Below is my column in The Hill on the recent reports confirming that the FBI has not been able to establish a planned insurrection on January 6th despite the overwhelming references in the media. The vast majority of charges concern trespass or unlawful parading. The absence of a major insurrection or sedition prosecution is conspicuous but has done little to temper the characterization of the riot in media accounts or political statements.
Here is the column:
It may be true, as Confucius said, that “the beginning of wisdom is to call things by their proper name,” but it can also be the end of politics. For politicians, labeling controversies is often more important than addressing them. Even well-defined terms used in legislation must change to fit political needs, like “infrastructure.” When its real meaning stood in the way of real money, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) simply tweeted: “Paid leave is infrastructure. Child care is infrastructure. Caregiving is infrastructure.” Done.
The same is true with labeling political violence. When protests by Black Lives Matter and other groups turned violent last summer, the media was expressly told not to refer to “rioters” but rather “protesters.” Riots causing massive property damage were described by CNN as “fiery but mostly peaceful protests.”
Conversely, the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol could not be just a riot, let alone a “fiery” protest, but only an “insurrection.” Many in the media continue to awkwardly refer to “the insurrectionists” rather than the rioters. National Public Radio even ran a running account of the “Capitol Insurrection.” The term was further driven home by House Democrats by impeaching President Trump for “incitement to insurrection” despite undermining any chance for an actual conviction. Members of Congress like Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) are still in federal court claiming a conspiracy of “armed and organized insurrectionists.”
The characterization of the attack as an insurrection served a myriad of political and personal purposes. First, it painted anyone associated with challenging the 2020 election results as supporting sedition and the country’s overthrow. Second, if this was a protest allowed to turn into an uncontrolled riot, there would be more questions about the failure to properly protect the Capitol.
It is easier to excuse a response to an insurrection than a violent protest. That point was expressly made by former U.S. Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund who insisted “this was not a demonstration. This was not a failure to plan for a demonstration. This was a planned, coordinated attack on the United States Capitol.”
Despite the adoption of the term by many in the media, there has been a growing disconnect with the actual cases in court. Indeed, a new report from Reuters disclosed that the FBI has struggled to support the account of a coordinated “insurrection” on Jan. 6. Reuters’ FBI sources said that, despite months of intense investigation, they could find “scant evidence” of any “organized plot” and instead found that virtually all of the cases are “one-offs.” One agent explained: ”Ninety to 95 percent of these are one-off cases. Then you have 5 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.”
In other words, they found a protest that became a runaway riot as insufficient security preparations quickly collapsed. While there clearly were those set upon trashing the Capitol, most people were shown milling about in the halls; many took selfies and actively described the scene on social media.
More than 570 people have been arrested, but only 40 face conspiracy charges. Those charges are often based on prior discussions about trying to enter Congress or bringing material to use in the riot; some clearly came prepared for rioting with ropes, chemical irritants and other materials. Those cases, however, are a small group among the hundreds charged and an even smaller percentage among the tens of thousands of protesters on that day. They remain a couple insurrectionists short of an insurrection.
After five months of dragnet arrests nationwide, a few reporters noted that no one was actually charged with insurrection or sedition. The vast majority of people face charges like simple trespass. For example, the latest guilty plea is from San Francisco real estate broker Jennifer Leigh Ryan, who posted an account on social media of how “We’re gonna go down and storm the capitol.” She pleaded guilty this week to “parading, demonstrating, or picketing in a Capitol building” and faces a maximum sentence of six months in prison and a fine of $5,000.
Yet, the characterization of the “insurrection” has continued as a virtual article of faith for those reporting on or writing about Jan. 6. Moreover, the treatment of many has remained severe, if not draconian by design. Justice official Michael Sherwin proudly declared in a television interview that “our office wanted to ensure that there was shock and awe … it worked because we saw through media posts that people were afraid to come back to D.C. because they’re, like, ‘If we go there, we’re gonna get charged.’ … We wanted to take out those individuals that essentially were thumbing their noses at the public for what they did.”
That “shock and awe” included holding people without bail and imposing “restrictive housing” for no obvious reason. That includes some of the most notable figures from that day, like Jacob Chansley (aka Jake Angeli), better known as “Chewbacca Man” or the “QAnon Shaman” for the distinctive horned headdress he wore during the riot. Angeli, 33, is not accused of attacking anyone while parading around the Senate floor in his bear skin. He always insisted he was not trying to overthrow the nation with his decorative outfit and spear-topped flagpole. While the government did not find a basis for an insurrection or sedition charge, it did learn that he has an array of mental illnesses including transient schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, depression and anxiety. Yet, he has been held since the riot and is charged with six crimes, including violent entry, trespass and parading, that collectively could yield up to 28 years in prison.
