The New York Times rewrites history while Jan. 6 families pay the price



The New York Times recently published an article attempting to recast the events of Jan. 6, 2021, through the lens of prosecutors who lost their jobs following President Donald Trump's return to the Oval Office. The piece depicts these lawyers as martyrs in a political purge, forced to leave behind diplomas and personal items as though they were casualties of injustice.

Yet this framing fundamentally ignores the real devastation that flowed from the government's handling of January 6: families destroyed, children traumatized, and ordinary Americans subjected to years of aggressive and politicized prosecution.

Prosecutors were not martyrs. They were the instruments of a system that made martyrs out of ordinary citizens.

Those of us who have worked directly with these families have seen firsthand the long-term impact of the Department of Justice's unprecedented approach. History cannot be rewritten to cast prosecutors as victims while erasing the lives they targeted from public memory.

The forgotten victims

The most overlooked victims of January 6 have been the children of defendants. These young people endured traumatic government raids that remain etched into their memories. Many remember predawn operations when flash-bang devices exploded inside their homes.

They recall doors being battered down, glass shattering, and heavily armed agents entering their bedrooms. They watched their mothers cry, attempting to hold families together as fathers were taken away in handcuffs. In certain cases, both parents were removed, leaving children to wonder if they would ever see their families whole again.

This was not a foreign dictatorship. It happened in the United States. These tactics, carried out against families who posed no threat, inflicted deep and lasting harm on innocent children. Yet the prosecutors who initiated these cases are now presented as political casualties.

That is an inversion of reality. They were not martyrs. They were the instruments of a system that made martyrs out of ordinary citizens.

The tragedy of Matthew Perna

The case of Matthew Perna illustrates the human toll of this prosecutorial overreach. Perna entered the Capitol, recorded video, and left without committing violence or destruction. Nevertheless, prosecutors pursued severe charges against him, including the application of a "terrorism enhancement" that would have drastically increased his sentence. Media outlets amplified the narrative, branding him as a threat to the nation.

The weight of this combined persecution proved too much for Perna. Before sentencing, he took his own life. His story exposes both the cruelty of the government’s approach and the complicity of media institutions that reinforced it. Today, prosecutors involved in such cases seek sympathy for their professional losses, while families like Matthew's continue to grieve irreparable personal losses.

An egregious double standard

The broader context highlights a political double standard. Democrats describe January 6 as one of the darkest days in American history. Yet the riots of 2020 — federal courthouses attacked, businesses destroyed, police assaulted, communities set ablaze — are routinely called “mostly peaceful.”

The murder of retired police captain David Dorn, killed on livestream while defending his community, generated little lasting outrage. Entire cities endured months of chaos, but few faced consequences comparable to the sweeping prosecutions unleashed against January 6 participants. Where were the terrorism enhancements then? Where were the years-long investigations, the solitary confinement, the relentless media coverage?

The truth is straightforward: Unrest associated with the political left is minimized or excused. Protests involving Trump supporters are magnified into terrorism. This inconsistency erodes public trust in equal justice under the law.

A critical course correction

Against this backdrop, the decisions by Attorney General Pam Bondi and special prosecutor Ed Martin should be recognized for what they are: efforts to restore fairness to a corrupt system. Bondi took decisive action to remove prosecutors who had shown an inability to separate justice from politics.

Martin, who himself witnessed the events of January 6, understood that Americans cannot be criminalized simply for supporting a particular political movement. His leadership in ending the ongoing persecution of defendants brought accountability to those who had turned prosecutions into a political weapon.

The New York Times calls this a "purge." A more accurate description is a course correction — an attempt to re-establish integrity in the Department of Justice and reaffirm that justice must not serve partisan ends.

The true victims of January 6 were not federal prosecutors. They were the more than 1,500 Americans caught in the dragnet of politicized charges. They were the families left bankrupt and broken. They were the children who still wake with nightmares of flash-bangs and broken doors. They were people like Matthew Perna, who lost hope under the crushing weight of unjust treatment.

They were also President Trump, the first lady, their son Barron, and allies who endured years of politicized investigations, predawn raids, tanks in neighborhoods, and heavily armed SWAT teams at their doors. These were the consequences of a government determined to use its vast powers not against criminals, but against political opponents.

Setting history straight

We must ensure that these truths are not forgotten. We cannot allow prosecutors to rewrite history by presenting themselves as martyrs. We cannot permit the suffering of families, the cries of children separated from their parents, or the suicide of Matthew Perna to be erased from public consciousness.

