If there is one image from Jan. 6th that will remain indelible with the day, it is the “QAnon Shaman.” Bare chested and wearing an animal headdress, horns and red-white-and-blue face paint, Jake Angeli Chansley is to the Capitol riot what Rosie the Riveter was to World War II. Howling and “chanting an unintelligible mantra” on the Senate floor, he is the embodiment of the unhinged rage that led to one of the most disgraceful attacks on our constitutional process in history.
However, the newly released Fox footage from that day raises serious questions over the prosecution and punishment of Chansley. The videotapes aired on Tucker Carlson this week show Chansley being escorted by officers through the Capitol. Two officers appear to not only guide him to the floor but actually appear to be trying to open locked doors for him. At one point, Chansley is shown walking unimpeded through a large number of armed officers with his four-foot flag-draped spear and horned Viking helmet on his way to the Senate floor.
It is otherworldly footage. While I admit that I approach these stories from the perspective of a long-standing criminal defense attorney, I would be outraged if I was unable to see such evidence before a plea or sentencing. At no point in the videotapes does Chansley appear violent or threatening. Indeed, he appears to thank the officers for their guidance and assistance. On the Senate floor, Chansley actually gave a prayer to thank the officers agreed “to allow us into the building.”
Before addressing the legal implications of this footage, one thing should be clear. The public should have been given access to this footage long ago and the Jan. 6th Committee withheld important evidence on what occurred inside the Capitol on that day.
While it is understandable that many would object to Carlson being given an exclusive in the initial release, many in the media are denouncing the release of the footage to the public at all. The press and pundits are now opposing greater transparency in resisting any contradiction of the narrative put forward by the Jan. 6th Committee. Indeed, MSNBC’s Jason Johnson angrily objected that this is “federal evidence” — ignoring that it is evidence that was denied to criminal defendants.
This is not just material that the public should be able to see, it was potential evidence in criminal cases like that of the QAnon Shaman.
When the footage aired, I wrote a column raising the question of whether this evidence was known to or shared with Chansley’s defense. After all, he was portrayed as a violent offender by the Justice Department at his sentencing.
It now appears that the answer is no. I spoke with Chansley’s new counsel, Bill Shipley, and confirmed that defense counsel did not have this material.
In the hearing, federal prosecutor Kimberly Paschall played videos showing Chansley yelling along with the crowd and insisted “that is not peaceful.”
That portrayal of Chansley would have been more difficult to maintain if the Court was allowed to see images of Chansley casually walking through a door of the Capitol with hundreds of other protesters and then being escorted by officers through the Capitol. At no point is he violent and at no point is he shown destroying evidence. Instead, he dutifully follows the officers who facilitate his going eventually to the unoccupied Senate floor.
We all knew that Chansley was treated more harshly because of his visibility. It was his costume, not his conduct, that seemed to drive the sentencing. In the hearing, Judge Royce Lamberth noted, “He made himself the image of the riot, didn’t he? For good or bad, he made himself the very image of this whole event.”
Lamberth hit Chansley with a heavy 41-month sentence for “obstructing a federal proceeding.”
However, the QAnon Shaman was led through the Capitol by officers. Defense counsel could have noted that his “obstruction” in going to an unoccupied Senate floor was facilitated by officers. While the police were clearly trying to deescalate the situation after the Capitol was breached, this is evidence of how Chansley came to the Senate. Indeed, his interaction with officers could have impacted how he viewed the gravity of his conduct. It certainly would have been material to the court in sentencing the conduct.
In his rambling sentencing statement to the court, Chansley apologized for “a lot of bad juju that I never meant to create.”
I have great respect for Judge Lamberth, who has always shown an admirable resistance to public pressure in high profile cases. I cannot imagine that Lamberth would not have found this footage material and frankly alarming.
At first blush, this would appear a clear “Brady violation” when a prosecutor fails to provide a defendant with any evidence that is favorable or exculpatory to his case. Like most things in Chansley’s life, it is a bit more complex than it would seem.
