BREAKING: UPDATE on Justice Department’s prosecution of election denier

You're watching the Legal Breakdown. Glenn, we have a major update on one of. the biggest cases that we've seen in the. last several years, and that is. regarding. this pipe bomber who targeted both the. DNC and the RNC. First and foremost, can. you explain what this court update is? Yeah, Brian, a new indictment was just. issued. It's called a superseding. indictment against the alleged pipe. bomber, young man named Brian Cole Jr. Our viewers may recall it was a couple. of months ago that the first indictment.

against Brian Cole was handed down. The. original indictment had just two. charges. I don't want to call them minor. charges, but they carried only a maximum. penalty of up to 10 years each. The. original two charges were interstate. transportation of explosives and. malicious attempt to use explosives. So, if he was convicted on those two. charges, he could face up to 20 years in. prison. Well, today we got a superseding. indictment adding two more consequential.

charges, and those are. the attempted use of a WMD, a weapon of. mass destruction, and. an act of terrorism while armed, armed. with the pipe bombs. Now, Brian Cole is. facing up to life in prison if he is. convicted on these charges. So, the. interesting part, Glenn, is that Brian. Cole reportedly did all of this because. he didn't agree with the election. results. That is a tactic that Donald. Trump has been taking for a long time.

And so, there there seems to be this. chasm here because usually election. deniers get preferential treatment from. the DOJ. And so, do you find it a little. bizarre that you have an election denier. who is not only being prosecuted by this. DOJ, but now the DOJ is actually putting. forward superseding indictments, meaning. he faces more charges and and more time. in prison if convicted when normally. that kind of. that kind of thing is is reserved for. for for special treatment at the hands.

of Trump's DOJ. Yeah, Brian, bizarre is. one word for it. There's there's a. searing inconsistency. That's another way to look at it. I. mean, here we are piling charges on. Brian Cole when at virtually the same. time Donald Trump's dirty DOJ leadership. is trying to dismiss the convictions of. the Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys who. were convicted of seditious conspiracy. So, I'm not sure are we supposed to like.

and reward election deniers who commit. massive felony crimes? Are we supposed. to dislike and prosecute election. deniers who commit massive, you know, violent, potentially violent crimes? You. know, there is no rhyme or reason to. what this Department of Justice does, but I will tell you one of the other. interesting aspects of this litigation, Brian, is there is a robust motion to. dismiss these charges based on what.

Donald Trump's sweeping blanket pardons. of January 6th offenders. So, that is an. issue that's actively being litigated by. the presiding judge, Judge Amit Ali. And. the next court hearing is coming up on. April 21st, and they're going to be. talking more about this motion to. dismiss based on Donald Trump's pardons. Well, specifically, unless he was the. recipient, Brian Cole was the recipient. of one of these pardons, you can't just.

point to the fact that a pardon was. given for similar crimes on the same day. as as evidence that the law no longer. exists. And so, what grounds does he. have to dismiss other than, you know, other than saying, "Well, I should have. been in that bucket, but I wasn't.". Well, because the pardons were not. delivered by name. They weren't issued. by name, they were issued by category. Anybody who was, you know, charged, anybody who was indicted for crimes on.

or around the capital on January 6th. Well, these crimes actually occurred on. January 5th, the night before January. 6th, and Brian Cole's lawyers are. arguing they are inextricably. intertwined with everything else that. went on during the attack of the. capital. Now, I went back and reread. these blanket pardons, you know, by. category that Donald Trump issued. previously, ill-advised as they were, and I and I actually think the. Department of Justice has the better. argument that, you know, Brian Cole's.

attorneys may try to kind of twist and. contort and expand the scope of those. blanket pardons, but he probably, Brian. Cole probably doesn't fall within the. scope of the language of those blanket. pardons. But again, this is robust. motions hearing that is underway, and. we'll learn more about it on April 21st. A quick note for folks who are watching. right now. If you'd like to stay on top. of this story or other legal news, please make sure to subscribe to both of. our channels. It's completely free to do.

so. We don't paywall any of our content, but a great way to support our work is. just to hit the subscribe button. So, I'm going to put those links in the post. description of this video. Glenn, to. that point, if. by some by some, you know, stretch of. luck Brian Cole is successful at at. grouping himself in with these pardon. recipients, is there a world where Trump. himself could say you know, could could. say, "No, he's not he you know, this. person shouldn't be a recipient of this. pardon." Like they're arguing about.

Trump's intent. with issuing these initial tranche of. pardons, but would Trump be able to to. like kind of butt in and offer himself. the final say on whether or not it. applies to this person in particular? You know, Brian, it's a great question, and because we are, you know, sailing in. uncharted waters, we have no idea how. courts might view a claim from a. president that, "Okay, I may have issued. blanket pardons before for large swaths.

of people who attacked the capital to. try to, you know, stop the certification. of an election that I lost and corruptly. helped me declare myself the winner, but. I didn't intend this particular person. or this particular act to fall within. that blanket pardon that I that I. issued." So, yes, and of course, the way. you would prove that up would actually. be to call Donald Trump as as a witness. in a motions hearing. Do we think we.

will ever see Donald Trump on the stand. in a criminal case? Do we think Donald. Trump could withstand the rigors of. cross-examination? Do we think Donald. Trump could testify truthfully beyond. the first question, "Please state your. name for the record." I think all of. those things very unlikely. But, you. know, again, I don't think this is going. to be a winning motion to dismiss, but. your point is a good one. I mean, in. theory, the president who issued the. blanket pardon could provide evidence. that no, this one was not within the.