RELATED: Exclusive: Justice for victim’s severe injuries is elusive after he was shot point-blank by police on Jan. 6

Photo by Suspended Image via Getty Images

Justice in America must return to its foundational principle: fairness for all citizens, regardless of political affiliation. Until that principle is restored, we must continue to speak out and to stand with those whose lives were devastated by the misuse of government power.

This is not about revenge. It is about truth. It is not about politics. It is about families. And it is not about power. It is about ensuring that no American child ever again experiences the terror of waking to flash-bangs, shattered doors, and the loss of their parents over politics.

The First Amendment Does Not Protect Media Matters From Breaking The Law

For a left-wing advocacy group, certain courts will bend over backwards to block investigations based on plausible allegations of wrongdoing.

New Jan. 6 subcommittee empaneled to tackle pipe bombs, fed-surrection, other issues



After nearly eight months of wrangling over jurisdictional and turf issues, a new Jan. 6 select subcommittee will begin oversight and investigation work on Sept. 2, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) announced Wednesday.

The new investigation panel will be a subgroup of the House Committee on the Judiciary, chaired by U.S. Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.), who did extensive investigative work on Jan. 6 issues during the 118th Congress that closed on Jan. 3, 2025.

'January 6th was the fulcrum event for the weaponization of government.'

The subcommittee, which will have full subpoena power, will be known as the Select Subcommittee to Investigate the Remaining Questions Surrounding Jan. 6, 2021. During the previous legislative session, Loudermilk’s Jan. 6 work was under the auspices of the Committee on House Administration and its chairman, Rep. Bryan Steil (R-Wis.).

Establishment of a Jan. 6 committee was a high priority of President Donald J. Trump, and it took the president’s persuasive skills to smooth over the disputes that delayed formation of the subcommittee. Final details were hashed out during recent meetings at the White House, senior officials told Blaze News.

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton told Blaze News that establishment of the committee is a milestone.

RELATED: Metropolitan Police Department refuses public access to Jan. 6 use-of-force reports

The new Jan. 6 subcommittee will have a full slate of issues to explore. Getty Images

“This is an important development,” Fitton said. “The challenge is the investigation must turn inward on the House! Who protected [Lt. Michael] Byrd? Who made decisions and when about U.S. Capitol security measures? What about collusion with Biden DOJ, Fani Willis, etc., to jail Trump and other Americans?"

“There is no comparable congressional corruption and abuse in American history,” Fitton said.

Mike Howell, president of the Oversight Project, said establishment of the J6 committee is long overdue.

“January 6th was the fulcrum event for the weaponization of government,” Howell told Blaze News. “It provided the supposed moral cover and justification for some of the worst abuses by law enforcement and the intelligence community in United States history.

Long overdue

“This committee should have been stood up long ago, particularly when it became evident that the supposed Weaponization Subcommittee was an unserious exercise, but better late than never,” Howell said. “There is much work ahead, and I expect there to be many fights over the enforcement of subpoenas. The Oversight Project stands ready to assist in any way we can.”

Although the subcommittee won’t officially begin work until after the August recess, some key staff are expected to remain in Washington setting the foundation for the first investigations to launch once the House is back in September.

The new Select Subcommittee comes into being amid a very different atmosphere in Washington than during the previous Congress, thanks to the election of President Trump last November.

Lack of cooperation from the Biden Department of Justice and FBI stymied the work of the former Subcommittee on Oversight that ceased operation with the closing of the 118th Congress.

The subcommittee has its work cut out on major Jan. 6 issues, including identifying the pipe bomber, exposing how many federal agents and informants were involved in the crowds at the U.S. Capitol, weaponization of the FBI and DOJ against more than 1,600 now-former Jan. 6 defendants, and public release of the rest of the Capitol Police CCTV security video.

The panel will also be tasked with investigating the killing of protester Ashli Babbitt and the questions that still surround former Capitol Police Lt. Michael Leroy Byrd.

Recently departed Capitol Police Chief J. Thomas Manger apparently ignored November 2024 demands from Loudermilk’s subcommittee for more details on Byrd’s significant disciplinary history and efforts by former Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to financially help the man who gunned down the 14-year Air Force veteran.

RELATED: Feds settle multimillion-dollar lawsuit in the death of Ashli Babbitt

A densely packed crowd gathers on and around the West Plaza of the US Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. U.S. Justice Department

Loudermilk revealed in a Nov. 20, 2024, letter that the Office of Professional Responsibility files on three incidents involving Byrd were somehow missing. Manger was asked to explain that, but sources told Blaze News that Manger never responded to Loudermilk’s letter.

