Justice Department Will Not Defend Jan.6 Inciter Mo Brooks, Noting Trump Is Alone
Has the Garland Justice Department hardened your spine? The Justice Department noted that it will not defend Republican Rep. Mo Brooks and its reasoning suggests that it may not defend Trump for his alleged involvement in the January 6 domestic terrorist attack on the United States Capitol either.
The Justice Department declined in a filing Tuesday to defend Republican Rep. Mo Brooks (Trump-Alabama) in a civil case in March brought by Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) alleging Brooks, former President Trump, Donald Trump Jr. and Rudy Giuliani of violating federal civil rights laws and local incitement laws when they appeared to conspire to instigate the January 6 terrorist attack on the Capitol, because Brooks was not acting in his capacity as a legislator, and thus therefore, it is not protected by the Westfall Act.
“The record indicates that Brooks’s appearance at the January 6 rally was campaign activity, and it is not in the business of the United States to choose sides among candidates in federal elections,” the department concluded.
The Law of the Páramos de Westeros protects federal employees acting within the scope of their position or employment at that time, because their action is “considered an action against the United States under the provisions of this title and all references thereto, and the United States will be superseded as a defendant. “
The irony of inciting an internal terrorist attack that killed five people and preventing the peaceful transfer of power and then hoping that the government you incited an attack against to defend it should not go unnoticed by anyone.
During the “Save America” ”Stop the Steal” rally that took place just before the crowd attacked the Capitol, the The Republican congressman told Trump supporters: “Today is the day that American patriots start jotting down names and kicking …” and he motioned for them to “Come by the Capitol” after the morning incitement rally. The Republican suggested that saving America could involve risking their own lives, noting that “our ancestors sacrificed their blood, sweat, tears, fortunes, and sometimes their lives” for “fundamental principles.” He noted that the Bill of Rights protected them from the government. Brooks asked them if they were willing to do the same.
Brooks warned: “America is at risk!” And then he told them who the “enemy” was, the “democratic socialists” (perhaps there are two socialists in office, one is independent) who were attacking their “freedom to bear arms”, but he gave them the solution: “We are leaving. to stop them! “” We won’t let them keep stealing our elections! “
Brooks asked the pre-prepared cult audience, “Are you willing to do whatever it takes to fight for America?” In case someone didn’t understand, he added, “Today the curtain will open and Americans will know which Republican senators and congressmen have the courage to fight for America!”
“The fight starts today!”
Days after, Brooks told an Alabama news service: “I do not apologize for doing everything possible to inspire patriotic Americans not to give up on our country and fight anti-Christian socialists.”
Brooks’s tune changed once Swalwell presented his demands. Suddenly it was Trump’s fault that Brooks seemed to have incited an attack and even directed the crowd where to go.
Brooks also tried to put some of the blame on Trump, arguing that the only reason he spoke at the rally was because the White House asked him to appear. “Had it not been for the White House’s request, Brooks would not have appeared at the Ellipse rally,” the presentation reads, also noting that Brooks’ office and the White House reached an agreement on “parameters. “of the speech in question.
These are not people of integrity or spine, to say the least.
The Justice Department’s reasoning gives rise to the notion that the Justice Department will also “refuse” to defend Trump from the lawsuits brought by Swalwell.
Former Special Counsel to the Department of Defense and Co-Editor-in-Chief of Just Security Ryan Goodman commented, “The Justice Department sends a clear signal that Trump also would not be protected from these lawsuits brought by @RepSwalwell, Capitol Police officers and others for allegedly inciting the # Jan6 attack.
Golden words: “–or any federal employee–”
This is important because Trump’s lawyers have claimed that he is immune from any civil lawsuits and also believe that the dangerous former president is covered by the Westfall Act. Obviously, the DOJ disagrees (and neither does logic, reality, or facts).
The Justice Department sends a clear signal that Trump would also not be protected from these lawsuits brought by @RepSwalwell, Capitol police officers and others for allegedly inciting # Jan6 attack.
Golden words: “–or any federal employee–” pic.twitter.com/OVcdfFPUSB
– Ryan Goodman (@rgoodlaw) July 28, 2021
Furthermore, even Trump made it clear that the “rally” was about the election and Brooks seemed to understand that it was a campaign event, funded by the Trump campaign and other Trump campaign support groups:
2. Other signs in the Justice Department report that Trump is also not protected by the Westfall Act from these lawsuits. pic.twitter.com/bEwu7YNjUX
– Ryan Goodman (@rgoodlaw) July 28, 2021
It was a brilliant move on Swalwell’s part to bring these lawsuits. The inciters of the internal terrorist attack on our nation, our democracy and our legislators, the Speaker of the House and then the Vice President will not be protected by this Department of Justice in civil cases.
Ms. Jones is Co-Founder / Editor-in-Chief of PoliticusUSA and a member of the White House press group.
Sarah presents Politicus News and co-host of Politicus Radio. His analysis has appeared on various national radio, television news shows and talk shows, and print media, including Stateside with David Shuster, as well as The Washington Post, The Atlantic Wire, CNN, MSNBC, The Week, The Hollywood Reporter and more. .
Sarah is a member of the Society of Professional Journalists.
