Image 01 Image 03

Special Counsel Is Needed To Investigate DOJ Conduct in Jan. 6 Cases

Special Counsel Is Needed To Investigate DOJ Conduct in Jan. 6 Cases

Judge Royce Lamberth: “I find that the civil rights of the defendant [Christopher Worrell} have been abridged. I don’t know if it’s because he is a Jan. 6 defendant or not, but I find that this matter should be referred to the attorney general of the United States … for a civil rights investigation.”

A federal judge has directed the Department of Justice to investigate whether the federal law enforcement is engaged in systemic discrimination – against Jan. 6 defendants, that is.

Last week, D.C. district court judge Royce Lamberth held the warden of the D.C. Jail and the director of the D.C. Department of Corrections in contempt for failing to promptly transmit an inmate’s medical records to the U.S. Marshal’s Service so he could receive necessary medical surgery.

The inmate – Christopher Worrell – is a Jan. 6 defendant, and the jail’s slow walking of his records has delayed his operation for nearly six months.

“It’s clear to me the civil rights of the defendant were violated by the D.C. Department of Corrections,” Lamberth said. “I don’t know if it’s because he’s a January 6 defendant or not.”

More importantly, the contempt order also directed the Clerk of the D.C. district court to transmit the order to U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland for the Justice Department to conduct an “appropriate inquiry into potential civil rights violations of January 6 defendants, as exemplified by this case.”

For the reasons stated in open court, it is ADJUDGED that the Warden of the D.C. Jail Wanda Patten and Director of the D.C. Department of Corrections Quincy Booth are in civil contempt of court.  The Clerk of the Court is ORDERED to transmit a copy of this order to the Attorney General of the United States for appropriate inquiry into potential civil rights violations of January 6 defendants, as exemplified in this case.

Lamberth’s referral should be read to encompass the whole of federal government’s treatment of Jan. 6 defendants from investigation through sentence.  It’s a bombshell.

And there’s every reason why those who value impartial justice should be gravely concerned about how partisan politics has influenced these cases at every step in the process.

The Riots

Figures from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives reveal that there were 876 reported arsons, 81 burglaries of federally-licensed gun dealers (with an estimated loss of 1,116 firearms) and 76 “explosive incidents” throughout the 2020 riots.

Further, according to the DOJ’s own data, one federal officer was killed, and 147 federal officers and 600 local officers were injured during that unrest.  Retired St. Louis police captain David Dorn also was shot and killed in June 2020 while attempting to protect a local pawnshop from suspected looters.

While the unions for the Capitol and Metropolitan Police Departments maintain that approximately 140 police officers were injured during the Jan. 6 chaos, none were killed. (The left’s libel that U.S. Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick was murdered by protesters that day was exposed as pure agitprop, as I wrote about here.)

Moreover, while the BLM-inspired riots caused property damage estimated at between $1 billion to $2 billion, the Jan. 6 riot carried a far lower price tag of $1.5 million.

While one might think these imbalances would have resulted in more federal resources being devoted to the investigation and prosecution of those who laid siege to cities across the country during 2020 than to those who were at the Capitol on Jan. 6, in fact the opposite is true.


Federal authorities were not evenhanded in how they investigated the different sets of offenders.

Law enforcement has admitted to using geolocation data from defendants’ cell phones at an unprecedented level to track and arrest participants in the Jan. 6 incursion.  They also have compelled banks to turn over data for clients who may have used their credit cards to make purchases in the D.C. area on Jan. 6 – possibly in violation of 12 U.S.C. § 3403, which prohibits financial institutions from turning over confidential client records.

Did the feds do the same when investigating crimes those who took over a Seattle police station and the surrounding blocks for nearly a month, creating an “Autonomous Zone” where two people were killed during four separate shootings?  How about when anarchists firebombed the federal courthouse in downtown Portland?

These questions are certainly worthy of answers.


So far, 684 people have been arrested in connection with the Jan. 6 riot.  According to the DOJ, only 55 people – a paltry 8 percent of those arrested – have been charged with using a weapon or causing injury to an officer.  Most people’s offenses sounded only in trespass, vandalism and disorderly conduct.