Blaze News reached out to USCP for comment. The story will be updated if we receive a response.

Serious questions remain about the DOJ report that cleared Byrd in the Babbitt shooting. The Biden DOJ used the wrong legal standard to justify not pursuing charges of excessive force against the 30-year Capitol Police veteran.

The death of protester Rosanne Boyland has also not been given attention by Congress in its work to date.

There are also many loose ends that were left behind by the Democrat-controlled Jan. 6 Select Committee empaneled by Pelosi in 2022. Witness transcripts, videos, and other materials that should have been preserved by the committee were destroyed. No one has been held to account for the destruction of legislative investigative records.

Loudermilk’s new subcommittee could also examine the apparently perjured testimony given by two former Capitol Police officers in the 2022 trial of the first group of Oath Keepers prosecuted by the Biden regime.

A Blaze News investigation proved that Officer Harry Dunn and Special Agent David Lazarus gave false and conflicting testimony on the witness stand regarding an alleged confrontation between a group of Oath Keepers and Dunn.

Mike Howell is a contributor to Blaze News.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

When I brought the truth to Congress, Democrats lost their minds



Democrats have dragged anti-law enforcement violence into the political mainstream. We’ve never seen this level of shameless rhetoric — let alone open justification of violence — from a major American political party in our history.

During a House Homeland Security Committee hearing Wednesday, I opened my testimony by reading direct quotes from Democrats calling for violence. I also cited the 830% spike in assaults against Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents. I even pleaded with Democrats to stop encouraging threats against law enforcement.

Democrats’ goal was obvious: Slow the hearing down, bore the public, and turn a losing argument into a sleepy C-SPAN rerun.

That’s when Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) lost it.

After just one minute's worth of testimony, Thompson interrupted me mid-statement and demanded a vote to strike my remarks from the record. He failed. I reclaimed my time and continued.

A quick reminder: Thompson chaired the January 6th Select Committee — the entire purpose of which was to blame President Trump for a riot he didn’t cause. Trump explicitly told supporters to remain peaceful and go home. But when I confronted Thompson and his colleagues with their own words — when I showed that they had actually called for violence—he tried to shut me up.

We already knew he was a hypocrite. He just confirmed it.

What triggered him exactly? Maybe it was me quoting a Democrat who told Axios, “There needs to be blood to grab the attention of the press and the public.” Or the one who said, “Civility isn’t working,” and told activists to prepare for “violence.”

Maybe it was when I reminded the room that Rep. LaMonica McIver (D-N.J.) had been indicted for interfering with federal officers at an ICE facility. Or when I listed attacks on the Department of Homeland Security personnel in Alvarado, McAllen, Portland, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Linda Vista.

I didn’t even get into the stack of quotes from Democrats calling DHS officers “Nazis,” “terrorists,” or “the Gestapo.” I had pages of them. But with only five minutes to testify, I picked the highlights.

Later in the hearing, Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) — who showed up late and left early — picked up where his colleagues left off. He said ICE was “terrorizing” illegal immigrants. He accused ICE of jailing a child with his parents instead of separating the family, apparently unaware that he was criticizing the very policy he demands.

The rest of the hearing dragged on for seven hours.

Democrats used procedural games to stall for time, forcing vote after vote on irrelevant subpoenas. Their goal was obvious: Slow the hearing down, bore the public, and turn a losing argument into a sleepy C-SPAN rerun. Not a single Democrat asked a question of any Republican witness until the very last minute.

I was barely paying attention by then.

When Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-Ariz.) said my name, I thought she was a staffer. I didn’t recognize her. I assumed she might be a delegate from one of the territories Americans forget they own.

She shuffled between reading from her Trapper Keeper and trying to deliver rhetorical questions that might eventually lead to something substantive. Then came her big moment.

She asked if I agreed with her description of a detention facility incident.

RELATED: ‘Democrats clearly weren't prepared’: Blaze News contributor schools libs on border crisis in fiery hearing

Homeland Security Committee

I told her flatly that I wasn’t going to take her word for it — and yes, I support detaining illegal aliens during removal proceedings. That’s the law. Her response was dramatic. She looked like someone had slammed on the brakes while she was mid-sentence. Head thrown back. Eyes wide. Total shock.

She tried to recover, flipped back to her notes, and asked if I agreed that Democrats have the authority to just walk into ICE facilities and call it “oversight.”

