Posted on 07/08/2026 11:00:57 AM PDT by Jayster
The Case for America takes on one of the most contested legal battles in modern American history - the true story of January 6th. Host Treniss Evans is joined by attorney Roger Roots and retired Army Lieutenant Colonel Ivan Raiklin to dismantle what they call a five-year government narrative built on the word "insurrection." Roots argues the DOJ systematically overcharged and over-sentenced J6 defendants with felony charges unprecedented in American history, while filing a sweeping 90-plus-page civil complaint on behalf of hundreds of Jers.
Raiklin says the statute of limitations on that testimony expires in just three weeks, and he's not stopping at Fanone - additional referrals are reportedly coming for other officers he claims lied under oath. This is a hard-hitting legal breakdown of accountability, justice, and what really happened on January 6th.
The views expressed in this video may or may not reflect the views held by RAV management or ownership.
RAV delivers news programs and live-event coverage that captures the authentic voice and passion of real people all across America.
The YouTube video titled “CRIMINAL Referral FILED Against Jan 6 Cop Michael Fanone” is from the channel Real America’s Voice.
It features host Treniss Evans in conversation with attorney Roger Roots and retired Army Lieutenant Colonel Ivan Raiklin. The discussion critically examines the official narrative surrounding the January 6, 2021, Capitol events, framing it as a contested legal and historical matter.
Key Points Covered:
* Critique of the “Insurrection” Narrative: The guests argue that the government and media promoted a one-sided story of a violent attack on Congress, downplaying it as a First Amendment-protected protest related to the 2020 election. They highlight what they describe as unprecedented overcharging and lengthy sentencing of January 6 defendants by the DOJ.
* Civil Complaint: Roger Roots discusses a 90+ page civil complaint filed on behalf of hundreds of January 6 participants (represented by the Tixton firm, with over 300 clients). It addresses alleged over-prosecution, and more filings are expected.
* Criminal Referral Against Michael Fanone: Ivan Raiklin announces he has drafted a criminal referral against former officer Michael Fanone. It alleges materially false congressional testimony that contradicts recently released body camera footage (obtained via a Judicial Watch lawsuit). The referral includes multiple counts, with the statute of limitations reportedly expiring soon. Raiklin mentions potential additional referrals for other officers.
* Broader Themes: The conversation emphasizes the need for truth, accountability, and justice regarding January 6, contrasting the official portrayal with evidence from bodycam footage and legal proceedings. It questions the use of military terminology like “attack” or “siege” and stresses that the focus is on factual accuracy rather than partisan narratives.
The video presents a perspective aligned with skepticism toward the mainstream January 6 account, positioning the discussion as part of ongoing efforts to challenge it through legal channels. It includes standard disclaimers about the views expressed. The content runs as a structured interview with analysis and calls for further accountability.
Host Treniss Evans is joined by attorney Roger Roots and retired Army Lieutenant Colonel Ivan Raiklin to dismantle what they call a five-year government narrative built on the word "insurrection."
But it is very poorly written expecting someone to completely understand what is going on or read between the lines.
.
neverevergiveup wrote: “Ashli Babbitt was a 35 year old mother who had served her country in the Air Force as a patriot. She was unarmed, did not pose any credible threat, and was shot point-blank by Capitol police officer Michael Byrd “
Exactly what does that have to do with Michael Fanone?
Ashli Babbit was shot while attempting to climb through a shattered glass panel of a barricaded door leading into the Speaker’s Lobby inside the U.S. Capitol. She was part of a mob attempting to breach the entrance where lawmakers were being evacuated, and she ignored verbal commands and warnings from a U.S. Capitol Police officer prior to the shooting.
It is absolutely relevant to Michael Fanone. These were two people on different sides of the political divide (I’m not going to say left vs right, because that’s entirely simplistic and inaccurate). One of these people, who had joined the US military as a patriot, was involved in a march that became more than that - in the context of now established involvement of undercover operatives (you can try to dispute that but you will be defenseless; Patel has clarified the involvement of at least 100 undercover operatives of one sort or another; As FBI director he would know).
