Trump’s blanket pardons offer hope and healing



Processing the events and emotions of the past week has taken time. BlazeTV documented my immediate reaction to President Trump’s sweeping pardons, commutations, and case dismissals. In a five-minute video recorded right after I learned Trump kept his promise, I struggled through tears and jumbled words to share my thoughts.

Over the past few days, I’ve come to terms with the reality of my January 6 case being “dismissed with prejudice.” I’ve also absorbed the reactions of other “J6ers,” whose own legal battles ended last Monday, as well as the responses from media pundits and politicians. As expected, reactions range from positive to negative. (I’ll delve deeper into this in a future piece.)

While Blaze Media and BlazeTV have covered my January 6 journey at length, a quick recap might be helpful for those unfamiliar with my story.

What I did and didn’t do

I traveled to Washington, D.C., on January 6, 2021, intending only to cover the final rally of Trump’s first presidency. I brought my camera, tripod, a microphone for street interviews, and extra batteries to capture reactions to the speeches scheduled for the day. My primary question was whether the so-called kraken would be unleashed — the final proof of an allegedly “stolen election.”

When it became clear that no such announcement would come from the speechmakers, including President Trump, a colleague and I began a mile-long walk to the Capitol building. Additional speeches were planned on the Capitol lawn at six separate, legally permitted “First Amendment Protest” events.

By the time we reached the west side of the Capitol’s outer perimeter, at about 1:15 p.m., there were no barricades or “Closed Area” signs — something I later learned had been breached and removed before our arrival. Hearing sirens, seeing smoke, and witnessing flash-bang grenades, we sprinted to the Lower West Terrace. There, at exactly 1:19 p.m., I turned on my camera and began documenting the events that would alter my life.

I followed the story wherever it led. An hour later, I was inside the Capitol building with thousands of protesters and around 80 other journalists and media personnel. I exited 37 minutes later through the Hall of Columns and out the south doorway. During that time, I committed no acts of violence, resisted no law enforcement, and caused no damage to Capitol property.

Media and news organizations worldwide quickly licensed my videos, which were featured in documentaries by HBO, the New York Times, the Epoch Times, and numerous others. I began writing accounts of that day and delved into investigations of the key figures and most puzzling anomalies related to January 6.

In July 2021, the FBI contacted me to request a voluntary interview. Because of my recognized status as “media,” the FBI needed written approval from the U.S. Attorney General’s Office. After my attorney negotiated and secured this agreement, I participated in the interview in October of that year. On November 17, 2021, my attorney received an email from Assistant U.S. Attorney Anita Eve, stating, “Your client will be charged within the week.”

To my shock — and admittedly, some amusement — the charges included a felony count of “interstate racketeering.” The Department of Justice alleged that I knowingly conspired to cross state lines (from North Carolina) with foreknowledge of an illegal event to profit from documenting and licensing footage of the activities.

Going public

On the Monday of Thanksgiving week in 2021, we sent a press release to over 200 media outlets, launching a public counteroffensive against the government’s absurd allegation. I did dozens of interviews with various news outlets, including newspapers, magazines, TV shows, podcasters, and bloggers.

This strategy caught the government off guard. No other individual accused of a January 6 crime had taken such an approach. The result? The government went silent for 20 months — no response, no action. During this period, my coverage of the January 6 trials and investigations into the conduct of certain U.S. Capitol Police officers gained attention from members of Congress and major media platforms, including Tucker Carlson.

Sources within the Capitol Police and the Justice Department informed me that officials were “not happy” with my reporting. In the spring of 2023, I was granted access to 41,000 hours of Capitol closed-circuit TV footage — all while I continued working independently, unaffiliated with any news organization.

For nearly 1,600 January 6 defendants, the government went too far. It repeatedly trampled due process, destroyed lives over misdemeanors, and handed down egregiously unfair sentences.

In early July 2023, Matthew Peterson, the new editor in chief of Blaze Media, reached out to discuss bringing my work to the publication as a contributor. In the final week of July, before we finalized my contract, my attorney informed me that a D.C. grand jury had subpoenaed all my January 6 videos.

Grand juries are not convened for misdemeanor offenses, so they were obviously looking for a reason to charge me with a felony. Twenty months after going silent, with growing national attention to my work as an independent journalist, I had become confident that the government had decided not to pursue charges against me.

I was devastated by this news. Not only because of the renewed legal jeopardy, but I was certain that Blaze Media would withdraw the offer. You know the drill.

“Hey, Steve. We really love your work, man. And when you get all this legal stuff behind you, call us back, and we may have a place for you here.”

