#trumppardonsrioters — Public Fediverse posts

“Not a peaceful protest”: Part 2 of 2 : Trump’s Terms – NPR

Jon Cherry / Getty Images / Photo illustration by Connie Hanzhang Jin / NPR

Trump’s Terms

“Not a peaceful protest”: Part 2 of 2

December 30, 2025, 11:00 AM ET 42-Minute Listen Transcript

Jon Cherry / Getty Images / Photo illustration by Connie Hanzhang Jin / NPR

In this NPR investigation, we look at how President Trump and his allies are rewriting history related to the Jan. 6, 2021 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol.

You can find the first part of “Not a Peaceful Protest” here. Support NPR and hear every episode of Trump’s Terms sponsor-free with NPR+. Sign up at plus.npr.org.

Editor’s Note: You can find my post of Part 1 here.

Continue/Read Original Article Here: “Not a peaceful protest”: Part 2 of 2 : Trump’s Terms : NPR

#Database #January6 #January62021 #January62026 #January6AttackOnUSCapitol #NationalPublicRadio #NotAPeacefulProtest #NPR #Part2Of2Parts #RiotJanuary6th #RiotersAssaultedCapitol #Trump #TrumpPardonsRioters

“Not a peaceful protest”: Part 2 of 2 : Trump’s Terms – NPR

Jon Cherry / Getty Images / Photo illustration by Connie Hanzhang Jin / NPR

Trump’s Terms

“Not a peaceful protest”: Part 2 of 2

December 30, 2025, 11:00 AM ET 42-Minute Listen Transcript

Jon Cherry / Getty Images / Photo illustration by Connie Hanzhang Jin / NPR

In this NPR investigation, we look at how President Trump and his allies are rewriting history related to the Jan. 6, 2021 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol.

You can find the first part of “Not a Peaceful Protest” here. Support NPR and hear every episode of Trump’s Terms sponsor-free with NPR+. Sign up at plus.npr.org.

Editor’s Note: You can find my post of Part 1 here.

Continue/Read Original Article Here: “Not a peaceful protest”: Part 2 of 2 : Trump’s Terms : NPR

#Database #January6 #January62021 #January62026 #January6AttackOnUSCapitol #NationalPublicRadio #NotAPeacefulProtest #NPR #Part2Of2Parts #RiotJanuary6th #RiotersAssaultedCapitol #Trump #TrumpPardonsRioters

“Not a peaceful protest”: Part 1 of 2 : Trump’s Terms – NPR

Trump’s Terms

“Not a peaceful protest”: Part 1 of 2

December 29, 2025,11:00 AM ET 43-Minute Listen Transcript

Dept. of Justice and Getty Images/Collage by Connie Hanzhang Jin / NPR

In this NPR investigation, we look at how President Trump and his allies are rewriting history related to the Jan. 6, 2021 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol.

You can find the second part of “Not a Peaceful Protest” here. Support NPR and hear every episode of Trump’s Terms sponsor-free with NPR+. Sign up at plus.npr.org.

Continue/Read Original Article Here: “Not a peaceful protest”: Part 1 of 2 : Trump’s Terms : NPR

#2025 #Database #January6 #January62021 #NationalPublicRadio #NotAPeacefulProtest #NPR #Part1Of2Parts #RiotJanuary6th #RiotersAssaultedCapitol #TrumpPardonsRioters

“Not a peaceful protest”: Part 1 of 2 : Trump’s Terms – NPR

Trump’s Terms

“Not a peaceful protest”: Part 1 of 2

December 29, 2025,11:00 AM ET 43-Minute Listen Transcript

Dept. of Justice and Getty Images/Collage by Connie Hanzhang Jin / NPR

In this NPR investigation, we look at how President Trump and his allies are rewriting history related to the Jan. 6, 2021 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol.

You can find the second part of “Not a Peaceful Protest” here. Support NPR and hear every episode of Trump’s Terms sponsor-free with NPR+. Sign up at plus.npr.org.

Continue/Read Original Article Here: “Not a peaceful protest”: Part 1 of 2 : Trump’s Terms : NPR

#2025 #Database #January6 #January62021 #NationalPublicRadio #NotAPeacefulProtest #NPR #Part1Of2Parts #RiotJanuary6th #RiotersAssaultedCapitol #TrumpPardonsRioters

Civil Discourse – The Dangerous Revision Of Jan 6 History On The Official WH Website – Joyce Vance

Civil Discourse with Joyce Vance

The Dangerous Revision Of Jan 6 History On The Official WH Website

By Joyce Vance, Jan 06, 2026

As I wrote to you last night, five years on from January 6, Donald Trump is trying to rewrite the history of the insurrection. The White House published a new website today, detailing their version of the timeline of the Jan. 6, 2021, breach of the U.S. Capitol by Trump supporters. He accuses Democrats, pictured in black and white across the top of the page along with Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, of promoting a “gaslighting narrative” of the day’s events.

The new page starts with the claim that, “President Trump took decisive action to pardon January 6 defendants who were unfairly targeted, overcharged, and used as political examples. They were not protected by the leaders who failed them. They were punished to cover incompetence.” It goes on to assert that his pardons ended “years of harsh solitary confinement, denied due process, and family separation for exercising their First Amendment rights.” The website fails to acknowledge that these criminal defendants were charged by grand juries, convicted at trial, or in many cases, convicted after they pled guilty, and had full appeal rights.

Trump concludes: “The Democrats masterfully reversed reality after January 6, branding peaceful patriotic protesters as ‘insurrectionists’ and framing the event as a violent coup attempt orchestrated by Trump—despite no evidence of armed rebellion or intent to overthrow the government. In truth, it was the Democrats who staged the real insurrection,” which the website says was the certification of the 2020 election that the White House describes as “fraud-ridden” and for allegedly “weaponizing federal agencies to hunt down dissenters.” The courts resoundingly rejected Trump’s claims of a stolen election, with even the Supreme Court ruling against him.

Some of Trump’s peacefully protesting tourists…

The website turns to the blame game—trying to foist off responsibility for January 6 on Nancy Pelosi and Democrats—and offers a timeline that emphasizes Trump’s call for peaceful protest.

A video taken by Pelosi’s daughter is included for the stunning proposition that she accepted blame for the attack on the Capitol. It’s selectively edited video and a debunked claim, indeed, an insincere one for the man who ignored pleas for help from members of his own party and watched the chaos unfold on television when he could have put a stop to it. As Pelosi’s office put it at the time, “Numerous independent fact-checkers have confirmed again and again that Speaker Pelosi did not plan her own assassination on January 6th.” But there it is, on the White House’s official website.

In a speech this morning at the House GOP retreat, held at the newly renamed “Trump Kennedy Center,” Trump, referring to the speech he gave on the Ellipse five years ago, alleged that “the news never reported the words ‘walk or march peacefully and patriotically to the Capitol.’” As far as I recall, those words were widely reported, along with everything else the president said and tweeted at the time, in full context. Trump’s claim that he called for an entirely peaceful protest that day is offset by Jack Smith’s recent testimony that the evidence he compiled established Trump’s complicity. “The evidence here made clear that President Trump was by a large measure the most culpable and most responsible person in this conspiracy. These crimes were committed for his benefit. The attack that happened at the Capitol, part of this case, does not happen without him. The other co-conspirators were doing this for his benefit.”

Read the full transcript of Trump’s speech to the crowd on January 6, 2021, here [https://www.rev.com/transcripts/donald-trump-speech-save-america-rally-transcript-january-6] and make your own assessment. The full context is important, especially with the president installing a sanitized version on the White House website, a slanted version that includes the word he was doubtless encouraged to insert about peacefulness, for the obvious reason that the speech was one that otherwise exhorted the crowd to take action. “We will never give up. We will never concede, it doesn’t happen. You don’t concede when there’s theft involved,” the president told the crowd in the first seconds of his address.

Trump also said:

• “Our country has had enough. We will not take it anymore and that’s what this is all about. To use a favorite term that all of you people really came up with, we will stop the steal. Today I will lay out just some of the evidence proving that we won this election, and we won it by a landslide. This was not a close election.”
• “By the way, does anybody believe that Joe had 80 million votes? Does anybody believe that? … There’s never been anything like this. We will not let them silence your voices. We’re not going to let it happen. Not going to let it happen.”
• [The crowd then breaks in, chanting, “Fight for Trump! Fight for Trump! Fight for Trump!” Trump does not discourage this.]
• “We’re going walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators, and congressmen and women … You have to show strength, and you have to be strong … We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated, lawfully slated. I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard. Today we will see whether Republicans stand strong for integrity of our elections.”
• “Looking out at all the amazing patriots here today, I have never been more confident in our nation’s future. Well, I have to say we have to be a little bit careful. That’s a nice statement, but we have to be a little careful with that statement. If we allow this group of people to illegally take over our country, because it’s illegal when the votes are illegal, when the way they got there is illegal, when the States that vote are given false and fraudulent information.”
• “So we’re going to, we’re going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue, I love Pennsylvania Avenue, and we’re going to the Capitol and we’re going to try and give … The Democrats are hopeless. They’re never voting for anything, not even one vote. But we’re going to try and give our Republicans, the weak ones, because the strong ones don’t need any of our help, we’re going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country.”

