A Different Definition Of Uniting America

Breitbart reported today on President Biden’s remarks about the tragic shooting in Buffalo on Saturday. His remarks were not unifying–they were divisive. They were a further indication of the Democrat’s efforts to paint all Republicans or Trump supporters as white supremacists before the mid-term election. That kind of name calling does not bring healing or comfort–it simply creates division.

The article reports:

President Joe Biden connected the racist mass shooting in Buffalo on Saturday to the protests of Trump supporters on January 6.

The president cited January 6th riots after calling all Americans to “reject white supremacy” because they were making the country look bad.

In an article posted today at Issues & Insights, the author notes:

Of course, the media aren’t always so exploitative in the wake of mass shootings. Often, they are very careful to wait for the facts and never speculate about motives.

Case in point: Just one month before the Buffalo shooting, a gunman threw smoke grenades in a New York City subway car filled with commuters and then opened fire, unloading 33 rounds before fleeing the scene.

Ten suffered gunshot wounds – the same number authorities say the Buffalo shooter killed – and 19 more had to be treated for smoke inhalation. Mercifully, none died. But all of them could have.

That alleged shooter – 62-year-old Frank James – was a radical just as incendiary as Gendron. The difference was that James was a black nationalist.

“The social media rants of the 62-year-old suspect reveal a man consumed with hatred of white people and convinced of a looming race war,” wrote Miranda Divine in the New York Post. “‘O black Jesus, please kill all the whiteys,’ was one meme he posted.”

He also lamented that new Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson married a white man.

“She married the devil,” said the man who was on the FBI’s terrorist radar.

And as it turns out, James was also a fan of CNN, and “in many of his videos appeared in front of a large TV tuned to the left-wing cable channel,” Divine wrote.

Yet the press took pains to describe this would-be mass murderer as the very lone wolf they now say doesn’t exist. They ignored his rantings and never made the connection between these views and those of many prominent Democrats. They didn’t blame CNN for its inflammatory coverage of racial issues.

Where were the comments on black racism after the subway shooting?

The article at Breitbart concludes:

Biden indicated that white supremacists were acting out of a type of misguided patriotism.

“Look, the American experiment in democracy is in a danger like it hasn’t been in my lifetime. It’s in danger this hour,” he said. “Hate and fear are being given too much oxygen by those who pretend to love America. But who don’t understand America.”

The president also proposed doing more to prevent evil content from spreading on the Internet.

“We can address the relentless exploitation of the Internet to recruit and mobilize terrorism,” he said. “We just need to have the courage to do that. To stand up.”

May I translate those remarks for you. Patriotism is only what the political left says it is. Any other patriotism is dangerous. We need more censorship of conservative speech. Any speech that disagrees with the Democrat agenda is hate speech and needs to be censored.

I agree that the American experiment in democracy is in danger. First of all, we are not a democracy–we are a representative republic. If we don’t vote the censorship crowd out in the midterms, our First and Second Amendment freedoms will be gone.

Questionable Characters Involved In January 6th

On Friday, The Epoch Times posted an article about a suspected entrapment operation against the Oath Keepers on January 6th. Please follow the link to read the entire article. I will post a few highlights.

The article reports:

Defense attorneys are seeking to identify and investigate 80 suspicious actors and material witnesses, some of whom allegedly ran an entrapment operation against the Oath Keepers on January 6, 2021, and committed crimes including the removal of security fencing, breaching police lines, attacking officers, and inciting crowds to storm into the Capitol.

In a motion (pdf) and supplement (pdf) filed after 11 p.m. on May 5 in federal court in Washington, attorney Brad Geyer listed 80 people, some of whom he said could be government agents or provocateurs. The people are seen on video operating in a coordinated fashion across the Capitol grounds on January 6, the attorney alleged.

Geyer’s suggestion of an entrapment scheme will resonate with dozens of January 6 defense attorneys, coming shortly after two men were acquitted of an alleged plot to kidnap Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D). There was a hung jury on charges against two other defendants. The jury in that case was allowed to consider FBI entrapment as a defense.

Geyer, who represents Oath Keepers defendant Kenneth Harrelson, is seeking a court order from U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta compelling federal prosecutors to help identify the individuals and disclose whether they were working for law enforcement or any government agency on January 6. Geyer wrote that the information is exculpatory, which compels the government to produce it. Other Oath Keepers defendants are expected to join in the motion.

…The towering Columbus Doors that lead into the Rotunda on the east side of the U.S. Capitol are secured by magnetic locks that can only be opened from the inside by using a security code controlled by Capitol Police, Moseley wrote in an eight-page memo in January.

The two inner doors are secured by magnetic locks and cannot be opened from the outside. Twice within an hour on January 6, suspicious actors opened the inner doors from inside the Rotunda, surveillance video shows.

According to Geyer’s filing, a large number of suspicious actors controlled the scene directly in front of the Columbus Doors after the giant doors were opened. They chased away regular protesters with pepper spray and moved other actors into place. The Oath Keepers, each of whom was shadowed by at least one suspicious actor, were positioned and coaxed toward the entrance.

Six to eight suspicious actors attacked police with mace in preparation to breach the entrance, Geyer wrote.

“The dynamic of the crowd makes this almost invisible or fleeting to almost all publicly available camera angles, so most people in the crowd could not have known these chemical assaults occurred and certainly no one could have known who was standing on the steps which is where the Oath Keepers were positioned at exactly this moment.”

The net effect is that the Oath Keepers, who had come up the east stairs, were swept into the Capitol with the group of suspicious actors, the document alleged. The actors attacked police, breached the doors, and led a crowd inside the Rotunda.

The article concludes:

The court filing will bring fresh attention to the issue of provocateurs at the U.S. Capitol. Epps, a former Oath Keepers member from Arizona, denies he was working as a government informant on Jan. 5 and 6.

Federal prosecutors announced earlier this year they would disclose more information about Epps, whose photo was removed from the FBI’s Jan. 6 most-wanted list. He has not been arrested or charged, despite urging crowds to enter the Capitol and being present when police lines were breached by protesters.

Some of the suspicious actors on Geyer’s list were also seen in the hallway outside the Speaker’s Lobby where Ashli Babbitt was shot at 2:44 p.m. on Jan. 6. There are a number of other unidentified individuals who stood near Babbitt before she tried to climb out of the hallway and was shot and killed by Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd.

Three witnesses to the Babbitt shooting were removed from the FBI’s most-wanted list in April 2021 without explanation. Those men have not been identified or charged.

After looking at the available video and realizing how much of the video was kept back for so long, I can’t help but wonder if this was an undercover government operation to change a peaceful protest into something that would begin to break political opposition to what was to come. The unpeaceful protest did prevent those who questioned that integrity of the 2020 election from being heard, and I believe that was its purpose.

More Desperation


On Saturday, Townhall reported that an Arizona judge ruled against voting groups seeking to prevent Reps. Paul Gosar and Andy Biggs, both Republicans from Arizona, as well as State Rep. Mark Finchem, a fellow Republican from the state, from appearing on the ballot. This is one of many lawsuits Democrats have initiated to keep key Republicans off the ballot in November. The uniparty in Washington does not like to be challenged.

The article reports:

Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Christopher Coury ruled against the voter groups, as Ryan King reported for The Washington Examiner, based on grounds to sue. The groups bringing the suit tried to claim that the Arizona Republican lawmakers had participated in an “insurrection” on January 6, based on their presence at the rally before the rioters headed for the Capitol.

Note that they were present at the rally where the President stated the following, “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard. today we will see whether republicans stand strong for the integrity of our elections but whether or not they stand strong for our country.” That is hardly a call for an insurrection. The Democrats are working hard to give the impression that what happened on January 6th was an insurrection so they can then use the the 14th Amendment to disqualify anyone from running for election who supports President Trump.

