• – Five Ways to Convince ‘Normies’ That J6 Was Planned to Take Down Donald Trump
• – Chuck Schumer Lies About Lying About Dementia Joe’s Mental Acuity
• – Don’t Trust Zuckerberg, Bezos, Cook, or Any Leftists Bearing Gifts
• – It Only Takes AI Agents 2 Hours to Replicate Your Personality With 85% Accuracy
• – John Macarthur Hospitalized, Facing ‘Slower Than Expected’ Recovery From Surgeries
• – Michigan Climate Cult to Clear 420 Acres of Tress to Build Solar Farm
• – NYC Halal Food Vendor Caught Capturing Pigeons and Bringing Them to His Food Truck
• – The Existential Threat of Artificial General Intelligence Comes This Year According to Sam Altman
• – Vegan Mob Takes Down Commiefornia Restaurant for Serving Meat
• – Who Are the Best Conspiracy Theory Content Creators
• – Women Call on Nike to Recognize Women in Women’s Sports

Sponsors:

• – Long-Term Storage Beef, Promo Code “JDR” – https://prepperfarms.com
• – Faith-Driven Precious Metals Company – https://rumblegold.com
• – MyPillow.com – Promo Code “JDR”
• – Long-Term Storage Meds: https://jdrucker.com/meds

They accomplished the second goal to some extent for a while but that faded. As for their primary goal, they failed.

To get “normies” to understand this, here are five facts about the J6 narrative that we discussed on today’s episode of The JD Rucker Show.

• FBI and Antifa were there undercover to spark the “riots”
• Mayor Bowser and Nancy Pelosi denied 10,000 National Guard
• Capitol Police were instructed to NEVER discuss
• J6 Committee DESTROYED evidence
• 5 Police killed “in line of duty” but ZERO charges, arrests, or convictions

To be sure, Democrats and propagandists in the press will continue to frame January 6, 2021 as worse than Pearl Harbor, 9/11, and the Civil War — fantastically false claims that make the speaker look dumb, deceitful, and historically illiterate.  Still, it will be difficult for Establishment automatons to continue pushing J6 lies when January 6th’s bête noire is celebrating re-election.

Democrats, Uniparty Republicans, and unelected bureaucratic tyrants have spent eight years trying to turn Donald Trump into a social pariah.  They called him a Russian spy, an illegitimate president, a misogynist, a racist, and a cheat.  They committed perjury in sworn affidavits and in testimony before Congress just to sully his name, maliciously prosecuted his friends for nonexistent crimes, and defrauded the American people with their Russia collusion lies.  They turned the DOJ and FBI into lawless “Get Trump” gangs, impeached him twice, hunted down his voters as “insurrectionists,” and accused him of treason.  The American people voted overwhelmingly for President Trump anyway.

Congress certifying his victory on January 6 while simultaneously denouncing him as some kind of un-American dictator would be as incongruous as Congress remembering the attack on Pearl Harbor while simultaneously making December 7 a day of national recognition for Japanese achievement.  Many members of Congress are stupid enough to try, but for all intents and purposes, the Establishment’s misguided efforts to transform the sixth of January into a day for national mourning are over.  The pretense is shattered.  The jig is up.  Far from being destroyed, Trump and his MAGA political movement are ascendant.

What remains of this four-year propaganda operation to slander President Trump and his voters as “domestic terrorists”?  Nothing good for the crusty Establishment barnacles that have long clung to the American hull.  In trying to delegitimize Trump and his supporters, the parasitic “ruling class” has only further delegitimized itself.

During his lucid moments as president, Joe Biden never missed an opportunity to label the January 6 protest a “deadly insurrection,” but the only people killed four years ago were Trump voters — including unarmed Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt.  Instead of subsequently de-escalating tensions and pursuing national unity, the Gestapo FBI dedicated tremendous resources to terrorizing patriotic grandparents for the “crime” of behaving like tourists and snapping pictures inside the Capitol.  The psychopathic DOJ unconscionably drove defendants to bankruptcy and suicide for doing nothing more sinister than strolling calmly around the “People’s House.”  Political prisoners who refused to accept bogus guilty pleas have languished inside jails without pre-trial bail and served years in prison for minor trespassing or vandalism offenses that never would have been pursued against the FBI’s Antifa and BLM friends.  The odor of two-tiered “justice” has been rank, and nobody with a nose can stomach the federal government’s revolting cruelty.

January 6 will be remembered for decades to come, but not for the reasons D.C.’s occupying clans have long hoped.  More akin to the Boston Massacre, the date will remain a rallying cry for public defiance against government villainy.  “Remember January 6” will acquire the same connotation as “Remember the Alamo” — provoking patriotic fervor in the face of despotic Big Government brutality.

Had the information warfare specialists gamed this scenario properly, they never would have taken the chance of turning January 6, 2021 into a sacred day of remembrance for the very people they wished to minimize, censure, and condemn.  The propagandists will regret their role in creating an enduring symbol for their enemies.

