just imagine for a second....hillary kept saying leading up to the election that if she lost it was rigged...then refused to concede...then held a rally at trump's inauguration...then democrats stormed the capitol, looking to hunt down kevin mccarthy and mitch mcconnell...republicans would be screaming about it harder and longer than any democrats and would likely enact incredibly restrictive laws and the arrests and harassment would never end.
just imagine.
anyone who believes the election was stolen honestly isn't fit to vote. the stupidity is off the fucking charts.
The stupidity will be ‘Murica’s downfall. As James The Ragin Cajun asked, “you know what you get when stupid people vote in primaries? Stupid people to run in the general.”
the stupidity is the downfall of any great civilization. the stupidity almost killed this country in the lead up to secession and the civil war. the soft peace and fucked up reconstruction is why the stupidity has not been tamped out by now. every one of those traitors should have been shot and this all would have ended right there. instead, confederate politicians and soldiers were allowed to keep their horses, go home, reproduce, and pass down the treason to subsequent generations.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
just imagine for a second....hillary kept saying leading up to the election that if she lost it was rigged...then refused to concede...then held a rally at trump's inauguration...then democrats stormed the capitol, looking to hunt down kevin mccarthy and mitch mcconnell...republicans would be screaming about it harder and longer than any democrats and would likely enact incredibly restrictive laws and the arrests and harassment would never end.
just imagine.
anyone who believes the election was stolen honestly isn't fit to vote. the stupidity is off the fucking charts.
The stupidity will be ‘Murica’s downfall. As James The Ragin Cajun asked, “you know what you get when stupid people vote in primaries? Stupid people to run in the general.”
the stupidity is the downfall of any great civilization. the stupidity almost killed this country in the lead up to secession and the civil war. the soft peace and fucked up reconstruction is why the stupidity has not been tamped out by now. every one of those traitors should have been shot and this all would have ended right there. instead, confederate politicians and soldiers were allowed to keep their horses, go home, reproduce, and pass down the treason to subsequent generations.
The Founding Fathers had really good reason not to trust the "people". They read first hand how the people executed the Bourbon Royal Family and then turned on themselves during the reign of terror, and constructed our gov't to try and inoculate the Republic from that ignorance. I am not a fan of populism, it's never good for the many.
Jan. 6 sedition trial of Oath Keepers founder goes to jury
By LINDSAY WHITEHURST and ALANNA DURKIN RICHER
Today
WASHINGTON (AP) — As angry supporters of President Donald Trump stormed the U.S. Capitol, ready to smash through windows and beat police officers, Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes extolled them as patriots and harkened back to the battle that kicked off the American Revolutionary War.
“Next comes our ‘Lexington,'" Rhodes told his fellow far-right extremists in a message on Jan. 6, 2021. ”It's coming."
Jurors will begin weighing his words and actions on Tuesday, after nearly two months of testimony and argument in the criminal trial of Rhodes and four co-defendants. Final defense arguments wrapped up late Monday.
The jury will weigh the charges that the Oath Keepers were not whipped into an impulsive frenzy by Trump on Jan. 6 but came to Washington intent on stopping the transfer of presidential power at all costs.
The riot was the opportunity they had been preparing for, prosecutors say. Rhodes' followers sprang into action, marching to the Capitol, joining the crowd pushing into the building, and attempting to overturn the election that was sending Joe Biden to the White House in place of Trump, authorities allege.
Not true, the Oath Keepers argue. They say there was never any plot, that prosecutors have twisted their admittedly bombastic words and given jurors a misleading timeline of events and messages.
The jury’s verdict may well address the false notion that the 2020 presidential election was stolen, coming soon after 2022 midterm results in which voters rejected Trump’s chosen Republican candidates who supported his baseless claims of fraud. The outcome could also shape the future of the Justice Department’s massive and costly prosecution of the insurrection that some conservatives have sought to portray as politically motivated.
Failure to secure a seditious conspiracy conviction could spell trouble for another high-profile trial beginning next month of former Proud Boys national chairman Enrique Tarrio and other leaders of that extremist group. The Justice Department's Jan. 6 probe has also expanded beyond those who attacked the Capitol to focus on others linked to Trump's efforts to overturn the election.
In the Oath Keepers trial, prosecutors built their case using dozens of encrypted messages sent in the weeks leading up to Jan. 6. They show Rhodes rallying his followers to fight to defend Trump and warning they might need to “rise up in insurrection.”
“We aren’t getting through this without a civil war. Prepare your mind body and spirit,” he wrote shortly after the 2020 election.
Three defendants, including Rhodes, took the witness stand to testify in their defense — a move generally seen by defense lawyers as a last-resort option because it tends to do more harm than good. On the witness stand, Rhodes, of Granbury, Texas, and his associates — Thomas Caldwell, of Berryville, Virginia, and Jessica Watkins, of Woodstock, Ohio — sought to downplay their actions, but struggled when pressed by prosecutors to explain their violent messages.
The others on trial are Kelly Meggs, of Dunnellon, Florida, and Kenneth Harrelson of Titusville, Florida. Seditious conspiracy carries up to 20 years behind bars, and all five defendants also face other felony charges. They would be the first people convicted of seditious conspiracy at trial since the 1995 prosecution of Islamic militants who plotted to bomb New York City landmarks.
The trial unfolding in Washington’s federal court — less than a mile from the Capitol — has provided a window into the ways in which Rhodes mobilized his group and later tried to reach Trump.
But while authorities combed through thousands of messages sent by Rhodes and his co-defendants, none specifically spelled out a plan to attack the Capitol itself. Defense attorneys emphasized that fact throughout the trial in arguing that Oath Keepers who did enter the Capitol were swept up in an spontaneous outpouring of election-fueled rage rather than acting as part of a plot.
Jurors never heard from three other Oath Keepers who have pleaded guilty to seditious conspiracy.
Over two days on the witness stand, a seemingly relaxed Rhodes told jurors there was no Capitol attack plan. He said he didn't have anything to do with the guns some Oath Keepers had stashed at a Virginia hotel that prosecutors say served as the base for “quick reaction force” teams ready to ferry an arsenal of weapons across the Potomac River if necessary. The weapons were never deployed.
Rhodes, a Yale Law School graduate and former Army paratrooper, said his followers were “stupid” for going inside. Rhodes, who was in a hotel room when he found out rioters were storming the Capitol, insisted that the Oath Keepers' only mission for the day was to provide security for Trump ally Roger Stone and other figures at events before the riot.
That message was repeated in court by others, including a man described as the Oath Keepers' “operations leader" on Jan. 6, who told jurors he never heard anyone discussing plans to attack the Capitol.
A government witness — an Oath Keeper cooperating with prosecutors in hopes of a lighter sentence — testified that there was an “implicit” agreement to stop Congress’ certification, but the decision to enter the building was “spontaneous.”
“We talked about doing something about the fraud in the election before we went there on the 6th," Graydon Young told jurors. “And then when the crowd got over the barricade and they went into the building, an opportunity presented itself to do something. We didn’t tell each other that.”
Prosecutors say the defense is only trying to muddy the waters in a clear-cut case. The Oath Keepers aren't accused of entering into an agreement ahead of Jan. 6 to storm the Capitol.
Defense attorneys for Caldwell, Watkins and Harrelson worked on Monday to cast doubt on the timeline presented by prosecutors, saying that communications were hampered by overwhelmed cell towers and that other rioters forced Congress to recess before they arrived.
Prosecutor Jeffrey Nestler, though, said any lag was brief and the Oath Keepers were among the rioters who interrupted congressional proceedings by preventing lawmakers from coming back into session to certify the presidenial vote.
Citing the Civil War-era seditious conspiracy statute, prosecutors tried to prove the Oath Keepers conspired to forcibly oppose the authority of the federal government and block the execution of laws governing the transfer of presidential power. Prosecutors must show the defendants agreed to use force — not merely advocated it — to oppose the transfer of presidential power.
After the riot, Rhodes tried to get a message to Trump through an intermediary, imploring the president not to give up his fight to hold onto power. The intermediary — a man who told jurors he had an indirect way to reach the president — recorded his meeting with Rhodes and went to the FBI instead.
Rhodes told the man, speaking of Trump, “If he's not going to do the right thing and he’s just gonna let himself be removed illegally then we should have brought rifles.” He said, “We should have fixed it right then and there. I’d hang (expletive) Pelosi from the lamppost,” Rhodes said, referring to Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Woman convicted of storming Pelosi's office in Jan. 6 attack
By MICHAEL KUNZELMAN
Yesterday
WASHINGTON (AP) — A Pennsylvania woman linked to the far-right “Groyper” extremist movement was convicted Monday of several federal charges after prosecutors said she was part of a group that stormed House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's office during the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.
Riley June Williams was found guilty of six federal counts, including civil disorder. But the jury deadlocked on two other charges, including “aiding and abetting the theft” of a laptop that was stolen from Pelosi's office suite during the insurrection. The jury also failed to reach a unanimous verdict on whether Williams obstructed an official proceeding.
U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson ordered Williams be taken into custody after the jury delivered its verdict.
Williams joined a mob's attack on the Capitol after attending the “Stop the Steal” rally, where then-President Donald Trump addressed thousands of supporters earlier that day. Entering Pelosi’s office, she found a laptop on a table and told another rioter, “Dude, put on gloves,” before someone with a black gloved hand removed the computer, according to prosecutors.
Williams later bragged online that she stole Pelosi’s gavel, laptop and hard drives and that she “gave the electronic devices, or attempted to give them, to unspecified Russian individuals,” prosecutors said in a June 2022 court filing.
“To date, neither the laptop nor the gavel has been recovered,” they added.
A witness described as a former romantic partner of Williams told the FBI that she intended to send the stolen laptop or hard drive to a friend in Russia who planned to sell it to Russia’s foreign intelligence service. But the witness said Williams kept the device or destroyed it when the transfer fell through, according to an FBI agent's affidavit.
Williams, a resident of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, was arrested less than two weeks after the riot. She was charged with theft of government property, assaulting police and obstructing the joint session of Congress for certifying the Electoral College vote. Williams also faced misdemeanor charges, including disorderly or disruptive conduct.
Williams denied stealing the laptop when the FBI questioned her. She claimed her ex-boyfriend “made up” the allegation, prosecutors said.
Before she left the Capitol, Williams joined other rioters in pushing against police officers trying to clear the building's Rotunda. Police body camera captured the confrontation, as Williams encouraged other rioters to “keep pushing,” and “push, push, push.”
Williams was wearing a shirt bearing the message, “I’m with groyper,” when she entered the Capitol. The term “groyper” refers to followers of “America First” movement leader Nick Fuentes, who has used his online platform to spew antisemitic and white supremacist rhetoric.
Other followers of Fuentes have been charged with Jan. 6-related crimes, including former UCLA student Christian Secor, 24, of Costa Mesa, California. Secor, who was waving an “America First” flag when he entered the Capitol, was sentenced last month to three years and six months in prison.
Williams' online footprint also included material associated with “accelerationism,” a violent ideology that asserts “Western governments are corrupt and unsalvageable, and therefore the best thing a person can do is accelerate their collapse by sowing social chaos and generating political conflict,” prosecutors said.
In December 2020, Williams attended at least two rallies protesting the outcome of the presidential election. Both rallies featured speeches by Fuentes.
“Her admiration of Nick Fuentes, self-identification as a ‘Groyper,’ belief in Accelerationism, and support for violence all circumstantially show the mixed motives behind her actions on January 6: she not only specifically sought to block Congress from certifying the Electoral College vote, but also to undermine and obstruct the government more generally,” prosecutors wrote.
