THE NATIONAL CAPITOL (Associated Press) — WASHINGTON On Thursday, a former NYPD cop was sentenced to a record 10 years in jail for invading the U.S. Capitol and hitting one of the police officers trying to fend off a mob of Donald Trumpanzees with a metal flagpole.

Among the roughly 250 people who have been penalized for their actions during the disturbance on January 6, 2021, Thomas Webster has received the longest prison sentence. Two more rioters were given identical sentences of seven years and three months in prison, making their combined term the longest in history.

Webster, a 20-year veteran of the NYPD, was the first defendant in the Capitol riot trial to be tried on an assault charge and the first to argue self-defense. Webster claimed he was acting in self-defense when, on January 6 outside the Capitol, he tackled Metropolitan Police Department officer Noah Rathbun and snatched his gas mask.

Webster, 56, was sentenced by U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta to ten years in prison and three years of supervised release. Instead of having Webster arrested immediately, he gave him a chance to report to prison at a later date.

The judge told Mr. Webster, “Mr. Webster, I don’t think you’re a bad person,” the judge said. “I think you were caught up in a moment. But as you know, even getting caught up in a moment has consequences.”

Webster whipped around to face Rathbun, who was present but hadn’t spoken to the judge, and offer his apologies. Webster expressed regret for ever having visited the nation’s capital.

He told the judge, “I wish the horrible events of that day never happened.”

A court stated that Rathbun wasn’t Webster’s only victim on January 6.

It’s important to remember that democracy was also lost in this tragedy, as Mehta pointed out.

An 18-year sentence was proposed by federal prosecutors. The probation division of the court had suggested a 10-year prison term. Mehta did not need to follow any of the suggestions.

An official court document states that Webster “disgraced a democracy that he had fought courageously to safeguard and serve.” Prosecutors claim Webster was the one who initially charged the police barricades in the Lower West Plaza of the Capitol. The rioters attacked the police with homemade projectiles and engaged in hand-to-hand combat, drawing comparisons to a medieval battle.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Hava Mirell said  “Nothing can explain or justify Mr. Webster’s rage. Nothing can explain or justify his violence,”.

James Monroe, a defense attorney, claimed in court documents that the mob was “directed by corrupt politicians” and others spreading the false narrative that the 2020 presidential election was stolen from the Republican incumbent. He pondered the prosecution’s position, asking why they thought Webster didn’t merit mercy after serving his country and New York City for 25 years.

That’s not how fairness is calculated in our society. That’s payback,” Monroe declared.

In May, a jury found Webster guilty on all six counts of his indictment. The jury also found Webster guilty of assaulting Rathbun with a dangerous weapon, the flagpole.

On the same day, a man in New Jersey pled guilty to using pepper spray on police officers, including one who ultimately died. Officer Brian Sicknick died of a stroke the day after the disturbance. As the Trump supporter horde stormed the Capitol, he and his fellow officers were hiding behind metal bike racks.

33-year-old Julian Khater admitted to two charges of assault or obstruction with a deadly weapon. His court is scheduled for December, and he faces up to 20 years in prison. However, he will likely receive a sentence of 6 1/2 to 8 years.

One of the more high-profile cases pursued by the DOJ is the one involving Khater and another individual. Pepper spray was carried in a backpack by George Pierre Tanios. Tanios has pled guilty and will be sentenced in the same month.

On trial, Webster said he blocked the hit from a “rogue cop” because he was trying to protect himself. He also claimed that Rathbun was to blame for starting the argument.

Rathbun stated under oath that he never intended to fight or throw a punch at Webster. Rathbun stated that he and the other cops were having trouble maintaining a secure perimeter and were trying to move Webster back from it.

Before they ever made physical contact, Webster was caught on Rathbun’s body camera yelling obscenities and slurs. It can be seen on the video that Webster slammed into one of the bike racks while yelling at Rathbun, prompting the officer to reach out with his open left hand and strike Webster on the right side of the face.

Webster swung a metal flag pole at the police officer in a downward chopping motion after Rathbun smacked his face, breaking a bike rack in the process. Webster lunged at the police officer, threw him to the ground with a tackle, grabbed his gas mask, and choked him by the chin strap before Rathbun took the broken pole from him.