As I reported on February 21st (article here):

Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states: “No person shall be a … Representative in Congress … who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress … to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same.”

Hopefully we have enough good judges to put an end to this legal foolishness.

 

 

Waiting To See The Impact Of The Lies

On Friday, Hot Air reported that The New York Times had the tapes to back up their claim that Kevin McCarthy thought Trump should resign and he would take that recommendation to the president and that he hoped Twitter would ban the MAGA types in the caucus like Marjorie Taylor Greene and Lauren Boebert who had pushed “rigged election” incitement before the insurrection. When initially faced with the accusation, Kevin McCarthy, in the true spirit of a Washington politician, lied about it.

Meanwhile, The Washington Examiner reported on Friday:

House Republicans appear to be in no rush to consider dumping House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy over his double-speak reaction to the Jan. 6 riots and tapped comments that former President Donald Trump should “resign” over the affair.

According to multiple insiders, Republicans are first looking to see what Trump says (or doesn’t) on the growing scandal and then hope to kick questions about leadership toward a time after the fall elections so it doesn’t distract from the goal of taking back control of the House.

It doesn’t matter if the Republicans take control of the House in November if the uniparty is still in control. The statements by Kevin McCarthy indicate to me that he is a member of the uniparty threatened by the popularity of President Trump.

The Washington Examiner concludes:

Importantly, Trump and McCarthy talked Thursday, and the former president isn’t upset in part because McCarthy never pushed for Trump’s resignation, fought impeachment, and subsequently moved to punish Republicans who did vote to impeach.

“It appears that Trump doesn’t care and that McCarthy changing his tune showed he capitulated to him,” said a longtime GOP insider.

Since Trump left office, McCarthy has stayed loyal to the former president and is considered a close ally and adviser himself as the former president eyes another run for office. Trump is also known to hate the press, and the media are already cheering him on to dump McCarthy’s friendship over the resignation call.

Should Trump give McCarthy a pass, “McCarthy will survive,” said a Republican lobbyist close to House GOP leaders.

Helping McCarthy’s cause is the expectation that the GOP will win control of the House and the party’s goal of keeping the focus on Election Day and not internal politics.

Also working for McCarthy, insiders said, is that those on the leadership team, notably No. 2 Rep. Steve Scalise, are not eager to rock the boat because they may get tossed in the storm.

“Scalise wouldn’t challenge McCarthy unless it was a virtual guarantee he’d get the job,” said one ally. “He’s already set to be the House majority leader in a Republican House and McCarthy’s heir apparent,” said the ally, adding, “Why risk it?”

I suspect that there was a deal made that will not be made public that will keep McCarthy in office at least temporarily. This is something to watch over the next two years. It may eventually have a bearing on the next presidential election.

Rumor has it that the tape was leaked by Liz Cheney. The swamp desperately wants to divide the Republican party.

Our Justice System Has Turned Political

On Sunday, The American Thinker reported the following:

One of the most visible signs of our federal government’s corruption is the treatment being meted out to the January 6 prisoners, who have been deprived of their express and inherent rights under the Constitution, one of which is the right to an impartial judge. Dustin Thompson, however, was not accorded that right, as Judge Reggie Walton explicitly showed his political bias and hostility to Thompson. Walton should have recused himself before the trial. With the trial over, at the very least, the judgment should be reversed. Ideally, Walton would be removed from the bench and disbarred.

The Bill of Rights describes rights inherent in the individual; they are not “gifts” from the government. All Americans enjoy them automatically and the government may override these rights only by showing an overwhelming need to do so.

When it comes to the January 6 martyrs, however, the federal government under Biden and Attorney General Merrick Garland has deprived these martyrs of multiple rights. Specifically:

    • the First Amendment (most of the defendants were peaceably assembling because the police let them into the Capitol),
    • the Fifth Amendment (for they have been deprived of life, liberty, and property for over a year without due process),
    • the Sixth Amendment (they’ve been deprived of speedy trials and the right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusations against them), and
    • the Eighth Amendment (being denied bail is tantamount to impermissible excessive bail).

This is a disgrace. The January 6th prisoners are political prisoners in what is supposed to be a free country.

The article concludes:

The worst thing, though, was Judge Walton, who insulted Thompson in front of the jury for daring to support a president of whom Walton disapproved:

As the defense played Trump’s speech before the jury, he spoke words of disdain for President Trump and Rudy Giuliani. He did not stop.

“Anyone who follows Trump is weak-minded. Thompson is a flight risk,” Walton continued, as Thompson was shackled and taken from the courtroom.

Judge Walton, “Trump is a charlatan who caused an insurgency. He is tearing America apart. That’s the reason why our country is falling apart. I am proud of the jury for doing this.”

In 35 years as a lawyer, almost all in the leftist San Francisco Bay Area, I’ve never seen a judge show this type of bias in front of a jury, and I have seen some pretty horrible judges over the years. Walton should be disbarred. That won’t happen but his disgraceful, indecent, unprofessional conduct certainly justifies a reversal and dismissal on appeal. 

What has happened to our judicial system?

Changing The Rules After The Fact

On Monday, PJ Media reported the following:

On Jan. 6, 2021, a protestor, 40-year-old Brady Knowlton, says that an officer at the Capitol told “You can go in, as long as you don’t break anything.” At 2:35 p.m., Knowlton did, entering through the Upper West Terrace doors. He looked around inside the building, walked through the Rotunda, lobby, and Senate chamber gallery, obeyed the officer’s injunction not to break anything, and left the building at 2:53 p.m. For that, Knowlton now faces twenty years in prison in Old Joe Biden’s vengeful banana republic.

…According to the charges filed against him in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Knowlton “did unlawfully and knowingly enter and remain in a restricted building and grounds.” He also “did knowingly, and with intent to impede and disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business and official functions, engage in disorderly and disruptive conduct in and within such proximity to, a restricted building and grounds, that is, any posted, cordoned-off, and otherwise restricted area within the United States Capitol and its grounds, where the Vice President and Vice President-elect were temporarily visiting.” He “willfully and knowingly engaged in disorderly and disruptive conduct within the United States Capitol Grounds. He “willfully and knowingly entered and remained in the gallery of either House of Congress, without authorization to do so.”

If Knowlton’s contention that a police officer said he could go in is true, it vitiates all these charges, and Knowlton’s claim is certainly corroborated by photographic and video evidence of cops at the Capitol opening gates, holding the doors open for protestors, and reports that police even posed for selfies with protestors. Also, when the FBI raided Knowlton’s home, they found no evidence whatsoever “concerning the breach and unlawful entry” of the Capitol, or “of any conspiracy, planning, or preparation,” or “maps or diagrams” of the Capitol, or of any “materials, devices, or tools” that Knowlton might have planned to use to get inside.

The article notes the obvious contrast with the way people with other political views have been treated:

Compare the treatment of Knowlton and the other Jan. 6 scapegoats to the treatment of Quintez Brown, the Black Lives Matter activist who recently shot at Louisville mayoral candidate Craig Greenberg. Journalist Miranda Devine noted that Brown was “portrayed sympathetically by the media and immediately bailed out of jail by his Black Lives Matter comrades, who crowdfunded the $100,000 cost.” Devine added that Brown was “a celebrated gun control advocate, anointed as a rising star by the Obama Foundation, he was an honored guest on Joy Reid’s MSNBC show. He was granted a biweekly opinion column in the Louisville Courier-Journal to spew boilerplate leftist, race-based, anti-cop sentiment.” Brown had, Devine says, “BLM privilege.” Indeed.