Before her trial, Williams' attorneys questioned the relevance of her political activities and ideology.
“There is no evidence linking her beliefs and actions prior to January 6 with her actions that day,” they wrote. “There is a legitimate risk that jurors will judge Ms. Williams merely for the unpopular and extreme ideologies she has embraced in the past, rather than for the actual crimes with which she is charged.”
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Oath Keepers dweeb found guilty of seditious conspiracy. Fitting. What's twatter saying? Or "truth" social?
A federal jury on Tuesdayconvicted Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes of seditious conspiracy for leading a months-long plot to unleash political violence to prevent the inauguration of President Biden, culminating in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol.
The panelof seven men and five women deliberated for three daysbefore finding Rhodes and a co-defendantguilty of conspiring to oppose by force the lawful transition of presidential power. Rhodes and all four co-defendants on trial were also convicted of obstructing Congress as it met to confirm the results of the 2020 election. Both offenses are punishable by up to 20 years in prison.
Rhodes, in a dark suit and black eye-patch from an old gun accident, stood at the defense table, watching impassively as verdicts were read for the defendants facing a 13-count indictment.
WASHINGTON (AP) — Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes was convicted Tuesday of seditious conspiracy for a violent plot to overturn Democrat Joe Biden’s presidential win, handing the Justice Department a major victory in its massive prosecution of the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection.
A Washington, D.C., jury found Rhodes guilty of sedition after three days of deliberations in the nearly two-month-long trial that showcased the far-right extremist group’s efforts to keep Republican Donald Trump in the White House at all costs.
If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
Question becomes, to be used in a debate with Deathsantis of course, is: As POTUS will you, and do you pledge here and now, not pardon any of the January 6th insurrectionists, particularly those found guilty of seditious conspiracy?
Fight over officer testimony roils Proud Boys sedition case
By ALANNA DURKIN RICHER
2 hours ago
A legal fight has erupted over a Washington D.C. police officer who was communicating with Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio in the run-up to the Jan. 6, 2021 Capitol attack that could shape the outcome of the upcoming trial of Tarrio and other far-right extremists.
But Lamond now plans to invoke his Fifth Amendment privilege against self incrimination if called to the witness stand after prosecutors warned the officer he could be charged with obstructing the investigation into Tarrio, the Proud Boy's attorneys say. They have accused the Justice Department of trying to bully Lamond into keeping quiet because his testimony would hurt their case. Prosecutors have vehemently denied that charge.
The legal skirmish is unfolding two weeks before jury selection is supposed to begin in one of the highest-profile cases the Justice Department has brought since the Jan. 6 insurrection. Prosecutors charge Tarrio and four co-defendants conspired to forcibly stop the transfer of presidential power from former President Donald Trump to Democrat Joe Biden.
The Proud Boys trial will be another major test for the Justice Department, which secured a major victory last month in the seditious conspiracy convictions of two other far-right extremist group leaders: Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes, of Granbury, Texas, and Kelly Meggs, who was the leader of the group’s Florida chapter. Tarrio's far-right, male chauvinist extremist group that seized on the Trump administration’s policies was a major agitator during earlier pro-Trump protests and at the Capitol on Jan. 6.
Tarrio wasn’t in Washington when the riot erupted, but authorities say he helped put into motion the violence of that day. Shortly before the riot, authorities say Tarrio posted on social media that the group planned to turn out in “record numbers” on Jan. 6, but would be “incognito” instead of donning their traditional clothing colors of black and yellow.
Tarrio was arrested in Washington two days before the riot and charged with vandalizing a Black Lives Matter banner at a historic Black church during a protest in December 2020. Tarrio was released from jail on Jan. 14, 2022 after serving his five-month sentence for that case.
An email seeking comment was sent to an attorney for Lamond. Tarrio's lawyers say Lamond has been under investigation for some time for possible obstruction of justice into the investigation of Tarrio.
The Washington Post reported in February that Lamond was placed on leave as part of an investigation into his contacts with the Proud Boys. Metropolitan Police Chief Robert Contee has said the department placed an officer on leave as part of an “ongoing investigation” by the department, the FBI and Justice Department but declined to name the officer.
Lamond, an intelligence officer for the police force, was responsible for monitoring groups like the Proud Boys when they came to Washington. Tarrio regularly communicated with Lamond before the Proud Boys came to the capital city to discuss the “purpose of the trip, the agenda, and the location," defense lawyers wrote in court documents.
Tarrio told Lamond that Proud Boys would not be wearing their traditional colors of black and yellow in order to protect themselves from possible attacks from antifa activists. Tarrio told the officer they planned to watch Trump's speech, protest the results of the election “and later that night they planned to party with plenty of beers and babes," Tarrio's lawyers wrote.
“He told me they are trying to go incognito this time,” Lamond told fellow officers in one message, according to Tarrio's attorneys. "Even if they aren’t wearing their colors they will stick together as a group so we should be able to identify them. Not to mention they won’t be head to toe in black with makeshift shields!”
The defense says Lamond's testimony would support Tarrio's claims that he was looking to avoid violence, not cause it. Tarrio’s lawyers have asked the judge to dismiss the case if the government refuses to grant immunity for Lamond so he can take the stand.
“How can there be sedition if the Proud Boys are informing law enforcement of their plans on Jan. 6?” Tarrio attorney Sabino Jauregui said during a recent hearing. “They don't want him to testify because it will completely destroy their case.”
Assistant U.S. Attorney Erik Kenerson told the judge the suggestion that prosecutors are pressuring and threatening witnesses is “categorically false.”
Tarrio has a history of cooperating with law enforcement.
Court records uncovered last year showed that Tarrio previously worked undercover and cooperated with investigators after he was accused of fraud in 2012. After Tarrio’s indictment for participating in a scheme involving the resale of diabetic test strips, he helped the government prosecute more than a dozen other people, according to court papers.
Tarrio will stand trial with four others: Ethan Nordean, of Auburn, Washington; Joseph Biggs, of Ormond Beach, Florida; Zachary Rehl, of Philadelphia and Dominic Pezzola of Rochester, New York.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Attacks, plots similar to sabotage of North Carolina power grid have threatened infrastructure nationwide
Federal officials issued a warning just days before the attack.
Cops still searching for suspects in North Carolina power sabotage
As utility crews scramble to restore power to thousands of customers, investiga...
Just three days before two electrical substations were shot up, causing tens of thousands of customers to lose power in North Carolina, the federal Department of Homeland Security issued a bulletin warning "lone offenders and small groups" could be plotting attacks and that the nation's critical infrastructure was among the possible targets.
The warning became a reality on Saturday when widespread power outages in North Carolina were reported after a perpetrator or perpetrators shot up the power stations in Moore County. The incident left up to 45,000 utility customers without electricity and prompted local officials to declare a state of emergency.
The Homeland Security "National Terrorism Advisory System Bulletin" issued on Nov. 30 said individuals and groups motivated by a range of ideological beliefs and personal grievances "continue to pose a persistent and lethal threat to the Homeland."
"Targets of potential violence include public gatherings, faith-based institutions, the LGBTQI+ community, schools, racial and religious minorities, government facilities and personnel, U.S. critical infrastructure, the media, and perceived ideological opponents," the bulletin reads.
The bulletin followed one issued by the Department of Homeland Security in January, warning that domestic extremists have been developing "credible, specific plans" to attack electricity infrastructure since at least 2020, according to the Associated Press.
Recent Stories from ABC News
While law enforcement investigating the Moore County sabotage has yet to identify a suspect or a motive, the attack has been described by local authorities as an "eye-opener" and prompted calls to harden the state's infrastructure to deter future incidents.
"This kind of attack raises a new level of threat," North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper said at a news conference Monday afternoon.
But similar attacks and foiled plots suggest electrical grids and other infrastructure across the United States have been targeted over the past decade.
In April 2013, a group of suspects wielding high-powered rifles staged an attack in California's Silicon Valley, shooting up the Pacific Gas & Electric Company's Metcalf substation, riddling transformers with bullets, officials said. PG&E said the attack caused $15 million in damage and prompted the utility company to spend $100 million to beef up security at its substations, including installing intruder detection systems.
No arrests were made in the California attack.
"Metcalf was an interesting attack because they also attacked the fiber communications vault just up the street to try to interfere with the alarm and communication with the substation," Kevin Perry, retired director of critical infrastructure protection at Southwest Power Pool in Arkansas, told ABC News.
Unlike in Moore County, the attack failed to cause a major power outage.
"There's a lot of redundancy that's built into the grid. And in the case of Metcalf, even though the substation was taken out of service, (PG&E) was able to bypass the substation and continue to energize the area," Perry said.
Perry said most electrical distribution substations across the country are vulnerable to attacks because they are usually in remote areas and have little security.
"Substations tend to be out in the middle of nowhere, and that means they’re, for the most part, unattended," Perry said. "If you take out enough equipment then you lose the redundancy and when you lose the redundancy you don’t have any way of feeding power to that particular area, and that’s when you end up with a regional blackout."
In February, three men each pleaded guilty in Ohio to a federal charge of conspiring to provide material support to terrorists as part of a scheme to attack power grids in the United States in furtherance of white supremacist ideology, according to the Department of Justice. The men - one from Ohio, one from Texas and the third from Wisconsin -- met online and plotted to use high-powered rifles to attack electrical substations in different regions of the United States, the DOJ said in a statement.
"The defendants believed their plan would cost the government millions of dollars and cause unrest for Americans in the region. They had conversations about how the possibility of the power being out for many months could cause war, even a race war, and induce the next Great Depression," the DOJ's statement reads.
The plot was thwarted when two of the men were pulled over by police in Ohio for a traffic violation and one swallowed a "suicide pill" but ultimately survived, according to federal prosecutors.
In 2019, a Utah man pleaded guilty to one federal count of destruction of an energy facility stemming from a 2016 rifle attack on a Buckskin Electrical substation in Kane County and was sentenced to 96 months in prison, according to federal officials. The attack caused nearly $400,000 in damage and triggered a power outage in Kane and Garfield counties, officials said.
As part of the plea agreement, the defendant admitted causing damage to three substations in Nevada, but was not charged in those incidents, according to federal prosecutors.
The defendants facing jurors in the latest trial are Joseph Hackett, of Sarasota, Florida; Roberto Minuta of Prosper, Texas; David Moerschel of Punta Gorda, Florida; and Edward Vallejo of Phoenix. They are charged with several other felonies in addition to seditious conspiracy.
While the Rhodes' and Meggs' verdicts were a major victory for the Justice Department, three of their co-defendants were acquitted of seditious conspiracy. The major question in the next trial is whether prosecutors will be convince jurors to convict lower-level defendants of the Civil War-era offense.
Seditious conspiracy can be difficult to prove, especially when the alleged plot is unsuccessful. Rhodes and Meggs were the first people in decades found guilty at trial of the charge, which carries up to 20 years in prison.
Thomas Caldwell, of Berryville Virginia; Jessica Watkins of Woodstock, Ohio; and Kenneth Harrelson of Titusville, Florida, were acquitted of sedition. But all five defendants in that case were convicted of obstructing Congress' certification of Biden's electoral win, which also calls for as many as 20 years behind bars.
