So I wouldn't have changed how I handled that situation at all in retrospect.

So I did wanna say one thing about the pardons that you were talking about, just 'cause this is a very common misconception.

A lot of people talk about the distinction between those who are convicted of trespass or misdemeanors in the January 6th context, and then those who are convicted of, like, assaults on police officers.

And what a lot of people don't realize is that on day one, those pardons, which were indiscriminate in nature and didn't take into account all of the individualized characteristics that you just described, the people they largely, if not 100% benefited, were the ones who were serving long sentences for assaulting police officers.

And so, like, I can't say that with, like, you know, 100% certainty, but the people who benefited were not the, the what, what you hear on the news of people, quote, "walking through the Capitol on a tourist tour." That, that ignoring the fact that that did not happen-The, but, but, like, those were, the least culpable people were not the beneficiaries of those, uh, pardons.

To answer the direct question, I also [laughs] naively thought, like, we're gonna, you know, we're gonna do our job, transition from one administration to the other.

I received a call on the night of the, uh, inauguration, uh, indicating that the, uh, executive order would be forthcoming relating to the pardons and commutations, and that we would have to implement it.

How do we deal with that?

So talk a little bit about when you first got to the DC US Attorney's office, kind of what was your progression through the office, and then how did you end up as chief of the Capitol Siege Unit?

Started off in misdemeanors.

Uh, like everybody else we go through what you know as the rotation.

Um, and so I was in the rotation for I think two to three years going through what they call guns and drugs, violent felonies, grand jury processes, homicides.

I didn't join the homicide section, but previously had done the homicide, uh, in Loudoun, and then, um, did some work when I went up to district court.

After a little bit of time I, uh, went to district court in a section called the Violent Crime and Narcotics Trafficking section, also known as VCNT.

Um, there, you know, we prosecuted anything on the federal level from possession charges involving narcotics or firearms all the way to murder.

Talk us through that, and then when did you become chief and what did, what did that entail, being chief of the Capitol Siege Unit?

So talk a little bit about when you first got to the DC US Attorney's office, kind of what was your progression through the office, and then how did you end up as chief of the Capital Siege unit?

Started off in misdemeanors.

Uh, like everybody else, we go through what you know as the rotation.

Um, and so I was in the rotation for I think two to three years going through what they call guns and drugs, violent felonies, grand jury processes, homicides.

I didn't join the homicide section, but previously had done the homicide, uh, in Loudoun, and then, um, did some work when I went up to district court.

After a little bit of time I, uh, went to district court in a section called the Violent Crime and Narcotics Trafficking section, also known as VCNT.

Um, there, you know, we prosecuted anything on the federal level from possession charges involving narcotics or firearms all the way to murder.

Talk us through that, and then when did you become chief, and what did, what did that entail, being chief of the Capitol Siege Unit?

Here's Greg Rosen, the prosecutor.

It is certainly the largest federal prosecution in American history.

In terms of the statistics, we prosecuted approximately 1,593 cases, and had approximately 260 plus trials.

There were only two defendants that were fully acquitted.

So, very high success rate.

That is the same reason Greg Rosen, the prosecutor, is still talking.

And so, you know, I think it's disappointing that people believe that what they did to police officers on that day, or what they did to members of Congress, or what they did to the institution itself was somehow justified or righteous.

But I'm hoping that the history of this prosecution is not simply memorialized by those feelings, but by the historical record in the court cases and then eventually what happens years and decades later.

Here's Greg Rosen, the prosecutor.

It is certainly the largest federal prosecution in American history.

In terms of the statistics, we prosecuted approximately 1,593 cases, and had approximately 260-plus trials.

There were only two defendants that were fully acquitted.

So, very high success rate.

That is the same reason Greg Rosen, the prosecutor, is still talking.

And so, you know, I think it's disappointing that people believe that what they did to police officers on that day, or what they did to members of Congress, or what they did to the institution itself was somehow justified or righteous, but I'm hoping that the history of this prosecution is not simply memorialized by those feelings, but by the historical record in the court cases, and then eventually what happens years and decades later.

What kind of message does it send that this person who participated in the January 6th attack is now inside the Justice Department?

Political views are now something that are subject to attack in our republic, and part of America is having that ability to dissent, having that ability to sort of freely speak on these issues.

So, I think it sends an incredibly dangerous message.

I think it's also incredibly hypocritical.

This administration has consistently talked about backing the blue and ensuring the protection of law enforcement.

So, to hire somebody who was accused, and at the time, remember, this was a public trial with public exhibits that was vetted by a federal judge.

At the time, having an individual who is alleged to have said, "Kill him, kill him, kill him," and encouraged political violence against police officers, to hire that person to the department sends exactly the opposite message that I think the department was trying to convey.

Does that undermine at all the work that you did, the convictions that you and your team sought?