This morning, Nancy Pelosi tweeted, “We must speak plainly: January 6th was an attempted coup. It was an effort to nullify millions of lawful votes and subvert the will of the American people. But the attack failed because of the courage of public servants who gave proof through the night that our flag was still there by refusing to bend to pressure, threats, or intimidation. On that day, the Constitution held and we kept the Republic.”

Trump is trying to take it away again, this time with a rewrite of history that is worthy of George Orwell’s 1984. Our job as citizens is clear. We have to remain committed and refuse to let that happen. Facts are powerful. If the truth wasn’t so damaging, Trump wouldn’t be going to this much trouble to rewrite it. That he has public resources and a president’s bully pulpit to do it with is shameful and dangerous.

Last night I wrote to you about the Virginia museum curator, Bill Martin, who insisted on exhibits that put on display a shameful history of teaching fourth graders in the state that slavery was a good time with happy slaves, a gross misrepresentation of reality. Mr. Martin stood for the truth and dislodged and exposed that narrative so it could not be reinstated. We have to do that with Trump’s newest effort to rewrite the history of January 6. Trump may temporarily control government websites and museums, but we control the public narrative on the ground—we are everywhere across the country.

Read more: Civil Discourse – The Dangerous Revision Of Jan 6 History On The Official WH Website – Joyce Vance

Continue/Read Original Article Here: The Dangerous Revision Of Jan 6 History On The Official WH Website

Tags: 1984, 5 Years Later, Attempted Coup, Civil Discourse, Do Not Forget, January 6 2021, January 6 2026, Joyce Vance, Nancy Pelosi, Remember January 6th, Riot January 6th, Rioters Assaulted Capitol, Trump, Trump Pardons Rioters
#1984 #5YearsLater #AttemptedCoup #CivilDiscourse #DoNotForget #January62021 #January62026 #JoyceVance #NancyPelosi #RememberJanuary6th #RiotJanuary6th #RiotersAssaultedCapitol #Trump #TrumpPardonsRioters

Civil Discourse – The Dangerous Revision Of Jan 6 History On The Official WH Website – Joyce Vance

Civil Discourse with Joyce Vance

The Dangerous Revision Of Jan 6 History On The Official WH Website

By Joyce Vance, Jan 06, 2026

As I wrote to you last night, five years on from January 6, Donald Trump is trying to rewrite the history of the insurrection. The White House published a new website today, detailing their version of the timeline of the Jan. 6, 2021, breach of the U.S. Capitol by Trump supporters. He accuses Democrats, pictured in black and white across the top of the page along with Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, of promoting a “gaslighting narrative” of the day’s events.

The new page starts with the claim that, “President Trump took decisive action to pardon January 6 defendants who were unfairly targeted, overcharged, and used as political examples. They were not protected by the leaders who failed them. They were punished to cover incompetence.” It goes on to assert that his pardons ended “years of harsh solitary confinement, denied due process, and family separation for exercising their First Amendment rights.” The website fails to acknowledge that these criminal defendants were charged by grand juries, convicted at trial, or in many cases, convicted after they pled guilty, and had full appeal rights.

Trump concludes: “The Democrats masterfully reversed reality after January 6, branding peaceful patriotic protesters as ‘insurrectionists’ and framing the event as a violent coup attempt orchestrated by Trump—despite no evidence of armed rebellion or intent to overthrow the government. In truth, it was the Democrats who staged the real insurrection,” which the website says was the certification of the 2020 election that the White House describes as “fraud-ridden” and for allegedly “weaponizing federal agencies to hunt down dissenters.” The courts resoundingly rejected Trump’s claims of a stolen election, with even the Supreme Court ruling against him.

Some of Trump’s peacefully protesting tourists…

The website turns to the blame game—trying to foist off responsibility for January 6 on Nancy Pelosi and Democrats—and offers a timeline that emphasizes Trump’s call for peaceful protest.

A video taken by Pelosi’s daughter is included for the stunning proposition that she accepted blame for the attack on the Capitol. It’s selectively edited video and a debunked claim, indeed, an insincere one for the man who ignored pleas for help from members of his own party and watched the chaos unfold on television when he could have put a stop to it. As Pelosi’s office put it at the time, “Numerous independent fact-checkers have confirmed again and again that Speaker Pelosi did not plan her own assassination on January 6th.” But there it is, on the White House’s official website.

In a speech this morning at the House GOP retreat, held at the newly renamed “Trump Kennedy Center,” Trump, referring to the speech he gave on the Ellipse five years ago, alleged that “the news never reported the words ‘walk or march peacefully and patriotically to the Capitol.’” As far as I recall, those words were widely reported, along with everything else the president said and tweeted at the time, in full context. Trump’s claim that he called for an entirely peaceful protest that day is offset by Jack Smith’s recent testimony that the evidence he compiled established Trump’s complicity. “The evidence here made clear that President Trump was by a large measure the most culpable and most responsible person in this conspiracy. These crimes were committed for his benefit. The attack that happened at the Capitol, part of this case, does not happen without him. The other co-conspirators were doing this for his benefit.”

Read the full transcript of Trump’s speech to the crowd on January 6, 2021, here [https://www.rev.com/transcripts/donald-trump-speech-save-america-rally-transcript-january-6] and make your own assessment. The full context is important, especially with the president installing a sanitized version on the White House website, a slanted version that includes the word he was doubtless encouraged to insert about peacefulness, for the obvious reason that the speech was one that otherwise exhorted the crowd to take action. “We will never give up. We will never concede, it doesn’t happen. You don’t concede when there’s theft involved,” the president told the crowd in the first seconds of his address.

Trump also said:

• “Our country has had enough. We will not take it anymore and that’s what this is all about. To use a favorite term that all of you people really came up with, we will stop the steal. Today I will lay out just some of the evidence proving that we won this election, and we won it by a landslide. This was not a close election.”
• “By the way, does anybody believe that Joe had 80 million votes? Does anybody believe that? … There’s never been anything like this. We will not let them silence your voices. We’re not going to let it happen. Not going to let it happen.”
• [The crowd then breaks in, chanting, “Fight for Trump! Fight for Trump! Fight for Trump!” Trump does not discourage this.]
• “We’re going walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators, and congressmen and women … You have to show strength, and you have to be strong … We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated, lawfully slated. I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard. Today we will see whether Republicans stand strong for integrity of our elections.”
• “Looking out at all the amazing patriots here today, I have never been more confident in our nation’s future. Well, I have to say we have to be a little bit careful. That’s a nice statement, but we have to be a little careful with that statement. If we allow this group of people to illegally take over our country, because it’s illegal when the votes are illegal, when the way they got there is illegal, when the States that vote are given false and fraudulent information.”
• “So we’re going to, we’re going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue, I love Pennsylvania Avenue, and we’re going to the Capitol and we’re going to try and give … The Democrats are hopeless. They’re never voting for anything, not even one vote. But we’re going to try and give our Republicans, the weak ones, because the strong ones don’t need any of our help, we’re going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country.”

This morning, Nancy Pelosi tweeted, “We must speak plainly: January 6th was an attempted coup. It was an effort to nullify millions of lawful votes and subvert the will of the American people. But the attack failed because of the courage of public servants who gave proof through the night that our flag was still there by refusing to bend to pressure, threats, or intimidation. On that day, the Constitution held and we kept the Republic.”

Trump is trying to take it away again, this time with a rewrite of history that is worthy of George Orwell’s 1984. Our job as citizens is clear. We have to remain committed and refuse to let that happen. Facts are powerful. If the truth wasn’t so damaging, Trump wouldn’t be going to this much trouble to rewrite it. That he has public resources and a president’s bully pulpit to do it with is shameful and dangerous.

Last night I wrote to you about the Virginia museum curator, Bill Martin, who insisted on exhibits that put on display a shameful history of teaching fourth graders in the state that slavery was a good time with happy slaves, a gross misrepresentation of reality. Mr. Martin stood for the truth and dislodged and exposed that narrative so it could not be reinstated. We have to do that with Trump’s newest effort to rewrite the history of January 6. Trump may temporarily control government websites and museums, but we control the public narrative on the ground—we are everywhere across the country.