Prosecutors will try to convince jurors that Minuta, Moerschel, Vallejo and Hackett plotted with Rhodes and others to use force to stop the transfer of presidential power from Donald Trump to Biden. Authorities say the plot came to a head on Jan. 6, 2021, when Oath Keepers stormed the Capitol alongside hundreds of other angry Trump supporters.
In Rhodes' case, prosecutors spent weeks arguing they were not whipped into an impulsive frenzy by Trump on Jan. 6 but came to Washington intent on keeping Trump in power at all costs. Authorities say the Oath Keepers discussed their plans in encrypted chats for weeks before the riot and stashed weapons at a nearby Virginia hotel in case they were needed to support their plot.
But while investigators combed through thousands of messages sent by Rhodes and his co-defendants, none specifically spelled out a plan to attack the Capitol itself. Defense attorneys emphasized that fact throughout the trial to argue there was never any plot. They said the Oath Keepers didn't come to Washington for violence but to provide security for people like Trump ally Roger Stone at events before the riot.
Authorities say Hackett and Moerschel were part of the first group of Oath Keepers along with Meggs and Watkins that pushed into the Capitol in military-style stack formation. Minuta later joined a second “stack” that forced its way inside as police desperately tried to defend the building, prosecutors say.
Vallejo is accused of helping coordinate the quick reaction force teams in Virginia that authorities say were ready to rush a cache of weapons into the capital city if necessary. The weapons were never deployed.
Prosecutors say that on the morning of the riot, Vallejo and another quick reaction force team member discussed the possibility of “guerrilla war” and “armed conflict.”
“It’s a do or die situation. Because if we walk away from this, and we don’t have any effectual change as a result, then we might as well just give up. We’re done. We’re done. If we don’t do something now, we’re done," Vallejo said on the podcast, according to authorities.
Three other Oath Keepers have pleaded guilty to seditious conspiracy and agreed to cooperate with investigators in the hopes of getting a lighter sentence. But they were never called by prosecutors to the witness stand in Rhodes' case. It's unclear why prosecutors didn't have them testify and whether they might take the stand in the latest trial.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Iowa man who joined mom at Capitol riot guilty on 12 counts
16 Dec 2022
DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) — A federal judge in Washington has found an Iowa man guilty of 12 charges including assaulting and resisting officers after he and his mother joined in the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol.
Judge Thomas Hogan ruled Thursday afternoon that Salvador Sandoval of Ankeny, Iowa, was guilty of the six felony and six misdemeanor counts he faced, according to KCCI-TV in Des Moines.
The conviction came a day after Sandoval's mother, Deborah Sandoval of Des Moines, pleaded guilty to entering a restricted building just before she was set to go on trial. Because of the agreement, prosecutors dropped other charges.
During Salvador Sandoval's trial Wednesday, prosecutors said he pushed two officers and tried to take riot shields from two other officers.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
There's a movie in here somewhere. Pages 25-26. Indict the fucker already.
Contemporaneous written correspondence also confirms both that: (1) Eastman
himself recognized Pence could not lawfully refuse to count electoral votes, and (2) President
Trump also knew this. While sheltering in a loading dock with the Vice President during the
violent January 6th attack, Greg Jacob asked Dr. Eastman in an email, “Did you advise the
President that in your professional judgment the Vice President DOES NOT have the power to
decide things unilaterally?” Dr. Eastman’s response stated that the President had “been so
advised,” but then indicated that President Trump continued to pressure the Vice President
to act illegally: “But you know him - once he gets something in his head, it is hard to get
him to change course.”
To be absolutely clear, no White House lawyer believed Pence could lawfully refuse to
count electoral votes. White House Counsel Pat Cipollone told the Select Committee this:
I thought that the Vice President did not have the authority to do what was
being suggested under a proper reading of the law. I conveyed that, ok? I think
I actually told somebody, you know, in the Vice President’s - “Just blame me.”
You know this is - I’m not a politician, you know... but, you know, I just said,
“Pm a lawyer. This is my legal opinion.”
Cipollone also testified that he was “sure [he] conveyed” his views." Indeed, other
testimony from Cipollone indicates that Trump knew of Cipollone’s view and suggests that
Trump purposely excluded Cipollone from the meeting with Pence and Pence’s General
Counsel on January 4th."*7 Indeed, at one point, Cipollone confronted Dr. Eastman in the
hallway outside the Oval Office and expressed his disapproval of and anger with Dr. Eastman’s
position. According to Jason Miller, “Pat Cipollone thought the idea was nutty and had at one
point confronted Eastman basically with the same sentiment” outside the Oval Office.* Pat Cipollone did not deny having an angry confrontation with Dr. Eastman outside of the Oval
Office - though he said he didn’t have a specific recollection, he had no reason to contradict
what Jason Miller said and, moreover, said that Dr. Eastman was aware of his views.’
Likewise, Eric Herschmann, another White House lawyer, expressed the same
understanding that Dr. Eastman’s plan “obviously made no sense” and “had no practical
ability to work.” Herschmann also recounted telling Dr. Eastman directly that his plan
was “completely crazy:”
And I said to [Dr. Eastman], hold on a second, I want to understand what you’re
saying. You’re saying you believe the Vice President, acting as President of the
Senate, can be the sole decisionmaker as to, under your theory, who becomes
the next President of the United States? And he said, yes. And I said, are you
out of your F’ing mind, right. And that was pretty blunt. I said, you’re
completely crazy.’”
Deputy White House Counsel Pat Philbin also had the same understanding.”” Indeed,
as Herschmann testified, even Rudolph Giuliani doubted that Vice President Mike Pence had
any legal ability to do what Dr. Eastman had proposed."?
Despite all this opposition from all White House lawyers, Trump nevertheless
continued to exert immense pressure on Pence to refuse to count electoral votes.
The pressure began before the January 4th Oval Office meeting with Pence, Dr.
Eastman, Jacob, Short and Trump, but became even more intense thereafter. On the evening
of January 5, 2021, the New York Times published an article reporting that “Vice President
Mike Pence told President Trump on Tuesday that he did not believe he had the power to
block congressional certification of Joseph R. Biden, Jr.’s victory in the Presidential election
despite President Trump’s baseless insistence that he did.”"* This reporting was correct -
both as to the Vice President’s power and as to Vice President Pence having informed President
Trump that he did not have the authority to change the outcome of the election. But in
response to that story, late in the evening before January 6th Joint Session, President Trump
dictated to Jason Miller a statement falsely asserting, “The Vice President and I are in total
agreement that the Vice President has the power to act.”*75 This statement was released at
President Trump’s direction and was false.'”®
Thereafter Trump continued to apply public pressure in a series of tweets. At 1:00
a.m. on January 6th, “[iJf Vice President @Mike_Pence comes through for us, we will win
the Presidency. Many States want to decertify the mistake they made in certifying incorrect
& even fraudulent numbers in a process NOT approved by their State Legislatures (which it
must be). Mike can send it back!”*7” At 8:17 a.m. on January 6th, he tweeted again: “States
want to correct their votes, which they now know were based on irregularities and fraud, plus
corrupt process never received legislative approval. All Mike Pence has to do is send them
back to the States, AND WE WIN. Do it Mike, this is a time for extreme courage!”"”8
President Trump tried to reach the Vice President early in the morning of January 6th,
but the Vice President did not take the call. The President finally reached the Vice President
later that morning, shouting from the Oval Office to his assistants to “get the Vice President
on the phone.””? After again telling the Vice President that he had “the legal authority to
send [electoral votes] back to the respective states,” President Trump grew very heated.*°
Witnesses in the Oval Office during this call told the Select Committee that the President
26
called Vice President Pence a “wimp,”** told him it would be “a political career killer” to
certify the lawful electoral votes electing President Biden,” and accused him of “not [being]
tough enough to make the call.”"*3_ As Ivanka Trump would recount to her chief of staff
moments later, her father called the Vice President “the p-word” for refusing to overturn the
election."
So much for there not being any weapons at the capitol on January 6th. Or that it was a "tourist visit."
Hours before the Ellipse rally on January 6th, the fact that the assembled crowd was
prepared for potential violence was widely known. In addition to intelligence reports
indicating potential violence at the Capitol, weapons and other prohibited items were being
seized by police on the streets and by Secret Service at the magnetometers for the Ellipse
speech. Secret Service confiscated a haul of weapons from the 28,000 spectators who did pass
through the magnetometers: 242 cannisters of pepper spray, 269 knives or blades, 18 brass
knuckles, 18 tasers, 6 pieces of body armor, 3 gas masks, 30 batons or blunt instruments, and
17 miscellaneous items like scissors, needles, or screwdrivers.“?° And thousands of others
purposely remained outside the magnetometers, or left their packs outside.
Others brought firearms. Three men in fatigues from Broward County, Florida
brandished AR-15s in front of Metropolitan police officers on 14th Street and Independence
Avenue on the morning of January 6th.” MPD advised over the radio that one individual was
possibly armed with a “Glock” at 14th and Constitution Avenue, and another was possibly
armed with a “rifle” at 15th and Constitution Avenue around 11:23 a.m.43 The National Park
Service detained an individual with a rifle between 12 and 1 p.m.’* Almost all of this was
known before Donald Trump took the stage at the Ellipse.
During that time, Giuliani has testified,
he was attempting to reach Members of Congress after the joint session resumed to encourage
them to continue objecting to Joe Biden’s electoral votes.666 A
So much for there not being any weapons at the capitol on January 6th. Or that it was a "tourist visit."
Hours before the Ellipse rally on January 6th, the fact that the assembled crowd was
prepared for potential violence was widely known. In addition to intelligence reports
indicating potential violence at the Capitol, weapons and other prohibited items were being
seized by police on the streets and by Secret Service at the magnetometers for the Ellipse
speech. Secret Service confiscated a haul of weapons from the 28,000 spectators who did pass
through the magnetometers: 242 cannisters of pepper spray, 269 knives or blades, 18 brass
knuckles, 18 tasers, 6 pieces of body armor, 3 gas masks, 30 batons or blunt instruments, and
17 miscellaneous items like scissors, needles, or screwdrivers.“?° And thousands of others
purposely remained outside the magnetometers, or left their packs outside.
Others brought firearms. Three men in fatigues from Broward County, Florida
brandished AR-15s in front of Metropolitan police officers on 14th Street and Independence
Avenue on the morning of January 6th.” MPD advised over the radio that one individual was
possibly armed with a “Glock” at 14th and Constitution Avenue, and another was possibly
armed with a “rifle” at 15th and Constitution Avenue around 11:23 a.m.43 The National Park
Service detained an individual with a rifle between 12 and 1 p.m.’* Almost all of this was
known before Donald Trump took the stage at the Ellipse.
which plays with Trump stating remove the magnetometors because he was in no danger.....
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Capitol riot trial starts for man with feet on Pelosi desk
By LINDSAY WHITEHURST and MICHAEL KUNZELMAN
44 mins ago
WASHINGTON (AP) — An Arkansas man who propped his feet on a desk in then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s office during the riot at the U.S. Capitol planned the trip for weeks and came prepared for violence, a prosecutor said Tuesday as his trial got underway.
Richard “Bigo” Barnett had a stun gun tucked into his pants when he stormed the Capitol, invaded Pelosi's office and posed for a photo that became one of the attack's more well-known images, prosecutors said. He also took a piece of her mail and left behind a note that said, “Nancy, Bigo was here," prosecutors said. Barnett punctuated the message with a sexist expletive.
“The defendant violated that space,” said prosecutor Alison Prout during opening statements. “He came prepared for violence.”
Staffers were huddled down the hall at the time, hiding from rioters after leaving behind computers, cellphones and personal files as they fled, she said.
Before leaving Capitol grounds, Barnett used a bullhorn to give a speech to the crowd, shouting, “We took back our house, and I took Nancy Pelosi’s office!” according to prosecutors.
"Barnett has emerged as prominent figure in the attack on the Capitol as a result of the widespread circulation of his photographs in Speaker Pelosi’s office and subsequent interview," prosecutors wrote in a court filing.
"Everything he did inside was grounded in political protest ... it was all protest, protest, protest," the defense wrote. They decided to wait to give opening statements later in the trial.
Defense attorneys have argued that the former firefighter didn’t break barriers or assault police as he was swept along into the building with the rest of the crowd. He wandered into Pelosi’s office suite looking for a bathroom, his lawyers said.
A grand jury indicted Barnett on eight charges, including felony counts of civil disorder and obstruction of an official proceeding. He also faces a charge of entering and remaining in restricted building or grounds with a deadly or dangerous weapon — the stun gun with spikes concealed within a collapsible walking stick.
Barnett planned for weeks before driving from his home in Gravette, Arkansas, to Washington, D.C., to attend the “Stop the Steal” rally on Jan. 6, prosecutors said. He hid or destroyed evidence of his riot participation after returning home to Arkansas, according to court documents.
Barnett turned himself in to FBI agents at a sheriff’s office in Bentonville, Arkansas, two days after the riot. He told investigators that the large crowd pushed him into the Capitol.
Records from a Bass Pro Shop in Arkansas showed that Barnett purchased the stun gun five days before he traveled to Washington. FBI agents found the packaging for the device in his home.
In June 2021, Barnett appeared on Russian state television with his attorney. When asked if he would do it again, he responded, “I exercise my First Amendment rights every hour, every minute, and every day, and I will never stop,” according to prosecutors.
Prosecutors said Barnett had a history of arming himself at political demonstrations before the Jan. 6 attack. In July 2020, they said, a 911 caller reported that a man matching Barnett's description had pointed a rifle at her during a “Back the Blue” rally.
"Law enforcement ultimately closed the investigation as unfounded due to unresolved apparent discrepancies in the evidence," prosecutors wrote.
In November 2020, police were called to a “Save the Children” rally when a caller said Barnett was carrying a gun at the protest and acting suspiciously.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Capitol riot trial starts for man with feet on Pelosi desk
By LINDSAY WHITEHURST and MICHAEL KUNZELMAN
44 mins ago
WASHINGTON (AP) — An Arkansas man who propped his feet on a desk in then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s office during the riot at the U.S. Capitol planned the trip for weeks and came prepared for violence, a prosecutor said Tuesday as his trial got underway.
Richard “Bigo” Barnett had a stun gun tucked into his pants when he stormed the Capitol, invaded Pelosi's office and posed for a photo that became one of the attack's more well-known images, prosecutors said. He also took a piece of her mail and left behind a note that said, “Nancy, Bigo was here," prosecutors said. Barnett punctuated the message with a sexist expletive.
“The defendant violated that space,” said prosecutor Alison Prout during opening statements. “He came prepared for violence.”
Staffers were huddled down the hall at the time, hiding from rioters after leaving behind computers, cellphones and personal files as they fled, she said.
Before leaving Capitol grounds, Barnett used a bullhorn to give a speech to the crowd, shouting, “We took back our house, and I took Nancy Pelosi’s office!” according to prosecutors.
"Barnett has emerged as prominent figure in the attack on the Capitol as a result of the widespread circulation of his photographs in Speaker Pelosi’s office and subsequent interview," prosecutors wrote in a court filing.
"Everything he did inside was grounded in political protest ... it was all protest, protest, protest," the defense wrote. They decided to wait to give opening statements later in the trial.
Defense attorneys have argued that the former firefighter didn’t break barriers or assault police as he was swept along into the building with the rest of the crowd. He wandered into Pelosi’s office suite looking for a bathroom, his lawyers said.
A grand jury indicted Barnett on eight charges, including felony counts of civil disorder and obstruction of an official proceeding. He also faces a charge of entering and remaining in restricted building or grounds with a deadly or dangerous weapon — the stun gun with spikes concealed within a collapsible walking stick.
Barnett planned for weeks before driving from his home in Gravette, Arkansas, to Washington, D.C., to attend the “Stop the Steal” rally on Jan. 6, prosecutors said. He hid or destroyed evidence of his riot participation after returning home to Arkansas, according to court documents.
Barnett turned himself in to FBI agents at a sheriff’s office in Bentonville, Arkansas, two days after the riot. He told investigators that the large crowd pushed him into the Capitol.
Records from a Bass Pro Shop in Arkansas showed that Barnett purchased the stun gun five days before he traveled to Washington. FBI agents found the packaging for the device in his home.
In June 2021, Barnett appeared on Russian state television with his attorney. When asked if he would do it again, he responded, “I exercise my First Amendment rights every hour, every minute, and every day, and I will never stop,” according to prosecutors.
Prosecutors said Barnett had a history of arming himself at political demonstrations before the Jan. 6 attack. In July 2020, they said, a 911 caller reported that a man matching Barnett's description had pointed a rifle at her during a “Back the Blue” rally.
"Law enforcement ultimately closed the investigation as unfounded due to unresolved apparent discrepancies in the evidence," prosecutors wrote.
In November 2020, police were called to a “Save the Children” rally when a caller said Barnett was carrying a gun at the protest and acting suspiciously.
I hope he gets 10 years in jail but I’m sure he will get a slap on the wrist!
Capitol riot trial starts for man with feet on Pelosi desk
By LINDSAY WHITEHURST and MICHAEL KUNZELMAN
44 mins ago
WASHINGTON (AP) — An Arkansas man who propped his feet on a desk in then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s office during the riot at the U.S. Capitol planned the trip for weeks and came prepared for violence, a prosecutor said Tuesday as his trial got underway.
Richard “Bigo” Barnett had a stun gun tucked into his pants when he stormed the Capitol, invaded Pelosi's office and posed for a photo that became one of the attack's more well-known images, prosecutors said. He also took a piece of her mail and left behind a note that said, “Nancy, Bigo was here," prosecutors said. Barnett punctuated the message with a sexist expletive.
“The defendant violated that space,” said prosecutor Alison Prout during opening statements. “He came prepared for violence.”
Staffers were huddled down the hall at the time, hiding from rioters after leaving behind computers, cellphones and personal files as they fled, she said.
Before leaving Capitol grounds, Barnett used a bullhorn to give a speech to the crowd, shouting, “We took back our house, and I took Nancy Pelosi’s office!” according to prosecutors.
"Barnett has emerged as prominent figure in the attack on the Capitol as a result of the widespread circulation of his photographs in Speaker Pelosi’s office and subsequent interview," prosecutors wrote in a court filing.
"Everything he did inside was grounded in political protest ... it was all protest, protest, protest," the defense wrote. They decided to wait to give opening statements later in the trial.
Defense attorneys have argued that the former firefighter didn’t break barriers or assault police as he was swept along into the building with the rest of the crowd. He wandered into Pelosi’s office suite looking for a bathroom, his lawyers said.
A grand jury indicted Barnett on eight charges, including felony counts of civil disorder and obstruction of an official proceeding. He also faces a charge of entering and remaining in restricted building or grounds with a deadly or dangerous weapon — the stun gun with spikes concealed within a collapsible walking stick.
Barnett planned for weeks before driving from his home in Gravette, Arkansas, to Washington, D.C., to attend the “Stop the Steal” rally on Jan. 6, prosecutors said. He hid or destroyed evidence of his riot participation after returning home to Arkansas, according to court documents.
Barnett turned himself in to FBI agents at a sheriff’s office in Bentonville, Arkansas, two days after the riot. He told investigators that the large crowd pushed him into the Capitol.
Records from a Bass Pro Shop in Arkansas showed that Barnett purchased the stun gun five days before he traveled to Washington. FBI agents found the packaging for the device in his home.
In June 2021, Barnett appeared on Russian state television with his attorney. When asked if he would do it again, he responded, “I exercise my First Amendment rights every hour, every minute, and every day, and I will never stop,” according to prosecutors.
Prosecutors said Barnett had a history of arming himself at political demonstrations before the Jan. 6 attack. In July 2020, they said, a 911 caller reported that a man matching Barnett's description had pointed a rifle at her during a “Back the Blue” rally.
"Law enforcement ultimately closed the investigation as unfounded due to unresolved apparent discrepancies in the evidence," prosecutors wrote.
In November 2020, police were called to a “Save the Children” rally when a caller said Barnett was carrying a gun at the protest and acting suspiciously.
looking for a bathroom? that has to be the dumbest criminal defense of all time.
if i were the prosecutor i would have said "why didn't you just shit on the floor like the rest of the savages that day?"
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
4.2 NOVEMBER 23, 2020: BARR CHALLENGES PRESIDENT TRUMP’S ELECTION LIES
As Barr predicted, the President did call on him for information about
alleged election fraud. Trump challenged him with a blizzard of conspiracy
theories in three face-to-face meetings after the election. The first such
meeting occurred on November 23, 2020.
On November 23rd, the Attorney General spoke with White House
Counsel Pat Cipollone, who said that it was important for him come to the
White House and speak to President Trump.16 Barr had not seen the President since before the election in late October, and the White House counsel
believed that it was important that the Attorney General explain what the
Department of Justice was doing related to claims of election fraud.17
“The President said there had been major fraud and that, as soon as the
facts were out, the results of the election would be reversed,” Barr recalled.
Trump continued “for quite a while,” and Barr was “expecting” what came
next.18 President Trump alleged that “the Department of Justice doesn’t
think it has a role looking into these fraud claims.”19 Barr anticipated this
line of attack because the President’s counsel, Rudolph Giuliani, was making all sorts of wild, unsubstantiated claims.20 And Giuliani wanted to
blame DOJ for the fact that no one had come up with any real evidence of
fraud.21 Of course, by the time of this meeting, U.S. Attorneys’ Offices had
been explicitly authorized to investigate substantial claims for 2 weeks and
had yet to find any evidence of significant voter fraud.22
Barr explained to the President why he was wrong. DOJ, was willing to
investigate any “specific and credible allegations of fraud.”23 The fact of
the matter was that the claims being made were “just not meritorious” and
were “not panning out.”24 Barr emphasized to the President that DOJ
“doesn’t take sides in elections” and “is not an extension of your legal
team.”25
During the November 23rd meeting, Barr also challenged one of President Trump’s central lies. He “specifically raised the Dominion voting
machines, which I found to be one of the most disturbing allegations.”26
“Disturbing,” Barr explained, because there was “absolutely zero basis for
the allegations,” which were being “made in such a sensational way that they obviously were influencing a lot of people, members of the public.”27
Americans were being deceived into thinking “that there was this systematic corruption in the system and that their votes didn’t count and that
these machines, controlled by somebody else, were actually determining it,
which was complete nonsense.”28 Barr stressed to the President that this
was “crazy stuff,” arguing that not only was the conspiracy theory a waste
of time, but it was also “doing [a] great, great disservice to the country.”29
As Attorney General Barr left the meeting, he talked with Mark Meadows, the White House Chief of Staff, and Jared Kushner, President Trump’s
son-in-law.30 “I think he’s become more realistic and knows that there’s a
limit to how far he can take this,” Meadows said, according to Barr.31 Kushner reassured Barr, “we’re working on this, we’re working on it.”32 Barr
was hopeful that the President was beginning to accept reality.33 The opposite happened.