Yet, in many of these cases, the arrests were conducted in pre-dawn tactical raids by specialized teams in full body armor and equipped with heavy artillery, armored vehicles, battering rams and flash bangs.

Inquiry should be made into the reasonableness these tactics, since the degree of force was wildly disproportionate to the crimes that these individuals are alleged to have committed.

Frank Figliuzzi, the FBI’s former assistant director for counterintelligence, stated in an interview that such tactical arrests on Jan. 6 suspects were justified because of their “potential” membership in extremist groups.

But by that logic, those who participated in the BLM- and antifa-led pillaging in 2020 should have been arrested in SWAT raids, too.  But they weren’t.

Of course, Figliuzzi’s explanation is a fig leaf.  In a June interview on MSNBC, Figliuzzi – who was at the highest echelon in the FBI – stated that “people in and around the former president” are the “command and control element of a terrorist group” that needs to be “attacked and dismantled.”

Because of statements like this, it’s vital to examine the extent to which people were arrested with an unreasonable degree of force simply because of their political affinities and their support of President Trump.


There likewise has been no equipoise in how the Jan. 6 and BLM rioters have been prosecuted.

In a June 2021 letter,  Senators Ted Cruz, Ron Johnson, Mike Lee, and Tommy Tuberville questioned why, despite “numerous examples of violence” during the BLM protests, there were “infrequent prosecutions” of those offenders.   We’re still waiting to get an answer.

But we know that most of those who were arrested were charged with misdemeanors or less.

If they were charged at all, that is.  According to a detailed survey of multiple jurisdictions conducted by the Guardian, at least 90% of state cases arising out of the BLM riots were dropped or dismissed.

And federal cases followed the same trend.

Of 42 arrests made over two days in August 2020 in D.C., Justice declined to prosecute 41 of them, according to D.C. mayor Muriel Bowser.

Meantime, the Justice Department assigned more than 100 federal prosecutors to the Jan. 6 cases, and as I documented here, charged hundreds of them with felony “obstruction,” which carries a penalty of up to 20 years in prison.

Several of the Jan. 6 defendants also have been denied bail and placed in 23-hour-a-day isolation.

The same treatment was not given to the most serious BLM-riot offenders.  For instance, two New York attorneys – Colinford Mattis and Urooj Rahman – who threw Molotov cocktails at the NYPD during a BLM riot in Brooklyn during the summer of 2020 were both granted bail release.


Finally, the sentences that federal prosecutors have recommended for Jan. 6 offenders have been far steeper than those they sought for participants in the BLM riots.

Of the few BLM cases that were federally prosecuted, the defendants in several of them were granted “deferred resolution agreements,” which results in the dismissal of the charges against them, and leaves them with a clean criminal record.

The same can hardly be said for the Jan. 6 defendants, most of whom have been sentenced to imprisonment at the recommendation of federal prosecutors.

At a recent sentencing hearing for one of the Capitol rioters, Judge Trevor McFadden, a Trump appointee who sits on the D.C. bench, recognized this variance and slammed the Justice Department for treating Jan. 6 defendants more harshly than BLM rioters.

Until last week, Judge McFadden was the only judge with the moxie to highlight this disparity.

Most others, like Clinton-appointee district court Judge Emmet Sullivan, have been  content to look the other way and to accuse those who participated in the events of Jan. 6 of being “terrorists.”

But now that Judge Lamberth has spoken up, McFadden is no longer a lone voice in the wilderness.

Special Counsel

It’s heartening that some judges are finally spotlighting the asymmetry in how federal law enforcement has treated the two sets of offenders.

But that only goes so far if Garland, who is charged with supervising the prosecution of the Jan. 6 defendants, is determined to memory hole Judge Lamberth’s investigation referral, narrowly interpret it or order a whitewash.

And that’s undoubtedly what will happen if Garland is left to his own devices.  His DOJ routinely uses its vast federal law enforcement powers to wage partisan political battles on behalf of its Democratic puppet masters – for example, suing Georgia because of its election integrity law, challenging Texas’ Heartbeat Act, and threatening to sic the FBI on PTA moms who speak out against critical race theory and progressive indoctrination at local school board meetings – and there’s no reason to think it will act differently here.

