How is this woman allowed to oversee Trump’s January 6 trial?
Yet another damaging courtroom ruling from Judge Tanya Chutkan in a January 6 case has come to light, as Trump demands she withdraw from his January 6 case.
Julie Kelly obtained a transcript of another sentencing hearing from Judge Chutkan for a J6er in which she blatantly lied about the Capitol protest.
During her sentencing, Judge Chutkan blatantly lied about the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, calling it an “armed attempt to overthrow this government.”
NEW CHUTKAN FILES: I have just obtained a transcript of a new sentencing by Judge Chutkan for a J6er, convicted by her of four felonies after a brief trial. Her opinion of what happened on January 6 is misinformed, to say the least.
It’s not an exaggeration, it’s a lie: pic.twitter.com/pwxEjeLgBp
— Julie Kelly (@julie_kelly2) September 18, 2023
Judge Chutkan said lawmakers who were in the Capitol on Jan. 6 looked outside and saw “gallows being set up.”
This never happened. There is no video evidence to support this absurd claim.
After admitting she watched the J6 committee hearings — and asking one defendant if he had, lol — Chutkan compares January 6 to Game of Thrones.
And no one saw anyone erect a gallows. There’s no video of it, and I’ve been trying to find it for two years without success. pic.twitter.com/KVQCEh4qNe
— Julie Kelly (@julie_kelly2) September 18, 2023
Judge Chutkan also said that protesters attempted to overthrow the government by force on January 6.
She already made a decision on January 6 and yet she gets to preside over Trump’s trial on January 6, in which the former president faces four federal charges: conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy to defraud an official proceeding. hindering, hindering and attempting to commit fraud. to obstruct an official proceeding, and conspiracy against rights.
President Trump’s lawyers filed a motion in a federal court in DC last week calling on Judge Tanya Chutkan, an Obama appointee, to recuse himself from Trump’s case filed on January 6 by special counsel Jack Smith .
An example of a disqualifying statement according to the motion filed last week:
In October 2022, before the appointment of the Special Prosecutor or the filing of this case, Judge Chutkan stated:
“This was nothing less than an attempt to violently overthrow the government, the legally, lawfully and peacefully elected government by individuals angry that their man had lost. I see the video tapes. I see the images of the flags and the signs that people carried and the hats they wore and the clothes. And the people who stormed the Capitol were there in allegiance and allegiance to one man – not to the Constitution, of which most people who come before me seem woefully ignorant; not to the ideals of this country; and not the principles of democracy. It is a blind loyalty to one person who, by the way, remains free to this day.” United States v. Christine Priola 1:22-cr-242, ECF #66 at 29:17–30:3 (conviction transcript) (emphasis added) (relevant portions attached as Example A).
Judge Tanya Chutkan treats President Trump worse than other defendants, including a meth dealer.
Noted attorney Techno Fog has reviewed Judge Chutkan’s recent history and provided evidence of bias after she rejected hearing dates requested by Trump’s lawyers.
She gave the meth dealer one week to respond to a protective order.
According to Techno Fog, the judge also postponed the hearing for two weeks after filing.
Judge Chutkan, on the other hand, gave Trump only ONE DAY to respond to a request for a protective order.
This is clear evidence of bias.
Mark Levin made an excellent case last week in favor of Tanya Chutkan’s denial, saying she is “not qualified” to preside over Jack Smith’s case against Trump: