Julie Kelly: ‘J6 Defendants Are Subjected to Highly Biased Judges and Juries’ in Washington, D.C.

Michael Patrick Leahy: Good afternoon, Nashville. It’s 12:05 PM. We are, indeed, broadcasting live from our studios in downtown Nashville. In-studio, the original all-star panelist, Crom Carmichael.

Welcome back, Crom.

Crom Carmichael: Thank you.

Michael Patrick Leahy: On our newsmaker line right now, it is my privilege to welcome perhaps the very best journalist in the country covering the January 6th defendant cases. In fact, the best journalist – let me take any qualifier away from that.

I am so delighted to call her my friend, Julie Kelly.

Welcome to The Tennessee Star Report.

Julie Kelly: Oh, thank you, Michael. Quite an introduction.

Thank you so much for having me on, and thanks for covering all my work. I really appreciate it.

Michael Patrick Leahy: Well, certainly well-deserved. I mean, you have just been tenacious in reporting the facts about the travesties of justice going on. A two-tiered justice system where these January 6th defendants are not being given fair trials, in my view.

Can you tell us what’s the latest going on in the J6 arena?

Julie Kelly: Well, as far as the overall January 6th prosecution of those who participated in the events of January 6th, the Department of Justice now is bragging that it has roughly 1,300 total defendants – that’s their caseload. Most of those charges despite being called an insurrection, no one has been charged with insurrection, and most of those charges are misdemeanors, like parading in the Capitol or walking on restricted grounds.

Nonetheless, these defendants are subjected to – it’s not even right to call it an impartial proceedings in Washington D.C. – but highly biased judges and juries rendering the fate of what happens with these defendants either in court or in pleadings.

So we now have 1,300 total.

But what was really egregious, Michael, is, a few weeks ago, Matthew Graves, the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia – a Biden campaign advisor turned Biden prosecutor – warned that his office planned to round up thousands more J6ers. People who were just standing on campgrounds outside that afternoon. No clue that they were trespassing, certainly breaking the law, but he plans to at least double this total caseload as this DOJ continues to retaliate against Americans who protested Joe Biden’s election three years ago.

Michael Patrick Leahy: What laws did the bystanders outside violate and why is the U.S. attorney prosecuting them?

Julie Kelly: Right, so this is all so highly unusual. Normally protests in Washington, protesters who either break the law or as we’ve seen recently, try to attack the White House or unlawfully occupy House office buildings, they get arrested, a slap on the wrist, a $50 fine, and they go on their way.

Not so with the January 6th defendants.

So what Matthew Graves is arguing, and what the government has argued for over three years, is that the entire Capitol complex was restricted grounds, it was off-limits because Mike Pence was in the building and as a Secret Service protectee that automatically rendered the building and the adjacent grounds as a restricted area.

Now, no one knows this. I certainly didn’t know it until, you know, I started covering this. And I guarantee you, 100 percent of the people who were on Capitol grounds, not even trying to go in the building, didn’t know about this law. So that is the statute, the misdemeanor, that he is going to use to prosecute thousands of more J6ers.

Michael Patrick Leahy: Crom Carmichael has a question for you, Julie.

Crom Carmichael: I am really confused. You’re saying the fact that they were just there? Just the fact that they were there in close proximity to Mike Pence, who is covered by Secret Service, that makes him guilty?

If the President of the United States goes to a restaurant, do all the people who come into the restaurant while he’s there, are they, could they possibly be found guilty, or arrested?

Julie Kelly: I mean, if you are going to apply the same rules, then certainly that is the case. And I think that’s a very good question; and Crom, I’ll tell you, this very issue is on appeal – the DC board of appeals – and the Democrat judge sounded very skeptical about DOJ’s application of this statute in one certain case and told the government, ‘Well, you need to prove that these individuals knew the statute; furthermore, knew that Mike Pence was there.’

Now keep in mind, Mike Pence had been evacuated by 2:20 PM. He went to what we’re told was some underground garage near a loading dock on Capitol grounds. Well, he was never in any danger, protected by Secret Service – he’s out of the way of any violence that happened.