I reminded her I’ve written about this extensively — including right here at Blaze News — and that no, Democrats can’t just show up at a federal detention center and expect to play dress-up as immigration watchdogs. I told her I was doing my best to keep them out of jail.

— (@)

Then, of course, she brought up Jeffrey Epstein.

At first, I considered thanking her for finally connecting mass illegal immigration to the topic of sex trafficking — but the exchange went in a different direction. She claimed I had reversed my position on the Epstein investigation to match the Trump administration’s narrative.

False.

Since Axios published its memo announcing the case closure, I’ve criticized that decision every single day — on air, in print, on social media, and in private. I haven’t backed off an inch. I called her a liar because she was lying. That clip went viral, and I’m glad it did.

If Ansari had taken the time to read my previous commentary — especially at Blaze News — she might’ve avoided the embarrassment. Maybe it’s time she got a subscription.

After Leaving Conservatives Out To Dry, Elite Law Firms Sprint To Help Biden Aides For Free

'White-shoe' law firms were out to lunch when conservatives needed legal help, but are picking up the tab now that Biden aides are in real trouble.

Metropolitan Police Department refuses public access to Jan. 6 use-of-force reports



The District of Columbia Metropolitan Police Department refused to provide Blaze News with copies of the Use of Force Incident Reports from its massive presence at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

Blaze News filed a Freedom of Information Act request with MPD on May 15, seeking the officer-prepared reports on the use of force for crowd control at the Capitol during the explosive Jan. 6 protests and subsequent rioting.

‘No, you’re going to kill her!’

Under MPD policy, the department had until June 2 to provide a response to the Blaze News request, but failed to do so until June 10.

“Your request was considered,” wrote MPD FOIA specialist Shania Hughes in a letter to Blaze News.

“A review of our records determined the information you seek is law enforcement sensitive and not for public release.”

Hughes’ letter cited §2-534(a)(4) of the Code of the District of Columbia, which states:

The following matters may be exempt from disclosure under the provisions of this subchapter: Inter-agency or intra-agency memorandums or letters, including memorandums or letters generated or received by the staff or members of the Council, which would not be available by law to a party other than a public body in litigation with the public body.

The D.C. Code makes no mention of the subjective and nebulous term “law enforcement sensitive.”

Hughes’ letter said release of the details of force used against protesters at the Capitol “would constitute as a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.” She cited §2-534(a)(2) and §2-534(a)(3)(c) of the D.C. Code, which make reference to “information of a personal nature” that would “constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.”

RELATED: Former Jan. 6 defendant gets life sentence for plot to kill FBI agents, other law enforcement

MPD Sgt. Frank Edwards fires crowd-control munitions into the packed West Plaza crowd at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. U.S. Department of Justice / Metropolitan Police Department

The sections of D.C. Code do not define the term “personal privacy” or explain why it applies to police officers employed by a government agency who were on duty during rioting at the Capitol.

Blaze News filed another FOIA request with MPD on May 1, seeking a record of all Jan. 6 use-of-force complaints. The department returned a spreadsheet listing a single complaint having to do with “shoving.”

Jacqueline Hazzan, legal counsel for the MPD Office of Police Complaints, said the details of that complaint would not be released because they would “reveal information about the agency’s internal deliberative process before it was completed” and “cause an unwarranted invasion of others’ personal privacy.”

The issue of police use of force on Jan. 6 still draws interest 4.5 years later because of what is contained on Capitol Police CCTV security video, MPD bodycam footage, and third-party videos that were often seized by the FBI for use in prosecuting close to 1,600 people who were at the Capitol on Jan. 6.

‘It wasn’t until I saw the video that I realized how bad it was.’

Metropolitan Police routinely refuse to release any bodycam footage from Jan. 6. Former Jan. 6 defendants have posted a large cache of MPD bodycam video, but the department practice has been that the public is not allowed access to Jan. 6 video.

Blaze News covered a high-impact use-of-force case in the point-blank shooting of Pennsylvania dump-truck driver Mark Griffin with a 40mm shell filled with hard rubber baton rounds. The shot — fired by an officer, according to video — split Griffin’s left femur from top to bottom. The injury required several surgical procedures to repair, including insertion of a titanium plate with 14 screws.

Sgt. Frank Edwards, the officer who video shows fired the shot, told a colleague late in the day on Jan. 6 that MPD went through 500 crowd-control munition shells, grenades, and gas canisters that day.