Read more: Civil Discourse – The Dangerous Revision Of Jan 6 History On The Official WH Website – Joyce Vance

Continue/Read Original Article Here: The Dangerous Revision Of Jan 6 History On The Official WH Website

Tags: 1984, 5 Years Later, Attempted Coup, Civil Discourse, Do Not Forget, January 6 2021, January 6 2026, Joyce Vance, Nancy Pelosi, Remember January 6th, Riot January 6th, Rioters Assaulted Capitol, Trump, Trump Pardons Rioters
#1984 #5YearsLater #AttemptedCoup #CivilDiscourse #DoNotForget #January62021 #January62026 #JoyceVance #NancyPelosi #RememberJanuary6th #RiotJanuary6th #RiotersAssaultedCapitol #Trump #TrumpPardonsRioters

Civil Discourse – The Dangerous Revision Of Jan 6 History On The Official WH Website – Joyce Vance

Civil Discourse with Joyce Vance

The Dangerous Revision Of Jan 6 History On The Official WH Website

By Joyce Vance, Jan 06, 2026

As I wrote to you last night, five years on from January 6, Donald Trump is trying to rewrite the history of the insurrection. The White House published a new website today, detailing their version of the timeline of the Jan. 6, 2021, breach of the U.S. Capitol by Trump supporters. He accuses Democrats, pictured in black and white across the top of the page along with Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, of promoting a “gaslighting narrative” of the day’s events.

The new page starts with the claim that, “President Trump took decisive action to pardon January 6 defendants who were unfairly targeted, overcharged, and used as political examples. They were not protected by the leaders who failed them. They were punished to cover incompetence.” It goes on to assert that his pardons ended “years of harsh solitary confinement, denied due process, and family separation for exercising their First Amendment rights.” The website fails to acknowledge that these criminal defendants were charged by grand juries, convicted at trial, or in many cases, convicted after they pled guilty, and had full appeal rights.

Trump concludes: “The Democrats masterfully reversed reality after January 6, branding peaceful patriotic protesters as ‘insurrectionists’ and framing the event as a violent coup attempt orchestrated by Trump—despite no evidence of armed rebellion or intent to overthrow the government. In truth, it was the Democrats who staged the real insurrection,” which the website says was the certification of the 2020 election that the White House describes as “fraud-ridden” and for allegedly “weaponizing federal agencies to hunt down dissenters.” The courts resoundingly rejected Trump’s claims of a stolen election, with even the Supreme Court ruling against him.

Some of Trump’s peacefully protesting tourists…

The website turns to the blame game—trying to foist off responsibility for January 6 on Nancy Pelosi and Democrats—and offers a timeline that emphasizes Trump’s call for peaceful protest.

A video taken by Pelosi’s daughter is included for the stunning proposition that she accepted blame for the attack on the Capitol. It’s selectively edited video and a debunked claim, indeed, an insincere one for the man who ignored pleas for help from members of his own party and watched the chaos unfold on television when he could have put a stop to it. As Pelosi’s office put it at the time, “Numerous independent fact-checkers have confirmed again and again that Speaker Pelosi did not plan her own assassination on January 6th.” But there it is, on the White House’s official website.

In a speech this morning at the House GOP retreat, held at the newly renamed “Trump Kennedy Center,” Trump, referring to the speech he gave on the Ellipse five years ago, alleged that “the news never reported the words ‘walk or march peacefully and patriotically to the Capitol.’” As far as I recall, those words were widely reported, along with everything else the president said and tweeted at the time, in full context. Trump’s claim that he called for an entirely peaceful protest that day is offset by Jack Smith’s recent testimony that the evidence he compiled established Trump’s complicity. “The evidence here made clear that President Trump was by a large measure the most culpable and most responsible person in this conspiracy. These crimes were committed for his benefit. The attack that happened at the Capitol, part of this case, does not happen without him. The other co-conspirators were doing this for his benefit.”

Read the full transcript of Trump’s speech to the crowd on January 6, 2021, here [https://www.rev.com/transcripts/donald-trump-speech-save-america-rally-transcript-january-6] and make your own assessment. The full context is important, especially with the president installing a sanitized version on the White House website, a slanted version that includes the word he was doubtless encouraged to insert about peacefulness, for the obvious reason that the speech was one that otherwise exhorted the crowd to take action. “We will never give up. We will never concede, it doesn’t happen. You don’t concede when there’s theft involved,” the president told the crowd in the first seconds of his address.

Trump also said:

• “Our country has had enough. We will not take it anymore and that’s what this is all about. To use a favorite term that all of you people really came up with, we will stop the steal. Today I will lay out just some of the evidence proving that we won this election, and we won it by a landslide. This was not a close election.”
• “By the way, does anybody believe that Joe had 80 million votes? Does anybody believe that? … There’s never been anything like this. We will not let them silence your voices. We’re not going to let it happen. Not going to let it happen.”
• [The crowd then breaks in, chanting, “Fight for Trump! Fight for Trump! Fight for Trump!” Trump does not discourage this.]
• “We’re going walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators, and congressmen and women … You have to show strength, and you have to be strong … We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated, lawfully slated. I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard. Today we will see whether Republicans stand strong for integrity of our elections.”
• “Looking out at all the amazing patriots here today, I have never been more confident in our nation’s future. Well, I have to say we have to be a little bit careful. That’s a nice statement, but we have to be a little careful with that statement. If we allow this group of people to illegally take over our country, because it’s illegal when the votes are illegal, when the way they got there is illegal, when the States that vote are given false and fraudulent information.”
• “So we’re going to, we’re going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue, I love Pennsylvania Avenue, and we’re going to the Capitol and we’re going to try and give … The Democrats are hopeless. They’re never voting for anything, not even one vote. But we’re going to try and give our Republicans, the weak ones, because the strong ones don’t need any of our help, we’re going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country.”

This morning, Nancy Pelosi tweeted, “We must speak plainly: January 6th was an attempted coup. It was an effort to nullify millions of lawful votes and subvert the will of the American people. But the attack failed because of the courage of public servants who gave proof through the night that our flag was still there by refusing to bend to pressure, threats, or intimidation. On that day, the Constitution held and we kept the Republic.”

Trump is trying to take it away again, this time with a rewrite of history that is worthy of George Orwell’s 1984. Our job as citizens is clear. We have to remain committed and refuse to let that happen. Facts are powerful. If the truth wasn’t so damaging, Trump wouldn’t be going to this much trouble to rewrite it. That he has public resources and a president’s bully pulpit to do it with is shameful and dangerous.

Last night I wrote to you about the Virginia museum curator, Bill Martin, who insisted on exhibits that put on display a shameful history of teaching fourth graders in the state that slavery was a good time with happy slaves, a gross misrepresentation of reality. Mr. Martin stood for the truth and dislodged and exposed that narrative so it could not be reinstated. We have to do that with Trump’s newest effort to rewrite the history of January 6. Trump may temporarily control government websites and museums, but we control the public narrative on the ground—we are everywhere across the country.

Read more: Civil Discourse – The Dangerous Revision Of Jan 6 History On The Official WH Website – Joyce Vance

Continue/Read Original Article Here: The Dangerous Revision Of Jan 6 History On The Official WH Website

#1984 #5YearsLater #AttemptedCoup #CivilDiscourse #DoNotForget #January62021 #January62026 #JoyceVance #NancyPelosi #RememberJanuary6th #RiotJanuary6th #RiotersAssaultedCapitol #Trump #TrumpPardonsRioters

Civil Discourse – The Dangerous Revision Of Jan 6 History On The Official WH Website – Joyce Vance

Civil Discourse with Joyce Vance

The Dangerous Revision Of Jan 6 History On The Official WH Website

By Joyce Vance, Jan 06, 2026

As I wrote to you last night, five years on from January 6, Donald Trump is trying to rewrite the history of the insurrection. The White House published a new website today, detailing their version of the timeline of the Jan. 6, 2021, breach of the U.S. Capitol by Trump supporters. He accuses Democrats, pictured in black and white across the top of the page along with Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, of promoting a “gaslighting narrative” of the day’s events.

The new page starts with the claim that, “President Trump took decisive action to pardon January 6 defendants who were unfairly targeted, overcharged, and used as political examples. They were not protected by the leaders who failed them. They were punished to cover incompetence.” It goes on to assert that his pardons ended “years of harsh solitary confinement, denied due process, and family separation for exercising their First Amendment rights.” The website fails to acknowledge that these criminal defendants were charged by grand juries, convicted at trial, or in many cases, convicted after they pled guilty, and had full appeal rights.

