Below is my column in The Hill on the furious response of some judges in Washington over the Trump pardons. One judge, however, may have ventured too far in effectively banishing commuted defendants from Washington, D.C. without his prior approval.
Here is the column:
Even though President Trump had made it a campaign pledge to pardon those involved in the Jan. 6, 2021 Capitol riot, the roughly 1,500 pardons Trump issued on his first day produced familiar reactions from politicians and pundits.
In Philadelphia, District Attorney Larry Krasner pledged to pursue those pardoned or commuted with new charges on the state level — eclipsing Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg in repackaging federal crimes as state offenses.
Others cited the pardons as evidence of an even greater plot or purpose. On MSNBC, former NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund head Sherrilyn Ifill declared that the pardons were all part of a plan to build an army of “brownshirts.”
Not to be outdone, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) warned that Trump was issuing pardons to create a “reserve army of political foot soldiers to act on behalf of MAGA and Donald Trump.”
Such hyperbole, particularly the Nazi references, is now commonplace. Indeed, the left jumped the shark on the Nazi-mania and death-of-democracy mantra months ago. This week, however, some of the most strident comments seem to be coming from the federal bench itself.
Indeed, some judges used dismissal hearings to launch into what seemed at points like cable-ready commentary. Take District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan, an Obama appointee who had previously presided over Trump’s election interference case.
Chutkan had been criticized for failing to recuse herself from that case after she made highly controversial statements about Trump from the bench. In a sentencing hearing of a Jan. 6 rioter in 2022, Chutkan said that the rioters “were there in fealty, in loyalty, to one man — not to the Constitution.” She added then, “[i]t’s a blind loyalty to one person who, by the way, remains free to this day.” That “one person” was still under investigation at the time and, when Trump was charged, Chutkan refused to let the case go.
She then pursued Trump with a vigor second only to Special Counsel Jack Smith.
In the latest hearing, Chutkan again decided to use the bench to amplify her own views of the pardons and Jan. 6. She proclaimed that the pardons could not change the “tragic truth” and “cannot whitewash the blood, feces and terror that the mob left in its wake. And it cannot repair the jagged breach in America’s sacred tradition of peacefully transitioning power.”
In fairness, judges often express the gravity of offenses at sentencing, and most of us certainly share the strong revulsion over what occurred on Jan. 6. However, these cases are being dismissed after an election whose winner explicitly pledged to close the prosecutions through executive clemency.
The defendant in her courtroom was there to have a required dismissal entered in his case, not to hear Judge Chutkan speaking truth to power. In this case, she is the power. It is the power to rule dispassionately on the specific case before her. It is not the power to hold court on the merits of presidential decisions.
Down the hall, Chutkan’s colleague Judge Beryl Howell, also an Obama appointee, lashed out at Trump’s actions, writing, “[T]his Court cannot let stand the revisionist myth relayed in this presidential pronouncement.”
Yet, all of that paled in comparison to what their colleague U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta, also an Obama appointee, did with his Jan. 6 cases. He ordered J6 defendants to seek prior approval before going to Capitol Hill or even coming within any of the 69 square miles of the nation’s Capitol. Thus Mehta practically banished Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes and seven other defendants.
It does not appear that the Trump Justice Department requested such restrictions, but Mehta was able to impose them because those defendants had received commutations rather than pardons. A commutation does not require the dismissal of a case, and courts are generally allowed to set conditions for released defendants.
However, these are new conditions imposed after presidential commutations. More importantly, they could affect the exercise of First Amendment rights from free speech to free association to the right to petition the government. For example, Rhodes and others would have to disclose intended meetings with members of Congress or participation in political events.
Rhodes previously asked to speak to the House committee that investigated the riot, but the Democrat-controlled committee refused to allow it. (A Yale law graduate, Rhodes insisted that the hearing be conducted in public, the very condition Hunter Biden made with the support of some of these same members.)
What if Rhodes now wants to meet privately with members to supply his testimony? He would need Mehta to approve it and potentially make such plans public.
In my book, “The Indispensable Right,” I discuss the J6 cases and serious concerns over what a top Justice Department official called the “shock and awe” campaign to make an example of the defendants by throwing the book at them.
Nevertheless, even though I opposed the seditious conspiracy charges on legal grounds, I did not support the pardoning of violent offenders who attacked police officers.
The court system plays a key role in either tamping down or fueling rage in society. The book details how “rage rhetoric” often became state rage during periods of crackdowns on free speech. Over the last two centuries, some judges used their courtrooms to lash out at political opponents, anarchists, unionists or communists.
I was particularly concerned in these cases with sentences that seemed visceral, even gratuitous, in denying free speech rights. In Washington, judges imposed limits on what political views defendants could read or share.
For example, Judge Reggie B. Walton, a Bush appointee who had previously called Trump a “charlatan,” had before him a typical Jan. 6 case — that of Daniel Goodwyn, 35, of Corinth, Texas. Goodwyn pleaded guilty on Jan. 31, 2023, to one misdemeanor count of entering and remaining in a restricted building. It is a minor offense that generated little jail time.
However, Walton faulted Goodwyn for appearing on Fox News and spreading “disinformation,” and so he ordered the government to monitor what he was viewing and discussing. The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals rebuked Walton for that surveillance order, but he doubled down. On remand, the Biden Justice Department insisted that Goodwyn was unrepentant and still viewing “extremist media.”
Walton, therefore, determined that the risk was too great in Goodwyn spreading “false narratives” when we are “on the heels of another election.”
