Der Prozess

Kafka would have understood why Trump pardoned the J6er's.

The English translation of Franz Kafka’s The Trial, the story of Josef K., a man arrested and prosecuted by a remote, inaccessible authority, for a crime the nature of which is never revealed to him or to the reader, is actually titled Der Prozess - The Process - in the original German.

Left leaning active and retired judges are relying on process to support their contempt for Trump's J6 pardons.

They are saying, "They went through the justice process, so that means the outcome was fair and valid."

Not just no, but hell no. The idea that a legal proceeding is about justice is a complete fantasy. Who wins is determined by who tells the best story, one that a judge or jury will believe. What people need to know is that a trial hinges on what evidence and arguments are allowed by the presiding judge. Not everything gets in, so the “process” can be poisoned from the jump.

If you watched Trump’s Alvin Bragg or Letitia James trials, you saw how judges control what is admissible and what can be heard.

Have a gander at these comments from judges in these proceedings:

Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, a Clinton appointee, spitefully wrote in one dismissal order that:

"What occurred that day is preserved for the future through thousands of contemporaneous videos, transcripts of trials, jury verdicts, and judicial opinions analyzing and recounting the evidence through a neutral lens. Those records are immutable and represent the truth, no matter how the events of January 6 are described by those charged or their allies."

Judge Beryl Howell, an Obama appointee, called the pardoned people “poor losers”.

To me these comments indicate a premeditated political bias toward those defendants.

It is always the same, cowards hide behind process when they know they are wrong.

I follow an account called “Insurrection Barbie” on X – several of you readers do as well - she randomly selected a case that is very, very similar to several of which I am aware. I found a lot of Kafka in the trial records I scanned. Here is what she found:

I picked a J6 case at random to review because I wanted to see how bad it was.

And let me tell you the random one I picked did not disappoint. This defendant went into the capital and walked down the corridor. He was not accused of violence. He did not break anything. He did not hurt anybody. He was sentenced by a jury to 19 months in prison he was overcharged by the prosecutor to the point where it should be called malicious prosecution, and a judge rubber stamped every single thing the prosecutor asked for.

The most egregious part of these filings was that the government introduced a 22-minute video montage that spliced together key breaches that occurred that day.

They introduced that video to a jury even when the defendant in question is only shown on that video for less than 60 seconds.

The defendant in question was not violent. He was walking through a hallway in the capital building with the crowd, he looked like it was a walking tour in the picture still shot.

The remaining 21 minutes shows the most violent portions of the event spliced together.

Luckily, this defendant seems to have had competent attorneys who filed a motion to exclude this video. The defendant’s lawyers argued that this video montage is highly prejudicial because it shows a jury a 22-minute video where all they see are the most extreme parts of the whole day, but the defendant in question is only on that videotape for six seconds and is seen walking around peacefully.

Further, attorneys for the defendant argued that the majority of the jury in Washington DC is made [up] of federal employees. This video is meant to inflame a jury, it has no probative value and therefore is a violation of federal rule of evidence 401 (which by the way they teach like on the first day of criminal procedure in law school).

District Court Judge Bates declined the motion and allowed the prosecutor to include the video montage.

I would be willing to bet everything I own that submitting a 22-minute video montage that shows the most egregious acts of violence you can find from that day when the defendant in question is on that video for only six seconds and is seen walking calmly is highly prejudicial and a violation of the defendant’s due process rights.

This person was found guilty and sentenced to 19 months in prison.

Let me repeat that again, this person got 19 months in prison for walking through the capital for 8 minutes.

It took me two hours to read through all of the documents that were in this case file. Every motion submitted by the defendant was denied, and every motion submitted by the government was granted.

They turned a trespass misdemeanor that would have result in a $50 ticket into a 5 misdemeanors and a felony charge by charging the defendant with a statute that would have required the Secret Service to rope off the section he was in, which they did not, they also charged him with a statute that would have required them to prove Mike Pence was in the building at the time he walked through that corridor, he was not, and finally they used an Enron statue that the Supreme Court struck down.

This defendant had to spend two years and probably hundreds of thousands of dollars in attorney’s fees for spending 20 minutes in the building and walking through the corridors.

And this is just the first case I dug into.

Imagine if we had the time to dig into the details of each and every single one of these cases, read all the filings and compile a report on the amount of due process violations that were committed. You know it’s called journalism. Something that only Julie Kelly and a small few others seem to understand how to do as it relates to J6.

People need to see the inside of jail cells. This is so far beyond prosecutorial discretion. This is straight up political persecution. But the biggest problem here is the judges that rubber stamped all of it.