Given the DOJ’s conflict of interest in policing itself and its possible violation of criminal civil rights statutes in its unequal treatment of Jan. 6 defendants, a special counsel must be appointed to perform this critical investigation.

Until that happens, we might as well get the Department of Justice a new name.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Any of the following:
– is there a conspiracy to deprive rights under the color of law – I ask the same of the Loudon School District, NSBA, White House, and DOJ
– disparity in sentencing?
– disparity in bond?
– withholding evidence that exonerates?
– other?

Is there any better way to suppress or kill a story than to appoint an IG, investigator, special counsel or special prosecutor?

How about deposing some of the folks who receive advances for the books they never write? It could be interesting to find out if they ever even read those money laundering/publishing scams.

So the judge is ordering the Fox who guards the henhouse to investigate the Foxes who are guarding the henhouse?

Based on Marrick Garland’s testimony at Congress the other day, it appears likely that FBI agents may have instigated or encouraged the rioting that occurred on January 6, 2021. If agents did participate there, why is Garland and the DOJ’s conduct withholding the agents’ identity and the nature of their involvement not a Brady violation? Just wondering…

    You have to look at it from Garland’s perspective. The way he sees it is parents taking their issues before their local school board is a far greater issue than the FBI being out of control.

So who’s going to investigate? Special Counsel from the DOJ to investigate the DOJ? The DOJ can’t be relied upon to be impartial and unbiased about the time of day anymore and I wouldn’t trust the FBI to impartially investigate a one-car traffic accident.

The only thing the FBI can be relied upon to do anymore is find evidence of government or Leftist wrong-doing, seize it and hide it from public exposure. All in the interests of “protecting the integrity of the investigation,” of course. All the while trapping witnesses in “process crimes” if they say something the Feebies don’t like.

There absolutely needs to be an independent investigation, but who do you get that can be reliably independent and yet tenacious enough to actually follow the evidence wherever it leads?

In theory, undercover FBI agents at the 1/6 riot are being shielded while the criminal cases are being developed. Revealing their identities now will endanger cases which have not been charged yet, and the Justice department will reveal their identities when the cases come to trial.

In reality, the FBI agents and confidential sources are being kept secret while the defendants are being strong-armed into guilty pleas by indefinite confinement and crippling financial burdens. Most will not be identified or placed on the stand except in extremely narrow circumstances, because far too many of them were involved in committing the acts that the FBI want to blame on the selected scapegoats.

We want to see the criminals who broke windows and attacked police officers punished. One has to wonder just how many of those collected a federal paycheck to incite that behavior in others or went ahead and did it themselves. I’m afraid we will never know the truth in this regard.

    Another Whitmer-closet, less a cover-up of planned parent/hood.

    CommoChief in reply to georgfelis. | October 23, 2021 at 11:34 pm

    Well sure, no disclosure of exculpatory evidence ‘while building the case’ is fine but not post arrest and certainly not including pre trial detention for non violent offenders which is the overwhelming majority. Eventually this episode is going to result in problems for the DoJ.

Subotai Bahadur | October 23, 2021 at 10:10 pm

Both sides of the UniParty hate those arrested on January 6 AND the citizens from which they sprang. There is no one who is interested in the rule of law or the Constitution. There will be no Special Counsel investigating how the government handled those arrested, There may be a Special Counsel appointed to try to find more people to arrest for Gedankenverbrechen.

Subotai Bahadur

First, they came for the babies…. fetuses in a bid for social progress, medical progress, and climate mitigation. Then they came for granny in planned parent/hood. Then they came for citizens seeking to assemble and petition for redress of diverse (number, not color) grievances. Finally, they came for mom and dad.

Why in the hell would ANYBODY trust ANY special counsel appointed by Turnip Brain and the Deep State?

Anybody appointed by them will be charged with covering it up, not investigating it.

Eye opening Situation. Thanks for covering it.

Let’s get Durham on the case… yeah, that’s a great idea!

