transcript

Speaker 1:
[00:00] Welcome to the Siren Podcast to my friend Harry Dunn, and Congressional Candidate for Maryland's Fifth District. Hi Harry.

Speaker 2:
[00:08] Jo, what's up baby? How are you? You doing well?

Speaker 1:
[00:10] It's a mixed bag, you know, you and I have had conversations behind the scenes about some stuff that's going on in my life that's stressful to say the very least, but none of us has it easy right now to say the least.

Speaker 2:
[00:24] Yeah, no, no, no, I think that's right. But we try our best to get through it while staying focused on what's important. And I think that a lot of times the shit that we go through, it's at the expense of other people, it's to keep us from fighting for the good fight, living in our purpose, because they're afraid. And I feel like a lot of times, if you don't have people trying to stop you, then you're not doing enough. So, I'd say to you, carry that with a badge of honor. I feel like I've done the same by the amount of hateful messages and shit. I've watched live streams of the Siren before and there were people that are miserable on there but they're watching. So, it's so crazy they have haters, if you will, that term gets thrown around a lot. But if you don't have haters, then you're not doing something right. If you have haters, you need to strive to get more, just piss more people off. Yeah.

Speaker 1:
[01:29] The thing too that so many people say, that's so fascinating to me is, and I think it is true, is that the more desperate they get, the more you realize they're losing their grip, that they're actually losing ground, they're losing control, they're losing their ability to shape things. Because when they're lashing out and going after people and doing what we're going to talk about related to January 6th, it all seems to me that they're flailing more than ever.

Speaker 2:
[01:56] Isn't that how it is like? Just think about animals, if you will, when they're on their last leg about to die or about to just croak, if you will, they give everything they got. They give that one last fight, that one last final gasp, and I feel like this is it. This is the last straw that they have. When we're referring to MAGA as a whole, because like I said, their leader is the most unpopular that he's ever been in his entire life. He's created infighting amongst the ranks of his supporters. I mean, the left, we've hated him from day one, and the hate just continues to grow. He doesn't have many people in this world that like him. So, they always say, you always see somebody's true colors. I was lucky enough to see him from day one as you were, so many other people. But I encourage everybody to come around. I mean, I yell at people for not getting there as fast as we did. But you don't have to be a piece of crap supporter your entire life.

Speaker 1:
[03:06] You've seen the worst of him up close and personal on January 6th, and we've talked about this so many times. Now, maybe you can help me understand this. I don't understand this. The Trump administration moves to erase January 6th riot convictions for seditious conspiracy. I didn't realize that their sentences had only been commuted and that they hadn't actually been among those 1,500 plus who were pardoned. Why this? Why now? And why do you think he didn't pardon them to begin with? What is this all about?

Speaker 2:
[03:36] So, yeah, so I don't know. I was actually wondering the reason why he didn't pardon them. Again, like I don't try to understand the mind of a demented, angry orange dude that, you know, that lives, that thinks diet coke can cure cancer. Like I don't, I don't.

Speaker 1:
[03:53] Because it kills grass.

