Latest News

August 24, 2023

It’s generally acknowledged that U.S. District Court Judge Tanya S. Chutkan, the judge who, apparently by luck of the draw, was handed President Trump’s J6 case, is not inclined to be lenient towards anyone she perceives to be associated in any way with the events of January 6, 2021.  In fact, some of her sentences in those cases have exceeded even those asked for by the prosecutors.  But did you know just how biased she is?

Judging by her own statements in the context of other J6 cases over which she presided, this 2013 Obama appointee is wildly, completely, undeniably, outrageously biased.  She has made it clear that she cannot wait to see Trump behind bars.  And yet, unless she’s recused from the case, an event unlikely to happen, she’ll be presiding at Trump’s trial --- before a DC jury, no less.  Talk about going through the motions of justice.

“Although judges often make comments from the bench,” investigative reporter Julie Kelly says, “Chutkan’s strident language raises questions about her impartiality in handling the case against the presumptive GOP nominee for president in 2024.”  Quite an understatement.

Kelly has a new piece at REALCLEAR INVESTIGATIONS that examines the politically charged rulings and incendiary statements Judge Chutkan has made in these cases.  If you’ve read her book, “JANUARY 6:  How Democrats Used the Capitol Protest to Launch a War on Terror Against the Political Right,” some of this information will be familiar to you, as Kelly used some of Judge Chutkan’s remarks to show the circular reasoning being employed to justify denying detainees bail and other basic rights.

For example --- this is cited in both the new article and the book --- Judge Chutkan, who herself believes that suspicions about election fraud are wild conspiracy theories --- said of defendant Donna Bissel, “As noted in the government’s sentencing memo, the defendant appears to be susceptible to believing outlandish and absurd conspiracy theories. To protect the public, it’s important to make sure that she does not fall victim to another lie or conspiracy and act out in a way that again jeopardizes public safety.  It’s one thing to believe in conspiracy theories in your basement, and it’s another thing act out on them and, for instance, to travel from Indiana to DC to storm the Capitol to overturn an election.”

It should be noted that Ms. Bissel’s crime was the huge threat to public safety known as “parading.”

But this is the judge Trump got.  Kelly has quote after quote showing that if anyone is being incendiary about January 6, it is Judge Chutkan.  She’s very emotional about it.  Sample quote, from the trial of Matthew Caspel in December 2022: “[Every] single time I watch the videos and look at the photographs of what was going on that day, I am struck anew by how horrible this was, by how violent and terrifying, and how outnumbered and vastly unequipped law enforcement officers were feeling that day as they were basically struggling for their lives and wondering if they were going to make it home to their kids.  I don’t know if we’ll ever recover from that.”

You know, if she’s still so concerned about “how outnumbered and vastly unequipped law enforcement officers were feeling that day,” she might want to know why President Trump’s approval of up to 20,000 National Guard troops was rejected by then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.  The presence of the National Guard would have kept the entire event under control.  She appears to be blaming the one person whose action, if it had been heeded, could have prevented the whole awful thing.

It seems this has never occurred to her.

This judge also apparently subscribes to the “Trump cult” idea --- that those who supported him did so because of the force of his personality and not because of legitimate concerns about our country.  In October 2022, she referred to this as “a blind loyalty to one person who, by the way, remains free to this day.”  (Implication:  but my courtroom will take care of that!!)  It’s hard to imagine any deeper bias.

In October 2021, at the sentencing of Matthew Mazzocco --- who spent only 12 minutes inside the Capitol and committed no violence --- she said, “He went there to support one man who he viewed had the election taken from him.  In total disregard of a lawfully conducted election, he went to the Capitol in support of one man, not in support of our country or in support of democracy.”

This is another defendant found guilty of “parading.”  He was sentenced to 45 days in jail.  This judge simply doesn’t understand: Trump supporters who attended the rally and participated nonviolently were there BECAUSE they supported democracy and thought it likely had been subverted.  Millions more still doubt the outcome and are nonviolently making our voices heard.  But Judge Chutkan’s remarks give the impression that she’d prefer to see all of us in jail --- you know, in the interest of public safety.

Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz recently filed a resolution to condemn and censure Judge Chutkan for exhibiting “open bias and partisanship in the conduct of her official duties as a judge.”  It’s fine to have at least a symbolic protest like this, but there are no teeth to it.  A judge will typically be removed for bias only if it is seen outside a judge’s work as a judge, and as far as we know, Judge Chutkan has kept her bias within the confines of her courtroom (where it’s okay??)  One would hope that for a trial this high-profile and a judge this incredibly biased, Trump’s case could be an exception.

RELATED:  You have to see what Trump legal adviser John Eastman had to say when he was arraigned in Fulton County, Georgia, on Wednesday.  Eastman is an eminent legal scholar and law professor who has been smeared with ridiculous racketeering charges by a biased local DA, and he took a moment before his arraignment to deliver via reporters a law lecture to Fani Willis, since she obviously didn’t pay attention to those at Emory University.

Eastman eviscerated Willis for her outrageous conduct and lack of understanding of the law. He said she is attempting to criminalize people exercising their rights and lawyers doing their job, and that her destructive actions are already having “profound consequences for our system of justice.” Victoria Taft’s piece at PJ MEDIA is a must-read.



Leave a Comment

Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

Your Information
Your Comment
BBML accepted!

More Stories

Once and for all, is Jack Smith a legitimate special counsel?

Closing statements Tuesday in Merchan’s Manhattan courtroom

No Comments