TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

The speaker discusses the 2020 riots and the January 6th attack on the White House. They mention the protection of the president by the Washington DC Police Department and the prevention of help from reaching the White House during the attack. The speaker questions who made the decision and mentions that charges were dropped for those involved in the riots. They highlight the disparity in how justice is being applied and express concern about the politicization of the situation.

There were violent and rambunctious individuals who were overcharged and over sentenced. However, there is a lack of action against Antifa and those who attacked life clinics. They have even tried to infiltrate the Catholic church and targeted parents. One specific case involves a 70-year-old man with no criminal history who was charged with obstructing a congressional proceeding. He faces a 14-year prison sentence for this bogus charge.

Jacob Chansley, a dangerous conspiracy theorist, was sentenced to nearly 4 years in prison for leading the violent insurrection to overthrow American democracy. There is dispute over how he got into the Capitol building, but internal surveillance video reveals that once inside, Capitol Police officers acted as his tour guides. They took him to multiple entrances, tried to open locked doors for him, and never attempted to slow him down. Chansley even thanked the officers in a prayer on the floor of the senate. This starkly contrasts with the reality of his actions on January 6th.

Speaker 0 highlights the aftermath of the January 6th violence at the Capitol, with over 1200 people charged and almost 900 convicted or pleading guilty. Trump, instead of labeling them criminals, refers to the insurrectionists as patriots and even promises to pardon them if he regains office. While Trump claims there was love on that day, the nation, including law enforcement, witnessed hate and violence. A Capitol police officer describes it as a medieval battle and expresses fear.

Prosecution of misdemeanor defendants was critically important because there were no small crimes on January 6th. Misdemeanor defendants were accused of trespassing at the Capitol, knowingly remaining where they shouldn't have, and their presence enabled mob violence. The volume of people who stormed the Capitol contributed to the violence and damage. Many misdemeanor defendants understood what the violent rioters meant to accomplish and knowingly lent their bodies to the effort. The rioters were treated fairly, with skilled attorneys, opportunities to challenge evidence, and jury trials. Their constitutional rights were protected, and they were convicted in overwhelming numbers.

Marxists, Islamists, and the administration have convinced a Washington DC jury to convict 5 pro-life activists who now face up to 11 years in prison for protesting. Meanwhile, individuals with different political beliefs are being sentenced to 10, 15, and even 20 years in prison. Antifa and other groups have caused chaos in cities like Portland, Minneapolis, and Seattle, engaging in violence, looting, and even taking over parts of the city. This political repression is immoral, un-American, and dangerous. If elected, the speaker promises to appoint a special task force to review the cases of unjustly persecuted political prisoners and sign their pardons or commutations on day 1.

On Trump's inauguration day, anti-fa anarchists and communists rioted, causing chaos and destruction. Despite facing serious charges, most were quickly released and had their cases rigged in their favor. Only one defendant served jail time, for just 4 months. In contrast, January 6 protesters are facing harsher treatment, with some in solitary confinement. This unequal justice system reflects anarcho tyranny, where criminals go unpunished while the innocent suffer.

On January 20, 2017, during Trump's inauguration, there were riots by antifa anarchists and communists who committed arson, threw rocks, smashed windows, and assaulted police. However, most of the 235 suspects were quickly bonded out and judges rigged the cases to free the defendants. Only two defendants were convicted, but their sentences were suspended, and only one person served jail time for four months. In contrast, the January 6th protesters who tried to stop the electoral college count were not bonded out and some are in solitary confinement. Over 570 protesters were arrested, charged with various offenses, and accused of preventing the peaceful transfer of power. This situation reflects what Sam Francis called anarcho tyranny, where criminals go unpunished, but the innocent suffer.