So at the same time, Matthew Graves is threatening to charge these people, you have the DC appellate court who might overturn this completely. But that doesn’t stop people like Matthew Graves and the DOJ. They just want the talking points. They want the threat and they want to use whatever weaponization of the law to criminalize political dissent and warn people: if you try to do this again after the 2024 election, here’s what’s coming for you.

Crom Carmichael: Well, a quick question, isn’t there some Supreme Court case that’s being heard right now that has to do with the J6ers?

Julie Kelly: Yes, sir. So, the Supreme Court last month agreed to take up a review of §1512(c)(2). This is obstruction of an official proceeding felony.

It is a post-Enron statute – never before been used this way – but at least 300 J6ers have been charged with §1512(c)(2), convicted, resulting in years in prison. And of course, this is two of the charges against Donald Trump and Jack Smith’s fourth indictment in Washington.

The Supreme Court is going to look at what’s called a splintered appellate court ruling that barely upheld DOJ’s intentionally misinterpretation of the language of that statute to say, ‘If you interfered in any way with proceedings that day, the counting of the electoral college vote, either before, during, or after the joint session adjourned, it doesn’t matter. You still obstructed this official proceeding that makes you a felon and it’s punishable by up to 20 years in prison.’

So the Supreme Court is going to review that oral arguments are set to take place may excuse me, March or April. We could get a ruling in May or June. And I’ll tell you, this poses a bigger threat to Jack Smith’s indictment against Donald Trump than even what’s happening on the presidential immunity matters.

So a lot of things happening now, but what’s a little encouraging is watching some of the appellate courts and the Supreme Court now taking a hard look. At DOJ’s unaccountable, untethered, retaliatory prosecution of all of these individuals, I’m hoping that they get some relief by the courts.

Michael Patrick Leahy: Doesn’t the conduct of the Department of Justice here, basically it’s sort of ‘Show me the man and I’ll show you the crime’ – doesn’t it really undermine public belief in our rule of law and the fairness of our legal system?

Julie Kelly: Oh, it absolutely does. I mean, what I thought was telling me the other night, Fox News’ analysis of Iowa Republican caucus voters, and it showed that 55 percent of Republican voters do not trust the U.S. legal system.

Now that is a huge reversal of generations of how Republicans view the legal system – that it was fair and impartial. And the laws were applied equally, but they now see – and Trump is just at the tip of the spear, of course – but now, it’s gone down all the way to just a Trump voter who walked on Capitol grounds that afternoon; a pro-lifer; somebody who posted a funny meme about Hillary Clinton.

And so that has really turned public sentiment.

Crom Carmichael: Hadn’t there also been cases against people who were literally not even there?

Julie Kelly: Oh yes, I mean, look at what happened to Enrique Tarrio, the leader of the Proud Boys, sentenced to 22 years in prison, convicted of “seditious conspiracy.” He was in a Baltimore hotel on January 6th.

He was not even at the Capitol, but because they said his planning to go to the city, his organization with his guys meeting at the Washington Monument. Going to Capitol ground, some of them went inside. That actually rose to the level of seditious conspiracy. Something tantamount to treason.

So, Enrique Tarrio, just one example of someone who, I don’t even go in the building, wasn’t even there, and still convicted of all these absurd charges, by a D.C. jury, remember – a 100 percent Democrat City, basically. And then sentenced to a crazy amount of time in jail.

Michael Patrick Leahy: Well, Julie Kelley, just so you know, Crom and I salute you for all of your fantastic work.

It’s Julie Kelley covering this stuff. The regime media is covering it up – and there are more than a hundred million Americans who track your work and trust you for your investigative journalism and your integrity.

Julie Kelly, thanks for joining us today.

Julie Kelly: Wow. Thanks, Michael. Thanks. I hope to be back soon.

Michael Patrick Leahy: All right. We’ll have more when we get back.

Hey, State Senator Kerry Roberts joins us. It’s a snow day for Kerry.

We’re going to talk about what he’s up to. This is The Tennessee Star Report.

I’m Michael Patrick Leahy. We’ll be right back after this.