RAWSTORY+ EXCLUSIVES

'Striking legal question': State court debates whether cops who rioted on Jan. 6 can hide

ALSO READ: Trump has finally made the move that will tip us all over the cliff

'Striking legal question': State court debates whether cops who rioted on Jan. 6 can hide
Capitol rioters on Jan. 6, 2021. (Shutterstock)

Justices on the Washington Supreme Court must decide whether police officers who attended former President Donald Trump's Jan. 6 "Stop the Steal" rally have a right to anonymity, according to a new report.

Six Seattle Police department officers — two of them fired months after the historic Capitol riots in 2021— who attended the riots are at the heart of a new case covered Wednesday by Law & Crime's Brandi Buchman.

"A striking legal question came before justices," she writes. "Must their names — and those results — be revealed to the public?"

Per the report, married former officers Caitlin Everett and Alexander Everett were in the area where rioters were scaling the walls and local police scrambled to fend them off.

"The SPD police chief in 2021, Adrian Diaz, ordered all officers to come forward if they were at the Capitol or attended any related events so they could present themselves for formal scrutiny by the Office of Police Accountability, or OPA," writes Buchman.

"Diaz resoundingly declared it 'absurd' of the couple to suggest that the evidence [Office of Police Accountability] amassed did not show them trespassing directly in a zone where 'they should not be amidst what was already a violent, criminal riot.'"

"It does not appear that any criminal federal charges have been filed against the couple at this time," noted the report. "As for the four other officers, who are all currently on active duty, OPA investigators determined in a final report that three did not violate department policy while a fourth officer’s conduct was deemed inconclusive."

A former law student named Sam Sueoka made public records requests to reveal the officers' identities and more information about them, which prompted the officers to tell courts that they should have a constitutional right to keep that information private.

Lower courts ruled against them, but an appeals court found OPA should consider whether these requests violate the officers' rights — namely, because they were not charged with a crime, but the disclosure of their identities could cause people to associate them with the January 6 rioters, causing harm to their reputations.

A number of people who were arrested for involvement in the Jan. 6 attack are current or former law enforcement, including a former FBI special agent who called for Capitol Police to be killed.

For customer support contact support@rawstory.com. Report typos and corrections to corrections@rawstory.com.

'What?' Megyn Kelly stuns with 'do not care' answer to Trump admin bribe scandal

When ex-Fox News host Megyn Kelly was confronted with a report about a bribery scandal in Donald Trump's administration, she stunned observers when she proudly declared, "We do not care."

Raw Story reported on Saturday about a MSNBC exclusive in which the outlet claimed that border czar Tom Homan had previously been investigated for accepting $50,000 from undercover FBI agents. That caused U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) to issue a stinging four-word response to Homan.

It also caused a senator to declare that Attorney General Pam Bondi "knew" about the reported bribery operation.

But for Kelly, she had a different type of response.

"We DO NOT CARE. Don’t bother [Homan] he’s a national treasure," she wrote on X.

Journalist Sam Stein replied, "For me, this just raises the question: is there ANYTHING Homan (and, I guess, Trump) could do that Megyn or others WOULD care about?"

"The question of whether there are any lines left is a valid one," Stein added.

Conservative strategist Tim Miller asked Kelly, "You don’t care that government officials are taking cash bribes? What?"

Kelly responded in part, "No, we don’t care what you say about Tom Homan. We do not trust you. We only care about defeating you."

Ex-GOP pollster Sarah Longwell also responded to Kelly's response to the scandal.

"Yes, we’re aware you don’t care about the rampant corruption in this administration," Longwell wrote on Saturday. "That’s been clear."

THANKS FOR SUBSCRIBING! ALL ADS REMOVED!

'Home is now on fire': Jack Smith issues Trump warning in 'rare public appearance'

Former Special Counsel Jack Smith issued a stark warning about Donald Trump in a "rare public appearance," according to a legal expert.

Legal analyst Allison Gill, better known as Mueller, She Wrote, noted on Saturday that Smith "delivered remarks at George Mason University this week, warning of the weaponization of the Justice Department under the Trump administration."

After reminding readers that Smith "was appointed by Merrick Garland in November of 2022 to continue the ongoing investigations into the January 6th attack on the Capitol and the unlawful retention of national defense information and subsequent obstruction of justice by Donald Trump," Gill pointed out how she got the details about the lowkey meeting.