Now, his colleague is similarly ordering that those freed under Trump’s commutations will disclose and seek approval to go to the Capitol to speak with members or other citizens.
Many of us have long viewed the Jan. 6 riot as a desecration of our constitutional process. Few people want to defend Rhodes or either the Oath Keepers or the Proud Boys. However, the First Amendment was not written to protect popular speech or popular individuals.
The Mehta order should not push President Trump toward converting these commutations into pardons. It should also not prevent us from questioning the court’s authority to regulate the exercise of First Amendment rights.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University and the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
Once again I disagree with Professor Turley on the closing paragraph. These DC Jurists have exhibited an inability to follow their Oath of unbiased arbiters and on numerous occasions knowingly and with malice violated the Constitutional rights of defendants. The President should immediately take these cases and convert them to full Pardons. The Congress should initiated an immediate investigation in to the DC Circuit Court and the clear collusion between these Judges to “get” these very bad actors against Democracy!!! Hopefully this investigation results in some impeachments from the bench!!!!
Turley dismisses the fact that Trump emphasized during his campaign that he would not pardon the most violent offenders. Republican allies agreed that this should be the limit for pardons regarding January 6th criminals, yet that did not occur. Turley also conveniently overlooks the hypocrisy involved in commuting the sentences of the most violent offenders—those who assaulted and injured police officers, as well as individuals found to have incited violence and engaged in sedition. The sedition charges were based on the same rules established by Attorney General Barr, a Trump appointee. Trump and Republicans are always about respecting and protecting law enforcement and here they are giving those who the pretend to respect a huge slap in the face.
Turley fails to mention that judges have the authority to impose limitations on those whose sentences were commuted rather than pardoned. The guilty verdicts remain unchanged; the individuals are still guilty of the charges, and while they may no longer be in prison, they are still, according to Turley, subject to conditions set by judges since they are legally considered convicts. Their felony convictions still stand. A commutation only alleviates the punishment, not the charges or verdict or their status.
Additionally, Turley neglects to acknowledge that those who violently attacked federal law enforcement showed disrespect toward the judges, which resulted in gag orders and contempt charges. A commutation does not protect them from new charges or restrictions because they remain convicted felons. While their sentences may have been commuted, their rights are still limited by their convictions since they have not received pardons.
Commutations do not restore civil rights, unlike pardons.
A commutation is simply a reduction of a sentence, whereas a pardon is the forgiveness of a crime. There is a significant difference between the two, which is why Turley’s criticism of D.C. judges setting limitations on those who only received commutations is misguided. They have the authority to do so.
Turley dismisses the fact that Trump emphasized during his campaign that he would not pardon the most violent offenders.
George dismisses the fact he has no credibility here. Here he is known for successfully staying ahead of character, honor, integrity and credibility trying to catch up with him his entire life.
So while George seeks personal sexual gratification with his daily expressions of rage towards Professor Turley, to everyone else he’s playing the part of Larry in The Democrat Marxist Three Stooges, the short bus that pulls up each day to deliver their performative political theater of Keystone Cops slapstick comedy.
Old Airborne Dog
“Turley dismisses the fact that Trump emphasized during his campaign that he would not pardon the most violent offenders.”
More accurately Trump said he would review these on a case by case basis.
Rhoades never went into the capitol and did not commit any acts of violence.
Regardless, as YOUR note there sentences have been commuted. That means they Judge has no legal authority to impose a new sentence.
You fail to grasp and Tuley dodges the Fact that in imposing new sentencing conditions these judges are acting lawlessly – the Judges are themselves committing crimes. They are violating the civil rights of others under color of law.
They are free to engage in their idiotic tirades. They are NOT free to attempt to circumvent the commutation.
The power of clemency is absolute and unappealable. The only limit to it is that the president can not use it to increase a sentence.
Biden altered several death sentences to life in prison. He has the power to do that.
No judge has the power to come back and modify Biden’s commutation to life or to impose new conditions on those granted clemency.
Regardless, ultimately Full pardons for all involved are REQUIRED.
Not because some of the J6 defendants Deserve pardons – this is not about them.
It is about correcting the corrupt process that took place in the DC courts.
These people MIGHT not Deserve pardons – but they did deserve fair trials by impartial judges and juries – they did NOT get that.
“Republican allies agreed that this should be the limit for pardons regarding January 6th criminals, yet that did not occur.”
Actually that is EXACTLY what did occur. But more and more people are learning how incredibly corrupt and lawless these prosecutions were.
Regardless, the remedy for the lawlessness of prosecutors, courts and juries is at the very LEAST vacating the conviction entirely.
“Turley also conveniently overlooks the hypocrisy involved in commuting the sentences of the most violent offenders—those who assaulted and injured police officers, as well as individuals found to have incited violence and engaged in sedition. The sedition charges were based on the same rules established by Attorney General Barr, a Trump appointee. Trump and Republicans are always about respecting and protecting law enforcement and here they are giving those who the pretend to respect a huge slap in the face.”
There was no sedition – sedition itself has no place in the US legal system. Please cite a single instance in which Sedition was not used unconstitutionally in US history ? Turley has repeatedly refered to the presidency of John Adams – one of our greatest founders, a renowned lawyer, who stained his legacy by being the most anti-free speech president in US history prior to Biden specifically for promulgating and abusing the alien and sedtion act.
Then in the 20th century we had Wilson convict Eugene Debbs of sedition forcing him to run a presidential campaign that got 6% of the vote from federal prison.
