Biden’s DOJ releases memo and filings in court that blow “Trump incited an insurrection” out of the water
Source: Law Enforcement Today
WASHINGTON, DC- Anyone who isn’t a partisan leftist knows that on January 6, 2021, former President Donald Trump didn’t incite anything. He told attendees at his rally to “march peacefully and patriotically and make your voices heard” to the US Capitol.
Nothing in his words, nor his “rhetoric” implied any type of insurrectionist activities. Yet here we are.
Hundreds of people….over six hundred to be specific…have been arrested and prosecuted, many of whom are held in Washington, DC-area jails without bond, a number of those held in solitary confinement.
Gateway Pundit has amassed a website, American GULAG which details all of those who have been basically held as political prisoners for months in the “best” traditions of the former Soviet Union.
As reported by investigative journalist Julie Kelly, many of the people currently held in jail have done nothing wrong.
Indeed, not one person has thus far been charged with insurrection, despite claims from leftist politicians and their complicit media mouthpieces that what occurred on January 6 was an “insurrection.”
In fact, some of those charged never even made it to the Capitol on that day. Thus far, no proof has come forward of any type of organized attempt to stage a coup at the Capitol on that date.
Last week, Kelly uncovered text of a motion from the Biden/Obama Department of Justice that blows the notion that “Trump incited a riot” out of the water, according to Gateway Pundit. According to Kelly, the document from the DOJ says:
“It is objectively unreasonable to conclude that President Trump could authorize citizens to interfere with the Electoral College proceedings…”
The DOJ’s affidavit is speaking to one of the Capitol siege defendant’s case, who claimed the then-president in essence “gave permission” to the defendant to attack the Capitol. The motion filed by the DOJ read, in part:
“The government moves in limine to prohibit Defendant from making arguments or attempting to introduce non-relevant evidence that former President Trump gave permission for Defendant to attack the U.S. Capitol.
“As a threshold matter, the defense of entrapment by estoppel on “applies to a defendant who reasonably relies on the assurance of a government official that specified conduct will not violate the law.”
Don't look now but Biden's DOJ just blew up the whole "Trump incited an insurrection" narrative: pic.twitter.com/oPEOtcb3Fb
— Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 (@julie_kelly2) December 2, 2021
The motion then goes on to cite federal case law, and notes that any such reliance must be “objectively reasonable.” The motion continues:
“Here, Defendant cannot make any credible claim that he understood his conduct to be lawful. He advanced on the U.S. Capitol wearing a helmet and armed with a baseball bat and pepper spray.
He assaulted law enforcement officers with pepper spray before ultimately climbing through a broken window to enter the Capitol and further interfering with and assaulting law enforcement officers. There is no rational claim that Defendant believed that such conduct was lawful.”
The motion continued thusly:
“Setting Defendant’s own conduct aside, it is objectively unreasonable to conclude that President Trump could authorize citizens to interferer with the Electoral College proceedings that were being conducted at the Capitol.” [emphasis added]
The motion continues, noting that:
“…the Supreme Court has made clear that an entrapment by estoppel defense is not available in cases where a government officials directive constitutes a ‘waiver of law’ beyond the official’s lawful authority.”
Finally, the motion says:
“Defendant should be prohibited from making arguments or attempting to introduce non-relevant evidence that former President Trump authorized Defendant’s conduct at the Capitol.”
"It is objectively unreasonable to conclude that President Trump could authorize citizens to interfere with the Electoral College proceedings…"
— Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 (@julie_kelly2) December 2, 2021
In other words, in their own arguments, the Department of Justice is saying that Trump didn’t incite anything. They cannot have it both ways.
If indeed he had “incited an insurrection,” any defendants who believed, such as this defendant, that they were “acting under the color” of the president’s authority would have their cases summarily dismissed.
Perhaps Liz Cheney (R-WY) and her politburo of Congressional “investigators” should read the DOJ’s own arguments and end this sham January 6 “investigation.”
For more on the January 6 “insurrection,” we invite you to read our prior reporting on the incident:
WASHINGTON, DC- Since January 6, Democrats and their state-run mainstream media bootlickers have tried to portray the January 6 US Capitol siege as an “insurrection,” as the “biggest threat to American democracy since the Civil War,” according to Joe Biden, other Democrats and their media collaborators.
That narrative was pushed by carefully released videos from the Department of Justice which only seemed to show violent confrontations between law enforcement and some protesters, and happily shared by the mainstream media.