"Former Deputy Director of the FBI Andrew McCabe, was in the audience and described to me what he heard," she wrote. "Smith spoke about the rule of law being under attack in a way that he hasn’t seen in his lifetime, and that he’s saddened by the firing of selfless public servants, the government using its vast powers to target citizens for exercising their constitutional rights, and the loss of credibility with the courts and the people."

She also added, "If you listen to the UnJustified podcast, you’ll recall that Andy and I have been talking about the destruction of the presumption of regularity and the loss of the court’s faith in the Justice Department at great length. Jack Smith shared those sentiments in his speech."

“The DOJ was my home for many, many years. That home is now on fire,” Smith said, according to Gill.

The report also states, "He spoke at length about what a society absent the rule of law looks like. It’s a society where critics and perceived enemies are targeted in an effort to silence them. One where prosecutors are left to figure out the basis for a case after the fact. And one where friends and allies of the administration face no legal consequences."

“In a society where the rule of law is eroding, you can have a situation where if you’re a Latino citizen… you can be stopped, detained, your liberty taken because of the color of your skin. Or maybe because you were speaking Spanish… whereas we all know that if you were white, that would never happen," Smith reportedly said.

Read the full report.

Trump's 'impeachable offense' sparks fury: 'Most corrupt thing I've seen from a president'

Donald Trump made waves on Saturday with this bombshell letter criticizing Pam Bondi.

The president over the weekend unleashed a blistering criticism on his hand-picked attorney general. The president took to his own social media site, Truth Social, over the weekend, where he posted an open letter addressed to "Pam."

"Pam: I have reviewed over 30 statements and posts saying that, essentially, 'same old story as last time, all talk, no action. Nothing is being done. What about Comey, Adam 'Shifty' Schiff, Leticia??? They’re all guilty as hell, but nothing is going to be done.' Then we almost put in a Democrat supported U.S. Attorney, in Virginia, with a really bad Republican past. A Woke RINO, who was never going to do his job. That’s why two of the worst Dem Senators PUSHED him so hard. He even lied to the media and said he quit, and that we had no case. No, I fired him, and there is a GREAT CASE, and many layers, and legal pundits, say so," Trump wrote. "[White House lawyer] Lindsey Halligan is a really good lawyer, and likes you, a lot."

The outrage flowed from all corners of social media.

Ex-prosecutor Ron Filipkowski said, "This is the most corrupt and disgusting thing I think I’ve ever seen from a president. A blatantly impeachable offense. Republicans in Congress will say and do nothing."

Gregg Nunziata wrote, "It's becoming increasingly untenable for principled, honorable, ethical conservative lawyers to continue serving in the Justice Department. That's a shocking truth and a dangerous state of affairs."

Yashar Ali of HuffPost wrote, "President Trump posts a public message to Attorney General Pam Bondi, who has been facing significant criticism from his base and from some inside the administration."

"The president pushes her to prosecute his enemies and also suggests that she allowed a liberal Trojan horse into the DOJ. The 'Lindsey' he’s referring to is Lindsey Halligan, I believe, his former personal attorney," Ali wrote. "Note how he says he’s reviewed 30 posts, it sounds like someone put together a compilation of criticism of Bondi and his administration on these matters to sway him."

Constitutional law professor Anthony Michael Kreis chimed in with, "The president ordering a prosecution notwithstanding the evidence, as assessed by United States attorney, is an affront to the rule of law."

MeidasTouch added, "Trump posts a deranged message to Pam Bondi pressuring her to prosecute his political enemies after a U.S. attorney quit because he refused to fabricate charges" before quoting the president saying, “We can’t delay any longer, it’s killing our reputation and credibility.”

Richard Hanania wrote, "It just keeps getting more insane. Trump apparently tried to send a DM to Pam Bondi essentially telling her that his enemies need to be prosecuted. Instead he posted it on Truth Social, and it’s now been deleted."

Ex-prosecutor Elizabeth de la Vega said, "Absolutely everyone needs to read this. Please, people, spread it far and wide!"

Copyright © 2025 Raw Story Media, Inc. PO Box 21050, Washington, D.C. 20009 | Masthead | Privacy Policy | Manage Preferences | Debug Logs
For corrections contact corrections@rawstory.com , for support contact support@rawstory.com .

{{ post.roar_specific_data.api_data.analytics }}