Our founders explicitly defined Treason in the constitution – to avoid using it as a political weapon – exactly the way YOU are trying to use sedition.
Those who committed ACTUAL violence on J6 have already served much longer sentences that the attorney’s in NYC who threw molotov cocktails into occupied police cars, or the Kavanaugh protestor who took an axe to a senators door.
There were more injuries to the Secret Service and Park police at the June 2020 “protests” at the WH that resulted in arson to St. Johns and a 20ft fend at the Whitehouse being torn off its foundations. Yet NO ONE was prosecuted.
Hundreds of rioters at the Portland Federal courthouse for 100 days straight in 2020, were attempting to blind law enforcement with lasers, attack them with fireworks, throw stones and frozen water bottles at officers, and these proprietors were not prosecuted.
The disparity in the conduct of J6 protestors – no rocks, no frozen water bottles, no firearms, no arson. no lasers, no fireworks, no incendiary devices, no pouring alcohol on police and lighting it all things that occured in the BLM riots that resulted in no prosecution or very minimal prosecutions and sentences. And that of J6 defendants not only cry’s out for redress – for pardons – but also for “blood”.
It cries out for the dismissal of the prosecutors and judges involved. In some cases their prosecutions.
You had your chance with commutations – you blew it. The remedy left to the president to restore justice is pardons.
“Turley fails to mention that judges have the authority to impose limitations on those whose sentences were commuted rather than pardoned.”
No they do not. Constitutionally clemency – in all forms is absolute. It is unreviewable.
These people were in court to have judicial records reflect their commutations – not to be resentenced.
All acts of clemency are FINAL.
“The guilty verdicts remain unchanged; the individuals are still guilty of the charges, and while they may no longer be in prison”
Correct.
“they are still, according to Turley, subject to conditions set by judges since they are legally considered convicts.”
Please cite where Turley said that. While they are still convicts, clemency is absolute – the clemency is the FINALTY of their punishment.
Their sentences were not comuted to probation, or supervised release. They appeared in court for the sole purpose of having the court record the commutation on their record.
Turley correctly notes that Judges often use post conviction appearances in court to chastise defendants, and that we do not generally restrict them from doing so, These diatribes have no legal meaning. A wise judge would refrain from editorial commentary, as that can come back to bite them in the ass – as these comments are.
But Judges do not have the power to increase ANY sentence – absent a new crime or a violation of the current sentence.
A commutation is The final sentence – the judge can not modify or extend it.
“Their felony convictions still stand. A commutation only alleviates the punishment, not the charges or verdict or their status.”
Correct, but it is FINAL with respect to sentencing.
“Additionally, Turley neglects to acknowledge that those who violently attacked federal law enforcement showed disrespect toward the judges, ”
Turley also noted that these same judges showed disrespect for the law, and constitution.
“which resulted in gag orders and contempt charges.”
Disrespecting a judge is a constitutional right. Free speech is a constitutional right. The judge has LIMITED power while inside the courtroom.
That power with respect to the free speech of even convicted criminals ends at the courtroom doors.
These judges are showing “disrespect” for Trump’s commutations – Can Trump impose a gag order on the judges ? Can he hold them in contempt ?
“A commutation does not protect them from new charges or restrictions because they remain convicted felons.”
A commutation ENDS the sentence for the crime they were convicted of, A Judge can not impose a new sentence. Nor can new charges derived from the crime commuted be imposed. Nor can new restrictions be imposed.
Merely being a convicted felon does NOT leave you under the supervision of the court. When ANY sentence is completed, the court loses jurisdiction over the defendant.
“While their sentences may have been commuted, their rights are still limited by their convictions since they have not received pardons.”
The limitations on their rights as a result of being convicted is outside of the jurisdiction of the DC courts.
Those limitations are imposed by statutory law, they are different from state to state.
“Commutations do not restore civil rights, unlike pardons”
Incorrect, commutations restore MANY but not all civil rights.
They end the jurisdiction of the courts, they restore all civil rights EXCEPT those that states have chosen to further restrict.
And even state restrictions – are outside the jurisdiction of DC courts, and further limited constitutionally.
The Supreme court has recently ruled that prohibitions against the ownership of firearms post conviction must rest on a conviction for a Violent crime. Most states bar convicted felons from voting – while incarcerated, SOME extend that for a few years after release, only a few bar voting for life. Further if you are convicted of another crime – your prior conviction may factor in your sentencing for the new crime.
But to a very large extent when any sentence is completed – and a commutation ends a sentence, they restrictions on civil rights nearly all end.
“A commutation is simply a reduction of a sentence”
No a commutation is the imposition of a new lessor sentence that is FINAL – it can only be modified by further clemency – not by the courts.
Biden commuted a number of death penalties to life sentences. Those people remain in jail. In the future they could be further commuted,
But no court can restore the death penalty, or extend their sentence absent a new crime.
“whereas a pardon is the forgiveness of a crime.”
A bit more complicated than that. A pardon is much broader than just forgiveness.
“There is a significant difference between the two”
There is.
“which is why Turley’s criticism of D.C. judges setting limitations on those who only received commutations is misguided. They have the authority to do so.”
Turley’s criticism is spot on. A commutation limits the authority of the courts. A commutation to time served – as in these cases, ends the jurisdiction fo the courts. No they can not set limitations or conditions.