Newly released videos totally debunk that narrative.
In fact, here’s a video showing the “violent insurrectionists” on their way to “storm” the Capitol:
With thousands of hours of video surveillance available, many questioned why the government wasn’t releasing all of the footage.
After all, didn’t the American people deserve to see how close we were to losing our country by a few thousand mostly senior citizens with American flags?
One would think that the government would be anxious to prove their case. So it was rather confusing why there seemed to be an attempt by the government to hide those videos. Now, we know why.
Prosecutors Lost A Fight To Keep A Set Of Jan. 6 Capitol Surveillance Videos Under Seal https://t.co/IwJekF6hSX pic.twitter.com/FTnNPoyuPU
— Zoe Tillman (@ZoeTillman) September 22, 2021
The Western Journal reported on Friday that one case involving one of the “violent insurrectionists” was particularly confusing to the presiding judge in the case, who ordered the release of a video showing him inside the Capitol.
The video showed what amounted to a field trip through the U.S. Capitol.
Definitely looks worse than 9/11 https://t.co/Rwqnz2joMD
— Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) September 23, 2021
U.S. District Chief Judge Beryl Howell ordered the video’s release after a number of media organizations, including BuzzFeed asked for the video’s release which prosecutors used in order to determine the culpability of defendants, in this case a man named Eric Torrens.
On August 19, Torrens pled guilty to a single count of illegally parading, demonstrating or picketing inside the Capitol as part of a plea bargain. Wow, that sounds pretty insurrection-like.
“He admitted entering the building through a broken door and walking around. The government noted in court papers that Capitol surveillance cameras recorded his entry into the building as well as his movements inside,” Zoe Tillman of BuzzFeed reported earlier this week.
“Prosecutors cited four other videos they obtained related to Torrens, including one that showed him saying, ‘We goin’ in!”
Sounds pretty violent, right? Sure, there were some idiots in the crowd who engaged in violent behavior, including assaulting police officers which is unacceptable, and those people should be dealt with in an appropriate manner.
Tucker opening monologue on January 6 lies and Biden regime attempts to keep all the video secret. My explainer from May here: https://t.co/yMzq6b9BCO
— Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 (@julie_kelly2) September 24, 2021
For people such as Torrens however, their entry into the Capitol, although poorly thought out, certainly didn’t rise to the level of an “insurrection.”
It was the government’s case involving Torrens that led to Howell issuing the release of the videos showing him inside the Capitol. Put it this way, the video was a snoozer.
“Before Torrens’ plea hearing, Howell asked to see videos that the government relied on in describing Torrens’ conduct. She also asked the parties to weigh in on whether those videos should be released to the public,” according to BuzzFeed.
“At the plea hearing, Howell noted that there was a presumption in favor of access to judicial proceedings and that the public had an interest in materials that were submitted in court, that judges relied on in making decisions, and that shed light on how prosecutors exercised discretion in criminal cases.”
The prosecution (DOJ) attempted to claim that the videos showed information, such as “secret” entrances and exits to the Capitol that were unknown to the general public and their release would “compromise the security of the United States Capitol and those who work there.”
“This footage, when combined with other footage from nearby cameras, could be used to track individual rioters moving through the building thereby creating a visual pathway which other bad actors could use in planning their breach point and pathway for future attacks,” they argued.
Howell last week decided the government’s “argument” is as absurd as it sounds and ordered the release of the videos, noting that they didn’t show “sensitive” parts of the Capitol and would be easily seen by the public on a public tour.
“Hundreds of cases have arisen from the events of January 6, with new cases being brought and pending cases being resolved by plea agreement every week,” Howell wrote.
“The public has an interest in understanding the conduct underlying the charges in these cases, as well as the government’s prosecutorial decision-making both in bringing criminal charges and resolving these charges by entering into plea agreements with defendants,” she said.
While the selected previously released videos only showed the violent protesters who were involved in the Capitol siege, the videos released and obtained by outlets such as BuzzFeed showed people calmly walking around the Capitol, as if they were on a public tour of the building, hardly a “violent” uprising.
As of this writing, some 650 people have been charged for entering the Capitol on Jan. 6, yet as the newly released videos show, certainly not all of them and likely few of them were engaged in violence.
The fact that the government is kicking and screaming about releasing ALL of the videos of the incident is telling. As the videos in Torrens’ case show, there was a lot more to the incident than has been carefully scripted by Biden’s Justice Department and the mainstream media.