Americans who have long wished for the government to leave them alone see in January 6 the glowing embers of growing tyranny.  When public calls for liberty rise against the inevitable excesses of the metastasizing national security surveillance state, “Remember January 6” will roll off tongues with the same fervor of our forefathers’ exhortation to “live free or die.”  Far from burying the MAGA movement, January 6 emboldened it.

As for the intellectually challenged stenographers who enjoy journalistic sinecures in corporate newsrooms and the Old Guard “ruling class” who see political power as a birthright, I want to explain clearly why their J6 intelligence operation failed.

President Trump’s first term in office provided a “Great Awakening” for millions of Americans, who saw for the first time how the federal government and its media co-conspirators routinely lie to the public.  For decades, institutional authorities had been given so much deference that attempts to question official “narratives” were dismissed as uninformed opinion or denigrated as “conspiracy theories.”

Donald Trump almost singlehandedly upended this cursed arrangement.  He called out the federal government’s penchant for endless wars, reckless spending, bad trade deals, open borders, and industrial outsourcing.  In turn, the Establishment Class told American voters that putting Trump in the White House would trigger nuclear war, economic depression, and national collapse.  When Americans ignored the “experts” and voted for Trump anyway, he gave middle-class Americans real economic growth, more secure borders, and a remarkably effective peace-focused foreign policy.  In short, the political “outsider” proved more competent and truthful than the political “insiders.”

Despite Trump’s numerous policy successes, he committed the political “sin” of exposing the “ruling class” as the un-American snake that it is.  Consequently, the Deep State snake dedicated all its resources to sabotaging Trump’s presidency and harassing him with criminal investigations.  In the old days, the institutional onslaught against him would have surely succeeded, but this time around, the Establishment’s ruthless partisanship and litany of demonstrable lies proved its undoing.  There are only so many times that a reasonable person can hear Adam Schiff, Hillary Clinton, Hakeem Jeffries, Nancy Pelosi, or John Brennan babble about “Russian collusion” before Americans accept that institutional authorities cannot be trusted to tell the truth.

The Americans who showed up in D.C. on January 6, 2021 to protest for free and fair elections were not armed and were not trying to overthrow the U.S. government — no matter how many years lying politicians, prosecutors, and credentialed “journalists” continue pushing that inane fantasy.  They showed up because Democrat operatives used COVID as an excuse to flood battleground states with anonymous and unsecured mail-in ballots and succeeded in overturning substantial Trump vote leads days after the election.  President Trump not only won ten million more votes than in his 2016 election, but also won nearly every traditional bellwether county by double-digits.  Joe Biden had never been a popular politician, had failed in several previous presidential campaigns, and was already showing signs of dementia, yet the American people were told that the basement-dwelling Biden somehow won millions more votes than any candidate in American history.  Nothing smelled right about the 2020 election.

Voters tried repeatedly to litigate claims of vote fraud in court.  Judges refused to do their jobs and scrutinize the elections.  Democrat secretaries of state certified vote counts that could not be replicated — including from precincts recording more votes than voters.  Democrat attorneys general refused to investigate allegations of fraud.  The news media ignored every story that cast doubt on a Joe Biden “victory.”  It was in this atmosphere of organized crime and journalistic apathy that ordinary citizens came to the nation’s capital to seek redress.  Little did they know that political leaders would weaponize their exercise of free speech and destroy their lives — all in the name of “democracy.”

President Trump, free the J6 political hostages.  Pardon those who have suffered due to government malice and corruption.  Remedy these awful abuses against the American people.  Use your victory to save their lives.  Remember January 6 — now and forever.

According to the Associated Press, whoever is running the country decided that Cheney, Thompson, and 18 other individuals will receive the Presidential Citizens Medal on Thursday.

“President Biden believes these Americans are bonded by their common decency and commitment to serving others,” the White House said in a statement. “The country is better because of their dedication and sacrifice.”

That said, we all know it was a sham from the beginning…

The J6 Committee was controversial and heavily partisan from the beginning. When it was first announced, then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) gave then-Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) a chance to seat the conventional number of Republicans on the committee. However, she rejected two of his choices, Congressmen Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) and Jim Banks (R-Ind.), for being too conservative, which led to McCarthy refusing to name any Republicans to the committee.

Pelosi herself then chose just two Republicans for the committee, both of whom were known for being radically anti-Trump: Cheney and Congressman Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.). Both Cheney and Kinzinger became extremely unpopular as a result of their involvement, with Kinzinger choosing to retire ahead of the 2022 midterms, while Cheney was defeated by primary challenger Harriet Hageman in one of the biggest landslides against an incumbent in the history of the House of Representatives. –American Greatness

Meanwhile, as Julie Kelly noted last week, it appears that Cheney is preparing to fight any Trump-era federal and/or congressional probe into her ‘demonstrably corrupt role’ as vice chairman of the J6 committee.