“I felt that things continued to deteriorate between the 23rd and the
weekend of the 29th,” Barr recalled.34 Barr was concerned because President Trump began meeting with delegations of State legislators, and it
appeared to him that “there was maneuvering going on.”35 Barr had “no
problem” with challenging an election “through the appropriate process,”
but “worried” that he “didn’t have any visibility into what was going on”
and that the “President was digging in.”36
Attorney General Barr then decided to speak out. He invited Michael
Balsamo, an Associated Press (AP) reporter, to lunch on December 1st. Barr
told the journalist that “to date, we have not seen fraud on a scale that
could have effected a different outcome in the election.”49
That made the President irate.
Later that evening, Attorney General Barr met with President Trump at
the White House. It was their second face-to-face meeting after the
November election.50 At first, President Trump didn’t even look at Attorney
General Barr.51 The President “was as mad as I’ve ever seen him, and he
was trying to control himself,” Barr said.52 The President finally “shoved a
newspaper” with the AP quote in Barr’s face.53
“Well, this is, you know, killing me. You didn’t have to say this. You
must’ve said this because you hate Trump—you hate Trump,” Barr
remembered him saying.54 “No, I don’t hate you, Mr. President,” Barr
replied. “You know, I came in at a low time in your administration. I’ve
tried to help your administration. I certainly don’t hate you.”55
President Trump peppered him with unsupported conspiracy theories.56
Because he had authorized DOJ and FBI to investigate fraud claims, Attorney General Barr was familiar with the conspiracy theories raised by the
President. The “big ones” he investigated included claims such as: Dominion voting machines switched votes, votes had been “dumped at the end of the night in Milwaukee and Detroit,” non-residents voted in Nevada, the
number of ballots counted in Pennsylvania exceeded the number of votes
cast, as well as a story about a truck driver supposedly driving thousands of
pre-filled ballots from New York to Pennsylvania, among others.57 Under
Attorney General Barr, DOJ would also investigate a false claim that a video
feed in Fulton County captured multiple runs of ballots for former Vice
President Biden. As explained in detail in Chapter 1 of this report, there was
no truth to any of these allegations, but that didn’t stop President Trump
from repeatedly citing these fictional accounts.
“And I told him that the stuff that his people were shoveling out to the
public was bullshit, I mean, that the claims of fraud were bullshit,” Barr
recalled about the December 1st meeting.58 “And, you know, he was indignant about that. And I reiterated that they wasted a whole month of these
claims on the Dominion voting machines and they were idiotic claims.”59
President Trump repeated that there had been a “big vote dump” in
Detroit.60 But Attorney General Barr quickly parried this claim.61 There was
nothing suspicious in how the votes flowed into a central location, Barr
explained, because that is how votes are always counted in Wayne County.62
Moreover, Barr pointed out that the President performed better in Detroit in
2020 than he had in 2016. “I mean, there’s no indication of fraud in
Detroit,” Barr said.63 Barr explained that the “thing about the truck driver
is complete, you know, nonsense.” 64 DOJ and FBI had investigated the
matter, including by interviewing the relevant witnesses.65 There was no
truck filled with ballots.
Nothing that Attorney General Barr said during that meeting could satisfy President Trump. So, the President shifted the focus to Barr. He complained that the Attorney General hadn’t indicted former FBI Director
James Comey and that U.S. Attorney John Durham’s investigation into the
origins of the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane investigation hadn’t made more
progress.66 “Look, I know that you’re dissatisfied with me,” Barr said, “and
I’m glad to offer my resignation.” 67 President Trump pounded the table in
front of him with his fist and said, “Accepted.” 68
In response to what President Trump was saying during the conversation, Rosen and Donoghue tried to make clear that the claims the President
made weren’t supported by the evidence. “You guys must not be following
the internet the way I do,” the President remarked.147 But President Trump
was not finished peddling wild conspiracy theories.
Comments
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
WASHINGTON (AP) — As angry supporters of President Donald Trump stormed the U.S. Capitol, ready to smash through windows and beat police officers, Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes extolled them as patriots and harkened back to the battle that kicked off the American Revolutionary War.
“Next comes our ‘Lexington,'" Rhodes told his fellow far-right extremists in a message on Jan. 6, 2021. ”It's coming."
Jurors will begin weighing his words and actions on Tuesday, after nearly two months of testimony and argument in the criminal trial of Rhodes and four co-defendants. Final defense arguments wrapped up late Monday.
The jury will weigh the charges that the Oath Keepers were not whipped into an impulsive frenzy by Trump on Jan. 6 but came to Washington intent on stopping the transfer of presidential power at all costs.
The riot was the opportunity they had been preparing for, prosecutors say. Rhodes' followers sprang into action, marching to the Capitol, joining the crowd pushing into the building, and attempting to overturn the election that was sending Joe Biden to the White House in place of Trump, authorities allege.
Not true, the Oath Keepers argue. They say there was never any plot, that prosecutors have twisted their admittedly bombastic words and given jurors a misleading timeline of events and messages.
Hundreds of people have been convicted in the attack that left dozens of officers injured, sent lawmakers running for their lives and shook the foundations of American democracy. Now jurors in the case against Rhodes and four associates will decide, for the first time, whether the actions of any Jan. 6 defendants amount to seditious conspiracy — a rarely used charge that carries both significant prison time and political weight.
CAPITOL SIEGE
Woman convicted of storming Pelosi's office in Jan. 6 attack
Man gets jail for joining Capitol riot after Tinder date
Feds: Oath Keepers sought 'violent overthrow' of government
Man who blamed Trump’s ‘orders’ for Jan. 6 riot sentenced
The jury’s verdict may well address the false notion that the 2020 presidential election was stolen, coming soon after 2022 midterm results in which voters rejected Trump’s chosen Republican candidates who supported his baseless claims of fraud. The outcome could also shape the future of the Justice Department’s massive and costly prosecution of the insurrection that some conservatives have sought to portray as politically motivated.
Failure to secure a seditious conspiracy conviction could spell trouble for another high-profile trial beginning next month of former Proud Boys national chairman Enrique Tarrio and other leaders of that extremist group. The Justice Department's Jan. 6 probe has also expanded beyond those who attacked the Capitol to focus on others linked to Trump's efforts to overturn the election.
In the Oath Keepers trial, prosecutors built their case using dozens of encrypted messages sent in the weeks leading up to Jan. 6. They show Rhodes rallying his followers to fight to defend Trump and warning they might need to “rise up in insurrection.”
“We aren’t getting through this without a civil war. Prepare your mind body and spirit,” he wrote shortly after the 2020 election.
Three defendants, including Rhodes, took the witness stand to testify in their defense — a move generally seen by defense lawyers as a last-resort option because it tends to do more harm than good. On the witness stand, Rhodes, of Granbury, Texas, and his associates — Thomas Caldwell, of Berryville, Virginia, and Jessica Watkins, of Woodstock, Ohio — sought to downplay their actions, but struggled when pressed by prosecutors to explain their violent messages.
The others on trial are Kelly Meggs, of Dunnellon, Florida, and Kenneth Harrelson of Titusville, Florida. Seditious conspiracy carries up to 20 years behind bars, and all five defendants also face other felony charges. They would be the first people convicted of seditious conspiracy at trial since the 1995 prosecution of Islamic militants who plotted to bomb New York City landmarks.
The trial unfolding in Washington’s federal court — less than a mile from the Capitol — has provided a window into the ways in which Rhodes mobilized his group and later tried to reach Trump.
But while authorities combed through thousands of messages sent by Rhodes and his co-defendants, none specifically spelled out a plan to attack the Capitol itself. Defense attorneys emphasized that fact throughout the trial in arguing that Oath Keepers who did enter the Capitol were swept up in an spontaneous outpouring of election-fueled rage rather than acting as part of a plot.
Jurors never heard from three other Oath Keepers who have pleaded guilty to seditious conspiracy.
Over two days on the witness stand, a seemingly relaxed Rhodes told jurors there was no Capitol attack plan. He said he didn't have anything to do with the guns some Oath Keepers had stashed at a Virginia hotel that prosecutors say served as the base for “quick reaction force” teams ready to ferry an arsenal of weapons across the Potomac River if necessary. The weapons were never deployed.
Rhodes, a Yale Law School graduate and former Army paratrooper, said his followers were “stupid” for going inside. Rhodes, who was in a hotel room when he found out rioters were storming the Capitol, insisted that the Oath Keepers' only mission for the day was to provide security for Trump ally Roger Stone and other figures at events before the riot.
That message was repeated in court by others, including a man described as the Oath Keepers' “operations leader" on Jan. 6, who told jurors he never heard anyone discussing plans to attack the Capitol.
A government witness — an Oath Keeper cooperating with prosecutors in hopes of a lighter sentence — testified that there was an “implicit” agreement to stop Congress’ certification, but the decision to enter the building was “spontaneous.”
“We talked about doing something about the fraud in the election before we went there on the 6th," Graydon Young told jurors. “And then when the crowd got over the barricade and they went into the building, an opportunity presented itself to do something. We didn’t tell each other that.”
Prosecutors say the defense is only trying to muddy the waters in a clear-cut case. The Oath Keepers aren't accused of entering into an agreement ahead of Jan. 6 to storm the Capitol.
Defense attorneys for Caldwell, Watkins and Harrelson worked on Monday to cast doubt on the timeline presented by prosecutors, saying that communications were hampered by overwhelmed cell towers and that other rioters forced Congress to recess before they arrived.
Prosecutor Jeffrey Nestler, though, said any lag was brief and the Oath Keepers were among the rioters who interrupted congressional proceedings by preventing lawmakers from coming back into session to certify the presidenial vote.
Citing the Civil War-era seditious conspiracy statute, prosecutors tried to prove the Oath Keepers conspired to forcibly oppose the authority of the federal government and block the execution of laws governing the transfer of presidential power. Prosecutors must show the defendants agreed to use force — not merely advocated it — to oppose the transfer of presidential power.
After the riot, Rhodes tried to get a message to Trump through an intermediary, imploring the president not to give up his fight to hold onto power. The intermediary — a man who told jurors he had an indirect way to reach the president — recorded his meeting with Rhodes and went to the FBI instead.
Rhodes told the man, speaking of Trump, “If he's not going to do the right thing and he’s just gonna let himself be removed illegally then we should have brought rifles.” He said, “We should have fixed it right then and there. I’d hang (expletive) Pelosi from the lamppost,” Rhodes said, referring to Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
___
Richer reported from Boston.
___
For full coverage of the Capitol riot, go to https://www.apnews.com/capitol-siege
More on Donald Trump-related investigations: https://apnews.com/hub/donald-trump
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
WASHINGTON (AP) — A Pennsylvania woman linked to the far-right “Groyper” extremist movement was convicted Monday of several federal charges after prosecutors said she was part of a group that stormed House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's office during the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.
Riley June Williams was found guilty of six federal counts, including civil disorder. But the jury deadlocked on two other charges, including “aiding and abetting the theft” of a laptop that was stolen from Pelosi's office suite during the insurrection. The jury also failed to reach a unanimous verdict on whether Williams obstructed an official proceeding.
U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson ordered Williams be taken into custody after the jury delivered its verdict.
Williams joined a mob's attack on the Capitol after attending the “Stop the Steal” rally, where then-President Donald Trump addressed thousands of supporters earlier that day. Entering Pelosi’s office, she found a laptop on a table and told another rioter, “Dude, put on gloves,” before someone with a black gloved hand removed the computer, according to prosecutors.
