But it also claims that Trump, Trump Jr., Giuliani and Brooks broke the laws of Washington, DC, including an anti-terrorism act by inciting the riot, and that they helped and incited violent protesters and inflicted emotional suffering on members of Congress.
“The Defendants, in short, convinced the crowd that something was going on that – if it were true – could in fact justify the violence and then sent the crowd to the Capitol with requests for immediate action tied to the violence,” the lawsuit, in Washington, DC’s Federal District Court, claims.
Friday’s lawsuit could run into protections for free speech for speakers at the rally, as well as the immunity that Trump could try to claim while serving as president. All employees elected in the process, including Trump, are appointed in their personal capacities in court, which means that they would use private lawyers and would not be protected by their public office.
But if this process or Thompson’s process continues, it would mean that the former president and his allies would be subject to findings and testimony, potentially exposing details and evidence that were not released during the Senate impeachment trial.
New lawsuit claims Trump, allies encouraged turmoil
Swalwell, who was locked up in the Chamber of Deputies during the siege, claims that Trump, Trump Jr., Giuliani and Brooks incited the attack on Congress with their repeated public statements of electoral fraud, their incentive for supporters to come to DC on June 6. January, and in his speeches that day. Each man told the crowd that Joe Biden’s electoral certification in Congress could be blocked and that Trump supporters should fight, the suit alleges.
“Trump directly incited the violence on the Capitol that followed and then watched with approval as the building was invaded,” the suit said. “The horrible events of January 6 were a direct and predictable consequence of the Defendants’ illegal actions. As such, the Defendants are responsible for the injuries and destruction that followed.”
In Trump’s own speech, just before the siege began, he told the crowd to “show strength” and “go down Pennsylvania Avenue.”
Brooks, in his speech, had declared “Today is the day when American patriots start to write down names and detonate”, then asked the rally participants if they were willing to fight.
Giuliani, during the January 6 rally, said: “We are going to do a combat test”, and the crowd responded with applause.
Trump Jr. said the crowd was a message to Republicans who were not fighting to overturn the election result.
“You can be a hero or a zero,” he said at the rally. “If you’re going to be the zero, not the hero, we’re going after you and we’re going to have fun doing it.”
The process tries to connect the speeches directly to the crowd’s response.
“In what should be a sign of how the crowd was receiving the Defendants ‘claims and allegations, spontaneous shouts of’ Fight for Trump! Fight for Trump! ‘ stood up while Trump Jr. criticized the supposed ‘glaring inconsistencies’ and ‘statistical impossibilities’ that allegedly made President Biden’s victory possible, “the suit said.
After speeches at the pro-Trump rally, many in the crowd marched to the U.S. Capitol, with several breaking into the building violently and looking for lawmakers who certified Biden’s victory over Trump in the 2020 elections. Five people, including a Capitol police officer of the United States, died.
Last month, Jason Miller, a Trump spokesman, removed him from responsibility for the insurrection in response to the Thompson lawsuit.
“President Trump was acquitted in the Democrats’ last Impeachment Witch Hunt, and the facts are irrefutable,” Miller said in a statement. “President Trump did not plan, produce or organize the January 6 rally at Ellipse. President Trump did not incite or conspire to incite any violence on Capitol Hill on January 6.”
Brooks and Giuliani took similar positions.
Brooks denied responsibility for the riot, telling a radio host the day after the attack that he “absolutely” has no regrets. He said later in a statement: “No one at the rally interpreted my comments as anything other than what they were: a pep talk after conservative kicks in the buttocks suffered in the dark 2020 elections.”
Court occupied with insurgency-related cases
The new lawsuit and Thompson’s claims must go hand in hand in DC’s federal trial court, potentially even before the same judge, Amit Mehta, who was appointed by Barack Obama. It could take months or even years to reach resolutions and proceed while the same federal court hears criminal cases against about 300 alleged troublemakers and other Trump supporters who came to Washington on January 6.
Swalwell, in his lawsuit, is seeking a court order that forces Trump and his three allies to give at least seven days notice before holding any meeting of more than 50 people in DC or state capitals on important election-related days, so o The household member may have the opportunity to go to court to try to block meetings.
Like the Thompson lawsuit, the second insurrection lawsuit also seeks damages, but has not named a value.
After the riot, Swalwell served as the House’s manager in Trump’s impeachment. The Senate voted for acquittal, with 57 of the 100 senators declaring Trump guilty, a division that failed to achieve the two-thirds majority needed for a conviction.
Using the KKK act in court
Both Thompson’s and Swalwell’s lawsuits could face a court challenge for their claims under the Ku Klux Klan Act.
The KKK statute was not widely used, according to Stephen Vladeck, a professor of law at the University of Texas and an analyst with the Supreme Court of CNN.
“The specific objective was to provide federal civilian resources to federal officers who were prevented from performing their duties by two or more individuals, whether they were federal delegates in the post-Civil War South, federal judges in undeveloped lower courts; or federal lawmakers,” Vladeck said last month.
“It is not at all difficult to see how this provision relates to what happened on January 6,” he added. “The most difficult question is whether Trump himself can be connected to this conspiracy.”
In the Thompson case, the Mississippi Democrat points out Trump’s words and tweets in the months leading up to the insurrection to accuse Trump and Giuliani of mobilizing and preparing their supporters for an attack to prevent Congress from certifying the results of the 2020 elections in 6 of January. , whose legal contours are being dealt with by the NAACP, was the first civil action brought against the former president in connection with the January 6 attack.
He was taken to court days after Trump was acquitted by the Senate for inciting the siege.
In Thompson’s lawsuit, Trump recently received formal notification that he was being sued.
According to a notice to the federal court filed this week, Trump received his subpoena by registered letter in February. It was sent to him in Mar-a-Lago and received there by a person named “Ricky”.
Citing a lawsuit is a standard procedural step in any lawsuit, and nothing about receiving Trump’s subpoena to respond to the action is unusual. However, the stage starts the process so that they can move on in court.
CNN’s Devan Cole and Jessica Schneider contributed to this report.