Trump may have urged Jan. 6 rioters to break law: Judge
Misty Severi
Video Embed
Former President Donald Trump may have urged his supporters to break the law during the Jan. 6 insurrection on Capitol Hill, a federal judge said Wednesday. But that does not absolve those who listened of legal responsibility, the judge ruled.
U.S. District Judge John Bates rejected a claim that on Jan. 6, 2021, followers of Trump were not aware that they were breaking the law because they believed Trump’s speech, about marching to the Capitol to stop the certification of the 2020 presidential election, gave them permission to storm the Capitol complex.
FOUR TAKEAWAYS FROM THE NEW JAN. 6 TRANSCRIPT DUMP
Bates ruled that defendant Alexander Sheppard is prohibited from making the “public authority” defense because Trump did not tell his followers that entering the restricted grounds of the Capitol was legal. In fact, Bates said, it could imply the opposite.
“[Trump’s words] could signal to protesters that entering the Capitol and stopping the certification would be unlawful,” Bates determined.
Bates cited the recent criminal referrals from the House Jan. 6 committee that recommended the Justice Department charge Trump for aiding or inciting an insurrection. The referrals also recommended charges of “conspiracy to make a false statement,” “conspiracy to defraud the United States,” and “obstruction of an official proceeding.”
Bates acknowledged that the findings indicate Trump could have intended to give the rioters permission when he told an armed mob to descend on the Capitol, according to Politico. But Trump did not mention anything about the legality of the actions.
“The conclusions reached here, that even if protesters believed they were following orders, they were not misled about the legality of their actions, is consistent with the Committee’s findings,” Bates wrote.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
The argument that Trump somehow led his followers to believe their actions in storming the Capitol building were legal is commonly used among Jan. 6 defendants. However, the arguments have largely failed in court proceedings.