First, Chansley quickly pleaded guilty to the charge. This may have been due in part to the draconian treatment that he received by the Justice Department, which insisted on keeping him in solitary confinement with no apparent justification. The result is that he moved rapidly to sentencing without significant discovery in his case.
Second, the footage was in the possession of the legislative branch so the Justice Department could claim that it was not required to produce it. Indeed, the prosecution may have been entirely unaware of the footage.
Third, Chansley waived an appeal of the plea agreement and is now weeks away from release. The case is practically closed.
It is not clear, however, if Judge Lamberth will find the failure to disclose this evidence troubling and worthy of inquiry. None of this means that Chansley should not have been given jail time. Indeed, it is appropriate to sentence rioters to greater than average time due to the assault on our constitutional process.
Yet, it is hard to believe that Judge Lamberth would have given 41 months to a nonviolent, first offender who was led through the Capitol by police officers to the floor. This was a Navy veteran who pleaded guilty to the crime.
The role of Congress in withholding this footage is disgraceful and wrong. The Congress and the January 6th Committee knew of this footage and its relevance to a pending criminal case. Yet, they refused to make it public. Instead, the January 6th Committee hired a former ABC producer to put on a made-for-television production of highly edited images for public consumption. Countervailing evidence or images were consistently excluded and witnesses appeared as virtual props to support high-quality video packages.
Even The New York Times admitted the narrative was meant to “recast the midterm message” and “give [Democrats] a platform for making a broader case about why they deserve to stay in power.”
The image of the QAnon Shaman being escorted through the Capitol by police officers is hardly the image that they wanted to show the public. So Committee members and counsel buried footage that was clearly relevant to literally hundreds of people facing criminal sentencing across the country. They did this while repeatedly referencing those cases in hearings as upholding the rule of law.
I hold little sympathy for Chansley or the others arrested on that day. I was highly critical of President Donald Trump’s remarks before the riot.
However, it is hard to see this withheld evidence and not conclude that the Qanon Shaman got the shaft on his sentencing.
It is in Kevin McCarthy’s self-interest, as a man who would like to keep his job as House Speaker, to release the J6 footage to the general public in the not-too-distant future. Nancy Pelosi and people like her, including lame duck Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, would never have released it.
It is also in the public interest.
This has been a problem for a long time.
At times Republicans have been guilty of it too.
But the most egregious recent instances are all from the left.
With incredibly rare exceptions involving compelling national security interests, the business of government must conducted in the sun light.
Elections must be conducted following the law – the people must be able to verify that themselves.
Elections must be conducted under public scrutiny.
When in doubt they should be thoroughly investigated.
The government should not be involved in censoring anything – but absolutely NOT censoring political speech.
It is NOT the role of govenrment to determine what is misinformation and what is not.
When government is hiding things, When it refuses public scrutiny – then the government can not be trusted and is not legitimate.
When government is hiding things it is ALWAYS reasonable for the people to believe that government has something to hide.
When government is controlling a narrative and precluding the discovery of anything that conflicts with the narative – it is likely the narative is false.
\
The only thing even slightly partisan in the above is that more recently it is the left who most frequently and most egregiously is hiding things.
Jonathan,
I am curious why you wouldn’t consider this a Brady violation?
The prosecution played selected videos in court. So the knowledge of such videos existed.
The state clearly withheld this exculpatory evidence.
To your point… there was clear prosecutorial misconduct on the part of the US Government.
To your point… yes there was the charge of interfering w Congress. (paraphrasing)
Yet even here we have some questions. But that’s a different issue.
As you pointed out, his treatment prior to trial was meant to coerce a plea deal.
I would be interested in what the judge has to say.
It absolutely is. The responsibility for Brady discovery vests solely with the government, and its obligation exists at the time of any plea negotiations; it is not any out to a Brady fault that Chansley accepted a plea sooner than later.
The solution here is dismiss the charges and allow prosecution to try again, but this time with full disclosure.
This can and should occur, even though allocution of the plea has occurred, sentencing completed, and that sentence nearly done. In fact it can occur if Chansley completes his sentence; the interest is justice which did not occur because of the government’s actions.
