Posted on 04/08/2022 4:04:08 AM PDT by MtnClimber
Capitol Police did, in fact, let the protesters in the building.
How does a mob “illegally storm” the Capitol building when police let them in? That is the latest narrative-shifting question the media wants desperately to avoid after a federal judge on Wednesday found a January 6 defendant not guilty for his conduct during the protest at the Capitol that day.
Matthew Martin was arrested in Santa Fe, New Mexico on April 22, 2021; he later was charged with the four most common misdemeanors related to the Justice Department’s prosecution of Capitol protesters: entering a restricted building, disorderly conduct, violent entry, and parading in the Capitol building.
Those petty offenses comprise the overwhelming majority of criminal charges against the nearly 800 or so January 6 defendants. More than 150 people have pleaded guilty to the “parading” charge—many have been sentenced to a few months in prison.
But those defendants might regret accepting the plea deal offered by the government after D.C. District Court Judge Trevor McFadden not only acquitted Martin on all counts but agreed with Martin’s assertion that he was “waved” in by Capitol Police officers. Martin, who opted for a bench trial before the Trump-appointed judge and testified in his own defense, entered the building around 3 p.m. through a set of doors on the east side. He walked through the Rotunda and stayed inside for about 10 minutes.
For that activity—a right protected under the Constitution up until January 6, 2021—Martin’s life, like that of every other American ensnared in this abusive prosecution, has been destroyed. Following his acquittal, Martin spoke to reporters outside the federal courthouse in Washington, D.C.
As Martin tries to rebuild the life his own government attempted to annihilate over a 10-minute jaunt through a
(Excerpt) Read more at amgreatness.com ...
It seems like those pushing the police and staging a brawl scene were probably ANTIFA plants wearing Trump garb doing a show to smear Trump supporters. I am not seeing where they were arrested. It seems most arrested were the real Trump supporters peacefully let into the Capitol on the other side of the Capitol Building.
Ina the initial videos I viewed, I saw guys dressed like Navy Seals. Who were these people and why were they there?
At the very least, we need to know who gave this policeman the order to wave This man in. Also, what was this reason for the order?
And of course, we still do not know who Ray Epps is.
Does this mean that the other defendants are gonna be able to cite the findings of this court? If so, I don’t see how there would be any more convictions other than those who actually did engage in violence. If not, why not?
What’s happening to these American political scapegoats is a disgrace. Those unfairly punished deserve recompense, and their accusers held accountable.
.
But everyone knows this. Everyone.
In a video shown many times on Greg Kelly (Newsmax), the Capitol police are actually holding the doors open for the protesters, encouraging them to go inside the Capitol building. A set up indeed!
https://www.revolver.news/2021/12/damning-new-details-massive-web-unindicted-operators-january-6/
It was a sting operation run by Pelosi and some gummit agencies to stop the challenge.
The defendant was very fortunate to have his case assigned to one of the only judges in DC who is not a far left-wing democrat hack. Most of the defendants are not so fortunate.
A decision by the only district judge in DC who is not a far left-wing democrat hack is not binding on the rest of the district judges who are. It would take a conviction being overturned by the DC Court of Appeals to have any precedential effect on DC district courts.
Can people who were waved in by Capitol police sue to change their sentence?
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.