It was J.D. who said he believed the right thing to do was pardon all the non-violent protesters, i.e. draw the line there. Obviously, Trump doesn’t take advice from his underlings. Things like “cleaning out everyone in Gaza to Jordan and Egypt” before even discussing this idea with King Abdullah and Pres. Al Sisi! What a bonehead idiot talks out loud that way? Did Rubio consult on it first? What do you think?
I’ve never seen political capital burned up at this speed.
Another pardon recanter from NH. As you would expect its on a NPR:
https://www.nhpr.org/nh-news/2025-01-24/keene-man-arrested-for-storming-the-capitol-on-jan-6-rejects-trumps-pardon
I used to think that the criminal justice system would protect the innocent and punish the guilty. I have since gotten a tattoo on my forehead: No Comment
I’ve watched too many innocent people freed from jail because of new evidence to ever trust the government.
Prosecutors, judges, and juries are human and capable of making mistakes. Grievous mistakes which destroy innocent lives.
While there is an unusual political element in the J6 cases that is really egregious – the arrogant and unconstitutional behavior that has been highlighted of these judges is unfortunately NOT unusual.
The convictions of the innocent are damning, but even the treatment of the guilty by the courts is often appalling.
The arrogance and unconstitutional conduct of judges and prosecutors – even with guilty defendants is little different from that of the criminals before them.
“Trump Pardons Trigger Leftist Rage”. Fixed it. The ‘outraged judges’ are just Trump hating leftist radicals who infest the judicial system, and are angry that their never ending attempts to somehow ‘get’ Trump failed, and now it’s crying time. Rest assured none of them are on the record of being outraged when dementia Joe pardoned his career criminal crackhead spawn.
The ‘outraged judges’ are just Trump hating leftist radicals who infest the judicial system
These three judges named in this column are also Professor Turley’s fellow Democrat lawyers who he rubs shoulders with as fellow members of the Washington DC Bar Association.
You can’t express strong revulsion of your fellow members of the bar – when you might find yourself seated beside them at the bar which serves liquor instead of Democrat Justice.
Old Airborne Dog
U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta is a FISA judge????? Little wonder the FISA Court is nothing more than a running dog for the DOJ.
The judges that demonstrate partisanship from the bench must be impeached.
Secret courts should not exist in our system.
U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta is a FISA judge????? Little wonder the FISA Court is nothing more than a running dog for the DOJ.
Judge Amit Mehta is one of the FISA judges who Obama’s Attorney Generals and FBI Directors repeatedly perjured themselves to while committing the additional felony of uttering false documents to the court with the illegal Russia Dossier to get unlawful spy warrants
One of those FISA judges who refused to haul Comey, McCabe, Mueller, Lynch, Yates, Szrok, etc back into their courtroom and at least sentence them for contempt of court.
Never mind recommend them for prosecution for serial felonies committed before them in their FISA courtroom?
Amit Mehta is a co-conspirator in Comey, Mueller, Lynch et al depriving Americans of their civil rights through color of law.
That’s the Democrat Double Standards Difference that we get from the Washington Bar Association’s Democrat lawyers making their living in the political courtrooms and social media courts .
Please Believe Us, Don’t Believe Your Lying Eyes; Move On™
Old Airborne Dog
The Justices condemn themselves with their own words. And we have all been told that they are righteous and should be valued members of the courts and constitution and that there are only Justices but not Republican or Democratic Justices. These words would suggest otherwise.
Ignore the Justices and just hold the hearings and committee meetings outside of DC.
Just like Ancient Rome. When Pompey was a proconsul after his consulship and commanded legions in his assigned province, he could not enter Rome so the Senate convened outside the City so that he could.
It didn’t work out to well for Pompey, but he wasn’t nearly as good a politician as you know who.
In the long run it was not the meetings outside of Rome that did him in. He did accomplish a great deal and was an excellent organizer like McClellan but he was a terrible Politician and not quite as good as Julius (you know who) as a general. Pompey severed the relationship. Julius tried to keep it going. I think Pompey listened too much to Cicero and Cato the Younger, who was almost psychotic in his hate for Julius, sort of like Joy Reid.
“The Mehta order should not push President Trump toward converting these commutations into pardons.” (JT)
Why not? A check on Mehta’s Draconian order (as you argued) is one of the reasons given by Hamilton in defense of a president’s pardon power.
Amen! This is communism at its best, kangaroo courts thinking they are gods & goddesses
Unlike some people, I am capable of watching videos and reading.
I don’t take the word of biased and known liars like the J6 committee.
Exactly. This is what the clemency power is for.
Igbmiel: the J6 committee didn’t “lie” because none of them testified. They called witnesses–almost all of them were Republicans and members of Trump’s inner circle. You are kidding yourself if you believe you are capable of sorting out the truth because you don’t even understand this basic premise. Which witnesses are liars? Here is the list:
Matthew Pottinger
Sarah Matthews
Stephen Ayres
Jason Van Tatenhove
Pat Cipollone
Cassidy Hutchinson
Jeffrey Clark
Jeffrey Rosen
Richard Donoghue
Steven Engel
Rep. Russell “Rusty” Bowers
Wandrea ArShaye “Shaye” Moss
Brad Raffensperger
Gabriel Sterling
Ginni Thomas
Greg Jacob
J. Michael Luttig
John Eastman
BJay Pak
Al Schmidt
Chris Stirewalt
Bill Stepien
Ben Ginsberg
Bill Barr
Caroline Edwards
Nick Quested
Peter Navarro
Steve Bannon
Mark Meadows
Name the liars and tell us what they lied about–or, just admit you got the idea that they all lied from MAGA media.