Williams later bragged online that she stole Pelosi’s gavel, laptop and hard drives and that she “gave the electronic devices, or attempted to give them, to unspecified Russian individuals,” prosecutors said in a June 2022 court filing.
CAPITOL SIEGE
Jan. 6 sedition trial of Oath Keepers founder goes to jury
Man gets jail for joining Capitol riot after Tinder date
Feds: Oath Keepers sought 'violent overthrow' of government
Man who blamed Trump’s ‘orders’ for Jan. 6 riot sentenced
“To date, neither the laptop nor the gavel has been recovered,” they added.
A witness described as a former romantic partner of Williams told the FBI that she intended to send the stolen laptop or hard drive to a friend in Russia who planned to sell it to Russia’s foreign intelligence service. But the witness said Williams kept the device or destroyed it when the transfer fell through, according to an FBI agent's affidavit.
Williams, a resident of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, was arrested less than two weeks after the riot. She was charged with theft of government property, assaulting police and obstructing the joint session of Congress for certifying the Electoral College vote. Williams also faced misdemeanor charges, including disorderly or disruptive conduct.
Williams denied stealing the laptop when the FBI questioned her. She claimed her ex-boyfriend “made up” the allegation, prosecutors said.
Before she left the Capitol, Williams joined other rioters in pushing against police officers trying to clear the building's Rotunda. Police body camera captured the confrontation, as Williams encouraged other rioters to “keep pushing,” and “push, push, push.”
Williams was wearing a shirt bearing the message, “I’m with groyper,” when she entered the Capitol. The term “groyper” refers to followers of “America First” movement leader Nick Fuentes, who has used his online platform to spew antisemitic and white supremacist rhetoric.
Other followers of Fuentes have been charged with Jan. 6-related crimes, including former UCLA student Christian Secor, 24, of Costa Mesa, California. Secor, who was waving an “America First” flag when he entered the Capitol, was sentenced last month to three years and six months in prison.
Williams' online footprint also included material associated with “accelerationism,” a violent ideology that asserts “Western governments are corrupt and unsalvageable, and therefore the best thing a person can do is accelerate their collapse by sowing social chaos and generating political conflict,” prosecutors said.
In December 2020, Williams attended at least two rallies protesting the outcome of the presidential election. Both rallies featured speeches by Fuentes.
“Her admiration of Nick Fuentes, self-identification as a ‘Groyper,’ belief in Accelerationism, and support for violence all circumstantially show the mixed motives behind her actions on January 6: she not only specifically sought to block Congress from certifying the Electoral College vote, but also to undermine and obstruct the government more generally,” prosecutors wrote.
Before her trial, Williams' attorneys questioned the relevance of her political activities and ideology.
“There is no evidence linking her beliefs and actions prior to January 6 with her actions that day,” they wrote. “There is a legitimate risk that jurors will judge Ms. Williams merely for the unpopular and extreme ideologies she has embraced in the past, rather than for the actual crimes with which she is charged.”
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
https://twitter.com/rvawonk/status/1595085571214704640?s=46&t=licrvQqli6A0AIJZBNwFOQ
yes, it’s from twitter. But she cites actual sources.
-EV 8/14/93
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
A federal jury on Tuesday convicted Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes of seditious conspiracy for leading a months-long plot to unleash political violence to prevent the inauguration of President Biden, culminating in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol.
The panel of seven men and five women deliberated for three days before finding Rhodes and a co-defendant guilty of conspiring to oppose by force the lawful transition of presidential power. Rhodes and all four co-defendants on trial were also convicted of obstructing Congress as it met to confirm the results of the 2020 election. Both offenses are punishable by up to 20 years in prison.
Rhodes, in a dark suit and black eye-patch from an old gun accident, stood at the defense table, watching impassively as verdicts were read for the defendants facing a 13-count indictment.
Oath Keepers trial: Stewart Rhodes guilty of Jan. 6 seditious conspiracy - The Washington Post
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/oath-keepers-founder-guilty-of-seditious-conspiracy-in-jan-6-case
Oath Keepers founder guilty of seditious conspiracy in Jan. 6 case
Politics Nov 29, 2022 5:45 PM ESTWASHINGTON (AP) — Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes was convicted Tuesday of seditious conspiracy for a violent plot to overturn Democrat Joe Biden’s presidential win, handing the Justice Department a major victory in its massive prosecution of the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection.
A Washington, D.C., jury found Rhodes guilty of sedition after three days of deliberations in the nearly two-month-long trial that showcased the far-right extremist group’s efforts to keep Republican Donald Trump in the White House at all costs.
https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-1999-title18-section2384&num=0&edition=1999#:~:text=If two or more persons,force to prevent, hinder, or
§2384. Seditious conspiracy
If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
A legal fight has erupted over a Washington D.C. police officer who was communicating with Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio in the run-up to the Jan. 6, 2021 Capitol attack that could shape the outcome of the upcoming trial of Tarrio and other far-right extremists.
Metropolitan Police Lt. Shane Lamond's testimony is crucial for the former Proud Boys national chairman's defense against seditious conspiracy and other serious charges stemming from the attack, Tarrio's attorneys say.
But Lamond now plans to invoke his Fifth Amendment privilege against self incrimination if called to the witness stand after prosecutors warned the officer he could be charged with obstructing the investigation into Tarrio, the Proud Boy's attorneys say. They have accused the Justice Department of trying to bully Lamond into keeping quiet because his testimony would hurt their case. Prosecutors have vehemently denied that charge.
The legal skirmish is unfolding two weeks before jury selection is supposed to begin in one of the highest-profile cases the Justice Department has brought since the Jan. 6 insurrection. Prosecutors charge Tarrio and four co-defendants conspired to forcibly stop the transfer of presidential power from former President Donald Trump to Democrat Joe Biden.
CAPITOL SIEGE
DOJ subpoenas election officials in states Trump disputed
Jan. 6 committee to issue criminal referrals, chairman says
Jan. 6 'heroes' honored for defending Capitol from Trump mob
Ex-candidate for governor seeks time to mull any plea deals
The Proud Boys trial will be another major test for the Justice Department, which secured a major victory last month in the seditious conspiracy convictions of two other far-right extremist group leaders: Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes, of Granbury, Texas, and Kelly Meggs, who was the leader of the group’s Florida chapter. Tarrio's far-right, male chauvinist extremist group that seized on the Trump administration’s policies was a major agitator during earlier pro-Trump protests and at the Capitol on Jan. 6.
Tarrio wasn’t in Washington when the riot erupted, but authorities say he helped put into motion the violence of that day. Shortly before the riot, authorities say Tarrio posted on social media that the group planned to turn out in “record numbers” on Jan. 6, but would be “incognito” instead of donning their traditional clothing colors of black and yellow.
Tarrio was arrested in Washington two days before the riot and charged with vandalizing a Black Lives Matter banner at a historic Black church during a protest in December 2020. Tarrio was released from jail on Jan. 14, 2022 after serving his five-month sentence for that case.
An email seeking comment was sent to an attorney for Lamond. Tarrio's lawyers say Lamond has been under investigation for some time for possible obstruction of justice into the investigation of Tarrio.
The Washington Post reported in February that Lamond was placed on leave as part of an investigation into his contacts with the Proud Boys. Metropolitan Police Chief Robert Contee has said the department placed an officer on leave as part of an “ongoing investigation” by the department, the FBI and Justice Department but declined to name the officer.
Lamond, an intelligence officer for the police force, was responsible for monitoring groups like the Proud Boys when they came to Washington. Tarrio regularly communicated with Lamond before the Proud Boys came to the capital city to discuss the “purpose of the trip, the agenda, and the location," defense lawyers wrote in court documents.
Tarrio told Lamond that Proud Boys would not be wearing their traditional colors of black and yellow in order to protect themselves from possible attacks from antifa activists. Tarrio told the officer they planned to watch Trump's speech, protest the results of the election “and later that night they planned to party with plenty of beers and babes," Tarrio's lawyers wrote.
“He told me they are trying to go incognito this time,” Lamond told fellow officers in one message, according to Tarrio's attorneys. "Even if they aren’t wearing their colors they will stick together as a group so we should be able to identify them. Not to mention they won’t be head to toe in black with makeshift shields!”
The defense says Lamond's testimony would support Tarrio's claims that he was looking to avoid violence, not cause it. Tarrio’s lawyers have asked the judge to dismiss the case if the government refuses to grant immunity for Lamond so he can take the stand.
“How can there be sedition if the Proud Boys are informing law enforcement of their plans on Jan. 6?” Tarrio attorney Sabino Jauregui said during a recent hearing. “They don't want him to testify because it will completely destroy their case.”
Assistant U.S. Attorney Erik Kenerson told the judge the suggestion that prosecutors are pressuring and threatening witnesses is “categorically false.”
Tarrio has a history of cooperating with law enforcement.
Court records uncovered last year showed that Tarrio previously worked undercover and cooperated with investigators after he was accused of fraud in 2012. After Tarrio’s indictment for participating in a scheme involving the resale of diabetic test strips, he helped the government prosecute more than a dozen other people, according to court papers.
Tarrio will stand trial with four others: Ethan Nordean, of Auburn, Washington; Joseph Biggs, of Ormond Beach, Florida; Zachary Rehl, of Philadelphia and Dominic Pezzola of Rochester, New York.
____
For full coverage of the Capitol riot, go to https://www.apnews.com/capitol-siege
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
https://abcnews.go.com/US/attacks-plots-similar-north-carolina-power-grid-attack/story?id=94574765
Attacks, plots similar to sabotage of North Carolina power grid have threatened infrastructure nationwide
Federal officials issued a warning just days before the attack.
Cops still searching for suspects in North Carolina power sabotage
Just three days before two electrical substations were shot up, causing tens of thousands of customers to lose power in North Carolina, the federal Department of Homeland Security issued a bulletin warning "lone offenders and small groups" could be plotting attacks and that the nation's critical infrastructure was among the possible targets.
The warning became a reality on Saturday when widespread power outages in North Carolina were reported after a perpetrator or perpetrators shot up the power stations in Moore County. The incident left up to 45,000 utility customers without electricity and prompted local officials to declare a state of emergency.
The Homeland Security "National Terrorism Advisory System Bulletin" issued on Nov. 30 said individuals and groups motivated by a range of ideological beliefs and personal grievances "continue to pose a persistent and lethal threat to the Homeland."
"Targets of potential violence include public gatherings, faith-based institutions, the LGBTQI+ community, schools, racial and religious minorities, government facilities and personnel, U.S. critical infrastructure, the media, and perceived ideological opponents," the bulletin reads.
The bulletin followed one issued by the Department of Homeland Security in January, warning that domestic extremists have been developing "credible, specific plans" to attack electricity infrastructure since at least 2020, according to the Associated Press.
While law enforcement investigating the Moore County sabotage has yet to identify a suspect or a motive, the attack has been described by local authorities as an "eye-opener" and prompted calls to harden the state's infrastructure to deter future incidents.
"This kind of attack raises a new level of threat," North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper said at a news conference Monday afternoon.
But similar attacks and foiled plots suggest electrical grids and other infrastructure across the United States have been targeted over the past decade.
In April 2013, a group of suspects wielding high-powered rifles staged an attack in California's Silicon Valley, shooting up the Pacific Gas & Electric Company's Metcalf substation, riddling transformers with bullets, officials said. PG&E said the attack caused $15 million in damage and prompted the utility company to spend $100 million to beef up security at its substations, including installing intruder detection systems.
