{"id":39949,"date":"2023-03-23T18:14:47","date_gmt":"2023-03-23T22:14:47","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/angry.net\/blog2\/?p=39949"},"modified":"2023-03-23T18:14:47","modified_gmt":"2023-03-23T22:14:47","slug":"house-republicans-moving-to-provide-j6-videos-to-defendants","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/angry.net\/blog2\/?p=39949","title":{"rendered":"House Republicans moving to provide J6 videos to defendants"},"content":{"rendered":"

Good day all. The release of the January 6th<\/sup> security videos has been rippling through the country. Kevin McCarthy provided Fox New\u2019s Tucker Carlson access to over 40,000 hours of video footage. Without question, Carlson\u2019s people have not had time to go through every second of it. However, what they have found has blown up the Democrats narrative that what happened January 6th<\/sup> 2020 was an insurrection.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

One group that has been very interested in what has been seen so far are the defense attorneys for the political prisoners being held, without trial in many cases, for over 2 years. Now the House Republicans are moving to provide that footage to the defense lawyers. Here are the details from Politico<\/b><\/a>:<\/p>\n

House Republicans are moving to provide defendants in Jan. 6-related cases access to thousands of hours of internal Capitol security footage, a move that could influence many of the ongoing prosecutions stemming from 2021\u2019s violent attack. <\/b><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

That is one excuse used by a judge who denied a defendant a delay so that her lawyer could review the footage. He was worried it would upset hundreds of trials now underway, coming up or even concluded. I suspect that ruling will be one of the avenues for appeal for this defendant. Denial of access to potentially exculpatory evidence.<\/p>\n

Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.), who chairs the House Administration Committee\u2019s oversight subpanel, said that the access for accused rioters and others \u2014 which Speaker Kevin McCarthy has greenlighted \u2014 would be granted on a \u201ccase-by-case basis.\u201d <\/b><\/p>\n

\u201cEveryone accused of a crime in this country deserves due process, which includes access to evidence which may be used to prove their guilt or innocence,\u201d Loudermilk told POLITICO in a statement. \u201cIt is our intention to make available any relevant documents or videos, on a case-by-case basis, as requested by attorneys representing defendants.\u201d <\/b><\/p>\n

The release of the video\u2019s to the defense attorneys is something that most Americans expect. In fact, I believe it is required by law, in that the Department of (In)Justice has to hand over all evidence to the defense in a criminal case. The excuse used by the DoJ is that they didn\u2019t have the footage in the first place. I don\u2019t believe that for a moment.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

I suspect that the DoJ used some sort of legal game that allowed FBI agents to review the security footage, but they never actually took possession of it. There is absolutely no doubt at all that if the Democrats had held on to the House and Pelosi was still Speaker, this footage would never have seen the light of day.<\/p>\n

McCarthy told reporters Tuesday that he ultimately envisions releasing nearly all of the Jan. 6 surveillance footage publicly, with exceptions for sensitive security information. <\/b><\/p>\n

\u201cI think putting it out all to the American public, you can see the truth, see exactly what transpired that day and everybody can have the exact same\u201d access, McCarthy said. \u201cMy intention is to release it to everyone.\u201d <\/b><\/p>\n

Which is exactly the right thing to do. It boils down to \u201cLet the people see it and make their own decisions.\u201d This is why the Democrats are utterly opposed to letting anyone see the videos. If the videos show that the Democrats and RINO\u2019s have been lying, then they might decide it\u2019s time to punish them by voting them out of office.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Similar measures would be taken with any footage opened up to Jan. 6 defendants and their lawyers, two of the people familiar said, though details of those steps remain unclear for now. Among the big logistical questions Republicans are still discussing: whether any footage they open up to defendants can be used in court proceedings, which would effectively make it public. <\/b><\/p>\n

Yes, it will make it public. It might also cause a few juries to acquit the defendants where, without the videos, they would have convicted them. You can always change security measures if you need to, which, apparently you do since they failed miserably in January 6th<\/sup> 2021. You can never truly make right someone wrongly convicted.<\/p>\n

McCarthy\u2019s decision to let Carlson view the footage from the violent riot by former President Donald Trump\u2019s supporters has already been raised in two ongoing Jan. 6 criminal cases. In one instance, a lawyer for one of the Proud Boys charged with seditious conspiracy has asked prosecutors<\/a> to determine whether they will access and share the footage; then on Tuesday morning, Joseph McBride, an attorney for Jan. 6 defendant Ryan Nichols, claimed he had already been given permission<\/a> to review the footage. <\/b><\/p>\n

That seditious conspiracy case has been raising all sorts of flags for people. It was only filed, as I recall, after a big stink was raised by the Progressive elites. I have not been following it much, however, I was under the impression that some of those charged never even went to Washington. However, that\u2019s something for another post.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s unclear if the Justice Department has requested similar access. A DOJ spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment. <\/b><\/p>\n

This is a sign of bad editing or writing. It doesn\u2019t make clear if the access request was before the release of the footage or after.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Some Republicans across the ideological spectrum praised McCarthy for his move to release the footage.<\/p>\n

\u201cBest if all Americans have access,\u201d said Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.), who hails from a competitive battleground district. \u201cI don\u2019t hear much about this at home.\u201d <\/b><\/p>\n

Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.), a member of the pro-Trump House Freedom Caucus, praised McCarthy for the move and shrugged off those voicing security concerns: \u201cThis place is so convoluted. That\u2019s why they don\u2019t have a map on it \u2026 I just got lost trying to get to the tunnel.\u201d <\/b><\/p>\n

The simple fact of the matter is that the not only those being charged and put on trial, but everyone should have full access to the videos of what happened that day. What we have seen to date indicates that what the January 6th<\/sup> Committee, The Democrats and other in the Uniparty may not have been entirely honest in their depictions of that day.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

There is the other little detail that so many forget, don\u2019t know or just don\u2019t care. In the United States you are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Prosecutors, in to many cases these days, don\u2019t care about anything but winning their cases by any means necessary. If they had any access to these videos, they may be guilty of knowingly violating the rights of the accused.<\/p>\n

I have hammered on Kevin McCarthy, and will continue to do so whenever I see him backsliding into his natural RINO Uniparty state. However, when he does the right thing, we must applaud him. Providing the J6 videos to defense teams is one of the times we should applaud him. (And sneer at the Democrats, RINO\u2019s and TransRepublicans who want to prevent people from discovering what actually happened that day)<\/p>\n

Thatisall<\/p>\n\"1\"2\"3\"4\"5 (2<\/strong> votes, average: 5.00<\/strong> out of 5)
<\/span><\/span>Loading...<\/span>\n

~The Angry Webmaster~<\/b><\/i><\/p>\n