Trump “continues to propagate the lie that inspired the attack almost daily,” she wrote Thursday in a notice now in jail for defendant Karl Dresch. “And the anger surrounding the bogus accusation continues to be stoked by multiple media outlets as well as state and federal party leaders who intend to censor those who dare to challenge the former president’s version of events. “
Dresch, like other Trump supporters, “stands ready to start over,” due to the belief that a civil war might be necessary and his allegiance to Trump, who continues to contest the election, Jackson noted.
But Jackson has handled more of the high-profile cases than perhaps any other district judge in Washington, and she continues to oversee historically significant cases.
Jackson has repeatedly noted the culture of lying.
“If people don’t have the facts democracy doesn’t work,” she told Manafort co-defendant and former Trump campaign manager Rick Gates in 2019 after the couple went into hiding their lucrative lobbying activity on behalf of Ukrainians.
That same year, she told former campaign chairman Trump Manafort, “What you were doing was lying to members of Congress and the American public. “
Take the lie
Jackson has become well known in recent years for preparing long recitations even for procedural courtroom tapes.
In the Manafort, Gates and Stone cases, and now in the Capitol Riot cases, she has sometimes spent more than an hour speaking without interruption, setting out her legal considerations and the facts of the case.
At times these speeches gave him the opportunity to comment on what could be the defining aspect of the Trump years: disinformation.
During Stone’s conviction, for example, she spoke at length about the audacity of her lies in Congress to protect the president.
She called Stone’s embrace a lie as a threat “to the very foundation of our democracy.”
In the Stone case – his last major defendant to be convicted during the Mueller era – Jackson gave even broader comments than before about the historical implications of what had happened.
“If he goes unpunished, it will not be a victory for one party or another,” she told him, before sentencing him to 40 months in prison. (Trump granted Stone clemency ahead of his surrender date.)
“Everyone loses because everyone depends on the representatives they elect to make the right decisions on a myriad of issues – many of which are politically charged but many are not – based on the facts. “
Jackson declined to speak to CNN about his experience on the bench.
Robert Trout, a defense attorney who is a former colleague and Jackson’s mentor, said that, like many judges, she held government and politicians to a high standard.
“Do I think she thinks her role in these high profile cases is historic?” Trout said, responding to a question from CNN about how Jackson can rate his work. “No, I think she thinks she’s just doing her job. What makes history about it? “
Threats and intimidation
In the Stone case, Jackson also had to respond to isolated political shootings and ad hominem attacks from Trump’s online sphere.
First, Stone posted an image of herself on Instagram with a crosshair behind her head; she banned him from social media and the Justice Department launched an investigation into the threats that resulted in no charges. Later, around Stone’s conviction, Jackson was confronted with tweets from Trump about what she should do as well as about a juror who agreed to convict Stone.
She retaliated against the harassment of jurors by bringing in surprise witnesses in court proceedings to testify to the integrity of Stone’s jury.
The hearing was dramatic – unusual for federal justice, especially compared to the halls of Congress and the White House, where cameras capture Washington’s top performing moments.
Set the tone
As of March, Jackson had been on the bench for a decade.
Prior to her appointment by President Barack Obama, she worked as a line prosecutor and then as a defense lawyer, gaining experience in high-profile trials in courtrooms like the one she presides over today. Defense attorneys who acknowledge her work experience for them now say she’s not particularly sympathetic to either side of a case.
His responses to Stone’s Instagram and the Justice Department’s more recent handling of the obstruction note to Barr are not irrelevant, they say, given that judges don’t like to be threatened or abused in their business.
“All the things she took offense to are part of the general reaction,” said a defense attorney, who declined to use her name because he was appearing before Jackson in court.
Shan Wu, who represented Gates in the Mueller investigation before pleading guilty, recalled that Jackson had a fair approach. “His demeanor, whether in a sparsely populated courtroom or filled with national media, is still the same, and I think that says a lot about his integrity as a judge. “
When he decided on the first sentence for a defendant in the Mueller investigation, Dutch lawyer Alex Van Der Zwaan, Jackson gave him 30 days in prison for lying, a heavier sentence than other defendants for a felony similar.
This set the tone for the start of the Mueller business. She later gave Manafort Gates’ deputy 45 days, largely because of her willingness to cooperate with investigators and her repentance. Manafort himself was sentenced to more than 7 years in prison for foreign lobbying and financial crimes.
Jackson has been as harsh on Democrats in his courtroom as Republicans in the past. She presided over the criminal cases of former Democratic Representative Jesse Jackson Jr., whom she lambasted for failing to act with greater integrity as a public official, and former Obama attorney at the White House, Greg Craig, acquitted by a jury at trial in a case that related to Manafort’s work for Ukraine.
Trump-era business continues
The cases of recent years – particularly those of Stone and Manafort – have given Jackson one of the views closest to anyone outside the Justice Department on foreign lobbying and Russian ties to politics. American.
Even this week, the judge was still working on the lingering aspects of the Manafort case and unveiled records of his interaction with a longtime Russian colleague and co-accused.
She is also still working on a Justice Department case that is not directly related, but which could trigger another round of Trump administration reviews. It was the lawsuits brought by former FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page against the Justice Department after their text messages were published that fueled years of Trump’s Twitter attacks.
Jackson has so far gathered evidence in the case, prompting Strzok and Page to subpoena documents from the Trump campaign. They could try to oust top Trump-era Justice Department leaders, and the case could still see Jackson this fall.