Cellular carriers have told Congress they possess intact phone usage data from the vicinity where two pipe bombs were planted during the Jan. 6 incident, directly disputing FBI testimony that agents couldn’t identify a suspect because the phone data was corrupted, a key House chairman tells Just the News.
Read MoreTag: January 6
Lawyer Working for Trump Says DOJ Attorneys Who Don’t Get on Board with Trump Agenda May Get Fired
A conservative attorney on President-elect Donald Trump’s transition team said that attorneys at the Department of Justice could face getting fired if they don’t cooperate with his agenda.
“Once the decision is made to move forward, career employees are required to implement the President’s plan,” Mark Paoletta wrote on the social media platform, X.
Read MoreCommentary: The Real Threat to American Democracy
Heading into Election Day, we hear constantly that the presidential candidates are mortal threats to American democracy. Anxieties about Donald Trump’s role in the Jan. 6, 2021, rampage at the U.S. Capitol and his declaration that he would act as “dictator for a day” are countered by Elon Musk’s warning that if Harris wins, “this will be the last election,” or alarms that Harris’ designs on overhauling the Supreme Court will lead to an end to the rule the law.
The very idea that our republic’s future hangs on the outcome of a single presidential contest, however, reveals the deeper, unacknowledged, underlying danger: a Congress incapable of performing its constitutional duties as our country’s lawmaking body and the guarantor of our representative democracy.
Read MoreJudge Chutkan in Special Prosecutor Jack Smith’s Trump Probe Unseals More Docs Ahead of Election
U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who is presiding over former President Donald Trump’s federal Jan. 6 election interference case, on Friday unsealed nearly 1,900 pages of documents from special counsel Jack Smith’s investigation for the public to view.
Read MoreJack Smith Argues Trump Isn’t Immune to Charges in D.C. Election Case
Special counsel Jack Smith on Wednesday submitted a new filing in his DC election case against former President Donald Trump, arguing that he is not immune from prosecution in light of the Supreme Court’s recent ruling on presidential immunity. Smith originally charged Trump with four counts related to his efforts to challenge the 2020 presidential election. Trump had argued he was immune form prosecution due to presidential immunity. The Supreme Court, earlier this year, found that the president enjoys immunity for constitutional acts and presumptive immunity for official acts. Smith subsequently filed a revised indictment and has asked the court to determine that Trump’s alleged conduct does not fall within the scope of presidential immunity.
Read MoreKey House Chairman to Ask Congress to Repudiate Democrats’ January 6 Findings in Face of New Evidence
No, Donald Trump didn’t grab the wheel of his presidential limousine and try to commandeer it. Yes, Nancy Pelosi felt responsible for security lapses at the Capitol, including the failure to pre-position National Guard there.
There’s no doubt that Trump did in fact order the Pentagon to send troops to secure the U.S. Capitol ahead of the Jan. 6, 2021, certification of electoral votes, but political and military brass declined to do so. And yes, there were both intelligence and security blunders by police that led to the breach of one of America’s most storied buildings.
Read MoreDOJ IG Horowitz Won’t Say How Many Confidential Human Sources Were Among Crowd on January 6, 2021
U.S. Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz on Wednesday would not say how many U.S. government confidential human sources were among the protestors during the Capitol riot on Jan. 6, 2021, when pressed on the matter by a lawmaker on Wednesday. Horowitz was asked if he has evidence of the number of confidential human sources that were operating on the Capitol grounds on January 6th.
Read MoreBombshell Transcripts: Trump Urged Use of Troops to Protect Capitol on January 6 , but Was Rebuffed
Then-President Donald Trump gave clear instructions to Pentagon brass days before the Jan. 6 riots to “do whatever it takes” to keep the U.S. Capitol safe, including deploying National Guard or active-duty troops, but top officials did not comply because of political concerns, according to transcripts of bombshell interviews conducted by the Defense Department’s chief watchdog that shine new light on government disfunction ahead of the historic tragedy.
Gen. Mark Milley, the former chairman of the Joints Chief of Staff, confirmed to the Pentagon inspector general three years ago that during a Jan. 3, 2021, Oval Office meeting Trump pre-approved the use of National Guard or active duty troops to keep peace in the nation’s capital on the day Congress was to certify the results of the 2020 election.
Read MoreTrump Attorneys Ask Judge to Stop Jack Smith from Making Case in ‘Court of Public Opinion’ Before Election
Special counsel Jack Smith should not be allowed to make an important public filing in his election interference case against former president Donald Trump while there are lingering evidence disputes, Trump’s attorneys told the judge Thursday.
His attorneys urged Judge Tanya Chutkan, who set a schedule allowing prosecutors to file the first brief on presidential immunity Sept. 26, to reconsider her decision. Without addressing ongoing evidence issues, Smith’s filing would “amount to an improper motion for summary judgment in the court of public opinion” ahead of the election, they argued.
Read MoreCommentary: DOJ Gets Political Before 2024 Election
Attorney General Merrick Garland broke precedent just weeks before the November election, delivering politically charged remarks at the U.S. Attorneys’ National Conference in Washington – pointedly speaking publicly rather than privately in a departure from his usual practice. “Our norms are a promise that we will not allow this department to be used as a political weapon,” he said before a packed house, gathered in the Great Hall of DOJ headquarters on Sept. 12. “Federal prosecutors and agents may never make a decision regarding an investigation or prosecution for the purpose of affecting any election or the purpose of giving an advantage or disadvantage to any candidate or political party.”
Read More