They say the FBI anticipated consternation around the election and actually prepared plans for January 6. They held a tabletop exercise in Boston in August 2020, five months before January 6. Kash Patel recently turned over memos to Congress at the request of Chairman Barry Lautenberg (Lautomilk) of the J-six investigation. The memos show the FBI knew there was a strong possibility of a hanging or contested election, with both sides agitated and likely to escalate to violence. They devised specific strategies, including embedding informants inside the groups where political violence or agitation might occur. They say the FBI had two dozen informants on the ground the morning of January 6. They also recommended mass prosecutions, even for the most minor crimes, which is described as exactly what the FBI did after January 6. Two big takeaways: the strategy appears to have been hatched months before and then carried out, and it involved a clear double standard compared to the political violence by the left in 2020. The FBI allegedly embedded informants in a broad range of groups, including Antifa and right-wing groups, and gathered intelligence suggesting a bad episode would occur. Barry Lautemux reportedly stated that while the warnings from informants were strong, the preparations of warnings to the brethren of the Capitol in Washington, DC did not exist. In other words, warnings were not passed along. The claim is that two failed examples of the Chris era of the FBI show that, knowing something was going to happen, they implemented a strategy that hurt conservatives but not liberals and did not warn the people who could actually prevent the violence. This is described as the legacy of the Chris Ray FBI, now laid open in documents for all to see. The question is whether any part shows that Bill Barr or Chris Ray briefed the president or his staff, or senior White House officials after the tabletop exercise and the development of the informant plan. The answer given is no: there is no documentation showing that the attorney general, Barr or other brass were briefed, and no mention that the White House, Homeland Security Department, Capitol Police, or Washington DC Metropolitan Police were alerted. The characterization is that the FBI remained insular, echoing the same “diseases” seen before nine-eleven.

Prosecution of misdemeanor defendants was critical because there were no small crimes on January 6th. Misdemeanor defendants knowingly trespassed at the Capitol, enabling mob violence. The volume of people who stormed the Capitol contributed to the violence and damage. Many misdemeanor defendants understood what the violent rioters meant to accomplish and knowingly lent their bodies to the effort. The rioters were treated fairly, with skilled attorneys and opportunities to challenge evidence. Their constitutional rights were protected, and they were convicted in overwhelming numbers.

Let's discuss January 6th. There’s no evidence it was an inside job; that’s a fringe theory. However, the released video footage raises questions about the number of federal agents present that day. It shows Capitol Police allowing people in, some of whom are now facing severe consequences, including suicide. This could be seen as entrapment, where authorities provoke individuals into actions they wouldn't normally take, then arrest them. Many were convicted before this evidence emerged. If law enforcement hadn't used forceful measures like concussion grenades and pepper spray, the situation may have remained peaceful.

You lack understanding of the January 6 cases and the reasons behind the detainment of individuals. For instance, a man has been in jail in Brooklyn for three years without charges. It's unjust to support such prolonged detention. While those who assaulted police should face consequences, three years is excessive for certain offenses. Comparatively, during protests in 2020, many faced minimal repercussions. Some individuals received harsh sentences for minor actions, while others, like Enrique Torrio, who wasn't even present, face severe penalties. This reflects a disregard for facts and fairness, as many accept the government's stance without question. It’s crucial to recognize the nuances in these cases rather than adopting a blanket approach to justice.

In 2011, Democrats occupied the Wisconsin capitol for over 2 weeks. In 2016, Black Lives Matter blocked highways and attacked police. During the Kavanaugh hearings in 2018, Democrats stormed the US Supreme Court. This summer, Democrats rioted in cities, setting fires and looting. In Seattle, Democrats took over blocks. After the Republican National Convention, a mob attacked Senator Rand Paul. Police stood down, governors didn't call in the National Guard, and Democrats paid bail for protesters.

The election was totally fraudulent as we all knew. 100% it was stolen. January 6 was just, you know, mom and dad who were mad about what they saw to be an election that they thought was unfair. During 02/2020, rioters caused about $3,000,000,000 worth of damage and killed about two dozen people over the course of eight months. This is David Dorn in his very last moments on Earth. He's a former police captain protecting a store. I happen to believe that a lot of the ways they treated rioters that were left wing. Kamala Harris was working to help the instigators, the criminals, get out of jail. Giving the narrative that there's no consequences for acts of violence even on federal grounds, cases being dropped from the federal siege in Portland by leftist rioters. I believe that was part of setting a narrative to gaslight the right wing into thinking that they could riot too and get away with it. This is mostly a protest. It is not, generally speaking, unruly. Show me where it says that protest was supposed to be polite and peaceful. Peaceful protest. Peaceful protesters. Too many see the protest as the problem. No. The problem is what forced your fellow citizens to take to the streets.

