Chansley and other Jan. 6 defendants are peaceful and simple-minded dupes who got played by Trump and were screwed by the Biden Department of Injustice.
The Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol was a shameful and disgraceful event for which President Trump was rightfully impeached (by the House of Representatives) and wrongfully acquitted (by the Senate).
As a result, no American who loves his country should ever think of voting for Trump in the 2024 presidential election.
If our ex-president had any sense of honor and shame, he would devote himself to good deeds and public works of charity and penance rather than run again for president.
But Trump’s dishonor and impeachable conduct does not mean that the thousands of Americans who came to the nation’s capital Jan. 6 were all “insurrectionists” who “threatened our democracy.”
Peaceful Dupes. This characterization is simply untrue as we knew at the time and as we now know in more detail today. The vast majority of the protesters, in fact, were peaceful but simple-minded dupes who were played and taken in by Trump’s lies and deception.
Two to three hundred of the protesters, by contrast, were violent agitators who used flag poles, baseball bats, bear spray, and other items to violently assault the police. These violent agitators deserve swift and appropriate punishment. No one disputes that.
Yet, in a gross act of prosecutorial overreach, many peaceful Jan. 6 protesters reportedly have been charged with crimes and subsumed into the criminal justice system for months upon months of never-ending incarceration and administrative delay while their cases are reviewed and prosecuted.
For many of the protesters, their “crime” was to show up at the Capitol and “trespass” into the building, thereby “obstructing” an official federal proceeding.
Trespassing and Obstruction. But the charge of “trespassing” and “obstruction” is manifestly unfair when you consider that most of the protesters genuinely believed they had a right to enter the Capitol. Trump himself basically said they had that right in his earlier Jan. 6 speech inciting them to “stop the steal.”
The Capitol, after all, is often referred to as “the people’s house.” The inference is that since the Capitol, or “people’s house,” is paid for and supported by the taxpaying public, then the public has a right to enter the building.
For this reason, some of the protesters shouted “This is our house!” as they stormed into the Capitol building. And in fact, the Capitol historically has been open and hospitable to visiting constituents in a way that other federal buildings (e.g., the FBI headquarters and the Pentagon) have not been.
The Capitol Police, moreover, implicitly buttressed this notion when, at some entry points, they opened the doors of the Capitol and stood by and watched as protesters streamed into the building.
We saw this in video taken by participants and observers of the Jan. 6 protest. And we see it again with the release of some 41,000 hours of surveillance video, snippets of which were shown on Fox News this week by Tucker Carlson.
Now, Carlson is no one’s idea of a fair or honest journalist. His reporting and analysis of Russia’s war on Ukraine has been dishonest and objectively pro-Putin and anti-Ukraine. But the Jan. 6 video that Carlson has shown doesn’t lie.
One defendant in particular, Jacob Anthony Chansley, appears to have been unfairly singled out for harsh and excessive punishment.
Chansely was sentenced to 41 months in prison for “obstruction of an official proceeding.” But as law professor Jonathan Turley observes:
The newly released Fox footage from that day raises serious questions over the prosecution and punishment of Chansley. The videotapes aired on Tucker Carlson this week show Chansley being escorted by officers through the Capitol.
Two officers appear to not only guide him to the floor but actually appear to be trying to open locked doors for him.
At one point, Chansley is shown walking unimpeded through a large number of armed officers with his four-foot flag-draped spear and horned Viking helmet on his way to the Senate floor.
Why didn’t the police stop Chansley? Because, we are told, there was a violent riot going on nearby and the outnumbered police were trying to “deescalate the situation.” Confronting Chansley, we are told, by Andrew C. McCarthy,
might have attracted attention and sparked a forcible reaction from him and other demonstrators. That would have been dangerous for the police (many of whom suffered injuries during the uprising) and for the demonstrators (one of whom was killed by an officer, and others of whom died during that afternoon’s frenzy).
The police objective, in those moments, was to stabilize an already bad situation so that it did not become a bloodletting.
Self-Serving Rationalization. I’m sorry, but this is a hyperbolic and self-serving rationalization for the Capitol Police interactions with Chansley. And it simply does not comport with the factual record, the video footage, and the geography of the Capitol building.
Yes, there was a violent riot that was developing outside of the Capitol; and there was a swarm of loud and agitated protesters within other parts of the Capitol. But as Turley points out, at the time in question, Chansley was far removed from the crowd, the noise, and the agitation.
At no point in the videotapes does Chansley appear violent or threatening. Indeed, he appears to thank the officers for their guidance and assistance. On the Senate floor, Chansley actually gave a prayer to thank the officers who agreed “to allow us into the building.”
The “new footage,” notes Wilfred Reilly, “reveals that Chansley and his first line of protesters/rioters were heavily outnumbered—at one point nine to one—by Capitol force officers with semi-automatic sidearms once inside the building.”
Adds New York Post reporter Miranda Devine:
In a jailhouse interview played by Carlson, he [Chansley], says: “The one very serious regret that I have [is] believing that when we were waved in by the police officers, that it was acceptable.”
And how, exactly, was Chansley, engaged in “obstruction of an official proceeding”? He walked into an empty Senate gallery opened for him by the Capitol Police. And for that, this nonviolent, first offender, and Navy veteran was given a “heavy 41-month sentence” after initially being held in solitary confinement, Turley notes.
Violent offenders, by contrast, are sometimes given much lighter sentences. David Jakubonis, for instance, was charged last year with second degree assault for attacking New York GOP gubernatorial candidate Rep. Lee Zeldin.
Jakubonis was arrested July 23, 2022, and released in late October “under strict conditions,” according to RochsterFirst.com.
He would have to go through a 28-day alcohol program at the VA in Bath, he would wear a GPS monitor and a monitor to gauge his alcohol intake, and after the Bath program, go to Veterans Treatment Court and live at the Richards House—a housing program provided by the Veterans Outreach Center.
Evidence Withheld. In light of all this, why did the Judge Royce Lamberth, who adjudicated Chansley’s case, come down so hard on him?
In large part, says Turley, because the judge didn’t know what we now know. He didn’t see the same video footage that we all have now seen.
Incredibly, this footage was withheld from Chansley’s attorney—even though, in the American legal system, exculpatory evidence must be shared with a defendant and his attorney.
“I have great respect for Judge Lamberth,” says Turley. He “has always shown an admirable resistance to public pressure in high profile cases. I cannot imagine that Lamberth would not have found this footage material and frankly alarming.”
The bottom line: justice is supposed to be blind and discriminating. But it is hard not to conclude that in the case of Chansley—and doubtless other wrongly maligned Jan. 6 defendants as well—justice was politicized, disproportionate, and vengeful.
Chansley and other like-minded Jan. 6 defendants are guilty of being simple-minded dupes who fell for Trump’s lies and deception. But they are not violent insurrectionists. They threatened no one and they assaulted no one. Others did and they deserve their punishment and comeuppance.
But Chansley deserves better—and America deserves better—than the miscarriage of justice carried out against him without liberty and justice for all in the name of freedom and democracy.
Our nation should right this wrong even as it rejects Trump’s contemptible quest to regain the presidency.
Feature photo credit: Jan. 6 defendant Jacob Anthony Chansley, courtesy of CBS News.