The USA authorities is doubling down on its efforts to maintain the true story of January 6, 2021, shrouded in secrecy, as evidenced by a latest courtroom submitting opposing January 6 defendant Ryan Zink’s motion to lift a protective order on discovery supplies. Filed on April 16, 2025, within the U.S. District Courtroom for the District of Columbia, the federal government’s 13-page transient claims that releasing these supplies would endanger “witnesses and victims” and threaten nationwide safety.
However a more in-depth look reveals a troubling narrative: the so-called “victims” are possible the Metropolitan and Capitol Law enforcement officials who escalated a peaceable protest into chaos, and the “witnesses” embrace shadowy teams just like the “Sedition Hunters,” whose superior AI instruments elevate extra questions than solutions. Ryan Zink, a pardoned J6 defendant now working for Congress, is decided to show the reality about that day and the relentless lawfare that adopted, however the authorities is pulling out all of the stops to silence him.
Thanks @gatewaypundit I’ll by no means cease preventing for the American individuals not simply J6 defendants!!
Alea iacta est.https://t.co/Wz05X1FUug
— Ryan Zink for Congress TX-19 (@RyanZ4Congress) April 10, 2025
The Authorities’s Claims About “Victims” and “Witnesses”
The federal government’s submitting insists that the protecting order, which Zink seeks to raise, is important to guard the privateness of “victims” and “witnesses” and to safeguard nationwide safety. However who’re these victims? The one believable candidates are the Metropolitan and Capitol Law enforcement officials who in lots of situations instigated violence on January 6 by launching tear gasoline grenades and firing rubber bullets right into a peaceable crowd. Earlier than a single protester entered the Capitol, the state of affairs had already turned lethal: Kevin Greeson and Benjamin Phillips misplaced their lives, Matthew Joshua Black was shot within the face with a rubber bullet, and Derrick Vargo narrowly escaped death at the hands of a Capitol Police officer who pushed him from a 30-foot ledge. These are the actual victims of January 6, but the federal government’s narrative conveniently ignores them, focusing as an alternative on defending the officers who set the stage for tragedy.
The “witnesses” the federal government seeks to defend embrace the enigmatic “Sedition Hunters,” a gaggle that operated with subtle synthetic intelligence instruments lengthy earlier than such expertise was broadly accessible commercially. These instruments allowed them to determine January 6 defendants, like Antoine Williams, based mostly on minute particulars comparable to a definite key fob. Little is thought concerning the Sedition Hunters, their funding, or their connections to federal businesses, however their skill to wield cutting-edge AI raises suspicions about their position within the authorities’s January 6 investigations. Are these the “witnesses” the federal government is so determined to guard? In that case, the general public deserves to know why.
Ryan Zink’s Ordeal and Quest for Reality
Ryan Zink’s story is a microcosm of the injustice confronted by January 6 defendants. On September 13, 2023, a D.C. jury convicted Zink of the unbeatable 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2) cost—obstruction of an official continuing—together with two misdemeanors. He was sentenced to 3 months in federal jail and 12 months of oppressive supervised launch, with situations so restrictive they stripped him of primary freedoms. After serving his time, the Supreme Courtroom remanded the 1512(c)(2) cost, leaving Zink with solely misdemeanors—however the injury was finished. His life was upended, his status tarnished, and the federal government’s relentless prosecution left scars that no pardon can erase.
Zink was amongst these pardoned by President Trump. Now free, he’s working for Congress and has vowed to uncover the reality about January 6 and the 4 years of presidency lawfare that adopted. His movement to raise the protecting order is a crucial step in that mission, searching for to make public the terabytes of discovery supplies that might reveal the extent of presidency overreach, together with the position of undercover authorities brokers identified to have been within the crowd that day. However the authorities is preventing tooth and nail to maintain these supplies beneath wraps, claiming they comprise delicate data important to nationwide safety—with out offering any compelling specifics.
The Hypocrisy of “Defending Private Data”
The federal government’s concern for the non-public data of “witnesses and victims” rings hole when contrasted with its therapy of January 6 defendants. The Justice Division issued press releases for each J6 case, even for senior residents charged with minor misdemeanors, broadcasting their names and costs to the world with no regard for his or her presumption of innocence. Native media retailers eagerly picked up these tales, destroying lives, costing defendants their jobs, and alienating them from family and friends. But now, the federal government claims that releasing discovery supplies would violate the privateness of others. The place was this concern for privateness when J6 defendants had been being publicly vilified?
The “Settlement” to the Protecting Order: A Compelled Alternative
The federal government’s submitting notes that Zink “agreed” to the protecting order, implying he willingly consented to protecting these supplies secret. This can be a gross misrepresentation. Within the U.S. justice system, such “agreements” are sometimes coercive. Defendants like Zink confronted a take-it-or-leave-it ultimatum: settle for the protecting order or be denied entry to the federal government’s proof towards them. If Zink had refused, the courtroom would have imposed the order anyway, leaving him unable to arrange a protection. This isn’t settlement; it’s coercion dressed up as consent, a standard tactic within the authorities’s playbook to regulate the narrative.
Nationwide Safety or Cowl-Up?
The federal government’s invocation of “nationwide safety” to justify the protecting order is equally suspect. The submitting vaguely references the necessity to defend Capitol surveillance footage and Secret Service protocols however provides no concrete examples of how releasing these supplies would endanger the nation. May this be an try to hide the presence of FBI brokers within the January 6 crowd, a undeniable fact that has lengthy been whispered about however by no means absolutely addressed? The federal government’s refusal to offer specifics solely fuels hypothesis that “nationwide safety” is a pretext for overlaying up its personal misconduct.
A Curious Signature and a Glimmer of Hope?
The transient is signed by Jennifer Blackwell, a J6 prosecutor concerned in almost 40 January 6 instances. Notably, the title of Edward Robert Martin, Jr., the U.S. Legal professional for the District of Columbia appointed by President Trump, seems unsigned on the doc. The submitting concludes:
The occasions of January 6, and the following investigations and prosecutions, are necessary to our historical past as a nation—occasions that should be thought of by means of applicable public entry to authorities data and thru public discourse. However prison discovery shouldn’t be the suitable mechanism to vindicate that curiosity. Lifting the invention protecting order would lead to important hurt to the safety of our nation and to numerous others.
The Street Forward
Zink’s movement is earlier than Decide James E. Boasberg, whose observe file suggests he’ll virtually actually aspect with the federal government. However Zink, alongside J6 investigators like these at The Gateway Pundit and his legal professional Roger Roots, stays undeterred. Their struggle is not only for Zink however for the American public, which deserves to know what actually occurred on January 6 and within the years of lawfare that adopted. Ryan Zink’s battle is much from over. As he campaigns for Congress and fights for transparency, he carries the torch for numerous J6 defendants whose lives had been shattered by a weaponized justice system.
