patrick.net

RWSGFY says

This is where having a good lawyer would've made a world of difference.

Doubtful. The venue was too rigged for any J6er to have a fair trial, regardless of legal merit.

This is where having a good lawyer would've made a world of difference.

With a good lawyer

RWSGFY says

With a good lawyer

$200/hour with $10,000 retainer...

Time for Truth and Accountability J6 Committee

The security video tells part of the story of what happened that day. As lives continue to be destroyed by Biden's DOJ, it is imperative House Republicans expose the full truth of January 6.

Notably, Lang does not dispute that he acted violently toward police officers.

Rather, he plans to argue his actions were in self-defense during his trial.

However, he does dispute the applicability of the particular statute that carries a far more severe penalty than any of the other charges he faces for things like assault, disorderly conduct, and trespassing, among other things.

“Without action from this Court, hundreds, if not thousands, of Americans will face substantial prison sentences for doing no more than speaking out at a protest that evolved into a dynamic conflict,” the petition argued.

“It is no overstatement to say the future of the First Amendment hangs in the balance.

“A statute intended to combat financial fraud has been transformed into a blatant political instrument to crush dissent.”

According to the Supreme Court’s docket for the case of Lang v. United States, the petition was accepted in July and, following the subsequent receipt of related motions and briefs, was scheduled for a conference meeting on Dec. 1, at which point the justices will decide whether or not to take up the case.

Nancy Pelosi’s Daughter Caught on Hidden Camera Admitting January 6 Was a Hoax

Nancy Pelosi’s nepo-baby, Alexandra, was caught on camera admitting essentially that January 6 and the ensuing prosecutions were a marketing gimmick to propagandize the public for the benefit of the Democrat Party.

The video, apparently filmed surreptitiously in the style of Project Veritas and released by CitizenLens, reportedly between Pelosi and a January 6 defendant she was courting so as to appear in her documentary of the event, featured Pelosi discussing the political implications of the Jan 6 show trials and their effects on the upcoming 2022 mid-term elections.

"After the Democrats lose the House and then they get rid of the committee, people may lose interest. The first trials are gonna get a lot of attention. It’s like [an] anniversary; the first one is a big deal… No one’s gonna care after the Democrats are out of power. And then take Biden out of office, then who cares?... I know you’re not the bad guys [to the Jan 6 defendant]… If it was an insurrection… you were supposed to have a plan…. You’re going to be able to laugh about this one day."

She then goes on to explain how she knows Gavin McInnes (the purported former leader of the Proud Boys) and used, in fact, to party with him. She knows that he’s a provocateur and doesn’t actually mean what he says.

It’s all bread and circuses, people.

Notice the dispassionate tone of the clip above in which Pelosi is soberly analyzing the political strategy behind the Jan 6 propaganda and the acknowledgment that what happened was not an insurrection compared to the unhinged public utterances of Democrat partisans about how THE LITERAL FOUNDATIONS OF DEMOCRACY™ ARE CRUMBLING IN REAL TIME AND HITLER IS ON THE MARCH.

… And it becomes very clear that the pearl-clutching and the Capitol police officer crying on the stand and Liz Cheney posturing as if she has any principles whatsoever was all a cynical weaponization of a one-off riot — not an insurrection by any means (the rioters didn’t even bring guns to the “insurrection” for God’s sake; who believes they were really trying to “take the Capitol”?) — for political gain.

It was a cheap trick. Alas, the MSNBC viewers of the world on their 12th boosters love cheap tricks.

Meanwhile, Alexandra Pelosi made out like a bandit, on top of all the political capital they squeezed out of Jan 6, with her stupid documentary and the fawning media coverage she got for it.

How the Police Ignited the Crowd on Jan. 6 When They Threw a Grandma Down a Flight of 10 Steps – TWICE!

House Speaker Mike Johnson has released over 40,000 hours of J6 footage including capitol police body cam footage to the public in the interests of transparency, an action which should have been taken years ago. Each new piece of footage only confirms what many Americans already understood - That the few scant minutes of available video recycled by the media paint a false picture of what really happened. Many would argue that J6 was nothing more than a protest that was turned into a riot by police incitement and establishment spin.

Even worse, there are many people now languishing in prison because of that spin. ...

New video clips seem to show capitol police firing rubber bullets, tear gas grenades and stun grenades into crowds of peaceful protesters on J6 before anyone tried to enter the capitol building, possibly triggering the violence that would follow (and creating the footage that was played ad nauseum on major news networks as proof of insurrection).

@AmericanHubener
CAPITOL POLICE ENTRAP CROWD BY KEEPING DOORS WIDE OPEN FOR THEM TO WALK IN Pelosi opened magnetic doors to the Capitol, I.e., Capitol Police Master at Arms opened the doors 100% under Pelosi’s direction:

Siaka Massaquoi, a conservative actor, RedState contributor, and activist from LA, was detained Friday night by the FBI after returning home from a Daily Wire movie premiere for charges related to January 6th, 2021, at the U.S. Capitol.

Siaka starred in the viral Californians Moving To Texas video series produced by The Babylon Bee last year.

Here are a few messages he shared on his Twitter account:

https://notthebee.com/article/siaka-massaquoi-conservative-actor-and-activist-was-detained-by-the-fbi-after-coming-home-from-daily-wires-movie-premiere

Authorities raided Siaka's house over two years ago, but he was not charged with anything at the time.

Turns out Siaka is on a "list." He entered the Capitol on January 6, 2021, but has not been charged with anything. His apartment was raided by over 20 armed FBI agents on June 10, 2021, and he's been under investigation ever since for "associating with members of a social media group."

Republican presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy schooled CNN’s Dana Bash on how the recently released Jan. 6 footage debunks the anti-Trump narrative peddled by her network and other corporate media outlets.

During a post-GOP 2024 debate on Wednesday night, Bash questioned Ramaswamy about his belief that Jan. 6 was likely “an inside job.”

After House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) recently made police bodycam and security footage from the U.S. Capitol public, the video has conflicted with the narrative that the events on January 6, 2021, were a “Trump-incited riot.”

The videos show Capitol Police officers throwing explosives into peaceful crowds and ushering protesters into the building, as Slay News reported.

The new evidence also suggests that FBI agents were operating undercover in the crowds. ...

VIVEK RAMASWAMY: “If you would asked me three years ago, is there some chance January 6 is an inside job, I would have said that was crazy talk.

“I would say, looking at the facts of the video footage that have come out, that it is shocking, that you still haven’t gotten a clear answer of how many federal agents were in the field that day.

“Look at now the video footage of actually throwing explosives and rubber bullets into what was a peaceful crowd, then releasing to the public what came in response to that.

“But now, look at the video footage that was released, and I’m glad we’re talking about it because viewers deserve to look at that footage, Capitol police literally letting people in who were then now prosecuted.

“Some of them gone on to commit suicide because of what the government is doing.

“That is the case of entrapment.

“I think the government has not been transparent about this, which is why I then brought up another case where the government now, 20 years later, would declassify documents, tell us that they lied to us at the time.”

DANA BASH: “Eight hundred and fifty people —”

RAMASWAMY: “I do think we have a government that consistently lied to its people.”

BASH: “An inside job suggests that everybody was — who attacked the Capitol was hard to —”

RAMASWAMY: “I didn’t say that.

“I didn’t say that, but I was saying that there is case — there’s entrapment going on.

“There’s entrapment going on and this looks like a case of entrapment.

“If you look at even over the last —”

BASH: “What do you mean by entrapment?”

RAMASWAMY: “Entrapment means that the police go to people to do something otherwise and the otherwise wouldn’t have done, and then they arrest them for actually doing it.”

BASH: “And you don’t think it was actually the former president who —”

RAMASWAMY: “Let’s — why do you think that was the media narrative? Now, look at —”

BASH: “We heard him — we heard him with our own ears.”

RAMASWAMY: “— case and see what you think about this, right?

“You guys said this for a long time, about the Gretchen Whitmer kidnapping plot, suddenly gone silent after it comes out a trial that — absolutely, that was a case of entrapment, which is why those people were acquitted.

“So, I’m saying this is somebody who, on the other side of this, as a biotech CEO, somebody who was even anti-woke.

“But if I was looking at this, I would have said aloud that this is crazy talk.

“But if you actually get into the details, I think it is startling, how much the government has systematically lied, and I think it’s both parties over the course of the last 25 years —”

BASH: “But on the January 6 —”

RAMASWAMY: “— the Left used to be better pointing this out are being skeptical of the government.

“But now, it is the Right.”

BASH: “— which is the most — which is the most aggressive offensive attack on the U.C Capitol, on democracy itself, that we have seen in our lifetime and in many, many lifetimes, to say without evidence that it was an inside —”

RAMASWAMY: “I’m not saying without evidence.

“I think that what we’re seeing now is the video footage that has come out.

“I was in a different place before a lot of that evidence came out.

“But you have to respond to the evidence. What is your response?

“What is anybody else in CNN response to the video footage that was released of Capital police literally just peacefully allowing people into the Capitol —”

BASH: “What we know —”

RAMASWAMY: “— or shooting into peaceful crowd?”

BASH: “— is that 850 people have been convicted of crime.”

RAMASWAMY: “But the reality is many of them were convicted before that information was released.”

BASH: “Do you think that former President Trump has anything to do with this?”

RAMASWAMY: “You’re bringing up a really good point and your audience and everybody deserves to know the truth about this.

“Normally, there is a rule in constitutional law.

“It’s called the Brady rule.

“You have to turn over exculpatory evidence to the other side.

“In this case, it wasn’t turned over because the DOJ said Congress was sitting on it.”

Former Congresswoman Liz Cheney has expressed outrage after Republican 2024 presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy declared Jan. 6 to be an “inside job” on national television.

The former Republican House leader blasted Ramaswamy for making comments during Wednesday’s GOP 2024 debate. ...

During the debate, Ramaswamy said:

“The real enemy is not Donald Trump.

“It’s not even Joe Biden.

“It is the deep state that at least Donald Trump attempted to take on.

“And if you want somebody who’s going to speak truth to power, then vote for somebody who’s going to speak the truth to you.

“Why am I the only person on the stage at least who can say that Jan. 6 now does look like it was an inside job?”

Ramaswamy also claimed that the 2020 election “was indeed stolen by Big Tech” and the 2016 election “was stolen from [Trump] by the national security establishment.”

Newly uncovered police body cam footage of Ruby Freeman reveal her stunning admissions that directly contradict allegations made under oath by January 6th Committee witnesses, by certain reporters and show hosts, by members of Congress, and by lawyers in sworn statements to Federal Court.

Freeman volunteers to blow the whistle on election fraud.
In the body cam, Ruby Freeman alleges a coverup by the Georgia Secretary of State, the DOJ/FBI, the GBI, and the Fulton County DA.

911 call transcript, body cam videos, and police report were obtained by Open Record Requests. From that information investigators have learned that the police report was supplemented in contradiction of the facts.

Yesterday, NBC ran an electrifying story headlined, “Supreme Court agrees to hear Jan. 6 case that could affect Trump prosecution.” It’s at once the best January 6th news we’ve had for a long while and it’s also very promising news for the Trump prosecution. ...

As you may know, the federal government criminalized January 6th protestors and Capitol tourists by re-purposing a rarely-used evidence law, originally passed to stop people from destroying evidence in white-collar crimes. The repurposing wasn’t surprising. Ever since Biden occupied the White House and appointed Grandma Garland to the DOJ, we’ve seen nonstop criminal prosecution of conservatives via ‘creative’ legal theories, which have delighted democrats and the compliant corporate media, who have no imagination or ability to extrapolate whatsoever.

Anyway, hundreds of peaceful Capitol protestors have been convicted by D.C. juries under 18 U.S. § 1512(c)(2), a law passed in 2002 after the infamous document shredding story fell out of the Enron case. The law provides up to 20 years in prison for illegally destroying evidence or — and this is the tricky bit — when someone “corruptly … obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so.”

Someone at DOJ saw that language, which was supposed to be about illegally (“corruptly”) destroying evidence so it couldn’t be used as evidence at trial (the “official proceeding”). The DOJ saw that and thought “Eureka!” Congress had assembled on January 6th to certify the presidential vote totals, and the meeting could be described as an “official proceeding.” The Trump supporters didn’t want the vote to be certified yet, so they were allegedly trying to “obstruct, influence, or impede” that proceeding.

And there you have it. Voilá! Twenty years.

The DOJ picked Jacob Chansley as its guinea pig to test out its new legal theory. Chansely was the colorful “QAnon Shaman” who’d be certain to inflame a cerulean-blue DC jury. And the DOJ’s strategy worked perfectly: the jury gave Chansley five years, and the DOJ got its precedent.

Since then, hundreds more J6 defendants have been convicted under the same re-tooled evidence statute. Relying on that swelling, Frankensteinian body of legal precedent, Jack Smith indicted President Trump for the very same crime in the DC ‘election interference’ case.

In yesterday’s thrilling development, the Supreme Court granted certiorari — agreed to hear — an appeal from a January 6th defendant named Edward Lang who’d been convicted under the evidence statute. In essence, Lang argues the evidence statute is “unconstitutionally vague,” letting prosecutors twist the law like Chinese bioweapons engineers into any shape they want. Significantly, the appellate court decided 2-1 to uphold the DOJ’s novel interpretation of the statute.

That’s significant because, if the four Supremes who voted to accept the case had agreed with the appellate court, they wouldn’t need to take the case. They could just deny certiorari, and then the DOJ’s interpretation would become the law.

So the bare fact the Supremes took the case is highly suggestive that at least four of them have something they want to say about it. Most observers think it doesn’t look too good for the government.

The decision created a lot of excitement, as it should have. If the Supreme Court throws § 1512(c)(2) out as unconstitutional, all those J6 prisoners will be released, and most of the election interference case against President Trump will dissolve just like a fresh dusting of snow evaporating on a warm morning.

Some folks, like WND News, even went so far as to predict Jack Smith, Trump’s prosecutor, will be forced to drop the charges just because the Supreme Court took the case.

My take is: this is a perfect, politically expedient opportunity for the Court to weigh in on a bunch of politically-difficult issues without taking the hit. Nearly every conservative judge in other courts who’ve looked at this issue found the statute to be too vague, so the Supreme won’t have to stretch at all to reach that conclusion. They can just quote lower-court opinions. And the Court could also easily help out President Trump, in a case that on its face has nothing whatever to do with Trump. Easy peasy.

This is an exciting and encouraging development. If you like the legal stuff, you can read Ed Lang’s Petition for Certiorari here.

Yesterday’s best clip featured Presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy on a live CNN Town Hall, rapidly tossing truth grenades like Hunter’s laptop, the Wuhan lab leak, and the Gretchen Whitmer fednapping trial (resulting in the jury finding the defendants not guilty). Vivek seized the live TV opportunity to go full-on, 100% January 6th Truther, while CNN anchor Abby Phillip was desperately trying to interrupt the candidate and redirect the question and was losing her mind:



As I’ve said before, I think we’re going to hear a lot more like this as new politicians enter the pipeline who weren’t connected with any of these awful scandals. I think it will happen for the jabs, too.

There’s a whole lot to love in Vivek’s answer, but I think my very favorite part was when Vivek said, “Abby, what I want CNN’s audience to know…” In other words, Vivek knew who he was really talking to: he wasn’t talking to Abby Phillip, but to the CNN audience, who are mainly people who think only white guys named Trump believe the government coordinated January 6th.

Say what you want about Vivek Ramaswamy, but it sure is fun watching him spar with woke reporters.