Trump concludes: “The Democrats masterfully reversed reality after January 6, branding peaceful patriotic protesters as ‘insurrectionists’ and framing the event as a violent coup attempt orchestrated by Trump—despite no evidence of armed rebellion or intent to overthrow the government. In truth, it was the Democrats who staged the real insurrection,” which the website says was the certification of the 2020 election that the White House describes as “fraud-ridden” and for allegedly “weaponizing federal agencies to hunt down dissenters.” The courts resoundingly rejected Trump’s claims of a stolen election, with even the Supreme Court ruling against him.

Some of Trump’s peacefully protesting tourists…

The website turns to the blame game—trying to foist off responsibility for January 6 on Nancy Pelosi and Democrats—and offers a timeline that emphasizes Trump’s call for peaceful protest.

A video taken by Pelosi’s daughter is included for the stunning proposition that she accepted blame for the attack on the Capitol. It’s selectively edited video and a debunked claim, indeed, an insincere one for the man who ignored pleas for help from members of his own party and watched the chaos unfold on television when he could have put a stop to it. As Pelosi’s office put it at the time, “Numerous independent fact-checkers have confirmed again and again that Speaker Pelosi did not plan her own assassination on January 6th.” But there it is, on the White House’s official website.

In a speech this morning at the House GOP retreat, held at the newly renamed “Trump Kennedy Center,” Trump, referring to the speech he gave on the Ellipse five years ago, alleged that “the news never reported the words ‘walk or march peacefully and patriotically to the Capitol.’” As far as I recall, those words were widely reported, along with everything else the president said and tweeted at the time, in full context. Trump’s claim that he called for an entirely peaceful protest that day is offset by Jack Smith’s recent testimony that the evidence he compiled established Trump’s complicity. “The evidence here made clear that President Trump was by a large measure the most culpable and most responsible person in this conspiracy. These crimes were committed for his benefit. The attack that happened at the Capitol, part of this case, does not happen without him. The other co-conspirators were doing this for his benefit.”

Read the full transcript of Trump’s speech to the crowd on January 6, 2021, here [https://www.rev.com/transcripts/donald-trump-speech-save-america-rally-transcript-january-6] and make your own assessment. The full context is important, especially with the president installing a sanitized version on the White House website, a slanted version that includes the word he was doubtless encouraged to insert about peacefulness, for the obvious reason that the speech was one that otherwise exhorted the crowd to take action. “We will never give up. We will never concede, it doesn’t happen. You don’t concede when there’s theft involved,” the president told the crowd in the first seconds of his address.

Trump also said:

• “Our country has had enough. We will not take it anymore and that’s what this is all about. To use a favorite term that all of you people really came up with, we will stop the steal. Today I will lay out just some of the evidence proving that we won this election, and we won it by a landslide. This was not a close election.”
• “By the way, does anybody believe that Joe had 80 million votes? Does anybody believe that? … There’s never been anything like this. We will not let them silence your voices. We’re not going to let it happen. Not going to let it happen.”
• [The crowd then breaks in, chanting, “Fight for Trump! Fight for Trump! Fight for Trump!” Trump does not discourage this.]
• “We’re going walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators, and congressmen and women … You have to show strength, and you have to be strong … We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated, lawfully slated. I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard. Today we will see whether Republicans stand strong for integrity of our elections.”
• “Looking out at all the amazing patriots here today, I have never been more confident in our nation’s future. Well, I have to say we have to be a little bit careful. That’s a nice statement, but we have to be a little careful with that statement. If we allow this group of people to illegally take over our country, because it’s illegal when the votes are illegal, when the way they got there is illegal, when the States that vote are given false and fraudulent information.”
• “So we’re going to, we’re going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue, I love Pennsylvania Avenue, and we’re going to the Capitol and we’re going to try and give … The Democrats are hopeless. They’re never voting for anything, not even one vote. But we’re going to try and give our Republicans, the weak ones, because the strong ones don’t need any of our help, we’re going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country.”

This morning, Nancy Pelosi tweeted, “We must speak plainly: January 6th was an attempted coup. It was an effort to nullify millions of lawful votes and subvert the will of the American people. But the attack failed because of the courage of public servants who gave proof through the night that our flag was still there by refusing to bend to pressure, threats, or intimidation. On that day, the Constitution held and we kept the Republic.”

Trump is trying to take it away again, this time with a rewrite of history that is worthy of George Orwell’s 1984. Our job as citizens is clear. We have to remain committed and refuse to let that happen. Facts are powerful. If the truth wasn’t so damaging, Trump wouldn’t be going to this much trouble to rewrite it. That he has public resources and a president’s bully pulpit to do it with is shameful and dangerous.

Last night I wrote to you about the Virginia museum curator, Bill Martin, who insisted on exhibits that put on display a shameful history of teaching fourth graders in the state that slavery was a good time with happy slaves, a gross misrepresentation of reality. Mr. Martin stood for the truth and dislodged and exposed that narrative so it could not be reinstated. We have to do that with Trump’s newest effort to rewrite the history of January 6. Trump may temporarily control government websites and museums, but we control the public narrative on the ground—we are everywhere across the country.

Read more: Civil Discourse – The Dangerous Revision Of Jan 6 History On The Official WH Website – Joyce Vance

Continue/Read Original Article Here: The Dangerous Revision Of Jan 6 History On The Official WH Website

#1984 #5YearsLater #AttemptedCoup #CivilDiscourse #DoNotForget #January62021 #January62026 #JoyceVance #NancyPelosi #RememberJanuary6th #RiotJanuary6th #RiotersAssaultedCapitol #Trump #TrumpPardonsRioters

60 Attorneys on the Year of Chaos Inside Trump’s Justice Department – The New York Times Magazine

“They didn’t want the ethics office calling them up and telling them what to do.”
Joseph Tirrell, former director of the Departmental Ethics Office“If we’re indicting people because the president hates them, that’s counter to the whole point of doing my job.” Mike Romano, former prosecutor in the Public Integrity Section“Our job wasn’t to engage in fact-finding investigations; our job was to find the facts that would fit the narrative.” Dena Robinson, former lawyer in the Civil Rights Division

The Unraveling of the Justice Department, New York Times Magazine

Sixty attorneys describe a year of chaos and suspicion.

By Emily Bazelon and Rachel Poser, Photographs by Stephen Voss, Nov. 16, 2025

President Trump’s second term has brought a period of turmoil and controversy unlike any in the history of the Justice Department. Trump and his appointees have blasted through the walls designed to protect the nation’s most powerful law enforcement agency from political influence; they have directed the course of criminal investigations, openly flouted ethics rules and caused a breakdown of institutional culture. To date, more than 200 career attorneys have been fired, and thousands more have resigned. (The Justice Department says many of them have been replaced.)

What was it like inside this institution as Trump’s officials took control? It’s not an easy question to answer. Justice Department norms dictate that career attorneys, who are generally nonpartisan public servants, rarely speak to the press. And the Trump administration’s attempts to crack down on leaks have made all federal employees fearful of sharing information.

But the exodus of lawyers has created an opportunity to understand what’s happening within the agency. We interviewed more than 60 attorneys who recently resigned or were fired from the Justice Department. Much of what they told us is reported here for the first time.

Beginning with Trump’s first day in office, the lawyers narrated the events that most alarmed them over the next 10 months. They described being asked to drop cases for political reasons, to find evidence for flimsy investigations and to take positions in court they thought had no legitimate basis. They also talked about the work they and their colleagues were told to abandon — investigations of terrorist plots, corruption and white-collar fraud.

Some spoke on the condition of anonymity because they feared retaliation against them or their new employers. We corroborated their accounts with multiple sources, interviewing their colleagues to confirm the details of what they described and reviewing court documents and contemporaneous notes. We also sent a list of questions to the Justice Department and the White House. “This story is a useless collection of recycled, debunked hearsay from disgruntled former employees,” a spokeswoman for the D.O.J. responded in an email. “Targeting the department’s political leadership while ignoring the questionable conduct of former attorneys who do not have the American people’s best interest at heart shows exactly how biased this story is, and further illustrates why Americans are turning away from biased, outdated legacy media platforms.”

Abigail Jackson, a White House spokeswoman, sent this statement: “These are nothing more than pathetic complaints lodged by anti-Trump government workers. President Trump is working on behalf of the millions of Americans who voted for him all across the country, not the D.C. bureaucrats who try to stymie the American people’s agenda at every turn.”

The attorneys who spoke to us for this project, many of whom have spent decades in government service, disagree.

On his first day in office, President Trump made it clear that lawyers loyal to him would lead the Justice Department. One of his personal defense attorneys, Emil Bove, became the temporary No. 2, and Trump nominated another of his lawyers, Todd Blanche, to take the position permanently once the Senate confirmed him.