Many were prosecuted for entering the building or engaging in violent conduct on Capitol grounds. Those who entered restricted areas without authorization committed a federal crime. Thousands occupied unauthorized areas.

Jacob Chansley, a dangerous conspiracy theorist, was sentenced to nearly 4 years in prison for his role in the violent insurrection at the Capitol. While there is dispute over how he gained access to the building, internal surveillance videos clearly show that once inside, Capitol Police officers did not stop him. In fact, they acted as his tour guides, taking him to multiple entrances and even attempting to open locked doors for him. At least 9 officers were within touching distance of Chansley, but none of them tried to slow him down. Chansley saw the Capitol Police as his allies and even thanked them in a prayer on the senate floor. This starkly contrasts with the reality of his actions on January 6th.

The January 6 committee was unlawfully formed by Speaker Pelosi and acted without due process, using cherry-picked and doctored video. The committee worked with regime media to blast the fake narrative of an insurrection. Secretly recorded video reveals Nancy Pelosi's documentary admitting no insurrection occurred. The shameful proceedings and media blitz poisoned the jury pool in DC. Many defendants were swept up in a vast dragnet violating the Fourth Amendment via geofencing and cellphone data warrants. The Justice Department didn't respect the protesters' First Amendment rights, unlike the kid gloves treatment of Antifa and BLM agitators in Portland. January 6 defendants haven't been dealt with in the same fashion as Antifa and BLM protesters, violating equal protection. Widespread Brady violations exist, including concealed footage around the Capitol and 800+ unreleased January 6 committee deposition transcripts potentially containing exculpatory evidence. Judges in DC seem to have come under the spell of the January 6 committee's original sin, allowing the mainstream media narrative to influence their decisions. A statute designed to close an obstruction of justice loophole is being misapplied. Antifa and BLM revolutionaries largely got off scot-free, while January 6 defendants' sentences are wildly disproportionate.

The FBI had over 200 agents embedded in the crowd on January 6th, some even posing as Trump supporters. They infiltrated online groups discussing COVID restrictions, leading discussions of violence. Capitol Police were seen welcoming people into the Capitol, contradicting the insurrection narrative.

The speaker presents seven core points about the January 6 investigations and related prosecutions. 1) Original sins of government and due process concerns - The lawless formation of the House Select Committee on January 6 led to a one-sided, due process-free process. - The committee was gerrymandered by Speaker Pelosi, operated without a ranking member or counsel for the ranking member, and Liz Cheney was granted vice chair status to cover that up. - The committee conducted scripted hearings with prewritten Q&A paths and cherry-picked, highly edited audio and video. 2) Collaboration with mainstream media and narrative shaping - The committee worked with major outlets (The New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, MSNBC) to blast a narrative of an insurrection. - The speaker claims secretly recorded video shows Nancy Pelosi, her daughter, and friends admitting no real insurrection occurred. - The combined effect of the committee’s conduct and the media blitz allegedly poisoned the jury pool in Washington, DC, and suggested that venue transfers should have been permitted. 3) Fourth Amendment concerns and the dragnet - Many defendants were swept up in a broad dragnet that the speaker believes resembled a general warrant violating the Fourth Amendment. - This involved geofencing technology and cell phone data warrants to telecom providers. - People arriving after the speech and the ellipse allegedly did not see that areas normally open to the public were closed, creating a trespass trap for the unwary. 4) First Amendment rights and unequal treatment - The Department of Justice did not treat First Amendment rights of the protesters with appropriate respect. - The speaker contrasts the January 6 cases with the 2020 Portland protests, where nightly attacks on federal courthouses and antifa/BLM activity were characterized differently. - The speaker asserts that insurrection labeling in Portland was more applicable to those actions than to the largely spontaneous January 6 crowd, implying selective enforcement. 5) Selective prosecution and unequal treatment - The January 6 defendants have not been treated the same as Antifa and BLM protesters in 2020 who damaged property and threatened the White House. - The speaker calls this a flat violation of equal protection of the laws and suggests broad public belief in selective prosecution. 6) Brady violations and exculpatory evidence - Widespread Brady violations are alleged, focusing on two areas: concealed or underreported footage of the Capitol, and the large number of unreleased January 6 committee deposition transcripts (over 800), with the possibility that exculpatory evidence remains unseen by defendants and their lawyers. - The committee allegedly acted like a star chamber, and there is concern that not all exculpatory material has been made available. 7) Judicial influence and misapplication of obstruction statutes - DC federal judges are said to have been influenced by the January 6 committee’s narrative and the mainstream media. - A statute designed to close an obstruction-of-justice loophole from Arthur Andersen/Enron is claimed to be applied to activity that in many instances is protected by the First Amendment, with unequal sentencing: Antifa and BLM defendants allegedly receiving lighter outcomes or settlements, while January 6 defendants face disproportionate sentences. - The speaker concludes by expressing disagreement with the overall approach and intention to speak on these concerns.

