Transcription
A DOJ filing went missing off the docket. And it was the DOJ filing that made serious accusations against Donald Trump, um, and linked Donald Trump to revealing the personal address of former President Obama, which then led to someone who was previously arrested for being in the insurrection, Taylor Toronto, to take the information that Donald Trump had publicly posted and to, uh, live stream himself going to Obama's house, um, and make terroristic threats against Obama.
Now, this guy, Taylor Toronto, is this former insurrectionist. He was being, uh, sentenced. The DOJ filed a sentencing memorandum about that conduct I just referenced in 2023. And the DOJ also referenced that Toronto was involved in a violent mob, a violent riot during the January 6th insurrection. And it used those terms. It said January 6th was an insurrection, violent mob. And it was using that to basically say Toronto should be sentenced to more time because of the conduct he engaged in in January 6th, which was a bad, bad event. And then he got this information that Trump posted publicly. And while he was spreading all of these conspiracy theories about the 2020 election, he took the information and then went to, uh, former President Obama's, uh, place.
Now, and he was caught and he was arrested. He was engaged in a lot of other threats during that same time period. But all of that information would be necessary to get the requisite sentence of this guy because it shows that he's a repeat offender. It shows his motives. It shows the types of, um, ill will and maliciousness that would enhance the sentence. So, one of the things we talked about, and others did as well, is that when this was published by the DOJ, I was like, "All right, I mean, what, everything they said there was accurate. It was the letter of the law, but you're calling January 6th a violent riot." I said, "And you're also having Janine Piro, the top federal prosecutor in Washington D.C. where this sentencing was taking place, that her name was, you know, on that filing as well with these other, uh, deputy United States attorneys and assistant United States attorneys." I said, "I bet you those people get fired or pushed out because that's not what Trump refers to the January 6th insurrection as. Trump has a whole other view about the January 6th insurrection." And also linking this individual with the terroristic threats to Trump posting the information. I go, with this weaponized DOJ by Trump, he's going to want to remove that filing. And I, so that's basically what happened.
The deputies, the, uh, individuals who were working for the United States, uh, attorney's office, um, they got placed on leave and they got pushed out. Assistant United States Attorney Carlos Valdevilla and Samuel White, they were placed on leave, but I think for all purposes they're going to be fired and they're going to be, uh, pushed out. And then the filing, the sentencing memorandum, just disappeared from the docket. There wasn't like a motion to remove it. There wasn't a request to seal it. It just disappeared, which doesn't happen.
So, there was a big hearing that was held at the end of last week in front of a judge named Judge Nichols. Judge Nichols is a Trump-appointed judge, but a fairly law and order guy. He makes a bunch of rulings I disagree with. But I wouldn't say that he's like an Eileen Cannon or any of the kind of Trump sick offense, but he does make some rulings that from time to time are like, "Huh, what'd you do right there?" But a law and order guy. So, this, uh, sentencing was before Judge Nichols. Judge Nichols, while he was there, was like, "How did this get removed from my docket?" And it seems what actually took place, um, Nichols says it's not entirely clear to me how that brief was sealed. Nichols said Thursday, noting that he did not authorize the removal of the brief. The judge said he'd read both prosecutions' brief, and if prosecutors want to keep the initial sentencing memo under wraps, they will need to file a motion to seal it or striking. It's going to have to, you're going to have to justify why it got removed. And it seems what took place is that senior officials at the United States Attorney's Office seemed to call the court clerk and using their kind of government authority, persuaded the clerk to do the wrong thing, to block online access to it, which is not supposed to happen at all. And it's frankly, in my view, misconduct by that clerk. The clerk should know better than just to block public access. But I think the judge probably figured, I don't know what they say to my clerk. You know, we're the government that you got to take it down. So the judge is at least saying, you need to justify why that's getting removed from my docket. And the judge has ordered the, uh, government, Trump's regime, to respond, um, forthwith about why this got deleted and why they're claiming saying the January 6th insurrection is a riot and saying that Trump was the individual who posted Obama's private information, uh, to the public. Why that should be under seal and not made public.
