You can add Judge Amit Mata, make that five judges in the D.C. courts who have now opposed

Donald Trump and his pardon and commutation of sentences for the Jan 6 defendants, the ones who were

convicted beyond a reasonable doubt of trying to overthrow our democracy and government by

violent means with seditious conspiracy as their charges,

while they might have, some of which might have gotten pardons, some of which might have had

just their sentences commuted, meaning that their guilty verdicts stay on the books.

These judges are all linked together, and now I'm going to talk about Judge Meta and the

difference between the oatha and the difference

between the Oathkeepers and the Proud Boys. There's a lot of confusion about that about

what Donald Trump did to which and why one group was given a full pardon and the other group

only had their sentence commuted meeting shortened keeping their conviction on their books.

I'm Michael Popock. You're on the Midas Touch Network and LegalAF.

Let's get to it.

I've done a lot of reporting here on the network and on LegalAF, the YouTube channel,

about how federal judges are responding to Donald Trump's, in their view, disgusting,

amoral, inappropriate, sacrilegious, if you will, pardons, and other

commutations of sentences and clemency for Jan 6th insurrectionists, including the most

violent ones, including the ones that attacked five different groups of law enforcement

in and around the Capitol. Now, their response

can be limited in a way. It depends on where the person is in the process along the continuum.

And that I'll also describe the big difference between the Oathkeepers and the Proud Boys.

And let me do a spoiler alert here.

...