scope of what I intended to to do by. virtue of that blanket pardon. You know, frankly, I think that Trump. would have a vested interest in allowing. allowing Brian Cole, if he is successful. at grouping himself with that initial. tranche of of mass pardons, because, you. know, you and I have spoken about about. this idea as recently as yesterday's. episode, where Trump wants people to. know that if they commit violence in his. name or on behalf of this idea that the.

election results are always rigged, he. wants them to know that they're safe. That they're safe from prosecution, that. he's got their back. And so, whether. it's the insurrectionists themselves, those more than 1,500 of them, whether. it's the leaders of the Proud Boys or. the Oath Keepers, and that was. yesterday's episode, where he is now. moving to dismiss their cases, dismiss. their convictions, or even somebody who. committed one-off acts of violence like. Brian Cole and and and, you know, hiding. these pipe bombs, Trump has a vested.

interest in letting people know that if. they want to commit violence in his name. or on behalf of his ideals, first and foremost of which is that any. election where he's not successful is. rigged, then then he's going to, you. know, then he's going to do whatever he. can to let people know that that's A-OK, especially as we head toward a midterm. cycle where, frankly, he needs all the. help that he can get. And so, if that. means that he can send a little discreet. message or not-so-discreet message to. his supporters by virtue of.

by virtue of allowing these criminals to. be pardoned, then he has every interest. in the world to do exactly that. Yeah, it's really kind of a curiosity. because whereas he's pardoned, I think, more than 1,500. insurrectionists who beat the hell out. of police officers and tried to stop the. certification of an election that he. lost. These were his basically criminal. associates in trying to help him steal. the presidency from the American people. You know, I have to wonder if Brian Cole.

had only planted a pipe bomb outside the. DNC, but not the RNC, would Trump's. Department of Justice be prosecuting. Brian Cole today? You know, that's. that's an open question. But, and then the other thing with. respect to the recruiting call that I. see this I see Donald Trump's pardons. and his attempts to now dismiss the. cases, the convictions for seditious. conspiracy against the Proud Boys and. the Oath Keepers, I see that as a. recruiting call because we've got.

midterms coming up. And just as he sent. people to the capital to fight like hell. or they won't have a country anymore, telling them to go stop the. certification, he used the word steal, but we know it wasn't a stolen election. He told them to go stop the steal, stop. Joe Biden's win. Um, he can try to send. those people to the various state. polling places in the upcoming midterms. If there's a little bit of a silver. lining there, the crimes that anybody. commits at a state polling place, guess.

what? Those are state crimes, not just. federal crimes. So, state prosecutors. can hold those folk accountable. Unfortunately, in DC, because it's not a. state, the president's pardon power. reaches not only federal crimes. committed in Washington DC, but local. crimes in violation of local DC city. law. That's why there were no state. prosecutions available for the January.

6th insurrectionists. If there were, they would have been pardon proof, but. in DC, they're not. You know, that's a. great point. And so, my next question. here is in the event that Trump does. catch wind of this and decide that he. should be either pardoned or that Brian. Cole unto himself is successful in. grouping himself or his lawyers are. successful in grouping himself with that. initial tranche of pardons, is there a. world where, you know, because he is in. Virginia and presumably this plan was.

hatched, the materials were bought, and. and maybe some of the the actual. erecting of these pipe bombs were done. in Virginia, does that leave an opening. or is there an obligation for Abigail. Spanberger and these Democrats who are. in elected office in Virginia to step up. where the federal government is dropping. the ball and prosecute Brian Cole Jr. at. the state level? Yeah, you know, it's a good point. If if. this case, this federal prosecution. against Brian Cole for some reason goes.

away, gets dismissed, I think it. unlikely, but then the prosecutorial. authorities in the Commonwealth of. Virginia could certainly look at it and. say, "Okay, he purchased component parts. with the intent to. create, construct a pipe bomb to then be. used to, you know, damage property or. potentially hurt individuals." That. could very well violate Virginia state. law and. >> do do do they have standing to to bring.

this case in Virginia or does it have to. be where the crime itself was committed? Well, it has to be where the crime was. committed, but you can have an ongoing. series of events that could violate any. number of state statutes. So, if. purchasing. the component parts to what you intend. to assemble into a bomb violates. Virginia state law, and it may very well. violate Virginia state law. I'd have to. look at the local state statutes in. Virginia. If anything he did in.

Virginia, you know, setting aside the fact that. this all culminated with him planting. those pipe bombs in Washington DC, then. those discrete state law violations. could be brought by Virginia state. prosecutors. Yeah, I mean, this is just. one more example, if this situation. plays plays itself out, where you need. the states to step up because the DOJ. has completely abdicated its. responsibility in blind deference to. Donald Trump and, you know, his. ideological affiliation. So, we will of.

course stay on top of this. For those. who are watching right now, if you'd. like to follow along with this story and. all other legal news, the best way to do. that is to subscribe to both of our. channels. Again, we don't paywall. anything. All of our content is. completely free, but we just ask that. you support our work by subscribing. I'm. Brian Tyler Cohen. And I'm Glenn. Kirschner. You're watching the Legal. Breakdown.