My only reply to those who are ‘anonymous’ is that I don’t answer anonymous posters.
Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) warned that Trump was issuing pardons to create a “reserve army of political foot soldiers to act on behalf of MAGA and Donald Trump.”
Oh, the horror! 😱 Raskin apparently doesn’t understand the concept of being sincere about campaign promises. He’ll just love the 8,000 soldiers offered a return to active duty after being forced out over the Covid vax.
The best thing the Democratic party did for President Trump was abandon commonsense, reality, rule of law, security of rights. That shoved the majority of Americans towards this America First tent. As long as they continue living up to the campaign promises, this “Army” will continue to grow.
The guy who did an attempted coup pardoning those who helped carry it out is Nazi like because the Nazis did that.
It is sad and illuminating that Turley is still a Trump apologist and won’t even acknowledge the attempted coup.
Ridiculous. There was no attempted coup. There were only citizens showing their support for some invalid electors being sent back to the states. Objections to some electors were being made. Those attending did not want the process stopped, they wanted the objections to be voted on. The evacuation halted that process. That was not what anyone wanted.
Pelosi used the protest to thwart the attempt by Trump to refute certification based upon illegalities and fraud believed to have occurred in the election. When was the last election where various States stopped their counting simultaneously and then continued later? Where are all those Biden voters in this last cycle? Do you think what we saw in Pennsylvania this time was an anomaly? I
hope Trump can bring this to closure with irrefutable proof, as it will be a way to end this and unite America.
Yes. There were so many things wrong with the 2020 election. Despite claims to the contrary, Congress is not a rubber stamp for state electors. Congress has Constitutional duties to fulfill.
I hope Trump can bring this to closure with irrefutable proof, as it will be a way to end this and unite America.
Traveler, many others and I also hope that Trump will make an effort to drag the duplicity and real history of J6 out in the open, and with special focus of how these same FBI, same Washington DC prosecutors, and same Washington DC judges gave a complete pass to the Democrat street thugs in Black Liars & Marxists and Antifa’s assault on the White House, just a few weeks earlier.
The glaring difference in both the scope of the crimes committed and how one riot was given the Democrat legal stamp of approval while the other was proclaimed a coup and responded to with Lavarentiy Beria style prosecutions should be laid out in the open so that deniers would have to claim they were blind if they didn’t see the difference.
But I have zero faith that either Trump or the GOP in the House or Senate are going to do that. Trump didn’t lay what was going on within the DoJ, FBI, CIA, etc regarding lawfare in his first term. He isn’t going to do it in his last term, either, with so much to do.
Further, even if this were to happen, doing so would not reunite these police state fascist Democrats with America – they have truly become the new DNC: the Soviet Democrats.
They didn’t start this abusive deprivation of the civil rights of Americans through color of law when Trump was elected. It started before Trump announced his entry into politics. And it was very successful.
Which is why they won’t stop attempting to use it.
Old Airborne Dog
@Igbmiel
Au contraire, there was an attempted coup – when Biden was pushed out and the dems installed Kamala without a primary!
The J6 riot was idiocy, but that’s all it was.
Ahhhh….yes. biden’s own party forced him out. He still thinks he could have beaten President Trump. He said Kamala could beat him, should have beaten him. Which was so bizarre, she didn’t beat him. Non compos mentis.
C’mon, man. The coup was when Obama made the phone calls that pushed Biden in, in 2020. Biden was never elected; he was selected by Obama.
You’re not illuminated, you’re in the liberal darkness.
“attempted coup”! You are precious, dear.
Hey Franke (sounds German btw), did Hitler ever sit there while some Episcopalian Reverend lambasted him in public? Did Hitler ever have “reporters” lie to his face while making accusations against him? Did Hitler ever step down after an election and then run again 4 years later?
Do you know what Hitler did do? Hitler had GERMAN shepherds, just like the two biting freak dogs that Joe Biden had.
@hullbobby
Precisely. Last time I checked, someone enacting the will of the people that elected them with ‘cellophane’ transparency is the *opposite* of a dictator. Free speech and due process for all are the *opposite* of fascism.
The brain washing is strong on the modern-left. It’s something to behold. 🤷🏽♂️
It’s obvious that you haven’t been reading Turley if you think that he hasn’t acknowledged the attempted coup. He mentions his disdain for J6 every time it comes up in an article including this one.
But what is really sad about your comment is your mind-numbed partisan attempt to impute Nazism to Trump and swim with the extreme propagandists on the Left.
The guy who did an attempted coup pardoning those who helped carry it out is Nazi like because the Nazis did that.
Don’t squat and drop your deuce and then run off and hide like Dennis, Franke. Readers here will start thinking Dennis is now posting under two different usernames.
Did Obama and Biden sending their FBI and Attorney Generals to perjure themselves in Judge Mehta’s secret FISA court in order to get spy warrants to take out Trump also do just like the Nazis (and Soviets) did, Franke?
Ever hear of Lavarentiy Beria, Franke? As a devout Democrat police state fascist, surely you must know how Lenin used his chief prosecutor Lavarentiy Beria to liquidate any person who was an obstacle to what he wanted.
Like Beria, these three Washington Democrat Judges who are Professor Turley’s fellow members of the Washington Bar ALSO have a perfect 100% conviction rate.
Just like the Nazi and Soviet judges and courts had, Franke.
You knew that while composing your comment, right Franke, you cheap fake police state fascist Democrat?