There is a fair distinction between those who tried to stop the certification of a presidential election and those who burn police stations or businesses during protests. While the majority of people who went to the Capitol were protesters and did not engage in the riot, there were some who sought to physically disrupt or prevent the certification, including the use of violent entry into the Capitol. Yet, there remains a striking contrast in how other riots are characterized or prosecuted. Most of those arrested for violent protests after the death of George Floyd saw their charges dropped by state prosecutors. For months, rioters sought to burn federal buildings or occupy state capitals and, in some cases, seized police stations, sections of cities, even occupied a city hall. They were not declared insurrectionists; they were rioters before being set free after brief arrests.
Many of us remain disgusted and angered by the Jan. 6 riot — but it was a riot. It also was a desecration. These people deserve to be punished, particularly those who went with an intent to try to enter the Congress. The question is whether you can have an insurrection without anyone actually insurrecting. That Zen-like question may find its way into the hearings of some pending cases.
Calling these people “rioters” does not minimize what they did, or undermine the legitimacy of their punishment. However, there is wisdom and even the chance for resolution when we “call things by their proper name.”
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. You can find his updates on Twitter @JonathanTurley.
Now that the insurrection fraud has been sorted, why are people charged with misdemeanors being held under what are reported to be horrific conditions?
Where is the media?
Where are the courts?
Where are the posh lawyers from white shoe firms who rushed to defend terrorists in Gitmo?
Where is America?
You’re a lawyer. Have you offered to represent any of them?
Mr. Turley, this topic is a good opportunity for a legal scholar such as yourself to take issue with the fact that some of those arrested were imprisoned without charge or trial for months – some in solitary confinement and with no bail. As a lawyer are you not repulsed by that violation of their constitutional rights?
You also don’t mention the role of the FBI in facilitating the protest/riot, acting as agent provocateurs and organizers of the riot. On that basis alone, the charges against any of the participants can and should be questioned. A good defense lawyer should argue that.
Yes, now the FBI has come back with the statement that there’s little evidence of insurrection — but only after the damage is done by the corrupt mainstream media and Democrats, who used this as their Reichstag fire moment to scapegoat all Trump supporters as potential insurrectionists. That’s the FBI’s way of backing out of what they did, to save face, once their shameful role was exposed in the conservative media. Despite their retraction, they have lost all credibility after their role in that debacle was exposed.
You say you’re disgusted and angered by the protestors/rioters of Jan. 6 – but I see that the majority of them were naïve people who were practically ushered into to building when police were told to stand down and were themselves justifiably angry at the loss of their country to anti-American forces operating within the Democrat Party, including the allegations of a stolen election – for which ample evidence does exist, despite the MSM bleating to the contrary.
Interesting how the MSM always aligns to impose censorship. Even Wikipedia fell in line with the mantra over the election and then so-called medical “misinformation” (which in many cases are legitimate physicians questioning the misuse and abuse of medicine to impose a commercial and political agenda by pharmaceutical companies and globalists).
Trespassing itself is not a major crime; it’s a misdemeanor. Nonviolent civil disobedience during protests is a tactic given legitimacy by Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. In most cases where that happens, the charges are dropped by judges who recognize that as a form of protected speech. That’s what most of them should have been charged with.
Those who resorted to actual property damage, yes they were in the wrong and should face property damage charges. But to face charges that amount to 28 years for trespassing is an abuse of the judicial system to punish political dissidents. It is what you might expect from a third-world dictatorship — which apparently the USA has become under the Democrats. This is all the more evident when contrasted with the lenience and assistance given to those actual insurrectionists and revolutionaries who perpetrated 100 days of terror on the nation in 2020 and got away with it because their cause aligned with the Democrats’ political agenda.
You also don’t mention the role of the FBI in facilitating the protest/riot, acting as agent provocateurs and organizers of the riot. On that basis alone, the charges against any of the participants can and should be questioned.
Do we have any evidence of that? I would not be surprised if it is true, but it seems to be speculation at this point.