Text messages obtained by Representative Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga), chair of a House subcommittee looking into the J6 committee, prove that Cheney colluded behind the scenes with star witness Cassidy Hutchinson, who dramatically changed her testimony after connecting with Cheney. The communications could represent witness tampering, subornation of perjury—every former White House official including the driver of the presidential vehicle on January 6 has refuted Hutchinson’s account of Trump’s behavior that day—and obstruction.

Based on the results of his ongoing inquiry, Loudermilk determined that “numerous federal laws were likely broken by Liz Cheney” and called for the FBI to investigate her.

Cheney immediately responded by playing the victim and, of course, by blaming Donald Trump. But the American people appear uninterested in Cheney’s excuses; a new Rasmussen poll shows strong public support, including three-quarters of Republicans, for an FBI investigation into the bitter and defeated nepobaby.

If Trump’s Department of Justice decides to proceed, Cheney undoubtedly will seek immunity protections in an attempt to keep records away from federal investigators; members of Congress are entitled to immunity under the Speech or Debate Clause of the Constitution, which shields lawmakers from criminal liability related to their legislative duties.

Officially named the January 6 Restitution and Wrongful Incarceration Lawsuit, this $50 billion class action is spearheaded by Jake Lang, a January 6 prisoner who has been incarcerated for nearly four years. Lang, through his new organization, Federal Watchdog, the Anti-Lawfare Group, is joined by an esteemed team of conservative attorneys, including Steven Metcalf, Anthony Sabatini, Stephanie Lambert, and Jonathan Gross. Together, they aim to expose the injustices faced by January 6 prisoners and secure much-needed restitution.

A Fight for Justice

The lawsuit, set to be filed on January 20, 2025, has already garnered widespread support, with over 100 prisoners signing on. This historic legal action seeks to compensate these individuals for the extensive harm inflicted by what they describe as a weaponized justice system. From the loss of generational family businesses, homes, and careers to the irreparable emotional and psychological damage suffered during years of wrongful incarceration, the plaintiffs are demanding accountability for the Federal Government’s actions.

Jake Lang, a prominent figure in the January 6 movement, emphasized the importance of this lawsuit, stating, “This isn’t just about restitution; it’s about setting a precedent. Weaponized government and lawfare against conservatives can never become the standard in America.”

A Two-Tiered Justice System

According to Federal Watchdog, the plaintiffs were “hunted down like animals” by the FBI for peacefully protesting at the Capitol on January 6, 2021. Many have faced harsh sentences, inadequate legal representation, and conditions that have worsened their physical and mental health. Critics argue this is a glaring example of a two-tiered justice system, one that has been particularly hostile to supporters of former President Donald Trump. […]

— Read More: www.thegatewaypundit.com

“Then said they unto him, Say now Shibboleth: and he said Sibboleth: for he could not frame to pronounce it right. Then they took him, and slew him at the passages of Jordan: and there fell at that time of the Ephraimites forty and two thousand.”

– Judges 12:6, King James Bible

(WND)—The word “shibboleth” in English has come to mean a word or phrase that insiders know and use but that outsiders do not. For the last few decades, leftists have been rolling out new shibboleths like Apple rolls out iPhones.

They redefined gay marriage as “marriage equality,” abortion rights as “reproductive rights,” and the sexual mutilation of children as “gender affirming care.”

In their most effective gambit, when temperatures started to flatline two decades ago, their alchemists converted “global warming” into “climate change.”

In so doing, they gave school children a whole new range of climate horrors to spice up their nightmares. Creating anxiety was in the game plan.

The Left stepped up their game in 2020. In the months before the election, their media routinely passed off violent riots as “mostly peaceful protests” and election integrity as “voter suppression.”

In the two months after the election, they launched a veritable shibboleth blitzkrieg, forcing the “big lie” and “free and fair election” down the throats of anyone desiring membership in the respectable kids’ club.

On Jan. 6, 2021, the master craftsmen at the shibboleth workshop outdid themselves. They introduced a new catchphrase and made it mandatory by day’s end.

In her indispensable book, “January 6,” Julie Kelly does a thorough job explaining how quickly “insurrection” emerged as the word of the day throughout the media and Democratic Party ranks.

Less than 90 minutes after the first bicycle rack fell, Rep. Ted Deutch tweeted, “This is a violent insurrection. An attempted coup by Trump supporters at his encouragement.”

At 4 p.m., Joe Biden gave the word his blessing. “It’s not protest,” he said. “It’s insurrection.”

Before the day was through, certain Republicans rushed to the nearest mic to prove their respectability. Said Sen. Mitt Romney, “What happened here today was an insurrection, incited by the president of the United States.”