Old Airborne Dog
The coup he attempted was a peaceful, lawyerly coup (aka gaming the Constitution). Jan 6th was the messy collapse of the last of these plots (The Pence Option). The riot was a spontaneous outburst to Trump’s 2:24 tweet “Mike Pence betrayed us”.
Such nuance is largely overlooked.
I would have voted for Trump II if he had owned up to these plots, but he didn’t, so I didn’t. That said, I respect that he went about running for President in 2024 the legal, Constitutional way. I believe he can do some good, but not if he slips into poor impulse control.
Are you retarded?
Judges become so used to their omnipotence in the courtroom that they forget that they are also answerable to laws, regulations, and higher authority, as are the rest of us. Hopefully the people Trump puts in place will have the capacity to be petty, vindictive, and relentless. I look forward to these pipsqueaks getting their just deserts.
They have become partisan activists blindly following the Party line. Sounds like the post commutation restrictions imposed can be challenged to a higher court. Trump could always pardon them instead of commuting the sentence, just a personal FU to these Obama acolytes.
cionnath: Judges become so used to their omnipotence in the courtroom that they forget that they are also answerable to laws, regulations, and higher authority, as are the rest of us.
These Washington DC Democrat judges and prosecutors are all members of the Washington DC Bar Association, where they rub shoulders with Professor Turley as a fellow member.
If you believe they’re answerable for their conduct, go read that bar’s Code of Professional Conduct – it’s published online. Start with rule 3.8 before reading it in its entirity.
Then ask yourself which one of these Washington DC Democrat lawyers employed in any capacity is in compliance with their code of professional conduct.
Old Airborne Dog
Instead of a DC Circuit, we need cases regarding the federal government to be heard on a rotating basis in district courts across the US. DC is supposed to represent all of America. Letting a handful of DC Judges control all judicial actions involving the US Government is not working out very well for most of us.
We have much yet to learn about J6. The numerous folks who’ve sat through hearings, gone through reams of evidence say there is no proof of the “feces” claim.
What should give everyone great pause about their present beliefs surrounding this event is the fact that Joe Biden preemptively pardoned all law enforcement present that day?
Why in the world would you need to do this?
Professor, have you EVER heard of such a thing as this? Doesn’t it cause you to question everything you’ve been told about J6 by the government and media?
I clear up the “feces question” below. Hallway smearing was definitely true. The Pelosi desk got to the voiced ideation level (shouts of protesters suggesting to do it), creating an indelible “image” that went viral. Funny, neither side’s narrative can get it right factually.
The infowarfare is sickening, indicating people have no interest in coming together around seeking the truth.
What are you talking about ? Please link the video that you claim has protesors shouting to do this ?
There are many left wing false memes that have gone viral – such as the collusion delusion.
Virality on the left is almost proof something is made up.
The false meme of the left is that someome took a dump on Pelosi’s desk.
The false meme of the right is that this accusation is 100% made up.
The truth always falls somewhere in between, in this case leaving a turd was proposed by more than one
occupier of the Speaker’s office, but it never was carried out. That sounds completely unlike something a committed zealot would push out — it’s too nuanced. It’s totally plausible that this is exactly what happened, and the origin of the leftist meme that went viral.
I tried to find the news article where this account of witnesses was given.
Really? Trump winning the ’24 election (viral news) was made up? The L.A. fires?…made up.
Homan flying illegals out of the US?….made up?
It’s the opposite of what you claim. Most viral info spread turns out to be correct. Stuff that is 100% made up (Jussie Smollett’s hoax, Hunter’s laptop is Russian propaganda) is rare by comparison.
Everything the government did connected to J6 — police actions on J6, prosecutors and judges, the J6 committee, and biden’s ‘pardons.’ None of it passes the smell test.
How about the feces? Did that pass?
Yes, it was number 2 on the list.
“We have much yet to learn about J6. ”
Yes, we do, including the level of instigation provided by Federal employees and operatives.
“Professor, have you EVER heard of such a thing as this? Doesn’t it cause you to question everything you’ve been told about J6 by the government and media?”
Professor Turley seems to very much like being able to have his J6 both ways. Whether that indicates a personal blind spot, or is a conscious, cynical attempt to continue to hype hits on his columns and web site, I truly do not know. Frankly, I am seeing content on several right-leaning web sites lately that appears to be deliberate distortion designed to artificially maintain the high level of viewer interest that they were able to generate during the recent campaign. I suppose that is understandable, but I don’t have to approve of it, and I emphatically do not.
@Number 6:Professor Turley seems to very much like being able to have his J6 both ways.
It’s the good ol’ Democrat Different Double Standards model of American justice.
One standard for “strong revulsion” when it comes to the three hour long J6 riot. No pejorative “strong revulsion” when looking at the years of his fellow Washington DC lawyers engaged in lawfare to deprive Americans of their rights through color of law – and at times by repeated felonies committed in this one Judge Mehta’s FISA court.
In other examples, Professor Turley condemns some of Trump’s comments with similar pejoratives – while today, the speech of these judges who are his fellow members of the Washington DC bar is described as “strident opposition”.
Democrat Different Double Standards: Please Believe Us, Don’t Believe Your Lying Eyes; Move On™
There’s no charge to read this blog, and we don’t have to come here to read it. But the obvious double standards in the analysis provided does nothing to build credibility of the analysis provided.
Old Airborne Dog
The feces claim is because Kavenaugh protestors DID drop feces in the capitol.