William_JD,
Who needs evidence? If you have faith what people are saying is true that the FBI facilitated the riot, then you cannot be lying. That’s Trumpism.
Exactly, Turley’s “disgust and anger” should be against those who wanted to invoke “shock and awe” against the protesters. It should be included the murder of Babbitt that has been exploited and used by the Democrats and RINOs as a further excuse to institute draconian measures against the citizens of the US. Yes, absolutely this crap has been analogous to the Reichstag fire and used for the same purpose. Mr Turley you milquetoast response draws my disgust and anger that you haven’t forcefully come down on the side of the constitution an American public.
The 17 Amendment provision potentially barring Trump from future political office can only be invoked if there was an “insurrection.” The anti Trumpers still hope to invoke that section against him. So they must continue to call the event an insurrection.
Russia and Trump conspired to steal the election, and Jan 6 was an insurrection. That’s all you need to know. The “history” books and school curriculum will reflect these two “truths” forever.
Handmade tales with “benefits” in a cover-up of human and civil rights violations, which, ironically, caught the hunters and judges in their own carefully spun web. Can they abort the baby, cannibalize her profitable parts, sequester her carbon pollutants, and have her, too? This story is either the tell, or confirmation of unmitigated progress beyond the point of no return.
Meanwhile… This weekend in Chicago, 41 were shot, 7 killed. This follows last weekend, when 56 shot in Chicago, 8 dead. Not a peep from the mainstream media.
Some, Select [Black] Lives Matter is the abortionists’ sincerely held religious (e.g. ethical) belief.
Now that the FBI has weighed in to correct the record that this was not an insurrection, will we see the “censors” on the social media platforms blocking anyone peddling “this was an insurrection” misinformation?
“[O]ur office wanted to ensure that there was shock and awe . . .”
We could use some of that “shock and awe” in Afghanistan, to rescue the some 15,000 Americans that Biden abandoned. And maybe some to rescue the allies he abandoned. And perhaps a touch to destroy the military equipment he left behind as parting gifts for the Taliban.
Owen Shroyer was order to turn himself in by 11 am this morning some 1/6 related charge?
https://givesendgo.com/G27P2
Sam,
People should realize that the Biden Administration had most all the Taliban caught out in the open recently as they were taking over the govt on long stretchers of highway where they could be almost completely destroyed, like Bush did to the Iraqi Army.
The likely reason Biden didn’t wipe them out was that the CIA with the Pakistan military were training the Taliban. It looks about like the same crap as in the past where CIA/Bush/Obama/Biden were all funding Al Quaeda, ISIS, etc….
Never ending wars for the globalist MIC.
Why do the three comments below this all look as if they came from the same office?
Correction– Nexr 2 comments.
Young, they may be the same or they may be different, but whoever they are they were too embarrassed by the comment to post under their usual aliases.
This is lawyer-talk. It is on the mark in the context of a criminal prosecution of the “rioters.” But in the media’s reports to the public there is nothing incorrect about calling it an insurrection since it is clear that the objective of a majority of the protesters was to overthrow the election. And there was certainly enough violence and weaponry at the scene.
So then those rioters and arsonists who tried to burn down the Mark O. Hatfield Courthouse in Portland were trying to overthrow the judiciary?
While the media is doing “nothing incorrect” in its calling it an “insurrection”, it won’t be lost on the public that the prosecution of these “criminals ” will, one again, make the government look foolish. Members of congress will each get their soundbite, but the final outcome will be pathetically empty. But of course, the media is expert at manipulating this to its advantage. We’ll see a parade of their sputtering pundits who will fulminate over how inept and timid the DOJ looked.”Where’s the outrage! The public betrayed again!”
If carrying combat equipment and Trump’s rally in preamble to the march to the Capital was not to prepare and incite an insurrection I don’t know what is.
DB:
List all “combat equipment” carried to the Trump rally not protected by the Second’s Amendment’s right to keep and BEAR arms.
Combat equipment? There was not a single deadly weapon carried by any of the PATRIOTS who entered the Capitol, not one. It was the cops who caused bodily harm, and they WERE carrying “combat equipment.”
DB
“…combat equipment…”
Either you deliberately lied, or you are remarkably stupid.
Some people consider anything that looks “tactical” as combat equipment. Take a JanSport backpack, make it multi-cam, and some people would call it “combat equipment.”
I mentioned the picture of the Taliban in the presidential palace at the desk in a previous post.