Trump also undid one of the largest investigations in the Justice Department’s history by pardoning or commuting the sentences of the nearly 1,600 rioters who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. The group included more than 200 defendants who were convicted of assaulting law enforcement officers.

Prosecutors said they were in disbelief when President Trump pardoned or commuted the sentences of Jan. 6 rioters. Ashley Gilbertson for The New York Times.

Ryan Crosswell, Public Integrity Section, which handles corruption cases: When I saw it was Blanche and Bove, I was actually relieved. OK, it’s gross that they were Trump’s personal attorneys, but before that they were federal prosecutors in New York. They’ve done the job. They know the prosecutors’ code. We’re the only lawyers whose job is not to get the best result for our client. Our job is to get justice. Sometimes that means losing or walking into court and saying we made a mistake.

But then things were 10 times worse than I thought they would be.

Liz Oyer, pardon attorney: We had no knowledge that the Jan. 6 pardons were coming on Day 1. Everybody was concerned that our office was being completely sidelined from the review process.

Gregory Rosen, chief of the breach and assault unit of the Capitol Siege Section, which prosecuted the Jan. 6 rioters: When I was alerted to the pardons, a lot of thoughts ran through my head about how absurd this could get, but first I had to do my job. We had to ask, Did we believe the order was lawful and constitutional?

My team and I determined that it was. The president has the right to pardon people and commute their sentences. So then it was a blitzkrieg of hundreds of cases. We stepped to it.

I was numb. As career prosecutors, we don’t talk about our feelings. We’re not partisans. We’re public servants just doing the job. Early on, we stayed away from using emotional language about our own reactions.

Mike Romano, Jan. 6 prosecutor: Anyone who spent any time working on Jan. 6 cases saw how violent a day that was. I’d spent four years living with that day, the things done to people. It’s incredibly demoralizing to see something you worked on for four years wiped away by a lie — I mean the idea that prosecution of the rioters was a grave national injustice. We had strong evidence against every person we prosecuted. And I knew that if they’re going to wipe all of that away based on a lie, either I’ll be fired as retaliation or pretext or asked to do something unethical. Or both.

Until that point, I’d hoped the second Trump term would be similar to the first one, or similar enough for a while. Then the pardons came down and I knew, in light of that, there is no way I can stay.

Trump appointed Ed Martin, another longtime ally, as interim U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia. Martin had promoted Trump’s baseless claims of election fraud in 2020 and then turned to the cause of defending the Jan. 6 rioters. He had never worked as a prosecutor.

Martin soon fired 15 attorneys in the Capitol Siege Section who prosecuted the Jan. 6 defendants. They joined more than a dozen other prosecutors fired for working under the special counsel, Jack Smith, on the criminal investigations of President Trump. According to the D.O.J.’s new leadership, they could not be trusted to “faithfully implement” the president’s agenda.

Gregory Rosen, Capitol Siege Section: When 15 employees were fired from the Capitol Siege Section, I was the angriest I’ve ever been. Most of them were younger attorneys. I’d hired them. They came from firms, federal and state government, all over. But some naïve part of me thought, Maybe this is the new leadership’s “pound of flesh.”

Prosecutor, Capitol Siege Section: It was inconceivable to me they’d fire people for no reason except they’d worked on cases that were now disfavored. People like me, who are career attorneys, work within a structure. We don’t have much latitude. To be told that you are being punished for your decisions, when you were following guidance created by very talented and skilled prosecutors above you, which judges blessed for the most part — it’s completely bizarre. It flipped the culture of the institution. It’s a culture now of fear. And they are losing people all the time, very good people, who were the future of the department.

 Editor’s Note: Please look at and read the narratives and share the post as you can. This is a case study of how Democracy is lost; how Justice in America is corrupted; by one man, one party, one President who is unfit for office. This is not the people’s DOJ any longer.

Continue/Read Original Article Here: 60 Attorneys on the Year of Chaos Inside Trump’s Justice Department – The New York Times

Tags: 2021, 60 Attorneys, Fired by DOJ, Firing DOJ Lawyers, January 6 Attack on U. S. Capitol, January 6th Attorneys, Resigned, Riot January 6th, The New York Times, The New York Times Magazine, Trump Pardons Rioters, Trump's Justice Department, Unraveling DOJ, Year of Chaos

#2021 #60Attorneys #firedByDoj #firingDojLawyers #january6AttackOnUSCapitol #january6thAttorneys #resigned #riotJanuary6th #theNewYorkTimes #theNewYorkTimesMagazine #trumpPardonsRioters #trumpsJusticeDepartment #unravelingDoj #yearOfChaos

60 Attorneys on the Year of Chaos Inside Trump’s Justice Department – The New York Times Magazine

“They didn’t want the ethics office calling them up and telling them what to do.”
Joseph Tirrell, former director of the Departmental Ethics Office“If we’re indicting people because the president hates them, that’s counter to the whole point of doing my job.” Mike Romano, former prosecutor in the Public Integrity Section“Our job wasn’t to engage in fact-finding investigations; our job was to find the facts that would fit the narrative.” Dena Robinson, former lawyer in the Civil Rights Division

The Unraveling of the Justice Department, New York Times Magazine

Sixty attorneys describe a year of chaos and suspicion.

By Emily Bazelon and Rachel Poser, Photographs by Stephen Voss, Nov. 16, 2025

President Trump’s second term has brought a period of turmoil and controversy unlike any in the history of the Justice Department. Trump and his appointees have blasted through the walls designed to protect the nation’s most powerful law enforcement agency from political influence; they have directed the course of criminal investigations, openly flouted ethics rules and caused a breakdown of institutional culture. To date, more than 200 career attorneys have been fired, and thousands more have resigned. (The Justice Department says many of them have been replaced.)

What was it like inside this institution as Trump’s officials took control? It’s not an easy question to answer. Justice Department norms dictate that career attorneys, who are generally nonpartisan public servants, rarely speak to the press. And the Trump administration’s attempts to crack down on leaks have made all federal employees fearful of sharing information.

But the exodus of lawyers has created an opportunity to understand what’s happening within the agency. We interviewed more than 60 attorneys who recently resigned or were fired from the Justice Department. Much of what they told us is reported here for the first time.

Beginning with Trump’s first day in office, the lawyers narrated the events that most alarmed them over the next 10 months. They described being asked to drop cases for political reasons, to find evidence for flimsy investigations and to take positions in court they thought had no legitimate basis. They also talked about the work they and their colleagues were told to abandon — investigations of terrorist plots, corruption and white-collar fraud.

Some spoke on the condition of anonymity because they feared retaliation against them or their new employers. We corroborated their accounts with multiple sources, interviewing their colleagues to confirm the details of what they described and reviewing court documents and contemporaneous notes. We also sent a list of questions to the Justice Department and the White House. “This story is a useless collection of recycled, debunked hearsay from disgruntled former employees,” a spokeswoman for the D.O.J. responded in an email. “Targeting the department’s political leadership while ignoring the questionable conduct of former attorneys who do not have the American people’s best interest at heart shows exactly how biased this story is, and further illustrates why Americans are turning away from biased, outdated legacy media platforms.”

Abigail Jackson, a White House spokeswoman, sent this statement: “These are nothing more than pathetic complaints lodged by anti-Trump government workers. President Trump is working on behalf of the millions of Americans who voted for him all across the country, not the D.C. bureaucrats who try to stymie the American people’s agenda at every turn.”

The attorneys who spoke to us for this project, many of whom have spent decades in government service, disagree.

On his first day in office, President Trump made it clear that lawyers loyal to him would lead the Justice Department. One of his personal defense attorneys, Emil Bove, became the temporary No. 2, and Trump nominated another of his lawyers, Todd Blanche, to take the position permanently once the Senate confirmed him.

Trump also undid one of the largest investigations in the Justice Department’s history by pardoning or commuting the sentences of the nearly 1,600 rioters who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. The group included more than 200 defendants who were convicted of assaulting law enforcement officers.

Prosecutors said they were in disbelief when President Trump pardoned or commuted the sentences of Jan. 6 rioters. Ashley Gilbertson for The New York Times.

Ryan Crosswell, Public Integrity Section, which handles corruption cases: When I saw it was Blanche and Bove, I was actually relieved. OK, it’s gross that they were Trump’s personal attorneys, but before that they were federal prosecutors in New York. They’ve done the job. They know the prosecutors’ code. We’re the only lawyers whose job is not to get the best result for our client. Our job is to get justice. Sometimes that means losing or walking into court and saying we made a mistake.

But then things were 10 times worse than I thought they would be.

Liz Oyer, pardon attorney: We had no knowledge that the Jan. 6 pardons were coming on Day 1. Everybody was concerned that our office was being completely sidelined from the review process.