Thank you!
As Julie Kelly now calls these judges and prosecutors, “crisis actors.” I agree and wouldn’t mind seeing them all locked-up, at least.
Oh, and there is a special place in hell for jamie raskin.
Locked up? On what charges? Think before you comment.
You obviously don’t think before you comment.
Oh, you don’t before you comment either you belligerent child.
You are amusing with your attempts to insult.
I guarantee I never post without a great deal of deliberation beforehand.
You could have stopped at the first four words and been spot on.
Hahahaha….
That is funny!
“Locked up? On what charges? Think before you comment?” Hey Einstein, if there are no charges possible then please explain what Biden pardoned them for…MORON!
The abuse of civil rights under color of law.
Trump’s commutation provides FINALITY to these peoples sentence.
While these judges are free to rant stupidly, they are NOT free to impose any new sentence or conditions beyond those in the grant of clemency. Anything beyond that is an unconstitutional violation of the defendants rights.
Truly, but doesn’t it give actors a bad name?
So the war continues, and the legal libs will destroy as many lifes as they can for no other purpose than to harm trump.
We’re all collateral. To be used and abused by the swamp as they deem.
Civil war anyone?
Inauthentic, manipulative speech pushed out into the public square by professionals trained in PsyOps at Langley with taxpayer dollars — let’s call such speech “unpopular”.
And we conservatives accuse the left of employing dismissive euphemisms to cut off meritocratic debate!
The double-speak of 1984 is now complete.
Can’t follow.
Mr. Turley, that judge should be censured at the least or impeached by House for knowingly violating those citizens’ rights.
The House doesn’t take that duty/responsibility seriously.
Remember Alcee Hastings? A federal judge impeached, convicted, and removed from office in 1988/89. He then went on to be elected to the House in 1992 because he wasn’t barred from holding office.
Yes, but he was of color so it was okay…
Free Derek Chauvin
I don’t want to think that is the reason. However, I can be too naive and trusting.
I sometimes think that it’s the D behind their name instead of skin color. How many democrats were prosecuted for contempt of court? Were prosecuted when Congress made referrals to the DoJ?
No, but who really cares.
Many people care about the egregious hypocrisy demonstrated by the left.
If you don’t care, why did you comment?
I also recall Marion Barry. On tape smoking crack and still is elected. He must have the pulse of the “people”
Hear, Hear!
The Democrats spent the last four years convinced of the righteousness of their crusade to destroy Donald Trump – who now occupies the highest office in the land, and is ostensibly the most powerful man on Planet Earth through January 20th, 2029.
Witness their heads exploding 🤯 on a daily basis, as this latest volley of blood and feces demonstrates so pungently 😆🥳💩
Revenge is indeed a dish best served cold, accompanied by a veritable smorgasbord of Just desserts 🍨 🤭
Rigteousness? Dems don’t think like that, you make them ionto humans. They are not. They are all about power, they are souless animals intent on gaining power and will hurt and kill if they have to. To think I only had a small cup of coffee already, imagine if I had a bucket.
With apologies to all former Catskills comics, my wife likes to serve me cold shoulder and hot tongue.
Someone please explain the reference to “feces” here. A Democrat friend told me that one of the pardoned rioters took a dump on Nancy Pelosi’s desk but my pretty thorough research has found nothing to support that claim. Is it true?
You couldn’t google your question? It took me all of 30 seconds. Some protestors took a dump in a bathroom, and then smeared their feces on hallway walls. A repugnant show of disrespect.
Nancy Pelosi’s desk? Witnesses assert that when a group broke into her office, multiple rioters were shouting “sh!t on her desk!” Apparently this “image” went viral and was later memorialized by an art piece with a cast bronze poop emoji on display in a national gallery.
What is your fixation with feces scatman?
My fascination is with truth. Truth has the power to unify where division pops up.
My disgust is with a preference for tribalistic narrative over truth, toward maintaining division.
This can’t be the *Anonymous” who consistently challenges bona fide findings with trite phrases. Come out “Anonymous” and adopt a handle of your silly own.
Just another fecalpheliac high on prozac…
Anonymous 6:59 am
Dumping on a desk is not a coup, maybe a particularly foul show of disdain.
Taking the occupant of the office and nailing them to the desk is probably a coup.
There is a wide gap between the 2, I believe.
You do understand that we have had so many lies from those on the left that we have no reason to beleive you.
You claim this happened – what is your actual evidence ? There is video of everything in the capitol on J6 – is there video of this ?
You claim that there is a witness – not sure why that would trump Video ?
Did this witness testify under oath ? I am aware of witness that testified under oath that there was NO feces.
The real origens of this appear to be because something similar DID occur during the Kavanaugh riots.
It would not surprise me in the slightest that left wing nuts would memorialize something that did not happen in bronze and put it into the national gallery.
BTW an emoji is a digital immage. They are made of bits – not bronze.
Feces? Really dude. That is your sole fixation with the article. Please, move on. Go away. You are yuck.
Mr. Turley…You are STILL confused about what happened on Jan6. The police, well documented with video, fired tear gas and rubber bullets into the crowds BEFORE any “attacks on police officers”. Most of the time, you seem to have a good grasp of situations, but somehow this one eludes you…
Confused, so says an anon. Fool.
So say many people.
Um… so name them.
Name the millions of people who were there and experienced the attack by the police and watched it happen? Then those who watched the videos?
I urge you to do your own investigation. I did.
Conspiracy theorist onboard!