This is exactly why Tucker Carlson and Fox News can’t be trusted.
“Fox News caught editing out Trump’s brag that he would have let Putin “take over” parts of Ukraine”
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/fox-news-caught-editing-out-trump-s-brag-that-he-would-have-let-putin-take-over-parts-of-ukraine/ar-AA18n17K?cvid=6870c24a13c847da841f2bf564e35d16&ei=16
Why would anyone trust what comes out of the BS factory that is Fox News? Clearly they are still sticking to their old business model. Lying to their audience because it’s important for the brand.
https://thefederalist.com/2021/12/15/during-january-6-hearing-schiff-doctored-text-messages-between-mark-meadows-and-rep-jim-jordan/
Are you contending that the video played by Mr. Carlson is inaccurate or inauthentic? I have not seen anything published by Democrats impeaching the authenticity. In point of fact, what Dems did publish to the court and to the nation appears – now, thanks to Mr. Carlson – to have been the publication that was misleading and incomplete.
So because Hannity didn’t air a barely noticeable quote by Trump, “At worst, I could’ve made a deal to take over something, there are certain areas that are Russian-speaking areas, frankly, but you could’ve worked a deal,” you’re going to smear the entirety of Fox News AND Tucker Carlson and claim they can’t be trusts?
There’s a reason why the left is losing the narrative. It’s because the left is falling back too much on gaslighting, disinformation, and censorship.
phids – Henry Kissinger long ago said that a peace settlement between Russia and Ukraine would probably involve the loss of territory where Russians were the dominant language group. It is a bit like the Sudatenland in 1938.
No offense, but you’re a moron.
Public Service Announcement. Svelaz’s link is to a Salon article. Reading anything on Salon generally makes you dumber. Read it at your own risk.
If I understand it correctly, the left wing trash echo chamber – in this case the worst of the worst, Salon and Daily Beast – are trying to gin up a fake scandal. Apparently, Hannity conducted an interview with Trump on his radio program. During the interview Trump told Hannity how to end the Ukraine War. His idea is to persuade Ukraine to cede a portion of the territory where Ukranians speak Russian to Russia. Hannity decided to air a portion of that radio interview on Fox, and omitted that part of the interview.
That’s the fake scandal.
Radio talkers have three hours of time to fill. I’ve never listened to Hannity, but Rush rarely even had guests. That made for a very free-wheeling format. Cable news programs are only one hour. They often have multiple guests lined up to appear on air. That means the segments are only a few minutes long. Very time constrained.
So the fake scandal is that the radio interview was edited down to conform to the time constraints of cable TV.
There’s no evidence, or even a rational reason to suggest, that editing out that part of the interview was done for any reason other than to meet time constraints. I’m certain Trump will eagerly repeat his solution for how to end the Ukraine War to anyone willing to listen. It is not a controversial position. Wars often end with concessions of territory.
In this case, the left wing pukes who tell Svelaz what to think are inventing vile motives. Because that’s what they do.
Svelaz needs to find better people to tell him what to think.
The devil’s advocate says saving Ukraine to fight again another day might have been a viable course. The negotiated return of an intact Ukraine after its admission into NATO might have worked out very well indeed. Is there anything left of Ukraine to be of benefit to anyone? Does the West have any ammo left?
looks like President Trump was right. instead of thousands of young soldiers dying for stringed puppet Zekensky’s being a double agent, it could have been done a better way.
Uninformed and biased
You had many responses that showed you are unable to think but one was short and sid it all. It was accurate and on point. The quote was” No offense, but you’re a moron.
I respect Jonathan greatly. As a criminal defense lawyer myself, I take a less generous view of the prosecution – and the sentencing court – here.
Assuming it’s true for the moment, Jon’s observation “…the footage was in the possession of the legislative branch so the Justice Department could claim that it was not required to produce it” is generous, IMO. Kyles v. Whitley is a crucial SCOTUS case among Brady progeny that confers an express duty on a prosecution to affirmatively collect evidence from those bodies who report to the prosecutor. Kyles goes further and actually IMPUTES knowledge of such evidence to a prosecutor. Here, while it may well be true Congress doesn’t routinely report evidence to the DOJ, this AUSA did receive some video from Congress because, as Jon concedes, some Jan 6 video was played at sentencing.