This sort of uneven treatment divides America. It is time that we went back to the concept of “equal justice under the law” which was part of the foundation of our government. If the foundation is destroyed, the building falls down.

Pay Attention To The Pattern

On Tuesday, The Federalist posted an article about the actions of private corporations regarding the war in Ukraine. Private corporations are denying services or products to Russia or to entitles connected to Russia. They are conducting their own private boycotts. Some of these companies are major corporation such as American Express, Apple, and Microsoft. That may seem like a good thing, but the pattern is troubling.

The article reports:

It could be tempting to cheer the move for targeting Russia’s authoritarian regime and condemning Russian President Vladimir Putin’s unprovoked attacks on the people of Ukraine. But the actions by private companies against Russians are part of a larger swing by U.S. corporations to deny services to those whose opinions they deem unacceptable — and that’s exactly the kind of social credit system Russia is building to impose on its own people.

That’s what we saw in Canada when bank accounts and other assets of protesting truckers were frozen.

The article notes:

Punishment might include anything from slower internet speeds to being barred from flying or staying in certain hotels. There have also been reports of people being denied higher education and having their pets confiscated.

If you think comparisons between Russia and China’s authoritarian credit systems and the increasing dragnet in the United States are outlandish, just think about how Mastercard and American Express blocked donations to Americans whose beliefs about the 2020 election were found unacceptable, while Visa’s political action committee used the Capitol riot on Jan. 6, 2021 to “temporarily suspend[] all political donations.” Paypal, Venmo, and Shopify all went after people who were supposedly involved in the riot.

A friend of mine had her Paypal account terminated because she used a credit card to buy a hamburger in Washington on the weekend of January 6th. She did not go near the Capitol–she went back to her hotel room after the rally, but her Paypal account was still canceled because her credit card company reported that she had made a transaction in Washington that weekend. This is not the America I grew up in.

The article concludes:

We shouldn’t cheer U.S. firms for appointing themselves the arbiters of who deserves to participate in our economy (and by extension, our society). If they can do it to Russia, they can do it to you.

But we also shouldn’t cheer such actions because they move us one step closer to blurring the line between ourselves and the authoritarian tyrants we purport to denounce. If we defeat Russia or China by making our differences unrecognizable, we’ve already lost.

This Is A Good Idea

On Thursday, The Washington Examiner posted an opinion piece about a group called “Look Ahead America” lead by Matt Braynard, a former Trump campaign aid.

The opinion piece notes:

A group fighting for the release of Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot suspects is urging voters to press candidates on the fairness of the extended jailings of many of those arrested after the pro-Trump protests.

Matt Braynard’s “Look Ahead America” is hoping to create a small citizen-journalist army that will film its questioning of candidates about those held, some for months.

“We encourage all of our fellow Americans to ask candidates for federal office the following question: What are you going to do about the patriots who are being politically persecuted for their participation in the Jan. 6 Capitol Protest?” he said.

He dubbed the effort the “J6 Question Project” and pledged to post the recordings on his website, which lists about 100 suspects who are behind bars.

The fact that these people are still in jail is a disgrace to our country. Our Congressmen took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution. They are supposed to abide by it. The extended jailing of the January 6th defendants is in direct violation of the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which states:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

The January 6th defendants have been in jail for more than a year. Where is the Congressional outrage? Where are the Congressmen defending the Constitution?

The opinion piece concludes:

Braynard’s group has held about 70 events around the nation to draw attention to the unusually long holding of Jan. 6 suspects arrested by the FBI, including many who never entered the Capitol but were seen in the crowds outside the day that President Joe Biden’s election was certified by Congress.

Several conservative members have also drawn attention to the long jailings, notably Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene and Matt Gaetz.

Braynard, in a statement Thursday, said: “For the last year, Look Ahead America has successfully held approximately 70 events across the country to raise the profile of the hundreds of Americans who have been politically persecuted. Now is the time to turn that public awareness into action by confronting candidates for public office and recording their statements on what they plan to do about our brothers and sisters who have been persecuted not for what they have done but for what they believe.”

This Needs To Be Shouted From The Rooftops

The violence in the ‘violent insurrection’ of January 6th was not on the part of the protesters. There were two people (at least) killed by irresponsible actions of the Capitol Police. We have seen the videos of Ashli Babbitt being shot. She was unarmed and posed no threat to the police. Now heavily redacted videos are being released relating to the death of Rosanne Boyland. On Friday, The Epoch Times posted an article about the death of Ronanne Boyland on Friday.

The article reports:

Heavily redacted bodycam videos from the West Terrace tunnel on Jan. 6, 2021, provide a glimpse into conditions at the time Rosanne Boyland lay unconscious—including the sound of her being beaten with a large wooden stick by police.

Several bodycam videos obtained by The Epoch Times have much of the screen blurred out by authorities, but key audio and video clues back up witness statements and other videos previously released by the U.S. Department of Justice.

A 39-second video clip from the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department shows the gloved hand of Officer Lila Morris picking up a long stick that was lying alongside an unconscious Rosanne Boyland, and then striking the prone woman multiple times. The sound of the stick making contact with Boyland’s body is clearly audible.

…Boyland, 34, of Kennesaw, Ga., died on Jan. 6 after being trampled by a crowd of protesters trying to escape being gassed by police inside the West Terrace tunnel entrance to the U.S. Capitol.

A variety of videos show Boyland struck by a weapon wielded by a D.C. Metropolitan Police Department officer, later identified as Lila Morris.

The Epoch Times reported on Feb. 10 that the beating of Boyland, who was unconscious at the time, by Morris was deemed to be “objectively reasonable” after an investigation by the department’s Internal Affairs Bureau.

Compare the treatment of the January 6th protesters (whose actions were not perfect but not threatening to anyone) to the treatment of the Black Lives Matter and Antifa protesters from the summer of 2020. The right of protest is protected by our Constitution. The right to burn down cities is not. Which group is being treated more harshly?

Is A Refusal To Answer An Answer?

There are many Americans who believe that a lot of what we saw on January 6th was a false flag operation. The fact that no one can explain why President Trump’s request for the National Guard was denied adds to that suspicion. The fact that Roy Epps mysteriously disappeared from the FBI’s Most Wanted List after being seen on video telling people to go into the Capitol also adds to that suspicion. A Congressional Hearing on Tuesday added further fuel to the suspicion that January 6th was a set-up.

The U.K. Daily Mail posted an article on Tuesday about the Congressional Hearing. The article reports:

An FBI agent refused to give answers on Tuesday as to who Ray Epps is and whether any agents or informants participated in any capacity in the January 6 Capitol riot.

Senator Ted Cruz demanded to know the level of involvement, if any, the agency had in the deadly attack last year and wanted to know more about an ex-Marine accused of being an FBI plant sent to help incite the events last year.

‘How many FBI agents or confidential informants actively participated in the events of January 6th?’ Cruz asked the FBI’s Executive Assistant Director of the National Security Branch Jill Sanborn during a hearing on domestic violence threats on Tuesday.

‘Sir, I’m sure you can appreciate that I can’t go into the specifics of sources and methods –’ Sanborn began, but was cut off but Cruz re-asking the same question.

‘I can’t answer that,’ said Sanborn, who joined the hearing virtually.

‘Did any FBI agents or confidential informants commit crimes of violence on January 6?’ Cruz pushed.

‘I can’t answer that.’

‘Did any FBI agents or FBI informants actively encourage and incite crimes of violence on January 6?’ the Texas Republican senator asked.

Sanborn repeated the same answer for a third time.

Cruz then said that President Biden needs to answer questions about the FBI’s supposed role in January 6.