Should also be noted that during this hearing, the judge praised the work of Carlos Vald Devilla and Samuel White, those prosecutors who basically were fired by the Trump regime. Let's bring in Harry Litman from the Talking Feds YouTube channel, Talking Feds podcast, and Talking Feds Substack. And Harry was a former United States Attorney at the Western District of Pennsylvania. As the United States Attorney, you oversee the entire office. And so you're at the head. Then you have your top deputies, your assistants, all of these people that you need to rely on. And here, the fact that these two individuals were telling the truth and doing their job got pushed out in this very, uh, sadistic way. H, how do you even work for these people, Harry? I mean, how, how could you even be an Assistant United States Attorney?
Well, let me start here because I was first an Assistant US Attorney. So, I filed these kinds of things. And the first point to make, Ben, is this is such an innocuous, pedestrian filing. It's a 14-page sentencing memorandum. It's got a sentence that says he engaged in the January 6th behavior where, and, and he was, by the way, this Toronto guy is really bad news. But anyway, it said he, he's one, you know, he breached the Capitol, but it's one sentence. And then this point about Trump, uh, in '23, uh, releasing Obama's name. By the way, can, can you just stop for a second and just, he did what? I can't, you know, gave, gave the MAGA, um, uh, crazies Obama's address and in fact, Toronto then, as you say, takes it. He's, he's filming himself saying, "I'm going to find a tunnel and, and, you know, he's going to throw a bomb, etc." That's how he was arrested. Anyway, they have to explain that just to set up what Toronto did. So, there's a sentence that says Trump tweeted this out or on Truth Social and he, uh, Toronto retweeted it. Those two sentences in a 14-page sentencing memorandum are, as mild as they could be. And, b, it's just a responsibility of the Assistant US Attorney, just like a judge when it comes to sentencing, you are supposed to supply all relevant conduct. That can include, by the way, conduct for which you've been acquitted. You, you know, the whole panoply goes before the judge. Okay. So, first, total, total, um, you know, and innocuous, um, and very kind of, uh, by the book and not sensational. And all point to Nichols is the guy who's tried, um, Toronto for these latest charges, six other charges he convicted him of in a bench trial, but also the January 6th conduct itself. So, there is no way that the justification is, oh, we don't want the court to consider that or be aware of it. This is all about the Orwellian effort to, you know, basically whitewash January 6th from history. Uh, and not to mention Trump's, uh, whole, you know, parade of of offensive. Behaving. I'm publishing Obama's, uh, name is is pernicious, not just, um, offensive. So, that's really, you know, a, um, it it's obviously part of a propaganda point for the public that they wanted to whisk it from the, um, pages of history and the court clerk. And then I just want to make a final point, sort of of sympathy for these two guys who Nichols made a point of saying they've been very solid. Again, Mick Nichols, a Trump appointee, and he was all, everybody on the D.C. bench there, oversaw these trials, knows what, um, wicked people, uh, they, they were and has to be appalled that Trump comes into office and just wipes away the work of three years with the pardons. But it's so, um, vile because look, if you want to never be there be a mention emerging from DOJ of the January 6th case or anything, there are supervisors. You decide who the supervisors are. You put somebody in place to review draft filings and, you know, red line it out and send it back. Instead, they do nothing. They let these guys do their job and that's all they're doing is doing their job, just straight up. No possible insinuation that they're trying to, you know, get at Trump or be more than normally, um, uh, sort of tough on the defendant. And boom, hammer comes down.
Well, and, and what's the impact? Well, first, you know, these guys get punished and maybe, as you say, are going to be fired for, you know, when you could have just actually told them, given the morning, you can't do that. But then everybody else in the system, right, USAs across the country are like cowering in fear. What could I by mistake put in there? I better scrub. Did I, did I even say January anywhere? Did I use the word election? Uh, what, you know, because it has the impact of keeping the whole rest of the prosecutorial force on, uh, tent hooks when they could have easily, if this was the point, just, you know, overseen it themselves with supervisors that they put into place. So, besides that, it's so innocuous, and besides that, it got, it only serves public propaganda purposes, it's just also nasty as can be.
Harry Litman runs the Talking Feds Substack, the Talking Feds YouTube channel, and the Talking Feds podcast. It's where I get my legal news from. Check it all out and just search Talking Feds right now on your YouTube. Thanks, Harry. Hey, thanks, Ben. Thanks for tuning in. If you enjoyed this video and other Talking Feds content, please take a second to like and subscribe. Talk to you later.