All hail the Conspiracy theorist!
Did its own investigation from the comfort of his cellar.
Its even a lgb-er. Hail the alphabet people!
Has no one told you about making ASSumptions?
So if I “do my own investigation” and find the Video of the CP firing a tear gas grenade at themselves accidentally, and then into the crowd, that makes me a conspiracy theorist ?
Regardless, my credibility and yours rests on what we tell others.
You are free to rely on “experts” or whoever you wish – when you do you bet your credibility on theirs.
Or you can seek the truth on your own.
So far the “experts” have an abysmal track record.
Why should you be trusted ?
What have you been right about ?
Regardless
“you don’t matter anymore”.
The video is available.
Look into this a little closer. A mob defied police orders to remain behind a cordon of metallic barriers (portable bike racks). The mob defied these orders, and crashed through the barriers, advancing on the greatly outnumbered Capitol police. That precipitated use of tear gas and rubber bullets.
Put yourself in the cops’ position. What would you have done?
Great story-telling. Just leave out context, and reverse “who started it?” question. This is what 5-year-olds do when explaining a conflict they got involved in.
As cop, I would have walked away feigning sickness, rather than beat people senseless for being provoked by Pelosis’ troops.
If it is how you described then it mirrors about 100 other riots that took place in 2020, with NO ARRESTS and/or JAIL SENTENCES.
the cops were sold out by Democrat architects of this “riot”
Look into this a little closer. A mob defied police orders… Great story-telling. Just leave out context, and reverse “who started it?” question.
Great! Now give us your analysis of the assault on the White House to get at Trump inside, a few weeks earlier by the Democrats street thugs in Black Liars & Marxists and their buddies in Antifa.
Over a day long of continuing attacks on Secret Service and Capitol Police. The attempted murder of those LEOs by throwing Molotov Cocktails at them. Over 50 of those LEO’s transported to hospital with wounds received from the rioters attempting to assault the White House.
Nothing to see here, you cowardly Anonymous Democrat police state fascist?
This is what 5-year olds dreaming of being police state fascists when they grow up look like when trying to claim that there is no history of Democrat violent riots attacking the White House, federal court houses, federal facilities before J6.
And this is why you cowards will only post as Anonymous, nor stick around to defend your deliberate tunnel vision, attempts to retcon history, and double standards of justice.
Old Airborne Dog
It would help if you actually got your facts correct.
The “mob” followed the direction of police and remained behind the barriers until the CP first accidentally teargassed themselves,
and then Hopefully accidentally lobbed a tear gass grenade in to the crowd of peacefull protestots.
Those close to the Teargas grenade fled pushing out in all directions like ripples in a pond.
As the ripples of people fleaing the tear gas grenade expanded and the ripple hit the bicycle fence the pressure of those behind fleeing the tear gas pushed over the baricade and the CP started firing rubber bullets and more tear gas. As well as whacking protestors with batons.
Regardless, the is is all captured on video – though it took 3 years for the public to see it – wonder why.
In the cops position I would not have fired a CS tear gass grenade into my own ranks which just pissed off lots of cops.
In the cops position I would not have lobbed a tear gas grenade into a peaceful crowd.
In the cops position I would have retreated into the west tunnel entrance and locked the doors behind me,
rather than going to war with peaceful protestors I had just tear gassed.
We have lots of video elsewhere showing the CP behaving more rationally.
There is video of Alishi Babbit and the crowd she was with moving through the capitol.
The video has the CP stopping protestors at various doors. Persuading them to wait peacefully for several minutes before opening the doors to allow them to proceed to the next barrier. This occured repeatedly as Alishi and the group she was with proceeded through the capitol.
This culminated at the doors to the speakers lobby where members of congress were exiting the house chambers and procedding to “safety”
Armed CP officers manned the coors on the same side as the protestors preventing the protestors from proceeding,
and though some protestors broke windows, No protestor engaged in violence with the CP officers and no protestor entered the speakers lobby, until the CP officers moved away from the doors after the last congressmen exited the lobby and the doors were locked behind them.
It was at this point at Alishi crawled through the window where she was murdered in cold blood by Officer Byrd.
Aside fromt he fact that Alishi was unarmed, and officer Byrd was in no danger – these protestors had not tried to harm a single CP officer as they proceeded through the Capitol, and no one else was in the Speakers Lobby, Byrd was shooing at Alishi with 3 CP officers immediately behind her. Had he missed even a little – he easily could have killed a CP officer instead of Alishi.
But the point is that even in one of the more violent episodes at the capitol – the protestors were not attacking the CP, not attacking anyone,
and allowed themselves to be delayed at many points along the way by one or two CP officers who stopped them at doors. delaying them a bit to clear the capitol.
You may not like the protestors – but they were far less violent than those at any left wing protest.
The “violent rioters who attacked cops” had their constitutionally protected rights violated by the far-left Biden communists, jewish man. You crying about their pardon/commutation makes you a far-left communist in my eyes, jewish man. You should watch yourself in the future, jewish man.
Anonymous coward, you are vile. Take your anti-Semitic rants elsewhere. Talk about feces!….
Jewish man, really? Sounds like floyd.
Floyd is Jewish
Could’nt happen to a nicer guy.
Cut it out.
What the heck is “Jewish man”? This “Anonymous” is probably a guy that calls Trump Hitler, supports Antifa and Hamas and yet thinks he is enlightened.
Undoubtedly a fluffer.
Create adversity, distract, create the fissures of division, change the focus of discussion.