Note, with the exception of one guy wearing what looks like some kind of cammo like jacket or coat, the rest are in traditional Afghan garments.
And yet, they are actual insurrectionists.
But if you are wearing “combat equipment” that too makes you an “insurrectionist.”
As of late, the Taliban is in fact wearing “combat equipment.”
But that is actual DoD bought and issued “combat equipment” that was left behind.
What more needs to be said? Never was an “insurrection” and the FBI “conclusions” and the absence of criminal charges show that. But those people never let facts get in the way of their narrative. That said, it was a horrible incident and those charged should be prosecuted with full due process
Some case law definitions of both incitement to riot and insurrection that appear to be representative of of the vast majority of defs I’ve seen on the internet.
the term “to incite a riot”, or “to organize, promote, encourage, participate in, or carry on a riot”, includes, but is not limited to, urging or instigating other persons to riot, but shall not be deemed to mean the mere oral or written (1) advocacy of ideas or (2) expression of belief, not involving advocacy of any act or acts of violence or assertion of the rightness of, or the right to commit, any such act or acts.
(Added Pub. L. 90–284, title I, § 104(a), Apr. 11, 1968, 82 Stat. 76.)
The following is a case law defining Insurrection:
Insurrection means “a violent uprising by a group or movement acting for the specific purpose of overthrowing the constituted government and seizing its powers. An insurrection occurs where a movement acts to overthrow the constituted government and to take possession of its inherent powers.” [Younis Bros. & Co. v. Cigna Worldwide Ins. Co., 899 F. Supp. 1385, 1392-1393 (E.D. Pa. 1995)]
Three mistakes made by partisans: 1. As Prof Turley said the events could easily be called a riot but not even close to insurrection. 2. Inciting to riot definition includes a clear and present danger causal relation. Trump’s remark to peaceably demonstate followed by his telling the people to go home when he found out that the demostration went wild does not come close. 3. Closely associated with the second mistake here is the confusion between reasons and determinate causes. The partisan line is “If Trump had not encouraged the demonstration ,the riot would not have happened.” That may be the case but it in no way implys a determinate cause of the riot. Imagine someone saying that if Robert Kennedy had not supported Israel, then Sirhan Sirhan would not have killed him. That is probably the case but one cannot thus claim that Kennedy is responsible for his own death.
Then as a final bonus of poor logic, the partisans put together the mistakes into the imbecilic ” Trump incited the insurrection since without his encouragement of the legal demonstration, the insurrection would not have happened”. Patent sophistry, yet widely disseminated.
There is a picture of the Taliban in the presidential palace, appears to be at the presidential desk.
Three are sitting at the desk, with half a dozen or so surrounding them.
They are all carrying weapons. They staged a insurrection. They came with the intent of overthrowing a sitting government. And in order to do so successfully, they brought weapons, had plans, command, control and communications. And an estimated 80,000 fighters.
By the FBI’s own admission, there were no weapons present inside the Capitol building (aside the CPD).
By the FBI’s own admission, there was no grand plans or conspiracy to conduct a insurrection.
Monument– “Either they [FBI] recover their integrity or Americans will place them in the same category as the ATF – incompetent and biased.
***
Too late for recovery, I think. The decay is too advanced.
“the beginning of wisdom is to call things by their proper name,”
‘Control of the words controls the culture (people, masses)’ An Orwellian statement that has multiple versions.
What is “an insurrection”. It can also be something along with it.
Some were there to take out office holders. Some to stop Biden from winning. Some to shout and be seen.
Lock em up and throw away the key.
This is controlling the narrative and the political left are literal experts at controlling the narrative and they have lots of practice in this regard; climate change, Trump is a racist, Conservatives are racists, white people are racists, fair share rhetoric, COVID-19 hysteria, January 6th insurrection, etc, etc…
And NOTHING will be done to the people who shoved that lie down our throats since January 6th.
“However, there is wisdom and even the chance for resolution when we “call things by their proper name.””
++++++++
If only. But no doubt the trolls are sharpening their cyber-pencils.
The damage is done.
The Lefties have locked “insurrection” into their little pea brains and nothing will dislodge that canard.
Just read one (even one is too much) of Natacha’s rambling, incoherent, and interminable screeds and you see the paranoid mix of half truths and outright lies.
The FBI has lost its way and become a politized arm of the Democrat party.
Either they recover their integrity or Americans will place them in the same category as the ATF – incompetent and biased.