Federal Judge Denies Jacob Chansley’s Bid to Withdraw Guilty Plea and Criticizes Tucker Carlson’s Distorted View of Jan. 6 Riot
In a recent development, a federal judge has denied Jacob Chansley’s request to withdraw his guilty plea for obstructing Congress on January 6. Chansley, also known as the “QAnon Shaman,” had pleaded guilty to the felony crime and was sentenced to 41 months in prison in November 2021. Judge Royce C. Lamberth, who presided over the case, expressed his disappointment with Chansley’s attempt to withdraw his plea and rebuked him for appearing on a Tucker Carlson program that presented a distorted view of the riot.
Chansley’s distinctive appearance, with his bare chest, painted face, and hat of fur and horns, made him one of the most recognizable participants in the attack on the Capitol. He was also among the first rioters to admit to a felony crime. During his sentencing, Chansley expressed remorse and called his behavior “indefensible,” which impressed Judge Lamberth.
Chansley completed his prison sentence in March but later asked Judge Lamberth to undo his conviction. He claimed that security camera footage from inside the Capitol, which was aired by Tucker Carlson on Fox News, showed that police allowed him to freely roam the building on January 6. However, Lamberth denied Chansley’s bid, stating that the surveillance video Chansley now claims undermines his conviction is duplicative of police body-camera footage he had been given months before he pleaded guilty.
Lamberth emphasized that the videos shown by Carlson were not exculpatory and highlighted Chansley’s actions during the riot, including carrying a spearhead-tipped pole, unlawfully entering the Capitol, disobeying law enforcement orders, screaming obscenities, entering the Senate chamber, climbing onto the Senate dais, sitting in the Vice President’s chair, and leaving a threatening message for the Vice President. The judge dismissed Chansley’s claims that he and other rioters were allowed in and around the Capitol by police, stating that the outnumbered law enforcement officers not physically engaging Chansley was irrelevant.
Lamberth expressed his disappointment with Chansley’s disavowal of his previous remorse, stating that it cast serious doubt on the veracity of any of Chansley’s claims. Chansley’s current attorney, William Shipley, indicated on Twitter that his client has moved forward and is unlikely to challenge the conviction any further.
Several other defendants have also argued unsuccessfully that the Fox News presentation is exonerating. Judge Lamberth further expressed his concern with Tucker Carlson’s misleading depiction of the riot, calling it “ill-advised” and inaccurate. He criticized Carlson for questioning the integrity of the court and the legitimacy of the U.S. criminal justice system with inflammatory characterizations of cherry-picked videos stripped of their proper context.
The judge recommended that members of the public who are concerned about the evidence presented in Chansley’s case and others should read the public filings and attend court hearings. He emphasized that the events of January 6 and the involvement of individual defendants cannot be fully captured in seconds-long videos aired on television or attached to tweets.
Tucker Carlson did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The Capitol surveillance footage aired on Fox News was provided to Carlson by House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, who had demanded the video as a condition of supporting McCarthy’s bid to lead the House against a right-wing revolt. Carlson was fired by Fox News in April following the network’s settlement of a defamation claim involving false claims about the 2020 election.
The developments in Chansley’s case come amid ongoing hearings by the Jan. 6 committee, which is investigating the events surrounding the Capitol attack.
How did Judge Lamberth determine that Chansley and the other participants forcibly entered the building and caused harm during the January 6 riot?
Ce, stating that it was clear from the evidence that Chansley and the other participants forcibly entered the building, causing harm and disrupting the proceedings of Congress.
In addition to denying Chansley’s request, Judge Lamberth also criticized Tucker Carlson for his coverage of the January 6 riot. Lamberth stated that Carlson presented a distorted view of the events by suggesting that Chansley and other rioters were allowed to freely roam the Capitol. The judge condemned Carlson for using selective video clips that excluded the violent and unlawful actions of Chansley during the riot.
Lamberth’s rebuke of Carlson highlights the ongoing controversy surrounding media coverage of the January 6 attack. Many critics argue that certain media outlets, including Fox News, have downplayed the severity of the riot and have provided a platform for individuals who seek to whitewash or excuse the actions of the rioters.
Overall, the federal judge’s decision to deny Chansley’s request to withdraw his guilty plea further underscores the seriousness of his actions and the accountability that all participants in the January 6 riot should face. Additionally, Judge Lamberth’s criticism of Tucker Carlson serves as a reminder of the importance of responsible and accurate reporting in accurately portraying the events of that day.