On that same January 6, before the OC gas had yet to settle at the Capitol, George Bush used the imprimatur of the “George W. Bush Presidential Center” to affirm his and wife Laura’s respectability.

“The violent assault on the Capitol – and disruption of a Constitutionally-mandated meeting of Congress – was undertaken by people whose passions have been inflamed by falsehoods and false hopes,” said Bush, speaking for himself and Laura.

Lest anyone be confused about where Bush stood, his remarks were headlined, “Statement by President George W. Bush on Insurrection at the Capitol.”

Bush and Romney might have checked the definition of the word before rushing to use it. Britannica defines “insurrection” as “an organized and usually violent act of revolt or rebellion against an established government or governing authority of a nation-state or other political entity by a group of its citizens or subjects.”

If there was anything “organized” that day, the Feds were the ones doing the organizing. The real protesters were anything but organized. If they had a common mission, it was not to subvert the rule of law but to persuade Congress to honor it.

In the years ahead, leftists and their media allies would have to ignore all evidence to maintain “insurrection” as the term of art.

MAGA America understood what the media refused to, namely that if protesters had intended to “storm the Capitol” – another shibboleth – and stage an “insurrection,” they would have come armed.

They did not. As Ashli Babbitt’s mom, Micki Witthoeft, wryly observed, “The gun-toting populous of the United States showed up that day without guns.”

While still on Fox News, Tucker Carlson pointed out the obvious. “Just to be clear on terms, an insurrection is when people with guns try to overthrow the government,” Carlson said in June 2022.

“Not a single person in the crowd on January 6 was found to be carrying a firearm. Not one.” Honoring their role in the war on truth, the “fact-checkers” rushed into the breach.

“Tucker Carlson Is Wrong,” insisted PolitiFact in its headline. Its minions reviewed hundreds of case files and found “some” protesters who were “charged with having firearms on Capitol grounds while others stashed them nearby.” In other words, no protester brought a gun into the Capitol.

To maintain the illusion of an “armed insurrection,” the media had to expand “armed” to include the “weapons” most often cited in the DOJ’s charging documents, starting with “flagpole” and followed by chemical spray, baton, stick, pocketknife and baseball bat.

The wordsmiths, however, had one major semantic problem to overcome: the only person who fired a gun on January 6 was “the son of a bitch who murdered my daughter.”

Unlike the shibboleth shapers on the Left, Ashli’s mom doesn’t need to mince words.

Jack Cashill’s newest book, “Ashli: The Untold Story of the Women of January 6,” is available in all formats.

Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected].

John Strand seems to agree for the most part. The former political prisoner who is still getting hounded over his actions on January 6 posted on 𝕏 on Sunday declaring that we need to stop referring to some of the protesters as “non-violent.”

As he noted:

PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT:

Please, if you truly care about truth, justice, and the plight of innocent J6 defendants unjustly suffering unspeakable horrors,

STOP SAYING “NON-VIOLENT”

Allow me to explain: the Merrick Garland/Matthew Graves DOJ is corrupt—they lied, manipulated evidence, and conducted an enormous fraud to falsely smear many protesters as “violent” when those protesters had no such intention.

*MOST* of the “violence” alleged by the DOJ is either bogus, and/or self-defensive reactions to conflict that was initiated and exacerbated by police brutality and the government’s truly violent abuse of use-of-force protocols—they killed four unarmed protesters that day alone, for starters.

There *will* be legitimate criteria for determining who was a bad faith actor, necessitating further legal scrutiny in the course of granting a proclamation-style “Pardon of Innocence”…but the assertion of “violence” is irredeemably tainted, and it does not honestly apply to the vast majority of J6 defendants.

This is not a small point—it is CRUCIAL to navigating the path through a deadly swamp of DOJ corruption in order to reach true justice.

We MUST carefully articulate this in the course of achieving EXONERATION for those truly innocent J6 victims, which they deserve and which our nation must deliver.

cc: @VivekGRamaswamy @BrandonStraka @julie_kelly2 @MattGaetz

Let’s bring them home and make this right #JusticeForJ6

PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT:

Please, if you truly care about truth, justice, and the plight of innocent J6 defendants unjustly suffering unspeakable horrors,

STOP SAYING “NON-VIOLENT”

Allow me to explain: the Merrick Garland/Matthew Graves DOJ is corrupt—they lied, manipulated…

— John Strand (@JohnStrandUSA) December 8, 2024

The vast majority in attendance at the rally in Washington DC on January 6, 2021, were there to express their concerns over an election that was clearly fraudulent. They were doing their duty to defend the Constitution and were calling on lawmakers to make a horrible situation right.

By no means am I defending every action taken by everyone at the event. Some clearly took their protests too far. But the hammer of justice was lowered on as many of them as the corrupt Department of Justice and our activist judiciary could wrangle. The event should be classified as a false flag to entrap as many passionate Trump supporters as possible.

