WASHINGTON — Federal prosecutors in the now-defunct Capitol Siege Section of the DCUS Attorney's Office have spent much of the past four years prosecuting cases against the Jan. 6 rioters. Suddenly, a signature erased the end result of that work—albeit not from the public record.

Three prosecutors working in the department described the week to NBC News, with one calling it the worst of their careers. It started with President Donald Trump signing a pardon. Prosecutors quickly dismissed the remaining active cases and shelved evidence they hoped would spark more charges.

On Friday, Acting U.S. Attorney Ed Martin filed a motion to lift remaining conditions imposed on members of the far-right Oath Keepers militia. Their ability to visit Washington remains restricted by judicial orders after Trump commuted their sentences.

Ashley Akers, who oversaw the Jan. 6 case, left the Justice Department on Friday, calling the pardon "shocking" and saying she acted when she felt she had more evidence than was reasonable. A motion to dismiss the case had to be filed, to which she had a "guttural" reaction. It is suspected that this indicates an attack on a law enforcement officer. Many people in the office have developed close relationships with the officers who were injured on January 6, 2021, which allows them to devote themselves to their jobs.

"It not only undermines the sacrifice that all of these officers have made, but also the experience that they went through," said Akers, who spoke to NBC News after turning in her computer and leaving the department. "The public record is very clear, and has been proven in hundreds of trials, that these officers were victims."

Prosecutors acknowledged that even though the Constitution gives the president extraordinary pardon powers, they still found it extremely difficult to file motions to dismiss cases they brought under orders from their new bosses.

"It went against all my instincts," a federal prosecutor who was assigned to the Capitol siege unit told NBC News. The person still works at the Justice Department and spoke on condition of anonymity because their employment would be in jeopardy if they spoke publicly.

"When you are a state or federal prosecutor, you pursue a case based on the evidence and the law, not on any political considerations. It is torture to be told that the case must be dismissed based on overwhelming evidence," the prosecutor continued.

Akers decided to leave the Justice Department after Trump named former Rep. Matt Gaetz as his top choice for attorney general. She said it was "unbelievable" that her career as a federal prosecutor was coming to an end as violent rioters she helped convict were granted pardons.

Some prosecutors decided to leave even before Trump was elected. Jason Manning, the former federal prosecutor who prosecuted the Jan. 6 case, left the Justice Department this summer to join the campaign of Vice President Kamala Harris. He said he wasn't really a political person before, but he heard Trump on the campaign trail promising to pardon the Jan. 6 criminals and he knew the Department of Justice's efforts to combat the rioters would be "significant" if Trump was elected. Came to a standstill”.

"The idea that all of this can be wiped away with the stroke of a pen makes me personally think it's more important for me to participate in the election in a way that tries to prevent that outcome, even if it means giving up on me Love this job,” Manning said.

Prosecutors have always been aware that Trump's election could mean he could try to erase their work, and they also know there are ways his administration could target those seeking to hold pro-Trump rioters accountable under the law .

"We joined this mission because we believed in defending democracy. But we all stayed for the police, who were brutally attacked multiple times that day," said the federal prosecutor who still works at the Justice Department. "If they want to retaliate against my actions, that's fine."

Former Jan. 6 defendant Steve Baker is a liberal writer who entered the Capitol during the attack, licensed his footage to the media and then became Glenn Beck's Journalist for The Blaze. He told NBC News that he believes federal prosecutors' case's harsh approach to misdemeanor defendants, as well as what he sees as excessive interference with other nonviolent participants, provides the right leverage in the fight against the Jan. 6 incident.

"I can guarantee you I'd bet a year's salary on it," Baker said. "If the Department of Justice only focused on violent offenders, we would never hear the word 'pardon' in President Trump's campaign promises."

Baker, who went to a friend's house to get a gun after a judge dismissed his case Thursday, shares at least one strong belief with many prosecutors on Jan. 6: Elon Musk's acquisition of Twitter helped surround the events Created a completely different media environment. Capitol riots.

"I don't think Elon's acquisition of Twitter is the key to it at all," Baker said. "You win battles on the battlefield and publicity is part of that...I think it certainly contributes to the balance of the narrative."

On January 6, multiple prosecutors told NBC News that Twitter (now X) was a key component of the Capitol investigation, noting that cyber sleuths assisting the FBI were initially organized on Twitter. They also noted with dismay that the evidence they presented in court had no impact on subsequent public dialogue, with some commenting that members of the public attending the hearings would see hours of footage they had never seen before. and were shocked by what they saw.

Some of the evidence did come through media requests, including a revealing video obtained by NBC News through a media alliance after it was presented as evidence. In the video, Rep. Troy Neers, R-Texas, told the rioters they "should be ashamed" and that as a former police chief, he had never seen anything like it in his decades of law enforcement. .

"I've been in law enforcement in Texas for 30 years and I've never had anyone do this," Niles said in the video. "I'm so ashamed!"

Niels has since downplayed the attack and written a book called "The Great Fraud: What Democrats Don't Want You to Know About January 6, the 2020 Election, and Much More."

Manning said contemporaneous evidence showing Niles' actual thoughts at the time is a powerful part of the historical record that remains despite the disappearance of the case and conviction.

“He made it very clear what he thought about the rioters and what they did that day,” Manning told me. "His position has changed over time, but that video captures what he was actually thinking as he actually lived through January 6th, and that's part of the record. That's why I emphasized the record stand. Creating this Records are very important.”

Prosecutors and some judges involved in the case appear to agree.

"When others in the public eye are unwilling to risk their own power or prestige when hearing lies," U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson wrote in an order in the case this week. When it’s time to speak out,” the transcript of the proceedings in this court will be made available to those seeking the truth. "