More from the article ...

... In a searing opinion in which he repeatedly cast doubt on the government's stated reasons for moving for the case's dismissal, U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta conceded he had essentially no power to deny the DOJ's motion while reaffirming his belief that their prosecutions were justified.

"This is the last of the prosecutions seeking to hold accountable those responsible for the events of January 6. That book is now closed," Mehta said. "Today's epilogue diminishes the gravity of that day, denigrates the work of the prosecutors and law enforcement officers who secured these convictions, and excuses criminal acts that caused a centuries-long pillar of our democracy -- the peaceful transfer of presidential power -- to buckle."

"The court cannot write a different ending," Mehta wrote, saying, "Reluctantly, the court grants the motion."

Mehta also noted that -- contrary to President Donald Trump's assertions that the DOJ's prosecutions of Jan. 6 defendants were an unlawful weaponization of government power -- the Justice Department made no such argument in seeking the dismissal of the Oath Keepers case.

"The government does not say that the charges were legally deficient or that the evidence presented is insufficient to sustain Defendants' convictions," Mehta said. "It confesses to no prosecutorial misconduct, nor does it assert any denial or compromise of a defendant's rights. And it does not identify any legal error that resulted in an unfair trial or a wrongful conviction (except perhaps as to the obstruction of an official proceeding counts)."

"Remarkably, then, the government does not maintain that dismissal is in the public interest to rectify a fundamental error or a grave injustice," the judge said. ...

So, the Judge seems to have ruled that the Trump DoJ (~Thank-you, Sir, I love you~) presented no evidence why the convictions should be dismissed.

Related?