Chronicles of a Stillborn Zombie Coup

[Brian Peacock]

Well you can't say it often enough.

[Animavore]

These latest sentences warm my heart somewhat but I won't be truly happy until the man at the top of it all is found guilty.

[Brian Peacock]

... or found dead.

[L'Emmerdeur]

His mom is perturbed.

'Enrique Tarrio’s mom speaks out about Proud Boys ex-leader’s 22-year prison sentence'

The mother of former Proud Boys leader Enrique “Henry” Tarrio on Thursday maintained her son’s innocence just days after he was sentenced to more than two decades in prison for his role in the Jan. 6, 2021 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, insisting that he didn’t play a serious part in the attack.

“Twenty-two years of sentencing seems, like, extremely excessive,” Zuny Duarte Tarrio said at a press conference held in the Miami Lakes law office of her son’s attorney.

Speaking alongside defense lawyer Nayib Hassan, Duarte Tarrio called her son a “pawn” for the government, and the case against him a “witch hunt.” She said Tarrio’s family had already spent hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees to defend her son against charges that he helped spearhead an effort to violently overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.

...

A federal judge sentenced Tarrio on Tuesday to 22 years in prison following his conviction in May on charges of seditious conspiracy related to the central role he played in the attack on the U.S. Capitol by a mob hoping to keep former President Donald Trump in power.

The sentence is the longest prison term handed down to any Jan. 6 defendant.

Hassan said Thursday that Tarrio’s team expected to appeal the sentence on Monday or Tuesday. He said that there were multiple avenues for the appeal, including issues with the trial’s D.C. venue, but didn’t specifically say which grounds he would pursue.

Tarrio wasn’t actually in Washington, D.C. on the day of the attack on the Capitol — a point his mother raised at the press conference on Thursday. He had been ordered by a judge to stay away after he was detained for burning a Black Lives Matter flag that belonged to a Black church in the District and found at the time of his arrest to be in possession of high-capacity gun magazines.

Prosecutors argued, however, that Tarrio commanded Proud Boy members from afar as a mob of pro-Trump rioters moved on the Capitol in an attack that according to a U.S. Senate report led or contributed to the deaths of seven people. According to his indictment, Tarrio and his colleagues set up a “Ministry of Self Defense” and exchanged hundreds of encrypted text messages about their “1776 Returns” plan to “storm the Capitol” and ring in the new year with a “revolution.” As Tarrio was watching from a television in a Baltimore hotel room, prosecutors said he messaged other members that he was “enjoying the show.”

“Make no mistake ... we did this,” he wrote.

[L'Emmerdeur]

Representative Jim Jordan attempted to stick his nose into the Fulton County, Georgia case (Trump and 18 others) and essentially threatened to block federal funding to the jurisdiction. District Attorney Fani Willis firmly bopped him back.

'Willis blasts congressman’s "interference" in Fulton Trump probe'

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis Thursday blasted a congressman who has pledged to investigate her handling of an indictment of former President Donald Trump and others.

U.S. Rep. Jim Jordan, an Ohio Republican and chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, recently demanded records of Willis’ communication with Justice Department officials who have also indicted Trump for his role in an alleged scheme to overturn the 2020 presidential election.

Jordan suggested Willis is attempting to interfere with the 2024 election – Trump is the front-runner for the Republican nomination. And he said her investigation could infringe on the free speech and other rights of Trump and other defendants.

On Thursday, Willis fired back, saying Jordan’s Aug. 24 letter included “inaccurate information and misleading statements.” She accused Jodan of improperly interfering with a state criminal case and attempting to punish her for personal political gain.

“Its obvious purpose is to obstruct a Georgia criminal proceeding and to advance outrageous misrepresentations,” Willis wrote of Jordan letter. “As I make clear below, there is no justification in the Constitution for Congress to interfere with a state criminal matter, as you attempt to do.”

...

In her response, Willis said Jordan’s concerns about the timing of the investigation are unfounded. She noted that many witnesses were uncooperative, requiring subpoenas to compel their testimony. She said that forced her to seek judicial approval to convene a special grand jury to compel testimony and the production of documentary evidence. Even then, she said, some witnesses resisted, requiring further delays.

