patrick.net

https://twitter.com/FreeStateWill/status/1774522842060648728



See above: https://patrick.net/post/1378157/2023-01-01-january-6th-should-be-a-national?start=210#comment-1991919

Having watched countless hours of January 6 footage in researching my forthcoming book, Ashli: The Untold Story of the Women of January 6, I feel safe to say that Rove has no idea what he is talking about. I would also argue that Trump should talk more about January 6, not less. The Capitol protest/riot lasted a little more than three hours. The Biden witch hunt has lasted more than three years and shows no sign of easing up. Trump is the only one with platform enough to expose this ongoing evil.

And evil it is. Of the ten female “thugs” that I profile, the worst crime any one of them committed was to help break a window. That woman, Rachel Powell, a 40-something mother of eight, is now serving a 57-month prison sentence. Prosecutors asked for eight years. In the way of comparison, female attorney Urooj Rahman, who firebombed at least one police car during the George Floyd riots in New York City, received a 15-month prison sentence.

Two of the ten women profiled did not survive January 6. Ashli Babbitt, a 110-pound Air Force veteran, was killed by a Capitol Police officer in what was arguably the least justified police shooting ever captured on video. That officer has since been promoted. Rosanne Boyland suffocated when police pushed a crowd of protestors on top of her. Once the pile cleared, a female Metropolitan D.C. Police officer mercilessly beat the dead or dying Boyland over the head with a tree branch. This beating was captured on video. The officer in question was rewarded a month later with a trip to the Super Bowl.

Six of the other seven women profiled entered the Capitol through an open door. The seventh climbed through a broken window to make a phone call and promptly climbed out. Those who stayed inside wandered around for ten or fifteen minutes, committed no violence or vandalism, and then left. Five of those women were sent to prison. The other two await sentencing.

Among the latter two is Rebecca Lavrenz, “a praying great grandmother” who was on trial these last two weeks in Washington. Lavrenz was bucking the odds. No D.C. jury had acquitted a J6er. The reason why is easily understood. No J6er has been allowed a change of venue from a district that begrudged Donald Trump no more than 5 percent of its vote.

RFK Jr. debunks claims Jan. 6 was 'insurrection'

Notes protesters 'had no plans or ability to seize the reins of government' ...

Despite the fact that the evidence of that was simply not there, Democrats have championed their talking point because they want, under an obscure constitutional provision adopted after the Civil War, to prevent President Donald Trump from running for office again.

In fact, charges of "insurrection" are ostentatious by their absence from the hundreds and hundreds of court cases brought against those who protested, including the small number who vandalized the Capitol that day. And when leftists in several states, including Colorado, simply decided on their own and without evidence, that they would banish Trump from the ballot, the Supreme Court had to step in and rein them in. ...

The protesters that day were concerned over the undue influences on the 2020 election, which was hit by the $400 million plus that Mark Zuckerberg handed out to elections officials, who often used it to recruit Democrat voters. Never before had such a sum been injected into an American election.

Further was the FBI's interference, when it warned media corporations to suppress reporting on the Biden family scandals revealed in a laptop computer abandoned by Hunter Biden.

Turns out that evidence was factual, and polling later showed had it been reported as other issues during the runup to the election, Joe Biden almost certainly would have lost the election. ...

"Like many reasonable Americans, I am concerned about the possibility that political objectives motivated the vigor of the prosecution of the J6 defendants, their long sentences, and their harsh treatment. That would fit a disturbing pattern of the weaponization of government agencies — the DoJ, the IRS, the SEC, the FBI, etc. — against political opponents," he warned.

SCOTUS Justice Gorsuch Grills Biden DOJ over Extreme Jan 6 Sentences for ‘Mostly Peaceful Protests’

Gorsuch grilled Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar over the extreme prison sentences for those involved in protests at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.

The SCOTUS justice noted the harshness of the sentencing when compared with similarly situated left-wing protesters and rioters.

The overwhelming majority of leftist protesters, violent rioters, and looters face slaps on the wrist if they face any accountability at all.