Other prominent Jan. 6 use-of-force cases included the beating of protester Rosanne Boyland by MPD Officer Lila Morris. Boyland had collapsed at the mouth of the Lower West Terrace Tunnel and appeared to be lifeless when Morris used a wooden walking stick to strike Boyland in the face, head, and ribs, according to video evidence.

RELATED: 141 days after President Trump’s pardon, Jan. 6 defendant Elias Nick Costianes Jr. released from prison

Metropolitan Police Department Officer Lila Morris winds up with a wooden walking stick to strike protester Luke Coffee and shortly turns her fury to a lifeless Rosanne Boyland outside the Lower West Terrace Tunnel at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. U.S. Department of Justice/Metropolitan Police Department Bodycam

It is unknown the extent of injuries Boyland suffered as a result. Third-party video and bodycam footage showed that Boyland was bleeding from her right eye and her nose. There was a visible injury above her right eye that was not mentioned or documented by paramedics, the emergency room physician, or the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner in its autopsy report.

The use of the walking stick against Boyland was “brought to our attention and reviewed thoroughly,” MPD public affairs specialist Alaina Gertz told the Epoch Times in April 2022. The review “did not substantiate the allegations you have outlined,” she said, suggesting that the videos of Morris striking Boyland were not properly vetted for “authenticity.”

Bagshaw had ‘gone hands-on with demonstrators in Washington for years.’

The Epoch Times filed a FOIA request for Officer Morris’ Jan. 6 bodycam footage, but MPD refused to grant access, saying releasing the video would violate Morris’ privacy.

Protester Victoria C. White of Rochester, Minn., was beaten in the head, neck, and face by then-Lt. Jason Bagshaw and other officers inside the Lower West Terrace tunnel about 20 minutes before Boyland collapsed, video showed. Capitol Police CCTV security video and MPD bodycam footage showed that White was struck nearly 40 times with steel riot batons and fists.

At 4:11 p.m., a bystander at the tunnel mouth repeatedly tried to intervene to protect White. He shouted at police, “No, no, no, no. Please … please don’t beat her!” and “No, you’re going to kill her!” according to the bodycam of MPD Officer Andrew Wayte. In one violent series, Bagshaw repeatedly pummeled White in the side of the face with a closed fist, security video showed.

“It wasn’t until I saw the video that I realized how bad it was,” White said in a 2022 Jan. 6 documentary. She sued Bagshaw and MPD Officer Neil McAllister in March 2024. That lawsuit is ongoing before U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols.

RELATED: Fact-check: President Trump authorized 20,000 National Guard troops for duty on Jan. 6, 2021

Protester Victoria White is tossed around by police during a severe beating in the Lower West Terrace Tunnel at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.Bodycam Images/Metropolitan Police Department

The lawsuit said White was subjected to “objectively unreasonable, excessive, and indeed, deadly force that shocks the conscience.”

Bagshaw has been with MPD for more than 22 years. A July 2022 article in the Washington Post said Bagshaw has “gone hands-on with demonstrators in Washington for years, winning colleagues’ respect but drawing criticism from demonstrators.” The article did not mention Bagshaw’s actions against White in the tunnel on Jan. 6. Bagshaw was promoted to commander in April 2022.

The FBI began collecting use-of-force data from law enforcement agencies nationwide on Jan. 1, 2019. Of 18,514 federal, state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies nationwide, 5,481 reported use-of-force data to the FBI. Participation in the National Use-of-Force Data Collection is encouraged, but not mandatory.

Both MPD and the Metro Transit Police Department supply use-of-force data to the FBI, according to the FBI Crime Data Explorer.

In 2024, 11,445 of the nation’s 19,277 law enforcement agencies participated in the data collection system. The reporting agencies represent 72% of federal, state, local, and tribal sworn officers nationwide, according to the FBI.

In 2024, the primary uses of force reported included firearms, hands/fists/feet, canine, and electronic control weapons such as a taser, according to the database. Police uses of force were a response to failure to comply with verbal commands, attempt to escape or flee from custody, using a firearm against an officer or other person, displaying a weapon at an officer, and resisting being handcuffed or arrested, the FBI reported.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

The Unelected Magistrate Judges Undermining Trump And Rule Of Law Are Completely Unconstitutional

Contrary to widespread perception, magistrate judges wield extraordinary power despite having no constitutional standing under Article III.

Pardoned Jan 6. Protester Gets Retribution, Courtesy Of Trump

'He wore a t-shirt advertising a Republican politician'