So, two conclusions. First, Kyles conferred a duty on this AUSA to collect ALL the Jan 6 video from Congress once it received ANY Jan 6 video from Congress – Congress became an evidence reporting agency once it [selectively] handed over the video it cherry picked.. Second, Kyles imputes to the AUSA actual knowledge of the Tucker video once it collected ANY video from Congress. This is so – this is the law = b/c SCOTUS recognized in Brady, Kyles, Bagley, and a host of other criminal discovery shennigans cases that no one else will know better what evidence exists than a prosecutor. A prosecutor has a different ethical framework than defense counsel: prosecutors are obliged to see justice done so they are tasked with a duty to look for and find all the relevant evidence.
For these reasons, I diverge from Jon’s take here. It’s always a knife fight, collecting evidence from a prosecutor and law enforcement. The judge is supposed to be the arbiter of this melee. I’m disappointed the court.
Gee, thanks for that additional information. I’m not familiar with criminal law or criminal procedure.
About “QAnon Shaman” Chansley, Turley says “Howling and ‘chanting an unintelligible mantra’ on the Senate floor, he is the embodiment of the unhinged rage that led to one of the most disgraceful attacks on our constitutional process in history.”
LOL — “unhinged rage”? — “one of the most disgraceful attacks on our constitutional process in history”? — really?
Was what occurred on January 6, 2021 really “unhinged rage”? Was it really an attack on our constitutional process? And was it really “one of the most disgraceful attacks on our constitutional process in history”?
I would dispute ALL of those naked assertions as being misleading, biased, and at the very least, extremely ignorant of history and of what occurred on January 6, 2021.
First of all, as for the alleged existence of “unhinged rage,” until the POLICE began indiscriminately firing tear gas canisters into the crowd, there was nothing but a rather large PROTEST happening in the vicinity of the Capitol Building.
There is also conflicting evidence concerning WHO it was that removed barriers that would have kept the crowd at some distance from the Capitol Building. And there is also conflicting evidence concerning WHO it was that let the crowd INTO the Capitol Building after the intial barriers were removed. In actuality, there seems to be evidence that at EVERY stage of the events at the Capitol Building that day, it was agents provocateurs that led the crowd — in removing barricades, in entering the Capitol Building AFTER being attacked with tear gas, and in leading to the shooting of Ashley Babbit.
What is undisputed is that there was a large PROTEST, and no REASONABLE person would characterize a PROTEST as an attack of any kind on our constitutional process, much less “one of the most disgraceful attacks on our constitutional process in history.” Beyond that FACT — that there was a very large PROTEST — all of the other alleged facts are in some ways controverted, not established, or outright disproven.
Who removed the barriers? Who was directing the large crowd of PROTESTERS? Who let the PROTESTERS into the Capitol Building? What transpired after the PROTESTERS were let into the Capitol Building? Those questions are still unanswered more than TWO YEARS LATER, just as we have yet to receive sufficient answers concerning WHY security at and around the Capitol Building wasn’t adequate to control such a large crowd. WHY did nobody responded to officers’ requests for reinforcements to deal with such a large crowd?
Professor Turley is jumping to some UNSUPPORTED CONCLUSIONS when he nakedly declares the existence of “unhinged rage” and “one of the most disgraceful attacks on our constitutional process in history.”
This ought to have 1,000 “likes.”
Thanks. You’re too kind.
It certainly was not as bad as the “Summer of Love” when “peaceful protestors” damaged police cars, looted stores, caused vandalism and arson worth millions of dollars in damage. Oh but we won’t see very many of those guilty ones who did that. And there is plenty of footage that we all saw the entire freaking summer!!! Where is the committee to try more of THOSE rioters? That’s right. That would go against the Democrat narrative!!!
That was out in the provinces. The aristocrats in Washington DC couldn’t have cared less.