I sat on this news over the weekend, not informing Peterson at Blaze Media. My attorney picked up the subpoena on Monday morning, confirming my worst fears. I then posted to Twitter that I was back in the government’s crosshairs.

My phone rang. It was Peterson. I assumed this was the bad-news call I expected. Peterson nervously laughed and said, “Uh … it looks like I need to get you a contract … right away.”

I broke down in tears. This wasn’t the response I expected from any corporation. We finalized an agreement that afternoon, and by Wednesday morning, I made my debut on "The Glenn Beck Program" as a Blaze Media contributor.

The government makes its move

After complying with the grand jury subpoena, we heard nothing from the Justice Department until December 14, 2023. While sitting in Kentucky Republican Rep. Thomas Massie’s office, I received a text from my attorney: “You need to call me ASAP.”

A message like that is never good news. I stepped into the hallway of the Rayburn Congressional Office Building and called him. He informed me that the FBI had just contacted him, saying I needed to surrender within the week.

My next call was to Peterson. The company sprang into action, booking me on all BlazeTV programs, including Glenn Beck's. Other major media outlets quickly picked up the story. By the end of the next day, the FBI agent called my attorney back to say the bureau would postpone my arrest until “sometime after the holidays.”

Early the following week, Peterson called me again. Was this the other shoe dropping at last? No. Instead, he told me Blaze Media wanted to hire me as a full-time investigative correspondent with full benefits. Once again, the tears flowed. Who are these people?

On March 1, 2024, I was finally compelled to report to the FBI’s Dallas field office for arrest on four basic misdemeanor charges — the same charges leveled against hundreds of January 6 defendants. Despite their efforts, the Justice Department couldn’t make a felony charge stick. Nearly 38 months after January 6, 2021, I was brought before a Dallas magistrate in leg irons — for nonviolent misdemeanor charges.

I’ll spare you the details of the legal battles over the next eight months involving my attorneys, federal prosecutors, and Judge Christopher Cooper. Suffice it to say, I wanted to go to trial despite Cooper’s consistent denial of every motion we filed and his generally hostile attitude toward me. Since then-candidate Trump was openly promising pardons for January 6 defendants, we believed it was crucial for my trial date to occur after January 20, 2025, in hopes that he would win the election and end the proceedings in my case.

Judge Cooper, however, refused to grant a continuance, holding firm to the November 12 trial date originally set on the court’s calendar.

November 12 — exactly one week after the election. The timing wasn’t favorable for me, regardless of the outcome. In 2020, 95% of the D.C. jury pool voted for Biden. If Trump won, jurors might seek revenge. If Kamala Harris won, they’d feel emboldened to bury me. And Cooper’s dislike for me was plain to see.

Still, my attorneys were optimistic. They believed presenting a selective prosecution defense could force the government to explain why it hadn’t charged over 80 other journalists — mainstream, independent, bloggers, podcasters, social media influencers, credentialed, or uncredentialed. If successful, this strategy could lead to a landmark decision.

Alas, it was not to be. On November 6, the day after Trump won the election, I appeared before Judge Cooper at a pretrial hearing. The session was brief and brutal, as he denied every motion for discovery, a continuance, and even my right to argue a selective prosecution defense.

Immediately after the hearing, I joined a Zoom call with my four attorneys. One of them remarked, “This trial will be nothing more than a shaming exercise.” With that in mind, I instructed them to notify the prosecutors and the court that I would not proceed to trial and would instead plead guilty to all four misdemeanor charges.

I fully understood that it would take at least two months to be sentenced after my guilty pleas. I also recognized that if Trump fulfilled his promise to pardon nonviolent January 6 defendants, I would be in a unique legal position. Under federal law, a defendant is not considered “convicted” until sentencing, even after pleading guilty.

I took the risk. After I entered guilty pleas to all four charges, my sentencing was scheduled for March 6, 2025. If Trump kept his word, my case would be dismissed and the entire four-year ordeal would conclude — technically and legally — as if it had never happened.

The truth about January 6

Two months before joining Blaze Media, I spoke at a Wake County Republican Women’s Club luncheon in Raleigh, North Carolina. During my remarks, I made what I thought was a simple filler comment: “Whatever the Oath Keepers may or may not be individually guilty of, the one thing they are not guilty of is the crimes for which they were convicted.”

Unexpectedly, more than 100 women in the audience rose to their feet in a standing ovation. In that moment, I realized that America hadn’t lost its desire for true justice in the January 6 cases, even for those convicted of seditious conspiracy.

This wasn’t just the largest investigation and dragnet in American history — it was the most politically motivated mass persecution.