The court is currently hearing oral arguments in a case brought forward by former Pennsylvania police officer Joseph Fischer.

Fischer is one of several hundred Jan. 6 defendants charged with an obscure felony for “obstruction of an official proceeding.”

The novel legal theory draws from the Enron corruption scandal and has been exclusively deployed against the Jan. 6 defendants.

Jan. 6 defendants are being charged with the felony statute, in addition to a handful of misdemeanors.

Since January 7th, 2020, the United States “Corporation” openly declared war on the American people. Everyone knows about January 6th when a million or more patriots had come together to support our real president, Donald J. Trump.

This event was infiltrated by FBI and CIA agents to entrap and create chaos, but many people don't know what happened On January 7th. Just the very next day, hundred of thousands social media accounts were canceled immediately. Conservative Republican voices were shut down across the United States because you could not dare say anything about the Biden regime and their illegitimate victory in the 2020 election. Through multiple lawsuits, we've now discovered how actively aggressive our government has been against us, against regular people and those who had any type of voice in our country. People have a hard time believing this is actual, but it is. It's happening. It's true, and every day that you watch the weaponization against Donald Trump, the first time that a president has been attacked this way using every facet they have of the justice system to take him down. But the problem is, as you well know, they are not just coming after him.

They're coming after the regular everyday person who dares to stand up to a government and believe that they have a seat at the table. Our founders created a Constitution, but they added something called the Bill of Rights. These are intrinsic rights. They are God-given. They're not mandated. They are God-given. They're intrinsic. We know that we have the right to speak up and say what we want to, to worship as we choose, and to express our grievances to our government. I can tell you right now that even the first amendment to the Bill of Rights, and actually all 10 amendments have been completely corrupted over the last three and a half years.

On November 16th, 2021, I was making breakfast for my boys who I was homeschooling at that time. We had pulled our kids out of these failing public school systems when we heard banging on our door.

I was a regular everyday parent. My husband worked in criminal justice and I was actively involved in politics. We had been rallying our school boards. This was mentioned in that incredible introduction. Thank you. We were doing all the things that citizens need to do to secure their own local communities. It's just a part of our lives, right? It's not special. It's not politics. It's what you're supposed to do as a citizen of your country and us as American citizens. I started hearing, banging- loud banging on my front door. It got louder, my boys got scared, and I heard them start yelling “open up”. “It's the FBI and we have a warrant”. My husband came upstairs. My children were put in their rooms quietly and quickly, and I just remember standing there just completely shell shocked. Because this stuff happens in other countries, countries that don't have a bill of rights, countries that don't have a sheriff, countries that don't have the doctrine of innocent until proven guilty, but everything is changing in America.

They promptly busted open my door with a battering ram. It was unlocked. They took me, handcuffed me and my husband in front of our home, and then paraded us for everyone. See, we had committed no crime. That was three years ago. Nothing's ever been done since.

The government in America is actively using terror and the abuse of law to silence as many people as possible.

National Guard whistleblower claims Trump was stripped of his commander-in-chief powers on January 6

Col. Earl Matthews says Army leaders stripped Trump of authority on January 6
Claims they plotted to balk orders to deploy the National Guard to the Capitol
READ: Ex-Acting Defense Sec. Chris Miller says Jan. 6 panel threatened him

Donald Trump's authority as commander-in-chief was ignored by senior military leadership on January 6, 2021, claims the chief legal advisor for D.C. National Guard on that day.

Colonel Earl Matthews came forward as a whistleblower to the House subcommittee reviewing the January 6 Select Committee's investigation.

He sat down with DailyMail.com two weeks after the public hearing to explain what he saw happen that day.

He claims that Mark Milley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff at the time, and then-Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy, were plotting to disobey any orders handed down by Trump because they 'unreasonably' assumed the then-president was going to break the law and try to use the D.C. National Guard (DCNG) to stop certification of the 2020 presidential election results.