Speaker 2:
[03:55] Oh, yeah, yeah, exactly. Right? Because it kills grass. So it must kill cancer. No, I don't try to get it. So I, no, I don't understand the reason why they weren't. However, like I said, they, they were commuted. Now I want to understand people to understand what they're doing right now. They're pushing to vacate the sentences. And I want people to understand what the difference between commuting and vacating is. Commuting is, you know, you've got your time served. You know, you're a free person, time served. Vacating is, is ultimately saying, hey, this didn't happen. Your conviction did not happen. And what everybody saw in America did not happen. And one of the things you have to realize with the majority of the people that just that the DOJ moved to vacate, they had appeals coming up, appeals of their convictions. And you know who argues for those appeals? Not, not, well, against their defense lawyers. It would be the Department of Justice. So have, think about this for a moment. The Department of Justice, DC, Judge Boxwine, I mean, Janine Pirro, Janine Pirro would have to be the one that would be arguing against them. And you know that anybody that opposes Donald Trump, especially on January 6th, will be looking for a new job. So I think this is a way of her saving face by saying, hey, we're not going to, let's just, hey, we're moving to vacate. We're moving to vacate. So that prevents them or saves them from having to argue against Donald Trump. So, you know, now they still has to be approved by a judge. But the thing that's interesting about this is the judge has to, like I said, judge has to approve it. But in the complaint, and I learned this from my friend, Glenn Kirchner, in the complaint, Judge Pirro, Janine Pirro says, they're doing this because, in the interest of justice. Like, that's her words in it. So, okay, that's what she says. Okay, we know that it's crap, right? All right, Ms. Pirro, please come before the court and explain what injustice was done and make her explain it instead of just accepting it. So I think the court, the judge actually has a little bit of a leeway here, the way that I understand it. You know, I'm not a legal scholar. We all know that it's bullcrap. So yeah, that's the legal road. But Jo, what also this does is this creates an avenue, if you will, for these people to sue the government. Because if they vacate their, they're vacating their convictions. If that happens, what's to stop them from saying, hey, I was prosecuted unfairly and maliciously? There's nothing to stop that. And now they will file civil lawsuits and sue the government. And the biggest thing that I want people to understand about these civil lawsuits that these January 6 rioters, now, not only is it crap and it's a slap in the face, it's costing the American taxpayers money. That's what people don't understand. Like, this isn't some unfound money. This is coming from the DOJ who's going to pay a settlement. Ashley Babbitt's family, that $5 million estate, that came from taxpayers money. The Proud Boys have a pending $100 million lawsuit against the government. Who pays that $100 million? The American taxpayers. And I said that, you know, the officers and, you know, myself, Daniel Hodges, Michael Fanon, Aquilino Ganel, and several others, but just the four people that I named are the, you know, the most prominent names, I guess, related to January 6th. We've dealt with the physical pain, the agony, the gas lighting, and we've had to deal with that. And you know, it sucks. Now, America, the taxpayers are going to have to deal with the pain of January 6th, the financial pain of it.

Speaker 1:
[08:00] For them to attack our capital. Like this is the thing, like I just, it's so upside down and so inside out. Like it's so like cuckoo for Coco Puffs to even think what we all watch, what you endured, what Ganell endured, what Fanon endured, what Hodges endured, what all of those heroes endured and how you stood in the breach and protected the citadel of our democracy and all those lawmakers. Like to think that all of you are on the receiving end of the suffering right now, emotionally, physically, financially, et cetera, but also under the thumb or at least, he's attempting to keep you under the thumb of the person who perpetrated that attack while the people who facilitated that attack for him will be rewarded. Not just, they're not just rewarded with the titles of hero and patriot and with freedom when a lot of their cases went through juries that convicted them. Let's talk about the people that we're talking about here because it's 13, right? It's 13 people.

Speaker 2:
[08:59] I believe it's 13 different individuals here.

Speaker 1:
[09:00] These are the original seditious conspiracy charges, which the Department of Justice at that time took a lot of time and energy and deliberations to even come to these charges. Like they had to pass lots of thresholds to get to this point and then they put these charges in front of juries with lots and lots of evidence and these juries convicted these people. What we're talking about is like Stuart Rhodes, right? We're talking about the original organizers who in many cases they didn't actually go to the Capitol just so rave of them.

Speaker 2:
[09:33] But that was known though during the trials that they weren't in like Enrique Tarrio and Stuart Rhodes. It was known to the jurors that they were not in DC. Like this wasn't just the jurors just found out, oh, they weren't in DC. And also you got to remember these cases went on for like two weeks or whatever. Like this wasn't just a, you know, a 30 minute television show trial. Like everybody had the opportunity to present their, and it was proven beyond a reasonable doubt, which is why they were convicted. By a jury, by a jury. They weren't convicted by mainstream media. They weren't convicted by CNN or MSNOW. They weren't convicted by Fox News. They were convicted by a jury.

Speaker 1:
[10:19] Right. And their sentences were lengthy and significant. In some cases, like more than a decade. I forget what Tario's was, but I think-

Speaker 2:
[10:28] I think it was like 23, 24 years or something. Yeah. Upwards of 20 years, 20 years or more, in a couple of different cases.

Speaker 1:
[10:35] Right. And those sentences were not handed out excessively either. I mean, these were things that were deliberated on. And to think that like, it's so, I know I use this expression a lot, but it's so Orwellian. It's like they are erasing the past. They're erasing history. They're telling us that what we saw with our own ears, what we heard with our, I mean, what we saw with our own eyes, heard with our own ears, we didn't.

