Report typos and corrections to: corrections@rawstory.com.
#story_page_post-content_regular-site
GOP's Adam Kinzinger blasts his party for attacking Liz Cheney more than N-word-spewing Capitol rioters
July 28, 2021
On CNN Wednesday, Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL), one of the only Republicans to serve on the House Select Committee on the January 6th Capitol riot, took a shot at members of his party who are more concerned with attacking Republican lawmakers on the committee than the actual people who stormed the Capitol.
"One of the police officers — and they were all heroic — Harry Dunn, offered an analogy during his testimony, sworn testimony before your committee, that a hitman, he says, goes to jail for killing someone, but so does the person who hired the hitman," said anchor Wolf Blitzer. "Is that now your mission, finding out who hired the so-called hitman?"
"Yes," said Kinzinger. "Because the mission is to find out what led to what happened on January 6th. Because the one thing we know is it wasn't a spontaneous, you know — we talk about the security posture and that's important to get to the bottom of, too, but an inadequate security posture is not like a vortex sucking protesters too far into the Capitol. That is an issue we need to get to the bottom of, but that's not what caused January 6. Yeah, there is a lot of questions. But I think we're going to get to the bottom of this."
"By the way, Officer Dunn's testimony about having racial slurs yelled at him, saying that was the first time in a uniform, broke my heart," added Kinzinger. "But I tell you, we should be spending, as a party, way more time denouncing those people that may claim to be Republicans than we should denouncing, I don't know, Liz Cheney, me and others that want to get to the truth."
Watch below:
Adam Kinzinger says his party is angrier at Liz Cheney than the Capitol rioters www.youtube.com
CONTINUE READING
Show less
MAGA riot committee will create damning 'jigsaw puzzle' of Trump's actions during insurrection: former federal prosecutor
July 28, 2021
Former federal prosecutor Nick Ackerman explained on Wednesday that any official who worked with militias in the lead-up to January 6th should be worried.
Speaking to MSNBC's Ari Melber, Ackerman explained that he is "totally convinced" that if House members coordinated with the Three Percenters or Proud Boys online or on their phones that it will be found out and they will be prosecuted.
Indeed, those alleged terrorists who have not been convinced and haven't made a deal with prosecutors would have an opportunity to give up the Republican officials to save themselves. The only person that Republicans could "give up" for a deal would likely be Donald Trump.
Both Melber and Ackerman supported the Justice Department's decision not to defend Rep. Mo Brooks (R-AL) for his involvement in the January 6th rally that led to the attack on the U.S. Capitol. Tuesday, the House of Representatives counsel also said that they wouldn't defend Brooks with taxpayer dollars.
"He used the word 'patriots' and he used the words 'kicking ass,'" recalled Ackerman. "Particularly when you put that in the context of what Donald Trump said and what Rudy Giuliani said about 'trial by combat.' I mean, this whole -- you put all of these people together in terms of what they were saying to this crowd, they were basically inciting them to go up to the Capitol and riot the place. It is exactly what they did. What they say is what you expected to be the end results."
Ackerman went on to say that it's just "common sense" that there was no way that the DOJ would defend anyone who attempted to overthrow the United States government.
"If someone came at you and tried to murder you and shot you in the arms, you are not going to fund his legal battle or not going to give him a lawyer so he can defend himself against you," he explained. "They stop the constitutional process of counting the votes for president because they didn't like who was elected. Under these circumstances, it would have been absolutely crazy and extreme for the Justice Department to represent Congressman Brooks."
Ackerman went on to explain that at the very least some of the officials and rally speakers will face depositions, including Trump -- and he predicted that the commission would use testimony and subpoenaed phone records to piece together a damning "jigsaw puzzle" of the former president's actions.
"And they don't really have much of a defense here," he said. "I think the more they can dig into the evidence showing that Trump and Rudy Giuliani and Brooks, knew these people had come up, and knew these people were looking for a fight — the more they can show what they were doing were inciting this riot. I am totally convinced once they start to dig into phone records, they find out who these people are meeting with. If Congressman Brooks was meeting with the Three Percenters or the Proud Boys — your duty as a congressman is not trying to overthrow the congress and stop their regular business. That's not going to fly well with the jury and the District of Columbia."
Melber called Brooks's demand that the DOJ represent him one of the "dumber things" he's heard.
"The Brooks defense is like someone accusing him of embezzling from his own bank and saying it is part of my duty," he said.
See the full conversation below:
Mo Brooks is screwed www.youtube.com
CONTINUE READING
Show less
Trump 'may want to worry' about some of the DOJ's most recent moves: Washington Post editorial board
July 28, 2021
The Washington Post editorial board lauded the Justice Department decision made earlier this week to vacate defending Rep. Mo Brooks (R-AL) for his role in the January 6th rally that led to the attack on the U.S. Capitol.
Brooks had demanded Attorney General Merrick Garland serve as his lawyer and the taxpayers foot the bill. But this week, Garland said that Brooks's actions at the rally didn't fall within the duties of a member of Congress, as the rally was obvious political rally that was exclusively funded by political organizations and boasted a political message.
But the main point from the Post is that this DOJ decision makes way for Garland to refuse to defend former President Donald Trump as well.
"Mr. Garland has spent his tenure so far picking through a political and institutional thicket: tasked, on the one hand. with holding the previous administration accountable for any legal wrongs and on the other with ensuring that prosecutorial decisions aren't based on partisan considerations. Too much concern about this second point, his critics on the left have warned, could result in his department overcorrecting by not pursuing prosecutable cases, or by defending indefensible ones, in an effort to avoid any appearance of bias," the editorial says.
Indeed, one of the decisions thus far that has been denounced and questioned by lawyers is that the DOJ would continue to support Trump in his lawsuit with E. Jean Carroll, who accused the former president of sexually assaulting her.
"The attorney general has signaled he doesn't plan to fall into that trap," said the Post. "Mr. Trump, who insists he has 'complete immunity' for his role in the winter's riot, may want to worry about his own footing."
CONTINUE READING
Show less
Copyright © 2021 Raw Story Media, Inc. PO Box 21050, Washington, D.C. 20009 | Masthead | Privacy Policy | For corrections or concerns, please email corrections@rawstory.com.
Don't Sit on the Sidelines of History. Join Raw Story Investigates and Go Ad-Free. Support Honest Journalism.
Subscribe Annually
$95 / year — Just $7.91/month
Subscribe Monthly
$1 trial
I want to Support More
$14.99 per month
{{ post.roar_specific_data.api_data.analytics }}