Eric Swalwell Attorney Mocks Mo Brooks Using Character Defense in Response to Jan 6th Lawsuit: He ‘Completely Missed the Point’
An attorney working with Congressman Eric Swalwell (D-CA) ridiculed Mo Brooks for how the Alabama Republican lawmaker responded to his client’s lawsuit by invoking his personal history to deflect from his actions on January 6th.
Swalwell has filed a civil lawsuit against Brooks and several other Republican figures, accusing them of helping to incite the storming of the U.S. Capitol by supporters of former President Donald Trump. Brooks is filing for legal immunity from the suit, claiming he was “cooperating” with the Trump White House and acting within his duty as a member of Congress when he gave his bombastic “Stop the Steal” rally speech before the riot. The Justice Department has rejected Brooks’ claim, saying his actions that day were rooted in political campaigning, which falls outside the scope of his congressional capacity.
Phil Andonian, an attorney working with Swalwell on the lawsuit, appeared on CNN’s New Day to dissect Brooks’ continued attempts to pursue legal immunity. The lawyer told Brianna Keilar that Brooks has already admitted in an affidavit that his activities were political in nature, “so as far as we’re concerned, it’s an open-and-shut case, and that’s exactly what the DOJ concluded.”
As Andonian outlined the perils of Brooks’ decision to represent himself over the lawsuit, Keilar led the conversation toward Brook’s “bizarre” legal argument where he went into a self-defense of his character.
Representing himself, Rep. Mo Brooks asked to be dismissed from Rep. Eric Swalwell’s lawsuit alleging a conspiracy to incite the Jan 6 riot.
In an unusual opening, Brooks says he’s always been faithful to his wife, never used tobacco, and that none of his kids are divorced. pic.twitter.com/f8Yu9ls1K4
— Jan Wolfe (@JanNWolfe) August 4, 2021
Asked why any of this was relevant, Andonian said “my favorite was he’s never been in a car wreck that somebody accused him of being at fault at, which then begs the question, how many non-fault accidents has he been in and why are you including this in a pleading?”
“Here he is, essentially mitigating his wrongdoing by laying at the feet of the court all of these good things that he calls ‘verified Brooks facts,'” Andonian said. “It’s obviously totally irrelevant, and again, his filings yesterday just completely missed the point that his own admissions of political campaign activity are at the core of the DOJ’s decision, and we certainly hope the judge is going to uphold the DOJ’s findings.”
Watch above, via CNN.
Have a tip we should know? email@example.com