This just another example of the Department of Dual Justice stacking the deck against a defendant. These prosecutors should be disbarred, sued, and sent to prison.
“In the hearing, Judge Royce Lamberth noted, “He made himself the image of the riot, didn’t he? For good or bad, he made himself the very image of this whole event.” ”
In this statement, the Judge indicates that he believes that participated in a “riot”, despite there being no evidence of his being near any of the limited violence. His bias should cause him to removed fro office.
“WE WILL STOP HIM!”
“I’m just a patsy.”
– Lee Harvey Oswald
_________________
“January 6th” was a “vast,” left-wing, global, communist, Deep Deep State “Swamp” operation and conspiracy.
Jake Angeli Chansley, the “QAnon Shaman,” was the dimwitted, primary patsy and star of the Jan. 6th Show, produced, cast and directed by the Obama DOJ/FBI Deep Deep State “Swamp.”
The Obama Coup D’etat in America is the most egregious abuse of power and the most prodigious crime in American political history.
Just ask President Susan Rice about her “fake” final Obama e-mail:
“President Obama began the conversation by stressing his continued commitment to ensuring that every aspect of this issue is handled by the Intelligence and law enforcement communities ‘by the book.'”
“The President stressed that he is not asking about, intimating or instructing anything from a law enforcement perspective. He reiterated that our law enforcement team needs to proceed as it normally would by the book.”
________________________
“We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.”
– Barack Obama
______________
“We will stop him.”
– Peter Strzok to FBI paramour Lisa Page
___________________________________
“[Obama] wants to know everything we’re doing.”
– Lisa Page to FBI paramour Peter Strzok
___________________________________
“I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office — that there’s no way he gets elected — but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before 40.”
– Peter Strzok to FBI parmour Lisa Page
_________________________________
“People on the 7th floor to include Director are fired up about this [Trump] server.”
– Bill Priestap
“Lamberth hit Chansley with a heavy 41-month sentence for “obstructing a federal proceeding.”
Turley leaves out the fact that the 41 month sentence is the lowest possible sentence for the crime he’s accuse of the sentence is 41 to 51months. The government wanted 51 months. The judge gave him 41, the least amount of time he could receive for the charge.
Also Turley neglects to mention that if the Shaman chose to go to trial on appeal. He would have faced 20 years instead. By pleading guilty and showing genuine remorse he got the lowest possible sentence 41 months.
That is another miscarriage of justice. Plead for four lives or you get twenty. Even an innocent passerby would take that deal. That is not a plea “bargain”, and it is not justice, that is extortion. I can see why DoJ has a trial success rate equal to North Korea.
He was still guilty of the charge that he was accused of. Even Turley agrees with the judge in the previous column. The Shaman was genuinely remorseful and he confessed that it was wrong to do what he did. That got him the lowest possible time behind bars according to the law. He would have been looking at 20 years if he fought it in a trial in DC. Clearly he would have lost. In retrospect he got off easy.
Chuckiechan – people like the Q’Anon Shaman and the other J6 protestors have no hope against the federal government. The legal cost of defense is beyond their means, and the DC Circuit, judges and juries, are more biased than the DOJ. In a “nation of laws”, we have in this circuit a functioning police state when the defendants are on the right politically.
Did you see Bret Baker’s interview of Christopher Wray earlier this week? Baier asked some very specific questions about J6 that were not really answered.
Svelaz – What is the source for your claim that 41 months is the minimum sentence for obstruction of a federal proceeding (which is 18 USC 1505). The statute says that a convicted defendant: “Shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both.” So, based on the statute, the harmless Shaman could simply have been fined or sentenced to a term of any minimum length.
Svelaz – I am going to assume that you will refer to sentencing guidelines. In anticipation of your citation, I would first note that courts may reject use of the guidlines on cases viewed by them as “atypical”. There is nothing about Q’Anon Shaman’s situation that is typical.
Second, I used the federal calculator and was advised that guidelines were for 18 USC 1505 in this case should be:
18-24 months; Zone: D Level:15 History: I Fine: $4,000 to $40,000
file:///C:/Users/emahl/Downloads/Sentencing%20Guidelines%20Calculator%20–%20Sentencing.us.pdf
I assumed that “history” referred to criminal history and that the Shaman had none.