On the eve of the “Stop the Steal” protest on January 6, Webster travelled alone from his home in Goshen, New York, to Washington, D.C., where Trump addressed thousands of supporters. Webster joined the crowd that stormed the Capitol while wearing a bulletproof vest and carrying a Marine Corps flag on a metal pole.

To “beg” lawmakers to “relook” at the results of the 2020 presidential election was Webster’s stated reason for visiting the Capitol. His testimony, however, indicated that he had no intention of disrupting the joint session of Congress called to officially declare Joe Biden the winner of the 2016 presidential election.

After 20 years of service, including time spent on then-Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s personal security detail, Webster retired from the New York Police Department in 2011. Between 1985 through 1989, he served in the United States Marine Corps, and then in 1991, he enlisted in the New York Police Department.

What’s Your Take?

Like, Share, Comment, Tweet It Out!

“It’s Your World, You Decide!”

Peter Navarro was indicted on contempt charges Friday after refusing a subpoena from a House subcommittee probing the Jan. 6 Capitol attack.

The interview that may have got him in trouble is here;

A later interview just yesterday June 2nd may have sealed his fate;

Navarro is the second former Trump advisor to be charged with contempt of Congress. His arrest follows Steve Bannon’s indictment.

Navarro, 72, was charged with contempt for missing a deposition and failing to submit requested papers.

Navarro said he was informed he couldn’t contact anyone after being handcuffed by an FBI agent at the airport on Friday. He was caught while trying to fly to Nashville for a TV appearance.

“Who are these people? This is not America,” Navarro said. “I was a distinguished public servant for four years!”

During the hearing, he called the House committee a “sham” and prosecutors “despicable.” Each charge has a one-month minimum jail penalty and a one-year maximum.

The indictment shows that the Justice Department is still pursuing criminal charges against Trump allies who obstructed or stonewalled congressional investigators.

The Justice Department and Attorney General Merrick Garland are under pressure to prosecute other Trump associates who have disobeyed subpoenas.

The indictment states that Navarro, when summoned for a deposition, declined and said Trump’s presidential privilege “locked my hands.”

After committee staff said he could share some things without invoking presidential privilege, Navarro declined and directed the committee to speak with Trump’s lawyers, according to the indictment. Navarro missed the March 2 deposition.

Navarro revealed in a court filing that he had been subpoenaed to appear before a grand jury this week as part of the Justice Department’s examination into the deadly Capitol rebellion.

Navarro informed Magistrate Judge Zia Faruqui that the prosecution’s action was preemptive. It contradicts good faith and due procedure.

Navarro, said the FBI handed him the subpoena last week. The subpoena was the first time prosecutors sought White House testimony in the attack probe. Thursday night, prosecutors issued the indictment.

Navarro sued the House select committee investigating the attack on Tuesday, arguing that the February subpoena is unenforceable.

He sued committee members, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and U.S. Attorney Matthew M. Graves, whose office is prosecuting him.

Navarro told The Associated Press this week that the purpose of his case is bigger than the subpoenas themselves. He wants the Supreme Court to address “a variety of concerns that have occurred with the weaponization of Congress’ investigatory powers” since Trump took office.

The select committee asked Navarro about his efforts to assist Trump to overturn the 2020 presidential election, including a call to state legislators.

But, Navarro wouldn’t let up, he endorsed Trump’s false voter fraud claims. Trump praised Navarro’s December 2020 report, which Navarro falsely claimed contained evidence of misbehavior and election fraud “more than sufficient” to flip the election to his former employer.

Another  Trump adviser Dan Scavino was found in contempt of Congress in April.

Scavino and Navarro were among a handful of people who ignored the committee’s requests and subpoenas, committee members said. Scavino and Meadows originally cooperated with the commission, turning up more than 2,000 text messages sent and received before and after the attack. Meadows quit in December. Federal prosecutors haven’t said if he’ll be charged.

Despite pushback from Trump friends, the Jan. 6 panel of seven Democrats and two Republicans has interviewed more than 1,000 witnesses about the revolt and is ready for public hearings next week. The panel’s lawmakers expect the six sessions would shed light on the domestic attack on the U.S. government.