Ashli Babit was a 5’2” 110 pound unarmed wife and mother who posed zero threat to the armed officer who shot her, point blank. Zero threat. Any feeble attempt to characterize that in a different light will be entertaining. Would you have shot her? Would you have been that much of a wuss? Further, this all happened AFTER the Capitol police allowed (actually somewhat guided) protesters into the Capitol). Plus, it was entry into a lobby (your words). That deserves being killed for?
The protesters were being fired upon with tear gas and crowd control projectiles (among other things) and Fanone was 100% conscious when he came out from the crowd with no visible injuries according to witnesses (i.e. he wasn’t beaten unconscious as he claimed). He did, however, make a lot of money from the incident.
For comparison, a federal judge in Oregon issued a preliminary injunction restricting federal officers from using tear gas and kinetic projectiles at Portland ICE protests unless there is an imminent threat of physical harm. So, if you are from the Trump crowd you are fair game; if you are an anti-Trump pro-illegal immigration protester you are protected.
I could (and will if necessary) go on and on. That said, what exactly are you trying to say on this site that has many patriots who have risked their lives for this nation on it? Who are you defending? Do you think January 6th was truly an insurrection? Really? If so, what was propping up a sadly infirm President (Biden) and using his infirmity to push a leftist agenda?
I don’t know you, or your history here, but I think I speak for many here when I say that there has been a significant shift in posts on FR that seem anti-conservative and anti-Trump. If you don’t like conservatism or are a conservative and don’t like Trump - just explain why. No need to fire bullets from behind a wall.
While one cannot sue the judges, lawyers, LEOs, etc involved in the J6 persecutions on criminal charges, they can be sued in civil courts. Basically use SLAPP on them ... make the process the punishment.
neverevergiveup wrote: “Ashli Babit was a 5’2” 110 pound unarmed wife and mother who posed zero threat to the armed officer who shot her, point blank. Zero threat. Any feeble attempt to characterize that in a different light will be entertaining.”
No, Babbit was not some innocent wife and mother who just happened to get shot while visiting DC and innocently touring the Capital. And she wasn’t unarmed. A knife was found on her at the hospital.
She was repeatedly warned not proceed, but she attempted to climb through a shattered window beside a barricaded door into the House Speaker’s Lobby. She was shot while breaking and entering and trespassing. What was this innocent wife and mother planning on doing once she breached the Speaker’s Lobby? Why was she even in the Capital building?
It is irrelevant if Babbit posed a threat to the shooter who was there, not to defend himself, but to defend the Capital. Her actions constituted a threat to everyone behind that barricade.
What should the officer have done? Do you think he should have helped her climb through the window? Or perhaps moved the barricade and escorted her on a tour of the Speaker’s Office?
The USCP deemed that the shooting was “lawful and within Department policy” and “potentially saved Members [of Congress] and staff from serious injury and possible death”.
What would you do if some one, who was part of a mob, was entering your house through a broken window?
BTW, I’ve been around here since 1999. When did you join?
neverevergiveup wrote: “Ashli Babit was a 5’2” 110 pound unarmed wife and mother who posed zero threat to the armed officer who shot her, point blank. Zero threat. Any feeble attempt to characterize that in a different light will be entertaining.”
No, Babbit was not some innocent wife and mother who just happened to get shot while visiting DC and innocently touring the Capital. And she wasn’t unarmed. A knife was found on her at the hospital.
She was repeatedly warned not proceed, but she attempted to climb through a shattered window beside a barricaded door into the House Speaker’s Lobby. She was shot while breaking and entering and trespassing. What was this innocent wife and mother planning on doing once she breached the Speaker’s Lobby? Why was she even in the Capital building?
It is irrelevant if Babbit posed a threat to the shooter who was there, not to defend himself, but to defend the Capital. Her actions constituted a threat to everyone behind that barricade.
What should the officer have done? Do you think he should have helped her climb through the window? Or perhaps moved the barricade and escorted her on a tour of the Speaker’s Office?
The USCP deemed that the shooting was “lawful and within Department policy” and “potentially saved Members [of Congress] and staff from serious injury and possible death”.
What would you do if some one, who was part of a mob, was entering your house through a broken window?
BTW, I’ve been around here since 1999. When did you join?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.