Speaker 2:
[10:59] I tell you what, this act by the DOJ is more egregious, in my opinion, that Donald Trump pardoning all 1,500 people. Wow. And I'll tell you why. Because, listen, the president, when I get elected, when I get elected, I think we definitely need to revisit the pardon, how it's just, it just relies with just the president. There's no board, there's no checks and balances. And I get the pardon power. And I get it, maybe it's time to revisit it. Maybe because 1 person did spoil it for everybody. And we've heard that so much. You know, when you talk about, you know, especially people that have kids, 1 person can mess it up for everybody. And I think Donald Trump has done that in a lot of different ways, but specifically with the pardon power. But that power is absolute. And the president had the right to do it. And a pardon does not absolve you. It says, hey, we forgive you, you're forgiven, but it still stands. It's not, it exists. Your conviction still stands, but you're just forgiven for it. In this case, it would like, it never even happened. And that's, I think what this is more egregious than that, because that basically is just saying everybody that what we saw with our own eyes, it didn't happen. And I think that's more egregious than saying, hey, I forgive you for it.

Speaker 1:
[12:20] Yeah. And I don't understand.

Speaker 2:
[12:21] I mean, they both suck. Let's be 100% clear, but I think this is even more egregious.

Speaker 1:
[12:26] I think you're right. And the thing that I keep coming back to is all those people that were in that building that you protected, those lawmakers who know what you guys, what you did that day and how you put yourselves in front of them to protect them. I don't understand, Harry, I'll never understand this. I will never understand how any one of them, Republican or Democrat, can look at all of this that was there that day, knowing what you guys endured and be like, oh yeah, that's fine. How can't, how does Mitt Romney, he's not in Congress anymore, but Josh Hawley, how does a fist pumping, running bitch like that look at all of this, knowing that you guys protected them and not speak up and say, you know what, this is a bridge too far, dude. We know what that was all about.

Speaker 2:
[13:13] Because it was in favor of the guy that they support, the full-throated support to Donald Trump. So first and foremost, they would have to admit they're wrong. They would have to admit they were wrong. How the hell, we don't see that often at all from adults, from men, especially politicians. I think that's where it starts. They have to admit that they were wrong and they got it wrong. How many times have we heard apologies or, you know what, I got this one wrong from elected officials?

Speaker 1:
[13:50] Particularly Republicans. Yeah. Well, let's pivot for the last second, a year or two, about your race. How is it going down there in Maryland's fifth? What are you hearing from people? How are you feeling? Where can people go to support you?

Speaker 2:
[14:05] No, I'm excited. I'm excited about it. Listen, I've run before and when I ran before, it was about the threats that could happen. When I ran in 24, it was about, hey, guys, we need to make sure that we have guardrails in place for when this, if and when this wannabe dictator takes over. It was about the threat of the things that could happen. Now we're living them now. And it's no longer a threat. It's about things that are happening. And we need to protect the people that are the most vulnerable during this, which is pretty much every single American. And as we've seen over the last few months, weeks even, that it's every single person in the world with this unhinged war that he's created. By the way, is there any calling it a war yet? Or is it still an excursion? Is it an excursion or have they accepted that it's a war yet? Because remember, they can't go to war without congressional approval, but don't expect Congress to enforce that. But that's one of the reasons why that I'm running, not just for the war, but just for these checks and balances that hold Donald Trump accountable and everybody in this administration accountable, while being able to lower prices because everything is so damn expensive. Accountability and affordability are some of the things that I'm running on. But the election is June 23rd, we're feeling good. We're ramping up our volunteer program now where people can volunteer, whether it be making calls or hell, even donating five bucks if you got it. But Harry Dunn for MD, F-O-R-M-D, harrydunnformd.com. And just check it out. And also I accept thoughts and prayers. I appreciate it. I accept them, I receive them, but in all the good vibes in the world.

Speaker 1:
[15:59] Yeah. Well, you are worthy of all the good vibes in the world. And I know you're going to be in Congress and I can't fucking wait for it.

Speaker 2:
[16:05] Thank you.

Speaker 1:
[16:06] It's great to talk to you. Thank you for coming and highlighting this important issue. I don't think it's getting enough attention. You'll be on, you said, MS Now on Sunday on LA Velshi show.

Speaker 2:
[16:14] Talk about this. Tune in on Sunday. I'll be on with our finale Velshi.

Speaker 1:
[16:19] Awesome. Thanks Harry. It's great to talk to you as always.

Speaker 2:
[16:22] Jo, take care.