I am listening in on the arraignment of dozens of people who were arrested at the pro-Trump riots and protests at the Capitol yesterday. Will tweet what I find out.

The first person arraigned in connection with yesterday's riots is Michael Amos from FL. Charges: Unlawful entry to the capitol building & violation of curfew. The Judge says he disobeyed Capitol Police & Metropolitan Police Dept. He is released pending trial, but banned from DC.
He was held overnight. He said his phone is dead, and that he's staying in a hotel outside of the DC area and that he has to drive through DC to go home to Florida. The government agrees to allow him to drive through the city if he doesn't get out of the car. He has no priors.
During this arraignment Metro Police released a list of all those arrested yesterday in connection with the riots/break into the capitol building, as well as the charges. Not all of them will be arraigned today: https://t.co/CZpjzzPlF8
Next is David Ross from MA, also charged w curfew violation, unlawful entry to the capitol. They read him his standard rights and ask him if he understands his rights. He responds, "Uh, kinda?" They clarify them and he pleads not guilty. Judge orders him to stay out of DC.
He also says he doesn't understand the charges: "Where was I entering?" They said his lawyer will follow up.
Next is Victoria Bergeson, 40, from CT, unlawful entry & curfew violation. Same pattern for each person: Gov requests barring them from DC, defense pleads not guilty, says DC ban is over-broad and requests they just be barred from the capitol building, judge bars them from DC.
The first DC resident: Nazeer Qaim, 29, unlawful entry & curfew also. He is banned from capitol grounds and any streets containing congressional buildings. They give him a map of the banned areas, but say he's allowed to take the metro through them if he doesn't get out.
Everyone is being temporarily released with stay away restrictions, they are all given virtual court hearing dates for the future during which penalties / sentences will be decided, or dismissed. If they don't show up, they could get jail time.
Press on the call are being admonished by the court for taking screenshots of the rioters being arraigned and posting them on Twitter. "If anyone is in violation of that order that person will be promptly ejected and will be referred for action"
I want to be VERY CLEAR. Everyone here is being temporarily released until their trial happens. They have *not been sentenced*, so we do not know if they are getting "a slap on the wrist" or if they are getting more severe penalties. Most of their next court dates are in June.
Someone who only speaks Russian and has a Russian interpreter is currently being arraigned for unlawful entry and curfew violation, same as the other rioters, though she said that she doesn't understand b/c she "didn't enter anything." I did not catch her name but she lives in OR
Timothy Wolfe was charged with "Carrying a Pistol Without a License (Outside Home or Place of Business) 2015, Possession of a Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device (and), Possession of Unregistered Ammunition" according. He was also released and barred from DC pending trial.
Correction: The woman who needed a Russian translator was Yevgemya Malimon, 54, who was arrested with her daughter Kristina Malimon, 28. A previous tweet incorrectly stated that Kristina needed the translator, I only heard the last name.
Yevgemya Malimon was released and allowed to return to OR pending her trail. She was banned from DC. Her daughter, Kristina Malimon, who was also arrested yesterday, seems to be the vice chairwoman of Young Republicans Oregon: https://t.co/GXpVa29v9i
I will also note that the Metro Police likely wrote her name incorrectly on the wrap sheet. Based on public records, her name is Yevgeniya Malimon, not Yevgemya Malimon.
There is now a man been arraigned who cannot hear well and keeps saying that he did not know there was a curfew, "the police didn't tell us there was a curfew! The police are lying!" He keeps trying to speak and they keep telling him to stop speaking, he keeps saying he cant hear
John Parker, unlawful entry, screams "I never unlawfully entered property." They read him his rights ("anything you say can be held against you"). He says "I'm surprised you read me my rights b/c they haven't been read yet ... I was asleep in my car and they wrapped me up"
He also seems to not be able to hear well (they are tuning in virtually from holding). He keeps saying "I don't understand them!" The court makes sure he has his lawyer's number to help clarify.
I missed a few people as this is happening very fast and I had to step away for a moment, but there will be a sheet when the arraignment hearings are done with all the information so I will draw from that afterwards.

More from Politics

THREAD:
Good afternoon, followers of frivolous election litigation. There's a last-minute entry in the competition for dumbest pre-inauguration lawsuit - a totally loony effort to apparently leave the entire USA without a government.

We'll start with the complaint in a minute.

But first, I want to give you a quick explanation for why I'm going to keep talking about these cases even after the inauguration.

They're part of an ongoing effort - one that's not well-coordinated but is widespread - to discredit our fundamental system of government.

It's a direct descendent, in more ways than one, of birtherism. And here's the thing about birtherism. It might have been a joke to a lot of people, but it was extremely pernicious. It obviously validated the racist "not good enough to be President" crowd. But that wasn't all.

Don't get me wrong, that was bad enough. Validating racism helped put the kind of shitbird who would tweet this from an official government account into power. But it didn't stop


(Also, if you agree with Pompeo about multiculturalism - the legendary melting pot - not being what this country is all about, you need to stop following me now. And maybe go somewhere and think about your life choices and what made you such a tool.)
This is partly what makes it impossible to have a constructive conversation nowadays. The stubborn refusal to accept that opposition to Trumpism and GOP nationalism is about more than simply holding different beliefs about things in and of itself. 👇


It's fine for people to hold different beliefs. But that doesn't mean all beliefs deserve equal treatment or tolerance and it doesn't mean intolerance of some beliefs makes a person intolerant of every belief which they don't share.

So if I said I don't think Trumpism deserves to be tolerated because it's just a fresh 21st century coat of cheap paint on a failed, dangerous 20th century ideology (fascism) that doesn't mean I'm intolerant of all beliefs with which I disagree. You'd think this would be obvious.

Another important facet. People who support fascist movements tend to give what they think are valid reasons for supporting them. That doesn't mean anyone is obliged to tolerate fascism or accept their proffered excuse.


Say you joined a neighborhood group that sets up community gardens and does roadside beautification projects. All good, right? Say one day you're having a meeting and you notice the President and exec board of this group are saying some bizarre things about certain neighbors.

You May Also Like