The National  Memo Logo

Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.

Monday, December 09, 2019 {{ new Date().getDay() }}

Rep. Mo Brooks

Reprinted with permission from American Independent

Rep. Mo Brooks (R-AL) appears to be up in arms after he was finally served a lawsuit from California Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell, who is accusing Brooks of helping incite the violent insurrection at the Capitol on January 6 and is seeking damages from Brooks for his conduct.

Brooks was one of the leaders of the effort to try to block congressional certification of President Joe Biden's Electoral College victory last January 6. And he spoke at a rally that preceded the insurrection, telling the Donald Trump-supporting crowd that eventually stormed the Capitol that "American patriots" should "start taking down names and kicking ass."

On March 5, Swalwell sued Brooks — along with Trump, Donald Trump Jr., and Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani — whom he accused of being responsible for the attack by launching "a campaign of lies and incendiary rhetoric [that] led to the sacking of the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021."

Yet Swalwell's lawyers had been unable to serve Brooks with the suit, claiming Brooks was evading them. On Sunday, Swalwell's lawyers were finally able to serve Brooks with the lawsuit.

Brooks took to Twitter to lash out.

"Well, Swalwell FINALLY did his job, served complaint (on my WIFE). HORRIBLE Swalwell's team committed a CRIME by unlawfully sneaking INTO MY HOUSE & accosting my wife!" Brooks Tweeted.

Brooks continued: "Alabama Code 13A-7-2: 1st degree criminal trespass. Year in jail. $6000 fine. More to come!"

One of Swalwell's lawyers, Philip Andonian, denied any wrongdoing, telling CNN that, "No one entered or even attempted to enter the Brooks' house. That allegation is completely untrue. A process server lawfully served the papers on Mo Brooks' wife, as the federal rules allow."

Andonian added, "This was after her initial efforts to avoid service. Mo Brooks has no one but himself to blame for the fact that it came to this."

Brooks was mocked online for his tweet, which included a photo of his computer screen that showed the Alabama legal code — along with a piece of paper that included Brooks' Gmail password and a pin number to an unknown account. Twitter users pointed out that Brooks serves on a House Armed Services Subcommittee that deals with cybersecurity, yet he gave access to his Gmail account to Twitter users by publicly posting his password.

Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.

Advertising

Start your day with National Memo Newsletter

Know first.

The opinions that matter. Delivered to your inbox every morning

Wandrea "Shaye" Moss

YouTube Screenshot

Just who deserves protection in America?

If you observe the folks this country chooses to protect and chooses to ignore, you may get an answer that doesn’t exactly line up with America’s ideals.

Keep reading... Show less
YouTube Screenshot

The First Amendment reflects a principled but shrewd attitude toward religion, which can be summarized: Government should keep its big fat nose out of matters of faith. The current Supreme Court, however, is not in full agreement with that proposition. It is in half agreement — and half is not enough.

This section of the Bill of Rights contains two commands. First, the government can't do anything "respecting an establishment of religion" — that is, sponsoring, subsidizing or providing special favors for religious institutions or individuals.

Keep reading... Show less
{{ post.roar_specific_data.api_data.analytics }}