‘Unfortunately, under Joe Biden we have seen an incredibly partisan Department of Justice,’ Cruz said. ‘And both the Department of Justice and the FBI have an arrogance that they are not accountable to anyone, that they can stonewall.’

So much for the transparency of the Biden administration.

Gradually The Truth Is Coming Out

In December, I posted two articles about the treatment of Victoria White on January 6th (here and here). Some of the video footage from the West Terrace tunnel of the U.S. Capitol that has been released shows a very different picture of what happened on January 6th than what we have been told. Recently The Epoch Times posted an article about one question posed by that video.

The article reports:

Newly released video from the West Terrace tunnel of the U.S. Capitol provides more details on the collapse, beating, and death of Rosanne Boyland on Jan. 6, 2021.

A three-hour video unsealed in late December in a Jan. 6 federal criminal case shows the 34-year-old President Donald Trump supporter entered the tunnel, was pushed back out, fell, and was struck by police before her lifeless body was dragged into the Capitol.

Boyland’s sister and a New York attorney question the District of Columbia medical examiner’s finding that Boyland died of an overdose of a prescription medication she took for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder.

Boyland, from Kennesaw, Ga., traveled to Washington D.C. for the Save America rally at the Ellipse on Jan. 6. She is seen on video entering the Capitol tunnel, walking next to conservative activist Philip Anderson. Bystanders continue filing in toward the double doors leading into the Capitol.

About 2 1/2 minutes later, police begin pushing the crowd backwards. Boyland is seen at one point looking down at her feet as the mass of humanity flows back toward the entrance. Less than two minutes after that, she disappears from view after falling. Police continue to push the crowd out of the tunnel, causing bodies to pile up on the stairs.

…At the lower right edge of the tunnel arch, the video shows a Metropolitan Police Department officer repeatedly striking someone at ground level with a baton or a large stick.

Bodycam footage released in 2021 by the U.S. Department of Justice, and cell-phone videos posted to social media, show that Boyland was hit by a police officer numerous times with what appears to be a small tree branch or walking stick.

The article continues:

The New York attorney who released the three-hour surveillance video repeated his call for a special prosecutor to investigate what went on in the Capitol tunnel.

“My assessment is that yes, she was killed by the police,” Joseph McBride told The Epoch Times.

McBride originally called for a special prosecutor after the three-hour video showed his client, Victoria C. White, was beaten by police in the West Terrace tunnel over a four-minute period on Jan. 6. The violence against White occurred just a few minutes before Boyland entered the tunnel.

“Our relentless pursuit of truth and justice requires a special prosecutor to investigate the brutal beating of Victoria White and killing of Rosanne Boyland, who were both victims of police brutality on January 6th,” McBride said.

Is January 6, 2021, the day that Americans lost their civil rights? It seems that there were a lot of things that were done wrong that day both on the part of Trump supporters and law enforcement. The biggest violation of Americans’ civil rights is the fact that there are political prisoners still held in the Washington, D.C., jail without being charged, allowed bail, or given all of their civil rights. That needs to be shouted from the rooftops every day until someone is our government is held accountable for that situation.

Politicizing What Shouldn’t Be Political

What happened on January 6th last year was wrong. It wasn’t an insurrection by any stretch of the imagination and it wasn’t a threat to our democracy (we are not a democracy–we are a representative republic), but it was wrong. We don’t know if there were government instigators in the crowd (it seems very possible that there were), and we don’t really know a lot of the details of what happened. Much of the video from that day is still being kept from the public. We do know that the House Democrats are planning to turn the day into something reminiscent of the Paul Wellstone funeral. They do this at their own risk. The public is growing weary of the double standard on protests, and it appears that the Republicans plan on fighting back.

On Tuesday, The Western Journal reported the following:

As Democrats and their mainstream media allies lather up to commemorate Thursday’s anniversary of the Jan. 6 Capitol incursion like it was the firing on Fort Sumter, House Republicans this week are accusing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of deliberately stonewalling the release of information about her own role in the events of the day.

And with the Democrats’ hold on power in the House looking shaky ahead of this year’s midterm elections, Pelosi’s partisans should be getting nervous.

While the committee’s clear purpose is to smear former President Donald Trump and his supporters, the country might be getting a different view of how Pelosi and her party are actually operating.

In a letter released Monday, Illinois Republican Rep. Rodney Davis, the ranking minority member of the House Administration Committee, called out Pelosi for refusing repeatedly over the past year to cooperate with their requests for information from House officers who answer directly to the speaker’s office.

…“There is irony in the fact that at the same time House Democrats are holding witnesses in criminal contempt of Congress for raising genuine questions of legal privilege, you continue to obstruct Republican access to House records relating to the security preparedness of the Capitol complex,” Davis wrote.

“Irony” doesn’t seem to be quite the right word here, though Davis might have been trying to maintain a veneer of civility in the correspondence. “Arrogance” describes it much better. “Dishonesty,” “cynicism,” and “naked abuse of power” fit the bill as well.

It would have been nice if there had been a bi-partisan investigation into Capitol security. However, at this point that is probably impossible.

 

The Comparisons Don’t Hold Up

On Monday, Paul Mirengoff posted an article at Power Line Blog that illustrates the current media campaign centered around January 6th. We need to keep in focus the fact that January 6th, although it was a serious event that involved illegal actions, followed a summer of violence which involved major property destruction and injuries to law enforcement that the mainstream media chose to overlook. How can we forget the news anchor describing the BLM protests as ‘mostly peaceful’ with the sky behind him lit up with fires set by the protestors? One cannot decry the ‘violence’ of January 6th while ignoring the deaths and property damage of the summer that preceded it.

The article reports:

The Washington Post reports that many people who worked at the U.S. Capitol have left their jobs because they were traumatized by the events of January 6. Among those who have quit are an unspecified number of congressional staffers. The few staffers cited by the Post all worked for Democratic members.

How many staffers were injured on January 6? I believe the answer is zero. Yet, the Post describes the staffers who haven’t quit as “soldiering on.” Should we give them medals?

If folks who work for liberal members of Congress really are as fragile and fainthearted as the Post makes them out to be, I consider that good news.

Some Capitol police officers were attacked and injured. It’s understandable that some within that group were traumatized to the point that they have resigned.

However, five dozen Secret Service officers and agents were injured by a mob near the White House during BLM protests in late May 2020. How many of them resigned?

We don’t know because media organs like the Post have never, to my knowledge, said. These news outlets don’t care. Their entire focus was on the supposed outrage of clearing the way for President Trump to make his way from the White House to a nearby church. Apparently, Trump should have holed up in the White House until the protesters finally tired of hanging out on Pennsylvania Avenue.

And what about police officers throughout America who have been attacked by BLM protesters? What about the ones who have had to cope with the invasion, and even the burning of, police stations? How many of them have resigned as a result?

To my knowledge, the Post has never addressed that question. It’s a pertinent one, though, because police officers perform far more important services than random congressional staffers.

The article concludes:

As we approach January 6 of this year, we can expect more articles like the one I discuss here. The events of last January 6 were serious and bad. The perpetrators should be, and are being, punished. If necessary, Capitol security should be enhanced to make sure something like this doesn’t happen again.

But the efforts of Democrats and their lefty media allies to convert January 6 into something like a national day of mourning, while studiously ignoring comparable or worse violence by BLM and Antifa that rocked city after city in 2020, is laughable.

Hopefully Americans are getting wise to the mainstream media’s antics.

A Necessary Event That Will Never Happen

Recently The Epoch Times posted an article related to the beating of Victoria White by two D.C. Metropolitan police officers on January 6th. (articles here and here)

The article reports:

An attorney representing a Minnesota woman allegedly beaten by a Metropolitan Police Department supervisor outside the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 is calling for a special prosecutor to be appointed after the release of dramatic video footage of the incident on Thursday.