As The Western Journal notes, “the fact that government officials wanted these videos suppressed because they represented some kind of ‘security’ threat—when they clearly didn’t—indicates how desperate they are to curate the narrative that they were far more of the former when what we see instead is a lot of the latter.”
Writing in American Greatness last May, Julie Kelly cites an affidavit filed by Thomas DiBiase, general counsel of the Capitol Police Department which notes the building is monitored 24/7 by “an extensive system of cameras,” positioned both inside and outside the building.
She noted that the system captured over 14,000 hours of footage between noon and 8:00 p.m. on January 6, 2021. She noted the archive has been made available to two Democrat-controlled congressional committees, the FBI and the DC Metro Police Department.
The affidavit sought to suppress the public release of any footage, claiming the release could “provoke further violence.”
“The Department has significant concerns with the release of any of its footage do defendants in the Capitol attack cases unless there are safeguards in place to prevent its copying and dissemination,” DiBiase wrote on March 17.
“Our concern is that providing unfettered access to extremely sensitive information to defendants who already have shown a desire to interfere with the democratic process will…[be] passed on to those who might wish to attack the Capitol again.”
We challenge the government to release ALL of the video surveillance from January 6. Transparency, right?
Four our prior report on Pelosi’s sham “January 6” commission, we invite you to:
WASHINGTON, DC – Rep. Jim Banks is not taking his removal from the January 6 select committee by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi quietly, saying the rejection shows Democrats are conducting a “political witch hunt.”
.@SpeakerPelosi knew that @Jim_Jordan and I were going to ask the tough questions she didn’t want answered.https://t.co/779MUUy9sg
— Jim Banks (@RepJimBanks) July 22, 2021
Speaker Pelosi (D-CA) said Thursday that he rejected two Republicans, Rep. Banks (R-IN) and Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), from serving on the committee because they were too partisan based on previous comments. In a statement, Pelosi said:
“With respect for the integrity of the investigation, with an insistence on the truth and with concern about statements made and actions taken by these Members, I must reject the recommendations of Representatives Banks and Jordan to the Select Committee.
“The unprecedented nature of January 6th demands this unprecedented decision.”
Jordan, the ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, and Banks, the chairman of the Republican Study Committee, have remained two of Trump’s top defenders in Congress.
🚨🚨 Dem Hypocrisy: Dem members of the Jan 6 committee voted to de-certify elections—2004 & 2016.
Pelosi blocking Jim Jordan & Jim Banks is really about her not wanting ALL the facts to come out.
It’s their classic playbook: Shut people down if you don’t like what they’ll say. pic.twitter.com/lyFPjP7jsS
— Steve Scalise (@SteveScalise) July 23, 2021
The Speaker’s rejection of the two prominent Republicans from the committee set to investigate the events leading up to the attack on the U.S. Capitol has drawn criticism from conservatives, who claim the move shows Democrats have no interest in finding the truth.
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, who put the names forward, called Pelosi’s actions an “egregious abuse of power.”
McCarthy decided to pull all five Republicans from the panel, promising voters the Republicans would conduct their own investigation.
Speaker Pelosi guilty of #Jimsurrection as she ousts Jim Jordan and Jim Banks from the January 6th Select Committee. 🔥 pic.twitter.com/G2IqBXtGdc
— Billy Baldwin (@BillyBaldwin) July 21, 2021
In an interview with Breitbart News on Wednesday, Banks said Republicans would press on to find the “breakdown” that occurred within the Capitol Police leadership that allowed the insurrectionists to access and overwhelm the Capitol:
“Why was there a systemic breakdown of leadership at the highest levels of the Capitol Police?” Banks asked. “The more you go down that path and start asking those questions, and the higher you go on the food chain, the closer to Nancy Pelosi you get.”
In a statement released by Banks following his appointment to the committee, he said that he accepted the appointment to “force the Democrats and the media to answer questions so far ignored.”
He went on:
“If Democrats were serious about investigating political violence, this committee would be studying not only the January 6 riot at the Capitol but also the hundreds of violent political riots last summer when many more innocent Americans and law-enforcement officers were attacked.
And of course, the committee would not overlook the Good Friday murder of USCP Officer Billy Evans that was perpetrated by a far-left extremist.
“Make no mistake, Nancy Pelosi created this committee solely to malign conservatives and to justify the Left’s authoritarian agenda.
“Even then, I will do everything possible to give the American people the facts about the lead up to January 6, the riot that day, and the responses from Capitol leadership and the Biden administration. I will not allow this committee to be turned into a forum for condemning millions of Americans because of their political beliefs.”