At the time, Fox News had just fired Tucker Carlson and largely abandoned January 6 coverage. For those of us working to expose the Justice Department’s weaponization, it was clear that the American people’s demand for real justice — and their frustration with the Biden DOJ’s witch-hunt — was growing. Trump must have sensed it too, as his promise of pardons became a centerpiece of his 2024 campaign.

Americans understand government overreach because resisting it is why this nation was founded. It’s in our DNA. Trump’s fulfillment of that promise on his first day back in office wasn’t just anticipated — it was a crucial factor in his November victory. Perhaps the decisive one. Because Americans want true justice for every citizen, regardless of the crimes those citizens may or may not have committed.

For nearly 1,600 January 6 defendants, the government went too far. It repeatedly trampled due process, destroyed lives over simple misdemeanors, and handed down egregiously unfair sentences. This treatment stood in stark contrast to D.C. rioters from 2017 and 2020, who often committed far worse crimes but saw their cases dismissed or received mere slaps on the wrist from the same D.C. judges and juries.

Relief, gratitude, and the need to heal

Initially, I advocated full pardons for all nonviolent January 6 defendants and a case-by-case review for the others. But in recent months, my stance shifted toward blanket pardons for everyone. Why?

It’s straightforward. Pick any case file from the nearly 1,600 defendants, and within five minutes, I could show you where the government violated basic due process rights or where judges allowed prosecutions to proceed under predetermined, unwinnable scenarios for defendants. Worse still, many defendants endured literal torture at the hands of their jailers.

Given the overwhelming complications and extenuating circumstances, reviewing each case individually would have taken months, if not years. Blanket pardons were the only just solution.

On the evening of January 20, I was stunned by Trump’s decision to grant blanket pardons, commutations, and dismissals with prejudice. Vice President-elect JD Vance and attorney general nominee Pam Bondi had already hinted at pardons for the nonviolent with case-by-case reviews for others. Trump’s final announcement and signature left me breathless.

It was the right decision and exactly what was needed. Even the most violent January 6 defendants had their rights trampled by Biden’s Justice Department. Trump’s courage and action brought tears to my eyes — and still do as I write this.

For nearly four years, I’ve said I saw bad people doing bad things on January 6. I also saw good people doing good things. And I saw otherwise good people doing stupid things.

This applied to both sides of the police line that day.

Critics decrying the pardons and commutations of the violent defendants fail to grasp the extent of the Biden administration’s weaponization against all January 6 participants — the violent, the rowdy, and the accidental tourists who walked through open doors to snap a selfie in the Rotunda.

This wasn’t just the largest investigation and dragnet in American history — it was the most politically motivated mass persecution. Nonviolent participants suffered severely for the minor offense of glorified trespassing. Those who assaulted law enforcement officers have already faced severe penalties, some warranted and others unconstitutional.

The president did the right thing. Let the healing begin.

Punk who slapped HS teacher twice in face gets charged — with misdemeanors



The North Carolina high school student who was caught on video slapping a teacher twice in the face has been charged with misdemeanors.

What are the details?

The Forsyth County Sheriff's Office on Tuesday said it "charged a juvenile with Assault on a Government Official and Communicating Threats." Specifically authorities said Juvenile Justice "issued a Secure Custody Order for one (1) count of Communicating Threats ... and two (2) counts Misdemeanor Assault ..." All the charges are misdemeanors.

The sheriff's office noted that the Parkland High School student — who's not being identified due to his age — was recorded on video Monday "assaulting an educator."

In the clip, the teacher remains seated and offers no resistance as the student delivers the pair of slaps — the second one sends the teacher's glasses flying.

“The f***’s wrong with you?" the student asks the teacher after the physical attack. "What you gonna do, still sit in that chair 'cause you a bitch ... ain’t nobody even coming, you got slapped, bitch go back to teaching ...”

Here's the video (Content warning: Language and racial slur, uttered by the student):

— (@)

Winston-Salem/Forsyth County Schools Superintendent Tricia McManus told WGHP-TV a district hearing will determine consequences for the student — and McManus will recommend expulsion.

“It’s just like everything else,” she told the station. “You’ve got people that are going to make bad decisions on a daily basis in schools, out of schools, in the community, everywhere. And we’ve got to take those incidents, and we’ve got to address them.”

When asked if he would try the student as an adult, Forsyth County District Attorney Jim O’Neill noted to WGHP that he cannot bring the case to superior court because the charges are only misdemeanors.