Victoria C. White, 39, of Rochester, Minnesota, had been arrested in April and charged with numerous felonies for her alleged role in violence at the Capitol. New York attorney Joseph McBride, who represents White in her criminal case, said the video shows a very different picture than what federal prosecutors portrayed in White’s charging documents.

The video shows a woman McBride identified as White being repeatedly struck with a collapsible baton by the same police officer in the west terrace tunnel of the Capitol on Jan. 6. McBride identified the policeman as a Metropolitan Police Department supervisor, a lieutenant, because of his white uniform and riot helmet with “MPDC” painted on the back. His name is not yet known.

The video shows White slumping to the ground numerous times over more than five minutes. Mace was sprayed in her face several times. She got up and was struck repeatedly with the baton. White suffered nearly three dozen blows before she was handcuffed and led away, McBride said. The supervisor at times put away the baton and punched White in the face with his bare fist, and grabbed her hair and jerked her head back and forth, McBride said.

“The highest-ranking officer in the tunnel targets her and just absolutely tees off on her and begins to brutally beat her,” McBride told The Epoch Times after releasing the footage.

There is no excuse for any policeman to treat anyone this way. The circumstances surrounding the arrest and detention of the people involved in January 6th is a disgrace. Video shows the police removing the barriers and inviting people into the Capitol building. Why are those policemen not being held accountable? Constitutional rights have been violated, and people have been mistreated. It is time to charge those responsible not only for the beating of January 6th prisoners, but the conditions in which they are being held with violating the civil rights of Americans.

Things Were Not What We Have Been Told They Were

January 6th will live in infamy. At least if the Democrats in Congress have anything to say about it. However, there are a lot of unanswered questions, unreleased video, mistreatment of prisoners, and other things around the edges of what Congress is trying to do. In case you haven’t noticed, the goal of the Congressional investigation is to make sure that President Trump does not run for office again. They impeached him twice and that didn’t work, so this is one of their last-ditch efforts. The next effort will be all mail-in ballots for the mid-term elections.

Meanwhile, on Monday The American Thinker posted an article about someone who seems to be a central character in the breaching of the Capitol but somehow hasn’t paid any consequences for his actions.

The article reports:

The House’s Soviet-style January 6 committee continues its unsuccessful efforts to tie Donald Trump, people in his administration, Republican congresspeople, and Fox News personalities to the events on that day. What they’re ignoring as they try to destroy their political enemies is those people caught on tape actively encouraging the crowd to breach the Capitol. The most notable of these people is one Ray Epps, but he’s not the only one. The Revolver has an extensive exposé looking not just at Epps, but at others in the crowd who ought to be at the top of the FBI’s dragnet but, somehow, aren’t.

…The Revolver studied all the people who are seen interacting with Epps on the available videos from January 5 and 6. It concludes that these people were operatives trying to entrap people.

The starting point for the analysis is the 12:50 barrier breach that Epps led along with a small team of people. They systematically destroyed all the barriers and “keep out” signage that people traveling from Trump’s speech to the Capitol would reach first.

By doing so, they created a honeypot that would lead people into the Capitol without their realizing they had crossed into illegal territory. Or, as The Revolver says, “the Ray Epps Breach Team thus set up what may amount to the largest legal booby-trap in American history.”

Please follow the link above to read the entire articles in The American Thinker and in The Revolver. It seems that we have some ethically challenged people in Washington who are running things. It is time they were replaced with people who love America and have some sort of moral code.

 

This Might Easily Backfire

On Sunday, Just the News posted an article about a law recently proposed by Democratic Representatives Hank Johnson (Ga.) and Jamie Raskin (Md.).

The article reports:

Democratic Reps. Hank Johnson (Ga.) and Jamie Raskin (Md.) on Wednesday reintroduced the Bivens Act, which would allow citizens to recover damages for constitutional violations committed against them by federal law enforcement officials.

The bill, which the lawmakers first introduced last year, seeks “to provide a civil remedy for an individual whose rights have been violated by a person acting under federal authority.” It would do this by adding five words — “of the United States or” — to a longstanding provision enacted in 1871, known as Section 1983, which gives individuals the right to sue state or local officials who violate their civil and constitutional rights. The additional words would include federal officials in the statute.

The FBI, Justice Department, Transportation Security Administration (TSA), U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and federal prison officials are among the law enforcement entities that would be held accountable under the legislation.

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) introduced a companion bill in the Senate this week.

Supporters of the legislation argue that no statute, including Section 1983, currently gives individuals the right to sue federal officials who violate the Constitution. Johnson and Raskin said as much in a press release, pointing to the former Trump administration as reason to pass their bill.

Obviously if this bill is passed, there are many possibilities for its abuse, but it also might open the path to justice for some of the January 6th defendants.

The article notes:

Several Jan. 6 prisoners allege the FBI, Justice Department, and federal prison officials under the Biden administration have violated their civil and constitutional rights.

Thomas Caldwell, 66, for example, says he was arrested at his Virginia farm in January and interrogated for hours without being told what he was being charged with. Caldwell, a military veteran, never entered the Capitol building on Jan. 6 but spent well over a month in solitary confinement.

George Tanios, 40, says he had a similar experience at his West Virginia home in March, claiming federal agents wouldn’t answer him when he asked why they were arresting him. He was imprisoned on charges related to the death of Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick and remained in jail for months, despite the District of Columbia’s chief medical examiner concluding Sicknick died of unrelated natural causes. According to Tanios, his business was devastated as a result of his arrest and imprisonment.

Christopher Worrell was also arrested and imprisoned for his involvement in the Capitol riot despite never entering the building. In October, a federal judge found D.C. Jail Warden Wanda Patten and D.C. Department of Corrections Director Quincy Booth in contempt of court for refusing to turn over records related to the care of Worrell, who suffers from non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and had a broken hand. The judge referred the matter to the attorney general “for appropriate inquiry into potential civil rights violations of Jan. 6 defendants, as exemplified in this case.”

Worrell’s lawyer said his client was subjected to “cruel and unusual punishment” in the jail that houses most of the Jan. 6 prisoners. The D.C. jail has come under heightened scrutiny in recent weeks over its conditions and treatment of inmates.

The U.S. attorney for D.C. is the federal official primarily leading the prosecution of Jan. 6 defendants. The position is appointed by the president.

It’s unclear whether Johnson, Raskins, or Whitehouse were aware their bills would potentially provide legal recourse for Jan. 6 prisoners. Raskins’s office had no comment when asked whether he’d considered this possibility before cosponsoring the legislation and whether he had any problem with the prospect of Jan. 6 prisoners using his bill as a way to sue the Biden administration for alleged mistreatment.

Stay tuned.

Terror In The Tunnel

On Wednesday American Greatness posted a first-hand account of a woman who was brutally beaten by police in Washington, D.C.,  on January 6th.

The article reports:

Amid video evidence, court filings, and firsthand witness accounts, new questions have emerged about the exact cause of Boyland’s (Rosanne Boyland, a 34-year-old Trump supporter from Georgia) death. A report issued by the D.C. Medical Examiner’s office in April claimed Boyland, a recovering addict, died of an accidental drug overdose. But others in the vicinity of Boyland when she lost consciousness insist her death was caused by law enforcement officers, who deployed a toxic chemical spray and, in some cases, used metal sticks, riot shields, and their own fists against Trump supporters.

White (Victoria White), 39, found herself in the tunnel near Boyland—and her harrowing account describes nothing short of criminal misconduct by still-unidentified members of the D.C. Metropolitan Police department. Further, her experience bolsters allegations that police contributed or directly caused the death of a second unarmed female Trump supporter on January 6.

