Dem Operative Bob Creamer was exposed in 2016 for hiring agitators to incite violence at Trump rallies.
More recently, Creamer and others tied to Democracy Partners got caught in 2016 on undercover video in Wisconsin talking about hiring agitators to create havoc at campaign rallies for then-GOP candidate Donald Trump and other political dirty tricks. Creamer, in response, said he was “stepping back” from working for the unified Democratic campaign for then-candidate Hillary Clinton.
Hillary Clinton was confronted over this by a Project Veritas reporter.
- Hillary Clinton was approached by Project Veritas reporters seeking comment on Shirley Teter being ordered by a Federal Judge to pay Project Veritas’ legal costs from a defamation suit stemming from a 2016 investigation into Democracy Partners.
- Formerly ran by Bob Creamer, Democracy Partners is a political organization with ties to the Democratic Party that was exposed for inciting violence at campaign rallies. After Project Veritas published its investigation, Creamer resigned, saying “I am unwilling to become a distraction to the important task of electing Hilary Clinton.”
- When asked if she would pay the legal costs ordered by a federal judge on behalf of Teter, Clinton repeatedly denied knowing anything about Teter, Democracy Partners, or Creamer saying “I don’t understand that. I don’t know Bob Creamer.”
- When pressed further, Clinton declined to state if she would pay for Teter’s legal bills, including when approached by a separate Project Veritas reporter when leaving the National Action Network luncheon event where Clinton spoke.
Federal Prosecutors of Jan. 6 Trespassers Are “Almost Schizophrenic”, Says Federal Judge
Chief Judge Beryl Howell, an Obama appointee, is one of the federal judges assigned cases against the January 6 defendants.
She’s confused. According to Politico, Judge Howell thinks prosecutors appear “almost schizophrenic” by describing the insurrection in violent and extreme terms but then taking plea deals for second-tier misdemeanors.
Your honor, they are not schizophrenic. The evidence against most of the defendants will only support trespass, not the violent insurrection you’ve been sold.
The DOJ’s investigation into the January 6 riot is the largest criminal investigation in U.S. history. Yes, the largest.
In public comments and court documents, the Justice Department has roughly put the cases into three categories: those who conspired over days, weeks and even months to attack the Capitol; those who allegedly violently attacked police, often with the use of weapons; and the remainder who breached the building as part of the mob, but did not commit other crimes. Fifty-seven defendants have been charged with conspiracy. At least 208 defendants have been charged with violence.
So far, 246 people have pleaded guilty to one or more charges stemming from the riot. Judges have handed down sentences to almost 140 people. 38% of those people who have been sentenced received prison time. The average prison sentence across all defendants who pleaded guilty is 99 days. One defendant has had a jury trial, Guy Wesley Reffitt, of Texas. After deliberating for just two hours, a Washington, DC, jury found him guilty on all five felony criminal charges he faced. Reffitt has not yet been sentenced. Another defendant, Couy Griffin, had a bench trial where he was found guilty on one charge and not guilty on the other. Two cases in federal court were dismissed, and seven cases in D.C. Superior Court were dismissed…. A large majority of those charged, however, have no known connections to established extremist groups.
Outside of the plea deals, only three cases have been resolved by trial so far. One of those cases was decided this week.
U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden acquitted Matthew Martin of all four counts for which he was charged.
According to the AP:
Martin … testified that a police officer waved him into the building after the riot erupted. A prosecutor dismissed that testimony as “nonsense.”
The judge, however, said video shows two police officers standing near the Rotunda doors and allowing people to enter as Martin approached the doors. One of the officers appeared to lean back before Martin placed a hand on the officer’s shoulder as a possible sign of gratitude, the judge said.
McFadden described Martin’s testimony as “largely credible.” The judge said it was not unreasonable for him to assume that officers allowed him to enter the Capitol, even though alarms were blaring and broken glass was strewn about the floor.
God bless Judge McFadden. And give this defendant Martin some credit. I suspect he was offered the same plea deal others are taking and he said no. He went for an acquittal and won it.
His win when will help others that did not do anything violent on January 6 negotiate harder with “almost schizophrenic” prosecutors.
If you want to see a database of the January 6 cases, follow this link and scroll to the bottom of the page it takes you to.
The DOJ needs a big win. With all the hype the media put into its insurrection day, the DOJ needs to deliver a trophy conviction.
Someone has to serve serious time or the whole narrative unravels.
Who will it be?
It looks like the Oath Keepers are in the cross hairs. The DOJ’s press release provides a breakdown of sealed indictments against 11 individuals, including the leader of the Oath Keepers, Stewart Rhodes.
I’m suspending judgment until the evidence is brought to bear in those cases. I urge any American who respects due process and understands government overreach to do the same.
The first wave of trials against the Oath Keepers is scheduled for April 19.
Who else could be a trophy catch for the narrative?
If not the Oath Keepers, Trump himself still remains a target of the elites. He would be the ultimate trophy to nail on the insurrection narrative.
What do we know about the judge presiding over those Oath Keeper trials?
For starters, he’s the same one presiding over Trump’s January 6 case.
His name is Amit Mehta. According to his profile, he was born in India, graduated from Georgetown University, worked for the second largest law firm in the world, and was nominated by Obama to serve in the D.C. court.
What should we expect from him?
In a 112-page opinion, Judge Mehta roundly rejected Trump’s claim of absolute immunity from lawsuits regarding inciting violence and the insurrection on January 6.
And just today, Politico reports that Judge Mehta has informed Oath Keeper defendant Kelly Megs that his lawyer cannot represent him because the State of Virginia revoked his license last week.
Politico quotes the panic in Mr. Megs response:
I don’t have the ability to contact an attorney,” said Meggs. “I have to get their phone number from somewhere that I can’t access because I’m not allowed to have any internet access … I can’t even try to defend myself at this point.”
Doesn’t seem like a fair contest to me.
The show must go on.
And it does seem like a scripted show.
Contrast January 6 to the riots that burned major cities in 2020.
You would think the largest criminal investigation in the history of American would be targeted at the costliest arson, vandalism, and looting in the history of American.
You’d be wrong.
According to Axious, the riots that took place in the spring of 2020 are estimated to result in at least $1 billion to $2 billion of paid insurance claims.
How can something that we’re supposed to believe was peaceful cause $2 billion in damages?
Now let’s compare the criminal element.
We’ve already witnessed (above) the extensive effort the DOJ is expending against January 6 defendants.
That seems to be in stark contrast to the case of Thomas Starks. He is the unrepentant “peaceful” Antifa protestor that violently smashed an axe into a republican senator’s door and window. The DOJ let him off with probation, democrats funded him, and the FBI kindly returned his axe.
Here’s surveillance footage that caught Mr. Starks in the axing act:
DOJ must not have seen that evidence.
Federal sentencing guidelines would indicate a 10-16 month prison sentence for Mr. Stark. But he didn’t have to fuss with any of that.
At least he had his mask on. Covid was raging in 2020. He could have passed the virus through the shattered window.
That could’ve made the situation dangerous.
Levity and irony aside, what are we to make of all this?
Antifa = Good.
Patriot = Bad.
Or perhaps, just perhaps, January 6 turned into a trap for many unwitting Americans.
Just as the Russian collusion narrative was hatched before Trump came into office, the insurrection narrative met him on the way out.
I’m reminded of Buffalo Springfield’s lyrics:
There’s something happening here. What it is ain’t exactly clear.