What’s Your Take On Mr. Navarro?

Like, Share, Comment, Tweet It Out! It’s Your World, You Decide!

Social media companies such as Facebook and Twitter had been accused by Republican Governor Ron DeSantis of discriminating against conservative viewpoints because of a Florida law intended to punish them, but an appeals court ruled that the law violated the First Amendment and thus was unconstitutional.

Judges on the 11th U.S. Court of Appeals in Atlanta unanimously found that DeSantis and the Republican-led Florida Legislature had gone too far in telling social media corporations how they should conduct themselves under the Constitution’s free speech provision.

Circuit Judge Kevin Newsom, an appointee of former President Donald Trump, stated in the judgment that the government “cannot dictate a private individual or business what to say or how to say it,” with minimal exceptions. “We believe that social media corporations — even the largest — are private actors whose First Amendment rights are protected,” we write.

There was an earlier finding in favor of the statute enacted by DeSantis, which was upheld by a federal district judge in the state of Florida in 2021. To depict social media businesses as largely liberal in perspective and antagonistic to ideas from the political right, it was part of a broader conservative push.

The panel’s conclusion was that editorial control over content is guaranteed by the Constitution.

Judge Newsom said that social media sites like Facebook, Twitter, and TikTok are “involved in constitutionally protected expressive activity when they moderate and select the content that they disseminate on their platforms,” which the appeals court found to be permissible.

Emails to DeSantis’ press secretary and communications director about the verdict went unanswered as of Monday afternoon. He is seeking for reelection this year, and has his sights set on the GOP nomination in 2024. Although similar bills have been offered in other jurisdictions, he was the first governor to sign one into law in his state.

For example, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in Texas recently approved the implementation of such a law; nevertheless, the IT businesses directly affected have asked the Supreme Court of the United States for immediate review of its constitutionality. There was no immediate announcement of a conclusion to this.

“The judgement represents an important step forward for internet users and their right to free speech in general,” said the nonprofit Computer & Communications Industry Association, which represents tech and communications firms.

According to CCIA President Matt Schruers, “when an online provider takes action against problematic content on its own site—whether extremism, Russian propaganda, or bigotry and abuse—it is exercising its right to free expression.”

Florida’s attorney general would be able to sue firms under the state’s Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act as a result of the law’s enactment. In the event that they believe they have been treated unfairly, Floridians might sue social media corporations for up to $100,000.

In addition to the likes of Twitter and Facebook, the law targeted social media platforms with more than 100 million monthly users. Lawmakers, however, carved out an exception for Walt Disney Co. and its apps by stating that theme park owners would not be subject to the legislation.

Large social media corporations would be required to post guidelines on how they decide to “censor, deplatform, and shadow ban” individuals and groups.

A majority of the law’s mandates were overturned by the court of appeals, with the exception of a few minor sections.

“Social media platforms exercise editorial judgment that is inherently expressive. When platforms remove users or posts, deprioritize content in viewers’ feeds or search results, or sanction breaches of their community standards, they engage in First-Am < UNK>- protected activity,” Newsom wrote for the court.

isthatporks take; it’s funny when people have a problem following the rules of life let alone the constitution and/or the rights of others. Enter Ron Desantis. Ron Desantis has been playing by the Donald Trump playbook of doing things he would not like done to him. Here he is in what is supposed to be a man in public office at the highest levels of democracy and constantly falls short of the example he’s supposed to hold in office and common sense. For that, among other things, we present to him the Pork award. This award has been specifically crafted for people like Ron who love to do things like change rules when it fits him or re-arrange them in a heartbeat if it fits you. Ron is a special kind of man with a special kind of pork that would rather use his power to punish those who disagree with him than to put his big pants on and just deal with it as we all do in a public forum such as Facebook, Twitter, Tik Tok, and all social media platforms. Sound familiar? Ron Desantis is a brat in its highest form. Pork in its highest regard. We’re glad a judge followed the rules of the law as it was designed for all and not Ron Desantis. Some people out there are still trying to quietly Jan 6th America into their way and Ron Desantis is one of them. It won’t work.

What’s your take on Ron Desantis? we’d like to hear what you think.

Like, Share, Comment, Tweet, It’s Your World, You Decide!