Gregory Rosen, chief of the breach and assault unit of the Capitol Siege Section, which prosecuted the Jan. 6 rioters: When I was alerted to the pardons, a lot of thoughts ran through my head about how absurd this could get, but first I had to do my job. We had to ask, Did we believe the order was lawful and constitutional?

My team and I determined that it was. The president has the right to pardon people and commute their sentences. So then it was a blitzkrieg of hundreds of cases. We stepped to it.

I was numb. As career prosecutors, we don’t talk about our feelings. We’re not partisans. We’re public servants just doing the job. Early on, we stayed away from using emotional language about our own reactions.

Mike Romano, Jan. 6 prosecutor: Anyone who spent any time working on Jan. 6 cases saw how violent a day that was. I’d spent four years living with that day, the things done to people. It’s incredibly demoralizing to see something you worked on for four years wiped away by a lie — I mean the idea that prosecution of the rioters was a grave national injustice. We had strong evidence against every person we prosecuted. And I knew that if they’re going to wipe all of that away based on a lie, either I’ll be fired as retaliation or pretext or asked to do something unethical. Or both.

Until that point, I’d hoped the second Trump term would be similar to the first one, or similar enough for a while. Then the pardons came down and I knew, in light of that, there is no way I can stay.

Trump appointed Ed Martin, another longtime ally, as interim U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia. Martin had promoted Trump’s baseless claims of election fraud in 2020 and then turned to the cause of defending the Jan. 6 rioters. He had never worked as a prosecutor.

Martin soon fired 15 attorneys in the Capitol Siege Section who prosecuted the Jan. 6 defendants. They joined more than a dozen other prosecutors fired for working under the special counsel, Jack Smith, on the criminal investigations of President Trump. According to the D.O.J.’s new leadership, they could not be trusted to “faithfully implement” the president’s agenda.

Gregory Rosen, Capitol Siege Section: When 15 employees were fired from the Capitol Siege Section, I was the angriest I’ve ever been. Most of them were younger attorneys. I’d hired them. They came from firms, federal and state government, all over. But some naïve part of me thought, Maybe this is the new leadership’s “pound of flesh.”

Prosecutor, Capitol Siege Section: It was inconceivable to me they’d fire people for no reason except they’d worked on cases that were now disfavored. People like me, who are career attorneys, work within a structure. We don’t have much latitude. To be told that you are being punished for your decisions, when you were following guidance created by very talented and skilled prosecutors above you, which judges blessed for the most part — it’s completely bizarre. It flipped the culture of the institution. It’s a culture now of fear. And they are losing people all the time, very good people, who were the future of the department.

 Editor’s Note: Please look at and read the narratives and share the post as you can. This is a case study of how Democracy is lost; how Justice in America is corrupted; by one man, one party, one President who is unfit for office. This is not the people’s DOJ any longer.

Continue/Read Original Article Here: 60 Attorneys on the Year of Chaos Inside Trump’s Justice Department – The New York Times

Tags: 2021, 60 Attorneys, Fired by DOJ, Firing DOJ Lawyers, January 6 Attack on U. S. Capitol, January 6th Attorneys, Resigned, Riot January 6th, The New York Times, The New York Times Magazine, Trump Pardons Rioters, Trump's Justice Department, Unraveling DOJ, Year of Chaos

#2021 #60Attorneys #firedByDoj #firingDojLawyers #january6AttackOnUSCapitol #january6thAttorneys #resigned #riotJanuary6th #theNewYorkTimes #theNewYorkTimesMagazine #trumpPardonsRioters #trumpsJusticeDepartment #unravelingDoj #yearOfChaos

60 Attorneys on the Year of Chaos Inside Trump’s Justice Department – The New York Times Magazine

“They didn’t want the ethics office calling them up and telling them what to do.”
Joseph Tirrell, former director of the Departmental Ethics Office“If we’re indicting people because the president hates them, that’s counter to the whole point of doing my job.” Mike Romano, former prosecutor in the Public Integrity Section“Our job wasn’t to engage in fact-finding investigations; our job was to find the facts that would fit the narrative.” Dena Robinson, former lawyer in the Civil Rights Division

The Unraveling of the Justice Department, New York Times Magazine

Sixty attorneys describe a year of chaos and suspicion.

By Emily Bazelon and Rachel Poser, Photographs by Stephen Voss, Nov. 16, 2025

President Trump’s second term has brought a period of turmoil and controversy unlike any in the history of the Justice Department. Trump and his appointees have blasted through the walls designed to protect the nation’s most powerful law enforcement agency from political influence; they have directed the course of criminal investigations, openly flouted ethics rules and caused a breakdown of institutional culture. To date, more than 200 career attorneys have been fired, and thousands more have resigned. (The Justice Department says many of them have been replaced.)

What was it like inside this institution as Trump’s officials took control? It’s not an easy question to answer. Justice Department norms dictate that career attorneys, who are generally nonpartisan public servants, rarely speak to the press. And the Trump administration’s attempts to crack down on leaks have made all federal employees fearful of sharing information.

But the exodus of lawyers has created an opportunity to understand what’s happening within the agency. We interviewed more than 60 attorneys who recently resigned or were fired from the Justice Department. Much of what they told us is reported here for the first time.

Beginning with Trump’s first day in office, the lawyers narrated the events that most alarmed them over the next 10 months. They described being asked to drop cases for political reasons, to find evidence for flimsy investigations and to take positions in court they thought had no legitimate basis. They also talked about the work they and their colleagues were told to abandon — investigations of terrorist plots, corruption and white-collar fraud.

Some spoke on the condition of anonymity because they feared retaliation against them or their new employers. We corroborated their accounts with multiple sources, interviewing their colleagues to confirm the details of what they described and reviewing court documents and contemporaneous notes. We also sent a list of questions to the Justice Department and the White House. “This story is a useless collection of recycled, debunked hearsay from disgruntled former employees,” a spokeswoman for the D.O.J. responded in an email. “Targeting the department’s political leadership while ignoring the questionable conduct of former attorneys who do not have the American people’s best interest at heart shows exactly how biased this story is, and further illustrates why Americans are turning away from biased, outdated legacy media platforms.”

Abigail Jackson, a White House spokeswoman, sent this statement: “These are nothing more than pathetic complaints lodged by anti-Trump government workers. President Trump is working on behalf of the millions of Americans who voted for him all across the country, not the D.C. bureaucrats who try to stymie the American people’s agenda at every turn.”

The attorneys who spoke to us for this project, many of whom have spent decades in government service, disagree.

On his first day in office, President Trump made it clear that lawyers loyal to him would lead the Justice Department. One of his personal defense attorneys, Emil Bove, became the temporary No. 2, and Trump nominated another of his lawyers, Todd Blanche, to take the position permanently once the Senate confirmed him.

Trump also undid one of the largest investigations in the Justice Department’s history by pardoning or commuting the sentences of the nearly 1,600 rioters who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. The group included more than 200 defendants who were convicted of assaulting law enforcement officers.

Prosecutors said they were in disbelief when President Trump pardoned or commuted the sentences of Jan. 6 rioters. Ashley Gilbertson for The New York Times.

Ryan Crosswell, Public Integrity Section, which handles corruption cases: When I saw it was Blanche and Bove, I was actually relieved. OK, it’s gross that they were Trump’s personal attorneys, but before that they were federal prosecutors in New York. They’ve done the job. They know the prosecutors’ code. We’re the only lawyers whose job is not to get the best result for our client. Our job is to get justice. Sometimes that means losing or walking into court and saying we made a mistake.

But then things were 10 times worse than I thought they would be.

Liz Oyer, pardon attorney: We had no knowledge that the Jan. 6 pardons were coming on Day 1. Everybody was concerned that our office was being completely sidelined from the review process.

Gregory Rosen, chief of the breach and assault unit of the Capitol Siege Section, which prosecuted the Jan. 6 rioters: When I was alerted to the pardons, a lot of thoughts ran through my head about how absurd this could get, but first I had to do my job. We had to ask, Did we believe the order was lawful and constitutional?

My team and I determined that it was. The president has the right to pardon people and commute their sentences. So then it was a blitzkrieg of hundreds of cases. We stepped to it.

I was numb. As career prosecutors, we don’t talk about our feelings. We’re not partisans. We’re public servants just doing the job. Early on, we stayed away from using emotional language about our own reactions.

Mike Romano, Jan. 6 prosecutor: Anyone who spent any time working on Jan. 6 cases saw how violent a day that was. I’d spent four years living with that day, the things done to people. It’s incredibly demoralizing to see something you worked on for four years wiped away by a lie — I mean the idea that prosecution of the rioters was a grave national injustice. We had strong evidence against every person we prosecuted. And I knew that if they’re going to wipe all of that away based on a lie, either I’ll be fired as retaliation or pretext or asked to do something unethical. Or both.