Like hundreds of thousands of Americans, White traveled from her home to Washington, D.C. to hear President Trump’s speech and protest the results of the rigged 2020 presidential election. A resident of Rochester, Minnesota, White, her daughter, and friends took turns driving so they would arrive in Washington on time. They stayed at the home of one of her friend’s parents in suburban Virginia.

Amid video evidence, court filings, and firsthand witness accounts, new questions have emerged about the exact cause of Boyland’s death. A report issued by the D.C. Medical Examiner’s office in April claimed Boyland, a recovering addict, died of an accidental drug overdose. But others in the vicinity of Boyland when she lost consciousness insist her death was caused by law enforcement officers, who deployed a toxic chemical spray and, in some cases, used metal sticks, riot shields, and their own fists against Trump supporters.

The story continues:

White then saw a man standing on a ledge near a window; as he attempted to break the glass, she began screaming at him. “I yelled, ‘we don’t do that sh*t’ and I grabbed his backpack to pull him off.” (Her account is confirmed by video and the government’s criminal complaint against her.)

The site of that confrontation is directly to the left of the lower west terrace tunnel. Looking for a way out of the dense crowd—she had lost sight of her friend at this point—White pushed her way toward the tunnel shortly after 4 p.m. and squeezed into the front opening.

That’s when she encountered a horror scene.

Grown men were crying, White said, from being doused repeatedly with a noxious chemical gas inside the tight confines of the tunnel. People were being crushed. Cops clad in full riot gear had filled the tunnel with the gas, causing victims to vomit and pass out.

“We were trapped. Police were pushing us out using riot shields and people outside were pushing in. I kept falling. A cop sprayed mace directly into my face.”

Then, she said, she felt the first blow.

It came out of nowhere, White told me. With her back to the line of officers, White tried to stand up but repeated blows to her head by an officer in a white shirt, presumably a D.C. Metro police supervisor, prevented her from regaining her footing.

“Because of my history, I started having flashbacks,” White told me slowly, choking up as she recalled what happened. “I felt like I had felt all those years, the times when I would get hit.” She remained crouched down as blow after blow, first by a stick then someone’s fist, landed on the top of her head and face. At one point, she confronted the abusive officer, reminding him “he took an oath to the Constitution.” Her remarks enraged the officer; he called her a “bitch” and continued the pummeling.

After several minutes, White was brought out of the tunnel by another officer. Her jacket, which she tied around her waist in the heated tunnel and contained her cell phone and money, was gone. So were her shoes. She was drenched in chemical spray.

The article concludes:

A motion filed last month by Joseph McBride, her new attorney, in the case of Ryan Nichols (another January 6 client of McBride’s), provided more explicit details related to the attack on White. McBride viewed three hours of surveillance footage recorded by security cameras inside the tunnel on January 6; that video remains under a protective order for now.

According to McBride, the supervisor hit White at least 13 times with the metal stick and at least five times in her face with his fist. He then “spears and pokes [White] with his baton about the head, neck, and face so as to inflict maximum pain,” McBride wrote. This happened as White tried to escape the tunnel numerous times. Another officer joined in and “starts beating [White] in the head with his baton, landing twelve strikes in seven seconds.”

White’s head was bleeding; she was covered in red welts.

How White survived is anyone’s guess. “It’s a miracle,” she told me. “I could have died.”

McBride is petitioning the court to remove the protective order so the American people can see what happened inside the tunnel on January 6. The Press Coalition, representing 16 major news corporations, has joined McBride’s request to make the three-hour video public. Biden’s Justice Department has until Friday to respond. 

Please follow the link to read the entire article. This shouldn’t happen in America.

Where Are The Lawyers And Judges Who Support The Constitution?

The American Thinker reported the following today:

On Friday, the attorney for Kelly Meggs, one of the prisoners being held without bail for events on January 6, filed a notice informing the United States District Court for the District of Columbia of a report that guards had negligently or intentionally disbursed a toxic substance in such a way that prisoners were inundated with it, resulting in several being evacuated on stretchers. Meggs’s lawyer also mentioned the dire conditions in the jail and requested, that the court release on bail those arrested in connection with events on January 6.

Here, in its entirety, is what Meggs told his family about the gas incident in the jail, all because one of the detainees didn’t want to wear a mask (which they’re forced to wear 24/7, even when in solitary):

When a January 6 detainee in the CTF / D.C. jail refused to wear a mask, the guards responded with some kind of mace or pepper spray.

This created a disturbance and the wing was locked down at 10 AM.

“They sprayed mace or some type of gas at an inmate and kept missing so it went into an intake that fed into other cells and the lady with the key left because she didn’t like the gas, so the inmates in the cells who were being fed the gas from that intake were locked in for like 15 minutes while it was going into their rooms and they couldn’t see/breathe.”

“Had to take some guys out in stretchers to the med bays”

This is third-world prison authority behavior. How is it acceptable in America? Is anyone concerned about the civil rights of these prisoners being violated? Has it occurred to anyone that if the ruling authorities can do this to people before their trial, they can do this to any American?

The article concludes:

There are other examples of leaders facing down overwrought crowds. Four-hundred-and-two years later, in 1783, as the American Revolution was winding to an end, the officers in the Continental Army hadn’t been paid for months, so they started to plot a coup. Washington learned of the planned meeting and allowed it to take place. He then showed up to read a letter from Congress begging the offices to be patient.

Washington looked at the letter, squinted, and then put his glasses on, something the shocked men had never seen him do. Then, Washington spoke the words that reduced many of them to tears: “Gentlemen, you will permit me to put on my spectacles, for, I have grown not only gray, but almost blind in the service of my country.” That was the end of the coup.

When the American people entered Congress, not a single politician had the courage to go out and face them. Every politician ran away and hid. Even now, Marjorie Taylor Greene is the only politician with the courage to force her way into the prison to speak with the captives. What a pathetic bunch of poltroons we have placed in a government that was created by great men and once was home to them too.

To comment, you can find the MeWe post for this article here.

Who is willing to stand up for these prisoners?

Reinventing January 6th

The Democrats seem to be intent on resurrecting and reinventing the events of January 6th. They continue to investigate while avoiding any evidence that might actually lead to the truth, and there is even a movie that emphasizes the Democrat narrative.

Yesterday The Patriot Daily Wire shared a recent Tweet from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

This is the Tweet:

Just for the record, none of that is true.

The Patriot Daily Wire reports:

Undoubtedly, the pro-Trump crowd at the Capitol engaged in a politically motivated riot. Beyond that, however, there is not much else to say. Despite claims to the contrary, the evidence has shown those present were not insurrectionists or terrorists.

None of these facts have stopped Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez from claiming otherwise, however. In fact, in a tweet published on Sunday, Ocasio-Cortez made the claim that the Jan. 6 riot was a “terror attack” that left “almost 10 dead.”

…In truth, there were four deaths that occurred during the Jan. 6 riot, not “almost 10.” All four of the dead were pro-Trump demonstrators.

Both Kevin Greeson, 55, and Benjamin Phillips, 50, died of heart attacks; Roseanne Boyland, 34, died of “acute amphetamine intoxication” and Ashli Babbitt, 35, died from a gunshot wound to her left shoulder, according to a KOKI-TV report of the D.C. medical examiner’s findings.

Two of the four deaths were of natural causes, a third died from an accidental drug overdose and the fourth — Ashli Babbit — was shot by Captiol police. And, again, all four were among the pro-Trump crowd.

So why are we still talking about this, and why is there so much emphasis on a false narrative? It’s called politics. As we experience supply chain disruptions, unlimited illegal immigration, and inflation, the Democrats needs a winning issue. If they can convince American voters that Republicans (especially Trump supporters) are lawless neanderthals, they might be able to hold their own in the coming gubernatorial and congressional elections. It’s that simple.