This is why it should be a blanket pardon. It seems very likely that if the Deep State psyop that was orchestrated that day had not occurred, the entire event would have remained peaceful. Even the few who took it too far would have been restrained by the other legitimate protesters.

As M. Dowling noted at Independent Sentinel:

President-elect Donald Trump said he is looking to issue pardons to his supporters involved in the attacks on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 as soon as his first day in office, saying those incarcerated are “living in hell.”

Trump’s comments, the most sweeping he’s made since winning the 2024 election, came during an exclusive interview with “Meet the Press” moderator Kristen Welker.

The event was designed to not only entrap protesters but to act as an example to those who would engage in their constitutional right to protest in the future. That alone should be the righteous sentiment that expedites pardons for all who were involved.

The article below from The Epoch Times represents an analysis of the facts and does not necessarily reflect the perspectives of this publication.

(The Epoch Times)—After President-elect Donald Trump won a second term, multiple defendants charged for their roles in the events of Jan. 6, 2021, asked to delay their cases because they anticipate pardons from Trump.

Many were denied, but each nonetheless raised questions about how Trump will handle the cases.

According to data collected by NPR, more than 1,500 people have been charged in relation to Jan. 6, with nearly 1,000 pleading guilty.

At least a dozen cases have been dismissed, while plenty remain with changes following Trump’s election. At the beginning of November, the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia announced multiple sentences and guilty verdicts.

Various factors could determine whether these individuals end up avoiding jail time, but perhaps the most important is Trump’s eventual control of the Department of Justice (DOJ) and who will lead that department.

On Nov. 13, Trump announced Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) as his pick for attorney general. Gaetz has been critical of the prosecutions and introduced a bill in July that was intended to prevent prosecutors from retaliating against Jan. 6 defendants for seeking resentencing. Gaetz has also questioned federal involvement, stating that Jan. 6 “wasn’t an insurrection” but that it “very well may have been a fedsurrection.”

Assuming the presidency also grants Trump substantial pardon power under the Constitution: Trump has indicated that he’s open to pardoning those charged but left open the possibility that some would face punishment.

“We will treat them fairly,” he said in January 2022. “And if it requires pardons, we will give them pardons, because they are being treated so unfairly.”

More recently, during an event in July, he was asked about individuals who assaulted officers. He said he would “absolutely” pardon the defendants “if they’re innocent” and added that “they were convicted by a very tough system.”

More than 70 defendants have received a mixed verdict, and so far, more than 1,000 people have been sentenced, with 64 percent receiving prison time, according to NPR data. Some defendants have also taken plea deals.

“I think there’s going to be a complete second look at all of the prosecutions,” Robert Ray, a former Trump impeachment attorney, told The Epoch Times, while noting the large number of cases brought. He added that a second look wouldn’t “necessarily yield a favorable result with regard to each and every defendant, but I think there’s going to be a pretty strenuous exercise of the pardon and commutation power to deal with overreaching [by prosecutors].”

John Pierce, an attorney who has represented Jan. 6 defendants, told The Epoch Times he expects a “blanket pardon,” while Trump–Vance transition spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt said the president-elect “will make pardon decisions on a case-by-case basis.”

Politics of Pardons

It’s unclear which individuals Trump will consider for pardon.

“That’s the million-dollar question,” Lori Ulrich, an attorney with the public defender’s office, told The Epoch Times. She is currently representing Joseph Fischer, whose case made it to the Supreme Court this year.

Fischer and other defendants face a myriad of charges, including an obstruction charge the Supreme Court addressed this summer in Fischer v. United States. It’s unclear how Trump’s DOJ will apply that ruling, but the president-elect’s pardons could be influenced by factors such as the politics surrounding his pardons.

“If President Biden either pardons or commutes the sentences for Hunter Biden, that gives President Trump political cover to either pardon or commute the non-violent J6 offenders, [as well as] Peter Navarro, and Steve Bannon, if he chooses to,” John Shu, a constitutional law expert who served in both Bush administrations, told The Epoch Times.

Shu was referring to President Joe Biden’s son, who was convicted in September of various tax offenses. Both of Trump’s former White House advisers, Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro, could be pardoned after each served a four month sentences for defying subpoenas from the House committee that investigated Jan. 6.

A CBS poll found that three years after the events of Jan. 6, 78 percent of Americans expressed disapproval toward “actions of those who forced their way into the Capitol.”

William Shipley, an attorney for one of the defendants, suggested in a motion on Nov. 10 that the election didn’t reflect well on the DOJ’s efforts.

“Defendant Baker would point out that the ‘people’ on behalf of whom the Government purports to speak made themselves heard clearly on November 5, and that should mean something to the Department of Justice without regard to what Administration is now in charge,” Shipley said in a motion for defendant Stephen Michael Baker.

That motion, which asked for a delay in proceedings, was quickly rejected by U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper this month.