Until that point, I’d hoped the second Trump term would be similar to the first one, or similar enough for a while. Then the pardons came down and I knew, in light of that, there is no way I can stay.

Trump appointed Ed Martin, another longtime ally, as interim U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia. Martin had promoted Trump’s baseless claims of election fraud in 2020 and then turned to the cause of defending the Jan. 6 rioters. He had never worked as a prosecutor.

Martin soon fired 15 attorneys in the Capitol Siege Section who prosecuted the Jan. 6 defendants. They joined more than a dozen other prosecutors fired for working under the special counsel, Jack Smith, on the criminal investigations of President Trump. According to the D.O.J.’s new leadership, they could not be trusted to “faithfully implement” the president’s agenda.

Gregory Rosen, Capitol Siege Section: When 15 employees were fired from the Capitol Siege Section, I was the angriest I’ve ever been. Most of them were younger attorneys. I’d hired them. They came from firms, federal and state government, all over. But some naïve part of me thought, Maybe this is the new leadership’s “pound of flesh.”

Prosecutor, Capitol Siege Section: It was inconceivable to me they’d fire people for no reason except they’d worked on cases that were now disfavored. People like me, who are career attorneys, work within a structure. We don’t have much latitude. To be told that you are being punished for your decisions, when you were following guidance created by very talented and skilled prosecutors above you, which judges blessed for the most part — it’s completely bizarre. It flipped the culture of the institution. It’s a culture now of fear. And they are losing people all the time, very good people, who were the future of the department.

 Editor’s Note: Please look at and read the narratives and share the post as you can. This is a case study of how Democracy is lost; how Justice in America is corrupted; by one man, one party, one President who is unfit for office. This is not the people’s DOJ any longer.

Continue/Read Original Article Here: 60 Attorneys on the Year of Chaos Inside Trump’s Justice Department – The New York Times

Tags: 2021, 60 Attorneys, Fired by DOJ, Firing DOJ Lawyers, January 6 Attack on U. S. Capitol, January 6th Attorneys, Resigned, Riot January 6th, The New York Times, The New York Times Magazine, Trump Pardons Rioters, Trump's Justice Department, Unraveling DOJ, Year of Chaos

#2021 #60Attorneys #firedByDoj #firingDojLawyers #january6AttackOnUSCapitol #january6thAttorneys #resigned #riotJanuary6th #theNewYorkTimes #theNewYorkTimesMagazine #trumpPardonsRioters #trumpsJusticeDepartment #unravelingDoj #yearOfChaos

60 Attorneys on the Year of Chaos Inside Trump’s Justice Department – The New York Times Magazine

“They didn’t want the ethics office calling them up and telling them what to do.”
Joseph Tirrell, former director of the Departmental Ethics Office“If we’re indicting people because the president hates them, that’s counter to the whole point of doing my job.” Mike Romano, former prosecutor in the Public Integrity Section“Our job wasn’t to engage in fact-finding investigations; our job was to find the facts that would fit the narrative.” Dena Robinson, former lawyer in the Civil Rights Division

The Unraveling of the Justice Department, New York Times Magazine

Sixty attorneys describe a year of chaos and suspicion.

By Emily Bazelon and Rachel Poser, Photographs by Stephen Voss, Nov. 16, 2025

President Trump’s second term has brought a period of turmoil and controversy unlike any in the history of the Justice Department. Trump and his appointees have blasted through the walls designed to protect the nation’s most powerful law enforcement agency from political influence; they have directed the course of criminal investigations, openly flouted ethics rules and caused a breakdown of institutional culture. To date, more than 200 career attorneys have been fired, and thousands more have resigned. (The Justice Department says many of them have been replaced.)

What was it like inside this institution as Trump’s officials took control? It’s not an easy question to answer. Justice Department norms dictate that career attorneys, who are generally nonpartisan public servants, rarely speak to the press. And the Trump administration’s attempts to crack down on leaks have made all federal employees fearful of sharing information.

But the exodus of lawyers has created an opportunity to understand what’s happening within the agency. We interviewed more than 60 attorneys who recently resigned or were fired from the Justice Department. Much of what they told us is reported here for the first time.

Beginning with Trump’s first day in office, the lawyers narrated the events that most alarmed them over the next 10 months. They described being asked to drop cases for political reasons, to find evidence for flimsy investigations and to take positions in court they thought had no legitimate basis. They also talked about the work they and their colleagues were told to abandon — investigations of terrorist plots, corruption and white-collar fraud.

Some spoke on the condition of anonymity because they feared retaliation against them or their new employers. We corroborated their accounts with multiple sources, interviewing their colleagues to confirm the details of what they described and reviewing court documents and contemporaneous notes. We also sent a list of questions to the Justice Department and the White House. “This story is a useless collection of recycled, debunked hearsay from disgruntled former employees,” a spokeswoman for the D.O.J. responded in an email. “Targeting the department’s political leadership while ignoring the questionable conduct of former attorneys who do not have the American people’s best interest at heart shows exactly how biased this story is, and further illustrates why Americans are turning away from biased, outdated legacy media platforms.”

Abigail Jackson, a White House spokeswoman, sent this statement: “These are nothing more than pathetic complaints lodged by anti-Trump government workers. President Trump is working on behalf of the millions of Americans who voted for him all across the country, not the D.C. bureaucrats who try to stymie the American people’s agenda at every turn.”

The attorneys who spoke to us for this project, many of whom have spent decades in government service, disagree.

On his first day in office, President Trump made it clear that lawyers loyal to him would lead the Justice Department. One of his personal defense attorneys, Emil Bove, became the temporary No. 2, and Trump nominated another of his lawyers, Todd Blanche, to take the position permanently once the Senate confirmed him.

Trump also undid one of the largest investigations in the Justice Department’s history by pardoning or commuting the sentences of the nearly 1,600 rioters who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. The group included more than 200 defendants who were convicted of assaulting law enforcement officers.

Prosecutors said they were in disbelief when President Trump pardoned or commuted the sentences of Jan. 6 rioters. Ashley Gilbertson for The New York Times.

Ryan Crosswell, Public Integrity Section, which handles corruption cases: When I saw it was Blanche and Bove, I was actually relieved. OK, it’s gross that they were Trump’s personal attorneys, but before that they were federal prosecutors in New York. They’ve done the job. They know the prosecutors’ code. We’re the only lawyers whose job is not to get the best result for our client. Our job is to get justice. Sometimes that means losing or walking into court and saying we made a mistake.

But then things were 10 times worse than I thought they would be.

Liz Oyer, pardon attorney: We had no knowledge that the Jan. 6 pardons were coming on Day 1. Everybody was concerned that our office was being completely sidelined from the review process.

Gregory Rosen, chief of the breach and assault unit of the Capitol Siege Section, which prosecuted the Jan. 6 rioters: When I was alerted to the pardons, a lot of thoughts ran through my head about how absurd this could get, but first I had to do my job. We had to ask, Did we believe the order was lawful and constitutional?

My team and I determined that it was. The president has the right to pardon people and commute their sentences. So then it was a blitzkrieg of hundreds of cases. We stepped to it.

I was numb. As career prosecutors, we don’t talk about our feelings. We’re not partisans. We’re public servants just doing the job. Early on, we stayed away from using emotional language about our own reactions.

Mike Romano, Jan. 6 prosecutor: Anyone who spent any time working on Jan. 6 cases saw how violent a day that was. I’d spent four years living with that day, the things done to people. It’s incredibly demoralizing to see something you worked on for four years wiped away by a lie — I mean the idea that prosecution of the rioters was a grave national injustice. We had strong evidence against every person we prosecuted. And I knew that if they’re going to wipe all of that away based on a lie, either I’ll be fired as retaliation or pretext or asked to do something unethical. Or both.

Until that point, I’d hoped the second Trump term would be similar to the first one, or similar enough for a while. Then the pardons came down and I knew, in light of that, there is no way I can stay.

Trump appointed Ed Martin, another longtime ally, as interim U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia. Martin had promoted Trump’s baseless claims of election fraud in 2020 and then turned to the cause of defending the Jan. 6 rioters. He had never worked as a prosecutor.

Martin soon fired 15 attorneys in the Capitol Siege Section who prosecuted the Jan. 6 defendants. They joined more than a dozen other prosecutors fired for working under the special counsel, Jack Smith, on the criminal investigations of President Trump. According to the D.O.J.’s new leadership, they could not be trusted to “faithfully implement” the president’s agenda.

