On Jan. 6, the fighting on the Lower West Terrace of the Capitol was the worst it had been all day and resembled a mediaeval battle in many ways. Many defendants are considering self-defense claims because they were involved in that brawl. Some of the rioters had flag poles, hockey sticks, bear spray and batons at their disposal as they engaged in hand-to-hand combat for nearly three hours.
Edward Jacob Lang, a self-described social media influencer from New York, was the first person to say he would pursue a self-defense case. In total, seven counts of assault against officers have been filed against him, some of which include use of a riot shield and others of a baseball bat as weapons.
After witnessing several women in the mob being attacked by police, including Trump supporter Rosanne Boyland, who ultimately died, Mr. Lang turned violent, according to documents filed by his lawyer, Stephen Metcalf in court. After being doused with an unidentified orange gas by police, protester Philip Anderson’s breathing became impossible, and Mr. Lang claims to have saved him by pulling him to safety.
“People ended up dying because the police were heartlessly pushing people on top of each other,” Mr. Lang said in a brief interview from a jail in Washington, DC, earlier this month.
Recognize the Executive Privilege Claim in the January 6 Inquiry
The first of eight cards.
An issue that has yet to be tested. The House’s investigation into the Jan. 6 Capitol riot has centred on Donald Trump’s power as a former president to keep information from his White House private. This executive privilege breakdown comes in the midst of Trump’s attempt to keep his personal records private and Stephen K. Bannon’s indictment for contempt of Congress;
Executive privilege is a term for what? Under the Constitution, presidents have the power to prevent the other two branches of government from accessing certain internal executive branch information, such as communications between the president and his top aides.
In what way does Trump assert his position? Legal action has been taken by former President Trump to prevent White House documents relating to his actions and communications during the January 6 Capitol riots from being made public. As a matter of executive privilege, he maintains that these matters should not be made public.
Is Trump’s claim of executive privilege valid? The line between a president’s powers of secrecy and Congress’s powers of investigation is hazy in the Constitution. In spite of the fact that a judge rejected Mr. Trump’s request to keep his private papers secret, the Supreme Court is expected to take the matter up.
Is the power of executive privilege unassailable? No. Even if the executive privilege claim is legitimate, it may not always be successful in court. In 1974, during the Watergate scandal, the Supreme Court upheld an order requiring Nixon to hand over his Oval Office tapes.
Executive privilege can be invoked by former presidents? Yes, but courts may treat their claims with less deference than those of current presidentsclaims. .’s But in 1977, even though the Supreme Court ruled against Nixon, the court said Nixon could claim executive privilege even though he had left office.
Is Steve Bannon entitled to executive privilege? This is a bit of a conundrum. To what extent, if any, can communications between an informal adviser outside of government be covered by a claim of executive privilege, as might be the case in Mr. Bannon’s case?
What constitutes “contempt of Congress”? People who refuse to comply with subpoenas from Congress are subject to this punishment. Contempt of Congress citations can be referred to the Justice Department and criminal charges can be sought. For refusing to comply with a subpoena seeking documents and testimony, Mr. Bannon was indicted on contempt charges.
When Ryan Nichols, a former Marine from Texas, assaulted the police a few weeks ago, he claimed that he was acting in self-defense and on behalf of other people, as well. Torch fire and screaming rioters were the order of the day in the Lower West Terrace, according to Mr. Nichols’ own testimony in court.
Police have released what they claim is surveillance video showing them “pulverising” an unarmed woman who was in the crowd near Mr. Nichols with their baton before turning their attention to another unarmed man, as Mr. Nichols’ lawyer Joseph McBride claimed. It appears that the white-shirted officer repeatedly strikes the woman until blood spouts from her face and she falls to the ground in the video.
Other video evidence, the government argued last week, shows that Mr. Nichols was not near the white-shirted officer and as a result was not in a position to see or be provoked by any attack against the woman. “Casting himself as a hero who was simply fighting back against officers who were “terrorising” civilians,” as Mr. Nichols claimed,” was preposterous,” according to the prosecutors.”