If I have miscalculated the guidelines, please feel free to point out my error.
I may be a lay person in regard to the ins and outs of the US constitution, but I do know that it states that we the citizens have a right to a fair and speedy trial to be judged among our peers. These judges and jurist in Washington DC are not the peers of the people being put in front of them. Washington DC, the people who live and work there are far removed from the people they are judging.
That said, this shaman fellow I do believe was used for the narrative that a lot of people in Washington needed to divert attention away from the actual issue of that day, states addressing anomalies in election vote totals. It was not a coincidence that just as the first state house rep objected to certification the democrats began running from the chamber while most everyone else looked confused as to what was happening. Did they have a heads up? Was this entire situation set up by a few or a lot of individuals to accomplish exactly what they wanted.
Pelosi made sure her daughter was there to film something. How convenient it was something they could use to dig their filthy hands into and put it against Trump. Democrats are evil!
Do you not have any sympathy for people arrested who have not been given due process, because that has happened. And I’ll tell you this…I’m a 69 year old grandma of 10 and If I had been there that day, I probably would have gone in there without a second thought. I went to DC many times for Pro-life marches and Tea Party events. we OFTEN went into the Capitol & walked around. If I had walked down there in that cold, I would have gone in. The people in front of the building had NO IDEA that those people were in the back breaking windows and climbing walls. Personally, I doubt those were part of the group that were there for Trump…They have admitted there were FBI agents there. Undoubtedly, Antifa also. And the fact that Pelosi/McConnell did not allow National Guard troops to come in and that the DC cops were so poorly prepared, is despicable and should be looked into on a much deeper level. And I don’t even want Trump to be president again (though I’d take him in a heartbeat over the guy in there now).
“[T]he Jan. 6th Committee withheld important evidence on what occurred inside the Capitol on that day.” (JT)
The Left favors releasing criminals. But it rejects releasing video that proves they are criminals.
I sense a pattern, here.
The Democrats compared this to Jan 6. https://millercenter.org/remembering-september-11/september-11-terrorist-attacks. They also compared it to the Civil War in which 600,000 Americans died. If you’re not convinced that they will say anything to stay in power there’s nothing else that I can tell you. The QAnon Shaman was worse than the Taliban so they say. On The Bill Maher show a guy from MSNBC said that they should shoot the guy but the right is excoriated if we call them Jackboots. They caught the hobnail boots when they were on sale and they bought a lifetime supply. https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo/hobnail-boots.html?sortBy=relevant
Tucker obviously cherry-picked the video he wanted to show, but did he provide video evidence that the other side chose not to show? Why didn’t Nancy Pelosi release the 40,000 hours to Rachael Maddow, and then the rest of the media? This particular issue is not about Democrats vs. Republicans, as Cheney and Kinzinger did not release the other parts of the video either. And an assortment of Republicans in the House and Senate have condemned Tucker in blanket terms. Those Republicans probably should’ve said something along the lines of, “I stand by Capitol Police on the whole, but there were segments of the video we should all find disturbing for very specific reasons.”
“Tucker obviously cherry-picked the video he wanted to show,”
Of course he did.
But he proved beyond any doubt at all that the J6 committee and DOJ and the Courts have done EXACTLY the same thing.
It is a minor problem when the media does that.
It is a gigantic constitutional and tyrantical problem when our government does that.
“but did he provide video evidence that the other side chose not to show?”
Not his obligation – and why this should have been made public.
“Why didn’t Nancy Pelosi release the 40,000 hours to Rachael Maddow, and then the rest of the media? ”
We do not know – but the reasonable inference is that the truth contradicted the cherry picked version the left has been shilling.
“This particular issue is not about Democrats vs. Republicans, as Cheney and Kinzinger did not release the other parts of the video either.”
Correct there are many republicans involved in supressing the truth.
“And an assortment of Republicans in the House and Senate have condemned Tucker in blanket terms.”