No arrests were made in the California attack.
"Metcalf was an interesting attack because they also attacked the fiber communications vault just up the street to try to interfere with the alarm and communication with the substation," Kevin Perry, retired director of critical infrastructure protection at Southwest Power Pool in Arkansas, told ABC News.
Unlike in Moore County, the attack failed to cause a major power outage.
"There's a lot of redundancy that's built into the grid. And in the case of Metcalf, even though the substation was taken out of service, (PG&E) was able to bypass the substation and continue to energize the area," Perry said.
Perry said most electrical distribution substations across the country are vulnerable to attacks because they are usually in remote areas and have little security.
"Substations tend to be out in the middle of nowhere, and that means they’re, for the most part, unattended," Perry said. "If you take out enough equipment then you lose the redundancy and when you lose the redundancy you don’t have any way of feeding power to that particular area, and that’s when you end up with a regional blackout."
In February, three men each pleaded guilty in Ohio to a federal charge of conspiring to provide material support to terrorists as part of a scheme to attack power grids in the United States in furtherance of white supremacist ideology, according to the Department of Justice. The men - one from Ohio, one from Texas and the third from Wisconsin -- met online and plotted to use high-powered rifles to attack electrical substations in different regions of the United States, the DOJ said in a statement.
"The defendants believed their plan would cost the government millions of dollars and cause unrest for Americans in the region. They had conversations about how the possibility of the power being out for many months could cause war, even a race war, and induce the next Great Depression," the DOJ's statement reads.
The plot was thwarted when two of the men were pulled over by police in Ohio for a traffic violation and one swallowed a "suicide pill" but ultimately survived, according to federal prosecutors.
In 2019, a Utah man pleaded guilty to one federal count of destruction of an energy facility stemming from a 2016 rifle attack on a Buckskin Electrical substation in Kane County and was sentenced to 96 months in prison, according to federal officials. The attack caused nearly $400,000 in damage and triggered a power outage in Kane and Garfield counties, officials said.
As part of the plea agreement, the defendant admitted causing damage to three substations in Nevada, but was not charged in those incidents, according to federal prosecutors.
WASHINGTON (AP) — After securing seditious conspiracy convictions against two leaders of the Oath Keepers, the Justice Department will begin Monday to try to make its Capitol riot case against four others affiliated with the far-right extremist group.
Openings statements are expected in Washington's federal court less than two weeks after Stewart Rhodes, the founder of the Oath Keepers, and Kelly Meggs, who led its Florida chapter, were convicted of seditious conspiracy for what prosecutors described as a violent plot to overturn President Joe Biden's victory.
The defendants facing jurors in the latest trial are Joseph Hackett, of Sarasota, Florida; Roberto Minuta of Prosper, Texas; David Moerschel of Punta Gorda, Florida; and Edward Vallejo of Phoenix. They are charged with several other felonies in addition to seditious conspiracy.
While the Rhodes' and Meggs' verdicts were a major victory for the Justice Department, three of their co-defendants were acquitted of seditious conspiracy. The major question in the next trial is whether prosecutors will be convince jurors to convict lower-level defendants of the Civil War-era offense.
Seditious conspiracy can be difficult to prove, especially when the alleged plot is unsuccessful. Rhodes and Meggs were the first people in decades found guilty at trial of the charge, which carries up to 20 years in prison.
Thomas Caldwell, of Berryville Virginia; Jessica Watkins of Woodstock, Ohio; and Kenneth Harrelson of Titusville, Florida, were acquitted of sedition. But all five defendants in that case were convicted of obstructing Congress' certification of Biden's electoral win, which also calls for as many as 20 years behind bars.
Prosecutors will try to convince jurors that Minuta, Moerschel, Vallejo and Hackett plotted with Rhodes and others to use force to stop the transfer of presidential power from Donald Trump to Biden. Authorities say the plot came to a head on Jan. 6, 2021, when Oath Keepers stormed the Capitol alongside hundreds of other angry Trump supporters.
In Rhodes' case, prosecutors spent weeks arguing they were not whipped into an impulsive frenzy by Trump on Jan. 6 but came to Washington intent on keeping Trump in power at all costs. Authorities say the Oath Keepers discussed their plans in encrypted chats for weeks before the riot and stashed weapons at a nearby Virginia hotel in case they were needed to support their plot.
But while investigators combed through thousands of messages sent by Rhodes and his co-defendants, none specifically spelled out a plan to attack the Capitol itself. Defense attorneys emphasized that fact throughout the trial to argue there was never any plot. They said the Oath Keepers didn't come to Washington for violence but to provide security for people like Trump ally Roger Stone at events before the riot.
CAPITOL SIEGE
Case against lawmaker with Oath Keepers ties moves to trial
Rioter who assaulted cops at Capitol gets 5 years in prison
Judge weighs how to proceed on case against Alaska lawmaker
Fight over officer testimony roils Proud Boys sedition case
Authorities say Hackett and Moerschel were part of the first group of Oath Keepers along with Meggs and Watkins that pushed into the Capitol in military-style stack formation. Minuta later joined a second “stack” that forced its way inside as police desperately tried to defend the building, prosecutors say.
Vallejo is accused of helping coordinate the quick reaction force teams in Virginia that authorities say were ready to rush a cache of weapons into the capital city if necessary. The weapons were never deployed.
Prosecutors say that on the morning of the riot, Vallejo and another quick reaction force team member discussed the possibility of “guerrilla war” and “armed conflict.”
“It’s a do or die situation. Because if we walk away from this, and we don’t have any effectual change as a result, then we might as well just give up. We’re done. We’re done. If we don’t do something now, we’re done," Vallejo said on the podcast, according to authorities.
Three other Oath Keepers have pleaded guilty to seditious conspiracy and agreed to cooperate with investigators in the hopes of getting a lighter sentence. But they were never called by prosecutors to the witness stand in Rhodes' case. It's unclear why prosecutors didn't have them testify and whether they might take the stand in the latest trial.
Another sedition trial is also expected to begin later this month against former Proud Boys national chairman Enrique Tarrio and other leaders of that extremist group.
____
Richer reported from Boston.
___
Follow AP's coverage of the Capitol riot at: https://apnews.com/hub/capitol-siege
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) — A federal judge in Washington has found an Iowa man guilty of 12 charges including assaulting and resisting officers after he and his mother joined in the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol.
Judge Thomas Hogan ruled Thursday afternoon that Salvador Sandoval of Ankeny, Iowa, was guilty of the six felony and six misdemeanor counts he faced, according to KCCI-TV in Des Moines.
The conviction came a day after Sandoval's mother, Deborah Sandoval of Des Moines, pleaded guilty to entering a restricted building just before she was set to go on trial. Because of the agreement, prosecutors dropped other charges.
During Salvador Sandoval's trial Wednesday, prosecutors said he pushed two officers and tried to take riot shields from two other officers.
Both Sandovals will be sentenced later.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
"rrrrrrrrrrrrrico."
lmao
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Contemporaneous written correspondence also confirms both that: (1) Eastman himself recognized Pence could not lawfully refuse to count electoral votes, and (2) President Trump also knew this. While sheltering in a loading dock with the Vice President during the violent January 6th attack, Greg Jacob asked Dr. Eastman in an email, “Did you advise the President that in your professional judgment the Vice President DOES NOT have the power to decide things unilaterally?” Dr. Eastman’s response stated that the President had “been so advised,” but then indicated that President Trump continued to pressure the Vice President to act illegally: “But you know him - once he gets something in his head, it is hard to get him to change course.” To be absolutely clear, no White House lawyer believed Pence could lawfully refuse to count electoral votes. White House Counsel Pat Cipollone told the Select Committee this: I thought that the Vice President did not have the authority to do what was being suggested under a proper reading of the law. I conveyed that, ok? I think I actually told somebody, you know, in the Vice President’s - “Just blame me.” You know this is - I’m not a politician, you know... but, you know, I just said, “Pm a lawyer. This is my legal opinion.” Cipollone also testified that he was “sure [he] conveyed” his views." Indeed, other testimony from Cipollone indicates that Trump knew of Cipollone’s view and suggests that Trump purposely excluded Cipollone from the meeting with Pence and Pence’s General Counsel on January 4th."*7 Indeed, at one point, Cipollone confronted Dr. Eastman in the hallway outside the Oval Office and expressed his disapproval of and anger with Dr. Eastman’s position. According to Jason Miller, “Pat Cipollone thought the idea was nutty and had at one point confronted Eastman basically with the same sentiment” outside the Oval Office.* Pat Cipollone did not deny having an angry confrontation with Dr. Eastman outside of the Oval Office - though he said he didn’t have a specific recollection, he had no reason to contradict what Jason Miller said and, moreover, said that Dr. Eastman was aware of his views.’ Likewise, Eric Herschmann, another White House lawyer, expressed the same understanding that Dr. Eastman’s plan “obviously made no sense” and “had no practical ability to work.” Herschmann also recounted telling Dr. Eastman directly that his plan was “completely crazy:” And I said to [Dr. Eastman], hold on a second, I want to understand what you’re saying. You’re saying you believe the Vice President, acting as President of the Senate, can be the sole decisionmaker as to, under your theory, who becomes the next President of the United States? And he said, yes. And I said, are you out of your F’ing mind, right. And that was pretty blunt. I said, you’re completely crazy.’” Deputy White House Counsel Pat Philbin also had the same understanding.”” Indeed, as Herschmann testified, even Rudolph Giuliani doubted that Vice President Mike Pence had any legal ability to do what Dr. Eastman had proposed."? Despite all this opposition from all White House lawyers, Trump nevertheless continued to exert immense pressure on Pence to refuse to count electoral votes. The pressure began before the January 4th Oval Office meeting with Pence, Dr. Eastman, Jacob, Short and Trump, but became even more intense thereafter. On the evening of January 5, 2021, the New York Times published an article reporting that “Vice President Mike Pence told President Trump on Tuesday that he did not believe he had the power to block congressional certification of Joseph R. Biden, Jr.’s victory in the Presidential election despite President Trump’s baseless insistence that he did.”"* This reporting was correct - both as to the Vice President’s power and as to Vice President Pence having informed President Trump that he did not have the authority to change the outcome of the election. But in response to that story, late in the evening before January 6th Joint Session, President Trump dictated to Jason Miller a statement falsely asserting, “The Vice President and I are in total agreement that the Vice President has the power to act.”*75 This statement was released at President Trump’s direction and was false.'”® Thereafter Trump continued to apply public pressure in a series of tweets. At 1:00 a.m. on January 6th, “[iJf Vice President @Mike_Pence comes through for us, we will win the Presidency. Many States want to decertify the mistake they made in certifying incorrect & even fraudulent numbers in a process NOT approved by their State Legislatures (which it must be). Mike can send it back!”*7” At 8:17 a.m. on January 6th, he tweeted again: “States want to correct their votes, which they now know were based on irregularities and fraud, plus corrupt process never received legislative approval. All Mike Pence has to do is send them back to the States, AND WE WIN. Do it Mike, this is a time for extreme courage!”"”8 President Trump tried to reach the Vice President early in the morning of January 6th, but the Vice President did not take the call. The President finally reached the Vice President later that morning, shouting from the Oval Office to his assistants to “get the Vice President on the phone.””? After again telling the Vice President that he had “the legal authority to send [electoral votes] back to the respective states,” President Trump grew very heated.*° Witnesses in the Oval Office during this call told the Select Committee that the President 26 called Vice President Pence a “wimp,”** told him it would be “a political career killer” to certify the lawful electoral votes electing President Biden,” and accused him of “not [being] tough enough to make the call.”"*3_ As Ivanka Trump would recount to her chief of staff moments later, her father called the Vice President “the p-word” for refusing to overturn the election."