Upon entering office, Trump’s pardon power would allow him to commute sentences and pardon convicts who have already served time, such as Ulrich’s client, Riley Williams. Williams was accused of helping to steal then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s laptop. She was found guilty on two felony counts, but the jury was unable to reach a verdict on two other counts, including aiding and abetting theft of government property.

Non-Violent Offenders

Shu told The Epoch Times that pardons for non-violent offenders were more politically palatable.

In August, the DOJ said that approximately 140 police officers were assaulted on Jan. 6, while more than 500 people have been charged with assaulting, resisting, or impeding officers or employees. It added that “approximately 163 individuals … have been charged with using a deadly or dangerous weapon or causing serious bodily injury to an officer.”

Among those are Daniel Ball, who pleaded not guilty but whom the DOJ accused of, among other things, “throwing an explosive device that detonated upon at least 25 officers.” Others included a father-son pair who pleaded guilty in January, and Zachary Alam, who was found guilty last year.

David Gelman, an attorney and former Trump campaign surrogate, told The Epoch Times that re-examining the Jan. 6 prosecutions would have to occur on a “case-by-case basis” but indicated that Trump could consider violence in choosing how to exercise his pardon power.

Trump said at a town hall in 2023 that he was “inclined to pardon many of” the defendants who had been convicted. “I can’t say for every single one because a couple of them, probably, they got out of control,” he said.

Earlier this year, he started one of his rallies with a recording of the national anthem sung by Jan. 6 prisoners. He also vowed in March that his “first acts” as president would be to “Free the January 6 Hostages being wrongfully imprisoned,” he wrote on his Truth Social account.

In a motion filed just after the election, one of the Jan. 6 defendants, Anna Lichnowski, asked her judge to postpone sentencing partly on the basis that her offenses were non-violent, making her “a good candidate for a pardon,” according to her attorney.

Lichnowski was one of a series of defendants who filed motions for some kind of delay in their cases after Trump’s victory. Many of them have been denied, including by U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton, who said that Trump’s potential pardon was “irrelevant” to Lichnowski’s case.

“The potential future exercise of the discretionary pardon power, an Executive Branch authority, is irrelevant to the Court’s obligation to carry out the legal responsibilities of the Judicial Branch,” Walton said in a Nov. 7 court order.

Matthew Graves, the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, similarly resisted the motions while arguing that the public is interested in a quick administration of justice.

Graves will likely exit the DOJ in Trump’s second term, experts speculated—something that is expected for many prosecutors at the beginning of a new administration. During Trump’s and Biden’s first terms, dozens of prosecutors were asked to leave.

The vast majority of defendants have been charged with a trespassing offense, the use of which the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit upheld in October. Defendant Couy Griffin, founder of Cowboys for Trump and a former county commissioner from New Mexico, had asked the court to review the DOJ’s use of this charge against him.

In a 2–1 decision, the court held that the DOJ could apply the trespassing law without proving that he was aware that former Vice President Mike Pence’s presence on the Capitol grounds was the reason for restricting that area.

Obstruction Charge

In June, the Supreme Court held in a 6–3 decision that the DOJ had misinterpreted a financial reform law in attempting to accuse the Jan. 6 defendants of obstructing an official proceeding.

The majority opinion in that case, Fischer v. United States, held that the DOJ erred in its attempt to disentangle two portions of the Sarbanes–Oxley financial reform law (Section 1512(c)(1) and (c)(2)).

The DOJ had argued that the law allowed prosecutions that targeted obstructive conduct in a catch-all way that included methods other than those mentioned at the beginning of the section.

A majority of the Supreme Court, including Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, disagreed and held: “To prove a violation of §1512(c)(2), the Government must establish that the defendant impaired the availability or integrity for use in an official proceeding of records, documents, objects, or other things used in an official proceeding, or attempted to do so.”

It’s unclear how Trump and his DOJ will apply the Fischer decision to the defendants’ unique circumstances. It carries a 20-year maximum sentence.

In November, the DOJ said that “approximately 259 defendants who, at the time Fischer was decided, were charged with or convicted of violating 18 U.S.C. § 1512 to determine whether the charge should continue to be prosecuted.”

The DOJ said that after Fischer, the government “decided to forgo the Section 1512(c)(2) charge for approximately 96 defendants, will continue to pursue the charge for approximately 13 defendants, and continues to assess the remaining defendants.”

Approximately 133 were sentenced, and more than half were convicted of that offense and other felonies, according to DOJ data from August.

Austin Alonzo contributed to this report.

Massie’s letter follows troubling testimony from the DOJ’s Inspector General, suggesting that the FBI had confidential human sources (CHSs) present on the Capitol Grounds that day. It raises a critical question: is the DOJ intentionally slow-walking the release of this crucial report?

