the US Capitol that day.

Pelosi and Mayor Muriel Bowser turned down thousands of National Guard troops at the Capitol on January 6 for political reasons.

Chris Wray’s FBI also refused to notify the Trump administration and his cabinet secretaries that they believed there could be violence like the mass protests at the Capitol that took place that day.

Nancy Pelosi also refused the National Guard at the US Capitol due to politics.

Capitol Police Chief Steve Sund said he asked House and Senate security officials for permission to request that the D.C. National Guard be placed on standby in case he needed quick backup. But they both turned him down.

John Solomon from Just The News released an explosive report in 2022 that revealed Capitol Police were first warned about possible violence at the January 6th protests TWO WEEKS before the planned rallies.

Keep reading

Military Whistleblowers to Challenge Jan. 6 Claims

D.C. National Guard members who have never talked publicly are set to challenge claims about what happened on Jan. 6, 2021.

The members are going to testify on April 17 that narratives contained in an official report on Jan. 6 “are false,” Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.) told The Epoch Times.

Brig. Gen. Aaron Dean, the D.C. National Guard’s adjutant general, and Capt. Timothy Nick, a top aide to the D.C. National Guard’s commanding general, will be speaking for the first time in public about the events that unfolded on Jan. 6.

D.C. National Guard Command Sgt. Michael Brooks, a senior officer with the Guard until he retired in 2022, and Col. Earl Matthews, a lawyer who was with Commanding General William Walker throughout the day, are also scheduled to testify to the House of Representatives Administration Committee’s Subcommittee on Oversight in the public hearing on Wednesday.

Command Sgt. Brooks has only offered brief comments on Jan. 6. Col. Matthews co-authored a previously-released memorandum with Major Gen. Walker, who is now retired, that challenged claims in an official report on Jan. 6 from the Department of Defense’s Office of Inspector General (DOD IG).

“We have several whistleblowers that have come forward and said a lot of what’s in that DOD IG report is false. It’s fabricated,” Mr. Loudermilk told The Epoch Times.

Keep reading

Government Employee Violated Law on Jan. 6 but Wasn’t Prosecuted: Document

A U.S. government employee violated the law on Jan. 6, 2021, but was not prosecuted, according to an internal report obtained by The Epoch Times.

Investigators with the U.S. Treasury Department Office of Inspector General (OIG), acting on a tip from the U.S. Department of Justice’s inspector general, found that an OIG worker was on U.S. Capitol grounds as the Capitol was breached on Jan. 6.

The employee admitted during an interview with the OIG to being near the Capitol but made a number of false claims, including that he did not witness any violence and did not do anything illegal, according to the OIG.

There was “widespread unlawful behavior” happening around the Capitol when the worker was on Capitol grounds, the report stated. Video footage showed that people gained unauthorized access to areas past barricades at about 1:45 p.m., the same time that the Treasury employee later admitted to walking through a U.S. Capitol Police barricade at the East Plaza.

The worker stayed on the grounds, moving to the West Plaza, for about two hours. During that time, he said later, he saw clashes between the Capitol Police and protesters. Video footage from the scene showed law enforcement officers retreating, protesters becoming violent, and barricades lying on the ground.

The Treasury Department worker was not identified by name.

Keep reading