The speaker outlines seven points regarding the treatment of January 6 defendants. First, the House Select Committee was lawlessly formed and acted in a one-sided way. Second, the committee worked with regime media to blast the narrative that an insurrection occurred. Nancy Pelosi's documentary allegedly admits no real insurrection occurred. Third, many defendants were swept up in a vast dragnet violating the fourth amendment via geofencing and cell phone data warrants. Fourth, the Justice Department didn't respect the protesters' first amendment rights, unlike how they treated Antifa. Fifth, January 6 defendants haven't been dealt with in the same fashion as Antifa and BLM protesters, violating equal protection. Sixth, there are widespread Brady violations, including concealed footage and unreleased deposition transcripts. Seventh, DC judges are under the spell of the January 6 committee and are misapplying a statute, leading to disproportionate sentences compared to Antifa and BLM, who largely got off scot-free.

A discussion takes place regarding the sentencing of a person involved in the Capitol breach. The speaker argues that if it were Antifa, the situation would have been worse, with bombs and casualties. They criticize the media for misrepresenting the events and claim that the only death was caused by a police officer. The speaker believes the sentences given to the January 6th participants were too harsh compared to lenient treatment of other criminals. They highlight past incidents of violence at the Capitol, suggesting that the January 6th events were not as severe. The speaker concludes that the situation has undermined the fairness of the criminal justice system.

The main issue at hand is the two-tier system of justice in the United States, particularly how individuals are treated based on their political orientation. For example, during the Antifa riots, two liberal attorneys firebombed a police car but were treated leniently by the justice system. Despite facing federal charges, the judge referred to them as "good guys," and the Department of Justice waived the charges, allowing them to receive probation instead of the mandatory minimum prison sentence. This disparity highlights the ongoing problem of unequal treatment in the justice system, which is likely to continue in future cases.

Presidential elections have been rigged for a long time. Trump may have stirred things up, leading to violence in the streets. In 2020, congress members caused $12 billion in damage while Antifa targeted police. Derek Chauvin and Trump are being prosecuted harshly. Jan 6 prisoners are still held. The government is attacking its own people, and many are passive.

We were federal prosecutors on the Justice Department's Capitol attack investigation until the Trump administration fired us on January 31st. Why were we fired? Because we did our job. We followed the facts and the law. What we did was justice for 140 police officers wounded on January 6th, 2021. We were hired to prosecute cases from the riot, and none of our defendants were acquitted, which shows the evidence was overwhelming. But last month, the president pardoned even the most violent convicts, calling them "hostages." Letters of termination hit the Justice Department, calling the prosecution itself a grave national injustice. Anyone who has watched videos of January 6th knows that prosecuting the rioters was not the injustice. The injustice has been the Department of Justice turning its back on law enforcement officers, members of Congress, and all the victims affected.

Jacob Chansley, a dangerous conspiracy theorist, received a nearly 4-year prison sentence for leading the violent insurrection to overthrow American democracy. There is dispute over how he entered the Capitol building, but internal surveillance videos reveal what happened once he was inside. The footage shows that Capitol Police never stopped Chansley and even acted as his tour guides. They took him to multiple entrances, tried to open locked doors for him, and were within touching distance of him. Chansley saw the police as his allies and thanked them in a prayer on the senate floor. This contrasts with the reality of his actions on January 6th.