There is a very insightful article about January 6th posted in the Hillsdale College magazine Imprimis. Please follow the link to read the entire article.

The Imprimis article concludes:

Hayek’s (Friedrich Hayek, who wrote The Road to Serfdom) overriding concern in The Road to Serfdom was to combat the forces that were pushing people further along that road to servitude. His chief concern was unchecked state power. In a new preface to the book’s 1956 edition, Hayek noted that one of its “main points” was to document how “extensive government control produces a psychological change, an alteration in the character of the people.”

“This means,” Hayek wrote, “that even a strong tradition of political liberty is no safeguard if the danger is precisely that new institutions and policies will gradually undermine and destroy that spirit.”

This dismal situation, Hayek continues, can be averted, but only if the spirit of liberty “reasserts itself in time and the people not only throw out the party which has been leading them further and further in the dangerous direction but also recognize the nature of the danger and resolutely change their course.”

Note the power of that little word “if.” It was not so long ago that an American could contemplate totalitarian regimes and say, “Thank God we’ve escaped that.” It’s not at all clear that we can entertain that happy conviction any longer.

That’s one melancholy lesson of the January 6 insurrection hoax: that America is fast mutating from a republic, in which individual liberty is paramount, into an oligarchy, in which conformity is increasingly demanded and enforced.

Another lesson was perfectly expressed by Donald Trump when he reflected on the unremitting tsunami of hostility that he faced as President. “They’re after you,” he more than once told his supporters. “I’m just in the way.”

Bingo.

Beware the rewriting of the history of January 6th.

This Would Be Funny If It Were Not So Serious

One of the problems with the political left’s claim that January 6th was an insurrection is that none of the ‘insurrectionists’ had weapons. The only person shot was an unarmed civilian by a policeman, and there are a lot of questions surrounding the incident. I somehow think real insurrectionists might have been armed. I also wonder why they are called insurrectionists when there is public video showing the police waving them into the building. But a narrative is a narrative I guess. At any rate, the political left is not done with January 6th. Their next step is somewhat unbelievable.

Yesterday BizPacReview posted the following:

The FBI has previously stated that no firearms were found in connection to the Jan. 6 storming of the Capitol, but despite that contention, the media is now breathlessly reporting that authorities have found guns in the homes of protesters.

“Numerous people arrested in connection with January 6 have also had weapons in their homes, including this latest case just today — 3 pistols and an AR-15,” Mother Jones explosively tweeted in reference to an NBC report.

“Some January 6 defendants, including additional Oath Keeper members charged with conspiracy, have lied to investigators and went to significant lengths to destroy evidence of their communications related to the insurrection, according to court documents. Others have kept weapons in their homes in violation of pretrial orders. And some defendants have threatened future attacks,” they reported.

The defendants have not been found guilty of anything yet. They still have Second Amendment rights. I seriously doubt the part about future attacks since there was never an attack to begin with.

The article continues:

NBC New York is reporting that a man named Antonio Vuksanaj was arrested Thursday in connection with the Jan. 6 protest on federal trespassing-related charges. An AR-15 as well as three other guns were allegedly found in his home. The media outlet notes that it is unclear if these were his and if they were possessed legally. It should have been fairly simple for a major media outlet to find out if that was or wasn’t the case but it apparently doesn’t make for as good a headline.

Vuksanaj was turned in by a tipster and has pleaded not guilty. He’s facing trespassing and disorderly conduct-related charges which don’t appear to have any connection to possessing firearms. Nevertheless, outlets such as Mother Jones are seizing on the fact that he had guns at home which may or may not have been perfectly legal.

The article also notes:

Sanborn (Jill Sanborn, an FBI official) contended at the time that nobody from the riot was facing weapons charges, though a firearm was recovered from a van containing Molotov cocktails found near the Capitol. It is not publicly known whose van that was and if those involved were actual protesters taking part in the riot.

Please follow the link above to the article. The tweets in response to the Mother Jones article are hilarious. Mother Jones needs to go back to her days of Acapulco Gold and give up on the magazine.

The Roots Of January 6th

The Constitution does not grant us our rights–it specifically states that our rights come from God. The Constitution is there to protect those rights. Unfortunately, many of our leaders have forgotten that. Those on the political left have begun to use our federal agencies as an arm of the Democrat party. They have also learned to use the media to blunt the blow when information about their questionable activities is about to come out.

Yesterday American Greatness posted an article that noted the role played by The New York Times in downplaying the pending indictment against Michael Sussman. Sussman, as you probably remember, was instrumental in getting the idea that Donald Trump was colluding with the Russians out into the public square. Well, The New York Times is at it again.

The article reports:

On Saturday, the Times published a carefully constructed bombshell intended to soften the blow of an explosive scandal in the making: the FBI had at least one informant among the group of Proud Boys who marched on the Capitol on January 6. The informant, according to “confidential documents” furnished to the paper, started working with the FBI in July 2020 and was in close contact with his FBI handler before, during, and after the Capitol protest. 

“After meeting his fellow Proud Boys at the Washington Monument that morning, the informant described his path to the Capitol grounds where he saw barriers knocked down and Trump supporters streaming into the building, the records show,” reporters Alan Feuer and Adam Goldman (the Times reporter most responsible for priming the ground for news that was unfavorable to the Russia collusion narrative) wrote on September 25. “In a detailed account of his activities contained in the records, the informant, who was part of a group chat of other Proud Boys, described meeting up with scores of men from chapters around the country at 10 a.m. on Jan. 6 at the Washington Monument and eventually marching to the Capitol. He said that when he arrived, throngs of people were already streaming past the first barrier outside the building, which, he later learned, was taken down by one of his Proud Boy acquaintances and a young woman with him.”

In other words, one of the informant’s Proud Boy “acquaintances” was removing temporary barriers to allow a crowd to enter the restricted grounds around the building.

Sounds legit.

The article also notes that there was another informant who took part in the sacking of the Capitol.

The article concludes with the following story:

In fact, after Beattie’s articles posted in June, Alan Feuer, the same reporter who co-authored this weekend’s spin story, wrote a piece disclosing Rhodes had been interviewed by the FBI in May. (Feuer’s article, conveniently, was posted after FBI Director Wray testified twice on Capitol Hill this week.)

Further, in my interview with him this week, Thomas Caldwell, one of the first people arrested in the Oath Keepers case, told me Rhodes approached him during a Stop the Steal rally in Virginia last November. Rhodes told Caldwell the Oath Keepers provided security for conservatives and asked if he’d be interested in assisting in the future.

Caldwell gave Rhodes his contact information, which led to Rhodes connecting Caldwell with other Oath Keepers; plans were made to travel to D.C. and meet near the Capitol after Trump’s speech on January 6.

Caldwell’s home was raided and he was arrested on January 19, just two weeks after the protest. Prosecutors already had a trove of evidence against Caldwell, which is highly curious considering Caldwell never entered the building and was charged with no violent crime.

How did the government get Caldwell’s information so quickly? It certainly suggests the involvement of someone working on the inside, someone who immediately provided investigators with incriminating evidence.

Someone like an FBI informant.

One thing is certain; the Times damage-control article is just the tip of the FBI iceberg. And more proof January 6 was an inside job.

How are the actions of the FBI considered Constitutional?