“We hope … the message we’ve delivered here today is that our teachers, our administrators that are out in these schools … deserve to feel safe," he said, according to the station. "We are here to protect you, and we’re here to see that … you’re never assaulted when you go to work. … We do want to remind people if you put your hands on a teacher, it’s the same as if you put your hands on one of these officers. The district attorney’s office will … bright the weight of this office down on top of you, so you should have fear of consequences.”

Student caught on video attacking teacher at Parkland High School, sheriff says youtu.be

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

Blaze News' Steve Baker released from courthouse after arrest over his Jan. 6 reporting — and notables have been reacting



Blaze News investigative journalist Steve Baker has been released from a federal courthouse in Dallas after his arrest earlier Friday over his Jan. 6 reporting:

— (@)

Baker also spoke to BlazeTV's Steve Deace after his release:

— (@)

What are the details?

Baker — who for years has been searching for the truth about Jan. 6, 2021, and believes the U.S. government has been targeting him for it — on Friday was charged with four misdemeanors related to his Jan. 6 coverage at the U.S. Capitol after turning himself in to the FBI in Dallas.

But first he was handcuffed and perp-walked:

— (@)

The charges are:

  • Knowingly entering or remaining in any restricted building or grounds without lawful authority
  • Disorderly and disruptive conduct in a restricted building or grounds
  • Disorderly conduct in a capitol building
  • Parading, demonstrating, or picketing in a capitol building

BlazeTV contributor Jill Savage noted Friday that she exited the courtroom with Baker, who "was able to wear his dress clothes but had shackles on his wrists and ankles. He is expected to be released today. His next hearing is set in DC for March 14th."

Baker learned of the charges for the first time Friday and earlier this week told Blaze News that the powers that be wouldn't tell his attorney about the charges because they believed Baker would post them on social media.

Baker's Dallas attorney, James Lee Bright, added to Blaze News that withholding the nature of the charges against his client was a "really unusual" move.

Bright told Blaze News that he's "disturbed" about what's happening with his client, especially given that Baker has been "in full compliance" all this time. Bright also said the federal government "three-plus years later going after people who were legitimate functioning journalists that day" appears designed to have an "absolute chilling effect."

Baker added that when he asked his other attorney, William Shipley, why the federal government is treating him like this, Shipley replied, "You know why. You've been poking them in the eye for three years."

'This is truly outrageous'

Baker's arrest and charges have been getting a ton of attention — and notable individuals have been weighing in:

— (@)
— (@)
— (@)

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

Impeachment evidence against Biden continues to mount



It doesn’t take much to see that President Joe Biden has committed several high crimes — which are grounds for impeachment according to Mark Levin and the Constitution.

Biden swore an oath when he came into office, and that oath has been violated.

Throughout his presidency, Biden has been engulfed in financial scandals with his family and enemies of the United States.

That includes communist China, Russians in Moscow, and the previous Ukrainian government, which Levin notes was “a puppet of Vladimir Putin and Burisma and all the rest of it — the front corporations, the money laundering, the failure to pay taxes. Mr. 10%, Mr. Big, the laptop.”

“He’s violated the United States Constitution at least three ways,” Levin adds.

He’s violated Article One when it comes to immigration.

“Joe Biden has purposefully, intentionally violated dozens of federal immigration laws, federal statutes passed duly by Congress,” Levin says, explaining that Biden has “underminded them by his actions, by his directives, by his executive orders.”

He’s also undermined them through his cabinet department of DHS and by not only not enforcing the laws but by insisting that they not be enforced.

“The mayhem that has been created in this country is unimaginable,” Levin says, referencing the fentanyl and human trafficking crisis our open border has caused.

And that’s just Article One.

Article Two says the power of the purse belongs to Congress and more specifically the House of Representatives.

“When Joe Biden decided, ‘You know what, I’m going to forgive a half a trillion or a trillion dollars in student loans because they’re my voters’” — he again violated the Constitution.

“Joe has actively gone around the Constitution, the Congress, has defied the purpose and directive of the U.S. Supreme Court and has now given away $400 to $500 billion of taxpayer dollars in violation of the Constitution,” Levin explains.

His last violation is empowering the enemy.

“What if we have a commander in chief that takes steps that actually empowers our sworn enemy. That takes steps to issue waivers that allows tens of billions of dollars to flow into the coffers of, say, the Iranian regime, a terrorist regime which has murdered American citizens,” Levin says.

“We have a president of the United States who not only gives aid and comfort to the enemy, he literally gives billions of dollars to them,” he adds.


Want more from Mark Levin?