Willis also responded to allegations she is unfairly targeting Trump. She said his “status as a political candidate cannot make him legally immune from criminal prosecution.” She noted the special grand jury recommended charges in the case, and a separate jury issued indictments.

“Face this reality, Chairman Jordan: the select group of defendants who you fret over in my jurisdiction are like every other defendant, entitled to no worse or better treatment than any other American citizen,” she wrote.

Willis blasted Jordan’s request for information as illegal and improper.

“Your letter makes clear that you lack a basic understanding of the law, its practice and the ethical obligations of attorneys generally and prosecutors specifically,” she wrote.

Willis also addressed Jordan’s inquiry about her office’s use of federal funds. She detailed her office’s use of federal grants to process “long-neglected sexual assault kits and prosecute dangerous sexual offenders who are identified via DNA results.” She also cited grants for prosecuting hate crimes, preventing community violence and aiding at-risk children.

“If you and your colleagues follow through on your threats to deny this office federal funds, please be aware that you will be deciding to allow serial rapists to go unprosecuted, hate crimes to be unaddressed, and to cancel programs for at-risk children,” Willis wrote. “Such vengeful, uncalled for legislative action would impose serious harm on the citizens we serve, including the fact that it will make them less safe.”

'Text of D.A. Willis's letter to Rep. Jordan'

[L'Emmerdeur]

Michael Steele, former chair of the Republican National Committee, more or less predicts the outcome of the Georgia case. Along the way he cuts Trump and his pack of stooges no slack.

'"He's s full of it": Former RNC head goes off on '"idiot" Jeffrey Clark for floundering Trump defense'

Appearing on MSNBC's Velshi with Ali Velshi, the former Maryland lieutenant governor blasted conservative attorney Jeffrey Clark's suggestion that in allegedly assisting Trump with efforts to overturn the 2020 election he was "actually doing government work."

...

During Velshi and Steele's conversation, Velshi said, "Jeffrey Clark is intriguing to me. He was an employee of the Department of Justice. Up to no good, but he has, he is making the case that 'I was actually doing government work.'"

Steele replied, "He's full of it. Because, you're right, he wasn't doing government work. There was no government work involved here. This was in the back end of a hotly contested presidential campaign! Donald Trump wasn't running you know, an operation inside the government to secure the rights for fill-in-the-blank, or to negotiate a deal with our allies abroad. There was no, no nexus to the State Department, or other government agencies who would be involved in this. This was a straight-up political contest in which the president wanted to use the authority, and power, and instruments of the government to get his way. And Clark and others who were inside, all those others, even Mark Meadows, these government officials, the moment they picked up the phone, and called Brad Raffensperger, in my humble opinion, they were in violation of the Hatch Act."

He continued, "They did it on government property, with government property, having a political conversation. Trying to change the outcome of a political campaign. So, let's stop being stupid and getting caught in this space with these idiots, and believing, and pushing out their narratives. Because they are flat-out wrong. And we need to be honest about that, and stand up, and push back against the noise they're making. They want to confuse the jury pool, Ali. This is all about the jury pools that will be put together over the next few months. This is not about anything other than that, so they can get that one juror, when Trump's name comes up, goes 'Oh no, Trump is not guilty,' and the whole thing falls apart."

[Cunt]

Listened to an interview with former Capitol Police Lieutenant Tarik Johnson.

If you don't know who he is, or what he was doing that day, you might want to check him out. I think he has been interviewed by lots of people (but not the J6 commission...hmmm....)

[L'Emmerdeur]

Lin Wood may be a swivel-eyed loon who pushed completely bogus lawsuits for Trump but apparently he has some sense of self-preservation.

'Pro-Trump lawyer Lin Wood is a witness in Georgia election subversion case, district attorney says'

Pro-Donald Trump lawyer Lin Wood is a “witness for the state” in the Georgia election subversion case, Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis revealed Wednesday.

The reference to Wood was buried in a new court filing by the DA’s office that raised potential conflicts of interest for six defense attorneys because they previously represented witnesses or other defendants in related proceedings.