When Your False Flag Event Doesn’t Happen

I firmly believe that the rally held in Washington, D.C., yesterday was supposed to be a ‘false flag’ event. I am sure that those on the political left were hoping a large crowd would show up and act like the ‘protesters’ at Black Lives Matter protests. Despite the fact that the rally was for a good cause–there are people in Washington, D.C., jails that as you read this are being denied their Constitutional rights–the rally was small. Many people who are aware of the situation of the January 6th political prisoners were not willing to take a chance on being part of a ‘false flag’ event. Although that was probably wise, it is obvious that a damper is being placed on the free speech of conservatives.

Today, Townhall posted some tweets about the rally. Below are two of them.

 

 

When The Media Totally Goes Off The Rails

It must be difficult right now to hold a job in the mainstream media. Think of all the pretending you have to do–Joe Biden is a good President, Kamala Harris is qualified to take over as President if necessary, the 2020 election was not stolen, January 6th was the end of our Republic. And the beat goes on.

On Sunday, Newsbusters posted an article about a recent discussion that occurred on CNN.

The article reports:

As we have all learned from Joe Biden’s presidency, the phoniest/baloney-est claim from liberals is that they have a deep desire for national unity. There is no unity in compromise, only in surrender to the Left.

At the end of Sunday’s Reliable Sources, fill-in host John Avlon interviewed the PBS gasbag Ken Burns, asking him about national unity, and he’s as phony as Biden. This is CNN, so Avlon demands unity in exaggerating the January 6 riot:

AVLON: You’ve made the point in terms of the quest for unity, that at the end of the day, Americans usually can rally together when something catastrophic has occurred. Sometimes that’s what’s required to focus it on our underlying humanity. And yet, the attack on the Capitol on January 6 does not seem to have united us. Instead, there is remains an effort to rewrite even that recent history. So, what hope do you have about a path forward when we have not been able to unite around an attack on our capital, the worst and the first since the War of 1812?

BURNS: Yeah — it’s terrifying. This is one of the great crises along with the Civil War, the Depression, and the Second World War that we have in large measure because things fall apart, the center cannot hold, mere entropy is loosed upon the world.

Somehow I suspect that neither one of these men has ever served in the armed forces.

The article concludes:

BURNS: And I don’t think there’s any right- thinking American — we can disagree on how you get things done — what the role of government is that I don’t think anybody wants this noble experiment to dissolve just when we have in our grasp the possibilities and the tools with which to solve these things. And we have looming ahead of us, this huge global threat of climate change that has to be addressed, and we can’t now permit the Flat Earth Society any more time.

The obvious question is who decides what the Flat Earth Society or its equivalent is. The left is convinced that the only path to unity is forcing everyone to agree with them.

The Friday Night News Dump

If you are a political person who has to report on a story that does not support the media narrative, the best time to leak the story is on a Friday night. It is really advantageous to leak the story on a Friday night when something like the fall of Afghanistan is occurring. The chances of anyone seeing your story are minuscule compared to what they normally would be. So it is not surprising that the following story was posted by Reuters at 5 pm on Friday, August 20th.

Reuters reports:

The FBI has found scant evidence that the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol was the result of an organized plot to overturn the presidential election result, according to four current and former law enforcement officials.

Though federal officials have arrested more than 570 alleged participants, the FBI at this point believes the violence was not centrally coordinated by far-right groups or prominent supporters of then-President Donald Trump, according to the sources, who have been either directly involved in or briefed regularly on the wide-ranging investigations.

“Ninety to ninety-five percent of these are one-off cases,” said a former senior law enforcement official with knowledge of the investigation. “Then you have five percent, maybe, of these militia groups that were more closely organized. But there was no grand scheme with Roger Stone and Alex Jones and all of these people to storm the Capitol and take hostages.”

This is not news to anyone with a brain. There were a lot of eyewitness accounts about people who were not dressed like the Trump supporters at the rally and did not have the attitude that was prevalent at the rally. There was also the fact that the attack on the Capitol occurred before the rally was over. There was also the fact that President Trump instructed those at the rally to go to the Capitol to show their support for the Congressmen protesting the possible election fraud and to do it peacefully. This news article goes against the picture the Democrats and some Republicans were attempting to paint. Therefore it was released at dinnertime on Friday.

The article continues:

Stone, a veteran Republican operative and self-described “dirty trickster”, and Jones, founder of a conspiracy-driven radio show and webcast, are both allies of Trump and had been involved in pro-Trump events in Washington on Jan. 5, the day before the riot.

FBI investigators did find that cells of protesters, including followers of the far-right Oath Keepers and Proud Boys groups, had aimed to break into the Capitol. But they found no evidence that the groups had serious plans about what to do if they made it inside, the sources said.

The article includes a picture of one aspect of what happened in the Capitol that day with a predictable caption. There are no pictures taken from the video of the police waving the protesters in.

The article notes:

Prosecutors have filed conspiracy charges against 40 of those defendants, alleging that they engaged in some degree of planning before the attack.

Many of those defendants are still being held in intolerable conditions in the Washington, D.C., jail without bail or visits from their families. They are essentially political prisoners in America.

The article includes the usual spin, failing to mention that the assault on the Capitol began before President Trump told his supporters to peacefully march there and referring to the President’s speech as incendiary.

Again, the article at Reuters is a classic example of a Friday-night news dump. They spun it as best they could, but a well-informed reader will see right through the spin.

A New Low In American Justice

Yesterday American Greatness posted an article about Timothy Hale-Cusanelli, an Army reservist arrested on January 15 for his involvement in the January 6 protest in Washington, D.C.

The article reports:

During a status hearing Friday afternoon for Timothy Hale-Cusanelli, an Army reservist arrested on January 15 for his involvement in the January 6 protest in Washington, D.C., an assistant U.S. attorney admitted the government will not meet its discovery obligations for all Capitol defendants until early 2022.

Kathyrn Fifield, the lead attorney representing the Justice Department, informed Judge Trevor McFadden that the “incalculable” volume of video collected by the government related to the Capitol breach investigation will prevent defendants and their lawyers from accessing the full body of evidence against them for several more months. “No system exists to wrap its arms around [all this evidence],” Fifield told McFadden. This includes at least 14,000 hours of surveillance video plus thousands of hours of body-worn camera footage from law enforcement.

Fifield resisted setting a 2021 trial date for Hale; McFadden and Jonathan Crisp, Hale’s court-appointed attorney, told the government last month that unless a plea arrangement was agreed upon, a trial would be set for later this year because Hale already has been incarcerated for more than six months. “If we do set a trial date, the government cannot meet discovery obligations until early 2022. That’s a conservative estimate,” Fifield said.

The article notes the strange handling of this case:

Despite the lack of evidence against him, Hale has been behind bars since January. He is not charged with any violent crimes but the Justice Department repeatedly—and successfully—has sought his pre-trial detention. (McFadden denied Hale’s release in March.) 

The article concludes:

On July 7, the D.C. Circuit Court denied Hale’s appeal seeking release.

McFadden scolded the government for its backwards process. “You would not arrest [someone] then gather evidence later. That’s not how this works.” When Fifield said full discovery is in the best interest of the defendant, McFadden shot back: “Freedom also is important to the defendant.” The Trump-appointed judge raised concerns over Sixth Amendment violations. “This does not feel what the Constitution [and] the Speedy Trial Act envisions.”

Despite the government’s confession that it is not prepared to make its case against Hale, McFadden set a trial date of November 9, 2021. (He did not release Hale, who has no criminal record, from prison.)

“No January Sixer should be made to suffer in a jail cell while the DOJ continues to delay discovery simply because it can,” one defense attorney told me by text this afternoon. “This is unprecedented, unreasonable, unconstitutional, and wrong.”

This is what a dictatorship detaining political prisoners looks like. Where are the people in Congress who swore an oath to defend the U.S. Constitution. This is a total violation of the Constitution they swore to defend, and most of Congress has been totally silent about the matter.