My statement on being appointed by @GOPLeader to serve as the Republican ranking member on the Select Committee to investigate Jan. 6: pic.twitter.com/dSJNF56EA9
— Jim Banks (@RepJimBanks) July 19, 2021
Banks told Breitbart News that the select committee is nothing more than a “witch hunt” to go after Donald Trump:
“They were never interested in asking the questions that mattered about January 6. They wanted this to be a political witch hunt from the very beginning to go after Donald Trump, to go after Republicans in Congress, and to go after 75 million people who voted for Donald Trump.”
Banks called into question the motives behind Speaker Pelosi’s actions, saying that as Speaker of the House, she is responsible for security at the U.S. Capitol and ultimately the failure to prevent the attack. He said when he started asking those questions, she got scared:
“It’s obvious that the moment Jim Jordan and I and Kevin McCarthy started asking questions about that, that spooked Nancy Pelosi.”
Refusing to seat Rep Jim Jordan & Rep Jim Banks on the Select Committee to Investigate Jan 6th is intolerable.
House Freedom Caucus is calling on GOP leader to file and bring up a privileged motion to vacate the chair and end Speaker Pelosi’s authoritarian reign.
Full letter: pic.twitter.com/u2AsXN5nfg
— House Freedom Caucus (@freedomcaucus) July 23, 2021
Gus Papathanasiou, head of the Capitol Police union, met with Rep. Banks early Wednesday and the representative said the meeting revealed there were serious questions about training, equipment, and preparation:
“There are serious concerns that they raise about the lack of preparation, the lack of training, the lack of equipment, and the Democrats do not want the head of the Capitol Police union to testify on Tuesday.”
Nancy Pelosi, 81, says “I’m a street fighter”, claims she would’ve fought off Capitol rioters
April 16, 2021
The following article contains editorial content written by a current staff writer for Law Enforcement Today
WASHINGTON, DC – When doing an interview with USA Today, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi claimed that if the Capitol rioters had encountered her personally on January 6th, those rioters would be in store for “a battle,” while referring to herself as a “street fighter”.
Pelosi says she would have put up a fight against Capitol mob: 'I'm a street fighter pic.twitter.com/LTTeER160p
— Tristan little (@Tristanlittle18) April 14, 2021
In an interview published by USA Today on April 13th, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi speculated on what she would’ve done had she come face-to-face with the Capitol rioters on January 6th:
“Well, I’m pretty tough. I’m a street fighter…They would have had a battle on their hands.”
Pelosi jokingly went on from there, lifting up her foot to showcase her stiletto heels and proclaiming she could’ve used them for a weapon had things gone awry:
“I would have had these.”
For the record, Nancy Pelosi is 81-years-old.
To be clear, what happened on January 6th is not something to condone. Nor is it at all appropriate to wish harm to befall elected officials, even if an elected official passes or touts policies that someone doesn’t agree with.
With that being acknowledged, it is pretty funny that an 81-year-old woman casually flaunted the idea that she was going to square up and engage in fisticuffs with anybody.
While she was realistically cracking a joke, I don’t think anybody actually believes that Nancy Pelosi could get down and start boxing people.
Hell, it was a struggle for her to stand up after engaging in that performative kneeling back in June of 2020.
Oooookaaaayyy…@SpeakerPelosi, this you? pic.twitter.com/QkaSpobRU8
— Steve Cox (@RealSteveCox) April 14, 2021
Chances are the only fights Pelosi has ever been in, in recent years, are probably verbal arguments with store clerks for not carrying her preferred brand of vodka.
Let’s face it, Nancy Pelosi’s political career started at a time where VHS and Betamax were still competing as to which would be the then-preferred home entertainment format – her most intense brawls today consist of her deciding between Brach’s cinnamon candies and Werther’s hard candies.
For heaven’s sake, she probably has a Life Alert button somewhere on her person. Considering her age, there is a possibility that she has Buffalo Nickels in the cracks of her couch.
Pelosi is 81-years-old, she doesn’t need to be Speaker of the House – she needs to be somewhere in Florida at a retirement home watching daytime television game shows.
The area codes system used for telephone calls was implemented seven years after Pelosi was born.
Likely the only reason that more Republicans and Conservatives don’t dunk on Pelosi more often for her practically carbon-dated presence within the House is the fact that President Joe Biden is like an adult version of Ralph Wiggum from the Simpsons.