Wood was previously subpoenaed by prosecutors in the Georgia probe but his status as a witness for the state was not previously known.

“Lin Wood is a witness for the State in the present case,” the court filing says.

As a witness, Wood could be subject to cross-examination by his former attorney and co-counsel who is now representing former Justice Department official Jeffrey Clark in the Georgia RICO probe – creating a potential conflict of interest.

Wood, a prominent right-wing attorney and election denier, filed a series of meritless lawsuits after then-President Donald Trump lost the 2020 election, which were filled with debunked theories about massive voter fraud that went nowhere in the courts.

He was never formally part of the Trump campaign’s legal team, though he promoted the same baseless claims that Trump embraced and could shed light on efforts to upend the election results in Georgia.

[Cunt]

Any of you hear out Tarik Johnson? Or is he an 'unapproved' source on J6?

[Brian Peacock]

Any of you hear out Tarik Johnson? Or is he an 'unapproved' source on J6?

I'm interested to hear about Tarik Johnson - so don't hold back. Who is Johnson and why are they important or relevant to what happened at the Capitol Building?

[L'Emmerdeur]

Any of you hear out Tarik Johnson? Or is he an 'unapproved' source on J6?

Since I listen fairly regularly to National Public Radio, I was aware of his story. Not world-shaking, and essentially irrelevant to the basic issues pertaining to the events of Jan. 6. He says he put on a MAGA hat because he feared for his life and the lives of his fellow officers, and hoped that wearing the hat would help him de-escalate the situation. He was unable to say that publicly because he was under investigation by the Capitol police for possibly aiding the mob.

The videos of him wearing the hat and chatting amiably with members of the mob certainly gave the impression that he was sympathetic to them and in fact he wanted to give that impression, if for an honorable reason (according to him). When he was able to speak publicly he told his side of the story, and it's plausible to me. However, given the video evidence it was reasonable to suspect something less admirable. I suppose some who have an obsession with denigrating mainstream media would be enthusiastic about it because they showed what appeared to be damning video of his behavior that day. Big revelation: they're not omniscient.

It's a minor story at best. Johnson's narrative doesn't exonerate any of the participants in the attack on the Capitol, nor those who urged them on and supported them.

[Cunt]

So you haven't heard him out. Thanks.

He was a police officer who was working and witnessing what happened that day. He's only relevant or important if you wanted to know about the day, and his perspective on it. I'm glad I listened to him (on a podcast - I still rarely view videos)

As to it's being a minor story, I would suggest trusting a proven outlet like NPR, rather than a dissident view of things.

The major part (to me) was that he initiated the evacuation of congress on his own initiative, yet wasn't there to testify at the j6 clown-show.

By the way, did they ever figure out who placed the pipe-bomb? Or is that still not important to the events of the day?

[Brian Peacock]

Have you been JAQing off much lately?

[L'Emmerdeur]

So you haven't heard him out. Thanks.

He was a police officer who was working and witnessing what happened that day. He's only relevant or important if you wanted to know about the day, and his perspective on it. I'm glad I listened to him (on a podcast - I still rarely view videos)

As to it's being a minor story, I would suggest trusting a proven outlet like NPR, rather than a dissident view of things.

The major part (to me) was that he initiated the evacuation of congress on his own initiative, yet wasn't there to testify at the j6 clown-show.

By the way, did they ever figure out who placed the pipe-bomb? Or is that still not important to the events of the day?

National Public Radio was the first to interview Johnson once he was able to speak publicly. Go ahead and fap away to whatever conspiracy theory outlet you prefer, but the fact is that Johnson's story does not exonerate members of the mob, nor does it indicate in the slightest that Democratic legislators were somehow complicit in the attack. The January 6 Committee had completed its investigations and hearings before the Capitol police allowed Johnson to speak publicly about his part in the events of the day. If you have a beef about that it's properly with the police rather than the committee.

[Cunt]

Your fantasizing about my fapping habits is flattering, but I'll leave it mysterious. Out of courtesy to your enjoyment.