Joining Massie in this call for accountability are Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) and Reps. Ben Cline (R-VA), Chip Roy (R-TX), Andy Biggs (R-AZ), Victoria Spartz (R-IN), Barry Moore (R-AL), Dan Bishop (R-NC), Harriet Hagman (R-WY), and Matt Gaetz (R-FL).

The presence of federal assets, particularly CHSs, on Capitol grounds during the events of January 6, 2021, is a game-changer. It starkly undermines the establishment media and federal government’s narrative surrounding that day. Meanwhile, just blocks away, Trump faces federal charges from special counsel Jack Smith, who alleges that he orchestrated the chaos at the Capitol.

Massie’s letter serves as a reminder to Garland of his own words during his June 4, 2024 testimony.

Garland “testified that Inspector General Horowitz is ‘independent’ and ‘the determination of the release of Inspector General reports is up to the Inspector General.’”

“We write to remind you of your commitment,” the letter states.

On September 25, DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz testified before the House Weaponization Committee that the draft of the report is being held up by the DOJ.

This investigation had already seen delays during hearings held by Speaker Pelosi’s House Select Committee on January 6. Horowitz only resumed his investigation in 2023.

Now, the DOJ continues to drag its feet on prosecutions as the 2024 election looms, with several new cases emerging in recent months—over three and a half years after the events of January 6.

During the September 25 hearing, Horowitz confirmed that his draft report would indeed address the presence of CHSs. Massie pressed him for evidence regarding the number of CHSs operating on the Capitol grounds that day.

“Our report will include information in that regard,” Horowitz stated.

However, when pressed on the exact number, he replied, “I’m not in a position to say that, both because its in draft form, and we have not gone through the classification review, and so I need to be careful.”

Yesterday in @Weaponization, I questioned Inspector General Horowitz about the number of confidential human sources who entered the Capitol on 1/6.

Horowitz said the number won’t be known before the election. Biden-Harris doesn’t want the feds’ role on 1/6 known. Why? pic.twitter.com/9UJ4GXMdTX

— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) September 26, 2024

Horowitz expressed a desire to issue his report soon but admitted that he does not expect it to be released before the election, indicating that the timing of the classification review is beyond his control.

Massie is not buying it and believes politics are afoot.

“Horowitz said the number won’t be known before the election. Biden-Harris doesn’t want the feds’ role on 1/6 known. Why?” Massie posted on X after the hearing.

Massie’s letter to Garland warns, “If you or any of your subordinates, associates, deputies, or agents within the Department act to delay or interfere with the release of this report, Congress will hold you accountable.”

If this report is ever released, it could drastically alter the prevailing narrative surrounding January 6. If Garland and the DOJ are found to have withheld this report until after the election, Congress may take decisive action.

Horowitz’s testimony strongly suggested that the report would contain explosive information.

Massie pressed Horowitz on how many confidential human sources entered the Capitol on January 6.

FBI protocols prohibit CHSs from breaking the law—entering the Capitol would certainly qualify, as made clear by numerous DOJ prosecutions—without express written consent.

“I’ll have that information in the report,” Horowitz replied.

Interestingly, when Massie inquired about how many CHSs were reimbursed for travel related to January 6, Horowitz responded, “as I sit here, I don’t recall the number,” before abruptly shifting gears and insisting, “and, if I did know it, I wouldn’t be in a position to tell you.”

The FBI operates under the DOJ, which ultimately determines what information is classified.

As the pressure mounts on Garland and the DOJ, one has to wonder: will the truth about January 6 ever see the light of day?

Article generated from corporate media reports.

The fact that Biden and his attorney general, Merrick Garland, are using the imprimatur of the criminal justice system as a smokescreen to railroad and possibly imprison the leader of the opposition party is bad enough.  By treating President Trump’s speech as the “proximate cause” of other alleged crimes (consisting mostly of questionable trespass violations reimagined and inflated into felonies) committed by strangers, the Biden-Garland-Smith Triumvirate of Tyranny has turned every American’s opinion into a potential criminal act.

Should this bother all those rabid leftists who desperately want to see President Trump behind bars?  I would say so.  President Trump has now survived two assassination attempts, and although the FBI has done its best to muddy the waters concerning the motivations of the first gunman (trying to kill the Republican nominee for president seems like a pretty good clue, does it not?), the social media history of the second gunman (as well as the Biden-Harris bumper sticker on his truck) clearly exposes him as a Ukraine War–obsessed, anti-MAGA, Kamala Harris–supporting zealot who believes that President Trump is a civilizational threat.

Where would he get that crazy idea?  Oh, I don’t know — maybe from the constant stream of contributors on networks such as MSNBC who call Trump a “dictator,” another “Hitler,” and a “Nazi.”  Maybe the would-be assassin took Democrat politicians seriously whenever they showed up on news shows these last eight years to claim with utmost sincerity that Trump is a “threat to democracy.”