80a91be4-ca85-495c-9394-3405a9477cf4.pdf (wapo.pub)
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Hours before the Ellipse rally on January 6th, the fact that the assembled crowd was prepared for potential violence was widely known. In addition to intelligence reports indicating potential violence at the Capitol, weapons and other prohibited items were being seized by police on the streets and by Secret Service at the magnetometers for the Ellipse speech. Secret Service confiscated a haul of weapons from the 28,000 spectators who did pass through the magnetometers: 242 cannisters of pepper spray, 269 knives or blades, 18 brass knuckles, 18 tasers, 6 pieces of body armor, 3 gas masks, 30 batons or blunt instruments, and 17 miscellaneous items like scissors, needles, or screwdrivers.“?° And thousands of others purposely remained outside the magnetometers, or left their packs outside.
Others brought firearms. Three men in fatigues from Broward County, Florida brandished AR-15s in front of Metropolitan police officers on 14th Street and Independence Avenue on the morning of January 6th.” MPD advised over the radio that one individual was possibly armed with a “Glock” at 14th and Constitution Avenue, and another was possibly armed with a “rifle” at 15th and Constitution Avenue around 11:23 a.m.43 The National Park Service detained an individual with a rifle between 12 and 1 p.m.’* Almost all of this was known before Donald Trump took the stage at the Ellipse.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
which plays with Trump stating remove the magnetometors because he was in no danger.....
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
WASHINGTON (AP) — An Arkansas man who propped his feet on a desk in then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s office during the riot at the U.S. Capitol planned the trip for weeks and came prepared for violence, a prosecutor said Tuesday as his trial got underway.
Richard “Bigo” Barnett had a stun gun tucked into his pants when he stormed the Capitol, invaded Pelosi's office and posed for a photo that became one of the attack's more well-known images, prosecutors said. He also took a piece of her mail and left behind a note that said, “Nancy, Bigo was here," prosecutors said. Barnett punctuated the message with a sexist expletive.
“The defendant violated that space,” said prosecutor Alison Prout during opening statements. “He came prepared for violence.”
Staffers were huddled down the hall at the time, hiding from rioters after leaving behind computers, cellphones and personal files as they fled, she said.
Before leaving Capitol grounds, Barnett used a bullhorn to give a speech to the crowd, shouting, “We took back our house, and I took Nancy Pelosi’s office!” according to prosecutors.
"Barnett has emerged as prominent figure in the attack on the Capitol as a result of the widespread circulation of his photographs in Speaker Pelosi’s office and subsequent interview," prosecutors wrote in a court filing.
VIOLENCE
Political vacuum in Haiti deepens as senators' terms expire
Puerto Rico reggaeton singer accused of domestic violence
Ill. Senate OKs gun ban, House Democrats agree with changes
5 dismembered bodies found in bags in southern Mexico
"Everything he did inside was grounded in political protest ... it was all protest, protest, protest," the defense wrote. They decided to wait to give opening statements later in the trial.
Defense attorneys have argued that the former firefighter didn’t break barriers or assault police as he was swept along into the building with the rest of the crowd. He wandered into Pelosi’s office suite looking for a bathroom, his lawyers said.
A grand jury indicted Barnett on eight charges, including felony counts of civil disorder and obstruction of an official proceeding. He also faces a charge of entering and remaining in restricted building or grounds with a deadly or dangerous weapon — the stun gun with spikes concealed within a collapsible walking stick.
Barnett planned for weeks before driving from his home in Gravette, Arkansas, to Washington, D.C., to attend the “Stop the Steal” rally on Jan. 6, prosecutors said. He hid or destroyed evidence of his riot participation after returning home to Arkansas, according to court documents.
Barnett turned himself in to FBI agents at a sheriff’s office in Bentonville, Arkansas, two days after the riot. He told investigators that the large crowd pushed him into the Capitol.
Records from a Bass Pro Shop in Arkansas showed that Barnett purchased the stun gun five days before he traveled to Washington. FBI agents found the packaging for the device in his home.
In June 2021, Barnett appeared on Russian state television with his attorney. When asked if he would do it again, he responded, “I exercise my First Amendment rights every hour, every minute, and every day, and I will never stop,” according to prosecutors.
Prosecutors said Barnett had a history of arming himself at political demonstrations before the Jan. 6 attack. In July 2020, they said, a 911 caller reported that a man matching Barnett's description had pointed a rifle at her during a “Back the Blue” rally.
"Law enforcement ultimately closed the investigation as unfounded due to unresolved apparent discrepancies in the evidence," prosecutors wrote.
In November 2020, police were called to a “Save the Children” rally when a caller said Barnett was carrying a gun at the protest and acting suspiciously.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
if i were the prosecutor i would have said "why didn't you just shit on the floor like the rest of the savages that day?"
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
4.2 NOVEMBER 23, 2020: BARR CHALLENGES PRESIDENT TRUMP’S ELECTION LIES
As Barr predicted, the President did call on him for information about alleged election fraud. Trump challenged him with a blizzard of conspiracy theories in three face-to-face meetings after the election. The first such meeting occurred on November 23, 2020.
On November 23rd, the Attorney General spoke with White House Counsel Pat Cipollone, who said that it was important for him come to the White House and speak to President Trump.16 Barr had not seen the President since before the election in late October, and the White House counsel believed that it was important that the Attorney General explain what the Department of Justice was doing related to claims of election fraud.17
“The President said there had been major fraud and that, as soon as the facts were out, the results of the election would be reversed,” Barr recalled.
Trump continued “for quite a while,” and Barr was “expecting” what came next.18 President Trump alleged that “the Department of Justice doesn’t think it has a role looking into these fraud claims.”19 Barr anticipated this line of attack because the President’s counsel, Rudolph Giuliani, was making all sorts of wild, unsubstantiated claims.20 And Giuliani wanted to blame DOJ for the fact that no one had come up with any real evidence of fraud.21 Of course, by the time of this meeting, U.S. Attorneys’ Offices had been explicitly authorized to investigate substantial claims for 2 weeks and had yet to find any evidence of significant voter fraud.22
Barr explained to the President why he was wrong. DOJ, was willing to investigate any “specific and credible allegations of fraud.”23 The fact of the matter was that the claims being made were “just not meritorious” and were “not panning out.”24 Barr emphasized to the President that DOJ “doesn’t take sides in elections” and “is not an extension of your legal team.”25
During the November 23rd meeting, Barr also challenged one of President Trump’s central lies. He “specifically raised the Dominion voting machines, which I found to be one of the most disturbing allegations.”26 “Disturbing,” Barr explained, because there was “absolutely zero basis for the allegations,” which were being “made in such a sensational way that they obviously were influencing a lot of people, members of the public.”27
Americans were being deceived into thinking “that there was this systematic corruption in the system and that their votes didn’t count and that these machines, controlled by somebody else, were actually determining it, which was complete nonsense.”28 Barr stressed to the President that this was “crazy stuff,” arguing that not only was the conspiracy theory a waste of time, but it was also “doing [a] great, great disservice to the country.”29
As Attorney General Barr left the meeting, he talked with Mark Meadows, the White House Chief of Staff, and Jared Kushner, President Trump’s son-in-law.30 “I think he’s become more realistic and knows that there’s a limit to how far he can take this,” Meadows said, according to Barr.31 Kushner reassured Barr, “we’re working on this, we’re working on it.”32 Barr was hopeful that the President was beginning to accept reality.33 The opposite happened.
“I felt that things continued to deteriorate between the 23rd and the weekend of the 29th,” Barr recalled.34 Barr was concerned because President Trump began meeting with delegations of State legislators, and it appeared to him that “there was maneuvering going on.”35 Barr had “no problem” with challenging an election “through the appropriate process,” but “worried” that he “didn’t have any visibility into what was going on” and that the “President was digging in.”36
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Attorney General Barr then decided to speak out. He invited Michael Balsamo, an Associated Press (AP) reporter, to lunch on December 1st. Barr told the journalist that “to date, we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have effected a different outcome in the election.”49
That made the President irate.
Later that evening, Attorney General Barr met with President Trump at the White House. It was their second face-to-face meeting after the November election.50 At first, President Trump didn’t even look at Attorney General Barr.51 The President “was as mad as I’ve ever seen him, and he was trying to control himself,” Barr said.52 The President finally “shoved a newspaper” with the AP quote in Barr’s face.53
“Well, this is, you know, killing me. You didn’t have to say this. You must’ve said this because you hate Trump—you hate Trump,” Barr remembered him saying.54 “No, I don’t hate you, Mr. President,” Barr replied. “You know, I came in at a low time in your administration. I’ve tried to help your administration. I certainly don’t hate you.”55
President Trump peppered him with unsupported conspiracy theories.56 Because he had authorized DOJ and FBI to investigate fraud claims, Attorney General Barr was familiar with the conspiracy theories raised by the President. The “big ones” he investigated included claims such as: Dominion voting machines switched votes, votes had been “dumped at the end of the night in Milwaukee and Detroit,” non-residents voted in Nevada, the number of ballots counted in Pennsylvania exceeded the number of votes cast, as well as a story about a truck driver supposedly driving thousands of pre-filled ballots from New York to Pennsylvania, among others.57 Under Attorney General Barr, DOJ would also investigate a false claim that a video feed in Fulton County captured multiple runs of ballots for former Vice President Biden. As explained in detail in Chapter 1 of this report, there was no truth to any of these allegations, but that didn’t stop President Trump from repeatedly citing these fictional accounts.
“And I told him that the stuff that his people were shoveling out to the public was bullshit, I mean, that the claims of fraud were bullshit,” Barr recalled about the December 1st meeting.58 “And, you know, he was indignant about that. And I reiterated that they wasted a whole month of these claims on the Dominion voting machines and they were idiotic claims.”59
President Trump repeated that there had been a “big vote dump” in Detroit.60 But Attorney General Barr quickly parried this claim.61 There was nothing suspicious in how the votes flowed into a central location, Barr explained, because that is how votes are always counted in Wayne County.62 Moreover, Barr pointed out that the President performed better in Detroit in 2020 than he had in 2016. “I mean, there’s no indication of fraud in Detroit,” Barr said.63 Barr explained that the “thing about the truck driver is complete, you know, nonsense.” 64 DOJ and FBI had investigated the matter, including by interviewing the relevant witnesses.65 There was no truck filled with ballots.
Nothing that Attorney General Barr said during that meeting could satisfy President Trump. So, the President shifted the focus to Barr. He complained that the Attorney General hadn’t indicted former FBI Director James Comey and that U.S. Attorney John Durham’s investigation into the origins of the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane investigation hadn’t made more progress.66 “Look, I know that you’re dissatisfied with me,” Barr said, “and I’m glad to offer my resignation.” 67 President Trump pounded the table in front of him with his fist and said, “Accepted.” 68
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
In response to what President Trump was saying during the conversation, Rosen and Donoghue tried to make clear that the claims the President made weren’t supported by the evidence. “You guys must not be following the internet the way I do,” the President remarked.147 But President Trump was not finished peddling wild conspiracy theories.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©