Judge Smacks Down Argument from Accused Jan 6 Pipe Bomber That He Was Covered by Trump’s Pardons

FBI via AP, File

On Monday, a federal judge rejected arguments by accused January 6 pipe bomber Brian Cole Jr. that the pardons issued by President Donald Trump applied to him.

Last December, Cole, a resident of Virginia, was arrested by the FBI and accused of planting pipe bombs at the Republican National Committee and Democratic National Committee headquarters on the evening of Jan. 5, 2021, mere hours before Trump supporters swarmed the Capitol in an effort to derail the certification of the 2020 Electoral College votes for President Joe Biden.

Fortunately, the devices were discovered, and no one was injured, but the crime baffled investigators for years.

Cole was charged with interstate transportation of explosives, malicious attempt to use explosives, attempt to use weapons of mass destruction, and act of terrorism while armed (attempted malicious burning, destruction, or injury of property).

On the first day of his second term in office, Trump issued sweeping pardons and clemency to nearly 1,600 defendants who had been charged or convicted for their roles in the Capitol riot, including many who were charged with violent assaults on the law enforcement officers defending the Capitol that day like the U.S. Capitol Police and the DC Metropolitan Police Department. Multiple pardoned rioters have since found themselves facing new criminal charges for unrelated crimes; one was fatally shot by a local police officer in Indiana for allegedly resisting arrest during a traffic stop mere weeks after his pardon. Another was sentenced to life in prison in March for sexually abusing two middle school age children.

Cole’s attorney Mario Williams told reporters that he had voted for Trump twice and argued that the president’s sweeping pardons should apply to his client too, filing a motion seeking to dismiss all charges against him.

On Monday, Judge Amir H. Ali with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, a Biden appointee, bluntly rejected that argument.

Ali noted that the language of Trump’s pardon covered three categories of January 6 defendants: commuting the sentences of several named individuals who had been convicted for their participation” in the Capitol riot, “a full, complete and unconditional pardon to all other individuals convicted of offenses related to events that occurred at or near the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021,” and a directive to the Attorney General to “pursue dismissal with prejudice to the government of all pending indictments against individuals for their conduct related to the events at or near the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021.”

The “plain and ordinary meaning” of the language in the president’s pardon excluded Cole, the judge wrote (citations omitted) because of the clear facts about the timeline:

The pardon says that it applies to “individuals convicted of offenses related to events that occurred at or near the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021.” Even assuming that the conduct Cole is charged with is “related to events that occurred at or near the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021,” the pardon is expressly limited to people who had been “convicted of offenses” related to those events. Cole had not been convicted of the conduct at issue when the President issued the pardon; indeed, he was not charged until many months after the President’s proclamation.

Cole does not try to explain how a pardon for “individuals convicted of offenses” applies to him, and he shifts to a new theory in his reply brief: that the President’s directive to the Attorney General to “pursue dismissal with prejudice to the government of all pending indictments” requires the Attorney General to dismiss the charges against him. But this argument does not work either. Cole was first charged in December 2025 months after the President’s proclamation. He therefore did not have “pending indictments” at the time of the President’s directive.

New: The Mediaite One-Sheet "Newsletter of Newsletters"
Your daily summary and analysis of what the many, many media newsletters are saying and reporting. Subscribe now!