Gregory Rosen, Capitol Siege Section: When 15 employees were fired from the Capitol Siege Section, I was the angriest I’ve ever been. Most of them were younger attorneys. I’d hired them. They came from firms, federal and state government, all over. But some naïve part of me thought, Maybe this is the new leadership’s “pound of flesh.”

Prosecutor, Capitol Siege Section: It was inconceivable to me they’d fire people for no reason except they’d worked on cases that were now disfavored. People like me, who are career attorneys, work within a structure. We don’t have much latitude. To be told that you are being punished for your decisions, when you were following guidance created by very talented and skilled prosecutors above you, which judges blessed for the most part — it’s completely bizarre. It flipped the culture of the institution. It’s a culture now of fear. And they are losing people all the time, very good people, who were the future of the department.

 Editor’s Note: Please look at and read the narratives and share the post as you can. This is a case study of how Democracy is lost; how Justice in America is corrupted; by one man, one party, one President who is unfit for office. This is not the people’s DOJ any longer.

Continue/Read Original Article Here: 60 Attorneys on the Year of Chaos Inside Trump’s Justice Department – The New York Times

#2021 #60Attorneys #firedByDoj #firingDojLawyers #january6AttackOnUSCapitol #january6thAttorneys #resigned #riotJanuary6th #theNewYorkTimes #theNewYorkTimesMagazine #trumpPardonsRioters #trumpsJusticeDepartment #unravelingDoj #yearOfChaos

60 Attorneys on the Year of Chaos Inside Trump’s Justice Department – The New York Times Magazine

“They didn’t want the ethics office calling them up and telling them what to do.”
Joseph Tirrell, former director of the Departmental Ethics Office“If we’re indicting people because the president hates them, that’s counter to the whole point of doing my job.” Mike Romano, former prosecutor in the Public Integrity Section“Our job wasn’t to engage in fact-finding investigations; our job was to find the facts that would fit the narrative.” Dena Robinson, former lawyer in the Civil Rights Division

The Unraveling of the Justice Department, New York Times Magazine

Sixty attorneys describe a year of chaos and suspicion.

By Emily Bazelon and Rachel Poser, Photographs by Stephen Voss, Nov. 16, 2025

President Trump’s second term has brought a period of turmoil and controversy unlike any in the history of the Justice Department. Trump and his appointees have blasted through the walls designed to protect the nation’s most powerful law enforcement agency from political influence; they have directed the course of criminal investigations, openly flouted ethics rules and caused a breakdown of institutional culture. To date, more than 200 career attorneys have been fired, and thousands more have resigned. (The Justice Department says many of them have been replaced.)

What was it like inside this institution as Trump’s officials took control? It’s not an easy question to answer. Justice Department norms dictate that career attorneys, who are generally nonpartisan public servants, rarely speak to the press. And the Trump administration’s attempts to crack down on leaks have made all federal employees fearful of sharing information.

But the exodus of lawyers has created an opportunity to understand what’s happening within the agency. We interviewed more than 60 attorneys who recently resigned or were fired from the Justice Department. Much of what they told us is reported here for the first time.

Beginning with Trump’s first day in office, the lawyers narrated the events that most alarmed them over the next 10 months. They described being asked to drop cases for political reasons, to find evidence for flimsy investigations and to take positions in court they thought had no legitimate basis. They also talked about the work they and their colleagues were told to abandon — investigations of terrorist plots, corruption and white-collar fraud.

Some spoke on the condition of anonymity because they feared retaliation against them or their new employers. We corroborated their accounts with multiple sources, interviewing their colleagues to confirm the details of what they described and reviewing court documents and contemporaneous notes. We also sent a list of questions to the Justice Department and the White House. “This story is a useless collection of recycled, debunked hearsay from disgruntled former employees,” a spokeswoman for the D.O.J. responded in an email. “Targeting the department’s political leadership while ignoring the questionable conduct of former attorneys who do not have the American people’s best interest at heart shows exactly how biased this story is, and further illustrates why Americans are turning away from biased, outdated legacy media platforms.”

Abigail Jackson, a White House spokeswoman, sent this statement: “These are nothing more than pathetic complaints lodged by anti-Trump government workers. President Trump is working on behalf of the millions of Americans who voted for him all across the country, not the D.C. bureaucrats who try to stymie the American people’s agenda at every turn.”

The attorneys who spoke to us for this project, many of whom have spent decades in government service, disagree.

On his first day in office, President Trump made it clear that lawyers loyal to him would lead the Justice Department. One of his personal defense attorneys, Emil Bove, became the temporary No. 2, and Trump nominated another of his lawyers, Todd Blanche, to take the position permanently once the Senate confirmed him.

Trump also undid one of the largest investigations in the Justice Department’s history by pardoning or commuting the sentences of the nearly 1,600 rioters who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. The group included more than 200 defendants who were convicted of assaulting law enforcement officers.

Prosecutors said they were in disbelief when President Trump pardoned or commuted the sentences of Jan. 6 rioters. Ashley Gilbertson for The New York Times.

Ryan Crosswell, Public Integrity Section, which handles corruption cases: When I saw it was Blanche and Bove, I was actually relieved. OK, it’s gross that they were Trump’s personal attorneys, but before that they were federal prosecutors in New York. They’ve done the job. They know the prosecutors’ code. We’re the only lawyers whose job is not to get the best result for our client. Our job is to get justice. Sometimes that means losing or walking into court and saying we made a mistake.

But then things were 10 times worse than I thought they would be.

Liz Oyer, pardon attorney: We had no knowledge that the Jan. 6 pardons were coming on Day 1. Everybody was concerned that our office was being completely sidelined from the review process.

Gregory Rosen, chief of the breach and assault unit of the Capitol Siege Section, which prosecuted the Jan. 6 rioters: When I was alerted to the pardons, a lot of thoughts ran through my head about how absurd this could get, but first I had to do my job. We had to ask, Did we believe the order was lawful and constitutional?

My team and I determined that it was. The president has the right to pardon people and commute their sentences. So then it was a blitzkrieg of hundreds of cases. We stepped to it.

I was numb. As career prosecutors, we don’t talk about our feelings. We’re not partisans. We’re public servants just doing the job. Early on, we stayed away from using emotional language about our own reactions.

Mike Romano, Jan. 6 prosecutor: Anyone who spent any time working on Jan. 6 cases saw how violent a day that was. I’d spent four years living with that day, the things done to people. It’s incredibly demoralizing to see something you worked on for four years wiped away by a lie — I mean the idea that prosecution of the rioters was a grave national injustice. We had strong evidence against every person we prosecuted. And I knew that if they’re going to wipe all of that away based on a lie, either I’ll be fired as retaliation or pretext or asked to do something unethical. Or both.

Until that point, I’d hoped the second Trump term would be similar to the first one, or similar enough for a while. Then the pardons came down and I knew, in light of that, there is no way I can stay.

Trump appointed Ed Martin, another longtime ally, as interim U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia. Martin had promoted Trump’s baseless claims of election fraud in 2020 and then turned to the cause of defending the Jan. 6 rioters. He had never worked as a prosecutor.

Martin soon fired 15 attorneys in the Capitol Siege Section who prosecuted the Jan. 6 defendants. They joined more than a dozen other prosecutors fired for working under the special counsel, Jack Smith, on the criminal investigations of President Trump. According to the D.O.J.’s new leadership, they could not be trusted to “faithfully implement” the president’s agenda.

Gregory Rosen, Capitol Siege Section: When 15 employees were fired from the Capitol Siege Section, I was the angriest I’ve ever been. Most of them were younger attorneys. I’d hired them. They came from firms, federal and state government, all over. But some naïve part of me thought, Maybe this is the new leadership’s “pound of flesh.”

Prosecutor, Capitol Siege Section: It was inconceivable to me they’d fire people for no reason except they’d worked on cases that were now disfavored. People like me, who are career attorneys, work within a structure. We don’t have much latitude. To be told that you are being punished for your decisions, when you were following guidance created by very talented and skilled prosecutors above you, which judges blessed for the most part — it’s completely bizarre. It flipped the culture of the institution. It’s a culture now of fear. And they are losing people all the time, very good people, who were the future of the department.

 Editor’s Note: Please look at and read the narratives and share the post as you can. This is a case study of how Democracy is lost; how Justice in America is corrupted; by one man, one party, one President who is unfit for office. This is not the people’s DOJ any longer.

Continue/Read Original Article Here: 60 Attorneys on the Year of Chaos Inside Trump’s Justice Department – The New York Times

#2021 #60Attorneys #firedByDoj #firingDojLawyers #january6AttackOnUSCapitol #january6thAttorneys #resigned #riotJanuary6th #theNewYorkTimes #theNewYorkTimesMagazine #trumpPardonsRioters #trumpsJusticeDepartment #unravelingDoj #yearOfChaos