Also upcoming at SCOTUS: Fischer v the United States, as to whether the DOJ tortured a federal statute on shredding financial records to overcharge J-6 rioters. In 2015 the court limited the scope of that law (part of the 2002 Sarbanes-Oxley Act), but Attorney General Merrick Garland used it anyway as an all-purpose dragnet to prosecute hundreds of people who merely paraded through the US Capitol — which provided legal footing for the House J-6 committee to color that event dishonestly as “an insurrection.” A decision against the government should lead to the release of many J-6 prisoners and perhaps lawsuits for malicious prosecution under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA). It would also toss out the pertinent charges in Special Counsel Jack Smith’s DC case against Donald Trump for supposedly fomenting an “insurrection.”

The third and final case that exploded out of the Court’s chambers yesterday is most likely to be the conservative crowd favorite. It was also the decision that triggered furious waves of anger from the left. NBC indignantly ran the story headlined, “Supreme Court rules for Jan. 6 rioter challenging obstruction charge.” Like the two other decisions, this one came down 6-3. But this time, liberal Justice Jackson joined the majority, and Amy Coney Barrett unaccountably joined the minority.

The case involved a January 6th defendant charged with an Enron-era statute intended to prevent the shredding of business documents. But Biden’s DOJ shredded the statute’s language, applying it to anyone who entered the Capitol on January 6th, and to President Trump for making an “insurrection.”

The DOJ warped the statutory language, applying it in a novel, creative, historic way never before used, because the other charges like trespassing were just misdemeanors. But this Enron law was a felony, providing prosecutors up to 20 years of potential prison time per count. Prosecutors charged all the J6ers with their creatively interpreted statute. And the DC judges ate it all up, except for one.

Yesterday’s wild liberal backlash against the decision, featured prominently in the dissent, complained that the majority had “bent over backwards” to corral the statute back into its intended boundaries. But the majority patiently noted that at least one DC judge —Joe Fischer’s judge— had also found the statute inapplicable to strolling into the Capitol. Plus, one of the three liberal DC appellate judges who heard Joe’s appeal agreed. Plus, liberal Justice Jackson agreed with the majority in a concurring opinion, and one of the conservative Justices disagreed.

It was clearly bipartisan. So don’t fall for the narrative that it was about conservative Justices helping out Trump. And yesterday’s hot rhetoric looks pretty fake in light of the questions the Justices asked months ago at oral argument, which correctly signaled how things were going.

Independent journalist and J6 advocate Julie Kelly called this Fischer decision an “unprecedented defeat for Biden” and a “massive victory” for January 6th political prisoners:




A bunch of January 6th prisoners are about to get out of jail much sooner than they would have. I got several excited texts yesterday from lawyers defending J6 people. It will also probably drain the gas out of the DOJ’s continuing prosecutions, which are still being filed as fast as the DOJ can manage.

And Fischer greatly complicates the “insurrection” case against President Trump. It might even end it entirely.

For some reason, liberals were madder about Fischer than they were about the greatly diminished Administrative State after the fall of Chevron. Weird.

President Donald Trump has called for the immediate release of individuals arrested over the January 6 protests at the U.S. Capitol in 2021.

This follows a pivotal Supreme Court decision that may alter the legal landscape for many involved.

In a significant legal and political development, a Supreme Court ruling might change the basis of charges against numerous January 6 defendants, Politico reported.

During a rally in Virginia on Friday, Trump voiced strong support for those arrested over Jan. 6.

He made these remarks following a Supreme Court decision issued the same day.

The high court questioned the grounds of federal obstruction charges against about 350 protesters.

The Supreme Court’s ruling clarified that such charges should be upheld only if it can be demonstrated that the defendants intended to obstruct the physical counting of electoral votes.

This decision has potentially significant implications for those charged.

Reacting to the court’s decision, Trump said:

“Free the [Jan. 6] hostages now.

“They should free them now for what they’ve gone through.”

Trump was emphasizing the lengthy wait and the perceived injustice faced by the defendants.

His comments came just hours after the Supreme Court delivered its 6-3 ruling.