Skip to content

Pelosi On Thin Ice? Violation of Legal Requests Is A Problem

  • by

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi claiming sovereign immunity in refusing to make public the purported evidence in the January 6th persecution is not viable.   The Legal clause applies to the right to not being ‘sued’ when the government acts “within” the jurisdiction of the US Constitution.   Obviously, the entire process of the January 6th Committee is outside of the Constitution and thus immunity would NOT prevail.   Nowhere in this law does it apply to the right to withhold evidence from the public in the prosecution of US citizens.   It is about being sued.

In 1946, Congress passed the Tort Claims Act. It allowed US District Courts to hold the US liable for torts committed by:

“agencies, officers, and employees just as the courts would hold individual defendants liable under similar circumstances. This general waiver of immunity included a number of exceptions, however, including the torts of BatteryFalse Imprisonment, False Arrest, Malicious Prosecution, Abuse of Process, Libel, Slander, Misrepresentation, deceit, interference with contractual rights etc…”

Pelosi’s claim that the Committee is immune from transparency applies if they have followed the letter of the law of the US Constitution.  They have Not.

The Freedom of Information Act could possibly have been a card play had Pelosi or the committee followed every rule of the Act to a tee.   Such as providing Judicial Watch with the reasons, providing redacted information, or responding according to the rules of engagement.   Pelosi & the committee did not and instead have attempted to make a claim, sovereign immunity, that is not a part of the FOIA, and have thus jeopardized any means at their disposal to hide the evidence.

In fact, they have violated various points of response, contact, and due diligence.

The first trial opened the ‘public’ denial point of FOIA when the judge allowed a media person – public, and the defendant’s wife – a public person, to attend the trial.   Therefore making the Pelosi violation even more egregious as she claims there is ‘no public interest’.

In a reality outside of Alice’s Wonderland, the request would have been required and met with full unredacted documents provided.   Judicial Watch is a member of the media and thus has full rights to the request.   There are also terms within the Act that specify how long they can drag their feet, which they have exceeded.

"*" indicates required fields

Are you voting in the midterm elections?*
This poll gives you free access to our premium politics newsletter. Unsubscribe at any time.
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

But the most damning of course is the fact that the Committee has effectively announced they are illegally withholding evidence that could prove innocence – they have completely denied hundreds of US citizens to their right of a speedy trial, held them without charges, and confined them to inhumane conditions which are all violations of the US Constitution –

Tort claims could be levied and having the evidence provides the means.  This is what Pelosi Fears most.

By Helena

Perhaps I am a female version of Don Quixote, a free spirit, a bit off, a bit different, riding Rocinante and fighting windmills! What I know is the world we are witness to today is not a Cinderella fit for me – and yet there is only one way to get back in the saddle and ride.   Holding a bridle of Honor, Respect, and Integrity. You can follow Helena’s blog here.

Enjoy HUGE savings at My Pillow with promo code BSC

The views and opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Blue State Conservative. The BSC is not responsible for, and does not verify the accuracy of, any information presented.

Featured photo by Gage Skidmore from Peoria, AZ, United States of America, CC BY-SA 2.0 <>, via Wikimedia Commons