Why isn’t the judge ordering US Marshals to go and secure the documents?
Why isn’t the judge not ordering the arrests of those who are ignoring court orders?
Garland will ignore. He will not do anything.
Remember when Judge Hanen ordered the DOJ to undergo ethics training because Holders DOJ lawyers were constantly lying to him in court?
The order went nowhere. Nothing was done

It’s shocking devolution of the U.S. government when the DOJ has been weaponized to terrorize free speech that doesn’t agree with far-Left ideology. Garland and Figliuzzi violated Title 18 U.S. Code § 242 – Deprivation of rights under color of law by threatening the free speech of the January 6 defendants through their violent arrests of defendants who were simply exercising the right to free speech. Both the FBI and the DOJ abused the prosecution authority by spying on the Trump administration, pursuing prosecutions of their political opponents, and threatening parents who speak out at school boards with being domestic terrorists.

    Ben Kent in reply to ruralguy. | October 24, 2021 at 12:58 pm



    >> We are slipping closer to Tyranny under Biden

    END THE MADNESS . .. .VOTE IN 2022

Unfortunately the need for special/independent counsel in order to hold the executive branch agencies accountable when a partisan DoJ won’t is looking more appealing.

The independent counsel process was a d/prog idea and they weaponized it. Then when it was employed v Clinton the DC establishment junked it because it was supposed to be a one way street. Now we have reverted to a politicized DoJ with no true independent and non partisan oversight.

Maybe a bicameral joint committee of HoR and Senate oversight committee voting to appoint an independent counsel as a check on truly partisan use while allowing the possibility of independent investigation? Lord knows the IG have been gutted and are hindered. Maybe allow the IG to report findings to the committee of jurisdiction and empower that committee to refer the case to a committee of the whole to appoint an independent prosecutor as a parallel track to nudge the DoJ out of a partisan or protect the establishment mindset?

Whatever is done or not done it won’t be perfect and it will eventually be abused by all sides.

I sent the following email to my senators and congressman (all Democrats):

Defend the civil rights of January 6 political prisoners!

I write to protest the shameful abuse of the political prisoners from the January 6th Capitol protests. Their treatment is a stain on you, your party and our country!

Judge Royce Lamberth has held the Warden of the D.C. jail and and the Director of the D.C. Department of Corrections in contempt, for purposely delaying the paperwork which defendant Christopher Worrell needs for an operation he was recommended to have in June!

There have been many reports of other prisoners being abused, and they are being denied their right to a speedy trial. Most of their charges are for minor offences. In contrast, few of the violent BLM/Antifa rioters of 2020 have been held to account, and your party has treated them leniently and paid for their bail!

I will continue to pray for you, and that you will have the wisdom and courage to do the right things.

FortesFortunaJuvat | October 24, 2021 at 7:19 pm

As if any “special counsel” appointed under the biden crime family can be trusted.

We need the militia to ride to the rescue. Cull the herd.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair | October 25, 2021 at 12:09 am

We already saw what investigations of clear criminal actions of the worst sort end up with in the years-long kabuki theater of the Durham investigation – after having put up with years of complete and utter BS from the criminal Mueller (and his co-conspirators in Congress).

Investigations are totally worthless in holding the left responsible for their heinous criminal acts – and they have carried out some of the worst crimes against America and Americans that are possible. We are far beyond that.

And it is beyond unfair and WRONG to even try to compare what happened on Jan 6th with what occurred through the summer of 2020 (and then some). Those two things are not even in the same universe. The problem is that no one on the right seemed to have the courage (and honesty_ to call the leftist traitors what they were in 2020 and to hold them responsible. Mayors and police chiefs and governors were aiders and abetters to insurrectionist mobs – true insurrectionist mobs who had no problem expressing their clear hate of America and everything this country stands for – and they should have been dragged out of their offices in chains.

Bucky Barkingham | October 25, 2021 at 7:24 am

There’s no way that the dirty, rotten, corrupt DOJ will do this. Let’s take a page out of the Left’s playbook and have a public “people’s tribunal” complete with witnesses. Surely there must be some conservative attorney’s willing to assist such an effort.

Yeah, it’s street theater but if it draws public attention to the issue then that’s the idea.