Maybe the man who turned an AK-47 on the president read one of the numerous opinion columns featured in the nation’s factually shoddy but stubbornly prominent publications, all universally libeling President Trump as a “rapist,” a “white supremacist,” a “fascist,” and a “dangerous” leader of the “far right.”  Should fake journalists who regularly claim that America will “literally end” if Trump returns to the White House be surprised when someone stumbles upon their neurotic rantings and subsequently attempts to “save” the country from the specter of their shared delusions?

Have we not also reached our “what’s good for the goose is good for the gander” political moment?  If President Trump must spend millions of dollars defending himself against mercenary prosecutors intent on locking him up for the remainder of his life because of the “dangerous” words that come out of his mouth, then surely those people who use their speech to beg for someone — anyone — to rid the country of the once and future president should be held similarly liable.  How many times can a Democrat politician or credentialed propagandist falsely compare Donald Trump to mass murderers and dictators such as Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini before those inflammatory slanders rise to the same level of “proximate cause” that prompted the Department of (in)Justice to put Trump in its crosshairs over January 6?

Jack Smith is prosecuting President Trump for somehow threatening the peaceful transfer of power from a legitimately elected president to an illegitimately installed stooge.  Even though Trump correctly believed (and still does believe) that the 2020 election was rigged in Biden’s favor (mail-in ballots stuffed into unsecured drop boxes in the dead of night, the use of Zuckerbucks to increase ballot collection in Democrat neighborhoods, and the Intelligence Community’s efforts to defraud the American people with regard to Hunter Biden’s “laptop from Hell” all amply support this conclusion), he left office as legally required on January 20.

Trump never called for violence against Joe Biden or the U.S. government.  He never urged Americans to revolt against their country.  Even on January 6 — the half-day of protest that leftist pundits and politicians say was worse than 9/11 and the Civil War combined — President Trump calmly urged his supporters “to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”  In other words, he defended his First Amendment right to speak his mind and the First Amendment right of all Americans to speak theirs — but he never, ever called for violence against his political enemies.

For the crime of speaking truthfully about the tremendous deficiencies and suspicious vote-counting activities surrounding the 2020 election, Jack Smith and the rest of the Triumvirate of Tyranny have thrown President Trump in the dock to defend his life.  And as atrocious as the Triumvirate’s political persecution of an American president has been, it pales in comparison to the way it has harassed, hunted, imprisoned, and even tortured thousands of ordinary Americans for showing up at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021 to protest for free and fair elections.

The vast majority of Americans who arrived in D.C. on that fateful day committed no crimes.  Most had no criminal records.  They included an inordinate number of veterans, law enforcement officers, grandparents, and retirees.  In D.C. courtrooms, however, prosecutors and partisan judges have described them as “terrorists,” “seditionists,” “insurrectionists,” and “domestic enemies.”

How did they earn such ignoble monikers?  They are accused of spreading the “Big Lie” that the 2020 election was stolen from President Trump.  It does not seem to matter to any of these courts that roughly 60% of the American people also believe that cheating likely affected that election.  For expressing an opinion unpopular in D.C., J6 political prisoners have been held in solitary confinement and forced to review “re-education materials” regarding Trump’s “lies,” “crimes,” and “attacks on democracy.”  These are actual lesson plans for conservative political prisoners in the United States.

If telling a “Big Lie” means that a person’s speech merits criminal punishment, though, surely Joe Biden and Kamala Harris deserve similar treatment.  Biden has repeatedly claimed that Trump-supporters murdered police officers on January 6.  That is a complete lie.  The only people to die that day were J6 protesters, including a female Air Force veteran shot in cold blood and another female beaten to death.  Crimes of murder and excessive force may very well have taken place on January 6, but Trump voters did not commit them.  That truth, however, is inconvenient for Biden, fellow Democrats, and their faithful media propagandists, who all desperately cling to the “Big Lie” that Trump engineered a “violent insurrection.”

Biden has also clung to the “Big Lie” that President Trump called neo-Nazis at a Charlottesville political rally “very fine people.”  Trump did no such thing.  He was discussing the issue of whether statues and monuments commemorating Confederate soldiers should be removed simply because they offend modern sensibilities.  In a moment when he sought to build unity among all Americans, he expressed his belief that there are good people on both sides of that contentious debate.  Trump warned, however, that once we start tearing down historic statues, the impulse to destroy our past will never end.  Eventually, he predicted, statues dedicated to George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, and other remarkable Americans would be targeted, too.  He was right.  Those who wish to transform America by first rewriting America’s history have spent the last four years toppling priceless monuments built by some of America’s finest artists.  But that truth does not permit Joe Biden to falsely portray President Trump as a “racist.”

Where have we heard the Charlottesville and J6 lies recently?  Kamala Harris repeated both during the presidential debate.  Surely, if President Trump is responsible for “inciting” a fake “insurrection,” Biden and Harris are responsible for inciting two very real assassination attempts.