.jpeg "Judge says prosecutors who were placed on leave ‘did a truly excellent job’")
Trump-Appointed Judge Defends Suspended Federal Prosecutors
In an extraordinary courtroom moment on Thursday, U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols publicly praised two federal prosecutors who were abruptly placed on administrative leave after describing participants in the January 6, 2021 Capitol incident as a "mob of rioters" in official court documents. The judge's remarks highlighted growing tensions within the Justice Department over how to characterize the events of that day.
Judge Nichols, who was appointed to the bench by President Donald Trump, offered what he called an "unusual tribute" to prosecutors Samuel White and Carlos Valdivia during the sentencing hearing of Taylor Taranto, a defendant facing charges unrelated to January 6. "In my view, both Mr. Valdivia and Mr. White did a truly excellent job in this case," the judge stated emphatically, adding that they had "upheld the highest standards of professionalism."
What Led to the Prosecutors' Suspension?
The controversy stems from a 14-page sentencing memorandum filed by Valdivia and White on Tuesday. The document provided a detailed description of Taranto's background, including his participation in the January 6 events at the U.S. Capitol. The prosecutors wrote that "a mob of rioters" attacked the Capitol to dispute the results of the 2020 presidential election.
Within hours of filing the memo, both prosecutors were locked out of their government devices and informed they were being placed on administrative leave. According to sources familiar with the matter, the attorneys were not given a clear explanation for their sudden suspension.
Senior officials at the U.S. Attorney's office in Washington, D.C., subsequently attempted to restrict public access to the original filing by persuading a court clerk to block it online. A notation indicated it was "filed in error," and the document disappeared from the public docket—though journalists had already downloaded copies before it became inaccessible.
Justice Department Scrubs January 6 References from Court Records
By Wednesday evening, two replacement prosecutors—including Jonathan R. Hornok, head of the criminal division in the D.C. U.S. Attorney's office—filed a revised sentencing memo that stripped all references to the Capitol attack and President Trump's role in related events. The new filing omitted language about the January 6 "riot" and removed a reference to Trump posting what he claimed was former President Barack Obama's address on social media.
Judge Nichols expressed concern about the unusual handling of the case during Thursday's hearing. "Not entirely clear to me how that first brief was sealed," he stated, noting that he had not authorized its removal from the public record. The judge warned that if prosecutors want to keep the initial sentencing memo under wraps, they will need to file a formal motion to seal it or strike it from the record and "justify that" decision.
The Taylor Taranto Case: More Than January 6
While the prosecutor suspension dominated headlines, the actual sentencing hearing concerned Taylor Taranto's conduct in June 2023. Taranto, a Navy veteran from Washington state, triggered a massive law enforcement response when he posted a livestream suggesting he was driving through Washington's Kalorama neighborhood in a van fitted with explosives.
The incident occurred after Taranto appeared to focus on a home belonging to former President Obama, following Trump's posting of what he claimed was Obama's address on Truth Social. Taranto was arrested after a brief Secret Service chase, with two pistols and ammunition found in his vehicle—though no explosives were discovered.
In May, Judge Nichols convicted Taranto of illegally carrying firearms without a license, unlawfully possessing ammunition, and making false information and hoax threats. Federal sentencing guidelines recommended 21 to 27 months in prison. Both the original and replacement prosecutors urged a 27-month sentence, but Judge Nichols sentenced Taranto to 21 months—essentially time served, as he had already spent 22 months in pretrial detention.
Broader Context: Justice Department Under Pressure
This incident represents the latest chapter in ongoing efforts by the Justice Department to reshape the narrative surrounding January 6. President Trump issued sweeping pardons or commutations for all approximately 1,500 individuals charged in connection with the Capitol incident on his first day back in office in January 2025.
Since Trump's return to the White House, the administration has fired or demoted numerous attorneys involved in the January 6 prosecutions. In January, then-acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove ordered the termination of about two dozen prosecutors who had been working on Jan. 6 cases. In June, two supervisors and a line attorney from the D.C. U.S. Attorney's office were also fired.
Current and former prosecutors have expressed alarm at what they describe as "Orwellian" efforts to revise the historical record. U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro, when asked about the situation at a Thursday press conference, declined to comment on internal office matters, saying only that "the papers speak for themselves."
Legal and Political Implications
The public praise from a Trump-appointed judge for prosecutors disciplined by a Trump administration Justice Department creates an unusual dynamic. Legal experts note that judicial officers typically maintain distance from personnel matters within prosecuting agencies, making Judge Nichols' comments all the more significant.
The incident raises questions about prosecutorial independence and whether political considerations are influencing how the Justice Department presents cases in court. The fact that the original memo was retroactively sealed without judicial authorization has sparked concerns about transparency in the federal court system.
Both Valdivia and White attended Thursday's hearing as spectators, accompanied by several colleagues offering support. However, they declined to comment to reporters as they left the courthouse. Hornok, the replacement prosecutor, also refused to explain why references to January 6 were removed from the revised sentencing memo.
What Happens Next?
Judge Nichols has signaled he may unseal the original sentencing memo unless prosecutors provide written justification for keeping it under wraps. This could force the Justice Department to publicly explain its reasoning for suppressing the document and disciplining the attorneys who filed it.
Meanwhile, Taranto indicated during the hearing that he plans to appeal his convictions. The defendant appeared remotely from his home in Washington state and offered brief comments during the proceeding, making references to the Constitutional Convention of 1787 and claims of "election fraud" in 2020.
The case continues to highlight the ongoing debate over how historical events should be characterized in official government documents and the extent to which political considerations should influence prosecutorial decisions and language.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why were the federal prosecutors placed on leave?
The prosecutors were placed on administrative leave hours after filing a sentencing memo that described January 6 participants as a "mob of rioters." They were not given a clear explanation for their suspension.
What did Judge Nichols say about the prosecutors?
Judge Carl Nichols praised prosecutors Samuel White and Carlos Valdivia, stating they "did a truly excellent job" and "upheld the highest standards of professionalism" in handling the case.
What was changed in the revised court filing?
The revised sentencing memo removed all references to the January 6 Capitol attack and eliminated mention of President Trump posting Barack Obama's purported address on social media.
Who is Taylor Taranto and what was he convicted of?
Taylor Taranto is a Navy veteran convicted of illegally possessing firearms and ammunition and making hoax threats after an incident near Barack Obama's home in June 2023. He was sentenced to 21 months (time served).
Will the original sentencing memo be made public?
Judge Nichols indicated he intends to unseal the original memo unless prosecutors file a formal motion with written justification for keeping it sealed.
Stay Informed on Legal Developments
This case highlights important questions about prosecutorial independence and government transparency. If you found this analysis valuable, please share it with others who care about these critical issues.