To enjoy more of "the Great One" — Mark Levin as you've never seen him before — subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

McCloskeys plead guilty to lesser charges, forfeit guns from encounter with rioters



The St. Louis couple who became famous last year for displaying guns at protesters trespassing on their property have agreed to plead guilty to misdemeanor crimes and to give up the firearms they brandished in the incident.

Mark and Patricia McCloskey, both attorneys, had originally been charged with felonies.

What are the details?

KHOU-TV reported that Mark McCloskey pleaded guilty to a count of fourth-degree assault, a Class C misdemeanor, and will pay a $750 fine. Patricia McCloskey pleaded guilty to second-degree harassment, a Class A misdemeanor, and will pay a $2,000 fine.

The couple both originally faced felony charges of unlawful use of a weapon and tampering with physical evidence.

As part of the deal, the McCloskeys agreed to allow their guns held in the incident to be turned over to the state and destroyed. Their attorney had requested that the couple be able to auction the firearms off for a charity.

Mark McCloskey told Fox News following the deal, "The good news is we're not in front of charges now, so I don't have any problem getting myself another AR."

Mr. McCloskey, who is currently running for U.S. Senate as a Republican, told the outlet:

They dropped all the weapons charges and they charged me with the lowest level of misdemeanor, which is something called assault four, which alleges that I purposely placed at least one other person in apprehension of immediate physical injury. I said, "Well, I guess I did. That was all point of the guns."

"It's the value of the Second Amendment," he added. "It's kind of humorous for me at any rate, the charge they finally settled on for me, because it's exactly what I did do. That's the whole point of the Second Amendment. We stood out there with guns, and that placed them in imminent fear of physical injury, and they back off."

What's the background?

The McCloskeys confronted rioters outside their home last June, standing guard with weapons after the activists broke down the fence to their private neighborhood purportedly en route to the mayor's house.

The couple, who said the rioters physically threatened them, became a symbol of defiance against the violence that emerged out of several 2020 protests following the death of George Floyd.

St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner originally charged the couple with the felonies, but was removed from the case after she exploited their prosecution in fundraising emails.

The nine protesters arrested and charged with trespassing on the McCloskeys' property were not prosecuted.

South Dakota AG charged with three misdemeanors over crash that killed pedestrian



South Dakota Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg (R) has been charged with three misdemeanors stemming from a fatal accident that occurred five months ago, when he struck and killed a pedestrian with his vehicle on a highway late at night.

What are the details?

On Sept. 12, Ravnsborg was driving home from a political event when he ran into 55-year-old Joseph Boever. The attorney general called 911 at around 10:30 p.m. to report that he "hit something" that "was in the middle of the road."

According to the call transcript, a dispatcher asked Ravsnborg, "Do you think it was a deer or something?" to which he replied, "I have no idea. Yeah, it could be, I mean it was right in the roadway..."

Ravnsborg returned to the scene of the accident the next morning along with authorities, when Boever's body was discovered. The attorney general put out a statement that night saying he was "shocked and filled with sorrow" over the incident, and that was "fully cooperating with the investigation."

The Argus Leader reported that Thursday, Ravnsborg was charged with three misdemeanors in connection with the crash: operating a vehicle while using a mobile or electronic device, a lane driving violation for driving outside of his lane, and careless driving. The announcement was made by Hyde County deputy state's attorney Emily Sovell.

If convicted, Ravnsborg could face up to 30 days in jail and fines of $500 for each offense, but he was spared from being charged in connection with Boever's death.

Prosecutors said the facts in the case simply did not warrant manslaughter or vehicular homicide charges over the incident, given that there was no evidence that Ravnsborg was under the influence, and that driving outside one's lane does not meet the legal definition of "reckless."

Beadle County State's Attorney Michael Moore explained to reporters, "Recklessness is an extremely high burden for us to establish and in this case we don't have it. I don't feel good about it but it's the right decision."

A spokesman for Ravnsborg told the Rapid City Journal that the attorney general does not plan to resign, and will not speak with the media until he has had a chance to review the charging documents and evidence.

Meanwhile, Boever's family members have been highly critical of authorities over how long the investigation has taken. Boever's widow, Jenny Boever, plans to file a wrongful death lawsuit against Ravnsborg over her husband's death.

Following the news of charges against the attorney general, Gov. Noem tweeted, "My heart goes out to Joseph Boever's family. I am not going to comment on the specifics of Ms. Sovell's decision. I am directing the Department of Public Safety to share additional details of the investigation with the public within the next week."

My heart goes out to Joseph Boever’s family. I am not going to comment on the specifics of Ms. Sovell’s decision. I… https://t.co/PeuE3W132t
— Governor Kristi Noem (@Governor Kristi Noem)1613680083.0