Correct – any senator of any party demanding censorship of the press should be removed from office for violating their oath of office to defend the constitution. Government efforts to censor are unconstitutional – Senators – particularly the majority leader are govenrment officers.
” Those Republicans probably should’ve said something along the lines of, “I stand by Capitol Police on the whole, but there were segments of the video we should all find disturbing for very specific reasons.””
They can say most anything they want – EXCEPT – this should be censored.
Navy veteran Chansley is as much a patsy as the Army veteran who tried to slash Lee Deldin’s throat.
The Democrats said that the riot at the Capitol was equal to this. https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/topics/pearl-harbor-december-7-1941. They used every ounce of Jan 6 to win the midterms.
The role of Congress in withholding this footage is disgraceful? Well, I will tell you McCarthy has withheld it from every journalist but Tucker. He did not choose Tucker because he was seeking the truth – just the opposite.
The Majority Leader said today that the footage will be released to other media.
It needs to be made public.
Tucker is prop…, didn’t you also think that the laptop was fake because the NY Post and Rudy Guliani had it? Lying sack of garbage?
Why didn’t the Jan 6 committee release all of the videos to “all” of the media? Why did they have to hire a Hollywood producer to do the cut and paste? Why did Biden lie when he said that he would have the most transparent administration of all time? Why did the Jan 6 committee hide the evidence from the Shaman lawyers? Just like when the Democrats said that the laptop had all the earmarks of Russian disinformation I say that the Shaman trial had all the earmarks of a witch-hunt.
The J6 committee had no duty to the J6 defendants.
DOJ Did, and they certainly had this.
Conversely the J6 committee had a duty to the american public.
They failed.
It is always reasonable to presume that when government is hiding things, censoring things, that what it is hiding and censoring is bad for them.
How many other commentators requested the footage be released to them? If he was the only one, it seems reasonable to release the footage to him. I would think anyone else who wants the footage could just ask for it.
It does appear that Tucker’s big reveal has fallen flat. The Fox News website is barely mentioning it at this point. Tucker promised a second day of footage but that seems to have been scrubbed too. Indeed, the emails revealed in the Dominion lawsuit shows without a doubt that Tucker is putting stuff on the air even he does not believe, because his gullible viewers believe it.
Turley perseveres nonetheless in trying to argue that some video showing the quieter period of a criminal trespassing after a violent break-in into a building is somehow exculpatory evidence.
If people were let into the building by the police, there was not a “violent break-in”.
Break in by whom? Identities never revealed— never prosecuted. How about bussed in antifa thugs and undercover FBI doing the violence and instigating the so called insurrection — of course only the undercover FBI were armed!
It was scrubbed because Trump hater Murdock stopped him after Schumer and McConnell got together like the Uniparty they are, and insisted. Murdock doesn’t want to go to the DC gulag.
Time and again, the Washington crowd just cannot keep from overplaying their hand. Calling this thing an insurrection is over the top. There was no threat to the government — no co-opting of the military, takeover of radio stations, television stations etc., etc., etc. It’s ridiculous to call it that.
Just as ridiculous as claiming these folks inside the Capital are law abiding citizens, and this was nothing more than a protest for the most part. The footage shows people who know they’re trespassing and could reasonably believe they disrupted a session of Congress. Either that or they have an I.Q. of about 1.
It also shows the situation after the Capital Police knew they were overwhelmed and so they began a strategy of de-escalation. Letting people mull about away from where they were trying to get Members of Congress out — who were in the House chamber. The Senate chamber was empty. So you let people into the Senate chamber for the time being — on the exact opposite end of where the evacuation was going on.
For this Shaman guy, 3 years is too much. Neither is he a innocent bystander. He knows he’s not supposed to be where he is. Trespassing inside a federal building and of all places the Captial.
I’ve been in the Capitol building a few times. It’s strange to me that people take it for granted that being “inside” is “trespassing”. Of course that was all due to Covid restrictions which had been in place for less than a year, ordered by one person, Speaker Pelosi, and which were part of the ongoing nationwide Covid lockdown psychotic overreaction.
Shaman Shamin‘