Here's what's striking if you read through the 460+ US Capitol Insurrection criminal cases ...
So many defendants in US Capitol Insurrection are accused of threatening or invoking the name of Nancy Pelosi
Haunting allegations
(thread)
Charging documents say Oliver Sarko of Ohio has video from Jan 6 saying, "Bring out Pelosi"
Leonard Ridge of Pennsylvania is accused of saying "America First B***h" upon entering Capitol and using Snapchat to say he raided Nancy Pelosi's office
Richard Harris of Florida is accused of picking up phone in Capitol and saying, "“Can I speak to Pelosi? We’re coming b*** ."
Feds allege Audrey Southard-Rumsey also said "Tell Pelosi we are coming for that b**" before shoving police sgt & pushing him into door w/ flagpole ("felt like he was being trampled")
And.. there's Richard Barnett of Alabama. The man accused of putting his feet on desk in Pelosi suite, taking mail and leaving vulgar note
Fundraising website for his legal defense is offering signed photos of Barnett with feet on desk.... for $100
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Some pardoned rioters are retracing their march from the Ellipse to the Capitol
Some victims are part of a 10am hearing organized by House Democrats
And: Anger, toxicity and confrontation continue to define Jan 6. Still.
Poltico Playbook on Jan 6 just now:
“Today D.C., and much of America, is deeply divided about what happened.
That lack of consensus represents a triumph, of sorts, for Donald Trump, and stands as testament to his unmatched ability both to reshape political narratives and to carry his supporters to extraordinary positions”
Injured DC police officer Dan Hodges says the Jan 6 denialism remains rampant
“Everything on January 6 occurred exactly as it appeared to. There’s no conspiracy here, there’s no, it wasn’t a “Fed-surrection”
NEW: House Speaker Mike Johnson – after two years of deflecting questions on the matter – is now arguing that the legally-required January 6 plaque must be re-considered
(more)
In a statement tonight, a spokesperson for Speaker Johnson says:
"As written, the statute authorizing this plaque is not implementable, and proposed alternatives devised by Democrat House staff, not members, also do not comply with the statute. If Democrats are serious about commemorating the work of USCP officers, they are free to work with the appropriate committees of jurisdiction to develop a framework for proper vetting and consideration, just as the House does for Congressional Gold Medals, commemorative gold coins, and similar ceremonial responsibilities”
Federal law required the Jan 6 plaque to be hung on Capitol grounds by March 2023
ALERT: House Judiciary Committee releases 250+ page transcript of its interview of Special Counsel Jack Smith
Smith testified: "January 6th was an attack on the structure of our democracy in which over 140 heroic law enforcement officers were assaulted. Over 160 individuals later pled guilty to assaulting police that day. Exploiting that violence, President Trump and his associates tried to call Members of Congress in furtherance of their criminal scheme, urging them to further delay certification of the 2020 election. I did not choose those Members, President Trump did"
(MORE)
Special Counsel Jack Smith interview w/ House Judiciary Committee (MORE)
Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH): "You just made some pretty definitive statements about your belief that President Trump was guilty of these charges. Is that correct?"
Jack Smith: "Yes, I believe we had proof beyond a reasonable doubt in both cases"
Jordan: "And doesn't the Justice Manual prohibit prosecutors from asserting that a defendant is guilty of something before a jury makes a determination?"
Smith: "When a case is pending, yes."
When he was asked about other election disputes (including 2000 election), Jack Smith told House Judiciary Cmte:
"There is no historical analog for what President Trump did in this case. As we said in the indictment, he was free to say that he thought he won the election. He was even free to say falsely that he won the election"
First line of 39-page opinion from Judge Amir Ali in DC:
"The Constitution forbids government officials from using their power to retaliate against people for their speech.. even when the speech is critical of the government"
Judge restores security clearance to whistleblower attorney Mark Zaid
(MORE)
Trump stripped Zaid's clearance in an executive order in opening days of 2nd term
Zaid told me Trump wanted him "taken off the playing field"
Zaid sued in DC federal court
(MORE)
Judge's ruling to restore Zaid's security clearance
"This case involves the government’s retribution against a lawyer because he represented whistleblowers and other clients who complained about the government, carried out by summarily canceling the attorney’s security clearance without any of the process that is afforded to others"